“Raban è quivi, e lucemi dallato
Il Calavrese abate Giovacchino
Di spirito profetico dotato.”—(Paradise xii.).
[14] Pseudo-Joachim de Oneribus Ecclesiæ c. iii., xv., xvi., xvii., xx., xxi., xxii., xxiii., xxx.—Ejusd. super Hieremiam c. i., ii., iii., etc.—Salimbene p. 107.—Monumenta Franciscana p. 147 (M.R. Series).
The author of the Commentary on Jeremiah had probably been disciplined for freedom of speech in the pulpit, for (cap. i.) he denounces as bestial a license to preach which restricts the liberty of the spirit, and only permits the preacher to dispute on carnal vices.
[15] Concil. Lateran. IV. c. 2.—Theiner Monument Slavor. Meridional. I. 63.—Lib. I. Sexto, 1, 2 (Cap. Damnamus).—Wadding, ann. 1256, No. 8, 9.—Salimbene Chron. p. 103.
Nearly half a century later Thomas Aquinas still considered Joachim’s speculations on the Trinity worthy of elaborate refutation, and near the close of the fourteenth century Eymerich reproduces the whole controversy.—Direct. Inquisit. pp. 4-6, 15-17.
[16] Joachimi Concordiæ Lib. IV. c. 31, 34, 38; Lib. V. c. 58, 63, 65, 67, 68, 74, 78, 89, 118.
Joachim was held to have predicted the rise of the Mendicants (v. 43), but his anticipations looked wholly to contemplative monachism.
[17] Joachimi Concordiæ Lib. I. Tract. ii. c. 6; IV. 25, 26, 33; V. 2, 21, 60, 65, 66, 84.
The Commission of Anagni in 1255 by a strained interpretation of a passage in the Concordia (II. i. 7) accused Joachim of having justified the schism of the Greeks (Denifle, Archiv f. Litt.-u. K. 1885, p. 120). So far was he from this that he never loses an occasion of decrying the Oriental Church, especially for the marriage of its priests (e.g., V. 70, 72). Yet when he asserted that Antichrist was already born in Rome, and it was objected to him that Babylon was assigned as the birthplace, he had no hesitation in saying that Rome was the mystical Babylon.—Rad. de Coggeshall Chron. (Bouquet, XVIII. 76).
[18] Rigord. de Gest. Phil. Aug. ann. 1210.—Guillel. Nangiac. ann. 1210.—Cæsar. Heisterb. dist. v. c. xxii.