In chapter 16 of Matthew, Christ says that to Peter, true.
But in Chapter 18, two chapters later, Christ says to
all of his apostles that they have the power to bind and loosen:
Anyone can see from the context of Chapter 18 that Christ was speaking to his disciples, as the Chapter starts with Christ talking about how the greatest disciple, out of the 12, in the Kingdom of Heaven will be the one who is least among them:
Christ repeated this teaching to his disciples many times, in many other passages, however, since Chapter 18 starts with a teaching to his disciples we can infer the power to bind and loosen later on in Chapter 18 is also to his disciples.
Thus, the Catholic teaching on the disciples, and the power to bind and loosen, is false; it goes beyond Peter to the other disciples. Furthermore, Peter was not meant to lord his power over the other disciples, contrary to Catholic heresy.
Why did Christ first spoke to Peter individually about the bind and loosen? And only afterwards repeated the same to others? Why didn´t He simply adressed all the Apostles at the same time?
There is clearly a repetition in 16 and 18. But Peter was chosen as the first to hear about it from Christ. Why? Because he had previously answered a question with faith. And therefore Christ decided to put him in a different position than the others. That Peter was treated differently from the others Apostles by Christ is a undeniable fact. He was spoken to first and individually.
This would be enough to establish Peter primacy.
But Christ did give something else to Peter. the keys of the kingdom of heaven. in the repetition of 16 and 18 chapter the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven were specifically left out by Christ when He mentioned the bind and loose to other Apostles.
If Christ had given the keys to all. Why would He repeat one part (bind and loose) and left out the other (keys)?
All apostles might have the power to forbid or allow. But only one of them also has the keys. And this is a big difference. Because others can bind or loose. But Peter is the one who holds the keys and can open or close the gates. The final decision is undoubtly with Peter. And his successor holds the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven.
But I´m not against orthodoxes. Do your thing. I don´t know how national orthodox churches reconcile with the church universality. But do your thing.
Anyway. Here´s a take from catholic cathecism:
838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."
322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church.
"323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."324
Here´s some more takes from dominicans.
"Christ did not place Peter simply as the first of his peers, but put him above all others. He gave him a power that others didn’t give him. In Mt 16,18-19, “And I so I say to you, you are Peter and upon this stone I will build my church and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” In v. 19, he said, “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus gives to Peter a power that does not extend to the apostles. Only he has the keys to the Kingdom.
3. In Mt 18,18, “Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven”. Jesus extends the power to bind and dissolve even the apostolic college, but not the individual apostles. Moreover there is an Apostolic College because there is Peter. Without him there would be no Apostolic College.
Finally, Christ, by giving the college what he had previously given Peter, does not take away from him the power he had conferred upon him. For this reason, it is rightly said that the college only has a cum Petro et sub Petro (with Peter and below Peter).
In addition to the steps on the primacy that you mentioned, there is another one, of particular importance, in which Jesus tells Peter, “Simon, Simon, behold Satan, has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turn back, you must strengthen your brothers” (Lk 22.31-32).
4. The passages of the Scriptures are eloquent and incontrovertible. But divine revelation, and the Orthodox know this very well, is not only made up of sacred scripture, but also of sacred tradition. It is interesting to note that this primacy was understood in the life of the church when the Divine Revelation was not yet closed. Incidentally, the Divine Revelation ends with the death of the last apostle. Tradition is the ring that binds our faith to the faith of the apostles. It’s that ring I can say, “My faith is the same as the apostles, those who have been with Jesus and who have heard his teachings with their ears.”
5. Well, the tradition reminds us that in the nineties, while Saint John is still alive in Ephesus, disorder erupts among the faithful in Corinth. Rather than appealing to St. John in Ephesus, on the other side of the Aegean Sea, the Christians of Corinth go directly to the third successor of Peter who is Pope Clement. And he intervenes with his authority. Saint John writes his gospel after these events. And it indirectly confirms the authority with which Pope Clement intervened by referring the task given by Christ to Peter to feed sheep and lambs, that is, the faithful and bishops."
