Let us just agree that there is so much of Jesus in this post, that a Calvinist is entirely out of his depth.
Rome suffers the same error that Judaizers of old did. Acts 15, they thought they were doing the Law and that the Gentiles should be taught to do the same. Peter corrects them, after he himself had been rebuked by Paul for the same error (Galatians). But, "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are." Rome has been doing this for centuries and cannot seem to hear Peter (in spite of claiming he is their first pope).
The Beatitudes will stand, regardless of Calvin. Matthew 25 will stand, regardless of Calvin. The Judgement of All by Jesus on their conduct will stand regardless of Calvin.
So Paul explains exactly what became of the Law and the "doing" that you now advocate.
I follow Jesus, not a kaleidoscope vision of Paul.
The RCC is sometimes subtle in their error, sometimes blatant. When confronted, they say this isn't taught. Next thing you turn around...there it is: Part and parcel of salvation.
Matthew 25. Love it and embrace it, or be Judged by it. You cannot hide behind the Reformers when you are face to face with Almighty God and are confronted with the verses that you claim to read and understand.
Now we are getting somewhere. If you believe you follow Jesus to become a believer, then you are clearly a heretic. Even according to words of Orange as they sided with Augustine over Pelagius.
But, if you mean you follow Jesus AFTER He sought you and rescued you and that salvation was not due to merit on your part, without anything done on your part, without any transaction whereby grace is a payback for belief or trust on your part, then you are actually a Calvinist. Which is it?
Go ahead...tell us: Heretic or Calvinist?