Posted on 10/08/2013 5:24:17 PM PDT by marshmallow
“Wycliffe became deeply disillusioned both with Scholastic theology of his day and also with the state of the church, at least as represented by the clergy. In the final phase of his life in the years before his death in 1384 he increasingly argued for Scriptures as the authoritative centre of Christianity, that the claims of the papacy were unhistorical, that monasticism was irredeemably corrupt, and that the moral unworthiness of priests invalidated their office and sacraments.”
The first to oppose his theses were monks of those orders that held possessions, to whom his theories were dangerous.
Wycliffe was summoned before William Courtenay, Bishop of London, on 19 February 1377.... The exact charges are not known, as the matter did not get as far as a definite examination.... four begging friars were his advocates.
Most of the English clergy were irritated by this encounter, and attacks upon Wycliffe began, finding their response in the second and third books of his work dealing with civil government. These books carry a sharp polemic, hardly surprising when it is recalled that his opponents charged Wycliffe with blasphemy and scandal, pride and heresy. He appeared to have openly advised the secularization of English church property, and the dominant parties shared his conviction that the monks could better be controlled if they were relieved from the care of secular affairs.
The reformatory activities of Wycliffe effectively began here: all the great works, especially his Summa theologiae, are closely connected with the condemnation of his 18 theses, while the entire literary energies of his later years rest upon this foundation. The next aim of his opponents – to make him out a revolutionary in politics – failed.
Wycliffe tried to gain public favour by laying his theses before Parliament, and then made them public in a tract, accompanied by explanations, limitations, and interpretations. After the session of Parliament was over he was called upon to answer, and in March, 1378, he appeared at the episcopal palace at Lambeth to defend himself. The preliminaries were not yet finished when a noisy mob gathered with the purpose of saving him; the king’s mother, Joan of Kent, also took up his cause. The bishops, who were divided, satisfied themselves with forbidding him to speak further on the controversy. At Oxford the vice-chancellor, following papal directions, confined Wycliffe for some time in Black Hall, from which Wycliffe was released on threats from his friends; the vice-chancellor was himself confined in the same place because of his treatment of Wycliffe.
The sharper the strife became, the more Wycliffe had recourse to his translation of Scripture as the basis of all Christian doctrinal opinion, and expressly tried to prove this to be the only norm for Christian faith. To refute his opponents, he wrote the book in which he endeavored to show that Holy Scripture contains all truth and, being from God, is the only authority. He referred to the conditions under which the condemnation of his 18 theses was brought about; and the same may be said of his books dealing with the Church, the office of king, and the power of the pope – all completed within the space of two years (1378–79). To Wycliffe, the Church is the totality of those who are predestined to blessedness. Its head is Christ. No pope may say that he is the head, for he cannot say that he is elect or even a member of the Church.
Extract from wikipedia. I tried to get some of that from the online Catholic Encyclopedia, but they were not very clear as to what Wycliffe’s theses were.
The people loved the monasteries, which were central to their lives in a thousand different ways. Do some research. I have studied the topic for many years. Your longer encomium of a heretic I barely glanced at, as I don’t have time for the continual hatred you spew. But I will pray for you.
Wycliffe stuff was exerpted from wikipedia, so it isn’t my spew, it is the folks from Wikipedia, and it didn’t seem like hatred.
Certainly the medieval church had problems, and Wycliffe was a member of that church, but yet, was popular with the people. The monastaries by their nature walled the people out, except for those who worked the fields, and had the product diverted to the monastary.
One ‘heresy’ of his has survived: The notion that sacraments performed by a bad priest are of less value than those performed by a good priest. That is one reason why young couples choose the clergy who marries them. In “The Other Side of Time” the French Resistance fighters told of the local bad priest that collaborated, and of their intention to have their children baptized by another priest. On the other hand, they had great affection for a nun who had not collaborated, and had ministered to and protected those betrayed by the bad priest.
That natural understanding that bad priests who don’t keep their vows, are not true priests, and so can not truly extend the sacraments is another reason why it is so very important for the church to have high standards for its personnel, rather than rotating paedophile priests around. The other reason is of course to protect children from paedophiles in (and out of) the church.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.