lupie:
No not really, that happens everyday here, i.e. Catholic doctrines as being heretical. The only problem is the reality that Catholic Doctrines stand in continuity with the historic Church, it is the modern and various versions found in Protestant doctrine that is heretical.
So this Catholic actually welcomes when someone claims a Catholic Doctrine is heretical, it allows me to write post that “destroys their position”, which my Siclian blood loves to do. So I have no problem with someone posting a Catholic Doctrine, as long as the post it accurately which is easy to do because the Catholic Church does not hide what it believes, the Catechism promulgated in 1992 is all there to see, and one can also find the Catechism of the Council of Trent, as it is out there online as well, along with various cites that document all of the Dogmatic Statements and pastoral and discipline canons of all of the 21 Councils that the Catholic Church recognizes.
Now, as somenone alluded to, any appeal to Sacred Scripture or anytime someone cites it ,they are in reality appealing to an interpretation of Scripture, no matter how they want to slice it. So as another Catholic poster noted, every Protestant when they cite and appeal to Sacred Scripture are in essence appealing to an interpretation of Scripture and interpretation is based on certain theological presuppositions and given that a core Protestant principle is sola scriptura and that all of them have stressed the principle of “priesthood of each believer” apart from the Community of the CHurch and Tradition, that results in every Protestant acting as his or her own “Pope” and is thus a magesterium of “One”. For that matter, when a Catholic does it, or holds a doctrine in contrary to “Defined Doctrines”, they are in essence acting the same way to be fair.
Neither of those is consistent with historic orthodox Apostolic Tradition as expressed via the early Church Fathers and great Councils of the early Church [Nicea 325 AD, Constantinopile 381 AD, Ephesus 431 AD, Chalcedon 451 AD].
Which was every bit as much the product of human interpretation as any contemporary or subsequent "heresy".
The "apostolic tradition" simply happens to be the one which was adopted by the Roman state and therefore backed with the force of law.
One can be an Arian or a Nestorian or a Socinian, each of whom could make their own Biblical case, and be no less a Christian.
I notice that whenever Fundamentalist Protestants believe something the Church fathers believed about the "old testament," the first eleven chapters of Genesis, or the Creation, the belief of the fathers is dismissed as "they were men of their time." But when the Church fathers believed something that Fundamentalist Protestants simply cannot stretch their minds around or believe in good conscience that Catholic apologists suddenly treat those opinions as infallible and non-negotiable.
Hence real presence is "absolutely essential," and six day young earth creationism is almost banned.