CathInfo.com

The ordinary magisterium is not infallible.  The “ordinary and universal” magisterium is infallible.  The point being, BOD has not been a “universal” belief as most Church Fathers condemned it.  Sorry, you just don’t know history.

Yes, it is the famous law of quantum infallibility. The Magisterium is both fallible and infallible before Fr Feeney examined their words to see if those words can be twisted into preaching against BOD/BOB.

If it's against BOB/BOD it's infallible, if it's for BOB/BOD it's fallible. Who would have thought to apply Heinsenberg's uncertainty principle to the Magisterium? This is a genius idea. 

Yes, it is the famous law of quantum infallibility. The Magisterium is both fallible and infallible before Fr Feeney examined their words to see if those words can be twisted into preaching against BOD/BOB.

If it's against BOB/BOD it's infallible, if it's for BOB/BOD it's fallible. Who would have thought to apply Heinsenberg's uncertainty principle to the Magisterium? This is a genius idea.

Shows your lack of education on the subject.  

Where do you come up with this idea?  Your idea of "The Desire/Intention/Wish/Will to Receive Baptism" is a BOD, is error - per the catechism. In fact, per the catechism, the person "receives a BOD even though he has never heard of the existence of the sacrament of baptism." As for being baptized invisibly by an angel -- that person received the sacrament of baptism, from an angel - that's not a BOD.

Per the catechism, making an act of perfect love or perfect contrition is the *only* thing that is required. As if that's so easy even a caveman can do it. The reason that is the only thing required is because it is not possible for one who does not even know that baptism exists to desire it.       

There are two possibilities for "BOB/BOD" to be true. What we mean by "BOD/BOB" being true, is that someone who has not been visibly baptized could still be saved :

A)BOD and BOB are theological descriptions of a particular case of baptism, that is performed invisibly by God or His angels on those who cannot get baptized by other means through no fault of their own. That is, every single member of the Church (after Revelation) has been baptized, even if it wasn't done by humans. That is a theological possibility.

B)BOD and BOB describe conditions of the soul of someone who is not baptized where their culpability is reduced or where the necessity of baptism is circuмvented by God, and God directly gives the effect of baptism without the required sacrament. The catechism you are using as a source describes this possibility, which is what St Thomas Aquinas wrote about.

An act of perfect contrition requires wanting to do God's will, even without knowing about Revelation. That is "implicit" desire for baptism, because it's impossible to know about baptism for someone who never heard of the Gospels or of the Christian religion at all.

Practically, there is almost no difference at all between the two positions, because there is no way to know about what God does invisibly unless He specifically reveals it to someone.

In fact, the more I examine this, the less I understand where the conflict lies.

What were we even getting angry about?