Post

There's no doubt that communion in the hand was the norm for the first 7 centuries, but it does need to be said that the posture and form it took was different than we see now (profoundly bowed, hands very close to face, passing the Host over the eyes, no picking up of the Host, but bringing your mouth to your cupped hands), as mentioned in writings by St. Cyril and St John Damascene and illustrated in the Rossano Gospels. I'm a woman, so it's pertinent to note that women circa 500 would receive on their veiled hands and touch the Host with only their mouths. Receiving in the hand isn't intrinsically irreverent, but interior disposition and exterior posture to remind yourself of that disposition is what brings it to reverence. If that's done, I'm more neutral to manual reception.

I'm of the belief that widespread communion in the hand (as well as the usual culprits like poor catechesis, etc) has led to the dropoff of belief in the True Presence, something that Paul VI very explicitly warned about when he started issuing the indults. Actually, he warned about care for particles as well now that I reread the stipulations. Because I personally don't know where to draw the line (much like the question of when life begins in the secular abortion debate), at the risk of being scrupulous even barely visible particles is too much risk for me so I do the easy thing and avoid it entirely.

To very briefly address your last paragraph, taking a deep dive into the rubrics of the TLM did a better job of convincing me that the priests actually knew the importance of what they do at the altar... as my catechist made clear, "if he didn't understand what he was doing the first three times he made the sign of the Cross over the species, certainly the next 15 will drive the point home." Eucharistic reverence is in my top 10 passion topics, and I'm much better convinced it's happening at the TLM. If that's not your experience, I'm not gonna be mad about it.

You're a pleasure to discuss with, you know.