John Wycliffe and Jan Hus

Pre-Reformers of the Late Middle Age

When the word reformation is mentioned in regard to the Christian faith, the most notable individual is Martin Luther. While Luther holds a place in history as the initiator of the Protestant Reformation with the publishing of his Ninety-five Theses, it should not go unmentioned that his work was not the first attempt of Christian reformation. There were “various movements of reform, each with its own program” (González, 2010, 407) just a century prior to Luther and his contemporaries. Two principle theologians of this time, the Late Middle Ages, were John Wycliffe and Jan Hus.

Both Wycliffe and Hus were considered heretics by the medieval church. Wycliffe “[stressed] a personal relationship between the individual and God” and stood against the church’s teaching that “the avenue to salvation passed through the church alone” (Perry, 2016, 12–2c). As an instructor at the University of Oxford he taught that “the Bible itself, rather than church teachings, is the ultimate Christian authority” also “[arguing] that Scripture, which was the final authority, needed no further development by church authorities and that the sacraments are not necessary for salvation” (Perry, 2016, 12–2c). Along with his opposition to the church’s teachings, Wycliffe “denounced the wealth of the higher clergy and sought a return to the spiritual purity and material poverty of the early church” (Perry, 2016, 12–2c). Jan Hus shared the same disdain for the luxurious and immoral lifestyle of the upper clergy of the medieval church. Both Hus and Wycliff agreed that the Bible should “be accessible to common people”, thus their advocation for “vernacular translations of the Bible” (Perry, 2016, 12–2c).

The bulk of information regarding John Wycliffe addresses “the last dozen years of his life when he entered into political and theological debate,” (Roberts, 1983) but “little is known of Wycliffe’s early years” (González, 2010, 412). What we do know of his childhood is that he was born in the Yorkshire village of Wycliffe-on-Tees, thus the surname attributed to him. There is some “disagreement as to the exact year of Wycliffe’s birth [, but] the consensus of authorities [… accepts] the year 1330” (Roberts, 1983). He would come to be known for his work as “a theologian, philosopher, churchman, ecclesiastical reformer, and Bible translator” (Carson, 2017, 437). Scholars agree that, “the work he did anticipated the Reformation” (Carson, 2017, 437). Around the age of fifteen, he studied at Oxford were he “eventually became famous for his erudition and his unflinching logic” (González, 2010, 412). His teachings would “reveal traces of ideas from several great thinkers before him”: Marsiglio of Padua, Occam, the Spiritual Fanciscans, Grosseteste as well Augustine (Roberts, 1983). Wycliffe would later leave the university “to serve the crown, first as a diplomat, and then as a polemicist” (González, 2010, 412). He lived during the Avignon papacy, a time when the church “was at the service of French interests” (González, 2010, 412). The English established a “series of […] statutes [which] sought to limit papal influence” (González, 2010, 412). The sentiment of the English authorities allowed Wycliffe’s teaching to be well received. One of the most well received arguments of Wycliffe was that of “the nature and limits of lordship or dominion, which he expressed in two major works, On Divine Dominion and On Civil Dominion.” (González, 2010, 412). In this regard, he believed that “all legitimate dominion comes from God” but the Christian ethic of service should be dominate (González, 2010, 412). Therefore, those in leadership should seek to serve those they lead rather than seeking to be served. With regards to the church, “any supposed ecclesiastical authority that collects taxes for its own benefit, or seeks to extend its power beyond the sphere of spiritual matters, is illegitimate” (González, 2010, 412). His arguments against the corruption of the papacy gave him the credibility to stand as an English representative at a “conference at Bruges in 1374” which addressed “the questions of taxation and of the temporal authority of popes” (González, 2010, 412). The favor that Wycliffe had won among the civil authorities soon lapsed as they began to understand that “Wycliffe meant every word he said [as he pointed] out that what he had affirmed regarding the limits of ecclesiastical dominion was also true of civil power” (González, 2010, 412).

The onset of the Great Schism would move Wycliffe towards more radical positions. It was at this time that he began teaching theology that denounced the supremacy of the papacy. In his perspective the upper leaders of the church had become so corrupt that he believed them to be “reprobate”, even “declaring that the pope was among those who were probably reprobate” (González, 2010, 412). His fallout with civil authorities left unprotected to the “repeated attacks” of the papacy (González, 2010, 414). By 1377 he had returned to Oxford but was denounced a heretic by many of his colleagues. By this time “Wycliffe made a swift progression from unqualified fundamentalism to a heretical view of the Church and its Sacraments” (Conti, 2017, 1.1). Wycliffe had already lost the support of civil leaders “but once he dismissed the traditional doctrine of transubstantiation, his (unorthodox) theses could not be defended any more”, by his fellow theologians (Conti, 2017). Though he would later be incarcerated, he “was allowed to continue his studies and his writing” (González, 2010, 414). In 1381 Wycliffe “retired to his parish at Lutterworth” but controversy and scandal would soon follow him. At the same time of his retirement “the first great peasant revolt in England” broke out. (González, 2010, 414). Wycliffe “was accused of having instigated the revolt”, because, “he expressed support for some of the peasants’ claims” (González, 2010, 414). Soon after, in 1382, “court to examine Wycliffe’s writings and teachings” was summoned by Archbishop William Courtenay, an opposer of Wycliffe’s teachings. During this council it was declared that “ten of Wycliffe’s tenets were […] heretical” (González, 2010, 414). With his writings now “placed under the ban” his followers also began feeling pressure from the church. (González, 2010, 414). Inspired by the teaching of John Wycliffe, an order of priests, called the Lollards, arose seeking to “spread Wycliffe’s teachings” but were denounced as heretics and “deprived […] of their priestly functions” (Perry, 2016, 12–2c). Although the writings of Wycliffe were declared heretical he was never excommunicated and was allowed to return to his parish. It was during his time of service at the parish of Lutterworth, that John Wycliffe “suffered two strokes, one in 1382, and another in 1384, which caused his death” (González, 2010, 412).

John Wycliffe’s writings were of such great influence that they were the topic of much debate at the University of Prague in Bohemia. Jan Hus was among those Bohemian scholars interested in the issues addressed by Wycliffe. The debate was separated into two camps. On one side were the Germans, who believed Wycliffe and his followers to be heretics, while on the other side of the aisle where the Czechs, who accept the philosophical views of Wycliffe. Hus, who was a Czech, “[defended] scholars’ rights to read and discuss the works of Wycliffe” but did not hold to the same teaching on transubstantiation as Wycliffe (González, 2010, 415). Jan Hus held to the traditional view “of the presence of Christ in communion” (González, 2010, 415). Hus was known to be “an eloquent preacher, with the result that in 1401 he became dean of the faculty of philosophy at the university, and in 1402 was appointed preacher at the Chapel of Bethlehem” (González, 2010, 415). It was from his pulpit at Chapel of Bethlehem that Hus preached against the “corruption of the clergy, whom he called “the Lord’s fat ones” (González, 2010, 416). During the time of the Great Schism an order by the Pisan pope Alexander V declared that “preaching should take place only in cathedrals, parish churches, and monasteries,” (González, 2010, 416). Hus did not obey the order and continued to preach. The papacy therefore excommunicated Hus in 1411 after he refused to answer for his disobedience against the church. Yet, “the papal sentence had little effect” since he was held in high regard by the Bohemia King and it’s people (González, 2010, 416). Like Wycliffe, Jan Hus would become more radical in his views as time went on. Hus “declared that an unworthy pope is not to be obeyed”, clarifying that “A pope who does not obey the Bible is not to be obeyed” (González, 2010, 417). Once again Hus was ordered to remain silent but this time it was by the king who sought the support of Pope John XXIII. Hus would not relent and therefore was excommunicated again. This time he withdrew “to the countryside, and continued writing on the need for reformation” (González, 2010, 417). Hus was then drawn into a trap by John XXIII, who had taken advantage of Sigismund’s invitation to Hus to attend a council in Constance and “defend himself before the assembly” (González, 2010, 417). It became clear to Hus upon his arrival that he had been tricked into his own trial which would lead to imprisonment, “Despite protection by the ‘gleit,’ a written guarantee of safe conduct to the council, at the council and departing from the council” (Skalicky, 1990, 44). Abandoned by the protection from civil authorities and set to be an example of sternness against heretics, Hus found himself involuntarily on the stage of political theater. As one scholar notes, “Hus could then be seen as a personification of the historical struggle between the true and false Churches, and as a living indictment of the false Church’s claims to authority” (Haberkern, 2009, 179). Repeatedly Hus was ordered to recant and admit his heresy, but he would not. It was on July 6, 1415 that Hus was humiliated before a crowd by having his head shaved, priestly garments torn from his body and a paper crown placed upon his head. He was then lead to the stake to burn alive.

Both John Wycliffe and Jan Hus can be described as men who were theologically ahead of their time. Their relentlessness for the truth and authority of the Bible lead them into times of suffering, abandonment and eventually death. However, being well studied in Holy Scripture they knew they had counted the cost and realized the sacrifice. Their faith and pursuit for a reformed church were foundational to the inception of the Protestant Reformation.

Essay originally submitted for coursework on May 14, 2018 for History of the Christian Church

References

González, Justo L. 2010. “The Story Of Christianity, Volume I: The Early Church To The Reformation.” HarperCollins Publishers. New York, NY. (accessed May 14, 2018).

Perry, Marvin. 2016. Western Civilization, Ideas, Politics, and Society. 11th Edition, Vol. 1: To 1789. Cengage Learning. Boston, MA. (accessed May 14, 2018).

Conti, Alessandro, “John Wyclif”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/wyclif/>. (Accessed May 14, 2018)

Skalicky, Karel (1990) “Jan Hus, The Catholic Church and Ecumenism,” Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe: Vol. 10: Iss. 4, Article 4. Available at: http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ree/vol10/iss4/4 (Accessed May 14, 2018)

Roberts, Donald. “John Wycliffe and the Dawn of the Reformation.” Christian History , Vol. 2, №2, Issue 3, 1983. https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/john-wycliffe-and-the-dawn-of-the-reformation (Accessed May 14, 2018)

Carson, D.A. “Should Pastors Today Still Care about the Reformation?” Themelios Vol. 42 (December 2017): Pg. 437. https://tgc-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/themelios/Themelios-42-3.pdf#page=0(Accessed May 14, 2018)