What I meant was "Why do scholarly Catholic converts never hear about Orthodoxy?"
I have no doubts that there are many well-read Orthodox converts.
Have in mind that I believe that Orthodox Christianity is "the Way" the only true succession of Apostolic teachings...Here I am presenting "both side" with hope to seeing reasons of the mentioned individuals can provide an answer to the OP. Bolding is done by me.
Here is one example of chosing Roman Catholicism:Cardinal John Henry Newmanhttp://credo.stormloader.com/Ecumenic/newmaneo.htm
In his remarkable volume "Newman to Converts: An Existential Ecclesiology", Real View Books, 2001, Fr. Stanley Jaki has provided key excerpts from Newman’s voluminous private correspondence where one finds the Oratorian, answering the queries of many troubled Anglicans. (Pages from this volume follow unless otherwise indicated). Some
sought to find justification for their Branch Theory of the Church by an appeal to the not insignificant numbers of Greek and Russian Orthodox Christians or were tempted to join the separated Eastern Orthodox communion as the "true Church".
Whatever their numbers, Newman replied to one correspondent, they were not universal, and thus like the ancient Donatists confined to North Africa, were not Catholic
The Church was the Kingdom of God on earth, and a unique visible polity ruled by the successors of the Apostles. "If the Church be a visible kingdom, where is such a kingdom, visible and yet spiritual, all over the earth except the Catholic Church?" (p. 238) The Catholic Church was "a body, and next a body in many lands... at once one and Catholic."
(p.238) Moreover, the relative stagnancy of the separated Eastern Churches suffering under oppression was a factor that could not be avoided: "The ‘kingdom of heaven’ is a polity, which implies political life, activity, history, progress, development, warfare, etc. All this the Roman Church has- the Greek has not- and the more it is known, the less it is seen to have." Moreover, the enslaved Church under the Czars had fallen victim to "the Erastian heresy",
and the absence of a center of unity among the Easterners
negated the visible unity demanded of the Mystical Body of Christ in the world : "What centre is there in the Greek Church? What real intercommunion between Russia and Syria? A sympathy, nothing else." (pp. 215-216)
Fr. Jaki relates how to the same correspondent "Newman recalled his own path to conversion: ‘I was converted by the manifest and intimate identity of the modern Roman Catholic Church with the Antenicene and Nicene Church- to which I thought the present Greek Church absurdly contrary."
Here areexamples of chosing Orthodox Christianity:Fr. Gabriel Bungehttp://journeytoorthodoxy.com/2011/01/26/a-catholic-hermit-converted-to-orthodoxy/#axzz1IkCaBp00
Q: Why did you decide to adopt it? One can love Orthodoxy with all one’s heart and stay within the traditional Catholicism. There are many such examples in the West.
A: Yes, many people who are drawn to Orthodoxy stay within the Catholic Church. And this is normal. In the majority of Western cathedrals there are Orthodox icons. In Italy, there are professional schools of icon painting taught by Russian specialists and others. More and more believers in Europe are interested today in Byzantine hymns. Even the traditionalists of the Catholic Church have been discovering Byzantine singing. Of course they do not use them during the divine service in the church, but outside of the church, for example, at concerts. Orthodox literature gets translated into all European languages, and the books are published in the major Catholic publishing houses. In short, in the West they really have not lost the taste for all authentic, Christian, that the Eastern tradition has preserved. But, alas, it changes nothing in real life of people and society on the whole. The interest in Orthodoxy is more cultural. And those wretched people like me who have a spiritual interest in Orthodoxy, are left in the minority. We are like weirdos; we are seldom understood.
Q: As a theologian, you have often spoken on the problem of West and East’s separation. Can we say that your conversion to Orthodoxy is the result of your meditation on this topic?
A: When I was in Greece and started turning towards Eastern Christianity, I began to perceive the schism between the East and the West very painfully.
It stopped being an abstract theory or a plot in a Church history book, but rather something that was directly affecting my spiritual life. This is why the conversion to Orthodoxy started looking like a very logical step. In youth, I sincerely hoped that the union of the Western and the Eastern Christianity was possible.
I was waiting for it to happen with all my heart. And I had some reasons to believe in it...But as I was growing older and learning some things deeper, I stopped believing in the possibility of the reconciliation of two Churches in terms of the divine services and institutional unity. What was I to do? I could only go on searching for this unity on my own, individually, restoring it in one separate soul, mine. I could not do more. I just followed my conscience, and came to Orthodoxy.Fr Placide Deseille http://avowofconversation.wordpress.com/2008/12/21/placide-deseille-on-twentieth-century-catholicism/
While the rapid disintegration of twentieth century Catholicism was troubling, Father Placide came to realise that it had deeper roots and was part of a certain logic of Catholicism itself.This led me to reflect on the religious history of the West, and especially on the profound changes that one can identify in all areas between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries. In this period one sees changes in the institutions of the Church (notably the understanding of the papacy in the Gregorian reform), the sacramental rites (abandoning baptism by emersion, communion under two species, the deprecative formula for absolution etc.), doctrine (introduction of the Filioque in the Symbol, development of the scholastic method in theology). At the same time one saw the appearance of a new religious art that was naturalistic and broke with the canons of traditional Christian art that were elaborated during the course of the patristic period.
ps. There is no need to wait for me...Please post examples as you please and hopefully there will be some consistency in reasoning of choosing one over the other...