The Breviary Psalter

  • Thread starter Thread starter AlexV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AlexV

Guest
Despite alterations in arrangement (especially the alterations of Pius X), for centuries and centuries the Breviary was governed by the principle that in one week you would recite the entire Psalter.

That didn’t always happen (i.e., you had to pray every Hour, obviously, and feasts of saints sometimes disturbed the arrangement, etc., etc.) – but the Breviary Psalter contained all 150 psalms.

Today, Friday of Week I in the Liturgia Horarum, illustrates the great change of the Bugnini Psalter.

At Matins, the psalm is 34 (35). But not exactly. More precisely, it’s 34 (35), verses 1-2. 3c. 9-19. 22-23. 27-28.

So what about 3a-b, 4-8, 24-26 (also known as the inspired Word of God)?

Well, they’re problematic. Imprecatory. Not exactly the image Bugnini wanted to portray of the Church at prayer.

Three of the 150 psalms are entirely absent from the Bugnini Psalter. Numerous verses are missing (all duly noted) from others.
 
I would like to ask about the Psalms. I noticed in a lot of the bibles it will show “Psalm 23 (24)”. Now the Psalm in question is 23 but what is the purpose of the subsequent number in brackets?
 
AlexV, I agree it is something that gives some cause for concern. I pray the modern Liturgy of the Hours but sometimes wonder about all the “missing stuff”. I wish I had more time to look into it.

childofmary1143, it’s simply the difference between the Hebrew and Greek numbering:
  • Psalms 9 and 10 in the Hebrew are together as Psalm 9 in the Greek;
  • Psalms 114 and 115 in the Hebrew are Psalm 113 in the Greek;
  • Psalms 114 and 115 in the Greek appear as Psalm 116 in the Hebrew; and
  • Psalms 146 and 147 in the Greek form Psalm 147 in the Hebrew
 
The larger number reflects the Hebrew numbering system, which starts off the same as the Septuagint numbering system but gets one number ahead after Psalm 9. The Septuagint’s Psalm 9 is the Hebrew’s Psalms 9 and 10. The USA-approved edition of The Liturgy of the Hours follows the Hebrew numbering.

Here’s a conversion table:
frtommylane.com/bible/enjoying_the_bible/04_ot_parta.htm
 
markadm said:
AlexV, I agree it is something that gives some cause for concern. I pray the modern Liturgy of the Hours but sometimes wonder about all the “missing stuff”. I wish I had more time to look into it.
Click to expand...
I’ve recently gotten tired of some of the language in the LOTH so I’m using the Psalms from a separate Bible. So far, most of the missing stuff seems to be prayers for the destruction of our enemies.
 
AlexV said:
Despite alterations in arrangement (especially the alterations of Pius X), for centuries and centuries the Breviary was governed by the principle that in one week you would recite the entire Psalter.

That didn’t always happen (i.e., you had to pray every Hour, obviously, and feasts of saints sometimes disturbed the arrangement, etc., etc.) – but the Breviary Psalter contained all 150 psalms.

Today, Friday of Week I in the Liturgia Horarum, illustrates the great change of the Bugnini Psalter.

At Matins, the psalm is 34 (35). But not exactly. More precisely, it’s 34 (35), verses 1-2. 3c. 9-19. 22-23. 27-28.

So what about 3a-b, 4-8, 24-26 (also known as the inspired Word of God)?

Well, they’re problematic. Imprecatory. Not exactly the image Bugnini wanted to portray of the Church at prayer.

Three of the 150 psalms are entirely absent from the Bugnini Psalter. Numerous verses are missing (all duly noted) from others.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I missed something. Do you have evidence that Bugnini ever had anything to do with the LOTH changes? Please provide.
 
otjm said:
Perhaps I missed something. Do you have evidence that Bugnini ever had anything to do with the LOTH changes? Please provide.
Click to expand...
There’s a whole book on the subject by Stanislaus Campbell, called From Breviary to Liturgy of the Hours: Structural Reform of the Roman Office, 1964-1971.
 
Bugnini was the prime participant in ALL liturgical changes from c. 1965 to c. 1975.

His book has a long and detailed chapter on the Divine Office.
 
AlexV said:
[Bugnini’s] book has a long and detailed chapter on the Divine Office.
Click to expand...
Have you read it?

I’m resisting doing so because I’m frightened I would just end up shouting and havering at the walls.
 
markadm said:
That doesn’t sound like a recommendation at all! 😉
Click to expand...
Parts of it that fascinated me included the development of the 1965 rite, which is the earliest form of the Mass I can remember from my kindergarten days (the little brown St Joseph Sunday Missal and Hymnal–I had the honor of carrying our family’s copies into the church from the car each Sunday morning).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top