Are canonizations considered infallible?

Okiedoke Thanks for clarifying that.

debatable, any number of the previous Popes never officially declared them

Probably there was too much folklore about the miracles to make a sound investigation about him.
Still since he was a kid he is in heaven for sure.

Wasn't Clement of Alexandria de-canonized around the 1600s?

Well he had never a cult in the universal church, he was never officially canonised and he believe in many no small time heresies.
When the pope revised the calendar they decided to remove him since we had no sufficient data on him. Because back then there were many persons the lay people believed they were saints (even a a dog) and got into the general calendars. From time to time the church has to clean the house.
He is still venerated by the Eastern Catholics, so he is Blessed.

Imagine believing that the pope decides who's in heaven

Attached: 5aa30c7e1e00008e0b7ae0b6.jpeg (640x960, 95K)

I don't believe that females can be pastors, and I also don't believe unrepentant trannies go to heaven either.

Congratulations, you are closer to Catholicism than you think. Come Home to Rome and begome.

Attached: download (1).jpg (230x219, 6.75K)

But I don't know how I feel about the idea of the papacy. I know the verses catholics use to justify it but those verses don't ever say that Peter is above all the other bishops. He even calls himself a fellow bishop in one verse, using the language of an equal instead of the language of a superior. A lot of the catholic practices aren't in the Bible, or are read into the verses at the very best. Inb4 you try to discredit what I'm saying by just calling sola scriptura, read 2 Timothy 3:16-17.