Evfimy wrote:Didn't I already give the references showing Trullo was rejected by the west?
Where? I could not find this 
But to be sure of this, we should look for the letter from pope Adrian I in his letter to Tarasius where he says "I accept the decisions made by the same holy Sixth Council, together with all the Canons it has duly and divinely uttered, wherein they are expressed." It is not impossible that the heretic popes rejected Trullo because it condemned their innovations.
To tell you the truth, I am not convinced at all by your explanation about the Honorius case. He was athematised by a council and a pope confirmed this, which shows the council did not believe that the see of Rome could not fall in heresy, and so did the pope.
Other point : during the Filioque affair, a pope had the Creed written without the filioque to assert his adhesion to the original creed. So the pope wa against filioque. After that, since Rome fell in heresy, the popes confirmed the filoque... One of them was then theologically wrong, which proves there is no infallibility...
The same with inmaculate conception : many popes said only Jesus and not his mother was born without sin.. And now, they say the Mother of God was too... These theological contradictions clearly shows that the see of Rome is not preserved from falling.
I could speak about the catholic cult of the Holy Heart of Jesus which against the.... Indeed, the cult is a in reality worship of the Heart of Christ later transformed in a worship of his love. But Jesus-Christ has to be worshiped in his totality (True man and true God). This is in contradiction with canon 9 of the 5th ecumenical council, which was endorsed by the pope then. The following extract is by Father Michael Pomazansky in his dogmatic.
The one worship of Christ.
To the Lord Jesus Christ as to one person, as the God-man it is fitting to give a single inseparable worship, both according to Divinity and according to Humanity, precisely because both natures are inseparably united in Him. The decree of the Fathers of the Fifth Ecumenical Council (the Ninth Canon against Heretics) reads: "If anyone shall take the expression, Christ ought to be worshipped in His two natures, in the sense that he wishes to introduce thus two adorations, the one in special relation to God the Word and the other as pertaining to the Man… and does not venerate, by one adoration, God the Word made man, together with His flesh, as the Holy Church has taught from the beginning: let him be anathema" (Eerdmans, Seven Ecumenical Councils, p. 314).
On the Latin cult of the "Heart of Jesus."
In connection with this decree of the Council it may be seen how out of harmony with the spirit and practice of the Church is the cult of the "sacred heart of Jesus" which has been introduced into the Roman Catholic Church. Although the above-cited decree of the Fifth Ecumenical Council touches only on the separate worship of the Divinity and the Humanity of the Saviour, it still indirectly tells us that in general the veneration and worship of Christ should be directed to Him as a whole and not to parts of His Being; it must be one. Even if by "heart" we should understand the Saviour’s love itself, still neither in the Old Testament nor in the New was there ever a custom to worship separately the love of God, or His wisdom, His creative or providential power, or His sanctity. All the more must one say this concerning the parts of His bodily nature. There is something unnatural in the separation of the heart from the general bodily nature of the Lord for the purpose of prayer, contrition and worship before Him. Even in the ordinary relationships of life, no matter how much a man might be attached to another — for example, a mother to a child — he would never refer his attachment to the heart of the beloved person, but will refer it to the given person as a whole.
The pope also contradicts himself with the Filioque because he previously accepted the anathema against those who would change the Creed. So by changing the Creed, the popes depose themselves.
Third ecumenical council
- These things having been read aloud, the holy Council then decreed that no one should be permitted to offer any different belief or faith, or in any case to write or compose any other, than the one defined by the Holy Fathers who convened in the city of Nicaea, with Holy Spirit. As for those who dare either to compose a different belief or faith, or to present one, or to offer one to those who wish to return to recognition of the truth, whether they be Greeks or Jews, or they be members of any heresy whatever, they, if Bishops or Clergymen, shall be deprived as Bishops of their Episcopate, and as Clergymen of their Clericate; but if they are Laymen, they shall be anathematized.
Well the history of papacy is full of such example : the heretic popes accepting which was condemned by previous popes... This clealy shows there is no infallibility there... The facts are clear : papcy fell into heresy...
