Certainly not. See post 55. Peter was not even distinctively ordained as a priest and is never said even administer the Lord's supper (nor described or looked to as the first of a line of infallible popes reigning supreme, let alone in Rome), as instead he is descrbed as one who feeds the flock with the word of God, which he calls food.(1Pt. 2:2) And the Holy Spirit characteristically describes notable unique aspects of persons (from the number of toes to sinlessness) as well as basic functions of offices.
Acts 1: Peter is simply part of the upper room prayer group.
Acts 2: Peter preaches the prophesied Christ as crucified and risen, and regeneration/salvation by effectual faith in the risen Lord Jesus, with no mention of the Lord's supper as salvific. And he is part of the apostolic teachers, but breaking bread is not described as a formal ritual led by apostles, or as being a sacrificial sin offering.
Acts 3: Peter preaches healing and salvation by repentant faith in the prophesied and risen Lord Jesus.
Acts 4: Peter leads the dissent from leadership to preach prophesied and risen Lord Jesus.
Acts 5: Peter, like Paul, disciplines hypocritical deceivers while being an instrument of grace for healing, and in the face of official censor asserts "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29) and preaches regeneration by obedient faith in the crucified and risen Lord Christ.
Acts 6: Facing the need of physically feeding the flock, Peter is one of the apostles who states that, "It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. (Acts 6:2-3)
Acts 7: Peter is not mentioned.
Acts 8: Peter along with John is sent by the other apostles to Samaria, who convey the Holy Spirit to new baptized believers. And he reproves Simon for unholy motives and heart.
Acts 9: Peter, like Paul, is an instrument of healing, but never via the Lord's supper.
Acts 10: Peter, using the keys to the kingdom, preaches justification by faith to the Gentiles, that "To him [the prophesied crucified and risen Lord Jesus] give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins, (Acts 10:43) and baptizes them, and remains with them a few days.
Acts 11: Peter defends being with Gentiles and preaching to them.
Acts 12: Peter is imprisoned and is prayed out.
Acts 13: Peter is not mentioned
Acts 4: Peter is not mentioned
Acts 15: Peter gives his testimony of salvation by grace thru faith, "purifying their hearts by faith" before baptism, and exhorts the Gentiles be not placed under the Law, which grace gospel to the Gentiles Paul and Barnabas testify to, while James provides the judgement as to what shall be done, confirmatory of Peter Paul and Barnabas.
Acts 16-28: Peter is never mentioned again, as the Spirit describes the labor of love for Paul for the church and the lost in the remaining 12 chapters of Acts.
Romans: Peter is never mentioned to the church RCs assert he founded, even among the over 30 souls Paul greets or mentions in cp. 16.
1 Corinthians: Peter (Cephas) is mentioned by name as one whom believers are not to follow as unique, (1Co. 1:12; 3:22) and as being married. (1Co. 9:3)
2 Corinthians: Peter is never mentioned
Galatians: Peter is specifically mentioned as one whom Paul stayed with for 15 days, 3 years after Paul began preaching. (1:18) And as one of those who appeared to be pillars, these being James, Peter and John in the order Paul gives, whom Paul chose to see as the Lord revealed to him, who affirmation was needed in the light of attacks impugning the validity of Paul's apostleship, while Paul stated that he "was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles." (2 Corinthians 11:5) And was the only one to publicly reprove another apostle, that being Peter for his duplicity. (2:1-14)
2 Corinthians thru Revelation" Peter is never mentioned again, except in his own two pastoral epistles, and in which he simply describes himself as "a servant," "an apostles," and "an elder." But nowhere is he described as administering the Lord's supper, or as part of a distinctive priesthood, for the only priesthood is that which Peter describes, that of all believers. (1Pt. 2:9)
Nor is either Peter or the Lord's supper mentioned in the Lord's critique of the representative churches in Rv. 2+3, either as regards a commendation for faithfulness or exhortation for their problems. Thus the idea of Peter celebrating Mass is without evidence, in clear contrast to that of feeding the flock by preaching, which is the primary active function of NT pastors, which are called presbuteros (senior/elder) or episkopos, referring to those in one office, and who are never called "priests. See here on that by the grace of God.
Holy Euharist is Mass. The apostles and Christians after them celebrated Holy Eucharist. It’s in the Bible, it’s in the writings and history of early Christians as far back as we have and continuous to the present.
You believe otherwise; you’re welcome to your opinion.