Of course the Holy Spirit (a "he" by the way, not "it") was meant for all believers but as we know by even reading Scripture alone, he brings forth and gives different gifts (charisms)'to different people. Not all are "teachers" but that's what everyone has to be in the "invisible church"
Of course you will disagree here but I don't care. I don't care about your personal opinion of Scripture. So you already have the "last word" here, go ahead and post something more in response to the above if you want. Again, I don't care.
Arius (father of Arianism) was excommunicated by Bishop Peter of Alexandria in 311, but under Peter's successor Achillas, Arius was re-admitted to Christian communion and in 313 made presbyter of the Baucalis district in Alexandria. It looks like sometimes in the early church the heretics could just wait for a new Bishop and be readmitted without repenting of their heresy. Arius didn't have to "find a new church down the road" - it looks like he could just wait for the Holy Spirit to change his mind and communicate it to the sole interpreters of scripture you are so fond of. /s
As is typical for many Protestants/anti Catholic Christians around here you only give a partial account of what happened in Church history.
"In 306, Arius sided with Meletius, an Egyptian schismatic, against the Bishop of Alexandria, Peter. But their dispute was soon reconciled, and Peter ordained Arius a deacon. Having fallen out anew with Peter, Arius gained the friendship of Peter's successor, Achillas, who ordained Arius a priest in 313, thus giving him official status in the Church. Achillas was succeeded by Alexander of Alexandria; it was under this bishop that Arius first ignited the controversy now that bears his name. This argument centered upon the precise nature of the Son of God, and His relationship to God the Father, and it struck at the very heart of the Orthodox Christian faith.
...
"According to Church historian Socrates Scholasticus, Arius entered in 318 into a dispute with Bishop Alexander of Alexandria over his teachings about God's divine Sonship and substance. "
source: http://orthodoxwiki.org/Arius
If you don't like that source post another.
You'll note though the following: during the time period you're describing, Arius was going about spreading another heresy, another one he apparently DID repent of, and that's why he was re-admitted to the Church. It was only after he started the whole heresy that bears his name was he kicked out again, this (that?) time for good.
It's history and fact. So you haven't shown anything at all with your example of Arius other than to show exactly what happens to a man when he disagrees with Church teaching. He's out. Unless he repents.
So you jump into an ongoing discussion, invite anyone to respond and when you don't like the first response you whine and snivel that you "don't care" and won't respond anymore. Classic.
Please nevermind responding to my silly question. Was thinking Armenian. Time to take another nap.