No veneration is an act. Contumacoous refusal while aware that she is due it is another matter. Here is a good explanation:
“In every age the Church has drawn a fundamental distinction (which, on account of its importance, should never be overlooked) between formal and merely material heretics, and her penal legislation was directed solely against the former category. As the open and obstinate rebellion of a Catholic against the Divinely instituted teaching authority of the Church, formal heresy still remains one of the most grievous sins. Material heresy on the other hand, i.e. an error in faith entertained undesignedly and unconsciously, is in itself neither sinful nor punishable, except where the error is itself inexcusable. In excusable error are all who possess subjectively the firm and honest conviction that they have the true faith of Christ, thus including the vast majority of non-Catholics, who were born and educated in their particular form of belief”
Interesting. If it is not too much trouble, will you provide a link or at least the name of the source of the quote? Thank you.
I see how easy it would be even for ME to use a; um; scatological term here.
Thank GOD that I am off the hook!
I wonder which one of these CATHOLICS had the teaching AUTHORITY???
Acts 15:39
And there arose a sharp disagreement, so that they separated from each other.