OK, so let me talk more specifically of the Orthodox and Oriental churches. Like the protestants they were part of the One True Church until they broke off from the Catholic Church. When they separated from the Catholic Church by not recognizing the Primacy of the Supreme Pontiff, then they lost their unity with the Catholic Church and, in consequence, the protection of the Holy Spirit that belongs only to the One, True Church.
If you want to get technical it was Cardinal Humbert, not even the Pope himself, who wrote, signed and laid that stinking pile of papal bull on the high altar of Aghia Sophia and stormed out, and it was the weeping Orthodox Deacon who chased him out the door of the Cathedral begging him to take it back! And all of this because the Ecumenical Patriarch kept putting off their meeting, and the papal legates felt that they were being treated with disrespect. And the poor last Orthodox Pope died before ever even hearing the news of this, and then guess what?! Cardinal Humbert was elected Pope. So, if we’re getting technical, it was Rome who broke communion and fomented the Schism. The east simply reacted in kind after learning that the Pope would not let go of his new found doctrine of double procession. Along, with many other misuses that had snuck up in the Roman Church’s traditions.
Although the leaders of these churches had Apostolic Succession prior to their breaking up with Rome, I cannot say the same of succeeding leaders after the schism (since their Orders will no longer be valid). I think that these churches had the protection of the Holy Spirit up to, but not after the schism.
**If you deny the validity of our Orthodox Orders on the grounds that the Orthodox reject that the Pope of Rome has Universal Jurisdiction and infallibility in and of himself when speaking ex-cathedra, then you deny that we can even be saved. This alone should get you banned from this sight, since I get flagged for simply defending Orthodoxy here. You have no understanding, obviously, of the historical problems that lead to the west considering the Pope “Supreme Pontiff” and infallible. During that time Rome was the center of the world. The Roman Empire was the Empire of most of the world. We all know that Constantine moved the capitol of the Empire to Constantinople, but the See of Rome kept its original Primacy of Honor. Then Rome fell. Having no emperor, and a language barrier between the latin speaking west and the greek speaking east, the Church of the West could only look in one direction for leadership, to the Pope of Rome, the Patriarch of the west. At this time he began to assume for himself titles such as “Ponitfex Maximus” (originally a title meant for the Emperor). This, along with such fraudulent documents as the “Donation of Constantine” began to lead the Pope to heap on himself more and more power, mostly out of political necessity. This was the root of the schism. (Many details left out) **
Although I look favorably at our Orthodox and Oriental brothers, and although they were keeping the faith of the early centuries, the truth is that the Church is to be for all time, and must clarify and define the Faith for all generations. I am not familiar with the details of Orthodox and Oriental Faith, and what their attitude is toward certain defined teachings of the Catholic Church such as, for example, the Immaculate Conception of Mary. The Catholic Church has defined it as a dogma, but I do not know if they accept it as an article of faith, or whether they look at it only as a pious belief. Does anybody know?
Also, you forgot the Assyrian Church of the East in your list.