Wyclif’s Latin works

De ecclesia, chapter 7, part 3

No privilege licenses sin, and he who offends against the law cannot claim its aid

Loserth pp. 148.25–152.13

¶1148.25–151.33

148Item, nec regi licet privilegium tale concedere nec sacerdoti suo accipere nisi ex titulo elemosine vel misericordie et ad augendum in populo caritatem, sed constat quod non est elemosina vel opus misericordie dare abbathie licenciam, ut sustineat perpetuo debitorem, ne unquam satisfaciat, vel quod voluptuose vivendo aliena consumat, quousque factus fuerit inpotens ad solvendum. Cum enim secundum Augustinum non dimittitur peccatum, nisi restituatur ablatum, 149patet quod licenciare ad hoc foret licenciare hominem ad peccandum, quod Deus non potest, et per consequens non continetur sub opere misericordie privilegium tale concedere, nec tenderet ad augmentum amicicie vel caritatis in populo communi commune ius de satisfaccione debitoris precludere. Et patet tam ex parte donatoris quam receptoris quod ad tale privilegium est indisposicio utrobique. Nec moveat quod ex tali privilegio quandoque bonum contingeret, ut puta debitoris depredati misericors expectacio vel aliter criminosi ex tutela refugii finalis conversio, quia Deus non posset permittere peccatum fieri, nisi exinde occasionaliter bonum contingeret. Ideo absit, dicit Apostolus, ut faciamus mala, ut bona eveniant. Docto igitur quod libertas talis sonaret in caritatem et elemosinam, posset concedi singulariter illi loco privilegium sub ista condicione quam necesse est in omni donacione legitima habere tacitam vel expressam. Unde videtur quod prelati nostri debent humiliter pulsare dominos, ut tales errores nostre ecclesie previe corrigantur, antequam invadant hostes forinsecus, quia ex testimonis Christi Matth. X°, 36 nulli plus infestant matrem ecclesiam quam eius domestici inimici. Tercio principaliter arguitur sic ad idem de iure nature: Frustra invocat legis auxilium qui offendit in eam, sed dicti fugitivi rebellando offenderunt in legem Dei, ecclesie et in legem regni: ergo iustum est pro tempore sue obstinacie quod careant in omnibus istis legis suffragio. Maior autem capitur ut regula per se nota in iure canonico et demonstrari potest ex fide evangelii Matthei V°, 25, ubi Christus precipit: Esto consenciens adversario tuo cito, dum es in via cum eo, ne forte adversarius tuus tradat te iudici et iudex 150tradat te ministro et in carcerem mittaris, ubi secundum exposicionem beati Augustini oportet intelligere legem Dei adversantem cuilibet peccatori, quia nisi sibi consenserit hic in via, accusabit eum in finali iudicio cum demonibus detrudendum. Si ergo lex Dei mitissima non potest non adversari suo offendenti, quia tunc sequeretur quod falsitatis malicia superet veritatem, manifestum videtur quod omnis alia lex secundaria non excusat sed accusat, non iuvat sed reprobat, stante obstinacia offensoris. Dicti autem fugitivi iuxta nobis exposita offenderunt in legem Dei ex inobediencia suis prepositis, offenderant insuper in legem ecclesie racione multiplici, quia (ut dicunt docti in illis iuribus) inobedientes mandatis suorum principum committunt quoddam genus sacrilegii, et cum inobedientes remanserint legi Dei de obediendo legibus regis sui, que lex iusta illos protegeret? Et insuper secundum quod informati sumus occisus erat primus invasor et ecclesie pollutor. Quomodo ergo lex libertatis illius ecclesie defenderet tam ingratum et illegitimum eius pollutorem excommunicatum de iure? Non enim palliari potest defensio arrestati legittime et intenti salvari in vita et membris, ut invadat contra legem Anglie suos legitimos arrestantes. Cum enim arrestacio et occisio sunt contraria, patet quod miles arrestans sine extraccione gladii vel cultelli non ostendit occiso necessitatem se defendendi sed pocius legitime paciendi; et patet ex facto multiplici, supposita veritate narrati, quod erant inobedientes patriis legibus pro qua inobediencia continuanda querebant subterfugia 151dicti loci. Que queso maior inobediencia regi nostro quam nolle tractari secundum leges suas, sed proprias leges proponere secundum quas et non secundum alias velint tractari, et illis, non regni legibus, obedire? Revera sic hostes crudelissimi depopulantes regnum offerrent regnicolis quod si velint consentire legibus quas illi volunt statuere concordabunt, sed non exinde gauderent privilegiis regni nostri. Mirum itaque foret quod rex et regnum tales hostes intra se defenderent. Idem enim foret contradicere legibus regis per quas regeret regnum suum et contradicere regalie, cum rex non foret rex nisi propter preeminenciam et officium legis sue. Ideo dicit beatus Gregorius quod qui diligit regem diligit eius legem et demonstrari potest ex illo Johannis XIV°, 23. Si quis diligit me, sermonem meum servabit; idem enim est Deum diligere et sermonem vel legem eius servare, et sic indubie est de rege. Unde inobediencia legibus est radix tocius nequicie. Exhinc enim ceciderunt angeli de celo, expulsus fuit Adam de paradiso et breviter sine contumacia que est inobediencia non recte denunciatur heresis vel excommunicacio; nec est possibile regnum dissolvi nisi ex inobediencia legi sue. Si enim maior pars regni nostri vel prope nollet stare legibus regni nostri, sed sparsim acciperet municionem ecclesie commovendo sedicionem in populo, pretendendo utrobique libertatem ecclesie, quomodo staret regnum? Et si non licet regi talem hostem domesticum de castris ecclesie sue extrahere, quomodo liceret in regno non tantum subiecto ecclesias Dei invadere et remissius proditores vel hostes occidere? Nam ubi est maior falsitas atque iniuria coloracior, ibi est pena iustior.

Again, it is neither lawful for the king to grant such a privilege nor for his priest to accept it, except by titletitulus: title of almselemosina: alms or of mercy and to increase charitycaritas: charity in the people; now it is evident that it is no alms or work of mercy to give an abbey licence to maintain a debtor perpetually, so that he never pays, or so that by living in pleasure he consumes what is another’s, until he has been made unable to pay. For since, according to Augustine, sin is not forgiven unless what was taken is restored, 149it is clear that to license [anyone] to this would be to license a man to sin, which God cannot do; and consequently to grant such a privilege is not contained under a work of mercy, nor would it tend to the increase of friendship or charity in the common people to shut off the common lawius: right / law concerning a debtor’s satisfaction.1 And it is clear, both on the side of the giver and on that of the receiver, that there is unfitness for such a privilege on both sides. Nor let it move [anyone] that from such a privilege some good would sometimes come about, as, for example, a merciful waiting on a debtor who has plundered, or otherwise the final conversion of a criminal through the protection of refuge; for God could not permit sin to be done unless some good came of it by occasionoccasionaliter: by occasion. Therefore "God forbid," says the Apostle, "that we should do evil, that good may come."2 Therefore, once it is shown that such a liberty would make for charity and alms, a privilege could be granted singly to that place under this condition, which in every lawful gift must be had, tacit or express. Hence it seems that our prelatesprelatus: prelate ought humbly to press the lordsdominus; dominari: lord; to exercise lordship / to lord it, so that such errors of our churchecclesia: church may be corrected beforehand, before enemies invade from outside; for by the testimony of Christ, Matthew 10:36, none harry mother church more than her enemies of her own household.3 Thirdly and principally, it is argued thus to the same [end], from the law of nature: he invokes the help of the law in vain who offends against it; now the said fugitives, by rebelling, have offended against the law of God, of the church, and against the law of the kingdomregnum: kingdom: therefore it is just, for the time of their obstinacy, that they lack the aid of law in all of these.4 And the major is taken as a rule self-evident in canon law, and can be demonstrated from the faithex fide: as faith teaches; with a genitive, from the faith of [scripture] of the gospel, Matthew 5:25, where Christ commands: "Be at agreement with thy adversary betimes, whilst thou art in the way with him: lest perhaps thy adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge 150deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison"; where, according to the exposition of blessed Augustine, we must understand God’s lawlex dei / lex Christi / lex evangelica: God's law / the law of Christ / the gospel law as the adversary of every sinner; for unless he agree with it here, in the wayvia / patria: the way / the homeland, it will accuse him at the final judgment, to be thrust down with the demons.5 If, then, God’s most gentle law cannot but oppose him who offends against it (for then it would follow that the malice of falsity overcomes truth), it seems manifest that every other, secondary law does not excuse but accuses, does not help but condemns, while the offender’s obstinacy stands.6 Now the said fugitives, by what has been set before us, offended against the law of God by disobedience to their superiorsprepositi: superiors; they had besides offended against the law of the church for many reasons, because (as those learned in those laws say) those who disobey the commands of their princes commit a kind of sacrilege; and since they have remained disobedient to God’s law on obeying the laws of their king, what just law would protect them? And besides, according to what we have been informed, the man who was killed was the first assailant and the polluter of the church. How then would the law of the liberty of that church defend so displeasingingratus: displeasing (to God) and unlawful a polluter of it, excommunicated by law?7 For the defence of one lawfully arrested, and meant to be kept safe in life and limb, cannot be cloaked so that he may assault, against the law of England, those who lawfully arrest him. For since arrest and killing are contraries, it is clear that a knight making an arrest without drawing sword or knife showed the slain man no necessity of defending himself, but rather of lawfully submitting; and it is clear from many deeds, the truth of the narrative being supposed, that they were disobedient to the laws of their homelandvia / patria: the way / the homeland, to continue in which disobedience they sought the hiding-places 151of the said place.8 What greater disobedience, I ask, [could there be] to our king than to refuse to be dealt with according to his laws, but to put forward their own laws, according to which, and not according to others, they would be dealt with, and to obey those and not the laws of the kingdom? In truth, so the cruellest enemies laying waste the kingdom would offer the inhabitants that, if they will consent to the laws which they choose to lay down, they will be at peace; but they would not on that account enjoy the privileges of our kingdom. It would therefore be a marvel that the king and the kingdom should defend such enemies within themselves. For it would be the same to gainsay the king’s laws, by which he should rule his kingdom, and to gainsay the regality, since the king would not be king except for the pre-eminence and office of his law.9 Therefore blessed Gregory says that he who loves the king loves his law; and it can be demonstrated from that [text], John 14:23: "If any one love me, he will keep my word"; for it is the same to love God and to keep his word or law, and so beyond doubt it is with the king. Hence disobedience to laws is the root of all wickedness. For from this the angels fell from heaven, Adam was driven out of paradise, and, in short, without contumacy, which is disobedience, neither heresy nor excommunication is rightly declared; nor is it possible for a kingdom to be dissolved except by disobedience to its law.10 For if the greater part of our kingdom, or nearly so, would not stand by the laws of our kingdom, but here and there took the defence of the church, stirring up sedition in the people, pretending on both counts the liberty of the church, how would the kingdom stand? And if it is not lawful for the king to drag such a household enemy out of the strongholds of his church, how would it be lawful, in a kingdom not so subject [to him], to invade the churches of God and, on lighter grounds, to kill traitors or enemies? For where the falsity is greater and the wrong more colouredcolor (non est color): colour (a plausible ground), there the penalty is more just.11

¶2152.1–152.13

152Ex istis colligitur, supposita veritate informacionis, quod dicti duo profugi post tantam inobedienciam non sunt homines legii regis nostri, nam idem est derelinquere dominum et derelinquere legem suam; sed ipsi patenter dereliquerant legem regis, cum invaserant citantem ad standum legi regni, volentes cum hoc rege invito incolere terram suam. Ideo omne suffragium privilegii regis tenentur amittere, et cum in eadem dampnacione sint omnes qui fovent aut favent iniuriam dicte cause in contemptum regis et regni, et specialiter hii qui sub pena excommunicacionis ad defensionem legum regni et regalie regis specialiter sunt iurati, patet quante illi forisfaciunt contra regem.

From these things it is gathered, the truth of the information being supposed, that the said two fugitives, after so great a disobedience, are not liege men of our king; for it is the same to forsake a lord and to forsake his law; now they had plainly forsaken the king’s law, since they had assaulted the man summoning [them] to stand to the law of the kingdom, wishing withal to inhabit his land against the king’s will. Therefore they are bound to lose every aid of the king’s privilege; and since all who cherish or favour the wrong of the said cause, in contempt of the king and the kingdom, are in the same condemnation, and especially those who, under pain of excommunication, are specially sworn to the defence of the laws of the kingdom and of the king’s regality, it is clear how gravely they commit forfeiture against the king.12

Notes

  1. 1 D Iterum nec (148.26); D factus sit (148.31). Augustine, Ep. 153 to Macedonius: Loserth 148.32 (Opp. II, 532 A); Ep. 153.20, PL 33:662: non remittetur peccatum, nisi restituatur ablatum (with his proviso cum restitui potest); Wyclif paraphrases with dimittitur. Sacerdoti suo: "his priest", the abbot holding of the king. Solvendum: pay (a debt). D lacks communi (149.5). Commune ius: "the common law" in the sense of the general rule of right on satisfaction; whether Wyclif means the English common law is not clear.
  2. 2 B ut patet (149.6). Indisposicio: "unfitness" (glossary: indispositus). Debitoris depredati misericors expectacio: we take depredati as active (deponent depredari), forbearance shown to a debtor who has plundered his creditor; passive "a plundered debtor" construes poorly. Quia Deus non posset …: good coming of a sin does not excuse it, since God permits every sin only for a good that follows by occasion. Rom. 3:8 (Loserth 149.14), Vulgate et non … faciamus mala ut veniant bona, DR "let us do evil that there may come good"; Wyclif’s absit … ut faciamus mala, ut bona eveniant translated.
  3. 3 Docto: ablative absolute, "it having been shown". Singulariter: singly, as a particular grant. D ecclesie privilegiate (149.20–21). Pulsare: urge. Matt. 10:36, DR "a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household", alluded; Wyclif’s paraphrase translated.
  4. 4 A margin Tercia responsio (149.24). Tercio principaliter: the third principal argument (the first two, 07-a). Frustra invocat legis auxilium …: the canonists’ maxim, in Friedberg frustra legis auxilium invocet qui committit in legem (X 3.49.10, II, 658; also X 1.6.23, 5.19.14, 5.39.45); Wyclif’s offendit in eam is his own wording. Sed dicti fugitivi: the minor premiss. Legis suffragio: "the aid of law", as in the glossary suffragium sensus; not the church’s suffrages.
  5. 5 Matt. 5:25 as DR; Wyclif has adversarius tuus tradat te for the Vulgate’s tradat te adversarius, hence "thy adversary". A margins Augustinus (150.2) and Lex Dei est noster adversarius. Loserth (150.2) refers to Augustine, Sermo 9 (De decem chordis) c. 3 (Opp. V, 49), PL 38:76 (Sermo Dei adversarius tuus est), and Sermo 251.8, PL 38:1171 (Sermo Legis). B detradendum (150.5). Hic in via: here in this life (glossary: via / patria).
  6. 6 A A₁ lex Dei iustissima, "most just" (150.5–6); D non potest adversari, without the second non; D lex contraria (150.8). The print is translated. Secundaria: secondary, i.e. human law beneath God’s.
  7. 7 Offenderant (150.12) is the reading of A B D, which Loserth prints; A₁ corrects to offenderunt. Translated as pluperfect. D committant (150.15). Docti in illis iuribus: the canonists and civilians; the "kind of sacrilege" is not found as such; nearest, Gratian C.17 q.4 d.p.c.29 § 1 (Friedberg I, 823–24; PL 187:1071A–B), after Cod. 9.29.2, sacrilege in disputing a prince’s judgment. Occisus: Haule (07-a n. 2). Ingratum: displeasing (glossary: ingratus), here to the church. Excommunicatum de iure: excommunicated by the law itself, presumably for violence in a church.
  8. 8 Non enim palliari potest … ut invadat: we take ut invadat as what the cloak would cover; or "cannot be pleaded as a defence for his assaulting". D occisio et arrestacio (150.25); A A₁ lack vel cultelli — defendendi, and B lacks se (150.26–27); A A₁ lack erant (150.29). Miles arrestans: the knight who made the arrest. Paciendi: submitting. Patriis legibus: the laws of the land (glossary: patria, earthly sense). Subterfugia: places of escape.
  9. 9 D nolle tractare (151.2). Defenderent: the manuscripts have defenderet (151.9–10); Loserth’s plural is printed and translated. A margin Legi regis esse inobedientem nocet multum (151.11). Concordabunt: they will be at peace. Regalie: the regality (proposed the glossary row).
  10. 10 A margin Gregorius (151.14); the saying is not identified. D demonstrare (151.15). John 14:23 as DR. A B lack enim (151.17). D non rite (151.22). Inobedie ncia (151.23) is one word, an OCR scar. Contumacia: contumacy, the refusal to appear or submit.
  11. 11 D liceret (151.29). Sparsim acciperet municionem ecclesie: took sanctuary here and there. In regno non tantum subiecto: we take it as a kingdom not so subject to the king, i.e. enemy country in war; remissius, "on lighter grounds"; doubtful, and "more mildly" is possible. Coloracior: more coloured, more plausibly cloaked (glossary: color).
  12. 12 A margin Conclusio (152.1). B D lack regis (152.3); B rege invicto, "the king unconquered" (152.7); D sunt omnes (152.9); D favent dicti cause (152.9–10). Citantem: the officer who summoned them. Hii qui … iurati: presumably the bishops, sworn to the king; Wyclif does not name them. Forisfaciunt: commit forfeiture.
How the Latin of this chapter was established
  • Plate readings; page · reading · note):
    • 148: in
    • 149: patet (149a folio mark, G margin letter)
    • 149: licenciare
    • 149: aliter (149b is the folio mark)
    • 149: ut
    • 149: obstinacie (print spelling) [NW]
    • 150: offenderunt
    • 150: in
    • 150: invasor
    • 151: proprias [NW]
    • 149: et
    • 150: subterfugia (subter- here, 149c fugia at top of p.151; main token holds whole word)
  • Testimonis (149.22): so the print (plate), Loserth’s misprint; translated as testimonio (our emendation; testimoniis equally possible).
  • OCR scars, translated as corrected: p. 151.23 inobedie ncia (read inobediencia). Doubts: p. 149.8 debitoris depredati (n. 2); p. 151.30 in regno non tantum subiecto … remissius (n. 11).