Order of Cistercians of the Strict Observance

L I T U R G Y

Get:bsemani Abbey Libnar.2Y

Volume 1 Number 1, December 1966

I II

PREFATORY NOIB

During the last meeting of the Liturgical Commission at Mont-des-Cats ,September 28 to October 1, the Commission expressed its desire to under take the publication of a liturgical bullet in .

The :'.\Jost Reverend Abbo t General , in the course of the session of the Central Commi.S.Sion recently held in Rome , was only too happy to give me his verbal approbation. But to avoid any room for poss ible misunderstanding , I think it well to state precisely that this bulletin is appe..=uing in the form of an unof ficial publication , not an of ficial one . I ts sole intention is to provide inf ormation concen1ing--:alings liturgical . Decisions in the strict sense , so of ten as the re is ques tion of such decisions , will be published in·the bulletin of inf ormation circulated by the finitory.

It seemed indeed necessary to give the Superiors of the Order a means of providing their cormnunities with infonnation as exact as possible concerning the work now in progress . Changes in rub rics are no more than the outer shell of the liturgical renewal undertaken by the Omrch ; and the decree "Perfectae.caritatis" (rm. 7 and 3) call us to participate in this renewal. The essential of this renewal is , however , situated on the plane of the spiritual. Still, it

.' mus t be admi tted that it is not always easy to discern the import of this or' that change , its place and its jus tification in the overall picture of renewal , fina1.ly, its connection with the spiritual lif e .Hence , astonishment , even dissatisf action. This is the precise dif f iculty which the present bulletin would like to remedy .

. Wbile of f ering its contribution to the inf ormation and the liturgical fonnation which each Superior tries to give his community , th.is bulle tin would also make it possible f or the membe rs of the Commission to keep each. other inf fonned about the progress of the ir work.

Finally , by making known projects undertaken by various individual re searchers throughout the whole Order , this bulletin would make it possible f or all the monas teries , as well as the Commiss ion itself , to prof it by the patient , useful work done by a f ew.

There is absolutely no intention of issuing this bulletin at set intervals .It will appear when we have something to make known . . .perhaps , also , when we f ind time to get it ready f or publication .

We hope with our whole heart that this bulletin will prove usef ul.f r . M. Enrrnanuel Coutant Abb6t of Bellef ontaineMember of the Liturgical Connnission

v

L I T U R G Y

Volume 1, Number 1, December 1966

PREFATORY NOIB I I IDom Emmo:nueZ Coutant

REPORT OF 'IHE LITURGICAL COMMISSION 1

"LITURGICAL FORMATION IN 1HE .MONASIBRY" 15

Fr. Damian Smyth

IBAQUNG LITURGY I : A BIBLIOGRAPHY 18

Fr. Damian Srrry th

1HE PRAYERS AND ANTIPHONS OF OUR LADY BEFORE 1HE CANONICAL OFFICE 2 4Fr. ChrysogonusWaddeZZ

- 1 -

LITURGICAL COMMISSION

The Liturgical Conunission met at Mont-des-Cats from the 28th of · tember to the 1st of October 1966.

The Abbot General asked Dom Ennnanuel, Abbot of Bellefontaine, to preside in the absence of Dom Edward of Westmalle, who had just offered his resignation.

Of the members nominated by the General Chapter of 1965 the following were present: Father Placid of Cl:teaux ,

Fr Nivard of Port-du-Salu Fr Damian of Roscrea,Fr Chrysogonus of Gethsemani, Fr Gerard of Mont-des-Cats.

Dom Bemard Lefebvre, now Secretary to.the Abbot General, was absent.

,1he following were invited:Dom Bernard Kaul, abbot of Hauterive, represent-

ing the Common Observance .Dom Guerric, Abbot of Scourmont, Dom John, Definitor,Frs Leonard and Bernard of Orval, Fr Dominic of Aiguebelle,Fr Armand of Mistassini, Fr Gabriel of Scounnont .

Before beginning our prograrrnne, we took note of certain recent happenings of ' interest to us.

M on a sterie s i n mis s i o n countries .

Dom Andre Louf, Abbot of Mont-des-Cats, had just come back from the con ference of major superiors of all the monasteries in Africa and Madagascar, which had been held at Rome . He explained to us the wishes the conference expressed to the Consilium as .regards the implementation of the constitution on the liturgy. The Consilium had already .approved in principle the undertaking of ex periments in the perfo.:rmance of the Divine Office in mission countries; but it was waiting to be presented with an ordo o f f icii which would be a foundation for

· . these expe.riments• . .This ordo was presented to them in the form of an abtline(loi-cadre ) : it lays down a certain.number of principles to be observed in the celebration of the Office, but the concrete application of these is left to

- 2 -the initiative of each monastery . It may be interesting to glance at these principles, which will form, as it were, the framework of the Office which our brethren in mission cotm.tries will say. They will be fotm.d in the first appendix.

These principles have not yet been approved by ·the Consilium, which will hold its plenary session during the first week of October; but Fr Bugnini holds out hopes of a favourable reception: we shall soon see whether this hope is well fotm.ded. Perhaps it is permissible to hope that one day all liturgical legisla tion will have this same "outline character".

Clearly it is not for us to coilll11ent on these wishes. But some members of the Connnission did point out the serious implications of some choices, no doubt legit imate, such as leaving the selection of public readings to the local superior. Su periors will be able, of course, to make use of the new patristic florilegium which the Consilium is preparing.

The monastic conference of Africa and Madagascar which has just come into being will set up a liturgical connnission: one of its first tasks will be to draw up a directory conceTiling the Divine Office.

S acr ificium la u dis .

Another recent event is the publication of an autograph letter from the Holy Father addressed to the superiors general of all clerical institutes botm.d to choir. This letter, Sacrificium laudis, .expresses a certain.fatherly anxiety which the Pope feels When faced with demands to introduce the veTilacular into the chant of the Divine Office. Despite his willingness to meet the desires of thesereligious families which are so dear to him, Paul VI finds himself here and now,"praesenti tempore", tmable to alter the norms laid down by the Cotm.cil and tluide explicit in two later instructions conceTiling the language to be used for the· Di vine Office in choir . This is why he exhorts those to whom he is writing to submit loyally and calmly, "animis sinceris et tranquillis", to these prescriptions which have the force of law as lcmg as they are not modified, "donec aliter legi time statuatur."

These fatherly exhortations are accompanied by reflections on the religious value of Latin and the attraction which the Gregorian chant exercises on the faithful who come to hear it, and which make. the .cho.ral .recitation of the Office a light which it would be a mistake .to put out, a light towards which men readi ly tuTil their eyes and hearts. On the other hand, the. religious corrantm.ities themselves would be the first to suffer from the impoverishment which a recita tion stripped of its Gregorian expression would engender .

That is why superiors are invited to reflect seriously on this complicated question of the language to be used at the Office, so as not to act thoughtless ly and have to regret their decision afteIWards .

There is no doubt that this letter will oblige us to deepen the theology - or the meaning of liturgical prayer, and for that matter, of the monastic life in general.

Our representative at the Consilium.

- 3 Fr Damian of Roscrea explained to us how he came to be nominated by the Con silium for the Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy on May

- 4 -3rd, 1966, He has the post of observer and representative of our liturgy at the Concilit.nn, Up to date the Cons ilium .consisted only of members engaged in the active ministry , experts principally concerned with the work to be done , and ad visers . Fr Damian is the f irst to represent a fourth class : the observers , Ob viously he is held to the same .secrecy as the others , but his pos t means that he can give to those who are responsible or who are connected with our commission , those directives which can help them or guide them in their task. This is cer tainly not an easy one as long as the outlines of the refonn of the Roman riteare not fixed and made known.

The s tatute of the commission:

Passing on to deal more directly with . the programme we had set ourselves , we: discussed the statute .of our commission which three abbots .are. to present at the inext General Chapter. Up to the present we have been govemed by the statute of·1953 which goes back ten years before the opening of the Cotmcil , and the consti tution on the liturgy. I t goes without saying that this statute envisaged a com-

. pletely dif ferent · situation f rom that in which we live today , and that it is hard ly possible.f or the commission , limited as it is , to ful fil the desires of our communities and of the order. Our superiors are well aware of this , and that is why they are preparing to revise the statute.. The f act that the structure of the

. goverrunent of the order is liable to tmdergo certain changes as a result of the' aee:..tee··Perfectae Caritatis does not .make . this job any easier Nevertheless , it

seems" 4>0ssible to us , even w:i.th .the present legislation, to lay down .some prin ciples which would define. more clearly·. the function of the commission and enable it to encourage a liturgical life in the order both' f ruitful and .in hannony with our tradition. Such:. a life should take .note ..0£ .all monastic .tradition and Cis-

. tercian tradition . in particular , . have .solid . theological foundations , as the con stittition demands , and be in contact.with the concrete situation and needs of then\en\bers of the order .considered from a pastoral point of view.

The commission could .consist of members of the General Chapter and expert.>from our. order in matters .liturgical.,. all elected .or nr•elooted by the General Chapter and holding office. .until .. the next .plenary General Chapter. The commis sion would be at the: service of the. General Chapter and of the central commission ,of the Abbot General while the General Chapter is not in session , and of local superiors and thei r cormnunities .

I t would be within its power to prepare documents applying the directives coming f rom Rome to· our rite , and,. .in .a more .general f ashion , the documents re vising our rite and our:.books I t could also of fer infonnation and advice in liturgical matters to those asking or .needing it , in the f irst place to super iors , also to members ..of . the central commission .and the General Chapter. In addition it could establish necessary contact with other orders and liturgical organisations [l],study and .co-ordinate· the liturgical experiments allowed by competent authority , and .circulate in· the order such inf ormation and instruc tions as would help to a f ruitf ul unde.rstanding of the reforms taking place and a better participation in.. the life and mystery of the liturgy.

The task is irrnnense. and..the commission f eeis· the need to be helped, support ed and tmderstood. It would be desirable for every monastery to name one of its members as correspondent .so as to ensure mutual exchange between the commission

- 3 [ll - The making of of f icial contacts with national organisations would be lef t to the regional conferences of abbots .

- 6 -

and the connnunities. (The names·are as: follows: for Europe, Africa and Mada gascar, Fr Gerard Dubois of Mont-des-Cats, 59 - GODEWAERSVE1DE, France; for.America, Mia and Australia, Fr Chrysogonus Waddell, O.L. of Gethsemani .Abbey, Trappist, Kentucky, 40073, U.S.A.) < ·

The members of the corrnnission, whether- they· are superiors or not, need to be kept infonned of the discussions and decisions taken by the various -aµthorities in the order in liturgical matters. This request will be officially expressed at the next General Chapter .

Loc a l cale n d a r s

The majority of our communities have answered the circular sent out by the president of the corrnnission dated 25th August, drawing attention to a point in the praenotanda of the Ordo of 1966 (pg 52). But some did not understand very well the matter in question, and 1$ked for feasts having no l o c al character about them, as for example, that of Mart', Mediatrix of all Graces, or expressed the de sire to reinstate this or that feast in its earlier rank. The whole poin ·of local calendars is not to correct the universal calendar of the order to suit one 's own taste, but to allow in each m::inastery the celebration of fasts whi-ch have a local character or some special connection with the monastery.

Fr Damian was able to inform the corrnnission in confidence of the general lines taken by the Consilium in the reform of the universal calendar .of the Church and the revision of the various lectionaries, and it seemed to him hard ly wise to introduce feasts and new texts which would sonn have to be suppress ed. Experience shows that conmrunities are easily upset by the many changes that have followed one another in recent years: it would be better not to multiply them needlessly. That is why the cormnission reconnnends the next General Chapternot to press for the implementation of the recent legislation of the Codex Rubri carurn, which is already liable to be changed. It should be remembered that the Codex came out before the Constitution on the liturgy, and that very soon weshall receive directives from the Consilium allowing us to act with a deeper under standing of the problems involved .

Nevertheless since the right exists, there is nothing to prevent its applica tion in those connnunities which desire it, as long as the pres.criptions of the Codex are observed (No 40, sb - g), and texts already approved by the Holy See are used, (as are the Propers of the various dioceses, adapting them to our Of fice, or the Common of Saints).

Several French communities in answer to a circular of the 10th of September wish to be allowed to keep the feasts of St Joan of Arc and St Therese of the 'Olild Jesus, not according to the particular rite granted to France (12 lessons), but as feasts of 3 lessons, with texts taken from the Connnon. There is nothingto prevent them doing so, according to the opinion of the best interpreters ofthe Codex. Similarly our conmrunities can use prefaces approved in their dioceses.

Cister cian Ritual

- 3 Several decrees or decisions in the recent past are contrary to our Ritual or annul it in some details. Consequently we no longer have a clear collection of laws that we can consult with confidence. Fr Placid wished to put an end to this situation, which in the long run can only lead to disorder and exasperation, and

- 6

I

a

f, certain stirit

. .

so sugges ted a .co.di£ic.ation. .of the norms . in f orce at the moment ;a codif ica tion which would. rep.la. ce .both the .Ritual r:md the liturgical pa:t .of tl1e Usages , ut would express those laws clearly now in force and the t raditional customs which stil l have value , while at the same time leaving scope for future legis-

' lation by paying attention to simplicity and flexibility . This codif ication , ref lecting our present situation , would not , by def inition , be any thing but

. temporary , sine the very situation which it intends to clarify is a transitory one , while we await a more prof ound reform which can only take place af ter theref orm of the Roman rite .

Neve rtheless seveTal members . of the commission wondered whe ther the time was ripe for such a co:di.f ica.tion The present situation is certainly not too comfort able , but perhaps it would be better to direct our energies towards preparatory work , in the his torical field above all , which may lay the f oundations f or afuture ref orm of the ritual , rather than merely mark time r Then too , there would

·. be the risk of provoking further exasperation by bringing out a new legislative text.

There can be no doubt . that these preparatory studies must be undertaken for a thorough reform of our rite The commission states this f act with conviction

·and recognises that these studies are already begun in some f ields. The question was also raised whether, in the future , the particular character of our Ciste r cian rite should be preserved, both. f rom the theoretical and concrete point of view.

Theoretical 1?9int . of view . . . It is... not only a ques..tion of .the le:S_al:. validi!)' of our own liturgicaLbooks: . on .this point the work .of our predecessors is

, finitive and resulted,- as f ar as . the Ritual is concerned, in a decree of the S.C.;"of Rites dated Sth -May., -1913 But there is also the question of .the· ius ti_fi_c:.!_i£_n.l.. f r_£m_a_e_£l0 5 i_c!_l d_yas_!_o!_al point of view , .of a particular rite .

If:YOU are of the opinion that: the. rite expresses a. spirituality or the way in which,a particular community lives· the Christian mystery , then it can be maintained

,;··that within the body of the Latin Church the .Cistercian· life , wtiich· has as its!· deal . a monachis -. with the accent Ol:1 solitude , .nees to express tself in a sp:c "; ial nte , and this perhaps more so in the celebration of the Of fice and monastic, observances than in the celebration of the Eucharist. · · ·

The particular character of this rite will cons ist in the inf luence of atill we do, f ar more than in an attachment to certain tradi-

,, tional ru rics . Such an approach leaves room for an evolution in the· "material" ' details . At the same. time it is worth noticing that· f idelity to the very

letter 1of Saint Benedict·' s . Rule. can lead to some revisions·: for example , what the Rule

.understands by litanies:· or by a responsary· does not necessarily· correspond to what. our present books .prescribe·. · St Benedict: again·,- only speaks of the Am' brosianum f or the· hymns of Vigils , Lauds , and Vespe rs . ·· What is·most important;to preserve is , . pexhaps, a certain logical structure (the pattern of Lauds , for, xample , which leads . us .from the confessio peccatorum to the confession laudis):rather- than· the··concrete details . in which it is realised ·

- 5 , Concrete point .of. view. One of the: characteristics of·. our Cistercian Ri tual 'is tJ:ie· f act that it . cove.rs the· whole lif e of a monk down to even the most prosaic details , thus making:.. of . iL.a. ritual , sacred observance . This springs f rom the :[, act that the Ri tuaL i:ncorpora.tes legislation that goes back to the Consuetudines . iBut at the same time it is a f act which could easily give rise to a mentality

- 6 which some would call ritualis tic, and which .would be contra!)' to present day aspirations ,

Would it be better in the future to dis tinguish more clearly what is strictly liturgical f rom what is either disciplinary or pertainink to the con stitutions? The question .is hotly debated, but does not yet seem to allow of decision , although all are agreed on the necessity and urgency of f inding an answer.

No one questions the need to prepare in this way a tho rough reform of our rite , following the ref orm of the Roman rite , by means of historical, theolo gical , and spiritual studies .

The f act remains that there are several questions which need to be answer ed now. Some examples : Should a monk not bound to choir duty receive the blemng of the monastic crown which goes with solemn profession in our pre sent rite? Now that grace is in the vernacular the need f or richer and more varied texts will soon be fel t : must we await the definitive reform of the ritual? Ought not certain postures of the choir to be revised: f or exalllJle the bow during the dialogue bef ore the pref ace or during the consecration of the chalice , especially at concelebrated masses? Could the choice of processional chants be lef t f ree , f ollowing certain recent nibrics of the Roman rite , so as to allow the non-choir members to participate in these rites which are essentially connnunal?

r.These questions and others like them will no doubt .. f ind a solution in the

def initive legislation. But sometimes , as in· the f irst exaJJl)le given - or f or pastoral reasons - it is impossible to wait • .One . of the aims that Fr Placid had in view in his suggestion of codif ication was precisely to answer such questions in a temporary manner , no doubt , but t!)'ing at the same time to a lign himself with future decisions.

While admi tting the need f or such answers, .other members. of the corranission thought that this rnade:;Qf procedure might .give. rise to more questions than one could find answers for, and that it would- be. preferable to let the questions arise naturally and answer them as they· come . up... They considered that this mode of procedure might also have the advantage.. of letting .the real needs of our connnunities become clear, which would make . the .preparation of a question naire much easier (the .questionnaire is mentioned later) • But this point was contested by others : the questions asked will reflect the character of the correspondents much more than the true neads _ of _ the order.

As regards the general trend to be f ollowed in . the answers , would it not be desirable to continue in the direction of . leaving a certain liberty to each su perior to f ind an answer to the particular . questions which arise in his own com munity - while preserving the authority of .. our Ritual intact - rather than lay ing down a new legislation which would be· mre suppte and· adaptable , but which would still nin the risk of being too unif orm and general? · In addition , would not the first solution be a better preparation for future legislation , which will probably be more of a f ramework , allowing a healthy pluralism within cer tain limits? Such liberty , under the control of higher authority, would not leave the cormm.mi ties· at the mercy of every p.assinR fancy of the superior and his advisers . The studies which the connnission has un:dertaken and is encourag ing will help superiors to arrive at well- f ounded decisions . I t mus t be added

- 7 once more that these studies will not be fully completed or able to bear all their fruit mtil the Roman rite has been reformed . But meanwhile, they can shed much light on concrete situationso

This is the point of view finally adopted unanimously by the commission which advised the central commission- to propc:>se it in the next General Chapter : to allow to each su erior, uided b the· father immediate or the re ional con- erence, t e poss1 1lity o a dlt1ng to t e concrete situation o is commmity those litur ical ractices whi do not come under the co etence of the Hol See. . ..The commission also remin s superiors that it is its function to help superiors and regional conferences, by means of studies and advice, to reach decisions with adequate knowledge. (Requests can be addressed to the secretary of the commission, Fr Gerard of Mont-des-Cats, who will deal with them).

Some particular instances show clearly that on the one hand it is difficult to legislate adequately on a universal basis, and on the other that concrete solutions need to be based on historical and doctrinal studies if they are not fo be mjustified and a source of regret .

P r o c e ssi o n s . In some monasteries the procession cannot take place on days prescribed if those days are work days, and the same is true of benediction of the Blessed Sacrament . It would seem difficult to demand the observance of the Ritual in every case (especially on certain feasts of Our Lady ). It should always be borne in mind

1)- that certain processions are connected with the rubrics of the Missal whic.n depend on the Holy See, such as those of Palm Sunday or the 2nd of Feb ruaiy;

2)- that some are of long standing in the order (the Ascension, introduced by St Bernard; the Assumption, 1223 ), while others are more recent (those of Our Lady's feasts are not found before the 17th C )

3)- lastly, that some are connected with an incident in the Gospel (Palm Sunday, Ascension ), or have a practical value, while others at first sight do hot seem to have any special meaning (the Immaculate Conception, St Bernard: the origin of this latter is purely practical, the monks of Clairvaux had to proceed from the basilica to the old church ).

Blessing of the weekly reader. This used to be given after the Last Gospel. At first sight it might seem that the formula used hardly rises above a nonde script moralism" But if St Benedict wanted.it to be given right after Communion, was not this because he thought of the reader as a real spiritual minister whose task was to proclaim the Word of God received in the Eucharist at Mass? It is easy to understand that the efficacy of such a ministry should depend on the humility of the one performing it, and that.we should ·ask it for him . At the iooment, especially if Mass is concelebrated. and this blessing given after Sext, the spiritual value of the rite does not come through sufficiently clear if we preserve the traditional formula just as it isoOn the other hand the character of the books usually read in the refectory today does perhaps alter slightly the primitive meaning of the reader's function. All this could be sufficient ground for revising the rite, .Anyone charged with. such a revision must realise the ele ments involvedo For its part the commission asked Fr Armand of Mistissini to study the question of the blessings for the reader, the refectory servers, and those going on a journey,

- He will also try to discover more exactly the meaning of the very

ancient rite of the praeconium paschale on Easter Sunday, which is now attached to the

- 7

proclamation of the feas t before the martyxology .

Some regret that the supplementary· Of f i ce of the Dead i '::cmceived as repli-

ca of the canonical of fice , thus obliging us to . sing, for e le , psalms SO, 150 , the Benedictus and Magnificat , and on some . days other psal well , twice over.I t would seem that it is not so much the ·principle of havin8 special prayer for the dead that of ten gives rise to some distcmte , but rather the concrete f orm that this prayer takes , Could it not take on the .character of a "sacred celebration of the Word of God" such as the constitution. le Sacra Liturgia recorrnnends (no .35, 4) ? In point of f act , the Noctums of the dead made . .up of psalms , chants , readings · and prayers are al ready of this characte r; it could even be said that- the· whole of the Divine Of fice is , basically , a celebration .of the Word of God So that it wouldnot be so much a question of introducing novelties. as of arranging more happily the traditional elements , so as to avoid doubling.. I t should be enough to point out some general principles to be followed in all these celebrations , while leav ing some possibility of adaptation to particular circumstances (presence pf the body , anniversary , 2nd of November if it is impossible to go to the cemetery . ..) , to time and place , to dif ferent colllIIllll1i ties . Fr Dominic of Aiguebelle . and Fr.Gerard of .MJnt- des- Cats are corrnnissioned to study this question in greater detail .

Some particular points. The corrnnission gave its advice on some questions sub mit ted to it :

- At solerrm prof ession , should the monastic crown be blessed if the· abbot does not wish to make the monk a cleric? In view of the ambiguity of the present rite and while waiting for a more thorough study of the possibility of a non-clerical m:mas tic tonsure , which the General Oi.apter would like to combine with the taking of the habit , it is suggested that in such a case the ceremony should not be per formed,

- Can a pries t concelebrate on the day of· his· solemn profession? There are several reasons against this , and such a priest is advised to confonn to the an cient cus tom and abstain f rom celebrating· .so as to·' receive· Cornrntm:ion at the Mass of his prof ession.

- Position of the abbot at concelebration. Tue· divergence of practice among our monas teries is a clear sign of tmcertainty in the theology of the abbatialof fice and the monastic church. More· detailed studies of the elements involved are promised f rom various quarters . · On the' conmrission itself Fr Nivard of Port du-Salut was deputed to follow up these· studies ' and engage in research.

- Can the weekly pries ts of the de Beata and pro Deftmctis Masses concele brate at the conventua1 Mass? The best interprete'r!S of the· Codex point out that the rubrics prescribing these Masses , as also no: 221 of the Codex, only applyif there are priests available to celebrate· these Masses. They cannot override the mo re general and fundamental principle :o:f tlie:''COnstitution ,on the liturgy (no .2 7) which lays down that each time a ri:te' 'llfvolves a corrnrn.mal celebration , this latter has precedence over any individual:and quasi-private · celebration , especially if it is a question of the Eucharist and the Sacraments .

- Commtmion tmder bo th kinds at non'"conventual ·:Masses . At the ·moment there is no hope that the Holy See will allow this.

- Weekly lectionary. The Notitiae of the · Consilium for the implementationof the constitution on the liturgy declare in the uActa Consilii" of their no. 15-16 (1966 pg. 76- 77) that religious of a non-Roman rite can use such: a lection ary without any particular decree concel"Iling their rite , in those

- dioceses in which it is authorised by the hierarchy.· They are even recorrnnended to do so .This reconnnendation is to be followed intelligently .

In the dioceses in which such a lectionary has not been introduced, the ab-

- 9 -:.',.·-

bot who desires it c;.ait ask the local ordinary ( or the episcopal conference ) for permission to u ·. ·.·. t ( or to use that of some othe r count ry ) . If the bis-hop can permit it f e whole of his diocese he can also permi t it for a part .

I t should be no te'i · that ·in the French lectionary the responsorial psalm is an integral part , and should normally be sung or read if this lectionary is a dopted,

Liturgical f ormation and education

Fr Damian of Roscrea , the member of the commission in charge of this depart ment . reported to the commission on what he had been able to do during the last few months ,

Only rarely has he been asked by a superior for inf ormation on any given,Point. In such cases he has made enquiries on a non-of ficial basis of the com-

' petent authorities and various professors of the Liturgical Institute of Sant 'Anselmo at Rome ( O.S.B. ) . He suggests that in the future the requests for in formation be cent ralised through the secretary who would f orward them to the various members of the commission ( cf . pg. 11 above) .

Liturgical formation. Fr Damian has collated the principal articles (50-60) which have appeared on the subject , and intends to synthesise them so as to draw the mos t usef ul conclusions f rom them. He has been prevented f rom comple t ing this task up to the present by circlUllStances beyond his control , but he has at leas t been able to collaborate with Ibm John Morson, who is preparing an of -

. f icial report on the mat ter. The commission asked Dom John to take the necessary steps to enable Fr Damian to represent the liturgical corrnnission on the Studies council. He will also contribute to the attempts at monastic formation whichare being tried out at Frattocchie and Tre Fontane as in other monasteries .

Fr Damian was one of about a hundred monks and nuns who took part in a con ference at Tai ze f rom the 28th to the 30th June 1966 , organised by "Liturgie et m:mast res" (1) on liturgical formation in monasteries . The conferen ces givenat this meeting will be published in a number of 11Paroisse et liturgie" (St -Andre,

· Bruges) , and the commission is ready to encourage houses which have not already subscribed to the collection to buy this number when it comes out .

During the holidays Fr Damian went back to I reland, and was thus able to give liturgical courses of six days in f ive of our monas teries , ( talk to the community in the morning (choir religious : the Of fice of Lauds) and in the evening (f or all: subjects of general interest) , various discussicms) . He emphasised the in terest of these contacts and would like to see teams of lecturers f rmed which a

;superior could invite to his monastery . This would be a delicate and dif ficult ltask , and it is important that the invitation should come f rom the superior so

as to ensure complete and willing co-operation . His experience corroborated the findings of an enquiry made by "Liturgie et monast res": the communities , bo th Benedictine and Cistercian, seemed to be poorly prepared , not only for liturgi cal reforms , but f or the liturgy itself . I t is of importance to go beyond the

. [l]- A private group meeting since February 1965 with the permission of their i·:superiors , and made up of Benedictine and Cistercian monk s , with a view to orga f lrl.sing a series of studies on the doct rinal problems which the restoration

- 16 of\ the liturgy raises for monks . The secretariat is at the Abbey of St-Andre, Brugesf}• Belgium.

l51;0,

- 9 changes in rubrics, which often give rise to some dissatisfaction on account of their makeshift character, and consider .the fundamental spiritual realities with which .tn.e·liturgical renewal of the Omrch is concernedo The abbot, who has care of souls, is ex officio the first person responsible for this renewal.

The connnission would like to take the opportunity of this report to remind superiors officially how important it is to ensure a serious and technical litur gical formation, (in so far as possible at a liturgical Institute ), for some of their religious, who will then be able ·to teach others how to work and see that a well-grounded formation is given in the liturgical life . It also calls to mind the importance of having the necessary books in our monastic libraries, not only popular works, but also editions of texts (Sacramentaries, Ordines .•. ) and technical works [ll. (See next page)

We can .report that the project of a liturgical conference gathering together in one of our monasteries several religious of the United States, professors es pecially, is under discussion at the .moment, For the first year the progranune would be spread over five weeks at the rate of two conferences a day with study groups, dealing with questions pertaining more exclusively to our Cistercian liturgy. After a year of reflection and experiment, these religious would meet again to deepen their findings. Something of the sort could profitably be at tempted in other regions (but the great lack, no doubt, is that of competent directors ). We ought also to consider that the nuns ought not to be fanned by the chaplains alone, but enabled to some extent to solve their own problems of formation (see the conferences of Taize on this subject when they appear ). It seems clear that they should be recommended to take part as far as possible in conferences like those which assembled contemplative nuns of various observances at the Abbey of :Ma.redsous in Belgium in 1965 and 1966.

Chronicle .

The question was then discussed of the usefulness of a bulletin which would provide both a means of contact between. the members of the commission and an ex change of information between the communities and the connnission concerning the work being l.ll1dertaken and the'other·questions connected with our communal effott at providing a better liturgical.formation and life. This bulletin could al.so give rise to very worthwhile reflections on what is taking place at the moment, list recent publications, draw up a basic bibliography for our libraries, give advice of a practical or doctrinal nature, etc. The meeting of the conunissionat Westmalle in July 1965 had·already discussed such a bulletin. A year's ex perience and the'reactions of our·comnumities to the silence that has reigned since the last report on the commission's activities point to the need for such a bulletin. But this would not be able to realise its aim if it were to be a malgamated either with the short infonnation bulletin which the Definitory sends out, or with the periodicals which :already exist in the order. Nevertheless, problems of a practical nature a-re not lacking : frequency (which would not be fixed ), editing, translation, lay-out, printing, distribution, finance. Allare agreed that the beginnings·should be modest.

- 18 Finally the connnission deputed the president to ask the Abbot

General for the necessary authorisation, and asked Fr Armand, who will keep in touch with the secretary, to look after the organisation of this bulletin and take charge of the editing.

Questionna i re to be prepared in view of the norms for the application of

the decree Perfectae Caritatis . .

- 11 -

The corrnnission considered how such a questionnai.re ought to be drawn up as f ar as the liturgy is concerned

The idea of having such a questionnaire and especially the way it should be dwwn up gave rise to heated discussion .which made clear how involved the question is and how llllprepared we are ·to . f ind .a ..so:lution. Yet there can be no question of drawing up a scheme lllltil the basic questions are made clear .For the moment we must wait until they are defined by competent authority

This does not mean · that answeTs carmo·t be· sought.. Any concrete suggestions could be of assistance to our superiors in .laying down such nonns r

That is why Fr Dominic agreed to collect suggestions· and schemes which might be usef ul. But the commission as such will no t undertake to produce a definitive text until these of f icial norms have been decided and made public.

Questions concerning the Of fice r· ·.

The fundamental questions to do·with . the structure of the. ·Office cannot bef ruitf ully discussed until certain·J:>as:ic.positions have been taken by competent authority and the reform of the .. DJ;eviary carried through. .( This does not mean that we shall have to copy the: latter· - the Of fice does not play the same part . in a priest ' s liEe:: as it does· in·· a monk's· - but it is a fact" a:hat every

·petition addressed to the Consi1.ium conaerning the monastic Off ice is met with the reply that - unless it is a question of a mission country - the petitioners

· · must await the ref oTI!l of the Roman rite:. )

All we can do for the moment is· prepare ourselves by studying in greater de tail the history and meaning of our Of fice . Father Chrysogonus will no doubt publish some studies of this kind·.in:· otr.r bulletin.

I t might seem at first sight· that this· reserve need no t be extended to some secondary points of the Of f ice . But the connnission does not think it is urgent to resolve them at once , independently of the basic question of the structure of the Of fice .

Some of these points are rather delicate , such as the question of the anti phons of Our Lady which preceed· the• Office. Dom Edward, Abbot of Westmalle , has received a report on this matter for. the reunion of the central corrnnission in

· February 1966 : f rom every· point-.of: ri.eW' it would be better if they were consi-. dered in relation to the generai'refo:n1t e>t' the· Of f ice . ( In any revision of the antiphons of Our Lady the whoie- :Marian :dui.rncter of our Of fice and the best way

·of expressing it is impiied. ·· Fr-'eb.TfSOgGnus· will probably publish a short study·on this subject. ) A too hasty decision·might only lead to a temporary compro mise , not in complete harmony with the rest of the Of fice , and consequently not

· really satisfactory ,

Redistribution of the psalms of Prime among the other hours in those monas terits where this Off ice is no longer recited.

- 20 [l]- I t is regrettable that the library'"Of Aiguebelle had to decide, af ter waiting seven years , to sell a spare copy of De .Antiquis Ritibus by Dom Martne , outside the Order,

-

Some think that we should not ex gerate the urgency ·of this step. We are not the only ones who do not say these psalms in choir : several Benedictine con gregations are in the same position.

But if it is desired to sing these psalms several solutions can easily be of fered, while recognising their tempora:ry character. The redivision of the Psalter is one of the f lllldamental questions in· the refonn of the breviary which cannot be resolved in the irrnnediate future , So· we must suggest the easiest- practical course given the· present state of our choir"."books With this· in mind the" commission pre pared, in July 1965 , three schemas . Others are possible , The choice between these dif ferent possibilities presupposes · that the· two following questions have been ans wered·:

(1) - Will the Benedictine abbots propose a redistribution of these psalms for all their congregations at the end of their meeting in 1966? If they do , it would be better for us to adopt their system.

(2) - If we have to make up a system of our own , would the press at Westmalle allow Gethsemani to make a photographic reproduction- of the psalms: of the little hours f rom the present text suitably rearranged? If so the second schema proposed last year by the commission is suggested as the most satisf actory. If not , then the third schema could be adopted which would allow us to use our present folio psalters without too much dif ficulty. ( These schemas will be f ound in the appen dix of last year ' s report . )

Fr Chrysogonus is deputed to keep abreast of the development of the position , and keep the president inf onned.

The session closed on Saturday rnoming af te r having nominated several members to prepare , for the next meeting , some rules of procedure for the commission it self . Some provisional norms were agreed on to guide the activities of the com mission until this meeting : they concern especially the ftmction of the secre tary and the preparation of the next plenary meeting , which no doubt will take place next surrnner.

- 13 -

APPENDIX

Proposal concerning the liturgy submitted to the Holy See by the superiors of the monks and nuns of Africa and Madagascar. (cf pg . 1 above).

".,,The following could be envisiged as the basic requirements;

(1) Each hour of the Office is made up of psalms, a reading and a prayer (oratio).(2) The other traditional elements of the Office will be adapted to the genius

of each people.(3) The psalter will be recited twice a month if possible .(4) The public readings in the Office will be chosen by the local superior

acting in harmony with his cormnunity.(5) Lauds and Vespers will be made up of at least three psalms, a reading, a

can ticle from the New Testament, and the conclusion(6) Vigils will ordinarily be made up of two noctums, each of three psalms

and a lesson; on Sundays and feast days there will be a thirtl'nocturn made up of canticles, Te Deum, and the reading. .of the Gospel.

(7) The little hours and Cornpline can be recited out of choir [l]where this is necessary: they will consist of at least one psalm, capitulum and conclusion."

[1].., But in cormnon. (clarification given by word of mouth).

INDEX

List of participants 1

Office in missionary countries ... 1

The papal letter "Sacrificium laudis" 2

Our representative at the Consilium 2

Statute of the cormnission 3

weal calendars 4

The RitualStatus questionis 4The cormnission's resolution 7Some particular instances

processions, blessing of the wei1J<ly reader,praeconium paschale, supplementary office of dead 7

Replies to some particular pointsblessing of the monastic crown, concelebration at solemn profession, the abbot at concel bration, the de Beata and pro Defunctis Masses, CoJJUIU.lili on under both kinds, weeklylectionary 8

Lituxgical formation and education 9

.

- 14 -

Oironicle 10

Questionnaire 10

Questions concerning the Officegeneral questions, antiphons of Our Lady,redistribution of the psalms of Prime 11

Appendix 13

- 15

"LITURGICAL FORMATION IN THE MONASTERY"

The title of our report was the theme of a congress organised by LITURGIE ET MONASTERES, and held at Taize, June 28- 30, 1966.

That such an event answered a real need is demonstrated by the fact that about ninety people attended: some 25 Benedictines , over30 Cistercians (mainly OCSO ) , and about 35 cloistered nuns (Benedictines , Bernardines , Carmelites , Poor Clares , Dominicans , Visitandines no Tranpistines , however ). The countries most heavily represented were , naturally, France , Belg ium, and Holland: two or three came from Germany , and ......one from Italy!

In this report (which we have already published , in Italian, in VITA MONASTt CA 20 (1966) 187- 190)

we confine ourselves to a brief resume of the excellent conferences. The full text of these will be published in a special volume of the collection PAROISSEET LITURG IE ,and without hesitation we consider it a "must" for all our communities.Orders can be placed with:

LITURGIE ET MONASTERES,Abbaye de St. Andre, Bruges I I I (Belgium ).

Inevitable, the session op ened with "Directives of Vatican I I" (Dom Robert Gantoy , St. Andre ). From a study of various conciliar documents , and not only from the Liturgy Constitution, it is clear that the monk needs a liturg ical formation that is organised (not merely left to chance and presumed good- will ) and integrated. We have to be realistic , and "demytholog ise'' the persistent myth of the monk who, simply by living in an ideal liturg ical milieu, comes to live the l iturgy spontaneously. Recent experi ence would rather in dicate that we have everywhere over- rated the liturg ical prepared ness of our monastic communities ( e.g. concelebration ! ) . The inevitable conclusion is that everywhere liturgical formation is inadequate, even in those monasteries which are g enerally

- 16 considered as liturgically "with it" .

As for the liturg ical formation of our young monks , the situa tion as a whole is not any better than that in the seminaries. Many

- 17 monasteries have no professor of Liturgy at all , qualified or otherwise. The speaker concluded by outlining various means of liturgical formation which were examined in detail in the follow ing lectures , A final question: "What monastery could hope to find in its own resources , spiritual and intellectual , all that was requirer.i?" W.e. need to pool our resources , we need a spirit of cooperation between our communities , male and female. LITURGIE ET MONASTERES aims to promote precisely such a spirit.

Logically , the liturgical formation of the monk begins in the novitiate. "To- day's novices and the Liturgy" (Dom Bernard Besret , Boquen ) made the important point that every postulant , invirtue of his Baptism , is "a liturgical being" . His formation must not confine itself to the sphere of knowing, or to the sphere of doing , but must penetrate his very being. A certain "conversion"to b iblical- patristic thought patterns will be necessary if he is not to remain a stranger in the world of the Liturgy. But this is not enough. "It is the whole man, and the man as a whole, thatGod wishes to encounter in the Liturgy. To arrive at this whole ness a life of authentic asceticism is required. '' There followed a series of observations that have much in common with the principles of anthropology and psychology which are basic to Dechanet's CHRISTIAN YOGA. A stimulating , even provocative, lecture.

"The Organisation of Studies in the Monastery" (Dom Philippe Rouillard , Wisques ) is no new problem. Nowadays there is a de cided tendency to abandon the seminary- type courses , and look for something more "monastic". This lecture is the fruit of various surveys made in monasteries , studentates , and seminaries. New programmes are being designed , teaching methods are being radical ly overhauled. Time alone will reveal their advantages and dis advantag es.

No longer can we condone the attitude of the theologian who treats the liturgy simply as the last and least (with archae ology! ) of the various "loci theo1ogici".

"Liturgy and Theology" (Dom Romain Swaeles , St. Andre ) sees in the Liturgy the Living Tradition. The argument from the liturgy requires of the theolo gian a technical preparation that is altog ether special. The various professors of the faculty must work together as a team ( fundamental ). The application of this and other principleswas illustrated with reference to four traditional tracts - De Trinitate, De Christo , De Gratia, De Sacramentis. In short ,-a conference whose messag e we would l ike to see reaching all our professors of theology.

"The Liturgical Fo rmation of Nuns" (Dom Francois Vanden broucke, Mont- Cesar ) is made all the more difficult by their more rig id "separation from the world", the lack of systematic theolo g ical formation, deficient library faciliti es , etc.

But the need is more urg ent than ever, since the

- 18 exacting demands of the young g irl of to- day can best be met by a Liturgy that is true, authen tic , lived. The lecturer concluded with a list of means , modest but efficacious , towards bettering the general situation. This

- 19

conference was eagerly followed by the many nuns (of all ag es ! ) present , and we feel that their Trappistine sisters will find the published text no less helpful and encouraging.

But it would be useless to speak about liturg ical formation if we have not got clear ideas about "The Objectives of the Liturgical Formation of Monks and Nuns" (Dom Adrien Nocent , Maredsous ). The principal objective of such formation is - the celebration it self, as the liturgical express ion of the Christian real ity.

After examining this , the lecturer, with his usual lively presentation( cf. THE FUTURE OF THE LITURGY ), passed in review the other ob jectives: a theology of the Liturgy ; the vital unity between theology , liturgy , contemplative life, and the life of love; living the present liturgy in the light of its past history ; distinguish ing between the permanent values and the transitory; a liturgy that is consistently "pastoral".

The final lecture was the extremely useful "The Liturg ical Formation of the Community" (P. Placide Deseille, Bellefontaine ). The most intimate prayer of the monk must be elicited by the litur gical celebrations , to express itself in them in the fullest way possible, to attain a contemplative orientation of the Liturgy. The principal means of formation will be the celebration its elf, pro vided it be authentic , truly "significant" ( a clear sign of a present , but hidden, reality ), intellig ently adapted to the en vironment.

Then ag ain, the forms of private devotion current inthe community must b e in harmony with the Liturgy, indeed , impreg nated with the liturg ical spirit. To achieve this two things are especially counselled: (a) the use of the psalms in private pray er ; (b) a more traditional "1ect io divina". Once we have assured thes e primary elements we can hope to profit also by other means of liturg ical formation:courses , conferences , community liturg ical commission, library , etc.

At the present moment we have an urgent need of monks ( and nuns ) with the necessary technical skill to work at the task of the liturg ical formation in the monasteries. Such skill is ac quired ideally, but not necessarily , at one of the Hig her Insti tutes of Liturgy. For our information short descriptions were given of the Institutes of Paris and Rome (Dom Nocent ), of the new Institute at Trier (Dom Suitb ert Benz ), and of the annualsession for Liturgy professors at Mont -C sar (Dom Vandenbroucke ).

The names of the lecturers are a sure guarantee of the solid theolog ical formation and the realistically practical quality of the lectures , fruit of experience from various monasteries. We eag erly await their publication which will be so useful for all those "Qui habent aures audiendi" superiors , father- masters , theology professors , etc. In our gratitude to the hardworking group that compose LITURG IE ET MONASTERES we can

- 20 only say: " Qui coepit vos Deus , Ipse perficiat" .

Tre Fontane. b. DAMIAN SMYTH, O.C.R.

- 21

TEACHING LITURGY I

A BIBLIOG RAPHY

Within the past few months we have received from monks and nuns of the order a series of request, of which the following is typical :

" I have just been appointed to tea h Liturgy this year. Of course I still have to teach Dogma, hear confess ions of the guests, and whatnot , so I have not got all that time to prepare my stuff.Still , I realise ever more how much we need , and lack, a sound liturgical foundation. Any sugg estions you have to make will be deeply appreciated ....... "

Thus , inevitably , we have monks and nuns who find themselves overnight "professors" of Liturgy. In most cases they have no lack of enthusiasm, but generally their ideas about how Liturgy should be taught are vague, imprecise, or even downright WRONG.

The present article is a first attempt on the part of the L it

urg ical Commission OCSO to reach all those who teach liturgy in our monasteries. Your's is an important task, and it is up to us to g ive you all the help possible. A section of our new Bulletin wil l be regularly devoted to this "dialogue" with you.

In this number we kick off, in best professorial fashion, with a bibliography. Kindly note that this list is neither(a) selective, nor (b) exhaustive.

It is not selective because some articles merely repeat what is said in other articles on the same list ( e.g.

Hurtado's "Formacion del Celebrante" is merely Lab igne's"Former des Celebrants" adapted for Spanish readers ). It is not exhaustive, for we have, for instance, nothing in German on the subject. The only

- 22 G erman periodicals currently availableto the present writer (Liturg isches Jahrbuch; Archiv fuer Lit- urgiewissenschaft ...... ) are too uncompromising ly "wissenschaft- lich" to descend to the more humb le level of our problem. More

- 19

"pastoral" periodicals in that language are probably even less available to you than they are to us at the moment o At any rate, you can run through the list , tick off the items which you are likely to find in your library , and ferret them out.

The Documents are, of course, more important than the Studies. After a careful examination of the former, readers of English would do well to beg in the latter with Fr. O'Shea's excellent article. We would unhesitating ly make it "required reading" for all.

Real ising that even the best Cistercian l ibrary will probably contain only a fraction of the items listed , we propose presentingin our next number a critical synthesis of all the relevant materi

al contained therein.

Lest the "dialogue" should deteriorate into a monologue, we should like very much to hear within the next few months from those teaching l iturgy in all our monasteries of monks and nuns. What we particularly want to know is (a) if the person teaching liturgy has any special qualifications for the job (a diploma from a Li turgical Institute ; a de.g..ree in Theo logy. .. ) ; (b) what kind ofprogramme has he mpped out ? (c) what are l ibrary facil ities like in the field of liturgy (Sources , studies , periodicals ... ) ? (d) what are the professorJ s biggst difficulties? (e) what are the students' bi gg es t difficulties?

If we g e t enough answers we should have a pretty clear picture of the "status quaestionis". After all , before attempting to meet your needs in thes e pages , we must know what they are. Furthermore, the experience pooled from different houses should be quite instruc tive.

Correspondence ( if possib le, in either English, French, Span- ish, or Italian ) should be addressed to :

Damian Smyth OCSO,Abbazia delle Tre Fontane, ROMA ( Italia ),

- 24 A.

1941

1945

D 0 C U M E N T S

Epist. Circularis S. C. de Seminariis De Institu- tione in Seminariis Theologicis Peculiaris Cursus ad Psal- mos Explanados. (Bugnini Doc. Pont. and instaur. Lit. spectantia; pp. 73- 75. )

Epist. Circularis S. C. de Seminariis De Institutione clericorum deque Officii Divini recitatione.

(Bugnini : ibidem, pp. 82- 88.)

1949 Epist. S. C. de Seminariis in Seminariis Fovendo. (AAS

De Musicae Sacrae Studio41(1949)618- 619)

1958 SRC Instructio de Musica Sacra et Sacra Liturgie, nn.109- 111 ; AAS 50(1958)661 )

1963

1964

B.

Cone. Vat. II Const. De Sacra Liturg ie, nn. 14- 20. cf. various commentaries on this section, e.g. HAENGGI , EL 78(1964)247- 250.

SCR Instructio ad exsecutionem Constitutionis .... nn.11- 18. cf. commentaries , e.g. BRAGA, EL 78(1964)421- 518.

S T U D I E S

ANON., Riv. Lit. 36(1949)30- 32 A proposito di insegnamento e formazione liturgica nei seminari.

ANON., Riv. Lit. 39 (1952)175- 176 Vita liturg ica nei seminari.

AMORI , G., RIV. Lit. 52(1965)326- 332 L'insegnamento della l iturgia per la formazione sacerdotale.

APPENDINO, F.N., Riv. Lit. 50 (1963)57- 77

g ia nei sem1nar1.

La scuola di litur-

ARNO , E.P., in LA SACRA LITURGIA RINNOVATA DAL CONCILIO (ed.Barauna ; Edizioni Elle D1 Ci, Torino 1965) pp. 279- 302La liturg ia al centro della teolog ia e della pastorale.

BARBUGLIO, G., Riv. Lit. 52(1965)333- 342liturg ica in sem1nario.

Esperienze di vita

BELTRAN, A., Liturgia (Silos) 12(1957)161- 169 : Datos de una encuesta sobre la vida liturgica en los seminarios mayores de, Esp ana ( 1955 - 56 ).

- 19 BOTTE, B., QLP 33(1952)117- 124 A propos des manuels de liturg ie.

- 21

n

IDEM, LMD 66 (1961)70- 76 :

(:fans" les seminaires.

A propos de la formation liturg ique

BOTZ, P., Orate Fratres 22(1948)481- 494 : Liturgy in the seminary.

BOUYER, M:- D., LMD 78(1964)124- 127 : La formation liturg ique des religeux pr tres.

BURBACH, M., The Benedictine Review 12 (1957)5- 8 : Liturgy an inte- grating prl.nciple fn Benedictine education. -

BUSCH, W., Orate Fratres 22(1948)291- 297 : Liturgy in our seminaries.

CAPELLE, B., 9..!:f 16 (1931)179- 189 : Obj et et but de 11·enseignement liturg ique.

CASTANIE , R., LMD 78 (1964)106- 115 : Comment enseigner les rubri ques en T904 ?

DANNEMILLER, L., U.S.Lit. Week 1959, _ pp.212- 216 : The liturgy in the seminary scripture course.

DUGEY, W.M. , Orate Fratres 21(1947)418- 421 The Conception seminary plan.

EVANGELINE , Sr.M., U.S.Lit. Week 1957, p. 190 The training of novices.

FORD, J. C., Orate Fratres 2 (1947)289- 299 : Teaching liturgy in the seminary.

FUERST, A.N., U.S.Lit. Week 1957, pp. 87- 113

grating principle in education.

Liturgy, the inte-

General discussion, U.S. Lit. Week 1957, pp. 165- 167 : Liturgy in in the seminary.

GIGUERE , R.J., U.S.Lit. Week 1963, pp.217- 2 23 : The reorientation of seminary courses.

HOFINGER, J., Worship 30 (1956)424- 437 : Liturg ical training in seminaries.

HURTADO, P., Liturgia (Silos) 16 (1961)292- 299 : Formacion del celebrante.

- 22

JENNY, H., QLP (1 56)206- 217 Prob lemes et methodes de l'enseigne mentlfturg ique.

- 23 JIMINEZ DUQUE, B. , Liturg ia (Silos) 13 (1958)19- 26

del movimento liturg ico en las seminarios.

Directrices

LABI GNE , J., LMD 66(1961)77- 91 : Former des celebrants.

MAERTENS, T., Paroisse et Liturg ie (1952)13- 26 : Le programme duC OU T S de liturg ie.

MALONE M. Master's thesis , Creighton University , Omaha (type-'script ) : The sacred liturgy .- the it grating principle in the Conception plan for seminary training.

MARTIN , C., U.S. Lit. Week 1955 , PP 67- 69 : What ought to be the liturg ical formation in a novitiate?

MAZZARELLO , S., Rivista di Pastorale Liturgica, 1(1963)49- 53; 2(1964 227- 233 : La liturgia nei seminari e negli studentati religi osi.

MI LLER , J. ., Yearbook of liturgical studies 1960, p .27-39 : Con tent of the liturgy course in major seminaries.

Montr al , Commission sacerdotale de Pastoral liturgique , 1958 (poly cop. ) : La vie et l'enseignement liturg iques dans les maison de formation du clerg e.

MOUREAU, E., QLP 33(1952)112- 116

les semIIlaires.

L'enseignement de la liturg ie dan

MUELLER, A. , QLP 22(1937)309- 321 : La place de la liturgie dans l'education, au seminaire et au colleg e.

NOIROT, M., Seminarium 5 N.S. (1965)245 - 254 : a formation du sens liturgique des jeunes clercs , A la lumiere du I I Concile Vatican.

NORRIS, F., U.S.Lit. Week 1959, pp.209- 211 : The use of liturgy in the dogma course.

OGGIONI , C., Riv. Lit. 50 (1963)52- 56 : La formazione sacerdotale nei seminari e ia liturg ia.

IDEM, Riv. Lit. 52(1965)313- 325 : Avviamento alla pastorale litur gica nel seminario teolog ico.

O'SHEA, W., Homiletic and Pastoral Review 58(1958)1140- 1146 ing liturgy in the seminary. Teach-

- 24

PALACIOS, M., Liturg ia(Silos) 19(1964)101- 119

de liturg ia para las seminarios.

Por un programma

- 25

PASCUAL, A., Liturgia(Silos) 12(1957)217- 223 : La liturg ia en la vida esp1ritual y en la formacion intelectual del relig ioso.

PRADO, G., Liturg ia (Silos) 17(1962)145- 149 : Preparar maestros de liturg1a.

QUINN , J.R., U.S.Lit. Week 1963, pp.213- 217 The theolog ical con tent of the seminary course.

RIGHETTI , M., Riv. Lit. 35(1948)12- 16 : L'insegnamento e la forma zione liturg 1ca nei seminari.

ROUI LLARD, P., in Litu\gie et Monast res , Etudes 1 (Brug es ), pp.

53- 140 : La formation 11turg1que clans les monasteres.

RYAN , V., Doctrine and Life June (1965) 299- 313 : Liturgical for mat10n of rel1g1ous.

SCHLECK , C.A., Yearbook of L ! cal Studies 1960, pp. 41-64 integration of crogmaticTheoTogy,1ith tfie

iturgy.The

SMOLDERS, D., Paroisse et Liturg ie (1965)579- 584 : La vie l itur g ique au s m1na1re.

STEVENS, P.G., Yearbook of Liturgical Studies 1960, pp. 65- 122 Moral theology and the liturgy.

TOLLU, F. LMD 78 (1964)82- 96 : La formation liturg ique des futurspr tres.

VAGAGINI , C. , Vita monastica 2(1958)165- 173 : Liturg ia e questione monastica.

Idem, I I Senso Teolog ico della Liturg ia (translations) : cf. referenc es 1n "lnd1ce anal it1co ':' s:vv. "Seminari",

''In segnamento".

Idem, Inaugurazione del Pont. Institute Lit. S. Anselmo 1961 Liturg ia e pensiero teolog ico recente.

VANDENBROUCKE , F., QLP 45(1964)251- 254 : Liturg ie et seminaire.

- 26

Tre Fontane. B. DAMIAN SMYTH,O.C.R.

- 27

TI-IE PRAYERS AND ANTIPHONS OF OUR LADY BEFORE 1HE CANONICAL OFFICE

Our subject is a delicate one, and there are probably few of us who have not already given considerable thought to the topic treated in this paper . We who profess to seek God truly realize that truly seeking God means, in practice,seeking Him there where He has most perfectly revealed Himself : in Jesus 01.rist. But if we love the Lord, we can hardly be indifferent when there is question of the Mother of the Lord; and it is only right that each of us should feel personal ly involved at a deep level of concern so often as there is question of our love and reverence for the Mother of God, and of the manner in which we give expres sion to this love and reverence.

The B a c kground, P u rp o se, and Pl a n o f t i 1 i s A rticle

What follows has grown out of a sunnnary report prepared earlier this year at the request of Dom Edouard Wellens, O.C.R., at that ti.me President of the Or der 's Liturgical Corrnnission. Dom Edouard 's request, in turn, had its origin inthe meeting of the Central Commission of Abbots, held at Monte Cistello in Decem ber of 1964. Our Marian prayers and antiphons were among the topics there treat ed; and they provided material for a discussion which was both ample and, one feels, lively. Still, little of a concrete nature emerged from this exchange of views - except, perhaps, the greater realization that, in at least some parts of the Order, these antiphons and prayers pose real problems. Everyone agreed that the matter called for further study.

The purpose of this article is a very modest one: simply to explore the area of concern in the hope of identifying the more important real problems. For some of the problems we shall meet are, indeed, real ones; others are perhaps a bit imaginary . .And of the real problems, some are important, others relatively minor . Only a clear-sightecrstirvey of the area of discussion will make possible the shaping-up of a reasonably satisfactory solution . Accordingly, the purpose of this article is not to provide such a solution, but merely to help define the area in which a solution might be found .

The plan of this article is mercifully uncomplicated, and falls into four parts. Since some of us, especially the younger members of the Order, may be unacquanted with the history of the introduction of these 'blocs' of Marian prayers and antiphons in o the Cistercian liturgy, a fi r st section will give the essentials of this history. A se c ond section will deal rather briefly with the various individual prayers and antiphons and other texts which make up the for ularies under discussion. Tl1is analytical examination will have to remain, I am very much afraid, confined within a somewhat dust-and-dry-bones area of investi gation. It would certainly be pleasant to begin

- 2 4 sorting out the many and pro foundly meaningful riches of these theologically dense texts. But this would

- 25 -

..involve an entire ries ef studies, and here we are concerned rather for a moregene al, 0ouh olrjecti;_ appreiation of our texts.

What we earn in 0is sec?nd

section will ! ,e1p us to . follow with better understandi0 ng when, in the third section we listen to t1 e Abbots of the Central Corrnnission of 1964 discussing some of the problems raised by these prayers and antiphons. In a f o urth and final section, we·shall gather from the preceding three sections some of the more meaningful emergents, asking if the results might not help us orientate ourselves in the direction of a solution acceptable to all.

I. How We Came to Adopt the Antiphons and Prayers of Our Lady before the

Office The relatively recent adoption of these Marian antiphons and

prayers is essentially bound up with the whole question of our suppression of the choral recitation of the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin . (1) . Already in the program for the General Chapter of 1951, reference had been made to requests for a reduction inthe number of obligatory vocal prayers (Office of the Dead, Little Office of Our Lady ) (2). The Fathers of the General Chapter prudently considered the matter much too serious to be treated lightly. Accordingly, each Superior was to study the question, and then submit his observations to the Definitory (3).

The fruits of this enquiry appeared in the Program of the General Chapter of 1953 (4); and, in view of the importance of the question, the problem was examined by all three corrnnissions. The results of the deliberations? Only a slight major ity of the Fathers favored a radical change in the centuries-old practice of the Order . On the contrary, a quite substantial majority favored the suppression of the Little Office so often as the canonical Office was de Beata (5). The Holy See respected this option of the General Chapter, and, in a decree dated November 9, 1953 (6), gave the necessary authorization, but with this important provision :The question was to be re-discussed at the following Chapter of 1955, and then re submitted for further examination by the S.C. of Religious (7).

The ;1question was 11fe"" disc:ussed at the General Chapter of 1955, but now in a context envisaginge total suppression of the Little Office. The circular let ter of the Most Reverend Abbot General, of March 21, 1955 (8), and the program of the General Chapter of 1955 (9)both reveal to what an extent the state of the question had "evolved" between 1951 and 1955; and the voting of the General Chap ter itself revealed that there was now a substantial majority, though by no means an overwhelming majority of our Superiors, who favored the suppression of the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin (10) .

The same General Chapter, after considering a proposal that each Hour of the canonical Office end with an antiphon, versicle, and prayer of our Lady, refused the proposed project, and thereby showed itself opposed in principle to the idea of a "substitute " for the soon to be suppressed Little Office (11).

How did the Holy See respond? In a decress of June 27, 1956 (12), the S.C. of Religious honored the decision of the General Chapter, at least in

- 2 4 substance . The principle of the suppression of the Little Office was accepted, but only con- ditionally; for we read in the text of the decree :

--2 0 As regards the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

a) Lest the total suppression of the Little Office of the Blessed

Virgin Mary give even the slightest impression of a diminution of external liturgical devotion toward the Blessed Virgin Mary in an Order professing a stricter devotion even in its filial devotion to the Blessed Virgin,

and since, moreover, not a small number of the capitular Fathers are opposed to the suppression,

the Sacred Congregation would desire (optaret ) that, by common agreement, the suppression of the Little Office be supplied for by some liturgical prayer (prece ) or commemoration in harmonywith the nature of the Cistercian Office.

b) If, for any reason, what is suggested (quad innuitur )a bove does not meet with general acceptance, the sµppressed Office is to be supplied for by some kind of prayers which, though not strict ly liturgical, have shown their worth and have been recommended on numerous occasions by the Church through the Supreme Pontiffs - even for clerics, and which have become so widely used in the states of perfection, that they rightly seem to belong to the patrimony ofsolid religious piety: for example, the Rosary of our Lady (can . 125,1° ) (13)

From the f i r st paragraph, let these points be kept in mind:a) There is question of an external exp r e ss i on in some liturgical

fonn of the devotion to our Lady so characteristic of our Order. (All of us will regret, in the Latin text, the juxtaposition of "external" and "liturgical" - "...externae liturgicae devotionis.•.")

b) The suppression of the Little Office cou ld be interpreted in the sense of a diminution of the liturgical honors accorded the Mother of God in our Order.

c) To prevent this, and also take into accotmt that a minority, but a siz a ble minority of Abbots opposed the suppression of the Little Office, the Sacred Congregation would like to see adopted some new practice of Marian de- votion. -

d) The nature of this new expression of Marian piety would be liturgical, and in hannony with the traditional Office as celebrated in our Order.

From the second paragraph, the cardinal point to be retained is this: by our failure to adopt some liturgical Marian fomula, we would incur the obligation to adopt the rosary or some other approved non-liturgical fonn of devotion.

Faced with the choice between a liturgical and a non-liturgical practice, few Superiors hesitated . The practice to be adopted would be liturgical! But what fom would this liturgical expression of Marian devotion take? It was Dom Vincent HERMANS, 0.C.R., Definitor of the Dutch and Geman language groups, who first proposed to the Most Reverend Abbot General and his

- 26 council the project later adopted and now familiar to us all .At the General Chapter of 1956 then, voting bore on the following points (14):

- 27 -

a) Should a private devotional practice replace the suppressed Little Office? or a devotional exercise "in cho r o "? The vast majority favored a corrnm.mity devotional practice .

b) Were the antiphons and prayers suggested by the Definitory an accept able solution? The answer was a quasi-unanimous vote in the affirmative.

c}Should the antiphons be preceded by the versicle, "Ave Maria"? MJst of the Abbots were favorable .

d) Should the versicle "Dulce nomen" close each section of the "abridg ed" Little Office? This was favored by a substantial majority.

e) Finally, should the new formularies precede or follow the canonical Hours? The overwhelming majority of Abbots opted for the position be f o r e the canonical Hours, an exception being made for Compline with its traditional "Salve Regina" and accompanying collect .

In brief, once the obligation to adopt a liturgical or non-liturgical "sub stitute" for the Little Office had been imposed by the S.C. of Rites and accept ed by the Superiors of our Order, the general agreement as to the precise form which this new practice was to take was truly remarkable . Yet, it must not be forgotten that the principle of a "substitute" for the $pppressed Little Office had been rejected by the General Chapter of 1955, and subsequently accepted by the Chapter of 1956 only when imposed by higher authority as the condition sine qua non for the suppression of the Little Office. --

There is yet another cause for uneasiness.. The decree of June 27, 1956, quoted above, had offered us a choice between a liturgical and a nonliturgical form of devotion. There was no hesitation in our Choosing a liturgical form .And yet, in reading the relevant paragraphs in the Acts of the General Chapter

. of.1956, one has the impression that the term "liturgical" , as applied to the new antiphons and prayers, has been studiously avoided. Instead, we read onlyof a ndevotional exercise" ("exercice de devotion"). Is this perhaps a slight indication that, already in 1956, one hesitated to recognize these Marian formu laries as liturgical?

II. A S unu n a ry Ana l ysis o f t h e Antip h on-and-Pr a yer

F orm u l a r i e s A. The general structure .

No doubt about it: so far as the general structure is concerned - vers- icle, antiphon, versicle, prayer, versicle our Marian formularies are not quite "classical". Are we dealing with a standard commemoration formula? Al most, but not quite, for there are a few too many versicles. Are we dealing with a sort of "abridged Little Office"? Perhaps, but if so, we should. expect to find a gesture toward the psalmody and the lessons which were a basic component of the traditional Cistercian Little Office (15). But if the form is a bit new, and if we cannot find quite the right classification, we ought not to worry overmuch.

- 26 After all, we are dealing with a rather new phenomenon.

Does this mean that these antiphons and prayers are liturgical "novelties"? Hardly! Few texts of our liturgical repertory are more traditional, as we shall

- 28

see in just a moment. Only the manner in which the various elements are linked together is a bit new; but this is a thing in itself indifferent, The critic dissatisfied with the general stnicture of these formularies, the, will haveto demonstrate convincingly that the structure - versicle-antiphon-versicle-pray er-versicle - is somehow intrinsically defective . This is , thesis I myself would hesitate to propose, still less, defend.

Let us now pass briefly in review the various elements constitutive of these "blocs" of Marian devotional texts.

B. The in dividu al elem ents .

1- The introductory versicle, "Ave Maria".

As an Office versicle and response, this Lucan text is curiously ab sent from the most ancient witnesses to the western Office tradition we would re cognize as "standard". No trace of such a versicle is found in the famous Com pigne .Antiphonar (ca. 860-880 ) (16), nor in the no less celebrated but some what less ancient .Antiphonar of Bl. Hartker the Recluse, (between 986 and 1011 ) (17). The same text occurs often as a responsory verset, or antiphon. Why notas a versicle? The following is only a parenthetical observation, and needs to be verified by carefully controlled collation of texts: but it would seem that the most ancient strata of versicle texts are of an ejaculatory type addressed to Christ or to God the Father; texts of a non-ejaculatory type, or texts ad dressed to the saints ("Ora pro nobis, sancte N ." )and to Our Lady ("Ave Maria .•.") seem to be of a somewhat later period .

As for our own Cistercian antiphonar or breviary tradition, it seems quite certain from the single known extant Cistercian breviary ms . traceable to a period as early as 1132 or thereabouts (18), that the versicle, "Ave Maria" did not appear as such in our early Office. But breviary and antiphonary mss.writ ten in the wake of the liturgical reform effected under St. Bernard's aegis sometime not long before 1147 do have the versicle, which is assigned to .the relative ly few :Marian feasts then celebrated in the Order (19). By this time, of course, the versicle "Ave Maria" had long since entered into universal usage in the West, particularly in the Marian Offices which had become so popular in the late 11th century, and which were to become even more popular as time went on (20).

Our prostration on the knuckles at the words, "Ave Maria" is no less charac teristic of the same period. Devotional literature of that time abounds in stories in which our text appears as a salutation to Our Lady and to her image; and more often than not, the salutation is emphasized by a bow, genuflection, or prostration (21). Most of us need look very far to explain such bows and pros trations. Whom have we ever greeted without accompanying our words by a nod of the head, a wave of the hand, or a hand-shake? And what could be more natural than to mark the full, human dimensions of our greeting to the Mother of God by some corresponding gesture?

But perhaps a few of us will prefer to complement such a "psychological"

expiailation with historical considerations of a somewhat more subtle order. It seems quite certain that the rosary or Mary-psalter had its origin as a kind of substitute for the 150 biblical psalms (22). Now, as Fr. J. A. JUNa1ANN, S.J., has so convincingly demonstrated (23), a genuflection or prostration of some kind

- 30 - 29 -

generaily was connected with the recitation of each psalm of the psalter. Accord ingly, the genuflection or prostration attached to the psalms would have been transferred to the angelic salutations of the Mary-psalter . Thus, the pair ,psalm-prostration, would have as its parallel the pair, "Ave Maria" - prostration .

Does the prostration on the knuckles which still accompanies our recitation of the versicle, "Ave Maria", have any real significance for the present-day monk or nun? It is a fact that many, very many, of our religious have suggested that the prostration be suppressed - and there is certainly no denying that the "clas sical" prostration on the knuckles raises problems not only for our monks and nuns, but for more than a few astonished retreatants. But need we think only in terms of Either/Or? Either a prostration on the knuckles/or no prostration at all? Between these two alternatives we have a whole range of possibilities: a simple kneeling posture; a single genuflection; a profound bow; a moderate bow .Any one of these postures would suffice to give the opening versicle, "Ave Maria@, a truly human dimension.

Closely linked with the problem of bodily posture is the question of orien tation . .Anyone who has ever assisted at Offices celebrated in churches of an Eastern rite has noticed that, at almost every mention of the Mother of God, the worshippers bow or turn toward the ikon of Our Lady, - an ikon, in churches of the Byzantine and derived traditions, usually located at the immediate right of the central door of the ikonastasis. 1he underlying assumption is, of course,that the representation somehow mediates the presence of the Mother of God . 1his is certainly not the place to launch into a discussion of the canons of the 7th ik:Dmenical Council, and of the sacramental dimensions of the ikon or sacred im age . At the same time, we might ask ourselves if our own mental attitude quite squares with the facts of tradition and sound principles of aacramental theology .Is a statue always just a statue? an image just an image? Certainly, some ofthe painted-glass windows of Our Lady or the plaster statues of the Mother of God foi.md in some of our monastery sanctuaries hardly serve the function of cult images. And it is no less certain that, for most (itf us, bowing toward the sanc tuary image of the Mother of God at the words of the initial versicle, "Ave Maria", would be somewhat on the artificial side . But perhaps the time will come when a practice which some of us would now brand as "medieval" or "too Eastern for West ern churches", will appear to us not only as acceptable, but as confonned withthe deepest reality of things. If the time has not come to change our present practice, perhaps the time has come at least to begin thinking about the theo logical dimensions of so simple a thing as greeting Our Lady, and translating this into truly human categories of expression.

2-1he antiphons.

a) The " O A dmir a bile" se r i e s .

Apart from the Compline "Salve Regina" and the Vespers "Beata Mater", our antiphons are taken from the marvelous "0 admirabile" series, now attached to the Octave Day of Christmas, ordinary days within the Christmas season after Jan uary 1st, and 1st Vespers of the Feast of the

Purification (24). These rich texts with their noble music are among the constants of our standard Office tradition in the . An analysis of the vocabulary and the general structure of these texts suggests, however, that western Europe is indebted to the East for these remark able formulae. Dom Joseph GAJARD, O.S.B ., is merely giving expression to the generally held view when he writes:

- 30

"These antiphons clearly have an indefinable chann which gives them a very special place in the entire repertory, and which doubtless de rives from their Greek origin - an origin recognized by everyone" (25).

It could well be that our texts have an origin as early as the immediate afterr ';- ',· math of the Council of Chalcedon (451). This has been suggested by)Dom Michel HUGLO, O.S.B., with specific reference to the two antiphons, ''Mirabile rnysterium" and "0 admirabile cornmercium" (26).

As might be expected, these antiphons are to be found in our "Stephen Hard ing Breviary" copied arolllld 1132. In passing into the somewhat later Bernardine codification, terminated around 1147, these antiphons escaped textual revision, but did lllldergo occasional melodic modifications. (27)

b) The ''Salve Regina'o'.

The "Salve Regina", now loosely attached to Compline, has a much more recent history . Even a summary list of the more important books and articles dealing with this IIRlch loved antiphon would exceed proportions compatible withthis modest series of notes (28). Though we must probably exclude the hypothesis of a Cistercian origin of this antiphon (29), we can say with all certainty that the text and melody were introduced into the Order's liturgy in the course of the Bernardine liturgical reform already mentioned above. At this early date, the antiphon (without the words "mater" at the beginning, and "virgo" at the end ) was assigned either to the Benedictus or the Magnificat of the four Marian feasts then celebrated, i.e. the Purification, the Annuntiation, the Assumption, and the Nativity of Our Lady (30). The year 1218, however, marks the beginning of a whole series of statues dealing with our antiphon in a context ou t s ide the canonical Office. The following schema offers only a few of the pertinent facts suggested by sources specified in the footnotes.

YEAR1218

(31)

FREQUENCYDaily

TIME and PLACE after chapter, in church.

1220

(32)

1221 (33)

1228

(34)

1229

(35)

1239

(36)

Daily;

u

n

s

pecified, because assigned for private recitation,

Statute of 1220 renewed.

Every Friday after chapter,in church .

Statute of 1228 renewed.

Daily after chapter, in church, after procession from chapter .

1241

(37)

1251

(38)

D

aily

D

aily

after Prime, in church.

after Compline, in

church.

We may recognize our present practice in the statue of 1251. In spite of the daily chanting of the "Salve Regina", however, the same antiphon continued to be sung for the four great Marian feasts and certain of the octave-days and days within the octaves; and it is only in the B r e v i a r ium C i ste r cie n se iuxta R oma n um of 1657 that we find this noble antiphon no longer among the Office Chants ofour Lady's feasts.

- 32 - 31 -

c) The antiphon "Beata Mater"

Like the "Salve Regina", the antiphon "Beata Mater" is also outside the "0 admirabile" series; but unlike the "Salve Regina", it is folll1d in the more ancient monuments of our western Office. The text, assigned variously to the Olristmas season, and/or to the four greater Marian feasts (39), occurs frequent ly in the form, "Beata Mater et i nn u pta Virgo ..."; and it was this reading which was current in the Order from the earliest days lll1til sometime in the mid-16th century (40).

Similarly outside the "0 admirabile" series, but not subject to discussion here, is our pre-Lauds antiphon, "Sub tuum". This antiphon has, in our Order,a history and a flll1ction lll1Connected with the other Marian fonnularies lll1der study, and in no way falls lll1der the terms of the Decree of Jlll1e 27, 1956.

In summary, then, it would be rather difficult to find Office texts more traditional than these theologically dense and poetically beautiful antiphons. Only the "Salve Regina'' is relatively late; but it is precisely the "Salve Re gina" in which most Cistercians still recognize the most perfect expression of their own Marian devotion.

3-The versicles after the antiphons. For many centuries, these ver sicles were the only ones used for the Marian feasts celebrated by the Order of Citeaux. The venerable so-called "Stephen Harding Breviary" already seve1'1 times mentioned provides a much earlier series, common to feas.ts of Our Lady and to feasts of virgins. (Whether this series originated as a "Marian" series, and was then extended to feasts of virgin saints is a question too intricate tobe discussed here . ) Cistercian breviaries of the period following 1147 present a more recent, but by the mid-12th century already traditional series, as can be seen from the following table:

ca. 1132 ca. 1147

Vesp. Diffusa est gratia Speciosa facta

Net. 1 Specie tua Ave Maria

Net. 2

Net.

3 Lds

.

Adiuvabit earn

Elegit earn

Speciosa facta

Benedicta tu

Post partum

Speciosa facta

It was the romanization of the Cistercian Office lll1der Dom Claude Vaussin that led to ablll1dant varieties of Marian versicles now found in our modern Cistercian Breviary.

Though many a contemporary liturgist would be prone to recognize in the list of ca. 1132 a series of texts as specifically Marian as the texts of1147, most of us would have to study the question before agreeing with him : and

-

this for the simple reason that the first list is used for saints such as Cecilia, Agnes, Agatha and others, whereas the later list is suitable exclu sively for feasts of the Mother of God . As regards the introduction of the ca. 1147 list into the Order 's liturgy, our present state of research admits no sure conclusions. Perhaps the series of versicles pre-existed i the an cient Cistercian Little Office of Our Lady, and passed into the canonical .Office around 1147; or perhaps the converse was tiue: the series was intro duced from some other source, passed from our canonical Office into the late 12th century Cistercian Little Office, and, more recently, from the Little Office into the Marian formularies under discussion . It matters little. Ob jectively, no serious change can be levelled against the 1147 series of ver '- ·· sicles, whether on the score of antiquity, liturgical character, or appro priateness for the function they perform.

4- The collec t s . Once again we find ourselves in an area of solid tradition, as can be seen by anyone who cares to check these prayers ,_against the sources given in the invaluable tomes edited by Dom P. BRlNLANTS,0. S.B ., L e s or a is o n s d u Mi s sel Romain (41). "Concede nos" already appears in Alcuin's celebrated libellus of votive Masses, compiled sometime before his death in 804 (42). "Deus qui de beata" is limited chiefly to the best witnesses of the Gregorian Sacramentary, and seems to have been used almost exclusively for the Feast of the Annunciation. The Gregorian tradition as signs "Deus qui salutis" to the octave-day of Christmas; while the 8th cen tury Gelasian sacramentaries assign it to yet other places, e.g. the Sunday after Christmas, or even the Feast of the Assumption. "Famulo!UID tuoIUID" seems to be an almost exclusively Gregorian foTillUla for the Feast of the Assumption.

But our collect attached to the "Salve Regina" is a special case, and has proved singularly difficult to identify in any of the ancient, really ancient sources. The documentation at my disposal is not particularly extensive, and it is only on the basis this limited material that the following remarks are made . So far as I can determine, the foTillUla "Omnipotens sempiterne Deus qui gloriosae" entered into the "Salve-complex" only in the course of the breviary reform effected under the general presidency of Dom Claude Vaussin in the 17th century. Before that time, from the year 1251 onwards, the corresponding col lect had been the familiar and very classical "Concede nos famulos" (43). Be tween 1218 and 1251 a number of various combinations occur. In 1218, thP "Salve" with its versicle "Ora pro nobis" is followed by two collects, i.e. "Adsit nobis" and "Concede nos" (44). The Statutes of the General Chapter for the years 1228 and 1229 mention only a single collect, but with no further de terminations (45). In 1239, the versicle is "Ave Maria", and there are no less than three collects, i.e. "Concede nos", "Ecclesiae tuae", and "Ineffabi lem misericorCliam " (46). The next sure bit of information is found in thestatute of 1251, which prescribes the single collect, "Concede nos".

.Must we wait, then, lllltil 1657 for the prayer "Omnipotens sempiteme Deus qui gloriosae" to make its first appearance in our breviary? No . Thanks to the curious tendency of the ancient Cistercian Little Office to accumulate accretions of various kinds, our collect appears will before 1657, as one of the many collects appended to Lauds of the Little Office .

- 33 The text is some what more ample than our own, at least in the latter half : "...eius pia in tercessione, a c r aecla r i s m e r it i s ab instantibus malis, a morte subitanea, atque perpetua 11bere:mur: et ad vitam aeternam pervenire mereamur: per elllldem

-

Christum" (47). Is it possible to detennine a precise date for the adoption of the prayer by the Order? and is it possible .to identify the source of the for-· mula? Not on the basis of the relatively meager documentation at my disposal. Granted the late origin of our text, however, few will fail to recognize in our present version a fonnula quite classical in structure and content.

5- The concludin versicle, "Dulce nomen". Here again, precision as regards date an place o origin is impossi le. e text is absent in our earliest mss .; it is present in at least one late 16th century breviary of our Order (48). There is no reason why it could not have found entrance into our liturgical books at a much earlier date . Indeed, Cistercians seem to have been only slightly behind Dominicans and Franciscans in their expression of devotion to the Holy Name of Jesus; and such was the impact of our own St. Bernard's texts about the Name of Jesus, that it became standard practice in the late Middle Ages to attribute to the illustrious Abbot of Clairvaux many of the bet ter hyrrms and devotional literature treating of the Holy Name (49). In view of the early widespread tendency to give liturgical expression to this prevalent devotion to the "sweet and friendly Name", it comes as a surprise to find that the earliest indication of a Mass of the Holy Name in a Cistercian Missal is as late as 1617. The Cistercian Breviary of 1630 gives the Office only in a sup plement Yro aliluibus locis. But by 1644, according to Fr. Bernard BACKAET, O .C.R. (50 , the east finally appears in the calendar of the entire Order.

The linking of the name of Mary with the Holy Name of Jesus is a somewhat later mediaeval practice, but one which was to become quite widespread . Fr. P. BIASIOTTO, O.F.M., who may be considered a qualified expert in all questions touching on the history of devotion to the Holy Name, cites an incident con cerning St. Edrntmd of Canterbury (ob. 1240)as the earliest linking of the two names in a devotional formula of the kind tmder discussion (51).

In our own day, numerous liturgical and biblical studies dealing with the theological dimensions of the concept of name - usually with reference to the divine Tetragramrnaton - have given many of our monks and nuns a deep apprecia tion of "name" as connating the presence and action of the person named. In this rich biblical and liturgical context, the adjective "sweet" perhaps serves less well to qualify the presence and action of Jesus Christ; nor is this less true of the "sweet name" of the Mother of God . Certainly, one can appeal to many patristic texts which link "sweet" with the Name of Jesus; one can also appeal to the marvelous Greek canons to the "Sweetest Jesus Christ", or to western texts such as the well-known "En ego, o bone et d u lc i s sime Iesu", or St. Bonaventure's "Transfige, dulc i ss i rne Domine Iesu". But the fact remains that at least one Superior has already excised "sweet" from the translationof the "Dulce nornen" used in his community, and many would doubtless like to follow suit. Nor is it any secret that, in the revised calendar of the Roman Rite, the Feast of the Holy Name will give way to a Feast of the Imposition of the Name of Jesus - though it is to be hoped that a less offensive English translation will be fotmd for the title of the feast !

- 35

We have just examined, although briefly, most of the elements constitutive of the Marian forrnularies under discussion. We can now follow with better un derstanding and sympathy the exchange of views recorded in the minutes of the

-

Central Conunission of Abbots, which met at Monte Cistello mn December, 1964, to prepare the agenda of the General Chapter of 1965.

III. 1he State of the Question at the End of 1964

We ought not to expect from the minutes of the 1964 meeting of Abbots a particularly systematic treatment of our question. 1he problem of the Marian antiphons and prayers had been raised only in a rather general way; and the minutes reflect faithfully the spontaneity and, one feels, liveliness of the discussion. True, no clear emergent resulted from the exchange of views. At the same time, the Abbots then present touched on many aspects of the problem, and we can do no better than to make their observations the basis of our own reflections and further developments (53).

But first, one important clarification. At Monte Cistello, was the ques tion discussed simply that of suppression or non-suppression of the Marian an tiphons and prayers? From the secretary's report, it would seem that such was indeed the presupposition of at least some of the participants. Others of those present seemed rather to envisage the retention of the "abridged Little Office", but with modifications. A priori, a whole range of solutions lies between two extreme positions, i.e.: TOTAL SUPPRESSION

Substitution of a totally new formulary Substitution of a partially new formulary Extensive revision of the present fonnulary Minimal revision of the present formulary

TOTAL RETENTION of the present fonnulary

Some of the Abbots apparently envisaged an either/or choice between the two extremes. Others ranged more freely within the interior between these two out side limits. Because the area of discussion was not clearly defined, the min utes of the meeting present a series of statements juxtaposed with only the min imum of logical nexus, if any.

Disjecta membra

1- Possibility of a change .

Dom X. initiated the discussion with a practical consideration of · prime importance. Since the suppression of the Little Office had had as its condition sine qua non the adoption of a "substitute" practice, the suppression of the "substitute" would revive automatically our obligation to the suppressed Little Office. 1here is no record of the subsequent discussion of this point; but the position implicit in the remarks made later by most of the Superiors is this: Just as in 1956, the Holy See could have allowed the suppression of the Little Office with no further obligation being incurred on our part, so too the same Holy See could allow the suppression of the "abridged Little Office" atthe present time, with or without conditions . 1his seems also to be the per suasion of Fr. A. BUGNINI, C.M ., Secretary of the Consilium, who answered,

- 37 when

-

queried on the subject, that our substitute for the Little Office was an obliga tion which could always be re-studied .

2- Extent of the desire for a change .

Dom Y., early in the discussion, raised an important question. Is the desire for a change loc a li z ed to a particular region or linguistic group? or is it general throughout tlie Order? The minutes of the meeting reproduceonly imperfectly the answer suggested by Dom Z., who remarked that since the rea sons for a change are litur ical, they are by that very fact general. The mean ing seems to be this: If t ere are i n t ri n sic reasons for a change in our present practice, these intrinsic reasons hold good always and everywhere, no matter how few may desire a change. But the question of the liturgical nature of these prayers and antiphons is precisely "intrinsic" in nature. Ergo .

The next logical step, then, would be to consider the liturgical nature of these prayers and antiphons. And this is precisely the step inunediately takenin the discussion. I think it of capital importance, however, that we dwell for a moment on the question raised by Dorn Y. Whether or not the desire for a change in our present practice is localized or general is a question of no slight impor tance. The liturgical reform based on the most solid of intrinsic reasons will bear precious little fruit unless those affected are in a position to understand in a meaningful manner, and to implement with conviction the program of reform. Moreover, the question of pastoral concern is by no means extrinsic to the area covered by the term "liturgical". An objection on the score of pastoral practice is, or s h o u ld be considered an objection of a liturgical nature.

Does this mean that any project for a revision of our present practice should be shelved indefinitely so long as it is evident that a change in presentpractice is favored only by a minority? By no means . If there are solid reasons for a change, each member of the Order should be put in possession of the objec tively valid, pertinent facts. Usually, opposition to what is, in se, good and even desirable, vanishes in the light shed by an adequate presentation of the question under study. A position held by few of us today may well prelude the consensus of opinion in the Order tomorrow or the next. But even when such a consensus in favor of change emerges, the minority have a right to receive the information necessary for an understanding and appreciation of the change ef fected by the will of the majority.

3- A rgumen t s of a li t u r gic a l na t u r e in f a v or of a change .

Which were the arguments of a liturical nature adduced in favor of the suppression or modification of our Marian ormularies? .

A) The antiphons and prayers are misplaced in their· present posit ion.

The Abbot who formulated this objection doubtless had in mind the anomoly all too evident in the introduction to the Night Office. Here the clas sical "versus aperitionis", "0 Lord, open my lips", comes two or three minutes too late, since the lips and hearts of everyone have presumably already been opened for the chanting of the preceding antiphon, "O admirabile commercium".

- 39 Other Abbots probably felt that our grouping of antiphon and prayer is

so much in the nature of a conunernoration that the logical place would be at the end

- of the Office. Against such a change of position would be the fact that the Con silium, according to Fr. Bugnini, is on the point of proposing the suppression of all such connnemoration-like appendages to the Office.

If not be f o r e the Office, and if not a f t er the Office, Why not within the Office? The possibility was not discussed, surely because, iri spite of evident parallels with the practice current in many of the Eastern rites, such an innova tion within the interior of our Office would find no support in the liturgical prescriptions of the Holy Rule. But this is already true of our Lauds and Ves pers conunernorations of Our Lady. It must also be admitted that an antiphon-pray er "bloc" before or after the Office hardly seems to have been envisaged by St. Benedict . Further, if our present practice is chiefly motivated by the desire to manifest in some liturgical manner the Order's special devotion to the Mother of God, perhaps we ought not to exclude a priori the possibility of a Marian formula w i thin the Office. Be this as it may, the truth is that objections can be madeas to the place of the antiphons and prayer no matter w he r e they are - before, after, or w ithin the Office.

B) The acclUilUlation of Marian prayers.

A rather extreme instance was cited -- that of certain days in Advent, when we have in rapid succession the "Sub tuum" with its prayer, "Pie tate"; the Benedictus antiphon with a text de Beata; the Lauds conunernoration of Our Lady; finally, the Angelus. In the same context, mention could be made of the repetition of the Marian antiphons during certain days of the Christmas season and on the Feast of the Purification, when the antiphons sung before the canonical Hour are repeated a few minutes later in the Office itself. Still, these are extreme cases; and, in the case of the Advent liturgy, the "Sub tuurn" and the Angelus serve functions different from those of the Office antiphons.

C) Even without the "abridged Little Office"£ our Office would be richer in Marian formulae than the Roman 0 fice..

The implication would seem to be that, in virtue of the Marian formulae before the Office, we tend a bit to excess in the matter of the expres sion of our Marian devotion. It is certainly true that, even without these an tiphons and prayers, our Office would still be richer than the Roman Office as regards specifically Marian elements.

So far as I can determine, these are the points suggested by way of point ing out the liturgical deficiencies of the "abridged Little Office". The ob jections do indeed point out several incongruities occasioned by our present practice.--Yet we should ask ourselves in all honestly whether these incongru ities touch on the liturgical nature of these forrnularies at a significantly deep level.

The answer to such a question will depend in large measure, of course, on one 's concept of what is liturgical .

- 41 Are the texts in question tmsuitable for liturgical worship? Hardly! With

- - 37

the exception of the versicle, "Dulce nomen", it would be diff icult to f ind a series of antiphons and prayers more remarkable f or their depth ) beauty - and classical inspiration. Is the . arrangement . of the texts really downright bad? the burden of the proof lies with the one adopting the position in the af firma tive. Granted that the arrangement is not the optimtun one , this by itself does..not render the fonnularies wholly "unliturgical". Is the tace assigned these, ,antiphons and prayers bad? In the case of the pre-Vigils loc", yes ; in the. .ease of the other Hours , the point can be debated. But this need not mean that..our: Marian· fonnularies are vitiated in their very essence.

Some of our monks and mms , ntj..ndful of Canon 1256' of the Code of Canon Law, wilL prefer not to pronollllce on the liturgical nature of our Marian antiphonsand prayers before checking our present practice against the elements of the definition of cultus publicus given in the canon. Are we persons legally deput ed to .pray in the name of the Church? Yes . Are these Marian prayers and anti-

. phons we. pray of ecclesiastical institution? No question about it , nor about.our obligation to pray these texts so oen as we celebrate the Of fice in conmen.:.Is the - - pardon the expression - - obiecttun cui God, or one of the saints , or one.of the blessed? Yes, in this instance, the antiphons and prayers. are in honor ofithe M:>ther of God. And the monk or nllll who knows that the Instruction of the

red Congregation of Rites , September 3rd, 1958 , Tu musica sacra (54) added yet another particular, will ask : Do we sing. these prayers and antiphons from books

. .approved by the Holy See? Once again, the answer is Yes •

. .. . · Others of us more aware of richer perspectives opening into the· mystery of·<hrist as actualized in the local comnn.mi ty of believers , will be inclined to.ask: Do these prayers and antiphons truly give valid expression to this· mystery of Cllrist? Do they truly express and actualize the f aith of the local comnn.mity? The answer is certainly Yes , th01Wfl perhaps with the following qualification. The

. texts tmder discussion do derive f rom what is roost excellent , or at least , toler:ably good, in our western Of f ice tradition. At the same .time , the imperative·.necessity of liturgical reform at this time is a clear indication that our tradi..tional Office, in its liturgical fonns and in its repertory of texts , leaves some..thing. to be desired. Now, the texts under discussion, certainly express quite well the mystery of Christ and the f aith of the Comrm.mity; they are , in this sense, liturgical.

But is this really a statement we can accept without reservation? 1here is no escaping it: we are deep in a nruch broader problem - the problem of the re lation between liturgy and the moden1 world, betwemi monastic culture and the modem world. If it is true that liturgy , llllder one of its chief aspects , ex psses the manner in which the Christian mystery is experienced and lived by the faithful , then it is only to be expected that our own generation shouldfeel on occasion a certain dif f iculty when f aced with a liturgical patriroonytributary in large measure to a culture alien to our own . Certainly , a greater openness and spirit of faith on our part might help considerably. But the f act that the Church has initiated a far- reaching, even flllldamental liturgical re fonn is proof that the "fault" does not lie wholly on our side .

1his problem of the relation between liturgical forms and the Christian mysi teiy as experienced by the faithf ul of a given culture is basic. True , a m.unber of inportant articles bearing on this precise point have already appeared (SS) ; but these do little more than help def ine the nature of a problem we all

recog nize as f raught with danger, but also rich with possibilities of enormous theo-

- 38

logical significance. For ti1e moment, however, we can accept as true that, since our Marian antiphons and prayers form part of the same fabric from which our mon astic Office has been cut, whatever difficulties our monks and nuns have with our Office taken as a whole will probably be present in the particular case of the "a bridged Little Office". The texts are "liturgical" even as the texts of the can onical Office are "liturgical"; but they also raise the same problems raised by the entire repertory of Office texts taken as whole .

There remains one important remark. We have examined the more important com plaints formulated against our Marian prayers and antiphons. For the most part, these criticisms have been brought to bear on relatively minor points of detail. This is surprising. For even though it is wrong to speak of a really deep and truly universal dissatisfaction with our present practice, dissatisfaction does exist in many quarters, and among religious whose monastic spirit and Maria.i1Cle votion cannot be called into question. One gets the impression of a dispropor tion between the effect and its alleged causes.

Nevertheless, recall for a moment the historical circumstances responsible for ushering in our present practice. These prayers and antiphons were adopted, not by way of answer to an i nner n eed to express concretely our Marian devotion, but chiefly because the adoption of a liturgical or non-liturgical form of prayer had been imposed as a condition sine qua non for the suppression of the Little Office. There is absolutely no question of the spirit of faith and obedience in which this condition was accepted. Nor is there question of the love and faith with which we sing these texts at the present time. But neither can we gainsaythe fact that the "abridged Little Office" was "imposed from without" rather than "elicited or brought forth from within". In the 12th and 13th centuries, the choral recitation of the Little Office was a phenomenon which simply "happened" in answer to a deeply felt inner urgency.

Indeed, the spirit of the Order'searly legislation was opposed to the introduction of such liturgical "accretions"; yet the collective experience of the Order called for the adoption of the Little Office as a valid means of expressing Cistercian devotion to Our Lady. Did our adoption of the "abridged Little Office" have the same quality of spontaneity?the same character of an answer to an imperative need experienced at a deep level?

IV. Lines of convergence.

From the preceding paragraphs a few fundamental points emerge.

1) The fundamental question is the general one of the manner in which we give expression to the Order 's Marian devotion. This presupposes, of course, that the Order does indeed bear a Marian "stamp", a Marian "cachet". Since the presentday is a time of serious self-examination and reflection, it is, of course, in evitable, even necessary, that the fact and nature of our Order 's Marian "cachet" be examined. Is it really true that we are consecrated to Our Lady in a special way? What are the mark6 of this consecration? Its implications? How does it affect our lives at every level, from the plane of the

institutional to the most secret part of our deepest selves? In brief, there is question of our giving concrete expression to a spiritual reality of the deepest order. We should bear this in mind when there is question of these Marian texts and antiphons.

2) The question should not be treated as an isolated problem, but rather as

- 38 - 39 -

part of the Order 's over-all liturgical reform. Simply to modify the present texts, or re-arrange them, or shift their place, or suppress them, or retain them without change - none of these possibilities would go very deep to the heart of the matter. On the other hand, if our consecration to Mary really means anything at all, our brevial)' reform will necessarily reflect this particular aspect of our participation in the mystery of Christ.

Just how this Marian "cachet" could be best expressed in an authentic 1itur gical dimension is a question of major importance in our program of breviary re fonn. A future issue of this bulletin will doubtless include an article dealing with this precise subject . For the moment, however, most of us will agree that, to treat of our present Marian formularies as an isolated phenomenon independent of the Office would be to emphasize their adventitious character.

We ought not exclude, however, all possibility of a more immediate, though proviso!)' modification of our present practice.A project could easily be drawn up on the principle that each of our Hours should have connected with it some expression of our Order's Marian "cachet". The following is offered only as a sam ple schema susceptible of countless variations.

VIGILS could be preceded by the Angelus prayed in corram.mity, but silently. This is indeed the beginning of the monk 's day; and, if the Angelus tradi tionally marks the beginning, the middle, and the end of the Christian's day, then the Angelus as prayed by monks belongs before Vigils rather than after Lauds. The silent praying of the Angelus would ensure the appropri.ateness, too, of the opening versicle of Vigils, "Domine, labia mea aperies".

LAUDS would terminate by a commemoration of Our Lady. True, Fr. Bugnini has rightly pointed out that such a practice would run counter to the present mind of the Consilium . But this would serve to emphasize the fact that, with us, the intention is precisely to honor the M:>ther of God in some special, even extraordinal)' manner.

The LITTLE HOURS could present an option. Since our present Marian formu laries already are almost "cormnemorations" as regards structure, these could be tuI!led into commemorations of the classic type -antiphon, versi cle, prayer -and transferred to the end of the Office, or after it. Fr.:c1E!ment of Bellefontaine has suggested yet another possibility which might be welcomed by some cormnunities: a Marian sta t ic in the cloister, before the statue of Our Lady. Our present texts, sung and prayed in this con text, "could help maintain the antiphon of the B.V.M. without botheringin any respect the good order of the Divine Office. At the same time it would help recollection (and maybe punctuality )at the entrance to the church and the beginning of the Divine Office" (56).

VESPERS would parallel Lauds: a cormnemoration de Beata at the end of the Office.

·COMPLINE would maintain the "Salve Regina" in its traditional place.

l\fy own personal view, however, is that any proposal along the lines of the schema given above remains at too superficial a level. M:>st of the elements in volved would retain the appearance of being adventitious, of being accretions. Accordingly, I myself would prefer to see the whole question of Marian devotion

- 40

in our Order studied at depth . In the light of recent studies in the field of biblical theology and ecclesiology, such a study could lead to nothing but an enrichment of our traditional patrimony, and to a deepening of our own collec tive and individual experience of the presence of the Mother of God in our Or der and in the lives of each of us. Inevitably, any future revision of our bre viary would bear the stamp of such an experience.

Is this future revision envisaged only for some remote time in the distant future? No. Work is already under way. Evidently, no one can speak yet of a ter minus adJuem. An enormous amount of work remains to be done. More of this later! But in e meantime, it would be well if we avoid too many stop-gap measures which will not really contribute positively toward a more or less definitive solution of the real problems. Stop-gap measures are good if they correct, albeit temporarily, an intolerable situation, or at least a really bad one; good, too, if they mark a step along the way to something better. But our present Marian antiphons and prayers are not really so intolerably bad, are they? And do any of the proposed "solutions" really make for a notable improvement?

At any rate, the question is still an open one. 1his article will have served its purpose if at least a few of those who read it begin to reflect on some ofthe more important questions touched on in the course of the preceding pages.

b. Chrysogonus Waddell Gethsemani Abbey

- 41 -N 0 T E S

1) For much of the information in this section, I am grateful to Dom Vincent HERMANS, O.C.R., Definitor for the Dutch and German language groups, who pro vided me with a detailed six-page memorandum dealing with the matter under dis cussion.

2) The question was entrusted to the First Commission. Readers with access to the documents will find the pertinent paragraph in the Programme, n.6.

3) A c tes du P · G d n . de 1 9 51, p .12.

4) Progrannne du Chap . Gen. de 1953, pp . 8-9, where the results of the written replies submitted by the Abbots are tabulated, and the motives for the various options expressed are sununarized.

5) Actes du Chap . Gen. de 1951, p .14.

6) Issued by the S.C. of Religious, Nf 0261/53.

7) The text of the indult reads in part:3) Quoad Officium Parvum B.M. Virginis ipsum dispensari poterit

illis diebus in quibus de Beata Virgine Divinum Officium recitetur .

Haec omnia in Capitulo a. 1955 iterum proponantur et postea huic Congregationi pro opporttmo examine submittantu r•..

8) A farily detailed presentation of the status quaestionis is fotmd in two separate sections, beginning with p . 12 and p . 25 respectively.

9) Programme du Chap . Gen. de 1955; see particularly pp . 4-5, 9-

10, 12, and 16, 10)Actes du Chap . Gen . de 1955, p . 13.

11) Ibid.,p . 16.

12) Prot. N° 0426/56.

13) 2°. Quoad Officium Parvum B. Mariae Virginis.a) Ne in totali suppressione Officii Parvi B. Mariae Virginis

aliqua vel a longe apparere possit species minoris extemae liturgicae devotionis erga Beatam Virginem in Ordine qui strictiorem observantiam etiam in filiali erga Beatam Virginem devotione profitetur, et cum ceterum non parvus Patrum Capitula rium numenis suppressioni obsistat, Sacra Congregatio optaret ut corrnntmi consilio Officii Parvi suppressio aliqua liturgica prece seu corrnnemoratione apte Officio cisterciensi respondenti, suppleretur.

b) Si quod innuitur (a), quavis de causa, cornrrn.miter non probetur, ttmc aliquibus precibus e£si non stricte liturgicis, quae ab Ecclesia per Stunm0s Ponti fi.ces seme1 iterunque probatae ac corrnnendatae etiam pro Clericis fueTtmt, quaeque in Statibus Perfectionis ita communes evaserunt ut iam ad religiosae solidae pie tatis patrimonium merito pertinere videantur, suppressum Officium supplendum es set, ut ecce Mar.iali Rosario (can. 125, 1°).

14) A surrnnary of the propositions and the results of the voting are

- 40 given in the Actes du Chap . Gn. de 1956, p .8.

- 42 -

15) Before the "romanization" of the Cistercian Office in the mid-16th

century, our Cistercian Little Office had a full complement of three lessons

and respon- series at Vigils; and even after 1656, the Office "Ad Matutinum"

had its lectio brevis, and the other Hours had their corresponding

capitulum.

For the early form of the Cistercian Little Office, see the transcription of the pertinent texts from the 12th century ms. Barberini latin 523 (Vatican Library ), ff. 122-123v, in Dom Jean LECLERCQ, O.S.B., "Eragmenta Mariana" in E E h e m e r ides Lit u rgic a e, LXXII (1958), pp . 299-301. A reasonably detailed historical study of the origins and evolution of the Cistercian Little Officehas not yet been published. P. Roberto MUNIZ, in his Bibl i oteca c i s t er c i e n se espanola, Burgos 1793, p . 311, describes an opus maum by P. Gregorio SANS, ca. 1635, religious of Moreruela, whose thesis was

at the Little Office obliges Cistercian s under pain of mortal sin ! The same P. Muniz, o cit., p .48, refers to another study of the Marian Office, by P. Francisco BIV , monk of Nogales (Spain ), ob . 1634. For a note about the "conunentaria mariana super officium B .M.V. ad usum Ordinis cisterciensis, ad modum dialogi", by Dom Jo hannes Chrysostomus WIESER, Abbot of Lilienfeld, ob . 1747, see Xenia Bernardina, III, pp . 283-284. For these last three references, I am indebted to P. Raymond MILCAMPS, O.C.R., monk of Scourmont, whose bibliographical lists of Cistercian mss. are of immense help to anyone working in the field of Cistercian studies .

16) Paris, Bibliothque Nationale, ms . lat. 17436. The "liber responsorialis" section, first edited by the Maurists in 1705, is reproduced in PL 78, 725-850; incipits and indices in Dom R.-J. HESBERT, O.S.B., C orpus Anti pho nalium Off icii, I, Roma 1963.

17) St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, ppd . 390/391; facsimile edition with indices in Paleographie Musicale, Ile Serie (Monumentale), T. I, Solesmes 1900.

18) Marburg, Sta ]:tiiothek,:}.;islat. 8°, 402. The date 1132 is suggested by the table of epacts, which follows the kalendar.

19) Purification, Annunciation, Assumption, Nativity of Our Lady.

20) Besides the article by Dom Jean LECbERCQ, O.S.B., referred to above, note 15;· see the same author's subsequent article in Ephemerides Liturgicae, LXXIV (1960), pp . 89-102. The bibliographical references in these two articles are many and in formative .

21) Frequent references to such accounts in H. THURSTON, S.J., Familiar Prayers: Their Origin and H i story, London 1953, pp . 90-114.

22) Cf. H. THURSTON, S.J., op . cit., pp . 108-114.

23) In his study, "Die Kniebeugung zwischen Psalm und Oration", re-printed in the same author's collection of essays, L i t u rg i sch e s · E rb e · und 12as t o r a le

Gege n w a rt, Innsbruck-Wien-Mfuichen 1960, pp . 228-239; English translation, "Genuflexion between Psalm and Oration", in P a stor a l L it u r gy, N.Y. 1962, pp . 172-180.

24) For other occasional uses of the antiphons which make up this series, see Dom R. LE ROUX, 0. S.B., "Les antiennes et les psaumes de matines et de laudes

- 43 -

pour Noel et le ler j anvier", in Etudes regoriennes , IV (1961) , p . 169 for the index of the antiphons treated in the bo y of the article .

25) "Notre Drune et l ' art gre'gorien", in Maria, t . II , _paris 1952 , p. 359.

26) "Le dogme de Chalcedoine et les chants de Noel", in Revue gregorienne , 30 (1951) ' 219- 2 22 .

2 7) 1his assertion concerning the music .is borne out by a series of unpublished studies dealing with the origins and evolution of the early 12th century Cister cian antiphonar. A few copies of these studies .may be available in late 1967.

28) Excellent bibliography in J.M. CANAL, Salve Re.gina· Misericordiae ( Temi e Tes ti 9) , Roma 1963, pp. 17- 25.

29) 1he claim that St. Beniard is probably the author has recently been resur rected and defended ( unconvincingly ) by Fr. CANAL, in the long study mentioned in the preceding f ootnote.

30) Since the antiphon was also assigned to the octave- days of those Marian feas ts with octaves , and even to the Sunday within such octaves , the antiphon was sung rather more often than four times a year. Fr . Canal's remarks·, op. cit. , p .llS, are .based .on·. a . f aulty reading of his source material - in this·· ins tance a statute of the General Chapter of ll74. Cf . J.""M. CAN IVEZ , O.C. R. , Statuta Capitulorum Generalium Ordinis Cisterciensis , I , Louvain 1933, p . 82 .

31) CANIVEZ , op. cit. , I , anno 1218, no 1, pp. 484-

485. 32) Ibid. , I , anno 1220 , n° 7 , p. 517.

33) Ibid. , II , anno 1221, n o 7 ' p. 2 .

34) Ibid. , II ' anno 12 28 , no 18, p. 69.

35) Ibid. , II , anno 1229 , no 17 , p . 78.

36) Ibid. , II ' anno 1239 ' no 2 , P· 201.

37) Ibid. , II , anno 1241, no 2 , P· 230 .

38) Ibid. , II' anno 1251, no 7 ' p. 361.

39) See the indices of the two volumes so f ar published in the series edited by Dom R.-J. HESBERT, Corpus .Antiphonalium Of f icii , Roma 1963 and 1965.

40) Of the printed Cistercian breviaries exrunined , those of 1595 and 1630 already have the reading "intacta". Was this change introduced under the inf luence ofthe then recently promulgated post-Tridentine Roman Breviary of 1568?

41) Louvain , 1942 , 1he manuscript sources are given in Vol. II , but the "sigla" of the . mss . appear in Vol. I , pp. XI- XIV• .

42) 1he formula occurs twice , in Cap . vii , Sabbato tflissa de sancta Maria (PL 101,455) , and in the final section composed of "Orationes de sancta Maria" (ibid. , 464) . I t is surprising that the praye r is r•rely f ound in the more ancient sacrrunentaries.

43) CANIVEZ , op. cit. , I I , p. 361.

44) Ibid. , I , 484- 485.

45) Supra , notes 34 and 35 .

46) CANIVEZ , op. cit. , I I , p. 201.'\47) Breviarium Sacri Ordinis Cisterciensis , Salmanticae 1595, pars posterior ,p .68.

48) I .e. the breviary indicated in the preceding note .

49) For the later medieval development of devotion to the Holy Name ,. see the dis sertation by Fr. P. R. BIASIOTTO , O.F.M. , History of the Develo men t · of Devotion to the Holy Name , St . Bonaventure , N .Y. 1943, especially pp . 2 -114.

50) Cf . "L I evolution du calendrier cistercien"' in Collectanea o.c.R. ' XII (1950)p. 85 , note 22 .

51) Details in BIASI , op. cit., p . 41.

52) One of the best examples of the 1iterature on the subj.ect is Vol. 12 of the series , Assembl es du Seigneur, · i.e . Octave de Noel: Pete du saint nom de Jesus , Bruges 1964 .

53) 1here is nothing of a particularly conf idential nature in the minutes of the discussion of our Marian antiphons and praye. rs. Still , in the p:resentation of the material covered by the Central Cormnisiion , all mention of names has been avoided, nor has any attempt been made to adhere closely to the points raised in their order of discussion.

54) In AAS SO (1958) , pp. 630-663. The pertinent paragraph is in article 1.55) See especially H. SCHMIDT, S.J. , "Le renouveau liturgique", in Nouvelle

Revue 1heologique , 88 (1966) pp. 80 7-829; the f ourth section , pp. 817-822 is particular ly ad rem. 1his article elicited a note in Notitiae , 23 (1966) , p. 340 .

See also the two recent articles in Paroisse et liturgie , 7 (1966) , "Le sacral et la menta lite actuelle . Un exemple : les relevailles", by Dirk SYM)ENS; and the even more per tinent study by H MANDERS, "nesacralisation de la liturgie. Reflexions sur 11 orientation de l ' experimentation aux ays-Bas".

56) From a letter dated December 5th , 1965.