Notes and Reflections for a talk on Franciscan Mysticism by Maury Smith
2c Fran Canticle Hammond mjs.doc, fcant.htm
The Canticle of St. Francis
Introductory Outline:
1. The Historical Context:
2. Illness of Francis at the time. (Schmucki)
3. Three meanings of per
4. Nature Mystic
5. Themes of the Canticle
6. A new interpretation that he composed it all at
once.
7. Straight tone the Canticle to experience it.
For a copy of The Canticle of the Sun of St. Francis, go to this web page.
Some of Robinson is outdated but at one time he was highly respected.
http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1172&chapter=83223&layout=html&Itemid=27 Of course for a more recent translation, see FAED I page 113.
References: Fumagalli, Edoardo. “Saint Francis, The Canticle, The Our Father.” Greyfriars Review 19 Sup. (2005) 1-87.
Leclerc, Eloi. The Canticle of Creatures: Symbols
of
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1. Historical Context
I think the most important element to know
about the Canticle is the historical context, the life situation in
which Francis wrote the Canticle.
Here is a brief overview of the history of
the times.
1219-1220
Participation in the Fifth Crusade in
from Schmucki, Illnesses.]
From CHRONOLOGY OF THE SOURCES FOR THE LIFE OF ST. FRANCIS
Appendix 1 http://ofm.org.mt/noelmuscat
1220
[spring] After staying in
Asks Pope to give the Order Cardinal Hugolino as Protector.
1220[29 Sept] Francis renounces government of the Order. Peter Catanio named Vicar.
1221 [30 May]Chapter of Pentecost (Chapter of Mats?)
Earlier Rule approved.
1223 [winter] Francis goes to Fonte Colombo and writes the Later Rule.
He is helped by brother Bonizo of Bologna, brother Leo and Hugolino.
1223[11 Jun] Chapter of Pentecost at Portiuncula approves Later Rule.
1223[29 Nov] Honorius III confirms Later Rule with Bull “Solet annuere”.
1223[25 Dec] Christmas celebration at Greccio.
1224[14 Sep] Feast of Exaltation of Cross, circa. Receives stigmata on La Verna.
1224 [Oct] Francis returns to Portiuncula through Borgo San Sepolcro, Monte Casale,
Città di
Castello. 1225[winter] Francis goes on a preaching mission
to
1225[spring] Francis stays at San Damiano. Composes Canticle of Creatures.
His eye condition worsens.
1225[June] Reconciles
Bishop Guido with Bernardo, the Podestà of
composing the stanza about forgiveness in Canticle of Creatures.
1225[summer]Goes to Rieti for eye treatment. Welcomed by Hugolino and Papal curia.
At Fonte Colombo undergoes a painful [eye] operation.
1226[Apr] Francis goes to
Dictates
Moves to Le Celle at Cortona. Dictates his Testament (?)
1226[Sept] Francis
asks to be transported to the Portiuncula. Blesses
At Portiuncula dictates his Testament (?)
1226[3 Oct] Francis dies at Portiuncula on
1226[4 Oct] Francis’s body is taken in procession to
Reflection:
The last six years of Francis life was miserable.
Major conflict in the Order.
Writing rules that were not accepted by all.
Traveling as a sick person at a time when travel was not a pleasant event for a healthy person.
Literally bleeding from the Stigmata.
Suffering from several diseases with painful operations. More about this in a minute.
He is going blind and this even gets worse after the Canticle.
AND IT IS IN THIS CONTEXT, THIS REAL LIFE SITUATION of PHYSICAL AND MENTAL PAIN,
EVEN BECOMING BLIND THAT HE WRITES THIS JOYFUL CANTICLE.
2. Illness of Francis at the time. (Schmucki)
Francis probably had malaria from the epidemic when he was in prison about 1203-1204.
He also had the contagious “Egyptian disease” from his
participation in the Fifth Crusade in
He had suffered a great deal for many years in this stomach, spleen and liver.
He would have swelling of the abdomen, legs and feet. (Schmucki Illnesses p. 45)
He wore a woolen and linen band over his eyes.
Perhaps in January 1226 he had the cauterization of this eyes..
The burn was from the ear to the eyebrow.
but Celano tells us “Yet he had no improvement but kept getting steadily worse.” (FAED I p. 271)
“In April, while lying in the hermitage of Alberiono near Siena, ‘Francis began to be gravely ill in all the rest of his body; and , with his stomach racked by a long-standing illness and his liver infected, he vomited much blood, so that he appeared to be approaching death.’” (FAED I p. 274)
And at times this lasted throughout the night and into the morning.
We must not forget the sufferings as a result of the stigmata and the loss of blood.
And it is in this context while he was blind that he wrote the lyrical and joyful Canticle of Brother Sun.
See for more detail: Octavian Schmucki.
“The Illnesses of Francis During the Last Years of His Life.” .
Greyfriars Review 13 (1999) 21-65.
Celano on Francis’s illnesses: IC 95, 98, 99, 101, 102, 105, 107, 108, 113, 2C 51, 93, 130, 166, 214, 215, 217, 220
3. Three meanings of per
The editors of the three volumes, FAED suggest the following interpretation:
Per suggests a variety of meanings:
(a) a corruption of the Latin per,
(b) the French pour, or
(c) the developing Italian par.
Thus it may be translated
"for" offering an attitude of thanksgiving;
"by," expressing a sense of instrumentality; or
"through," suggesting instrumentality and, at the same time, a deeper sense of praising God's presence in the creatures mentioned.
This translation follows the last possibility based on verse 3,
"Praised be you, my Lord, with all your creatures . . ."
FAED p. 114
The continuous repetition of the preposition per reveals much about the canticle's complexity.
Who is the one giving praise and how,
especially in light of Francis' use of the passive imperative (laudato) rather than the active?
In other writings (e.g., 2 EpFid 61) Francis invites all creatures to praise God and
some have seen a similar sense of agency in the per in the canticle,
but the passive construction suggests that causal and instrumental connotations of per are more powerful here, that is, humans are called upon to praise God because God has created such wonderful creatures and especially by means of the creatures who manifest God's glory.
In light of the apophatic insistence at the outset of the canticle, however, we may well agree with Giovanni Pozzi who emphasizes that in the deepest sense
the per signifies that God alone is able to give God true praise in and through the entire enfraternized universe God has created.31
McGinn, Bernard.“Was St. Francis a Mystic?” in Doors of Understanding: Conversations on Global Spirituality in Honor of Ewett Cousins. ed. Steven Chase (Quincy, IL, Franciscan Press, 1997) pp145-74.
Fumagalli notes that Leclerc champoions a considetaton about the interpretation of “per” is that it contains all the meanings and that the distinction that exists in the modern languages does not exist for Francis. See p. 55. in Fumagalli, Edoardo. “Saint Francis, The Canticle, The Our Father.” Greyfriars Review 19 Sup. (2005) 1-87.
For a recent exposition of this throny exploration of the meaning of “per,” see pp. 52-59, 46 in Fumagalli, Edoardo. “Saint Francis, The Canticle, The Our Father.” Greyfriars Review 19 Sup. (2005) 1-87.
4. Francis As a Nature Mystic
It seems to me that thee is a connfusion between what it means for someone to be a nature mystic as opposed to someone who is a nature lover. And if I may say it this way, some people are not versed in mysticism and some simply do not really know St. Francis. Sometimes this is because of how artist depict Francis. Perhaps a quick way of clarifying what I mean is to take a look at how Francis is presented in statues. We all know that images are powerful and influende us significantly. We have the old saying that is by no means a cliché: “A picture is worth a thousand words. Many times we will see a statue, small or large of Francis with a bird on his shoulder, on his arm and sometimes also at his feet as opposed to at times you will see a statue of Francis with the bird but also a cross in one hand and a bible in the other hand or with a scull at his feet or an indication of the stigmata on his hands or sides or various combinations these objects which are symbols. A statue of Francis with a bird or birds or sometime other animals gives the impression to those who do not know Francis that he is solely a nature lover, especially when these kinds of statues are part of a bird bath or garden.
And some people do not understandd the hagiographical symbolism of these objects but rather take them in a literal or fundamentalist way. The cross is a symbol of Francis’s love of Christ Crucified. The bible is a symbol of how well Francis knew and used the Word of God in his writings; his love o f Scripture. The skull is a symbol of Francis’ asceticism that enabled him to imitate Christ and that brought him into union with God. And of course the depiction of Francis’ stigmata denote that it is an historical fact that Francis received the marks of Christ’s crucifixion .
As I reflect on the official bioggraphies of Celano and Bonaventure and the understanding that Longpre has of Francis’s life I have come to the conclusion that first of all Francis was given the gift of being a mystic and it was as a mystic that he perceived God in creation,. After the gift of union with God, as a mystic Francis could then see God in all of creation. As Angela of Foligna said, all of creation is pregnant with God. To emphasize my interpretation, Francis was first a mystic and then he was able to see God in creation. And this is the meaning of a true mystic or precisely a nature mystic. By no means was Francis solely a nature lover. Some times nature lovers stop with nature and do not see any connection between creation and God. At the same time it is a beautiful and worthwhile experience to be a nature lover which at some time may be the journey that they are on which eventually leads them to God.
Some may object that Bonaventure in the Itinerarium teaches that nature leads to God. I think a closer reading of the text will recall what he say s in the prologue which basically calls for the person to be reformed by grace and then after this is a person able to see God in nature.
5. Structure and Themes on Canticle
FAED I p. 113
a. & Cf. The
b. & Cf. AC 84.
c. & Cf. AC 7.
d. & It would seem that in these first nine verses Francis envisioned this as a song of God's creatures in which
human beings, because of sin, hadd no part, a theme about which he hints in other writings, e.g. Adm II, ER
XIII. While the first verse direccts praise, glory, honor and blessing to God alone, a sentiment underscored
in the first part of this second verse, its second part is quite clear in denying any role to a human being.
e. & In Francis's use of the passive voice, "Praised be you. . .", and his linking the praise of the Lord with that of
creatures, this verse provides maany insights into the interpretation of the entire Canticle. While the sun,
moon and stars, wind, water, firee, and earth may be seen as instruments of praise or as reasons for praise,
praising them also implies praisiing the God Who created them and acknowledging that they are symbols of
their Creator. Thus Francis's poeetic use of adjectives is important to comprehend his images of God.
113
FAED I p. 114
a. & Per suggests a variety of meanings: (a) a corruption of the Latin per, (b) the French pour, or (c) the
developing Italian par. Thus it mmay be translated "for" offering an attitude of thanksgiving; "by,"
expressing a sense of instrumentaality; or "through," suggesting instrumentality and, at the same time, a
deeper sense of praising God's prresence in the creatures mentioned. This translation follows the last
possibility based on verse 3, &quuot;Praised be you, my Lord, with all your creatures . . ."
b. & The second section of the Canticle introduces humanity into the praise of God. However, such praise is only
achieved through identifying withh the suffering Servant of God, Jesus, who endured weakness and
tribulation in peace. In this wayy, reconciliation is achieved in light of the Paschal Mystery.
c. & These two verses, 12 and 13, composed in Francis's last hours, indicate an understanding of death much
different from that of ILtf 2:14fff, 2LtF 72ff, and Letters to the Rulers of the Peoples 2-4 [hereafter LtR].
Rather than fearing death, Franciis greets it as yet another expression of God's presence.
d. & Fulgentius of Ruspe comments on these verses in his treatise on forgiveness: "Here on earth they are
changed by the first resurrectionn, in which they are enlightened and converted, thus passing from death to
life, sinfulness to holiness, unbbelief to faith, and evil actions to holy life. For this reason the second death
has no power over them ... As thee first resurrection consists of the conversion of the heart, so the second
death consists of unending tormennt (cf. Fulgentius of Ruspe, On Forgiveness, Liber 2, 11, 1-2,1. 3-4;
Corpus Christianorum 91A, 693-6955).
The canticle falls into four partts. In the first, or properly theological, section dealing with God, one strophe is devoted to direct praise of God in terms typical of the saint's Latin writings, while the second sets up the paradox of all attempts to praise God: "No man is worthy to name you" (Italian mentovare = Latin nominare). This introduction is followed by a cosmological section of seven strophes devoted to praise of the Creator as revealed "with" (cun) and "through" (per) his creatures, with the sun (the central manifestation of divine light and goodness) being given the primary role:
McGinn, Bernard.“Was St. Francis a Mystic?” in Doors of Understanding: Conversations on Global Spirituality in Honor of Ewett Cousins. ed. Steven Chase (Quincy, IL, Franciscan Press, 1997) pp145-74.
6. New interpretation that he composed it all at once.
Fumagalli has made a proposal that the Canticle was written all at once and bases this in the internal consistently. This is a very recent interpretation and it remains to be seen whether scholars will accept this viewpoint in the light of the classical perspective that the Canticle was written in stages. Namely, that the strophe on peace and Sister Death were written later.
Fumagalli also sees a relationship between the Canticle and the Our Father proposing that the Our Father is also one of the influences upon Francis as are the other more common claims such as the Canticle of the Three Young Men and Psalm 148. Even Fumagalli admits this is a subtle interpretation. Once again we will see if this novel interpretation finds acceptance with other scholars.
See pp. 29-30, 46 in Fumagalli, Edoardo. “Saint Francis, The Canticle, The Our Father.” Greyfriars Review 19 Sup. (2005) 1-87.
Notes on McGinn’s “Was St. Francis a Mystic?”
From this perspective, I do not tthink that the majority of Francis' own writings are explicitly mystical.
There may, however, be exceptionss to this, especially among the saint's prayers. The most striking of these is the "Canticle of Brother Sun" (also called the "Praise of the Creatures"), the poem Francis composed in his native Umbrian dialect toward the end of his life.27 This noted work, the earliest surviving religious poem in Italian, is a paradigm of all Francis' writings in its ability to mask subtle and profound
theology under a deceptively simpple presentation. A number of recent authors have made it central to their interpretation of his mysticism.28 The canticle reflects the saint's attitude toward the natural world as displayed in the numerous animal-stories found in the hagiographical accounts (though animals are not mentioned in the poem). While it is true that Francis was an innovator in Christian attitudes toward the environment, his vision of the "enfraternization" of the whole created world, that is, the mutual relation of all creation, must be seen in the context of his fundamental theological.belief in God as Creator, Redeemer and Savior revealed in Jesus Christ as Lord and as crucified
Servant.29
The canticle falls into four partts. In the first, or properly theological, section dealing with God, one strophe is devoted to direct praise of God in terms typical of the saint's Latin writings, while the second sets up the paradox of all attempts to praise God: "No man is worthy to name you" (Italian mentovare = Latin nominare). This introduction is followed by a cosmological section of seven strophes devoted to praise of the Creator as revealed "with" (cun) and "through" (per) his creatures, with the sun (the central manifestation of divine light and goodness) being given the primary role:
McGinn, Bernard.“Was St. Francis a Mystic?” in Doors of Understanding: Conversations on Global Spirituality
in Honor of Ewett Cousins. ed. Steven Chase (Quincy, IL, Franciscan Press, 1997) pp145-74.
Laudato sie, mi signore, cun tucte
le tue creature,
spetialmente messor lo frate sole,
lo qual'e iorno, et allumini noi
per loi. 'Et ellu e bellu e radiante con grande splendore,
de te, altissimo, porta
significatione. Laudato si, mi signore, per sora luna e le stelle,
in celu 1'ai formate clarite et ppretiose et belle. *«•* [Praised be you, My Lord, with all your creatures,
especially Sir Brother Sun,
who is the day and through whom yyou enlighten us. And he is beautiful and shining with great splendor,
of you, Most High, he bears the llikeness. Praised be you, My Lord, through Sister Moon and the stars,
in heaven you formed them shiningg and precious and
beautiful.]w
The first three stanzas deal withh the heavenly realm of the sun, moon and stars, each of which are characterized by three attributes, while the next four stanzas describe the four elements of terrestrial
McGinn 153
medieval cosmology (air, water, ffire, earth), assigning four attributes to each. The continuous repetition of the preposition per reveals much about the canticle's complexity. Who is the one giving praise and how, especially in light of Francis' use of the passive imperative (laudato) rather than the active? In other writings (e.g., 2 EpFid 61) Francis invites all creatures to praise God and some have seen a similar sense of agency in the per in the canticle, but the passive construction suggests that causal and instrumental connotations of per are more powerful here, that is, humans are called upon to praise God because God has created such wonderful creatures and especially by means of the creatures who manifest God's glory. In light of the apophatic insistence at the outset of the canticle, however, we may well agree with Giovanni Pozzi who emphasizes that in the deepest sense the per signifies that God alone is able to give God true praise in and through the entire enfraternized universe God has created.31
In the third, or anthropological,, part (traditionally said to have been
added by Francis to celebrate peace made between the bishop and mayor of
Assisi), two strophes praise those who pardon others for love's sake and those
who bear infirmity in peace, what we might describe as the fundamental active
and passive dimensions of Francis' understanding of following Christ. Finally,
in the last, or eschatological part, composed shortly before his death, Francis
praises God in three strophes through "Our Sister Bodily Death,"
expressing his hope to die in God's most holy will. Bodily (not spiritual) death
has no fears for the person who has understood the true meaning of praise.
Though Francis obviously knew andd depended on the creation psalms and
canticles of the Old Testament, his song strikes a new note both because of the
solidarity it expresses between the human and cosmic order and because of the
way in which it conveys an experience of the world as a single harmonious
theophany of God.32 We can, along with Ewert Cousins, speak of the canticle as
expressing a form of theo-phanic nature mysticism, which is to say that
Francis' consciousness of the world is more than just a sense of integration
with the cosmos conceived of as in some way divine, as found in some forms of
ancient classical mysticism (e.g., the Asclepius), or in modern nature mystics,
like Richard Jeffries.33 Francis presents a specifically Christian nature
mysticism in which the divine presence is experienced as luminously real and
immediate in the cosmos as a whole and in each of its elements insofar as
they reflect some aspect of the divine fullness. In discussing how the corporeal eye of the
resurrected body will see God in heaven, Augustine's
City of
In order to appreciate the full impact of Francis on the new mysticism, however, we cannot restrict ourselves to his own writings, but we must also utilize the picture of the saint found in the hagiography, because it was primarily this image that influenced subsequent Western mystical traditions. Two aspects of this picture are of central importance: Francis as ecstatic contemplative; and Francis as literal image of Jesus, especially through his reception of the stigmata.
Francis' writings provide no accounts of his own visions, though the saint insisted on direct access to God regarding the form of life he conveyed to his brothers. If Francis had visionary and ecstatic experiences, it is salutary to know that he did not think them worth writing about. (This marks him as belonging to the older Christian tradition in which depth of spiritual teaching was more important than personal charisms or accounts of one's own experience of God.)37 The hagiographical materials about Francis, however, portray him as a potent visionary, one who shows interesting analogies to the experiences ascribed to the Beguine Mary of Oignies and other contemporaries.38 For example, a developed picture of Francis the visionary is found in the Legend of the Three Companions, a text which some have seen as containing early materials emanating from reminiscences of the townfolk of Assisi and Francis' most intimate companions. Whatever the validity of this claim, the Legend is a good witness for the hagiographical picture of Francis as mystical visionary.
In the Legend, Francis is depicted as undergoing a form of ecstatic initiation culminating in the ne plus ultra experience of identification
Schmucki
“Three possible explanations have been offered to explain this sudden attack:
(a) a gastric ulcer aggravated by malnutrition and stress;
(b) a malignant tumor, a cancer of the stomach;
or © a recurring
malarial infection that reached the point of malarial cachexia.
Cf.
Octaian Schmucki. GR 13 (1999) 42-46 [FAED II p. 161 a]
Notes
from
The Canticle of the Creatures (1225-26)119
With the Canticle we arrive at Francis's most celebrated masterpiece.120 The Canticle encapsulates his deeply sacramental vision of reality and proclaims his wondrous image of God's glory, power, and goodness. Francis wrote the poem in his native Umbrian dialect while convalescing at San Damiano for over fifty days early in 1225,12] six to nine months after receiving the stigmata.122 It provides a culminating insight into Francis's doxological mysticism. The Canticle represents Francis's vision of the new creation where God's own self-expression throughout all creation transfigures all creation into a harmonious doxology of God's presence: All is God's self-gift: Praise God!
The Canticle is a deceptively simple poem that can be read on many different levels. Its organization has five basic parts123 forming a harmonious balance that follows a precise numerical scheme:124 1) stanzas 1-2 are theological, introducing a tension
138
between I he praise of God and an apophatic qualification directed at humans'25 marked by seven attributes reserved for God alone: most high, all powerful, good, praises, glory, honor, blessing; 2) stanzas 3-9 are cosmological, dividing the praise of God between (he firmament of the sun, moon, stars (3-5), with three attributes assigned to each, and the terrestrial four elements of air, water, fire, earth (6-9), with four attributes assigned to each; 3) stanzas 10-11 are anthropological, celebrating pardon and peace, the fruits of God's love; 4) stanzas 12-13 are eschatological, relating to the universality of death and the promise of eternal life; and 5) stanza 14 is probably a refrain to be sung after each verse.126
The Assist Compilation provides the Canticle's historical background.127 It conveys that, while almost blind, Francis greatly suffered physical afflictions,128 and the torment of living in a mouse-infested house. In this state of anguish he was "moved by pity for himself" and asked the Lord to help him bear his illness patiently. In response, Francis "was told in spirit" that he would receive a "great and precious treasure" for all his sufferings. The inner dialogue ends with a promise: "be glad and rejoice in your illness and troubles, because as of now, you are as secure as if you were already in my kingdom." The next morning, Francis gave thanks to the Trinity for "such a great grace and blessing" in promising him the kingdom and decided to write the Canticle:
139
Therefore for His praise, for our consolation and for the edification of our neighbor, I want to write a new Praise of the Lord for his creatures, which we use every day, and without which we cannot live. Through them the human race greatly offends the Creator, and every day we are ungrateful for such great graces, because we do not praise, as we should, our Creator and the Giver of all good.129
The praise of God, consolation of the spirit, and the edification of neighbor define the Canticle's threefold purpose. Once again the existential effect on Francis is profound. He is converted from angst to joy, and the result of the event is a spontaneous doxology.130
Even though the Assisi Compilation reports that the Canticle arose spontaneously, it did not originate in a vacuum. It has roots in Fran-1 cis's earlier prayers, especially The Praises to be Said at All Hours that he prayed at least eight times a day as a prelude to the Divine Office;131 he also ended each hour with a shorter prayer.132 Such prayerful repetition must have profoundly influenced his image of God and likely forms the immediate backdrop to the Canticle.133
140
Francis's own statement "I want to write a new Praise of the Lord" confirms it,"4 and the similar phraseology shared by the two prayers corroborates it.135 Thus, the Canticle sprang forth from the rich liturgical rhythm of the Praises and Office.
So when Francis is promised the kingdom, he utilizes memorized prayers to compose a new Praise of the Lord that is The Canticle of the (.features. But why if he is promised the heavenly kingdom does he praise physical reality? Four points will help illustrate how the Canticle represents, not only "a distinctive form of theophanic nature mysticism" in general, but a specific form of doxological mysticism that envisions the promise of a new creation.
First, if the Assist Compilation's report about Francis being promised the kingdom is reliable, then the Canticle should be interpreted within an eschatological framework. In this context, Francis sings the praise of the new creation.136 The three celestial objects of sun, moon, stars and the four elements of wind, water, fire, earth are all transfigured in a panoramic hymn of praise and become signs of the
141
new creation. But, what do the selection of the seven objects convey about the new creation?
The symbolism of the number seven is obvious. It recalls the first creation narrative in Genesis thereby affirming that God creates all things, creation is ordered, and above all, creation is good.137 To capture this, the Canticle employs the most inclusive symbols possible: the three orbs of the heavens and the four elements of earth to arrive at seven, the number of perfection. On the one hand, the sun, moon and stars represent everything that was known to exist in the heavenly firmament. All the seasons, night and day, as well as astrology depended on these celestial orbs. Thus, the rhythm of these celestial objects "creates" time itself. On the other, the four elements symbolically represent everything that exists on earth. Every solid (earth), liquid (water) and vapor (wind) and their transformation from one to another through the agency of heat (fire) represents the complex interconnectedness of creation. Thus, the harmony of these four elements "creates" all physical space. In effect, Francis's vision of the new creation involves all time and all space which ultimately point to God their eternal and infinite Creator. This imagery symbolically conveys Francis's new understanding of both God and creation as inextricably intertwined in a grand interconnected reality on every level of existence. Francis's imagery excludes nothing. The stanzas added later provide concrete examples of what the new creation entails: peace on earth and eternal life in heaven. The Canticle's all-inclusive doxology transforms every relationship into a mystical vision of the new creation.
Second, this eschatological interpretation gains support by considering the passive subjunctive construction of the Pater noster, "holy be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth
137. It also likely alludes to John 1:1 and the belief that creation is through the Word, and therefore, the affirmation that the new creation will likewise be through the Word's redemption.
138. Duba, "Doxology," 369. The "universality of praise" in Chapter 23 of the Earlier Rule which Francis tried to convey with his two lengthy litanies is now complete by employing simpler, more inclusive imagery; see above footnote 71 and related text. Also note the parallel between the number 70 in the two litanies and the number 7 in the cosmic elements.
142
as in
heaven."139 As Giovanni Pozzi points out, "(he- third petition \ of
(he Our Father is linguistically identical to the expression 'praised be' used
by Francis."140 So while The Praises to be Said at All I lours may be an
immediate source for the Canticle generally, the Our Father, which Francis said
before the Praises during the Office,141 is the immediate source for the
passive construction specifically. Moreover, the fact that this line of the Our
Father immediately precedes the eschatological hope of the kingdom elucidates
why Francis sings the praises of creation in response to the promise of the
kingdom, literally: "on earth as it is in heaven." Such a reading
identifies the Canticle as an eschatological celebration of the new creation!
Third, the key to the Canticle is the iterative phrase Laudato si, mi signore, per that occurs eight times,142 and provides the laude's structural and rhythmic backbone. The unique combination of the passive subjunctive "Praised be You" (Laudato si) with the complex meaning of the preposition per leads to the central question of who is giving praise in the Canticle? The answer centers on the interpretation of the preposition per. Four explanations have been offered, each with supporters and detractors:143 1} Per as causal, meaning
139. The Our Father was central to Francis's prayer life as well as that of the brothers. He
recited the prayer at least eight times a day (I, 139, 157), but if he followed the
directives for the lay brothers in the LR 3.3 then he recited the prayer at least
seventy-six times a day (I, 101). The ER 3.10 had the lay brothers reciting the
prayer eighty-six times a day (I, 66). Moreover, Francis wrote a prayerful
commentary of the Our Father that "is perhaps the only instance in which we find
an example of how Francis responded to his brothers' request to teach them how to pray" (I, 158); also see 2LtF 21 (I, 47), Test 18(1,
143
"for" where Francis exhorts humanity to give God praise for God's creatures;144 2) /;<•/• as agency, meaning "by" where creatures themselves give praise to God; 3) per as instrumentality, meaning "by means of" where humans praise God by means of creatures; and 4) per as mediation, meaning "through" where God is the very agent of praise to whom all creation begins and ends.145 In short, creation itself manifests God's self-communicative praise. Given the grammatical complexity of the Canticle, it seems that all four meanings of per (for, by, by means of, through) are valid and call for a "polyvalent" reading that struggles to express the nexus of relationships shared among God-Humans-Creation.146 Thus, the Canticle operates on several levels signifying distinct but interconnected relationships involving both praise and thanksgiving. Such genius should not be underestimated,147 because the report of Francis's own explanation for the prayer indicates that he understood the prayer on more than one level.148
Although a
polyvalent reading of per is warranted by external and internal evidence, the
translation of "through," with the implication that- 144
God is the very agent of praise, gains support when linked with the passive subjunctive "Praised be" (Laudato si). The important relation between laudato si and the Our Father was mentioned above, but there is deeper meaning to this unique construction that takes on special significance when combined with the preposition per. Given the apophatic restriction in strophe two,149 the mediating function of per, and the repetitive use of laudato si as a "theological passive" referring to God, Giovanni Pozzi convincingly argues that f "the one giving praise is the very God who is being praised."150 In the deepest sense only God's self-communication can give ' authentic praise to the ineffable mystery of the divine reality freely extended to creation by God's creative act. God's self-expressive praise of God through creatures exemplifies the central and climactic insight of Francis's doxological mysticism. Such an insight glimpses the ineffable beauty of God's self-communicative presence transforming everything in the new creation into participatory praise of God.
For Francis, the only proper response to God's self-communication as praise is to join in by praising. This dialectic between God's self-praise and the human's response through participatory praise is present in the transition between the passive subjunctive laudato si (3, 5-10, 12) and the active indicative laudate which ends the prayer (14).151 Further, if the closing stanza serves as the refrain, then the doxological dialectic between Creator and created permeates the entire Canticle. Such a dialectic strongly suggests that Francis understood mystical union to be in the very act of doxology itself. In effect, God and creation become one through praise!
The effects of this mystical union upon Francis's consciousness are graphically expressed by his use of the first person possessive
145
"my Lord" (mi signore), and in his change of language to his native Italian. On the one hand, Francis again, for the first time in twenty years, employs the first person in his prayer,152 and its very position in the grammatical construction of Laudato si, mi signore, per is suggestive. Between God's self-communicative praise echoing through creation, is a personal identification that directly joins Francis's praise to God's. With this doxological act, Francis participates in the reconciliation of the new creation resulting in his humble reception of a new personal identity. He now identifies himself by mystically joining God's own praise "with (cun) all your creatures."153 In effect, by joining God's self-expressive praise, Francis becomes a con-creator of the new creation; a profound mysticism has profound consequences. On the other hand, if language gives rise to thought, then Francis's shift in language signifies a new consciousness of God that spills over into his new vision of reality.154 Although he may have written the Canticle in the vernacular to more easily disseminate it,'55 this practical consideration does not preclude the simple fact that he may have shifted language because he wanted to express his new understanding in his own terms. In effect, both the use of the personal pronoun mi and the vernacular shift signifies a profound personal transformation. Fourth, Francis's new identity within the new creation is vividly ,, expressed by the use of the titles Brother and Sister throughout the
146
Canticlc.156 By joining God's self-expressive praise, Francis joins God's family. This is not mere sentimental imagery. Rather, three coupled siblings, surrounded by parents, order all creation into a reconciled cosmic family:
Sir Brother Sun
Sister Moon
Brother Wind
Sister Water
Brother Fire
Sister Mother Earth
All created things are brothers and sisters because they all originate from the same loving Father, and so with this imagery Francis celebrates "the universal fatherhood of God."157 Later in stanza 12 Francis introduces Sister Bodily Death thereby breaking the parallelism. However, Francis implies the parallel because he is the Brother who has been promised the eternal life of the Father's kingdom. So Sister Death sings with Brother Francis and together they join in God's self-expressive love, and through the act of participatory praise, they reconcile with each other.158 If this interpretation holds, then the addition of the eschatological stanzas about the universality of death and the promise of eternal life closes the Canticle at the same place where it initially arose, God's promise of the kingdom. In effect, God's self-communicative praise crowns the new creation with a cosmic communion of peace, harmony, and reconciliation.
If the Canticle represents creation as God's self-expressive doxology, then why is Christ, the perfect expression of God, not explicitly mentioned in the prayer? There are two elements that provide inferential evidence of Christ's pervasive albeit implicit
147
presence. First, just as in Chapter 23 of the Earlier Rule, Francis places an apophatic restriction at the outset: "no human is worthy lo men I ion your name." In the earlier prayer it is Christ who mediates between creation and the Father, and the same dynamic is implicit in the Canticle.159 It is Christ who enables Francis to join in God's praise. Thus, Francis's own participatory praise utters God's self-expression who is Christ. Since all creation is through the Word, the new creation is also through the Word.
Second, the identification of the created elements as brothers and sisters also points to Christ. Earlier in the Second Letter to the Faithful Francis wrote:
We are brothers, moreover, when we do the will of His Father who is in heaven . . . O how holy and how loving, gratifying, humbling, peace-giving, sweet, worthy of love, and above all things desirable it is to have such a Brother and such a Son: our Lord Jesus Christ!160
The Canticle extrapolates Francis's familial identification with Christ to all of creation.161 It is through Christ, God's Son, that all creation relates to the Father. And so, the "enfraterization" 162 of creation is ultimately rooted in the divine Sonship of Jesus Christ who is the invisible center of creation's interconnection. By identifying himself as the little brother, literally a lesser brother to the Son of God, Francis set out "to follow His footprints," and with the Canticle, Francis encounters God's vestiges or "footprints" throughout all creation. Thus, with a grand doxological theophany he renders all creatures as visible signs of God's invisible presence, and invites all creation to join in the participatory praise of God worshiping God through everything.
148
Stepping hack from the sheer beauty of the Canticle's vision, we can figuratively locate Francis at the circle's center ga/ing hack out at the wondrous circumference of God's majestic creation. Twenty years after hearing the voice of Christ at San Damiano, Francis, nearing death, returns to the place of his conversion. Just as he embarked on his journey by praying before the crucifix without uttering Jesus' name, he now gazes upon the harmonious splendor of God's "new" creation without again expressing Jesus' name. By standing in the center, the center seems to disappear because Francis, altogether penetrated by Christ, now looks out at the circle's circumference through Christ, and delighted by the beauty he sees, he responds by praising God through Christ. In a very real sense, the medium is the message. The medium is Christ and the message is that all the created elements are brothers and sisters who share the same origin from God and thus ultimately the same fundamental vocation: to give praise to God who is a mystery of Triune love. Francis calls all creation to share in this loving communion of God's self-praise. Such is the climatic insight of Francis's doxological mysticism.
With
this as a brief introduction to the Canticle I think we are ready to experience
the Canticle itself.
You
will recall that in my introduction I emphasized the importance of not only
talking about the Franciscan texts
but
that it is very important to read and experience the Franciscan texts.
I
want to invite you to taste the Canticle itself.
We
will straight tone the canticle.
Notice
that the handout (click on handout for a copy of the
Canticle)
has
the Canticle broken into SIDE ONE and SIDE TWO.
The
left half will be SIDE ONE
and
the right side will be SIDE TWO.
Let
us begin the recitation.
See Illia Delio Canticle article Fran Studies
52 (1992)
Eloi Leclerc Symbols of
St. Francis, The Canticle, the Our Father. Edoardo
Fumagalli GR vol. 19 (2005 Sup.)
Return to section
on Francis.
Return to Franciscan Mysticism page or to the Table
of Content.