283. Bread alone vs. bread and wine
283. BREAD ALONE VS. BREAD AND WINE
What justifies the Church in offering the laity only the bread and not the wine in the Eucharist?
On the part of the sacrament it is proper for both the Body and the Blood to be received, since the perfection of the sacrament lies in both, and consequently, since it is the priest’s duty both to consecrate and to finish the sacrament, he ought on no account to receive Christ’s Body without the Blood.
But on the part of the recipient the greatest reverence and caution are called for, lest anything happen which is unworthy of so great a mystery. Now this could especially happen in receiving the Blood, for if uncautiously handled it might easily be split. And because the multitude of the Christian people increased, in which there are old, young and children, some of whom have not enough discretion to observe due caution in using this sacrament, on that account it is a prudent custom in some churches for the Blood not to be offered to the reception of the people, but to be received by the priest alone.
The perfection of this sacrament does not lie in the use of the faithful but in the consecration of the matter. And hence there is nothing derogatory to the perfection of this sacrament if the people receive the Body without the Blood, provided that the priest who consecrates receive both (III,80,12).
The first answer to the question is that it is not bread, nor is it bread and wine, that is received in the Eucharist. It is the Body and Blood of Christ under the appearances (or “species”) of bread and wine.
The justification of the practice of many Catholic churches in not offering the laity the Precious Blood but only the Body is that it is a matter of practical prudence, not doctrine, just as with the last question, the question about frequent or daily Communion. The doctrine says that the whole Christ is received wholly under both species; therefore one who receives Christ only under the species of bread receives no less than one who also receives Him also under the species of wine.
The reason for the priest receiving under both species is that only thus is the sacramental symbol complete. The lay recipient may also find that his devotion is increased by this more complete symbolism if he receives under both species, and this may be a reason for doing so. But it is not necessarily or automatically better for devotion. Sometimes it is the rarity of a thing that sparks our devotion by sparking our interest, and this interest may lessen once the rarity ceases.
The reason for the laity not receiving the Blood is logistical and practical: the danger of spillage. If we fully understand what (or rather Who) is really there under the appearance of wine, this will be not merely a matter of mere impropriety vs. worldly prudence but a matter of sacrilege vs. worship.
The priest, however, must always receive the Blood as well as the Body, since he consecrated both elements. Therefore he is always under strictest obligation to be extremely careful with these most precious things in the world. A drop from the consecrated chalice is not a drop of wine. It is a drop of God’s own Blood. A crumb that falls off the consecrated bread is not a crumb of bread but a particle of God’s own Body. For anyone, priest or laity, to treat these things in a common way is a very serious lack of faith as well as of love and respect. For this reason, it is contrary to canon law to use ordinary bread, which often does flake off crumbs. This misuse, which occurs in some Catholic parishes, does not make the sacrament invalid and the consecration ineffective, however. It is precisely because it does not make the consecration invalid, precisely because it is still Christ Himself Who is there, that the Church forbids the use of ordinary bread, except under special circumstances and permission.
These issues may seem technical and legal minutiae about which the Church is being “picky”, but they are not that at all, as is clear to anyone who understands the “big picture”, the holiest thing the world has ever seen, the very Body of God incarnate.