St. Francis of Assisi

[St Columcille]

Considering I am about to finish my orientation phase with the Secular Franciscan Order, and I was starting a conversation with another member who considers themselves outside the faith, yet percieves or respects St. Francis of Assisi, I was thinking this is a good place to start a discussion on St. Francis of Assisi's ethos and his influence or impact that he has had in the world and within ourselves. I have no idea where this discussion will lead us. However, I do plan to discuss more when I find a more appropriate forum for the discussion. Eventually, I should like to discuss the Rule of St. Francis for Seculars individually and how other Christians might reflect on scriptural aspects of the Rule as well as how to impliment the rule or adapt it to specific circumstances.

As such, I am leaving the discussion open and hope that the poll question and answers will help direct the discussion. It is not really meant as an apologetic, just a sort of personal reflection from other people.

 

[lawrance]

Considering I am about to finish my orientation phase with the Secular Franciscan Order, and I was starting a conversation with another member who considers themselves outside the faith, yet percieves or respects St. Francis of Assisi, I was thinking this is a good place to start a discussion on St. Francis of Assisi's ethos and his influence or impact that he has had in the world and within ourselves. I have no idea where this discussion will lead us. However, I do plan to discuss more when I find a more appropriate forum for the discussion. Eventually, I should like to discuss the Rule of St. Francis for Seculars individually and how other Christians might reflect on scriptural aspects of the Rule as well as how to impliment the rule or adapt it to specific circumstances.

As such, I am leaving the discussion open and hope that the poll question and answers will help direct the discussion. It is not really meant as an apologetic, just a sort of personal reflection from other people.

I don't consider my self out side of the faith! i could talk about St Francis all day.
I am just not in the Catholic order but i would like to be maybe but there is not many Franciscans hear in Australia i would have to drive a long way just to talk to them.
And i have no interest in going to a Catholic Church where people are not interested in talking about Christ.

 

[St Columcille]

I don't consider my self out side of the faith! i could talk about St Francis all day.
I am just not in the Catholic order but i would like to be maybe but there is not many Franciscans hear in Australia i would have to drive a long way just to talk to them.
And i have no interest in going to a Catholic Church where people are not interested in talking about Christ.

Sorry, I misunderstood you. I consider only three Christian groupings: Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant. When you said you were not a Protestant, and you did not affirm being Catholic nor mentioned anything in regards to Orthodox--Eastern nor Oriental, I assumed your faith in Christ as a Christian was of a backslidden state. However, I hope you would head the advice of the writer of Hebrews:

Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who has promised is faithful. 24 And let us consider how to provoke one another to love and good deeds, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

The Holy Bible : New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition. 2008 (Heb 10:23–25). Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.

I would hope that you would not let your past experiences taint you by preventing from meeting together with other Christians. Some Catholics may or may not agree with me on what I am about to advise you. However, I feel that Pope John Paul II's encyclical "Ut Unum Sint" does compel you to have some fellowship with other Christians if your own personal situation prevents you by distance, by economy, from attending Mass. You need to have others provoke you to love and good deeds. Now, I go to a Catholic Church, and I do not know any reason why people would not want to talk about Christ, since Christ is the very center of the Mass. And if the parish laity is lax, it is a perfect time for you to emulate St. Francis of Assisi and bring about genuine reform. To stay away is a silly excuse. And this is where imitating Paul as he imitates Christ comes in when imitating Francis of Assisi as he imitated Christ. The popular catch phrase "What Would Jesus Do?" is exemplified in the saints as St. Francis of Assisi.

 

[aspen]

I love Chesterton's view of St. Francis

http://www.ignatiusi...ancis_may05.asp


:

 

[St Columcille]

Considering the Rule of St. Benedict is perhaps one of the most influential documents on Western monasticism, it might be fun to compare the Rule of St. Francis with St. Benedict's Rule. However, since you are married, I am guessing that as an oblate that there is a secular or third order of Benedict?

I have the Rule of St. Benedict both in book and electronic format. I also have the Rule of St. Francis for the first order on my LDLS software system, but the third order Rule I only have in my "Secular Franciscan Companion" and in the SFO resource library commentaries. I am thinking the Rule of St. Benedict that I own would not be fully implimented by seculars unless it is some sort of cenobitical community. I've been to a Benedictine monastery in Oceanside, CA when I was in the Marine Corps stationed at Camp Pendleton back between 1993-97. This monastery seemed more hermetical as I would expect most would be.

 

[aspen]

Considering the Rule of St. Benedict is perhaps one of the most influential documents on Western monasticism, it might be fun to compare the Rule of St. Francis with St. Benedict's Rule. However, since you are married, I am guessing that as an oblate that there is a secular or third order of Benedict?

I have the Rule of St. Benedict both in book and electronic format. I also have the Rule of St. Francis for the first order on my LDLS software system, but the third order Rule I only have in my "Secular Franciscan Companion" and in the SFO resource library commentaries. I am thinking the Rule of St. Benedict that I own would not be fully implimented by seculars unless it is some sort of cenobitical community. I've been to a Benedictine monastery in Oceanside, CA when I was in the Marine Corps stationed at Camp Pendleton back between 1993-97. This monastery seemed more hermetical as I would expect most would be.

Yes, I have been a third order Benedictine for about 8 years - we are just called oblates.

Yeah, I've stayed at that monastery before and it really is a hermitage. My monastery is Mt. Angel in Mt. Angel Oregon and is much more of a traditional monastery. Check in out on the web, sometime.

I felt called to the Carmelites at first, but I found it too difficult to practice their rule in everyday life. The Benedictines emphasis on balance and hospitality and lectio divina really made me realize that I am called to practice Christ's sanctification in my heart in this form of community.

I am glad you have found the Franciscans - my wife is enjoying her work with the poor a great deal more simply by following the example of the SFO.

Have you seen Into Great Silence? I simply love it - In fact, I find myself watching it as a meditation. Check in out:

Synopsis: Nestled deep in the postcard-perfect French Alps, the Grande Chartreuse is considered one of the world's most ascetic monasteries. In 1984, German filmmaker Philip Groning wrote to the Carthusian order for permission to make a documentary about them. They said they would get back to him. Sixteen years later, they were ready. Groning, sans crew or artificial lighting, lived in the monks' quarters for six months--filming their daily prayers, tasks, rituals and rare outdoor excursions.

 

[Thankful 1]

Considering I am about to finish my orientation phase with the Secular Franciscan Order, and I was starting a conversation with another member who considers themselves outside the faith, yet percieves or respects St. Francis of Assisi, I was thinking this is a good place to start a discussion on St. Francis of Assisi's ethos and his influence or impact that he has had in the world and within ourselves. I have no idea where this discussion will lead us. However, I do plan to discuss more when I find a more appropriate forum for the discussion. Eventually, I should like to discuss the Rule of St. Francis for Seculars individually and how other Christians might reflect on scriptural aspects of the Rule as well as how to impliment the rule or adapt it to specific circumstances.

As such, I am leaving the discussion open and hope that the poll question and answers will help direct the discussion. It is not really meant as an apologetic, just a sort of personal reflection from other people.

I read a biography of Francis that was written by a woman, but it was many years ago, and I don’t remember her name. But in sharing her findings with people in the Franciscan Order, there was much disparity in their findings and hers.



Her understanding was that Francis was very against people going to seminaries. And Jesus finely told Francis to stop fighting, that he would keep three of his followers for him. I remember that she shared that Francis told people they should not even own bibles.



Also she said that when Francis was all fitted out in armor and was on his way to the Crusades, Jesus spoke to him and said: Francis are you going to follow the prince to the world or are you going to follow me? That is where Francis gave away his armor, and stayed home. This had to be changed by the Church, because the pope was the prince who started the Crusades.



Jesus then asked Francis to rebuild his church. Francis misunderstood, and thought he meant rebuild an old church building.



I could and can really relate to what this woman wrote about Francis, because most of what Francis believed has been taught to me by Jesus also.



After my expierance of reading one person’s understanding of Francis, and then hearing other people’s understanding, saw that one can’t believe anything that is written. People make the written word say just what suits him or her. People do this with the Written Word of God, so it is much easer to do it with any other writing.

 

[St Columcille]

I read a biography of Francis that was written by a woman, but it was many years ago, and I don’t remember her name. But in sharing her findings with people in the Franciscan Order, there was much disparity in their findings and hers.



Her understanding was that Francis was very against people going to seminaries. And Jesus finely told Francis to stop fighting, that he would keep three of his followers for him. I remember that she shared that Francis told people they should not even own bibles.

Also she said that when Francis was all fitted out in armor and was on his way to the Crusades, Jesus spoke to him and said: Francis are you going to follow the prince to the world or are you going to follow me? That is where Francis gave away his armor, and stayed home. This had to be changed by the Church, because the pope was the prince who started the Crusades.

Jesus then asked Francis to rebuild his church. Francis misunderstood, and thought he meant rebuild an old church building.

I could and can really relate to what this woman wrote about Francis, because most of what Francis believed has been taught to me by Jesus also.

After my expierance of reading one person’s understanding of Francis, and then hearing other people’s understanding, saw that one can’t believe anything that is written. People make the written word say just what suits him or her. People do this with the Written Word of God, so it is much easer to do it with any other writing.

There are many books on St. Francis. The most important of which seems to be the "Early Documents" which is a four volume set. It is always best to find the books with the imprimatur and nihil obstat. However, in regards to the specific comments above. Yes, Jesus did tell Francis to rebuild his church, and he took it to mean literally building churches at first. In regard to Francis giving up his armour, and what Jesus told him... yes that did happen. As regarding something that needed to be changed because of the pope starting the crusades, that is something which I would disagree with. There would have been no need for the Crusades had it not been for Muslim expansion, it was deemed a threat by all of Europe. In the first instance, regarding owning bibles and such, it was not like our own day. Bibles were expensive. He lived in 1220, all the bibles were written by hand, and the process to make books was costly. Due to the Rule of St. Francis that focused on Gospel poverty, to take literal the passages where Jesus tells his disciples to go out and not take anything with them... it was natural for St. Francis to instruct his followers not to own anything but the clothes on their back. Ownership of materials in Francis' idealogy meant that it was something by which needed protection, and if needing protection would lead to harming others. If you don't own any materials, nobody can steal from you, nobody can envy what you don't have, and nobody would harm you in the process of forcefully taking something not their own. I think you might misunderstand the life and times that St. Francis lived due to the comforts we have in our contemporary age.

 

[Thankful 1]

There are many books on St. Francis. The most important of which seems to be the "Early Documents" which is a four volume set. It is always best to find the books with the imprimatur and nihil obstat. However, in regards to the specific comments above. Yes, Jesus did tell Francis to rebuild his church, and he took it to mean literally building churches at first. In regard to Francis giving up his armour, and what Jesus told him... yes that did happen. As regarding something that needed to be changed because of the pope starting the crusades, that is something which I would disagree with. There would have been no need for the Crusades had it not been for Muslim expansion, it was deemed a threat by all of Europe. In the first instance, regarding owning bibles and such, it was not like our own day. Bibles were expensive. He lived in 1220, all the bibles were written by hand, and the process to make books was costly. Due to the Rule of St. Francis that focused on Gospel poverty, to take literal the passages where Jesus tells his disciples to go out and not take anything with them... it was natural for St. Francis to instruct his followers not to own anything but the clothes on their back. Ownership of materials in Francis' idealogy meant that it was something by which needed protection, and if needing protection would lead to harming others. If you don't own any materials, nobody can steal from you, nobody can envy what you don't have, and nobody would harm you in the process of forcefully taking something not their own. I think you might misunderstand the life and times that St. Francis lived due to the comforts we have in our contemporary age.

Yes there is agreement on some of what we both believe about Francis. And of course you being Catholic would have to support the pope and his going into the Crusades. That alone makes me not trust the writings about Francis that the Church indorses.



The Catholic Church before Constantine the Great was pacifist, and God never rescinded his Word. (Matthew 5:39) “You have learnt how it was said: ‘Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.’ But I say this to you: offer the wicked man no resistance.”



You see Jesus told me as he did Francis, that we are not to hurt/harm anyone for any reason.



You failed to address Francis’ true ministry and that was to rebuild his Church, and if he was successful of not. The Church needed rebuilding because it no longer walked in the grace of God. It became part of the world.

 

[St Columcille]

Yes, I have been a third order Benedictine for about 8 years - we are just called oblates.

I'd be interesting in knowing how the Rule of St. Benedict has been adapted to the third order.

Do you have a sort of "secular companion" that would reflect these changes?

Sorry for being a little hard-line in my other posts. I guess in some ways, there are fleshly desires of which I would like the Church to change, to help me live in a comfort zone, at worst, of sinfulness or , at the very least, in mediocrity. Perhaps this is how you understand your "liberal" mind, something which is a burden of the mind.

Yes there is agreement on some of what we both believe about Francis. And of course you being Catholic would have to support the pope and his going into the Crusades. That alone makes me not trust the writings about Francis that the Church indorses.



The Catholic Church before Constantine the Great was pacifist, and God never rescinded his Word. (Matthew 5:39) “You have learnt how it was said: ‘Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.’ But I say this to you: offer the wicked man no resistance.”



You see Jesus told me as he did Francis, that we are not to hurt/harm anyone for any reason.



You failed to address Francis’ true ministry and that was to rebuild his Church, and if he was successful of not. The Church needed rebuilding because it no longer walked in the grace of God. It became part of the world.

St. Francis was successful in rebuilding the Church, and this is only where his influence is felt. As such, the apostolate ministries that the two fraternities that I have been blessed to participate with have, for Chattanooga, a ministry to AIDS patients and, for Nashville, a ministry to the homeless. I have heard great things in regards to some hospitals having a "Franciscan wing" where terminal patients are cared for. The manner of reform that Francis undertook was internal reform. As far as the Church after Constantine, well, Francis did go after his conversion of his own accord to minister to the Crusaders in Egypt where King John and Pelagius were fighting against Al-Kamil. King John was so impressed with St. Francis of Assisi, that he was buried next to him instead of where he as a King would have been naturally buried. I just get the impression that what you want Francis of Assisi to be and what he actually was is not an easy cookie-cutter. Francis of Assisi was both simple in his expression, but also very complex. I'd say Francis is easier understood than Martin Luther, but both men were in their respective greatness rather paradoxal.

 

[Thankful 1]

I'd be interesting in knowing how the Rule of St. Benedict has been adapted to the third order.

Do you have a sort of "secular companion" that would reflect these changes?

Sorry for being a little hard-line in my other posts. I guess in some ways, there are fleshly desires of which I would like the Church to change, to help me live in a comfort zone, at worst, of sinfulness or , at the very least, in mediocrity. Perhaps this is how you understand your "liberal" mind, something which is a burden of the mind.



St. Francis was successful in rebuilding the Church, and this is only where his influence is felt. As such, the apostolate ministries that the two fraternities that I have been blessed to participate with have, for Chattanooga, a ministry to AIDS patients and, for Nashville, a ministry to the homeless. I have heard great things in regards to some hospitals having a "Franciscan wing" where terminal patients are cared for. The manner of reform that Francis undertook was internal reform. As far as the Church after Constantine, well, Francis did go after his conversion of his own accord to minister to the Crusaders in Egypt where King John and Pelagius were fighting against Al-Kamil. King John was so impressed with St. Francis of Assisi, that he was buried next to him instead of where he as a King would have been naturally buried. I just get the impression that what you want Francis of Assisi to be and what he actually was is not an easy cookie-cutter. Francis of Assisi was both simple in his expression, but also very complex. I'd say Francis is easier understood than Martin Luther, but both men were in their respective greatness rather paradoxal.

Francis was a man of God, and in my opinion Martin Luther was not. Francis was much more than Luther ever hoped to be.



No Francis did not rebuild the Church. You also failed to address Francis opposition to people going to seminaries.



What about what Jesus said to Francis when he asked Francis if he was going to follow the prince of the world or him? Who was the prince of the world that Francis was going to follow?



By the way I am no longer under the headship of the Catholic Church, but I am not a Protestant.

 

[St Columcille]

No Francis did not rebuild the Church. You also failed to address Francis opposition to people going to seminaries.

What about what Jesus said to Francis when he asked Francis if he was going to follow the prince of the world or him? Who was the prince of the world that Francis was going to follow?

I am perusing "The Little Flowers of Saint Francis" and do not see his opposition to people going to seminaries. I'll have to read the story to gather a sort of context. I do recall he was against ownership for those who followed his Rule. However, he allowed one of the brothers to marry and did not oppose him from marrying after seeing him struggle. We all have our particular calling, and if someone is not right for seminary, it is quite possible that he was just denying the individual and not making a broad sweeping general rule that one could not go to a seminary. In fact, there were many educated Francicans with St. Bonaventura becoming a Doctor of the Church. Not only that, but I do not see any Rule of St. Francis denying people from seminary not for the Seculars nor the Religious.

As far as the second instance, I am under the impression that you are referring to his giving up military persuits. According to the "introduction" of The Little Flowers of St. Francis of Assisi, it states the following:

But his military career was brief and disappointing. Captured during a battle between Assisi and Perugia, he spent a frustrating year as a cheerful and popular prisoner of war. After a period of illness he set out to fight for the Pope, but a revelation which he received in nearby Spoleto urged him to serve the Lord rather than man, so he went home and began to turn to Christ in solitary prayer. At this time he was also granted an unforgettable vision of Jesus suffering His Passion on the Cross. (Ugolino di Monte Santa Maria. "The Little Flowers of St. Francis of Assisi." Tran. Raphael Brown. Image Book. New York. 1958. p.14)

So the context, if this is the instance you are referencing is not following the "prince of this world or Him," but between "serving the Lord rather than man."
In this case, it is only referencing to St. Francis and not to the whole Crusaders. St. Francis was a son of a wealthy textile merchant and following after his earthly father's will at the time. His father wanted him to gain prestige and to further profit the family name and business.

 

[Thankful 1]

I am perusing "The Little Flowers of Saint Francis" and do not see his opposition to people going to seminaries. I'll have to read the story to gather a sort of context. I do recall he was against ownership for those who followed his Rule. However, he allowed one of the brothers to marry and did not oppose him from marrying after seeing him struggle. We all have our particular calling, and if someone is not right for seminary, it is quite possible that he was just denying the individual and not making a broad sweeping general rule that one could not go to a seminary. In fact, there were many educated Francicans with St. Bonaventura becoming a Doctor of the Church. Not only that, but I do not see any Rule of St. Francis denying people from seminary not for the Seculars nor the Religious.

As far as the second instance, I am under the impression that you are referring to his giving up military persuits. According to the "introduction" of The Little Flowers of St. Francis of Assisi, it states the following:

But his military career was brief and disappointing. Captured during a battle between Assisi and Perugia, he spent a frustrating year as a cheerful and popular prisoner of war. After a period of illness he set out to fight for the Pope, but a revelation which he received in nearby Spoleto urged him to serve the Lord rather than man, so he went home and began to turn to Christ in solitary prayer. At this time he was also granted an unforgettable vision of Jesus suffering His Passion on the Cross. (Ugolino di Monte Santa Maria. "The Little Flowers of St. Francis of Assisi." Tran. Raphael Brown. Image Book. New York. 1958. p.14)

So the context, if this is the instance you are referencing is not following the "prince of this world or Him," but between "serving the Lord rather than man."
In this case, it is only referencing to St. Francis and not to the whole Crusaders. St. Francis was a son of a wealthy textile merchant and following after his earthly father's will at the time. His father wanted him to gain prestige and to further profit the family name and business.

Thank you I have often wondered what the Catholic Churches sanitized version would say about some parts of Francis’ life.



There was a time that the Catholic version would have pleased me. Now it only makes me feel sad. Sad because I don’t believe the truth is being shared with us.



Don’t you ever wonder why it is that now the Church accepts killing of other people? If you know anything about the history of the Church you should know that the Early Churchwas pacifist. Jesus told us:(Matthew5:39) “You have learnt how it was said: ‘Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.’ ButI say this to you: offer the wicked man no resistance.”



Also the Church needs to take a very hard look at itself. It is no longer teaching the Word of God. I am not only speaking of the Catholic Church. There is no Church teaching the message that Jesus taught.



Francis tried to share what I am sharing, and his success was about what my success has been so far.



Jesus taught community, no possessions, love and the very opposite of Capitalism. Jesus would never have owned a bank, or charged someone interest on a loan. A disciple of Jesus would never have taken advantage of a child. A disciple ofJesus would never have allowed a sinner to stay in his community.





(1Corinthians 5:11) “What I wrote was that you should not associate with abrother Christian who is leading an immoral life, or is a usurer, or idolatrous, or a slander, or a drunkard, or is dishonest; you should not even eat a meal with people like that.”

 

[St Columcille]

(1Corinthians 5:11) “What I wrote was that you should not associate with abrother Christian who is leading an immoral life, or is a usurer, or idolatrous, or a slander, or a drunkard, or is dishonest; you should not even eat a meal with people like that.”

"usurer," Oxford English Dictionary Second Edition on CD-ROM (v. 4.0)
© Oxford University Press 2009:

One who practises usury or lends money at interest; a money-lender, esp. in later use one who charges an excessive rate of interest.


Thankful1, I am grateful that you are trying to live a godly lifestyle. One that is simplier. However, your ideas about St. Francis of Assisi has not exactly been demonstrated from more primary source materials regarding who St. Francis of Assisi was. A Catholic version of St. Francis is perhaps the only good resources we have on him. Since the Original Post is in regards to St. Francis of Assisi, I do not want to engage in a digression of the percieved wrongs of the Catholic Church. I will discuss it with you to a certain point if you actually cite some more primary and credible sources to substantiate who St. Francis of Assisi was and the circumstances of his time. Since Francis lived in the early 1200s, it is a long time away from Constantine the Great from around a.d. 306–337. The two periods are apart by about just around 900 years. Imagine how long ago it was from our modern time back to the Reformation in the 1500s. We are much closer to Luther, Calvin, and Arminius than Francis was to Constantine the Great.

 

[Thankful 1]

"usurer," Oxford English Dictionary Second Edition on CD-ROM (v. 4.0)
© Oxford University Press 2009:

One who practises usury or lends money at interest; a money-lender, esp. in later use one who charges an excessive rate of interest.


Thankful1, I am grateful that you are trying to live a godly lifestyle. One that is simplier. However, your ideas about St. Francis of Assisi has not exactly been demonstrated from more primary source materials regarding who St. Francis of Assisi was. A Catholic version of St. Francis is perhaps the only good resources we have on him. Since the Original Post is in regards to St. Francis of Assisi, I do not want to engage in a digression of the percieved wrongs of the Catholic Church. I will discuss it with you to a certain point if you actually cite some more primary and credible sources to substantiate who St. Francis of Assisi was and the circumstances of his time. Since Francis lived in the early 1200s, it is a long time away from Constantine the Great from around a.d. 306–337. The two periods are apart by about just around 900 years. Imagine how long ago it was from our modern time back to the Reformation in the 1500s. We are much closer to Luther, Calvin, and Arminius than Francis was to Constantine the Great.

The biography of Francis that I happened to read was so great, and I really could relate to what the person who wrote it said about Francis. So much of what she said God told Francis, was very much like what Jesus has said to me.



I have tried to share some of what I read about Francis, with Catholics that have studied his life, and it almost seems that we have read about a different person.



I don’t care to get into a fight about the Catholic Church. In fact Jesus told me to cooperate with and not to fight the Catholic Church. I personally believe that my cooperating with the Church is to help heal its faults.



You see I was a Catholic until into my forties. I went to Mass and Communion everyday. I truly loved the Church. When Jesus started teaching me I soon saw that the church was not teaching the truth. I did not know what to do. I asked Jesus how I could stay submitted to a Church that was not teaching the truth and he told me that I was no longer to be under the Churches headship.



I can tell just about any Catholic that a Christian who knows God will not sin, and there is no understanding. Yet St. Maximus the Confessor taught the same thing that Jesus taught me, and he got his tongue, and right arm cut off for teaching it. The Church made him a Saint, but it does not teach what he taught.

 

[St Columcille]

The biography of Francis that I happened to read was so great, and I really could relate to what the person who wrote it said about Francis. So much of what she said God told Francis, was very much like what Jesus has said to me.

I do not know the author, nor the name of the biography, because you failed to mention it. I am more a stickler for accuracy when it is needed. Like my quoting the introduction to "The Little Flowers" I had to correct the notion that what was said was between the prince of the world and Christ, when it was between Christ and man. There is a significant difference between serving man and serving the prince of the world. Francis of Assisi was serving the intentions of his family, and laid it down in front of the bishop. Being completely bare naked and renouncing his Father's wealth and status.

 

[Thankful 1]

I do not know the author, nor the name of the biography, because you failed to mention it. I am more a stickler for accuracy when it is needed. Like my quoting the introduction to "The Little Flowers" I had to correct the notion that what was said was between the prince of the world and Christ, when it was between Christ and man. There is a significant difference between serving man and serving the prince of the world. Francis of Assisi was serving the intentions of his family, and laid it down in front of the bishop. Being completely bare naked and renouncing his Father's wealth and status.

The biography I read about Francis had that Francis was selling his fathers goods to get money to fix up an old church. His father objected and then Francis dressed in a burlap bag, and panted a cross on it, giving up all possessions.



When Jesus asked me to give him my life and I was about to say yes, the Holy Spirit told me I would lose everything I owned if I gave my life to Jesus. A few months later I was living in a tent with my wife, and three babies.



You have to see that if the biography that I read was right, that the Church would never have allowed such a statement to enter the official biography.

Even the official church biography, lets one know that the pope was not following God, but man. It does not give the pope the status of Christ here on earth.



You need to look at what Jesus told us, and what the Church has done. Then you will see that the Church has deviated from the truth.

 

[St Columcille]

The biography I read about Francis had that Francis was selling his fathers goods to get money to fix up an old church. His father objected and then Francis dressed in a burlap bag, and panted a cross on it, giving up all possessions.



When Jesus asked me to give him my life and I was about to say yes, the Holy Spirit told me I would lose everything I owned if I gave my life to Jesus. A few months later I was living in a tent with my wife, and three babies.



You have to see that if the biography that I read was right, that the Church would never have allowed such a statement to enter the official biography.

Even the official church biography, lets one know that the pope was not following God, but man. It does not give the pope the status of Christ here on earth.



You need to look at what Jesus told us, and what the Church has done. Then you will see that the Church has deviated from the truth.

What it sounds like is a sort of secret gnosis. The bible was not hidden, it was not delivered to Joseph Smith, it was not written by "lost writings." The fact that you refuse to give up an author and title suggests to me that you are relying on a sentiment as proof rather than something more concrete as the actual writings of St. Francis or St. Clare or of the Franciscans who followed his Rule.

 

[Thankful 1]

What it sounds like is a sort of secret gnosis. The bible was not hidden, it was not delivered to Joseph Smith, it was not written by "lost writings." The fact that you refuse to give up an author and title suggests to me that you are relying on a sentiment as proof rather than something more concrete as the actual writings of St. Francis or St. Clare or of the Franciscans who followed his Rule.

You seem to be ignoring my points. The biography of Francis that I read was about thirty years ago, and I picked it up in a public library. Having the authors name would not mean anything, because she did not agree with the Catholic Official version. Using the written word can prove nothing. People change and read into the written word anything that suits him or her.



But even using the Catholic Official Version of Francis biography tells a story that shows that the Church is in the wrong. It lets one know that the pope was not following God, but man. It does not give the pope the status of Christ here on earth you see Jesus asked Francis was, using the Catholic version, he going to follow man. I don’t believe that if the pope were of God, that Jesus would have asked Francis if he was going to follow man. You see the Crusaders were following the pope, and isn’t the pope supposed to be Christ here on earth?

 

[St Columcille]

You seem to be ignoring my points. The biography of Francis that I read was about thirty years ago, and I picked it up in a public library. Having the authors name would not mean anything, because she did not agree with the Catholic Official version. Using the written word can prove nothing. People change and read into the written word anything that suits him or her.



But even using the Catholic Official Version of Francis biography tells a story that shows that the Church is in the wrong. It lets one know that the pope was not following God, but man. It does not give the pope the status of Christ here on earth you see Jesus asked Francis was, using the Catholic version, he going to follow man. I don’t believe that if the pope were of God, that Jesus would have asked Francis if he was going to follow man. You see the Crusaders were following the pope, and isn’t the pope supposed to be Christ here on earth?

Well, my thinking is that it is always better to hear it from the horse's mouth rather than from a spectator. St. Francis of Assisi was a Catholic through and through. The prism of an author that you haven't read for thirty years and who sounds like a Protestant seems to make the impression farther removed and distant. An artist can create a lovely unicorn, and author can write an impression, but that does not necessarily make unicorns real or that impression real. Which is why I feel the writtings of St. Francis and St. Clare offer the best source first, and then the writings of their Franciscan disciples. I appealed earlier to the Scripture only as an example that applying hermeneutical precision is necessary, and if you treat the writings of St. Francis and St. Clare with the same methodical research that you might apply to the Scriptures... you would not be preaching to me the fallacy of Catholicism in St. Francis day... you'd be able to show me with good citations, primary resources, and more authoritative and reliable sources.