“Christ in present fully in either consecrated species, so long as either species remains in appearance, respectively, apparent bread or apparent wine”
Let’s see here: Before the ‘species’ is consecrated Christ is not present body, blood, soul and divinity but after consecration he is but only “so long as one of the two species remains what it appears to be, the entire Christ is present.”
He’s not present, he is present and then he’s not present as the apparent bread, which is body, blood, soul, divinity is eaten and changes appearance. Same for the apparent wine.
“This is why a communion in bread alone or in wine alone is possible, and in fact for many centuries was the norm.”
Amongst whom? Certainly not among those who followed Jesus’ instructions given at that last memorial meal, not amongst those who were going to be part of that “new covenant”, so amongst whom was this counterfeit communion acceptable?
The only place where Christ’s blood was offered was in heaven. (Hebrews 9:12)
I can see why you say it’s not something to think about
Correct. The appearance is here to indicate the real Eucharistic presence specifically of Christ, apart from the ordinary omnipresence of God.
The only place where Christ’s blood was offered was in heaven. (Hebrews 9:12)
"By his own blood, entered once into the holies, having obtained eternal redemption." Indeed. Ther Eucharist is not a separate sacrifice but that very sacrifice described in Hebrews 9, applied to us personally.