an English language Antiphon in the 1962 Divine Office, is it allowed?
  • Chris_McAvoyChris_McAvoy
    Posts: 389
    Dear fellow cantors,

    I attended a sung 1st vespers for all saints day and something unusual occurred.

    Everything was done in the expected manner, 100% latin, except for one part.

    For all antiphons, the first time it was sung with the psalm or canticle in latin, but when repeated for the second time, it was sung in english.

    Most of those who attended had very little experience with the sung divine office (many never encountered in their entire life).
    There was no one who objected to this practice of bi-lingual antiphons, but at the same time, no one knew for certain if it was allowed.

    Can anyone tell me if this practice is allowed? Officially, was what was done wrong or illicit in any way?

    Are the rules for music in the extraordinary form of mass or office flexible enough to allow any music in english?
    Must all music be in latin, always? What are the rules?

    I personally think that a small degree of traditional english music can be an asset and would hope that the rules are not too strict in this area.

    Kind regards.
  • ClemensRomanusClemensRomanus
    Posts: 1,023
    Well, I can't say for certain, but Universae Ecclesiae has:

    32. Art. 9 § 3 of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum gives clerics the faculty to use the Breviarium Romanum in effect in 1962, which is to be prayed entirely and in the Latin language.


    Now, I don't know if that applies just for private recitation or for all instances, so I'll defer to more knowledgeable members. Personally, in my own private prayer, I use the Roman Breviary in English, translated by Rev. Bede Babo with Ecclesiastic approval from Rome.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,507
    Question: is the repetition of the antiphon optional? If so, perhaps singing it once in Latin fulfills the obligation. Thus the English repetition is simply a pastoral provision, much like repeating the Gospel of the day in English at the beginning of the homily of an EF Mass.

    Just brainstorming here.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,211
    Since lay people have no obligation to pray the Divine Office (unless they are members of religious "third orders" or secular institutes), they are free to use adapted forms.
  • Chris_McAvoyChris_McAvoy
    Posts: 389
    Not all canon lawyers agree with this assessment, Chonak.
    Lay people may have no obligation, but generally parish Churches should not officially promote liturgies which are breaking rules.
    Maybe they can call it a concert or something else..but if it does not conform to all the rules, is it really vespers?

    What I am asking is: how we are ment to view our faith?
    Which is more correct: to view the faith in a strict legalistic way, or view it in a spiritual way following closely the "spirit of the law"?
    If we follow our own devices too much, does this not make us individualist protestants?

    I am uncertain that the question here has been answered. But thanks for the guesses.

    Realistically we've gone through a very "protestant period" where many individuals and parishes probably do break rules, but this does not necessarily mean it is good to continue these types of practices...
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,211
    Good points, Chris. By the way, just to be sure: is there a possibility that the Vespers was offered according to the modern Liturgy of the Hours? Using the vernacular along with Latin would be OK there.
Add a Comment