To: Bigg Red
I still don't understand why we now receive the Eucharist in both forms? Why is this necessary? This was not done for hundreds of years. Why now? Communion under both kinds was the common way of reception in the early Church (along with reception of the Body of Christ in the hand).
It is not "necessary"; one is free to receive under one kind only.
21 posted on
05/23/2004 3:38:32 PM PDT by
sinkspur
(Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
To: sinkspur
...one is free to receive under one kind only.
&&
I realize that, but what is the point now? Was the Mass dimished for all those hundreds of years that only one form was offered?
22 posted on
05/24/2004 11:10:30 AM PDT by
Bigg Red
(Never again trust Democrats with national security!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson