Has anyone seen this anti-papal quotes before?

“All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.”
On the Authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17–“The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.”
Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, “Cities Petrus Bertanous”–"…the Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power."
Lucius Ferraris, in “Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica”, Volume V, article on “Papa, Article II”, titled “Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility”, #1, 5, 13-15, 18, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition.–“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.” Quoted in the New York Catechism.

These words are written in the Roman Canon Law 1685: “To believe that our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is to be deemed heretical.”

Father A. Pereira says: “It is quite certain that Popes have never approved or rejected this title ‘Lord God the Pope,’ for the passage in the gloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in 1580 by Gregory XIII.”

Writers on the Canon Law say, “The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in heaven and earth.”
Barclay Cap. XXVII, p. 218. Cities Petrus Bertrandus, Pius V. - Cardinal Cusa supports his statement.

Pope Nicholas I declared: “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.

“The pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man … he is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power.” Lucius Ferraris, «Prompta Bibliotheca», 1763, Volume VI, ‘Papa II’, pp.25-29

“The supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires… complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself.”
Leo VIII, «On the Chief Duties of Christians as Citizens», Encyclical letter, 1890

“God separates those whom the Roman Pontiff, who exercises the functions, not of mere man, but of the true God…dissolves, not by human but rather by divine authority.”
Decretals of Gregory IX», Book 1, Chapter 7.3

“Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions (infernorum).”
Lucius Ferraris, «Prompta Bibliotheca», 1763, Volume VI, ‘Papa II’, p.26)

"Innocent III has written: “Indeed, it is not top much to say that in view of the sublimity of their offices the priests are so many gods.”
The dignity of the priesthood by Liguori p, 36

“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

“For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman, finally thou art another God on earth.”
Labbe and Cossart’s “History of the Councils.” Vol. XIV, col. 109

Roman Catholic Canon Law stipulates through Pope Innocent III that the Roman pontiff is
“the vicegerent upon earth, not a mere man, but of a very God;” and in a gloss on the passage it is explained that this is because he is the vicegerent of Christ, who is “very God and very man.” Decretales Domini Gregorii translatione Episcoporum, (on the transference of Bishops), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice (2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99; (Paris, 1612), tom. 2, Devretales, col. 205

“The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land… He is the vicegerent (replacement) of Christ, who is not only a Priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords.”
La Civilia Cattolica, March 18, 1871, quoted in Leonard Woosely Bacaon, An inside view of the Vatican Council (American Tract Society ed.), p.229

“Christ entrusted His office to the chief pontiff;… but all power in heaven and in earth has been given to Christ;… therefore the chief pontiff, who is His vicar, will have this power.”
Corpus Juris chap. 1 column 29, translated from a gloss on the words Porro Subesse Romano Pontiff

“The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land . . . He is the vicegerent of Christ, and is not only a priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords”
La Civilta Cattolica, March 18, 1871.

“All the faithful must believe that the Holy Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff [the Pope] possesses the primacy over the whole world, and the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and is true vicar of Christ, and heed of the whole church, and father and teacher of all Christians; and that full power was given to him in blessed Peter to rule, feed, and govern the universal Church by Jesus Christ our Lord.”
First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ, “Eternal Pastor,” published in the fourth session of the Vatican Council, 1870, chap. 3, in Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom. vol. 2, p. 262.

“The Pope’s authority is unlimited, incalculable; it can strike, as Innocent III says, wherever sin is; it can punish every one; it allows no appeal and is itself Sovereign Caprice; for the Pope carries, according to the expression of Boniface VIII, all rights in the Shrine of his breast. As he has now become infallible, he can by the use of the little word, “orbi,” (which means that he turns himself round to the whole Church) make every rule, every doctrine, every demand, into a certain and incontestable article of Faith. No right can stand against him, no personal or corporate liberty; or as the [Roman Catholic] Canonists put it—“The tribunal of God and of the pope is one and the same.”
Ignaz von Dollinger, “A Letter Addressed to the Archbishop of Munich” 1871; as quoted in MacDougall,

“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).

“This is our last lesson to you: receive it, engrave it in your minds, all of you: by God’s commandment salvation is to be found nowhere but in the Church; the strong and effective instrument of salvation is none other than the Roman Pontificate.”
(Pope Leo XIII, Allocution for the 25th anniversary of his election, February 20, 1903; Papal Teachings: The Church, Benedictine Monks of Solesmes, St. Paul Editions, Boston, 1962, page 653).

“Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors.”
(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical, Mortalium animos, January 6, 1928, The Papal Encyclicals, Claudia Carlen, I.H.M., McGrath Publishing Co., 1981, pp. 317, 318).

“We define that the Holy Apostolic See (the Vatican) and the Roman Pontiff hold the primacy over the whole world.”
A Decree of the Council of Trent, quoted in Philippe Labbe and Gabriel Cossart, “The Most Holy Councils,” col. 1167.

I’ve done some googling and I’m pretty sure it’s made up. I also remember reading these before and learned that they were made up. Anyone have any idea as to how to respond?

To such deep-seated and ingrained ignorance, one can only pray. To engage them is to waste irreplaceable time.

Well, it looks like some of these were mistranslated or had crucial words left out.

In the midst of a long series of comments on the relationship between the Good Shepherd, human pastors, and St. Peter and his successors, there’s this home from Bl. Pope John XXIII on the occasion of his “coronation” Mass in Nov. 1958:

*He is the gate of the sheepfold; “I am the sheep-gate.” [Jn. 10:7]

Into this [the Church], the sheepfold of Jesus Christ, only with the Supreme Pontiff as guide can anyone enter; and moreover, only humans yoked together with him can be saved without danger; seeing that the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ, and he governs the earth in [Christ’s] persona.

How sweet, how attractive it is to recall the image of that Good Shepherd to mind, who in the Gospel narration is described in such exquisite and winning words!*

So they left out the Latin word “tuto”.

And then it goes on, talking more about Christ… Anyway, if non-Catholics object to the Church calling itself by its ancient sheepfold name, there’s nothing we can do about that. But the point here is that if you want to be saved by the ordinary means of grace that Christ instituted in the Church, obviously being in communion with the Pope is a lot safer than not. Otherwise, you’re trying to climb over the fence, or hang out with the sheep from outside the fence, or hoping to wander inside the fence without intending to.

Far better, in my mind, to implore the Holy Spirit to illumine their hearts.

Here’s an article that deals with a lot of these so called “quotes:”

geoffhorton.com/PapalClaims.html

Here’s an extract:

Herein lies one of the difficulties of which Catholics experience in defending the fair fame of their Mother Church against the more noisy and ill-informed class of controversialists. A suspicious-looking ‘extract’ is quoted, with suspicious-looking vagueness, from (say) ‘a Catholic writer,’ or ‘a distinguished Catholic theologian.’ You forthwith make a request for name and chapter and verse. This is sometimes met with angry resentment, sometimes by an airy gibe, sometimes by a general statement to the effect that it is in Suarez (or Saurez, as a Wellington enthusiast called him recently), or Aquinas or Bellarmine or De Lugo or Liguori or some other noted Catholic writer–only that and nothing more, and you are left to toil through the 23 massive volumes of one author, or the 17 of another, or the 10 to 20 of the rest. More rarely there is a show of precise reference, but it is commonly found to be inadequate or deceptive–a mockery, a delusion, and a snare–as if one should refer you to ‘the seventeenth verse of the Bible’; or the ‘authority’ is non-existent, like ‘the Tablet of October 9, 1864.’ In the comparatively rare instances in which detailed references are given, you find that the alleged quotation is conspicuously absent, or that the author’s words have been shamefully garbled or mistranslated, or–as in the case of an ‘extract’ recently attributed (in a Dunedin paper) to St. Thomas Aquinas–that not a line of it was ever written by him. If you persecute your opponents on one reference (as, for instance, the Tablet of October 9, 1864), they fly to another (August 6, 1859). You follow the direction indicated by the new sign-post only to find that you have been again chasing a rainbow. And the upshot of the whole thing is this: you find, in practically every instance, that the ‘quotations’ are secondhand or tenth-hand, that they have been carefully and deliberately lopped and chopped and pruned and twisted and contorted till they more or less seriously misrepresent the views of the authors to whom they are attributed, and you not unnaturally conclude that all these inadequate and misleading references are merely so many ruses–the side-jumps of the hunted roebuck–to delay or prevent the discovery and exposure of those discreditable bits of controversial trickery.

To most of these I reply “context, context, context!” For example, regarding the quote
*
**
“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty”
Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894***

that is technically true. However, because of the nature of the website that reports these “Catholics believe the pope is God”, the reader will automatically see this quote as proof, or at least have a biased viewpoint of it.

Now, we must remember that the pope is the vicar (representative) of Christ (who is God) on earth. So it’s just a simpler way of saying “We [the pope] hold upon this earth the place [meaning, are the vicar (meaning, representative)] of God Almighty [who is Incarnated into Christ Jesus, the Second Person of the Trinity, and so on].”

Also, this quote:
**
“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
**

does not exist. Type it into google, and you’ll find it only from anti-Catholic websites. Type in the Catholic National into any sort of search, and you’ll find that there is no such magazine. This is a deliberate fabrication, a deliberate lie.

Thanks guys, I figured most of the were forged or taken out of context. I didn’t doubt that fact for one second. In fact, I’ve seen them before and I knew that they were forged from previous research but I didn’t know where to find the sources. I greatly appreciate it because I’m doing a bunch questions and answers for my friends and this one required a lot more research than the other questions. I knew I could find the answers but I had quite a bit on my plate and I knew there were plenty of smart folks here. So, thanks again guys!

Many of the quotes are actually true, or contain much truth.

To a non-Catholic they seem scandalous, but as a Catholic, I read many of the quotes and am actually quite comfortable with much of what they say.

for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth.

I’m good with that.

-Tim-

This one is an accurate quotation from Mortalium Animos, section 9.

But not particularly shocking or scandalous.

This article will help as well.

philvaz.com/apologetics/num4.htm

Scandalous, no, but it seems surprising to me, since it (the whole of Mortalium Animos) appears to me to give a strict definition of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.

Sorry, I got the section wrong earlier—the quote is from paragraph 11, not 9.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.