Medieval Philosophy

by Peter S. Adamson

clearly against the ethos of poverty. His Ethics emphasizes the need for wealth as a component of the good life, if only because it enables us to show generosity towards others. As for the Franciscans’ claim that they could coherently abandon all ownership of goods, the secular masters responded that this is, in fact, impossible. Everyone must at least be guaranteed the basic means of subsistence. This is why one may be excused for stealing food if one is starving to death. Godfrey of Fontaines introduces the idea of “natural ownership,” a kind of inalienable right so fundamental that one cannot even give it away voluntarily. I’d like to dwell for a moment on how extraordinary this is: we’re seeing the emergence of the notion of a basic economic right. Of course, that is not to say that Godfrey is developing a systematic theory of human rights, but it is a significant step along the way to such theories, something we would scarcely have expected to find within the context of a politicized debate over religious asceticism. The secular arguments damaged the Franciscan case, but the friars’ cause was arguably harmed still more by poverty zealots among their number who demanded a more radical approach than the one defended by Bonaventure. The main protagonist here is Peter Olivi, who set the theme of poverty within an apocalyptic view of history.12 For him, Francis of Assisi was the “angel of the sixth seal” from the Book of Revelation, whose role was to usher in a new and fin...