Commissio Constitutionum OFMCap.

DRAFT OUTLINE OF OUR CONSTITUTIONS FOR THE LXXXIV GENERAL CHAPTER

Chapter IV: Our life in poverty

Second Proposed Revision (PdR2)

Rome — General Curia — 2012

Table of Contents

• INTRODUCTION
  • I. Basic Principles
  • II. Enriching the Text
  • III. The Complementary Code (CC)
• Article I: Our Commitment to Poverty
  • N. 61 (59,1-3)
  • N. 62 (59,4-8)
  • N. 63 (60,3-4)
  • N. 64 (60,5-6)
  • N. 65 (61)
  • N. 66 (60,1)
• Article II: Poverty in Goods and Money
  • N. 67 (62)
  • N. 68 (63)
  • N. 69 (64)
  • N. 70 (65)
  • N. 71 (66)
  • N. 72 (67)
  • N. 73 (cfr. 67,6)
• Article III: Poverty in Our Buildings
  • N. 74 (68+60,2)
  • [Complementary Code
  • N. 75 (70
• Article IV: The Administration of Goods
  • N. 76 (new)
  • N. 77 (71)
  • [Complementary Code]
  • [Complementary Code] 
  • N. 78 (74)

INTRODUCTION

The Schema for the revision for the revision of Chapter IV of the Constitutions was prepared by the sub-commission in its meeting at the General Curia, 23-28 February 2009. Two brothers from the Commission made personal contributions prior to this work. The Schema was then further studied and revised via ongoing correspondence between the members of the Commission during March and April. The Schema was distributed to all the members of the Commission on 3 May 2009.

During its full meeting (29 June – 11 July 2009) the whole Commission studied and revised the Schema twice, and then approved it on 10 July. When the Explanatory Notes and the Introduction had been completed (15 July 2009), the PdR1 for chapter IV was sent out to the Order, accompanied as usual by the General’s letter dated 29 August 2009 (Prot N. 00610/09).

The Commission resumed work on chapter IV in its XI plenary session from January 31 – February 10 2011, following the feedback received from the Order, which was carefully studied.

There was relatively little feedback on the proposed texts, but on that basis the Commission proceeded to modify 21 out of the 103 paragraphs that made up the text of PdR1. Many of the proposals concerned language or style, so the Commission paid attention not only to the content but also to the formulation of the texts, so as to avoid misunderstandings and mistakes in translation in the various languages. A few repetitions were eliminated, and sometimes the current text was restored when it proved to be simpler and more direct than the proposed revision.

Some feedback on the PdR1 maintained that the Commission’s propsals for chapter IV were marginal, fragmentary, haphazard and merely formal. The critical observations can be grouiped into four basic points:

1) For some, PdR1 did not reflect the new thinking on the topic arising from PCOs VI and VII. It would have been better, some thought, to present the brothers with the text of chapter IV as proposed by Project 2006, which was thought to be more homogeneous and to reflect the recent plenary councils on this fundamentally important topic;

2) Chapter 4 of Project 2006 faithfully expressed this change of direction introduced by PCOs VI and VII. PCO VI, 3 states that “without minority, our poverty would be meaningless, and would turn to pride; just as without poverty, minority would be a sham”. PCO VII, 4 states that poverty and minority, “as well as being elements of Christian discipleship, bring Franciscan freedom”. Finally, in the letter presenting the conclusions of PCO VII, the General Definitory, headed by General Minjister John Corriveau, wrote: “…we would like to remind you that PCO VII should be seen as completing the Sixth, because without minority and itinerancy, poverty lived in brotherhood would have little social impact. Its spirit would be missing”.

3) Others asked that chapter IV on poverty be replaced by the text of Project 2006. In the PdR, minority as the foundation of poverty has disappeared;

4) Chapter. II of the current Constitutions did incorporate many important changes arising out of PCO IV on Formation, just as chapter XII did from Mattli. Many brothers asked that the current chapter IV should accommodate the proposals of Project 2006.

These general observations, spread over many pages, had to do with the choice of content and also of sources, but in fact no alternative texts to PdR1 were proposed.

Neither did the criticisms take into account that many of the sources they had indicated had actually been incorporated into the proposed text. Members of the Commission had the impression that brothers had paid insufficient attention to what was said in the Introduction to PdR1 about the fundamental principles that had guided the work of enriching the Constitutions. Our Commission did not ignore either PCO VI or PCO VII, or Project 2006, but kept them in mind, and in fact enriched them further and asked that they be studied even more carefully in view of the work being done on the Constitutions. All of this was made clear in the Introduction to PdR1, as we will report later in this one (cf. I. Fundamental principles). Moreover, we must once again recall the fact that the mandate this Commssion received from the General Chapter in 2006 did not call for new Constitutions, nor for the replacement of entire chapters. This did not happen in 1982 either: the General Chapter of that year accepted the main concerns of PCO III on missionary activity, and those of PCO IV on Formation, but it steered well clear of completely replacing in chapters II and XII the text of the Constitutions drafted in 1968. Neither did it incorporate everything that PCOs III and IV had said. A careful comparison of the texts of PCOs III and IV on the one hand, and that of the 1982 (current) Constitutions on the other, cannot fail to confirm that this is the case.

Hence our Commission’s intention, in trying to keep faith with the mandate of the 2006 General Chapter, was to incorporate into the Constitutions or into the Complementary Code whatever was effectively new, or any elements which were totally absent from the Constitutions. Moreover it was found that some elements, stressed by PCOs VI and VII, are already abdundantly present in the Constitutions as from 1968, even if expressed differently from the style used by the plenary councils.

Let us first repeat what was said in the Introduction to PdR1 about the fundamental criteria which guided the Commission’s work on chapter IV. We then list the main areas in which we tried to enrich the current text, respecgting it as regards its content and particolar form; finally we mention those texts that have passed to the Complementary Code. Subsequently, as usual, the Explanatory Notes provide justification for each intervention or change in the text, either of PdR1 or in PdR2.

I. Basic Principles

As always, the fundamental principle that guided the work of the sub-commission first, and then of the Commission, is the one established by the General Chapter of 2006: “In the revision of the Constitutions their doctrinal and spiritual content is to be respected as much as possible, and then be further enriched by drawing from recent documents of the Church and of the Order.”^[1] Therefore the Commission has carried out its work with the conviction that the current Constitutions must be neither substituted nor contradicted, but be expanded – and if necessary made clearer or more precise. Then in his Circular Letter of 27 May 2007 the Minister General set the guiding principle: (the revision) “is about an enrichment that is more qualitative than quantitative (non multa, sed multum!), the result of the journey of the Church and the Order as expressed in the more recent documents” (n.4,2)^[2].

Certainly Chapter IV of the Constitutions is the one that lends itself most to an expansion with the contributions made by the more recent Plenary Councils of the Order: Living Poverty in Fraternity (PCO VI) and Our Fraternal Life in Minority (PCO VII). Therefore the 2006 Project, beginning with these Plenary Councils, produced a radical revision of Chapter IV of the Constitutions. The 2006 Project replaced most of Chapter IV and included in the new draft some of the statements from the current Constitutions and transferred many others to the General Statutes.

Faithful to the mandate received from the General Chapter our Commission realised the urgent need for a further study, and obtained from the General Minister and his Definitory a more detailed study comparing the current Constitutions and the recent PCOs to identify development in the outlook (mens) of the Order: Do PCO VI and VII actually say anything new in regard to the Consitutions? What do they contain that comes from the Constitutions themselves? Is there a consistent development between the Constitutions and the PCOs? From what the PCOs say, what is already found in the Constitutions? What elements should then be included in the Constitutions?

Therefore the Commission has been able to make use of three full comparative studies (one of which is not yet finished). Regarding PCO VI these studies show that while the PCO does not say anything new in regard to the Constitutions, it does offer a contemporary way of interpreting (hermeneutical key) the reading and understanding of our Constitutions within a globalised context.^[3]

In particular, it is noted that:

– the Constitutions (cf nn. 59,9; 60,1-6) already show a wealth of insights and responses concerning new themes 8e.g. greed and ambition, avarice and competitiveness, service and solidarity; sharing and involvement in the condition of the poor; a simple and sober life-style, the renunciation of power, etc.).

– PCO VI bases its own statements on the Constitutions,

– PCO VI systematically organises some of the themes already in the Constitutions and sometimes focuses on them in a new perspective so as to identify new ways today to reword truthfully and powerfully the lasting values that identify our charism.^[4]

As for PCO VII the comparative study points out that this was not the only Council to reflect and focus on minority. PCO I (Quito 1971) also did this, adopting as its theme for reflection: Fraternal Life, Poverty and Minority. In the concluding document of PCO I one can see how minority is in the background and inspires many of its statements. However the theme is hardly ever treated explicitly.^[5] While signs of its presence and consequences can be discerned, there is a discreet silence about the theme of minority as such.^[6] So then, should it not be asked: isn’t minority a concept that describes an essence rather than a thing, an agent rather than an action, a spirit rather than some thing?^[7]

If such is the case, strictly speaking ‘minority’ is not a theme in itself, but an aspect that qualifies all the particular themes possible concerning our life: fraternal life, poverty, chastity, obedience, prayer, apostolic life, work, itinerancy, our life in common. Therefore, when comparing the Constitutions and PCO VII, attention should not be given so much to the frequency of the appearance of such terms as minority and minor^[8] but rather to verify whether minority, or any aspect of it, may have been considered in a better way in PCO VII than in the Constitutions. Or perhaps the PCO discovered an aspect that was not only new, but which may be perennially valid for the whole Order.

Therefore we arrive at these important conclusions:

– regarding minority, the Propositions of PCO VII are more expressions that enhance an awareness or articulate that awareness already present in germ, whether implicitly or generally, in the Constitutions. Rather than introduce something new, probably one worthwhile contribution of PCO VII was that of giving greater clarity to the Order’s awareness that minority is more than an isolated theme in itself. Rather, minority is a spirit that should characterise all the dimensions and aspects of our life, including those that have not always been associated with minority in our tradition.

– The theological foundations for minority and its expressions in the Propositions of PCO VII certainly go beyond what is found in the current Constitutions, even if those Propositions are not fully elaborated and are only listed together. Minority has its foundations within the Trinity itself. It pervades the kenosis of the Son of God (Phil 2,5-11) and the Francis of Assisi’s spiritual outlook. As such it broadens the horizon of the understanding of our charismatic identity and life, lending a special quality to the relationships of Francis’ brothers in all the contexts and aspects of their life.^[9]

Bearing in mind the contributions received by the Commission and what the Commission has studied itself, we believe that the last two PCOs have served to make the Constitutions more actual and up-to-date, thus prompting the Order to a more dynamic faithfulness to our charism. From this we can see the specific character of the PCO documents as means to put the Constitutions into practice. In themselves they do not need to be included in the Constitutions. Regarding Chapter IV then the Commission developed this approach:

– to closely follow the present text;

– seeking to respect it as much as possible;

– while working to add the contributions of PCO VI and VII into the current text.

II. Enriching the Text

The structure of chapter IV, both in PdR1 and in this PdR2, is organised in 4 articles, just like the present Constitutions. The text in each article has been enhanced with a number of modifications and inclusions drawn especially from PCO VI and VII and the Circular Letters of John Corriveau. Reference is also made to documents of the Church Magisterium, e.g. Pope John Paul II’s post-Synod Exhortation Vita Consecrata and the Encyclical Sollicitudo rei socialis; the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Compendium of the Church’s Social Teaching; and lastly, Benedict XVI’s Encyclical Caritas in veritate.

The explanatory notes indicate the references to documents of the Church and of the Order.

Article I – Our Commitment to Poverty – has been enriched with references to:

• • • fundamental Trinitarian and Christological models, as well as inspirational models (Saint Francis) for our life in poverty (cfr. PdR2, n. 61);
    • the Capuchin tradition (cf. PdR2, n. 62).
    • Other clarifications and inclusions concern:
    • sobriety-austerity and minority (cf. PdR2, n. 63);
    • Solidarity with the poor (cf. PdR2, n. 64; Complementary Code 4/1);
    • Observance of common life and the sharing of goods(cf. PdR2, n. 65; 68,4);
    • The principles of equity, pluriformity and inculturation (cf. PdR2, n. 66,1; 72,3; 74,2);
    • scrutinium paupertatis (cf. PdR2, n. 66; Complementary Code 4/2).

Article II – Poverty Concerning Goods and Money has some clarifications about:

personal management of money (cf. PdR2, n. 70,2; Complementary Code 4/4);

• • la eccedenza del denaro a livello di fraternità locale e di circoscrizione (cf. PdR2, n. 72,4; Complementary Code 4/5);

The criterion the minimum necessary and not the maximum allowed is clarified. It is to be put into practice in the differing contexts in which we live. In the light of PCO IV this requirement is connected to the criteria of equity, pluriformity and enculturation (cf. PdR2, n. 72,3).

Given the relevance that the topic of economic solidarity has gained within the Order, the topic will be treated in a special number at the end of the Article II where the matter is already considered (cf. PdR2, n. 73).

Article III – Poverty in Our Buildings has inclusions concerning:

the relationship between our dwellings and the dwellings of the poor in the region (cf. PdR2, n. 74,3);

the correspondence between our dwellings and our lifestyle of poverty and minority (cf. PdR2, n. 74,4; Complementary Code 4/9);

the need to avoid the accumulation of property and consequently the need to restructure property assets (cf. PdR2, Complementary Code 4/9).

Article IV – The Administration of Goods highlights the criteria of transparency and participation, as well as the need for formation in the spirit of the fraternal economy (cf. PdR2, n. 76; Complementary Code 4/13).

Other inclusions concern the texts that refer to bursars and administrators, as well as the need for a more detailed regulation for the administration of goods in the Codices additicii (cf. PdR2, n. 77,7; Complementary Code 4/17).

In all, Chapter IV has 18 numbers, two more than the current text of the Constitutions. This is due to the introduction of a number on economic solidarity and another in Article IV on the administration of goods (cf. PdR2, nn. 73 e 76). Article I has six numbers ((cf. PdR2, 61-66)), three more than the current Constitutions. This is due to the introduction of some matters, the division of some numbers of the text, and the transfer of some paragraphs. Article II has seven numbers (cf. PdR2, nn. 67-73): 1\ more than in the current text, as a specific number has been introduced concerning economic solidarity. Article III has two numbers (cf. PdR2, nn. 74-75):1 less than the current text, because the current n. 69 has been transferred to the Complementary Code. Article IV has 3 numbers (cf. PdR2, nn. 76-78): 1 less than the current text, because a new numbr has been introduced (76) aat the beginning of the Article, while numbers 72 and 73 have been teransferred to the Complementary Code.

III. The Complementary Code (CC)

Altogether the CC of chapter IV consists of 19 numbers; some of these have more thaan one paragraph.

There are 9 new texts (cf. PdR2, CC 4/1; 4/2; 4/4; 4/5; 4/8; 4/9; 4/9; 4/13; 4/17).

The following numbers of trhe Constitutions are transferred to the Complementary Code, either as they stand, or with changes and additions:

The following current Ordinances are also placed in the Complementary Code:

Chapter IV: ^[10] Our life of poverty^[11]

Article I: Our Commitment to Poverty

N. 61 (59,1-3)

Explanatory Notes

(1) The proposed formula introduces the Chapter by bringing out the Trinitarian foundation of poverty. The text is inspired by some expressions of St Francis (cf. LOrd 52:) and is intended to show that God is humility precisely because He is Trinity, because of the relationship of love flowing among the three Persons. The text is also inspired by Vita Consecrata (n. 21), to underline the reciprocal total self-giving of the Persons of the Trinity as the model of all human relationships and the foundation of our poverty and humility. Cf. also Caritas in veritate n. 54.

(2) The new opening phrase added to the current text establishes the link with the preceding §. The formulation of the text therefore requires: “and who was sent to preach good news to the poor”.

(3) In the Latin text the first verb is in the perfect tense (amavit – loved), and the second in the imperfect (testificabatur – gave witness). The text of 1968 said : “A nativitate in praesepio usque ad mortem in cruce amorem Dei quaerentis pauperes testificabatur in discipulorum exemplum”^[12] (From his birth in the manger to his death on the cross he gave witness to the love of God seeking out the poor as an example for his disciples). In 1982 the text was modified by inserting amavit pauperes, changing Dei into Patris and inserting the pronoun eos (= pauperes)^[13]. We believe that in doing this the revisers neglected to modify the verbs to make the tenses agree, and it seems more appropriate that both verbs should be in the perfect.

(4) To make the definition in the preceding § more explicit (Saint Francis is a prophetic image of gospel poverty), it was thought appropriate to recall the personal example of St Francis. We therefore propose to insert two paragraphs into the current text: the first explains how Francis was led to choose poverty; the second expresses what the choice of poverty actually meant for Francis.

(5) The proposed text has a strongly Christological connotation. It begins with a reference to LodAl, in which Francis, among the many divine attributes, mentions four which are a kind of watermark of the attributes of Jesus: the Son of God who “did not cling avidly to his equality with God” (Phil 2,6), but humbled himself to the point of annihilation (You are humility!); the Christus patiens, (suffering Christ) who gave himself up to suffer on the cross (You are patient!); thus became “the fairest of the sons of men” (Ps 44,3; [You are beauty!]), the “meek king” with a heart full of gentleness (You are meekness!)^[14]. In v.6 of LodAl Francis repeats and joins together “You are beauty!” and “You are meekness!”, as if to underline that the beauty of the Son of God is identical to meekness and manifests itself in meekness, or that conversely beauty is the external reflection of that inner attractiveness which is imparted by meekness^[15]. The association of beauty and meekness (cf. the meek lamb of Jer 11,19) is perhaps a hint of the “unimaginable beauty” and the suffering of the crucified man-seraph contemplated in the vision of the stigmata (cf 1Cel 94)»^[16]. The biblical text by which Francis was most likely inspired, is 2Cor 10,1^[17]; and from this we can deduce that he made reference to the praytēs (sweetness, gentleness, humility, kindness, meekness)^[18] and to the epieikēs (meekness, kindness, amiability)^[19], attitudes which are characteristic of Jesus in his relationships with people during his life on earth and are typical features of the lordship of Christ. He is the saviour-king who on entering Jerusalem^[20] fulfils the prophecy of Zachariah^[21], after having proclaimed himself prays, or of lowly condition^[22], and tapeinòs of heart. From this experiential concept of God Francis derives his choice of a life in poverty-humility. But the biblical hinterland of vv. 4 and 6 of LodAl clarifies their underlying meaning and aesthetic dimensions, which have recently found an echo in the teaching of Vita consecrata: “The One who in death appears to human eyes as disfigured and without beauty, so much so that the bystanders cover their faces (cf. Is. 53:2-3), fully reveals the beauty and power of God’s love” (n. 24).

(6) The inserted phrase experienced in the humility and charity of the Incarnation and in the charity of the Passion, is a literal reference to 1Cel 84, and brings out the foundation and origin of the choice of radical poverty which Francis made. He arrives at poverty after having listened, on February 24, 1209 in the Portiuncula, to the words of the gospel (Mt 10,7-9; Mc 6,7-12; Lk 9,1-6; 10,1-16) about the sending of the disciples (cf. 1Cel 22; 3Comp 25), but also – according to the account of 3Comp (29) – after having consulted the book of the gospels: the first time Mt 19,21; the second time Lk 9,3ff.; and the third time Lk 9,23ff. Francis encountered poverty because he had heard the Lord’s words, not because he had seen it in others. He himself makes this clear in his Testament. (cf. Test 16). Through the sacramentum of the word he discovered the reality (res) of Christ’s poverty, which particularly impressed him and gripped him totally, to the point of provoking in him a profound sense of emotional participation and an intense desire to conform his life to Christ in His poverty. In the light of the Sacrum Commercium, we can say that the poverty of Christ is the genetic cause of Francis’ poverty^[23]. He discovered poverty in the Incarnation of the Son of God and in the Paschal Mystery. He came to know the historical reality of Jesus “not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit” (cf. 2Cor 5,16). Contemplation of the poor and crucified Christ put the seal on his vision of the Christian life. He was the lover whose only wealth is his Beloved, and in this way he was able to see the cross as glory and the historical form of the poverty of the crucified one as his absolute and permanent norm of life, the spiritual expression of the covenant.^[24] The Capuchin Constitutions have constantly stressed the fact that Francis contemplates poverty in the mysteries of Christ: “Our Seraphic Father Saint Francis pondered the most high poverty of Christ, King of heaven and earth: When he was born he did not have even a small place in the inn for his dwelling, and he lived as a pilgrim, staying in the houses of others. And when he was dying he had no place to rest his head. Reflecting moreover that He was most poor in everything else, and wishing to imitate Him, Francis commanded the friars in the Rule not to possess anything of their own, so that unencumbered, like pilgrims on earth and citizens of Heaven, they might run with alacrity of spirit in the way of God.” (Const 1536, n. 69)^[25].

(7) The final phrase in the text: so that, naked himself, he could follow the crucified Lord in His nakedness, is an almost literal reference to LegM (II,4). The sources particularly stress the theme of Francis’s nakedness: from the moment when he undresses and gives his clothes back to his father (cf. LMj, II,4; LMj VII; L3C IV,19; AP I,8) to the moment when he dies naked on the earth (c. 2Cel CLXII, 214; 2Cel CLXIII,217; LMj, XIV,3; LMj VII,3; 2319), through a whole journey of discipleship “in nakedness” (i.e. in the most extreme poverty), from start to finish (Cf. LMj XIV,4) following the Crucified One in his nakedness (cf. LMj, II,4). The hagiographical sources also recount that Francis stripped or had himself stripped as a sign of a penitential attitude (cf. LMj VI,2; LegP, 60; 2MP, 61), and that he ordered Brother Rufino (cf. Fioretti XXX) and another brother (cf. LMj VIII, 5 ) to strip as a penance. Nudity, as a spiritual attitude of radical expropriation, is required by Francis of those who wish to enter the Order (cf. 2Cel 194; (LMj VII,2). Spiritual “nudity” therefore appears as an essential characteristic of the forma vitae of the lesser brothers. This is underlined by Jacques de Vitry: “They renounce all ownership, deny themselves and, taking up their cross, they strip themselves of everything in order to follow Christ in his nakedness” (Historia Occidentalis, 1, II, c. 32, 5). In the Capuchin Constitutions we find the expression the Crucified One, naked and humble^[26] and in Proposal n. 11 of PCO VI we read: “Francis embodied gospel radicalness and, in his unmistakable style, stressed the fact that to live and proclaim the Gospel means nudus nudum Christum sequi.”

(8) The proposed text is intended to highlight the choices made by Francis: poverty as expropriation (living with nothing of one’s own) and minority, above all as a spiritual attitude (poverty of spirit or humility of heart) and then as a sharing of life with the poor.

N. 62 (59,4-8)

Explanatory Notes

(1) After the reference to the example of Saint Francis, the new text has been introduced to provide a link with Capuchin tradition. The text as formulated is inspired by the Constitutions of 1968, 1970, 1974, which said: “Speciale munus Ordinis nostri est, ut freti providentia Dei et fideliter laborantes, praeceptum paupertatis revera servemus” (“It is a special task of our Order that we should truly observe the precept of poverty, relying on God’s providence and working faithfully”). The new formulation maintains the content of that text, underlining the idea of the speciale munus: to live in poverty is a special mission of the Order. At the same time it maintains the reference to hard work and trust in Providence, as essential components of a truly poor life. The aspect of sharing in the lot of ordinary people also appears essential for us, called as we are by vocation to be part of the company of the poor. From this point of view the text is inspired by the teaching of Paul VI: “We have often wondered how it is that the sons of St Francis are less present among the masses of working people than they fittingly should be, with their words full of popular appeal, their vocation to share the bread of ordinary people earned by the sweat of their brow, and with their ability to sow joy and hope among the thorns of this life!” (A hard and perfect road. Address to participants at the General Chapter of 21 October 1968). The text, as formulated, also reflects PCO VI: “Within the Franciscan movement the Capuchins have placed particular emphasis on austere simplicity in their manner of living poverty and closeness to the people in practising minority (preaching to the people, serving the sick and plague victims, questing…). These values, when they are lived in brotherhood, renewed and encultured, are a powerful witness to the gospel and a stimulus for the advancement of the weakest people”. (Proposal n. 5).

(2) According to some opinions raised in the Commission, the change of subject, from (we) participate (current text) to Poverty… gives us a share (proposed text), was intended to make the text more concrete: it is not poverty in the abstract, but our life of poverty that makes us sharers…. .

(3) The phrase for the kingdom or for the Kingdom of heaven in Matthew’s gospel (19,12), and subsequently in the patristic and liturgical sources and in the documents of the Magisterium, is more properly used in reference to virginity and celibacy. For this reason the Commission proposes to replace the current formulation, poverty for the sake of the kingdom of God, by poverty, chosen in order to follow Christ..

(4) The Latin text reads: habitudinem Christi filialem erga Patrem, with the preposition erga, which has a local meaning (in the direction of, towards, opposite)^[27], corresponding to the Greek pròs (in front of, directly ahead, preceding). The text approximates to the Johannine vision lógos – pròs (towards) tòn theón (Jn 1,1). Translators should take this feature of the Latin text into account.

(5) This paragraph anticipates the final expression of the current n. 59,5 and it leads to solidarity with the little ones of this world. In this way the text (Proposed revision n. 63,2 – Current text n. 59,4) suffers no alteration and enables a fuller development of the concepts contained in the following paragraph.

(6) The proposed formulation returns to the poverty-Kingdom link in the light of the gospel beatitude (cf. Mt 5,3; Lk 6,20) and of Francis’ hymn to poverty: “This is that sublime height of most exalted poverty which has made you, my beloved brothers, heirs and kings in the kingdom of heaven, poor in temporal things but rich in virtue” (Rb 6,4). What the Saint has in mind is not only the reward of glory in heaven…but also the fact that, here and now, we belong, by right, to the Kingdom and have a “royal dignity”. (LPer 61)^[28].

(7) In the Commission’s judgement, availability in love and conformity to the poor and crucified Christ are basic requirements and essential conditions in order to live in poverty. We therefore prefer to say that commitment to the gospel ideal of highest poverty “calls for” availability in love and conformity to the poor and crucified Christ. This is why we believe the Latin verb complectitur should be replaced by another that is more appropriate to the concept.

(8) Aiming to simplify the text and so avoid the risk of inexact translations, PdR1 (n. 63,4) said as if they were our own. On further eflection, the Commission has gone back to the current text, translating it literally.

(9) PdR1 (n. 63,5) had highlighted the apostolic dimension of poverty, but the proposed formulation, according to the feedback we received, [Prot. N.: IV-00126); IV-00127; IV-00090; IV-00118], was laboured and repetitive. We therefore preferred to return to the current text, whiile maintaining the slight expansion inspired by n. 45 of the 1968 Constitutions del 1968: quatenus simus eorum adiutores et sortis participes^[29].

N. 63 (60,3-4)

Explanatory Notes

(1) §§ 1-2 of the currect n. 60 have not been deleted, but transferred later (cf. nn. 67,1; 75,4).

(2) Because of the transfer of the first §§ of the current text, the conjunction in fact is no longer required.

(3) This is not a textual deletion, because the current formulation, which has two parts, is amplified and part two is transferred to paragraph 4. This has been done in order to highlight two aspects of poverty: austerity and minority. Some details from the first part (clothing, food, houses) are brought out later (cf. Proposed revision, n. 72,6).

(4) The new text which completes the current one is inspired by Proposal 26 of PCO VI and by Proposal 26 of PCO VII. Here we propose to underline further the meaning of austerity. Austerity is not just a matter of an external attribute found in the lives of saints, although as such it does have some value. Rather, it refers above all to the quality of moderation that should be evident in our lives, whatever our needs and however they may manifest themselves. The final part of the § merits particular emphasis, with its reference to the consumer mentality: we too are subject to its influence and should keep it at bay.

(5) § 3 expounds on the meaning of the previous text. In an assertive sentence, similar to so many others in the Constitutions currently in force, the effects of austerity are underlined. Thus it links up with PCO VII, which among other things relates austerity with solidarity (cf. Proposal n. 26). In Circular Letter n. 24 (Courageous choices for a more fraternal world) (22 May 2005), Br. John Corriveau broadens the relationship still further: austerity “mediates between solidarity and equity. The use of modern tools of technology varies greatly throughout the world. Think of the tools which have become ordinary and necessary to our lives in the past 10 years: cell-phones, internet access, computers, and a host of other electronic devices. Access to the modern tools of technology is a major source of inequality in our world. Equity demands that the fraternal economy make available all that which is necessary, according to the diverse needs of each brother. Solidarity demands that the fraternal economy share resources between brothers and fraternities. In a world increasingly controlled by the ‘proliferation of desire,’ an economy without austerity leaves nothing for solidarity: ‘Marketing and advertising collapse the distinction between necessity and superfluity. The reach of need and want run to infinity. The consumer is ‘trained’ to exceed his/her satisfaction and to desire an infinite array of goods, products and services.’ Equity without austerity leaves nothing for solidarity! Austerity is a constitutive element of a truly ‘fraternal’ economy (n. 6.2)”.

The position of the text also reminds us of the ascetical value of austerity. Reducing our own material needs or depriving ourselves of something that may well be useful or necessary is not something that we do spontaneously. It takes effort and sacrifice, both as individuals and communities, but such a process is liberating because it enables us to concentrate on the essentials (God, the values of the spirit, the brothers): “Poverty, minority and itinerancy, as well as being constituent elements of the following of Christ, bring Franciscan freedom. They are means to our end, i.e., to building the kingdom of God or, in Franciscan language, building brotherhood wherever and whenever we can. Fraternally-structured poverty, minority and itinerancy, according to the situation in each place, help Capuchins to free themselves from the effects of structural sin, inconsistent inner drives, manipulation by other power interests, lack of skills for crossing boundaries, and anachronistic traditions that enslave us, in order to build a viable fraternity in the 21st century” (VII PCO, n. 4). So, paragraphs 2 and 3 complete one another: § 2 stresses the radical quality of austerity, namely the privations it involves, and therefore the effort and struggle required to practise it; while § 3 aims to describe the result of this ascetical process. . The formulation used in PdR1 (n. 64,3): makes us concentrate on spiritual values has been slightly changed to makes us more open to spiritual values.

(6) The text of § 4 underlines a second aspect of poverty, more directly connected to minority. In fact, it is also part of our choice of poverty to renounce “all forms of social, political or ecclesiastical power”. The Commission reflected at length on this expression in the current text (n. 60,4) in the light of elements emerging from PCO VII, with particular reference to Proposal 18: “The word of God enlightens and inspires the decision of a Capuchin brother who wishes to live in minority. From it he learns the need to abandon every form of dominant power (cf Mk 9,33-37; Rnb V,12-15) and the fact that service is the correct attitude of him who understands Jesus as servant (cf Lk 22,24-27). In the same way, the Gospel teaches him to identify with the excluded (cf Mt 25, 31-46) and to share all good things with them (cf Rm 15,27). A good use of power is the “genuine sacrifice” characteristic of one who has had a profound experience of Jesus (cf. Rm 12,1). The modern social sciences make it clear that, because all social relationships are asymmetrical, it is impossible to live without exercising power. Jesus taught his followers not to “lord it over” one another as nonbelievers do (cf. Mt 20:25;Mk 10:42-45; Lk 22:24-27; 1 Pt 5:3). Francis wrote that the brothers should not exercise power or dominion (RnB V 12-15)”. Bearing in mind also that the connotations of the noun “power” are not the same in all cultures, we preferred to adopt a wider formulation which prescribes that we are to avoid seeking for ourselves forms of prestige, power or dominion.

(7) In the second part of § 4 the text describes in a positive sense the choices that flow from our profession of a life in poverty and minority. It does this by reference to an expression of 2Lf IX,45 and to another from PCO VII (Proposal 3). This gives greater prominence to the aspect of minority.

(8) § 5 serves as a concluding summary of n. 65 and is intended to underline the unbreakable connection between poverty and minority. The proposed text was formulated on the basis of the statement of PCO VI: “Without minority, our poverty would have no meaning and would become a source of pride, just as without material poverty, interior poverty would be unreal” (Proposal n. 3; cf. also Project 2006 n. 42,4). The Commission’s formulation contextualises poverty and minority within the category of a life sine proprio, in which a much broader horizon is visible than the one offered by the generally accepted meaning of the word poverty. Living sine proprio refers to the attitude of someone who does not appropriate anything to himself; it is the fundamental quality of the way of life of the friars, so that almost nothing else is needed to define how a friar lives. Also, this “life without anything of one’s own” is defined not just in relation to ownership of things, but also and above all as the attitude of someone who has renounced even his own legitimate rights and who therefore truly lives without anything of his own. This attitude should permeate every relationship, not just to things but also and above all with God and the brothers^[30].

N. 64 (60,5-6)

Explanatory Notes

(1) The problems associated with the use of the expression progress or development of peoples have already been faced in chapter I (n. 13, note 4). For the reasons given on that occasion, here too we prefer to change the expression in the present text to the common good.

(2) It is certainly better to use the noun brothers, rather than the pronoun those.

(3) The idea of PCO VI (Cf. Proposal n. 9) had already been accepted by Project 2006 (cf n. 49,1). In our view it is appropriate to insert this into the text of the Constitutions to strengthen the two previous paragraphs and to make them more concrete. The formulation of the text does not ignore nor undervalue personal initiatives, but these cannot be individualistic – they must express a commitment of the community and be carried out as a missio fraternitatis (“mission of the fraternity”) and in obedience to the ministers. The text therefore states that the Order as such is bound to a preferential option for the poor which has to be translated into particular choices, and these must be assumed and shared at community level.

(4) The text proposed for the complementary code is derived from Proposal n. 10 of PCO VI. The intention here is to encourage communal applications of what is said in the Constitutions. The formulation of the proposal takes account of the fact that it is not always possible for individual jurisdictions to implement particular ways of being present among the poor. This is one area where inter-provincial collaboration may be called for.

N. 65 (61)

Explanatory Notes

(1) The current text has been expanded and modified to expound the foundation (the vow of poverty) which binds us to practice common life and to share all goods. The majority of the Commission considers the expression “we are obliged to hand over to the fraternity” more concrete and more realistic than the current: “should be handed over for the use of the fraternity”.

(2) The new text of § 3 amplifies and sharpens the current text: “individuals receive from the fraternity the same food, clothing and other necessities”. At the same time it is intended to codify the criterion or principle of “equity” arising out of the Proposals of PCO VI, whose value lies in the development of fraternal relationships and in the observance of poverty in the different contexts and cultures. The application of different forms of observing poverty is closely bound up with a sense of equity, which protects us from egalitarianism. At the same time PCO VII exhorts us: “We should divest ourselves of any privilege that might arise from office, education received, presbyteral ministry or from any other service we render for the common good or for the benefit of the people of God (n. 9). “Equity does not require a universal and identical Capuchin model. It seeks to ensure that the varying and differing needs of each brother and of each fraternity will be met with equal concern. Communion cannot survive where there is privilege. ^[31]

N. 66 (60,1)

Explanatory Notes

(1) N. 68 re-proposes the text of the current n. 60,1, which already commits us to verify how we observe poverty. The Commission thought it appropriate to make this aspect more explicit: we wish to propose and to instil the practice of scrutinium paupertatis (poverty-check). This aspect is particularly relevant to the ongoing formation of the brothers.

(2) To define poverty as “an essential commitment” of our life is more appropriate than “a very important commitment”. PCO VI defines poverty as “an essential element of our life” (Proposal n. 12)

(3) The addition of and to the diversity of places is called for by the principle of pluriformity and conforms to the words of Rb 4,2 .

(4) § 2 outlines the scope of the verification (personal and communal) that has to be undertaken and the conditions required for its conduct: mutual charity and docility to the Spirit.

(5) The text proposed for the Constitutions invites us to evaluate often our way of observing poverty. This principle needs to be implemented in practice, particularly in the periodical community meetings (local chapters). Next, the text of the complementary code calls on the ministers to issue guidelines on the frequency of the scrutinium paupertatis, its content and methods. While the expression scrutinium paupertatis is not being inserted into the text of the Constitutions, similar expressions are used to indicate ways of ensuring fidelity to a well-defined religious profession which we have made freely and in a public, ecclesial form. The result should be that we are enlightened and purified in our way of thinking, planning and working, in trustful dependence upon God and in joyful solidarity. The aim of the scrutinium paupertatis, which is more than a simple examination of conscience, is to lead each individual brother, each fraternity and each friar who exercises the ministry of authority to an experience of the Spirit that will revive our fidelity to a life with nothing of our own.

Article ii: Poverty in Goods and Money

N. 67 (62)

Explanatory Notes

(1) Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the current text have been reversed. In this way the instruction concerning the use of temporal goods is immediately linked to the recommendation of Saint Francis, referred to in paragraph 1, and it is possible to expound the contents of paragraph 3 (= n. 62,2 of the current text) regarding itinerancy.

(2) The expansion of the current text is intended to underline the aspect of itinerancy. It is based on Proposals n. 5 and n. 24 of PCO VII.

(3) We see no need for n. 62,4-5 to remain in the Constitutions. We agree with the proposal of Project 2006 to transfer them to the complementary code.

(4) The addition of the phrase within the limits of their own competence and in obedience to universal law is justified for obvious reasons.

N. 68 (63)

Explanatory Notes

(1) The final addition is intended to highlight a very important feature of Capuchin tradition and spirituality: “We are like the sea, which receives water from everywhere, and in turn distributes it to every river” (A. Manzoni, The Betrothed, chap. III). The text expresses a finding of PCO VI: “The values underlying questing need to be reinstated, namely trust in Divine Providence and a sense of dependence and reciprocity between us and the people. People give to us because we give to the poor, and in order to give alms, we must welcome alms” (Proposal n. 20).

N. 69 (64)

Explanatory Notes

(1) The proposed change (in today’s conditions) does not alter the content of the current text.

(2) To avoid possible ambiguities in the translation of the Latin text, and referring to n. 6 of PCO VI, PdR1 (n. 70,2) had translated the Latin volentes Patris intentionem adimplere as in order to remain faithful to the profound intention of the Seraphic Father. We accept the suggestions received [Prot. N.: IV-00048; IV-00150.], and return to the current text, while making it clear that the meaning is the Seraphic Father.

(3) We propose according to the prescriptions of our particular law instead of according to the Constitutions. The current text was drafted at the General Chapter of 1968, when the Ordinances were abrogated and everything was put into the Constitutions. This was the intention of the Order until the General Chapter of 1982, but the Chapter of 1988 decided to reinstate the Ordinances and today, by the express will of two General Chapters (2000 and 2006), we are drafting a Complementary Code (Ordinances or General Statutes) alongside the Constitutions. This complementary code is also an integral part of our particular law. It therefore seems more appropriate to say according to the prescriptions of our particular law. However we believe that the use of money in the Order needs to be regulated with greater precision and timely intervention.

N. 70 (65)

Explanatory Notes

(1) The text proposed for the complementary code is intended as an application of the constitutional text. The prescription seems to be necessary because of a widespread practice, which is not always legitimate or legitimised. On the other hand there are cases and situations where individual brothers, other than those exercising the office of bursar or a similar administrative service (Mission secretaries, vice-postulators, etc) need to administer money.

(2) In light of the feedback received, the current text is modified to or relatives and adding nor receive gifts for their exclusive use without the permission of the guardian or minister.

N. 71 (66)

Explanatory Notes

(1) The proposed change is substantial. In the current text superiors clearly refers to local superiors or guardians, who must act according to norms issued by the provincial minister with the consent of the definitory. However, the Commission now proposes that the legal competence indicated in the text should be reserved to the ministers, with the consent of their Council. The reason for this is clear enough, since we are dealing with a very important and sensitive issue. But there is nothing to prevent the prescription of the Constitutions, as proposed by the Commission, being further specified in the particular Statutes of the circumscriptions.

(2) The statement needs an explicit subject, to replace the pronoun they.

(3) The Draft composed by the C.C.L. and presented to the General Chapter of 1968 said: Non eis tamen prohibetur, quominus pecunia necessaria, more hominum modestae condicionis, in tuto, etiam cum moderato fenore, collocetur.^[32] (However, it is not forbidden for them to safely deposit necessary funds, even at a moderate rate of interest, as is done by people of lowly condition). In this text the emphasis was clearly placed on “safely depositing”(in tuto) the necessary funds”, according to the custom of ordinary people. For this purpose – i.e. to safeguard the money – even a modest rate of interest is allowed. The 1968 Chapter deleted the words in tuto, because they were materially contained in the following words, i.e. they said that money that was clearly necessary can be deposited in banks and other similar institutions, even at a moderate rate of interest^[33]. The text, in the formulation approved in 1968^[34] and maintained in successive Chapters^[35],may have lost some of its clarity but the intention underlying even at moderate interest seems to have been preserved. The Commission has deleted even in the form of investments, which had been inserted in PdR1 (n. 72,3). We believe it is more appropriate for this subject to be dealt with, if necessary, in a special economic Statute, and that one must always stop at limited interest, avoiding any form of speculation and taking as the norm people of lowly condition, as is said elsewhere in the current Constitutions (nos. 66,2; 67,2) and in the Proposed revision (Cf. nos. 71,2; 72,2).

(4) The proposed revision adds the phrase observing the precepts of our own law, because we are convinced that this subject needs to be carefully regulated at Order level and in the circumscriptions.

N. 72 (67)

Explanatory Notes

(1) Cf. PCO VI, Proposal n. 13: “The Constitutional norm : “The minimum necessary, not the maximum allowed” ( 67,3) can only be meaningfully applied in the context of the societies in which our friars live. We therefore propose that the Brothers in each circumscription apply this norm to their own specific circumstances”. This norm is connected to the other principle stressed by PCO VI, that of equity, and reminds us of the need for pluriformity, which has to be adapted to different cultures: “This Plenary Council of the Order reaffirms that poverty, too, as an essential element of our life, must be lived in the light of what the Constitutions say about the unity and pluriformity of our Franciscan vocation. On the one hand, unity refers to brotherhood and to the principle that “because of the same vocation, the friars are all equal” (Const. 84,3). But situations differ, so that without sound inculturation, no true pluriformity or evangelization will ever be possible. Inculturation of poverty must go as far as our dwellings, buildings, lifestyle, the poor means we use in the apostolate, and our external appearance” ( PCO VI n. 12). In PdR1(n. 73,4), the last sentence had been suggested as a separate pragraph: This principle needs to be applied in the different social contexts in which we live.

(2) The insertion of and of the Order seems timely, to widen horizons and develop the sense of solidarity.

(3) The changes clarify the three alternatives proposed in the current text.

(4) The material proposed in § 4 of the constitutional text requires regulation. The two new texts drafted for the complementary code correspond to the constant teaching of the General Ministers in recent decades, to the Plenary Councils, especially PCO VI (nos. 33 and 36), and to a growing awareness that has been developing in the Order.

(5) The proposed text is derived from PCO VI: “Local chapters are the ideal occasion for preparing the fraternity budget and monitoring how money is spent. Our administration of money is one of the ways in which brotherhood is expressed, and the local chapter is the proper place to examine whether it conforms to gospel values, minority, etc.” (Proposal n. 31). “The local fraternity can have only short-term capital investments (cash in bank). The capital at its disposal represents only what is necessary for the ordinary running of the community. The Major Superior and his council should establish the upper limit that each fraternity may manage (cf. Const.67,4). For this purpose the circumscription should produce appropriate forms or models, and assess whether a centralized economic administration at provincial level is advisable”. (Proposal n. 33). The text formulated by the Commission does not speak of “the ordinary running of the community” since our legislation provides the possibility even for guardians to incur “extraordinary expenditure” within the limits of their competence (Cf. Const n. 72,2-3). Neither do we think it appropriate to add any further explicit details – either in the Constitutions or in the complementary code – about budgets. Further specifications on these matters can be put into an additional statute or in the particular Statutes of the circumscriptions.

(6) The text of the complementary code reproduces almost literally Proposal n. 36 of PCO VI: “Each circumscription, bearing in mind the principles of solidarity established by this Plenary Council and the provisions of our Constitutions (cf. 67,7; 73,1), and after consulting its own Conference, should determine, at the level of the definitory or of the chapter if necessary, what is required for its ordinary administration. It should decide the amount to be held in reserve/investments for internal extraordinary expenditure (maintenance of buildings, the sick, employee insurance, formation) and for external solidarity (missions and charity)”.

The Commission thought it right to leave it to the Chapter of each jurisdiction to set the maximum limit of the sum it would manage for its own administration, both ordinary and extraordinary.

The meaning of the clause found in PCO VI (after consulting its own Conference) does not appear easy to implement at the present time, so it has been moved to the complementary code. Further consideration of this question at Order level may bring us to a more precise formulation.

At the end the proposed text speaks of ways determined by the general chapter or by the general minister and his definitory. Such “ways” have clearly become more and more necessary for the implementation of what is prescribed by the Constitutions (n. 67, 4 = Proposed revision n. 73,5).

(7) According to Project 2006, norm n. 67,7 should be transferred to the complementary code, immediately followed by the prescription in the current Ordinances, 4/3.

(8) The text has been compiled from elements of the current n. 60,4 and 67,5. The details listed are examples, intended to refer to a much wider field which would be the subject of the scrutinium paupertatis to be conducted in the local chapter. The particolar mention of tecnological instruments (cell phones, internet, computers and many other electronic gadgets) seems timely in an age in which we are literally invaded by them and when their use is universally widespread, even indiscriminate.^[36]

(9) The Commission thinks that the insistence on poor means should be brought out in the text of the Constitutions. “We must seek to implement models of evangelization that are less bound up with the power and security that derives from having many expensive resources. We should be more ready to learn from the poor and to place our trust in God alone” (PCO VI, Proposal n. 11). “Inculturation of poverty must go as far as our dwellings, buildings, lifestyle, the poor means we use in the apostolate, and our external appearance” (VI PCO, Proposal n. 12).

N. 73 (cfr. 67,6)

Explanatory Notes

(1) § 1 is proposed in order to highlight the aspect of mutual dependence, which is a very important component of our form of life and spirituality, found in Rnb: “Let each one confidently make known his need to another so that the other might discover what is needed and minister to him. Let each one love and care for his brother a s a mother cares for her son, in those matters in which God has given him the grace” (9,10-11). The context is what the Rule was speaking of before: questing, and the difficulties that can arise in the exercise of this office (shame, the affront of the people etc.). In the midst of life’s difficulties brotherhood and mutual love should be a material and moral support for the brothers. In order for this to happen certain conditions are necessary, both on the part of the person in need and of the one who helps. No-one may enclose himself in his own discomfort in a vain attempt to bear everything and resolve everything by himself. There is no room in the Franciscan life for self-sufficiency. Francis has given us the golden rule of inter-dependence. Therefore each one must allow his brother to know that he needs something, especially that he needs help, so that he can be loved and cherished. In the Italian text of the Rule (and in the one proposed for the Constitutions) the attitude of the person in need is described by the noun fiducia (trust). The Latin text of the Rule says secure manifestet, (let him confidently make known), which highlights even more the correct psychological attitude Francis wishes to see in the relationships of his brothers with one another. The adverb secure (etimologically derived from sine cura) corresponds to “unworried, without fear, without anxiety or trouble, with no hesitation at all”^[37], but rather with confidence, i.e. with that psychological certainty that in some way one can rely on one’s brother in time of need. The passage from Rnb is also found, with some variations, in Rb 6,7-8: “Wherever the brothers may be and meet one another, let them show that they are members of the same family. Let each one confidently make known his need to the other, for if a mother loves and cares for her son according to the flesh, how much more diligently must someone love and care for his brother according to the Spirit?”. The context is still that of poverty and of the most absolute material insecurity. “The sublime height of most exalted poverty” is not risk-free. But it is precisely the lack of human support that should bind the brothers all the more closely in the bond of brotherly love. The only life-insurance policy Francis is able to offer his brothers is the genuinely Christian and evangelical one of brotherhood, understood as a perfect communion of life in which every poor person can and should find refuge and support^[38]. Here we see clearly the relationship of inter-dependence that exists between poverty and brotherhood. There is no brotherhood without poverty. Brotherhood is not the cause, but in so far as it is a gift of God it is the effect of our meeting with Him, the effect of prayer. At the same time it is the effect of a life without anything of one’s own, where by denying ourselves material goods and every form of pride we are rendered capable of accepting our brothers and of entrusting ourselves to them. This is the lot we choose, and it leads to the land of the living. The text on austerity should be read in this light (see above at n. 64,2-3), in the light of PCO’s VI and VII and of the Circular Letter n. 24 (Courageous choices for a more fraternal world) of Br. John Corriveau (22 May 2005).

§ 1 on reciprocal dependence introduces the consequences of solidarity, which were drafted on the basis of Proposal n. 21 of PCO VI: “Indeed, Francis states clearly that dependence on others is a consequence of being created and redeemed, and is therefore a right (Rnb 9, 8). Furthermore, interdependence requires the theological gift of love, which enriches giver and receiver alike (Rnb 9, 9). Fraternal communion and interdependence should inspire and determine our structures of solidarity within the local, provincial and international fraternities, as well as our interaction with the world, particularly the world of the poor”^[39].

(2) The current Constitutions, at n. 67,6, present a text on economic solidarity within the Order. In the light of PCO VI it seems appropriate to develop this aspect, outlining the need for solidarity both within and outside the Order.

(3) The proposed text is inspired by the Order’s experience in the field of economic solidarity in the last decades and refers immediately to Proposal n. 21 and to the Encyclical Sollicitudo rei socialis (n. 38) of John Paul II, quoted by the same PCO^[40].

(4) The exhortation to share promptly seems more incisive than the present “they should be ready to share”. The Commission also thought it right to add in a spirit of sacrifice, intending to suggest that solidarity among ourselves should be practised even when it requires sacrifice.

(5) It is sufficient to provide a Statute for Economic Solidarity in our fundamental law, without specifying any further details. The requirements of the PCO’s can be accommodated in the Statute itself which, once it is approved by the General Chapter, becomes a part of the Order’s particular law. The phrase When necessary, which began this text in PdR1, has been deleted

(6) The texts proposed in paragraphs 4, 5, 6 were drafted in the light of Proposals (nos. 21-28) of PCO VI, but their spirit is found in the text of the current Constitutions. In particular, Proposal n. 36 is echoed in Const 60,4-5; 97,2; 99,1-3; Proposal n. 27 intends to update the prescriptions of Const 11,4-5; 94-95; 97; 100,1-4; 147,4, by promoting the culture of participation. Therefore, solidarity is not absent from the current Constitutions. However, given the importance of the subject at PCO VI, it seems appropriate to make it even more explicit here.^[41].

(7) In PdR1 (n. 74,5): genuine economic and social development.

Article iii: Poverty in Our Buildings

N. 74 (68+60,2)

Explanatory Notes

(1) The proposed addition (the living conditions of the poor of the region) is made to encourage us to implement our commitment to poverty and apply the principle of pluriform ways and sound inculturation. This is not simply a response to PCO VI (Cf. Proposals nos. 12-13) and of PCO VII (Cf. Proposals nos. 27b ; 49), but also to the constant legislative tradition of the Order, according to which the brothers: “Should take as their model the small dwellings of the poor, not modern houses”^[42] .

(2) The majority of the Commission agreed that the concept should be expressed positively ((so) that they are accessible to all) rather than negatively (“in such a way that they do not appear inaccessible to anyone”).

(3) The current text has been slightly recast to reflect the criterium veritatis, (principle of truth) which should always inspire and guide us in identifying real needs, and only what is truly necessary.

(4) The additions at the beginning and end of the text are intended to underline in a striking way the meaning of the scrutinium paupertatis (poverty-check) which challenges the conscience of any Capuchin fraternity: the fraternity is obliged to see how it measures up to the fundamental requirements of our charism. For this reason the text speaks of conformity to a life that is truly poor and lowly. The stress should be placed on the word truly. Indeed, we are to examine our life to see whether it corresponds with the truth of our charism. In the scrutinium paupertatis or in reviewing one’s life one must always reaffirm the contents or values which are or should be the foundation of everything we do. In this sense PCO VI reminds us that “with respect to houses, the guidelines given in the Constitutions and previous Plenary Councils are more than sufficient to provide solutions in particular cases (cf. I PCO, 53)”, and it goes on to say: “The Brothers are to live in this world as pilgrims and strangers. We therefore encourage them to re-examine whether their present dwellings make it sufficiently obvious that we are called to rely on divine providence. They should assess whether their residences are in proportion to the number of Brothers and to the work carried out there” (Proposal n. 38).

(5) The final insert of § 4 and the text proposed for the complementary code are once again dependent on PCO VI (nos. 38 and 40) and should be considered together. Individual circumscriptions, too, are obliged to conduct assessments periodically to avoid all forms of accumulation either of money or real estate. In particular, the complementary code intends to encourage a resizing of our structures and works. This is urgent in some areas of the Order and permanently relevant to all of us if we wish to be faithful to our fundamental charism as a “Reform”. If our life is in need of constant renewal in order to be open to the voice of the Spirit and to interpret correctly the signs of the times, then the work of “resizing” becomes an ongoing commitment aimed at continuously renewing ourselves, our fraternities and our circumscriptions. This process of constantly adjusting the dimensions of who we are is much more than a merely contingent need, it is a requirement of our charism. The principal subjects of this continuous process of verification and resizing are the individual circumscriptions as such. We need to stop thinking of “resizing” in this sense as a bureaucratic operation conducted from the top downwards by an elite. Everything will need to be done to involve the largest possible number of brothers. But it also requires a patient, firm authority that produces unity and is capable of ensuring the execution of the task.^[43] The proposed text also suggests that the process of “resizing” is not a private matter for each circumscription. It is a problem that involves the entire Order and requires broader planning to guarantee the vitality of our charism and so that we choose presences that have real significant in the different ecclesial contexts and geographical and cultural areas. For this purpose we suggest that circumscriptions enter into dialogue with their neighbours and with the Conference, and also that it would be appropriate to issue guidelines at Order level. On the question of the disposal of buildings we no longer need, PCO VI presents some very clear guidelines: renting is not the first or the only recourse to solve the problem of superfluous or unused buildings, but it “(is) acceptable in the context in which we live and according to norms to be determined by the General Minister and his definitory. We highly recommend the sale of goods and land which we no longer use. If this is not possible they should be used for social purposes at non-speculative rents” (VI PCO, Proposal n. 40).

[Complementary Code] ⁽¹⁾

Explanatory Notes

(1) Following the choice made by Project 2006, we propose to transfer to the complementary code n. 69 of the current text, as we do not consider that it must necessarily be in the Constitutions.

2) PdR1 said simply minister. By specifying that the provincial minister is meant, the current text is therefore restored.

N. 75 (70) ⁽¹⁾

Explanatory Notes

(1) According to can. 608, “A religious community is to live in a lawfully constituted house, under the authority of a Superior designated according to the norms of law. Each house is to have at least an oratory, in which the Eucharist is celebrated and reserved, so that it may truly be the centre of the community”. The church, therefore, or at least an oratory, is one of the constitutive elements of a religious community. For this reason we do not think it is appropriate to transfer to the complementary code the prescription found in n. 70,1-4. However the current text has been contracted into two paragraphs, leaving its content intact.

(2) The addition to the text comes from can. 608 mentioned above. Our churches must be above all functional in relation to a life of prayer and brotherhood.

Article IV: The Administration of Goods

N. 76 (new) ⁽¹⁾

Explanatory Notes

(1) The text of this number is totally new. Taking account of PCO VI and VII and of the animation that has followed from it in the last decade (cf. in particular the Circular Letters of Br. John Corriveau) one cannot fail to insert those elements now proposed for the Constitutions.

(2) Living Poverty in Brotherhood: this was the title of PCO VI, which intended to encourage the Order to reconsider and study more deeply the meaning of our poverty at the communal, instutitional and structural levels. Consequently, § 1, which introduces this proposed new text for the Constitutions, intends to highlight the relationship between the administration of goods and fraternity. Therefore, following one of the propsals we received, [cf. Prot. N.: IV-00076], we have now added the phrase poverty, which is an option we have taken as a family (cf. VI CPO, 7). The previous version of PdR1 (n. 77,1) has therefore been modified, to bring out the fact that for us, administration of goods is not a vlue in itself, but is one way to observe poverty.

(3) The principle of transparency was particularly highlighted in PCO VI: “Fraternal life also requires transparency in local, provincial and general administration. Such transparency begins with the individual friar, continues in the local fraternity and finds its completion in the circumscription to which the fraternity belongs. Transparency expresses and facilitates brotherhood and solidarity among all the constituent parts of the Order” (Proposal n. 30). In the precise context of transparency it is not out of place to mention the need for accountability in all that we receive and use at every level, individual and communal. The wording of PdR1 (n. 77,2) is maintained, but with the first sentence in the form of a statement rather than an exhortation.

(4) The text presents participation, – together with trasparency, equity, solidarity and austerity – as criteria or principles of the fraternal economy, based on the particular accentuation placed on them at PCO VI (Cf. n. 29 e 45) and in Circular Letters n. 17 e 24 of Br. John Corriveau. Active participation and sharing must characterise our mutual fraternal relations even when the administration of goods is at issue, because we all share responsibility for fraternal life in each of its aspects.

(5) While the text of § 4, as formulated here, is not found literally in PCO VI and VII it does suitably interpret the mind of both plenary councils. In particular, Proposals 29 and 37 of PCO VI can be seen in the background of this number. In fact, accuracy and precision, transparency and sharing can and should be features of any administration, but they do not ipso facto express the inner quality of the administration of goods by religious. Our administration of money and other assets must be conducted with full respect for our state of life and of our vocation. Therefore it develops along different parameters from that of efficiency, by which persons and things are normally measured. The Order and its Provinces are not companies, nor should they become such.

(6) The concern expressed in this § corresponds to the decision of the General Chapter of 2006^[44].

(7) The expression fraternal economy does not appear in the Proposals of PCO VI. It arose out of the later reflections, after the plenary council itself^[45], and reappears several times in the Proposals of PCO VII. (Cf. n. 6. 40. 51).

N. 77 (71)

Explanatory Notes

(1) The current text has been kept, but adapting – here and in the following § – the terminology (minister and Council), instead of major superior and definitory). PdR1 (n. 78,1) also mentioned vice-prvinces and custodies.

(2) The second part of the § in the current text (n. 71,2) is a specific instance of the preceding statement. As such it can be transferred to the complementary code, leaving in the Constitutions the statement of principle that in each of our houses there should be a bursar. In the text, superior is replaced by guardian.

(3) The expression in harmony with our style of life comes from Proposal n. 41 of PCO VI. This is the first and most fundamental requirement when discerning the suitability of brothers called to serve in economic administration. The expression is ideally connected to what is stated above in n. 76, 4.

(4) Apart from the opening phrase in harmony with our style of life, highlighted above (cf. note 3), this § keeps to the current text, except for the final phrase (according to the prescriptions of the definitory), which was unclear and has been changed to following the norms of universal and proper law.

(5) The text proposed for the complementary code repeats Proposal n. 41 of PCO VI. It refers to initiatives geared to formation and updating in the circumscriptions or at other levels, meaning by the latter any joint ventures undertaken by two or more jurisdictions at Conference level.

(6) Wording of PdR1 (n. 78,4) revised to make it more fluid. The text speaks of administrators and bursars, referring not only to brothers in charge of the administration of the local fraternities, the provincial curia and the general curia, but also to those entrusted by their ministers with the care of particular structures such as missions, the office of the postulator or vice-postulator, pastoral activities (parishes) social works, various funds, etc.

This § was drafted out of an awareness of how sensitive the task entrusted to bursars and administrators is. Theirs is a ministry which is becoming more and more complex and problematic. This makes it necessary to provide real communal support to these brothers. The proposed text is also based on a reference to our specific charism and to the spirit of minority, which requires that there be a turnover of brothers who occupy the various offices, jobs and services. Even the service of administration depends on the same charismatic reference. In this connection the words of PCO VII, referring to the management of works of social development, must be kept in mind: “Because these works often involve the exercise of great power, no brother should stay in a position of leadership or control for too long. To do otherwise risks abusing power and developing habits inconsistent with our life of minority. The norm of tenure for a brother in such a position might be similar to that of a provincial minister, i.e., no more than six consecutive years in leadership” (n. 51).

(7) The proposed constitutional text enshrines a principle of flexibility which attempts to take account of particular situations in the various circumscriptions of the Order. Hence it says: and should not ordinarily remain in the same job for too many years. In the Complementary code, the faculty is given to the chapters in each circumscription to determine the length of office for brothers in the service of the economy and administration.

(8) Following Project 2006, we propose to transfer to the complementary code all the norms currently contained in nos. 71,4-8 concerning economic reports.

(9) The current text has been slightly modified for greater clarity and simplicity.

(10) The proposed formulation is not intended to nullify the concerns underlying the current text (n. 71,9), which, however, could appear contradictory in certain aspects to the previous prescriptions concerning bursars and the administration of goods.

(11) The Commission tried to make the current text more precise by adding some elements based on experience. However the subject needs further reflection and study in the light of PCO VI and VII.

(12) To avoid useless repetitions the prescriptions of nos. 67,8 and 71,10 have been merged. But we think it fitting that this paragraph should remain in the text of the Constitutions and enriched by references to ethical principles, as suggested by PCO VI (Proposal n. 37) and decided by the General Chapter of 2000^[46]. Also, for reasons that are more than obvious to us religious, there should be a reference to the social teaching of the Church. In fact the two elements should be understood as being closely connected: it is a matter of keeping to ethical principles according to the teaching of the Church. “ […]Today we hear much talk of ethics in the world of economy, finance and business. […]It would be advisable, however, to develop a sound criterion of discernment, since the adjective “ethical” can be abused. When the word is used generically, it can lend itself to any number of interpretations, even to the point where it includes decisions and choices contrary to justice and authentic human welfare. Much in fact depends on the underlying system of morality. On this subject the Church’s social doctrine can make a specific contribution, since it is based on man’s creation ‘in the image of God’ (Gen 1:27), a datum which gives rise to the inviolable dignity of the human person and the transcendent value of natural moral norms. When business ethics prescinds from these two pillars, it inevitably risks losing its distinctive nature and it falls prey to forms of exploitation; more specifically, it risks becoming subservient to existing economic and financial systems rather than correcting their dysfunctional aspects. Among other things, it risks being used to justify the financing of projects that are in reality unethical. […]” (Caritas in veritate n. 45). With renard to the text, note that the expression universal law (as in nn. 67,8; 71,10 of the current Constitutions and of n. 78,5 of PdR1) has been changed to canon and civil law.

(13) In the context of the administration of goods, the two current Ordinances (4/1 and 4/2) go to the complementary code.

(14) The addition and in all the houses has been deleted

(15) The text we propose to insert in § 7 seems important and urgent. It is obvious that not everything that concerns the correct administration of goods can find a place either in the Constitutions or in the complementary code (General Statutes or Ordinances). Neither is it opportune that the Constitutions or the complementary code should mention everything, including investments, budgets, etc. This is a subject that requires more detailed regulation. For this reason, as already anticipated in the Introduction, we propose the creation of a special Codex additicius, (additional code) at Order level. In the light of a number of suggestions [Prot.N.: IV-00163; IV-00101; IV-00051], the previous wording (cf. PdR1, n. 78,7) as been recise, and the reference to an economic statute has been transferre to the Complementary Code.

(16) This text, suggested for the Complementary Code, was not present in PdR1. As mentioned in the previous note, it is derived friom the reformulation of § 7.

(17) Many circumscriptions have already drafted this kind of Statute. It is not at present explicitly envisaged in the Constitutions, but it can be indirectly derived from n. 72, which speaks of economic commissions, whose competence is to be determined by the Chapter (72,2). The clause in the proposed text calling for these economic Statutes to be approved by the General Minister with his definitory should come as no surprise. In reality, the purpose of these documents is to apply the Constitutions, and as such they come under the principle enunciated by the Constitutions themselves in n. 184,5: “Provincial chapters or Conferences of Major Superiors may enact particular statutes so that the regulations of the Constitutions may be properly applied to the situations of provinces and regions. Such statutes need the approval of the General Minister with the consent of the definitory”. The text which PdR1 (n. 78,8) proposed for the Constitutions, is now reformulated and tranmsferred to the Complementary Code

[Complementary Code] ⁽¹⁾

Explanatory Notes

(1) In n. 72 the current Constitutions make a recommendation; the text is not strictly binding. For this reason we propose to transfer it to the complementary code.

[Complementary Code] ⁽¹⁾

Explanatory Notes

(1) We propose to transfer to the complementary code the current n. 73 regarding the limit sums for extraordinary expenditure.

N. 78 (74)

Explanatory Notes

1) We thought it right to add to this final text of chapter IV, to give it a richer teological and spiritual content. The first addition is suggested by Proposal 3 of PCO VI: “Conversely, for Francis poverty and minority are not ends in themselves, but help us to put into practice “the highest gift” (cf. 1Cor 12, 31) which is love, expressed for people and for all creation in Franciscan brotherhood”. In a text such as chapter IV, which frequently speaks of earthly and material goods, it is more than appropriate at the end to turn one’s eyes towards “the Good”. The additional text, inspired by the words of St Francis, (cf. Rnb 23,8-9), in PdR1 (n. 79,4) came immediately after § 3 as a new exhoration: Therefore, let us liong for perfect charity… The feedback from the Order in general suggested that we avoid repetitions and an excessively elaborate style [Prot. N.: IV-00164; IV-00164; IV-00087]. This suggested a rewording, but in the new formulation of PdR2 the phrase for the glory of the Father and the good of His children. present in the current text (n. 74,4), was lost.

(2) This second insertion is derived from Rnb 17,17 and LodAl 5 and is based on an attitude that was typical of St Francis. Precisely because he did not want to appropriate any good thing he had received from the Lord, he knew that everything had to be given back to Him. The word “render” is typical of Francis’ vocabulary, and he uses it in the context of praise and thanksgiving. It also seems quite fitting, at the conclusion of the chapter on poverty, to affirm that the poor possess the greatest of treasures: God is all our wealth and sufficiency.

1. Cf. Atti dell’83° Capitolo Generale. Official version edited by Br. Carlo Calloni, Rome, Capuchin General Curia, 2006. vol.II, 833. ↑
2. Cf. Analecta OFMCap 123(2007) 55. ↑
3. Agapit Mroso, Living Poverty in Fraternity. A Comparative Study of the Constitutions and the Propositions of the Sixth Plenay Council of the Order, in www.ofmcap.org Commission for the Constitutions. ↑
4. Cf. Luciano Pastorello, The Constitutions and the PCO VI. A Rich Comparison, in www.ofmcap.org Commission for the Constitutions. ↑
5. In this sense the General Minister and his Definitory believed it sufficient to note in summary form: “Likewise, it became more vividly evident to the brothers of the Plenary Council of the Order how dynamic and full of feeling our Franciscan way of life is if we sincerely strive to live in real fraternity the “minority” in poverty that we have vowed, in that unity of mind and heart that makes Christ really present among us, so that each and every fraternity of ours, whether local or provincial, becomes a kind of expression of the presence of the poor and humble Christ, the Servant of God and man in charity.” In the letter from Quito, 23 October 1971 in Renewing the Capuchins. The Plenary Councils of the Order 1971-1992, Gowland & Co, Merseyside, 1993, p.7. ↑
6. Nevertheless it is useful to consult “Minority, Friars Minor” in the index to Renewing the Capuchins. The Plenary Councils of the Order 1971-1992, p. 243-244. ↑
7. Ci si chiede allora: non è forse la minorità un concetto che descrive non tanto un quid, quanto piuttosto una quidditas, non tanto un factum, quanto un factor, non tanto qualche cosa, ma piuttosto uno spirito? ↑
8. minorità, minore, minoritico. ↑
9. Cf. Prudente L. Nery, Our Fraternal Life In Minority. A systematic comparison between the Constitutions of the Capuchin Friars Minor and the Propositions of PCO VII in www.orfmcap.org Commission for the Constitutions. ↑
10. The Italian text of the Commission’s “Proposed revision” differs in many places from that of the Italian edition of the Constitutions published in 2002. The translation has been revised to make it more faithful to the Latin original. This work was done by constantly comparing the Italian versions of 1971, 1978, 1983, 1990 and 2002. ↑
11. The Commission thinks it right to keep the present title of Chapter IV without further specification or additions. It did not seem appropriate to say: Our life in poverty and minority. As already noted, minority is a dimension that involves and permeates not just a single aspect of our life but the whole of it. One could perhaps add the phrase in minority to the headings of all the chapters of the Constitutions, but it is not necessary; it is sufficient to understand that the Constitutions are the “life of the Capuchin Lesser Brothers”, and in that “life” the two components of the phrase – lesser-brothers – constitute a single substantive (from substantia) which indicates our specific charismatic identity. One also has to keep in mind that the material in chapter IV is in part the object of the “vow” to which we oblige ourselves by profession; but we take a vow of poverty (having nothing of our own), not of minority. ↑
12. Cf. Acta Capituli generalis specialis Ordinis Fratrum Minorum Capuccinorum Romae a die 19 Augusti ad 25 Octobris 1968 celebrati. Romae, Curia generalis OFMCap., 1969; II, 428. ↑
13. Cf. Acta Capituli Generalis LXXIX Ordinis Fratrum Minorum Capuccinorum. Romae a die 1 iunii ad 11 iulii 1982 in Collegio S. Laurentii a Brundisio celebrati. Roma, Curia Generalis OFMCap., 1983; 232; Cf. Fr. Iglesias (a cura di), Constitutiones Fratrum Minorum Capuccinorum post Concilium Vaticanum II retractatae (a.1968-1988). I. Textus. Romae, Curia generalis OFMCap., 1988; 60, note 7. ↑
14. Cf. J.-C. Cominardi, Quand la louange prend toute la place. Prier avec saint François (Presence de saint François, 36). Paris, Les Editions Franciscaines, 1994; 164-180. ↑
15. Cf. I. Rodriguez Herrera – A. Ortega Carmona, Los Escritos de San Francisco de Asis… (Publicaciones del Instituto Teológico Franciscano). Murcia, Editorial Espigas, ²2003; 88-89. ↑
16. Scritti di san Francesco d’Assisi. Translated by F. Olgiati and C. Paolazzi. Introduction and notes by C. Paolazzi in FF ² 2004 p. 175, nota 8. ↑
17. Cf. I. Rodriguez Herrera – A. Ortega Carmona, Los Escritos… 89. ↑
18. Cf. 1Cor 4,21; Eph 4,2 ↑
19. Cf. Phil 4,5. ↑
20. Cf. Mt 21,4-5. ↑
21. Zac 9,9 expresses the post-exilic expectation of a non-Zealot messiah who renounces violence and who in that sense is meek. In Mt the meaning of praytēs and prays derives from a Christology structured in OT terms: Jesus is the “peacemaker king” riding on a donkey and a colt (Mt 21,5), he is wise, meek and humble for those who are “weary and oppressed”, who are consoled by the light and easy yoke of the wisdom of Jesus, and to whom he addresses the words: “learn from me” (Mt 11,29), which is the same thing as discipleship. Cf. H. Frankemölle, praytēs, prays in Dizionario esegetico del Nuovo Testamento II, 1087-1088. ↑
22. Cf. Mt 11,29. A typically Semitic thought pattern: the Hebrew concept of ‘āni, which underlies the Matthean text, leads us to conclude that by prays (meek) we are also to understand the humble condition of the Messiah. Cf. W. Bauder – H.-H. Esser, Umiltà, mansuetudine in Dizionario dei concetti biblici del Nuovo Testamento… 1890. ↑
23. Cf. L. Hardick, Povertà in Dizionario Francescano 1553-1559. ↑
24. Cf. J. Garrido, La forma di vita di santa Chiara (Presenza di S. Francesco 35). Milano, Edizioni Biblioteca Francescana, 1989; 287. ↑
25. Cf. Constitutiones Ordinis Fratrum Minorum Capuccinorum saeculorum decursu promulgatae. Vol. I. Constitutiones Antiquae (1529-1643). Anastatic edition. Vol. II. Constitutiones Recensiores (1909-1925). Anastatic edition. Accedunt Constitutiones an. 1896 Bibliographia et Indices. Roma, Curia generalis OFMCap., 1980-1986. For a specific reference to what is said above, modified vol. I, 53; 105-106; 172-173; 248; 360; 485; 596; vol. II, 89; 242; 396); 504. ↑
26. Cf. Constitutiones … saeculorum decursu promulgatae vol. I, 63; 122; 189; 266; 398; 527; 617; vol. II, 129; 276; 428; 541. ↑
27. Cf. A. Ernout – A. Meillet, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine. Histoire des mots. Paris ⁴1959; 201; Ae. Forcellini, Lexicon totius latinitatis. Secunda impressio anastatice confecta quartae editionis aa. 1864-1926. Patavii 1965II, 292. ↑
28. Cf. L. Iriarte, Vocazione francescana. Sintesi degli ideali di san Francesco e di santa Chiara. Quarta edizione italiana… Bologna, Centro Editoriale Dehoniano, 2006; 189. ↑
29. Acta Capituli generalis specialis… 1968; II vol., 429. ↑
30. Cf. C. Vaiani, La via di Francesco (Presenza di San Francesco 41). Milano, Ed. Biblioteca Francescana, 1993; 38-69. ↑
31. J. Corriveau, Circular Letter n. 17: 7.4; cf. also Circular Letter n. 20: 5.3. ↑
32. Schema Constitutionum nostrarum. Textus continuus quinquies emendatus cum indice alphabetico (Pro manuscripto ad usum PP. Capitularium). Romae, Officium Scretariatus C.C.L., 1968; n. 93,3 (p. 59). ↑
33. Cf. Acta Capituli generalis specialis… 1968; I, 425. ↑
34. Cfr. Acta Capituli generalis specialis… 1968;, II, 430. ↑
35. Cf. Fr. Iglesias (a cura di), Constitutiones… I. 66. ↑
36. Cf. Br. John Corriveau, Circular Letter n. 24 (22 May 2005) n. 6.2; VII PCO, n. 26. ↑
37. Cf. A. Ernout – A. Meillet, Dictionnaire étymologique…; sub voce: cura; Ae. Forcellini, Lexicon totius latinitatis… IV, sub vocibus: secure, securus. ↑
38. Cf. F. Iozzelli, La vita fraterna nell’Ordine Francescano primitivo in C. Di Nardo – G. Salonia (a cura), La “Fraternitas” di Francesco d’Assisi. Novità e attualità. Giulianova, Edizioni Italia Francescana, 2003; 88-90. ↑
39. Cf. Circular Letter n. 15 (Solidarity and interdipendence) of Br. John Corriveau (1 November 1999). ↑
40. Cf. also Caritas in veritate n. 38-39; Pontifical council for justice and peace, Compendium of the social teaching of the Church; br. John Corriveau, Circular Letter n. 15 (1 November 1999). ↑
41. Cf. also Project 2006, 43,4; 45,3-4. ↑
42. Cf. Constitutiones … saeculorum decursu promulgatae. vol. I, 55; 108; 174; 252; 599; vol. II, 94; 246; 400; 511. ↑
43. Cf. CICLSAL, Fraternal Life in Community n. 50; 67; Vita consecrata 63. ↑
44. Cf. Atti dell’83° Capitolo generale…. vol. II; 834. ↑
45. Cf. Fr. John Corriveau, Scelte coraggiose per un mondo più fraterno. Lettera circolare n. 24 (22 maggio 2005), n. 6.1. ↑
46. Cf. Atti del Capitolo generale LXXXII celebrato in Roma… dal 25 giugno al 16 luglio dell’Anno Santo 2000. Edizione ufficiale a cura di Fr. Felice Cangelosi… Roma, Curia Generale OFMCap, 2001; 713. ↑