No interest in arguing over what Christ meant when he assured Peter, that the latter was the rock upon whom he would build his church, which implied the Concept of Infallibility.
Man will find out on Judgement Day.
As for Pope Frankie when he authors an Encyclical w/1% of the power and wisdom that Vincenzo Cardinal Pecci(Leo XIII) exhibited in his magisterial Encyclical, Rerum Novarum; I will take him seriously.
Which even fails of the unanimous consent of the fathers, while in contrast to Peter, that the LORD Jesus is the Rock (“petra”) or "stone" (“lithos,” and which denotes a large rock in Mk. 16:4) upon which the church is built is one of the most abundantly confirmed doctrines in the Bible (petra: Rm. 9:33; 1Cor. 10:4; 1Pet. 2:8; cf. Lk. 6:48; 1Cor. 3:11; lithos: Mat. 21:42; Mk.12:10-11; Lk. 20:17-18; Act. 4:11; Rm. 9:33; Eph. 2:20; cf. Dt. 32:4, Is. 28:16) including by Peter himself. (1Pt. 2:4-8) Rome's current catechism attempts to have Peter himself as the rock as well, but also affirms: “On the rock of this faith confessed by St Peter, Christ build his Church,” (pt. 1, sec. 2, cp. 2, para. 424) which understanding some of the so-called “church fathers” concur with.)
And where in Scripture does leading the people of God and providing and preserving Truth (or anything else you attribute to Peter) require ensured perpetual infallibility of office?
As for Pope Frankie when he authors an Encyclical w/1% of the power and wisdom that Vincenzo Cardinal Pecci(Leo XIII) exhibited in his magisterial Encyclical, Rerum Novarum; I will take him seriously.
So in essence you are as a Protestant, picking choosing what to obey based upon your judgment as to what is valid teaching.
Upon the “petra” (large span of rock — Christ) — not the “petros” (individual rock — Peter) — the church was to be build, so says the text. With living “petros”-es. Peter was #1 of the “petros”-es.
So goes a literal reading.
And so if Christians seem to the world to have rocks in their heads this is why :-)