What is the scope or purpose that the author prefers in his contribution?
In his contribution, Peter Sorci offers an overview of the popular form of the Liturgy of the Hours in a particular way. He focused his study on the origin and the development of the Office of the cathedral (one of the most popular forms in history), its ritual characteristics, the of its decline, and a glimpse of The Monastic Office. He maintains this work through the analysis of key texts from both from the Eastern and the Western tradition (the Diary of Egeria, the Apostolic Constitutions, and the Book of Common Prayer of the Anglican church).
What is the fundamental thesis that the author maintains?
In this elaboration, Peter Sorci has done a careful and detailed historical research. He shows the shapes of the popular form of The Liturgy of the Hours in history from Jewish backgrounds, through the experiences of the early centuries, and the developments in the East and West of this form of prayer, in particular, through the two types that have emerged over time: The Cathedral Office, the oldest and most "popular" one, and the Monastic Office.
The Origin and the development of the Liturgy of Hour
Pietro Sorci began his contribution with a few basic points that he had about the origins and the development of the Liturgy of the Hours. He mentioned some of the subjects of these thoughts as a foundation of discussion because he does not want the explanation to extend to the subject matter he established in his previous research. These points are as follows:
1. The hourly prayer is always a part of the religious life of men especially in monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). This prayer is usually held on the rising of the light, at dusk, and at other times of the day.
2. The Christian hourly prayer, without a doubt, was influenced by the Jewish liturgy of the temple.
3. The Cathedral Office was not derived from the Monastic Office but by accretion, contamination, and absorption.
4. Cathedral Morning Prayer and Vespers Cathedral were liturgies of praise and intercession and not of the word, except in Egypt and in Cappadocia, and Sunday Vigils, where one could read the Gospel of the Resurrection.
5. We cannot speak about Liturgy of the Cathedral before the middle of the 4th century but this does not mean that the hourly prayer did not exist before then. Origen, Tertullian, and Cyprian clearly testify to the Apostolic tradition that there were some prayers at the particular times. They valued the symbolism of light, a reference to Christ the Light of the World, and its eschatological expectation.
Panoramic History
After giving some foundation, Pietro Sarci begins his explanation by giving some historical overview points to give a clearer framework of the history so that the emergence of these rites can be understood more clearly. Some points of the panoramic history presented by Pietro Sarci are as follows:
- The Diary of Egeria, Antioch, and the Apostolic Constitutions;
- Cappadocia;
- The East Syrian liturgy;
- Constantinople and the Byzantine liturgy;
- Ambrose and Ambrosian liturgy;
- The Church of Rome;
- Cesario of Arles and the churches of Gaul;
- The Hispanic Liturgy or Mozarabic;
- The churches of the Anglican Communion;
- Some experiences of the Church of Palermo.
In this paper, I will not rewrite the explanation, stage by stage of history, because it would be too long. Noteworthy is that the stages were selected by Sorci because these stages imply how the Liturgy of Hours existed and developed from era to era (especially the Morning Office and the Evening Office).
Form of The Popular Liturgy of hours
After Sorci shows the development of The Liturgy of Hours through history, from a Jewish background, through the experience of the first century, and its development in Eastern and Western forms of prayer, he then shows two of the most popular forms of The Liturgy of Hours in that time which have established themselves over time: The Cathedral Office Form, the oldest and most popular one, and the Monastic Office Form.
The Monastic Office
The monastic communities were established in various places by the fourth century, particularly in Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. With the existence of these communities, regular times of common prayer came into being, especially in the morning and evening. The Monastic Office focuses on listening, recitation, or singing of the psalms during the continuous reading. In those days there was no preoccupation with “active participation,” but the emphasis was more on truly listening to God’s Word in silence, pondering it in the heart, and making simple responses by a few words only. The Monastic Office is characterized by the following:
- there were solo cantors who read or chanted while the rest of the assembly listened and then responded with simple refrains
- they used only Liber Horarum book for their liturgy
- they used a long monastic psalmody
The Cathedral Office
The Cathedral Office, as indicated by tradition, was a popular celebration. The popularity of the form cathedral is given by its ritual elements. The Cathedral Office is characterized by the following:
- the participation of the people of God in all its components: clergy, laity, religious;
- by symbols and ceremonies: place, light and darkness, listening, silence, choral singing and prayer, incense, the cross, the Gospel book, icons, liturgical vestments, processions towards the cross, at the ambo, the baptistery, the tomb of a martyr, exchange of peace, gather around the ambo or in front of the shrine, prayer of inclination, etc.;
- songs, hymns, Responsorial, antiphons, tropari, hymns;
- a diversity of ministries: bishop, priests, deacons, lectors, acolytes, psalmists, cantors, etc.;
- many books were necessary: for example, in the Hispanic liturgy: Liber hymnorum, Liber canticorum, Liber Psalterium, Liber orationum psalmographus, Libellus de quotidiano, Antiphonarium, Passionarium, and Liber orationum festivus.
- a limited and determined psalmody (psalms and verses selected, suitable for day and time)
Even though the Cathedral Office was very popular, as it developed further, it slowly disappeared. The reasons for its disappearance are many:
- slowly the laity was alienated because the existence of monasteries ensured the constancy of prayer in the great basilicas;
- the prestige of monastic prayer, which led to hybrid forms of the Liturgy of Hours;
- the willingness of bishops, who had been monks, to impose the monastic rhythms and systems on the secular clergy and lay faithful;
- the use of the Latin language and the complexity of songs that ended up discouraging secular clergy and lay people from participating;
- the obligation to pray daily in private, which was subject only to the clergy, making them no longer gather the community to pray together;
- the excessive emphasis on the required presence of the faithful in the celebration of the Eucharist on Sunday made them no longer pay attention to the other liturgies outside of the Eucharist.
Critique!
Internal
In my opinion, this contribution of Pietro Sorci would be understood more easily if accompanied by a table or some sort of diagram of the development of the Liturgy of Hours through time, for example like a work of Robert Taft on The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West book, page 211 and following. Indeed, Sorci has given a clear narrative structure of each stage, but it would be easier for the reader if it could see visually this development through time in a table.
External
I am very interested and am glad to read this article because in this article Sorci gives a fairly complete panorama of the history of the Liturgy of Hours. Before I read this article, I felt that the history of the Liturgy of the hours was very vague and unclear. By reading this article it has become clearer how the Liturgy of Hours in our Church emerged. In addition, the most important lesson I can take from reading this article is that it affirms that from history emerges, the indication to resume and re-evaluate the elements that the tradition and the reformation have given us. We should keep trying to discover a new form, responsive to the nature of the liturgy and to the needs of the community so that we will remain rich in ritual, capable of moving the heart of the faithful and fascinate those who are thirsting to have an encounter with God.
No comments:
Post a Comment