Receiving Communion, both bread and wine

Printer-friendly versionSend to friend

Q: At the Last Supper Jesus consecrated the bread and wine into his body and blood, and told us to take  and eat and drink. Why are we not compelled to receive both species at Communion?

Perhaps a bit of history will help put it in perspective for you. For most of the history of the Church (about 12 centuries) Communion under both species was standard. Much spiritual and theological significance was placed on the symbolism of receiving the Lord under the form of both bread and wine.

Even during this time, however, Christians understood that one did not need to receive both forms in order to receive the living Lord. It was never assumed that one received only the “body”  in the bread and then the “blood.”

Communion under one species, therefore, was not at all uncommon from the beginning. The Eucharist was taken to the sick at home, for example, and no one doubted that the individual received the whole sacrament. Infants and young children and the sick were often given Communion only in the form of wine.
Receiving only the consecrated wine is not forbidden. It is done often, in fact, for example when Communion is given to patients who cannot swallow even a small part of the host.