It seems clear to me that errors of judgment have already been made by Pope Francis, by those who appointed him, and those whom he has appointed. How harmful or how anodyne, short term or long term, is going to be hard to sort out, as always.
As a Catholic, I am convinced that, as you rightly say, true belief is not be coerced by torture --- which Benedict said was intrinsically evil. I think Benedict has the backing of Divine and natural Law on that one. Other popes erred on this in the past, but did not introduce their errors into the de fidedoctrine of the Church.
Here's an interesting incident: Pope Innocent III, on the very day he died in Rome, appeared in flames to the Abbess Lutgarda in Brabant (Belgium) and said he was being punished for three great crimes he has committed. One can't know what they were, but I don't think I'm far wrong when I think of the Albigensian Crusade, the Fourth Crusade (sack of Constantinople) and the suppression of the Waldensians. His errand was to beg the abbess to have her sisters pray for his soul, let he remain in Purgatory until the end of time.
Incidents like that make me think that God allows torturers to get a good taste of their own medicine. And Purgatory is, by all accounts, precisely this: medicinal. I've never actually prayed for Innocent III, but maybe I will now. Maybe 8 centuries in flames is enough!
As for Francis, I personally think he will be good pope, because he is a good man following a good Master. And when he errs, he will do well to repent quickly and take correction graciously. Let's pray for him.
Which means you only have a limited coverage plan, and most of what RCs believe and practice has never been stated infallibly. Meanwhile, how many time Rome, and not only popes, have spoken infallibly, is subject to some interpretation, as is to varying degrees their meaning, and which are not infallible.
In any case, Scripture known not of Rome's formulaic infallibility, and such an infallible magisterium was not necessary for writings to be established as Scripture nor truth to be preserved, nor for souls to have assurance of faith, contrary to the RC argument for her mag. The church simply did not begin under the means of establishment truth that Rome operates under.
Here's an interesting incident: Pope Innocent III, on the very day he died in Rome, appeared in flames to the Abbess Lutgarda in Brabant (Belgium) and said he was being punished for three great crimes he has committed...His errand was to beg the abbess to have her sisters pray for his soul, let he remain in Purgatory until the end of time.
And legend also has it she also levitated and dripped blood from her forehead and hair when entranced, but which legends are just that, while if she has a vision of "Innocent" in flames it was him in Hell, the only place he would be outside Heaven.
And Purgatory is, by all accounts, precisely this: medicinal.
Purgatory is in invention resulting from a false premise. It is true that true faith is that which effects characteristic holiness in heart and deed, “things which accompany salvation,” (Heb. 6:9) and which includes repentance when one is convicted of sin, (1Jn. 1:6,9) but one either has such faith, which has great recompense of reward, (Heb. 10:35) or he does not. And those professors who do not, but deny the faith as by drawing back in unbelief or impenitent sin, are not promised a second chance but damnation. (Gal. 5:1-4; Heb. 3:6,12,14; 10:25-39)
Those who are immature and do not always strive lawfully will suffer the grievous disapproval of the Lord and loss of rewards at His return (not at death), but will be saved despite the loss of works being burnt up, referring to what he built the church with, and not because of this loss. See 1Cor. 3. This is the only postmortem suffering mentioned in Scripture for believers. here .
Meanwhile, growth in grace is accomplished in this life with its trials and temptations and ability to deliver oneself. Thus the Lord Himself was "made perfect thru sufferings." (Heb. 5:8,9)