[kosta50]

The issue on the other thread had to do with ecclesiology, not theology, namely Rome accepting a bishop under discipline from his own Synod. That sort of interference in the workings of a synod of bishops within the Apostolic Succession is among the concerns which Orthodox people have about reunion with Rome

I agree, but Rome did not actively interfere. The Bishop left on his own.

Theologically speaking, to the extent that the Assyrians are still and in fact Nestorians, it goes without saying that those faithful are better off with Rome and a more correct Christology than remaining Nestorian heretics. Fleeing heresy, however, was not what motivated these people

I really don't know what motivated these people. From his letter, the Bishop seems to outline the Petrine supremacy as interpreted by the Latins. Whether he really believes it or whether that was his 'way out' is not mine to determine.

[Kolokotronis]

“Whether he really believes it or whether that was his ‘way out’ is not mine to determine.”

He has written the simpleton’s version of Met. John’s theory of Petrine Primacy and even at that he got it wrong. Whether he believes it or not is neither here nor there. This character was under discipline for a number of acts of disobedience going back some time. Rome rightfully accepted the laity and likely the clergy. They should have sent the bishop packing back to his synod for forgiveness. They didn’t and that’s cause for concern...even in papophile Constantinople.