Part,  Chapter, Paragraph

 1     I, 3,1 |      west; but there were two ~points of doctrine where the two
 2     I, 3,1 |        been these two further ~points of difficulty. To them we
 3     I, 3,2 |  Greeks, singling out ~ 28~the points where Byzantine practice
 4     I, 3,2 |      concerning ~the two great points of difference which the
 5     I, 3,2 |     opponent wrong upon ~these points of doctrine; and so Rome
 6     I, 3,3 |     Mohammedan Dhikr; ~but the points of similarity must not be
 7     I, 3,3 |    true agreement on the great points of dispute. At the same
 8     I, 4,3 |        Sergius, two important ~points of difference must be noted.
 9     I, 7,6 |       monastic structure, ~ 73~points the way to future developments
10    II, 0,12|       Orthodox belief on these points is~contained mainly in the
11    II, 1,1 |       and second of these four points, see pp. 72-9; for the third
12    II, 1,1 |       for the third and fourth points, see pp. 28-37).~Those brought
13    II, 1,3 |       there are~of course many points of contact; yet in the western
14    II, 1,5 |    such misinterpretation, six points must be made.~First, deification
15    II, 2,3 |      must be admitted, certain points in the Orthodox theology
16    II, 3,1 |      often attribute to minute~points of ritual an importance
17    II, 4,3 |         but they insist on two points:~first, there are many other
18    II, 6,1 |     secures agreement on~a few points and leaves everything else
19    II, 6,2 |       attempt was made to face points of doctrinal disagreement.~
20    II, 6,2 |    tendency to select specific points of disagreement and to consider
21    II, 6,2 |    discussed, so that specific points~could be seen in context
22    II, 6,2 | pursued at length. But certain points must be made.~First, the