Below are excerpts from a comprehensive booklet produced by the FAI's Anticlerical Working Group, which provides an interesting critical reading of the Franciscan movement and the construction of the myth of Francis. This is a highly interesting contribution, especially in light of the relentless campaign on the figure of "Saint" Francis eight hundred years after his death. This insight highlights little-known aspects of a Franciscan order perfectly functional to clericalism, but also to nationalism and capitalism. For the full text, see "The Franciscans at the Service of the Inquisition and Colonialism - Between National Myth and Symbol of Pacifism: The False Parable of Poverty."
Daniele Ratti - Anticlerical Working Group
Premise
[...]The following reflections attempt to sketch, albeit briefly, a picture of Franciscanism, and not of the figure of Francis of Assisi, already a highly versatile and extremely contradictory historical figure. From a universal example of pauperism to the founder of a movement that, by breaking up the original order into a series of "derivative orders," each with its own "exemptions" from the concept of poverty, achieved veritable economic empires, sometimes (see the Capuchins) through a lavish display of their wealth. Perhaps the most surprising fact (we will attempt to explain it later) is that the image of Francis and Franciscanism, despite profound changes over time, has retained its fame and notoriety intact. The founder's habit has, over time, taken on different and opposing meanings: from a champion of nationalism at the end of the 19th century, to the celebration of the "Saint of Italians" by Fascism, to an icon of pacifism today.
Francis of Assisi's entry into the pantheon of "important" Italians occurred with Law 132 of 1958. The Italian state incorporated the papal provision into its own law and established that October 4th, the day on which the Catholic Church commemorates Saint Francis, would be a "civil solemnity." In 2005, rather than abolish that clerical anachronism, a new law, number 24, also designated October 4th as a "day of peace, fraternity, and dialogue between members of different cultures and religions." Not only that, it was also decided that October 4th would be the site of "ceremonies, initiatives, and meetings, particularly in schools of all levels, dedicated to the universal values embodied by Italy's special patron saints." This law, it should be remembered, enjoyed more than bipartisan consensus: it was passed in a right-wing legislature, after the bill had been signed by several parliamentarians, including those from both Communist parties. Opposites meet: the nationalist right, which seeks to portray itself as Christian, celebrating the protectors of the homeland, and the pauperist and pacifist left, celebrating the "poor man." That the Franciscans, along with the Dominicans, were the most zealous leaders of the Inquisition Tribunals, as well as the most active protagonists of the Catholic colonial era, is something almost no one cares to point out. But the image of Franciscanism does not stop there; it continues, becoming an icon of pacifism in the second half of the 20th century. It becomes a central figure in the collective imagination of the participants in the Perugia-Assisi peace march, a democratic, ecologist, anti-capitalist movement in the diverse "anti-global system" world. The contradictions surrounding Franciscanism have persisted throughout the centuries and appear to be the reason for its success, as has the transformism of its "Mother House," the Roman Catholic Church, a transformism that has allowed it to survive two millennia of history unscathed, with its structures and privileges.
Why reflect on Franciscanism
2026 marks the eighth centenary of the death of "Saint" Francis of Assisi. In 1939, Pope Pius XII proclaimed Francis of Assisi and Saint Catherine of Siena patrons of Italy. The "Poverello" of Assisi has always been portrayed as the symbol of a simple, selfless religiosity, detached from material interests, an image in stark contrast to a rich and powerful papacy. He was a precursor of animal rights, environmentalist, and pacifist tendencies, attracting the sympathy of many laypeople, and even non-believers. Creating a portrait of him, outside of and in contrast to this shared vision, as it has developed over the centuries, is not easy, and above all, it requires us to answer a question: what is real in this sugarcoated image, accepted by most? Francis's preaching captures a pivotal and triumphant moment in the history of Christianity: that of a suffering Christ, more human and close to the people, in contrast to a worldly and triumphant Church, secure in its dogmas, as it appeared at the time. This shift has profound consequences, so much so that the Assisi native appears as "the new Christ" ( alter Christus )-the case of the stigmata being emblematic. Francis's "miracles" and practices fit into this trend and also reveal a religiosity tied to pre-Christian cults and culture, still deeply rooted in the peasant world, but explicitly condemned by the Church as heretical and witchcraft-like, as in the cases of tree worship and communication with birds. This is why the figure of the "poor man of Assisi" has always been "under observation" by ecclesiastical authorities.[...]
In the post-war period, the saint's icon underwent a further evolution: it shifted to a more universal image, cloaked in internationalism and pacifism. This was a move undertaken by left-wing culture to capture the Catholic electorate. In reality, Francis was not a pacifist at all (for example, cultivating contacts with nobles and military leaders), nor did he oppose wars and crusades; on the contrary, he fervently followed the crusaders and zealously advocated the need for Muslim conversion (despite the legend of a peaceful "intercultural" encounter with Sultan Malik al-Kamil).
The crucial turning point that brought Franciscanism to its current popularity is due to the Second Vatican Council and a significant fraction of the Catholic-based protests that affected parts of its ecclesiastical apparatus and youth associations. In that period of strong cultural, political, and social unrest, all the experiences in the history of the Church that proposed pauperism and community life as the basis of their action aroused natural sympathy, even among non-believers, if only as a contrast to an official clergy perceived as collusive and an expression of power. The Franciscan mendicant orders, in particular, were reevaluated, arousing sympathy even among the diverse world of protests. A Francis of pauperism, a pacifist and environmentalist, then took shape. This narrative was largely taken up by the pacifist mythology of the 1960s and into the following decade. The figure of "Saint" Francis, and especially the story of his life, made him a perfect symbol of many themes that have characterized the decades of multiple generations of opponents of liberalism, to the point of fully enlisting, as "fellow travelers," a large portion of the Catholic community, at least on the issues of Third Worldism, pacifism, and environmentalism. Even if one does not fully subscribe to this vision, one cannot help but agree that in the vast hagiographical panorama, Saint Francis was and is unquestionably the most well-liked within the secular world, representing in some ways a universally acceptable image. From the second half of the 20th century to the present day, the figure of Saint Francis and his movement have been perceived as a symbol of universal and shared values such as peace, brotherhood, and charity. The perception of a figure of harmony between faiths, but above all of communication, dialogue between believers and non-believers, and exchange between different cultures, has increasingly developed as the basis for the media success of Franciscanism. In conclusion, Francis and Franciscanism are the image of what is most appropriate and convenient to display: the intellectuals of the current regime are only busy emphasizing one aspect or another of the thousand contradictions, to paint a different face suited to each situation.
The search for and celebration of a myth: "the holiest of Italians, the most Italian of saints"
The seventh centenary of Francis's death, in 1926, was the moment when the myth of the "national saint" was created. Why was this process initiated precisely then? The answer lies in the fascist regime's need for a continuous search for images of the past that could root the myth in Italian history, well beyond the rhetoric of the Roman Empire, and the saints perfectly satisfied this need. The triad of Francis of Assisi, Catherine of Siena, and John Bosco are the absolute champions of Italianness. If "holiness" also coincided with "Italianness," this was also a sign of the times, and furthermore, it brought great political benefits: it strengthened the reconciliation between Church and State, as enshrined in the Lateran Pacts, Mussolini's political masterpiece, which resolved a dispute that had remained unresolved since Italian unification until 1929. Mussolini took the opportunity to celebrate Saint Francis as the guiding light of the "Italian saint" of the new Fascist Italy. Mussolini's words are a clear indication of this, as is evident from the message sent on November 28, 1925, to Italian representatives abroad:
"The greatest genius of poetry with Dante, the most daring navigator of the oceans with Columbus; the most profound mind of the arts and science with Leonardo. But Italy, with Francis, has given the holiest of saints to Christianity and humanity. Because, together with the heights of intellect and character, our people possess a simplicity of spirit and a zeal for ideal conquests, and, where necessary, the virtue of renunciation and sacrifice." A peasant saint to contrast with the bourgeois and urban world: Saint Francis of Italy.
The "myth" became a tool for political penetration into the rural world, a necessary operation to "reconquer" that part of the country against which the fascist squads had attacked during the two red years, further helping to reconcile the Catholic rural area with the regime in preparation for the Concordat. Mussolini's message and the nationalization of Francis, with his biography overlapping with the political path of fascism, were fully and enthusiastically embraced by Catholic associations, which mobilized to offer their cooperation to the government.[...]
The complete and definitive consecration of Franciscanism coincided with the debut of the Italian kingdom on the Mediterranean and North African stage. Italian colonial expansion was understood not only as a geopolitical operation, but was also justified as the spread of Christian civilization, since it became essential to find a moral justification for Italy's colonial aspirations. A connection was found with Francis's journey to the East during the Fourth Crusade. Francis was seen as the one who showed his compatriots the path to territorial expansion in the Mediterranean.[...]And it was precisely during these twenty years that an "Italian" approach to the interpretation of Francis was consolidated. However, this was not an entirely original product of Fascism, but rather the maturation of a process that had begun in the preceding decades, a period during which a nationalistic interpretation of the Assisi native began, who was invested with the title "the holiest of Italians, the most Italian of saints."[...]
But the enlistment of the Assisi native in the ranks of militant nationalism was not painless for the Vatican and triggered a reaction. It was not only the need to reclaim the figure of Saint Francis, but above all the need to stem the nationalist ideology that was invading the hagiographic imagination. The war had exacerbated patriotic myths and demonstrations in support of interventionism, borrowing religious language and liturgy: a script at hand to further emotionally charge an atmosphere that had reached a point of no return in Europe's interventionist squares.[...]
The pope had indeed reacted to the politicization of Francis's image and intended to bring the saint's figure back into a more strictly religious context, or rather, under the aegis of the Roman Church, beyond political exploitation, thus ensuring his subordination to ecclesiastical authority. The words with which he declared that Catholicism makes use of, not uses, are definitive on the use that nationalists make of the Catholic religion and its saints, including Saint Francis.[...]
However, this clear and unequivocal stance did not imply a renunciation of a certain openness to the nationalization of Francis. But the exaltation of his Italianness had to be "correct," that is, free from "the narrow limits of modern nationalism." It was simply a matter of avoiding a reading of him through the lens of that "exasperated nationalism" which, after the First World War, was included, along with liberalism and communism, among the political errors denounced by the Church.
In response to the Vatican's actions, Mussolini issued a decree proclaiming October 4th a national holiday. Mussolini, in an attempt to reclaim Francis's "Italianness," shifted attention to another aspect of the saint's biography-his travels to the East and his involvement in the Crusades. He seemed to want to portray him as a precursor of the Mediterranean colonial expansion that, in the Fascist conception, was inscribed in the destiny of the new imperial Italy. He reaffirmed the connection between Italianness and colonial expansion, which had found expression in D'Annunzio's nationalization of his image, based on a sacralization of the homeland. The model of sainthood, represented by Francis, was depicted with the colors of the homeland's new religion. The fulfillment of an inescapable destiny that had to be realized through Mussolini, the man chosen by destiny. The Assisi native was the Italian saint par excellence, who, by sailing the Mediterranean, had demonstrated the "racial" superiority of the Italian nation and justified its claims to political dominance in that area. It was the consecration of the new image of Saint Francis, the saint "at the service" of the country's fortunes: the "National Saint."
A little-known story
The Franciscans and the Birth of Financial Capitalism: The Monti di Pietà
The development and rebirth of cities beginning in the 12th century led to the expansion of the merchant class, the protagonist of the new urban classes. Customs, as well as the centuries-old social and economic balances, changed. The concept of wealth was overturned, no longer understood as the simple accumulation of resources-whether land, real estate, or personal property-but as the ability to circulate money. In this context, the Franciscan Friars Minor, through the Monti di Pietà, assumed a decisive role, not only religious but above all economic and civil. The Franciscans were not allowed to own any property; they could not accept money, but they could use the goods they received in alms. The development of the concepts of property, use, and possession was therefore one of their primary contributions to economic development.
The profession of merchant was regarded with enormous respect by 13th-century Franciscan theologians. It was their point of reference in civil society, a society that was rapidly changing, leaving behind rigid medieval feudal models and becoming more flexible in all its aspects: economic, theological, artistic, technological, and scientific. This epochal shift was establishing the West as the undisputed protagonist on the global stage of history, also projecting Christianity and the Catholic Church into a leading role for the centuries to come. Operating in the world of trade and commerce, merchants demonstrated that wealth is a transitory phenomenon. They enjoyed public trust (unlike usurers), and the trust they enjoyed stemmed from the fact that their money was productive capital, because they considered it not a means of accumulation, but a medium of exchange. The Monti in the 15th and 16th centuries arose thanks to the preaching of the Friars Minor: in Italy by 1515, there were already 135 of them. They were a form of what today we would call microcredit. The process was simple: anyone in need of money would deposit an item at the Monte di Pietà, which appraised it and offered the borrower a sum. The Monte di Pietà would safeguard the item for a year, after which the owner could redeem it by paying a sum equal to the sum offered, plus a requested percentage, if they needed to regain possession of their item. If the item was not redeemed, the Monte di Pietà had the right to resell the item, and if the sale yielded more than the amount deposited, a previously agreed-upon percentage would be retained by the institution, while the remainder would go to the owner. The low interest rate charged by the Monte di Pietà (typically 5-10%, considered very low for commercial transactions at the time) was the institution's strong point, as it had to compete with the interest charged by Jewish banks (which ranged between 20 and 30%). The institution of the Monti di Pietà spread especially in the 16th century, that is after Pope Leo X, with the bull Inter Multiplices The decree of May 4, 1515, produced by the Fifth Lateran Council, recognized the legitimacy of the Monti di Pietà, praising their "good and necessary for society" purposes and declaring the legality of the modest financial burden (i.e., the interest rate), provided that the burden was limited to covering operating expenses. Lending was provided to the poor, at a negligible interest rate, so that they could start or expand a business, without falling into the hands of usurers. The name Monte di Pietà derives from the union of two terms: Monte, in the financial jargon of the time, indicated an institution or a place for collecting money, while Pietà refers to the Imago Pietatis , or the representation of Christ rising from the tomb, also known as Cristo in Pietà, frequently used as an emblem by the Monti to effectively represent and spread the charitable purpose of the institution.
Friars Minor and the Inquisition
The relationship between the Friars Minor and the Inquisition paints a profoundly discordant image of Franciscanism, far removed from the sense of piety and tolerance most people hold for Brother Francis and the Order he founded. The profound harmony with creation conveyed by compositions such as the famous Canticle of Brother Sun stands in stark contrast to the violent and coercive power of the inquisitio haereticae pravitatis (the inquisition of heretical wickedness), in which the Friars Minor also participated with great dedication. The image of "Brother Fire," who lights up the night, "beautiful and playful, robust and strong," and for whom the Lord must be praised, is tragically distorted and contradicted by the luminous contrast with the burning of heretics and with an all-too-often stereotypical interpretation of the role of Brother Francis and his work, understood as universally peacemaking and completely censored and obscured by the role he played in the history of the Inquisition.
The friars participated, without hesitation, without internal debate, as far as we know, in the repression of heretical depravity from the very beginning, obeying the pope's directives. It should be noted that the pontiff was Gregory IX, who had long been Cardinal Protector of the Order of Friars Minor by order of Francis. Only a year after Francis's death did the Friars Minor become involved in the repression of heresy, before the birth of the Inquisition in the hands of the Mendicant Orders. This fact, which invested the Franciscans with a role of absolute importance in the repression of heresies and subsequently in the development of the entire history of the Inquisition, is due to the institution of a figure, the so-called inquisitor generalis Giovanni Gaetano Orsini, cardinal for thirty-three years and, finally, pontiff with the name of Nicholas III (1277-1280), who, for seventeen years, would carry out the role of referent and consultant to the inquisitors (1260-1277). In the history of the Inquisition his name is associated with the expression inquisitor generalis , an effective definition to indicate a special function. What did this role consist of? He was to be the referent of the Friars Minor and Preachers who, if there were "impediments" in the carrying out of the officium fidei (that is, the inquisitorial activity), were required to inform him "by letter or through nuncios" so that he could report to the pontiff. It should be noted that Giovanni Gaetano Orsini also became Cardinal Protector of the Friars Minor in 1263. One cannot help but wonder about the potential interference of these two roles, given that he was the point of contact for all inquisitors and protector of the Friars Minor only. In a complex situation, where the legislation was being consolidated, a special figure was established for "sensitive" cases, in a strategic position of liaison (between the Mendicant Orders, inquisitors, and the Pope) and clearly connected to the Order of Friar Francis.
https://umanitanova.org/il-bluff-francescano-la-costruzione-di-una-mitologia-funzionale-al-potere/
_________________________________________
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten