I agree just because the matriarch was deceased. Here we have a living God who is greater than Christ himself. So that is why we have the order we have.You should reformulate this, it's not a good example and it's certainly not analogous to the interpretation you are proposing, unless you take Jennifer as the crown jewels, which the sentence does not allow. But to remove all doubt we would write, "Awaiting the appearing of our beloved princess Jennifer and the crown jewels of the late matriarch."
When did Jesus refer to himself as God? Are we to obey the ECFs who taught contrary to Jesus or to Jesus? Did Jesus tell us to listen to his words, or the words of the ECFs?The identity of the Father and Son has not been lost to time.
Matt 7:24Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.
Effectively, you are telling us to forsake Christ for the ECFs. That is your message, and the message of the ECFs and the scholastics.
By the time of Clement of Alexandria (a persecuting wolf), my suspicion is that church doctrine had become fatally corrupted by its insistence that the Word was a begotten "God in heaven" per the Greek model (which the Jewish model knew nothing of). This was done to "draw men away" to follow them (Act 20:29). However I need to look at Clement more. I have just gotten some of his books.Can you name one of the ancient Greek fathers who read the passage that way? Because what I see consistently is them referring to Christ as "great God." The attributive usage of the genitive case is common in the GNT, and particularly lends itself to Hebrew thought.
What are you doing when you follow the ECFs, but succumbing to the temptation to follow men?
Don't forget that Paul dated the corruption of the church to his leaving. At the time of Christ, there was no-one referring to him as God. Rather he was "man" or son of God (see numerous places in Acts).