261 religious encyclopedia exile of the Israelites Extreme Unction

Download 6.59 Mb.
Size6.59 Mb.
1   ...   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   ...   65

Francis, Saint


committee, the D616gation Lib6rale. On Doe. 11, 1905, Parliament voted and promulgated a law which decreed the separation of Church and State. The two parties, the orthodox and the liberal, are now utterly separate. A third party, the Center, which had at first tried in vain to unite the two others, forms now a third church. The three churches are called: the Agliee. R6form6e Avan­g6lique (orthodox), the Union d'l~glises R6form6eB de France (Center), and the Aglises11kform6es Unies (liberal).‑In 1848 Fr6d6ric Monod (q.v.) and others seceded from the State Church and in 1849 formed the Union den Aglises Avang6liques, generally called the Free Church. At first it numbered fifty con­gregations, but subsequently many returned to the State Reformed Church. See the articles GALLICAN CONFF$BION; Huauwon; and FRENCH RIcvoLu­TION.

9. The Lutheran church: Before 1908 the status

of the Lutheran Church also depended upon the

laws of 1802 and 1852. The conaistories, however,

were to form an inspection, and the inspectors were

chosen for life. The Church had a central govern­

ing body, the head consiatory, in two divisions, one

legislative and one administrative. This state of

affairs lasted until the Franco‑Prussian war, when

the loss of Alsace‑Lorraine, which contained six of

the eight inspections, shook the Lutheran Church of

France to its foundations and compelled it to enter

upon a struggle for existence. The two inspections

which were left (Montb6liard and Paris [including

Algeria]) were at first suspicious of each other, and

that of Montb6liard wished to join the Reformed

churches. A general synod, summoned July 23,

1872, brought peace; and a proposition for union

with the Reformed Church was voted down, like­

wise a creed submitted by the Pietistic minority.

They passed, however, a project for reorganization

of the Church, brought forward by the minority.

The head consistory was given up and the Church

was divided into two synodal districts, Montb6liard

and Paris, almost wholly independent of each other.

The inspectors were named for only nine years. There

was a general synod constituted for the government

of the Church, to meet alternately at Paris and at

Montbdliard. The theological faculty at Strasburg

was replaced by one at Paris. Owing to the dis­

turbed condition of France after the war, this

scheme was not sanctioned by the two chambers

and carried into effect until 1880. At the separa,­

tion of Church and State in 1905, the synod adapted

the constitution of the Church to the law of separa­

tion, and named the Church the #glise tvang6lique

Luth6rienne de France. The parishes became

Associations cultuelles. C. PFENDER.

S. Evangelical Work in France: Samuel Vincent says, " After the Revolution the French Protes­tants experienced a profoudd tranquillity very much like indifference. Religion possessed little interest for them, as it did for most Frenchmen; for them as for many others the eighteenth century was still in existence. The law of 1802 insured tranquillity and so relieved them and their pastors from all anx­iety for the support of their form of worship, but at the same time that it removed the chief cause of unrest it also did away with that of awakening.

The pastors preached their sermons, the people

heard them, the consistoriea met, the service re­

tained all its forms, but no one was interested or

troubled about it; religion was outside the sphere

of every one's daily life." This condition of things

lasted until the third decade of the century when

the religious awakening came from Switzerland into

France and gave new life to the Church. It roused

especially a glowing zeal for missions, and Evan­

gelical work of all kinds was‑ undertaken with great

eagerness. The famous society of Evangelical mis­

sions among the heathen was founded in 1822,

Bible societies were formed (see BIBLE Socnrrlas,

I1., 2), also several other societies for Evangelical

work in France. This great display of missionary

zeal, however, has another side: French Protestant­

ism up to the middle of the last century produced

nothing noteworthy in theology. But since then

matters have improved, societies have been formed,

periodicals have been begun, and many learned

works have been written. In this work the Lutheran

Church has had its share; and the church at Paris

especially has become a spiritual force. Since

1896 the Lutheran Church has maintained a mis­

sion in Madagascar. The . Methodists in France

have twenty‑five parishes, the Baptists twenty‑nine.

BIHwoa$APH7: On the Catholic Church in general consult: Gallia Christiana, 18 vole., Paris, 1715‑1885; J. H. AI­banbs, Gallic Christiana nooissima, vol. i.. Valence, 1899; W. H. Jervis, The Gallican Church 1618‑1788 2 vole., Edinburgh, 1872; idem, The Gallivan Church and the Revolution London, 1882; E. de Presee , L'Aplise de France pendant la rivolutiorN Paris, 1890; ~ V. Maumus. La Republiqus et la politique do l'iplise, Paris, 1892; C. F. Ballet, Lee Oripines des 4plisee de France et lea tastes ipis­copauz, ib. 1898; E. BirE, Le Clergb de Franca pendant Is resolution, 1789‑1798, Lyons, 1901; L. Bourgain, L'Apliss de France. at 1'iW au 19 eiicle, 2 vole., Paris, 1901; W. M. Sloane, The French Revolution and Religious Reform, 1789‑180;, London, 1901; Archives de Mist. religiswe de la France, Paris, 1902 sqq.; F. V. A. Aulard, La Revolution fransaise et lea eonpripations, ib. 1903; L. Launay. Hint. de 1'ielim pauloise' jusqu'd la conquite franque, 611, 2 vole., ib. 1908.

On the aonoordate consult: J. Baisew, Le Concordat de 1801 et lea articles orpaniques, Paris, 1902; A. Body, Le Concordat; son histoire 1801‑1803, Lyons, 1903; F. D. Matthieu, Le Concordat de 1801, Paris, 1903; A. Bau­drillart, Quatra cents an* de concordat, ib. 190.5; E. Sd­veetre, L'Histoire, k texts at la destines du concordat de 1801, ib. 1906.

On the clergy and the orders consult: Rwueil des aetea, titres et m6moiraa concernant lea afaires du cleroi de France, 12 vols., Paris, 1718; E. Marie, Le Clerpi at les temps nou­veaux, ib. 1892; A. Deeeaine, Le Clergi /ranvais au 20. sitde, ib. 1897; S. Grenier, Noa iviquee, ib. 1900; E. Leone. La Hierarchic 6piscopale an Gaul@ et Germane, 742‑882, Lille. 1905; Le Clerpi franraia (annual); E. Keller, Les ConprApations reiipituses an France, Paris, 1880; L. A. R dmondibre, Lea Congregations religicusss, is fiac, Is parlemsnt at is cow de caaaation, ib. 1892; G. Su­rugue, Regime legal des oonpr*ahone reiigeeueta en France, ib. 1898; Besunier, La France monastique, new ad., ib. 1905; Helyot, Ordrea monaetiques; Heirnbucher, Orden and Konprepationen.

On the separation of Church and State and its conse­quences consult: J. A. C. Sykes, The New Reign o/ Terror in France, London, 1903; J. L. E. Combes, fine campapne laique, 1800‑03, Paris, 1904; G. Berry, Une page d'hist.; la separation den eplisse et de 1'itat i1 la chambre des di­putds, ib. 1905; A. Briand, La Separation des iplina et de Md. Rapport au nom de la commission de la chambre des diputis, ib. 1905; P. Grunebaum Balfin, La Separa­tion des Mime a de Mal, ib. 1905; J. Roche, La Separa­tion de l'ipliee et de lWQt, ib. 1883; Berard, Essai his‑

torique our la siparation de 1'6plies et do 1'6tat pendant la

r6roolution, ib. 1905; A. Debidour, L'Itplias ootholique et

1'f4 1870‑88, vol. i., ib. 1908; R. Bertin et J. Charpen­

tier, Manuel des associations d&lar&a, ib. 1907; J. E. C.

Bodley, The Church in France, London, 1908; A. Galton,

Church and State in Franc, 1300‑1807, London, 1907;

E. Barbier, Le Proprta du libtralisme oatholiqua en Francs

sow . . . Lion XIII., 2 vols., Paris, 1907; J. N. Brod­

head, The Religious Persecution in France, 1800‑OB, Lon­

don, 1907; E. Lecsnuet, L'Aplise de Franc sow 1a boi­

sihme ~r6puUique.

Paris, 1907. See also under Cauwa AND BTATm.

On Protestantism in France consult: T. Bees, Hint. ecclhiastique de Franc, ed. P. Vessor, 2 vole.. Toulouse, 1882: D'Huismau, La Discipline due Aplisee r.1fonn* de France. Geneva, 1f86: G. de Fdlioe, Hist. do synodes nationaux do l*lise r6formie do Francs, Paris, 1884; idem, Hint. do proteatanta do Franc, Toulouse, 1580; idem, lea Protestants d'autrs foia, 4 vole., Paris, 1897­1902; G. Weber, Ouchichtliche Darstellunp des Calvinie­mue in Prankrcich bin sur Aufhebunp den Edikta von Nantes, Heidelberg, 1835; A. L. Herminiard, CoRSspon­dance des r4formateura, 9 vole., Geneva, 1888‑‑97; E. Ber­sier, Hint. du synods p6gralh do 7'Miae rbform6e de France, 2 vole., Parie, 1872; E. and 1t. Haas, La France protea­tante, ed. H. L. Bordier, Paris, 1877 eqq.; L. Aguesse, Hut. do l'6tabliasemant du protestantjsms en France, 4 vols., ib. 1882‑80; A. Lode, La LApidation do eultae pro­testanfe 1787‑1887, ib. 1889; N. A. F. Puaux, Hist. du proteatantisms en Franc, ib. 1894: J. B. Marsval. Le Protestantism au 16. et 19. siicle, Albi, 1900; E. Belle­roohe, Successive Events that finally Led to the Edict of Nantes, New York, 1901; C. Durand, Hint. du protcetan­tiame frangais pendant la rivolution et 1'empirs, Paris, 1902;


I . Life of Saint Francis.

Boyhood and Early Manhood (§1).

The Winning of the Brotherhood (§ 2).

Work and Extension of the Brother­hood (§ 3).

The Last Years of Francis (§ 4).

II. The Three Rules of the Order and the Testament of Saint Francis.

The First Rule (§ 1).

The Rule of 1221 (§ 2).

The Third Rule (§3).

The Testament (§ 4).



Francis, Saint

C. Coignet, L'tvotu#ms du protaatantisms Jrnngats au 18. siJcie, ib. 1907; Bulletin hiatorique et Litlfrairs de la aoci.. 6t6 de Mist. du Protestantism franpaia (a monthly): Ades et d6asrnne du synods. den 6glisEa r6/ormbes de France; E. Davsine end A. Lode, Annuaire du proteefantiame fra. Paris, 1892 eqq.: $‑ Besu7our, L'Aplise r6­form6s do Franc uni6 d l'6tat, eon organisation todifi6s, lC~a~en, 1883; and the literature under such articles as WLIaNI; HDaDE'NOTB; J•NaENIaIr, and NANTHs, EDICT or. For the Lutheran Churches consult W. Jackson, Recueii do documents relatifa d 7a r6orpaniaation de l'6plise de la confession d'Aupebo,ap, Paris, 1881; L'Aplias lu­th6rienna do Pons pendant la r6volution, ib. 1892.


FRANCICA‑NAVA DI BONTIFE, fran"chf"ca'­na"vii' df ben"tl"f2', GIUSEPPE: Cardinal; b. at Catania (b4 m. n.n.w. of Syracuse), Sicily, July 23, 1848. After the completion of his studies and a successful career as a priest, he was consecrated titular bishop of Alabenda in 1883, and six years later was made titular archbishop of Heraclea end appointed papal nuncio to Brussels. He was then nuncio at Madrid, and in 1895 was enthroned arch­bishop of Catania. He was created cardinal priest of Santi Giovanni a Paolo in 1899, and is a mem­ber of the Congregations of the Council, Index, Studies, and Ceremonial.


III. Development of the Order after the Death of Frantic.

Dissensions During the Life of Francis (§ 1)•

Development to 1239. The Lazer Party (§ 2).

To 1274. Bonaventms (§ 3).

To 1300. Continued Dissensions (§ 4).

Temporary Success of the Stricter Party, Persecution (§ b).

Renewed Controversy on the Suc­tion of Poverty (16).

From the designation Frtttrea minorea the mem­bers of the Franciscan order were called Minorites, and in England they were popularly called Grey Friars from the color of their dress.

I. Life of Saint Francis: Giovanni Bernardore, commonly known as Francesco, the founder of the Franciscan order, was born in the little town of Assisi, in Central Italy, between Perugia and Foligno, in 1182. His father Pietro, a well‑to­domerchant;gave the boy a good education. The 1. Boyhood tee, of Francesco ("the French‑

and Early m >> bY .which his baptismal name

was soon altogether replaced, is said

to have been given him soon after his

birth by his father, returning to Assisi from a trip

to France; according to another account it was

due to his early acquisition of the French language.

Francis showed little inclination to concern him­

self with his father's business, but lived a gay life

with the young men of his own age. In 1201 he

joined a military expedition against Perugia, was

taken prisoner, and spent a year as a captive. It

is probable that his conversion to more serious

thoughts was gradual. It is said that when he

began to avoid the sports of his former compan‑

ffepoaste Congrotgtione (§ 7).

Unsuccessful Attempts Ust(I7) Unite the

order <§ s).

IV. Spread of the Order in Modern Times.

New Congregations ($ 1).

Present Status (12).

Distinguished Names (§ 3).

V. The Clsrissee or Poor Clsles.

VI. The Third Order.

Origin and Rule (§ 1).

New Arrangements of Leo XIII.

ions, and they asked him laughingly if he were thinking of marrying, he answered " Yes, a fairer bride than any you have ever seen "‑meaning his " lady poverty," as he afterward used to say. He spent much time in lonely places, asking God for enlightenment. By degrees he took to nursing the moat repulsive victims in the lazar‑houses near Assisi; and after a pilgrimage to Rome, where he begged at the church doors for the poor, he had a vision in which he heard a voice calling upon him to restore the Church of God which had fallen into decay. He referred this to the ruined church of St. Damian near Assisi, and sold his horse together with some cloth from his father's store, giving the proceeds to the priest for this purpose. Pietro, highly indignant, attempted to bring him to his senses, first with threats and then with corporal chastisement. After a final interview in the pres­ence of the bishop, Francis renounced all expecta­tions from his father, laying aside even the gar­ments received from him, and for a while was a homeless wanderer in the hills around Assisi. Re­turning to the town, where he spent two years at this time, he restored several ruined churches, among them the little chapel of St. Mary of the

Francis, Saint THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 356

Angels, just outside the town, which became later his favorite abode.

At the end of this period (according to Jordanus, in 1209), a sermon which he heard on Matt. x. 9 made such an impression on him that he decided to devote himself wholly to a life of apostolic poverty.

Clad in a rough garment, barefoot, and, 2. The Be‑ after the Evangelical precept, without ginning of

the Broth‑staff or scrip, he began to preach erhood. repentance. He was soon joined by a

prominent fellow townsman, Bernardo di Quintavalle, who contributed all that he had to the work, and by other companions, who are said to have reached the number of eleven within a year. The brothers lived in the deserted lazar­house of Rivo Torto near Assisi; but they spent much of their time traveling through the moun­tainous districts of Umbria, always cheerful and full of songs, yet making a deep impression on their hearers by their earnest exhortations. Their life was extremely ascetic, though such practises were appar­ently not prescribed by the first rule which Francis gave them (probably as early as 1209), which seems to have been nothing more than a collection of Scriptural passages emphasizing the duty of poverty. In spite of the obvious similarity be­tween this principle and the fundamental ideas of the followers of Peter Waldo, the brotherhood of Assisi succeeded in gaining the approval of Pope Innocent IIi. Many legends have clustered around the decisive audience of Francis with the pope. The realistic account in Matthew of Paris, according to which the pope originally sent the shabby saint off to keep swine, and only recog­nized his real worth by his ready obedience, has, in spite of its improbability, a certain historical interest, since it shows the natural antipathy of the older Benedictine monasticism to the plebeian mendicant orders.

It was not, however, a life of idle mendicancy on which the brothers entered when they set out in 1210 with the papal approbation, but one of dili­gent labor. Their work embraced devoted serv­ice in the abodes of sickness and poverty, earnest

preaching by both priests and lay 3. Work and brothers, and missions in an ever Extension of widening circle, which finally included

the Broth‑

erhood. heretics and Mohammedans. They

erhood. came together every year at Pente­cost in the little church of the Portiuncula at Assisi, to report on their experiences and strengthen them­selves for fresh efforts. There is considerable un­certainty as to the chronological and historical de­tails of the last fifteen years of the founder's life. But to these years belong the accounts of the or­igin of the first houses in Perugia, Crotona, Pisa, Florence, and elsewhere (1211‑13); the first at­tempts at a Mohammedan mission, in the sending of five brothers, soon to be martyrs, to :Morocco, as well as in a journey undertaken by Francis himself to Spain, from which he was forced by illness to return without accomplishing his object; the first settlements in the Spanish peninsula and in France; and the attempts, unsuccessful at first, to gain a foothold in Germany. The alleged meeting of Francis and Dominic in Rome at the time of the

Fourth Lateran Council (1215) belongs to the do­main of legend; even Sabatier's argument to show that such a meeting actually took place in 1218 is open to serious objection. Historical in the main are the accounts relating to the journey of Francis to Egypt and Palestine, where he attempted to convert the Sultan Kameel and gave fearless proofs of his readiness to suffer for his faith; the internal discord, which he found existing in the order on his return to Italy in 1220; the origin of his second and considerably enlarged rule, which was replaced two years later by the final form, drawn up by Cardinal Ugolino; and possibly the granting by Pope Honorius III. (in 1223) of the Indulgence of the Portiuncula‑a document which Sabatier, who formerly rejected it, has recently pronounced authentic on noteworthy grounds.

Francis had to suffer from the dissensions just alluded to and the transformation which they op­erated in the originally simple constitution of the brotherhood, making it a regular order under strict supervision from Rome. Especially after Cardinal

4. The Last Ugolino had been assigned as proteo­Years of for of the order by Honorius III.‑it

Francis. is said at Francis' own request‑he

saw himself forced further and further

away from his original plan. Even the independ­

ent direction of his brotherhood was, it seems,

finally withdrawn from him; at least after about

1223 it was practically in the hands of Brother

Elias of Crotona, an ambitious politician who sec­

onded the attempts of the cardinal‑protector to

transform the character of the order. However,

in the external successes of the brothers, as they

were reported at the yearly general chapters, there

was much to encourage Francis. Ca;sarius of

Speyer, the first German provincial, a zealous ad­

vocate of the founder's strict principle of poverty,

began in 1221 from Augsburg, with twenty‑five

companions, to win for the order the land watered

by the Rhine and the Danube; and a few years

later the Franciscan propaganda, starting from

Cambridge, embraced the principal towns of Eng­

land. But none of these cheering reports could

wholly drive away from the mind of Francis the

gloom which covered his last years. He spent

much of his time in solitude, praying or singing

praise to God for his wonderful works. The can­

ticle known as Laudes creaturarum, with its child­

like invocations to Brother Sun, Sister Moon with

the stars, Brother Wind, Sister Water, Brother

Fire, and finally Sister Death, to raise their

voices to the glory of God, dates from this period

of his life. The hermit stage which opened the

career of many monastic founders was reserved

for the end of his who had once been so restless in

his activity. He spent the short remainder of his

life partly on Monte Alverno on the upper Arno,

where he fasted forty days and longed for union

with God, to be demonstrated by the impression

on his body of the wounds of Christ (see STIGMA­

TrzATroNr); partly at Rieti under medical treat­

ment; and partly in his beloved Portiuncula at

Assisi waiting for his deliverance from the flesh.

He died Oct. 3, 1226, at Assisi, and was canonized

two years later by Pope Gregory IX., the former cardinal‑protector of the order.

II. The Three Rules of the Order and the Testa­ment of Saint Francis: The oldest rule, referred to above, no longer preserved in its original form, seems to have contained not much more than the three Scriptural commands in Matt. xix. 21; Luke

1. The First ix. 3; and Matt. xvi. 24. The at‑

Rule. tempted reconstruction by Mfiller as­

cribes to it too extensive a content,

though Sabatier goes too far in the other direction

when he limits it to these three sayings of Christ,

which, according to Celano, formed the kernel of

the rule, surrounded by certain other more detailed

prescriptions. Sabatier's theory that these were

gradual accretions, depending especially on de­

cisions of the yearly general chapter, needs further

evidence to confirm it; the oldest biographers say

nothing of any intermediate stage between the

primitive rule and that. of 1221. The former, based

upon the idea of poverty and self‑denying labor in

the cause of Christ, was intended fo: an associa­

tion of a similar kind to the Pauperes Catholici or

" Poor Men of Lyons." It had little or nothing in

common with the older monastic rules, Benedictine

or Augustinian.

The rule of 1221 is more adapted to the needs of a monastic order intended to further the general ends of the Church and based upon the three usual vows, but laying special stress on that of poverty. It was drawn up by Francis himself, but under the influence of Cardinal Ugolino, as well as of the

2. The Rule learned and practical Caesarius of

of 1221. Speyer and apparently of Brother

Leo, who from 1220 on was the con­

stant companion of the founder. The matter of

the primitive rule was included in it, but scattered

among a large part of detailed directions, besides

many edifying thoughts and pious outpourings of

the heart, probably the work of Francis. But

there is much in the new rule which breathes a

different spirit. The humble founder, though re­

fusing the title of general of the order, and appear­

ing simply as " minister‑general," sometimes with

the addition " the servant of the whole brother­

hood," appears now at the head of a regular mo­

nastic hierarchy, consisting of provincial ministers

over the provinces, custodes over smaller districts,

and guardians over single houses. Definite rules

for the novitiate, the habit, hours of prayer, and the

discipline of the houses were modeled after the

older monastic tradition. In place of the informal

yearly gatherings of the brotherhood, there are

now regular chapters at fixed times. Of special

interest are the provisions for apostolic poverty

and the ascetic life in general, which show this rule

to be essentially a development of the older disci­

pline, with the obligation of poverty made more

strict while that of other ascetic practises was miti­

gated, partly for the reason that the new Fratres

minores were expected to be diligently occupied

in exhausting labors.

The third rule, confirmed by Honorius Ill. on Nov. 29, 1223, has still less of Francis' own work in it. The edifying tone, the citation of the Scrip­tural texts, have disappeared from it. Instead of


the strong emphasis upon Christ's admonitions to his disciples with which the rule of 1221 had begun, 3. The Third the ,enumeration of the three tradi‑

Rule. tional monastic vows is here substi­

tuted. The character of the order as a

mendicant order, pledged to an ideal of the strict­

est poverty, comes out here, it is true; but these

concessions to the spirit of the earlier rules are in­

termingled with a number of other prescriptions

which clearly show the externally official character

of the new statutes, framed in the interest of the

papacy and in conformity with the other organs

of the hierarchy. A cardinal appointed. by the

pope as protector of the whole order was to super­

vise its activity. The conditions for entrance axe

more definitely laid down; the Roman Breviary

is expressly named as the obligatory basis of the

daily devotions of priests belonging to it; and the

preaching brothers have a more dependent position

than before. In a word, the life here regulated is

no longer the old free, wandering life of the first

years, marked by apostolic poverty and loving,

simple‑hearted devotion to the Lord, but rather a

carefully arranged quasi‑monastic system, shorn

of much of its original freedom.

Francis, as may be seen from more than one passage in the accounts of his last years, was un­happy about these changes. As a demonstration against them, he left what is called his " Testa­4. The Tes‑ ment," whose occasional reading to‑

tament. gether with the rule was enjoined on

the brethren. Its tone is rather plain­

tive than angry; it looks back in a spirit of regret

to the primitive days of the first love. It urges

unswerving obedience to the pope and the heads

of the order, but at the same time emphasizes the

necessity of following its principles, especially the

imitation of the poverty of Christ. The brethren

are commanded to oppose the introduction of any

future secularizing influences, and at the same time

are forbidden to ask for any special privileges from

the pope. In spite of the direct command in the

"Testament" against considering it as a new

rule, the Observantist section of the Franciscans

practically regarded it as even more binding than

the formal rule, while the advocates of a less strict

observance paid little attention to it, especially to

its prohibition of asking for ecclesiastical privileges.

III. Development of the Order after the Death of Francis: The controversy about poverty which extends through the first three centuries of Fran­ciscan history began in the lifetime of the founder. The ascetic brothers Alattliew of Narni and Greg­ory of Naples, to whom Francis had

1. Dissen‑ entrusted the direction of the order lions Dur‑ during his absence, carried through ing the Life at a chapter which they held certain of Francis. stricter regulations in regard to fast­ing and the reception of alms, which really de­parted from the spirit of the original rule. It did not take Francis long, on his return, to suppress this insubordinate tendency; but he was less suc­cessful in regard to another of an opposite nature which soon came up. Elias of Crotona originated a movement for the increase of the worldly con­sideration of the order and the adaptation of its

Francis, Saint THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG 3688

system to the plans of the hierarchy which con­flicted with the original notions of the founder and helped to bring about the successive changes in the rule already described. Francis was not alone in op­position to this lax and secularizing tendency. On the contrary, the party which clung to his original views and after his death took his " Testament " for their guide, known as Observantists or Zedanti, was at least equal in numbers and activity to the followers of Elias. The conflict between the two lasted many years, and the Zdanta won several notable victories, in spite of the favor shown to their opponents by the papal administration‑until finally the reconciliation of the two points of view was seen to be impossible, and the order was actu­ally split into halves.

Bt. Anthony of Padua (q.v.) has usually been re­garded as the first leader of the Observantists; but recent investigations have shown that he was in­clined to the opposite side. When Elias sent a delegation to Rome in 1230 to obtain papal sanc­2. Develop. tion for his views, Anthony was one

ment to of the envoys; and there is little doubt

1889. The that the bull Quo elongati of Gregory

Later IX., favoring this side, was due in

pa'tY. large measure to his influence. The

earliest leader of the strict party was rather Brother

Leo, the witness of the ecstasies of Francis on

Monte Alverno and the author of the SPwulum

perfechonis, a strong polemic against the laxer

party. Next to him came John Parens, the first

successor of Francis in the headship of the order.

In 1232, however, Elias succeeded him, and ad­

ministered the affairs of the order in the interest of

his own, party for seven years. Much external

progress was made during these years; many new

houses were founded, especially in Italy, and in

them, without regard to the founder's depreciation

of secular learning, special attention was paid to

education. The somewhat earlier settlements of

Franciscan teachers at the universities (in Oxford,

for example, where Alexander of Hales was teach­

ing) continued to develop. Contributions toward

the promotion of the order's work came in abun­

dantly, and Elias authorized his subordinates to get

around the provision of the rule against the receiv­

ing of money, usually by the appointment of agents

outside the order, who had the custody of the

funds. Elias pursued with great severity the prin­

cipal leaders of the opposition, and even Bernardo

di Quintavalle, the founder's first disciple, was ob­

liged to conceal himself for years in the forest of

Monte Sefro.

At last, however, the reaction came. At the

general chapter of 123b, held in Rome under the

personal presidency of Gregory IX., Elias was

deposed in favor of Albert of Pisa, the former

provincial of England, a moderate Ob­

8. To 1274. servantist. None the less, Elias' at‑

Bonaven‑ titude remained widely prevalent in the

order. The next two ministers‑general

Haymo of Faversham (1240‑44) and Crescentius of

Jesi (1244‑47), governed to a great extent in this

sense, and had the new pope Innocent IV. on their

side. In a bull of Nov. 14, 1245, he even sanc­

tioned an extension of the system of financial

agents, and declared the funds in their custody the property of the Church, to be held at the disposal of the cardinal‑protector and not to be alienated without his permission. The Observantist party took a strong stand in opposition to this ruling, and carried on so successfully an agitation against the lax general that in 1247, at a chapter held in Lyons, where Innocent IV. was then residing, he was replaced by the strict Observantist John of Parma (1247‑57). Elias, who had been excom­municated and taken under the protection of Fred­erick II., was now forced to give up all hope of recovering his power in the order. He died in 1253, after succeeding by recantation in obtaining the removal of his censures. Under John of Parma, who enjoyed the favor of Innocent IV. and Alexander IV., the influence of the order was no­tably increased, especially by the provisions of the latter pope in regard to the academic activity of the brothers. He not only sanctioned the theo­logical institutes in Franciscan houses, but did all he could to facilitate the entrance of their teachers to the universities, especially Paris, the headquar­ters of theological study. It was due to the action of his representatives, who were obliged to threaten the university authorities with excommunication, that the degree of doctor of theology was conceded to the Dominican Thomas Aquinas and the Fran­ciscan Bonaventura (1257), who had previously been able to lecture only as licentiates. , In the same year Bonaventura succeeded John of Parma. In spite of his adherence to Observantist princi­ples, Bonaventura took a decided stand against the teaching of Joachim of Fiore, which John of Parma had been inclined to favor. Not a few of the " Spiritual " party, as they were now coming to be called, were condemned to lifelong imprison­ment; and for the purpose of discouraging their extreme tendency a new life of the founder was compiled by Bonaventura, at the request of the general chapter held at Narbonne in 1280, and authorized by that of Pisa. three years later as the only approved biography. Apart from the severe measures taken against Joachim's followers, Bona­ventura seems to have ruled (1257‑74) in a moder­ate spirit, which is represented also by various works produced by the order in his time‑especiauy by the Expositio regulce written by David of Augsburg (q.v.) soon after 1280.

The successor of Bonaventura, Jerome of Ascofi (1274‑79), the future Pope Nicholas IV., and his successor, Bonagratia (1279,85), also followed a middle course. Severe measures were taken against certain extreme Spirituals who, on the 4. To 1800. strength of the rumor that Gregory

Continued X. was intending at the Council of

Dissensions. Lyons (1274‑75) to force the mendi­

cant orders to tolerate the possession

of property, threatened both pope and council

with the renunciation of allegiance. Attempts

were made, however, to satisfy the reasonable de­

mands of the Spiritual party, as in the bull Exiit

qui semixiat of Nicholas III. (1279), which pro­

nounoed the principle of complete poverty meri­

torious and holy, but interpreted it in the way of

a somewhat sophistical distinction between pos‑


session and usufruct. The bull was received re­spectfully by Bonagratia and the next two gen­erals, Arlotto of Prato (1285‑87) and Matthew of Aqua Sparta (1287‑89); but the Spiritual party under the leadership of the fanatical apocalyptic Pierre Jean Olivi (q.v.) regarded its provisions for the de­pendence of the friars upon the pope and the division between brothers occupied in manual labor and those employed on spiritual missions as a corruption of the fundamental principles of the order. They were not won over by the conciliatory attitude of the next general, Raymond Gaufredi (1289‑96), and of the Franciscan pope Nicholas IV (1288‑92). The attempt made by the next pope, Celestine V., an old friend of the order, to end the strife by uni­ting the Observantist party with his own order of hermits (see CELEsTINEs) was scarcely more suc­cessful. Only a part of the Spirituals joined the new order, and the secession scarcely lasted beyond the reign of the hermit‑pope. Boniface VIII. an­nulled Celestine's bull of foundation with his other acts, deposed the general Raymond Gaufredi, and appointed a man of laxer tendency, John de Murro, in his place. The Benedictine section of the Celes­tines was separated from the Franciscan section, and the latter was formally suppressed by Boni­face in 1302. The leader of the Observantists, Olivi, who spent his last years in the Franciscan house at Narbonne and died there in 1298, had pronounced against the extremer " Spiritual " at­titude, and given an exposition of the theory of poverty which was approved by the more moder­ate Observantists, and for a long time constituted their principle.

Under Clement V. (1305‑14) this party succeeded

in exercising some influence on papal decisions.

In 1309 Clement had a commission sit at Avignon

for the purpose of reconciling the conflicting parties.

Ubertino of Casale (q.v.), the leader,

6. Tempo‑ after Olivi's death, of the stricter rary Success pay who was a member of the com‑

ofthe mission, induced the Council of Vienne

Stricter. to arrive at a decision in the main Party. Per‑

secution. favoring his views, and thepapal con­

stitution Exivi de paradiso (1313) was

on the whole conceived in the same sense. Clem­

ent's successor, John XXII. (1316‑34), favored the

laxer or conventual party. By the bull Quorundam

exigit he modified several provisions of the constitu­

tion Exivi, and required the formal submission of

the Spirituals. Some of them, encouraged by the

strongly Observantist general Michael of Cessna,

ventured to dispute the pope's right so to deal

with the provisions of his predecessor. Sixty‑four

of them were summoned to Avignon, and the most

obstinate delivered over to the Inquisition, four of

them being burned (1318). Shortly before this all

the separate houses of the Observantists had been


A few years later a new controversy, this time theoretical, broke out on the question of poverty. The Spirituals contended eagerly for the view that Christ and his apostles had possessed absolutely nothing, either separately or jointly. This proposi­tion had been declared heretical in a trial before an inquisitor. A protest was now made against this

decision by the chapter held at Perugia in 1322, as well as by such influential members of the order as William Occam (q.v.), the English e. Renewed provincial, and Bonagratia of Berga­Controveray mo. John XXII. ranged himself de­onthe cidedly with the Dominicans> who Bueation of

poverty. combated the theory, and by the

bull Cum inter nonnullos of 1322

declared it erroneous and heretical. Appealing

from this decision, Bonagratia, Occam, and Michael

of Cesena were imprisoned at Avignon for four

years, until they escaped by the help of the Em­

peror Louis the Bavarian. Supported by him,

they carried on a literary war against the papal

and Dominican denial of the absolute poverty of

Christ and his apostles. The pope deposed Cessna

and Occam from their offices in the order, and ex­

communicated them with the Franciscan antipope

Peter of Corvara (Nicholas V.) and all their adher­

ents. Only a small part of the order, however,

joined them, and at a general chapter held in Paris

(1329) the majority of all the houses declared their

submission to the pope. The same step was taken

in the following year by the antipope, later by the

ex‑general Cesena, and finally, just before his death,

by Occam.

Out of all these dissensions in the fourteenth century sprang a number of separate congrega­tions, almost of sects. To say nothing of the heret­ical parties of the Beghards and Fraticelh (qq.v.), some which developed within the order on both 7. Separate hermit and cenobitic principles may Congrega‑ here be mentioned: (1) The Clareni tione. or Clarenini, an association of hermits established on the river Clareno in the march of Ancona by Angelo di Clareno after the suppression of the Franciscan Celestines by Boniface VIII. It maintained the principles of Olivi, and, outside of Umbria, spread also in the kingdom of Naples, where Angelo died in 1337. Like several other smaller congrega­tions, it was obliged in 1568 under Pius V. to unite with the general body of Observant­ists. (2) The Minorites of Narbonne. As a sepa­rate congregation, this originated through the union of a number of houses which followed Olivi after 1308. It was limited to southwestern France and, its members being accused of the heresy of the Beghards, was suppressed by the Inquisi­tion during the controversies under John XXII. (3) The Reform of Johannes de Vallibus, founded in the hermitage of St. Bartholomew at Brugliano near Foligno in 1334. The congregation was sup­pressed by the Franciscan general chapter in 1354; reestablished in 1368 by Paolo de' Trinci of Fo­ligno; confirmed by Gregory X1. in 1373, and spread rapidly from Central Italy to France, Spain, Hun­gary and elsewhere. Most of the Observantist houses joined this congregation by degrees, so that it became known simply as the " brothers of the regular Observance." It acquired the favor of the popes by its energetic opposition to the heret­ical Fraticelli, and was expressly recognized by the Council of Constance (1415). It was allowed to have a special vicar‑general of its own and legislate for its members without reference to the conventual

1   ...   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   ...   65

The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2020
send message

    Main page