THE PROBLEM OF LOLLARDY

Lollard is a problematic label. A loan from the continent, where it denoted someone of dubious orthodoxy, the word lollardus was used in England from the late fourteenth century to denigrate certain theologians and preachers as heretics. (The word was linked to lolia - weeds - evoking the parable of the tares among the clean grain, Matthew 13:24-30.) The term continued to be applied as a series of episcopal investigations detected lollardi in various dioceses throughout the fifteenth century. Despite the label, there are many problems concerning the origins, coherence, and impact of Lollardy. Because of these problems, it is not possible simply to describe 'Lollard theology'.

From the earliest trials and councils in the process against Lollard heresy, the thought of the Oxford theologian John Wycliffe (d. 1384) was identified as its ideological source. A debt to Wycliffe was recognized, too, in some Lollard texts. Among modern historians of Lollardy, however, the nature and extent of that debt are the subject of debate. Until relatively recently, historians saw Lollard heresy as a debased version of John Wycliffe’s teachings that was intellectually incoherent and extremely diverse. This view was largely based on study of hostile sources: the chronicles and refutations of opponents, and the records of ecclesiastical councils and trials, for example.