<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV>The very earliest records of the liturgy, circa about 150 A.D., indicate that when the priest distributed Communion to each person, he said, "The body of Christ." The person then said, "Amen."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The current rite of the Mass re-instated this liturgical practice.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>By the way, the Council of Trent was not the first ecumenical council to speak on the reception of BOTH the body AND blood under either <SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">species</SPAN> of bread OR wine. The Council of Constance, on June 15, 1415, declared in part:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"...(A)lthough this sacrament was received by the faithful under both kinds in the early church, nevertheless later it was received under both kinds only by those confecting it, and by the laity only under the form of bread. For it should be very firmly believed, and in no way doubted, that the whole body and blood of Christ are truly contained under both the form of bread and the form of wine." </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#0000ff size=3><FONT color=#007f40 size=4 face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><STRONG><EM>Art Kelly</EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #006600; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><FONT size=2><STRONG>Turris Fortis Mihi Deus</STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV></FONT></STRONG></DIV><BR>--- On <B>Mon, 6/27/11, Stuart D. Gathman <I><stuart@bmsi.com></I></B> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><BR>From: Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com><BR>Subject: Re: [Apologetics] If the whole Christ is present under both species of the Eucharist, why do we say "The Body of Christ" and "The Blood of Christ"?<BR>To: "Dianne Dawson" <rcdianne@yahoo.com><BR>Cc: "Apologetics Group" <apologetics@gathman.org><BR>Date: Monday, June 27, 2011, 6:40 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>On Mon, 27 Jun 2011, Dianne Dawson wrote:<BR><BR>> <A href="http://newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/06/if-whole-christ-is-present-under-both.html" target=_blank>http://newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/06/if-whole-christ-is-present-under-both.html</A><BR>> If the whole Christ is present under both species of the Eucharist, why do we<BR>> say "The Body of Christ" and "The Blood of Christ"?<BR><BR>Simpleminded Protestant answer: because Jesus said "This is My Body"<BR>and "This is My Blood".<BR><BR>--<BR> Stuart D. Gathman <<A href="http://us.mc659.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=stuart@bmsi.com" ymailto="mailto:stuart@bmsi.com">stuart@bmsi.com</A>><BR> Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154<BR>"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for<BR>a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from
here?" commercial.<BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Apologetics mailing list<BR><A href="http://us.mc659.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Apologetics@gathman.org" ymailto="mailto:Apologetics@gathman.org">Apologetics@gathman.org</A><BR><A href="http://bmsi.com/mailman/listinfo/apologetics" target=_blank>http://bmsi.com/mailman/listinfo/apologetics</A><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table>