J
jmj1984
Guest
I suppose Br Jr ultimately we will just have to agree to disagree 
- Status
J
JReducation
Guest
I make the same proposal that Francis made to the sultan. If we cannot agree on details, let us agree on brotherhood.I suppose Br Jr ultimately we will just have to agree to disagree
God is honored by great love, not great knowledge.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
jmj1984
Guest
Indeed Br Jr, we are all brothers, those of us who are Catholic even more so.
J
JReducation
Guest
Bold is mine.
Itās an interesting coincidence that JMJ said this. On this point, Holy Father Francis disagreed with the Churchmen of his time. Of course he never said anything, because his policy was total submission to them, even when he disagreed.
However, he was a genius and he knew how to say things in a way that did not place him in conflict with the hierarchy, something that all of us need to learn to do. We tend to run our mouths and then wonder why the hierarchy ignores us.
When Francis sent the brothers to Jerusalem he gave them a very simple directive. He directed them to remember that the Jews and Muslims were just as much our brothers as were the Catholics. Therefore, the brothers were commanded to submit to them in a good things and neve to be argumentative with them.
He did not contradict the hierarchy by saying, āYouāre wrong.ā He was quiet in their presence. He simply told the brothers what to do and not do, without asking the hierarchy for their opinion. This way, he kept peace with the Christians and non-Christians. This earned him the respect of the Muslims and the Jews. The orthodox Mulsims (as opposed to radicals) refer to Francis of Assisi as Suffi (a holy man) and the Jews call him a Righteous Man.
One reason why the Crusaders were unable to take Dalmietta was that Francis warned the Muslims. He abhored the cruelty of the Christians who were invovled in that particualr assault. He did not know much about the big picture. I donāt think anyone did. We do because we have the benefit of hindsight. However, when he saw how the Crusdaders behaved toward their captives, he was discouraged. This was a man who had been a solider and who had aspired to be a Crusader. These were not the values that had been instilled in him. He knew the difference between a true Crusader and an opportunist. Apparently, the crew at Dalmietta was not very honorable. There is something to be learned here about justice and not sweeping things under the rug, but at the same time preserving peace with all men. One can do both, be honest and be peaceful.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
T
TrueLight
Guest
Br. JR, did Saint Francis believe that we were not all brothers or that we are all brothers?
J
JReducation
Guest
Nooooooo
He believed that that we are all brothers, without distinctions.
Remember, he builds his theology of fraternity on the one passage of scripture that tells us that Jesus is the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.
If you remember in The Perfect Joy of St. Francis, he calls all of his sons Brother. Many were priests, but he requires that they surrender the title, Father, for Brother. He took this further. He refers to all created things as brother and sister, such as Brother Sun and Sister Moon.
He saw non-Catholics as equally brothers and sisters who had to be cared for, served and respected. He had an uncanny ability to meet people where they were, not where he wanted them to be. This is the part of him that Bl. John Paul most admired. Francis was able to speak to others from the common ground. He was very clear that the way to win over menās souls was to win their hearts. This meant that they established relationships built on brotherhood, which requires trust. When there is trust, people can listen and dialog without argumentation. He commanded the religious and the laity to refrain from such argumentation, even with heretics. He was a wise man.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
T
TrueLight
Guest
I agree with that up to a point. We should respect everyone because they are all our brothers and sisters as pertains to the human race. We are all humans.Nooooooo
He believed that that we are all brothers, without distinctions.
Remember, he builds his theology of fraternity on the one passage of scripture that tells us that Jesus is the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.
If you remember in The Perfect Joy of St. Francis, he calls all of his sons Brother. Many were priests, but he requires that they surrender the title, Father, for Brother. He took this further. He refers to all created things as brother and sister, such as Brother Sun and Sister Moon.
He saw non-Catholics as equally brothers and sisters who had to be cared for, served and respected. He had an uncanny ability to meet people where they were, not where he wanted them to be. This is the part of him that Bl. John Paul most admired. Francis was able to speak to others from the common ground. He was very clear that the way to win over menās souls was to win their hearts. This meant that they established relationships built on brotherhood, which requires trust. When there is trust, people can listen and dialog without argumentation. He commanded the religious and the laity to refrain from such argumentation, even with heretics. He was a wise man.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
However, by virtue of being Christians, we are adopted into the family of Christ. As such, we are true brothers and sisters.
My issue with ecumenism is that it seems to imply that we are all fine as we are, as long as we love God, whether we are Muslims or Hindu or Protestant.
If that is the case, there is no reason for me to become Catholic. I could do with a lot less rules.
I know we are digressing, and maybe I should start another thread.
J
JReducation
Guest
Francis never said that the was no difference between faiths. He said that there was no difference in our realationship to people. There is a big difference. The fact that all men are equally brothers, does not mean that all faiths are equal.I agree with that up to a point. We should respect everyone because they are all our brothers and sisters as pertains to the human race. We are all humans.
However, by virtue of being Christians, we are adopted into the family of Christ. As such, we are true brothers and sisters.
My issue with ecumenism is that it seems to imply that we are all fine as we are, as long as we love God, whether we are Muslims or Hindu or Protestant.
If that is the case, there is no reason for me to become Catholic. I could do with a lot less rules.
I know we are digressing, and maybe I should start another thread.
What he did was treat people of all faiths with great respect, which was not a common thing in his day and age, when there was so much vitriol and anger on both sides.
Iāve seen this before and Franciscans think that itās horrible how this individual manipulates history for his agenda. This article has been going around forever.
First, he distorts the dialog between Francis and the sultan. It was true that Francis wanted to covert the Muslims. Thatās why he traveled there. He was also true that he failed to convert the sultan, but made a very good friend for the friars and an alliance beween the sultan of Dalmietta and the friars that is in effect ot this day. That particular sultanās territory covers an area that is today within Egypt, Jordan and Israel.
The author fails to mention that mulsins then and now did not constitute one nation. The friars who were executed by the Muslims were on the other side of Palestine. Those Muslims had never met Francis and never would. Francis never went there. There are two different events involving two different groups of people. This author makes it look as if itās all one event. That was not the case. The matyrdom of the friars at Morroco took place before the visit to Dalmietta.
The writer also makes a rather loose use of Francisā mind to throw barbs at terms such as āNew Pentecostā and āSpirit of Assisiā as if it were Francis speaking. Thatās total nonsense. Francis never new such terms. He also says that Francis held to the wording of the Council of Florence. Thatās not true. The Council of Florence took place 200 years after Francis was dead.
It also tries to imply, without mentioning Bl. John Paul and Pope Benedict XVI, that they are in error. Why not be honest enough and attack them directly, why distort, misquote and manipulate Franciscan history instead? The reason is simple. If he attacks the popes directly, he may come off as a sede.
If he attacks the popes directly, he gives himself away as being everything but a friend of Francis of Assisi. No one obeyed the popes more and nor defended them more than Francis of Asissi. Francis had friars excommunicated for uttering words of dissent on prudential judgments. There is the famous case of Brother Elias. There are the words of St. Francis in his testament in which he promises obedience to the popes and commands his brothers to obey him, in turn obeying the popes in all things. Francisā fidelity to the Catholic faith and to the popes cannot be separated. However, it is very cunning of this person, to speak about the former and not the latter.
The Franciscan authors whom he cites would be horrified to see their work taken out of context and used to launch a stelth attack on the current popes.
I would take that and throw in the trash along with the junk mail in your mailbox.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
PS. The very idea that someone would try to use the Holy Father Francis to attack the actions of the popes is so underhanded and so offensive to the memory of St Francis and to all Franciscans that Iām totally disgusted.
Iām out of this thread.
Br. JR
Iām out of this thread.
Br. JR
J
jmj1984
Guest
Br Jr,Francis never said that the was no difference between faiths. He said that there was no difference in our realationship to people. There is a big difference. The fact that all men are equally brothers, does not mean that all faiths are equal.
What he did was treat people of all faiths with great respect, which was not a common thing in his day and age, when there was so much vitriol and anger on both sides.
Iāve seen this before and Franciscans think that itās horrible how this individual manipulates history for his agenda. This article has been going around forever.
First, he distorts the dialog between Francis and the sultan. It was true that Francis wanted to covert the Muslims. Thatās why he traveled there. He was also true that he failed to convert the sultan, but made a very good friend for the friars and an alliance beween the sultan of Dalmietta and the friars that is in effect ot this day. That particular sultanās territory covers an area that is today within Egypt, Jordan and Israel.
The author fails to mention that mulsins then and now did not constitute one nation. The friars who were executed by the Muslims were on the other side of Palestine. Those Muslims had never met Francis and never would. Francis never went there. There are two different events involving two different groups of people. This author makes it look as if itās all one event. That was not the case. The matyrdom of the friars at Morroco took place before the visit to Dalmietta.
The writer also makes a rather loose use of Francisā mind to throw barbs at terms such as āNew Pentecostā and āSpirit of Assisiā as if it were Francis speaking. Thatās total nonsense. Francis never new such terms. He also says that Francis held to the wording of the Council of Florence. Thatās not true. The Council of Florence took place 200 years after Francis was dead.
It also tries to imply, without mentioning Bl. John Paul and Pope Benedict XVI, that they are in error. Why not be honest enough and attack them directly, why distort, misquote and manipulate Franciscan history instead? The reason is simple. If he attacks the popes directly, he may come off as a sede.
If he attacks the popes directly, he gives himself away as being everything but a friend of Francis of Assisi. No one obeyed the popes more and nor defended them more than Francis of Asissi. Francis had friars excommunicated for uttering words of dissent on prudential judgments. There is the famous case of Brother Elias. There are the words of St. Francis in his testament in which he promises obedience to the popes and commands his brothers to obey him, in turn obeying the popes in all things. Francisā fidelity to the Catholic faith and to the popes cannot be separated. However, it is very cunning of this person, to speak about the former and not the latter.
The Franciscan authors whom he cites would be horrified to see their work taken out of context and used to launch a stelth attack on the current popes.
I would take that and throw in the trash along with the junk mail in your mailbox.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Thanks for your opinion on that, Iāll certainly keep it in mind next time I have a look at such articles
G
GraceSofia
Guest
Br. JR,
I never heard of this writer before, but I just did a quick search and read two of his articles in which he criticises Blessed John Paul II pretty openly.
I donāt know what one has to do to be an official āsedeā but this author has no credibility as far as I am concerned.Thank you for analysing the article though.
These objections are floating around the internet and, as Islam is an issue today, it is important to understand St. Francisā thought on it.
O
Ophoe
Guest
Br. JR, Thank you so much for that clarification. Certain mortifications have always disturbed me, and itās reassuring to know that we are right to use discretion in which practices we look up to in the lives of the saints. Especially the clarification that we can still imitate their holiness while maintaining reserve about certain of their practices. For me, the realization that there are limits to what is healthy and that we donāt have to trample our natural sense of propriety just because someone was holy is very relieving. Now I will have the freedom to be honest about what makes me uncomfortable, and since I know itās possible to go too far, somehow that will give me the freedom to also notice the difference between things that obviously arenāt healthy and other penances that just depend on the person doing them, and which might make me uncomfortable not because they are always unhealthy but because they would not be healthy for me. Somehow good boundaries make for much clearer and better understanding of thingsActually, thatās not a āno no.ā The Catholic Church employs several hundred of us in the fields of Ascetical and Mystical Theology as well as Christian Pysychology. Among other things, one of our jobs is to study the behavior of the saints and separate the human from the divine, the healthy from the unhealthy.
(ā¦)
It is also true that the Church does not endorse unhealthy practices, even if they are found in saints. Such things as consuming the puss from the wound of another person, is not seen as a heroic act of virtue. However, the Church looks past this unhealthy behavior to see the charity and humility behind it. It is this charity and humility that sanctifies the person, not the behavior that he or she uses to express it.
One has to take people in their context, as I always like to say. People can do very strange things for very noble reasons. As long as those strange behaviors are not sinful, then the personās holiness is unchallenged. It is one thing to do deliberate harm, which is always morally wrong and quite another to be eccentric or even neurotic. These conditions do not take away from holiness.
My personal feeling is that if we were a little more honest about our neuroses, we would probably all be a little holier. Honesty is the first step in humility.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Thank you very much.
J
jimdi3
Guest
I suppose, the time to change your own methods of Mortification is when they become routine and enjoyable. 
B
Brooklyn
Guest
I have never yet found any mortification to be enjoyable, so I for one donāt think I have to worry about that! I agree they are very important, but my big problem is just doing them.I suppose, the time to change your own methods of Mortification is when they become routine and enjoyable.
D
domNoah
Guest
No, Jesus said My Burden is Light and my yoke is sweet. When they become routine or enjoyable that is a good sign, but it is a sign that we should do more not less.I suppose, the time to change your own methods of Mortification is when they become routine and enjoyable.
U
uselessbeggar
Guest
Extreme mortifications must be done with permission of a spiritual director, priest confessor, or a superior (if the person is a member of a religious community) as far as I know. Such permission is often given with a time limit. There are many temptations for persons who seek the exterme way of life, vanity being one of them.
St. Margaret Mary Alacoque lived an extremely mortified life from a very early age - without anyoneās knowledge, not even her parents. She was good at leading a hidden life even when so young. But, this was Our Lordās special grace for her. After she entered the Visitation Community she was gifted with many visitations and she reported that Our Lord on one occasion told her He wanted her to live on bread and water all year long except for ferial days when she could keep the Lenten fast. Her superior and spiritual director tested this message and under obedience ordered her to take the meals served to everyone in the refectory. She was always obedient. Every time she attempted to follow orders she became violently ill. She was given permission to keep the fast. She of course, was being prepared for a very special mission- to promote devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. In all things and for everyone OBEDIENCE is what the Lord wants not self imposed austerities. Didnāt He say "I want a loving heartā?
Just as we are not all called to be āblood martyrsā we are not all called to extreme mortifications of the type spoken of here. But I do think that if perfection is our ultimate goal then perhaps being a āmartyr of loveā as St. Jane de Chantal refers to it should be
on our mind.
Stā¦Therese of Lisieux early on tried physical bodily mortifications, hair shirt, iron piercing her body under her habit but she gave it up to live a life of love.
Self denial is what Our Lord specifically asks of all of usā¦ and how difficult that is especially today. Deny yourself, take up your cross daily and follow Jesus. No easy task - impossible without grace.
Obedience is what Our Lord taught us. I had a young woman tell me once when I asked her if she wanted to be a saint and she responded quickly with an emphatic 'NO" I canāt do all the things the saints did. She misunderstood what she had obviously been taught or read. So donāt be led astray. each of us becomes a saint in the way God wants us to not according to our will. Always seek advice and permission for anything the least bit extreme.
In whatever way Our Lord chooses to make you a saint, I pray that you will be obedient to His will. God bless us all with perservance.
A fellow traveller
St. Margaret Mary Alacoque lived an extremely mortified life from a very early age - without anyoneās knowledge, not even her parents. She was good at leading a hidden life even when so young. But, this was Our Lordās special grace for her. After she entered the Visitation Community she was gifted with many visitations and she reported that Our Lord on one occasion told her He wanted her to live on bread and water all year long except for ferial days when she could keep the Lenten fast. Her superior and spiritual director tested this message and under obedience ordered her to take the meals served to everyone in the refectory. She was always obedient. Every time she attempted to follow orders she became violently ill. She was given permission to keep the fast. She of course, was being prepared for a very special mission- to promote devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. In all things and for everyone OBEDIENCE is what the Lord wants not self imposed austerities. Didnāt He say "I want a loving heartā?
Just as we are not all called to be āblood martyrsā we are not all called to extreme mortifications of the type spoken of here. But I do think that if perfection is our ultimate goal then perhaps being a āmartyr of loveā as St. Jane de Chantal refers to it should be
on our mind.
Stā¦Therese of Lisieux early on tried physical bodily mortifications, hair shirt, iron piercing her body under her habit but she gave it up to live a life of love.
Self denial is what Our Lord specifically asks of all of usā¦ and how difficult that is especially today. Deny yourself, take up your cross daily and follow Jesus. No easy task - impossible without grace.
Obedience is what Our Lord taught us. I had a young woman tell me once when I asked her if she wanted to be a saint and she responded quickly with an emphatic 'NO" I canāt do all the things the saints did. She misunderstood what she had obviously been taught or read. So donāt be led astray. each of us becomes a saint in the way God wants us to not according to our will. Always seek advice and permission for anything the least bit extreme.
In whatever way Our Lord chooses to make you a saint, I pray that you will be obedient to His will. God bless us all with perservance.
A fellow traveller
T
TrueLight
Guest
Very well said.
J
jimdi3
Guest
What more enjoyment? My yoke is sweet ā¦ Mmmmmmmm No wonder razor blades are used to increase the sweetness ā¦
Perhaps as the above poster indicates - an enjoyable activity should be given up rather than increased.
J
jwinch2
Guest
Great stuff Brother. Thanks for this.Actually, thatās not a āno no.ā The Catholic Church employs several hundred of us in the fields of Ascetical and Mystical Theology as well as Christian Pysychology. Among other things, one of our jobs is to study the behavior of the saints and separate the human from the divine, the healthy from the unhealthy.
Saints were human beings. Many of them did have psychological problems. That does not take away from their holiness. Holiness is measured by a heroic life of faith and virtue, not the externals. A person can have extraordinary faith and extraordinary manifestations of charity and other virtues, but also have behaviors that are outside of the realm of good mental health.
We have had saints who suffered from depression, anxiety disorders, mood disorders, eating disorders and even PTSD. Mental illness is no more an obstacle to being a saint than is diabetes, heart disease, TB, or cancer. That is not what the Church looks at. Illness is illness.
During the inquiry leading up to Veneration, we separate that which can be dysfunctional behavior from that which can be sinful behavior. Dysfunctional behavior is not a sin and certainly not an obstable to holiness. It can be rooted in some pathology. One of the most famous saints who suffered mental illness was St. Dymphna. She suffered from panic attacks. St. Francis of Assisi suffered from depression, which is no surprise considering the abuse that he suffered at the hand of his ruthless father. There have been other saints with mental illnesses, such as St. Benedict Joseph.
The term insane is not a term of theology or medicine. Itās a legal term invented by lawyers in order to process their cases using concrete language, since the language of mental health is often too abstract for the courtroom. Itās a very old term, but not a very precise one.
It is also true that the Church does not endorse unhealthy practices, even if they are found in saints. Such things as consuming the puss from the wound of another person, is not seen as a heroic act of virtue. However, the Church looks past this unhealthy behavior to see the charity and humility behind it. It is this charity and humility that sanctifies the person, not the behavior that he or she uses to express it.
One has to take people in their context, as I always like to say. People can do very strange things for very noble reasons. As long as those strange behaviors are not sinful, then the personās holiness is unchallenged. It is one thing to do deliberate harm, which is always morally wrong and quite another to be eccentric or even neurotic. These conditions do not take away from holiness.
My personal feeling is that if we were a little more honest about our neuroses, we would probably all be a little holier. Honesty is the first step in humility.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- Status