Eucharistic Unity, Aaron.
If I commune at a non-Orthodox chalice I excommunicate myself by my virtual (actual) acceptance of all that that non-Orthodox church holds. No matter how many "requirements" Deacon Lance says the PNCC fulfills to be Orthodox, they nullify all of it via their intercommunion with a non-Orthodox church.
Which just goes to show that when EO bishops consent to their faithful recieving from the chalice in an OO church it is exactly because they do not consider the OO to be non-Orthodox. And that is the same reason that OO are allowed to commune in most EO churches when there is need.
It happens all over the place. It shows what EO bishops really think, and what OO bishops really think.
MP's communing Copts, Copts communing MP's. Serbians and ROCOR communing Copts and Ethiopians. Antiocheans and Syrians communing each other. Alexandrians communing each other. It is happening all over the world. And is a sign that these bishops do not consider each other to be non-Orthodox.
Of course this means, by the EO logic being applied here that the EO is non-Orthodox, since apart from ROAC all EO are implicated in the network of inter-communion that is taking place. Why I even know of an EO bishop who offered communion to an entire OO congregation when they were in dire need one Pascha when their church was suddenly unavailable. That implicates any bishop who is in communion with him and makes them all non-Orthodox, apparently.
But then what do I know, apparently I'm an 'uber-ecumenist' whatever that means. if it means I put up with defects in EOxy that's true, if it means I put up with heresy then it's a damn lie.
I wonder how determined many of the posters are here and yet they haven't been elevated by their churches to the position of bishops. Yet they seem to consider they know better than all their bishops about everything. Yet another interesting difference between what I learn of the EO here and the OO where in fact bishops are universally respected, certainly in my own Church.