The glass chalice is illicit; no consecration took place. Although I have no doubt (sadly) that the priest involved was an ordained Catholic priest, Rome has never validated let alone authorized such sacrilege.
As for the potato chip comment, you should hang your head in shame. It is one fourth of a round, unleavened communion wafer, as is the Latin tradition since at least the 3rd century.
>> You don’t know much about communism, do you? Only old women could go to churches without being harrassed or accused of counterrevolutionary activities. It was a totalitarian society, wiht gulgas and worse <<
Oh, yes, I know much of how the Soviets stole Catholic properties to give to the Orthodox, and how the Orthodox still bitterly cling to such stolen property, and how they rush into the arms of the Soviet Union once again, so long as Putin’s puppets promise to forbid evangelization, and how the state church eagerly cheers on the neo-Soviet siezure of missionary’s bibles. As even FReepers have told me, “better Red than Roman.”
That's all you can say? The question is what is a glass chalice doing in a Catholic church, and why are the sheep not saying anything, but keep coming back for more? How many clown Masses does one have to have to continue coming to the same church?
And yes, pictures are worth a thousand words. That's why the Catholic Church is now removing them from the Internet. We are trying to bury the truth, aren't we? Gone are the pictures of bare-breasted native dancers jiggling in front of the cardinals and the pope , and other throught-provoking evidence of the similar kind. Who allowed that and why did the sheep keep coming back for more?
Why would the East want to be associated with such a "church" where its supreme pontiff and vicar of Christ, and what not, kisses the Koran? And the sheep keep coming back in blind obedience without the KGB forcing them or threatening them, or exiling them, or killing them. All on their own.
And why would the Orhtodox want a reunion with a church that doesn't believe what the Orthodox believe, and where everything changes in one generations, only to be reversed with the next pope. What guarantee do we have the West will not pull another 40-years stunt with the next pope?
Why should we believe a church that was abale to drop, in a heartbeat, 1,400 years of its liturgical tradition in exchange for glass chalices, clowns and bare-breasted natiuve dancers, and why should we beileve it will not do it again all in the name of "ecumenism"?
What does the West have to offer the East that is worth considering? You have nothing we wnat or need. Nothing.
Yet it is the West that keeps asking for reunion without even spelling out under what conditions, or what compromises it is wiling to make, or what guarantees it is willing to give that it will not repeat the Vatican-II circus show!
The Latin west really has a lot of gall to be "offended" at the Orhtodox for not running into your arms, and like the sheep, follow whatever the shepherd does with then and to them.
That is debatable. I have seen Catholic videos which call it a chip. I have seen priests holding cookies instead of hosts.
I recommend this video made by Catholics about the Mass and maybe then you will understand why we Orthodox really want to have nothing to do with a church capable of such heresy until and when we can have some guarantees that this will not repeat itself.
Your Church is a Church that broke not only the prohibition of the Councils of the undivided Church not to make changed to conciliar proclamations, but also of your own sacred Council as well.
I think the only ones who should hang their head in shame are on your side of the divide. Enjoy the show.
WHAT ALL CATHOLICS SHOULD KNOW
And a longer version.
You mean like the Catholic Church hung on to stolen property from Constantinople and other orthodox countries for centuries?
For the sake of parity and fraternal equality, maybe we will return them in a few hundred years. Do you think that would be fair?