“With regard to the doctrinal teaching of the Church it must be well noted that not all the assertions of the Teaching Authority of the Church on questions of Faith and morals are infallible and consequently irrevocable. Only those are infallible which emanate from General Councils representing the whole episcopate, and the Papal Decisions Ex Cathedra (cf. D 1839). The ordinary and usual form of the Papal teaching activity is not infallible. Further, the decisions of the Roman Congregations (Holy Office, Bible Commission) are not infallible. Nevertheless normally they are to be accepted with an inner assent which is based on the high supernatural authority of the Holy See (assensus internus supernaturalis, assensus religiosus).”

The Simon says approach to Catholicism is absolutely mandated when infallibility has clearly and certainly occured as it has on abortion section 62 of Evangelium Vitae…but there are areas in which the Simon says approach causes non growth in the Church which is why we were able to be incorrect on usury until 1830 while Calvinists had our 1830 answer in 1545 despite our apologetics people constructing an elaborate explanation as to how we were just waiting for the nature of money to change.
How then did Calvin have our answer in 1545 without waiting for money to change in nature? Apologetics should defend what needs defending; it should not function as a coverup on ususry or as did Leo XIII’s encyclical to the Brazilian bishops which was a fictional recounting of how solidly the Church fought slavery (he left out the papal support for same from 1452 to 1511) and yet subsequent apologetics people simply copied his erroneousl recounting…including the late Cardinal Avery Dulles.
Obeying the Pope from 1452 onward til 1537 in Portugal meant inter alia signing up for the slave trade based on a permision in Romanus Pontifex/ 4th paragraph middle.

I agree that the Church’s presentation should change or should be one of our bishops and priest asking us to change. Speaking as an American, so many of us have so much stuff and live at a hectic pace that it all becames a huge detriment to live the Gospel. Speaking locally of my diocese in Northern California, there are many proud efforts to be the pilgrim church and to live and give as presented in the Gospel…yet, our parishes also seem so caught up in on-going capital projects that I wonder to what end.

Last week Benedict warned the Czechs about hedonistic consumerism and Benedict has a grand piano, Prada or personal cobbler shoes, Serenghetti sunglasses and a bullet proof BMW. He is not getting enough feedback on the weirdness of it all. Few Czechs can afford a BMW let alone a bullet proof one. They” accept rebuke on consumerism from someone like Mother Teresa who had not Prada shoes…not from recent Popes. John Paul did similar in his warnings to the West about materialism while he put in an inground swimming pool at Castel Gandalfo. Again there are no men around them who are helping them grow through rebuke. Augustine said one only grows by both rebuke and grace and we are trying in families and in the papacy to grow only by grace and without rebuke for half a century now.
Demanding obedience? Christ would not have simultaneously said as we do in our parish bulletins that God “invites” you into relationship and then made it and kept by canon law a mortal sin to miss Mass even though your homilist for 20 years has been a zero. So you perish into damnation if one day you can no longer stand the moron homily level. I don’t think Christ would require that. He’ll bind what the Pope binds on earth…but even Christ has his limits in that area. And it had the weird result that Catholics will worry about missing Mass but not about driving above the speed limit on residential streets where children are playing….or smoking and ending up dying in the ICU of a hospital.
Thank you. I’m done.