Office of Readings and Eucharist

[Eupraxia]

I recently visited a monastery where few things surprised me. Those might be perfectly ok, but they were new to me. Here are the “biggest” things:

Is it normal in the Office of Readings to read second reading from the writings of contemporary theologians? The reading what I heard there was written by Scott Hahn.

Can white wine be used for Eucharist? I know in Orthodox Churches the wine has to be red, but is it the same in Catholic Church, I am not sure?

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Is it normal in the Office of Readings to read second reading from the writings of contemporary theologians? The reading what I heard there was written by Scott Hahn.

On that I have no idea if religious orders can or have exemptions for that kind of thing.

Can white wine be used for Eucharist? I know in Orthodox Churches the wine has to be red, but is it the same in Catholic Church, I am not sure?

Yes, white wine can be used. As long as its true wine it can be used in a Catholic Mass. The GIRM #322 states only: The wine for the eucharistic celebration must be from the fruit of the grapevine (cf. Lk 22:18), natural, and unadulterated, that is, without admixture of extraneous substances.

 

[OraLabora]

I recently visited a monastery where few things surprised me. Those might be perfectly ok, but they were new to me. Here are the “biggest” things:

Is it normal in the Office of Readings to read second reading from the writings of contemporary theologians? The reading what I heard there was written by Scott Hahn.

Can white wine be used for Eucharist? I know in Orthodox Churches the wine has to be red, but is it the same in Catholic Church, I am not sure?

From the General Instructions of the Liturgy of the Hours for question 1:

1. There are two readings: the first is from the Scriptures, the second is from the writings of the Fathers or church writers, or else is a reading connected with the saints.

and:

1. In keeping with the tradition of the Roman Church the office of readings has, after the biblical reading, a reading from the Fathers or church writers, with a responsory, unless there is to be a reading relating to a saint (see nos. 228-239).

1. Texts for this reading are given from the writings of the Fathers and doctors of the Church and from other ecclesiastical writers of the Eastern and Western Church. Pride of place is given to the Fathers because of their distinctive authority in the Church.

1. In addition to the readings that The Liturgy of the Hours assigns to each day, the optional lectionary supplies a larger collection, in order that the treasures of the Church’s tradition may be more widely available to those who pray the liturgy of the hours. Everyone is free to take the second reading either from The Liturgy of the Hours or from the optional lectionary.

162. Further the conferences of bishops may prepare additional texts adapted to the traditions and culture of their own region, [8] for inclusion in the optional lectionary as a supplement. These texts are to be taken from the works of Catholic writers, outstanding for their teaching and holiness of life.

In the 4-volume LOH, you will find “modern” writings such as documents from the Second Vatican Council or from Paul VI. There are two approved lectionaries for the first (biblical) reading: the 1-year cycle and the 2-year cycle. The 4-volume LOH uses the 1-year cycle but lists the readings for the 2-year cycle. It also gives second readings. However those are not necessarily mandatory. You’ll find that many monasteries will use their own lectionary for the 2nd readings, with readings chosen that are appropriate to the charism of the house. If it’s a Benedictine monastery, you also probably will find an entirely different ordering of the psalms compared to the LOH (Saint Benedict’s rule prescribes all 150 psalms in one week).

Scott Hahn is perhaps a little more modern than I am used to hearing but assuming what was read has no theological errors, was approved, and somehow is edifying for those hearing the reading, it is entirely appropriate for a monastery to include it in its list of readings for the second reading of the Office of Readings. One hopes though that they are not neglecting traditional readings from the Church fathers, nor the hagiographic readings for memorials to saints. At least in the abbey I am affiliated with, writings like Scott Hahn’s books would be more likely heard as the reading in the refectory at meals. But though it seems like an innovation, it does not appear to be forbidden.

From Canon law concerning the second question, the only requirement for the wine is:

§3. The wine must be natural from the fruit of the vine and not spoiled.

On that I have no idea if religious orders can or have exemptions for that kind of thing.

They can and do have their own lectionaries for the second readings. For benedictines, they often tend to draw from monastic sources or the Desert Fathers like John Cassian.

 

[Joannm]

I recently visited a monastery where few things surprised me. Those might be perfectly ok, but they were new to me. Here are the “biggest” things:

Is it normal in the Office of Readings to read second reading from the writings of contemporary theologians? The reading what I heard there was written by Scott Hahn.

Can white wine be used for Eucharist? I know in Orthodox Churches the wine has to be red, but is it the same in Catholic Church, I am not sure?

The monastery where I am an Oblate often has readings from contemporary theologians. I know Benedictines are not obligated to follow the same LOTH as secular priests. many follow the monantisi durnial or a modified durnial which often has more psalms than th LOTH and different readings.

 

[OraLabora]

The monastery where I am an Oblate often has readings from contemporary theologians. I know Benedictines are not obligated to follow the same LOTH as secular priests. many follow the monantisi durnial or a modified durnial which often has more psalms than th LOTH and different readings.

The main office for the Benedictines is what’s known now as “Schema A”, and it involves 255 psalms per week. Obviously many are repetitions since there are only 150 psalms; notably psalms 3 (Vigils), 50, 66, 148, 149, 150 (Lauds), the gradual psalms at the small hours, and 4, 90 and 133 at Compline.

Schema B is a revised schema that came out from the Second Vatican Council: it is 150 psalms with no repetitions that can be spread over 1 or 2 weeks, and Schemas C and D are also post-Vatican II and are divided over 2 weeks if memory serves.

I am Oblate of an abbey that uses Schema B and does Lauds and Vespers in traditional Gregorian chant.

BTW a diurnal only covers the daytime offices, not Vigils.

 

[CDNowak]

The main office for the Benedictines is what’s known now as “Schema A”, and it involves 255 psalms per week. Obviously many are repetitions since there are only 150 psalms; notably psalms 3 (Vigils), 50, 66, 148, 149, 150 (Lauds), the gradual psalms at the small hours, and 4, 90 and 133 at Compline.

Schema B is a revised schema that came out from the Second Vatican Council: it is 150 psalms with no repetitions that can be spread over 1 or 2 weeks, and Schemas C and D are also post-Vatican II and are divided over 2 weeks if memory serves.

I am Oblate of an abbey that uses Schema B and does Lauds and Vespers in traditional Gregorian chant.

BTW a diurnal only covers the daytime offices, not Vigils.

Not only that, but monasteries can receive permission to use the 4 week psalter of the LotH (particularly in small houses of a “mixed” life), and in some cases to modify it from there.

 

[OraLabora]

Not only that, but monasteries can receive permission to use the 4 week psalter of the LotH (particularly in small houses of a “mixed” life), and in some cases to modify it from there.

That’s true, as you note in particular for Benedictine houses that are engaged in apostolic work like teaching, providing pastors for parishes, etc.

And for Oblates faced with the daily responsibilities of life outside the cloister

 

[puzzleannie]

I recently visited a monastery where few things surprised me. Those might be perfectly ok, but they were new to me. Here are the “biggest” things:

Is it normal in the Office of Readings to read second reading from the writings of contemporary theologians? The reading what I heard there was written by Scott Hahn.

Can white wine be used for Eucharist? I know in Orthodox Churches the wine has to be red, but is it the same in Catholic Church, I am not sure?

yes and yes, if the order has their own selection of readings for OR and those are approved as alternates.

In general when confronted with practices that differ from our own experience it is best to trust that the priest knows his business since he has far more training in those areas than we do, and assume everything is correct unless and until we have definite knowledge and proof that there is a deliberate abberation or abuse. Leads to much healthier spirituality and peace of mind.

 

[OraLabora]

yes and yes, if the order has their own selection of readings for OR and those are approved as alternates.

In general when confronted with practices that differ from our own experience it is best to trust that the priest knows his business since he has far more training in those areas than we do, and assume everything is correct unless and until we have definite knowledge and proof that there is a deliberate abberation or abuse. Leads to much healthier spirituality and peace of mind.

This is true, especially in religious orders. I’m sure some not familiar with Gregorian chant, for example, would complain in our monastery that there’s no responsorial psalm after the first reading. It is replaced by the gradual.

It is perfectly allowed by the rubrics and the source is the official chant book of the Mass, the Graduale Romanum (the sister publication, the Graduale Simplex, does have resp. psalms, it is a simpler chant book for smaller churches without fully-formed choirs).

Religious orders may also have other variations from practices one normally finds in parishes, for instance the abbot at our abbey is a mitered abbot and uses the episcopal blessing at the end of Mass even though he is not a bishop.

Now some abuses are so obvious that they scream out at us. But the ones as the OP noted aren’t abuses but allowed variations (the wine in fact isn’t a variation at all, there’s no rubric specifying red or white wine).

 

[Eupraxia]

Thank you all! Now I am little bit more “clever”.