Wyclif’s Latin works

De ecclesia, chapter 16, part 1

The first argument for Silvester’s endowment, and the form of the donation

Loserth pp. 359.6–363.12

¶1359.6–359.13

359Post hec dubia respondendum est ad magistrales argucias quas doctores obiciunt contra dicta. Arguitur primo quod beatus Silvester, recipiendo dotacionem perpetuam ecclesie pro se et suis successoribus nullo modo peccavit, et libenter acceptarem argumenta ad istam partem, quia quamvis neutram partem asseram, pars tamen isti opposita est mihi credibilior.

After these doubts, reply must be made to the masterly stratagemsargucie; argucia: stratagems, quibbles; a quibble which the doctors raise as objections against what has been said. It is argued first that blessed Silvester, in receiving the perpetual endowmentdotacio: endowment of the churchecclesia: church for himself and his successors, in no way sinned; and I would gladly accept arguments for that side, because although I assert neither side, yet the side opposed to it is more credible to me.1

¶2359.14–360.2

359Prima itaque racio sic formatur: quam licite recipiunt sancti elemosinas pro relevandis indigenciis presentis vite, tam licite ipsas elemosinas servant idem sancti distribuendas indigentibus in perpetuum. Non enim videtur racio diversitatis quin, si licet recipere elemosinas propter indigenciam propriam relevandam, a pari erit licitum ipsas elemosinas sic collatas propter indigenciam futuram perpetuo conservare; ergo si licet indigenti recipere elemosinas propter se relevandum et hoc absque peccato, a pari licet conservare elemosinas sic receptas in perpetuum ad usus pauperum absque peccato. Sed beatus Silvester in faciendo sibi licitum simpliciter nullo modo verisimiliter peccavit; ergo beatus Silvester in retinendo dotacionem 360perpetuam ecclesie nullo modo verisimiliter peccavit.

The first reason, then, is framed thus: as lawfully as the saints receive almselemosina: alms for relieving the needs of the present life, so lawfully do the same saints keep those alms to be distributed to the needy in perpetuity. For there seems to be no reason for a difference why, if it is lawful to receive alms in order to relieve one’s own need, it will not by parity be lawful to keep in perpetuity the alms so conferred on account of future need; therefore if it is lawful for a needy man to receive alms in order to relieve himself, and this without sin, by parity it is lawful to keep alms so received in perpetuity for the uses of the poor without sin.2 Now blessed Silvester, in doing what was lawful to him without qualificationsimpliciter / secundum quid: without qualification / in a certain respect, in all likelihood in no way sinned; therefore blessed Silvester, in retaining the 360perpetual endowment of the church, in all likelihood in no way sinned.3

¶3360.3–362.27

360Quantum ad istud argumentum, non oportet respondere ad formam, nec vidi probacionem assumpti, cum Christus recepit elemosinas temporales, sicut et apostoli ab ipso receperant pro temporali indigencia pauperum relevanda (ut patet Joh. VI°), et tamen non legitur apostolos recepisse elemosinas pro pauperibus perpetue conservandas. Et quantum ad illud brogardicum, ergo per idem vel questionem vagam que est ultimum refugium simplicis arguentis qua queritur que sit racio diversitatis, retorqueo utrumque in arguentem. Si Christus docuit nos in suis apostolis non solicitari in crastinum, quia sufficit diei malicia sua, Matthei VI°, 34, et non videtur racio, quare non preciperet eis providere de elemosinacione perpetua, per idem preciperet eis providere de elemosinacione perpetua; vel racio diversitatis confirmatur ex hoc quod tempore apostolorum fuerunt homines devociores et ad elemosinas prompciores et post avariores, ergo fuisset congruum quod ipsi obligassent suos heredes ad elemosinas perpetuas. Si dicatur quod voluntas Christi est racio diversitatis sufficiens, revera sic doctrina Christi exemplata future ecclesie est racio diversitatis, et forma sufficiens ad movendum nos clericos ritum gentilem deserere et omnem solicitudinem nostram inpresenciarum proicientes in ipso confidere. Non solicitemur ergo quomodo providebitur nunc ad mille annos Christi pauperibus de pabulo corporali, sed permittentes mortuos sepelire mortuos suos sequamur Christum attencius et sic christianis futuris ad mille annos magis proficimus, et ita (ut dixi superius) perpetua elemosinacio est dotanti inductivum blaspheme superbie et elemosinato fomentum mundane confidencie et vigilanter requirendi divinum 361auxilium aversive desidie, et utrumque istorum per elemosinacionem temporalem excluditur. Et istam racionem assignant doctores, quare Deus non particulariter premunivit primos parentes, ut caveant de calliditate serpentis promissa eius fallacia detestando. Nam dixit illis illabendo generale principium, cui innitentes, prudenter confidendo in domino et consulendo ipsum in ambiguis, amplius meruissent, et sic negata penultima consequencia negatur assumptum sequens, scilicet quod beatus Silvester in faciendo sibi licitum simpliciter nullo modo verisimiliter peccavit. Nam omnis conversacio secularis est inseparabiliter cum peccato, sicut dicit fides scripture et Augustinus persepe commemorat; et cum multe conversaciones seculares sint licite ac meritorie, patet quod beatus Silvester in faciendo sibi licitum sepe peccavit, sicut de se confitetur beatus Evangelista qui fuit Silvestro sanccior. Unde notet homo formam dotacionis, XCVIª dist. Constantinus, quomodo imperator tribuit Silvestro potestatem, vigorem et honorificenciam imperialem, decernendo quod habeat primatum super quatuor sedes et princeps sacerdotibus tocius mundi existat. Consideret secundo quomodo tradidit beato Silvestro et successoribus suis Lateranense palacium, diadema et frigium, superhumerale, clamidem purpuream et tunicam coccineam cum aliis insigniis et potestatibus imperialibus, et breviter cum omnibus dignitatibus quas papa vendicat non fundabilibus ex scriptura, ut puta, quod equitet super equum candidum cuius frenum cesar tenuit et alias reverencias quas mundo cecati in ipsis preponderant sibi exhibuit. Nam illud 362affeccione ceca quis tribuit quod in se reputat preciosum. Consideret ergo evangelicus attente ordinem predicte carte, et miror si excuset beatum Silvestrum ab omni elacione, ab omissione contemptus mundi et defectu informacionis imperatoris et populi. Unde exhinc irreligiose accepta fuit occasio faciendo scisma in ecclesia instinctu dyaboli, ut notat decretalis, XCVª dist., Olim, ex dicto Jeronimi. Et hec creditur racio, quare ecclesia orientalis remanens in sua pauperie detestata est monstruosam superbiam occidentalis ecclesie. Unde legitur quod ecclesia Grecorum misit domino Johanni pape XXII magnam epistolam ad exhortacionem suam qua suadebat eos sue coactive iurisdiccioni subici plenarie responsivam et in fine inseruisse talem clausulam: Potenciam tuam summam super tuos subditos firmiter credimus, superbiam tuam summam tollerare non possumus, avariciam tuam summam saciare non intendimus, dominus tecum, quia dominus nobiscum est. Consideret ergo procurator Romane ecclesie cum approbabili: beatus Augustinus fuit sciencior, religiosior et sanccior beato Silvestro; ipse autem asserit irrevocabiliter cum aliis sanctis eum sequentibus: si quid utile est, in scriptura sacra invenitur, et moneat ut fautores illius dotacionis dicentes quod fuit omnino sine peccato ipsam fundent clarius ex scriptura, quod nulli usque hodie potuerunt.

As to this argument, there is no need to reply to its form; nor have I seen a proof of the assumptionassumptum: the assumption, since Christ received temporal alms, as the apostles too had received them from him, for relieving the temporal need of the poor (as is clear from John 6), and yet we do not read that the apostles received alms to be kept in perpetuity for the poor.4 And as to that brocard, "therefore, by the same token", or the vague question which is the last refuge of a simple arguer, in which it is asked what the reason for the difference is, I turn both back on the arguer.5 If Christ taught us, in his apostles, not to be solicitous for the morrow, because sufficient for the day is its own evil (Matthew 6:34), and there seems to be no reason why he should not command them to provide for perpetual almsgivingelemosinacio: almsgiving, then by the same token he would command them to provide for perpetual almsgiving; or else the reason for the difference is confirmed from this, that in the time of the apostles men were more devout and readier to give alms, and afterwards more avaricious: therefore it would have been fitting that they should have bound their heirs to perpetual alms.6 If it is said that the will of Christ is a sufficient reason for the difference, truly in this way the doctrinedoctrina: doctrine of Christ, set as an example to the future church, is the reason for the difference, and a sufficient form to move us clerics to desert the heathen rite and, casting all our care at present upon him, to trust in him.7 Let us not, therefore, be solicitous how provision will be made now, a thousand years ahead, for the poor of Christ in bodily food; but, letting "the dead bury their dead", let us follow Christ more attentively, and so we profit the Christians of a thousand years to come the more. And so (as I said above) perpetual almsgiving is, to the endower, a thing that induces blasphemous pride, and to the almsmanelemosinare; elemosinatus: to give alms to; almsman a kindling of worldly confidence and of a sloth averse to vigilantly seeking divine 361help; and each of these is excluded by almsgiving from time to time.8 And the doctors assign this reason why God did not forewarn our first parents in particular to beware of the craftiness of the serpent by detesting his promised deceitfallacia: fallacy: for he spoke to them by flowing intoillabi: to flow into them a general principle, leaning on which, prudently trusting in the Lord and consulting him in doubtful things, they would have merited more.9 And so, the penultimate inferenceconsequencia: inference being denied, the assumption that follows is denied, namely that blessed Silvester, in doing what was lawful to him without qualification, in all likelihood in no way sinned. For every secular manner of lifeconversacio: manner of life is inseparably joined with sin, as the faith of scripture says and Augustine very often recalls; and since many secular manners of life are lawful and meritorious, it is clear that blessed Silvester, in doing what was lawful to him, often sinned, as the blessed Evangelist, who was holier than Silvester, confesses of himself.10 Hence let a man note the form of the endowment, Dist. 96, Constantinus: how the emperor granted to Silvester imperial power, vigour and honour, decreeing that he should have primacy over the four sees and should be prince over the priests of the whole world.11 Let him consider, second, how he handed over to blessed Silvester and his successors the Lateran palace, the diadem and the phrygium, the superhumeral, the purple chlamys and the scarlet tunic, with the other imperial insignia and powers; in short, with all the dignities which the popepapa: pope claims that cannot be grounded in scripture: for instance, that he should ride on a white horse whose bridle Caesar held; and he showed him other marks of reverence on which those blinded by the world set great weight. For one grants with 362blind affection what one reckons precious in itself. Let the evangelical man, therefore, consider attentively the order of the aforesaid charter, and I wonder whether it excuses blessed Silvester from all elation, from the omission of contempt of the world, and from a failure to instruct the emperor and the people.12 Hence, from this, occasion was irreligiously taken for making schism in the church at the devil’s instigation, as the decretal notes, Dist. 95, Olim, from a saying of Jerome.13 And this is believed to be the reason why the eastern church, remaining in its poverty, has detested the monstrous pride of the western church. Hence we read that the church of the Greeks sent to the lord Pope John XXII a great letter in reply to his exhortation, by which he urged them to submit fully to his coactivecoactivus; cohercere, cohersitivus: coactive; coerce, coercive jurisdiction, and that it inserted at the end such a clause as this: "Your supreme power over your subjects we firmly believe; your supreme pride we cannot bear; your supreme avarice we do not intend to satisfy. The Lord be with you, for the Lord is with us."14 Let the proctorprocurator; procuratrix: proctor of the Roman church, therefore, consider [this] with an approvable [argument]: blessed Augustine was more learned, more religious and holier than blessed Silvester; now he asserts irrevocably, with other saints following him, "if anything is useful, it is found in holy scripture"; and let him urge that the abettors of that endowment, who say that it was altogether without sin, ground it more clearly from scripture, which no one has been able to do to this day.15

¶4362.28–363.12

362Et si obicitur quod eque evidenter credendum est errori cuiuscunque hominis in scriptis sicut in factis, et sic periret testificacio ex scripturis. Sed quod falsum assumitur (ut beatus Augustinus declarat epistola VIIIª ad Jeronynum), cum ex veritate scripture 363credimus quod propheta David peccavit cum uxore Urie et quod Petrus peccavit tempore passionis et post ascensionem, tamen scripta eorum credimus esse summe autentica, et sic maiori probabilitate credimus scriptis famosorum doctorum quam nudis factis, tum quia communiter ex maiori deliberacione, ex minori temptacione et pro ulteriori explanacione scribunt personis gravibus nec posterius revocant. Sed alii multi sancti post et ante in sentenciam illam concordant, sed (ut reor) nec ex scriptura nec racione fundabitur quod beatus Silvester non peccavit recipiendo dotacionem cesaream.

And if it is objectedinstatur; obicitur: it is objected that a man’s error, whoever he is, is to be believed as evidently in his writings as in his deeds, and so testimony from writings would perish: but what is assumed is false (as blessed Augustine declares in the eighth letter to Jerome), since, although from the truth of scripture 363we believe that the prophet David sinned with the wife of Urias, and that Peter sinned at the time of the passion and after the ascension, yet we believe their writings to be supremely authenticautenticus / autenticacio: authentic / authentication; and so we believe the writings of famous doctors with greater probability than their bare deeds, both because they commonly write from greater deliberation, under less temptation and for further explanation, to weighty persons, and do not afterwards retract.16 Now many other saints, after and before, agree in that teachingsentencia: CONTEXTUAL: teaching / sentence; but (as I think) it will be grounded neither from scripture nor from reason that blessed Silvester did not sin in receiving the caesarean endowment.17

Notes

  1. 1 A has two marginal notes here: at 359.6, Nota bene istam totam columpnam, quia ponuntur fundamenta pro dominacione civili cleri ("mark this whole column well, for the foundations of the clergy’s civil exercise of lordship are laid down in it"); at 359.15, Prima racio. Nota argumenta pro dominacione cum solucionibus. Magistrales argucias: the schoolmen’s arguments, which Wyclif states before he answers them.
  2. 2 At 359.14 B reads qui licite for quam licite; at 359.15 A and A₁ omit pro relevandis … elemosinas; at 359.20 Loserth reports the manuscripts as reading quin a pari, so the print’s placing of the si licet clause is his. The sense is unchanged.
  3. 3 Simpliciter is taken with licitum, "lawful without qualification"; it can also qualify the whole clause ("in no way sinned, without qualification"). The answer (361.6–7) repeats the phrase and denies it. Verisimiliter qualifies peccavit: the argument claims only likelihood.
  4. 4 Assumptum is the minor premiss just stated (Silvester in no way sinned). B omits cum at 360.4–5 (assumpti Christus), which makes the next clause a fresh sentence. S. "John 6" is Wyclif’s reference; he does not say which verse.
  5. 5 Brogardicum (360.9): so the manuscripts, for the schoolmen’s brocardicum, a stock maxim of argument. R. B in the margin at 360.10: Questio vaga que est ultimum refugium simplicis arguentis. Hic notatur. C. Utrumque is the brocard and the vague question: Wyclif turns each against the arguer in the next two clauses.
  6. 6 Matthew 6:34, Vulgate Nolite ergo solliciti esse in crastinum … sufficit diei malitia sua (DR "Be not therefore solicitous for to morrow … Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof"); Wyclif gives the sense in reported speech. C. Both limbs are reductions: the first draws an absurd command by the arguer’s own "by the same token"; the second shows the arguer’s "reason for the difference" proving too much.
  7. 7 At 360.23–24 B reads exemplativa for exemplata. S. 1 Peter 5:7, Vulgate omnem sollicitudinem vestram proicientes in eum (DR "Casting all your care upon him"); Wyclif turns it to the first person and adds in ipso confidere.
  8. 8 Matthew 8:22 (DR "let the dead bury their dead"). C. Requirendi depends on desidie: the almsman’s sloth is averse to seeking God’s help. Elemosinacio temporalis is almsgiving from time to time, set against perpetual almsgiving.
  9. 9 Promissa eius fallacia is taken as the object of detestando, "his promised deceit" (the serpent’s promise, Genesis 3:4–5); it could also be an ablative absolute, "once his deceit had been promised". Illabendo: God spoke by flowing a general principle into them, without a particular warning; Loserth’s side-note gives the point. The "doctors" are not named.
  10. 10 The "penultimate inference" is the parity step of 359.18–23; the "assumption that follows" is the minor at 359.23–360.1. The "blessed Evangelist" is John, who confesses sin of himself in 1 John 1:8; Wyclif does not quote it.
  11. 11 Decretum, D. 96 c. 14 Constantinus (Loserth: Decret. I pars, dist. XCVI, c. XIV; the modern form is ours). Loserth notes that what follows is drawn from this decretal. The four sees are not named here. R. A in the margin at 361.19: Nota formam dotacionis per Constantinum.
  12. 12 At 362.3 B reads minor for miror. C. The subject of excuset is taken to be the charter’s order; it could be the evangelical reader ("whether he can excuse").
  13. 13 Decretum, D. 95 c. 5 Olim (Loserth: dist. XCV, cap. V; the form is ours). Wyclif gives it as Jerome’s; the passage is Jerome on Titus 1:5, as the canon’s inscription says (Item Ieronimus supra epistolam ad Titum).
  14. 14 A and B in the margin at 362.15: Nota epistolam Grecorum. Loserth gives no source for the Greeks’ letter to John XXII or its closing clause, and none has been found; the clause circulates later with Diabolus tecum for dominus tecum. C. Responsivam agrees with epistolam: the letter answered John’s exhortation.
  15. 15 Cum approbabili (362.20) is the print, confirmed on the plate; the noun it qualifies is not expressed, and "[argument]" is supplied from the syllogism that follows. At 362.20 B reads procreator for procurator; at 362.21 A and A₁ omit et sanccior. S. Cf. Augustine, De doctrina christiana 2.42.63, quidquid homo extra didicerit, si noxium est, ibi damnatur; si utile est, ibi invenitur; Wyclif compresses it. Loserth gives no reference.
  16. 16 Sed quod falsum assumitur (362.30) has no verb of answering; "[the answer is]" is supplied, and a word may have been lost. VIIIª is Loserth’s; the manuscripts read nona. The print spells Jeronynum. S. Loserth refers to Augustine’s Opera, vol. II; the letter is Ep. 82 to Jerome, identified by content: 82.3, no canonical author erred in writing; 82.5, rather believe that Peter denied Christ and David committed adultery and murder than that scripture lies (PL 33:277); Loserth’s reference reads Aug. Opp. II, pag. 45. David and Urias: 2 Kings 11 (DR); Peter after the ascension: Galatians 2:11–14.
  17. 17 Sentencia (CONTEXTUAL): here "teaching", the position just quoted from Augustine that what is useful is found in scripture. Dotacionem cesaream: the endowment from Caesar.
How the Latin of this chapter was established
  • Plate readings; page · reading · note):
    • 359: CAP. XVI.
    • 360: VI° (print: Matthei VI°, 34)
    • 360: mille annos (main token covers two printed words)
    • 361: Et (capital E; 179b is the folio mark)
    • 361: XCVIª (C 1 are alinea letter and argument numeral)
    • 362: affeccione
    • 362: XCVª
    • 362: Et
    • 362: VIIIª
    • 362: quis
    • 363: et (David is in the English side-note (writings of David and Peter), not the Latin line)
    • 361: seculares (secu-/lares; output holds both halves) [-MARK]
  • 362.20: cum approbabili: read on the plate (n0399) as printed; 362.25 the plate has sequentibus: (colon) before the quotation.