The early Church is looking more Catholic or Orthodox than I expected. That still leaves a major question: why Rome?
I can see that Peter is important, but importance is not automatically the modern papacy.
WHAT I AM STUDYING
I am reading Matthew 16, Luke 22, and John 21 together. Jesus gives Peter the keys, tells him to strengthen his brothers, and commands him to feed the flock.
Historically, I am looking at Clement’s intervention in Corinth, Irenaeus’s appeal to the Roman succession, Cyprian’s language about Peter and unity, and the later development of Roman authority.
A FEW THINGS I AM LEARNING
Peter’s role looks stronger than simply being the apostle who speaks first most often.
Rome also has a distinctive place early, even though the later legal language of universal jurisdiction does not appear fully formed in the first century.
WHAT I AM STILL UNSURE ABOUT
I still need to distinguish early Roman primacy from every later papal claim. I do not want to read Vatican I backward into Clement or Irenaeus.
WHAT I WANT TO LOOK AT NEXT
The biggest test may be whether the Catholic pieces fit together as one account of the Church rather than separate proof texts.