< the best understanding: And thus the gospel-jewel, the evangelical pearl, is thrown about, and trodden under foot of swine. However, some great and learned mèn were of opinion, there was an older translation, which must have been that above mentioned: Though it has been asserted, the first translation that was ever made of the whole Bible into the English language, as spoke after the conquest, was made by doctor Wickliffe. He and his assistants were very careful in making their translation, by correcting the Latin text, collecting the glosses, and consulting the ancient divines; after which they set about the translation, not literally, but as clearly as they could to express the sense and meaning of the text according to the Hebrew, as well as the Latin Bibles. In this he had much assistance from the commentators, and particularly from the annotations of Nicholas Lyra. They distinguished which books had the authority of holy writ, and which were apocryphal: They justified their translations; and affirmed, "that he that keepeth mekeness and charitie, hath "the trewe understandynge and perfection of holi write."

The zeal of the bishops to suppress Wickliffe's Bible only made it, as is generally the case, the more sought after. They, who were able, among the reformers, purchased copies; and they, who were not able, procured at least transcripts of particular gospels, or epistles, as their inclinations led. In after times, when Lollardy increased, and the flames were kindled, it was a common practice, to fasten about the neck of the condemned heretic, such of these scraps of scripture as were found in his possession, which generally shared his fate.

Wickliffe proceeded in detecting the errors and abuses that had crept into the church; and opposed the popish doctrine of transubstantiation, which was asserted by Radbertus about the year 820. It is confessed by the papists, that this man was the first that wrote seriously and copiously on this subject, the truth or reality of the body and blood of the eucharist.' This was contrary to the catholic doctrine that had existed near a thousand years after Christ, and particularly in the church of England according to the Saxon homilies. Wickliffe attacked this error in his divinity lectures, in 1881, and maintained the true and ancient notion of the Lord's supper. On this account he published sixteen conclusions, the first of which is, that "the consecrated host, seen upon the altar, is not "Christ, or any part of him; but an effectual sign of him." He offered to enter into a public disputation with any man

upon

upon these conclusions; which was prohibited by the religious, who were doctors in divinity; and Wickliffe then published his opinion concerning the eucharist.

In his tract de Blasphemia, he observed, that the true doctrine of the sacrament of the eucharist was retained in the church a thousand years; even till the loosing of Satan; but this opposition to the doctrine of transubstantiation soon brought Wickliffe into more difficulties; for he was attempting to eradicate a notion, that exalted the mystical and hierarchical powers of the clergy. William de Barton chancellor of the university, and eleven doctors, of whom eight were of the religious, condemned Wickliffe's conclusions as erroneous assertions. Wickliffe told the chancellor, that neither he, nor any of his assistants, were able to confute his opinion; and he appealed from their condemnation to the king.

William Courtney, bishop of London, succeeded archbishop Sudbury in the see of Canterbury, and was entirely devoted to the interest of his patron the pope. This prelate had before shewn himself a violent opposer of Wickliffe, and now proceeded against him and his followers. But as soon as the parliament met, in 1382, Wickliffe presented his appeal to the king, and both houses. Walsingham represents this, as done with a design to draw the nobility into erroneous opinions; and that it was disapproved by the duke of Lancaster, who ordered Wickliffe to speak no more of that matter. Others say, that the duke advised the doctor, not to appeal to the king, but submit to the judgment of his ordinary; upon which, the monks assert, he retracted his doctrine at Oxford, in the presence of the archbishop of Canterbury, six bishops, and many doctors, surrounded with a great concourse of people. It is true,

he openly read a confession in Latin; which was so far from being a retractation, that it seems rather a vindication of his opinion of the sacrament; for it declares his resolution. to defend it with his blood; and censures the contrary as heresy. He at large explains his meaning, how he un-. derstood the body of Christ to be in the eucharist, or sacrament of the altar; and expressly says, "this venerable "sacrament is naturally bread and wine; but is sacramen"tally the body and blood of Christ."

The new archbishop prevailed upon the king to empower the bishops to imprison heretics, without asking the royal permission: But the house of commons complained to the king, that this was a breach of the people's privileges, and very destructive to liberty; since the clergy thereby be

came

came the absolute masters of the honour and fortune of private persons. The king revoked the grant; but the revocation is not to be found on the parliament rolls, where it was expunged by the artifices of the clergy, whose chief view was to punish the Wickliffites.

The king, in 1382, married Anne of Luxemburg, sister of the emperor Wenceslaus; and this princess became a great patroness of the Wickliffites to the time of her death, which happened in 1394. But archbishop Courtney prosecuted Wickliffe, and appointed a court of select bishops, doctors and batchelors; which assembled in the monastery of the preaching friars, London. This court declared fourteen conclusions of Wickliffe, and others, heretical and

erroneous.

It is said, Wickliffe was cited to appear at this court, but was prevented by his friends, who advised him, that a plot was laid by the prelates to seize him on the road. However, his cause was undertaken by the chancellor of Oxford, the two proctors, and the greatest part of the senate, who, in a letter, sealed with the university seal, sent to the court, gave him a great commendation for his learning, piety, and orthodox faith. Doctor Nicholas Hereford, Doctor Philip Rapyngdon, and John Ayshton, M. A. were the principal followers of Wickliffe, and appeared at this court, where they defended his doctrine, as also in the convocation. Doctor Hereford afterwards took a journey to Rome, and offered, in the consistory before the pope, to defend the conclusions lately condemned by the archbishop, who committed him to prison on his return to England. It has also been said, that the duke of Lancaster deserted the Wickliffites; and that all of them, except Wickliffe, submitted to the established church. Archbishop Courtney exerted all his own authority, and all his interest at court, to punish the Wickliffites, and suppress their doctrine. He ordered the condemnation of the heretical articles to be published in the university. But Wickliffe increased in reputation, and his doctrine gained ground in the affections of the people; while he was obliged to quit his professorship, and retire to Lutterworth, where he still vindicated his doctrine, and justified his followers.

Doctor Wickliffe was seized with the palsy, in 1382, soon after he left Oxford; and the pope then cited him to appear at Rome. Wickliffe returned a letter of excuse to this citation; wherein he tells the pope, that "Christ 66 taught him more obeishe to God than to man." His enemies were sensible that his distemper would soon put

a period to his life; and therefore they permitted him to spend the remainder of his days in tranquillity, after he had been many years exposed to continual danger. He was seized with another violent fit of the palsy, on Innocents' day, 1384, as he was in the church of Lutterworth, when he fell down, never recovered his speech, and soon expired, in the sixtieth year of his age.

The Christian world has not had a greater man in these -last ages than doctor Wickliffe. He had well studied all the parts of theological learning; and he was endowed, by the grace of God, with an uncommon gravity and sanctity of manners; from whence arose that vehement desire of restoring the primitive purity of the church in that ignorant and degenerate age. His most inveterate adversaries never presumed to call in question his excellent piety, and unblemished life: But many of them have sufficiently acknowledged his great learning, and uncommon abilities. Indeed, in those writings of his which are yet remaining, doctor Wickliffe has shewn an extraordinary knowledge of the scriptures; he discovers a sound judgment, argues closely and sharply, breathes a spirit of true piety, and preserves a modesty becoming his character. Nothing is to be found in him either puerile or trifling, a fault very common to the writers of that age; but every thing he says is grave, judicious, and exact. He wanted nothing to render his learning consummate, but his living in a happier age.

The great Bradwardin was, in some sense, Wickliffe's spiritual father; for it was the perusal of Bradwardin's writings, which, next to the holy Scriptures, opened that proto-reformer's eyes to discover the genuine doctrine of faith and justification. Bradwardin taught him the nature of a true and justifying faith, in opposition to merit-mongers and pardoners, purgatory and pilgrimages.

The censure which Melancton passed on Wickliffe was made great use of by the papists: And some protestant writers have charged him with maintaining several erroneous opinions; but what Collier says of him is beneath contempt. Guthrie affects to condemn him for being a predestinarian; but he acknowledges, however, that his notions about the fopperies of religion, images, pilgrimages, legends, and the like, are many of them sensible, and most of them allowable: That his opinions with regard to the sacraments of the church, as then believed in England, are free, and such as have been adopted by many strict foreign churches: That, however immo

6

6

• derate

⚫derate he was in his principles, he appears to have been a wise and moderate man in his practice; witness his dying in peace upon his own living, amidst an universal • combustion which his tenets had raised: And that he • must be allowed to have left behind him the dawn of that • Reformation which was afterwards compleated.'

Mr Guthrie observed, that Wickliffe seems to have been a strong predestinarian.' It will presently appear (says a later writer) that he more than seemed to have been such; and that Luther and Calvin themselves were not stronger predestinarians that Wickliffe. I shall open the evidence with two propositions, extracted from his own. writings:

1. The prayer of the reprobate prevaileth for no man." 2. "All things that happen, do come absolutely of ne«cessity."

The manner in which this great harbinger of the Reformation defended the latter proposition, plainly shews him to have been (notwithstanding Guthrie's insinuation to the contrary) a deep and skilful disputant. "Our

"Lord," says he, "affirmed that such or such an event "should come to pass. Its accomplishment, therefore, "was unavoidable. The antecedent is infallible: By "parity of argument, the consequent is so too. For the "consequent is not in the power of a created being, for "as much as Christ affirmed so many things" [before they were brought to pass]. "Neither did [pre] affirm any "thing accidentally. Seeing, then, that his affirmation "was, not accidental, but necessary; it follows, that "the event affirmed by him, must be necessary likewise. "This argument," adds Wickliffe, "receives additional

strength, by observing, that, in what way soever God "may declare his will, by his after-discoveries of it in "time; still, his determination, concerning the event, took "place before the world was made: Ergo, the event will "surely follow. The necessity, therefore, of the ante"cedent, holds no less irrefragably for the necessity of "the consequent. And who can either promote or hin"der the inference, namely, That this was decreed of "God before the formation of the world." I will not undertake (says Mr Toplady) to justify the whole of this paragraph. I can only meet the excellent man half-way.

I

agree with him, as to the necessity of events: But I cannot, as he evidently did, suppose God himself to be a necessary agent, in the utmost sense of the term. That God acts in the most exact conformity to his own decrees,