[mas cerveza por favor]

I have already written in post 248 that the statement by St. Catherine of Siena was humble hyperbole from one of the most audacious papal critics in history herself. Like St. Paul, she succeeded in convincing the pope to make far-reaching and necessary reforms.

The council statement only recognizes that the papal office always retains some power, not that Catholics are obliged to obey a sinful command. They most certainly are not.

[boatbums]

The council statement only recognizes that the papal office always retains some power, not that Catholics are obliged to obey a sinful command. They most certainly are not.

I'm glad to hear that. Now what should they do about dogma that does not agree with Scripture? What happens if some "tradition" is not confirmed by Scripture and/or is contradicted by it? I know about the "three-legged stool" idea, but my question concerns what has primacy in the case of such a dilemma?