I’m saying much more than that. I’m saying that, if the Assumption was a lie from satan, we can’t trust ANY Church doctrine. We would have no way to isolate satanic doctrines, and everything the Church taught would be suspect, even if only one teaching was actually a lie. We would have no way to know how many lies had infiltrated Church doctrine, and no way to identify and correct them.
If it was POSSIBLE for the Church to teach lies as doctrines, we could not trust any of it. The only way we can trust it is because the Holy Spirit protects it (not because Bishops and Popes are all morally upright, wise, and insightful).
One cannot achieve spiritual perfection unless s/he accepts the full doctrine of the Church. But, obviously, nobody actually KNOWS full Church doctrine (it’s a BIG subject). There were Saints who achieved spiritual perfection, such as St. Ignatus of Loyla, long before Assumption was taught as doctrine. Had someone suggested it to him and he said, “naw, I don’t think so,” it would not have mattered.
But, had Assumption been taught in Ignatius’ day, he could not have achieved spiritual perfection if he knew about it but rejected it.
We are not required to personally discern the truth of things that the Church has not taught (such as Assumption in Ignatius’ day). We may very well believe things that are not true, but we can yet achieve perfection if we accept the teaching of the Church, to the best of our knowledge and ability.
(It is important that I make clear that I am NOT saying we can achieve perfection by ONLY accepting Church doctrine. There’s a lot more to it than that. But we can never get there if we REJECT Church doctrine. We don’t even get out of the starting gate)
Which is not a doctrine of the Church. The Pope is giving certain people permission to do bad things. That doesn’t mean he is giving US permission to do bad things. In order for something to be considered doctrine, it must apply to all Catholics everywhere.
You could point to any number of Popes who were personally very sinful. You chose to cite a Pope who was actually pretty good (his reign was only eight years, but he accomplished many amazing things). There are far worse examples you could have cited, such as Alexander-4. I think he committed just about every sin that the Church has a name for, and didn’t feel any remorse at all. But that doesn’t mean WE can commit these sins. As a man, he was detestable, but as a Pope, he was faithful to his Office. He never attempted to enshrine his faults or sins into Catholic doctrine.
Jesus tells us to respect the Authority of the Church, even if its leaders do not obey Church teaching:
Sinful Popes are no different than sinful Scribes and Pharisees. Do as they say, not as they do.
In fact, Alexander-4 is my favorite of the “evil” Popes. I bring him up often, because he is the worst of the worst. When people come here and bring up Pope Nicholas-5 (actually, I think you’re the first) or Pope Stephen-6 (who comes up often because of the Cadaver Synod), I say, “let’s not piddle with the small timers. Let’s talk about Alexander-4.” Because, if personal imperfection actually impact Church doctrine, Alexander would surely have had the greatest impact. But, like all Popes, he was a sinner (just worse than the others), but he was faithful to his Office. This, in itself, is a remarkable testimony to how well the Holy Spirit protects the Papacy.