Which one would be infallible? The one sitting ex-cathedra from his throne?
13 x Catholic Church had 3 popes simultaneously
827: Eugene II[3] — Valentine[4] — Gregory IV[5] 896: Formosus[6] — Boniface VI[7] — Stephen VI[8] 897: Stephen VI[8] — Romanus[9] — Theodore II[10] 928: John X[11] — Leo VI[12] — Stephen VII[13] 964: Leo VIII[14] — Benedict V[15] — John XIII[16] 1003: Sylvester II[17] — John XVII[18] — John XVIII[19] 1045: Sylvester III[20][a] — Benedict IX (second reign)[21] — Gregory VI[22][a] 1187: Urban III[23] — Gregory VIII[24] — Clement III[25] 1503: Alexander VI[26] — Pius III[27] — Julius II[28] 1555: Julius III[29] — Marcellus II[30] — Paul IV[31] 1590: Sixtus V[32] — Urban VII[33] — Gregory XIV[34] 1605: Clement VIII[35] — Leo XI[36] — Paul V[37] 1978: Paul VI — John Paul I — John Paul II
There was also a year in which the Roman Catholic Church was led by four popes, called the Year of Four Popes:
1276: Gregory X[38] — Innocent V[39] — Adrian V[40] — John XXI[41] See alsoN
4 if one counts the Black Pope, commander of the Jesuit military.
Anne Barnhardt gonna 💩
No man is infallible. Not even the pope. Not even regarding church doctrine. ALL are born with original sin.
I’m not putting it in terms I believe, which you state perfectly, but in terms that RCC believe.
What is the Catholic doctrine of infallibility?
Official Catholic teaching is that when the Pope makes an official statement, or speaks 'ex cathedra', his words are infallible. This means they are without error and cannot be challenged or contradicted.
The Second Vatican Council in the 1960s reviewed a host of Church teaching and decided to extend infallibility to all bishops across the world when they proclaimed a united statement. Since 1870, infallibility had been a luxury reserved for the pope
https://www.christiantoday.com/article/is-the-pope-infallible-what-catholics-believe-and-why/81615.htm#:~:text=Official%20Catholic%20teaching%20is%20that%20when%20the%20Pope,without%20error%20and%20cannot%20be%20challenged%20or%20contradicted.
Well, technically-speaking, it would be Pope Benedict due to a technicality when he recited the words of his resignation:
https://abyssum.org/2019/12/07/lets-get-it-straight-pope-benedict-did-not-resign-the-office-of-peter-he-resigned-the-office-of-ministry-but-not-the-office-of-munus-which-means-that-he-remains-pope/
https://abyssum.org/2019/12/05/as-it-stands-bergoglio-was-never-the-pope-because-pope-benedict-never-resigned-the-papal-munus-nor-has-he-ever-indicated-that-he-has-ever-intended-to-resign-it-because-he-considers-the-munus/
There was a video online of Benedict reciting his resignation. I can't seem to find it now, as it appears to have been scrubbed or buried. He did not say the Latin word, "munus," which would have made his resignation official. So, this means that Pope Francis is illegitimate and always has been.