^' m.

L!Bn.4f:

REGINALD PECOCK
Churchman and Man of Letters

A Study in Fifteenth Century
English Prose

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Faculty of Letters of the
Catholic University of America in partial
fulfilment of the requirements for the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

By

REV. EMMET A. HANNICK, A. B., A. M.,
of the Diocese of Detroit

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

Bought with the income
ofthe
WILLIAM C. EGLESTON FUND

REGINALD PECOCK
Churchman and Man of Letters

A Study in Fifteenth Century
English Prose

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Faculty of Letters of the
Catholic University of America in partial
fulfilment of the requirements for the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

By

REV. EMMET A. HANNICK, A. B., A. M.,
of the Diocese of Detroit

Nihil Obstat. t THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D. D.,
Censor Deputatus.
Imprimatvir. tMICHAEL J. CURLEY, D. D.,
Archiepiscopus Baltimorensis.
Baltimorae, die 26 Mail, 1922.

Copyright, 1922, Emmet Hannick.

To
The Rt. Rev. M. J. Gallagher, D. D.,
Bishop of Detroit,
this volume is
respectfully dedicated.

CONTENTS PAGE
Preface  i-ii
Chapter I  1
Reginald Peeock, Biographical Sketch.
Chapter II  24
LoUardy, Its Causes, Remote and Proximate.
Chapter III  52
Fifteenth Century Prose and LoUardy.
Chapter IV  70
Peeock 's Repressor and LoUardy.
Chapter V  102
Peeock, the Exponent of Fifteenth Century
Prose.
Bibliography  125-128
Following Chapter V.

PREFACE
The fifteenth century is one of the most difficult
periods for the student of English History to contend
with. Due to the absence of documentary evidence a
great deal of conjecture and obscurity still surrounds the
political, social and religious conditions of the times.
However, earnest research of comparatively recent date
has cast new light upon this obscurity, and conjecture is
giving way to certitude, or at least conclusions are being
arrived at that will, perhaps, necessitate the recasting of
the traditional viewpoint.
Fifteenth century literature has also suffered from
this traditional viewpoint. Scholars in their zeal to set
in relief the literary attainments of the thirteenth century
or to embellish the phenomenal outburst of sixteenth cen
tury originality, have either neglected altogether the
fifteenth century, or have exaggerated the lines of con
trast, thus leaving the stigma of mediocrity upon a period
that is worthy of greater consideration.
The author of the following study first became inter
ested in this period while pursuing a course of lectures
on Early English Chroniclers given at the Catholic
University of America by Prof. P. J. Lennox, Litt. D.
This interest was further stimulated by later studies in
fifteenth century drama under Mr. D. Nichol Smith,
M. A., at Oxford.
The present work had its inception in the library of
Duke Humphrey of Gloucester, Oxford. This was a very
happy coincidence, since at the beginning of my labours
I had not yet come to the realization that the lives of the
two great men, Humphrey of Gloucester and Reginald
Peeock, were so intimately interwoven.
Very few scholars, even in recent times, have
attempted a solution of the problem surrounding the
life and works of the greatest prose writer of the fif-

teenth century. The few, three in number, have ap
proached the question with a great deal of scholarly
experience, bequeathing to us very worthy contributions.
However, it occurred to me that something more could
be done by a detailed study of the literary qualities of
the model English prose productions of this obscure
period ; and that there are certain historical facts dealing
with Peeock 's life that might be cleared up; but what
is ot still greater importance, that there is a viewpoint
in dealing with such matters, one which must necessarily
be taken into consideration, namely, the viewpoint of
one who has a common faith with the one time Bishop
of Chichester. While in Rome I took occasion to consult the Vatican
Archives, and found there correspondence that sheds
light upon the interesting controversy which had its
origin in the incidents connected with the fall of Peeock.
While this documentary evidence is not conclusive, never
theless the inference to be drawn from it is that Peeock 's
downfall was as much the result of the work of political
foes as of his theological aberrations.
I have received helpful suggestions and a great deal
of consideration from many throughout my course.
Thanks are due, and here sincerely expressed to my
bishop the Rt. Rev. M. J. Gallagher, D. D., Bishop of
Detroit, to whom I am most grateful for the opportunities
afforded me ; to Prof. P. J. Lennox, D. Litt. who has
been very generous in placing his scholarly experience at
my disposal; to my former tutor Prof. T. Seccombe,
M. A., who so kindly assisted me in gaining access to
the various MSS. at Oxford; to the Rev. Graham Rey
nolds, B. A., who was untiring in the labour of manu
script reading, and to the officials in the libraries at the
Catholic University of America, at Oxford and at Rome
who were so courteous and helpful with their assistance.
EMMET HANNICK.

CHAPTER I
REGINALD PECOCK
Biographical Sketch
No conclusive documentary evidence, if ever it did
exist, remains whieh reveals the origin or ending of that
singular and pathetic churchman and man of letters,
Reginald Peeock, Bishop of Chichester, champion of
orthodoxy and condemned heretic. His parentage and
place of birth, as also his early education, remain a
matter of conjecture. Wales, according to Gascoigne and
Leland, was the land of his birth and that of his
parentage.^ Pope Eugenius, in elevating him to the See
of St. Asaph, states in his bull of provision that he was
"presbyterum Menevensis diocesis, in artibus magistrum
ac in theologia baccalaureum, " etc.'®
One might conjecture with Wood that the versatile
scholar of mature years spent his boyhood in preparing
himself for more advanced studies. However, we find
him afterwards attracting attention at Oriel College,
Oxford, for on October 30, 1417, we find young Peeock
elected to a fellowship made vacant by the elevation of
Dr. Garsdale to the office of Provost of the college. The
date of his birth must have been about the last years
of the fourteenth century. Three years after his election
to a fellowship we find the youthful scholar determining
upon the vocation in which he was destined to rise to
heights of fame and power, that would in the hour of
failure serve only to intensify the humiliation of his fall.
On December 21, 1420, he was ordained by Dr. Flemmyng,
Bishop of Lincoln, acolyte and subdeacon. On February
1. "Wallicus origine" Gascoigne in Hearne, XI. S. 514, 516, 548.
"Nations Wallicus" Insert. Chron., in Leland Collect., tom. ii, p. 409;
"relicta Cambria, patrio solo" Leland, De Scriptt. Britt. c566.
2. Beg. Staff. F15; Wharton MSS, 577, p. 31. The bull of Eugenius
rV and the "Juramentum fidelitatis episcopi Assavensis" are still pre
served at Lambeth.

2 Reginald Pecock
15, 1421, he was made deacon, and on March 8, 1421, was
raised to the dignity of priest, ordained on the title of
his college fellowship. Shortly after this he took his
degree of Bachelor of Divinity, and in 1425'^ he was in
cepted under a Cistercian monk, during the chancellor
ship of Gascoigne.
His persistent application to both profane and sacred
literature could have no other results than success. He
won not merely the esteem of his fellow university men,
but the acclaim of his enemies as well, who do not hesi
tate in according to him the recognition that was duly
his.-* Of far greater importance, however, was the
recognition which he received from Humphrey Plantage
net, Duke of Gloucester. At this time Gloucester was
the protector of the kingdom and the most powerful
patron of letters in England. In him the scholar found
a sympathetic and enthusiastic protector and supporter.
The library which he founded at Oxford still remains a
monument to his zeal for scholarship. The reputation
which the young priest Pecock enjoyed amongst his fel
lows at Oxford did not escape the attention of the Duke,
for we find him called up to court, where, as Leland^ tells
us, he soon became a considerable figure and was of such
service to his Prince that in a short time he was endowed
with ample fortunes.
In 1431, and in all likelihood through the influence of
Duke Humphrey, he was made Master of the College of
St. Spirit and St. Mary, Whittington College, London, to
which the rectory of St. Michael in Riola was attached.
Pecock refers to his residence here in his Repressor.

3. Gascoigne 's MS. tom. ii, p. 597, gives 1445. TMs date cannot be
sustained in the light of subsequent events. Lewis observes that Pecock
left Oxford about 1445. Lewis's Lives, Pt. II, p. 3.
4. Leland, Comment, de Soriptoritus Britt.
5. Leland, ibid.

Chuechman and Man op Letters 3
This is one of the particulars of his life — few in number,
unfortunately — that can be gleaned from his works.
Whether or not Pecock became connected with the
diocese of St. David's between this time and his elevation
to the See of St. Asaph is difficult to determine, since the
evidence is not at all conclusive. ^ At all events the next
thirteen years, the greater part, and probably all, of
which were spent in London, were to be fruitful in deter
mining the interesting career of the future Bishop of
Chichester. It was during these years that the Master
of Whittington assiduously applied himself to a great
deal of study, not merely of an academic turn but prob
ably such as would enable him to minister to the spiritual
needs of the flock entrusted to his care. Peeock had the
heart of a real shepherd.'' He loved his flock and any
disaffection in the fold pained him. Undoubtedly at this
time he came in contact with individuals under the in
fluence of Wycliffe's teachings.- Although the king had
taken a strong stand for the suppression of the Lollards
there still remained under cover many disaffected in
dividuals throughout the kingdom, and in London they
were in considerable numbers.^ They boasted in the
literature scattered in public places that they were a

6. Lewis, Rev. John, The Life of Reynold Peooch, S. T. P., Oxford,
1822, ch. I, p. 6, says: "It seems as if after this, Mr. Pecock was
promoted in the diocese of St. David's in his own country, since in the
papal bull of provision of Mr. Pecock to the bishopric of St. Asaph, he
is styled a Presbyter or Priest of the diocese of St. David's; unless this
ouly relates to his being a native of that part of the country."
7. Pope Calixtus III, in a rescript to the Archbishop of Canterbury
for Pecock 's restoration says : ' ' Sane pervenit nuper ad noticiam nostram
quod venerabilis frater noster Reginaldus episcopus Cicestrensis dudum
area salutem populi sibi commissi solicitus quosdam Xpiane religionis et
nonnullos alios eontemplativam vitam coneernentes tam in vulgari anglieo
quam in linga [sic] latina libellos sive tractatus aut quinternos compilavit.
Et deinde eis accurate, ut conveniebat, non correctis neque emendatis,
diversis personis, tam clericis, quam laicis tradidit, sperans ut exinde
salutares f ructus eisdem personis provenirent. ' ' Archiv. Vatic. ' Reg. Vatic.
Calixti III, vol. 462, fol. 326-327.
8. Knighton tells us ("Knighton de Event. Angliae c. 2663") "that
a man could not meet two people on the road, but one of them was a
disciple of Wycliffe. . . . For that they always pretended in all their

4 Reginald Pecock
body of a hundred thousand men at least. Blessed
Thomas More, commenting on this in later years, main
tained that this noising that the realm was full of heretics
was an artifice of theirs to embolden their party and
intimidate Catholics. ^ The discerning of the numbers of
Lollards at this time is not to our purpose. AVliat Ave do
know, however, on the testimony of Pecock himself is that
he knew in a very intimate way individuals, and very
prominent individuals, in the sect, so much so that his
knowledge emboldened him to challenge these individuals
to defend themselves against very grave and serious
charges made by him against their character and
morals.^" No scholar of the period was more intimately
acquainted with the practices and teachings of the Lol
lards, and no scholar of the period has left such an ex
haustive treatment of the subject as we find in Pecock 's
various treatises. With zealous enthusiasm he cham
pioned the cause of orthodoxy. Those that had strayed
from the fold he sought to win back by the gentle means
of argument. If only they could come to the proper
understanding of the orthodox teachings, the greatest
barrier would be surmounted. To accomplish this a ra
tional treatment of the subject in the language of the
people was in his estimation a prime requisite. Undoubt
edly many hours of the thirteen years spent in London
were devoted to this problem, both in study and with his
pen. Some of his earliest treatises were in all probability
composed at this time. Gascoigne tells us that Pecock
wrote books in English for twenty years. Pope Calixtus
III in a rescript to the Archbishop of Canterbury also
mentions this fact.^^

discourses a great respect for the law of God. . . . By which means
a great many well meaning people were deluded, and brought to be of
their sect, lest they should seem to be enemies to the law of God and the
Divine precepts.
9. More, Thos., EngUsh Works, p. 915, coll. 2.
10. Pecock, Repressor ch. XVIII.
11. Archiv. Vatic. Beg. Vatic. Calixti III, vol. 462, fol. 326-327.

Chuechman and Man of Letters 5
We shall see more of these writings later. Our
present purpose is to follow the Master of Whittington
to those loftier heights to which his abilities and f riendly
influence were to lead him, and from which in the hour
of his croAvning, he was to be ignominiously cast down,
amidst the caustic exultation of inferior and less scrup
ulous individuals.
The Protector's eye was upon him. Humphrey of
Gloucester procured for his brilliant young protege a
Mshopric.i^ John Lowe, Bishop of St. Asaph, was trans
ferred to the See of Rochester and was succeeded in St.
Asaph by Reginald Pecock. The bull of appointment
raising him to the See of St. Asaph is dated April 22,
1444, in the reign of Eugenius IV. The same year, June
14, he was consecrated in the chapel at Croydon, as it
appears by the register of John Stafford, Archbishop of
Canterbury and Chancellor of England. At the same
time the degree of Doctor of Divinity was conferred
upon him, in all likelihood by royal mandate, at any rate
without keej)ing any exercise or act.
This procedure exasperated the puritanical sensi
tiveness of the zealous Gascoigne, who has bequeathed to
us a lamentation^^ worthy of his narrowness. The value
of Gascoigne 's evidence, it must be borne in mind, is
minimized by the colouring it receives from Gascoigne 's
temperament. Like Wycliffe, he had been disappointed
in his ambitions. A good man, one would say, whose faults
were petty, but faults making him less a man; one who

12. Bale unqualifiedly states the fact, "De Scriptt. Britt." and Bab-
ington. Bolls Ser. Pecook's Repressor vol. I, Intro., p. XIII says, "There is
no reason why Lewis should question the fact."
13. Doctor fuit in Oxonia per gratiam absentandi: numquam enim
respondit alicui doctor! pro forma sua ut esset doctor, nee aliquem actum
in scholis fecit Oxonia, postquam incepit in theologia, an postea fecerit
nescitur a nobis. Per omnes annos a die ineeptionis suae in Oxonia usque
ad diem praesentis scripturae nullum actum fecit scliolasticum, nee legendo,
nee praedicando, nee disputando, nee determinando. " Le Neve, Fasti
Ecclesiae Anglicanae, vol. I, pp. 71-72, ed. Hardy T. D. 1854. Hardy, Gas
coigne n. s. pp. 516-517.

6 Reginald Pecock
perceived disaster every-ft-here principally because he felt
his OAvn opportunities passing, and saw younger, and m
some cases, less worthy men placed in positions of honour
and responsibility.
Three years after his elevation to the See of 'St.
Asaph, the rising young prelate preached his memorable
sermon at Paul's Cross. It Avas the year 1447, a por
tentous occasion, and a never to be forgotten sermon. It
does not seem possible that Pecock Avas not cognizant of
the popular prejudice of the time. On the contrary, it is
evident that he Avas quite aAvare of the conditions. How
ever, the seven untimely conclusions which he expounded
at Paul's Cross, in Avliich he defended the non-preaching,
and non-residence of bishops, are in their temerity and
boldness indicative of Pecock 's most vulnerable point.
Either he did not understand,, or he thought himself suf
ficiently strong to buffet any opposition ; or, feeling that
his cause was just, had giA^en no thought to eventualities.
His downfall may be traced to his famous sermon. In
the interval greater honours Avere to be his, but prejudice
and the steady silent Avork of enemies would in due time
accomplish their intent.
Fall and Condemnation of Pecock.
The impression made by his Paul's Cross sermon,
certainly, could never haA^e been foreseen by Pecock.
That opposition Avould be forthcoming from the enemies
of the Church, against whom the sermon Avas prin
cipally directed, Avas naturally to be expected, but that
there should be a general resentment on the part of the
bishops, Avhose champion he had constituted himself,
could not have been anticipated by the zealous young
prelate. According to Gascoigne, the young Bi.-^hop of
St. Asaph Avas quite contented Avitli the sermon itself
and Avas confident of its excellent results. He was
supposed to have remarked to one Master Chapman

Chuechman and Man op Lettees 7
"That the consequence of his opinion would be that no
one hereafter would speak ill of the Bishops, or murmur
about them, since by him it Avas made evident that
Bishops are not obligated to preach, nor to do the other
works of a cure of souls, as children and the common
people think; but it is their office and business to over
see those Avho haA'e cures. "^^ That his championing the
cause was not received Avith enthusiasm by the bishops
seems evident from the fact that he found it necessary
to draw up in Latin, supposedly for the Archbishop of
Canterbury, certain conclusions in vindication of his
Paul's Cross sermon.^^
To perpetuate abuses was far from the intention of
the Bishop of St. Asaph. He, of all his contempor
aries, would be the last to make use of the privileges
that he had defended in his sermon. He had preached
on numerous occasions, and none of the bishops had
exercised their office more frequently. But we may con
jecture that it was his indiscretion, and rather sincere
self -acclaiming, that nettled their lordships, a nettling
that showed itself to Pecock 's detriment in the hour of
trial. Other enemies of the zealous type of Dr. Gascoigne
saw disaster in the conclusions propounded by this
rapidly rising court prelate. Gascoigne was not in
sympathy with the measures adopted by Archbishop
Arundel in 1408 to offset the abuses occasioned by the
irresponsible and heretical discourses of preachers. The
Archbisliop had legislated that no preacher be permitted
to address the faithful unless he be first approved and
licensed by the bishop.^^ This measure undoubtedly
had had a tendency to discourage preaching, and abuses
arose from its being neglected, until even the supporters

14. Gascoigne, Dictionarimm Theologicum.
15. "Abbreviatio Regnaldi Pecock" (MS. Bibl. Bodl. Oxon. n. 117, fol.
11-13 saec. XV). Also Babington's edit, of the "Repressor."
16. Die. Theol. pars prima.

8 Reginald Pecock
of the Church decried "the unpreaching prelates" and
"dusty pulpits." Gascoigne saAv in it nothing but dis
aster, and was firmly convinced that the strange malady
of the throat with Avhich the Archbishop Avas afterwards
seized, was nothing other than a A'isitation from Heaven
for his stand on the restricting of preachers. It Avas in
such a charged atmosphere of oA-erdone zeal that
Reginald Pecock fearlessly enunciated his conclusions, on
the face of which Avas to be seen a palliation of grave
abuses. This was only one group that Pecock had the mis
fortune to stir against himself. His was a genius for
making enemies, especially at a time when his friends
and supporters were most needed. As we have seen, the
Lollards were professedly against him, if for no other
reason than that he Avas a bishop, but in addition, Pecock
was a prelate that had spent years in confuting their
conclusions. The bishops were now evidently set against
him, and continued to be until the end; the monks, in all
likelihood, were not enthusiastic over his disparaging re
marks when he designated them "pulpit baAvlers;" nor
could the king look with the best grace upon one Avho, in a
position of prominence, did not hesitate to reprimand
him publicly, and especially when his sovereign Avas
labouring under difficulties. HoAvever, apart from all
this, there is another reason not sufficiently set forth :
one of greater importance than these animosities aroused
through indiscretions; one more intimately Avorking to
the destruction of Pecock than even his heresies, and it
is this, that Reginald Pecock had in some way stirred up
the suspicion and displeasure of the reigning party.
The direct eA'idence in support of the contention that
Pecock had fallen in grace Avith the court, or in some
manner had, in the opinion of the authorities, placed
himself amongst those who were inimical to the interests
of the reigTiing poAvers, and was therefore an undesirable,
and one to be feared, is not abundant. The inferences

Chuechman and Man of Letters 9
to be drawn from the evidence at our disposal, hoAvever,
are numerous and striking in support of our contention.
Many of the subsequent events in his life Avill have no
bearing or import unless AdcAved in the liglit of such an
hypothesis. The insatiable and unrelenting thirst for
our author's destruction As^as the result of poAverful
prejudice and enmities; factors more powerful than the
subdued Lollards; more powerful than the bishops, and
more powerful and unforgiving than the men of the
Gascoigne type.
Wliile the Paul's Cross sermon paved the way for
his ultimate fall, still his position and influence was
powerful enough in 1450, at Avliich time he was translated
and elcA'ated to the important bishopric of Chichester.^^
Gascoigne attributes this promotion to the influence of
the Duke of Suffolk and Walter Hart, Bishop of Nor-
Avicli. To the See of St. Asaph, Humphrey of Gloucester
had assisted him, and noAv, strange as it may seem,
Gloucester's great enemy, the crafty Duke of Suffolk,
assisted in his elevation to Chichester. Grave suspicions
were still whispered about, and Suffolk, the Queen's
favorite, was responsible in the minds of many for his
part in the murder of the Duke of Gloucester. In 1448
Pecock 's friend and protector, Gloucester, fell a victim,
not only to the Queen 's envy and insatiable desire to rule,
but also to the ambitious aspirings of her favorite,
Suffolk. It is very reasonable to suppose that when in
1449 Adam Moleyns, Bishop of Chichester, was set upon
and murdered^^ by the hired ruffians of the Duke of
York's friends, the Duke of Suffolk lost no opportunity
or time in elevating to Chichester, Gloucester's very
intimate friend. This would at least tend to offset sus
picion. Moreover, it is possible that the Queen and

17. Archiv. Vatic. Reg. Lateranen. Nic. V, vol. 465, fol. 222-225, also
Nic. V. Beg. Stafford, p. 35.
18. Summary of English Chronicles.

10 Reginald Pecock
Suffolk had come to realize that Gloucester and his
friends were, after all, true friends of the court and the
realm. Certainly Pecock was not a sycophant. It is difficult
to ascertain his motives in reprimanding the king, or in
speaking disparagingly of the "sowdiers forto fighte
and slee for spoile and money. "^^ This is very clear,
hoAvever, that Pecock was incensed at something, and
did not hesitate to giA^e expression to his resentment.
Whether or not Pecock had grown very . active in his
standing against the ruling poAvers Avill never be knoAvn.
In 1456, it is clear that he committed his last serious in
discretion. His letter to Thonias Canynge, Mayor of
London, was to be his undoing. The exact contents of
this epistle are unknown, but the Mayor thought it of
sufficient importance to send it to the King, before whom
and his lords it was read. All concerned were greatly
moved by it, for it was reported to have contained ' ' sug
gestions of a change of faith, popular tumults, together
Avith scandalous imputations upon the great lords of the
realm." It is interesting to note with what promptness the
lords temporal responded to this attack upon their noble
persons. Suddenly, they are impelled with a burning
zeal to don their armour in defence of orthodoxy, and
this in spite of the fact that the delinquencies in doctrinal
matters, upon which they based their accusations, had
been in circulation since the publication of the Repressor
in 1449. This zeal for orthodoxy was, undoubtedly, noth
ing else than a cloak to conceal their real designs of
personal revenge.
In 1457 the clamour that went up against Pecock
Avas so great, Gascoigne tells us, that, about the feast of
St. Martin, he Avas, by the King's command, expelled
from the House of Lords in London and forbidden to

19. Repressor, Part V, Ch. XI.

Churchman and Man of Letters 11
enter the King's presence, by the Archbishop of Canter
bury. The temporal lords were so aroused against him
that they refused to proceed to business, so long as he
remained in the House. At the same time, in this same
assemblage of temporal lords and bishops, it was decided
that the works of the author of the Repressor should be
examined. In submitting the works of his pen. Bishop
Pecock requested that he might be judged by his peers.
He disavowed all responsibility for any of his Avorks that
had been circulated earlier than three years previous,
for, as he stated, some of them had been intended for
circulation among his friends, and, contrary to his in
tention and Avishes, had been prematurely published be
fore receiving his final correction and his approbation.
Nine of his Avorks were submitted to twenty-four doctors,
who reported to Canterbury and three other bishops ap
pointed to hear his case, that they contained many errors.
A humorous incident is recorded as having occurred in
the course of the examination — George Nevill, Bishop-
elect of Exeter, a youth of twenty-four years, whose ap
pointment to the bishopric was a papal scandal, assailed
the learned Ordinary of Chichester Avith the foUoAving
admonition: "My Lord of Chichester, God, of His just
judgment, wills that you undergo these indignities be
cause you most unworthily reproved, and denied to be
true, the writings of St. Jerome, St. Augustine and St.
Gregory the Pope, as well as the works of other saints. ' '
It is stated that Nevill was not among the appointed
judges, but only an onlooker. Pecock replied, "I am
sorry I have so written, for I was not sufficiently well
informed. ' '^^
Pecock must have failed to sense the approaching
storm. Whether it was an unhealthy sense of security, or
lack of the proper understanding of his enemies, and the
extremes to whieh they were prepared to go in order to
rid themselves of his dangerous person, is difficult to say.
20. Rogers, J. T., Loci e Lihro Yeritatum, p. 213.

12 Reginald Pecock
At all events the storm breaking about him found him
unprepared. No avenue Avas left unexplored doAvn Avhich
a thread of error might be traced ; no benefit of the doubt
was given him, but, on the contrary, the most extreme
construction Avas placed upon his intentions, and his
errors were grossly exaggerated. As we shall see more
at length later in this work, he had but one ideal, and that
was the defence of orthodoxy. His criticisms of popular
abuses Avere sound and commendable; his denial of the
Apostles' authorship of the Creed was not a denial of
any defined article in the deposit of faith, and while his
disparaging remarks about the authority of the Fathers
might be construed as flippant, they could never be the
foundation for an accusation of heresy. He did, however,
tread on dangerous ground, and really became heretical
in exalting the authoritA^ of reason over that of Scripture.
It must be understood, however, that his heterodoxy in
this matter has been flagrantly magnified, and that a
great portion of his teaching is nothing else than ortho
dox teaching of the Church.
On November the tAventy-first, in the presence of the
Archbishop, Bourchier, and a number of other bishops
and doctors, our author repudiated various conclusions,
supposedly heretical, in his works. On the twenty-eighth
of the same month, in the presence of an assembly of
bishops, doctors and laymen gathered at Westminster,^^
judgment Avas meted out to the condemned prelate. The
Archbishop addressed him thus :
"Dear brother, Master Reginald, since all heretics
are blinded by the light of their own understandings,
and will not OAvn the perA^erse obstinacy of their oAvn con
clusions, Ave shall not dispute Avith you in many AVords
(for we see that you abound more in talk than in reason-

21. Gascoigne says Lambeth. See Hearne at end of Henningford vol.
ii, p. 493 (AVhethamstede) .

Churchman and Man of Letters 13
ing), but briefly show you that you have manifestly pre
sumed to contravene the sayings of more authentic doc
tors. "^^
The Archbishop, after dAvelling upon certain of the
most outstanding errors, proceeded Avith the sentence,
Avhich Avas the alternative of recanting, or being deliv
ered, after degradation, to the secular arm as fuel for
the fire.^^ To proceed A^dth such extreme measures
against a bisliop of the Church Avas so unusual, that one
cannot help but feel that this was merely a threat, and
that even in the event of a refusal to recant, the extreme
sentence never Avould have been carried out. Certainly,
there is copious evidence^^ to demonstrate that in the
case of individuals of less importance, this extremity Avas
resorted to only after every expedient had been exhausted
in an endeavour to persuade the heretic. This is par
ticularly noteworthy, since the state and the community
Avere greatly disturbed, and eA^en threatened by the
advent of the Lollard heresy, which, with some justice,
came to be associated in both the popular and official
mind as synonymous Avith disloyalty and treason .^^
The decision of the assembly was receiA'ed by Pecoek
in silence. In those brief moments, his active intelligence
was wrestling with a momentous decision. Some of the
A'ery few commentators, in fact the majority, thrusting
their own personal Adew to the front rather than a judg
ment based on facts of our author's life, see in his final
procedure weakness Avhich they strive to palliate, and a
groA^elling abasement of his otherAvise magnificent intel
ligence. These are nothing more than pet, stereotyped
phrases, catchy and easily mistaken for intelligent criti
cism. Pecock did the obvious thing. Had he acted other
wise, his principles reg-arding authority, set forth in the
Repressor and Booh of Faith, could be naught but incon-
22. Gairdner, Lollard'y and the Beformation, vol. 1, p. 234.
23. Babington's Introd. XII-XIV.
24. Gairdner, ibid. vol. 1, pp. 1-2, sq.
25. This was especially true after Wat Tyler's insurrection.

14 Reginald Pecock
sistencies. In truth, he may have had little regard for
the intelligence and distinterestedness of his judges, still
they represented authority to him, until he could appeal
higher. His reply to the pronouncement is quite under
standable. "I am in a strait betAvixt two," he said, "and
hesitate in despair as to what I shall choose. If I defend
my opinions and positions, I shall be burned to death ; if
I do not, I shall be a byAvord and reproach. Yet, it is
better to incur the taunts of the people than to forsake
the law of faith, and to depart after death into hell-fire
and the place of torment. I choose, therefore, to make an
abjuration, and intend, for the future, so to liA^e that no
suspicion shall arise against me all the days of my life. ' '
He then made a confession of his errors and an abjura
tion of his heresies. This abjuration was repeated
solemnly on December third at Lambeth ; and on Sunday
the fourth, probably at Paul's Cross before a great con
course of people, he repudiated seven particular heresies
that he acknowledged to be his. They were:
I. That it is not necessary to salvation to believe that
Jesus Christ after deatli descended into hell;
II. Nor to believe in the Holy Ghost;
III. Nor to believe in the H0I3' Catholic Church ;
IV. Nor in the Communion of Saints ;
V. That the universal Church may err in things which
are of faith;
VI. That it is not necessary to salvation to believe and
hold that Avhat a General Council of the whole
Church has ordained, approves, or determines in
favour of faith and for the health of souls, is to be
approved and held by all the faithful of Christ; and
that what it reproves and determines or condemns
to be contrary to the Catholic faith or its good
morals is to be considered by them as reproved' and
condemned ;

Churchman and Man of Letters 15
VII. (According to one MS.) It is lawful for everyone
to understand Holy Scripture in a literal sense;
nor is anyone bound by necessity of salvation to ad
here to any other sense.
This last article is not to be found in most MSS.,
and seems doubtful.^^
Certainly, from Pecock 's admissions in these par
ticular errors, arises a problematical situation, the solu
tion of which is no longer possible. Conjecture would
be no solution. What may have been his motives, or
what may have prompted him to such an admission, is
even difficult to conjecture. From the content of his
works it could never be concluded that he denied the
existence of the Holy Ghost. His explicit profession in
this article so frequently recurring in his Repressor and
Donet^'^ would seem to leave no doubt in the matter. As
to several of the other articles — and this we will dwell on
later in this work — it seems quite evident that his denial
was purely hypothetical. However, the difficulty is en
hanced in the light of the evidence from the rescript of
Pope Calixtus III to the Archbishop of Canterbury.
From this document it is clear that Pecock, in his appeal
to Pope Calixtus, made the same admission that he had
erred in the aforesaid matters.^^
The figure of that outstanding divine of the fifteenth
century is a pathetic one. We close the book on the last
sad chapter of his tragic end Avith a sigh. The little
weaknesses of vanity that he occasionally betrays we are
ready to overlook, since in his guilelessness he thought
not to conceal them. Like a broken reed he lay shattered
in the midst of the storm that overAvhelmed him. How
like the sincerity and impetuosity of another Avho went
forth into the night and wept ! Pecock stood before his
judges, a subdued individual, broken in spirit, AAdth the
26. Babington, ibid. p. xiix, note; iii note.
27. Ibid, note 1.
28. Archiv. Vatic. Calixti III, vol. 462, fol. 326-327.

16 Reginald Pecock
dream of a lifetime fleeing like the mist of the morn ; a
dream fathered in sincerity and personal disinterested
ness. With the conviction that his aberrations had gone
beyond his first principles and intent, at the same time
Avith the realization that an unsympathetic audience were
actuated by other motives than the cloak of zeal which
they feigned and prepared to distort even the truth itself
in their thirst for his destruction, is it to be marveled
at, that he should betray in his demeanour the conviction
of his heart that all is vanity? Humbly he acknoAvledged
that he had walked in darkness and was now brought to
the light of truth. His one wish was that no man give
faith to his pernicious doctrines, nor read, nor keep his
writings, but submit them to "my Lord of Canterbury"
or his commissaries. With his own hand he delivered to
the executioner three folios and eleven quartos of his
writings to be consumed by the fire. As the flames arose
aboA^e his efforts of years, the children of his mind, he
said aloud, "My pride and presumption have led me
into these troubles and reproaches." Gascoigne venom
ously adds that if he had gone down to the fire himself,
the people would have thrown him into it.^^
The shout of triumph that went up over his fall re
flects upon the scoffers rather than upon Pecock. It
Avas vicious and petty. Doggerel verses, punning upon
his name and exulting in his igmominy, sang of the Pea
cock that had been stripped of his feathers and become
an OAvl; and Abbot Whethamstede wrote of the impious
poisoner Avho was compelled to spew out his venom in
public so that he should never dare to reimbibe it.'^^
The Archbishop of Canterbury sent copies of Pe
cock 's reA'Ocation and recantation to all the bishops of
the province, requiring them to publish these through
out the A'arious dioceses. He also commanded those
"who had books of diverse works, not only of Brother
29. Lib. Verit. 215-216.
30. AVhet., u. s., 501; Gairdner op. cit., vol. I, p. 236.

Churchman and Man of Letters 17
Reginald, Bishop of Chichester, Avritten in the vulgar
tongue, but some others by the same brother,^^ that Avith
in fifteen days after the admonition, they give up these
books under pain of greater excommunication."
The University of Oxford lost no time in placing its
seal of disapproval upon the condemned works. In fact
it had anticipated the command of Canterbury, for on
November 17, 1457, a fortnight before the burning of the
books at Paul's Cross, the Chancellor, Master Thomas
Chandler, together with the scholars of the University
marched in solemn procession to Carfax, where they burnt
all of his works in their possession. The King and his
zealots had a clause added to the statutes of King's Col
lege, Oxford, which had been founded by his majesty
about fourteen years before. The substance of the
amending clause was to this effect : that a scholar enter
ing the college should, after a year's probation, take an
oath that he would never in his lifetime favour the con
demned opinions of John Wycliffe and Reginald Pecock
or those of any other heretic.^^
John Bury, a friar of the Order of the Friars Here-
mites of St. AugTistine in the proviilce of Canterbury, was
commissioned by the Archbishop to Avrite against the
eonclusions maintained by the author of the Repressor.
This work of Bury entitled Gladius Salomonis is in Latin
and is still extant in the Bodleian at Oxford.^^ Bury sets
forth thirteen Catholic conclusions against Pecock 's thir
teen heretical conclusions contained in the first book of
his Repressor.
Pecoek in the meantime appealed his case to Rome.
Was it before he was deprived of his see, or after, that
this appeal was made? LeAvis^^ contends that he was
still acknoAvledged Bishop of Chichester four months
31. Reg. Geo. Nevil, Ep. Exon. fol. 38.
32. Wood, Sistorij and Antiqmties of the Vniversit^y of Oxford, ed.
Glutch, vol. 1, p. 223.
33. Bibl. Bodl. Oxon. u, 108, 4 to aff. 63, sec. XV.
34. Lewis, op. cit., p. 174.

18 Reginald Pecock
after his abjuration at Lambeth and Paul's Cross. This
is not possible in the light of the evidence found in the
correspondence in the Vatican Archives. From this it is
quite evident that Pecock lost no time in making his ap
peal. In a rescript of Pope Calixtus IIF^ to the Arch
bishop of Canterbury dated June, 1458, it is explicitly
stated that Pecock had been deprived and had meted out
to him all the other censures. It hardly seems possible
that, in those days of sIoav travel, had Pecock Avaited
four months after his abjuration, that is, until April,
1458, his case could have been carried to Rome, tried, and
returned before the middle of June, 1458.
Calixtus III Avas evidently very favourably impressed
by Pecock 's appeal. Of all those who were concerned
with the case of the Bishop of Chichester, the Pope gives
evidence of the broadest and most human understanding.
The condemned man apparently had been very frank in
his self-accusation, and the Pope, Avhile not minimizing
the unhappy phases of the situation, readily grasped the
lofty motives that actuated our author. He says in the
rescript: "Sane pervenit nuper ad noticiam. nostram., quod
venerabilis frater noster, Reginaldus episcopus
Cicestrensis dudum area salutem populi sibi com
missi solicitus cpiosdam. Xpiane religionis et non
nullos alios contemplativa-m vitam coneernentes, tam
in vulgari anglieo quam in linga^ (sic) latina libellos
sive tractatus aut quinternos compilavit. Et deinde
eis accurate, ut conveniebat non correctis neque
emendatis, diversis -personis, tam clericis, quam laicis-
tradidit, sperans ut exinde salutares f ructus eisdem
personis provenirent. Verum dictus episcopus spe
sua frustratus remansit. Nam cum a quibusdam
assereretur libellos sive tractatus aut quinternos
huiusmodi plura continere que fidei CathoUce ad-
35. Archiv. Vatic. Reg. Vatic. Calixti III, vol. 462 fol. 326-327

Churchman and Man of Letters 19
versa et contraria existebant, prefatum episcopwn
coram, te evocari fecisti, libellos, tractatus et quin
ternos ipsos iam viginti quatxior annis elapsis -per
eum editos exhibiturum . quiquidem episcopus obed-
ientie filius libellos ipsos sub certis protestationibus,
videlicet: quod si aliqua in eis continerentur, que
prelibate fidei CathoUce contraria forent, ilia tenere
non volebat, nee pertinaciter defendere sed ea pro
mdlis et infectis habebat, coram te reverenter ex-
hibuit, atque produxit, tuque libellos ipsos certis in
'Theologia magistris! et in utroque jure doctoribus
exa m ina ndos com m is isti. ' '^^
A great part of the rescript is taken up Avith the
discussion of the errors, tho trial and the condemnation.
From this it appears that the Archbishop had already
commissioned one, John 'Stokes, archdeacon of Ely, to
absoh'e the condemned Bishop from all irregularities and
censures incurred, and to restore him to the enjoyment
of his benefice. The Pope's intention in sending the
rescript was to make regular the procedure and to supply
whatever may haA^e been Avanting either in jurisdiction
or procedure. The rescript continues thus :
"Quem etiam nos auctoritate apostolica et simili
scientia absolvimus et cum eo dispensamus eunique
restituimus, reponimus et rehabUitamus, et infamie
macula.m. abolemus per presentes supplendo etiam,
omnes defectus tam juris quam facti, si qui forsan
in ahsolutione dispensatione rehab il it atione et resti-
tutione archidiaconi hujusmodi intervenissent."
He continues, "Et insuper eidem Reginaldo episcopo Cices-
tren. Efficacis defensionis subsidio assistens facias

36. Archiv. Vatic. Reg. Vatic. Calixti III, vol. 462, fol. 326-327. We
have quoted at length, for it supports our contention that Pecock 's fall
was due to political causes, rather than his lapse into heresy.

20 Reginald Pecock
eum pacifica dicte ecclesie Cicestren. Possessione
gcmdere, et non permittas ipsum premissorum oc
casione i-n iudicio vel extra, publice vel occulte,
directe vel indirecte, aut quovis alio quesito colore
quomodolibet molestare aut ei iniurias vel offensas
irrogari.''^"^ The bulls of Calixtus III restoring Pecock to the See
of Chichester were not Avell receiA^ed in England by his
enemies. The Archbishop made representations to the
King, in Avhich was set forth that Reginald Pecock, Min
ister of the See of Chichester, had been detected and
couAdcted of certain errors and heresies and had abjured
and taken his penance ; that he obtained surreptitiously
from the Holy Father bulls of restoration contrary to the
laAvs and "statutes provisors" and to the great con
tempt aud derogation of his Majesty's prerogative and
estate royal.-^'^, ^^
Unfortunately for Pecock, Pope Calixtus III passed
to Ilis eternal reward August 6, 1458. He was a man
remarkable for his mortified life, firmness of purpose,
and prudence in the face of difficulties. It was by his
direction that the rcAdsion of the trial of Joan of Arc was
carried out, and the sentence of the first court quashed,
thus Adndicating the innocence of the Maid of Orleans.^''
Calixtus III Avas succeeded by the famous humanist,
Fjv.qsi Sih'io De Piccolomini, as Pius II, Augaist 19, 1458.
Was there any connection betAveen the ele\"ation of a new
pope and the reopening of Pecock's case at Rome? Be
this as it may, a mandate from the King, dated Septem
ber 17, 1458, at St. Albans Avas issued to the Bishop of
St. Asaph and to Robert Stillington, Canon of York, to
call together as miany Doctors in Theology and LaAv as
37. Archiv. Vatic. Reg. Vatic. Ca. ixi III, vol. 462, fol. 326-327.
38. It is a point of interest to observe that the Archbishop himself
together with two of his assessors, Kempe and Lowe, were appointed by
Papal provision.
39. Certifieat. super mandate regio in causa heretiei Pecock MS e
coll. R. R. Ep. Petroburg. '
40. CathoUc Encyclopedia, vol. HI, Calixtus.

Churchman and Man of Letters 21
they deemed necessary to make a study of thc effect and
the contents of the said bulls (Calixtus III). Further
more, they were to certify to his Majesty the result of
their investigations.^^
The findings of the committee Avere :
I. "That his Highness should send an ambas
sador to the pope, who should represent to him the
Bishop's pernicious heresies, and the dangers ac
cruing to the Church from them; and should desire
that he should cassate his bull of restitution, and ap
point to the see a pious and learned Bishop to be
nominated by the King.
II. That since by the process and recantation of
Pecock, they think he was infected with heresy long
before he was translated to the See of Chichester,
that translation was ipso facto null; and so it was
laAvful for the King, and expedient for the Church,
that the possessions of the 'See, which they call "tem
poralities," should immediately be seized by the
King, and detained bj^ him until a catholic successor
be appointed. "^^
Whether or not this communication reached the suc
cessor of Pope Calixtus is of no importance. But this
is certain, that its contents, together Avith an appeal for
his depriA^ation, Avere sent to Pius II. In this appeal, it
is quite evident that his accusers had recourse to a very
decisiA^e measure. Pecock wa.s accused of having con-
coaled certain of his Avorks in both Latin and English;
to have feigned repentance at his trial; and finally to
have relapsed into heresy. It hardly seems probable,
even though he were feigning and insincere, that he
Avould bo so rash in the midst of his case pending at Rome
so to compromise himself as to m.anifest by Avord or
action any such grounds for accusation by his enemies.
There is no evidence, apart from the accusation made to

41. E Collect. White Ep. Petroburg.
42. Lewis, op. cit.. Part II, p. 177.

22 Reginald Pecock
Pius II by Pecock's enemies, to the effect that ho actually
did relapse into heresy. Pius II Avas, however, greatly
agitated by the contents of the appeal, for in a rescript
dated April, 1459, to the Archbishop of Canterbury and
the Bishop of London, he manifests great concern about
the matter, and commands that immediate steps be taken
to investigate thoroughly the accusations ; search out the
works that had been concealed by Pecock, and if the ac
cused should be found gTiilty, he AA^as to be sent to Rome,
or the ecclesiastical and ciAdl authorities of England Avere
to proceed against him, together Avith all his associates
irrespective of position or standing. The guilty ones
were to have meted out to them all the canonical punish
ments, such as degradation from office, deprivation and
excommunication. That the Pope was deeply impressed, and unfaA'or-
ably toAvard Pecock is seen from the manner in which
he speaks of him where he says :
"Tamen idem. Reginaldus protervio et nephario
spiritu instigatws, et pristvnarum tenebrarum cecitate
obscessus, etiam postquam ipse penitens, ut vide
batur, et indignus regimini et ad-ministrationi dicte
ecclesie Cice.stren., seu omni iuri sibi in illis, vel ad
ea quomodolibet competenti, sponte et libere ces-
serat, nonnullos ex predictis libris manifestam here-
sim coniinentes, in latino ac etiam in dicto ydiomate,
a se compositos et per eum. minime tunc patefactos,
Itt perpetuo extare possent ocndtare, ac sic ficte
penitens in errorem pristimi-m. quem simulate
abiuraverat, relabi, et tamquam nepharius et incor-
rigibilis .servus, quedam alia que contra orthodoxam,
fid'Cm .sunt, et contra ea, que sacrosancta tenet Ec
clesia machinari minime formidavit, propter que
omnia' maximum, imminet periculum, ne dicte hereses
taliter in ipso regno disseminate -magnorum pariant
fomenta scandalorum, et plurium ingenia subverfant
et animarum perictda generent."^^
43. Archiv. Vatic. Reg. Vatic. Pii II, vol. 499 fol. 63.

Churchman and Man of Letters 23
In the bull appointing Pecock's successor to the See
of Chichester, Pius affirms the guilt of heresy of the for
mer incumbent of the See. He also states that all the
rights to the See had been given up by Pecock. However,
there is a problem arising from the discrepancy in dates
of the various documents. The bull appointing a suc
cessor in Chichester is dated January, 1458. Pius II,
however, did not ascend the throne until August 19. 1458.
The rescript to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the
Bishop of London, in which a thorough investigation is
demanded, is dated April, 1459. Was Pecock's successor
appointed before the investigation? Supposing the ap
pointment to have been January, 1459, the discrepancy
being due to the carelessness of a scribe, it appears
even then that the appointment was made three months
before the investigation was ordered.
Pecock's career is overshadowed with the myster
ious. At almost every turn there is a lack of evidence,
especially facts about his own person. From the facts
at our disposal, one cannot but surmise that something
other than the lofty motives of defending orthodoxy Ayas
actuating his enemies. For twenty years he remained
unmolested in his errors until he clashed Avith the civil
political party. From that time until his downfall this
mysterious power worked, cloaked under' a disguise.
Pecock passes from the stage. His cause was lost.
Mystery shrouds his passing as it shadoAved his advent.
We know that he Avas sent to the abbey of Thorney on
the Isle of Thorney in Cambridgeshire. Provision was
made for him, some say an ample provision, others say
meagre. How long he remained here would be mere con
jecture. He passes without applause of contemporaries,
with his errors and his rashness, but with his lofty mo
tives . . . and, we think, misunderstood.

24 Reginald Pecock

CHAPTER II

LoLLARDY, Its Causes Remote and Proximate
We must now see something of those various influ
ences that contributed to the change so noticeable in
every phase of English life in the year 1447. Similar
forces Avere, and had been, at work in every country of
Europe, and these same forces, at least in their effects,
were to continue until what is called modern Europe
and modern civilization should be evolved.
We are not concerned, however, Avith the continent
nor with modern civilization, but approach the various
contributory factors only in so far as it seems to us that
they were responsible in bringing about the religious
and social conditions, to the alleviation of which Reginald
Pecock had dedicated the greater part of his life and
talents. Transition periods, Avhether social, political, or relig
ious, are not circumscribed. Our computations of them
must be relative and not absolute. Historians can define,
for the most part, only proximately, the limits of any
given period in history. Phenomena that we observe
on the horizon of history, like a beautiful sunset or the
breaking of a tumultuous storm, are the result of a whole
series of circumstances so remote and minute that it is
impossible to exhaust them. This fact, together with
ncAv discoveries and change of vicAvpoint, is Avhat gives
occasion for the roAvriting of history. Moreover, it is
for these very reasons that the AA^riting of history is
difficult, and especially the history of transition periods.
Reginald Pecock, the subject of our inquiry, belongs
to one of these transition periods. That outstanding
ecclesiastic of the mid-fifteenth century can be under
stood only AAdien A'ieAved in relation to his oaati times ; and

Churchman and Man of Letters 25
his OAVii times, if isolated from the history of his country
for at least a century preceding, remain in the realm
of conjecture. His OAvn parents must have lived in the
trying times of the Great Pestilence. In his boyhood
he might have heard the men and women of the genera
tion just preceding him, tell stirring tales of the upris
ings under the leadership of Ball and Tyler; and, in
later years, when he had attained to a position of author
ity and responsibility, it was brought home to him very
strikingly what evil results and havoc religious dissen
sion was begetting amongst his OAvn flock and throughout
large sections of the kingdom. A scholar, a zealous
churchman, fearless unto rashness, with a consciousness
of his great responsibility, he entered the lists in defence
of orthodoxy and to decry the evils of his day.
The Avidespread and far-reaching consequences of
the social unrest and religious dissension could not have
been entirely due to the age in Avhich they manifested
themselves. Predisposing causes there must have been,
even back in the distant past. No one cause can account
for them ; nor can we reach out and lay our finger upon
any individual, or group of individuals, or upon any one
event, or series of events, and say absolutely this indi
vidual or this happening is responsible for the unhappy
state of affairs against Avhich Pecock thrust his strength.
We must go back one hundred years, or better, to the
accession of Edward II. To confine ourselves to this
period is somewhat arbitrary, but to a great extent justi
fied by the A^ery nature of the period. Undoubtedly, one
might trace the course to other predisposing causes in
the preceding century, but the period I have designated
seems to be the most obvious turning point in the history
of events. It seems the beginning of a ncAv era, an era
of turmoil and strife, of Avars and rumours of wars, and
all the evils accompanying Avars : famine, pestilence,
taxation, depression, poA-erty. It Avas to be an era of
intrigue and selfishness, and of small men.

26 Reginald Pecock
Transition periods seem to Avork according to invar
iable rule. In social and political life, particularly when
there is the passing of an old order, these changes are
never accomplished peaceably. A new era is observable
with the accession of Edward II. So full of contrasts is
the change that the student of history may not ignore
it. We pass from an age of greatness to an age of
mediocrity; from an age of strong men both in church
and state, men of a strength and stature to set aside
personal advantage in the interest of God and their
fellowmen, to an age of small men. We leave behind
the thirteenth century which Bishop Stubbs^ very aptly
calls the golden age of English churchmanship, the age
that produced one Simon among the earls, produced
among the bishops Stephen Langton, St. Edmund,
Grosseteste and the Cantilupes. The Charter of Runny-
mede Avas draAvn under Langston's eye; Grosseteste was
the friend and adviser of the constitutional opposition;
Berksted, the episcopal member of the electoral trium
virate, was the pupil of St. Richard of Chichester; St.
Edmond of Canterbury was the adviser who compelled
the first banishment of the aliens ; St. Thomas of Canti-
lupe was the chancellor of the baronial regency. These
men, all without exception, had the greatest love and
esteem for the authority of the See of Rome, but their
respect and obedience were rational.
This age of giants both in church and state was
followed by an age of inferior men. Edward II stands
in marked contrast to his great father, Edward I. Often
the advisers whom he drew about him were of his ovm
inferior calibre. He Avas neither an accomplished knight
nor a great commander.^ Lacking in the kingly ideal, he
had neither kingly pride nor sense of duty ; an idler with
out piety, he had no high aims, and no policy but the
cunning of unscrupulous selfishness. He was often de-

1. stubbs. Constitutional Sist. of England, p. 313 1887.
2. Mon. Malmesb. p. 136; Cron. Ed. I, II, ii, 192.

Churchman and Man of Letters 27
scribed as Avorthless. His faults were quite as much
negative as positive; his character AA-as not so much
Adcious as devoid of Adrtue. With the pursuit of amuse
ment the one aim of his life, it can be readily ascertained
Avhat a puppet such a character Avould be in the hands
of an unscrupulous court.
These circumstances, beyond doubt, play an impor
tant role in determining the tenor of the incoming era
Avhich contrasts so clearly with the period just passed.
Such influences do not begin to show their effects until
the age of decline sets in. Despotism thwarted, chaf
ing under the restraint of constitutionalism and wounded
in pride, sought advice from favourites, rather than
from duly constituted guides. Then it Avas that the
Aveaklings, the sycophants, the ministers of the king's
pleasures, and the companions of his follies, became a
degrading influence and a menace to society. To this
one influence must be attributed a goodly portion of the
responsibility for the great evils of the times. Had it
ceased Avith the passing of one weak monarch, the even
tual storm that broke upon the Avhole realm might liaA'o
been averted, but it continued until the social fabric of
England Avas on the verge of collapse. "It is to the
action of the court," says Bishop Stubbs,^ "that Ave must
attribute the extravagance, the dishonesty, the immor
ality, private, social and political of the period; it is to
the antagonism between the court and the administration,
between the curia and the camera, or in modern language,
the court and the cabinet, that many of the constitutional
quarrels of the century are OAving; it is to the unpopu
larity of the court that the social — as distinct from the
constitutional — disturbances are chiefly due, and to the
selfish isolation of the court that much of the national
discontent is to be traced." He goes on to say, "A body
of courtiers, greedy of wealth, greedy of land and titles,
careless of the royal reputation and national credit, con-

3. Stubbs, ibid. p. 325.

28 Reginald Pecock
stantly Avorking to obtain office for the heads of one or the
other of its factions, using office for the enrichment of
its own members, contained in itself all the germs of
future trouble. In rivalry Avitli the baronage Avliich col
lectively looked upon the courtiers as deserters from its
own body, although the barons individually, or the several
factions among them, Avere ready enough to plaj' the part
in their turn; in riA'alry Avitli the clergy whose political
poAver they begrudged and Avliose religious influence they
uniformly thAvarted; in riA^alry with the ministry Avliich,
if it Avere composed of honest men, Avas in hostility to the
court as a whole, or, if it were itself the creation of one-
half of the court, Avas in hostility to the other. ' '^
Bishop Stubbs giA'es a A^ery fair statement in his
summing up of the situation. HoAvcA-er, it must be borne
in mind that we must not speak in superlatiA^es and foist
the whole blame for the evils of the day upon Aveak kings
and unscrupulous courts. There were extenuating cir
cumstances in this period over which no one had any
control, such as famine and plague, and especially the
great Black Death. The social and religious conditions
of the period cannot be treated adequately Avithout taking
these into consideration. HoAvever, Ave cannot ignore
that the Church both in England and abroad Avas passing
through a serious crisis. The "exile" of the papacy at
Avignon under French influence — and France Avas Eng
land's implacable enemy; the incessant Avars Avith Scot
land and France, draining the treasury and crushing the
people with unbearable burdens of taxation; the Great
Schism in the papacy ; the interminable struggle betAveen
the temporal and spiritual poAver; all those, in order to
have a proper prospective of the situation, must be taken
into consideration.
The great change and decline so obvious in the reign
of EdAvard II unfortunately did not pass Avith him. Evils
then set afoot greAv more serious with timo. Plotting,
4. Stubbs, ibid., p. 326.

Churchman and Man of Letters 29
treachery and internecine warfare continued throughout
the period of which we speak. Revolution and regicide
destroyed tAvo kings and placed upon the throne a
dynasty Avhich was never sure of its position; foreign
Avars continued, folloAved by famine and disease; daily
the people groAv more restless and helpless under the
burden, until it needed only the socialistic and revolu
tionary principles of John Ball and John Wycliffe to
apply the torch that ignited a conflagration which
threatened to sweep before it all semblance of law and
order. England had had Aveak and despotic kings before,
but she had strong men amongst the nobility, and strong
men amongst the churchmen. A few Langtons, Grosse
teste, or St. Edmunds might have tided over the crisis.
The unfortunate and the depressed Avould have had
shepherds worthy of their confidence.
Those of us who have a filial interest in Mother
Church cannot, in the face of the record of human Aveak-
ness shoAvn in certain prominent individuals of the
Church of this age, rise to very sublime heights of
enthusiasm over this period. Not England alone, but all
Christendom, felt the effects of the Avignon experiment
and the confusion of the Great Schism. To gloss over
such glaring historical facts is neither scientific nor
moral. God does not want our lies. In the first volume
of the Councils the learned Labbe remarks, "Non tali
auxilio nee defensoribus istis iiidiget Ecclesia." Hoav
presumptuous, inconsistent, absurd and immoral that in-
diAddual must seem who wduld attempt to defend truth
by untruth. NeAvman's^ remarks are quite to the point
when he observes thus, "the. endemic perrenial fidget
which possesses us about giving scandal: facts are
omitted in great histories, or glosses are put on mem
orable acts, because they are thought to be not edifying ;
whereas, of all scandals, such omission, such glosses
are the greatest." Leo Xlll, that unique churchman,

5. Newman, Historical Sketches, ii, p. 231.

30 Reginald Pegock
statesman and scholar of the nineteenth century, gave a
ncAv impetus and direction to research and the writing
of Church History Avheii, in his encylical, he gave the
f oUoAving comforting adAdce : ' ' The Historian Avill be all
the better able to manifest the Church's diAdne origin,
so far transcending all that is purely terrestrial and
natural, in proportion as he is faithful to keep back
nothing of the trials Avhich she has had to experience
in the course of the ages through the fraility of her
children, and sometimes even of her ministers. Studied
in this fashion, the history of the Church itself affords
a splendid and conclusive proof of the truth and the
divinity of Christianity."^
The religious unrest, to Avliich we have already allu
ded, Avas not restricted to England alone. It AA^as not the
case of the branch of a great tree paling under a Avither-
ing blight, but rather it Avas the case of a great tree having
its vigour taxed to the utmost under the clinging attack
of parasitical growths. The Mother Church was sick
and her impaired efficiency reacted upon every member
of the great family. The "exile" of the Papacy at
Avignon, Avhich finally ended with the Great Schism in the
Papacy itself, is certainly accountable, not wholly, but
to a great extent, for a great many evils of the time.
These cAdls, against which the real reformers raised
their voices of AA'arning, can be attributed to a category
of proximate causes, such as we have mentioned before,
but remotely and finally they are traceable to causes that
are intellectual. One is struck by the ascendency of
the dilettante in the theological schools. There was a
great deal of mediocrity among the theologians Avho seem
to have been concentrating upon the fantastic and the
novel in religion. As an example of this, we see in the
Avritings of the times the most extreme and antithetical
vicAvs set forth on the question of pontifical authority,
6. "Encyclical to the Archbishops, Bishops, and Clergy of France,"

Churchman and Man op Letters 31
its foundation, rights and privileges. On the one hand,
we find such man as the Dominican John of Paris attack
ing the temporal poAver of the Church, Avhile Marsilius of
Padua attempts to undermine the doctrine of the spiri
tual authority of the Pope, the primacy of St. Peter, the
power of the Keys. The Englishman, William of Occam,
and some of his revolutionist Franciscans, go farther in
their advice to Louis of Bavaria in that unhappy struggle
with John XXII; "Defend yourself," they advise, "with
the SAvord and we will come to your aid with the pen."
Such "thunder" crashing from the lips of adventurers
like Robert Knolles, Arnaud de Cervale or Raymond de
Turenne would have a note of consistency, but falling
from the lips- of churchmen, it manifests at least a con
fused notion of the papacy. On the other hand, the
reactionary teachings against these excesses went to the
other extreme, and Avere as disastrous for the discipline
of the Church as any doctrine ever expounded. Augus
tinus, the general of the Augustinians, ascribed to the
successor of St. Peter a wholly exaggerated power and
authority; his poAver and authority, even over all things
temporal, Avere unlimited. "The Sovereign Pontiff,"
he said, "himself does not knoAV how far his supreme
authority can extend."" We see one faction, who were
revolutionists, faAvning upon the temporal monarch,
while the other extremists flattered the spiritual sover
eign. Chaos reigned in the schools. lA the midst of
these doctrinal monstrosities, a true idea of the Church,
her head, her magisterium, and her rights, was obscured
in the eager pursuit of the novel thing in doctrine. In
the light of this, the events at Rome and Fondi, the
crisis of 1378, and the double election which resulted,
can be better understood. These events were not the
original causes of the Schism, but only the occasion for
the free development, extension and continuation of
latent errors. The cardinal electors and the principal

7. Summa de potestate ecclesiae ad Joannem xxii, q. 1, a. 1.

32 Reginald Pecock
upholders of each of the tAvo obediences Avere imbued
with ideas taken from the great schools. On the other
hand also, the jurists by whom the princes Avere sur
rounded, the "milites legum" Avho inspired their coun
sels, had listened to the pernicious maxims of Peter
Dubois and JMarsilius of Padua. They Avere sure of a
favorable hearing AAdien, Avith theories of autocracy, they
flattered the interests of kings.
The fantastic teachings of the schools, so effective
in occasioning the Great Schism as Avell as the evils of
the Avignon administration, undoubtedly reacted upon
the morals and the ecclesiastical discipline of the time.
A liberal latitude is alloAved to the. various schools in
thrashing out points of doctrine still open to discussion.
Thus it has ever been. But it is only when these opinions,
held by the different schools, are taken from the lecture
hall and heralded broadcast, that thoy become a menace.
It is amazing to find among the writings of this time
so many theological propositions that border on the fan
tastic. The budding young doctor of the school seems to
have taken a particular delight in going to the extreme
edge of orthodoxy, and often under the guise of a
hypothesis, to have wandered far beyond it. The au
thority of the pope Avas one of the faA^ourite fields in
which they indulged their inclination to scholastic gym
nastics. Many of the errors since condemned had their
counter part, if not their origin, in some of these very
theses expended by young men in their search for novelty
rather than truth.
We noAv turn from the erroneous principles enunci
ated at the time to observe some of their effects. With
the centre and head of Christendom so disturbed, cer
tainly Ave can look for abuses and abnormal happenings.
Real reformers, from cloister, altar, and the Avorld, raised
a Avarning cry, but the cry AA'as unheeded until almost
irreiiarable CAdl had been accomplished. Like St. Ber-

Churchman and Man of Lettees 33
nards at an eariier date, St. Catherine of Siena, that
most extraordinary Avoman, did not hesitate to point out
the abuses that existed in the very court of the pope.
She Avas disappointed in the Roman court ; expecting to
find there a paradise of virtue, she laments that she
found there an odour of hell.^ The great Catholic poet,
Dante, "theologus Dantes," does not spare eA'en those in
the loftiest positions, but confines them to the loAvest
depths, and Avith all the vehemence of his magnificent
genius lashes the abuses and corruptions of his day. To
the Donation of Constantine, which he mistakenly
thought genuine, he attributed all the evils that had come
upon the Church.^'' Petrarch calls AAdgnon the "Baby
lon of the Apocalypse," and blackens it Avith all the
exaggeration of a poetical mind. The anonymous author
of the "Songe du Vergier" re-echoes all the hatred of
the laAA^ers against ecclesiastics, and all the attacks of
free-thinkers upon clerical morality .^^ The complaint
of St. Antoninus, at a later date, is far more important.
It sounded like the Avarning and resentment of a Grosse
teste or a St. Edmund at an earlier period in Engiand.^^
All evidence must be Aveighed dispassionately; A^ar-
ious circumstances that modify the A-alue of evidence left
behind must be considered. Poets are not historians,
nor have they the mental mould of the historian. Then
too, we know that it is not an uncommon happening in
the history of literature, for a sensitive Avriter when in
a satiric mood to vent the venom of his spleen upon a
class, Avhen, in reality, only an indiAddual or a group of
a class have enraged him. There is also that category
of laymen, the puritanical laymen, who wax wroth at
a moment's notice, burning Avith a holy interest in things

8. St. Bernard, De consideratione lib. i, iii & iv.
9. Bollard, Acta Sanctorum Aprilis, t. iii, p. 891. Pastor, Histoire
des Papes, ii, p. 135.
10. Dante Inferno, xix and xxvii ; Purgat., vi ; Paradise, xxii and xxvn.
Also cf. Ozanam, Dante et la philosophic Cathol.
11. Somnium viridarii (ed. Goldast, 1614) t. ii. p. 61, ff.
12. Chron., p. iii, c. i.

34 Reginald Pecock
religious, but in reality, nursing the fire of revenge for
having been retarded on the road to honour or to some
financial goal. They are found in every age.
Undoubtedly there AA^ere abuses. Justice demands,
however, that we recognize the Avorth of a A^ast army of
iiidiAdduals in every Avalk of life, about Avliom history is
silent. Chaucer tells us about the Pardoner, but he also
tells us about the faithful Parish Priest. History records
the Avork of the pardoner, it is unusual and exceptional ;
but the usual, the expected, slips noiselessly into obliAdon.
Is not this silence and oblivion a litany of praise in itself I
The general disorder that prevailed within the
Church became more chaotic in the midst of the confusion
that reigned Avithout. International bands of mercenary
ruffiians, Avith fire and sword, thrcAV the greater part of
Europe into confusion. Under the leadership of such
adventurers as Robert Knolles, Jolm HaAvlnvood, Arnaud
de Cervale, Raymond de Turenne, Eustach d'Auberchi-
court, Geoffrey de Boucicault, puppets of rival kings,
monasteries and episcopal residences Avere fired and pil
laged; chapters and estates were reduced to pauperism.
In the confusion, bishops fled from tlieir posts to Paris
or Avignon; ecclesiastical discipline in the monasteries
and dioceses became relaxed, and the ecclesiastical au
thorities became helpless, as can be seen from the replies
of the popes to the appeals made to them. Disorganiza
tion is perpetuated and intensified. In vain do good
bishops protest; and futile are the entreaties and threats
issued by the general chapters of the religious orders.^^
The Avidespread decline and mediocrity is seen from
the absence of that real churchmanship and statesman
ship Avhieh has generally characterized the reign of eccle
siastical superiors throughout the ages. The spirit of
faction had got hold of the Church. Bishoprics and
other responsible posts Avere looked upon as rewards for
13. Martene and Durand, Thesaurus, t iv, p. 1206, ff.

Churchman ax^d Man of Letters 35
the proteges of some factional leader. Often sons, and
sometimes the umvorthy sons, of noble families were
thrust upon the Church. The choice of such individuals
was often not based upon the qualities of the individual
or the needs of the position, but too often Avas made for
no other purpose than to enjoy the pecuniary roAvards of
the position or the influence accruing to the faction from
the lofty post.
Paradoxical as it may seem, it is nevertheless true,
that the Church suffered from the exercise of legitimate
rights. "Annates," "reservations" and "expecta
tions ' '^^ are rightfully within the sphere of ecclesiastical
jurisdiction. Grave evils and serious harm to the
Church arose from the abuse of these rights. These
abuses were not confined to the lesser superiors but were
sometimes to be found among certain of the popes. This
was particularly true of the Avignon popes. The extrav
agant and worldly-minded court at Avignon Avas often in
need of finances that Avere not forthcoming from the nor
mal channels of revenue. As a result, we find bishoprics,
abbeys, parishes, priories and capitular appointments
seized and handed over to laymen, some of whom Avere
not even in the Church; or given to nephcAvs avIio Avere
profligates, or to lay prelates who held a plurality of
benefices illegally. To ascertain the inestimable harm
that f oUoAved this period for generations, one has simply
to turn over the pages of history. Pastor suggests these
dire results in his observations, Avhere he says in part,
"the financial system adopted at AAdgnon contributed
more than is generally supposed, to destroy the prestige
of the Papacy, and singularly facilitated the Avork of our
foes."^^

14. D. V. Berliere, "Inventaire analytique des Libri obligationum et
resolutionum des Archives Vaticanes, 1904 (Paris, Champion), Preface
V-XXV, and also Inventaire analytique des "Diversa Cameralia" 1906,
ibid. Samaran; MoUet, La Fiscalite pontiflcale en France, an. XIV^,
siecle (Paris, 1904).
15. Pastor, ibid., t. i, p. 87.

36 Reginald Pecock
Thus far, we have a general vioAv of the principal
CAdls that contributed to the unsettling of social and
moral conditions in Europe as a Avhole, during the four
teenth, and first part of the fifteenth centuries. The
treatment is not in any Avay detailed or exhaustive, but is
sufficient for our purpose.
Let us see hoAV religious affairs in England Avere
proceeding during the same period. Here Ave find an
incessant struggle betAveen the temporal and spiritual
poAvers. The lingering dispute Avas interminable, the
result of a misunderstanding of respective rights, and
of a great deal of uiiAAdllingnoss to respect them Avhen
understood. It is not that the English people looked
upon the spiritual poAver of the pope as a usurped poAver,
a Roman tyranny. The testimony of history sets forth
the opposite. It cannot be said that there Avas ever any
general discontent arising from the Roman jurisdiction
in matters spiritual. Jurisdiction, or rather, effective
jurisdiction depends upon the Avillingness of the subject
to submit to constituted authority. Temporal jurisdic
tion may be perpetuated effectively by the assistance of
various sanctions ; but in the case of a spiritual authority
imposing itself upon a community or nation, its perpet
uity and effectiA'eiiess is beyond comprehension unless the
individual accepts it for loftier motiA^es than those of
mere expediency. Gairdner, in writing of the Roman
jurisdiction in England, says, "That Rome exercised her
spiritual poAver by the Avilling obedience of Englishmen
in general, and that they regarded it as a really Avhole-
some poAver, even for the control it exercised over secular
tyranny, is a fact Avhich it requires no A'ory intimate
knoAvledge of early English literature to bring home to
us. AVho Avas 'the holy blissful martyr' AAdiom Chaucer's
pilgrims Avent to seek at Canterbury? One Avho had re
sisted his sovereign in the attempt to interfere Avith the
clainis of the papal Church. For that cause, and for no
other, pilgrims Avho Avent to visit his tomb regarded him

Churchman and Man of Letters 37
as a saint. It was only after an able and despotic king
had proved himself stronger than the spiritual poAver of
Rome, that the people of England Avere divorced from
their Roman allegiance ; and there is abundant evidence
that they Avere divorced from it first against their Avill."^^
The first care of the Church must ahvays be to ap
point good bishops, the shepherds of the flocks. It is not
sufficient that Adce be absent from their lives, but their
virtues must be unmistakable and positive; not merely
one outstanding virtue, such as learning, or holiness, but
rather a combination of many virtues of a high degree.
A bishopric has always been a position of respect and
power in the community. Its influence, Avlien conscien
tiously directed, cannot but be for the welfare of the
whole community. When in the hands of a weak man,
its very omissions are the source of irretrievable losses ;
and in the hands of an unscrupulous man, its faults are
disastrous. The bishops of the medieval Church were not
only poAverful spiritual lords, but powerful temporal
lords as Avell. They formed an estate^'' in the adminis
tration of temporal government just as did the nobles
and the commons Avho made up distinct estates in them
selves. After the concessions of the Magna Charta the
right of choosing bishops Avas given to the chapters. On
the vacancy of a See, the chapter solicited a conge d'elire,
and chose by the majority of votes or by compromise, the
incumbent Avho Avas presented by them to the king for
approbation. The approbation Avas signified to the
metropolitan, or to the pope if it Avas an archbishopric.
If the election Avas confirmed by the metropolitan or by
the pope, respectively, the king, notified of the confirma
tion, received the homage of the neAV bishop and conferred
on him the temporalities of his see.^-^ Hoav readily this
system would lend itself to complications and abuses.

16. Gairdner, op cit., chap. 1, p. 5.
17. Rotten Parliament i 189 and ii 450.
18. Rot. Pari. IV, 61.

38 Reginald Pec(jCK
just as any sA'stem may, is seen at a glance. The chapters
in their zeal to secure proper candidates and to exclude
undue influence in the choice, oA^erburdened the system
Avitli minute regulations. Complications of A'arious na
tures arising in the chapters often necessitated an appeal
to the pope or to the metropolitan, Avho in turn Avas often
influenced, in the period of Avhicli avo speak, by an inter
ested and unscrupulous court at Rome, and especially at
Avignon, or liy an ambitious king or faction at home, to
appoint uiiAvorthy men, or men unfitted for the high
office. Too frequently Ave find bishoprics given to favour
ites. Gradually the popes for various reasons withdrcAv
the priAdleges of the chapters, and reserved to themselves
the right of "proAdsion" to Sees. Often this proved to be
a groat safeguard in selecting a good man, but unfor
tunately, too often it becanie a source of abuse.
It is interesting to note the number of "proAdsions"
mado in the reign of EdAvard II, during the pontificate
of John XXII. Previous to this, direct papal nomina
tions Avere exceptionally mado, but henceforth, it almost
became the practice. According to the testimony of
Robert of Reading, John XXII reserved to himself the
nominations of English bishops because he was disgusted
Avith the appointments made through the influence of
EdAvard II.^-' This evidence does not come from friends,
since the Westminster monks Avere not friendly to
EdAvard II. Professor Tout observes, however, that
"John did provide to the English Church some very
uiiAvorthy clerks, but he also stopped some of the Avorst
jobs Avhich the English government Avished to perpe
trate."-" BetAveen 1307 and 1316 there were only two
indiAddual English prelates appointed directly by the
pope. These Avere Walter Reynolds, a member of the
king's household, made Bishop of Worcester 1309, and
translated to Canterbury 1314, and Walter Maidstone

19. Robert of Reading, Flores. Hist, iii, 175 and 176
20. Tout, The Place of Edward II in English History.

Churchman and Man of Letters 39
Bishop of Worcester in 1314. BetAveen 1317 and 1326
ten bishops were appointed by papal reservation and pro
vision. These Avere : 1317, Thomas Cobham to Worcester,
Louis of Beaumont to Durham, and Adam Orleton to
Hereford; 1320, Rigaud of Assier to Winchester, and
Henry Burgherish to Lincoln; 1323, John Eaglescliffe
to Llandaff, and John Stratford to Winchester; 1325,
John Ross to Carlisle and William Airmyn to NorAvich.^^
In this list of appointments Ave find the aristrocratic
Louis of Beaumont and Henry Burgherish avIio stood
Avell Avith pope and government ; respectable officials like
Roger Northburgh; and scandalous self-seekers of the
official type, such as Adam Orleton, John Stratford and
William Airmyn. Tavo Avere Frenchmen, Beaumont and
Rigaud of Assier. Thomas Cobham Avas the only one of
a high spiritual type. He was the "good clerk," the
"floAver of Kent," the distinguished academic teacher
Avho receiA^ed in his promotion to Worcester some con
solation for having had his election to Canterbury set
aside in favour of Walter Reynolds. The two other
bishops created by John XXII had at least the merit of
not being politicians. Professor Tout goes on to say that
after 1322, John XXII deserved credit for rejecting the
nominees of Edward II, as rigorously as he ruled out
those elected by the chapters. He quashed the election
of Robert Baldock to the See of Norwich and so saved
England from an uuAvorthy bishop.
In providing spiritual heads for the Church, the pope
Avas undoubtedly acting within his rights. His inter
ference in temporal affairs, such as the appointing the
temporalities of the See to Avhomever he chose, Avhether
Englishman, Frenchman or Italian is a very debatable
question. Foreign prelates enjoying the revenues of an
English bishopric were not uncommon in this period.
There are instances in which such prelates never were
Avithin the borders of their territory. Apart from all this.

21. Tout, Ibid. p. 231, footnote.

40 Reginald Pecock
the real struggle centred around the control of the ap
pointments to bishoprics. Kings and factions on both
sides did not hesitate to prostitute these most sacred
offices to the attainment of their OAvn petty ambitions. In
doing so they violated the sacred rights of the spiritual
authority. The greatest evds arose from the " provisions "_ to
inferior benefices. Later in the century, about the time
of the outbreaks of John Ball and Wycliffe, the evil of
these abuses cried to heaven for vengeance, because there
was no one to overturn the tables of the money-changers
and scourge the buyers and sellers from the temple of
God. LiAdngs Avere given to foreigners Avho neither
knoAv the language nor resided in the kingdom; pastors
absented themselves from the care of their flocks, mani
festing no interest in them other than reaping the reve
nues ; parishes and benefices Avore turned over to laymen
for exploitation; and inferior, illiterate, and poorly
recompensed clerics Avere left to be the leaders of the
people. These abuses continued practically throughout the
period of Avliich Ave treat. They increased in numbers
and seriousness as time Avent on, and other forces con
tributed to the general breakdoAAm. It must be borne in
mind that there Avere many excellent prelates and priests
in the midst of all this lax discipline. There Avere many
others who, Avliile being men of good morals and noble
ideals, Avere iieA-ertheless products of the age and victims
of a Adcious system. Many too, especially foUoAving the
Black Deatli and in the time of our author, Avere of
mediocre ability and false ideals. Under Henry IV
and Henry V there Avas hope that something by Avay of
reform Avould be accomplished, but like their predeces
sors, they were preoccupied in the AA^ar Avith France.
We haA'e seen something of the opening of this period
of moral and social decline in the reign of EdAvard II
and his more immediate successors. . Let us noAV dAvell

Churchman and Man op Letters 41
more in detail upon the closing years of our period. It
was during this time that Pecock grcAV to manhood,
emerging from obscurity to a position of prominence and
influence. Undoubtedly much of the zeal for reform, so
manifest in his administration in after years, Avas the
outcome of personal experience as a young priest and
especially his experience in London. Reginald Pecock
was not a mere denouncer of evils; his criticism Avas
constructive. Another, a contemporary, full of zeal and
full of destructive criticism. Dr. Gascoigne, of Avliom Ave
have already spoken, has bequeathed to posterity some
interesting bits of ecclesiastical gossip on the CAdls of his
day. There is certain exaggeration in it, for Gascoigne
revels in superlatiA^es, and a deal of truth about it that
throAvs light upon the unrest and the spread of LoUardy.
Speaking of the grave neglect of bishops in the duty of
preaching, he says that OA'en the people cried out against
them in these Avords, "Woe to you, bishops avIio are so
rich, Avho love to be called lords, and to be served by
otliers on their knees, avIio ride attended with so many
and pompous horses, and avIio avIU do nothing for the sal
vation of souls, by the preaching the Word; for they
either knoAv not hoAv to preach, being entangled in Avorldly
business and 'bodily pleasures, or they cannot preach
truly without preaching against those evils of Avhich they
themselA-es are guilty."- Speaking of non-residence of
bishops he says, "Before King Henry IV, the kings of
England Avere Avont to choose for their Confessors grave
Doctors of Divinity, Avho had no other cure, and Bishops
then attended to the care of the dioceses. Thus, Henry
IV, Avhen his Confessor Avas made Bishop, commanded
him to go to his cure and bishopric. Henry V, likeAvise
a very wise king and a terror to a great many kingdoms,
had with him "one grave Doctor of Divinity, Thomas
AValden, Avho had no cure of souls, for his Confe-ssor. And
thus the kings and lords used to .retain such for their

22. Wood, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 222, e I.

42 Reginald Pecock
chaplains Avho had no cure of souls. But in the time of
Henry IV, Stafford, Bishop of Canterbury, Avas chan
cellor of England; Adam Molens, Bishop of Chichester,
Avas keeper of the PriA-y Seal, and Avas murdered; the
Bishop of NorAvich, Walter Lyard, a Cornish man, was
the Queen's Confessor residing at court; and the Bishop
of Carlisle, and afterAvards of Lincoln, Marmaduke
Lumley Avas treasurer of England; and the uiiAvorthy
Bishop of Coventry, Butli, Avas then chancellor to Mar
garet, Queen of England. "~'^' He further obseiwes that
"John Kemp, a native of Kent, Bishop of Rochester and
afterAvards of London, and then of York for almost
tAventy-eight years, Avhile he continued Archbishop of
that province, Avas AvhoUy absent from his diocese, living
at London or at Kent or elscAvhere in England at a dis
tance from his diocese ; excepting that sometimes in ten
or tAvelve years he resided in his diocese of York for two
or three Aveeks, and at York a fcAV or no days," and that
the mob, Avlicn they set on Asku, Bishop of Salisbury, to
murder him, thus insulted and upbraided him, "That
f elloAv ahvays lived Avith the King, and was his Confessor,
and did not reside in his diocese of Salisbury Avith us,
nor keep any hospitality, therefore, he shall not live!"^'^
In speaking of the holding of inferior beneflces by
laymen, Gascoigne says: "I know at the very time that
the said doctor (Gascoigne himself) was Chancellor of
Oxford, well famed for knoAvledge and good rule among
men, that, among others uiiAvorthily promoted, a foolish
youth eighteen years of age Avas promoted to twelve
prebends and a great archdeaconry of one hundred
pounds A'aluo, and to a great rectory, and a secular man
received all the rents of the said benefices and spent
upon the said youth just as much as he, the secular man,
pleased, and never gave an account ; and the said youth
Avas the son of a simple knight, and like an idiot, almost
23. Gascoigne, op. cit. pars prima, p. 401, secunda, p. 450, pars
prima, (p. 387). ' ^ ' ^
24. Gascoigne, ibid, pars prima, p. 137.

Churchman and Man of Letters 43
every day drunk. The bishop promoted him to please a
great Avoridly lord whose playmate he had been in his
boyhood; and he remained nearly twenty years in the
enjoyment of those prebends and of the archdeaconry,
dunng Avhich time he Avas never judged capable of being a
priest, nor did he ever reside in any of his prebends,
nor in the archdeaconry, nor in the rectory. "¦^^
Who Avere responsible for these abuses? Undoubt
edly the evidence of history leads to one conclusion in
this case, namely, that the papal court, the English court,
and the English hierarchy must shoulder a great deal of
the responsibility. There are, however, a few more phases of the situa
tion taken as a Avhole, that Ave must consider, before Ave
can^ arrive at the proper perspective. Throughout this
period there Avas practically incessant Avarfare. If Eng
land happened not to be at Avar with Scotland, she Avas
fighting the Irish, and assuredly the French. In the
reign of EdAvard II, we find England at Avar, first Avith
the Scotch, and then Avith the Irish. Finally, civil Avar
rages and EdAvard II loses his throne and his life. Ed
ward III, shortly after ascending the throne, is at Avar
with Scotland, and then in long drawn out campaigns
Avith the French. Richard II continues the Avarfare in
both France and Ireland, and eventually the country, in
the throes of insurrection and civil war, drives Richard
from his throne. He is afterward treacherously mur
dered. Civil strife continues and conditions remain
unsettled throughout the succeeding reign. Although
Henry IV Avas a much stronger king than his predecessor,
and dealt Avith rebellion and insurrection very summarily
and drastically, still the mysterious circumstances at
tendant upon his taking the throne were the source of a
great real of unrest and discontent among the people.
Enemies from within and without only awaited an op
portunity to begin some ncAV disturbance. We find him
25. Roger, op. cit., pp. 13-14. See also Gairdner, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 247.

44 Reginald Pecock
at war Avitli Scotland; another time crushing the lords
appellants; putting down the Percies, and the Oavcu
Glendower rebellion ; and dealing severely and vigorously
with insurrection in Yorkshire. In addition, the French
under St. Pol and the Duke of Orleans continued to give
trouble. Under Henry V, the mad project of subduing
France Avas once again undertaken. This meant the cost
of many lives and the burdening of the people Avho Avere
already overburdened Avith taxation. Some idea may be
had of the carnage of this almost ceaseless Avarfare
throughout the period of Avhich we treat, Avlieii we con
sider that Edward Ill's glorious victories Avere purchased
Avith the slaughter of 50,000 men, the floAver of English
manhood. War and social strife Avere not alone in contributing
to the reign of general chaos. Famine and pestilence
were undoubtedly prime factors in bringing about the
social and religious disturbances that manifested them
selves in the uprisings under the leadership of .John Ball
and the followers of John Wycliffe. Within a period of
thirty-three years, England Avas scourged by two great
epidemics, the latter of Avhich Avas the greater. FoIIoav-
ing the overAvhelming defeat at Bannockburn in 1314, the
country Avas visited in 1315 by famine and pestilence.
The harvest of 1314 failed, leaving the supply so scanty
that the king, at the request of parliament, fixed a maxi
mum price on provisions, but to no avail. Wheat, peas
and beans sold at twenty shillings the quarter. This
calamity Avas accompanied by disease breaking out among
the cattle; the early crops Avere destroyed by rain and
the late crops never ripened; lack of nourishment pro
duced dysenteries and pestilence. The poor were reduced
to feeding upon roots, horses, dogs and other animals.
Stories of men eating the dead bodies of their companions
are recorded, and of parents those of their children.^^
Bands of unfortunate but desperate men roamed the

26. Walslngham 107-108; Strokel. 37; Mon. Malms. 166.

Churchman and Man of Letters 45
country, whicli presented one great theatre of rapine,
anarchy and bloodshed.^'' Internecine war broke out
among the barons, and Robert Bruce, taking advantage
of the civil dissension, carried his Avar into England in
1318, pushing as far south as Yorkshire.
The Great Plague, known as the Black Death, fol
lowed in a few years. The first visitation lasted about
fourteen months in 1348 and 1349. The exact number
that died in this visitation cannot be accurately com
puted. It is estimated that from one-third to one-half
of the population perished. We do knoAV, hoAvever, that
the exterminating malady carried off thousands, both
men and beasts ; agriculture Avas neglected ; courts of
justice Avere closed; parliament Avas repeatedly pro
rogued by proclamation; the carcasses of sheep, horses
and oxen lay scattered on the fields, untouched by birds
of prey. We know too that in a short time all the ceme
teries in London were filled, and that Sir Walter Manny
purchased a field of thirteen aeres for a public burial
place, and that the bodies buried there amounted to two
hundred daily for several weeks. Two Archbishops of
Canterbury died in this year, and the frequent appoint
ments to vacant livings in the same year show the mor
tality among the clergy and their faithfulness to duty.
Many of Chaucer's "Good Parson" type perished. In
the diocese of Norwich, 800 parish priests died in 1349,
and the diocese lost altogether 2000 clergy during the
plague. Edward III speaking of the mortality through
out the country, uses the expressions, "non modica pars
populi" and "magna pars popuU."^^
England was never to be the same England again.
The far-reaching results of this terrible visitation, upon
the political, social and religious institutions of the
country were to affect generations yet unborn. First, it

27. Wals. 107, 109. , „t t^t t, ¦•• qia
28. Lingard, John, History of England, vol. IV: New Rym, in, 31b,
621.

46 Reginald Pecock
led to a great social revolution. Scarcity of labour was
so marked that some of the manors could not be culti
vated at all; the surviving labourers took advantage of
the scarcity, and as a result we find wages increasing
from fifty to tAvo hundred per cent ; the land owner was
brought face to face Avith ruin, and commodities soared
in price beyond the reach of all except the wealthy. The
government, alarmed at the situation, Avas forced to pass
stringent legislation controlling the price of labour and
commodities.^^ A growing restlessness among the people had been
evident long before the appearance of pestilence. They
Avere the victims of the military ambitions of generations
of kings. The people fought the Avars, and in times of
peace paid for the wars. Then, too, many of the
shepherds from Avhom they should expect leadership and
support Avere uiiAvorthy of their confidence. Unfortun
ately, the clerical estate remained aloof from the con
stitutional struggles of the commons, and naturally the
feeling groAv in some quarters that their spiritual lead
ers Avere not Avith them. In the midst of the confusion,
this calamity of 1348 swept aAvay in a short period the
true and sympathetic leaders, the men of God who
remained Avith their flocks. Their places could not be
filled, but men had to take their places. Very often
these compromises Avere deficient educationally and spir
itually. These Avere fortuitous circumstances. No one
can be held responsible. In all likelihood the superiors
acted on the principle that half is better than none.
Just Avhat Avere the results, and how comprehensive
in its influence this calamity may have been, Avill never
be known. Its effects penetrated, perhaps, avenues yet
unexplored by historians. To it, as a primary influence,
may be traced evils in the next two centuries which are
often attributed to more proximate causes. Certainly it
is not forcing a conclusion to state that the discontent,

29. Knyght, 2599; AVals. 198; Ford. XIV, 7.

Churchman and Man of Letters 47
unrest and ignorance among many of the lower clergy
was ideal ground for John Ball's and John Wycliffe's
socialistic principles to fall upon. The fanatic reformer
always takes advantage of discontent and unrest in order
to obtain a hearing and a f oUoAving.
We will now see something of the man Wycliffe, the
most learned of the revolutionists of his day, and the soul
of the revolt against the Church and the State. John
Wycliffe first comes into prominence about the year 1360.
The contempt manifested by his bitter invectives against
the different orders of friars places the man as an
extremist. This hatred and contempt increased with
years, until it extended not merely to monks and friars
but to all priests,'^'' bishops and the pope himself. Charity
and sincerity are the first requisites in the true reformer.
No matter what his other qualifications may be, no matter
what his position may be, if these virtues are absent, his
denunciation and crying from the house tops are in vain.
Great evils existed. It cannot be denied. The times
Avere sorely in need of a great reformer, but John
Wycliffe, from the testimony of history, cannot be said
to have been that reformer. His radical principles struck
at the very foundations of existing society. Certainly
his memorable doctrine that OAvnership is founded in
grace added to the general confusion. This doctrine as
set forth by him states explicitly that "Everyone that
is finally justified hath not only a right to, but in fact
enjoys all the things of God."'^^ In other words, a man
in mortal sin was incapable of OAvnership, and had no
right to anything, while a man in the state of grace
really possessed all things. Furthermore, among Chris
tians there ought to be community of goods ; the clergy
ought to live on alms freely given, and the possession of
temporal goods by them was a gross abuse. Wycliffe,
Avhether sincerely or not, but quite in the fashion of the

30. His own poor priests excepting.
31. Lewis, op. cit., p. 46.

48 Reginald Pecock
typical reformer Avho followed him, made sure to incor
porate int© his teachings principles that Avere a bait for
avaricious laymen. "If God is," he states, "temporal
lords may lawfully and meritoriously take away the goods
of fortune of a delinquent Church. "¦^^ He continues,
"Whether the Church be in such a state or not, is not
my business to examine, but the business of temporal
lords ; who, if they find it to be in such a state, are to act
boldly, and on the penalty of damnation to take away
the temporalities."'^'^ Bishop Stubbs makes this obser
vation about Wycliffe: "Wycliffe himself was a deep
thinker and a popular teacher ; but his logical system of
politics, Avhen it Avas applied to practice, turned out to be
little less than socialism, and his religious system,
unless its vital doctrines are understood to be throAvii
into the shade by its controversial tone, was unfortun
ately devoid of the true leaven of all religious success,
sympathy and charity." Dr. Gairdner, in commenting^^
upon the practicability of Wycliffe's teaching, says: "It
(the teaching) Avas clearly dangerous to an existing sys
tem, and could not maintain itself as a school of thought
. . . His mode of reforming the Church was not con
sistent with practical politics, and the Church found her
OAvn Avay out of that virtual anarchy which had suggested
such drastic remedies. "^*^
Such testimony is not founded upon a prejudice
against Wycliffe. It need not be a question of prejudice
but of fact. Wycliffe's principles were undoubtedly
socialistic and inflammatory, and above all, most inop
portune. To what extent the responsibility for the insur
rection of 1381, the like of which England never before
had experienced, may be laid upon Wycliffe is difficult
justly to compute. His principles were revolutionary
beyond a doubt, and from what we glean of the man him-
32. Ibid. pp. 46-47; Vide Lechler, 425, "Trialogi Supp "
33. Lewis, Ibid. pp. 45-47.
34. Stubbs, op. cit., vol. II, p. 460.
35. Gairdner, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 12.

Churchman and Man of Letters 49
self, he was quite capable of an extreme, inflammatory,
revolutionary appeal. Other preachers, it is true, had
been setting forth dangerous doctrines before the out
break. The priest, John Ball, had been inflaming the
countryside for some time. To what extent Ball was
under Wycliffe's influence cannot be ascertained. We
do knoAv that Ball's doctrine about tithes harmonised
with that of Wycliffe. And we know also that after the
terrible happenings of 1381, Avhen Wycliffe beheld his
principles in operation, the countryside in flames and
rapine and murder stalking forth, and the very social
fabric trembling, he compromsied, and very consistently
modified his first stand, and rather paradoxically advo
cated another set of principles.
Was Wycliffe sincere ? Let us suppose that the man
was sincere, and that his bitter invectives and paradoxes
were the result of his sanguine, ardent zeal. But in spite
of this there remains a great deal to be explained away,
a great deal of evidence that excludes him from the cate
gory of the disinterested, deeply religious reformers of
every age. While there were abuses existing in religious
orders, still Wycliffe's petty quibbling and inveighing did
not bear the mark of fraternal correction. Moreover,
there is much to be explained in his method of obtaining
the wardenship of Canterbury Hall at Oxford. His
method was that of a petty politician, dishonorable, and
in violation of the constitutions. He yielded, finally, to
the rightful appointee, after the united authority of king
and pontiff had been brought to bear upon him, but Avith
bitter resentment. His contemporaries attributed his
violent attacks upon the popes and the monastic orders in
after years to his bitter and lasting resentment at the
loss of the Avardenship. But this incident does not stand
alone ; even in aa endeavor to be just one cannot wholly
rid one's mind of the realization that there is something
to be explained before Wycliffe's sincerity and integrity
will be alloAved to pass without qualifications. As Luther

50 Reginald Pecock
in his association Avith Philip of Hesse, so John Wycliffe
in his intimate friendship and association Avith John of
Gaunt Avould have much to explain in an effort to dispel
all suspicion. John of Gaunt was a clever unscrupulous
trickster Avho did not hesitate at any means, no matter
how immoral, to attain his end. His loyalty to both king
and country is still very questionable. It was he Avho
championed Wycliffe's cause. That Wycliffe, in his close
association with this man, was Avholly unaware of his
character and standards of morality, that he thought him
sincere, is an explanation commonly offered, but one
entirely unsatisfactory, and unjust in so far as it reflects
upon Wycliffe's keen intelligence.
We have endeavoured to trace the course of some of
the principal causes that led up to the social and religious
upheaval that manifested itself under the leadership of
John Wycliffe. We have seen that the responsibility
cannot be justly attributed to any one cause, or to any
individual, or group of individuals, but Avas the outcome
of forces of disintegration that had been at AVork in the
distant past. The final outcome could be avoided only by
the special interposition of DiAdne Providence.
Wycliffe soon attracted to himself a large foUoAving.
His novel doctrines found root in the soil of discontent
and soon he reaped a harvest of numbers amongst the
loAver and untutored clergy as Avell as among the laity.
All Avere caught up Avith the fanatical zeal that led them
boldly to denounce the adherents of the Church tradition
as impious, wicked and perverse. "So strong had they
become," says Dr. Gairdner, "Avitli poAverful patronage,
that numbers actually accepted their teaching from fear.
They created dissension among families, setting up father
against son, and son against father, servants against
masters, and generally speaking, neighbours against

Churchman and Man of Letters 51
neighbours. Such at least was the accusation against
them. "56
Such Avere the conditions in England Avhen the first
light of reason began to dawn upon the child, the future
Bishop of St. Asaph and later of Chichester. His child
hood days and young manhood were spent in one of the
most trying periods of England's history. It is possible
that his youthful dream was to restore peace and har
mony to his people, and to that Church which he loved
and venerated to his last day. Later in this volume,
Reginald Pecock, a master on the subject, will tell us
more of John Wycliffe and LoUardy.
36. Gairdner, ibid., vol. 1, p. 13. Vide Chronicle of Henry Knighton
(Rolls Ser.) ii, 18-1-187.

52 Reginald Pecock
CHAPTER III
Fifteenth Century Prose
AND
LoLLARDY
The ascent and decline in the political fortunes of
nations is almost mathematical in its progression. The
history of great nations and great empires has no excep
tion to offer to the invariable rule. A nation rises from
obscurity, struggles upAvard to a pinnacle of power and
prestige, relaxes in the refulgence of its own transfigura
tion, and in turn goes the way of all nations to take its
place amongst those that have been. With the literary
fortunes of a people or nation this has not been the
experience of history. There is nothing regular or
mathematical about the rise and fall in the literary pres
tige of a people. We do know, hoAvever, that a nation
Avhich loses its ideals is doomed to dark oblivion from
Avhich there is no return. A nation Avithout ideals will
never produce anything that is original, vigorous and
manly in the field of art, of which literature is a part.
Apart from this the possibilities for a literary future
amongst a civilized people are unlimited.
Those who trace the history of literary movements
have a passion for seeing in them a regular, steady
progression, but unfortunately, or rather inconveniently,
the few exceptions, and they are very great exceptions,
greatly upset this theory of progression. No satisfactory
explanation for the appearance of geniuses has yet been
put forward. A literary genius may spring into existence
from any civilized quarter. So also may a great literary
movement. Its coming is not always foreshadowed or

Churchman and Man of Letters 53
heralded; they come when and AAdience least expected, and
often they come unto their own and their own receive
them not. The Anglo-Saxon lyric and epic, Deor's Com
plaint, Beowulf, and the poems of Caedmon and Cyne-
Avulf arose from the unknoAvn past; the thirteenth century
romance Avas not a result, but came out of that period
of blight and death following the Norman Conquest;
Shakespeare's unsurpassed genius blossomed on the medi
ocrities that succeeded to the genius of Chaucer. There
is, in truth, a tide in the fortunes of literature, but a
tide ungoA^erned by invariable laws.
In turning to prose we must be prepared to modify
our vieAv on the theory of the progression. The theory,
like all theory, lends itself to the abuse of exaggeration,
but in prose it has some foundation in experience. Some
may see a development from King Alfred to our oavu day.
We are not prepared to grant such comprehensive con
cessions, but one must admit that there is, in the history
of English prose, a sloAA^er, steadier and more continuous
development than in poetry, since in the latter there is
greater freedom and less hampering by predominant
forms and tastes of the age. The literary genius is pri
marily an artist, and naturally seeks the most perfect
medium of expression for his intellectual and emotional
experience. This medium is poetry Avith its charm of
expression, and harmony of rhythm, in which the caprice
of genius is poured forth impulsively rather than under
the dominance of any laAvs of progression ; Avhile, on the
other hand, prose, the medium of expression for exact
thinking and exact description, is more dependent upon
and determined by the exigencies of form and taste of
the agp. The atmosphere of chivalry in the thirteenth
and early part of the fourteenth centuries Avas not an
atmosphere for didactics and polemics but rather an
atmosphere of green woodlands, sparkling brooks, old
castles, fair ladies, champing steeds and warrior knights.

54 Reginald Pecock
The thirteenth century romance supplied this demand.
Didactics and polemics came into their own shortly after
this, when Wycliffe initiated the movement against the
Church. Both sides of the controversy felt the need of
exact and vigorous expression. In this period, this age of
Wycliffe and Pecock, English prose received an impetus
that has come doAvn to us. Later, in the sixteenth century
when men felt so keenly, yes bitterly, about religious and
political matters, we find English prose under Fisher,
More, Latimer and Thomas Elliot, and finally under
Tyndal, reaching one of the highest pinnacles of develop
ment in its history. Finally in the nineteenth century,
the age that sees the Romantic revival, the age of great
political and religious controversy, the age of the Novel,
the form of exact expression and exact description, we
find English prose in its golden age.
Let us return to fifteenth century prose. Until quite
toAvards the close of the fourteenth century, England can
hardly be said to have possessed any prose literature not
avowedly or practically of a didactic character. "To
save some one's soul or to improve some one's morals
Avere seemingly the only motives which could suffice to
persuade an EngUshman to write his native language
except in verse. "^ It is a commonplace to remark that
the greatest Avork in the field of EngUsh Uterature even
up to the middle of the fifteenth century was executed in
verse. We have already observed that the impulse to prose
writing began in earnest with the period of Wycliffe's
attack. The fifteenth century is one of the most difficult
periods to understand. The sources of its history are
often obscure, and for the most part fragmentarv. More
over, in tlie presence of aU the confusion arising from
poUtical struggles, wars, pestilence, famine and reUgious
t.-...^' ?.°"^"^' "^"^ ^¦' ¦^»/*«««*'^ Century Prose and Verse, p. XIX
Fifteenth Century Prose aud Verse.

Churchman and Man of Letters 55
strife, Ave are apt to pass over this period in the conven
tional fashion with the summary remark that aU was
confusion and darkness, transitory and mediocre. Tn
the development of constitutional institutions of the
period, this is, according to Professor Tout, a serious
exaggeration. It is also an exaggeration to state that aU
was decline in the literary world. Dr. Gairdner very
aptly remarks, "We are apt to transfer to the age itself
the difficulties Avhich we encounter, forgetting that the
forces Avhich AA'ere to produce the Renaissance Avere
already at Avork and indeed beginning to bear fruit. "^
No transition period in English literature has been
more attacked and maltreated than this. In their
attempts to throw greater lustre upon the Elizabethan
outburst of original work, literary historians of the old
school were accustomed to place the English Mandeville
nearly half a century too early; they ignored or very
summarily passed over very worthy attempts at dramatic
production in this period, reserAdng their attention and
their praise for the middle of the sixteenth century. It
was also their Avont to attribute to the sixteenth century,
as a special characteristic, the industry of translators,
when, really, men had been earnestly pioneering in this
field at least as early as 1380.'^
There has been a disappointment arising from the
achievements of fifteenth century literary endeavours, a
disappointment from expectation not Avell founded, and
from a lack of the proper understanding of the great fer
mentation that was taking place not merely in matters
political and religious, but even in the literary Avorld.
The thirteenth and fourteenth centuries Avere closed
volumes, they were past history. Their ideals and aspir
ations and vicAvpoint were those of a truly great people,
but these all passed with them. It Avas a noAV people with
2. Gairdner, Paston Letters 1, 318.
3. Ten Brink History of English Literature, ed. AV. Clarke Robinson,
vol. II and L. Dora Schmitz, vol. III.

56 Reginald Pecock
a different viewpoint who were to succeed. This new
era was to be "the century cf the commons," and this
"century of the commons" Avas to imprint itself on every
phase of the life of the people. Certainly, there is great
disappointment in comparing Hoccleve and Lydgate with
Chaucer; Chaucer is the exception, however. The pro
gression theorists naturally would expect something from
the promise of the great thirteenth and fourteenth cen
turies. With Chaucer as the height of these centuries'
attainment Avhat could they not expect, according to their
own theories, in the century that followed?
A retracing of steps was absolutely necessary, and
this is especially true as regards prose. It is this retrac
ing of steps, or better marking time, that is looked upon
as decline. In fact, it is the first healthy advance taken.
Without it a strong, healthy, vigorous English prose
would never have been possible. Latin and French had
to be driven from the domination of English letters. They
were the foreign domination in the literary sphere, and
as long as they held SAvay the native tongue remained
inert and declined. Henry Vs victories in France and
the first displacement of French or Latin by English as
the official medium of correspondence were not mere coin
cidences ; it was the new spirit asserting itself. The lan
guage of the common people was coming to its own in
"the century of the commons."
There was a general demand for education in this
age. To be able to read and to write Avas no longer a
distinction and rare privilege of the upper class. The
Paston Letters give testimony of this fact. Dr. Gairdner
says: "From the extreme scarcity of original letters of
snch an early date we are too easily led to undervalue
the culture and civiUzation of the age. But the standard
of education was by no means so low. and its advantages
by no means so exceptionaUy distributed as might be

Churchman and Man of Letters 57
otherwise supposed."^ Above the class of, ordinary
labourer, no one seems to have been wholly illiterate. All
could write and most persons could express themselves in
writing with fluency and ease. The nobility Avere the
worst writers, and Dr. Gairdner observes that their spell
ing and handwriting alike were outrageous. William Bing
ham draws an extreme picture in his lamentation over the
condition of the grammar schools of the period. William
Bingham, it must be borne in mind, was one of the
old school who saAV decline in the fact that native English
was beginning to supplant Latin as the principal medium
of communication. He says: "The grammar schools
which used to be flourishing and numerous, had decayed
for want of masters, and that the faculty of grammar was
much neglected both in the Universities of Oxford and
Cambridge, and in the country generally, whereby not
merely was the knowledge of sacred scripture and Latin
requisite for the pursuit of the laAV, and the affairs of
the realm likely to perish, but also the power of communi
cating Avith foreigners. ' '^ Moved by these considerations
Bingham founded Clare Hall at Cambridge. His testi
mony, however, is rather a proof that real progress Avas
being made in the nse of the English language.
French was also giving Avay. In the reign of Henry
V the fact that Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwiciv,
could speak French fluently was regarded as something
of an accomplishment.^ At the beginning of the fifteenth
century, Latin or Anglo-French Ava s the usual medium of
expression for letters or semi-official documents; but
before the middle of the century, men of public affairs,
politicians and statesmen, resTilarly made nse of their
native language in their correspondence. Latin or French
Avas still the language of diplomacy. However, Charles

4 Gairdner Paston Letters 1, 318.
5. Cal. Patent Rolls. Hen. VI, III, 295.
6 Kingsford, English Historical Literature in 15th Century, p. 195.

58 Regix-ald Pecock
the Bold Avrites Avitli his oavu hand in English to the
governor of Calais.''
The demand for education was not confined to the
upper classes. Since Agincourt, in 1415, and Calais, in
1436, a great wave of patriotism had swept over the
country, and men felt the pressing need of being able to
express themselves clearly in their native English. In
1445 four grammar schools Avere founded in London,
Avhere there Avere already a number of similar institu
tions.-''' Under HenrA' V, education made marked prog
ress. The scholar and man of letters found in him a
patron, not a mere dilettante, but a fond reader cf goodly
tales and Avorks on hunting and even chronicles and Avorks
of theology. It was his brother, however, the "good"
Duke Humphrey of Gloucester, in whom the scholar found
a patron and a great advocate of the new learning in
England. His library at the University of Oxford stifl
proclaims to the world his scholarly interest in books and
in men of letters. He did a great Avork for the revival
of letters in England in establishing a connection be
tAveen tlie representatives of the continental Renaissance
and the patrons of the revival in England. He carried on
a personal correspondence Avith Italian humanists like
Leonardo Bruni and Pier Candido Decembri. It Avas said
of him by the University of Oxford, that nnder his patron
age Greek Avas coming to lif c'
The zeal for learning was not confined to the noble
efforts of Duke Humphrey of Gloucester. It Avas Walter,
Lord Hungerford, AAdio encouraged the pseudo-Elinham
to Avrite his "Life of Henry V.''^^ James Butler, fourth
Earl of Ormonde, had in his service scholars like James
Young, Avho engUshed the "Secreta Secretorum." The
7. Kirk, Charles the Bold, ii, 70.
8. Leach, Educational Charters, pp. XXXVII and XXXVIII. Also
Kingsford, ibid., p. 195, sq.
9. Epistolae Academicae, p. 203.
10. Preface of All Souls M. S.

Churchman and Man op Letters 59
Earls of Warwick and Salisbury gave freely of their
patronage to Lydgate, and Cardinal Beaufort assisted
Hardyng. Adam Moleyns, Thomas Bekynton, and John
Somerset, men of scholarly tastes, were friendly to
scholars. The kept up a friendship Avith the men of
letters in England and in Italy. Moreover, young men
like WilUam Grey, John Phreas or Free and John Gun-
thorpe, scholars of Balliol College, went to Italy to study
under Guarini at Ferrara.^^ William Sellyng, a fellow of
All Souls, and afterwards prior of Christ Church, Canter
bury, made more than one visit to Italy, and collected
Latin and Greek MSS. Certainly, as Kingsford remarks,
that learning cannot have been altogether dead, which
gave his succession of scholars their first training. An
other succession of scholars is to be seen in Thomas
Bekynton, William Waynflete, John Morton, and John
Russell, who Avere trained at Oxford for the serAdce of the
state. These men in the midst of their other duties still
retained their scholarly tastes. Anthony Woodville was
a nobleman of culture, and, like Tiptaft, translated into
English, works which Caxton printed.
We have seen something of the growing interest in
education and in English letters, as evinced by the moral
and material support given it from every quarter. We
shall now see to what extent this new enthusiasm ex
pressed itself in actual results. John of Trevisa, Vicar of
Berkley, while appearing earlier than the period which
we are treating, really belongs to the movement. His
great work, which was supposed to have been finished in
1387, was his translation of Higden's Polychronicon. It
is an interesting specimen of the earliest English prose.
In addition to this, tw^o other translations, one of "Vege-
tius" and the other of "Aegidius Romanus," are attrib
uted to him. According to Caxton, and it is a mere
supposition, he was supposed to have translated the Bible.
11. Kingsford, ibid., p. 6.

60 Reginald Pecock
But Trevisa 's really great contribution to EngUsh prose
was to prepare the way for others to foUow along more
original lines.
The unqualified statement that the period was medi
ocre and barren, is indeed misleading. We must not make
the mistake of passing over, with a conventional observa
tion, the important and Adtal Avork that must be accom
plished with yeoman plodding and industry in any initial
stage of development if the final results are to be crowned
with the glories of the blossoming period. Unfortunately,
too, often the blossoming period receives more than a
just due of the harvest of praise and recognition. What
Ave have seen of the results of the period, and more
important still, what has been destroyed in the succeed
ing generations during the pillaging and firing of monas
teries, is sufficient to convince us that the English Avorld
AA'as anything but lacking in intellectual and literary
interests. We find the monks at work in their copying rooms,
and the rich abbeys not only turning out good books but
laying the foundations for the literary medium of history
as is seen from the sequence of chronicles produced in
the Abbey of St. Albans.^^ The AVork of one monk, John
Capgrave (b. Apr. 21, 1393, d. Aug. 12, 1464), a priest of
the order of Austin Friars is, even in its extensiveness,
phenomenal. At one time he Avas provincial of the order
in England, but a greater and more lasting distinction
is his because of his scholarly attainments. He Avrote in
both Latin and English. Amongst his works in Latin
are his "Chronicle of England," "Book of the Noble
Henries." his commentaries on the Pentateuch, Joshua,
Judges, Ruth and the Books of Kings. His other com
mentaries are on the Psalter, Ecclesiastes, Isaias, Daniel
and the Twelve Minor Prophets; on the Epistles of St.
Paul; on the Canonical Epistles, the Acts, and Apoca-
12. Ten Brink, op. cit., vol. Ill, pp. 16-21.

Churchman and Man of Letters 61
lypse. He also contributed works on the Creeds; also a
"Manual of Christian Doctrine"; "Theological Conclu
sions''; "Sermons for a Year"; "Scholastic Lectures";
"Ordinary Disputations"; "Addresses to the Clergy on
the Sentences of Peter Lombard"; "On the Followers
of St. Augustine"; "Of Illustrious Men of the Order of
St. Angustine"; "The Life of St. Augustine"; the "Life
of Duke Humphrey of Gloucester." In English he wrote
the "Life of St. Gilbert of Sempringham," the only
manuscript of which was destroyed by fire in 1731. He
also contributed in English rhyme "The Life of St.
Katherine" three manuscripts of which still remain.
Certainly, in the presence of available evidence the charge
of slothfulness can not be sustained, nor can it be said
that literary interests were confined to the exceptional
few, and that industry in this field is to be found only
with such men as Wycliffe and Pecock.
Another interesting phase in the development of
prose in this period is to be seen in the contemporary
chronicles. The English Chronicles of Londoii begin to
take shape. In 1430 a full version was probably compiled.
From this, two versions appeared; one in 1431, and the
other in the following year. The importance of these
versions is seen from this, that historical prose Avas
beginning to take on distinctive characteristics, literary
qualities in advance of the traditional methods used in
the monasteries. The deep, groAving interest in these
productions is another healthy manifestation; within
three A-oars three distinct versions were in demand. This
interest was concommitant with the wave of patriotism
which was sweeping the country. The chronicles assur
edly give CAddence of the aAvakening of this vigorous
national feeling. The main narrative of "The Great
EngUsh Chronicle of the Brut" is a rehandling of the
material contained in the London Chronicles; but the
significant characteristic is this, that the writers make

62 Reginald Pecock
use of such sources as ballads and popluar poems as in
the case of Agincourt, the siege of Rouen, and the defence
of Calais. We find ourselves in the presence of a marked
stage of continuous, progressive development. The
literary achievement may not be of a high order, still it
is a step forAvard and promising, springing from the
commercial classes.^'^
Trevisa 's translations do not stand alone in this
period. Occasionally instances are met where works in
verse form are turned into prose, as is the case of one of
the versions of the "Life of Adam and Eve." Later in
the fifteenth century a number of the "Lives of the
Saints" Avore translated from Latin into English prose.
Legends of the Blessed Virgin were also written in prose.
An English priest compiled for a noble lady, Ms penitent,
a life of St. Jerome from the "Legenda Aurea" and from
correspondence between St. AugTistine and St. Cyril. The
purpose of the Avork Avas, that the noble lady and others
might learn therefrom hoAv to Uve and how to die. A
monk, probably of the northeast Midlands, translated, at
the request of his prior, the legends of four female saints
from Latin into the vernacular.
There Avere also the prose-legends that began to
appear at an early date, especially in Western England.
These Avritings Avere primarily for the reUgious instruc
tion of the people, and also to assist the clergy in their
preaching. John Myrc, a canon regular of tlie Augus
tinians at Lilleshall in Shropshire, was the author of the
first of these. From a Latin source he produced in
rhymed-couplets, "Instructions for Parish Priests. "^^
This he afterAvards brought out in prose. Another of
his set of sermons is the "Liber Festivalis" or the
"Festial," Avritten about the beginning of the fifteenth
century. The source of this Avas the "Golden Legend,"
13. Kingsford, op. cit., p. 78.
14. Pub. by Early Eng. Text Society.

Churchman and Man of Letters 63
which he used very freely. He does not make use of as
many legends as did Jacobus of Genoa, although he added
several new ones such as that of St. Alkmund, patron
saint of Lilleshall church, and that of St. Wenefrede of
Wales. Later, in 1438, the "Legenda Aurea" was
translated again by an anonymous individual who signed
himself a "pore sinner." This translation was made
from one of the existing French versions.
Another author, a contemporary of John Myrc, also
left many sermons which are preserved in libraries and
museums. This was John Felton, vicar of St. Mary
Magdalen, and Fellow of Mary Magdalen College, Ox
ford. His course of Sunday sermons, some fifty-eight in
number, was much used by his successors in preaching.
He tells us in his preface that he purposed to draw up
the course of sermons founded on the Gospels of the
Sundays, in order to assist priests in instructing the
faithful and also to assist students of moral and dogmatic
theology who were poor and could not buy books.^'^
A work that was very popular, not merely in the
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, but even as late as the
seventeenth, when it was again circulated in manuscript,
and may have suggested to Bunyan his "Pilgrim's
Progress," was that of a French monk, Guillaume de
DeguilcAdlle. DeguilcAdlle, a Cistercian of the Abbey of
Chalis in the diocese of Senlis, wrote his "Pelerinage de la
Vie Humaine" sometime betAveen 1330 and 1331. This
was followed by his "Pelerinage de L'Ame Humaine." In
1358 he produced the "Pelerinage de Jesu Christ." He
himself admits that he was largely under the influence
of the great work, the "Roman de la Rose." Jean
GaUopes, a French priest of EngUsh extraction, trans
lated the first two "Pelerinages" into EngUsh prose,
sometime in the fifteenth century before 1435, about the
same time that the original text of the "Pelerinage de la

15. Harl MS. 861, fol. 2. Sermones Dominicales were pub. 1431.

64 REGiN.iLD Pecock
Vie Humaine" Avas translated into the prose of the South-
English dialect, and another version was produced at a
later date in the Northern dialect.
There is one AVork of the first half of the fifteenth
century which for maturity and ease, and freedom of
expression, stands next to the productions of Reginald
Pecock. Long before Caxton printed it in 1490, it had
influenced a dramatic poet. The author of the moral
play "Spirit, Will and Understanding" is indebted to
"The SoA^ene Payntes" for his theological learning.
"The Sevene Payntes" is an adaptation from the
German, "Biichlein der Wois?heit," the work of a German
Dominican. The work Avas very popluar in the Middle
Ages, and in Germany is said to have had a wider circula
tion than the "De Imitatione Christi. "^^
A striking characteristic of the literary works of
this period is their great dependence upon foreign sources
in matter and literary form. The principal literary
treasures Avere in Latin and French, a considerable part
of the latter consisting of translations from the former.
At this period of development the French Avere just one
stage in advance of that in England. English insularity
in more ways than one, and the French proximity to
the centre of the reviA^al in Italy, account for this. This
must be said, hoAvever, that Avhile the English prose
translations of the period are, for the most part, imita
tive, still there is with each successive attempt a personal
and original recasting, a fuUer development, particularly
in the poAver of description, and epic qualities. An
EngUsh prose rendering of one of the earliest EngUsh
romances is the history of King Ponthus of GaUcia and
the beautiful Sidogne, daughter of the King of Little
Bretagne. This is based on a prose version in the French.
Another important translation, made in the reign of
Henry VI, Avas that of the A^eritable literary treasure

16. Ten Brink Eng. Lit. ed. Dr. Alois Brandl, vol. II, pt. II, p. 7.

Churchman and Man of Letters 65
house, the "Roman de Merlin." The author, Robert de
Boron, a Frenchman, produced the original at the begin
ning of the thirteenth century, bringing the narrative up
to the croAvning of Arthur. Later the work is supple
mented Avith the additional history of the King and his
knights to the coming of Lancelot to the court. It is this
fuller version of the "Roman de Merlin" Avhich Avas
translated into English prose.
Before concluding our sketch of the prose of the
period we feel that a few observations upon another most
important phase ef EngUsh prose development are nec
essary. It was at this time that political prose, began to
give signs of reawakening. Previous to this there was
the already mentioned "Aegidius Romanus," "The
Mirror of Princes," and in addition attempts had been
made in handUng such themes as the "'Commodytes of
England. ' ' With the outbreak of the Wars of the Roses,
a champion of the Lancastrian cause arose in the person
of Sir John Fortescue, the first great writer on political
subjects. In the midst of the struggle, the heat of relig-
gioiis controversy abated temporarily, and men became
allied in the two hostile camps, according to their political
sympathies. Fortescue, in his enthusiasm for his
espoused vieAvs, gave expression to them in both Latin and
his native English. In many respects his coming forth re
sembles that of Pecock. He came a zealous champion Avith
a keen intelligence and a virile gift of expression, stand
ing next to Pecock as a representative of the period. He
AA'as another man of the hour, whose literary career had
its origin in the necessity of the times rather than being
pursued as an end in itself. His first efforts were a series
of political pamphlets written partly in Latin and partly
in English. But the work upon Avliich his literary repu
tation is chiefly founded is his treatise "On the
Governance of England," or "Difference between Abso
lute and limited Monarchv. ' ' Throughout the treatise a

66 Reginald Pecock
keen, penetrating, religious mind is revealed. In these
respects he strikingly resembles a great prose writer of
a somewhat later date. Sir Thomas More.
Among the various factors that influenced fifteenth
century literature, leaving upon it an enduring character,
John Wycliffe and the English Bible stand eminently in
relief. No study of the prose of the period would be
complete without a reference to them. Whatever diver
gent opinions may be held of Wycliffe's sincerity and
zeal, or of Wycliffe as a religious reformer, this is cer
tain : He stands alone as a literary figure in his own age.
Very few Avriters in the history of English literature, and
especially in the history of prose development, have given
sueh an impetus to the language. His influence is both
direct and indirect; direct in his own contributions, and
indirect insofar as be Avielded a power over his own fol-
loAvers and also upon others of liis age. The influence
which he exerted indirectly Avas far greater, perhaps, than
that arising from his oavu personal literary contributions.
That his controversy and attack upon the church, which
was taken up by his foUoAvers, gave a character and a
coloring to the Avriting of the period is undeniable. When
men feel keenly they give vent to their emotional experi
ence through some medium of expression, as marble,
colour or harmony, or even language. This inteUectual
together Avith emotional experience when conformed to
language may be said to comprise the art of Uterature.
At this particular time in history men did feel keenly on
matters of religious controversy. Wycliffe led in the
movement ; he was the inteUectual of the faction, Avhose
fire and zeal inflamed every individual of his foUowers.
The reUgious movement led to great efforts in a liter
ary way. Pamphlets and tracts and treatises poured
forth, and in turn men like Pecock thrust themselves into
the heat of the controversy in defence of orthodoxy. The
times give evidence of great efforts being made on both

Churchman and Man op Letters 67
sides; Wycliffe's works are voluminous, while the Ust of
the non-extant works alone, Avith which Pecock met the
attack, give some idea of the enthusiasm with which
men entered the contest. The opponents in the contro
versy seem to have read the signs of the time, since
both parties were thoroughly awakened to the growing
enthusiasm for the revival of knowledge and especially
to the enthusiasm for the native language. At a glance
it can be seen what effect this would have upon the ver
nacular literature. Wliat would naturally be expected
did aetually happen. Men delved into every available
source whence they could draw power for their weapons
of attack and defense ; into the Fathers and Doctors of the
Church, into legends and chronicles, into the ancient
philosophers and theologians and particularly into the
Scriptures.^^ No other one book has impressed itself upon English
literature as have the Sacred Scriptures. To the English
language it has been a great reservoir to which the lan
guage of successive generations has returned for new
life and pristine purity. Literature is indebted to
Wycliffe, although it is evident in the light of renewed
research, that his work in the matter of translating the
Bible has been greatly exaggerated. One must not for
get that the movement to popularize the vernacular text
had a great influence upon the future literary history of
the country. That the same results Avould have event
ually come about avo have no doubt; still, one cannot
dissociate Wycliffe from the popularization of the Scrip
tures and from the movement that accomplished it at
an earlier 'date than would otherAvise have been done.
That the popularization of the Sacred Text AVould
have eventually been accomplished seems certain, since,
contrary to a prevailing false view, there is nothing in

17. See list at end of Babington's edit, of the Repressor. It mani
fests an extensive reading experience in Pecock.

68 Regin'ald Pecock
the teaching or attitude of the Catholic Ov urch that would
have frustrated it. This is quite evident from the frag
mentary portions of the vernacular Scriptures still extant
in various museums, libraries and monasteries. In Eng
land during Anglo-Saxon times we find Caedmon^'^ giving
several passages of Scripture. Aldhelm, Bishop of Sher
born (d. 709), is reported to have rendered the Psalter
into his native language.^^ Venerable Bede (d. 735),
rendered the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed and the
Gospel of St. John into Anglo-Saxon.^'' Also to the
period of Aldhelm may be ascribed the Anglo-Saxon
translation of the Gospels.^^
Up to the age of Wycliffe there was no great need for
a version of the Scriptures in English. French was
actuaUy the language of the court and of the educated
classes until after the middle of the fourteenth century.
After the Norman Conquest, Avhilst the wants of the
educated classes were satisfied by the Norman-French
translations, the Anglo-Saxon version of the Gospels was
copied as late as the 12th century.^^ There is a very
interesting collection of vernacular versions of the Scrip
tures in the British Museum.^ There are Bohemian,
Dutch and Italian, the dates of pubUcation of which
range from 1466-1532.^^ Certainly the idea of giving the
Sacred Writings to the people did not originate with
WycUffe nor Avith Luther, nor with any of their contem
poraries and colleagues.

18. Caedmon was a monk of Whitby in 7th century.
19. Bale Scriptorum inns, catalogus ed. 1557 p 84
p. 306.' ^"^''' ''^^ ''''• ^^^''''¦t"™' ^^'e Hist. Eccl. 'ed. Smith Cantab. 1722,
See also Bodl. Rushworth 3946 (a MS. of the Bodl. Lib.) also another
gloss m the famous Bk. of Durham Brit. Mus. Cotton. Nero D4
1 • ^Jr}^\Y''^^'''' P"^- ^"^ 15^1; ^J'- Marshall, rector of Lincoln Col-
iT;/^ ]^^\}^'- ^''^- T'^^^P"' i^ 1842. See also by Sir John SpeVan
entitled "Psalterium Davidis Latino Saxonicum Vetus 4 Lond 1640 '
2I L'^CaSogTeTf ^^' ^^^^"^°" (^^"- ^-•)- P- ™-
Melb^ur^rT9?.^:L^Cr.ff„/«!:^/,^l^*^- ^-«-' P- '''-' -^ a^-

Churchman and Man of Letters 69
Wycliffe's actual work in translating the Bible has,
as we have observed, been greatly exaggerated. Sir E.
Maunde Thompson, principal librarian of the British
Museum, makes this comment : "It is not surprising that
much has been ascribed to him which is due to Avriters
whose names have died." He goes on to say: "The
Commentary on the Apocalypse, which probably dates
from the middle of the fourteenth century, and those on
the Gospels of Sts. Matthew, Luke and John were all
believed to be the works of his pen, although recent criti
cism has rejected his claim to the authorship.^^ The same
author observes further that the New Testament can be
said probably to be due, "to the hand of Wycliffe him
self." Of the second or revised version of the Avhole
Scriptures, he says : "Wycliffe himself, who, above others,
would be conscious of defects, may have commenced the
work of revision. He did not however live to see it
accomplished."^^ The silence of his contemporaries and
particulariy of his great adversaries is significant. Of
aU those who wrote so voluminously and exhaustively on
his errors only one makes mention of any connection
between him and Scriptural translations.
Finally, the last word, as far as the evidence is avail
able on the WycUffe authorship, has been said by Messrs.
Forshall and Madden in their introduction to the edition
of the WycUffe Scriptures. They have compiled what
ever evidence is at hand. Although their argument is
not final, stiU they are at one Avith Sir E. Maunde Thomp
son in the conclusion that only the Gospels can Avith any
probabiUty be ascribed to John WycUffe.^''

25 Wycliffe Exhibition (Brit. Mus.), p. XVII.
26. WvcUffe Exhibition (Brit. Mus.). ^ . ^, ^ ,,-, q„ ¦„. ,,
27. Fo'rshall and Madden " Introduction to ed. of the Wycliffe Script.

70 Reginald Pecock
CHAPTER IV
Pecock's Repressor and Lollardy
In the tAVO preceding chapters we have attempted:
first, to trace the origin and development of the various
factors that resulted finaUy in the social and religious
conditions that necessitated, in the opinion of the Bishop
of Chichester, the bringing forth of his principal work;
and secondly, to trace those forces at work in EngUsh
prose development that were to contribute to the greatest
English prose Avriting of the fifteenth century, namely
Pecoch's Re-pressor. In this chapter Ave purpose to make
a study of this principal literary production.
Before proceeding to a review of Pecoch's Repres
sor, we will attempt a better understanding of the author
himself. In fact this is essential for the proper grasp
of the Avork itself. His Avas rather a unique position, that
of a fifteenth century bishop Avhose one ambition was to
reconcile the heretic to the Church, but who in turn was
himself called upon to ansAver to the charge of heresy.
It does not fall Avithin the scope of this present
treatise to treat in a conclusive manner the theological
vicAvs of the author. Our present object is literary rather
than theological. Nor is it our purpose to exonerate
Pecock from the charge of heresy. Undoubtedly there
is oAddence for certain of the charges made against him,
but it is difficult to reconcile the majority of them Avith
the actual facts sot forth in his writings. To him the
Church Avas that diAdnely constituted body, the visible
head of which is the Bishop of Rome in virtue of the fact
that he is the successor of Peter, upon whom Jesus Christ
Himself founded this Church. No contemporary prelate
in England had greater esteem for the Papacy than had
Reginald Pecock. In an age Avhen abuses arose from the

Churchman and Man of Letters 71
manner of appointing to benefices, and thoroughly ortho
dox bishops protested the exercise of papal power, not
in matters spiritual, but in temporal affairs, the author
of the Repressor stood out amongst his feUoAV bishops
in defense of the most extreme claims. "Holy Writt of
the NcAve Testament," says Pecock, "makith mensioun,
Johun firste chapiter, that Crist seide to Symount Petir
thus, 'Thou art 'Symount the sone of Johanna, thou shalt
be clepid Cephas,' or heed; and thaime Johun settith to
this 'which is interpretid, Petir' and bigynnyng, and
le Cor. xve4-c in the bigynnyng and Galat. toward the
myddis, Poul clepid Petir Cephas . . . thanne her
A^pon y argue thus : Petir Avas heed in the maner in which
noon of the othere Apostolis Avas heed : for elUs cause
hadde he noon good Avhi Crist schulde haA'e seid so
singulerli to him and not othere thus: Thou shalt be
callid heed; and herAvith it is trewe, that no thing is an
heed but of sum certeyn bodi; wherefore of sum bodi
Petir Avas heed, of which bodi noon of the othere apostolis
was heed, etc. "^
Granting that Pecock was a heretic, certain quali
fications must be made in order to understand the man
and his work. Undoubtedly it would have greatly grieved
this unique defender of orthodoxy to have been classified
with Wycliffe and the various heresiarchs that preceded
him, or Avith Luther and the numerous founders that
succeeded him. Those Avho see in the Bishop of Chi
chester a forerunner of the fomenters of sixteenth cen
tury dissensions, or even o,f the modern rationalist, have
not a comprehensive understanding- of his mental and
religious attitude toAvards the traditional authority and
teachings of the Catholic Church. His final act of sub
mission even to a local tribunal was not inconsistent, as
some maintain, but quite consistent with the principles
Avhich he enunciated. He did indeed wander off on
tangents and touch upon matters rather speculative and
I. Bepressor. Pt. IV, ch. 4.

72 Reginald Pecock
premature, but his procedure was neither singular nor
unprecedented. He Avas thoroughly aware that a very
wide latitude was allowed in the field of speculation.
None knew better than he what really constituted heresy
or a heretic. A man is a heretic, according to Pecock,
"Wlianne he trowith a falshede contrarie to any article
of the feitli or to eny conclusioun folewing out of an
article of feitli, and he wold obstynatly cleeve to thilk
fals trowing and wole not leve it for eny sufficient schew-
ing which is maad to hym that his troAVing is fals. ' '^
In the end of the prologue to his Reule of Crysten
Religioun our author very clearly sets forth this atti
tude of which we have already spoken. It seems plain
that this should be kept before the reader who would
attempt to understand either Pecock or his writings. He
assures us that it is far from his intention to defend in
his writings any error or heresy, i. e. "eny conclusioun
which is azens treuthe, and specialy azens the feeth or
LaAV of oure Lord God (or ageyns the determynacioun of
Goddis Churche here in erthe)'^ and if eny such it happe
me to write, or offre or purpose holde defende or favoure
bi eny vnaAdsidnesse, hastynes or ignoraunce eer than y
may se the treuthe or bi eny other maner, y schal be redy
it to leeve, forseake and retrete mekely and devoutly at
the assignementis of myn ordynaries fadris of the
Chirche, after that thei han take sufficient airsyng there
upon. Yhe, and it the same y now as far thanne forsake
and leeve. In the contrarie maner to this gouverance y
was never zit hiderto disposid, y tlianke my Lord God;
and y purpose never in contrarie Avise to be, however it
happe oner hastie and undiscreete awaiters and back
biters, in other Avise of me feele or diffame."
This statement is of the greatest importance to the
proper understanding of Pecock. There is no ambiguity.
2. Pecock's, The Be-ule of Crysten Belig., Chap XIII
„ 3. Interlined in a different hand, by a friend and perhaps at request
of Pecock. We teow that Pecock attempted a hurried revision of his
works when the storm burst about him.

Churchman and Man of Letters 73
The terminology is precise, the reasoning clear and ex
haustive. It is the reply to a chaUenge, and a reply of
one fully conscious of the nature of the challenge and the
inimical designs of an unsympathetic faction. There is
no statement in his Avritings more characteristic of
Pecock. It is sincere, and sincerity Avas one of his great
virtues. This virtue, or rather the weakness which often
accompanies it, namely rashness, later had much to do
in bringing about his doAvnfall. When in the complete
effulgence of his noonday glory, the unsuspected quake
shook the foundations beneath him; when the real sig
nificance and seriousness of his plight were thrust in
upon him, he very consistently spoke and acted upon the
principles enunciated in this statement. There were
amongst his Avritings certain doctrines that could be taken
as dangerous, but far from his intention Avas it to ex
pound or disseminate erroneous opinions. Many of his
works had been written for private circulation and had
gotten abroad before being revised. He did not Avish,
therefore, to be responsible for any work Avritten prior
to the year 1454. Pecock very explicitly admits in this
pronouncement the possibility of error in his writings,
but it is far from his intention to sponsor such errors.
The prologue to The Booh of Faith sheds addi
tional light upon the authors attitude towards the church,
and must not be overlooked in a, study of the author.
Here Pecock sets forth the expedient to Avhich he has
had recourse in treating controversial matters. In his
experience he finds people throughout England, Avho in
their disobedience, with perd to their souls, tenaciously
cling to the authority of private interpretation of Scrip
ture. He desires most ardently to Avin back these Avay-
ward ones to the truth. To speak to them of the authority
of the clergy and the infallibility of the Church is to
draw from "them naught but laughter. He purposes
therefore to approach them with arguments from reason,
namely: although a teacher may fad, Ave ought to

74 Reginald Pecock
believe him in so far as it is not knowii that he has failed.'
He says in part "Whereto therefore schulde the clergie
leene oonly to thilke meene anentis lay men, whiche lay
men wole not admitte. Bettir it were to seche aftir
another meene. Wherefore y, unworthiest and yongist
and louj^est of prelatis, aspiying this mischeef ayens
which y have not knoAve eny remedie yitt hiderto
therayens Avriten, and desiring forto wynne the lay chil
dren of the chirche into obedience, whiche undir greet
perel of ther soulis, thei owen paie and holde to the
clergie, entende and purpos in this present book forto
mete ayens such unobedieneers bi another way, and in
another maner, and bi meene which the lay persoonys
Avole admitte and graunte; AA^hich meene is this, that we
OAven to bileoA'e and stonde to sum seier or teoher which
may fade, Avhile it is not knowe that thilk seier or techer
theryne failith."^
The very few who, from Pecock's day, have assisted
in placing this greatest of mid-fifteenth century prose
writers in his merited niche of dignity, for various rea
sons have either ignored or failed to grasp the most im
portant phase of his character, namely, his zeal for ortho-
dox3^ With these observations before us we will pass
to the review of Pecock's literary achievements.
His greatest work was, "The Repressing of over
miche wyting of the Clergie " or " The Repressor of over
myche blamyng the Clergie " or as it is commonly known
The Repressor. The reasons for undertaking the
work are given in the prolog-ue. For many years accu
sations have been made against the Church by the lay
party (the LoUards). The attack is not merely upon a
group of clergy, but upon the clergy of the Avhole world.
The critics have not restricted themselves to abuses;
they have attacked even the teachings and practices of
the Church. Moreover these "blamers" can not
4. Morison, Pecock's Book of Faith, p. 113, 1908.

Churchman and Man of Letters 75
"shewe," "teche" and "proue," that these teachings
and practices are "defautis and synnes," but succeed
only in stirring up rancours, disturbances, schism and
other evils amongst the people. Such faultfinders should
recall the advice of St. Paul to St. Timothy, when he says,
"Vndirnyme thou, biseche thou, and blame thou in al
pacience and doctrine" ( ) ; or the words of
St. Luke, "0 leche, heale thi silf."
Abuses, however, do exist amongst the clergy, and it
is not his desire to condone such. His purpose is to Avin
the lay party from their policy of criticism, the source
of which is ignorance of the teachings of the Church. To
this end he intends to expound eleven articles and defend
them against the attack of the Lollards. These eleven
articles are: (1) the use of images; (2) pilgrimages;
(3) the holding of landed possessions by the clergy; (4)
the various ranks of the hierarchy; (5) the framing of
ecclesiastical laAvs and ordinances by papal and episcopal
authority; (6) the institution of the religious; (7) the
invocation of saints; (8) the costliness of ecclesiastical
decorations; (9) the ceremonies of the mass and the sac
raments, generally; (10) the taking of oaths; (11) the
maintaining of war and capital punishment to be laAvful.
PARTI
Chapter I
The work is divided into five parts. In the first part
the author refrains from attacking the eleven objections
directly, but strikes at errors more fundamental. The
aberrations of the LoUards are the result of three prin
cipal erroneous opinions. If these opinions are shown
to be false, aU their other tenets wiU collapse; "if it be
sufficientU proued that tho thre ben nought and vntrewe
opiniouns and holdingis bildid upon hem fal and lacke
it wherebi thei mighten in eny colour or semyng be

76 Reginald Pecock
mented, holde, and supportid. "^ The first of these
errors is this. No Christian is to hold an ordinance a
law of God unless it is grounded in Scripture. As a re
sult, whenever a clerk affirms any ordinance which is
beyond their knowledge or contrary to their liking, even
if it is reasonable and therefore in conformity with
"moral lawe of kinde," (natural law) they demand:
"Where groundist thou it in the Newe Testament?" or,
"Where groundist thou it in Holy 'Scripture in such place
which is not bi the Newe Testament reoukid."^
The second of these errors is, that every Christian
man or woman, truly meek and humble and willing to
understand the Scriptures, shall infallibly come to their
meaning, even to the understanding of the "Apocalips."
The third opinion is, whenever such a Christian dis
covers the true sense of Scripture after the aforesaid
manner, he must not listen to any reasoning or arguing
to the contrary on the part of a clerk.
Chapter II and III
Thirteen principal conclusions are set forth against
the first error. Before undertaking the refutation, Pe
cock feels that a clearer understanding of his termin
ology, and a short discourse on certain of the rules of
logic, wiU be of use to the lay party. The present errors
of the LoUards are due to their lack of logic. If only
they were better schooled in this science, it would be a
great safeguard against error and would be a means of
dravring them out of their present errors.
The first of the thirteen conclusions is this : It is not
the office of Holy Scripture to found any law of God, to
the knowledge of which man can attain by means of his
natural reasons— "It longith not to Holy Scripture,
neither it is his office into which God hath him ordeyned,
neither it is his part forto ground eny gouernaunce or
5. Pec. Repress., Chap. I.
6. Ibid. Ch. I.

Churchman and Man of Letters 77
deede or seruice of God, or eny laAV of God, or eny trouthe
which mannis reasoun bi nature may fynde, leerne, and
knowe." In proof of this conclusion he states that Avhatever
God ordains to be a ground or fundament of any truth,
it must so fully set it forth that the given truth can not
be wholly known Avithout this ground or fundament. But
Holy Scripture alone does not AvhoUy set forth a truth
or ordinance together Avitli all the knowledge necessary
to be had upon it, to Avliich man can attain by the use of
his reason alone. Therefore no truth to which man can
come by reason alone, is founded in Holy Scripture.
The first premise of this argument must be granted,
says Pecock. He then sets forth his reasons for this.
The second premise he undertakes to prove as fol
lows : Whatever reason does as fully and perfectly as
Holy 'Scripture, it does, and Holy Scripture alone does
not do it. For in the truths attainable by man's reason
alone, whatever knowledge and learning Holy Scripture
sets forth, man's reason can and may show the same
knowledge and learning, for one can not find in Holy
'Scripture any truth of natural law which reason does not
fully and equally well command to be done.
Wherefore it follows that none of the said natural
laws or ordinances is taught by Holy Scripture alone,
and therefore the second premise must be true.
The second of the thirteen conclusions is, that only
is the true ground of anything upon which it would rest
in the absence of all other pretended grounds. So it is in
the case of truths of natural law, the knowledge of them
may be attained to by the aid of natural reason alone,
Avithout the aid of Holy Scripture.
Without foUoAving out the reasoning through this
syllogism, the interesting matter to note is, the truths
which Pecock recites as truths knowable by man's un
aided reason. These are : that man must love God above
all things ; that man must love himself and his neighbor as

78 Reginald Pecock
himself though not as much as himself ; promises made to
God must be fulfiUed; that he must take care to learn
what is pleasing to God ; that a man must be temperate
in eating and drinking and not gluttonous ; that he ought
to be meek towards other men and not proud; that he
ought to be mild in speech and answer, etc. Reason alone,
he contends, proves all these and many more. Pecock
in expounding these truths seems to have had the failings
and shortcomings of the Lollards in mind.
His vieAvpoint is interesting in so far as it partly
accounts for his overemphasizing the work of reason in
coming to the knowledge of truths knowable by reason
alone. Certainly the unaided reason of the average man
would never come to the knowledge of all the truths which
Pecock suggests.
Reason, he continues, also plays a prominent part in
evolving truths that necessarily follow from truths re
vealed or knoAvn from reason. In certain cases there is
contained in Scripture comparatively little revealed
about giA^en truths. Nevertheless there are a great many
ordinances following from this revelation and from rea
son which are none the less tme. For example, there is
matrimony. In Scripture there are comparatively few
places of direct revelation on marriage ; the total number
would not be a hundreth part of the teachings contained
in the book AAdiich he has Avritten on matrimony.^
Chapter IV
The third of the thirteen conclusions against the
first error: Before God assigned any positive laws to
the Jews, from the faU of Adam to the time of the cir
cumcision of Abraham and the positive precepts given
to Moses, the people lived and served God, and were
bound by almost aU the moral ordinances and truths to

7. Pecock IS laying emphasis on the part which reason plays in the
evolving of doctrine. The Lollards denied this, goiag to the other extreme
of private interpretation under individual inspiration.

Churchman and Man of Letters 79
the knowledge of which they attained by the use of rea
son. These same ordinances of natural law still bind
Christians. Moreover the giving of the positive law
about judicial and sacramental ceremonies to the Jews
did not abrogate the natural law. The Founder of the
New Law while abrogating the judicial and sacramental
ordinances did not revoke the other ordinances that
bound the Jews, but gave new positive laws concerning
His sacraments.
Pecock speaks of the Old Law, even the positive laws
given to Abraham and Moses, excepting however the
judicial and sacramental ordinances about ceremonies, as
the "lawe of kinde," i. e., natural law. The New Law
comprises this "lawe of kinde" and the positive ordi
nances of the New Law. Since this is so, he argues, a very
great part of the New Law which is "lawe of kinde" is
not founded on Holy Scripture of the Old or the New
Testament, "but in the book of lawe of kinde writen in
mennis soulis vrith the finger of God as it was so groundid
and written bif ore the dales of Abraham and of Jewis. ' '^
Holy Scripture has, however, a function in these
truths of natural law knowable by reason alone. It is
this and only this. It recalls these truths and exhorts,
bids and counsels men upon the virtues and ordinances,
to the end that they make use of them and flee their con
trary vices. The said ordinances, virtues, and truths
can no more be said to be grounded in Holy Scripture
than can the virtues, ordinances, and truths of natural
law which a bishop happened to mention in his epistle to
his diocese, be said to be grounded in the epistle.^
Chapter V and VI
Fifth Argument: Christ, the Apostles, and Holy
"Scripture, in speaking of any of the aforesaid truths
which are known by reason, spoke in such manner as
8. Pecock, Bepressor, Chap. IV.
9. Bepressor, Chap. IV.

80 Reginald Pecock
implies that these truths were knowii before. They did
not make a new revelation, but exhorted and counselled
about truths already knoAvn. To say that these ordi
nances and truths are founded on the words of Christ, the
Apostles, or Holy Scripture, is to say that the thing
founded was before the thing on whicli it was founded.
Hence it follows that these aforesaid truths are not
founded on Scripture, the words of Christ, or the
Apostles. Sixth Argument : From the fact that Holy Scripture
affirms truths of natural law to be truths, it does not fol-
loAV from this that they are founded on Holy Scripture.
If, in reasoning thus, you maintain that Scripture is
the foundation for such truths, you Avould have to admit
that Scripture is the foundation for truths of natural
philosophy. No man will grant this, even if Scripture
does make mention and affirms truths of natural philos
ophy. These truths were knowable before they received
an affirmation in the Scriptures. Moreover, the knowl
edge of them is far more extensive than that contained
in 'Scripture. The same argument can be applied to
moral truths of the natural law.
Truths to which the unaided reason of man can
attain are more truly in man's soul than in the book of
"parchemyn" or "velym" of Holy Scripture. Should
there arise some "semyng discorde" between the words
of Scripture and reason, the words so written must be
expounded and interpreted in conformity with reason,
and reason should not be made to conform to the
' ' semyng discorde ' ' in the outward words of Scripture.
The author continues to end of Chapter VI multi
plying unusual and striking examples almost to tedium.
He finally concludes that it can not be said that truths
of natural law are founded in Holy Scripture.

Churchman and Man of Letters 81
Chapter VII
Scripture, as before mentioned, bears witness to the
aforesaid tmths. Profane writings, however, and Scrip
ture have their own separate and distinct spheres. While
Scripture does indeed bear Avitness to truths of natural
law, profane works bear Avitness to "trouthe of
dyuynyte" (divinity), but have neither right nor power
to found any Divine ordmance.
Again, the faculty of Canon Law and the faculty of
Divinity are two distinct faculties with their proper lim
itations, "as that Canon Lawe groundith constituciouns
and ordinancis of general counseilis and of papis and
prouyncial (provincial) and synodal constituciouns, as
hise propre to him, trouthis and conclusiouns ; and
dyuynyte, in verri maner forto speke of diuinite,
groundith articles of feith, that is to seie trouthis and
conclusiouns reuelid (revealed) and affermed bi God to
be trewe, as propre to him trouthis and conclusiouns, into
whos fynding, leerning, and knowing mannis resoun mai
not sufficientU with oute revelacioun ascende and come
to." Canon Law therefore ought not and may not
ground any truth or conclusion which is proper to the
sphere of Divinity; nor may Divinity ground any trutli
proper to Canon Law. Yet books of Canon LaAv may
state many truths and conclusions strictly of Divinity,
while books of Divinity may state many truths of Canon
Law. The Avhole office and work for Avhich God has or
dained Holy Scripture is to found articles ot faith, and
to reaffirm and bear witness to moral truths "of laAve
of kinde groundid in moral phUosophie."
"Some of the articles of faith are not laws. Of such
are these: "that God made heuen and erthe in the
bigynnyng of tyme; and that Adam Avas the firste man
and Eue was the first Avomman; and that Moises ladde
the peple of Israel out of Egipt; and that Zacharie was

82 Reginald Pecock
fadir and Elizabeth was modir of Johun Baptist; and
that Crist f astid XL dales ; and so forth of many like. ' '
Some are articles of faith which are laws, "as that
ech man ought to be baptisid in water, if he may come
therto; and that ech man ought to be hosilid (be given
the Eucharist) if he may come ther to."
In proof of the conclusion that the work of Holy
Scripture is to found articles of faith, he asserts that
since the truths of natural law are attainable by reason,
truths which are above man's reason must come by means
of revelation which is contained in Scripture. These
truths above man's reason and contained in revelation
are the truths of articles of faith, and it is the special
work of Scripture to found such truths.
Pecock concludes this chapter with an interesting
remark about the reading of Scripture. He does not
object to the laymen reading and studying the Bible, pro
vided they are under the direction of Avise and learned
clerks, and with the license of their bishop. What he
does object to, and this he has attempted to prove to be
a false principle, is that laymen take the Scripture for
their sole guide, and "bi her inreding in the Bible" come
to more knoAvledge than all the rest of men on earth, lay
and cleric, together. Chapter VIII
Other conclusions against the first error are set
forth. A great deal of what has been already stated is
repeated. The point of interest is his expansion on the
question of truths which are articles of faith. Man's
unaided reason can not come to the knowledge of truth
which is an article of faith without the assistance of
revelation, which is contained in Holy Scripture. An
article of faith can not be founded on reason alone. "But
so it is that noon article of feith mai be groundid in doom
of resoun sufficientU; neither into his finding, leerning.

Churchman and Man of Letters 83
and knoAving mannis resoun bi itsUf and bi natural help
may rise and suffice, Avithoute there to maad revelacioun
or affirmyng fro God. ' '
He has developed this idea at greater length in the
foUowing works, "Forwhi thanne feith were no feith, as
it is tanght in 'The folwer to the donet' and to the book
of feith and of sacramentis in Latyn. ' Wherefore moral
laAve of kinde which is not ellis than moral phUosophie
writen depe in mannis soule, there ligging with the prent
(imprint) and the ymage of God, mai not grounde eny
article or treuthe or conclusioun of feith, but into the
grounding of feith serueth Holi Scripture."
Chapter IX and X
The argument against the first error is continued
throughout Chapter IX and concluded in Chapter X.
No man by the aid of Scripture alone can come to
the knowledge of all those truths which all Christians
are bound to knoAV. It is difficult for all men, but espec
ially for the untrained mind. On the other hand, the
man who is trained in moral philosophy Avill be greatly
assisted in coming to the proper knowledge of God's
Law, "no man mai leerne and kunne the hool lawe of
God to which Cristen men ben bounde, but if he can
(know) of moral philosophic; and the more that he can
in moral philosophic bi so miche the more he can of
Goddis laAve and seruice."
Where there is question of truths to Avhich the
natural reason of man can not attain, that is, super
natural truths knowable only by supernatural revelation,
there is no argTiment. HoAvever, even the truths to which
man's reason can come by its oavu unaided poAver, cannot
be perfectly, surely and sufficiently understood in the
Scripture, by private interpretation. Certainly a knoAvl-
edge of moral philosophy would greatly assist in this.
"No man schal perfitli, sureli, and sufficientU Amdir-

84 Reginald Pecock
stonde HoU Scripture in alie the placis Avhere jn he
rehercith moral vertues not being posityf lawe of feith,
but being such as mannys resoun may fynde, leerne,
and knowe, but if he be bifore weel and perfitU, suerli,
and sufficiently leerned in moral pMlosophie, and more
perfitli, suerU, and sufficiently he is leerned in moral
phUosophie the more able as bi that he schal be forto
perfitli, suerli and sufficientU vndirstonde Holi Scripture
in aUe tho placis Avheryn he spekith of eny moral lawe of
God being not posityf laAVe of faith."
Laymen not well learned in moral phUosophy should
therefore esteem the clergy Avho are weU trained in this
science. The clergy should assist the laymen in the right
understanding of Holy Scripture, in those places where
the before spoken conclusions and truths of moral philos
ophy are mentioned. The laymen without the assis
tance of the clergy shall not easily and lightly understand
the proper meaning of Holy Scripture in the aforesaid
matters. In concluding his final argument against the first
error of the Lollards, he asks the question: If a man is
afraid of trespassing against God if he undervalues "the
Holy Scripture, why is he not afraid lest he undervalue
the "inward Scripture" which is written by God in man's
heart? So firmly convinced is he of the. truth of his
thirteen eonclusions against the first error, that he is
Avilling to wager his arm to be smitten off in their defense.
Throughout the A^aiious argmments it is to be ob
served, and this is A^ery striking, that the author has an
exception and intimate grasp of the viewpoint and diffi
culties of his opponents. Not oiice in the Avhole discourse
does he lose sight of his audience. , His arguments are
for them. This undoubtedly accounts for his overempha
sizing the role of reason and moral philosophy in the
matter of coming to the knowledge of religious truth.
The Lolb.rds, it must be remembered, Avent to the other

Churchman and Man of Letters 85
extreme. They minimized the place of reason and sus
pected and scoffed at moral philosophy.
Chapter XI to XIII
In these chapters the author takes up and refutes
certain quotations which the LoUards were accustomed
to advance in support of their position. The first of
these texts is 1 Cor. xiiu e in the eende thus, i. e. (1 Cor.
XIV 38), "Sotheli if eny man unknowith, he schal be
unknowun." The LoUards interpret this text to mean
that if any man does not literally know the Scripture as
it is in the text, "namelich the Avriting of the Newe Tes
tament," he shaU be unknown to God. They busy
themselves about learning the text "as it is writun word
bi Avord," and call themselves "knowun men." The
ansAver to this objection is, that the words of 'St. Paul
could not mean this since at this time the New Testament
had not been written, neither the second epistle to the
Corinthians nor the Apocalypse.
The second text is "ii. Cor. iiiie e in the bigynnyng,
where Paul seith thus : That and if oure Euanglie is
couered, it is couered to hem whiche spillen; in Avhiclie
God of this world hath blinded the myndis or wittis of
unfeithful men, that the lighting or cleering of the
Euanglie of the glorie of Crist, which is the ymage of
God, schine not." This the Lollards take to mean that
Avhoever is a person of salvation shall soon understand
the true meaning of Holy Scripture, CA^en of the Apoc
alypse. MoreoA'er, the true meaning of Scripture shall
be hid for none but tiiose who shall perish and be lost.
The Lollards or "knoAven m.en" are the children of sal-
A'ation, all other men being erring sheep and in danger
of perishing. To the latter the Gospel is covered, to the
former it is known, and this, as Pecock says, in spite of
the fact that both the natural laAv and the laAV of faith is
knoAA'n Icfs to thom than to those Avhom thoy condemn.

86 Reginald Pecock
As to the text ii^ Cor. iiiie e, the "EuangeUe" Avas
not the written text, since the written text did not exist.
Before a word of the New Testament had been written
Christ commissioned the Apostles, "Go ye, and preche
ye the Euanglie to ech creature. ' ' Certainly the commis
sion was not to preach a Gospel which did not exist, but
a Gospel Avliich they then kncAV. It foUows from this
that the Gospel which aU men Avere afterwards to receive
unto their salvation Avas, ere a Avord of the Ncav Testa
ment Avas written. The Apostles preached the Gospel
soon after Pentecost, "Avhanne thei hadden receyned the
Holy Goost and kunnyng of langage." This they con
tinued to do for many years before they wrote.
The author concludes the first part of his Avork, and
the arguments against the first of the three principal
errors, Avith a discourse upon the sweetness and true
dignity of the Holy Scriptures, and the necessity of
keeping in mind the distinct spheres of Scripture and
moral philosophy. He also dAvells upon the importance
to be attached to the Avritings of the Fathers to which
the Lollards make an insincere appeal. Some of them
might make an appeal to certain passages from the writ
ings of the Fathers, in support of their opinions. How-
CA'-er, he is beginning to compose in Latin a book, to Avliich
he refers them, entitled. The Just Apprising of
Doctor-is. Those interested in this subject Avill find
there a lengthy treatment of the matter. However, he
feels that Patristic authority Avould have weight with
these people only in so far as they might see in it an
effective arg-ument against his vioAvs.
Chapter XIV to XX
There are two objections which his opponents might
bring against him. The first is that man's reason is fal
lible and often fails in its judgments, as experience shows.
It is not in keeping Avith the Avisdom of God that man in
his service to Him should lean upon a thing so frail. In

Churchman and Man of Letters 87
answer to this objection he says, it is indeed most profit
able to man in matters of sights really to see the object
which he gazes upon, but what other power has God given
to man to see than his eyesight; and what eyesight is
there that AviU not faU at sometime? The same may be
said for hearing, or for Avalking, all of Avhich poAvers avUI
at some time fail. In like manner reason, though it is
very desirable that it should not, wiU at some time faU.
But God has given to man no other poAver by whicli he can
know these truths (truths other than supernatural) and
this power is one that may fail. If, hoAvever, in the pur
suit of such truths we exercise our poAvers to the best of
our ability, God will demand no more.
The second objection: Holy Scripture is a sacred
and Avorthy thing since by it and from it the Christian
Church of God takes its faith. Therefore it does not
seem that God would make Scripture dependent upon
reason for its proper understanding and interpretation,
since reason is a fallible instrument and Scripture is a
worthier. This objection he answers in Chapter XV.
In the meantime, in Chapter XIV, he gives further rea
sons in answer to the first objection. When he says that
God has ordained reason to be our guide in these matters,
he does not mean the power of reason simply, but rather
a formal complete arg-ument called a syllogism, both
premises of which are knoAvn to be surely or likely to
be true. The conclusion of such a syllogism is the
infallible gTiide. If the premises are surely knoAvn the
conclusion is true Avithout a doubt. Of such are funda
mental truths. If the premises are to be considered
likely true, the conclusion is to be held as true until it
can be proven to the contrary.
As to the second objection, from considerations
already pointed out it is clear that it Avould not be
unbecoming in God to ordain the human reason and judg
ment to be "reulis to Holi Scripture," in aU the truths
therein set forth. It is aUeged that Holy Scripture Avas

88 Reginald Pecock
Avorthier than "doom of reason." But Avhat is Holy
Scripture? It nUght be taken to mean the lettersi of
various shapes and figTires written on parchment or
vellum. In this sense it is not hoUer or better than any
other Avriting, "Avhich hath like good ink and is like craf
tily figured. ' ' In another sense it may be understood as
"the kunnyng Avherebi the thing is kunne whicli is signi
fied and bitokened by the noAV seid outward Holy Writ,"
or it may be taken for the outAvard writing coupled with
the knowledge of the truths signified thereby. So also
"doom of reason" may be taken in two senses. In one
sense it is the act of reasoning by making syllogisms;
in another sense it is the cognizance of the conclusion
arrived at by such syllogisms. Now, if in the second
objection Holy Scripture be understood in the second
sense, and doom of reason in the second sense, surely
Holy Scripture, where it rehearses and teaches "inoral
laAV of kinde" (natural law), is less worthy than "moral
law of kinde" itself and therefore less worthy than
"doom of reason" taken in the second sense, since here
it only borroAvs the truths which it sets forth from "moral
law of kinde." Certainly if Holy Writ be worthier in
any of its truths than "doom of reason," it is in matters
of faith which are not laws to man, and which reason
can not ground. Such are the doctrines of the Trinity,
the Incarnation, and so forth. And yet whether Scrip
ture be more profitable to man than doom of reason in
the second sense, to enable him to serve God and deserve
meed in heaven, the author Avill not discuss in his book,
but may perhaps in other A^adtings, "to hearers of higher
understanding." He AviU only refer to proofs already
given that aU the faith, grounded on Scripture, Avhich is
a positive laAv to man is not so valuable or necessary for
him "as is the said doom of reason, being ('moral law
of kind')." The author seems to feel, for an instant, that in his
argument, he is soaring above the heads of his audience.

Churchman and Man of Letters 89
However, if it is true that he has written or said more
"than wole anoon accorde Avith the capacite of the Bible
men" he would much rather do so than either say or
write less, thus giving them the impression that their
two objections could not be answered. Men so impressed
naight be led to believe that by poring over the Bible
alone they would be able to solve all difficulties Avithout
talang counsel of substantial clerks, "Aveel leerned in
logic and in moral philosophic." If tliere Avere not such
men to expound Scripture, or the laity Avould not attend
to their teaching, but trust only to their OAvn Avits and
texts of the Bible before them, it would give rise to such
various opinions, "that al the world schulde be cumbrid
therewith, and men schulden accorde to gidere in keping
her service to God as doggis doon in a market Avhanne
ech of hem terith otheris coot. ' ' One man would under
stand a text one Avay, another in another way, and a
third in a third Avay. Wherever Scripture speaks of any
point of "moral law of kind," the language is such as
requires "a redressing of it into accordance Avitli lawe
of kinde and with doom of reason." Without a judge to
settle disputes, there Avould be no end of strife. This
was the very cause of the ruin of "the worthy city and
university of Pragme," and of the whole realm of
Bohemia. After the most unhappy experience of dis
sensions the people were noAv glad to return to the
Catholic faith and to rebuild what Avas burnt and throAvn
down. How true are the Avords of our Lord Avhen He
said, "that ech kingdom deuidid in hem silf schal be
destruyed." His earnest prayer is tliat such a distur
bance may never come to England, "God for his merci
and pitee kepe Ynglond that he come not into lyk
daunce." These "Bible men" had only to observe the schisms
and dissensions amongst themselves to soe the absurdity
of their principles. Thoy had relied upon their own Avit
in interpreting the 'Scripture. See the results. "And

90 Reginald Pecock
therefore ye Bible men, bi this here now seid which ye
muste needis graunte, for experience which ye han of the
disturblaunce in Beeme, and also of the disturblaunce
and dyuerse feelings had among you sUf noAV in Ynglond,
so that summe of you ben clepid Doctour mongers, and
summe ben clepid Opinioun holders, and summe ben Neu-
tralis, that of so presumptuose a cisme abhominacioun to
othere men and schame to you it is to heere. ' '
The matter of choosing a wise counseUor from
amongst the clergy was of the greatest importance. No
better advice in such a matter could be given than that
of Ecclesiastics, vje "manie be to thee pesible, but of a
thousand oon be thi counseder." "And in special be
AViinr that thou not accepte, chese and take a clerk for to
be sufficient to thee into the now seid purpos bi this
aloon, that he mai were a pilioun^" on his heed ; neither
bi this that he is a famose and plesaunt precher to the
people in a pulpit ; neither by this that he is a greet and
thikke rateler out of textis of Holi Scripture, or of Doc-
touris in feestis or in othere companyingis, fer certis
experience hath ofte taught and mai here teche surely
jniough that summe werers of piliouns in scole of
dyuynyte han scantli be worthi for to be in the same scole
a good scoler."
Pecock feels that since he is treating the question
of preachers he must say something about the matter of
preaching. The office of preaching is to exhort and to
reiterate truths, rather than to expound and set forth
arguments in support of truth. If preaching is wanting
in these qualities, it loses its essential characteristic.
Disputing and proAdng is the special field of teaching,
which has its proper setting in the lecture hall, Avhereas
the lecture hall is no place for preaching, Avhich has its
proper place in the pulpit. The great need of the time
is teaching, Avhich gives men the grounding necessary for
the repressing of error, and the understanding of God's
10. A doctor's cap.

Churchman and Man of Letters 91
law. Mere preaching ability is no panacea for the evUs
that have arisen from the need of proper training in
disputation. Some good preachers, amongst the "lay
party, Avho have had no further training at school than
in grammar, can, by their quoting of texts and reciting
of parables, preach "ful gloriously" for the satisfaction
of the people, leaving the impression that they are men
of wisdom, when in reality, if they Avere opposed in any
one of the texts or parables, they could not defend it.
It is to such mitrained minds as these that errors, dis
turbance and schism can be traced.
The author makes a statement which is worthy of
notice in so far as it gives an insight into his character.
As we have noted before, his sincerity and boldness of
speech made him no respecter of persons when there was
question of principle involved. In this instance he
does not hesitate to reprimand his sovereign in very
pointed and unmistakable language: "But wolde God
that the King of Ynglond wolde sette so myche bisynes
forto conquere and reforme his lond of Ynglond fro this
seid Avickid scole, and fro othere defautis, as miche as he
dooth aboute the conquest of Ms lond of Normandi and
of Fraunce, and perauenture he schulde thanne haue more
thanke and reward at his last comyng lioom to the King
of blisse, and more noble flauour of digne fame among
alie the princis of the world and the Avorthi peeris of
heuen, than he schal haue bi much of his labour and cost
doon aboute Avorldli conquest of Fraunce."
Pecock now proceeds to the refutation of the second
erroneous opinion of the Lollards. That every humble
Christian shall come to the understanding of the true
meaning of Scripture, is a false proposition, as can be
demonstrated both from experience. He has knOAvn certain
humble individuals who have come to an opinion about
certain passages of Holy Writ, but afterwards, without
becoming more humble, have arrived at another opinion
about the same things. Their own experience should be

92 Reginald Pecock
for them convincing CAddence of the falsehood of the
proposition. Moreover, adherents of the error often hold
divergent opinions about the same passage of Scripture.
Moreover the matter of individual righteousness or sin
fulness does not enter into the understanding of Scrip
ture. Experience is against it, since a bad clerk can arrive
at the meaning of a passage of Scripture as readily as a
good clerk; Avhat is more, both Avill arriA'o at the same
meaning. The understanding of a passage of Scripture
is the work of the intellect and "a badde man and a ful
yuel disposid man in Aril and in affect mai haue so cler
and so well disposid witt and reson into all thingis to
be founde bi witt, as hath a good man Avell disposid in
manneris of his affect and Avil." Therefore, the second
principal opinion is erroneous.
The third principal error : — The true sense of Scrip
ture being once attained to by humble diligence, no hu
man arguments opposing this true sense should be admit
ted. Such an opinion is contrary to the teaching of Scrip
ture, as is seen from "1 Petri iii^ c. " He goes on to
say that without doubt man's intellect can not come to
the knowledge of truth Avithout argument. This applies
to truths Avhicli the intellect can attain to by its own
powers, and to truths of faith properly so called, since
none of these truth.- can be grasped unless by examination
of their evidence.
There is a fourth opinion, the adherents of which
maintain that if a man keeps God's laAv he shall ahvays
have the proper understanding of Holy Scripture, other-
Arise he will never come to its understanding. This
opinion is also contrary to experience. Careful investiga
tion has placed at his disposal irrefutable evidence.
Among the holders of this opinion he has found even
prominent teachers and persons in authority among this
sect who are living impure and adulterous lives, and some
indeed are thieves. They dare not deny these accusations,
for he is prepared to prove any of his statements. AU

Churchman and Man op Letters 93
men know, and these sinners themselves know, that such
sins are serious offenses against the law of God, and stUl
they imagine that they have the true understanding of
Holy Scripture and no man has a better or truer under
standing of it than they.
These same men accuse prelates of the Church of
being evil-doers against God's laAv. He admits that the
prelates, being men and not angels, are not without faults,
stiU their faults have been exaggerated and certain faults
have been attributed to them of which they are not guilty.
From this and the context which foUows it is evident
that the accusations made against the prelates were of
faults in administering their dioceses. Pecock advises
his readers not to be too hasty in such judgments, since
they have no idea of the grave hardships a bishop experi
ences in trying to govern his diocese. Acts should be
judged by their motives, not by the mere facts. He
himself has heard of censures passed upon him for the
govemment of his diocese, which he is sure the censors
themselves would have revoked if they had known all the
circumstances. He concludes Part 1 of his work Arith the statement
that it is beyond his comprehension how a good and
thoughtful man could be a Lollard. He understands,
however, that many were beguUed by shallow reasoning
and thus led astray into dangerous paths.
In this first part of Pecock's principal work, we have
attempted to give a summary of his principal doctrines ;
and those especially important, since it was in the treat
ment of this part that he overreached himself, for rea
sons already given, and became heretical. It may seem
to some rather detailed and perhaps fatiguing, but when
one considers the magnitude of the work itself this
treatment will appear quite summary. As we have
already stated, it is not our purpose to enter the contro
versy as to Pecock's orthodoxy or heterodoxy. The
doctrines involA'ed in controversy of this sort are such.

94 Reginald Pecock
and the history of their development is so important,
that the maximum space possible to allot for their treat
ment would be altogether inadequate. A volume or several
volumes of generous proportions Avould not be too exten
sive for an exhaustive treatment of the matter.
The aim of this part of the dissertation is primarily
literary. This we have kept before us in selecting pas
sages, and in choosing arguments ; we wished to empha
size something of the mentality of the author, his logic,
his power of expression, and something of his OAvn per
sonality as reflected in his Avritings.
The remaining four parts of the work Avill be dis
missed very summarily. There Arill be no particular
effort made to f oUoav the logical argument. Our purpose
Arill be to choose certain arguments and passages that
seem to cast further light upon what has been said.
PART II
The author's purpose in the next four parts of the
Repressor is to offer a defense of the eleven Church
ordinances against the erroneous attack of the Lollards.
But before taking up the defense proper, he lays down
in the systematic fashion of the schoolmen certain sup
positions or rules Avhich are apparent to everyone. These
shall assist in proving and justifying each of the eleven
ordinances. These suppositions or rules are:
(1) An ordinance expressly given by an authority,
whether this authority be God, man, angel, or Scripture,
implies the carrying out of everything logically involved
in it. It may be fulfilled in different ways, but that way
is best, which most effectively attains the end sought.
(2) An ordinance may be enjoined not expressly in
Avords, but in various ways that point unmistakably to
the will of the authority.

Churchman and Man of Letters 95
(3) In both of these aforesaid rules, wherever the
authority points to the observance of an ordinance, it
thereby enjoins and sanctions aU nieans necessary to the
fulfillment of the ordinance, for example: he, Pecock,
orders his servant to attend the sermon at Paul's Cross,
which implies of course that he ordered or suggested to
the servant that he should learn something from that
sermon; it also impUed that he ordered or suggested that
he go out the gate, and take one of several Avays to
Paul's Cross, avoiding, hoAvever, any particular way,
that may interfere Avith the fulfillment of the command.
From this, four conclusions follow :
(a) Holy Scripture teaches us: to love God Arith all
our hearts ; to love all that God loves ; and to despise all
that He does not love. All of His law and service follow
from these principles, such as: reading Holy Scripture,
listening to sermons, meditating upon pictures and
images, going on pilgrimages to places where holy men
dwell or have dwelt, or Avhere their relics still remain.
Holy Scripture sanctions all these methods.
(b) Each of the elcA'en ordinances is virtually or
implicitly commanded or recommended by Holy Scrip
ture. (c) Each is thus founded on 'Scripture.
(d) If the bidding, counselling, or Avitnessing of
Holy Scripture to a truth of "moral laAV of kind" were
a grounding in Scripture in the sense indicated in
previous passages of his treatise, undoubtedly the Avhole
bf the eleven ordinances whicli he proposes to vindicate
were really grounded in Holy Scripture properly under
stood. This second part of the Repressor is devoted to the
vindication of the use of images and the going on pil
grimages. The use of images in Churches as signs to commem
orate and recall are not reproved either by Scripture or

96 Reginald Pecock
"by long vse of Chirchis bileeuyng neither bi eny
myraculose thereto of God wirching (working)."
Amongst his arguments are these: Solomon made
various images for his temple and was commended for
it by God; to the people of Israel it Avas permitted to
raise up a brazen serpent, why wonder that it is laAvful
to raise up an image of Christ crucified; if it is lawful
to have an image of an earthly king, Avhy not have an
image of the King in Heaven; Christ permitted the use
of the coin upon which there was an image of an earthly
king. He continues that it is very explicitly stated in the
Scriptures that an image raised up as a false God is
unlawful, but it is not unlaAvful when not set up as a
false God.
In trutli erroneous opinions regarding the use of
images may be held, but it does not follow from this that
images should be forbidden. The saints, like St. Bernard,
St. Nicholas, and St. Martin, worked miracles. Simple
minded people of their day may have thought that these
wonders were the result of the saints' own power, but
it would not follow that these saints should be hindered
or put to death on account of this. Moreover, as regards
some images, it is not a false and foolish opinion to hold
that they have worked miracles, since experience has
undoubtedly shoAvn it to be so.
Again, it is not unlawful to have images as reminding
signs, for "Whanne euere Holy Scripture biddith, coun
seilith, or alloArith eny eende, he ther yn and ther bi
biddith, counseilith, or alloAvith, or approueth ech meene
profitable into the same eende. ' ' Christ ordained in the
New Law His Sacraments, sensible and reminding signs
of His life, passion, and death, as is seen and proved in
The Booh of Sacramentis, or in The boohis of Baptim
and of Euharist. Thus Holy Scripture gives testimony

Churchman and Man of Letters 97
that the use of sensible, reminding signs, is laAvful, ex
pedient, and profitable, otherwise the Sacraments of
Christ would be unlaAvful, inexpedient, and unprofitable.
PART III
^ A justification of the endowments of the clergy and
their right to possess property:
Arguments from Scripture, both the Old and New
Testament, are expounded by the author, showing that
the clergy may lawfully possess landed property. Argu
ments to the contrary are refuted. He then advanced five
arguments which some of the laity used against clerical
endoAArments. These are : simony and avarice are their
natural outcome. What is more Christ did not appoint
them. Again, it has been the experience of ecclesiastical
history that as the clergy became more endowed Arith
this Avorld's goods, they grew worldlier and more cor
rupt. An angel exclaimed that poison was infused into
the Church the day that Constantine made his donation
to the Church of Rome. The power over life and death
accruing to bishops and abbots in virtue of ecclesiastical
endoAvments, is most objectionable and cruel.
Each argument is given separate consideration and
refuted. To the argument about the donation of Con
stantine Pecock replies that from various historical evi
dence this gift of Constantine has been proven to be
fabulous. PART IV
A vindication of the various ranks and degrees
amongst the clergy ; also of the laAvfulness of statutes and
canons made by ecclesiastical authorities.
It is seen from Scripture, both Testaments of which
allowed this variety of ranks and degrees. In the Old
Testament God ordained that one bishop was to be "m
rule and jurisdiction" over all the clergy, just as the
Pope is now one person governing the clergy in God's

98 Reginald Pecock
Church. Certainly Scripture did not forbid this variety
of ranks, but on the contrary sanctions it.
Then follows proof from the New Testament that
Peter was made "heed" of the Church by Christ. He
refers the reader to "Johun first chapiter" and to i^ Cor.
ix e c ; ie Cor. XV e 4c ; Galat ij ^ c.
The variety of degrees in the hierarchy is laAvful in
the most proper manner of speaking of laAAdulness. That
it is true is proven thus. Whatever governance Holy
'Scripture and clearly disposed reason aUow and approve,
is laAvful in the most proper manner of speech in which
one can speak of laAvfulness. But Holy Scripture and
reason allow and approve of these various degrees in
the hierarchy. The Lollards unjustly and falsely accuse, that the
Pope and lesser Bishops impose ecclesiastical laws over
and above Divine law, and contrary to it. In ansAvering
this false accusation he says: "It is leeful to princis
with hir comsunalte forto make politik and cyuyle lawis
and ordinauncis for the better reule of the peple in tem
poral and cyuyl gouernauncis, longing into Avorldli pees
and prosperite, and worldi welthe, to be the better tlierbi
kept and contynued. " Certainly St. Paul in his letter to
Timothy, "i^ Thim. 1 ^ c," has made it very clear that
the laAvs made by temporal rulers must be respected and
obeyed. He even cautions the bondman to be obedient to
his master. In like manner, the spiritual rulers must be
obeyed in those laws and ordinances imposed for the
spiritual welfare of men. What is more, these spiritual
rulers can have recourse to such sanctions as are neces
sary for the attainment of this end.
He then gives certain arguments in support of cer
tain ecclesiastical laws made by spiritual authority. If
Scripture does not forbid, and reason does not forbid,
then such ordinances are lawful. In the case of ecclesias
tical laAvs neither of these forbids.

Churchman and Man op Letters 99
Again: Whatever ordinances were introduced into
the Chnreh by the Apostles or by their consent, are law
ful, and Avorthy to be had and used. But the fourth, fifth,
and sixth principal governances, treated in this Avork,
namely, the distinction in the ranks of the hierarchy, the
framing of ecclesiastical laws and ordinances by papal
and episcopal authority, the institution of the religious,
were introduced into the Church with consent or at least
not against the vrishes of the Apostles. This premise is
proved from the writings of St. Dionysius the Aereo-
pagite in his The Chirchis lerarchie, where in Chap
ter VI he says, "that the grete dukis of the Chirche,
which lyueden vrith the Apostolis, maden and ordeynedan,
the religioun of monlichode to be had and vsid in the
Chirche. "^-^ Also in the same book mention is made of
positive laws made by the "seid dukis and reulers of the
Chirche," who lived in the time of the Apostles. Of such
were the regulations about the administering of bap-
tism,^^ and, "Iioav the sacrament of the auter schulde be
mad, and how the masse schal be seid, and Iioav the
mynystris schulen be araied, and what officis thei schulen
do^^ . . . Avhat and hoAv manie thingis schulen be
doon aboute a man whanne he schal be mad bischop,^'^
what and hoAV manie thingis schulen be doon about a
man whanne he schal be mad preest^^ . . . what
and how manie thingis schulen be doon aboute a man if
he be mad a monk^^ . . . and to a bischop ben re
served these powers, that is to seie, for to halewe creme
(chrism), for to halcAve chirchis and auteris and for to
give orderis of preesthode and of dekenhode. "^''
LU?:eAvise Holy Scripture demonstrates this. St.
Paul (1 Cor. xi.) made an ordinance to the men of Corinth

11. De Eccl. Hierech, c. 6.
12. Id. c. 2.
13. Id. c. 3.
14. Id. c. 5.
15. Id. c. 5.
16. Id. c. 6.
17. Id. c. 5.

100 Reginald Pecock
that they should not "take her hosU (Holy Eucharist) at
night" after her soper (or in sum other special maner
thanne vsid, not now sureli knowen) for to therbi coii-
tirfete Cristis doing at his soper." He goes on to say
that St. Paul gave this regulation notArithstanding the
fact that the former custom had been one of long stand
ing. Furthermore, St. Paul warns them that he will
come to them and establish more laws and ordinances.
PART V
Throughout Part V of this Avork, the author gives
an exhaustive treatment of the question of religious
orders and religious Ufe. He sets forth various argu
ments, quite to the point, both from reason and Scripture,
in support of his thesis: that religious orders are not
merely not contrary to the laws of God but are in con
formity with the ideals enunciated in the 'Scripture. He
argTies thus : the religious life makes many more men
in Christendom morally Adrtuous and good, or much less
vicious and bad, than they Avould have been had they not
entered the religious life. Certainly there have been
hundreds of thousands who have led the life of religious
and have led lives much less vicious and evil than they
Avould have, had they lived as laymen. Take all the men
who have entered the religious life since its foundation,
and mark well hoAv they would have lived had they not
entered religion. Certainly they Avould not have liA^ed
lives different from the men living in the Avorld in their
day, such as "gileful crafti men, or iurouris and quest-
mongers, or pleders for mony, or as soAvdiers forto fight
and sloe for spoile and money," or, as they in Pecock's
time see neaiiy all Avorklly people live, avIio live covet-
tously ancl according to the flesh, untruly to God and to
man. As to the Avords of the Apostles about false teachers,
certainly they do not refer, as the Lollards maintain, to

Churchman and Man of Letters 101
the reUgious orders, but to the various false teachers who
lived in the time of the Apostles and after the Apostles
down through the ages, to WycUffe. He specifies thirty-
six different bodies of heretics that had arisen at various
times from the days of the Apostles to those of Wycliffe.
He states that there were many more heretical sects
than these, as is seen from Ysidor in the viij" book of
his "Ethymologies," and Austyn in his book "of here
sies." To see these heresies at length, he must read the
book composed by "Epiphanius the Greke," and that of
"Philaster the Latyn Avriter."
It is interesting to note, since Pecock Avas accused
of denying the existence of the Holy Ghost, that among
the various sects which he enumerates are those Avho
denied either the presence of the Holy Ghost among the
Apostles as did the " Cataphrygians or Montanists,"
who maintained that the Holy Ghost ca-me not into the-
Apostles but into the members of their own sect, or those
who denied the existenot? of the Holy Ghost as God, as did
the Sabellians, "which holden that of the Fadir, Sone,
and Holy Goost is not but oon person," or the Mace
donians "which belden that the Holy Goost was not God"
and the Donatists "which helden that the Sone is lasse
than the Fadir, and the Holi Goost lasse than the Sone."
Such were the views set forth in Pecock's principal
literary undertaking. Our purpose was to lay a synopsis
of the Avork before the reader, emphasizing the most im
portant principles set forth in the treatise, keeping in
mind that it is best to let the author speak for himself.
The phrasing, terminology, and argumentation is Pe
cook's. We have refrained from a great deal of com-
xnent, or interpretation. In the foUoAving chapter we Arill
enter upon a more detailed study of Pecock as a literary
artist and the exponent of fifteenth century prose.

Reginald Pecock

CHAPTER V
Reginald Pecock, the Exponent of Fifteenth
Century Prose.
The foregoing is a synoptic review, a general im
pression of Pecock's thought, artistic appreciation, power
of expression, and literary qualifications. His other
literary productions inight have lent themselves to the
same purpose, but the results would have been less con
clusive. The Repressor is his greatest work, and his
principal work. Moreover, it was the principles ad
vanced in this treatise that eventually, in his OAvn day,
gave rise to the accusation of heresy, and in our day,
give occasion, but not with justification, to certain writers
to hail him as a prophet of Protestantism and of the
modern school of Rationalism.
Pecock the man of letters is the subject of our present
undertaking, and one of the two primary objects of the
work as a whole. With these considerations before us,
we shall enter upon a more thorough investigation of his
literary qualities properly so called. In the course of
this study, excerpts from other of his writings will be
introduced in confirmation of findings observed in the
Repressor, or in evidence of literary characteristics not
to lie found in it. Also recourse Arill be had to other con
temporary prose writers, or to prose writers of the fif
teenth century period, to the end that in the comparison
we may ascertain our author's rightful place among the
exponents of the prose of his age.
Perpetuation is an end to which all living things
tend. It is a natural impulse coming from God Himself.
Man lives to this world in the offspring which he begets
in the physical order; but in the children of his men
tality he bequeathes to posterity something more inti-

Churchman and Man of Letters 103
mately himself, and as superior as mind is above matter.
The man of letters in the offspring of his inteUigence
leaves behind himself, his personality, his moods, his
tempers, his joys, his sorrows, his emotions, his passions,
his temperament, and his accentricities. If we grasp
this Ave comprehend the meaning of the term literature.
Literature is not science ; nor is science literature ; litera
ture has to do Avith ideas, science Avith realities; litera
ture is characteristically personal, science comprehends
the universal and external. Literature is no longer
literature, but becomes science, Avhen it ceases to be per
sonal; Avlien it ceases to be individual; Avlien it ceases
to be Shakespeare, or BroAvning, or Tennyson. Although
this is particularly true of verse and not so readily recog
nizable in prose, it is nevertheless true of both. No one
who is sensitiA-e to the prose style of Macaulay, or Burke,
or NcAvman can deny it for an instant. The trained ear
of the experienced reader will detect the author without
difficulty. There is something in the rhythm, the phras
ing, the mode of expression that is differentiating; and
like the soothing outpouring of a crystal spring it gives
evidence of the source whence it came.
In approaching the study of an author these ideas
must be borne in mind. The historical facts of a Avriter's
life assist undoubtedly in the better understanding of
his work, but the fruit of his imagination and intellect
must, if he is worthy of the name, introduce us to a phase
of his life and character which history very often leaves
untold. We approach the task in the role of a modern
critic, with preconceived ideas, and modern canons of
criticism— it is difficult completely to dispel aU such, and
not wholly to be desired — and we find that in reality the
fundamental qualities of literature are not circumscribed
by time, or race, or language. This is true of art in
general. Every age and people since history began—
we may suppose that even before its dawn— has had its
own artistic souls; its own truly great literary men.

104 Reginald Pecock
There is a rise and fall among nations and individuals
in the literary Avorld ; not a regular progression toAvards
a higher state of perfection with each succeeding gen
eration; but something fitful, and capricious for Avliich
there is no satisfactory explanation. This phenomenon
can not wholly be accounted for by the tastes and de
mands of any particular age or people. These may acci
dentally modify it ; Homer is Greek reflecting the Greek
mentality and culture ; the Sacred Scriptures are HebreAV
and cannot conceal their origin; Cicero is Rome at the
height of its glory; but the fundamental qualities that
make them eternal and universal in their appeal are the
fundamental qualities of aU art, Avliich are eternal and
universal. Reginald Pecock was first of all a churchman, and,
whatever his literary interests and acquisitions may have
been, they were all handmaidens to the one great interest
of his life, the quest of immortal souls. Often writing
was to him a science, and not always an art; a science
used as a means for strengthening the relation of souls
Arith their Creator. Very early in his career, he came
to realize the power of written language as a means to
this end. He had seen it utilized by the enemies of the
Church, in bringing about deplorable conditions to the
amending of Avhich he had dedicated his life and his
abilities. His treatment of the subject-matter was not that of
a purely scientific treatise, although the subject-matter
itself Avas such as lent itself to a purely scientific treat
ment. Writers before and since have filled volumes in
handling the same topics in a purely scientific way. Cir
cumstances determined Pecock's method; and these same
circumstances influenced him as a man of letters. One
might conjecture Avhat he might have produced had he
sought literature as an end in itself; one may, hoAvever,
with very good reason, determine the nature of his work,
had he had recourse to a purely scientific method in the

Churchman and Man op Letters 105
execution of his writings. In all likelihood, he would
have foUowed the traditional and conventional method of
the schools, and by doing so would have accomplished
httleor nothing in a literary Avay for his native language.
The influence of the LoUard controversy on the prose of
the period is readUy understood, when one realizes that
Pecock wrote for a class of people, the average of whom
had no scientific training. His writings to be effective
must conform to the capacities of this class, with the
consequence that there was a reciprocal influence of the
popular treatise upon his literary style, as weU as his
influence upon the popular treatise.
His principal work is reaUy an attempt to popularize
the traditional scholastic treatises of the schoolmen. His
success was greater than it would have been had the
master-workman been less fitted to the task than was the
author of the Repressor. In our opinion the stereotyped
form of the schoolmen's treatise, while lending itself to
logical argumentation, has, from a purely literary point
of view, a made-to-order woodenness about it that lacks
that originality and spontaneity of expression and emo
tion so essential to art. It has an unrealness that sug
gests a superimposed veneer. Pecock, particularly in his
Repressor, has taken this made-to-order form of the
Latin treatise, and under the necessity of accommodat
ing himself to the capacity of the populace, has embel
lished it with much that is of literary merit. The heavier
lumber, the uprights and the crossbeams, are still quite
visible. For the student of St. Thomas, or for those
acquainted Avith more recent treatises on scholastic phil
osophy, or even with the contemporary treatise ' ' Gladius
Salomonis,"^ the general outlines of the Latin treatise
appearing in Pecock's AVorks can not be disguised. Pe
cock's early training at Oxford, the stronghold in Eng
land of the schoolmen's philosophy, betrays itself on
every page. Logic and the syllogism were almost an
1. John Bury's answer to Pecock.

106 Reginald Pecock
obsession Avith him. They Avere the one panacea for all
evils, and, strange to say, it seemed the AVorkings of fate
that his logic Avas one of the factors that contributed so
much to his dovmfall.
It is in the general outlines of his literary form that
this influence is most noticeable. He expounds "eleven"
articles, setting forth reasons in support of them; but
before starting upon the task proper, he will carry the
AA^arfare immediately into the enemy lines, expounding
three fundamental errors, the downfall of which Avill
mean the utter collapse of the enemy stronghold. Later
he takes up thirteen conclusions, and quite after the
method of St. Thomas himself, centres his whole attack
about the syllogism.^ He establishes his major premise,
his minor and his conclusion, very methodically offering
arguments in confirmation of them. This exhaustive
method is, indeed, conclusiA^e, but fatiguing to the reader,
since the interest lags after several interesting argu
ments haA'e been advanced in support of the same
premise. If a criticism is to be offered, it should be
said that there is a superfluity of argument. His scho
lastic training is seen again in this, that he foresees the
A^ulnerable points of his argument, and sets himself to
the defense. The subject-matter of the Repressor, strictly speak
ing, belongs in the scientific treatise. For reasons already
suggested, the author under force of circumstances pro
duced a modified form of the traditional treatise, and not
the treatise properly so called. Many of the character
istics of the literary form knoAvn several centuries^ later,
as the essay have been introduced, still the Repressor
could never be classified as an essay. What the author
of the Repressor really attained to, although it can not
be said that he intended it or even adverted to the fact,
was what has since come to be called the popular treatise.

2. Bepressor, Chap. II, Pt. I.
3. Montaigne, End of 16th Century.

Churchman and Man of Letters 107
Pecock had other adventures in literary form. WhUe
the treatise is in reality the proper medium of expression
for the subject-matter of his various productions, stiU
in the "Book of Faith" we find him attempting the dia
logue. It is not the dialogue properly so caUed ; not the
dialogue as Plato conceived it, but rather as Berkely
conceived it ; and very successfully Pecock utUized it to
the end that a popular turn be given to certain very dog
matic opinions, about which there is no diffidence, there
are no half-lights, in the writer's own mind. The dia
logue is essentially an essay, an essay now and then
taking on other qualities of both prose and poetry; full
of every art to captivate the fancy, Avinning, dramatic,
eloquent, full of digression; now relieving the mind by
the most playful humour ; noAV rising into solemnity and
poetry. With Pecock such a form was uncalled for ; his
subject did not lend itself to it nor did he rise in his
efforts to the highest and most limited form of the dia
logue. With Plato the dialogue is essential, necessary,
organic; the very form belongs to the matter which it
embodies, for Plato's Dialogues reflect the actual method
in Avhich, by preference to anything like formal lecturing,
Socrates conveyed his doctrine to others. It is the liter
ary transformation, in a word, of what was the intimate
and homely method of Socrates, not only of conveying
truth to others but of arriving at it himself. Always
it is Socrates, still loitering in the market place or saun
tering forth upon the streets and suburban roads of
Athens seeking truth from others,^ seeking it, doubtless,
from himself, but along with, and by the help of, his
supposed scholars.
When we say that Pecock attempts the dialogue in
the "Book of Faith," it must be understood only that the
very general outlines of the dialogue are adopted. The
stiffness of the scientific treatise is relieved by the intro
duction of a conversation between father and son. It is

4, Walter Pater, Plato and Platonism, p. 158.

108 Reginald Pecock
a spiritual father and a spiritual son ; Pecock himself and
an imaginary zealous seeker after truth, who is a rather
precocious youth of considerable experience and train
ing. Neither of the personages can disguise his early
training in the methods of the schools. They discuss at
length Avith syllogism, Avith majors and minors and con
clusions, distinguishing and conceding. The matter of
their discussion is the very scientific tract on faith which
is treated in text-books of dogmatic theology under the
heading: "Tractatus De Fide." The father and son
carry on the discussion in the form of a dialogue through
out the first seven chapters, when very abruptly the dia
logue ceases and the author addresses himself to an
imaginary opponent, a Lollard, and a very attentive
listener who neither questions, nor replies. In Part II
the same topic is continued in the dialogue form.
In the "Book of Faith" Ave see Pecock less ham
pered, at work in a more comprehensive and elastic
literary form, in Avhicli there is greater play for his
originality and spontaneity. The same observation is
applicable- to individual passages of his other works;
but in the "Book of Faith," which is one of his latest
productions, the author seems to be at his best. There
is an unction and rhythm in his expression; the Avord-
ing and phrasing come rolling forth Avith a facility and
perfection, like a fabric from a well regulated and Avell
adjusted loom. The experience of years of writing
undoubtedly was manifesting itself; but unquestionably
the freedom of the dialogue was a prime factor.
Before quitting the general characteristics, Ave must
see something more of our author's technique in the
execution of his zealous labours. As is to be expected
from a mind so logical, trained in a system almost me
chanical in its rigidness, unity of thought and purpose
is outstanding in all his works. The fault, if it be a fault,
to which Ave have already referred, is not only charac
teristic of the writings, but of the man himself. He

Churchman and Man of Letters 109
attempts to be exhaustive, and perhaps emphatic, bv
what would seem in our day a needless repetition of like
arguments. Our author has shown in his Avorkmanship a knoAvl-
edge of the technical aspect of writing Avhich is of a very
high order and in advance of the contemporary Avriters
of vernacular prose. The individual treatise taken as a
whole approaches nearer to technical perfection than
does the individual sentence or paragraph. To some it
may seem an exaggeration to speaks of Pecock, in the
matter of technique, as the Newman of the fifteenth cen
tury. Certainly no prose writer of the period handled
the sentence with such skill. This is especially true of
the periodic sentence, the frequent use of which is char
acteristic of Pecock. He did not, however, confine him
self to the use of this one particular structure. Through
out his writings, every kind of sentence, which writers
of the best periods of prose have utilized, are to be
found. The following quotation is what rhetoricians
would call a periodic sentence. It is a striking example
of Pecock's control over the "period":
"Fadir, it semeth to my resoun out of this to
foloAve, that if Cristen clergie wer wel avisid of the
CA^'^dencis Avhich myghten prove her bileeve of ech
article, and if the seid Cristen clergie woldeii gadere
tho evydencis togidere, ordynatli and formabli, in
forme of silogismes, forto have redili and currauntli
at honde and at moutlie, Avhanne ever nede Avere to
make bi hem eny profis, and if herwith the IcAvis
and the Sarracenes woldeii geve audience for to heere
and now seid evydencis to be myngstrid to hem in
the seid foorme, and bi sufficient leiser at dyvers
tymes, the Cristen clergie schulde convicte, and in
maner constreyne, or ellis nede the undir stonding.

110 Reginald Pecock
bothe of alie lewis and of all Sarracenes, to bileeve
after Cristen feith, and to be convertid therto, Avhere
thei woldeii or nolden. ' '¦^
The very frequent use of such long sentences, both of
periodic and of loose structure, but especially the latter,
is quite characteristic of the prose Avritings of the period.
It is, however, a fault. We feel that the style would be
relieved, the reading made more pleasurable, and the
sense conveyed Avith greater facility, were the long sen
tence broken up. Pecock in this respect sins less against
the canons of rhetoric than any of his contemporaries.
Certainly the author of the Repressor has no peer in
the realm of fifteenth century prose. While one, or
perhaps two, can in some respects rank Avith him, in
form and finesse all are inferior. With Avriters' like
Wycliffe and Chaucer, while they have not attained to
the same degree of development of a literary prose style,
nevertheless their inferiority in this matter is more than
compensated for by their thought, and by their purity
and simplicity of language, together Avith their originality
and strikingness of expression. Wycliffe, among the
earliest of the period, and leader of a movement, was a
radical thinker rather than a literary man. His English
is clear and nervous, rather stiff, and shows a great deal
of sameness in rhythm and phrasing. He looked to what
the Avords conveyed, rather than to the words and their
artistic arrangement. Imagination is lacking, or rather
he never allows himself to be carried aAvay by it, but is
almost always guided by his intellect, if not labouring
under some prejudice. One short characteristic phrase
is sufficient for the thought as it occurs. To give diver
sity and color to his diction by the unexpected use of a
striking word in the right place; to heighten the effect
by a Avise economy in the arrangement and expression;
to the idea of such devices he seems never to have ad-

5. Book of Faith, Part I, Chapter II.

Churchman and Man of Letters 111
verted. One could never imagine a sermon of Wycliffe
eloquent, unless Wycliffe himself preached it. But from
the mouth of Wycliffe aU the burning emotionalism of
his being, aU the uncontroUed zeal of the conventional
reformer, crowned by a dominating personality, would
pour forth in the highest form of eloquence.
The foUoAving is quite typical of Wycliffe's prose
style. Other passages, more emotional, almost tragic,
might be chosen from those scenes in Avhich he rails
against the pope whom he stigmatises as Anti-Christ;
but a quieter and saner passage is more to our purpose
in ascertaining his usual style and form. It is to be
observed that his great mentality always made him pro
pound a doctrine favourable to the king and nobles. He
says: "The King hath a jurisdiction and power of
the persons of high Prelates and less Priests, and
goods of holy church. That Solomon put doAvn one
high priest, and ordained another in his place, and
outlawed the first without axing help of Clerks, for
traitery don to Solomon and his people ; and treason
agenst Christ and his law, and his people, is more
then treason agenst an earthly Kinge, and more
shulde be punished. That as Peter and Paul techen,
lords ben ordained of God to venge misdeeds and
misdoers, and to praise good deeds and good
doers. "^
At a glance, it wUl be seen that the author is making
little effort at a finished prose style. The impression
received is that the author has one principal idea in mind,
and that about it he has gathered relative ideas in sup
port which he is freely jotting doAvn.
In "The Persones Tale" Chaucer has bequeathed to
us an interesting prose treatise on penance. Like the

6. MS, e. 11 Of Servants and Lords MS. The spelling is greatly
modernized.

112 Reginald Pecock
works of both Pecock and Wycliffe this prose AVork is
devoted to the expounding of a religious doctrine. The
man of letters in this period seems to have appreciated
the fact that prose was the only medium for imparting
didactic religious teaching. The treatise is invaluable
not so much from the theological viewpoint, although in
this respect it is the greatest extant English prose
treatise on the subject in that period, but it is invaluable,
as a sequence to the Canterbury Tales, in so far as it
opens a new vista into the inner life and character of
that extraordinary literary genius of the fourteenth
century. Ten Brink makes this observation which is
very much to the point, "Such a conclusion is not
strange; on the contrary, it is in perfect harmony with
the spirit of the Middle Ages. And yet it is most signif
icant as showing Chaucer's frame of mind when he gave
the final touches to his great master-work."''
The following quotation is a typical prose passage
from Chaucer's treatise on Penance:
"And therefore oure Lord Jesu Crist seith thus :
'by the fruit of hem ye shul knowen hem.' Of this
rote eek springeth a seed of grace, the which seed
is moder of sikernesse, and this seed is egre and
hoot. The grace of this seed springeth of God,
thurgh remembrance of the day of dome and on the
peynes of belle. Of this matere seith Salomon, that
'in the drede of god man forleteth his sinne.' The
hete of this seed is the love of god, and the desiring
of the joye perdurable."'*
We say it is a typical passage. It is rather typical
of the doctrinal part of the sermon. Justice can hardly
be done to the work in such a short quotation. Certainly
the author had a very clear grasp of his subject and

7. Ten Brink, op. cit.. Vol. II, p. 183, ed. Wm. C. Robinson, Ph. D.
D. 8. Chaucer, The Persones Tale.

Churchman and Man of Letters 113
exhibits a knowledge of the doctrines involved that would
do credit to a churchman of distinction. Is it presuming
to suppose that Chaucer was penning another of his
realistic pictures? The subject is repentance and pen
ance; the thoughts of one groAvn very serious; the
thoughts of a youth, who had laughed not in scorn, whose
soul sparkled to overflowing with mirth as he roUicked
and played AvhUe the sun was high, but in the shadows of
evening, bethinking himself of the day, grew serious and
concerned about the things that really count. Can we
picture the poet groAvu old ; beneath the pulpit, listening
Arith attention and the docUity of a chUd to the consoling
words of his beloved "parson": "Our swete lord god
of hevene, that no man wol perisse, but wol that we
come alie to the knoweleche of him, and to the blisful lyf
that is perdurable."^
There is charm in the simplicity of these didactic
passages, and a rhythm that one would expect from
' ' The Father of English Versification, ' ' but a rhythm not
indicative of the author's real power. There is a logical
sequence and unity of thought, less emphatic perhaps,
but more ascertainable than in Wycliffe ; and an origin
ality of expression and freedom from conventional Latin
treatise forms that surpass Pecock. However, the sim
plicity of phrasing, and the regular rhythmical sameness
become interminable. Pecock becomes tedious in his at
tempt to be exhaustive ; Chaucer because of his simplicity.
Pecock was not alone in his knowledge and command
of the technique of prose. Chaucer had a very compre
hensive knowledge of the science of prose composition,
as well as a mastery over verse. The music of his periods
is light and thin even in his attempts to be very serious ;
quite unlike the stentorian roll of Pecock's periods.
As we have noted before, the frequency with which
Peeock and Wycliffe made use of both the periodic and
loose sentence, was a fault of construction, a fault com-

9. Ibid.

114 Reginald Pecock
mon in the period. In Chaucer, the simple sentence is
employed more freely and oftener. Chaucer, undoubt
edly, understood all these dcAdces of rhetoric and did not
hesitate to employ them. The following quotation, a
prayer of repentance on the part of the poet himself,
a regret for some of his compositions that may have
giveii scandal and done harm, is an instance of the use
of the period, rather than a great prose selection :
"But of the translacion of Boece de Consola-
cione, and othere bokes of Legendes of seintes, and
omelies and moralitee, and devocioun, that thanke
I oure Lord Jesu Crist and his blisful moder, and
alie the seintes of hevene; bisekinge him that they
from liennes forth, unto my lyves ende, sende me
grace to biwayle my giltes, and to studie to the sal-
vacioun of my soule: — and graunte my grace of
verray penitence, confessioun and satisfacioun to
doon in this present lyf; thurgh the benigne grace
of him that is king of kinges and preest over all
preestes, that boghte us with the precious blood of
his lierte ; so that I may been oon of hem at the day
of dome that sliuUe be saved. "^^
Thus far we have been treating of the more general
outlines of Pecock's prose form. In the course of the
study we have noted also some of the general character
istics of prose form as seen from two of the leading
literary men of the period. There are, however, other
qualities that must be sought out in the study of an
author. Some of these we have suggested merely, in the
foregoing study, and it Avill be our endeavor in the re
maining part of this chapter to dwell upon them at
greater length and detail.
There is no set formula by which the merits of a
literary production can be estimated. Literary critics
are not unanimous in their conclusions ; nor can they be.

10. Conclusion of, "The Persones Tale."

Churchman and Man of Letters 115
Since literary criticism is an art rather than a science;
its conclusions are the result of feeling and appreciation
rather than hard and fast rules. However, there are
certain fundamentals, comprehending the whole field of
both prose and poetry, upon which aU more or less agree.
There are certain qualities of style that may be present
m any literary Avork ; and certain of these, not aU, con
comitantly, must be present if the production is to be
classified as Uterature properly so caUed. There are the
inteUectual qualities of style that correspond to the ele
ment of thought ; the emotional qualities arising from the
appeal to the emotions ; the imaginative corresponding to
the element of ideality, and the aesthetic qualities aris
ing from the melody and harmony.
The inteUectual qualities of style are not necessarUy
artistic, although they may form a true basis of style.
In works of a didactic nature, such as our author exe
cuted, it is seen without a second glance that the intel
lectual qualities are a prime requisite ; all other qualities
are secondary and subordinate. "A great author," says
Cardinal NcAvman, "is not one who merely has a 'copia
verborum, ' whether in prose or verse, and can, as it Avere
turn on at his will any number of splendid phrases and
swelling sentences; but he is one who has something to
say and knows how to say it."^-^ Pecock had something
to say and he said it with a logic that is almost irrefut
able, and with an unction and zeal that are contagious.
Even the modern reader loses sight of the archaisms,
and the unusual phrasing and expression. The ingenious
methods of attack and defense in the argument; the
copious outpouring of language in dignified harmonious
rhythm, are sufficient to arrest the attention, bearing it
eagerly on from major premise to conclusion.
These general observations are not meant to be
absolute but must be qualified. There are particular
instances where Pecock descends to sophistry. A strik-
11. Newman, Idea of a University, Literature.

116 Reginald Pecock
ing example of this is in the Repressor where he attempts
to prove that the ruse of the friars in counting money
Avith a stick Avas not inconsistent with their vows of
poverty. There are also instances of inconsistencies
Avhich give one the impression that the author is arguing
for argument's sake. An instance of this is in his argu
ment for submission to the teaching church, "the hool
chirche of the clergie," in which he denounces the Lol
lard for relying upon his own individual reason in the
interpretation of Scripture. He says in part, "And if
thou wolte pretende thi natural resoun forto be so cleer
in his nature, into the fynding of right and dew undir-
stonding of Holy Scripture, that thi natural Aritt schal
do as myche as alie the natural resouns of al the clergie
of the chirche, etc."^^ On the other hand he extols the
reasoning of an individual above that of a general
council, when he says, "For certis, it may be that sum
oon symple persoone as in fame, or in state, is wiser
forto knoAve, iuge, and declare what is the trewe sense of
a certeyn porcioun of Scripture, and what is the treuthe
of sum article, and that for his longe studiyng, laboring,
and avising therupon, than is a greet general conceil."^^
Pecock resorts to sophistry and arrives at conclu
sions unworthy of his intelligence. Pie does not mean
that the intelligence of a simple individual is superior
to the combined intelligence of all the members of a
council. If this were conceded, a great portion of his
saner and past reasoning in both the Repressor and
Booh of Faith becomes mere sophistry and contra
dictory. In this particular instance he confuses the in
fluence that the individual by his eloquence and persua
sive abilities may have upon the whole assembly, with
that of the individual's intellectual powers.
There is another fault to be found in Pecock's works
taken individually. It may seem inconsistent, since we

12. Pecock, Book of Faith, ed. Morison, Part I, Ch. X.
13. Ibid. Part II, Ch. IV.

Churchman and Man of Letters 117
have already observed that his method of argumentation
is very exhaustive, to state in a second breath that in
certain respects he was not sufficiently exhaustive in his
treatment of his subject-matter. The individual treatise,
and this is especially noticeable in the Booh of Faith,
leaves the reader with suspended judgment as to the
author's opinions in certain flne points of orthodoxv.
This is due, no doubt, to the fact that the individual
treatise was one of a series, each of Avhich supplemented
the other. The author seemed to realize that certain of
his arguments needed additional expansion, and for this
reason Ave frequently find references to other works
where the subject is treated more at length. Such are
references to The booh of presthode,^^ The booh of
the chirche,^^ lust apprising of Holi Scripfure,i<^
the iust apprising of doctouris,^'^ and numerous other
references. Unfortunately these works are no longer
extant, and our conclusions regarding the author's opin
ions will always have to be received with qualifications.
Certainly, definite charges of heresy were made at his
trial, after a great number of his works were supposed
to have been examined. However, in the light of those
works still with us, all of the charges can not be sub
stantiated, and about the majority of them an atmosphere
of suspicion hangs. One gets the impression that with a
friendlier body of judges Pecock could have explained
away, if not all, at least the majority of the accusations.
Again, Pecock at times in his argument has recourse
to a hypothesis. Later, and remotely removed from the
hypothetical statement, other misleading observations
are made which can not be thoroughly understood unless
considered in relation to the hypothesis. From a literary
point of view, this is a lack of clearness and simplicity.
Very frequently this statement appears : ' ' Every singu-
ler personne ... is bounden, undir peyne of dampnaci-
14 and 15. Ibid., Pt. I, Ch. X.
16 and 17. Ibid. Pt. I, Ch. III.

118 Reginald Pecock
oun, for to bileeve thilk same article as feith . . . though
the chirche therynne bileeved or determyned falseli or
amys."^^ The real significance of such a statement can
not be properly understood unless considered in relation
to the observation made by Pecock in the prologue to
The Booh of Faith, Avhere the author remarks that it
is useless to appeal to this "lay party" on the ground
that the Church or a General Council is infallible, since
they Avould only laugh one to scorn. However, he Aviii
prove from reason to this "lay party" that "we owen to
bileeve and stonde to sum seier or techer which may
fade, while it is not knowe that thilk seier or techer
theryne failith."^^
Naturally the mpre aesthetic qualities of style, ar
tistic qualities properly so called, such as the emotional
appeal, pathos, and the ludicrous, are not to be found in
any marked degree in any of Pecock's works. The very
nature of his subject-matter would exclude them, and
Avhat is more, the elementary state of development of
prose language did not lend itself to the expression of
those finer qualities Avliich are so characteristic of the
literary essay and treatise of a later and more plastic
period. As has been noted before, the great poets and
literary artists of the period^^ had not come to realize
the possibilities of the essay or treatise as a literary form
properly so called. Chaucer's prose can not be ranked
with his verse.
The dialectical powers are the outstanding charac
teristics of our author. However, that which is next in
importance and supplementary to the other great gifts is
his ability to illustrate his point by means of a homely
striking example. In proof of the conclusion that truths
of natural laAv are not founded in Holy Scripture, he

18. Pt. I, Ch. VII, ibid.
19. Prologue, Book of Faith.
20. Really Chaucer was the only great artist, unless we consider the
Scotch school immediately following 1400 A. D.

Churchman and Man of Letters 119
makes use of the homely old custom^^ of countrymen
bringing, on Midsummer Eve, flowers and branches of
trees to the citizens of London, with which they could
decorate their houses. He observes that the flowers and
branches did not grow out of the carts and hands of the
countrymen, but had their foundation in the land. An
other striking example is that of Christ and his Apostles
bringing fish which they had caught. His comment on
this is that God forbid, that men for reverence Avould
take such liberty with truth as to say that the fish grcAv
out of the hands of Christ or the Apostles, and not in
the sea.^^ Pecock's illustrations are homely but forceful. His
originality and power of expression is best set forth in
his applying an example. Here for an instant he forgets
his academic phrasing and for an instant we see and hear
the author. He warns the "Bible men" against the
danger of dissension. They remind him of the dogs in the
market place who snarl and tear one another. Moreover,
they should not forget what the same sort of dissension
did for Bohemia where the city and University of Prague
were destroyed. This was all to no avail, for after the
destruction the people were glad to return to the unity
of the Catholic and universal faith and doctrines of the
Church.^^ He draws a very striking picture of a "learned"
doctor of the period. Sarcasm is in every line, and be
neath the surface one can not help but detect the quiet
humour.^^ Reginald Pecock, in the estimation of some men Avas
candid to a fault. There is indeed that open sincerity
and frankness about him that made him one of his OAvn
greatest enemies, but an openness and sincerity that
endears him to the unbiased observer. He communicates

21. Bepressor, Pt. I, Ch. VI.
22. Ibid. Pt. I, Ch. VL
23. Bepressor, Pt. I, Ch. VI.
24. Ibid. Pt. I, Ch. XVI.

120 Reginald Pecock
this quality to his writings. It shows through in every
paragraph. Tolerant he was with the common weak
nesses of men, but for the insincere man he held no brief.
Like the Master Himself, he rose in his might and
scourged them forth. For the egotistical strutting doctor
he had naught but caustic denunciation; the pleasant
popular preachers among the friars were "pulpit
bawlers"; for the misguided, illiterate Lollard he had
gentle, kindly, fatherly advice, while their leaders were
to him "hypocrites, adulterers and lecherous men." Nor
was he a respecter of persons. A lover of authority, yes,
but not a faAvning sycophant.
It is amusing and almost approaching the ludicrous
to hear Pecock state that his purpose in his works was
to conciliate the lay party. Conciliation is an incongru
ous term when applied to the author of the Repressor.
In addition to the many uncomplimentary things which
we have already observed, our author in the following
passage gives expression to his method which is typical
of his idea of conciliation. He says, "And if thou Avolte
pretende thi natural resoun forto be so cleer in his nature,
into the fynding of the right and dcAV understonding of
Holi Scripture, that thi natural witt schal do as myche
as alie the natural resouns of al the clergie of the chirche,
. . . which thing is ful unlikli, that noon in al the
multitude of clergie is now, or hath be so cleer in such
witt as thou art, etc."^*^
There is one final passage that should be seen at
length. It is important first of all for its literary quali
ties; it is one of Pecock's great prose passages. None
other of his possesses the outstanding characteristics of
good prose as does this one. It is also important insofar
as it sheds considerable light upon any doubt that may
arise regarding Pecock's formal attitude toAvards the
universal Church and her teachings. He remarks as
follows: "And thanne aftir alie these thus bifore going
25. Book of Faith, Pt., Ch. X.

Churchman and Man of Letters 121
argumentis, y argue ferther thus. Sithen who ever bi
ful avisement agenstondith God, and his ordynaunce,
puttith him into dampnable synne, and perel of dampna -
cioun, it folowith that who ever avisidli agenstondith,
and unobeith the prelatis of the chirche, in cause and
mater of feith teching, and leernying, and fulfilling, Avith
out the seid excepcioun, he therynne synnyth deedli and
dampnabili. Wolde God that lay peple hadden in her
modir tunge the epistilis of Seynt Ignace, the blissid and
holi martir, and disciple of Seint Jolinne evangelist, and
whom Denyce hath in comendacioun bi writing in his booi;
of Goddis Namyngis. For certis, red y never in no
mannys writingis, so tendirli charchid, the obeischaunce
to bischopis and to preestis as is there in his Avriting ofte
chargid. How holi a man he Avas, and hou greet a doer
in the chirche, in the dales, and bischop, yhe, patriarke
of the greet Antioche, may be rad in a storie ioyiied to
hise epistlis, which storie was writen in tho same dales
bi a persoone which knewe sureli, as he there knowl-
echith, al the persecucioun of Ignacis martirdom. Ech
man and Avoman therefore be Avare, and bise himsilf hou
he stondith in the point of this present purpos. For
feithfuUi forto seie, manye which holden him silf ful
cleene from dampnable synne, and ful perfit lovers and
kepers of Goddis lawe, ben, in as myche as y can deme,
ill the noAV tretid and spokum dampnable synne, so that,
for al her glorie of her conscience, thei stonden in case
of the gospel; that a litil soAvrdough in her soule cor-
ruptith al the lumpe of her conversacioun and servyce
to God. . . And therefore, as y seid bifore, alias and out
upon so greet blindness in hem, Avhich pretenden hem to
be of more kunnyng than other in Goddis laAve, and
clepen hem sUf therfore knoAving men. VerUi to seie,
this pride and presumpcioun stynkith bifore God; yh'^
and peraventure more than the syniiys of othere men,
Avhich thei in her hertis bittirli condempen. And if y
schulde seie my feling, peraventure the unobedience of

122 Reginald Pecock
Adam and Eve was not so myche gilti, neither the pride
of Lucifer ; but Avhether this be trcAve or no, y remitte it
to God ; but herof y muste holde me sikir, that if Lucifer
and Adam were in dampnable synne for her pride, and
presumpsioun, and unobedience, f orsothe as forto iuge bi
the comoun lawe of God, goven to alie Cristen men, alie
the now bifore spokun agenstonders to prelatis of the
chirche ben, for thilke agenstonding, in dampnable synne,
and ellis the seid comoun lawe of God were not troAve."^^
There are a few more observations to be made re
garding Pecock's style. There is a certain use of Avords
and phrases that is characteristically Pecock. The
author of the Repressor, as Ave have already observed,
is, in his treatment of a subject, exhaustive to a fault.
Nevertheless, it is Pecock ; it is the mentality of the man.
In his exemplification of a point of argument, we have
seen that one simile or metaphor or example does not
satisfy him, but they must be multiplied until the repeti
tion becomes tedious. So also in his use of AVords and
phrases he attempts to be exhaustive. Scarcely a para
graph of his various writings can be found in which the
arrangement of words and phrases such as the f oUoAring
is not to be found. There is redundancy in his use of
words, Avhich he combines into rhythmical pairs such as :
"seier or techer"; "credence and faith"; "word and
speche"; "remove and take awey"; "admitte and
graunte"; "gendrith and getith"; "leerne and gete";
"erre and fade"; "acceptid and allowid"; "denouncid
and enformed"; "ordynatli and formabli"; "concluding
and scheAving"; "opener and clerer"; "telling or de
nouncing " ; " bi another Avey, and in another maner. ' '
Also a triplex combination of words, as: "bifore
spokun attendaunce , herhenyng, and heering" ; "Avrit-
yng, fynding and knowing"; "opener, and clerer, and
sickerer"; "provying and concluding and schewing";
"unworthiest and yongist and lowest"; "iuge, deeme,
26. Ibid., Pt. i, Ch. VII, pp. 189-194.

Churchman and Man of Letters 123
and consent"; "to be sende, and to be govun or lende
abrood"; "must go, and proceede, and be maad."
Also the frequent use of such phrases as: "now
spokun " ; " now errying " ; " f ul of te " ; " more and higher
treting " ; " bifore writen " ; " last givun " ; " bifore seid ' ' ;
"wel avisid"; "so gete"; "therfore doyng"; "bifore
knew"; "soner impunge"; "rehercid there — and there
rehercid" (in the same sentence) ; "never the lasse and
never the latter" ; "ask and leerne— answer and seie."
There is also the Latin use of the verb construction ;
the sense being suspended by placing the verb or part
of the verb construction at the end of the phrase or sen
tence as " communicacioun schal be with the persoongs
had"; or again, "utterly into uce dely vered"; or,
"Avhanne thei it receyveden."
Then, too, there is the frequent recurrence of the
Latin sentence construction to be found so prevalent in
the Latin treatise of the time. An exemplification of this
is to be had in the following: "Wherefore, sithen every
opinioun which is not feith is maad the strenger and
perfiter in his kinde, bi that that the mo, and the perfiter,
and the strenger CA^dencis perteynyng to his kinde ben
had, as no wys clerk wole seie nay, it foloAvith bi lijk
skile that every opinioun which is feith, is maad the
strenger and the perfiter in his kinde, bi that the mo and
the perfiter and strenger eA^ydencis, perteynyng forto
gendre an opinial feith ben. ' '^^
With these observations we conclude our study of
Reginald Pecock and fifteenth century prose. From the
beginning, and especially in the latter part of this work,
our interests have been primarily literary. The one con
viction, it seems to us, that must be the reward for efforts
spent in delving into the secrets of fifteenth century
letters, is that the period, a prose period, is of a much
higher order in a literary way than is ordinarUy con
ceded ; and a conviction intimately related to this is, that

27. Ibid., pp. 141-2.

124 Reginald Pecock
Reginald Pecock, Bishop of Chichester, and greatest ex
ponent of prose writing of his time, was a man of letters
and literary talents of a very high order. Had he con
tinued his literary labours, one feels that the age of More
and Fisher and Latimer would have been a generation
earlier. Perhaps, too, in the religious affairs of England,
had a More or a Fisher been a generation earlier, relig
ious controversy might have taken a different turn.

Churchman and Man of Letters 125

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Pecock's Extant Works
1. The Donet (about the year 1440).
A manuscript in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. (Bod.
n. 916.) Also a transcript by Doctor James, en
titled, Reginald Pecoch's Donet. (James MS. n.
14 in Bibl. Bodl. pp. 49-79.)
2. The Repressor (A. D. 1449).
A MS. in the University Library, Cambridge (Kk. iv.
26). Repressor of Much Over Blaming of the
Clergy ed. by Churchill Babington, 1860 A. D. ;
Rolls Series.
3. The Book of Faith (A. D. 1456).
A MS. in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge
(B. 14, 15), Reginald Pecoch's Booh of Faith,
A Fifteenth Century Theological Tractate ed.
from above MS. by J. Morrison, M. A. 1909.
4. The Follower to the Donet (about 1454 A. D.).
A MS. in the British Museum, Bibl. Reg. 17 D ix.
5. The Reule of Crysten Religioun (about 1443 A. D.).
ed. by James Gairdner C. B., LL. D., D. Litt.,
printed privately for J. Pearson ,& Co., London.
6. The Poor Men's Mirror.
A MS. formerly in Archbishop Tenison 's Library,
now in the library of Lord Amherst of Hackney.
(a) Collectanea quaedam. ex Reginaldi Pecock Cices
trensis episcopi opusculis exustis consevata, etc.
(printed in John Foxe's Commentarii rentiu in
Ecclesia gestarum.. 8 vo. Argent. 1554, fol. 199,
b-203, b.)^
(b) Abbreviatio Reginaldi Pecoch.
A MS. in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, (n. 117,
formerly n. 1979, Cat. Libr. MSS. AngL p. 100.)

126 Reginald Pecock
Works not Known to be Extant
A list of at least thirty-four AVorks both in Latin and in
English may be found in Babington 's edition of the
Repressor. Rolls Series.
Contemporary Accounts and Works
Full account copied by Stow Annals, and from Stow by
Holinshed.
Howlett, Cronicle of Grey Friars. In Monumenta
Franciscana, vol. II. Rolls Series, 1882, sub. an.
1457. For Pecock's abjuration. See also Wilkin's
Concilia, vol. Ill, p. 576.
Gascoigne, Thomas, Dictionarium Theologium. Extracts
in Gascoigne 's Loci e Libro Ver-itatum, ed. Rogers,
J. E. P. Oxford, 1881. Contains much information
by a bitter enemy.
Historical MSS Commission, 12th Report, Appendix,
Part IX, 1891, pp. 385, 584.
Rolls of Parliament, Vol. V, p. 279.
Whethamstede, Registrum Abbot. Johnius, ed. Riley, H.
T. 2 vols. Rolls Series, 1872-3. Also but less correct
in T. Hearne's Due Rerwm Anglicarum Scriptores
Veteres 1732, vol. II, the view of a bitter enemy.
Wharton MSS in Lambeth Palace, Libr. Nos. 577, 594.
Archiv. Vatic, reg. Vatic. Pn II, vol. 499, fol. 63.
Archiv. Vatic. Calixti III, vol. 462, fol. 326-327.
ArchiA^ Vatic, reg. Laternanen. Nicolai Vol. 465, fol.
222-225.
Vatican Transcript in Brit. Mus. xxxiii 484, seq.
Camden Societv, Three Fifteenth Century Chronicles, pp.
71, 167-168.
Davies, English Chronicles of the reigns of Ric. II, Hen.
IV, Hen... V, and Hen. VI, pp. 75, seq. (Camden
Society).
Leland, Collectanea ii 409-410, ed. 1715 and Comment de
scriptt. Brit., pp. 594-5, ed. 1559.
Foxe, Acts and Monuments Hi 731, seq. ed. ToAvnsend.
Tanner, Bibl. Brit. Hib., p. 583.

Churchman and Man op Letters 127
Wood, Hist, et Ant. Univ. Oxon. lib. i. pp. 220, seq. ed.
1674, and Athena,e Oxon. i. 232, ii. 875.
History and Antiquities of the University of Oxford, ed.
Glutch.
Hearne, Hemingford, vol. i, pp. Ixxxvi-lxxxvii, and pref.
Wharton, Hist, de Episc. et Dec. Londin, et assav., p.
349 and Preface to his edition of Pecoch's Booh of
Faitli, 1688, also Survey of Cath. of St. Asaph, i.
80-81, u. 118-119.
Caxton, Chron. of Eng. pt. vii; Henry VI, p. cciii, ed.
1502.
Fabyan, Chronicle, p. 463, ed. 1559.
Fabricius, Bibl. Lat. Med. aet. V, 657-658, VI, 172-173.
Historisches Lexicon, ii. 745, ed. 1722.
Harpsfield, Hist, of Wiclif in Hist. Angl. Eccles. vol.
x-xix.
Nicolai, Proceedings of the Privy Council, vi. 185 and C.
Rymer, Foedera, vol. V, pt. i, p. 132, pt. ii. p. 25.
Lives of Pecock. Modern Accounts
By Rev. John Lewis, M. A., Minister of Mergate, The
Life of Reynold Pecock, S. T. P., Oxford, 1822.
Babington, ChurchiU, Biographical Sketch in the Intro
duction to the edition of the "Repressor." RoUs
Series, 1860.
Morison, J. L., Biographical Sketch, Reginald Pecoch's
Book of Faith, 1908.
Gairdner, James, Biographical Sketch, Lollardy and the
Reformation in England, Vol. I, Chapt. II.
Greenwood, Alice D., Biographical Sketch, Cambridge
History of Eng. Lit. Vol. II, p. 286.
Dublin Review, New Series, XLVII, 27, seq.
Miscellaneous Works Used in Preparation
Stubbs, WiUiam, D. D., The Constitutional History of
England.

128 Reginald Pecock
Lingard, John, D. D., History of England.
Lodge, R. M. A., Close of the Middle Ages, 1293-1494.
Hallam, Middle Ages, ii. 448 n.
Cooper, Annals of Cambridge, i. 309.
Stephens, Memorials of the See of Chichester, pp. 152,
seq.
Ramsay, Lancaster aud York ii. 202.
Hook, W. F., Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury,
V. 178, 293, sq.
Ten Brink, English Literature, ed. Robinson, W. C, ii.
333, sq.
NeAvman, John Henry, Idea of a University; Historical
Sketches.
Tout, Prof., Place of Edward II in English History.
Pollard, Alfred W., Fifteenth Century Prose and Verse.
Gairdner, James, Pasto-n Letters, i. 318.
Kingsford, C. L., M. A., English. Historical Lit. in Fif
teenth Century.
Leach, Educational Charters.
Kirk, Charles the Bold.
Thompson, E. M., Wycliffe Exhibition in Brit. Mus.
Gasquet, The Old English Bible and Other Essays.
Forshall & Madden, Introduction to Edition of Wycliffe
Scriptures.
Todd, Three Treatises of John Wycliffe, DubUn, 1851.
Arnold, Select EngUsh Works of Wycliffe, Oxford, 1869-
71.
MatthcAV, F. D., Unprinted Eng. Works Of Wycliffe
(Early Eng. Text. Soc).
Skeat/, RoA^ Walter W., The St f dent's Chaucer.
Morley, Henry, LL. D., EngUsh Writers.
Moulton, Charles Wells, Library of Literary Criticism.
Salembier, L., The Great Schism of the West.
Pastor, Histoire des Papes.
Vaughan, Roger Bede, 0. S. B., Life and Labors of St.
Thomas Aquin.

VITA
The author of this dissertation was born in St.
Louis, Missouri, June 22, 1891. His recoUections of
earUest chUdhood are of those years passed upon a
typical Louisiana plantation near St. Gabriel. It was
here that he had his first experience at school. Later he
removed to Canada where he attended the Grammar and
pubUc High Schools at Simcoe, Ontario. In 1908, he
entered Assumption CoUege, SandArich, Ontario. It was
in this institution that he came under the influence of
that most efficient body of educators the Basilian Fathers.
At the end of five happy, profitable years at Sandwich he
presented himself as a student for the priesthood to the
Bishop of Detroit Avho sent him to complete his prepara
tory studies in Theology under the Sulpioian Fathers at
St. Mary's Seminary, Baltimore, the cradle of the
American Priesthood. In the year 1916 he was ordained
deacon in Baltimore Cathedral by the late Cardinal Gib
bons, and on June 2 of the foUoAring year was raised to
the priesthood in Sts. Peter and Paul Cathedral, Detroit,
Michigan. For two years he was stationed at St.
Alouysius Church, Detroit, and at the completion of this
term was sent by his bishop to pursue a postgraduate
course of studies at the Catholic University of America,
Washington, D. C From this institution he obtained the
degree of Master of Arts, and the foUoAring year was
sent by the Bishop of Detroit to Europe, to continue his
studies and research at Oxford, and in the Vatican
Archives in Rome. In 1921, he returned to the Catholic
Univer sily of America to complete lus studies for the
degree Doctor of Philosophy.
At Ox'ford he followed courses in English Literature
under Sir Walter Raleigh, M. A. ; D. Nichol Smith, M.
A. ; A. J. Carlyle, M. A., D. Litt. ; T. Seccombe, M. A. ;
and at The Catholic University of America, courses under
Prof. P. J. Lennox, M. A., D. Litt.; Dr. Gleis and Dr.
Geary.

3 9002 00818 6042