Well, why don't YOU tell me. And then I can give you multiple official pronouncements by past popes to contradict your fantasies.
Here's one now: The Vatican II council suddenly gave authority to administer the bread and wine to laypersons. For the previous 1,900 years, it was the Priest's exclusive role because even though the Primary Sacrificing Priest is Jesus Christ, they believe that Christ utilizes the priest as His servant and representative and He (Christ) fulfills the consecration through him (the priest). It's one of the perks.
< sarc> Before the 1960s, I guess the priests were better athletes than the laity. (Maybe they thought the laity had "bricks" for hands.) But the laity must have trained and improved so they eventually got on the "team." The "team" wants the fumble and turnover rates to be nearly zero. :^)
< /sarc>
What changed? God's Word? (no.) Their vain tradition changed. SOURCE
It's easy to be impressed by the contortions that Catholics make to continue their blasphemy. Just take a look at the link above. While reading, ask, "Where did that come from?" Notice, too, all the Biblical references (footnotes) for the rules and regulations. (Hint: there are none.)
.
So, since I mentioned scripture, I must provide something substantial to support my claim of blasphemy:
(Heb 9:23-28)
Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
Well, why don’t YOU tell me. And then I can give you multiple official pronouncements by past popes to contradict your fantasies.
You are the one asking the question. In trying to come up with an answer, I searched the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is a full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine. I did not find where it says that Catholic doctrine contradicts the idea that “Protestant Christians can be saved and are genuine Christians.”
So you tell me. Where does it say in the Catechism that Protestant Christians cannot be saved and are not geniune Christians?
When I was a young man, we passed the cup during the LITURGY of the EUCHARIST (specifically, the Communion Rite).
Then along came Louis Pasteur's discovery of germs. Eventually the Catholic Church commanded that, in spite of the fact that Christ Himself passed the cup, we could no longer drink from the cup (glass or otherwise.)
The wafer could be distributed as before (but not fumbled). Even though they were practicing only HALF of what they read, they were stopping the plague - so, it's all good.
Was the priest afraid of spreading germs and risking a low turnout at BINGO night?
Did the priest say, "I know it is His actual blood, but now it could be infected? I better wash it out good (with Holy Water) at the end of the Mass." Did he ever ask, "Can Christ's actual blood be the vector for a communicable a disease? I'd better ask the Bishop on his next visit."