Animadversions on Doctor Heylins Quinquarticular History, Part 56 – Part 58
Dr. H. page 8, 9.
That it cannot be proved, that our Reformers had any eye at the man: and that his Field had more Tares in it than Wheat: and that his Books afford all the Sects and Heresies among us, the grounds of their several dotages. To make good this charge, we are referred to Thomas Waldensis, and Nicholas Harpsfield; and lest we should except against them, to (that which is more liable to exception) the Convocation in Henry the Eighth's time, Anno 1536.
Answ. To which I say first, that neither Waldensis nor Harpsfield, nor that discontented Convocation, are meet Witnesses against Wickliff or his Followers; for they all lay to their charge things which we can manifestly prove they alway abhorred.
2. I set against these,
1. The University of Oxford, which in a Convocation Anno 1406, gave Letters testimonial to Wickliff, declaring him to be a man of honesty and great worth. 2. The judgement of Iohn Huss, and Hierom of Prague, who are acknowledged to have lighted their Candle at his: and Iohn Huss had such an opinion of him, that he wished no greater happiness, than to be where the Soul of Wickliff was. 3. Finally his own works, whether printed or manuscript; out of which, or some of which, Dr. Iames hath collected enough to prove his conformity with the Church of England Reformed.
3. I will take a particular view of all the Errors fathered on him by these men, or rather by the Doctor out of them.
1. That the Sacrament of the Altar is nothing but a piece of Bread. Mr. Fox makes mention of Wickliff's Wicket, and I my self have it, as it was reprinted at Oxford by Ioseph Barnes Prefaced by the Reverend Henry Iackson of Corpus Christi Colledge; by the which any one may see, he speaks reverently of the blessed Eucharist, and strongly confuteth Transubstantiation. It is there expresly said, the Bread consecrated is Christ's Body in figurative speech, which is hid to the understanding of Sinners.
2. That Priests have no more authority to minister Sacraments than Lay-men. This is a calumny, as Dr. Iames his Apology for Wickliff will manifest: Yet if he had maintained, that a Lay-man, or Woman, in case of necessity, may administer the Sacrament of Baptism, he had been in an error, but in an error common to him, with the Popish Church, and the Lutheran Church, and our own Church, till headed b… King Iames; yea, had he held that a Lay-man, or woman, may administer the Lord's Supper, I hope the Doctor will not much swagger against him on that score, seeing the beloved of his Soul, Simon Episcopius, affirms as much as that comes to, making also the immortal Grotius his Vouchee for this opinion: Lo his words in his Answer to the sixty four Questions, page 39, It is not absolutely necessary, that the Administration of the Supper should be performed by some Officer of the Church; and therefore because in Christ there is neither male nor female, it may in like manner be performed by all. Where that Order obtains, that some Officer should perform the Administration, that Order is to be kept for peace-sake, and reverence of the Order. Where the Officer is not present, or cannot be present in the publick Assembly, it is lawful for any man, especially a meet man, to perform that Administration: For why should the Administration of the Lord's Supper be thought forbidden to them, unto whom it is allowed to speak and teach in the Assembly? But unto all men doth the Apostle permit to speak in the Church, because he does except women, though meet understanding women, that are married, and subject to Husbands, as is manifest out of both Texts, 1 Cor. 14.34, 35. 1 Tim. 2.12. For Virgins and Widows the Apostle seemeth not to except, especially if endowed, with the gift of Prophecy from God, 1 Cor. 11.5; because unto them do not belong the reasons for which the Apostle would have women hold their peace in the Assemblies, not to teach, but to be in silence. Although it is certain where men, especially meet, are present, that it is fit that they should be prefer'd to any kind of women whatever in teaching and administring. I add, where no men meet, but only women religious and godly, that there is no cause why they may not teach one another, and celebrate the Lord's Supper among themselves, seeing that the precept of celebrating the remembrance of Christ's death, and of testifying our mutual communion, belongs not less to women than to men, Gal. 3.28. Verily if we view the ancient custom of the Church, which Grotius hath alledged out of Tertullian and Cyprian, we we cannot doubt but that the Administration of both Sacraments were granted to Laicks, and sometimes to women.
3. That all things ought to be common. This is a most perfect calumny; Wickliff held no community, except that which hath nothing against it, but covetousness the root of all evil, as Dr. Iames hath manifested.
4. That it is as lawful to Christen a Child in a Tub of Water at home, or in a Ditch by the way, as in a Font-stone in the Churches. And what if Wickliff, at a time when the publick Administration of Baptism was defiled with most dreadful Superstition, did tell the People, that Baptism was not by God's Law tied to a Font-stone in the Church? would not the Doctor have told them as much had he lived in those dayes? yea, do not all say as much at this very day? For my part I heartily rejoyce in the usages of those Churches, that have Baptisteries placed in the Temple, so as the Administration of the Ordinance may be observed by all the Members of the Congregation. Nevertheless Antiquity used Tubs of Water, and Ditches, or Lakes, not Font-stones. Of the Apostolical times this will not be denied. For the two following Centuries it is manifest by Iustin Martyr, in his second Apology, and Tertullian in his third Chapter de Corona Militis, that it was customary not to bring water to the Church, but to carry the Church to the Water. I would thank that Scholar that would from any undoubted Record of Antiquity shew me that Font-stones, placed near the Church door, came in before the fourth Century.
5. That it is as lawful at all times to confess unto a Lay-man as unto a Priest. Is not this a shrewd Heresie? delivered long before Wickliff by Saint Iames; who not only allows, but enjoyns us to confess our faults one to another? Yet to say, that Confession unto a Lay-man, is to all intents and purposes as availeable, as unto a Priest, is an Error, and never owned by Wickliff.
6. That it is not necessary, or profitable, to have any Church, or Chappel to pray in, or to do any Divine Service in. A Church is not necessary to perform Divine Service in, that is certain: no, nor yet profitable, so as to commend our Services to God. But yet usually Temples are more convenient than any other places in our Parishes: and therefore we are to rejoyce, that they are continued to us, notwithstanding the fury of the late Wars; and to use them, making no question for conscience sake. Wickliff doubtless used to Pray and Preach in his Church at Lutterworth, neither thinking that his Church did sanctifie his Services, nor defile them: and of this belief am I. Never do I find it so much as mentioned or objected against Wickliff, that he performed Divine Service in any other than a Consecrated place. To William Swinderby indeed I find it was objected,Vide Fox in Richard II. that many times and oft he had come to a Desart Wood, cleped Derwalf Wood, and there in a Chappel not hallowed, but accursed Shepherds Hulk, presumed to sing, but rather to curse in contempt of the Keys. But he replies, that this was falsly put on him; saying, it was a Chappel where a Priest useth to sing certain dayes in the year with great solemnity.
7. That burying in Church-yards is unprofitable, and in vain. Wickliff's own Body was buried in his Church-yard, after he had served God in his generation: Had he accounted it unprofitable to have such a burying place, why did he not take order with some of his Friends to have his Carcase laid elsewhere? Were it not a custom received in our Church to bury in the Church, or Church-yard, I would never petition that it might be made a custom; knowing that from the beginning it was not so, either in the Jewish or Christian Church.
8. That Holy-days ordained and instituted by the Church (and taking in the Lord's day for one) are not to be observed and kept in reverence, in as much as all dayes are alike. The Parenthesis here is of the Doctor's own adding. The Convocation represents the Wickliffists as distinguishing betwixt Sundayes and Holy-dayes, Article 35. We may give a shrewd ghess at Wickliff's Opinion, by the Opinion of Hierom of Prague, which was as Bernard Luzenberg represents it, that we must cease from work no day but the Lord's day. To this the Bohemian Churches do stand to this very day; keeping some dayes indeed besides the Lord's day, but meerly as circumstances, not as parts of worship: and therefore so soon as Divine Service is over, allowing people to follow their work; yet granting no such allowance on the Lord's day, which they aver to be of Divine institution.
9. That it is sufficient, and enough to believe, though a man do no good works. This is but the Heresie of St. Paul, only maliciously represented by Wickliff's Adversaries; and it is at this day the stone that every Papist carries in his pocket, to throw at the heads of all Protestants whatsoever, whether Calvinist or Lutheran. It were to be wished that some Lutherans had no more given occasion to this reproach, than Wickliff did.
10. That no humane Laws, or Constitutions, do oblige a Christian. 'Tis added by the Convocation, but such as be in the Gospels, or Paul's Epistles, or the New Testament. And why the Doctor omitted this addition, or restriction, no man can give a good reason. Such limitation doth take off all the offensiveness of the Universal negative; for there can be no good Law, or Constitution humane, but what is to be found either expresly, or implicitely in the New Testament. The New Testament requires obedience to all humane Laws, that are not contrary to the eternal Rule of Righteousness or some Divine positive institution, under the severest penalties, and from the most perfect motive.
11. That God never gave grace or knowledge to a great person, or rich man, and that they in no wise follow the same. This was indeed the opinion of Pelagius, with whose Heresies Wickliff was never thought to be infected: that Wickliff ever held any such opinion, is neither true nor probable. He was so much favoured by the Nobility and Gentry of this Nation, who had great estates, and ever upon increase, that it cannot be thought he would ever broach a Tenent, that left none of them any hope of salvation. Dr. George Abbot, afterwards Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, mentions in his Answer to Dr. Hill, a Manuscript he had seen of one Henry Knighton, a Canon of Leicester. That Manuscript is now published, with some others, by Cornelius Bee; the learned Selden having put a large Preface to the whole Book. From that Preface I collect, that Knighton was contemporary to Wickliff, and so was the more able to give us right information of him. He never chargeth Wickliff with denying grace or salvation to all rich men: Some such thing indeed he fathers upon William Swinderby ▪ page 2646, but if he had indeed held any other impossibility of rich mens salvation than what is the clear result of our Saviours own speech, why was no such thing charged on him in the Process made against him by the Bishop of Lincoln, or Hereford? Both which are related by Mr. Fox, and have not one tittle of this import in them.
All that I shall further add, is
First, Wickliffists did maugre all the malice of their Adversaries increase. Knighton saith, page 2666, Secta illa maximo in honore illis diebus habebatur, &c. that Sect in those dayes was in great honour; and so multiplied, that you would scarce see two in the way, but one of them was a Disciple of Wickliff.
Secondly, That Wickliff laid the Foundation of our Reformation in England, as well as of that in Bohemia. By three means especially did he advance our Reformation in England,
1. By Translating the Scriptures into the English Tongue: by this means kindling in his Countrey-men a desire to understand the last Will and Testament of their blessed Saviour. By him, saith Knighton, page 2644, the Gospel was made vulgar, and more open to Laicks and Women knowing how to read, than it was wont to be to the Clergymen very learned and well understanding.
2. By asserting the due power of Kings in their own Kingdoms, against the Usurpations of the Popes of Rome. Of this the Pope was very sensible, and feelingly complained of it, in his Letter to the University of Oxford, and to King Richard the Second, 1378, saying, Wickliff broached the Errors of Marsilius of Padua, and of Iohn of Gandune of unworthy memory. The very same complaint did Pope Gregory the Twelfth make, in the time of King Henry the Fourth: A Copy of this Letter I have not seen; but Dr. Abbot had seen it, and any Oxford man may see it in the Book that Mr. Hare gave to the University. How much Marsilius had shaken the Pillars of the Papal Jurisdiction, is not unknown to Scholars: It were to be wished that his Defensor were in more of their hands. And Wickliff indeed trod in his steps, (or rather in the steps of William Ocham, his Senior in Merton Colledge;) for he strenuously asserted, That the Lordship of all Temporalities, both of Secular men and Religious, pertained to the King; for else he were not King of England, but of a very small part of it: and that the Kingdom of England may lawfully (in case of necessity) for its own defence, detain and keep back the Treasure of the Kingdom, that it be not carried away ro foreign and strange Nations, the Pope himself demanding and requiring the same under pain of Censure, and by virtue of Obedience.
3. He corrected and curbed the exorbitance of the Episcopal power also: asserting, that the Order of Priesthood in its own nature and substance, receiveth no degrees of more or less; and yet notwithstanding, the power of inferiour Priests is in these dayes, upon due consideration, restrained, and sometimes again in time of necessity enlarged. See his exposition on the Conclusions in Mr. Fox, Rich 2. page 567. One of his Articles condemned by the Councel of Constance was, that Hallowing of Churches, Confirmation of Children, the Sacrament of Orders, be reserved to the Pope and Bishops only for lucre. This notion was sucked in by all our Martyrs, and even by those Papists that were not wedded to the Court of Rome, as well as to the Church of Rome; as may be seen in the Institution of a Christian man, concerning the Sacrament of Orders. And that our first Reformers in King Edward's dayes, proceeded on the same Principle, will appear undeniable by that which Mr. Stillingfleet hath Printed in his Irenicum, out of Arch-Bishop Cranmer's Manuscript. But enough of Wickliff.
Dr. H. pag. 9.
Tindal, Barnes, Frith, are the next whom the Doctor mentions; and about them he spends pag. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15.
Ans. To what purpose he spent so much Paper, or made so bold with the Readers patience, I wot not. Mr. H. H. had only said, that they, and as many others as lived and suffered before the Reformation, if they gave us their judgements in the five Points, gave them agreeable to Mr. Calvin. This the Doctor in effect grants foreign; only adds for a close, that
Dr. H. page 15.
As those suf…ered death before the publick undertaking of Reformation under Edward VI, so nothing was ascribed to their Authority by the first Reform…rs.
Answ. The latter part of which clause is as false, as the former is true. Something was by the first Reformers ascribed to the Authority of Tindal; for notwithstanding King Henry the Eighths Proclamation, the Act of Parliament, and Sir Thomas More's active endeavours, to suppress and smother and abolish Tindal's Translation, yet it came to light, and was, being corrected by Thomas Matthews, printed with Annotations, by the special priviledge of King Edward the Sixth, Anno 1551. Yea, the Bibles used in Churches from 1549, to 1577, were those of Tindal's Translation; called also Coverdale's, because he had made some corrections of Tindal's. And they who have taken pains to compare Books, say, that the Psalter now enjoyned to be used, is agreeable to Tindal's Translation: as also were the Epistles and Gospels, till this last Edition of the Liturgie.
And if any thing in this kind was ascribed to the Authority of Tindal, something also was ascribed, at least by Arch-Bishop Cranmer (one of our Reformers,) to the Authority of Iohn Frith; for he seems to have received his Faith in the Doctrine of the Sacrament from him: and with his Heifer did he plow, in his Answer to Stephen Winchester; Rationes argumenta atque e Doctoribus petita testimonia (Johannis Frithi) singula commemorare, ut immensi esset negotii ita nec valde necessarii: praesertim cum Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis in suo adversus Wintoniensem Apologetico idem abunde praestitisse videatur; hinc contracta maxima praesidiorum materia, quibus adversus cum nititur, nec scio an ulli magis Authori hujusce doctrinae fidem acceptam debuit Archiepiscopu… quam huic adolescenti: Iohn Fox in his Commentary in Latine, pag. 130.