Tony Tew

THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF JOHN WYCLIFFE
One Bishop, the Bishop of Rome, sat in supremacy at the top of religious and civil authorities.
A schism occurred in which there were, at one point, three rival popes.
The Latin clergymen in England, together with the monks, had been corrupted by greed and engaged in simony, collecting money in exchange for sacraments.
Celibacy was mandatory for clergy.
The Franciscan ideal of poverty had been widely accepted as a sign of true spirituality.
The vast majority of the laity were poorly educated in contrast to the wealthy and clergymen.
Consquently, the authority of the clergy could more easily remain unchecked by the criticism of the laity.
The Bible and the services of the Church were all in Latin, apart from the preaching.
The teachings of purgatory, the satisfaction theory of atonement, and the merits of saints were standard in the Latin Church.
Indulgences were being sold as means of reducing the temporal punishment of sins.
While the Latin Church used images, it lacked the Orthodox teaching regarding their rationale.
The teachings of the Church were filtered through the predestinarian teachings of Augustine of Hippo.
The teachings of the Church were framed in the terms of the scholasticism of Thomas Aquinas.
The Mystery of Holy Communion had been “explained” in Aristotelian terms as “Transubstantiation.”

JOHN WYCLIFFE’S PROPOSALS TO CORRECT ABUSES AND CORRUPTION
Wycliffe challenged the supremacy of the pope of Rome by proposing the authority of the Scriptures as supreme, by denying any scriptural justification for the existence of a papacy, and by teaching the supremacy of the king over the priesthood. He further challenged the authority of the clergy by drawing a distinction between the corrupt “visible” church and the “invisible church” comprised of “those predestined to be saved,” according to the teaching of Augustine of Hippo. He further attacked the rich clergy by holding forth poverty as a sign of true spirituality. He pushed for the dissolution of monasteries. He disapproved of clerical celibacy. He attacked indulgences by denying the “scriptural validity” of the doctrine of purgatory and the idea of transferable merits of the saints. He oversaw the translation of the Bible into the vernacular for the religious education of the laity and so offset the power differential between clergy and laity. He rejected prayer to the saints as being “unscriptural.” He rejected the Thomist teaching of “Transubstantiation,” teaching rather that the bread of the Eucharist remains bread, becoming only a sacramental sign of the Body of Christ, but not the reality of the Body of Christ. Finally, he resorted to condemning his critics as being partners with the Antichrist.

ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN CRITIQUE OF JOHN WYCLIFFE AND THE LATIN PECULIARITIES HE OPPPOSED
The Bible is a Holy Book, but it cannot speak for itself. It must be read and be interpreted in order to have any influence. Although we can appeal to the Gospels as supreme within the canon of Scripture, we must also recognize that even the Gospels must be read and interpreted in order to exert influence. Even the Gospels were written by members of the Church. The Church identified which scriptures were considered "canonical." On these accounts, it would be incorrrect to say with Wycliffe that the Scriptures are supreme. As Orthodox Christians, we would deny the supremacy of any state over the Church. Nevertheless, Orthodox Christians would agree with Wycliffe in opposing papal claims to supremacy and they, along with Wycliffe, would certainly appeal to Scripture in their denial of papal supremacy and the more modern doctrine of papal infallibility. The Orthodox Church would oppose the more Gnostic distinction between the visible and the invisible churches that Wycliffe makes. The Orthodox Church rejects many of Augustine's ideas about predestination and considers them not to be representative of Orthodox tradition. Therefore, the Orthodox Church does not accept later developments of Augustinian predestination as seen in Wycliffe and John Calvin. Poverty can be a good thing though certainly not a required sign of true spirituality. Saint Mary Magdalene and Saint Joseph of Arimathaia were both wealthy and are numbered among the saints. The monastic life offers the possibility and challenge of a more angelic way of life. Its corruption by greed does not invalidate the many goods arising from monastic and ascetical pursuits. In his desire to fight corruption, John Wycliffe often sought not to reform, but rather complete rejection of many of the ancient traditions of the Church. Orthodox Christians would agree that Wycliffe was right to question the mandated clerical celibacy of the Latin Church which was instituted after the Great Schism of A.D. 1054. The idea of indulgences was never widely accepted in the Eastern Christian Churches and Wycliffe was right to question it. Likewise, the Orthodox Church has not accepted the Anselmian satisfaction theory of atonement which casts the crucifixion of Christ as an act intended to appease the just wrath of God the Father against a sinful world. Connected to this doctrine is the teaching regarding a kind of "heavenly bank account" of the merits of the saints from which the living can make withdrawals to assuage the just "temporal punishment" incurred by venial sins. The education of the laity ought to be an important value in the Church. The services of the Orthodox Church are instructive, offering a mode of experiential learning. It makes sense to have these services and the Scriptures in the vernacular. Despite this valuing of education, however,, what was once the vernacular has often become an ancient, ecclesiastical language over the passage of time. Liturgical renovation is a periodic need of the Churches in order to improve the comprehension and education of the laity which ought to be taking place in the liturgical services of the Church. The laity has always been an important and necessary part of the Orthodox Church in contrast to the common practice among the Latins, at times, especially pre-Vatican II, to identify "the Church" as the magisterium of bishops and cardinals in union with the Pope. The ancient Orthodox practice of requesting the intercessions of the saints is integral part of the ancient doctrine of the Communion of the Saints in the Holy Spirit. This doctrine is reflected in the Writings of the Orthodox Church, including the Holy Scriptures. Orthodox Christians understand that we are surrounded by "a great cloud of witnesses" and that we stand in the presence of myriads of angels and the spirits of righteous people who have been perfected (Hebrews 12:1, 23). The saints assist us by their prayers because they, like all Orthodox Christians, are members of Christ, the Mediator, and participate in His ministry of intercession for all people. In this context, it is only natural to request the prayers of the saints. Like Thomas Aquinas, John Wycliffe is mistaken in his attempt to explain the Mystery of Holy Communion by human reason. The Apostle Paul is very clear: "The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" (I Corinthians 10:16). By contrast, if the bread and wine are just symbols, then Holy Communion is not a participation in the reality they symbolize. In that case, Christians would not have an altar, even though the Apostle says we do (Hebrews 13:10). Whoever denies an actual partaking of the body and blood of Christ in Holy Communion runs the risk of being "guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord" (I Corinthians 11:27) and "eats and drinks condemnation on himself, not discerning the Lord's Body" (I Cor 11:29). Wycliffe was right to condemn the corruption he saw in the Latin Church, but he went too far, condemning ancient Orthodox Catholic Tradition in the process.… (más)