CathInfo.com

Which one of us still believes what the Church taught before Vatican II?  For example, which one of us still believes that the true Church - the "one, holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church" (Pius XII) -  is a visible, hierarchical, indefectible society with four marks, that consists of the bishops with the authority to teach, govern and sanctify - i.e., those appointed as heads of a legitimately established particular Church that is in union with local Church of Rome - and the faithful subject to them (Vehementur Nos, Pius X); and still believes that "those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit." (Pius XII)? 

And which one of us now believes the Catholic Church "subsists" in hundreds of sects, separated from each other at least in governent, and that to be a "true Catholic" today one must separated from the visible organization that they admit was the true Church with four marks a mere 60 years ago?

Only the land of make believe does the "Church" that subsists in hundreds of sects separated from each other in government constitute the True Catholic Church, while the visible organization that has existed since the time of the Apostles constitute a New Church.

This was explained to you in the conversation you dropped out of in the other thread.

Pay attention to what you are reading. I never said a pope could define a novelty. What I said is when he defines a doctrine he teaches infallibly; and when he defines a doctrine he acts as the rule of faith, because the doctine he defines becomes an object of divine faith.  But I seriously doubt you will even undersand what that means.

Pay attention to what YOU are SAYING:

…the pope is the rule of faith. …

Even a true Pope is NOT "the rule of Faith."

The Deposit of Faith is the rule of Faith.… period.

If a true Pope teaches what has always and everywhere been taught, he is merely teaching the Deposit of Faith, the "ordinary Magisterium."

If a true Pope makes an ex cathedra refinement explaining what has always and everywhere been taught, he is merely expounding upon the Deposit of Faith. he is not becoming "the rule of Faith."

There are no other alternatives. By definition, anything moral or dogmatic other than Ordinary Magisterium and Extraordinary Magisterium is a novelty, hence outside the Deposit of Faith.

Read and understand Pastor Aeternus. (linked previously by me) Pay attention especially to the constraints upon even a true Pope.

Regarding Señor Jorge Bergoglio, he long ago unseated himself with his pertinacious тαℓмυdic doctrines (linked previously by me). He is therefore not a Pope, but an anti-Pope, to whom no Catholic owes obedience. Quite the contrary, practicing Catholics should pray for Jorge's speedy death in order to end his soul-killing anti-papacy.