Did any medieval popes not distinguish themselves from God?

[Alterego]

I have a couple of quotes here that put a couple of popes in question. Can an expert put them in perspective for me? Were a couple of popes “off their rockers” ?

*I am in all and above all, so that God Himself and I, the vicar of God, hath both one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do…wherefore, if those things that I do be said not to be done of man, but of God, what do you make of me but God? *(Decret. par. Distinct 96 ch. 7 edit. Lugo 1661)

“The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth…by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth.” The RC New York catechism*

“The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.” (Barclay Cap. XXVII p. 218 Cities Petrus Bertanous, Pius V)

“the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who being God, cannot be judged by man.” (Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can 7 Satis Evidentur Decret Gratian Primer Para) Pope Nicholas I

I know that the pope is Christ’s representative on Earth, but it seems as if these fellows took it a step too far on first glance.

 

[Alterego]

bump
very curious about this topic

 

[Vincent]

It’s too bad that we’re unable to authenticate any of these quotes. It’s important to check the context as well as the accuracy of the translations, but the alleged source citations are too obscure to be helpful.

 

[Reformed_Rob]

This is a contention I had myself some months ago. As a previous poster commented, the quotes are somewhat ambiguous. But, aside from that, there is the fact that you must understand them the way the Church would teach it, rather than the way that the anti-Catholics would have you to understand it.

How do Catholics understand it? Well, here’s an expose on the topic, a thread that I posted long ago, and it enjoyed some fruitful discussion. It’s not too long either.

Something to remember, the Pope exercises the office of Vicar of Christ, as Tertullian says and Cyprian explains. Christ is the Superior Head, over all things earthly and heavenly. However, He made Peter to be the head of the Apostles, and thus the Church exercises supreme temporal power, in the name of Christ on earth, and the Pope is the leader of the Church.

 

[Reformed_Rob]

Alterego:

Were a couple of popes “off their rockers” ?

it seems as if these fellows took it a step too far on first glance.

Yeah, it sure seems as though that is the case. Did you copy that from a website or what? I just ask because there’s lots of sites out there that have quotes like that.

Anyways, knowing the historical circumstances would be helpful. What the Popes say about themselves can be seen as “self-serving” or seen as “defending the unity of the faith.” I’m not even Catholic, and I know that the Church doesn’t teach that the Pope is the “4th person of the Godhead.” I think such quotes should not be dismissed, but rather explained.

As an aid in explanation, a quote from the Summa

On the contrary, We read in the council of Constantinople: “In accordance with the Scriptures and the statutes and definitions of the canons, we venerate the most holy bishop of ancient Rome the first and greatest of bishops, and after him the bishop of Constantinople.” Therefore one bishop is above another.

Further, the blessed Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, says: “That we may remain members of our apostolic head, the throne of the Roman Pontiffs, of whom it is our duty to seek what we are to believe and what we are to hold, venerating him, beseeching him above others; for his it is to reprove, to correct, to appoint, to loose, and to bind in place of Him Who set up that very throne, and Who gave the fulness of His own to no other, but to him alone, to whom by divine right all bow the head, and the primates of the world are obedient as to our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.” Therefore bishops are subject to someone even by divine right.

I answer that, Wherever there are several authorities directed to one purpose, there must needs be one universal authority over the particular authorities, because in all virtues and acts the order is according to the order of their ends (Ethic. i, 1,2). Now the common good is more Godlike than the particular good. Wherefore above the governing power which aims at a particular good there must be a universal governing power in respect of the common good, otherwise there would be no cohesion towards the one object. Hence since the whole Church is one body, it behooves, if this oneness is to be preserved, that there be a governing power in respect of the whole Church, above the episcopal power whereby each particular Church is governed, and this is the power of the Pope. Consequently those who deny this power are called schismatics as causing a division in the unity of the Church. Again, between a simple bishop and the Pope there are other degrees of rank corresponding to the degrees of union, in respect of which one congregation or community includes another; thus the community of a province includes the community of a city, and the community of a kingdom includes the community of one province, and the community of the whole world includes the community of one kingdom.