St. Francis in the Eastern Churches?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ConstantineTG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Br JReducation,

As you know there are many Franciscan Orders today. You belong to the OSF which appears to have emerged centuries after the founding of the common OFM Conv, OFM and OFM Cappuchins. Would you know who are the Original Franciscans? and how the OSF came into existence?
Actually, there is a common misunderstanding among the lay faithful regarding the Franciscan family. It’s really the Church’s fault, because of “Church Speak”.

There are only three Franciscan Orders and each order is subdivided into obediences. Our Holy Father wrote four rules: Friars Minor, Poor Sisters, Order of Penance and the Hermits. The Hermits were never an autonomous order. They are members of one of the three orders who live by the Rule for Hermits. That leaves us with three orders.

What happened, during Francis’ lifetime is that situations arose that were not covered in the rules. Francis then created the chapters in which the members of each order discussed, voted and created statutes to address these situations. These statutes became known as constitutions.

As the three orders grew, there were several constitutions. Eventually, the Franciscan family was reorganized according to which constitution each group obeyed. Hence the term Obediences. Each Obedience was allowed to elect its General Superior.

In essence, all of the obediences of the Franciscan family trace our roots back to Francis, because we are all part of one of the three orders that he founded. Each obedience follows one of the rules and comes directly out of one of the Franciscan communities.

There are other Franciscan communities that are not part of the Franciscan Orders. They do not have Franciscan Succession, because they were not founded by Franciscans. They are related to us in spirit, but not historically or canonically. A good example of this are the Sisters of St. Francis in the USA. They were founded by St. John Neumann, a Redemptorist .

The OSF or Order of St. Francis dates back to 1228. During his life time, our Holy Father founded the Order of Penance. It was referred to as the third order (notice lower case), because of the chronology. That was not its name. The Order of Penance was for secular men and women. It welcomes married, single, widows, deacons, priests and bishops who were not consecrated men. It always had a complement of lay and clergy. But they were not consecrated men and women. They lived in the world; however, they did form fraternities… They were penitential fraternities.

Some of these men and women were celibate. They gradually gathered into communities and adopted the conventual life. Eventually, in 1228, they were given their own General Superior and were given the name, Regular Brothers of Penance or Regular Sisters of Penance. But that name only stuck on paper. People referred to them by different names: Third Order Regular (TOR), Order of St. Francis (OSF) and many other names, as different Franciscan men and women founded new communities.

It is important to remember that all of these communities or obediences, follow one of the three rules written by Francis and their leadership has an unbroken line of succession that can be traced back to Francis. Because they came out of an existing Franciscan fraternity.

The Friars Minor were also divided into many obediences, with many constitutions. In the 1500s there were two large groups of Friars Minor, the Observants and the Conventuals. The former were called thus because they observed a strict form of poverty. The latter were called thus because they lived in convents (friaries). Four friars came out of these two groups and joined in one house. Long story short, out of that house there came another very large group of Friars Minor known as the Capuchins. In the 1800s, Pope Leo XII called all of the Observant Friars together. There were many constitutions. He asked them to merge them into one and elect one General Superior, instead of several. They did so. There was a question as to the name for the merger, Pope Leo said, “Franciscan”. That’s how we get the Franciscans (OFM). They are really a merger of many small Observant groups of Order Friars Minor.

All three orders were originally founded by St. Francis, but they quickly grew and evolved during his lifetime. All of the succeeding General Ministers (Superiors) are his canonical successors elected from among the line of succession and according to Canon Law.

It is believed that the Secular Franciscans may be the original foundation, even though their rule was written third in chronological order. Francis did not begin his life as a religious. He and the early brothers were a fraternity of penitents, whom Pope Innocent III elevated to the status of an Order of Pontifical Right. The remaining secular men and women who originally followed him were later given a rule and then elevated to an Order of Pontifical Right, today known as the SFO or OFS. They still have married, single, and clergy. They’ve actually had several popes including Gregory IX (who canonized Francis and Anthony), Pius X, Pius XII and John XXIII.

The friars were sent to the East to negotiate a union between the Greek Church and the Catholic Church. They were well received, but the question about the procession of the HS was a kink in the armor. However, they did attract Easterners. Through the centuries there have been many Eastern Catholics who have become Franciscans, mostly from Eastern Europe and Jerusalem. There is a lot of diversity in the Franciscan family, but only three rules, one Patriarch and Matriarch.

I don’t know if that answers the question.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Thanks Br, That was a very good account that I was looking for.

You did mention the merging of the Observants into what became the OFM. Do you see any plans of the same with regards the Capuchins?, as you might know, the CFR claims to be descendant from the Capuchins.

Thanks
 
Thanks Br, That was a very good account that I was looking for.

You did mention the merging of the Observants into what became the OFM. Do you see any plans of the same with regards the Capuchins?, as you might know, the CFR claims to be descendant from the Capuchins.

Thanks
I don’t foresee the CFR being merged with the Capuchins for the simple reason that the Capuchins are very large and can sustain themselves. They have many vocations around the world. The CFRs are also gaining momentum and receiving many new brothers and are now international as well.

The CFR have a right to claim descendency from the Capuchin Franciscans. The CFR began with six Capuchin Franciscans. There is that whole Franciscan Succession thing again. One obedience comes out of another obedience. The Franciscan Missionaries of the Eternal Word (MFVA) also come from the Capuchins. Their first superior was Friar Angelus Shaughnessy, OFM, Cap. The Franciscans of the Primitive Observance (FPO) also come from the Capuchin tradition. Originally, they were Capuchins, then they were CFR, then they became an autonomous obedience. All of them follow the Rule of the Friars Minor, which is also called the First Order Rule, because it was the first rule.

The scenario is not as bad as people paint it. What happens is that people go to these sites that have statistics on vocations and read the numbers and are freaked out. They begin to think that the Church is disappearing, because they read low numbers.

There are some important things to remember.
  1. The people who do these studies don’t understand communities such as the Franciscan family. The focus of the Franciscan family is not to ordain priests and staff parishes. The focus is to live in obedience, in brotherhood, in prayer, without property and among the poor. That was the vision of St. Francis. He never envisioned an order of priests. He was not a priest. Nor did he allow priests to occupy a special place in the community. Today, you have the Franciscan men moving back to our roots, there are going to be less ordinations. We don’t need priests as much as we did when we were doing parish work 90% of the time. We’re moving back to more time spent in prayer, living together as brothers spending time together, living and working among the poor, immigrants, elderly, sick, and other people in need. We’re doing a lot of work in pro-life ministry, outreach, youth and communications ministry. There is also a lot of work being done in developing nations.
  2. The friars who are ordained take on more supportive ministries. They may do one particular kind of work during the week and help at a diocesan parish on a weekend. This was the vision that Francis had. The ordained friars would support the secular clergy, not displace them. These priests sort of materialize and dematerialize. This is good. They are taking that place of minores or lesser brothers that Francis embraced.
  3. Then there is how one identifies himself. If you ask an individual Franciscan, “Are you a priest?” He’ll tell you “yes” if he is ordained or “no” if he’s not ordained. However, if you ask them “Are you an order of priests?” The answer is, “No. We’re a brotherhood.” Statisticians don’t know what to do with that answer. But that’s the beauty of the Franciscan family. It allows a friar to be ordained or not. He can be a superior today and a contemplative tomorrow. He can go from being a pastor in a parish to being a high school teacher or the other way around. You can have a house full of priests governed by a friar who is not a priest. He’s the only non-cleric in the house. You can have a house full of non-clerics without a priest or another where you have a non-cleric who is a contemplative that never leaves the house, whose life is to pray and do manual labor.
That’s why we could never be monks. Monks are very uniform. Franciscans are not. We have never been uniform, even during Francis’ lifetime.

There is another interesting fact that applies to this forum. Franciscans are not limited to the Latin Church. It is a Latin spiritual family. But not all of the brothers and sisters are Latin Catholics. I’m going to GUESS that we have few vocations from the Eastern Churches because of the political conditions under which the Eastern Churches have had to live.

Most Eastern Catholics lived under very oppressive regimes. There was no room for these multi-faceted itinerant men and women in those cultures, because the State would not allow them to found there. Many of these were governments that TOLERATED what was contained. Monasticism works better in these countries. I’m just guessing. I’m not from Eastern Europe or the Middle East. I’m a southern boy. 😃

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
St.Francis of Assisi is the patron saint of MCYM, (Malankara Catholic Youth Movement) of the Syro Malankara Catholic Church.
 
One text, which can be interpreted in different ways, does not prove that he had stigmata. Personally, I think it unlikely that he did, and that the text is simply referring to his imprisonment as the wounds of Christ in a metaphorical sense.
But since there seems to be an Orthodox “bias” against stigmata, especially in contemporary times, we will never know for sure.

Orthodox hagiography tends to overlook the overt Latinizations of its Kievan Baroque-era Saints, including the emphasis on Purgatory etc.

That doesn’t mean such openness to Western Catholicism didn’t exist within Orthodoxy.

Alex
 
That’s very common among us. We recite the office in chapels, on the road, in cafeterias, etc. If we were monks, we would need a choir. The way that I describe Franciscan spirituality is one that has monastic elements, without the monastery. One of those is the Liturgy of the Hours. I know that many people prefer the term Divine Office. The fact is that in the early days of our history, we did simply called it Praying the Breviary. Both terms are interchangeable for Franciscans.

Unknown to many Latin Catholics, Francis also introduced many Eastern Catholic customs into his family, one of them being standing during the canon of the mass. In later years, there was an option to stand or kneel. This is still in place today. You had the ordained friar celebrate the Latin Rite, but everyone stood. You kneel in adoration when the Blessed Sacrament is exposed, but not during the mass. As the friars went out to other cities and countries, they adapted to the local customs when celebrating mass with the laity. In the conventual mass, things are a little different. Chapels usually have very few if any statues. Mosaics, frescoes and icons are more common than in most Latin religious houses.

There are also certain postures for prayer that Francis brought back from Egypt, which are really Muslim. He had this incredible sense of the sublime that he could see the holy and reverent even outside of the boundaries of the Roman Catholic Church, while at the same time loving and protecting the Roman Church. He was truly a catholic man. The lower case is deliberate. In a certain sense, he was more Eastern than Western. He was a different kind of mystic. You can’t peg him into the same slot as you would Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross and other Latin Catholic Mystics. His was a very strong Trinitarian mysticism and strong Incarnational mysticism. Everything in the created world reflects a Divine attribute. If you read the Canticle of the Creatures, aka: Canticle of Brother Sun, you see a truly Franciscan approach to theology that is not present in other mystics and theologians in the East or West and yet, there is an air that appeals to both lungs.

One of the things that was very interesting about him was his strong inclination to unity while preserving diversity. When his friars went to the East, they did not try to Latinize the local people. They were themselves and let the locals be who they were. The focus was always the Gospel, not the externals. The individual expressions of the Gospel have always been respected.

Maybe I’m biased. I think he was a delightful man.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Dear Reverend Brother,

With respect to the matter you’ve raised, did not the Franciscans in China and India strenuously oppose local inculturation at first . . . ? Did they not complain about Fr. Matteo Ricci and Fr. Roberto diNobili?

St Francis also made the Sign of the Cross with three fingers as Eastern Byzantine Catholics do. Pope Innocent III defended this more ancient form of the Sign of the Cross and also spoke highly of the Tau symbol - which St Francis also adopted.

Alex
 
One text, which can be interpreted in different ways, does not prove that he had stigmata. Personally, I think it unlikely that he did, and that the text is simply referring to his imprisonment as the wounds of Christ in a metaphorical sense.
Actually, there were many eye-witnesses to the fact. We also have the bandages that Clare made for his hands and feet with the blood stains. We have one of his habits that also has blood stains. One of the eye witnesses was the pope himself, Pope Gregory IX. To ensure that it is held by the entire Catholic Church, Pope Gregory includes the stigmata in the bull of canonization. Bulls of canonization are infallible, because they are Ex Cathedra.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Actually, there were many eye-witnesses to the fact. We also have the bandages that Clare made for his hands and feet with the blood stains. We have one of his habits that also has blood stains. One of the eye witnesses was the pope himself, Pope Gregory IX. To ensure that it is held by the entire Catholic Church, Pope Gregory includes the stigmata in the bull of canonization. Bulls of canonization are infallible, because they are Ex Cathedra.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Our (very Eastern 😉 ) Brother and Defender of Orthodoxy Todd/Apotheoun is referring to the “unlikely possibility” that St Gregory Palamas was a stigmatist based on a single line in his hagiographic bio - not St Francis.

St Francis is in the calendar of the UGCC, he was also privately venerated by the Russian emigres in France and also by the OCA New Skete monastery.

In western Ukraine, there were several cases of stigmata e.g. Steven Navrotsky. I knew a priest who was Met. Andrew Sheptytsk’s canonical investigator of these matters (Fr. Petro Khomyn +eternal memory!). He told me he once investigated the case of stigmata in a young girl. At the height of her meditations, he could not only see blood coming out of marks in her hands, feet and side, but also the formation of what looked like a crown of thorns on her head . . .

Devotion to the stigmatist priest St Pio of Pietrelcina is very widespread in western Ukraine and there is even a Ukrainian language akathist to him.

Alex
 
Incidentally, just as cases of the stigmata can be found in the East, so too cases of the “Divine Light” can be found in the West. There is a story, I don’t know where the source is as I learned it from a professor of mine (Fr. Conrad Harkins, O.F.M., an expert in Franciscan history), that speaks of Francis and Claire praying in the woods near Assisi one night. They were so intent on their prayer that the entire area around them was transfigured into an unnatural light. Supposedly the inhabitants of Assisi were quite startled by the incident. There is also the tale that near the head of St. Dominic (founder of the Dominicans) could be seen a star, that shone even brighter as his death approached. I know there are many other stories of the Divine Light occuring among saints in the West, but I can’t think of any more right now.
 
Incidentally, just as cases of the stigmata can be found in the East, so too cases of the “Divine Light” can be found in the West. There is a story, I don’t know where the source is as I learned it from a professor of mine (Fr. Conrad Harkins, O.F.M., an expert in Franciscan history), that speaks of Francis and Claire praying in the woods near Assisi one night. They were so intent on their prayer that the entire area around them was transfigured into an unnatural light. Supposedly the inhabitants of Assisi were quite startled by the incident. There is also the tale that near the head of St. Dominic (founder of the Dominicans) could be seen a star, that shone even brighter as his death approached. I know there are many other stories of the Divine Light occuring among saints in the West, but I can’t think of any more right now.
Excellent, Master Beadsman!

Alex
 
Today is the feast day of St. Francis of Asisi. He’s one of my favorite saints. How well received or recognized is he in the Eastern Churches?
What about St Seraphim of Sarov, is he recognized on the Roman Calendar?.
 
What about St Seraphim of Sarov, is he recognized on the Roman Calendar?.
St. Seraphim of Sarov cannot be included in the calendar of the Catholic Church because he lived and died in schism. However, that does not mean that the Catholic Church ignores his sanctity. Bl. John Paul II referred to him as a saint in his book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope.

It is important to understand that he is not included because he lived in schism, but he is not guilty of the schism. He was born into the Orthodox Church. Living in a situation that you inherited is not the same as causing the problem.

Our ancestors caused the problem. Now it’s up to us to fix it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Dear Rev. Brother,

In fact, St Seraphim of Sarov can be readily found on the internet under Catholic Saints Online.

If Rome can acknowledge the sanctity of St Gregory Palamas, it can do the same for any number of Eastern Saints whose communion with Rome isn’t at all clear at the time they lived.

St Seraphim could not, by your own words, be considered to have been in schism. And Fr. Holweck in his “Dictionary of the Saints” 1924 records numbers of saints who originated from even heretical communities. St Artemius the Dux Augustalis of Egypt and martyr is venerated in both East and West for his martyrdom when he was destroying pagan temples.

What is not included in his “saintly bio” is that he was, at the same time and as an Arian, destroying Catholic churches. But his martyrdom by pagans, like those, of others, was honoured by the Church that chose to overlook their defects in their orthodoxy.

St Seraphim is receiving a growing cultus in the West, such as at the biritual Benedictine monastery at Chevetogne where his relics were openly venerated. He was very devoted to the Rosary called in the East the “prayer rule of the Most Holy Theotokos” and he said that he received a communication from the Mother of God telling him that this prayer is the most important prayer in her honour, moreso than canons or akathists, to obtain her protection over our lives.

He is also the saint who predicted the fall of communism (and this in the 18th century!).

If Bl. John Paul calls him a saint, that is more than good enough for me! 😉

East and West do not question each other’s canonizations to begin with. Roman Catholic delegates have attended Orthodox canonizations, such as that of St Herman of Alaska, have venerated the relics of those Orthodox saints and have received and taken away copies of their icons.

Sounds like the Roman Catholic church has a very close relationship to Orthodoxy and hardly one that can be characterized as a relationship with a “schismatic” body . . .

Alex
 
Dear Rev. Brother,

In fact, St Seraphim of Sarov can be readily found on the internet under Catholic Saints Online.

If Rome can acknowledge the sanctity of St Gregory Palamas, it can do the same for any number of Eastern Saints whose communion with Rome isn’t at all clear at the time they lived.

St Seraphim could not, by your own words, be considered to have been in schism. And Fr. Holweck in his “Dictionary of the Saints” 1924 records numbers of saints who originated from even heretical communities. St Artemius the Dux Augustalis of Egypt and martyr is venerated in both East and West for his martyrdom when he was destroying pagan temples.

What is not included in his “saintly bio” is that he was, at the same time and as an Arian, destroying Catholic churches. But his martyrdom by pagans, like those, of others, was honoured by the Church that chose to overlook their defects in their orthodoxy.

St Seraphim is receiving a growing cultus in the West, such as at the biritual Benedictine monastery at Chevetogne where his relics were openly venerated. He was very devoted to the Rosary called in the East the “prayer rule of the Most Holy Theotokos” and he said that he received a communication from the Mother of God telling him that this prayer is the most important prayer in her honour, moreso than canons or akathists, to obtain her protection over our lives.

He is also the saint who predicted the fall of communism (and this in the 18th century!).

If Bl. John Paul calls him a saint, that is more than good enough for me! 😉

East and West do not question each other’s canonizations to begin with. Roman Catholic delegates have attended Orthodox canonizations, such as that of St Herman of Alaska, have venerated the relics of those Orthodox saints and have received and taken away copies of their icons.

Sounds like the Roman Catholic church has a very close relationship to Orthodoxy and hardly one that can be characterized as a relationship with a “schismatic” body . . .

Alex
I have not denied St. Seraphim’s sanctity. I was explaining why he is not on the Catholic liturgical calendar. There are many saints canonized by the Orthodox that the Catholic Church believes are truly saints. He’s not the only one.

I agree, if Bl. John Paul refers to him as a saint, whom am I to argue. 🤷

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top