What's wrong with the Liturgy of the Hours?

[tmw89]

To begin this discussion, I'd like to point everyone in the direction of - and encourage everyone to read - Fr. Cekada's article, The Centenary of Divino Afflatu and St. Pius X's Breviary Reforms:  A Personal Appreciation on Rorate Coeli:  http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2011/11/divino-afflatu-centennial-iii-centenary.html

Second, has anyone here actually used the LotH and at least one iteration of the traditional Breviary?  I admit my own experience with the LotH is VERY limited, and have spent much more time with the Breviary using Monastic and Pius X rubrics.

So, over to you, SD posters!

[Peregrine]

I used to use LotH and, as I got into tradition, I had to stop.  The wording was annoying me so much that it was distracting me from praying.

[peccator]

I used the LOTH for a few months when I was preparing for the Franciscan Third Order, before moving to traditionalism (Deo gratias!). I've been using the beautiful and uplifting Roman Breviary from Baronius Press since it came out earlier this year. The difference is night and day. Or Catholicism and Protestantism, to be more accurate since the explicit focus of the LOTH is that it can and should be used by all Christians. That it includes Morning Has Broken as one of its hymns tells you all you need to know.

The Breviary perfectly complements the TLM. Sadly, the same is true of the LOTH and the NO.

[tmw89]

For further background, here's a chronology of 20th (and some 21st) century Breviary developments:  http://www.kellerbook.com/timeline.htm

[tmw89]

Even more in-depth information - an entire book dedicated to the subject!  From Breviary to Liturgy of the Hours:  The Structural Reform of the Roman Office, 1964-1971 by Stanislaus Campbell, published in 1995, some of which is available free of charge on Google Books:  http://books.google.com/books?id=KLASAVprexwC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

To purchase, check out Amazon - http://www.amazon.com/From-Breviary-Liturgy-Hours-Structural/dp/0814661335/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1357006977&sr=8-3&keywords=From+Breviary+to+Liturgy+of+the+Hours

(although it is currently OOP, and the persons offering a copy are charging HEFTY prices)

[JoyfulMother]

I have the 4 volume LoTH.  I used it when considering the Third Order Caremlites.  At the time, I thought it was wonderful.  But, it was too much, raising 5 children and trying to keep up with it, so it languished on my shelf.

Then I found tradition.  The more I read my Angelus Press Missal, the less I wanted to use it.  THe translation is horrid!  Then I found out - from FE - that whole Psalms and lines from Psalms had been cut and that was the last of it for me.

I found the Divine Office from FE - via Lazlo & Tim - and have sometimes used it, but have no money for an expensive Baronius breviary and find it considerably more time consuming than the LoTH.

I have found the best thing for me is the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary.  It is inexpensive & compact.  It can fit in my purse and go anywhere.  I love the paper, the side- by - side English & Latin and the explanation of the history of the Little Office at the end. 

My 2 cents.

[peccator]

I, too, used the Baronius Little Office for two or three years until their Breviary came out, and still do now and then. However, a free alternative that is both easy and excellent is the divinumofficium.com website. If you haven't checked it out I recommend you do so. I prefer a physical book but when it is impossible or impractical then I use the website on my tablet.

[JoyfulMother]

I don't have any sort of tablet or mobile device or i would use the diviniumofficium.com website.  I am very familiar with it from FE and have it bookmarked on my computer.  A deceased member of FE began that website. 

I also find the Divine Office longer and more difficult, so I like my  Little Office.

But thanks for the suggestion. 

[poche]

I have used the Liturgy of the Hours off and on for over thirty years. When I get frustrated with the English translations I go over to the French, Latin, or the Spanish.
There are some questions I would like to ask, but they are about issues that are not in English.     

[Elliott]

To begin this discussion, I'd like to point everyone in the direction of - and encourage everyone to read - Fr. Cekada's article, The Centenary of Divino Afflatu and St. Pius X's Breviary Reforms:  A Personal Appreciation on Rorate Coeli:  http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2011/11/divino-afflatu-centennial-iii-centenary.html

Thanks tmw, very informative.

[EcceQuamBonum]

My exposure to LOTH has been quite limited, but what exposure I have had has left me with the feeling that it is, as Peccator notes, the perfect complement to the NO:  a banal, trite liturgy that avails itself of every opportunity to evacuate the prayers of any poetry or sense of sacrality.  Any rigor is likewise absent.  Whereas Matins of nine offices plus Lauds generally takes me around a hour-and-a-half to recite, the Office of Readings takes (from my recollection, at least) around a half-hour.  I guess we can't be bothered to offer our sacrifice of praise to Almighty God for much longer.  (I guess this befits our postmodern attention span.)

Anyway, I use the Anglican Breviary because it is the only affordable breviary out there (to my knowledge) that adheres mostly to Divino Afflatu rubrics.  Plus, it's a nice, compact single volume, and it retains the lovely, hieratic English of the KJV and the BCP.  I prefer DA, but I'm saving up my money so that I can buy a '60 Baronius and pray the Office in Latin. 

[Der Kaiser]

I use the Anglican Breviary because it is the only affordable breviary out there (to my knowledge) that adheres mostly to Divino Afflatu rubrics.  Plus, it's a nice, compact single volume, and it retains the lovely, hieratic English of the KJV and the BCP. 

This is what I use. I was told about it by some friends who use it instead of TLOTH as it is essentially the 1910 breviary in King James English and no Latin. I would like a breviary that has latin on one side English on the other unfortunetly I am poor.

[EcceQuamBonum]

I use the Anglican Breviary because it is the only affordable breviary out there (to my knowledge) that adheres mostly to Divino Afflatu rubrics.  Plus, it's a nice, compact single volume, and it retains the lovely, hieratic English of the KJV and the BCP. 

This is what I use. I was told about it by some friends who use it instead of TLOTH as it is essentially the 1910 breviary in King James English and no Latin. I would like a breviary that has latin on one side English on the other unfortunetly I am poor.

This is more or less the case.  I think they use a few of the collects from the BCP, but not many.  I check divinumofficium using the handy Divino Afflatu option before the offices to make sure everything squares up.  (This has more to do with the fact that I don't entirely trust my abilities as a rubricist than the BCP collects, as the BCP collects don't bother me.)  DO also keeps me in line in the Sundays after Trinity, in which the AB is usually off of the Roman Breviary by a couple of Sundays for some reason.  Other than that, smooth sailing. 

I wish they'd just reprint the 1910 with Latin/English (or just in Latin).  Doesn't CMRI use the 1910?  They should get on that.

[tmw89]

I wish they'd just reprint the 1910 with Latin/English (or just in Latin).

I resolved a year or two ago that if I should be in a financial position to fund it some day, I'm having a small print run of Divino Afflatu rubrics Breviaries made by letterpress.

Doesn't CMRI use the 1910?  They should get on that.

I was under the impression that CMRI uses the Missale and Breviary from the time of Pius XII.

[EcceQuamBonum]

I wish they'd just reprint the 1910 with Latin/English (or just in Latin).

I resolved a year or two ago that if I should be in a financial position to fund it some day, I'm having a small print run of Divino Afflatu rubrics Breviaries made by letterpress.

Aw, man.  That would be a beautiful offering.  I'd be happy to chip in!  (Though as a future educator, my contribution would probably have to cover a couple of ribbons or something.   )

Doesn't CMRI use the 1910?  They should get on that.

I was under the impression that CMRI uses the Missale and Breviary from the time of Pius XII.

Ah, okay.  I wasn't aware of that.  I knew they didn't use the '62, so I just figured they used the 1910.  Of course, there were intervening editions, so I shouldn't have just assumed...