A quick guide to Matins Part 2 - Finding the opening section of matins and the psalmody in your books**

In the first part of this brief overview of Matins, I provided something of an overview of the hour.  

In this part, I want to point you particularly to the opening section of the hour and the psalmody, and where to find it in your Office book.

Where to find Matins in your book

If you are using a breviary, the core texts for Matins can be found starting immediately after Prime for Monday to Saturday.  For each day of the week, the breviary starts with Matins and then provides Lauds of the day before moving to Matins of the next day.

In breviaries and the Le Barroux Nocturnale, the psalter section is towards the middle of the book

 Page numbers for the basic texts for each day of the week for the most commonly used books are set out in the table below.

Matins page numbers
OFFICE BOOK	Gower (For Sundays, ferias…)	Brignoles Nocturnale vol 1 (Psalter)	Breviary (1963)	Le Barroux Nocturnale Monasticum
Dominica (Sunday)	Pg 4	Pg 9	Pg (22)	Pg 652
Monday (Feria II)	Pg 28	Pg 48	Pg (58)	Pg 668
Tuesday (Feria III)	Pg 49	Pg 70	Pg (85)	Pg 678
Wednesday (Feria IV)	Pg 64	Pg 86	Pg (105)	Pg 690
Thursday (Feria V)	Pg 82	Pg 104	Pg (126)	Pg 703
Friday (Feria VI)	Pg 101	Pg 123	Pg (149)	Pg 714
Sabbato (Saturday)	Pg 118	Pg 141	Pg (172)	Pg 715

 Where to find the "ordinary' of Matins

 The first challenge you will encounter though, is that each of these books takes a different approach on where it places the various texts of the opening section of the hour.

In essence, as the table below illustrates, the opening section of the hour has a fixed structure used for ordinary (ferial) days, Sundays and feasts alike.  But the invitatory antiphon and hymn are of the day of the week.

Note that the links in the table go to more detailed notes on each of these Office components.

OPENING SECTION	VARIABLE COMPONENTS
Opening prayer - Domine labia mea aperies
Psalm 3 - 'in directum'
Invitatory antiphon (integrated with Psalm 94)	Of the day, feast or season
Psalm 94
Hymn	Of the day, feast or season

Note that Psalm 94 is said responsorially rather than antiphonally: the invitatory antiphon is repeated twice in full at the beginning, then inserted after each couple of verses either in full or in part, so if you aren't familiar with how to do this, do look carefully at the more detailed notes on how to say (or preferably) sing it!

The various books differ on whether to put all of the repeated components in a separate section or under the Sunday, and then whether to repeat some or all of the material each day.

The Gower book, for example, provides the Ordinary of the hour upfront, including the invitatory antiphons, and then just starts from the section for each day of the week with the ferial hymn.  In general, they don't bother repeating Psalm 94 each day, leaving you to refer back to either the Ordinary Le Barroux), Sunday and/or Monday, or the section with Psalm 94 in each chant tone. 

The table below summarises the situation for each of these books: 

Matins page numbers
OFFICE BOOK	Gower (For Sundays, ferias…)	Brignoles Nocturnale vol 1	Breviary (1963)	Le Barroux Nocturnale Monasticum
‘Ordinary’	Pg 1 -3	Pg 9	Pg (58) – (59)	Pg 7 -12
Daily section	Starts at ferial hymn	On Sundays all; weekdays, invitatory antiphon and hymn only for each day	On Sunday and Monday all; on weekdays, opening prayer, Ps 3, invitatory antiphon and hymn of the day.	On Sundays, all; weekdays, includes ferial invitatory antiphon and hymn

The opening section of the hour on feasts and Saturdays of Our Lady

It is also worth noting that on feasts, the invitatory antiphon and hymn are either specific to the feast, or (particularly in the case of Class III feasts) taken from the relevant Common.  Le Barroux's Nocturnale includes all the commonly used ones in its Ordinary section, while Gower includes the relevant texts at the end of its psalter book.

The invitatory and hymn for Saturdays of Our Lady can either be found in the Ordinary, psalter section or after the Common of Our Lady (in the breviary). 

The psalmody

The other key component of the hour is the psalms, which are set out under each day of the week.

Benedictine Matins (unlike the Roman version) always includes twelve psalms, divided into two sets (Nocturns) of six.

The number of antiphons used varies between the seasons, but the normal pattern is that on weekdays (including Class III feasts) Nocturn I has three antiphons (ie one antiphon for two psalms), while Nocturn II has one (consisting of alleluias).

The psalms are said in exactly the same way as for other hours, with a doxology (Glory be) at the end of each psalm, or part of a psalm. 

On higher level feasts (Class I&II), however, sets of festal psalms, typically with one antiphon for each psalm are used, generally as set out in the Commons for various types of saints.

The canticles

On Sundays and major feasts, a third Nocturn is added on to the hour, but rather than adding additional psalms, it consists of three canticles, said exactly the same way as psalms are, said under one antiphon.

The table below summarises which types of days have special sets of antiphons, psalms and canticles.

	Psalms and antiphons	Nocturn III canticles
Sundays	Of the Sunday/ferial antiphons or of the season	Of the season
Class I&II feasts	Of the Common or feast	Of the Common or feast
Class III feasts, Vigils	Of the day of the week	none
Class IV days	Of the day of the week	none

The versicle

The psalter section for each day of the week also generally provides you with the versicle of the day or season said at the end of Nocturn I (and Nocturns II&III on Sundays).  Note that these do not change on Class III feast days.

In the next part of this series, I will look at the readings and other variable parts of the hour.

On saying Matins Pt 1: The two forms of Matins

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.  

But if you just want to cut to the chase, in my next post I’ll provide a quick guide to the moving parts, and what to look out for.  

Advent responsory: Rod of Jesse

Miniature, Jacques de Besançon, Paris, c.1485. 

Today, for the last in this series on the Advent responsories, one of two responsories for the day that draw on the image of  the 'Jesse tree' (one of the many versions of which is depicted above), inspired by Isaiah 11:1, named for the father of King David, and depicts the genealogy of Christ.

Isaiah 11 and the rod of Jesse

The text for the other responsory on this theme set for today, Radix Jesse is only loosely based on Scripture, and largely takes its cue from St Paul's allusion to Isaiah in Romans 15:12.

The text for this responsory, though, is taken straight from Scripture, from Isaiah 11:1-5 (the verses used in the responsory are bolded):

1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower shall rise up out of his root.

Et egredietur virga de radice Jesse, et flos de radice ejus ascendet.

 2 And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him: the spirit of wisdom, and of understanding, the spirit of counsel, and of fortitude, the spirit of knowledge, and of godliness.

Et requiescet super eum spiritus Domini : spiritus sapientiae et intellectus, spiritus consilii et fortitudinis, spiritus scientiae et pietatis;

 3 And he shall be filled with the spirit of the fear of the Lord. He shall not judge according to the sight of the eyes, nor reprove according to the hearing of the ears.

et replebit eum spiritus timoris Domini. Non secundum visionem oculorum judicabit, neque secundum auditum aurium arguet;

 4 But he shall judge the poor with justice, and shall reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked.

sed judicabit in justitia pauperes, et arguet in aequitate pro mansuetis terrae; et percutiet terram virga oris sui, et spiritu labiorum suorum interficiet impium.

 5 And justice shall be the girdle of his loins: and faith the girdle of his reins.

Et erit justitia cingulum lumborum ejus, et fides cinctorium renum ejus.

R. Egrediétur / virga de radíce Iesse, et flos de radíce eius ascendet: * Et erit iustítia cíngulum lumbórum eius, † et fides cinctórium renum eius. V. Et requiéscet super eum spíritus Dómini: † spíritus sapiéntiæ, et intelléctus: spíritus consílii, et fortitúdinis. R. Et erit iustítia cíngulum lumbórum eius, † et fides cinctórium renum eius.

R. There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse and a branch shall grow out of his roots. * And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins and faithfulness the girdle of his reins. V. And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding. R. And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.

LR 395/NR 145

Source: Nocturnale Romanum Project (D Crochu)

Origins of the responsories

I noted at the beginning of this (somewhat meandering) series that there are basically two modern theories around the origin of the responsories as we know them, namely a Roman origin in the fifth century, or an external origin, so that they were imported into the Roman Office perhaps through St Benedict's influence.

The Roman origin theory hangs largely on the use of the same term, responsorium, to describe both the singing of the psalms with a refrain, in earlier Roman use, and the great responsories of Matins.  

But the use of the same term in itself is a pretty thin basis on which to construct a theory since many Office terms seem to have had completely different meanings in different places in late antiquity. An antiphon, for instance can mean variously a psalm sung antiphonally (Roman); a block of psalms (Jerusalem Office); or a refrain used in the modern sense (St Benedict); while the term missa means the ending of an hour with the Our Father in St Benedict, but a block of psalms, readings and prayers in Caesarius of Arles' Rules.

More importantly perhaps, if psalm based responsories were the prototype, one would surely expect there to be psalm based responsories in the sets used in association with the various books of the Bible as the repertoire expanded, rather than using texts taken from those books.  In the Mass after all, most of the propers are clearly psalm based, and there are, after all, many psalm verses that directly relate to the various Scriptural books. 

In fact though, psalm based responsories represent a very small part of the overall repertoire, and are mostly confined to use for particular seasons or feasts rather than in the 'histories' that  likely formed the early core of the repertoire.

There is more to it than that, of course, and I hope to come back to this with a look at the de psalmiis responsories now used after Epiphany in the new year.

 

In the meantime though, I thought a good way to wind up this series on the Advent responsories, would be to take a quick look at some of the early claims around the origin of the responsories.

Gennadius and Isidore

I've already discussed Gennadius' witness to a mid-fifth century search for suitable psalm based texts for responsories for both the Mass and Office.  

Another key reference point is Isidore of Seville's De Ecclesiis Officiis, which claims an Italian (but not specifically Roman) origin for them.  The difficulty with this theory though, is just how widespread the several distinctive 'dialects' of responsories seem to be - indeed the early Coptic office also apparently used from form of responsory.

Accordingly, an eighth century text's claims on their origins, the Ratio de cursus, which claims Gallic origins for them, is of particular interest.

The Ratio de Cursus

Written by an Irish monk, the Ratio de Cursus is largely a defense of the validity of the Irish and Gallican forms of the divine office in the face of Carolingian efforts to impose the Roman and Benedictine forms universally.

Its main argument is that although Rome's Office may derive from St Peter's authority, the distinctive liturgies of other places too, had their roots in the teaching of the other apostles who evangelised them, as well as their successor bishops who developed and safeguarded those forms of the Office.

While some of its claims for the Gallican and Irish liturgy in particular are surely overstated, it is an intriguing document for several reasons.

First, it provides a useful witness to the existence of and awareness of several different of local Office traditions in use at that time in both the Easter and West, such as those of Alexandria, Antioch and Milan. 

Secondly and more controversially, he argues that these different traditions reflect the patterns taught by different apostles, transmitted and developed through their successor bishops (for which he provides lists for several places).   

The idea of the Office as either a divine or apostolic tradition, safeguarded and developed by the bishops, is not one you will find teased out in most standard books on the history of the Office, which are mostly more concerned with either the search for Jewish origins for it; or alternatively  argue that the Office did not exist at all before the fourth century. 

But in fact there are a number of earlier references to the Office as an ecclesial or apostolic tradition, and the topic deserves more exploration.

Thirdly, it is clear that the author has actually had very little contact with either the Roman or Benedictine Offices, and knew little or nothing about their history.

Ratio de cursus on the origin of the responsories

The key section of the document for our purposes, though, is this statement:

John the Evangelist chanted the first liturgy in Gaul, then later blessed Polycarp, disciple of saint John, then Iraneus, who was third bishop of Lyons of Gaul, sang this liturgy among the Gauls.  From there, they composed reciprocal antiphons and responsories or chants [sonus] and Alleluias as a flow in modulations of the writings of the New and Old Testament, not from their own writings, but from the sacred scriptures.  And the order of he Church, namely the liturgy of the Gauls, travelled the whole world and was diffused through the entire globe, which Jerome the priest ordained...(Trans Constant Mews, in Lynette Olson (ed), St Samson of dol and the earliest History of Brittany, Cornwall and Wales).

Whether we accept the claim that the responsories were Gallic in origin or not, it is clear that by the eighth century at least, the responsories were certainly not viewed as a Roman creation by those outside its sphere of influence.

Meanwhile, I hope you have found this series of interest (and any comments on it, on or offline will be welcome).  I plan to go back and fill in footnotes for these posts, and may try and pull together a distillation of  it over at Psallam Domino in due course). 

Advent responsory: Send forth the lamb

Today's Advent responsory, Send forth the lamb, is the third for Friday in the third week, and also the last for the fourth Sunday of Advent. 

Send forth the lamb

The text of the respond is taken directly from Isaiah 16:1; the verse is from Psalm 84:8:

R. Emítte / Agnum, Dómine, Dominatórem terræ, * De Petra desérti ad montem fíliæ Sion. V. Osténde nobis, Dómine, misericórdiam tuam, et salutáre tuum da nobis. R. De Petra desérti ad montem fíliæ Sion. V. Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui Sancto R. De Petra desérti ad montem fíliæ Sion.

R. Send forth the Lamb, O Lord, the Ruler of the land; * From the rock in the wilderness unto the mount of the daughter of Zion. V. Show us thy mercy, O Lord, and grant us thy salvation. R. From the rock in the wilderness unto the mount of the daughter of Zion. V. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost. R. From the rock in the wilderness unto the mount of the daughter of Zion.

The chant

The chant itself  is a very short chant in mode 2, drawing on standard melodic patterns, making it look, at least to my admittedly inexpert eye, as if it belongs to the older layers of responsories.  

But although it appears in multiple sources, surprisingly it isn't contained in either of the two main 'Old Roman' manuscripts.  

That in itself is not of course decisive, since some responsories that appear in earlier 'Ordines' aren't in the Old Roman manuscripts, so either moved in and out of the repertoire, were perhaps used in particular basilicas or churches not captured by the old Roman manuscripts, or perhaps have a non-Roman (but older) origin.

The lamb, the rock and the daughters of Sion

This responsory is one of those (relatively few) that it are entirely Scriptural and make no changes at all to the text.  The psalm verse is identical in both the Romanum and Gallican versions, so there are no clues as to its origin or age there either.  

The text of the respond is one of those highly symbolic texts from Isaiah, actually part of two chapters taking the form of an oracle directed against  the ancient kingdom of Moab, condemned as a race of idolaters. 

And there is certainly a long exegetical tradition around it.  St Jerome, for example, explained that the lamb is of course Christ; the rock refers to Ruth, who, although of the race of Moab, forms part of the genealogy of Christ; and the daughter of Jerusalem refers to Sion or the Church.

Although there are a number of variant verses, none of them really give much aid to Scriptural interpretation: they assume this is one that everyone is familiar with, despite its complexity.

Since the versicle is also used at Matins of Fridays as the first Nocturn versicle though, as well as the second antiphon for the day hours on Tuesdays in the period December 17 - 23, it was clearly well-known as an Advent text.

Canonical texts and otherwise 

Given the strictly Scriptural nature of today's text, a relative rarity amongst the Advent responsories, this seems like a good point to talk a little about the use of  non-Scriptural texts in the Office responsory repertoire.

As we've seen, many responsories adapt the Scriptural texts somewhat, either to make the link with its usage clearer, to provide an interpretative gloss (sometimes quoting directly from Patristic commentaries), or make it more suitable to be sung as a short extract.

The merits of adapting Scriptural texts, or using non-Scriptural texts in the Office have long been hotly contested at times, with early prohibitions on the use of hymns in some places; indeed the debate still raged in the high middle ages, where the Carthusians, for example, 're-scripturalised' their responsories and other texts.

The responsory repertoire

The sixth century Italian Rule of St Stephen and Paul for example, seems to reflect Roman attitudes in admonishing its monks to stick strictly to the text of Scripture:

May no one in this community presume to sing, learn, or say the responses and antiphons, as some are wont to sing on an ornate tone, doing so as they wish, and not taking them from the canonical Scriptures.."

 Only sing what you read is to be sung," as blessed Augustine has written; "do not sing what you read is not to be sung."  What the Lord desired to reveal to us through his prophets and apostles is not to be rendered in praise so that it differs from what he himself has prescribed.

The comment rather implies that two competing repertoires of responsories, one Scriptural based, one with a more broader set of source texts, were already available in the mid to later sixth century, and indeed one of the earliest preserved Gallic psalm responds, for example, is actually non-Scriptural.

The instruction goes on to insist that what is supposed to be sung should not sound like the recitation of a reading, and vice versa. 

Benedictine vs Roman attitudes

It is difficult, with the limited sources we have for the early Office, to know how this really played out in the acceptance into the repertoire and development of  responsories, but it does seem likely that the wider debate about the use of non-Scriptural texts, which extended far beyond responsories, did have an impact.  

In many of the early Eastern Rites, the use of non-Scriptural texts in the office, in the form of psalm refrains, hymns and other texts, flowered early on.  This tradition was apparently imported to the West by St Ambrose and others.

But in Rome and some other places in the West, there was active resistance to this.

And on this, it is worth noting that the Benedictine Rule is, in this respect (and many others), quite different in its attitude to that reflected in the early Roman Office.

We are used, today, to seeing the Roman and Benedictine Offices as very closely linked, sharing a common rubrics and core texts.  

But in reality this reflects a long history of mutual influence between the two forms of the Office.

Hymns, for example, though certainly part of the Ambrosian and Arles monastic Offices, seem not to have been used in the Roman secular office (and possibly the Roman monastic office as well, as the rule of the Master likewise did not include them) until very late indeed. 

By contrast, St Benedict prescribes at least one hymn (and three for festal/Sunday Matins) for all of the hours of the Office.

Similarly, when it came to readings, where St Benedict famously prescribed Patristic (and possibly saints lives) readings for Matins, these may not have been part of the Roman secular Office until perhaps the eighth century.

These connections may well have played a role in the particular texts selected for responsories, and their allocation over the course of the year, as I hope to show in due course.

And by way of something to listen to for today, I couldn't locate a recording of today's responsory, but one of the other responsories of the day is Rorate Caeli, so herewith Byrd's setting of the text.