Praying the Liturgy of the Hours with Interrruptions

[OraLabora]

The OP is a husband and father to small children. The care of his family is one of the foremost duties of his vocation. It does not seem right to me for him to rigidly set aside “me time” in the busiest part of his day, when he is most needed. I agree that he should educate his family, but the education should be in the importance of prayer. Ideally the family could join in with the recitation of the Evening Prayer once the kids are mature enough (“Where two or more are gathered in my name…”). That way the whole family would be strengthened by joining the prayer of the Church.

^^^This.

My family do know not to interrupt me during an Office unless the house is burning down or something; but my kids are all grown (youngest is 18 and at college).

But it wasn’t always that way; 10 years ago when I entered Oblate formation, sometimes I’d have to miss Offices altogether; plus making a habit of the Office requires some self-training. Fortunately as laity we aren’t bound to the Office; as an Oblate my promise is to say at least part of the Office, as my life circumstances allow, with Lauds, Vespers and Compline being the recommended, though not compulsory, part.

Now the Divine Office has become an encrusted habit for me; not one that my wife (Anglican) shares in, but one that she profoundly respects. There are still times when I have to miss an Office, but they are now quite rare.

 

[sw85]

SW85, Sacrosanctum Consilium predates the LOTH by some 7 or so years. SC was the product of the Council. The actual reform of the liturgy in the post-conciliar era was carried out by *Consilium ad Exsequendam Constitutionem da Sacra Liturgia *. Group 9 (Coetus IX) of that group was responsible for drafting the LOTH.

SC predates the novus ordo, as well, but so what? There is one Mass and one Divine Office, and SC regulates both.

Note that even in a family setting, it clearly says to “celebrate” the “liturgy” of the hours, not to recite the “private devotion” of the hours.

Of course not, because “the liturgy of the hours” is the name of the prayer. It doesn’t follow that when I pray it I’m praying it as liturgy qua liturgy.

You’re very mistaken to state that the laity cannot pray the LOTH even privately.

I would indeed be mistaken if that were what I was saying, but it isn’t. I pray the LOTH quite often myself. What I’m saying is that it lacks a liturgical character when not undertaken in an official capacity on the Church’s behalf, which would seem to require explicit authorization (i.e., clerics, religious acting according to their constitutions, etc.).

Communal paraliturgical prayer is not devotional - it’s a separate category that, outside of monasticism and friary, has been dying out in the west.

“Paraliturgical” isn’t exactly a recognized category at least in the West (I’m unaware of the word ever being used formally), being of relatively recent origin. But it seems to describe laity praying the LOTH on their own initiative pretty well. It also sort of reinforces my point, since “para” pretty much means “ancillary to,” i.e., “ancillary to liturgy.”

 

[OraLabora]

1088530What I’m saying is that it lacks a liturgical character when not undertaken in an official capacity on the Church’s behalf, which would seem to require explicit authorization (i.e., clerics, religious acting according to their constitutions, etc.).

And again, you’re wrong. Why are you wasting your (and our) time on this argument? You’ve been given plenty of evidence that you’re wrong; you’re a relatively new Catholic. Some of us here have been involved in this liturgy for a decade or more, have spiritual directors, and have a fairly deep understanding of liturgy. I am a director of the Gregorian Institute of Canada for which I teach and coordinate the liturgy at various functions that we hold, in both the Roman and the Monastic rites. The LOTH has rubrics for celebration in common or in private, with our without priest or deacon. In each case it is liturgy.

With all due respect, and not trying to be rude or condescending, I can’t understand why you’re so persistent with this issue if other than for the love of a good argument. Perhaps a little humility and respect for knowledge of others would be appreciated.

This forum has at least in part a teaching function, and it’s important that what we say isn’t based on personal interpretation or mis-information, but accurately reflects the mind of the Church. I’ll let the official teaching instrument of the Church, the Catechism, have the last word:

The Liturgy of the Hours

1174 The mystery of Christ, his Incarnation and Passover, which we celebrate in the Eucharist especially at the Sunday assembly, permeates and transfigures the time of each day, through the celebration of the Liturgy of the Hours, "the divine office."46 This celebration, faithful to the apostolic exhortations to “pray constantly,” is "so devised that the whole course of the day and night is made holy by the praise of God."47 In this "public prayer of the Church,"48 The faithful (clergy, religious, and lay people) exercise the royal priesthood of the baptized. Celebrated in “the form approved” by the Church, the Liturgy of the Hours "is truly the voice of the Bride herself addressed to her Bridegroom. It is the very prayer which Christ himself together with his Body addresses to the Father.49

1175 The Liturgy of the Hours is intended to become the prayer of the whole People of God. In it Christ himself "continues his priestly work through his Church."50 His members participate according to their own place in the Church and the circumstances of their lives: priests devoted to the pastoral ministry, because they are called to remain diligent in prayer and the service of the word; religious, by the charism of their consecrated lives; all the faithful as much as possible: "Pastors of souls should see to it that the principal hours, especially Vespers, are celebrated in common in church on Sundays and on the more solemn feasts. the laity, too, are encouraged to recite the divine office, either with the priests, or among themselves, or even individually."51

1176 The celebration of the Liturgy of the Hours demands not only harmonizing the voice with the praying heart, but also a deeper "understanding of the liturgy and of the Bible, especially of the Psalms."52

1177 The hymns and litanies of the Liturgy of the Hours integrate the prayer of the psalms into the age of the Church, expressing the symbolism of the time of day, the liturgical season, or the feast being celebrated. Moreover, the reading from the Word of God at each Hour (with the subsequent responses or troparia) and readings from the Fathers and spiritual masters at certain Hours, reveal more deeply the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, assist in understanding the psalms, and prepare for silent prayer. the lectio divina, where the Word of God is so read and meditated that it becomes prayer, is thus rooted in the liturgical celebration.

1178 The Liturgy of the Hours, which is like an extension of the Eucharistic celebration, does not exclude but rather in a complementary way calls forth the various devotions of the People of God, especially adoration and worship of the Blessed Sacrament.

Now can we end this sideshow, and stick to how to help the OP handle the LOTH and a busy family life at the same time? If you have any further bone to pick with me on this topic, please take off-line via PM.

 

[sw85]

And again, you’re wrong. Why are you wasting your (and our) time on this argument? You’ve been given plenty of evidence that you’re wrong; you’re a relatively new Catholic.

Except you haven’t given me any evidence and it’s not even clear to me you understand what I’m saying, since until about five minutes ago you seemed to think I was saying the laity couldn’t even pray the LOTH.

If I’m wrong (and I’m always open to being proven wrong; see, e.g., the third paragraph of post #12) it should be pretty easy to find something to the effect that I’m wrong. Instead you keep pointing to passages in the GILOTH that don’t actually deal with what I’m saying while discounting the actual, substantive contributions of the conciliar constitution on liturgy that do, e.g., paragraphs 84 and 98 of Sacrosanctum Concilium, which make the understanding of the character of the LOTH which you have advanced here incomprehensible, for reasons I already mentioned.

Interestingly enough, and also relevant, is that canon law seems to support my position (CIC 230, sec. 3):
§3 Where the needs of the Church require and ministers are not available, lay people, even though they are not lectors or acolytes, can supply certain of their functions, that is, exercise the ministry of the word, preside over liturgical prayers, confer baptism and distribute Holy Communion, in accordance with the provisions of the law.

Unless I’m misreading this – and I don’t see how publicly celebrating the liturgy of the hours would not constitute “presid[ing] over liturgical prayers” – that seems to make clear that while clerics and religious always pray the LOTH liturgically, laity only do so acting on their own (as opposed to, say, participating in it along with priests and/or religious) when they are deputized for that purpose.

The LOTH has rubrics for celebration in common or in private, with our without priest or deacon. In each case it is liturgy.

This has nothing to do with the question of whether or not laypeople in general pray the LOTH in a liturgical fashion when acting on their own. They may, after all, be licitly deputized to publicly celebrate the LOTH by a priest or religious whose other obligations prevent them from doing so themselves, per both canon law and SC.

With all due respect, and not trying to be rude or condescending, I can’t understand why you’re so persistent with this issue if other than for the love of a good argument. Perhaps a little humility and respect for knowledge of others would be appreciated.

At this point I’m mostly just defending myself from your unjust and gratuitously personal attacks. You don’t get to harp relentlessly on what you believe to be an irrelevant point and then get angry when others don’t roll over like a cheap typewriter ribbon.

To me it’s mostly a question of little more than semantic interest, anyway. My point in even bringing it up was to dissuade the OP from unnecessary scrupulosity in observance of the hours.

Now can we end this sideshow, and stick to how to help the OP handle the LOTH and a busy family life at the same time? If you have any further bone to pick with me on this topic, please take off-line via PM.

My original answer stands: there is no need to be distressed about not praying the LOTH according to the specified schedule because it is at best devotional/paraliturgical when done personally; and even if it is liturgical, even clergy are not rigorously obligated to recite the hours according to their appointed time frames, and are permitted to delay or even forego reciting particular hours as the circumstances demand. I would think having to take care of family counts as just such a circumstance.

 

[OraLabora]

Except you haven’t given me any evidence and it’s not even clear to me you understand what I’m saying, since until about five minutes ago you seemed to think I was saying the laity couldn’t even pray the LOTH.

If I’m wrong (and I’m always open to being proven wrong; see, e.g., the third paragraph of post #12) it should be pretty easy to find something to the effect that I’m wrong. Instead you keep pointing to passages in the GILOTH that don’t actually deal with what I’m saying while discounting the actual, substantive contributions of the conciliar constitution on liturgy that do, e.g., paragraphs 84 and 98 of Sacrosanctum Concilium, which make the understanding of the character of the LOTH which you have advanced here incomprehensible, for reasons I already mentioned.

Interestingly enough, and also relevant, is that canon law seems to support my position (CIC 230, sec. 3):
§3 Where the needs of the Church require and ministers are not available, lay people, even though they are not lectors or acolytes, can supply certain of their functions, that is, exercise the ministry of the word, preside over liturgical prayers, confer baptism and distribute Holy Communion, in accordance with the provisions of the law.

Unless I’m misreading this – and I don’t see how publicly celebrating the liturgy of the hours would not constitute “presid[ing] over liturgical prayers” – that seems to make clear that while clerics and religious always pray the LOTH liturgically, laity only do so acting on their own (as opposed to, say, participating in it along with priests and/or religious) when they are deputized for that purpose.

This has nothing to do with the question of whether or not laypeople in general pray the LOTH in a liturgical fashion when acting on their own. They may, after all, be licitly deputized to publicly celebrate the LOTH by a priest or religious whose other obligations prevent them from doing so themselves, per both canon law and SC.

At this point I’m mostly just defending myself from your unjust and gratuitously personal attacks. You don’t get to harp relentlessly on what you believe to be an irrelevant point and then get angry when others don’t roll over like a cheap typewriter ribbon.

To me it’s mostly a question of little more than semantic interest, anyway. My point in even bringing it up was to dissuade the OP from unnecessary scrupulosity in observance of the hours.

My original answer stands: there is no need to be distressed about not praying the LOTH according to the specified schedule because it is at best devotional/paraliturgical when done personally; and even if it is liturgical, even clergy are not rigorously obligated to recite the hours according to their appointed time frames, and are permitted to delay or even forego reciting particular hours as the circumstances demand. I would think having to take care of family counts as just such a circumstance.

 

[yellow8yellowM]

To me it’s mostly a question of little more than semantic interest, anyway. My point in even bringing it up was to dissuade the OP from unnecessary scrupulosity in observance of the hours…

My original answer stands: there is no need to be distressed about not praying the LOTH according to the specified schedule because it is at best devotional/paraliturgical when done personally; and even if it is liturgical, even clergy are not rigorously obligated to recite the hours according to their appointed time frames, and are permitted to delay or even forego reciting particular hours as the circumstances demand. I would think having to take care of family counts as just such a circumstance.

Back to the original post. I had two questions:

1. Is it okay to pray the Evening Prayer late?
2. Can I break up certain Hours into sections instead of going all the way through?

If it really is liturgy, then it is not just semantics. I would imagine that you could not just pray one Psalm, go smoke a cigarette, pray another Psalm, put the kids to sleep, then finish, and still call it liturgy. Then it would be a private devotion. Does this make sense to anybody?

And I’m not saying there is anything wrong with a private devotion, but it is not the same as liturgy.

 

[OraLabora]

Back to the original post. I had two questions:

1. Is it okay to pray the Evening Prayer late?
2. Can I break up certain Hours into sections instead of going all the way through?

If it really is liturgy, then it is not just semantics. I would imagine that you could not just pray one Psalm, go smoke a cigarette, pray another Psalm, put the kids to sleep, then finish, and still call it liturgy. Then it would be a private devotion. Does this make sense to anybody?

And I’m not saying there is anything wrong with a private devotion, but it is not the same as liturgy.

The rubrics say that we should keep the “verity of the hour”. So it depends how late. At our abbey on Thursdays they pray Vespers followed immediately by Compline, starting Vespers at 7 pm. But it wouldn’t do to celebrate Vespers in the morning or Lauds at night. A clue might be what consists of “evening” and “night”. In ancient days the LOTH was said according to the sun. Evening in the northern latitudes can last up to 10 or 11 pm in some places. There really is no “fixed” time.

One shouldn’t break the hours up.

Though it is liturgy, as laity we are not obligated to the Hours unless we are under a promise (like oblates) but even then the promise is to do part of the LOTH as our condition in life allows.

IMHO it’s always best to simply skip an hour, if for some reason we can’t pray it at an appropriate time or we won’t be able to see it all the way through in one sitting.

 

[agnes_therese]

To me it’s mostly a question of little more than semantic interest, anyway.

That’s good. Because you know, it is entirely possible that those of us who have been praying the LOTH for decades, especially as Oblates and/or Secular Order members, might know just a tiny bit more about it than you do.

 

[sw85]

Back to the original post. I had two questions:

1. Is it okay to pray the Evening Prayer late?

Sure. Again, even those who are obligated to pray the LOTH such as clergy are allowed to delay or forego recitation of whole hours for reasons of serious inconvenience. I don’t see how we could forgive a priest for foregoing Morning Prayer on Sunday because he has four back-to-back Masses but not forgive a parent for foregoing Evening Prayer while trying to keep kids in line.

1. Can I break up certain Hours into sections instead of going all the way through?

“Can I” is an odd question to ask. If you had asked “should you,” I would say no. “Can I” seems to suggest you need permission to do that, which in turn implies that you might be dodging some kind of obligation, but you have none to begin with.

Again, I’m of the opinion that, acting on your own, the LOTH doesn’t even have a liturgical character, so it’s not exactly a profanation or anything to pray it in parts (even if you ought not to). I often pray individual Collects (especially the Pro Devotis Amicis, for the conversion of loved ones); Collects are liturgical in the sense that they are the public prayer of the Church, but it doesn’t follow that my praying them on my own makes the act of praying them a liturgical act. Follow?

If it really is liturgy, then it is not just semantics. I would imagine that you could not just pray one Psalm, go smoke a cigarette, pray another Psalm, put the kids to sleep, then finish, and still call it liturgy. Then it would be a private devotion. Does this make sense to anybody?

Why not simply delay reciting the hour for a time?

That’s good. Because you know, it is entirely possible that those of us who have been praying the LOTH for decades, especially as Oblates and/or Secular Order members, might know just a tiny bit more about it than you do.

You guys keep saying “We know more than you” but can’t or won’t explain your position effectively. And you seem to think it’s a poor reflection on me that I won’t trust the largely-unsupported assertions of strangers on the Internet, however much they may be backed up with unverifiable credential-flashing, which is especially bizarre to me. Lots of people in recent decades have claimed to be experts. Some of them even were, with masters degrees in theology and so on. And yet, curiously, many of those experts were either profoundly wrong or deliberately dishonest about, for instance, Vatican II and what it actually said. The damage they did to the Church was incalculable and we are only just now beginning to undo it all.

So, no, I don’t trust the judgment of “experts” unconditionally, even the ones that aren’t strangers on the Internet. And my refusal to do so at a time when it is known that judgment of experts cannot be trusted unconditionally isn’t an issue of humility but of prudence. It is never, ever good to behave imprudently. Hence, I verify. “Verify,” in this case, means going to the source material: to Sacrosanctum Concilium, canon law, etc., both of which I have cited in support of my position.

BTW, it seems that, as an oblate/religious tertiary/whatever, if you’re obligated to pray the LOTH in accordance with the constitutions of your order, then *you *pray it liturgically. But you pray it liturgically by virtue of your membership in that order and obedience to its precept, not merely by virtue of your Catholicity, per SC. Has it occurred to you that your experiences as an oblate/religious tertiary may have colored your understanding in a way that cannot generalize to the masses of ordinary people?

 

[OraLabora]

Again, I’m of the opinion that, acting on your own, the LOTH doesn’t even have a liturgical character,

It remains that, your opinion, not substantiated by current Church teaching on the subject.

I won’t trust the largely-unsupported assertions of strangers on the Internet,

We have given you quotes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the official teaching document of the Church for the laity (and to teach clergy what to teach). What more could you want? We’ve posted from the General Instructions of the LOTH, approved by Paul VI himself, the supreme pontiff. We’ve posted from SC, which you did as well, but we also pointed out that this document, historically, pre-dates the LOTH and was intended as the general guidelines on the reform of the Liturgy, in many instances superseded by more recent and more specific instructions and guidelines for the liturgies themselves. We pointed out that indeed many of us do have expertise on the LOTH, have spiritual directors who guide us in the praying of the LOTH, and have been praying it for years if not decades.

Yet you stubbornly promote your opinion, and sorry if this offends, but a not very learned one at that, as something people should use to guide their prayer lives.

I just don’t get it. I really don’t

Seriously, what more evidence do you need???

Hence, I verify. “Verify,” in this case, means going to the source material: to Sacrosanctum Concilium, canon law, etc., both of which I have cited in support of my position.

The Canon you quoted pertains to the ministries of acolyte and lector, thus completely out of context. Canon law says this specifically about the LOTH:

THE LITURGY OF THE HOURS (Cann. 1173 - 1175)

Can. 1173 Fulfilling the priestly function of Christ, the Church celebrates the liturgy of the hours. In the liturgy of the hours, the Church, hearing God speaking to his people and recalling the mystery of salvation, praises him without ceasing by song and prayer and intercedes for the salvation of the whole world.

Can. 1174 §1. Clerics are obliged to carry out the liturgy of the hours according to the norm of ⇒ can. 276, §2, n. 3; members of institutes of consecrated life and societies of apostolic life, however, are bound according to the norm of their constitutions.

§2. Other members of the Christian faithful, according to circumstances, are also earnestly invited to participate in the liturgy of the hours as an action of the Church.

Can. 1175 In carrying out the liturgy of the hours, the true time for each hour is to be observed insofar as possible.

The General Instructions of the LOTH spell out just exactly how the laity can fulfill Canon 1174.2

BTW, it seems that, as an oblate/religious tertiary/whatever, if you’re obligated to pray the LOTH in accordance with the constitutions of your order, then *you *pray it liturgically. But you pray it liturgically by virtue of your membership in that order and obedience to its precept, not merely by virtue of your Catholicity, per SC. Has it occurred to you that your experiences as an oblate/religious tertiary may have colored your understanding in a way that cannot generalize to the masses of ordinary people?

I’ve been praying the LOTH since well before I became an Oblate.

These are not my “opinions”, they are the Church’s invitation for the laity to fully participate in the Liturgy, even those parts that do not need to be celebrated in a public setting, because the liturgy is the public prayer of the Church. It belongs to all the Church. To be sure within the liturgy, there are some sacerdotal functions, namely confecting the Eucharist, and there are some functions reserved for the ordained, such as the formulas for the final blessing at the LOTH, with formal blessings allowed for Deacons and Priests (take note: the blessing is related to the ordained state, not sacerdotal function, while you state that only “priests” can make it liturgy; this is simply not true; deacons can even administer the sacrament of baptism, in fact so too can the laity in specific circumstances), and a simpler dismissal (not a blessing) for private recitation for clergy and the laity

If I sound testy it’s because I am. Liturgy is not a matter of personal opinion. People come here to learn, and we have a responsibility to not mislead. Many times I start responding to a post and realize “I don’t really know for sure what I’m talking about” and delete it before posting.

On this subject, I happen to know what I’m talking about, and you have made some very misleading statements that needed correction. It’s not personal, it’s not a personal attack as you have accused.