Latin traditionalists still failing to grasp that the problem is not Vatican I or Vatican II or even the Council of Florence; it is Latin ecclesiology concerning the primacy of the bishop of Rome, as Latin pretensions concerning the primacy of the bishop of Rome arguably go back to the first millenium. Did any other Apostolic Church accept them? Would it have even made sense for them to, in an age of limited communication and an already multiethnic and multicultural Church? Perhaps the claim could have been sustained when the whole Church still understood and spoke Greek, including the bishop of Rome, but once that linguistic unity passed? How could the bishop of Rome possibly be competent to teach Christianity in any other language except his own? No man can be fluent in every single human language, and there is no special divine gift or charism that makes the bishop of Rome such a panglot.
What sort of rationalist apologetics for such an exaggerated notion of primacy can Latins pull out of their hats now?
1P5: The Second Vatican Council Is Now Far Spent by Peter Kwasniewski