Hi, I am wondering, since many of you go to TLM masses,
whether connected to the NO or not, does the priest
ALWAYS offer Communion in both forms ?

Exactly when did it become the teaching of the Church
that both species are not required ?

The NO parish I belong to just recently got a new pastor
who did away with the Cup. Hardly anyone at all was receiving
it for fear of germs and sickness. I am not pleased by this.

My older relatives who went to Mass before Vatican II
regularly said that the parish they went to did not offer
the Cup to the lay people.

Experiences ?

There's an anathema (perhaps in the Council of Trent) about "if anyone believes that the whole Christ is not present under either Species, or that both Forms need to be received by the Faithful..."

Something to that effect.

The protestants came up with this idea, that to "properly commemorate" the Last Supper -- for a commemoration is all a church service is -- all present must partake of BOTH species.

But we're Catholics, not protestants.

Being able to receive under both Species is one of the privileges of the priesthood.

In fact, if a young man is asked by his bishop, "Why do you want to be a priest" and he answers, "I want to be able to receive the Blood of Christ as well at Holy Communion" it is to be considered a legitimate motivation for aspiring to the priesthood.

I read that in one of the many Trad books on the Catholic priesthood.

Do you mean that they did not offer the cup to the people before Vatican 2?  If so, that was the required discipline of the Church.

Yes, and to be sure I just asked her if they offered the Cup even at
any Masses at all such as Christmas, Easter, Holy Thursday, etc,
and she said no, never. This was in the 1940s and 50s in Rhode Island.

'[On the octave of Pentecost (Trinity Sunday, the day around 5,000 people received Baptism), at the first holy Sacrifice of the Mass, after receiving her Son in the Blessed Sacrament, at the hands of St. Peter] She [Blessed Mary] remained in a trance, elevated from the floor; but the holy angels shielded Her somewhat from view according to her own wish, in order that the attention of those present might not be unduly attracted by the divine effects apparent in Her.  The disciples continued to distribute holy Communion, first to the disciples and then to the others who had been believers before the Ascension.  

But of the five thousand newly baptized only one thousand received Communion on that day; because not all were entirely prepared or furnished with the insight and attention required for receiving the Lord in this great sacrament and mystery of the Altar.  With regard to the manner of Communion in that day, the Apostles observed the distinction of giving to the most holy Mother and to the one hundred and twenty, upon whom the Holy Ghost had come, both species, of bread and wine; but the recently baptized partook only of the species of bread.  But this difference was not made because the new faithful were less worthy of the one species than of the other; but because the Apostles knew, that in either one of the species they received the same Object in its entirety, namely the sacramental God; and that there was no precept, and likewise no necessity that each one receive both species.  They considered, that there would be great danger of irreverence and other very grave inconveniences to permit the multitude to partake of the species of the blood, while this was not to be feared of the Communion of the few, who then partook of them at that time.  

I have been made to understand, that, for all those who were not consecrating or celebrating, the practice of communicating only the specie obtained from the very beginning of the Church.  Although some, that were not priests, for some time partook of both species; yet, as soon as the Church increased and spread over the whole world, she being guided by the Holy Ghost, very wisely ordained, that laymen and those not celebrating Mass should communicate only in the specie of the sacred body; and that it was to pertain to those who were celebrating these divine mysteries, to partake of both species.  Such is the secure practice of the Roman Catholic Church.'

Ven. Mary of Agreda, Mystical City of God, Vol. IV, 113

'[On the octave of Pentecost (Trinity Sunday, the day around 5,000 people received Baptism), at the first holy Sacrifice of the Mass, after receiving her Son in the Blessed Sacrament, at the hands of St. Peter] She [Blessed Mary] remained in a trance, elevated from the floor; but the holy angels shielded Her somewhat from view according to her own wish, in order that the attention of those present might not be unduly attracted by the divine effects apparent in Her.  The disciples continued to distribute holy Communion, first to the disciples and then to the others who had been believers before the Ascension.  

But of the five thousand newly baptized only one thousand received Communion on that day; because not all were entirely prepared or furnished with the insight and attention required for receiving the Lord in this great sacrament and mystery of the Altar.  With regard to the manner of Communion in that day, the Apostles observed the distinction of giving to the most holy Mother and to the one hundred and twenty, upon whom the Holy Ghost had come, both species, of bread and wine; but the recently baptized partook only of the species of bread.  But this difference was not made because the new faithful were less worthy of the one species than of the other; but because the Apostles knew, that in either one of the species they received the same Object in its entirety, namely the sacramental God; and that there was no precept, and likewise no necessity that each one receive both species. They considered, that there would be great danger of irreverence and other very grave inconveniences to permit the multitude to partake of the species of the blood, while this was not to be feared of the Communion of the few, who then partook of them at that time.  

I have been made to understand, that, for all those who were not consecrating or celebrating, the practice of communicating only the specie obtained from the very beginning of the Church.  Although some, that were not priests, for some time partook of both species; yet, as soon as the Church increased and spread over the whole world, she being guided by the Holy Ghost, very wisely ordained, that laymen and those not celebrating Mass should communicate only in the specie of the sacred body; and that it was to pertain to those who were celebrating these divine mysteries, to partake of both species.  Such is the secure practice of the Roman Catholic Church.'

Ven. Mary of Agreda, Mystical City of God, Vol. IV, 113

Isn't just a tad "convenient" that Venerable Mary of Agreda had this locution or vision concerning the life of the Blessed Mother mere decades after Trent made the declaration ? Why is she not a Saint ?
Why does Mary of Agreda sound like a lawyer ?
I am aware of the Hussites and Calixtines who insisted upon both species
and the lengths to which the Church combatted them, not only in that regard
but others, and that the Church calls it a formal heresy of Utraquism to insist
upon both species to the laity.
Regardless, my only reason for starting this thread was to ask if the
Eucharist is presented to the laity today in Resistance masses in the Cup
at all or not.

You shouldn't make insinuations like that, for your own sake.

what are you referring to ? I am not required to believe in the
validity of the revelations of Mary of Agreda.

So, snowball, are you suggesting that the TLM is wrong not to offer the Cup?

No Traditional Mass ever has or ever will give communion under both species.   If it was given, it would no longer be a Traditional Mass.

has ever ? will never ? are we certain of that ?

there is no formal prohibition of both species.