“Bishop Strossmayer’s Speech at Vatican I”
(Important Excerpts from His Speech – And Some Other Quotes about Papal Infallibility)
Prepared by Darryl Eberhart, Editor of ETI & TTT Newsletters
Date: September 16, 2008 (Updated: October 15, 2009) // Website: www.toughissues.org
A 2-page Handout // All emphasis is mine unless otherwise stated.
Bishop Josip Juraj Strossmayer of Croatia (1815-1905) courageously opposed “papal infallibility” at Vatican I (the Roman Catholic Ecumenical Council that was held in St. Peter’s Basilica from 1869 to 1870).
Immediately below are important excerpts from the speech that Bishop Strossmayer gave at the Vatican I Council in 1870:
“I [Ed.: i.e., Bishop
Strossmayer] have set myself to study with the most serious attention the
Old and New Testaments, and I have asked these venerable monuments of truth to
make known to me if the holy pontiff [Ed.: i.e., the Pope], who presides
here, is truly the successor of [Ed.: the Apostle] St. Peter, vicar of
Jesus Christ, and the infallible doctor of the [Ed.: Roman Catholic] church.
…I
find in the apostolic days no question [Ed.: i.e.,
discussion; controversy; dispute of the topic] of a pope, successor to
[Ed.: the Apostle] St. Peter…
…Now,
having read the whole New Testament, I declare before God…that I have
found no trace of the papacy as it exists this moment.
…Reading
then the sacred books…I do not find one single chapter,
or one little verse, in which Jesus Christ gives to St. Peter the
mastery over the apostles, his fellow-workers.
…[Ed.:
Jesus] Christ – so says the Holy Scripture – forbade Peter and his
colleagues to reign or to exercise lordship, or to have authority over the
faithful like the kings of the Gentiles (St. Luke 22:25 [Ed.: and 26]).
Now,
while we [Ed.: i.e., Roman Catholic prelates] teach that the church is
built upon St. Peter, St. Paul (whose authority cannot be doubted) says, in his
epistle to the Ephesians 2:20, [that] it [Ed.: i.e., the church]
is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, [Ed.: with] Jesus
Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone. …The same
apostle [Ed.: i.e., the Apostle Paul], counting up the offices of the
church, mentions apostles, prophets, evangelists, doctors, and pastors. Is it
to be believed…that St. Paul, the great apostle of the Gentiles, would
have forgotten the first of these offices, the papacy, if the papacy had
been of divine institution?
…The
apostle Paul makes no mention, in any of his letters directed to
the various churches, of the primacy of Peter. If this primacy had existed, if,
in one word, the church had in its body a supreme head infallible in teaching,
would the great apostle of the Gentiles have forgotten to mention it?
…Neither
in the writings of St. Paul, St. John, nor St. James, have I
found a trace or germ of the papal power. St. Luke, the historian of the
missionary labors of the apostles, is silent on this all-important point
[Ed.: i.e., of Peter’s alleged primacy]. The silence of these
holy men, whose writings make part of the canon of divinely inspired
Scriptures, has appeared to me burdensome and impossible, if [Ed.: the
Apostle] Peter had been pope…
…Scalinger,
one of the most learned of men, has not hesitated to say that St. Peter’s
episcopate and residence at Rome ought to be classed with ridiculous legends.
…I
have sought for a pope in the first four centuries and not found
him.
…The
importance of the bishops of Rome proceeded not from a divine
power, but [Ed.: rather] from the importance of the city in which
they had their seat.
…The
Sixth Council of Carthage forbade all the bishops to take the title of
prince of the bishops, or sovereign bishop. As for this title of universal
bishop, which the popes took later, St. Gregory I [Ed.: pope: 590-604], believing
that his successors would never think of adorning themselves with it, wrote
these remarkable words: ‘None of my predecessors has consented to take this
profane name [Ed.: i.e., universal bishop]; for when a patriarch gives
himself the name of Universal, the title of patriarch suffers discredit.’
…I establish: (1) That Jesus [Ed.: Christ] has given to His apostles the same power that He gave to St. Peter. (2) That the apostles [Ed.: of Jesus Christ] never recognized in St. Peter the vicar of Jesus Christ and the infallible doctor of the Church. (3) That St. Peter never thought of being pope, and never acted as if he were pope. (4) That the [Ed.: Church] Councils of the first four centuries, while they recognized the high position which the Bishop of Rome occupied in the Church on account of Rome, only accorded him a preeminence of honor, never of power or of jurisdiction. (5) That the ‘holy’ fathers in the famous passage, ‘Thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my church’, never understood that the church was built on Peter (super Petrum) but on the rock (super petram), that is, on the confession of the faith of the apostle. I conclude…that Jesus Christ did not confer any supremacy on St. Peter and that the bishops of Rome did not become sovereigns of the church, but only by confiscating one by one all the rights of the episcopate [Ed.: i.e., of the bishops collectively].
…History
raises its voice to assure us that some popes have erred. …[Ed.:
Pope] Hadrian II (867-872) declared civil marriages to be valid; [Ed.:
Pope] Pius VII (1800-1823) condemned them. [Ed.: Pope] Sixtus V
(1585-1590) published an edition of the Bible, and by a bull recommended it to
be read; [Ed.: Pope] Pius VII condemned the reading of it. [Ed.:
Pope] Clement XIV (1769-1774) abolished the order of the Jesuits, permitted
by [Ed.: Pope] Paul III, and Pius VII reestablished it.
If then you [Ed.: i.e., the Roman Catholic prelates at the First Vatican Council] proclaim the infallibility of the actual [Ed.: i.e., the existing; the current] pope, [Ed.: then] you must either prove that which is impossible – that the popes never contradicted each other – or else you must declare that the Holy Spirit has revealed to you that the infallibility of the papacy only dates from 1870. Are you bold enough to do this?”
Ed.: Here are several additional quotations about alleged Papal infallibility:
“It
took the professedly infallible popes eighteen hundred years to
discover and define their own infallibility, and to make it an article
of faith which people must believe. This was done in Rome at the
Vatican Council of 1870.
At that Council there was a great debate, in which Bishop Strossmayer, Bishop Kendrick, Dr. Dollinger [Ed.: the famous German Roman Catholic Church historian], and many other Roman [Ed.: Catholic] prelates, opposed the dogma of Papal infallibility. When the dogma was decreed, many priests and multitudes of people, including the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Utrecht, Holland, and all of his priests and congregations, withdrew from the Roman Catholic Church and formed the Old Catholic Church. This Church introduced many reforms, and spread over Europe, and from Europe it came to America.” – Samuel D. Benedict (“Catholic Doctrine in the Bible”; Page 15)
“[Ed.: Pope] Pius IX [Ed.: at the Vatican I Council of 1869-1870] constantly applied pressure and threats, engineered behind-the-scenes intrigue, and denounced in vicious terms any who opposed [Ed.: papal] infallibility.” – Dave Hunt (“A Woman Rides the Beast”; 1994; Page 137)
“The [Ed.: Vatican] Council [Ed.: of 1870] which ratified the infallibility decree was clearly packed in favor of the Jesuit-controlled papal party.” – Dr. Loraine Boettner (“Roman Catholicism”; 1962; Page 244)
“The fact is: the popes are not infallible. …They [Ed.: i.e., the popes of Rome] not only contradict themselves, but [Ed.: they also] contradict the Bible as well. All the fanfare of wealth, the tinsel of ceremony, and the prestige of power which we witness at [Ed.: Papal] Rome cannot avail before God.” – Dr. R. Laird (Professor of Old Testament, Covenant Theological Seminary, St. Louis)
“It is
not the pope, but the [Ed.: Holy] BIBLE, which is infallible.”
– Samuel D. Benedict (“Catholic Doctrine in the Bible”; Page 18)