Changes In Divine Office From 1960 Breviary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catechist54
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catechist54

Guest
Hello. I recently began praying portions of the Divine Office from the 1960 Breviarium Romanum, mostly because it contains so many more Psalms and traditional prayers which have been stricken from the current Liturgy of the Hours. I also must admit that I found many of the translations of Scripture in the current LOTH to be less spiritually satisfying than the Biblical versions I tend to favor, Douay-Rheims and RSV-CE. Since I’m a layman and not canonically bound to recite the Office, I used to pray Morning and Evening Prayer from the modern LOTH and just substitute RSV-CE or DR psalms and canticles for those contained in the current texts. I even would pray the Office of Readings a few times a month, although you lose continuity if you don’t do it daily. In any event, I was excited to find the online resources I’m now using to pray the pre-Conciliar Office.

One thing I’ve noticed, however, is the source of my question today: In the texts provided by the excellent website Divinum Officium and the companion iOS App, Breviarium Meum, in Lauds and Vespers just before the closing prayers the notation “Weekday Intercessions {omit}” appears. This is, of course, the point at which the current LOTH text of Morning and Evening Prayer includes the Intercessions.

I haven’t been able to find anything on the Divinum Officium website to further explain this. Does anyone know (a) if there is a set of daily intercessions that was included in the 1960 Breviary, (b) if so, why are they omitted and where can I find them, and (c) if not, why the reference to weekday intercessions appears in the 1960 text?

I hope this makes sense. Thanks and blessings!
 
I have had to go the other way: from the Divine Office matching the old Mass to the LOTH (due to a community I am associated with)… and I never recall running across intercessory prayer in any format of that version.

I agree with your observations and do miss the old breviary so much …that’s great, keep it up!

I assume you assist the Mass in the EF form?
 
There are certain times of year or certain feasts where a standard formula of intercessions are said. Most of the time these are omitted.

The www.divinumofficium.com website groups everything into “chunks” (A psalm, a Canticle, the Magnificat, an antiphon, a Collect, a hymn, a prayer, etc…) and, according to the programmed ordo, these chunks are simply arranged into the appropriate order for the day’s office. One “chunk” are these intercessions. When any “chunk” is omitted, the site notes this in small print. This is helpful to people who pray from a printed book but use the site as a guide because they are cued whether or not to flip to those intercessions in their books.

As to praying so many more psalms, there are only 3 more Psalms in the 1960BR compared to the 1970LH (and some individual verses are removed from the LH psalter). Beyond that, I would venture to say that you were praying more of the psalms from the Bible with the complete 1970LH **unless **you take the time to pray Matins in the 1960BR. Matins is too much of a time commitment for most laymen, so they skip it. If so, they are not praying all 150 Psalms per week.

As for the Collects and stricken prayers, I would say that, of all things with the reform of the liturgy, the loss of the Collects is the most regrettable. That, however, was done in conjunction with the reform of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, so there is little chance of recovering those Collects.

Personally, I flip-flop between offices. I have the English LotH, the Latin LotH, the 1960BR, and the 1963 Monastic Diurnal. The Latin LotH gets the most use.
 
This thread is already 4 hours old and OraLabora hasn’t shown up yet? Hope he’s ok;)
 
Windmill said:
This thread is already 4 hours old and OraLabora hasn’t shown up yet? Hope he’s ok;)
Click to expand...
Still alive, but I’m actually not all that familiar with all the arcane details of the 1960 Roman Breviary since I’ve neer used it. 😛

I do however have a monastic breviary of the same era.
 
There’s a breviary out there that’s a better translation than CBP Christian Prayer – St. John’s Abbey “Book of Prayer for Personal Use” published in 1975. It’s hard to find, but if you can get your hands on one, it’s light-years easier to use that any of the others.
 
I assume you assist the Mass in the EF form? [/QUOTE said:
That’s next on my list. It’s a long drive from where I live but I’ve been working up to it. I am on the RCIA team at my OF parish and we have class on Sunday mornings, so it’s a scheduling problem.

Thanks for your reply!
Click to expand...
 
Thanks also to Windmill, Magdalen2013 and Ora Labora for your replies. 🙂
 
FWIW, the only days you will wind up saying those Preces feriales/weekday intercessions are Wednesdays and Fridays of Lent/Passiontide and Ember days. So the noteworthy thing is not when they are omitted, but when they are actually said (as Windmill pointed out, it is just the construction of the site that causes the note about their omission).

Previous versions of the Office had imposed the recitation of preces much more frequently (indeed, the very name of preces feriales indicates that they were once said on every day that was not a feast, i.e. on ferias), but the general thrust of breviary reform through the centuries has been to pare things back for the sake of a secular clergy overburdened by an Office designed for monastic use.
 
Thanks, Andreas. That’s very helpful.

Is “secular” really the right term to describe any priest? It means non-ecclesial or non-clerical. I guess “non-monastic” is really what you’re getting at, correct?

Thanks again and God bless everyone. 🙂
 
Catechist54 said:
Thanks, Andreas. That’s very helpful.

Is “secular” really the right term to describe any priest? It means non-ecclesial or non-clerical. I guess “non-monastic” is really what you’re getting at, correct?

Thanks again and God bless everyone. 🙂
Click to expand...
In canon law, a secular priest is a priest not attached to a religious community. Usually, this means a diocesan priest. Secular has other cannotations to us, but that is the proper term.
 
Secular means “of the world” as opposed to a cloister. Secular clergy are typically assigned to parishes. Religious priests are members of religious orders. Some of these orders are cloistered, some are not. The name “religious” has been held onto by orders to differentiate their priests from secular priests who are usually tied to a diocese.
 
Windmill said:
Secular means “of the world” as opposed to a cloister. Secular clergy are typically assigned to parishes. Religious priests are members of religious orders. Some of these orders are cloistered, some are not. The name “religious” has been held onto by orders to differentiate their priests from secular priests who are usually tied to a diocese.
Click to expand...
Not all religious institutes are orders.

And being “tied to a diocese” is called being “incardinated in a diocese”.
 
Thanks once more for the clarifications, and greetings Brother Knights!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top