confine them, until they would 'justify themselves' in the ecclesiastical courts.[1] Wycliffe petitioned against the bill, and it was rejected; not so much perhaps out of tenderness for the reformer, as because the Lower House was excited by the controversy with the Pope; and being doubtfully disposed towards the clergy, was reluctant to subject the people to a more stringent spiritual control.
But Wycliffe himself meanwhile had received a clear intimation of his own declining position. His opposition to the Church authorities, and his efforts at re-invigorating the faith of the country, had led him into doubtful statements on the nature of the eucharist; he had entangled himself in dubious metaphysics on a subject on which no middle course is really possible; and being summoned to answer for his language before a synod in London, he had thrown himself again for protection on the Duke of Lancaster. The Duke (not unnaturally under the circumstances) declined to encourage what he could neither approve nor understand;[2] and Wycliffe, by his great patron's advice, submitted. He read a confession of faith before the bishops, which was held satisfactory; Dec. 31, 1834.he was forbidden, however, to preacn again in Oxford, and retired to his living of Lutterworth, in Leicestershire, where two years later he died.
With him departed all which was best and purest in the movement which he had commenced. The zeal