Yes, I can and will put aside the words “peer” and “equal” when I talk about internal mediation. However, please know that I am confused as to why I should. The phrase you use to define internal mediation (“same immediate life setting”) seems to be equivalent in substance to what people regularly mean by “peer.” In fact, I can’t think of a more clear and concise way to define “peer” than “same immediate life setting.” Nevertheless, I’ll proceed as if there is a reason for us to distinguish “peer” from “internal mediator,” even though I don’t yet understand why.
I fear that I ran into more or less the same confusion in our Module 1.1 discussion, when you invited me to undertake the great challenge of seeing God as an equal. That time (discussing divine nature), I didn’t think you were justified in using the word “equal”; this time (discussing internal mediation), you don’t seem to think I am justified in using the word “equal.” Clearly, you and I aren’t yet in the habit of using this word in the same contexts. I’ll do my best to adopt JFG vocabulary and usages, but I write you this note (2 weeks on) to inform you that—with respect to this one particular term—I am still struggling mightily to do so.