I have watched the Youtube videos.  They are interesting, but too brief.  Father C. is using them to sell the book.  I would prefer if he would use Youtube to tell the whole story, rather than giving some information and telling the viewer to buy the book.

I assume that Vladimir is referring to Michael Davies' 3-volume work under the general title of "Liturgical Revolution".

I possess both that set and Fr Cekada's recent book "Work of Human Hands: A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI".  There is no comparison.  

If you are interested in its subject then I consider Fr Cekada's book, to be well worth getting.  I look upon it as a fuller treatment of what has come to be known as "The Ottaviani Intervention".

It won't offend non-sedevacantists.

Twenty-five thousand selected Italian Catholic youth gathered around Pope Benedict XV in SI. Peter's for a communal celebration of the Holy Sacrifice on September 5, 1921. It was what might be called an incipient Dialog Mass of orderly but thunderous proportions, in which the whole group recited the Credo and even the Pater Noster with the august celebrant.

That Mass was one of the last great demonstrations of the pontificate, as the Pope's untimely death befell on January 22, 1922. Achille Ratti became Pius XI on February 11, and one of the first big  demonstrations of the new pontificate was an even more spectacular Dialog Mass in the same basilica, in connection. with the men's nocturnal adoration session, during the night of May 26-27, 1922, as part of the XXVI International Eucharistic Congress, with delegates from the whole Catholic world. Father (later Bishop) d'Herbigny, in a stirring eyewitness account, says in part: "Of a sudden, led by the priests, the multitude of the faithful recite with the Holy Father the Gloria, the Credo, Sanctus, Pater and Confiteor. What a spectacle before man and God, this low Mass of the Pope celebrated when the night was at quiet peace.... The endless distribution of the Bread of Life by the Pope himself, and by Bishops of every nation, race, and color ... this Eucharistic Tryst of Christendom at the tomb of the Sainted Peter, was it not a spectacle surpassing in grandeur the most pretentious manifestations of the ages that have marched before us?" "At least twice to my knowledge," states Dom Lebbe; "His Holiness Pope Pius XI himself celebrated Mass in this way. The first time was in the basilica of St. Peter . . . the second time was with the French pilgrims, in a chapel of the Vatican, during the Jubilee of 1925."

But meanwhile the Sacred Congregation of Rites was hard put to reply to all the requests it was getting for direction. Even in the year 1921, the Bishop of Mantua was sent a written reply on February 18, and it speaks of having made "like answers to similar petitions"; the Bishop of Pesaro’s turn came on February 25, Cardinal-Archbishop Mercier's on April 27, Abbot (later Cardinal-Archbishop) Schuster's on May 7, and the Bishop of Metz on May 27. None of these replies was given official publication by the Holy See, but (as far as the texts are known) they are unanimous in remitting the decision as to the permissibility of Dialog Mass to the local bishop, while deprecating it on the principle of the Apostle, that things licit in themselves are not always expedient because of some difficulty.

The Sacred Congregation of Rites, then on August 4, 1922, published the decree given here in English translation:
 
Doubts concerning the body of the faithful assisting at Mass:

May they answer jointly for the server, or read the canon in a loud voice?

The following doubts have been proposed to the Sacred Congregation for a timely answer, namely:

1. May the Congregation, assisting at the Sacrifice, make the responses in unison, instead of the server?

2. Is the practice to be approved, according to which the faithful assisting at Mass read aloud the Secrets, the Canon and the very words of Consecration, all of which except a very few words of the Canon should, according to the rubrics, be read secretly by the priest himself?

Reply: The Sacred Congregation of Rites, having heard the opinion of the Special Commission, and having considered everything carefully, has decided to reply:

To the First question: [The question is remitted] to the Most Reverend Ordinary [for decision] according to this norm. The norm (mens) is: Things that are in themselves licit are not always expedient, owing to the difficulties which may easily arise, as in this case, especially on account of the disturbances which the priests who celebrate and the people who assist may experience, to the disadvantage of the sacred Action and of the rubrics. Hence, it is expedient to retain the common usage, as we have several times replied in similar cases.

To the Second Question: [It is answered] in the negative; nor can the faithful who assist at Mass be permitted something that is forbidden by the rubrics to the priest celebrating, who says the words of the Canon secretly, for the sake of greater reverence towards the sacred Mysteries, and to enhance the veneration, modesty and devotion of the faithful: hence, the proposed practice is to be reprobated as an abuse, and if it has been introduced anywhere it is to be entirely removed.

And it is thus replied, declared and decreed. - August 4, 1922.

I just want to know what it means that when I clicked on the first link the video had 666 views?   All kidding aside, I spoke with a religious I'll not name who has written numerous books and has read, Work of Human Hands.  This person's opinion of the book is that it is sloppily written, many parts that should have seen the red pen for repair were not.  It was said that the book was difficult to follow.  It was hard for the person to give a review to the information in the book because of the way it was written.  Canute, when you're not sure if a book is worth the time and money, pop over to Amazon and read the reviews. Although it appears that you already own, Work of Human Hands, it's a good way to not spend your money on a bad book.  I've skimmed it and wasn't impressed, but if you're enjoying it, that's fine too. :reading:

I just want to know what it means that when I clicked on the first link the video had 666 views?   All kidding aside, I spoke with a religious I'll not name who has written numerous books and has read, Work of Human Hands.  This person's opinion of the book is that it is sloppily written, many parts that should have seen the red pen for repair were not.  It was said that the book was difficult to follow.  It was hard for the person to give a review to the information in the book because of the way it was written.  Canute, when you're not sure if a book is worth the time and money, pop over to Amazon and read the reviews. Although it appears that you already own, Work of Human Hands, it's a good way to not spend your money on a bad book.  I've skimmed it and wasn't impressed, but if you're enjoying it, that's fine too. :reading: