Continuing my series on the differences between the 1953 and 1963 breviaries, I want to focus today mainly on the psalter section of the breviary.
The main changes were to separate out Prime and the chapter office; make some (unnecessary in my view) simplifications; remove some verses of Psalm 13 and the Saturday ferial canticle; make some changes to the division points in the psalms; and remove some post-Tridentine accretions to the Office.
Prime and the Chapter Office
The first change, I think, concerns the separation of the texts for Prime and Chapter, and is relatively harmless in my view.
In the Roman Office, chapter has long been, and remains, formally part of Prime.
In the monastic use, though, its position has always been somewhat different, since it was generally said not in the church, but in the chapter room of the monastery (hence the name) and not counted as one of the formal parts of the Office (since St Benedict does not mention it in the Rule).
Although the post Tridentine breviaries generally did provide a version of chapter integrated into Prime, many monasteries used their own version of it (some of which have been published in the Rituales of the various congregations).
Accordingly, as far as I can see the 1963 breviary's approach of placing Prime and the chapter office in different places in the book and explicitly noting that monasteries are free to use their own version just codifies existing practice (though it is unfortunate that the monastic Diurnal didn't include the chapter office in full).
Silly simplifications
There are, I have to say, some changes made presumably in the name of 'simplification' that I think are just silly, and can and should easily be restored, namely the abolition of hymn doxologies for the seasons and feasts, and abolition of the ferial Prime short chapter (Love truth and peace, says the Lord) in favour of using the Sunday version (Regi saeculorum) all the time.
Changes to the psalter
One of the least desirable changes between 1953 and 1953, though, in my view, concerns the psalter.
On the face of it changing the division points for Psalms 9 and 106, ostensibly to make them align with the Hebrew Masoretic Text version of these psalms, sounds relatively innocuous. But I think there is more to it than that, and I've written previously on why I don't like these changes:Psalm 9 pt 1; Psalm 9 (pt 2); and Psalm 106.
Similarly a number of verses - admittedly almost certainly not an authentic part of the psalm, but included in the Vulgate translations and so treated as such in the West for centuries - were removed from Psalm 13.
But by far the biggest and most fundamental change was to cut out around half of the Saturday ferial canticle, almost certainly because it offends modern sensibilities with its condemnations of sodomy and other immoral behaviours.
Prayer pruning
The final group of changes, and one I'm in favour of, essentially shorten the Office by removing assorted prayers that have been added to it at various points in time.
As I've noted before, the fact that the Benedictine Rule spells out the components of each hour and the order in which they are said has long served as an anchor point for this particular form of the Office. St Benedict, moreover, clearly favoured keeping the hours (relatively) short.
It is human nature, though, to keep adding things to the hours - thus the periodic need to prune.
Preparation for the hours
In terms of unnecessary accretions, my personal view is that the previous requirement to say the Creed (before Matins) and/or Our Father and Hail Mary before (or as an extra part of ) each hour is at the top of the list, particularly given the Our Father is included in each hour of the Benedictine office (though not the Roman) anyway.
We do of course need to put ourselves in the right frame of mind before starting an hour (such as the prayer Aperi Domine, that appears in many breviaries), but there is surely no need to regulate this.
Deus in adjutorium at Matins
Similarly, starting the Night Office with Deus in adjutorium is a Romanism imported into the Benedictine Office that in my view makes no sense, and so was rightly removed.
St Benedict, after all, is clear that the first words the monk says each day, ending the great silence of the night, should be O Lord open my lips, that I may announce your praise.
Suffrage of All Saints/Commemoration of the Cross at Lauds and Vespers
One of the things that has regularly been added to the Office at various points is explicit intercessions for assorted causes, or requests for assistance to particular saints (including St Benedict in the pre 1911 monastic breviaries).
The suffrages formerly said at Lauds and Vespers are one example of this, with suffrages added in the Tridentine reforms of 1563 gradually increasing in number, but then replaced by two suffrages, of All Saints and the Cross (depending on the season), in the 1911 Pius X reforms.
These (in their twentieth century versions) consisted of an antiphon, versicle and collect, so look like a commemoration, and like commemorations, they were said after the collect of the day, generally on days that were not feasts.
The two new suffrage (of All Saints) apparently did not get positive reviews at the time of its introduction though its not obvious at first glance why - both of the 1911 suffrages are nice prayers of medieval origin that were often included in books of hours.
But I don't personally have a problem with trimming them out of the office proper.
Marion antiphon after Lauds and Vespers
Lauds and Vespers also added the Marian antiphons to the end of the hours. The 1960 revisions retained it for Compline only.
The preces at Prime and Compline
On ferial days, Prime and Compline previously had a set of additional prayers inserted into it, namely the Creed (that makes three times!), an extra Confiteor (confession and absolution formulas) at Prime, and a versicle.
Given that the Confiteor is said in the daily conventual Mass (as well as any private masses), I can see why this was thought to be an unnecessary duplication.
Working forward or reverting back?
In this quick comparison between of the 1953 and 1963 monastic breviaries, the issue I've touched only lightly on concerns the rubrics, particularly when clashes of feasts occur.
It is, I think, an important topic, so I will cover it briefly in my next and last post on this series, where I will look again at the question of whether it is better to start from the 1963 breviary, and make some amendments to its rubrics and calendar (as most of the traditional monasteries are doing), or revert back altogether to some earlier date.
No comments:
Post a Comment