Edition used: The Writings of Saint Francis of Assisi, newly translated
into English with an Introduction and Notes by Father Paschal Robinson, OFM (Philadelphia: The Dolphin Press, 1906).
In the Public Domain.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
to the most reverend Father Denis Schuler the one hundred and fifth successor of saint francis as minister general of the friars minor
I.
THE writings of St. Francis may, as is obvious, be considered from more than one point of view. Premising this, we are afforded a clue to the difficulty which has led students of Franciscan sources to divide themselves into two camps as to the objective value of these writings. Indeed, one writer1 goes so far as to compare the attitude of modern scholars toward them to that of the “Spiritual” and Conventual Friars respectively in the first century of Franciscan history. For while one party, led by M. Paul Sabatier,2 attaches what some regard as almost undue weight to the writings of St. Francis as a source of our knowledge of him, the other party, following Mgr. Faloci Pulignani,3 displays, we are told, a tendency to belittle their importance. The truth is, as Professor Muller long ago pointed out,4 that these writings afford us little if any information as to the life of their author, a fact which may perhaps account for their comparative neglect by so many of the Saint’s biographers, but it is not less true that they bear the stamp of his personality and reflect his spirit even more faithfully than the Legends written down on the very morrow of his death by those who had known him the best of all.1 For this reason they are well worth all the serious study that scholars outside the Franciscan Order are now beginning to give to them.
To say that the writings of St. Francis reflect his personality and his spirit is but another way of saying that they are at once formidably mystic and exquisitely human; that they combine great elevation of thought with much picturesqueness of expression. This twofold element, which found its development later on in the prose of mystics like St Bonaventure and in the verse of poets like Jacopone da Todi, and which has ever been a marked characteristic of Franciscan ascetic literature, leads back to the writings of the Founder as to the humble upper waters of a mighty stream. St. Francis had the soul of an ascetic and the heart of a poet. His unbounded faith had an almost lyric sweetness about it; his deep sense of the spiritual is often clothed with the character of romance. This intimate union of the supernatural and the natural is nowhere more strikingly manifested than in the writings of St. Francis, which, after the vicissitudes of well nigh seven hundred winters, are still fragrant with the fragrance of the Seraphic springtide
Important as the doctrinal aspect of St. Francis’ writings must of necessity be to all who would understand his life—since “the springs of action are to be found in belief, and conduct ultimately rests upon conviction”—it is foreign to the object of the present volume. I am here concerned with the literary and historical aspect of these writings. Suffice it to say that St. Francis’ doctrine,1 which received, so to speak, the Divine Imprimatur upon the heights of La Verna two years before his death,2 is nothing more or less than a paraphrase of the Sermon on the Mount. Nowhere can there be found a simpler literalness in the following of the “poverty, humility, and holy Gospel of the Lord Jesus” than in the writings of St. Francis, and any attempt to read into them the peculiar doctrines of the Abbot Joachim of Flora, the Humiliati, the Poor Men of Lyons, or any of their nameless followers, is as unjust as it is unjustifiable. Needless to add that St. Francis’ writings contain no new message. Indeed, the frequency with which certain very old and familiar aspects of the eternal truths are insisted upon by St. Francis in season and out of season, is not unlikely to weary the average reader who does not pause to look between the lines. This tendency to repeat himself, which is habitual with St. Francis, does not necessarily bespeak any dearth of ideas. On the contrary. His simple, childlike nature fastened upon three or four leading thoughts “taken from the words of the Lord,” which seemed to him all-sufficing, and these he works into his writings over and over, tempering them to the needs of the different classes he addresses as he understood them. If then we recall the circumstances under which St. Francis wrote and the condition of those for whom his writings were intended in the first instance, far from being bored, we may gain something from each new repetition.
Because St. Francis loved Jesus and His Eucharistic Passion, ardently, enthusiastically, almost desperately—to borrow Bossuet’s adjectives—his sympathy extended to every creature that suffered or rejoiced. His writings are eloquent witnesses to this far-reaching, all-embracing solicitude. They may be said to run over the whole gamut. Witness the soft note touched in the letter to Brother Leo and the deep masculine tone in which the Testament is pitched. On the whole, however, his writings fall naturally under three heads:1 those, like the Rules, which represent St. Francis as legislator; those, like the Letter to a Minister, which show us St. Francis as a spiritual father; and those, like the Praises and Salutations, in which we see St Francis as his earliest biographer saw him—“not so much a man praying as prayer itself.”2
It was Matthew Arnold, I believe, who first held St. Francis up to English readers as a literary type3—a type withal as distinct and formal as the author of the Divine Comedy. But however true a poet—and without St. Francis no Dante—it is certain that the Poverello was in no sense a man of letters. He was too little acquainted with the laws of composition to advance very far in that direction. His early years had been a bad preparation for study, and he ever remained a comparative stranger to the ecclesiastical and classical learning of his time, though probably his culture was larger than we might be led to conclude from his repeated professions of ignorance and the disparaging remarks of some of his early biographers. Through his mother he seems to have got some acquaintance with French;1 he received elementary instruction in reading and writing from the priests at San Giorgio, who also taught him enough Latin to enable him to write it in later years after a fashion,2 and to understand the ritual of the Church and its hymns, which he was wont to sing by the wayside. But in considering St. Francis’ literary formation, we must reckon largely with the education he picked up in the school of the Troubadours, who at the close of the twelfth century were making for refinement in Italy3 The imagery of the chansons de gestes seems to have exercised an abiding influence upon St. Francis’ life and writings, as is evident from his own tale of the Lady Poverty, which later inspired the pen of Dante and the brush of Giotto. Witness, too, his frequent allusions to the Knights of the Round Table; his desire that his Friars should become “the Lord’s Jongleurs,” and his habit of courtesy extended even to Sister Death.4 On the other hand St. Francis was nothing if not original. His writings abound not only in allegory and personification, but also in quaint concepts and naive deductions. His final argument is often a text of Holy Scripture, which he uses with a familiarity and freedom altogether remarkable. Indeed there are parts of his writings in which the interweaving of Scriptural phrases is so intricate as almost to defy any attempt to indicate them by references, the more so since the Biblical language adopted by St. Francis is not always taken from the Bible, but often from the Liturgy, Missal, and Breviary.1 For the rest, as Celano puts it, “he left empty ornaments and roundabout methods of speech and everything belonging to pomp and to display to those who are ready to perish; for his part he cared not for the bark, but for the pith; not for the shell, but for the nut; not for the multiple, but for the one only sovereign good.”2
If we may judge from the two solitary autographic fragments of his that have come down to us,3 St. Francis was not by any means a skilful penman. Be this as it may, St. Bonaventure clearly implies that he had a secretary,4 to whom he dictated notes, and affirms with Celano that the Saint signed such documents as called for his signature with the “sign thau,” or capital T.1 Whether or not St. Francis’ practice of signing his name thus has any connection with Brother Pacifico’s vision of the large T,2 is a matter of conjecture and of small import. What is certain is that St. Francis wrote little The most characteristic of his extant writings are very short, extremely simple in style, and without any trace of pedantry. If some of the longer pieces seem to show the touch of a more skilful hand than that of St. Francis, idiota et simplex, we need not on this account feel any misgivings as to their authenticity. Whatever assistance he may have received in pruning and embellishing certain of his later compositions from Cæsar of Spires or another, no one who examines these writings carefully can doubt but that they are the work of the great Saint himself.
From a literary standpoint perhaps the most carefully composed bit of St. Francis’ writing that has come down to us is the realistic picture of the miser’s death in the letter “To all the Faithful.” More interesting, however, to the student is the “Canticle of the Sun,” not only as an example of the simple, spontaneous Umbrian dialect rhyme which St. Francis taught his poet followers to substitute for the artificial versification of courtly Latin and Provençal poets, but also because of the light it throws on St. Francis’ literary method,—if method it may be called. His piecemeal fashion of composing as the spirit moved him, is also manifest in a very different work, the First Rule, as is evident from the modification and additions this strange piece of legislation suffered during the fourteen years it was in force.1 St. Francis’ practice of returning to his old writings, retouching and remoulding them, working them over and inserting parts of them in his new ones, goes far toward explaining difficulties which would otherwise arise from the resemblance between his different compositions.
For the rest, even though St. Francis’ literary culture was incomplete, his constant contemplation of the “things that are above” and the perfect purity of his life whetted alike his understanding of supernatural truth and of the human heart, and so it comes to pass that his simple words, written down in the far-off thirteenth century and with a fashion of speech different from ours, yet work wonders to this day, while the tomes of many a learned doctor “leave all things as they were before.”
It remains to say a few words concerning the history of St. Francis’ writings before coming to the writings themselves.
II.
The history of the writings of St. Francis, from the time of their composition in the far-off thirteenth century down to our own day, opens up a most interesting field for speculation. Who, it may be asked, first gathered these writings together? In answer to this question nothing definite can be said, for the early Legends and Chronicles of the Order are silent on the subject, and we must rest content to begin our inquiry with the oldest MS. collections containing the writings of St. Francis. Many such collections exist in mediæval codices, but any attempt to classify these MSS. is, in the present state of our documentation, beset by peculiar difficulties. Not the least of these difficulties arises from the fact that even as in the Legends or Lives of St. Francis we can distinguish a double current;1 so, too, in the early MS. collections two distinct families or categories are found representing or rather illustrating the twofold tradition and observance which date from the very beginnings of Franciscan history.2
The first place among these collections belongs to the MS. numbered 338, formerly in the Sacro Convento, but now in the municipal library at Assisi. Critics who have studied this early codex are not in accord as to its age.1 But it dates at least from the beginning of the fourteenth century. It includes eleven of the nineteen works here translated. They are contained in three parchment books in the following order: fol 12-16, The Second Rule of the Friars Minor;2 fol. 16-18, The Testament;3 fol. 18-23, Admonitions;4 fol. 23-28, The Letter to All the Faithful;5 fol. 28-31, The Letter to the General Chapter;6 fol. 31-32, Instruction to Clerics on the Holy Eucharist;7 fol. 32, Salutation of the Virtues;8 fol. 33, The Canticle of the Sun;9 fol. 34, Paraphrase of the Lord’s Prayer;10 fol. 34-43, The Office of the Passion;11 and fol. 43, The Regulation for Hermitages.12
The same collection either wholly or in part is given in the well-known fourteenth century compilation of materia seraphica known as Fac secundum exemplar from the opening words of its prologue, and which may be found in the Vatican MS. 4354, the Berlin MS. 196, the Lemberg MS. 131,1 and the Liegnitz MS. 122 The Mazarin MSS. 989 and 1743,3 as well as the Dusseldorf MS 132,4 may also be said to belong to this family of codices which present the writings of St. Francis in practically the same number and order as Mariano of Florence adopts in his Chronicle, composed about 15005
We now come to the second collection of St Francis’ writings, which is often found along with the traditional Legenda Trium Sociorum, and the Speculum Perfectionis. It is represented by the celebrated Florentine codex at Ognissanti,6 the codex 1/25 at St. Isidore’s, Rome,7 the Vatican MS. 7650,8 and the codex of the Capuchin convent at Foligno,1 all of which contain St. Francis’ works in almost the same order as that given by Bartholomew of Pisa, in his Liber Conformitatum.2
This second collection of the writings of St. Francis differs from the first one in several details. In the first place it omits the Instruction to Clerics on the Holy Eucharist and adds the letter To a Certain Minister3 Again, the Assisi and Liegnitz MSS., which are typical examples of the first collection, place the prayer, “O Almighty Eternal God,” etc.,4 at the end of the letter to the General Chapter, whereas in the Ognissanti MS. and others of the same family this prayer is found elsewhere. So, too, in the Assisi and Liegnitz MSS. the Salutation of the Virtues is inscribed “Salutation of the Virtues which adorned the Soul of the Blessed Virgin Mary and which ought to adorn the holy soul,” while in the Ognissanti and kindred MSS. the title of this piece reads: “Salutation of the Virtues and of their efficacy in confounding Vices.” These examples suffice to indicate that this twofold family of MSS. includes also a twofold reading, as becomes more evident from the variants noted elsewhere in the course of this work. Meanwhile, let us pass on from the MS. collections of St. Francis’ writings to the
Two diverse compilations, each containing part of the Opuscula, were published at the beginning of the sixteenth century. The first of these, known as the Speculum Vitae B. Francisci et Sociorum ejus,1 and quarried largely from the Actus Beati Francisci, contains (fol. 126-127) among various legends and other narrations some of St. Francis’ prayers, and (fol. 189) also the First Rule The second compilation, which is of a much more polemic character,2 and which contains a larger number of the Opuscula, appeared successively with some variations in form at Rouen in 1509 as the Speculum Minorum,3 at Salamanca in 1511 as the Monumenta Ordinis Minorum,4 and at Paris in 1512 as the Firmamenta trium Ordinum B. Francisci.1 The seventeenth century saw the appearance of
The honor of making the first serious attempt to collect all the writings of St. Francis belongs to the renowned Annalist of the Order, Father Luke Wadding.2 His celebrated edition of the Opuscula3 is distributed in three parts: Part I contains the Letters, Prayers, and the Testament; Part II, the Rules; and Part III, the Monastic Conferences, the Office of the Passion and Canticles, followed by Apophthegms, Colloquies, Prophecies, Parables, Examples, Benedictions, etc.
Wadding’s edition of the Opuscula differs mainly from all preceding collections in this, that whereas the latter contained only those pieces which as regards both matter and form were the handiwork of St. Francis, Wadding felt justified in including among St. Francis’ writings many dicta of the Saint found in the early Legends. For example, St. Bonaventure4 relates of St. Francis “Non enim securum esse putabat earum formarum introrsus haurire imagines.” Wadding, in his sixth Conference, by changing putabat into puto, gives this passage as the ipsissima verba of St. Francis Again, in the seventeenth Conference, he entirely changes the form of what St. Bonaventure elsewhere1 relates of St. Francis when he substitutes “Officium praedicationis Patri misericordiarum omni sacrificio est acceptius” for “Istius Miserationis officium Patri misericordiarum omni sacrificio firmabat acceptius.”
Thus it comes to pass that in Wadding’s edition, side by side with the undisputed writings of St. Francis, we find doubtful, even spurious, extracts from different sources attributed to the Seraphic Father. It must ever remain a matter of regret that Wadding, instead of following the oldest MSS. that he had at hand, was content to transcribe the incomplete and often interpolated parts of them he found in second-hand compilations, like that of Mark of Lisbon. His work from our standpoint is vitiated by imperfect research and unreliable criticism. But if Wadding was more profuse than prudent in his attribution of Franciscan fragments to the Founder, it must be remembered that he wrote at a time when even the highest minds troubled themselves little enough about literary exactness. For what we now glorify as “scientific criticism” had not yet become the fashion. The faults therefore of Wadding’s edition of the Opuscula are largely the faults of his time; and considering the difficulties to be overcome, the result of his labors was very creditable. And if he had never undertaken the task of collecting St. Francis’ writings, any attempt of ours to that end would be surely more arduous, and perhaps not so fruitful.
Several editions of St. Francis’ writings have appeared since Wadding’s day, notably those published by de la Haye,1 Von der Burg,2 and Horoy.3 But these editions are very imperfect. Their authors, in spite of the advance made in historical criticism since Wadding’s day, have merely reproduced and rejuvenated the edition of the great annalist. The same is true of the various translations of the Opuscula,—they are simply Wadding in Italian,4 English,5 French,6 German,7 or Spanish,8 as the case may be.
On the other hand, M. Sabatier’s strictures on the “numerous ecclesiastics” who have edited the writings of St. Francis, for not reprinting Wadding’s comments on them, are a trifle wide of the mark, seeing that their editions were prepared mainly for a class of readers whose point of view is practical and devotional, rather than theoretical and speculative, who read the writings of the saints not merely as historical or literary documents, but as words of spirit and of life. For such a clientele critical notes would be caviare indeed.
The remarkable upgrowth of interest in the sources of early Franciscan history that has characterized the literature of the past decade accentuated the need of a more perfect edition of St. Francis’ writings. The matter was soon taken in hand by the Friars Minor at Quaracchi—already famous in the literary history of the Order—and in 1904 they issued the
of the Opuscula.1 Without overlooking the internal character of each document, the Quaracchi editors based their edition upon the early MS. tradition, weighing by this standard all the various writings contained in the stereotyped editions of St. Francis’ works, with the result that many a familiar page that had come down to us on the good faith of Wadding was found wanting. Thus the seventeen letters commonly ascribed to St. Francis have been reduced to six, the Rules of the Second and Third Orders have been eliminated, only one of the twenty-eight monastic conferences, and one of the seven blessings, are left; most of the prayers have gone, and all the colloquies, prophecies, parables, etc, have likewise disappeared. Most likely the doubtful and suppositious works thus excluded often embody the doctrine and ideas of St. Francis; to a greater or lesser extent some of them may even be his in substance, but as there is no good reason to believe they are his own composition they are not entitled to a place among his writings.
The authentic works of St Francis left to us then, according to the Quaracchi edition, are the Admonitions, Salutation of the Virtues, Instruction on the Blessed Sacrament, the First and Second Rules of the Friars Minor, the Testament and Regulation for Hermitages, some fragments from the Rule of the Clares, Six Letters, the Praises of God, the Salutation of the Blessed Virgin, the Chartula containing the Laudes and Benediction for Brother Leo, the prayer Absorbeat, and the Office of the Passion.
The Quaracchi edition does not therefore embody any new matter, but it contains for the first time in any edition of St. Francis’ works the letter “To a Minister” in its entirety. For the rest, while purging the text of St. Francis’ writings of the many doubtful and apocryphal pieces with which they had come to be burdened in the course of time, the Quaracchi editors have perfected the text of the authentic writings by their emendations and collations, notes and comments, thus conferring the freedom of no small city upon the students of Franciscan sources.
The year 1904 also saw the publication, almost simultaneously, of two other works dealing with the Opuscula of St. Francis, written by well known professors at Bonn1 and Munich,2 and both of real value.3 It would be foreign to our present purpose to examine either of these works in detail. Suffice it to say that they accord in substance almost completely with the conclusions of the Quaracchi editors. If anything, they lean more on the side of kindliness toward certain doubtful writings. Thanks to this trilogy of works, and to certain learned criticisms which they have called forth from Fr. Van Ortroy,1 M. Sabatier,2 and Mr. Carmichael3 among others, we are now in a position to form a fairly accurate estimate of what St. Francis really wrote.
It is obvious, however, that in dealing with writings like those of St. Francis we are left largely to the probabilities of criticism; and criticism has by no means said the last word as to the authenticity of certain pieces. It may yet take away from St. Francis some writings now commonly ascribed to him; it may even give back to him others at present with seemingly greater likelihood made over to one or another of his immediate followers. But in the long run, to whatever criticism St. Francis’ writings may be subjected, the main lines will always remain the same. It may well be true as a recent writer4 has remarked, that it is not yet the time to essay a complete English edition of St. Francis’ writings, yet withal the lack of any translation of these writings in English which aims at fulfilling the requirements of modern criticism has led me to think that English students of Franciscan literature might be glad to have some such translation of them, however imperfect. To this end I have ventured to prepare this humble volume, which may perhaps be suffered tentatively, at least, to stand in the gap which it is not worthy permanently to fill.
My first object, then, is to give a literal and, I hope, accurate translation of the Latin text of the authentic writings of St. Francis as it stands in the critical Quaracchi edition. The present volume, however, represents something more than a mere translation of the Quaracchi text. In the first place it is not restricted to the Latin works of St. Francis, and as a consequence the “Canticle of the Sun,” which does not figure in the Quaracchi edition, finds a place here. I have often deviated from the order of the Quaracchi edition and have distributed the critical notes throughout the book instead of relegating them to the end. I have added an Introduction, Appendix, Bibliography and Index, besides much original matter collected at Quaracchi and elsewhere in Italy, when I was afforded an opportunity of consulting the original MS. authorities. I should state that I have not translated all the variants in the Latin text, but only such as change the sense. A table I had made for the purpose of indicating the probable date of each piece, I have omitted, since it remains a matter of pure conjecture when many were written.
I am glad of this opportunity to record my sincere thanks to all those who have assisted me in any way in the preparation of this volume. Not only have I profited by the labors of the Fathers at Quaracchi, but I have enjoyed the rare advantage of Fr. Leonard Lemmens’ personal interest in the work. To him, therefore, my grateful recognition is first due. I wish further to acknowledge my indebtedness to Mr. Montgomery Carmichael, who, amid his own literary labors, made time to assist me with many helpful suggestions. Moreover, by placing at my disposal all the references to Holy Scripture which occur in the Office of the Passion, which he had looked up and translated, he has afforded me very substantial aid. My thanks are also due to Father Stephen Donovan, O.F.M., for his kind cooperation in collating the text of the “Canticle of the Sun,” in the Assisi MS., with other versions, and for contributing the translation of it. For the generous loan of books of reference I am under obligation to Mgr. O’Hare, Father John J. Wynne, S.J., Fathers Ludger Beck, and Bede Oldegeering, O.F.M., and Mr. John A. Tennant; for the gift of their own writings to Father Cuthbert, O.S.F.C., Luigi Suttina, and Prof. A. G. Little; and for the photographs here reproduced to Mgr. Faloci Pulignani, M. Paul Sabatier and Signor Lunghi. I may perhaps be permitted to take this occasion to thank the Guardians at the Portiuncula, La Verna, St. Damian’s, and the Carceri, as well as the Friars at St. Antony’s and St. Isidore’s at Rome, at Ognissanti, Florence, and the Mother Abbess at Santa Chiara, for their courtesy and hospitality.
For the rest, it is with a clear sense of its many shortcomings and not without some diffidence that I offer this volume to the public. I shall be more than repaid for any labor its preparation may have entailed if its publication conduces ever so little toward making St. Francis better known and better loved. To this end I ask the reader to forget all that may be mine within these pages, and to remember only the words of him who, “saintlier than any among the saints, among sinners was as one of themselves.”1
Fr. Paschal Robinson, o.f.m.,
- Franciscan Convent, Paterson, N.J.
Feast of St. Agnes of Asissi, 1905.
“ [ ] nel crudo sasso, intra Tevere ed Arno,
Da Cristo prese l’ultimo sigillo,
Che le sue membra due anni portarno”
PART I
UNDER this title a precious series of spiritual counsels on the religious life has come down to us from the pen of St Francis The early Legends afford no indication of the time or circumstances of the composition of these Admonitions; nor is it possible to determine by whom they were collected. But they accord so completely with the Saint’s genuine works and are so redolent of his spirit that their authenticity is admitted by all.1 Moreover, the various codices in which these Admonitions may be found are unanimous in attributing them to St. Francis, while the number of the Admonitions2 and the order in which they are given in the different codices are almost the same as in the Laurentian codex at Florence, dating from the thirteenth century.
Codices containing the Admonitions of St. Francis are to be found at the following places 1. Assist (Munic. lib. cod. 338, fol. 18),—2. Berlin (Royal lib. cod. lat. 196, fol. 101);—3. Florence (Laurentian lib. cod. X. Plut XIX dextr., fol. 448),—4. Florence (cod. of the Convent of Ognissanti, fol. 5);—5. St. Floriano (monast lib. cod XI 148, fol 38);—6. Foligno (cod. of Capuchin Conv., fol. 21),—7. Lemberg (Univ. lib. cod. 131, fol 331),—8 Liegnitz1 (lib. of SS Peter and Paul cod. 12, fol 131),—9. Luttich (Munic. lib. cod. 343, fol. 154),—10. Munich (Royal lib. cod. lat. 11354, fol 25, number 1 only);—11. Naples (Nation lib. cod XII. F. 32, folio antepaen. numbers 6-27),—12 Oxford2 (Bodl. lib. cod. Canon miscell. 525, fol. 93);—13 Paris (Nat. lib. cod 18327, fol. 154),—14, 15. Paris (Mazarin lib. cod 1743, fol. 134, and cod. 989, fol 191),—16. Paris (codex at lib. of the Prot. theol faculty, fol. 86);—17. Prague (Metrop. lib. cod B XC., fol. 244),—18. Rome (codex at St. Antony’s Coll.,3 fol. 77),—19, 20. Rome (archiv. of St Isidore’s College, cod. 1/25, fol. 14, and cod. 1/78, fol 11);—21, 22. Rome (Vatic. lib. cod. 4354, fol. 39, and cod. 7650, fol. 10);—23. Toledo (capit. lib. cod. Cai. 25, no. 11, fol. 65) and—24 Volterra (Guarnacci lib. cod 225, fol. 141).
Of the foregoing codices that in the Laurentian Library at Florence dates from the thirteenth century; those at Ognissanti, Florence, at Assisi, Berlin, St Floriano, Oxford, Rome (St. Antony’s, St. Isidore’s, and the Vatican codex 4354), Toledo, and Volterra date from the fourteenth, and the others from the fifteenth century.
For the Quaracchi edition of the Admonitions, upon which the present translation is based, the two oldest of all these codices, to wit, those of the Laurentian Library at Florence and of the Municipal Library at Assisi,1 have been used Those at St Isidore’s, Rome, and Ognissanti, Florence, have also been consulted, besides the editions of the Admonitions found in the Monumenta Ordinis Minorum (Salamanca, 1511, tract. 11, fol. 276 r), the Firmamenta Trium Ordinum2 (Paris, 1512, P. I, fol. 19 r), and the Liber Conformitatum of Bartholomew of Pisa (Milan, 1510, fruct. XII, P. 11). But for the titles and paragraphing, which differ more or less in different codices, the Laurentian codex has been followed3
So much by way of preface to the
The Lord Jesus said to His disciples: “I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life. No man cometh to the Father, but by Me. If you had known Me you would, without doubt, have known My Father also: and from henceforth you shall know Him, and you have seen Him. Philip saith to Him: Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us. Jesus saith to him: Have I been so long a time with you and have you not known Me? Philip, he that seeth Me seeth [My] Father also. How sayest thou, Shew us the Father?”1 The Father “inhabiteth light inaccessible,”2 and “God is a spirit,”3 and “no man hath seen God at any time.”4 Because God is a spirit, therefore it is only by the spirit He can be seen, for “it is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing.”5 For neither is the Son, inasmuch as He is equal to the Father, seen by any one other than by the Father, other than by the Holy Ghost. Wherefore, all those who saw the Lord Jesus Christ according to humanity and did not see and believe according to the Spirit and the Divinity, that He was the Son of God, were condemned. In like manner, all those who behold the Sacrament of the Body of Christ which is sanctified by the word of the Lord upon the altar by the hands of the priest in the form of bread and wine, and who do not see and believe according to the Spirit and Divinity that It is really the most holy Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, are condemned, He the Most High having declared it when He said, “This is My Body, and the Blood of the New Testament,”6 and “he that eateth My Flesh and drinketh My Blood hath everlasting life.”1
Wherefore [he who has]2 the Spirit of the Lord which dwells in His faithful, he it is who receives the most holy Body and Blood of the Lord: all others who do not have this same Spirit and who presume to receive Him, eat and drink judgment to themselves.3 Wherefore, “O ye sons of men, how long will you be dull of heart?”4 Why will you not know the truth and “believe in the Son of God?”5 Behold daily He humbles Himself as when from His “royal throne”6 He came into the womb of the Virgin; daily He Himself comes to us with like humility; daily He descends from the bosom of His Father upon the altar in the hands of the priest. And as He appeared in true flesh to the Holy Apostles, so now He shows Himself to us in the sacred Bread; and as they by means of their fleshly eyes saw only His flesh, yet contemplating Him with their spiritual eyes, believed Him to be God, so we, seeing bread and wine with bodily eyes, see and firmly believe it to be His most holy Body and true and living Blood And in this way our Lord is ever with His faithful, as He Himself says: “Behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”7
The Lord God said to Adam: “Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat. But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat.”1 Adam therefore might eat of every tree of paradise and so long as he did not offend against obedience he did not sin. For one eats of the tree of knowledge of good who appropriates to himself his own will2 and prides himself upon the goods which the Lord publishes and works in him and thus, through the suggestion of the devil and transgression of the commandment, he finds the apple of the knowledge of evil; wherefore, it behooves that he suffer punishment.
The Lord says in the Gospel: he “that doth not renounce all that he possesseth cannot be” a “disciple”3 and “he that will save his life, shall lose it.”4 That man leaves all he possesses and loses his body and his soul who abandons himself wholly to obedience in the hands of his superior, and whatever he does and says—provided he himself knows that what he does is good and not contrary to his [the superior’s] will—is true obedience. And if at times a subject sees things which would be better or more useful to his soul than those which the superior commands him, let him sacrifice his will to God, let him strive to fulfil the work enjoined by the superior. This is true and charitable obedience which is pleasing to God and to one’s neighbor.
If, however, a superior command anything to a subject that is against his soul it is permissible for him to disobey, but he must not leave him [the superior], and if in consequence he suffer persecution from some, he should love them the more for God’s sake. For he who would rather suffer persecution than wish to be separated from his brethren, truly abides in perfect obedience because he lays down his life for his brothers.1 For there are many religious who, under pretext of seeing better things than those which their superiors command, look back2 and return to the vomit of their own will.3 These are homicides and by their bad example cause the loss of many souls.
I did “not come to be ministered unto, but to minister,” says the Lord.4 Let those who are set above others glory in this superiority only as much as if they had been deputed to wash the feet of the brothers; and if they are more perturbed by the loss of their superiorship than they would be by losing the office of washing feet, so much the more do they lay up treasures to the peril of their own soul.
Consider, O man, how great the excellence in which the Lord has placed you because He has created and formed you to the image of His beloved Son according to the body and to His own likeness according to the spirit.1 And all the creatures that are under heaven serve and know and obey their Creator in their own way better than you And even the demons did not crucify Him, but you together with them crucified Him and still crucify Him by taking delight in vices and sins. Wherefore then can you glory? For if you were so clever and wise that you possessed all science, and if you knew how to interpret every form of language and to investigate heavenly things minutely, you could not glory in all this, because one demon has known more of heavenly things and still knows more of earthly things than all men, although there may be some man who has received from the Lord a special knowledge of sovereign wisdom. In like manner, if you were handsomer and richer than all others, and even if you could work wonders and put the demons to flight, all these things are hurtful to you and in nowise belong to you, and in them you cannot glory; that, however, in which we may glory is in our infirmities,2 and in bearing daily the holy cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Let us all, brothers, consider the Good Shepherd who to save His sheep bore the suffering of the Cross. The sheep of the Lord followed Him in tribulation and persecution and shame, in hunger and thirst, in infirmity and temptations and in all other ways;1 and for these things they have received everlasting life from the Lord. Wherefore it is a great shame for us, the servants of God, that, whereas the Saints have practised works, we should expect to receive honor and glory for reading and preaching the same.
The Apostle says, “the letter killeth, but the spirit quickeneth.”2 They are killed by the letter who seek only to know the words that they may be esteemed more learned among others and that they may acquire great riches to leave to their relations and friends. And those religious are killed by the letter who will not follow the spirit of the Holy Scriptures, but who seek rather to know the words only and to interpret them to others. And they are quickened by the spirit of the Holy Scriptures who do not interpret materially every text they know or wish to know, but who by word and example give them back to God from whom is all good.
The Apostle affirms that “no man can say the Lord Jesus but by the Holy Ghost,”1 and “there is none that doth good, no not one.”2 Whosoever, therefore, envies his brother on account of the good which the Lord says or does in him, commits a sin akin to blasphemy, because he envies the Most High Himself who says and does all that is good.
The Lord says in the Gospel, “Love your enemies,” etc.3 He truly loves his enemy who does not grieve because of the wrong done to himself, but who is afflicted for love of God because of the sin on his [brother’s] soul and who shows his love by his works.
There are many who if they commit sin or suffer wrong often blame their enemy or their neighbor. But this is not right, for each one has his enemy in his power,—to wit, the body by which he sins. Wherefore blessed is that servant who always holds captive the enemy thus given into his power and wisely guards himself from it, for so long as he acts thus no other enemy visible or invisible can do him harm.
To the servant of God nothing should be displeasing save sin. And no matter in what way any one may sin, if the servant of God is troubled or angered—except this be through charity—he treasures up guilt to himself.2 The servant of God who does not trouble himself or get angry about anything lives uprightly and without sin. And blessed is he who keeps nothing for himself, rendering “to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s and to God the things that are God’s.”3
Thus may the servant of God know if he has the Spirit of God: if when the Lord works some good through him, his body—since it is ever at variance with all that is good—is not therefore puffed up; but if he rather becomes viler in his own sight and if he esteems himself less than other men.4
How much interior patience and humility a servant of God may have cannot be known so long as he is contented1 But when the time comes that those who ought to please him go against him, as much patience and humility as he then shows, so much has he and no more.
“Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven”2 Many apply themselves to prayers and offices, and practise much abstinence and bodily mortification, but because of a single word which seems to be hurtful to their bodies or because of something being taken from them, they are forthwith scandalized and troubled. These are not poor in spirit: for he who is truly poor in spirit, hates himself and loves those who strike him on the cheek.3
“Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.”4 They are truly peacemakers who amidst all they suffer in this world maintain peace in soul and body for the love of our Lord Jesus Christ.
“Blessed are the clean of heart: for they shall see God.”1 They are clean of heart who despise earthly things and always seek those of heaven, and who never cease to adore and contemplate the Lord God Living and True, with a pure heart and mind.
Blessed is that servant who is not more puffed up because of the good the Lord says and works through him than because of that which He says and works through others. A man sins who wishes to receive more from his neighbor than he is himself willing to give to the Lord God.
Blessed is the man who bears with his neighbor according to the frailty of his nature as much as he would wish to be borne with by him if he should be in a like case.
Blessed is the servant who gives up all his goods to the Lord God, for he who retains anything for himself hides “his Lord’s money,”2 and that “which he thinketh he hath shall be taken away from him.”3
Blessed is the servant who does not regard himself as better when he is esteemed and extolled by men than when he is reputed as mean, simple, and despicable: for what a man is in the sight of God, so much he is, and no more.1 Woe to that religious who is elevated in dignity by others, and who of his own will is not ready to descend. And blessed is that servant who is raised in dignity not by his own will and who always desires to be beneath the feet of others.
Blessed is that religious who feels no pleasure or joy save in most holy conversation and the works of the Lord, and who by these means leads men2 to the love of God in joy and gladness. And woe to that religious who takes delight in idle and vain words and by this means provokes men to laughter.
Blessed is that servant who does not speak through hope of reward and who does not manifest everything and is not “hasty to speak,”4 but who wisely foresees what he ought to say and answer. Woe to that religious who not concealing in his heart the good things which the Lord has disclosed to him and who not manifesting them to others by his work, seeks rather through hope of reward to make them known to men by words: for now he receives his recompense and his hearers bear away little fruit.
Blessed is the servant who bears discipline, accusation, and blame from others as patiently as if they came from himself. Blessed is the servant who, when reproved, mildly submits, modestly obeys, humbly confesses, and willingly satisfies. Blessed is the servant who is not prompt to excuse himself and who humbly bears shame and reproof for sin when he is without fault.
Blessed is he2 who shall be found as humble among his subjects as if he were among his masters. Blessed is the servant who always continues under the rod of correction. He is “a faithful and wise servant”3 who does not delay to punish himself for all his offences, interiorly by contrition and exteriorly by confession and by works of satisfaction.
Blessed is that brother who would love his brother as much when he is ill and not able to assist him as he loves him when he is well and able to assist him. Blessed is the brother who would love and fear his brother as much when he is far from him as he would when with him, and who would not say anything about him behind his back that he could not with charity say in his presence.
Blessed is the servant of God who exhibits confidence in clerics who live uprightly according to the form of the holy Roman Church. And woe to those who despise them: for even though they [the clerics] may be sinners, nevertheless no one ought to judge them, because the Lord Himself reserves to Himself alone the right of judging them. For as the administration with which they are charged, to wit, of the most holy Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which they receive and which they alone administer to others—is greater than all others, even so the sin of those who offend against them is greater than any against all the other men in this world.
Where there is charity and wisdom there is neither fear nor ignorance Where there is patience and humility there is neither anger nor worry.1 Where there is poverty and joy there is neither cupidity nor avarice. Where there is quiet and meditation there is neither solicitude nor dissipation. Where there is the fear of the Lord to guard the house the enemy cannot find a way to enter. Where there is mercy and discretion there is neither superfluity nor hard-heartedness.
Blessed is the servant who treasures up in heaven2 the good things which the Lord shows him and who does not wish to manifest them to men through the hope of reward, for the Most High will Himself manifest his works to whomsoever He may please. Blessed is the servant who keeps the secrets of the Lord in his heart.3
Thomas of Celano, St. Francis’ earliest biographer, bears witness to the authenticity of this exquisite Salutation in his Second Life, written about 12471 It is found in the codices of Assisi, Berlin, Florence (Ognissanti MS.), Foligno, Liegnitz, Naples, Paris (Mazarin MSS. and MS. of Prot. theol. fac.), and Rome (Vatican MSS.), above mentioned,2 as well as at Düsseldorf (Royal arch. cod B. 132), and is given by Bartholomew of Pisa in his Liber Conformitatum3 (fruct. XII, P. 11, Cap. 38). This Salutation was also published in the Speculum Vitae B. Francisci et Sociorum Ejus (fol. 126 v)4 and by Wadding,5 who followed the Assisian codex. This codex, which is the oldest one containing the Salutation, has been used for the Quaracchi edition, which I have here followed, as well as the Ognissanti MS. and the version given in the Conformities.
Now follows the
Hail,7 queen wisdom! May the Lord save thee with thy sister holy pure simplicity! O Lady, holy poverty, may the Lord save thee with thy sister holy humility! O Lady, holy charity, may the Lord save thee with thy sister holy obedience! O all ye most holy virtues, may the Lord, from whom you proceed and come, save you! There is absolutely no man in the whole world who can possess one among you unless he first die. He who possesses one and does not offend the others, possesses all; and he who offends one, possesses none and offends all; and every one [of them] confounds vices and sins. Holy wisdom confounds Satan and all his wickednesses. Pure holy simplicity confounds all the wisdom of this world and the wisdom of the flesh. Holy poverty confounds cupidity and avarice and the cares of this world. Holy humility confounds pride and all the men of this world and all things that are in the world Holy charity confounds all diabolical and fleshly temptations and all fleshly fears. Holy obedience confounds all bodily and fleshly desires and keeps the body mortified to the obedience of the spirit and to the obedience of one’s brother and makes a man subject to all the men of this world and not to men alone, but also to all beasts and wild animals, so that they may do with him whatsoever they will, in so far as it may be granted to them from above by the Lord.
The arguments already adduced to establish the authenticity of the Admonitions may also be used in behalf of this instruction addressed “to all clerics.” It is found in eight of the codices above mentioned—to wit, those of Assisi, Liegnitz, Paris (both Mazarin MSS. and at lib of Prot. theol. fac), Rome (St. Antony’s and St. Isidore’s MS. 1/73), and Dusseldorf. In Wadding’s edition of the Opuscula this instruction on the Blessed Sacrament is placed among the letters of St. Francis1 (No. XIII), but the early codices do not give it in an epistolary form,2 but rather as it is printed here without address or salutation. For the present edition the Assisian codex3 has been used as well as the codices of St. Antony’s and St. Isidore’s at Rome. The text is as follows
Let us all consider, O clerics, the great sin and ignorance of which some are guilty regarding the most holy Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ and His most holy Name and the written words of consecration. For we know that the Body cannot exist until after these words of consecration. For we have nothing and we see nothing of the Most High Himself in this world except [His] Body and Blood, names and words by which we have been created and redeemed from death to life.
But let all those who administer such most holy mysteries, especially those who do so indifferently, consider among themselves how poor the chalices, corporals, and linens may be where the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is sacrificed. And by many It is left in wretched places and carried by the way disrespectfully, received unworthily and administered to others indiscriminately. Again His Names and written words are sometimes trampled under foot, for the sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of God.1 Shall we not by all these things be moved with a sense of duty when the good Lord Himself places Himself in our hands and we handle Him and receive Him daily? Are we unmindful that we must needs fall into His hands?
Let us then at once and resolutely correct these faults and others; and wheresoever the most holy Body of our Lord Jesus Christ may be improperly reserved and abandoned, let It be removed thence and let It be put and enclosed in a precious place In like manner wheresoever the Names and written words of the Lord may be found in unclean places they ought to be collected and put away in a decent place. And we know that we are bound above all to observe all these things by the commandments of the Lord and the constitutions of holy Mother Church And let him who does not act thus know that he shall have to render an account therefor before our Lord Jesus Christ on the day of judgment. And let him who may cause copies of this writing to be made, to the end that it may be the better observed, know that he is blessed by the Lord.
The early history of the Seraphic legislation, to wit, the Rules of the Friars Minor, the Poor Ladies and the Brothers and Sisters of Penance, is intricate beyond measure, as those at all conversant with the subject are but too well aware. Withal, as regards the Rule of the Friars Minor, with which we are now more particularly concerned, St Francis seems, on the whole, to have written it twice. We have the formal testimony of St Bonaventure and other trustworthy authorities to this effect Suffice it to say that in the third year after he underwent the great spiritual crisis we call conversion, “the servant of Christ, seeing that the number of his Friars was gradually increasing, wrote for himself and for them a form of life in simple words, laying as its irremovable foundation the observance of the holy Gospel and adding a few other things which seemed necessary for uniformity of life.”1 It was this “form of life,” which has become known as the first Rule, that Innocent III approved viva voce, April 23, 1209.2 Some fourteen years later on, when the Order had greatly increased, Francis “desiring to bring into a shorter form the Rule handed down in which the words of the Gospel were scattered somewhat diffusely . . . caused a Rule to be written. . . . And this Rule. he committed to the keeping of his Vicar, who, after a few days had elapsed, declared that he had carelessly lost it. Once more the holy man . . . rewrote the Rule as at the first . . . and by Pope Honorius obtained its confirmation”1 on November 29, 1223. Such in briefest outline is the genesis of the first and second Rules written by St. Francis for the Friars Minor.
To these two Rules Prof Karl Muller2 and M Paul Sabatier3 would fain add a third, written, as they aver, in 1221 Their opinion, however, seems to rest upon a misconception, for the Rule which they describe as dating from 1221, is not a new one, but the same that Innocent III approved, not indeed in its original form, which has not come down to us,4 but rather in the form it had assumed in the course of twelve years, as a consequence of many changes and additions.5
Early expositors of the Rule, such as Hugo de Digne1 and Angelo Clareno,2 in their works always represent the Rule of which we are now speaking as the first and original one Moreover, none of the thirteenth century writers make mention of any third rule; they speak only of the changes and accretions which the first Rule suffered between 1209 and 1223.3
For example Jordan a Giano tells us that St. Francis chose Brother Cæsar of Spires, a profound student of Scripture and a devoted friend, to assist him in putting this Rule into shape,1 and Jacques de Vitry, writing about 1217, relates that the Friars “meet once a year . . . and then with the help of good men adopt and promulgate holy institutions approved by the Pope”2 One of these institutions has been recorded for us by Thomas of Celano in his Second Life. It appears that “on account of a general commotion in a certain chapter, St. Francis caused these words to be written ‘Let the friars take care not to appear gloomy and sad like hypocrites, but let them be jovial and merry, showing that they rejoice in the Lord, and becomingly courteous,’ ”3 words which may be found in the seventh chapter of the first Rule.4 Honorius III, on September 22, 1220, issued a decree forbidding the Friars to leave the Order after having made profession, or to roam about “beyond the bounds of obedience,” and this ordinance was added to the second chapter of the Rule.5
All permanent and powerful rules grow, as a recent writer6 has justly remarked, and it was thuswise that the first Rule of the Friars Minor received constant additions in the form of constitutions enacted at the Chapters held at Portiuncula after 1212 or otherwise—it is necessary to insist on this point1—during the fourteen years it was in force. It is not hard therefore to understand why the texts we have of this Rule do not always agree, since these changes and additions did not come to the knowledge of all through the same channel. For example, in the tenth chapter, which deals with “the sick brothers,” we have two different readings the one followed in the present translation is that found in the majority of the codices;2 the other, which has been incorporated by Celano in his Second Life,3 has been used by Hugo de Digne in his exposition of the Rule4 So too in the twelfth chapter, which prescribes that the friars should avoid the company of women, we find the following addition in the exposition of Angelo Clareno5 and the Speculum Vitae B Francisci.6 “Let no one walk abroad with them alone or eat out of the same plate with them at table,”—words not to be found in the more common form of the Rule
It remains to say a word about the relation of this first Rule to the second and definitive one approved in 1223. In treating of the difference between these two Rules, M. Sabatier errs still more strangely They had little in common, he avers, except the name, the second being the very antithesis of the first, which alone was truly Franciscan.7 To say the truth this assertion is less conformable to reality than it is to the theories and prejudices of the French writer. In so far as the first and second Rules written by St. Francis for the Friars Minor may be said to differ, the difference lies in this that the second Rule is shorter, more precise, and more orderly;1 but essentially and in substance it is clearly and truly the same as the first Rule. Indeed, the very wording of the second Rule already exists in great part in the first one, as any one must observe who makes an unbiassed comparison of the two So true is this agreement between the two Rules that they are often regarded as one and the same. Thus Pope Honorius III himself in his bull of 1223 confirming the second Rule makes no distinction between the two. “We confirm,” he says, “the Rule of your Order approved by Pope Innocent, our predecessor, of happy memory.”2 And Brother Elias, in a letter addressed to the friars “living near Valenciennes,” exhorts them to observe purely, inviolably, unweariedly the “holy Rule approved by Pope Innocent and confirmed by Pope Honorius.”3 Rightly then does Hugo de Digne (“spiritualis homo ultra modum”) describe the difference between the two Rules in his Exposition,4 when he says: “Some things were afterwards omitted for the sake of brevity from the Rule approved by Pope Innocent before it was confirmed by the bull of Pope Honorius.”1
For the rest, M Sabatier’s assertion that the “Spiritual” friars at the beginning of the fourteenth century did not dream of using the first Rule2 can hardly be admitted. To refute it, it suffices to cite Angelo Clareno, the leader of the “Spiritual” friars, who so very often mentions the first Rule in his exposition and whose citations prove that in the first quarter of the fourteenth century there was no memory of any other Rule, even in the camp of the rigorists. In a word, “the opposition which the distinguished French critic would fain set up between the two Rules, does not exist, and Chapter XV of his Life of St. Francis is not at all consonant with history.” Such is the assertion of the Quaracchi editors. Its truth will be best demonstrated by an examination of the text of both Rules, which now follow:
FIRST RULE OF THE FRIARS MINOR
Which St. Francis made and which Pope Innocent III confirmed without a Bull.3
In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. This is the life that Brother Francis begged might be conceded to him and confirmed by the Lord Pope Innocent. And he [the Pope] has conceded and confirmed it to him and to his brothers present and future.
Brother Francis, and whoever may be at the head of this religion, promises obedience and reverence to our Lord Pope Innocent and to his successors. And the other brothers shall be bound to obey Brother Francis and his successors.1
The Rule and life of these brothers is this: namely, to live in obedience and chastity, and without property, and to follow the doctrine and footsteps of our Lord Jesus Christ, who says: “If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come, follow Me.”2 And: “If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me;”3 in like manner: “If any man come to Me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple”1 “And everyone that hath left father or mother, brothers or sisters, or wife, or children or lands, for My sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting.”2
If any one, wishing by divine inspiration to embrace this manner of life, comes to our brothers, let him be kindly received by them. And if he be firmly resolved to undertake our life, let the brothers take great care not to meddle with his temporal affairs, but let them present him as soon as possible to their minister. Let the minister receive him kindly, and encourage him, and diligently explain to him the tenor of our life. This being done, if he be willing and able, with safety of conscience and without impediment, let him sell all his goods and endeavor to distribute them to the poor. But let the brothers and the ministers of the brothers be careful not to interfere in any way in his affairs, and let them not receive any money, either themselves or through any person acting as intermediary; if however they should be in want, the brothers may accept other necessaries for the body, money excepted, by reason of their necessity, like other poor. And when he [the candidate] shall have returned, let the minister grant him the habit of probation for a year; that is to say, two tunics without a hood and cord and breeches and a chaperon1 reaching to the girdle. The year of probation being finished, let him be received to obedience. Afterwards it shall not be lawful for him to pass to another Order, nor to “wander about beyond obedience,” according to the commandment of the Lord Pope.2 For according to the Gospel “no man putting his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.”3 If, however, anyone should present himself who cannot without difficulty give away his goods, but has the spiritual will to relinquish them, it shall suffice. No one shall be received contrary to the form and institution of the holy Church.
But the other brothers who have promised obedience may have one tunic with a hood, and another without a hood, if necessity require it, and a cord and breeches. And let all the brothers be clothed with mean garments, and they may mend them with sackcloth and other pieces, with the blessing of God, for the Lord says in the Gospel: they that are in costly apparel and live delicately and they that are clothed in soft garments are in the houses of kings.4 And although they should be called hypocrites, let them not cease to do good; let them not desire rich clothes in this world, that they may possess a garment in the kingdom of heaven.
The Lord says: “This kind [of devil] can go out by nothing but by fasting and prayer”;1 and again: “When you fast be not as the hypocrites, sad.”2 For this reason let all the brothers, whether clerics or laics, say the Divine Office, the praises and prayers which they ought to say. The clerics shall say the Office, and say it for the living and the dead, according to the custom of clerics; but to satisfy for the defect and negligence of the brothers, let them say every day Miserere mei, with the Pater noster; for the deceased brothers let them say De profundis, with Pater noster. And they may have only the books necessary to perform their Office; and the lay-brothers who know how to read the Psalter may also have one; but the others who do not know how to read may not have a book. The lay-brothers however shall say: Credo in Deum, and twenty-four Paternosters with Gloria Patri for Matins, but for Lauds, five; for Prime, Tierce, Sext, and Nones, for each, seven Paternosters with Gloria Patri; for Vespers, twelve; for Compline, Credo in Deum and seven Paternosters with Gloria Patri; for the dead, seven Paternosters with Requiem aeternam; and for the defect and negligence of the brothers, three Paternosters every day.
And all the brothers shall likewise fast from the feast of All Saints until the Nativity of our Lord, and from Epiphany, when our Lord Jesus Christ began to fast, until Easter; but at other times let them not be bound to fast according to this life except on Fridays. And they may eat of all foods which are placed before them, according to the Gospel.1
In the Name of the Lord let all the brothers who are appointed ministers and servants of the other brothers place their brothers in the provinces or places where they may be, and let them often visit and spiritually admonish and console them. And let all my other blessed brothers diligently obey them in those things which look to the salvation of the soul and are not contrary to our life. Let them observe among themselves what the Lord says: “Whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you also to them,”2 and “what you do not wish done to you, do it not to others”3 And let the ministers and servants remember that the Lord says: I have not “come to be ministered unto, but to minister,”4 and that to them is committed the care of the souls of their brothers, of whom, if any should be lost through their fault and bad example, they will have to give an account before the Lord Jesus Christ in the day of judgment.
Therefore take care of your souls and of those of your brothers, for “it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”1 If however one of the ministers should command some one of the brothers anything contrary to our life or against his
|
