FYI, the word Catholic is supposed to mean "universal", and all Born again believers are in that sense Catholic. The R in RCC identifies that branch of the church which was founded in Rome, but it was never the first church as this was in Jerusalem and met regularly in the temple until the persecutions. Peter was not the first leader of the church, but James, the brother of our Lord was. Peter was an apostle to the Jews throughout the diaspora, Paul was an apostle to the gentiles. Peter as an apostle and chosen by the Lord Himself to shepherd the church, still answered to a body of elders which met in Jerusalem. The bible even records an event where Paul rebuked Peter for his inconstancy in fellowship with gentiles because of his fear of the Jewish leadership. Doesn't sound infallible to me. Even so called protestants are Catholic if they have genuinely received of His Spirit, in the sense that they are a part of the Church universal. In common usage, however, the word Catholic has been misused to apply solely to the Roman Catholic Church. The first big split in the Church universal, was between Rome and Constantinople, and guess what it was over. The practice in Rome of allowing the simple and uneducated to keep their household gods in the guise of saints, hence the notion of patron saints. Historical records are available about the controversy, but my only available source was a really boring book titled "the bad popes" which featured translations from church historians of the period who were notably inaccurate. I have encountered at least a few historians active in the Roman church who are a bit more honest than their resident appologist, and these reasoned that the office of the pope remained valid in spite of the apostasy of some of the popes, during that period of time when a single man was both bishop of Rome and governor of Rome (which spanned more than one Papacy.) The marriage of politics and religion even spawned a split in church leadership where there were two popes vying for supremecy, one in Rome and one in France. Some do try to rewrite history. It happens all the time. Some "orders" within the churches went so far as to produce forgeries of both documents and relics in their attempts to consolidate power. As an example we have the shroud of Turin, an inspiring relic reportedly showing the image of Christ's face, but not being old enough to have existed at Christ's burial. There was even a bloodline of kings called the Merovingians that claimed their authority as being through a royal bloodline from a marital union between Mary Magdalene and Jesus Himself, and this based upon Gnostic gospels and other unreliable sources. Yet it was all about temporal power, the domain of Satan.