L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Hi, amica mia.
Page #'s mostly. The new Guides at Saintswillarise are excellent, 
- Status
Page #'s mostly. The new Guides at Saintswillarise are excellent,
W
Windmill
Guest
I was a long-time pray-er of the LOTH, and then switched to the MD. I used this website to learn ( Saints Will Arise ), and there was a little learning curve…but not too bad at all.
I am still trying to decide which version of the Office I will settle on. Each one has its strengths and weaknesses.
**MD:
**Strengths: Beautiful collects and hymns, Elizabethan English/Latin, compact, solid binding
Weaknesses: Hours are longer, no Matins (OOR in LOTH), More Hours per day, no intercession prayers
**LOTH:
**Strengths: Shorter hours therefore you are more likely to get them all in in the course of the day, follows the current calendar (if you are at an OF parish it is in sync with Mass), OOR is rich in patristic writings
Weaknesses: dull Collects, mundane translation of Psalms, “liturgy-by-committee” after Vatican II (IOW no link with generations past), larger size book is harder to tote around.
That’s been my experience.
I am still trying to decide which version of the Office I will settle on. Each one has its strengths and weaknesses.
**MD:
**Strengths: Beautiful collects and hymns, Elizabethan English/Latin, compact, solid binding
Weaknesses: Hours are longer, no Matins (OOR in LOTH), More Hours per day, no intercession prayers
**LOTH:
**Strengths: Shorter hours therefore you are more likely to get them all in in the course of the day, follows the current calendar (if you are at an OF parish it is in sync with Mass), OOR is rich in patristic writings
Weaknesses: dull Collects, mundane translation of Psalms, “liturgy-by-committee” after Vatican II (IOW no link with generations past), larger size book is harder to tote around.
That’s been my experience.
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Very interesting, thanks!
I find the intercessory prayers in the LotH to be really dull generally. There are some beautiful ones, but you really get the flavor of a jazz Mass from them (if you know what I mean
)
W
Windmill
Guest
I completely understand. The prayers are often devoid of any real substance. They tend to be very focused on social concerns.
This has really been a difficult thing for me the past 5 years. I am an avid reader of all things liturgical, and have been for the past 12 years. I have read a ton of stuff from many conservative and traditionalist publishers, and have attended many different rites of the Catholics Church. I’ve even started up a men’s schola in our town (www.brazoschant.org). It’s going on it’s 6th year and is very well supported in the community. I’ve also gone through a rabid apologetics phase where I devoured every Scott Hahn Bible Study tape and Tim Staples talk-on-tape I could find. So, all in all, I feel I have a grasp of biblical texts and liturgical significance. All of these things combined have made me hunger for something more than the tepid waters of the LOTH. However, I just don’t have the time to really dive in deep. The time commitment is what keeps me coming back to the LOTH.
This has really been a difficult thing for me the past 5 years. I am an avid reader of all things liturgical, and have been for the past 12 years. I have read a ton of stuff from many conservative and traditionalist publishers, and have attended many different rites of the Catholics Church. I’ve even started up a men’s schola in our town (www.brazoschant.org). It’s going on it’s 6th year and is very well supported in the community. I’ve also gone through a rabid apologetics phase where I devoured every Scott Hahn Bible Study tape and Tim Staples talk-on-tape I could find. So, all in all, I feel I have a grasp of biblical texts and liturgical significance. All of these things combined have made me hunger for something more than the tepid waters of the LOTH. However, I just don’t have the time to really dive in deep. The time commitment is what keeps me coming back to the LOTH.
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Pray the MD: Lauds and Vespers only (maybe add Compline). You are under no obligation (unless you are a religious) to pray all the hours.
Put another way, your choice is between 2 (or 3) beautiful “A” hours (without intercessory prayer, but I tend to pray most of that before I pray the LotH, anyway), or more B+ offices.
I love the beauty of the MD (I am a major thee/thou junkie
). I struggled for awhile making the choice, but I now know (I think–I will know better after a month of actually praying the MD, obviously) that the MD is for me
W
Windmill
Guest
It may sound weird, but it makes me feel better knowing that others have gone through this internal debate over which office to use, too. In this town, no one has even heard of the MD. Those that pray the LOTH think it’s a very traditional thing to do, when in fact, it’s not even 40 years old. Beyond that, there is no EF Mass in this town, so it is like worshiping in two different worlds with two different calendars…so I always feel out of sync with the MD and then the OF Mass.
I may try to do the MD again, or I may try the Baronius Press Breviary. I’m not settled on anything yet. I just know that I want something that spiritually “kicks my butt,” not something that just reminds me to love everybody and realize my own dignity.
Besides, I guess my thinking has been tainted with the negativity toward Bugnini (Inside the Vatican even said that he was a Freemason), and it rubs me the wrong way every time I open up to the first page of the LOTH and see his name on the title page. I shouldn’t speak ill of the dead, but I can’t help but be on guard.
I may try to do the MD again, or I may try the Baronius Press Breviary. I’m not settled on anything yet. I just know that I want something that spiritually “kicks my butt,” not something that just reminds me to love everybody and realize my own dignity.
Besides, I guess my thinking has been tainted with the negativity toward Bugnini (Inside the Vatican even said that he was a Freemason), and it rubs me the wrong way every time I open up to the first page of the LOTH and see his name on the title page. I shouldn’t speak ill of the dead, but I can’t help but be on guard.
O
OraLabora
Guest
Just a few points on the LOTH. I have been doing quite a bit of research on the LOTH for the Gregorian Institute of Canada in the last couple of years.
On the mundane translations of the psalms I do the LOTH in Latin (chant in Latin, read in French). The French translation isn’t as bad. I can’t speak about the collects, technically you can use the Sunday collect for Lauds and Vespers of OT.
I do take exception with the comment “no link with generations past”. The Office is an organic, dynamic thing. Radical departures are not new. In the early 1900s, Pius X did what, IMHO was as radical a change as the LOTH has been post Vatican-II: he eliminated the Laudate psalms at Lauds (ps. 148, 149 and 150), and reorganized the others and broke them up into sections. At this point the Roman Office completely broke with the Monastic Office.
The changes wrought by Vatican II were in fact a continuity with a process begun under Pius XII when he, and not Paul VI, appointed Annibale Bugnini in 1948 to head up the Commission for Liturgical Reforms. For the Office, this resulted in some simpler rubrics and calendar, for instance changes to how the antiphons were chanted. The commission was also responsible for reintroducing the Easter Vigil in 1951. Before then, hymns, which were always part of the Monastic Office (the “ambrosian” in the Rule of St. Benedict), did not make it into the Roman Office, in a general way, before the 13th century.
Moreover, it is incorrect to say that the council that undertook the reform of the Office, broke entirely with tradition. Much effort was taken to balance tradition against the needs for a lighter office. Many psalms continue to be in their traditional places at Lauds and Vespers; 62, 99, 117 for Lauds, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113 etc at Vespers. In Latin at least, the hymnology in fact returned to more ancient and traditional verses. The Office of Readings was set up to continue to be used as Vigils if desired. Psalm 66, among others, was allowed to be used as an alternative invitatory thus keeping the tradition of reciting it first thing in the morning (I am using the Vulgate numbering). Yes there were innovations, some of them questionable (the NT canticle taken from the Apocalypse or the Pauline Letters at Vespers for example), and worse, taking out the imprecatory psalms/verses. But many traditions were also preserved.
Saint Benedict would have long ceased to recognize the Divine Office of the Roman Rite. In about 1911 to be exact.
From my personal perspective, due to my schedule, I found that I was missing out on several psalms during the week by praying the Monastic Office. My main reasons for choosing the LOTH is first of all due to it accommodating better to my schedule, but also since in a 4-week cycle I can get all the psalms. I think it is better to pray all of them in 4 weeks than missing the same ones every week and thus never praying them. I never used the MD however (though I do have a copy from Barroux, in French). I used Psalterium Monasticum and the Antiphonale Monasticum, so I had Vigils as well (with a punishing 12 psalms a day in two nocturnes, plus OT canticles in a 3d nocturne for Sun. and feasts). Coupled with a monastic lectionary, I also had the long readings and patristic readings for Vigils.
I have also used a shorter Monastic Office, Schema B (a post Vatican II office) that is used at my abbey. It does the entire psalter in 1 week. But again, since can’t recite either Tierce or None due to work, I miss out on many psalms in particular Ps. 118 (at Tierce every day in that office) and the Gradual psalms.
For a good scholarly summary on the evolution of the Divine Office into the LOTH:
From Breviary to Liturgy of the Hours by Stanislaus Campbell
A good if dry read which should put to rest the notion of masonic conspiracy theories on the destruction of the liturgy.
W
Windmill
Guest
I have that book by Campbell. He is no fan of the haphazard reforms of the Consilium, either.
Also, they made it a point not to include all the psalms in the LOTH. They removed the deprecatory Psalms and other parts of other psalms because they didn’t think they played a part in the average Christian’s prayer life.
I agree that the simpler structure of the LOTH fits better with the modern man’s schedule, but I definitely see the rigor in the wording of the older collects when compared to the newer ones…and they also gutted those in the LOTH, too (most were simply removed). Just read the new office and the old one. The difference is readily apparent simply by the words used.
I agree, Pius X started substantial reforms. However, even if you read the Collects from the Breviarium Romanum form 1911 to 1970, they are solid. The newer ones are pablum.
That’s just my experience.
Also, they made it a point not to include all the psalms in the LOTH. They removed the deprecatory Psalms and other parts of other psalms because they didn’t think they played a part in the average Christian’s prayer life.
I agree that the simpler structure of the LOTH fits better with the modern man’s schedule, but I definitely see the rigor in the wording of the older collects when compared to the newer ones…and they also gutted those in the LOTH, too (most were simply removed). Just read the new office and the old one. The difference is readily apparent simply by the words used.
I agree, Pius X started substantial reforms. However, even if you read the Collects from the Breviarium Romanum form 1911 to 1970, they are solid. The newer ones are pablum.
That’s just my experience.
O
OraLabora
Guest
True but at least he has the honesty to point out in his book the work done to try to preserve at least the most important traditions.
That’s my big beef with the new office. Not just the psalms but verses from psalms as well. The schema used at our abbey proposes them ad libitum, and the monks pray them and do not eliminate verses.
I tend to be more focused on the psalms than the collect (which are also part of the Mass as well).
What really pleases me though is that we now have the resources to chant the LOTH in Gregorian chant thanks to Solesmes and the Communauté Saint-Martin in France. At least, the daytime offices. That is, finally, a step in the right direction.
I guess the LOTH is an example of “management by committee”. But it isn’t all bad.
F
Famule
Guest
The MD may be more difficult but at least you are praying what those of the centuries have prayed. You are linked to the whole Church, past and present.
T
Terra_Australia
Guest
Personally I like the test of liturgical development suggested Alcuin Reid, namely ‘organic’ vs inorganic development. There were certainly major changes to the Office before the 1970s reforms, but in general of a far less radical nature. Pius X’s changes to the Roman Rite for example, substantially rearranged which psalms were said when, but left the basic structure intact. The LOTH doesn’t. His new book on VII is coming soon I believe…
The 1962 Roman Rite is of course another option to consider as it is shorter than the full Benedictine, available in Latin-English parallel texts, and authorised by Summorum Pontificum. Alternatively the Little Office of Our Lady (though as only Matins varies in the psalms from day to day this can be a bit repetitive to modern tastes!), published with chants by Baronius.
Personally though I think the Monastic Diurnal (or the 2 vol Latin only text 1962 Monastic Breviary if you want to be able to say Matins) is a very attractive option. Traditional in form as specified by the Rule, nice langauge in the translation, and attractively printed. Most laypeople don’t have the time to say all of the hours each day anyway, and Prime and Compline, or if you want to spend a little more time, Lauds and Vespers is probably enough, with the capacity to add a few more hours (or Office of the Dead) on days when you have more time.
The 1962 Roman Rite is of course another option to consider as it is shorter than the full Benedictine, available in Latin-English parallel texts, and authorised by Summorum Pontificum. Alternatively the Little Office of Our Lady (though as only Matins varies in the psalms from day to day this can be a bit repetitive to modern tastes!), published with chants by Baronius.
Personally though I think the Monastic Diurnal (or the 2 vol Latin only text 1962 Monastic Breviary if you want to be able to say Matins) is a very attractive option. Traditional in form as specified by the Rule, nice langauge in the translation, and attractively printed. Most laypeople don’t have the time to say all of the hours each day anyway, and Prime and Compline, or if you want to spend a little more time, Lauds and Vespers is probably enough, with the capacity to add a few more hours (or Office of the Dead) on days when you have more time.
O
OraLabora
Guest
Whichever office you use, you are praying what those for centuries have prayed. The psalms have been along for a lot longer than the Church and were also part of Jewish liturgical daily prayer.
The psalms, really, are at the heart of the Divine Office, followed closely by the Word, and the hymns. The rest is structural.
The current Monastic Office though, still uses the same basic psalm schema as prescribed by Saint Benedict in his Rule. You don’t have to use the MD to pray according to the Rule of St. Benedict. You can use the modern Antiphonale Monasticum for the diurnal office; the nocturnal office is just around the corner, Solesmes is supposed to publish it some time this year. Either that or the 1962 breviary (which is what the MD is extracted from) will work.
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Amica mia,
a couple of comments, if I may:
- The Little Office of the BVM is a misnomer…it is longer than some LotH days
- Is the Office of the Dead a separate office?
ie, it is distinct from Matins, Lauds, etc, etc?
I’ve never prayed it…
O
OraLabora
Guest
No, it is Lauds and Vespers (and the other offices) for the dead, typically on the funeral day when a monk passes from this world, but it can also be used on an anniversary day (and on Nov. 2).
- Is the Office of the Dead a separate office?
ie, it is distinct from Matins, Lauds, etc, etc?
I’ve never prayed it…
Long tradition, even the current Liturgy of the Hours has an Office of the Dead.
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Thank you, sir.
O
OraLabora
Guest
You’re very welcome! You should be able to find it in your MD. It’s in mine.Thank you, sir.
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
I did indeed receive a MD amico mio, but it was damaged in the mail. Haven’t yet received the replacement.
T
Terra_Australia
Guest
Office of the Dead - Matins, Lauds and Vespers is in the back of the Diurnal. As Ora et Labora mentioned, said traditionally on day of death, burial and anniversaries. Religious also said it in addition to the normal Office once a month (first dya without a feast).
It is true that the Little Office of Our Lady is not really that little - but it is still shorter than the trad Roman or monastic Breviary - Matins with only one nocturn and three pslams each day for example!
It is true that the Little Office of Our Lady is not really that little - but it is still shorter than the trad Roman or monastic Breviary - Matins with only one nocturn and three pslams each day for example!
O
OraLabora
Guest
Sounds like the Office of Readings in the LOTH…
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Yeah. It seems fairly long to me. I dunno.
- Status