II. Pseudo-Joachim Commentaries on Isaiah and Jeremiah
Strange as it may seem, Joachim did not rise in fame so much by his own writings as by those which were later falsely attributed to him. Among the most outstanding of these pseudonymous writings are the two commentaries on Isaiah and Jeremiah. These established Joachim’s reputation as a “prophet,” and were quoted again and again by the Joachim and the Franciscan Spirituals, who succeeded them. They were, in reality, the pattern for innumerable tracts and pamphlets of like nature, appearing from then on till the time of the Protestant Reformation.PFF1 725.2
Why did these pseudo-Joachim writings find greater acceptance and a wider circulation than the genuine writings of the noted abbot of Fiore? And what are the main differences between them? Just this: The genuine writings of Joachim Were more in the realm of abstract thinking and theorizing. They were an attempt to find a new solution to the perplexing problem of the outworking of the plan of God in human history, and of the realization of God’s will in the material sphere. They were an attempt to harmonize divine revelation with everyday facts, and they expressed the strong hope that in a future age, soon to come, the complete fulfillment of all that had been predicted by revelation will take place.PFF1 725.3
To think along the lines of general principles and abstractions is in most cases too difficult for the untrained mind of the common man. He wants tangible facts and figures and things he can visualize. He wishes to lift the curtain, not from the distant future, but from his immediate future. He is interested in what is going to happen within his own lifetime. This need the writers of these commentaries both sensed and sought to supply. They were good Joachimites. They sought to write in the spirit of Joachim, but what they produced was clearly a substitute, which finally led men in a direction far away from the one intended by Joachim.PFF1 725.4
1. PAINTS GLOOMY PICTURE OF CONTEMPORARY CONDITIONS
Of the two pseudo-Joachim commentaries, the one on Jeremiah is the earlier. It is mentioned by Salimbene in 1248, by Albert of Stade in 1250, and by William of St. Amour in 1255. Kampers dates it as between 1244 and 1247, whereas the commentary on Isaiah is generally dated 1266, or shortly before. Both are very much alike in general structure and in attitude toward their own time. They paint a most gloomy picture of the general degeneration, corruption, and depravity of their own day. They point to the worldliness of the church, and charge the ambition and lustfulness of her ministers as the cause of the prevailing evil. The emperor Frederick II is considered the scourge of God to punish the fallen church.PFF1 726.1
Here is one of the differences between the two commentaries, which is regarded as a clue to the later dating of the Isaiah commentary. The earlier Jeremiah commentary sees in Frederick II the seventh head of the dragon, which is also the the Antichrist, whereas the Isaiah commentary includes Frederick and his successors, as represented by the red dragon, yet who is not himself the Antichrist but only his forerunner or his vicar; both, however, consider him to be the Little Horn of Daniel 7, and the king of fierce countenance of Daniel 8. PFF1 726.2
2. YEAR 1260 LOOKED TO As END OF PERIOD
Both commmentaries mention the year 1260 as the end of the forty-two generations or months, as Joachim himself had particularly avoided doing. The Isaiah commentary says that at that time Elijah will come or the seventh angel will sound the summons to judgment at the coming of the judge. The Jeremiah commentary speaks of the affliction of the holy city, that is, the Roman or general church, during forty-two months, ending in the year 1260. “In 60 years will be ended the affliction of the church,” it says, and speaks of a particular tribulation of three years and a half. This reference to sixty years shows that, whenever this work might have been written, it is put back ostensibly to the time of the genuine Joachim.PFF1 726.3
3. STRICTURES ON THE PAPAL COURT
Both commentaries, although upholding the orthodoxy of the Catholic faith, attack the papal system without mercy; so much so that the Protestant church historian Flacius, in 1562, and Arnold in his history of the church and her heretics (1740), considered Joachim to be a true “prophet.” Here are sample strictures:PFF1 727.1
“The papal court outstrips all others in intrigues, machinations, extortions, and blackmailing. It is full of hedgehogs, hawks, and cunning, covetous hooting owls.” PFF1 727.2
“And as the Roman Church asserts to have preeminence among all others, just as Judah claimed the same among the tribes of Israel, therefore in a special manner is the Roman Church the woman in golden dress, riding on the scarlet colored beast; she is the harlot who, without discrimination, commits adultery with all the princes of the world.” PFF1 727.3
And in another place we read, “Because of avarice and lust the church went to Egypt and Assur, to receive from the French rich benefices and from the Germans power and great honor.” According to this pseudo Joachim, the beginning of all this disaster springs from Pope Sylvester, who raised the church to worldly glory. The day on which Sylvester received the patrimony was the one on which the church ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It would have been better for Sylvester not to be born at all. All this is in striking contrast to the genuine writings of Joachim, who lauded Sylvester because under him the church began to enjoy the freedom of worship. PFF1 727.4
4. FRIVOLOUS POPES DANIEL’S ABOMINATION
Most unlike Joachim’s unfailing respect is this attitude toward contemporary popes.PFF1 728.1
“Now, frivolous popes are sitting in the chair of Peter; their hearts are hardened, they inflict the severest wounds upon the church without the least care; they despise the incense and the myrrh; their desire is gold, in order to mix strong drink in golden cups with Babylon, the world; and they defile with their outrages and depravity all sons of the church. To them the prophecy of Daniel refers in the expression, the ‘abomination of desolation.”’ PFF1 728.2
5. A FERMENT IN THEOLOGICAL THINKING
But the judgment will come, this Joachimite continues. The Imperium Ro that is, the empire of the Germans, these new Chaldeans, will be the scourge in the hand of God to punish the church. Their emperor (Frederick II) will be the destroyer. Then follow many predictions of a local nature. The empire will be reduced to a most miserable state by the invasion of the Saracens, who, according to the Isaiah commentary, will be destroyed in turn by the Mongols and Tartars. Thereupon peace will reign between the kings of Europe; the church will sit in their midst as the true light from heaven, following her original calling to contemplation and poverty. This blessed state will be interrupted only by the coming tribulation, caused by Gog and the last Antichrist, whence will follow the resurrection. PFF1 728.3
He also lashes out against the Crusades, declaring that the popes under pretext of desiring to rescue desolate and rejected Jerusalem, which Jesus declared would be destroyed, are seeking to gain temporal advantage to themselves. PFF1 729.1
These concrete, down-to-earth interpretations of the prophecies had a tremendous effect upon the common people, and gave strength to the Joachimite movement. They became a constant ferment in the development of theological thinking during the next centuries, and without doubt helped materially to prepare the ground for the Reformation in the sixteenth century. It must be remembered that succeeding= generations derived their ideas of Joachim’s teaching largely from these more extreme spurious writings which were believed to be his.PFF1 729.2