John de Wyclif had a differing view of the Eucharist than the church, which resulted in an abundance of agitation and declarations of heresy from the church. The Roman church viewed transubstantiation from the Eucharist as the divine act of transforming bread and wine into the blood and flesh of Christ, so that one may be in the presence of Christ. With this view, members of the Roman church believed that the actual presence of Christ impregnates the bread and wine. Wyclif, on the other hand, believed the Christ not exist physically in the bread, but symbolically (Madigan, 391). Wyclif had many other controversial views as well, like church offices being required to live modestly and behave in a holy manner, abiding by the Lord’s will. One really controversial belief of Wyclif is that the Roman church should not hold secular or jurisdictional authority, as well as less civil dominion, which involved holding property and how the revenue is managed (Madigan, 390). He also believed that Christ was the true pope, and that church heads were merely the highest ranking physical members. To the church, if these beliefs were enacted, they would lose a significant amount of power and wealth.

In Wyclif’s “Communion,” depicted as a conversation between Truth, Wisdom and Falsehood, Wyclif expresses his views on substantiation. Through Truth, Wyclif states that there isn’t acceptable evidence to show that the bread and wine really does become the flesh and blood of Christ. Wisdom explains that there can’t be two of the exact same thing (i.e., flesh of Christ) using logic, as to emphasize that the actual flesh and blood of the Lord cannot be conjured over and over and be the exact same flesh. The last statement, given by Falsehood, says that “The bread becomes corrupt, or eaten by a mouse. Second, The same bread is the body of Christ. Third, Therefore, the body of Christ does thus become corrupt…” This means that if the legitimate presence of Christ was in the bread, that the Christ himself would be corrupted.

In Wyclif’s view of dominion, no one can truly own something. Property behaves as a loan, and one can only own property as long as one remains a righteous life. Under this belief, popes, clerics, bishops and etc. couldn’t seize land or property, nor exercise their power, unless they exercise a virtuous and pious lifestyle. This idea would ensure that church status could not be abused effectively by those not following God’s laws. The church, of course, despised this because it would negatively impact their physical wealth, as well as force church offices to behave correctly, reducing their power. In “Conclusions,” Wyclif illustrates his views with statements like “That Christ is not in the sacrament of the alter identically, truly and really in his proper and corporeal presence.” In response to these ideas, Pope Gregory the XI published a writing of 18 errors within Wyclif’s work, than had him called to be arrested. Fortunately for Wyclif, he was protected by powerful figures so he wasn’t arrested. Pope Gregory depicts Wyclif as a madman, and that “He (Wycliff) does not hesitate to… vomit forth from the recesses of his breast, certain propositions and conclusions that are erroneous and false.” Gregory XI then demanded that Oxford shall not admit propositions with any variance from the correct interpretation of Roman Catholicism, and that John Wyclif be arrested. If Oxford were to not follow these orders, they would be completely cut off in all regards from the Roman Church, exercising his papal authority.

When summoned to Rome by the Pope, Wyclif responded with a letter. In the letter, he discusses how the pope is the closest vicar of Christ that earthly people can achieve, and that pope’s closeness to Christ be measured in virtuous behavior, and not of material wealth. He also said that if the Pope were justly summoning him, he would happily go, and happily die, but if the cause were not “skilful,” then Wyclif would not go. That being said, Wyclif didn’t go, and in doing say called the Pope the Antichrist, which lead to Wyclif’s condemnation from the church.