Yes, there are orthodox interpretations of these very words. The point is that usually the modernist means something else entirely by them. And in Humani Generis, just because Pius XII said a certain view of evolution was not necessarily contradictory to the Faith, does not mean he endorsed it. Also, the modernists employs this term frequently to all kinds of situations within the Church (liturgy) and means something else totally by it--as if it was "common knowledge" that everything evolves.
The Latin word for "active" is not used in Sacrosactum Concilium. I doubt it was used in the Pius X encyclical you quote either. Regardless, "active" participation for some people can mean silently meditating or comtemplating the Sacred Mysteries OR simply contemplating Christ's life through use of the rosary.
As for love, the modernist usually means "a good feeling or sentiment," not St. Thomas's definition of charity.
Yes, but Derksen specifically singles out the use of evolution in reference to the origin of species as "Modernist" - Pius XII certainly would not have allowed belief in it if that were so. (Evolution of doctrine is different, and condemned by St. Pius X)
The Latin word for "active" is not used in Sacrosactum Concilium.
What do you think it is?
14. Valde cupit Mater Ecclesia ut fideles universi ad plenam illam, consciam atque actuosam liturgicarum celebrationum participationem ducantur,
actuosus , a, um, adj. [actus], full of activity, very active (with the access. idea of zeal, subjective impulse; diff. from industrius, which refers more to the means by which an object is attained, Doed. Syn. 1, 123) ... (Lewis & Short, A Latin Dictionary)
Regardless, "active" participation for some people can mean silently meditating or comtemplating the Sacred Mysteries OR simply contemplating Christ's life through use of the rosary.
Pius XI says in Divini Cultus:
In order that the faithful may more actively participate in divine worship, let them be made once more to sing the Gregorian Chant, so far as it belongs to them to take part in it. It is most important that when the faithful assist at the sacred ceremonies, or when pious sodalities take part with the clergy in a procession, they should not be merely detached and silent spectators, but, filled with a deep sense of the beauty of the Liturgy, they should sing alternately with the clergy or the choir, as it is prescribed. If this is done, then it will no longer happen that the people either make no answer at all to the public prayers -- whether in the language of the Liturgy or in the vernacular -- or at best utter the responses in a low and subdued manner.
This appears to me to indicate that actively participating in the Mass implies singing the chant when proper, and that not giving the responses is not desirable.
The imprecision of language is a serious problem.
One could legitimately theorize that dropping Latin as a standard was a very good move, for those who wished to "migrate" definitions around the game-board...