Monday, 16 March 2015


More rubbish on the NLM about participatio actuosa. I wonder if the author realises that the term was coined by Pius X, pope of the liturgy, in that Italian motu proprio Tra le sollecitudini? The later interpretation by conservative liturgical scholars is nothing but a cop out. Pius X actually meant "active participation," in the sense that people do things with their hands and voices; not some nebulous, Aristotelian idea of contemplation at a low Mass, which is elitist, clericalist nonsense and completely aliturgical. At the Lugano liturgical conference in 1953, "active participation" was on the agenda and such things as vernacular readings were proposed. The scholars there praised the new Paschal Vigil and called upon the pope for further reforms. Cardinal Ottaviani, another hero of Traddieland, was present at the conference and celebrated Mass facing the people. All a decade before the traditional 1962 missal!

Benedict XVI, "Doctor of the Liturgy?" Is this the very same who wore scarlet on Palm Sunday? He of the aliturgical "altar arrangement?" I attended an Orthodox Pontifical liturgy on Sunday and witnessed for the first time in my life the reception of the Metropolitan at the west doors of the cathedral. He was received by the clergy, gave the kiss of peace to his suffragan and was vested. I was moved, so beautiful it was, thinking to myself: "this is Liturgy; this is how to greet the LORD's Day!" In all the years I spent in Traddieland I never once saw something so simple yet magnificent. But Cardinal Burke celebrates an illicit votive Mass at the wrong time of the day according to a bastardised rite, preaches an egregiously bad sermon which just repeats the hackneyed old platitudes about "roman pontiff," and "holy sacrifice," and that's "Tradition?" For the sake of your eternal souls, stop spreading these constant lies! If you're not interested in Tradition, please call yourselves something else.


  1. Yeah they had a real doozy a few weeks back about how the TLM involves _more_ participation - because you have to work harder to keep up with what's going on! I prefer it to the NO but I haven't seen such straining to demonstrate that a word means its opposite since Bill Clinton.

  2. Here is another classic straining at the meaning of plain words.

    ‘The title word "new" is rather misleading today. it refers to the new code of rubrics of 1960 for the traditional Roman Breviary.’

    Thus a heavily revised Breviary becomes traditional with a little straining of words and a dash of credulity. Well, why not? There is a mythology to maintain after all.

    1. I used to own that very book! I bought it from Southwell Books, when they were still in business, concurrent with a handsomely bound 1961 Breviary.

      Since the liturgical books of Paul VI were published by the infallible magisterial authority of the Roman pontiff, I marvel that this fringe, partisan group still maintains its delusion that the reforms called for by Sacrosanctum Concilium were somehow jettisoned in favour of modernism. Hence all the apologetics about reform of the reform, and the article penned by this "Dr" Unpronounceable-Name.

      The "Novus Ordo," with all its beauty, is here to stay. Tough luck!

    2. One might also note that the 1960 rubrics were novel enough to warrant the change in the book's title; the first edition of Fr. Hausmann's book was simply called "Learning the Breviary" (Benziger 1932).