THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA

The Man of Perfect Virtue:

Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior in the Tradition of Hagiography

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to the Faculty of the

School of Theology and Religious Studies

Of the Catholic University of America

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

By

Matthew William Kozlowski

Washington, DC

2020

The Man of Perfect Virtue: Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior in the Tradition of Hagiography

Matthew William Kozlowski

Director: Raymond Studzinski, PhD

Abstract

In 1263, Bonaventure of Bagnoregio submitted a new life of Francis of Assisi. The

Legenda Maior Sancti Francisci (Major Legend of Saint Francis) was soon decreed as the official biography for the Franciscan order. Despite its ongoing importance to the order, the

Legenda Maior came under criticism in the 20th century for its perceived lack of attention to the

‘true’ historical Francis. Paul Sabatier, for example, evaluated the earlier accounts of Francis as being far superior. More recently, scholars have come to see Bonaventure’s text as a masterpiece of spiritual and theological insight. What Sabatier seems to have overlooked is that the Legenda Maior was, and is, a hagiography. The genre of hagiography is unique in that the life of a saint is presented for the purpose of forming and edifying those who encounter it as readers (or just as commonly, listeners). This dissertation will first examine several well-known hagiographies, such as the life of St. Antony the Great. Next, early Franciscan texts such as

Thomas of Celano’s Life of St. Francis will be discussed. It will be shown that all of these texts share a focus on virtue – in many cases the virtues of the saints are presented as being equally important as miracles. With this groundwork laid, the dissertation will offer an in-depth reading of Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior, focusing on virtue. It will be shown how Bonaventure presented the virtue of Francis as a manifestation of grace, tightly connected to Francis’ imitation of Christ. In this way, the Legenda Maior presents Francis as not only a great saint, but as one

perfectly conformed to Christ, and the man of perfect virtue. Bonaventure’s overall theory of grace, free will, virtue, and moral progress are also discussed. The dissertation concludes with a short chapter on the stigmata. Overall, it is argued that modern readers who approach

Bonaventure’s Francis today may be inspired to pursue virtue in their own lives. In this way, the

Legenda Maior functions as hagiography, forming and edifying those who encounter the text.

This dissertation by Matthew William Kozlowski fulfills the dissertation requirements for the doctoral degree in Theology and Religious Studies approved by Raymond Studzinski, PhD, as Director, and by Joshua Benson, PhD, and David Elliot, PhD as Readers.

______

Raymond Studzinski, PhD, Director

______

Joshua Benson, PhD, Reader

______

David Elliot, PhD, Reader

ii

CONTENTS

Introduction 1

Chapter 1. Virtue in the Lives of the Saints 12

Chapter 2. The Emerging Portrait of Francis 53

Chapter 3. Bonaventure’s Francis: The Man of Perfect Virtue 98

Chapter 4. Reading the Legenda Maior as Hagiography Today 146

Conclusion. The Stigmata and Moral Progress 182

Bibliography 194

iii

INTRODUCTION

Between 1260 and 1263, Bonaventure of Bagnoregio completed a new life of Francis of

Assisi. The Legenda Maior Sancti Francisci (Major Legend of Saint Francis) was soon decreed as the official biography for the Franciscan order. At the time, there were other vitae of Francis in circulation: works written by Thomas of Celano, Julian of Speyer, and other ‘companions’ of

Francis who had known him before his death in 1226. What all of these works had in a common was a desire to present the person and life of Francis, both to the world and to the members of the order that he had founded. The term “Legend” is often confusing for English speakers, as it conjures up notions of fantasy or myth. For a 13th century audience, however, Legenda, from the

Latin legere (to read), referred to the fact that the life of a saint was to be read, usually aloud at worship or during meals. As a text read aloud, the vita of a saint was, and is, more than a biography – rather, it is a hagiography. The difference between these two terms is not merely a question of terminology. While a biography ostensibly aims to report the facts of a person’s life, hagiography has a different intention, which is to shape and form those readers (or listeners) who encounter it.

The unwillingness of some 20th century scholars to view the lives of the saints

(hagiographies) as representing a unique genre with unique motivations has led to some unfortunate conclusions. In the case of Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior, the work has been often criticized for not being authentic to the historical Francis. Paul Sabatier and others claimed that the author offered too much of his own agenda, producing a text that had little value for

1 2 understanding the ‘real’ Francis of Assisi.1 The problem with this approach was not that it lacked appropriate historical curiosity, but rather that it asked something of hagiography that the genre never promised to deliver. As Jean Leclercq so cogently explains, “The reason for recording a saint's life is not always, as we might believe at first thought, to tell the story of his life. For what is being dealt with is the existence not of just any outstanding personality… but of a Christian who has achieved sanctity.”2 Facts do matter to the hagiographer, but only in so far as those facts relate to the broader project of edification. Indeed, the primary aim of hagiography is formation.

The following dissertation approaches Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior with this understanding in mind: that the text was, and is, a work of hagiography with an intention to shape and form those who encounter it. How the text achieves that aim is the main question of the dissertation. The short answer to this question can be summed up in one word: virtue. In the tradition of Christian hagiography, the presentation of a saint’s virtue was almost always a central theme. Again, in the words of Jean Leclercq, “What matters is less the circumstances of his [the saint’s] existence than the opportunities they afforded him to practice virtue.”3 The saints, for all their extraordinary words and deeds, were also put forth as models of charity, humility, patience, fortitude, and a host of other virtues. In many cases, the presentation of these

1 Sabatier wrote, for example, that “circumstances controlled his [Bonaventure’s] work, and it is no injustice to him to say that it is fortunate for Francis, and especially for us, that we have another biography of the Poverello than that of the Seraphic Doctor.” Paul Sabatier, The Life of St. Francis of Assisi, trans. L.S. Houghton (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1919), 395.

2 Jean Leclercq, The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture (New York: Fordham University Press, 1996), 161.

3 Leclercq, 161. 3 virtues was even more important than the miracles that the saints performed.4 This dissertation will therefore approach the genre of hagiography through the lens of virtue, arguing that an understanding of virtue allows for a fruitful reading of Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior in particular.

What is a Virtue?

The contemporary field of virtue ethics has become a well-known method of moral reasoning. Pushing back against the previous traditions of deontology (ethics based on duty), virtue ethics, broadly speaking, emphasizes the notion of ‘being’ over ‘doing.’5 This is not to say that actions do not matter, for they matter deeply. Rather, the suggestion is that actions flow out of consistent dispositions that guide behavior – these dispositions are virtues. Thus the ethical ‘task’ for the individual is to develop the character necessary to practice right action, regardless of the situation. Such an understanding of virtue is actually rooted in ancient thought.

Aristotle’s definition of virtue is as follows: “virtue in a man will be the disposition (habitus) which renders him a good man and also which will cause him to perform his function well.”6

4 For example, the authors of the Legenda Trium Sociorum (Legend of the Three Companions, abbreviated as L3C) reveal a clear preference of virtue over miracles. They write, “We do not intend merely to relate miracles, which demonstrate, but do not cause sanctity. Our intention is to point out some striking aspects of his holy manner of life.” L3C Letter (Fontes, 1374; FAED II, 67): Non contenti narrare solum miracula, quae sanctitatem non faciunt sed ostendunt, sed etiam sanctae conversationis eius insignia. Latin from Fontes Franciscani, ed. Menestò, Enrico and Stefano Brufani (Assisi: Porziuncola, 1995), hereafter Fontes. English translation Francis of Assisi Early Documents, ed. Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short (New York: New City Press, 2000-2001), hereafter FAED.

5 Stanley Hauerwas, A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981), 113.

6 Nicomachean Ethics II.6. 4 Christian theologians in the medieval scholastic period, having rediscovered the works of

Aristotle with access to Latin translations, crafted a theory of virtue that was similar in many ways to the Greek tradition. Both Thomas Aquinas and Bonaventure agreed, for example, that a virtue was a stable disposition (habitus) out of which a person acts well.7 Conversely, a vice is a habitus out of which one acts poorly. Key to this understanding of habitus – and this point is also crucial in contemporary virtue ethics – is that habits are shaped and formed over time. In other words, one is not simply born as an honest or dishonest person. Rather, one becomes an honest person through practice and the ongoing cultivation of the virtue of honesty, thereby shaping a disposition toward honest actions. In this way of thinking, virtue is more than a good character trait – virtue is deeper, for indeed it is a way of being. In Christian virtue theory, the process of ‘habituation’ is sustained by God’s grace, and therefore it is not simply a human endeavor. In other words, grace is inextricably bound to the virtues.8

Virtue in the Lives of the Saints

A central argument of this dissertation is the fact that the lives of the saints, upon examination, reveal a well-developed understanding and presentation of virtue. Saints such as

Antony the Great, the famous desert ascetic, are consistently described as acting with courage, temperance, humility, and a host of other key virtues. It is clear in these descriptions that the

7 Bonaventure’s definition is found in his Commentary on the Sentences II.27.3. Aquinas’ definition is found in the Summa Theologica I-II.22.1.

8 Bonaventure writes that grace is “the origin, the end, and the form of virtuous habits.” Breviloquium V.4.2 (Opera Omnia V, 256; Monti, 183): quae est habituum virtualium origo finis et forma. Latin text taken from Bonaventure Doctoris seraphici S. Bonaventurae opera omnia, ed. Fathers of the Collegium S. Bonaventurae (Quaracchi, 1882–1902), hereafter Opera Omnia. English from Breviloquium, trans. Dominic V. Monti (St. Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute, 2005). 5 hagiographers do not regard such virtues as mere character traits. Rather, the holy actions of the saints flow out of well-formed dispositions that govern their behaviors. Antony, to give an example, is not shown to be courageous in some situations but cowardly others – on the contrary, he displays fortitude consistently across a variety of circumstances. It is also clear that the authors of the lives of the saints showcased the virtues of the saints with an eye toward edification. In other words, the saint is held up as a model of virtue in order that the faithful might follow the example of right living. As Athanasius states in his preface to the Life of

Antony: “the very act of remembering Antony is of enormous profit and benefit to me and I am sure that you, listening in wonder, will be keen to follow his commitment: for to know who

Antony was offers us the perfect path to virtue.”9

When it comes to Francis of Assisi, the authors who presented him to the world centered much of their reflections on his virtues. In this way, the tradition of Franciscan hagiography stands in line with the previous traditions of hagiography. Thomas of Celano, for example, clearly took inspiration from the lives of such classic saints as Antony, Bernard, Benedict, and

Martin of Tours. The shift one sees in the presentation of Francis, however, is that the man of

Assisi is put forth as a second Christ (alter Christus). This is especially true in the writings of

Thomas of Celano and Bonaventure. If the saints of old pointed to Christ, Francis was the exact image of Christ. This conformity to Christ is, of course, definitively established through the reception of the stigmata. Indeed, for Bonaventure, the stigmata represents the very imprint of the image of Christ upon Francis’ body. That being said, Francis’ virtue also fundamental to his conformity to Christ. Even before receiving the stigmata, Francis’ soul is conformed to Christ

9 Vita Antonii (Life of St. Antony) preface. This quotation will be discussed in full in capter 1. 6 through grace, and in his virtues he manifests the height of “gospel perfection” (evangelicae perfectionis).

Francis as the Man of Perfect Virtue

The argument of this dissertation can be laid out follows. These assertions will be repeated throughout the dissertation, and it is therefore useful to state them clearly here:

• Hagiography is a unique genre with the stated aim to form and edify the reader.

• The early tradition of hagiography – as seen in classic texts such as the Vita Anontii – consistently puts forth virtue as a central theme.

• The early lives of Francis of Assisi are in line with the traditions of hagiography, as these lives likewise put forth the virtue of Francis as a central theme.

• Bonaventure in the Legenda Maior takes this presentation a step further in portraying Francis as the man of perfect virtue.

• For Bonaventure, Francis is uniquely touched by grace, such that he makes moral progress and is ultimately conformed to Christ in his virtue and in the stigmata.

• The Legenda Maior was and is a work of hagiography, and as such it intends to edify the reader.

• The method by which readers are formed by the Legenda Maior is the inspiration to pursue virtue in their own lives.

Here a word must be said about imitation. Hagiography often explicitly encourages emulation. The faithful are invited to view the saint as a moral exemplar whom they should follow through right living. Again, the preface to the life of Antony makes this clear. The author tells the reader that he has composed the work in order “that you might be able to emulate him and follow his example.”10 From a Christian point of view, the saint is worth following not

10 Vita Anontii preface. 7 only because of his holy life, but because he points to Christ. In other words, to follow the example of a saint is also to follow the example of Christ. As Paul wrote to the Christians in

Corinth” “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1; ESV).

Francis of Assisi, to a degree, functions in this model of imitation. Bonaventure states in the prologue to the Legenda Maior that Francis was “worthy of love by Christ, imitation by us, and admiration by the world.”11 It becomes clear, however, in the course of Bonaventure’s text that

Francis cannot be fully imitated. He states in chapter six that Francis’ humility “was easier to admire than to imitate.”12 This line – a unique addition by the Seraphic Doctor – seems to preclude the possibility of readers simply imitating the Francis whom they meet in the Legenda

Maior. Indeed, how could one hope to emulate a man of perfect virtue who has been perfectly conformed to Christ? It is the argument of this dissertation that the Legenda Maior therefore functions in a slightly different way. Because of the text’s consistent emphasis on grace and virtue, Bonaventure invites readers to be edified, not through imitation, but through the acceptance of God’s grace and the pursuit of virtue in their own lives.

Dissertation Outline

The dissertation will proceed in four chapters, plus a short conclusion. The first two chapters will set the stage for the discussion of the Legenda Maior. Chapters three and four will then focus on Bonaventure's text itself.

11 Prologue to the Legenda Maior, hereafter LM. This quotation will be discussed fully in chapter 4.

12 LM 6.2. This quotation will be discussed fully in chapter 4. 8 Chapter One, entitled “Virtue in the Lives of the Saints” will analyze three classic hagiographical texts in Western Christianity. These texts are the Vita Antonii (Life of Antony the Great), the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi (Fist Life of Saint Bernard of Clairvaux), and the Vita

Sancti Antonii “Assidua” (First Life of Anthony of Padua). While many other hagiographies could have been chosen for this chapter – the lives of Benedict and Martin, for example – the three selected vitae represent different perspectives and historical periods, providing a suitable diversity within the tradition. In addition, Bonaventure could have been familiar with all these texts. The chapter will describe how all three texts present virtue as a central theme. Antony,

Bernard, and Anthony of Padua all display virtue in their lives and ministries, and the authors consistently reinforce the overall importance of virtue. Interestingly, virtue is often shown in these texts to be on par with miracles, and in some cases even more important than miracles.

The chapter will therefore also describe the important conclusions of André Vauchez regarding virtue and miracles in the lives of the saints.

Chapter Two, entitled “The Emerging Portrait of Francis” will turn to Francis of Assisi himself and the accounts of his life written shortly after his death in 1226. Again, there are several texts that could have been selected for this chapter. The three selected texts represent different perspectives, yet they all represent the Franciscan hagiographical tradition that emerged in the thirteenth century. Mira Circa Nos, the Papal Bull that announced the canonization of St.

Francis, presents the saint through an eloquent series of Biblical allusions. Thomas of Celano’s

Life of Francis, later known as the Vita Prima, was the first complete life written on Francis.

The Legenda Trium Sociorum (Legend of the Three Companions), on the other hand, represents a slightly later period in which Franciscan brothers who had known Francis during his life hastened to contribute their own accounts and portraits of the poverello. All three of these texts, 9 of course, predate the Legenda Maior. Regarding the theme of virtue, the chapter will show how virtue is of central importance in all three of these hagiographical writings. In addition, the chapter will ask the broader question: “What are the Franciscan virtues?” Turning to some of

Francis’ own writings, a set of virtues can be identified that includes caritas, sapientia, patientia, humilitas, paupertas, laetitia, quies, timor Domino, misericordia, discretio, simplicitas, and obedientia. The chapter will not argue for direct connections or overlaps among the three hagioographical texts and this list of Franciscan virtues. Rather, the chapter will broadly propose the importance of virtue for Francis himself and the early texts that presented him to the world.

Chapter Three, entitled “Bonaventure’s Francis: The Man of Perfect Virtue” will most directly focus on the text of the Legenda Maior itself. The chapter will describe the background, structure, and theology of Bonaventure’s text. It will be shown how virtue is both an overarching theme as well as a guiding principle for the structure of the Legenda Maior. By analyzing chapters 5-9, the chapter will argue that Bonaventure’s presentation of key virtues – austeritas, humilitas, paupertas, pietas, and caritas – portray Francis as being conformed to

Christ. This point is critical. In the Legenda Maior, Francis is not simply a good person with good qualities. Nor is he merely an outstanding saint of God. Bonaventure takes the presentation of Francis a step further, presenting him as a man of perfect virtue in the perfect image of Christ. To understand what Bonaventure is doing in the Legenda Maior, one must understand his underlying theory of grace and virtue, which he explains most clearly in the

Breviloquium. Francis is put forth in the Legenda Maior as one who is uniquely touched by

God’s grace, which is the font of his virtue. It is in his practice of virtue – in addition to the stigmata – that Francis is conformed to Christ. The chapter will argue therefore that in the

Legenda Maior, grace leads to virtue; and virtue leads to conformity to Christ. 10 Chapter Four, entitled “Reading the Legenda Maior as Hagiography Today” returns to the fundamental point that hagiography, as a genre, intends to shape and form the reader. This chapter will therefore explore how the Legenda Maior can form modern readers of the text today. It will be proposed that there are at least three possible lenses with which one might approach Bonaventure’s text from the point of view of personal spiritual formation. These three lenses are: 1) Francis as moral exemplar, 2) Francis as converted self, and 3) Francis as the man of perfect virtue. The merits of all three approaches will be shown. The chapter will argue, however, that the third lens – Francis as the man of perfect virtue – is most true to the text itself.

In order to make this case, the chapter will describe additional elements of Bonaventure’s theology. For example, Bonaventure understood virtue as residing in the human will, and therefore the practice of virtue led to merit and moral progress. So it is that virtue becomes more than just an theoretical construct for Bonaventure, but rather a fundamental part of an individual’s unique response to grace and moral development.

Finally, a conclusion will draw together a number of the arguments put forth in the dissertation. This short concluding chapter will also more fully discuss a critical aspect of the

Legenda Maior: Bonaventure’s description of the stigmata. It will be argued that the stigmata does not represent a divergent thread in Bonaventure’s text. On the contrary, the stigmata works in consort with the overarching themes of virtue, grace, conformity to Christ, and moral progress.

As alluded to above, Bonaventure cautions against the idea of Christians attempting to simply imitate the example of Francis. Francis is indeed worthy of imitation, but following him involves a richer and fuller understanding of how God works in the human person. As Francis 11 said to his brothers before he died, “I have done what is mine, may Christ teach you yours.”13 In the end, this dissertation proposes that those who encounter Francis of Assisi in Bonaventure’s

Legenda Maior are inspired to accept God’s grace; and to develop and practice virtue in their own lives. This is how readers are formed by the text. Virtue, therefore, provides the key lens for modern readers to see the Legenda Maior for what it has always been: a hagiography that intends to edify those who encounter it.

13 LM 14.3 (Fontes, 901; FAED II, 642): Ego quod meum est feci; quod vestrum est Christus edoceat.

CHAPTER ONE

VIRTUE IN THE LIVES OF THE SAINTS

Introduction

The following chapter will explore the role of virtue in three hagiographical texts. The texts come from three different eras of Western Christianity. First, the Vita Antonii (Life of

Antony the Great) by Athanasius, written shortly after the desert father’s death in 356. Second, the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi (Fist Life of Saint Bernard of Clairvaux), focusing on Book I written by William of Saint-Thierry sometime before William’s death in 1148. Third, The Vita

Sancti Antonii “Assidua” (First Life of Anthony of Padua), written by a contemporary

Franciscan friar in 1232, the year Anthony was canonized. A close reading of all three hagiographies reveals a consistent presentation of virtue, as the authors extol the virtues of their saints throughout the texts.

This chapter will describe how the authors present the virtues of their respective saints.

In addition, the authors’ broader purpose in presenting virtue will be discussed – in other words, how and why does the text use virtue as a central theme? Moreover, the chapter will specify particular virtues that feature most prominently in each text. For example, in the Vita Antonii, the virtue of faith is the most frequently mentioned. The chapter will then discuss the role of miracles in these three hagiographies. It will be argued that in many cases, the presentation of saintly virtue is on par with the presentation of miracles. Finally, this chapter will remark briefly on the influence that the lives of the saints had on Bonaventure and his Legenda Maior (Major

Legend of Saint Francis).

12 13

Background on the Vita Antonii1

The Life of St. Antony the Great, or Antony of the Desert, is one of the foundational texts in the Western Christian tradition. Indeed, Bernard McGinn calls the Vita Antonii “the magna carta of Christian hagiography.”2 The text, originally composed in Greek by St. Athanasius shortly after Antony’s death in 356, enjoyed immediate and widespread popularity. Latin translations were produced within just a few years, the most well know Latin text being that of

Evagrius of Antioch (not to be confused with Evagrius of Pontus). So it was that the Vita

Antonii went on to be read in Latin through the medieval period.3 Thomas Hägg summarizes that the vita is “a key text, absorbing as it does various trends of ancient Greek biography, moulding them into a new, specific form, and thereby creating a model for future hagiographical writing in the east as well as the west.”4 In other words, within the genre of hagiography, the

Vita Antonii set the form for the lives of the saints.

1 Latin critical edition Vitae Antonii Versiones Latinae, ed. P. H. E Bertrand and Lois Gandt, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina (CCSL) v.170 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2018). English translation of the Latin text Life of Antony by Athanasius in Early Christian Lives, trans. ed. Carolinne White (London: Penguin, 1998), 7-70.

2 Bernard McGinn, “The Influence of Francis on the Theology of the High Middle Ages: The Testimony of St. Bonaventure,” in Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, ed. Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco (Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988), 106.

3 Dennis Dutschke explains, “Throughout the Middle Ages in the West, Antony continued to be extolled as the exemplar of ascetic life, and the Vita Antonii remained the primary text upon which the saint's image was based… By the 13th century, the St. Antony of the Vita Antonii was widely known as the Father of Monachism both within and without the monastic walls: he was the embodiment of the ascetic ideal.” Dennis Dutschke, “The Translation of St. Antony from the Egyptian Desert to the Italian City,” Aevum 68, no. 3 (1994): 505.

4 Thomas Hägg, “The Life of St. Antony between Biography and Hagiography” in The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, ed. Stephanos Efthymiadis (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2011), 18.

14 The Vita Antonii is a text in which the author shares the fame of its subject. Athanasius,

Bishop of Alexandria beginning in 328, had risen to prominence through his continued battles against Arianism following the council of Nicea in 325. Indeed, his episcopacy was marked by conflict, and included several exiles. It was during one of these exiles in the desert that the great theologian penned the Vita Antonii.5 Though the attribution to Athanasius was questioned by some modern scholars – most notably T.D. Barnes6 – the current consensus is that Athanasius did indeed write the vita. As Peter Juriss succinctly concludes: “The Life of Antony can with some measure of confidence, be attributed to a text penned in Greek by Athanasius, Patriarch of

Alexandria. The burden continues to lie with those positing the counter-argument to produce sustainable evidence and argument to the contrary.”7 In terms of content, the Vita Antonii traces the journey of the great desert monk Antony, from his birth to death. Athanasius describes the saint’s upbringing, his retreat into eremitical life, his eventual fame which attracted flocks of followers and visitors, and finally his death.

Virtue in the Vita Antoni

In the first half of the text, the most striking parts of the narrative are Antony’s battles with the devil and demons. These struggles are described in vivid detail:

“The devil was afraid that, as time went on, Antony might cause the desert to become inhabited, so he gathered together his minions and tortured Antony by beating him all over. The intensity of the pain deprived Antony of his ability both to move and speak,

5 White, Introduction to The Life of Antony, 3.

6 T.D. Barnes, “Angel of Light or Mystic Initiate? The Problem of the Life of Antony,” Journal of Theological Studies 37 (1986): 353-68.

7 Peter Jurris, “In Defense of Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria as Author of the Life of Antony: A Discussion of Historical, Linguistic and Theological Considerations,” Phronema 12 (1997): 24–43.

15 and later he himself would often tell how his injuries had been so serious that they were worse than all the tortures devised by men.”8

“There was a sudden noise which caused the place to shake violently: holes appeared in the walls and a horde of different kinds of demons poured out. They took on the shapes of wild animals and snakes and instantly filled the whole place with specters in the form of lions, bulls, wolves, vipers, serpents, scorpions and even leopards and bears, too. … Antony, beaten and mauled, experienced even more atrocious pain in his body but he remained unafraid, his mind alert.”9

In these passages Athanasius accentuates the physical nature of the attacks, asserting that the monk’s struggles were not merely psychological. These early descriptions paint Antony as a desert hero who is able to endure hardships and battles. In this way, it is the virtues of patience and courage that come to the fore. Antony, for example, repeatedly chants the phrase from

Psalm 27 non timebit cor meum (my heart will not fear).10

As the text continues, however, a new theme emerges. Instead of brute force, the enemy uses cunning, as the devil attempts to trick Antony through various disguises and beguiling suggestions. Antony himself narrates one of these episodes:

“While I was fasting, [the devil] appeared to me as a monk and offered me bread, trying to persuade me in the following words to eat and indulge this poor body of mine a little, ‘You, too, are human,’ he said, ‘and limited by human weakness. Cease your efforts for a while, otherwise illness may snatch you away.’ At once I recognized that serpent’s

8 Vita Antonii 8 (CCSL, 14; White, 14): Metuens ergo diabolus ne accessu temporis eremum quoque habicari faceret, ica eum aggregatis satellitibus suis uaria caede lacerauic, ut doloris magnicudo et motum auferret et uocem. Nam et ipse postea referebac uulnera fuisse tarn grauia, ut uniuersa hominum cormenta superarent.

9 Vita Antonii 9 (CCSL, 15; White, 15): Sonitus igitur repentinus increpuit ita, ut loco funditus agitato et parietibus patefactis multifaria daemonum exinde turba se effiinderet. Nam et bestiarum ct serpentium formas induentes, omnem protinus lo cum repleucre phantasiis leonum, taurorum, luporum, aspidum, serpentium, scorpionum, necnon et pardorum atque ursorum… Antonius flagellacus atque confossus sentiebat quidcm asperiorcs corporis dolores, sed interritus durabat mentc peruigili.

10 Vita Antonii 9 (CCSL, 15; White, 15).

16 ghastly face, and while I sought refuge as usual in the protection of Christ, he vanished like smoke wafting through an open window.”11

In scenes such as this, what is highlighted is Antony’s virtue of prudence. The monk is able, through his wisdom, to discern the tricks of the devil, shrewdly identifying the enemy’s false appearance and words. So it is that the text paints a portrait of Antony as a multifaceted man of virtue – he is courageous enough to face the devil, patient enough to endure suffering, and prudent enough to identify the devil at work. In the episode described above, it should also be noted that Antony displays the virtue of faith as he seeks “refuge in the protection of Christ.”

Athanasius never presents Antony as taking up the battle through his own strength, rather it is through his faith and reliance on the divine that he is able to gain victory.

While medieval readers likely appreciated the literal descriptions of Antony enduring demonic attacks, modern readers of the Vita Antonii may doubt the physical nature of the confrontations. What is clear from the descriptions, however, is that Athanasius’ intention is not merely to impress the reader with supernatural episodes, but rather to present the hero Antony as a figure of virtue. David Brakke, who has written extensively on Anthanasius and the Vita

Antonii makes this very point, even as he approaches the topic from a purely psychological perspective:

“Because the demons cannot really harm the monk, the purpose of their apparitions is to instill fear in him and thereby render him incapable of pursuing the life of virtue. … The

11 Vita Antonii 40 (CCSL, 45; White, 33): leiunanti etiam mihi uisus est ut mo- nachus et panes offerens his sermonibus suadebat ut uescerer et huic aliquid indulgerem corpusculo: ‘Et tu homo es et humana fragilicatc circumdaris. Labor paululum conquiescat, ne aegritudo ubripiat.’ Illico luridam faciem serpentis agnoui et, cum ad consueta Christi munimenta confagerem, tamquam per fcnescram fiimus labcrecur, euanuit.

17 monk can replace the disorienting fear of death with an attitude toward death that results in moral courage and an intensified life of virtue.”12

Whether one believes that Antony’s struggle was primarily physical, psychological, or both, virtue is still at the center of the presentation.

As the Vita Antonii continues, the narrative makes a shift. The text recounts Antony’s speeches to the monks who have come to learn from him. What does not shift, however, is the emphasis on virtue. It is in the extended speeches and instructions that Athanasius takes the concrete descriptions of virtue from the first part of the text and now presents them in a theoretical framework. As Paul van Geest observes: “In his representation of Antony’s life, or of his sermon, [Athanasisus] constantly sends out an insistent appeal for… a certain value or virtue that he considers inherent in monastic life.”13 In other words, Athanasius presents Antony as having in mind a particular way of living the Christian life. This is clearly seen in the following passage:

“Why then do we not make virtue a necessity? … Let Christians care for nothing that they cannot take with them. We ought rather to seek after that which will lead us to heaven, namely wisdom, chastity, justice, virtue, an ever watchful mind, care of the poor, firm faith in Christ, a mind that can control anger, hospitality. Striving after these things, we shall prepare for ourselves a dwelling in the land of the peaceful.”14

12 David Brakke, Athanasisus and the Politics of Asceticism (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 221- 223.

13 Paul van Geest, “‘Seeing that for monks the life of Antony is a sufficient pattern of discipline,’ Athanasius as Mystagogue in his Vita Antonii,” Church History and Religious Culture 90 (2010): 207.

14 Vita Antonii 17 (CCSL, 24l; White, 20): Cur igitur non fecimus de necessitate uirtutem? Cur non ad lucranda regna caelestia ultro relinquimus quod lucis istius fine perdendum est? Nihil eorum curae sit monachis quae secum auferrc non possunt. Illud potius debemus cxpetere quod nos ducat ad caelum: sapientiam scilicet, castitatem, iustitiam, uirtutem, sensum peruigilem, pauperum curam, fidcm in Christo robustam, animum irae uictorem, hospitalitatem. Haec sectantes mansionem nobis in terra quietorum.

18 What is clear from these lines is that virtue in the Vita Antonii is far more than a set of good qualities. On the contrary, virtue for Antony (and for Athanasius) involves a stable way of living and a cultivation of habits. Such habits, Antony tells his monks, will not merely reflect good personality traits, they will prepare the monks for eternal union with God.15

Key Virtue in the Vita Antonii: Faith (Fides)

Though the virtues of fortitude and patience feature prominently in the early portions of the Vita Antonii, these virtues wane in the later chapters. When examining the text as a whole, the most consistent virtue is actually faith. The Latin word fides (and its associated adjectives, adverbs, etc.) is used 43 times in the text. This is far more than fortitude, for example, which only has 9 mentions. Fides is often mentioned when Antony is fasting and praying. For example, “Antony returned to his former cell and achieved a daily martyrdom of faith and conscience, wearing himself out by means of more rigorous fasting and nightly devotions.”16

Moreover, in the following line Antony tells his monks that faith is the determining factor in repelling demons: “Let them not strike fear into you. For the prayers and fasting of those who

15 The ancient understanding of virtue, which was adopted by Christian theologians with some alteration was firmly committed to the understanding of virtue as habit. As Bonnie Kent summarizes, “The Greek hexis was translated into Latin as habitus and thence into English as “habit.” The English word tends to mislead insofar as habit can signify for English speakers any routine performance, however trivial or mechanical – tugging at one’s necktie, for example, or wincing at the screen of a police siren. A hexis or habitus, in contrast, is a durable characteristic of the agent inclining to certain kinds of actions and emotional reactions, not the actions and reactions themselves. Acquired over time, habits grow to be ‘second nature’ for the individual.” Bonnie Kent, “Habits and Virtues (Ia IIae, qq. 49-70),” in The Ethics of Aquinas, ed. Stephen J. Pope (Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 2002), 116.

16 Vita Antonii 47 (CCSL, 53; White, 38): Ad pristinum monasterium regressus quotidianum fidei ac conscientiae martyrium merebatur acrioribus se ieiuniis uigiliisque conficiens.

19 have faith in the Lord cause the demons to collapse immediately.”17 Here Antony describes

‘prayers and fasting’ as issuing forth from faith, thereby asserting that the virtue of faith is the source of holy actions. Even when the text does not use the word fides, Antony’s faith is still on display. The holy father relates, “While I was being thrashed (for I admit that I was often beaten by the demons), I would chant words such as these, No one will separate me from the love of

Christ.”18 This line, which seems initially to focus on the physical aspects of Antony’s confrontations with the demons, quickly switches to focus on his supreme declaration of faith.

The fundamental truth of his existence, says Antony, is that Christ is always – and always will be

– with him.

Is faith in the Vita Antonii truly a virtue? The answer is yes. This is confirmed when

Antony argues with a set of Greek philosophers who visited him in his later years. The discussion stretches for several chapters, in the middle of which Antony states:

“Anyone who has faith working in his mind, will find superfluous the composition of words which you use to try and tear out the credulity rooted in our minds. … We Christians keep the mystery of our life stored up, not in worldly wisdom, but in the power of faith which God has granted us through Christ.”19

Here Antony firmly states that faith is not simply intellectual assent, or merely a feeling or emotional state. Rather, faith is a stable disposition of the rational soul (animus). This is what

17 Vita Antonii 23 (CCSL, 29; White, 23): Sed nihil uobis in hoc terroris incutiant; fidelibus enim oracionibus atque ieiuniis ad Dominum statim corruunt.

18 Vita Antonii 40 (CCSL, 46; White, 34): Cum uapularem autem – nam saepe me a daemonibus non denego uerberatum – canebam: Nullus me separabit a cavitate Christi.

19 Vita Antonii 77-78 (CCSL, 84-85; White, 57): operationem fidei animo sitam quis habuerit, superflua erit uerborum compositio per quam conceptam sensu nostro credulitatem tentatis euellere… Nos Chrisciani myscerium uitae nostrae non in sapicntia mundi habemus repositum, sed in uirtute fidei quae nobis a Deo attributa per Christum est.

20 Antony means when he says that the Christian has faith working in the mind (operationem fidei animo). As a stable disposition residing in the rational soul, faith is indeed a virtue.20

Athanasius, by including this theological reflection in the midst of the Vita Antonii, shows the reader just how important faith is for understanding the entirety of the text. As shown above,

Antony grounds all that he does in the virtue of faith; his trust and commitment to God directs his words, actions, and practices.

The Purpose of Virtue in the Vita Antonii: Imitation

In the text of the Vita Antonii, the virtues of Antony are sometimes directly and simply stated. For example, “Never was he provoked to impatience by sudden anger nor did he allow his humility to become puffed up into pride.”21 The text even states that Antony’s virtue extended itself to his physical appearance, for one could “recognize Antony’s spiritual purity from his face and through the mirror of Antony’s body… perceive the grace of his holy mind.

20 Bonaventure, in his Commentary on the Sentences affirms that faith is a virtue. He writes: “I respond: it must be said that without doubt the very faith by which we believe in God is not only a virtue but the charioteer of the virtues just as Bernard says regarding prudence in his letter to Eugenius. It is surely a virtue since faith consists in rectitude of life according to a rule of justice… No one believes God more than himself except by this means: that he wants his intellect to be held captive in obedience to Christ (II Cor. 10:5). If, then, the captivity of the intellect in obedience to the supreme Truth looks to the rectitude of life, the will, whereby someone wants to be so held captive, is an upright will, and the habit, by whose mediation this is aided and carried out, causes an upright will. If, then, justice is nothing but ‘rectitude of will’ and faith is nothing but the habit whereby our intellect voluntarily is held captive to the obedience of Christ, we may conclude that the habit of faith looks to rectitude of life according to a rule of justice and therefore it has within itself the true and proper definition of virtue.” Commentary on the Sentences Book III, distinction 23, a. 1, q. 1-2.

21 Vita Antonii 67 (CCSL, 74; White, 51): Numquam ille aut ira subica concitatus patienciam rupic auc humilicatem erexit in gloriam.

21 For Antony always had a cheerful look which showed that his mind was on heavenly matters.”22

What lies beneath these descriptions? In other words, what is Athanasius’ purpose in presenting the virtues of Antony? In answering this question, the topic of imitation (or emulation) comes to the fore. Athanasius makes clear this agenda in the preface:

“You asked me to write to you about the life of the blessed Antony… and whether those things are true which rumour has spread abroad concerning him, so that you might be able to emulate him and follow his example. It is therefore with great joy that I have undertaken what you asked. Indeed, the very act of remembering Antony is of enormous profit and benefit to me and I am sure that you, listening in wonder, will be keen to follow his commitment: for to know who Antony was offers us the perfect path to virtue.”23

Here the author states that his aim is not merely to impress the reader, but rather he desires that the reader might imitate and emulate Antony’s holy life. Furthermore, in referring to “the perfect path to virtue” the text affirms that virtue is the linchpin for this project of imitation.

Athanasius says that his goal is for Antony’s virtue to be imitated by other Christians, in order that they might be better followers of Christ. As Van Geest summarizes: “Athanasius makes use of classical literary motives and topoi, indicating his aim to present Antony primarily as a role

22 Vita Antonii 67 (CCSL, 74; White, 51): nullo indicantc caeceris praetermissis ad Antonium currebat ec animac puritatem agnoscebat in uultu et per speculum corporis gratiam sanccae mentis intuebatur. Nam semper hilarem faciem gerens liquido oscendebat se de caelestibus cogitate.

23 Vita Antonii preface (CCSL, 3; White, 8): Quoniam igitur exegistis a me ut uobis scriberem de conuersatione bcati Antonii, uolentibus discere quemadmodum coeperit, quiue fuerit ante sanctum propositum, qualem etiam habuerit terminum uitae et si uera sine ca quae de ipso fama dispersic, ut ad eius aemulacionem acque exemplum uos inscituere possitis, magna cum laecitia suscepi uestrae caritatis imperium. Et mihi enim ingens lucrum est atquc utilitas hoc ipsum quod recordor Antonii et uos cum admiracione audientes scio eius propositum cupere sectari; perfecta est siquidem ad uirtutem uia Antonium scire quis fuerit.

22 model.”24 Thomas Hägg makes the point even more clearly: “Antony is chosen as an exemplum for imitation, rather than as the model of an authentic portrait.”25

The text shows that Antony himself understands the value of imitation. As a young monk in the desert he himself learned by watching other holy men, at one point observing a particular old ascetic so that he could “emulate his goodness” (aemulatus esc ad bonum).26 Later in the text, Antony goes on to tell his student monks that developing virtue is a matter of practice.

“I beg you not to fear the word ‘virtue’ as if it were something unattainable. Do not think that such an endeavor which is dependent on our will is alien to you or something remote. Man has a natural inclination to this kind of effort and it is something that only awaits our willingness… The virtue that is within us only requires the human will. For who can doubt that the natural purity of the soul, were it not tainted by filth from outside, would be the fount and source of all virtues?”27

This passage speaks volumes, for in it Athanasius spells out a theory of virtue that hinges on the goodness of the human soul and the power of the will to choose virtue. Virtue, Antony tells his monks, is within their grasp. Antony does not directly mention emulation here, but it is clearly implied. In order to obtain virtue, the young monks must watch and imitate Antony in the practice of the ascetic life. In this way, virtue depends on the individual will, but also the ability to imitate the master in practice. As Van Geest affirms: “Athanasius subtly emphasises especially that Antony becomes the embodiment of the directives passed on. Antony is, for

24 Van Geest, 203.

25 Hägg, 28.

26 Vita Antonii 3.

27 Vita Antonii 20 (CCSL, 26; White 22): Nolite, quaeso, ‘uirtutis’ tamquam impossibile nomen pauere; nec peregrinum uobis aut procul positum uidcatur hoc studium quod ex nostro pendet arbitrio; huius operis homini inserta natura est, et eiusmodi res est quae nostram tantum exspectat uoluntatem. … Virtusquaeinnobisestmentemtantumrequirithumanam.Cui enim dubium est, quin naturalis animae puritas si nulla fuerit extrinsecus sorde polluta, fons sit et origo uirtutis?

23 instance, characterised as patient, pure and humble of soul, unperturbed, and full of inner joy.

Therefore his kind face has a special aura.”28 The point is that Antony himself perfectly models the example to be followed, both for his own monks, and for anyone who reads the Vita Antonii.

Athanasius adds a concluding coda to Antony’s speech to his brothers. This line perhaps more than any other reveals the hope that the figure of Antony will inspire virtue in those who encounter him. “When Antony had finished speaking, everyone was in a joyful mood: in some a desire for virtue flared up, in others their flagging faith revived.”29

Imitation, of course, has its limits. Ordinary Christians likely cannot hope to follow exactly the example laid out by Antony the Great. David Brakke laments this reality.

“Athanasius’ Antony performed a double function: he provided a model for the spiritual progress of every Christian, but he made clear that perfection would be achieved only by those who followed his example of nearly complete withdrawal. As a model whole perfection is elusive, Athanasius’ Antony resembles Athanasius’ God, whose likeness human beings can approach through virtue but achieve in only a limited, imitative fashion.”30

Brakke is obviously correct in his assertion that a full imitation of Antony would be “elusive.”

One wonders, however, if “complete withdrawal” is really the path to which the Vita Antonii calls every Christian. True, Athanasius’ original audience may have been primarily monks, but the widespread popularity of the work suggests that common Christians likewise found great inspiration in the life and words of the desert father. After all, Antony himself states that one

28 Van Geest, 217.

29 Vita Antonii 44 (CCSL, 49; White 36): Postquam Antonius dicendi finem fecit laetanibus cunctis, in aliis virtutis cupido exardescebat, in aliis infirm refouebatur fides.

30 Brakke, 262.

24 should not consider virtue “as if it were something unattainable.”31 Indeed, the Vita Antonii puts forth the figure of Antony as an example of virtue for every Christian to follow. By pursuing such virtue, a faithful person can attain spiritual progress through holy practices that flow out of a stable habitus. Antony says as much in reminding his listeners that “Satan is terrified by the nocturnal devotions, the prayers, fasting, gentleness of those who live rightly; by their voluntary poverty, their contempt for vainglory, their humility, their compassion, their control over anger, and particularly by their love of Christ.”32

Background on the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi 33

The first life of St. Bernard was written by multiple authors. William of Saint-Thierry began the work around 1145, but he left the work incomplete upon his death. The text was therefore completed by Arnold of Bonneval and Geoffrey of Auxerre. Though the full text of the

Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi is comprehensive, William of Saint-Thierry’s section (Book I) stands out as the most lively and personal portion of the vita. As Hilary Costello explains, Book I is

31 Vita Antonii 20 (quoted above).

32 Vita Antonii 30 (CCSL 37, White 28): Pertimeseic Satanas recte uiuentium uigilias, oraciones, ieiunia, mansuetudinem, uoluntariam paupertatem, uanae gloriae contempeum, humilitatem, misericordiam, irae dominatum et praecipue purum erga Christum amorem.

33 Critical edition Guillelmi a Sancto Theodorico, Vita prima sancti Bernardi Claraevallis abbatis, ed. Paul Verdeyen, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Mediaevalis (CCCM) 89B (Turnhout: Brepols, 2011). The most common English translation is Bernard of Clairvaux: Early Biographies, Volume 1, trans. Martinus Cawley, Guadalupe Translations (Lafayette, OR: Abbey of Our Lady of Guadalupe, 2000). However, a more recent English translation by Fr. Hilary Costello provides a richer rendering, and it will be used throughout this chapter: William of St. Thierry et al, The First Life of Bernard of Clairvaux, trans. Hilary Costello (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2015). Note, however, that Costello based his translation on Recension B of the Vita Prima, for which there is no Latin critical edition. Thus the footnotes in this chapter will reference the Latin from Recension A of the Vita Prima. Gratitude is offered for the personal guidance of Dr. Marsha Dutton in this matter.

25 “imbued with William’s enthusiasm for his friend and spiritual guide… [and] ablaze with

William’s admiration for Bernard.” Costello concludes that William’s is the “most personal” description of Bernard, for “it focuses much more on Bernard the man, the monk, and the abbot than on Bernard the public figure.” 34 As for William, he was a Benedictine monk who served for 15 years as abbot of Saint-Thierry, a community outside of Reims in Northeastern France.

He was a contemporary of Bernard, and during William’s visit to Clairvaux in 1118, the two developed a friendship that would last their entire lives. William himself became a Cistercian in

1135, though he never lived in Clairvaux, instead entering the abbey at Signy, also north of

Reims. There is a unique quality to a hagiography written by someone so close to the saint, writing while the saint was still alive. As Brian Patrick McGuire remarks: “As Bernard’s friend,

William felt qualified to express disagreement with him, and his book of the Vita prima is by far the most revealing in terms of Bernard’s way of leading the monastic life.”35 Taking into account these points – William’s particular perspective on Bernard, the unique qualities of Book

I, and the intentional focus on Bernard’s personality – it is fruitful to consider William’s text almost a hagiography unto itself. For the purposes this chapter, Book I of the Vita Prima Sancti

Bernardi will serve as the subject of discussion.

34 Costello, xxiii.

35 Brian Patrick McGuire, “Writing about the Difficult Saint: Bernard of Clairvaux and Biography,” Cistercian Studies Quarterly 44.4 (2009): 451.

26 Virtue in the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi

William makes clear in his prologue that virtue will be at the forefront of his treatment of

Bernard. He states that “the whole church tells Saint Bernard’s virtues.”36 As the narrative continues, the text is replete with specific mentions of Bernard’s virtue.37 The reader is told that as a boy, Bernard was “simple with regard to worldly matters… obedient to his parents… kind and gracious to everyone… he was devout… and was highly perceptive in his mental aptitude.”38

In this statement, the author is pointing to the virtues of simplicity, obedience, charity, piety, and prudence. Even when the text does not mention virtues by name, the author showcases

Bernard’s virtue through his words and actions. For example, charity is seen in the following anecdote about a mother and her son, who was mute, blind and deaf.

“Bernard felt deep sympathy for this distraught mother who was so tortured by the agony of her boy. He caressed the pitiful youth, and laying his gentle hands on his head and face he began to speak to him with soothing words.”39

The boy is later healed, but this passage shows how the narrative thrust of the story is set squarely on the charity of Bernard. Looking earlier in the text, there is an episode in the Vita

36 Vita Prima prologue (CCCM, 31; Costello, 2): uirtutes eius narret omnis ecclesia sanctorum.

37 As Costello writes: “the book William wrote looks deeply into the heart of Bernard, describing in simple yet elegant words the humility, charity, and gentleness of this great man.” Costello, xxiii.

38 Vita Prima 3 (CCCM, 34; Costello, 6): Erat quippe simplicissimus in saecularibus, amans habitare se cum, publicum fugitans et mire cogitatiuus. Parentibus oboediens et subditus, omnibus benignus et gratus, domi simplex et quietus, foris rarus, et ultra quam credi possit uerecundus; nusquam multum loqui amans, Deo deuotus, ut puram sibi pueritiam suam conseruaret; litterarum etiam studio deditus, per quas in Scripturis Deum disceret et cognosceret. In quo quantum in breui profecerit, et quam perspicacem in discernendo induerit sensum.

39 Vita Prima 67 (CCCM, 81; Costello, 71): Compassus uero miserae matri, quam maxime sensus doloris illius excruciabat, misero adolescenti blandiens, et piis manibus caput eius et faciem demulcens, alloqui eum cepit, et quomodo etiam in matrem suam mittere manus praesumpsisset sciscitari.

27 Prima which describes Bernard’s response to a woman trying to seduce him. This story obviously points to Bernard’s chastity, but perhaps even more pointedly, his prudence.

“She then made up a special bed for him to honor him above the others. That night she got up and brazenly approached him. When Bernard realized what was afoot, he, never short of ideas, shouted out, “Thieves, thieves!” Hearing this, she fled. The whole family got up, lit their lamps, and looked for the thief, but of course he was not to be found.”40

Here William makes sure to point out that Bernard was “never short of ideas,” and indeed the impact of the story has more to do with his clever – and even comical – ability to diffuse the situation without shaming himself or the woman. Though Bernard later tells his companions that, “the hostess was trying to snatch away from me a priceless treasure, my chastity,”41 the description of the scene equally emphasizes the virtue of prudence.42

Sometimes Bernard’s virtues come through in William’s descriptions of the Clairvaux community as a whole. William describes the collective virtues of the monks as he writes,

“These meek and virtuous men settled down… they served God in simplicity for a time in poverty of spirit, in hunger and thirst, in cold and exposure, in constant vigils.”43 Here the reader

40 Vita Prima 7 (CCCM, 38; Costello, 10): Cum que tamquam honoratiori omnium seorsum ei fecisset lectulum praeparari, surgens ipsa de nocte impudenter accessit ad eum. Quam Bernardus sentiens, nec consilii inops, clamare cepit: ‘Latrones! latrones!.’ Ad quam uocem fugit mulier, familia omnis exsurgit, lucerna accenditur, latro quaeritur sed minime inuenitur.

41 Vita Prima 7 (CCCM, 38; Costello, 10): Quibus ille: ‘Veraciter, inquit, aderat latro, et quod mihi pretiosius est in hac uita, castitatem uidelicet, hospita nitebatur auferre, incomparabilem irreparabilem que thesaurum.’

42 Thomas Gilby and Joseph W. Koterski provide some background on prudence: “The word prudence is from the Greek Φpóυησις and the Latin prudentia. The connotation of the English word has been altered in ethical writing by the Kantian term Klugheit and has ceased to convey the confidence, enterprise, and generosity of what perhaps is better now called ‘practical wisdom.’” See Thomas Gilby and Joseph W. Koterski, “Prudence” in New Catholic Encyclopedia Supplement 2012-2013: Ethics and Philosophy (Gale, 2013), 1272.

43 Vita Prima 25 (CCCM 52; Costello, 29): Ibi ergo in loco horroris et uastae solitudinis consederunt uiri illi uirtutis, facturi de spelunca latronum templum Dei et domum orationis. Vbi simpliciter aliquanto

28 picks up on the virtues of humility, simplicity, poverty, temperance, and patience in suffering.

Can such virtues of the community be imputed to Bernard himself? From William’s point of view, the answer is yes. William is quick to point out that the virtuous activity at Clairvaux

“took place at the period under Bernard, the abbot, and through his teaching.”44 For William, there is little separation between the virtue of the Clairvaux community and the virtue of its leader – the former is a reflection of the latter.

A critical theme for William in describing Bernard’s virtue is the fact that the great man grew in virtue over the course of his life. William says that Bernard was “able to overcome himself by his innate quality of virtue.”45 This single line holds a great deal of meaning. In referring to “innate” virtue, William affirms that Bernard was born with a certain propensity for virtue. In addition, in saying that Bernard overcame himself, William clearly points to the power of Bernard’s will. William ties these threads together by saying that Bernard “put this continual mortification into practice as was his custom, [that] it became habitual and second nature to him.”46 The point here is that virtue for Bernard developed over the course of his life through practice, or habituation. Through the repeated actions of virtues of activity, virtue for Bernard became “second nature.” William buttresses this important point by affirming that the acquisition of virtue is also supported by divine grace. He makes this point in writing that

tempore Deo seruierunt in paupertate spiritus, in fame et siti, in frigore et nuditate, in uigiliis et angustiis multis.

44 Vita Prima 38 (CCCM, 62; Costello, 43): Haec ergo fuit in tempore illo sub abbate Bernardo et magisterio eius.

45 Vita Prima 21 (CCCM, 48; Costello, 24): naturali quadam uirtute pollebat ingenii.

46 Vita Prima 20 (CCCM, 48; Costello, 23): Quod cum continui usus instantia in consuetudinem mitteret, consuetudo ei ipsa quodammodo uertebatur in naturam.

29 Bernard “was keen to acquire that full tally of virtue that he had through grace.”47 So it is that

William, in his description of how Bernard grew in virtue, actually sketches out a rather complete theory of habituation. He states that virtue is 1) partially innate, 2) developed through habituation, and 3) assisted by grace. In Bernard one sees a lived progression of Christian virtue

– a process involving innate propensity, human agency, and divine support.48

Key Virtue in the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi: Love (caritas/amor)

Love is the most consistently described virtue in William’s Book I of the Vita Prima. In terms of usage, caritas appears 13 times, with amor adding an additional 14 usages. Such a presentation of Bernard’s love is unique to William. For comparison, Arnold of Bonneval’s

Book II of the Vita Prima mentions caritas and amor only 8 times and 2 times respectively. It appears that William desired to show a more personal side of the great abbot, while other authors concentrated on his political and ecclesial accomplishment. It should also be noted that William had a specific interest in the virtues of love – with one of his earliest writings, for example, being

De natura et dignitate amoris (On the Nature and Dignity of Love).

William generally describes Bernard’s love in reference to God’s love. This is the case as he writes, “When he began very frequently to experience the sweetness of God’s love

47 Vita Prima 41 (CCCM, 64; Costello, 46): Fuerit ei studium tantam uirtutum plenitudinem quam habebat ex gratia.

48 John Coakley remarks on the combination of grace and innate virtue in Bernard as he writes: “Thus God's intentions and actions explain Bernard's effectiveness as a saint in the world, and Bernard's intentions and actions explain his development as a worthy man of virtue; the divine agency and the human agency, though ultimately in harmony, are distinct from each other.” John Coakley, “The Conversion of St. Francis and the Writing of Christian Biography, 1228-1263,” Franciscan Studies 72 (2014): 45.

30 bestowed on him, because he was being enlightened interiorly with love.”49 Clairvaux itself is described as “a valley aglow with light and love, a school of contemplation and spirituality.”50

Even in descriptions of Bernard’s other virtues, William often brings the focus back to love. For example, in speaking of Bernard’s austerity and temperance, which often resulted in the abbot being quite sick, William laments the fact that the shepherd was unable to be with his flock:

“This became a sad necessity, for that holy brotherhood was now deprived for the first time of his constant paternal companionship. In this we are saddened, and we weep over this sorry outcome of his sickness, but at least we admire the love he shows in his holy desires and spiritual warmth.”51

Toward the end of the text, William asserts that love is indeed a virtue for Bernard. It was not just a feeling that he had or a particularly gentle aspect of his personality. Rather, says William, love was a way of being, a true habitus for Bernard.

“Who is found these days so efficacious or so loving at fostering charity wherever it is, or at promoting it where it is not? Who is so beneficial to those whom he can help, so benevolent to everyone, so gracious to his friends, so patient with his enemies?”52

This is perhaps the definitive statement on Bernard’s caritas in William’s text. It is as if Bernard cannot help but extend love to those around him. Even in places “where he is not,” love is still

49 Vita Prima 20 (CCCM, 48; Costello, 23): Cum enim iam interiore sensu illuminati amoris dulcius ac frequentius sentire inciperet desursum spirantem sibi suauitatem.

50 Vita Prima 38 (CCCM, 62; Costello, 43): eius in clarissima et carissima ualle illa spiritualium scola studiorum.

51 Vita Prima 40 (CCCM, 63; Costello, 45): Et haec fuit tristis illa necessitas, qua primo sancta illa fraternitas sanctae illius paternitatis iugi consortio carere posse coacta est. In quo dolemus quidem et plangimus infirmitatis eius tristem effectum, sed sancti desiderii et spiritualis feruoris affectum ueneramur.

52 Vita prima 71 (CCCM, 83; Costello, 74): Quis enim tam peruicacis et affectuosae peritiae hodie inuenitur ad fouendam caritatem ubi est, ad prouocandam ubi non est? Tam ad quoscumque potest beneficus, ad omnes beneuolus, tantam habens gratiam ad amicos, patientiam ad inimicos?

31 fostered by Bernard. Such is the power of the stable and consistent virtue of love in the Vita

Prima Sancti Bernardi.

The Purpose of Virtue in the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi: Inspiration

To understand the purpose of virtue in William’s life of Bernard, one must grasp the overall narrative arc of the vita. What is the overall story that William seeks to tell? For

William, Bernard cannot be understood apart from this desire to reach others. In other words,

Bernard lived for other people, both at Clairvaux and beyond.53 A main component of William’s presentation of virtue in the Vita Prima is how virtue allows Bernard to nurture and inspire other people. William makes this point as he writes, “His greatest care was the salvation of many souls. From the first day of his conversion right up to the present time, he was known to have one thing in his thoughts, namely to have a mother’s love for every soul.”54

As William lays out his narrative, his overall message becomes clear. It is not that

Bernard was simply gregarious, or even that people admired him. These points may be true.

What William asserts in the Vita Prima, however, is that Bernard’s virtues – especially his virtues of charity and humility – allowed him to affect other people in extraordinary ways. 55

53 Jean Leclercq remarks that in his early years as abbot Bernard “seldom went out but he drew others to himself… new recruits abounded.” Leclercq goes on to explain, “At his death in 1153, Bernard would be the father of seventy communities, besides those which were affiliated by him. The total would come to one hundred and sixty-four, almost half the entire Order.” Bernard of Clairvaux and the Cistercian Spirit, trans. Claire Lavoie (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1976), 15-16.

54 Vita Prima 26 (CCCM,52; Costello, 29): Summa ei sollicitudo de salute multorum, quae a prima die conuersionis suae usque ad hoc tempus tam singulariter sacrum illud pectus noscitur possidere, ut erga omnes animas maternum gerere uideatur affectum.

55 Here one must understand that the Vita Prima was instrumental for Bernard’s canonization under Pope Alexander III. In this sense the text is not a biography, but truly a hagiography. As Marsha Dutton

32 Bernard’s mission, says William, was to reach and inspire others; to save their souls and bring them to faith. Virtue was central to this mission: William says that it was Bernard’s charity that spurred him to pursue lost souls, while it was his humility that allowed the him to accept the inevitable failures along the way. This is what William meant when he wrote, “In the end, charity gives birth to confidence, yet humility keeps it in place.”56 Bernard’s entire mission was therefore sustained by his virtues. His charity and humility were not simply good qualities that helped him succeed; instead, these virtues were integral to his mission and ministry.

If William’s Bernard was continually sustained by virtue, then it comes as no surprise that others were inspired by his virtue. William explains the effect of Bernard’s virtue as he describes one of his own meetings with the abbot of Clairvaux. The following passage overflows with William’s awe of Bernard, and one notices that virtues are at the center of the experience.

“While I was there with another abbot visiting him, I found him in a little hut such as lepers often have… I was admitted into that royal bedchamber, and when I pondered over that dwelling and him who dwelt there, I swear to God, the house filled me with such reverence that it seemed as if I were approaching the altar of God. I overflowed with such affection for that man, with such a desire to be with him in his poverty and his simplicity, that if I had been given the option that day, I would have desired nothing more than to remain with him forever and be at his disposal. Since he received us with

explains: “It is easy to assume a vita to be a neutral record, full of biographical detail that presents a persuasive and reliable portrait of its subject, and therefore to believe it possible to know that subject through that narrative. A careful reading of the Vita Prima, however, disabuses readers of that idea, reminding them that its writers and the writers of other vitae were neither personally naive nor rhetorically casual. This carefully shaped work is not a simplistic portrait of Bernard the man, the monk, the abbot, the miracle worker, written from affectionate instinct and without agenda, but rather a letter of recommendation, dedicated to explaining the particular strengths that Alexander should consider in evaluating Bernard’s claim to sanctity.” Marsha L. Dutton, “A Case for Canonization: The Argument of the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi,” Cistercian Studies Quarterly 52 (2017): 160.

56 Vita Prima 26 (CCCM, 52; Costello, 29): Sane fiduciam caritas pariebat, sed eandem castigabat humilitas.

33 such great joy, we asked what he was doing, how he was getting on; he smiled at us in his generous fashion, and replied, ‘Wonderfully!’”57

Here William’s awe is initially caused by Bernard’s humble dwelling, which of course reflects the humility of the man himself. As the passage continues, William is overwhelmed by the full cadre of virtues that Bernard displays: poverty, simplicity, joy, generosity. As William states, he would have wished nothing more than to be in the presence of this man forever. The larger point, however, is that it was Bernard’s virtues that created this effect. William suggests that simply being in the presence of Bernard was enough to be inspired to live a holy life. William later describes how the men of Clairvaux followed Bernard’s example, and in these descriptions he specifically calls them “men of virtue” (uiri uirtuti).58 William even says that in Clairvaux virtue was not practiced begrudgingly, but rather with pleasure: “They undertook [this life] not only all the time without grumbling but even with huge pleasure with the help of God’s grace, since their spiritual father’s zeal instilled this pleasure into them.”59 This last phrase is critical, for it

57 Vita Prima 33 (CCCM, 58; Costello, 38): Quem cum ibi cum quodam abbate altero uisitarem, inueni eum in suo illo tugurio, quale leprosis in compitis publicis fieri solet… Ingressus que regium illud cubiculum, cum considerarem habitationem et habitatorem, tantam mihi, Deum testor, domus ista incutiebat reuerentiam sui, ac si ingrederer ad altare Dei. Tanta que affectus sum suauitate circa hominem illum, tanto que desiderio in paupertate illa et simplicitate cohabitandi ei, ut si optio illa die mihi data fuisset, nil tam optassem quam ibi cum eo semper manere ad seruiendum ei. Cum que et ipse uicissim nos cum gaudio suscepisset et quaereremus quid ageret, quomodo ibi uiueret, modo illo suo gratioso arridens nobis: ‘Optime,’ inquit.

58 Vita Prima 35.

59 Vita Prima 36 (CCCM, 61; Costello, 42): Cum enim circa omne genus carnalis tolerantiae, cum adiutorio gratiae Dei, studium spiritualis patris hoc in eis effecisset ut plurima, quae homini in carne constituto impossibilia prius uidebantur, iam non solum constanter peragerent et sine murmuratione, sed etiam cum ingenti delectatione.

34 emphasizes that Bernard, the “spiritual father,” instilled and inspired virtue in those around him.60

To conclude: virtue is clearly at the heart of William’s picture of Bernard. The saint is shown to practice many virtues, with love (caritas and amor) being chief among them. Virtue plays a critical role in book I of the Vita Prima, for Bernard’s virtue sustains his mission to reach many souls, while also inspiring those souls toward virtue themselves.

Background on the Vita Sancti Antonii “Assidua”61

The first life of Anthony of Padua, the Vita Sancti Antonii, also called the Vita Prima or

Assidua, was written in the same year that Anthony was canonized, 1232. The author was an unknown Franciscan brother who was a contemporary of Anthony. Giuseppe Abate proposes that author could have been Thomas of Celano.62 That being said, the author admits that he was not an eyewitness to many of the events which he recounts. Rather, as the author reports, he

“came to know them from my Lord Sugerius, bishop of Lisbon, and from other Catholic men

60 Clearly the way of life at Clairvaux contributed to the practice of virtue. David Clairmont explains that for Bernard the “pace of life” was critical for inculcating moral living and healthy relationships. He writes: “All of this suggests that, for Bernard, there existed a close relation between the pace at which we considered ourselves, our relationship with others and with our environments, and the possibility that we might become virtuous people in community with others.” David A. Clairmont, “Medieval Consideration and Moral Pace: Thomas Aquinas and Bernard of Clairvaux on the Temporal Aspects of Virtue,” Journal of Religious Ethics 41 (2013): 95.

61 Latin from La Vita Prima Di S. Antonio, ed. Giuseppe Abate, Il Santo 8 (1968): 138-201. English from Life of Anthony “Assidua” by a Contemporary Franciscan, ed. Vergilio Gamboso, trans. Bernard Przewozny (Padua: Messaggero, 2006), hereafter Assidua.

62 Abate, 128-30.

35 who told me about them.”63 Wherever the author obtained the details of Anthony’s life, the resulting vita is an expertly woven hagiographical account, and as the first account of Anthony’s life it is of primary importance.64 The structure of the work is relatively straightforward. After a prologue, the text recounts Anthony’s life and deeds in part I, while part II describes his death, canonization, and miracles. Overall the text is short, especially the portion on Antony’s life and deeds. That said, the Assidua is effective in its presentation of Anthony as a devoted brother, a captivating figure, and a brilliant preacher.65

Virtue in the Vita Sancti Antonii “Assidua”

In the prologue the author asserts that the text will be concerned with both miracles and virtues. He writes:

“In a ‘life’ of saints, everything is transmitted in writing to a future generation of believers so that, having heard of the miraculous signs which God works in them, the Lord may always and in all things be praised, and to the faithful there may be offered a norm of right living with an incentive to devotion.”66

63 Assidua prologue (Abate, 138; Przewozny, 18): Denique nonnulla quae occulis ipse non vidi, Domino tamen Sugerio Ulixibonensi episcopo et aliis viris catholicis referentibus haec ipsa cognovi.

64 Gamboso, Introduction to The Life of St. Anthony “Assidua,” 5.

65 For an excellent summary on Anthony’s preaching and his enduring popularity see Lawrence C. Landini, “St. Anthony of Padua: Portrait of the Ideal Preacher,” Josephinum Journal of Theology 4 (1997): 51-60. Landini offers historical background on Franciscan preaching in the following: “From the perspective of Anthony and the Friars, the goal of preaching was the good of souls… Through their preaching, the Friars pioneered opportunities for a devout life among the laity, a life of prayer, sacrifice, and charity lived out fully in city life. Their presence among the people proclaimed loudly and clearly that the monk was no longer the only professional ascetic and that flight from the world was no longer the only context in which to find the Lord.” Landini, 52.

66 Assidua prologue (Abate, 138; Przewozny, 17): Id namque in vita sanctorum agitur quae posteritati fidelium scripto mandatur, quatenus, auditis miraculorum signis quae Deus operator in sanctis, semper et in omnibus laudetur Dominus et vitae correctionis regula una cum devotionis fervor ministretur fidelibus.

36 Here the author first references miracles, but then alludes to saintly virtues in the phrase “norm of right living.” Overall, the author places a high priority on describing Anthony’s virtue. Later in the text he explains:

“Since it would take too much space to relate the many provinces through which he had travelled and how many parts of the earth he had filled with the seed of God’s word, we set our hands on those things which necessarily present themselves of greater importance and give much more evident proof of his virtues.”67 Here the author asserts that the travels of Anthony, while interesting, are ultimately less important than the descriptions of his virtuous life. One of the most poignant descriptions of

Antony’s virtue is seen in an episode in which the young Anthony is called upon to speak to a group of friars. The superior, knowing little about Anthony except that he spoke Latin compelled him to address the group. Anthony’s impromptu homily surprised all who were present:

“He began to speak with simplicity. But when that writing reed of the Holy Spirit (I am referring to Anthony’s tongue) began to speak of many topics prudently, in quite a clear manner using few words, then the friars, struck by wonder and admiration, listened to the orator attentively… the unexpected depth of his words increased their astonishment… and his fervent charity edified them. Filled with holy consolation, they all respected the virtue of humility, accompanied by the gift of knowledge, that was manifest in the servant of God.”68

This one passage is rich with mentions of specific virtues that Anthony practiced. The text makes clear that what so impressed the assembly was not simply the young man’s prowess in

67 Assidua 11.1 (Abate, 156; Przewozny, 30): Sed quia longum est enarrare quot lustraverit provincias quotque verbi Dei semine repleverit terrarium partes, ad ea quae necessario magis occurrunt et evidentiora virtutum eius experimenta declarant manum convertimus.

68 Assidua 8.7-9 (Abate, 153; Przewozny, 27): Simpliciter loqui exorsus est; cumque calamus ille sancti Spiritus luculenta satis expositione ac brevi sermonis compendio multa prudenter disseruisset, stupenda Fratres admiratione percussi intentis auribus perorantem Virum unanimiter intendebant. Dabat quippe stuporis augmentum insperata dictorum profunditas; sed nec minus aedificabat spiritus quo loquebatur et ferventissima caritas. Omnes denique, sancta consolatione perfusi, humilitatis meritum in servo Dei Antonio cum dono scientiae venerati sunt.

37 public speaking. Rather, the brothers were struck by Anthony’s simplicity, depth, humility, and knowledge. Furthermore, the text asserts that those who heard Anthony were personally edified by his “fervent charity.” Finally, the text specifically states that Anthony spoke “prudently.”

Taking all of these points together, it is clear from this early scene that Anthony is described as a virtuous young man.

As the narrative continues, Anthony is often referred to with mentions of specific virtues.

He is called “the faithful and prudent servant of God” (fidelis ac prudens Domini Servus).69 The author recounts that he “devoutly obeyed the commandments of the Holy Roman Church until the end.”70 Anthony is said to have been “guided by the fortitude of the Holy Spirit.”71 In referring to both his piety and humility, the text states that Anthony “neither mentioned his studies nor boasted of the churchly ministry he had exercised; instead, out of love for Christ, hiding all his knowledge and intelligence, he declared that he wished to know, thirst for, and embrace only Christ, and him crucified.”72 All of these descriptions add up to a portrait of

Anthony that includes a variety of virtues. It is even stated that the young man “edified his affections with virtues” (aedificabat moribus affectionem).73 The author’s high regard for virtue is later confirmed in the descriptions of the activity leading up to Anthony’s canonization: “The

69 Assidua 15.2.

70 Assidua 9.6 (Abate, 155; Przewozny, 29): Mandatis sanctae Ecclesiae Romanae usque in finem devotus obtemperavit.

71 Assidua 5.1 (Abate, 143; Przewozny, 22): directus est et ipse fortitudine Spiritus Sancti.

72 Assidua 7.3 (Abate, 149; Przewozny, 25): Nulla prorsus datae sibi litteraturae mentio, nulla exercitationis ecclesiasticae ab ipsius ore personabat iactatio, sed scientiam et omnem intellectum captivans in obsequium Christi, ipsum solum, et hunc crucifixum, scire, sitire, amplecti, velle proclamabat.

73 Assidua 4.4.

38 faith of the Church came to be exalted; highest poverty was esteemed and simple humility was honored.”74 While the second part of the Assidua focuses a great deal on Anthony’s miracles – especially those that occurred after his death – the text as a whole is firmly grounded in a presentation of virtue as a unifying theme.75

Key Virtue in the Vita Sancti Antonii: Zeal

While the text describes many virtues of Anthony, the one virtue that is most frequently mentioned is zeal (fervor). Fervor, difficult to describe in English, is strongly associated with heat. So it is that a person with the virtue of zeal is described as ‘boiling over’ or blazing with excitement. In the Assidua, fervor is never used to describe Anthony as angry. On the contrary, he is filled with the Holy Spirit and propelled forward by this inner glow.

The author writes, for example, that in moving to the monastery “his growing fervor showed that he had changed not so much his place as his habitual conduct.”76 This line asserts that Anthony’s growth in the virtue of zeal changed his whole behavior. In other words, his virtue governed his “habitual conduct.” The Latin word is mos, which can also be translated as

74 Assidua 27.1 (Abate, 179; Przewozny, 59): Exaltatur igitur Ecclesiae fides; altissima commendatur paupertas ac simplex humilitas honoratur.

75 Anthony was most honored for his prowess as a preacher, and his sermons themselves likewise contain an emphasis on virtue. As Eleonora Lombardo writes, “Dans les sermons sur saint Antoine on trouve souvent de longues considérations – on pourrait dire académiques – sur le concept de vertu en soi, et pas seulement sur des qualités individuelles, des propriétés ou des vertus isolées.” Translation: In Anthony’s sermons one often finds a full, even academic consideration of the concept of virtue; rather than just individual qualities, properties or isolated virtues. See Eleonora Lombardo, “Les sermons sur saint Antoine et le bon usage de la prédication comme Vertu',” Medieval Sermon Studies 56 (2012): 55.

76 Assidua 4.1 (Abate, 141; Przewozny, 21): non tam loci quam morum translationem fecisse vita eius, solito ferventior, ostendebat.

39 “way” or “manner.” This is indeed a critical passage in the text, as it directly points to

Anthony’s growth in virtue, which is the disposition out of which his behavior arises. Later, the author says that Anthony “strengthened his arm with the weapon of divine zeal.”77 Here zeal is closely connected with martyrdom, for Anthony had received the relics of the Moroccan martyrs, and he himself zealously desired to undergo martyrdom himself. “His zeal for the spread of the faith urged him on ever more earnestly and his thirst for martyrdom which burned in his heart, never gave him rest.”78 Martyrdom for Anthony, of course, would not happen. Anthony’s fervor, however, would express itself in preaching and teaching: “Out of untiring zeal for souls,

[he] persevered in preaching, teaching and listening to confessions until sunset, and often without having eaten.”79 Overall, the text describes Anthony as being consumed with a special energy that allowed him to minister far and wide. The author describes him “going about cities and castles, villages and countrysides, [where] he sowed the seed of life most abundantly and fervently.”80 In all of these excerpts the reader sees Anthony as a passionate preacher, always on the move, propelled by a fervent zeal to reach as many souls as possible.

The Purpose of Virtue in the Assidua: Admiration

77 Assidua 5.1 (Abate, 143; Przewozny, 22): roborabat brachium armatura zeli illius.

78 Assidua 6.1 (Abate, 145; Przewozny, 24): Sensim igitur et per incrementa zelus fidei eum enixius perurgebat et martyrii sitis in corde illius accensa quiescere eum nullatenus permittebat.

79 Assidua 11.7 (Abate, 159; Przewozny, 31): propter infatigabilem tamen animarum zelum praedicando, docendo, confessiones audiendo, usque ad solis occasum quam saepe ieiunus perseverabat.

80 Assidua 9.3 (Abate, 154; Przewozny, 28): Circuibat proinde civitates et castra, vicos atque campestria, et vitae semina, sicut affluentissime ita et ferventissime, cunctis spargebat.

40 As in the hagiographies devoted to Antony the Great and Bernard of Clairvaux,

Anthony’s virtues are described as having a great effect on those whom he encounters. People constantly notice and respond to his virtues. A nuance in the Assidua, however, is that the text does not speak much of imitation or emulation, nor does the text describe Anthony with the special reverence reserved for Bernard. Rather the Assidua is concerned primarily with the common people who followed Anthony, and the word that best captures their response is admiration. Indeed, it should be remembered that the text was composed in the same year as his canonization in 1232, and thus the popular excitement around the saint was likely at its height.

The Assisuda shows just how much the people of Padua admired their saint, certainly after his death, but also during his life. For example, the following passage describes Anthony’s preaching at the height of his fame:

“His preaching, seasoned with the salt of grace, conferred abundant divine grace on his listeners. The more respectable marveled that a man who had barely outgrown puberty and who was uncultured could subtly adapt spiritual things to spiritual men; the less respectable were stunned how he plucked out the causes and occasions of sins and how with greater care he sowed the practice of virtue. Men of every condition, class, and age were happy to have received from his admonitions suitable for their lives.”81

Here the author points out how some “marveled” at Anthony, while others were “stunned.” It seems that this admiration opened their hearts to receive his preaching and its message. This is important, for it would not be accurate to say that the Assidua presents Anthony as being only admired. The passage above makes clear that his listeners were affected by his preaching such

81 Assidua 10.3-5 (Abate, 156; Przewozny, 29): Sermo namque ipsius, in gratia sale conditus, non mediocriter audientibus gratiam conferebat. Mirabantur maiores virum pubentus idiotam spiritualia spiritualibus subtiliter comparantem; stupebant minores peccati causas et occasiones evellentum et virtutum mores cautius inserentem. Omnis demum conditionis, ordinis et aetatis viri congruentia sibi vitae documenta suscepisse laetati sunt.

41 that they altered their lives. Still, there is the strong sense that Anthony’s “practice of virtue” results mainly in admiration among the faithful. Such devotion is revealed poignantly in the second part of the Assidua, as scene after scene depicts the tear-filled and passionate actions of the people of Padua.82 Whether they are demanding the body of their beloved preacher, or appealing to the church leaders, they are zealous in their love of Anthony: “Truly, from east to west, from north and south, people came in well-ordered procession. Seeing the marvelous signs which happened before their eyes through the merits of blessed Anthony, they extolled with due honor the virtues of his holy life.”83

To conclude the discussion of the Assidua, at least three points may be made: 1) Virtue is a consistent theme in the text. 2) Zeal is the primary virtue that come to the fore throughout the narrative. 3) The function of virtue in the text is strongly connected to the admiration of the faithful who followed and adored Anthony both in his lifetime and after his death.

Virtue and the Saints

The above analysis has shown how three classic hagiographical texts – the vitae of

Anthony the Great, Bernard of Clairvaux, Anthony of Padua – all present virtue as a central

82 Padua would continue to hold Anthony in special reverence. As Sarah Blake McHam explains: “The city of Padua and the Franciscan order both promoted the cult of St. Anthony. Their devotion was inspired by Anthony’s saintly character, the miracle-working power of his relics, and recognition that the tremendous popular appeal of the saint contributed to the reputation and economic health of each…. The hordes of pilgrims who visited Padua were a major source of city revenues.” Sarah Blake McHam, “The Cult of St. Anthony of Padua,” in Saints: Studies in Hagiography, ed. Sandro Sticca (Binghamton, NY: Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies, 1996), 232.

83 Assidua 26.2 (Abate, 177; Przewozny, 55): Revera enim ab oriente et occidente, a meridie et septemptrione, ordinatis processionibus, populi conveniunt et, videntes magnalia quae, beati Antonii meritis, in oculis eorum fiebant, honore debito merita sanctitatis eius extollunt.

42 element in the narratives. Other vitae could have been included in this list, most notably the lives of Benedict of Nursia and Martin of Tours. The intention of this chapter is to present a strong sample of the western hagiographical tradition, with the three selected texts offering perspectives from different periods and traditions.

Virtue is critical in the tradition of hagiography. André Vauchez, in his landmark work,

Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages, affirms this point. Vauchez remarks on the genre of hagiography, while he carefully details processes of canonization and makes conclusions about popular and ecclesial attitudes on sainthood in Western Christianity. In this way, Vauchez reconstructs what he calls the “mental representations and ideologies” surrounding the saints, especially in the medieval period. In other words, Vauchez speaks to the attitudes around sainthood among common Christians, the clergy/nobility, and the Roman curia.84 Regarding virtue, Vauchez asserts that it is of central importance in the lives of the saints. He writes: “The aim was rather to judge if the Vita was suitable to support the pastoral intent which lay behind every canonization, and ‘to ensure that the life of the saint was told in a manner likely to promote imitation of their virtues, and not marred by extravagant and unedifying tales.’”85 What Vauchez is saying here is that the ‘point’ of a hagiography was not simply to impress the reader, but rather to form the reader through imitation of virtue.

That the genre of hagiography mainly intends to edify its readers is a fact for which scholars need not apologize. As Michael Casey asserts:

84 André Vauchez, Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 3.

85 Vauchez, 35. Quotation from Adriaan Bredero, Etudes sur la Vita Prima de Saint Bernard (Rome, 1960), 98.

43 “The fundamental assertion of the Vita prima is that Bernard of Clairvaux was a holy man. The single most important fact which this work mediates is that some of his contemporaries thought sufficiently highly of him to present his career from this perspective…. What is certain is that the Vita prima is not principally concerned with conserving objective data for the use of future historians. Facts it certainly contains, but they are elaborated selectively.”86

Here Casey is stating what many modern readers seem to miss: hagiography is not primarily intended to recount verifiable facts about the life of saint. Rather, those who wrote these texts had in mind the faithful who would be affected by the living memory of the saint in question.

The agenda of promoting the saint as “a holy man” (that is, one who works miracles and who is full of virtue) is a valid project, both for the author and the audience. This is precisely because such a presentation will form, inspire, edify, and encourage the faithful in virtuous and holy living.

In 1905 Hippoltye Delehaye defined hagiography based on two characteristics: 1)

Hagiography “doit avoir un charactère religieux et se proposer un but d’édification.” 2) Such writings are “inspiré par le culte des saints et destiné à le promouvoir.”87 Two generations later,

Jean Leclercq would agree. Leclercq presents his view of hagiography in the following passage:

“Hagiography is one branch of this historiography whose methods it applies to a special domain. It also demands an appreciation of the truth and a critical approach. But, in its case, attention is even more sharply focused on the aim to edify, which is indeed often its sole aim. The reason for recording a saint's life is not always, as we might believe at first thought, to tell the story of his life. For what is being dealt with is the existence not of just any outstanding personality, even one who had played a role in political life but of a

86 Michael Casey, “Towards a Methodology for the Vita prima: Translating the First Life into Biography,” in Bernardus Magister: Papers Presented at the Nonacentenary Celebration of the Birth of Bernard of Clairvaux, ed. John R. Sommerfeldt, (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1992), 57. Quoted in Costello, xix.

87 Hippoltye Delehaye, Les Légendes Hagiographiques, Duxième Édition (Bruxelles: Bureaux de la Societé des Bollandistes, 1906), 2. Hagiography must have a religious character and aim at edification… Such texts are inspired by devotion to the saints and aimed at increasing that devotion.”

44 Christian who has achieved sanctity. What matters is less the circumstances of his existence than the opportunities they afforded him to practice virtue.”88

What both Delehaye and Leclercq assert is that hagiography must be understood on its own terms. Hagiography, as a unique genre, has a unique aim. This aim, as has been said above, is formation. As it relates to virtue, Leclercq points out that when it comes to presenting

“sanctity,” the task of the hagiographer is to present the events of the saint’s life as a stage for virtue. The intention was for readers (or listeners) to both admire the virtues of the saint, and also to practice such virtues themselves. It is not the case, therefore, that hagiography simply includes virtue. On the contrary, hagiography depends on virtue to fulfill its ultimate aim of edification.

The Role of Miracles in the Lives of the Saints

A main question for Vauchez and others is the role of miracles in the lives of the saints.

The question naturally arises, which is more important in the hagiographical tradition: miracles or virtuous living? As Vauchez explains, there was tension around this issue in the medieval period. In short, common Christians were more drawn to the miraculous deeds of the saints, while church officials encouraged a focus on the virtues of the saints. Vauchez explains that in the first bull of canonization by Pope Innocent III (the saint in question being Homobonus of

Cremonia), one sees a clear attempt by the Roman Curia to bring virtue onto the same level of importance as miracles. As Innocent wrote: “Two things are required before someone can be regarded as a saint: virtue of morals and truth of signs, that is, works of piety in life and evidence

88 Jean Leclercq, The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture, trans. Catharine Misrahi (New York: Fordham University Press, 1996), 161.

45 of miracles after death.”89 Vauchez, of course, is pointing to a particular point in European history – he details processes of canonization from 1185 to 1431. It is interesting, therefore, to consider the three texts discussed in this chapter, which date from 356 (Vita Antonii), 1148 (Vita

Prima Sancti Bernardi), and 1232 (Vita Sancti Antonii, Assidua). In other words, the first text comes well before the medieval period, the second text comes just before the shifts described by

Vauchez, and the third text comes in the Franciscan era toward the beginning of the period that

Vauchez analyzes.

It is therefore worth asking: how do these three texts balance the roles of virtues and miracles? In the lives of Antony, Bernard, and Anthony of Padua many miracles are recounted.

A close reading of the texts, however, reveals that even in the descriptions of miracles, the authors consistently describe the virtues of their subjects. This is a critical point. To restate the argument: in these three hagiographical texts, references to virtue come through clearly even in the midst of miracle accounts. For example, as mentioned above, when Bernard heals a young boy, the thrust of the narrative focuses on Bernard’s charity: “He caressed the pitiful youth, and laying his gentle hands on his head and face he began to speak to him with soothing words.”90

The healing itself is described as being almost bland by comparison: “The boy then came back to

89 Vauchez, 36. Vauchez remarks just how divergent this was from the attitudes of common Christians: “The fact that the life of a saint, that is, his faith and his works, should be put by the pope on an equal footing with miracles, may seem banal. It represented, nevertheless, a decisive choice on the part of the Roman Church, given that, for the vast majority of the contemporaries of Innocent III, sainthood was defined essentially, if not exclusively, as a collection of supernatural powers, chief of which was healing the sick; we will see below how difficult it was for the papacy to impose the idea that virtues were as important as miracles.”

90 Vita Prima 67 (quoted above).

46 himself and at once recalled his sin; from then on he promised to reform himself and was restored unharmed to his mother.”91

In the Vita Antonii, a similar dynamic can be seen in the story of a diseased and paralyzed girl who is brought to Antony for healing. Antony’s initial reply to his monks reveals his low opinion of himself and his healing power:

“When the monks asked him to permit the parents to enter with their daughter, Antony would not allow it, but said, ‘Go, and you will find the girl healed, if she is not dead,’ adding, ‘No one should come to me, insignificant creature that I am, for the bestowal of cures is not a matter for human wretchedness, but for the mercy of Jesus Christ who always gives assistance to those who believe in Him wherever they are.”92

Here the reader sees both Antony’s humility and faith on display – humility in that he refuses to claim credit for cures, and faith in that he trusts in Jesus Christ to assist the needy. As the story continues, Antony is adamant that the girl’s own prayers will heal her. 93 The text does finally admit that Antony prayed for the girl and that she was healed, but again the healing itself is described without fanfare: “He spoke and his words were followed by the girl’s restoration to health, for when they went out… the monks found the girl healthy and her parents overjoyed.”94

Antony, who does not make physical contact with the girl (he remained inside the whole time) is

91 Vita Prima 67 (CCCM, 81; Costello, 71): Ille uero ad se reuersus, continuo peccatum suum recognouit, et deinceps emendationem promittens, incolumis restitutus est matri suae.

92 Vita Antonii 58 (CCSL, 65; White, 45): Rogantibus autem eum monachis ut parentibus cum filia permittcretur ingressus, non concessit, sed ait: ‘Ite et inuenietis puellam, si non est mortua, curatam. Nullus debet ad meam humilitatem uenire, quia largitio curationum non est humanae misericordiae, sed lesu Christi qui ubique in se credentibus pracstare consueuit auxilium. Quamobrem et ilia, pro qua petitis, suis precibus liberata est; et, cum ego orarem ad Dominum, mihi praescientia sanitatis eius indulta est.’

93 As David Brakke writes, “Athanasius uses the passive voice to de-emphasize Antony’s agency in such healings: people ‘were cleansed’… Antony’s miraculous powers are not his own, but are the achievements of Christ working through Antony.” Brakke, 249.

94 Vita Antonii 58 (CCSL, 65; White, 45): Dixit et uerba eius puellae incolumitas consecuta est, nam exeuntes foras ad beatum Paphnu tium et filiam sospitem et parentes laetos repererunt.

47 shown in this episode to be primarily a humble and faithful disciple, not a grand miracle worker.

As he later tells his monks: “Do not think that it is I who have given these people health. It is

Christ who performs these miracles through his servants. You too should believe and you will see that it is devout faith in God… that is rewarded by such miracles.”95

Turning back to Bernard of Clairvaux, there is a miracle involving a letter remaining dry in the rain. William recounts it as follows:

“All of a sudden it unexpectedly started to rain. The one who was writing… wanted to put the document away. But the holy father said, ‘It is the work of God; keep writing, do not fear.’ He therefore wrote the letter in the pouring rain, without the rain’s getting it wet. For while the rain was pouring down, the sheet exposed to it was covered with the power of charity, and what charity wrote in the letter, charity likewise preserved.”96

The substance of the story appears to be the dry letter, but the virtue of charity is clearly emphasized over and above the miracle. Indeed, the whole episode seems to set the stage for

William’s poetic line quae dictabat epistolam, scedulam quoque pariter conseruabat. One may also note that Bernard’s faith is announced at the beginning of the passage, as he assures the brother not to fear because God will protect the letter. What makes this passage even more focused on virtue is the content of the letter: it contained Bernard’s heartfelt request for his brother Robert to return to Clairvaux. Again, charity takes center stage.

Turning to the Assidua, all of Anthony of Padua’s healing miracles in this text are described as occurring after his death. It is therefore difficult to offer an example similar to those

95 Vita Antonii 80 (CCSL, 87; White, 59): Nolitc me putare his sanitatem dedisse, sed Christus per seruos suos facit ista miracula. Credite et uos et uidebitis quia deuota Deo fides, non eloquentiae uanus tumor talia signa mereatur.

96 Vita Prima 50 (CCCM, 70; Costello, 55): Subito autem inopinatus imber erupit et is qui scribebat - sicut ipso referente didicimus - cartam reponere uoluit. Ad quem pater sanctus: ‘Opus,’ inquit, ‘Dei est; scribe, ne timeas.’Scripsit ergo epistolam in medio imbre sine imbre. Cum enim undique plueret, cartam expositam uirtus operuit caritatis, et quae dictabat epistolam, scedulam quoque pariter conseruabat.

48 above. That being said, there is one miraculous occurrence in the Assidua that takes place during

Anthony’s life. After the devil attacked the young friar, his room instantly filled with light. The author describes the scene in the following:

“One night… as he slept to give rest to his tired limbs, behold the devil dared to squeeze violently the throat of the servant of God and… tried to choke him. But Anthony, having invoked the name of the glorious Virgin and having made a sign of the life-giving cross on his forehead, put to flight the enemy of mankind and immediately felt alleviated. And, since he wanted to see the fleeing devil, he opened his eyes. Behold, the whole cell in which he was sleeping was gleaming, made brilliant by a heavenly light. We are certain beyond a doubt that the light descended into the cell by divine power.”97

This miracle appears difficult to parse, as it is unclear whether the miracle should be attributed to

Anthony or simply to a divine source. As it relates to virtue, however, the episode clearly extols

Anthony’s faith and prudence. He quickly invokes the Virgin Mary and signs himself with the cross. While such actions may seem insignificant, it is noteworthy that Anthony does not attempt to banish the devil by his own power. Rather he places his trust in divine protection and acts with proper wisdom given the situation. The emphasis on virtue is further seen in the context of the passage, for in the preceding lines the author states that the devil planned the attack because he was “jealous of virtue” (virtutis aemulus).98 Thus the light that envelopes the room is presented almost as a celebration of Anthony’s faithful and virtuous victory.

To conclude this section, it must be admitted that miracles are certainly of great import in the lives of the saints, including the three hagiographies under discussion. But Vauchez’s

97 Assidua 12.3-5 (Abate, 159; Przewozny, 32): Cum nocte quadam in principio quadragesimalis, quam praefati sumus, occuptionis, fatiscentes artus somni beneficio recrearet, ecce Diabolus guttur viri Dei ausus est violenter comprimere ac pressum nisus est suffocare. Ay ille, invocato Gloriosae Virginis nomine, fronti signum vivificae crucis impressit, fugatoque humani generis inimico, confestim levamen sensit. Cumque, fugientem cernere cupiens, oculos aperuisset, ecce tota, in qua iacebat, cella luce caelitus illustrata fulgebat; quod nimirum lumen divinae virtutis auctoritate cellae illapsum credimus.

98 Assidua 12.1.

49 conclusion describes a shift in the presentation of virtue in hagiography, revealing an attempt by the Roman Curia to bring virtue on par with miracles. The fact that the Assidua contains no miracle accounts during Anthony’s life seems to support the claim. It is also interesting to see that even in the lives of Anthony the Great and Bernard of Clairvaux (written before the shift that

Vauchez describes), the presentation of virtue comes through even amidst the descriptions of miracles. Of course, this chapter does not discuss the popular feelings toward these three texts, rather the focus is on the intentions of the authors. Still, the words of the texts themselves speak volumes in emphasizing virtues over and against miracles. As Antony the Great says to his monks: “I also advise you, my dearest friends, to be more concerned about your way of life than about miracles.”99 Even more pointedly, William remarks of Bernard: “What this little-known and ailing man, at death’s door and strong only in speech, did in this life was a greater miracle than all his other miracles.”100

Lives of the Saints and the Legenda Maior

The last section of this chapter proposes a simple question: Did Bonaventure have in mind the classic lives of the saints when he wrote the Legenda Maior in the years 1260-1263?

The answer is yes. William Cook argues that at the very least, Bonaventure makes reference to

Antony the Great, Martin of Tours, and Benedict or Nursia. Cook concludes,

“A close examination of the Legenda Maior and a comparison between it and the well- known Lives of the three most famous monastic saints of antiquity [Anthony, Martin,

99 Vita Antonii 38 (CCSL, 43; White, 32): Ulud quoque, mei carissimi, admoneo, ut uitae magis sit uobis quam signorum sollicitudo.

100 Vita Prima 61 (CCCM, 76; Costello, 65): Vnde factum est ut in breui illi maiori miraculo prae omnibus quae in hac uita gessit miraculis, per unum hominem languidum et seminecem.

50 and Benedict]… show that Bonaventure carefully refashioned several stories about Francis in order to make them more exactly analogous to events in the Lives of these greatest of monastic saints.”101

Cook’s best examples of Bonaventure’s “refashioning” a story to match previous saintly vitae is the vignette of Francis throwing himself into the snow in order to quell his passion (Legenda

Maior 5.4). This action by Francis mirrors Benedict throwing himself into a thorn bush, after being nearly overcome by lust. While Francis’ plunge into the snow was first recounted by

Thomas of Celano (2C 117), Bonaventure adds a concluding line that bears striking similarity to the conclusion of the thorn bush episode in the Life of Benedict.102 The point is that

Bonaventure clearly had the Benedict episode in mind when writing his life of Francis. In speaking of Thomas of Celano, who wrote the first life of Francis Assisi, it should be pointed out that he too took substantial influence from the lives of the saints.103 Bonaventure, of course, borrowed extensively from Thomas in crafting the Legenda Maior, and thus both texts stand on the shoulders of the previous hagiographical tradition.

Bonaventure would certainly have been familiar with the accounts of Bernard of

Clairvaux. Regarding the accounts of Anthony of Padua, it would be surprising if Bonaventure as the minister general of the Franciscan order was not familiar with the Assidua as a text.

101 William Cook, “Tradition and Perfection: Monastic Typology in Bonaventure's Life of St. Francis," American Benedictine Review 33 (1982): 2-3.

102 Bonaventure writes: “He so quenched the fire of lust within, that he hardly felt anything of that sort from that time on,” while The Life of Benedict reads, “He thereby managed to extinguish the fire burning sinfully within him… From that time onwards… he managed to control the temptation of sexual pleasure so completely that he never experienced it in the slightest.” See LM 5.4; Life of Benedict II.3.

103 The editors of Francis of Assisi Early Documents note a plethora of examples of Thomas alluding to Antony, Bernard, Martin, and other saints. Albert Haase also details many of Thomas’ references to the lives of the saints. See Albert T. Haase, “Bonaventure’s Legenda maior: A redaction critical approach,” (Ph.D. diss., Fordham University, 1990), 85-91.

51 Bonaventure mentions Anthony by name three times in the Legenda Maior, though there are no direct references to the text of the Assidua. Overall, Bonaventure’s use of the lives of the saints is subtle. Cook suggests that Bonaventure was more interested in comparing Francis to Biblical figures such as Moses, David, and of course, Christ.104 Bonaventure does not directly mention

Antony, Benedict, or Bernard by name. While he does provide a passing reference to Martin of

Tours (LM 4.9), it is likely that Bonaventure avoided direct references to previous saints in order to better highlight the Biblical typologies.105

Cook and Haase do not address, however, the virtues of the saints. It is the argument of this chapter that Bonaventure situated himself squarely in the hagiographical tradition by emphasizing the virtues of Francis. As John Coakley summarizes, Bonaventure “makes Francis a distinctly admirable figure from the start, following the old hagiographical convention of constancy… [and] by declaring his innate and growing virtue.”106 By emphasizing Francis’ virtue, Bonaventure was doing what authors of previous hagiographies had done for hundreds of years. Both the saints of late antiquity like Antony, and the more recent saints like Bernard and

Anthony of Padua were presented in their vitae as models of humility, charity, faith, zeal, and a host of other virtues. As will be described in chapter 3 of this dissertation, Bonaventure followed this tradition of focusing on the virtues of his subject. In actuality, Bonaventure would surpass the tradition of previous hagiographies, as he would portray Francis as the man of perfect virtue.

104 Cook, 2.

105 Regarding the preference for Biblical typologies, Albert Haase writes, “By relegating the comparisons between Francis and the monastic saints to secondary, implicit references, the Seraphic Doctor has set in relief his explicit comparisons between Francis and some great biblical figures.” Haase, 197.

106 Coakley, 65.

52 Conclusion

As Hippoltye Delehaye explained,

“Les saints pratiquent toutes les virtus d’une façon superhumaine: la douceur, la miséricorde, le pardon des injures, la mortification, le renoncement, et ces vertus, ils les rendent aimables et ils invitent les chrétiens à les pratiquer. Leur vie est, en effet, la realization concrete de l’esprit évangélique, et par le fait qu’elle rend sensible cet ideal sublime, la légende, comme toute poésie, peut pretender à un degré de verité plus élevé que l’histoire.”107

After more than a century, this remains one of the finest statements about virtue in the hagiographical tradition. This chapter stands in full agreement with the Belgian Jesuit. Virtue is central to the project of hagiography, as a close analysis of three saintly vitae reveals. In addition, virtue is even on par with the miracles of the saints, and in some cases virtue is presented as being even more important than miracles. Texts like these set the stage for the presentation of Francis of Assisi – perhaps the most honored saint in the western tradition. As the next chapters will show, the virtue of Francis was primary for those authors that presented him as a saint to the world.

107 Delhaye, 259. The saints show forth every virtue in superhuman fashion – gentleness, mercy, forgiveness of wrongs, self-discipline, renunciation of one’s own will: they make virtue attractive and ever invite Christians to seek it. Their life is indeed the concrete manifestation of the spirit of the Gospel; and, in that it makes this sublime ideal a reality for us, legend, like all poetry, can claim a higher degree of truth than history.” [Translation by Donald Attwater, The Legends of the Saints (New York, Fordham University Press, 1962), 181.]

CHAPTER TWO

THE EMERGING PORTRAIT OF FRANCIS

Introduction

The following chapter examines three 13th century texts on the life of St. Francis of

Assisi. All three of these texts are early pieces of the Franciscan hagiographical tradition.

Moreover, all three texts predate Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior.1 Mira Circa Nos, the Papal

Bull that announced the canonization of St. Francis, was issued in 1228. Thomas of Celano’s

Life of Francis, later known as the Vita Prima, was completed in 1229. The Legenda Trium

Sociorum (Legend of the Three Companions), ostensibly written by three Franciscan brothers who desired to offer their own vision of the founder’s life, was likely completed in 1246. The following chapter will offer a close reading of these texts, arguing that the concept of virtue is central in all three. While there are many other hagiographical texts on Francis that could have been selected for this chapter, these three texts were chosen because they present diversity of style and perspective, while still representing the early period of the Franciscan tradition. All three texts contain a focus on virtue, though each text highlights specific virtues that Francis practiced. For example, Mira Circa Nos alludes most consistently to Francis’ fortitude and temperance, more so than virtues such as humility and poverty. The chapter will also discuss the role of miracles in each of these texts. While accounts of miracles are central to most

1 Bonaventure wrote the Legenda Maior, along with the shorter Legenda Minor, between 1260 and 1263. The text was approved in 1263 and established as the definitive vita for the Franciscan order. All other previous lives were ordered to be destroyed. This 1266 decree obviously did not apply to the Bull of Canonization Mira Circa Nos, but the decree did result in the destruction of many copies of Thomas of Celano’s work, as well as copies of texts such as the Legenda Trium Sociorum. Fortunately, some manuscripts of these texts survived. 53 54 hagiographies, this chapter will argue that these three texts present Francis’ virtues as being equally important – if not more important – than his miracles. The chapter will conclude with a discussion of the ‘Franciscan Virtues’ and a look at Francis of Assisi’s own list of key virtues in two of his writings. Overall, this chapter will not argue for a single definitive virtue that spans all the texts (humility, for example); nor will the chapter propose a definitive set of Franciscan virtues. Rather the aim of this chapter is to show how virtue is centrally important, both in the writings of Francis himself and in the early hagiographic materials that presented Francis as a saint to the world.

Background on Mira Circa Nos - The Bull of Canonization

The document that proclaimed Francis of Assisi as a saint of the Church was written in

1228, just two years after he died. The title of the text comes from its opening phrase Mira circa nos (wonderful toward us). The Papal Bull was composed and issued by Pope Gregory IX, formerly Hugolino, Bishop of Ostia. Hugolino’s relationship with Francis is well documented in the early biographies and by Francis himself. Indeed, the future Pope served as the appointed cardinal protector of the Franciscan order.2

Outside of Regis Armstrong’s 1984 article, the secondary literature on this text remains scant – though several scholars have commented on its significance. John Coakley argues that the Bull clearly influenced Thomas of Celano’s Life of Francis, and that Thomas’ work “stands thoroughly in harmony with Gregory's vision for Christian society and with his understanding of

2 Regis J. Armstrong, “Mira Circa Nos: Gregory IX’s View of the Saint Francis of Assisi,” Laurentianum 25 (1984): 385-414. Armstrong notes that the Papal Bull reveals “the dedication and devotion of Pope Gregory IX to the cause of Saint Francis.” Armstrong, 392.

55 Francis.”3 Similar connections between Mira Circa Nos and the Thomas of Celano’s Vita Prima have been described by Felice Accrocca.4

In terms of the content of Mira Circa Nos, Emanuela Prinzivalli summarizes the text well:

“[Mira Circa Nos] fissava il senso che Gregorio IX… intendeva dare alla santità di Francesco. Può stupire nella lettera, redatta in uno stile particolarmente fiorito, l’assenza di ogni cenno esplicito alle stimmate e la povertà di dati biografici, pur se il pontefice non trascura di ricordare la sua amicizia con Francesco: si tenga pero presente che un documento del genere per sua natura implica un’assunzione del dato evenemenziale limitata e orientata a fini interpretativi. Nella lettera si constata infatti una sovrabbondanza connotativa, ottenuta mediante il continuo susseguirsi di simbologie tratte dalle Scritture, il più delle volte non spiegate perché di uso commune in un linguaggio, quello ecclesiastico, altamente codificato.”5

As Prinzivalli suggests, one way to approach this text is to notice what the text does not do.

Gregory does not offer a chronological account of Francis’ life. He does not provide quotations

3 John Coakley, “The Conversion of St. Francis and the Writing of Christian Biography, 1228-1263,” Franciscan Studies 72 (2014): 31.

4 Felice Accrocca, “Alter apostolus: Per una rilettura della Vita beati Francisci,” in La leggenda di un santo, ed. Paciocco and Accrocca (Milano: Biblioteca Francescana, 1999), 165-94. Accrocca writes, “La Mira circa nos in realtà rappresentò per Tommaso ben più che una semplice fonte di inspirazione” (187). She later adds that, “Tommaso recepí lettura del pontefice, ma non mi sentirei di dire che lo fece perché essa gli venne imposta, quanto piuttosto perché tale lettura appariva congeniale al suo modo di vedere e di sentire” (194). Translation: Mira Circa Nos was, in reality, much more than simply a font of inspiration… Thomas received the pontifical document, but this is not to say that it was imposed on him, but rather because it meshed with his own way of seeing and feeling.

5 Emmanuela Prinzivalli, “Un santo da leggere: Francesco d’Assisi nel percorso delle fonti agiografiche,” in Francesco d’Assisi e il primo secolo di storia francescana (Torino: Einaudi, 1997), 76. Translation: Mira Circa Nos fixed the meaning that Gregory IX ... intended to give to the sanctity of Francis. The letter, written in a particularly flowery style, amazingly has no explicit reference to the stigmata, and the biographical data is small. The Pope does not neglect to remember his friendship with Francesco: but bear in mind that a document of this nature assumes a limited use of facts and is oriented to interpretative purposes. In fact, the letter shows an overabundance of allusions, through a continuous series of symbols drawn from the Scriptures, most of the time unexplained because of common use in a highly codified ecclesiastical language. [Translation by Edward Hagman, “A Saint to be Read: Francis of Assisi in the Hagiographical Sources,” Greyfriars Review 15.3 (2001): 263-298.]

56 of Francis’ words or preaching. He does not describe specific miracles that Francis performed during or after his life. Gregory does not even recount particular events in the saint’s life.6

What then does Mira Circa Nos primarily do as a text? The answer is relatively straightforward: the text presents the figure of Francis through a variety of Biblical allusions. In this way, the text is similar to the canonization declaration of St. Dominic, published in 1234 and also written by Pope Gregory IX. In Mira Circa Nos Gregory puts Francis’ sanctity in context through connections to the great heroes of Scripture, such as Abraham, Jacob, Samson, Paul, and others. For example, one of the most striking examples of these analogies is the comparison to

Samson.

“Like another Samson, with God’s help he broke the bonds that tied him to the seductive world. Filled with the zeal of the Holy Spirit, he took up the jawbone of an ass, preaching in simple words… with the mighty strength of God… he slew, not just a thousand, but many thousands of Philistines.”7

This comparison, which may strike readers as unusual, equates Francis’ preaching to the jawbone wielded by Samson. Gregory says that Francis “slew” many people with his sermons – that is to say, he brought them to salvation through acceptance of the Gospel. Francis himself

6 In this way Gregory offers an extreme example of hagiography (as a genre) in its ambivalence toward precise historical detail. As Evelyn Birge Vitz remarks: “The function of hagiography is not merely – perhaps even not primarily – to tell historically accurate things about particular historical figures but to move hearts to God.” Evelyn Birge Vitz, “From the Oral to the Written in Medieval and Renaissance Saints’ Lives” in Images of Sainthood in Medieval Europe, ed. Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski and Timea Klara Szell (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991), 113.

7 Mira Circa Nos 3 (Bullarium Franciscanum, 42; FAED I, 567): Quasi alter Sampson gratia divina praeventus dirupit & Spiritu fervoris concepto, asinique arrepta mandibula, praedictione siquidem simplici, nullis verborum persuasibilium humanae sapientiae coloribus adornata, sed tamen Dei virtute potenti, qui infirma Mundi eligit, ut fortia quaecumque confundat, non tantum mille; sed multa Philistinorum eo. Latin text from Bullarium Franciscanum Romanorum Pontificum, Tomus I, ed. Fr. Joannis Baptistae Constantii (Rome, 1759), 42-44. English from Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Vol I: The Saint.

57 might not have appreciated this violent comparison, but as Regis Armstrong remarks, “[Gregory] preferred to present [Francis] as an indefatigable defender of the church.”8 From this example alone, one sees that Mira Circa Nos is thoroughly Gregory’s document – the text reflects the

Pope’s view of Francis and what Francis means for the Church. Moreover, Gregory employs his own particular method, which is to paint the man of Assisi through Scriptural allusions. A close reading of these allusions reveals the centrality of virtue, both in the Biblical references themselves and in the text as a whole.

Virtue in Mira Circa Nos

The longest section of the Papal Bull is section four, in which Francis is compared to at least five Biblical figures: Abraham, Jephthah (from Judges 11), Christ, Paul, and Jacob.

Readers may find it difficult at first to make sense of the Biblical allusions. In some cases the references are somewhat literal, but most have no basis in a literal connection. In order to decipher the author’s meaning in these Biblical allusions, it is helpful to see that Gregory is almost always pointing to one or more virtues of Francis. In other words, virtue is an interpretive key for Mira Circa Nos. For example, in a comparison of Francis to Abraham,

Gregory writes:

“Finally, following the footprints of our father Abraham, this man not only left spiritually his country and his kindred, but even his father’s house, to go to the land which the Lord, by divine inspiration, had shown him.”9

8 Armstrong, 396.

9 Mira Circa Nos 4 (Bullarium Franciscanum, 43; FAED I, 567): Hic denique Patris nostri Abrahae imitatus vestigia, mente de terra, & cognatione sua, nec non Domo Patris ejus egrediens, iturus in terram, quam sibi Dominus, & divina inspiratione monstrarat.

58 In this passage there is a literal comparison at work, namely that Francis, like Abraham, left his

“father’s house” to pursue a new life. That being said, this analogy breaks down when considered purely literally – Francis did not initially travel to a different land, rather he began his ministry in Assisi, his place of birth. Looking at the analogy with an eye toward virtue, however, reveals the heart of this comparison: Francis, like Abraham, displayed obedience by following

God’s command without question. Gregory returns to the Abraham comparison in the following paragraph: “As he approached the land of vision, on one of the mountains that had been shown him – namely the height of faith – he offered as a holocaust to the Lord his own flesh.”10 This analogy is, of course, far from literal: Francis never offered sacrifices like Abraham. The point, rather, is that Francis offered his entire life and body as a sacrificial offering to God. Here again, virtue is the key to what Gregory is asserting: Francis displayed obedience in following God. In addition to obedience, this reference also points to Francis’ faith in trusting God as Abraham did in his willingness to sacrifice Isaac, and temperance in that Francis sacrificed his “flesh” by subduing his body and its passions during his life.

As the text continues into the next paragraph, virtue continues to be a focus as Francis is compared to Jepthath from the book of Judges:

“As it had previously deceived him, like Jepthah he offered this only-begotten daughter, laying it on the fire of love, mortifying his flesh by hunger, thirst, cold, nakedness, fasting, and countless nights of prayer. When he had thus crucified his flesh with its passions and desires, he was able to say with the Apostle: It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. Truly, he no longer lived for himself, but rather for Christ, who

10 Mira Circa Nos 4, (Bullarium Franciscanum, 43; FAED I, 567): Et in terram visionis accedens, super unum sibi montium demonstratum, videlicet excellentiam fidei, carnem suam quasi filiam unigenitam.

59 died for our sins and was raised for our justification, so that we might no longer be enslaved to sin.”11

Here Gregory again points to the virtue of temperance in stating that Francis mortified his flesh through “hunger, thirst, cold, nakedness, fasting, and countless nights of prayer.” Gregory weaves in a lesser known Biblical character, Jephthah the Gileadite, the warrior described in

Judges 11. The horror of Jephthah’s story was that he vowed to God that, should he be granted victory in battle, he would sacrifice the first thing that crossed his threshold upon returning home. Tragically, it was his daughter who ran to greet him, and Jephthah kept his vow and killed his daughter. How can Francis of Assis be compared to such a Biblical figure? The key to the analogy is the virtue of temperance. Gregory asserts that Francis is like Jephthah because

Francis willing sacrificed his own “flesh” (carnem) through his ongoing practices of self-denial and “mortification” (macerando). Thus it is Francis’ virtue that make sense of the comparison.

In speaking of Francis’ flesh, Gregory may also have in mind the stigmata, but in this section the central point is Francis’ lived practices and habits. Francis’ sacrifice, says Gregory, was not a one-time event, but rather a daily sacrifice through the virtuous practice of temperance.12

As section four of the text continues, Gregory alludes to more Biblical characters. He

11 Mira Circa Nos 4, (Bullarium Franciscanum, 43; FAED I, 567): quae ipsum interdum deceperat, cum Jephte Domino in holocaustum obtulit, igne supposito charitatis, illam fame, siti, frigore, ac nuditate, vigiliis multis, & jejuniis macerando; qua cum vitiis, & concupiscentiis crucifixa, dicere poterat cum Apostolo: Vivo ego, jam non ego, vivit autem in me Christus: quoniam jam non sibi vixerat, sed Christo potius, quo pro peccatis nostris mortuus est, & resurrexit propter justificationem nostram, ut nullatenus peccato ulterius serviamus.

12 This section of Mira Circa Nos, with its focus on self-denial, has parallels to Bonaventure’s approach in the Legenda Maior. As John Coakley argues: “Francis's internalizing of the Passion now appears… as the confirmation or culmination of the ascetic self-denial that has been Bonaventure's central focus in the narrative. It is the decisive consequence specifically of his ‘victory over himself.’” Coakley, 68.

60 states that Francis is also like Paul, who wrote, “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me” (Galatians 2:20). Here Gregory is alluding to the virtue of humility. Both Francis and Paul were humble in that they minimized their own roles in their salvation, uplifting instead the power of Christ working through them.13 Next, Gregory compares Francis to Christ. He writes of

Francis: “He conformed himself to the one who, although rich, became poor for our sake.”14

Here Gregory is citing 2 Corinthians 8:9, in which Paul explores concepts of poverty and wealth.

Christ, of course, is the prime example of one who embraced poverty in order to make others rich spiritually. Francis fits this mold – not simply because he was poor, but because the poverello embraced poverty as a practice.15 In other words, Francis displayed the virtue of poverty, and therefore he is likened unto Christ.16

13 Regis Armstrong explains the full analogy of Francis to Paul in the following: “Francis is described as the person who not only embraces poverty in order to run more quickly after a heavenly reward (Phil 3:4; Rom 8:29), but also to be more closely identified with Christ Who while He was rich became poor for us (2 Cor 8:9). Because of the crucifixion of his vices and concupiscences Gregory describes Francis as living through the presence of Christ in his life and because of that living for Him alone (Gal 5:24 2:20; Rom 4:25; 6:6), not seeking His own interests but those of Christ (Phil 2:21), and, therefore, leading his captivity to submission to Jesus Christ (Eph 4:8). In Francis Gregory perceived one of those weak persons whom God chooses to confound the strong (1 Cor 1:17), whose words were filled with the powerful strength of the Spirit and not the colorful, persuasive force of human wisdom (1 Cor 2: 4). When all of these Pauline references are brought together, we can have little doubt that the pope saw Francis as the epitome of that reformed person of the Apostle of the Gentiles and desired to place him before the Christian world as a model.” Armstrong, Mira Circa Nos, 400.

14 Mira Circa Nos 4, (Bullarium Franciscanum, 43; FAED I, 567): se Illi conformans, qui cum dives esset, pro nobis factus est pauper.

15 As Michael Cusato observes, the spiritual connection to the poverty of Christ was fundamental to the Franciscan movement. Proof of this is found in chapter nine of the Earlier Rule. Custato explains: “the clarion phrase which encapsulated the minorite charism in shorthand was ‘the humility and poverty of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ The phrase expresses a lifestyle and spirituality of Jesus of Nazareth which the friars then promised to live out in their own lives.” Michael F. Cusato, “Highest Poverty or Lowest Poverty?: The Paradox of the Minorite Charism,” Franciscan Studies 75 (2017): 305.

16 Giovanni Miccoli has written on Francis’ poverty as a choice, a way of life, with a specific aim in mind: “la povertà… è una precisa scelta di campo sociale perché per Francesco è solo attraverso questa condizione che il messaggio di Cristo può essere riproposto alla società.” Translation: Poverty is an

61 Gregory offers one more Biblical allusion in this section, comparing Francis to the patriarch Jacob.

“Uprooting his vices and courageously taking up the struggle against the world, the flesh, and the spiritual forces of evil, he utterly renounced wife, farm, and oxen, the things which had prevented those who had been invited from attending the banquet. Rather, when the Lord commanded him, he rose like Jacob.”17

Gregory’s emphasis on virtue is shown in the use of specific words: vitia (vices), viriliter

(courage), and virtutem (virtue). Regarding the comparison to Jacob, Gregory’s first alludes to

Jacob by using the word luctamen, which can be translated as struggle, but more obviously refers to wrestling.18 Gregory sees Francis as one who, like Jacob, had courage to struggle and wrestle in the spiritual life. Francis’ struggle, says Gregory, was against worldly pleasures and the passions of the flesh. These lines therefore once again highlight Francis’ temperance, but also his fortitude in taking on the struggle. The text also clearly alludes to the virtue of poverty in that Francis renounced worldly items such as wife, farm, and oxen – those items that prevented the three characters from attending the King’s banquet in Christ’s parable. The comparison to

Jacob continues throughout the rest of the paragraph:

“Having received the seven-fold gift of the Spirit, and with the aid of the eight Gospel beatitudes, he went up by these fifteen steps of virtue, mystically contained in the Psalter, to Bethel, the house of God, which he himself had prepared for him. There he made an altar of his heart for the Lord and offered upon it the fragrance of devout prayers.”19 explicit choice within the social realm because for Francis it is only through this condition that the message of Christ can be presented to society. Giovanni Miccoli, “Francesco e La Pace,” Franciscan Studies 64 (2006): 44.

17 Mira Circa Nos 4, (Bullarium Franciscanum, 43; FAED I, 567): Vitia quoque supplantans, & contra mundum, carnem, & potestates aereas luctamen assumens viriliter, uxore, villa, bobus a coena magna retrahentibus invitatos penitus abdicatis, cum Jacob Domino jubente surrexit.

18 Luctabatur is the verb used in the vulgate in Genesis 32:24, in which Jacob wrestles with the angel.

19 Mira Circa Nos 4 (Bullarium Franciscanum, 43; FAED I, 567): gratia Spiritus septiformis accepta, octoque sibi assistentibus Beatitudinibus evangelicis, Bethel Domum Dei, quam se ipsum praeparavit

62

There are several elements to unpack in this passage. First, Gregory states that Francis received

“the seven-fold gift of the Spirit,” in addition to “the eight Gospel beatitudes,” which add up to

“fifteen steps of virtue” from the psalter. Virtue is at the heart of both of these statements. The seven ‘gifts’ listed in Isaiah 11:2 are in essence virtues: wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord. The eight beatitudes from Matthew 5

(meekness, mercy, etc.) can likewise be considered virtues. Gregory’s point that these two sets add up to15 virtues is a reference to psalms 120-134, which is the Song of Ascents.20 While this may seem to be a complicated reference, Gregory’s conclusion is straightforward: Francis, in his practice of virtue, ascended to new spiritual heights.21 Finally, the mention of Bethel in this passage is also important, for Jacob built an altar at Bethel, and Francis likewise made an “altar of his heart.” This is a reference to the virtue of piety, as Gregory is highlighting Francis’ proper devotion and honor of God.

To conclude this discussion of section four of Mira Circa Nos, it is clear that Gregory is fully focused on the virtue of Francis. This focus on virtue extends throughout the entire text.

As mentioned above, Mira Circa Nos offers no miracles of Francis, nor does it offer any quotations from the saint, or even specific events from the life of Francis. Furthermore, Gregory does not mention the stigmata, a theme so important for both Thomas of Celano and

eisdem, per quindecim gradus virtutem, qui mysticè in Psalterio continentur, ascendit. Et ibidem Altare cordis Domino contrahens, aromata devotarum orationum obtulit super eo.

20 For a summary of the symbolism attached to these psalms by the early church fathers, see Frederick Hockey, “Cantica Graduum: The Gradual Psalms in Patristic Tradition” in Studia Patristica (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1970): 355–59.

21 This is a central theme for Bonaventure in the Legenda Maior, and also his previous works the Triplici Via and the Intinerarium Mentis in Deum. The theme of spiritual progress and ascent in Bonaventure’s thought is described in chapter 3 of this dissertation.

63 Bonaventure. Instead, Mira Circa Nos is firmly rooted in virtue, using comparisons to Biblical figures to show that Francis was obedient, poor, pious, humble, temperate, patient, and courageous.

Key Virtues in Mira Circa Nos: Fortitude and Temperance

Regis Armstrong opines that Gregory undervalued the virtues of poverty and humility in the Bull of Canonization. Such an omission, according to Armstrong, is curious. He writes:

“[Gregory] was certainly a man who was close to Francis, sensitive to his struggles and to his ideals, and eager to promote his cause in the life of the Church. Yet it was Gregory who canonized him and, in the process, described him not as the poor and humble man that he strove to be, but as a mighty and brilliant warrior that he would not have wanted to be.”22

As Armstrong points out, Francis himself might have wished for a Bull of Canonization focused on poverty and humility. In Mira Circa Nos, however, the most commonly described virtue is fortitude. While Gregory does not use the word fortitudo, he expresses this virtue consistently throughout the text. Fortitude is described most explicitly in the line (quoted above):

“Uprooting his vices and courageously taking up the struggle against the world, the flesh, and the spiritual forces of evil, he utterly renounced wife, farm, and oxen…” In this line the word translated as ‘courageously’ is the Latin adverb viriliter, from the word virilis meaning

‘manliness,’ a classical virtue closely linked to fortitude. Fortitude is also clearly seen in

Gregory’s references to Shamgar and Samson and their slaying of thousands of Philistines.

Similarly, fortitude is seen in the allusion to Abraham who bravely left his home country for

Canaan. Finally, Gregory offers his most impassioned praise of Francis’ fortitude in describing

22 Armstrong, 414.

64 the saint’s triumphant entry into death: “Having overcome even while here on earth the three- fold enemy, he entered the kingdom of heaven violently, taking it by force. After many glorious combats in this life and triumphing over the world, he passed happily to the Lord.”23 Using military imagery, Gregory presents Francis as a powerful spiritual warrior who triumphs over the world. Here, as in the cases described above, the texts insists that Francis is to be commended and remembered for his fortitude.

Temperance is the other key virtue in Mira Circa Nos. Though the Latin words temperantia and austeritas are not used, the virtue of temperance is described and alluded to throughout the text. The most obvious description of temperance is seen in the line (quoted above): “mortifying his flesh by hunger, thirst, cold, nakedness, fasting, and countless nights of prayer.” In addition, the reference to Samson includes a strong mention of temperance in that

Francis, like Samson, “broke the bonds that tied him to the seductive world… bringing back to spiritual servitude those who had previously been enslaved by the pleasures of the flesh.”24

Gregory’s mention of “the flesh” (carnis) alludes to sacrificial imagery and points to Francis’ commitment to temperance. Temperance and the flesh are further described in the lines (quoted above) in which Francis is said to have taken up the struggle “against the world and the flesh”

(contra mundum, carnem), offering the Lord “his own flesh” (carnem suam), and crucifying “his flesh with its passions and desires” (cum vitiis et concupiscentiis crucifixa). Throughout the text,

23 Mira Circa Nos 6 (Bullarium Franciscanum, 44; FAED I, 568): Hoste itaque triplici in Terra positus superato, Regno Coelorum vim intulit, et illud rapuit violenter, et post hujus vitae quamplura gloriosa certamina, mundum triumphans feliciter migravit ad Dominum.

24 Mira Crica Nos 3 (Bullarium Franciscanum, 42, FAED I, 566): impiger surgens Mundi vincula blandientis… in Spiritus servitutem redegit carnis illecebris antea servientes.

65 Gregory portrays Francis as one who, by virtue of his perfect temperance, is able to save others from “the poison of their earthly sensual pleasures” (potione terrenae cadentibus voluptatis) and

“baneful excesses” (excessibus dura).25 Thus for Gregory, Francis’ entire mission – his preaching, his example, his ministry, and his lasting impact – are all dependent on his renunciation of earthly pleasures and his practice of temperance.

Miracles in Mira Circa Nos

As previously stated, Gregory’s Papal Bull does not mention any specific miracles performed by Francis of Assisi, either while he was living or after he died. Gregory simply states that there were “numerous and outstanding miracles” and that “we have been convinced by reliable witnesses of his many splendid miracles.” These remarks come from two separate passages. In the first passage Gregory states that Francis, because of his miracles, should be held up and revered as a saint:

“God has shown that he wishes [Francis] to be placed on a lampstand to give the consolation of light to those in the house by declaring through numerous and outstanding miracles that Francis’s life was pleasing to God and that his memory should be venerated by the Church Militant.”26

Here Gregory says that Francis’ miracles revealed that the saint’s life was 1) pleasing to God, and 2) worthy of veneration. In other words, for Gregory the miracles themselves are less

25 Mira Circa Nos 1, 5.

26 Mira Circa Nos 7 (Bullarium Franciscanum, 44; FAED I, 569): sed eam volens super Candelabrum collocari, his, quis sunt in Domo, luminis solatium praebituram, vitam ejus sibi fuisse acceptam, et ipsius memoriam esse a militanti Ecclesia venerandam, multis, et praeclaris miraculis declaravit.

66 important than what they reveal. The second passage referring to miracles in Mira Circa Nos makes a related point:

“Since we have been convinced by reliable witnesses of his many splendid miracles, we are confident that, through the mercy of God, we and the flock committed to us will be helped by his prayers, and that we will have as a patron in heaven him who was our close friend on earth.”27

Here the text again makes clear that the details of the miracles themselves are not the key point.

Instead, Gregory asserts that because the man of Assisi assisted many people while on earth, so too will Francis assist the faithful “as a patron in heaven.” In other words, because Francis performed miracles on earth, the Church can be confident that Francis will assist the faithful as a saint in heaven.

Taking these two passages together, it can be concluded that in the Bull of Canonization, the purpose of miracles is not to present Francis’ extraordinary deeds to impress the audience. If this were the case, Gregory would likely have offered detailed accounts of several miracles. On the contrary, miracles are mentioned as credence and evidence for the larger argument: Francis of Assisi led a saintly life, and Francis will benefit the Church as a saint in heaven. In this way

Mira Circa Nos supports André Vauchez’s thesis that church leaders in the 13th century began emphasizing the faith and virtue of the saints as a counterbalance to the fascination with miracles still held by the laity. As Vauchez concludes: “The fact that the life of a saint, that is, his faith and his works, should be put by the pope on an equal footing with miracles, may seem banal. It

27 Mira Circa Nos 8 (Bullarium Franciscanum, 44; FAED I, 569): plene cognita nobis essent; et de miraculorum coruscatione multiplici per testes idoneos Nobis facta fuerit plena fides; confidentes per Dei misericordiam nos, et Gregem nobis comissum ejus suffragiis adjuvari; et quem familiarum habuimus in Terris.

67 represented, nevertheless, a decisive choice on the part of the Roman Church.”28 Pope Gregory, in his canonization of Francis, was doing just that – bringing onto “equal footing” the virtue of

Francis. Such a move would be repeated by the first biographer to write a full life of Francis, to whom this chapter now turns.

Background on Thomas of Celano’s Vita Prima

In 1228, Thomas of Celano was given the task of writing a full life of Francis of Assisi.

He completed this work in less than one year, and in 1229 his Vita beati Francisci was approved and declared official by Pope Gregory IX. The text, commonly known as the Vita Prima remains a central work in the Franciscan tradition. The editors of Francis of Assisi Early

Documents remark that the Vita Prima “holds a place of honor.”29 Prinzivalli asserts that

“l’importanza della Vita beati Francisci non può in alcun modo essere minimizzata.”30 Alluding to the prowess of Thomas himself, Placid Hermann states that “the work itself shows that the author was both a skilled literary craftsman and a painstaking artist.”31 Dominique Poirel agrees, stating that “Parmi les biographes de François d’Assise, Thomas de Celano occupe une place à part,” and later, “Thomas, on l’a dit, est le premier biographe de saint François. Pour le meilleur ou pour le pire, il a créé une tradition. Désormais, qu’on le cite ou qu’on le contredise, toute vie

28 André Vauchez, Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 36.

29 FAED I, 173.

30 Prinzivalli, 78. Translation: The importance of the Life of Francis cannot in any way be minimized.

31 Placid Hermann, “Introduction to the First and Second Life of St. Francis,” in St. Francis of Assisi: Omnibus of Sources (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1973), 184.

68 nouvelle du saint dépend de ce qu’il a écrit.32 Even if Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior eclipsed the Vita Prima in theological scope, the fact remains that any serious discussion of the life of

Francis must take into account Thomas’ first hagiography.

The content of the Vita Prima is vast, describing Francis’ early life, conversion, the calling of brothers, his ministry, travels, miracles, the stigmata, Francis’ death, and his canonization. In addition to the miracles described in the main sections of the text, Thomas concludes the work with an additional book of miracles, which describes more specific healings.33 The editors of Francis of Assisi Early Documents refer to this wide scope in calling

Thomas’ work a “master’s tapestry interweaving multiple colored threads of hagiography, historical data, invitation toward gospel and ecclesial renewal, and identification of the mission and formation of the brothers of Francis.”34

Virtue in Thomas of Celano’s Vita Prima

As in other hagiographies, the virtues of the saint are a consistent theme in the Vita

Prima.35 In the prologue Thomas clearly states that virtue is part of his project, explaining that

32 Dominique Poirel, “L’écriture de Thomas de Celano: une rhétorique de la rupture,” Franciscan Studies 70 (2012): 73. Among the biographers of Francis of Assisi, Thomas of Celano stands apart… Thomas, it has been said, is the first biographer of St. Francis. For better or for worse, he has created a tradition. Going forward, whether one quotes him or contradicts him, all new lives of St. Francis depend on what he wrote.

33 For a full background on the Vita Prima, as well as information on Thomas himself, see Roberto Paciocco, “Come ho potuto e con parole improprie,” in La leggenda di un santo di nome Francesco: Tommaso da Celano e la Vita beati Francisci, ed. Paciocco and Accrocca (Milano: Biblioteca Francescana, 1999), 15-141.

34 FAED I, 178.

35 Coakley points out that while Thomas’ work stands in the tradition of hagiography, the Vita Prima promotes Francis in a way that goes beyond previous saints: “As is typical of hagiographical texts, the

69 the first book is “devoted principally to the purity of his blessed way of life, to his virtuous conduct and his wholesome teaching.”36 Thomas is true to his word: while the second and third books contain some references to Francis’ virtue, it is in the first book that the virtues are described extensively.

In presenting the virtues of Francis, Thomas employs at least three tactics. 1) He explicitly names the virtue. For example, he calls Francis “the holy lover of profound humility.”37 2) Thomas describes actions and behaviors of Francis that point to a particular virtue. This is the case in the following passage that alludes to Francis’ perseverance:

“Meanwhile, the holy man of God, having changed his habit and rebuilt that church, moved to another place near the city of Assisi, where he began to rebuild a certain church that had fallen into ruin and was almost destroyed. After a good beginning he did not stop until he had brought all to completion.”38

Note that the specific virtue is not named, but the description paints a picture of a man fueled by perseverance. This passage also alludes to virtue in the use of the word habitus, which literally refers to Francis’ garment but in this case also refers to a classical understanding of virtue as a stable disposition that produces right action. 3) Thomas often describes or names several of

Life of Francis displays many similarities with, and borrowings from, the vitae of earlier saints, against the background of which its distinctive characteristics stand out the more clearly.” Coakley, 32.

36 1C Prologue (Fontes, 275; FAED I, 180): Primum itaque opus historiae ordinem servat ac puritati beatae conversationis et vitae suae, sanctisque moribus et salutaribus documentis eius potissimum dedicatur. Thomas of Celano’s biographies of Francis are generally abbreviated as 1C for the first life (The Life of Saint Francis); 2C for the second life (The Rememberance of the Desire of a Soul); and 3C for The Treatise on the Miracles. Latin taken from Fontes Franciscani, ed. Menestò, Enrico and Stefano Brufani (Assisi: Porziuncola, 1995). English from Francis of Assisi Early Documents.

37 1C 17 (Fontes, 290; FAED I, 195): vero totius humilitatis sanctus amator.

38 1C 21 (Fontes, 295; FAED I, 201): Interea sanctus Dei, mutato habitu et praedicta ecclesia reparata, migravit ad locum alium iuxta civitatem Assisii, in quo ecclesiam quamdam dirutam et propemodum eversam reaedificare incipiens, a bono principio non destitit quousque ad perfectum adduceret universa.

70 Francis’ virtues in the same passage. An example of this is found in the description of Francis receiving several new brothers:

“Shortly afterwards when Francis returned to the Church of Saint Mary of the Portiuncula, some literate men and nobles gladly joined him. He received such men with honor and dignity, since he himself was very noble and distinguished in spirit, and respectfully gave to each his due. In fact, since he was endowed with outstanding discernment, he wisely considered in all matters the dignity of rank of each one.”39

Here Francis is presented as practicing at least two virtues: prudence (considerabat prudenter) in his ability to discern how to act in the situation; and piety in giving “to each his due” (unicuique piissime impendebat).

A key theme in the Vita Prima is how virtue becomes an all-encompassing way of being for Francis of Assisi. Thomas of Celano understood that virtues are not merely good qualities or character traits. Rather, as a habit (habitus), virtue involves a consistent way of acting.40

Thomas presents Francis’ virtue in such a way that it seems to overcome him: body, mind, and spirit. The following passage sums up this point well:

“There was in him such harmony of flesh and spirit and such obedience that, as the spirit strove to reach all holiness, the flesh did not resist but even tried to run on ahead,

39 1C 57 (Fontes, 331; FAED I, 231): Revertente quoque ipso ad ecclesiam Sanctae Mariae de Portiuncula, tempore non multo post, quidam litterati viri et quidara nobiles ei gratissime adhaeserunt. Quos ipse, ut erat animo nobilissimus et discretus, honorifice atque digne pertractans, quod suum erat unicuique piissime impendebat. Revera discretione praecipua praeditus, considerabat prudenter in omnibus cunctorum graduum dignitatem.

40 Stanley Hauerwas makes this point as he speaks of the virtues as being akin to skills: “Like any skills, the virtues must be learned and coordinated in an individual's life, as a master craftsman has learned to blend the many skills necessary for the exercise of any complex craft. Moreover, such skills require constant practice as they are never simply a matter of routine or technique. For skills, unlike technique, give the craftsman the ability to respond creatively to the always unanticipated difficulties involved in any craft in a manner that technique can never provide. That is why the person of virtue is also often thought of as a person of power, in that their moral skills provide them with resources to do easily what some who are less virtuous would find difficult.” Stanley Hauerwas, A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981), 115.

71 according to the saying: For you my soul has thirsted; and my flesh in so many ways! Repeated submissions became spontaneous, as the flesh, yielding each day, reached a place of great virtue, for habit often becomes nature.”41

This passage is fruitful for explicating Thomas’ overall theory of virtue. Thomas (quoting

Cicero’s De Finibus bonorum) explains that “habit becomes nature.” This is consistent with both an Aristotelian understanding of virtue, and that of medieval scholasticism – again, virtue as a habitus is a consistent way of acting and being.42

While Thomas does not use the word grace in the passage above, he clearly has grace in mind. Thomas understands that grace moves the spirit to pursue holiness, such that the flesh will follow. As it relates to virtue, Thomas would agree with Bonaventure that virtue has its source in grace. Chapter three of this dissertation will discuss grace as a central theme in Bonaventure’s

Legenda Maior, but it is important to point out here that grace is also seen in the Vita Prima.

What both Bonaventure and Thomas both affirm is that Francis was not simply a good person – rather he was one conformed to Christ through grace. Dominique Poirel makes this point in the following:

“Autrement dit, si Thomas de Celano tient François d’Assise pour un saint différent des autres, c’est à cause de ce qui est raconté dans la deuxième partie: sa conformation au Christ. La deuxième partie est donc l’histoire d’une rencontre entre François et le Christ, rencontre qui transforme la vie de François et la fait basculer d’une sainteté remarquable mais traditionnelle vers une sainteté nouvelle, inouïe, qui n’est plus seulement imitation du Christ, mais configuration totale, absolue, en corps comme en esprit. Les stigmates de

41 1C 97 (Fontes, 374; FAED I, 266): Tanta enim in eo carnis ad spiritum erat concordia, tanta obedientia, quod cum ille omnem niteretur apprehendere sanctitatem, ipsa nihilominus non solum non repugnabat, sed et praecurrere satagebat, iuxta quod scriptum est: Sitivit in te anima mea, quam multipliciter tibi caro mea. Assiduitas vero subiectionis fecerat eam voluntariam, et ex quotidiana inclinatione sui, situm apprehenderat tantae virtutis, quoniam consuetudo saepe vertitur in naturam.

42 Aristotle’s definition of virtue is found in Nicomachean Ethics II.6: “virtue in a man will be the disposition (habitus) which renders him a good man and also which will cause him to perform his function well.” Translation by H. Rackham. Stanley Hauerwas sums up this sentiment in stating that “an ethic of virtue centers on the claim that an agent's being is prior to doing.” Hauerwas, 113.

72 la Passion, que François reçoit au début de la seconde partie, alors qu’il cherchait ce qu’il pourrait bien faire pour ressembler davantage au Christ, sont le sceau que Dieu imprime dans le corps de François afin de témoigner qu’il a obtenu ce qu’il désirait, qu’il a été configuré au Christ.”43

Poirel states that Thomas’ Francis is unlike any saint because he is closer to Christ than any saint. Indeed, as Thomas himself states: “his glorious life reveals in even brighter light the perfection of earlier saints”44 So it is that Francis’ virtue in the Vita Prima cannot be considered in a vacuum. Thomas asserts that Francis’ virtue is part of his grace-filled journey to perfect union with Christ. Bonaventure would take up this vision and amplify it – proposing Francis as the perfect image of Christ, the hierarchic man, perfectly united to Christ, and the man of perfect virtue. Thomas’ Francis in the Vita Prima anticipates this vision.

Virtue at the Crèche in Greccio

Thomas of Celano concludes the first book of the Vita Prima with a rich description of

Francis’ Christmas celebration at Greccio. It seems that Thomas was so taken by this episode that he reserved for it a place of honor in his text. Wayne Hellmann argues that the Greccio

43 Poirel, 98. Translation: In other words, if Thomas of Celano considers Francis of Assisi as different sort of saint, it is because of what he tells the reader in the second part: his conformation to Christ. The second part is the story of a meeting between Francis and Christ, an encounter that transforms Francis' life and makes it change from a remarkable but traditional holiness to a new, unheard of holiness that is no longer just an imitation of Christ, but total, absolute configuration, in body and in spirit. The stigmata of the Passion, which Francis receives at the beginning of the second part, as he sought to be more like Christ, is the seal that God prints on Francis’ body to testify that he received what he desired, to be configured to Christ.

44 1C 90 (Fontes, 366; FAED I, 206): Et quidem gloriosa vita ipsius priorum sanctorum perfectionem illustrat lumine clariore.

73 celebration is the second of four great “gospel events” in the Vita Prima.45 Thomas explains that the creche event took place at the country estate of a man whom Francis knew – the text simply names him as John (Ioannes). Francis had called this man to himself several days before the feast of the Nativity and instructed him to prepare a manger and animals in order that they might enact the birth of Christ. Ioannes agreed, and on Christmas Eve Francis stood before the manger, surrounded by brothers and townspeople holding candles and torches. Francis sang the gospel and preached with love and tenderness about the babe of Bethlehem.

The story of the crèche at Greccio provides a powerful ‘case study’ for the way Thomas presents Francis’ virtue. The emphasis on virtue is seen in the opening lines:

“His highest aim, foremost desire, and greatest intention was to pay heed to the holy gospel in all things and through all things, to follow the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ and to retrace His footsteps completely with all vigilance and all zeal, all the desire of his soul and all the fervor of his heart.”46

Here Thomas points to Francis’ virtue of zeal as the driving energy behind the Christmas celebration. The first line of the passage also alludes to Francis’ piety and faith in Christ.

Thomas’ emphasis on virtue encourages readers to understand the Greccio episode as more than a sentimental story, or a nod to Francis’ flair for the dramatic. On the contrary, Thomas is

45 Wayne Hellmann, “A Theology of Preaching – A Theology of Transformation: The Life of St. Francis by Thomas of Celano,” in Franciscans and Preaching: “Every Miracle from the Beginning of the World Came about through Words,” ed. Timothy J. Johnson (Leiden: Brill 2012), 59–69. The four “Gospel events” are 1) Francis’ hearing the priest read from the Gospel of Matthew at the Portiuncula; 2) The reenactment of Christ’s birth at Greccio; 3) Francis’ opening of the scriptures three times on the altar at the hermitage; and 4) Francis asking to hear the Gospel of John before his death.

46 1C 84 (Fontes, 360; FAED I, 254): Summa eius intentio, praecipuum desiderium, supremumque propositum. eius erat sanctum Evangelium in omnibus et per omnia observare ac perfecte omni vigilantia, omni studio, toto desiderio mentis, toto cordis fervore, Domini nostri Iesu Christi doctrinam sequi et vestigia imitari.

74 emphatic that Francis’ main motivation flows out of his virtuous love of Christ the Son, and his reverence for the Incarnation itself. Joshua Benson asserts this point in the following:

“Francis lives in a world of signs and he is about to create, from his love of creation and the Word of God, a new sign of the Incarnation. This new sign is simply an ad litteram representation meant to lift its viewers from sign to reality, from the scene of Bethlehem to the understanding of God’s majesty revealed in humility.”47

In other words, Francis desires to create a physical representation of – and perhaps even a mystical connection with – the grandeur of the Incarnation. This is why he desires to “enact the memory of that babe who was born in Bethlehem: to see as much as is possible with my own bodily eyes the discomfort of his infant needs.”48

Thomas uses more virtue language throughout the narrative in at least five direct references. 1) He states that Francis meditated on the “humility of the Incarnation and the charity of the Passion” (incarnationis humilitas et charitas passionis). 2) He describes the manger scene as a place where “simplicity is given a place of honor, poverty is exalted, humility is commended, and out of Greccio is made a new Bethlehem.”49 3) Thomas says that while

Francis preached about the babe of Bethlehem he seemed to “burn with excessive love” (amore flagrans nimio). 4) The onlookers are described as being filled with joy (gaudia), just as Francis himself was “overcome with wondrous joy” (mirabili gaudio superfusus). 5) Thomas states that

47 Joshua Benson, “Reflections on Memory in Thomas of Celano's Vita Prima” in Ordo Et Sanctitas: The Franciscan Spiritual Journey in Theology and Hagiography: a Festschrift in Honor of J.A. Wayne Hellmann, O.F.M. Conv., ed. Michael F. Cusato, Timothy J. Johnson, and Steven J. McMichael (Leiden: Brill, 2017), 18.

48 1C 84 (Fontes 360; FAED I, 255): Volo enim illius pueri memoriam agere, qui in Bethlehem natus est, et infantilium necessitatum eius incommoda, quomodo in praesaepio reclinatus e et quomodo, adstante bove atque asino, supra foenum positus exstitit, utcumque corporeis oculis pervidere.

49 1C 85 (Fontes, 361; FAED I, 255): Honoratur ibi simplicitas, exaltatur paupertas, humilitas commendatur et quasi nova Bethlehem de Graecio facta est.

75 Ioannes too was moved to virtue by the God’s grace: “The gifts of the Almighty are multiplied there and a virtuous man sees a wondrous vision.” 50 This last line holds particular meaning, for

Thomas is clearly referring to the virtues when he writes of the “gifts of the Almighty.” Thus what Thomas asserts at the end of the Greccio story is that God worked through Francis to touch the hearts of those who joined the celebration. Indeed, the Grace of God and the virtue of

Francis spread like torchlight to the gathered faithful. In Thomas’ words, Christ himself was

“awakened and impressed on their loving memory by His own grace through His holy servant

Francis.”51

Key Virtues in the Vita Prima: Love and Joy

The two virtues that come through most clearly in the crèche story are love and joy.

These two virtues are also the most consistently described virtues in the entire text of the Vita

Prima. Thomas uses two words for love, with amor having 29 mentions and caritas 21. This is substantially more mentions than pietas, humilitas, or paupertas. The virtue of joy has even more mentions. Thomas uses the Latin words iucunditate, gaudium, and laetitia. Of these, gaudium is the most common, which alone is used 35 times. Thomas does not ignore the other virtues; indeed Francis in the Vita Prima is presented as a man filled with piety, humility,

50 1C 86 (Fontes, 362; FAED I, 256): Multiplicantur ibi dona Omnipotentis et a quodam viro virtutis mirabilis visio cernitur.

51 1C 86 (Fontes, 362; FAED I, 256): ipsius gratia faciente, per servum suum sanctum Franciscum resuscitatus est et impressus memoriae diligenti.

76 poverty, and other virtues. Nevertheless it is striking how love and joy come to the fore.52

While one could list dozens of examples in which Francis embodies love and joy in the

Vita Prima, it will perhaps suffice to offer one poignant example of each. Beginning with love, the following passage presents Francis as one filled with the virtue of love (amor), flowing out of his passionate devotion to Christ:

The brothers who lived with him know that daily, constantly, talk of Jesus was always on his lips, sweet and pleasant conversations about Him, kind words full of love. Out of the fullness of the heart his mouth spoke. So the spring of radiant love that filled his heart within gushed forth. He was always with Jesus: Jesus in his heart, Jesus in his mouth, Jesus in his ears, Jesus in his eyes, Jesus in his hands, he bore Jesus always in his whole body. Often he sat down to dinner but on hearing or saying or even thinking “Jesus” he forgot bodily food, as we read about another saint: “Seeing, he did not see; hearing, he did not hear.” Often as he walked along a road, thinking and singing of Jesus, he would forget his destination and start inviting all the elements to praise Jesus. With amazing love he bore in his heart and always held onto Christ Jesus and Him crucified. For this reason, he, above others, was stamped with Christ’s brilliant seal.53

52 The emphasis on love and joy in Francis’ life have led many to sentimentalize the saint. This is a mistake. Francis’ love and joy are firmly grounded in orthodox Christian belief. As Freidrich Heiler argues, admirers of Francis must remember that “the loving and joyful piety of our saint rests on a dogmatic belief in the mysteries of the Incarnation and atonement.” Friedrich Heiler, “Saint Francis of Assisi and the Catholic Church,” in Review of the Churches 4 (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1927); reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, ed. Maurice Sheehan (St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982), 116.

53 1C 115 (Fontes 394; FAED I, 283-284): Norunt praeterea qui cum illo conversati sunt fratres, quam quotidiana et continua collatio de Iesu fuerit in ore ipsius, quam dulcis et suavis confabulatio, quam benigna et amore plena collocutio. Ex abundantia cordis os loquebatur, et fons illuminati amoris replens omnia viscera eius ebulliebat foras. Multa illi utique cum Iesu, Iesum in corde, Iesum in ore, Iesum in auribus, Iesum in oculis, Iesum in manibus, Iesum in reliquis membris semper portabat. O quoties cum sederet ad prandium audiens, vel nominans, vel cogitans Iesum, corporalis escae oblitus est, et ut de sancto legitur: Videns non videbat, audiens non audiebat. Immo et multoties cum per viam iret, meditans et cantans Iesum, obliviscebatur itineris et omnia elementa invitabat ad laudem Iesu. Et quia miro amore semper in corde suo gerebat et conservabat, Christum Iesum et hunc crucifixum, propterea signaculo suo gloriosissime supra caeteros est signatus.

77 What is striking about this passage is Thomas’ description of Francis practicing love as a daily habit. In other words, love for Francis is far more than a feeling or sentiment. Furthermore,

Thomas’ description portrays Francis as one who fully embodies love through his devotion and imitation of Christ.54 For these reasons this passage is perhaps the best example of amor as a virtue in the Vita Prima.

The other key virtue in the Vita Prima is joy (gaudium). The following passage best exemplifies Thomas’ description of Francis’ joy. Francis has just read from the Gospels, and he is overcome with a desire to follow Christ.

“He said, ‘this is what I seek, this is what I desire with all my heart.’ The holy father, overflowing with joy, hastened to implement the words of salvation, and did not delay before he devoutly began to put into effect what he heard. Immediately, he took off the shoes from his feet, put down the staff from his hands, and, satisfied with one tunic, exchanged his leather belt for a cord. After this, he made for himself a tunic showing the image of the cross.”55

The importance of this passage is highlighted by the term superabundans gaudio (highest joy).

What Thomas states is that Francis’ highest joy is manifested in the practical and literal actions of following Christ (removing his shoes, using one tunic, etc.) This passage therefore makes

54 As Pope Pius XI wrote in his 1926 encyclical on the 700th anniversary of Francis’ death: “Is there any one who cannot see that all these virtues proceeded from the one and same fountain of divine love? This love of God he poured out in love for his neighbor and conquering himself loved with a special tenderness the poor and, amongst the poor, the most miserable of all, the lepers.” Reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, ed. Maurice Sheehan (St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982), 177.

55 1C 22 (Fontes, 297; FAED 202): Hoc est, inquit, quod volo, hoc est quod quaero, hoc totis medullis cordis facere concupisco. Festinat proinde pater sanctus, superabundans gaudio, ad impletionem salutaris auditus, nec moram patitur aliquam praeterire qui operari devotus incipiat quod audivit. Solvit protinus calceamenta de pedibus, baculum deponit e manibus et, tunica una contentus, pro corrigia funiculum immutavit. Parat sibi ex tunc tunicam crucis imaginem praeferentem.

78 clear that joy in the Prima Vita is not an emotion, but a virtue – a virtue that Francis lives out in his daily practices that unite him to Christ.56

The Role of Miracles in the Vita Prima

Thomas of Celano recounts numerous miracles, performed by Francis both during his life and after his death. The third book of the Vita Prima contains a section on posthumous miracles.

Like hagiographers before him Thomas describes miracles as evidence of Francis’ holiness.

That being said, his rich descriptions of miracles showcase more than supernatural occurrences or healings. As Dominique Poirel poetically observes: “Le récit de miracle selon Thomas de

Celano n’est donc pas seulement l’histoire d’une guérison, il suggère aussi l’idée qu’avec

François il se produit quelque chose de neuf.”57 Thomas himself alludes to the deeper importance of Francis’ miracles as he writes:

“This holy servant of Christ, like one of the lights of heaven, shone from above with a new rite and new signs. The ancient miracles have been renewed through him. In the desert of this world a fruitful vine has been planted in a new Order but in an ancient way, bearing flowers, sweet with the fragrance of holy virtues and stretching out everywhere branches of holy religion.”58

56 This theme of superabundant joy is echoed in the opening lines of the 2013 apostolic exhortation by Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium: “The joy of the gospel fills the hearts and lives of all who encounter Jesus. Those who accept his offer of salvation are set free from sin, sorrow, inner emptiness and loneliness. With Christ joy is constantly born anew. In this Exhortation I wish to encourage the Christian faithful to embark upon a new chapter of evangelization marked by this joy, while pointing out new paths for the Church’s journey in years to come.” Accessed online via www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations.index.html#apost_exhortations.

57 Poirel, 87: The recounting of a miracle in the work of Thomas de Celano is not only the story of a cure, it also suggests that with Francis something new is produced.” (emphasis added)

58 1C 89 (Fontes, 365; FAED I, 260): Christi servus et sanctus novo ritu, novisque signis desuper radiavit. Renovata sunt per eum antiqua miracula, dum in deserto mundi huius, ordine novo sed antiquo more, plantata est vitis fructifera, proferens fiores suavitatis in odorem virtutum sanctarum, ubique sacrae religionis palmites extendendo.

79 Here Thomas asserts that Francis’ “signs” include both “ancient miracles” and “holy virtues.” In the Vita Prima, therefore, miracles and virtues are not incompatible. Thomas states that both point toward Francis’ special status as a light from heaven.

The link between miracle and virtue is seen, for example, in a short passage in which

Thomas recounts how “water was changed into wine for him once at the hermitage of

Sant’Urbano when he was suffering from a severe illness.”59 While ‘water to wine’ is a common typology to Christ, Thomas’ interpretation of the miracle has a deeper focus. A close reading of this episode reveals that the narrative is grounded in the virtue of obedience. In stating that the water changed “for him,” the text asserts that the water bends toward Francis’ needs. Thomas sets the stage for this interpretation in the preceding passages, which all show various animals

(birds, rabbit, fish) obeying Francis’ words. In the same way, the water – also an element of creation – obeys Francis by changing into wine. What Thomas makes clear, however, is that the obedience of nature to Francis is only made possible by the obedience of Francis to God. This point is made in the following: “Thus the glorious father Francis, walking in the way of obedience, and embracing the yoke of complete submission to God, was worthy of the great honor before God of having the obedience of creatures.”60 In other words, obedience reflects obedience. In this way, Thomas frames this simple episode of water into wine in order to showcase the virtue of his subject.

59 1C 61 (Fontes, 336; FAED I, 236): Nam et aqua in vinum ei conversa est, cum tempore quodam apud eremum. Sancti Urbani aegritudine gravissima laboraret.

60 1C 61 (Fontes, 336; FAED I, 236): Sic enim gloriosus pater Franciscus in via obedientiae ambulans et divinae subiectionis perfecte iugum amplectens, in creaturarum. obedientia magnam coram. Deo adeptus est dignitatem.

80 Thomas is clear that his main purpose in describing miracles in the Vita Prima is not to impress the reader, but to point to the holiness of Francis’ life. He writes, “We have not chosen to describe miracles – they do not make holiness but show it – but rather to describe the excellence of his life and the honest form of his manner of living.”61 In this line Thomas also asserts that Francis’ virtue is on equal footing with his miracles. Indeed, behind almost every miracle in the Vita Prima is a virtue. For example, Thomas describes the healing of a young boy in Toscanella. The boy’s father “humbly fell down” before Francis (proiecit se ad pedes eius humiliter) and begged him to heal the boy. Francis responds with his own display of humility:

“For a long time the holy man Francis refused to comply, considering himself useless and unworthy of such power and grace.”62 The story ends with Francis healing the boy, to the joy of the onlookers; but Thomas uses the story to emphasize Francis virtue of humility.63 This tactic is likewise seen in the story of Francis exorcising a demon from a woman. After praying, Francis called the woman to himself, then spoke directly to the demon: “In the virtue of obedience, I command you, evil spirit: come out of her.”64 Here Francis is likened to Christ, as the passage essentially quotes Mark 5:8, but Thomas adds the phrase “virtue of obedience” (virtute obedientiae). Just as animals and water obey Francis (see above), a demon will obey Francis

61 1C 70 (Fontes, 346; FAED I, 243): Gratias omnipotenti Deo, qui omnia in omnibus operatur. Verum, quia non miracula, quae sanctitatem non faciunt sed ostendunt, sed potius excellentiam vitae ac sincerissimam conversationis ipsius formam decrevimus explanare.

62 1C 66 (Fontes, 341; FAED I, 240): Qui cum tantae virtutis et gratiae se indignum et inutilem reputaret, diu hoc facere recusavit.

63 Francis’ initial reluctance to heal is similar to a scene from the life of St. Anthony, ch. 58. See chapter 1 of this dissertation.

64 1C 70 (Fontes, 346; FAED I, 243): In virtute obedientiae praecipio tibi, immunde spiritus, exi ab ea.

81 because the man of God was so obedient himself. From these and other examples, it is clear the

Thomas desires to highlight the virtues of Francis even when describing miracles. Such an emphasis on virtue is also seen in a hagiographical text by three Franciscan brothers, to which this chapter now turns.

Legenda trium Sociorum – The Legend of the Three Companions

The Legenda trium Sociorum is another early vita of Francis of Assisi, written around

1246, about 17 years after the Vita Prima by Thomas of Celano. The genesis of this text is described in Arnald of Sarrant’s The Chronicle of the Twenty Four Generals, which states that in

1244 Crescentius of Iesi, the new Minister General of the Franciscan Order, asked for additional details and accounts about Francis.65 Three brothers – specified as Leo, Angelus, and Ruffinus, who had been companions of Francis during his life – responded to the request. They proceeded to write a new account of the life of the founder, a text which came to be known as the Legenda trium Sociorum (the Legend of the Three Companions). What was the reason for Crescentius’ request for this additional account of Francis’ life? Possibly he felt that there were details and stories from Francis’ life that had not been included in the previous lives by Thomas of Celano and Julian of Speyer. More likely, however, he sought a rekindling of Francis memory among the brotherhood. The editors of Francis of Assisi Early Documents suggest this possibility:

“Crescentius may simply have recognized the fact that Francis's followers were dying at the same time that the Order was growing dramatically… [and] that a return to the initial ideals of the primitive fraternity could only be achieved by a re-acquaintance with the memory of the Founder's life and holiness.”66

65 Chronicle of the Twenty Four Generals, in Annalecta Franciscana III (Quaracchi, 1885), 262.

66 FAED II, 62.

82

In other words, there was a desire on the part of the Franciscan leadership to offer another description of the life of Francis, not written by an official biographer, but rather composed by those who had lived and worked with him during the very years that the movement had taken shape. That being said, the authors of the Legenda trium Sociorum were clearly aware of the

Vita Prima by Thomas of Celano, as they often lift passages directly or “shorten, refine, or clarify” details from the previous biography.67 The text also offers material that is unique, and not found anywhere in previous lives of Francis. Overall, the Legend of the Three Companions became a highly respected work and a critical part of the collection of sources on the life of

Francis. Emanuela Prinzivalli asserts that the uniqueness of the text is twofold: 1) It focuses mostly on events in Assisi, rather than other parts of Italy or foreign lands, and 2) It penetrates into the psychological dimension of Francis, offering a well-rounded picture of the man’s qualities and his human motivations.68 The last word may appropriately be given to Theophile

Desbonnets who assures readers that “the portrait of St. Francis in the Legend of the Three

Companions is just as true as that drawn by Celano or St. Bonaventure… To know Francis well, we must not neglect any testimony worthy of credence; the Legend of the Three Companions is one of them; it should therefore be read.”69

67 FAED II, 64.

68 Prinzivalli, 96. “La personalità del giovane Francesco risalta a tutto tondo: estroverso, amante dell’orinalità, pieno di slanci e di immediatezza, generoso et ottimista…” Translation: the resulting personality of the young Francis is well-rounded: extroverted, loving originality, impulsive, generous, and optimistic.

69 Theophile Desbonnets, “Introduction to The Legend of the Three Companions,” trans. Paul Oligny, in St. Francis of Assisi, Writings and Early Biographies: Omnibus of the Sources for the Life of St. Francis, third edition, ed. Marion A. Habig (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1973), 880.

83

Virtue in the Legenda trium Sociorum

That the Legenda trium Sociorum is concerned with virtue is first emphasized in the introductory letter. The authors state that their “intention is to point out some striking aspects of his [Francis’] holy manner of life and the intention of his pious desires, for the praise of almighty

God and of the holy father Francis, and for the edification of those who desire to follow in his footsteps.”70 Here the authors allude broadly to the virtue of Francis by speaking of his holy manner of life” (sanctae conversationis), while also pointing to the particular virtue of piety (pii beneplaciti voluntatem). Moreover, the authors align their work with a main purpose of hagiography, the increase in virtue in those who read or hear the text through “edification”

(aedificationem).

The authors of the Legenda trium Sociorum clearly have a theory of virtue that includes the potential for growth and development. In chapter 1 Francis is said to be “generous” (largus), but also “a flamboyant squanderer of wealth” (dispensator erat vanissimus opulentiae saecularis).71 In this way, the authors assert that Francis was not perfect from birth but that he exhibited various vices and shortcomings.72 In admitting his vices, the authors plan to emphasize

70 L3C 1 (Fontes, 1374; FAED II, 67): sed etiam sanctae conversationis eius insignia et pii beneplaciti voluntatem ostendere cupientes, ad laudem et gloriam Summi Dei et dicti patris sanctissimi, atque aedificationem volentium eius vestigia imitari. Legend of the Three Companions (abbreviated as L3C). Latin text from Fontes Franciscani, ed. Menestò, Enrico and Stefano Brufani (Assisi: Porziuncola, 1995). English from Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume II: The Founder.

71 L3C 1.

72 Thomas of Celano similarly describes the vices of the young Francis. Bonaventure, on the other hand, downplays Francis’ youthful shortcomings, describing him in more glowing terms from the beginning. See chapter 4 of this dissertation.

84 that Francis transformed through his conversion and grew in virtue.73 Taking the virtue of generosity for example, the authors begin by describing Francis’ existing virtue, while also showing how he struggled with giving.

“From these stepping stones of natural strengths, he was brought to that grace that prompted him to look within himself: ‘You are generous and courteous to those from whom you receive nothing except passing and worthless approval. Is it not right that, on account of God who repays most generously, you should be courteous and generous to the poor?’”74

Clearly Francis has some natural advantages: he gives generously to certain people (albeit to members of his class); and he also has the capacity to be introspective. That said, God’s grace leads Francis to reconsider to whom he should give, in light of how generous God has been to him. The text goes on to describe a change in his behavior: “From that day he looked on poor people generously and provided them affluently with alms.”75 The wonderful irony of this line is that Francis’ very vice of lavish spending ends up being re-ordered and converted into the virtue of extravagant almsgiving. In other words, the text asserts that what was bad for Francis as a son and a merchant becomes good for him as a lover of mercy. Again, the authors are showing a

73 As Yves Congar remarked: “His deliverance from all social bondage and from everything the world accepted took place in successive stages, each of which meant for Francis a call to which he responded, an opportunity for spiritual discovery, a preparation for a further call and for a more radical self-giving.” Yves Congar, “St. Francis of Assisi: or the Gospel as an Absolute in Christendom,” in Faith and Spiritual Life (New York: Herder & Herder, 1968); reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, ed. Maurice Sheehan (St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982), 63.

74 L3C 1 (Fontes, 1376; FAED II, 69): A quibus virtutum naturalium gradibus ad hanc provectus est gratiam ut diceret ad seipsum conversus: ‘Ex quo largus et curialis es apud homines a quibus nihil recipis nisi favorem transitorium et inanem, iustum est ut, propter Deum qui largissimus est in retribuendo, pauperibus sis curialis et largus.’

75 L3C 1 (Fontes, 1376; FAED II, 69): Libenter igitur ex tunc videbat pauperes tribuens eis eleemosynas affluenter.

85 growth and development in the young Francis through his virtues of generosity and charity.76

Francis’ transformation in the virtue of generosity can be better seen in the following two passages, which offer practical examples. In the first passage, he is touched by divine grace to rethink his outlook on almsgiving. In the second passage he lives into his newfound generosity through the giving of his personal items.

“One day when he was in the shop where he was selling cloth, totally absorbed in business of this sort, a poor man came in, begging alms for the love of God. Preoccupied with thoughts of wealth and the care of business, he did not give him alms. Touched by divine grace, he accused himself of great rudeness, saying: ‘If that poor man had asked something from you for a great count or baron, you would certainly have granted him his request. How much more should you have done this for the King of kings and the Lord of all!’77

“He proposed in his heart, from then on, never to deny alms to any poor person begging from him for God's sake, but rather to give more willingly and abundantly than usual. When away from home, if he could, he always gave money to any poor person requesting alms. If he had no money, he gave him his hat or belt, making sure never to send him away empty-handed.”78

76 This is akin to the understanding of virtue in antiquity. For a discussion of the acquisition of virtue and the development of the virtuous person in classical thought, see M.F. Burnyeat, “Aristotle on Learning to be Good” in Essays on Aristotle's Ethics, ed. Amélie Rorty (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980). Burnyeat writes that “to be virtuous [is] to understand better what he should do and why. Such an understanding, as Aristotle conceives it, is more than merely cognitive. Since it is the articulation of a mature scheme of values under the heading of the good, it will itself provide a new and more reflective motivation for virtuous conduct. That is why Aristotle can claim that the goal of the study of ethics is action, not merely knowledge.” Burnyeat, 81.

77 L3C 1 (Fontes, 1376; FAED II, 69): Cum autem quadam die in apotheca ubi pannos vendebat circa huiusmodi staret sollicitus, venit quidam pauper ad eum petens eleemosynam amore Dei. Cumque cupiditate divitiarum et mercationis cura detentus illi eleemosynam denegasset, divina prospectus gratia seipsum arguit magnae rusticitatis, dicens: ‘Si pro magno comite vel barone pauper ille a te aliquid postulasset, certe postulatum sibi dedisses. Quanto ergo magis pro Rege regum et omnium Domino id facere debuisti!’

78 L3C 3 (Fontes, 1381; FAED II, 72): Firmius in corde suo d proposuit nulli pauperi eleemosynam pro Deo petenti se ulterius denegare, sed liberius et affluentius solito eleemosynas facere. Semper igitur quicumque pauper ab ipso extra domum eleemosynam postulabat, de denariis providebat illi si poterat. Carens vero denariis, infulam vel corrigiam dabat ei, ne pauperem dimitteret vacuum.

86 What the authors highlight in these two passages is that Francis convicts himself of being a hypocrite, then re-orders his intentions and behaviors. In the first passage, not even the request for alms “for the love of God” (amore Dei) is enough to arouse him. This shocks Francis.

Moreover, Francis has the potential to be generous, but when the situation presents itself, his motivations are dis-ordered. In the second passage Francis’ heart has clearly been re-ordered.

His intentions and his actions are matched, and as the text asserts, he will give a hat or belt if he has no money. In other words, generosity has become for Francis a consistent habit regardless of the situation.

Overall, the text of the Legenda Trium Sociorum describes Francis’ virtues through concrete examples like the one above. Three points can be made briefly with regard to this presentation of virtue. 1) The authors often detail the inner thought process that Francis goes through in his practice of virtue. 2) Francis possesses natural abilities and propensity toward virtue, which he fully develops over the course of the narrative. 3) God’s grace is present and active in Francis’ development of virtue. As in the above example it is divina gratia that spurs

Francis to re-order his motivations and actions.

Key Virtues in Legenda Trium Sociorum: Joy and Zeal

In the above example, generosity is the key virtue at work. That said, when one counts the mentions of virtues in the Legenda Trium Sociorum, one finds that joy and zeal are the most commonly referenced virtues in the text. Joy is consistently and prominently described, with the word gaudio being used 16 times, gaudens/gavisus adding 13 more occurrences, and laetitia/laetus adding 11 more usages. This makes joy more mentioned than any other virtue in

87 the text. Francis is described as having joy or being overjoyed in a variety of situations. For example, an early passage describes Francis’ joy in restoring the church of San Damiano: “While laboring with others in that work, he used to cry to passers-by in a loud voice, filled with joy, saying in French: ‘Come and help me in the work of the church of San Damiano.’”79 Upon opening the Gospels at random and finding the injunction to sell everything and give to the poor, the young man of Assis is filled with joy: “Blessed Francis was overjoyed when he read this passage and thanked God.”80 When Francis preaches to the Pope and cardinals, he presents himself “with boundless joy” (cum ingenti gaudio).81 Joy is so palpable in the Legenda Trium

Sociorum, that it even extends to others, such as the bishop of Assisi:

“When they arrived in Rome and found the bishop of the city of Assisi there, they were received with immense joy, for he honored blessed Francis and all the brothers with special affection. Not knowing the reason for their arrival, he began to be apprehensive, fearing that they might want to leave their native land, where the Lord had begun to do marvelous things through them. For he rejoiced to have in his diocese such men whose life and conduct he greatly appreciated. After he learned their purpose and understood their plan, however, he was overjoyed and promised them his counsel and help.”82

79 L3C 24 (Fontes, 1396; FAED II, 83): Cum aliis autem laborantibus in opere praefato persistens, clamabat alta voce in gaudio spiritus ad habitantes et transeuntes iuxta ecclesiam, dicens eis gallice: Venite et adiuvate me in opere ecclesiae Sancti Damiani.

80 L3C 29 (Fontes, 1401; FAED II, 86): Quo comperto, beatus Franciscus gavisus est valde et gratias, egit Deo. As noted earlier in this chapter, this episode was first described by Thomas of Celano (1C 22).

81 L3C 64. The Latin ingens refers to something that goes beyond its natural state, exceeding that which is normal for its species or genus. Thus Francis’ joy is so great as to be almost unnatural.

82 L3C 47 (Fontes, 1420; FAED II, 95): Cum autem venissent Romam et invenissent ibi episcopum civitatis Assisii, ab ipso cum ingenti gaudio sunt suscepti, nam Beatum Franciscum et omnes fratres speciali venerabatur affectu. Nesciens tamen causam adventus eorum, coepit turbari, timens ne patriam propriam vellent deserere, in qua Dominus per eos coeperat mirabilia operari. Gaudebat enim vehementer tantos viros in suo episcopatu habere, de quorum vita et moribus maxime praesumebat. Sed audita causa eorumque intellecto proposito gavisus est valde, spondens eis ad hoc consilium et iuvamen.

88 As in this passage, the text often states that those who received Francis and his brothers did so with joy (cum gaudio). Overall, the repeated use of gaudium creates an ebullient tone to the narrative. That being said, joy in the Legenda Trium Sociorum is more than a feeling. Rather, as a virtue, joy is a state of being. Francis lives out joy consistently, in all circumstances, and his joy radiates to others precisely because he embodies it so well himself. Francis is truly a man living into the habitus of joy in the Legenda Trium Sociorum.

The other virtue that comes to the fore in Legenda Trium Sociorum is zeal (fervore). The word fervore (and its associated adverbs such as ferventius) is used a total of 25 times in the text.

Succensus adds 3 more usages. Overall, zeal/fervor is one of the most mentioned virtues in the text, and Francis is shown to have this virtue throughout his life. As he began to repair the church of San Damiano Francis is said to be filled with fervore spiritus, thanking God with spiritus fervor, and working ferventer.83 In Francis’ meeting with the Pope in Rome, the pontiff sensed the young man’s zealous way of being, asserting “there can be no question about your living it because of your great zeal. … The Pope saw that their constancy of faith and the anchor of their hope were so firmly grounded in Christ, that they did not want to be shaken from their enthusiasm.”84 The definitive statement on Francis’ zeal comes toward the end of the work in chapter 27. Here the virtue of zeal is placed within the holistic context of Francis’ faithful walk with God.

83 L3C 21-22. Note that the editors of Francis of Assisi Early Documents often translate these usages of fervore as “enthusiasm” and “enthusiastically.”

84 L3C 49 (Fontes, 1422; FAED II, 96): “credamus vos esse tanti fervoris quod de vobis non oporteat dubitare, tamen considerare debemus pro illis qui secuturi sunt vos, ne haec via nimis ipsis aspera videatur.” Cumque videret eorum fidei constantiam et anchoram spei firmissime roboratam in Christo, ita ut nollent a suo fervore divertere.

89 “For he had worked intensely in the Lord's vineyard, eager and fervent in his prayers, fasts, vigils, sermons, and wholesome journeys, in care and compassion for his neighbor, and in disregard of himself. From the beginning of his conversion to the day of his passing to Christ, he had loved Him with his whole heart, constantly keeping the memory of Him in his mind, praising Him with his mouth, and glorifying Him with his fruitful deeds. For he loved God with such enthusiasm from the depths of his heart that, on hearing His name, completely melting within, he would burst forth saying that heaven and earth must bow at the Lord's name.”85

Here the authors speak of Francis’ zeal at both the beginning and the end of the paragraph, first using the word fervens and then the superlative ferventissime. In this way they poetically describe Francis as ‘boiling over’ with the love of God. What this paragraph makes clear is that fervore drives Francis’ personality and behavior in the Legenda Trium Sociorum. His actions, his prayers, his faithfulness, his praise, his preaching all flow out of a fiery zeal that not only burned within him, but that he practiced externally. In other words, the virtue of zeal is absolutely critical to the character of Francis in this text.86

A final note on the virtues of joy and zeal in the Legenda Trium Sociorum: these two virtues are often linked. For example at the beginning of chapter seven the text describes Francis

85 L3C 68 (Fontes, 1440; FAED II, 107-108): Laboraverat enim multum in vinea Domini, sollicitus et fervens in orationibus, ieiuniis, vigiliis, praedicationibus et salutaribus itineribus, in cura et compassione proximorum suique abiectione, a suae conversionis initio usque ad transmigrationem ipsius ad Christum quem ex toto corde dilexerat, assidue memoriam eius habens in mente ipsumque ore collaudans et glorificans operibus fructuosis. Sic enim ferventissime ac praecordialiter Deum dilexit, quod audiens eum nominari, liquefactus totus interius, exterius prorumpebat, dicens caelum et terra deberent ad nomen Domini inclinari.

86 Eugène Martin writes on the zeal of Francis. He was likely considering the Legenda Trium Sociorum when he wrote, “He loved life, the world, and was sensitive to all the charms of creation. Being of enterprising goodwill, energetic, generous, and spontaneous, he did not know how to equivocate or do anything half heartedly. He sought glory more than power or profit. In him were combined the impulsive nature of a seer and the steadfastness of a doer.” Eugène Martin, “’Franciscus, Vir Catholicus’ or, The Catholicism of St. Francis,” Etudes Franciscaines 49 (1937), trans. Frederick E. Colton; reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, ed. Maurice Sheehan (St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982), 87.

90 in the following line: “Returning to the church of San Damiano, joyful and eager, he made a hermit's habit for himself...”87 In making the explicit pairing of gaudens et fervens, the text proposes that Francis’ joy and zeal work in tandem. In other words, these two virtues have much in common, especially in the person and life of Francis.

The Role of Miracles in Legenda Trium Sociorum

Miracles do not play a large role in the Legenda Trium Sociorum. The authors actually inform their readers in the introductory letter that miracles are not part of their main intention:

“We do not intend merely to relate miracles, which demonstrate, but do not cause sanctity. Our intention is to point out some striking aspects of his holy manner of life and the intention of his pious desires, for the praise and glory of almighty God and of the holy father Francis, and for the edification of those who desire to follow in his footsteps.”88

Here the authors make clear that miracles do not cause holiness, just as Thomas Celano explained in the Vita Prima. They state that their aim is to focus more on Francis’ way of life and his pious desires. Indeed, throughout the text, there are no natural or healing miracles described. In the last chapters, the authors do admit that many miracles occurred after Francis’ death, but they do not describe any specific miracles or provide details.89

87 L3C 21 (Fontes, 1393; FAED II, 81): Revertensque ad ecclesiam Sancti Damiani gaudens et fervens, fecit sibi quasi heremiticum habitum, et sacerdotem illius ecclesiae confortavit eodem sermone quo ipse fuerat ab episcopo confortatus.

88 L3C Letter (Fontes, 1374; FAED II, 67): Non contenti narrare solum miracula, quae sanctitatem non faciunt sed ostendunt, sed etiam sanctae conversationis eius insignia et pii beneplaciti voluntatem ostendere cupientes, ad laudem et gloriam Summi Dei et dicti patris sanctissimi, atque aedificationem volentium eius vestigia imitari.

89 The earliest manuscripts of the Legenda Trium Sociroum do not contain chapters 17 and 18, and it may be that these chapters were added later. See FAED II, 107, note b. It is possible, therefore, that on the whole, this text contains no direct reference to Francis’ miracles.

91 While miracles do not play a large role in Legenda Trium Sociroum, the text does describe many dreams and visions that occurred among Francis, his brothers, and the people they encountered. In a way, these episodes bring the reader into the ‘realm’ of the miraculous, though they are not healing miracles or nature miracles. That said, the descriptions of the visions are inspiring. For example, the authors recount a dream in which Francis sees himself growing to a great height so as to touch the top of a tall tree and bend it to the ground (L3C 53). This vision, which appears in Thomas of Celano’s Vita Prima (1C 33) symbolizes how Pope Innocent would later kindly bend to Francis’ request. The authors also reproduce a story from the Anonymous of

Perugia in which a brother who gives a cloak to a poor man has a vision of the beggar’s alms rising up to heaven while the brother himself was infused with a mystical happiness (L3C 44).

Another vision, likely original to the Legenda Trium Sociroum is Francis’ own imagining of a small black hen with many chicks, which Francis interprets in reference to himself: “short in stature, and dark by nature. I must be simple like a dove, flying up to heaven with the feathered strokes of virtue.”90

What is intriguing about these visions is the way in which they all refer, in some way, to virtue. In the same way that Thomas of Celano often includes a portrayal of virtue in his accounts of Francis’ miracles, the Legenda Trium Sociroum portrays virtue in the accounts of the visions. For example, this is clearly seen in the vision of the hen, which leads Francis to expound on “feathered strokes of virtue.” Likewise, in the vision of Francis bending the tree, the line that directly precedes the paragraph states that Francis “was growing each day in the

90 L3C 63 (Fontes, 1436; FAED II, 105): Ego sum illa gallina, statura pusillus nigerque natura, qui debeo esse simplex ut columba et affectibus pennatis virtutum volare ad caelum.

92 hope and trust of the savior” (crescensque quotidie in spe et fiducia salvatoris). Here the authors draw a parallel between Francis’ growth in the virtue of hope/trust and his physical growth in the tree vision. More pointedly, in the story of the brother giving the cloak, the mystical vision is said to occur “because of the reverence and devotion which that brother had” (propter reverentiam et devotionem quam habuerat frater). In other words, it is the brother’s virtues of reverence and devotion (that is, his pietas) that sparks the vision. In this way, the authors of the

Legenda Trium Sociroum use the descriptions of visions to showcase and point out the importance of virtue.

The Franciscan Virtues

In reviewing the three early hagiographical sources above, it is clear that virtues play a central role in all three texts. In consideration of these early documents, is it possible to discern a tradition of Franciscan virtue? If so, what are the ‘Franciscan virtues’?

Krijn Pansters completed a 2012 project in which he searched the works of three

Franciscans – Francis, Bonaventure, and David of Augsburg – and coded all references to particular virtues.91 After compiling the results he arrived at a list of eight key Franciscan virtues: charity, obedience, goodness, truth, faith, humility, joy, poverty. To these he added penance and peace as being critical to Franciscan thought, bringing the total to ten. In light of the three hagiographical texts examined above, Pansters’ list is perhaps not a perfect match. The

91 See Krijin Pansters, Franciscan Virtue: Spiritual Growth and the Virtues in Franciscan Literature and Instruction of the Thirteenth Century (Leiden: Brill, 2012).

93 reason is that Pansters’ list does not include fortitude, temperance, or zeal – all of which this chapter has identified as key virtues in one or more of the texts under discussion.

Of course, it is difficult to discern a set of virtues that will apply to the breadth of the

Franciscan movement – any such project may seem arbitrary or lacking.92 Looking at Francis’ own words, however, provides a clue. First in his Admonitions Francis lists nine virtues, contrasting them to various vices. The text is as follows:

Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance.

Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor disturbance.

Where there is poverty with joy, there is neither greed nor avarice.

Where there is rest and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor restlessness.

Where there is fear of the Lord to guard an entrance, there the enemy cannot have a place to enter.

Where there is a heart full of mercy and discernment, there is neither excess nor hardness of heart.93

92 Kathryn Getek laments the difficulty of identifying the central virtues in the Franciscan tradition: “If we were to… search for the Franciscan virtues, the difficulty of the quest would be immediately obvious. A website for Australian vocations to the Order of Friars Minor speaks of the Franciscan virtues of peace, joy, and compassion. Franciscan Penance in the Confraternity of Penitents names poverty, humility, littleness, love, simplicity, faith, self-sacrifice, and peace. The vaults of the Lower Basilica of San Francesco illustrate the virtues of obedience, chastity, poverty, prudence, and humility… The multiple permutations of Franciscan virtue witness to the fact that there is likely no criteria by which we can identify the comprehensive and definitive set of Franciscan virtues.” Kathryn Getek, “Virtues and Vices: A Franciscan Approach,” in Moral Action in a Complex World: Franciscan Perspectives: Washington Theological Union Symposium Papers 2008, ed. Daria Mitchell (St. Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2008), 68-69.

93 Admonitions 27 (Fontes, 36, FAED I, 136-137): Ubi caritas est et sapientia, ibi nec timor nec ignorantia. Ubi est patientia et humilitas, ibi nec ira nec perturbatio.

94 The first line of each couplet offers the virtues, while the second line of the couplet points out the opposing vices. The nine virtues listed are caritas, sapientia, patientia, humilitas, paupertas, laetitia, quies, timor Domino, misericordia, discretio. Elsewhere, Francis takes up the subject of virtue in an undated work entitled A Salutation of the Virtues:

Hail, Queen Wisdom! May the Lord protect You, with Your Sister, holy pure Simplicity! Lady holy Poverty, may the Lord protect You, with Your Sister, holy Humility! Lady holy Charity, may the Lord protect You, with Your Sister, holy Obedience. Most holy Virtues, may the Lord protect all of You from Whom You come and proceed. There is surely no one in the whole world who can possess any one of You without dying first. Whoever possesses one and does not offend the others possesses all. Whoever offends one does not possess any and offends all.94

Ubi est paupertas cum laetitia, ibi nec cupiditas nec avaritia. Ubi est quies et meditatio, ibi neque sollicitudo neque vagatio. Ubi est timor Domini ad atrium suum custodiendum, ibi inimicus non potest habere locum ad ingrediendum. Ubi est misericordia et discretio, ibi nec superfluitas nec induratio.

94 A Salutation of the Virtues (Fontes, 223; FAED I, 164): Ave, regina sapientia, Dominus te salvet cum tua sorore sancta pura simplicitate. Domina sancta paupertas, Dominus te salvet cum tua sorore sancta humilitate. Domina sancta caritas, Dominus te salvet cum tua sorore sancta obedientia. Sanctissimae virtutes, omnes vos salvet Dominus, a quo venitis et proceditis. Nullus homo est penitus in toto mundo, qui unam ex vobis possit habere, nisi prius moriatur. Qui unam habet et alias non offendit, omnes habet. Et qui unam offendit, nullam habet et omnes offendit.

95 The virtues listed in this passage are sapientia, simplicitas, paupertas, humilitas, caritas, obedientia. This list therefore introduces two additional virtues: simplicitas and obedientia.

Between these two works, Francis sets down a key set of virtues which are arguably the central

Franciscan virtues and which capture the spirit of Francis and his movement.

There are some obvious omissions, however. The list still does not include fortitude, temperance, or zeal, which are key virtues in Mira Circa Nos and the Legenda Trium Sociorun.

While it is not essential to the argument of this chapter to prove that Francis’s list of virtues match perfectly with the key virtues of the Vita Prima, Mira Circa Nos, and the Legenda Trium

Sociorum, it would make sense to see the virtues espoused by Francis himself similarly emphasized by his earliest biographers. Perhaps a deeper consideration of fortitude, temperance, and zeal is needed.

First, the virtue of fortitude – so emphasized in Mira Circa Nos – is actually related to the

Franciscan virtue of patience. Francis lists Patientia as a virtue in Admonitions 27. In the

Franciscan tradition patience is not about waiting for something, but rather patiently bearing suffering. Patience thus has much in common with fortitude.95 Indeed, patience for Francis and his followers involves a willingness to risk suffering and pain.96 Thus fortitude finds its way into

Francis’ list of virtues under the ‘umbrella’ of patience.

95 As David of Augsburg writes, “Patience is the generous endurance – with a supernatural motive – of difficulties; and what is fortitude but facing labours and dangers calmly and without wavering or interior disquiet.” Spiritual Life and Progress, ch. IV, trans. ed. Dominic Devas (London: Burns Oates & Washbourne, 1936), 90.

96 Katherine Getek argues that patience is linked to fortitude in the Francsican tradition. She remarks that “Francis and his companions in the Order of Lesser Brothers suffered persecution, especially of their bodies. They endured abuses of mockery, insult, stripping, being beaten and jailed, etc. without defending themselves; ‘they endured all of these abuses so bravely that from their mouths came only the sound of praise and thanksgiving.’” Getek, 83. Quotation from 1C 40.

96 Turning to temperance – again so emphasized in Mira Cira Nos. Francis’ list of virtues does not include temperance, and yet in Admonitions 27 he does refer to the “fear of the Lord to guard an entrance.” Furthermore, temperance is related to simplicity, which is listed in the

Salutation of the Virtues. Finally, the virtue of poverty, which is listed in Admonitions 27, has strong connections to temperance in the Franciscan tradition. Both poverty and temperance involve abstaining from certain earthly goods in order to pursue a spiritual benefit.97 Thus the virtue of temperance is found in Francis’ list of virtues, under the guise of poverty, simplicity, and “fear of the Lord to guard an entrance.”

Finally, there is the virtue of zeal, which is emphasized in the Legenda Trium Sociorum, but does not appear in either of Francis’ lists. A closer consideration of zeal, however, reveals that it is closely related to joy. As described above, the Legenda Trium Sociorum portrays

Francis as being joyful and zealous in the same sentence. As has been stated, in the Franciscan tradition joy is more than an emotion, but rather an active disposition that propels the human person toward service to God and others. So it is that a virtuous person may be described as fervent and zealous in joy. Thus zeal finds its way into Francis’ list of virtues in its obvious relation to joy.

Francis’ summary of the virtues, set down in Admonitions 27 and in the Salutation of the

Virtues, offers a rather complete scope of the Franciscan virtues. Were the early crafters of the

Franciscan hagiographic tradition aware of these texts by the founder of the order? Perhaps. It is

97 Getek also makes this connection, buttressing her claim with John Caulibus’ Meditations on the Life of Christ. She writes: “Caulibus… applies the virtue of poverty to issues of food, abstinence, and the resistance of gluttony, and he remarks how poverty requires the distinction between pleasure and health. Thus, poverty is well-suited as the Franciscan version of temperance, a virtue which is centrally concerned with pleasure and desire.” Getek, 83.

97 clear that many of the same virtues espoused by Francis himself in these two writings are present in the early hagiographies devoted to him.

Conclusion

This chapter has argued that virtue is critical to understanding the life of Francis and the hagiographical sources. Moreover, Francis himself makes clear the importance of virtue in his own writings. In looking at three of the earliest hagiographic pieces on Francis, the reader sees virtue as a central theme throughout. In the Papal Bull that declared him a saint (Mira Circa

Nos) virtues are consistently described through Biblical allusions – with fortitude and temperance being most central. In Thomas of Celano’s masterpiece, the Vita Prima, virtue plays an important role throughout the text, as Francis is said to embody love (caritas/amor) and joy

(gaudia/laetitia) in his imitation of Christ. The Legenda Trium Sociroum maintains a similar focus on virtue throughout the text, with joy (gaudium) and zeal (fervore) being presented as fundamental to the person of Francis. These virtues in the hagiographic material dovetail with the virtues that Francis himself presented in his own writings. That being said, this chapter does not seek to make direct correlations and explicit parallels between the writings of Francis and the three hagiographic texts under discussion. Nor does this chapter attempt to draw explicit parallels among the three hagiographic texts themselves. It is not necessary to argue that gaudium, for example (or any other particular virtue) is the most important Franciscan virtue in all the texts under discussion. Rather, the purpose of this chapter has been to analyze each text on its own, showing how virtue is central for Francis himself and for the authors who presented him as a saint to the world.

CHAPTER THREE

BONAVENTURE’S FRANCIS: THE MAN OF PERFECT VIRTUE

Introduction

The following chapter argues that in the Legenda Maior Bonaventure presents Francis of

Assisi as the perfect image of Christ and the practitioner of perfect virtue. Scholars of the early

20th century have often missed Bonaventure’s spiritual and theological intention, and for many years the Legenda Maior was criticized for its perceived lack of attention to the ‘authentic’

Francis. After reviewing these critiques, this chapter will describe Bonaventure’s theory of grace and virtue, which lays the foundation for the portrait of Francis he offers in the Legenda Maior.

The chapter will then reflect on Bonaventure’s description of particular virtues of Francis, most notably austerity, humility, poverty, piety, and charity. It is the contention of this chapter that in the Legenda Maior, the presentation of Francis’ virtues is just as important as the presentation of his miracles. In describing these virtues Bonaventure makes clear that Francis is not simply a man of good character; rather he is the man of perfect virtues, precisely because it is through grace and virtue that Francis becomes fully conformed to Christ. Francis’ transformation into

Christ is, of course, confirmed in his reception of the stigmata, in which the image of Christ is physically impressed upon him. The chapter will conclude with analysis of Bonaventure’s sermons on Francis – especially the sermon of 1262 which he delivered while writing the

Legenda Maior. A close reading of this sermon shows that Bonaventure had in mind many of the same themes around virtue that he wove into the Legenda Maior. Overall, this chapter

98 99 argues that Bonaventure is consistent in his portrayal of Francis as a man filled with divine grace, perfect virtue, and conforming fully to Christ.

Background of the Legenda Maior

When Bonaventure was commissioned to write a new life of Francis at the General

Council of Narbonne in 1260, there were already several lives of Francis in circulation. Among these were Thomas of Celano’s Vita Prima, his subsequent work the Vita Secunda (properly titled in English as The Remembrance of the Desire of a Soul), and Julian of Speyer’s Vita Sancti

Francisci. In addition, the texts of the Assisi Compilation and The Legend of the Three

Companions were in circulation.1 It would appear that the brotherhood desired a single vita to serve as an authoritative document, transmitting the details and meaning of Francis’ life to the subsequent generations of the order.

In accepting the task of writing a new life of Francis, Bonaventure drew heavily on

Thomas of Celano’s Vita Prima, and indeed a large portion of the Legenda Maior is comprised of direct quotations from Thomas’ text. Bonaventure, however, eschewed a purely chronological

1 For an in-depth description on the hagiographical writings on Francis leading up to the Legenda Maior, see Michael W. Blastic, “Francis and the Hagiographical Tradition,” in The Cambridge Companion to Francis of Assisi, ed. Michael Robson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 68-83. See also Emanuela Prinzivalli, “Un santo da leggere: Francesco d’Assisi nel percorso delle fonti agiografiche,” in Francesco d’Assisi e il primo secolo di storia francescana (Torino: Einaudi, 1997), 71- 116, republished in English as “A Saint to be Read: Francis of Assisi in the Hagiographical Sources,” trans. Edward Hagman, Greyfriars Review 15.3 (2001): 263-298. Blastic remarks, “Each of these accounts reflects a particular historical context which determined the way the story of Francis would be told. Thus, no two hagiographical accounts of Francis are the same, even those that used the same sources.” Blastic, 68.

100 account and instead created his own original thematic structure.2 The result of Bonaventure’s labors were the Legenda Maior, or Major Legend of Francis, as well as the Legenda Minor, a shorter life suitable for use in worship.3 These texts were presented to the order in 1263, and the reception on the part of the Franciscan leadership was overwhelmingly positive. At the General

Chapter of 1266 it was decreed that the Legenda Maior would be the official biography of the founder of the order and that copies of all other previous vitae should be destroyed.4

Scholars of the early twentieth century have been critical of Bonaventure’s portrait of

Francis.5 For example, John H.R. Moorman judged the works of Thomas of Celano to be superior, arguing that Bonaventure was motivated by politics and the needs of the order. He writes:

“Bonaventure glosses over or suppresses many things for the sake of reconciling conflicting parties in the Order or to bring credit on the Order in the eyes of the world. He writes essentially as Minister General, a man of a responsibility to fulfill and a writer whose every sentence must be considered in its bearing on the future of the Order… If the purpose of Celano in writing his Vita Prima was to present a picture of a saint for the

2 The editors of Francis of Assisi Early Documents summarize how Bonaventure wove the existing texts into his own composition: “Like any gifted architect living in close contact with the sculptors, glass painters, and wood carvers, Bonaventure focused his attention on the details of Thomas of Celano, Julian of Speyer, and those who knew Francis, and studied their writings attentively that he might gracefully incorporate them into his own design.” FAED I, 502.

3 Marianne Schlosser summarizes the purpose of the two works as follows: “The Legenda Maior which was intended to serve as table reading, and the Legenda Minor to be used during the office of matins.” Marianne Schlosser, “Bonaventure: Life and Works,” in A Companion to Bonaventure ed. Jay Hammond, Wayne Hellmann, and Jared Goff (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 29.

4 The editors of Francis of Assisi Early Documents suggest that this was never the intention of Bonaventure himself, though he submitted to the will of the order. That said, the decree was carried out, such that modern scholars “discovered less than twenty manuscripts of Thomas's Life of Saint Francis and most of these were in the possession of the Cistercians. There were only two of Thomas's Remembrance of the Desire of a Soul.” FAED I, 503.

5 The most complete compilation of these critiques is found in Regis Armstrong’s “Lex Gratiae, Lex Sanctitatis: Homage to a Saint by a Saint,” (unpublished manuscript, 2017).

101 edification of the world as a whole, Bonaventure set out to paint a portrait that would belong primarily to the Order.”6

Some decades later, Adolf Holl added: “The biography by Bonaventure, for centuries the only officially authorized text, is historically worthless. It adds little new material to older sources and suppresses practically everything that makes Francis interesting.”7

These critiques can be partly traced to Paul Sabatier who published his Vie de Saint

Francois d’Assise in 1894. This text cast doubt on Bonaventure’s image of Francis, and on

Bonaventure’s motivations in general. Some of Sabatier’s comments are worth quoting in full.

“The course of the new historian was therefore clearly marked out: he must do the work of compiler and peacemaker. He failed in neither. His book is a true sheaf, or rather it is a millstone under which the indefatigable author has pressed, somewhat at hazard, the sheaves of his predecessors. Most of the time he inserts them just as they are, confining himself to the work of harvesting them and weeding out the tares. Therefore, when we reach the end of this voluminous work we have a very vague impression of St. Francis. We see that he was a saint, a very great saint, since he performed an innumerable quantity of miracles, great and small; but we feel very much as if we had been going through a shop of objects of piety.”8

“God forbid that I should say or think that St. Bonaventura was not worthy to write a life of St. Francis, but the circumstances controlled his work, and it is no injustice to him to say that it is fortunate for Francis, and especially for us, that we have another biography of the Poverello than that of the Seraphic Doctor.”9

6 John R. H. Moorman, The Sources for the Life of S. Francis of Assisi (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1940), 143-44.

7 Adolf Holl, The Last Christian, trans. Peter Heinegg (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1980), 12.

8 Paul Sabatier, The Life of St. Francis of Assisi, trans. L.S. Houghton (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1919), 394.

9 Sabatier, 395.

102 For Sabatier, the Legenda Maior was a text ‘controlled by circumstances,’ written by a leader trying to ‘make peace’ in the Franciscan order. What was lost, argues Sabatier, was the soul of the actual Francis of Assisi; the heartfelt desires and tender deeds of the Poverello.

Contemporary scholars have pushed back against such claims. Bernard McGinn summarizes the counter argument succinctly and forcefully as he writes: “The Major Life of

Francis, once dismissed by some because of its ‘unhistorical’ character, has been reevaluated in recent years as a hagiographical and theological masterpiece.”10 Among the most devoted commentators of the Legenda is Ewart Cousins. He argues that while Bonaventure was not uninterested in producing accurate details of Francis’ life, the value of the text lies not in the historical realm, but rather in the spiritual and theological: “From the standpoint of spirituality and theology, Bonaventure’s is the most profound picture of St. Francis that we have.”11

Cousins buttresses his point with a quotation from John Fleming, the entirety of which is worth reproducing here.

“The ‘theological’ interpretation of Francis which we find in the Legenda Maior of St. Bonaventure is an accurate formulation of Francis’ own self image, not an extrinsic imposition. That is, I believe, that the Legenda Maior is the kind of book that Francis himself might have written had he been a learned man and a speculative theologian, neither of which he was. Bonaventure, I would argue, has given schematic and discursive form to a set of ideas fully operative within Francis’ life though nowhere systematically expounded in his own sparse writings.”12

10 Bernard McGinn, The Flowering of Mysticism: Men and Women in the New Mysticism 1200-1350 (New York: Crossroad, 1998), 94.

11 Cousins, Ewart. “The Image of St. Francis in Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior,” in Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, ed. Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco (Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988), 312.

12 John Fleming, “The Iconographic Unity of the Blessing for Brother Leo,” Franziskanische Studien 63 (1981): 204.

103 Cousins and Fleming both argue that Bonaventure is “true” to Francis in ways that go beyond the historical recounting of events. In other words, Bonaventure captures the spirit of Francis and his movement while simultaneously presenting Francis through a theological and spiritual lens.

Along with Bernard McGinn, these authors convincingly argue that Bonaventure’s text should not be seen as simply a tool for the Franciscan order, but rather as a gift to the entire tradition of

Christian Spirituality.

Virtue in the Legenda Maior

Bonaventure’s desire to focus on the virtue of Francis is firmly established in the prologue of the Legenda Maior. He writes that Francis was “enriched by the merit of unshakable virtue.”13 Later in the prologue, in describing his purpose, Bonaventure writes: “This is my principle reason for undertaking this task: that I may gather together the accounts of his virtues, actions, and words – like so many fragments, partly forgotten and partly scattered – that they may not be lost when those who lived with this servant of God die.”14 This line, which echoes the Eucharistic imagery of the disciples gathering broken pieces of bread following Christ’s feeding of the multitudes, is critical to understanding Bonaventure’s deep motivations in writing the Legenda. Just as the Eucharist re-members Christ – that is, puts Christ back together –

Bonaventure desires that his text similarly re-members Francis in order that the poor man of

13 LM Prologue 1 (Fontes, 778; FAED II, 526): dehinc virtutis invictae adauctus meritis.

14 LM Prologue 3 (Fontes, 780; FAED II, 528): Et haec penes me causa praecipua hunc assumendi laborem, ut ego, qui vitam corporis et animae a Deo mihi conservatam recognosco per ipsum et virtutem eius in me ipso expertus agnovi, vitae illius virtutes, actus et verba quasi fragmenta quaedam, partim neglecta partimque dispersa, quamquam plene non possem, utcumque colligerem, ne, morientibus his qui cum famulo Dei convixerant, deperirent.

104 Assisi might be presented to the world. This presentation of Francis, says Bonaventure, will include his virtues, actions, and words (virtutes, actus et verba). Clearly Bonaventure sees the virtues of Francis as being fundamental to who he was. In addition, Bonaventure is saying that in order to understand Francis’ actions and words, one must understand his virtues.

The ‘theory’ of virtue in the Legenda Maior is richer and deeper than a simple list of good qualities that Francis possessed. This is critical. As Regis Armstrong explains,

“[Bonaventure’s] portrait, consequently, casts the facts of the saint’s life into a theological framework, the underpinnings of which are those of grace. Rather than a fixed, well-defined formula, Bonaventure believed that holiness demanded receptivity to and cooperation with a transformative energy.”15

Here Armstrong argues that for Bonaventure all of Francis’ virtutes, actus et verba come out of abundant divine grace that welled up in him and overflowed over the course of his life. Such a movement of grace allowed Francis to ‘progress’ through the spiritual stages of purgation, illumination, and perfection, culminating in his total union with Christ.16 Furthermore, the movement of grace and Francis’ spiritual ascent is expressed in Bonaventure’s statement that

Francis was the “hierarchic man” (vir hierarchicus).17 As Jacques Dalarun helpfully summarizes, the Legenda Maior presents “Francis as a hierarchic man on a shining ladder: in ascent toward God, then in descent toward people in order to re-ascend with them.”18 All of this

15 Armstrong, “Lex Gratiae, Lex Sanctitatis,” 10.

16 Bonaventure describes the stages of purgation, illumination, and perfection most clearly in De Triplici Via (The Triple Way).

17 LM Prologue 1. For an in-depth description see Jay Hammond “Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior” in A Companion to Bonaventure, ed. Jay Hammond, Wayne Hellmann, and Jared Goff (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 486.

18 Jacques Dalarun, The Misadventure of Francis of Assisi, trans. Edward Hagman (Saint Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2002), 239.

105 raises a critical point: Francis’ virtue must be considered in light of Francis’ spiritual progression and ascent.19 Bonaventure himself makes this clear in the Legenda Maior in the opening lines of chapter fifteen:

“Francis, the servant and friend of the Most High, the founder and leader of the Order of the Lesser Brothers, the practitioner of poverty, the model of penance, the herald of truth, the mirror of holiness, and the exemplar of all Gospel perfection, foreordained by grace from heaven, in an ordered progression from the lowest level arrived at the very heights.”20

Here Bonaventure draws direct lines between Francis’ outward works (“founder and leader of the order”), his virtues (“practitioner of poverty, model of penance”), his receptivity to grace

(“foreordained by grace from heaven”), his movement through the stages of purgation and illumination (“ordered progression”), his arrival at a state of perfection and union with Christ

(“mirror of holiness, Gospel perfection”), and finally the overarching concept of an upward and hierarchical spiritual ascent (“from the lowest level arrived at the very heights”). Indeed, this one passage shows how Bonaventure understands virtue as part of a rich conceptual framework in which divine grace works generously in the human person.21

19 The theme of ascent is most clearly seen in Bonaventure’s Itinerarium Mentis in Deum (The Souls’s Journey into God). Prinzivalli alludes to the influence of this text on the Legenda Maior in the following summary: “A year before Narbonne [1259], Bonaventure wrote The Soul’s Journey into God while in seclusion on LaVerna. Reworking themes from the Platonic mystical tradition, he described the process of the soul’s intellectual ascent to wisdom, which as such is a gift from God. Francis is the supreme example of this adventure, but he is also the one who reaches the summit, despite human weakness, through the unfathomable mercy of God who awakens in him an insatiable love for Christ crucified.” Prinzivalli, 283.

20 LM 15.1 (Fontes, 905; FAED II, 645): Franciscus igitur, servus et amicus Altissimi, Ordinis Minorum Fratrum institutor et dux, paupertatis professor, poenitentiae forma, veritatis praeco, sanctitatis speculum et totius evangelicae perfectionis exemplar, superna praeventus gratia, ordinato progressu ab infimis pervenit ad summa.

21 This is seen more clearly in part V of Bonaventure’s Brevlioquium, described below.

106 With this broad conceptual framework in mind, one can proceed to analyze the way in which Bonaventure describes particular virtues of Francis. At the end of the prologue, the author explains that the structure of the work will not be purely chronological, but rather he will group together events of Francis’ life based on particular themes. He then proceeds to list the titles of the fifteen chapters, many of which are based on particular virtues or behaviors of Francis. The full list of the chapters is as follows:

Chapter 1: His manner of life while in the attire of the world

Chapter 2: His perfect conversion to God and his restoration of three churches

Chapter 3: The foundation of the Order and the approval of the Rule

Chapter 4: The progress of the Order under his hand and the confirmation of the Rule

Chapter 5: The austerity of his life and how creatures provided him comfort

Chapter 6: His humility and obedience and God’s condescension to his slightest wish

Chapter 7: His love of poverty and the miraculous fulfillment of his needs

Chapter 8: His affectionate piety and how irrational creatures were affectionate toward

him

Chapter 9: The fervor of his charity and his desire for martyrdom

Chapter 10: His zeal for prayer and the power of his prayer

Chapter 11: His understanding of Scripture and his spirit of prophecy

Chapter 12: The efficacy of his preaching and his grace of healing

Chapter 13: His sacred stigmata

Chapter 14: His patience and his passing in death

Chapter 15: His canonization and the solemn transferal of his body

107 Chapters 1-4 are not titled with specific virtues, but rather they describe portions of Francis’ life.

These chapters (1-4) are therefore chronological, although they do describe the purgation stage of Francis spiritual journey.22 Chapters 14-15 are likewise chronological, as they recount the saint’s death and burial, although these chapters also describe the stage of perfection at which

Francis arrived. The middle chapters (5-13) describe the spiritual progress and illumination of

Francis as he grows into the image of Christ. Note that in these chapters (5-13), a deeper sub- structure of spiritual progression can be seen: chapters 5-7 point to purgation; 8-10 point to illumination, and 11-13 point to perfection.23

In addition to this overall structure, which is critical to understanding Bonaventure’s project, it is also fruitful to examine how the Seraphic Doctor describes Francis’ individual virtues. As shown above, the chapters of the Legend Maior often focus on particular virtues of

Francis. Chapters 5-9 stand out most clearly in this regard, as they present Francis’ austerity, humility, poverty, piety, and charity. In examining these chapters and the virtues that they describe, it becomes all the more obvious that the virtues of Francis are not merely good qualities or character traits. On the contrary, virtues are stable dispositions and habits brought about by practice and devotion.24 Moreover, it must be said that Francis was not only humble, but that he

22 Jay Hammond, 484.

23 See Regis Armstrong, “The Spiritual Theology of the Legenda Maior of Saint Bonaventure,” Ph.d. Diss. (Fordham, 1978).

24 As David Elliot explains, “Virtues are ‘habits’ (habitus) understood as stable dispositions of the intellect, will, and passions which perfect agency by inclining us to act well… a virtue develops a human capacity to engage in pursuits and attain goods that conduce to human flourishing… We are not born with these capacities developed. As with language acquisition or fine motor skills, formation is required. The virtues have a crucial role here in that they dispose our capacities to function harmoniously, so that we get beyond a fissiparous, haphazard, and self-divided way of life, and more stably pursue our comprehensive good.” David Elliot, Hope and Christian Ethics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017), 17.

108 practiced humility. Implicit in this claim is that Francis practiced humility consistently in all situations. Bonaventure underscores this notion of consistent virtuous action by offering multiple examples of Francis practicing particular virtues throughout the text. What becomes even more clear, however, is that Bonaventure describes Francis as practicing these virtues perfectly, especially as Francis grows fully into the image of Christ. Indeed, that Francis practiced perfect virtue as part of his imitation of Christ is one of the key points to grasp in analyzing virtue in the Legenda Maior.25

One must now turn to the descriptions of key virtues in the text itself. The following sections will describe how Bonaventure, in chapters 5-9, presents Francis’ austerity, humility, poverty, piety, and charity.

Austerity in the Legenda Maior

Bonaventure uses the word austerity (austeritas) in the title of chapter five “The austerity of his life and how creatures provided him comfort.” Apart from this he only uses the word three other times in the work (6.2, 9.4, 13.2). What Bonaventure means by austerity is perhaps best expressed in a reference to Galatians 5:24 that he quotes in the first paragraph of chapter five:

25 As G.K. Chesterton poetically observed, “The difference between Christ and St. Francis was the difference between the Creator and the creature; and certainly no creature was ever so conscious of that colossal contrast as St. Francis himself. But subject to this understanding, it is perfectly true and vitally important that Christ was the pattern on which St. Francis sought to fashion himself.” Chesterton continues, “If we understand that it was truly under the inspiration of his divine Master [Christ] that St. Francis did these merely quaint or eccentric acts of charity, we must understand that it was under the same inspiration that he did acts of self-denial and austerity… He does not compare himself with his followers, towards whom he might appear as a master; he compares himself more and more with his master, towards whom he appears a servant.” G.K. Chesterton, St. Francis of Assisi (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1952), 173-179.

109 “Those who belong to Christ have crucified their flesh with its passions and desires.”26

Bonaventure goes on to explain that Francis “held in check his sensual appetites with rigid discipline.”27 Bonaventure’s concept of austerity can therefore be understood to include the virtues chastity, purity, and the cardinal virtue temperance.

Perhaps the most striking scene in the chapter on austerity is the image of Francis throwing himself into the snow in order to repel a temptation of the flesh. The scene, which has echoes of St. Benedict throwing himself into a thorn bush, was first recounted by Thomas of

Celano (2C 117). Bonaventure’s version is as follows:

“Even more inspired by a wonderful fervor of spirit, once he opened the cell, went out into the garden and, throwing his poor still naked body into the deep snow, began to pack it together by the handful into seven mounds. Showing them to himself, he spoke as if to another person: ‘Here, the larger one is your wife; those four over there are your two sons and two daughters; the other two are a servant and a maid who are needed to serve them. Hurry, then, and get them some clothes because they are freezing to death! But if the complicated care of them is annoying, then take care to serve one Master!’ At that the tempter went away conquered. And the holy man returned to the cell in victory, because while he froze outwardly as penance, he so quenched the fire of lust within, that he hardly felt anything of that sort from that time on.”28

The final line of this passage is not present in Thomas’ text – Bonaventure has added the line to provide a spiritual interpretation of the episode. In saying “he so quenched the fire of lust

26 LM 5.1 (Fontes, 813, FAED II, 560): Qui autem sunt Christi carnem suam crucifixerunt cum vitiis et concupiscentiis.

27 LM 5.1 (Fontes, 813, FAED II, 560): Tanta disciplinae rigiditate sensuales appetitus arcebat.

28 LM 5.4 (Fontes, 816, FAED II, 563): Insuper et mirando fervore spiritus animatus, aperta cella, foras exivit in hortum, et in magnam demergens nivem corpusculum iam nudatum, septem ex ea plenis manibus coepit compingere massas. Quas sibi proponens, suo sic exteriori homini loquebatur: ‘Ecce,’ inquit, ‘haec maior uxor tua est, quatuor istae duo filii et duae filiae, reliquae duae servus et ancilla, quos ad serviendum habere oportet. Festina igitur omnes induere, quoniam frigore moriuntur. Si vero eorum nultiplex sollicitudo molestat, uni Domino sollicite servi!’ Illico tentator victus abscessit, et vir sanctus in cellam cum victoria rediit; quia, dum bene poenaliter alsit foris, ardorem interius sic exstinxit libidinis, ut deinceps tale aliquid minime sentiret.

110 within,” the author emphasizes that Francis’ external act was equaled by his internal victory.

Though the physical action is dramatic, Bonaventure intentionally draws the reader back to

Francis’ virtue. In other words, Bonaventure stresses that the episode is not simply about bodily abasement, but rather about spiritual progress in the virtues of chastity and temperance.

That austerity in the Legenda Maior is both a virtue and spiritual practice is further established in chapter nine. Bonaventure recounts how Francis fasted in isolation for forty days:

“resting in a place of solitude, shut up in a cell, with as little food and drink as possible, fasting, praying, and praising God without interruption.”29 While these lines focus on the physical actions of the Poverello, the preceding and ensuing text makes clear that the event is completely focused on spiritual union with Christ. Bonaventure introduces the scene by saying that Francis

“longed to be totally transformed [into Christ] through an enkindling of ecstatic love.”30 Then, following the description of Francis’ fast, Bonaventure states that Francis “was born aloft into

Christ with such burning intensity… that it seemed to that servant of God that he was aware of the presence of that Savior before his eyes, like a yoke.”31 This episode, which is original to

Bonaventure, serves to underscore the importance of austerity as a virtue. The reader sees that austerity is not valued only for its own sake, but precisely because austerity allows Francis to

29 LM 9.2 (Fontes, 854; FAED II, 597): Latuit in deserto ad solitudinis loca declinans cella que reclusus quanta poterat arctitudine cibi et potus ieiuniis orationibus et laudibus dei sine intermissione vacabat.

30 LM 9.2 (Fontes, 854; FAED II, 597): In quem optabat per excessivi amoris incendium totaliter transformari.

31 LM 9.2 (Fontes, 854; FAED II, 597): Tam fervido quidem in Christum ferebatur affectu sed et dilectus illi tam familiarem rependebat amorem ut videretur ipsi famulo dei quasi iugem prae oculis ipsius salvatoris sentire praesentiam sicut aliquando sociis familiariter revelavit.

111 unite with Christ at a mystical level. This is why Bonaventure employs the Biblical image of the yoke, which unites two oxen or other animals, and in this case unites Francis to Christ.

In the end, austerity in the Legenda Maior is centered around two connections: 1) the conformity between the flesh and the spirit, and 2) the connection between the human the divine.

Bonaventure highlights these two connections as he states that Francis “had reached such purity that his flesh was in remarkable harmony with his spirit, and his spirit with God.”32 In other words, Francis does not abuse his body or deny his appetites out of a masochistic impulse. On the contrary, he seeks to align the purity of his body with the purity of his spirit, for such purity will align his spirit to God. So it is that Francis in the Legenda Maior is not simply an ascetic who chastises his body, but rather he is one who perfectly possesses the virtue of austerity. Such perfection of virtue is what Ewart Cousins alluded to as he writes, “In him [Francis] one can see the dynamics of spiritual growth and the ideal realization of all the virtues.”33

Humility in the Legenda Maior

The word humilitas is found in the title to chapter six, “His Humility and Obedience and the Divine Condescension Made to Him at His Nod.” In total, humilitas is used 34 times in the

Legenda Maior, including the treatise on the miracles, making it one of the most used words in the entire text.

32 LM 5.9 (Fontes, 820; FAED II, 567): Quia enim ad tantam pervenerat puritatem, ut caro spiritui et spiritus Deo harmonia mirabili concordarent.

33 Ewart Cousins, Introduction to Bonaventure: The Soul’s Journey into God, The Tree of Life, The Life of St. Francis (Mahwah, New Jersey: Paulist Press, 1978), 45 (emphasis added).

112 That humility for Francis is inextricably bound to the imitation of Christ is established in chapter one. Francis experiences his first ecstatic vision: an image of Christ fastened to a cross.

Bonaventure writes that this vision allowed Francis to internalize the following Gospel text as being directly addressed to him: “If you wish to come after me, deny yourself and take up your cross and follow me.”34 Bonaventure then writes that “From then on he clothed himself with a spirit of poverty, a sense of humility, and an eagerness for intimate piety.”35 In other words, the image and memory of Christ’s passion pushed Francis toward a new way of being, and this new way of being revolves primarily around humility. It is clear then from just these initial descriptions that Bonaventure is not proposing humility as a good quality that Francis carried.

On the contrary, humility in the Legenda Maior is a virtue that Francis perfects through daily practice. He comes to embody humility perfectly, precisely because he is conforming himself to the humility of Christ.

Bonaventure goes on to a give a concrete example of Francis’ humility by describing a scene involving lepers. The text explains that previously Francis gazed at lepers from a distance, but in his new state of humility he acted differently: “But, now because of Christ crucified, who according to the text of the prophet appeared despised as a leper, he, in order to despise himself completely, showed deeds of humility and humanity to lepers with a gentle piety.”36

34 LM 1.5 (Fontes, 785; FAED II, 534): Si vis venire post me, abnega temetipsum et tolle crucem tuam et sequaris me. The passage appears in Matthew 16:24; Mark 8:34; Luke 9:23.

35 LM 1.6 (Fontes, 786; FAED II, 534): Induit ex tunc spiritum paupertatis, humilitatis sensum et affectum intimae pietatis.

36 LM 1.6 (Fontes, 786; FAED II, 534): Propter Christum crucifixum, qui iuxta verbum propheticum contemptibilis ut leprosus apparuit, ut semetipsum plene contemneret, humilitatis et humanitatis obsequia leprosis benefica pietate praestabat.

113 This line offers a critical point about Francis’ imitation of Christ’s humility: it is not that Francis cared for lepers because Jesus also cared for lepers. Rather, the text states that because Christ was despised like a leper, Francis also desired to despise himself by humbly associating with lepers.37 Bonaventure’s multi-layered point hinges on the scriptural allusion to Isaiah 53:3 “He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not” (ESV). Note that this allusion to Isaiah is unique to Bonaventure, not appearing in the parallel passages from Thomas of Celano and Julian of Speyer. The overall thrust is that for Francis, humility comes through a complete imitation of Christ, which not only entails practicing behaviors that Christ practiced, but also living into Christ’s passion and identifying with Isaiah’s suffering servant through a willingness to be despised (contemno).38

37 Yves Congar offers an interpretation of this episode that focuses on growth in virtue: “The kiss that Francis gave the leper must not be romanticized or regarded sentimentally. He had no taste for lice. Twenty years later, on his death bed, when he made his will, he began by recalling this episode, and he says that lepers disgusted him. At the time, although much drawn to solitary communion with God, he was still in bondage to worldliness and luxury. In his life, kissing the leper is not described as spontaneous impulse of great love, but as a victory over self-will, and even as the first noteworthy occasion of his practical obedience to the command he had learned from God in prayer: to go against his own inclinations, to accept as pleasurable what repelled him.” Yves Congar, “St. Francis of Assisi: or the Gospel as an Absolute in Christendom,” in Faith and Spiritual Life (New York: Herder & Herder, 1968); reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, ed. Maurice Sheehan (St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982), 63.

38 Michael Cusato explains that humility figures prominently in the Earlier Ruler. He draws the connection between humility and the imitation of Christ serving those who are despised in the world in the following: “the ‘humility of Jesus Christ’ refers to Jesus’ conscious choice to go among those who were the lost and marginalized, those who had been disadvantaged by life, oppressed into submission by the powerful and, finally, despised by the great ones of the world. In a word: to choose humility was to choose to live among the poorer sectors of one’s society and to be the face of the compassionate Christ in their midst.” Michael F. Cusato, “Highest Poverty or Lowest Poverty?: The Paradox of the Minorite Charism,” Franciscan Studies 75 (2017): 298.

114 Understanding humility in the Legenda Maior as being intricately linked to the imitation of Christ allows readers to make sense of arresting passages like the following:

“Frequently when people extolled the merits of his holiness, he commanded one of the brothers to impress upon his ears words that were, on the contrary, insulting. When the brother, though unwilling, called him a boor and a mercenary, unskilled and useless, he would reply, exhilarated in mind and face: ‘May the Lord bless you, my beloved son, for it is you who are really telling the very truth and what the son of Peter Bernadone needs to hear.’”39

Here Francis appears to be playacting, demanding to be criticized by his fellow brother in order that he might be humbled. At a deeper level, however, this simple role-play shows Francis taking the role of Christ – and by extension the suffering servant in Isaiah. The brother, on the other hand, is taking the role of those who hurl insults. It is through such drama that

Bonaventure’s Francis seeks not only to act in humble ways, but to fully practice humility in a way that unites him with Christ in his passion.

That humility is a virtue for Bonaventure is made clear in the opening line of chapter six:

“Humility, the guardian and embellishment of all the virtues, had filled the man of God with abundance.”40 Here the Seraphic Doctor is echoing his statements in Disputed Questions on

Evangelical Perfection. The very first question in this treatise is on humility, which Bonaventure describes as “the root of all perfection” totius perfectionis radice.41 He goes on to call humility

39 LM 6.1 (Fontes, 823: FAED II, 569): Et ideo saepe cum populi merita in eo sanctitatis extollerent, praecipiebat alicui fratri, ut in contrarium verba ipsum vilificantia suis auribus inculcando proferret. Cumque frater ille, licet invitus, eum rusticum et mercenarium, imperitum et inutilem diceret, exhilaratus tam mente quam facie respondebat: ‘Benedicat tibi Dominus, fili carissime, quia tu verissima loqueris, et talia filium Petri Bernardonis decet audire.’

40 LM 6.1 (Fontes, 822; FAED II, 659): Omnium virtutum custos et decor humilitas, copiosa virum Dei ubertate repleverat.

41 Disputed Questions on the Evangelical Perfection prologue, trans. Thomas Reist and Robert J. Karris (St. Bonaventure: The Franciscan Institute, 2008), 29.

115 “the gate of wisdom, the foundation of justice, and the dwelling place of grace.”42 Again, humility for Bonaventure is not simply a good quality; rather it is a way of being brought about by grace, which subsequently opens the way for additional movements of grace. Humility is indeed a habitus and a virtue – Bonaventure urges the reader to “ponder the excellent virtue of the humble Francis in the eyes of God!”43

A final point must be made about humility in the Legenda Maior: Bonaventure, in both the title and content of chapter six, links humility to obedience. What is the source of this pairing? Bonaventure has already made this pairing in part IV of the Breviloquium, in which he speaks of Christ restoring the honor of God “through humiliation and obedience” (per humiliationem et obedientiam).44 But the Biblical source is the Christ hymn in the second chapter of Philippians: “And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (Phil 2:8, ESV). Here humility is linked to obedience in that the humble servant of God is willing to completely obey God, even if such obedience leads to a humiliating death. Bonaventure’s soteriology is clear: human beings, having dishonored God through pride and disobedience, must rely on the humility and obedience of Christ in order to repair the breech. Bonaventure imports this paired concept of humility/obedience into the Legenda Maior as he writes that Francis “abhorred pride, the source

42 Disputed Questions on the Evangelical Perfection question I, conclusion, Reist and Karris, 41.

43 LM 6.7 (Fontes, 829; FAED II, 574): Et humilis Francisci excellentem in oculis Dei perpende virtutem.

44 Breviloquium IV.9.3.

116 of evil, and disobedience, its worst offspring, but he welcomed the humility of repentance.”45 In making this statement, Bonaventure is clearly comparing Francis to Christ. The Poverello, like

Christ himself, participates in the mystical undoing of human brokenness by embracing the virtues of humility and obedience, and restoring the human relationship to God.46

Poverty in the Legenda Maior

Bonaventure titles chapter seven of the Legenda Maior “His Love of Poverty and the

Miraculous Fulfillment of Needs.” The word paupertas is used a total of 37 times, making it one of the most common words in the text. Francis’ movement toward poverty is described at the end of chapter one. As is the case with humility, Francis is said to embrace poverty following his first ecstatic vision of Christ on the cross: “From then on he clothed himself with a spirit of poverty, a sense of humility, and an eagerness for intimate piety.”47 Bonaventure adeptly uses the theme of clothing in his next mention of poverty, reversing the image as he writes,

“Encouraged partly by the love of poverty, he gave his own clothes to one of the neediest among them.”48 Thus chapter 1 declares that Francis first clothes himself with poverty, and then he is

45 LM 6.11 (Fontes, 831; FAED II, 576): Abhorrebat nempe vir sanctus superbiam, omnium malorum originem, et inobedientiam, ipsius pessimam prolem, sed non minus humilitatem poenitentiae acceptabat.

46 As Ewart Cousins writes, “Francis saw the mystery of emptiness revealed in the humanity of Christ. In the growing devotion to the humanity of Christ in the Middle Ages, he focused on the kenotic image of Christ. For Francis the humanity of Christ emptied itself in the poverty and humility of the birth at Bethlehem and in the suffering and nakedness of the crucifixion. This is what Francis saw; this is what he imitated; this is what he bequeathed to Western Christians throughout the subsequent centuries.” Cousins, “The Image of St. Francis,” 319.

47 LM 1.6 (quoted above).

48 LM 1.6 (Fontes, 786; FAED II, 535): Partim paupertatis allectus amore, uni ex eis magis egenti proprias largitus est vestes.

117 enticed (adlicio) by poverty to remove his clothes and offer them to the needy. This coupled set of passages sets the stage for the presentation of poverty throughout the Legenda Maior. Poverty for Francis is not something to be endured; rather it is a virtue to be joyfully ‘put on,’ for indeed poverty continually beckons the one who wears it into further glory.

Bonaventure continues the personification of poverty in chapter seven. Quoting liberally from Thomas of Celano (2C 55), he describes Francis’ love and affection for Lady Poverty in the following: “Through his love of the highest poverty, the holy man, realizing that she was a close friend of the Son of God… was eager to espouse her in an everlasting love.”49 As the text continues, the analogy changes to one of riches. Again quoting Thomas, Bonaventure writes:

“No one coveted gold as he coveted poverty; no one was as careful of guarding a treasure as he was of this pearl of the Gospel.”50 The point for the reader is that Francis pursued poverty as other men pursued money. What differentiated Francis from others is that for Francis his pursuit of poverty was not empty – on the contrary, poverty for Francis was deeply fulfilling.51

Moreover, Francis found in poverty a connection to Christ.52

49 LM 7.1 (Fontes 832; FAED II, 577): Per altissimae paupertatis amorem, hanc Filio Dei vir sanctus familiarem attendens caritate sic studuit desponsare perpetua.

50 LM 7.1 (Fontes 832; FAED II, 577): Nemo tam auri quam ipse cupidus paupertatis, nec thesauri custodiendi sollicitior ullus quam iste huius evangelicae margaritae.

51 See Cuthbert Hess “St. Francis and Poverty” in Franciscan Essays I (Aberdeen: The University Press, 1912); reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, ed. Maurice Sheehan (St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982). Hess writes, “It is just as a satisfying possession that poverty appears in all the purest Franciscan literature… This attitude of the would toward poverty is in truth the supreme test of the genuine Franciscan spirit whether in life or in art.” Hess, 100.

52 As Ray Petry succinctly writes: “Francis was most literal in his interpretation of Christ’s poverty and of Gospel renunciation. He sought poverty because Christ had loved it.” Ray C. Petry, “Poverty and the World Apostolate,” in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, ed. Maurice Sheehan (St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982), 141.

118 Poverty in the Legenda Maior extends far beyond the lack of material wealth.

Bonaventure is consistent with the outlook established in the Earlier Rule that brothers are to live sine proprio (without anything of one’s own).53 Again, such a lifestyle includes not only the renunciation of material wealth, but also the renunciation of ownership over one’s own body, mind, and spirit. Bonaventure offers a fascinating example of this sine proprio disposition in chapter twelve of the Legenda Maior. As Francis preaches before the Pope and cardinals, he forgets the words of his sermon that he had prepared and memorized:

“He went completely blank and was unable to say anything at all. This he admitted to them in true humility and directed himself to invoke the grace of the Holy Spirit. Suddenly he began to overflow with such effective eloquence and to move the minds of those high-ranking men to compunction with such force and power that it was clearly evident it was not he, but the Spirit of the Lord who was speaking.”54

Here Bonaventure has actually cobbled this episode together from two separate stories in

Thomas of Celano, with the result being a new story with a new narrative thrust. The point is not that Francis was so mentally nimble as to come up with an impressive sermon at a moment’s notice. In fact, the opposite is true. Bonaventure asserts that Francis called upon the Holy Spirit, who supplied the necessary words. Bonaventure emphasizes that it was “clearly evident” that the Spirit spoke, not Francis. So it is that in this moment before the Pope and cardinals, Francis possessed nothing, not even his own words. He was literally dis-possessed of his own sermon and his ability to preach. Fully dependent on God, Francis was given the words he needed. Such

53 The Earlier Rule I.1 (FAED I, 63).

54 LM 12.7.

119 a moment of poverty echoes the radical nature of sine propio as expressed in the Ealier Rule.

Bonaventure shows how the Poverello claims nothing of his own and relies entirely on God.55

Is poverty a virtue? In the Legenda Maior, yes. That poverty is a virtue is established in chapter fifteen as Bonaventure calls Francis paupertatis professor.56 This phrase, not found anywhere else in the early writings on Francis, is likely unique to Bonaventure. One could translate the phrase literally as “the professor of poverty,” though the editors of Francis of Assisi

Early Documents render it as “the practitioner of poverty.” Ewart Cousins also translates the phrase as “practitioner.” Bonaventure uses the word professor only one other time in the

Legenda Maior, when he writes in the prologue that Francis was evangelicae perfectionis professorem, “a practitioner of Gospel perfection.” This word “practitioner” (professor) suggests one who exercises a certain set of behaviors and actions – and indeed for Bonaventure poverty is a virtue that begets a set of behaviors and actions. Such actions flow out of a stable disposition; an attitude of sine proprio. As stated above, virtue for Bonaventure is never simply a good human quality, but rather a habitus, a disposition and a lived way of being. Francis in the

Legenda Maior is not one who simply deals with the reality of being poor; rather he embraces the habit of poverty and then practices poverty daily as a way of life.

55 Kevin Hughes points out how poverty results in dependence on an outside source in his analysis of Bonaventure’s Apologia Pauperum: “With this foundation in mind, Bonaventure then begins to define evangelical poverty itself. If possession of temporal goods consists in both ownership and use, and if use of temporal goods is necessary in the present life, then evangelical poverty ‘consists in renouncing the dominion and right to earthly possessions…; [it is] the virtue of abdicating temporal goods, such that someone, having nothing for himself, is sustained by what is not his own.’” Kevin Hughes, “Bonaventure’s Defense of Mendicancy” in A Companion to Bonaventure, ed. Jay Hammond, Wayne Hellmann, and Jared Goff (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 533. Quotation is Apologia Pauperum 7.2.

56 LM 15.1 (Fontes, 905; FAED II, 645).

120 Understanding poverty as a virtue also allows for progress or growth in poverty, which indeed Francis does in chapters 1-4. This is why Bonaventure can write toward the end of chapter 4 that “the merits of the virtues increased in Christ’s little poor.”57 More than this, however, Francis in the Legenda Maior is the perfect practitioner of poverty. Bonaventure alludes to this in chapter seven as he writes that Francis internalized the words from the Gospel of Matthew: “if you wish to be perfect, go sell all you have, and give to the poor” (Matthew

19:21). Bonaventure confirms the image of Francis as the perfect professor of poverty as he writes, “the beauty of Gospel perfection, consisting in poverty, chastity, and obedience was fittingly revealed to be shining perfectly in the man of God.”58

Piety in the Legenda Maior

The word pietas is used a total of 42 times in the Legenda Maior, including the treatise on the miracles. Notoriously difficult to translate into English, pietas may conjure up in the minds of modern readers images of conspicuous religious displays. Pietas for Bonaventure, however, is centered around proper devotion. As such, it is closely related to the cardinal virtue of justice, because like justice, piety involves giving certain parties their due. There are at least two points that readers should bear in mind when considering pietas: 1) A person may have piety

57 LM 4.9 (Fontes, 809; FAED II, 556): Crescentibus quoque virtutum meritis in parvulis Christi.

58 LM 7.6 (Fontes, 837; FAED II, 581): evangelicae perfectionis formositas; quantum ad castitatem scilicet, obedientiam et paupertatem, satis convenienter ostenditur in viro Dei pari forma perfecte fulsisse.

121 both toward God and toward neighbor, and 2) True piety must include tender care and a desire to honor the other.59

The first use of pietas in the Legenda Maior comes in chapter one. In this episode

Francis fails to give alms to a beggar, then comes to his senses and runs back to the man to offer

“extravagant alms.” Bonaventure writes that Francis “promised God that from that moment, while he had the means, he would not refuse those who begged from him for the love of God.

He observed this with untiring piety until his death and merited an abundant increase of grace and love for God.”60 This line shows that for Francis, piety includes active works of mercy toward those in need, while at the same time piety involves approaching others with the love of

God. Bonaventure concentrates on the concept of piety in chapter eight, entitled “The Drive of

Piety and How Irrational Creatures Seemed Moved Toward him.” Here most of the examples of

Francis’ piety include the care of other people who are in states of distress. The text states that

Francis “spared nothing at all, neither mantles nor tunics, neither books nor even appointments of the altar: all these he gave to the poor, when he could, to fulfill his obligation of piety.

Frequently, whenever he met poor people burdened with heavy loads, he would carry their

59 For a brief synopsis of the virtue of piety including classical definitions through Christian scholasticism see John F. Quinn, “The Moral Philosophy of St. Bonaventure,” in Bonaventure and Aquinas: Enduring Philosophers, ed. Robert W. Shahan (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1976). Quinn summarizes as follows: “The piety of Christian religion, according to Augustine, consists properly in worship of God or the true wisdom of faith, hope, and charity. Christian piety is also a gift of the Holy Spirit, and thus Augustine and Gregory say that it consists in works of mercy… Natural piety looks first to God, whom man ought to worship and to serve chiefly because he is made in the likeness of God, the first principle of man’s being and creation. Second, natural piety looks to parents, whose image their children bear and from whom they take their origin. As a gift of the Holy Spirit, Christian piety looks to the image of God in every man, and so benevolence and beneficence are due to each man.” Quinn, 49-50.

60 LM 1.1 (Fontes, 781; FAED II, 531): Promisit Domino Deo, quod numquam ex tunc, dum adesset possibilitas, petentibus pro amore Domini se negaret; quod usque ad mortem indefessa pietate observans, copiosa in Deum dilectionis et gratiae, incrementa promeruit.

122 burdens on his own weak shoulders.”61 Lines such as this emphasize the physical acts of mercy that Francis practiced, as Bonaventure shows how Francis possessed the virtue of piety out of which flowed acts of mercy. Other places in the Legenda Maior highlight the care and affection

Francis felt, such as when Bonaventure speaks of the “piety of his heart” pietas cordis.62

The Legenda Maior also speaks of “divine piety” which involves the caring gifts of God bestowed on humans. For example, Francis speaks of God as being the “great almsgiver” who gives to the worthy and unworthy out of divine piety.63 Piety, in other words, starts with God.

This concept that piety comes from God allows Bonaventure to make an important point in chapter eight. In a critical statement in the middle of the chapter he proposes that Francis grows in piety, stating that “He certainly had an inborn kindness doubled by the piety of Christ poured out on him.”64 Here Bonaventure is quoting from Thomas of Celano (2C 83), but the Seraphic

Doctor has added the phrase “of Christ” to explicitly state that it was divine piety from Christ that effectively doubled Francis’ own virtue. In this way Bonaventure suggests that Francis is not just a pious Christian, but rather that he is the man of perfect piety. In other words, Francis

61 LM 8.5 (Fontes, 846; FAED II, 590): Nulli prorsus rei parcebat, nec mantellis nec tunicis nec libris nec etiam paramentis altaris, quin omnia haec, dum posset, ut pietatis impleret officium, indigentibus largiretur. Pluries, cum oneratis obviaret in via pauperibus, imbecilles humeros illorum oneribus supponebat.

62 LM 9.4 (Fontes, 856; FAED II, 599).

63 LM 7.10 (Fontes, 840; FAED II, 583): quoniam universa in eleemosynam post peccatum dignis et indignis Eleemosynarius ille magnus largiflua pietate concessit

64 LM 8.4 (Fontes, 845; FAED II, 589): Sane elementiam habebat ingenitam, quam superinfusa Christi pietas duplicabat.

123 in his piety is literally becoming more like Christ.65 He gives to all what is due, and he does so with proper care and devotion. It is Francis’ perfect piety that Bonaventure has in mind when he proposes Francis as a new Adam and a new Christ in the opening lines of chapter eight. True piety, writes Bonaventure, is what brought Francis to “the state of innocence” innocentiae statum

(new Adam); and also “transformed him into Christ” transformabat in Christum.66

Charity in the Legenda Maior

Bonaventure uses the word caritas a total of 24 times, including once in the treatise on the miracles. Caritas is often used to describe the divine love of God. For example, at the very end of chapter 15 Bonaventure writes that it was fitting for Francis’ bones to be the source of miracles because Francis was “beloved by Him in life, and borne by Him into paradise like

Enoch, and of one who, through the zeal of love (caritatis zelum), was snatched into heaven in a

65 Michael Cusato explains that Francis’ pious concern for the lowest members of society broadened into a theological understanding, such that he began to see people the way that God saw them. He writes, “But in one of the most startling movements of grace in history, God was able to find a way to lead him into a wholly unsettling situation and enter into his consciousness in such a way that he suddenly was able to see these fragile, decomposing people in front of him not only as suffering human beings worthy of compassion and tenderness but also as sacred creatures, created—as he had been—by the hand of a loving Creator. And in that moment, he learned the cardinal insight of his young life: that all men and women, without exception are creatures created by the same God; that all men and women, without exception, have been endowed with the same inalienable dignity and worthy; that all men and women, without exception, have been offered the same grace of salvation; and finally, that all men and women, again without exception, are fratres et sorores, brothers and sisters one to another, bound inextricably together in a sacred human fraternity.” Custato, “Poverty,” 302.

66 LM 8.1.

124 fiery chariot like Elijah.”67 The caritas here is clearly God’s love, and it is the power of that divine love that lifts Francis into the heavenly realm.

As is the case with piety, understanding charity as having a divine source is critical for understanding the presentation of this virtue in the Legenda Maior. Chapter nine entitled “The

Ardor of Charity and the Desire for Martyrdom” specifically focuses on charity, and throughout this chapter divine charity takes the initiative. Francis, for his part, continually responds to divine charity, and this is the foundation for his virtue of love. For example, when Francis considers the Eucharist he focus his mind and soul on Christ’s sacrificial love: “Toward the sacrament of the Lord's Body he burned with fervor to his very marrow, marveling with unbounded wonder at that loving condescension and condescending love (caritas).”68 Here

Bonaventure, quoting from Thomas of Celano (2C 201), is not saying that Francis merely adored the Eucharist, or even that Francis adored Christ. Rather, the point is that Francis was fully inspired, infused, and set on fire by the charity of Christ, who condescends to be present in the

Eucharistic bread.69 By laying this groundwork on the charity of Christ, Bonaventure is able to proceed in describing Francis’ charity, which can only be understood in parallel to that of Christ.

In one of the most memorable passages of the Legenda Maior, Bonaventure writes that “The

67 LM 15.8. (Fontes, 910; FAED II, 649): ut quem Deus in vita sibi placentem et dilectum effectum in paradisum per contemplationis gratiam transtulerat ut Henoch, et ad caelum in curru igneo per caritatis zelum rapuerat ut Eliam.

68 LM 9.2. (Fontes, 855; FAED II, 598): Flagrabat erga Sacramentum Dominici Corporis fervore omnium medullarum, stupore admirans permaximo illam carissimam dignationem et dignantissimam caritatem.

69 This echoes Francis’ Letter to the Entire Order in which he writes, “O wonderful loftiness and stupendous dignity! O sublime humility! O humble sublimity! The Lord of the universe, God and the Son of God, so humbles Himself that for our salvation He hides Himself under an ordinary piece of bread!” FAED I, 118.

125 poor man of Christ had nothing other than two small coins, namely his body and his soul, which he could give away in generous charity. But for the love of Christ he offered them so continuously.”70 These lines, original to Bonaventure, clearly establish Francis’ virtue of charity in direct parallel to the charity of Christ. Francis gives away his body, just as Christ gives away his body in his passion and in the Eucharist. Furthermore, Francis is able to give away his body and soul in perfect charity because he has been inspired and infused with the perfect charity of

Christ by contemplating Christ’s passion and receiving the Eucharist.

Throughout the Legenda Maior, Francis is inspired and fueled by divine love.

Bonaventure is therefore able to speak of perfect charity as belonging to both Francis and Christ at the same time. He makes this clear in the following lines in which he speaks of Francis’ charity and Christ’s charity almost interchangeably: “The exceptional devotion of his [Francis’] charity so bore him aloft into the divine that his loving kindness was enlarged and extended… no wonder the charity of Christ made him even more a brother to those who are marked in the image of their creator.”71 The thrust of this line is that Francis’ charity cannot be understood apart from the charity of Christ, precisely because it is the latter that fuels the former. Such an understanding also allows the reader of the Legenda Maior to see how Francis was properly disposed toward charitable actions, such that he practiced charity in everyday life.

70 LM 9.3 (Fontes, 856; FAED II, 599): Non habebat aliud Christi pauper nisi duo minuta, corpus scilicet et animam, quae posset liberali caritate largiri. Sed haec per amorem Christi sic offerebat continue.

71 LM 9.4 (Fontes 856; FAED II, 599): Sic autem eum caritatis excessiva devotio sursum in divina ferebat, ut eiusdem affectuosa benignitas ad naturae consortes et gratiae dilataret. Quem enim creaturis ceteris germanum pietas cordis effecerat, mirum non est, si Creatoris insignitis imagine et sanguine redemptis Auctoris germaniorem Christi caritas faciebat.

126 The best example of such ‘practical’ charity occurs in chapter five. Francis, in the middle of the night, assists a brother who is suffering with hunger due to extreme fasting. Knowing that the brother would not eat on his own, Francis called the man to himself and set before them some bread. Taking the first bite himself, Francis gently encouraged his companion to eat as well.

The brother, deeply grateful, satisfied his hunger and prevented further injury. In the morning,

Francis explains the situation for the brothers in saying “Brothers, in this incident let charity, not food, be an example for you.”72 This episode is taking directly from Thomas of Celano (2C 21), but Thomas makes no mention of Christ. Bonaventure ‘rectifies’ this, adding his own coda to the story: “He taught them, moreover, to follow the discernment as the charioteer of the virtues, not that which the flesh recommends, but that taught by Christ, whose most sacred life expressed for us the exemplar of perfection.”73 As in chapter nine, Bonaventure links the charity of Francis to the charity of Christ, asserting that perfect virtue is seen both in the life of Christ and in the life of Francis.

It is because of Bonaventure’s insistence that Francis’ charity parallels Christ’s charity that the Seraphic Doctor can make the somewhat unexpected leap to martyrdom in chapter nine.

Martyrdom in the Franciscan tradition has its roots in the earliest missions of the brothers to foreign lands, and martyrdom is described in the Earlier Rule.74 Francis’ own journey toward

72 LM 5.7 (Fontes, 818; FAED II, 565): Sit vobis, fratres, non cibus, sed caritas in exemplum.

73 LM 5.7 (Fontes, 818; FAED II, 565): Docuit insuper eos discretionem sequi ut aurigam virtutum, non eam, quam caro suadet, sed quam edocuit Christus, cuius sacratissimam vitam expressum constat esse perfectionis exemplar.

74 The Earlier Rule (1221) makes the reality of martyrdom explicit in chapter 22. “All my brothers: let us pay attention to what the Lord says: Love your enemies and do good to those who hate you for our Lord Jesus Christ, Whose footprints we must follow, called His betrayer a friend and willingly offered Himself to his executioners. Our friends, therefore, are all those who unjustly inflict upon us distress and

127 martyrdom includes his desire to preach to the Muslims in Syria, and later his well-known 1219 journey to Damietta, Egypt where he crossed through the crusader encampments to meet with

Sultan al-Malik-al-Kamal.75 Much of this material – Francis’ desire for martyrdom and journey to the Muslim lands – is recounted by Thomas of Celano and Julian of Speyer. In the Legenda

Maior, however, Bonaventure transfers this material to chapter nine on charity. The reason for this involves his understanding of caritas. For Bonaventure, charity comes from God, and true charity is perfectly displayed in Christ’s sacrificial passion. Thus for Bonaventure’s Francis martyrdom is the natural outcome of perfect charity because dying as a martyr would place him in perfect alignment with the caritas of Christ.76 Bonaventure makes clear the connection between martyrdom and charity in the middle of chapter nine:

“In the fervent fire of his charity he strove to emulate the glorious triumph of the holy martyrs… set on fire, therefore, by that perfect charity which drives out fear, he desired to offer to the Lord his own life as a living sacrifice in the flames of martyrdom so that he might repay Christ, who died for us, and inspire others to divine love.”77 anguish, shame and injury, sorrow and punishment, martyrdom and death. We must love them greatly for we shall possess eternal life because of what they bring us.” FAED I, 79. For a summary of early missionary activity and martyrdom in the Franciscan tradition see Isabelle Heullant-Donat, “Martyrdom and Identity in the Franciscan Order (Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries),” Franciscan Studies 70 (2012): 429-453.

75 For a summary of Francis’ journey and the written sources see Steven J. McMichael, “Francis and the Encounter with the Sultan (1219),” in The Cambridge Companion to Francis of Assisi, ed. Michael Robson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 127-142.

76 McMichael argues that for the historical Francis, it was not his primary intention to be martyred at the hands of the Sultan, but rather to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ. McMichael admits, however that “Many of the early hagiographical sources tell us that one of Francis’s main desires in life was martyrdom, and that this was what he intended to have happen in Egypt. This would not have been surprising, because the patron saint of Assisi was San Rufino, a martyr of the third century. Also, the little church in Assisi where Francis most probably prayed was devoted to St. Stephen, the first follower of Jesus to be martyred (Acts 7).” McMichael, 136.

77 LM 9.5 (Fontes, 600; FAED II, 858). Ferventi quoque caritatis incendio gloriosum sanctorum Martyrum aemulabatur triumphum… Desiderabat propterea et ipse, fila perfecta caritate succensus, quae foras mittit timorem, per martyrii flammam hostiam Domino se offerre viventem, ut et vicem Christo pro nobis morienti rependeret et ad divinum amorem ceteros provocaret.

128

Here Bonaventure draws a line between “perfect charity” and the perfect example of Christ in his martyrdom. In practicing the virtue of charity, Francis is willing to allow God’s burning charity to lead him all the way to the point of death. Francis, in desiring martyrdom, is enflamed with the perfect charity that comes from Christ.78

Overall, the virtue of charity in the Legenda Maior is centered on both the imitation of

Christ and Francis’ desire to perfectly align himself with the love of Christ. To state it differently: Francis’ charity is never his own. Rather, the love that Francis embodies is a perfect reflection of divine love, made available to him through grace. By perfecting the virtue of charity, Francis co-operates with God; like Christ he is willing to take up his cross and offer his own life for the sake of love.79

The Man of Perfect Virtue

Having examined chapters 5-9 in which Bonaventure describes the specific virtues of austerity, humility, poverty, piety, and charity, one must now step back to consider

Bonaventure’s overall understanding of grace and virtue operating in the human person. Francis, of course, is Bonaventure’s perfect example of grace, virtue, and union with Christ. But the underpinnings of this presentation of Francis are found in one of Bonaventure’s previous works,

78 G.K. Chesterton summarized this sentiment succinctly as he wrote, “St. Francis was not thinking of martyrdom as a means to an end, but almost as an end in itself; in the sense that to him the supreme end was to come closer to the example of Christ.” Chesterton, 182.

79 See Timothy Johnson, The Soul in Ascent, Bonaventure on Poverty, Prayer, and Union with God. (St. Bonaventure: Franciscan Institute, 2012). Johnson writes, “the willingness to carry the Cross and the corresponding desire to be conformed to the Crucified are related intrinsically to the ecstatic transformation of the soul by the Crucified. Francis, who played out the drama of his life in the shadow of the Cross, looked upon the life of the Crucified as the model for his own life.” Johnson, 189.

129 the Breviloquium. Chapter five of this work contains Bonaventure’s most succinct discussion of grace and virtue. The section begins with two points on grace: 1) that grace is given directly by

God, and 2) that grace perfects the human soul.80 Bonaventure is clear that the human soul cannot begin to lift itself, rather the soul is fully dependent on God to condescend and lift it up.

It is here that Bonaventure introduces habitus into the equation: “Neither is the soul lifted up in a physical sense, but by virtue of a habit that renders it conformed to God.”81 The human will, says Bonaventure, cooperates with the divinely implanted habitus, and this manifests itself in virtue: “Our mind is not conformed to the blessed Trinity except through the uprightness of our free choice, and this occurs only through the strength of virtue, the splendor of truth, and the fervor of love.”82

Throughout the Breviloquium Bonaventure labors to explain the relationship between grace and free will. He is adamant that the human soul can only make progress and be saved through grace. At the same time, however, he is committed to the concept of human merit.

Merit, says Bonaventure, depends on free choice because a person can only be credited for acting well if he or she makes a conscious choice to do so.83 That being said, Bonaventure is careful to

80 Breviloquium V.1.2.

81 Brev. V.1.3 (Opera Omnia V, 252; Monti, 171): nec spiritus elevatur supra se per situm localem sed per habitum deiformem. Dominic Monti explains that “the term habit (habitus) designates a permanent state or disposition within a thing, as distinct from a transitory act. Thirteenth-century theologians introduced this Aristotelian notion to express their conviction that God’s self-gift of grace has a transformative effect on human nature.” Dominic Monti, Breviloqium, 170 note 8.

82 Brev. V.1.6 (Opera Omnia V, 253; Monti, 172): Postremo quia mens nostra non efficitur conformis beatissimae trinitati secundum rectitudinem electionis nisi per vigorem virtutis splendorem veritatis et fervorem caritatis et vigor virtutis animam purgat stabilit et elevat splendor veritatis.

83 Brev. V.2.1-2.

130 assert that the choice to act well is precipitated by an initial movement of grace.84 The Seraphic

Doctor continues to hold these dual assertions throughout the Breviloquium, maintaining that grace “stirs up” (excitare) free will; and that “grace is related to free will as a rider to the mount.

Like a rider, grace directs free will and leads it on, bringing it at last to the haven of eternal happiness, by training us, through its own seven-fold gift, in the deeds of perfect virtue.”85

With this stroke, Bonaventure transitions to a focused discussion on virtue. Dominic

Monti explains that “Bonaventure calls the virtues ‘habits’ to emphasize that they are perduring dispositions within the soul, orienting it toward certain actions.”86 Bonaventure’s central point is that these ‘habits’ are fully dependent on grace, “which is the origin, the end, and the form of virtuous habits.”87 Bonaventure goes on to describe particular virtues, especially the three theological virtues: faith, hope, charity; and the four cardinal virtues: prudence, fortitude, temperance, and justice. Bonaventure delves into even greater detail, explaining for example that justice is a general virtue that involves giving to each his due – therefore it comprises other virtues such generosity, repentance, and piety.88 But the point to which the Seraphic Doctor continues to return is that the virtues are made possible through grace. Even when a person

84 Jennifer Herdt refers to this scholastic insistence on grace and meritorious virtue in her term “grace- enabled human agency.” See Jennifer Herdt, Putting On Virtue: The Legacy of the Splendid Vices (Chicago: University of Chicago Press: 2012), 97.

85 Brev. V.3.5-6 (Opera Omnia V, 255; Monti, 182): gratia ad liberum arbitrium comparatur sicut sessor ad equum qui quidem sessor liberum arbitrium dirigit deducit et perducit ad portum aeternae felicitatis exercendo nos in operibus perfectae virtutis secundum donum ipsius gratiae septiformis. Bonaventure credits Augustine with the analogy of the rider and the mount. Monti notes that the oft- repeated analogy of the rider to the mount first appears in the Pseudo-Augustinian work Hypognosticon.

86 Monti, 183 note 39.

87 Brev. V.4.2 (Opera Omnia V, 256; Monti, 183): quae est habituum virtualium origo finis et forma.

88 Brev. V.4.5.

131 seems to be mired in sin, explains Bonaventure, grace can re-invigorate his or her virtues, just as when light falls upon colors, the colors are once again made visible.89 In this way, grace has the power to form and re-form the virtues in the human person.

Bonaventure clearly brings his theory of grace and virtue into the Legenda Maior. One sees this in the very first lines of the text: “The grace of God our Savior has appeared in these last days in his servant Francis.”90 From the outset, Bonaventure shows his readers that Francis is first and foremost a vessel of God’s grace. Like the light of grace described in the

Breviloquium, God gave Francis “as a light for believers, a practitioner, a leader, and a herald of

Gospel perfection, that by bearing witness to the light he might prepare for the Lord a way of light and peace to the hearts of his faithful.”91 Bonaventure goes on to say that the result of

God’s outpouring of grace on Francis was his virtue. “First endowed with gifts of divine grace, he was then enriched by the merit of unshakeable virtue.”92 As the Legenda Maior unfolds,

Bonaventure works from this foundation, proposing that Francis was filled with the grace that results in perfect virtue, and that grace and virtue transform into the image of Christ. This is one of the central motifs of the entire text: grace leader to virtue; virtue leads to conformity to Christ.

Throughout the Legenda Maior, Francis is likened to Christ. Albert Haase, in his 1990 dissertation, sketches this narrative development in pointing out specific scenes and actions

89 Brev. V.4.6.

90 LM Prologue 1 (Fontes, 777; FAED II, 525): Apparuit gratia Dei Salvatoris nostri diebus istis novissimis in servo suo Francisco.

91 LM Prologue 1 (Fontes 777; FAED II, 526): verum etiam evangelicae perfectionis professorem, ducem atque praeconem effectum in lucem dedit credentium, ut testimonium perhibendo de lumine, viam lucis et pacis ad corda fidelium Domino praepararet.

92 LM Prologue 1 (quoted above).

132 which link the life of Francis to the life of Christ.93 Obvious examples include Francis changing water into wine (5.10) or the brothers asking Francis to teach them to pray (4.1). More nuanced examples include the fact that Francis’ preaching, like Christ’s preaching “was confirmed with the signs that followed” (12.8; Mark 16:20). Hasse agrees that the Legenda Maior presents

Francis as a second Christ or alter Christus.94 The presentation of Francis as a second Christ is was first seen in Thomas of Celano’s Vita Prima. As Bernard McGinn explains “Francis is portrayed [by Thomas of Celano] as being gradually changed by his poverty, penance, and preaching into the perfect image of Christ.”95 McGinn goes on to argue, however, that the

Legenda Maior takes the theme of Francis as alter Christus to an even higher level.96 Of course,

Francis’ full identification with Christ in the Leganda Maior occurs when he receives the stigmata on Mount La Verna. In the stigmata Francis was “honored with the imprint of Christ’s likeness” (expressa promeruit similitudine decorari).97 Albert Haase considers this to be one of the most important statements in the text. Indeed, the importance of the stigmata in the Legenda

Maior cannot be overstated; it is the confirming seal placed upon Francis that signifies his final transformation into Christ.

93 See Albert Haase, “Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior: A Redaction Critical Approach,” (Phd Diss. 1990), 334-336.

94 For a full description of this motif, see Stanislao da Campagnola, L'Angelo del sesto sigillo e l‘alter Christus: Genesi e sviluppo di due temi francescani nei secoli XIII-XIV (Roma: Laurentianum, 1971).

95 Bernard McGinn, “The Influence of Francis on the Theology of the High Middle Ages: The Testimony of St. Bonaventure” in Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, ed. Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco (Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988), 107.

96 McGinn, 107.

97 LM 14.4 (Fontes, 902; English translation by Ewart Cousins, 318).

133 What Haase does not address, however, is the consistent description of Francis’ virtue throughout the Legenda Maior and how Francis’ virtues liken him to Christ. As described above, Bonaventure structures the central portion of the Legenda Maior around virtues, especially chapters 5-9 on austerity, humility, poverty, piety, and charity. In the stories about

Francis, and in Bonaventure’s analysis, it is shown that Francis not only possesses these virtues, but that they dispose him to right and perfect action. Such perfect virtue comes only by imitating

Christ. E. Randolph Daniel makes this exact point in his analysis of the Legenda Maior. He writes: “Francis’ spiritual quest had its origin in a revelation of Christ to Francis, not in any other source. Christ called Francis and showed him the path which he was to follow.”98 Here Daniel states that Bonaventure’s Francis does nothing apart from a desire to fully identify with Jesus.

For this reason Daniel claims that the Legenda Maior portrays Francis primarily as a ‘Christ mystic.’ What he means by this term is that Francis’ spirituality “began with the summons to imitate and to identify with Christ in his incarnation.”99 Daniel goes on to highlight the way

Bonaventure portrays the virtues of Francis, explaining that all the descriptions of virtue in the

Legenda Maior point toward Christ. The crux of Daniel’s argument is worth quoting in full:

“Throughout these chapters Bonaventure insisted that Francis’ quest was focused on identification with the crucified Christ. At the beginning of the chapter on austerity, Bonaventure quoted from the apostle Paul’s letter to the Galatians (5:24) where Paul says that ‘those who belong to Christ crucify their flesh with its vices and lusts.’ Speaking of Francis’ pietas, Bonaventure wrote that this piety ‘lifted Francis up to God by means of devotion, it transformed him into Christ by compassion.’ Francis’ mission

98 E. Randolph Daniel, “Symbol or Model? Bonaventure’s Use of St. Francis,” in Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, ed. Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco (Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988), 57.

99 Daniel, 57.

134 to the Muslims were prompted by his desire for martyrdom, a desire which grew out of the saint’s imitation of Christ and his inner longing to be conformed to the passion.”100

Daniel is arguing that Francis’ virtues in the Legenda Maior cannot be understood as simply belonging to Francis himself. On the contrary, each virtue is intricately bound up in the imitation of Christ. So it is that through the development and practice of virtue, Bonaventure’s Francis does not merely grow into a better person, or even a better Christian. Rather, Francis in the

Legenda Maior becomes the man of perfect virtue as he grows into the perfect image of Christ.

Such perfect virtue is almost certainly what Bonaventure has in mind when he calls Francis “the exemplar of all Gospel perfection” (totius evangelicae perfectionis exemplar).101 To quote

Daniel once more, “By his mortification of his body, by his humility and his obedience and especially by his observance of poverty, Francis has become like Christ.”102

The present chapter of this dissertation stands in agreement with Daniel about the role of virtue in Bonaventure’s presentation of Francis. The key that Daniel highlights is that virtue functions as the ‘method’ through which Francis arrives at the image of Christ. A simple proof of this is seen in a powerful double-entendre in the prologue where Bonaventure speaks of “a habit conformed to the cross” (habitus cruci conformis).103 Here habitus refers to the garment that Francis instructed his followers to wear (a simple robe shaped like the letter Tau), but also to

100 Daniel, 58.

101 LM 15.1.

102 Daniel, 59.

103 LM Prologue 2.

135 the habit of virtue – that is, a lived way of being and disposition toward right action.104 In a masterful stroke Bonaventure says that Francis lived a life of virtue conformed to the shape of the cross. This statement reinforces the theme that Bonaventure puts forth throughout the text: that Francis is the man of perfect virtue, filled with God’s grace, and in perfect alignment with

Christ.

The Role of Miracles in the Legenda Maior

Like Thomas of Celano before him, Bonaventure crafted a separate section of his portrait of Francis focusing specifically on the saint’s miracles. That said, all of the miracles in the treatise on the miracles occurred after Francis’ death. Miracles that occurred during Franics’ life, on the other hand, are interspersed throughout the main portion of the Legenda Maior. For example, Bonaventure includes a lengthy series of healing miracles at the end of chapter twelve.

As described in the previous chapter of this dissertation, Thomas of Celano presented the miracles of Francis in a way that highlighted the saint’s virtue. Bonaventure takes this same tactic and amplifies it. For Bonaventure, Francis’ virtue is just as important, if not more important than his miraculous acts. Bonaventure makes this clear in chapter two as he describes

Francis kissing and healing a leper: “I do not know which of these we should admire more: the depth of humility in such a kind kiss or his extraordinary power in such an amazing miracle.”105

104 As Regis Armstrong explains, “Other uses of habitus suggest that he envisions a deeper set of meanings that accentuate a spiritual quality or character of the soul that disposes it to receive the light and warmth of grace and to act accordingly.” Armstrong, “Lex,” 38.

105 LM 2.6 (Fontes, 792; FAED II, 540): Nescio, quod horum magis sit merito admirandum, an humilitatis profunditas in osculo tam benigno, an virtutis praeclaritas in miraculo tam stupendo.

136 This statement – unique to Bonaventure – is critical for understanding how the Seraphic Doctor views the miraculous acts of Francis. Bonaventure states that the virtue shown – in this case humility – is on equal footing with the power of the healing itself. The same point is made even more forcefully at the end of chapter six. Bonaventure recounts a miracle involving a disobedient brother. Francis orders that the brother’s hood be thrown into the fire as a punishment. After several minutes in the flames, however, the hood is pulled out and returned to the brother without a singe. While this miracle is described by Thomas of Celano (2C 154),

Bonaventure adds his own closing interpretation as follows: “This was done so that, with this one miracle, God might so commend both the holy man’s virtue and the humility of repentance.”106

In this statement Bonaventure clearly argues that in this case Francis’ virtue is primary, over and above the miracle described.

Virtues and miracles have a close relationship throughout the Legenda Maior. At the very end of the main portion of the work, Bonaventure once again connects virtue to miracles as he writes “Just as that blessed man had shone in his life with marvelous signs of virtue, so from the day of his passing until the present… he shines with outstanding examples of miracles through the divine power that glorifies him.”107 This set of lines – reworded from the text of

Julian of Speyer (LJS 76) – obviously makes a transition to the treatise on the miracles after

Francis’ death. More than that, however, this passage offers two critical points: 1) Francis’

106 LM 6.11 (Fontes, 832; FAED II, 576). Sicque factum est, ut hoc uno Deus miraculo et sancti viri virtutem et humilitatem poenitentiae commendaret.

107 LM 15.9 (Fontes, 911; FAED II, 649): Porro, sicut vir iste beatus mirandis virtutum signis in vita claruerat, sic et a die transitus sui usque in praesens… praeclaris miraculorum prodigiis, divina se potentia glorificante, coruscat.

137 virtuous acts are just as important as his miracles, and 2) The source of Francis’ miracles comes from God (divina se potentia). This second point – that the miracles come from God – is crucial.

As has been argued above, Bonaventure understands Francis’ virtue as having a divine source.

Bonaventure is therefore saying that both virtue and miracles have the same source – both flow out of the grace of God. Chapter 15 thus ends by asserting that virtue and miracles are not opposed to one another, but rather that virtue and miracles are two types of ‘signs’ that are akin to each other, precisely because they both grow out of divine grace and manifest themselves in

Francis the man of God.

Bonaventure’s Sermons on St. Francis

Bonaventure preached at least seven sermons on St. Francis, usually offering these homilies on the saint’s feast day. Dating these sermons is difficult.108 In Francis of Assisi Early

Documents, the sermons are listed as follows:

• The Morning Sermon on Saint Francis – Preached at Paris, October 4, 1255 • The Evening Sermon on Saint Francis – Preached at Paris, October 4, 1255 • The Evening Sermon on Saint Francis – Preached at Paris, October 4, 1262 • Sermon on Saint Francis – Preached at Paris, October 4, 1266 • Sermon on the Feast of the Transferal of the Body of Saint Francis – Probably preached at Paris, May 25, 1267

• The Morning Sermon on Saint Francis – Preached at Paris, October 4, 1267 • The Evening Sermon on Saint Francis – Preached at Paris, October 4, 1267

108 See Ignatius Brady, “Saint Bonaventure’s Sermons on Saint Francis,” Franziskanische Studien 58 (1976): 132-137.

138 Bonaventure’s audience for these sermons were likely groups of Franciscan brothers living and studying in Paris. The content of the sermons is naturally focused on Francis, but the Seraphic

Doctor does not simply discuss the saint’s life – rather he examines themes of grace, virtue, and union with Christ.109 It is fruitful to consider the timing of these sermons in light of the Legenda

Maior, which Bonaventure wrote between 1260 and 1263: the first two sermons were preached well before the Legenda, while the final four sermons came several years after its completion.

The sermon of 1262, however, was preached during the exact time that Bonaventure was writing his life of Francis. It is reasonable then then to examine the sermon of 1262 in greater detail, in order to further see the theme of virtue as Bonaventure envisioned it in the Legenda Maior.

Virtue in the Sermon of 1262

Bonaventure begins this sermon by focusing on the stigmata, which he asserts that

Francis bore physically and was seen by many witnesses. Bonaventure states that the stigmata had a divine source as he says, “The Lord himself imprinted this sign on the most humble and poor little man.”110 The stigmata, states Bonaventure, is the sign of the cross revealed in a

109 For a full treatment of Bonaventure’s sermons on Francis, see Zachary Hayes, “The Theological Image of St. Francis of Assisi in the Sermons of St. Bonaventure,” in Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, ed. Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco (Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988). Hayes remarks, “If it is true in general that Bonaventure’s sermon material provides a ready key to his theological views, it is particularly true in the case of his attempt to reflect theologically on the person of St. Francis of Assisi. The remarkable sermons about Francis which Bonaventure preached over a period of years reveal a penetrating depth of insight and sensitivity to the meaning of the evangelical perfection urged by St. Francis. In these sermons the Seraphic Doctor gives a more detailed elaboration of the theological meaning of the phenomenon of Francis of Assisi than perhaps anywhere else in the entire corpus of his writings with the exception of the Legenda. Hayes, 328.

110 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 586; FAED II, 719): Istud signum impressit Dominus istis pauperculo et humillimo.

139 unique way to Francis as the “privilege of a special grace” through which Francis was

“conformed to Christ.”111 With this groundwork laid, the sermon transitions to a focus on virtue, with the following specific virtues addressed in detail: poverty, purity, and humble obedience.

Many of the themes surrounding virtue found in the Legenda Maior are also present in the sermon of 1262. This section will discuss four such common themes: 1) Francis’ virtues work in consort with one another; 2) Francis is virtuous like the saints of old; 3) Francis in his perfect virtue is conformed to Christ; and 4) Francis’ virtue is on par with his miracles.

Regarding the first theme – that the virtues of Francis work in consort with one another –

Bonaventure describes Francis’ poverty by saying “there is a poverty borne in patience that is good, a poverty that is desired and longed for which is better, and a poverty embraced with joy… which is best of all.”112 Later Bonaventure reminds his audience that “purity enhances the other virtues, it adorns and ennobles them all.”113 In both of these statements Bonaventure advances an important concept that virtues strengthen and support one another. In practical terms, this means that a person strong in a virtue such as prudence is likely to be strong in other virtues as well.114 This theme of virtues acting together comes through clearly in the Legenda Maior, as

111 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 587; FAED II, 721): privilegium gratiae specialis, quod habuit beatus Franciscus in conformitate ad Christum.

112 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 587; FAED II, 721): sic est paupertas bona, quae est in patientia; melior, quae est in desiderio et concupiscentia; optima, quae est in gloria, quando homo gaudet et gloriatur in paupertate sua.

113 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 588 FAED II, 724): castitas est decus virtutum et reddit totum ornatum et honestum.

114 This concept, accepted by Aquinas and other scholastics, is referred to as “the unity of the virtues.” See Jean Porter, “The Unity of the Virtues and the Ambiguity of Goodness: A Reappraisal of Aquinas's Theory of the Virtues,” Journal of Religious Ethics 21.1 (1993): 137-163. Porter writes, “The virtues cannot be considered as discrete components of the personality of the truly virtuous person, components which can be separated out of the context of her overall personality with their structure and behavioral

140 Bonaventure often lists Francis’ virtues together, stating them in rapid succession. For example:

“This marvelous man… rich in poverty, exalted in humility, vigorous in mortification, prudent in simplicity.”115 Thus one sees this ‘unity of the virtues’ as a common thread between the

Legenda Maior and the sermon of 1262.

As for the second theme surrounding virtue in the sermon of 1262 – that Francis is like the saints of old – Bonaventure makes this clear in comparing Francis to Saint Benedict of

Nursia. The preacher cites the story of Benedict flinging himself into a thorn bush to subdue a temptation of the flesh, just as Francis did when he flung himself into a pile of snow. The snow episode in the Legenda Maior (described earlier in the chapter) plays an important role in

Francis’ development of purity and temperance. Further on in the sermon of 1262, Bonaventure compares Francis to another saint, Paul of Tarsus. Specifically, he says that Francis is a model of humility like Paul who displayed utmost humility in calling himself “the first of sinners” (1

Timothy 1:15). Finally, Bonaventure compares Francis to Saint Antony of the Desert in saying that Francis could, among other gifts of wisdom, see the secrets of people’s hearts. The point in all of these typologies is that Francis is like the saints of old in that he possesses virtues like the saints of old. This is why Bonaventure tells his listeners at the end of the sermon that they should not merely try to be like Francis, but rather that they should focus on virtue, asking “God to grant us so to humble ourselves in this life like Saint Francis.”116 Again, this theme of

expressions intact. For this reason, the person who possesses a similitude of a given virtue will not consistently behave in the same way as the truly virtuous person, even in the particular area of life that the seeming and true virtues regulate.” Porter, 159.

115 LM 15.1 (Fontes 905; FAED II, 645): Hunc virum mirabilem, utpote paupertate praedivitem, humilitate sublimem, mortificatione vividum, siniplicitate prudentem.

116 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 590; FAED II, 730): rogabimus ipsum, quod det nobis sic in praesenti humiliari cum ipso beato Francisco.

141 comparing Francis to the saints of old is found both in the sermon of 1262 and in the Legenda

Maior.

The third theme around virtue in the sermon of 1262 is that Francis is conformed to

Christ through perfect virtue. This is established in multiple places. For example, Bonaventure links Francis’ poverty to the image of Christ’s cross as he says, “Saint Francis also chose the highest poverty. It is fitting, therefore, that the sign of the Son of Man, namely, Christ’s cross, should be found on Saint Francis.”117 Here Bonaventure is referring to the stigmata, but the reader should notice how the preacher clearly connects all of the following elements: the stigmata, the cross, Christ, Francis, and the virtue of poverty. By connecting these elements

Bonaventure puts forth his point that Francis’ virtue – in this case his practice of “highest poverty” – led Francis into the full imitation of Christ. This is, of course, a central motif in the

Legenda Maior. Bonaventure makes the same point even more clearly later in the sermon: “The cross or sign of the cross imprinted on his body symbolized his love of Christ crucified and by the flame of that love he was totally transformed into Christ.”118 Here Bonaventure says that

Francis’ transformation into Christ is brought about by his very love of Christ. Near the end of the sermon, Bonaventure makes the case once more, weaving in his theory of grace and virtue, as he says, “Christ's cross is the sign of God's boundless grace because from the cross, that is, from

Christ's sufferings, flow all the gifts of grace. So, once again, we should expect to find the sign

117 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 587; FAED II, 722): Si ergo crux Christi signum est paupertatis, recte signum Filii hominis, hoc est crux Christi, in eo debuit situari.

118 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 589; FAED II, 727): Crux autem sive signum crucis impressum corpori eius significabat affectum, quem ipse habebat ad Christum cruxifixum; et tunc ex illo ardore dilectionis totus fuit transformatus in ipsum.

142 of the Son of man, the cross of Christ, on Saint Francis who was filled with the gifts of the Holy

Spirit.”119 For Bonaventure the “gifts of grace” include the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit and the seven cardinal virtues. In essence, therefore, Bonaventure is confirming that virtue – brought about by grace – is what filled Francis in order that he might be imprinted with Christ’s cross in his Christ-like transformation. This is the same argument made in the Legenda Maior: grace leads to virtue; virtue leads to conformity to Christ.

Turning to the fourth theme regarding virtue in the sermon of 1262 – that Francis’ virtue is on par with his miracles – Bonaventure makes this clear in several places. First, there is a description of a healing in Rieti, notable because it is one of only two specific healings described in all of Bonaventure’s sermons on Francis.120 In the case of the miracle in Rieti (which is also found in LM 13.6, and 3C 18), Bonaventure recounts how numerous animals were cured of an epidemic which rendered them unable to eat. A local person was advised by an unnamed devout man to obtain “some water in which Saint Francis had washed his hands and feet [and] sprinkle it over the animals.”121 The animals, of course, were cured. What is striking about the description of this miracle is that Bonaventure gives no agency or credit to Francis. The narration of the story makes clear that Francis did not himself sprinkle the water on the animals –

119 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 590; FAED II, 729): Et crux Christi signum est diffusionis gratiae Dei, quia de cruce Christi, hoc est a passione, fluunt charismata gratiarum; et ideo signum Filii hominis, hoc est signum crucis Christi, in illo debuit collocari, qui fuit replentus charismatibus Spiritus sancti.

120 The other healing appears in the Evening Sermon of 1267, in which Francis heals a hunchbacked man. The man, however, returned to a life of greed and was later killed when his house collapsed, just as Francis had predicted. Bonaventure says that he tells this story to emphasize Francis’ wisdom in foretelling events, but mainly to describe how Francis brought forth the virtue of justice.

121 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 589FAED II, 727): lotura manuum et pedum beati Francisci et inde aspergeret super animalia, et sanarentur.

143 in fact, Francis was not even aware of the healing, since the water was obtained surreptitiously without his knowledge. The thrust of the story, then, clearly points to the stigmata, for the water had touched Francis’ hands and feet. Indeed, in the Legenda Maior Bonaventure recounts this same miracle and places it directly in the middle of chapter thirteen “The Sacred Stigmata.” In a similar way, in the sermon of 1262 Bonaventure says he recounts this miracle in order to confirm what he has been saying about Francis’ transformation into the image of Christ. Bonaventure does not expound on Francis’ miraculous powers, but rather he concludes that “because Saint

Francis had a love as vast as the heavens, and the cross is the sign of the greatest love in the world, it is expected that we should find this sign [of the cross] on him.”122 Bonaventure is suggesting that Francis’ virtue is just as important as his miracles, a sentiment confirmed toward the end of the sermon where Bonaventure says, “He shed light on his neighbors, less advanced on the way of perfection, by his manifest virtue; refreshed them with ardent love by his devout prayers; and filled them with wonder by the miracles wrought through his holiness and goodness.”123 This passage – one of the few places in the sermons that Bonaventure mentions miracles – focuses squarely on Francis’ virtues. In the sermon of 1262, much like in the

Legenda Maior, Francis is not presented primarily as a worker of miracles, but rather he is put forth as a man filled with grace and virtue, imprinted with the sign of the cross and conformed to

Christ. For Bonaventure, Francis’ miracles serve as evidence and confirmation of his grace,

122 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 589; FAED II, 727): Quia ergo beatus Franciscus fuit caelum continentiae amplae per caritatem, et crux est signum summae caritatis et dilectionis; ideo in ipso debuit situari.

123 Evening Sermon 1262 (Opera Omnia IX, 590; FAED II, 729-730): illustrans inferiors sive proximos per documenta virtutis; imbribus irrorans per exempla perfectionis et virtutis…

144 virtue, and the perfect imitation of Christ. To conclude: in this theme, and in the other themes discussed above, there is remarkable consistency between the sermon of 1262 and the Legenda

Maior.

Conclusion

Bonaventure in the Legenda Maior presents to his readers a Francis who is the man of perfect virtue, filled with God’s grace, and perfectly conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. As

Dominique Poirel remarks, Bonaventure’s portrait of Francis is characterized by nothing less than a divine harmony.

“Le but, en effet, n'est pas de surprendre l'auditeur, mais au contraire de combler une attente après l'avoir suscitée, pour procurer ainsi un sentiment de plénitude et de perfection. Si la vie de François selon Bonaventure se développe sous la figure de l'harmonie et de la symétrie, c'est parce qu'elle correspond à la volonté divine, c'est parce que la vie de François est elle-même parallèle et symétrique à la vie du Christ.”124

What Paul Sabatier and others seemed to miss is that this theological and spiritual presentation was central to Bonaventure’s project in crafting the work. Bonaventure also focused on particular and specific virtues of Francis: most notably austerity, humility, poverty, piety, and charity. What is striking about the description of each of these specific virtues is that Francis is shown to embody them perfectly. Bonaventure shows his reader over and over that in his virtue,

Francis reflects the perfect image of Christ. Not surprisingly, these same sentiments are present in Bonaventure’s sermons on Francis, especially the sermon of 1262 which he delivered while

124 Dominique Poirel, “L'écriture de Thomas de Celano: une rhétorique de la rupture,” Franciscan Studies 70 (2012): 79. The aim, in fact, is not to surprise the listener, but rather to satisfy an expectation after having piqued it. The result is a feeling of wholeness and perfection. If the life of Francis according to Bonaventure develops under harmony and symmetry, it is because it corresponds to the divine will; and because the life of Francis is parallel and symmetrical to the life of Christ.

145 writing the Legenda Maior. None of this undervalues the importance of the stigmata in the

Legenda Maior, which is central to Bonaventure’s portrait of Francis. On the contrary, because the stigmata also represents Francis’ full conformity to the image of Christ, the stigmata works in consort with the presentation of Francis’ virtues. Both the stigmata and the virtues confirm

Francis’ journey to perfection. In moving through the stages of purgation, illumination, and perfection, through his dispositions and actions, and in his reception of the stigmata, Francis is shown to be the perfect image of Christ, the alter Christus, and the man of perfect virtue.

CHAPTER FOUR

READING THE LEGENDA MAIOR AS HAGIOGRAPHY TODAY

Introduction

As stated in the previous chapter, Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior received immediate positive reception within the Franciscan order upon its acceptance in 1263. Years later, in the

20th century, reception would be mixed, partly due to the critiques by Paul Sabatier and others.

Today Bonaventure’s portrait of Francis is read with attention to the theological and spiritual treasures of the text. The question remains, however: how are modern readers to approach this text? Is it an artifact of Franciscan history? A window into the theology and spirituality of St.

Bonaventure? While the text can indeed be fruitfully studied in these ways, this chapter will argue that the Legenda Maior is best approached from the point of view of its original genre: hagiography. Bonaventure wrote the Legenda Maior as a work of hagiography, presenting

Francis to the world for the purpose of edifying the readers (and listeners) who would encounter the text. Such edification can still occur for readers today. In other words, modern readers of the

Legenda Maior may be formed through their encounters with Bonaventure’s Francis. How might this occur? Through what lens might readers approach Bonaventure’s Francis in order that they might be changed? There are at least three possibilities: 1) Francis as moral exemplar, 2)

Francis as converted self, and 3) Francis as the man of perfect virtue. All three of these hermeneutical lenses are potentially fruitful. This chapter will argue, however, that the third lens

– Francis as the man of perfect virtue – is most true to the text itself.

146 147 This chapter will begin by reviewing Bonaventure’s theory of virtue, adding some additional points about how the Seraphic Doctor understands virtue residing in the will of each individual’s souls. The chapter will then reiterate the goal and intention of hagiography, which is to form and edify those who read it. The Legenda Maior clearly follows this model –

Bonaventure’s text is a hagiography and should be approached as such. With this groundwork laid, the chapter will present three possible lenses with which modern readers might approach

Francis in the text: moral exemplar; converted self; man of perfect virtue. The first two of these lenses will be shown to have limitations, while the third lens – Francis as the man of perfect virtue – will be suggested as the most complete. The chapter will conclude that the Legenda

Maior forms and edifies readers by inspiring them to practice virtue in their own lives.

Bonaventure on Virtue: Three Additional Points

This dissertation has explained Bonaventure’s understanding of virtue as habitus, a stable disposition out of which one acts well. In addition to this foundational definition, there are three additional points on virtue that must be stated. Bonaventure believes that: 1) Virtue is located within the will of the human being, 2) Virtue allows for moral progress, and 3) Virtue is an individualized project.

Regarding the first point – that virtue resides in the will – Bonnie Kent explains this concept well. She states that for Bonaventure, virtue is revealed in actions, and that actions are necessarily controlled by the will. She writes:

“Virtuous acts are elicited directly by the rational powers of the soul; they are elicited by lower powers only as a sort of consequence. In the same way, Bonaventure argues, the

148 hand is rectified in giving when the will is rectified in dispensing, yet liberality is not in the hand but in the will.1

What this means is that the source of virtuous actions – that is to say, virtues themselves – reside in the rational parts of the soul, namely the will. The underlying point here is that virtue must be praiseworthy, precisely because a person deserves a certain amount of credit for acting well.

This simply could not be the case if virtue resided outside the will. Kent alludes to one of

Bonaventure’s best analogies, a person giving alms. When someone gives alms, the hand does not ‘get credit’ for the giving. This is because the hand simply acts as an instrument. The real virtue lies in the will that controls the hand.2 Kent therefore concludes that Bonaventure

“consistently emphasizes that virtue must lie within the scope of free decision: it must, in effect, be within the agent’s control.”3 This is helpful when it comes to interpreting the Legenda Maior.

If Francis is the man of perfect virtue, it follows that he must have a perfect will. Or, to say it more clearly, Francis’ will must be perfectly aligned with the will of God. This, of course, is exactly what Bonaventure proposes in the text, for he continually states that the grace of God has acted upon Francis and conformed him to Christ. This point substantially deepens the understanding of Francis’ virtue. The Poverello is not simply someone who acts well in every

1 Kent, Virtues of the Will, 214. See Bonaventure’s Commentary on the Sentences III.33.3.

2 Bonaventure summarizes this point in the fifth collation of his Hexaemeron (Collations on the Six Days). He writes: “Now from what has been said – that some virtues are intellectual, and others a matter of habit – it should not be understood that therefore virtues are to be found in some part other than the rational, for the essence of every virtue is in the rational part. Yet some virtues are in this part by their very nature in so far as reason is speculative, others are in it in so far as reason is the ruler of the exterior man.” Collation 5.13. De Vinck, 82

3 Kent, Virtues of the Will, 215.

149 situation. Rather, he is one whose very soul is so in tune with the divine reality that he cannot help but act well, for the virtues of his will are perfectly formed.

The second point is that Bonaventure’s theory of virtue makes room for moral progress.

This is critical. Bonaventure clearly believes that one can grow in virtue. David Clairmont explains Bonaventure’s notion of progress in the following:

“Bonaventure clearly recognizes that, even within a general style of life that finds it possible to disregard material possessions, there are degrees of approximation and points of progress. The will, as he states, admits of various degrees of effort, but these degrees when taken together nonetheless constitute a coherent form of life.”4

Here Clairmont is speaking specifically about Bonaventure’s understanding of poverty 5 But there is a broader concept at work. The larger point is that individuals can indeed progress in virtue, as their wills are formed over time. The example of poverty is a good one. Bonaventure says that when it comes to poverty, a person might begin by reducing his or her attachment to possessions. Later on, he or she may begin to renounce and dispose of the actual possessions themselves. In other words, moral progress is possible, and virtue can unfold by degree. This concept is quite helpful in interpreting the Legenda Maior. Indeed, the text portrays Francis as one who is on a journey. Even prior to Francis’ experience with the leper, the Legenda Maior describes the young Francis as growing in generosity through a series of experiences that turn his heart to the poor. When looking at sections such as this, one sees that the narrative of the

4 David Clairmont, Moral Struggle and Religious Ethics: On the Person as Classic in Comparative Theological Contexts (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011), 94.

5 See The Morning Sermon on St. Francis 1255. Bonaventure writes: “If one does not have the will to do that [sell all possessions], one must at least keep oneself from the cares, anxieties, and vanities that go with possessions.” FAED II, 510.

150 Legenda Maior supports Bonaventure’s understanding of moral progress. Francis, for all his inate goodness, does indeed get better, especially in the first four chapters of the text.

The third point is perhaps the most difficult to explain. This is the idea that for

Bonaventure, virtue is an individualized project. It has already been stated that virtue resides in the will. A corollary to this fact is that virtue must operate at the level of the invidual, for indeed each person possesses a unique will within his or her rational soul.6 Here the concept of free will is fundamentally important, and Bonaventure is a firm believer in human free will. As Etienne

Gilson explains: “Freewill is not nothing. It is more than a mere accident of the rational soul… it is rooted in the very essence of the soul.”7 What Gilson means is that free will goes to the very core of every person. Virtue then, which operates along with reason, empowers the individual in a unique way. It is therefore possible to say that for Bonaventure the practice of virtue is, in a sense, unique to each person.8 This is not to say that virtue is somehow subjective, or that virtue is defined by the individual, with charity for one person meaning something different than

6 See Christopher M. Cullen, Bonaventure (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 96-104. Importantly, Cullen explains that for Bonaventure, virtues simply cannot reside in the appetites; they must reside in the will. Cullen writes, “He admits that this view might seem probable to moral philosophers, but it does not seem reasonable to the theologian, because all the cardinal virtues are equal with respect to their dignity in meriting eternal life. All the virtues are sources of merit. Furthermore, since merit is found in free choice, it follows that the virtues, whether cardinal or theological, are found only in those powers containing free choice. And since free choice is a habit of the rational part of the soul (will and intellect working together), the virtues must reside there.” Cullen, 99.

7 Etienne Gilson, The Philosophy of St. Bonaventure, trans. Dom Illtyd Trethowna and Frank J. Sheed (Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony Guild Press, 1965), 369.

8 As Thomas Nairn and Thomas Shannon remark, “the contemporary Franciscan moral vision exhibits a profound respect for the individual…God did not simply create abstract human beings, but rather individual men and women, each precious in their distinctiveness… The contemporary Franciscan vision maintains that morality, while respectful of norms, is more specifically a way of life into which one is called.” Thomas A. Nairn and Thomas A. Shannon. “The Franciscan Moral Vision and Contemporary Culture,” in The Franciscan Moral Vision: Responding to God’s Love, ed. Thomas A. Nairn (St. Bonaventure: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2013), 219-220.

151 charity for another. This is not the case.9 Rather, the point is that virtue is practiced at the individual level, with actions flowing out of each person’s reason and will. This is why virtuous actions are, in a sense, unique and personal.10

A better way to understand the notion of virtue being unique and personal is through

Bonaventure’s description of the spiritual senses in the Itinerarium. In chapter 4 the Seraphic

Doctor insists that grace descends into the human soul, and subsequently works deep within the individual.11 He explains that divine grace then goes about working on the spiritual senses within the soul.

“The soul, therefore, believes and hopes in Jesus Christ and loves him… When by faith the soul believes in Christ as the uncreated Word and Splendor of the Father, it recovers its spiritual hearing and sight; its hearing to receive the words of Christ and its sight to view the splendors of that Light… For in this stage, when the inner senses are restored to see the highest beauty, to hear the highest harmony, to smell the highest fragrance, to

9 Defining virtue only with reference to the individual would make impossible the broader project of moral theology. John Quinn highlights Bonaventure’s broad view of moral goodness as he writes, “Moral philosophy, in particular, proceeds from this or that particular good to arrive at the optimum good, which is the final cause or end of all moral goodness. Now, in Bonaventure’s view, the sufficient end of the human soul can be only that good for which it is created. This is the supreme good, which is superior to the soul, and the infinite good, which is beyond the powers of the soul.” John F. Quinn, “The Moral Philosophy of St. Bonaventure” in Bonaventure and Aquinas: Enduring Philosophers, ed. Robert W. Shahan and Francis J. Kovach (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1976), 29.

10 This point is made clear in Bonaventure’s opening discussion of virtue in the Commentary on the Sentences in which Bonaventure restates the following definition from Aristotle: “Virtue is a habitus, which perfects its possessor and renders his work good.” Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, II, 6, quoted in Commentary on the Sentences II.27.3. Mary Beth Ingham makes the same point in her discussion of the later Franciscan theologian Duns Scotus. She writes: “Scotus explains that authentic moral goodness admits of a two-fold excellence: both internal harmony and external beauty. The morally good act is both suitable (fitting or seemly) for an individual to perform. It possesses its own internal coherence or suitability, something another person would recognize and admire.” Mary Beth Ingham, “Moral Goodness and Beauty,” in The Franciscan Moral Vision: Responding to God’s Love, ed. Thomas A. Nairn, (St. Bonaventure: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2013), 102.

11 See Gregory F. LaNave, “Bonaventure,” in The Spiritual Senses: Perceiving God in Western Christianity, ed. Paul L. Gavrilyuk and Sarah Coakley (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 159–73.

152 taste the highest sweetness, to apprehend the highest delight, the soul is prepared for spiritual ecstasy.”12

Spiritual senses, like the physical senses, are of course unique to each person. Thus

Bonaventure’s model of grace awakening and rectifying the spiritual senses must likewise be a unique experience for each person. Indeed, Bonaventure says that this process only begins when the individual soul believes in Christ and accepts him. Bonaventure goes on to conclude, “No one grasps this except him who receives.”13 Having received grace and experienced the awakening of the spiritual senses, the individual goes on to be formed in virtue, producing right action through the power of free will. For Bonaventure this is a spiritual – even mystical – project. At the same time, the development of virtue includes a person’s everyday attitudes and actions. On the whole, then, Bonaventure’s theory of virtue is a theory of formation. With this in mind, we now turn back to the Legenda Maior, for this chapter will argue that Bonaventure’s portrait of Francis – as hagiography – is primarily intended to shape and form the individual reader.

Hagiography as Formational

In 1905 Hippolyte Delehaye wrote that for a text to be called a hagiography “le document doit avoir un caractère religieux et se proposer un but d’édification.” Furthermore a hagiography

12 Itinerarium 4.3 (Opera Omnia V, 306; Cousins, 89): Anima igitur credens, sperans et amans Jesum Christum… dum per fidem credit in Christum, tanquam in Verbum increatum quod est verbum et splendor Patris, recuperat spiritualem auditum et visum: auditum ad suscipiendum Christi sermones; visum, ad considerandum ipsius lucis splendores… In hoc namque gradu recuperatis sensibus interioribus, ad videndum summe pulchrum, ad audiendum summe harmonicum, ad odorandum summer odoriferum, ad degustandum summe suave, ad apprehendendum summe delectabile, disponitur anima ad mentales excessus.

13 Itinerarium 4.3 (Opera Omnia V, 306; Cousins, 89): Quem nemo capit, nisi qui accipit.

153 must be “inspiré par le culte des saints, et destiné à le promouvoir.”14 Over a hundred years later, this definition is still an apt description of the genre of hagiography. The lives of the saints have a clear and unapologetic intention to affect those who read them. In other words, the “aim” of hagiography is to edify the reader – to make him or her better, or to urge him or her to lead a better life.15 In this sense, hagiography cannot stand on its own as an artifact of history. On the contrary, the genre requires an audience; it must be read. The term legenda, from the Latin legere (to read) suggests this very point. It is only in the reading (or hearing) of the life of a saint that the purpose of hagiography comes to fruition. As Athanasius says to his audience in the preface to the Vita Antonii, “The very act of remembering Antony is of enormous profit and benefit to me and I am sure that you, listening in wonder, will be keen to follow his commitment: for to know who Antony was offers us the perfect path to virtue.”16 Here Athanasius states his hope that the text will shape both author and hearer alike.

The Legenda Maior functions as hagiography precisely because it likewise intends to shape and form those who encounter it. Bonaventure makes this clear in the prologue as he

14 Hippolyte Delehaye, Les Légendes Hagiographiques, Deuxième Édition (Bruxelles: Bureaux de la Société des Bollandistes, 1906), 2. Translation: The document must have a religious character and have edification as its aim. It must be inspired by the cult of the saints (i.e. devotion to the saints) and intended to encourage that devotion.

15 Lawrence S. Cunningham agrees, observing (in jocular tone) that, “the lives of the saints also tend to be unremittingly and suffocatingly edifying. Why is there not just one saint in the history of Christianity who admitted in a moment of weakness that he found the mayor’s wife attractive or confessed that he hated the food in the monastery refectory and slipped out for a good plate of pasta at the local trattoria. Why, in short, is hagiography so edifying?” Lawrence Cunningham, The Meaning of Saints (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980), 2.

16 Vita Antonii preface (CCSL, 4; White, 8): Et mihi enim ingens lucrum est atquc utilitas hoc ipsum quod recordor Antonii et uos cum admiracione audientes scio eius propositum cupere sectari; perfecta est siquidem ad uirtutem uia Antonium scire quis fuerit.

154 states that Francis was given by God “as a light for believers, a practitioner, a leader, and a herald of Gospel perfection, that by bearing witness to the light he might prepare for the Lord a way of light and peace to the hearts of the faithful.”17 At the end of chapter six, Bonaventure writes “worthy of being followed is the humility of Francis.”18 His use of the verb “follow”

(sector) is telling. This Latin word meaning ‘to pursue continually,’ has connotations related to hunting.19 Bonaventure suggests that Francis is not merely a saint to be admired, but one to be tracked down and chased after. In other words, readers of the Legenda Maior must not be passive, but rather they are to actively follow the poor man of Assisi, shaping their own lives in response.

As Delehaye says, “Les saints… rendent [les virtus] aimables et ils invitent les chrétiens

à les pratiquer.”20 Indeed, the purpose of hagiography is to invite readers into a new way of living, such that they are different for having encountered the saint in the text. Bonaventure’s

Francis certainly extends such an invitation. The question is: how exactly does this occur? This chapter will present three lenses with which modern readers might approach Bonaventure’s

Francis. The first lens is the idea that Francis in the Legenda Maior functions mainly as a moral exemplar.

17 LM prologue 1 (Fontes, 777; FAED II, 525): verum etiam evangelicae perfectionis professorem, ducem atque praeconem effectum in lucem dedit credentium, ut testimonium perhibendo de lumine, viam lucis et pacis ad corda fidelium Domino praepararet.

18 LM 6.10 (Fontes, 832; FAED II, 576): Digne itaque sectanda est Francisci humilitas.

19 See Lewis & Short entry on “sector,” via Latin Word Study Tool www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper.

20 Delhaye, 259. Translation: The saints make virtue attractive and ever invite Christians to seek it. Translation by Donald Attwater, The Legends of the Saints (New York, Fordham University Press, 1962), 181.

155

Francis as a Moral Exemplar: A Model for Imitation

Peter Brown has written convincingly on the importance of moral exemplars in both the ancient world and in the Christian era. For the ancients, learning involved personal connections between pupils and teachers which depended firmly on the concept of imitation. As Brown succinctly concludes: “the role of ancient exemplars was overwhelming.”21 Christians perpetuated this model, but with some modification. The saints were indeed presented as moral exemplars; but they no longer referred to themselves – they pointed to Christ. In Brown’s words: “In Christian thought, God himself was proposed to man as the Exemplar behind all exemplars.”22 The saints were honored with intense devotion, but they were understood as

“Christ-carrying” exemplars who made Christ accessible. As his monks were said to have addressed Athanasius: “When we look at you, it is as if we look upon Christ.”23 Such sentiment echoes Paul’s exhortation to the Corinthians: “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1

Corinthians 11:1, ESV). The overall point is that the Christian cult of the saints maintained a strong model of imitation, which depended upon the concept of moral exemplars.

Turning to the Legenda Maior, one sees that Bonaventure does initially suggest Francis as a moral exemplar to be imitated. For example, Bonaventure makes direct references to imitation in the prologue, writing that, “all who are truly humble and lovers of holy poverty,

21 Peter Brown, “The Saint as Exemplar in Late Antiquity” in Saints and Virtues, ed. John Stratton Hawley (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), 4.

22 Brown, 6.

23 Brown, 10. The quotation appears in The Life of Saint Pachomius, trans. Armand Veilleux, Pachomian Koinonia, Vol I, (Kalamazoo Cistercian Publications, 1980), 144.

156 who, while venerating in him God's superabundant mercy, learn by his example…”24 and later that, “this messenger of God – worthy of love by Christ, imitation by us, and admiration by the world – was God's servant, Francis. In this, while living among humans, he was an imitator of angelic purity and was placed as an example for the perfect followers of Christ.”25 In chapter three Francis himself realizes that “he should give himself as an example to others.”26 Clearly,

Bonaventure does present Francis as one who sets an example for the faithful.

However, a particular passage in chapter six suggests that Bonaventure cautioned against viewing Francis as one to be imitated. The text relates a famous scene in which Francis, having eaten some meat while recovering from illness, immediately went out to berate himself before the townspeople for this act of weakness.

“‘It is not right,’ he said, ‘that people should believe I am abstaining while, in fact, I eat meat secretly.’ He got up, inflamed with the spirit of true humility, and after he had called the people together in the piazza of the city of Assisi, he solemnly entered the principal church with many of the brothers whom he had brought with him. He commanded that he be dragged before the eyes of all, with a cord tied around his neck and stripped to only his underwear, to the stone where criminals received their punishment. Climbing upon the stone, although he had a fever and was weak and the weather was bitter cold, he preached with much vigor and spirit. He asserted to all his hearers that he should not be honored as a spiritual man but rather he should be despised by all as a carnal man and a glutton.27

24 LM prologue 1 (Fontes, 777; FAED II, 525): omnibus vere humilibus et sanctae paupertatis amicis, qui superaffluentem in eo Dei misericordiam venerantes, ipsius erudiuntur exemplo.

25 LM prologue 2 (Fontes, 778; FAED II, 527): unc Dei nuntium amabilem Christo, imitabilem nobis et admirabilem mundo servum Dei fuisse Franciscum, indubitabili fide colligimus, si culmen in eo eximiae sanctitatis advertimus, qua, inter homines vivens, imitator fuit puritatis angelicae, qua et positus est perfectis Christi sectatoribus in exemplum.

26 LM 3.7 (Fontes, 798; FAED II, 546): Sciens se datum aliis in exemplum.

27 LM 6.2 (Fontes, 824; FAED II, 570): ‘Non est,’ inquit, ‘conveniens, ut populus abstinentem me credat, et ego e contrario carnaliter reficiar in occulto.’ Surrexit propterea sanctae humilitatis spiritu inflammatus, et in platea civitatis Assisii populo convocato, solemniter cum fratribus multis, quos secum adduxerat, maiorem introivit ecclesiam, funeque ad collum ligato, nudum cum femoralibus solis in oculis omnium se trahi praecepit usque ad lapidem, in quo malefactores puniendi consueverant collocari. Super

157

Here Francis acts out of deep humility, as well as a fervent desire to be transparent – he must show the people of Assisi that his hypocrisy is not acceptable. The text shows, however, that the crowd responded to Francis’ actions by respecting him even more. Rather than being upset, they were moved by his contrition. As the text states: “those who had gathered there were amazed at so great a spectacle. They were well aware of his austerity, and so their hearts were struck with compunction.”28 Up until this point, Bonaventure has described the story with the same details as Thomas of Celano.29 In the closing line, however, Bonaventure alters Thomas’ text substantially, both in word and meaning. While Thomas writes: “They were touched in their hearts and were moved to a better way of life by such an example,”30 Bonaventure writes, “They professed that his humility was easier to admire than to imitate… This incident seemed to be more a portent like that of a prophetic utterance than an example.”31 This line is nothing short of striking. Bonaventure, in direct contrast to Thomas, states that the townspeople could not imitate

Francis. While Thomas puts forth Francis as an example to follow, Bonaventure’s alteration suggests that Francis set the proverbial bar too high. He can only be admired, not emulated.

quem conscendens, licet quartanarius esset et debilis, acerbi frigoris tempore cum multo vigore animi praedicavit, audientibusque cunctis asseruit, se non tamquam spiritualem honorandum fore, quin immo tamquam carnalem et glutonem ab omnibus contemnendum.

28 LM 6.2 (Fontes 824; FAED II, 570): Igitur qui convenerant, tam ingenti viso spectaculo, admirati sunt, et quia ipsius austeritatem iam noverant, devoto corde compuncti.

29 See 1C 52.

30 1 C 52 (Fontes, 326; FAED I, 228): Sicque compuncti corde , ad melioris vitae statum tanto provocabantur exemplo.

31 LM 6.2 (Fontes, 824; FAED II, 570): Humilitatem huiusmodi magis admirabilem quam imitabilem proclamabant. Licet autem id magis videatur portentum fuisse instar prophetalis vaticinii quam exemplum.

158 What might one make of this change by Bonaventure? Hester Goodenough Gelber, in analyzing this particular textual choice, concludes that, “the extreme nature of Francis’s behavior

– having himself dragged naked through the streets like a criminal for having eaten a little meat while ill – led Bonaventure in the Legenda Maior to caution against viewing his actions as exemplary.”32 Gelber argues that in doing so Bonaventure “seems to miss the mark,” precisely because he fails to properly highlight the exemplary power of Francis’ public witness.33 Is this correct? Timothy Johnson, for his part, remains skeptical of the claim that Bonaventure avoided an exemplary presentation of Francis. He chides: “Repeated often enough, this belief that

Bonaventure creates a Francis beyond reach, who is unable to be imitated by the brothers, has become something of a truism in certain circles.” 34 Johnson points out that Bonaventure explicitly suggests imitation multiple times in the Legenda Maior, as noted above. Michael

Cusato, on the other hand, argues that Bonaventure’s presentation of Francis’ sanctity is intentionally crafted to be out of reach. He writes that Bonaventure “has placed Francis above and beyond the Franciscan Order in history. He is, therefore, one whose holiness can be admired and venerated but which, in the mind of the Seraphic Doctor, can never be fully imitated or attained.”35

32 Hester Goodenough Gelber, “The Exemplary World of St. Francis of Assisi” in Saints and Virtues, ed. John Stratton Hawley (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), 17.

33 Gelber, 17.

34 Timothy J. Johnson, “The ‘Umbrian Legend’ of Jacques Dalarun: Toward a Resolution of the Franciscan Question: Roundtable,” Franciscan Studies 66 (2008): 494.

35 Michael Cusato, "Esse ergo mitem et humilem corde, hoc est esse vere fratrem minorem: Bonaventure of Bagnoregio and the Reformulation of the Franciscan Charism," in Charisma und religiose Gemeinschaften im Mittelalter, eds. Giancarlo Andenna, Mirko Breitenstein, and Gert Melville, (Vita

159 The question is therefore an open one. Does Bonaventure present Francis as a model to be imitated? Jacques Dalarun has deeply considered the question of imitation in the Legenda

Maior. His conclusion is worth quoting in full:

“Here we must judge without irony the contradiction in the Major Legend between the prologue, which says that Francis can be imitated, and the later statement, in the course of the narrative, that most of his deeds cannot be imitated. The possibility of imitating Francis is not a false promise in Bonaventure. It can be done in two ways, preferably joined together: Enter the Order, and follow Bonaventure’s Francis along the mystical way of knowledge of God – more precisely, knowledge in God – begun on La Verna. Imitation of Francis, proclaimed in Bonaventure’s prologue, cannot be inserted into the account of the saint’s life. That is because it is not so much a historical and human possibility as a model, both institutional and metaphorical, theological rather than moral. In Bonaventure, Francis is no longer an experience, he is an allegory.”36

Unpacking this passage takes some effort. The key point is that Dalarun agrees that a casual or surface-oriented imitation of Francis is not possible, at least not in Bonaventure’s thought.

Rather, following Francis is an immersive lifestyle, likely necessitating a commitment to the

Franciscan order. The Francis of the Legenda Maior can be imitated, says Dalarun, but not literally. Bonaventure offers him as a guiding light to those who are willing to fully devote their lives to his ideal.

Jay Hammond, on the other hand, suggests that Bonaventure recommends both admiration and imitation.

“Bonaventure resolves the tension between admiring Francis and following him by imitation via a spiritual askesis whereby the brothers, through the graced activity of purgation, illumination, and perfection, transform themselves into hierarchic men, thereby conforming themselves, like Francis, to Christ. For Bonaventure, admiration is

regularis. Ordungen und Deutungen religiosen Lebens im Mittelalter. Abhandlungen) 26 (Munster, 2005), 371.

36 Jacques Dalarun, The Misadventure of Francis of Assisi, trans. Edward Hagman (Saint Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2002), 254.

160 the object of knowledge, imitation is the object of desire. The Legenda Major attempts both.”37

Here Hammond, like Dalarun, focuses on “the brothers” who are willing to devote their lives to the Franciscan way. For them, imitation is possible through the path of ascent. For all others, it may be that admiration is the only option.38

What these authors show, despite their differences, is that the concept of imitation in the

Legenda Maior is a complex hermeneutic. In the end, Bonaventure’s Francis cannot be a moral exemplar in a strictly literal sense. Bonaventure’s project is too broad for that. One must remember that for Bonaventure, Francis is almost cosmic in scope. In the last section of chapter twelve Bonaventure writes: “Since the herald of Christ in his preaching brilliantly shone with these and many other marvelous miracles, people paid attention to what he said as if an angel of the Lord were speaking.”39 This line contains two telling phrases: Francis is the herald of Christ

(praeco Christi) literally bringing Christ to the faithful; and Francis speaks “as if an angel of the

Lord were speaking” (ac si Angelus Domini loqueretur), offering a message to the people of the world. The overall point is that Francis is the bearer of a divine message. Bonaventure repeats this exact idea in the final lines of chapter twelve: “Francis, the herald of Christ… truly preached

37 Jay M. Hammond, “Bonaventure’s Legenda Major” in A Companion to Bonaventure, ed. Jay M. Hammond, J.A. Wayne Hellman, Jared Goff (Boston: Brill, 2014), 507.

38 Overall, however, Hammond does forcefully claim that the Legenda Maior puts forth Francis as an exemplar to be imitated. He cites the multiple times that Bonaventure references imitation, while also dealing with the problem of the town scene in LM 6.2 Hammond suggests that Bonaventure did in fact desire for the current brothers to follow Francis’ example of evangelical perfection. See Hammond, 460- 465.

39 LM 12.12 (Fontes, 889; FAED II, 628): Cum his et aliis multis miraculorum prodigiis praeco Christi praedicans coruscaret, attendebatur his quae dicebantur ab eo, ac si Angelus Domini loqueretur.

161 the Gospel of Christ as a messenger of God.”40 Here Bonaventure again states that Francis is a herald/messenger, and that his message is the Gospel of Christ (Christi Evangelium). Taking these passages together, it is clear Bonaventure’s Francis extends beyond the man himself. He is extraordinary not simply because of his words and deeds, but because of the clarity of the Gospel message he presents. In other words, the message is greater than the messenger. It is as if the

Seraphic Doctor were gesturing to a stained-glass window, pointing out that while the glass itself is important, it is the light shining through that creates the beauty.

For Bonaventure, Francis may be a commendable example to the faithful, but first and foremost he is a vessel of God’s grace. Bonaventure states this in the very first lines of the

Legenda Maior: “The grace of God our Savior has appeared in these last days in his servant

Francis.”41 Francis may be remarkable and even perfect, but the power of his mission is the grace of God. As Regis Armstrong writes:

“Bonaventure drew his readers into a world where the visible facts of history demonstrate the invisible currents of the divine. His portrait, consequently, casts the facts of the saint’s life into a theological framework, the underpinnings of which are those of grace. Rather than a fixed, well-defined formula, Bonaventure believed that holiness demanded receptivity to and cooperation with a transformative energy… To understand Bonaventure’s portrait of the saint, Francis, is to read it as a meditation on the call of every Christian who, in Bonaventure’s rich theology of grace, possess the seeds of holiness.”42

40 LM 12.12 (Fontes 889; FAED II, 629): Christi praeconem Franciscum…vere Dei nuntium Christi Evangelium praedicasse.

41 LM prologue 1 (Fontes, 777; FAED II, 525): Apparuit gratia Dei Salvatoris nostri diebus istis novissimis in servo suo Francisco.

42 Regis J Armstrong, “Lex Gratiae, Lex Sanctitatis: Homage to a Saint by a Saint,” (Unpublished manuscript, 2017), 10.

162 Because Bonaventure places such emphasis on the grace of God in the Legenda Maior, the portrait of Francis himself cannot overshadow that grace. Bonaventure’s Francis, as has been suggested above, represents more than himself. He is the bearer of the Gospel of Christ and a vessel of grace. Thus Bonaventure’s Francis cannot simply be imitated. To truly follow Francis is to open oneself to a lifelong transformation through grace. Francis may be at least worthy of imitation. But as a primary lens for reading the Legenda Maior today, the concept of moral exemplar falls short, for it does not honor the complex portrait of Francis presented in the text.

Francis as a Transformed Self: A Model of Conversion

Moving to a different lens, it may be that a more fruitful way of reading the Legenda

Maior is to focus on how Francis is transformed. Bonaventure’s text – like the previous lives of

Francis – describes how the young Francis underwent a dramatic change as the grace of God propelled him forward. Furthermore, Bonaventure portrays Francis as being transformed through his reception of the stigmata. In approaching the Legenda Maior as hagiography today, readers might therefore try to discern how Francis is transformed, and then search for similar transformation in their own lives. The lens of transformation is better understood with insights from contemporary psychology and spirituality. Indeed, self-transformation is both a psychological and spiritual topic. This section will therefore discuss the work of three thinkers –

Walter Conn, David Ford, and Serjey Horugy – all of whom present self-transformation from a psychological and spiritual perspective.

Much has been made of the ‘conversion’ of Francis of Assisi, the wayward youth who became the poor man of God, practicing altruism and piety instead of worldly business and

163 pleasures. Pinpointing the locus on this conversion, however, is a challenge. There are at least three seminal ‘conversion’ moments in Francis’ life: 1) The interaction with the leper on the road, when he dismounted his horse to kiss the diseased man,43 2) The moment when Francis stood naked in the cathedral, rejecting his father and offering his devotion to God and the bishop,44 and 3) the reception of the stigmata in which Francis was fully transformed into the very image of Christ. The Legenda Maior attaches significance to all three of these moments, asserting that Francis was substantially transformed through each of them.

Of the first – the meeting with the leper – Bonaventure says that Francis was able to gain victory over himself (ipsius victoria). A few lines later Bonaventure adds the Latin verb devinco, meaning to conquer completely, to overcome, to subdue.45 With such strong language,

Bonaventure portrays the meeting with the leper in terms of Francis’ old self being radically defeated, and a new self taking shape. Regarding the second locus of conversion – Francis standing naked before the bishop – Bonaventure refers to Francis a “crucified and half naked poor man” (crucifixi hominis et pauperis seminudi).46 This phrase, absent from the previous biographies and likely original to Bonaventure, compares Francis’ conversion to a death to self.47

43 See LM 1.5; 2C 9; L3C 11; (the episode does not appear in 1C).

44 G.K. Chesterton argues for this moment as the locus of Francis’ conversion as he writes, “We have now reached the great break in the life of Francis of Assisi; the point at which something happened to him.” Chesterton concludes, “there was a new air about Francis.” G.K. Chesterton, St. Francis of Assisi (New York: Doubleday, 1952), 76-79.

45 See Lewis & Short entry on devinco via Latin Word Study Tool, www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper.

46 LM 2.4.

47 That Bonaventure understood Christian conversion as a type of death can be seen in the Itinerarium 7.6. “Whoever loves this death can see God because it is true beyond doubt that man will not see me and live. Let us, then, die and enter into the darkness; let us impose silence upon our cares, our desires and our imaginings. With Christ crucified let us pass out of this world to the Father.” Translation by Cousins, 116.

164 Indeed, the phrase “crucified man” echoes St. Paul’s statement, “I have been crucified with

Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me” (Galatians 2:20, ESV). Finally, regarding the third locus of conversion – the stigmata – Bonaventure emphasizes transformation as he writes, “the friend of Christ might learn in advance that he was to be totally transformed into the likeness of Christ crucified, not by the martyrdom of his flesh, but by the enkindling of his soul.”48 Thus Bonaventure puts all three of these ‘conversion moments’ forward as experiences that powerfully transformed Francis.

Bonaventure, of course, believed that conversion only comes about by grace.49

Moreover, grace transforms the human person, putting away the old self and ushering in a new

“self” in Christ. When considering the idea of “the self,” is helpful to turn to insights from contemporary spirituality and psychology. Indeed, understanding self-transformation is one way of grasping the power of Christian conversion. Again, this section of the chapter is evaluating the merits of self-transformation as a lens for approaching Francis in the Legenda Maior. We move then into a discussion of “the self” and Christian conversion, relying on the writings of

Walter Conn, David Ford, and Serjey Horugy.

48 LM 13.3 (Fontes, 892; FAED II, 632): amicus Christi praenosset, se non per martyrium carnis, sed per incendium mentis totum in Christi crucifixi similitudinem transformandum.

49 See Itinerarium Mentes in Deum 1.1. “No one can be made happy unless he rise above himself, not by ascent of the body, but of the heart. But we cannot rise above ourselves unless a higher power lifts us up.” Translation by Ewart Cousins in Bonaventure: The Soul's Journey to Into God, The Tree of Life, The Life of St. Francis (New York: Paulist Press, 1978), 59.

165 To begin, Walter Conn has examined the self with a Christian lens, and he outlines the concept of the self by listing several key components. The self, he explains, includes at least the following:50

• A sense of interiority

• The ability to think and act as a subject – that is, a subjective “I”

• The ability to experience other people and the external world as an object – that is, an objective “me”

• The knowledge that one is embodied, though at the same time more than a body

• The striving for meaning and value

• The desire to connect with others and/or with God

For Conn, the human self is a firm concept, allowing a person to operate as an individual and to navigate life as such. Having an authentic and grounded self is a critical step in personal and spiritual development. One cannot, for example, love others if one does not have a strong sense of self from which to proceed in love. Furthermore, conversion is impossible without a grounded self. One must surrender, says Conn, but such an impulse presupposes that one has something to surrender in the first place – in other words, one cannot give what one does not have. Indeed, Conn argues that all people possess a natural urge to "reach out, to move beyond, and transcend the self.”51 From a religious perspective, this is conversion. Conn’s phrase “self transcendence” is carefully chosen, for he makes clear that one must be wary of two extremes: self-sacrifice on the one hand, and self-fulfillment on the other. Self-sacrifice is to utterly

50 Walter Conn, The Desiring Self: Rooting Pastoral Counseling and Spiritual Direction in Self- Transcendence (New York, NY: Paulist Press, 1998), 38-56.

51 Conn, The Desiring Self, 71.

166 renounce the self, such that a person is left with no self from which to proceed. The other extreme is self-fulfillment, which is a focus on personal desires and an attempt to find happiness by filling as many of those desires as possible.52 Both of these extremes are doomed to failure.

Conn opts for self-transcendence precisely because it maintains the self, while inviting a person to go beyond the self in order to connect with others and with God. In a Christian sense, self- transcendence takes place through a process of ‘falling in love with God.’

Theologian David F. Ford would agree with Conn’s understanding of self-transformation.

On the topic of conversion, however, Ford has a more Christocentric view. He writes:

“Salvation for the self is therefore to be ‘christomorphic’ in its facing of him [Christ] and ‘being transformed from glory to glory.’”53 In other words, the individual, by facing Christ, opens up a new and more vulnerable self. The result, says Ford, is transformation and salvation. Ford asserts that the power of conversion does not come from within the individual, for of course one cannot convert oneself. Rather, it is through the power of facing Christ in Christian worship that conversion takes place and a new self is made possible. Ford writes: “Baptism and eucharist are ways of being placed before others, and they shape a habitus of facing. Above all they are oriented towards the face of Christ.”54 In the Eucharist especially, worshippers come ‘face to face’ with Christ, an encounter that cannot fail to transform when worshippers receive Christ’s body with humility and gratitude. The new self that emerges in Christian worship is a self with

52 Joann Wolski Conn and Walter E. Conn, “Conversion as Self-Transcendence Exemplified in the Life of St. Thérèse of Lisieux,” Spirituality Today 34/4 (1982): 303-311.

53 David Ford, Self and Salvation: Being Transformed (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 214.

54 Ford, 163.

167 new boundaries, more open to God and to others, for “the new self is one that has ‘learnt’ this

Christ and therefore lives in a social space in which the barriers of hostility are already down.”55

Such a transformed self is truly a new creation, as Paul wrote, “if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come” (2 Corinthians 5:17, ESV).

Russian theologian Sergey S. Horujy would agree with both Conn and Ford that the self is a critical concept for understanding Christian conversion. What is unique about Horujy is his articulation that the self is transformed through a synergetic relationship with the divine. The

Christian self, explains Horujy, relies on practices (such as the hesychast practices of eastern asceticism), which allow for gradual transformation. He writes:

“Orientation toward the telos of Other-being is the defining property that makes hesychast practice an alternative practice and imparts to it an extremely specific nature… and also imparts to it the character of the total self-transformation of the human being. The latter characteristic means that hesychast practice is a practice of the self, but a very special, ontological practice.”56

Horujy’s point is that spiritual practices transform the human being, but only because such practices draw the human attention beyond the human-centered practices of everyday life. These spiritual practices instead focus on God, a goal that is “ontologically beyond” the horizon of human experience. At the same time, affirms Horujy, conversion is still deeply meaningful on the human level, for it is a process of “unlocking” one’s true self.57 Horujy’s thesis can therefore be summarized in one idea: the Christian self transforms as the individual engages in practices which make the individual more like God (deification). This simple claim presupposes that 1)

55 Ford, 119.

56 Sergey S. Horujy, Practices of the Self and Spiritual Practices: Michel Foucault and the Eastern Christian Discourse, trans. Boris Jaki (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2015), 102.

57 Horujy, 124.

168 The human self is not independent, for it exists fundamentally in its relation God, and 2) the human self transforms through a cooperation between divine and human energy. Overall,

Horujy speaks of a self that is defined by its openness to God, and so it is that “conversion is when an individual ‘turns around to hear this call,’ when he catches it and recognizes it as a call from the Source-beyond-there, and responds to it wholly, with his whole being.”58

Where does this leave us in terms of approaching Francis of Assisi in the Legenda

Maior? This brief departure into the specific work of Conn, Ford, and Horujy is helpful because

Bonaventure’s Francis clearly experiences conversion and self-transformation. In reading the

Legenda Maior today, modern readers might try to understand how Francis was transformed, while also seeking transformation in their own lives. Conn, Ford, and Horujy, provide helpful direction for such a search. There are, however, two pitfalls in this approach: the first is the question of self-annihilation.

It was shown above that in Francis’ experience with the leper, and in his experience standing naked in the cathedral, Bonaventure’s language suggests that his old self was defeated and even crucified. The theme of annihilation was common in medieval spiritual literature.59

Bonaventure, however, does not have this in mind when he describes Francis’ conversion. Conn,

Ford, and Horujy would also resist such an impulse. While the authors describe dramatic self- transformation through Christian conversion, they thoroughly maintain that the self is not destroyed. This is an important point. For Bonaventure, the transformation that occurs in

58 Horujy, 108.

59 See Barbara Newman, “Annihilation and Authorship: Three Women Mystics of the 1290s,” Speculum 91/3 (July 2016), 591-630. Bernard of Clairvaux’s well known analogy of drops of water falling into a vat of wine is an apt image for ‘annihilation.’ See Bernard of Clairvaux De Diligendo Deo 10.

169 Francis of Assisi is not a destruction of self, but rather a manifestation of divine grace, acting within a willing and enthusiastic subject.60 This is seen in Francis’ movements in chapter two.

“From there the lover of profound humility moved to the lepers and lived with them, serving them all most diligently for God’s sake. He washed their feet, bandaged sores, drew pus from wounds and wiped away filth. He who was soon to be a physician of the Gospel even kissed their ulcerous wounds out of his remarkable devotion. As a result, he received such power from the Lord that he had miraculous effectiveness in healing spiritual and physical illnesses.”61

In these lines Bonaventure asserts that even in the midst of a leper community, Francis’ personality remains intact. Francis has not been annihilated – his zealous personality and pious devotion are still in him, and indeed these virtues allow him to do shocking things like kissing the leprous wounds. Francis’ personality has been awakened by God’s grace and put to new use.

This is exactly the point that Conn, Ford, and Horujy make as they describe self-transformation.

All three authors speak of conversion as a process of the self becoming more, not less. They describe the self going beyond itself and into new territory, propelled by God’s grace. God’s grace, however, never destroys autonomy. On the contrary, grace supports and strengthens autonomy in preparing the self to surrender to God.62 Horujy sums up this sentiment perfectly as he writes: “the process of the practice here takes place in the element of gain, not of loss; in the

60 Such optimism is summed up by Regis Armstrong and Ingrid Peterson who write, “Francis seemed overwhelmed at the meaning of his baptismal life” (emphasis added). The Franciscan Tradition (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2010), xi.

61 LM 2.6 (Fontes, 792; FAED II, 539): Exinde totius humilitatis amator se transtulit ad leprosos eratque cum eis, diligentissime serviens omnibus propter Deum. Lavabat ipsorum pedes, ligabat ulcera, educebat plagarum putredinem et saniem abstergebat; osculabatur etiam ex miranda devotione ulcerosas plagas ipsorum, evangelicus medicus mox futurus. Propter quod tantam est a Domino consecutus virtutem, ut in spiritualibus et corporalibus morbis mirabiliter expurgandis mirabilem efficaciam obtineret.

62 Walter Conn, Christian Conversion: A Developmental Interpretation of Autonomy and Surrender (New York: Paulist Press, 1986), 31.

170 element of self-building, not of self-dissolution. Even the necessary presence of the self- renunciation at the initial stage signifies not a loss of identity… but their potentiation.”63

Horujy’s words could very well describe Francis in the Legenda Maior. The young man of

Assisi is not dissolved or annihilated; instead he cooperates with grace and maintains himself while simultaneously becoming more.

In further considering self-transformation in the Legenda Maior, readers may arrive at a second pitfall. This is the thought that Francis’ conversion is simply a change from ‘bad youth’ to ‘holy adult.’ This notion is incorrect. Indeed, the Legenda Maior describes Francis’ early life differently than the other early lives of Francis. Bonaventure softens the portrait of the young

Francis, making the transition less abrupt. For example, Thomas of Celano writes that the young

Francis “was still boiling in the sins of youthful heat, and his unstable time of life was driving him without restraint to carry out the laws of youth.”64 Thomas even calls the young Francis an

“excessive inciter of evil and a zealous imitator of foolishness.”65 Bonaventure, on the other hands, presents a gradual blossoming of Francis’ innate goodness:

“Yet with God’s protection, although he indulged himself in pleasures, even among wanton youths, he did not give himself over to the drives of the flesh… There was to be sure, growing with him from his infancy, a generous care for the poor divinely implanted in the heart of the young Francis.”66

63 Horujy, 159.

64 1C 3 (Fontes, 279; FAED II, 184): Enimvero cum adhue vir iste iuvenili calore in peccatis fervesceret, et lubrica aetas ad explenda iuvenilia iura ipsum impelleret insolenter.

65 1C 2 (Fontes, 278; FAED II, 183): incentor malorum et aemulator stultitiae abundantius exsistebat.

66 LM 1.1. (Fontes, 781; FAED II, 530): superno sibi assistente praesidio, nec inter lascivos iuvenes, quamvis effusus ad gaudia, post carnis petulantiam abiit, nec inter cupidos mercatores, quamquam intentus ad lucra, speravit in pecunia et thesauris Inerat namque juvenis Francisci praecordiis divinitus incita quaedam ad pauperes miseratio liberalis.

171 For Bonaventure, Francis’ conversion will not be a simplistic story of ‘bad’ to ‘good.’ Rather,

Francis’ transformation in the Legenda Maior involves an awakening of that which was

“divinely implanted in his heart.” Conn, Ford, and Horujy would agree with such an understanding. All three authors assert that “the self” is neither bad nor good, but rather a baseline description of human experience. The self changes through an ongoing relationship with God. David Ford sums up this process in his analysis of Ephesians 1.

“Ephesians chapter 1 is perhaps the most daring statement of human identity and worth conceivable – every spiritual blessing; chosen before the foundation of the world; destined in love to be children of God through Jesus Christ; redemption, forgiveness, riches of grace freely lavished; all wisdom and insight into God’s purpose; and being part of a process through which ‘all things in heaven and on earth’ are being united in Christ. There is here a confident dignity and worth due to participation in a reality that embraces each person in love and aims to inspire whole-hearted… response.”67

Ford’s use of the word “response” is critical, for this is how he understands the self’s experience of grace. When touched by grace, the self responds to God. Bonaventure would have agreed.

Here is how he describes the young Francis:

“Drawn in several directions to the external by the demand of his father as well as forced down to the inferior by the corruption of his natural origin he had not yet learned how to contemplate the celestial nor had he become accustomed to savor the divine.”68

Francis is hampered by sin and worldly concerns, but he is nonetheless being prepared to follow

God. The phrase “not yet” (nondum) is central here, for it alludes to Francis’ potential. Francis is not a ‘bad youth’ waiting to be made ‘good.’ Instead, he is waiting to be touched by grace.

67 Ford, 177.

68 LM 1.2. (Fontes, 782; FAED II, 531): pro eo quod, tam iussione patris ad exteriora distractus quam corruptione naturalis originis ad inferiora depressus, nondum didicerat contemplari caelestia nec assueverat degustare divina.

172 Such a touch of grace will begin a journey for Francis, as Bonaventure describes in chapter 13, looking back on Francis’ life since his conversion:

“For the cross of Christ, both offered to and taken on by you at the beginning of your conversion and carried continuously from that moment throughout the course of your most proven life and giving example to others, shows with such clarity of certitude that you have finally reached the summit of Gospel perfection.”69

When Francis arrives at “gospel perfection” in the Legenda Maior, it is the culmination of a self- transformation that began with the divine seeds present since his youth, now fully blossomed.

Given these helpful insights on the Legenda Maior – suggested by the writings of Conn,

Ford, and Horujy – one may ask whether self-transformation is overall a helpful lens in interpreting the Legenda Maior. Modern readers can see a Francis who overcomes himself without annihilating himself, and a Francis who undergoes transformation through a lifelong blossoming brought about by grace. In approaching the text as a hagiography, readers might see in themselves the potential for transformation, opening themselves to ongoing conversion through grace.

That being said, the lens of self-transformation ultimately falls short for one reason: this lens fails to explore the dispositions, habits, practices, and actions through which Bonaventure’s

Francis grows into the full image of Christ. How, for example, does Francis embrace humility and live into the humble obedience of Christ? How does Francis become a man who – like

Christ – “people of all ages and both sexes hurried to see and hear… a man given to the world by

69 LM 13.10 (Fontes, 898; FAED II, 639): Christi namque crux in tuae conversionis primordio tam proposita quam assumpta et dehinc in conversationis progressu per vitam probatissimam baiulata in te ipso continue et in exemplum aliis demonstrata, tanta certitudinis claritate ostendit evangelicae perfectionis apicem te finaliter conclusisse.

173 heaven”?70 How does self-transformation make sense of Francis’ lived faith that is so powerfully described in the Legenda Maior? Take for example the complexity of Francis’ behavior in the following passage.

“He used to make this statement frequently: ‘What a person is before God, that he is and no more.’ Therefore, judging that it was foolish to be elated by worldly favors, he rejoiced in insults and was saddened by praise. If nothing else, he would rather hear himself blamed than praised, knowing that the former would lead him to change his life, while the latter would push him to a fall. And so frequently when people extolled the merits of his holiness, he commanded one of the brothers to impress upon his ears words that were, on the contrary, insulting.”71

In this passage Bonaventure makes a statement about Francis’ overall disposition – “what a person is before God” – while simultaneously pointing to Francis’ consistent practice of asking his brothers to insult him. In the middle of the passage Bonaventure asserts that it is these very dispositions and practices that will “lead him to change his life.” In other words, in the Legenda

Maior, Francis’ conformation to the image of Christ depends on habitus, i.e. virtue. A lens of self-transformation – helpful though it may be – lacks a detailed mechanism for explaining this complex and ongoing process of moral development. In the end, therefore, the lens of self- transformation falls short in approaching the Legenda Maior. A lens centered on virtue, on the other hand, will do just that. It is to this lens of virtue that this chapter now turns.

70 LM 12.8 (Fontes, 885; FAED II, 626): Omnis aetas omnisque sexus properabat virum novum mundo caelitus datum et cernere et audire.

71 LM 6.1 (Fontes, 823; FAED II, 569); Sed et verbum hoc dicere solitus erat: ‘Quantum homo est in oculis Dei, tantum est et non plus.’ Stultum proinde iudicans mundanis extolli favoribus, gaudebat de opprobriis et de laudibus tristabatur. Malebat quidem de se vituperium audire quam laudem, sciens, quod hoc ad se emendandum induceret, illa impelleret ad cadendum. Et ideo saepe cum populi merita in eo sanctitatis extollerent, praecipiebat alicui fratri, ut in contrarium verba ipsum vilificantia suis auribus inculcando proferret.

174 Francis as the Man of Perfect Virtue

The previous chapters of this dissertation have described the role of virtue in the lives of the saints, in the early hagiographical Franciscan sources, and in Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior.

All of these texts have been shown to contain descriptions of virtue, as well as broader theories of how virtue operates in the human person. Over the course of the first three chapters, multiple clarifications about virtue have been pointed out. Now four points about virtue must be restated.

First, virtue is not merely a description of good human qualities. Rather, virtue is defined as a good habit (habitus). As Warykow summarizes “A habit is a stable disposition to act in a certain way.”72 Indeed, the virtuous life involves both intention and action, with actions flowing out of a stable way of being. Virtue is therefore never simply a thought or a feeling. Second, virtue is acquired through practice, or as it is sometimes called, habituation.73 Bonnie Kent describes how the ancients were particularly interested in the long process of habituation leading to the development of virtue.

“Philosophers of antiquity were much impressed by the many years of learning and practice necessary to become a thoroughly admirable human specimen. While they all emphasized the intellectual prerequisite of ‘practical wisdom (Greek: phronesis; Latin: prudentia), they also emphasized the long conditioning, habituation, and sheer practice necessary to produce excellent moral character.”74

72 Joseph P. Warykow, The Westminster Handbook to Thomas Aquinas (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008), 167.

73 Julia Annas explains how this idea goes back to Aristotle. She writes, “Aristotle compares acquiring a virtue with learning an expertise or skill (techne) like house-building or learning to play an instrument. There is something that you learn to do by doing it, and you end up doing it well or badly. He comments that if this were not the case, then there would be no need for teachers.” Julias Annas, The Morality of Happiness (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 67.

74 Bonnie Kent, “Habits and Virtues (Ia IIae, qq. 49-70),” in The Ethics of Aquinas, ed. Stephen J. Pope (Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 2002), 116.

175 Kent goes on to argue that even the scholastic category of ‘infused moral virtue’ may be strengthened through habituation. Thus habituation remains critical in Bonaventure’s overall theory, for it applies to all virtues.75 Third, true virtue leads to actions in which the human person actually takes pleasure. In other words, a virtuous person acts well in a given situation and comes to naturally enjoy the practice of acting well. David Elliot explains this notion in the following:

“To be virtuous it is not enough to do what the just or temperate person does; we must do it as the just or temperate person does it: from a settled character and with the appropriate intention, manner, judgement, timing, sensibility, and so forth. Those who have the habitus that disposes to virtuous activity typically engage in the appropriate acts with a certain ease, promptness, and pleasure. Far from doing one’s duty with gritted teeth and fevered brow, virtue is almost a style.”76

This passage describes what one might call the facility of virtue – that is, it comes easily to one who has been habituated. Fourth and finally, virtue involves stability. This is the idea that a virtuous person displays virtue consistently regardless of the situation. As David Decosimo explains, virtue “is only properly ascribed after observing an agent act excellently over time, across varied situations (difficult ones especially), and in multiple emotional states.”77

Francis in the Legenda Maior exhibits all of four of these aspects of virtue. He embodies virtue as a habitus; he acquires virtue over the course of his life through habituation; he shows joy and facility in acting well; and he acts well across various situations. Perhaps the best

75 Infused moral virtue is a proposed category of virtue that is implanted in the human person through grace, and therefore not ‘acquired’ in the traditional sense. Bonnie Kent, Virtues of the Will: The Transformation of Ethics in the Late Thirteenth Century (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1995), 213-216.

76 David Elliot, Hope and Christian Ethics (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017), 18.

77 David Decosimo, Ethics as a Work of Charity: Thomas Aquinas and Pagan Virtue (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2014), 171.

176 example of Francis portraying all these elements of virtue is found in chapter six. Here Francis proposes a hypothetical situation to one of his brothers, describing how he would wish to respond to an immensely difficult situation.

“He once said to his companion: ‘I wouldn’t consider myself a Lesser Brother unless I had the attitude I will describe to you. Suppose, as a prelate of the brothers, I go to the chapter, preach and admonish the brothers, and, at the end, they speak against me: ‘You are not suitable for us, because you are uneducated, inarticulate, unlettered, and simple!’ So in the end, I am thrown out into disgrace, looked down upon by everyone. I tell you, unless I hear these words with the same expression on my face, with the same joy, and with the same resolution for holiness, I am in no sense a Lesser Brother!’”78

This passage, one of the most poignant in the Legenda Maior, will strike most readers as deeply moving.79 Why is Francis’s imagined scenario so powerful? An understanding of virtue

78 LM 6.5 (Fontes, 826; FAED II, 572): Dixit aliquando socio suo: ‘Non mihi videor frater Minor, nisi fuero in statu, quem tibi descripsero. Ecce, praelatus exsistens fratrum, vado ad capitulum, praedico et commoneo fratres, et in fine dicitur contra me: Non convenis nobis, quia illitteratus es, elinguis, idiota et simplex; tandem eicior cum opprobrio, vilipensus ab omnibus. Dico tibi, nisi eodem vultu, eadem mentis laetitia et eodem sanctitatis proposito haec verba audiero, frater Minor nequaquam sum.’

79 This episode is recounted also by Thomas of Celano, 2C 145. More dramatically, the story is told fully in an early Franciscan piece of writing likely dictated by Francis himself, entitled True and Perfect Joy. See FAED I, 166. The text is as follows: The same [Brother Leonard] related in the same place that one day at Saint Mary’s, blessed Francis called Brother Leo and said: “Brother Leo, write.” He responded: “Look, I’m ready!” “Write,” he said, “what true joy is.” “A messenger arrives and says that all the Masters of Paris have entered the Order. Write: this isn’t true joy! Or, that all the prelates, archbishops and bishops beyond the mountains, as well as the King of France and the King of England [have entered the Order]. Write: this isn’t true joy! Again, that my brothers have gone to the non-believers and converted all of them to the faith; again, that I have so much grace from God that I heal the sick and perform many miracles. I tell you true joy doesn’t consist in any of these things.” “Then what is true joy?” “I return from Perugia and arrive here in the dead of night. It’s winter time, muddy, and so cold that icicles have formed on the edges of my habit and keep striking my legs and blood flows from such wounds. Freezing, covered with mud and ice, I come to the gate and, after I’ve knocked and called for some time, a brother comes and asks: ‘Who are you?’ ‘Brother Francis,’ I answer. ‘Go away!’ he says. ‘This is not a decent hour to be wandering about! You may not come in!’ When I insist, he replies: ‘Go away! You are simple and stupid! Don’t come back to us again! There are many of us here like you—we don’t need you!’ I stand again at the door and say: ‘For the love of God, take me in tonight!”’ And he replies: ‘I will not! Go to the

177 provides the interpretive key. Francis states that he is willing (even eager) to face humiliation, precisely because he would have an opportunity to act with joy and holiness in the midst of extreme difficulty. In this way, Francis affirms the importance of virtue as a stable disposition out of which one acts well, with ease, pleasure and consistency. Francis says that he wishes to have a certain attitude, using the Latin word status. In the use of this word he underscores that virtue involves a way of being; a better translation of status might be “posture.” Francis knows, however, that such a “posture” is not innate, but comes rather through practice, i.e. habituation.

His overall point in telling the story is to encourage the brother (and himself) to act with humility every day, so that when the time of testing appears, they will be ready to respond with “joy… and resolution for holiness.” This, for Francis, would be the ultimate proof of virtue.

Virtue truly characterizes Bonaventure’s Francis in the Legenda Maior. That being said, for Bonaventure Francis is not simply a well-habituated man; he is the man of perfect virtue. As shown in chapter three of this dissertation, all of Francis’ virtues are inextricably bound up with his imitation of Christ, his movement through the stages of purgation, illumination, and perfection, and his complete transformation in the image of Christ. Because Francis is the man of perfect virtue, Bonaventure calls Francis the “pattern of humility” (humilitatis forma), rather than simply stating that Francis was humble.80 The virtue of Francis, implies Bonaventure, is of an exquisite shape and form (like a perfect circle). This is one reason why the figure of Francis is so attractive in the text; why Bonaventure’s portrait of the Poverello is so inspiring. 81 Thus

Crosiers’ place and ask there!’ “I tell you this: If I had patience and did not become upset, true joy, as well as true virtue and the salvation of my soul, would consist in this.”

80 LM 6.5.

81 Robert Glenn Davis writes, “Thus, Francis does not simply represent Christ; he takes the place of, or becomes Christ through the force of his love. And the reader, for whom Francis appears as the desirous

178 the lens of virtue is the most fruitful lens with which modern readers may approach the Legenda

Maior. Indeed, virtue best characterizes Bonaventure’s Francis, and virtue offers the method by which readers are inspired and shaped by the text. Such formation is the goal of hagiography.

The Legenda Maior Inspiring Virtue

The importance of free will, moral progress, and the individual practice of virtue leads to a rich understanding of how readers may be formed by the Legenda Maior. As stated above, the intention of the text as hagiography is to shape and edify those who read or hear it. But exactly how does the text form those who encounter it?’ In many ways, this is a personal question. Each person, acting from his or her own free will, finds themselves at a particular point on the road of moral progress. At the same time, the inspiring portrait of Francis’ perfect virtue in the Legenda

Maior urges every reader to live differently.82

It has also been stated above that following Francis as a moral exemplar is a model that ultimately falls short. Likewise, a focus on self-transformation and conversion, while fruitful, does not do justice to Francis’ complex intentions and actions in the Legenda Maior. Virtue, on the other hand, fits the text and provides a model for being formed by the text. Here then is the

and desirable object of the Legenda Maior, is moved and transformed into Francis.” Robert Glenn Davis, The Weight of Love: Affect, Ecstasy, and Union in the Theology of Bonaventure (New York: Fordham University Press, 2016), 125.

82 As Ray C. Petry poetically writes: “The Poverello was and still remains a ‘voice crying out in the wilderness,’ a true Christian prophet of transcendent values.” He continues, “What Francis discerned of life’s ultimates – of God, his Son, his Bible, his Church, and his world – may actually become instructive to people so sophisticated as we. It may be that we shall learn, after all, the secret of Francis’ power. Our world may yet discover through renunciation the true riches of the divine fullness; it may one day pass through the doors of love and humility into the glories of God’s peace.” Ray C. Petry, “Poverty and the World Apostolate” in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, ed. Maurice Sheehan (St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982), 146-149.

179 key: readers of the Legenda Maior are inspired by Francis to pursue virtue in their own lives.

Bonaventure makes this point forcefully in recounting Francis following statement, “If I speak in the tongues of men and angels, but without charity and do not show examples of the virtues to my neighbors, it is little use to others, nothing to myself.”83 Here Francis says that his example to others operates via his virtues. The text is not exactly saying that readers should imitate Francis.

Bonaventure considers this option and explicitly rejects it when he writes, “They professed that his humility was easier to admire than to imitate.”84 No one is able to fully imitate Francis, or imitate his perfect virtues. Those who read the Legenda Maior, however, are able to be inspired by Francis and his perfect virtues. They may then seek to develop and practice virtue in their own lives. Such a project is both formational and unique to each individual – it is also quite possible.

Clearly, it was Bonaventure’s intention that readers be inspired by Francis to live differently after reading or hearing his text. He desired that the same grace that worked in

Francis would likewise work in his readers. Nowhere is this intention more clearly stated than in the prologue.

“In an outpouring of kindness, the Most High God looked upon him, a little, poor, and contrite man, so that He not only lifted the needy man from the dust of a worldly life; but also gave him as a light for believers, a practitioner, a leader, and a herald of Gospel perfection, that by bearing witness to the light he might prepare for the Lord a way of light and peace to the hearts of the faithful.”85

83 LM 9.4 (Fontes, 857; FAED II, 600): Si linguis hominum loquar et Angelorum, caritatem autem in me ipso non habeam et proximis virtutum exempla non monstrem, parum prosum aliis, mihi nihil.

84 LM 6.2, cited above.

85 LM prologue 1 (Fontes, 777; FAED II, 525): In ipsum namque ut vere pauperculum et contritum, tanta Deus excelsus benignitatis condescensione respexit, quod non solum de mundialis conversationis pulvere suscitavit egenum, quod non solum de mundialis conversationis pulvere suscitavit egenum, verum etiam evangelicae perfectionis professorem, ducem atque praeconem effectum in lucem dedit

180

Here Bonaventure explains God’s dual purpose in giving grace to Francis. The Most High God lifted Francis to perfection, while simultaneously lifting him up to deliver “light and peace” to the faithful. Bonaventure’s metaphor of light is well chosen. Light is beautiful in and of itself, but light also affects those on whom it shines. Moreover, light bears witness to its source. Thus the above passage insists that God made Francis a light in order to bear witness to God, and also to be a pathway of grace to the faithful who encountered him. That Bonaventure has virtue in mind is established in two other lines from the prologue. He writes: “First endowed with gifts of divine grace, he [Francis] was then enriched by the merit of unshakable virtue.”86 And later:

“This is my principle reason for undertaking this task: that I may gather together the accounts of his virtues, actions and words – like so many fragments, partly forgotten and partly scattered – that they may not be lost when those who lived with this servant of God die.”87

In these two passages virtue is central to Bonaventure’s project, for it is the very mechanism by which Francis affects the next generations. In this way, the author fervently hopes that Francis’ virtues will outlive him. Moreover, he hopes that his text will inspire readers to pursue piety, poverty, humility, and a host of other virtues in their own lives.

credentium, ut testimonium perhibendo de lumine, viam lucis et pacis ad corda fidelium Domino praepararet.

86 LM prologue 1 (Fontes, 779; FAED II, 526): Primum supernae gratiae praeventus donis, dehinc virtutis invictae adauctus meritis.

87 LM prologue 3. (Fontes, 779; FAED II, 528): Et haec penes me causa praecipua hunc assumendi laborem, ut ego, qui vitam corporis et animae a Deo mihi conservatam recognosco per ipsum et virtutem eius in me ipso expertus agnovi, vitae illius virtutes, actus et verba quasi fragmenta quaedam, partim neglecta partimque d1Spersa, quamquam plene non possem, utcumque colligerem, ne, morientibus his qui cum famulo Dei convixerant, deperirent.

181 This inspiration toward virtue is precisely how the Legenda Maior operates as hagiography – that is, a text that forms and edifies.88 This is Bonaventure’s stated aim, which he makes clear in the closing lines of chapter fifteen: “Thus the magnificence of the power of the

Most High doing wonders for his saint shines forth to the faithful.”89 Again, Bonaventure says that his text is for the faithful. This line also emphasizes the enduring power of Francis’ perfect virtue, for God’s grace will shine through Francis to touch many lives. It is telling that

Bonaventure uses the same word for God’s power (virtutis Altissimi) as he does for Francis’ own virtue when he writes, “that blessed man had shone in his life with marvelous signs of virtue.”90

For Bonaventure, Francis’ life may only be understood through the lens of God’s grace working in him to produce perfect virtue and union with Christ. It is Bonaventure’s final hope that the same grace that shaped Francis into the man of perfect virtue will also empower the faithful

(innotescit fidelibus) to open themselves to God as they seek virtue in their own lives. As hagiography, the Legenda Maior inspires just that.

88 As Joshua Benson concludes, “these [hagiographical] texts invite us not just into a series of reported facts but into a set of interpretations, into an announcement, a call to transformation.” Joshua Benson, “Reflections on Memory in Thomas of Celano's Vita Prima” in Ordo Et Sanctitas: The Franciscan Spiritual Journey in Theology and Hagiography: a Festschrift in Honor of J.A. Wayne Hellmann, O.F.M. Conv., ed. Michael F. Cusato, Timothy J. Johnson, and Steven J. McMichael, (Leiden: Brill, 2017), 31.

89 LM 15.9 (Fontes, 911; FAED II, 649): innotescit fidelibus mirificans Sanctum suum magnificentia virtutis Altissimi.

90 LM 15.9 (Fontes, 911; FAED II, 649): vir iste beatus mirandis virtutum signis in vita claruerat.

CONCLUSION

THE STIGMATA AND MORAL PROGRESS

This dissertation has proceeded in four chapters. Chapter One, entitled “Virtue in the

Lives of the Saints” analyzed three classic hagiographical texts in Western Christianity: the Vita

Antonii (Life of Antony the Great), the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi (Fist Life of Saint Bernard of

Clairvaux), and the Vita Sancti Antonii “Assidua” (First Life of Anthony of Padua). The chapter argued that all three of these texts present virtue as a central theme. Furthermore, the texts present virtue as being on par with miracles in importance.

Chapter Two, entitled “The Emerging Portrait of Francis” turned to Francis of Assisi himself and the accounts of his life written shortly after his death in 1226. The three texts under discussion were Mira Circa Nos, the Papal Bull of canonization, Thomas of Celano’s Life of

Francis, later known as the Vita Prima, and the Legenda Trium Sociorum (Legend of the Three

Companions). Like the hagiographies discussed in Chapter One, all three of these texts maintain a strong focus on virtue. It was also shown that several of Francis of Assisi’s own writings prominently feature a particular set of ‘Franciscan’ virtues. Overall, the chapter broadly proposed the importance of virtue for Francis himself and for the early texts that presented him to the world.

Chapter Three, entitled “Bonaventure’s Francis: The Man of Perfect Virtue” directed its attention to the text of the Legenda Maior. It was shown that virtue is both an overarching theme and a guiding principle for the structure of the Legenda Maior. The chapter then discussed the key virtues presented in chapters 5-9: austerity, humility, poverty, piety, and charity. In

182 183 examining these chapters, as well as the whole of the Legenda Maior, the chapter argued that

Bonaventure portrayed Francis as being conformed to Christ. In other words, in Francis’ virtue he is presented as a second Christ (alter Christus). The chapter also discussed Bonaventure’s underlying theory of grace and virtue, concluding that in the Legenda Maior, grace leads to virtue; and virtue leads to conformity to Christ.

Chapter Four, entitled “Reading the Legenda Maior as Hagiography Today” returned to the fundamental point that hagiography, as a genre, intends to shape and form the reader. The chapter therefore explored how the Legenda Maior might form modern readers of the text today.

Several lenses were explored, including Francis as moral exemplar, and Francis as converted self. In the end, however, the chapter argued that the most fruitful lens is Francis as the man of perfect virtue. To make this case, the chapter pointed to Bonaventure’s theological commitment that virtue resides in the human will. Because of this, virtuous living deserves merit as the human person makes moral progress. The chapter then concluded that the Legenda Maior, as hagiography, intends to inspire its readers toward such moral progress and virtue in their own lives.

This short concluding chapter will draw together several of the conclusions already proposed above. In doing so, this conclusion will also focus on a specific topic that has yet to be fully discussed: Francis’ stigmata. Bonaventure’s description of Francis’ reception of the wounds of Christ following his vision on Mount LaVerna is a critical portion of the Legenda

Maior. This chapter will point out three important connections or ‘links,’ which elucidate

Bonaventure’s overall understanding of the stigmata: 1) The stigmata’s link to Francis’ conformity to Christ; 2) The stigmata’s link to virtue; 3) The stigmata’s link to moral progress.

184 These points are of course interrelated, with overlap among them. As the points are explained, it will be clear that Bonaventure understands Francis’ stigmata as a physical sign, impressed upon

Francis by God to confirm or ‘ratify’ his conformity to Christ. Furthermore, the Legenda Maior puts forth the stigmata as being inextricably connected to virtue, primarily because both the stigmata and virtue are informed by grace. Finally, the stigmata in the Legenda Maior fits into

Bonaventure’s theory of moral progress, as it clearly shows both free will and grace coexisting in the person of Francis.

To begin, it is necessary to see how Bonaventure describes Francis’ reception of the stigmata in chapter 13. The text is as follows:

“On a certain morning about the feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, while Francis was praying on the mountainside, he saw a Seraph having six wings, fiery as well as brilliant, descend from the grandeur of heaven. And when in swift flight, it had arrived at a spot in the air near the man of God, there appeared between the wings the likeness of a man crucified, with his hands and feet extended in the form of a cross and fastened to a cross. Two of the wings were raised above his head, two were extended for flight, and two covered his whole body. Seeing this, he was overwhelmed and his heart was flooded with a mixture of joy and sorrow. He rejoiced at the gracious way Christ looked upon him under the appearance of the Seraph, but the fact that He was fastened to a cross pierced his soul with a sword of compassionate sorrow.”1

What stands out in this passage is of course the description of the seraph and the crucified man.

Equally as poignant, however, is Francis’ response of joy and sorrow. Both the objective event and the subjective response are critical, and this approach sets the stage for how Bonaventure

1 LM 13.3 (Fontes, 891; FAED II, 632): Quodam mane circa festum Exaltationis sanctae Crucis, dum oraret in latere montis, vidit Seraph unum sex alas habentem, tam ignitas quam splendidas, de caelorum sublimitate descendere. Cumque volatu celerrimo pervenisset ad aeris locum viro Dei propinquum, apparuit inter alas effigies hominis crucifixi, in modum crucis manus et pedes extensos habentis et cruci affixos. Duae alae super caput ipsius elevabantur, duae ad volandum extendebantur, duae vero totum velabant corpus. Hoc videns, vehementer obstupuit, mixtumque moerore gaudium cor eius incurrit. Laetabatur quidem in gratioso aspectu, quo a Christo sub specie Seraph cernebat se conspici, sed crucis affixio compassivi doloris gladio ipsius animam pertransibat.

185 will address the stigmata in the rest of the text. After some additional explanation, Bonaventure continues:

“As the vision was disappearing, it left in his heart a marvelous fire and imprinted in his flesh a likeness of signs no less marvelous. For immediately the marks of nails began to appear in his hands and feet just as he had seen a little before in the figure of the man crucified. His hands and feet seemed to be pierced through the center by nails, with the heads of the nails appearing on the inner side of the hands and the upper side of the feet and their points on the opposite sides. The heads of the nails in his hands and his feet were round and black; their points were oblong and bent as if driven back with a hammer, and they emerged from the flesh and stuck out beyond it. Also his right side, as if pierced with a lance, was marked with a red wound from which his sacred blood often flowed, moistening his tunic and underwear.”2

Bonaventure’s description of the wounds themselves does not differ drastically from that of

Thomas of Celano.3 The ensuing analysis of the stigmata in chapters 13-15 of the Legenda

Maior, however, sets the Seraphic Doctor’s work apart.4 Bonaventure goes on to give mystical

2 LM 13.3 (Fontes, 892; FAED II, 633): Disparens igitur visio mirabilem in corde ipsius reliquit ardorem. sed et in carne non minus mirabilem signorum impressit effigiem. Statim namque in manibus eius et pedibus apparere coeperunt signa clavorum quemadmodum paulo ante in effigie illa viri crucifixi conspexerat. Manus enim et pedes in ipso medio clavis confixae videbantur, clavorum capitibus in interiore parte manuum et superiore pedum apparentibus, et eorum acuminibus exsistentibus ex adverso; erantque clavorum capita in manibus et pedibus rotunda et nigra, ipsa vero acumina oblonga, retorta et quasi repercussa, quae de ipsa carne surgentia carnem reliquam excedebant. Dextrum quoque latus quasi lancea transfixum, rubra cicatrice obductum erat, quod saepe sanguinem sacrum effundens, tunicam et femoralia respergebat.

3 See 1C 94.

4 Jacques Dalarun is critical of this choice on the part of Bonaventure. He writes, “Here, the ‘allegorical’ interpretation of the La Verna event weakens – or relegates to second place – the ‘historical’ meaning. Talk about ecstasy and the love of Christ absorbs, and ultimately negates, the scandal of the plain and unvarnished event. The mystical theology conceals the story, because the danger lies in the story. In the same way, the unspeakable surpasses the recounting. In The Major Legend we find this significant shift from the great temptation to the great secret, a shift which, together with the use of the stigmata, summarizes Bonaventure’s endeavor.” Jacques Dalarun, The Misadventure of Francis of Assisi: Toward a Historical Use of the Franciscan Legends (St. Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute, 2002), 233-234.

186 significance to Francis’ experience at La Verna, brilliantly weaving the stigmata into an overall theory of virtue, grace, conformity to Christ, and moral progress.

The Stigmata and Conformity to Christ

Bonaventure’s description of the stigmata is strongly tied to Francis’ imitation of Christ.

In receiving the wounds of Christ, Francis body has come to imitate Christ’s body, just as

Francis’ way of life had come to imitate Christ’s. This point may seem obvious. Going further, however, one sees that Bonaventure presents the stigmata as the seal or ‘ratification’ of Francis’ conformity to Christ. In other words, the stigmata is an ‘argument in flesh,’ asserting that

Francis has not merely acted like Christ, but that he has, in a way, become Christ. The Legenda

Maior makes this clear several times in chapter 13, most notably in saying that the “true love of

Christ transformed the lover into His image.”5 Bonaventure would later state his case even more clearly in his 1269 Apologia Pauperum:

“And so it was fitting that Christ, by means of the Seraph’s appearance, impressed the stigmata as his seal of approval on this poor little holy man. He did it that he might show an open sign of perfection for us in the face of the dangerous cloud of the last times – one that might lead us back to Christ, the exemplar and goal of perfect virtue.”6

The metaphor of the seal is an apt one. The reader imagines a signet ring bearing a distinct image, which is pressed onto a piece of parchment such that the image of the ring in impressed

5 LM 13.5 (Fontes, 893; FAED II, 634): verus Christi amor in eamdem imaginem transformavit amantem.

6 Apologia Pauperum 3.10 (Opera Omnia VIII, 247), translation by Bernard McGinn, The Flowering of Mysticism: Men and Women in the New Mysticism 1200-1350 (New York: Crossroad, 1998), 95. Digne proinde huic pauperculo sacro, qui perfectionem Evangelii perfecte servavit et docuit, in apparitione seraphica stigmata sua tamquam sigillum approbativum Christus impressit, ut contra finalium temporum periculosam caliginem manifestum nobis in via perfectionis ostenderet signum, quo reducemur in Christium perfectae virtutis exemplar et finem…

187 upon the parchment – the result being that the parchment is conformed to the image of the ring.

The fact that a seal also represents an official approval only serves to strengthen the analogy.

For Bonaventure, the stigmata affirms and ‘approves’ the fact that Francis has become an alter

Christus. As Michael Cusato explains, “[Francis] alone is fully identified with the life of Christ, as demonstrated in his life of absolute poverty and as exemplified in the gift of the stigmata.

Francis has already attained this perfection…”7

The stigmata for Bonaventure is much more than a miraculous occurrence or a mark of holiness – though it is certainly both of these. The Legenda Maior presents the stigmata as the outward sign of Francis’ lifelong imitation of Christ. Furthermore, Bonaventure understands the stigmata as a divine impression upon Francis that confirms his conformity to Christ.8 This is the first of three links described in this chapter: that the stigmata is connected to the conformity of

Christ. For the second, we must turn again to the theme of virtue.

7 Michael Cusato, "Esse ergo mitem et humilem corde, hoc est esse vere fratrem minorem: Bonaventure of Bagnoregio and the Reformulation of the Franciscan Charism," in Charisma und religiose Gemeinschaften im Mittelalter, eds. Giancarlo Andenna, Mirko Breitenstein, and Gert Melville, (Vita regularis. Ordungen und Deutungen religiosen Lebens im Mittelalter. Abhandlungen) 26 (Munster, 2005), 371.

8 Ilia Delio alludes to the power of conformity as she speaks of Clare of Assisi, who like Francis strove to perfectly imitate Christ. “Although Clare sought a unity with God through contemplation with the crucified Spouse, union was not the goal of relationship with God; rather, the goal was imitation. The gaze on the crucified Spouse is to lead to imitation of the Spouse. We become what we love and who we love shapes what we become. Imitation is not a literal mimicking of Christ; rather, it means becoming the image of the beloved, an image disclosed through transformation. We might say that, for Clare, we are transformed as we are conformed to Christ. The purpose of transformation is imitation of Christ.” Ilia Delio, “Clare of Assisi and the Mysticism of Motherhood” Franciscans at Prayer, ed. Timothy Johnson (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 54.

188 The Stigmata and Virtue Informed by Grace

The second point is that in the Legenda Maior the stigmata is inextricably linked to virtue. Here it is helpful to refer to the work of Jay Hammond. He asserts that for Bonaventure

Francis’ stigmata is “the culmination of the virtues.”9 Both the virtues and the stigmata, argues

Hammond, ratify Francis’ status as the perfect image of Christ. What is more, however, is the fact that both virtue and stigmata allow Francis to reach beyond himself to affect other people.

As Hammond explains, Francis is “Christ’s knight who carries the cruciform standard for others to follow. Thus, just as Francis follows Christ, the brothers should follow Francis.”10 This assertion makes clear that in the Legenda Maior Francis’ virtues and the stigmata are not somehow opposed to one another – on the contrary, the virtues and the stigmata work in consort.

Hammond goes on to reference Bonaventure’s words toward the end of chapter 13, explaining that “Francis’ stigmata will confirm the brothers’ faith, elevate their hope, and ignite their charity.”11 Again this is a critical point, for it asserts that the stigmata actually kindles and increases virtue, especially among the brothers. One of the conclusions of this dissertation is that the Legenda Maior functions as hagiography because it inspires virtue in those who read the text. It is therefore important to see how the stigmata works with virtue, inspiring those who encounter Francis.

9 Jay Hammond, “Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior” in A Companion to Bonaventure, ed. Jay Hammond, Wayne Hellmann, and Jared Goff (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 496.

10 Hammond, 501.

11 Hammond, 501. See LM 13.9.

189 Virtue, of course, is informed by grace. Bonaventure states this in the Breviloquium as he writes that grace “is the origin, the end, and the form of virtuous habits.”12 John Quinn, explaining this aspect of Bonaventure’s thought, summarizes: “According to Christian wisdom, if men are good, then they do good, because good acts flow from virtue informed by grace.”13

Like virtue, the stigmata is also a manifestation of grace – Bonaventure asserts this as he writes,

“In his blessed hands and feet could be seen the nails that had been marvelously fashioned by divine power out of his flesh.”14 The key phrase here is “divine power” (virtute divina). Indeed, the stigmata does not come only as a result of Francis’ faith or piety, but rather through the gracious power of God. In this way, the Legenda Maior presents the stigmata as being very much like virtue, for both are deeply informed by grace. Again, this is a critical link: that virtue and the stigmata work in consort in Bonaventure’s presentation. Turning now to the third connection, we address Bonaventure’s overall view of moral progress.

The Stigmata and Moral Progress

At the end of chapter 13, Bonaventure proposes that the stigmata represents a culmination of Francis’ journey. In other words, the stigmata is something at which Francis has arrived.

Bonaventure underscores this theme of arrival when he writes, speaking as if to Francis, “Now the first vision you saw is truly fulfilled,”15 and later, “you have finally reached the summit of

12 Brev. V.4.2 (Opera Omnia V, 256; Monti, 183): quae est habituum virtualium origo finis et forma.

13 John F. Quinn, “The Moral Philosophy of St. Bonaventure,” in Bonaventure and Aquinas: Enduring Philosophers, ed. Robert W. Shahan (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1976), 47.

14 LM 15.2 (Fontes 906; FAED II, 645): Cernebantur quidem in membris illis felicibus clavi ex eius carne virtute divina mirifice fabrefacti sicque carni eidem innati.

15 LM 13.10 (Fontes 897; FAED II, 637): Iam vere impleta est prima visio,

190 Gospel perfection.”16 These lines contain a clear sense of destination. Even Bonaventure’s use of the word “knight” (miles) suggests the image of a crusading solider riding toward his sacred goal of Jerusalem. Ewart Cousins agrees that the stigmata represents an arrival of sorts as he explains, “Here the dynamics of purgation, illumination and perfection reach its culmination; here the emptiness of his imitation of the humanity of Christ reaches its fulness…”17

The point here is that because the stigmata is a culmination, it necessarily reveals a sense of progress, for indeed Francis’ whole life can be read back as a progression toward his experience at La Verna. In this case, it is not only Francis’ physical life journey that brings him to the wounds of Christ, but also his moral progress in virtue. Understanding the stigmata in this way establishes the link between the stigmata and moral progress, a key concept for

Bonaventure. The Seraphic Doctor believes that one can increase in virtue as grace works in the human soul. Like the traveler on the Triplici Via, or the voyager in the Itinerarium, one can indeed progress to higher levels of virtue and union with God – one can indeed ‘get better,’ so to speak.

For Bonaventure such progress depends fully on God’s grace. At the same time, however, moral progress necessitates free will.18 When considered in this way, Francis is the perfect exemplar of moral progress, for indeed one sees in him the workings of divine grace and the strength of his will. In other words, Francis is a vessel of God’s grace, while at the same

16 LM 13.10 (Fontes 898; FAED II, 639): evangelicae perfectionis apicem te finaliter conclusisse.

17 Ewart Cousins, “The Image of St. Francis in Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior,” in Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, ed. Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco (Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988), 320.

18 See Brev. V.1.2, discussed in chapter 3 of this dissertation.

191 time he is credited for moral actions that proceed from his will. Here it is important to recall that

Bonaventure insists that all virtue resides in the will.19 Sustained by grace, Francis makes a free will commitment to take up his cross and follow Christ. The Legenda Maior lauds Francis, referring to “the cross of Christ, both offered to and taken on by you at the beginning of your conversion and carried continuously from that moment.”20 Francis, like Christ, willingly takes up his cross. For Bonaventure, this is crucial. Yes, Francis (like Christ) is fully supported by divine grace; but like Christ he chooses to take up the cross, and this action therefore deserves merit. Etienne Gilson draws together these concepts of virtue, grace, and merit into a cohesive understanding of moral progress. Appropriately, he uses a metaphor of seeds growing into plants:

“Just as rain penetrating the soil where the grain lies causes the plant to germinate and brings it to its full fructifying, so grace entering the soul awakens the seminal reasons of the virtues still dormant in it, and enables them to bear all their fruits. Henceforth, rendered meritorious by the grace which informs them, rightly related towards each other and towards their end by the charity which draws them on and holds them in union, the virtues are enabled to perform their specific work of determining the will and fitting it for collaboration with an intellect properly illumined by the light of faith.”21

19 See Bonnie Kent, Virtues of the Will: The Transformation of Ethics in the Late Thirteenth Century (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1995), 214. See Bonaventure’s Commentary on the Sentences III.33.3.

20 LM 13.10 (Fontes 898, FAED II, 639): Christi namque crux in tuae conversionis primordio tam proposita quam assumpta et dehinc in conversationis progressu.

21 Etienne Gilson, The Philosophy of St. Bonaventure, trans. Dom Illtyd Trethowna and Frank J. Sheed (Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony Guild Press, 1965), 386.

192 The key phrase is “rendered meritorious by the grace which informs them.” Bonaventure, in speaking about grace and free will, is not willing to let go of either side of the coin – grace and the merit of free choice are both necessary for moral progress.22

Stepping back, one realizes that Bonaventure’s point here has vast implications for the understanding of sanctity. For without merit, what would be the point of sainthood? Moreover, what would be the point of hagiography? Without merit, the life of a saint would simply be a story of grace overriding a chosen human being. On the other hand, without grace, the life of a saint would be akin to a museum exhibit showcasing exemplary human striving. The Legenda

Maior resists both of these pitfalls. Francis’ moral progress depends firmly on grace and free will, for they are both critical to Bonaventure’s overall model.

Turning back to the stigmata in the Legenda Maior, one can see how free will and grace both contribute to Francis’ ‘arrival’ at the physical sign. Free will is on full display as

Bonaventure writes, “In all things he [Francis] wished without hesitation to be conformed to

Christ crucified.”23 Bonaventure also states that Francis’ pain at the end of his life was “in order that his merits might increase.”24 These two lines clearly link the stigmata to free will and merit.

On the other hand, the stigmata is consistently described as a divine seal that was “engraved on

22 Christopher Cullen explains that for Bonaventure “All the virtues are sources of merit. Furthermore, since merit is found in free choice, it follows that the virtues, whether cardinal or theological, are found only in those powers containing free choice. And since free choice is a habit of the rational part of the soul (will and intellect working together), the virtues must reside there.” Christopher M. Cullen, Bonaventure (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 99.

23 LM 14.4 (Fontes, 902; FAED II, 642): oluit certe per omnia Christo crucifixo esse conformis.

24 LM 14.2 (Fontes, 899; FAED II, 641): ut autem viro Dei cumulus meritorum accresceret.

193 parts of his flesh by the finger of the living God.”25 Here Bonaventure affirms that the stigmata is a manifestation of God’s grace, for it is God’s finger that engraves the marks upon Francis.

Clearly Bonaventure is committed to maintaining the coexistence of free will and grace in his presentation of Francis’ stigmata. Indeed, it is this very coexistence that links the stigmata with moral progress, allowing us to understand the stigmata as the culmination of Francis’ moral journey.

To conclude this short chapter, it can therefore be said that the Legenda Maior puts forth the stigmata in a way that is cohesive and complementary to Bonaventure’s overall presentation of Francis. The stigmata, for all its powerful drama, does not represent a departure from the broader strokes of the Legenda Maior. Rather, the description of Francis’ reception of the wounds of Christ fits with, and enhances Bonaventure’s key themes: conformity to Christ, virtue, grace, free will, and moral progress.

25 LM 13.5 (Fontes, 893; FAED II, 634): in carneis membris descriptam digito Dei Vivi.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Accrocca, Felice. “Alter apostolus: Per una rilettura della Vita beati Francisci.” In La leggenda di un santo, edited by Paciocco and Accrocca, 165-194. Milano: Biblioteca Francescana, 1999).

Annas, Julia. The Morality of Happiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Armstrong, Regis, and Ingrid Peterson. The Franciscan Tradition. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2010.

Armstrong, Regis J. “Lex Gratie, Lex Sanctitatis: Homage to a Saint by a Saint.” Unpublished manuscript, 2017.

———. “Mira Circa Nos: Gregory IX’s View of the Saint Francis of Assisi.” Laurentianum 25 (1984): 385-414.

———. “The Spiritual Theology of the Legenda Maior of Saint Bonaventure.” Phd Diss., Fordham, 1978.

Athanasius. Life of Antony. In Early Christian Lives. Translated and edited by Carolinne White, 7-70. London: Penguin, 1998.

———. Vitae Antonii Versiones Latinae. Edited by P. H. E Bertrand and Lois Gandt, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina (CCSL) v.170. Turnhout: Brepols, 2018.

Barnes, T.D. “Angel of Light or Mystic Initiate? The problem of the Life of Antony.” Journal of Theological Studies 37 (1986): 353-68.

Benson, Joshua. “Reflections on Memory in Thomas of Celano's Vita Prima.” In Ordo Et Sanctitas: The Franciscan Spiritual Journey in Theology and Hagiography: a Festschrift in Honor of J.A. Wayne Hellmann, O.F.M. Conv., edited by Michael F. Cusato, Timothy J. Johnson, and Steven J. McMichael, 11-31. Leiden: Brill, 2017.

Birge Vitz, Evelyn. “From the Oral to the Written in Medieval and Renaissance Saints’ Lives.” In Images of Sainthood in Medieval Europe, edited by Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski and Timea Klara Szell, 97-115. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991.

194

Blake McHam, Sarah. “The Cult of St. Anthony of Padua.” In Saints: Studies in Hagiography, Edited by Sandro Sticca, 215-232. Binghamton, NY: Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies, 1996.

Blastic, Michael W. “Francis and the Hagiographical Tradition.” In The Cambridge Companion to Francis of Assisi, edited by Michael Robson, 68-83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Bonaventure. Breviloquium. Translated by Dominic V. Monti. St. Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute, 2005.

———. Evening Sermon on St. Francis,1262. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume II: The Founder, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2001.

———. Legenda Maior. In Fontes Franciscani, edited by Menestò, Enrico and Stefano Brufani, Assisi: Porziuncola, 1995.

———. Legenda Maior. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume II: The Founder, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2000.

———. Collations on the Six Days. Vol. 5, The Works of Bonaventure: Cardinal Seraphic Doctor and Saint. Translated by José de Vinck. Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony Guild Press, 1960.

———. Disputed Questions on the Evangelical Perfection. Translated by Thomas Reist and Robert J. Karris. St. Bonaventure: The Franciscan Institute, 2008.

———. Doctoris seraphici S. Bonaventurae Opera Omnia. Edited by the Fathers of the Collegium S. Bonaventurae. 10 vols. Quaracchi, 1882–1902.

———. Itinerarium Mentis in Deum. Translated by Ewart Cousins. In Bonaventure: The Soul's Journey to Into God, The Tree of Life, The Life of St. Francis. New York: Paulist Press, 1978.

———. The Morning Sermon on St. Francis 1255. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume II: The Founder, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2001.

195

Brady, Ignatius. “Saint Bonaventure’s Sermons on Saint Francis.” Franziskanische Studien 58 (1976): 132-137.

Brakke, David. Athanasisus and the Politics of Asceticism. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.

Bredero, Adriaan. Etudes sur la Vita Prima de Saint Bernard. Rome: 1960.

Brown, Peter. “The Saint as Exemplar in Late Antiquity.” In Saints and Virtues, edited by John Stratton Hawley, 3-15. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987.

Burnyeat, M.F. “Aristotle on Learning to be Good.” In Essays on Aristotle's Ethics, edited by Amélie Rorty, 69-92. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.

Casey, Michael. “Towards a Methodology for the Vita prima: Translating the First Life into Biography,” in Bernardus Magister: Papers Presented at the Nonacentenary Celebration of the Birth of Bernard of Clairvaux, edited by John R. Sommerfeldt, 55-70. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1992.

Chesterton, G.K. St. Francis of Assisi. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1952.

Chronicle of the Twenty Four Generals. In Annalecta Franciscana III. Quaracchi: Collegio S. Bonaventura, 1885.

Clairmont, David A. “Medieval Consideration and Moral Pace: Thomas Aquinas and Bernard of Clairvaux on the Temporal Aspects of Virtue.” Journal of Religious Ethics 41 (2013): 79- 111.

———. Moral Struggle and Religious Ethics: On the Person as Classic in Comparative Theological Contexts (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011), 94.

Coakley, John. “The Conversion of St. Francis and the Writing of Christian Biography, 1228- 1263.” Franciscan Studies 72 (2014): 27-71.

Congar, Yves. “St. Francis of Assisi: or the Gospel as an Absolute in Christendom.” In Faith and Spiritual Life. New York: Herder & Herder, 1968. Reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, edited by Maurice Sheehan, 59-76. St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982.

Conn, Joann Wolski and Walter E. Conn, “Conversion as Self-Transcendence Exemplified in the Life of St. Thérèse of Lisieux.” Spirituality Today 34/4 (1982): 303-311.

196

Conn, Walter. Christian Conversion: A Developmental Interpretation of Autonomy and Surrender. New York: Paulist Press, 1986.

———. The Desiring Self: Rooting Pastoral Counseling and Spiritual Direction in Self- Transcendence. New York, NY: Paulist Press, 1998.

Cook, William. “Tradition and Perfection: Monastic Typology in Bonaventure's Life of St. Francis." American Benedictine Review 33 (1982): l-20.

Cousins, Ewart. “The Image of St. Francis in Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior.” In Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, edited by Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco, 311-321. Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988.

———. Bonaventure: The Soul’s Journey into God, The Tree of Life, The Life of St. Francis. Mahwah, New Jersey: Paulist Press, 1978.

Cullen, Christopher M. Bonaventure. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Cunningham, Lawrence. The Meaning of Saints. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980.

Cusato, Michael "Esse ergo mitem et humilem corde, hoc est esse vere fratrem minorem: Bonaventure of Bagnoregio and the Reformulation of the Franciscan Charism." In Charisma und religiose Gemeinschaften im Mittelalter, edited by Giancarlo Andenna, Mirko Breitenstein, and Gert Melville, (Vita regularis. Ordungen und Deutungen religiosen Lebens im Mittelalter. Abhandlungen) 26. Munster, 2005.

———. “Highest Poverty or Lowest Poverty?: The Paradox of the Minorite Charism.” Franciscan Studies 75 (2017): 275-321.

Da Campagnola, Stanislao. L'Angelo del sesto sigillo e l‘alter Christus”: Genesi e sviluppo di due temi francescani nei secoli XIII-XIV. Roma: Laurentianum, 1971.

Dalarun, Jacques. The Misadventure of Francis of Assisi. Translated by Edward Hagman. Saint Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2002.

Daniel, E. Randolph. “Symbol or Model? Bonaventure’s Use of St. Francis,” in Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, edited by Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco, 55-62. Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988.

David of Augsburg. Spiritual Life and Progress. Translated and edited by Dominic Devas. London: Burns Oates & Washbourne, 1936. 197

Davis, Robert Glenn. The Weight of Love: Affect, Ecstasy, and Union in the Theology of Bonaventure. New York: Fordham University Press, 2016.

Decosimo, David. Ethics as a Work of Charity: Thomas Aquinas and Pagan Virtue. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2014.

Delehaye, Hippoltye. Les Légendes Hagiographiques, Duxième Édition. Bruxelles: Bureaux de la Societé des Bollandistes, 1906. English translation by Donald Attwater. New York, Fordham University Press, 1962.

Delio, Ilia. “Clare of Assisi and the Mysticism of Motherhood.” Franciscans at Prayer, edited by Timothy Johnson, 31-62. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

Desbonnets, Theophile. “Introduction to the Legend of the Three Companions.” Translated by Paul Oligny. In St. Francis of Assisi: Omnibus of Sources. Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1973.

Dutschke, Dennis. “The Translation of St. Antony from the Egyptian Desert to the Italian City.” Aevum 68, no. 3 (1994): 499-550.

Dutton, Marsha, L. “A Case for Canonization: The Argument of the Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi.” Cistercian Studies Quarterly 52 (2017): 131–60.

Elliot, David. Hope and Christian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Fleming, John. “The Iconographic Unity of the Blessing for Brother Leo.” Franziskanische Studien 63 (1981): 203-220.

Ford, David. Self and Salvation: Being Transformed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Francis of Assisi. The Admonitions. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume I: The Saint, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2001.

———. The Earlier Rule. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume I: The Saint, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2001.

198

———. True and Perfect Joy. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume I: The Saint, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2001.

———. A Salutation of the Virtues . In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume I: The Saint, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2001.

———. Letter to the Entire Order. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume I: The Saint, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2001.

Francis I. Papal Encyclical Evangelii Gaudium. Rome, 2013.

Getek, Kathryn. “Virtues and Vices: A Franciscan Approach.” In Moral Action in a Complex World: Franciscan Perspectives: Washington Theological Union Symposium Papers 2008, edited by Daria Mitchell, 67-92. St. Bonaventure, NY: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2008.

Gilby, Thomas, and Joseph W. Koterski, “Prudence” in New Catholic Encyclopedia Supplement 2012-2013: Ethics and Philosophy (Gale, 2013): 1272-1276.

Gilson, Etienne. The Philosophy of St. Bonaventure. Translated by Dom Illtyd Trethowna and Frank J. Sheed. Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony Guild Press, 1965.

Goodenough Gelber, Hester. “The Exemplary World of St. Francis of Assisi.” In Saints and Virtues, edited by John Stratton Hawley, 15-35. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987.

Gregory IX. Mira Circa Nos. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume I: The Saint, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2001.

———. Mira Circa Nos. In Bullarium Franciscanum Romanorum Pontificum, Tomus I, ed. Fr. Joannis Baptistae Constantii. Rome, 1759.

Haase, Albert T. “Bonaventure’s Legenda maior: A Redaction Critical Approach.” PhD diss., Fordham University, 1990.

199

Hägg, Thomas. “The Life of St. Antony between Biography and Hagiography.” In The Ashgate Research Companion to Byzantine Hagiography, edited by Stephanos Efthymiadis, 17- 34. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2011.

Hammond, Jay. “Bonaventure’s Legenda Maior.” In A Companion to Bonaventure, ed. Jay Hammond, Wayne Hellmann, and Jared Goff, 453-507. Leiden: Brill, 2014.

Hauerwas, Stanley. A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981.

Hayes, Zachary. “The Theological Image of St. Francis of Assisi in the Sermons of St. Bonaventure,” in Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, edited by Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco, 323-345. Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988.

Heiler, Friedrich. “Saint Francis of Assisi and the Catholic Church.” In Review of the Churches 4. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1927. Reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, edited by Maurice Sheehan, 113-132. St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982.

Hellmann, Wayne. “A Theology of Preaching – A Theology of Transformation: The Life of St. Francis by Thomas of Celano.” In Franciscans and Preaching: “Every Miracle from the Beginning of the World Came about through Words,” edited by Timothy J. Johnson, 59- 69. Leiden: Brill 2012.

Herdt, Jennifer. Putting On Virtue: The Legacy of the Splendid Vices. Chicago: University of Chicago Press: 2012.

Hermann, Placid. “Introduction to the First and Second Life of St. Francis.” In St. Francis of Assisi: Omnibus of Sources. Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1973.

Hess, Cuthbert. “St. Francis and Poverty.” In Franciscan Essays. Aberdeen: The University Press, 1912. Reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, edited by Maurice Sheehan, 99-112. St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982.

Heullant-Donat, Isabelle. “Martyrdom and Identity in the Franciscan Order (Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries).” Franciscan Studies 70 (2012): 429-453.

Hockey, Frederick. “Cantica Graduum: The Gradual Psalms in Patristic Tradition” in Studia Patristica, 355–59. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1970.

200

Holl, Adolf. The Last Christian. Translated by Peter Heinegg. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1980.

Horujy, Sergey S. Practices of the Self and Spiritual Practices: Michel Foucault and the Eastern Christian Discourse. Translated by Boris Jaki. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2015.

Hughes, Kevin. “Bonaventure’s Defense of Mendicancy.” In A Companion to Bonaventure, edited by Jay Hammond, Wayne Hellmann, and Jared Goff, 509-541. Leiden: Brill, 2014.

Ingham, Mary Beth. “Moral Goodness and Beauty.” In The Franciscan Moral Vision: Responding to God’s Love, edited by Thomas A. Nairn, 91-128. St. Bonaventure: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2013.

Johnson, Timothy J. “The ‘Umbrian Legend’ of Jacques Dalarun: Toward a Resolution of the Franciscan Question: Roundtable.” Franciscan Studies 66 (2008): 479-510.

———. The Soul in Ascent, Bonaventure on Poverty, Prayer, and Union with God. St. Bonaventure: Franciscan Institute, 2012.

Jurris, Peter. “In Defense of Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria as Author of the Life of Antony: A Discussion of Historical, Linguistic and Theological Considerations.” Phronema 12 (1997): 24–43.

Kent, Bonnie. “Habits and Virtues (Ia IIae, qq. 49-70).” In The Ethics of Aquinas, edited by Stephen J. Pope, 116-130. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 2002.

———. Virtues of the Will: The Transformation of Ethics in the Late Thirteenth Century. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1995.

La Vita Prima Di S. Antonio. Edited by Giuseppe Abate. Il Santo 8 (1968): 138-201.

LaNave, Gregory F. “Bonaventure.” In The Spiritual Senses: Perceiving God in Western Christianity, edited by Paul L. Gavrilyuk and Sarah Coakley, 159–73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Landini, Lawrence C. “St. Anthony of Padua: Portrait of the Ideal Preacher.” Josephinum Journal of Theology 4 (1997), 51-60.

Leclercq, Jean. Bernard of Clairvaux and the Cistercian Spirit. Translated by Claire Lavoie. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1976.

201

———. The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture. Translated by Catharine Misrahi. New York: Fordham University Press, 1996.

The Legend of the Three Companions. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume II: The Founder, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2000.

Legenda trium Sociorum. In Fontes Franciscani, edited by Menestò, Enrico and Stefano Brufani, Assisi: Porziuncola, 1995.

Life of Anthony “Assidua” by a Contemporary Franciscan. Edited by Vergilio Gamboso. Translated by Bernard Przewozny. Padua: Messaggero, 2006.

Lombardo, Eleonora “Les sermons sur saint Antoine et le bon usage de la prédication comme Vertu'.” Medieval Sermon Studies 56 (2012): 46-62.

Martin, Eugène. “’Franciscus, Vir Catholicus’ or, The Catholicism of St. Francis.” Translated by Frederick E. Colton. Etudes Franciscaines 49 (1937). Reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, edited by Maurice Sheehan, 77-98. St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982.

McGinn, Bernard. “The Influence of Francis on the Theology of the High Middle Ages: The Testimony of St. Bonaventure.” In Bonaventuriana: miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, edited by Francisco de Asís Chavero Blanco, 97-118. Rome: Edizioni Antonianum, 1988.

———. The Flowering of Mysticism: Men and Women in the New Mysticism 1200-1350. New York: Crossroad, 1998.

McGuire, Brian Patrick. “Writing about the Difficult Saint: Bernard of Clairvaux and Biography.” Cistercian Studies Quarterly 44.4 (2009): 447-462.

McMichael, Steven J. “Francis and the Encounter with the Sultan (1219).” In The Cambridge Companion to Francis of Assisi, edited by Michael Robson, 127-142. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Miccoli, Giovanni. “Francesco e La Pace.” Franciscan Studies 64 (2006): 33-52.

Moorman, John R. H. The Sources for the Life of S. Francis of Assisi. Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1940.

202

Nairn, Thomas A., and Thomas A. Shannon. “The Franciscan Moral Vision and Contemporary Culture.” In The Franciscan Moral Vision: Responding to God’s Love, edited by Thomas A. Nairn, 197-220. St. Bonaventure: Franciscan Institute Publications, 2013.

Newman, Barbara. “Annihilation and Authorship: Three Women Mystics of the 1290s.” Speculum 91/3 (July 2016): 591-630.

Paciocco, Roberto. “Come ho potuto e con parole improprie.” in Paciocco and Accrocca, La leggenda di un santo di nome Francesco: Tommaso da Celano e la Vita beati Francisci, edited by Paciocco and Accrocca, 15-141. Milano: Biblioteca Francescana, 1999.

Pansters, Krijin. Franciscan Virtue: Spiritual Growth and the Virtues in Franciscan Literature and Instruction of the Thirteenth Century. Leiden: Brill, 2012.

Petry, Ray C. “Poverty and the World Apostolate.” In St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, edited by Maurice Sheehan, 133-150. St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982.

Pius XI. Papal Encyclical Rite Expiatis, on Saint Francis of Assisi. Rome, 1926. Reprinted in St. Francis of Assisi: Essays in Commemoration, 1982, edited by Maurice Sheehan, 163- 190. St. Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1982.

Poirel, Dominique. “L’écriture de Thomas de Celano: une rhétorique de la rupture.” Franciscan Studies 70 (2012): 73-99.

Porter, Jean. “The Unity of the Virtues and the Ambiguity of Goodness: A Reappraisal of Aquinas's Theory of the Virtues.” Journal of Religious Ethics 21.1 (1993): 137-163.

Prinzivalli, Emmanuela. “Un santo da leggere: Francesco d’Assisi nel percorso delle fonti agiografiche.” In Francesco d’Assisi e il primo secolo di storia Francescana, 71-117. Torino: Einaudi, 1997. Republished in English as “A Saint to be Read: Francis of Assisi in the Hagiographical Sources.” Translated by Edward Hagman. Greyfriars Review 15.3 (2001): 263-298.

Quinn, John F. “The Moral Philosophy of St. Bonaventure.” In Bonaventure and Aquinas: Enduring Philosophers, edited by Robert W. Shahan, 25-56. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1976.

Sabatier, Paul. The Life of St. Francis of Assisi. Translated by L.S. Houghton. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1919.

203

Schlosser, Marianne. “Bonaventure: Life and Works.” In A Companion to Bonaventure, edited by Jay Hammond, Wayne Hellmann, and Jared Goff, 7-59. Leiden: Brill, 2014.

Thomas of Celano. Vita Prima. In Fontes Franciscani, edited by Menestò, Enrico and Stefano Brufani, Assisi: Porziuncola, 1995.

———. The Life of Saint Francis. In Francis of Assisi Early Documents, Volume I: The Saint, edited by Regis J. Armstrong, Wayne Hellmann, and William J. Short. New York: New City Press, 2001.

Van Geest, Paul. “‘Seeing that for monks the life of Antony is a sufficient pattern of discipline,’ Athanasius as Mystagogue in his Vita Antonii.” Church History and Religious Culture 90 (2010): 199-221.

Vauchez, André. Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Warykow, Joseph P. The Westminster Handbook to Thomas Aquinas. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008.

William of St. Thierry et al., The First Life of Bernard of Clairvaux. Translated with an Introduction and Notes by Hilary Costello. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2015.

———. Vita prima sancti Bernardi Claraevallis abbatis. Edited by Paul Verdeyen, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Mediaevalis (CCCM) 89B. Turnhout: Brepols, 2011.

204