Riigghhttt . . . because of course you understand Catholic teaching here better than I do.
As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18, note the bishops promise in the profession of faith of Vatican 1.
You see, right out of the gate here, you cite to a source that shows you really aren't thinking through this clearly at all.
The First Vatican Council is the council that defined Papal Infallibility. The notion that somehow Vatican I is speaking against Petrine Primacy is ludicrous. But what I again perceive is your post here is again just big copy and paste; so this sort of blunder is commonplace.
Your own CCC allows the interpretation that, “On the rock of this faith confessed by St Peter, Christ build his Church,”
Exactly. It is often the case that a passage permits of more than one interpretation; this is somewhat common among the Church Fathers. So all the Patristic citations your list speaking of "the rock" as Peter's faith are just fine by me. That this should be so isn't difficult to understand, as if Peter can be separated from Peter's faith.
Ambrosiaster . . . 'Upon this rock I shall build my Church,' that is, upon this confession of the catholic faith I shall establish the faithful in life.
By the late 4th century when Ambrosiaster is writing, the "catholic faith" entailed a whole lot of things I suspect I'm much more in agreement with than you. Why you bring him into the mix is at this point a puzzle.
Augustine
It is absolutely ridiculous how some cherry-pick from Augustine to try to make him appear more Protestant in outlook. Here, as with about every other topic, the effort fails. Augustine is absolutely clear in associating "this rock" with not only Peter, but the entire line of apostolic succession on the see of Rome as the pillar of orthodoxy:
“If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them [the bishops of Rome] from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer it.’ Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement. … In this order of succession a Donatist bishop is not to be found” (Letters 53:1:2 [A.D. 412]).
Whether you're disingenuously selectively sampling Augustine or whether you're just doing a fine copy and paste and don't know any better remains to be established. But you're way off the mark with Augustine in either case.
Basil . . .
Basil, like the Catechism, is one that, as I said, saw multiple interpretations:
"The house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the foundations of which are on the holy mountains, for it is built upon the Apostles and prophets. One also of these mountains was Peter, upon which Rock the Lord promised to build His Church." (Basil, Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah, Ch. 2.).
Chrysostom.. .
Again, another who states it both ways:
"Peter himself the Head or Crown of the Apostles, the First in the Church, the Friend of Christ, who received a revelation, not from man, but from the Father, as the Lord bears witness to him, saying, 'Blessed art thou, This very Peter and when I name Peter I name that unbroken Rock, that firm Foundation, the Great Apostle, First of the disciples, the First called . . ." (Chrysostom, T. ii. Hom)
"Blessed art thou" indicates Chrysostom has Matt 16 in view.
For now, I see no point in going through the same exercise as to the other Fathers cited.
As to the comments by Congar and Kenrick, these are Catholic writers who recognized Petrine Primacy. To fully appreciate their views it would be necessary to understand their comments in the context of their overall view on the topic.
If you say so.
Mary is dead and answers NO prayers.
Oh yeah...
Guys; while we're at it; let's say we're gonna be INFALLIBLE; too!
Let’s not forget Ignatius of Antioch who dies in about 110 AD.