What happened is that the Liturgy of St. James, the first Liturgy of the Church, was shortened by St. John Chrysostomos (it used to be 4 hours long -- and try standing for the entire thing) without taking out the essentials of the original. As far as I know your Church recognizes St. John Chrysostomos, so I rest my case.
As for the other anecdotal evidence you site, it is not what one father says or what even a Church Father says, it is what the Church as the Body of Christ teaches.
We know that there are apostates in both Churches, but they do not speak for nor represent the Church. You need to widen your horizons my friend.
For your information, the Orthodox recognize +Peter and his role, but not the Roman Catholic interpretation of it. You may wish to read up more on how the popes acted and how the church was before the 4th century. You will find that such "Petrine Supremacy" was not claimed by early popes, and that Petrine primacy was a different thing altogether. But that's something for another thread -- and has been regurgitated too many times to make it worthwhile.
"it is not what one father says or what even a Church Father says, it is what the Church as the Body of Christ teaches."
Ah, but each of these parishes belong to a Diocese that calls itself "Orthodox," and they do NOT teach the same things . . . to the extent that they do not even recognize the legitimacy of each other's bishops.
So who's to say that one of these bishops isn't more correct than another?
Or that one Diocese or Synod is right and the other wrong?
People on this site consider the Ecumenical Patriarch a heretic.
Others consider the monks who consider him heretical to be heretical themselves.
It seems to me perfectly borne out by both your Church and the Episcopalians that when you have no single Pope, you have a bunch of popes (bishops).
No, I'm sorry. I still think your Orthodox "unity" is theoretical and abstract, not real and incarnate.
RE: the Divine Liturgies of East or West being unchanged since the apostolic age
In general, the ancient structural core of the Divine Liturgies of both East and West is identical with the Eucharist of the apostolic age. Several important factors must be taken into consideration concerning liturgical development.
Liturgical language and popular language: When the language of the Liturgy is popular there is a centrifugal tendency to move liturgy to reflect current concerns. This centrifugal process of liturgical change may be sudden or gradual but always at work. In general, Western liturgy ceased being in the popular tongue about the 6th century (and has only recently returned). A special liturgical language for the West then replaced the popular tongue in worship bringing to a halt this sort of liturgical development. In the East special liturgical languages developed later, after the 15th century, in general. Therefore the period of liturgical development of this kind was more protracted in the East than in the West.
Nature of liturgical worship: Divine worship develops and grows in a special way in monastic communities, state courts and Patriarchal sees. Monks have a tendency to mold worship to fit their own circumstances. This process of change may be seen in the variation of worship among the various monastic communities. During the Middle Ages in the West and afterwards in the East monastic communities exerted a profound influence on the shape of divine worship. The variation of monastic worship after 1453 is one of the challenges that those who have sought to codify Eastern worship into a single tome have experienced. State courts profoundly effect worship. Byzantine, Frankish and Anglican Imperial courts have all impressed their own stamp on worship. Finally, Patriarchal sees each have an effect, over time, on liturgical worship. Patriarchs have impressed the episcopal worship of their sees on those in other localities. Historically, worship has had 2 major poles. Christians have experienced the various developements of Latinization or Hellenization. In the West, Rome has engaged in 3 major reforms of worship: Gregorian, Tridentine and Paulan (Vatican 2). In the East there have been local attempts to either codify or reform worship, but none have addressed the various major imprints that Imperial, monastic and Patriarchal have left on Eastern worship. The delicate balance that must be struck by those that celebrate a living liturgy faces both East and West, today.