Lollardy[a] was aproto-ProtestantChristian religious movement that was active in England from the mid-14th century until the 16th-centuryEnglish Reformation. It was initially led byJohn Wycliffe,[1] aCatholic theologian who was dismissed from theUniversity of Oxford in 1381 forheresy. The Lollards' demands were primarily for reform ofWestern Christianity. They formulated their beliefs in theTwelve Conclusions of the Lollards. Early it became associated withregime change uprisings and assassinations of high government officials, and was suppressed.
 | This section has multiple issues. Please helpimprove it or discuss these issues on thetalk page.(Learn how and when to remove these messages) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
|
Lollard,Lollardi, orLoller was the popular derogatory nickname given to those without an academic background, educated, if at all, mainly inEnglish, who were reputed to follow the teachings ofJohn Wycliffe in particular. By the mid-15th century, "lollard" had come to mean aheretic in general. The alternative term "Wycliffite" is generally accepted to be a more neutral term covering those of similar opinions, but having an academic background.
The term is said to have been coined by theAnglo-Irish clericHenry Crumpe, but its origin is uncertain. The earliest official use of the name in England occurs in 1387 in a mandate of theBishop of Worcester against five "poor preachers",nomine seu ritu Lollardorum confoederatos.[2] According to theOxford English Dictionary, it most likely derives fromMiddle Dutchlollaerd ("mumbler, mutterer"), from a verblollen ("to mutter, mumble"). The word is much older than its English use; there were Lollards in the Netherlands at the beginning of the 14th century who were akin to theFraticelli,Beghards, and other sectaries similar to the recusantFranciscans.[2]
Originally the Dutch word was a colloquial name for a group of buriers of the dead during theBlack Death, in the 14th century, known asAlexians, Alexian Brothers or Cellites. These were known colloquially aslollebroeders (Middle Dutch for "mumbling brothers"), orLollhorden, fromOld High German:lollon ("to sing softly"), from their chants for the dead.[3]Middle Englishloller (akin to the verbloll,lull, the English cognate of Dutchlollen "to mutter, mumble") is recorded as an alternative spelling ofLollard, while its generic meaning "a lazy vagabond, an idler, a fraudulent beggar" is not recorded before 1582.[citation needed]
Two other possibilities for the derivation ofLollard are mentioned by theOxford English Dictionary:[4]
According to scholar Margaret Aston, as Wycliffe's academic theology percolated to the masses, it changed measureably, some parts strengthening and others weakening.[6] Historian John Thomson is paraphrased "Rather than a specific creed of well thought out theological doctrine, Lollard beliefs are more aptly described as a set of consistent attitudes."[7]
With regard to theEucharist, Lollards such asJohn Wycliffe,William Thorpe andJohn Oldcastle taught a view of the mystical real presence of Christ in Holy Communion known as "consubstantiation" but did not accept the formulation oftransubstantiation, which the Roman Catholic Church required the faithful not to deny.[8][9] Wycliffite teachings on the Eucharist were declared heresy at theBlackfriars Council of 1382, and later by the Pope and theCouncil of Constance.
"The Plowman's Tale", a 16th-century Lollard poem, argues that theological debate about orthodox doctrine is less important than theReal Presence:[10]
I say sothe thorowe trewe rede
His flesh and blode, through his mastry
Is there/ in the forme of brede
Howe it is there/ it nedeth not stryve
Whether it be subgette or accydent
But as Christ was/ when he was on-lyve
So is he there verament.[11]
[In modern English:]
I say the truth through true understanding:
His flesh and blood, through his subtle works,
Is there in the form of bread.
In what manner it is present need not be debated,
Whether as subject oraccident,
But as Christ was when he was alive,
So He is truly there.[12]
William Sawtry, a priest, was reportedly burned in 1401 for his preaching that "bread remains in the same nature as before" afterconsecration by a priest. A suspect in 1517 summed up the Lollards' position: "Summe folys cummyn to churche thynckyng to see the good Lorde – what shulde they see there but bredde and wyne?"[13][14]
In the mid 15th century a priest named Richard Wyche was accused of false doctrine that corrupted the faith of Northumbrians, and left a letter detailing his version of the inquisitional proceedings, where a succession of theologians and others attempted to convince him of the Catholic position or to find some compromise wording that involved him not denying transubstantiation.[15] When asked about transubstantiation during his questioning, he repeated only his belief in the Real Presence.[16] When asked if the host was still bread even after consecration, he answered only: "I believe that the host is the real body of Christ in the form of bread". Throughout his questioning he insisted that he was "not bound to believe otherwise than Holy Scripture says" and resorted to various loopholes. Following the questioning, he claimed he had been allowed to swear an oath on his heart;[15] later his inquisitors denied this, saying he had sworn a different oath, which would have actually freed him; his denial of having taken that oath was taken as a re-canting by the bishop, preventing his attempted appeal to the Pope, so he was excommunicated, defrocked, imprisoned and eventually executed.[16][17]
Lollard teachings on the Eucharist are attested to in numerous primary source documents. It is the fourth of theTwelve Conclusions and the first of theSixteen Points on which the Bishops accuse Lollards. It is discussed inThe Testimony of William Thorpe, theApology for Lollard Doctrines,[18]Jack Upland, andOpus Arduum.[19]
The Lollards did not believe that the church practices ofbaptism andconfession were necessary forsalvation.
Believing in auniversal priesthood, the Lollards challenged the Church's authority to invest or to deny the divine authority to make a man a priest. Denying any special status to the priesthood, Lollards thoughtconfession to a priest was unnecessary since according to them priests did not have the ability to forgive sins. However, while it is beneficial to confess to a good priest, it is perilous to confess to a bad one.[20]: Art.9 Lollards challenged the practice ofclerical celibacy and believed priests should not holdgovernment positions as such temporal matters would likely interfere with their spiritual mission.
They considered praying to saints andhonouring of their images to be a form of idolatry. Oaths, fasting and prayers for the dead were thought to have noscriptural basis. They had a poor opinion of the trappings of the Catholic Church, including holy water, bells, organs, and church buildings. They rejected the value ofpapal pardons.[21]
One group of Lollards petitioned Parliament with theTwelve Conclusions of the Lollards by posting them on the doors of Westminster Hall in February 1395. While by no means a central statement of belief of the Lollards, the Twelve Conclusions reveal certain basic Lollard ideas.
Later, an expanded version the "Thirty Seven Conclusions" or "Remonstrances" was submitted in the late 1390s; the author is not known.[23]
Lollardy was a religion ofvernacular scripture.[21] Lollards opposed many practices of the Catholic church.Anne Hudson has written that a form ofsola scriptura underpinned Wycliffe's beliefs, but distinguished it from the more radical ideology that anything not permitted by scripture is forbidden. Instead, Hudson notes that Wycliffe'ssola scriptura held theBible to be "the only valid source of doctrine and the only pertinent measure of legitimacy."[24]
Later Lollards believed that people deserved access to a copy of their own Bible. Many attempted to distribute English copies. Due to the lack of a printing press and low literacy levels, it was difficult to accomplish this goal.[25]
However, a notable feature of some Lollard inquisitions was the common claim of illiteracy, or vision impairment, as a defence against the suspicion of Lollardy raised by possession of suspect vernacular texts.[6]: 495
Despite popular beliefs to the contrary:
"There is no doubt that the Lollards (as Wycliffe's followers were called) were persecuted, but it does not appear that the possession, use, or manufacture of an English version of the Bible was one of the charges specially urged against them. The subject is not raised in the extant list of articles upon which the suspected were to be questioned."
— Fredrick Kenyon,Our Bible and the ancient manuscripts, 1903[26]: 206
Lollards did not observefasting and abstinence in the Catholic Church. Inheresy proceedings againstMargery Baxter it was presented as evidence that a servant girl foundbacon in a pot ofoatmeal on the first Saturday ofLent. Non-observance of dietary restrictions was used as evidence of heresy in anotherNorfolk case against Thomas Mone, where it was alleged that a piglet was eaten forEaster dinner when eating meat was forbidden.[27]
Special vows were considered to be in conflict with the divine order established by Christ and were regarded asanathema.[28]
Lollards had a tendency towardiconoclasm.[citation needed]
Some Lollards believed work was permissible on Sundays.[6]
Sixteenth-centurymartyrologistJohn Foxe reduced the main beliefs of Lollardy to four, to an extent eliding the Wycliffite doctrine ofdominium, claiming they were:
Although Lollardy was denounced as aheresy by the Catholic Church, initially Wycliffe and the Lollards were sheltered by politically-influential noblemanJohn of Gaunt and other anti-clerical nobility, who may have wanted to use Lollard-advocated clerical reform to acquire new sources of revenue from England's monasteries. TheUniversity of Oxford also protected Wycliffe and similar academics on the grounds of academic freedom and, initially, allowed such persons to retain their positions despite their controversial views.
Two primary religious opponents of the Wycliffites wereArchbishop of CanterburyWilliam Courtenay and his successorThomas Arundel, assisted by bishops likeHenry le Despenser ofNorwich, whom the chroniclerThomas Walsingham praised for his zeal.[30]
Historian T. Waugh suggests the Lollard movement was small with little appeal to the upper classes, who liked the anti-clerical politics but not the religious doctrines. "Notices of Lollardy after the death of Wycliffe are scattered and meagre. Sixteenth century Protestantism invested the Lollards with a posthumous renown, but there can be little doubt that, when their first energy had spent itself, they speedily became an obscure sect, destitute of living leaders, and vaguely re-echoing the teaching of a deceased founder whom they only half understood."[31]
The initial Lollards were a small group of scholars, particularly atMerton College, Oxford University, some with important positions, who came under the influence of Wycliffe in the 1360s and 1370s. After Wycliffe's natural death, all of them eventually submitted to Archbishop of CanterburyWilliam Courtenay to renounce Wycliffe's contentious doctrines, and none suffered long-term consequences.[32]: ch9 These notably includedNicholas Hereford, who is usually named as the translator of most of the Old Testament of the WycliffeanMiddle English Bible.
Lollards first faced serious persecution after thePeasants' Revolt in 1381. While Wycliffe and other Lollards opposed the revolt, one of the peasants' leaders,John Ball, preached Lollardy. Prior to 1382, Wycliffite beliefs were tolerated in government as they endorsed inroyal superiority to bishops.[clarification needed] However, the government and royals were hesitant, as they did not want to encourage subjects to criticize religious powers.[25]
After 1382, royalty and nobility found Lollardy to be a threat not only to the Church, but to English society in general. The Lollards' small measure of protection evaporated. This change in status was also affected by the departure ofJohn of Gaunt (Duke of Lancaster, patron ofChaucer and protector ofJohn Wycliffe) who left England in 1386 to pursue theCrown of Castile.
Paul Strohm has asked: "Was the Lollard a genuine threat or a political pawn, agent of destabilising challenge, or a hapless threat of self-legitimizing Lancastrian discourse?"[33]
A group of gentry active during the reign ofRichard II (1377–99) were known as "Lollard Knights" either during or after their lives due to their acceptance of Wycliffe's claims.Henry Knighton, in his Chronicle, identifies the principal Lollard Knights as Thomas Latimer, John Trussell, Lewis Clifford, Sir John Peche (son ofJohn Peche of Wormleighton), Richard Storey, and Reginald Hilton.Thomas Walsingham's Chronicle adds William Nevil andJohn Clanvowe to the list, and other potential members of this circle have been identified by their wills, which contain Lollard-inspired language about how their bodies are to be plainly buried and permitted to return to the soil whence they came.
There is little indication that the Lollard Knights were specifically known as such during their lifetimes. They were men of discretion, and unlike SirJohn Oldcastle years later, rarely gave any hint of open rebellion. However, they displayed a remarkable ability to retain important positions, without falling victim to the prosecutions of Wycliffe's followers during their lifetimes.
Religious and secular authorities strongly opposed Lollardy. In eventual response to the revolting Lollards, the lawDe heretico comburendo was enacted in 1401 during the reign ofHenry IV; traditionally heresy had been defined as an error in theological belief, but this statute equated theologicalheresy withsedition against political rulers.[33]
By the early 15th century, stern measures were undertaken by Church and state which drove Lollardy underground. One such measure was the 1410 burning at the stake ofJohn Badby, a layman and craftsman who refused to renounce his Lollardy. He was the first layman to suffercapital punishment in England for the crime of heresy.
John Oldcastle, a close friend ofHenry V of England and the basis forFalstaff in theShakespearean historyHenry IV, Part 1, was brought to trial in 1413 after evidence of his Lollard beliefs was uncovered. Oldcastle escaped from theTower of London and organized an insurrection, which included an attempted kidnapping of the king. The rebellion failed, and Oldcastle was executed.Oldcastle's revolt made Lollardy seem even more threatening to the state, and persecution of Lollards became more severe.
An insurrection was nipped in the bud in 1428, feared to involve several thousand Lollards, intent on "destroying the English church."[6]: 769 It was associated with Lollard missionary William White.
Lollards were effectively absorbed intoProtestantism during theEnglish Reformation, in which Lollardy played a role. Since Lollards had been underground for more than a hundred years, the extent of Lollardy and its ideas at the time of the Reformation is uncertain and a point of debate.[34][35][36] Ancestors ofBlanche Parry, the closest person toElizabeth I for 56 years, and ofBlanche Milborne, who raised Edward VI and Elizabeth I, had Lollard associations.[37]
Many critics of the Reformation, includingThomas More, equated Protestants with Lollards. Leaders of theEnglish Reformation, including ArchbishopThomas Cranmer, referred to Lollardy as well, andBishop Cuthbert Tunstall of London calledLutheranism the "foster-child" of the Wycliffite heresy.[38] Scholars debate whether Protestants actually drew influence from Lollardy, or whether they referred to it to create a sense of tradition. Late Lollards had little direct connection to Wycliffe's ideas.[39]
Othermartyrs for the Lollard cause were executed during the next century, including theAmersham Martyrs in the early 1500s andThomas Harding in 1532, one of the last Lollards to be persecuted. A gruesome reminder of this persecution is the 'Lollards Pit' in Thorpe Wood, nowThorpe Hamlet, Norwich, Norfolk, "where men are customablie burnt",[40] includingThomas Bilney.
Despite the debate about the extent of Lollard influence there are ample records of the persecution of Lollards from this period. In theDiocese of London, there are records of about 310 Lollards being prosecuted or forced to abjure from 1510 to 1532. In Lincoln diocese, 45 cases against Lollardy were heard in 1506–1507. In 1521, there were 50 abjurations and 5 burnings of Lollards.[clarification needed] In 1511,Archbishop Warham presided over the abjuration of 41 Lollards from Kent and the burning of 5.[41]
In 1529,Simon Fish wrote an incendiary pamphletSupplication for the Beggars, including his denial ofpurgatory and teachings that priestlycelibacy was an invention of theAntichrist. He argued that earthly rulers have the right to strip Church properties, and thattithing was against theGospel, Protestant views that echo the Wycliffite/Lollard teaching.[42][43] He advocated closing of all monasteries, and notably provided economic estimates of the revenues of various monastic and church institutions.
The extent of Lollardy in the general populace at this time is unknown. The prevalence of Protestanticonoclasm in England suggests Lollard ideas may still have had some popular influence ifHuldrych Zwingli was not the source, as Lutheranism did not advocate iconoclasm. Lollards were persecuted again between 1554 and 1559 during theRevival of the Heresy Acts under the CatholicMary I, which specifically suppressed heresy and Lollardy.
The similarity between Lollards and later English Protestant groups, such as theBaptists,Puritans, andQuakers, also suggests some continuation of Lollard ideas through the Reformation.[44]
The Roman Catholic Church used art as an anti-Lollard weapon. Lollards were represented onmisericords asfoxes dressed as monks or priests preaching to a flock ofgeese.[45] These representations alluded to the story of the preaching fox found in popular medieval literature such asThe History ofReynard the Fox andThe Shifts of Raynardine. The fox lured the geese closer and closer with its eloquent words, until it was able to snatch a victim to devour. The moral of the story being that foolish people are seduced by false teachers.
One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Lollards".Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.On the dating of "The Plowman's Tale", see Andrew N. Warn, "The Genesis of The Plowman's Tale, Yearbook of English Studies 2" 1972
| 400–1100 AD |
| | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1100–1400 AD |
| |||||
| 1400–1500 AD |
| |||||
| Events | ||||||
| Literature | ||||||
| Other | ||||||
Italics indicate their inclusion to be controversial or disputed. | ||||||
