[dangus]

>>If the Pope, speaking ex-cathedra, says something that contradicts the Bible, then what are we left with? We are left with one of only two options: A: the Pope is not infallible speaking ex-cathedra, or B: the Bible is not inerrant in its original manuscripts. But, if B: is the case, and the Bible does contain errors, then the question becomes what parts are errors and what parts are not, and there is no rational way to achieve a firm answer, so the whole foundation crumbles. <<

Basically what you are saying could be applied to any law of science: If the impossible happened, then the fact that it happened would disprove that it was impossible; therefore, it is not impossible. But the reason it is "impossible" is because Christ promised the Holy Spirit would not allow it to happen.

Papal correctness can not be used to prove Papal infallibility. Papal infallibility can only be used to prove Papal correctness.

[monkfan]

But the reason it is "impossible" is because Christ promised the Holy Spirit would not allow it to happen.

Would this be a bad time to mention that several of the Popes were condemned as heretics by the Councils?