The texts, for example, that the Catholic answers articles refer to (see my 175) self-evidently refer to the person of St. Peter and not to some collegium. Here Christ promises to pray for St. Peter's success
But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren. (Luke 22:32)
and here St. Peter promises us that his office be handed down in perpetuity
13 But I think it meet as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance. 14 Being assured that the laying away of this my tabernacle is at hand, according as our Lord Jesus Christ also hath signified to me. 15 And I will endeavour, that you frequently have after my decease, whereby you may keep a memory of these things. (2 Peter 1)
Now, the only model of perpetuating the office is by tying it to a geographical location and establishimg a method of succession. There is never a suggestion anywhere that Rome should have several bishops. So a pope is a pope, various collegia that exist in the governance of the Church notwithstanding. Now is Rome necessarily and forever the city where Peter's successor resides? No, it is not, and in fact, it is presently not in Rome but in the Vatican. If an asteroid strikes Rome quite conceivably the papacy will move, perhaps, to Cicero, Ill. as Walker Percy playfully suggested.
It is also a strawman that the governance of the Church is "papal supremacy". The papal infallibility only works in union with the college of bishops. The Pentecost established the Church as a conciliar organization lead by Peter as the chief pastor who alone has the power to bind and loose, while the pastoral duties to evangelize were given all the bishops without distinction. The pope is, of course, elected and not appointed by the predecessor. The doctrine moves from council to council. Protestantism was condemned by a council, -- not by a pope acting on his own, and following prolonged negotiations and discussion. Ideally, we need ecumenical councils which we cannot assemble because of the separation of the Orthodox. We get by with Catholic councils from necessity, not by design. The Catholic Church in the East operates in significant autonomy from Rome. Papal authority is felt, of course, in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church, but that is because the heresies of the modern age, -- Protestantism and the 20 century moral relativism -- all originated and are sustained nearly exclusively in the West. Serious Catholics understand that striong papacy is a temporal necessity in the West, and in fact we want it become stronger. But it is abundantly clear to all that the role of the papacy in the universal Church cannot be modeled after the Latin Rite and needs to be more conciliar, if unity is to be reached.
But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren. (Luke 22:32)
and here St. Peter promises us that his office be handed down in perpetuity 13 But I think it meet as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance. 14 Being assured that the laying away of this my tabernacle is at hand, according as our Lord Jesus Christ also hath signified to me. 15 And I will endeavour, that you frequently have after my decease, whereby you may keep a memory of these things. (2 Peter 1)
This is an example of the huge leap in exegesis of these texts that is demanded to support the notion that they have anything whatever to to do with either the Papacy or exclusively the Roman Church. There is absolutely nothing in these texts themselves, either in what is said to Peter or what he says, in context, or as interpreted by any of the early church, that connects in any meaningful way what is said as applying exclusively to the bishop of Rome alone as the sole, unique successor of Peter, or that in any way does not apply to the entire bishopric of the Church. There is not a shred of evidence that they were historically viewed as supportive of an office of a Papacy.
Now, the only model of perpetuating the office is by tying it to a geographical location and establishimg a method of succession. There is never a suggestion anywhere that Rome should have several bishops.
The exact opposite is true; there is never anywhere a suggestion in Scripture or the early church that Rome or any other church should have only one bishop.
It is also a strawman that the governance of the Church is "papal supremacy". The papal infallibility only works in union with the college of bishops.
Tell that to the enraged Pius IX who shouted at Cardinal Guidi, who had emphatically stated that the pope was not infallible in and of himself, independently of the Church, but only insofar as he reflected the views of the bishops and the tradition of the Church, "I am Tradition!"
Cordially,