Varying requirements present after 1963 do indeed present a big problem with regards to liturgies. Sacrosanctum Concilium 89 also states that the three Minor Hours are to be consolidated into one Hour. This also seems to have been pointed toward the Breviarium Romanum as it was, and not to an ideal office in the future. Things changed, sadly. It’s never entirely clear if those 1963 instructions applied to the Office as it was, or if they apply to the Office as it came to be. Hence my question.
Having read Sacrosanctum Concilium I would have to say that it’s norms have been followed faithfully. Remember it was a general guideline to guide the work of the commission entrusted with the reform of the Divine Office. Incidentally Sacrosanctum Concilium para. 89 says:
e) In choir the hours of Terce, Sext, and None are to be observed. But outside choir it will be lawful to select any one of these three, according to the respective time of the day.
which is not quite what you have written.
Moreover the other guidelines have been observed faithfully:
- Therefore, when the office is revised, these norms are to be observed:
a) By the venerable tradition of the universal Church, Lauds as morning prayer and Vespers as evening prayer are the two hinges on which the daily office turns; hence they are to be considered as the chief hours and are to be celebrated as such.
b) Compline is to be drawn up so that it will be a suitable prayer for the end of the day.
c) The hour known as Matins, although it should retain the character of nocturnal praise when celebrated in choir, shall be adapted so that it may be recited at any hour of the day; it shall be made up of fewer psalms and longer readings.
d) The hour of Prime is to be suppressed.
e) In choir the hours of Terce, Sext, and None are to be observed. But outside choir it will be lawful to select any one of these three, according to the respective time of the day.
All of these have been observed by the LOTH. Moreover in other paragraphs:
- So that it may really be possible in practice to observe the course of the hours proposed in Art. 89, the psalms are no longer to be distributed throughout one week, but through some longer period of time.
The work of revising the psalter, already happily begun, is to be finished as soon as possible, and is to take into account the style of Christian Latin, the liturgical use of psalms, also when sung, and the entire tradition of the Latin Church.
Again the LOTH respects this: the psalter settled on is 4 weeks; the revision of the psalter also, with the Novo Vulgate.
- To whatever extent may seem desirable, the hymns are to be restored to their original form, and whatever smacks of mythology or ill accords with Christian piety is to be removed or changed. Also, as occasion may arise, let other selections from the treasury of hymns be incorporated.
The 1983 Liber Hymnarius in fact did restore the ancient hymns back from the adulterated and ill-considered modifications of Urban VIII.
And this the great treasure given to the laity by the Church (my bold):
- Pastors of souls should see to it that the chief hours, especially Vespers, are celebrated in common in church on Sundays and the more solemn feasts. And the laity, too, are encouraged to recite the divine office, either with the priests, or among themselves, or even individually.
I would say that the LOTH fulfills the above exactly and thus perfectly captures the intent of Scrosanctum Concilium.
Morover as SC alludes to, this reform process began well before SC or VII. Pius X took the first major stab at it in 1910 with issue of the breviary that is the basis of the 1960 edition. Many departures from tradition and precedents started with that breviary in 1910. Annibale Bugnini was first appointed to oversee the Divine Office and Mass in the mid 1940s. Experimentation with things like Mass versus populum began in Rome at Sant’Anselmo monastery in the 1940s, with the blessing of the Holy See.
To me, the LOTH, especially since excellent hymnals and antiphonaries now exist to celebrate it in Gregorian chant, is very much not banal. Anybody praying it is not engaged in a banality. It fits the reality of most busy lives. As a professional, husband and father it made the Divine Office well within my reach to do
in its entirety. Sometimes I do revert to a monastic version (schema B as at our abbey, but over two weeks instead of 1), when I have a bit more time and want to join my prayer more closely to that of the monks who do need our prayers right now but most of the time the LOTH is it for me.
But most important of all, the fact that more and more laity are now able to join their voices to the clergy and religious celebrating the Divine Office, certainly isn’t a banality and certainly acts as force that draws us closer to the Body of Christ.
I recommend as a good read on the topic “From Breviary to Liturgy of the Hours” by Stanislaus Campbell. Although the author criticizes it for different reasons, it’s a great explanation of the process of how it was arrived at. It’s also important to note that the Holy Father at the time, Paul VI, was keenly aware of the developments and interjected his advice and instructions more than once. In fact it was his insistence that the imprecatory psalms and verses be removed. Whether we agree or not with that decision is immaterial, it was his right to implement that particular change, and the LOTH is the prayer of the Church as the Church currently intends it.
