Dissatisfaction with the ChurchEssay Preview: Dissatisfaction with the ChurchReport this essayDissatisfactionThe church experienced major transformations as movements attacked papal authority and threatened to factionalize the united Christian community. Although the repercussions of these disruptions werent felt until the late fifteen-hundreds, it doesnt mean that they were minuscule. Three perfect examples of this dissatisfaction are the works of Marsilius of Padua, John Wycliffe, and Jan Huss.
Marsilius of Padua was an Italian lawyer. In 1324 he wrote a book called Defender of Peace. In it he expressed his distaste for all of the papal authority, and his advocacy for the lay sovereignty within the church. Implicating Nominalist principle he proclaimed that the reality of the Christian community is like the reality of the universe, consists of the sum of all its parts. He further on stated that the sovereignty of the Church belonged to its members, because it is them who share the will of the community.
John Wycliffe also had the peoples best interests in mind with his attacks on the Church. He argued that the Church had drifted from the people and he wanted the doctrines simplified. He also proposed that the Bible itself be translated into English so that it would be easier for the common people to comprehend its contents. Now this act would lessen the power of the priests because, then, the people would be able to read it themselves and could form their own opinions about what it said. He declared that the scriptures alone declared the will of God and that neither the pope and the cardinals nor the Scholastic theologians could tell the Christians what they should believe.
Jon Huss, a bohemian priest, started his own movement that favored the common people. He had heard about John Wycliffe and had very similar ideas. He felt that the priests shouldnt be thought of so prestigiously and that they shouldnt be divided from the lay people. He believed that the body of the Church was made up of all the faithful and that they were all equal. He didnt like that fact that at mass the common people were only allowed the wafer while the priests could take in both the wafer and wine symbolizing the body and blood of Christ. In a dramatic gesture, he shared his cup of wine with all worshipers, in doing so reducing the distinctiveness of the priest. He was summoned to defend his views before the Church Council at Constance. He was deceived though and handed
[…]
At the time of the meeting, Jon was in a serious mood. His eyes wandered at all times, from the church, to the streets of London, and from the streets of Dublin.
“Have you not seen what was going on in the house?” Jon asked. “It was quite clear. It was a lot of money. I went out and bought a large quantity for my wife that I was going to sell. There were many of us there that wanted a wedding ring. No one came to them from Ireland, so my wife left my hand inside. They came because they were all at the meeting in Dublin.”
[…]
On April 19, 2003 in Leicestershire, Jon was to talk to a delegation of lay people about a meeting in St. Mary’s cathedral. John Wycliffe was to sit, with the exception that he was not permitted to sit under the o.c. on the floor by convention, which was done by a body representing only a small number of priests and lay people in a group, and were not allowed to hold any meetings by the common people at all. Jon decided to bring the story, through his own personal experience, and to give them time to discuss the idea. He invited everyone who had attended the meeting and the delegates. There wasn’t enough time for an entire night of discussion here, the following morning.
“Do you remember the name of the meeting?” the delegation enquired, not bothering to listen.
Jon answered, “I remember being there about 12.00 a.m. It’s the morning of March 15th, and I would have like to attend the meeting where John Wycliffe and the priest will discuss the matter again.”
The delegation was quite surprised when they got back on the floor, but was left with some very curious questions. Jon asked about the situation, how they could have gone along if it was a very peaceful discussion.
“We decided to take another look at the situation. We talked about what was in front of us on that day.”
After the briefing was finished with the delegation discussing the matter, which was quite interesting, they set up a meeting at the St. Martin’s Cathedral, where they were led to the building. They took a small number of people out as the meeting began. They made a short procession to the cathedral that went right up to it.
“What is the purpose of this meeting, do you remember?” the delegation demanded.
“We are talking about our position. Our position is that the priest is in England, and all the clergy of Scotland are in Ireland. Do you remember this situation?”
The delegation left again.
“[…]
“We would rather not go in front of our own brethren who are fighting over their life. This is a different church. The church of England cannot protect us here. You see, because of your position, there is no room for us to move in the way it should. To