VI. Wyclifism Condemned as Heresy at Oxford and Constance

In 1382 the church council at London formally condemned Wyclif’s doctrines, but he himself remained at large and unmolested. The Reformer, however, was growing old, and now occupied himself in writing tracts and two of his most important works, one of which was the Trialogus. Pope Urban cited him to answer for his opinions before him at Rome, but the summons came too late. Wyclif had already, in 1382 or 1383, suffered a paralytic stroke. On the 28th of December, 1384, he had a final stroke, and died on New Year’s Eve. ^{55Flick, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 350; Mansi, op. cit., vol. 26, cols. 695-706.}PFF2 59.2

Back in 1383 Oxford had expelled all Lollards from her walls. ^{56A Wyclifite, or Lollard, came to indicate one who opposed the hierarchical order and temporal endowments of the church, as well as certain doctrines, chief of which was transubstantiation, and who maintained that public preaching is imperative. (Poole, Wycliffe and movements for reform, p. 113.)} To many the doctrine seemed suppressed by the time of Wyclif’s death. ^{57Workman, John Wyclif, vol. 2, p. 330.} When Wyclif was summoned to Rome by Urban VI to be tried for heresy in 1384, he boldly declared: “No man should follow the pope, nor no saint that now’ is in heaven, but in as much as he [the pope] follows Christ.” And Wyclif tactfully adds, “I suppose of our pope that he will not be Antichrist, and reverse Christ in this working, to the contrary of Christ’s will.” ^{58Ogg, op. cit., pp. 476, 477; Old English text found in select English works of John Wyclif, vol. 3, pp. 504-506; see also Lee, op. cit., pp. 212-214.}PFF2 59.3

The Lollards continued to stress the disparity of papal dogmas and practices with New Testament teachings. In 1395 they affixed to the door of St. Paul’s and of Westminster Abbey, in London, a placard attacking the Roman clergy. Laws of extreme severity against them were passed through Convocation and Parliament (1399-1400), and for the first time in England “heresy” was punishable with death by fire. Nor did these laws remain a dead letter. Wyclif’s followers were arrested. Some recanted. Of those who stood fast, some were imprisoned for life, and others died for their faith ^{59Trench, op. cit., p. 317; Kurtz, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 206; see also Albert Henry Newman, A Manual of church History vol. 1, p. 592. The death penalty for heresy, which had been authorized for nearly two centuries on the continent, was officially used as a threat in England in 1389. (Poole, Wycliffe and Movements for Reform, pp. 115, 116.)}PFF2 59.4

1. COUNCIL OF OXFORD REPUDIATES WYCLIFISM IN 1408

In 1406 a document was issued in the name of the chancellor of Oxford University, and sealed with the university seal, declaring in favor of Wyclif. ^{60Lechler op. cit., p. 456.} However, the Council of Oxford (1408)—against the Lollards—forbade reading from any book composed by John Wyclif, or written in his time or since, unless it had first been examined and unanimously approved by a group representing the universities of Oxford or Cambridge (Canon 6). It declared translation of the text of Holy Scripture a dangerous thing, because of the difficulty of preserving the original meaning, and forbade reading Wyclif’s translation under pain of excommunication, with the same penalty for making or reading any other unauthorized translation. Finally, it declared the University of Oxford to be “infected with new unprofitable doctrines, and blemished with the new damnable brand of Lollardy.” (Canon 11.) ^{61Edward H. Landon, A Manual of Councils of the Holy Catholic Church, vol. 2, pp. 13-15; Mansi, op. cit., vol. 26, cols. 1037-1041.}PFF2 60.1

In 1412 the Catholic leaders of the university transmitted to the governing body 267 propositions taken from thirteen treatises by Wyclif, which were declared erroneous and heretical. By 1414—thirty years after Wyclif’s death—Oxford had repudiated Wyclifism. It was on Bohemia, however, that Wyclif’s real legacy devolved. There his doctrines were planted and nourished, and grew to power. The recently established University of Prague had adopted the plan of traveling scholarships to assist Bohemian students at Paris or Oxford. Bohemian students continued to flock to England after the death of Anne of Bohemia, the queen of Richard II, in 1394, and Wyclifs writings were transcribed by them. Thus the Lollard teachings were transmitted to Bohemia, where they were earnestly read. They brought fresh vitality to the Reform movement, but by 1403 Wyclif’s teachings were solemnly condemned by the University of Prague. ^{62Poole, Wycliffe and Movements for Reform, pp. 119, 120, 124.}PFF2 60.2

2. COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE ORDERS WYCLIF’S BONES EX HUMED

In 1414 the Council of Constance opened. In addition to ending the Great Schism, one of its chief objects was “to take cognisance of the heresies of Huss and Wickliff.” Forty-five articles, or propositions, were extracted from Wyclif’s writings. In 1415 these, together with all his books, were condemned, including Article 37, which declared that “the Church of Rome is the synagogue of Satan.” Wyclif’s bones were ordered exhumed and cast forth from consecrated ground—if they could be separated from the bones of the faithful. ^{63H. J. Schroeder, Disciplinary Decrees of the General Councils, p. 449; Mansi, op. cit., vol. 27, cols. 632-636; Foxe, Acts, vol. 1, p. 529.} This sentence was not executed, however, until 1428—thirteen years later—when Pope Martin V sent renewed orders to Fleming, bishop of Lincoln, ^{64Lechler, op. cit., pp. 466, 467.} once a favorer of Wyclif’s doctrines. The moldering remains were taken from the grave where they had reposed for more than forty years, and burned. The ashes were then cast into an adjoining rivulet called the Swift. Thomas Fuller well observes:PFF2 61.1

“Thus this brook hath conveyed his ashes into Avon, Avon into Severn, Severn into the narrow seas, they into the main ocean. And thus the ashes of Wyclif are the emblem of his doctrine, which now is dispersed all the world over.” ^{65Workman, John Wyclif, vol. 2 p. 320; also put into verse by William Wordsworth in Ecclesiastiastical Sonnets, Part 2, Sonnet 17, “Wicliffe,” in The Poectical works of William Words worth, edited by E. de selincourt [vol. 3], pp. 369, 370.}PFF2 61.2

3. IDENTIFICATION OF ANTICHRIST “PRESENT TRUTH” FOR MIDDLE AGES

It is obvious that recognition of the historical Papacy as the Antichrist, prophesied by Daniel, Paul, and John, and seen as a then-present reality, was the emphasis designed of God as the Middle Ages drew toward their close. The outline prophecies in general, and the papal Little Horn section in particular, along with the anticipation of God’s coming kingdom, were again in the forefront, though the other two of the five factors governing the advent hope ^{66Treated in Volume I of Prophetic Faith.}—the literal resurrection and the true concept of the millennium—were still misconceived. But an increasing number of earnest students knew approximately where they were in the Antichrist period of the grand prophetic outline, as they waited and longed for the closing events at the end of the age, and the return of the Lord Jesus. They had recognized the Little Horn phase when it had come to pass.PFF2 62.1

Wyclif had threatened the very citadel of papal dogmatism by appealing to the Bible and its prophecies as the primary authority. Asserting every man’s right to examine the Bible for himself, he had contended for the literal sense. Verily, Wyclif was a brilliant light shining in the darkness of the late Middle Ages. He stands out like an illuminated mountain peak amid the enshrouding darkness—one of God’s true noblemen of the ages.PFF2 62.2