I’m sorry, but you need to read #49 again. It talks about protestants, old and new. It talks about orthodox. It says that it isn’t protestant, that maybe it’s orthodox. And, since Francis is a Roman Catholic pope, (for Pete’s sake), I said it’s either Roman or nothing.
I didn’t try to instruct you about Catholicism at all. Maybe I’m the worst writer in the world. That’s a possibility. I think I was clear. Therefore, I’m thinking that you must be reading a different post than the one that I wrote.
Having said that you never came out and said you were referring to the "title" of the article, so I can see where ebbtide could honestly say you didn't do that. As for your interpretation of what kind of Christianity is reflected in Francis words, it seems as if you aren't so much as telling us the way it is, but wondering out loud. Is that right? However, I can absolutely see why ebbtide would take it as your telling him/the OP that as Catholics they have no clue what they are talking about. Hence, his negative response. And considering the way you judged him in previous threads, is it really all that surprising?
For you, it doesn't seem Protestant because the view of Mary is still too high for Protestants. You are wondering whether it would reflect a more Orthodox view. That's a fair question. Even if it were more Orthodox in nature, it is still not Catholic. The leader of the Catholic Church's words should be unequivocally Catholic. They were not.
Personally, this topic is getting old for me in the sense that the same players are involved and we're not going to change each other's views apparently. Time will tell who was in the right and who was in the wrong. I have no doubt about that.