Midst the delicacy and ingenuity of his language we find what Pope Benedict XVI offers us.
“Our handling of the Eucharist can only arouse concern” writes Pope Benedict XVI in his essay ‘ The Church and the Scandal of Sexual Abuse:’

“The Second Vatican Council was rightly focused on returning this Sacrament of the Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ, of the Presence of His Person, of His Passion, Death and Resurrection, to the center of Christian life and to being strong.

The very existence of the Church is undermined.

In part, this has really come about, and we should be most grateful to the Lord for it, and yet a rather different attitude is prevalent.

What predominates is not a new reverence for the presence of Christ’s death and resurrection, but a way of dealing with Him … that destroys the greatness of His mystery.”

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI

Is the “very existence” of the Church threatened by downplaying the existence of her mystery and her supernatural aspect?

Don Federico Botoli, whose book, ‘La Distribuzione della Comunione sulla mano’ “The Distribution of Communion in the Hand”, which he wrote for his doctoral dissertation in Canon Law, was interviewed by the website One Peter Five about this matter:
The key document relative to the distribution of Holy Communion in the hand is the instruction of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship ‘Memoriale Domini’ (May 29, 1969), issued at the direction of Paul VI; can you tell us how this document originated and what directives it contained?

“The document originated because in the years immediately following Vatican II, the practice of receiving Communion in the hand became widespread in many countries; This was obviously a liturgical abuse, which put its roots down in those countries where there was already doctrinal problems regarding the Holy Eucharist: Belgium, Holland, France, and Germany; The Holy See, not succeeding in stopping this abuse, decided to consult all the bishops on this question. The decision of Paul VI already allows us to understand the importance of the argument. I say this, because some would maintain that this whole question is only of marginal importance.

OP5: And what resulted from this consultation?

DFB: The majority of bishops expressed their opposition to the introduction of this practice.  M.D. acknowledged the outcome of the consultation and confirmed that the universal norm for receiving Communion is precisely that of receiving it directly on the tongue. At the same time, (Memoriale Dei) consented that the Bishops conference of those places in which the abuse was already occurring would be able to request an indult for Communion in the hand, if the bishops were able to achieve a vote of a two thirds majority in favor of requesting it.

OP5: M.D. thus confirmed that the two ways of receiving the Eucharist are not on the same level?

Absolutely; In my book, I examine the entire text of the instruction, which when read, clearly is understood to say that the traditional and universal discipline of the Church is that of Communion on the tongue, because “it is based on a centuries-old tradition.It expresses and signifies the reverent respect of the faithful towards the Holy Eucharist Furthermore “it avoids the danger of profaning the Eucharistic species Communion on the tongue is recommended in Memorial Domine. Communion on the hand is permitted, provided that certain precautions are observed such as checking to see if any fragments of the Host remain in the palm of the hand.”

Have we ever seen the priest or the Eucharistic Minister checking for fragments of the host in the palm of the hands of the recipient of the Host?

St. Thomas Aquinas writes: “out of reverence towards this Sacrament, nothing touches it but what is consecrated.Tthe corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this Sacrament. Hence, it is not lawful for anyone else to touch it except from necessity, for instance, if if were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency.” (Summa Theologiae, III, 8