Well, I’m not entirely certain that Mr. R and I would agree on everything...I’m not Protestant, I’m Orthodox.
I accept that +Peter was the first among, and frequent spokesman for, the 12.
What I don’t accept was that +Peter was more than primus inter pares. If he was, then why did he not issue that opinion of the elders at Jerusalem as testified to in Acts 15?
+James the Just did, because he was Bishop of Jerusalem. +Peter was visiting and deferred to he in whose house he was a guest.
“Well, I’m not entirely certain that Mr. R and I would agree on everything...”
Shoot - my WIFE and I don’t agree on everything! That’s why I have 3 dogs. At any given time, at least one of them will agree with me. Particularly when I’m holding their food bowls...
My understanding (slim, since I admittedly don’t spend a lot of time reading Augustine) is that he considered Peter a type, and what he received, he did so on behalf of all bishops.
Some Protestants view it that way, some broaden it to all believers, and some restrict it to the Apostles. I tend to be one of those who broaden it a bit, and say Peter received it on behalf of all the church, to use as led by the Holy Spirit. I’m not dogmatic on it, apart from seeing no indication it meant Peter and Peter’s ‘successors’ alone. That just seems silly.