The same could be asked about divorce and several other things.
If people are guided by the Holy Spirit they do not reverse themselves or claim that "Christian Liberty" applies whenever they're caught in a contradiction. The Holy Spirit never leads anyone into a contradictory position from one day to the next or one decade to the next.
Of course, those who worship their own, Most High and Holy Self rather than Jesus Christ always claim that "Christian Liberty" permits them anything from adultery to the Zoroastrian duality doctrines they apply to the Holy Spirit.
I suppose that King Barry relies on the same sort of bogus application of "Christian Liberty" and "Charity" when he says that any infant that survives and abortion should just be left to starve or die from exposure. Apparently some people are comfortable with accepting as their beliefs whatever the king of their nation believes.
I agree. Since you are now a faithful Roman Catholic ask your local bishop why certain Popes in the past did exactly as you condemn here. Ask him to tell you why Pope Alexander VI kept his mistresses handy near the papal chambers and made his illegitimate son a Cardinal or why Pope John XII gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife. Then there was Pope Benedict IX who was accused by Bishop Benno of Piacenza of "many vile adulteries." Pope Victor III referred in his third book of Dialogues to "his rapes... and other unspeakable acts." His life prompted St. Peter Damian to write an extended treatise against sex in general, and homosexuality in particular. In his Liber Gomorrhianus, Damian accused Benedict IX of routine sodomy and bestiality and sponsoring orgies. In May 1045, Benedict IX resigned his office to pursue marriage.
There was Pope Julius III who was alleged to have had a long affair with Innocenzo Ciocchi del Monte. The Venetian ambassador at that time reported that Innocenzo shared the pope's bedroom and bed. According to The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, "naturally indolent, he devoted himself to pleasurable pursuits with occasional bouts of more serious activity".
I'm sure your helpful bishop will give the standard pat answer that "all have sinned" and "Christ came to save sinners" or "the Church is a place for the sick not the healthy" and so on. Yet, these few instances of the many that I could have described are the actions of the leaders of the Christian world (according to Rome) and who, it is claimed, are divinely appointed to their positions as "successors to St. Peter". Did the Holy Spirit not know of the character quirks of these men? Did God somehow not have any idea what these men were going to do? When the College of Cardinals got together to seek the will of God in choosing the next Vicar of Christ, did they ask the Holy Spirit to guide them in this decision?
It's a fine thing to sit in judgment over Christians that do not bow their knee to Rome and accuse them of being their own "popes" and worshiping their own "most high and holy self" when they desire to only follow the Holy Scriptures and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Yet when an honest look is taken of the history of the organization that demands full and faithful obedience, it should be obvious that it is ONLY Jesus Christ who deserves the honor, worship and glory. Though Jesus established his body of believers on earth to be the ground and pillar of the truth, he also ensured that we had the Holy Scriptures as the container of that truth. If any "church" is not faithful to those truths, they cease to be the buttress of it. There IS no such right, by reason of office to be THE Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church with full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which can always be exercise unhindered (Catechism, Para 882). There is a HIGHER authority and genuinely faithful Christians will trust in the Word of God before the word of men.