Who said, "Power tends to corrupt..." and whom was he addressing?

[Roberth]

In1870, along with his mentor Döllinger, Acton opposed the moves to promulgate the doctrine of papal infallibility in the First Vatican Council, travelling to Rome to lobby against it, ultimately unsuccessfully.[SUP][12][/SUP] Unlike Döllinger Acton did not become an Old Catholic, and continued attending Mass regularly; he received the last rites on his deathbed.[SUP][13][/SUP] The Catholic Church did not try to force his hand. It was in this context that, in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887, Acton made his most famous pronouncement:

But if we might discuss this point until we found that we nearly agreed, and if we do agree thoroughly about the impropriety of Carlylese denunciations and Pharisaism in history, I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it. That is the point at which the negation of Catholicism and the negation of Liberalism meet and keep high festival, and the end learns to justify the means. You would hang a man of no position like Ravaillac; but if what one hears is true, then Elizabeth asked the gaoler to murder Mary, and William III. ordered his Scots minister to extirpate a clan. Here are the greatest names coupled with the greatest crimes; you would spare those criminals, for some mysterious reason. I would hang them higher than Haman, for reasons of quite obvious justice, still more, still higher for the sake of historical science.[SUP][4]

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dalberg-Acton,_1st_Baron_Acton#cite_note-lmcone-4[/SUP]
​

 

[Roberth]

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men...."

Who wrote this?

John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton

Whom was he addressing?

Ultimately the Pope because the power of "the doctrine of papal infallibility" would be a corrupting power to his office.

 

[Pemican]

You seem to have answered your own question.
But here is a photo of Lord Acton.

 

[Proverbs_Four]

Roman Catholic Heresies and Inventions:

Infallibility of the pope in matters of faith and morals, proclaimed by the Vatican Council - 1870

 

[Magenta]

While Peter was central in the early spread of the gospel (part of the meaning behind Matthew 16:18-19), the teaching of Scripture, taken in context, nowhere declares that he was in authority over the other apostles or over the entire church (see Acts 15:1-23; Galatians 2:1-14; 1 Peter 5:1-5). Nor is it ever taught that the bishop of Rome was to have primacy over the church.

Nowhere does Scripture state that, in order to keep the church from error, the authority of the apostles was passed on to those they ordained (the Roman Catholic Church teaching of "apostolic succession"). Apostolic succession is “read into” those verses that the Roman Catholic Church uses to support this doctrine (2 Timothy 2:2; 4:2-5; Titus 1:5; 2:1; 2:15; 1 Timothy 5:19-22).

Nowhere in Scripture is the “teaching Magisterium,” or mastery of bishops, taught and treated as of equal weight with Scripture. What history has shown is that, when any other source of authority is treated as being of equal weight with Scripture, that second authority always ends up superseding Scripture (such is the case with the Mormons' other accepted writings and the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Watchtower). So it is with the Roman Catholic Church. Repeatedly, Catholic Catechisms state that many of their doctrines are not found in or based on Scripture (e.g., Mary being Co-redemptress and Co-mediator, sinless, and conceived without sin; Mary’s ascension; praying to saints and venerating them and images of them; etc.). For Roman Catholics, it is the “mother Church” that is the final authority, not Scripture, no matter that they say that the Magisterium is the “servant of Scripture.”

http://www.gotquestions.org/papal-infallibility.html

 

[Proverbs_Four]

When the triple crown is placed on the head of a new pope at his "coronation" ceremony the ritual prescribes the following declaration by the officiating cardinal:

"Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns, and know thou art the Father of Princes and Kings, Ruler of the World, the Vicar of our Saviour Jesus Christ . . ." (National Catholic Almanac).​

 

[Stephen63]

Who wrote this?

John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton

Whom was he addressing?

Ultimately the Pope because the power of "the doctrine of papal infallibility" would be a corrupting power to his office.

And indeed it was. When any man believes/proclaims infallibility, you might as well proclaim loudly that major sin is being secretly committed.

There is a group of Protestants in this forum that proclaims that fallibility doesn't matter, 'cuz they're saved no matter what.

Seems like each group has their own "perfect" agenda/doctrine, doesn't it?