PECOCK
600
PECTORAL
led him beyond the limits of his jurisdiction, and de-
puted St. Thomas of Hereford to carrj' their joint ap-
peal to Rome, where apparently it was upheld. At
Oxford he renewed the condemnation of certain errors
already censured bj- Robert Kilwardby, many of them
containing errors of Averroes, but several of them
enunciated by St. Thomas Aquinas, and afterwards
commonly accepted in Catholic schools. ("Nine-
teenth Century and after", January, 1911, p. 74.) In
forming an estimate i>f his character a complete ab-
sence of subs(r\ii'ncy antl an imswcrving adherence to
principle come into view, but his frequent exertions in
favour of the poor and against anything like oppres-
sion must not lie overlooked. His humility, sincerity,
and constancy in the duties of his office, and strict ob-
servance of his rule, won for him the admiration of hia
contemporaries. As the Apostolic protector of his
order he defended it and other Mendicant Orders
against their enemies. His remains rest in Canter-
bury Cathedral, but his heart was buried in the church
of the Grey Friars, London. A complete list of his
writings is published in "British Society of Franciscan
Studies" (vol. II, 1909), his letters (720) are found in
Martin's "Registrum Epistolarum Fr. Joannis Peck-
ham". He was an excellent poet, some of his poems
being attributed to St. Bonaventure, as was also his
"Life of St. Antony of Padua" written as Glasberger
states, at the bidding of Jerome of Ascoli, and recently
identified by F. Hilary, O.S.F.C., in a manuscript in
the Capuchin library at Lucerne.
KiNGSFORD in Diet. Nat. Biog.; Wadding; Trivet; Rodol- PH1D3, Hisioria Seraphicw Religionis; Sbar.\lea; Little, Grey- friars at Oxford; Denifle, Chartul. Vniver. Paris.
Andrew Egan.
Pecock (Peacock), Reginald, Bishop of Chiches- ter, b. in North Wales about 139.5; d. at Thorney Ab- bey about 1460. He was educated at Oriel College, Oxford, where he obtained a fellowship in 1417. Dur- ing the following years he taught in the schools belong- ing to Exeter College, obtaining a wide reputation for learning and scholarship. He was ordained priest on S March, 1421, and took the degree of bachelor in divinity four years later, about which time he left the university for the court where he won the favour of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. In 1431 he was ap- pointed master of Whittington College, London, and rector of St. Michael's-in-Riola. The activity of the London Lollards drew him into controversy against them and at this time he wrote "The Book or Rule of Christian Religion" and "Donet", an introduction to Christian doctrine which was published about 1440. In 1444 he was made Bishop of St. Asaph by papal provision dated 22 April, and on 14 June he was conse- crated by Archbishop Stafford. At the same time he took the degree of doctor in divinity at Oxford without any academic act. The bishop's troubles began with a sermon which he preached at St. Paul's Cross in 1447 which gave general offence because of his attempt to justify the bishops for not preaching. The manner of this offended both the agitators whom he attacked and the ecclesiastics whom he defended. Undaunted by the opposition, he .summarized his argument in a tract called "Abbreviatio Reginaldi Pecock." It is noteworthy that he incurred in a sjiecial degree the re- sentment of the religious orders. It was unfortunate for Pecock that he was befriended by the unpopular Duke of Suffolk, one of whose last acts before his as- sa&sination was to procure the translation of Pecock from St. Asaph's to Chichester, an api)ointment by which the bishop was attached to the falling house of Lanciister. Soon after he was ma<le a i>rivy councillor, and he was among those who signed the appointment of Richard, Duke of York, as protector during the king's illness.
About 145.5 he completed and published his best known work, "The Repressor of Over Much Blaming of the Clergy", written against Lollard doctrine, and
about a year later he issued his " Book of Fait h ". The
tendency of the.se works afforded ground for an at I ack
on him by his theological and political opponents, and
on 22 Oct., 1457, Archbishop Bourchier cited Pecock
and his accusers to appear before him on 11 Nov.
Nine books which he produced were submitted to a
commission of theologians who reported adversely on
them on tlic grounds;unong other reasons th;i( he set
the natural law:ilii)\<' llic autliority of liie Scriptures,
denied the iici-issil\- of liclicving Clirisl's descent into
hell, and lidittled the autliority of the Church. On
28 Nov., Pecock w:is sentenced either to complete pub-
lic abjuration or degradation and dc'ith at the stake.
Pecock, who all his life hail been defending the doc-
trines of the Church, though possibly in an imwise
way, had no intention of a conflict with authority, and
abjured first privately, then in public at St. Paul's
Cross, a list of errors most of which he had neither
held nor taught. The whole proceeding was illegal ac-
cording to canon law, which required the authority of
the Holy See for such a process. This became clear
when Pecock appealed to the pope, for Callistus III
sent back Bulls of restitution which were equivalent to
a condemnation of the Lambeth court. Archbishop
Bourchier received these Bulls but refused to act on
them and the king was advised to despatch an ambas-
sador to Rome to obtain their revocation. Unfortu-
nately for Pecock Callistus died, and the new pope,
Pius II, acting on Pecock's confession, ordered a new
trial with the express instructions that in case of con-
viction he was to be sent to Rome for punishment, or
if that were impossible, he was to be degraded and
punished in England as the canons decreed. In this
document Pecock is said to have already resigned his
see of his own accord. His successor John Arundel
was appointed on 26 March, 14.59, which was before
the arrival of the papal brief. There is no indication
either that he was sent to Rome or degraded, but there
is a document which shows that he was confined in the
Abbey of Thorney. There probabl}' he died, though
reports differ, but no certain account of his death has
been recorded. Space does not permit a statement of
Pecock's doctrine, but his intentions were orthodox,
and his indiscretions would certainly not have been
visited by such severe treatment had it not been for
the intrigues of his political enemies. Irregularly they
forced from him under fear of death a confession,
which Pope Pius, taking it on its merits, naturally re-
garded as evidence of his guilt.
Bishop Pecock, his Character and Fortunes in Dublin Review (January, 1875); Lewis, Life of Reynold Pecock (London, 1744); Babington. Introduction to The Repressor of Over Much Blaming of the Clergy in Rolls Series (London, 1800), 2 vols.; Cooke in Did. I^^at. Biog., giving cxliaustive list of contemporary and later references; Wager in Mod. Lang. Notes, IX. iv (1894); Gaird- NER, Lollardy and the Reformation in England (London, 1908).
Edwin Burton.
Pecs. See Funfkirchen, Diocese of.
Pectoral {'Z'~, rcu'^in ";"~. "pectoral of judg- ment"). — The original meaning of the Hebrew term has been lo.st, and little light is thrown upon it by the early translations. The prevailing equivalent in the Sept. is X67101'; the Vulgate ha.s rdlimmlc, whence the literal "rational" of the Douay Version; the render- ing in the Authorized Version is "breastplate". In the minute directions given for the distinctive official dress of the high priest in Exodus, xxviii, a section be- longing to the priestly code (cf. also Ex., xxxix, 8-21), special prominence is given to the breastplate or pec- toral. The divergent description of the same recorded by .losephus ("Antiq.", Ill, vii, 5 and "Bell.", V, v. 7) is considered less reliable. The main reason of the importance attached to the construction of the pec- toral seems to be the fact that it was the receptacle of the sacred oracular lot, the mysterious Urim and Thummim (([. v.), a consideration which renders prob- able the tentative etymologic;d signification of the original term proposed by Ewald ("Antiquities of
