The Bishop of rome (pope) was not the sole authority or "final say" of the church.

Thanks very much for all your comments. Let me begin by addressing the most important point in this debate: The Role of Peter the Apostle. By reading both of ours responses, I believe voters and debaters clearly see the stance that we hold: My opponent believes that Peter received a role of honor and responsibility, while I argue that Peter received a role of authority. Let me begin by refuting the Biblical interpretation that Jesus' prefrence of Peter is merely that of honor and responsibility. To think that Jesus had a personal preference is rather too human in my opinion. In claiming that Jesus chose Peter as an authority figure makes more sense as the Son of God who supposedly loves all equally. For while having a preference of "honor" and "responsibility" have overly human tendencies. I agree with my opponent in saying that Peter was no greater individually than any other of the Apostles. Just as how no Jew is considered better than any other individual, in Christian doctrine, even though they are the "Chosen People." That is why St. Augustine saw Peter and Paul as equal. But keep in mind, St. Augustine was a devout ROMAN Catholic, and deeply believed in infallibility of the Pope. Becarful with your sources. So rather than Jesus' choosing of Peter being of a moral nature, we must assume that it was that of authority. Jesus preference of Peter for responsibility, lies under the notion that Jesus felt that Peter was best suited as leader of the Christian faithful once He was gone. Let us go back to the Gospel accounts: Once Jesus got arrested on that fateful Final Supper, the Apostles scattered about out of confusion that their spiritual leaders had just been apprehended. They were utterly confused and dazed at what had happened. It makes sense that Jesus understood that without an authority figure or leader in place, the Christian faith would not last. So He, before hand, appointed Peter as the leader of the future faith. But that did't make him moraly or ethically superior to the other Apostles. The proof that Christ constituted St. Peter head of His Church is found in the two famous Petrine texts, Matthew 16:17-19, and John 21:15-17. "Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." -Matthew 16:17-19 Referring to Matthew: In the following verse (Matthew 16:19) He promises to bestow on Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven. The words refer evidently to Isaiah 22:22, where God declares that Eliacim, the son of Helcias, shall be invested with office in place of the worthless Sobna: And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he shall open, and none shall shut: and he shall shut and none shall open. In all countries the key is the symbol of authority. Thus, Christ's words are a promise that He will confer on Peter supreme power to govern the Church. Peter is to be His vicegerent, to rule in His place. (Catholic Encyclopedia) & "So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of Jonah,[a] do you love Me more than these?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You." He said to him, "Feed My lambs." He said to him again a second time, "Simon, son of Jonah,[b] do you love Me?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You." He said to him, "Tend My sheep." He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of Jonah,[c] do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus said to him, "Feed My sheep." -John 21:15-17 I think St. Chrysostom says it best: "He saith to him, "Feed my sheep". Why does He pass over the others and speak of the sheep to Peter? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the head of the choir. For this reason Paul went up to see him rather than the others. And also to show him that he must have confidence now that his denial had been purged away. He entrusts him with the rule [prostasia] over the brethren. . . . If anyone should say "Why then was it James who received the See of Jerusalem?", I should reply that He made Peter the teacher not of that see but of the whole world. ["Hom. 88 (87) in Joan.", 1. Cf. Origen, "In Ep. ad Rom.", 5:10; Ephraem Syrus "Hymn. in B. Petr." in "Bibl. Orient. Assemani", 1:95; Leo I, "Serm. iv de natal.", 2]." (Catholic Encyclopedia) It seems that my opponent concedes to the fact that Peter spent most of his ministry in the city of Rome. If not, I do hope to see him counter in the following rounds. Now let me focus on some of his points: My opponent doesn't clearly explain why the Matthew quote is not referring to St. Peter. Furthermore, it is clearly shown in St. Pauls epistles that Peter was known as "the Rock." "Now I say this, that each of you says, 'I am of Paul,' or 'I am of Apollos' or 'I am of Cephas' or 'I am of Christ'"- 1 Corinthians 1:12 Who is Cephas? Cephas translates from the original Greek as "rock." But it is obviously clear in this passage and other passages in 1 Corinthians about Cephas, that Cephas was a person. Scholars agree that Paul is referring to Peter (as shown by Acts) when he talks about Cephas. Cephas was a nickname that Paul labeled for Peter. My opponent is utterly wrong in his Greek translation of rock as "Petros" or "Petras". (I'm not sure of the Aramaic). I challenge my opponent to show me evidence to the contrary. The true translation from the original Greek is "Cephas" as shown by St. Paul in his letters. What I merely did in this round was defend my stance, quite effectively if I do say so myself. I have faith my opponent will bring new evidence to light to show how St. Peter was not given authoritative power, which I hope to refute. For it seems that this debate of whether the Pope is trully the sole authority of the Church will be based off whoever can prove or disprove St. Peter was given leadership-type authority over the Christian Church upon Christ ascension.