Oh, but there is so much more to Vatican I than what you have quoted. Like this, which is so seldom referred to:
“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
o promised to the blessed apostle Peter and
o conferred on him by Christ the lord.
[PROMISED]
2. It was to Simon alone,
* to whom he had already said
o You shall be called Cephas [42] ,
that the Lord,
* after his confession, You are the Christ, the son of the living God,
spoke these words:
* Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
* And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the underworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven [43] .
[CONFERRED]
3. And it was to Peter alone that Jesus,
* after his resurrection,
confided the jurisdiction of supreme pastor and ruler of his whole fold, saying:
* Feed my lambs, feed my sheep [44] .
4. To this absolutely manifest teaching of the sacred scriptures, as it has always been understood by the catholic church, are clearly opposed the distorted opinions of those who misrepresent the form of government which Christ the lord established in his church and deny that Peter, in preference to the rest of the apostles, taken singly or collectively, was endowed by Christ with a true and proper primacy of jurisdiction.
5. The same may be said of those who assert that this primacy was not conferred immediately and directly on blessed Peter himself, but rather on the church, and that it was through the church that it was transmitted to him in his capacity as her minister.
6. Therefore,
* if anyone says that
o 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
o it was a primacy of honour 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.
Chapter 2. On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs
1. That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ’s authority, in the church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time [45] .
2. For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the catholic church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the saviour and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the holy Roman see, which he founded and consecrated with his blood [46] .
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] .
5. Therefore,
* if anyone says that
o it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole church; or that
o the Roman pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy:
let him be anathema.
Chapter 3. On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman pontiff
1. And so,
* supported by the clear witness of holy scripture, and
* adhering to the manifest and explicit decrees both of our predecessors
o the Roman pontiffs and of
o general councils,
* we promulgate anew the definition of the ecumenical council of Florence [49] ,
* which must be believed by all faithful Christians, namely that
o the apostolic see and the Roman pontiff hold a world-wide primacy, and that
o 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.
o 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
o episcopal and
o immediate.
* Both clergy and faithful,
o of whatever rite and dignity,
o both singly and collectively,
* are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this
o not only in matters concerning faith and morals,
o 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.
5. This power of the supreme pontiff by no means detracts from that ordinary and immediate power of episcopal jurisdiction, by which bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the apostles by appointment of the holy Spirit, tend and govern individually the particular flocks which have been assigned to them. On the contrary, this power of theirs is asserted, supported and defended by the supreme and universal pastor; for St Gregory the Great says: “My honour is the honour of the whole church. My honour is the steadfast strength of my brethren. Then do I receive true honour, when it is denied to none of those to whom honour is due.” [51]
6. Furthermore, it follows from that supreme power which the Roman pontiff has in governing the whole church, that he has the right, in the performance of this office of his, to communicate freely with the pastors and flocks of the entire church, so that they may be taught and guided by him in the way of salvation.
7. And therefore we condemn and reject the opinions of those who hold that
* this communication of the supreme head with pastors and flocks may be lawfully obstructed; or that
* it should be dependent on the civil power, which leads them to maintain that what is determined by the apostolic see or by its authority concerning the government of the church, has no force or effect unless it is confirmed by the agreement of the civil authority.
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
o 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
o he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that
o 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.”
No limitations there, are there!
Papal infallibility is at the heart of the schism between the Roman and Orthodox churches. Papal jurisdiction and infallibility are directly addressed in Vatican I and thus any discussion on papal infallibility must address the decrees of this council on the nature of the papacy. Indeed, the parts of Vatican I which you posted above make it very difficult to reconcile the Orthodox and Roman Catholic positions.
The question of papal infallibility was addressed in great detail in Vatican I in terms which leave little room for doubt of papal primacy and the nature of that primacy. Vatican II made an attempt at ecumenism. Incidentally, the dogmatic constitutions of Vatican one such as Pastor Aeternus are quite a contrast to the decrees of Vatican II aren't they? Nevertheless, according to the Roman Church, Vatican I's statements meet the criteria for infallibility, while most of Vatican II's do not. Anyone who is Roman Catholic, presumably even a pope who wanted to deny his own primacy to help reunify the Orthodox and Roman Churches, would ipso facto anathematize himself because Vatican I infallibly decrees otherwise. How the Roman church and Orthodox can reconcile this, I do not know, but it appears that one side must give completely way to the other.
Vatican I wasn't written to address limitations to Papal power. It was written to set forth the truth that the Pope is the head of the Church, and in what manner that headship is to be understood. I.e.:
(1) That St. Peter received a primacy of jurisdiction over the whole Church from Our Lord, (2) that the Roman Pontiff is successor of St. Peter in this office, (3) that the Pope has immediate, ordinary, and final unappealable Episcopal jurisdiction over all the faithful in matters, of faith, morals, discipline, and government, (4) in order to safe-guard his judgement in these matters he is infallible in matters of faith and morals when teaching the faithful.
Vatican I was not concerned with the organization of the Church, the source, role, rights, and powers of Bishops, the criteria for the Pope to exercise his authority legitimately, the limits placed on these powers by the faith, Tradition and Revelation, and previous Popes, the general infallibility and indefectibiility of the Church, infallibility and jurisdiction held by others or available to others in the heirarchy, etc.
One might express this as Vatican I told us the truth that the Pope has the right to do or to ensure the carrying out of any action that any other heirarch has in the Church. But it doesn't follow from this truth that the Pope has the right to always carry out these actions and to abolish the rights of the other heirarchs to do them, even de facto.