Hardly. It a source which the reader can examine for himself and to which in some instances he can actually contribute or even correct which purports to set forth the actual words in some instances and the actual findings in other instances of the parties vs. Jeff Chandler who offers no citation beyond the two covers of a book of his version of what the author said about the real meaning of the overall transaction.
But I am not clear whether you are defending the Pope of the 17th century was the Pope of the 21st century and upon what grounds. There is no more reason for me or any other sentinent person to accept the authority of the Pope of the 21st century on this issue than there is for us to accept the authority of a Pope in the 17th century on this issue.
That is the point of my original post and it stands because it stands uncontradicted.
