[Leoni]

With all due respect, your ONE source has no basis in tradition. You’re “tradition” dates back to Vatican II. That is not Catholic.

Here’s a test for you, you can’t quote Vatican II, any Progressive Periti from Vatican II, or Vatican II pope, now, show me your teaching from a council, pope, Father of the Church or saint? If you can’t, then it’s a novelty. Very simple.

[annalex]

You posted sources that affirm the essential correctness of the Orthodox doctrines as they state that the Eastern Orthodox sacraments are valid. Were the Eastern Orthodox in doctrinal error, their sacraments would be invalid as well, -- the tragedy that befell the Anglicans. Here is the Catholic Encyclopedia article (1909) that lists various errors of the Eastern Orthodox churches in the sphere of church administration and does not mention any heresy apart from the schism itself. See Eastern Churches; note the part subtitled "1. Orthodox" and note that it is other churches and not the Orthodox that are described as "the old heretical Eastern Churches".

It is entirely proper to refer to Vatican II documents to define the Catholic teaching on ecumenism with the East since the lifting of the anaphemas that reversed the previously schismatic course of Eastern Orthodoxy occurred recently. Thia is what Church councils are for: to steer the Church in light of latter-day developments.

I was baptised Russian Orthodox and switched to the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church in 1994, where I happily am to this day. I believe that all that the Holy Catholic Church teaches, confesses and proclaims is inspired by God.

Now, are you Catholic? It is not every day that I meet one who believes that her church "speaks with a forked tongue" and remains in it.