Number 1 Error/Heresy in the Church

[Michael Wilson]

Phil,

You cited one church father.

No St. Thomas cites St. Augustine, but he says that "all agree" i.e. All the Church Fathers:

I answer that, All are agreed in saying that original sin was remitted in circumcision.

Phil:

Your appeal to authority and labeling mean very little at this point.  They are your "opinion".  I will certainly retract my claim that it is heresy, being that Augustine certainly appears to agree with Aquinas.  But, I will not retract my claim that it is erroneous.

In discussions about the Catholic faith, authority means everything.
re. My "opinion": St. Thomas cites St. Augustin and says it is also the opinion of "All".
re. "Erroneous"; Here is where you would have to cite a Doctor of the Church; Papal Encyclical or Manual of Dogmatic Theology; otherwise its just your opinion; and can be dismissed.
Phil:

Concerning the fathers, "llkewise it decrees that the works and treatises of all the orthodox fathers who in no way have deviated from the society of the holy roman church ... ought to be read

Great! I agree, lets see some quotes from these Church Fathers on the subject under discussion.
Phil,

Finally, St. paul says, "Prove...all things, hold that which is good".
That is a far cry from what you make of my opposition.

Good, how are we going to "prove what is good" except through the authority of the Church?
Re. Authority of St. Augustine: Yes, St. Augustine is a great authority; but he is not to be preferred over the teaching of the Magisterium; but again, you haven't quoted from either St. Augustine, from some other Father of the Church, or from the teachings of the Magisterium; you have basically been 'freelancing' here.
Phil,

But, a material heretic who is catholic and in the church is not by the very fact of their material heresy cast out of the church.  It requires a formal declaration.  If it requires a formal declaration in the church, it requires a formal declaration outside of the church.  You have yet to step up to the plate in that regard, and that is what kicked this debate off.

Yes, I cited Mistici Corporis and, again you gave it your own "spin" without citing where you came up with this. I can cite from a Manual of Dogmatic Theology to substantiate my view of it (plus the obvious sense of the words). But I'm not getting anything back from you in this regard of equal value.
Phil,

You cannot substantiate your claim that a non catholic sectarian pastor is ipso facto a formal heretic.

Yes, I concede that I will try to find something on this.
Phil:

"Once a catholic, always a catholic" is an error/heresy. 

Fine, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but please substantiate your claim.

[Gardener]

All of these things Philip is claiming/addressing have already been addresses multiple times, consistently, by the Church.

It's the height of irony that in declaring heresies, he must engage in them to defend his position(s).

The mind boggles.

[St.Justin]

 "excommunication" does not make one no longer a Catholic. It for bids ta person from receiving the Sacraments except for confession.

I have no idea where the idea came from that is makes one no longer Catholic.

[Non Nobis]

"excommunication" does not make one no longer a Catholic. It for bids ta person from receiving the Sacraments except for confession.

I have no idea where the idea came from that is makes one no longer Catholic.

Maybe from Pope Pius XII saying that it separates one from actual membership in the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church.  https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12mysti.htm

Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. “For in one spirit” says the Apostle, “were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free.” 17 As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. 18 And therefore if a man refuse to hear the Church let him be considered — so the Lord commands — as a heathen and a publican. 19 It follows that those are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.

But I wonder if they can't still be called Catholic if they don't apostasize; is there a kind of membership in exile if not actual membership and unity? I'm not a theologian.