CathInfo.com

This argument actually makes my point, not yours, because Trent is *very* clear that perfect contrition can work before a sacramental confession as long as the intent to eventually go to sacramental confession is there.  And yet God still did this miracle.

Ahh, but you’re missing the key part...intent/opportunity to confess.  This man had no opportunity to confess at a later date, which is why a “perfect act of contrition” wouldn’t suffice for forgiveness.  
.
Point - God doesn’t tear down rules of salvation.  But he does work miracles so that the rules can be fulfilled.  God will not change the requirement for confessing sins to a priest.  He created this requirement.  If the opportunity to confess isn’t possible, he will work a miracle.  
.
If God had known (and decided) that this man trapped in an avalanche would be rescued and his life continued, then the man’s contrition/intent to confess would suffice.  A miracle would not be needed.  But since the man was going to die, and God determined that was this man’s fate, then God worked a miracle because there was no later date to confess.  
.
God does not create rules in order to break them.  This would be a destruction if His integrity, authority and respect.  “Oh what kind of God makes rules that can’t be followed and He has to break them?”, pagans would say.  It would destroy the fabric of Catholicism.  
.
This also applies to BOD.  The graces of justification ONLY work for those who vow/promise to receive the sacrament.  Those that 1) are unable to, or 2) made an insincere promise do NOT get the graces.  
.
Those that die before reception of the sacrament, we can (and must) say that 1) they were not sincere or 2) God worked a miracle to provide water baptism that we didn’t see or weren’t there.
.
To say that a person dies before baptism and goes to heave due to BOD is heresy and accuses God of changing the rules.  It accuses God of lying to us, and makes doctrine arbitrary because God changes whatever, whenever.
.
The proper catholic explanation is that God created the rules of the sacraments.  God is unchanging and eternal, so His rules for grace and holiness are unchanging and enteral.  If one can not fulfill the rules humanly, God will work a miracle to fulfill the rules.  He does not suspend or alter the rules.  In a sense, He’s not allowed.  He cannot deceive.  
.
This is why those who try to explain BOD outside of the rules are utterly confused and never agree.  Because anything not of God leads to confusion.

Baptism of blood is the shedding of one’s blood, i.e. death, suffered for the Faith or for some other Christian virtue. Now this baptism is comparable to true Baptism because, like true Baptism, it remits both guilt and punishment as it were ex opere operato. I say as it were because martyrdom does not act by as strict a causality [“non ita stricte”] as the sacraments, but by a certain privilege on account of its resemblance to the passion of Christ. Hence martyrdom avails also for infants seeing that the Church venerates the Holy Innocents as true martyrs. That is why Suarez rightly teaches that the opposing view [i.e. the view that infants are not able to benefit from baptism of blood — translator] is at least temerarious. In adults, however, acceptance of martyrdom is required, at least habitually from a supernatural motive.

Woa... but Bp. Felllay spoke from a San Francisco pulpit in 2016 saying aborted babies likely went to Heave via BOB.

I mean, couldn't the Pro-lifers standing outside the abortion clinic just think, "I want the babies to be a martyrs and go to Heaven" and that would suffice for the Sacrament?

I laud the people who continue to work out the specifics of this discussion as I myself have done for years.  But not all are able to discern so I like to look at simple basics.

Not one person in any of these threads can prove BOD saves anyone. On the other hand, it is certain Baptism saves. So, if BOD does save, whether we believe in it or not, it will get done when God sees fit and that's great.  It is not even remotely dependent on my belief, whereas Baptism is dependent on my belief so that others may learn of salvation and obtain it.  BOD doesn't benefit a potential recipient if I don't believe it.  And it certainly doesn't benefit me or hurt me or any other living person if I don't believe it.  I have yet to determine what benefit there is for believing in BOD as I can only see pitfalls of a very clever undermining of Baptism.  If BOD is false, however, the people who spread the notion of no baptism (BOD), are going to answer for it and for the souls lost to the spread of laxity harbored because of it.  There is no fault or cost for not believing in BOD, but an eternity in hell if Baptism is actually necessary.