Criticism of the Latin Mass at the National Shrine in D.C

[Brendan]

Yes, Father Z is big on the notion of silently praying along as “active participation,” and there’s definitely some truth to it. Mostly there is not, though, and I would rather that people argued against the notion of active participation in everything than try to claim that sitting and reading is somehow active. .

Here is Pope John Paul II on the subject. He was one of the key figures at Vat II, so one would presume that he understands what the Council meant

Yet active participation does not preclude the active passivity of silence, stillness and listening: indeed, it demands it. Worshippers are not passive, for instance, when listening to the readings or the homily, or following the prayers of the celebrant, and the chants and music of the liturgy. These are experiences of silence and stillness, but they are in their own way profoundly active. In a culture which neither favors nor fosters meditative quiet, the art of interior listening is learned only with difficulty. Here we see how the liturgy, though it must always be properly inculturated, must also be counter-cultural.

Address to the US bishops on their ad lima visit - 1998

Pope Benedict also has very similar thought in his book “The Spirit of the Liturgy”, specifically in chapter “The Body and the Liturgy” notes that the ‘actuosa participatio’ address an act. That act in which we participate (participatio) is the Actio of the Mass itself, the offering of the Body and Blood of Christ. So the actio to which we are participating is the silent offering of our whole selves along with the offering the priest makes.

So, according to Pope Benedict, the ‘active participation’ that Vatican II calls us to do is the silent offering of ourselves in conjunction with the sacrifice of the priest.

So yes, being silent at Mass is really the most complete active participation we can do, at least according to some pretty good sources