The Divine Office | Page 9

needed
not, nor could they have in those bookless days, a psalter script. In the
third century, morning, evening, and night offices are mentioned.
Compline was in existence in the time of St. Benedict. "From the
seventh century onwards, ecclesiastical writers, papal decrees and
conciliar decrees recognise the eight parts of the office, which we have
seen took shape during the sixth century, and regard their recitation by
priests and monks as enjoined by positive law. During this period, or at
least at its commencement, Lauds and Vespers alone had a clearly
defined structure and followed a definite arrangement. As far as we can
see, St. Gregory arranged the little hours for Sunday only, and their
arrangement for week days was left to the care of the bishops and
metropolitans, or even of abbots. This was also the case, in many
instances, with regard to Matins, for the number of psalms to be recited
thereat was not definitely fixed. As regards the little hours--Prime,
Terce, Sext, None and Compline--the freedom of the competent
ecclesiastical authorities was as yet unconfined by canonical
restrictions. Chrodegang (766) was first to follow the usages of the
Benedictines of the Roman Basilica, in prescribing for secular clergy
the celebration at Prime of the officium Capituli (_i.e._, the reunion in
the chapter for reading the rule or, on certain days, the writings and
homilies of the Fathers). The rest of the chapter--_i.e._, all that follows
the confiteor in Prime as a preparation for the work of the day, seems to
have been composed in the ninth century.... Under Charlemagne and
his successors variations in the canonical hours completely
disappeared" (Baudot, _op. cit._, pp. 63-65).

On this foundation was built up the Office, to which additions were
made, and of which reforms were effected, up to our own time.
"For us, traditional liturgy is represented by the Roman Breviary of
Urban VIII., a book which constitutes for us a Vulgate of the Roman
Office.... The thing which renders this Vulgate of 1632 precious to us is
that, thanks to the wisdom of Paul IV., Pius V., and Clement VIII., the
differences between it and the Breviary of the Roman Curia of the
thirteenth century are mere differences of detail: the substantial identity
of the two is beyond dispute. The Breviary of Urban VIII. is the lineal
descendant of the Breviary of Innocent III. And the latter in its turn is
the legitimate descendant of the Roman canonical Office, as it was
celebrated in the basilica of St. Peter at the end of the eighth century,
such as it had gradually come to be in the course of the seventh and
eighth centuries, a genuinely Roman combination of various elements,
some of them Roman and some not, but of which some, at all events,
go back to the very beginnings of the Catholic religion" (Battifol, _op.
cit._, p. 353).
CHAPTER III.
EXCELLENCE OF THE ROMAN BREVIARY--THE ESTEEM
WHICH WE SHOULD HAVE FOR THE BOOK ITSELF.
The Roman Breviary is excellent, firstly, in itself; and, secondly, in
comparison with all other breviaries.
It is excellent in itself, in its antiquity, for in substance it goes back to
the first ages of Christianity. It is excellent, in its author, for it has been
constructed and imposed as an obligation by the supreme pontiffs, the
vicars of Jesus Christ, the supreme pastors of the whole Church. It is
excellent, in its perpetuity, for it has come down to us through all the
ages without fundamental change. It is excellent in its universality, in
its doctrine, in the efficacy of its prayer, the official prayer of the
Church. It is excellent in the matter of which it is built up, being
composed of Sacred Scripture, the words of the Fathers and the lives of
God's saints. It is excellent in its style and in its form for the parts of

each hour; the antiphons, psalms, canticles, hymns, versicles, follow
one another in splendid harmony.
The opinions and praises of the saints who dwelt on this matter of the
Breviary would fill a volume. Every priest has met with many such
eulogies in his reading. Newman's words are very striking. "There is,"
he wrote, "so much of excellence and beauty in the services of the
Breviary, that were it skilfully set before the Protestants, by Romanistic
controversialists, as the book of devotions received by their
communion, it would undoubtedly raise a prejudice in their favour, if
he were ignorant of the case and but ordinarily candid and
unprejudiced.... In a word, it will be attempted to wrest a weapon out of
our adversaries' hands, who have in this, as in many other instances,
appropriated to themselves a treasure" (Newman, Tracts for the Times,
No. 275, _The Roman Breviary_). This tract raised a storm amongst
Newman's