There are two extant churches which meet 3 of the 4 marks of the Church. Catholics and Eastern Orthodox. They will reunite. It is theologically necessary. Then both, (by now being one), will fulfill the 4 marks of the Church by being One, Holy, catholic, and Apostolic. I believe this will happen before the parousia. I can understand why there are EO's, and I can understand why there are Catholics.
Since we DID have the reformation, I understand intellectually, (but not in the heart), why we might still have protestant denominations, (up to a point), because of cultures and generations who have grown up in protestantism. I myself fall into that category.
I see many discussions, arguments, and debates. The stances all remain the same. There seem to be 3 categories of stances. Catholic Christian, Non-Catholic Christian, and Non Christian groups who believe themselves to be Christian under their groups self created definition.
I'm afraid I've lost sight of what it is that we are doing. One thing seems to ring true. All of us have given far too much weight over the past several centuries of Christianity to personal opinion. It's hard enough for folks to understand the existence of one Pope, let alone tens of thousands. Peter and his successors were always supposed to simply supply the role of Peter among the Apostles. That is, to settle controversies among the other Apostles, and to lead, when there was a conference of Bishops. To declare dogma when necessary to combat some heresy or another. He is not royalty. He is a bishop. The bishop of Rome. The only difference is that Christ built His Church upon him, gave him the keys to the kingdom of Heaven, and the power to forgive sin. Peter organized the Church after Pentacost. Jesus told him to "feed my sheep", "feed my lambs". When the other Apostles discussed organizational matters; or when at the first council they needed a firm decision on what elements of the law to lay on the Gentiles, etc., it was he they turned to. It doesn't make him superhuman. It doesn't mean he has "more" of the Holy Ghost than other bishops. He is just the arbiter of debate, by virtue of position. It was a mistake during the renaissance to ascribe to the Pope, some of the powers which belong to the state. Those rightly went away over time. They aren't coming back. Things happen. Bad people floated in and out of the office, but not a single one of them changed the doctrines of the Church. They were only bad or wrong for that matter up against the doctrines of the Church. They weren't being good examples of the see of Peter. Okay...Got it. But now, still, in 2015 when unity of the Church would make every difference in the world, and all of us know it was Jesus prayer for us to be one, and that the world would know us by how we love one another, what are we doing? Isn't maybe time to subjugate our personal opinions and egos to the way that Jesus, the founder upon whom we all agree, wanted us to be set up until He returns? In fact promised that His Church would pierce the very gates of Hell itself?
I will take my answer off the air, so to speak. These are rhetorical questions actually. Stuff I've been thinking about. I am certainly nothing and no-one special, so I'm sure that all of you think about this stuff also. Perhaps from a completely different perspective. But I pray that the thoughts are at least there. The wondering. The hoping that our discussions may be meaningful to our union as followers of the Way. As the members of the mystical body of Christ, and why we aren't all understanding at least that much in the same way. I pray that we may all come to the same conclusion, and not be frightened or offended by the see of St. Peter, which only does what it was asked to do 2,000 years ago by our blessed Lord.