Diurnal Help

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jacob21
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
OraLabora said:
If they’re using an approved version of the current office they aren’t using the MD but are using one of the approved Benedictine schemas. Schema “A” has the same psalm arrangement as the MD but with several differences in the Office as a whole:
  1. The OT Canticle at Lauds will now be on a 4-week cycle rather than the two week cycle in the MD; the Rule of Saint Benedict specifically states that the OT canticle will be what the current Roman Church uses;
  2. The calendar won’t be the calendar of the MD but will be the modern Benedictine calendar of saints, which is an amalgam of the current Roman calendar with Benedictine saints (and with some saints, such as Saint Benedict on Jul. 11, elevated from memorial to solemnity);
  3. The liturgical year will match the current Roman Church (i.e. Advent, Christmas, OT, Lent, Easter, OT, and not “time after Epiphany” and “time after Pentecost”, no Septuagesima, etc);
  4. Prime is no longer a required hour, and many monasteries have abolished it; if it is abolished, the psalms of Prime need to be redistributed into the other Offices (Tierce, Sext, None, Vigils). There are different schemas “suggested” to do this and this will mean differences from abbey to abbey;
  5. In the current Office, the placement of the hymn at Lauds and Vespers is optional, either after the opening verse or after the responsory.
And lastly they may simply be using one of the other approved Benedictine Schemas (B, C or D), which is totally unlike the MD.
Click to expand...
I would imagine that it’s B,C or D, amico mio. I think:o
  • The Hymn is in the middle of the Office
  • They do have intercessory prayers, though
OraLabora said:
  1. The OT Canticle at Lauds will now be on a 4-week cycle rather than the two week cycle in the MD; the Rule of Saint Benedict specifically states that the OT canticle will be what the current Roman Church uses;
Click to expand...
Where? Not doubting you, I just want to read it. (I read the Rule daily)

Does this mean using the MD is not fully in line with the Church?:eek:😦
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
I would imagine that it’s B,C or D, amico mio. I think:o
  • The Hymn is in the middle of the Office
  • They do have intercessory prayers, though
Where? Not doubting you, I just want to read it. (I read the Rule daily)

Does this mean using the MD is not fully in line with the Church?:eek:😦
Click to expand...
Hmm. B, C and D are nothing like the Monastic Diurnal. Completely different psalm schema. B has all psalms in 1 week, the other two in 2 weeks.

The hymn in the middle is permissible in the above schemas as well as the traditional schema (A).

For the OT canticle, here is the relevant chapter (13):
On weekdays
the Morning Office shall be celebrated as follows.
Let Psalm 66 be said without an antiphon
and somewhat slowly,
as on Sunday,
in order that all may be in time for Psalm 50,
which is to be said with an antiphon.
After that let two other Psalms be said according to custom,
namely:
on Monday Psalms 5 and 35,
on Tuesday Psalms 42 and 56,
on Wednesday Psalms 63 and 64,
on Thursday Psalms 87 and 89,
on Friday Psalms 75 and 91,
and on Saturday Psalm 142 and the canticle from Deuteronomy,
which is to be divided into two sections
each terminated by a “Glory be to the Father.”
**But on the other days let there be a canticle from the Prophets,
each on its own day as chanted by the Roman Church. **
Next follow the Psalms of praise [148-50],
then a lesson of the Apostle to be recited from memory,
the responsory, the Ambrosian hymn [Te Deum], the verse,
the canticle from the Gospel book,
the litany, and so the end.
Click to expand...
 
OraLabora said:
Hmm. B, C and D are nothing like the Monastic Diurnal. Completely different psalm schema. B has all psalms in 1 week, the other two in 2 weeks.

The hymn in the middle is permissible in the above schemas as well as the traditional schema (A).

For the OT canticle, here is the relevant chapter (13):
Click to expand...
Thank you. You could argue that St Benedict meant as chanted by the Roman Church then, ie at the time when he wrote the Rule:D
 
Almost forgot. I know of at least one monastery using the traditional pre-VII office, which would be the MD but in Latin (I believe it is Fontgombault, in the Solesmes Congregation).

I will have to say that the MD is problematic on many points:
  1. what psalm translation is being used? For it to be liturgical it should be an approved translation, or in Latin.
  2. What calendar is being used?
  3. The Liturgical year will be an issue.
The pre-VII offices are meant to be said in Latin, not the vernacular; the post-VII version of the Monastic Office, including Schema A, can be said in the vernacular.

However, this is how I would use the MD “liturgically”, assuming it was using approved psalm translations.

I would use it alongside my 4-volume LOH. I would take everything from LOH except the psalmody. The latter I would take from the MD.

You would then be saying the approved version of Monastic schema “A”.

For memorials and feasts with proper antiphons: most of these are “traditional” saints so would be in the MD with the proper antiphons, in the Propers. For newer saints, for the psalmody, just use the psalmody of the day (for memorials) or commons (for feasts). Take everything else (proper hymns, gospel canticles, readings, intercessions and collects) from LOH.

Of course it depends on whether you want your prayer to be a liturgical act, or just a personal devotion. For the latter, go ahead and use MD straight up as is.

Personally, I just use the 4-volume LOH; I chant the office in Latin, using Les Heures Grégoriennes which is faithful to LOH and has chant notation. When I go to the abbey, I have books to follow along in Schema B which is used there. Schema A (the schema of the MD) is simply too long for me, chanted; otherwise I take up too much time for ora and not enough for labora to satisfy my employer 😃

As we are not monastics but oblates, that is perfectly permissible (even monks with external apostolates, or when traveling, may use LOH instead, legitimately).
 
OraLabora said:
I would use it alongside my 4-volume LOH. I would take everything from LOH except the psalmody. The latter I would take from the MD.
.
Click to expand...
The 4 Volume=the 1 Volume (at least for Lauds and Vespers).

I wish you had posted this before I ordered the MD:(
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
Thank you. You could argue that St Benedict meant as chanted by the Roman Church then, ie at the time when he wrote the Rule:D
Click to expand...
Yep, but the official purveyor of monastic chant books, Solesmes (and for that matter for all of the Roman Church), has taken a flexible interpretation as in “the contemporary Latin Church” and the new Monastic Antiphonary of 2005-2009 has chosen to follow the current Roman Office for the OT canticles, readings, intercessions and collects.

Benedictines are as a lot flexible though (as was the Rule), and therefore monasteries can probably interpret it the way they wish. You’re even flexible as a Benedictine, to be rigid 😉
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
The 4 Volume=the 1 Volume (at least for Lauds and Vespers).

I wish you had posted this before I ordered the MD:(
Click to expand...
No biggie. I doubt there’s any other sources for the Monastic Office in English other than in-house publications at abbeys, so it is still very valuable if you want to pray the Monastic Office.

And like I said nothing wrong with using it as a personal devotion.

I would have posted sooner but I was at a colloquium of the Gregorian Institute of Canada since last Thursday (where in fact I presented a paper on the Divine Office), and there was no Internet in the monastery it was held (not Benedictine, an order of nuns “Servants of the Blessed Sacrament” where there is also a beautiful chapel of perpetual adoration).
 
OraLabora said:
No biggie. I doubt there’s any other sources for the Monastic Office in English other than in-house publications at abbeys, so it is still very valuable if you want to pray the Monastic Office.

And like I said nothing wrong with using it as a personal devotion.

I would have posted sooner but I was at a colloquium of the Gregorian Institute of Canada since last Thursday (where in fact I presented a paper on the Divine Office), and there was no Internet in the monastery it was held (not Benedictine, an order of nuns “Servants of the Blessed Sacrament” where there is also a beautiful chapel of perpetual adoration).
Click to expand...
I appreciate you clearing this up 🙂
 
Does anyone know of a “LotH type” Ordo (besides Saintswillarise, which I will probably end up using)?

From any monastery, website or whatever…
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
Does anyone know of a “LotH type” Ordo (besides Saintswillarise, which I will probably end up using)?

From any monastery, website or whatever…
Click to expand...
www.solesmes.com in the books section, called “Ordo”.

It’s all in Latin though. They put out their full ordo every year. Our abbey adapts its own from it but in French.
 
Just got mine, but it is damaged. 😦

Please pray that the seller will exchange it. 😦
 
The seller is going to make it good. Highly recommended, BTW. I have had several dealings with him, and he is top notch.

MD: HERE
 
Actually there is a provision out there allowing the continuing use of the Traditional Benedictine Office under the 1962 rubrics, namely the decrees Ecclesia Dei (JPII) and Summorum Pontificum (BXVI), backed up by a number of rulings of the Ecclesia Dei Commission.

Quite a few monasteries use the 1962 Office and calendar (with local variants), including the men and women’s monasteries (just about to put out a Decca label chant recording) of Le Barroux (who have published a French-Latin edition of the Monastic Diurnal equivalent to the Farnborough edition) and many others. You may also have read about the Cistercian monastery of Marianwald who received Vatican permission to revert to the 1962 Office and Constitutions despite the objections to this direction from the hierarchy of the Order! The biggest growth in new monasteries is actually in those using the Extraordinary Form mass either uniquely or in conjunction with the OF, and the 1962 Office and calendar fits best with that.

You can read more on this subject here:

saintsshallarise.blogspot.com/2010/08/liturgical-status-of-traditional.html
 
Terra_Australia said:
Actually there is a provision out there allowing the continuing use of the Traditional Benedictine Office under the 1962 rubrics, namely the decrees Ecclesia Dei (JPII) and Summorum Pontificum (BXVI), backed up by a number of rulings of the Ecclesia Dei Commission.

Quite a few monasteries use the 1962 Office and calendar (with local variants), including the men and women’s monasteries (just about to put out a Decca label chant recording) of Le Barroux (who have published a French-Latin edition of the Monastic Diurnal equivalent to the Farnborough edition) and many others. You may also have read about the Cistercian monastery of Marianwald who received Vatican permission to revert to the 1962 Office and Constitutions despite the objections to this direction from the hierarchy of the Order! The biggest growth in new monasteries is actually in those using the Extraordinary Form mass either uniquely or in conjunction with the OF, and the 1962 Office and calendar fits best with that.

You can read more on this subject here:

saintsshallarise.blogspot.com/2010/08/liturgical-status-of-traditional.html
Click to expand...
Excellent news. I missed that (despite visiting saintsshallarise daily):o

Will go check it out. 🙂

Nice to see you over here, BTW. Great community here, 🙂
 
I got my first one damaged, but checked it out a bit. Nice. Smaller than I expected-it will be difficult finding a book cover for it…
 
AC Books sent me out a replacement. I highly recommend them.

I am so excited about getting start–I feel like aq kid in a candy store 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top