The PNCC and the Orthodox Church share in many agreed statements, and the PNCC probably shares more theologically with Orthodoxy than the PNCC does with Roman Catholicism.

To your first point, I think legitimacy, in this context, means adhering to the truth. I’ll bite on this one and play Pontius Pilate: “truth, what does that mean.” Notice the small “t.”

That’s one of the essential problems. Small “t” truths which are simply small “t” traditions like celibacy aren’t even handled equitably within the Roman Church.

Look at Byzantine Catholics in union with Rome as represented in the United States. They cannot express themselves on their own terms or with their own character (re: celibacy is not required of their priests except in the U.S.).

Recognizing legitimacy means that we would all have to respect the innate catholicism of the other, and the fact that we all proclaim essential truth apart from small “t” traditions. We would have to do that without seeking to impose our traditions on the other (for example something the Young Fogey often points to, i.e., the latinization of the Byzantine traditions).

Also, I think ’sister churches’ is an artistic construct which plays well to the folks in the pew, while at the same time meaning something completely different in the theological and ecumenical language of the Roman Church (see the Congregation For The Doctrine Of The Faith’s Note On The Expression “Sister Churches”).

The Orthodox Churches cannot be seen as legitimate strictly within an Eastern construct. They either are or are not Catholic. I believe them to be so (not that my untrained opinion really matters).

As to the question on dogmatics, the Orthodox and the PNCC seem to have a pretty strong ecclesiology, without having a Pope. I think we would all agree that something is not dogma apart from the concurrence of the whole Church in a truly Ecumenical Council.

On talking, talking is legitimate and can promote understanding. Better yet, it is a place to discuss issues that would otherwise erupt into unfortunate internecine conflicts. The PNCC does consider itself to be fully Catholic and we admit those holding to Catholic faith, beliefs, and practices to the Eucharist.

In Christ’s body we have our unity. Perhaps, one day, you and I will share in the Holy Eucharist together. May the Holy Spirit guide us and may Mary intercede for us.

What does this mean? What is legitimacy? There is truth
and only truth! We may disagree as what truth is, but
“legitimacy” smacks too much of “truth.” If legitimacy
means “theological position”, the Roman Catholic Church
has acknowledged that the Orthodox Churches interpret
and explain Christian truths in their own legitimate
Eastern terms. Orthodoxy, however, rejects Catholic
scholastic theology as illegitimate. Also, the Catholic
Church calls the Orthodox Church “a Sister Church”,
but some Orthodox will not say the same about the
Catholic Church. Talk about legitimacy!

——-

As for the “the weight of the teaching authority of the Orthodox Church”, this is a legitimate Catholic
concern. Some Orthodox Churches will not have communion
with others; some Orthodox Churches insist on use of
the Old Calendar; some Orthodox Churches state that
they do not recognize the autocephalous or autonomous
declaration of others. These are confusing and
contradictory ecclesial positions within Orthodoxy.
Who is to decide which Orthodox Church is Orthodox
and correct?

——

“And yet the Orthodox are supposed to take seriously the dogmatic claim by Rome that the Orthodox are at least materially heterodox.” This is false! Rome has
stated that the Orthodox are in “schism”, not
heresy. Some (but not all) Orthodox churches claim
that Rome is heterodox; others claim the opposite.
Again, which Orthodox church is correct?

——–

“All of us, in the Catholic fold, excepting Rome, are inherently schismatic in their eyes, and anyone who lives apart from the Pope is not fully Catholic.”

This is essentially the same as the Orthodox position:
“Everyone who claims to be Orthodox, except the
‘canonical’ Orthodox, are inherently schismatic in
their eyes, and anyone who who lives apart from the
‘canonical’ churches is not fully Orthodox.” The
Orthodox Churches do NOT believe in the “branch”
theory of Catholicism - only Anglo-Catholics and the
myriad of Old Catholic groups do so.

——–

“And to even ask when Orthodoxy dogmatized this question is to measure Orthodoxy by [Roman] Catholic standards. It didn’t and doesn’t need to because it is in the Fathers and the Liturgy. It’s called Tradition, not a dictionary.”

But WHO decides what is in the Fathers and Liturgy and
what is Tradition? That is the question that the
Orthodox cannot seem to answer. It still must be
asked and answered and agreed upon by all Orthodox
Churches.

——-

“Indeed the Roman Church’s sine qua non for unity is adherence to its terms, conditions, and definitions.”

No, the Roman Catholic Church’s position is that
other churches must UNDERSTAND its terms, conditions,
and definitions. The Orthodox position is the same.
From that, you go on to discuss WHEN and WHERE you can
AGREE on religious terms and definitions and when you cannot. Then, you discuss WHY you do not agree.

——-

“When the PNCC, or Orthodoxy for that matter, are admitted in the door as full living Churches with their own character and practices, which are at heart fully Catholic, then I’ll believe it is otherwise. Else wise we must continue to pray and talk.”

But, you see, if you ‘are at heart fully Catholic’,
then there is NO need to talk. There is already full
communion - such as with the Eastern Catholic
Churches. You are putting the cart before the horse.
But, you are correct about ‘pray and talk’. As
Christians we must do that. For the rest, we rely on
God.