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.
The Greeks and Romans internalized that the path to wisdom was clarity and succinctness, attributes they stressed in their learning and speaking.
They understood that in order to convince another in an argument one must first get, then hold, their attention. But this is a bridge to far for you.
Your #143 post droned on for more than 25 redundant paragraphs, most well exceeding 100 words; a 3000 word run-on-sentence! Now you’re back at it again!!!
It’s obvious your catalyst is relentless Bible Thumping and has absolutely nothing to do w/either seeking or sharing knowledge.
As such, I have nothing else to say; now or in the future.
Suggest you try a soap box.