Post-Trent Catechism By St. Peter Canisius Contradicts "Baptism Of Desire"

 

Michael and Peter Dimond are correct here in general on the baptism of desire and the necessity of the baptism of water with no exceptions for salvation.

However they use the False Premise to interpret the baptism of desire (LG 14) and invincible ignorance (LG 16). So they are correct on extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( with no practical exceptions) but are wrong on Vatican Council II, with LG 14 and LG 16 being exceptions for EENS. For them Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition (EENS etc).This is irrational. They are not using the Rational Premise to interpret LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc.

They interpret Vatican Council II like the traditionalists and the liberals.   -Lionel Andrades