No, I’m saying apostolic succession is not Biblical; the Roman Catholics insist it is, but don’t realize their own hypocrisy in being schismatics themselves.
This is a case where the Protestant position would actually save the Roman Catholics - but we can’t have that, can we?
As far as Peter - no dispute with him in Rome. And until the Council of Trent in 1054 there was a single Church, and it moved its seat of power to Constantinople. Then in 1054 the Roman Catholics splintered off - and thus are no longer part of the single succession they so righteously insist upon. No more so than Lutherans, when Luther split from the Roman Catholic Church.
The Council of Trent started in 1545, but what's this about the Church moving her seat of power to Constantinople?
Luther was ex-communicated by the Catholic church for wanting to hold it accountable and getting rid of the corruption within..
He did not split to start a new denomination, as some Catholics here have proposed, but rather he was trying to get the Catholic church back to its roots in the Bible that Catholics claim their own church WROTE.
How dare he expect the RCC follow their (allegedly) own Scripture?