De La Salle and His Brothers
Luke Salm, FSC
Address of Brother Luke Salm, F.S.C.
Professor of Religious Studies, Manhattan College
on the occasion of the
Inaugural John R. Mulhearn Lecture
De La Salle Chapel, Manhattan College
December 2, 1980
II. THE INSTITUTE
Although the educational adventure did not end with the death of the Founder in 1719, it
seemed at first as if it might. All during the rest of the eighteenth century, the
Brothers were tenacious in resisting any developments of change that might depart not only
from the spirit but from the letter of the legacy that De La Salle had left behind. It was
enough to be content with the extraordinary numerical growth, from little more than one
hundred Brothers in 1719 to just about one thousand in 1792. But there were no new
adventures into new areas of the educational apostolate. Even more surprising, as
Battersby notes, is that there was no inclination to spread the work outside of France.
This period of growth and consolidation came to a swift and unexpected end with the French
revolution. By the time the worst excesses were over, the Institute had all but
disappeared. The Brothers had all been dispersed and secularized; some were jailed, exiled
or executed. The Superior General himself was in jail and beginning to show the physical
and mental strain. All that was left were two small schools in Italy with only a handful
of Brothers barely hanging on. But somehow the charism and the spirit of adventure
prevailed. The shock of discontinuity was enough to spark the determination to begin anew,
in effect to re-found the Institute. Little by little the Brothers who survived began to
regroup their forces and find new recruits to help meet the challenge of rebuilding the
life of the Church in France.
The process of re-foundation was so successful that by the end of the nineteenth century
the Brothers had grown from almost nothing to an educational force 15,000 strong. More
significant than the numerical growth was the geographical expansion. The Institute during
this period spread to every part of the globe and recruited into the association of
Brothers, men of varied racial, national and cultural backgrounds. The charism and vision
of the Founder began to take on new meaning in the novelty and diversity of the
educational needs the Brothers were called upon to serve.
Nowhere was this more apparent than in the new foundations in the United States. As the
immigrant generations of Catholics in this country became upwardly mobile, it was no
longer necessary to desirable for the Brothers to limit their teaching to elementary
parish schools. Responsive to the call of the Church, the American Brothers embarked on
new adventures, opening secondary schools, boarding schools, military academies and
orphanages. The most revolutionary development of all was the venture of the Brothers into
the field of higher education. The needs in that area were particularly acute. A college
degree was necessary if Catholics were to break into the professional fields of law and
medicine, engineering and teaching. At the same time, it was important that such an
education be provided in an atmosphere where the Catholic faith of the students and their
immigrant origin would not be the object of attack or ridicule. Furthermore, the American
Church was faced with the problem of building a native clergy and colleges were needed to
provide the requisite instruction in the classical languages. The Bishops preferred the
Brothers' colleges for this purpose. They realized that, unlike colleges conducted by
orders of priests, the Brothers would not be tempted to lure young men with a priestly
vocation into their own novitiate and away from the diocesan seminary. In this adventure
into higher education, therefore, the Brothers saw that it was necessary to depart from
the letter of the Founder's prohibition against teaching Latin and his preference for
elementary education in parish schools for the poor.
This innovative approach did not sit well with the higher superiors in France. The
mistrust of the American adventure by the superiors of the Brothers was only part of a
larger climate of mistrust of the American Catholic experience by church officials in
Rome. It was the era of the Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX, the definition of papal
infallibility by Vatican I, the condemnation of Americanism by Leo XIII and of Modernism
by Pius X.
For the Brothers, these tensions came to a head in what became known as the Latin
Question. Despite reasoned and respectful argumentation by the American Brothers and
earnest entreaties by the American Bishops, the superiors insisted on the letter of the
Rule, forbade the teaching of Latin and, to drive the point home more effectively,
transferred all the Brother Presidents of the American Colleges, including the President
of Manhattan College, and assigned them to teaching duties in the grammar schools of
France and Egypt.
This could have been a mortal blow and, indeed, some of the Brothers' academies and
colleges had to close. But the spirit of adventure again prevailed. In the colleges that
survived, the Brothers began to open their eyes to new opportunities in higher education,
especially in science engineering and business. In a way they had a jump on those
institutions that were still rooted in a purely classical approach to higher education. It
is ironical that by the time the teaching of Latin was restored to the Brothers, by
intervention of the Pope in 1923, it was already apparent that quality education, even in
the humanities, was quite possible without Latin and Greek.
The way to a new era in the history of the Institute has been opened by Vatican Council II
and the General Chapters of 1966 and 1976. Three hundred years after the foundation, and
almost two hundred years after the near dissolution of the Institute in the French
revolution, we again confront essential change. We do not know what the future holds. That
is what makes it an adventure.
Before we move into the unknown, it might be appropriate after three hundred years to take
stock of where the adventure thus far has led us. One way to do this would be to ask the
question: What is a Brothers' school? The school has been, still is, and perhaps will
always be the dominant mode in which the Brothers educate. If we can succeed in isolating
the qualities that are distinctive of a Brothers' school, we can better appreciate what it
is the Brothers can bring to new forms of educational activity, to the new adventures in
education that lie ahead.
III. THE BROTHERS' SCHOOL
Thus far we have traced the educational adventure of De La Salle and his Brothers from an
historical perspective. This concluding section will be more reflective. For this purpose,
it is possible to suggest six elements which, taken together, constitute the concrete and
distinctive reality of the Brothers' school where the meaning of the whole adventure comes
together.
The first such characteristic is a sensitivity to social needs. This is what started the
adventure in the first place. The Founder became increasingly aware that the Christian
schools were one solution to the urgent needs of the artisans and the poor. The Rule of
the Brothers says: "The vocation of the Brothers is a total commitment directed to
the service of the poor through education." And again: "In his educational
activity the Brother...shows a special concern for those who lack material goods, personal
talent or human affection; this is the essential part of his mission." Even when they
are teaching the well-to-do, the Rule reminds the Brother that he is to teach "all
his students that they have a responsibility to bring the reign of justice and charity to
all the world."
The social problems of today's world are no less acute but much more complex than they
were in the Founder's time. And they are much less susceptible of direct and easy
solution. In our secularized society, a religiously motivated or sponsored approach to
social problems is not always welcome or even possible. Many situations of social
injustice cry out for radical solutions that demand resources that the Brothers simply do
not have. For these and other reasons, the Brothers in many parts of the world feel
justified in extending their educational work to secondary schools and colleges, to the
suburban apostolate as it might be called.
Yet, despite all the complexities and rationalizations, the Brothers know that they could
not lose their traditional sensitivity to the needs of the poor without losing their
identity. That is why the tuition in a Brothers' school is kept relatively low. The
Brothers try to expand scholarship programs, to make exceptional arrangements for the less
gifted students and to treat them with special concern. In the United States there is a
national committee of Brothers that serves as a stimulus and a resource for our schools to
introduce and to improve courses in social justice. These courses are designed to provide
not only instruction in abstract principles but also to sensitize students to global
social needs and, where possible, to provide some direct field experience in social
action. The Brothers themselves, unwilling to lose this perspective in the relatively
affluent ambiance where so many of them live and work, are becoming more conscious of the
need to adopt a simpler life style, to become themselves involved in movements to
alleviate world hunger, cut consumerism and change the social structures that perpetuate
oppression and injustice.
The second but not secondary characteristic of the Brothers' school is the importance
given to religious education. This, too, means something different than it did in the
Founder's day. Society today is no longer religiously homogeneous; it is not exclusively
or dominantly Christian, must less Roman Catholic. The 1966 Declaration on the Brother in
the Modern World recognizes this when it says: "Not all of those who come to a
Christian school are necessarily looking for an education that is explicitly Christian. A
keen sensitivity to the requirements of religious freedom obliges us not to impose
indiscriminately the same catechesis on all of our students, especially when they are more
mature."
For this reason, we recognize that religious education today can mean many things. It can
help a student understand his religious experience and commitment at the deepest level of
maturity and freedom. Religious education reveals the element of mystery in human
existence, the possibilities that transcend the empirical order, the horizons that expand
the meaning of what it is to live and to die. Religious education is value-centered
education and so concerned with all that relates to life, love, trust, fidelity, freedom,
justice and brotherhood. Religious education raises doubts about limited perspectives and
unexamined presuppositions; it raises the questions that can lead from agnosticism to
faith. A religious educator knows how to lead students who no longer respond to
traditional doctrine and creeds, legal codes or sacramental cult, to seek new words to
express what they doubt and what they believe, to externalize their awe at a transcendent
mystery in sign and ritual that they can relate to, to identify their failure and repent
of sin, to live out their commitment in justice and love. This in no way excludes the
opportunity that the Christian school has to provide students, when it is appropriate,
with formal instruction in the Christian faith and, even better, an introduction to the
more profound implications of the religious truth they already know and accept.
A third characteristic of the Brothers' school is commitment, in association, to teaching
as a vocation. It was at once the most difficult task and at the same time the most noble
achievement of John Baptist de La Salle to bring the Brothers to see that the teacher does
not merely work at a job; he has a vocation and a mission; the work that he does in the
classroom has a significance that is worthy of the commitment and dedication of a
lifetime. This commitment takes place in a community where teachers are associated
together to live out their vocation to teach. In the vow formula of the Brothers,
essentially unchanged since the Founder's time, the Brother begins by declaring that he
consecrates himself entirely to God to procure God's glory as far as he is able. Then the
Brother says: "For this purpose I promise to unite myself and to remain with the
Brothers of the Christian Schools who are associated together to engage in educational
work for the service of the poor." There is the commitment, there is the association,
there is the vocation.
In today's world there is a need to reaffirm the vocation of the teacher. Teaching is seen
today less as a vocation than as a profession, with professional standards to be met on
the one hand and professional privileges to be jealously guarded on the other. And
teaching is not generally regarded as one of the more lucrative professions. In the wake
of the upheaval that followed Vatican II, it is distressing to observe that while most
Brothers want very earnestly to preserve the schools, not very many are willing to teach
daily in the classroom. Brothers are more and more attracted to careers as administrators
and guidance counselors and in auxiliary services. Indispensable as these functions may
be, the Brothers' school will lose an important part of its identity if the teaching staff
does not appreciate the unique effectiveness of what happens between a competent committed
teacher and the students he faces in the classroom.
For that reason, the element of association is important. In today's educational
institutions this concept has to be, and indeed has been, expanded to include the lay and
clerical colleagues of the Brothers. The traditional sense of association is now
understood in terms of a genuine educational community where, in the pursuit of knowledge,
persons meet persons, mind speaks to mind and heart to heart. The Brothers play an
important part in this. The 1966 Declaration, already cited, challenges them to be
"the animating force of the school." But the Brothers can be this only as long
as their own attitudes and priorities reflect the importance of teaching as a vocation.
The fourth characteristic of the Brothers' school is the quality of the education that
takes place there. That is what the word "Christian" in the designation of the
schools originally stood for. The Founder favored the term Christian schools to
distinguish the Brothers' schools form the other charity schools of the day where chaos
rather than quality prevailed. In contrast to noisy and filthy ruffians in the charity
schools presided over by underpaid and undertrained masters, De La Salle insisted on
cleanliness, politeness, discipline and ‹ what was most unusual for the time ‹
regular attendance. His teachers, as we have seen, were dedicated and trained. This made
scholastic progress possible. In a short time, the bourgeoisie, who would never allow
their sons to mingle with the smelly roughnecks in the charity schools, began to seek
admission to the schools of De La Salle, happy now to have them receive their education
side by side with the poor. The Christian school got to be known as the best school in
town.
The Brothers still enjoy a reputation for running good schools. They have tried to keep
the standards of scholarship high and to provide the best possible professional training
for the Brothers. The reputation of the Brothers for maintaining discipline in their
schools is well known and perhaps a bit exaggerated. What is less well known is the spirit
of friendliness that the Brothers aim to have prevail in their schools. It is no accident
that the Brothers are called Brothers. The Founder himself encouraged them to relate to
their students as an older brother. This two-fold spirit of discipline and friendship
creates a climate that enhances the quality of the education that takes place in the
school. The loyalty of our alumni associations provides evidence for this. In today's
world, where quality education is more generally available than it was in the Founder's
time, it might be presumptuous to claim that the Brothers' school is always the best in
town. But wishing is one way to make it so.
The fifth characteristic of the Brothers' school is its emphasis on the practical. De La
Salle had a clear sense of what was needed to advance the social situation of the children
of the poor. If not the very first to offer instruction in French instead of Latin, he
argued for its practicality against the educational establishment of the time and
demonstrated that it could work. He wrote a manual for the schools that puts the emphasis
on the basics of reading, writing, and religious instruction with precise methodologies to
produce effective results. The importance he gave to cleanliness and the rules of
politeness made it possible for the children of the poor to move about more easily in the
stratified society of seventeenth-century France. The students left the Christian schools
well- trained in how to write business letters, contracts, bills of sale and with other
useful skills that would ensure a decent livelihood.
To this day, the Brothers' schools intended for the poor and disadvantaged still focus on
training in skills and trades that will make the students useful to themselves and to
society. When the Brothers extended their work to secondary schools and colleges, they
brought this practical orientation with them. More than in most similar institutions, the
Brothers' colleges, for example, tend to parallel instruction in the liberal arts with
pre-professional training in specialized fields, especially business and engineering. The
education of the Brothers themselves has tended to have a practical aim. More often than
not the training of the Brothers has been determined less by personal choice and more by
the needs of the schools; advanced degrees are earned by the Brothers not so much for
scholarly pursuits but rather to secure the credentials needed for accreditation of the
institutions in which they serve.
This practical sense is so deeply rooted in the Brothers that as a group they sometimes
seem to be almost anti-intellectual. That is not necessarily bad insofar as it keeps the
attention of the Brothers centered on the needs of the students. However, there have
always been some Brothers who develop into creative and productive scholars in their
respective fields. In our colleges, particularly, and in some secondary schools as well,
there are Brothers who argue that the most practical education is a sound theoretical one.
In an age of technical know-how and explosive discoveries in empirical science, society
needs theoreticians to think creatively and critically about what is going on in the
world. It would not be a betrayal of the Brothers' sense of the practical if their schools
also were to contribute a fair share of the future leaders in the humanities and the arts.
The sixth and final element that distinguishes the Brothers' school is rooted in the fact
that, although the Institute has lived its history within the organization of the Roman
Church, it has managed at the same time to keep a certain distance from it. The Founder
did not want the Brothers to become dependent on any particular bishop or local church
authority. When threatened in one diocese he would move to another. Since he did not want
to model his society too closely on any other religious congregation, he adopted a rather
bizarre religious habit and moved very cautiously in the matter of religious vows. Much
has been made of the fact that he sent a Brother to Rome, but this was less a gesture of
subservience than an attempt to secure papal approval that would authenticate and protect
the special character of his Institute. The total exclusion of the priesthood kept the
Brothers out of the mainstream of ecclesiastical politics and theological disputes. De La
Salle was careful, before his death, to arrange for the election of a Brother to succeed
him as Superior. Fundamentally obedient and intensely loyal to the Church, he yet kept an
independent stance for the sake of the imperatives he saw in the gospel.
With some notable exceptions, this attitude has prevailed in the history of the Institute
and in the Brothers' schools. It has helped the Brothers to be receptive to students of
other faiths. In some cases, it has made them less cautious than clerics might be in
encouraging an open and critical attitude to some aspects of Catholic policy and
observance. The Brothers seem more inclined to emphasize the simplicity of the Christian
lifestyle and to minimize manifestations of ecclesiastical pomp. Although the Brothers and
their students respect and admire priests and the priesthood, sometimes almost
excessively, they manage by and large to dispense with the external deference due to
clerical privilege and rank. Being laymen themselves, the Brothers understand and tend to
support movements to give laymen and laywomen more leadership roles in the Church.
More than anything else, the Brothers have kept alive in the Church the spirit and reality
of brotherhood. Brothers are not fathers in any sense of the word. The Brothers are happy
that the horizontal model of brotherhood is replacing the vertical model of fatherhood in
contemporary language and life. some of the Brothers seem happy, too, at the realization
that brotherhood implies sisterhood, that their brotherhood is the basis for an equal and
equitable relationship with their sisters. In all of these respects, the fact that the
Brothers are brothers gives them an original and prophetic role in the life of the Church.
Those, then, are six distinctive features of the Brothers' school. To recap them briefly,
they are: sensitivity to social needs, religious education, teaching as a vocation,
practical instruction, quality education, and a unique relation to the Roman Church. Many
other schools, no doubt, manifest many of these same qualities. But taken together they
seem to describe that elusive something that we call a Brother's school. It is what we try
to express when we say of one of our graduates, "Oh, he's a Brothers' boy!" That
expression, by the way, will have to be revised now that the Brothers also teach girls. It
won't quite do to say, "Oh, she's a Brothers' girl!"
This concludes our survey of the educational adventure of De La Salle and his Brothers. We
know that there are more adventures that await us in the future, but that is not for
analysis tonight. The Founder did not know what he was in for when he began, and neither
did you when you came her tonight. But relief is on the way. Class dismissed.
 
|
