I did nothing of the sort. Guetee said St. John didn't call St. Peter "rock", so I quoted him doing just that. That isn't cherry-picking, its a simple contrast of truth and falsehood. Guetee has no credibility.
The rock according St. John Chrysostom is the rock of St. Peter's confession of faith, not Simon personally.
Why do you insist on ignoring that minor text in Chrysostom's writings? So are you saying St. John is being self-contradictory where I quote him as saying the rock is the confession?
When reading any author it is imperative to read their writings in their larger cultural, historical and in the context of their other writings, unless of course they change their minds?
You were cherry-picking because you ignored the section a few lines earlier where St. John Chrysostom refers to St. Peter's confession as the rock. I guess St. John doesn't know what he is talking about there, so his writing ought to be disregarded right? He can't make up his mind.
The Ultramontane view of the papacy can't rest upon St. Peter personally because he is dead. A successor would rest his authority upon St. Peter's confession.
Why is it you ultramontanes avoid the patristic passages referring to St. Peter's confession being the rock like the plague? Is it because it is inconvenient for you?
The papal monarchy is a novelty of the Middle Ages that didn't exist prior to that. The pope can become a heretic, and several have. Vigilius, Pope Honorius, John XXII, St. Marcellus I who offered sacrifices to the pagan gods, etc.
If a pope cannot fall into heresy, why would Pope Pius IV find it necessary to promulgate the decree Cum Ex Apostolatus?
At least in a conciliarist system, if the primate falls into heresy, not everyone falls with him.