Which Office Do You Pray?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Luigi_Daniele
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
OraLabora said:
Resources now exist to chant the current LOTH in Latin, in Gregorian chant.
Click to expand...
Could you elaborate on this? I have been looking for such resources over the last few days without much success.

Many thanks.
 
Gaudium86 said:
Could you elaborate on this? I have been looking for such resources over the last few days without much success.

Many thanks.
Click to expand...
Two sources. For the first, the first printing has unfortunately run out, but the details are here:

The Gregorian Hours

It’s a Latin-French diurnal antiphonary for the LOTH, for every day, season and feast (does not contain Office of Readings). Intended for choir use, it’s very easy to use, everything is in the right order. There is also an appendix for common tones, psalm tones, etc. It is an approved work. It is for the use of the Communauté St-Martin, a community of clerics and seminarists; but since they use the LOTH integrally it can be used elsewhere. They’re taking expressions of interest for a possible second printing, so get yours in if you’re interested. Very pricy though, but worth every penny. Also there is an accompanying set of CDs with MP3s of every hymn, antiphon, responsory, and the first verses of every psalm or canticle chanted in the psalm tone accompanying the antiphon. Also, with common tones. Very, very useful, and the CDs are still available.

For an official antiphonary for the LOTH, great news the first volume (actually labeled Volume II), has come out and allows the chanting of Vespers for every Sunday of the year (all seasons), and for feasts and solemnities. It is also very well designed for choir use as most of the office just follows straight though in the right order except for a few ordinary elements such as the Magnificat. It has the additional advantage that all psalms are pointed for the appropriate psalm tone, and there is a separate Magnificat version pointed for each of the psalm tones. It is stand-alone, in that you don’t need any other books to chant the entire office unless you want vernacular readings and intercessions, in which case a copy of Christian Prayer (or the 4-volume LOTH) would be required.

It has been published by the monks of Solesmes:

Solesmes Catalogue

Antiphonale Romanum II description (in French)

Of course, Solesmes also puts out just about everything you need to chant the Monastic Office as well, according to the current rubrics.
 
I read Matins and Lauds from the 1961 Breviarium Romanum this morning; almost exactly 1 hour, all read (I generally don’t sing on ferias). All in all, that’s 15 psalms + the Benedictus (Canticle of Zecharias) and 3 readings. All Latin.
 
Acolythus_sum said:
I read Matins and Lauds from the 1961 Breviarium Romanum this morning; almost exactly 1 hour, all read (I generally don’t sing on ferias). All in all, that’s 15 psalms + the Benedictus (Canticle of Zecharias) and 3 readings. All Latin.
Click to expand...
The Monastic Office is even worse: Psalm 3 before the Invitatory psalm, the Invitatory psalm, 12 psalms for Matins alone; 5 regular psalms for Lauds (ps. 66, 50, 148-150), 2 other psalms for Lauds, the O.T. Canticle + the Benedictus.

That’s 21 psalms plus the canticle; 2 long and one short reading. I do the readings in French (my mother tongue) but the rest in Latin.

Chanted this morning it was 1h03 min. for Matins and roughly 30 min. for Lauds.

In the case of the Monastic Office, the Ora is the Labora!!!
 
Thanks everyone! As an Oblate, I feel drawn to the MD now and again, but as a father of school age children, the time is just not do-able.

My monastery adds a Psalm and a much longer reading (as I stated before) to both Lauds and Vespers. Over all, it is very beautiful.

Thanks again 🙂
 
I recently bought a 4 volume LOH on ebay for a great price…it’s hard to figure out how to use it
 
I don’t think so…if your breviary came with those handy little cards, those are a good reference. When you don’t have your ordo (or computer) with you, it’s very valuable to have learned how to do it, even without the cards. It just takes time (in my case, a couple months).
 
Acolythus_sum said:
I don’t think so…if your breviary came with those handy little cards, those are a good reference. When you don’t have your ordo (or computer) with you, it’s very valuable to have learned how to do it, even without the cards. It just takes time (in my case, a couple months).
Click to expand...
I could do it, too…I think 😉

Thanks very much 🙂
 
I have continued to subscribe to this thread and have been very interested in all your answers.
I use the Shorter Christian Prayer and sing what I can of it; Glory to the Father…, the Our Father…, and any of the songs that I know the music too. I would like to chant more of it.
I have no grounding in chant, but love the sound. is there a simple guide in English ( it has been 40 years since 9th grade Latin)

thanks
Glory to God in the Highest
:harp:
 
Windmill said:
The Pian reforms did not destroy the Roman structure of Office. It shortened the number of Psalms used per day (but still retained the use of all 150 Psalms in a week) and introductory/conclusion prayers. What did it keep? The number of offices in a day, the same calendar, the same Collects, the same general structure, the same feasts, the same seasons, the same hymns, the same language (Latin), the same use of all 150 Psalms, and the same chants that had been used for centuries.

The modern Liturgy of the Hours retained none of these things (except about 15% of the Collects and the Latin language…but how often do you see Latin used nowadays?).

So, yes, the Pian reforms did change the Office, but it retained a semblance of the previous Roman Office. The reforms enacted after Vatican II by the Consillium have created an entirely new office. No one, Traditionalist or Liberal, denies that. So, I don’t think it’s right to equate the reforms enacted by Pius X with the ones that resulted in our current Office.

Beyond that, the translation into English by the ICEL is horrendous. This is same group that gave us the bad translations of the Missal (which had over 400 translations errors, some of which had very bad theological implications and needed to be fixed…and they are being fixed, Deo Gratias, in accordance with Liturgiam Authenticam). Just like the MIssal, the Liturgy of the Hours is the next item on the list to be fixed so that it better conforms to the edicio typica in Latin. So, if even the Bishops recognize that the translation is in need of repair, then I think we can safely say that it is inferior.
Click to expand...
The basic structure of the office is unchanged except for the placement of the hymn. That was variable prior to the reforms, and standardized in the new Office. Much effort has gone into the new Office to place psalms in their appropriate location and maintaining some traditions. For example using psalm 66 as invitatory allows one to perpetuate the practice of making that the psalm just before Lauds if that’s your first office. Psalm 109 is always at Sunday Vespers. Psalms 4, 90 and 133 are still the Compline psalms par excellence, and the rubrics allow their use daily at Compline if you wish, to facilitate recitation of compline from memory (I recently attended a monastery where it was chanted from memory in the dark, very beautiful); even if you do so, you won’t miss the other psalms for Compline as they are cleverly included in other Hours. It is false to say that it is a “completely” new Office. That it is a major change, and a major simplification, nobody can deny.

To me what is more important than the number of psalms in a week, is that one does not miss out on any psalms. For busy people, in the old pre-Vatican II Office, you miss an office regularly for a valid reason (say you can never make None) then you miss those psalms. The flexibility of the new Office ensures a greater chance of getting through all psalms in the 4-week cycle. Except of course for the deprecatory psalms, which is a major miss IMHO, but you can blame Paul VI for that one, not Annibale Bugnini.

As for the translations, that is a specifically English-language issue. In French it hasn’t been as much of an issue except that the French LOTH, instead of translating the Latin hymns, instead relies on new compositions in French and for the most part they are horrid: same vapid and meaningless words as one sees for current Mass hymns, and basically un-singable.

Still, a careful and scholarly study of the LOTH would reveal that in fact much effort was expended to maintain traditions. The main differences are:
  1. Shorter psalmody
  2. Introduction of a N.T. canticle at Vespers
  3. Consolidation of the minor hours into one mid-day hour for non-choir use (sort of like consolidating your debt at the bank I suppose)
  4. Standardized hymn placement;
  5. Office of Readings replaces Vigils (but it still can be used as Vigils including with optional canticles);
  6. No nocturns at the Office of Vigils;
  7. Intercessions
Much on the other hand has been kept: psalms in their proper place, basic structure of Opening verse-hymn-psalmody-O.T. canticle (Lauds)-short reading-responsory-Benedictus/Magnificat-Pater-collect-conclusion.

As the collects and the liturgical year, since most of the collects, and the year, are shared with the Mass, the Office reforms can’t be blamed.

Honestly, the new LOTH also increases lay participation, and lay exposure to the entire corpus of psalms (excluding the deprecatory ones). For most folks, even the pre-VII Office was simply too heavy to do all but a part of it.

I guess what I am saying is that I wish folks would stop griping about it. If you have the time, and can manage the pre-Vatican II Office or one of the Monastic schemas, be thankful, and be thankful that the current Liturgy of the Hours dramatically increases the number of folks who join you in praying the Hours even if in a simplified form.

If you really take the time to study the LOTH, you’d realize it was in fact very intelligently designed for its purpose.
 
magdalina said:
Lauds [with community] from *Christian Prayer *

Prime thru Compline [privately] from Monastic Duirnal

Matins [as time permits] from Baronius LOBVM
Click to expand...
UPDATE:

Matins [as time permits] from Lancelot-Andrews Monastic Breviary Matins
 
OraLabora,

I am really enjoying our dialog. Thanks for sharing.

Your last post gave me food for thought, but I still see a lot of deficiencies when I pray the new vs. old Office. The older forms are more rigorous in their language. They are not afraid to talk about things like purgatory, sin, “soul”, devil, the necessity of grace and our total dependence upon it, original sin, etc… So many times, when I read Psalms and Collects from the Monastic Diurnal vs. the Grail Psalter and Collects in the LOTH, I can see not only deletions or mistranslations, but I see a pattern of words chosen that emphasize: the dignity of man, our social responsibilities, prayers for earthly peace; but I see an avoidance of: a personified evil in Satan himself, our natural tendency to sin, our need to persevere in grace to make it to Heaven, our need to pray for souls in Purgatory, etc… It’s not universal, but it’s a pattern.

It must be me, but I leave praying the LOTH like I’ve been given a hug by Jesus and my fellow man. I leave praying the Monastic Diurnal or the 1962 Breviarium Romanum like I’ve just finished a spiritual battle. One makes me feel content with myself. One makes me feel like I’ve grown stronger in my resistance to the world, the flesh, and the Devil.

I know this is subjective, and I wish I could give more concrete examples right now, but it’s just a pattern. I know that the Collects match the Mass, but it’s the fact that these Collects were either fabricated or altered significantly in the first place.
 
yosupman said:
Personally, I go to an Ordinary form church, and don’t want to be a liturgical monster, saying the traditional office, but going to the ordinary form mass.
Click to expand...
This has been my biggest problem, too. The dichotomy can start to affect your spiritual life. You can start to feel like you are praying “in protest”. This is why I sometimes fall back on the LOBVM (Baronius Press version). It doesn’t rely so much on the liturgical calendar from day to day, and so you can get a more traditional flavor without having to always be mentally translating yourself away from the OF calendar.

I have other friends who have found this to be a good solution until an EF Mass is started up in the area…and many are hoping for that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top