The pope can bind and loose.  The Church is made up of divine and human parts.  The Church is the bride of Christ.  They are one, in a spiritual sense, but still distinct.

Nope. They are one and the same thing.

This is repeated by PPXII in a few of his encyclicals, it's even the title of the often quoted:
Mystici Corporis
The Mystical Body of Christ, the Church

Which, on a side note, is why it is altogether ridiculous, even asinine to be concerned with and doubt the Church's indefectibility, as at least one poster on CI has even dubbed himself an "indefectibilist."  

This is pretty incredible. Yes, "a fornicator is separated from the Church..or in other words, "separated from the unity of the Body." Because of their sin, they separate themselves from Christ, which is the Church, which means they have separated themselves from the unity of the Body, whats more they make themselves an enemy of Christ and they cannot partake of the sacraments (except Penance).

There is no way for you to reconcile what you are saying with what Pius XII taught:

Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have [...] not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body...

Mystici Corporis 

If a fornicator is separated from the unity of the Body due to that sin, then he is not a member of the Church. That is the only conclusion to what you are saying

But no, "you must also admit that he [fornicator] loses membership in the Church, and is therefore outside the Church." Again,as I said above.

See above

If that were the case, a fornicator could not receive absolution of his sins..as Pope Eugene IV teaches at the Council of Florence that...the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church’s sacraments contribute to salvation"
Then neither could a Catholic with the sin of heresy on his soul.

A heretic must abjure his heresy and have censure absolved (not a sacrament) before being absolved of his sins (sacrament). There is so such requirement for a fornicator

One cannot be separated from God, and at the same time united with the Church because the two are one. Such a thing is impossible, because the two are one.
" ...the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing". - Pope Pius XII Humani Generis

You fail to even attempt to reconcile what you believe with what Pius XII teaches. I would say a fornicator (or other mortal sinner save for heretics, schismatics, etc.) is a dead member, still attached. Not separated..unlike a heretic, apostates, or schismatic..like Pius XII teaches

The problem you have, is the priest who is absolving the penitent is a heretic.

So we are talking about the minister of the sacrament, not the recipient? If a heretic, schismatic, or apostate priest can effect the sacrament of Extreme Unction it would be because the salvation of souls is supreme law of the Church..not because he is a member (he isn't, as per Pius XII)

No, because they never were, as St. Thomas said: "Baptism without faith is of no value."

Huh? You're saying infants validly baptised in heretical/schismatic sects are not Catholics?

Trent, On Baptism:

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the baptism which is even given by heretics in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, with the intention of doing what the Church doth, is not true baptism; let him be anathema.

CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that little children, for that they have not actual faith, are not, after having received baptism, to be reckoned amongst the faithful; and that, for this cause, they are to be rebaptized when they have attained to years of discretion; or, that it is better that the baptism of such be omitted, than that, while not believing by their own act, they should be bapized in the faith alone of the Church; let him be anathema.


Pope Clement VI, Super quibusdam, Sept. 20, 1351: “…We ask: In the first place whether you and the Church of the Armenians which is obedient to you, believe that all those who in baptism have received the same Catholic faith, and afterwards have withdrawn and will withdraw in the future from the communion of this same Roman Church, which one alone is Catholic, are schismatic and heretical, if they remain obstinately separated from the faith of this Roman Church. In the second place, we ask whether you and the Armenians obedient to you believe that no man of the wayfarers outside the faith of this Church, and outside the obedience of the Pope of Rome, can finally be saved.”

Pope Leo XIII, Nobilissima Gallorum Gens:
The Church, guardian of the integrity of the Faith-which, in virtue of its authority, deputed from God its Founder, has to call all nations to the knowledge of Christian lore, and which is consequently bound to watch keenly over the teaching and upbringing of the children placed under its authority by baptism

" ...the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing". - Pope Pius XII Humani Generis

  Never said they weren't the same.  I said that Christ is separate from the REST of his Mystical Body.

Christ + Church = Mystical Body
Christ without the Church = protestantism

Getting back to the point, before you confused things, is the truth that one can be separated from Christ (though sin) but not separated from the Church.

Pius XII literally says that NOT ALL SINS separate from the Church.
For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy.

There is no way for you to reconcile what you are saying with what Pius XII taught:

If a fornicator is separated from the unity of the Body due to that sin, then he is not a member of the Church. That is the only conclusion to what you are saying

 You are equating being separated with being outside. The pope uses the words "separate themselves" for a reason....it does not mean outside or he would have said "put themselves outside."   

A heretic must abjure his heresy and have censure absolved (not a sacrament) before being absolved of his sins (sacrament). There is so such requirement for a fornicator

Censures get lifted, sins get absolved. This occurs in all confessions in the traditional formula every time the priest administers the absolution for a reason. What do YOU think that reason is?

You fail to even attempt to reconcile what you believe with what Pius XII teaches. I would say a fornicator (or other mortal sinner save for heretics, schismatics, etc.) is a dead member, still attached. Not separated..unlike a heretic, apostates, or schismatic..like Pius XII teaches

Again, he is talking about sin, he is speaking of the effects of the nature of sin, here in particular he mentions the nature of the sins of heresy, schism and apostacy. "For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church..." That is the nature of those sins. Not every sin, however grave they may be, have that same nature. He does not say that no other sins do not have the same nature, because they all do. 
   
Next, all sin severs, but does so spiritually. If one's head gets severed there's no healing it, but spiritually, because it was part of the body, it can be reattached through confession. 

So we are talking about the minister of the sacrament, not the recipient? If a heretic, schismatic, or apostate priest can effect the sacrament of Extreme Unction it would be because the salvation of souls is supreme law of the Church..not because he is a member (he isn't, as per Pius XII)

What? So Trent teaches that a non-Catholic priest can absolve someone in danger of death? Balderdash I say. 

Huh? You're saying infants validly baptised in heretical/schismatic sects are not Catholics?

No, I never said that - you are falsely saying I said that.

  Never said they weren't the same.  I said that Christ is separate from the REST of his Mystical Body.

Nope, that is impossible.

" ...the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing"

No, you're forgetting the first phrase "Not every sin...however grave...has the nature...to sever..."

Not all sins are equal.  That's the point.  No amount of mental gymnastics from you, changes what he said.

What he does *not* say is: No sins separate from the Church except heresy, schism and apostasy which is how you guys are reading it. 

You are equating being separated with being outside. The pope uses the words "separate themselves" for a reason....it does not mean outside or he would have said "put themselves outside." 

If you are not a member, you are not a part of. If you are not a member you cannot be inside. If you are separated from, you are not a member. If you are separated from, you cannot be a part of, or inside.
As Pius XII teaches,  "Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have [...] not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body..."

You are trying to make a distinction when there is none to be made

Censures get lifted, sins get absolved. This occurs in all confessions in the traditional formula every time the priest administers the absolution for a reason. What do YOU think that reason is?

The censure is lifted, the heretic is now a member again. The reason is evident. A non-member cannot partake in the sacraments.

Again, he is talking about sin, he is speaking of the effects of the nature of sin, here in particular he mentions the nature of the sins of heresy, schism and apostacy. "For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church..." That is the nature of those sins. Not every sin, however grave they may be, have that same nature. He does not say that no other sins do not have the same nature, because they all do.

 Don't even know what you're talking about at this point. Pius XII teaches that heresy, schism, apostasy by their nature separate someone from the Church..unlike other grave sins

Next, all sin severs, but does so spiritually. If one's head gets severed there's no healing it, but spiritually, because it was part of the body, it can be reattached through confession.

Right...but not all sin separates someone from the Church..like heresy, apostasy, schism as Pius XII teaches 

What? So Trent teaches that a non-Catholic priest can absolve someone in danger of death? Balderdash I say.

I didn't say that, I said if that could happen. I'm not sure if it can happen. What I do know is that unrepentant, unconscious heretics cannot receive Extreme Unction..because they are not penitents, and not members of the Church

No, I never said that - you are falsely saying I said that.

I say: What do you make of those validly baptised as infants in heretical sects? They were made Catholic by their baptism, but adhere to their false sect when they reach the age of reason. Are they still Catholic?

You say: As St. Thomas said: "Baptism without faith is of no value." They are not members after the age of reason if they remain adhering to their false sect.

I say: Not members, okay. But I asked if they are Catholic. Are they?

You say: No, because they never were, as St. Thomas said: "Baptism without faith is of no value."

I say: Huh? You're saying infants validly baptised in heretical/schismatic sects are not Catholics?


You say: No, I never said that - you are falsely saying I said that

As they say: Make it make sense

No, "Not every sin" means what it says, you are insisting he means "no other sin." Which is why you, "the distinction man" fails to make the proper distinction. 

You're trying to make a distinction, with no conclusion and no facts.

You're arguing that Pius XII meant that OTHER sins are similar to heresy, schism or apostasy.  But he doesn't list those.  Nor does he make a reference to a list that exists.  Your distinction fails.  

You have no proof that this distinction is valid.  Making a distinction without an explanation is illogical.