[ealgeone]

You kinda left out the key one!

Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.

§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.

§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__PU.HTM

In either case, the Roman Catholic has to follow the pope.

[Campion]

"The Roman Catholic" is bound to obey his superiors (in their lawful spheres of authority) unless they command him to sin. Holding heretical opinions is sin. Therefore, if the Pope were to demand adherence to a novelty of doctrine that was inimical to the faith -- heresy, in other words -- I would be morally bound to reject that teaching.

[ebb tide]

In either case, the Roman Catholic has to follow the pope.

Only the Catholic popes, not Bergoglio.