Why not receive communion under both species?
Why isn't the Eucharist given under both species as was the custom in the beginning of Christianity? The present way does not agree with the Lord's words: "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood will have life eternal...?"
Maybe we are afraid that drops of the Precious Blood will fall on the ground. But, it is greater profanity to receive it in a selfish and greedy heart, which has no place for the Lord.
Don't see any bitterness in my letter, but a mere desire to accomplish the Lord's words authentically.
Your letter could be answered in a few words. But, I prefer to give some useful explanations. I do not see any bitterness in your question but just a concern about living your faith better.
You are right when you say that, in the first centuries of Christianity, the Eucharist was commonly received under both species.
In the Eastern rites, this custom has been retained. In the Catholic Church of Latin rite, the custom was modified during the Middle Ages for practical, hygienic reasons, that is to prevent the danger of spreading contagious diseases, etc. This was not a total novelty. Communion under the sole species of the bread had always been practiced in particular cases.
According to faith, the Lord Jesus is totally present in each of the species, be it the Host or the Holy Blood. You know Saint Thomas of Aquinas, this great Catholic theologian of the 13th century? Didn't he compose a famous hymn (Pange Lingua, or Sing My Tongue the Savior's Glory) that we still sing in honor of the Blessed Sacrament? This hymn recalls the fact that God is present in the Host, even in the smallest crumb of it.
"His flesh nourishes, His blood quenches thirst, but under each of the species the total Christ is received."
In our case, the external way of uniting with Christ was modified, but Communion as such remained untouched. The pastors of the Church thought it wise to modify the way of giving Communion for practical reasons. The underlying doctrine and the essentials of the sacrament were not altered in the least. What was modified was only the way of doing things, that is the "discipline", not the "doctrine".
Today, since Vatican II, in order to better symbolize the eating and the drinking, Communion under both species is allowed and practiced at least on special occasions. But, that does not make Communion more real than it was before Vatican II. It only makes the mystic symbol more transparent.
Of course, the living Church must adapt to a constantly changing world. She changes her way of doing things, but she never alters the Lord's teaching. One may prefer such and such manner. Let us not fight over that! Let us rather peacefully rely on the decision of the Church's pastors!
Some think that their pastors change too many things, others not enough. Tastes and mentalities differ according to places.
With regard to Communion under one or two species, everyone's preference must be respected. Whatever the way of receiving Communion, the essential thing is union with the Lord in love and joy.