Hermann,
I had pretty much decided to ignore you because of your absolute calumny against Charles Coulombe. Your obviously green with envy to such an extent that you have to lie and calumniate the man because he has credentials that you will never have. Dealing with someone who does the evil you do tells me one thing. You'll stoop to whatever level it takes to try to "win". Truth means nothing to you.
But the absolute stupidity of most of your answers will force my hand on some points that I'll have to deal with after I deal with the other obsessed one's 1001 pointless posts.
The Ordinary Magisterium contains both the Ordinary Authentic and the Ordinary Infallible magisterial quality.
The Ordinary Infallible Magisterium does not err. The Authentic is quite capable of error.
But it's obvious you can't tell the difference. No Catechism is infallible and the equal footing given to the dogma of the absolute necessity of Baptism with water and the speculative theology of Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood is one of the errors most commonly published.
You'll notice in all the citing of the earliest Fathers who may "speculate" on Baptism of Blood and Desire that they are actually speculating and not handing on the Tradition of the Church.
You probably don't know this, but the Fathers of the Church don't produce doctrine.
So on the one hand, you claim that the Fathers state that they are speculating and not handing on the Tradition of the Church. On the other hand, those same Fathers themselves state: "We have indeed, likewise, a second font ... concerning which the Lord said", "Let men of this kind, who are aiders and favourers of heretics, know therefore ... that they certainly are not deprived of the sacrament ... concerning which the Lord also said ... The Lord is able by His mercy to give indulgence", and "as you are not ignorant ... as is contained in the Acts ... as Peter also subsequently most abundantly taught us ... there will be no doubt ... Thy thinking him to have perished will be opposed by the sentence of the Lord ... let us come to the proof of the statement proposed, that we may not appear to have done this of our own judgment and with rashness ... Assuredly both in water, and none the less in their own blood, and then especially in the Holy Spirit, men may be baptized."
We have indeed, likewise, a second font, (itself withal one with the former,) of blood, to wit; concerning which the Lord said, "I have to be baptized with a baptism," when He had been baptized already. For He had come "by means of water and blood," just as John has written; that He might be baptized by the water, glorified by the blood; to make us, in like manner, called by water, chosen by blood. These two baptisms He sent out from the wound in His pierced side, in order that they who believed in His blood might be bathed with the water; they who had been bathed in the water might likewise drink the blood. This is the baptism which both stands in place of the laver when not received and restores it when lost. (Tertullian, De Baptismo, 16)
On which place [St. John 3.5] some, as if by human reasoning they were able to make void the truth of the Gospel declaration, object to us the case of catechumens; asking if any one of these, before he is baptized in the Church, should be apprehended and slain on confession of the name, whether he would lose the hope of salvation and the reward of confession, because he had not previously been born again of water? Let men of this kind, who are aiders and favourers of heretics, know therefore, first, that those catechumens hold the sound faith and truth of the Church, and advance from the divine camp to do battle with the devil, with a full and sincere acknowledgment of God the Father, and of Christ, and of the Holy Ghost; then, that they certainly are not deprived of the sacrament of baptism who are baptized with the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood, concerning which the Lord also said, that He had "another baptism to be baptized with." ...But some one says, "What, then, shall become of those who in past times, coming from heresy to the Church, were received without baptism?" The Lord is able by His mercy to give indulgence, and not to separate from the gifts of His Church those who by simplicity were admitted into the Church, and in the Church have fallen asleep. (St. Cyprian, Letter 72:22-23)
And further, as you are not ignorant, the Holy Spirit is found to have been given to men who believe, by the Lord without baptism of water, as is contained in the Acts of the Apostles ... Even as Peter also subsequently most abundantly taught us about the same Gentiles, saying: "And He put no difference between us and them, their hearts being purified by faith." And there will be no doubt that men may be baptized with the Holy Ghost without water,--as thou observest that these were baptized before they were baptized with water; that the announcements of both John and of our Lord Himself were satisfied,--forasmuch as they received the grace of the promise both without the imposition of the apostle's hands and without the laver, which they attained afterwards. And their hearts being purified, God bestowed upon them at the same time, in virtue of their faith, remission of sins; so that the subsequent baptism conferred upon them this benefit alone, that they received also the invocation of the name of Jesus Christ, that nothing might appear to be wanting to the integrity of their service and faith. ...And what wilt thou determine against the person of him who hears the word, and haply taken up in the name of Christ, has at once confessed, and has been punished before it has been granted him to be baptized with water? Wilt thou declare him to have perished because he has not been baptized with water? Or, indeed, wilt thou think that there may be something from without that helps him to salvation, although he is not baptized with water? Thy thinking him to have perished will be opposed by the sentence of the Lord, who says, "Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I also confess before my Father which is in heaven; " because it is no matter whether he who confesses for the Lord is a hearer of the word or a believer, so long as he confesses that same Christ whom he ought to confess; because the Lord, by confessing him, in turn Himself graces His confessor before his Father with the glory of his martyrdom, as He promised. ...
And it was fitting that both these kinds should first of all be initiated and sanctified by our Lord Himself, so that either one of the two or both kinds might afford to us this one twofold saving and glorifying baptism; and certain ways of the one baptism might so be laid open to us, that at times some one of them might be wanting without mischief, even as in the case of martyrs that hear the word, the baptism of water is wanting without evil; and yet we are certain that these, if they had any indulgence, would also be used to be baptized with water. And also to those who are made lawful believers, the baptism of their own blood is wanting without mischief, because, being baptized in the name of Christ, they have been redeemed with the most precious blood of the Lord; ...
And since we seem to have divided all spiritual baptism in a threefold manner, let us come also to the proof of the statement proposed, that we may not appear to have done this of our own judgment, and with rashness. For John says of our Lord in his epistle, teaching us: "This is He who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood: and it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For three bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three are one;" --that we may gather from these words both that water is wont to confer the Spirit, and that men's own blood is wont to confer the Spirit, and that the Spirit Himself also is wont to confer the Spirit. For since water is poured forth even as blood, the Spirit also was poured out by the Lord upon all who believed. Assuredly both in water, and none the less in their own blood, and then especially in the Holy Spirit, men may be baptized. ... Which Spirit also filled John the Baptist even from his mother's womb; and it fell upon those who were with Cornelius the centurion before they were baptized with water. Thus, cleaving to the baptism of men, the Holy Spirit either goes before or follows it; or failing the baptism of water, it falls upon those who believe. We are counselled that either we ought duly to maintain the integrity of baptism, or if by chance baptism is given by any one in the name of Jesus Christ, we ought to supplement it, guarding the most holy invocation of the name of Jesus Christ, as we have most abundantly set forth; guarding, moreover, the custom and authority which so much claim our veneration for so long a time and for such great men. (Anonymous Treatise Against Rebaptism, 5, 11, 14-15)
Calumny? Obviously, you do not know the lush.
Your obviously green with envy to such an extent that you have to lie and calumniate the man because he has credentials that you will never have.
God save me from ever having the credentials of being a friend and defender of occultists and occultist schismatics, a writer for occult publications like Gnosis and Fate, and a creator of Catholicized magical superstition.
I would not want his credentials.
No Catechism is infallible
If the Holy See cannot publish a Catechism without teaching doctrinal errors where the Catechism is purporting to teach authentic doctrine, of what purpose is the infallibility of Rome? You make infallibility into a new Delphic Oracle, rather than a girdle of doctrinal chastity when teaching.
You probably don't know this, but the Fathers of the Church don't produce doctrine.
No, they are evidence for doctrine, and their unanimity on this point (BOD/BOB), along with the evidence of the Liturgy, of the Doctors, of the Theologians, and of the Popes and Councils, is strong evidence of its truth. There is not a Father who broaches the topic who does not carve out these alternatives in extremis for the necessity of Baptism as a means of salvation, most especially the universally repeated example of a Catechumen baptised in their own blood.