 |
NOTE A.
THE BREVIARY HYMNS.
Of all the many and varied branches of Christian art, there is none
which offers to the researches of criticism a field so extensive as
does the hymnography of the Roman Breviary. No other source of
liturgical study, if we except the antiphonarium, has received such
attention from studious men. But never, in any age, did this study
receive such careful treatment and give rise to such patient and
laborious research as in our own. (Pimont, Les hymnes du Breviare Romain, Introduction.)
In this note, an attempt will be made to define a hymn, to tell of the
introduction of hymns into the Roman Breviary, and to note briefly the
character of these hymns.
St. Augustine, commenting on
Psalm 122, defined a hymn as a song with praise of God, cantus est cum
laude Dei. It may, however, be more strictly defined as a spiritual
song, a religious lyric (v. Cath, Ency., art. "Hymn").
In the early Christian assemblies great use was made of the psalms and
canticles in their congregational singing. St. Paul wrote: "Speaking to
yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual canticles, singing and
making melody in your hearts to the Lord" (Ephes. v. 18) "...teaching
and admonishing one another in psalms, hymns and spiritual canticles,
singing in grace in your hearts to God" (Col. iii. 16). The Jesuit,
Father Arevalo, in his Hymodia Hispanica, cites many
witnesses, such as Clement of Alexandria, the Apostolic Constitutions,
Pliny the younger, to prove that hymns were used in the first and
second centuries. But a much-debated question is, whether those hymns
were really made part of the Office, as hymns stand there to-day. Some
scholars deny that they were; others assert that they were certainly
part of the Church's Office. All agree that they were certainly in use
formally and substantially in the Office in the third and fourth
centuries in the Eastern and in the Western Church. The Council of
Antioch (269-270) wrote to the Pope that Paul of Samosate had
suppressed some canticles recently composed in honour of Jesus Christ.
St. Dionysius of Alexandria composed some hymns, to win over an erring
bishop. In the fourth century the Council of Laodicea spoke of the
introduction of some hymns, which were not approved; and St. Basil
tells us that hymns were in universal use in the Eastern Church.
In the Western Church, St. Hilary of Potiers (370) composed a hymn book
for his church. Its existence is known from the words of St. Jerome.
St. Augustine states that St. Ambrose (340-397), shut up with his
people in the church in Milan by the persecutors, occupied his flock by
their singing of hymns which he himself had composed, and some of which
are in our Breviaries. The Church of Milan certainly had hymns in its
Office and in its Office books then, for St. Paulinus in his life of
St. Augustine wrote: "Hoc in tempore, primum antiphonae, hymni ac
vigilae in Ecclesia Mediolanensi celebrari coeperunt; cujus
celebritatis devotio usque in hodiernam diem, non solum, in Ecclesia
Mediolanensi verum per omnes pene Occidentis provincias manet."
But the question arises, when did Rome introduce hymns into her
liturgy? The learned Jesuit, Father Arevalo, held that the Roman Office
had hymns as an integral part from the time of St. Ambrose, and he
called the opinion of those who held that they were of later
introduction an inveterate error, errorem inveteratum (Hymnodia Hispanica
XVIII., n. 95). The introduction of antiphonal chanting was introduced
into Rome at the time of St. Ambrose and liturgical hymn singing, too,
was introduced about the same time. This we know from the Milanese
priest Paulinus, St. Augustine, Pope Celestine I., and Faustus, Bishop
of Riez. But formal, official and systematic hymnody was not introduced
in Rome until centuries after the death of St. Ambrose. Mabillon
(Suppl. ad IV. lib de div. off. Amalarii, t. 11) and Tomasi (In annot,
ad Resp. et antip. Rom. Ecc.) place the date of the introduction of
hymns into the Roman liturgy, in the eleventh or twelfth centuries. But
scholars now agree that hymns were formally recognised in the liturgy
of Rome in the latter half of the ninth century. "To judge of what
Amalare of Metz says, there was no sign of it at the beginning of the
ninth century, but from the middle of the same century onwards hymns
must have been introduced into the Office used by the Churches of the
Frankish empire, and shortly afterwards in Rome" (Baudot, op. cit.,
pp. 67-68). Wilfrid Strabo agrees with Amalare. Rabanus Maurus
testifies that hymns were in general usage in the second part of the
ninth century. (Migne, Pat. Lat. clx. 159, cxiv. 956). This is the
opinion of Gueranger, Pimont, Blume and Baumer.
Dom
Gueranger explains why Rome, the mother and mistress of all the
churches, did not adopt the practice of hymn chanting in her liturgy
for centuries; why she did not precede or quickly follow the Eastern
and many parts of the Western Church in this matter of liturgical
hymns. "The Church," he says, "did not wish to alter by religious songs
the simplicity, or the meaning, of her great liturgical prayer. Nor did
she wish to adopt quickly any innovation in her liturgy or discipline" (Inst. Liturg. I. 1, pp. 170-171).
No part of the Church's liturgy has met with such persistent, abusive, and often ignorant criticism as her hymns have received.
The renaissance clerics, the Gallicans, the Jansenists, and the
Protestants poured forth volumes of hostile and unmerited criticism on
the matter and form of Rome's sacred songs. Becichemus, rector of the
Academy of Pavia in the sixteenth century, in his introduction to the
work of Ferreri, wrote of the hymns: "sunt omnes fere mendosi, inepti,
barbarie refecti, nulla pedum ratione nullo syllabarum mensu
compositi.... Ut ad risum eruditos concinent, et ad contemptum
ecclesiastici ritus vel literatos sacerdotes inducant.... Literatos
dixi: nam ceteri qui sunt sacri patrimonii helluones, sine scientia,
sine sapientia, satis habent, ut dracones stare juxta arcam Domini."
The remarks of the rector recall the saying of Lactantius, "literati
non habent fidem." Ferreri, who had been commissioned by Pope Clement
to revise and correct the Breviary hymns, wrote in his dedication
epistle: "I have given all my care to this collection of new hymns,
because learned priests and friends of good Latinity who are now
obliged to praise God in a barbarous style, are exposed to laugh and to
despise holy things." Santeuil (1630-1697) characterised the Breviary
hymns as the product of ignorance, the disgrace of the Latin language,
the disreputable relics of the early ages, the result of lunacy.
Violent attack leads to violent defence. Both are generally born of
ignorance, a partizan spirit, and exaggeration. Pious Catholic
defenders write that the Roman Breviary has hymns far superior to the
classic lyrics of ancient Rome; that they have an inimitable style;
that they are far superior to Horatian poetry; that there is nothing to
compare with their style and beauty in pagan classics, Indeed, zeal has
led some holy men to censure Pope Leo X., Clement VII., and. Urban
VIII. for their attempts to correct these compositions, which they hold
to have been perfect.
Truth seems to hold the place of
the golden mean between the bitter critics and the over zealous
defenders of our Breviary hymns. The following propositions, drawn from
Father Barnard's Cours De Liturgie Romaine, may be taken as a
fair and accurate statement of the views of scholars, views which may
be safely held by all students of this portion of liturgy.
First Proposition:–Many of the hymns of the Roman Breviary have not the elegance of the Odes of Horace, of the hymns of Santeuil and of Coffin.
Proof:-(1) The holy Fathers had outlined in a rough sketch rather than
perfected their hymns (Pope Urban VIII., Bull Quamvis, 17th June, 1644).
(2) Speaking of the new Hymnal of Ferreri, Pope Clement VIII. says that
the new work could only add to the splendour of worship and help to the
common interest, implying that the new hymns helped religion by their
accuracy and grace of correct poetic forms.
(3) Pimont,
the author of a classic work on the Breviary Hymns, in a number of
comments, notes the crudities of the Breviary hymns, even in their
revised forms. Thus, in the hymn for Prime, he notes apparent
ruggedness. He passes similar comments on the hymns assigned to the
little hours.
(4) Bacquez states that all the hymns do
not join beauty of expression to the merit of the thought expressed,
and that a certain number lack style and good prosody.
These opinions should not be extended to all, nor even to very many of
the Breviary hymns. All serious critics agree about the beauty of such
hymns as the Aeterne rerum Conditor, the Somno refectis artubus, Splendor Aeternae gloriae, Verbum supernum prodiens, and a good number of others.
The greater part of the Breviary Hymns are composed according to the
rules of prosody, and their form is lyric, the popular form of Latin
song, which preceded in Italy the prosodical system borrowed from the
Greeks, and used by the classic pagan poets. The critics of the
Renaissance period are very loud and very wrathful over the form of
these hymns. Some of them accuse St. Ambrose, Prudentius and Gregory
the Great of gross ignorance of the rules of Latin verse and, what to
the critics was worse, ignorance of the ways of pagan classical models.
But, was the rhymed, tonic accented lyric, which was to be sung by all
sorts and conditions of men, in public, such an outrageous literary
sin? Was it ignorance or prudence that guided the early hymn writers in
their adoption of popular poetic form? It is not certain by any means
that the early hymn writers wished to copy or adopt the classic forms
of the Augustinian age. Nor is it clear that such men of genius as St.
Ambrose, Prudentius, St. Gregory the Great, were ignorant of the rules
and models of the best Latin poets. It seems that they did not wish to
follow them. They wilfully and designedly adopted the popular lyric
forms, so that they might give to their flocks in popular and easily
remembered forms, prayers and formulas of faith.
Second Proposition:-The Breviary hymns have the principal elements of poetic beauty.
Briefly, these elements are sublimity of thought, beauty of sentiment,
aptness of expression, unction of form. In these matters the Breviary
hymns are not inferior to the classic poetry of paganism, nor to the
much-belauded beauties of the Gallican Breviary hymns (vide Bacquez, Le Saint Office, notes vi. and viii. in finem).
The composition of the hymns is in perfect harmony with the end for
which they are intended, that is, liturgical prayer, chanted prayer.
Their phrases do not display the vain and superfluous literary glitter
of the much-lauded Gallican hymns, but their accents go out from the
sanctuary and live in the hearts of the people. Their language is, like
the thought and expression of the psalms, the word of a soul praying to
God and adoring Him in fervour, in simplicity, and in faith. Of the
piety and expression of the French hymns, Foinard, an ardent apostle of
the French liturgical novelties, wrote: "Il ne parait pas que ce soit
l'onction qui domine dans les nouveaux Breviaries; on y a la verite,
travaille beaucoup pour l'esprit; mais il semole qu' on n'y a pas
travaille autant pour le coeur." Letourneux, the fierce Jansenist,
wrote to the Breviary-poet, Santeuil, his co-worker: "Vous faites fumer
l'encens; mais c'est un feu estranger qui brule dans l'ensenoir. La
vanite fait en vous ce que la charite devrait faire." And the Catholic
De Maistre, so famed for his fair-minded criticisms, wrote of the new
hymn-makers' works: "They make a certain noise in the ear, but they
never breathe prayer, because their writers were all alone (i.e.,
unaided by the grace and guidance of the Holy Spirit) when they
composed them." Of the Roman Breviary hymns he wrote: "They always pray
and excite the soul to prayer." "Train your hearts to attention, and
hear all their prayers. You will in them see the true religion, as
clearly as you see the sunbeams."
Fourth Proposition:–The
characteristic of the Roman Breviary hymns is to express with lively
sentiments and with unction the noble ideas and beautiful sentiments of
the supernatural order, in a simple manner, without prosodical
pretension, yet having ever a true rhythm which sometimes vies with
better compositions.
The characteristic mentioned in
this proposition, which comes as a corollary from the three preceding
propositions, is one which is clearly noted in our Breviary hymns. For
by their very position in the Breviary, side by side with the Psalms,
Scripture extracts and words of the Fathers, the Church shows her
esteem and her use of these lyrics of prayer and praise. Again, the
Church's mind is shown by her retention of her hymns in her liturgy,
notwithstanding the many efforts made to substitute a new hymnal. Up to
the sixteenth century these Breviary hymns were universally esteemed.
They were admired by St. Augustine. They are quoted and praised by St.
Thomas in his Summa. Deays the Carthusian {1402-1471} wrote a beautiful
commentary on them. Amongst all priests, secular and regular, the hymns
were venerated and loved. Although there were many men of genius in
every age and in every part of the Christian Church, the hymns escaped
until the renaissance under Leo X. (1475-1521).
The
lovers of everything classic and pagan were pained and exasperated at
the venerable simplicity, the lack of prosody, the vagueness and
crudity of the wording of the liturgical hymns. In 1531, Wimpheling, a
priest of the diocese of Spire, produced a work, Himni de tempore et de sanctis ... secundum legem carminis diligenter emendati.
Leo X., yielding to his own taste and the wishes of the learned
innovators who were ardent students of pagan antiquity, commissioned
Ferreri to compose a new hymnal for liturgical use. His book was
allowed for liturgical use, but was not prescribed. It omitted all the
old hymns sanctioned by the Church for centuries, and sung with fervour
by thousands down the ages. "There are found in the work of Ferreri,"
wrote Dom Gueranger, "all the images and all the allusions to pagan
beliefs and usages which we find in Horace. Sometimes, it is only fair
to say, his hymns are beautiful and simple ... but they follow
generally and too servilely the pagan models ... but they are the work
of strong and clear inspiration, which under the mask of classic
diction shows itself in every part." (Inst. Liturg. t. I., p.
370.) During the reign of Pope Paul III. new hymnals were issued, but
the Breviary hymns were not removed. St. Pius V. in his reform of the
Breviary did not touch the Breviary hymns. Clement VIII. in his reform
added new hymns but did not remove nor retouch the old ones. This work
remained for Pope Urban VIII. (1623-1644).
Urban VIII.,
Maffeo Barberini, was a poet of no mean rank. Before his election to
the papacy, he was a recognised lover of classical literature and an
adept in following classic themes and classic forms. Our Breviaries
contain some few of his compositions and they show correctness of form,
poetic merit, and piety. They are the hymns, Martinae celebri, Tu natale solum (January 20); Nullis te genitor, Regali solio fortis
(April 13). His great desire was the correction of the Breviary hymns.
This work of correction was not beyond the personal power of the Pope
himself, if we judge him by his hymns. His views are expressed in the
Bull Divinam Psalmodiam, issued to promulgate the corrected
hymns. It found a place in all copies of the Roman Breviary in the last
century. To carry out the corrections outlined by the Pope, four
Jesuits were appointed, and whether the result of the corrections is
the Pope's or the Jesuits' is a highly and hotly disputed point. First
of all, the task set to the Jesuits was a very difficult one, and one
demanding much prudence as well as learning. It may seem to us that to
begin the correction, mutilation and reconstruction of the works and
words of men so great in church history and liturgy as Prudentius,
Sedulius, St. Ambrose, St. Paulinus, was a work of rashness, a sort of
sacrilege, attempting to remodel the glowing piety of their poems to
the pattern of Horace's verse. But the Jesuits had got their commands
and they were bound to obey. They were chosen on account of their
classical scholarship, which was kept sharp by their daily teaching in
college, and they were specially bound by a vow of loyal obedience to
Papal orders. "It is only fair to give them the credit that out of
respect for the wishes of Urban VIII, they treated these ancient
compositions with extreme reserve and, while they made some impressions
clearer, they maintained the primitive unction in a large number of
passages" (Baudot, op. cit., p. 185).
They
corrected more than nine hundred false quantities found scattered
through the Breviary, 58 in the psalter per hebdomadam, 359 in the
proper de Tempore, 283 in the proper of Saints, and 252 in the common
of Saints. They changed the opening words of more than thirty hymns.
Some hymns were untouched—e.g., the three hymns of the Blessed
Sacrament, the Ave Maris Stella, which is rhythmic prose, not verse, and the hymn of the Angels, which was sufficiently perfect. The metre of three hymns, Tibi Christe splendor Patris, and the Urbs Jerusalem and Angularis fundamentum were changed.
The Jesuits have been censured very bitterly for their work of
correction. Perhaps they merited some censure, but surely they did not
merit the censures heaped on them by hostile critics like Thiers, Henri
Valois, and the Franciscan, Cavalli. They answered their critics
splendidly and triumphantly by the works of Father Arevalo, S.J. But
the wordy war lasts to the present day. Students who wish to see the
unrevised and the revised hymnal of Urban VIII. may consult Daniel's Thesaurus hymnologicus
for examples. Other examples are given in Monsignor Battifol's work,
and others in Dom Baudot's. If the reader read in the Breviary, the
hymn Te lucis ante terminum, he may note a difference in that, the revised form, and this, the unrevised:–
Te lucis ante terminum, Rerum Creator poscimus, Ut solita clementia Sis praesul ad custodiam.
Praesta pater omnipotens Per Jesum Christum Dominum Qui tecum in perpetuum regnat Cum Sancto Spiritu
Again, see Lauds for Passion Sunday, Lustra sex, second verse, unrevised reads:–
Hic acetum fel arundo Sputa clavi lancea Mite corpus perforator Sanguis
unda profluit Terra, pontus, astra, mundus Quo lavantur flumine.
Iste Confessor, unrevised reads:–
Iste confessor domini sacratus Festa plebs cujus celebrat per orbem Hodie laetus meruit secreta Scandere coeli.
Qui Pius, prudens humilis judicus, Sobrius, castus fuit et quietus Vita dum praesens vegetavit ejus Corporis artus.
The imitation of Breviary hymns has for centuries formed a notable part
of sacred Latin poetry. A great amount of Latin poetry dealing with
sacred themes finds no place in Missal or Breviary. Every nation has
ancient Latin hymns, generally modelled on the then existing liturgical
models; and these hymns are found in national hymnals and in works
dealing with Christian antiquities, but they find no place in modern
liturgy. Thus the Latin poetry of the ancient Irish Church is formed
for private and not choral use. The oldest purely rhythmical Latin hymn
is that of St. Sechnall (1448), "Audite omnes amantes Deum, sancta
merita." But neither it, nor any other of the old Latin hymns by Irish
writers, finds place in the Breviary. Collections of Latin hymns by
Irish writers of early Christian Ireland are to be found in Todd's Book of Hymns of the Ancient Irish Church (Dublin, 1885-1891); the Irish Liber Hymnorum (London, 1898), the Antiphonary of Bangor (Warren's Edition, London, 1893).
One of the most difficult works for a scholar to attempt and to carry
out to his satisfaction is the translation of prose or poetry into
another language. The work of translating the Latin of the Roman
Breviary into English was attempted and completed years ago. The work
was great and creditable, but not renowned as a feat of translation.
The hymns of the Breviary have been translated by several authors in
every country of Christendom, and with different degrees of success.
The study of the Breviary hymns is a highly interesting one, and when
it is supported by the different efforts of different translators, it
yields new delights, and new beauties are discovered in verses which
are sometimes said too rapidly for earnest thought and attention. In
the list of books given in the bibliography below, there are given the
names of books of translated hymns. Any one of them is of great
interest.
NEXT
SECTION: Note B. Particular Examen On The R…
B. Proper Of The Saints.
Index
|
|
