Roman Breviary questions
#1
Having realized that praying privately in Latin simply distracts me, I stopped using my Baronius Breviarium Romanum in January. The Liturgy of the Hours, however, is so lacking in psalmody that I feel as if I've finished before I've even begun. Last week, I was greatly blessed to receive a 1964 Benzinger Roman Breviary in English from my Godmother, who now proudly owns the Baronius Press version for her Latin fix.

As I come back to the more involved older office - now mercifully in direct English that I can understand - I am liturgically happier than ever before. A few questions come out of this, however! Starting simply:

Why does the Roman breviary of the last few centuries contain only the instruction "Et reliqua" ("And so forth") after a verse of the Sunday's/Feast day's Gospel lesson at Matins?

Is it meant to be read in full at that point, or merely excerpted?

If this practice was literally to make the Breviary book shorter in terms of text, and priests were expected to read the whole Gospel in, say, a Bible, why was this text shortening not applied, for example, to all Scripture readings at Matins, with a similar resolution?

Is the very short Gospel lesson merely a remainder of the full Gospel reading in the ancient monastic office (between "Te Deum" and "Te decet laus") which simply became derelict in the Roman practice?

This foreshortening fascinates me.  Smile
Reply
#2
I don't know why "et reliqua" is there, but the entire gospel reading is not read at Matins. My guess would be that there's no point to it, since the priest is going to read the whole thing later anyway when he says Mass. and the priest is expected to know his Scripture and know what the full reading is about.
Reply
#3
Thank you, Paul. I was wondering what the history was behind it, too. The fact that the Monastics had the short version than the full version within the same Hour fascinates me.
Reply
#4
A similar history question:

Why is June 29 the Feast of Ss. Peter & Paul, if the antiphons and lessons are entirely about S. Peter? It seems rather strange to call June 29 the feast of the two Apostles, when it's manifestly only S. Peter's feast day. Is it simply the obligation to associate the two Apostles on a single day, given the tradition of their simultaneous martyrdom?

Also, does anyone know when S. Paul received a distinct "Feast" on June 30, separate from June 29's feast?

One sense I get from the Roman Breviary is truly how Roman it is. Practically every feast and commemoration is of an Italian or Roman. I can understand why the Vatican II party tried to universalize the General "Roman" Calendar, given their apparently larger vision of the scope of the word "Church".
Reply
#5
I found this in the Catholic Encyclopedia, in the article on St Paul:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11567b.htm

"Formerly the pope, after having pontificated in the Basilica of St. Peter, went with his attendants to that of St. Paul, but the distance between the two basilicas (about five miles) rendered the double ceremony too exhausting, especially at that season of the year. Thus arose the prevailing custom of transferring to the next day (30 June) the Commemoration of St. Paul."
Reply
#6
(06-29-2015, 05:26 PM)Paul Wrote: I found this in the Catholic Encyclopedia, in the article on St Paul:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11567b.htm

"Formerly the pope, after having pontificated in the Basilica of St. Peter, went with his attendants to that of St. Paul, but the distance between the two basilicas (about five miles) rendered the double ceremony too exhausting, especially at that season of the year. Thus arose the prevailing custom of transferring to the next day (30 June) the Commemoration of St. Paul."

Ahh! I forgot that these feasts are often the remembrance of the dedication of titular Churches. Silly me. Smile
Reply
#7
Curious why you just wouldn't keep using the Baronius but just using the "English" columns? 

Funny enough but I'm almost opposite... I find praying in English distracting nowadays and tend to mangle some of the basic prayers since the Latin has become so familiar.  Not quite that familiar with the Psalms but getting there! 

Reply
#8
I tend to go either way, sometimes using Latin for everything,sometimes using English. The Little Office I printed from the Age of Mary site is all Latin so I've got no choice. It depends on my mood, and whether I want to chant it. If chanted it's always in Latin. I prefer my English hieratic, preferring either the King James, Coverdale or Knox versions for style but to each his own I guess. Sometimes I forget that for some folks hieratic English is a stumbling block that feels contrived.

One thing I can say is that with repetition over a long period of time I find myself attached to certain versions of the psalms. I practically memorized Psalm 50 in English from the HTM translation, so that's what I go to. For Latin its always the Vulgate, not the Neo Vulgate or the Bea Psalter. They just feel strange and unfamiliar to me.
Reply
#9
(06-30-2015, 12:29 PM)Uxi Wrote: Curious why you just wouldn't keep using the Baronius but just using the "English" columns?

Two reasons:

1. I stopped using Baronius in February. Due to an obsessive need to be in union with the Church during my prayer -- i.e. the Office done only in Latin, and at least whispered -- it had just exhausted me mentally & spiritually.

During the time that I rejected that "rubric slavery" (to my own scruples) and went to the LOTH, I happened to develop a terrible abscessed tooth whose healing required a lot of money. My Godmother happily gave me the $450 CAD which I'd paid for the Breviary. Since I had the LOTH, I was quite happy to let go of the Breviary.

2. Even if I hadn't been forced to sell Baronius, I don't like the fact that its psalm verses are partitioned with Parsch's sectional headlines: "Prayer in Time of Trouble", "Farewell", etc. -- I vastly prefer Benzinger's uninterrupted printing of the Psalms.

Quote:Funny enough but I'm almost opposite... I find praying in English distracting nowadays and tend to mangle some of the basic prayers since the Latin has become so familiar.  Not quite that familiar with the Psalms but getting there!

I love Latin in the Mass and the public Office. In private, however, it just doesn't work for me.

(06-30-2015, 01:28 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: I tend to go either way, sometimes using Latin for everything,sometimes using English. The Little Office I printed from the Age of Mary site is all Latin so I've got no choice. It depends on my mood, and whether I want to chant it. If chanted it's always in Latin. I prefer my English hieratic, preferring either the King James, Coverdale or Knox versions for style but to each his own I guess. Sometimes I forget that for some folks hieratic English is a stumbling block that feels contrived.

Like I said to Uxi: hearing it, chanting it, and singing it in Latin is beautiful. One thing I did love about privately singing the Hours in Latin was that one can go slow enough to look at the English translation between pauses and grasp the sense easily. It's exhausting for me, though. I prefer to "rest in God", rather than to "adore God", if you understand the distinction.

Quote:One thing I can say is that with repetition over a long period of time I find myself attached to certain versions of the psalms. I practically memorized Psalm 50 in English from the HTM translation, so that's what I go to. For Latin its always the Vulgate, not the Neo Vulgate or the Bea Psalter. They just feel strange and unfamiliar to me.

I must say that repetition does have its glories in memorization. Despite my all-English Benzinger 1964 edition, for example, I always, always, always pray the Te Deum in Latin. It just has that association, that memory, that nostalgia, of the first days of coming to the Faith (when I learned the Gloria in excelsis & Te Deum by heart). Usually it's mental, but I always sing it aloud on the great feasts -- and outside my apartment on New Years' Eve. The ice and snow are usually my only audience, but they praise God well enough.
Reply
#10
Heorot, first of all, thanks for praying the Office. 

I have been praying the Office in Latin for the last couple of months and I do suffer from distraction as well.  Nevertheless, I have come to appreciate this because even though I would love for my prayer to be full of consolations, the Office, being the prayer of the Church has a particular burden attached to it.  Fulton Sheen makes this point in "The Priest Is Not His Own" that when (he was talking to Priests, of course) a person prays the Office, he is also praying for the alcoholic or the cheating wife or the son who is an atheist.  When I am distracted, I realize that the Office should be hard because it is work and we pray for those Catholics who have fallen.

Also, since I pray the Monastic Office, Terce through Sext is the same five days a week and Compline is essentially the same every day!  Also the beauty of the Latin at the conclusion of Lauds with Psalms 148, 149, and 150 is sublime. 

Nevertheless, praying the Office in English or any other language is an incredible thing to do.  May the Lord continue to guide you my friend and bring you to life everlasting.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)