Gibbons Decline & Fall & Christianity

[Valletta]

Yes, this is true. This is not the fault of those being ruled over. Yet those being ruled over can either choose to support such for survival, or reject it as non Christian and therefore being practiced or enforced by professed Christian entities, as antichrist. Which many did and do. The history of Roman Catholicism is the history of contending Christian professing entities, seeking the support of the state, or at that time Imperial support. Which once obtained, turned into Imperially enforced "Christianity".

What are the names of the individuals who you accuse of first seeking out the support of the state. Do you claim to have statements from them? If not statements what historical documents from the time do you have that make such allegations? Please cite the documents.

 

[Valletta]

It was more an identification of the entity described in Revelation 17 by interpreters, than historical accounts by historians. Peoples being persecuted by the Catholic Church in league with Catholic political leaders, noticed the colors and golden cup employed by the church, its direct connection to the Roman Empire, and simply put 2 and 2 together. They were Christians (saints), they were being persecuted and killed by Roman Catholic religious and political leaders in league with each other, and the Catholic church employed the colors and cup described as an identifying mark in Revelation 17. It is hard to dialogue, with people who outlaw what you say and believe with penalties up to torture and death. Many of course today, look back at said history, and see these same identifying marks played out in actual history.

There is no question purple is mentioned in the Bible, I have given an example as have you. No one disputes that. But why pick one color of many colors used by the Catholic Church? Why didn't these people note when their own religion used purple and then "put two and two together?" Has anyone ever noted when you have used purple, perhaps your clothing or something in your residence, and then associated you with Revelation 17? My point is that the hatred was there first, choosing one particular passage from the Bible instead of another, and choosing one of the many colors used by the Catholic Church instead of another, and putting those together is far-fetched. Using such "logic" virtually anyone could be accused of anything.

 

[The Liturgist]

It was more an identification of the entity described in Revelation 17 by interpreters, than historical accounts by historians. Peoples being persecuted by the Catholic Church in league with Catholic political leaders, noticed the colors and golden cup employed by the church, its direct connection to the Roman Empire, and simply put 2 and 2 together. They were Christians (saints), they were being persecuted and killed by Roman Catholic religious and political leaders in league with each other, and the Catholic church employed the colors and cup described as an identifying mark in Revelation 17. It is hard to dialogue, with people who outlaw what you say and believe with penalties up to torture and death. Many of course today, look back at said history, and see these same identifying marks played out in actual history.

Obviously whoever complained about the use of purple vestments, which the Roman Catholic Church does not actually use (rather they use violet and in the Ambrosian Rite, morello), was writing relatively recently, within the past few centuries. In England the Roman Catholic Church historically never used violet vestments before the Council of Trent, instead using Sarum Blue in the South during the penitential seasons and elsewhere, for example in those areas using the liturgy of York, used only gold, red, white and black vestments.

If we go back a bit further, to the medieval period, and to the Classical period when the pre-schism Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches became the official religion in Edessa, Armenia, Ethiopia, Georgia, and after a long flirtation with Arianism, of the Roman Empire around 390 AD, only two types of vestment were in use, dark vestments and light vestments, with the rules on whether to use one or the other varying between church - for example, the Copts use dark vestments during services such as Evening Prayer and their Readers have reversible stoles which are normally red but if reversed are dark blue or black, which are reversed during Holy Week to commemorate the Crucifixion on Good Friday, before being reversed again on Holy Saturday to commemorate His Resurrection (a similiar change of vesture colors happens in the Byzantine Rite on Great and Holy Saturday).

Later, in the early Renaissance, or perhaps a few years before hand, violet vestments were introduced in the Roman Rite on most penitential occasions, but other alternatives were also used, for example, in Lyons, a tan vestment color was used, which is still used in the traditional Lyonaise liturgy on Ash Wednesday, and in the UK the aforementioned colors were used, and also something called “Lenten Array” which was used in the aforementioned Sarum Rite and consisted of natural linen rather than linen bleached white: Lenten Array in the Sarum Use

Several liturgical rites continue to use only light and dark vestments, including the Coptic Orthodox, the Mozarabic Rite, the Ethiopian Rite, and officially at least, the Syriac Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox and several Eastern Orthodox churches (the Eastern Orthodox typikon, the book which regulates the services, specifies only whether light or dark vestments are to be used, so while in Russia, Ukraine, and certain jurisdictions in the US and certain Eastern Catholic churches that also use the Byzantine Rite, a more complex color scheme is in use, it is entirely optional, with other churches even in the US such as most of the Greek Orthodox really not caring; likewise the Syriac Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic and the Assyrian Church of the East (East Syriac) just pick colors and use them whenever light vestments are as well, while wearing more minimal vestments, which are usually black, red and gold in color at other times.

Regarding the use of a golden chalice, this is an absurd accusation against the Roman Church, and ignores the historic existence of silver and brass chalices. At any rate, since the Orthodox churches and all other traditional liturgical churches also use these, and the Syriac Orthodox informally use, and the Russian and Ukrainian Orthodox formally use, purple vestments, we can dismiss this whole conspiracy theory as moot, since it relies on a connection with the Church of Rome and is just obvious anti-Catholic agitation, probably of 18th century origin at the earliest, probably written by someone who was a non-Trinitarian opposed to the Council of Nicaea given the dating (since historically most Trinitarian Christians were aware of the importance of Nicaea in opposing Arianism and it was only in the 19th century in the US that poorly educated people began to make the Council of Nicaea the center of various conspiracy theories, while, due to peer pressure from other Christians, not rejecting the doctrine of the Incarnation which was defended at Nicaea against the heresy of Arius.

 

[Amo2]

What are the names of the individuals who you accuse of first seeking out the support of the state. Do you claim to have statements from them? If not statements what historical documents from the time do you have that make such allegations? Please cite the documents.

First, authentic Christianity would reject all inroads of political powers of this earth, taking control of the church and or enforcing it upon all citizens. As neither our Lord Jesus Christ or any of His apostles provided any such examples, but to the contrary, clearly stated and taught that the kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world are two distinctly and separate institutions. Which are meant to remain so. The acceptance of government interference and or control of Christ's church is in fact of itself apostasy. So, no real need to supply the evidence you have requested.

Second, when Christianity itself becomes so immoral as to require government intervention due to mob violence between differing "Christian" sects in order to keep the peace, then the professed "Christians" involved in such are already obviously apostate.

These two factors played an important part of the development of apostate amalgamated church and state. Which the quotes I have provided from Gibbons, establish as authentic history, which things our Lord and His apostles also foretold. This is not to say that there weren't people guilty of seeking such out for themselves though. I'll work on finding some examples for you as time allows, it will be an interesting study. Are you just interested in those who first sought out the aid and support of the state, or would you like more abundant evidence throughout history including papal Encyclicals, Doctrinal Notes, Accords, and or official teachings as well?

Do you really think those our Lord and the apostle Paul predicted would come in the following verses, would not and or did not take advantage of government support when it came there way, and or their own control of government as well if possible?

Jhn 16:1 These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended. 2 They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. 3 And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me.

Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

I will end with one example of Roman Catholic call for government or state support which exists in their teachings to this very day. Which has been implemented within nations and states hundreds of times over throughout history, and to date. Emphasis in the following quotes is mine.

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

A day of grace and rest from work

2184 Just as God "rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done,"[121] human life has a rhythm of work and rest. The institution of the Lord's Day helps everyone enjoy adequate rest and leisure to cultivate their familial, cultural, social, and religious lives.[122]

2185 On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are to refrain from engaging in work or activities that hinder the worship owed to God, the joy proper to the Lord's Day, the performance of the works of mercy, and the appropriate relaxation of mind and body.[123] Family needs or important social service can legitimately excuse from the obligation of Sunday rest. The faithful should see to it that legitimate excuses do not lead to habits prejudicial to religion, family life, and health. The charity of truth seeks holy leisure- the necessity of charity accepts just work.[124]

2186 Those Christians who have leisure should be mindful of their brethren who have the same needs and the same rights, yet cannot rest from work because of poverty and misery. Sunday is traditionally consecrated by Christian piety to good works and humble service of the sick, the infirm, and the elderly. Christians will also sanctify Sunday by devoting time and care to their families and relatives, often difficult to do on other days of the week. Sunday is a time for reflection, silence, cultivation of the mind, and meditation which furthers the growth of the Christian interior life.

2187 Sanctifying Sundays and holy days requires a common effort. Every Christian should avoid making unnecessary demands on others that would hinder them from observing the Lord's Day. Traditional activities (sport, restaurants, etc.), and social necessities (public services, etc.), require some people to work on Sundays, but everyone should still take care to set aside sufficient time for leisure. With temperance and charity the faithful will see to it that they avoid the excesses and violence sometimes associated with popular leisure activities. In spite of economic constraints, public authorities should ensure citizens a time intended for rest and divine worship. Employers have a similar obligation toward their employees.

2188 In respecting religious liberty and the common good of all, Christians should seek recognition of Sundays and the Church's holy days as legal holidays. They have to give everyone a public example of prayer, respect, and joy and defend their traditions as a precious contribution to the spiritual life of society. If a country's legislation or other reasons require work on Sunday, the day should nevertheless be lived as the day of our deliverance which lets us share in this "festal gathering," this "assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven."[125]

Hundreds if not thousands of Sunday laws have been established and enforced upon all citizens of various nations or states throughout history and to date. Which type of Sunday legislation was first mandated and enforced by the first professed Roman Catholic emperor of the Roman Empire.

"One the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country however persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits because it often happens that another day is not suitable for gain-sowing or vine planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost. (Given the 7th day of March, Crispus and Constantine being consuls each of them the second time." Codex Justinianus, lib. 3, tit. 12, 3; translated in History of the Christian Church, Philip Schaff, D.D., (7-vol.ed.) Vol. III, p.380. New York, 1884

Which the Roman Catholic church backed up with the following statement to all citizens of the Roman Empire who had recently all been made Roman Catholics themselves by royal decree.

The Synod of Laodicea - 343-381 A.D. - furnishes a decree which is quoted by many:
"Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday [Sabbatum is always used for the Sabbath and is translated Saturday in the English edition of Hefele], but shall work on that day; but the Lord's-day they shall especially honor, and as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing they shall be shut out from Christ. (Canon 29, Hefele, Vol. 2, p. 316.)

Which Pope Gregory I later expanded upon with the following command to all citizens as well.

Pope Gregory I (AD 590-604) said :
"Gregory, bishop by the grace of God to his well-beloved sons, the Roman citizens: It has come to me that certain men of perverse spirit have disseminated among you things depraved and opposed to the holy faith, so that they forbid anything to be done on the day of the Sabbath. What shall I call them except preachers of anti-Christ?." Epistles of Gregory I, b.13, epist.1, found in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.

The following link addresses many of the Sunday laws throughout the past.

A critical history of Sunday legislation from 321 to 1888 A. D. : Lewis, Abram Herbert, 1836-1908 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The metadata below describe the original scanning. Follow the All Files: HTTP link in the View the book box to the left to find XML files that contain more...

archive.org

 

[Amo2]

There is no question purple is mentioned in the Bible, I have given an example as have you. No one disputes that. But why pick one color of many colors used by the Catholic Church? Why didn't these people note when their own religion used purple and then "put two and two together?" Has anyone ever noted when you have used purple, perhaps your clothing or something in your residence, and then associated you with Revelation 17? My point is that the hatred was there first, choosing one particular passage from the Bible instead of another, and choosing one of the many colors used by the Catholic Church instead of another, and putting those together is far-fetched. Using such "logic" virtually anyone could be accused of anything.

It was not far fetched for people who were being persecuted and killed by Roman Catholic powers, to search the scriptures for why they might be doing this, and therefore ending up ascribing this identifying mark in the book of Revelation with several others she was fulfilling as well. It made perfect sense to them. Not that this one attribute alone proved their understanding, but that several different identifying marks added up to a positive I.D. as they saw and experienced it.

 

[Valletta]

It was not far fetched for people who were being persecuted and killed by Roman Catholic powers, to search the scriptures for why they might be doing this, and therefore ending up ascribing this identifying mark in the book of Revelation with several others she was fulfilling as well. It made perfect sense to them. Not that this one attribute alone proved their understanding, but that several different identifying marks added up to a positive I.D. as they saw and experienced it.

That's quite a take, to assume that people who were "being persecuted and killed" would "search the scriptures for why they might be doing this."
If that were the case for me I would not be busy trying to interpret Revelation, I would be praying.

 

[Valletta]

First, authentic Christianity would reject all inroads of political powers of this earth, taking control of the church and or enforcing it upon all citizens. As neither our Lord Jesus Christ or any of His apostles provided any such examples, but to the contrary, clearly stated and taught that the kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world are two distinctly and separate institutions. Which are meant to remain so. The acceptance of government interference and or control of Christ's church is in fact of itself apostasy. So, no real need to supply the evidence you have requested.

Second, when Christianity itself becomes so immoral as to require government intervention due to mob violence between differing "Christian" sects in order to keep the peace, then the professed "Christians" involved in such are already obviously apostate.

These two factors played an important part of the development of apostate amalgamated church and state. Which the quotes I have provided from Gibbons, establish as authentic history . . .

No, that is NOT "authentic history." I have asked you for specific citations from historical documents of the time. Didn't the supposed "historians" you revere provide any? Without such historical documents from the time it is just supposition and fabrication.

 

[Amo2]

That's quite a take, to assume that people who were "being persecuted and killed" would "search the scriptures for why they might be doing this."
If that were the case for me I would not be busy trying to interpret Revelation, I would be praying.

That is what they did, and how they came to the conclusions they did.

 

[Amo2]

No, that is NOT "authentic history." I have asked you for specific citations from historical documents of the time. Didn't the supposed "historians" you revere provide any? Without such historical documents from the time it is just supposition and fabrication.

That is absolutely authentic history. Deny whatever you wish. Nevertheless, the historical account and teachings of the New Testament reveal this exact predicted change within Christianity, from an institution empowered by the Holy Spirit of God unto conviction and conversion unto an institution empowered by the state and the man of sin. Which the histories I have and will continue to share on this thread document and confirm as well. Which of course those who deny these truths, downplay as unreliable and insignificant history. You may pretend that that which happened and was recorded by historians didn't happen if you wish, nevertheless I have already furnished you with the facts regarding Sunday sacredness established by Imperial law and continued state enforcement throughout the world and history to this very day. Not to mention the many examples of Imperially enforced "Christianity" already posted from Gibbons which all confirm this fact. This change took place, period, fact of matter. Professed Christinas instigated and caused government intrusion by their own infighting and violence as they ever grew in numbers, the favored parties then accepting such intrusion as being befitted by such, then they promoted such, and then they became the overlords of state enforced religion themselves. Unto untold persecutions then and in the future. Deny what you wish, I will continue due to supply the historical record of these exact processes.

 

[Amo2]

The emperor himself was chaste, temperate, liberal, and merciful; but these qualities—which can only deserve the name of virtues when they are supported by courage and regulated by discretion—were seldom beneficial, and they sometimes proved mischievous, to mankind. His mind, enervated by a royal education, was oppressed and degraded by abject superstition: he fasted, he sung psalms, he blindly accepted the miracles and doctrines with which his faith was continually nourished. Theodosius devoutly worshipped the dead and living saints of the Catholic church; and he once refused to eat, till an insolent monk, who had cast an excommunication on his sovereign, condescended to heal the spiritual wound which he had inflicted. (The History of the decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol. 3, Chap. 32, pg. 361 of the Everyman's Library edition)

Theodosius, concealed behind a curtain in the apartment of his sister, was permitted to behold the Athenian virgin: the modest youth immediately declared his pure and honorable love; and the royal nuptials were celebrated amidst the acclamations of the capital and the provinces. Athenais, who was easily persuaded to renounce the errors of Paganism, received at her baptism the Christian name of Eudocia; but the cautious Pulcheria withheld the title of Augusta, till the wife of Theodosius had approved her fruitfulness by the birth of a daughter, who espoused, fifteen years afterwards, the emperor of the West. The brothers of Eudocia obeyed, with some anxiety, her Imperial summons; but as she could easily forgive their unfortunate unkindness, she indulged the tenderness, or perhaps the vanity, of a sister, by promoting them to the rank of consuls and præfects. In the luxury of the palace, she still cultivated those ingenuous arts which had contributed to her greatness; and wisely dedicated her talents to the honor of religion, and of her husband. Eudocia composed a poetical paraphrase of the first eight books of the Old Testament, and of the prophecies of Daniel and Zechariah; a cento of the verses of Homer, applied to the life and miracles of Christ, the legend of St. Cyprian, and a panegyric on the Persian victories of Theodosius; and her writings, which were applauded by a servile and superstitious age, have not been disdained by the candor of impartial criticism. The fondness of the emperor was not abated by time and possession; and Eudocia, after the marriage of her daughter, was permitted to discharge her grateful vows by a solemn pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Her ostentatious progress through the East may seem inconsistent with the spirit of Christian humility; she pronounced, from a throne of gold and gems, an eloquent oration to the senate of Antioch, declared her royal intention of enlarging the walls of the city, bestowed a donative of two hundred pounds of gold to restore the public baths, and accepted the statues, which were decreed by the gratitude of Antioch. In the Holy Land, her alms and pious foundations exceeded the munificence of the great Helena, and though the public treasure might be impoverished by this excessive liberality, she enjoyed the conscious satisfaction of returning to Constantinople with the chains of St. Peter, the right arm of St. Stephen, and an undoubted picture of the Virgin, painted by St. Luke. (The History of the decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol. 3, Chap. 32, pgs. 362&63 of the Everyman's Library edition)

The half hearted conversions of former pagan royalty, contributing to an increasingly superstitious and supposed “Christian” age. With those easily converting from paganism with improper motives, carrying their pagan tendencies right into “Christianity”. Being converted as a matter of political necessity, rather than heartfelt understanding, desire, and conversion. In order of course to escape persecution and the loss of their power and influence from Imperially established "Christianity".

 

[Amo2]

“The Catholic Church demanded assistance in her ambitious aim to make her power and authority absolute over all; and for Constantine’s purposes it was essential that the church should be a unit. These two considerations combined to produce results both immediate and remote, that proved a curse to the time then present and to ages to follow. The immediate result was that Constantine had no sooner compassed the destruction of Licinius in A.D. 323, than he issued an edict against the Novatians, Valentinians, Marcionites, Paulians, Cataphrygians, and “all who devised and supported heresies by means of private assemblies,” denouncing them and their heresies, and commanding them all to enter the Catholic Church. The edict runs as follows: —

“Victor Constantinus Maximus Augustus, to the heretics: Understand now, by this present statute, ye Novatians, Valentinians, Marcionites, Paulians, ye who are called Cataphrygians, and all ye who devise and support heresies by means of your private assemblies, with what a tissue of falsehood and vanity, with what destructive and venomous errors, your doctrines are inseparably interwoven; so that through you the healthy soul is stricken with disease, and the living becomes the prey of everlasting death. Ye haters and enemies of truth and life, in league with destruction: All your counsels are opposed to the truth, but familiar with deeds of baseness; fit subjects for the fabulous follies of the stage: and by these ye frame falsehoods, oppress the innocent, and withhold the light from them that believe. Ever trespassing under the mask of godliness, ye fill all things with defilement: ye pierce the pure and guileless conscience with deadly wounds, while ye withdraw, one may almost say, the very light of day from the eyes of men. But why should I particularize, when to speak of your criminality as it deserves, demands more time and leisure than I can give? For so long and unmeasured is the catalogue of your offenses, so hateful and altogether atrocious are they, that a single day would not suffice to recount them all. And indeed it is well to turn one’s ears and eyes from such a subject, lest by a description of each particular evil, the pure sincerity and freshness of one’s own faith be impaired. Why then do I still bear with such abounding evil; especially since this protracted clemency is the cause that some who were sound are become tainted with this pestilent disease? Why not at once strike, as it were, at the root of so great a mischief by a public manifestation of displeasure? “Forasmuch, then, as it is no longer possible to bear with your pernicious errors, we give warning by this present statute that none of you henceforth presume to assemble yourselves together. We have directed, accordingly, that you be deprived of all the houses in which you are accustomed to hold your assemblies: and our care in this respect extends so far as to forbid the holding of your superstitious and senseless meetings, not in public merely, but in any private house or place whatsoever. Let those of you, therefore, who are desirous of embracing the true and pure religion, take the far better course of entering the Catholic Church, and uniting with it in holy fellowship, whereby you will be enabled to arrive at the knowledge of the truth. In any case, the delusions of your perverted understandings must entirely cease to mingle with and mar the felicity of our present times; I mean the impious and wretched doublemindedness of heretics and schismatics. For it is an object worthy of that prosperity which we enjoy through the favor of God, to endeavor to bring back those who in time past were living in the hope of future blessing, from all irregularity and error, to the right path, from darkness to light, from vanity to truth, from death to salvation. And in order that this remedy may be applied with effectual power, we have commanded (as before said), that you be positively deprived of every gathering point for your superstitious meetings; I mean all the houses of prayer (if such be worthy of the name) which belong to heretics, and that these be made over without delay to the Catholic Church; that any other places be confiscated to the public service, and no facility whatever be left for any future gathering; in order that from this day forward none of your unlawful assemblies may presume to appear in any public or private place. Let this edict be made public.” ( Eusebius’s- “Life of Constantine,” book 3, chaps. 64, 65. )

Some of the penal regulations of this edict “were copied from the edicts of Diocletian; and this method of conversion was applauded by the same bishops who had felt the hand of oppression, and had pleaded for the rights of humanity.”
( Gibbon- “Decline and Fall,” chap. 21, par. 1. )

The above quotes were within the book The Two Republics, by A. T. Jones. Which may be viewed and read at the following link.

The Two Republics, or Rome and the United States of America

m.egwwritings.org

 

[Valletta]

That is absolutely authentic history.

No, history is not about what someone thinks it should have been like or must have been like without historical documentation from the time.

 

[Valletta]

The above quotes were within the book The Two Republics, by A. T. Jones. Which may be viewed and read at the following link.

The Two Republics, or Rome and the United States of America

m.egwwritings.org

Again I've asked you to cite documents from the time so that you may try and substantiate specific points, not a book from 1891 copyrighted by Ellen White.

 

[Amo2]

No, history is not about what someone thinks it should have been like or must have been like without historical documentation from the time.

I've already given you two examples of recorded history with documentations you simple choose to ignore. Neither recorded history, or myself, or anyone else is prohibited by the parameters you are trying to impose over recorded history or individuals discussing or referring to them. Of course I do not have the original documents, and must depend upon copies of them within recorded histories. Just like all the rest of us, including you. Again, deny what you will. As I will continue to supply historical accounts, regardless of your denials or attempts control the narrative.

 

[Amo2]

Again I've asked you to cite documents from the time so that you may try and substantiate specific points, not a book from 1891 copyrighted by Ellen White.

Ellen White is not the author of the book, A.T. Jones is. This book with many others can be viewed at the EGW estate link provided. For the exact purpose of confirmation of EGW's views by many others, and their historical references. Documents are quoted in the references I continue to supply. Why don't you try reading them, and or proving them false or to have never existed, if this is the truth.

 

[Valletta]

I've already given you two examples of recorded history with documentations you simple choose to ignore. Neither recorded history, or myself, or anyone else is prohibited by the parameters you are trying to impose over recorded history or individuals discussing or referring to them. Of course I do not have the original documents, and must depend upon copies of them within recorded histories. Just like all the rest of us, including you. Again, deny what you will. As I will continue to supply historical accounts, regardless of your denials or attempts control the narrative.

Copies are fine. My point it that so much of what the author says is supposition that he weaves around the few known historical facts. There you go, you describe my questions and discussion as an attempt to "control the narrative."