1031 31. Condemned Error: Perfect and sincere charity, which is from a "pure heart and good conscience and a faith not feigned" [1 Tim. 1:5], can be in catechumens as well as in penitents without the remission of sins.
1032 32. Condemned Error: That charity which is the fullness of the law is not always connected with the remission of sins.
1033 33. Condemned Error: A catechumen lives justly and rightly and holily, and observes the commandments of God, and fulfills the law through charity, which is only received in the laver of baptism, before the remission of sins has been obtained.
http://denzinger.patristica.net/#n1000
The above errors were condemned in the Papal Bull Ex omnibus afflictionibus published on October 1, 1567 by Saint Pope Pius V, the Roman Pontiff who confirmed the decrees of the Council of Trent!!!
Yeah, I'm sure that the Council of Florence needs to be interpreted by a FUTURE Papal Bull that has nothing to do with this.
You guys just throw piles of manure at wall hoping that some of it will stick.
31 and 33 essentially reduce to 32 and what's being condemned is the question of whether there can be charity without the remission of sins. du Bay had this notion of a kind of charity that could exist in the soul while at the same time the guilt of sin would remain.
du Bay is saying essentially, in 31, that a catechumen can have a kind of charity but yet would not be saved if he died in that state because his sins would not have been remitted. There was some talk among even mainstream theologians of what was called the
amor initialis, the beginning love of incipient charity that was a precursor to true supernatural charity. du Bay simply took that discussion too far.
33 is stating that even when the catechumen receives charity in the laver of Baptism this takes place before the remission of sins has been obtained. So evidently du Bay believed that even when charity is received in Baptism there wasn't always an immediate remission of sins.