different documents which are preserved in the archives of this college, and which have all a bearing upon the fact that Wiclif, as "Magister seu Custos Aula de Balliolo,' takes possession, in name of the college, of the already mentioned incumbency of Abbotesley in the county of Huntingdon, which had been incorporated with the foundation." From these documents it appears that Wiclif must already before this date have been Master or Warden of Balliol; and yet it cannot have been long previously that he acquired the diguity, for in November 1356 the name of Robert of Derby occurs as master. Nor was even he Wiclif's immediate predecessor, but another whose name was William of Kingston. Three of these documents, dated 7th, 8th, and 9th April 1361, have immediate relation to the Act of Incorporation itself, while the fourth document, dated July in the same year, is that along with which Wiclif, as master, sent to the Bishop of Lincoln, John Gynwell, the Papal bull wherein. the incorporation was sanctioned. But before this last date. Wiclif had been nominated by his college, 16th May 1361, to be Rector of Fillingham. This is a small parish in the county of Lincoln, lying ten miles north north-west from the city of Lincoln. This appointment did not imply that Wiclif immediately thereafter left the University and lived entirely in the country, in order to devote himself to pastoral duties. This does not appear to have been contemplated in the nomination. Agreeably to law and usage prevalent at the period, he remained after as before, a member of the University, with all the powers and privileges belonging to him as such; and without doubt he continued, for all important purposes, to reside in Oxford. What provision he made for the work of the parish, perhaps by the appointment of a curate, and whether, perhaps, during the recesses of the

University he resided regularly in Fillingham, in order to discharge his pastoral duties in person-these are points. which we are obliged to leave undecided. But it is matter of fact that an entry exists in the Acts of the See of Lincoln, to which diocese Fillingham belonged, from which it appears that Wiclif applied for and obtained in 1368 the consent of his bishop to an absence of two years from his parish church of Fillingham, in order to devote himself to the studies of Oxford." It may be conjectured that he had obtained similar leave of non-residence on previous occasions, in each instance for a like period of two years.

On the other hand, his nomination to the rectorship of a landward parish made it a necessity that he should relinquish the mastership of Balliol. That this took place in point of fact may be inferred from a circumstance of which documentary proof still exists in the account-books of Queen's College, that Wiclif, in October 1363, and for several years afterwards, paid rent for an apartment in the buildings of that college. We know, besides, from other sources, that in 1366 a certain John Hugate was Master of Balliol.

During the twenty years which we have in view in the present chapter, Wiclif's work in Oxford was twofold, partly scientific, as a man of scholastic learning, and partly practical, as a member, and for some time president of a college, and also as Magister regens in the general body of the University. That he did not apply himself continuously to pastoral labours in Fillingham (from 1361) may be assumed with certainty. With respect to his scientific labours, he commenced while yet only a master in the faculty of Arts by giving disputations and lectures on philosophical subjects, particularly in Logic. From many passages of his extant manuscript works it appears that he gave courses

of such lectures with zeal and success. But from the time when he became Bachelor of Theology, he was at liberty to deliver theological lectures in addition—i.e., only, in the first instance, on the Biblical books, not on the Sentences of the Lombard, which latter privilege was reserved exclusively for the higher grades of Bachelorship and the Doctors of Theology. But the Biblical lectures which he delivered, it may be conjectured, proved of the greatest use to himself, for, in teaching the Scriptures to others, he first learned the true meaning of them himself (docendo discimus); so that these lectures unconsciously served as a preparation for his later labours as a Reformer.

But Wiclif had also the opportunity of acquiring practical ability, and of making himself useful, by taking part as a Fellow of Merton College in the administration of that society. Doubtless, the fruitfulness and utility of his activity in this position contributed essentially to bring about his appointment to the headship of Balliol. What was chiefly valued in him in this relation appears in the clearest manner from the document by which the Archbishop of Canterbury, Simon Islip, an earlier fellow-student of his, appointed Wiclif to the Presidency of "Canterbury Hall." The archbishop gives as his reason for this nomination, apart from Wiclif's learning and estimable life, his practical qualifications of fidelity, circumspection, and diligence.”

SECTION II.-Wiclif as Head of Canterbury Hall and
Doctor of Theology.

IN the meantime, as has just been mentioned by anticipation, Wiclif had been appointed to the headship of a small newly-founded college. But this position also, without any

blame on his part, proved to be one of only short duration. We mean the position of Warden of Canterbury Halla point in his biography, however, which is attended with more than one historical difficulty. Up till 1840 it was the universally received understanding that Wiclif was for some time head of this new hall.

Simon Islip, Archbishop of Canterbury, founded a Hall in Oxford which should bear the name of the Archiepiscopal See. Its first warden was a monk of violent character named Woodhall, under whom there was no end of contention among the members; to remedy which the Archbishop removed Woodhall from the headship, and replaced three other members, who were monks, by secular priests. In 1365 he appointed "John of Wiclif" to be second warden, and entrusted to him the oversight of the eleven scholars, who were now all seculars. But in the following spring (26th April 1366), the active Archbishop Islip deceased, and was succeeded, as Primate of England, in 1367, by Simon Langham, a man who had previously been a monk, and continued to cherish a thoroughly monastic spirit. By him Wiclif was deposed from his wardenship, and the three members who had been introduced along with him were removed from the college. Langham restored Woodhall to the headship, and the three monks who had been deprived along with him were once more made members. Wiclif and the three Fellows appealed from the Archbishop to the Pope, but the process proved an uncommonly protracted one, and ended in 1370 with the rejection of Wiclif and his fellow-appellants, and with the confirmation of their opponents in their several places.

The termination of this affair exceeds by several years the limit of the present period of Wiclif's life; but for the sake

VOL. I.

L

of connection we shall dispose of the whole subject in the present place. From the fourteenth century down to our own time, this chapter of Wiclif's history has been turned to polemical use against him by his literary adversaries. They knew how to attribute his antagonistic tendencies, and especially his attacks upon the Pope and the monastic system, to motives of petty personal revenge for the losses which he had incurred on this occasion, and thus to damage his character and fair fame. We shall, therefore, have to inquire whether this imputation is well-grounded or not, keeping before us, however, here as always, the truth as our highest aim.

We might, indeed, have entirely dispensed with the elucidation, if it could be shown that this whole account had been smuggled into the biography of the precursor of the Reformation only by confounding him with another individual of the same name. This view of the subject has, in fact, been recently entertained and defended with no inconsiderable amount of learning and acutenesss. It is due to truth, however, at once to state that it was by no means the design of the scholars whom we have now in our eye in this investigation, to offer any defence against these imputations, but simply and solely to bring to the light the historical facts of the case as they really occurred.

The historico-critical difficulties which have here to be solved, may be comprised in two questions:

1. Is John Wiclif, the Warden of Canterbury Hall, identical with Wiclif the precursor of the Reformation, or is he not?

2. Was the appointment of Wiclif to the headship of the Hall, and of those three secular priests or members of the same, contrary to the terms of the foundation, or not?