A couple of points. Pope Francis made me nervous with a few

Posted on: September 4, 2016 at 19:09:18 CT

of the things he's said and done but...

The pope is the vicar of Christ and is protected from teaching erroneous doctrine to the faithful, but he is not protected from wrong opinions, imprudent actions or even from sin. There have been several popes throughout our history who have fallen into some grave sin, including having concubines etc. Others may have had shaky theology on one point or another, but never proclaimed it as a teaching of the Church.

The Eastern Orthodox do indeed have Apostolic Succession and they have a valid priesthood and all 7 sacraments, outward signs instituted by Christ to impart the grace which they signify.

The fact that they have broken away from the Church and the pope is a drawback than a benefit, however.

The Eastern Orthodox were still united in the Church when the Council of Nicea promulgated the Nicene Creed in 325 AD. The Nicene Creed enunciates "the four marks of the Church": "And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church..."
Both the Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox point to The Four Marks of the Church enunciated in the Nicene Creed as evidence that they are "The Church". I think any impartial observer would have to conclude that the Catholic Church fits that description most closely.

Those four marks are:

1. One - This is the one that is relevant to the point you make about the Eastern Orthodox having no pope. The pope is a unifying influence on the Church. Each of the Orthodox Churches is lead by a Patriarch and for the most part they all have kept the faith and teach the same thing... BUT they do have some differences of opinion with each other and they do dissociate themselves from each other. I don't keep up on such things, but Church A may be in communion with Church B and Church C may also be in communion with Chruch B but may not be in communion with Church A. In other words they are not fully "one" as the Catholic Church is. The Church's teaching is clearly laid out in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Any Catholic knows exactly what the Church teaches when any potential disagreements come up. For the Eastern Orthodox One partriarch may teach one thing, and another may teach something different and there is no way to say what exactly is the "correct" teaching. It is two equals with equal authority saying two different things and no way to resolve the situation... other than an ecumenical council. The Eastern Orthodox participated in all of the Ecumenical Councils until they broke away from the Church and have never had one ever since. The Catholic Church has continued on that Tradition which came from the Apostles, of course.

2. Holy. This mark is one people will undoubtedly jump up and down and point to the sinful actions of Catholics, particularly Catholic priests and bishops, but the holiness applies to the teachings, not to how well individual members of the Church adhere to those teachings. As some have noted the Church is a hospital for sinners, not a museum of saints... though the Church does indeed have many of both. Both the Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox have their share of sinners and saints, of course. I think it is clear, however, that the Catholic Church has kept the doctrines handed down by Jesus through His Apostles more fully and completely than the Eastern Orthodox. The two main examples would be on the teachings against divorce and remarriage and against artificial contraception. Both agree that those are both taught in the bible and were taught by the early Church. But, there is no question that the Eastern Orthodox have preserved FAR more of the original teachings handed down by Our Lord than the Protestants have.

3. catholic. This mark is an adjective as used in the Creed, not the proper noun. That is why it is not capitalized in the creed. It comes from the Greek word "katholikos" which means "universal". It meant that the Church founded by Jesus was the same in Jerusalem or Rome or Constantinople or Ephesus or anywhere else in the world. Little christian communities had popped up ostensibly based upon Christianity, but they were not in union with the Church and may have had beliefs that differed in some respects from what was being taught by the Apostles in the Church. The Council was noting that a way to tell whether or not a community purporting to be "The Church" was in fact The Church Founded By Jesus Christ was whether it was a part of the universal Church. The Catholic Church has spread to every part of the earth. Every square inch of earth is under the jurisdiction of a bishop of the Catholic Church. Since the split the Orthodox Church has become largely regional. There is a Greek Orthodox Church and a Russian Orthodox Church etc.

4. Apostolic. Both the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches are Apostolic. Both have had Holy Orders passed down in an unbroken chain from Jesus to the Apostles to the priests, bishops and patriarchs today. It should be noted that Jesus Himself designated the Pope as the leader of His Church and the Apostles recognized and respected that fact without question. Anytime the Apostles are listed in the bible, St. Peter is always listed 1st. He is also mentioned more than twice as often as all of the other Apostles.

Historians noted that this same pattern of deference to the pope continued on throughout Church history. He called the Ecumenical Councils and his approval was needed for their validity at the end. Disputes among bishops and patriarchs were sent to the pope to adjudicate.

So, the bottom line is that the Eastern Orthodox are indeed Apostolic... but they don't quite have the fullness of the faith found in the Catholic Church.