"this man will not be abandoned by God" merely because the sacraments are not available to him in the normal course of events
Yes and that does not change the fact that he is bound by the law of baptism whether or not he realizes it. [...] Affirm, along with St. Thomas and numerous other authorities, that, "Consequently it is manifest that all are bound to be baptized: and that without Baptism there is no salvation for men
." Summa Theo. III, Q. 68. Art. 1c.
Asked and answered. As to baptism in the extended sense including baptism of blood and baptism of desire (including, if necessary, implicit and vicarious desire), I affirm. As to the sacrament of baptism, I deny, for baptism of desire and baptism of blood are not sacraments and yet are sufficient for salvation [S.T. III, Q. 66, Art. 11, reply obj. 2].
Now it's your turn to affirm or deny: "God gives all innocent unbelievers (infideles negativi) sufficient grace to achieve eternal salvation. (Sent. certa.)."
(Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma,
p. 241). If He gives them all sufficient grace, and if this includes at least the possibility of some kind of baptism of desire in every case, fine; no problem. Only the supposition that some are bound by a divine law that it is absolutely impossible for them to fulfill
would conflict with the principle that God does not require anyone to do the impossible.
If a person is bound by the law of baptism "whether or not he realizes it," either he can
realize it or he can't. If each person who is bound by the law either (1) can
realize it and obey the law, or (2) can be baptized without realizing it (as at least some infants certainly can), there is no conflict with the same principle, nor with the universal gift of sufficient grace to innocent unbelievers. Is this what you hold? If not, how do you (or do you?) claim that those who (1) cannot realize that they should obey the law of baptism, and (2) cannot be baptized without realizing it, are not required to do the impossible by God in order to be saved?
The fact remains that a pre-rational person who dies without receiving baptism is excluded from heaven. This fact alone proves the necessity of baptism for it is intrinsically impossible for such a person to receive the promulgation of the law, as you put it.
It has not been divinely revealed, or authoritatively taught [EDIT: by the "Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium" (1983 CIC Canon 752)], that infants who die without receiving the sacrament
of baptism are [EDIT: necessarily] excluded from heaven. Whether such infants may be freed from original sin through a "vicarious baptism of desire," in which others' desire that they be baptized would take the place of their own just as it does when infants receive the sacrament of baptism, is an open question [see Ott, pp. 114, 241-242].
Will you ever cease being obtuse and intellectually dishonest?
Will the Pope ever stop beating his wife?
Take a little lesson on Anger & Its Remedies
and call me in the morning or whenever you're ready to answer the questions posed above, whichever comes last.