Whenever it comes to a discrepancy or contradiction between the personal interpretation of a biblical text by a man called "Augustine", and a directive of the Holy Spirit (God) to one of the biblical authors to write something seemingly contradictory (like actually having them call various men "father" in the inspired Bible), God is always right, and the man called "Basil of Seleucia" is always wrong, without exception. In other words, if a man called "Bede" interprets something in the Scriptures to mean something that directly contradicts something that God teaches by direct example elsewhere in the Scriptures, that man named Cassiodorus' interpretation is always wrong, and God is always right.
Just like the REST of these fellas!! Cyril of Alexandria, Origen, Hilary of Potier...
As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18 (and less understood)
, note the following Early Church Fathers promise in the profession of faith of Vatican 1:
• Augustine, sermon:
"Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer. — John Rotelle, O.S.A., Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine , © 1993 New City Press, Sermons, Vol III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327
Augustine, sermon:
Upon this rock, said the Lord, I will build my Church. Upon this confession, upon this that you said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,' I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer her (Mt. 16:18). — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 236A.3, p. 48.
• Augustine, sermon:
For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, 'On this rock will I build my Church,' because Peter had said, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.' On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church. — Augustine Tractate CXXIV; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: First Series, Volume VII Tractate CXXIV (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf107.iii.cxxv.html)
• Augustine, sermon:
And Peter, one speaking for the rest of them, one for all, said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:15-16)...And I tell you: you are Peter; because I am the rock, you are Rocky, Peter-I mean, rock doesn't come from Rocky, but Rocky from rock, just as Christ doesn't come from Christian, but Christian from Christ; and upon this rock I will build my Church (Mt 16:17-18); not upon Peter, or Rocky, which is what you are, but upon the rock which you have confessed. I will build my Church though; I will build you, because in this answer of yours you represent the Church. — John Rotelle, O.S.A. Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 270.2, p. 289
• Augustine, sermon:
Peter had already said to him, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' He had already heard, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not conquer her' (Mt 16:16-18)...Christ himself was the rock, while Peter, Rocky, was only named from the rock. That's why the rock rose again, to make Peter solid and strong; because Peter would have perished, if the rock hadn't lived. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 244.1, p. 95
• Augustine, sermon:
...because on this rock, he said, I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not overcome it (Mt. 16:18). Now the rock was Christ (1 Cor. 10:4). Was it Paul that was crucified for you? Hold on to these texts, love these texts, repeat them in a fraternal and peaceful manner. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1995), Sermons, Volume III/10, Sermon 358.5, p. 193
• Augustine, Psalm LXI:
Let us call to mind the Gospel: 'Upon this Rock I will build My Church.' Therefore She crieth from the ends of the earth, whom He hath willed to build upon a Rock. But in order that the Church might be builded upon the Rock, who was made the Rock? Hear Paul saying: 'But the Rock was Christ.' On Him therefore builded we have been. — Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VIII, Saint Augustin, Exposition on the Book of Psalms, Psalm LXI.3, p. 249. (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf108.ii.LXI.html)
• Augustine, in “Retractions,”
In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,' that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ,' in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable. — The Fathers of the Church (Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine, The Retractations Chapter 20.1:.
• Basil of Seleucia, Oratio 25:
'You are Christ, Son of the living God.'...Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it 'Peter,' perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: 'For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.' To whom be glory and power forever. — Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297.
• Bede, Matthaei Evangelium Expositio, 3:
You are Peter and on this rock from which you have taken your name, that is, on myself, I will build my Church, upon that perfection of faith which you confessed I will build my Church by whose society of confession should anyone deviate although in himself he seems to do great things he does not belong to the building of my Church...Metaphorically it is said to him on this rock, that is, the Saviour which you confessed, the Church is to be built, who granted participation to the faithful confessor of his name. — 80Homily 23, M.P.L., Vol. 94, Col. 260. Cited by Karlfried Froehlich, Formen, Footnote #204, p. 156 [unable to verify by me].
• Cassiodorus, Psalm 45.5:
'It will not be moved' is said about the Church to which alone that promise has been given: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.' For the Church cannot be moved because it is known to have been founded on that most solid rock, namely, Christ the Lord. — Expositions in the Psalms, Volume 1; Volume 51, Psalm 45.5, p. 455
• Chrysostom (John) [who affirmed Peter was a rock, but here not the rock in Mt. 16:18]:
Therefore He added this, 'And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is, on the faith of his confession. — Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew, Homily LIIl; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.LII.html)
• Cyril of Alexandria:
When [Peter] wisely and blamelessly confessed his faith to Jesus saying, 'You are Christ, Son of the living God,' Jesus said to divine Peter: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church.' Now by the word 'rock', Jesus indicated, I think, the immoveable faith of the disciple.”. — Cyril Commentary on Isaiah 4.2.
• Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII):
“For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, 1 Corinthians 10:4 and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.'
“For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters.” — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XII), sect. 10,11 ( http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101612.htm)
• Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II):
Thus our one immovable foundation, our one blissful rock of faith, is the confession from Peter's mouth, Thou art the Son of the living God. On it we can base an answer to every objection with which perverted ingenuity or embittered treachery may assail the truth."-- (Hilary of Potier, On the Trinity (Book II), para 23; Philip Schaff, editor, The Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers Series 2, Vol 9.
My brother, Elsie, here's some friendly advice. I've seen you do this many, many times, posting these big, long, boring, time-consuming, tedious lists, of what are ostensibly "quotes", from various long-dead figures, which in your mind "prove" that those figures disagree with some teaching or other of the Church. First of all, do you really believe everything you read in books, or online? If so, I have a great chicken farm to sell you in the middle of the ocean, and you'll really love it! (Just send all your money to me, a true Nigerian prince, and it is all yours!)
You probably believe this pious religious book, too, don't you?
Over the centuries, there have been lots of books and other writings of questionable veracity, filled with bias on both sides (Anti-Catholic, and Anti-Protestant), and, in that light, it is best to take any books filled with quotes and accounts from long-dead figures with a grain of salt. Many of the writers of books and online materials probably have even less credibility than today's mainstream media, and their fictitious published accounts of Trump and of Trump supporters.
But, for arguments sake, let's pretend for a moment that all of your quotes from these long-dead figures are genuine and accurate.
So what?
Right from the beginning, the Bible records that some prominent Church leaders have expressed or promoted erroneous ideas, but those teachings were never officially (magisterially) accepted or implemented by any form of the Church Magisterium, as guided by the Holy Spirit. (Read, for example, Galatians 2, where St. Paul says he had to straighten out St. Peter himself, right to his face, regarding the issue of forcing new converts to live like Jews, so the Holy Spirit can and does at times even cause popes to be overridden, before they are able to implement something magisterially in the Church.) St. Peter's views were expanded and "refined" over time, as the Church's teachings developed more fully over time, and were settled by the Church Magisterium under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and that refining of individual views can probably be said to be true about all Church leaders (and Church members) over the centuries.
Does that mean you throw out the whole Church, just because some number of its early Church leaders did not have a full and complete or correct understanding yet of some particular issue, and which the Holy Spirit caused to be overridden and rectified in the Church's actual official magisterial teachings, which came out of the Church leaders' prayerful discussions? Of course not! Or, do you throw out the Bible, just because some of the early Church teachings mentioned in it, later turned out to need to be further developed, or refined, or corrected, or because some Epistles in the Bible are attributed to St. Peter, who was at some point corrected by St. Paul (who was also in very deep error for a while, and was strongly corrected himself - see Acts 9 - regarding his own strikingly erroneous views before that)? Of course not!
The Church leaders of the time, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, magisterially hammered out a new formal Church doctrine (concerning an issue Jesus had never instructed them on), which declared the new official Church teaching that new converts did not have to become like Jews, and get circumcised, and so forth. They nipped that right in the bud. (This official doctrinal decision was all done magisterially by the Church leaders, based on prayer-guided tradition, without any consultation or interpretation of the New Testament writings, as most (if not all) of the New Testament "books" weren't even written yet.)
This is another great illustration of the fallacy of following your own personal interpretation of the Scriptures. Both the Apostle Peter and the Apostle Paul knew the Jewish Scriptures well, and both men also knew a great deal about the teachings of Jesus, and they both came to opposite personal conclusions about the "Judaizer" issue. But, they didn't just rely on their own personal interpretations of those things, and they didn't split up into two churches, or just agree to disagree about it. Instead, those Apostles and the Church leaders sought and received the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and were directed on which way to go, which was to establish a brand new doctrine for the One Church, which did not require gentiles to adopt Jewish practices, and that became the official Church doctrine from that time forward.
Other humans in various Church leadership roles over the centuries have also said or done things that are later determined by the Magisterium to be inadequate, just like those early Judaizers (like Peter and James), but that is why the Holy Spirit is necessary, to guide the Church and her magisterial doctrinal decisions, and keep her on course, as Jesus promised. Those "erroneous teachings" of various individual Church leaders do not end up becoming official, magisterial teaching of the Church over time, thanks to the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
What you always have to look at is not the expressed opinions of various individuals within the Church, but the actual teachings of the Church, as hammered out over the centuries by the Magisterium, directly guided by the Holy Spirit (as Jesus promised), which are conveniently available these days in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. You may still want to attack those Church teachings, but you won't have to force yourself to continue to post so many long, rambling lists of questionable quotes, attributed somewhere, to some long dead individuals, who can no longer be questioned about those "quotes", or about their true beliefs.
There have been prominent Church leaders right from the very beginning (and recorded in the Bible), who have made misstatements concerning Church doctrines, or non-magisterially proposed some erroneous teachings, as mentioned in Galatians 2. The opinions of those individual Church leaders in biblical times (like the Judaizers) were listened to, and considered, then officially abandoned by the Magisterium leaders of the Church, under the guidance of God, and the same kind of assessments and decisions have continued to be resolved in that same way ever since those early biblical examples. So, you can save yourself a lot of time (and save your misemployed fingers) from a lot of useless and senseless typing of all those protracted, wearisome, and thoroughly irrelevant lists! :-)
(You're welcome, brother!)