CathInfo.com

I'm glad I discovered the book. It was only in reading the footnotes of Fr Fortescue's The Greek Fathers: Their Lives and Writings (another book I highly recommend) that I saw mention of the book. What a shame that it's not in print with any of the big Catholic publishers, because I think it is an invaluable resource in today's time due to how many traditional Catholics are being seduced by the Eastern schismatics during the crisis. I've witnessed two Catholics so far that I've communed with go over to the Eastern schismatics. Online and charismatic Orthobros like Jay Dyer are preying on the chronically online confused young men of today.

Thanks man. I will get that book too. It's interesting that you said this, yesterday I was discussing with a trad friend how much of an issue Dyer is. Despite Dyers stark shifts of religious views, and being a schismatic, he knows how to argue subtle points of theology… And his material on conspiracy and occult symbolism attract many young men to his content. It's sad to say it but you are right about him. I think he is purposely deceptive, and a convincing, effective Orthobro honeypot. “Orthobro“ is funny, I'm going to start referring to them as that. Haha. It describes them well. They often try and portray this Chad persona that's nothing but a caricature of masculinity. 

Lastly, I agree also that there are many out of print Catholic books that need to be Resurrected back into circulation. God willing, I will do this one day. That's a personal goal of mine. There are many hidden gems in the public domain just waiting to be made available for Catholics to read. I know most books are reprinted n’ such nowadays but I'm talking about nice copies that are fitting for these books. One of the books at the top of my list if not the first is to make a pocket size copy of Humility of Heart. Why no one else has done this before is borderline criminal. Ha.

Why would someone down vote this comment when I am simply laying out an ecclesiological fact?

Eastern Orthodoxy is a religious system shot through with inconsistencies and nationalisms. A Latin Catholic would be rash and foolish to defect to Orthodoxy because he would have to abandon his culture and he would always be suspect as a foreigner amongst the Orthodox. And, of course, Orthodoxy is cut off from the true Church. Even to go to the Western Orthodox vicariates with the Russians or Antiochians is senseless since most Orthodox hold that only the Byzantine liturgy is acceptable worship.

What I stated in my comment is simply a presentation of facts and a counsel against rash judgments since the distance between Byzantine Catholics and Eastern Orthodox is much shorter than thd distance between Byzantine Catholics and Roman Catholics, yet the Byzantine Catholics are own brothers in ecclesial communion.

Not advocating taking up with them --- God forbid! --- but some Orthodox congregations, particularly Russian Orthodox ones, are very heavily made up of converts.  Such people are typically not of nationalities one commonly associates with Orthodoxy.  There is a certain deference to the culture and mentality of the "host country", whatever country that might be, but these people are not Russified (in the example I describes above) and never will be.  This is in contrast to, most of all, the Greek Orthodox, whose parishes are, at the end of the day, pretty much Greek cultural and social organizations.  Ditto the Antiochian Orthodox, though they are a bit (but only a bit) more able to comprehend someone being among them who is not Syrian or Lebanese.

Having married a Polish woman (albeit divorced for many years now) and having a son who is half of that blood and is a Polish citizen, I think of myself sometimes as what I call "SABA", "Slavic American By Assimilation".  I could fit into a Russian or Ukrainian parish better than any other (somewhat of a familiarity with the language group, and I do like the food!), not to mention that I am sometimes taken for Slavic --- there is nothing about my appearance that suggests I'm not, whereas in a Greek or Lebanese parish, I'd stick out like a sore thumb.  But I'm not about to become Orthodox, nor even Eastern Catholic for that matter.  Latin Catholicism is my home and always will be.

You should read Fr Fortescue's book The Orthodox Eastern Church. It's hard to find in print, but some independent publishers will make reprints of it. I'm in the middle of reading it currently, and I've learned a lot about the history of the Eastern schismatics. Fr Fortescue masterfully points out the errors at the root of the Eastern schismatics, namely their propensity for wanting to involve the secular state in everything religious rather than the appropriate ecclesiastical authorities and their blind, irrational hatred of everything Latin/western.

I just finished reading the part about the Photian schism. I think if you read that section, you will have no doubt that the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ and not the Eastern schismatics. And if you read before that the history of the see of Constantinople illicitly increasing its importance from backwater nowhere to "New Rome, second to Old Rome" (while also swallowing up the rightful places of actual apostolic sees), you can easily see that it is a sham of a church.

Furthermore, the Eastern schismatics have no objective principle for determining what councils are ecuмenical. As a whole, they have no objective way of discerning theological truth. They have no way to objectively resolve jurisdictional disputes at the highest levels, so naturally the state gets involved.

I've always wondered how Constantinople could claim to be a "patriarchate" as it was not one of the original apostolic sees (the others being Rome, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria).

I claim relative ignorance here.  Can someone shed light on this?