What about those of us who just whisper it?
The ordinary way to celebrate the Office is to sing it. This is not to say that the canonically mandated practice in the 1962 (and before) books of at least mouthing the words, or praying the Office in complete silence (as is allowed in the
LOTH) has no subjective merit, but neither method (i.e.: mouthing words or silence) are the liturgical ideal.
Bakuryokuso, that's a huge question you ask. In short I dislike the 1910-1962 Office because its Psalm schema has an artificial feel to it. The Psalms of Prime and Compline just seem dumped into where they are. Additionally, while it was simplified from its earlier incarnations, the books were still far too complicated for laymen to start saying in large numbers. The selections at Mains were too halting and short. The only real plus I see it the
BR is the use of the full and unedited Psalter, prayed in full weekly. The
LOTH suffers from editorial stupidity (e.g.: Compline was thrown together at the last second. Somehow, almost unbelievably, the Consilium just forgot about writing Compline(!) until someone realized, “opps;” only half of the original selections for the Office of Readings were ever published throughout the Universal Church). The 50+ Psalm verses, and three full Psalms which are missing from the modern Office is a disgrace, as is the loss of the Latin language as the ordinary way to celebrate the ritual prayer. On the plus side, the
LOTH was and is immensely helpful in dispelling the idea – still entrenched in traditional parishes, much to the frustration of traditional clergy – that the Office is “the priest’s thing.” The Divine Office is the prayer of everyone, and we should be on our knees thanking God that the horrible idea of the Prayer of the Church being only for the clergy is going the way of New Coke. Additionally the simplified “prayer load,” and the thematic placement of the Psalms in the Psalter is a plus for the
LOTH.
