amasimp said:
That is not true. Traditional orders such as the FSSP, ICK, Society of St. John, etc. still use the traditional Office. Even diocesan clergy can pray it. All they need is permission of the bishop.
Because the question was regarding the Divine Office as it was before Vatican II. Perhaps this person is simply interested from an historical perspective.
If this is so then I suggest they go to anglicanbreviary.com/.
One could say, too, that just because a person has an attachment to racing cars, spoilers, tire fins, engine coolers, loud mufflers, and big-cc engines does not cause one to develop a mentality of driving too fast. It’s true, but the association is overwhelming, and speeding is virtual certainty. Among those with the attachment you mention, there is evident a rampant tendency to judge the Church and the Holy Father, and to become suspicious of the rites of the Church. To suggest to people that they introduce into their prayer life a web site that is closely linked to sentences like, ‘Then Paul VI suddenly made everyone happy. He died.’ is irresponsible to say the least. I can’t find that file now but I recall reading it when I was once exploring the theory sites that lie behind the one(s) in question. Or files that compare the “old and new mass” in the least favorable terms possible, or blame the Second Vatican Council for a lack of reverence – this is irresponsible and misleading. People need to have their faith strengthened, not replaced with schismatic tendencies. As for the Holy Father, among those with the attachment you mention there is present a constant unwillingness to pray for him, so the generosity is one-sided to be sure.
amasimp,
I think it would be easy to consider that the earlier prayer was more complete, more comprehensive, and more expressive of Catholic dogma. But I think that the new prayer, in addition to being the one that the Church is praying, is actually a better expression of our faith, and that nothing is omitted. Some elements are unnecessary, such as that what God did for St. Agatha is one of His works of almighty power; recall that there are psalms that one will have prayed already, and that the psalms acknowledge God’s works quite thoroughly. Do we really have to say that women are weaker than men? Can’t we acknowledge her virtue in a less obtuse way? The “heavenly birth” is pious to say, but the newer prayer seems somehow more keyed to a more natural, coherent theology; recall that we are now praying (once again?) in a language we know. “Heavenly birth” might be her death, but in English, “heavenly birth” sounds quite unusual, and in Latin–does anyone know Latin well enough to really contemplate in it? Truly? Also, do we necessarily want to “follow in her footsteps”? I’m not saying we reject martyrdom, but we don’t necessarily seek to become martyrs. The prayer does focus on “likewise attain[ing] unto thee” but the more recent prayer seems to focus more on the point: her intercession for us, which we need because we are sinners, and which she can offer because of her actions which are described more clearly.
The FSSP also publishes a Divine Office book, as does Angelus Press.