Wyclif’s Latin works

De ecclesia, chapter 1, part 7

The elect are one person; Armagh’s objection of many heads

Loserth pp. 20.18–22.5

¶120.18–22.5

20Sed oportet sic opinantes negare maiorem partem scripture sacre et specialiter magnum sacramentum de Christo atque ecclesia de quo loquitur apostolus Ephesiis V°, 32. Immo oportet sic loquentem negare omnem particularem ecclesiam, cum particulare non dicitur nisi in comparacione ad totale et universale. Ideo negata universali et totali ecclesia neganda foret quelibet particularis ecclesia, vel aliter dicendum foret quod Deus cognoscit mille universales ecclesias: quod esset summe hereticum, quia nedum sentiret contra ecclesiam sed omnino destrueret ecclesiam et singulas leges eius. Sic ergo error in logica scripture quem diabolus introducit ad cecandum mentes fidelium, facit filios eius prorumpere in conclusiones multas blasphemas ex quibus mater ecclesia perturbatur. Nam sancti doctores dicunt concorditer quod omnes electi a principio mundi usque ad diem iudicii sunt una 21persona que est mater ecclesia, ut patet per beatum Gregorium XXIII° Moralium primo capitulo supra illo Job XIX°, 25, Scio quod redemptor meus vivit. Sciendum inquit quod redemptor noster unam personam se cum sua ecclesia quam assumpsit exhibuit. De ipso enim dicitur: Qui est caput Christus. Rursumque de eius ecclesia scriptum est: Et corpus Christi quod est ecclesia. Et sequitur: Quod Christum inquit, et ecclesiam unam personam credimus, hoc eciam unius persone actibus significari videamus. Et idem dicit XIX° Moralium cap. IX et IV° Moralium cap. IX. De illa siquidem ecclesia cuius Christus est caput (secundum testimonium huius sancti pape) suppono quod fiat nobis sermo. Et patet quod, si christianus foret caput illius ecclesie, tunc vel haberet multa capita quod negat decretalis, vel aliter christianus foret Christo superior. Non enim est color quod quilibet qui est caput partis ecclesie sit caput illius ecclesie, quia tunc nedum dominus papa sed quilibet uxoratus et omne caput bestie foret caput ecclesie, et sic (ut sophiste concedunt) ecclesia haberet monstruosissime caput et membra quotlibet asinina; quod foret nimis sophisticum. Videamus ergo racionem secundum quam Christus dicetur singulariter caput tocius sponse sue post diem iudicii, et patebit luce clarius quod nemo alius potest esse caput illius ecclesie. Sed obicitur per dominum Ardmacanum libro VII°, De Questionibus Armenorum cap. VI, ubi videtur tenere quod idem corpus habet multa capita subordinata, 22sicut idem populus habet multos dominos, unum subordinatum alteri (sicut patet in materia civili). Et sic videtur dicere quod eadem ecclesia habet multa capita ordinata secundum inferius atque superius.

But those who hold this opinion must deny the greater part of holy scripture, and especially the great sacrament of Christ and the churchecclesia: church, of which the apostle speaks in Ephesians 5:32.1 Indeed, one who speaks so must deny every particular church, since "particular" is said only in comparison to the total and universal. Therefore, if the universal and total church is denied, every particular church would have to be denied; or else it would have to be said that God knows a thousand universal churches: which would be supremely heretical, since it would not only think against the church but would utterly destroy the church and each of its laws.2 So, therefore, the error in the logic of scripture which the devil brings in to blind the minds of the faithful makes his sons break out into many blasphemous conclusions, by which mother church is troubled.3 For the holy doctors say with one accord that all the elect from the beginning of the world to the day of judgement are one 21person, which is mother church, as is clear through the blessed Gregory, Moralia XXIII, the first chapter, on Job 19:25, "I know that my Redeemer liveth." "It is to be known," he says, "that our Redeemer has shown himself one person with his church, which he assumed. For of him it is said: 'who is the head, even Christ'. And again of his church it is written: 'and the body of Christ, which is the church'." And he goes on: "What we believe," he says, "that Christ and the church are one person, let us see signified also in the acts of one person."4 And the same [Gregory] says [this] in Moralia XIX, chapter 9, and Moralia IV, chapter 9. It is of that church, indeed, whose head is Christ (according to the testimony of this holy pope), that I suppose our discourse to be.5

And it is clear that, if a Christian were head of that church, then either it would have many heads, which the decretal denies, or else a Christian would be superior to Christ. For there is no colour [for saying] that whoever is head of a part of the church is head of that church; for then not only the lord popepapa: pope but every married man, and every beast’s head, would be head of the church; and so (as the sophists grant) the church would most monstrously have a head and any number of asinine members; which would be too sophistical.6 Let us see, therefore, the reason according to which Christ will be called singularly the head of his whole bridesponsa / sponsus: bride / bridegroom after the day of judgement, and it will be clearer than light that no one else can be head of that church.7 But it is objected, by appeal to the lord of Armagh, in book 7 On the Questions of the Armenians, chapter 6, where he seems to hold that the same body has many subordinate heads, 22as the same people has many lords, one subordinate to another (as is clear in civil matters). And so he seems to say that the same church has many heads, ordered as lower and higher.8

Notes

  1. 1 Eph. 5:32, DR "This is a great sacrament: but I speak in Christ and in the church"; a reference, not a quotation. Sic opinantes: the third party at the end of the last part, who say the universal church is not yet. B’s margin: Eph. V.
  2. 2 Sentiret … destrueret: the subject is the one who so speaks (or his saying); the escalation is from thinking against the church to destroying it.
  3. 3 Filios eius: the devil’s sons (cf. John 8:44), not the sons of the faithful. Error in logica scripture: an error in construing scripture’s own terms, here "universal" and "particular" church.
  4. 4 Gregory, Moralia XXIII.1 (Loserth: Opp., ed. Maur., I, 731); PL 76:251C–D, XXIII.1.2. Loserth notes that the MSS read cum sua where Gregory has sancta ("with holy church"), as the PL confirms; we translate the print. Et sequitur skips a clause of Gregory’s. Job 19:25, Vg Scio enim (Wyclif lacks enim); Eph. 4:15, DR "who is the head, even Christ"; Col. 1:24, Vg pro corpore eius, quod est ecclesia, here corpus Christi, and we translate the Latin. Et sequitur is not an inference: "and he goes on". B’s margins: Ecclesia est persona.
  5. 5 Moralia XIX.9 and IV.9: Wyclif’s references, which do not locate the doctrine; it is stated at XIX.14.22 (PL 76:110C, Christum et Ecclesiam unam esse personam). Suppono … sermo: Wyclif fixes the subject term of his argument.
  6. 6 Decretalis: Unam sanctam, the decretal of the chapter’s second conclusion, which denies the church two heads "like a monster" (Friedberg II, 1245–46). Color: a plausible ground (the glossary). The reductio: if heading any part sufficed, every husband (head of his wife) and every beast’s head would head the church. Sophisticum: the sophists’ kind of conclusion, absurd but granted.
  7. 7 Dicetur is future: after the judgement, when the church is wholly triumphant, Christ alone will be called its head; the reason for that will show who is head now.
  8. 8 Richard FitzRalph, archbishop of Armagh (d. 1360), Summa de quaestionibus Armenorum (Loserth identifies him, citing a Vienna MS); book 7, c. 6 is Wyclif’s reference, not independently checked. Obicitur per: "it is objected, by appeal to" (cf. the glossary arguitur per). A and B margins: Obieccio. Ardmacanus.
How the Latin of this chapter was established
  • Plate readings; page · reading · note):
    • 20: a (print: 'electi a principio mundi'; the a stands before principio)
    • 20: principio (box word is principio (read with 9.1 a / 9.3 ∅ = 'a principio mundi'))
    • 20: ∅ (nothing between principio and mundi; principio is pos 256)
    • 21: persona (130d is the folio mark)
    • 21: Qui
    • 21: Quod
    • 21: unam
    • 20: iudicii
    • 20: V°, 32. (print has verse 32 after chapter (confirmed on leaf n0057)) [-VERSE]
  • 21.5 cum sua: so the MSS; Loserth: "recte: sancta" (note 4).
  • Variants noted but not affecting the English: 21.8 B qui est; 22.1 B lacks multos.