Chant and Pope Francis

[JReducation]

Brother, it has nothing to do with mocking or degrading Jesuits. St. Ignatius wanted the clerks regular to be able to celebrate the Divine Office with less solemnity than was commonly expected in his time, so chanting is something that’s very uncommon among Jesuits. And that’s ok!

Source: newliturgicalmovement.org/2009/10/compendium-of-reforms-of-roman-breviary_06.html#.UsRUY_sxsw8

This is true. The founders who shied away from the choral chanting of the office was not anti-choir. They had very logical reasons.

St. Francis and St. Clare:

The chant was a monastic custom. The problem with that was that it did not fit into the Franciscan tradition. In monasticism, they had choir monks who chanted and they had lay brothers who did not chant, but prayed separately and they prayed less hours, so as to be more free to run the house.

In Franciscan tradition, the lay brother was imposed by the Church about 200 years later, but then retracted in 1968, because Pope Paul VI said that it was not part of the vision of Francis and Clare.

The only way to have one body of friars or nuns who prayed together was to avoid the chant, since many people just can’t chant.

The was an exception to this, the Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration. They were allowed to follow the Rule of St. Benedict.

In any case, there as a good reason not to chant, but to recite the office.

The Jesuits and St. Ignatius

As you have rightly pointed out, Ignatius did not want his men to be confined to monastic practices.

St. John Baptiste de La Salle - Christian Brothers

Also banned chant and anything that was Gregorian from the liturgy. He wanted his brothers to be very secular. There was a reason. They were to be models of secular Christian life for their students.

St. John Bosco - Salesians

Also banned chant and anything that was Gregorian from the liturgy. He wanted his boys to be able to participate in the celebration of the mass without having to train long hours learning music. The Salesians taught their boys what I call the “oldies but goodies” such as Adeste Fidelis, The First Noel, Oh Sacred Head Surrounded, Humbly We Adore The, Immaculate Mary, etc. These were beautiful hymns, but easy to learn.

St. Vincent de Paul - banned the breviary

Again, he has a good reason. He wanted his sons (Vincentians or Congregation of the Mission) and his daughters (Society of Charity or Daughters of Charity) to be completely secular. They were to be celibate and to live in community in order to be free to serve the poor. Their life of prayer was very simple. Later the Church would impose the LOTH on their priests. Even today, they only pray two hours. They’re not bound to do it together. The Daughters pray the LOTH, but it’s optional for them. As long as it does not take them away from the care of the poor. Then they are to pray on the move. Vincent said, “Let your chapel be the streets of the slums.”

There is a long tradition of non-chanters. Is there such a word as non-chanters?

Anyway, there is a long tradition of non-chanters alongside those who chant. I think it’s beautiful when we open our hearts and minds to the full spectrum. I get excited when I’m at a gathering of priests, religious and laity and I can see the diversity: who chants, who doesn’t, who uses Latin, who doesn’t, who who bows, who stands, who genuflects, who prostrates. It reminds me of the Apostles. They were so different from each other. Just look at the 23 churches that they founded, one faith, but many different external expressions.

 

[EphelDuath]

Isn’t it true that Conventual Franciscans have a very vibrant history of public celebration and chanting of the Hours and Holy Mass? I thought the only part of the Franciscans that shyed from chant are the Capuchins, who heavily stress the spirituality of silence.

 

[JReducation]

Isn’t it true that Conventual Franciscans have a very vibrant history of public celebration and chanting of the Hours and Holy Mass? I thought the only part of the Franciscans that shyed from chant are the Capuchins, who heavily stress the spirituality of silence.

The other way around. The Conventuals, hence their name, are the only branch of the Franciscan family that incorporated many Augustinian traditions, including living in a convent with a choir and all of the rituals that go with convent life. They actually wore the Augustinian habit until recently, but with a chord.

They’re still Franciscan in every other respect. The liturgical customs, dress and living setting has strong Augustinian influence, but the rest is Franciscan. Had they adopted the Benedictine model, they would have had two parallel communities, the choir monks and the lay monks. In the Augustinian tradition there is only one class of friars. All are religious. There are no lay and no choir. This worked for the Conventual Franciscans, because it was not contrary to the rule.

Bl. John Paul II called on them and the other Franciscans of the different branches to return to the simple and austere liturgical practice of St. Francis and the early friars. He said that it was not the intention of the Church or of St. Francis that the friars should be monastic. He pointed out to the Council of Franciscan Superiors General that monastic practices keeps the friars confined to a structure rather than on the street where the friar belongs.

At the Chapter of Mats, in 1209, Pope Benedict said something similar. He urged the friars to return to the 13th century and recover their way of life from that era.

Yes, chant has an important place in the life of the Church, but one must be careful not to forget that there has also been a parallel tradition where chant is not the norm, but the tradition is equally rich and equally beautiful.

I think this is the problem. Some people think that if you don’t have chant, you don’t have beauty. That’s not true. A lot of times, beauty is in the custom itself. When you walk into our chapel and you hear us recite the office, if you don’t stop to remember that Clare and Francis always recited the office, you’ll miss the beauty of the moment. But if you stop and remember this, you’ll be uplifted by the thought that here is a group of men, 800 years later, still very much connected to their spiritual father and mother. They are still thinking as did their spiritual parents. That’s awesome.

 

[EphelDuath]

The other way around. The Conventuals, hence their name, are the only branch of the Franciscan family that incorporated many Augustinian traditions, including living in a convent with a choir and all of the rituals that go with convent life. They actually wore the Augustinian habit until recently, but with a chord.

Ah, forgive me for the error. I based that on an article I read a while ago:

I am old enough to remember having heard Franciscans of various allegiances chant the Divine Office in choir in Latin. It was impressive. The Franciscans of the Atonement at Graymoor were particularly marked by a love for the Divine Office inherited from their founders — both converts from Anglicanism — Father Paul James Francis Watson and Mother Lurana Mary Francis White.

The Conventual Franciscans (O.F…M., Conv.) had, in many places, a strong commitment to choral prayer and a somewhat higher standard of liturgical performance than that cultivated by the (O.F.M.) Friars Minor, although the latter are not entirely without a few strongholds of choral liturgical prayer in Italy and, of course, in the Holy Land.
The Capuchins, for their part, while reciting the Hours dutifully in choir, eschewed chant as a distraction and an impediment to recollection, and like so many movements of reform, invested more in the ways of mental prayer and a bracing asceticism than in choral liturgical prayer.

Source: vultus.stblogs.org/index.php/2010/11/saint-francis-and-the-liturgy/

I’ll take your word for it that you know better.

I think this is the problem. Some people think that if you don’t have chant, you don’t have beauty. That’s not true. A lot of times, beauty is in the custom itself. When you walk into our chapel and you hear us recite the office, if you don’t stop to remember that Clare and Francis always recited the office, you’ll miss the beauty of the moment. But if you stop and remember this, you’ll be uplifted by the thought that here is a group of men, 800 years later, still very much connected to their spiritual father and mother. They are still thinking as did their spiritual parents. That’s awesome.

I don’t know of any traditionalists that have some sort of grudge against religious communities that have their own traditions, apart from the secular traditions of the Latin Church. I do know a lot of anti-traditionalists, however, that throw out beautiful architecture and Gregorian chant, while giving the cop-out justification that “well, Benedictines/Franciscans/Jesuits/who ever and their mother never did it that way.” Unfortunately they don’t ever adopt the other traditions of those orders, just their nonconformity.

 

[JReducation]

I don’t know of any traditionalists that have some sort of grudge against religious communities that have their own traditions, apart from the secular traditions of the Latin Church.

I’ve met a few; but most of the time it’s a misunderstanding on their part. For example, I’ve had people here say to me that St. Francis and the other Franciscan saints were made saints by the Tridentine mass. That’s not true. The form of the mass does not make one a saint. The Franciscans had their own version of the Tridentine mass and the custom always was to use either our missal or that of the local Church, which in this case would be the OF missal. But those who don’t know the custom, can become upset, not because they have an ax to grind. It’s because they don’t know.

I do know a lot of anti-traditionalists, however, that throw out beautiful architecture and Gregorian chant, while giving the cop-out justification that “well, Benedictines/Franciscans/Jesuits/who ever and their mother never did it that way.” Unfortunately they don’t ever adopt the other traditions of those orders, just their nonconformity.

I have seen this as well. The schools are there for the laity, not just for the religious. The first thing that we have to remember is that the orders are schools that the Church offers to all. The argument “I’m not a Franciscan, Jesuit, Cistercian, or other” does not hold water. One does not have to be a member of an institute to embrace the spirituality and liturgical life of the institute. The institute is part of the Church. Liturgy is public. Anything that happens in a religious institute is available to the public for its adoption. The institute does not have a copyright on it.

Then there are those who say as you said. “The Franciscans do it this way or the Jesuits do it that way,” but they don’t integrate it into their spiritual life. For example, reciting the office instead of chanting. The recitation has several very good reasons. It eliminates the distinction between choir and lay, between priest and brother. It creates an environment of silence conducive to silent prayer. Silent prayer leads to great asceticism and greater charity.

But if people are just going to drop the chanted office and not embrace the silence, silent prayer, asceticism and works of charity of the Franciscan, why bring it up?

I agree with you. It’s more of a copout than a legitimate reason.

 

[Cojuanco]

On the whole unique traditions thing, I’ve heard some Norbertines complain about how some trads don’t seem to understand that there is no cookie cutter Mass, and that Norbertines have legitimate differences in how they celebrate both forms. One who works at a parish even asked some parishioners who wanted to videotape one of the Masses he offered that while uploading it online was fine, to please turn the comments off because people would inevitably start complaining that there were some things in there not to their liking because they incorporated things that were how Norbertines did the EF, and had always done so. And this is a priest who likes the EF!

 

[JReducation]

On the whole unique traditions thing, I’ve heard some Norbertines complain about how some trads don’t seem to understand that there is no cookie cutter Mass, and that Norbertines have legitimate differences in how they celebrate both forms. One who works at a parish even asked some parishioners who wanted to videotape one of the Masses he offered that while uploading it online was fine, to please turn the comments off because people would inevitably start complaining that there were some things in there not to their liking because they incorporated things that were how Norbertines did the EF, and had always done so. And this is a priest who likes the EF!

That’s a issue for some people. For that reason, we have the EF mass only several times a year, rather than daily and we do not allow laymen to attend. Those are the few days out of the year when the chapel is closed to the laity. We had constant questions and comments about things like no doing the prayers at the foot of the altar, not doing the prayer to St. Michael and the Aves at the end, not having a lavabo, the priest going to the superior to ask for permission to being, etc. These are little things that are part of our tradition, just as the O’Praem have their little idiosyncrasies. The EF is not a one size fits all. It never was. One can certainly use the Roman Missal of 1962 as it’s printed, do the red and say the black or one can adjust to ones customs that were in place in 1962. I’m trying to remember what community it is that prepares the gifts at the beginning of the mass in the EF, not in the OF.

 

[kozlosap]

Once again, thank you so much, Brother JR, for your explanation on our Dear Holy Father and the Jesuits. I have attended a Jesuit parish for many years and cannot imagine more holy and compassionate priests anywhere in the world. In addition, we do not have cookie cutter homilies! That Papa Francis is more interested in promoting care for the least among us instead of delivering long tomes on plenary indulgences is truly a Jesuit “thing” though…

 

[EphelDuath]

That Papa Francis is more interested in promoting care for the least among us instead of delivering long tomes on plenary indulgences is truly a Jesuit “thing” though…

Who gives “long tomes on plenary indulgences”?

What Pope hasn’t been “interested in promoting care for the least among us”?

 

[JReducation]

I second Ephel’s question. Confused here.