From another forum, which since I'm leaving it, I will not advertise for them (for you will not be there long enough to continue responding). My words will be in maroon. An Orthodox person who goes by the nickname of "Lion" said:
Lion says: I will challenge that Scott for the Only Church that was and still is connected to the beginning of Christendom is the Orthodox churches... You seem to forget the Break Away from Holy Praxis of the first Millennium and subsequent acts of departures...
I submit, there was no "departure" or "Break Away" from Holy Praxis (or practice) in the first millennium or thereafter. Our traditions are different, but Sacred Tradition remains. The concept of Theosis, while not a practice of Western Christians - it is not objected to either.
I (Lion) will bring forth:
In the Holy Praxis:
1) the abrogation of the married priesthood
The married priesthood is not a churchwide abrogation, it is a discipline of the Latin Church, which is shared, at least in part, in much of the Eastern Church. Even in the Eastern tradition, once ordained a priest marriage is forbidden and there are no married bishops.
2) the separation of Baptism and Confirmation
Baptism and Confirmation are two distinct Sacraments and need not be combined.
3) the abrogation of Communion to the Holy Blood
Communion in both species has ALWAYS been practiced in the Latin Rite! The Precious Blood has not always been distributed to the congregation (though it is commonplace now) but it has ALWAYS been part of the Eucharistic celebration - in fact the Mass would be invalid without it.
4) the abrogation of giving Holy Communion to babies and little children
There is no "law" stating the Eucharist is to be shared with babies and little children. This is a matter of discipline within the rights of each rite.
5) the secularization of the Sacred Roman(Latin) Orthodox Divine Liturgy
I am not exactly sure of what "Lion" is getting at here. I hope he reads this and adds a comment.
6) the ''pyramidalization'' of the structure of the Church
Again, I believe more clarity is needed here. I am unfamiliar with this label of "pyramidalization."
In the Apostolic Doctrine:
7) the self-proclamation of the supremacy of the pope
But of course, we do not see this as a self-proclamation, but something Jesus, the Good Shepherd, passed down to St. Peter in John 21:15-17.
8) the self-proclamation of the infallibility of the pope by himself
Again, this is not a self-proclamation, but directly bestowed upon Peter, alone, in Matthew 16:18-19.
9) the misunderstanding of the Divine Relations in the Most Holy Trinity
Catholics have no misunderstanding of the "Divine Relations in the Most Holy Trinity." We may use some different terminology, but our understanding is not flawed. I'm sure this is a "dig" at the use of the Filioque in the Nicene Creed - and though I agree it is an addition to that creed, it is not a misunderstanding of the "Divine Relations in the Most Holy Trinity." This can be a whole debate in itself, so the response here is not intended to answer all of Orthodoxy's objections to the Filioque.
10) the misunderstanding of the Divine Energies
Again, Catholics have no misunderstanding here, those who have looked into the Divine Energies that is. There really is no disagreement here between Catholics and Orthodoxy, the philosophical discourse used to describe the Divine Energies is not commonly used in Western/Latin thought, but there is nothing in Western thought opposed to Orthodoxy's view of Divine Energies.
11) the innovation of Purgatory as Lieu and the processus of Indulgences
Well, since Purgatory is not an innovation, but something referenced in Scripture itself, "Lion's" claim here is from an ignorance to Scripture and in direct contradiction to the scriptural position of the Christian Church. As for "as Lieu and the processus of Indulgences," the statement makes no sense, so again I would have to ask "Lion" for clarity.