Within the Roman Catholic church, it is taught that Christ is literally present during Communion. They taught that Christ was not figuratively or symbolically there but rather He was wholly present. They taught that people were genuinely eating the body of Christ and drinking His blood. In summation the Catholic Church taught Real Presence, which was Jesus literally being present during Communion. Wyclif was considered a heretic due to his views regarding the Eucharist. Wyclif held the view of Remanence which was “that the substance of the bread and wine remained after the consecration” (Madigan 390). He believed that it was not possible “for any real substance to be destroyed and miraculously transformed” Madigan, 390). This would be Wydclif’s main stance against the Catholic Church in that he questioned the presence of Christ in the Eucharist and that Christ was not truly present but rather Christ was symbolically there which is a clear cut contradiction and heresy against the teachings of the Church.
Wyclif uses his own logic in saying “that there is no identification of the bread with the body of Christ” (Magic and Heresy, 163). He goes further in saying that the Eucharist is an accident and that he cannot find purpose or meaning with the occurrences of an accident. He also argues that “For if A is identical with B, then both of them remain; since a thing which is destroyed is not made identical, but is annihilated, or ceases to be. And if both of them remain, they differ as much as at first, and differ consequently in number, and so are not, in the sense given, the same…” (163). What this is saying is that If Christ and the bread/wine are the same thing how then can Christ who is eternal be destroyed (eaten) and still remain? Two things that are made separately cannot be similar because no two things (his example uses Peter and Paul) can be identical because they are different objects. There is an Object A and an Object B, two separate objects cannot be similar A+B=/=AB. Finally, Wyclif asserts the idea that if a mouse eats the bread then the bread becomes corrupt and if the bread = Christ then the bread(Christ) then to is corrupt.
The church was so afraid because Wycliffe pointed out flaws within the church that lay people could agree with, he didn’t see it fit that Jesus could be portrayed as bread and destroyed. He claimed that “the pope was, at best, the head only of the visible, Roman church” (Madigan 390). He condemned that head of the church, saying that he was only a figure head and not truly the mouth piece of God. Wyclif made statements that Mass wasn’t grounded in the Gospel, God was obedient to the devil, he said that if any priest was found to be living in sin then they were unfit to baptize, teach, or ordain. He argued against the confusion within the teachings of transubstantiation.
“Wyclif took the view that as only God can vouchsafe property or power, he does so not by conferring permanent property. Rather, he does so in the form of temporary loans” (Madigan 388). According to Wyclif everything on earth belonged to God which means that the Church didn’t truly own anything. They were only temporarily maintaining possession of land, kingdoms, and property. The only way to hold land according to Wyclif was to live a virtuous life. Any cleric or priest to be found living in sin was not allowed according to Wyclif to hold any lands. The Church was so against Wyclif’s teachings on dominion because they wanted their priests to own land, they wanted to church to be able to hold property, be a ruling kingdom, maintain land, dictate who could own land according to their favor with the church. They didn’t want to be questioned by Wyclif or to be seen as a temporary force or a temporary kingdom on earth that could just as easily be eradicated. The church taught that a virtuous life didn’t grant you land, but God did, and the Church was the mouth piece of God. Therefore, the church had the ability to dictate land to whoever they saw fit. Ultimately Wyclif questioned the divine purpose of the papacy which would obviously cause problems within the Church.
The Pope says that he is saddened by Wyclif’s teachings on the basis of his teachings being based in heresy. He says that Wyclif is trying to weaken the stance and state of the church by criticizing critical doctrines and teachings. The Pope wanted to see that anyone spouting the heretical teachings of Wyclif be barred and arrested from the University of Oxford. He urged the university to be diligent in repairing the damage that Wyclif and his teachings had caused the University as well as the Church.
Gregory depicts Wyclif as a heretic. He says that his teachings are unethical and are simply false. HE urges the University of Oxford to bar and arrest anyone who is spouting of the heretical teachings of Wyclif. He urges the Univesity into action by saying that their reward for defending the church will be honor along with divine recompense. Simply, the people who are loyal to the church and its teachings will have heavenly rewards.
The response to Wyclif shows that the church was truly afraid of the Lollards and the teachings of Wyclif. They went on full defense in order to stop his heretical views to spread any further. They wanted all people spouting his teachings at the University of Oxford to be arrested. This shows utter fear of Wyclif. This contrasts with Pope Innocent 3 and King John in that John gave all of his land over to the Catholic Church. Wyclif argued against the church having land because he saw that all the land on earth belonged to God and therefore all the land withheld by the church was temporary. John gave tithes, annual taxes, and land to the Church. Wyclif would disagree with all of the actions wholeheartedly.
Wyclif shows his true understanding of the gospel in quoting that Jesus was the poorest man on earth. Jesus owned no possessions, he had no land, and he was content. This is the direct opposite of what the church was doing. The church was maintaining land, becoming kings, and brining in currency annually. His view is grounded in the Gospel because he quotes from the gospels, cites Christ, Peter, Paul, and other scriptures. The similarities that I see regarding the Waldensians and Wyclif is that they both urged the Church and the papacy to get rid of their lands and live in a poor condition. Neither wanted to see the church rule the world as kings but rather guide the people of the world through humility, worship, and a focus on scripture.
Wyclif refuses to go to Rome because he believes that he has done nothing wrong. He believes that every word that he has said, every teaching that he has taught has been centered in Christ and therefore he has done no wrong. He feels that the pope is summoning him unjustly and therefore opening himself up to sin. He believes that the pope is only acting on wicked intentions through the cruel consulship of the church. This decision leads to his condemnation of the pope due to his own feeling of being wrongfully summoned. Wyclif believes that because the Pope his summoning him for things that he is doing that are rooted in scripture then the pope must be corrupted by the Antichrist and therefore evil. He believes that the Pope cannot pass judgement no his due to his corruption.
