[GirlShortstop]

...the Council fathers wished to offer pastoral guidance only, and therefore nothing they said was actually either binding or infallible.

"In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent.  This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra..."

ultima, I will NEVER see how you can adhere to your line of thought.  Thank you for the courtesy of a reply nonetheless.
FReegards.

[ultima ratio]

If you can't understand my line of thought, read post #114 for a fuller explanation.

[ultima ratio]

One of the problems that is unique in our age is that many pronoucements of the Holy See actually contradict previous Church teachings. So a dilemma is set up: are we to follow Rome's contemporary teachings--or its previous ones? Which have precedence? This problem is not so much apparent in papal encyclicals as it is in statements made by papal organs such as the Pontifical Biblical Commission or by the Vatican Commission for Religious Relations or by the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, among others. These have semi-official papal status, but teach doctrines that are out of keeping with Church doctrines affirmed in the past.