[dangus]

>> I have seen priests holding cookies instead of hosts. <<

I call BS. Given the way images of liturgical abuses get traded around like baseball cards, there’s no way on Earth that wouldn’t become instant legend.

I could imagine there’s a picture of a priest holding a cookie. Who doesn’t eat cookies. I could imagine there’s even one being held as if it were a host: sometimes a priest might demonstrate deliberately with something that couldn’t possible be confused with the real thing, no matter how ignorant Americans are. But I call BS on the claim that a cookie was ever used in a mass.

>> I have seen Catholic videos which call it a chip. <<

That’s quite a backpedal, going from “potato chip” to “chip.” “Chip” is describing its physical properties, noting that it need not be whole. “Potato chip” specifically makes an explicit denotation of a thoroughly profane substance (using profane in the classic sense), with connotations of slovenliness, gluttony, etc.

And that video is beneath contempt, mixing actual outrages which wild, unfounded assertions. If that’s where you are getting your information, forget it.

[kosta50]

But I call BS on the claim that a cookie was ever used in a mass.

Behold second picture from above.

[kosta50]

That’s quite a backpedal, going from “potato chip” to “chip.”

Review the Catholic links I postedhere

It identified the "host" as a "Dorito chip." Again, the source is Catholic.

[kosta50]

And that video is beneath contempt, mixing actual outrages which wild, unfounded assertions. If that’s where you are getting your information, forget it.

I understand your outrage, but you have not offered a single argument to the contrary. They quote from documents and show evidence to back up their claims. They specify which prayers have been removed. All you do is offer outrage!

You are just going to have to do more than just say "forget it" if you want to be credible. I repeat: that source is Catholic.