Francis of Assisi

[Stewart (SDA)]

Today, even among our own people, “Saint Francis of Assisi” is often thought of as a quaint, harmless, even adorable, character in history. And yet, Protestant historians speak of this man in quite another tone – a tone representing a reality that is not often heard.

The following thought is drawn from Milman’s “History of Latin Christianity” --

During the late 1100's, the “popular mind throughout Christendom seemed to demand instruction. There was a wide and vague wakening and yearning of the human intellect.”

This kind of ‘awakening’, this desire for intelligent instruction, was a threat to the Roman Church, and the Adversary was prepared with a counter-measure.

“Just at this juncture [there] arose almost simultaneously, without concert, in different countries, two men wonderfully adapted to arrest and avert the danger which threatened the whole hierarchical system.”

One if these two men was St. Dominic, the founder of the Friar Preachers.

“The other, St. Francis of Assisi, was endowed with that fervor of mystic devotion, which spread like an epidemic with irresistible contagion among the lower orders throughout Christendom ; it was a superstition, but a superstition which had such an earnestness, warmth, tenderness, as to raise the religious feeling to an intense but gentle passion ; it supplied a never-failing counter excitement to rebellious [i.e. early reformation] reasoning, which gladly fell asleep again on its bosom."

"After the death of its author and example, it raised a new object of adoration, more near, more familiar, and second only, if second, to the Redeemer himself. Jesus was supposed to have lived again in St. Francis with at least as bright a halo of miracle around him, in absolute, almost surpassing perfection.” (Milman, Bk. 9, p.237-238)

Oh yes, "he would have had the Emperor make a special law against killing or doing any injury to "our sisters the birds"" (Schaff vol.5 p.172), but he seems to have had no hesitation in telling his followers to surrender any heretic to the bishop for trial. (Durant vol.4, p.801.)

No gentle pacifist, when it came to heretics.

___________________

[JoeMo]

One of my favorite prayers is the following prayer written by Francis of Assisi:

"Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.

Where there is hatred, let me sow love;

where there is injury,pardon;

where there is doubt, faith;

where there is despair, hope;

where there is darkness, light;

and where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek

to be consoled as to console;

to be understood as to understand;

to be loved as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive;

it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;

and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life. Amen!"

[Stewart (SDA)]

I'm sorry JoeMo, but I think you'll find that St. Francis's name was first put to that prayer in 1927.

[Kevin H]

I don't know about St. Francis himself, but it is through the Franciscan Priesthood that a strong interest in the Advent developed, where they very much latched on to the teachings of Joachim of Flore. Joachim is who pointed out the year-day Principle and who pointed away from Augustinian interpetation of Revelation to Historisism and the Franciscan's building on this came to the conclusion that the Pope was Antichrist and it was this school of thought that evolved into the Advent movement of the 1700s that Sr. Isaac Newton was a part of, and lead to the Powerscourt conferences of the late 1700 and early 1800s which lead to Millerism and Seventh-day Adventism.

In a church history lecture I heard it was pointed out that St. Francis believed a lot like the Waldencenians, but was welcomed by the Papacy and that scholars debate whether the Papacy was really welcoming of St. Francis, of was afraid that if they did not welcome and include him that he and his followers would go off like the Waldencenians did. Now I don't know enough about St. Francis himself to know whether or not to count him among us, but it was from the priesthood that he started where our beliefs evolved.

Now this next part I have not studied out much, but from the little that I have seen, to me it appears that much of the debates between Seventh-day Adventists and the Evangelicals are rooted in the Augustinian/Franciscan perspectives towards the scriptures with the Evangelicals being Augustinians and we being more Franciscan.

[Stewart (SDA)]

Kevin, I accept and appreciate your post about the Franciscans.

But Francis of Assisi really is another story. To me, many warning flags fly over his name. He bore obsessions with poverty and self-abasement, and tried to pass these on to his Order. But it all seems to be stamped with fanaticism. Francis himself came to the point where he "refused all food which he did not obtain by begging."

In 1219AD he set out to confront the great enemy of Christianity -- the Mohammedans of the east.

When Francis reached his destination "the Sultan is said to have listened with respect ; his grave face no doubt concealed his compassion. St. Francis offered to enter a great fire with the priests of Islam, and to set the truth of either faith on the issue [i.e. on the outcome of the proposed 'ordeal'].

The Sultan replied that his priests would not willingly submit to this perilous trial. " I will enter alone," said Francis, "if I should be burned, you will impute it to my sins; [but] should I come forth alive, you will embrace the Gospel." The Sultan naturally declined these terms, as not quite fair towards his creed. But he offered rich presents to Francis (which the preacher of poverty rejected with utter disdain), and then sent him back in honor to the [Christian] camp..." (Milman, bk. 9, p.262)

To some, this may sound like a great example of devotion and courage, but to me it is only an example a man's readiness to tempt God.

Much is written about Francis's humility and self-abasement, but again, to my mind there is so much of it as to be excessive and extreme. Much of his work seems to have been done for effect, and it certainly did have an effect!

[Johann]

I don't know about St. Francis himself, but it is through the Franciscan Priesthood that a strong interest in the Advent developed, where they very much latched on to the teachings of Joachim of Flore. Joachim is who pointed out the year-day Principle and who pointed away from Augustinian interpetation of Revelation to Historisism and the Franciscan's building on this came to the conclusion that the Pope was Antichrist and it was this school of thought that evolved into the Advent movement of the 1700s that Sr. Isaac Newton was a part of, and lead to the Powerscourt conferences of the late 1700 and early 1800s which lead to Millerism and Seventh-day Adventism.

In a church history lecture I heard it was pointed out that St. Francis believed a lot like the Waldencenians, but was welcomed by the Papacy and that scholars debate whether the Papacy was really welcoming of St. Francis, of was afraid that if they did not welcome and include him that he and his followers would go off like the Waldencenians did. Now I don't know enough about St. Francis himself to know whether or not to count him among us, but it was from the priesthood that he started where our beliefs evolved.

Now this next part I have not studied out much, but from the little that I have seen, to me it appears that much of the debates between Seventh-day Adventists and the Evangelicals are rooted in the Augustinian/Franciscan perspectives towards the scriptures with the Evangelicals being Augustinians and we being more Franciscan.

During the Middle Ages Augustine of Hippo was held in such high esteem by the Church that no theologian or priest was counted as worthy of his salt unless 75% of his material consisted of quotations from the writings of Augustine.

[Johann]

“Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace. Where there is hatred, let me sow love.”

― St. Francis of Assisi

Genuine?

[Stewart (SDA)]

Unfortunately, that prayer, often attributed to St. Francis is not genuine. I believe his name was first put to it in 1927, about 700 years after his death.

One of Francis's main works, "Canticle of the Sun", shows a very different style of expression. (See Schaff, vol 5, p.173)

His history is full of warning bells.

The historian, Durant, writes that about a year before he died, Francis was losing his eye-sight. He had his eyes anointed with "the urine of a virgin boy", but when this failed, a rod of white hot iron was drawn across his forehead.

"Francis, we are told, appealed to "Brother fire: you are beautiful above all creatures; be favorable to me in this hour; you know how much I have always loved you"; he said later that he felt no pain. He recovered enough sight to set forth on another preaching tour." (Durant, vol.4, p.801)

[JoeMo]

Whatever ... It's still one of my favorite prayers.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I'm sorry JoeMo, but I think you'll find that St. Francis's name was first put to that prayer in 1927.

So what? It's a beautiful prayer that acknowledged the *good* attributes of St Francis of Assisi.

[Stewart (SDA)]

We both need to be careful, rudywoofs.

"He that justifies the wicked, and he that condemns the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord." (Prov 17:15)

[Gail]

We both need to be careful, rudywoofs.

"He that justifies the wicked, and he that condemns the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord." (Prov 17:15)

Is justifying the good that someone produces actually justifying the wicked?

Who is the author of truth? If a wicked person comes out with truth, does it make the truth wicked?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

That can be very true, Stewart. But sometimes one can ascribe too much importance on "names"... for example, "witch hazel," "devil's club," and the infamous "skunk cabbage" (which is really very good to eat!)

Likewise, connecting a name to a specific prayer doesn't make the prayer any less meaningful and lovely. :)

[Tom Wetmore]

We both need to be careful, rudywoofs.

"He that justifies the wicked, and he that condemns the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord." (Prov 17:15)

I think you are missing the point of this. It is essentially describing the Divine view of a direct violation of the 9th Commandment. It speaks of unjustly condemning an innocent man and acquitting a guilty man. That is what can and will happen by bearing false testimony against either one.

And it also spoken of in a more general way in the Isaiah 5:20, "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil..."

The object of God's distain in this verse is not on the one who is wrongly acquitted, nor is he vindicating the one wrongly convicted of a crime. He is condemning the action of the one who exercises wrong judgment either way.

[Bravus]

The main argument of this thread was that St Francis was a bone thrown to the masses by the organised Church. I'd be interested to see a bit more evidence on that, since another poster has suggested that in fact he was barely tolerated by the organised Church.

[Johann]

We have been dealing with two important "Church fathers" here, Francis and Augustine.Both have made a contribution to the Church, and both made some serious mistakes.

Augustine discovered two practices in the church of his day for which there was no valid defense, so he made it. He authored the the doctrine of original sin on which he based the documentation for infant baptism and the cloister life for monks and nuns. SDA accept neither of these doctrines because they are not scriptural.

Some Lutheran theologians detect the agape motif in the writings of Augustine, and therefore also the basis of justification and righteousness by faith, which they think may have helped Martin Luther make a fuller discovery of it in the writings of Paul a thousand years later.

This is not a defense of either, but a suggestion that it is difficult to claim neither of them all good nor all bad. And we may make some serious mistakes when we base our judgment of them on teh basis of insufficient information. The silence is preferable.

This is one reason why SDA reject the foundation of the Roman Catholic church which claims that the Church Fathers are as much a basis of their faith as the Bible.

We base our faith on the Bible alone. This does not prevent us from reading some of the works of these men in order to see the history of the Great Controversy as it has developed from the time of the Apostles, like Ellen G White did.

[Stewart (SDA)]

Tom,

We understand the Proverbs 17 verse the same way. I applied it just as you have explained it.

I was trying to say to rudywoofs that I think she may be trying to justify a wicked man.

Perhaps she felt that I was going too far in what I had been saying, and was condemning a good man.

Personally, I believe that there is nothing good in the work of St. Francis of Assisi. Once we go beyond the traditional gloss concerning this man, everything misses the mark.

[Tom Wetmore]

There seems to be quite opposite perspectives on the man. As Bravus noted, I am also inclined to be skeptical of the sources that seem to directly contradict each other. As is so often the case, the truth lies somewhere between. This would seem most likely since most of what has been written about him was done long after his death.

The fault in your perspective that "there is nothing good in the work of St. Francis" is the absolutism of it. A certain truth is that there is nothing on earth, no person, totally without flaw. But likewise, there is nothing on earth, no person, totally without some good, some redeeming quality. You seem unwilling to give the man any credit for any good thing, only willing to focus on his flaws and count them as wholly defining what he was. It seems that the weight of the evidence tends to go the other way, that there was more good to be said of him. Ignoring that is the thing of unjustly condemning the man spoken of in Proverbs 17:15, IMHO.

[Stewart (SDA)]

The Spirit of God strives with all men, but in the end

"a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit." (Matt 7:18)

[Gail]

Not ever?

[CoAspen]

Depends on the direction of life. All can bring forth good or bad, at times. Peter...anyone remember Peters denial and curseing?

[Gordon1]

Jesus told Peter in advance that he was not yet converted. (Luke 22:32)

[Gordon1]

Or we could ask those in Buenos Aires for the Pope's track record - those who didn't 'disappear'.

New Pope tied to Argentina's Dirty War:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-pope-tied-to-argentinas-dirty-war/5326816

[Stewart (SDA)]

Gail,

It was certainly possible for Jesus to sin, so it must be possible for any of us to sin.

The only thought I can offer, in response to your "Not ever?" question, is that

individually, as branches grafted in to Christ, we cannot produce evil fruit, but if temptation comes and we yield to it, then we have to break ourselves off from the Vine in order to sin.

And yet, if we have never known Christ, then we can salute our friends and family, we can be kind to our friends and strangers, we can give away all our possessions, we can give our bodies to be burned as martyrs -- but without a real connection with Christ all of it is wasted. In God's eyes none of it was truly good.

[Gordon1]

In God's eyes none of it was truly good.

Yes all for naught.