Since the emperor has no clothes, for under the NT the spiritual validity of neither a true Jew or a true believer is based upon genealogical linkage, but upon Abrahamic faith (Matthew 3:9; Romans 8:28.29) and its attestation;
And thus the church began under in dissent from the historical magisterium, following itinerant preachers;
And seeing as Rome's so-called apostolic successors even fail of the qualifications and credentials of manifest Biblical apostles; (Acts 1:21,22; 1Cor. 9:1; Gal. 1:11,12; 2Cor. 6:1-0; 12:12)
And Catholic distinctives are not what is manifest in the only wholly inspired record of what the NT church believed (including how they understood the gospels)
Therefore, the argument based on claimed apostolic authority does not even attach any legitimacy to the rebellion of Rome, and in essence her claimed elitism and most manifest deformation curses its claimed mother as illegitimate, yet she is pure in his own eyes, yet remains unwashed. It reminds me of the Samaritans and their re-formation, re-construction, and re-creation of their own religion. It is apparent that they were sincere, yet salvation is of the Jews who believed in Christ, and the inspired record of whose church reproves Rome as illegitimate.
Thus there is no way Rome can lay claim to being the NT church on the basis of its inspired record. But her followers are too often will-fully blind to that, choosing instead to read Scripture thru the autocratic eyes of Rome. Meanwhile even the EO's reject some of Rome' traditions on the basis that they are not of tradition. he EOs