A catholic is a catholic. Roman or not.
Well yes, in the Nicene Creed we confess belief in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, although there are differences in opinion on what that means - most Roman Catholics regard it as referring to those churches in communion with the Pope of Rome, Lutherans connect Catholicism with correct worship (orthodoxologia), Eastern Orthodox and most Oriental Orthodox regard orthodoxy as requiring a continuity of correct worship and apostolic succession and a continuity of Eucharistic communion, Anglicans, Assyrians, Old Catholics and some Oriental Orthodox and other Protestants and the more ecumenically minded Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox tend to favor the “branch ecclesiology,” and among Congregationalists, Baptists and the Stone/Campbell movement we have the local church ecclesiology, whereas Evangelicals and other low church Protestants lean towards an invisible church ecclesiology. However, Catholicism remains a vital part of the creed, since belief in the unity and centrality of the Church as the Body of Christ is a part of normative Christian faith.
However it is not the case that all Catholics subscribe to Roman Catholic theology.
The internal distinctions 'you' (the peoples) make among yourselves is simply infighting over definitions, names, words, usages and personages. I can show (in another place, as it is not the purpose of this OP or thread) that so called 'Orthodoxy' and Roman Catholicism share a great deal of "theology" and "praxy" (even as you said, "although I agree with some of it"),
The Eastern Orthodox share as much in common with the Roman Catholics as we have in common with the Lutherans and Anglicans and other liturgical Protestants. We have much more in common with the Assyrian Church of the East, and even more in common with the Oriental Orthodox, with whom we are close to reunification. But it is the case that most traditional churches are working towards ecumenical reconciliation rather than further division.
The issue is that unfortunately, the differences are much greater than “infighting over names, words, usages and personages,” neither can it be said to be infighting, since the Roman Catholics are external to the Eastern Orthodox.
and since the Jesuit counter-reformation, and the infiltration and destruction of the 'old 'orthodoxical' orders' by them (Russian Revolution, Greek revolutionary wars and various others, &c.) they are closer than the 'lay' will admit, but the upper echelon knows the facts.
I really hope you are not actually suggesting that the Eastern Orthodox are controlled by Jesuit Secret Masters who were also responsible for the Russian Revolution, because not only would that be demonstrably false, but it would also be extremely offensive particularly since as of today (Sunday June 14th on the Gregorian calendar) we are commemorating the memory of the New Martyrs of Russia who were killed under Communism.
The Orthodox Church was extremely severely persecuted by Communists but survived. In addition, Russian Old Orthodox, who did not accept the Nikonian liturgical reforms of 1666, also survive, both as independent churches such as the Pomorsky, and as canonical churches such as the Lipovans in Romania and the Edinovertsy.
The Greek revolution of 1821 was in no respect a Roman Catholic takeover of Eastern Orthodoxy but rather was the liberation of much of Greece from Turkocratia (unfortunately many parts of Greece such as Crete, Mount Athos, Thessalonica and so on) would have to wait until later in the 19th century.
Additionally it is worth noting that many Orthodox lands were not liberated, for example, the Churches of the Antiochians, Alexandrian Greeks, Phanariot Greeks and Hagiopolitan Orthodox still iive under non Christian regimes (of which only that in Egypt is friendly, following the downfall of the problematic Assad regime in Syria, which has caused a huge increase in persecution of Christians in Syria under the new government). Likewise the Syriac Orthodox and Coptic Orthodox (with the Copts and Alexandrian Greeks and the Church of Sinai benefitting from a friendly regime but one which has proven itself catastrophically incapable of ensuring their safety, with frequent terrorist attacks on Coptic churches; the Church of Sinai, which consists mainly of St. Catharine’s monastery, survives through divine protection, not unlike the monastery of St. Matthew in the hills above Mosul or the monasteries of Tur Abdin in Turkey.
Likewise the Armenians and Ethiopians, despite having their own countries, have not been spared Islamic violence, most recently with the brutal conquest and genocide of Ngorno-Karabakh by Azerbaijan.
If you have any concerns about Orthodox theology being under the control of the Roman Catholic Church I have no doubt my fellow Orthodox friends such as
@prodromos @jas3 @FenderTL5 @HTacianas can attest that it is not under Roman Catholic control (and never has been); likewise with regards to Lutheran theology, my friends
@MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis and
@Ain't Zwinglian can confirm the same. And with regards to Anglicans, my friend
@Jipsah would be amused, bemused and perhaps cmused at the thought of his church being secretly under the control of Jesuits, considering the dim view he and I take towards suggestions of extra terrestrials being responsible for UFO sightings.
Indeed the Eastern Orthodox have more in common with Anglicans, conservative Old Catholics and Lutherans than with Roman Catholics, particularly continuing Anglo Catholics and confessional Lutherans (Evangelical Catholics) since the rejection of the idea of the development of doctrine and in the case of Anglicans and conservative Old Catholics we share the idea of the church as a communion of bishops who are equal in authority, with Archbishops, Metropolitans or Patriarchs merely being the primus inter pares (first among equals) whose do not have the ability to wield episcopal authority in the dioceses of other bishops, but whose function is rather to preside over the ecclesiastical province or Holy Synod of their church. Of course there are some episcopal-oriented Lutherans who likewise share this view.
Now, with regards to the Sabbath, the amusing thing in all of this is that most Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox and the Assyrian Church of the East worship on the Sabbath, since the majority of those who attend the Divine Liturgy have attended Vespers or All Night Vigils the night before (particularly in Coptic and Slavonic churches), and all Roman Catholic clergy edcdcare required to celebrate the mass on every Sabbath, in addition to the Liturgy of the Hours (which usually results in a total of three daily worship services per priest - morning prayer, a mass, and evening prayer), even those who are retired, so that’s over 1.2 million worship services per Saturday. A large number of Anglicans and Lutherans also worship on the seventh day. So even though this worship is not actually required (nothing in Scripture actually declares it to be a final test of loyalty), the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrians, Roman Catholics and other traditional services do Sunday services than the SDA, especially when we consider Eucharistic liturgy, since Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Assyrians and most Oriental Orthodox (and also the Amborsian Rite Catholcs of Milan, who number around over a million) celebrate the Eucharist every Sabbath throughout the year.
But apparently this is inadequate since we also worship on the First Day in honor of the resurrection, despite there being no Scriptural prohibition of the same…
