Article contents
From Prophecy to Mysticism: Bonaventure's Eschatology in Light of Joachim of Fiore
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 July 2016
Extract
In the Middle Ages, the destiny of the historical process was a subject of intense thought, fueled by an overarching notion of historical change and the impending final age. Of the many theologians who contributed to this discussion none stands out in more colorful form than the Cistercian abbot, Joachim of Fiore (1135–1202). Joachim made his mark by describing history as a process of patterns unfolding according to the relationships of the Trinity. For Joachim, history was an ongoing work of the living God, and he sought to elucidate the innermost mystery of the trinitarian relationships in the working-out of history. The whole process of history, he maintained, was progressing toward a higher spiritual level that would be characterized by the image of the mystical body of Christ in the final age, an age that he held would take place in this world. Although Bonaventure dismissed Joachim early in his academic career as ignorant and simplex, his rise to minister general in an order divided by radical Joachimism may have influenced his view of the abbot's theology. E. Randolph Daniel has shown that Bonaventure borrowed one of Joachim's patterns of history to define his eschatology more clearly in terms of Christocentricity. Like Joachim, Bonaventure held that the final age would take place in this world, and would be characterized by mystical peace. Potential Joachimist influence may also be detected in Bonaventure's Legenda maior.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Fordham University Press
References
1 Joachim of Fiore, also referred to as the “Calabrian abbot,” was a Cistercian abbot of a monastery in Corazzo in the early 1180s. Around 1190, he left the Cistercian order and founded his own monastery at San Giovanni in Fiore in the alpine sila plateau of Calabria. For the details of his life, see McGinn, Bernard, The Calabrian Abbot: Joachim of Fiore in the History of Western Thought (New York, 1985), 3–37; Grundmann, Herbert, Neue Forschungen über Joachim von Fiore (Marburg, 1950), 31–64.Google Scholar
2 I Sent. d. 5, a. 2, q. 2, dub. 4 (I, 121). “Et ideo ignoranter Ioachim reprehendit Magistrum, et quia, cum esset simplex, non est reveritus Magistrum, ideo iusto Dei iudicio damnatus fuit libellus eius in Lateranensi Concilio, et positio Magistri approbata.” The critical edition of Bonaventure's works used in this study is the Opera Omnia, ed. Collegii, PP. Bonaventurae, S., 10 vols. (Quaracchi, 1882–1902). Latin texts are indicated by volume and page number in parentheses.Google Scholar
The following abbreviations are used throughout the text: Sent. = Commentary on the Sentences; Brev. = Breviloquium; Hex. = Hexaëmeron; De plant. par. = Tractatus de plantatione paradisi; Itin. = Itinerarium mentis in Deum; LM = Legenda maior; Lig. vit. = Lignum vitae. Google Scholar
3 Joachimism became an issue in the dispute between the Franciscans and the secular masters at the University of Paris when Gerard of Borgo San Donnino published his Liber introductorius in evangelium aeternum, which the secular master, William of St. Amour, described as evidence that the mendicants were purveyors of heresy. The relationship between Gerard and his brother, John of Parma, minister general from 1247 to 1257, is not entirely clear but John was somehow linked with his radical brother. He resigned as minister in 1257 and nominated Bonaventure as his successor. For a brief summary of the controversy, see Randolph Daniel, E., “St. Bonaventure: Defender of Franciscan Eschatology,” in S. Bonaventura 1274–1974, ed. Bougerol, Jacques, 4 vols. (Grottaferatta, 1974), 4:797–98; Moorman, John, A History of the Franciscan Order (Oxford, 1968), 124–31.Google Scholar
4 Emmerson, Richard K. and Herzman, Ronald B., The Apocalyptic Imagination in Medieval Literature (Philadelphia, 1992), 34–75.Google Scholar
5 Reeves, Marjorie, “The Originality and Influence of Joachim of Fiore,” Traditio 36 (1980): 271–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Ibid., 283. The notion of a progressive movement of history was discussed by Rupert of Deutz, Anselm of Havelberg, Honorius of Autun, and Gerhoh of Reichersberg. See Classen, Peter, “Res Gestae, Universal History, Apocalypse: Visions of Past and Future,” in Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century, ed. Benson, Robert L. and Constable, Giles (Cambridge, 1982), 404–8.Google Scholar
7 Reeves, , “Originality,” 274–76; eadem, , Joachim of Fiore and the Prophetic Future (New York, 1977), 8. On Augustine's Pattern of Seven Ages see De Genesi contra Manichaeos 1.23 (PL 34.190–93).Google Scholar
8 Reeves, , “Originality,” 277–85; Randolph Daniel, E., “Abbot Joachim of Fiore: The De Ultimis Tribulationibus,” in Essays in Honour of Marjorie Reeves , ed. Williams, Anne (Harlow, 1980), 170; Lerner, Robert, “Medieval Return to the Thousand-Year Sabbath,” in The Apocalypse in the Middle Ages , ed. Emmerson, Richard K. and McGinn, Bernard (Ithaca, 1992), 51–71.Google Scholar
9 Reeves, , “Originality,” 293.Google Scholar
10 For the study on Joachim's arboreal figures, see Reeves, Marjorie and Hirsch-Reich, Beatrice, The Figurae of Joachim of Fiore (Oxford, 1972), 1–19.Google Scholar
11 Reeves, Marjorie, “The Liber Figurarum of Joachim of Fiore,” in Medieval and Renaissance Studies, ed. Hunt, Richard and Klibansky, Raymond (London, 1950), 182.Google Scholar
12 On Joachim's patterns, see Randolph Daniel, E., “Joachim of Fiore: Patterns of History in the Apocalypse,” in Apocalypse in the Middle Ages, 72–88.Google Scholar
13 Randolph Daniel, E., “The Double Procession of the Holy Spirit in Joachim of Fiore's Understanding of History,” Speculum 55 (1980): 474.Google Scholar
14 Reeves, Marjorie, “Dante and the Prophetic View of History,” in The World of Dante: Essays on Dante and His Times, ed. Grayson, Cecil (Oxford, 1980), 54; Crocco, Antonio, Gioacchino da Fiore e il Gioachimismo (Naples, 1976), 91–114; Ratzinger, Joseph, The Theology of History in St. Bonaventure, trans. Zachary Hayes (Chicago, 1971), 108–18.Google Scholar
15 Bloomfield, Morton, “Joachim of Flora: A Critical Survey of His Canon, Teachings, Sources, Biography and Influences,” in Joachim of Fiore in Christian Thought, ed. West, Delno C. (New York, 1975) 1: 260–71; Crocco, , Gioacchino da Fiore, 91–114; McGinn, Bernard, “The Abbot and the Doctors: Scholastic Reactions to the Radical Eschatology of Joachim of Fiore,” Church History 40 (1971): 30–47. McGinn sums up the controversy by saying (34), “the relationship of the third age to the second is the center of the most heated debates over just how radical Joachim's eschatology really is. Those who wish to preserve his fundamental orthodoxy claim that by the third age is meant nothing more than the purified church with its institutions and sacraments intact, in other words, Joachim is just another orthodox reformer. Other scholars see the third age as effecting serious changes in the institutions of the present church (especially with regard to the papacy, the sacraments, and the supremacy of the clerical order), and thus challenging the centrality of Christ in the divine scheme of salvation.” CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16 Joachim of Fiore, Liber de concordia novi ac veteris testamenti (Venice, 1519; repr. Frankfurt a. M, 1964), bk. 2, tr. 1, ch. 8, fol. 9va. “Ita enim existimanda est apud deum universa multitudo credentium ac si unus homo qui constat ex carne et sanguine et spiraculo vite.” Google Scholar
17 Ibid. Google Scholar
18 Daniel, , “Double Procession,” 478.Google Scholar
19 Ibid., 476.Google Scholar
20 Reeves, and Hirsch-Reich, , Figurae (n. 10 above), 7–9. On the viri spirituales, see Reeves, Marjorie, The Influence of Prophecy in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1969), 175–83; eadem, Joachim and the Prophetic Future (n. 7 above), 29–58; McGinn, Bernard, “Apocalyptic Traditions and Spiritual Identity in Thirteenth-Century Religious Life,” in The Spirituality of Western Christendom 2: The Roots of the Modern Christian Tradition , ed. Rozanne Elder, E. (Kalamazoo, 1984), 1–26; Workman, Deborah, “The Spirit Clothed in Flesh” (Ph.D. dissertation, Kent State University, 1986), 212–28; cf. Ratzinger (Theology of History, 41–42), who notes that Joachim designated the final order of the seventh age as viri spirituales as well as ecclesia contemplativa, ecclesia contemplantium, and ordo contemplantium. Google Scholar
21 Reeves, , Influence of Prophecy, 18–20.Google Scholar
22 Daniel, , “Double Procession,” 480.Google Scholar
23 Ibid., 481.Google Scholar
24 Ibid., 483.Google Scholar
25 Randolph Daniel, E., “St. Bonaventure's Debt to Joachim,” in Medievalia et Humanistica, ed. Colgan, Paul Maurice (Totowa, 1982), 61–74.Google Scholar
26 Brev. prol., 2 (V, 203). In the Breviloquium Bonaventure defines the ages of history as follows: “The first from Adam to Noe, the second from Noe to Abraham, the third from Abraham to David, the fourth from David to the Babylonian exile, the fifth from the exile to Christ, the sixth from Christ to the end of the world; while the seventh, running concurrently with the sixth, begins with the placing of Christ in the tomb, and shall last until the universal resurrection.” Trans. de Vinck, José, St. Bonaventure: The Breviloquium (Paterson, N.J., 1963), 9. Bonaventure states at the end of this paragraph: “quando incipiet resurrectionis octava,” that is, “when the eighth age of resurrection will begin.” De Vinck omits this phrase from his translation.Google Scholar
27 Augustine De Genesi contra Manichaeos 1.23 (n. 7 above). For a summary of Augustine's eschatology see Daniel, , “Defender of Franciscan Eschatology” (n. 3 above), 795–96; cf. Reeves (“Originality of Joachim,” 273) who notes Augustine's ambiguity with regard to the seventh age as a symbol of historical climax. Augustine distinguished the seventh age from the eighth age of eternity without making the seventh age a distinct age of history, although his thought later changed in this regard.Google Scholar
28 Brev. 4, 4 (V, 244). Trans. De Vinck, , Breviloquium, 154.Google Scholar
29 Hex. 1, 11 (V, 331). See Ratzinger, , Theology of History (n. 14 above), 118.Google Scholar
30 III Sent. q. 3, d. 1, dub. (III, 33). “Dicendum, quod est plenitudo naturae et plenitudo gratiae et plenitudo gloriae.” Google Scholar
31 Daniel, , “Defender of Franciscan Eschatology,” 799–800.Google Scholar
32 Hex. 22, 24 (V, 441). For a discussion on the notion of the microcosm in Bonaventure's theology see McEvoy, James, “Microcosm and Macrocosm in the Writings of St. Bonaventure,” in S. Bonaventura 1274–1974, 2:309–43.Google Scholar
33 Hex. 23, 4 (V, 445).Google Scholar
34 Hex. 1, 11 (V, 331).Google Scholar
35 De plant. par. 15 (V, 578b).Google Scholar
36 Brev. prol., 2 (V, 203–4); cf. Reeves, , Influence of Prophecy (n. 20 above), 179. In Delorme's edition of the Collationes in Hexaëmeron (Florence, 1963), 160–63, a fourth time is added, that is, the time of prophecy (tempus prophetiae). Google Scholar
37 III Sent. q. 3, d. 1 dub. (III, 33). Bonaventure provides six reasons for the Incarnation as the time of fullness: “Primo, quia Deus implevit quod praefinierat…. Alia ratio est propter impletionem promissionis, quia ille nobis datus est … tertia ratio est quantum ad completionem figurarum … quarta ratio est proper plenitudinem gratiae quae fuit in Christo, quae fuit principium omnium plenitudinum … quinta ratio est propter plenitudinem generationis … sexta vero ratio est, quia tempus incarnationis est tempus sextae aetatis, in qua quidem est plenitudo et perfectio.” Google Scholar
38 Brev. 4, 4 (V, 244). Trans. De Vinck, , Breviloquium, 156.Google Scholar
39 Hex. 14, 6 (V, 394).Google Scholar
40 Hex. 15, 22 (V, 401).Google Scholar
41 Hex. 1, 11 (V, 331); cf. Ratzinger, , Theology of History (n. 14 above), 118.Google Scholar
42 For concordance of the two testaments see Liber de concordia bk. 2, tr. 1, ch. 29, fol. 18 ra–rb.Google Scholar
43 Itin. 5, 1–2, 6, 4 (V, 309, 311). Trans. Cousins, Ewert, Bonaventure: The Soul's Journey Into God, The Tree of Life, The Life of St. Francis (New York, 1978), 94–95, 106.Google Scholar
44 Hex. 3, 11 (V, 345). Trans. de Vinck, José, St. Bonaventure: On the Six Days of Creation (Paterson, N.J., 1966), 47–48.Google Scholar
45 Daniel, , “De Ultimis Tribulationibus” (n. 8 above), 170.Google Scholar
46 McGinn, Bernard, “The Influence of St. Francis on the Theology of the High Middle Ages,” in Bonaventuriana: Miscellanea in onore di Jacques Guy Bougerol, ed. de Asis Chavero Blanco, Francisco, 2 vols. (Rome, 1988), 1:113–14; idem, “Abbot and the Doctors” (n. 15 above), 44; cf. Ratzinger, (Theology of History, 14) who states: “Bonaventure believes in a new salvation in history within the limits of time. This is a very significant shift in the understanding of history and must be seen as the central historico-theological problem of the Hexaëmeron.” Google Scholar
47 Reeves, , “Originality of Joachim” (n. 5 above), 300; eadem, , Influence of Prophecy (n. 20 above), 176; Haase, Albert, “Bonaventure's Legenda Maior: A Redaction Critical Approach” (Ph.D. dissertation, Fordham University, 1990), 296.Google Scholar
48 McGinn, , “Influence of Francis,” 114. In a corrupted text at the end of collatio 16 and in a more detailed discussion in collatio 22, Bonaventure identifies the coming age of peace with the appearance of Francis. He also cites Apoc. 7:2 in reference to the hierarchized soul and those who are sealed with the sign of the living God (Hex. 23, 2–3, 14 [V, 445, 447]). The seal is also interpreted as the seal of love impressed on the contemplative soul. See Hex. 23, 11–14 (V, 446–47).Google Scholar
49 LM prol., 1–2 (EM, 4). The critical edition of the Legenda maior used is the Legenda maior S. Francisci Assisiensis , ed. Collegii, PP. Bonaventurae, S. (Quaracchi, 1941), 2–125. Since the editio minor is used, Latin texts are indicated by EM and page number in parentheses.Google Scholar
50 Reeves, and Hirsch-Reich, , Figurae (n. 10 above), 13–19. The number seven symbolizes the spirit and inner fulfillment. Joachim used a pattern of fives and sevens to illustrate the progression of history to its consummation.Google Scholar
51 LM 13, 10 (EM, 114); Haase, , “Bonaventure's Legenda Maior,” 341.Google Scholar
52 von Balthasar, Han Urs, Studies in Theological Style: Clerical Styles, trans. Louth, Andrew et al. (San Francisco, 1984), 263.Google Scholar
53 Itin. prol., 3 (V, 295).Google Scholar
54 Itin. 7, 6 (V, 313). Trans. Cousins, , Bonaventure, 115.Google Scholar
55 Itin. prol., 1–2 (V, 295).Google Scholar
56 Itin. prol., 3 (V, 295).Google Scholar
57 Ibid. Google Scholar
58 Bloomfield, , “Critical Survey of His Canon” (n. 15 above), 42.Google Scholar
59 Hex. 20, 1–30 (V, 425–30); Hex. 21, 17–33 (V, 434–36); Hex. 22, 1–23 (V, 437–41); Pseudo-Dionysius De coelesti hierarchia 3.2–3, 8.1 (PG 3.166–67); idem, , De ecclesiastica hierarchia 5.3, 7 (PG 3.503, 507). The Pseudo-Dionysius states that the goal of hierarchy “is to enable beings to be as like as possible to God and to be at one with him” (Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works , trans. Luibheid, Colm [New York, 1987], 154). It is within the framework of procession and return that Dionysius uses the categories of purification, illumination, and perfection, which Bonaventure adapts both for the soul's journey and for the historical process (Itin. 4, 3; Hex. 20, 3; 22, 16). For Dionysius, the trio of purification, illumination, and perfection underlines the progress along the path of spiritual understanding in the ascent to God. In the Hexaëmeron, Bonaventure transforms the notion of a cosmic hierarchy into a historical scheme so that hierarchical progress is not only by vertical dignity but also by development within history (Hex. 22, 16). See Ratzinger, , Theology of History (n. 14 above), 92–94; McGinn, , “Influence of St. Francis” (n. 46 above), 114.Google Scholar
60 Brev. 4, 1 (V, 241).Google Scholar
61 Hex. 22, 6–23 (V, 438–41).Google Scholar
62 Hex. 22, 22 (V, 441). “Iste est ordo seraphicus. De isto videtur fuisse Franciscus. Et dicebat, quod etiam antequam haberet habitum, raptus fuit et inventus iuxta quandam sepem.” Bonaventure is speaking here about the level of ecstasy which Francis attained and which characterizes the seraphic order. However, the word “rapture” is inserted into the text and seems to be an interpolation by the reporter of the lectures on the Hexaëmeron that Bonaventure delivered to the friars in Paris. It is unlikely that Bonaventure would use the term “rapture” synonymously with “ecstasy,” since he held that these are two different types of experience. See Hex. 3, 30 (V, 348).Google Scholar
63 Ratzinger, , Theology of History, 55. Ratzinger's position was later affirmed by McGinn (“Abbot and the Doctors,” 45) who concludes: “Francis's eschatological position has been maintained, but by depriving him of the honor of founding the Franciscans!” Google Scholar
64 Ibid., 49–55.Google Scholar
65 Daniel, , “Defender of Eschatology” (n. 3 above), 801–2.Google Scholar
66 Itin. 7, 3 (V, 312). Trans. Cousins, , Bonaventure, 112–13.Google Scholar
67 Randolph Daniel, E., “St. Bonaventure a Faithful Disciple of St. Francis? An Examination of the Question,” in Bonaventuriana 1:172–87, esp. 185–86. Daniel's argument stands against that of Ratzinger (Theology of History, 50) who claims that to ensure the order's transition to the seventh age, Bonaventure had to create institutional structures.Google Scholar
68 Hex. 22, 22 (V, 440). Trans. De Vinck, , Six Days of Creation, 352.Google Scholar
69 Hex. 22, 23 (V, 441). “Comparatio autem est secundum status, non secundum personas; quia una persona laica aliquando perfectior est quam religiosa.” Google Scholar
70 Daniel, , “St. Bonaventure a Faithful Disciple,” 186.Google Scholar
71 For the eschatological symbolism of the Franciscan Rule, see Randolph Daniel, E., “The Desire for Martydom: A Leitmotiv of St. Bonaventure,” Franciscan Studies 30 (1972): 86–87; Harkins, Conrad, “The Authorship of a Commentary on the Franciscan Rule Published among the Works of Bonaventure,” Franciscan Studies 29 (1969): 157–248.Google Scholar
72 Hayes, Zachary, “The Theological Image of St. Francis of Assisi in the Sermons of St. Bonaventure,” in Bonaventuriana 2:345.Google Scholar
73 Heinz, Hans Peter, “Dreifaltige Liebe–Gekreuzigte Liebe,” Wissenschaft und Weisheit 47 (1984): 12–22. Heinz develops Bonaventure's doctrine of cruciform love based on the De triplici via. A more detailed discussion of cruciform love is by Strack, Bonifatius, Christusleid im Christenleben. Ein Beitrag zur Theologie des christlichen Lebens nach dem heiligen Bonaventura (Werl/Westfalen, 1960), 40–150, esp. 40–50.Google Scholar
74 De tripl. via 2, 11 (VIII, 11a). Trans, de Vinck, José, “The Triple Way or Love Enkindled,” in St. Bonaventure: Mystical Opuscula (Paterson, N.J., 1960), 78.Google Scholar
75 Randolph Daniel, E., The Franciscan Concept of Mission in the High Middle Ages (Lexington, Ky., 1975), 50; idem, “Desire for Martyrdom,” 74–86.Google Scholar
76 De tripl. via 2, 8 (VIII, 9b). Trans. De Vinck, , Triple Way, 76.Google Scholar
77 Ibid. Google Scholar
78 Lig. vit. prol., 1 (VIII, 68). “Christo confixus sum cruci”; cf. Gal. 2:20 RSV.Google Scholar
79 Daniel, , Concept of Mission, 51.Google Scholar
80 Hex. 22, 6 (V, 438). Bonaventure specifically identifies the seraphic order of viri spirituales with the apostolic order of the New Testament stating that, “the apostolic order is conformed to Christ.” This is a clear affirmation of the endurance of the New Testament against those who proclaimed that the age of viri spirituales ushered in a new eternal testament (evangelium aeternum). The foremost proponent of the eternal testament was Gerard of Borgo San Donnino who, in 1254, published his Introductorius in evangelium aeternum, claiming that the Franciscan order, in light of its apocalyptic founder, would triumph in the final age. The eternal testament, the testament of the Spirit, would supersede the Old Testament and New Testament since it was given by the Holy Spirit to Francis. Thus, the New Testament and the clergy would be supplanted by the eternal testament and its bearers. Gerard's work was condemned by Pope Alexander IV in 1255. See Daniel, , Concept of Mission, 79; McGinn, , “Abbot and the Doctors” (n. 15 above), 44; Reeves, , Influence of Prophecy (n. 20 above), 176–77.Google Scholar
81 Stoevesandt, Hinrich, Die letzen Dinge in der Theologie Bonaventuras (Zurich, 1969), 65–71. Stoevesandt compares Bonaventure's eschatology with the “theology of hope” of the contemporary theologian, Jürgen Moltmann. He discovers a similarity between them, stating that both are utopic: for Moltmann the goal of the eschaton is Christian hope, for Bonaventure it is Christian love. Moreover, Stoevesandt (p. 67) claims that the innerhistorical final age for Bonaventure is speculative and passive, not active.Google Scholar
82 Vigneaux, Paul, “Condition historique de la pensée de saint Bonaventure: Christocentrisme, eschatologie et situation de la culture philosophique,” Miscellanea Francescana 75 (1975): 422–27.Google Scholar
83 De tripl. via 2, 5–8 (VIII, 9); LM 8, 1 (EM, 64); LM 13, 1 (EM, 106).Google Scholar
84 Brev. 4, 9 (V, 249–50).Google Scholar
85 LM 14, 1 (EM, 115).Google Scholar
86 Daniel, , “Bonaventure's Debt to Joachim” (n. 25 above), 68–70.Google Scholar
87 Reeves, , “Dante and the Prophetic View of History” (n. 14 above), 54; Crocco, , Giacchino da Fiore (n. 14 above), 91–114; Ratzinger, , Theology of History (n. 14 above), 109–18.Google Scholar
88 On earlier views see Bloomfield, , “Critical Survey” (n. 15 above), 260–71.Google Scholar
89 Ratzinger, , Theology of History, 118. Ratzinger claims that Bonaventure ultimately rejected Joachim's prima diffinitio because it denied Christ as center. However, he also acknowledges Joachim's influence on Bonaventure particularly with regard to historical schemes (p. 48). David Burr (“Bonaventure, Olivi and Franciscan Eschatology,” Collectanea Franciscana 53 [1983]: 28) states that Bonaventure's trinitarian structure of history “implies both yes and no to Joachim.” Daniel (“Debt to Joachim,” 70) claims that Bonaventure did not reject the abbot “but restudied him,” a position also held by McGinn (“Abbot and the Doctors,” 43). Reeves's position is more ambivalent. She states that “Bonaventure was a Joachite malgré lui (Influence of Prophecy, 181), but elsewhere maintains uncertainty as to whether or not Bonaventure “in his doctrine of history was a conscious adapter of the Joachimist expectation” (“Originality of Joachim,” 302).Google Scholar
90 Daniel, , “Double Procession of the Holy Spirit” (n. 13 above), 472. Daniel bases his argument on Joachim's text from the Liber de concordia (bk. 2, tr. 1, ch. 8, fol. 9vb.): “Quia vero unus est Pater a quo procedunt Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, unus Spiritus qui a Patre simul procedit et Filio, duo qui procedunt ab uno Patre, recte primus status ascribitur Patri, secundus soli Filio, tertius communis Filio et Spiritui Sancto.” Google Scholar
91 Daniel, , “Double Procession,” 475; cf. Eph. 4:13 RSV.Google Scholar
92 Reeves, , “Originality of Joachim” (n. 5 above), 293; eadem, , Joachim and the Prophetic Future (n. 7 above), 6.Google Scholar
93 Daniel, , “Double Procession,” 476.Google Scholar
94 Ibid., 475.Google Scholar
95 Workman, , “Spirit Clothed in Flesh” (n. 20 above), 195; cf. Crocco (Gioacchino da Fiore, 114) who also identifies the third age as the mystical body of Christ but one that is marked by the power of the Spirit and not the unity of orders.Google Scholar
96 III Sent. d. 1, a. 2, q. 3, resp. (III, 29–30); cf. Zachary Hayes, introduction to Saint Bonaventure's Disputed Questions on the Mystery of the Trinity (St. Bonaventure, 1979), 32. Hayes notes that by being molded into the image of the Son, one enters into the Son's relationship with the Father and Spirit. By becoming Christ-like the human person is conformed to the Trinity.Google Scholar
97 Francis of Assisi, Admonition 5. Saint François d'Assise. Documents , écrits et premières biographies, ed. Desbonnets, Théophile (Paris, 1968), 98.Google Scholar
98 Hex. 20, 15 (V, 428). “Quando consummabuntur passiones Christi, quas modo corpus Christi patitur.” Google Scholar
99 Hex. 22, 23 (V, 441). “Iste ordo non florebit, nisi Christus appareat et patiatur in corpore suo mystico.” Google Scholar
100 LM 13, 10 (EM, 108).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
101 Ibid. Google Scholar
102 LM 13, 5 (EM, 109). Trans. Cousins, , Bonaventure, 307.Google Scholar
103 Hex. 22, 22 (V, 441). Trans. De Vinck, , Six Days of Creation, 352.Google Scholar
104 Hex. 16, 30 (V, 408).Google Scholar
105 Hex. 16, 31 (V, 408). Trans. De Vinck, , Six Days of Creation, 249–50.Google Scholar
106 Hex. 23, 7 (V, 446).Google Scholar
107 Ibid. Google Scholar
108 Brev. 5, 7 (V, 261a). Trans. De Vinck, , Breviloquium, 209.Google Scholar
109 LM 14, 4 (EM, 118). Trans. Cousins, , Bonaventure, 318.Google Scholar
110 LM 14, 1 (EM, 115). Trans. Cousins, , Bonaventure, 315.Google Scholar
111 Throughout Bonaventure's Legenda maior there are numerous examples of Francis as an alter Christus: for example, Francis's retreat to lonely places to pray (LM 10, 3); his fasting in solitude for forty days (LM 13, 1); his manner of preaching (LM 12, 12), healing (LM 13, 6–7), and working miracles (LM 7–13); cf. Haase (“Bonaventure's Legenda Maior,” 334), who provides a longer list but without specific references to the text. See also Manselli, Raoul, “San Bonaventura e la storia francescana,” in 1274, Année Charnière: Mutations et continuitiés (Paris, 1977), 863–72. Manselli associates Francis, the angel of true peace, with the image of alter Christus. Google Scholar
112 Hex. 22, 23 (V, 441).Google Scholar
113 Lig. vit. 44 (VIII, 84).Google Scholar
114 Daniel, , “Double Procession” (n. 13 above), 477.Google Scholar
115 Joachim of Fiore, Liber de concordia, bk. 2, tr. 1, ch. 8, fol. 17 vb. Trans. Daniel, , “Double Procession,” 474.Google Scholar
116 Daniel, , “Debt to Joachim” (n. 25 above), 68.Google Scholar
117 Ibid., 69–70. Daniel states: “No theologian could describe Joachim's theology of history as Christocentric in the same sense [as Bonaventure's] but the relationship between the Son and the Holy Spirit in the secunda diffinitio points in a similar direction.” Google Scholar
118 Reeves, , “Originality of Joachim” (n. 5 above), 301. Reeves's “doubt” becomes a firm denial in McGinn (“The Significance of Bonaventure's Theology of History,” Journal of Religion 58 [1978]: 77) who clearly states that Joachim's view of history is not Christocentric. This conclusion is based on the notion of Christ as a turning point in history (“the person of Christ tends to become just another element of comparison rather than the primary analogate, the middle point that explains all.”) He does not entertain the idea of the double procession of the Holy Spirit.Google Scholar
119 Itin. prol., 3 (V, 297). “Via autem non est nisi per ardentissimum amorem Crucifixi.” Google Scholar
- 4
- Cited by