[quote="L_piperatus, post:12, topic:281343"]
Yes, with the EO, you have the perennial problem of who is in communion with whom.
For example, ROCOR (Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia) is currently in communion with other Old Calendar EO Churches and groups, such as the Moscow Patriarchate (MP), the Serb EOC, the monks on Mount Athos, and small (out-of-mainstream) groups of Greek, Romanian, and Bulgarian bishops who adhere to the Old Calendar. But ROCOR is not in communion with New Calendar Churches such as the Greek and Antiochian, or the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople. The MP is currently in communion with the EP, but it actually broke communion with the EP during the 1990s, because the EP granted autocephaly to the Estonian EOC, against the MP's protests. The OCA (Orthodox Church in America) is recognized by the MP, but not by the EP. The Ukrainian EOC is split in two, with one Patriarch recognized by Constantinople and not by Moscow, as well as a Metropolitan loyal to the Moscow Patriarch. Obviously, the autocephalous Patriarch of Kyiv is out of communion with Moscow. Same situation, same split in Estonia - two EOC out of communion with each other, one loyal to Moscow and one who was granted autonomy by Constantinople against Moscow's protests. In Japan, the situation is the reverse - the EP believes the Japanese EOC should stay under Constantinople's authority, but Moscow granted autonomy to a Japanese EOC, which is disputed by Constantinople, and this autonomous Japanese EOC is out of communion with the EP.
It's quite a mess, just keeping track who's out of communion with whom, and who has lately broken communion with whom. This can't possibly be the unity Jesus Christ prayed for on the day of the Last Supper.
You are wrong. ROCOR is an autonomous Church within the Russian Orthodox Church, and is therefore in communion with the churches on the revised julian calendar. The OCA situation is one of canonical irregularity, where the MP recognizes its autocephaly, while the EP does not. Regardless, the OCA remains in communion with both. The Ukrainian situation is simple. There is one autonomous Church (under the Russian Orthodox Church) there which is recognized by Orthodoxy. The EP does not recognize the so-called Ukrainian Patriarchate, nor is it in communion with it. The Estonian situation similarly involves canonical irregularity, with two separate jurisdictions. Regardless, the parent Churches, the MP and EP, remain in communion, and therefore the two Estonian jurisdictions exist in a state of communion. Similarly with the Japanese situation, the autonomous Japanese Church is in communion with the EP, because it is part of the Russian Orthodox Church, which is in communion with the EP. Autonomous churches are not free to break communion with Churches the parent Church are in communion with.
Dishonest polemics like this do not help dialogue or understanding. One could just as easily say that the Catholic Church is "fractured" between its liberal, conservative and traditionalist movements (some of which have left communion with Rome), but this is of course an unfair criticism of Catholicism (it should be clear why this is so). Can you not at the very least be courteous and not engage in such dishonest attacks on Orthodoxy?