[CpnHook]

“If we are bound to follow the majority of the fathers in this thing, then we are bound to hold for certain that by the rock should be understood the faith professed by Peter, not Peter professing the faith.”

Again, why you think digging into Vatican I helps you on this topic in a mystery. Though, as is most often the case, I suspect you've just copied this entire pre-formatted post from somewhere with little clue about the overall topic.

Archbishop Kenrick was one who opposed promulgation of the doctrine of papal infallibility at Vatican I. So it's no surprise he advances a more skeptical view of Patristic support. His argument was found lacking by the Council.

Though, to his credit. Archbishop Kenrick didn't then go and declare his view was superior and go form his own denomination. He accepted the decision of the Council.

[Elsie]

Though, as is most often the case, I suspect you've just copied this entire pre-formatted post from somewhere with little clue about the overall topic.

You might be right.

Now that you've discredited the messenger; discredit the message.

[Elsie]

He accepted the decision of the Council.

Would it not be prudent for you to do the same?