This sort of psuedohistorical claptrap should be embarrassing to anyone posting it. It is on the same intellectual and academic level as the evidence advanced in support of Holocaust denial and is tainted by a similar odor of bigotry.
And for the record I am not Catholic.
You're comparing the observation that the Papacy was a later development (which is actually taught by YOUR own scholars and theologians) to holocaust denial?
The reaction from Catholics here to this thread is interesting. Someone else noted that the Catholics make oodles of threads promoting the supremacy of their church, yet when a thread that even some of your scholars would agree with is published, but which offends the poor "traditionalists," all of a sudden it's like a David Duke posting!
Readers should take note of this.
The work of actual historians is now “pseudo-historical”?
As opposed to the conflicting Catholic traditions, for which there is a serious dearth of historical evidence to support?
Welcome to FR.