I. Outstanding Expositor of the Middle Ages

1. CALLED. AND SET APART TO PROPHETIC EXPOSITION

Joachim gained far greater repute as, an expounder, of prophecy than any other personage, of the Middle Ages, Indeed, in the later, Joachimite school of prophetic interpretation a unique restoration of prophecy to power and influence took place accompanied by a remarkable penetration into ecclesiastical land even secular literature. Strange as his teachings may seem to modern ears in many respects, certain major points nevertheless continued for centuries to influence the minds of men respecting the divine counsels. Not only the’ “Joachimites” and’ the Spiritual Franciscans, but also Dante, Wyclif, Cusa, Huss, and some of the Reformers were definitely molded by certain principles enunciated by Joachim. ^{2Dollinger, Prophecies, p. 106; W. Beveridge, “Joachimites,” Hastings, op. cit., vol. 7, p. 567.}PFF1 685.1

Picture 2: THREE GREAT MEDIEVAL FIGURES
Illustrious spokesmen on prophecy from the middle ages-bernard of Clairvaux (d. 1153), Joachim of Floris (d. 1202), and Arnold of Villanova (d.c. 1313). See pages 632, 743 ff. For Bernard and Villanova.
Page 685PFF1 685

Joachim formed one of the first links of a long spiritual chain extending through St. Francis, the Spirituals with their apocalypticism and poverty, and on “to the later forms of ascetic, mystic, and antiecclesiastical movements that preceded the Reformation and even persisted afterwards.” ^{3George La Piana, “Joachim of Flora: A Critical Study,” Speculum, April, 1932 (vol. 7, no. 2), pp. 259, 260.}PFF1 685.2

Joachim is said to have been by turns a courtier, traveler, missionary, and contemplative hermit. He made a pilgrimage in early life to the Holy Land ^{4Buonaiuti has pointed out that this controverted pilgrimage to Jerusalem is proved by a statement of Joachim himself, in his book on the four Gospels.(Ernesto Buonaiuti, Introduction, p. xxii, and footnote, p. 93, in his modern edition of Joachim, Tractatus Super Quatuor Evangelia.)} at a time when Jerusalem was still held by the successors of the Crusaders, though threatened by the surrounding Moslems. According to the account of this early visit, he was converted after seeing some calamity, possibly a pestilence; and this pilgrimage had—a definite influence on his interest in prophecy—indeed, it was there that the conception of a call to the exposition of prophecy first came to him. ^{5Edmund G. Gardner, “Joachim of Flora,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 8, p. 406.}PFF1 686.1

Born of wealthy parents, Joachim was, in his youth, introduced to the court of Roger II of Sicily. But after a short residence there he broke away in disgust and went on his pilgrimage to Egypt and the Holy Land, retracing Christ’s footsteps and giving himself over to severe ascetic exercises. On his return—Joachim joined the Cistercian monks, first as a lay brother and volunteer preacher, and finally as a priest and abbot. ^{6Coulton, Five Centuries, vol. 2, pp. 114, 115.}PFF1 686.2

About 1177 he became abbot of the Cistercian Abbey at Corazzo. Having already entered upon a period of intense Bible study and contemplation, especially in the interpretation of the hidden meaning of Scripture, Joachim found the duties of his office an intolerable hindrance to this higher calling, In 1182 he appealed to Pope Lucius III to relieve him of the temporal care of the abbey, and obtained permission to dwell in any Cistercian house.PFF1 686.3

2. RETIRES FROM ABBACY TO PURSUE STUDIES

Already noted for his Scriptural “research and explication,” Joachim, with express permission from the pope, retired, from the abbacy, and gave himself exclusively to his studies at the Abbey of Casamari, where the monk Lucas—afterward archbishop of Cosenza—was assigned as secretary. Day and night Lucas and two other monks assisted Joachim as scribes on the three major works upon which he was engaged simultaneously. For a year and a half he applied himself to “dictating and correcting,” though continuing to perfect the books until the time of his death. These writings were Liber Concordiae Novi ac Veteris Testamenti (Book of the Harmony of the New and Old Testament), Expositio ... in Apocalipsim (Exposition of the Apocalypse), and Psalterium Decem Cordarum (Psaltery of Ten Strings).PFF1 686.4

Two other popes—Urban III, in 1185, and Clement III, in 1187—urged him to complete his work and submit it to the Holy See. In 1192 he was summoned by the Cistercian leaders to appear, to answer the charge of apostasy. ^{7J. C: Robertson, op. cit., vol. 5, p. 340.} Later, with the approval of Celestine III, Joachim founded a new monastery of stricter rule at Fiore, or Flora (in the instep of the Italian boot), which became the center of thirty or forty monasteries. ^{8Henry Bett, Joachim of Flora, pp. 16, 17.} In 1200 Joachim publicly submitted his writings to the examination of Innocent III, but died before any judgment was passed.PFF1 687.1

It is still an unsettled question whether Joachim attained great fame during his lifetime, ^{9La Piana, op. cit., p. 279.} but after his death his influence rose on the crest of the Franciscan wave. He had a high reputation as an expositor and was even reverenced by many as a prophet.PFF1 687.2

3. DISCUSSIONS WITH KINGS AND PRELATES

It was inevitable that in later years traditions should cluster about Joachim. In these traditions Joachim was assumed to have exercised a powerful influence over important personages, secular as well as ecclesiastical. According to Roger de Hoveden, his reputation at length reached the ears of Richard I, called the Lion-hearted, king of England, who resolved to hear for himself, and engaged Joachim in discussion over the interpretation of the prophecies. ^{10Roger de Hoveden, Annals, entry for 1190, vol. 2, pp. 176-180.} Both Richard the Lion-hearted and Philip Augustus of France, on their way through the Mediterranean to the Holy Land for the Third Crusade, in 1190, are said to have held conferences with Joachim at Messina, wherein Richard was greatly impressed by the prophecies of the Apocalypse. And in 1191, it might be remarked, Sicily was a halfway house for the crusading princes. Another story relates that Joachim caused Henry VI to desist from his cruelties, and that Henry requested him to expound the prophecy of Jeremiah. ^{11J. C. Robertson, op. cit., vol. 5, p. 340. This evidently refers to the pseudo-Joachim commentary on Jeremiah long ascribed to him.}PFF1 687.3

English and French bishops of high standing were said to have sought his advice, and his predictions were said to have caused a great stir, even in the distant north, before his writings were widely known. Perhaps his contemporaries knew that he was said to have declared to the king of England and his bishops that an Antichrist would soon appear, and would usurp the papal chair.PFF1 688.1

Hoveden gives this sketch of the views expounded during Richard’s visit with Joachim. Revelation 12 and 17 were under discussion. The symbolic woman of Revelation 12, Joachim asserted, is the church, clothed with Christ, the Sun of Righteousness. The church’s head, crowned with twelve stars, is Christ, whose crown is the Catholic faith preached by the twelve apostles. The dragon is the devil, working principally through seven persecuting powers—Herod, Nero, Constantius, Mohammed, Melsermut, Saladin, who at that time possessed Jerusalem, and Antichrist. These seven are also the heads of the beast in Revelation 17. Saladin, Joachim averred, will lose the Holy City within seven years of the capture of Jerusalem, and Antichrist, the last of the seven, is already born in the city of Rome, and is to be elevated to the Apostolic See in fulfillment of 2 Thessalonians 2:4. ^{12Hoveden, op. cit., vol. 2, pp. 177, 178; see also Paul Fournier, Etudes sur Joachim de Flore et ses doctrines, p. 5, note 2. Fournier does not endorse Hovenden’s account, but considers it an exaggeration or distortion of Joachim’s thought by later narrators.}PFF1 688.2

Richard replied with the usual concept of Antichrist as a Jew, from the tribe of Dan, to reign in the temple at Jerusalem. ^{13Hoveden, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 179.} A number of bishops and other learned ecclesiastics joined in the controversy. Many arguments were adduced on both sides, the matter remaining undecided. ^{14Ibid., p. 180.} Thus the keen interest in prophecy engendered by Joachim’s innovations in exposition is attested. Significantly enough, it was the concern of eminent statesmen as well as of churchmen.PFF1 689.1

4. ONLY A STUDENT WITH KEEN UNDERSTANDING

Dante (d. 1321) voiced the general opinion of his age that Joachim had been “endowed with prophetic spirit.” But Joachim himself asserted that he was no prophet, in the proper sense of that term; that he had only the spirit of understanding, of deep penetration and knowledge, or of rightly interpreting the prophetic content of the Old and New Testaments, and of construing the course of events in the world and the church from the prophecies, types, and analogies of the Bible. ^{15Dollinger, Prophecies, p. 107; J. C. Robertson, op. cit., vol. 5, pp. 340,341.}PFF1 689.2

According to Döllinger, ^{16Dollinger, Prophecies, p. 106.} Joachim was a keen theologian, trained in careful study of the Scriptures, although in order to make his writing appear to have come from special illumination, others maintained that he was destitute of scholastic training. But Buonaiuti rejects the traditional view that Joachim was a noble, and regards him as having risen from the peasantry. He bases this on Joachim’s calling himself a homo agricola (a farmer) from his youth up. ^{17Cited in La Piana, op. cit., p. 271.} Certainly Joachim’s mystic or spiritual illumination did not take the place of study, but rather led to closer examination of Scripture. The mystics, it might be added, claimed to see divine truth through the inner vision of the soul, by reflecting, brooding, and waiting for light. Joachim, and the Joachimite school that followed the trail that he blazed, exemplified Mysticism, believing that the world was growing old, and that the time of her change was at hand.PFF1 689.3

Later Joachim was variously adjudged. He was called a pseudo prophet by Baronius, but he was supported by early papal approbation of his works; his prophetic teachings were not disparaged by the Fourth Lateran Council’s condemnation of his teaching concerning the Trinity (1215). Half a century after his death his teachings were condemned by a French council (Arles, 1260), but they were never condemned by a pope. ^{18Dollinger, Prophecies, pp. 107-110, 122.}PFF1 690.1

Although his writings made little impression during his lifetime, thirty years after his death he became the oracle of his time, and continued to hold the place of paramount interest in wide circles for about a century thereafter. His two principal books were printed in Venice in 1519 and 1527 respectively, but no longer occasioned any unusual notice. In the nineteenth century he was so little known that some scholars denied that he had ever written anything, and others attributed to him many of his followers’ writings of a much later date. Thorough investigation by Denifle and others, and more recently by Grundmann and Buonaiuti, has sifted the evidence so that we are now able to get a true picture of his writings and his influence.PFF1 690.2

To sum it up briefly: Joachim was the turning point marking the return of the historical view of prophecy as opposed to the Tichonius-Augustine view.PFF1 690.3

In Joachim we find “a typical and complete renascence of the apocalyptic spirit with which the early Christian generations were saturated”; his motives were not primarily theological, but he used whatever theology was concerned with his interpretation of history. ^{19Ernesto Buonaiuti, Gioacchino da Fiore (Rome Collezione Meridionale Editrice, 1931), p 8, translated in La Plana, op. cit., p. 270.}PFF1 690.4