[Terretta]

Misc points of doctrine are not really the “collective interpretation” as if fundamentals were changing, and the comment to which I replied said “radically different”.

None of your examples feel like radically different Catholicism, except perhaps the papal infallibility thing, though even that seems it was generally believed, but not categorically, before being written down and today is generally believed, but not categorically, so, not radically different.

[btilly]

By mainstream Christian doctrine as understood for most of the history of Christianity, you would go to hell for having a modern bank account.

That seems to me to be a pretty radical difference.