text: A few questions:
  1.  Is it 'clericalism' when a pope, bloated by the arrogance of Vatican One,  believes he has the authority to impose a liturgy (='work of the people') of his own devising on the entire church?  Would the patriarch of Constantinople ever presume to do that with the Liturgy of S John Chrysostom?
  2.  Conceding that some of the relatively few Catholics who actually still go to Mass actually like the Novus Ordo, is it right to deny to other Catholics the opportunity to worhip according to the older rite, if that is what they prefer?  Because that's exactly what Fr Ruff wants to do.
  3.  Why is St John's Abbey still open? (See  http://www.behindthepinecurtain.com/wordpress/welcome/ )
  4. Exactly what evidence should we require to determine whether the "reforms" that followed Vatican II were a success or a failure?  Does the massive defection of most Catholics tell us anything about the Novus Ordo?  Is it time, 50 years later, to have an honest appraisal of that council?