Now that you mention it - if they were being cleansed of original sin, then why did Christ come?  Why were they detained in the Limbo of the Fathers?

You can't have it both ways, mate.  If they died with original sin upon their souls, they could NOT be justified after death.  See your citation from the Council of Florence.  What do you even understand justification to mean pre-Gospel (or even post-Gospel)?  St John the Baptist died before Our Lord.  Did he die with original sin upon his soul?  St Joseph?  They were detained in Limbo because no one could enter Heaven until Christ paid the debt in actu, not just in potentia - and He, rightly, was to be the first to enter into His own kingdom.  Btw, to be without original sin is NOT, strictly speaking, the same as being filled with divine grace.

That you think you may have made some kind of point with the above comment is rather telling.

...if they were being cleansed of original sin, then why did Christ come?  Why were they detained in the Limbo of the Fathers?

You are, effectively, positing the idea of an OT BoD-style of justification that takes place AFTER DEATH.  Isn't that ironic?

If NO ONE was being cleansed of original sin pre-Incarnation, ALL who lived and died before the Passion/Resurrection/preaching of the Gospel, etc, ARE IN HELL, no?

Quote from: C.M.M.M

The rite of baptism performed by the Church, in water, is the perfect means of salvation for both adults and children.  Vienne did not say the only means.

The decree is clear:  ALL who are baptized in Christ are baptized in natural water, according to the form of the Church.  So you are saying that someone can be saved who is NOT baptized in Christ - not baptized according to the matter and form laid out in this decree.

I'm not sure what you call that kind of accusation, but I said no such thing and you took a meaning no one but yourself would pull from it.

Vienne first asserts..

All are faithfully to profess that there is one baptism which regenerates all those baptized in Christ, just as there is one God and one faith'.

I agree.  The baptism is the baptism instituted by Christ.  Baptism regenerates all baptized in Christ.

We believe that when baptism is administered in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit, it is a perfect means of salvation for both adults and children.

Again, I agree.  baptism in water is the perfect means to effect the salvation of adults and children.  Again I say that it is not the only way, and neither does Vienne.

One may believe by natural reason, but without supernatural faith there is NO divine charity, which alone can produce perfect contrition in a soul.  The faith that catechumens beg of the Church is the faith that SAVES.

Could you provide me with an article which expounds your understanding of supernatural faith?  All I can find are evangelical and protestant perspectives on such a word/term.

Quote from: C.M.M.M.

Notice, with careful reading of all the Canons of Baptism, several are dealing specifically with the rite of baptism, as performed by the Church...  I assert that this deals specifically with the rite of baptism as it is to be performed by the Church.

VERY GOOD!!!  I assert that you are RIGHT!!!

Now apply that to all the Canons!

Canon 2: "If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of our Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him be anathema."

Canon 5: "If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema."

The rite of the sacrament of baptism employed by the Church, according to the correct matter and form, IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION!

Again, no.  You are interpreting with your schismatic agenda.  Refer to my explanation of Pius.  The same logic applies here.

Quote from: C.M.M.M.

True.  Pay close attention to the words used, specifically 'preserved', which, when understood properly, assumes that one has already entered into the Church.  This fit's in perfectly with the tradition of the Church for those who leave the truth of Catholicism for something else.

No, it's not preserve, it's persevere.  And you cannot persevere in something if you never partake of it in the first place.

So you agree with my point, despite my typo?

That you think you may have made some kind of point with the above comment is rather telling.

What?  I was asking a question, not making a point.  I did some reading about Old Testament justification, and couldn't find anywhere that a cause for was declared.

As Dawn said, the rules have changed with the advent of the Gospel.  Getting into Old Testament justification is neither necessary (since it is no longer relevant) or prudent (since the answers are nowhere to be found).

The Catholic Church teaches that the legal prescriptions of the Mosaic Law are obsolete, but they were at one point adequate for salvation.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, 1442: "It firmly believes, professes and teaches that the legal prescriptions of the Old Testament or the Mosaic Law, which are divided into ceremonies, holy sacrifices and sacraments, because they were instituted to signify something in the future, although they were adequate for the divine cult of that age, once our Lord Jesus Christ who was signified by them had come, came to an end and the sacraments of the New Testament had their beginning."

I did some reading about Old Testament justification, and couldn't find anywhere that a cause for was declared.

It is not necessary to do extra reading to realize the cause for ANY justification, at ANY time post-Fall, is the merits of Christ Crucified.  It is all just a question of how those merits are applied.

Getting into Old Testament justification is neither necessary (since it is no longer relevant) or prudent (since the answers are nowhere to be found).

If you think it is remotely possible that ALL people were dying without being justified, but SOME were hanging out in Limbo in said state, and were subsequently justified post-mortem, "getting into OT justification" is rather necessary.