The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1914-10-10

luxurious, less costly lives Those
who Joined his Third Order, were,
while remaining in the world, to dress
plainly and inexpensively. The effect
was immense. Many who never be-
fore realized the crime of luxury were
brought to see the tremendous in
justice of their ways; many more who
had previously wished to oppose the
prevailing styles but were too weak,
were now buoyed up by numbers and
organization to make a stand What
hey were ashamed to do through real
economy and individual judgment, they
could do now because it was part of
the rule of the society they had join
ed.
Never was this lesson more needed
than now. There are those who will
tell you that dress of many women to-
day is immoral because it is immodest.
But l say that it is immoral because
it has endangered the souls of thou
sands. What right has any woman to
put upon her back in one year what
would keep twenty-five families for
that time? What right has any man
to spend fifty thousand dollars on a
single entertainment? Is it any won
der that Socialism spreads when our
papers are full of such items? When
eXtravagant people send a hundred
thousand dollars worth of flowers to
the grave of one man? When foolish
society leaders give entertainments to
dogs and monkeys?
These may be instances of eXagger-
ated extravaganza. No one here has
gone to such lengths. But many here
have offended against charity and
good taste in their personal eXpend1-
lures. Few have always considered
simply comfort and utility and beauty
in their dress and have never par
AIDED finery because they were
ashamed to seem unable to afford it.
Among us English-speaking peoples
especially" said William James, "do
the praises of poverty need to be
boldly sung. We have grown literally
afraid to be poor. We despise anyone
who elects to be poor in order to sim
plify and save his inner life. If he
loes not join the general scramble and
pant with the money-making street,
we deem him spiritless and lacking
in ambition. We have lost the power
even of imagining what the ancient
jdealization of poverty could have
meant, the liberation from material
attachments, the unbribed soul, the
manlier Indifference, the paying our
Way by what we are to do and not by
what we have, the right to fling away
our life at any moment Irresponsible
the more athletic trim, in short, the
moral fighting shape. When we of the
5O-called better classes are scared as
men never were scared in history at
material ugliness and hardship; when
we put off marriage until our house
can be artistic, and quake at the
thought of having a child without
bank account and doomed to manual
labor, it is time for the thinking men
20 protest against so unmanly and
irreligious state of opinion" (Varie-
les of Religious Experience, p. 1861.
Would that another Francis might
arise to preach simplicity to our
wealthy Catholics, would that the
Third Order of st. Francis might to-
lay affect the life of its members as
once it did. Alas, that he should have
failed so pitifully in influencing after
generations in this regard. Can there
be a revival? Is the idea dead? Or
will there come some leader to tell
is, she is not dead but sleepeth? Who
will resurrect that glorious conception
and start anew the crusade of justice
and charity?
But if Francis failed to influence
after generations in this particular re-
gard he did not fail IN one of even
wider significance. A recent Protes-
tant Bishop OF London has said that
that "the two men who have had
greatest effect on modern history, in
widely different ways, are Napoleon
Bonaparte and Francis of Assist" And
the saying is not so far off the mark
as the unthinking might suppose. In
Iced, | think we may say that he had
even a greater and more enduring in.
fluence than Napoleon. The bound
aries of nation, the family of a
sovereign, the title of a ruler matter
little. They do not affect the really
personal and intimate life of the
whole people. But not so an institu-
ton like feudalism. No man could
escape it. The serf was subject to
some lord, the lord to an overload,
who In his turn did homage to a
king or emperor. These petty
lords warred necessarily among
themselves, consulting no man about
commencing hostilities. And each
| liegeman was obliged to serve under
his lords banner or furnish tax in
exchange for personal service.
The tyranny Of the system was
tremendous. But there seemed no
remedy. For centuries men had
known nothing else, and only few
prophetic souls or visionary anar-
chists (as you choose) could dream
Of something different. One Of these
souls was Francis. The love of God
and of his neighbor led him to dccry
| war, and he insisted that his followers
should not bear arms and take
an oath to render feudal service in
the field. Had this affected only
his monks there would have been
little stir. But men and women of
the world who could not become
monks or nuns were vet infatuated