I think some of the language and terms used in the decrees were very western which scandalized some people, that's my impression of it.

But mostly it's Decree 16 and the assertion that infants are damned if unbaptized. Most EO don't seem to literally believe this, and say (fairly) that there's nuance and that Decree 16 can be addressed by a broader understanding, but that the claim probably shouldn't have been made so strongly.

It was an effort to encourage people to baptize their infants, which is very noble, but the way it was worded causes some scandal, so I used it as an example. No ill intent meant, just an example of how a Synod/Council can speak truth in a way that isn't perfectly prudent.