What do you predict would happen if a traditional Catholic pope was elected?

[Lormar]

I see heads popping all over MSNBC.

I see them on CNN.

 

[Esrb99]

Sarcasm?

The Liturgy of the Hours is the specific name for the post-conciliar Breviary. It wasn’t called that prior to the reforms.

The Liturgy of the Hours is a great spiritual benefit to me. The 1961 Roman Breviary is not. Roll back the Liturgy of the Hours and you deprive me and many others of full participation in the Church’s official prayer.

Good thing you mention Dei Verbum too. But it looks like some people would still roll that back anyway, just because it’s Vatican II.

You’re a layman, right? Laymen can use whichever version of the divine office to pray privately for their devotions.

 

[aemcpa]

Sarcasm?

The Liturgy of the Hours is the specific name for the post-conciliar Breviary. It wasn’t called that prior to the reforms.

The Liturgy of the Hours is a great spiritual benefit to me. The 1961 Roman Breviary is not. Roll back the Liturgy of the Hours and you deprive me and many others of full participation in the Church’s official prayer.

Good thing you mention Dei Verbum too. But it looks like some people would still roll that back anyway, just because it’s Vatican II.

Semi-sarcasm. The benefits of the revision of the breviary aside, there is no reason we as laity could not have used the Roman Breviary had it not been revised. It could have been rendered into English, or published in English and Latin side-by-side (as it is today anyway). Or it could have been revised into its current format without approval for the vernacular. In every case, the hours would still be of spiritual benefit.

 

[porthos11]

You’re a layman, right? Laymen can use whichever version of the divine office to pray privately for their devotions.

I’m not praying a devotion. I’m liturgically praying the prayer of the Church in my capacity as a baptized Christian. If the Church rolls that back then I’m left with the 1961 Roman Breviary, which does not benefit me due to its length and language. More than the reforms of the Mass, the Liturgy of the Hours is the greatest thing that came out of the Second Vatican Council.

 

[Genesis315]

It is actually canonically possible for a future pope to annul the outcome of the council, as it was merely a pastoral council:

• The Council of Ephesus (449), which was regularly called and attended by all the East and by delegates from Pope St. Leo the great, was annulled by that pope’s subsequent opposition to it and was branded as the Latrocinium, or “Robbers’ Council”
• The Council of Hieria (754) was annulled by Pope Stephen II in 769. This council had introduced and blessed iconoclasm.
• The Council of Pistoia (1794), which was attended by the Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II, the bishops of France, and some bishops of Italy, was annulled by Pope Pius VI. It had adopted “reforms” and liturgical experiments that resemble to a significant extent the innovations of Vatican II (1962-1965), including the provisions that there be only one “table” in each church and that it should not be ornamented with flowers or relics. The council condemned processions in honor of the Blessed Virgin and the Saints, the Rosary, the Way of the Cross, and images. It demanded a “simplified” Mass said entirely out loud in the vulgar tongues. Pope Pius VI, in annulling the decrees of the council, called them “rash, offensive to pious ears, insulting to the Church, favorable to the charges of heretics against it.”

None of those were ecumenical Councils approved by the Pope.

 

[Esrb99]

I’m not praying a devotion. I’m liturgically praying the prayer of the Church in my capacity as a baptized Christian. If the Church rolls that back then I’m left with the 1961 Roman Breviary, which does not benefit me due to its length and language. More than the reforms of the Mass, the Liturgy of the Hours is the greatest thing that came out of the Second Vatican Council.

If praying with a cleric, it should be noted that clerics are bound to pray even the LOTH in latin daily.

You say that if the church reverts to the 61 Breviary, you will be stuck. Since monastic communities tend to pray their own version of the office, does this mean they do not pray the prayer of the church because its not the same as yours? What about Ecclesia Dei communities which DO use the 61 office-are they not praying the prayer of the church?

 

[porthos11]

Semi-sarcasm. The benefits of the revision of the breviary aside, there is no reason we as laity could not have used the Roman Breviary had it not been revised. It could have been rendered into English, or published in English and Latin side-by-side (as it is today anyway). Or it could have been revised into its current format without approval for the vernacular. In every case, the hours would still be of spiritual benefit.

Language and length.

But no matter. The fact is that the Liturgy of the Hours now as revised is of great benefit for many members of the Church and came as a result of Sacrosanctum concilium. The approval into the vernacular was an even greater benefit. But NOOOOO, it was Vatican II, so that should go too.

 

[porthos11]

If praying with a cleric, it should be noted that clerics are bound to pray even the LOTH in latin daily.

You say that if the church reverts to the 61 Breviary, you will be stuck. Since monastic communities tend to pray their own version of the office, does this mean they do not pray the prayer of the church because its not the same as yours? What about Ecclesia Dei communities which DO use the 61 office-are they not praying the prayer of the church?

They are using approved editions, which is beside the point. I said “I” would be stuck. I would also be praying the prayer of the Church with the 1961 Roman Breviary, but I would not derive as much benefit because I do not have a command of Latin. But then again, back to the thread, even good things like the Liturgy of the Hours would have to be reversed because it came out of the “pastoral” Vatican II, so it should also be swept away.

This thread isn’t about the Liturgy of the Hours itself but of the attitude some Catholics hold that Vatican II was somehow a blot on the history of the Church despite the obviously many good things that came out of it. I was only using the Hours as an example.

 

[Esrb99]

They are using approved editions, which is beside the point. I said “I” would be stuck. I would also be praying the prayer of the Church with the 1961 Roman Breviary, but I would not derive as much benefit because I do not have a command of Latin.

My copy of the '61 breviary has the latin and english side by side. As a layman, I can pray the prayer of the church in the vernacular or in latin with my copy. Since such copies exist, you would be able to do the same if you so chose.

 

[aemcpa]

I’m not praying a devotion. I’m liturgically praying the prayer of the Church in my capacity as a baptized Christian. If the Church rolls that back then I’m left with the 1961 Roman Breviary, which does not benefit me due to its length and language. More than the reforms of the Mass, the Liturgy of the Hours is the greatest thing that came out of the Second Vatican Council.

The Liturgy of the Hours is officially in the Latin language. The language is not the issue - one can pray in Latin as easily as in English after putting in a modicum of effort, especially when one has a breviary with Latin and the vernacular together. To say that “it doesn’t benefit me because it’s in Latin” is rather lazy. Also, there is no reason why the 1961 Breviary could not have been approved for translation into the vernacular. The real reform was the four-week Psalter, which made the office manageable for the laity. And I agree that it was a profoundly beneficial change and one that is still underutilized in the spiritual life of the Church.

 

[Thomas_Casey]

MODERATOR NOTICE

As we have said before, because we’re a Catholic apostolate that serves to answer questions about the Catholic faith, any position or statements that contradicts the Holy See is unacceptable.

The Migisterium has already spoken on the place of Vatican II in Catholic Tradition. Anyone contradicting this position or pushing an agenda contrary to this position will be banned no questions asked.

After you’ve heard something several times and you continue to press forward with the same question and statements disguised in different words, it becomes agenda posting. Agenda posting is a banable offense.