era of reforms—­they were controversial theologians, like those of the age of Theodosius; in the seventeenth century they were fighting nobles; in the eighteenth they were titled and hereditary courtiers and great landed proprietors; in the nineteenth they are bankers, merchants, and railway presidents,—­men who control the material interests of the country.  It is only at elections, though managed by politicians, that the people are a power.  Socially, the magnates are the rich.  It is money which in these times all classes combine to worship.  If this be questioned, see the adulation which even colleges and schools of learning pay to their wealthy patrons or those from whom they seek benefits.  The patrons of the schools in the Middle Ages were princes and nobles; but these princes and nobles bowed down in reverence to learned bishops and great theological doctors.

Wyclif was the representative of the schools when he attacked the abuses of the Church.  It is not a little singular that the great religious movements in England have generally come from Oxford, while Cambridge has been distinguished for great movements in science.  In 1365 he was appointed to the headship of Canterbury Hall, founded by Archbishop Islip, afterwards merged into Christ Church,—­the most magnificent and wealthy of all the Oxford Colleges.  When Islip died, in 1366, and Langham, originally a monk of Canterbury, was made archbishop, the appointment of Wyclif was pronounced void by Langham, and the revenues of the Hall of which he was warden, or president, were sequestered.  Wyclif on this appealed to the Pope, who, however, ratified Langham’s decree,—­as it would be expected, for the Pope sustained the friars whom Wyclif had denounced.  The spirit of such a progressive man was, of course, offensive to the head of the Church.  In this case the Crown confirmed the decision of the Pope, 1372, since the royal license was obtained by a costly bribe.  The whole transaction was so iniquitous that Wyclif could not restrain his indignation.

But before this decision of the Crown was made, the services of Wyclif had been accepted by the Parliament in its resistance to the claim which Pope Urban V. had made in 1366, to the arrears of tribute due under John’s vassalage.  Edward III. had referred this claim to Parliament, and the Parliament had rejected it without hesitation on the ground that John had no power to bind the realm without its consent.  The Parliament was the mere mouthpiece of Wyclif, who was now actively engaged in political life, and probably, as Dr. Lechler thinks, had a seat in Parliament.  He was, at any rate, a very prominent political character; for he was sent in 1374 to Bruges, as one of the commissioners to treat with the representatives of the French pope in reference to the appointment of foreigners to the rich benefices of the Church in England, which gave great offence to the liberal and popular party in England,—­for there was such a progressive