Answering "Our Lord God the Pope"

  • Thread starter Thread starter ASimpleSinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

ASimpleSinner

Guest
A particularly prolific and earnest adherent of Orthodoxy has submitted the following in the Eastern Christian Forum of CAF:
40.png
StMarkEofE:
If what you say is true then how would you answer these statements:

The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh." Catholic National July 1895.

"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" …Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894,

The title “Lord God the Pope” is found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4
In an Antwerp edition of the Extravagantes, the words, “Dominum Deum Nostrum Papam” (Our Lord God the Pope) can be found in column 153. In a Paris edition, they are found in column 140.

The Bull Unam Sanctam… Issued by POPE BONIFACE VIII reads as follows: "The Roman Pontiff judges all men, but is judged by no one. We declare, assert, define and pronounce: to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every human creature necessary for salvation that which was spoken of Christ ‘thou has subdued all things under his feet’ may well seem verified in me… I** have the authority of the King of Kings. I am all in all and above all, so that God himself and I, the vicar of God, have but one consistory, and** I am able to do all that God can do**."

“The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: ‘I am the door of the sheep.’ Into this fold of Jesus Christ,** no man may enter unless he be led by the Sovereign Pontiff;** and only if they be united to him can men be saved, for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth.” (Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).
Click to expand...
Given that these concearns are not exclusively the domain of Eastern Orthodox (When one googles any of the quotes one finds many fundamentalist sites using them to assert concearn and rejection of Papal authority/perceptions of Papal abuse…) So I was thinking that it might not be a bad thing to consider opening this discussion up to the wider CAF apologetics community.

Are we to take it to mean that Catholics think the Pope is God? How are we to deal with these difficult assertations?

Many thanks!
 
ASimpleSinner said:
A particularly prolific and earnest adherent of Orthodoxy has submitted the following in the Eastern Christian Forum of CAF:

Given that these concearns are not exclusively the domain of Eastern Orthodox (When one googles any of the quotes one finds many fundamentalist sites using them to assert concearn and rejection of Papal authority/perceptions of Papal abuse…) So I was thinking that it might not be a bad thing to consider opening this discussion up to the wider CAF apologetics community.

Are we to take it to mean that Catholics think the Pope is God? How are we to deal with these difficult assertations?

Many thanks!
Click to expand...
Thank you A SimpleSinner. As an Orthodox Christian, I have always wondered about these quotes also. I have never read the documents they purport to come from, so I don’t know if they are real.
 
As a Catholic, I would like answers to these quotes too. There must be so much more information needed to have an answer. The Pope is by NO means God, not divine neither.
 
freudmacher said:
As a Catholic, I would like answers to these quotes too. There must be so much more information needed to have an answer. The Pope is by NO means God, not divine neither.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the forum!

Watch out for the lions! (G)

What say ye, o Catholics? Have we been “found out?” Is this something we believe - the pope as God? Something we believed but just didn’t know we believed? Has a lynch pin been offered?

Or is it that these quotes - however bothersome and annoying to defend against, are simply inaccurate when it comes to expressing our faith. Either through misues of hyperbole, bad translation, or deliberate misrepresentation, is it possible that we do NOT maintain the nition of “Our Lord God the Pope”???

Whatever the cause of these unfortunate quotes could it be we as Catholics are agreed they do not represent our position?

Could it then be agreed that it is at least telling, how celebrated these isolated quotes are (especially by those who “mine” for them) and how interesting it is that folks make special effort to highlight what is admittedly unusual and uncommon to prove a point? Beyond these three-oft quoted quotes, is this common? Or are they conspicuous by virtue of being so pecular in a LARGE sea of writing on the papacy?
 
As a Catholic, I have no problem with any of these quotes.

The Bishop of Rome is the head of Christ’s Church, Christ is God, the pope is the Vicar of Christ, so on and so forth.

Yes, to be Catholic is to submit yourself to the Authority of your pastor, your bishop, and the Bishop of Rome.

Anything less is less than Catholic.
 
The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh." Catholic National July 1895.
Click to expand...
That quote had actually appeared from the Protestant magazine Evangelical Christendom, January 1, 1895. It also appeared in another Protestant magazine, “Church Review,” in England, October 3, 1895. The article in the magazine charges Cardinal Sarto, Archbishop of Venice, with having uttered those words at Venice. Cardinal Sarto was elected Pope in 1903.
But as soon as the charge was made in 1895 that Cardinal Sarto had said those words, inquiries were sent from England to Venice, and Cardinal Sarto produced the manuscipt of his discourse. What the Pope actually said is:
The Pope represents Jesus Christ Himself, and therefore is a loving father. The life of the Pope is a holocaust of love for the human family. His word is love; love, his weapon; love, the answer he gives to all who hate him; love, his flag, i.e., the Cross, which signed the greatest triumph on earth and in heaven.
Click to expand...
No. 2.
“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty” …Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894,
Click to expand...
That was taken from Pope Leo’s Encyclical, Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, which called for the reunion of Eastern and Western churches into the “Unity of the Faith”.

The full text
…A great deal, however, has been wanting to the entire fulness of that consolation. Amidst these very manifestations of public joy and reverence Our thoughts went out towards the immense multitude of those who are strangers to the gladness that filled all Catholic hearts: some because they lie in absolute ignorance of the Gospel; others because they dissent from the Catholic belief, though they bear the same name of Christians.
This thought has been, and is, a source of deep concern to Us; for it is impossible to think of such a large portion of mankind deviating, as it were, from the right path, as they move away from Us, and not experience a sentiment of innermost grief.
**But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty, who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth, and now that Our advanced age and the bitterness of anxious cares urge Us on towards the end common to every mortal, We feel drawn to follow the example of Our Redeemer and Master, Jesus Christ, who when about to return to heaven, implored of God, His Father, in earnest prayer, that His disciples and followers should be of one mind and of one heart: I pray … that they all may be one, as thou Father in Me, and I in Thee: that they also may be one in Us. And as this divine prayer and supplication does not include only the souls who then believed in Jesus Christ, but also every one of those who were henceforth to believe in Him, this prayer holds out to Us no indifferent reason for confidently expressing Our hopes, and for making all possible endeavors in order that the men of every race and clime should be called and moved to embrace the unity of divine faith. **
Click to expand...
Looks like a simple affirmation of the Pope being the ‘representative’, the ‘Vicar’ of Christ to me.
The title “Lord God the Pope” is found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4
In an Antwerp edition of the Extravagantes, the words, “Dominum Deum Nostrum Papam” (Our Lord God the Pope) can be found in column 153. In a Paris edition, they are found in column 140.
Click to expand...
Here’s a website refuting that claim:

angelfire.com/ms/seanie/forgeries/zenzelinus.html

The problem here is, this argument only relies on an edition of the Extravagantes. Why not look at the original version in the Vatican?

Plus, that remark is attributed, not to Pope John XXII, but to the Canonist Zenzelinus, in his commentary on Title XIV of the “Extravagantes.” But an examination of the original manuscript of Zenzelinus, preserved in the Vatican Library, failed to reveal the words attributed to him; and it has been definitely proved that the reference to God is an interpolation in later copies of his commentary.
 
The Pope is the vicar meaning servaant or like a priest vicar of Christ. He is humbling himself not exalting himself to be Lord over God.
Dessert
 
The Bull Unam Sanctam… Issued by POPE BONIFACE VIII reads as follows: “The Roman Pontiff judges all men, but is judged by no one. We declare, assert, define and pronounce: to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every human creature necessary for salvation that which was spoken of Christ ‘thou has subdued all things under his feet’ may well seem verified in me… I have the authority of the King of Kings. I am all in all and above all, so that God himself and I, the vicar of God, have but one consistory, and I am able to do all that God can do.”
Click to expand...
Here’s the full text of Unam Sanctam, which was written by Pope Boniface to assert his rights against King Philip the Fair of France.
That quote above does not appear in it.
“The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: ‘I am the door of the sheep.’ Into this fold of Jesus Christ, no man may enter unless he be led by the Sovereign Pontiff; and only if they be united to him can men be saved, for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth.” (Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).
Click to expand...
I don’t see anything wrong with this.
Extra Ecclesiam nulla Salus.

Here’s an article that refutes these, and other Catholic ‘Inventions’…

hometown.aol.com/philvaz/articles/num4.htm
 
Believe it or not. There are people out there who think this of us.
I had to explain to a co-worker that Catholics do not worship statues. He had went to a Catholic Church saw the statues, saw everyone kneeling and filled in the blanks.

He was with other Catholics who couldn’t explain why they were doing what they were doing. And then he met me:D
 
fellowChristian said:
Believe it or not. There are people out there who think this of us.
Click to expand...
And even more believe it or not, there are people out there who invent lies to claim that the Church teaches what it does not teach.

In the past it was very effective to claim that damning quote such-and-such was found in some papal document from 900 years ago. What average person could refute such a claim? But now with the internet and the information age, all these forgeries can be much more easily found out.

Now is a good time to refer once again to Newman’s article on why lies are essential to the Protestant critique of the Catholic Church: newmanreader.org/works/england/index.html

A quote from that article:

If you would have some direct downright proof that Catholicism is what Protestants make it to be, something which will come up to the mark, you must lie; else you will not get beyond feeble suspicions, which may be right, but may be wrong. Hence Protestants are obliged to cut their ninth commandment out of their Decalogue. “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” must go, must disappear; their position requires the sacrifice. The substance, the force, the edge of their Tradition is slander. As soon as ever they disabuse their minds of what is false, and grasp only what is true,—I do not say they at once become Catholics; I do not say they lose their dislike to our religion, or their misgivings about its working;—but I say this, either they become tolerant towards us, and cease to hate us personally,—or, at least, supposing they cannot shake off old associations, and are prejudiced and hostile as before, still they find they have not the means of communicating their own feelings to others. To Protestantism False Witness is the principle of propagation. There are indeed able men who can make a striking case out of anything or nothing, as great painters give a meaning and a unity to the commonest bush, and pond, and paling and stile: genius can do without facts, as well as create them; but few possess the gift. Taking things as they are, and judging of them by the long run, one may securely say, that the anti-Catholic Tradition could not be kept alive, would die of exhaustion, without a continual supply of fable.
 
patrick457 said:
That quote had actually appeared from the Protestant magazine Evangelical Christendom, January 1, 1895. It also appeared in another Protestant magazine, “Church Review,” in England, October 3, 1895. The article in the magazine charges Cardinal Sarto, Archbishop of Venice, with having uttered those words at Venice. Cardinal Sarto was elected Pope in 1903.
But as soon as the charge was made in 1895 that Cardinal Sarto had said those words, inquiries were sent from England to Venice, and Cardinal Sarto produced the manuscipt of his discourse. What the Pope actually said is:

No. 2.

That was taken from Pope Leo’s Encyclical, Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, which called for the reunion of Eastern and Western churches into the “Unity of the Faith”.

The full text

Looks like a simple affirmation of the Pope being the ‘representative’, the ‘Vicar’ of Christ to me.

Here’s a website refuting that claim:

angelfire.com/ms/seanie/forgeries/zenzelinus.html

The problem here is, this argument only relies on an edition of the Extravagantes. Why not look at the original version in the Vatican?

Plus, that remark is attributed, not to Pope John XXII, but to the Canonist Zenzelinus, in his commentary on Title XIV of the “Extravagantes.” But an examination of the original manuscript of Zenzelinus, preserved in the Vatican Library, failed to reveal the words attributed to him; and it has been definitely proved that the reference to God is an interpolation in later copies of his commentary.
Click to expand...
how does one prove that these documents werent edited …from what iv been reading in ec forum its been brought up several times of forged documents used to prop up the popes supremecy …i cant and wont believe or accept any of these…i believe the other ones,why… once a long while back i bought a book about the catholic popes quit a few were so bad …that i really can imagine popes writing something like that .not that im judging all the popes…as a orthodox christian we honor a few orthodox popes…on our church calender that fought for truth and the orthodox way…stashko:p
 
ASimpleSinner said:
A particularly prolific and earnest adherent of Orthodoxy has submitted the following in the Eastern Christian Forum of CAF:

Given that these concearns are not exclusively the domain of Eastern Orthodox (When one googles any of the quotes one finds many fundamentalist sites using them to assert concearn and rejection of Papal authority/perceptions of Papal abuse…) So I was thinking that it might not be a bad thing to consider opening this discussion up to the wider CAF apologetics community.

Are we to take it to mean that Catholics think the Pope is God? How are we to deal with these difficult assertations?

Many thanks!
Click to expand...

These are not on the whole problematic​

The human as god description is found in the Bible, in the use of elohim for men:
  • Moses (“I will make you a god to Pharaoh”)
  • judges of Israelites in criminal cases
  • Psalm 82
  • Ps. 89
John 10.34 quotes one of the last two. And there is 2 Peter 1.4 - which would be condemned as blasphemous if it were not in the Bible

The metaphor was used as a descriptor of Popes from the 8th to the 15th century - the same descriptor is used by James VI & I, as a metaphor for human kings: & he was not a “Papist”.

The source of the metaphor is probably to be found in the notion of an assembly of gods, which is found in (e.g.) Mesopotamia, Egypt, & Canaan - Israel took it over, & adapted it to her own faith, so that “the gods of the nations” were subjected to hers. That’s why God is called “God Most High” in certain OT passages; this expresses His sovereignty over all gods.

Some of the passages you quote are untraceable 😦 - which is not too helpful 🙂

Some of them describe the Pope as exercising some sort of vicariate on behalf of Christ - which is not the same thing as calling the Pope God. BTW, the Latin could equally well be rendered “god” in some places - which does not = God. Various ideas have gone into the notion of a papal vicariate - including also those of sovereignty, corporations, the prince as a living law, etc. Some are Hebraic, some Greek, some sacramental, some derive from Roman Law, etc. - just as with any other form of Christianity of any great age
  • If the Popes thought they were God - why did they say the same Creed as lesser mortals ?
  • Why did they confess their sins to God ?
    To a modern Western reader, the God-metaphor for a man may seem odd - it was not unusual to use what we are accustomed to think of as purely Christological titles for human beings: thus, Dante, in his seventh letter, greets the Enperor Henry VII (1308-13) as the “Lamb of God”. And we are all familiar with Marian titles & epithets which have arisen in this way
Hope that helps.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

These are not on the whole problematic​

The human as god description is found in the Bible, in the use of elohim for men:
  • Moses (“I will make you a god to Pharaoh”)
  • judges of Israelites in criminal cases
  • Psalm 82
  • Ps. 89
John 10.34 quotes one of the last two. And there is 2 Peter 1.4 - which would be condemned as blasphemous if it were not in the Bible

The metaphor was used as a descriptor of Popes from the 8th to the 15th century - the same descriptor is used by James VI & I, as a metaphor for human kings: & he was not a “Papist”.

The source of the metaphor is probably to be found in the notion of an assembly of gods, which is found in (e.g.) Mesopotamia, Egypt, & Canaan - Israel took it over, & adapted it to her own faith, so that “the gods of the nations” were subjected to hers. That’s why God is called “God Most High” in certain OT passages; this expresses His sovereignty over all gods.

Some of the passages you quote are untraceable 😦 - which is not too helpful 🙂

Some of them describe the Pope as exercising some sort of vicariate on behalf of Christ - which is not the same thing as calling the Pope God. BTW, the Latin could equally well be rendered “god” in some places - which does not = God. Various ideas have gone into the notion of a papal vicariate - including also those of sovereignty, corporations, the prince as a living law, etc. Some are Hebraic, some Greek, some sacramental, some derive from Roman Law, etc. - just as with any other form of Christianity of any great age
  • If the Popes thought they were God - why did they say the same Creed as lesser mortals ?
  • Why did they confess their sins to God ?
    To a modern Western reader, the God-metaphor for a man may seem odd - it was not unusual to use what we are accustomed to think of as purely Christological titles for human beings: thus, Dante, in his seventh letter, greets the Enperor Henry VII (1308-13) as the “Lamb of God”. And we are all familiar with Marian titles & epithets which have arisen in this way
Hope that helps.
Click to expand...
brother,werent they using their god powers and changed the creed…from the original Nicene creed …stashko:p
 
stashko said:
how does one prove that these documents werent edited …from what iv been reading in ec forum its been brought up several times of forged documents used to prop up the popes supremecy …i cant and wont believe or accept any of these…i believe the other ones,why… once a long while back i bought a book about the catholic popes quit a few were so bad …that i really can imagine popes writing something like that .not that im judging all the popes…as a orthodox christian we honor a few orthodox popes…on our church calender that fought for truth and the orthodox way…stashko:p
Click to expand...
I am not sure we can satisfy your need for incontrovertable proof that that these isolated quotes are in error and misquoted.

Even though somewhat conspicuously different and isolated from more modern ways of speaking on the papacy,you don’t think that is telling?

Even though there is a millenium of post-1054 writings on the matter, Fundamentalists and some other anti-Catholics seem to come back to these - at best - “unusual” quotes time and time again? Of the ocean of written material, it isn’t the least bit suspect to you that these may be somewhat dubious?

And as to the idea of some sort of “conspiracy” to edit, don’t you think it stands to reason that if these documents were correct, in print, and in fact accurate, someone out there would have been able to “shine the light of truth” with these rather damning-sounding allegations by actually producing original copies? Do you imagine Rome to be able to persist in a 100 year conspiracy?

What would satisfy you? Can you be satisfied?
 
Most of those quotes are usually used by Fundamentalist and those who question the Papacy…it was actually the first time an Orthodox used them.

If you’ll criticize the Papacy, at least try to do so using quotes that can be verified (and try to show them in context), not those without any credibility and taken out of context.

If you’d do the opposite, you may endanger your credibility among people and be no better than those who take a quote and twist it to whatever they want it to mean.
😉

I just noted above that one of the quotes came from Pope Leo XIII’s Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, which called for the reunion of the East and the West. Isn’t it ironic?
 
patrick457 said:
Most of those quotes are usually used by Fundamentalist and those who question the Papacy…it was actually the first time an Orthodox used them.

I just noted above that one of the quotes came from Pope Leo XIII’s Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, which called for the reunion of the East and the West. Isn’t it ironic?
Click to expand...
Come check out the Eastern Christian Forum at CAF and see what you will about the strange ebdfellows and common causes made there. Very interesting.
 
patrick457 said:
I just noted above that one of the quotes came from Pope Leo XIII’s Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, which called for the reunion of the East and the West. Isn’t it ironic?
Click to expand...
Yes, this is bound to cause any approach to reunion to be still born:

"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty"

Does Pope Benedict XVI still teach this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top