CathInfo.com

Regarding those underlying metaphysical and theological notions, here is the passage from Ezechiel in question (Chapter 37):

The hand of the Lord was upon me, and brought me forth in the spirit of the Lord: and set me down in the midst of a plain that was full of bones. [2] And he led me about through them on every side: now they were very many upon the face of the plain, and they were exceeding dry. [3] And he said to me: Son of man, dost thou think these bones shall live? And I answered: O Lord God, thou knowest. [4] And he said to me: Prophesy concerning these bones; and say to them: Ye dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. [5] Thus saith the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will send spirit into you, and you shall live.

.

[6] And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to grow over you, and will cover you with skin: and I will give you spirit and you shall live, and you shall know that I am the Lord. [7] And I prophesied as he had commanded me: and as I prophesied there was a noise, and behold a commotion: and the bones came together, each one to its joint. [8] And I saw, and behold the sinews, and the flesh came up upon them: and the skin was stretched out over them, but there was no spirit in them. [9] And he said to me: Prophesy to the spirit, prophesy, O son of man, and say to the spirit: Thus saith the Lord God: Come, spirit, from the four winds, and blow upon these slain, and let them live again. [10] And I prophesied as he had commanded me: and the spirit came into them, and they lived: and they stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.

.

[11] And he said to me: Son of man: All these bones are the house of Israel: they say: Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost, and we are cut off.

Note the careful detail the Scriptures devote to the chronology of the resurrection.  It could just as easily have read, (something along the lines of) "and now all the bones were raised up by the Lord and were men again, who said/did such and such a thing..."
.
But instead the scriptures actually devote time to describing precise stages of resurrection.  The flesh is formed back onto the bone.  This makes the body potentially capable of movement, and we see that the Lord moves the joints in order to facilitate the rejoining of flesh to bone.  And then, before the reunion of soul to body, Ezechiel stops to note that "there was no spirit in them."  Only after the spirit (soul) is breathed back into them is the army now composed of actual men who, of their own, can live and speak.
.
The point is simply that a human person, who alone is capable of receiving a sacrament, is soul and body (a metaphysical claim, supported here by the scriptures).  But since Christ's Resurrection, the two are separated after death, and not united again until after the general judgment, which is at the end of time (a dogmatic claim).  
.
With that in mind, it's impossible-- metaphysically, but also as a matter of doctrine-- for someone to be resurrected in the way contended, after Christ's Resurrection.  And that's why the only instances we find of resurrection are in fact in scripture, and prior to the Resurrection of Our Lord, when there was still a Limbo of the Fathers.  
.
But look, this is all a more intricate approach to the question which is settled quite simply by the infallible definition of Benedictus Deus, which doesn't get into the theology behind the matter, but simply defines the fact that those who die justified go immediately to Heaven (or purgatory, which is just a roundabout way of getting there-- you don't go to purgatory unless you're going to Heaven) where they enjoy the Beatific vision, or immediately to Hell where they are separated from God for all eternity.  If, on the anti-BoD hypothesis, someone dies without water baptism, they, by definition, go to Hell.  And now these same theorists will have us believe that they can leave Hell, come back to earth, be baptized, and go to Heaven?  No, no, no.  This runs roughshod over Catholic metaphysics and Catholic doctrine.  You ruin every conception of the human person as soul and body by so contending, not to mention that you directly deny Benedictus Deus in the process.
.
Of course, the proof advanced in the OP is just one many that those who deny BoD will advance, and I don't pretend that its failure is tantamount to proof for BoD being Catholic teaching (that is proved through the magisterium).  But this particular proof is completely bogus.  It is telling, just like the thread on here several months ago that tried to claim that BoD is a condemned Calvinist proposition, that many deniers of BoD don't care about theology in the slightest.  

Have they ever said? If not, we don't know.
All we can actually know with certainty, is that once they were baptized and left this life, they went directly to heaven.

.
We can know, though, through very simple deduction.
.
There are a grand total of two possibilities after death (after Christ's resurrection).  Either Heaven (including purgatory, which guarantees eventual Heaven) or Hell.
.
Now, from the anti-BoD perspective, you can't possibly argue that such persons went to Heaven or purgatory.  Which only leaves Hell.  Which, in this particular narrative, is a place that they're leaving and then afterward going to Heaven.  Nice.  Definitely incentivizes not getting baptized while you're alive the first time, wouldn't you say? :D
.