Needed LOTH Resources

I’m also a bit dismayed to discover that the First Reading in the Office of Readings is only a link to the verses in the preferred Bible. I assume that this is also due to restrictions but it feels like an unfinished product. I would have bought Verbum 9 anyway so I’m not clamoring for a refund. But if I had bought it separately, I would have been annoyed.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167080#Comment_1167080

Here’s an example. The text of the First Reading for today is entirely absent except for the link.

I’d like something like what you did with the Lectionary:

The Missal is a closer match to the functionality required to make a "coherent" LOTH. An equivalent homepage card for LOTH would most likely be a link to the starting point for each each of the hours and for the offeratory.

First Reading in the Office of Readings is only a link to the verses in the preferred Bible.

I am certain that the copyright for the Bible text is a separate copyright than that for the LOTH. The contract for the rights to the LOTH probably did not include rights to the Bible text. I am toying with possibilities that can be shared that would make the LOTH behave more like the Universalis version ... it is one of those "almost simple" problems where most of it is easily done and then there are the thorny, rally thorny, parts.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167119#Comment_1167119

I’d like something like what you did with the Lectionary:

The Missal is a closer match to the functionality required to make a "coherent" LOTH. An equivalent homepage card for LOTH would most likely be a link to the starting point for each each of the hours and for the offeratory.

First Reading in the Office of Readings is only a link to the verses in the preferred Bible.

I am certain that the copyright for the Bible text is a separate copyright than that for the LOTH. The contract for the rights to the LOTH probably did not include rights to the Bible text. I am toying with possibilities that can be shared that would make the LOTH behave more like the Universalis version ... it is one of those "almost simple" problems where most of it is easily done and then there are the thorny, rally thorny, parts.

Yes, I assume this was due to restrictions. I recall that the “Divine Office“ app ran into problems.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167120#Comment_1167120

The current implementation makes the same demands on the user as purchasing the four volumes in dead tree format. It is reasonably easy to set up bookmarks as if they were ribbons ... and where we any of us be in the Missal or LOTH without ribbons? I have a couple of ideas as to how to make them more novice friendly without running into copyright issues as I am not Faithlife. But I'm in the middle of some other things so I won't be getting to it immediately ...

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167119#Comment_1167119

I am certain that the copyright for the Bible text is a separate copyright than that for the LOTH.

It might also be nice if we could set one Bible to link with the LOTH and another as our "favorite" one without having to reset "favorite bible" every time we use LOTH

[[and maybe also link Bibles to other resources. Again with out having to reset "favorite bible" every time]]

[[or Just give us a command that sets ""favorite bible" making it real easy to change as maybe what we want is "favorite bible" for this resource]]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167119#Comment_1167119

An equivalent homepage card for LOTH would most likely be a link to the starting point for each each of the hours and for the offeratory.

There is no Offertory in LotH.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167436#Comment_1167436

I am certain that the copyright for the Bible text is a separate copyright than that for the LOTH.

It might also be nice if we could set one Bible to link with the LOTH and another as our "favorite" one without having to reset "favorite bible" every time we use LOTH

[[and maybe also link Bibles to other resources. Again with out having to reset "favorite bible" every time]]

[[or Just give us a command that sets ""favorite bible" making it real easy to change as maybe what we want is "favorite bible" for this resource]]

I‘m a bit perplexed about the decision to release the set this way. If the Bible readings are just links to our preferred Bible, instead of the approved ICEL text, then I don’t think it can be considered a complete product or one approved for official use. Unless I’m overlooking something.

Kevin Clemens

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167436#Comment_1167436

It might also be nice if we could set one Bible to link with the LOTH and another as our "favorite" one without having to reset "favorite bible" every time we use LOTH

Would creating a custom layout for LOTH with the desired Bible work? On said Bible, you could set "Send Hyperlinks Here"

Kevin Clemens

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167440#Comment_1167440

If the Bible readings are just links to our preferred Bible, instead of the approved ICEL text, then I don’t think it can be considered a complete product or one approved for official use

Agreed, this seems like it will be a hang-up for those who are obligated to pray the hours.

I'm hoping that the same licensing issues will be avoided when it comes to the Liturgia Horarum

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167444#Comment_1167444

If the Bible readings are just links to our preferred Bible, instead of the approved ICEL text, then I don’t think it can be considered a complete product or one approved for official use

Agreed, this seems like it will be a hang-up for those who are obligated to pray the hours.

I'm hoping that the same licensing issues will be avoided when it comes to the Liturgia Horarum

I imagine it could be easier as they wouldn’t have to deal with the ICEL permissions, which I seem to recall are more difficult.

David J. Ring, Jr.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167403#Comment_1167403

I cannot understand why hyperlinks couldn't have been made, for example, selecting the DATE then being brought to a choice of the Ordinary for the Hour wished to pray, then (as in today, to the Tuesday for the 7th Sunday of Easter) to the Morning Prayer, then and this is most annoying, the lack of a hyperlink on CANTICLE OF ZECHARIAH and be able to pray the Hours easily, not flipping around as is just needed in paper, but with electronic resources, it can be done, and should be done to have hyperlinks to eliminate bookmarks and ribbons. Right now, I find paper and ribbons easier than what I'm seeing as a real mess of what so far is nearly useless to me. If this is the result of others not licensing Logos/Verbum/Faithlife what they nee need to produce this, they shouldn't have refused, they should have joined in to make this a good thing and an improvement to our prayer life.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167449#Comment_1167449

Yes, I gave it a try, but until these things get resolved, I’ll have to stick with the Divine Office app.

Kevin Clemens

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167452#Comment_1167452

For the past few years, I've used the Breviario Digitale edition of the Liturgia Horarum (scroll down on this page for a sample of the navigation pages). Each volume is a separate pdf file, where each page of the physical text is represented in identical form along with a simple navigation bar along the right side (see below).

These nav bar headings take you to fairly basic pages from which one can easily navigate around the text to the desired section. This doesn't do a whole lot more than the Table of Contents view of LOTH in Verbum, but perhaps something similar with quick access links to high-frequency places in the text (e.g. Canticle of Zechariah, Canticle of Mary, etc) would make for easier use.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167440#Comment_1167440

If the Bible readings are just links to our preferred Bible, instead of the approved ICEL text, then I don’t think it can be considered a complete product or one approved for official use.

Correct. No one obligated to pray the LotH, or who intends to pray the LotH properly, can use the present edition.

I imagine it could be easier as they wouldn’t have to deal with the ICEL permissions, which I seem to recall are more difficult.

Notice what is missing, and look at the copyright statements included in LotH itself. The NAB isn't ICEL, for example.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167462#Comment_1167462

Notice what is missing, and look at the copyright statements included in LotH itself. The NAB isn't ICEL, for example.

Yeah, I was probably too vague, and perhaps I went off on a tangent. I was thinking more about the ICEL permissions for what countries were allowed to dIstribute their translations. There have been complaints about that in the past.

My thought was the Latin would not be under their limitations.

Sorry for the imprecision.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167462#Comment_1167462

Correct. No one obligated to pray the LotH, or who intends to pray the LotH properly, can use the present edition.

What?! Can you explain why you think this is true?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167472#Comment_1167472

As I understand it, the official use does require use of the approved Bible translation in a country. The imprimatur for the US apparently involves these sections:

if true, then the FL version, providing links to the preferred Bible instead of the NAB 1970, seems to indicate that the imprimatur does not apply. That won’t impact private use of course.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167476#Comment_1167476

if true, then the FL version, providing links to the preferred Bible instead of the NAB 1970, seems to indicate that the imprimatur does not apply. That won’t impact private use of course.

Hmmm ... since the NAB (and NABRE) are easily made the preferred Bible, this appears to me to be a non-issue. However, if FL makes a "harness" that pulls in the readings, it should provide an option to state the preferred translation. However, the imprimatur has little to do with the legitimacy of the prayers and whether or not they meet an individual's obligations. This information appears in the General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours (the equivalent of the GIRM for the Missal).

For example, one may change the scriptural reading:

[quote]

46. There is freedom to choose—especially in a celebration with the people—a longer Scripture reading, either from the Office of Readings or the Lectionary for Mass, particularly texts which for some reason have not been used. In addition, there is nothing to prevent the use from time to time of a more suitable reading, in accordance with the rules laid down in nos. 248–249 and 251.

International Commission on English in the Liturgy, The Liturgy of the Hours with Supplement, vol. 1 (New York: Catholic Book Publishing Corp., 1975–1992), 44–45.

In some parts of the country, one sees a mingling of the Mexican and American LOTH - especially in the hymns which must (theoretically) be approved.

official use does require use of the approved Bible translation in a country

There are often multiple translations -- and one can appeal to the practice of the cathedral which in my part of the country is heavily influenced by the Canadian practices.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167472#Comment_1167472

Correct. No one obligated to pray the LotH, or who intends to pray the LotH properly, can use the present edition.

What?! Can you explain why you think this is true?

Because I had forgotten about the loophole you later noted regarding not always having to actually use the readings found in LotH.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167483#Comment_1167483

There are often multiple translations -- and one can appeal to the practice of the cathedral which in my part of the country is heavily influenced by the Canadian practices.

As a Canadian, I have no idea what you're referring to.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167502#Comment_1167502

As a Canadian, I have no idea what you're referring to.

Let's put it this way. When the USCCB sent a liturgist to the dioceses, a priest involved in the development of the book for Services in the Absence of a Priest, panned his own work and recommended we bring contraband books from Canada across the border. The problem was that the American book was rushed and basically edited the priest's prayers to be lay-acceptable; the Canadians took the time to create lay appropriate prayers. But, of course, we learned the appropriate justifications which for me was very simple "practice of the cathedral". There were a couple of other common liturgical contraband ... fortunately, the border guards weren't liturgical police.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167501#Comment_1167501

Because I had forgotten about the loophole

"Loophole" ...no, not English law but Italian law .. "Yes, officier, I was well above the posted speed limit but I needed to clean out my engine and I was on my way to see my dying grandmother for the last time and ..." i.e. think of laws as guidelines to be followed where they are logically reasonable but there is room for negotiation ... And yes, it was a canon law professor who taught me that as the first principle.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167438#Comment_1167438

An equivalent homepage card for LOTH would most likely be a link to the starting point for each each of the hours and for the offeratory.

There is no Offertory in LotH.

Sorry, but somehow I am missing the point you are trying to make. I was not taking into consideration how one combines a LOTH service with a Mass ... I was thinking of the home page card having links for each of the hours.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167444#Comment_1167444

Agreed, this seems like it will be a hang-up for those who are obligated to pray the hours.

I am quite certain that the format was tested and "approved" by some obligated to pray the hours. They probably were not representative of the expectations of the lay Verbum users as they are already used to having to use ribbons to flip back and forth ... and to further adjust for the requirements of their order (if any). What concerns me is the lack of the hymns - essential but with a less than obvious means for filling the gap.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167483#Comment_1167483

There are often multiple translations -- and one can appeal to the practice of the cathedral which in my part of the country is heavily influenced by the Canadian practices.

Two thoughts on that.

1. If there are multiple approved translations for the Liturgy of the Hours (for example, bilingual services, or the approved variants of the religious orders), then sure.

2. I'd keep in mind Sacrosanctum Concilium #22:

[quote]

22. 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop.
2. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established.
3. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

Catholic Church, “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy: Sacrosanctum Concilium,” in Vatican II Documents (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2011).

So with this "practice of the cathedral," as I have no idea whether you're using it to mean the decree of the bishop or the informal, "that's what they do at the cathedral," the question is who has the authorization to permit a change compared to who is making the change.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167510#Comment_1167510

I would suggest that you take a class on interpreting Church documents on liturgy - one either offered by your diocese or by a professor of canon law in an accredited canonical law program. The first two principles you would learn are:

apply law in the sense of Italian law not of English law
there are at least 17 levels of authority of official documents applying to liturgy -- don't assume that if you have an answer that it is necessarily the answer that applies in your locale and specific circumstances.

So with this "practice of the cathedral,"

I am using it in the sense it is normally used in applying liturgical rules - it is the practice of cathedral which is not "informal" but forms the rule of practice within the diocese.

Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

True which is why the General Instructions on the Liturgy of the Hours explicitly gives the right to make changes within certain parameters -- as I have already quoted above. It's a good illustration of why one needs to look at all the relevant documents and know their relative weight.

But I fear I've taken this much further than the forums justify ... and, no, I am not a canonical lawyer, I am simply a well-trained liturgist.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167511#Comment_1167511

I would suggest that you take a class on interpreting Church documents on liturgy - one either offered by your diocese or by a professor of canon law in an accredited canonical law program. The first two principles you would learn are:

apply law in the sense of Italian law not of English law

there are at least 17 levels of authority of official documents applying to liturgy -- don't assume that if you have an answer that it is necessarily the answer that applies in your locale and specific circumstances.

Masters in Theology 1998.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167512#Comment_1167512

Masters in Theology 1998.

Outside the narrow field of liturgical theology, praxis, and canon law as it applies to liturgy, I will defer to you at least until I have the opportunity to educate myself. But within the narrow confines of what my instructors taught me, I'll trust their credentials over yours ... PhD's and international training.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167517#Comment_1167517

I was merely pointing out that your last response was rather patronizing given the fact that you know nothing about me.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167503#Comment_1167503

As a Canadian, I have no idea what you're referring to.

Let's put it this way. When the USCCB sent a liturgist to the dioceses, a priest involved in the development of the book for Services in the Absence of a Priest, panned his own work and recommended we bring contraband books from Canada across the border.

Ah, borrowing Canadian liturgical books. Now I understand. I had thought that you were referring to Canadian liturgical customs that had escaped my awareness.

Because I had forgotten about the loophole
"Loophole" ...no, not English law but Italian law .. "

I was using the term "loophole" in a loose sense. The GILH states that it can be done, therefore no 'negotiation' with the law is required in this particular case.

An equivalent homepage card for LOTH would most likely be a link to the starting point for each each of the hours and for the offeratory.

There is no Offertory in LotH.

Sorry, but somehow I am missing the point you are trying to make. I was not taking into consideration how one combines a LOTH service with a Mass ... I was thinking of the home page card having links for each of the hours.

Your original message seemed to indicate that a proper home page card for the LotH would like to "each of the hours and ... the offeratory". The LotH has no Offertory, therefore a LotH homepage card would have no reason to link to one.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167543#Comment_1167543

I was merely pointing out that your last response was rather patronizing given the fact that you know nothing about me.

If you watch the forums long enough you will understand that I am never intentionally patronizing but that I can be a bit tone-deaf for a significant group of forum members. MJ's communication style - Faithlife Forums (logos.com) Fortunately, I removed my first response to your post because I had completely mistaken your intent.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1167549#Comment_1167549

Your original message seemed to indicate that a proper home page card for the LotH would like to "each of the hours and ... the offeratory". The LotH has no Offertory, therefore a LotH homepage card would have no reason to link to one.

Come on, MJ, turn on brain to right topic -- I meant invitatory ...[:$]