It seems even broader than that according to popes who taught that,
'the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors," "to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff," "of submitting with docility to their judgment," with "no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed... not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ;" and 'not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority, " for "obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces," and not set up "some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them," "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent." (Sources http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3578348/posts?page=14#14)
It sure is good that Catholicism has one centralized authority to determine what correct doctrine is so people don’t stray from it, isn’t it?
Then they can show us be example, the unity of belief that comes from having one authority that everyone can follow.
Now there’s no arguing or quibbling about the fines points of doctrine since everyone believes and agrees with the dictates of the Vatican.
Right?
Someone, i e., Bergoglio, who sold out to the demonic, pagan Pachamama by inviting the devotees onto sacred ground and blessesd the idol axiomatically has no power, authority, etc.