MATTHEW OF ACQUASPARTA
(c. 1237–1302)

Matthew of Acquasparta, the Italian Franciscan scholastic philosopher and theologian, was born in Acquasparta, near Todi in Umbria, possibly of the illustrious Bentivenghi family. In 1254 he entered the Franciscan order, and about 1268 he began studies at the University of Paris, where he was profoundly influenced by Bonaventure's system. Matthew was lector in the Studium Generale at Bologna (at least for the year 1273–1274), and in 1276 he became master in theology at Paris. From 1279 to 1287, he was lector Sacri Palatii in Rome, succeeding John Peckham. He was general of the order from 1287 to 1289. In 1288 he was made cardinal, and in 1291 he was named bishop of Porto and Santa Rufina. Matthew died at Rome, where he is buried in the church of Ara Coeli.

Doctrine

Matthew taught and wrote during the time of conflict between the Augustinian–Franciscan doctrinal tradition and the rising Thomistic Aristotelianism. In this far-reaching controversy he proved himself to be exceptionally well-versed in Augustine's doctrines and in general a faithful follower of Bonaventure. Although he incorporated a few Aristotelian elements, Matthew's system in its entirety shows that he was among the purest adherents of Augustinianism in the last quarter of the thirteenth century. He had a calm, balanced mind, a sober style, and an exact manner of formulating his ideas. In discussion he was generally modest and perceptive. With these qualities he often achieved, at least in his Quaestiones Disputatae de Fide et de Cognitione, a level comparable to that of the greatest thinkers of his age.

In his theory of knowledge Matthew taught that our intellect knows the individual object not only by reflection, as St. Thomas Aquinas held, but also by a direct perception, which precedes the formation of an abstract idea. By virtue of this perception, the intellect forms a species singularis of the concrete object with all the richness of detail it possesses in reality. In this way the mind prepares for knowledge of the essence of the object. Similarly, the soul knows its own existence and habits not only by reasoning and by reflection but also by a direct and intimate intuition. In Quaestiones Disputatae de Cognitione, Matthew presented a personal solution to the controversial question of the activity of the knowing subject. Rejecting the impressionism of Bonaventure and Thomas Aquinas, the innatism of Thomas of York and Roger Bacon, and the pure activism of William of Auvergne and John Peckham, Matthew defended a semiactivism, not an occasionalism. Whereas according to pure activism the species intentionalis is completely (matter and form) caused by the knowing subject, according to Matthew the matter comes from the object, the form from the subject. This opinion, however, was soon contested by Roger Marston as contradicting both Aristotle and Augustine.

Matthew defended the theory of divine illumination almost in the same manner as did Bonaventure. The purely human faculties for knowing the extramental world do not give us either clear understanding or certainty. We need the aid of the divine rationes aeternae (divine ideas) to illuminate our mind during the process of knowledge. God is not simply the creator of human intelligence; he also conserves it and concurs in each of its actions. This collaboration of God by means of the divine illumination is possible because man in his mind bears a special likeness to his creator. Our intellect is illumed by the divine light that contains the eternal ideas and is the ground of all created beings. The divine light is not the object itself of our knowledge but the moving principle that leads us to the true knowledge of the created world. Following the Augustinian doctrine, Matthew believed that the object of knowledge never determines the election of the will.

Among Matthew's other philosophical theses, the following are worthy of mention. Matthew, like Bonaventure, rejected the possibility of a creation from eternity; the spiritual beings (souls and angels) are necessarily composed of matter and form, because if they were composed simply of essence and existence (as Thomas Aquinas taught), this would not account for their contingency. Also, the process of coming to existence must be explained by the Augustinian theory of the rationes seminales. The "being body" (esse corporale ) constitutes a plurality of forms. The two elements of the beings, matter and form, are together the cause of individuality. Matthew upheld the Ontological Proof of the existence of God; he also argued that the knowledge of God that we attain through faith is compatible with scientific knowledge. Matthew was particularly interested in problems concerning the relations between the natural order and the supernatural order.

Importance

Matthew is undoubtedly to be ranked among the great scholastic thinkers. His importance, however, lies not so much in the originality of his thought as in the fact that he is, after Bonaventure, the ideal representative of Augustinianism. The only philosophers that are known to have been directly influenced by him are Roger Marston and Vitalis of Furno.

See also Aristotelianism; Aristotle; Augustine, St.; Augustinianism; Bacon, Roger; Bonaventure, St.; Marston, Roger; Medieval Philosophy; Ontological Argument for the Existence of God; Peckham, John; Thomas Aquinas, St.; Thomas of York; William of Auvergne.

Bibliography

primary sources

Matthew's most important philosophical works are Introitus ad S. Scripturam (1268–1269), in Bibliotheca Franciscana Scholastica Medii Aevi, Vol. I (Quaracchi, 1903; 2nd ed., 1957), pp. 3–21; Introitus ad S. Theologiam (probably 1271–1272), ibid., pp. 22–33; Commentarius in I, II, et III Sententiarum (1271–1272), unedited manuscript at Quaracchi; Quaestiones Disputatae (1267–1287), which is almost complete in Bibliotheca Franciscana Scholastica Medii Aevi, Vols. I–II, XI, XVII–XVIII (Quaracchi, 1903–1961); Quaestiones de Anima VI, in Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen âge, edited by A.-J. Gondras, Vol. XXIV (Paris, 1958), pp. 203–352; Quaestiones Disputatae de Anima XIII, edited by A.-J. Gondras, Études de philosophie médiévale 50 (1961); VI Quodlibeta, about 90 questions (1276–1279), unedited manuscript at Quaracchi; Concordantiae Super IV Libros Sententiarum, unedited manuscript at Quaracchi.

secondary sources

Beha, H. M. "Matthew of Acquasparta's Theory of Cognition." Franciscan Studies 20 (1960): 161–204; 21 (1961): 1–79, 383–465.

Bettoni, E. "Rapporti dottrinali fra M. d'Acquasparta e G. Duns Scoto." Studi francescani 15 (1943): 113–130.

Bonafede, G. "Il problema del 'lumen' nel pensiero di Frate M. d'Acquasparta." Rivista rosminiana 31 (1937): 186–200.

Doucet, V. Matthaei ab Aquasparta, Quaestiones Disputatae de Gratia. Quaracchi, 1935. See pp. 11*–163* for a general introduction.

Pacchierini, L. La dottrina gnoselogica de M. d'Acquasparta. Naples, 1949.

Pegis, A.-C. "Matthew of Aquasparta and the Cognition of Non-being." In Scholastica Ratione Historico-Critica Instauranda, 463–480. Rome: Pontificum Athenaeum Antonianum, 1951.

Simoncioli, F. "Il concetto di legge in M. d'Acquasparta." Studi francescani 56 (1959): 37–50.

A. Emmen, O.F.M. (1967)