Follow up to last PR

[FAJ-Munich]

List of fixes:

• for Officium parvum:

  the Minor Hours have Sunday's Psalms on Thursday.
  in Terce and Vespers, the same Capitulum doesn't have all the accents
  in Vespers, Comm. Omn. Sanct., in Versicle, an accent is missing
  The Collects have always short conclusions
  R.br. in Lauds and Vespers remains the same, and no Allelúia is added.
  the Latin version of Salve isn't divided in the middle, but the Czech one is

• for commemoratio altovadensis:

  for Vigils, the Antiphon is O admirábile commércium. ℣. Speciósa facta es., both from Lauds.
  for Lauds, it's the Benedictus Antiphon, Beáta Dei Génitrix María.

• in general:

  this word is always written as Allelúia, never with a "j".

• for the Roman and Benedictine:

  • no R.br. in Benedictine C12 Lauds and Vespers
  • C12 in Paschal tide

---

Apart from that before:

Actually no, they still have the [Ant Laudes] from the Sunday, no exception until the Christmas Eve (24. Dec). But the Benedictus Antiphons are proper, and the exceptions for St. Thomas and 23. Dec. are the same as in the Roman Rite, same with the O Antiphons.

I have attempted to fix, yet not tested.

However, for the time being, if 29. or 31. Dec. fall on Sunday, in both occurrence and concurrence, the Sunday wins and the MM. min. feasts of St. Thomas Beckett or St. Silvester are only commemorated. And - so far - only the Christmas Octave is kept.

Added it to the transfer tables; the actual propers might still be quite off

This is quite interesting, the Sunday was important then.
In the Cistercian rite, the Sunday in Christmas Octave was also used on 5. Jan., if it fell on Sunday 🙂 But otherwise it was not really important at all in Christmastide.

You've made me read the rubrics for January 5 in the 1885 Cistercian book. This is amazing! Just like the Sunday within the Octave has only been kept if it fell on December 30 (otherwise this was the 6th day within the Octave), the "Second Sunday of Christmas" has only been kept if it fell on January 5, otherwise the Vigilia Epiphania had a ferial type office just like Dec 30.
WOW!
For the Roman and Benedictine, January 5 has always been the Sunday office: for no other day in that week has been free: Jan 1, 6, and 7 are naturally occupied and Jan 2 through 4 has been impeded by the Octave Days of Ss. Stephanus, Joannes et Innocentes. However, that Sunday never had the name "Dominica secunda Nativitatis" but "Vigilia Epiphaniæ" given its fixed location: this, I think, is the biggest blunder of the whole 1955 butchering with the decree cancelling almost all Vigils and noboday objecting that the Vigil of the Epiphany is not a Vigil but a Sunday office: Semiduplex in rank, white paraments, and with first Vespers.

Yes, understandable, however this, for the current Altovadum version, is unfortunately not correct. Sunday wins over MM. min. in concurrence as well as in occurrence and the only "exception" is a feast on Saturday, that quite logically replaces the Saturday Ferial Psalms with the Festive ones... But this was the other way around - St. John Chrysostom comes on Monday, and the Sunday is only commemorated.

Attempted to implement but we can only really test it once we have filled the Kalendarium. the Cistercian logic is almost like the Tridentine version. Divino Afflatu has made the blunder to introduce ferial Saturday psalms for I. Vespers of Sunday even when a feast on Saturday was still to be commemorated in the Sunday office. The later only used to start "A capitulo" similar to the Simplex feasts. Sometimes it is quite frustratring, having analysed all these different versions with the help of the divinum-officium project and seeing how perfect everything was in the past and each reform just punched more and more holes in this work of divine art. There would have been so many easier solutions to the problems that had arisen by the early 1900s.

---

and as always, merged the upstream ...

[FAJ-Munich]

I've thought about the second Sunday of the nativity aka Vigilia Epiphaniæ question some more:
This year, commemorating both would be a redundancy as these are actually the same offices.
I guess in other years when Jan 5 is on a Feria, the office on that day should be as described in the books. The question remains whether in those years, where Sunday is on Jan 2 through 4, it makes sense to commemorate it in the office of the Most Holy Name?
The Roman doesn't. The Benedictine 1930 also doesn't but has Jan 5 as fully dominical every year. The Benedictine 1963 does have the second Sunday albeit they dropped the celebration of the Most Holy Name in anticipation of what came in 1969 and had to fill the gap.

[Augustinus-Altovadensis]

List of fixes:
...

Everything works!

I have noticed some more Kleinigkeiten in the Off. Parvum de Beata:

• in the Psalm Veníte, exultémus Dómino. for Matins, in the Czech version, there is (*poklekneme*) in place of (genuflectitur), but it doesn't convert to small red text anymore. The same goes for the main Office.
• in R. br. for Lauds, the Verse is only "Benedícta tu in muliéribus." The same goes for Sabb. de Beáta.
• in the header, it says "Officium Parvum Beatæ Maríæ Virginis ~ Serm. maj." for example. The rank of the feast has nothing to do with the Off. Parvum, therefore if there is a simple way, the rank should be deleted. Or it could show the feast of the day, and below, as a subtitle, could be "Officium Parvum Beatæ Maríæ Virginis".
• in Vespers, Ant. ad Magnificat ends after ...devóto femíneo sexu. in the Cistercian Rite. The same goes for every other instance of this Antiphon, in C10 and C11 (and it's spelled fœmíneo, but that's just a small detail).
• More broadly: it would be great, if the page header somewhere said the day of week. And maybe the date. Simply to check, whether the correct page has been loaded. I can change the date in the input field without applying it, so this simple check might be a good idea.

Apart from that before:

Actually no, they still have the [Ant Laudes] from the Sunday, no exception until the Christmas Eve (24. Dec). But the Benedictus Antiphons are proper, and the exceptions for St. Thomas and 23. Dec. are the same as in the Roman Rite, same with the O Antiphons.

I have attempted to fix, yet not tested.

For Lauds it works.

However, for the time being, if 29. or 31. Dec. fall on Sunday, in both occurrence and concurrence, the Sunday wins and the MM. min. feasts of St. Thomas Beckett or St. Silvester are only commemorated. And - so far - only the Christmas Octave is kept.

Added it to the transfer tables; the actual propers might still be quite off

The occurrence works fine, but currently, in Vespers on 29. Dec. 2024, the main feast is the Holy Innocents, which is fine, but then the first Commemoration is from St. Thomas Becket, which is wrong. But it's not the only thing wrong here, e.g. it shows a Commemoration of Octave SS. Innocentium on the very feast...

... However, that Sunday never had the name "Dominica secunda Nativitatis" but "Vigilia Epiphaniæ" given its fixed location: this, I think, is the biggest blunder of the whole 1955 butchering with the decree cancelling almost all Vigils and nobody objecting that the Vigil of the Epiphany is not a Vigil but a Sunday office: Semiduplex in rank, white paraments, and with first Vespers.

Yes, it's still called Vigilia Epiphaniae, but it uses the texts from Die vj./Sunday in Christmas Octave, and if it's a Sunday, it has first Vespers and 3 Nocturns with 12 Lessons. And no matter on what day it falls, it's always a mixture of Antiphons from Feria/Sunday with Die vj./Sunday in Oct. Nat.

Attempted to implement but we can only really test it once we have filled the Kalendarium. the Cistercian logic is almost like the Tridentine version. Divino Afflatu has made the blunder to introduce ferial Saturday psalms for I. Vespers of Sunday even when a feast on Saturday was still to be commemorated in the Sunday office. The later only used to start "A capitulo" similar to the Simplex feasts.

I tested it on above mentioned date and it works fine. For more, we need more feasts.

BTW, Suffragium de Beata shows now this in the end: " $Amen ℟. Amen."

Sometimes it is quite frustratring, having analysed all these different versions with the help of the divinum-officium project and seeing how perfect everything was in the past and each reform just punched more and more holes in this work of divine art. There would have been so many easier solutions to the problems that had arisen by the early 1900s.

Tell me about that... I'm glad to see religious communities trying to go back to a state that actually makes sense. I hope that in a reasonable time, the only difference between 1951 and Altovadum Cistercian Rite will be the Calendar... Current state of the Christmastide is quite strange.

and as always, merged the upstream ...
Nice!

[Augustinus-Altovadensis]

I've thought about the second Sunday of the nativity aka Vigilia Epiphaniæ question some more: This year, commemorating both would be a redundancy as these are actually the same offices. I guess in other years when Jan 5 is on a Feria, the office on that day should be as described in the books. The question remains whether in those years, where Sunday is on Jan 2 through 4, it makes sense to commemorate it in the office of the Most Holy Name? The Roman doesn't. The Benedictine 1930 also doesn't but has Jan 5 as fully dominical every year. The Benedictine 1963 does have the second Sunday albeit they dropped the celebration of the Most Holy Name in anticipation of what came in 1969 and had to fill the gap.

Yes, that's a good question. Of course, "both" won't be commemorated, as it's still the Vigilia Epiphaniae, it only uses the texts from Die vj./Dom. in Oct. Nat. So it's still one office. In the old Cistercian Directorium Divini Officii, it is always designated as Dominica vacans, and it doesn't have proper texts. And as such, it wouldn't be commemorated on Jan 2 through 4, if it falls on Sunday. And anyway, since 1950, it would be celebrated as the Most Holy Name. Between 1950 and 1955, there wasn't any instance of Vigilia Epiphaniae on Sunday, therefore I cannot check, but before that, e.g. in 1930, the Vigil was celebrated, although it fell on Sunday, and following this logic, I (along with the Brothers from Hohenfurth) would definitely commemorate in on the Most Holy Name, but only as Vigilia Epiphaniae, and only on Sunday.

After 1956/7 (I didn't find the appropriate part in 1956 Directory, as from the copy in Heiligenkreuz someone tore out pages 1-11...), the other Octaves were abolished, Vigilia Epiphaniae abolished, so the Most Holy Name doesn't have any commemorations, not even on 5. Jan. in Vespers from Epiphany. And interesting is, that even before that, if the Most Holy Name was celebrated on 2. Jan., it didn't have any first Vespers, but the Octave of St. Stephen was commemorated. Strange.

[FAJ-Munich]

Your description of the Cistercian practice of the 1950s sounds to me like they simply adopted the Roman rubrics by the letter without taking care of the Cistercian specifities.
Agreed with you're description as above. I'll adopt the Tabulae accordingly for both versions.