Assume for a moment that a king came to a far off province of his. During his visit, he established his rule and set up ministers to oversee the province for him while he returned to his kingdom. Would you be obeying him by saying you are only subject to the king and not to the ministers he set up over you?
In the context of the Apostles, remember that they were given authority in Heaven and on Earth (binding and loosing; see Matt 16:19 & Isaiah 22:22). In other words, it isn't just "like" authority where they can set up little rules that have no Heavenly significance. They have real authority in all of creation throughout the eternal Catholic (universal) Church.
There are several problem with your premise.
First is the presumed superiority of Peter over all of the other apostles which is not supported by the Bible.
Second is that there is no apostolic succession. We do not have any guidance in the NT about the apostles "passing on" their authority.
In other words, it isn't just "like" authority where they can set up little rules that have no Heavenly significance.
I wish this were true, but very sadly, the RCC has done just that. See indulgences, mortal v venial sins, loss of salvation, forgiveness only through a priest, prayer/worship of Mary etc.
Being subject to Christ means obeying Christ and those in whom He vested His authority. You can't have one without the other. If there is a Church (and He promised to build His Church [Matt 16:18]), then it must have authority in order to preach, teach and hold the faithful to the Way.
The authority is found in the Word itself as noted in many passages in the NT. That's the reason Paul, Peter, James and the rest of the boys left us the written Word. There is no new revelation. The NT contains all we need to know about obtaining salvation and how to conduct our walk with Christ.
You're attempting to tell me that if I, or another Christian, am in a conversation with someone regarding eternity and that person asks how one is saved and I show them in the Bible the passages regarding believing in Christ for salvation that I don't have the authority to do that??
Let's even suppose this person was in a car wreck and they're dying. Are you saying I wouldn't have the authority to witness to them as an adopted member of God's family?? Nonsense.
If it does not have such authority then there is no Church but rather a conglomeration of confederates who can only study what has been but possess no authority for teaching what the Spirit inspires.
If/when the RCC gets it right I would listen to them. However, the RCC is scripturally off on a lot of topics as previously noted.
In that view, we have been orphaned and Christ has not fulfilled His promise to us.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Jesus has said He would not leave us as orphans. He will come back for us. He has given us the Holy Spirit as a helper. The Holy Spirit is also a pledge of our inheritance. If the Holy Spirit is in us as Christians, then we have the authority and guidance of the Holy Spirit in our walk with Christ.
We have been adopted as children into God's family.
For though some may be inspired, there can be no teaching and building of doctrine without authority.
A reading of the NT will clear this up.
The Christian church is built upon Jesus. Ephesians 2:19-22 does a really nice job of explaining this.
The authority we have when we teach comes from Him. Recall that some are given the gift of teaching, prophecy, etc. But as noted in 1 Cor 12:4-7, now there are varieties of gifts but the same Spirit, and there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord, and there are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.
Sure sounds like authority to me.
Acts 1 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. 14 These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. 15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,) 16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus. 17 For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. 18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. 19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood. 20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take. 21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. 23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, 25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. 26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
There is ample evidence.
1. When there is a gathering of the Apostles, he speaks for them (with only one exception that will only open a whole new can of worms).
2. The Matt 16 reference Catholic and Protestant go round and around on. Don't think you and I will cover any new ground in this area.
3. He is specifically pulled aside by Christ to build up his brethren and feed Christ's sheep.
4. When it comes to the followers of Christ, there is more written about St Peter in the Gospels and Epistles than anyone (with the possible exception of St Paul). A casual reader who picked up the text of the NT could be forgiven for thinking this was a story ABOUT St Peter and his being raised up by Christ!
Second is that there is no apostolic succession. We do not have any guidance in the NT about the apostles "passing on" their authority.
Then the Church died when the Apostles passed. You can't have it both ways. You could argue they left us the Scriptures... but then you would be putting your faith in St Guttenberg. Until the printing press, there was no way for Bibles to be produced than by the hard work of monks. If you read the NT carefully, you will clearly see that the Apostles left us the Church, not just the written Word. And this Church had authority for teaching, preaching, and discipline.
I wish this were true, but very sadly, the RCC has done just that. See...
indulgences (binding and loosing authority over temporal punishment due to sin. See 2 Sam 12)
mortal v venial sins (In Matt 5:19, Jesus says that whoever breaks one of the least of the commandments will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven--but clearly still in Heaven. In Matt 5:22, Jesus describes a sin that leads to the fire of Hell. He goes on to speak that there is even a sin [against the Holy Spirit] which will not be forgiven. Clearly, there are levels of sin. We can argue on the semantics).
loss of salvation (In James 1:12, we read that the man is blessed who endures temptation for, when his is proved, he will receive the crown of life promised him. Clearly, the opposite is true for the man who does not endure).
forgiveness only through a priest (2 Cor 5:18-20)
prayer/worship of to Mary etc. (We don't worship Mary or anyone but God. If we're going down that road, you and I will have irreconcilable differences and should simply part ways. As to prayer, we simply acknowledge her for who she is. She is the embodiment of Israel who has born Christ into the world. As the mother of the Body of Christ, she is mother of the Church and our mother. She is the new Eve to Christ's Adam joined at the Cross in the redemption of man. As the mother of Jesus, Who is God in the flesh, she is mother of God. She was bodily assumed into Heaven at her death and has taken her place as both queen mother and embodiment of the bride to the bridegroom. As the bearer of God's authority, the manna come down from Heaven, and the Word, she is the Ark of the New Covenant. I think she deserves some respect. She is not insignificant in the economy of God).
I'm out of time. Unfortunately, this is what tends to happen on here. Instead of sticking to main points, you guys tend to throw multiple things all at once and it essentially turns into a filibuster. I will try to get back to this another time.
God bless you.