Orthodox Eucharist, Valid But Illict? Huh?

[Jesuita]

Catholics can't receive Communion in an Orthodox Divine Liturgy. I don't do it and I don't challenge that we can't, I just don't really understand the "why" part. Previously, I had always assumed it had to do with the fact that the Eucharistic celebration is an expression of unity, of doctrinal/dogmatic agreement and submission.

But today it occurred to me that since the Orthodox Churches have apostolic succession, it should logically lead to a valid Holy Orders, which should logically lead to a valid priesthood, .....valid sacraments. Valid, but illicit. For the Roman Church to declare something licit, it obviously has to be done according to the specifications of the Roman Church.

What I don't understand is just what exactly, other than what I previously understood and noted above, is such a no-no about receiving Orthodox Eucharist. Valid Eucharist = true Body and Blood of Christ, but what? Forgive me for sounding like a snot ball (which, being 15, I can totally be ) but is the Precious Body and Blood of the Orthodox "not as good as" ours? I mean, there is only one Jesus and if we are all receiving the same Jesus aren't we in Communion with each other whether or not we want to be?

Sorry if I have misunderstood the terms valid and licit, I think I might have.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Although Jesus is present when the Eucharist is valid but illicit, do you think He's happy to be involved in an illicit act? Do you think it pleases Him when a Catholic, perfectly capable of receiving Communion in the Catholic Church, receives instead in the Orthodox Church?

I guess that's the way I look at it.

God bless,

Micah