Liber tertius

XINTRODUCTION.property, the real tendency is quite apparent. In this sense he says: Ifthe possessions of the Church wcre in the hands of laymen, hovv differentlythey could be divided. It would be best for the state to provideevery clergyman with food and clothin^. If there is no governmentwhich is estabUshed tor all time, ecclesiastical foundations cannot be madefor eternit}': confiscation is the fate which will one day o\ ertake theestates of the proud abbeys. What wonder is it that the churchauthorities resisted theses which threatened their possessions: and that isthe reason wh}^ suddenly the hierarchy began to oj^pose the professor,who till then had been little enough regarded.In London such doctrines soon gained ground everywhere;members of the aristocracy joined Wyclif; the people Hkcd to hear himspeak; and in manv London churches he appeared as a celebratedpreacher. But the most annoying" thing, as Walsingham tells us, was thatVVyclif proclaimed his theses briefly and bluntly, as he had written them,without in anywise limiting them. AU London was fuU of his fame. Butfor a iong- time the bishops would not hear, and the archbishop lay"in a deep sleep".Tlie first that rose against tlie bold man were members of thepossessing orders of monks, for whom Wyclifs theories could not butsome day become dangerous. They found allies also among other orders;Oxford monks began the conflict. and introduced into the polemics thatrude tone of which Wyclif complained.' Then the bishops woke up. Theywould have liked to confine the dispute to their own ground. Theysummoned Wyclif to appear at St, Paurs on February ig**', it was aThursday. He appeared after Nones. i. e. after 12 o'clock.2The issue of the affair is well known. Wyclifian tendencies arerecognisable in the threatening words which Lancaster addressed toCourtenay, Bishop of London. He would, he said, bend the Englishclergy. even were its members descended from the noblest families.1 Fasc. Zii:. 239. Loserth, „Studien zur englischen Kirchenpolitik", p. 96.2 Lechler thinks that the sitting took place before 9 o'cIock. But I do notundcrstand how he reconciles that with the fact that before the proceedings atSt. PauPs on that same day a sitting of parliamenl which Lancastcr altcnded hadtakcn place. Lechler did not see that the horae by which thc chronicler reckoncd arehorae canonicae, so that the Nona is at 12 o'clock, which makes everything fit in: inthe morning sitting of parliament, in the afternoon meeting at St. PauFs.