Confederate,
I never said the communion in the hand invalidates the mass, but that the non-emergency, non-necessary indult is a Sacrilege.  Such sacrileges are so intertwined with the new liturgy that it makes the new mass immoral.  Much like having a water gun fight with holy water doesn’t de-sanctify the blessing, yet this activity is an abominable sin.  So, the practice of communion in the hand does not invalidate the mass, but it desecrates a holy activity, and (it is one of many actions which) makes the new mass immoral to attend.
.
If a person approaches to receive communion in the hand, with no emergency situation, then the priest/deacon who participates and the layman commit a Sacrilege.  It’s an indult, not the norm.  Just like it’s an indult to go to mass on Sat night.  Just like it’s an indult to eat meat on Friday.  Unless there’s an extreme reason, the law says it’s not allowed.  All the modernist priests/bishops forget to instruct the faithful about the “fine print” and the faithful go along with whatever novelty happens without question so the sacrileges continue.  But they are sacrileges, make no mistake. 

Yes, communion in the hand can’t affect the canon/consecration of the mass.  2 separate parts of the mass there.  
.
Since communion in the hand is an irreligious abomination, it’s easy to say that it makes the mass immoral, therefore it’s not a holy and pleasing rite.  I think it’s a stretch to argue that this practice makes the mass invalid but being that it philosophically leads one to believe that communion is a “supper” or a “meal”, one could argue that.  But such Protestant ideals are more heinously implied in the offertory and canon prayers (since the ideas of sacrifice were expunged).   Whether or not this practice is invalidating is immaterial, as there are plenty of other invalidating aspects. .

Communion in the hand is certainly immoral and illegal, so the novus ordo must be avoided for these simple reasons (because to attend public sacrileges and publicly illicit rites are gravely sinful) even if EVERY OTHER part of the mass was valid.  

What does Sean have to say about this?

After being thoroughly pummeled, Sean took has bat and ball and went back home.

Is this topic part of the new book?  Seems to me on the topic of the  new mass’ inherent goodness, that Sean agrees with both the old sspx and the new-sspx, so not sure how this topic is part of the new-sspx changes.