Focusing on the Traditional Benedictine Office in accordance with the 1963 Benedictine calendar and rubrics, including the Farnborough edition of the Monastic Diurnal.
I've now received my lovely new reprint of the 1963 breviary from Editions Pax inter spinas (Monastery of St Benedict at Brignoles), and it is wonderful to have the breviary finally back in print, packed with lots of bonus extras, and in a very nice edition at that!
As I've previously provided a guide to the contents of the 1963 breviary (ie the reprint section), I thought it might be useful now to highlight the contents of the new material included in its two volumes, which take the form of two appendices in each volume, essentially providing extracts from the 1953 breviary.
Overview of the supplement
The appendices are placed at the end of each volume of the book, starting at page 375* in Volume 1, and 348* in Volume II (the one you should be using currently).
The key contents are:
the traditional prayers said before and after the Office (Aperi Domine, and Sacrosanctae), pg 375* in vol I, 348* in Vol II;
additions to the Ordinary, essentially capturing changes made to it in the 1963 breviary, starting at pg 376* in Vol I, and pg 349* in Vol II;
the propers of time, starting at pg 383* in Vol I, and pg 356* in Vol II; and
propers for feasts, starting from pg 426* in Vol I, and pg 386* in Vol II.
The Ordinary
The section on the Ordinary essentially covers the differences between the 1963 and all earlier breviaries, and they basically fall into a couple of different categories: some verses of psalms and canticles removed from the psalter in 1963 for no good reason in my view; some changes made in the name of 'simplification' that many traditional monasteries have restored; and other sections removed in 1963.
First, as those who follow my blogs know, I'm generally an advocate of sticking to the 1963 rubrics. There are however a few key exceptions that I would urge you to consider, in particular:
in the 1963 breviary, Psalm 13 (said at Prime on Thursday) had several verses verses removed from it, for reasons I've explained here. The supplement gives you the full version;
even more egregious in my view, is the utter butchering of the Saturday ferial canticle. Again, the supplement gives you the full version.
I would note that the 1963 breviary also changed the divisio points in some psalms, but its easy enough to mark these in your psalter: if you want to read up on what they are and my speculations on why they were done, have a look at my posts on Psallam Domino blog on 1962isms!
The second category of changes included in the supplement were made in the name of simplification, but are largely (though not universally) ignored by the traditional monasteries these days, partly because they add some richness to the Office, and partly for purely practical reasons, since they are included in the Antiphonale which most monks and nuns sing from, viz:
seasonal doxologies for hymns;
the ferial chapter for Prime; and
1 Vespers of the Office of Our Lady.
The third category is, I suspect things that were deemed to be unnecessary accretions to the Office, and to be honest, I tend to agree with that judgment, but everyone can make their own judgment. These include the Preces at Prime and Compline (mostly consisting of the Creed, and still used by some monasteries), and Patristic readings for (mostly abolished) Vigils of Apostles (a Romanisation of the Monastic Office added post-Trent).
The temporale
This section includes the texts for things like the Octaves of Epiphany, Corpus Christi and Ascension. There has been some support from Rome in times past (albeit informally, the form of the Vatican Ordo) for the restoration of the Corpus Christi Octave at least, and Epiphany is one of the earliest in the calendar, so worth having a look through.
That said, my view of Octaves in general is that wherever possible the normal Scriptural reading cycle should have priority over purely patristic readings (however interesting they may be!).
Feasts of saints
The supplement starts from the 1953 breviary, the last printed before 1963, and this means it:
picks up several feasts omitted from, or whose rubrics or texts changed significantly from the 1930 breviary. This means that it aligns with the 1934 Antiphonale; and
includes the one reading or several readings where feasts were downgraded to Class III or memorials in 1963; and
provides the texts for feasts and octaves removed from the calendar in 1963.
The decree Cum Sanctissima provides a mandate for celebrating such feasts as Class III as desired. If you want to go further on a devotional basis, these books give you the tools to do so!
In my last few posts I've focused on the mechanics of the Benedictine Office - finding your way around the breviary, and how to say Matins.
I now want to turn to its theological and spiritual underpinnings in order to help you absorb its deeper meanings.
Matins as a generic, monastic and Benedictine hour
And on this, I want to suggest that there are three key dimensions of the hour that we need to consider.
First, the hour has long traditions, dating both before and after St Benedict's time, that encompass a variety of forms of it, and types of participants in it.
The second perspective is as a particularly monastic hour: Matins seems early on to have been regarded as the pre-eminently monastic hour: monks, someone recently suggested, 'prayed Matins so the rest of us don't have to'!
And the third perspective, is a focus on the particular form and meanings of the Benedictine version of the hour.
Taft and the liturgists
Before we go into any further though, it is worthwhile, I think, very briefly revisiting the origins and early history of the Office as a whole, and three key propositions around it, not least because many of the claims made in the standard accounts (such as Taft's The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West) are now, in my view at least, either discredited, well and truly out of date, or both.
Most modern accounts of the history of the Divine Office such as Taft's, effectively view the Office as largely a fourth century invention, a product of the conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity. They tend to dismiss later references to Scriptural models to explain particular hours and practices associated with it as mere 'proof-texting', and view the pace of the psalms in it as a result of the rise of monasticism. A number of recent discoveries and studies, however, have challenged these propositions.
Roots in Jewish prayer and the New Testament?
Although it is true that earlier attempts to link the Office to Jewish daily prayer as it developed after the destruction of the Temple largely failed, for example, there is now reasonably strong evidence for its roots in the diverse regular daily Jewish prayer regimes - Temple-based and otherwise - as practiced at the time of Our Lord.
Sources such as the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Cairo Genizah have shone a new light on both early Jewish and early Christian prayer, and the implications of this are still being worked through.
One of them though, is that we should take seriously the idea that 'the prayers' referred to in Acts, as among the activities practiced by the newly converted Jerusalem crowds, are a reference to a proto-form of the Office. The text says:
And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles, and in the communication of the breaking of bread, and in prayers. (Acts 2:42)
St Benedict's famous insistence on the absolute priority of the 'Work of God', I would suggest, may well flow in part from his emphasis in the Rule on that early Jerusalem community as the model for his monks.
The Office as an ecclesial tradition
Following on from this, some historians and liturgists tended to dismiss as nonsense eighth century (and earlier) claims that the diverse forms of the Office found in different places had apostolic origins.
But while the earliest sources don't provide much detail of what the earliest forms of the Office consisted of, there are actually quite a few early references to prayer at fixed, particular times that go some way to making the case for a degree of continuity.
One of the most important, I think, is from Clement I's letter to the Corinthians (composed circa AD 70-96), which seems to imply that the Office was a Divinely-instituted tradition:
These things therefore being manifest to us, and since we look into the depths of the divine knowledge, it behooves us to do all things in [their proper] order, which the Lord has commanded us to perform at stated times. He has enjoined offerings [to be presented] and service to be performed [to Him], and that not thoughtlessly or irregularly, but at the appointed times and hours. Where and by whom He desires these things to be done, He Himself has fixed by His own supreme will, in order that all things, being piously done according to His good pleasure, may be acceptable unto Him....
The idea that the Office was an established ecclesial tradition from its very beginnings, that needed to be safeguarded by the Church seems actually to have been well established by St Benedict's time, as from the fifth century onwards we have records of bishops commissioning books for it; holding synods treating on it; and issuing decrees around its form, content and obligation to say it.
Indeed, in the early sixth century, the influential Abbot John of Gaza noted that the liturgically minimalist approach of the hermits of Skete that St John Cassian had lauded a century earlier as the ideal model for monks (their Office involved saying only Vespers and Matins as a Vigil for the Sunday only), was suitable for hermits only, not laypeople or cenobites. He said:
THE [fixed canonical] hours and odes are ecclesiastical traditions, and they are good from the perspective of the unity of the whole people. Similarly in communities for the sake of unity among many wills....With regard to Vespers, those of Skete say twelve psalms; then at the end of each they say the “Alleluia” doxology and offer one prayer. It is the same at night: twelve psalms, then after the psalms they sit down to manual labor.
St Benedict clearly agreed with Abbot John's view of the liturgy as a force for creating community and maintaining unity within it, insisting, for example, that everyone attend it, even those otherwise temporarily excommunicated; insisting the abbot recite the Our Father aloud at Lauds and Vespers as a way of addressing internal scandals, disputes and slights; and, inter alia, inserting some communal rituals (such as the blessing of the weekly kitchen servers) into it.
The place of the psalms in the early Office
A third key issue relating to the early Office relates to the psalms. The Office as we know it has the psalms at its core. But was this always the case?
There have been some very curious theories put forward about the use of the psalms in the Office over the last fifty years or so.
The early liturgists, for example, conflated the meditative recitation of the psalms in their Scriptural order through the day with the Office, and drew from this the conclusion that the monastic Office was about 'praying without ceasing' and individual sanctification, without it having any broader ecclesial dimension (while a smaller selection of psalms was used in the ecclesially oriented 'cathedral' Office). In reality its now clear that the Office and meditatio on the psalms were two quite distinct monastic practices.
Another theory particularly popular in the 1970s and 80s (particularly among those arguing for saying fewer psalms in the Office each week!) was that originally, the psalms were treated as readings rather than prayers, and had to be 'turned into prayer' as it were, by long spaces for meditation after saying each one, and use of 'psalm collects'. But in fact, several of the earliest commentaries on the psalms directly contradict these claims: while they may have been treated as both readings and prayers in some places and times, St Basil the Great, for example, argued that although the psalms effectively encompass all of Scripture, we absorb its messages unconsciously as we sing them.
A third theory was that the psalms only became the core of the Office as a result of monastic adoption and promotion of them in the fourth century. But we know the psalms were sung liturgically in Our Lord's time - aside from assorted New Testament references to them, Josephus even records the particular psalm numbers used at the sacrifice each day in the Temple for example. And now, fortunately, some newly discovered sources, most notably that of some of the long lost commentaries on the psalms by Origen, have confirmed their importance in the liturgy in the first few centuries of the Church's life.
No wonder then, that St Benedict prescribes that the readings can be shortened or cut altogether if necessary, but all 150 psalms must be said each week.
But more on all this in the next part of this series!
In the last part of my notes on Matins, I said that there
were basically two forms of Matins, the ferial and festal/Sunday.
Today, by way of a quick start guide, I want to talk about
some of the moving parts of the hour that you should focus on when learning it.
The opening section
The two ‘new’ elements of this hour are the opening prayer, and the way the invitatory antiphon is used with Psalm 94.
Opening prayer: Although some earlier breviaries add several starting prayers to the hour, including the Deus in Adjutorium, the 1963 breviary restores the hour to St Benedict’s specifications, opening with the prayer O Lord open my lips that I may announce your praise (Domine labia mea aperies...). Note that it is said three times, as the Rule provides, while making the sign of the cross over your lips with your thumb.
Invitatory antiphon: Psalm 94 at Matins is the sole remaining example of responsorial psalmody in the Office, with part or all of the antiphon repeated after each group of verses.
To see a written out example of how it works, take a look at Sunday Matins, pg (23). Monday Matins (Feria secunda) uses ** to show where the antiphon should be repeated in full, and * for the use of just the second part of the antiphon.
There is a different invitatory antiphon (and a different hymn) for each day of the week, and these also change for feasts of all levels. So on Class III feasts, for example, if there isn’t a proper antiphon or hymn for the feast, you use the appropriate one from the Common.
For those who want to read more on the components that make up the opening section of Matins, just follow the links below:
The psalmody of Matins is said or sung in exactly the same way
as other hours, with antiphons and a doxology at the end of each psalm. The only new feature is the third Nocturn of canticles, but these are treated exactly like psalms.
Most of the year Nocturn
I has three antiphons (so each antiphon is used with two psalms) on weekdays,
while Nocturn II on weekdays just has one alleluia based antiphon.
Class III feasts always use the ferial
psalter, while Class I&II feasts use either the psalms of the relevant Common, or are proper to the feast.
Versicle: At Nocturn I on weekdays, and all three Nocturns on Sundays and feasts, a short versicle and response is said immediately after the last antiphon. These vary with the season. Class III feasts just use the appropriate seasonal versicle, while higher level feasts usually have their own, or use the ones in the relevant Common.
Absolution: After the Our Father an absolution formula is said. Normally, the three used on Sundays are then rotated throughout the week, but there are a few special ones, including for the Office of Our Lady on Saturday.
If you want to read more, click on the links below:
The name 'new' element of Matins relates to the readings and their responsories.
Blessings for the readings: The Sunday blessings used before each reading, as well as the couple of variants used on major feasts and weekdays are summarised at the front of the Breviary.
The formula 'Iube, domne, benedicere' (pray Lord, give a blessing) is used before each blessing, and each reading concludes with the formula 'Tu autem, Domine, miserere nobs. Deo gratias.
On weekdays, you need to pay attention as to which set of blessings to use, as there are different ones for Scriptural readings (and these vary depending on the day of the week), Patristic readings, feasts of saints and the Office of Our Lady on Saturday.
Readings: In 'summer' on weekdays, only a short fixed reading for the day of the week more is used in Nocturn I on ordinary days, in conjunction to a short responsory; the rest of the year there are three readings and full responsories for the day of the week of the season (or month between August and November).
Where there are three readings said, on Class III feasts and Saturdays of Our Lady, the second and third readings of the day are combined, to allow the third reading to be of the feast.
Responsories: First, responsories are usually given in shorthand, abbreviated form in the breviary, so you need to know their structure so as to read them in full. In particular, the last responsory of each Nocturn has a doxology inserted into it.
The other trick with responsories is in knowing just where to find the correct ones.
On Class III feast, always check the propers in advance, as some feasts have more than one responsory.
For August to October, the Sunday responsories are set out under the relevant Sunday of the month, not with the third Nocturn readings (which are of the Sunday after Pentecost), while in the period after Epiphany, which set you use depends on the date and when Epiphany falls.
On weekdays and Class III feasts, the concluding prayers of Matins essentially follows the same pattern as the day hours.
On Sundays and major feasts, however, the hour adds several new elements. The psalter section of the breviary on Sundays gives you all the relevant fixed texts on pages (48) and (49), but keep in mind are that unless you are a priest or deacon, simply omit the 'Dominus vobiscum/Et cum spiritu tuo' immediately before the Gospel.
As promised a few notes on how to say Benedictine Matins.
Today, a quick overview of the differences to the Roman Office version of Matins, and then a quick look at the two basic forms of Benedictine Matins. In the next post I will provide a quick start guide to the moving parts that you need to keep an eye out for, particularly for feasts and special days.
1953 vs 1963
I am of course providing notes in the context of 1963
breviary’s calendar and rubrics.
But, with two exceptions (relating to the opening of the hour and the commemoration
of feasts displaced by another three Nocturn Office), as far as I am aware Benedictine
Matins did not actually change in structure over the twentieth century.
The only substantive content changes, as far as I am
aware, are very minor (to a few readings).
The changes that did affect it relate primarily to additions and omissions from the calendar, changes to the rankings of some feasts, and rules of precedence.
Accordingly, if you want to add back feasts, or give them a higher ranking than their 1960 one using the supplement in the new reprint of the Monastic Breviary, you should find these instructions will still work for this purpose.
How much do you already know?!
How you approach learning Matins basically depends on your
starting point.
If you have been using
the day hours of the monastic Office using the Diurnal, focus on the components
of the hour that aren’t common to the other hours, as well as on how feasts of
various levels impact on Matins.
If you are familiar with the Roman (1911 - 1962) Office, you have a huge head-start on everyone else, so just focus on the differences between the two.
Swapping from Roman 1962?
That said, Benedictine Matins has long puzzled commentators, because it
looks quite different, in many respects to the Roman version of the hour. Over time, some of those differences have been erased, but they do still look quite different.
I’ll come back to the historical differences and possible
reasons for them in a later post, but for now, if you are used to the 1962
Roman Office, be warned that overall, the Benedictine Office is much longer
than the Roman (post 1910), and that is especially true on feast days.
There are three main reasons for the extra length.
First, the psalmody is longer.The Roman Office of Pius X divides a lot more
psalms, and into smaller chunks.Psalm
77 in the Roman Office for example is split into six sections, but in the
Benedictine, it is only divided in two.
Secondly, on Sundays, there are twelve readings and
responsories, not three (or if you have been using an earlier version of the
Roman Office, eight). Sundays also have an extra Nocturn of canticles, on top
of the usual twelve psalms, as well as several other extra components.
And finally, instead of a shorter, nine psalm and readings of the Roman Office on feasts, Class I&II feasts use the longer Sunday structure, while Class III feasts retain the full ferial twelve psalm/two Nocturn structure.
Some of the other key differences you may notice are that:
there is an extra invitatory psalm, Psalm 3;
where the Roman hour starts on Psalm 1, St
Benedict starts at Psalm 20;
during ‘summer’ Benedictine Matins has only a short
reading and responsory of the day of the week, while the Roman has three
readings and responsories throughout the year; and
on Sundays the Gospel of the Sunday or feast is
read at the end of Matins.
The two forms of Benedictine Matins
As the table below shows, Benedictine Matins basically comes
in two forms: the three Nocturn Office used on Sundays and major feasts; and
the two nocturn version said on weekdays throughout the year, as well as on Class
III feasts.
Both forms of Matins have an identical opening section (in earlier breviaries, an Ave, Pater and Credo are also said, as is the Deus in adjutorium),
which is then followed by twelve psalms spread between two Nocturns.
There are three key differences between the two forms, relating to the number of
readings, the number of Nocturns, and the concluding section used on Sundays
and major feasts.
First, on weekdays, there is only either one reading (from
Easter to November) or three readings (the rest of the year) in Nocturn I, plus
a short chapter appropriate to the season or feast at the end of Nocturn
II.On Sundays and major feasts, by
contrast, each Nocturn has four readings and responsories.
Secondly, on Sundays an extra Nocturn consisting of canticles )for the season or feast) is added.
And thirdly, Sundays and major feasts have a much longer
concluding section, including two hymns and the recitation of the Gospel for
the Sunday or feast.
SECTION OF THE HOUR
WEEKDAYS/CLASS III FEASTS
SUNDAYS AND FEASTS
OPENING SECTION
Domine mea labia aperies…*3
Ps 3
Invitatory antiphon with Psalm
94
Hymn
NOCTURN I
6 psalms with 1 or 3 antiphons
Versicle
Our Father
Absolution
6 psalms with 1, 3 or 6
antiphons
Versicle
Our Father
Absolution
READINGS FOR NOCTURN I
Blessings with 1 or 3 readings
and responsories
Blessings with 4 readings and
responsories
NOCTURN 2
6 psalms with 1 or 3 antiphons
6 psalms with 1, 3 or 6
antiphons
Versicle
Our Father
Absolution
READINGS WITH NOCTURN 2
Short chapter and versicle for
season or feast
Blessings with 4 readings and
responsories
NOCTURN 3
NA
Antiphon and three canticles
Versicle
Our Father
Absolution
READINGS FOR NOCTURN 3
na
Blessings with 4 readings and
responsories
CONCLUDING SECTION
As per days hours, Kyrie,
Pater, collect, concluding blessing
Te Deum
Gospel
Te decet laus
Collect
Concluding formula if separated
from Lauds
If you are familiar with the day hours of the Benedictine
Office, a lot of this will already familiar.But Matins does have several components that will be new to you, such as
Psalm 94 which is said responsorially (with a repeated refrain) rather than
antiphonally, the use of blessings, the use of responsories with the readings, and
more.
So if you are planning on saying the hour, I’d urge you to
take a look at my more detailed notes on the hour which you can find here.
For those interested in adding additional feasts to the Benedictine 1963 calendar, or utilising the Diurnal in conjunction with later versions of the calendar, I've done a summary listing of the various calendars for the month of September below.
Can you add feasts to the Benedictine calendar?
By way of context, the decree Cum Sanctissima gave permission for saints canonised after 1962 to be celebrated in the earlier form of the Office, as well as for the inclusion of other feasts included in previous books and/or the Martyrology to be celebrated as Class III feasts.
Strictly speaking, it is supposed to be done in both Mass and Office of the day, so you should follow whatever your monastery or parish church is doing.
For modern calendar feasts that do not have propers in the Diurnal, you can simply utilise the appropriate Common (and where appropriate, take the collect from your Missal or Roman Breviary
Pre-1960 Benedictine calendar
For September, the main differences between the 1960 and earlier calendars relates to assorted saints remembered in memorials only (though in the earlier books memorials were generally marked at both Lauds and Vespers, not just the first!).
And as you will see if you look down the list, several victims of the 1960 'pruning' were (as for the rest of the year) female saints, the most important of whom is St Thecla, once generally regarded (in the East at least still), as the first female monastic saint.
Her very early Vita (dating from the second century) was widely circulated in the early centuries of the Church, but met some early, rather misogynistic opposition in the West led by Tertullian, but her cult was commented on favourably by many others, such as St Augustine. Twentieth century scholarship was similarly inclined to downplay her historicity, and she was removed from the General Calendar in 1969, but, as in several other cases, the tide has turned again recently, at least terms of in academic scholarship.
