|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Eccles: Daily Offices Redux
|
Ignatius' Acolyte
Shipmate
# 12426
|
Posted
Hmmm... I'm pretty curious about the Merton office already!
I came across a resource that may help those engaged in the public celebration of the Office and of liturgy generally. It is Ormonde Plater's new website.
I should note three office-related resources in particular: his settings of Tenebrae and the Great O Antiphons (Advent is a long way away, so we can practice singing them), and office litanies. In the latter, he has his own version of the litany which appears as Suffrages B for Evening Prayer II in the 1979 American book.
<tangent> His general intercessions for the Eucharist are themselves quite a model and are for me the way forward, rather than the didactic nonsense that is often foisted on Filipino Catholics. But that's another topic entirely. </tangent>
[edited to tinker with wording, slightly.]
[ 14. April 2007, 14:24: Message edited by: PostDenominational Catholic ]
--------------------
Be a blessing.
Posts: 427 | From: Quezon City, the Philippines | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
Thanks for that Plater link, PDC. It is rather interesting.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ignatius' Acolyte
Shipmate
# 12426
|
Posted
You're welcome. Someone lent me a St. Helena's Breviary, personal edition, by the way. I'll try using it starting Wednesday.
*bump*
--------------------
Be a blessing.
Posts: 427 | From: Quezon City, the Philippines | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PostDenominational Catholic:
You're welcome. Someone lent me a St. Helena's Breviary, personal edition, by the way. I'll try using it starting Wednesday.
*bump*
If you're not used to neutral language, it will take some time. Give it a chance for at least one cycle of the Psalter.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
John H
Shipmate
# 9599
|
Posted
Just a very quick question re the LOTH (UK edition). In the psalms, I understand what the asterisks mean at the end of every other line, but what do the little daggers mean?
These are sometimes found at the end of a line where there are two lines before an asterisk (hope y'all are suitably admiring of my grasp of the technical language, here...), but sometimes appear at the start of a line straight after an asterisk, which kind of undermined my assumption that they meant "slightly shorter break than for an apostrophe".
--------------------
"If you look upon ham and eggs and lust, you have already committed breakfast in your heart."
Posts: 423 | From: Orpington, Kent, UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
I'm guessing it's a flex - a pause for breath in a very long verse. If you sing the psalms, there is usually a modification of the tone there, e.g. down a minor third for many tones, down a step for others.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
DitzySpike
Shipmate
# 1540
|
Posted
One question. With the diversity in thr ordering of the Divine Office in the monastic communities, is it still fair to maintain the distinction between the monastic and secular office? Given the Benedictine influence over the LOH, the Roman office does look like a variant of the monastic office. Furthermore, true secular/cathedral office seems to have disappeared from practice for a while already,except in the example of the Taize office. The concept of a secular office is polyvalent: are there essential characteristics that define it anymore?
Posts: 498 | From: Singapore | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by John H:
Just a very quick question re the LOTH (UK edition). In the psalms, I understand what the asterisks mean at the end of every other line, but what do the little daggers mean?
These are sometimes found at the end of a line where there are two lines before an asterisk (hope y'all are suitably admiring of my grasp of the technical language, here...), but sometimes appear at the start of a line straight after an asterisk, which kind of undermined my assumption that they meant "slightly shorter break than for an apostrophe".
I don't know. The only use of them in the US edition is as per the first use you mention, in the Benedictus, where they let you know that just because we're on a new line of text, we haven't left the reciting note.
The US edition isn't exactly typo-free, so could the others just be typos?
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DitzySpike:
One question. With the diversity in thr ordering of the Divine Office in the monastic communities, is it still fair to maintain the distinction between the monastic and secular office? [...] are there essential characteristics that define it anymore?
I think the second question is perhaps the answer to the first. But I'm not sure what the answer to the second question is - what do you see as the defining characteristics of secular vs monastic office say 100 years ago?
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
I feel as though I just got a hard-to-find book at a steal of a price. It's The Prayer Book Office: Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer According to the American Book of Common Prayer With Invitatories and Hymns, Antiphons to the Gospel Canticles, and Other Enrichments pub. 1944 by Morehouse-Gorham Co., New York. Paul Hartzell was the editor.
I was browsing for copies of this, found a few at US$200+, then found one in a California used-book shop for $15.83. Got it shipped for a total of $21.33.
Is the really expensive one a better edition? Or should the book shop have known better than to let it go so cheaply?
It must not have been used much by "Mom," to whom it's inscribed; it's in practically mint condition, just a bit dusty.
![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif) , I think.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
ecumaniac
Ship's whipping girl
# 376
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by John H:
Just a very quick question re the LOTH (UK edition). In the psalms, I understand what the asterisks mean at the end of every other line, but what do the little daggers mean?
These are sometimes found at the end of a line where there are two lines before an asterisk (hope y'all are suitably admiring of my grasp of the technical language, here...), but sometimes appear at the start of a line straight after an asterisk, which kind of undermined my assumption that they meant "slightly shorter break than for an apostrophe".
I've never seen the daggers at the start of a line. In my office books it indicates that you don't leave the reciting note.
--------------------
it's a secret club for people with a knitting addiction, hiding under the cloak of BDSM - Catrine
Posts: 2901 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Office
Shipmate
# 10558
|
Posted
Scott wrote:-
quote:
I feel as though I just got a hard-to-find book at a steal of a price. It's The Prayer Book Office: Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer According to the American Book of Common Prayer With Invitatories and Hymns, Antiphons to the Gospel Canticles, and Other Enrichments pub. 1944 by Morehouse-Gorham Co., New York. Paul Hartzell was the editor.
I was browsing for copies of this, found a few at US$200+, then found one in a California used-book shop for $15.83. Got it shipped for a total of $21.33.
I've seen this book before on eBay, where I think it fetched a pretty high price.
It seems very similar in content to The English Office, which was recently reprinted by Canterbury Press, and which was based on the BCP of 1662. Fr Hartzell's work will, of course, be based on the ECUSA BCP of 1928. I suppose it was the inspiration for Howard Galley's updated PBO of 1980, itself now pretty hard to find.
It would be good if Fr Hartzell's original PBO was also to be reprinted, perhaps by Lancelot Andrewes Press or the Anglican Parishes Association. Any chance?
DIVINE OFFICE
Posts: 309 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
DitzySpike
Shipmate
# 1540
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Office:
It seems very similar in content to The English Office, which was recently reprinted by Canterbury Press, and which was based on the BCP of 1662. Fr Hartzell's work will, of course, be based on the ECUSA BCP of 1928. I suppose it was the inspiration for Howard Galley's updated PBO of 1980, itself now pretty hard to find.
DIVINE OFFICE [/QB]
While the English Office primarily draws from the Roman Office, the Hartzell PBO uses mostly Sarum propers, IIRC. Congratulations to Scott for the acquisition.
Posts: 498 | From: Singapore | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
DitzySpike
Shipmate
# 1540
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
I think the second question is perhaps the answer to the first. But I'm not sure what the answer to the second question is - what do you see as the defining characteristics of secular vs monastic office say 100 years ago?
I guess I tend to categorize the secular office with the Cathedral office, in opposition to the Monastic office. The Cathedral Office uses a fixed sets of Psalms and has plenty of processions, while the Monastic office runs through the Psalter and is far simpler.
The Western rite Office, (perhaps with the exception of Milan) has been quite consistently monastic, for the last five centuries?
Posts: 498 | From: Singapore | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
Consulted my copy of 'The Study of the Liturgy' ed. by Jones, Wainwright and Yarnold. At least two of the chapters on the Divine Office [by other authors] suggest the distinction between monastic and Cathedral office collapsed by the 16th century in both the East and the West. So it may have been making much of small distinctions to refer to two lines of offices for the last 500 years. I guess the terms are more of historical use now.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Patrick
Shipmate
# 305
|
Posted
Christ is Risen!
Fr. Hartzell's 1940's Office book went through two subsequent revisions, which tended to be more idiosyncratic than the earlier Sarum based book, though they are still interesting(providing material from the Gallican uses, for instance). He was never as ecclectic as Galley, IMHO, although he was very interested in the adoption of a World Calendar that would stabilize the date for the Paschal Feast and provide the same day of the week for every feast year after year. No more need for the Golden Number or for tables of occurence and of concurrence! I own a 1940 version bound up with the Bible/Apocrypha, plus an early 1960's revision and an early 1970's revised book. Hartzell includes both Office hymns for Mattins (after the Invitatory and before the Benedictus) and also a table of lessons for the major black letter feasts, unlike the English Office. The English Office, on the other hand, provides ferial antiphons for the daily Psalter, whereas Hatzell uses a triple Alleluia.
Posts: 109 | From: Fordham University, Bronx, N.Y. U.S.A. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Office
Shipmate
# 10558
|
Posted
Methinks I shall have to keep an eye open for a copy of Fr Hartzell's PBO. I suspect I would pay handsomely for it, though!!!
Incidently, there is currently a copy of the 1980 edition of Galley's PBO listed on ABE Books.
I think it is quite reasonably priced at about £37 sterling, if I remember correctly. Any other copies I have seen have been over £100 sterling.
DIVINE OFFICE
Posts: 309 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
John H
Shipmate
# 9599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ecumaniac:
I've never seen the daggers at the start of a line. In my office books it indicates that you don't leave the reciting note.
Here's an example (Psalm 64(65) from Week 2, Tuesday, MP). As I don't know how to type a dagger, I'll use a "plus" sign instead:
quote:
To you our praise is due*
in Sion, O God.
+to you we pay our vows,*
you who hear our prayer.
And then there's this from the following day, Psalm 96(97):
quote:
The Lord is king, let earth rejoice,*
+let all the coastlands be glad.
Cloud and darkness are his raiment;*
his throne, justice and right.
Posts: 423 | From: Orpington, Kent, UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by John H:
Here's an example (Psalm 64(65) from Week 2, Tuesday, MP). As I don't know how to type a dagger, I'll use a "plus" sign instead:
quote:
To you our praise is due*
in Sion, O God.
+to you we pay our vows,*
you who hear our prayer.
And then there's this from the following day, Psalm 96(97):
quote:
The Lord is king, let earth rejoice,*
+let all the coastlands be glad.
Cloud and darkness are his raiment;*
his throne, justice and right.
Sometimes markings are used to denote that the last two parts of a four-part chant, for instance, are to be repeated twice in a row. Is this a possibility?
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by John H:
quote:
Originally posted by ecumaniac:
I've never seen the daggers at the start of a line. In my office books it indicates that you don't leave the reciting note.
Here's an example (Psalm 64(65) from Week 2, Tuesday, MP). As I don't know how to type a dagger, I'll use a "plus" sign instead:
quote:
To you our praise is due*
in Sion, O God.
+to you we pay our vows,*
you who hear our prayer.
And then there's this from the following day, Psalm 96(97):
quote:
The Lord is king, let earth rejoice,*
+let all the coastlands be glad.
Cloud and darkness are his raiment;*
his throne, justice and right.
I just looked it up in my copy of the UK Divine Office, p. [165].
In this case, the dagger shows where to continue after using the Lent antiphon, which reads, To you our praise is due in Sion, O God. +
The dagger at the end of that antiphon means the antiphon is the same text as the first verse of the psalm, so rather than repeat that text as you begin the psalm, jump from the dagger after the antiphon to the dagger before the second verse, +To you we pay our vows...
But now in Eastertide, the antiphon doesn't come from the first verse, so you can ignore the dagger before the second verse of the psalm.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingbird
Mimus polyglottos navis
# 5818
|
Posted
In my copy of Jones, Wainwright, Yarnold, and Bradshaw, the distinction between "cathedral" and "monastic" officies applies only to the early history of the office, say for the first five centuries. So when Crichton writes "the distinction between cathedral and monastic office to all intends and purposes no longer exists" (p. 427) he is referring to the difference in the early centuries. He isn't saying that there is no distinction between the developed secular and monastic offices of later times.
--------------------
Foržon we sealon efestan žas Easterlican žing to asmeagenne and to gehealdanne, žaet we magon cuman to žam Easterlican daege, že aa byš, mid fullum glaedscipe and wynsumnysse and ecere blisse.
Posts: 1443 | From: Between Broken Bow and Black Mesa | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingbird:
In my copy of Jones, Wainwright, Yarnold, and Bradshaw, the distinction between "cathedral" and "monastic" officies applies only to the early history of the office, say for the first five centuries. So when Crichton writes "the distinction between cathedral and monastic office to all intends and purposes no longer exists" (p. 427) he is referring to the difference in the early centuries. He isn't saying that there is no distinction between the developed secular and monastic offices of later times.
There seem to be two divisions of types of offices that often get confused, partly because of the terms:
The first is monastic versus secular; for example, Breviarium Monasticum versus Breviarium Romanum; or Thesaurus Liturgiae Horarum Monasticae versus Liturgia Horarum.
The second is monastic versus "cathedral," and "cathedral" is the confusing term. A modern manifestation of a "cathedral"-style office would be the short offices given in the middle of Celebrating Common Prayer, with a limited psalm repertoire and an emphasis on everyone having a role to play (psalm reader, prayer leader, lesson reader, canticle reader) and a lot of attention paid to the time of day. William Storey of Notre Dame University published a cathedral-style office called Praise God in Song. It's "cathedral" in that it has repetition of psalms from day to day, short readings, and many ceremonial possibilities (candles, processions, incense). Perhaps a better term than "cathedral" is "people's office." It's meant less as a daily discipline than as a praise opportunity for people not bound to a (monastic-type) office.
George Guiver CR's book Company of Voices has good descriptions of and rationale for a renewed people's office.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Scott Knitter:
There seem to be two divisions of types of offices that often get confused, partly because of the terms:
The first is monastic versus secular; for example, Breviarium Monasticum versus Breviarium Romanum; or Thesaurus Liturgiae Horarum Monasticae versus Liturgia Horarum.
The second is monastic versus "cathedral," and "cathedral" is the confusing term. A modern manifestation of a "cathedral"-style office would be the short offices given in the middle of Celebrating Common Prayer, with a limited psalm repertoire and an emphasis on everyone having a role to play (psalm reader, prayer leader, lesson reader, canticle reader) and a lot of attention paid to the time of day. William Storey of Notre Dame University published a cathedral-style office called Praise God in Song. It's "cathedral" in that it has repetition of psalms from day to day, short readings, and many ceremonial possibilities (candles, processions, incense). Perhaps a better term than "cathedral" is "people's office." It's meant less as a daily discipline than as a praise opportunity for people not bound to a (monastic-type) office.
George Guiver CR's book Company of Voices has good descriptions of and rationale for a renewed people's office.
I've thought of the offices from Lutheran Book of Worship as "cathedral" offices. Along with what you've said, they seem to emphasize continuity from day to day. Take, for instance, the nightly use of Psalm 141 at Evening Prayer. The use of extra Psalmody is encouraged, of course, but few churches would use more than one additional Psalm.
Even though a certain amount of effort was devoted to making the LBW offices manageable for individual or small group use, it is plainly obvious that they are best used in a corporate worship setting, perhaps even with accompaniment. They can be done individually as they are printed, but it seems to work best with great modification.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingbird:
He isn't saying that there is no distinction between the developed secular and monastic offices of later times.
I'm sure you're more familiar with the book than I, although this makes for a confusing term. If the 'monastic' office effectively replaced the 'Cathedral' office in the first five centuries, then what is the definition of the monastic office of later times? Does one actually speak of a monastic office?
I suppose one definition would be 'an office used by monastics', I expect, but since a number of them use the standard office of the Roman Catholic church, what does this really mean?
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
I suppose one definition would be 'an office used by monastics', I expect, but since a number of them use the standard office of the Roman Catholic church, what does this really mean?
I think the main characteristic of a monastic-style office is one in which there's an attempt to cover most or all of the psalter in a week or some other period, such as the USA BCP's seven weeks. A cathedral-style office (that's a confusing term now because it isn't really found in cathedrals, most of which have a monastic-style office if any at all) would have fixed psalms appropriate to morning and evening and would pay more attention to the time of day and the season of the church year; for example:
Cathedral-Style Vespers
Opening versicle or hymn
Lucernarium
Ps. 141 with incense - always
Maybe a selection from a small group of evening psalms
A short reading and some silence
The Benedictus, perhaps as a metrical hymn
Procession to the font
Prayers at the font
A closing hymn
...or some such pattern.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ignatius' Acolyte
Shipmate
# 12426
|
Posted
I am confused sometimes about the distinction, but Scott seems to have gotten close to what a "cathedral"-style office means.
In fact, I must note that apart from the simple office in Celebrating Common Prayer which Scott mentioned, much of the book can indeed be placed in the cathedral office tradition.
This is especially if in public celebration, the Form A of the Preparation (the acclamations in the morning and the lucernarium at night) is consistently used. But the way the Psalter is arranged, especially the seasonal "opening canticle" and psalms, fits some of the parameters mentioned earlier.
An obvious example from the US Anglican tradition would be Galley's arrangement of Great Paschal Vespers. Also, it should be noted that a crucial element of a cathedral office is the use of ceremonial, such as incense, processions, vestments, etc., as much as the structure of the office itself.
The distinction, as Leonel Mitchell admits, has often been blurred in the West (and I should add the East), with elements commonly connected with monastic and cathedral offices often showing up in one office.
--------------------
Be a blessing.
Posts: 427 | From: Quezon City, the Philippines | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingbird
Mimus polyglottos navis
# 5818
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DitzySpike:
One question. With the diversity in thr ordering of the Divine Office in the monastic communities, is it still fair to maintain the distinction between the monastic and secular office? Given the Benedictine influence over the LOH, the Roman office does look like a variant of the monastic office. Furthermore, true secular/cathedral office seems to have disappeared from practice for a while already,except in the example of the Taize office. The concept of a secular office is polyvalent: are there essential characteristics that define it anymore?
The classical (that is, medieval) monastic and secular rites had different distributions of the psalms, different rotations of hymns, different numbers of readings at nocturns, and some differences in the canticles. Those on ship who have lived in monasteries can confirm (or qualify) whether the weekly distribution of psalms as found in the Rule of Benedict is still used. My guess is that in some places, it is. But Benedict himself states in the rule that anyone who doesn't like his course of the psalms can work out another, so long as the whole psalter is sung in a week. I wouldn't be surprised to find places where this liberty had been used.
The classical secular rite of the Breviarium Romanum still has its friends. Those disgruntled by the modern LOTH seem to hold it in high esteem, but not those only. Whatever might be said for or aginst the LOTH, though, it's probably fair to say that some modification was needed. John Mason Neale, on page 20 of this book, describes some of the evasion techniques that were used to lighten the load of the Roman Breviary office:
quote:
The heaviest Matins, as the idleness of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries called them, are those of Thursday and Saturday: the former, because it contains the immensely long 78th psalm; the latter as embracing not only the 102nd to the 107th Psalm, all of them long, but also (at Lauds) the Song of Moses, forty-four verses, for the most part of considerable length. Hence the introduction of offices of so-called devotion for those two nights: that of the Blessed Sacrament for Thursday; that of S. Mary for Saturday. By this contrivance, the former, instead of having 421 verses, has only 197; the latter, instead of 452, only 208...Again: as doubles take precedence of ordinary Sundays, the eighteen Psalms of the latter have generally been replaced by the nine of the former; and even on those Sundays which are of the first or second class, dispensations have not unfrequently been allowed, to skip the alternate Psalms. Thus, in point of fact, according to the practice of the modern Roman Church, a Priest is in the habit of reciting about fifty Psalms, and not more; these fifty being on the whole the shortest of the Psalter.
The underlying assumption here is that the entire Psalter should be sung over the course of time: a "monastic" rather than a "cathedral" assumption. Those who have more experience of the office than I have can tell us whether they have found value in making a point of going through the whole psalter. My more limited experience is that if the whole psalter is kept in view, and every psalm, even the terrible psalm 109, is given a hearing at least once in a while, the stronger parts of the psalter can to some extent balance out the weaker parts, while the profound humanity (in both good and not-so-good senses) of the psalms is not swept under the rug.
--------------------
Foržon we sealon efestan žas Easterlican žing to asmeagenne and to gehealdanne, žaet we magon cuman to žam Easterlican daege, že aa byš, mid fullum glaedscipe and wynsumnysse and ecere blisse.
Posts: 1443 | From: Between Broken Bow and Black Mesa | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingbird:
The classical (that is, medieval) monastic and secular rites had different distributions of the psalms, different rotations of hymns, different numbers of readings at nocturns, and some differences in the canticles. Those on ship who have lived in monasteries can confirm (or qualify) whether the weekly distribution of psalms as found in the Rule of Benedict is still used. My guess is that in some places, it is. But Benedict himself states in the rule that anyone who doesn't like his course of the psalms can work out another, so long as the whole psalter is sung in a week. I wouldn't be surprised to find places where this liberty had been used.
The four psalm-distribution options in the current guideline are linked to this Web page. Scroll down to where "Schema A" through "Schema D" are given. (Psalm numbering is the Septuagint, which is one number lower than the Hebrew numbering, through most of the psalter.) Schema A is the Rule of St Benedict plan. Schema B was revealed in a study by a former Benedictine Abbot Primate to be the one used in more monasteries than A, C, or D. B is particularly prevalent in German-speaking communities, as an excellent monastic breviary uses Schema B.
What's distinctive about Schema B is that, while accounting for all of the psalter in a week, it pays little attention to the order of the psalms, so one office could have Pss. 118, 24, 94, and 19 in that order.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RCD
Shipmate
# 11440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingbird:
The classical secular rite of the Breviarium Romanum still has its friends. Those disgruntled by the modern LOTH seem to hold it in high esteem, but not those only. Whatever might be said for or aginst the LOTH, though, it's probably fair to say that some modification was needed. John Mason Neale, on page 20 of this book, describes some of the evasion techniques that were used to lighten the load of the Roman Breviary office:
quote:
The heaviest Matins, as the idleness of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries called them, are those of Thursday and Saturday: the former, because it contains the immensely long 78th psalm; the latter as embracing not only the 102nd to the 107th Psalm, all of them long, but also (at Lauds) the Song of Moses, forty-four verses, for the most part of considerable length. Hence the introduction of offices of so-called devotion for those two nights: that of the Blessed Sacrament for Thursday; that of S. Mary for Saturday. By this contrivance, the former, instead of having 421 verses, has only 197; the latter, instead of 452, only 208...Again: as doubles take precedence of ordinary Sundays, the eighteen Psalms of the latter have generally been replaced by the nine of the former; and even on those Sundays which are of the first or second class, dispensations have not unfrequently been allowed, to skip the alternate Psalms. Thus, in point of fact, according to the practice of the modern Roman Church, a Priest is in the habit of reciting about fifty Psalms, and not more; these fifty being on the whole the shortest of the Psalter.
The underlying assumption here is that the entire Psalter should be sung over the course of time: a "monastic" rather than a "cathedral" assumption. Those who have more experience of the office than I have can tell us whether they have found value in making a point of going through the whole psalter. My more limited experience is that if the whole psalter is kept in view, and every psalm, even the terrible psalm 109, is given a hearing at least once in a while, the stronger parts of the psalter can to some extent balance out the weaker parts, while the profound humanity (in both good and not-so-good senses) of the psalms is not swept under the rug.
Though Neale is speaking of the pre-1913 breviary. Still, 9 psalms takes a long time particularly if you want to meditate.
Posts: 434 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Scott Knitter:
I think the main characteristic of a monastic-style office is one in which there's an attempt to cover most or all of the psalter in a week or some other period, such as the USA BCP's seven weeks. A cathedral-style office (that's a confusing term now because it isn't really found in cathedrals, most of which have a monastic-style office if any at all) would have fixed psalms appropriate to morning and evening and would pay more attention to the time of day and the season of the church year;
I thought the typical Anglican Cathedral office just went through the psalter in course, doing half the days psalms in the morning and the other half in the evening. Perhaps I have that wrong.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
I thought the typical Anglican Cathedral office just went through the psalter in course, doing half the days psalms in the morning and the other half in the evening. Perhaps I have that wrong.
That's why "cathedral" is confusing; it's a technical term used to describe the people's office with fixed time-of-day-related psalms and lots of singing and ceremonial - but what one experiences now in cathedrals is not that sort but the monastic-style praying of the whole psalter over a month (which is a public offering of a discipline of prayer that used to belong to the cathedral chapter and in some places still does...that's why it doesn't matter if nobody else shows up). And it can be argued that a typical UK cathedral Evensong combines elements of each type.
So these days, it's probably best to speak of a "monastic" type of office and a "people's" type of office.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
So what does one call a rite of the office that goes through the entire psalter in a fixed period with lots of ritual/ceremonial? Or is the question of ritual/ceremonial irrelevant?
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
So what does one call a rite of the office that goes through the entire psalter in a fixed period with lots of ritual/ceremonial? Or is the question of ritual/ceremonial irrelevant?
I think the use of the psalter is probably the main factor: whether the Office is seen as being primarily about praying (all of) the psalms (monastic) or as being primarily about praise of God using several different genres, one of which is a small set of psalms appropriate to the time of day. The "people's office" really does not use many of the psalms. Not even 50, I'd guess, over the church year.
Here's Guiver again:
quote:
It would be helpful to speak of two poles which sum up quite aptly what the secular/monastic distinction seems to stand for: on the one hand there is worship which aims to attract the worshippers, engage their emotions, and use any appropriate means to enable them to transfer from a state of indifference to one of attention to God. It is specially prepared wholesome food, easily digestible, and coming in doses the person can cope with. This kind of worship is needed, for instance, for those who are in their Christian infancy, not yet ready for solid meat. It is for people passing through a difficult time such as bereavement. It is for those who often find themselves far from a state of inner quiet, such as some busy parish clergy. It can be more necessary when praying alone than with others. And there will always be some people for whom it will be the only way of prayer.
The other pole we can discern is worship as a discipline submitted to in loving obedience and self-giving. It is taken as it comes, and is characterized by a certain sobriety and indifference to frills. It presupposes a degree of commitment, continuity, and ability to be attentive. These two poles could be indicated respectively by the words courtship and covenant. The one courts the worshippers, even to the extent that each act of worship is seen as 'priming the pump', or 'charging the batteries' which in the intervening times are rapidly depleted. The spirit of covenant, however, is more concerned with sustaining that 'prayer-without-ceasing', that constancy in recollection of God in and out of church which was so important to the early Fathers. While one often predominates in the worship of a particular community, it is impossible to have one without at least something of the other.
So I'd say the answer to your question is "monastic." I would say a Taize service is more of a people's or secular office. (Company of Voices, pp. 187-188)
[ 20. April 2007, 21:50: Message edited by: Scott Knitter ]
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
DitzySpike
Shipmate
# 1540
|
Posted
Under those criteria the Roman Liturgy of the Hours is a monastic office. No?
Posts: 498 | From: Singapore | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ignatius' Acolyte
Shipmate
# 12426
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DitzySpike:
Under those criteria the Roman Liturgy of the Hours is a monastic office. No?
Yes, in its current state.
Any adaptation, like "Praise God in Song," is not monastic.
--------------------
Be a blessing.
Posts: 427 | From: Quezon City, the Philippines | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingbird
Mimus polyglottos navis
# 5818
|
Posted
Here is St. Basil's description circa A.D. 375 of an office that scholars have designated "cathedral-type:" quote:
The practices now in use have been recieved with one voice and one mind by all the churches of God. Among us, folk rise by night to go to the house of prayer: even though they have many cares, afflictions, or are yoked with sorrow, still, trusting in God, when they arise from their prayers they proceed to psalmody. They divide themselves into two companies, and sing and chant by turns, at the same time reinforcing their contemplation of the scriptures and readying for themselves an alert mind and a heart free of distraction. Then, forming a single company, as the leader sings, the rest join in. And so they carry on through the rest of the night with a variety of psalms intermixed with prayers. When day breaks, all as though from a single heart sing a psalm of confession to the Lord, each one saying to himself appropriate words of penance. In short, if you shun us because of these things, you shun the Egyptians, those beyond Libya, the Thebans, those in Palestine, the Arabs, the Phoenecians, the Syrians, those who live along the Euphrates; in a word, you shun all those who cherish vigils, prayers, and shared psalmody.
--St. Basil, Letter #207, to the clergy of Neocaesarea
Which psalms are sung seems to be leader's choice.
The scholars have done a valuable service in identifying the "cathedral-type" and "monastic-type" in the early office, and tracing their development into "monasticized cathedral-type" and "cathedralized monastic-type". If I understand the theory right, classic secular Lauds would be considered "monasticized cathedral-type" office while classic secular Nocturns would be considered a "cathedralized monastic-type" office.
But we misread history if we see the developed offices (including our modern ones) only in terms of this theory about their origins. The middle ages knew nothing of "monastic-type" and "cathedral-type" offices or elements of offices. But to them the distinction between monks and secular canons, and their respective liturgies, was quite clear. Meanwhile in the modern Prayer Book office there are elements that are "cathedral-type" in origin and elements that are "monastic-type" in origin, but the integrated whole needs to be seen as an integrated whole, and in its own cultural setting, not the cultural setting of fourth-century Anatolia or Jerusalem.
--------------------
Foržon we sealon efestan žas Easterlican žing to asmeagenne and to gehealdanne, žaet we magon cuman to žam Easterlican daege, že aa byš, mid fullum glaedscipe and wynsumnysse and ecere blisse.
Posts: 1443 | From: Between Broken Bow and Black Mesa | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ignatius' Acolyte
Shipmate
# 12426
|
Posted
Which is why I want to ask: has anyone after Robert Taft written anything proposing a new theory on the origins of the office? The discussion so far points to the conclusion, as Taft seems to have made at one point, that the distinction blurs in quite a lot of points, both ancient and modern.
--------------------
Be a blessing.
Posts: 427 | From: Quezon City, the Philippines | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Scott Knitter:
The Benedictus, perhaps as a metrical hymn
Surely the Magnificat at Vespers?
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
quote:
Originally posted by Scott Knitter:
The Benedictus, perhaps as a metrical hymn
Surely the Magnificat at Vespers?
Yes, surely! Pardon my error. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ignatius' Acolyte
Shipmate
# 12426
|
Posted
In the Ecclesiantics videos thread, a link was posted to the Monastic Fraternity of Jerusalem's daily office, broadcast on France's Catholic TV network.
Are there any other daily office broadcasts/podcasts available? I know Vatican Radio does one in Latin, and the Order of St. Luke has a weekly one that incorporates contemporary Christian music.
--------------------
Be a blessing.
Posts: 427 | From: Quezon City, the Philippines | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PostDenominational Catholic: Are there any other daily office broadcasts/podcasts available? I know Vatican Radio does one in Latin, and the Order of St. Luke has a weekly one that incorporates contemporary Christian music.
Here's the Monastery Podcast.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
Anyone interested in an update on the New Camaldoli office book to be published? A prominent member of the community reports, through an Internet forum, that "some very good news will be posted" regarding the book before his return from Ireland in mid-May. So we should have news in two or three weeks.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
J.S. Bach
Shipmate
# 9633
|
Posted
According to their Oblate News, New Camaldoli Hermitage's office book is now available. Its official title is Lauds and Vespers, Including Compline and Additional Acclamations. I am pleased that the price is $25. I've definitely caught the breviary bug, but this will be my last one for a while. It and The Mundelein Psalter should keep me busy for some time to come!
Blessings,
JSB
Posts: 104 | From: Near Washington, DC | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by J.S. Bach:
...this will be my last one for a while...
Blessings,
JSB
Famous last words.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Office
Shipmate
# 10558
|
Posted
JS Bach wrote:-
quote:
According to their Oblate News, New Camaldoli Hermitage's office book is now available. Its official title is Lauds and Vespers, Including Compline and Additional Acclamations. I am pleased that the price is $25. I've definitely caught the breviary bug, but this will be my last one for a while. It and The Mundelein Psalter should keep me busy for some time to come!
Is this a replacement for the earlier Monastic Breviary published by the Order of the Holy Cross?
It would be interesting to hear how the offices are structured in the new book, and what version of the psalter is used. Are office hymns included?
It is printed by Liturgical Press, and sounds like a handsome publication. I would like to hear more about it. If I liked the sound of it, I might obtain a copy later, as well as the Mundelein Psalter, which I think is a must-have.
DIVINE OFFICE
Posts: 309 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Office:
JS Bach wrote:-
Is this a replacement for the earlier Monastic Breviary published by the Order of the Holy Cross?
It would be interesting to hear how the offices are structured in the new book, and what version of the psalter is used. Are office hymns included?
[/QUOTE]
No, I don't think it replaces the OHC Monastic Breviary. It's the office book of the Roman Catholic New Camaldoli Hermitage. I have the Italian version from (old) Camaldoli, and it has the psalms in strophes with simple tones not terribly different from Simplified Anglican Chant, but not exactly the same either. Easy to pick up the tones, as will be the case with the Mundelein Psalter's two-line Saint Meinrad tones.
I hope the New Camaldoli book presents the ordinary of each office a bit more clearly than the Italian edition. But there are psalm distribution charts in front and back that allow for the inclusion, or not, of an office of Vigils/Readings. This is to accommodate the differing schedules of various Camaldolese communities. Everything in the Italian book is numbered continuously (I love that), so it's easy to find things.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
DitzySpike
Shipmate
# 1540
|
Posted
I know that the OHC community at Santa Barbara uses that. I was there years back.
Posts: 498 | From: Singapore | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
John H
Shipmate
# 9599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
quote:
Originally posted by J.S. Bach:
...this will be my last one for a while...
Blessings,
JSB
Famous last words.
Quite. You do realise, JSB, that this thread is actually a thinly-veiled online meeting of "Liturgoholics Anonymous"? ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
"If you look upon ham and eggs and lust, you have already committed breakfast in your heart."
Posts: 423 | From: Orpington, Kent, UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
