His resistance to doctrine is invariably couched in elision and ambiguity rather than declarative refusal.
This makes Pope Francis comments no less dangerous; in fact, I would say MORE dangerous, since it always allows him to keep on sowing confusion while maintaining a certain plausible deniability.
Do you believe Ed Peters to be infallible? He has been known to change his mind; just like St JPII did on altar girls.
Mr. Peters is fallible and deeply tied in to the Vatican II errors which include the fallacious revisions to the 1917 Cannon Law.
On the other hand, consider the following quote from practicing priests and bishop who adhere to the true teaching of the Church and her popes (while rejecting the modern heretical anti-popes) via this snippet from http://www.cmri.org/theolog.htm :
V. MODERN HIERARCHY OF THE VATICAN II CHURCH: In the light of the above, it must be concluded that the modern hierarchy who have approved and implemented the errors of Vatican II no longer represent the Catholic Church and her lawful authority. This most certainly includes the one who confirmed, approved, decreed, and implemented these heretical teachings, namely Paul VI (Montini). Likewise included are his successors, namely, John Paul II (Wojtyla) and Benedict XVI (Ratzinger), who have continued to implement these heretical teachings. Despite the lack of canonical warning and formal declaration of loss of office, their repeated acts of ecumenism and their enforcement of the heresies of Vatican II and the new code of Canon Law, which are injurious to faith and morals, are manifestations of their pertinacity in heresy.
THEREFORE, as the First Vatican Council infallibly teaches: “‘Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build My Church,’ these words are proven true by actual results, since in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved untainted...the See of St. Peter always remains unimpaired by any error, according to the divine promise of Our Lord.” Further, since John Paul II has manifestly taught heresy, promoted ecumenism and fostered interfaith worship, he clearly cannot be recognized as a successor of St. Peter in the primacy.
See more at: http://www.cmri.org/theolog.htm#sthash.GYAi2WUo.dpuf
Which is just one more example of the multitudes of things that RCS disagree on, which the magisterium does not settle, while RCs promote it. Another example is that RCs debate whether papal elections are infallible .