Nothing this pope has said or published is excathedra and binding on the faithful being anathema for disagreement. He has stated a wide range of personal opinions some of which are not in accord with the long held dogmas of the Church. The luxury of a long, unbroken chain of Magisterial teaching is that we can discern how Francis’ sayings fit within Church teaching and disregard what is contradictory.
However, Unam Sanctum doesn’t allow that escape provision Roman Catholics love to fly to when the pope says something they don’t like.
Gosh!
It sounds as though the Church doesn't really NEED a 'pope' then!
But the thing is that according to Unam Sanctam you still have to submit to the Pope.
Now, if you wanna argue that submission is contingent upon the orders being Biblical, we can discuss that.
My issue is that the OP insists that he doesn’t have to submit at all because he doesn’t like this current Pope, and he still claims to be a faithful Catholic even while attacking his own church leadership every single day.
So what is this now?
You all Catholics can decide all on your own that the pope whom the College of Cardinals elected as pope is Christ’s representative on earth or not?
Since when is deciding who is pope and whether or not you have to listen to him is left up to the unwashed masses anyways?
The concept of a long unbroken chain of magisterial teaching is not a luxury, it’s a fantasy, mere wishful thinking.