Traditional Calendar, vernacular Office?

[angel12]

In the immediate time preceding the Council, most of the laity did often participate in the Divine Office.

I doubt that. While there undoubtedly some churches that held public Vespers, and maybe sometimes other Hours, “most laity” did not have the opportunity. Many wouldn’t have even known what the Office was, aside from being something priests and religious did.

The Liturgy of the Hours has been a great blessing in making the riches of liturgical prayer far more accessible to far more lay people.

 

[OldCAFMember]

In the immediate time preceding the Council, most of the laity did often participate in the Divine Office. I don’t know what the statistics are for this, but I think most people are in agreement on that.

I would dispute both assertions, i.e., that most of the laity participated in the Divine Office, and that most people are in agreement on that.

 

[voltape1]

Seems stangre - in old times priests used Latin and nobody understood - Now I, a layman, use the entire office and the Mass in Latin, whilst the religious don’t. After 60-odd years using the Pian Psalter (Pius XII) I just couldn’t use any other in Latin or any other language. Occasionally I turn to Italian or Spanish (my mother tongue). For me, English is an ugly language for praying and French, while accepting that the Holy Books are magnificently translated into French, I still can’t get used to them

 

[OraLabora]

In the immediate time preceding the Council, most of the laity did often participate in the Divine Office.

I also doubt this other than public participation at Vespers on Sundays, and major feasts and solemnities. Very few would have recited the entire office. And where I grew up, Catholicism was very much the “working class” religion, with few with educations beyond grade 10, let alone high school, and I doubt those would have had enough proficiency in Latin to comfortably recite the Office on a daily basis. And most would have been working too hard to manage a cursus of 150 psalms in a week. The laity’s equivalents were the Rosary, and the Angelus; our local parish in fact still chimes the Angelus bells three times a day,

For that matter, it is also debatable how many clerics truly participated in the Office themselves, aside from rambling off the Hours to fulfill their obligation.

And therein lies the problem with the pre-Conciliar Office. With today’s reality of one or two priests covering up to 4 rural parishes and having to say up to three Masses, often driving many miles in foul weather (this is the reality in my area), plus provide pastoral care to the sick & dying, and run the parish, and it’s clear that a 150-psalm per week Office, with multiple levels of feast, simply wasn’t workable and priests would often, as you note, rattle off the Office in one sitting early in the morning or anticipated in the evening. How this is supposed one is supposed to sanctify the day by reciting Vespers in the morning, Lauds in the evening, or Sext at either, is beyond me. At least the LOTH has short offices that can easily be recited in 10 minutes at the appropriate time. A busy priest can recite his office quietly on the bus or subway, and if he has more time, recite it in a more meditative and purposeful way in his church or rectory, and yes if he can with the people (rare, but I know of two places where this happens regularly for Lauds and Sunday Vespers). I can’t speak for Eastern tradition as I am not familiar with it.

Regardless of any private recitation, the public choral Office, its true form, has fallen off from the face of the Church’s liturgical map,

Not really. First of all monasteries certainly do recite the choral office daily. In my parish Lauds is used in lieu of Mass when a priest isn’t available for a weekday, and the Cathedral in Sherbrooke QC does Lauds most days, and Vespers in Advent and Lent. Yes, choral vespers. I know because I sing in the schola that is responsible for the Gregorian version (on other Sundays of those times different choirs provide the music). And the cathedral of my diocese, does the same (I live on the border of two dioceses)

(cont’d)

 

[OraLabora]

I can not agree that the Liturgy of the Hours is a gift to the Church, no more than Divino Afflatu was, as it is a massive rupture with the traditional cursus of psalms and the general structure of the Hours.

I couldn’t disagree more. While Divino Afflatu, I agree, was a major change in the Divine Office, pretty much on par with the LOTH in its extent, and while the cursus of psalms changed, I think “massive rupture” is excessive.

First of all, the tradition is not to say the entire psalter in a week, it is to say it over a period of time. St. Benedict’s Rule was the first rupture: he took the Office from saying the entire psalter in a day, as he taught us was the practice of the Desert Fathers in his Rule, to in a week. You could argue it’s been “downhill” since then and I can’t say I completely disagree. However, other than the placement of the hymn at the major hours (and the LOTH simply standardized the placement for all hours, whereas in the past it was placed before the psalmody at Vigils and the minor hours), the structure remains the same: (hymn), psalmody, reading, response to the readings, gospel canticle (L&V), supplications, and collect.

Moreover I did a semi-scholarly analysis of the LOTH for the oblates of our abbey a few years back. The truly important psalms associated with a certain time of day, remain at that time of day: psalms 62, 92, 99, 117, 148-150 at Sunday Lauds, Psalms 109, 110, 111, 112 at Sunday Vespers (Monastic tradition) and 113A and 113B also at Sunday Vespers (Roman tradition), 4, 90 and 133 at Compline (allowed every day by the rubrics), psalm 50 at Lauds and most appropriately Friday Lauds. Moreover with a few exceptions, the psalms of the Office of Readings (which can still be used as Matins) are almost entirely from the monastic cursus of Matins. Similarly, the psalms for Vespers of the last week of the cycle are all from the monastic cursus. I was surprised, in fact, from this analysis, just how much the LOTH did respect tradition because I initially thought like you about this.

Aside from our modern sleeping patterns, we are no different than our ancestors who managed to get on with the old Office.

Disagree here as well. Long gone are the days when a rectory housed 4 or 5 priests. Much, on a practical level, has changed for today’s clergy.

I think what the new Office gets correct, then, is freeing up some obligations and allowing for more breathing room, aside from combining many Hours together.

Yes this is an important change, it is now possible to respect the verity of the hours.

 

[Gabika50]

You are correct; it is a question of habit. I have a psalter from 1708 all in Latin and refer to it from time to time (passed on by family).

 

[angel12]

I have a psalter from 1708 all in Latin and refer to it from time to time (passed on by family).

What a treasure!

 

[voltape1]

In Lima, Peru, where I was born and I live, there are second hand bookstores and years ago I got the 2-volume John XXIII breviary in Latin new! without use , the gold brilliant - I have them here and now and then I use it. Mind you, I got the 2 tomes for ten soles (Peruvian currency) which is about the price of a Hamburger Royal (around US$3.- ) (Three dollars) - for similar prices I got I volume of one breviary from 1819 and an Horae Diurnae from 1900 - So far I have about 30 breviaries around my home. A brother of my grandfather was bishop of Ayacucho, Peru, around the 1890’s and his breviary remained in the family - It was an enormous 4-tome set all in Latin, complete to the last detail - large and heavy books measuring some 10" x 8" and 3.5" wide - all offices were complete, no “et reliqua”, and no need to jump from a page to another.

 

[OraLabora]

I have the pre-conciliar Monastic breviary myself, given to me by one of the monks at the abbey I’m associated with. I also have the 1934 Antiphonale Monasticum and 1935 Aniphonale Solesmensis. Those, I purchased. The first, new, from Solesmes, the second, very well used, from the abbey bookstore.

I don’t have much from the pre-Conciliar Roman Office as I don’t have much affinity for that breviary, only what exists in my Liber Usualis and Paroissien Romain (local Quebec adaptation of the Liber Usualis).

 

[Venite]

My apologies, I made a typo. I do agree that most did not have any familiarity with the Office immediately before the Council, hence the remaining part of the paragraph contrasting that period with the rest of history.

Frankly, I myself am not concerned with every lay person having to recite all the psalms. This is, of course, one of the objectives of the Office, but it is not its only objectives, and certainly it should not be stressed to the detriment to the substance of the liturgy. The particular structure of an Hour with its respective ancient psalmody is just as important. From what I understand, Matins/Vigils, where most of the psalter has always been frontloaded, was never something the laity regularly observed, aside from perhaps major feasts in certain regions in certain periods. I believe St. Thomas More makes mention of this.

And therein lies the problem […]

Right, it was a problem. Was this universal when breviaries and private recitation become widespread, or is the problem confined to modernity? Either way, the solution is to allow for more leeway in what each cleric is legally bound to recite. The Office is the prayer of the Church, not of any individual. Chapters, canons, and so on, are more than capable of reciting the old Office; it is literally their job.

I couldn’t disagree more. While Divino Afflatu, I agree, was a major change in the Divine Office, […]

I would say that that what happened for 1400 years is tradition, whereas whatever the custom was in different regions in the first 500 years of the Church is not tradition simply because it happened in antiquity. Otherwise we open up a huge Pandora’s box that, I think, nobody is wanting to deal with.

I am aware of the cursus of the Liturgy of the Hours. I respect the fact that the reformers tried to keep some of its traditional shape despite the very limited allowance to do such a thing because of how short the Hours are, and I am certainly surprised that psalm 50 was able to enter in as a weekly feature of Friday, considering the absolute disdain modern people have for repetition. For a psalter that is stretched to four weeks within four Hours, it is actually a well-designed one. Nevertheless, this does not stop it from being a rupture with the old Office simply because a few traditional elements are kept in it or restored.

Disagree here as well. Long gone are the days when a rectory housed 4 or 5 priests. Much, on a practical level, has changed for today’s clergy.

But that’s exactly my point. The Office itself does not need to be changed! You need to lighten the burden of individual clerics, and this is probably best decided by their bishops, but you need not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are several authors who have made their respective suggestions in this regard, such as Monsignor Gamber, Professor Dobszay, and, most recently, Bishop Schneider.

 

[OraLabora]

But that’s exactly my point. The Office itself does not need to be changed! You need to lighten the burden of individual clerics, and this is probably best decided by their bishops, but you need not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are several authors who have made their respective suggestions in this regard, such as Monsignor Gamber, Professor Dobszay, and, most recently, Bishop Schneider.

I think the problem with that is that most clergy would pounce on the idea if that were the only solution, and as a result large parts of the psalter will never get prayed by them, and as a result, will never get prayed at all by the secular clergy, as they follow a different cursus compared to monastics who do pray the entire psalter.

And that would be a pity because I find value in chanting all the psalms, which is why I like the LOTH with the exception of not being happy about the two missing psalms, placing three psalms as seasonal psalms, and the missing verses. Which drives me crazy enough to do what I’m doing now: praying monastic schema “B” with all 7 canonical hours and all 150 psalms in 1 week. Fortunately I’m retired and winter is a pretty quiet time for me. In summer I’ll either switch back to the LOTH, or use a two-week variation on monastic “B”, which is allowed by the rubrics (Vigils over two weeks, one median hour combining Terce and Sexte one week, and Terce and None the next week).

What you suggest is already what the Church does in most places for permanent deacons with the LOTH, who are generally only required to pray Lauds and Vespers (not sure about Compline).

Quite frankly, the psalms have become my spiritual “crack cocaine”, and I can’t do without. I’ve been praying the Office for some 16 years now since entering oblate formation, and they have really come to grow on me. So for me any formula that omits psalms either by praxis or design, truly bothers me. I’d rather do nearly all psalms in 4 weeks than having a large number of them that I never pray.

And for your suggestion, if that were truly the solution, the 1910 Pius X psalter is the last one I’d use. I’d instead recommend the monastic one, as it has been in continuous use, both in pre- and post-Conciliar flavours, for some 1500 years. Hard to get more traditional than that. There’s no more traditional about the Pius X psalter than the LOTH. It’s cursus breaks with both Monastic and Roman traditions.

 

[Venite]

I think the problem with that […]

I don’t think one should simply omit things. I don’t want to propose a solution, but I know others, who are smarter than myself, have made proposals. Prof. Dobszay in his book Bugnini-Liturgy does so, which you can find the chapter on the Office here: https://media.musicasacra.com/publications/sacredmusic/pdf/divineoffice.pdf. I’m not going to give my opinion on his outline. The main point is to preserve the ancient cursus while allowing for some options. The Liturgy of the Hours does this to an extent, and I think it would done even better without Divino Afflatu having shaped the minds of clergy and religious for 50 years at that point.

Quite frankly, […]

I have been praying multiple forms of the Office since becoming a catechumen. I can’t imagine myself not praying the psalms, so I agree with you there. That said, aside from clerics, religious, and lay enthusiasts such as ourselves, I don’t believe this must apply to everyone, and it certainly won’t, which is why preserving the traditional character of the Hours for public celebration is more important than simply throwing more psalms at people, as most of them will never be praying all 150 psalms on a regular basis, anyway.

For myself, the daily repetition of certain psalms is such a spiritual gift. In particular at Lauds with the Miserere and the Laudate psalms. The same applies to the psalmody of Compline (again, another thing the LotH gets right over Divino Afflatu).

And for your suggestion, […]

Yes, I am in full agreement with you here. I have the Monastic Diurnal in my library, which in some ways I prefer, but there is no good option for Monastic Matins, other than the less than stellar option on Divinum Officium. I expect that when I get busier in life and unable to pray Matins in full I will switch to the Diurnal.

I don’t think I’ll ever again use the 1914-1962 Roman breviary unless I am forced to do so in public celebrations.

 

[OraLabora]

Yes, I am in full agreement with you here. I have the Monastic Diurnal in my library, which in some ways I prefer, but there is no good option for Monastic Matins,

You may not be aware of this as it is “inside information” but the Solesmes congregation, in deference to the aging monastic population, now allows monastic Matins to be spread over two weeks. That considerably lightens the load! I use monastic schema B which is also 6 psalms at Matins, divided into two nocturnes of 3 psalms, with a third nocturne of 3 OT canticles + Gospel reading and Te Deum on feasts, solemnities and Sundays.

Moreover the new antiphonary allows monastics to eliminate the third nocturne on feasts, leaving them only for solemnities and Sundays; though the Te Deum is still chanted on feasts. That also considerably reduces the load. So those are both licit options,

I think what this back-and-forth discussion illustrates though, is that there is no one perfect Office schema. They all have their advantages and disadvantages, and irritants. I’m no big fan of Monastic schema B myself; psalm 109 at Sunday Matins? Psalm 50 at Saturday Lauds? Really? But it does have the advantage of praying the entire psalter in one week, and no matter what one does to their organization, the psalms remain the psalms. My main reasons for praying it are that it remains a manageable for a layman to pray all psalms in one week (unlike the original Benedictine schema now known as Schema A), and it is what my monastic community prays. So in solidarity with them and joined in prayer, I like to use it for that reason. The community has been enormously important in my life. At least they still do Lauds and Vespers in Latin Gregorian chant, as do I incidentally, though lately I’ve been experimenting more with French psalmody (French is my mother tongue), partly just for the heck of it, partly because our schola sometimes psalmodies in French for the benefit of the laity in our liturgies, and I am their psalmody instructor. So I like to remain sharp in both languages.

 

[jesusalright4me]

1. Got it, I actually just discovered the Murray psalm tones in the back of Christian prayer. They aren’t really so bad, and I think I may primarily use those! Now just to figure out how to chant all those antiphons.
2. I actually just picked up a copy of the Liber. Now I have all the hymns in both English and Latin. What a striking difference there is between the Latin of the old breviary and the new breviary! I am sticking with the Liber for now, simply because I can find no sort of approval by the bishop’s conference on the Fr. Weber hymns. As I understand, bishop’s need to approve the hymns, and that would include translations of the official Latin ones. But if you could prove to me the contrary, I would gladly use Fr. Weber’s hymns from time to time.
3. That is a-okay. I have come to just accept the translation that I currently have. Either way, it would have been more money dropped to by the UK version.

Just a few comments: I have found that praying the modern office is not as bad as I thought it would be. Particularly, for night prayer, I have found that by saying some of the prayers that used to be in compline before I begin the office (e.g. Iube Domine benedicere, the pater noster, etc.) as well as by praying some of the discarded Marian prayer after the Marian hymns at the end, an compline with more “substance” is achieved. It would be similar to, for example, a priest leading his congregation in the prayers at the foot of the altar directly before and OF mass, or in reciting the Last Gospel after mass had ended. Because they are outside of the mass, they become private devotions, and therefore do not break any rubrics. I have also decided that whenever the seasons don’t match up for me and this would affect the way the office is said, I will make the sacrifice of taking the time to at least praying the EF compline in Latin. A good example is tomorrow; pre-Lent begins in the old rite, and the alleluia will be buried. As I want to enter fully into that season, I will also avoid saying alleluia in the office as well, hence why I will default to the old office. (I wish they would have never removed pre-Lent in the first place, but that is another discussion).

 

[jesusalright4me]

I did, however, come across this clause in the GILH:

1. For a public cause or out of devotion, except on solemnities, the Sundays of the seasons of Advent, Lent, and Easter, Ash Wednesday, Holy Week, the octave of Easter, and 2 November, a votive office may be celebrated, in whole or in part: for example, on the occasion of a pilgrimage, a local feast, or the external solemnity of a saint.

So, my question to you would be, with this in mind, would it be at all possible to celebrate a votive office for any saint upon any day (besides the exceptions listed)? I ask because this would allow me to bring the traditional calendar I largely follow even more in sync with how I pray the Divine Office. For example, let’s say I wish to celebrate the feast of Thomas Aquinas on the old date (March 7th). Could I say a votive office in honor of him on that date, even though in the new calendar he is celebrated on January 28th? It seems that this would be “out of devotion” in the sense that I would like to pay honor to the saint of that particular day in the old calendar, and while the reason I would be doing it does not correspond to any of their examples, the question remains, are we limited to the examples they give? Please let me know your thoughts.

 

[OraLabora]

Votive Offices are a grey area in the LOTH. There are no specific Votive Offices unlike in the Missal.

I found this on Zenit.org, a reliable and orthodox Catholic site:

The present missal distinguishes between “Masses for various needs and occasions” and “votive Masses.” The first class refers to formulas that implore graces for a wide range of ecclesial or civil circumstances, whereas votive Masses are celebrated in honor of the Divine Persons, of Mary, and of the saints.

It would appear that only the latter form would be subject to a votive office alongside the office for the dead. There are no specific offices in the breviary that correspond to the missal’s Masses for various needs and occasions.

That would appear to allow a fair amount of wiggle room. The GI also says this however:

“252. Everyone should be concerned to respect the complete cycle of the four-week psalter. Still, for spiritual or pastoral advantage, the psalms appointed for a particular day may be replaced with others from the same hour of a different day. There are also circumstances occasionally arising when it is permissible to choose suitable psalms and other texts in the way done for a votive office.”

And now a bit of spiritual advice from a longtime prayer of the Divine Office. It is easy to suddenly find one’s self swimming upstream against a strong current as we try to “personalize” the Office to suit our particular tastes and peccadilloes, even when exercising licit options. The LOTH is above all the prayer of the Church. Some options make sense for a religious community with a long tradition. Others require some gymnastics.

Eventually though, when exercising too many options like swapping psalms, doing special Offices, etc., one finds one’s self “fighting” with the Breviary, taking a piece here, a psalm there, and then the Liturgy loses its fluidity. To me the pieces must all flow together and there should be as little page-turning possible otherwise it loses its beauty.

A good example is my praying of the Monastic Office which I’m currently using. My practice was, in the schema I use, to use psalms 4, 90 and 133 every night. The structure of that Office meant doing Vigils on a two-week cycle instead of one, so I could move the psalms of Compline to the second nocturne which meant jumping back and forth in the breviary. Instead I gave in, I just go with the flow of the Office as written. It has regained its fluidity, and since I already know the Confiteor, the hymn, the Responsory and the Nunc Dimittis and the Marian antiphons by heart, I simply turn the lights out at those parts and chant them in the dark. It works out very well. It isn’t an issue in the Roman Office where the psalms of Compline are already doubled elsewhere, but it is a problem in monastic Schema B even though it’s a licit option.

Learning to embrace the Office as-is, is a great test of Benedictine humility where *thy will be done, not my will", is a pillar of the 12 degrees of humility in the Rule. It is also extremely liberating, and the true intelligence and richness of the Breviary will become obvious.

 

[OraLabora]

I would add that I don’t think a mismatch between your EF Mass and OF Office is that big a deal. Even being exclusively OF I run into the issue because the Roman and Monastic calendars are different, and I could find myself going to Mass in a parish on a memorial or feast on the monastic calendar and it’s just an ordinary feria at the parish. Or vice-versa, or when Ascension or Corpus Christi, for example, are transferred to the nearest Sunday whereas in the Monastic world they remain on their original days.

Pray with the mind of the Church, which is that the EF and OF Calendars are different.

 

[jesusalright4me]

The comment concerning the fluidity of the office is fair. I would not plan on doing it too much; honestly I would only want to do it for some of the more important saints on the Old Roman calendar. Would you have any idea how to even make a Votive Office for a saint who does not have a feast day on that day in the OF? If I had to guess, I would just take the propers from their actual feast day, or the commons area. Ideally, when I would do this, I would like to retain the day’s current psalm structure in order to respect it.

And I agree to an extent that it is not that big of a deal. However, when given the option between an optional memorial on the OF calendar and an unlisted martyrology saint that is still on the EF calendar whom I celebrated in mass on that day, I think it makes far more sense to go with the later for myself, simply because it keeps things more unified in my mind. The biggest issue for me is a few of the seasonal changes they made. After going to quite the penitential septuagesima mass in the EF, I have no desire whatsoever to proclaim the alleluia, hence why I am switching to the EF breviary compline until Lent begins in the OF. (On a side note, I cannot wait for Lent when, by and large, the readings for the OF mass and the EF mass line up. Super pumped!)

 

[OraLabora]

To celebrate a saint from the Martyrology not on the calendar, simply use the texts from the appropriate common, e.g. Martyr, Saint, Religious, Pastor, Virgin.

There maybe proper texts somewhere if the saint is celebrated on a local calendar.