Spiritual Franciscans

The term Spiritual Franciscans refers to two distinct yet interrelated phenomena within the first two centuries of the Order of Friars Minor: a broad and diverse current advocating for a rigorous interpretation of the Rule, present even during the lifetime of Francis of Assisi; and a specific, organized movement that emerged in the mid-1270s and persisted for approximately fifty years.^[1]

The early movement of the Spiritual Franciscanism reflects the ideals and lifestyle adopted by Francis of Assisi and his first companions prior to the formal institutionalization of the Order of Friars Minor. During this formative period, apostolic poverty was practiced radically and directly, unencumbered by complex regulations or rigid legal frameworks; the group's cohesion relied primarily on the personal charisma of the Poverello.^[2] This primitive fraternity, lacking material security and centralized organization, derived its stability from its small scale and shared spiritual purpose.^[3] However, as the Order expanded, the influx of new members—often from the clergy or intellectual circles—rendered this informal way of life increasingly untenable against the administrative demands of a growing international institution.^[4]

Following the death of Francis, internal tensions intensified regarding the interpretation and application of the Rule of Saint Francis. In his final days, Francis composed his Testament, which demanded literal adherence to the ideal of poverty; however, the papacy soon declared the document non-binding. This ruling facilitated structural modifications that were viewed by some as necessary institutional adaptations and by others as a fundamental betrayal of the founding charism.^[5] Within this climate of resistance, the "Spiritual" faction emerged. They advocated for a rigorous and absolute observance of poverty—specifically the principle of Usus pauper (poor use)—and rejected the practical compromises and dispensations introduced by the Order's hierarchy over time.^[5]

The Franciscan Spirituals did not represent a mere continuation of the movement's origins; rather, they emerged as a rigorous faction within an Order that had become increasingly large and hierarchical. They advocated for a strict observance of the Rule, viewing any institutional concession as an erosion of Franciscan identity. Consequently, they opposed the "Conventual" elements of the Order who sought compromises to facilitate the organization's integration into contemporary society .^[6] Over time, certain segments of the Spirituals developed complex theological frameworks influenced by prophetic and apocalyptic traditions, interpreting the history of the Order through a Joachimite lens of providential history .^[7]

The fundamental distinction between the early Franciscan era and the rise of the Spirituals lies in the conceptualization of poverty. In the early years, poverty was an immediate, lived experience; for the Spirituals, it became a doctrinal principle to be defended amidst escalating tensions and overt conflict with both the Order's leadership and the Papacy. By the 14th century, this ideological rigidity led to formal condemnations and systematic persecutions, marking a definitive departure from the relative simplicity of the movement's inception .^[8] The doctrine of the absolute poverty of Christ (also termed apostolic poverty) reachied its polemical zenith between 1210 and 1323. The core premise of the doctrine was that Christ and the Apostles possessed no property whatsoever, neither individually nor as a collective community. This debate culminated in the so-called theoretical poverty controversy of 1322–23.^[9]

Drawing inspiration from their founder, Francis of Assisi, early Franciscans operated as itinerant preachers who strictly observed the injunction in Luke 9:3:

Take nothing for the journey, neither walking stick, nor sack, nor food, nor money, and let no one take a second tunic.

This radical commitment to the mendicant ethos—specifically the practice of begging for alms—fostered friction with traditional monastic orders, who competed for the same charitable resources, and with local donors burdened by the friars' frequent appeals. As the Order expanded, it faced the pragmatic necessity of maintaining infirmaries for the elderly and supporting friars engaged in university-level theological training.^[10]

To reconcile these needs with the vow of poverty, a legal artifice was developed: property and gifts were nominally held by patrons in trust for the friars' use. This allowed the Order to function without being perennially destitute. The "Spirituals" viewed these arrangements as a betrayal of the founder's intent, arguing that the Rule required a restricted "poor use" (usus pauper) of goods. The Franciscans were initially authorized by Pope Gregory IX to employ non-members to manage their material needs, while the friars themselves maintained the "simple use of fact" (simplex usus facti) without legal ownership. However, two distinct factions emerged: the Zelanti, who lived austere, isolated lives in strict adherence to the testament of Francis of Assisi, and those in urban convents who required liturgical furnishings and libraries for study and preaching. Bonaventure, elected Minister General in 1257, attempted to mediate these tendencies and is often regarded as the "second founder" for providing the Order's first General Constitutions.^[11] External accusations of hypocrisy from secular clergy and Joachimite apocalypticism further radicalized the Zelanti, who became known as the Spiritual Franciscans.^[12]

In the early 14th century, the conflict between the Spirituals and the Conventual Franciscans reached a breaking point.^[13][14] The Spirituals, led by the Joachimite Peter Olivi, adopted extreme positions that prompted a severe crackdown by Pope John XXII.^[15]

In the 1279 bull Exiit qui seminat, Pope Nicholas III had codified the arrangement where legal ownership of Franciscan property was vested in the Holy See. Nicholas declared that renouncing all ownership, "both individually but also in common," was a holy path established by Christ.^[16] However, John XXII found this "juridical fiction" untenable. In 1322, he removed the ban on debating Nicholas III’s bull and commissioned a theological review. The majority of experts concluded that the doctrine undermined the Church's right to property. Despite the Franciscan chapter in Perugia declaring the doctrine "true and catholic," John XXII issued the bull Ad conditorem canonum (1322), which abolished the Papacy's role as the legal owner of Franciscan goods, forcing the friars to accept ownership.^[17] He mocked the existing system, stating it was "ridiculous to pretend that every egg and piece of bread... belonged to the pope." This was followed by the bull Cum inter nonnullos in 1323, which formally condemned the doctrine of absolute poverty as "erroneous and heretical."^[18]

Resistance was led by the Minister General Michael of Cesena, the English provincial William of Ockham, and Bonagratia of Bergamo. In 1324, Louis the Bavarian aligned with the Spirituals and accused the Pope of heresy. John XXII responded with the bull Quia quorundam, clarifying that "living without property" did not necessitate having nothing in common. After Michael and Ockham fled to the protection of Louis in 1328, the Emperor attempted to depose John XXII and installed the Spiritual Franciscan Pietro Rainalducci. However, the majority of the Franciscan houses submitted to the Pope at the 1329 Chapter in Paris. John XXII issued a final rebuttal in the bull Quia vir reprobus (1329), and by 1330, the primary insurgents, including the Antipope and Michael of Cesena, had largely submitted or been marginalized.^[12]

The Fraticelli were a heterodox religious movement that emerged in the 14th century within Franciscanism, developing as a radical offshoot of the Spiritual Franciscans.^[19] Following the death of Francis of Assisi, the tension between those advocating for absolute poverty and the moderate elements of the Order led to the formation of dissident groups. Notable among these was the faction led by Fra Liberato and Angelo Clareno, who established communities in Rome, the March of Ancona, and the Kingdom of Naples.^[20] Their austere lifestyle, combined with the patronage of various nobles and several bishops, significantly complicated efforts by the Inquisition to suppress the movement.^[20] After Clareno's death, the movement lost its central charismatic leadership, yet its legacy was maintained by figures such as Philip of Majorca and spread across various regions of Italy.^[21] The Fraticelli eventually split into two primary branches: the Fraticelli de paupere vita, who emphasized the practical observance of poverty and the imitatio Christi, and the Fraticelli de opinione (or "Michaelists"). The latter adopted the theological theses of Michael of Cesena, asserting that Christ and the Apostles owned nothing, either individually or in common.^[20]

During the 14th century, the Fraticelli expanded primarily in Central Italy, particularly in Perugia and the environs of Assisi. Despite the measures enacted against them by Pope John XXII in 1334, they maintained considerable influence and even held monasteries such as Monte Salvi.^[22] During this period, they developed a polemical doctrine against the official clergy, accusing them of simony and the loss of spiritual authority. However, while deeming such clergy unworthy, the Fraticelli generally maintained the validity of the sacraments they administered.^[23]Persecution intensified in the 15th century. In Rome and Umbria, many Fraticelli were tried and burned as heretics, though some remained steadfast in their adherence to apostolic poverty, choosing martyrdom over recantation.^[24] The rise of the Observant Franciscans, who received papal approval, ultimately undermined the Fraticelli by reclaiming the spiritual and popular ground they had long occupied.^[25] By the late 15th century, the movement had ceased to exist as an organized force, surviving only in isolated pockets within the Umbrian countryside.^[24] Subsequent attempts to revive their ideal of poverty, such as those led by the Spanish Franciscan Filippo Berbegall, were decisively suppressed by Pope Eugene IV.^[24]

The Calabrian abbot Joachim of Fiore is regarded as one of the most distinctive figures in medieval religious thought. His theological framework, predicated on a complex allegorical interpretation of Scripture, divided human history into three distinct ages corresponding to the persons of the Trinity: the Age of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.^[26] This historicist vision, which prophesied a future era of spiritual perfection and divine illumination, exerted a profound influence during the 13th century, despite Joachim's specific Trinitarian doctrines being condemned at the Fourth Council of the Lateran in 1215.^[27] Joachite theories were enthusiastically embraced by the Franciscans, who viewed them as a prefiguration of a community of "spiritual poor" destined to renew the Church.^[28] In particular, the Spiritual Franciscans identified their own Order with the "Contemplative" order foretold by Joachim.^[29] While moderates interpreted this prophecy as an exhortation toward internal reform and the restoration of evangelical poverty, more radical factions—influenced by figures such as Gerard of Borgo San Donnino—adopted an apocalyptic reading. These groups anticipated the advent of the Antichrist and the subsequent dawn of a new age defined by peace and charity.^[30]

Franciscan Joachism fostered a prolific literary output, ranging from the works of Angelo Clareno and Ubertino of Casale to pseudo-Joachite treatises such as the Liber de Flore and the Vaticinia Anselmi, which merged historical analysis with prophetic visions of spiritual renewal.^[31] Within these texts, the papacy was frequently characterized as corrupt and antithetical to the original Franciscan ideal, with the regeneration of the Church entrusted to a future "Angelic Pope".^[32]

Between the 14th and 15th centuries, Joachite thought persisted within Fraticelli circles and among the Provencal Beguines, continuing to inspire expectations of a universal renewal rooted in poverty and charity.^[33] In later spiritual literature, this legacy resurfaces in the Historia septem tribulationum and notably in Ubertino of Casale’s Arbor Vitae Crucifixae Jesu Christi, a work that helped cement Joachim’s presence within the Paradiso of Dante Alighieri.^[34]

Angelo Clareno was a Franciscan friar, author, and translator, recognized as a leading figure of the Spiritual movement between the 13th and 14th centuries. After joining the Order of Friars Minor, he became a staunch advocate for a literal adherence to the Rule of Saint Francis and the ideal of absolute poverty, opposing the increasing institutionalization of the Order. Internal tensions led him, alongside Pietro da Macerata (later known as Fra Liberato), to petition Pope Celestino V for the recognition of a new eremitical fraternity. This group, known as the Poor Hermits or Clareni, was formally separated from the Conventual Franciscans.^[35]

Initially protected by Cardinal Napoleone Orsini, Angelo assumed leadership of the group following Liberato's death. He established several communities in Lazio, the Marche, and the Kingdom of Naples, organizing them into provinces governed by custodes and guardians, modeled after the original Franciscan structure.^[36] According to Douie, letters and inquisitorial records from 1334 suggest that while the members practiced rigorous poverty and devotion, some elements of the movement adopted a polemical stance against the secular clergy and Pope John XXII.^[37]

Angelo spent his final years at the Monastery of Subiaco, where he focused on the translation of Greek ascetic texts, including the Rule of Saint Basil and the Ladder of Divine Ascent by John Climacus. These works were instrumental in introducing Eastern patristic spirituality to the West.^[38] He is also noted for his Expositio Regulae Fratrum Minorum, a commentary on the Franciscan Rule characterized by evangelical rigor that eschewed the scholastic and theological mediations of authors such as Bonaventure.^[39] In his primary historical work, the Liber chronicarum sive tribulationum ordinis Minorum, Angelo presents a dramatic narrative of the Order's perceived decline from the ideals of Francis of Assisi. Written likely during his early years in Subiaco, this chronicle remains a critical source for understanding the Spiritual movement and its conflicts with ecclesiastical authorities.^[40]

Following his death c. 1337, Angelo's reputation for sanctity spread rapidly. His associate Simone da Cassia compiled his letters and sayings, while the Celestine prior Tommaso l’Inglese composed an Office in his honor. Although he received popular veneration as a "Blessed" and was included by the Bollandists in the Acta Sanctorum for June 15, he never received official canonization from the Church.^[38] Angelo's work and thought represent a synthesis of early Franciscan rigorism and Eastern mystical influences, serving as a significant reference for the later Observants and subsequent spiritual reforms within the Order.^[41]

Peter John Olivi (Pietro di Giovanni Olivi) was a Provencal Franciscan theologian and a preeminent figure within the Spiritual movement. Born in Sérignan, near Béziers, he was raised in a region deeply influenced by Joachitism, an intellectual heritage that significantly shaped his religious and eschatological views.^[42] After joining the Order of Friars Minor, he served as a lector in Florence and other centers of learning, where he gained prominence for his doctrinal rigor and his nuanced synthesis of spirituality and moral realism.^[43] Olivi’s theological reflection centered on evangelical poverty and the concept of usus pauper (poor use), which he considered intrinsically linked to the vow of poverty. He argued that an unrestricted use of material goods would render the renunciation of ownership a mere legal fiction. Consequently, he maintained that the path to Christian perfection required a strict adherence to the example of Christ and the Apostles through the total renunciation of temporal goods.^[44] However, he avoided radical asceticism, asserting that the application of such rules required pastoral discretion and a consideration of specific circumstances, thereby discouraging excessively harsh judgments of fellow friars.^[45]

While staunchly opposing perceived abuses within the Order—such as the procuratorial system and the privilege of burial within Franciscan churches—Olivi maintained a fundamentally moderate stance and remained loyal to the Church hierarchy.^[45] He contended that even the Pope lacked the authority to grant dispensations from the vow of poverty, as papal power was intended to edify spiritual life rather than dismantle the evangelical ideal.^[46] Philosophically, Olivi is regarded as a transitional figure between Bonaventure and the later Scholasticism of Duns Scotus and William of Ockham. Although not always ranked among the primary medieval philosophers, his thought demonstrates significant autonomy and rational coherence.^[47] His principal works include the Quodlibeta,^[47] commentaries on the Sentences,^[48] and the Lectura super Apocalypsim (Commentary on the Apocalypse). The latter, influenced by Joachim of Fiore, envisioned a spiritual renewal of the Church and the dawn of the Age of the Spirit; however, it was condemned in 1319 due to its prophetic and apocalyptic assertions.^[49] Olivi’s influence was enduring: while he remained a guiding light for the Spirituals and the Beguines of Provence, his theses frequently provoked hostility from ecclesiastical authorities, who viewed his positions as a precursor to heterodoxy.^[50]

Ubertino da Casale was a Franciscan friar, theologian, and leading figure within the Spiritual movement. A disciple of Peter Olivi, Ubertino became a prominent, albeit controversial, advocate for the literal and rigid observance of the Rule of Saint Francis and his Testament. He emerged as a primary leader of the order's most intransigent faction, dedicated to the defense of paupertas absoluta (absolute poverty).^[51]

Ubertino played a central role in the theological and jurisdictional disputes that divided the Franciscan Order in the early 14th century. He represented the Spirituals during the inquiry commissioned by Pope Clement V and was a key protagonist at the Council of Vienne (1311–1312), where he fervently argued for evangelical poverty against the positions of the Conventuals.^[52] Following the failure of his appeals at the Curia, he withdrew to La Verna, where he composed his major work, Arbor Vitae Crucifixae Iesu Christi. This extensive mystical-theological treatise integrates meditations on the Passion, biblical exegesis, and Joachimite apocalypticism.^[53][53] Dedicated to "all true faithful of Christ and friends of holy Poverty," the Arbor Vitae is regarded as a seminal work of Franciscan mysticism.^[54] Douie describes the work as a "prose poem of the life and passion of Christ," noting its synthesis of religious fervor, theological reflection, and personal introspection.^[55] The text includes sharp invectives against clerical corruption and the perceived opulence of the Order, alongside lyrical passages devoted to Poverty and Saint Francis.^[56]

In his later years, Ubertino aligned himself with the imperial party of Louis the Bavarian, openly opposing Pope John XXII and preaching against him in Como in 1329.^[53] A letter from Pope Benedict XII (1341) refers to him as "quondam Ubertinus de Elia de Casale," suggesting he was already deceased by that date, possibly in violent circumstances according to later tradition.^[53]

Ubertino's thought, deeply influenced by apocalyptic and Joachimite themes, left a significant mark on medieval spirituality and Italian literature. In the Divine Comedy, Dante Alighieri references him in Paradiso (Canto XII, 124–126), pairing him with Matteo d'Acquasparta as representatives of two opposing extremes that drifted from the Franciscan ideal.^[51] Douie suggests that Dante drew upon imagery from the Arbor Vitae for the hagiographic cantos of Francis and Dominic.^[57] Despite its polemical tone and radical historical vision, Ubertino’s work remains a primary testament to the reformist and mystical tensions within the Franciscan movement during the 13th and 14th centuries.^[58]

Michael of Cesena (c. 1270 – 1342) was an Italian Franciscan friar and theologian who served as the Minister General of the Order of Friars Minor from 1316 to 1328. He is primarily known for his staunch opposition to Pope John XXII during the conflict over apostolic poverty and for leading the dissident faction later known as the "Michaelists."

Born in the late 13th century in the settlement of Ficchio, near Cesena, Michael is traditionally associated with the Foschi family. He entered the Franciscan Order and likely received his early education at the studium of Cesena, attached to the convent of San Francesco (on the site now occupied by the Malatestiana Library).^[59] In 1316, while teaching theology in Paris, he was elected Minister General during the General Chapter of Naples. His candidacy was supported by twenty-eight electors and bolstered by the patronage of King Robert of Naples and Queen Sancha of Majorca.^[59] During his generalate, Michael advocated for structural reforms and expanded evangelical missions, while navigating the growing rift between the "Spiritual" and "Conventual" factions of the Order. Although he maintained a rigorous interpretation of Franciscan poverty, he initially adopted a cautious stance toward the more radical elements of the movement.^[59]

At the General Chapter of Perugia in 1322, the Order formally asserted that Christ and the Apostles owned nothing, neither individually nor in common, exercising only a "de facto use" (usus facti) of goods. Michael, alongside Bonagrazia of Bergamo and William of Ockham, championed this position, which challenged the earlier Bonaventurian synthesis.^[59] Pope John XXII responded by issuing a series of papal bulls—Ad conditorem canonum, Quia quorundam, and Cum inter nonnullos—which declared the doctrine of "de facto use" heretical, arguing that Christian perfection was rooted in charity rather than poverty. Michael countered by citing the decretal Exiit qui seminat issued by Pope Nicholas III.^[59] Summoned to Avignon in 1327 to defend his views, Michael became increasingly alienated from the Curia. On May 26, 1328, fearing imprisonment, he fled Avignon with Bonagrazia and Ockham. The group sought refuge first in Pisa and subsequently at the court of the Holy Roman Emperor, Louis the Bavarian.^[59]

Michael's followers, the Michaelists, formed a radical dissident current within the Franciscan tradition. While sharing the Fraticelli's emphasis on absolute poverty and their critique of ecclesiastical wealth, the Michaelists further developed sophisticated theories regarding the limits of papal authority.^[59] They argued that a pope who fell into heresy forfeited his office ipso facto and could be judged by the faithful—a significant development in medieval ecclesiology.^[59] Despite his excommunication, Michael remained a prominent intellectual figure in Northern and Central Italy. From his exile in Munich, he and his circle produced several polemical appeals between 1328 and 1338 against John XXII and his successors. These writings introduced innovative political concepts concerning the separation of spiritual and temporal powers.^[59]

The Apostolic See, through a series of papal documents issued by Honorius III, Gregory IX, Alexander IV, Nicholas III, and John XXII, intervened repeatedly to formalize, regulate, and interpret the Franciscan way of life. Particular attention was given to the Spiritual Franciscans, proponents of a rigorous observance of poverty whose views often conflicted with the ecclesiastical hierarchy. These documents were fundamental not only in defining the relationship between the Order and the Church but also in establishing the canonical limits of the Franciscan poverty ideal.^[60][61]

Representing the first official attestation of papal favor toward the Friars Minor, the bull Cum dilecti served as a formal ecclesiastical recognition during a period when many bishops viewed pauperist movements as potential sources of heresy. Honorius III mandated that the followers of Francis of Assisi be welcomed as "Catholic and faithful men," declaring them members of a "religion approved by the Roman Church." In a historical context where the distinction between orthodoxy and heterodoxy was often indistinct, this document functioned as a certification of Catholicity. Furthermore, the bull reflects the Curia's intent to channel evangelical zeal into established canonical frameworks, preventing the movement from diverging from ecclesiastical discipline. It marks the initial step in a prolonged mediation between Franciscan poverty and institutional obedience.^[61]

Two years after his initial support, Honorius III again intervened to defend the friars, particularly in France, where local prelates had been reluctant to host them due to concerns that their itinerant preaching might bypass diocesan jurisdiction. Through the bull Pro dilectis, the Pope reaffirmed that the Friars Minor belonged to an "approved order" and were to be welcomed as devout Catholic religious. While the document introduced no new legislation, its political significance was profound: it effectively transitioned Francis’s original vision—a poor, itinerant brotherhood—into a formally recognized ordo. This marked the evolution of the movement from a charismatic group into an institutional body under the protection of the Apostolic See.^[61]

Cum secundum addressed the first challenges of internal discipline by mandating a compulsory year of novitiate and prohibiting both unauthorized departure from the order and vagrancy. These measures were necessitated by the rapid growth of the Order, which required a shift away from its initial spontaneous character. The bull represents a pivotal moment in which the Franciscan evangelical charism began to be institutionalized through canonical prudence. Honorius III sought to safeguard the movement's original intent while integrating it into the formal safeguards of the Church, serving as a direct precursor to the Regula Bullata.^[61]

With Solet annuere, Honorius III formally approved the Regula Bullata of Saint Francis, drafted with the assistance of Cardinal Ugolino (the future Gregory IX). This document established the Friars Minor as a permanent entity within canon law. By confirming the Rule as a binding normative text, the Apostolic authority concluded the experimental phase that had begun in 1209. Theologically, this approval signaled that Francis’s "evangelical form of life" was not an alternative to the Church structure, but an integral part of it, effectively merging charism with institutional authority.^[61]

This document granted the friars the privilege of celebrating Mass in their own oratories and using portable altars, provided they respected existing parochial rights. This concession arose from the need to reconcile the friars' mendicant and eremitic lifestyle with liturgical requirements. The text reflects Honorius III’s pragmatic approach: despite their lack of property and formal churches, the friars needed the faculty to celebrate the Eucharist without violating ecclesiastical norms. It serves as a concrete example of the Holy See adapting discipline to the unique needs of a highly dynamic mendicant order.^[61]

Through this bull, the Pope commissioned both the Friars Minor and the Dominicans for missions within the Almohad Caliphate (North Africa). Consequently, the Franciscan Order assumed an active role in global evangelization, demonstrating that apostolic poverty was not a withdrawal from the world but a tool for missionary service. The document underscores the Church's confidence in the friars’ charism, authorizing them to preach, baptize, and reconcile apostates. Their commitment to poverty became a primary means of testimony and conversion in non-European contexts.^[61]

Following the death of Francis, Pope Gregory IX initiated the construction of a basilica dedicated to him and encouraged the faithful to contribute through the granting of indulgences. The bull served both a practical and symbolic purpose: it transformed the memory of the saint into a universal cult, linking his charism directly to the ecclesiastical hierarchy. Recolentes demonstrates the integration of the canonized Francis into the official system of sanctity. Franciscan poverty, originally a radical and peripheral choice, was thus repositioned as an object of veneration and a formal model for ecclesial life. ^[61]

This bull marks the official canonization of Saint Francis. Gregory IX, who as Cardinal Ugolino di Conti had been Francis's protector and confidant, presented the saint as a "man after God's own heart." The text employs significant biblical imagery, depicting Francis as a "new Samson" and a "new Abraham," prepared to renounce everything to follow the Lord. Although the bull does not explicitly mention the stigmata, it interprets Francis's poverty as a sign of conformity to the "poor and crucified Christ." While the canonization provided official recognition of his evangelical life, it also framed Francis within a model more closely monitored by the Church. ^[61]

As the first official commentary on the Regula Bullata, this bull constitutes the juridical core of the debate regarding Apostolic poverty. Gregory IX clarified that Francis's Testament carried no legislative weight and that the friars were not bound by all evangelical counsels, but only by those explicitly contained within the Rule. Furthermore, he established that the friars held no property rights—either individually or communally—though they could utilize movable goods through lay intermediaries (nuntii). This distinction between spiritual poverty and the use of goods became the foundation for subsequent papal interpretations. While the bull sought a compromise between practical necessity and Franciscan ideals, it also became a source of tension between the Spirituals and the Conventuals. ^[61]

With this bull, Pope Alexander IV rescinded Innocent IV's Etsi animarum, which had restricted the pastoral activities of the Mendicant orders. It restored the friars' authority to preach, hear confessions, and administer sacraments. This decision was a response to pressures arising from the conflict with the secular clergy, who felt their authority challenged by the Mendicants' presence. The Pope sought to restore ecclesial peace and reaffirm the friars' apostolic role. This move represented the culmination of a process begun under Honorius III, whereby the friars transitioned from a charismatic movement into a fully integrated component of the Church's pastoral care. ^[61]

The bull Exiit qui seminat, promulgated by Pope Nicholas III in 1279, codified the legal status of Franciscan poverty. It stipulated that all assets used by the Friars Minor—both movable and immovable—belonged exclusively to the Holy See, while the friars were granted only the "simple use of fact" (simplex usus facti) of necessities. This legal framework aimed to preserve the ideal of absolute poverty while allowing the Order to function within society through an administrative system managed by papal agents (apostolic syndics). The bull sought to reconcile the diverging factions within the Order, specifically the Conventuals and the Spirituals, although tensions regarding the practical interpretation of poverty persisted.^[62] In the 14th century, Pope John XXII reinterpreted and ultimately dismantled the provisions of Exiit qui seminat, rejecting the premise that Christ and the Apostles owned nothing. Through successive decrees, he declared this theological position heretical, effectively terminating the legal structure established by Nicholas III and intensifying internal conflicts within the Franciscan movement.^[60]

Issued during the Council of Vienne, the bull Exivi de Paradiso reaffirmed that the ownership of Franciscan goods remained with the Church, restricting the friars to the mere use of such goods. The document provided specific guidelines on the practical limits of poverty (usus pauper) and the management of daily necessities. John XXII frequently invoked this bull to justify restrictions against the Spirituals, arguing that evangelical poverty did not imply an absolute or abstract renunciation of all goods, but was primarily defined by obedience to the Church and spiritual detachment.^[60]

Promulgated on 7 October 1317, Quorundam exigit confirmed the validity of the Franciscan Rule as approved by Pope Honorius III, while emphasizing that its observance was inseparable from obedience to ecclesiastical superiors and the papacy. The bull asserted that opposing the directives of superiors constituted a violation of the Rule itself; consequently, defiant friars were subject to ecclesiastical sanctions, including excommunication. By establishing a clear boundary between the pursuit of evangelical life and institutional authority, Quorundam exigit marked a decisive step in the suppression of the Spirituals. It positioned John XXII as the ultimate arbiter of doctrinal and disciplinary rectitude within the Order, addressing the inherent tension between radical poverty and the requirements of ecclesiastical governance.^[60]

The bull Sancta Romana atque universalis Ecclesia, issued on 30 December 1317, reaffirmed the authority of the Pope and bishops over Franciscan discipline and formally condemned the practices and doctrines of the Spirituals. Extreme forms of voluntary poverty were deemed heretical when they led to conflict with the hierarchical Church. The text asserted that grace and the sacraments could not be separated from the visible Church, and those who claimed to be the "true poor of Christ" in opposition to ecclesiastical authority were declared to be outside the Catholic community. Through this decree, John XXII established that holiness and poverty must be exercised within the institutional framework of the Church, identifying radical deviations as both disciplinary and doctrinal threats.^[60]

Historically, this bull was instrumental in defining Church doctrine on property and poverty, providing the legal basis for the repression of dissident groups (such as the Fraticelli) and reinforcing papal primacy over monastic movements.^[60]

Published on 23 January 1318, Gloriosam Ecclesiam further upheld the Franciscan Rule of Honorius III but reiterated that obedience to the Holy See was an essential principle for all friars. John XXII characterized dissent as a threat to the unity of the Church, equating it with heretical behavior. The document ordered rebellious friars to cease preaching, return to the official obedience of the Order, and submit to established penalties. By encouraging bishops and superiors to exercise rigorous disciplinary oversight, the bull transformed internal dissent into a theological and legal matter punishable as heresy.^[60]

This decree represented a pivotal moment in the Franciscan conflict, shifting the confrontation from a disciplinary dispute to a systematic repression of the Spiritual faction. It consolidated the centralized governance of the Order and set a precedent regarding the relationship between spiritual liberty and institutional obedience.^[60]

Promulgated by Pope John XXII on 8 December 1322, the papal bull Ad Conditorem canonum addressed the legal and doctrinal complexities raised by the Spiritual Franciscans. The Pope rejected the distinction between the use of goods (usus) and legal ownership (dominium), asserting that simple usage inherently implies a form of possession. He argued that the claim to "possess nothing" while consuming goods was logically and juridically inconsistent. The bull clarified that the ideal of absolute poverty, as interpreted by the Spirituals, was impractical; furthermore, it affirmed the Church's right and duty as an institution to administer property according to its own legal framework. Consequently, John XXII presented a vision of property that was not merely material but normative: the use of a good creates a right that the Church, as the representative of divine order, is entitled to regulate.^[60]

The document carries a dual significance: it effectively ended the formal separation of use from ownership, refuting the Spirituals' theses, while establishing a theological and political stance that granted the ecclesiastical hierarchy the final authority over the interpretation of the Rule of Saint Francis. Ad Conditorem canonum thus marked a decisive shift in defining the relationship between papal authority, the management of ecclesiastical assets, and the ideals of poverty, consolidating the pontiff's role as the ultimate arbiter in Franciscan disputes.^[60]

Published on 26 March 1322, the bull Quia nonnumquam sought to manage the escalating debate regarding the poverty of Christ and the Apostles through a pragmatic approach, stopping short of an immediate condemnation. The text permitted theologians and members of the Order to freely discuss and comment on questions of evangelical poverty, particularly concerning Pope Nicholas III's 1879 bull Exiit qui seminat, which viewed Franciscan poverty as a spiritual instrument rather than a formal legal right. While the bull allowed for scholarly exchange, it did not endorse the Spirituals' positions; instead, it served to contain the discourse within specific boundaries under direct papal oversight.^[60]

The content reflects a synthesis of prudence and resolve. John XXII acknowledged the utility of theological debate, given that the matter remained legally unsettled. However, he imposed strict limitations, as any shift toward separatist propaganda or defiance of ecclesiastical authority was deemed improper or potentially heretical. Strategically, the Pope allowed for a controlled discussion on the doctrine of poverty while simultaneously reinforcing his role as the supreme judge and guarantor of the unity of both the Order and the Universal Church.^[60]

The bull Cum inter nonnullos, issued on 12 November 1323, followed a General Chapter of the Franciscans held in Perugia in 1322, which had openly supported the thesis that Christ and the Apostles owned nothing, either individually or in common. In clarifying the doctrine, John XXII explicitly condemned this position. The bull declared that denying all property rights to Christ and the Apostles contradicted Scripture and theological reason, rendering such a belief a formal heresy. The Pope insisted that absolute poverty could not be established as a dogma of faith, as the Gospels record Christ receiving goods and money, and the Apostles possessing the necessities of life.^[60] Beyond a mere judgment, the document held significant doctrinal and legal weight, setting the limits of permissible interpretation within the Church and strengthening papal supremacy. It proved a turning point for the Franciscan Order, marking a definitive rupture with the Spirituals and closing the debate on absolute poverty as a mandatory norm.^[60]

Promulgated on 16 November 1329, Quia vir reprobus was issued following the flight of key figures of the movement, including the Minister General Michael of Cesena and William of Ockham, who sought protection at the court of Emperor Louis the Bavarian. The bull served as the Pope's final response to the challenge posed by these dissident friars, reinforcing a framework where papal authority and ecclesiastical property were legitimized by both divine law and natural reason.^[60] In the text, John XXII expanded upon the arguments presented in Ad Conditorem canonum and Cum inter nonnullos, accusing the Spirituals of heresy, schism, and rebellion. He categorically rejected their doctrine, reiterating that the claim that Christ and the Apostles possessed no goods, whether individually or collectively, was doctrinally untenable.^[60]

The bull Decet Sanctam, issued by Pope Boniface IX early in his pontificate, is a primary source for the history of the Clareni, as it marked their formal reconciliation with the Church after decades of suspicion and persecution.^[63] Addressed to the bishops of several dioceses in Central Italy—including Fermo, Foligno, Camerino, Spoleto, Narni, Amelia, and Ascoli—the document recognized the regularity of the Poor Hermits' life and ordered local inquisitors to protect them, effectively ending a period of systemic tension and accusations of heresy.^[63]

Promulgated by Pope Pius V in 1568, the bull Beatus Christus salvatoris mandated the final incorporation of the Clareni into the Order of Friars Minor Observant, terminating the autonomy of this specific spiritual branch.^[64] With this decree, Pius V concluded a process of integration that had begun with the 1391 Decet Sanctam, through which Pope Boniface IX had previously recognized the orthodoxy and ecclesial legitimacy of the eremitic communities following the teachings of Angelo Clareno.^[63][65]

• Douie, Decima Langworthy (1978). The Nature and Effect of the Heresy of the Fraticelli. Manchester: Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0719001390.
• Lambertini, Roberto (2006). "Non so che fraticelli...": identità e tensioni minoritiche nella Marchia di Angelo Clareno (PDF) (in Italian). Spoleto: Centro Italiano di Studi sull'Alto Medioevo.