Oh dear, was it something I said?
Which means you refused to bow down to the red pradas.
Never have before, why the difference now?
Congratualtions, if Rome calls you a heretic, it means they reject the plain teachings of those who understand that grace is free and the finished work of Christ is sufficient.
We have always understood that the Grace of God is freely offered to all men and that what Christ did is sufficient to claim all men from death.
Welcome to the world of following Paul as he followed Christ by direct revelations of the risen Christ, for a pattern to them who would hereafter believe on Christ Jesus to life everlasting.
We use Paul as a great example and use much of his letters to his flock as a model for Church hierarchy. Ummm, no different than say, this morning. Do you have a point?
Simply claiming salvation is not going to pass muster with the Judge. Imagine getting a traffic ticket and then claiming that the most righteous Judge in the Universe is going to let you off because you want it in spite of all of Scripture telling you the opposite?
And what will your account be? Something that somebody else did?
If you read Matthew 25, that recompense can be to be thrown in the outer darkness. This is what we believe; this is the Faith of the Church. Not some airy fairy story told by sugar pill pushers.
But now in this post you do a turnaround and say:
We have always understood that the Grace of God is freely offered to all men and that what Christ did is sufficient to claim all men from death.
At one point you seem to say we cannot depend upon another to pay our penalty, but then you claim - as "we have always understood" - that God's freely offered grace is sufficient through Christ's sacrifice to "claim all men from death", which means another paid our penalty. And y'all wonder why we question your Gospel?