Assuming what you write is correct, it destroys the Bible [as we know it] from being the one and only to ever contain all truth. This opens up tradition as guidance. Somehow it validates that Jesus wrote only once and that was in sand. Jesus relied on teaching through individuals, not books, to teach. He didn’t rely on individual interpretation. Sounds like the Catholic Church got it right with apostolic succession.
No person alive today can be a successor to any of the apostles ... the criterion for apostleship includes
1. Eyewitness to resurrection
2. With apostles from the beginning
3. Signs of an apostle, miracles, wonders, etc.
I am not aware that anyone in the RCC meets these criteria ... or any other church.
I don’t believe it destroys the Bible at all, but it sure does expose the church in Rome:
The Muratorian fragment represents the canon of scripture for the church in Rome, c. 180 A.D. It has the NT, minus some missing parts, but also contained the Revelation of Peter - a Gnostic text.
The church in Rome sure was infallible all right as they had a Gnostic text within their approved canon of inspired scripture.
Some infallibility all right...