So, is it therefore true to say that Rome was willing to enter into communion with the Chaldeans even though the Chaldeans refuse to 'condemn Nestorius and Theodore... accept the Third Council, the term 'Theotokos,' and the Theopaschite formula
It is not true. When the Chaldeans entered union with Rome, Nestorius and Theodore were struck from the calendar and as being attributed as authors of the 2nd and 3rd Anaphorae, they accepted all the Councils, and accepted use of the term Theotokos. They did not accept the Theopaschite forumla as Rome didn't accept either.
Romes current position on the Theopaschite formula is that if the Trisagion is directed to Christ the clause is acceptable, if it is directed to the Trinity it is unacceptable, so the Latin, Byzantine, Chaldean, and Syro-Malabar Churches do not use it as they consider the Trisagion Trinitarian. The Maronites have reintoduced it and while I am not 100% sure I belive those Catholic Churches descended from the Oriental Orthoodx have reintoduced it.
I know of one chaldean who teaches sunday school in her church. There not neccesarily nestorian at the same time shes not too familiar with the RC feast days pertaining to the Theotokos. When i asked her if she believe in the Immaculate Conception, she never heard of it, and had to check some catechism to find out what it was.
The Chaldean Church has inserted several Latin Feasts into its calendar including that of the Immaculate Conception, one catechist's ignorance isn't really good to go on.
The Chaldean Diocese of San Diego has a nice website:http://www.kaldu.org/index.htm
Fr. Deacon Lance