Recently, OnePeterFive published yet another article alleging a “false spirit of Vatican I” and decrying what they term “hyperpapalism” or “ultramontanism”. Here is the latest of these articles: What is the False Spirit of Vatican One? by T. S. Flanders (October 3, 2023), which includes links to similar past articles. These articles allege that there is nothing wrong with the teachings of Vatican I, but that misrepresentations and reactions to Vatican I resulted in a “false spirit” of the Council supporting excessive authority for the Roman Pontiff.

The term hyperpapalism intends to convey and condemn an ideology which gives the Pope too much authority over doctrine and discipline, and which allows no way to resist or oppose an heretical, idolatrous, or apostate Pope. Ultramontanism, as it is being used with respect to Pope Francis, has a similar meaning. Ultramontanism has a long history as a term with varied meanings, at times supporting and at other times undermining papal authority. The term “ultramontanism” literally means “beyond the mountains”, referring to the mountains between France and Italy. This is sometimes used so that a separation of geography between the Roman Pontiff and the rest of the Church represents a limitation of the Pope’s authority over the rest of the Church. Here is a good article on the history of the term ultramontanism.

As these terms are used by OnePeterFive’s authors, and by other opponents of Pope Francis, “hyperpapalism” or “ultramontanism” convey an ideology that would greatly reduce the authority of the Roman Pontiff over the universal Church, and permit, in particular, conservative and traditionalist Catholics to claim that they can obey their own interpretation of Tradition in contradiction to the teachings and decisions of the Roman Pontiff. They also have presented a theology of the papacy which gives the Pope a level and extent of authority that directly contradicts the definitive teachings of Vatican I and other Ecumenical Councils as well as the teaching of many past Popes, Saints, Fathers, Doctors, and other Church sources [cited here at length]. The claim to believe the teachings of Vatican I, and to be merely opposing a recent false interpretation or false spirit of Vatican I is not supported by their own descriptions of this alleged “false spirit”.

This false and, quite frankly, heretical doctrine of the papacy, presented under the pretext of opposing the alleged errors of hyperpapalism or ultramontanism, proposes to greatly reduce the Pope’s authority, and also allows anyone who claims to be adhering to Tradition to accuse any Pope or Ecumenical Council of heresy, apostasy, idolatry, and of leading the Church astray by grave errors on doctrine and discipline. These claims are contrary to the ancient constant teaching of the Church on papal authority, on the papal charism of truth and never-failing faith, and on the indefectibility of the Church.

The motivation for this attack on the authority of Popes and Councils, as well as on the body of Bishops who support Vatican I and II and the recent Popes, appears to be related to their strong objections to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, the Popes since that time, and especially Pope Francis. They have a certain understanding of the Catholic Christian faith in their minds and hearts, and in their lives. They have been believing and often teaching that particular very conservative interpretation of the Faith for many years. They are supported in their version of the Gospel by other lay persons and clergy of the same ideology, in a particular subculture within Catholicism. And when Vatican II, the recent Popes, and Pope Francis in particular taught doctrines and instituted disciplines contrary to their own version of the Gospel, they rejected those doctrines, those disciplines, the Council and Popes that taught them, and the very authority of Popes and Councils. To support this rejection, they have concocted a schismatic and heretical theology that is exceedingly perverse in its rejection or extensive distortion of the perennial teaching of the Church. They have presented false versions of Church history, to support the same errors. And they have labeled the perennial teaching of the Faith as the grave errors of “hyperpapalism” or “ultramontanism”.

But the actual teachings of Vatican I have been largely ignored by OnePeterFive’s articles on the alleged “false spirit” of Vatican I. Then, when we look at the teachings of Vatican I, we find full and extensive support for the supreme authority of the Roman Pontiff, not only in exercises of infallibility, but also in the ordinary daily authority of the Pope over doctrine and discipline worldwide, an authority which is incumbent upon every individual Catholic Christian, as well as on parishes, diocese, and other groups, and on Catholics of every rank and state of life. Then Vatican I supports this teaching with quotes from past Ecumenical Councils. This proves that the true teaching is that of supreme full ordinary authority of the Roman Pontiff, and that this doctrine is not a new and false innovation. Nor is this teaching a false interpretation or bad reaction to the Council. Rather, it is plainly stated in no uncertain terms:

The documents of Vatican I are here. See especially Session 4 : 18 July 1870, First dogmatic constitution on the Church of Christ [Pastor Aeternus].

Pastor Aeternus
“7. This doctrine is to be believed and held by all the faithful in accordance with the ancient and unchanging faith of the whole Church.”

“1. We teach and declare that, according to the gospel evidence, a primacy of jurisdiction over the whole Church of God was immediately and directly promised to the blessed apostle Peter and conferred on him by Christ the lord.”

“6. Therefore, if anyone says that blessed Peter the apostle was not appointed by Christ the lord as prince of all the apostles and visible head of the whole Church militant; or that it was a primacy of honor only and not one of true and proper jurisdiction that he directly and immediately received from our lord Jesus Christ himself: let him be anathema.”

“3. Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole Church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the Church which he once received [47].”

“4. For this reason it has always been necessary for every Church–that is to say the faithful throughout the world–to be in agreement with the Roman Church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body [48].”

“1. And so, supported by the clear witness of Holy Scripture, and adhering to the manifest and explicit decrees both of our predecessors the Roman Pontiffs and of general councils, we promulgate anew the definition of the ecumenical Council of Florence [49], which must be believed by all faithful Christians, namely that the Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff hold a world-wide primacy, and that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, the prince of the apostles, true vicar of Christ, head of the whole Church and father and teacher of all Christian people.

To him, in blessed Peter, full power has been given by our lord Jesus Christ to tend, rule and govern the universal Church.

All this is to be found in the acts of the ecumenical councils and the sacred canons.

“2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.

“3. In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one Supreme Shepherd [50].

“4. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation.”

“8. Since the Roman Pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole Church, we likewise teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the faithful [52], and that in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment [53]. The sentence of the Apostolic See (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone, nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon [54]. And so they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman Pontiff.

“9. So, then, if anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the Churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema.”

The above teachings, quoted only in part, clearly show that the teaching of Vatican I is that the Roman Pontiff has “supreme power” over the whole Church, over every local church, and over each person, clergy or laity. This teaching also shows that every Pope has full and supreme power over doctrine and discipline, and that he is the supreme judge of all the faithful, and there is no appeal from his decisions, not even to an Ecumenical Council.

This teaching is not new, but has been the constant teaching of the Church since ancient times. And Vatican I issued anathema against any Catholic Christian who rejects this teaching. But the position of certain opponents of Pope Francis as well as opponents of Vatican II and the recent Popes is absolutely included in the positions which Vatican I has condemned with anathema. They give varying explanations and excuses, but they do not accept the supreme authority of the Roman Pontiff over them, as taught by Vatican I.

“7. This doctrine is to be believed and held by all the faithful in accordance with the ancient and unchanging faith of the whole Church.”

Then Pastor Aeternus continues, citing past Councils and further elucidating the authority of the Roman Pontiff and his freedom from grave error by the charism of truth and never-failing faith.

Pastor Aeternus, Chapter 4:
“1. That apostolic primacy which the Roman Pontiff possesses as successor of Peter, the prince of the apostles, includes also the supreme power of teaching. This Holy See has always maintained this, the constant custom of the Church demonstrates it, and the ecumenical councils, particularly those in which East and West met in the union of faith and charity, have declared it.

2. So the fathers of the fourth Council of Constantinople, following the footsteps of their predecessors, published this solemn profession of faith: The first condition of salvation is to maintain the rule of the true faith. And since that saying of our lord Jesus Christ, You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church [55], cannot fail of its effect, the words spoken are confirmed by their consequences. For in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved unblemished, and sacred doctrine been held in honor. Since it is our earnest desire to be in no way separated from this faith and doctrine, we hope that we may deserve to remain in that one communion which the Apostolic See preaches, for in it is the whole and true strength of the Christian religion [56].

What is more, with the approval of the second Council of Lyons, the Greeks made the following profession:
“The Holy Roman Church possesses the supreme and full primacy and principality over the whole Catholic Church. She truly and humbly acknowledges that she received this from the Lord himself in blessed Peter, the prince and chief of the apostles, whose successor the Roman Pontiff is, together with the fullness of power. And since before all others she has the duty of defending the truth of the faith, so if any questions arise concerning the faith, it is by her judgment that they must be settled.” [57]

Then there is the definition of the Council of Florence:
“The Roman Pontiff is the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole Church and the father and teacher of all Christians; and to him was committed in blessed Peter, by our lord Jesus Christ, the full power of tending, ruling and governing the whole Church.” [58]

3. To satisfy this pastoral office, our predecessors strove unwearyingly that the saving teaching of Christ should be spread among all the peoples of the world; and with equal care they made sure that it should be kept pure and uncontaminated wherever it was received.

4. It was for this reason that the bishops of the whole world, sometimes individually, sometimes gathered in synods, according to the long established custom of the Churches and the pattern of ancient usage referred to this Apostolic See those dangers especially which arose in matters concerning the faith. This was to ensure that any damage suffered by the faith should be repaired in that place above all where the faith can know no failing [59].

5. The Roman pontiffs, too, as the circumstances of the time or the state of affairs suggested, sometimes by summoning ecumenical councils or consulting the opinion of the Churches scattered throughout the world, sometimes by special synods, sometimes by taking advantage of other useful means afforded by divine providence, defined as doctrines to be held those things which, by God’s help, they knew to be in keeping with Sacred Scripture and the apostolic traditions.

6. For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.

Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Savior to the prince of his disciples: I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren [60].

7. This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this See so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole Church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell.”

Vatican I rejects and utterly condemns the errors, put forward anew by the opponents of Pope Francis who shout “hyperpapalism” and “ultramontanism” (as well as “heretic”, “apostate”, and “idolater”). These papal accusers are not in conformity with the Gospel teachings, with the ancient and constant teaching of the Church, nor with the teachings of the First and Second Vatican Councils.

And notice that Vatican I teaches two related truths: the supreme authority of the Roman Pontiff, AND the charisms given to the Roman Pontiff and to the Church so that this authority can never be used to teach heresy, nor to lead the faithful astray.

The papal accusers assume that their own understanding of the Faith is divine revelation without error, as if they were infallible. And so when Popes and Councils teach what is contrary to their own minds, they frantically grasp at a wide array of excuses, rationalizations, perverse theological claims, distorted historical descriptions, and mere rhetoric — as well as malicious false accusations against the Pope and his supporters. The solution that the opponents of Pope Francis have rejected is that their understanding of the Gospel contains many grave errors, and that they should submit their minds and hearts to the teachings of the Magisterium. Instead, they pervert doctrine and oppose the Magisterium itself.

The OnePeterFive article

The article begins by giving distorted descriptions of past Councils, where supposedly a false spirit or bad reaction to a good Council resulted in misunderstandings. It is sufficient to say that such claims about historical situations have no bearing on the teachings of divine revelation and of the Popes and Councils on papal authority.

The following claims by the article at OnePeterFive are heretical and schismatic; these claims are directly contrary to the above quoted teachings of Vatican I:

T.S. Flanders at OnePeterFive:
“Before Vatican One, the Papacy issued universal decrees only in extraordinary circumstances, i.e. rarely and for the gravest of situations. This is because the ordinary teaching office of the Church was exercised primarily by the local bishop, whose office of episkopos means to “watch over” the depositum fidei, which is ordinarily and primarily taught and passed down by bishops to their clergy, by parish priests to their faithful, and by parents to their children.

“So let us note this first of all, the primary teacher of the Faith for most Catholics is the parent, and then the parish priest. The local bishop would be involved in a typical Catholic’s life at Confirmation (in the Latin rite) or if that Catholic attended pontifical events or processions. That local bishop might write a pastoral letter to his diocese, but that’s it. The typical Tradition was passed down and imbued in a local village around the village (or municipal) church. It was seen in all the monuments built by parents and priests down the ages in a community – the parish church, the statuary, the processional paths, the customs, cuisine, dancing etc. All of these things were passed down and taught by parents and then the priest. That’s it. Only in extreme cases would the pope himself be involved in a normal Catholic’s life. This cannot be overemphasised: the normal teaching office was the parent first and the priest second, and only rarely the local bishop.

“Thus the doctrine of the Two Swords was most commonly seen in the cooperation and mutual help between the parents (lay power – temporal sword) and the local priest (clerical power – spiritual sword). “

Jesus said to Peter:
[Matthew] {16:18} And I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.
{16:19} And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall release on earth shall be released, even in heaven.”

There are two keys on the Vatican flag, and the Pope wears a symbol of two crossed keys. The Gospel quotes Jesus and directly giving these two keys to Peter. This authority over doctrine and discipline is also represented by the two swords of Luke’s Gospel:
{22:38} So they said, “Lord, behold, there are two swords here.” But he said to them, “It is sufficient.”

The claim by T.S. Flanders that one sword was exercised by parents and the other by the local priest directly contradicts the teaching of our Lord in the Gospels, directly contradicts the teaching of Pope Boniface in Unam Sanctam (on the two swords), and directly contradicts the teaching of Vatican I on the supreme authority of the Pope, which is, by “divine ordinance”: “ordinary”, “immediate”, “supreme,” “full”, “universal,” and without appeal.

Flanders’ claim that, “Before Vatican One, the Papacy issued universal decrees only in extraordinary circumstances, i.e. rarely and for the gravest of situations”, is historically false and doctrinally heretical. It also represents a full rejection of the authority of the Roman Pontiff and the body of Bishops over the faithful, and so is also schismatic.

Flanders claims that, historically, “The pope increasingly began to intervene in various nations and in more extreme cases on the universal (Latin) level, but with the caveat that the local custom and local bishop would trump the pope (except for grave cases).” But Vatican I, citing other Ecumenical Councils, teaches the supreme authority of the Pope over the entire body of the faithful, singly and as a group. Here it is again, from Pastor Aeternus, chapter 4:

“Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.”

No matter what explanation Flanders gives, twisting history and making false baseless claims about what the Church does or has taught, the teaching of the Church throughout the centuries is clear. Here is a long list of those teachings, throughout Church history. Some examples follow:

Pope Saint Clement I, 88-97: “If any disobey what He [Jesus Christ] says through Us, let them know that they will be involved in no small offence and danger; but We shall be innocent of this sin.”

Pope Saint Clement I: “Joy and gladness will you afford Us, if you become obedient to the words written by Us, and, through the Holy Spirit, root out the lawless wrath of your jealousy, according to the intercession which We have made for peace and unity in this letter.”

Saint Irenaeus, Doctor, 130-202: “For to this Church [of Rome], because of Her mightier rule, every Church must agree, that is, those who are faithful from all sides, in which the tradition from the apostles is kept by those who are from all sides.”

Saint Cyprian, Bishop, 210-258: “Where Peter is, there is the Church”, repeated by Saint Ambrose and Saint Boniface. Confirmed by Pope Benedict XV, in the encyclical In Hac Tanta.

Saint Cyprian: “If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?”

Pope Saint Lucius I, Martyr, 253-254: “The Roman Apostolic Church is the mother of all Churches and has never been shown to have wandered from the path of Apostolic tradition, nor being deformed, succumbed to heretical novelties according to the promise of the Lord himself, saying, ‘I have prayed for thee, etc.’ [Lk 22:32]”

Pope Saint Felix I, 269-274, speaking on the Roman Church: “As it took up in the beginning the norm of the Christian Faith from its authors, the Princes of the Apostles of Christ, She remains unsullied according to what the Lord said: ‘I have prayed for thee, etc.’ [Lk 22:32]”

Theodotus of Ancyra, martyr, fl. 303: “This holy See holds the reign of the Churches of the world, not only on account of other things, but also because She remains free from the heretical stench.”

Pope Saint Julius I, 337-352, writing to the Eastern Bishops: “Do you not know that this is the custom, that first you must write to us, and that here what is just shall be decreed.”

Pope Saint Julius I: “It is not right to make laws for the Churches, apart from the knowledge of the Bishop of Rome.”

Council of Sardica, 344 (not Ecumenical), writing to Pope Saint Julius I: “It seemed best and most proper that the priests of the Lord should refer from every province to the head, that is to the See of the Apostle Peter.”

Saint Optatus of Milevis to the Donatists: “How can you pretend to have the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, [you] who sacrilegiously fight against the See of Peter by your presumption and impudence?”

Saint Jerome as quoted by Pope Benedict XVI: “This is what Jerome wrote: ‘I decided to consult the Chair of Peter, where that faith is found exalted by the lips of an Apostle; I now come to ask for nourishment for my soul there, where once I received the garment of Christ. I follow no leader save Christ, so I enter into communion with your beatitude, that is, with the Chair of Peter, for this I know is the rock upon which the Church is built’ (cf. Le lettere I, 15, 1-2).”

Pope Saint Damasus I, the Roman Synod of 378, to the emperors Gratian and Valentinian II: “Certain bishops, unworthy pastors, have carried their insolence and contempt to the point of refusing obedience to the Bishop of Rome. If the accused is himself a Metropolitan, he will be ordered to go at once to Rome, or in any case to appear before the judges whom the Bishop of Rome shall appoint.”

Pope Saint Zosimus, 417-418: “the tradition of the Fathers attributed so much authority to the Apostolic See that no one dared to challenge its judgment and has always preserved it through canons and regulations … such great authority belongs to Us that no one could argue again with Our decision….”

Pope Saint Boniface I, 418-422: “No one has ever boldly raised his hands against the Apostolic Eminence, from whose judgment it is not permissible to dissent; no one has rebelled against this, who did not wish judgment to be passed upon him.”

Pope Saint Boniface I: “there is to be no review of our judgment. In fact, it has never been licit to deliberate again on that which has once been decided by the Apostolic See.”

Pope Saint Boniface I, to the bishops of Thessaly: “It is therefore certain that this Church [the Roman See] is to the Churches throughout the world as the head to its members. If anyone cut himself off from this Church, not being in union with her, he is outside the Christian religion.”

Pope Saint Celestine I, 422-432: “The sanctions of the blessed and Apostolic See may not be violated.”

Pope Saint Gelasius I, 492-496, epistle to the Emperor Anastasius: “This is what the Apostolic See guards against with all her strength because the glorious confession of the Apostle is the root of the world, so that She is polluted by no crack of depravity and altogether no contagion. For if such a thing would ever occur (which may God forbid and we trust cannot be), why would we make bold to resist any error?”

Saint Maximus the Confessor (c. 580-662): “This Apostolic See, which, from the Incarnate Word of God Himself, as well as from the holy councils (according to the sacred canons and definitions) has received and possesses the sovereignty, authority and power of binding and loosing over all the churches of God in the entire world, in and through all things.”

Pope Saint Vitalian, 657-672, to Archbishop Theodore (608): Pope Vitalian, servant of the servants of God…. And in accordance with the authority of the blessed Peter, first of the apostles, to whom was given by our Lord God the power of binding and loosing in heaven and earth, we, though unworthy, holding the office of that same blessed Peter key-bearer of the kingdom of heaven, grant to you, Theodore, and your successors, to hold unchangeable in your own metropolitan see in the city of Canterbury the rights granted in perpetuity in ancient times. If anyone, whether bishop or priest or deacon, tries to go against our wishes and the authority of our apostolic decree of privilege, we decree with our apostolic authority that a bishop shall be removed from office and priests or deacons be told that they have lost their posts; and lay people, kings or princes, great or small, must know that they are banned from sharing in the body of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Pope Saint Nicholas I (the great), 858-867: “If anyone condemns dogmas, mandates, interdicts, sanctions, or decrees, promulgated by the one presiding in the Apostolic See, for the Catholic faith, for the correction of the faithful, for the emendation of criminals, either by an interdict of threatening or of future ills, let him be anathema.”

Pope Saint Nicholas I: “Neither by the emperor, nor by all the clergy, nor by kings, nor by the people will the judge be judged…. The first See will not be judged by anyone….”

Pope Saint Nicholas I, Letter to the Emperor: “Furthermore, if you do not listen to Us, it necessarily follows that for Us you are to be considered, as our Lord Jesus Christ commands, as those who refuse to listen to the Church of God, especially since the privileges of the Roman Church, built upon blessed Peter by the word of Christ, deposited in the Church herself, observed in ancient times and celebrated by the sacred universal councils and venerated jointly by the entire Church, can by no means be diminished, by no means infringed upon, by no means changed: for the foundation that God has established, no human effort has the power to destroy, and what God has determined remains firm and strong…. These privileges, therefore, which were given to this holy Church by Christ, not by the councils, but only celebrated and venerated [by them] thereafter… constrain and compel Us ‘to have solicitude for all of the churches of God’ [cf. 2 Cor 11:28]….”

Pope Saint Nicholas I: “Since, according to the canons, where there is a greater authority, the judgment of the inferiors must be brought to it to be annulled or to be substantiated, certainly it is evident that the judgment of the Apostolic See, of whose authority there is none greater, is to be refused by no one….”

The Second Council of Lyons: “If questions will have arisen on faith, they ought to be decided by his [i.e. the Roman Pontiff’s] judgment”.

The Council of Florence, 1438: “the most illustrious profession of the Roman Church about the truth of the faith, which has always been pure from all stain of error.”

Florence: “We also define that the holy Apostolic See and the Roman pontiff holds the primacy over the whole world and the Roman pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, and that he is the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole Church and the father and teacher of all Christians, and to him was committed in blessed Peter the full power of tending, ruling and governing the whole Church, as is contained also in the acts of Ecumenical Councils and in the sacred canons.”

The Council of Florence condemned the proposition that the pope “cannot in any way by his own authority dissolve a universal general council”.

Lateran V: “For it is clearly established that only the contemporary Roman pontiff, as holding authority over all councils, has the full right and power to summon, transfer and dissolve councils. This we know not only from the witness of holy scripture, the statements of holy fathers and our predecessors as Roman pontiffs, and the decisions of the sacred canons, but also from the declarations of the same councils.”

Lateran V: “It arises from the necessity of salvation that all the faithful of Christ are to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

Lateran V: “the person who abandons the teaching of the Roman pontiff cannot be within the Church….”

.

Ronald L Conte Jr