No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Another Kind of Saint: A Lollard Perception of John Wyclif
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 February 2016
Extract
In 1966 Crompton predicted that there would be ‘no comparison in mood’ between observations of the sexcentenary of John Wyclif’s death and the ‘crescendo of praise’ heard at its quincentenary. His prediction has not proved altogether true, but he was right insofar as we are unable to approach our subject with anything like the assurance of our predecessors. They had a Wyclif coated with many layers of varnish, not least the ‘rich brown protestant’ ones McFarlane speaks of.Ours has been stripped, and we find ourselves very uncertain about what we now see.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1987
Footnotes
*
I thank Dr A. Hudson and Professor J. Schleusener for reading drafts of this essay and for helpful references and suggestions. Its errors and shortcomings are, of course, my own.
References
1 Crompton, James, ‘John Wyclif, A Study in Mythology’, Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society 42 (1966-7) pp. 18,19.Google Scholar
2 McFarlane, K. B., John Wycliffe and the Beginning of English Nonconformity (London 1952) p. 10Google Scholar; see also Crompton p. 8.
3 Crompton pp. 6-34; Mudroch, Vaclav, The Wyclyf Tradition, ed. Reeves, A. Compton (Lawrence, Kansas 1978)Google Scholar; Aston, Margaret, ‘John Wycliffe’s Reformation Reputation’, PP 30 (1965), repr. in her Lollards and Reformers: Images and Literacy in Late Medieval Religion [LR] (London 1984) pp. 243–72Google Scholar. (I quote the latter.)
4 Crompton p. 10.
5 Mudroch pp. 27-8.
6 Crompton p. 15.
7 Crompton p. 17, quoting Shirley’s, W. W. Introduction to Fasciculi Zizaniorum, (FZ) RS 5(London 1858) p. xlvi.Google Scholar
8 For perceptions of Wyclif held by medieval continental admirers, see Šmahcl, F., ‘“Doctor evangelicus super omnes evangelistas”: Wyclif’s Fortune in Hussite Bohemia’, BIHR 43 (1970) pp. 16–34Google Scholar, especially p. 25.
9 See Aston, LR p. 264, and her ‘Lollardy and the Reformation: Survival or Revival?’ History 49 (1964), repr. LR pp. 235-40.
10 Thomae Waldensis Doctrinale Fidei Catholicae, ed. Blanciotti, B., 3 vols. (Venice 1757-9) 2 col. 11.Google Scholar
11 I am preparing a study of the extent to which the Lollards knowingly had access to Wyclif’s words.
12 ‘The Trial of Richard Wyche’, ed. Matthew, F. D., EHR 5 (1890)p. 536Google Scholar;on Wyche, see Emden(O) 3 p. 2101.
13 The Register of Henry Chichele, Archbishop of Canterbury 1414-1443 ed. Jacob, E. F., 4 vols.(Oxford 1937-47) 3 p. 222Google Scholar; Registrum Thome Spofford, Episcopi Herefordensis 1422-1448, ed. Bannister, A T., CYS (1919) p. 155Google Scholar; Lichfield Court Book B/C13 fol. 21v; the cases are noted by Thomson, J. A. F. The Later Lollards, 1414-1520 (Oxford 1965) pp. 122, 31–2, 113.Google Scholar
14 Doctrinale 2 cols. 13-18.
15 Ed. Forshall, J. (London 1851) p. 133.Google Scholar
16 Ed. Hudson, A., Selections from English Wycliffite Writings (Cambridge 1978) p. 32Google Scholar. Hudson has here edited a selected part of Thorpe’s Examination from Oxford Bodleian MS Rawlinson C 208 (s xv); her edition of the whole is forthcoming in EETS. That ed. Pollard, A. W., Fifteenth Century Prose and Verse (London 1903) pp. 97–174Google Scholar is a partly modernized version of a print probably made in Antwerp in 1530: see further Hudson, A., ‘“No newe thyng”: The Printing of Medieval Texts in the early Reformation Period’, in Middle English Studies Presented to Norman Davis in Honour of his Seventieth Birthday, ed. Gray, D. and Stanley, E. G. (Oxford 1983) pp. 156, 162–4.Google Scholar
17 Transl. Foxe, John, Acts and Monuments ed. Cattley, S. R., 8 vols. (London 1837-41) 3 pp. 57–8Google Scholar; see further Workman, Herbert B., John Wyclif, A Study of the English Medieval Church, 2 vols. (Oxford 1926) 2 pp. 347–55Google Scholar. A medieval copy is preserved in Prague University Library MS XI E 3 fol. I.
18 Netter, Doctrinale 2 cols. 18-19.
19 Bale, John, The Examination of Lord Cobham, in Select Works of John Bale, ed. Christmas, H., Parker Society 1 (London 1849) p. 34Google Scholar; cf Netter’s account (Doctrinale 1 col. 21); The Register of John Stafford, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1425-1443, ed. Holmes, T. S., Somerset Record Society, 21-2 (London 1915-16) 1 p. 77.Google Scholar
20 Jack Upland, Friar Daw’s Reply, and Upland’s Rejoinder, ed. Heyworth, P. L. (Oxford 1968) p. 104/85-7, 90–1Google Scholar (here and elsewhere line numbers follow an oblique stroke). Heyworth suggests (p. 18) that Upland’s Rejoinder was composed in the mid-fifteenth century.
21 See, for example, Davidson, Clifford, A Middle English Treatise on the Playing of Miracles (Washington 1981) p. 21Google Scholar. On the manuscript, see further A. Hudson, ‘Wycliffite Prose’, in Middle English Prose, A Critical Guide to Major Authors and Genres, ed. Edwards, A. S. G. (New Brunswick 1984) pp. 260–1.Google Scholar
22 On these figures, see Emden (O) 1 pp. 244-6; 2 pp. 692-4, 830-3, 1050-1 (Kilvington). Lollards regularly refer to FitzRalph and Grosseteste as saints; on the former see, for example, Select English Works of John Wyclif, ed. Arnold, T., 3 vols (Oxford 1869-71) 3 pp. 281/13-14, 412/21-2, 416/21–2Google Scholar; The English Works of Wyclif Hitherto Unprinted, éd. F. D. Matthew, EETS os 74 (London 1880, revised 1902) p. 128/27-8; on the latter see, for example, Arnold 3 p. 459/1; ‘A Lollard Chronicle of the Papacy’, ed. Talbert, E. W., Journal of English and Germanic Philology 41 (1942) p. 191/505–6.Google Scholar
23 FZ p. 429. On White, see Aston, Margaret, ‘William White’s Lollard Followers’, Catholic Historical Review 68 (1982), repr. LR pp. 84–8.Google Scholar
24 The Great Chronicle of London, ed. Thomas, A H. and Thornley, L D. (London 1938) p. 252.Google Scholar
25 LR pp. 262-3; see further Reg Stafford 1 p. 79, Reg Chichele 3 p. 222, Foxe 4 p. 208. On George Bull, also listed by Aston, see below, p. 437.
26 LR p. 263.
27 Fines, J., ‘Studies in the Lollard Heresy’, University of Sheffield PhD. Dissertation (1964) p. 55 n. 3.Google Scholar
28 Arnold 3 p. 489.
29 Arnold 1 pp. 329-30; 3 pp. 467-8.
30 Matthew p. 469; Foxe 3 pp. 157-8.
31 Heresy Trials in the Diocese of Norwich, 1428-31, ed. Tanner, N. P., CSer, 4 series 20 (1977) pp. 34. 54, 71, 72Google Scholar, etc; questions listed in the Register of Thomas Polton, ed. Hudson, A., ‘The Examination of Lollards’, BIHR 46 (1973) pp. 154Google Scholar items 29 and 30, 155 item 18; Houlbrooke, R. A., ‘Persecution of Heresy and Protestantism in the Diocese of Norwich under Henry VIII’, Norfolk Archaeology 35 (1970-1) pp. 312, 315–6Google Scholar. The issue probably received its most sophisticated treatment by William Taylor in his letter to Thomas Smith: Reg Ciucitele 3 pp. 163-6.
32 As Oldcastle (Bale p. 39) and William and Alice Cowper (Foxe 4 p. 177). When they recant they are often forced to confront these issues together; see, for example, the Juramenlum Lollardis impositum of 1396 printed by Wilkins 3 p. 225.
33 Great Chronicle p. 252.
34 Reg Stafford pp. 78, 79; FZ p. 429.
35 McFarlane p. 184.
36 This view of the Church was invariable among Lollards: see, for example, Arnold 1 p. 264/24; 2 p. 209; 3 pp. 101-2; Matthew p. 198; Heresy Trials p. 61; The Register of Thomas Bekynton, Bishop of Bath and Wells 1443-1465, ed. Maxwell-Lyte, H. C. and Dawes, M. C. B., 2 vols., Somerset Record Society 49-50 (Frome and London 1034-5) 1 p. 124Google Scholar (Yonge is answering the question ‘an mali sint pars ecclesie catholice?’); Salisbury Diocesan Registry, Register of William Aiscough, Bishop 1438-50, 2 fol. 53v, ‘holi chirche catholike is congregacioun of trewe men whiche only shul be saued.’
37 On popular beliefs concerning saints, see Sumption, Jonathan, Pilgrimage: An Image of Mediaeval Religion (Totowa, N.J. 1975) especially pp. 11-21, 41–88Google Scholar; Finucane, Ronald C., Miracles and Pilgrims: Popular Beliefs in Medieval England (Totowa, N J. 1977) pp. 191–202Google Scholar; on the established church’s attitude towards saints, see Thomas, Keith, Religion and the Decline of Magic (London 1971) pp. 25–31;Google Scholar Finucane p. 201.
38 For references to Wyclif’s discussion of saints, 1 am indebted to Dubois, D. J., ‘Thomas Netter of Walden, OC(c. 1372-1430)’, University of Oxford B. Lift. Dissertation (1978) pp. 81–4.Google Scholar
39 Dial. p. 27; Trial., p. 235.
40 Dial. p. 27.
41 De Civ. Dom. 3 pp. 163-4; Dial. p. 69; Trial, p. 237.
42 De Eccles. p. 45; Trial, p. 238.
43 On Wyclif’s view of the Church, see Leff, G., Heresy in the Later Middle Ages, 2 vols. (Manchester 1967) 2 pp. 516–45.Google Scholar
44 Doctrinale 3 col. 720.
45 See, for example, Polemical Works 1 pp. 34/17, 351/28, 363/4; DeMand. p. 142/22; Arnold 1 pp. 13/36,99/5.204-27.
46 Oxford Bodleian MS Rawlinson C 208 fol. 38v. For this definition, see OED s v ‘Saint’ sb 3. The earliest example there given of this use is the Wyclif Bible translation of 1 Corinthians 1.2. See further below, n. 77.
47 See, for example, Cambridge, Gonville and Caius MS 354/581 fol. 95r/v (predestinate); Arnold 1 p. 70/7-852 p. 255/15 (chosen); 1 p. 19/23 (justmen); 1 pp. 6/24, 50/20,74/19:2 pp. 209/20, 210/21 (saved).
48 On die terminology, see Workman 2 p. 201. On the poor priests, appropriately enough a model set up by Wyclif himself, see Lechler, G., transl. Lorimer, P., John Wycliffe and his English Precursors (London 1884) pp. 189–201Google Scholar; Cannon, H. L., The Poor Priests; A Study in the Rise of English Lollardry’, Annual Report of the American Historical Association 1 (1889) pp. 451–82Google Scholar; Wilks, M., ‘Reformatio Regni: Wyclif and Hus as Leaders of Religious Protest Movements’, SCH 9 (1972) pp. 119–21Google Scholar; Thomson, Williell R., The Latin Writings of John Wyclyf, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Subsidia Mediaevalia 14 (Toronto 1983) p. 281.Google Scholar
49 Heresy Trials p. 47.
50 Foxe 3 p. 702;Emden (O) 3 p. 2101.
51 Great Chronicle p. 252.
52 Foxe 5 p. 34, quoted by Aston, LR p. 263.
53 This was taught by William White (FZ p. 430). His view was echoed by some of his pupils (Heresy Trials pp. 45, 57, 96). See also Davis, J. F., ‘Lollards, Reformers and St Thomas of Canterbury’, University of Birmingham Historical Journal 9 (1963) pp. 1—15.Google Scholar
54 Quoted by Aston, LR p. 236.
55 Here I disagree with Fines, who suggests (p. 45) that their comments represent ‘the beginnings of a tradition about Wyclif, expressed in the form of an aphorism learned off by heart’.
56 See the section of text in Hudson, Selections pp. 32-3.
57 Ibid. p. 33.
58 By contrast, the youthful Philip Repingdon seems willing to drive wedges into aspects of Wyclif’s virtue: ‘Dixit se velie defendere omnem doctrinam suam in materia morali, et digitum ori suo imponere donee Deus illustraret corda cleri de sacramento altaris’ (FZ p. 297). That he was not thinking primarily in archetypes may explain why he later apparently found it easy to return to orthodoxy.
59 Oxford Bodleian MS Rawlinson C 208 fol. 91.
60 On Thorpe’s career, see fines, J., ‘William Thorpe: an early Lollard’, History Today 18 (1968) pp. 49$-505Google Scholar; Kighdy, Charles, ‘The Early Lollards: A Survey of Popular Lollard Activity in England, 1382-1428’, University of York D. Phil. Dissertation (1975) pp. 1–5.Google Scholar
61 On the schools, see Hudson, ‘Prose’ pp. 258-9.
62 For discussion of how lists of questions were used in heresy trials, see Hudson, ‘Examination’ pp. 143-59. A tendency to consider the parts rather than die whole is continued especially by those analysing documentary sources. See especially Thomson, and note his description of Lollardy, pp. 239-50.
63 See, for example, Arnold 3 pp. 426, 489; Matthew p. 422; Oxford Bodleian MS Laud. misc. 200 fols. 47v-48.
64 FZ p. 387: this is among the passages extracted as erroneous from Purvey’s ‘book’ by Lavenham.
65 Hudson, Selections p. 112/94-5. On Poor Priests teaching the gospel and poverty, see for example, Matthew pp. 93, 276, 305; on them speaking out against the church, see Matthew p. 93; Cannon p. 457 and n. 6. BL Additional MS 24202 indicates that the latter would alone ensure sainthood: ‘for riзt as in be tyme of Crist it was nedeful to shewen & openen crist to ♭e puple & ♭erfore ♭o ♭at diden it were seyntus, riзt so aзen ♭e comyng of antecrist it is nedeful to shewe & openen ♭e malice of anticrist & his sectus whiche ben ♭e forseid religions now, & ♭erfore lincolne & armacan ♭at hulpen ♭er to be now seyntis in heuene’ (fol. 54).
66 Wilkins, H.J., ‘Was John Wycliffe a Negligent Pluralist?’ (London 1915)Google Scholar; Dahmus, J. H., ‘Wyclyf was a Negligent Pluralist’, Speculum 28 (1953) pp. 378–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
67 Chronicon Henrici Knighton, ed. Lumby, J. R., RS 92, 2 vols. (London 1889-95 (2 P.156.Google Scholar
68 Doctrinale 2 col. 22.
69 This is quoted by Loserth, J., Catalogue of the Extant Latin Works of John Wyclif (London [1924]) p. 8 no. 27Google Scholar. On the English origin of this tract, see Hudson, A., ‘Contributions to a Bibliography of Wycliffite Writings’, Notes and Queries ns. 20 (1973) p. 447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
70 Transl. Foxe 3 p. 58.
71 Remonstrance pp. 132-3: as Forshall points out (p. 134), this plainly alludes to Wyclif, Pierce the Ploughmans Crede, ed. Skeat, W. W., EETS os. 30 (London 1867) p. 20/528–32.Google Scholar
72 Netter, Doctrinale 2 col. 25.
73 LR pp. 262-3.
74 Foxe 3 p. 94.
75 Reg Stafford p. 79.
76 On Bale’s efforts to create a new group of Protestant saints, see Fairfield, L. P., ‘John Bale and the Development of Protestant Hagiography in England’, JEH 24 (1973) pp. 145–60Google Scholar; idem, , John Bale: Mythmaker for the English Reformation (West Lafayette, Indiana 1976) pp. 121–43:011Google Scholar Foxe’s, see White, H. C., Tudor Books of Saints and Martyrs (Madison 1963) pp. 132–95Google Scholar; Haller, W., Foxe’s Book of Martyrs and the Elect Nation (London 1963).Google Scholar
77 See, for example, Walzer, M., The Revolution of the Saints (London 1966).Google Scholar
78 For up-to-date discussion and bibliography, see Davis, John F., Heresy and Reformation in the South East of England, 1520-1559 (London 1983).Google Scholar
79 On this projected work, see Fairfield, John Bale pp. 94, 203.
80 On his reputation as Reformer, see Aston, LR pp. 259-60.