"you speak of orthodoxy as though it is some all encompassing group."
"I have repeatedly shown you the example of ROCOR which is as close to the early church as you will ever get, and there is no doctrinal confusion."
You contradict yourself. Orthodoxy is not one all-encompassing group, but I should refer to the ROCOR as the gold standard of Orthodox doctrine. How do you reconcile these two statements?
"FTR the Catholic doctrine on evolution, as well as divorce, abortion, and contraception is confused. I have had catholic freinds ask church officials and get differing answers on ALL of those."
The manner of creation is not dogmatically declared (nor does it need to be, in my opinion). Divorce, abortion and contraception are very clear, beyond a shadow of a doubt. The opinions of dissenters do not matter, since they do not line up with the doctrines expressed within, among other places, the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Consider the following quotes from the Catechism that refute your claim of doctrinal confusion on just these two matters of abortion and contraception:
2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).
2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:
Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.
2322 From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a "criminal" practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life.
Nothing confusing about this, except for those who would choose to dissent from revealed truth...
You pick at obscure eastern church on the footsteps of full communion with the Roman church and use that as the pinnical of Orthodoxy?
The fact is there are Catholic bishops openly endorse homosexuality, contraception, abortion, etc. The Catholic bishop is the make and break of doctrine within the diocease.
I am well aware the 'official word' on Catholisim I had my Catholic education in a Catholic school with Catholic education materials. I am also extremely aware that precious few Catholics follow this.
Even if Catholic DID follow it to the letter it would not change the fact that Catholic innovations like papal supremacy, papal infailibility, and the Filioque are heretical.
The Roman church abandoned the truth in 1054 and the result was protestantism, and things like today's rampant homosexuality and child abuse in the church.
It is this continuing heresy that is the root of the Catholic church's problem.
The Orthodox church has Christ as it's head. The Catholics instead have a man (and one who has long since been outside the bloodline of Peter).