Life of St. Francis of Assisi by Paul Sabatier (i am malala young readers edition TXT) 📖

10. 2 Cel., 1, 16; Spec., 100a-101b.

11. Giord., 14; cf. 2 Cel., 1, 17; Spec., 102; 3 Soc., 56 and 63.

12. Cum secundum. The original is at Assisi with Datum apud Urbem Veterem X. Kal. Oct. pont. nostri anno quinto (September 22, 1220). It is therefore by an error that Sbaralea and Wadding make it date from Viterbo, which is the less explicable that all the bulls of this epoch are dated from Orvieto. Wadding, ann. 1220, 57; Sbaralea, vol. i., p. 6; Potthast, 6561.

13. 2 Cel., 3, 118; Ubertin, Arbor. V., 2; Spec., 26; 50; 130b; Conform., 136a, 2; 143a, 2.

14. 2 Cel., 3, 83; Bon. 77. One should read this account in the Conform. according to the Antigua Legenda, 142a, 2; 31a, 1; Spec. 43b.

15. Tribul. Laur. MS., 12b; Magl. MS., 71b.

16. Luke, ix., 1-6. Tribul., 12b: Et fecerunt de regula prima ministri removere.... This must have taken place at the chapter of September 29, 1220, since the suppression is made in the Rule of 1221.

17. 2 Cel., 3, 81; Spec., 26; Conform., 175b, 1; 53a; Bon., 76; A. SS., p. 620.

18. The epitaph on his tomb, which still exists at S. M. dei Angeli bears this date: see Portiuncula, von P. Barnabas aus dem Elsass, Rixheim, 1884, p. 11. Cf. A. SS., p. 630.

19. Spec., 9b; Arbor. V., 3; Conform., 170a, 1; 2 Cel., 3, 124. Cf. Ubertini, Archiv., iii., pp. 75 and177.

Table of
Contents

The winter of 1220-1221 was spent by Francis chiefly in fixing his thought by writing. Until now he had been too much the man of action to have been able to give much thought to anything but the living word, but from this time his exhausted forces compelled him to satisfy his longing for souls by some other means than evangelizing tours. We have seen that the chapter of September 29, 1220, on one side, and the bull Cum secundum on the other, had fixed in advance a certain number of points. For the rest, complete liberty had been given him, not indeed to make a final and unchangeable statement of his ideas, but to set them forth. The substance of legislative power had passed into the hands of the ministers.2

That which we call the Rule of 1221 is, then, nothing more than a proposed law, submitted to a representative government at its parliament. The head of authority will one day give it to the world, so thoroughly modified and altered that Francis's name at the head of such a document will give but small promise, and quite indirectly, that it will contain his personal opinion.

Never was man less capable of making a Rule than Francis. In reality, that of 1210 and the one which the pope solemnly approved in November 29, 1223, had little in common except the name. In the former all is alive, free, spontaneous; it is a point of departure, an inspiration; it may be summed up in two phrases: the appeal of Jesus to man, "Come, follow me," the act of man, "He left all and followed him." To the call of divine love man replies by the joyful gift of himself, and that quite naturally, by a sort of instinct. At this height of mysticism any regulation is not only useless, it is almost a profanation; at the very least it is the symptom of a doubt. Even in earthly loves, when people truly love each other nothing is asked, nothing promised.

The Rule of 1223, on the other hand, is a reciprocal contract. On the divine side the call has become a command; on the human, the free impulse of love has become an act of submission, by which life eternal will be earned.

At the bottom of it all is the antinome of law and love. Under the reign of law we are the mercenaries of God, bound down to an irksome task, but paid a hundred-fold, and with an indisputable right to our wages.

Under the rule of love we are the sons of God, and coworkers with him; we give ourselves to him without bargaining and without expectation; we follow Jesus, not because this is well, but because we can do no otherwise, because we feel that he has loved us and we love him in our turn. An inward flame draws us irresistibly toward him: Et Spiritus et Sponsa dicunt: Veni.

It is necessary to dwell a little on the antithesis between these two Rules. That of 1210 alone is truly Franciscan; that of 1223 is indirectly the work of the Church, endeavoring to assimilate with herself the new movement, which with one touch she transforms and turns wholly from its original purpose.

That of 1221 marks an intermediate stage. It is the clash of two principles, or rather of two spirits; they approach, they touch, but they are not merged in one another; here and there is a mixture, but nowhere combination; we can separate the divers elements without difficulty. Their condition is the exact reflection of what was going on in Francis's soul, and of the rapid evolution of the Order.

To aid him in his work Francis joined to himself Brother Cæsar of Speyer, who would be especially useful to him by his profound acquaintance with the sacred texts.

What strikes us first, on glancing over this Rule of 1221, is its extraordinary length; it covers not less than ten folio pages, while that of 1223 has no more than three. Take away from it the passages which emanate from the papacy and those which were fixed at the previous chapter, you will hardly have shortened it by a column; what remains is not a Rule, but a series of impassioned appeals, in which the father's heart speaks, not to command but to convince, to touch, to awaken in his children the instinct of love.

It is all chaotic and even contradictory,3 without order, a medley of outbursts of joy and bitter sobs, of hopes and regrets. There are passages in which the passion of the soul speaks in every possible tone, runs over the whole gamut from the softest note to the most masculine, from those which are as joyous and inspiring as the blast of a clarion, to those which are agitated, stifled, like a voice from beyond the tomb.