This first paragraph drives the concern of many liturgists. It’s still ignored in many places:
That more perfect form of participation in the Mass whereby the faithful, after the priest’s communion, receive the Lord’s body from the same sacrifice, is strongly commended.
We have the germ of the notion of communion under both forms laid down here:
The dogmatic principles which were laid down by the Council of Trent remaining intact (Session XXI, July 16, 1562. Doctrine on Communion under Both Species, chap. 1-3: Condlium Tridentinum. Diariorum, Actorum, Epistolarum, Tractatuum nova collectio ed. Soc. Goerresiana, tome VIII (Freiburg in Br., 1919), 698-699.), communion under both kinds may be granted when the bishops think fit, not only to clerics and religious, but also to the laity, in cases to be determined by the Apostolic See, as, for instance, to the newly ordained in the Mass of their sacred ordination, to the newly professed in the Mass of their religious profession, and to the newly baptized in the Mass which follows their baptism.
The former point if often overlooked in parishes. Maybe people don’t think it would have all that great an impact, but it serves to underscore receiving Communion as a ritual or devotional act distinct from the celebration of Mass. And on the latter, you wouldn’t expect me to disagree, would you?