Ordo 2020: The Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of the Southern Cross
  • Blaise
    Posts: 439
    For friends of the ordinariate, you may be interested in the Ordo 2020: The Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of the Southern Cross, published by Lulu. While we ordinarians do not have an official Divine Office approved by the Vatican as of yet available for public purchase (as I understand the situation), this is the closest we have to having one available to the public, approved on an ad experimentum basis by their ordinary.

    I post this chiefly so that those interested in having an ordinariate prayer book for their personal prayer life may have one.

    Consult your own pastor regarding use in public liturgies, such as Mattins, Evensong, etc.

    (Disclaimer: I am not from the chancery or from any official church body.)

  • This is indeed a treasure!

    Also of interest to friends of the Ordinariates are two further books. They are -

    The CTS Divine Worship Sunday Missal (People's Edition)
    This book contains, in addition to the mass of the Ordinariate Use, all the year's readings and propers (one horrid mishap is that the 'responsorial psalm' [given as an 'or this' option to the gradual] is NOT in our Coverdale translation. This is a shameful (and dumb, actually) blot on the book - and there are a few other such blots. We all are plagued by artless people who just can't get everything right.) Still, it is good to have this copy of the Ordinariate Use for people to have in their homes.

    The other book, a largely Anglican-heritaged personal or family prayer book, is St Gregory's Prayerbook, available from Ignatius Press. It contains a selection of Coverdale psalms, numerous devotions, the Ordinariate Use for mass, prayers for morning, noon, and evening, etc. This could be a valued addition to the private prayer life of individuals or families. All in Old Church English.

    Thanked by 2Blaise CHGiffen
  • toddevoss
    Posts: 162
    This is a website which has the DRAFT Divine Office which awaits final approval for the Personal Ordinariate of St. Peter. You can dial in and say morning and evening prayer with a handful of people from the ordinariate if you want to do it in some form of community. http://prayer.covert.org/
  • Blaise
    Posts: 439

    I have noticed your name several times on one of the Facebook informal forums for the ordinariates.

    Paul Viola

    (My screen name, Blaise, in case anyone is wondering about the disguise, is the name of a bishop and martyr that I venerate and invoke.)
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,277
    Another source is the Customary of Our Lady of Walsingham :Daily Prayer for the Ordinariate (2012). What I particularly like is the provision of alternative post-biblical readings to supplement the one-year Roman cycle. These are drawn from English writings consonant with the Cathoilc faith, but not exclusively writers in Communion with Rome when they wrote them. Unfortunately these seem to have occasioned a pushback by the Vatican (as did the original two year cycle proposed by the non-US conferences). However since I have no obligation to the Office, I can use them privately.
  • jefe
    Posts: 200
    On MJO's recommendation, I tried to see the Ordo 2020 but got a 404 (item not found) note on Lulu.
  • I see the Autralian one here, but the 2021 Ordo should be available soon I imagine.
  • RevAMG
    Posts: 159
    Forum readers might be interested in the recently issued Bulletin on Divine Worship (vol. 1, no 1) from the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham in the UK. Included are updates on Divine Worship: Daily Office (Commonwealth Edition): "Update on Divine Worship: Daily Office" and "Preparing for the Daily Office".
  • Does that suggest that North Americans will continue to do something different?
  • For the life of me, I've never understood why there are different english translations for Canada, USA, Mexico, Australia & the UK. I can understand tweaks to the calendar in terms of adding in local saints days that wouldn't necessarily be celebrated universally, but to use different translations for one language... just baffles me. Either the translation is sound, or it isn't. And if it IS sound, why is it OK for Mass in the UK, but not the US?
  • ServiamScores - For Mass texts of the Sacramentary I think we have all adopted (had imposed on us) the ICEL translation as hacked about by Una Voce. With one or two small (in size) national tweaks.
    For the Office, outside the USA we produced a translation before ICEL had done theirs, and have resisted all attempts to change it (change annoying, contentious, bad! think CBCEW). ICEL suited the US bishops better, I suppose.
    For lectionaries, I suggest that uniformity is undesireable. No translation fully conveys the sense to everybody, in particular reading a text on the page (where you are free to flick your eyes back and forth) is different from listening to it. Even the Vulgate was not imposed on the Psalter.
  • davido
    Posts: 782
    That’s because the psalter and the mass texts predated the Vulgate. But the translation for each liturgical text was standard throughout the Latin world.
    That’s what’s ridiculous, we all speak English and if almost the whole Anglophone could use the KJV for hundreds of years, why can’t Catholics all use the same translation?!
    If there’s a word you don’t understand immediately, look it up and increase your lexicon, don’t dumb down the text for the man on the street because as the last 60 years have shown, that ain’t making him come to mass.
  • ...Anglophone...KJV for hundreds of years...
    Oh, would that we could use the Authorised Version (KJV) in the ordinariates. Rome would not have permitted it - and, quite oddly (if not traitorously), most of our people didn't want it. We use the Catholic RSV, which may be the most poetic of modern translations, but, really, isn't all that fine. It lacks the grace, rhythm, and rich imagery of both the KJV and the Douai. And the Douai itself does not compare to the KJV. (But then, our contemporary translators and the Church are not interested in poetic grace and rhythm, let alone musciality.)
    Whenever I read the lesson from Genesis at Advent lessons and carols it's all I can do to keep from saying 'who told thee that thou wast naked'. There is power there that's not to be found in any contemporary translation. One could offer countless other examples (the Prologue to St John's gospel, for one) of masterful translation and masterful language.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • Jackson, I'm curious what you think of the Jerusalem Bible which was supposedly in common use in the past among Catholic circles. (Before my time, unfortunately.)
  • Schonbergian -

    I have profited from the Jerusalem for many years and often find it more beautiful in places than the RSV. I said 'often', not 'always'. The language is often clunky and abrupt, but does have a certain precarious flow once one gets used to it. Nor is it always the most faithful to the Latin. Here is one of my favourite passages of scripture, I. Corinthians 2.9 -

    Latin -

    Oculos non vidit,
    Nec auris audivit
    Nec in cor hominis ascentdit
    Quae praeparavit Deus his
    Qui diligunt illum.

    Anthorised (KJV) Version -
    Eye hath not seen
    Nor ear heard
    Neither hath it entered into the heart of man
    What God hath prepared for them that love him.

    Jerusalem Version -

    What no eye has seen
    And no ear has heard
    What the mind of man cannot visualise
    All that God has prepared for those who love him.

    RSV -
    What no eye has seen
    Nor ear heard
    Nor the heart of man conceived
    What God has prepared for those who love him.

    One can see that both the Authorised Version and the RSV are more faithful to the Latin, as evidenced particularly in the third line, where cor is given as 'heart', whereas Jerusalem has 'mind'. (Heart and mind are not synonymous.) Also, Jerusalem's 'visualise', besides being rather clumsy and artless (if not downright ugly), does not really give the best sense of ascendit, 'entered into ...'. The RSV's 'conceived' gives a somewhat better sense of the Latin and, to boot, has far more power and grace - not to mention euphony. A glaring omission in the Jerusalem is that the sentence (verse) as structured makes no sense at all without a verb such as 'is' following 'visualise'. Likewise, the RSV requires the same verb following 'conceived'. This is incredibly sloppy and shows an astonishing lack of thought and care in crafting words into grammatically sensible literature and sacred texts. Further, it will be noticed that neither of these has the flawless rhythmic flow that inheres both in the KJV and the Latin.

    While I do like the Jerusalem I find it less graceful and faithful to the sources than the RSV. Still I do very much enjoy reading and studying it.

    Of course, for one who was reared on the Authorised Version all else pales in comparison. There simply is not its equal in beauty of language and power of expression.

    This is a short answer to your question. One could speak of Jerusalem's reliance on the Hebrew and Greek texts which give, perhaps, a more literal, though often forced, abrupt, and clumsy reading than others. But then, abruptness and clumsiness seem, to some greater and lesser extents, to be, if not de rigueur, characteristic of any modern translation of any sacred text that I have experienced - a studied poverty of expression and little, if any, sense of rhythm, grace, and euphony.
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,580
    Oh, would that we could use the Authorised Version (KJV) in the ordinariates. Rome would not have permitted it - and, quite oddly (if not traitorously), most of our people didn't want it. We use the Catholic RSV, which may be the most poetic of modern translations, but, really, isn't all that fine. It lacks the grace, rhythm, and rich imagery of both the KJV and the Douai. And the Douai itself does not compare to the KJV.

    This is a problem with the Vernacular, at least in the Old Rite I can put what ever English translation I like next to the Latin... most hand missals use a version of Douai, but at least one has the Knox, perhaps we should produce versions with the KJV and RSV as the English translation. With the online Missals it would be relatively easy.

    I suspect the KJV is out of favour due to the style of English, rather than childish arguments about the translations of the Bible.

    We had the RSV at our church when I was a child, but it is not always very readable, even when written out in that stupid and ugly left justified style they have in N.O. books. While the Jerusalem had the input of J.R.R. Tolkien, and is I am told an excellent French translation the English version suffers from following the French translation, rather than the Hebrew / Greek original.

    As for the Douai, this is a special case and should not really be compared with translations, The Douai was designed as an 'Englishing' of the Latin and so tries to closely follow the Latin style. While this may be faithful, it does not always produce an easily readable text.
  • If you want to hear JB in use, move to the UK.
    In England&Wales the OF Lectionary is only available in JB(©1966), with the Psalms Grail(©1963); RSVCE(©1965/66) is authorised but no one publishes it. As I said above, CBCEW (our Bishops) think all change is annoying, contentious, and thus bad (for them). When I said to our Archbishop, that I hoped the then forthcoming 2011 Sacramentary would be accompanied by RSV Lectionaries, he replied "I still prefer Knox".
    For the Office(1974) a mixture JB or RSV for most books, Knox for Wis and Gal - and Today's English Version: Good News for Modern Man for Acts and several epistles.
  • On the original topic of the Ordinariates -

    Today (transferred from last Thursday) the Solemnity of Our Lady of Walsingham (our patronal feast) was celebrated at the Cathedral of Our Lady of Walsingham with a pontifical high mass in the morning and solemn evensong in the afternoon. These may be heard at olwcatholic.org. Lots of Anglican chant and Palmer-Burgess propers, and, amongst other things, a specially commissioned anthem in honour of our Lady which was sung as the anthem at evensong.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CHGiffen
  • I suspect the KJV is out of favour due to the style of English, rather than childish arguments about the translations of the Bible.

    Which is what is particularly sad. I was just telling my schola two weeks ago how it is incumbent upon us to raise up the liturgy and encourage people to assent to it, rather than dumb it down to their level. The old English is beautiful. I use "high church english" wherever I can in my arrangements and compositions. Much like "sacred music" should sound sacred (ie-set apart for liturgy) I believe that our vernacular translations should too. The Thee's and Thou's, and ______-eth words really hammer home that this is not normal language, and that to me is a good thing.
  • RevAMG
    Posts: 159
    As the KJV is being mentioned here, many of you might be aware that Walsingham Publishing released its King James Bible for Catholics on September 19, 2020, the feast of St. Theodore of Canterbury.


    This is the full 1611 text of the Authorized Version of the most beloved and most published bible in the world. Designed for private devotional use by Catholics, all 80 books of the original 1611 edition are included. The 14 books not found in many later editions of the KJV have been included in the order Catholics expect within the 46 (not 39!) books of the Old Testament. As in the 1610 Douay, The Prayer of Manasses and the two additional Books of Esdras are placed in an Appendix. Then follow, of course, the 27 books of the New Testament.
    998 x 312 - 135K
  • What wonderful news!
    This makes me even more resentful
    that it is not allowed for liturgical use in our Ordinariates.
    I'm ordering my copy today.
    (Incidentally, I have a quatercentenial facsimile of the original 1611 edition, published by Oxford.)
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CHGiffen
  • A significant problem exists both in the Australian ordo and In the draft American office book, namely that the prescribed Magnificat antiphons for Sunday Second Evensong (aka Sunday Vespers) in the “green seasons” correspond to the gospel readings at Sunday Mass in the one-year lectionary rather than the three-year lectionary actually in use. As a result, the traditional connection between the Mass and Office of Sunday is severed—quite unnecessarily, but not inexplicably. The precise antiphon texts prescribed exactly match those in an old Anglican publication, the ‘Salisbury Antiphoner’ (available online). So, it seems like having accessible chants for the antiphons overruled the beautiful integrated structure of the Mass and Office. (Mind you, I’d strongly prefer the use of the ancient one-year lectionary, but it’s not happening any time soon.)