Saint Bonaventure Part 3

It is a.s.serted that it was at the Chapter of Narbonne that the Franciscan habit received its present shape. Up to that time it appears to have been more or less identical with the dress worn by the Umbrian shepherds--a simple tunic with a girdle, and a hood to protect the head. It is not, however, easy to determine the precise nature of the alteration effected.

There is one incident of Bonaventure's administration which calls for special attention; an incident which has deeply influenced the historical estimate formed of him by certain writers. This is his action {48} with regard to John of Parma--his predecessor in the Generalship of the Order. The upholders of the rigorous observance of the Rule pretend to see in it evidence of harshness, injustice, nay, even of duplicity. This a.s.sumption, needless to say, is utterly devoid of solid foundation.

Owing to the peculiar temperament of the times and some untoward circ.u.mstances, John of Parma fell under the suspicion of heresy, and at the request of the Sovereign Pontiff it became necessary for Bonaventure to investigate the charge. The biographers of our Saint are at variance in determining the year in which this trial was held.

Wadding [Footnote 21] and the editors of our Saint's works [Footnote 22] place it under the year 1257, but as Father Livarius Oliger, O.F.M., points out in a review [Footnote 23] of Father Lemmens' recent "Life of St. Bonaventure," the investigation is known to have been proceeded with before Cardinal John Cajetan, who at the time was the Protector of the Order. Cardinal Cajetan, however, was nominated Protector of the Order "shortly after the a.s.sumption of Pope Urban,"

who was elected Pope, 29 August, 1261. This is a typical instance of the chronological difficulties and uncertainties which are a.s.sociated with the life of our Saint.

[Footnote 21: Tom. IV, Anno 1256. Nos. 5 and 6.]

[Footnote 22: II Tom. X, p. 48. No.4.]

[Footnote 23: "Archivium Franciscanum Historic.u.m," Annus III, Fasc. II, p. 346.]

{49}

How a man so remarkable for learning and virtue as the ex-General should have provoked such an accusation demands some further explanation.

In the first place, it must be borne in mind that this was the period when the Inquisition reigned in all the fervent zeal of its recent inst.i.tution. Whatever savoured in the least of heterodoxy, either in theory or in practice, aroused its vigilance. It was closely investigated and its author, no matter what admirable qualities he might otherwise display, was regarded with suspicion and distrust.

This att.i.tude of the ecclesiastical authorities was fully justified by the prevalence of false mysticism, under the guise of which the Waldenses and Albigenses were just then putting forth the most pernicious and subversive doctrines.

True mysticism is the perfection of Christianity. Its essence is union with G.o.d. The more perfectly it accomplishes this union, the more thoroughly it achieves its end. It is the n.o.blest and most exalted aspect of religion, but, at the same time, it is attended by very grave dangers. The mystic sees only G.o.d and his own soul--or rather he has no direct consciousness of anything but G.o.d alone. He converses with G.o.d and is guided directly by him--anything else is to a large extent ignored.

The danger of this state is apparent. The mystic is at the mercy of his imagination and of a thousand natural influences which he is liable to {50} mistake for the voice of G.o.d. And when he thinks that G.o.d speaks, no matter to what folly or extravagance the imagined voice may urge him, nor how clearly it may oppose the dictates of obedience, he considers himself bound to obey it; for is he not sure, even as St.

Peter, that he "must obey G.o.d rather than man!" Unless he possess a sound judgment and a thorough grasp of Catholic doctrine, or, failing these, unless he be humbly submissive to the teaching of some competent spiritual guide, he needs must go astray. This danger, Francis, who was a mystic in the truest sense of the word, avoided perfectly, but as much cannot be said of some of his earlier followers. For notwithstanding Pontifical utterances and the enactments of General Chapters, they persisted in maintaining that their particular views concerning the observance of the Rule were the only permissible ones. A mild form of fanaticism seems to have laid hold of them. Their immoderate regard for the Rule and its observance led them to extremes. They were convinced that it was inspired by our Lord Himself and they attributed to it an authority equal to that of the Gospels. Contending that it was perfectly clear and intelligible, they denied that any authority on earth had the power to explain or interpret it. In these ideas they were strengthened by the writings of Joachim, Abbot of Flora.

This remarkable man flourished about the latter {51} portion of the twelfth century. He was deeply imbued with the spirit of mysticism, and its dangers were only too fully realized in his case. In treating of the Blessed Trinity he erred seriously, and his doctrine was condemned by the Fourth Lateran Council. He seems to have considered himself inspired, and he gave utterance to a long series of prophecies concerning the Church's future. He declaimed vehemently against all ranks of the clergy--denouncing Popes, Cardinals and Bishops for their indifference and corruption, and predicting for them the most terrible punishments. Turning to the relations between mankind and G.o.d he proceeded to divide Revelation into three epochs: that of the Father, or the Old Testament; that of the Son, or the New Testament; and that of the Holy Ghost--a period which was to come and which would be much more perfect than the preceding two. It was to be characterized by the most powerful and universal sway of Divine Love, a clear vision of the eternal truths, and the rise of a contemplative monachism.

Notwithstanding these peculiar tenets, Joachim was a man of rare virtue and piety and he died in full union with the Church. He was regarded by many as a saint and a prophet, and his writings were thought to be divinely inspired. John of Parma, indeed, held him in high esteem, but some of the Brethren with whom he was intimately a.s.sociated, and to some extent identified, exceeded {52} the bounds of all moderation in their ardent advocacy of him. Inflamed as they were with intense religious fervour and deeply penetrated with a spirit of penance and self-sacrifice, the teaching of Joachim appealed most forcibly to them. His denunciation of the worldliness of the age, his contempt for all things temporal, his love of contemplation, and above all, his vivid prophecy about the inst.i.tution of a new Religious Order in which the light and love of G.o.d would govern all, filled them with unbounded admiration. They pretended to see in Joachim the precursor of St. Francis and the realization of his prophecy in the Order he established. Amongst the most extreme partisans of Joachim were two intimate friends of John of Parma--Friars Gerard and Leonard. Upon these princ.i.p.ally rested the suspicion of heresy. They were tried, found guilty, and condemned to perpetual confinement.

The trial of Blessed John of Parma then came on. He was accused of leaning to the views of Abbot Joachim and of wavering in his belief in the Trinity. The ex-General, perhaps, inclined somewhat to certain of the Abbot's views; in any case the suspicion that such was the fact had subjected him to many and great persecutions. The public character of John, the immense influence he wielded over a great part of the Order, rendered it imperative that the case should be thoroughly investigated and a definite issue come to at a public trial. Were {53} John guilty of heresy--the stern measure would be more than justified; were he innocent--his name would gain l.u.s.tre from the ordeal, and malicious tongues be silenced.

The details of the trial have not come down to us. Wadding [Footnote 24] merely gives us the result, stating "that iniquity was not found in him ". He admits, however, that John was too favourably inclined to the mysticism of Joachim, and that he submissively retracted in the presence of the Cardinal and a.s.sembled Fathers. A few details we have, but it is impossible to determine how far they are coloured with partisan prejudice. One historian states that the suavity of John's answers so wrought on his opponents that they openly declared that as a heretic he should be sentenced to perpetual imprisonment. To be stigmatized as a heretic was more than John could bear in patience.

Drawing himself to his full height and looking up to heaven he professed clearly and with ardent zeal his adherence to all the articles contained in the Apostles' Creed. "He a.s.sumed the role of an innocent follower of Christ," writes Angelo Clarenus, "and averred that he did believe as he ever had believed on that question as on all other questions what the Church holds and the Saints teach." This further incensed his accusers; and they determined to imprison for life their late Minister-General. That he was finally {54} acquitted must be attributed to the intervention of Cardinal Otto Boni--then one of the most influential members of the Sacred College and afterwards Pope Adrian V. He dispatched two letters, one to the Cardinal President, the other to Bonaventure, in which, among other things, he wrote: "It is with the deepest regret I have learned of the process inst.i.tuted against John of Parma, and that party strife has led to his arraignment on a charge of heresy. For many years--even before my elevation to the Cardinalate--I have had personal warrant both as to the orthodoxy of his doctrine and the holiness of his life; nor have I yet found anyone more loyal to his creed or more faithful to his ideals. So firmly am I persuaded of this, that I have no hesitation in saying that his faith is my faith. Let me then most earnestly beseech you that this trial be not conducted recklessly nor with partisan bias. He and I are one: injustice towards him will redound on me; the verdict you pa.s.s on him you pa.s.s also on me; his sentence, too, is mine--and my sincerest wish is to be fully a.s.sociated with him."

[Footnote 24: Tom. IV, Anno 1256. No.6.]

These letters produced the desired effect. John left the a.s.sembly fully acquitted, and availing himself of the choice of residence that Bonaventure courteously extended to him, withdrew to the friary at Greccio. There he spent many years in the practice of every virtue and finally expired in the odour of sanct.i.ty.

{55}

Angelo Clarenus, [Footnote 25] condemns the part played by Bonaventure in this inquiry. "Bonaventure," he states, "on the testimony of John of Parma himself, acted wrongly in no slight degree; for whilst discussing the question in dispute privately with John of Parma in his cell he agreed with him, affirming that he thought as he did, but publicly in presence of the Brethren he showed that he held the contrary." And again he says: "Brother John enters; as one suspect of heresy he is forced to take an oath; a wise man is cross-examined by those less wise, an aged man by youths; one full of the Holy Ghost is searched into by the indevout, and by those who follow the desires of their heart. Then the wisdom and holiness of Bonaventure were obscured and vanished, and his mildness by the agitation of his soul was changed into violent anger. To such an extent was he carried away that he exclaimed: 'If it were not for the honour of the Order I should have him publicly punished as a heretic'."

[Footnote 25: Cf. "Opera Omnia," Tom. X, p. 49.]

To preside at this trial was one of the painful duties which his position placed upon Bonaventure. At the instance of the Brethren and the Sovereign Pontiff he was bound to undertake it. John of Parma had acquired a great reputation for holiness, and his indefatigable labours on behalf of the Order and of the Church had made his name famous throughout Europe. Furthermore, he was a {56} personal friend of Bonaventure, for was it not he who recommended him for the office of General! In the face of these considerations it is incredible that he should have been guilty of injustice or duplicity towards him. It is much easier to believe that Angelo Clarenus, carried away by party spirit, gave ready credence to the exaggerated reports circulated by the admirers of John of Parma, who were bitterly, though unreasonably, indignant that Bonaventure should have listened to the accusation of heresy and lent his authority to the investigation that followed.

CHAPTER VIII.

ST. FRANCIS' BIOGRAPHER.

At the General Chapter of Narbonne, in 1260, Bonaventure was requested to write the life of St. Francis. Owing to the circ.u.mstances that surround it, considerable importance attaches to this incident. There already existed several legends of the Saint. Thomas of Celano had written one in 1229. His work received the approval of Gregory IX., who had officially recommended it to the Brethren. In the year 1246, at the request of the Minister-General, Crescentius, appeared the "Legend of the Three Companions," written by Brothers Angelo, Rufinus and Leo. A second life was written by Thomas of Celano in 1247 or 1248.

A few years ago the well-known French writer, {57} M. Paul Sabatier, edited a work [Footnote 26] which he contended was anterior to any of these. He maintained it was nothing less than a complete life of St.

Francis written by Brother Leo in the year 1227--within a year of the Saint's death. This remarkable work had been already well known, but according to M. Sabatier its authorship and the date of its _compilation_ had been misconceived. Although the learned writer supports his contention with weighty arguments he cannot be said to have rendered it certain. He is enamoured of the tone and spirit of the book. If it be an original work and the production of Brother Leo, it is, to the modern critic, an ideal biography. It reveals simply and forcibly the human side of Francis. The personal traits of the Saint are brought prominently before us in all their unique individuality.

We have the real, living man--not the stereotyped example of every virtue which the earlier hagiographers delighted in. Still it must be admitted that the book is characterized by the prejudices of its author. Certain sayings and doings of Francis which appealed to his prepossessions are insisted upon with evident emphasis. Indeed, to such an extent is this apparent that the work cannot be regarded as purely historical. It is largely polemical and would seem to have been designed to refute the ideas of the moderate party concerning certain points of observance.

[Footnote 26: "The Mirror of Perfection," by Brother Leo, Paris, 1898.]

Before quitting this subject it may be said that {58} the ardour and enthusiasm with which the greatest literary critics of the day, Catholic and non-Catholic, devote themselves to the investigation of the sources of St. Francis' biography, is one of the most remarkable phenomena which our times witness. We hear of the formation of societies composed of the ablest scholars of Europe for the study of early doc.u.ments relating to Francis and his Order. How the words of Christ are herein verified: "He that humbleth himself shall be exalted!" I doubt if there is a personality in history, exclusive of the Divine Founder of Christianity, whose words and actions are so closely studied in a spirit of loving admiration as are those of St.

Francis.

To return to Bonaventure and the task imposed upon him by the General Chapter, the importance of the latter becomes apparent when we reflect that as far as the Order could effect it, the legend he was about to compose was to be the sole record of the life of Francis which should come down to posterity. This purpose evidently underlay the demand for its composition, for when the work was finished and submitted to the General Chapter of Pisa three years later it was officially approved of and all the other legends were formally proscribed. More stringent measures still for the suppression of the older legends were adopted at the Chapter of Paris in 1266. Therein was framed the following Const.i.tution: [Footnote 27] "The General Chapter commands {59} under obedience that all the legends of St. Francis. .h.i.therto composed be destroyed, and that where they can be found outside the Order the Brethren shall strive to remove them, for the legend composed by the General was written according as he had it from the mouth of those who, as it were, had been always with Blessed Francis and knew everything with certainty, and those things which are proven are therein diligently set down."

[Footnote 27: "Rinaldi," p. 11. Cf. "Opera Omnia," Tom. X, p. 58.]

On the part of modern historiographers this ordination has excited much criticism, and even the warmest admirers and staunchest advocates of the Order must confess their inability to account for it adequately. At first sight it appears to be a very high-handed and obscurantist procedure, little in keeping with the ingenuous simplicity of the Franciscan spirit. It looks like an attempt to put out the light--to abolish the true ideal and subst.i.tute a counterfeit in its stead. But in reality it was nothing of the sort. At the present day it is impossible to determine the precise motives that actuated the authors of that statute, but no one who is even slightly acquainted with the condition of the Order at the period can fail to conjecture what most likely was the prevailing influence.

The Chapter aimed at introducing peace and harmony amongst the Brethren and producing uniformity of thought and action in their common life. We have seen that these most desirable elements were wanting--that there were dissensions {60} and differences concerning the nature of the observance to be pursued. The appeal of the contending parties was ever to the words and actions of St. Francis, which, according to their respective views, they strained and exaggerated and, unconsciously perhaps, even falsified. We cannot but conclude that such a state of affairs affected very prejudicially the biographers of the Saint and tended to depreciate the historical value of their labours. For these, too, took sides, and, as it is easy to see, they made the Lives they wrote the vehicle of their particular ideas. Thus Thomas of Celano favours Brother Elias and the moderate observance, whilst the "Three Companions," and (if M. Sabatier's contention be correct), the "Mirror of Perfection" by Brother Leo, const.i.tute a species of manifesto against the latter, and an appeal for a literal and rigorous observance.

Now it is evident that whilst such a condition of things was tolerated, unity and peace could never be established. As long as these old legends, redolent of party spirit and bia.s.sed views, remained, legislation making for harmony would be of no avail. This the Chapter clearly perceived, and hence its statute. We may say of it finally that although it was a drastic measure the circ.u.mstances more than justified it. And we must not forget that it was adopted only after Bonaventure's work had been examined and approved.

Of this work it is now time to give some account. {61} Owing to the important place in history this new "life" was to hold, and the manifold distractions of public duties among which it was to be written, we may accept in strict and literal sincerity our Saint's expressions of reluctance to undertake it. "Feeling myself unworthy,"

he writes, [Footnote 28] "to relate that life most worthy of all imitation, I should in no wise have attempted it, had not the devout desires of the Brethren and the unanimous importunity of the Chapter moved me thereunto, and had not that love compelled me which I am bound to feel for our holy Father. . . . This, indeed, was my chief reason for undertaking this work; to wit, that since I owe to him under G.o.d the life of my body and soul, and have learned the holiness of his life through personal experience of his power with G.o.d, it behoved me in return to collect, as best I could, his words and deeds--fragments, as it were, partly overlooked and partly scattered--that they be not utterly lost with the death of those who lived and conversed with the Blessed Servant or G.o.d."

[Footnote 28: "Legend of St. Francis," Prologue, -- 3.]

During the year 1261, St. Bonaventure was in Italy collecting the materials for his work. "The better to come by first-hand information of this life," he tells [Footnote 29] us, "I visited the scenes of the birth, life and death of the Blessed Francis, and held studious converse on these things with all who had enjoyed his intimacy, and with such especially as {62} had fuller knowledge of his holiness and were his chief disciples. To all of these all credence is due alike for their tried virtue as for their perfect knowledge of the truth."

We cannot say definitely who these "chief disciples" were. To have mentioned them by name would have frustrated the purpose for which the life was undertaken. We presume, however, that our Saint was chiefly indebted to Brothers Leo, Illuminatus, and Giles.

[Footnote 29: "Ibid." -- 4.]

When these researches were completed, Bonaventure returned to Paris to work up into an authentic record of St. Francis' life all the materials--oral and written--he had come by during his sojourn in Italy. Every incident of any moment in St. Francis' life is faithfully recorded. The graces bestowed upon him, the labours he undertook, the sufferings he bore, the virtues he practised, the miracles he worked: all are graphically and sympathetically described. The following episode gives us an insight into the fervour of soul with which this task was undertaken. On one occasion, as our Saint was engaged on his work, his intimate friend St. Thomas Aquinas came to visit him. Gently opening the door of his cell, the saintly Dominican saw Bonaventure seated at his table, pen in hand, and so engrossed in contemplation that he was lost to exterior things. Deeply moved, St. Thomas withdrew whispering to his companion "Come! let us leave a Saint to write the life of a Saint".

[Ill.u.s.tration: ST. BONAVENTURE IN ECSTASY WHILE WRITING THE LIFE OF ST. FRANCIS IS VISITED BY ST. THOMAS AQUINAS _From a fres...o...b.. Giacomelli in the Franciscan Church at Cimiez_.]

{63}

In his undertaking Bonaventure had before him an ideal. He wished to present Francis as the chosen servant of G.o.d, raised up to be the founder and head of a great Religious Order. Accordingly, his attention is fixed on the supernatural rather than on the natural element in Francis, and he deals more with those aspects of his life and character that bring him within practical reach of his spiritual children than with those that lift him up into a sphere so high that the ordinary soul dares not aspire to it. He distinguishes judiciously between what Francis recommended and practised himself and that which he strictly enjoined upon his Brethren. Here the conciliatory aim of the book is apparent. But he is never betrayed into anything unworthy of an upright biographer. All his facts are una.s.sailable--nothing of importance is suppressed or distorted. In consequence, such a picture of Francis as his spiritual children required is the result. This was the end Bonaventure had in view, and having accomplished it, it matters little if his work forfeits the approval of those modern critics who, in the life of Francis, wish to find a record of the natural rather than the supernatural.

From this "Greater Legend"--as it is called--Bonaventure made an abstract of the salient events, and arranged them under seven headings, each of which contained nine lessons or readings. This was called the "Smaller Legend" and was intended {64} for the use of the Religious in the Divine Office during the Octave of St. Francis. To this smaller work attaches the same historical accuracy that distinguishes the Greater Legend. In many instances events are described in the same words; other incidents are given in abridged form; the whole work is marked by a more liturgic style, and occasionally fresh details are given.

CHAPTER IX.

INTERIOR SPIRIT.