The Anti Papists

What is it about a Pope, the Bishop of Rome,  that triggers non Catholic folks? Looking at one critic from the past to minimize that in 2025

As a collector of older books, particularly those that address faith, I came across two editions of Why Do I Believe the Bible is God’s Word by William Dallmann (Concordia Publishing House), first published in 1910.  One was a 1937 reprint, so it must have been somewhat popular.  Rev. Dr. Dallmann (1862-1952) emigrated from Germany and was deeply associated with Concordia College and Seminary.  He wrote numerous pro Martin Luther  and anti Romanism books and articles and seemed vehemently opposed to Catholicism, especially poorly assessing many Popes. 

Why I Believe the Bible is God’s Word is no exception to Dallmann’s otherwise extraordinary devotion to Scripture and living a Christian life.  Indeed, except for some early clues in the little booklet, such as repeated references to the Protestant sixty-six Books of the Bible but insistence that there re no errors in the Bible—without distinguishing that man can and did alter the Bible with the Reformation—Dallmann’s work is even praiseworthy in parts.  Certainly, Dallmann would have been absolutely appalled at what some persons embrace as “Christianity” today; scoffed at the self identified Catholics who wholeheartedly support abortion; and most certainly would have questioned Pope Francis, even absent any Catholic incredulous wonder about the meaning of some of his actions and words.  

Yet, herein, is the aim to address Dallmann’s mischaracterizations of earlier Popes and the Roman Catholic Church.  He charges the Roman Catholic Church, as trying “her upmost to stamp the Bible out of existence.” (Pg 53).   His submitted evidence are the words or actions of various Popes, from Pope Gregory VII in 1080 to Pope Leo XIII in 1896, and some other clergy are also accused of the same.  Cherry picking various texts or events, Dallmann builds his position that the Catholic Church is simply anti Scripture and is determined to destroy the Bible.

What is most puzzling, however, is that it does not appear that Dallmann went to any source that clarified or contradicted his thesis.  Or, if he did read or hear of such, he turned the same deaf ear to those counter arguments that he accuses the Catholic Church of committing.  Moreover, he ignores the Mass filled with the Word of God; the ever present reference to Scripture by all Popes in their writings, including Encyclicals; and pulpit homilies also referencing the Bible.  There would be no Roman Catholic Church without the Word of God.

The ultimate error Dallmann commits, like all heretics even well meaning ones,  is confusing a Bible with the Word of God.  The Catholic Church upholds and has so historically, the Word of God through intensive and prayerful reflection, Councils, and the Magisterium of the Church while also warning about and declaring some works mislabeled as Biblical.  At times, the Church admonishment and response has been harsh and unyielding.  Not all that is stamped “Bible” is the Word of God. 

More so, what confounds is that Dallmann did not seem to at all critique Martin Luther who he saw as a “blessing,” as a man intent on asserting an egoistic world view not that Truth of Jesus Christ.   Yes, the Bible is a foundational block to understanding Christianity, but what Bible is the critical question.  Furthermore, how does one receive that Word?  Was Martin Luther more inspired than the Church, the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ?  Is that what Dallmann, and now, modernists Christians, insist?

Set against numerous Church leaders and Popes consistently upholding the 73 Books, cohesive and cogent interpretation of Scripture, and advising individuals not to fall into individualized misunderstanding of the Word over the past two thousand years, Martin Luther appears as the one who is the renegade, along with others of the same bent.  That Dallmann, an otherwise adherent to virtuous living, well studied historian, and staunch supporter of the goodness of Christianity, seems so stuck on this one person, astonishes the reader. 

However, are we doing likewise in 2025?

Yet, likely Dallmann was ill taught himself, felled by selective words of various Popes (and others), strung along like a string of Christmas lights to illuminate only the negative interpretation of these events.  Perhaps then avoiding any “taint” of a pagan echo of faith, he then was quite adverse to discovery of truth.  How many of us care to venture into other churches—though we would not be granted entrance anyway to some—to better know about what we have already been taught is in error.

Even when that occurs, most people are looking for what is wrong or missing, anyway.  Dallmann likely acted accordingly despite a keen intellect and arduous study of other religions.  Martin Luther was his main advisor in all things religious, but he was careful not to just focus on Luther, as he led an exemplarily life by recorded accounts.  He also appreciated aspects of Christianity that pious Catholics respect.  

However, Catholics would do themselves a service to know persons like Dallmann and his works, which may serve as a revealing mirror.  Dallmann presents as a solid Christian, but in unreservedly promoting one destructive, rebellious Catholic, Martin Luther,  and twisting the works of Popes, over extended time, Dallmann merely further eroded trust in the authority of Jesus Christ, the Head of the one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.  Thus, Christianity has been splintered  even further, ironically resulting in a near total deification of the individual.   Dallmann got the unintended consequences, but they were prophesied by the very Scripture he loved:  Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians (though that, too, often misinterpreted by individual non-Catholics.)

The ultimate punchline is that the modern “Christian” does not know the Bible very well, if at all, the Book to which Dallmann devoted his life.  Worse, the most recent generation, Catholics among them,  also extrapolate that which appeals to them, like he,  and incredulously cling to primarily Matthew 25: 31-46 and Acts 2:45, to justify a utopian collectivism oriented on the material world.  Is it any surprise that we find Catholics so intent upon placing Pope Leo XIV in one (political) camp or the other.  Worse, we now seem to perceive the Holy father through the manmade lens of DEI and race?  From God’s throne, what does “being the first American Pope” have to do with the salvation of souls worldwide?  Only God knows, but one can certainly bet it has nothing to do with “making American great again.” And, does God care a whit whether the Vicar of Christ and the shepherd of the whole Church boasts black (or mulatto) grandparents?

One wonders what Dallmann would say if he was present today, he who declared in reference to those who would adhere to the Bible:  …the men that work for law and order; for the protection of life and property; for the health and happiness of the community; for the safety of the home and the family; for the sanctity of marriage; for the maintenance of purity, chastity, and virtue of man and woman; for the advancement of education and art and science; for the building of orphanages, hospitals, asylums, reformatories—the men that sacrifice money, time, ease, learning, and life for these and like things are the men that believe the Bible is God’s Word and study and teach it.

A rightfully catechized Catholic in 2025 could not agree more!

Also, In that Dallmann unwittingly endorsed the spirit of the Papacy.  In turn, let us assure our non-Catholic —and any confused Catholic brothers and sisters— that this is why Jesus Christ instituted the Papacy. ..that visible head of the Church moved by the Holy Spirit to propagate timeless truths.