>>600745
>Assyrian and oriental patriarchates (Antioch, Jerusalem, alexandria) break away from Rome after Chalcedon.
Only Alexandria had a non-chalcedonian majority.
Jerusalem was cool with both Romes, and Antioch saw the whole schism as silly, and welcomed the latin eastern patriarch as their own with no problem.
The clusterfuck of the crusades would ultimately estrange them, but no too much, given they would be welcoming of latin clergy until the Melkite Schism.
So, exhibit 1 of people that were ambivalent or pro-Rome getting driven away by catholic actions.
>200 years later they are conquered and persecuted by Muslims.
Along with large parts of North Africa, Hispania, Sicily, which were under direct Roman jurisdiction, which paved the way for the Barbary Slave Trade, and the sacking of the Tomb of Saint Peter by saracens.
>Crusades btfo slimes and reconquers holy land and Anatolia for the East
Wait, what?
You conquered a sliver of the Holy Land, and Anatolia got damaged super hard in the process.
An excommunicated french lord managed to recover way more of the holy land than the papal sanctioned crusades ever did, and with way less bloodshed.
>allows 4th crusade to sack Constantinople rather than conquering Egypt.
So, God showed His justice via a totally unsanctioned mob 22 years later, acting in excommunication by the Petrine See(which means a ton of soldiers just lost their souls fulfilling God's will, in your opinion), that destabilized the gateway into Europe, which would result in catholic Hungary getting conquered, and central Europe nearly falling to turks, and leaving the greeks way more anti-latin than before.
So, exhibit 2a of people that were ambivalent or pro-Rome getting driven away by catholic actions.
>Ottomans conquer and East begs Rome for help and reunites at Florence. Ottomans take Constantinople and new patriarch denies Florence and the East is conquered by slimes.
So, the city fell, despite the Union of Florence being in effect, with 2 pro-union patriarchs in a row in charge(Gregory III+Athanasius II), and Hagia Sophia doing a liturgy with the Pope in the dypchis, while the anti-uniates left in disgust?
And all of this before these folks would have managed to ratify the Council in a synod back home, which would leave any anti-unionist factions with no legal or canonical leg to stand on?
A defeat which would leave anti-unionists in charge of the Church, with ottoman backing, instead of pro-latins that could have easily spun a successful defense of Constantinopole into a HUGE argument towards the legitimacy of the Union, and a sign of God's providence?
Seems like a way bigger argument against your point, than for it.
So, exhibit 2b of people that were ambivalent or pro-Rome getting driven away by catholic actions.
>Russian patriarchate gets conquered by mongol slimes.
You are mixing your dates.
There was no russian patriarchate at the time.
The mongol conquests happened centuries before(and ruined hungary and parts of Poland), during which both historical evidence, and the roman saint calendar, says the russians considered themselves in communion with both branches of Christendom.
In the meantime, the russians would get driven away from liking Rome by the Northern Crusades and Teutonic madness.
So, exhibit 3 of people that were ambivalent or pro-Rome getting driven away by catholic actions.
>get conquered by jewish communists and destroyed.
Communism hurt and isolated the Eastern Church, but absolutely ruined the Uniate one, leaving them from a significant minority to a footnote.
So, exhibit 4… you know the drill.
>but eventually, most of our fuck-ups would go away!
Benefit of hindsight.
Muslims could invoke the same arguments you do, and continue to do so to this day.
I could delve in a ton of other cases(Chinese rites, etc.) where catholics could have done things differently, or atleast not turn people against them for no good reason.
Providence invokers, be they orthodox(see >>600838 ), catholic, protestant, atheist, or islamist, are just pagan-tier shamans twisting historical narrative to fit their worldview, and got debunked almost 2k years ago by St. Augustine in City of God.