The rock is not the man and the petra/petros thing is ignorant. Jesus says that his divine nature was revealed to Simon by God himself and then says "you are Rock and on this rock I will build my Church". The rock is God's revelation to man, particularly in the Holy Spirit. The rock is hearing the word of God rather than going with the flow of the world.

Then, Simon is called Rock from that point on. Not Peter, the greek word but Kephas, the Aramaic word. He holds an office of listening for God's word. Even though popes have been imperfect or even evil, their job remains to listen for the voice of God and tell us what it says.

Immediately afterward, Simon says something stupid "God forbid Lord, no such thing will ever happen to you" and Jesus calls him Satan, proving that thr man whose job is to listen and speak the will of God also sometimes is a false prophet speaking his own will. He must carefully discern whether he is hearing the will of God or his own.

What use is it to have such a person in the Church if they sometimes evil and even the good ones are sometimes wrong? Because God uses the man to communicate his will. When God chooses to speak through the Rock he does so. This provides a certain unity to the Church which is so sadly lacking in non-Catholic communities and Churches. Better to have an imperfect pope than no pope at all.

What about infallibility? When the man speaks as himself he is not infallible. When he speaks as the Rock, who has listened to God and then spoken, he is infallible. How do we know when he is speaking his own mind and not officially? This requires discernment.

In this case he tweeted: We need to dismantle the perverse logic that links personal and national security to the possession of weaponry. This logic serves only to increase the profits of the arms industry, while fostering a climate of distrust and fear between persons and peoples.

Sounds right to me. The literal meaning of his words is "We need to logically disprove that weapons cause safety." And of course he is right. Gun control people do need to logically disprove it before I stop believing it.

The rock is not the man and the petra/petros thing is ignorant. Jesus says that his divine nature was revealed to Simon by God himself and then says "you are Rock and on this rock I will build my Church". The rock is God's revelation to man, particularly in the Holy Spirit. The rock is hearing the word of God rather than going with the flow of the world.

Then, Simon is called Rock from that point on. Not Peter, the greek word but Kephas, the Aramaic word. He holds an office of listening for God's word. Even though popes have been imperfect or even evil, their job remains to listen for the voice of God and tell us what it says.

Immediately afterward, Simon says something stupid "God forbid Lord, no such thing will ever happen to you" and Jesus calls him Satan, proving that thr man whose job is to listen and speak the will of God also sometimes is a false prophet speaking his own will. He must carefully discern whether he is hearing the will of God or his own.

What use is it to have such a person in the Church if they sometimes evil and even the good ones are sometimes wrong? Because God uses the man to communicate his will. When God chooses to speak through the Rock he does so. This provides a certain unity to the Church which is so sadly lacking in non-Catholic communities and Churches. Better to have an imperfect pope than no pope at all.

What about infallibility? When the man speaks as himself he is not infallible. When he speaks as the Rock, who has listened to God and then spoken, he is infallible. How do we know when he is speaking his own mind and not officially? This requires discernment.