RICHARD OF MEDIAVILLA. - Franciscan philosopher and theologian, called doctor solidus, b. ca. 1249, d. ca. 1307-1308. Biographical information is scanty and uncertain; he is believed to be of English origin, but the identification of Mediavilla with Middletown in England is still debated, in comparison with Menneville and Moynerville in France.
He studied at Oxford; around 1278-80 he is found in Paris. In 1283-85 he was part of the commission set up to examine the writings of Peter John Olivi (v.). In Sept. 1284 he obtained the license to teach as master, which he exercised until June 1287. He was magister et socius of St. Louis of Toulouse in Naples (cf. Analecta franciscana, 7 [1951], p. 14). On 20 Sept. 1295 he was elected superior of the province of Paris. It is unlikely that he returned to England.
R.'s authentic works are: the commentary on the books of the Sentences (book I separately, Venice 1479; the 4 books together, in two vols., ibid. 1307-1309), delivered in the years 1282-84, but written in 1295; 45 quaestiones disputatae, to which R. often refers in his other writings, probably composed in 1284 (unpublished, except the XIII in De humanae cognitionis ratione, Quaracchi 1883, pp. 221-245; for the titles cf. E. Hoedda, Les quaestiones disputatae de R. de M., in Recherches de science religieuse, 6 [1916], pp. 500-13); three Quodlibet (Venice 1507), held respectively in 1285, 1286 and 1287; Quaestio de privilegio papae Martini IV (Quaracchi 1925): it is an extensive defense of the privilege granted to the Mendicant Orders of hearing confessions without the prior approval of bishops and parish priests; Quaestio de gradu formarum (ed. R. Zavalloni, Louvain 1951, in the series Philosophes médiévaux); and four sermons, delivered ca. the years 1281 and 1283.
A traditionalist with respect to the Franciscan school, he often made himself independent, reconnecting to Thomist positions or simply admitting them as probable. He gave particular prominence to the sciences and to canon law. In theology R. was faithful to St. Bonaventure in various theses: theology is a practical science; Grace and charity are not really distinct; the will is the basis of the supernatural virtues; composition of matter and form in the Angels and their multiplication within the same species; duality of filiation in Christ, etc. He oriented himself toward Thomism, without fully embracing it, in the denial of seminal reasons, of the sin of the Angels in the first instant, of the possibility of the Incarnation of the Word without sin, and likewise on the impeccability of Christ, etc.
He showed himself more independent from Thomism and from Aristotelianism in philosophy, where, while generally keeping to the path of St. Bonaventure, he took positions of his own and gave particular value to experience, willingly orienting study toward nature. In psychology he was a moderate realist on the question of universals; he denied the univocity of being in God and in the creature, and combated the possibility of eternal creation. In psychology he admitted the plurality of forms; the principle of individuation is given by the incommunicability of the essence and not by matter signed by quantity; he attributed to the will the primacy over the intelligence, admitting, as the source of freedom, the self-determination of the volitional act.
It can be said that R., more analytical than systematic, is a Bonaventurian open to Thomism with frequent personal views, even in physics, where he is regarded as a precursor. Great was the influence he had afterward, even outside the strictly scientific field, as on St. Bernardino of Siena. Today he is being studied again with sympathy.
Bibliography10 works
Gaudenzi Melani