Just let the theologians take care of it." Yeah. Just like at Florence.
Why is it like Florence? And why should I leave it to anyone to take care of. I am a member of the Church and it is my job as well as all the other faithful to be aware of what is being discussed and intelligently have a view on it. Isolated Eastern Orthodox are communed in my Church. They are communed because they have the same faith. I know that Oriental Orthodox are communed in many Eastern Orthodox Churches. Even in ROCOR.
Why...because anyone who actually takes the time to investigate what folk actually believe, instead of just reading rubbish off orthodoxinfo, comes to discover that the OO do not teach any confusion of humanity and Divinity in Christ, and on the other side it becomes clear that EO's generally do not separate Christ into two beings.
THAT in essence is the substance of the controversy between us. Since in reality it proves that there is no difference of opinion between us concerning whether Christ is fully and completely human and Divine then the matter of communion on the ground becomes an issue for local bishops not some grand council that will never take place.
Do you not think that the rejection of fellowship with those who DO believe rightly about Christ is not sin? How can I not spend my time in seeking to work for reconciliation and understanding? After 1500 years of being isolated from each other the EO and OO have substantially the same faith and practice. Is that not a miracle?
Do you forget that when St Cyril and John of Antioch were reconciled it was just by a letter of agreement. I can find no-where that John of Antioch had to agree that Ephesus I was the best thing since sliced bread. In fact it is clear that though many Antiocheans were willing, just about, to anthematise Nestorius they were not at all willing to concede that Ephesus I had been fair to them.
But St Cyril concentrated on what was most important. He asked of folk - do you anathematise Nestorius - and if they did then that was enough. He even refrained from anathematising Theodore in person because he tried hard to win the Antiocheans by concession as far as it were permissible.
Yet today there seems to be an entirely un-patristic concentration on minutiae. Constant criticism of patriarchs for this and that. Very little effort from the 'True Church' types to actually win anyone by charity and permissible concessions. Thank God that such views are not universal on both sides, though there are still a few Oriental Orthodox who consider the EO to be Nestorians.
Despite the difficulties and polemics during the controversial period it was actually much EASIER for groups to be reconciled because they did not take the same line at all that so called Traditionalists do in the 21st century. They looked then for agreement on the substantial matters.
I am quite sure that even if the OO signed up to the latter councils in some manner there would still be some True Churchers going off into schism because the OO didn't accept them in quite the same way, or used a different paradigm so that their agreement meant that they disagreed really, or just weren't repentant enough.
Yuck! These are just games and we don't have time to play them. Speak against inter-communion if you wish but engage manfully in the efforts for reconciliation based on the fulness of truth, don't carp from the sidelines.
I am reminded of the Scripture:
"They are like unto children that sit in the marketplace, and call one to another; who say, We piped unto you, and ye did not dance; we wailed, and ye did not weep. For John the Baptist is come eating no bread nor drinking wine; and ye say, He hath a demon. The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold, a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners!"