If they are not, then they are not in complete union with See of Rome. We all know of the schism that occurred in AD 1054
I’m not talking about the schism. I’m talking about the early church fathers. Your statements on this indicate they were. I’m asking you if this is true. Are they in 100% agreement on the roman catholic position of the Eucharist being the actual literal flesh and blood of Christ wen consumed?
And the EO consider the Roman rite to be the ones in schism with the EO being the TRUE form of Catholicism.
So who's correct?
Both are making the same claims for the same reason, that they are the original church established by Christ and the other is wrong. Since they can both trace their roots back to the same starting point, how do you know that you are right and they are the ones who are wrong?
How do you know that THEY aren't the ones who are right and you're in the wrong church after all?