The Liturgy of the Hours in the Life of the Parish

by John Schnakenberg

Truly one of the great gems of the Second Vatican Council is the revised Liturgy of the Hours, known also as the Divine Office. Surprisingly, it remains one of the most under-appreciated components of the reformed liturgical rites. Considering the potential value of the Hours for places where daily Mass is infrequent or non-existent, it is a mystery why its riches are not more fully explored. Parish pastors may be pleased to discover that the Divine Office offers a way to deepen the liturgical life of their parish, while also fulfilling a goal of the conciliar reform. Namely, restoring the Hours to their proper place as a liturgical celebration of the Christian faithful.

An ancient form of prayer restored
The first few centuries after Christ witnessed the birth of Christian ritual and liturgy. The legalization of Christianity under Constantine transformed these liturgical seeds into forms that have largely endured the millennia. Among this heritage from the early Church can be found the custom of praying at fixed times, known as Horae or “Hours.” Christian communities lived St. Paul’s exhortation to “pray constantly” in this most noteworthy manner.¹ As this form of prayer matured, Morning Prayer (Lauds) and Evening Prayer (Vespers) became the liturgical method through which the Christian faithful sanctified each new day. Josef Jungmann, perhaps the most noted liturgist of the 20th century, observes that unlike the present day, “these Horae came to be regarded not so much as a choir prayer for clerics as a religious service for the laity.”² In union with the bishop – with the celebration occurring at his church – these prayers united the entire Christian community in a common act of daily worship.

At the heart of these prayers were the Psalms of the Hebrew Scriptures. Day by day the faithful probed deeper into their meaning, now made more manifest in the light of Christian revelation. Numerous references to Christ were observed in the Psalms, including the prefiguration of His Divine Nature (“from the womb before the dawn I begot you”) and His crucifixion (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).³ Eminently suited to prayer, the Psalms had been quoted by Christ more than any other book, with the sole exception of Isaiah. To pray the Psalms was to pray as Christ had. The wide variety of psalms, expressing the whole range of human emotions, provided the early Christians with a collection of prayers satisfying nearly every need and occasion. Psalm 141, for example, became the common prayer for evenings: “Let my prayer arise before you like incense, the raising of my hands like an evening oblation.”⁴ These prayers at fixed times were rightly understood to be the prayers of the whole Church as the people of God. In the days before daily Mass, Christians expressed themselves liturgically in this manner as an extension of Sunday’s celebration. Each day of the week was sanctified through these prayers, and the greater sanctification of those who participated was hopefully accomplished as well.

The Hours, however, underwent a complex and highly textured evolution from the end of patristic period up until the Second Vatican Council. Distinguished liturgical scholar Robert Taft, S.J., traces this development in The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West, a truly definitive work on an often overlooked topic. Clearly, the dominant trend in the Western Church was a corrosive “privatization” of the Hours into a purely clerical prayer. The common “cathedral” office, where the bishop led his flock in public prayer, suffered a severe decline over the centuries. Monastic influences contributed to this by intensifying the Hours into longer and more time-consuming functions.⁵ Though suitable for monastic life, the resulting Office was among the first things jettisoned when the strictly apostolic religious were born (the Jesuits being one of the first and most notable examples).⁶ Understandably, heavy choral burdens were viewed as too constricting for missionary and activist orders. Praying all 150 Psalms a week in choir – as was the traditional norm – required a substantial portion of the day. Instead, by opting for private celebration, the ‘obligation’ of the Hours was turned into a much quicker affair.

Even earlier, however, the rise of the parish church played a role in the Hours’ decline.⁷ These smaller parochial outposts, staffed by individual priests rather than large cathedral communities, lacked the clerical manpower for public celebrations of the Hours. As parishes became the basic cell of the Catholic Church, the private Office became the pastoral way to escape this otherwise heavy burden.⁸ This permitted priests to care for the other needs of their congregation, but it was not without consequences. Taft provides an excellent analysis of the result:

Communal prayer, once the only way, is now reduced to the better way to pray the hours. And what was once the obligation of the entire Christian community in solidum . . . has now become an individual, personal obligation of the clergy as such.⁹

Not only did the Hours fall subject to this trend, the Breviary (the book containing the Hours) became synonymous with the very notion of private clerical prayer. With the death of the public Office – at least as far as the Christian laity were concerned – devotional creativity filled much of the resulting void. This was not altogether a bad thing. The Rosary is an example of this par excellence. The 150 Hail Marys of the Rosary emerged, at least partially, as a lay alternative to the 150 Psalms of the Divine Office.¹⁰ Daily Mass can also be included among the beneficial “devotional” developments. However, there was the corresponding loss of the Psalms as a liturgical form of prayer. The ‘sanctification of time’ also lost its place in Christian worship, since the Divine Office had been its most profound expression. For the laity at least, the beginning and ending of each day no longer had any dedicated ritual.

Despite reforms in the ensuing centuries, the Hours remained the province of clergy and religious, until the Second Vatican Council ushered in a new approach. Following the Council, the Liturgy of the Hours underwent a restoration to bring it into line with principals annunciated in Sacrosanctum Concilium. One aim of this revision was to return the Hours to their rightful place as a public celebration. Indeed, the Council called upon “Pastors of souls to see to it that the chief hours, especially Vespers, are celebrated in common in church on Sundays and the more solemn feasts.”¹¹ This directive envisioned the laity taking an active part in the celebration. The Constitution further stated, “the laity too, are encouraged to recite the divine office, either with priests, among themselves, or even individually.”¹² Practical steps were outlined when the General Instruction on the Liturgy of the Hours (GILH) was issued, amplifying the importance of public celebration:

Whenever possible, other groups of the faithful should celebrate the liturgy of the hours communally in church. This especially applies to parishes – the cells of the dioceses, established under their pastors, taking the place of the bishop; ‘they represent in some degree the visible Church established throughout the world.’¹³

The focus on the parish church as a proper place for the Hours called for a reversal of long ingrained assumptions. The parish, a contributor to the death of the communal Hours, was now singled out as a place for its rebirth. Since, as the Instruction indicates, parishes represent the visible Church, the Hours must be considered their prayer as well. Parishes were called upon specifically to integrate the revised (and simplified) Office into their daily liturgical life. This call remains largely overlooked and unheeded. However, if the burdensome nature of the Office led to its abandonment, the question must be asked: Has anything changed? The answer, it seems, is yes.

Among the bright spots of the liturgical reform was the way it confronted longstanding problems with the Divine Office.¹⁴ The reformers were pessimistic about lay participation in the Hours, but they (thankfully) did not lose sight of this goal. In an outline of proposed changes submitted to Pope Paul VI, the following was communicated about the Divine Office:

The basic problem which we face today . . . is this: How is the Divine Office, while continuing to be the prayer chiefly of the clergy and religious, to be also accessible to the faithful, so that they may find in it, not something that is, as it were, a concession to them, but rather the exercise of a function that truly belongs to them as members of the praying ecclesial community?¹⁵

The result of this inquiry, the revised Liturgia Horarum, materialized only after long and intensive study. What changes were directed at making the Hours more suitable for lay participation? Perhaps the most pastorally significant was the restructuring of the Psalter. Rather than praying all 150 psalms each week, a more manageable 4-week cycle was established. The Hours were also more carefully arranged according to when they would be prayed. This allowed them to be more personal in nature, since they took into account the time of day and the liturgical season. Streamlining the structure added logical consistency (eg. a hymn now opened each Hour, rather than popping-up in middle). Other changes, such as the elimination of the additional morning hour of Prime, gave Lauds and Vespers their rightful place as the ‘hinges’ of the liturgical day. Finally, the reorganized Office of Readings (formally Matins) injected new lifeblood into the rotation of biblical and patristic readings, which could now be celebrated at any point during the day.

Despite these changes, greater lay participation in the Office was probably unlikely if Latin remained the only permissible language. The reformers envisioned full translations of the Office into the vernacular languages, as was already taking place with the Mass. Evidently, Paul VI did have reservations about the strong push for the vernacular.¹⁶ The monastic ideal of rising early to chant the Psalms in Latin was especially close to his heart. He was made aware, however, of the persistent desire for vernacular celebration, even in monastic communities.¹⁷ Many priests had simply abandoned the Divine Office for lack of spiritual profit, and the requirement to pray in Latin was seen as part of the problem. When the vernacular was fully conceded, it was therefore done with the hope of sparking a renewed devotion to the Hours. Time has shown much more is also needed.

Paul VI promulgated of the revised Office in 1971. The Bishops were called upon “to see to the preparation of editions of this liturgical work in the vernacular and . . . to fix the date when the vernacular editions may or must be used, either in whole or in part.”¹⁸ This preparation resulted in the new vernacular editions, which assumed their place in the regular spiritual diet of priests and religious. Until recently, however, the parish laity have had only minimal contact with the new Office. Although publishers have issued editions of the Hours designed for the laity, parishes have been slow to take the lead. Religious communities that celebrate the Hours are often open to the public, but this reaches only the highly inclined and/or motivated. The real parish-level adoption of the Hours, envisioned by the Council and the GILH, is only beginning to show signs of life.

The value for contemporary parishes
Clearly, the momentum following the liturgical reform centered on the revised rites of the Mass. This is reasonable, considering the effort that was needed to implement such changes. The Liturgy of the Hours was therefore treated as peripheral to the renewed liturgical life of the parish. In the over twenty-five years that have passed, however, only a few parishes have taken it upon themselves to provide the laity with greater access to the Divine Office.

There are good reasons why this should begin to change. Unlike the Mass, the Liturgy of the Hours can be celebrated by ordained clergy or by the laity themselves. A minimally trained layperson, it would seem, could handle the celebration of Morning Prayer, Evening Prayer, or any other hours of the Divine Office. Likewise, permanent deacons, who play an increasing role in parish life, are especially suited to be leaders of these liturgical celebrations. An option also exists to add a homily to the Office, which suits the role of the deacon perfectly. One of the great characteristics of the GILH is the flexibility it permits, and at the parish level, these options should be explored.

Care, of course, always needs to be taken to prevent any confusion about the differing purposes of the Divine Office and the Mass. The Hours cannot substitute for the Eucharist by any means, but they can serve as a liturgical encounter with God in places where this would be otherwise impossible.

We can envision, for example, a typical parish that may have an insufficient number of priests to sustain all of its daily Masses. Rather than simply eliminating a daily Mass, the possibility of introducing the Hours should be explored. Consider, for instance, utilizing a deacon or layperson to lead an appropriate part of the Office during that time (ie. Lauds, Vespers, or the Office of Readings). This succeeds in both expanding the liturgical repertoire of the parish and maintaining a timeslot that has proven itself viable with the parish’s congregation. Those who might be unable to attend other daily Masses can at least take part in this form of the Church’s liturgy. In this way, the Liturgy of the Hours could be used – from a very utilitarian point of view – to plug the voids that may develop in places where the availability of clergy has declined.

Far more preferable, of course, would be the adoption of Lauds and/or Vespers as part of the regular liturgical life of the parish. The GILH proclaims the value in this, declaring that the Office provides “excellent preparation for the celebration of the eucharist itself”.¹⁹ Here too the laity could be tapped as potential leaders for daily celebrations, while priests and/or deacons might lead the office on Sundays and more solemn occasions. This is surely in line with the vision of the Council, and could only serve to provide more spiritual nourishment for the laity. If desired, the Hours could be expanded by combining the Office of Readings with Lauds or Vespers. The laity would then encounter the writings of the Church Fathers, who have heretofore gone unheard in most parishes.

If the Hours are ever to outgrow their current niche, it will be parish pastors and the laity who lead the way. There is no reason why today’s laity cannot begin the process of adding these ancient prayers to their current parish’s schedule. Much like with Perpetual Adoration, a few dedicated souls can effect a real change in parish life. The Vatican Council has given the Church a true gift in the new Office. It is a gift of prayer drawn from the early Church, and it is a gift waiting to be opened.

Concluding note: John Paul II and the promotion of the Hours
In recent months, Pope John Paul II has lead a catechesis on the psalms and canticles of the Office. His aim is to “to encourage and help all to pray with the same words used by Jesus, which have been present for thousands of years in the prayer of Israel and of the Church.”²⁰ He has done this through several of his General Audiences, held each Wednesday at the Vatican. Inaugurating this catechesis, the Pope observed, “It is an encouraging fact that, both in parishes and in ecclesial gatherings, many lay people have learned to appreciate [the Liturgy of the Hours].”²¹

Devotion to the Office does appear to be growing, although this can be difficult to measure. The information available has been greatly enriched by the efforts of the Pope and others who have taken the lead. The Archdiocese of New York, for example, boasts impressive Internet resources, made available through their Liturgical Commission.²² Their website lists roughly 60 parishes offering the Hours in the New York area. Other budding Internet resources such as universalis.com and liturgyhours.org even offer the complete texts – calculated daily – for downloading and printing. Even the most visionary of the Council’s reformers probably did not contemplate the day of Point-and-Click Prayer!

We can hope that these efforts are signs of a renewed interest in the Hours. In that regard, it is interesting to note that the Vatican Bookstore recently issued a complete 4-volumn reprint of the Latin Breviary. No one expects a sudden resurgence of the Latin Office anytime soon, but it would seem the great “Prayer of the Church” is staging its comeback on all fronts. The relatively new Catechism of the Catholic Church does not ignore the Hours either. Instead, it too encourages that the Hours “become the prayer of the whole People of God.”²³

As with many things in the Church, the parish will be where the faithful encounter (or do not encounter) the richness of liturgical tradition. The American bishops, for their part, included considerations for the Hours in Built of Living Stones: Art, Architecture, and Worship. These newly issued guidelines offer the observation that “many parishes are rediscovering the spiritual beauty of the Hours and are including Morning or Evening Prayer in their daily liturgical life.”²⁴ To the extent they are able, we can hope parish pastors will increasingly “awake the dawn” with more frequent celebrations of the Divine Office.²⁵ As we have already noted, this should not simply be another task for an already overburdened clergy. Good planning and a little lay training can go a long way towards making the Hours a reality. The Hours offer a real opportunity to introduce the laity to a fountain of spiritual nourishment from which clerics already drink. Once given a taste, we may be surprised to see more people fulfilling the ancient call of the Psalmist:

Praise, O servants of the Lord,
praise the name of the Lord!
May the name of the Lord be blessed
both now and for evermore!
From the rising of the sun to its setting
praised be the name of the Lord!26

Endnotes

1 Thes 5:17, cf. Lk 18:1; also cf. CCC, no. 1174.
2 Josef A. Jungmann, Christian Prayer Through the Centuries trans. John Coyne, S.J. (New York: Paulist Press, 1978): 28.
3 Psalm 110:3; Psalm 22:2. All psalm translations from The Psalms: A New Translation (England: The Grail, 1963), as used in the Liturgy of the Hours.
4 Robert Taft, SJ. The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: The Origins of the Divine Office and Its Meaning For Today (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1986): 16, et passim.; Psalm 141: 2. An interesting continuity can be found with the modern Office, which locates Psalm 141 at the beginning of the Sunday Vigil (Evening Prayer I) for Week I of the Psalter.
5 Cf. ibid., p. 158, et passim.
6 This is not to suggest that orders founded earlier (e.g., the Dominicans and Franciscans) are not apostolic. Quite the contrary! Rather, these religious blend monastic and apostolic elements into a type of daily harmony. The Jesuits preferred a different approach, dispensing with the former and specializing upon the latter. The contrast between these religious is a wonderful example of the diversity of charisms within the Church.
7 Taft, pp. 298-9.
8 ibid.
9 ibid., p. 300.
10 For an excellent short summary of the Rosary’s history, see William A. Hinnebusch, O.P. The Rosary, fwd. by Romanus Cessario, OP (New York: Dominican Province of New York, 1996).
11 Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy” (Sacrosanctum Concilium), in The Documents of Vatican II, Walter M. Abbot, SJ gen. ed. (New York: America Press, 1966): no. 100.
12 ibid., no. 100.
13 Congregation for Divine Worship, General Instruction on the Liturgy of the Hours (1971): no. 21.
14 This is not to suggest the liturgical reform always produced the best results in every instance. It did, however, squarely address the liturgical concerns of the times—and often did so with both copious scholarship and a pastoral mindset.
15 Quoted in Annibale Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy: 1948-1975 trans. Matthew J. O’Connell (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1990): p. 501.
16 ibid., pp. 559-565.
17 ibid., p. 564.
18 Paul VI, Laudis Canticum.
19 GILH, no. 12.
20 Pope John Paul II, General Audience, 28 March 2001. Zenit translation.
21 ibid.
22 Available at http://liturgyny.catholic.org/ lithours.htm
23 Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition (Washington: United States Catholic Conference, 2000), no. 1175.
24 United States Catholic Conference, Built of Living Stones: Art, Architecture, and Worship. (Washington: United States Catholic Conference, 2000): Chapter II.
25 From Psalm 57; used at Thursday’s Morning Prayer in Week I and at Thursday’s Daytime Prayer in Week II.

This item 6845 digitally provided courtesy of CatholicCulture.org