Why isn't the Canticum Trium Puerorum strictly scriptural?
  • Geremia
    Posts: 289
    Why isn't the Canticum Trium Puerorum (a.k.a Benedicite omnia opera Domini, from the Song in the Fiery Furnace in the book of Daniel 3:57-88) in the Roman Breviary strictly scriptural?

    Especially the non-scriptural, very Trinitarian part: "Benedicámus Patrem et Fílium cum Sancto Spíritu"? What is the origin of this?

    See this comparison table.
  • FSSPmusic
    Posts: 502
    I don't know the answer to your question, but that doxology is also sung in place of the usual Gloria Patri at the introit on Trinity Sunday according to many of the oldest sources, restored in the newer editions.
    https://wiki.omnigreg.at/grad:0007
  • Charles_Weaver
    Posts: 208
    The comparison table is not so helpful, as the most important part of the comparison is that the last part of the canticle's litany structure (laudate et superexaltate eum in saecula) is not repeated after each verse. This seems to have been a pretty early (and very practical) omission. I especially love the very elaborate melodies of this canticle.

    Otherwise, the text is taken directly from the scriptural source. Of course the doxology is added, as with all the psalms and canticles, and it happens to be a proper doxology rather than the usual "gloria patri."

    I guess I don't understand the question. What is not strictly scriptural about it?
    Thanked by 1Roborgelmeister
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,599
    That comparison is hard to read because it fails to account for omitted vv and partial vv from the source; omissions of that type for liturgical use are very common. If your argument is that such omissions render it not strictly scriptural, you'd also be saying the same thing about liturgical Gospels and Epistles, et cet.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CHGiffen
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 3,502
    Or the rough paraphrase of Galatians that yields Nos autem.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CHGiffen
  • Geremia
    Posts: 289
    @Charles_Weaver
    What is not strictly scriptural about it?
    I mean it's not verbatim taken from Daniel.
    laudate et superexaltate eum in saecula) is not repeated after each verse. This seems to have been a pretty early (and very practical) omission.
    What's "very practical" about that omission? Why was it omitted?
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 3,502
    By that token none of the psalms are.

    I mean, it’s shorter. They didn’t compile the office while writing down their motivations for posterity.
    Thanked by 1Liam
Add a Comment