Posted on 10/21/2019 5:35:59 AM PDT by Gamecock
He had been dead and buried for a few decades, but the church wanted to make a point. His remains were exhumed and burned, a fitting end for the “heretic” John Wycliffe. Wycliffe once explained what the letters in the title CARDINAL really mean: “Captain of the Apostates of the Realm of the Devil, Impudent and Nefarious Ally of Lucifer.” And with that, Wycliffe was only getting started.
Wycliffe rejected the doctrine of transubstantiation, which states that the elements of the bread and wine in the Lord’s Supper become the actual body and blood of Christ. He was against priestly absolution, he spoke out against indulgences, and he denied the doctrine of purgatory. He rejected papal authority. Instead, he asserted that Christ is the head of the church. And he had a profound belief in the inerrancy and absolute authority of Scripture. He fully believed that the church of his day had lost its way. Scripture alone provided the only way back. Now we see why the medieval Roman Church wanted to make a statement against Wycliffe.
John Wycliffe has often been called “the Morning Star of the Reformation.” Jan Hus, another pre-Reformation reformer, felt obliged to express his supreme debt to Wycliffe. And though he lived long after Wycliffe’s death, Martin Luther, too, felt an obligation to recognize the pioneering reforms of John Wycliffe. Luther stood on the shoulders of Hus, who stood on the shoulders of Wycliffe. Hus, Luther, and the other Reformers were indebted to him. So are we. Wycliffe was indeed “the Morning Star of the Reformation.”
The term morning star has been used alternately to refer to either the star Sirius or the planet Venus. It appears brightest in the predawn, the time when darkness still dominates, but also the time of promise—the time of the promise of the dawn and the rising sun. So John Wycliffe is situated historically between the darkness and the morning light.
John Wycliffe was born around 1330 and died on December 30, 1384. His century was one of growing disillusionment with the medieval Roman church. There was disillusionment with the church hierarchy and also with the church’s piety (or lack thereof). These were times of unrest. The long reign of the night, of the darkness, had taken its toll, especially on the laity. They bore the brunt of a wayward church. And perhaps none was more acutely aware of this than John Wycliffe.
WYCLIFFE’S STUDIES
Oxford University became Wycliffe’s home in 1346, during his teen years. As soon as Wycliffe arrived at Oxford, he witnessed all the pomp and circumstance of convocation, which included a Mass in honor of the royal family and the scholars at Oxford. Wycliffe then settled into the academic routines of attending lectures and disputations. Wycliffe would sit under and be profoundly influenced by the theologian Thomas Bradwardine and the philosopher William of Ockham. He studied broadly, learning science and mathematics; law and history; and, of course, philosophy. At Oxford, Wycliffe soon moved from the rank of student to that of scholar, later becoming master at Balliol College. Wycliffe’s first writings would be in the field of philosophy.
Biblical studies, and later theology, however, captured his attention and piqued his interest the most. Wycliffe qualified as a doctor of theology, allowing him to lecture on the subject. He also became embroiled in church politics in the 1370s, the decade in which the crisis in the papacy would come to a head, ending the Avignon Papacy and marking the pope’s return to Rome. Wycliffe drew upon his vast education, applying his keen mind and his philosophical competency to the pressing ecclesiastical and theological problems of his day.
WYCLIFFE’S THESES
Luther famously had his “95 Theses.” While not having quite as many, Wycliffe had his own theses (that is, arguments) against the church. One thesis declares, “There is one universal church, and outside of it there is no salvation. Its head is Christ. No pope may say that he is the head.” For this and other ideas, Pope Gregory XI condemned Wycliffe.
But Wycliffe had friends in high places, and his condemnation had little effect. The mother of the boy king Richard II favored Wycliffe, as did John of Gaunt, the young king’s uncle, who wielded significant influence. These supporters swayed Parliament against the pope and for Wycliffe. At Oxford, the students and faculty rallied to his support.
These controversies and censures did little to dissuade Wycliffe. In fact, they propelled him further into his studies and writings, resulting in even more compelling arguments against the religious status quo in favor of reforms. Later, the tide would turn against Wycliffe, and he and his followers would be persecuted.
Two important works penned during the 1370s had a significant and lasting influence. In the first, On Divine Dominion (likely written in 1373-74), Wycliffe levels arguments against papal authority. Any authority held in the church ultimately derives from maintaining fidelity to the Word of God. Authority that sidesteps or runs counter to God’s Word is no authority at all and has no right to rule in the church, Wycliffe argued. In the second work, On Civil Dominion (likely written in 1375-76), Wycliffe makes a case for the civil authorities not to be at the mercy of the church. Instead, he argues that the patrons of the church, the royalty and nobility in England, need not financially support the church or church officials who are in error or corrupt. It is not surprising, then, that Pope Gregory XI condemned Wycliffe and his ideas.
These books of Wycliffe made their way onto the banned book list. But that didn’t keep them from reaching Jan Hus. Wycliffe’s books also influenced Martin Luther. Luther’s The Babylonian Captivity of the Church reflects ideas in On Divine Dominion, and Luther’s Advice to the German Nobility reflects ideas in On Civil Dominion. Finally, Thomas Cranmer enlisted these “heretical” ideas in his efforts to persuade Henry VIII to break from the Roman Catholic Church and establish the Church of England. These were influential books indeed.
WYCLIFFE’S BIBLE
Yet it would be other writings of Wycliffe that would have the most profound influence. In 1378, Wycliffe wrote On the Truth of Sacred Scripture. Here we see the beginnings of the doctrine so crucial to the Reformation: sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). In this work, Wycliffe makes the case that all Christians have a right to the Word of God in their own language. Wycliffe so believed in this principle that he devoted his later years to translating the Latin Vulgate text into Middle English. He was joined by others, such as Nicholas of Hereford and John Purvey. These labors culminated in what would come to be Wycliffe’s crowning achievement—the Wycliffe Bible.
The Wycliffe Bible consisted of hand-copied manuscripts—hundreds of them. They were put into service by Wycliffe’s troupe of pastors, the so-called poor priests. They had very little to their name, and they likely were not all that impressive looking. A friend of Wycliffe once described him as having a “spare, ill, emaciated frame.” His poor priests likely fared no better. But they had copies of the Bible.
WYCLIFFE’S LEGACY
These preachers came to be called Lollards. Soon that term was expanded to apply to those who followed Wycliffe’s teachings. The Lollards grew and grew. “Every second man that you meet,” the saying went, “is a Lollard.”
Lollard is a Dutch word meaning “to mumble” or “to murmur.” Since Wycliffe’s followers were preaching and reading the Bible in English, not in Latin, they were derided as mumblers and murmurers. But they weren’t mumbling. They were speaking the truth. The Lollards even had their Wittenberg Door moment, nailing a petition to the doors of Parliament’s Westminster Hall in 1395. The Lollards extended Wycliffe’s influence well beyond his lifetime, and even on into the British Reformation of the sixteenth century.
While attending church on December 28, 1384, Wycliffe suffered a severe stroke, his second. He died two days later. Post tenebras lux—“after darkness, light”—is the slogan representing the Reformation at Calvin’s Geneva. The sun did rise in the Reformation of the sixteenth century, and the light of the gospel chased the darkness away. But we can all be grateful for the pioneering efforts of the fourteenth-century Oxford scholar John Wycliffe, the Morning Star of the Reformation.
Leading up to the Reformation.
The only mention of scripture alone in the Bible is in the negative.
We owe these courageous men a great debt of gratitude. Praise be to God for their faithfulness.
And IF one does a Bible study on faith and works one will still come to the conclusion that it is faith in Christ that saves you. Only faith in Christ.
Recall also that James said if you keep the whole Law yet broke one part of it you were guilty of breaking the Entire Law.
The "good" works we do come about as a result of faith in Christ; but they don't save you.
A person can do a 1000 good deeds, but without Christ they are lost and condemned.
A person can be on their deathbed and profess faith in Christ and not be able to do one "good" work and they will gain Heaven.
Only if you read it with your catholic blinders on. Jesus taught from scripture and rebuked Satan with Scripture and told us man does not live by bread alone but every Word that proceeds from the mouth of God. Paul commended the Bereans for checking his message against Scripture. On the road to Emmaus Jesus opened Scripture to the disciples. In Timothy we find all Scripture is God breathed and useful for teaching. Time and again Scripture appeals to Scripture and condemns the doctrines and rules of men.
What does Sola Scriptura Mean?
The Reformation principle of sola Scriptura has to do with the sufficiency of Scripture as our supreme authority in all spiritual matters. Sola Scriptura simply means that all truth necessary for our salvation and spiritual life is taught either explicitly or implicitly in Scripture. It is not a claim that all truth of every kind is found in Scripture. The most ardent defender of sola Scriptura will concede, for example, that Scripture has little or nothing to say about DNA structures, microbiology, the rules of Chinese grammar, or rocket science. This or that “scientific truth,” for example, may or may not be actually true, whether or not it can be supported by Scripture—but Scripture is a “more sure Word,” standing above all other truth in its authority and certainty. It is “more sure,” according to the apostle Peter, than the data we gather firsthand through our senses (2 Peter 1:19). Therefore, Scripture is the highest and supreme authority on any matter on which it speaks.
But there are many important questions on which Scripture is silent. Sola Scriptura makes no claim to the contrary. Nor does sola Scriptura claim that everything Jesus or the apostles ever taught is preserved in Scripture. It only means that everything necessary, everything binding on our consciences, and everything God requires of us is given to us in Scripture (2 Peter 1:3).
Furthermore, we are forbidden to add to or take away from Scripture (cf. Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Rev. 22:18-19). To add to it is to lay on people a burden that God Himself does not intend for them to bear (cf. Matt. 23:4).
Scripture is therefore the perfect and only standard of spiritual truth, revealing infallibly all that we must believe in order to be saved and all that we must do in order to glorify God. That—no more, no less—is what sola Scriptura means.
“The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.” —Westminster Confession of Faith
This excerpt is taken from John MacArthur’s contribution in Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible.
Amen.
In after today...
I agree. We owe them thanks, for taking on the OTC. I didn’t know anything about them, till I also left the OTC. But then again, I didn’t have some whacked out inquisitor chasing me all over creation either. 😁
actually, Wycliffe was a man of letters in areas other than the Bible, as well.
He postulated the Copernican view of the earth rotating around the sun some 100 years before Copernicus. I kid you not.
The economic and political and spiritual “climate” was ripe for the Reformation, largely because of Gutenberg.
Wycliffe was a hero’s hero.
One other thing about the nonsense that surfaces about “tradition” being an equal source of authority with scripture... or in fact, superior than scripture.
NONE of the reformers, and I mean ZERO ZIP NADA eschewed tradition and the writings of the fathers. NONE of them. Every single one is packed with citations from the heritage of theologians in the early church. Calvin especially was well versed and well read in the fathers, and cites them as buttresses to his scriptural arguments constantly.
“Tradition” for the papal loyalists seems to have begun about 500 AD for their most silly doctrines, because that is where they first began creeping into the writings they cite as tradition.
The people who use this silly silly argument that the reformers ignored tradition are just historically ignorant, and in fact ignorant of the very traditions that they cite as a rebuttal to the reformers.
Show me the word Trinity.
I’ll wait.
Good article bump.
Or any of the Marian dogmas. Or the celebrity priesthood. Or transubstantiation. The list could go on and on.
With all respect, when I read what Jesus said about Scripture, He convinced me of Sola Scriptura.
I noticed. 😁
Interesting that Oxford supported the pre-reformation writings of Wycliffe but Cambridge was the center of English reformation. “Cambridge learned them and Oxford burned them”
Of course you realize that whatever Jesus said about scripture was about the Old Testament?
Tell me where does the Bible give a table of contents’
Read 1st Peter, he refers to the Father, the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ. If you are looking for a word you will not find sola scriptura or faith alone, or Christmas, or Bible, or a table of contents either.
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.