A question: What can you do without? I was taught to value books, and have quite a library of books I might want to read again, or might want my kids to be able to poke their noses into, or just feel good knowing that they're there. Yet I find myself now wondering, do I really need them?

How about my record albums and CDs?

How about the collection of magic equipment I have from the days when I was a magician? I might use it again some day . . . my kids might get into magic . . . but as for right now I don't need it.

I have so many things and can't help wondering:

How far to take simplicity?

Erik Walker Wikstrom

Boy, that's a tough one for all of us! I've been a professed member of OEF since 2002, and this issue is always a part of my Rule. As you know, Francis took his simplicity to an extreme most of us can't begin to imitate. Lately, I've begun to think of it in terms of ownership. I may have a lot of things, but I don't really "own" them. I am obligated to use them in service to others. Your plan to save books for your children is a good example. If I can be willing to give/share/loan my possessions freely without expecting them to be returned, I have won the battle. I still have a ways to go to get there!

Thanks, Christine, for your thoughtful reply.

If I understand what you wrote correctly, it'd be like a shift from an "owner" to a "steward" mentality. This understanding of simplicity, of poverty I suppose, would be the mind set that the things that are in my possession are not mine, per se, but have been given to me to use in the carrying out of my duties. Carried to the extreme, then, I could check my "inventory" to make sure that I had nothing there that didn't serve that purpose, yes?

Of course, would I be merely rationalizing to say that some measure of enjoying life -- celebration -- is part of my "duty"? I agree with the Buddha's assessment that a string stretched too tight will snap, while one left too loose will do nothing; it is the string stretched just enough -- the middle way -- that produces beautiful music. So, too, we need to have some comforts, some enjoyments, some pleasures, else we would "snap." Right?

Yes, exactly!

It's my understanding that even the First Order Brothers could not meet Francis' standards of poverty, and folks who did not live in community certainly could not. This is why the Third Order was formed. People who have lives and obligations outside of the Order need some leeway in order to meet their responsibilities, especially if they have a family to care for. Our goal in this Order is to make sure we don't go overboard with luxuries we don't need, and to use the things we do have to help others. In other words, as you said, become stewards, rather than owners. Of course, meeting our own spiritual/emotional needs would be part of that. We can't help anyone if we are stretched too thin.

Chris, I really like the idea of stewardship of our stuff. I have too many musical instruments. I had a 12-string guitar that a friend expressed an interest in, and I wasn't really playing it any more, so I gave it to him. I did the same with a classical guitar; I loved playing it for years, then I couldn't really play it due to arthritis, so I gave that to a Native American school that Shoshanah told me about. Not to blow my horn here (hah!), as I still have lots of stuff I don't need, but I am very grateful for the opportunity to give those instruments away. I guess I was holding them in stewardship until they found good homes.

And the instruments I do have I consider to be tools to express my music with, to share that deep part of myself with others and with God. That is their value to me, not their dollar value. Like your books, etc., Erik. All possessions are tools, I suppose--only means, not ends.

p&g,

br. bruce

I have to say, this topic took an amount of prayer and meditation in order for me to answer it. Then it hit me, that's the key; prayer and meditation. Simplicity is only part of the Franciscan life. Another part is to "pray unceasingly," as is prescribed to us in scripture. If anyone in hear hasn't tried to learn the Liturgy of the Hours, the Rosary (watch out, I'm getting a bit Catholic here), or the Lectio Devina (scripture meditated on so that it becomes prayer), I'd highly recommend any of these.

Now there are some things in this thread that admittedly disturbed me. I will say them and give my reasoning behind it. First, it was rationalized that we should have some measure of comforts, too. Simplicity, as far as I know, means to do without anything unnecessary. The idea of being stewards is good, great even, but to rationalize luxury by using reference to the buddha-- this is a Franciscan Order. St. Francis was a follower of Christ.

Pray, pray, pray, pray. The Liturgy of the Hours, Franciscan by origin, gives eight set times of prayer and meditation. Instead of thinking of what you need to give up to attain simplicity, try instead to attain the life of the contemplative. Doing this will bring simplicity in and of itself.

Brother John --

Again, as I wrote to you elsewhere, welcome to these forum. I look forward to getting to know you (and vice versa).

My apologies for the offense that my use of an aphorism of the Buddha appears to have caused you. I was raised within the Christian traditions but, during my young adulthood, turned away from this path and spent many years as a practicing Buddhist. There is much from that time that still informs me on a very deep level.

And, after all, Father Francis wasn't above using a popular (and secular) song of his day as the starting point of a sermon, so I don't see why the words of the Buddha should be off-limits to a follower of Christ.

Peace and all good to you,

Erik Walker Wikstrom, postulant

Erik,

I didn't mean to come off as if I was offended, but I did. Maybe the use of "troubling" instead of "disturbing" would have been helpful. Maybe, I should have made my main point on prayer other than focusing on the Buddha. Regardless, it was I who erred, not you, sir. Please accept my apology.

Jon.

Accepted, of course, Brother Jon. And may we find the bridge over troubled e-mail.

Erik

While we each struggle with these questions and concepts for ourselves - which is a good thing, I think - it can also be helpful to reflect on what others have done with these questions (hence a forum like this where we ask one another to share our own ponderings).

I recently ran across something in Bonaventure's writings which feels to me like it pertains, although indirectly. Anyway, I'll offer it and we can make of it what, if anything we will. As 7th Minister General of the Friars Minor, just old enough to have been able to meet with Brothers who knew Francis but too young to have talked with him himself, Bonaventure lived and served the Order at a fragile moment in time. Things were changing, the Order was growing wildly, with so many passionate ideals and beliefs in so many directions. He had to contend with the practical concerns of uniting so many crazy Brothers and also trying to understand what it was the Francis called them to collectively. So these questions of what constitutes simplicity, poverty even, in that context (would Jesus really have wanted thousands of mendicant Brothers combing the hillsides, hitting villagers up for meals? at what point is the essence lost in the practice?) were very pressing for him. Also, and what this quote speaks more directly to, is the question of book learning, of academics. Francis obviously felt it an impediment for most folks and discouraged getting lost in books. But might not Francis's own spirituality be lost without an attempt to describe it, to explore what he uniquely offered theology?

So Bonaventure offers us this (in his Journey of the Soul into God):

Here's what the Friars of the Renewal do. Not perhaps appropriate for all of us, but perhaps lending some inspiration in spirit,-

36. The friars of each house will periodically evaluate all personal and communal goods to assure that only those things necessary for our life and work be used by the friars. This evaluation must take place in each fraternity four times a year, before the feast of St. Francis, after Christmas, during Lent and after Pentecost.

www.franciscanfriars.com/articles/cfr_constitutions2.htm

Beautiful, Alison. And helpful. Thank you.

Thanks, Colin. I love the clarity of this.

Moving around several times in a few years can help a lot with the problem of clutter! I am amazed at the amount of stuff we've gotten rid of just by moving to a new city. When that isn't the case, a semiannual or quarterly house cleaning is a great practice.

There's another aspect to simplicity that is vitally important for my rule. I try to carefully consider the sourcing for necessities. How many of my necessities can be acquired for barter or for free? When it comes to food, am I producing a reliable portion of my food organically? How much of the money I do have goes to supporting locally owned small business and therefore enriches my community, rather than padding the bottom line of multinationals directly. Are there local artisans whom I can support as I seek to clothe myself?

Finally, and this is the really hard part, if I have had the good fortune to own investments, is there any way I can let these go? Can I build the sort of supportive community around me that will supplant the worries about having "enough" on a monthly statement? In order to reap a 4% return from this paper wealth, I am placing a demand on the economy to double two and a half times over the course of a forty-five year working life. That means 250% more debt for the world, 250% more transactions, 250% more resource extraction, 250% more environmental degradation, and all of the winners and losers created by that scenario. Is there any way to call such a demand simple? Food for thought.

THanks, brother THomas (Colin). I think I shall make such an evaluation prior to Francistide this very year. It is in my Rule to do so every 6 months, and I am faithful to do so, but a PRE Francistide "purging" seems right on many levels.

Peace and joy to you all! May we be truly free as Lady Poverty directs.

One thing I have discovered about the question of simplicity, poverty and alms giving is that giving things away is the tale waging the dog.
St. Francis seemed to embrace poverty (simplicity) as a means of better loving God. And giving things away as a part of that. He needed to prioritize his life and holding on to wealth inhibited his desire. However, he still needed things to build these churches he had been instructed to do, so whether he owned and begged made little difference. Freedom to love God was his focus, and nothing was to get in the way.
When it comes to giving things away, I think of alms giving. I can give away money, stuff, my time and talent(s). And this is the stewardship required of all Christians. Jesus emphasized that the depth of one's giving reflects the depth of one's faith.
Thus my poverty is the result of my pursuit for God and the alms giving portion reflects just how committed I am to the pursuit.

I am only an inquirer at this point,but living a life of simplicity/poverty scares me a bit.As a middle aged woman,i have amassed quite a bit of things;jewelry,books(wall to wall book cases full)clothing,tapes/cd's and my framed impressionist prints.How do you choose what to keep and what to let go?And at what point do you start letting go

I read Christine Petersens reply with great interest.

I think there is great Scriptural basis for her question of "owning" things.

The Jewish Study Bible references Leviticus 25:23
"The land shall not be sold...you are but aliens who
have become my tenants." as a footnote to Genesis
1:28, which translates "dominion" as "rule" and links it to Genesis 1:26 "in our image and likeness"
to teach that man is God's steward of creation.

So Christine's recognition of the obligation to use
things to serve others has a Scriptural foundation in
the Torah, the Scriptural foundation of both Judiaism and Christianity, in all of its branches.

Wonderful topic!

It starts with the living example of Jesus. What hinders us in our relationship with God? It can be material things, of course. But it also be attitudes, beliefs/concepts, practices, our very selves...anything to which we hold strongly and blocks God from flowing in our lives.

I say Compline everyday and am working on another Office, but simply sitting in the Silence and allowing God--that which animates and interconnects--to BE, to fill and transform my emptiness...that, to me, is what is so important.

Irony of irony: though I am a poet, I find that words get in the way! I find the Silence time for God to speak to me, without my controlling it. I have to let go of my very being...Holy Poverty

Frances, in OEF we promise to live IN THE SPIRIT of the evangelical counsels. See principle 8, "Christ chose for himself a poor and humble life, even though he valued created things attentively and lovingly. Let the Order of Ecumenical Franciscans seek a proper spirit of detachment from temporal goods by simplifying our own material needs. Let us be mindful that according to the gospel we are stewards of the goods received for the benefit of God's children. We shall strive to purify our hearts from every tendency and yearning for possession and power."
So, it is the spirit of detachment which is the emphasis. The second we move away from a naked homeless condition, we have moved away from poverty in the absolute sense. However, most of us feel the need for clothing, a roof...especially while we have responsibility for dependants. So, it is more about trying not to be enslaved to material things, and being generous with what we have. This has been a point of tension within the Franciscan movement from the word go. Francis yearned for the absolute, but others, including Bonaventure needed books. Francis capitulated and said ok but keep it reasonable. At the end of his life he acknowledge that he had been too harsh on his body. He said that he had done what was for him to do, and told his followers to do what was there's to do. there is latitude, though, as Franciscans in the world, it is a constant battle to say no. Do I need this shiny thing, or do I just want it?!

ps I should have read this before I posted it. However, y'all can do a "spot the number of grammatical errors" quiz. Oh dear!

Something to think about.I guess I have formed an over attachment to a number of things which I really don't need or use all the time.The spirit of detachment is something I need to cultivate.In other ways I live simply,not needing to go to fancy restaurants or carrying out activities that are shoe string.In many other ways I live simply.

Stunned that Ed Shirley is dead. This is the ultimate simplicity: letting go of life itself. May he know God in the fullest sense now and dance in his presence.

I am new to in-depth Franciscan thinking. I figure it this way: God gave us the world and the universe, and called it good. He told us to manage it. We can enjoy it, but not be absorbrd by it. I and my first wife have accululated property (books, dishes, furniture, prints--nothing worthy of being hung in the Louvre, mind you) At times "stuff" can and has been a problem (where to put it, why to hold onto it, who to save it for. "Stuff" gives us comfort at times, and difficulties at other times. How to deal with stuff as a Franciscan seems to be another dimension to be faced. I don't really know how to face it. So, I will go thru my stuff over time, relieve myself of much of it, hopefully in a productive was (church book sales, library donations, Salvation Army, relatives, some saved to pass down as inheritances). I will let my clothing go as it fits no more (I am Friar Tuckian in many ways) or simply wears out (attrition), and purchase only what I need and feel comfortable in. My step-son says "Is it a want, or a need?". A good question for me to consider. I will care for what I and my family have, as it has been a gift of God in a way, but now I will consider the need or want to obtain any more. There are basic necessities, comforts, and luxuries. For me, perhaps it is time to reconsider some of my luxuries. Thanks for reading.

I am fortunate in that I've never really been greatly enamored of material possessions - except for books. Growing up, we never had a lot of fancy stuff. I drive an inexpensive Toyota. I purchased it new because I had just taken a job that required a lengthy daily commute and needed a reliable vehicle. But, otherwise, I buy pre-owned vehicles and pre-owned clothing at the local Goodwill store. I'm wearing a pair of $5 dress shoes as I write this. I find it hard to justify buying a $60 shirt at Dillard's, when there are people could use that $60 to buy groceries or keep the heat on. Besides, I can get a perfectly good shirt for $7 at Goodwill and support my less fortunate brothers and sisters in the process. We also recycle at home. Still, there's much more I could do, and trying to live out Franciscan simplicity seems to entail (for me)a constant evaluation and re-evaluation of "needs" versus "wants".

I am fortunate in that I've never really been greatly enamored of material possessions - except for books. Growing up, we never had a lot of fancy stuff. I drive an inexpensive Toyota. I purchased it new because I had just taken a job that required a lengthy daily commute and needed a reliable vehicle. But, otherwise, I buy pre-owned vehicles and pre-owned clothing at the local Goodwill store. I'm wearing a pair of $5 dress shoes as I write this. I find it hard to justify buying a $60 shirt at Dillard's, when there are people could use that $60 to buy groceries or keep the heat on. Besides, I can get a perfectly good shirt for $7 at Goodwill and support my less fortunate brothers and sisters in the process. We also recycle at home. Still, there's much more I could do, and trying to live out Franciscan simplicity seems to entail (for me)a constant evaluation and re-evaluation of "needs" versus "wants".

I have a lot of books (I am pursuing two Masters degrees), but usually wear jeans/T shirts/sweat shirts--to me the ultimate Franciscan habit(I hate ties). Other than that, not into "stuff" all that much. Jim and I have a simple apt with nice things, but not even too many of those.

Ultimately, we, ourselves, have to empty ourselves internally as well for God to fill us...we need to let go of attachments etc.

I find I do not need any fancy furniture.Most of my apartment is furnished with tables,bookcases and chairs that I either found in the neighborhood or pieces that were given to me by neighbors.I do not have an extensive wardrobe,and am pretty satisfied with what I have.I used to have an attachment to buying jewelry,but I am giving that up.My only problem is buying books.Lately,I have become an amazon.com fan.

Simplicity can also be in how we live as well as what we buy.

I recently read the book "Almost Amish". What great ordinary ways we can live more simply and also more respectfully of each other.

Isn't it better, warmer and more Christlike to visit someone and talk to them personally than to text them?

Why are we so busy that we have to text someone?

Why are they so busy that they need us to text them?

Could we say, "I care for you too much to disrepsect our relationship with text messages"?

I am still unsure how to aproach simplicity. Our 21st century world makes many demands on us. I am not sure texting someone is all that disrespectful of the relatiosnhip as it is not putting more "personal" into the conversation. I seldome text, however, just once in awhile with my son. But your concern is well taken. How do we put more of ourselves into a relationship, both one at hand when we meet someone, or contact someone nearby that we haven't seen for a good while, or contaact comeone at a great distance just to say hello, how are you doing? The other side of the coin, I think, is Facebook--a very indescriminate shotgun approach, to my old style mentality. I guess it is good to just keep it simple. St. Francis was limited by personal meeting, messenger, and by letter. Our society and tecknology has greatly advanced since then. How do we accommodate our tecknology and still maintain that personal touch and simplicity and not get preoccupied with the medium rather than the message?

I don't necessarily believe there's anything inherently wrong with Facebook or texting - they're simply new technological tools for communication. True, they can be misused - just like the ball-point pen, the printing press and the telephone. In my mind, the real question is: Are we truly present when we communicate with another human being? How can we cultivate a more mindful awareness and wholehearted attention when communicating with another person, regardless of the medium?

Good point, Shane!
I often wish I had the presence of mind to say a little prayer for each person I come in contact with, no matter what the medium. I try to do so at least when I send out the newsletter.

"All things in moderation", as St. Paul has said. So it is with what we say or write or email, etc. But also, as you have said, there is a quality of communication which is very lacking at times in the general public, but also between associates and even friends. And so it might be even in prayer? Maybe we are used to the urban communicatiins pattern: "Was up? How ya doin?" Brief. Superficial. Impersoanl. It is learned behavior and attitude. The trick of it is, I guess, to alter our behaviors with insights. p/OEF