Volker Leppin What is Later FranciscanTheology? Ockham and the Early Franciscans Abstract: Although the traditions of particularreligious orders had an impact on shapingindividual theologies,contemporary debates were influential as well. This can be seen in the case of the Franciscan William of Ockham (d. 1347). While reading the Sentences in Oxford, he developed an understanding of theologythat fit quite well with current debates between the university mastersand the mendicantorders. Though thereare not manyexplicit references to the earlier Franciscans in his work, the few quotations from the Summa Halensis in his Commentaryonthe Sentences can be divided according to those thatattribute the Summa to an anonymous group of scholars who represent abroader consensus opinion, on the one hand, and at least one quote, on the other hand, where Ockham seems to contradict Alexander of Hales’ views on theology. In this case, however,itbecomes clear that Ockham might have known the position of the Summa onlybythe means of other Francis- cans, in particular, William of Alnwick. Thus, speakingabout aFranciscan tradition in the Venerable Inceptor’swork involves speakingabout abroken tradition. The studyofmedievaltheologygenerallyassumes the importance of the religious or- ders of the period and the different intellectual traditions associated with them. For example, the Franciscan tradition of thought would begin with Alexander of Hales or the Summa Halensis and lead subsequentlytoBonaventure, Duns Scotus,and Wil- liam of Ockham. Obviously,thereisabasis in the social reality of medieval academic education for reconstructing the history of theologythis way: orders provided study housesfor their members, wherethey receivedtheir initial training in the subject matter.This was true not least of the Franciscans, and it standstoreason that in the Franciscan houses of studies, Franciscans wereread more than scholars working in other traditions. Foratleast two reasons, however,one might query whether this wayoftelling the history of theology, namely,interms of order traditions, is the right one or indeed the onlyright one. The first reason concerns the historiographyofresearch concern- ing medieval members of the orders.For along time, research in the field of scho- lastic theologywas dominated by scholars who themselves weremembers of apar- ticular order.Thus, the great editions of Dominican authorswereprepared by Dominicans; the editions of key Franciscan works wereprovided by Franciscans. The same is true as regardsresearch about them. In that light,one might ask if the idea of specific order traditions simplyreflects the conditions under which mod- ern research on these traditions was undertaken, thatis, within the religious orders OpenAccess. ©2021Volker Leppin, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative CommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110684827-019 282 Volker Leppin themselves, which wereconcerned with writing their own history and advancingthe ideas that they themselvesregarded as important. The second reason is that research in recent decades, whether by JacquesLeGoff, Alain de Liberaorothers, has laid astronger emphasis on the social realm of univer- sities as the context for the development of both concepts and methods of thinking in this period.¹ When we approach William of Ockham in this light,wemight ask if the Franciscan school reallyformed the horizon of his thinking,consideringthat we do not find Alexander of Hales and Bonaventure mentioned in the index provided by Franciscan editors to his Quodlibeta,the least restricted theological work thathepro- duced. In terms of Franciscan influences, Ockham’scontemporaries, aboveall, Wal- ter of Chatton (d. 1343), who taught duringOckham’stime in Oxford, seem to be much more at the background of his arguments than such earlier members of the order.Furthermore,one might ask if the problems Ockham discussed werereally raised by his order tradition or if they wereaproduct of the current intellectual sit- uation, e.g. the condemnation of radical Aristotelianism in Paris and England in the 1370s. In light of these considerations, the following will not onlydeal with the ques- tion of Ockham’srelationship to the older Franciscan school, but also with the ques- tion concerning which motivesingeneral made him think and argueinparticular ways. The Franciscan Context of Ockham’sTeaching The life and thinking of William of Ockham shows that there was no real dichotomy between academic training undertaken in the context of an order or in the university context,for asimple reason. As aFranciscan teachingatthe university,Ockham nonetheless livedinthe house of his order and possiblyevenoffered his lectures there. Le Goff has made us aware of the fact that the overall medieval idea of mendi- cants living in their houses and giving lectures for university studentswas not with- out problems.² Acertain rivalry arose from the simple fact thatmendicants could give lectures for free while secular masters wereaccustomed to being paidbytheir stu- dents. This economic reality might not have been the onlyreason for the problems between mendicants and secular clerics at medieval universities, but it was one of them. Another possiblereason concerns the fact thatmembers of an order represent- ed acoherent group at the universitywith acertain influenceinits council while sec- ular clerics tendedtobethere as mere individuals. Jacques Le Goff, Intellectuals in the Middle Ages,trans. Teresa L. Fagan (Cambridge,MA; Oxford: Blackwell, 1993). Alain de Libera, La philosophie médiévale (Paris:Presses Universitaires de France, 2017). Le Goff, Intellectuals in the Middle Ages. What is Later Franciscan Theology? Ockham and the Early Franciscans 283 There is evidence of conflicts between the two groups not onlyinParis, which has been the focus of Le Goff’sanalysis,but also in Oxford. In fact,the main agents there werenot the Franciscans but the Dominicans, though there is some reason to assume that the two mendicant orders shared some common interests.³ These derivedinpart from the exemption they enjoyedwhen it came to taking the equivalent to an undergraduatedegree in the faculty of arts in Oxford. By papal decree, the university had to accept thosebrothers who had attended an arts course in their order’sstudyhouse,asfor example Ockham might have done.⁴ This was particularlyimportant for the Dominicans who werenot allowed to studythe arts at the university.⁵ Now,asweknow from an appellation of the Dom- inicans written in 1311, the university council in the beginning of the 14th century gave new power to astatute of 1252 thatdid not allow anyone to attend ahigher fac- ulty at Oxford who had not graduated from the facultyofarts.⁶ Onlyamajorityofall regent masters of the university was able to free an indi- vidual of this requirement. Furthermore, decisions on this scorehad to be taken on acase-by-case basis, which meant thatseveral times, the mastersactuallydenied access to Oxford Universitytobrothers from the Dominican order who had studied at one of the order’sstudyhouses. The question became even more complicated as it was the preliminary for ahigher course of studyintheology. Against protesting Dom- inicans, the majority of masters claimed that no one should be allowed to hold lec- tures on the Bible before having lectured on the Sentences,which the Dominicans regarded as aperversion of doctrine.⁷ In this requirement,one might discern apref- erencefor philosophicallyskilled teachers at the university over what the secular masters might have seen as simple-minded mendicant brethren. Institutionally, all these measurescan be seen as an attempt to strengthen the unity of the university against the centrifugalpowers of the orders, particularlythe Dominicans. Such measures wereunderpinnedbypolemics against the services of the Dominicans as well as against their lectures.⁸ Here, as well as in the instruction to hold academic celebrations in the central church of the university instead in the mendicant convents, the Franciscans came into the picture.⁹ Forthey supported the Dominicans in opening up their own church so that the friars preachers could protest this decision.¹⁰ Forthe following, see Volker Leppin, Wilhelm von Ockham: Gelehrter,Streiter, Bettelmönch,2nd ed. (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft,2012), pp. 42– 47. Leppin, Wilhelm von Ockham,p.20. H. Rashdall, ‘The Friars Preachers vs. the University,’ in Collectanea,ed. M. Burrows,4vols (Ox- ford: Clarendon Press, 1890), vol. 2, pp. 193–273, on p. 217. Rashdall, ‘The Friars Preachers,’ p. 217. Rashdall, ‘The Friars Preachers,’ p. 218. Rashdall, ‘The Friars Preachers,’ p. 220. Rashdall, ‘The Friars Preachers,’ pp. 223–25. Rashdall, ‘The Friars Preachers,’ p. 242. 284 Volker Leppin Here, we begin to understand what all these conflicts meant for ayoung Francis- can theologian such as William of Ockham. PresumablyOckham entered Oxford Uni- versityin1308, which meant that he witnessed the conflicts mentioned aboveand had to feel himself somehow involved in them.¹¹ Afterall, he seems to have studied at the order’shouse in London and so would have benefittedfrom the exemption from studying in the faculty of arts.¹² All this has to be taken into account in order to understand his new concept of the coherence of arts and theology, as Iargued years ago.¹³ To him, logic or dialectics alone was enough to ensure the validity of ascience, especiallytheology. What Ockham impliedhere regardingthe