Saint Francis was no "community organizer"

My son is an undergraduate at Pomona College. This weekend is Parents' Weekend at Pomona. Parents are invited to come to the college for several days, visit their child, and participate in various events sponsored by the college. One of these events was a lecture given by Professor Ken Wolf on Saint Francis of Assisi, which I attended.

Professor Wolf read and interpreted various passages from Thomas of Celano's Life of Saint Francis. From the passages discussed, I came away with the impression that Saint Francis was a kind of medieval Stoic. As a young man he had been the son of a rich merchant. But, over time, he came to be filled with a sense of surfeit and disgust at the excesses of his class, and felt himself called to turn away from all concerns of the flesh and to lead a life of utter poverty, to achieve a kind of Stoic ataraxia or apatheia (equanimity or unconcern) in the face of worldly desires and preoccupations. The nobility of his calling can be seen by his characterization of poverty as a kind of Lady, Lady Poverty, to be served by him with an almost chivalrous devotion (like Don Quixote serving Dulcinea). Thus, although he led a life of abject poverty, he served thereby a noble ideal with the kind of dedication normally reserved to one's lover.

Professor Wolf is the author of the book The Poverty of Riches: St. Francis of Assisi Reconsidered. I should acknowledge that my impression of Saint Francis as a genuine ascete devoted to achieving a higher plane of existence through the renunciation of worldly concerns seems to stand in stark contrast with Professor Wolf's view that Saint Francis, reconsidered, was to some extent a charlatan, a person whose apparent devotion to poverty was to some degree self-serving. I must grant that my assessment of Francis may be naive when he is viewed in the light of other medieval "ascetes," like Peter the Hermit.

One passage from Thomas' Life, however, stood out to me for other reasons:

When [Saint Francis] was once passing through Apulia with a companion he found in the way near Bari a large purse ... stuffed with coin. The Saint’s companion advised him and urgently pressed him to take up the purse, and give the money to the poor; extolling the virtue of pity towards the needy, and praising the mercy which would be shown by spending the money thus. The Saint absolutely refused to do it, declaring that it was a trick of the Devil. “My son,” said he, “it is not lawful to take away the property of others; and to give away what belongs to others involves punishment for sin, not honour for merit.” So they left the spot and hastened to finish their journey. However, that brother, deluded by a vain compassion, was not satisfied; and continued to suggest transgression. The Saint consented to return to the place ... [H]e bade the brother take up the purse (which, through his prayer, contained a snake instead of money). The brother ... took the purse in his hands; when lo! a large serpent leapt out of the purse and showed that brother how the Devil had deceived him. Then said the Saint to him: “To God’s servants, brother, money is nothing else but a devil and a venomous snake”. [emphasis added]

Brother Thomas of Celano (2013-10-10). The Lives of Saint Francis of Assisi (Kindle Locations 2431-2444). The Pergamum Collection. Kindle Edition.

In light of this passage we can reconsider the modern liberal state, which taxes the rich in order to give to the poor. The proponents of such a state celebrate its acts of redistribution as exemplary of the "virtue of pity towards the needy" and as "mercy shown by the spending of the money thus." Saint Francis, on the other hand, sees these acts for what they really are: a form of "vain compassion," "unlawful seizure of the property of others," behavior that should be "punished as sin," not "honored as meritorious."

Saint Francis sees the agents of redistribution with a clear eye. They haughtily presume to know best how the wealth of others should be spent. They are perfectly willing to seize that wealth, acting in a way that Francis views as unlawful. In so doing, they are really only seeking to aggrandize themselves. Their so-called compassion is mere vanity. Their corruption is a sin and merits punishment, not honor.

In sum, when given the opportunity, Saint Francis refused to assume the mantle of community organizer (like Barack Obama or Robert Reich) attempting to aid the downtrodden. He did not presume to take from some to give to others on some pretense that "we are all in this together" and that he was the best arbiter of how the resources of the rich should be directed to benefit the general welfare. Instead, he saw that engaging in this kind of activity was merely another species of corruption and vanity, another violent appropriation of power.

Saint Francis' companion is a wonderful example of my Thesis 7:

Increases to government spending or programs that benefit particular special interest groups are always justified by noble-sounding, plausible arguments about promoting the general welfare:
• when we increase teachers' pay, we are "helping the children;"
• when we increase the pay of policemen, firefighters, and prison guards, we are "improving public safety;"
• when we increase spending on defense contractors peddling the latest computer hardware and software, we are "keeping America safe from Muslim extremists;"
• when Fannie Mae purchases junk loans from banks, we are "expanding homeownership;"
• when we expand affirmative action programs for various minority groups, we are “combating racism;”
• when we funnel billions of dollars to venture capitalists, we are “promoting green technologies.”
In fact, the money spent does not go to promoting the general welfare, but primarily benefits only the narrow special interest groups.

To Saint Francis, the unlawful seizure and doling out of money is nothing more than an attempt to aggrandize oneself, to promote oneself into a position of power and control. And those who act in this way are merely serving the devil, even when they portray themselves as well-intentioned community organizers.