The Good Eleven

Catholic Files

I have at various points uploaded files and linked to them for download in the context of blog posts. I also have many other files which people might find useful, many of which were created by me, but some of which I found elsewhere online, or compiled from other sources. I have decided it is best to make them all available in one place so that they are described and available for easy searching. The files can be downloaded by following the link at the word "This" at the beginning of each description.

Liturgical

This is a traditional central altar card. This is the Epistle-side/Lavabo card. This is the Last Gospel card.

This is a traditional Requiem central altar card. This is the Lavabo and Last Gospel cards.

This is a Novus Ordo altar card. This is the Epistle-side/Lavabo card. This is the [optional] Last Gospel card.

This is a chart dealing with the calendar around the end of Advent/Christmas/Epiphany and showing all seven possibilities for how this time of the liturgical year plays out based on what weekday Christmas falls on.

This is the liturgical calendar as in 1954.

This is a supplement to the 1955 Breviary containing the original feast and octave of St. Joseph Patron of the Universal Church that was replaced by St. Joseph the Worker.

This describes the 1956 rubrical changes to the Breviary in English.

This is a chart comparing the antiphons of the Breviary before and after the 1911 reforms under Pius X.

This is an inventory of antiphons in the pre-1911 psalter of the Breviary (specifically, from an 1888 set).

This is an inventory of antiphons in the post-1911 psalter of the Breviary.

This is a chart of the antiphons from the pre-1911 psalter of the Breviary (specifically, from an 1888 set).

This is a chart of the antiphons from the post-1911 psalter of the Breviary.

This table describes what happened to the various pre-1911 antiphons of the psalter that disappeared after 1911 and also which psalms or divisi have never been assigned "their own" antiphon in either psalter.

This is a proposal I made for a "more moderate" reform of the weekly psalter.

This is a partial proposal for the distribution of antiphons in my hypothetical psalter.

This is a chart comparing the distribution of antiphons in my hypothetical proposal to the pre-1911 and post-1911 versions.

This is Part I of a scan of Dunney's book on "The Mass." This is Part II.

This is a file with the General Rubrics of the Breviary in English, both 1900 and with the Pius X reforms.

This is a list of the feasts in the Calendar of 1954.

This is a file of the paraliturgical Grace for Meals from the appendices of the Breviary.

This is a file of the paraliturgical celebration of the Gradual Psalms, from the appendices of the Breviary.

This is a Guide to the Celebration of Low Mass.

This is a scan of the book "Hymni de Tempore et de Sancti" which contains all the hymns of the Roman Breviary in their forms both before and after the revisions of Urban VIII.

This is a chart of the Invitatories as they existed prior to the reforms of 1911 (specifically from the 1888 breviary).

This is a chart of the Invitatories as the existed after the reforms of 1911.

This is file of the paraliturgical Itinerarium for journeys from the appendices of the Breviary.

This is a scan of the comic-style book "Know Your Mass" for children.

This is a Latin-English file of the 1961 Breviary rubrics.

This is a supplement to the Roman Martyrology in English (1961) containing a description of the revisions made due to the calendrical reforms of John XXIII. (The supplement would allow the book to be used for 1954 liturgical celebrations, for example).

This is a chart of all the Scripture Lessons at Matins from the traditional Roman Breviary.

This is a chart of all the Scripture Lessons at Mass from the traditional Roman Missal.

This is a chart of the Scripture Lessons at Mass from the traditional Roman Missal, plus the ferial readings from the Ferial Lectionary of 1967.

This is a chart of the Scripture Lessons at Mass from the traditional Roman Missal, plus the ferial readings from the Ferial Lectionary of 1967, plus the restored Sunday Old Testament/Prophecy lessons from the historic lectionary (as reconstructed in the Lutheran Service Book).

This is a chart comparing the versicles at Matins pre-1911 and post-1911.

This is a scan of the Octavarium Romanum, an obscure liturgical book containing extra texts for octaves of feasts given an octave in certain churches (but not on the general calendar), from 1883. This is a scan of the index and introductory pages of the Octavarium Romanum of 1902, which was substantially a re-print of the 1883 edition beyond these opening pages.

This is a file about the correct postures for the public celebration of the Divine Office.

This is a file of the paraliturgical celebration of the Penitential Psalms, as found in the appendices to the Breviary.

This is the Tridentine liturgical calendar of Pius V.

This is a file about the correct postures for Low and High Mass.

This is a file of the paraliturgical Psalms Before Mass.

This is a file of the paraliturgical Psalms After Mass.

This is a chart of the traditional Collect and Stational churches in Rome for Lent. While the list of station churches can be found lots of places (with some modern additions or alterations), this list is most interesting for also identifying the ecclesiae collectae where the procession gathered.

This is a chart I made which fits all of Scripture into the traditional 1-year Temporal Cycle, leaving the traditional daily Epistle and Gospel readings in place, and taking traditional Matins as its starting place for the Old Testament cycle. This could be used for a traditionally liturgically-based lectio divina cycle over a year, and one might even imagine it as a sort of hypothetical expanded lectionary for Matins and Mass (as explained in this post).

Prayers

This is a file about some traditional devotions including the 54-Day Novena, the 3 Hail Mary's in the morning and evening, the 7 Hail Mary's, the 7 Offerings of the Precious Blood (associated with St. Bridget), and the Enthronement of the Sacred Heart.

This is a file of St. Bonaventure's Psalter of Our Lady, a version of the psalter rewritten to praise Our Lady specifically but with the same form or spirit for each psalm.

This is a file describing and telling how to pray various chaplets and rosaries (from my collection).

This is a file describing the various devotional Cincture Cords that were traditionally approved for use as sacramentals by the faithful.

This is a file describing the various practices associated with the Divine Mercy devotion.

This is a file describing the various practices associated with the Fatima devotion.

This is a Franciscan traditional version of the Stations of the Cross.

This is the traditional Stations of the Cross by St. Alphonsus Liguori.

This is a traditional Stations of the Cross in Latin.

This is a private devotional Litany of the Poor Souls in Purgatory.

This is a very Baroque yet Medieval-themed private devotional "Litany of Knighthood" I found somewhere online once and then expanded myself.

This is the Little Office of St. Anthony of Padua.

This is the Little Office of St. Joseph.

This is the Little Office of the Immaculate Conception.

This is the Little Office of the Passion.

This is the Little Office of the Sacred Heart.

This is the Little Office of the Seven Sorrows of Our Lady.

This is a file of various prayers, some just in English, some in English and Latin, mainly taken from the appendices of the Breviary for Before and After Mass (or Communion), for example.

This is a file of prayers from an old prayer book I found to be said by the laity at the various parts of Mass encapsulating their spirit as an alternative to just following the priest's prayers.

This is a file of a few additional very traditional prayers for before and after Mass or communion.

This is the Prayer to the Shoulder Wound of Jesus.

This is a file of some prayers before and after confession.

This is a file of the prayers of the Rosary in Latin. 

This is an alternative booklet for the Rosary in Latin.

This is a file on all the various Scapulars traditionally approved for use by the laity.

This file describes the devotion of the "Secret Tortures of Our Lord" the night He spent in prison.

This file describes the devotion of the 15 Daily Prayers of St. Bridget that you're supposed to say for a whole year.

This is the St. Gertrude Prayer for the souls in purgatory.

This is the devotion of the "True Letter of Our Lord Jesus Christ."

This file describes various miscellaneous traditional Catholic sacramentals.

This is the so-called "Golden Arrow" Prayer for reparation for blasphemy.

Information

This is a file (for scholarly purposes, of course) of the Index of Forbidden Books as in 1948.

This may be a bit out of date, but it's a list of Catholic-majority countries and populations.

This is a list of the ecumenical councils.

This is a description of the contents and symbolism of a traditional Polish Easter basket.

This is a chart describing a potential "gradual/multi-layered" fast and abstinence schema for the liturgical year based on Western tradition, but similar to the East in this regard, as explained in this post. This document also explains the logic of the chart.

This is a file about the traditional tables of hierarchical precedence in the Church.

This may be a bit out of date too, but it's a file of the reigning hierarchal heads (patriarchs, major archbishops, etc) of all the various sui juris churches.

This is a file with an outline of all the various sui juris churches and Rites.

This is a file describing describing the various positions in the hierarchy of the Church.

This may be a bit out of date also, but it's a file of the current emperors (well, there's only one left: in Japan) and pretenders of the world's [former] imperial thrones.

This is a list of the Popes with correct and alternate regnal numbers.

This is a sort of checklist of all the books and chapters and verses of Scripture (according to the Douay-Rheims version).

This is a little primer on all the Doctors of the Church.

This is a scan of the book "The Foundation of a Religious Institute" regarding the canonical process for founding a new institute of consecrated life in the Church.

This is a file describing the various departments and organs of the Roman Curia.

This is a file containing some of the ballads about Walsingham and its traditional shrine of Our Lady in England.

Good Things

This article had some good and reassuring things:

"When a pope or a teacher must say 'I am in charge here,' or 'I am the superior here,' it is because he has already lost authority and is seeking to attribute it to himself with words. Saying that one has the staff of command implies that one no longer has it. Having the staff of command does not mean giving orders and imposing, but serving.”

[...]

"I confess that in general, through the fault of my temperament, the first solution that comes to my mind is the wrong one. Because of this I have learned to distrust my first reaction. Once I am more tranquil, after I have passed through the crucible of solitude, I draw near to that which I must do. But no one can save me from the solitude of decisions. One can ask for advice but, in the end, one must decide alone.”

In practical action, it is in short to be expected that with Francis the decisional primacy of the pope will not be undermined, not even with a future more collegial body of Church governance.

"When Benedict XVI went to Spain in 2006, everyone thought that he would criticize the government of Rodriguez Zapatero because of its divergences with the Catholic Church on various issues. Someone even asked him if he had addressed the issue of homosexual marriage with the Spanish authorities. But the pope said no, he had only spoken about positive things and the rest would come later. He wanted to suggest that first of all one must emphasize the positive things, those that unite us, and not the negative ones that serve only to divide. The priority must be given to the encounter among persons, to making the journey together. In this way, afterward it will be easier to tackle the differences."

In another passage of the interview, Bergoglio criticizes those homilies “which should be 'kerygmatic' but end up speaking about everything that has a connection with sex. This can be done, this cannot be done. This is wrong, this is not. And so we end up forgetting the treasure of Jesus alive, the treasure of the Holy Spirit present in our hearts, the treasure of a project of Christian life that has many implications that go much further than mere sexual questions. We overlook a very rich catechesis, with the mysteries of the faith, the creed, and we end up concentrating on whether or not to participate in a demonstration against a draft law in favor of the use of condoms.”

And again:

"I am sincerely convinced that, at the present time, the fundamental choice that the Church must make is not that of diminishing or taking away precepts, of making this or that easier, but of going into the street in search of the people, of knowing persons by name. And not only because going to proclaim the Gospel is its mission, but because if it does not do so it harms itself. It is obvious that if one goes into the street it can also happen that one has an accident, but I prefer a thousand times over an accident-ridden Church to a sick Church."

People Change

The Best I Could Do

I probably just could have bought those brown eggs they sell! They look quite similar. Oh well, it was fun to go through the process. And now we have a lot of skinned onions left...

The Mandatum

By now, the crazy trads are going crazier over the fact that Pope Francis included two girls and two Muslims among those whose feet he washed this night.

I have my own grave reservations about Francis's liturgical style and flouting of tradition. But to be honest, this foot-washing question is one of the flashpoints of identity-politics in the Church which I've never understood at all. I'm much more concerned that he didn't do this major Triduum liturgy in a proper basilica than that women were included. I've never understood why, in the age of altar girls and readeresses, conservatives (including just your run-of-the-mill neocon Novus Ordo types) were always so concerned about women being included in the maundy of all things. (Perhaps it was a "hyper-investment of outrage" given that it was one of the last contested hold-outs when many of the other traditional gender boundaries had already collapsed?)

And it's not that I'm some sort of radical feminist when it comes to liturgy or symbolism. I strongly acknowledge that the gender duality, male and female, masculine and feminine, is one of the most (perhaps the most) fundamental symbolic elements of liturgy and Scriptural typology and even just the human psyche. By the sheer elegance of the logic of the nuance of the symbolism, I am a firm supporter of the all male priesthood (the diaconate, I think, is a slightly more complicated question; but a probably dangerous slippery slope at this point either way). I think that public roles in liturgy (like altar server and reader) should be limited to actually [minor] ordained acolytes and lectors (and thus men; though, I'll say, once you admit lay substitutes, concern with limiting it just to male lay substitutes seems sort of like too little too late). And I think it's unfortunate that after 1900 years, the symbolism of Corinthians is being lost because women stopped covering their heads.

But I've never really understood the limitation of the feet washing to men, because it seems to me that the symbolism of the rite of the mandatum in general is historically vague and shifting. Just consider the Catholic Encyclopedia's description of its evolution:

This tradition, we may believe, has never been interrupted, though the evidence in the early centuries is scattered and fitful. For example the Council of Elvira (A.D. 300) in canon xlviii directs that the feet of those about to be baptized are not to be washed by priests but presumably by clerics or at least lay persons. This practice of washing the feet at baptism was long maintained in Gaul, Milan, and Ireland, but it was not apparently known in Rome or in the East. In Africa the nexus between this ceremony and baptism became so close that there seemed danger of its being mistaken for an integral part of the rite of baptism itself (Augustine, Ep. LV, "Ad Jan.", n. 33). Hence the washing of the feet was in many places assigned to another day than that on which the baptism took place. In the religious orders the ceremony found favour as a practice of charity and humility. The Rule of St. Benedict directs that it should be performed every Saturday for all the community by him who exercised the office of cook for the week; while it was also enjoined that the abbot and the brethren were to wash the feet of those who were received as guests. The act was a religious one and was to be accompanied by prayers and psalmody, "for in our guests Christ Himself is honoured and receive". The liturgical washing of feet (if we can trust the negative evidence of our early records) seems only to have established itself in East and West at a comparatively late date. In 694 the Seventeenth Synod of Toledo commanded all bishops and priests in a position of superiority under pain of excommunication to wash the feet of those subject to them. The matter is also discussed by Amalarius and other liturgists of the ninth century. Whether the custom of holding this "maundy" (from "Mandatum novum do vobis", the first words of the initial Antiphon) on Maundy Thursday, developed out of the baptismal practice originally attached to that day does not seem quite clear, but it soon became an universal custom in cathedral and collegiate churches. In the latter half of the twelfth century the pope washed the feet of twelve sub-deacons after his Mass and of thirteen poor men after his dinner. The "Caeremoniale episcoporum" directs that the bishop is to wash the feet either of thirteen poor men or of thirteen of his canons. The prelate and his assistants are vested and the Gospel "Ante diem festum paschae" is ceremonially sung with incense and lights at the beginning of the function. Most of the sovereigns of Europe used also formerly to perform the maundy. The custom is still retained at the Austrian and Spanish courts.

So the symbolism here seems multivalent and thus inevitably confused if any sort of strict logic is imposed on it. The history of the rite raises serious questions about what it should be taken to signify, or whether any one "tradition" or significance can be nailed down. 

Is it a rite whose origins should be connected with the catechumens about to enter the Church (consider the custom in many cultures of washing the feet before one enters the house)? In this case, the inclusion of Muslims isn't so out of line. Admittedly, they weren't catechumens; still the notion of "guest" might be seen to apply in their case, invoking the symbolism of the hospitality among early monks. 

Is it a rite strictly to be associated with performance by a bishop or a priest? Or is it something even lay people might do for each other, as the traditional performance of the rite by lay monarchs might suggest?

Is it a rite whose origins in Christ washing the feet of the Twelve Apostles should see it remain somehow connected to the idea of ordination? Or is it just an act of humility and charity more generally, an example to all Christians without any particularly sacerdotal connotations?

The limitations might make sense if one chose to impose a strict logic on it in terms of whom was selected. If you are a bishop really limiting it to, say, a logically "complete unit" like your cathedral chapter of twelve canons, or the Pope's traditional washing of twelve subdeacons, etc...then maybe it makes sense. Though, even then, I have to wonder "Why twelve subdeacons?" If the symbolism is allegedly the Apostles, why not twelve priests or bishops? And which twelve subdeacons? Was there a logical unit there, a college associated with, say, the Lateran that contained twelve subdeacons?

But when (as must needs be the case on the parish level, or was the case when the Pope did the second washing, of the feet of thirteen paupers after his dinner) we are talking about lay people anyway...the importance of the sex distinctions seems even less clear. Yes, only men can be ordained priests. But the laymen whose feet are washed in the rite...do not thereby get ordained. It would seem, then, there would be a much more profound lay/clerical confusion (and has been traditionally) in the rite if the rite is in fact to signify some sort of connection to ordained ministry. Limiting it to men doesn't really mitigate this if those men are (and remain) lay.

On the other hand, if it's an act of humility...then whomever, anyone suffices. But at that point, one in turn wonders why the obsession with keeping the number at twelve (or thirteen) specifically? There seems to be much debate on this number point too! (Including one legend I heard that it used to be twelve paupers until one day a mysterious thirteenth showed up when Gregory the Great was preforming the maundy, a beggar who was revealed to be our Lord Himself):

This number is not prescribed in the rubrics of the Roman Missal, and many conjectures have been hazarded as to the origin of the number thirteen, some supposing that the thirteenth represented the Lord, whose feet were washed some days before by Mary Magdalene; some, that the thirteenth represents the master of the house where the Last Supper was taken. But the solution given by Cardinal Merati is, that in the earliest times the Pope was wont to wash the feet of twelve sub-deacons; and that from the time of St Gregory the Great it has been the practice to entertain thirteen paupers daily; and he is of opinion that the former practice having become obsolete, the Roman Church revived it, and kept in memory also the charity of St. Gregory, by combining both of these customs on Holy Thursday - namely, both by washing the feet of thirteen poor priests, and entertaining them at supper.

And again, if you're washing the feet of just anyone, of lay people or random priests...it becomes a real question of whom. Why these twelve (or thirteen) and not others? Do they represent some sort of logically complete unit? Or is it just an arbitrary "representative" sampling of the clergy or of the community or of the poor? (Such "representative sampling" usually not being a traditional liturgical concept in the West!) And, indeed, is twelve more traditional, or is thirteen??

I suppose my suggestion, then, for imposing some "order" on the tradition would be as follows; there would actually be three types of mandatum on Holy Thursday:

1) Bishops (including the Pope) would, during the Chrism Mass, wash the feet of their chapter of twelve (priest) canons of their cathedral. (This would require a regularization whereby every cathedral would have a chapter, and a chapter of twelve specifically; though perhaps there could be "supernumerary" canons, etc, but they would not affect the mandatum.)

2) Pastors would, during the Mass of the Lord's Supper, wash the feet of all that parish's catechumens (women and men; the number would be simply how many catechumens there were. Including the already-baptized "candidates for full communion" might be considered as well, especially if there were no full-fledged catechumens that year).

3) Monarchs, including the Pope, and any bishops who also felt so inclined, would (as a ceremony separate from any other liturgy) wash the feet of thirteen paupers (women and men, potentially; and possibly of any religious affiliation) chosen by some sort of lot. (Divergent traditions of various royal houses, however, would be encouraged to continue; in England, for example, many more than thirteen have traditionally received the royal maundy and it was at one point tracked to the monarch's age; when it comes to the gender question, I might add, in the joint reign of William and Mary the issue was addressed by the King giving to poor men and the Queen to poor women).

Additionally, abbots should wash the feet of all their monks (and abbesses their nuns) and the heads of households or families could be encouraged to (as a private devotion of the domestic church) wash the feet of their dependents.

This way, I think, the various divergent traditions on twelve versus thirteen, lay versus cleric, catechumens versus clergy versus paupers...could all be maintained and reconciled.

Reassuring

 

 I have only two points to make today.

First, what is that box thing on the table? Other pics show it is not the box the gifted icon was in. So what is it?

Two: priests, bishops, and popes (active or emeritus) should always wear a fascia/sash with their cassock. It should not be interpreted as a sign of jurisdiction or anything. It should just be considered an essential part of the outfit, like a belt with pants. Cassocks (unless covered by a surplice or something) which are not cinched at the waist and broken visually by a horizontal feature...just look really bad and unfinished and unshapely. I think it looks really incomplete and even sort of effete, like it's some sort of weird mumu.

Lectio(-nary?) Ideas (and a Chart!)

I have long wanted to make an experimental cycle for reading the whole Bible in a year. There are Catholic plans that exist for this, usually based around the idea of having a similar number of verses each day. But I really wanted to come up with something that tracked the traditional one year lectionary cycle, for the purpose of having a traditional liturgically-based lectio divina schedule (and also to hypothetically imagine what sort of lectionary reform could be implemented if we wanted to put the whole Scriptures into a traditional one-year cycle at Matins and Mass).

I'm not the only one who has contemplated such an idea. See this page, for example. However, the idea given there seems to be that you will only be reading one book at a time, whereas I wanted an "Old Testament/Epistle/Gospel" format (though Old/New would also have been workable, I think, given that there are simply a lot fewer total verses in the New Testament). I wasn't at all concerned about having the readings be of similar length (and indeed there is quite a bit of variation, from very small readings, to several chapters at a time from the longer Old Testament books).

So I came up with this chart. The readings in bold are the traditional readings of the temporal cycle. The readings in red were drawn from the "restored" lessons of the historic lectionary from the Lutheran Service Book (I used this just to fill in a few missing Epistle readings on special days). If a verse is in light blue, it indicates that I expanded the traditional reading slightly simply for the sake of completeness. The carats during the Pentecost octave indicate that the reading was taken from a day above; specifically, the Tuesday has basically two Acts sections, so I moved the second down to Friday which had none (traditionally the first reading is from Joel in the Old Testament). And since Trinity Sunday perpetually occludes the Sunday, I moved the Sunday's reading down to Monday (since traditionally the subsequent ferias were the only time the Mass for the First Sunday after Pentecost was used).

I'll explain the choices I made in this post.

I based the yearly cycle on the traditional liturgical calendar. As such, instead of fixed dates, it is based on the traditional weeks of the liturgical seasons, which are only truly fixed around Christmas time. So, for example, "Wednesday after the Second Sunday of Lent" or "Friday after the Sixteenth Sunday After Pentecost." Because of the way that Easter is moveable, this traditionally means that four "flex weeks" may occur either after Epiphany, or be transferred to immediately before the end of the liturgical year. I had to keep this in mind. But, generally, all the liturgical weeks occur each year.

The only times they don't are the rare occasions when Easter occurs at the earliest possible dates and Christmas occurs on certain weekdays, which can lead to the Second Week of Epiphany being occluded (in which case the Sunday is anticipated, and everything from that week would have to be read anticipated). And also years when Christmas occurs on a Monday and so the the Fourth Sunday of Advent is Christmas Eve and there is no Fourth Week to speak of. In such a case, the Epiphany Octave (which usually has space for exactly as many days of its own lessons as were left out of the Fourth Week of Advent in a given year) also is cut short on space. Under the current system one just has to anticipate the lessons, I suppose, but a better system might be to reform the rubrics slightly so that if the Sunday Within the Octave of Epiphany occurs on January 7th, the readings for the First Week of Epiphany don't start until the next Sunday (which would also allow that Sunday to be actually used at some point instead of being perpetually occluded by either Holy Family or the Octave Day).

It should be noted that this is based only on the Temporal Cycle. The Sundays, Advent, Christmastide (though that actually is based on fixed dates) Septuagesima, and Lent, and Ember Days and Rogation Days, and holy days like Ascension, Corpus Christi, and Sacred Heart which are based on the Temporal Cycle (rather than the fixed dates of the Sanctoral Cycle). I did not (could not, really) take into account feasts or solemnities that would interrupt this cycle; it is not feasible to take these into account in terms of making sure that all Scripture occurs each year, and when they do interrupt the Temporal Cycle's lessons (I would be inclined to have proper readings only at the most important feasts), the lost ones would simply have to be anticipated by combining them with the nearest readings that are part of the lectio continua. (Of course, this would only be an issue for a theoretical lectionary; in personal lectio divina, one would not have to take the Sanctoral Cycle into account at all if one did not want). 

The only really moveable days the chart includes in that sense are the traditional readings for the Ember Days in September, which can occur at various weeks after Pentecost but which are still Temporal rather than Sanctoral really; when they fall, I just indicated to combine the occluded Gospels (and Epistle) with the the previous day.

For the Old Testament readings, the traditional cycle at Matins definitely has to be your starting point, as the suggestions in that article I linked makes clear. There are not many days at Mass that have Old Testament Scripture in the Old Rite; mainly just the days of Lent and Ember Days. Mass is never going to be a realistic place to attempt a full lectio continua of the Old Testament, even if you were to introduce daily/ferial Old Testament readings. That will always be the appropriate place only for the most important selections.

From this perspective, however, Matins leaves something to be desired in terms of a year-long Old Testament cycle, since the weeks after Epiphany are all Epistle readings at Matins (which seems wasteful of Matins lessons space: as those Epistle readings could be put at Mass) and likewise after Easter are New Testament too. And yet, there are books totally left out!

So I had to alter the Matins cycle to fit the whole Old Testament (while not including any New Testament) in a way that makes some major changes but which keeps the general spirit of the logic around whic the readings at Matins seem to be structured (as described in the suggestions in the article I linked). My basic logic for Matins/Old Testament lessons was this:

Isaias is very traditional at Advent.

The time right around Christmas is too "proper" and too variable to try to put any continuous reading of a single book there in the lectionary, so for my own lectio divina cycle I put the Psalms there which can be divided up easily as needed to fit the number of days needed during that time (but which would not ever be used in an actual Matins lectionary since the psalter occurs complete each week across the various hours of the Divine Office, and since I would be disinclined to meddle with the traditional fixed proper lessons from this period in the year). The psalms are songs of praise, mostly, so they are fitting for Christmas time (albeit some of have a more penitential tone that might be a sort of "call-back" to Advent).

For the first two weeks after epiphany (the first of which always occurs, and the second of which almost always does; if the second week did not occur, you'd simply do it all in one week) I put Job because it can stand alone, but could also be conceptually grouped with the other "Stories about One Main Character" books. This time of year is a sort of "limbo" liturgically. We've finished contemplating Eschatological themes from the end of the year and Advent up to Epiphany, but we haven't started yet with Creation at Septuagesima and the Old Law at Lent and all the History that takes up post-Pentecost time. In the dead of winter, the themes of Job seem appropriate for this awkward liturgical holding-space time that is after the end of the world, but before its beginning from the beginning of salvation history again.

For the remaining weeks after epiphany (where at Matins there were just Epistles, remember) I put the "Stories about One Main Character" books (Ruth, Tobias, Judith, Esther) because this is the part of the year that can occur in January/February, but which also can be moved or split-up with some or all of it put in November depending on how early Easter is. These books seem easiest to do that with in a cycle as they can stand alone as stories (with each other and with Job), but they also wouldn't be out of place occurring near the end of the "History" section of the year (albeit a bit out of "chronological" order), so they're rather "flexible" books in terms of placement, which is perfect for this "flexible" part of the calendar.

Then at Septuagesima, Sexagesima, Quinquagesima, and Lent I, II, and III...I put the Pentateuch. This makes sense and is vaguely traditional and what was recommended in that article I linked. Yes, the Matins lectionary itself focuses on Genesis (and a bit of Exodus) but expanding it to the whole Pentateuch make sense. To fit, the readings have to be quite long each day, which fits the penitential spirit of Lent, as does the "boring"/dry nature of all the Mosaic Law stuff in Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, etc. Indeed, Lent symbolically is about our "bondage to the Law" before Easter brings in "freedom in Grace" so concentrating on the Old Law during this part of the year is traditional (and besides, except for the Sundays, Lent had no proper scripture at Matins during this time anyway, only Gospel Homilies, so there's a good chunk of free space for putting the Pentateuch at the "beginning" of the salvation-history story of the liturgical year).

Passiontide remains, as traditional, Jeremias, and Holy Week remains Lamentations. So I also put Baruch (associated strongly with Jeremias, of course) at Lent VI so he would be near Jeremias (and his book also has penitential themes appropriate to Lent).

During Easter (where at Matins there were New Testament readings) I put the Wisdom books, as "Christ is the power of God, and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." By putting them here at Easter instead of later, this also freed up space in the Fall for filling in the remaining History books that the Matins lectionary didn't originally include. Easter "interrupts history" as it were with more mystical/poetic tones, and I especially like putting the Canticle of Canticles during the Easter Octave (at Matins it has no Scripture, just Gospel Homilies) and Ecclesiastes during the Pentecost Octave (same thing) as these are very "special" and mystical books, in my mind.

Then the rest of the year is just the History, basically, in its chronological order, which is what Matins did traditionally. However, instead of doing the weird thing where Matins switches to Months (August, September, October, November) instead of Weeks After Pentecost in late Summer...I just kept it determined by Weeks After Pentecost. At the end of the year (as we start focusing on eschatological themes), as traditional, Ezechiel, the Minor Prophets, and finally Daniel make their appearance.

Between the minor prophets and Daniel during the last week some of the "story books" from Epiphany time might be inserted in a given year, as I discussed previously. That's a bit disruptive of the end of the year "prophecy" theme (though, perhaps more seamless considering I make Jonah the last Minor Prophet read that week...since he is both a Minor Prophet and a sort of "story book") but it's not terrible, and the last week of the year will still always be Daniel with his eschatological vision. (I might actually explore, if I were in charge of reforming the traditional liturgy, having these flex weeks be inserted after the 19th Week of Pentecost in the Fall, rather than interrupting in between the 23rd and 24th Weeks...)

For the Epistles, then, I started first by assuming that the traditional Mass Epistle readings on Sundays and other days of the Temporal Cycle would remain in place. There is actually more space in this regard, because the days of Lent have Old Testament readings at Mass instead of Epistles.

Then, layered over this traditional cycle, on the remaining free days, the ferias, looked to the Ferial Lectionary of 1967 to fill in a lectio continua of the Epistles. I did not bother to slavishly exclude the verses already covered by the traditional Sunday readings; I wasn't going to interrupt the continuous reading of Epistles merely to eliminate all redundancy in the lectionary.

In terms of the distribution, Romans takes up Advent. The first two weeks after Epiphany (which almost always occur, in January/February) have James and then for the four "flex weeks" that can be moved to the end of the year I put most of Revelations (except the very end which will always be the Last Week of the liturgical year in November before Advent starts).

I didn't exactly consider this ideal (and as I said above, it would actually make more sense to me, for a lot of reasons, to have the flex weeks inserted between the 19th and 20th weeks after Pentecost instead of the 23rd and 24th/Last weeks; in which case I would put the smaller Epistles at the Time After Epiphany and keep Revelations in its entirety at the end of the liturgical year; this may be one reason why Matins traditionally did that August/September/October/November thing instead of keeping the Weeks After Pentecost/Epiphany cycle), but the idea is that in years when all four weeks are moved to the end of the year, Revelations will all occur at the end of the year, but in years where fewer than four are moved to the end of the year...Revelations seemed one of the least controversial books to "split up" between two parts of the liturgical year (especially since the Time After Epiphany is an awkward time anyway).

At Septuagesima I put Galatians, at Lent Colossians and Hebrews, and then at Eastertide is Acts with its account of the history of the Apostolic Church immediately after the Resurrection, and then the rest of the year is filled out with the rest of the Epistles in basically the same order suggested by the Ferial Lectionary of 1967 except I rearranged some of the smaller Epistles at the very end of the cycle.

For the Gospels, I kept the traditional Gospel readings from the Temporal Cycle (Sundays, all the days of Lent, all the fixed days around Christmas, Ember Days, Octaves of Easter and Pentecost, etc) and then, as with the Epistles, layered in a sort of lectio continua. Though there was less space for Gospels than for Epistles, as all the days of Lent have their own proper Gospel.

As with the Epistles, I generally did not bother to slavishly exclude the verses already covered by the traditional readings; I wasn't going to interrupt the continuous reading of Gospels merely to eliminate all redundancy in the lectionary. However, taking my cue from the 1967 Ferial Lectionary (and just from common sense), I did exclude the Infancy/introductory chapters (generally up to the Baptism/40 Days in the Desert) from the lectio continua (these occurred at their appropriate narrative time around Advent/Christmas/Epiphany instead) and I of course excluded the Passion Narratives, and the Resurrection chapters at the ends of the Gospels (which occur around Holy Week and Easter instead), and also the Palm Sunday story (which occurs right around Palm Sunday in the liturgical year anyway).

So basically, after putting the Christmas/Easter material at the appropriate corresponding time in the liturgical year, I took the remaining "Public Ministry" chapters of the Gospels and distributed them on the free ferias in a continuous reading. Taking my cue, again, from the 1967 Ferial Lectionary, the shortest Gospel, Mark, occurs after Epiphany (which means it could get split up, for better or worse), John occurs (rather naturally, I think) during Eastertide, and then Luke and Matthew fill out the time after Pentecost.

If one were to take my lectio reading chart and imagine making it an actual working lectionary for the Roman Rite, few changes would need to be made. As I mentioned above, the Psalms would not be read at Matins around Christmas (rather, the traditional proper readings would just be used) and I might be inclined to interrupt the lectio continua for the Sundays of Septuagesima and Lent (to keep their traditional Matins lessons, which it has been suggested are thematically "structural" to the liturgy), but the "Ordinary Time" Sundays do not have "special" readings and seem to just be part of the general partial lectio continua that the traditional Matins lectionary vaguely attempted. My system assumes that Scripture would occur each day at Matins (the selections I've chosen would have to be divided into the traditional three lessons), and that things would be restructured (perhaps by always having nine lessons every day, or at least on these days) so that days that currently have simply a Gospel Homily instead of any Scripture would, in fact, have Scripture too.

Old Testament readings at Mass would not be effected by this system as Matins, not Mass, is the basis for the "full Scripture" principle in this system. Mass, I assume, would keep the traditional readings (during Lent and on Ember Days) where the Old Testament would be used, Sundays could use the "restored Prophecy" readings that have been reconstructed from historical sources based on something like the Lutheran Service Book one-year lectionary, and then the rest of the free ferias could be filled in with the most important selections from whatever book is currently being read at Matins.

The Epistles and Gospels would not really require any changes to be adapted into the actual lectionary from my system. The only change this would really require to the traditional cycle would be that a few of the Resurrection accounts at Eastertide would be expanded so that the entirety of each Gospel is included rather than merely selections, and a few other readings (a couple of the Passion accounts, and few readings around Christmas) would likewise be expanded. Also, I included John 1:1-14 on the fifth day of Christmas, though traditionally it was the reading for the Mass of the Day on Christmas (since Christmas had three Masses). I needed to put it somewhere in my chart, but a real lectionary would probably replace it with something else as redundant.

Got My Hopes Up, but Nope.

Nope. It never happened. Got my hopes up, though. Back to despondency, eh?

If It's True, He's Won Me Over!!

I saw this article this morning. If it's true (and some are telling a different story), my feelings have totally turned from a sort of deep doubt and suspicion and cynicism, even dread, that began when I saw him come out without the mozzetta and then heard about all these showy, seemingly self-conscious, gestures of "humility" being touted...into something like elation. If this is true, then I am exuberant and love this guy now:

So when the appearance of a disgraced cardinal threatened to cast a shadow over his first engagement, Francis I made sure it couldn’t happen again – by banning him from his own church.

Cardinal Bernard Law resigned as Archbishop of Boston in 2002, after being accused of actively covering up for a litany of paedophile priests.’

Despite the scandal which exploded to engulf the entire church, he was given an honorary position at the Basilica Santa Maria Maggiore, in Rome.

Though now retired, the cardinal still enjoys a grace and favour apartment in the cathedral complex.

So hearing that the new Pope was offering prayers at the very same church, it seems he couldn’t resist a discreet peek.

But when Pope Francis recognised him, he immediately ordered that Law be removed, according to Italian media reports. He went on to command: ‘He is not to come to this church any more.’

One of the new Pope’s first acts will be to arrange new ‘cloistered’ accommodation for the disgraced cardinal, the Italian daily, Il Fatto Quotidiano, reported.

I still have deep reservations and disagreements on the liturgical and aesthetic and "image" question, of course. But as Shawn Tribe said on New Liturgical Movement this morning, though the absolutely abrupt change in style apparent even just in his first public liturgy is disconcerting, the new liturgical movement does not have the Pope as its be-all and end-all. As strong public example from the Pope is nice, but maybe that needs to take a backseat at the highest levels to the questions of cleaning up the Church, administrative reform, personnel overall, spiritual purity, and salvaging things from the scandal and PR-nightmare. His won't be a terribly long pontificate, anyway, and maybe these things needs to be prioritized first (even if sacrificing liturgical excellence for a time).

As long as he doesn't revoke Summorum Pontificum or persecuted traditionalists on the ground, this doesn't change much for any of us personally in our Old Rite venues or private prayer lives (though reconciliation of the SSPX is out of the question now; unless, ironically, he "gets tough" with them and they actually respond to that sort of stern discipline).

But this act with Cardinal Law is really heartening, inspiring even. My heart literally leapt for joy and I got giddy. For so long this blog has expressed exasperation that the previous popes, even though they are absolute monarchs, seemed unwilling to institute real change though all it would take was a word from their mouths or a stroke of their pen, seemed to instead pussyfoot diplomatically around actually punishing anyone or sacking anyone or stepping on any toes, doing all this weird passive-aggressive back-room gradualist game playing. I mean, it's not like they're Presidents who need to worry about getting the support of Congressmen.

On the other hand, Pope Francis, just off the cuff, says, "Get him out of here, and he's not to come back!" and is ordering him into cloister after 10 years of getting away with his criminal negligence! Amazing! If it's true, I really really like him now, and he's totally converted me from my initial skepticism.