When he says, "they teach . . .," he's either talking about the teachers in the seminaries (and I think he's right about that) or BODers, not all sedevacantists.

It's because many Traditonal Catholics come to the realization that all the Vatican II errors derive from Vatican II ecclesiology.  And one cannot come to terms with these ecclesiological questions without addressing the points raised by Father Feeney.  Once these Catholics wrestle with these ecclesiological issues, they come to the realization that most anti-Feeneyites have an ecclesiology that's identical to that of Vatican II and that there's no justification for them to be Traditional Catholics.

This is what I can't stand. They (the BODers) sit there and swear up and down that the Sacrament is necessary for Salvation, then offer exceptions to the actual reception of it for Salvation, clearly making it unnecessary.
The contradiction of heretics is exhausting.

.
I cannot understand why it's so important to some to go around proclaiming their faith in a theory of speculation.
.It’s not speculation when *all* of the Church’s popes, bishops, catechisms, theologians, canonists teach BOD for 400+ years (again, not saying that it was not taught from the beginning)....that is the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.


To say it's been supported by theologians for hundreds of years for them is all they need.

It is the OUM.
.
Never mind the same theologians have been wrong in other cases.
.
The teaching is unanimous, they can’t all be wrong and lead souls into error. This is one way a Catholic can distinguish between true and false teaching. This is why if some NO bishop insisted that there are no such things as guardian angels, you would recognize that this person was spouting heresy. No offense, but it seems to me this is why you run afoul with regard to the sedevacantist position. The Church can’t officially teach error, period. 


Take St. Thomas Aquinas, for example, who denied the Immaculate Conception, based on a pagan tradition of "ensoulment."

Firstly, this was before it was defined by the Extraordinary Magisterium. Secondly, he did not deny it, he was just mistaken about ensoulment because science had not advanced to that level of understanding in the 13th century.
.
That alone could have slowed down the Definition for several hundred years.
.
But the Nicene Creed's words "I believe in one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins" is to be understood in a different way....?

No, it is understood in only one way.
.
It doesn't say three baptisms, does it? 

There is only one sacrament of baptism. BOD is just a descriptive name of how one can be justified by desiring the sacrament if he dies before actually receiving the actual sacrament, it is NOT a sacrament. 
.
I heard an otherwise reliable priest say that I John 5:8 refers to this -- when the subject of that Scripture is not Baptism.
.
Then he said BoD and BoB are not sacraments, but "these three are one." 
.
You can't make this stuff up.
.
Now they argue that St. Emerentiana never received Baptism. 
.
Show me her Baptism of Desire Certificate. 

One of the reasons she stands out in the Roman Martyrology is the fact that she *was* a catechumen. Catechumens are by definition NOT baptized.
.
Show me ANYONE'S Baptism of Desire Certificate!

See above.
.
If St. Emerentiana sincerely asked God for Baptism of water then certainly God must have provided it for her. 
.
Yes he could’ve, but he didn’t.

How could He have refused her such a simple matter?

God’s ways are not your ways.
.
Just to break His own rule so the liberals could make the Exception into the New Rule?

Liberals like, Saint Thomas Aquinas, Saint Robert Bellarmine, Saint Alphonsus, Venerable Pius IX?
.
Why can't we just be concerned with the essential matters and leave the speculation for theologians?
.
It’s not speculation.

Then the operative condition for BOD is: "unforeseen accident" ?

"their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness."

.
PLEASE CONSIDER??
.
In charity,  I really would like everyone to pause and look and digest all the comments regarding BOD [desire] and the Council of Trent, chapters VI and XIV.  Those of good-will, will be able to see, regarding all the comments here, that this is exactly the thing, that was going on at the Council of Trent, from the time of Session VI, all the way to Session XIV.  Why would I say this??  Because Pope Julius saw it and the proof of it, is in his words, the first thing that Pope Julius said upon opening Session XIV is this!
.
Julius III., celebrated on the twenty-fifth of November, 1551.
.
Doctrine on the Sacrament of Penance.
.
The sacred and holy, ecuмenical and general Synod of Trent, -lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost, the same Legate and Nuncios of the holy Apostolic See presiding therein, --although, in the decree concerning Justification, there has been, through a certain kind of necessity, on account of the affinity of the subjects, much discourse introduced touching the sacrament of Penance; nevertheless, so great, in these our days, is the multitude of various errors relative to this sacrament, that it will be of no small public utility to have given thereof a more exact and full definition, wherein, all errors having been, under the protection of the Holy Ghost, pointed out and extirpated, Catholic truth may be made clear and resplendent; which (Catholic truth) this holy Synod now sets before all Christians to be perpetually retained.
.
I would like everyone to consider, for a moment, as to what is said above, collectively and compare it to the incredible noise, from everyone now in this forum, on the topic of the fallacious BOD heresy?
.
Then, please consider that it would be necessary for Pope Julius to put this to rest and he did so, by giving an exact and full definition, by defining the differences between the sacrament of Justification and the sacrament of Penance.  When Pope Julius, spoke about Justification, he did not include the word "desire", when he spoke about the laver of baptism, at all!  He could have easily and without effort, incorporated the word "desire", with laver of baptism but he did not, its not there.  In the first sentence of chapter II, he even says that non-members of the Catholic church have no right to the sacrament of Penance, who have not entered the gate of baptism.  Which would have been another opportunity to incorporate the word "desire" but he didn't!  Pope Julius goes on to make clear, a distinction of Justification and Penance, as two fruits, unique, unto themselves.  And furthermore, he confirms this by saying that the sacrament of Penance is for those, who have fallen after baptism, just as baptism is for those, who have not yet been regenerated.  Another opportunity to incorporate the word "desire" but he did not do it.  Because it is not taught!  
.
Chapter II.
.
On the difference between the Sacrament of Penance and that of Baptism.
.
For the rest, this sacrament is clearly seen to be different from baptism in many respects: for besides that it is very widely different indeed in matter and form, which constitute the essence of a sacrament, it is beyond doubt certain that the minister of baptism need not be a judge, seeing that the Church exercises judgment on no one who has not entered therein through the gate of baptism. For, what have I, saith the apostle, to do to judge them that are without? (m) It is otherwise with those who are of the household of the faith, whom Christ our Lord has once, by the laver of baptism, made the members of His own body; for such, if they should afterwards have defiled themselves by any crime, He would no longer have them cleansed by a repetition of baptism--that being nowise lawful in the Catholic Church-but be placed as criminals before this tribunal; that, by the sentence of the priests, they might be freed, not once, but as often as, being penitent, they should, from their sins committed, flee thereunto. Furthermore, one is the fruit of baptism, and another that of penance. For, by baptism putting on Christ, (n) we are made therein entirely a new creature, obtaining a full and entire remission of all sins : unto which newness and entireness, however, we are no ways able to arrive by the sacrament of Penance, without many tears and great labours on our parts, the divine justice demanding this; so that penance has justly been called by holy Fathers a laborious kind of baptism. (o) And this sacrament of Penance is, for those who have fallen after baptism, necessary unto salvation ; as baptism itself is for those who have not as yet been regenerated.
.
And then please consider what Pope Julius said in Session XIV; chapter IV, On Contrition. He was speaking about both sacraments, Justification and Penance and the distinctions there of.  Pope Julius, had another easy and perfect opportunity to incorporate "desire", with the laver of baptism, but the word "desire", is nowhere to be found, in chapter IV, concerning baptism.  In fact, Pope Julius, opens chapter IV, clearly defining Contrition and its attributes, with one, who has fallen after baptism!  
.
This is incredibly important to understand and admit, when going forward, in chapter IV, of Session XIV.
.
"Contrition, which holds the first place amongst the aforesaid acts of the penitent … in one who has fallen after baptism" …
.
Pope Julius, from that point, goes on in a description of the requirements of the penitent.  And then Pope Julius, specifically introduces and incorporates the word "desire" with the sacrament of Penance.  He said that a man is reconciled with God, if he has perfect contrition, and the desire for receiving the sacrament of Penance, before actually going before a priest, to physically receive it, i.e. performing the action of.  He goes on to describe imperfect contrition, unto conclusion.  In chapter IV, there is nothing there attributed to baptism and the desire of.  
.
CHAPTER IV.
.
On Contrition.
.
Contrition, which holds the first place amongst the aforesaid acts of the penitent, is a sorrow of mind, and a detestation for sin committed, with the purpose of not sinning for the future. (r) This movement of contrition was at all times necessary for obtaining the pardon of sins; and, in one who has fallen after baptism, it then at length prepares for the remissions of sins, when it is united with confidence in the divine mercy, and with the desire of performing the other things which are required for rightly receiving this sacrament. Wherefore the holy Synod declares, that this contrition contains not only a cessation from sin, and the purpose and the beginning of a new life, but also a hatred of the old, (H) agreeably to that saying; Cast away from you all your iniquities, wherein you have transgressed, and make to yourselves a new heart and a new spirit. (t) And assuredly he who has considered those cries of the saints; To thee only have I sinned, and have done evil before thee, (v) I have laboured in my groaning, every night I will wash my bed, (w) I will recount to thee all my years, in the bitterness of my soul, (x) and others of this kind, will easily understand that they flowed from a certain vehement hatred of their past life, and from an exceeding detestation of sins. The Synod teaches moreover, that, although it sometimes happen that this contrition is perfect through charity, and reconciles man with God before this sacrament be actually received, the said reconciliation, nevertheless, is not to be ascribed to that contrition, independently of the desire of the sacrament which is included therein. And as to that imperfect contrition, which is called attrition, because that it is commonly conceived either from the consideration of the turpitude of sin, or from the fear of hell and of punishment, It declares that if, with the hope of pardon, it exclude the wish to sin, (y) it not only does not make a man a hypocrite, and a greater sinner, but that it is even a gift of God, and an impulse of the Holy Ghost, --who does not indeed as yet dwell in the penitent, but only moves him, --whereby the penitent being assisted prepares a way for himself unto justice. And although this (attrition) cannot of itself, without the sacrament of penance, conduct the sinner to justification, yet does it dispose him to obtain the grace of God in the sacrament of Penance. For, smitten profitably with this fear, the Ninivites, at the preaching of Jonas, did fearful penance and obtained mercy from the Lord. Wherefore falsely do some calumniate Catholic writers, as if they had maintained that the sacrament of Penance confers grace without any good motion on the part of those who receive it: a thing which the Church of God never taught, or thought: and falsely also do they assert that con-trition is extorted and forced, not free and voluntary.
.
Please look how, Session XIV, CANON II, further supports the clear and distinct, separate natures of the two sacraments, Justification and Penance.
.
PENANCE
.
Session XIV, CANON II.--If any one, confounding the sacraments, saith that baptism is itself the sacrament of Penance, as though these two Sacraments were not distinct, and that therefore Penance is not rightly called a second plank after shipwreck; let him be anathema.
.
**The only reason that you find the word "desire" in Session VI, chapter 4, is because you are dealing with the impious, those above the age of reason i.e. adults.  In truth, desire, necessarily, did not need to be there, because everyone commonly knows that in order for an action to have taken place, it must have originated in the mind i.e. desire, the thought.  This is a self-evident principle!  Quite honestly, I believe God allowed that word "desire" to be there, to weed out the good from the bad.  [1 Corinthians 11:19]
.
Furthermore, the last words of Session IV, chapter 4 concludes with this; "as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."
.
And then followed with the Canons for Session VI.  Please notice that Session VI, Canons XII,  XIV says that believing alone, or confidence alone, without the work done, the thought, the desire, is anathematized.
.
JUSTIFICATION
.
Session VI, CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.
.
Session VI, CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.  
.
Please take notice, carefully, Session VII, Canon II, mentions that anyone who denies the absolute necessity of water baptism, in favor to and reducing it to some sort of metaphor, a word, for instances,  like "desire", is anathematized.
.
METAPHOR.  a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
.
ON BAPTISM
.
Session VII, CANON II.-If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of our Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him be anathema.
.
Session VII, CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.
.
And finally because of the exact and full definition of Pope Julius III on Justification and Penance, it is absolutely clear, that what Pope Paul III said, regarding Session VII; Canon IV, on the sacraments in general, the word desire is specifically attributed to Penance but also with a description of disposition of the impious concerning, Justification.
.
ON THE SACRAMENTS IN GENERAL
.
Session VII, CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.
.
This conclusion is also supported by the fact that desire, is not included in the causes for Justification, in Session VI, chapter 7.
.
CHAPTER VII.
.
What the justification of the impious is, and what are the causes thereof.
.
This disposition, or preparation, is followed by Justification itself, which is not remission of sins merely, but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man, through the voluntary reception of the grace, and of the gifts, whereby man of unjust becomes just, and of an enemy a friend, that so he may be an heir according to hope of life everlasting.
.
Of this Justification the causes are these: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting; while the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance; but the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified; lastly, the alone formal cause is the justice of God, not that whereby He Himself is just, but that whereby He maketh us just, that, to wit, with which we being endowed by Him, are renewed in the spirit of our mind, and we are not only reputed, but are truly called, and are, just, receiving justice within us, each one according to his own measure, which the Holy Ghost distributes to every one as He wills, and according to each one's proper disposition and co-operation.
.
For, although no one can be just, but he to whom the merits of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ are communicated, yet is this done in the said justification of the impious, when by the merit of that same most holy Passion, the charity of God is poured forth, by the Holy Spirit, in the hearts of those that are justified, and is inherent therein: whence, man, through Jesus Christ, in whom he is ingrafted, receives, in the said justification, together with the remission of sins, all these (gifts) infused at once, faith, hope, and charity. For faith, unless hope and charity be added thereto, neither unites man perfectly with Christ, nor makes him a living member of His body. For which reason it is most truly said, that Faith without works is dead and profitless; and, In Christ Jesus neither circuмcision, availeth anything, nor uncircuмcision, but faith which worketh by charity. This faith, Catechumen's beg of the Church-agreeably to a tradition of the apostles-previously to the sacrament of Baptism; when they beg for the faith which bestows life everlasting, which, without hope and charity, faith cannot bestow: whence also do they immediately hear that word of Christ; If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Wherefore, when receiving true and Christian justice, they are bidden, immediately on being born again, to preserve it pure and spotless, as the first robe given them through Jesus Christ in lieu of that which Adam, by his disobedience, lost for himself and for us, that so they may bear it before the judgment-seat of our Lord Jesus Christ, and may have life everlasting.
.
And so it is, desire, faith alone, is not a cause, it can do nothing, in and of itself, it is just a description of disposition, the action and completion of baptism, must be performed!
.
"As it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God." [John 3:5]
.
Sincerely,
.
Freedom