Effectively, +Schneider’s position that a pope can not only become a personal heretic, but that he can officially teach heresy to and through the universal Church, defeats the raison d’etre of Christ instituting the papacy (and Church) in the first place.

If such were possible, we’d have to adopt the very principle of private interpretation in order to maintain the faith, and sift all that comes from Rome instead of simply assenting to her teachings, in order to maintain the faith. Yet, is it not the same conservative conciliarists who deride traditionalists for doing just that?

Consequently , it seems to me that Schneider’s position carries within itself this inherent contradiction, and cannot be the answer. I find Cajetan/John of St Thomas or St. Bellarmine’s positions much more persuasive, as both would protect the integrity of the Church’s teaching/doctrine, where +Schneider’s theory makes all Catholic teaching questionable (and this last consideration makes me suspicious of him).