Select English works of John Wyclif. Vol. 3. Miscellaneous works / edited from original mss. by Thomas Arnold.

No. I.

[The following short piece exists nowhere but in Knyghton's [On the question of the genuineness of Knyghton's Fifth Book, see Appendix.] Chronicle, bk. v., col. 2650. His account of it is, that after having been cited by the Pope—Gregory XI—to appear before the Archbishop of Canterbury and sundry learned doctors in the church of the Black Friars, London, Wyclif appeared there on the day appointed, renounced all his errors in order to escape death, and made the confession 'I knowleche,' &c. Now, Knyghton's narrative of these transactions, as will more clearly appear when we come to consider the longer declaration concerning the Eucharist (No. 2), is confused and inaccurate; and as Walden, who is in every way a more trustworthy guide, in his detailed narrative of these very transactions, says nothing about this confession, but does give a much longer confession in Latin, beginning 'Saepe confessus sum et adhuc confiteor' (Fasciculi, p. 115), the first part of which agrees in its general drift with the short piece we have before us, I am forced to adopt the conclusion that the short piece before us is merely an abstract in English of the longer Latin Confessio. It is difficult to imagine for what purpose such an abstract would have been made. It would not have proceeded from the Lollards, for their practice was to give to any documents or manifestos which they might be handling, not a more, but a less, 'uncertain sound;' instead of circulating as Wyclif's an English abstract of his Confessio, which was absolutely inoffensive to the hierarchy, they would have been more likely, in trans∣lating it, to exaggerate the divergence from received tenets which that paper presents. I can only conceive that some zealous and orthodox priest or friar, perhaps, like Knyghton himself, an inhabitant of Leicester, might have made this abstract of the contents of the celebrated Confessio, (for that it was celebrated, the number of answers which it called forth, and which are found in the Fasciculi, demonstrates,) in order that, being shown about to the illiterate laity, it might convince them that Wyclif had been obliged or induced to abandon his novel views on the Eucharist. It would take too much space to quote passages from the Confessio confirmatory of the opinon given above; nor is it necessary, as the Fasciculi is a book

generally accessible; but I think that a careful consideration of the two documents in connection with each other would induce most critics to take the same view.

The Confessio was written in the early summer of 1381 (Fasciculi, p. 115, note 1), William Barton being then Chancellor (Wood's History and Anti∣quities of Oxford University).

The text given here is not taken from the printed edition of Knyghton in the Decem Scriptores, but from the MSS. in the British Museum (Tiberius C. VII. and Claudius E. III.) from which Twysden originally printed the Chronicle.]

I KNOWLECHE þat þe sacrament of þe auter is verrey Goddus body in fourme of brede; but it is in anoþer maner Godus body þan it is in hevene. For in hevene it is sene fote [The use of this singular phrase, which, so far as I know, occurs nowhere else, appears to me to show clearly the connection be∣tween this piece and the Latin Con∣fessio, which I have tried to establish in the prefatory notice. In the latter, the terms 'septipedalis' and 'septipedalitas' occur several times, apparently in the same sense as that which we now give to the words 'extended' and 'extension,' used as philosophical terms. This usage appears to have grown out of the belief mentioned by Dr. Shirley (Fasciculi, p. 558) that the place in the Holy Sepulchre where Christ's body was laid was seven feet long. The substitution of 'extended' for 'sene foot' or 'seven foot' would, I think, convey the precise meaning of the writer.] in fourme and figure of flesshe and blode. But in þe sacrament Goddus body is be myracle of God in fourme of brede, and is he nouþer of seven fote, ne in mannes figure. But as a man leeves for to þenk þe kynde of an ymage, wheþer it be of oke or of asshe, and settys his þouȝt in him of whom is þe ymage, so myche more schuld a man leve to þenk on þe kynde of brede, but þenk upon Crist; for his body is þe same brede þat is þe Sacrament of þe Autere; and wiþ alle clennes, alle devo∣cion, and alle charite þat God wolde gif him, worschippe he Crist, and þan he receyves God gostly more medefully þan þe prist þat syngus the masse in lesse charite. Ffor þe bodely etyng ne profites nouth to soule, but in als mykul as þe soule is fedde with charite. Þis sentence is provyde be Crist þat may nouȝt lye. For, as þe gospel says, Crist, þat nyght þat he was betrayede of Judas Scarioth, he tok brede in hise hondes, and blesside it, brak it, and gaf it to hise disciplis to ete. Ffor he says and may not lye, Þis is my body.