If you mean...

What century and exact date did the Church stop distributing Holy Communion under both species, then I would have to say, "I have no idea...but I'm sure someone will answer soon!"

bhokuto, I drink the Blood of Christ every day at mass. The church did not stop reception of the cup of the Blood of Christ. Individual priest in parishes where the Blood is not well received stop the reception in both forms of Bread and Wine, Body and Blood. The catechism outlines the doctrine of faith defining Christ as present in either form of Body or Blood and so a person attending mass may receive in either form to be considered as having received Christ if exclusively drinking the Blood or exclusively eating the Body.

Many churches in the Eastern Rite in communion with the Vatican use a method of coummunion where the Bread is cubed then soaked in Blood/Wine. The Priest spoons the Body from the Blood then places the cubed Body onto the tongue of the Catholic faithful.

Also, some Catholic Priests dip the Body into the Blood/Wine slightly then place the Body onto the tongue.

You may ask your parish priest to allow you the great honor of receiving the Body and the Blood at once. If he denies your request ask the Bishop to intercede for you or find another parish that will commune both the Body and Blood [usually the Eastern Rites almost always commune both the Body and the Blood].

The reason the communion has sometimes been reduced to only the Body of Christ is because of the faint-heartedness of some who are concerned that germs may be transferred through drinking from the common cup of Blood. The church has accomodated the faint-hearted. I am not faint nor do I believe you are faint so why not seek a parish that will allow you to eat from the Bread of Life then drink deeply from the cup of Eternal Salvation?

 In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Amen

Bobo, Christ didn't dip the bread into the wine. In response to the apostle who asked," who will betray you Jesus?", He answered, "the one who dips his bread in the bowl will betray me.{paraphrase}

In Christ,

David

Remember, the Sun is always shining!

TrentForever

     I came across something recently that may apply.  Originally, both the bread and wine were distributed, but as St. Paul indicated in his

chastisement of the Corinthians (about getting drunk) there were dangers and abuses, people like Simon Magus trying to buy the "secrets"

of the faith... etc...  But the interesting point I came accross is that the

wine was not regularly used up to the time of the Manichean heresy, but because the manichees refjected wine as impure and could be identified by their refusal to drink it when they tried to infiltrate the Eucharistic service for their hidden agendas, the wine did come into gernerally widespread use in areas where the heresy appeared.  This continued for quite a while until hygienic and other reasons caused the Church to distribute the bread alone and that somewhat in a limited manner due to other exigencies. ,Then, the precursors of the Reformation (13-14th Cent.) complained

because these early reformers protested that the Catholic Church was not fulfilling the teaching of Christ as given in the New Testament where bread AND wine are clearly mentioned.  The Catholic Church, in order to emphasize that after the epiclesis and the words of institution -SPOKEN

BY AN ORDAINED PRIEST- THE BODY, BLOOD, SOUL, AND DIVINITY WERE TRULY, REALLY, SUBSTANTIAL;LY, PRESENT UNDER THE APPEARANCE OF BREAD AND WINE and in each and every particle of each species,. whether the bread or the wine.  To prove the point the

Church generally distributed only the consecrated bread to the laity and

it is still valid to receive only the bread.  Vat II reintroduced the chalice to the laity.   Hope this helps....

yanastrovich - the honor of tincicture ( the intermixing of blood and body by dipping) is reserved to the priest within the roman right.  It would be inapproriate for a lay person to ask for it and a sin for the priest to grant the request, because the priest would be breaking his vow of obediance.

Bobo, The Church does not reason that the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity is the Bread alone! The Church teaching is that Jesus is present Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in both the Precious Blood and the Eucharist. Hypostasis is a term used to help describe the mystery that is the Real Presence. One meaning of the word is the substance or essential nature of an individual.

Now, back to the Chalice that contains the Precious Blood of Jesus. It is not unreasonable to understand that there is a great potential for disease to spread from making contact with the Chalice after an inflicted person has made contact with the same. If a person had a cold and drank from a bottle of water, wiped the brim and offered you a drink, would it be prudent for you to accept? The water itself may not be contaminated but the vessel may be.

Also, I will not state that therein lies the main reason for withholding the Chalice from the faithful. Wealth of the parish, especially in the medieval and subsequent ages leading to today, geographical region as well as an individual pastors desire to do so form a large part of the decision making that was given back to the parishes post Vatican II.

The Church does not see a supposed "dipping of the bread into the wine" at the Last Supper as a reason to withhold the Precious Blood, those reasons have already been addressed at various synods throughout history. You would do well to make yourself aware of these proceedings as it concerns the topic you are discussing.

The Church follows precisely Jesus' commandment to, "do this in remembrance of me." When Jesus fed the five thousand as a precursor to the Eucharistic banquet that He would provide after His death and resurrection did He provide something to drink? Jesus' Blood is present in the consecrated host and when you eat His Body you do indeed drink His Blood. This is the Church teaching. This is the faith of our fathers.

In closing, the popes and magesterium of today and years past do not err, it is you who errs, Bobo, in choosing to be ignorant to the teachings available and your wanton refusal to accept the same.

In Christ,

Remember, the Sun is always shining!

I realize the wikipedia is not the best of sources but here is a link expaling the question asked fairly well.

It has refrences can anyone find some more first hand sources that are online?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communion_under_both_kinds

according to the article communion under both speices was still in use but fallin out of favor byt 1249 and seems to have completely dissapered by 1400 or so .  It was restored in full by the second vatican concil.

fishman - welcome back. Are you willing to state emphatically that sharing a vessel to drink the Blood of Christ from can in no way spread a communicable disease?

I would not state so emphatically without statistican proof, I do believe such to be true in faith , not withstanding some stronger evidence I might encounter.

Do you know of a documented case were a desease was transmitted through the chalice.

The alchol alone should kill the common cold and most bacteria, but I really don't have enough science to back that up , nor to I know of not study that was ever done.  It is simply my suspicion.

I'm certainly open to whatever evidence for the topic might be avialbe that I have not yet encountered.

fishman - I know of no documented case, just relying on common sense. I am not stating you can get ill from the Blood but from the residue of disease that may be left on the Chalice.

Remember, the Sun is always shining!

fishman- on the allergy, you would have the reaction and suffer its consequences unless there was a miracle...see Michael's post

Remember, the Sun is always shining!