“Hardly one ambiguous verse and disputed only after more than 1500 years of the clergy and papal succession.”
No. One verse, and that is ambiguous. Other sections (Acts 15 & Galatians 2, for example, indicate otherwise.)
And there was NO tradition of papal supremacy. Or have you forgotten the Orthodox have refused to accept the Pope as head?
As for Matthias, what did he go on to do? What did Paul? If 11 plus one are the foundation of the city of God, was that additional one Matthias or Paul?
“Or have you forgotten the Orthodox have refused to accept the Pope as head?”
Are you Orthodox, sir?
Papal primacy was universally accepted, but the immediate, ordinary jurisdiction found in modern Catholic canon law didn’t exist.
The Eastern patriarchs, nor bishops, were appointed by the Pope. The acts of the ecumenical councils, however, strongly affirm the primacy of the Roman Pope.
As a son of the Patriarchate of Antioch, I have a sense of pride that St. Peter was in Antioch first.
****No. One verse, and that is ambiguous. Other sections (Acts 15 & Galatians 2, for example, indicate otherwise.)****
One individual’s opinion, contrary to hundreds of theologians and historians. I think I will continue to accept what I believe Scripture says which is in communion with all those hundreds of theologians and historians.