Sadness over the Divine Office

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spyridon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Spyridon

Guest
Does anyone else feel a bit of sadness when reading and comparing the Liturgy of the Hours we have today with the Extraordinary Form Roman Breviary?

So many of the “meaty” prayers were stripped or “neutered” of explicit Roman Catholic concepts…
It just makes me very sad that the Ordinary Form was so drastically overhauled…

Compare the Concluding Prayer of the OFLOTH (Ordinary Form Liturgy of the Hours):

“Grant, we pray, almighty God,
that no tempests may disturb us,
for you have set us fast on the rock
of the Apostle Peter’s confession of faith.
Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.”

With the concluding prayer of the EFRB (Extraordinary Form Roman Breviary):

“O God, Who hast given unto thy Blessed Apostle Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the power to bind and to loose, loose us, we beseech thee, at his mighty intercession, from all the bands of our sins.”

The difference is glaring.

The OF makes no mention of Peter himself being the Rock, but rather his confession. This is okay as both concepts are true, but it’s not as explicitly Catholic as the statement in the EF version.

Also, the OF does not invoke the intercession of the Saint or make any sort of invocation at all - it merely speaks of the Saint.

I find this very saddening.

Also, compare the explicit Petrine hymn of the EFRB:

"Peter, blest shepherd, hearken to our cry,
And with a word unloose our guilty chain;
Thou! who hast power to open the gates on high
To men below, and power to shut them fast again.

Praise, blessing, majesty, through endless days,
Be to the Trinity immortal given;
Who in pure unity profoundly sways
Eternally alike all things in earth and heaven.
Amen."

To the generic Apostolic hymn of the OFLOTH:

"Let all on earth their voices raise,
Resounding heaven’s praise,
To him who gave apostles grace
To run their glorious race.

Of Gospel truth they bore the light
To brighten earthly night;
May we that heav’nly light impart
To ev’ry mind and heart.

Praise God the Father and the Son,
And Spirit Three in One,
Who sent these men with holy fire
All mankind to inspire.
Amen."

I suppose an argument could be made that the OF hymn is more God-centric whereas the EF one is more man-centric… But still the EF version just feels more “in your face Catholic,” if that makes sense.

Does anybody else feel similar?
Can you give more examples of such things?

Can anybody offer a good apologia for the OF differences or show how it’s closer to more ancient usages than the EF?
 
Last edited:
Translational issues aside, I like the simplification of format of the modern office. I learned it in college in about a day or two and have been praying it for over a decade now. The simplified format makes it easier for laity to incorporate into their often busy lives, it’s easier to incorporate into parish life, and it’s easier to do for a very overworked priest putting in long hours and having many obligations throughout the day. The ideal is to have much more time to pray, but the reality on the ground is very often one of trying to squeeze in one’s daily prayers in a few free moments here and there.

Also, the hymns in the book aren’t obligatory by any stretch of the imagination. You can substitute another one. We did all the time in seminary, especially when the one in the breviary was less than edifying for whatever reason, or else unfamiliar to most.

-Fr ACEGC
 
The Divine Office was not the only thing that was butchered
(EDIT: too strong of language… “altered for the worse” would be more appropriate)
after V2, IMO. However, AFAIK, one can still pray the original Divine Office, so I think it is good that the Church opened up LOTH for the laity in such a way.
 
Last edited:
edward_george1 said:
The simplified format makes it easier for laity to incorporate into their often busy lives, it’s easier to incorporate into parish life, and it’s easier to do for a very overworked priest putting in long hours and having many obligations throughout the day.
Click to expand...
As I understand it, that was at least one of the main goals of the simplification. I’m very happy that it’s more accessible to the laity now.
 
edward_george1 said:
Also, the hymns in the book aren’t obligatory by any stretch of the imagination. You can substitute another one. We did all the time in seminary, especially when the one in the breviary was less than edifying for whatever reason, or else unfamiliar to most.
Click to expand...
Thanks Father.

I do acknowledge and enjoy the holy austerity and noble simplicity of the OF.

There are just some examples with things like this when I wish it was more “ornate…”

I’m not one of the people who wants to go wholesale back to the EF.

However, I am someone who would like to see a “reform of the reform.”

For instance, I would love if the OF LOTH was offered with two different versions of Psalmody - one that is the current 4-week Psalter, and another incorporating a 2-week Psalter. The people praying it could choose which one to pray depending on their circumstances, vocation, and time.

I would also like to see some of the prayers make a compromise between the OF and EF. For example:

The OF concluding prayer says:

"Grant, we pray, almighty God,
that no tempests may disturb us,
for you have set us fast on the rock
of the Apostle Peter’s confession of faith.
Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.”

While the EF prayer is:

"God, Who hast given unto thy Blessed Apostle Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the power to bind and to loose, loose us, we beseech thee, at his mighty intercession, from all the bands of our sins.”

What I’d like to see would be something like this:

“Grant, we pray, almighty God,
that no tempests may disturb us,
for you have set us fast on the rock
of your Blessed Apostle Peter’s confession of faith; Your Apostle who has the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the power to bind and to loose. Therefore, we beg you to loose us by his mighty intercession from all the bands of our sins.”
 
I am extremely grateful for the modern Liturgy of the Hours. There’s no way I can profitably pray the older Office, while with the modern form, I have a means of participating in the prayer of the Church and personally benefitting from it.

Rather than a “butchering”, I consider the modern Liturgy of the Hours to be the great success of the Conciliar reforms, even more than the Mass.

Besides, the Liturgy of the Hours is undergoing a retranslation, and the hymns are expected to be translations of the typical edition Latin hymns, and the Collects will read the same as they do at today’s English Mass.
 
Last edited:
Maximilian75 said:
However, AFAIK, one can still pray the original Divine Office,
Click to expand...
The problem with that is that for it to be a legitimate participation in the Liturgy of the Church, if one wants to pray the EF Office, one must do it in Latin.

Also, I would not say they “butchered” it - rather, I would say they went a little overboard in totally changing things which probably shouldn’t have been changed quite so drastically.

Also, I love the OF and pray it almost daily - I just long to see it reformed in a way which would recover some of that which was lost after the initial reform.

And finally, I am very excited for the Anglican Ordinariate to come out with its official Divine Office.

I think when the Ordinariate Office comes out, I will make the switch to that as the main form of the LOTH I will use (unless I’m short on time and still want to pray the LOTH, then for that Office I would use the Roman OF).

Or maybe I will invest in an Eastern Catholic version of the Office.
 
Last edited:
I find it sad and telling when a person uses such strong language.
What makes you think the the Church, who has every right to make changes as she sees fit, “butchered” anything?
 
CilladeRoma said:
What makes you think the the Church, who has every right to make changes as she sees fit, “butchered” anything?
Click to expand...
I don’t agree with the term “butchered,” however I can sympathize with the sentiment.

Do a side by side comparison of the EF and the OF and it’s abundantly clear that there was a very serious “softening” of many, many prayers.

The EF was much more explicitly Catholic and ascetic, whereas the OF is much more streamlined and generic.
 
I agree. Butchered is excessively strong language.

I feel as though a lot of amazing liturgical symbolism was destroyed (intentionally or unintentionally) through the Council. However, I do not discount the good that the Council accomplished, nor view the OF mass as some kind of horrible thing.
 
Last edited:
I have. I am not into the "flowery thee’s & thou’s & we beseech you’s " to make it an effective way for me to pray.
In fact, I would not pray the Office at all, had it not been changed.
 
Maximilian75 said:
symbolism was destroyed (intentionally or unintentionally) through the Council. However, I do not discount the good that the Council accomplished, nor view the OF mass as some kind of horrible thing.
Click to expand...
My sentiment exactly.

I do not wish to return to the EF and I LOVE the OF - if I had to choose between the OF or EF, I will choose the OF.

However, I long to see the day when the OF will be reformed to recover some of the rich liturgical patrimony which was excised in the initial post-VII reforms.
 
Spyridon said:
Can anybody offer a good apologia for the OF differences or show how it’s closer to more ancient usages than the EF?
Click to expand...
I know not if it’s closer the ancient usage or not, but I think one of the goals was to make all Christians comfortable with the Liturgy of the Hours.
 
phil19034 said:
Christians comfortable with the Liturgy of the Hours.
Click to expand...
That would certainly explain the “softening” of the prayers with regards to the Saints… Is there anything in the Council Documents or post-Conciliar documents touching on this subject, that you’re aware of?
 
as a Discalced Carmelite Secular for the past ten years we pray the LOTH and I do not find myself sad praying it. I look forward to it day and evening and night and feel it really help in finding the tine to be with God.
 
This is a good thought- the American title of the short LOTH, ‘Shorter Christian Prayer’ may well be indicative of this as well.
 
spina1953 said:
Discalced Carmelite Secular for the past ten years we pray the LOTH and I do not find myself sad praying it. I look forward to it day and evening and night and
Click to expand...
Not sad while praying it. I look forward to the times of praying it as well…

Sad when comparing the OF to the EF and seeing some of the incredible prayers which were either discarded or changed totally in tone and content.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top