Customer Reviews

A Mended and Broken Heart: The Life and Love of Francis of Assisi

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Wendy Murray wrote her book to prove that St. Francis' deep conversion was the direct result of a platonic love affair of sorts with St. Clare. The evidence that she brings to bear is weak and rises to not more than the level of speculation and in some ways is no more than outright gossip. In addition, Murray reports that Francis' early life was whitewashed by the Catholic Church to keep the faithful from knowing the true extent of his libertine lifestyle prior to his conversion. In the end though, there is no smoking gun here either, but only a refutation from her sources that said that, despite being the leader of his partying friends, Francis was not prurient. In the end, then, the primary argument for her thesis is without claim, as are ancillary claims about Francis. The book also ends with a poor and obviously strained effort by Murray to culminate with a dramatic literary flair but the effort falls far short of the goal.

There is enough interesting history here, however, to make the book a worthwhile read: the constant warring among cities, including the involvement of Assisi; the allure of knighthood and the crusades; and the battle between the Holy Roman Empire and the Papacy, for example. The characters that took part in Francis' life, from St. Clare to the Pope to Francis' fellow friars, are also interesting, as are, in particular, the details of Francis' life, from his early days as a partier, to his conversion, to his efforts to create an order and ultimately to his struggle with illnesses near the end of his life. Ignoring the backdrop of an attempted expose, A Broken and Mended Heart remains a good short biography of St. Francis and a history of his times.

Prior reviewers use as a premise for their reviews, the theorized "love affair" between St. Clare and St. Francis and seem to be evaluating this book on the basis of whether or not the author "proved" without a shadow of a doubt a torrid (sexual?) affair...Setting this premise aside, this book does provide insights into the life and love(s) of St. Francis and some of the not so saintly things about his life. As a premise for this review, so many times "Lives of the Saints" stories are sanitized and homogenized and pasteurized so that the portrayal of saints' lives are elevated onto a pedestal that no human being can hope to attain. That is NOT the case with Murray's book and that is the primary reason I liked the book. She shows some of the very real human foibles of St. Francis. This helps me to relate to his story, his life and his conversion. He did not get along well with his father, a well to do cloth merchant. Prior reviewers report that the church whitewashed some of the aspects of Francis' earlier life and that is most likely true. However, if one also reads the Confessions of St. Augustine Confessions of St. Augustine, The: Modern English Version, here too is a Saint who also readily admits to a decadent life prior to conversion. One thing I like about Murray's treatment is her portrayal of Sir Knight Francis, that is to say, the machismo young man of his times who gets rolled up into fantasies of heroic knighthood adventures. Also, when describing Francis' conversion, Murray takes pains to describe to us Francis' revulsion to people with leprosy. The leprosy part of any saint's story is so difficult for any of us to appreciate in this day and age as very few of us have personally encountered people with Hansen's disease (as leprosy is now called). We may have some image of leprosy and lepers from movies like "Ben Hur" Ben-Hur where Charlton Heston's mother and sister live in a leper colony. Murray portrays as do others, Francis' actual physical embrace (hugs him) of a leper which must have been terrifically difficult for him to do. In the context of conversion, the hugging of the leper, is integral to the life of Francis. Also depicted here is the migration from his original intentions of his religious order. As the Franciscans grow, others lead the order and it strays in its orientation. In frustration, Francis considers quitting the religious life, marrying and having children. He also self reports on his death bed his ability to still father children which seemingly could disqualify him from sainthood. These admissions seem to indicate a man with an intact potency and libido who chose to live in a manner whereby he did not seek satisfying those drives as his primary goal in life.

The author's main point, that St. Francis of Assisi was in love with St. Clare of Assisi, is not well developed. The evidence presented, praying together at the start of their religious conversions and their later contact is interesting but not convincing.

The book covers other pieces of St. Francis's life. Of particular interest to me were his experiences on a Crusade and his illnesses and their treatments.

While there is some interesting material here, it needs more content. This is more like an essay than a book.

Some reflections:

(1) That Francis was a good looking man, as suggested by the author,was hardly the case. We have contemporary portraits of Francis showing otherwise along with descriptions of his contemporaries such as Thomas of Celano;

(2) That Francis was a womanizer, again suggested by the author, is doubtful. There is no evidence at all of this. In 13th Century Assisi, such a small town, it would have been prohibitied unless the author is suggesting Francis visited houses of prostitution. There is no record of this at all. The author is putting her 21st Century inklings into the 13th Century;

(3) There is no indication at all that Francis had any romantic feelings
toward Claire of Assisi. History is completely silent on this issue. The author is right concerning Francis' and his love of Arthurian legends.
As a matter of history, the idea of chivalric love prohibited sexual contact. Lady Poverty was just that - an element of his mystical life. And indeed the age difference is suspect - Francis was almost 30 when he converted to the mystical life - Claire turning 14 - 15;

(4) Yes, Francis did go to war. The author says he was a "warrior."
Such a word suggests a lifestyle that could hardly portray the Francis of Assisi of historical record. Yes, he went to battle but we have no idea of what he did. He could have killed or he could have been nursing the wounded in his first battle. We don't know. We do know he was trying to fulfill his father's aspirations when he armored up to go on the Cursades. This venture, we know, was interrupted by a mystical event for Francis. He turned back and became a knight of his Lord - the mystical Christ who eventually spoke to him at Daniano. Was he then a "failed knight?" as suggested by the author. Francis thought otherwise. The problem here appears to be the author's lack of religious instinct which would make such events incomprehensible. If anything can be said about Francis at this juncture is that he failed to live up to his father's wishes - a failed son rather than a failed knight. The relationship between Francis and his father is a gold mine that deserves psychological scrutiny - to be sure a Freudian would come to a different conclusion than a Jungian.

(5)The author contends that he created friendship with the Muslims. Highly exagerated. Francis was a medieval man and most likely thought as most medieval Christians the belief of the highly influential Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, the first preacher of the Crusades a century earlier. Bernard said "to kill a Muslim is not to commit homocide." Francis confronted the Sultan during the Crusades. At that time he justified the killing going as being necessary until the Muslims accepted the Gospel of Jesus Christ. On his return from the Crusades he not only did not preach against the Crusades but his Order, the Franciscans, were ordered by the Pope to preach the Crusades. In this capacity, they went from town to town to raise men, money and material for the Crusades. Had it not been for the Franciscans the Crusades could not have happened in that century. No objections from the founder here;

There are many good books on Saint Francis. This is not one of them. The author lacks the spirit of the age, the religious instinct that can comprehend what the actors are going through. I am sorry to say this is not good history. It is sloppy history reflecting the feelings of the present into the past. Of the possible five stars I take away three for want of history but give it one star for the cover and one star for the paper it is written on. Why punish the innocent even if inanimate?

A biography of St. Francis and St. Clare which draws upon and speculates closely adherent to the literal documentation available regarding the two saints. I had not been aware that so much actual documentation existed regarding Francesco. Was interested to learn the large influence of knightly idealism in his life. Did not feel Murray's conclusions about a special relationship between Francis and Clare were far-fetched.

Interpreting Frances' spirituality, Murray writes that Francis' canticle at the end of his life sums up his idea that God alone is Altissima, the highest omnipotent God, and that all creation and all creatures "have been fashioned to participate in a COSMIC PERFORMANCE, one sung in every landscape by each participant in that landscape, and each is unified in a single purpose of GIVING BACK TO GOD the beauty and originality of his own PERSONALITY." (word emphasis mine) She points out that Francis' canticle is not, as usually supposed, a "sort of nature worship." She says that whereas in the Psalms creation is the recipient of God as the Maker's handiwork, in the Canticle, God is the recipient as nature gives back to God the beauty and originality he bestowed on it. So, the scheme that Murray perceives in Frances' spirituality is: God as the giver, and nature as giver back to God, making nature a point of intersection between this world and the next. Eden is restored, she says, for Francis and Clare in their "upward reach to Heaven," p.146. "And not just thanking him specifically for the one who gave up every worldly dream and desire to stretch his arms on a cross....Frances would say those arms make all creatures DEBTORS. The PERFORMANCE is the thank you," p. 185. "Francis would say time--this life--renders the opportunity to make decisions. It is the opportunity to find one's part in the cosmic performance of thanks." p. 188. Murray calls mysticism an "odd and inexplicable mingling of cosmic and human elements."

I think Murray's explanation of this reciprocal synergy between Heaven and earth in terms of a responsive PERFORMANCE offers enlarging insight into Frances' and Clare's spirituality, and her book is well worth reading. Rejecting the book on grounds of whether or not the historical conclusions drawn by Murray are valid or likely negates the opportunity of assessing the spiritual insights that Murray offers in connection with the extensive research and speculation she has done with the historical facts available.

I think that the title of the book fails to give a good idea of what the book is about. The narrative style is a little hard to follow in places.

francis as a real human in touch with the divine WITHIN (himself, clare...) is about a sacred as it gets. those who see god as being outside of themselves and something to be petitioned according to dogmatic litigation won't be happy with this...