1: The Catholic Church accepts EO sacraments as valid and EO bishops as having apostolic succession, and thus magisterial authority. This undermines the Catholic Church's "one true church" concept. You in fact don't need to be in communion with Rome. But wait, yes you do? No you don't, stop contradicting yourself.
2: Catholics can't actually tell you definitively what statements are "ex cathedra" except for two of them. There are two instances of ex cathedra which are undisputed, the rest are debated. With no infallible list of infallible teachings, you don't actually have infallible teachings. Catholics claim that the Pope is protected from teaching heresy by the holy spirit, however popes have been condemned by ecumenical councils as heretics. The primary example is Pope Honorius being condemned in the sixth and seventh ecumenical councils for his support of monothelitism (Christ having one will as opposed to the orthodox view which is dyothelitism/christ having two wills).
3: After the great schism the Catholic church became so corrupt that the protestant reformation was actually justified, which Catholicism is forced to admit by virtue of the fact that the Catholic church was forced to reform itself to compete with protestantism after kicking out reformers and calling them heretics. The spirit of protestantism to simply make up random doctrines arguably comes from Catholicism, because the Catholic church believes whatever they teach is true just because they're the ones teaching it and they can simply change whatever they feel like changing. While not as bad in this regard as protestants, the Catholic church is still more prone to theological liberalism than EO churches because modern opinions are seen as equally valid to time-honored tradition in many cases. This also comes from the "intellectualism" of western Christianity, an over-reliance on human reason which the bible warns against and which I'm starting to realize isn't so great after seeing Thomas Aquinas' pathetic attempts to "prove" God. Western Christians trust too much in their own ability to understand things and thus are too hasty to develop doctrine.
4: Orthodox Christians have more of a reputation of having a toxic online presence, as well as letting state interests seep into the church particularly in Russia. You shouldn't judge an entire denom by edgy people online who may just be larping, but in my experience I have been insulted by Catholics multiple times but have never had a negative encounter with an EO Christian. As for state interference, politics have found their way into the Catholic church plenty of times. Also let us not forget that the actual catholic clergy themselves have raped children and protected child rapists among their ranks, whereas EO is often only guilty by association. For example human trafficking may be more common in some EO countries, but is there evidence that the church is responsible?
5: EO are seen as the edgy alt-right Christians and less charitable than western Christians. The Catholic church is indeed the largest charitable organization on earth, but that is mostly because the catholic church is just larger in general. Not only is EO comparable in it's "fruits" pound for pound in terms of charity, but it's fruits may be better overall when you consider the lack of bending it's values to conform to modernity and the lack of violent persecution relative to the Catholic church. Catholics and Protestants have conducted large scale inquisitions where they burn people at the stake and torture them for heresy, often based on false accusations. Eastern Orthodox are often more merciful in their approach to disagreement with church doctrine, with all of the violent persecutions being spearheaded by government officials rather than the church itself.
2: Catholics can't actually tell you definitively what statements are "ex cathedra" except for two of them. There are two instances of ex cathedra which are undisputed, the rest are debated. With no infallible list of infallible teachings, you don't actually have infallible teachings. Catholics claim that the Pope is protected from teaching heresy by the holy spirit, however popes have been condemned by ecumenical councils as heretics. The primary example is Pope Honorius being condemned in the sixth and seventh ecumenical councils for his support of monothelitism (Christ having one will as opposed to the orthodox view which is dyothelitism/christ having two wills).
3: After the great schism the Catholic church became so corrupt that the protestant reformation was actually justified, which Catholicism is forced to admit by virtue of the fact that the Catholic church was forced to reform itself to compete with protestantism after kicking out reformers and calling them heretics. The spirit of protestantism to simply make up random doctrines arguably comes from Catholicism, because the Catholic church believes whatever they teach is true just because they're the ones teaching it and they can simply change whatever they feel like changing. While not as bad in this regard as protestants, the Catholic church is still more prone to theological liberalism than EO churches because modern opinions are seen as equally valid to time-honored tradition in many cases. This also comes from the "intellectualism" of western Christianity, an over-reliance on human reason which the bible warns against and which I'm starting to realize isn't so great after seeing Thomas Aquinas' pathetic attempts to "prove" God. Western Christians trust too much in their own ability to understand things and thus are too hasty to develop doctrine.
4: Orthodox Christians have more of a reputation of having a toxic online presence, as well as letting state interests seep into the church particularly in Russia. You shouldn't judge an entire denom by edgy people online who may just be larping, but in my experience I have been insulted by Catholics multiple times but have never had a negative encounter with an EO Christian. As for state interference, politics have found their way into the Catholic church plenty of times. Also let us not forget that the actual catholic clergy themselves have raped children and protected child rapists among their ranks, whereas EO is often only guilty by association. For example human trafficking may be more common in some EO countries, but is there evidence that the church is responsible?
5: EO are seen as the edgy alt-right Christians and less charitable than western Christians. The Catholic church is indeed the largest charitable organization on earth, but that is mostly because the catholic church is just larger in general. Not only is EO comparable in it's "fruits" pound for pound in terms of charity, but it's fruits may be better overall when you consider the lack of bending it's values to conform to modernity and the lack of violent persecution relative to the Catholic church. Catholics and Protestants have conducted large scale inquisitions where they burn people at the stake and torture them for heresy, often based on false accusations. Eastern Orthodox are often more merciful in their approach to disagreement with church doctrine, with all of the violent persecutions being spearheaded by government officials rather than the church itself.
