While Catholics greatly disagree with each other, their claimed superior doctrinal unity is based upon a required implicit assent to an assuredly Infallible Magisterium (IM), which has infallibly declared itself to be infallible (in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and content-based) formula), which is the very means used by cults (which deviate from certain core truths evangelicals contend for), versus the Biblical means of “manifestation of the truth.” (2Cor. 4:2) Nor can Rome cannot boast of a greater unity than any individual group may have based upon “sola ecclesia,” while it may be argued that the transdemonational unity of the Spirit among the evangelicals is superior in quality than that of Roman Catholicism, as it does not depend upon implicit assent to an IM.
The fact that disagreement among Catholics may not be as manifest as it might be if Catholics were more committed to doctrine - rather than evidencing that modern Rome allows and effectually fosters laxity in this area (much to the chagrin of Traditional Catholics) - does not negate the fact that beneath their oft-repeated profession of certainty is much real or potential uncertainty and disagreement.*
Even though Catholics have an IM, yet they are confused over how many times Rome has spoken infallibly (and which also have to some degree of interpretation), from 3 to potentially hundreds or more. And which is necessary to ascertain in order to yield the required assent of faith.
Moreover, as these declarations do not necessarily extend to her argumentation or reasons behind them, Catholics can be confused as to where the infallibility begins or ends.
Catholics also may not know, with the certainty of faith, whether they have received a true sacrament.
In addition, some varying degrees of dissent are allowed for teachings of the non-infallible magisteriums, which rarely issues infallible pronouncements, and is where much (or most according to Sungenis) of what Catholics believe and practice comes from, and this degree of dissent and where, is variously interpreted.
Catholic are also commanded not to interpret Scripture contrary to the “unanimous consent” of the Fathers, but this “unanimous consent” of the Fathers is itself interpreted to mean something quite different than unanimous.
In addition, as very very little of the Bible has been infallibly defined, and clarity is lacking in many areas, thus the Catholic has great liberty in interpreting Scripture, resulting in varying interpretations, even as Rome's scholarship exhibits the same. Looking to the official Roman Catholic Bible for America for guidance, the Catholic will find a hermeneutic and interpretations that vary from others, and is quite liberal.
Looking to Vatican Two, Catholics find confusion as to its own orthodoxy and degree of authority and thus the assent one must give. Here on FR some Roman Catholics contend that Lumen Gentium does not affirm Protestants can be saved unless they convert before death, and the charge of sedevacantists that Vatican Two seriously deviated from orthodox Roman Catholicism, or is so ambiguous as to allow them to be invoked by both sides, is not without a good deal of substance. Nor is the rejection by the Orthodox of Papal infallibility and Roman purgatory, as being contrary to Tradition.
Where Catholics seem most unified in is confidence in Rome that it will see them through to glory, eventually, no matter how nominal, as long as they do not covert to become conservative evangelicals as multitudes do (far more then the opposite). Yet the basis for Rome's claim of unique supremacy and power is herself, as she has infallibly defined herself thusly, and submission to her is said to be necessary to know truth of a certainty, versus searching the Scripture with the heart of a noble Berean.
Furthermore, while infallibility does not extend to all a pope says or does, but is exercised when conforming Rome's infallibly defined formula, yet much of Rome's guidance and unity is based upon having a visible head. But looking to their leader, Catholics can have a pope who, according to a leading Roman Catholic apologist,
1. Invited pagans to pray to their false gods.
2. Looked the other way while his clerics raped his children, and ordained faggots to say his Masses
3. Shuffled pedophiles and homosexuals from parish to parish, even giving them safe haven at the Vatican.
4. Subjected those Catholic who dare protest to droning quotes from Vatican I and Lumen Gentium about “submission”
5. Watched scantily clad women dance while Mass was being said.
6. Suggested that hell might not exist.
7. Suggested that the Jews still have their Old Covenant
8. Kissed the Koran
9. Made it appear as if God has given man universal salvation by using ambiguous language in official writings
10. Accepted the tenets of evolution.
11. Wrote a catechism that contained theological errors and ambiguities.
12. Changed the canonization laws: marriage laws, capital punishment laws, laws about women’s roles.
13. Went against the tradition by putting women in leadership positions and dispensing with head coverings.
14. Failed to excommunicate heretical bishops and priests who were spouting heresies.
15. Protected Bishop Marcinkus and his entourage of financial hoodlums in the Vatican.
16. Ignored the pleas of a bishop who was merely trying to preserve the tradition (Archbishop Levebre)
17. Exonerated Luther
18. Allowed the Luther‐Catholic Joint Declaration, signed by a high‐ranking Cardinal, to explicitly state that “man is justified by faith alone.”
19. Disobeyed the Fatima request to consecrate Russia. — http://www.catholicintl.com/articles/Response%20to%20John%20Dejak%20of%20The%20Wanderer.pdf http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/04/sungenis-alone.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Just some of the things which Roman Catholics can disagree on to varying degrees,
The infallible or non-infallible nature of multitudes of teachings
Meanings of the above
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Lemun Gentum (status of Prots)
Whether the anathemas of Trent still stand and what they entail
The infallibility of Scripture, and scope of inerrancy claims, and hermeneutical methodology .
What Tradition is
What the Fathers taught
The distinction between contrition and attrition and contritio caritate perfecta.
Whether Tradition is the second of a two-part revelation (known as partim-partim), or if both forms of revelation contain the entirety of God's revealed truth.
Darwinian evolution vs not-Darwinian evolution
Geocentricity or Heliocentricity
Parts of predestination
Purgatorial suffering
Whether one can know they are part of the elect.
Capital punishment.
Whether the church was right in sanctioning torture
Papal infallibility
Whether the Virgin Mary died and then was assumed or whether she was assumed before death
Whether the Pope is subject to Ecumenical Councils
What mode of predestination is right - ie Molinism vs Augustinian
Mass in Latin or in vernacular
Whether Trent closed the canon or not
Infallibility of canonizations
What happens to unbaptized babies
The authority of Vatican Two
The meaning of Lumen Gentium as regards the salvation of those apart from Rome, etc.
Bingo!