You keep saying that, but never tell us what precisely that "one single" truth is, other than by your own repetitive demonstrations it could possibly be assumed that that "truth" is to bash and insult any and all whom would dare question the specious claims for this alleged "Petrine authority" which you incessantly yammer on concerning...
That such alleged authority as it later developed over long centuries, and exists (in form of claim or allegation) was nowhere to be seen in the history of the earliest centuries of the wider, thus more truly universal Church, continues to well enough indicate that you are far from correct in both; your suppositions engaged in to support your overall thesis, and the ending results of that same thesis.
The early Church knew no such thing as singular authority over all the Church be afforded to Simon Peter, alone, and more importantly did not attribute or recognize authority over all the Church to afforded to whomever it would be that would later occupy the office of Bishopic, of Rome. Thus your overall thesis is a miserable failure, and due to the manner in which you continue to present the claim, for reason of what other content and context is often included, by now has turned into a form of serial abuse of forum participants.
Paul rebuked him to his (Peter's) face.
May the Lord Himself rebuke you, in similar but more forceful manner than did Paul when he corrected Peter, more or less in front of God, and everybody...
Merry Christmas
Amen BlueDragon, you very well expressed the understanding and Holy Spirit-ual insight of many posters here.
Steelfish, you’ve been quite effectively “Columboed.”
The Credo- and the Magisterium of the Church.
You don’t explain why calling heresy a heresy is a from of serial abuse after it has been explained at great length including earlier posts where many theological students have explained at length why they converted from one form or another of Protestantism to Catholicism.
Surely, you don’t mean to say that Christ threw a lot of loose cannons on decks to cause a multiplicity of confusing interpretations? And that up until the Protestant Reformation of 1517, the Church that authenticated the canonical texts, interpreted, and preached its dogma was wrong for eleven centuries misleading a host of saints and martyrs on the way?
Or the vast constellation of theologians that support the Petrine Doctrine were all off-course? Or the scores of converts to the Catholicism from other non-Christian faiths?
All your write is an unsupported opinion about “specious” claims of Petrine authority.