OLIVI (OLIEU), PIETRO di GIOVANNI. — Friar Minor, scholastic master, and leader of the Spiritual group, born in Sérignan (Languedoc) c. 1248, died in Narbonne on 14 March 1298.
I. LIFE
A Friar Minor of Béziers at the age of twelve, he was sent to the Order’s studium generale in Paris, where his teachers were Guglielmo della Mara, Giovanni Peckham, and Matteo d’Acquasparta. In 1277 he taught in Provence, where he soon became involved in the spiritual movement that sought the reform of the Order and of the Church according to the tendencies of the rigorists and Gioachino da Fiore (v.). From then on, superiors and masters of the conventual group opposed to the zealous friars sought to conflate in a single condemnation both his Apocalyptic Postils and his scholastic questions and his theses on the strict observance of the Franciscan Rule. The General Chapter of Strasbourg (1282) had his writings examined by seven doctors and bachelors of Paris, who, without allowing O. to clarify his thought, listed in the Letter, known as that of the seven seals, 22 propositions, which the accused was required to endorse without reservation. Moreover, in a Rotulus they censured 34 theses extracted from his scholastic Quaestiones and demanded that the reading of his writings be strictly prohibited. In the autumn of 1283, O. subscribed « secundum sanum intellectum » to the 22 propositions of the Letter. Moreover, in a Note sent from Nîmes and in a Letter from Montpellier to Raimondo Gaufredi and other zealous friars (1285), he defended himself against 19 erroneous propositions attributed to him by his opponents. Shortly before his death, O. made an important declaration in eight points concerning the Franciscan observance of poverty, followed by a magnificent profession of Catholic faith and unconditional obedience to the reigning pope, Boniface VIII, expressly named.II. WRITINGS AND DOCTRINE
O.’s writings are divided as follows:1. Scholastic writings
First place belongs to the 118 Quaestiones in secundum Librum Sententiarum (ed. B. Jansen, 3 vols., Quaracchi 1922–26), which embrace almost the whole of speculative and moral philosophy. Vigorous accusations were raised against q. 51, in which O. expounds his theory concerning the manner in which the soul is united to the body. According to this theory, only the principles of vegetative and sensitive life, distinct substantial forms, directly inform the human body and are formally united with it, whereas the principle of intellectual life does not directly and in itself inform the human body, but is united to it through substantial coherence by means of the principle of sensitive life. If the intellectual form were directly and formally united with the body, the human body, according to O., would thereby become spiritual and immortal, because the form not only communicates itself to matter but also absorbs its entire being. O.’s theory should be related to the thesis of the plurality of the substantial forms of the soul and of the existence of a spiritual matter in which their union takes place, professed at that Kilwardby (v.) and the Franciscan Riccardo da Mediavilla, and should also be considered in the light of the five Quodlibeta (Venice 1509), in which O. deals extensively with the « colligantia potentiarum » intimately united to the « radicatio animae in substantia corporis » (B. Jansen, s. V. in LThK, VII, cols. 709–11).O.’s doctrine concerning the manner in which the soul is united to the body, already censured in the Letter of the Seven Seals (1283), was denounced to the Council of Vienne. The Council took the mitigating circumstances into account, especially the passion-filled atmosphere in which the accusations against O. were presented, and preserved his memory from a nominal condemnation. Without any personal allusion, in the decree Fidei catholicae fundamento (6 May 1312) it declared that henceforth anyone who obstinately asserted « quod anima rationalis seu intellectiva non sit forma corporis humani per se et essentialiter » was to be regarded as a heretic (Denz-U, no. 481), against two other so-called errors improperly attributed to O.: a) that St. John had preserved the order of events « narrando, quod Christo iam mortuo, unus militum lancea latus eius aperuit » (ibid., no. 480; O. never taught the contrary, but merely considered also the possibility that Christ was struck by the lance while still alive, as other spiritual authors before him had done, without formally contradicting the Gospel); b) that the Council regarded as more probable the opinion according to which Baptism not only remits original sin to infants but also confers grace and habitual virtues « tesi non pro illo tempore quoad usum » (ibid., no. 483; O. had expounded the two opinions without pronouncing in favor of one to the exclusion of the other). qq. 52 and 57, on the immortality of the soul and free will, are true models of exposition. In the qq. on knowledge (60–74), O. closely follows St. Augustine and St. Anselm. Augustinian, too, is his doctrine concerning the transmission of original sin, the implicit culpability of the involuntary movements of concupiscence, and the gravity of venial sin (qq. 110, 118). The 118 Qq. in II Sent. alone would suffice to secure O. a place of honor among the scholastics of the thirteenth century. Mention should also be made of the brief treatises De quantitate and De perlegendis philosophorum libris (cf. F. Ehrle, art. cit. in bibl., pp. 479–81).
2. Exegetical writings
O.’s exegetical work comprises glosses on almost all the sacred books, from Genesis to the Apocalypse. Also worthy of note are the Principia generalia in S. Scripturam, Expositio super Dionyssi de angelica hierarchia, and probably also De hierarchia ecclesiastica. The Postilla in Apocalypsim is the most noteworthy, because it exerted a profound influence in Franciscan Spiritual circles. In it O. expounds the decline of the Church and the advent of the kingdom of the spirit according to the speculations of Gioachino da Fiore. The Spirituals abused it against the superiors of the Order and against the pope himself; and because of the extravagances to which it gave rise, Giovanni XXII condemned it in a public consistory, as heretical, against the unity of the Church and the authority of the Pope (8 February 1326).3. Ecclesiastical-Franciscan writings
First of all, the Qq. de perfectione evangelica (begun as early as 1270–74); in addition, the Expositio in Regulam s. Francisci, the Tractatus de paupere rerum usu, and the Q. (fragmentary) de indulgentia Portiunculae (Acta O.F.M., 14 [1895], p. 139 ff.). Of general ecclesiastical interest, with particular regard to the history of fundamental theology, are the Qq. de perfectione evangelica; De infallibilitate romani pontificis; De renuntiatione papae; An papa possit in omni voto dispensare, to which may be added qq. 18–19 of the first Quodlibet: An papa habeat universalissimam potestatem; An aliquis ex mandato papae teneatur pro defensione rei temporalis proeliari. O. answers affirmatively, without any reservation, the question whether all Catholics owe obedience to the Roman pontiff « tamquam regulae inerrabili in fide et moribus », and clearly expounds the « modus inerrabilitatis » both of the Church in general and of the see in Rome and of the Pope. Then, in q. 13, he treats of the renunciation of s. Celestino V and of the obedience that the faithful owe to his successor Bonifacio VIII.The fragmentary and largely unpublished state of O.’s writings does not permit an overall judgment. They are of unequal value. The declaration of the Council of Vienne does not compromise the soundness of his teaching in matters of faith, and therefore his doctrine does not deserve the charge of heterodoxy with which his adversaries persistently sought to characterize II. In the Franciscan tradition, O. occupied a worthy place among the masters who flourished after s. Bonaventura and before G. Duns Scoto. With regard to the doctrine of the Church and the pope, O., among the theologians of the thirteenth century, is the one who dealt most profoundly and most correctly with the question of supreme authority and papal infallibility.