Here is what the Catholic Encyclopedia has to say in its article about Pope Gelasius:
Code:
"A stanch upholder of the old traditions, Gelasius nevertheless [knew](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08673a.htm) when to make exceptions or modifications, such as his [decree](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04670a.htm) [obliging](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11189a.htm) the reception of the [Holy Eucharist](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05572c.htm) under both kinds. This was done as the only effective way of detecting the [Manichæans](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09591a.htm), who, though present in [Rome](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13164a.htm) in large numbers, sought to divert attention from their hidden propaganda by feigning [Catholicism](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm). As they held wine to be impure and essentially [sinful](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14004b.htm), they would refuse the [chalice](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03561a.htm) and thus be recognized. Later, with the change of conditions, the old normal method of receiving [Holy Communion](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07402a.htm) under the form of bread alone returned into vogue."
930 Thus, the holy Synod itself, instructed by the Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and piety, [Isa. 11:2]. and following the judgment and custom of the Church itself, declares and teaches that laymen and clerics not officiating are bound by no divine law to receive the sacrament of the Eucharist under both species, and that without injury to the faith there can be no doubt at all that communion under either species suffices for them for salvation.
I do not understand how the holy Synod decided that their wisdom and understanding was above Jesus Christs teachings? Was this not a command that Christ gave his Apostles to do as I say? How can men of faith even with the holy spirit with-in them over ride a command by Jesus Christ? Are they trying to tell us that Jesus Christ changed his mind about the how we are to receive him when we partake in the Eucharist?
Okay, I guess it would be useful to distinguish between
doctrine and
discipline.
The
doctrine is that Jesus is fully present (Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity) in every fragment of either eucharistic species. It’s not as though we have “half” of Jesus over here in the ciborium and the other “half” in the chalice. Jesus is not a jigsaw puzzle that we separate and put back together again. Jesus is Jesus. No assembly required.
Whether the Church has recommended that lay people receive one or both species at different times is a
discipline and that can change. Often, it changes in response to heresy. As notacat pointed us to, Pope Gelasius required Communion under both species as a way to counteract the heretical Manicheans who thought that drinking alcohol was evil. Requiring everyone to drink from the cup forced their hand in either renouncing their Manichean heresy or embracing the fact that they weren’t following the teachings of the Church.
At Trent, they emphasized that it was only necessary to receive
one species because of the heresy of some of the Reformers that one needed to receive
both species in order to “fully” receive Jesus.
As that threat has largely passed, following Vatican II, we see a rise in the reception of both species because it has a fuller sign value and most people are no longer arguing that both species are necessary. Also, people had begun to think that lay people
couldn’t receive the cup. So, again, the Church emphasizes receiving both species in order to correct a misunderstanding.
I should point out, too, that, through it all, the priest celebrating Mass
always receives both species. What I’m talking about above in regards to discipline pertains only to the laity.
). I appreciate your openness and your willingness to ask questions.