There is increasing interest, these days, in the use of older breviaries, at least amongst liturgical nerds and in some parts of traddy world.
Accordingly, this Advent I decided to use a 1953 (Latin only) monastic breviary as my main office book, adapting it to the 1963 calendar and rubrics, but reading the texts that differ outside the Office, so I could get a better feel for features of the older rubrics and calendar.
So herewith some reflections on the differences between the books and their respective merits, in the hope that it might spark some debate!
I plan to divide up my comments into a couple of posts, covering:
- the physical books;
- the calendar differences for the sanctoral and temporal cycles;
- differences the structure and content of the hours themselves (things like preces, hymn doxologies, etc).
The books
So first something about the physical books.
None of the monastic breviaries are currently in print, and they are all fairly scarce and expensive to buy secondhand (although the 1930 breviary is available online).
Four volumes vs two
The 1963 breviary (and the 1930) comes in two volumes, but the 1953 edition follows the Roman by being spread over four volumes, thus increasing the cost.
The need for four volumes is presumably because of the slightly smaller size - 1953 book is two centimeters in length shorter - but I don't personally find that any more convenient than the slightly bigger book.
The type size and fonts seem to be the same.
Psalter placement
Secondly, the 1963 breviary places the psalter at the middle of the book. Personally I prefer that - it helps to prolong the book's life a bit, but also makes it easier to see where the temporale vs sanctorale are. By contrast, the 1953 follows the older structure of putting the psalter at the beginning.
Repeated texts
Perhaps the most annoying feature of the 1953 book is that, like the Diurnale, it doesn't bother repeating key fixed part of the hours such as the Prime hymn and the Benedictus and Magnificat each day - with four volumes to spread it over, it seems to me that more concession to convenience could have been made.
I guess part of the rationale is that monks will tend to know these parts by heart - and yes I do know them too, but I like having them in front of me all the same!
More importantly perhaps, breviaries were presumably mostly only used when a monk was out of the monastery, for the Matins readings (with a psalter or the Antiphonale for the psalms), and as a reference document for rubrics and planning purposes. But it is still annoying.
Sanctoral calendar
When it comes to the sanctoral calendar, the changes are in my view, a bit of a mixed bag. The changes were that:
- the feast of St Peter Chrysologus on December 2 (a fifth century bishop of Ravenna) was reduced to a commemoration in 1963 (previously the equivalent of Class III);
- the feasts of St Ambrose and St Lucy are reduced from being a Class II equivalent, with three Nocturns, to Class III;
- the Octave of the Immaculate Conception was abolished;
- the second and third class equivalent feasts (St Lucy and St Thomas in December) no longer have a first Vespers;
- the commemorations of St Melchiadus (Pope 311-313, December 10) and St Thomas (Beckett, December 20) were abolished; and
- commemorations were generally previously made at both Vespers and Lauds; under the 1960 rubrics they occur at Lauds only.
The Octave of the Immaculate Conception
The biggest change is clearly the abolition of the Octave of the Immaculate Conception, and in my view that was a positive step.
The effect of the Octave (introduced to the Roman office in the eighteenth century) was to displace the ancient texts of Advent, including the antiphons set for the day hours each week, and replace them with the same repeated texts each day in the day hours; and to replace the reading of Isaiah, a tradition dating back to St Benedict's time, with readings from the Papal Bull of Pius IX.
In a year when the feast of the Immaculate Conception falls on a Sunday, the antiphons wouldn't be said at all.
I really can't see a strong case for the suppression of the seasonal texts, particularly as the season already has a strong Marian flavour in its readings and the responsories.
It has been pointed out to me though, that the monks of Norcia have come up with a sensible compromise approach to this problem for those keen on octaves, namely commemorating the Octave at Lauds and Vespers but privileging the Advent days.
Class III vs Class II?
Similarly, I don't mind the reduction of St Ambrose and St Lucy to Class III feasts - Class II feasts in the Benedictine Office are not very different when it comes to the day hours, but festal Matins is very very long indeed compared to both the Class III structure (3 vs 12 readings and responsories, plus extra three canticles, Te Deum and Gospel) and the Roman Office version.
It is not obvious though, why St Peter Chrysologus was demoted, or the two commemorations abolished - they all represent quite important saints on the face of it.
First Vespers
One of the most important rubrical changes between the 1953 Office and the 1963 was the abolition of First Vespers for most feasts.
It was a mistake I think, as it means that Class III feasts regularly don't have any Vespers at all, such as when they fall on a Saturday.
Most monasteries have restored them for class II feasts, but I think there is scope to go further.
If the concern is the displacement of the ferial psalm cursus in favour of the festal, a concern I agree with in principle, the simple solution would surely be to specify the use of the ferial psalms in conjunction with the antiphons of the feast at either First and/or Second Vespers.
But anyway, more anon...
