Motive goes to "mens rea", to whether the caucus status is being used as a sword or as a shield, and so forth.
Moreover, among gentlemen, to enter into a conversation or a transaction with ulterior motives might be found a but caddish.
Not to be confused with kaddish, which is another thing altogether.
By the way, the judge in this case, that is, the RM, seems to have found that what you think a gnat was a real issue. That should count for something.
I don't know what a but caddish is but I'm pretty sure I don't want to find one. ;P
That should count for something.
And it did. The designation was dropped. I don't expect the RM to be a Historical theologian and have all these questions of history at his/her fingertips. One Orthodox writer I read was fairly sure that Lucaris was not directing any arrows at the Bishop of Rome but rather, because of controversies he was having with other Eastern Bishops, directing them, if at all, toward the East. The problem is that the RM relied upon a Romanist gnat-strainers interpretation. Maybe a little more care is needed not to just react to the first wail and not simply repeat an allegation, "thinly veiled", that the first gnat-strainer trumps up.