19 August 2016

Rubrical specialists out there ...

The Instruction Universae Ecclesiae says that Religious Orders may use their propriis libris liturgicis anno 1962 vigentibus. Does anybody know whether such books, in, for example, the Dominican or Franciscan or Cistercian or Carmelite Rites, were "kept up to date" (perhaps by an Authority within each Order?) in accordance with the general "reforms" of Roman Rite in the 1950s?

I have in mind things like the decimation of Vigils and Octaves ... the insertion of feasts like S J the Workman (May 1) and BVM Queen (May 31) ... the replacement of Gaudeamus with Signum magnum ...

13 comments:

Matthew Hazell said...

For the Dominican Rite, an article by Fr Augustine Thompson, O.P. entitled Preconciliar Reforms of the Dominican Rite Liturgy: 1950–1962 from Antiphon 15.2 (2011), 185-201, might be of help.

√Čamonn said...

I think so, for the Dominican Rite; have a look at Fr Augstine Thompson's webpage for exact information.

Gregory Pearson OP said...

I don't know about other orders, but the Dominican Rite was certainly "kept up to date" in respect of the various changes in the calendar and the reclassification of feasts: indeed, the pace of change seems to have brought about an increasing convergence with the Roman Rite in this respect, as the calendar filled up with "Roman" feasts.

On your specific questions, St Joseph the Workman and BVM Queen both found their way into the calendar, vigils and Octaves were lost, and the classification of feasts (previously following a different structure in the Dominican Rite) was reduced to I, II, III class in 1961.

In this context it is particularly interesting that the only change to the Dominican Mass for the Assumption was in the readings. These underwent the same change as in the Roman Rite (from Ecclus 24, Lk 10 to Jdt 13, Lk 1), presumably for the convenience of preachers (we had already been made to conform our Sunday Gospels to the Roman Rite in, I believe, the 16th or 17th century for the same reason). None of the other propers (some of which coincided with the Roman Rite, some not) were changed, including the unfashionably cataphatic Collect:

Veneranda nobis, Domine, hujus diei festivitas opem conferat salutarem; in qua sancta Dei Genitrix mortem subiit temporalem: nec tamen mortis nexibus deprimi potuit; quae Filium tuum Dominum nostrum de se genuit incarnatum. Qui tecum.

James Agnew said...

I have a Carmelite Rite Holy Week Book that incorporates the Bugnini stuff-50's. Yet it seems the Altar Missal & Breviary are 1938.

Matthew Roth said...

Holy Week in the Dominican Rite was revised in 1955. I cannot speak, unfortunately, to other changes (in fact, the most annoying change was the insertion of “Ecce Agnus Dei”) but I do understand it to be the case that not all changes were made or had to be made to religious rites. The Franciscans use the Missale Romanum (according to their proper calendar with proper texts), so they would have changed on the Assumption, I believe. The OCD breviary (which, sadly, is Roman Rite) was last updated in 1959. So the book itself is not in conformity to 1962, but you could observe the rubrics using it.

Brian M said...

The Abbey of Mariawald (http://www.kloster-mariawald.de/view.php?nid=179) currently uses the 1962 liturgical books according to the Cistercian Use. I have seen their monthly Ordos, but not their actual Missals, Antiphoners, etc. Perhaps someone who can correspond in German could ask them how they accommodate 1962 with their Cistercian books.

Gregory DiPippo said...

I have a copy of the Dominican Breviary of 1962; the Office was mutilated almost beyond recognition.

I have heard, anecdotally, as it were, that the other proper Uses, (O. Carm. O Praem. O. Cist., O Carth.) were left alone, or that revisions were prepared but never promulgated.

The Franciscans used the Roman Breviary, with their own Saints and Blesseds added to the Calendar. (An enormous number of them, in fact; by the early 19th century, there were fewer than 15 ferial days left in the year.) I also have a Franciscan Martyrology printed in the early '50s. It would seem that, like the Dominicans, they revised their calendar by removing the vast majority of their Blesseds, leaving them to local churches and congregations, since in that copy of the Martyrology, they have all been cancelled out (in blue ball point pen...sigh...)

Dominican Tertiary said...

The best resource for answering your question with regard to the Dominican Missal is Fr. Augustine Thompson, O.P.'s blog "Dominican Liturgy". In particular, look at the following short post:

http://dominican-liturgy.blogspot.com/2011/05/using-1933-and-1965-dominican-rite.html

He provides a more extensive description of it in this post at New Liturgical Movement here:

http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2007/10/dominican-rite-requiem-for-all-souls-in.html#.V7dHx_krKUk

The Order had a 1933 Missal which was updated by successive General Chapters during the mid-20th Century to include more "Roman" practices. This process culminated in the 1965 Dominican Missal. The Breviary was reissued in 1962, in accordance with the changes called for by St. John XXIII.

jagribbin said...

Changes were made to the Premonstratensian breviary and missal as a result of the reforms of St. John XXIII, if one studies the acts of General chapters and the 'Directorium Liturgicum' of 1962 (and those for the early 1960s) of the Order. The rubrical changes were eventually published in 1963, I think, in one book. However no reprint or new edition of the liturgical books, which physically incorporating these changes, was made.

Matthew Roth said...

It should be noted that when using the O.Praem rite, the members of said order celebrate according to mid–1950s practice, e.g. they use folded chasubles. I don’t know what the text of the liturgy looks like, unfortunately, for new or changed liiturgies.

Gareth said...

I understand that the Dominicans were pretty happy to drop the last Gospel in the 'sixties having taken it up only reluctantly late in the 16th Century. The reluctance demonstrated by the priest packing up the corporal and chalice, and the server sniffing out the candles during its recitation.

Edward Ahlsen-Girard said...

How would anyone know what the Carthusians were doing? :-)

Capreolus said...

I can confirm what Gregory di Pippo says about the O. Praem. (Norbertine) books. I had a look through the "acta" of the General Chapters from the late '50's through the '60's, and although changes were discussed in some of the sessions, I never found an official decision (votum) or decree from any of the General Chapters that would bring those discussions into force. I had the impression that there was a kind of unspoken disdain for canonical procedure regarding liturgical changes, which was more or less a phenomenon of those times. (Most copies of the altar Missal, though, did have blue-pencil notations of some of the changes, though: the abridged Passions in Holy Week, for instance.)