As for Pope Innocent III, I am not a student of the era but I do know that although he was one of the most influential Popes in history, he is far from being considered a saint.
Furthermore, somebody who IS a canonized saint --- St. Lutgarda of Brabant -- received a vision of him being in the fires of purgatory on the very day he died. Engulfed in flames, he declared to her, “I am Pope Innocent”. He continued to explain that he was in purgatory for three crimes grievously offensive to Our Lord. He said --- according to St. Lutgarda--- that he had repented on his deathbed and was saved by the grace of God, but still had to make reparations for his grave faults.
"Alas! It is terrible; and will last for centuries" he is reported to have said to Lutgarda.
So do not make the mistake of supposing that evil men and their henchmen---- even wicked Popes --- are regarded as "true believers."
"Great men's" lives -- and I am unable to use the term"great men" without conscious irony, always --- are often a mixture of great good and great evil. Just today I was reading 1 Samuel 27, which recounts David's massacre of every human being, men and women alike, when he was raiding tribes and seizing cattle and booty and on the run from Saul. Sin of every sort, and surely murder, is deadly if not repented; and as the admirable American Catholic Dorothy Day said, "You can go to hell by imitating the vices of the saints!"
As for the ex-sword-wielding Peter: no, he didn't go out and burn and torture heretics. He went out and repented instead. And Jesus was good to heal the man he maimed, and the soul of Peter as well. May it always be so.
“So do not make the mistake of supposing that evil men and their henchmen—— even wicked Popes -— are regarded as “true believers.”
Then would it not follow that their wicked directives should have not have been obeyed by those who were believers?
On what basis could a Catholic refuse to follow a decree by “the Vicar of Christ”?