You do realize that Mithrandylan did not say that Saint Alphonsus was infallible, right?

No, he simply cited a passage out of context from Gregory XVI implying precisely that.

No, he simply cited a passage out of context from Gregory XVI implying precisely that.

The Church gave us a Saint and Doctor to follow with complete safety. Sorry, but your opinion and the opinion of the D’s carry no weight.

I was directly responding to Pax Vobis's prima facie dismissal of St. Alphonsus and his elevation of fake monastics with a financial stake in baptism of desire as a better way to learn the truth.

And I was simply CORRECTING your view of St Alphonsus to the proper level - that he is a supreme saint which we should imitate in virtue, but not always theology.

The Church gave us a Saint and Doctor to follow with complete safety.

The Church teaches that only the pope is infallible, and only under certain circuмstances.  No Saint/Doctor is infallible.  That's absurd.

.
Here is an exchange found among the 138 Comments under a video of +Williamson published in 2016. Jacob Snell offers as an answer a text he claims was part of the schema composed by ABL (which was later abandoned by the liberals in power at Vat.II) and replaced with the Vat.II docuмents we have today (the numbers 1-13 seem to be for footnotes which were not supplied):
.
Question:

PhilipHowardMedia   1 year ago
"Does that mean that no Protestant, no Muslim, no Buddhist or animist will be saved? No" How is that not heretical? Protestants, Muslims etc are saved? He then explains the dogma away.

Answer:

Jacob Snell  1 year ago
+PhilipHowardMedia He continues, "The error consists in thinking that they are saved by their religion. They are saved in their religion but not by it. There is no Buddhist church in heaven, no Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God. As priests we must state the Truth." The Church has never believed that those that are not formal converts can be saved in a number known only to God. To believe that no Protestant, Jєω, Moslem, Buddhist, or Hindu can receive baptism of desire or of blood is to believe a heresy called Feeneyism, which was condemned by the Holy Office under Pius XII and John XXIII. 
.
Question:

PhilipHowardMedia  1 year ago (edited)
Jacob Snell But if they are saved by a mystery only known to God they would not be a Protestant, a Muslim etc etc and that is the problem here. Saved in their religion? Does that not mean they are outside the Church?
.
Answer:

Jacob Snell  1 year ago
They are saved by receiving the grace of baptism through an implicit desire without an explicit desire. The schema for Vatican II authored primarily by Archbishop Lefebvre and Cardinal Ottaviani had this to say:

"8. The Holy Synod teaches, as God's Holy Church has always taught, that the Church is necessary for salvation1
and that no one can be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded by God through Jesus Christ, nevertheless refuses to enter her or to persevere in her.2
Just as no one can be saved except by receiving baptism--by which anyone who does not pose some obstacle to incorporation3
becomes a member of the Church--or at least by desire for baptism,4
so also no one can attain salvation unless he is a member of the Church or at least is ordered towards the Church by desire. But for anyone to attain to salvation, it is not enough that he be really a member of the Church or be by desire ordered towards it; it is also required that he die in the state of grace, joined to God by faith, hope, and charity.5

"9. Although many real relations exist in the juridical6
and sacramental order, and indeed can exist in the mystical order,7
by which every baptized person is linked with the Church, still, according to the most ancient tradition, only they are called members of the Church in the true and proper sense in whom the Church, one and indivisible, indefectible and infallible, comes together in unity of faith, sacraments and government. They, therefore, are truly and properly to be said to be members of the Church who, washed in the bath of regeneration, professing the true Catholic faith, and acknowledging the authority of the Church,8
are joined in its visible structure9
to its Head, Christ, who rules it through his Vicar,10
and have not been cut off from the structure of the Mystical Body because of very serious offences.11
As for those ordered by desire towards the Church, these include not only catechumens,12
who, moved by the Spirit, consciously and explicitly desire to enter the Church, but also those who, even if not knowing that the Catholic Church is the true and sole Church of Christ, still, by God's grace, implicitly and unknowingly desire the equivalent,13
either because they sincerely will what Christ himself wills or because, though ignorant of Christ, they sincerely desire to fulfill the will of God their Creator. The gifts of heavenly grace will never be wanting to those who sincerely desire and ask to be renewed by the divine light."

God is just and does not condemn those who through no fault of their own do not know Christ or his Church. 

The Church has been infiltrated by Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ over the last two centuries and as Br. Francis Maluf wisely remarked in one of his meditations on the secret society, “We are the Church militant. That means that a war is on. How can a man be a soldier of Jesus Christ if he knows neither the enemy nor the issue.”

The 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man contains the following article: “No one may be disturbed for his opinions, even religious ones, provided that their manifestation does not trouble the public order established by the law.” Anyone who has spent even a minimal amount of time studying the French philosophes would know that when it came to religion, dogma is what they expressed a hatred for more than anything else. They hated the “bigotry” and “intolerance” that follows from Catholics believing with absolute certainty that the dogmas which the Church proposes as divinely revealed are infallibly true.

One of their principal aims has been to attempt to reduce religion in the minds of men to a matter of mere opinion. All who reject dogma as the rule of faith necessarily aid them in their conspiracy. The Freemasons hate dogma in general but there is, of course, a particular dogma of the faith that bothers them more than all the others: the dogma about which Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote the following in The Social Contract, “But whoever dares to say: Outside the Church there is no salvation, ought to be driven from the State.”

.
Whenever the Freemasons conduct a ritual where they ridicule a Catholic pope, there is one Pope in particular they use, as if by default. And it seems their reason is not so much the person of this pope as it is what this particular Pope represents. For he is the one whose name (Pope Boniface VIII in Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302) is attached to the second of the 3 ex cathedra dogmatic definitions of EENS. 

Namely, 

Correct.  St. Alphonsus is using the term implicit narrowly.

Explicit Desire for Baptism:  "I intend to be baptized." (note that votum is much more than a "desire" but is always loosely translated as such).
Implicit Desire for Baptism:  "I want to become a Catholic." (intention to be baptized implicit in the intention to become Catholic)

Now the modern heretics go, several steps removed, all the way down the line to ...
Implicit Desire:  "I want to be a good person and do what God wants."

.
It seems to be a bit deeper than this. Modernists today go all the way down to ...
Implicit Desire: "I have a vague longing for something good, and have an ambiguous hankering to do what some higher power, or the Great Architect of the Universe, would have me do, that is, if she exists."
.
In a YouTube video conference +W testifies that when ABL first arrived at a remote village in Africa, where the Catholic Faith had never been preached, he did not find the 6th and 9th Commandments to be prominent sins. Rather, he said, the most rampant problem was the sin of hate. He said that nearly everyone in the village confessed having a practically uncontrollable and abiding hatred for something or someone else in the village.
.
He (+W in the video) didn't take it to its logical conclusion, but I don't mind doing that. I ask:
How can anyone, who has habitually practiced abiding hate for his neighbor while living in a culture where this hatred is the norm not the exception, and has never heard of the Catholic Faith, die while making a perfect act of contrition, which requires the virtue of perfect charity?
.
Baptism of desire presumes perfect charity, thereby perfect contrition, whereby justification without water baptism.