[Cronos]

Let me understand you correctly. The Pope is infallable since he is a direct successor of the Apostle Peter. However, if a council like Vatican II disagrees with the Pope, then the Council takes president. Kind hard to reconcile for a "poor dumb country boy."

Tenn, I'll say this gently -- your "facts" and statements are wrong. Papal infallibility is purely for extreme circumstances as an arbitrator when a Council does NOT come to a conclusion on a difficult matter of faith. Take the iconoclastic heresy. Who agree with what? Or take the Arian heresy. Who made the decision then? The Emperor Constantine. Was he wrong? Should we all reject the idea of the Trinity because there was an arbitrator? Just wikipedia papal infallibility and read up on it. That's all I say -- it would give you a starting point to understand. Then read the Catholic church's view of it. You've been posting the incorrect anti-Catholic distorted view of things.

[tenn2005]

You have been posting the Catholic view of things. I and others have merely been pointing out where that view differs from the Bible.