My Own Experience of Roman Catholic Hypocrisy: Doubting the Bible While Trusting the Papacy and Councils Above the Bible!
When it came to biblical interpretation, they say that I must never doubt the Council of Trent or the Pope because of papal infallibility. According to Catholic.com, here's how Papal Infallibility is defined:
Vatican II explained the doctrine of infallibility as follows: "Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they can nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly. This is so, even when they are dispersed around the world, provided that while maintaining the bond of unity among themselves and with Peter’s successor, and while teaching authentically on a matter of faith or morals, they concur in a single viewpoint as the one which must be held conclusively. This authority is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church. Their definitions must then be adhered to with the submission of faith" (Lumen Gentium 25).
Infallibility belongs in a special way to the pope as head of the bishops (Matt. 16:17–19; John 21:15–17). As Vatican II remarked, it is a charism the pope "enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (Luke 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals. Therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, an assistance promised to him in blessed Peter."
It's important to understand that the Roman Catholic institution does not say that the Pope is perfect that like he can't be wrong like he can't make the mistake of telling the Cardinals that there was a new Pizza Parlor in this part of Rome when there wasn't one. Rather the heresy teaches that that the Pope has the assistance of the Holy Spirit to prevent from from doctrinal error which is not true either considering how the Vatican's teaching has contradicted the Bible many times.
I don't know if it's time to really declare the Vatican's way of reasoning to be guilty of equivocating words that while they teach that the Pope is not infallible in one sense, he is infallible in the other. My brother-in-Christ, Bro. Gerry Soliman who had read my previous writings when I was still an Independent Baptist before I became Reformed, said this in the post concerning the demotion of a Roman Catholic Cardinal:
Oh yes, then there is that ridiculous defense that the Pope was not declaring the controversies as official. The Pope can be in error as much as he wants as long as he is not speaking ex-cathedra (from the chair as pope). How convenient!
To the Roman Catholic apologists out there reading this, how long will you live up with this hypocrisy and double standard? You declare even the slightest difference in teaching between Protestants as a major and catastrophic anarchy among them. But when the pope has a different view, you still claim that you're still united?
Remove the dirt from your eyes first before you remove from others.
No matter how many times they beat around the bush (not getting straight to the point), I still cannot help but agree with Bro. Gerry's statement above. It has become very convenient that the Pope can say something absurd as long as he is not speaking ex-cathedra then they slam it on my face that shouldn't doubt the Pope with doctrinal issues. If the Pope can't even discipline himself when it comes to being error and be in error as long as he's not sitting on his chair, how can I trust him with interpreting the Scripture and speak doctrine without error? When I think of the
The Vatican's history of doctrinal error has been evidence that the Pope doesn't even have the assistance of the Holy Spirit to start with. When I think of listening to the incumbent Pope, it does get annoying to hear his unbiblical garbage one way or another like declaration of death penalty is unbiblical, to declare that a personal relationship with Christ is "dangerous" and I don't know what garbage do the Popes have to spew. If the Pharisees kept speaking unbiblical garbage, the Popes who are the successors of Caiaphas also spew the same unbiblical garbage. I am not surprised that Roman Catholic apologists tend to say, "The Council of Trent is the final authority." that they wrongly appeal to Matthew 16:16-18 to justify their heretical views.
Jesus warned in Mark 7:8-13 of the dangers of rejecting God's Word in full to keep the traditions of men. Looking at how Caiaphas took over the Jewish place of worship as its head and he became absolute law, does that not remind you of the Pope? It's no wonder why a lot of early Reformers declared the Pope the Antichrist and later, others viewed the final Pope as the Antichrist while others view the final Pope as the False Prophet.