Since the promulgation of the Novus Ordo (the ordinary form of the Mass), it has become common for the Precious Blood (consecrated wine) to be distributed along with the Sacred Body (consecrated bread) of Our Lord. In the Tridentine Mass (the extraordinary form of the Mass), however, only the Sacred Body of Our Lord is distributed in communion. This liturgical difference begs the question of why there was a change at all, and if there are any theological implications for receiving under just one or both kinds.
The Mass is the re-presentation of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. In the words of the Catechism, “The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice,” and when celebrated at Mass it is “offered in an unbloody manner” (CCC 1367). So then, when we see the Mass, we are in a real way seeing the self-same sacrifice of Our Lord in front of us. When we partake of the elements of Communion, we are partaking in the very same elements that the apostles and every subsequent generation of Christians partook of down to the present day.
If this is the case, then that means that at every Mass, the priest is doing what Christ Himself did at the Last Supper. In one of his expositions on the Psalms, St. Augustine goes so far as to say that at the Last Supper, “Christ was being carried in his own hands when he handed over his body.” If then, in the Eucharist, we are doing what Our Lord did at the Last Supper, then why do we not always receive both Our Lord’s Sacred Body and Blood?
According to the Council of Trent, in the Eucharist, “the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained” (CCC 1374). This means that whether we partake of the consecrated bread, wine, or both, we receive the entirety of the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ. To claim that you must receive under both forms to receive the fullness of the Eucharist would be the 15th-century heresy with the funny name of utraquism.
The reason why it’s important to say that Christ is fully present under both forms of the Eucharist is that to say otherwise would break Christ into various parts. When we receive the Eucharist, we are receiving the entirety of the Risen Lord, not just this or that part of Him. This is why we can go to the Eucharist in adoration, because if the Sacred Host did not house the full divinity of Jesus Christ, then it would be idolatrous. This is why, according to Pope St. Paul VI, “The Catholic Church has always offered and still offers to the sacrament of the Eucharist the cult of adoration” (CCC 1378). However we receive the Eucharist, we can be confident that we are receiving the fullness of God in the flesh.
Why then has the liturgy changed in how the Eucharist is distributed? Prior to the 12th century, both the priest and the laity normally received under both kinds, but due to an increasing focus on the desire to prevent any desecration of the Precious Blood, reception of the Eucharist under the form of consecrated wine by the laity was done away with in the Western Church. This lasted until the reforms of the liturgy in Vatican II and the promulgation of the Novus Ordo by Pope St. Paul VI. One reason for the change to reallow the laity to receive from the chalice was that it helped better imitate the original Eucharist celebrated at the Last Supper where the apostles received both the consecrated bread and wine.
There are legitimate differences of opinion and liturgical variation on this topic. Just as there are those who have a preference for receiving the Eucharist on the tongue or the hand, so too there are reasons for choosing to receive it under just one kind or both. Some feel that reception under one kind can be more reverential and respectful, while others find a greater symbolic value in receiving under both. Ultimately, Our Lord is present in either way you receive, so do so in the way which more inclines you to a worshipful spirit.
James Pritchett is a Sophomore studying History and Classics with a deep affinity for his native land, the Golden State. Despite being the most recent lover of Catholicism on the Torch staff, he is the C101 editor and his main interests consist of reading Dostoyevsky, playing devil’s advocate, and correcting people on niche theological heresies.
- The Pope, Fatima, and World Youth Day - February 26, 2024
- Fr. José Guibert on St. Francis Xavier - November 29, 2023
- Where is Faith When I Doubt? - October 30, 2023