Diurnale Romanum

[futureKC123]

Hi Alll!
I’m thinking of getting the Diurnale Romanum from PCP and wondering if anyone has experience wiht it? I’m worried about finding my way around the book and knowing which psalms what day and such. Please share your imput and experiences!
FKC

 

[giuseppeTO]

I use the Diurnale and it is pretty easy to use. It contains all hours except for Matins and Lauds from the 62 books. It you want to know the particulars of the hours for individual days, you might also get a copy of the Ordo from PCP. It will tell you when the office is Festal or semi-festal instead of ferial and when responses change for the different liturgical seasons.

 

[JReducation]

If you’re attracted to Benedictine spirituality, you can get the diurnal for that particular tradition. Every Benedictine congregation has one. They’re all called Diurnale Romanum, but they don’t have the same psalms for the same days. The abbots organize it for their congregation. Some people like a particular Benedictine congregation and use its Diurnale. You just get the ordo to go with it. Most ordos are user friendly, except the Franciscan one. It’s horrible. The darn thing should come with an instruction manual.

Fraternally,

Br.JR, FFV

 

[Laudate_Dominum]

I second Brother JR.'s recommendation about the Monastic Diurnal. You can get one that is Latin - English for the same price as the Roman Diurnal which is all Latin. There are two editions. There’s the Farnborough Abbey (Catholic Benedictines in England) edition and the Lancelot Press (Anglican) edition. The Catholic edition follows the norms for 1963 and the Anglican one (actually published by Western Rite Orthodox) follows either the 1955 or pre-155 rubrics. Personally I recommend the Catholic version. You don’t need to worry about saying the right collect, it’s published by Catholic Benedictines, and it’s actually liturgical (the Latin in it, not the English).

The major difference between the Benedictine and Roman Offices is the Psalter arrangement throughout the week. Calendar wise, even on its own, the Monastic Diurnal is very similar to the Roman Office so you wont have many problems if you regularly attend the traditional (1962) Mass. You can also, relatively easily, adapt it to the Roman calendar. The seasons are the same, it’s just the saints that may become an issue if you want to go fully Roman.

You can also adopt it to use within your local diocese, your country or as Brother JR. said above, you can ask for an Ordo from your local Benedictine abbey/monastery (I recommend a traditional community, because an Ordinary Form community with make it harder with the seasons, etc).

So I strongly recommend the Monastic Diurnal.

Unless you are fluent in Latin!

Edit: forgot to link you to the Monastic Diurnal: farnboroughabbey.org/press/dirunal.php

I do not know if they do international shipping. I know that www.cenacle.co.uk does, and you can find it there. Or you may be able to find it at a North American site.

Edit 2: The above poster said that the Roman Diurnal from PCP does not include Matins and Lauds. Whilst the Monastic Diurnal does not include Matins it does include Lauds. If you want to say Matins, Lancelot Press has a stand-alone Matins volume though I don’t know how you’d adopt it to the 1963 rubrics (the Psalter arrangement should be the same, it was set down by Saint Benedict in the Rule and is one of, if not the, oldest arrangements in the Latin Church). I also noticed you asked about how to find things. Since the rubric instructions are in English, you shouldn’t have a problem. You can also check out this brilliant blog on how to use the Monastic Diurnal.

saintsshallarise.blogspot.co.uk/

 

[giuseppeTO]

Edit 2: The above poster said that the Roman Diurnal from PCP does not include Matins and Lauds. Whilst the Monastic Diurnal does not include Matins it does include Lauds. If you want to say Matins, Lancelot Press has a stand-alone Matins volume though I don’t know how you’d adopt it to the 1963 rubrics (the Psalter arrangement should be the same, it was set down by Saint Benedict in the Rule and is one of, if not the, oldest arrangements in the Latin Church). I also noticed you asked about how to find things. Since the rubric instructions are in English, you shouldn’t have a problem. You can also check out this brilliant blog on how to use the Monastic Diurnal.

Ooops … my bad. The Diurnale does contain Lauds. Not Matins.

We say these offices in common 1st - 2nd - and 3rd order in Latin. So the English doesn’t help much.

 

[JReducation]

Personally, I like the monastic breviary better than the Roman one. Maybe I’m biased. But I feel that the religious communities bring a tradition to the Liturgy of the Hours, which the secular clergy does not. Stands to reason. The secular clergy dos not have a corporate identity, nor a common spirituality.

Whether one uses the monastic breviary in its traditional diurnal form, its current form, the Roman-Franciscan Breviary, the Dominican Breviary, the Jesuit Breviary or the Carthusian Breviary, each of them has what I like to call a special flavor.

Obviously, they are not the breviaries that are of common usage. The breviaries of common usage, whether it’s the older version or the revised version are the Roman Breviaries. The good thing is that the laity is not bound to the Roman Breviary, only secular clergy are bound to it. Laity and religious can pick and choose.

If you feel comfortable with the chant, any of the Benedictine editions will serve your needs. If you prefer the more poetic rendition of the psalms that are meant to be recited, not sung, the Franciscan and Jesuit breviaries are the way to go. That psalter is adapted so that it flows like poetry while being recited. I have never seen the Carthusian or the Dominican breviary, but I’m told that they are quite beautiful as well. Carthusians chant. Some Dominicans do, not all.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[OraLabora]

Personally, I like the monastic breviary better than the Roman one. Maybe I’m biased. But I feel that the religious communities bring a tradition to the Liturgy of the Hours, which the secular clergy does not. Stands to reason. The secular clergy dos not have a corporate identity, nor a common spirituality.

Whether one uses the monastic breviary in its traditional diurnal form, its current form, the Roman-Franciscan Breviary, the Dominican Breviary, the Jesuit Breviary or the Carthusian Breviary, each of them has what I like to call a special flavor.

Obviously, they are not the breviaries that are of common usage. The breviaries of common usage, whether it’s the older version or the revised version are the Roman Breviaries. The good thing is that the laity is not bound to the Roman Breviary, only secular clergy are bound to it. Laity and religious can pick and choose.

If you feel comfortable with the chant, any of the Benedictine editions will serve your needs. If you prefer the more poetic rendition of the psalms that are meant to be recited, not sung, the Franciscan and Jesuit breviaries are the way to go. That psalter is adapted so that it flows like poetry while being recited. I have never seen the Carthusian or the Dominican breviary, but I’m told that they are quite beautiful as well. Carthusians chant. Some Dominicans do, not all.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

I am of course partial to the monastic breviary (or rather breviaries…) myself; I like the original Benedictine one (and as far as I can tell the Carthusians’ is very similar), but use the one my abbey uses (schema B, all psalms in a week but I use a 2-week division… work oblige…)

The current monastic diurnal (and nocturnal for that matter) follows the same schema as St. Benedict laid out 1500 years ago, but adapted to the post-Vatican II liturgical year, sharing the same collects as the Roman office. The only difference is that those abbeys who have dropped Prime, have a couple of options to distribute the psalms of Prime to different Offices (mainly the minor hours, or Vigils and the invitatory). There is still an option to say Prime with that Office, and some abbeys still do so.

It’s a great compromise of keeping with a 1500 yr. tradition, but being in synch with the modern post-Vatican II Church. I have a Latin-French psalterium monasticum to use (and the French psalms are the current liturgical translation so it can be used in French; I generally say Lauds and Vespers in Latin and the rest in French but sometimes I use French psalm tones for Lauds and Vespers). I’m unaware of an English version with the current psalm translations.

 

[JReducation]

I am of course partial to the monastic breviary (or rather breviaries…) myself; I like the original Benedictine one (and as far as I can tell the Carthusians’ is very similar), but use the one my abbey uses (schema B, all psalms in a week but I use a 2-week division… work oblige…)

The current monastic diurnal (and nocturnal for that matter) follows the same schema as St. Benedict laid out 1500 years ago, but adapted to the post-Vatican II liturgical year, sharing the same collects as the Roman office. The only difference is that those abbeys who have dropped Prime, have a couple of options to distribute the psalms of Prime to different Offices (mainly the minor hours, or Vigils and the invitatory). There is still an option to say Prime with that Office, and some abbeys still do so.

It’s a great compromise of keeping with a 1500 yr. tradition, but being in synch with the modern post-Vatican II Church. I have a Latin-French psalterium monasticum to use (and the French psalms are the current liturgical translation so it can be used in French; I generally say Lauds and Vespers in Latin and the rest in French but sometimes I use French psalm tones for Lauds and Vespers). I’m unaware of an English version with the current psalm translations.

The Franciscan Breviary does something similar. Prime is gone, but not the psalms. They’re distributed among the minor hours and the invitatory psalms. Except that our breviary was never meant to be chanted. Chanting is a very novel thing with us. It began in the 1980s. From 1209 to about 1985, there was no chanting allowed at mass or the LOTH. Other forms of music were allowed.

I don’t know anything about the Carthusian Breviary other than the fact that it has a Benedictine flavor with some changes of their own. I visited a friend of mine who is a Carthusian, but I did not pray with them. Even if you’re a religious, you remain in the guest house.

As to the Benedictine Breviary, I believe that there is an English version with the current psalm translations. There is an abbey in Alabama. The monks were on EWTN one night. They spoke about using the traditional Benedictine diurnal, but in English, because their abbot does not like Latin. I don’t have to tell you that the abbot is always the voice of Christ. End of story.

I guess it’s this obedience that makes the monastic life the highest vocation in the Church and gives them the highest rank in dignity among religious. If I had a hat, I’d take it off to them. But we wear cowls.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[OraLabora]

Indeed, the abbot decides. As you pointed out obedience is hugely important to Benedictines. Obedience to the abbot but also, on the whole, to the Holy Father. Which is why you find so few abbeys using the pre-Vatican II Mass and office. When the new liturgies came out, abbeys were pretty quick to adapt out of obedience to the Church and the Pope.

Fortunately though they did a good no of preserving tradition so that the oldest Divine Office in the Church survives 1500 years later with only fairly minor changes to adapt it to the new liturgical year; mostly to the lectionary for year B which required some adaptations to antiphons as well, and redistribution of the psalms of Prime.

 

[ssa_trad_cath]

The Franciscan Breviary does something similar. Prime is gone, but not the psalms. They’re distributed among the minor hours and the invitatory psalms. Except that our breviary was never meant to be chanted. Chanting is a very novel thing with us. It began in the 1980s. From 1209 to about 1985, there was no chanting allowed at mass or the LOTH. Other forms of music were allowed.

I don’t know anything about the Carthusian Breviary other than the fact that it has a Benedictine flavor with some changes of their own. I visited a friend of mine who is a Carthusian, but I did not pray with them. Even if you’re a religious, you remain in the guest house.

As to the Benedictine Breviary, I believe that there is an English version with the current psalm translations. There is an abbey in Alabama. The monks were on EWTN one night. They spoke about using the traditional Benedictine diurnal, but in English, because their abbot does not like Latin. I don’t have to tell you that the abbot is always the voice of Christ. End of story.

I guess it’s this obedience that makes the monastic life the highest vocation in the Church and gives them the highest rank in dignity among religious. If I had a hat, I’d take it off to them. But we wear cowls.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Are there copies of the Franciscan Breviary in circulation? Or do you use a Roman Breviary with something like an appendix containing Franciscan modifications?

 

[Windmill]

I have both the Monastic Diurnal and the Diurnale Romanum, and I pray both depending on what I want for the day.They both have their pro’s and con’s. Basically, if you are fluent in Latin I’d recommend the Diurnale Romanum. The structure is easier to follow, the hours aren’t quite so tedious, Compline varies more and has the Nunc Dimmitis, and it follows the Roman calendar more closely (the MD emphasizes more Benedictine feasts and de-emphasizes other minor feasts). The MD’s strengths are the Latin/English, superior binding and printing, and the fact that you aren’t trapped in the Commons nearly as much as the DR.

Honestly though, if I was fluent in Latin I’d only pray the Diurnale Romanum.

 

[JReducation]

Are there copies of the Franciscan Breviary in circulation? Or do you use a Roman Breviary with something like an appendix containing Franciscan modifications?

There is a new Roman-Franciscan Breviary that follows the form of the Liturgy of the Hours that was adopted in the 1970s. The English translation is still not out. In English we’re using the double book format. It’s the Roman Breviary and a smaller Franciscan Breviary in one binder. The smaller Franciscan one is complete. It has all of the proper offices for the Franciscan holy days. It’s just that it’s not, let’s say, woven together. They’re two books that you have to carry around. Today you use the Roman side and tomorrow you use the Franciscan side.

The other language groups have the integrated edition. The English language group has not finished its work.

The good thing about the religious orders is that we don’t depend on ICEL. We have our own liturgical commissions and they do all of our translating. The benefit to that is that the same people who create the English translation produced the other translations: Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, and Hebrew.

The benefit of having all of the languages in front of you along with the Latin is that you can cross examine to make sure that you translated the Latin the same way in each language. Whereas ICEL does not have the other texts. They only have the original Latin. That explains why the Roman texts were off in English, but right in the other languages. One wonders if ICEL had the chance and the language experts to do the cross referencing.

Now, the Franciscan Liturgical Commission is working on the 1962 Breviary. Because we had the Seraphic Breviary, but that was abrogated by Pope Paul VI and Pope Benedict has not authorized it’s use. We have to take the Roman Breviary that was in place and “Franciscanize” it. I know, there is no such word. But I couldn’t find another. That can take years to finish.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[wasserfall]

Indeed, the abbot decides. As you pointed out obedience is hugely important to Benedictines. Obedience to the abbot but also, on the whole, to the Holy Father. Which is why you find so few abbeys using the pre-Vatican II Mass and office. When the new liturgies came out, abbeys were pretty quick to adapt out of obedience to the Church and the Pope.

If I recall correctly the Church and the Pope never asked religious to adopt the reformed Roman Missal. So why would it be a matter of obedience?

 

[wasserfall]

Now, the Franciscan Liturgical Commission is working on the 1962 Breviary. Because we had the Seraphic Breviary, but that was abrogated by Pope Paul VI and Pope Benedict has not authorized it’s use. We have to take the Roman Breviary that was in place and “Franciscanize” it. I know, there is no such word. But I couldn’t find another. That can take years to finish.

Why didn’t you just ask the Pope if you could use the seraphic breviary?
Or was it requested but denied?

 

[JReducation]

Why didn’t you just ask the Pope if you could use the seraphic breviary?
Or was it requested but denied?

It was denied. The Holy Father only allows us to go back to 1962. Our breviary was composed in 1223. New saints were added over the centuries, but the structure never changed. It was a wonderful breviary, because it was just one volume. The new one is four volumes in English and three in the other languages.

We can’t use the Seraphic missal either. We use the Roman Missal for the EF, but we follow the OF calendar. We do have a Roman-Franciscan Missal and a Roman-Franciscan Lectionary. Those are complete. They’re beautiful. The are for the OF. It comes in Latin, French, Spanish, English, Italian, Portuguese, German and Hebrew. If you watch mass on EWTN you will see the Franciscan OF.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JReducation]

If I recall correctly the Church and the Pope never asked religious to adopt the reformed Roman Missal. So why would it be a matter of obedience?

We were not asked. We were ordered to do so. That’s why SP says that if the priest is a religious, he can celebrate the EF in private, but not in public without the permission of his superior, who grants the permission according to the constitutions.

Some of the constitutions prohibit the EF and others never mention it, because no one thought that it would be back.

The Carmelites, Dominicans, and Carthusians were not ordered to surrender their rites. They are rites. The rest of us used Roman missal of the time with modifications according to our traditions. That’s where Pope Benedict got thew term “Form”. We used that term.

For example, we would say “the Franciscan form of the Latin Rite mass.” With that, everyone knew that you stood during the Gloria and the Canon. That the priest prepared the chalice at the beginning of the mass. There were no prayers at the foot of the altar, nor were there kneelers. You knelt on the floor. The friars never walked onto the sanctuary with shoes or sandals. The prayers were all in dialog between the priest and the congregation, instead of the altar server. The priest proclaimed the canon sot hat everyone could hear it. Later, microphones were introduced. The chant was very plain, not Gregorian chant was allowed. You could use hymns. I’m not really sure when we started to use the organ. I know it was much later than anyone else, except the Carmelites. Maybe we didn’t all acquire them at the same time. Who knows.

Fraternally,

Br.JR, FFV

 

[wasserfall]

The Carmelites, Dominicans, and Carthusians were not ordered to surrender their rites. They are rites.

But didn’t they do it anyway for the most part. Or at least reform their rites along the same lines at the new roman missal?

Why would they do that if they were not asked to do so?

 

[OraLabora]

If I recall correctly the Church and the Pope never asked religious to adopt the reformed Roman Missal. So why would it be a matter of obedience?

The abbot decides based on the needs of his community. The monks are bound to obey him. A few communities use the 1962 Missal, the majority use the current Missal.

 

[JReducation]

But didn’t they do it anyway for the most part. Or at least reform their rites along the same lines at the new roman missal?

Why would they do that if they were not asked to do so?

The Carthusians reformed their rite. The Carmelites surrendered theirs. I’m not too sure about the Dominicans, other than the fact that they did not use again it until very recently.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Rich_C]

FutureKC,

Do you regularly assist at the traditional Mass? If so, I recommend the Roman Divine Office because it will be on the same calendar your parish uses for Mass. I really feel like I’m praying with the Church and that my breviary is an extension of the Mass.

p.s. good for you for trying to say all the day hours. I can barely scrape by with lauds, vespers, and compline.