OK. So aside from my dissertation (Yes, Doc Dork, I am working on it), my obsession this summer has been trying to find a copy of the Divine Office with all 150 psalms in Latin, to keep my mediocre Latin skills from going to mush.
The progression of this obsession has been thus: last March I spent a few days at Our Lady of the Rock, where they did the Divine Office in Latin. I thought it was cool, but didn't think that much of it. Fast forward a few months, and I obtained a copy of the LIttle Office of the BVM in parallel translation. It's nifty, although it's not as user-friendly to the gamer geek grad student as the current 1975 version put out by the Catholic Book Publishing Co. The ICEL version I don't mind, aside from some cheesy 1960's hymns I can't stand. (I kinda like the Grail Psalms.) The big thing that I don't like about it is that they've taken out any part of the psalms that could be offensive, including the two cursing psalms.
So I started looking for a copy of the Monastic Diurnal. But geek that I am, I thought it would be cool to get ahold of Matins, as well, since I'm usually up then, anyway. Then I heard that the breviary published by the OSB in 1963 is the Diurnal + Matins. And, lo and behold, my university actually had a copy. (Which I'm scanning. At least the first 1040 pages of each volume are the same...) Then I hear that the version they published isn't really the Benedictine offices, but the Roman Breviary. Does the Diurnal have all 150 psalms? I know St. Michael's Abbey Press in the UK has a reprint of it, but I don't want to shell out money for it, until I know what I need.
Who's right about the 1963 breviary? And should I be concerned about these people? So much of the Latin liturgy has been coopted by weird scismatic groups, I'm not sure who to trust.
Saturday, July 08, 2006
Knowledge Base
Posted by
Garpu
at
5:45 PM
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)
|