"If a future pope teaches anything contrary to the Catholic faith, do not follow him." --Pius IX.
So, back to this question. What specific doctrine has the current, or any of the past four popes taught that you must obey that is contrary to the Catholic Faith?
Remember this discussion, which went on for eons, and you refuse to answer, then finally admitted, there was none. Finally.
So what does this quote apply to? Does it somehow negate Pius X's quote? But Pius X came after Pius IX.
JPII directly discourages by his governance, Catholic Piety, the papacy, EENS, the respect due sacred things, and a whole host of other scandals. He's the Pope. A very very bad Pope. He may be a really nice guy. But he's a bad Pope. He's known about the pedophiles but he's done nothing about it. Nothing. Absolutely Nothing.
JPII did not even command LeFebvre directly Not to consecrate bishops. He pleaded, cajoled and did the usual diplomatic dance. But there is no explicit command from JPII.
The question really is, How can you be disobedient to a papal "deadbeat Dad?" He's never around when you need him. He's usually not in his right mind. Yep. He's still your father. But he's also a deadbeat. You can't count on him to lead. And you never could. He was given time and power and failed to use it. He abandoned the defense of the faith and his flock. He's pushed so many into heresy with his vague and overlycomplicated "reflections" on what "might" be possible in the Church that he leaves no room for real doctrine as known and understood from before Augustine's time to Pius XII's time.
Ut Unum Sint leaves open the inference that JPII is "open to a new situation" regarding papal primacy. What in the world does that mean? That is "UNDEFINING" something. The exact opposite of what a Pope is supposed to do. His doctrine is exclusively undefining and undermining what was previously understood and accepted. This is a scandal among the other pile of scandals. This is malfeasance in High office and a direct assault on the Unity of the Church. Just as his false opinion that Christ's prayer was not fulfilled is prevalent throughout the encyclical.
When he stops the political blather,and starts defining things and doing his job as Pope, he'll get the obedience you crave and he obviously hates having given him.
Both syncretism and indifferentism are contrary to the Catholic faith. Offering our most sacred altars to heathens for the worship of their gods was a clear violation of Church doctrine. I have no intention of accepting such teachings--not in the name of ecumenism nor anything else--because the Church has consistently considered such actions heretical. No pope is exempt from these teachings any more than he is exempt from not commiting murder.
Well of course that's correct, Mershon. There isn't any.
That's not the problem. The problem is that faithless prelates suppress true Catholic belief and practice, burden us with crap, and use a myriad of deceptive and coercive means to get the faithful to go along with a new understanding of Catholcism, and a new practice of it.
But that's not nearly as bad as the over-zealous right-wing liberals calling themselves conservative Catholics they are manipulating into their service, who fall all over themselves to embrace a stupid new way of being Catholic in our age of enlightened so-called. It's these people who are the brainless inertia of conciliar Catholicism. The faithless prelates are merely enablers by dropping a truckload of the manure of ambiguity in their driveways. They know they can count on the pious newbies to make of it what they will and to distribute it accordingly.
What, do you think you caught him in some sort of trap here?
Here's the fact: a New Catholicism is being brandished as if it were something we were under pain of obedience to buy into and to practice. Don't pretend like you don't know this, eh? Check it out: every instance of a traditional Catholic priest getting the axe is based not on any errancy in doctrine or practice, but on some dorky trumped up disobedience charge. And they trap them into the disobedience charges, too. They lay out traps for them, and make compliance impossible. That's because they could never deal with true Catholic teaching and true Catholic practice up front. Never. They know this.
How about this. What's his error? You would be at equal loss to identify it. Is he going to Hell, or what? What's at stake here?