[Conservative til I die]

Paul had several journeys to Rome and Irenaeus seems to suggest that Peter had at least one. But Irenaeus does not make Peter the Pope of Rome nor does he say that Peter stay around to oversee it.

The claim to the Papacy does not hinge on how many times or how long Peter was in Rome. The Papacy is based on Christ anointing Peter the Rock. But as you said, Linus was appointed successor, and we recognize him as the second Pope.

The Papacy is similar to the Presidency. The claim is not based on residency or location, it is claimed on authority.

[Salvation]

Great points. Glad the thread is still on topic. And most amazingly, attracting many Catholic-bashers.

[HarleyD]

The Papacy is similar to the Presidency. The claim is not based on residency or location, it is claimed on authority.

I understand the Catholics claim Linus as the "second" Pope. However, there is no indication Peter claimed himself as the first nor is there any indication that Peter had some "authority" over Paul.