Life of Soul - Orthodoxy

Orthodoxy

The emphasis on lay piety and Biblical translation together have caused some to doubt the orthodoxy of both books; indeed, Pore Caitif, Book to a Mother, and Life of Soul have all aroused suspicions of sympathies with the Lollard movement. After the 1407 prohibition by Bishop Arundel of lay ownership of the Scriptures in English, possession of either Life of Soul or Book to a Mother could have been grounds for suspicion or even prosecution. Moreover, four other features of Life of Soul raise suspicions of heterodoxy:

1. Oaths. In explicating the virtue of "truth," Life of Soul issues a blanket dismissal of oath-taking: "among true men there is no need for oaths." The host in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales was not the only one able to scent "a loller in the wynd" when oath-taking was condemned. If carried out in practice, such a prohibition would be socially disruptive, if not revolutionary, and it was so regarded when mentioned as a symptom of Lollard sympathies. The tract's statement is bare and brief, and could be taken as an abbreviated form of some more balanced position such as that taken by the Wycliffite Lantern of Light or the radically reformist but orthodox Dives and Pauper. But as stated, the position of our tract is that of the Lollards. It is worth noting, too, that "true men" was evidently the Lollards' own favorite name for themselves.
2. Peaceableness or pacifism? Peaceableness is certainly well established as an orthodox Christian virtue, but its socially disruptive extension to outright pacifism has always been treated with more suspicion. Pacifism was only intermittently part of the Lollard ideology—but it is worth noting that the section on peaceableness is the one replaced in the H and A versions of Life of Soul.
3. A memorial view of the eucharist. If the author held an orthodox Catholic view of the eucharist, he is remarkably reticent about it. Both the words of institution ("This is my body") and the more explicit words of John 6 about eating the flesh of Christ are quoted, but are consistently interpreted symbolically, or so it would seem; and the events of the last supper itself, when mentioned, are referred to as something done in order that we might remember. There is nothing explicitly heterodox, and no polemic, but like many Lollard confessions, the tract is "more significant for what it did not say than for what it did." A more or less spiritualized or memorial view of the eucharist was prevalent among the Lollards; as late as 1499 we find words in a Lollard's confession that echo our text: "Whosoever receive devoutly God's word, he receiveth the very body of Christ."
4. Dominion. Among the potentially most revolutionary of Wyclif's ideas was that "dominion"--the right to rule and own—depended on the righteousness of the ruler and owner; and a truly righteous owner would be inclined to give his wealth away. "Lords of this world who do not truly serve God, steal God's goods, for the things that they possess they have without his leave--and then they are thieves." Lollardy derived from this theory a political program of disendowment for the clergy and a personal ideal of simple poverty divested of all wealth beyond that needed for survival. The interpretation of "poor in spirit" given by Life of Soul appears to be in harmony with those views: "Someone who holds onto God's goods in his keeping in order to spend them on his own desire, where there is no need, it is certain that he holds these goods against God's will, and then he is a thief that robs God of his goods."

None of these points is conclusive, but together they strongly suggest an author at least sympathetic to Wycliffite views.