Religious Issues in Late 14th Century England and Europe
From Wyclif
[edit] The Eucharistic Controversy
During the Middle Ages a dispute developed regarding the Echarist, or what many churches today call communion. Theologians and philosophers had decided that the bread and wine of the Eucharist literally transformed into the flesh and blood of Christ when these elements were blessed by a priest; Wiclif was profoundly angered by this on an intellectual level and reacted against this doctrine by claiming it to be an incorrect interpretation of the Biblical texts.
The interesting thing about this, and perhaps the most important thing in regards to the "Canterbury Tales", is that some of Wiclif's followers (the Lollards) were friends of Chaucer's. This could suggest that in the Second Nun's Tale, Chaucer is writing with the beliefs of a particular group in mind- the Lollard Knights. After all, by the end of Chaucer's life, the debate over the Eucharist was a very prickly issue, and Lollards were persecuted in England. in looking at the Second Nun's Tale, we might suggest that Cecilia is sending a message to the Lollards (or to the church). It's unclear whether Cecilia is Wiclifian in her inability to be boiled alive (ie, she is invulnerable to alchemy/transmutation, both words that can be used to describe the church's official position about the Eucharist, therefore suggesting that such things do not exist); or, if Cecilia is an argument on the side of the church, and because her faith in Christianity saves, her we are meant to assume that total faith is always the right way to go - in this case, her speech in lines 498 - 504 would have to be taken as sarcasm. However, this second argument is weak, considering that Cecilia does not see the stone as a god and therefore is really only stating that what appears to be stone is, in fact, stone.
What we can gather from this example is that the politics of the 14th Century were possibly a motivation for Chaucer in writing at least some of his tales. We must then ask: what was his reason for writing the entire collection? Had he finished it, what would the final message be? We can only take what we know and assume the rest.
To put it simply, Wiclif believed that the Eucharist was a symbol of the blood and flesh of Christ. The church, however, took the stance that the Eucharist underwent a physical transformation and change from bread and wine to body and blood, literally. This suggestion offended Wiclif on an intellecutal level, and during the trials of the lollards, it was the one issue which seemed to trip them up. Compared to Cecelia's reaction to the rock - that if it looks, smells, feels, and tastes like rock then it is - could be viewed either as an argument that Cecelia would be believe in the symbolic value of the Eucharist but not the literal value. This view would make her character sympathetic to the lollards. However, this is a tricky subject because Cecelia obviously is a believer of miracles. She survives boiling water and an axe to the neck, and continues through all this to preach Christian doctrine. Surely a woman of her belief could believe in the literal transformation of the Eucharist; but perhaps that is what we ought to bear in mind. Just because we can possibly believe it does not mean it is true; we must believe our senses as much as we believe our faith.
The discussion of Friars in Medieval Society in The Structures of Medieval Society is also relevant.
[edit] Lollardy:
Lollards are the followers of John Wycliffe, who, as stated earlier, non-believers in several strict, literal Christian interpretations of the Bible. For this reason, they are sometimes called “heretics.” Lollardy began in the late fourteenth century. John Wycliffe and his followers (the Lollards) disagreed with the literal translations of the Bible being made by Christian, papal sects, and also sought to expose the frauds and corruptions of the Catholic church. The word “lollard” has several interpretations, including derivation from the verb “to lull” or sing softly, and the other verb “to loll” or be lazy. Of course, during the period in which Lollards were present, it was also synonymous with “hypocrite.” People who shared the Lollardy mindset thought of the literal translation of the Eucharist as being inaccurate and believed clerical/papal leadership to be corrupt (which, no doubt it was). However, because of the church’s power and influence, this group was outcast in clerical circles and thought to be against God for being against priests. Some parody can be seen with regard to the church in the Canterbury Tales. For example, the pardoner, associated with the church, sells things to people, hoping for pardon from their sins. He is also constantly bragging to the other pilgrims (and thus, the reader of the Canterbury Tales) about how he swindles fools into buying fake relics simply for a profit, not truly caring if their souls are redeemed.
[edit] The Great Schism
The climate of religion during the late fourteenth century no doubt had an impact on Chaucer, and most likely his work. Depending on when Chaucer composed The Canterbury Tales, one can argue that the “Second Nun’s Tale” was quite probably written in response to the Great Schism of 1378.
In the 1370s, there was much debate in England and the rest of Europe about the issues of papal authority and wealth. Depression, war, and the Plague all contributed to feelings of discontent with both Edward III and the church. John Wyclif, who in the 1370s began investigating the issues of papal primacy, was used by the royalty to question papal revenue. Soon after, the Great Schism occurred, after which Wyclif’s views became even more pointed.
In 1378 in Rome, Urban VI was elected Pope. However, a few months later, a group of cardinals said this election was void, and elected Clement VII the new Pope in Avignon. Thus, there were two popes. Obviously, this made church unity a joke, and illustrated the degrees to which the power of the church was vested in the money of secular powers. England was in support of Urban, and France and allies support Clement. Obviously, this contributed largely to the continuation of the war that had been taking place between England and France. Soon, each pope was declaring a military “crusade” against the other, and few seemed to be seeking a possible way to find peace between the powers.
The crusade proved both a military and moral flop. According to Lynn Staley Johnson, “Wyclif’s reaction to the financing of the expedition was pronounced: in his view, the Church had thereby put itself in the position of authorizing the killing of fellow Christians and had done so by trading a spiritual commodity for a financial gain.”
Chaucer, being an artist and a social figure, no doubt had been well aware of these issues as the fourteenth century came to a close. He traveled frequently during this period, often connected with England-France negotiations. He was also closely involved in many political proceedings. In fact, he worked directly with Edward III, and was probably in Milan when Clement was elected Pope; some historians believe he may have even been the one to bring this shocking news home with him. Several historians point out that, due to his position in society and politics, it is unlikely that he would not write about any of these happenings in his work. It is also unlikely that he would have approached the legend of Saint Cecilia, found in the “Second Nun’s Tale,” with no intention of casting it as a comparison to what was going on during his own times.
Similarly, all of the characters in the tales are on a pilgrimage to a holy place in Canterbury. Making such a journey was considered a way to renew one’s faith. Perhaps Chaucer was encouraging his contemporaries to consider a renewal of Europe’s faith; the church had gained too much secular power, and needed to return to its primitive roots of pure faith in God and the Gospel.
Chaucer most likely two different versions of the legend while composing his own: the Golden Legend and the Franciscan Abridgement. In the Franciscan Abridgement, the combativeness of Saint Cecilia is highlighted, and he carefully selects portions of the legend to create his own. He reshapes the legend to bring Saint Cecilia most clearly to the forefront of the tale. Chaucer removes anything which detracts from her, such as long speeches of the brothers, the speeches or debates with Maximus, etc. By editing the legends this way, Cecilia becomes the Tale’s true preacher.
By highlighting Cecilia herself, Chaucer creates a perfect contrast to the contemporary, troubled church of his time. The primitive church of Cecilia’s time is obviously the opposite of the compromised church of the late fourteenth century. This primitive church was joined by a fierce love for Christ and an ardent belief in the Gospels, while Chaucer’s contemporary church is riddled with problems stemming from its increasingly secular and political power. Cecilia stands in stark contrast to the institutions, values, and codes of this new imperial, secular Rome. If Cecilia could accuse people of her times of worshipping idols and making false gods, imagine what she would have to say about the church of Chaucer’s time!
If Chaucer was in fact making a point about the religious climate of his times, which seems quite obvious, then he did have to protect himself. Heretical and blasphemous speech was not something to be taken lightly during his time; Wyclif was eventually charged with heresy, and in the early fifteenth century, the church banned his books and tried to burn most of them. In order to protect himself from a similar fate, Chaucer created multiple screens for himself while composing the “Second Nun’s Tale.” First, if ever questioned about his motives, Chaucer could merely claim that he was retelling a story that had been told many times before, and that he did not truly mean anything by it. Because saint’s tales were so often rewritten and retold, this was not a stretch. Having a female figure tell the tale also protects Chaucer. Throughout the Canterbury Tales, nearly all of the female characters are subversive and destructive of social norms. Therefore, if he was blamed for the tale, he could say that it was the nun telling it, and not Chaucer himself, and the women were detrimental to society. Thus, Chaucer protects himself from being blamed for creating what might be seen as a program for reform for the church.
Chaucer’s political connections, the religious climate of the time, and the choice of the legend of Saint Cecilia all seem to justify classification of this tale as one for reform. The Great Schism affected the whole of Europe, and it is unlikely, if this was in fact written after all of the church’s trouble, that Chaucer would not have taken all of this into account and written about it in the Canterbury Tales.
