Oh, so than actual Eastern Catholic teaching is condemned by you.
Try reading the treaty of Brest which was pre VII and find agreement on purgatory cause there aint one.
Benedict was referred to by me XVI so obviously not 64 AD. The meandering was to try to explain to Forlorn that a Latin Patriarch was not original.
Also the Russian Orthodox Church is not in communion currently with Constantinople the only reason they were referenced was the reference to EO saying mass there.
There are two different things being discussed the right of access to pray before the relics saying liturgy there which they do. And.......giving away relics to a place they do not belong.
Your list of heresies is mostly a list of Thomistic Scholastic points that most orthodox theologians agree with and even part of discussions Most orthodox disagreement is either by uberdox and uneducated or over different. Praxis for example Copts object to deacons giving blessings and see it as a dealbreaker.
I admit it's a little nitpicky but use 1964 or '64. As a fan of ancient history and in particular classic antiquity, it sticks out.
And yes anything as comprehensively antagonistic to Thomistic thought as mainstream "Orthodox" tends to be has to be thrown out. If that's your precious Orthodox teaching, buckle up.
The ROC may not have a recognized union with the Greeks but that hardly matters in this context. What Russia says goes for the most part. As far as the ROC and the Vatican, you must admit that Francis is Russia's favorite Pope, whether you go by Putin or Kirill. If the Crisis has taught us anything it's that you don't need a full agreement to accomplish your goals. Half measures, innuendo and ambiguity will be enough to destroy the enemy.
Right of access as far as being able to use it, yes. But they don't make the Mass schedule, they don't maintain or own the basilica so they would still have to let someone know they were coming. The only true capacity they have is as honored guests. That's very different from what you are referring to. The way things are today however, St. Peter's is just as likely to host a car company or pagan worshippers as they would any given Eastern Rite.
But back to your schizophrenic post history...
Your first post was spent downplaying the significance of the relics:
Relics don't make the papacy. Popes have given away relics for some time as gestures of goodwill.
Then you tried to say they were rightly returned because they already belonged to Patriarch Bartholomew:
You do understand that the major churches in Rome belong to the Patriarchs right. The Popes church is the Lateran. St. Peters belongs to Constantinople, etc. You can't actually give away relics that already belong to someone else. For good or ill the mutual excommunication was lifted by Paul VI.
I never said pre VII it is Not me who wrote the idiotic claim that Francis was abandoning the Papacy because he gave a few bone fragments away ( like other Popes have done)
Though when confronted by the obvious problems of these statements, you pull a 180:
Byzcat they always belonged to Rome, and this is unprecedented and wrong for the Relics of Peter unify Christendom around Rome, where Peter died.
Well as you know, Constantinople is nowhere near Rome. So now when anybody criticizes your past statements you refer back to this inexplicable change as though it was a natural part of your argument. It isn't, it's called talking from both sides of your mouth. Admit the first posts were wrong and move on. The attempt at gaslighting is becoming more and more interesting the further we go with this.
There's a lot of things that haven't been settled officially yet regarding the "Orthodox." A future Restoration would ideally address these issues for good, but in the meantime all we have to do is to look how far afield their theology has developed over the centuries. They have up until recently enjoyed a relatively low profile in the West mainly due to barriers of language, politics, geography, and overall lack of unity from country to country. The Heterodox have become the ultimate snake in the grass. Thanks to people like Jay Dyer however, this is all becoming more well known.
Though they may lack unity on paper, I'm not going to discount Russia's role as the head and center of the "Orthodox" world since 1453 and especially after the onset of Communism and now a fully integrated Satanic Leninist regime. Greeks may not check all the boxes that the Russians do, but getting a hoof in the door is all it takes to destabilize and let's just say we had a little more than the hoof enter in during VII. There's no question in my mind who orchestrated this agreement between the two. Then you have Montini's disgraceful past as a suspected soviet collaborator during his tenure Substitute of the Secretariat of State/Prosecretary which caused him to be removed by Pius XII.