As said, all of Staples' proof texts only show Peter was being the street-level leader among brethren whose faith would persevere, despite faltering at times, and strengthen his brethren, but not that Peter was the exalted infallible head whom all the church looked to as the first of a line of infallible popes ruling from Rome.
There simply is no exalted Roman pope sitting above all the bishops, and the recipient of such perpetuated unique powers and superlatives such as,
“The Pope’s authority is unlimited, incalculable; it can strike, as Innocent III says, wherever sin is; it can punish every one; it allows no appeal and is itself Sovereign Caprice; for the Pope carries, according to the expression of Boniface VIII, all rights in the Shrine of his breast. As he has now become infallible, he can by the use of the little word, 'orbi,' (which means that he turns himself round to the whole Church) make every rule, every doctrine, every demand, into a certain and incontestable article of Faith. No right can stand against him, no personal or corporate liberty; or as the Canonists put it -- 'The tribunal of God and of the pope is one and the same.'” - Ignaz von Dollinger, in “A Letter Addressed to the Archbishop of Munich”, 1871 (quoted in The Acton Newman Relations (Fordham University Press), by MacDougall, pp. 119 120
It is Peter who provides briefly key testimony and sound counsel in Act 15, affirming the evangelical gospel, "purifying their hearts by faith," before baptism. And briefly urges this counsel to be accepted versus the gospel of the Judaizers. Yet it is James who provides the (approx. 175 word) conclusive decree on what is to be believed and done.
And after this chapter Peter is no more heard of in the rest of Acts, as the focus then shifts to Paul, who specifically records of Peter that he was married, as were the rest of the apostles, (1Cor. 9:5) but who fails to even mention Peter in Romans, despite mentioning 26 names. (Rm. 16)
Moreover, in all the church epistles and the rest of the the NT obedience to Peter as the universal head is never enjoined upon the churches, nor is such obedience to him as the universal head commended or the failure to do so faulted, even in the Lord's critique to all the churches in Rv. 2,3, or mentioned as solution to their problems. Not once is even prayer specifically for him exhorted (though he was prayed for, as others were). And which conspicuous omission, along with the manner of Petrine leadership that is recorded, is incongruous in the light of the Roman construance of Peter 's leadership, and fatal to it
Furthermore, for Peter the "more sure word of prophecy" is Scripture, (2Pt. 1:19-21) while there is zero mention of any apostolic successors, like for the martyred James, (Acts 12:1,2) besides for Judas who was to maintain the original 12, ( Rv. 21:14) and thus only one was elected, and who was elected by the non-political, non-Roman OT method of casting lots, (Josh. 18:6; Prov. 16:33) not voting. (Acts 1:15ff)
Thus the Roman papacy is not seen, and Peter, who taught that the heart was purified by faith, a faith that is confessed in baptism, (Acts 10:43,47; 15:7-9) is not shown as being the infallible exalted head to whom all the churches looked to, while there is no mention of any successor for him or manifest preparation for such.
This does not mean a centralized magisterium is not the ideal, and if we can find men like Peter evangelicals would themselves see him as an true pastor. But Rome is not even in the running for such in the light of what manner of the apostles were, upon which the church was built, Jesus Christ being the rock. (Eph. 2:20;1Cor. 3:11)
But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. (2 Corinthians 4:2)
But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings; By pureness, by knowledge, by longsuffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, (2 Corinthians 6:4-7)
Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds. (2 Corinthians 12:12)
It was under this manner of manifest apostles, in word, virtue and overt and abundant demonstrations of attestive supernatural power, that the primitive church had its unity:
"And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles." "And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart.." (Acts 2:46) (Acts 2:43) "Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them." (Acts 15:12)
And the greater the claims, then the greater the correspondent attestation must be, yet Rome claims for herself things which even the apostles did not, and which she utterly fails of warrant for.
And in contrast to Rome, the Lord and His established their truth claims upon the basis of Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39, 14:11; Acts 17:2,11; Rm. 15:19; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.) as it alone is the supreme material standard for obedience and testing truth claims, as is abundantly evidenced .
And which in principal forces the church (us) to continually manifest itself as the church of the living God, versus the institutionalized version of Catholicism and much fo Protestantism. Not that I think I am giving great witness to the resurrection either, but as a former weekly mass-going RC what I do know is the profound contrast between Biblical regeneration and that of ritualism.
Thank you once again for your well researched and sourced comments. We should keep them on speed dial for the next time this SAME topic is repeated on the RF. What I also know is that most of the already-catholicized will stuff their collective fingers in their ears, cover their collective eyeballs and skip OVER everything as if doing so means it isn't there and they won't have to deal with it.
One of the reasons some do this is because they MUST remain convinced they are in the "right" church, jumping the right hoops, doing the right rituals and praying the right prayers in order to somehow have hope that maybe, just maybe, they might make it to heaven when all is said and done. They cannot countenance that worldview being rocked even IF everything you have said is verifiable and true - they won't take that chance. And for some others, this one point - the Papacy in Scripture (which we can see well enough is fantasized as being there) - gives them the assurance that therefore EVERYTHING else this "Church" says must also be the truth. IF they can convince an undecided that the Roman Catholic Church IS the one Jesus set up headed by Peter, they can get their foot jambed in the door enough to slip in all the other developed, contrived, invented and perverted doctrines thought up over the many years since then and make acceptance of them mandatory.
The thought that comforts me through all this is knowing that God is a rewarder of all those who diligently seek HIM. Those looking for a religion or church they can boast about or which helps them to feel good about themselves and what they do, will probably not be the ones doing the seeking of the truth. That road to heaven is narrow - and few there be that find it.