Papal infallibility is a doctrine of the Catholic church. If you don't recognize all popes as infallible, you disagree with Catholic doctrine.
Like Martin Luther and all protestants.
You say there were a few "bad popes", but indulgences went on for a span of almost 500 years.
Why were people able to pay for salvation in 1566 but not 1567?
Kind of funny how indulgences started 1095, Martin Luther posted his thesis in 1517, indulgences ended in 1567. Sounds like Catholic dogma yielded to pressure from protestant arguments?
I don't know how you can seriously continue being an apologist for Catholic dogma while simultaneously disagreeing with parts of it. To me, it seems I'm conversing with a mostly-Catholic protestant.
Papal infallibility is a doctrine of the Catholic church. If you don't recognize all popes as infallible, you disagree with Catholic doctrine.
Like Martin Luther and all protestants.
You say there were a few "bad popes", but indulgences went on for a span of almost 500 years.
Why were people able to pay for salvation in 1566 but not 1567?
Kind of funny how indulgences started 1095, Martin Luther posted his thesis in 1517, indulgences ended in 1567. Sounds like Catholic dogma yielded to pressure from protestant arguments?
I don't know how you can seriously continue being an apologist for Catholic dogma while simultaneously disagreeing with parts of Catholic dogma. To me, it seems I'm conversing with a mostly-Catholic protestant.
Papal infallibility is a doctrine of the Catholic church. If you don't recognize all popes as infallible, you disagree with Catholic doctrine.
Like Martin Luther and all protestants.
You say there were a few "bad popes", but indulgences went on for a span of almost 500 years.
Why were people able to pay for salvation in 1566 but not 1567?
Kind of funny how indulgences started 1095, Martin Luther posted his thesis in 1517 and then indulgences ended in 1567. Funny how they ended relatively shortly after Luther posted his thesis, don't you think?
I don't know how you can seriously continue being an apologist for Catholic dogma while simultaneously disagreeing with parts of Catholic dogma. To me, it seems I'm conversing with a mostly-Catholic protestant.