terrell dg masters thesis

AMERICAN PUBLIC UNIVERSITY SYSTEM

Charles Town, West Virginia USA

JUSTICE AND MERCY: THE COMMUNICATION OF CONCEPTS THROUGH THE

LETTERS OF ROBERT GROSSETESTE, BISHOP OF LINCOLN, FROM GREGORY

THE GREAT TO JOHN WYCLIFF

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the

Requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

in

HISTORY

by

David Glenn Terrell

Department Approval Date:

September 1, 2011

The author hereby grants the American Public University System the right to display these

contents for educational purposes.

The author assumes total responsibility for meeting the requirements set by United States

Copyright Law for the inclusion of any materials that are not the author’s creation or in the

public domain.

Terrell 2

© Copyright 2011 by David Glenn Terrell.

Except where otherwise noted, content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-

Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.1 For permission to use content

under terms outside this license, contact the author.2

1 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

2 [email protected]

Terrell 3

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to my family and friends, whose strong support of my decision to

undertake my Master’s program, and patient understanding and acceptance of my attending to its

intense reading schedules and the demands of satisfying its writing deadlines, allowed me to

progress towards achieving a childhood dream, to become a historian.

Terrell 4

Acknowledgements

I am indebted to those who taught me to think: my parents, Byron and Annette Terrell;

and, the teachers of my youth, especially Mrs. Mary Lou Baylor, Mr. William “Bill” Traylor,

and, Mr. Marshall Toppel. I am grateful to my professors at American Military University,

especially Drs. Dorothy A. Slane and Stanley D. M. Carpenter, for their insight, conversation,

and example—all of which I hope to emulate. I also thank Dr. Don Sine for his guidance and

support given me during the writing of this thesis.

Terrell 5

ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS

JUSTICE AND MERCY: THE COMMUNICATION OF CONCEPTS THROUGH THE

LETTERS OF ROBERT GROSSETESTE, BISHOP OF LINCOLN, FROM GREGORY

THE GREAT TO JOHN WYCLIFF

by

David Glenn Terrell

American Public University System, September 1, 2011

Charles Town, West Virginia USA

Dr. Don Sine, Thesis Professor

Robert Grosseteste (c. 1168-1253), an English, Catholic theologian, learned many

theological concepts through the study of the works of earlier theologians. For example, he

derived an understanding of divine Justice and Mercy, as a concept, from Gregory the Great’s

Moralia in Iob; and expressed his views upon it often, in his letters. Later, his papers fell under

the eye of John Wycliff (1328-1384), who, in turn, incorporated many Grossetestean views into

his own theology; including those about Justice and Mercy Grosseteste derived from Gregory.

This thesis examines the transmission of Gregory’s conceptualization of Justice and Mercy to

Wycliff, through the medium of Grosseteste’s letters. This researcher examined the Moralia,

Grosseteste’s letters, and Wycliff’s English Sermons, seeking evidence of a common

conceptualization of Justice and Mercy. Analysis of the results support the idea that Grosseteste

founded his beliefs about Justice and Mercy upon views expressed in Gregory’s Moralia and,

giving them expression in his letters, influenced Wycliff’s theological position relative to the

same.

Terrell 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER

PAGE

DEDICATION

3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

4

ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS

5

I INTRODUCTION

7

II LITERATURE REVIEW

12

III ROBERT GROSSETESTE AND HIS WORLD

19

IV JUSTICE AND MERCY IN GREGORY THE GREAT’S MORALIA IN

IOB

29

V JUSTICE AND MERCY IN GROSSETESTE’S LETTERS

44

VI JUSTICE AND MERCY IN WYCLIFF’S SERMONS

66

VII CONCLUSIONS

81

BIBLIOGRAPHY

91

Terrell 7

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Bishop Robert Grosseteste of Lincoln (c. 1168-1253) was an English Catholic statesman,

scientist, metaphysician, philosopher, theologian and pastor. He lived during the re-

crystallization of medieval Europe’s civic, intellectual and religious institutions from the

scattered fragments surviving late Antiquity. He was present at the First Council of Lyons

(1245), which excommunicated Emperor Fredrick II; and, was an early advocate of reforms

targeting practices whose continued exhibition would later contribute to the fragmentation of

western Christendom. His extant writings include philosophical and scientific texts,

commentaries on Aristotle, scriptural analysis, sermons, translations of Greek patristic writers,

and over 130 letters. These letters provide the modern researcher with valuable insights into the

ideas, attitudes, concerns and practices of early 13th

century English clergy and laity.3

For the two centuries after his death, Grosseteste’s writings exercised a significant

influence upon English philosophy and theology. For example, John Wycliff (1328-1384), bible

translator and proto-Reformer, ranked Grosseteste above Aristotle in intellectual regard.

Grosseteste’s opposition to abuses of curial and papal prerogatives; his assertions about the

primacy of Scripture; and, his faith that Christ lay at the center of God’s covenant with mankind,

became central ideas in Wycliff’s theology. However, in spite of being labeled “the first

reformer”, Grosseteste never recanted his sincere devotion to catholic doctrine, never abjured his

3 Robert Grosseteste, The Letters of Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln, (Translated by F. A. C.

Mantello, & Joseph Goering, Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2010), 3; James McEvoy, "Robert Grosseteste: The

Man and His Legacy" (In Editing Robert Grosseteste, edited by Evelyn A Mackie, & Joseph Goering, 3-30.

Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003), 18.

Terrell 8

ultimate obedience to Papal authority, and always and insistently supported a unified

Christendom.4

In subsequent centuries, scholars have viewed Grosseteste as a reformer, a teacher, and a

statesman and have used these labels to give context to their examination of his many efforts: to

reform the church, dauntlessly striving to correct curial abuses; to improve the education of his

colleagues, reviving the study of ancient languages and promoting clerical instruction in ancient

and classical thought; and, to promote the liberties of the church relative to secular authority.

Through each lens, finds a consistent thread; Grosseteste’s insistence “that abstract notions such

as love, truth, mercy, justice, and peace should have real consequences in human action and the

life of the church.” 5

Of interest to this researcher is the evolution of Christian conceptualizations of Justice

and Mercy, which figured prominently in the soteriological writings of Protestant reformers,

including those of John Wycliff. Robert Grosseteste derived his conceptualization of divine

Justice and Mercy from Gregory the Great’s Moralia in Iob (Moralia on Job) and, through

expression in his extant letters, influenced Wycliff’s theological position relative to the same.

Pope Gregory “the Great” (540-604) is one of the doctors of the early church who

wrestled with the theological doctrines of his day, including the role of Christ, the character of

the Eucharist, the existence of purgatory, and the nature of the Trinity.6 He also concerned

himself with the doctrine of Justice and Mercy, presenting his views best in his Moralia on Job,

4 Stephen E. Lahey, John Wycliff, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 139-140; Francis Seymour

Stevenson, Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln: A Contribution to the Religious, Political and Intellectual History

of the Thirteenth Century, (London: MacMillan & Co. , 1899), 335-336.

5 Grosseteste, Letters, 21; Stevenson, 337.

6 Jaroslav Pelikan, The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600), (Chicago: University of Chicago

Press, 1971), 274, 355, 334-339, 355-356, 336.

Terrell 9

a commentary on the Old Testament book of Job. Gregory extolled Job’s virtues, especially the

patient acceptance of suffering that Job exemplified.7

Gregory believed that Christians should face God’s Justice and Mercy by righteous action

classifiable into six virtues. Anticipating Justice, Christians were to live a life of Duty to God,

having a righteous Fear of God’s judgment over their human failings, and making proper

Restitution for the effects of those failings on others. Hoping for Mercy, they were endure

Suffering without railing against God, performing Penance to demonstrate contrition, while

striving to find Acceptance and a measure of peace in one’s tribulation.

Mantello and Goering, who translated and annotated Grosseteste’s letters in 2010, assert

that Grosseteste, in almost every letter, wrestled over these same issues. This researcher read the

Moralia and examined Grosseteste’s letters in detail, identifying and understanding his notions

of, and attitudes about, Justice and Mercy and found significant similarities, especially through

the six notional virtues describing Gregory’s ideal Christian accommodation to God’s imposition

of Justice and promise of Mercy.

John Wycliff is usually regarded for fomenting religious antagonism, if not rebellion.

However, he was also, like Grosseteste, a dedicated preacher concerned with the salvation of his

fellow Christians. This researcher believes that Wycliff developed his understanding of Justice

and Mercy through the medium of Grosseteste’s letters, during his studies at Oxford.

Accordingly, this researcher examined Wycliff’s English Sermons for signs that his

conceptualization of Justice and Mercy is similar to that Grosseteste derived from his studies of

Gregory.

7 Kevin L Hester, Eschatology and Pain in St. Gregory the Great: The Christological Synthesis of

Gregory's 'Morals on the Book of Job', (Bletchley: Paternoster, 2007), 97; Gregory, Moralia, Preface, 6. 14.

Terrell 10

In pursuit of proving this thesis, this researcher examined the following primary sources:

Gregory’s commentary on the Book of Job, Moralia in Iob (Moralia on Job); Grosseteste’s

letters, and several of his sermons and poems; and, Wycliff’s English Sermons. Biographies

about Grosseteste helped this researcher determine that earlier historians had not specifically

addressed his conceptualization of Justice and Mercy. Other scholarly works written about

Gregory, Grosseteste, and Wycliff provided useful assessments of their several attitudes, works,

and theology. Appropriate general histories provided knowledge of 12th

century western

philosophy and theology against which one could measure Grosseteste.

This thesis is organized as follows: (1) an Introduction to the thesis and to Robert

Grosseteste, his historical position, and the methodology pursued by the researcher; (2) a

literature review; (3) a brief biography of Grosseteste; (4) a discussion of Justice and Mercy as

expressed in Gregory the Great’s Moralia in Iob; (5) a review of Grosseteste’s letters,

documenting references to Justice and Mercy; (6) a review of John Wycliff’s Sermons relative to

the same; and, (7) Conclusions.

The research supports the thesis, in that Grosseteste’s letters contained many references

to his expectation, derived from the Moralia, that the fundamental force balancing Justice and

Mercy is the experience of, and response to, suffering. Both believed that suffering was an

unavoidable characteristic of life God uses for both the punishment and salvation of mankind.

Wycliff, in his turn, read Grosseteste’s annotated works and letters, came to admire him and to

believe his assurance that, through suffering, God is preparing humanity against the Last

Judgment. Wycliff listened, learned and, in his turn, taught others similarly. Demonstrating the

plausibility that Grosseteste was the intermediary for transmitting this concept from Gregory to

Wycliff illuminates how this fundamental Christian concept moved from the 5th century to the

Terrell 11

14th century relatively unchanged, and acknowledges Grosseteste’s largely unheralded influence

upon modern Christianity.8

8 Diarmaid MacCulloch, The Reformation, (New York: Penguin Books, 2004), 106-152; Grosseteste,

Letters, 21-22.

Terrell 12

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

The sources contributing to this thesis consisted of the primary and secondary sources

necessary to ascertain the attitudes and views concerning the theology of divine Justice and

Mercy in the works of Grosseteste, those who influenced him, and John Wycliff. These

consisted primarily of Grosseteste’s own letters, Sermons and other pastoral writings.9

Grosseteste-centric Sources

Letters and Autographic Documents. Grosseteste’s letters became more accessible in a

2010 work, in which Mantello and Goering translated and annotated his 132 extant letters in

English. The letters serve to illustrate Grosseteste’s character, convictions, assumptions and

concerns. Mantello and Goering distinguished between those letters and documents Grosseteste

included in his official collection, probably meant for official dissemination, and a second group

of letters that survived outside of the collection. Considered in contemporary terms, the letters

represent a fascinating collection of official correspondence in which Grosseteste provided

instruction, requested favors, or offered advice and personal communications.10

Biographies. Other sources of value were the five, readily locatable, Grosseteste

biographies. 11

The earliest, written by Samuel Pegge in 1793, is written in two parts. The first

is a straight narrative that chronicles Grosseteste’s interactions with papal and secular authority;

and, his actions as Bishop relative to his immediate superiors and subordinates. The second part

9 Lahey, 140.

10 Grosseteste, Letters, 3-6.

11 There are six Grosseteste biographies, by: Richard of Bardney (1502), Pegge (1793), Perry (1871),

Stevenson (1899), Southern (1986), and McEvoy (2000). That written by Richard of Bardney proved impossible to

locate.

Terrell 13

of Pegge’s work consists of an examination of Grosseteste’s character as expressed through the

testimony of his contemporaries; and, a catalog of his works.

George Perry’s biography, written in 1871, is another narrative which positions

Grosseteste as the proto-protestant of the 13th century. Perry’s entire narrative focus is upon the

vice and corruption Grosseteste found in the church once he became Bishop. Any analysis of

Grosseteste’s theological stance within the volume must be inferred from Perry’s assessments of

his opinions and intentions. That said, as Perry concludes the story of Grosseteste’s life, he

dwells upon his character in a manner that makes this researcher believe that, between Perry’s

obvious anti-Catholicism and English nationalism, one could glean some sense of Grosseteste’s

theological attitudes as Perry understood them.

In contrast, Francis S. Stevenson’s 1899 work eschewed unveiled anti-Catholicism.

Stevenson does acknowledge that there is ambiguity in factual knowledge concerning

Grosseteste’s life and career, stemming from a lack of information, and admits that previous

interpretation may have been biased. He also availed himself of papal registers that previous

biographers did not and his use of these materials served to provide a more nuanced conception

of Grosseteste’s opinions and attitudes.

The next biography was published by R. W. Southern in 1986. During the intervening 90

years, Grosseteste scholars had continued to translate, analyze and disseminate his writings but,

no new biographies emerged. Southern revisited Grosseteste’s life because he came to believe

that previous biographies were incorrect in their assumption that Grosseteste studied in Paris.

Partially driving this was Southern’s understanding of the critical importance that education in

Paris played in the career of 13th century clerics. While there are no explicit records to indicate

Grosseteste had schooled in Paris, his chancellorship at Oxford and his call to the Bishopric in

Terrell 14

Lincoln assured later scholars that he had. Southern points to Grosseteste’s early career as a

natural philosopher, his style of speech, and his modes of argument as evidence he studied in

English provincial schools, perhaps at Oxford itself, contradicting those who insisted he studied

in France. Southern’s biography is not a pure narrative. Instead, it traces the history of

Grosseteste’s scientific and theological modes of thinking—his “vision.” Later in the book,

Southern examines Grosseteste’s thought pertaining to God as it evolved over time, where this

researcher found hints of Grosseteste’s theological positions.

Finally, James McEvoy wrote his work in 2000 as part of the Great Mediaeval Thinkers

series published by Oxford University Press. McEvoy intended his book to provide an overall

view of Grosseteste’s life, philosophy and theology; to examine Grossetestean historiography;

and, provide readers with insights into the historical origins of Grosseteste’s thought. One of the

book’s aims, “to expound Grosseteste’s thought on the basis of his authentic writings, and

insofar as possible to understand his own ideas and initiatives in the light of developments taking

place around him…,”12

makes the book explicitly applicable to the thesis.

Studies and Essays. When reviewing scholarly publications about Grosseteste, one

finds that the overwhelming majority of work has examined him as a philosopher or in a politico-

religious context. In a sense, scholarship overlooked his many writings on pastoral theology, the

time he spent as a professor of theology at Oxford, and his continued interest in theological

issues while Bishop of Lincoln. In 2004, James Ginther published his study of Grosseteste as

theologian, in which he examines the focus of Grosseteste’s theology, naming it “the person and

work of Christ” and surveys the state of Christian doctrine in the 13th century, all relevant to this

thesis.

12 James McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), xiv.

Terrell 15

An earlier book of essays, edited by D. A. Callus and published in 1953, commemorated

the seventh centenary of Grosseteste’s death. Of interest to this researcher are two essays in this

volume. In the first, William Pantin describes and evaluates Grosseteste’s relations with both

pope and king, detailing many theological and pastoral attitudes Grosseteste exhibited while

Bishop. The second, by Beryl Smalley, speaks of Grosseteste as a Biblical scholar and discusses

his style, outlook, technique, and preferences with regard to analyzing scriptural and pseudo-

Biblical works. Although attitudes pertaining to this thesis are not specifically addressed, one

can infer characteristics of Grosseteste’s attitudes about Justice and Mercy from his opinions

about related Biblical issues.

In 2003, Mackie and Goering edited a collection of essays that discussed several of

Grosseteste’s works. This included an essay by Mackie about the “Castle of Love”, a poem

written by Grosseteste said to contain the heart of his theology. Overall, the work discusses

aspects of editing Grosseteste’s works and its examination of their “authenticity, chronology,

textual transmission, editorial practice, and contemporary sources and influences,”13

which

provides essential information that assisted this researcher to arrive at reasonable interpretations,

and to make supportable assertions.

Gregory the Great

Upon his death, Grosseteste left his substantial library to the Oxford University, giving

scholars access to his reading and the valuable marginal notes inscribed within. From these

books and textural analysis of Grosseteste’s letters, it is clear that he revered Gregory the Great,

especially his Moralia on Job.

13 Evelyn A Mackie, and Joseph Goering, Editing Robert Grosseteste, (Toronto: Toronto University Press,

2003), dust jacket.

Terrell 16

This researcher based assertions pertaining to Gregory’s attitudes towards Justice and

Mercy primarily upon a valuable work by Kevin Hester. His Eschatology and Pain in St.

Gregory the Great: The Christological Synthesis of Gregory's 'Morals on the Book of Job'

thoroughly discusses Gregory’s eschatology and christology, in which he declares the experience

of pain to be useful in the motivation of a Christian towards spiritual advancement and eventual

salvation at the Last Judgment. The work was also a valuable guide to reading and understanding

the Moralia.

Mainstream Thirteenth-century Theology

To provide foundational knowledge about Justice and Mercy, as 13th century theological

concepts, this researcher utilized several reputable general, intellectual and theological histories,

sourcebooks, monographs, and papers. These included: Maurice Powicke’s The Thirteenth

Century; Charles Haskins’ The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century; Gillian Evans’ Philosophy

and Theology in the Middle Ages; Jaroslav Pelikan’s most valuable sourcebooks, The Emergence

of the Catholic Tradition (100-600), The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700), The Growth

of Medieval Theology (600-1300), Reformation of Church and Dogma (1300-1700) and

Christian Doctrine and Modern Culture (since 1700); Gregg Allison’s Historical Theology; Leo

Donald Davis’ The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787): Their History and Theology;

Jon D. Levenson’s Sinai & Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible; Gregory Sadler’s Mercy and

Justice in St. Anselm’s Proslogion; Robert Brentano’s Two churches: England and Italy in the

thirteenth century; and, Mary Mansfield’s The Humiliation of Sinners: Public Penance in

Thirteenth-century France. Additionally, this researcher consulted the works of Thomas

Aquinas, particularly the Summa Theologica and his Commentary on the Sentences of Peter

Lombard with an eye to illuminating then-contemporary contrasts to Grosseteste’s attitudes on

Justice and Mercy.

Terrell 17

Wycliff’s Theology and the Reformation

If Wycliff, as an Oxonian theologian critical of Church abuses and corruption, was

exposed to Grosseteste’s papers and then espoused ideas traceable to Grosseteste, then it is

possible to assert a transmission of ideas from Grosseteste to Wycliff and thence into the

Protestant Reformation. To address the aspect of the thesis pertaining to the transmittal of

Grosseteste’s ideas to Wycliff, this researcher consulted recent histories focusing upon Wycliff’s

thought and upon histories examining the roots of the Protestant Reformation. Stephen E.

Lahey’s John Wycliff, another biography in Oxford’s Great Mediaeval Thinkers series, provides

valuable information about his attitudes and beliefs.

Wycliff’s sermons consist of two bodies of writing. The first, written in Latin, probably

for an educated audience, were edited and published in four volumes by Johannes Loserth in

1887 for the Wycliff Society of London. The second, written in English, were collected and

edited by Thomas Arnold in 1868. Although their authorship is not perfectly ascertained, Arnold

was convinced that Wycliff authored them. 14

As this researcher currently lacks Latin reading

skills and, in the absence of English translations of Wycliff’s Latin Sermons, except a few partial

translations Loserth provides, this researcher will concentrate on the English Sermons in the

search for similarities to Grosseteste’s conceptualization of Justice and Mercy.

The general history, The Reformation, written by Diarmaid MacCulloch in 2003,

provides information about general aspects of the period including, changes in the manner clergy

and laity conceived of God as both judge and redeemer. Steven Ozment’s 1980 work, The Age

of Reform (1250-1550), was valuable in its investigation of the reformation as a continuation of

some domains of mediaeval thought while it revolted from others. In a brief exploration for

14 John Wyclif, and Thomas Arnold, Select English Works of John Wyclif, (Vol. I. III vols. Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1871), xiv-xv.

Terrell 18

signs that Grosseteste’s ideas on Justice and Mercy truly survived to be incorporated into the

roots of the Protestant Reformation, this researcher examined Jaroslav Pelikan’s previously

mentioned sourcebooks and Roland Bainton’s 1950 landmark biography and intellectual history

of Martin Luther, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther.

Terrell 19

CHAPTER III

ROBERT GROSSETESTE AND HIS WORLD

Feudalism, the Church, and the Universities were the great European mediaeval

institutions. Their development between c.800 and 1300, eventually led to the dissemination of

knowledge developed in antiquity across large numbers of people, throughout many centers of

learning, and fueled the later era of rapid religious, intellectual, and political transformation. The

transition from European antiquity to classical Europe began about the second quarter of the 12th

century, with the rediscovery of ancient learning that had survived in Greek and Arabic texts

brought to the west as a result of trade and scholarly clerics fleeing the sack of Constantinople in

the Fourth Crusade. Once rediscovered, the “new science” continued to affect Europe into the

13th century, as the ancient texts were translated and absorbed into the curricula of the European

universities. By the year 1200, this “mediaeval renaissance” is widespread, and by Grosseteste’s

death, has irreversibly changed Europe, setting it on the course that would lead to renaissance,

reformation and enlightenment. During this time, France was important as a center of

theological learning. Spain, influenced by Moorish thinking, functioned primarily as an

information conduit, funneling information and documents, arriving by sea from the east, to the

north of Europe. England proved to be a primary adopter of innovation, particularly with regard

to technologies related to the design and manufacture of devices.15

The 12th century, or more precisely, the one hundred years ending with the Fourth

Crusade’s sack of Constantinople in 1204, did constitute a renaissance of sorts—marked in the

beginning by the rise in prominence of the cathedral schools, and continuing through the creation

15 Charles Homer Haskins, The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard

University Press, 1927), 4, 10-11.

Terrell 20

of the earliest universities at Salerno, Bologna, Montpellier, Paris, and Oxford. The scope and

curriculum of higher education evolves during this century, the seven liberal arts giving way to:

Roman law, both secular and canon; the Ancients, including Aristotle, Euclid, and Ptolemy; and,

the Greek and Arabic Physicians who expanded upon them. The intellectual centers thus

developing during the 12 and 13th century formed around bodies of men who were literate and

engaged in the pursuit of theological or secular learning, or the creation and promulgation of law,

such as those found surrounding universities, cathedrals, and the courts and administrative

departments which formed in the larger towns and cities. This was a change from the

immediately preceding centuries, when monasteries were the chief centers of culture.16

Grosseteste’s adult life, straddling the end of the 12th century and the beginning of the

13th century, was a period of great transitions. In literature, art and architecture, the stolid and

squat old Romanesque gave way to the airy, tall and new Gothic. Opportunities for learning

expanded, in both the scope of subjects and the dissemination of knowledge, through the

consistent use of Latin as a near-universal language in the West. At the same time, new forms of

literature became available to larger numbers of people through the use of the vernacular.

Nevertheless, the fairly frequent dearth of material in the historical record adversely affects a

modern historian’s ability to make well-supported assessments. For example, the chronology of

Grosseteste’s career, especially the years before he became Bishop, is not firmly fixed.

Southern’s chronology, the most reasonable to this researcher, positions Grosseteste as a scientist

and natural philosopher from about 1195 to 1225, as a practicing theologian between 1225 and

1235, and as Bishop from 1235 to the end of his life in 1253. This chronology is conjectural, as

there is almost no record of Grosseteste’s early education but, because of the prevalence and

16 Haskins, 6, 32-33.

Terrell 21

prestige of the Parisian schools, and the almost universal use of Parisian-trained clerics in the

Bishoprics of the church, Callus assumes that Grosseteste was a joint product of Paris and

Oxford. Other scholars, especially Southern, assert that Grosseteste’s strong independence and

unconventional academic methods argue against his having been trained in Paris; an assertion

shared by this researcher. Southern asserted that Grosseteste was strictly a product of the

English provincial schools, and represented a pure example of a 12th

century English scientific

mind, unaffected by years of continental scholasticism. Southern bases much of his assertion

upon Grosseteste’s scientific originality, arguing that only an insular education would have

allowed him to mature without killing his uncertainty about the nature of being, natural

phenomena, and the zoological and physical wonders of the world. Grosseteste was not strictly

dogmatic about science, nor was he a slavishly bound to Patristic writers. Because he came to

the study of theology later in life, his mind had already assumed a cast molded differently from

those produced by the continental schools, particularly those in Paris, where scholastic authority

defined intellectualism. In classifying Grosseteste, Southern dwells upon his theological non-

conformity; his early interest in conducting scientific, observation-based studies; his willingness

to focus exclusively upon his pastoral responsibilities; his openness to the theology he finds in

his studies of Greek writers; and, his passionate, even violent espousal of his principles.

Grosseteste exemplified a new type of man emerging in Europe, interested in re-examining the

past with a new energy that we have come to call humanism. One hesitates to define Grosseteste

as a humanist but, he was a curious man, interested in the origins of ideas and in knowing about

the men who had originally thought them. In spite of his erudition and insight, Grosseteste’s

influence only extended a little over 150 years after his death. He is not well known today, even

to the informed public and academic community.17

17 R.W. Southern, Robert Grosseteste: The Growth of an English Mind in Medieval Europe, (Oxford:

Terrell 22

When trying to understand Grosseteste’s intellectual contributions, one is best served by

viewing him against the contemporary environment at Oxford. When Grosseteste was

chancellor of Oxford, the curriculum concentrated on the study of the Holy Scriptures,

interpreted through the works of Church Fathers and argued utilizing Aristotelian reasoning. In

spite of his leadership, this situation did not continue long after he left Oxford for his bishopric in

Lincoln. By the time of his death, theologians educated in Paris and teaching at Oxford had

standardized the curriculum to the continental model, which focused almost exclusively on

scholastic authors, especially the Sentences, written by Peter Lombard—to the diminishing of

scriptural study.

Grosseteste is notable as a theologian and philosopher because of his incorporation of

“scientific” modes of reasoning into his theology and willingness to seek out and appeal to

earlier works, such as his translations of Greek classics and the works of Eastern Christian

writers. His points of view and temporal setting situate him squarely between Aristotle and

Descartes. Grosseteste’s ecclesiastic career gives ample evidence of his sincerity in performing

the duties assigned to him and, of insisting upon rectitude of conduct in himself and those under

his authority. He became a model, exemplifying the uncompromising reformer, known for

fairness, strict judgment and a fiery temper displayed in the pursuit of both. 18

A possible source of Grosseteste’s temperamental nature is his origins. Grosseteste was

from peasant stock; a condition held against him by more aristocratic members of clergy and

nobility. His laying aside of science, when called to be a theologian; and, his similar stepping

away from teaching when called to be a pastor exemplified his devotion to the church and to

Oxford University Press, 1986), 24,140; Haskins, 6; McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, xiii-xiv, 23.

18 McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, i; George G Perry, The Life and Times of Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of

Lincoln, (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1871), 18-20.

Terrell 23

those souls whose care were placed in his charge. Grosseteste was born around 1170, probably in

a small town in Lincolnshire, to an Anglo-Norman-speaking peasant family; a later source of

scorn heaped upon him by those of more aristocratic lineage. The first decade of his life

coincided with significant political and religious upheaval in the Holy Roman Empire and the

British Isles. The dispute between King Henry II and Archbishop Thomas Becket crested when

Grosseteste was two years old. Before he was 10, Queen Eleanor would raise Aquitaine against

Henry II, be defeated and then imprisoned; the Waldensian movement would begin at Lyons; the

first authenticated influenza epidemics would be recorded; and, Henry II would do penance at

Canterbury. By the time Grosseteste would reach 30 years of age, the Muslims would take

Jerusalem, and Richard I (“the Lion’s Heart”) would succeed Henry II; only to be imprisoned

during the Third Crusade, released, crowned for a second time, and killed in war with France.19

Around age 30, Grosseteste entered upon an administrative career, taking service with the

Bishop of Hereford, home to a cathedral school where Roger of Hereford and Alfred Sareshel,

renowned masters of learning, were teaching the “new science”, based upon recent translations

of Greek and Arabic texts. These years were also notable for the growing number and size of

universities, which were beginning to replace the monasteries as chief centers of culture. 20

Between 1202 and 1204, while Grosseteste was in his mid-thirties, the fourth crusade

raged in far Eastern Europe. The sack of Constantinople would shatter the eastern empire but,

monks fleeing to the west, and secular nobles returning for war, would infuse Europe with a

great mass of Greek documents. The papacy, in the hands of Pope Innocent III, asserts papal

authority over the Empire; places England under interdict; preaches for an unprecedented

19 Perry, 17-20; McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, 20; Bernard Grun, The Timetables of History, (Third Revised

Edition. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1991), 156-163.

20 Southern, liii; McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, xi; Grun, 162-3; Haskins, 33.

Terrell 24

crusade within Europe; and, excommunicates both King John of England and the emperor, Otto

IV.21

Although professionally an administrator, Grosseteste’s personal interests between

approximately 1198 and 1222 were scientific. After this period, Grosseteste became increasingly

focused upon theology. Sometime around the year 1214, Oxford University was founded.

Grosseteste returned to Oxford and became both lecturer in theology and chancellor for about 20

years.22

He entered clerical orders as a deacon in 1225, the year after the first Franciscan friars

entered England; and, he served as an archdeacon between 1229 and 1231.23

His extant scientific

works from this period include explorations of the scintillation of stars; the origin of sound; the

flooding of the Nile; the nature of color, light, eclipses, comets and the tides; the structure of the

calendar; the causes of thunder; and, commentaries upon Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics and

Physics.24

The years of Grosseteste’s scientific and theological studies were prolific, in terms of

academic work. He established himself as a preeminent natural philosopher and an innovative,

independent-minded theologian; and, would continue to teach theology at Oxford until 1230,

when he became the first lector of the Franciscans at the university; an undertaking he continued

for five years, ending with his election as Bishop, in June, 1235.25

Grosseteste was over 65 years of age in 1235, when he became Bishop of Lincoln, the

largest diocese in England. He was an atypical candidate. Southern asserts that Grosseteste

21 Grun, 164-5; James Trager, The People's Chronology: A Year-by-Year Record of Human Events from

Prehistory to the Present, (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1992), 103-4.

22 McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, xi.

23 Southern, xviii; McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, 25-29; Grun, 168-9; Richard C Dales, "Robert

Grosseteste's Scientific Works," (Isis, 1961: 381-402), 402; Trager, 107.

24 Southern 125-160.

25 Southern, xviii; McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, xi, 25-29.

Terrell 25

never studied in Paris—normally a critical qualification for higher clerical office— and, that he

may not even have studied at Oxford. Instead, Southern believes that he received a provincial

education, probably in Lincoln, at the cathedral school, or at Cambridge. If true, his provincial

background may explain his lack of “systemic moderation which is one of the distinguishing

marks of scholastic thought”26

while it also explains his individuality.27

Grosseteste was Bishop of Lincoln for 18 years, from 1235 to his death in 1253. During

his life, he established himself as a master of Aristotelian logic and had contributed to the rising

conversation concerning mathematics and natural phenomenon. He wrote a well-received

treatise on the nature and metaphysical meaning of light that combined his philosophical and

theological interests. He learned Greek at an advanced age, when it was most unusual for any

Roman Catholic cleric to do so, and translated several Greek philosophical and theological works

into Latin, including the Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs by Pseudo-Dionysus. In spite of a

strict, traditional theological outlook, Grosseteste contributed some distinctive theological

attitudes and views for discussion by the academic community, including views concerning

divine Justice and Mercy this researcher believes derived from his interest in and admiration for

Gregory the Great’s Moralia on Job.28

To assist one achieve an understanding of Grosseteste’s attitudes, it is useful to examine

the philosophy he lived. Grosseteste, as a Bishop and pastor, was intent upon the necessity of

having a qualified, attentive, and responsible priest in every parish of his see. Shortly after his

installation, he published a letter to his archdeacons in which he described certain abuses and

exhorted them to reform them. Repeatedly, he asserted that the work of the parish priest and the

26 Southern, vii.

27 Southern, vii-xviii; McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, 21-25.

28 McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, xii.

Terrell 26

rural monk was more than outward manifestations of administering the sacraments and

celebrating masses. For Grosseteste, the main work of the pastor was that exemplified by Christ,

the Great Shepherd; feeding the hungry, covering the naked, visiting the sick, teaching spiritual

truth, condemning vice, and severely punishing vice when necessary. His commitment to this

ideal exceeded his sympathy with the financial difficulties faced by the papal curia. He hated the

abuses inherent in the assignment of unqualified or absent parish priests. His letters proclaim his

views about the significant threat to the spiritual welfare of simple Christians posed by absent or

inept priests. However, one should note that Grosseteste was just as hard on himself. Once

made Bishop, he evidenced continual concern for the spiritual welfare of those in his charge. He

often agonized over the prospect of failing in this responsibility, facing Christ at the Last

Judgment, and suffering eternal damnation as a result. This fear and expectation caused him to

preach often to his clergy, plainly describing their duties and exhorting them to obedience and

responsible attendants to those duties. In response, some accused him of intolerance, impatience

and of being an enemy to the monks and priests subordinate to him. However, it is clear that this

was never the case when these individuals followed the rule of their respective orders. It is

unjust to accuse him of oppression while he was attempting to eliminate vice and correct

irregularity. 29

In his zeal, Grosseteste removed from their positions at least eleven heads of subordinate

religious communities in his first several years as Bishop. His standards in this regard were

clearly more sharply defined and insisted upon more energetically than were those of his

contemporaries. Grosseteste considered the pastoral care provided by a good priest to be a

significant component of God’s mercy. He believed those who had accepted the tonsure, yet

29

Robert Brentano, Two Churches: England and Italy in the Thirteenth Century, (Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 1968), 7; Perry, 16, 86-7, 119, 136, 215, 230-1; Samuel Pegge, The Life of Robert Grosseteste, the

Celebrated Bishop of Lincoln, (London: Society of Antiquaries, 1793), 38, 141, 254; Southern, 7.

Terrell 27

provided for their own carnal and temporal needs from the tithes and offerings of the church,

endangered the souls of both themselves and of those people in their charge. 30

Very few Bishops rose from humble origins, which argue that Grosseteste was clearly an

exceptional individual whose intellectual background and theological and social orthodoxy were

acceptable to the canons of the cathedral, the pope and the king. Certainly, had this not been the

case, Grosseteste would never have become Bishop of the largest diocese in England. 31

Two ideas drove Grosseteste during his episcopate. First, he was certain in his belief in

an imminent, post-mortal judgment at the hands of Jesus Christ. Second, he anticipated Jesus

Christ holding him to a higher standard of performance and conformance to Christian virtue,

based upon his acceptance of Holy Orders and its covenant assigning him personal responsibility

for the spiritual and pastoral care of souls in his care. He knew that he was responsible for more

than his own behavior and that he would be held accountable at the Last Judgment. This deeply-

held belief was the source of his insistence upon the appointment of educated and worthy parish

priests, the correction of abuses, and a preference for employing Dominicans and Franciscans as

preachers. 32

For Grosseteste, theology was a discipline that called one to courageously express one’s

beliefs in morality and with the use of intellect. 33

In seeking the source of his courage, one

wonders if its origins lay in his science. His scientific curiosity and the satisfaction he derived

from returning to first principles and deriving useful knowledge empowered him to go to the

30 Southern, 260; Perry, 267.

31 Southern, 5.

32 McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, 30.

33 McEvoy, Robert Grosseteste, 7.

Terrell 28

scriptures and, using clear logic and many illustrations drawn by analogy from the natural world

and people around him, express views unaligned with the masters held up by the scholastics. 34

Grosseteste therefore read the scriptures and the works of the church fathers with benefit,

incorporating their conceptualizations into his theological worldview. His reading preferences

gave priority to Augustine’s City of God and to Gregory’s commentary on Job, based upon an

analysis by Southern that indexed Grosseteste’s references to other authors. We are fortunate

that Grosseteste’s copy of the Moralia is still extant. The annotations in the book demonstrate the

intensity with which he read and pondered Gregory’s work. Unsurprisingly, he references the

Moralia more frequently than any book except Augustine’s City of God. 35

34 Perry, 57.

35 Southern, 198

Terrell 29

CHAPTER IV

JUSTICE AND MERCY IN GREGORY THE GREAT’S MORALIA IN IOB

In the centuries following the origin of Christianity, the nascent religion repeatedly

confronted two theological issues. First, Christianity, as a monotheistic religion arising out of

Judaism, had to resolve a seeming contradiction resulting from their assertion that the mortal

Jesus was also the divine Christ; who was also God, but not God. Second, the religion became

deeply concerned about the post-mortal status of man relative to God, embodied in whether

one’s eternity would be spent in heaven or hell, represented metaphorically as Eden (or Zion)

and Babylon, respectively. Eden represented a paradisiacal world, as created by God, for his

human children—who were, originally, worthy to live in it. After Adam’s willful disobedience

of God, man, now unfit to enjoy God’s personal presence, was cast out of Eden into a world

without God, metaphorically typified under the name of Babylon. Within this framework,

humanity’s only hope for reunion with God lay in the redemption and salvation wrought by the

Christian atonement that freed the Elect from sin; rendering them worthy to enter Zion, a place

of purity where God can dwell; leaving the Reprobate to suffer torment in Hell.36

However, the Christian religion, formed in an oriental mind comfortable with continuing

uncertainty inherent in such inscrutable divine mysteries, collided with the intellectual mindset

of the Hellenes and the legalistic paradigms of the Romans. 37

Church fathers, such as

36 Jon D Levenson, Sinai & Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible, (New York: HarperCollins, 1985), 111-

136.

37 Ori Brafman, and Rod A Beckstrom, The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations, (New York: Penguin Books, 2008), 19; Leo Donald Davis, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils

(325-787): Their History and Theology, (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1983), 33; David G Terrell,

"Historical Evaluation of the First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787)," Scribd.com Portfolio of David G Terrell,

(February 26, 2010, http://www.scribd.com/doc/31886314/terrell-dg-historical-evaluation-of-the-first-seven-

ecumenical-councils-325-787-scribd (accessed June 26, 2011)), 1.

Terrell 30

Augustine, wrestled with trying to reconcile divine foreknowledge—within which, an omniscient

God was clearly able to decide the fate of a human soul—with human free will. Foreknowledge

implied predestination, yet the Christian concept of the atonement, with its personal and merciful

divine grace continually provoked controversy over whether one could have any effect upon

one’s salvation through personal performance. Augustine, in the last years of his life, became

convinced one could not. He believed that, God, in his omniscience, foreknows those he will

save, and that humanity’s ability to choose good over evil was destroyed by the fall of Adam.

Therefore, for Augustine, humanity was incapable of consciously behaving morally without

God’s direct intervention, through the application of divine grace.38

Pre-Christian philosophers tried to explain how the natural world operates, in physical

and metaphysical terms. As they considered the causes of events, they postulated the existence

of a variety of spiritual powers of varied intentions, striving to account for nature and its

phenomena; and, to understand the forces that moved matter and effected man. Christianity

introduced a new element into the human equation—divine grace. Grace, the actions of a

merciful God, was presented as an idea or force able to change the course of events for righteous

ends. The primary action of grace, as defined in the Christian orthodox thought of the Middle

Ages, concerned itself with human agency and will. Grace moved humans to act in a way that

rescued them from their sinfulness; defined as actions contrary to the commandments or will of

God. 39

The concept of grace was intimately concerned with that of Justice and Mercy, as

Christians faced judgment at the hands of a God who commanded his followers to be perfect

“even as I am.” [Mt 5:48 KJV] Yet, humanity was obviously not perfect; neither in their daily

activity, nor though the inherited effect of Adam’s transgression. It seemed a difficult matter for

38 Evans, 81; Pope Gregory I, Morals on the book of Job, (Oxford: J.H. Parker, 1844), 7. 24, 33. 12.

39 Evans, 86; Gregory, Moralia, 16. 32.

Terrell 31

theologians to explain why Christians, redeemed by the atonement of Christ, still needed to pay

for their sins. Medieval writers taught that one’s baptism was free but redeemed one only from

the sins committed prior to that baptism and, thereafter, a Christian continually worked to

redeem himself.40

These conflicts of opinion constituted the soil from which theology arose during the few

centuries after Christ’s crucifixion. Initially lacking the characteristics promoting the long-term

survival of a religion – including a centralized hierarchy, any condescension on the part of ruling

elites, and rapid communications that would facilitate the creation and maintenance of hierarchy

and acceptance – Christian religious groups around the Mediterranean formed isolated local

organizations focused on the ideas of redemption and salvation through a reconciliation wrought

by the Christian atonement.41

Gregory the Great, one of the doctors of the early church who wrestled with the doctrine

of Justice and Mercy, presented his views best in his Moralia on Job, a commentary on the Old

Testament book of Job. For Gregory, the virtue Job exemplified was patience, in the face of

suffering. Gregory’s took the position that Christians should respond to tribulation just as Job—

enduring suffering patiently and never rebelling against God, due to a sure faith in divine Justice

and Mercy. Faced with divine judgment, Christians should, like Job, examine themselves deeply

and penitently, seeking within for a fault but, always being submissive.42

In examining Justice, Gregory associated the concept with three aspects. First, one had a

duty to obey God’s commandments. Second, one should be conscious of their imperfect

40 Mary C Mansfield, The Humiliation of Sinners: Public Penance in Thirteenth-century France, (Ithaca:

Cornell University Press, 1995), 115.

41 Terrell, 1.

42 Kevin L Hester, Eschatology and Pain in St. Gregory the Great: The Christological Synthesis of

Gregory's 'Morals on the Book of Job', (Bletchley: Paternoster, 2007), 97; Gregory, Moralia, Preface, 6. 14.

Terrell 32

attendance to those duties, feeling the fear at the prospect of the consequences of failure. Finally,

one had the responsibility to make restitution to parties injured by one’s failures, to absolve

oneself from debts owed God because their failings. As to Mercy, Gregory likewise associated it

with three aspects of its own. First, Christians should acknowledge that the suffering they

experience is sent by God, either as punishment or corrective guidance. Second, Christians

should perform penance for their failures, both to acknowledge them and to demonstrate sincere

regret for them. Finally, Christians must practice acceptance in the face of whatever suffering is

directed towards them, so that they might be purified and sanctified by the experience. In the

preface to his Moralia, Gregory plainly tells of these aspects, writing:

For of scourges there are sundry kinds; for there is the scourge whereby the sinner is

stricken that he may suffer punishment without withdrawal, another whereby he is

smitten, that he may be corrected; another wherewith sometimes a man is smitten, not for

the correction of past misdeeds, but for the prevention of future ; another which is very

often inflicted, whereby neither a past transgression is corrected, nor a future one

prevented, but which has this end, that when unexpected deliverance follows the stroke,

the power of the Deliverer being known may be the more ardently beloved, and that

while the innocent person is bruised by the blow, his patience may serve to increase the

gain of his merits; for sometimes the sinner is stricken that he may be punished, without

withdrawal, as it is said to Judaea when doomed to destruction, I have wounded thee

with the wound of an enemy, with the chastisement of a cruel one; and again. Why criest

thou for thine affliction thy sorrow is incurable.43

The experience of judgmental and merciful suffering is a central theme in Gregory’s

commentary on Job, along with a fearful anticipation of the end of the world, and the Last

Judgment expected therein. He is caught up in his considerations of judgment, for:

The mind of the righteous not only considers well what it is now undergoing, but also

dreads what is in store. It sees all that it suffers in this life, and fears lest hereafter it

suffer still worse things. It mourns that it has fallen into the exile of this blind state away

from the joys of Paradise; it fears, lest, when this exile is quitted, eternal death succeed.

And thus it already undergoes sentence in suffering chastisement, yet still dreads the

threats of the Judge to come as the consequence of sin.44

43 Gregory, Moralia, Preface. 12.

44 Gregory, Moralia, 7. 6.

Terrell 33

He reconciles these themes through the expected role of Jesus Christ as the judge of

mankind. Gregory, as he wrote, expected the imminent return of Christ. He used this feeling of

anxious anticipation to encourage the spiritual advancement of the church; declaring that

Christians must prepare themselves by submitting their actions to their own self-judgment. He

was adamant that:

God requires these things, which He searches out in executing judgment upon them. He

does not require those, which He so pardons as to let them be unpunished henceforth in

His own Judgment. And so 'this day,' i.e. this enjoyment of sin, will not be required by

the Lord, if it be visited with self-punishment of our own accord, as Paul testifies, when

he says, For if we could judge ourselves we should not be judged of the Lord.45

Gregory believes that one will more likely engage in self-judgment in the aftermath of

personal suffering. The suffering provides one an opportunity and incentive to contemplate their

actions, examine their motivations, seek forgiveness, make restitution, and submit oneself to

God—learning of God in the process. 46

Introspective events like these interested Gregory, who

observed:

… with what exactness the holy man passes judgment on himself, that the judgments of

God may find nought in him to take hold of. For having an eye to his own frailty, he

says. How much less shall I answer, and talk in my words with Him? Not relying upon

the claims of his own righteousness, but betaking himself to the hope alone of entreating,

he adds, Who, though I had anything righteous, yet would I not answer, but I would make

supplication to my Judge. But apprehensive for the very entreaty itself, he adds, And

when I have called, and He hath answered me, yet do I not believe that He hath

hearkened unto my voice. Why does he shrink with so great apprehension, why does he

tremble with such sore misgiving? But that his eye is fixed on the dreadfulness of the

Judge, in the last strict reckoning, and not supporting the power of His searching eye, all

that he does seems little worth in his account?47

For Gregory, suffering was both an instrument that God, the great Physician, would use

to administer Justice—in the punishment of sin—and an act of Mercy—through its ability to


46 Hester, 1-8.


Terrell 34

focus one’s attention, spiritually, summoning one to penance and perhaps redemption. The

character of Job provided a valuable example through which Gregory taught his view as to the

proper response of a godly man to suffering; and of the manner in which God might use pain and

suffering for executing Justice and bestowing Mercy. 48

Conversely, Job also instructed Gregory

as to one’s contemplation of sins committed in life, for which one has not faced tribulation.

The Elect, when they know that they have done unlawful things, but find upon careful

examination that they have met with no afflictions in return for those unlawful deeds,

with the immense force of their fear, are in a ferment with alarm, and labour and travail

with dark misgivings, lest grace should have forsaken them forever, seeing that no

recompensing of their ill-doing keeps them safe in the present life; they fear lest the

vengeance which is suspended be stored to be dealt in heavier measure at the end; they

are eager to be stricken with the correction of a Father's hand, and they reckon the pain of

the wound to be the medicine of saving health.49

Gregory’s emphasis on restitution and acceptance derived from his belief that Christians

were not subject to double jeopardy in the case of their sins. As Christians righteously

considered their actions and judged themselves appropriately, inflicting penance, making

restitution, and repenting; they could be forgiven for these faults and would no longer be held

accountable for them at the Last Judgment.

For because no believer is ignorant that the thoughts of the heart will be minutely

examined at the Judgment, as Paul testifieth, saying, Their thoughts the meanwhile

accusing or else excusing one another; searching himself within, he examines his own

conscience without sparing before the Judgment, that the strict Judge may come now the

more placably disposed, in that He sees his guilt, which He is minded to examine, already

chastised according to the sin.50

Therefore, for Gregory, the Christ who was to judge mankind was also the God who

would save mankind, often through the infliction of pain inherent in human existence.51

48 Hester, xi.



51 Hester, xi.

Terrell 35

Hester, examining Gregory’s commentary on Job to discern how his theology impacted

Christian spiritual life, points out that Gregory relies on two ideas. First, Gregory insists that

contemplation, focused upon one’s interior landscape, is a spiritual discipline one can employ to

proactively act as judge of one’s own actions, and through subsequent repentance, preserve

oneself from the effects of sin. Secondly, he insisted upon a worldview in which Christians view

all evil in the world as the “scourge of God” used to sanctify humanity.52

Interestingly, Gregory does not see Christ’s first and second coming as separate events,

but rather sees them as related events linked in a continuum of activity. The eternal salvation of

humanity is the work of Christ which began with his incarnation and will finish in the eschaton.

After Christ sits in judgment of humanity, he will restore Earth to its original and perfect state.

Eden will return. When Christ came to earth, declared his divine identity, and called mankind to

repentance, fallen humanity had its spiritual vision renewed. The intensity with which

individuals responded to his call became identified with their position with regard to their divine

election. “For every Elect one at the Judgment is hid in the countenance of the Godhead in

interior vision, whereas the blindness of the Reprobate without is banished and confounded by

the strict visitation of Justice.”53

As Gregory conceived it, those who accepted Christ

demonstrated that God had already accepted them.54

In his consideration of Job and his companions, as types of humanity, Gregory clearly

agreed with Augustine, who divided mankind into the Elect of God and the Reprobate, destined

for Hell. The Elect could turn inward through contemplation and examine their own motivations

and innermost conceptualizations, in anticipation of Christ’s strict and exacting post-mortal

52 Hester, 8.


54 Hester, 124.

Terrell 36

judgment of their thoughts and intentions while the Reprobate could not, being incapable of

doing good. This idea of judgment did not preclude the judgment of one’s outward acts but,

since Christ would judge perfectly, comprehending all, he would be capable of discerning the

truth, brushing away all confusion, subterfuge, or denial. Thus, one could be confident in a fair

judgment, as was Job.55

According to Gregory, Christ, during his mortal life, exemplified a middle way between

Justice and Mercy. As exemplified in the scriptures, Christ was quick to forgive and equally

quick to denounce others for hypocrisy. From this example, Gregory saw the beginnings of a

cycle of judgment, originating during Christ’s mortal life, which will conclude at the Last

Judgment; where Christ will complete the election of those destined for heaven. Where Gregory

does make the distinction between the two advents of Christ, he does so by contrasting the

humility and obedience Christ demonstrated during his earthly incarnation with the wrath and

justice expected of Christ at the prophesied second coming.56

In a pastoral appeal, later taken up by Grosseteste, Gregory calls for Christians to prepare

themselves through constant internal evaluation, for “if individuals could not stand before Christ

judgment when he came in humility how could they expect to stand on the day when he comes in

wrath.”57

In this way, Gregory combines eschatology and suffering into his Christology,

intimately connecting Justice and Mercy with each other. Christians find one within the other,

and the suffering Christian’s experience becomes part of the manifestation of a sanctifying grace.

This grace promotes personal righteousness, within the context of contemplation upon one’s

inner life, and prepares the Christian for Christ’s judgment. Therefore, Gregory viewed suffering

55 Hester, 114.

56 Hester, 124.

57 Hester, 124.

Terrell 37

as either an experience intended to turn one from sin and towards righteousness or, as something

of a down payment against suffering otherwise due after the Last Judgment.58

The mechanism for achieving this inner redemption is contemplation that incorporates

the act of judging oneself against the example provided by Christ. For Gregory, the self-

judgment that arises from the compunction of conscience and the contrite suffering of penance is

capable of reconciling one with Christ the Judge, making the atonement effective in the life of

the Christian. Accordingly, he encouraged a reader that, if he could only:

… raise himself to [contemplate] things eternal, and fix the eye of the soul upon those

objects which remain without undergoing change, he sees that here below all whatsoever

runs to an end is almost nothing at all. He is subject to the adversities of the present life,

but he bethinks himself that all that passes away is as naught. For the more vigorously he

makes his way into the interior joys, he is the less sensible of pains without.59

The contemplative and penitent Christian, whose sins have been expiated through sincere

and voluntary acts of recognition, remorse, and restitution, will therefore be released from

judgment for those sins, at the last day. However, those who have not conducted this intense

self-examination and self-correction will find themselves standing naked, terrified, and alone

before the divine judge; feelings intensified by the perception that the end of the world was near.

Gregory emphasized this anxiety and called upon Christianity to prepare for the Last Judgment

by turning inwards and engaging in contemplation and action preparatory to the judgment.60

According to Gregory, the prospect of God’s judgment engenders fear but, this fear is not

the intent of Christ’s expected return. The fear of God should be turned by grace into a power

through which mankind can correct their lives. It is this fear that transforms, or leads a human to

penance, and which can then provide one some confidence that God will forgive their

58 Hester, 124-125.


60 Hester, 128-130.

Terrell 38

transgressions. This fear of God’s judgment, in the Christian, makes the soul more open to the

grace of God and often serves as the first step in a person’s consideration of their internal

landscape. However, at the Last Judgment, the division between one’s internal and external

landscape will disappear. Each person will receive the exact reward merited by their

performance in mortal life relative to the Christian standards which they accepted and

exemplified. Gregory encouraged the Christian accordingly, writing:

Whereas Paul the Apostle saith ; For, if we would judge ourselves, we should not be

judged, the Lord is found to be our ‘Salvation' then, in proportion as our sin is now

rebuked by ourselves, from fear of God. Whence the Elect are used never to spare their

own sins, that they may find the Judge of sin rendered propitious; and they look to find

Him hereafter truly their 'Salvation,' whom they now strictly fear as their Judge. For, he

that spareth himself now in sin, is not spared hereafter in punishment. So let him say.

But I will rebuke mine own ways before Him. And what use and advantage results from

such rebuking, let him add, He also shall be my salvation.61

Thus, Christ will reward those who examine their interior landscape and strive to bring it

into conformity with the Christian ideal. The love, exemplified by Christ, found in their heart

will, by the grace of God, will allow them to find a place with God in heaven. In the Last

Judgment, those who sought only the exterior life of the world, and refused the shaping and

illumination of God’s just punishments will not receive an invitation to heaven. The concept of

the Last Judgment, with its “laying bare” of the entirety of one’s life, allows a person to

remember how they lived their lives—to their own glory or condemnation. Gregory uses a

concept of the “inner judge” to express his conceptualization of interiority and exteriority. He

asserts that Christ, through the atonement, earned the right to sit as judge of a person’s interior

landscape but, Christians are also to exercise judgment upon themselves. The individual

participates in his or her own judgment and, potentially supplants Christ’s judgment.62


62 Hester, 36-113.

Terrell 39

Gregory’s understanding of the Last Judgment also carried with it a distinct

eschatological flavor. At the expected end of the world, Christ will be manifest to all mankind,

as they stand to be judged. All will have the opportunity to examine their own lives in perfect

detail and will have no choice but to agree with the accusations of the judge who stands before

them, because the knowledge of one’s deeds and intentions will be perfect in both the judge and

the accused. All will see their own sins projected upon their interior landscape, forced to

acknowledge their condition in a torturous self-evaluation:63

For now is the time of affliction to the good, that one day exulting may follow them apart

from tears. Hence it is elsewhere said by those, Thou hast humbled us in the place of

affliction. Since the place of affliction is the present life, so the righteous here below, i.e.

‘in the place of affliction,’ are ‘humbled,’ because in the eternal life, i.e. in the place of

delight, they are elevated. But when he said that ‘the soul was withered,’ he rightly put

before too, in mine own self; because in our own selves, indeed, our soul is afflicted, but

in God refreshed, and it is become far removed from the greenness of joy, in proportion

as still being withheld from the light of the Creator, it draws back to itself. But then it

attains to the greenness of true joy, when being lifted up by the grace of eternal

contemplation it even transcends its very self.64

As Gregory considered the manner in which God uses suffering to affect the lives of

humanity, his thinking fell into two distinct threads, based on Augustine’s division of humanity

into the Elect and the Reprobate. Every person experiences suffering in the course of their life.

The source of that pain and suffering is bound up in the will of God. Gregory incorporates this

Augustinian doctrine into his personal, pastoral point of view, knowing that the world, by

default, contains both classes of humanity; and, that the membership of the church reflects this

population. Gregory knows, therefore, that God will save some at the last day and not others.

He also knows that God’s judgments are just. It was this condition that drove Gregory to ponder

63 Hester 114.


Terrell 40

the significance of suffering in the life of the Elect and the Reprobate. It also made Gregory

realize that the Mercy of God cannot exist independently from God’s Justice.65

Gregory’s original contribution to this theological concept lies in his asserting that the

pain Christians undergo in mortality is part of this same interior self-judgment. Gregory

believed that such external sufferings drive the Christian’s mental focus inward, where their own

conscience can observe and judge their own actions and intentions. From this, Christians learn

that they can sentence themselves to penance, make restitution, and reform themselves. In the

Last Judgment, one’s own judgment is irrevocably bound up with the judgment rendered by

Christ and one who properly prepares has nothing to fear. It is because of Job’s embodiment of

this pattern that Gregory holds him up as an exemplar for Christians. Even though Job was

unable to find culpability in his actions, he still concurred in God’s judgment because he held

God’s judgment to be perfect. In judging himself, Job desired to clear himself from the need to

do penance or make restitution as a result of sin. He was aware of his own ignorant and weak

human nature, and instead of rebelling against God’s actions against him, he embraced them,

choosing to trust more upon the divine judge than upon his own concept of individual

righteousness. For Gregory, this translated into a paradigm that asserted the Elect should be

quick to engage in self-evaluation because they know that sinful behavior and intention

unresolved at life’s end would be punished by Christ. Gregory’s understanding of divine Justice

is explainable in the context of double jeopardy. He asserts that if Christians face judgment and

punishment in mortal life for wrongdoing, those sins will have no impact upon the Last

65 Hester, 71; Gregory, Moralia, 28. 7.

Terrell 41

Judgment. Gregory encourages the Elect to realize this and turn inward in self-examination,

prayer, and penance.66

In his contemplations of Job, Gregory came to understand that God inflicts pain upon

humanity to turn them from unrighteousness by turning their minds towards God; and, among

the Elect, increasing their love and devotion to God through two mechanisms. First, God

occasionally distances himself from humanity, as the Father did from the Son during the

crucifixion, leaving mankind alone, that the Christian might experience the absence of the light

of Christ, that they might desire it greater afterward. Second, suffering in the Elect causes them

to look forward to an idyllic, pain-free existence in heaven, and reminds them to look upon this

life as ephemeral. For Gregory, suffering is a necessary part of salvation, based in the example

of the incarnation and death of Christ.67

In opposition to the manner in which suffering affected the Christian Elect, Gregory

believed that suffering for the Reprobate was always punitive. When reprobates suffered, they,

in accordance with their nature, refused to repent; thus, meriting greater punishment at a future

time. Gregory acknowledged that evil persons are not always punished for their wickedness, in

mortality and, he considered this to be indicative of God’s desire to preserve righteous

punishment for Judgment Day.68

He summarized his views regarding the role of imposing self-justice in the pursuit of

divine mercy by writing:

Since then it is now in our power to undergo an inward judgment of our mind against

ourselves, let us examine and accuse our own selves, let us torture our former selves by

penitence. Let us not cease to judge ourselves, while it is in our power. Let us carefully

attend to what is said. For it is no longer in the power of man to come near to God for

66 Hester, 115-117; Gregory, Moralia, 9. 19.

67 Hester, 134.

68 Hester, 133.

Terrell 42

judgment. For it is a property of reprobates to be ever doing wrong, and never to repent

of what they have done. For they pass over, with blinded mind, everything that they do,

and do not acknowledge what they have done, except when they have been punished.

But it is the custom of the Elect, on the other hand, to examine daily into their conduct

from the very first springs of their thoughts, and to drain to the bottom, whatever

impurity flows forth from thence. For as we do not notice how our limbs grow, our body

increases, our appearance changes, our hair turns from black to white, (for all these things

take place in us, without our knowing it) in like manner is our mind changed from itself,

by the very habit of anxiety every moment of our life; and we do not perceive it, unless

we sit down to carefully watch our inmost condition, and weigh our advances and failures

day by day. For in this life, to stand still, is, in itself, to go back, as it were, to our old

state, and when the mind is left undisturbed, it is overpowered by an old age, as it were,

of torpor: because by neglecting itself, and by losing insensibly its proper strength, it

wastes away, unknown to itself, from the appearance of its former power.69

What a Christian does in contemplation, with regard to their sins, determines how the

Christian responds to suffering. Gregory called upon Christians to focus upon their sins and seek

rebirth and re-creation through an interior examination, followed by self-directed action in the

form of penance and restitution. Through this self-judgment, Gregory believed one could find

future security against Christ’s judgment, and present consolation in an evil world. Gregory saw

the contemplation of one’s own intentions as a method capable of leading Christians to judge

themselves against the Christian standard. When they did so, Christians could create and

reinforce psychological schema, within which they could interpret their sufferings in an eternal

perspective, as Gregory intended. For, concerning the quiet introspection needed to allow

Christians to see mortal life in a context of eternity, he writes:

He then who knows how to endure with boldness the temptation of the contest, even

when he feels its shock, sits on high in the lofty citadel of peace. For he sees that the

assaults of sin are, even when within him, subject to his power, since he does not yield

his consent to them, from being overcome by any pleasure.70

This intention likely originated in Gregory’s long personal involvement in the monastic

tradition, which encouraged the practice of contemplation as a spiritual exercise. For Gregory,



Terrell 43

contemplative self-examination was a necessary activity within which Christians could evaluate,

judge and pronounce sentence upon themselves; thus, preserving themselves when, after death,

the power of judgment devolved upon Christ.71

In Gregory’s eyes, Christ is both the suffering servant, who washed his Apostles’ feet,

and the just judge, who will preside at the Last Judgment. Sin, if properly managed by the

Christian through contemplation, self-examination, self-recrimination, repentance, and

restitution, can find solace in the Last Judgment. Thus, Gregory asserted that God pronounces

judgment upon the Elect in the present, so that they may not suffer double jeopardy at the Last

Judgment; and God gives mercy to the Reprobate in mortality so that they may justly stand

convicted in the afterlife. Through this, Gregory believed that the Elect could find comfort in

suffering a while the Reprobate would have no later claim upon mercy.72

71 Hester, 118-119; Gregory, Moralia, 23. 21, 31. 27.

72 Hester, xii, 72.

Terrell 44

CHAPTER V

JUSTICE AND MERCY IN GROSSETESTE’S LETTERS

Grosseteste served as bishop of Lincoln from 1235 to his death in 1253. His

correspondence provides insight into a 13th

century personality that is essentially unique in the

historical record. We are unable to know the mind of any of Grosseteste’s contemporaries nearly

so well. Because of his position within the clergy and the types of people with whom he

corresponded, Grosseteste’s letters also provide a reasonable basis for understanding the mindset

and biases of early 13th

century secular and religious leaders and laity—during the time when

European theology and canon law were becoming institutionalized. Grosseteste’s letters often

relayed news of local happenings; asked for assistance and advice from those better placed,

geographically or hierarchically, to provide it; and, disseminated ecclesiastic directives and

administrative notes. The letters survived in eleven different manuscripts, each containing all or

part of the corpus translated by Mantello and Goering. These manuscripts, complemented by

some individual letters that circulated separately, now form the basis of understanding

Grosseteste and his milieu. His letters are brilliant points illuminating a past we often see but

darkly.73

To modern readers unused to mediaeval language forms, Grosseteste’s letters seem

florid, exaggerated, overwrought, and over-formal. However, if one assumes that Grosseteste

wrote with the intention of communicating himself effectively to his correspondents, it follows

that the tone and style of the letters would be acceptable to the receiver. While reading the

letters, this researcher benefitted by viewing them less as personal letters, in the modern sense,


Terrell 45

and more as mediaeval literature, whose style, vocabulary and rhetorical devices were shaped by

the conventions and preferences current at the time of their writing.74

Mantello and Goering estimate that Grosseteste probably assembled the collection of

letters himself, in about 1246. There are, therefore, no letters originating in the last seven years

of his Bishopric. Having examined the letters in detail, one sees Grosseteste’s overwhelming

insistence that the Church, in the person of the priest, provide adequate pastoral care to the laity.

Pastoral care was, for Grosseteste, the central passion of his life in holy orders; which began in

1225 when he received his first benefice. Grosseteste was already more than 50 years old when

he became a cleric, having served years as a civil administrator and having pursued his personal

avocation of natural philosophy. He consistently took his pastoral responsibility seriously, while

serving as archdeacon, canon of Lincoln, and Bishop of Lincoln, He always communicated that

commitment to those above and beneath him in the priesthood with a directness and vigor that

some mistook for insubordination and tyranny.75

Throughout his letters, Grosseteste demonstrated his belief in, and commitment to,

obeying divine law. He found this law primarily in the scriptures, but also in the writings of

church fathers. Grosseteste insisted that these documents, and the commandments given within

them, constituted a sure foundation for the proper conduct of one’s life and relationships. In

various letters, Grosseteste repeatedly calls upon these fundamental documents to support his

positions; “whether he is refusing the request of the pope, a cardinal, or a powerful lord to grant

an unqualified person a benefice in his diocese, or arguing that the king about the appointment of

74 Grosseteste, Letters, 6.


Terrell 46

monks and clerics as secular judges, or disputing with this cathedral chapter over their rights and

responsibilities.”76

Throughout his letters, Grosseteste repeatedly demonstrated his belief that abstract

virtues such as Justice and Mercy had, or rather should have, distinct consequences in Christian

life. In his role as bishop, Grosseteste exercised ecclesiastic jurisdiction over the people within

his see and, frequently faced decisions requiring him to reconcile claims for Justice and pleas for

Mercy. In addition to his letters, Grosseteste authored a poem, The Castle of Love, in which he

embodied aspects of his pastoral theology. In this poem, Grosseteste includes the story of a

powerful king; the father of four daughters. These four girls were named after four virtues,

Mercy, Justice, Truth and Peace. In the story, a king’s servant, having committed a crime, was

condemned and placed in prison. The daughters, hearing of the servant’s conviction and

punishment, each approach their father. Mercy, the eldest, pleads for pity. Truth, angered by her

sister’s appeal, reminds the king of his duty to seek in proclaim truth at all times, even when it

would be easy to have pity, ignoring the truth about the servant’s guilt. Justice, the third

daughter, agrees with Truth; for the servant, by his own agency committed the crime. 77

When,

Peace, the youngest daughter, arrives, she summarizes Grosseteste’s thoughts about his role as

judge:

“Noble father, listen to me. I am undoubtedly your daughter, born of your substance, and

before you I should be heard. My two sisters [Truth and Justice] have abandoned me,

and make their judgment without me. Similarly, Mercy was not called. No refuge

therefore can be found for any living soul. For this reason I have fled; I will make my

home with few until this conflict which has arisen among my sisters is resolved at last in

peace. But why were truth and justice established if not to keep the peace? Justice has

no other calling them to preserve peace. Should I then be denied when all things were

made for me and set down for my existence? Yet I am not at all preserved if Mercy is not

heard. My words should carry great weight, for you are the Prince of peace. Peace is the



Terrell 47

end of all things; the one who has peace lacks nothing. Without peace there is no value

in either riches or wisdom. The one who labors for peace will die in peace. Thus Peace

should be heard on behalf of this servant who cries for mercy. I will tell you a most

truthful statement about the four of us. Since four were established to make lawful

judgments, and must all together make a single judgment, there will be no record of

judgment until they are in agreement. They must agree as one and then form the

judgment.”78

Grosseteste was not a careful scholastic, in his approach to these concepts. He rarely

engaged in the careful arranging of his texts, nor did he specify precise definitions for his

technical terms. Rather, Grosseteste was prone to seek his own solutions, going back to the

primary sources and solving his own problems independently of the carefully built up body of

knowledge produced by the scholastics. He was thought to be regressive, when ignoring about

100 years of cautiously reasoned argument, but he was simply not content to accept these often

contradictory authorities as a foundation upon which to build belief, especially when his eternal

salvation was in the balance. Interestingly, in spite of this independence, Grosseteste was often

fearful to tread where earlier authorities made definitive assertions. If he was unable to support

earlier “authoritative” conclusions, Grosseteste tended to respond by suggesting “possible”

alternatives and then confessing an inability to choose decisively. His preferred method of

reasoning consisted of identifying critical concepts, followed by a period of unhurried

consideration, during which he pondered each concept from various angles limited only by his

imagination. He learned this method in his early life, when he was observing nature and

attempting to determine the causes of physical phenomena. However, imagination, as

Grosseteste would have conceived it, did not concern one’s invention but, rather with one’s

ability to discriminate, retain, and remember the kaleidoscopic impressions captured by the


Terrell 48

senses, allowing their repeated examination and making them subject to interpretation in pursuit

of truth.79

When Grosseteste transitioned from being a natural philosopher to theologian, he did not

abandon his scientific method. He continued his usual practice of returning to original sources

and eschewing later commentators until he understood the basis of a subject. To prepare himself

for these scientific and theological studies, Grosseteste learned to read Greek so he could return

to the original works of Aristotle and Ptolemy, and read the works of Greek theologians

beginning to enter Europe from Constantinople. He followed the same course with regard to

theology and turned to the scriptures; an approach which differed from that taught in Paris, in the

mainstream scholastic and theological curricula. Parisian scholasticism focused more attention

upon the works of church authorities, whose commentaries upon the scriptures were often at

odds with one another.80

Justice and Mercy.

Grosseteste’s letters consistently show that he struggled to balance Justice and Mercy in

an effort to achieve peace; and to provide adequate pastoral care as a vehicle for promoting peace

amongst his flock. As a bishop, Grosseteste demonstrated the same intellectual habits that he

had developed as a natural philosopher and theologian. These habits manifested themselves in

his insistence upon finding problems previously solved by the scholastic community and

addressing them once more, relying upon fundamental sources and eschewing both the

comments of intermediate authorities and traditional practices. He focused intently upon the

79 Southern, 33, 35, 40-44.

80 Southern, 173.

Terrell 49

details, developed an inductive understanding of the broader situation, and acted upon that

understanding with a zeal approaching brutality and a fearlessness approaching temerity.81

Between August 1231 and November 1232, Grosseteste wrote to Richard Marshal, earl of

Pembroke, in which he advised Richard how a Christian knight might obtain the joys of heaven.

In the letter, Grosseteste presents Richard with a metaphor, well suited to his correspondent’s

military mind, which describes his conceptualization of Justice and Mercy, telling Richard that

he should not:

“…proceed half-heartedly on foot along the way that leads to [your] homeland, [but]

should mount the horse of holy and heavenly desire; its bridle is discretion, its saddle is

circumspection, it sees in advance the severity of the Judgment yet to come and the

shame of past sin behind. There are two stirrups, humility on the right and repentance on

the left, and two spurs, on the right foot the promise of future blessedness and on the left

the fear of hell. And because it is unsafe for one to proceed unarmed along this way,

where the most cruel thieves lie in ambush, put on the breastplate of justice, guard

yourself with the shield of faith, protect yourself with the helmet of salvation, gird

yourself with the sword of the spirit, that is, the word of God.” [Eph 6:14, 16-17]82

In this story, Grosseteste presents a conceptualization identical to that presented by

Gregory in his commentary on Job. Here, Grosseteste describes Justice and Mercy as the vehicle

by which one travels home, to heaven, and he associates the journey with duty, performed with

discrete circumspection. He exemplifies Justice and Mercy through the means by which one

rides the horse, perhaps symbolizing one’s body. Grosseteste associates humility with salvation

and repentance with the fear of Hell. The use of the right hand-left hand symbology would cause

Richard to remember scriptural imagery of the Last Judgment, in which the Elect were to be

placed on the right hand of Christ and the Reprobate upon the left. Taken together, Grosseteste

associates humility and salvation with the merciful right hand, and repentance and the fear of hell

with the judgmental left.



Terrell 50

About one year later, Grosseteste wrote a second letter to Richard Marshal, in which he

discussed the difference between true and false wisdom, with the stated goal of teaching Richard

“the characteristics of both kinds of wisdom” that he might “both fervently esteem the one kind

and studiously avoid the other.”83

Here, Grosseteste draws explicitly upon Gregory, quoting the

Moralia, to express his concept of wisdom, telling Richard that:

… the wisdom of the just consists and doing nothing ostentatiously, in using words that

make one’s meaning clear, in cherishing the truth as it is and avoiding falsehood, in doing

good for no reward but thanks, in being more willing to put up with evil than to be its

cause, in not seeking revenge for an injustice, in enduring insults for the sake of the truth,

in supposing that there is an advantage in praying for those who are given to insults, in

seeking out poverty, in forsaking possessions, in offering no resistance to the thief, and in

offering the left cheek to the person who strikes the right one.”84

Around the year 1237, Grosseteste wrote a letter to Simon De Monfort, lord of Leicester,

who was sitting in judgment of a burgess from Leicester. Grosseteste’s letter contained a short

essay upon the role of a righteous judge, telling Simon that:

Holy and righteous people are of the opinion that it is as wrong not to punish the guilty as

it is to punish the innocent. So the person whose concern it is, by virtue of his office, to

correct others is unjust if he fails to punish their transgressions. … Conversely, then, I

infer that punishing the guilty is just and upright, approved before God and men, but

punishing the innocent is cruel and brutish—no, it is even diabolical. …

Now, punishing the guilty short of what they deserve is justice with mercy and in

imitation of Christ, who punishes everyone in this way. Punishing the guilty with

attention to achieving an exact correspondence and balance with what they deserve is

justice applied inflexibly, or perhaps not justice at all, for it wants the intermingling of

mercy, and only makes one deserving of being judged without mercy, since it is written

that judgment will be without mercy for the one who has shown no mercy [Jas 2:13].

Punishing the guilty beyond what they deserve is an obvious injustice, for the

more the punishment exceeds the fault, the more is innocence punished. So those who

punish the guilty beyond the measure of their fault are liable to be accused of or charged

with punishing innocence, and those who punish innocence are the companions of the


84 Gregory, Moralia, 10. 29; Grosseteste, Letters, 74.

Terrell 51

Herod who slew the innocents, indeed, they are the companions of those who crucified

the innocent lamb, God’s own son.”85

Grosseteste does not explicitly reveal the names of the “holy and righteous people” to

which he refers. However, it seems obvious from the tone that he believes his statements to

represent a minority view. It is notable that he separates judgment from punishment; in that he

does not suggest that Simon should eschew judgment all together but rather that he should judge

righteously and exercise care in determining innocence, and then to allow mercy to affect his

determination of the proper punishment for the guilty.

Justice. As with Gregory, Grosseteste associated the concept of Justice with one’s duty

to obey God’s commandments; to the sanctifying fear one experiences when considering their

own sins; and, rendering restitution as part of the repentance process. One readily sees these

concepts within his letters. Grosseteste also associated “the feeding of the flock” with

“dispensing not only knowledge and doctrine, but also judgment and justice …”86

which

operated in “the nature of spiritual medicine, that the more people who administer it, the more

effectively does it bring about salvation.”87

Taking the shepherd symbolism further, Grosseteste

described his judgmental responsibilities in the same words used to describe the herding of

insentient animals, saying:

One will actually have to block the way of such animals, use a rod to strike and turn them

in the right direction and prod them when they are sluggish, and so with hard work, and

rousing words too, bring them back home. … Much more, the then, will a bishop use the

rod of the Church’s discipline to bring back the wandering sinner who is weighed down


86 Grosseteste, Letters, 389; from a document sent to the papal curia about 1245 detailing Grosseteste’s

perceptions of his rights and responsibilities as bishop.

87 Grosseteste, Letters, 51; from a letter written to the provincial minister of the Franciscans in England

around 1230.

Terrell 52

by the burden of sin; he has been entrusted to the bishop’s Care, and for his damnation

the bishop is accountable …88

Grosseteste often dwelt upon his positive belief in his culpability for the salvation of

those placed in his pastoral care, as expressed in the document just referenced. In a letter to

Margaret De Quincy, countess of Winchester, written in 1231 or 1232, Grosseteste discusses the

actions of one of her agents, a man who was in conflict with the residents of his parish. Taking

the side of his parishioners, Grosseteste rebukes the countess, telling her that if she does “not

take appropriately harsh measures to restrain the vices of [her] agents, those vices will be

considered [her] sins. “89

Shortly after becoming bishop, Grosseteste became involved in a controversy with the

dean and chapter of Lincoln Cathedral, related to the authority of a bishop to visit subordinate

organizations, to inspect their activities and procedures and correct errant behavior. Before the

Pope decided the matter in his favor, Grosseteste wrote several letters justifying his actions with

respect to his judicial function. In about 1240, Grosseteste wrote such a letter to the dean and

chapter of Lincoln, detailing his objections to their behavior with respect to Master Richard of

Kirkham. After opening the letter with an introduction describing the relationship between

Grosseteste and the chapter as being identical to that of parent and child, he asserts his parental

rights by declaring that his:

…desire for the true good of the object of one’s love is first of all the truthful teaching

and effective urging of the obligation to imitate virtue and avoid evil. Second, it is the

rebuking of any sin that results from not heeding that teaching—not a gentle rebuke, like

that of Eli the priest, but a stern one, like that of John the Baptist and the Savior himself.

Third, it is the lashing of those who have not been corrected by rebukes. For it was in

these stages that our savior revealed the actuality of his love for us. … Now, however,

88 Grosseteste, Letters, 397; from Grosseteste’s c. 1245 document sent to the papal curia.


Terrell 53

… I am obliged to combine rebuking with teaching, lest your blood be required at my

hands [Ez 3:18].90

In conjunction with the same controversy and writing to Walter of Cantilupe, Bishop of

Worcester, in mid-1242, Grosseteste dwelt upon the duties inherent in one’s calling as a spiritual

leader. Drawing upon the old testament, Grosseteste expounded upon the ancient prophet,

Moses, whom he deems “the meekest of man who ever lived on earth”91

and through whom “the

Lord teaches that it is just to perform one’s duties not in any way one pleases, but in accordance

with justice.”92

He uses Moses to relate his conceptualization of his judicial responsibilities,

telling Walter that:

[Moses] loved the people entrusted to him. … Yet his extraordinary gentleness and

unique and indescribable feelings of affection did not cause him to hold back his hand

from appropriately just punishment of a people guilty of sin. … There can be no doubt

that the person whose hand is held back in this regard by gentleness or love or in

anything else will not truly be Moses; instead he will be able to fear what has been

written: A curse on him who withholds his sword from bloodshed [Jer 48:10] … So

wickedness must not be spared…93

In 1243, Grosseteste wrote to the abbot and monks of a Benedictine monastery in France

concerning the objectionable actions of other monks of their order, then residing in Lincoln

diocese, telling them that:

… as the Apostle teaches, not only those who commit mortal sins, but also those who

consent to such conduct in others, deserve to die [Rom 1:32]. Now, those who consent

include people that do not stop evil when they have the power to do so. … So, when you

have the power, by satisfying these responsibilities, to ensure that no one from among

you is a transgressor, and especially an obvious one, how when you fail to do so, do not

deserve to die?94

90 Grosseteste, Letters, 298-299; the reference to Eli derives from 1 Sm 2:22-25; that of John the Baptist

from Mt 3:1-12; and, that from Jesus from Jn 2:14-17.





Terrell 54

Shortly after writing this letter, Grosseteste wrote another to the archdeacons under his

authority, in which he further refined these ideas by drawing upon the New Testament and telling

them to:

Pray ceaselessly [1 Thes 5:17], following both the example and the teaching of the

Apostle, preach the word of life, and harshly criticize but all these means those in error,

to put fear into the rest [1 Tim 5:20]. Punish harshly with the rod of correction any who

do not comply with your rebukes, but do so in such a way that your every act is done with

charity and a zeal for the salvation of souls. Deal justice, judgment, and equity to all

freely, remembering that you are exercising the judgment not of mankind but of God,

with whom there are no favorites and no greed for money [2 Chr 19:7].95

Duty. As one examines Grosseteste’s personal motivations, as revealed in his letters, one

discovers a man strongly concerned with his own salvation. His personal quest to achieve

heaven drove him to take his episcopal vow to “reverently receive, teach, and preserve the

traditions of the orthodox fathers in the decretal constitutions of the holy and apostolic see”96

very seriously. His fear of failing, with its attendant consequence of eternal damnation, weighed

upon him. Late in 1235, Grosseteste wrote, a letter to William of Raleigh, treasurer of Exeter

Cathedral and Chief Justice of the King’s Court, in which he clearly stated to William his

“obligation to pass on the truth of the gospel, so that in you I may gain the reward of eternal

salvation that I desire most of all.”97

About the same time, in late 1235 or early 1236, Grosseteste wrote a letter to the

archdeacons within his diocese in which he gave them direction concerning their duty and

responsibility to correct errors and abuses in their subordinate parishes. In the letter’s opening,

he illuminated his perceived responsibility and duty by telling the archdeacons that:

It is a pastor’s duty to suffer with those who were ignorant and go astray, and to keep

watch over the flock entrusted to him as if he will have to give an account of its souls




Terrell 55

[Heb 13:17], and to feed that flock, as it is written in Jeremiah, with knowledge in

doctrine [Jer 3:15]. I knowledge this duty and desire to do all I can to heal those in the

flock entrusted by the Lord’s plan to me, despite my own unworthiness, who are ignorant

and go astray.98

Grosseteste uses the symbolism of the shepherd on multiple occasions to illustrate the

relative role of the priest and the parishioner, and to reinforce the accountability of the priest for

the welfare of his “flock.” Examples include:

So seek with the Apostle the sheep alone, come to them with the intention of feeding

them with the word of preaching, the example of a holy way of life, and the devotion of

simple prayer, for it is in these three duties, as you know, that the feeding of the lord’s

flock consists. Since your absence would make it impossible for you to perform them,

you are to be conspicuously and persistently present, so that at the time you give an

account you are not found efficient when it is said: give an account of your stewardship

[Lk 16:2].99

What, then, readily offers itself for offering to God as a sweet-smelling and most

acceptable sacrifice is zeal for the election and appointment of a suitable shepherd in the

Church of Winchester, and for the courageous rejection of all evil schemes opposed to

the promotion of a good shepherd in that bishopric. May God then accept from your

hands this sacrifice, that is to say, a zeal whose energetic concern is to ensure that a

shepherd is elected and appointed in that church about whom one may justly and

confidently presume that he desires not honor or rank but a burden of responsibility, not

wealth but the work of one who preaches the gospel, that he desires not to rule but to

serve, that he is one who as Scripture requires, wishes to lay down his life for his flock [Jn

10:11, 15] and to show himself and all things an example of good works [Ti 2:7], one

who is willing and able to feed the lord’s flock in Scripture’s pasture with justice and

judgment, knowledge and doctrine. … When, therefore, one who does not feed his flock

with knowledge in doctrine takes a position as a shepherd, he first brings about his own

death, because he arrives at the tabernacle but enters and comes forth from it without

raising his voice to preach, and he is guilty of the death of the entire flock, since he owes

them the fodder they need to sustain their lives but does not distribute it.100

In this way shepherds may be assigned to high office in his church who are imitators of

the supreme shepherd, who feed the lord’s flock with judgment and justice, knowledge

and doctrine, who are ready to lay down their lives for their flocks, “who,” as the blessed

Bernard teaches, “stand up like men to defend the afflicted and make just decisions for


99 Grosseteste, Letters, 169; written in late 1236 to Richard of Cornwall, in a letter conferring a prebend

upon him.

100 Grosseteste, Letters, 209; written in mid-1238 to Otto of Tonengo, papal legate in England, concerning

his choice of a bishop for the See of Winchester.

Terrell 56

the meek of the earth; who are imperturbable in character, of proven holiness, ready to

obey, meek and patient, submissive to discipline, strict in censoring, catholic in faith,

loyal in behavior, disposed toward peace, and supportive of unity; who are upright in

judgment, farsighted in council, discrete in commands, assiduous in organization,

energetic in action, modest of speech, untroubled in adversity, faithful in prosperity,

temperate in zeal, not remiss in mercy, not idle in their spare time, not unrestrained in

hospitality, not extravagant in entertainment, not anxious when taking care of their own

property nor greedy for someone else’s, not wasteful with their own possessions, and

prudent and all places and circumstances.”101

So, when electing a shepherd, as is already evident, there is a very great danger of error

as far as concerns the person to be chosen, as the wrong choice drags into the abyss the

elector in the elected, together with all those of whom the one chosen is placed in

charge.102

If it is agreed that a good bishop is a shepherd whose sheep are his own [Jn 10:3], who is

so attached to them that he is always prepared to lay down his life for them [Jn 10:11],

placing their eternal salvation ahead of his own temporal welfare, and who owes an

accounting of all of his sheep to the shepherd who is his superior and in whose place he

serves, surely by law he cannot but visit them all, for all of them are his own [Jn 10:3].103

In sacred scripture we find the clearest possible evidence that those stand guilty of this

sin who, when once given power in the care of souls, provide for their own carnal and

temporal desires and necessities from the milk and wool of the sheep of Christ, and do

not fulfill the duties of the pastoral office that oblige them to work for the eternal

salvation of Christ sheep. For that failure to perform ones pastoral duties is, by testimony

of scripture, the killing and damnation of the sheep.104

Lest one begin to believe that Grosseteste relished his role as a judge, other letters

revealed his cautious approach to that duty. In a letter to Master Thomas of Wales, a canon of

Lincoln Cathedral in the spring of 1238, Grosseteste outlined the qualities an archdeacon should

possess. After describing the teaching, preaching, exemplary and fiscal duties of a curate,

101 Grosseteste, Letters, 215-216; written between mid-1238 and early 1239 to Ralph de Neville, bishop of

Chichester, concerning his election to the see of Winchester; and, quoting St. Bernard, De consideratione, 4. 12.

102 Grosseteste, Letters, 288; written in 1240 to the Augustinian canons of Missenden, in Buckinghamshire,

as they prepared to Elect a new abbot.

103 Grosseteste, Letters, 387; written in a document arguing Grosseteste’s pastoral responsibilities written

for the papal curia in 1245.

104 Grosseteste, Letters, 445; from a letter written in early 1253 to Stephen de Montivial, archdeacon of

Canterbury, and a member of the papal curia in which Grosseteste refuses to install a nephew of Pope Innocent IV as

a canon of Lincoln Cathedral. The imagery calls to mind Ez 34:2-3.

Terrell 57

Grosseteste speaks to his judicial role in more lenient terms than one might expect from previous

examples. While on one hand, Grosseteste insisted that the priest should grieve terribly “when

his warnings about salvation go unheeded.”105

On the other, the priest should rejoice:

… when he is able justly to acquit anyone accused, and he feels compassion when

compelled for reasons of justice to condemn someone; one whom neither love nor hatred,

fear nor hope, entreaties nor bribes, nor favoritism, divert from an honest judgment, nor

whom the opinion of the majority beguiles into straying from that judgment [Ex 23:2].

His delight should be temperance and self-restraint, his repose should be labors and

vigils, his whole desire should be to help souls. Exercising jurisdiction should be for him

a serious an onerous responsibility, but for the good of others this burden must be

undertaken with humility and born with courage.”106

Fear. Religious fear was a natural side-effect arising from comparisons of imperfect

mankind to an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent God who would judge humanity against

the standard of Christ’s exemplary life. The story of Job appealed to Grosseteste’s imaginings

upon the subject, which he revealed in a letter he wrote to Adam Marsh, his closest friend and

clerical colleague, in late 1232. In the letter, Grosseteste, in humility, debased himself by

identifying closely with Job; for as “… with Job in his distress, I fear all my works [Jb 9:28].

And I know that, just as it is written in the book of Job, a man cannot be justified compared with

God, or one born of woman appear clean, and that if the Moon does not shine in the stars are not

pure were in his site, how much less man, who is rottenness, and the son of man, who is a worm

[Jb 25:4-6]?”107

Grosseteste felt such fear deeply, especially when faced with decisions regarding the

delegation of authority. He drove himself hard and he expected much of his subordinates.

Nevertheless, he felt his own salvation depended, in part, on the performance of those he selected

as his subordinates, and the potential personal consequences of their failure concerned him




Terrell 58

deeply. In probably 1244, Grosseteste mentioned this trepidation to the Archbishop-Elect of

Canterbury in a letter in which he related that when he trusted “…someone with a cure of souls,

every part of me shakes with the fear that I may by chance expose those souls to people who

would murder rather than given new life, and that I may myself thereby be condemned at the

dreaded Last Judgment together with the murderers.”108

Restitution. In Grosseteste’s time, the expiation of sin required both an expression of

repentance and the restitution of ill-gotten gain or advantage. Restitution had always been an

accepted social practice, seen in the wergild of the Norse and Germanic tradition and in the

culture inherited from the Roman tradition. The practice became part of canon law in 1139,

when the Second Lateran Council declared penance invalid in the absence of restitution to

injured parties. Grosseteste’s scholastic contemporaries were quite adamant in their insistence

upon requiring restitution as a prerequisite to penance. 109

By the standards of the day, restitution

was a serious obligation in which God expected one to devote significant effort and resources to

find and repay those injured. Restitution was a mandatory action which did not excuse one

responsibility for acts of charity, alms, and self-imposed vicarious suffering. 110

In his letters, Grosseteste demonstrated that expected restitution without question, from

himself and from his correspondents. For example, in a letter to Margaret De Quincy written late

in 1231 or early 1232, and previously considered, Grosseteste tells the countess, with respect to

her agent, “If he takes steps to make restitution at your command, I shall be grateful and

content.“111

108 Grosseteste, Letters, 293; written to Boniface of Savoy, referring a decision regarding a parochial

benefice in the diocese of Lincoln to his higher authority.

109 Mansfield, 109-110.

110 Mansfield, 115.


Terrell 59

In a similar manner, Grosseteste wrote a letter to the dean and chapter of Lincoln in late

1238 in which he asked them to enumerate their grievances against him. In the letter, he assured

them of his peaceful intent and “… a mind ready to forsake evils, whenever they are shown to

me to be evils, and to revoke and correct all wrongs, if I have any to acknowledge that I have

inflicted on any one, and especially on you.”112

In probably 1246, Grosseteste also wrote to King Henry III, in response to his learning

that the king was angry with his opposition to several royal mandates. In seeking to regain royal

approbation, Grosseteste wrote to the king, declaring:

If I have offended you either by writing or in some other way, I’m most devotedly beg

you to have mercy and to pardon my offense, especially as to secure your clemency’s

goodwill, I am prepared to correct and demand anything you consider wrong during the

next conversation I will have with you.113

Mercy. The obverse side of Justice, in Christian eyes, was Mercy. To Grosseteste,

Mercy was concerned with achieving forgiveness and the absolution of one’s sins. As with

Gregory, Mercy in this life became associated with godly suffering, which God imposed upon

the faithful as loving correction and upon the Reprobate as a merciful punishment in this life.

However, at the same time, Grosseteste associated Mercy with one’s ability to forsake sin

through repentance and through the penance by which one demonstrated one’s remorse and the

abandonment of one’s sins. In further agreement with Gregory, he also viewed the experience of

Job as worthy of emulation, especially Job’s submissive acceptance of tribulation.

In general practice, Grosseteste tried to moderate God’s insistence upon Justice with his

personal desire to be merciful. For example, He wrote a letter to the dean and chapter of Lincoln

Cathedral, in late 1240 in which he expressed a desire “… to spare the whole body to the extent



Terrell 60

that he could, just as a man who places another in custody, but nevertheless wishes to show him

Mercy, does not enclose the man’s entire body and iron fetters but places only shackles on his

feet or manacles on his hands, not to punish the feet or hands separately but the man who is in

custody…” and speaking to them against nourishing any feeling of vengeance towards those they

judged, warned them that, “… the lust for a vengeance … pierces his own soul and causes the

soul’s virtues to pour out as if they were his lifeblood.”114

Suffering. The example of righteous behavior presented by the Old Testament book of

Job was the dignified acceptance of suffering in the face of life’s adversity. In late 1239,

Grosseteste wrote a letter to Simon de Montfort, comforting him in the face of some adversity,

probably related to a dispute with the king related to his marriage to Eleanor, the king’s sister.

Immediately after his salutation, Grosseteste consoles Simon by encouraging a dignified

response that views the adversity as an opportunity for spiritual growth, writing thus:

I have received the letter, dear friend, in which you make known the weight of your

suffering, for which, and rightly, I feel much compassion, although it is my hope that this

suffering will benefit your spiritual wellbeing, for the Apostle says: All who want to live

piously in Christ Jesus suffer persecution [2 Tm 3:12]; and again, Now all discipline

certainly seems for the present to bring not joy but grief; afterwards, however, it will

yield for those who have been trained by it the most peaceful harvest of justice [Heb

12:11].

I also hope that the suffering of yours, if borne with patience and offered with

thanks to him who scourges every son he acknowledges [Heb 12:16], well even accrue to

you in temporal glory. For I have read that a great many holy fathers who courageously

endured adversity were restored even to temporal prosperity with an increase of glory.

So, let the harshness of this world’s sufferings not weaken but strengthen you, not cast

you down but raise you up, not sadden you but give you cause to rejoice, as you say

together with the Apostle: Our present suffering is short-lived and slight, and is earning

for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all measure and comparison [2 Cor 4:17], and

again, But we exult even in our sufferings [Rom 5:3].

For suffering is to the righteous what pruning is to vines, what cultivation is to

untilled land, what washing is to dirty garments, what a healing but bitter drink is to those


Terrell 61

who are ill, what shaping with a hammer is to vessels not yet fully molded, what proving

in fire is to gold. So, the discipline of suffering is—for those who meditate not so much

on its present annoyance as on the glory of its future reward—an occasion not for sadness

but for joy. May you … be prepared, by imitating him and hoping for the reward that

will come from suffering, to endure all suffering with the unshaken and dauntless courage

of a resolute mind.115

Grosseteste wrote similarly to the dean and chapter of Lincoln, probably in early 1242.

In this case, the see of Canterbury was vacant and the monks of Christ Church were claiming the

authority to act in the absence of an archbishop. Apparently, while the dean and chapter had

appealed for “peace in a spirit of clemency and affection,” they were not backing Grosseteste’s

opposition to the monks’ assumption of priestly authority. After speaking to the Augustinian

concept of ‘peace’ as “tranquility of order, one in which inferior powers are obediently

submissive in all things to superior ones …,”116

Grosseteste directly addressed the issue at hand,

writing:

You also suggest, as if to complain, that the opposite of peace has caused you to feel of

oppressed to some degree. Now, I know that the opposite of that peace I described above

cannot truthfully be anything but oppressive and wicked, and it is right that a person who

rejects the tranquil and sweet gentleness of this peace should experience confusion and

oppression. As the poet says: “Gently must we bear whatever sufferings we deserve.”117

… So, if the opposite of any peace that is not part of the peace I mentioned causes

you or me to experience any punitive distress or discomfort, let us praise and thank God

and not grumble. In this he has shown us his compassion, deeming us worthy, in

imitation of himself and after the manner of those who are his imitators, to receive as

good what is oppressive and distressing; for to those who endure such a burden as

something good there is that certain promise of the kingdom of heaven.118

Penance. In Grosseteste’s day, a single Latin word, penitentia, could describe both a

sinner’s act of contrition and the penalty imposed by the priest under which a sinner could attain

absolution. In the several centuries following Grosseteste, English came to distinguish between



117 Ovid, Ep. 5,7.


Terrell 62

a person’s "doing penance" and their "being penitent" while in Latin a single word, penitere,

included both concepts—one intended as an act of reconciliation with God affecting one’s

eternal salvation, and the other constituting one’s reconciliation with earthly church. When

imposed, public penance partook of both these natures—being both a sacrifice on the part of the

sinner and an example to the community. 119

Thus, when Grosseteste wrote to the abbot of the Augustinian canons of Leicester in

about 1238, in response to a request that he lift a penalty of banishment from an errant monk, he

is careful not to confuse what might be a merciful act in mortality with an act that might work ill

upon the monk’s eternal salvation; telling the abbot:

You are trying to convince me to permit his return because he is ill and old and has long

wished to die at home among his brethren. But the more ill and old of body he is, the

greater is his need to complete the just penance imposed for his former transgressions, so

that his youth may be renewed like the eagles [Ps 102:5]. It was to perform this penance

that he was sent to your community.”120

On the other hand, he tells the dean and chapter of Lincoln that “… when lovers of truth

and goodness truly acknowledge their own evils, then immediately forsake them, and wipe them

away with remorse, the shame of choosing evil is most blessedly concealed by a covering.121

Taken together, the two quotations just referenced exemplify the conventional theological

view of Grosseteste’s time; that penance paid a debt in a real sense. It was neither symbolic nor

paradoxical.122

The offended expected the offender to be humiliated, before God and his priests,

for religious offenses; and, before his human neighbors when restitution was called for.

Therefore, in the 13th century, restitution and routine private confession before one’s priest

became the accepted practice by which one might pay debts to God and to one’s fellow man.

119 Mansfield, 16-17.


121 Grosseteste, Letters, 226; written in 1238 or early 1239.

122 Mansfield, 118.

Terrell 63

This paradigm grew out of interpretations of Omnis utriusque sextus, the 21st canon of the Fourth

Lateran Council (1213), which formalized previous custom and sacred requirements for

Christians to confess their sins to one’s priest.123

Penance as a doctrine originated in the belief

human beings could, with God’s help, repair the damage done by Adam to the cosmic order

through a form of compensation underlying the atonement of Christ. Penance was, in some

microcosm, a corollary of the atonement; it consisted of suffering, and sometimes even violence,

but it was not worldly for it was voluntary, even passive. While such submission was often quite

humiliating, it was accepted, if only because other alternatives were worse; and, if done properly,

it could even become seen as constituting a moral triumph.124

Acceptance. The patient willingness to endure tribulation was essential to Grosseteste’s

conceptualization of the mercies of God. In November 1232, he answered a letter from his sister

that inquired about his health, in which she told her that the truly religious life consisted of “a

striving to reach the peak of perfection, so that a person who lives such a life no longer wrongs

his neighbors and calmly bears his neighbors wrongs.”125

Shortly after, perhaps before the end

of 1232, he wrote to his good friend, Adam Marsh, in which he spoke of his decision to resign

one of his benefices, which his sister and some of his colleagues thought to be unwise. Opening

his heart to his friend, he reveals his commitment to accept criticism, trial, and tribulation;

saying:

Although my mind was in turmoil in for a time troubled now and then by these and

similar jibes, I have nevertheless now returned to my senses and accept them with joy.

For if my conduct in this matter and the like has been foolish, the punishment I am

suffering is just; and seeking God’s pardon, I cheerfully in gratefully submit to his just

treatment of me. But even if I have wisely freed myself of a heavy burden, I nevertheless

know that by this action I am not free of the stain of pollution, since all our justices are

123 Mansfield, 119.

124 Mansfield, 290.


Terrell 64

like the rag of a menstruous women [Is 64:6], and our evil deeds are purely evil, but our

good deeds are not purely good. So the more devoutly it is to be hoped that the bad that

was mixed with the good of my action may be purged clean away, the more joyfully

bought by to accept contumely and contempt. …

[But] how hard it is to keep pride in check, how rare is the sense of one’s own

weakness, how powerful is one’s feeling of contempt for others, how reluctantly one

recognizes the needs of one’s weaker brethren, how false and merely fanciful is this

position of power, and how true and substantial is the submission of servitude.”126

Several years later, in 1235, Grosseteste became bishop of Lincoln. He already had

established a reputation for being stern and strict in the execution of his clerical responsibilities.

In the months before his consecration in June 1235, Grosseteste received a letter from Michael

Belet, a royal and ecclesiastical administrator. The letter charged him with excessive severity in a

matter regarding a candidate for a parish rectory whom Grosseteste deemed to be unsuitable. His

response is notable, in that it exemplified his response to criticism, even that which he

considered unfounded, writing, “But my thanks are greater an even more sincere in heartfelt

because you have been good enough to rebuke and reproach me with compassion and affection

for my own rebuke and reproach, which, as many believe and feel, exceeded all measure and

moderation. … Your rebuke will not cause me distress but will make me grow.”127

As Grosseteste demanded of himself, so did the demand of others. Between 1232 and

1234, while teaching at Oxford, he chastised an unnamed master theology for immoral behavior.

After encouraging him to come to his senses, he closes his letter thus:

So, with the deepest affection I ask you to drink, lovingly and therefore agreeably and

healthfully, the bitter cup that is this letter, as I with bitterness drink the bitter and

notorious sweetness that is the lasciviousness blamed on you. … So drink, not only

agreeably but also greedily, the cup that is this bitter censure, that I may at some time

drain with joy the cup that is your transformation into a new man.128




Terrell 65

From these examples, one can know that Grosseteste was strongly committed to a

conceptualization of Justice and Mercy derived from the book of Job, as commented upon by

Gregory the Great. To act as Job did; to endure tribulation with patience, in fearful submission

to God; having faith that it would be useful experience preparing one return a life in shielding

one against the Last Judgment—was the epitome of Christian behavior, to be done in emulation

of Christ. In probably 1236, he wrote a letter to John of Foxton, comforting him in a time of

illness in words that distill the essence of his conceptualization of patiently enduring tribulations.

I thank God that you are bearing with thanks to him the discomforts that come with

illness and are drinking the bitter cup of tribulation with the sweetness of patience. I

thank God, too, that for you the whip is conducive to learning, vexation to understanding,

temptation to testing, and testing to the hope that does not prove false [Rom 5:45]. …

Moreover, to you for your wisdom I offer my warmest thanks, as it has been responsible

for your praying and reminding me, to my very great benefit, to prepare myself for that

tribunal where all things will lie naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must

give our account [Heb 4:13]. That wisdom has also endowed you, despite your fear, with

the courage to stand up against Leviathan; it has been responsible for strengthening you,

despite your weakness, to endure temptation; it has roused you from your sluggishness to

do good deeds abundantly and to endure evil ones courageously; and, in a word, it has

taught you to fear and to tremble before him alone whose light dispels error, whose

saving grace banishes grief, and whose protection is a fortification against attack. It has

also taught you not to have a fearful heart should armies encamp against you, but instead

to have hope, even if wars are raged upon you [Ps 26:3], because the denser the battle

lines of your enemies, the greater their collapse as they totter and fall before the brilliant

and terrifying splendor of the illumination that comes to us from God.

So I entreat our Lord Jesus Christ, who is our illumination and our salvation, that,

to reward you for this luminous and salutary teaching, he grant you his light and

perpetual salvation, and strengthen you in the trials you endure to achieve the patience

that has its perfect work [Jas 1:4]. And may he grant that with the Apostle you may exult

in tribulations [Rom 5:3]. And know from experience what it means to say: Strength is

made perfect in weakness, and when I am weak, then I am strong [2Cor 12:9-10].129


Terrell 66

CHAPTER VI

JUSTICE AND MERCY IN WYCLIFF’S SERMONS

John Wycliff is known to secular historians for instigating the Lollardy movement, or for

inspiring the Hussite rebellion in Bohemia; to church historians for his anti-papal and anti-

fraternal writings; to philosophers for his opposition to the conceptualism of Ockham; and, to

others for his political, scientific and logical works. However, in addition to his roles as

theologian, philosopher, metaphysician, semanticist, scriptural exegete, hermeneuticist,

polemicist, and preacher, Wycliff was, like Grosseteste, a pastor concerned with the salvation of

his fellow Christians. Additionally, the two men likewise combined a superior intellect with a

cranky disposition and, like many cranky intellectuals, were never content to cultivate their

understanding of the world quietly. Possessed by their thoughts and, in the spirit of extraversion

usual to such men, they imposed them upon their fellows and demanded to be heard,

contradicted, or accepted. While reading Wycliff’s Sermons, this researcher has come to agree

with Lahey’s assessment, that “Wycliff’s writings give evidence of a contentious, acerbic

personality who evolved from a philosopher with a quicksilver wit to a churchman unswervingly

dedicated to the pastoral responsibilities of preaching and writing.”130

Two features distinguish Wycliff’s extant works. First, each demonstrates a high degree

of analytic rigor, comparable to contemporary philosophical argument. Second, Wycliff is prone

to digressing, revisiting points of personal interest with rigorous analysis.131

The sermons among

Wycliff’s works consist of two bodies of writing. The first was written in Latin, probably for an

audience of educated individuals. Johannes Loserth edited and published these sermons in 1887,

130 Lahey, x-4.

131 Lahey, 11.

Terrell 67

in four volumes. They are readily classifiable into two groups, the largest of which, Wycliff

probably compiled near the end of his life; probably writing these sermons for the edification of

a group of preachers he was organizing. The smaller group consists of forty sermons that differ

from the others by being generally orthodox, free of an ideological bitterness that pervades the

larger group; and pervaded with “the idea that part of the Christian life involves patient suffering,

enduring injustice and tyranny on earth to avoid damnation for succumbing to the temptation to

return evil for evil.”132

The second body of sermons attributed to Wycliff were written in English, and collected

and edited by Thomas Arnold. Although their authorship cannot be directly attributed to

Wycliff, those collected by Arnold were likely authored by Wycliff; based upon a tradition of

authorship in multiple manuscripts and they never having been ascribed to anyone else.

According to the editor, “in the present case the weight of internal evidence tends strongly in the

same direction … to establish Wycliff in the authorship of these Sermons beyond all reasonable

doubt.”133

They present their contents in a more "plain and popular, even a drastic style of

speaking, and a moving heartfelt tone, especially when the preacher anticipates the judgment-

seat and the last account.”134

In the absence of English versions of Wycliff’s Latin Sermons, and given the lack of

translation skills possessed by this researcher, except where Loserth was kind enough to provide

translations, this effort to correlate Grosseteste’s conceptualization of Justice and Mercy will

utilize Wycliff’s English Sermons.

132 Lahey, 161-162.

133 Wycliff and Arnold, Select English Works Vol I,, xiv-xv)

134 Iohannis Wycliff, and Iohann Loserth, Iohannis Wyclif Sermones Vol I, (Vol. I. IV vols. London: Wyclif

Society, 1887), ix-x; citing Lechler, John Wycliffe and his English Precursors, 187.

Terrell 68

Grosseteste and Wycliff. After his death, Grosseteste’s books and letters found their

way into the library of the Oxford Franciscans. After two generations of Oxford scholars passed,

“…a change of intellectual climate brought them into the central controversies of the day, and

men found, or thought they found, that Grosseteste had anticipated some of their most hazardous

thoughts.”135

It was about 1360, when scholars began to study them sympathetically, reading his

letters, sermons and tracts as scholastics, seeing them as another link in the tradition, rather than

as historical documents in their own right. Of these scholars, Wycliff is the only person to

develop theological concepts very closely aligned with Grosseteste. 136

Wycliff found

Grosseteste to be stimulating and even inflammatory. Grosseteste’s scientific efforts and

intellectual method inspired Wycliff, as did his translations from Greek and his adoption of a

program of study that emphasized the importance of the Holy Scriptures. One also wonders if

Wycliff identified with Grosseteste’s life as scientist, theologian, pastor, reformer, and

persecuted Christian. 137

Well into the late middle ages, Christian theology conceived of the Last Judgment using

the symbolism of a heavenly balance, in which Christ, the severe judge, would strictly examine

humanity, “weighing them in the balance,” and calling the Elect to heavenly exaltation and

condemning the Reprobate to hell. Wycliff saw that Grosseteste used this conceptualization

often, to better effect the salvation of those Christians placed in his care. He also saw how

Grosseteste accepted with joy the repentance of the penitent, a subtle shift in emphasis away

from seeing Christ as only a judge and towards recognition of the human Christ, whose suffering

and death affected the salvation of humanity. This changing dialectic regarding the Last

135 Southern, 39.

136 Southern, 315-316.

137 Southern, 39-48, 298.

Terrell 69

Judgment; giving one the expectation of receiving grace and clemency through ones’ acceptance

of Christ as Savior influenced Wycliff. 138

The full extent of Grosseteste’s influence upon Wycliff is not settled. Southern, for

example, considers Grosseteste to be a minor factor in Wycliff’s overall theological

development; never eclipsing Augustine’s influence upon Wycliff’s thinking. Also, in spite of

the claims of Grosseteste’s biographers, it is unclear if his criticism of papal decisions affecting

him set Wycliff upon a similar path. Yet, Wycliff did appeal to Grosseteste in matters regarding

clerical corruption, the primacy of scripture, the critical importance of proper pastoral care for

the laity, and the necessity of Christ’s incarnation regardless of the fall of Adam; and, he

acknowledged the substantial value of the works Grosseteste translated from Greek. More

subtly, hidden among his theological arguments and polemic against clerical abuses, one finds

rare indications that Wycliff seems to have evolved a conceptualization of Justice and Mercy

based upon Grosseteste’s, which was drawn, in turn, from Gregory the Great’s commentary on

Job. 139

The scarcity of Wycliff’s references to the subject is likely related to his reluctance to

discuss the three things of which Christ refused to speak, the hour of ones’ death, whether

someone is destined for salvation or damnation, and when the earth will end. Wycliff strongly

believed that clerics:

… who pretend knowledge of such things only confuse the faithful: ‘preaching to the

people of the future should be moderated prudently. … By narrating the events of the

Day of Judgment and the future from prognosticating by the constellations they often

138 Berndt Bast Hamm, Reformation of Faith in the Context of Late Medieval Theology and Piety: Essays

by Berndt Hamm, (Edited by Robert James. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2003), 34.

139 Southern, 302-306.

Terrell 70

deceive themselves and others.’ 140

A presumptuous care to discover things that God

means us not to know only detracts from the more important business of saving souls.141

Wycliff on Justice and Mercy. What follows is a selection of material from Wycliff’s

Sermons pertaining to Justice and Mercy, organized in a similar manner to the discussion of

Gregory the Great and Grosseteste already provided. After presenting generalized examples of

Wycliff’s attitudes, the researcher will present references to Justice and judgment, organized

under the same subordinate concepts as were examples from Grosseteste’s letters: duty, fear, and

restitution. Then, references to Mercy will be provided, being addressed through the same lenses

as were Grosseteste’s letters: suffering, penance, and acceptance.

Many of these concepts are combined in Wycliff’s English Sermon 17 which describes

the banquet he imagines occuring after the Last Judgment, telling his listeners that:

…the last seat at this feast is reserved for the man who does not presume to deserve

heaven before others; but in his meekness, he can rest in knowing he shall come to

heaven. Each man shall hope for eternal bliss; but if they live feebly and rely on a false

hope, they will have only themself to blame. For this false hope, or despair, has an

unfortunate quality, in that once we realize that we should have a hope of heaven, we

compare ourselves with others. Many men, because of pride, hope to be set above others

and this presumption of hope will prevent them from having a place at the feast. Instead,

we should rest in the hope that we shall come to heaven, and forsake such vain

comparisons, lest we join the prideful. 142

Later, in the same sermon, Wycliff expands upon the relationship between worldly

position and wealth, and the prospects for one’s eternal exaltation by explaining that:

140 Lahey 193, note 35, citing Wycliff, De Antichristo, chap. 28, 102. 18-25, which is contained in Opus

Evangelicum II.

141 Lahey, 193.

142 Wycliff and Arnold, Select English Works Vol I, 42) Translated throughout by the researcher.

Terrell 71

Many men, powerful and wealthy in the things of this world, think that they should retain

their power and wealth in heaven, and be preferred before other men. They suppose that,

having lived a godly life, and having profited more in this world than the mass of

mankind, they shall be esteemed higher in heaven; and so they say, that as they hope to

come to heaven, they hope there to be esteemed higher in heaven. But such proud men,

heedless of their state, should struggle to be virtuous so that they do not fool themselves;

and therefore wise men teach us that the more important that you are here, the more you

should strive to be meek. 143

In the next sermon in the series, Wycliff continues speaking upon the state of a man who

would achieve heaven. He does so by speaking about man’s four passions:

… that, when indulged upon, lead to either sin or reward. They are joy and sorrow, hope

and fear of things that should come. Some take joy in good things, and some have joy in

sin or in the riches of the world. Some men have sorrow at other men’s’ welfare because

they have few worldly goods, for they love them too much. Some men have hope of

worldly position and goods and fear losing them. But men should have sorrow for sin,

their own and for other’s. Christ still weeps tears over sin, for sin is worse than any pain;

and since the worst thing is this matter of sorrow, man should have more sorrow for sin

than any other thing, and more joy in heavenly bliss than in any possible amount of

worldly wealth or earthly position of power. 144

Justice. Wycliff, like Grosseteste, viewed Justice in terms of duty, fear, and restitution.

Duty was part of one’s obligation to be obedient to the commandments of God and to the

covenants one might make with God. This is especially true for those who had taken holy

orders, assuming a responsibility for the spiritual welfare of other Christians; as the "…first and

143 Wycliff and Arnold, Select English Works Vol I, 43.


Terrell 72

greatest work of the priest is the promulgation of religious truth.”145

However, man is never

perfect, in this life, and in the commission of sin fails in his duties to God. Penance is the

mechanism by which one repents for one’s sins, demonstrating remorse and the intention not to

fail again. Restitution provided the mechanism by which one could demonstrate repentance in a

tangible manner and provide recompense to persons wronged in one’s commission of sins.

Duty. In his English Sermon 48, intended for delivery on the second Sunday after Easter,

Wycliff drew upon the imagery of the shepherd to illustrate to his listeners the qualities of a good

pastor, as was often used by Grosseteste. Holding up Christ as an example, Wycliff describes:

… the habits of a good shepherd, so that by comparison we may be able to know when

our earthly shepherds fail at their duties. The failure of such shepherds is most perilous

for the church; for, when their duties are rightly performed, they can bring men to

heaven, and when not, they can draw men to hell. Christ describes himself as a good

shepherd, and he is the best shepherd that mankind may have. For he is good in himself

and he cannot fail, for he is both God and man; and God cannot sin. And thus we have a

measure by which we can know a good shepherd from an evil one, for the more that a

shepherd is like Christ, the better shepherd he is; and the more that he strays from Christ

the worse he is. And now that Christ has given us a standard by which we can know

good shepherds from bad, he tells us the highest duty of a good shepherd: a good

shepherd, according to Christ, puts his life before those of his sheep, for no one has more

charity than someone who gives his life for his friends, and such a wise shepherd brings

his sheep to heaven. Therefore, a good shepherd will have the most pain while his sheep

gain the most profit. 146

Later, in the same sermon, Wycliff continues to examine the duties of a pastor using the

shepherd metaphor. He draws further upon the shepherd’s responsibility to defend his flock

145 Wycliff and Loserth, Sermones Vol. I, iii; citing Sermon, p. 11, 16: Primum atque precipuum opus

pastoris est veritatis fidei evangelizacio.


Terrell 73

against attack, first by relating Christ’s assertion that he is a good shepherd who knows his

sheep, and they him; and, then using this assertion to relate the duties of a shepherd, which:

…make them known among the sheep, as my father knows me and as I again know my

father. So says Christ, I put my life to keep my sheep against wolves. And as this

knowledge does not separate Christ and his Father, so should the shepherd wait upon

their sheep; and they should know them not by bodily habits nor by their sins, but by the

three duties of the shepherd that Christ has assigned to them. A good shepherd is

responsible to lead to his sheep in holy pastures; when his sheep are hurt or stabbed, he is

to heal them and salve their wounds; and, when other evil beasts assail them, he is to help

and protect them, even sacrificing his life to save his sheep from such beasts. 147

In English Sermon 79, Wycliff speaks to his audience about the role of one’s confessor

and Bishop. Speaking in words very reminiscent of Grosseteste, he says:

…that no man should become a prelate, having a cure of souls, without feeling great fear,

for if such men prove unable, they should be damned before God, for the sheep will

likely not be saved. Being in the care of such a prelate does them much spiritual harm,

especially when such a person has sought a curate for money or worldly recognition.

God gives men, especially his priests, responsibility, power and knowledge to govern his

church after his law. Accordingly, men should take more care to fulfill their

responsibilities well…. 148

In English Sermon 103, Wycliff speaks about the Last Supper and, after describing the

event, he dwells for a time upon the many mansions in heaven of which Christ spoke and of the

various degrees of merit and reward that man might obtain. Then, discussing the bliss he expects

to find in heaven, Wycliff explains to his listeners how they should proceed to obtain it, by

assuring them that:



Terrell 74

Christ does not start anything but he will make an end of it, therefore when he says that if

they want to go to heaven he shall come again and take these apostles with him, we will

see this verified at Christ’s coming at the last day, that where Christ is forever, both in

heart and in bliss, they are there with him after this day without end. … And thus Christ

identifies those who know how the world will end, and describes the way in which they

should come to bliss, even those fathers known in the Old Testament. Therefore, we may

trust in Christ… [knowing] the life that Christ led here [on Earth] is the way to come to

heaven. However, if we forsake him in this life, we shall never come to bliss. 149

Fear. A central aspect of man’s experience of deeply-felt religious experience is a

feeling of dependents which Otto calls “creature-consciousness”, which he then defines as “the

emotion of a creature, submerged and overwhelm by its own nothingness in contrast to that

which is supreme above all creatures.”150

This ‘mysterium tremendum’ possesses aspects of fear,

or rather a peculiar sort of dread; an element of overpowering, unapproachable ‘majestas’; and

an element of energy, urgency, or impetus to action that is somehow alien, or supra-human, and

possesses an element of fascination. 151

In English Sermon 81, Wycliff expands upon the

method by which Christian men should keep themselves in a state worthy of salvation. As when

Grosseteste invoked Gregory’s Moralia, Wycliff calls upon his listeners to engage in

contemplation when facing such fear, since when “… man is turned to himself, when his

conscience bites him; that man’s soul fares much better.” 152


150 Rudolf Otto, The Idea of the Holy, (2nd Edition. Translated by John W Harvey. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1923), 1950, 10.

151 Otto, 12-40.

152 Wycliff and Arnold, Select English Works Vol II, 271.

Terrell 75

In English sermon 82, Wycliff expounds on the characteristics of the “saintly life” and

instructs his listeners therein about the manner in which they should face death, telling them that:

… nothing is more subject to man’s power than his innermost thoughts and we may have

fear, while alone with God in the hour [of our death]; since we know that old sins may

trouble our soul, that we shall not have the power to resist the devil’s temptation. For as

a considerate man becomes great, and although he may be in the prime of his strength,

nevertheless, sin may grow in any man, and be so strong at the time of his death that the

justice of God would not let that man come unto Him. We should have this fear of God,

especially at the hour of our death; for it is a good defense against the devil and against

despair. But this fear must be faced alone, with hope in the love of God; knowing that

God has more love then the devil has envy; for God’s love is without end, but this envy is

foul and enfeebling; but this envy cannot stand against the virtue of God’s love; … for

God’s love empowers you to overcome evil in that hour. 153

Restitution. Wycliff speaks only rarely upon this topic. When he does, he seems to

conform to the attitude presented by Grosseteste, in his letters. In English Sermon 57, Wycliff

speaks upon Christian love, its precepts and scope. After encouraging his listeners to conform to

the Christian ideal of loving one’s enemies, he speaks to the idea of “overcoming the world”

through Christ-like behavior that includes making restitution to those one has wronged.

Apparently, there was some theological question as to whom restitution was to be made, to God,

in the form of the church, or to those wronged. Wycliff directly addressed the issue by telling his

listeners, in a very Grossetestean manner, that:

Men are commonly confused about determining to whom they should restore goods, that

they have gotten wrongfully, since they should not give ill-gotten goods as alms before


Terrell 76

having restored them to the men that should have them. They should make amends to

God by the law he has given, and make restitution to them to whom God requires it. 154

Mercy. The experience of ‘creature-feeling’, with its associated feelings related to the

imposition of divine justice, is often marked by a depreciation of self. Both the Prophet Isaiah

and the Apostle Peter speak to this when they encounter this feeling, saying “Depart from me, for

I am a sinful man, O Lord.” The Christian religion balances the despair of failure with an

atonement that provides a covering or shield against the judgment of God. This covering

redeems mankind such that man is once again fit to live in the presence of his God. 155

In an

exegetical tract describing “The Seven Works of Temporal Mercy”, Wycliff begins by asserting

that mercy is a requirement for the Christian, in that:

If a man was confident that, tomorrow, he would come before a judge, to either lose or

keep all of his earthly goods, and also his life; he would dread his judgment, and prepare

himself and his family to face the sentence with him. But where is our belief in the Day

of Judgment, when we know that we shall come before the highest judge, and have our

life judged, along with everything we have, to win and live forever in heaven, or else to

lose and live forever with the pain of hell, with the devils and their angels? This should

be our faith, and therefore we should have hope. If our life is good, in accordance with

the law of God, to be glad in charity and with the sentence pronounced upon us. Since

our beliefs teach us that Christ will not judge anyone unmercifully and that he will have

mercy only on those who are merciful, each man should learn to be merciful. For this

reason Christ says in this gospel, ‘Blessed be merciful men for they shall have mercy!’156

154 Iohannis Wycliff, and Iohann Loserth, Iohannis Wyclif Sermones Vol III, (Vol. III. IV vols. London:

Wyclif Society, 1887), 174.

155 Otto, 45-70.

156 Wycliff and Arnold, Select English Works Vol III, 168.

Terrell 77

Suffering. The central event of Christianity was Christ’s assumption of the role of

sacrificial lamb, thus taking upon himself the sins of humanity—becoming the ultimate Paschal

lamb and earning the right to judge humanity. The atonement wrought by Christ in the garden of

Gethsemane and his passive, accepting behavior he exemplified in response to the pain of torture

he experienced were held up as exemplifying the proper behavior men should emulate in the face

of tribulation. In Epistle Sermon 34, Wycliff exhorts his listeners to perseverance in the face of

suffering. He declares that man, after the fall of Adam, became subject to vanity that he might

be taught some small understanding of his debt to Christ. It was man’s response to vanity that

resulted in his:

… bodily pain and illicit spiritual passions. Because of this, he necessarily suffers death

for his sins. What man should therefore regret suffering willfully, if it will lead to

heavenly bliss, since otherwise he will suffer terrible pain, and have no reward? Blessed

be the Lord that subjects man to vanity so that he can have a hope of heaven. Therefore

you should willingly suffer for righteousness. Have hope and solace in your pain,

knowing men shall come to heaven as joint heirs of God’s Son, for the little pain that they

suffer here. … We well know that man was made in this state so he might live forever

and without death, be translated into heavenly bliss; but because of sin it became

necessary to suffer pain and bodily death. But Christ has brought man again to the state

that he should have had. … And as God rewards man over that which he deserves, so the

state that men have now, having a hope of heaven, is better than was the state of

innocence. This future should move man to be martyrs for the love of Christ. 157

157 Iohannis Wycliff, and Iohann Loserth, Iohannis Wyclif Sermones Vol II, (Vol. II. IV vols. London:

Wyclif Society, 1887), 324-325.

Terrell 78

Penance. The Christian doctrine of Justice and Mercy includes within its framework, the

concept of penance. The exercise of which allows one’s sin to be redeemed through God

response to one’s personal effort, consisting of the acts of contrition, confession, and satisfaction.

158 It was before God that a sinner did his penance and made his confession, “not so that [God]

would change his judgment in response to our prayer, but so that by our prayer we might acquire

the proper disposition and be made capable of obtaining what we request.” 159

Such was the

divinely instituted means of soliciting God’s grace for the forgiveness of sin. Wycliff’s English

Sermon 88 describes his conceptualization of the necessity of penance, in which he declares that

all men should:

… do penance [for sin], for the return of God shall come. It is known through God’s law,

how mankind was exiled because of the sin of our first father; … Christ, our spiritual

father taught us to do penance to redeem us from Adam’s sin. and, since God’s kingdom

will not come without penance, each man that desires heaven should be doing penance.

Therefore, the cause of Christ is plain to men that would understand it. Simply

anticipating God’s return is not enough. 160

Acceptance. A central characteristic of the story of Job, commented upon by Gregory,

extolled by Grosseteste, and held up to all Christianity as exemplary behavior was Job’s quiet

acquiescence in the face of disaster and tribulation. During the middle ages, Europeans had

ample opportunity to face situations similar to those spoken of in the book of Job. Life was

short, oft times miserable and often wracked with pain, yet in the face of pervasive misery and

agony, the church held up the example of Job, who prefigured the example of Christ, as the

158 Jaroslav Pelikan, Reformation of Church and Dogma (1300-1700), (Chicago: University of Chicago

Press, 1984), 95 -96.

159 Pelikan, Reformation of Church and Dogma, 130.

160 Wycliff and Arnold, Select English Works Vol I, 306-307.

Terrell 79

method by one which could obtain Mercy at the Last Judgment by one’s patient accepting

emulation of Jesus Christ. In several tracts written late in his life, Wycliff encourages the

Christian in a manner reminiscent of Grosseteste, writing, “For in all the passion that Christ

suffered, he failed not in steadfast cheer. He did not cry out for his pain, and so suffer yours

likewise;” 161

and that “Christian men should be patient in the tribulation that falls upon them, for

there are few men, and none that are currently living, that have not had persecution, and thus

patience is required.”162

Wycliff, in his Epistle Sermon 2, succinctly stated his conceptualization

that linked patient suffering and acceptance of tribulation with the development of Christian

virtue and the comforting of the Holy Ghost, when he wrote that:

God ordained [the scriptures] to be written so man can patiently hope, and find comfort in

these writings. … [Be] of goodwill, and openly worship God, the father of our Lord

Jesus Christ. … [For] Christ taught man to suffer, both in word and deed, with a sure

hope of God’s comfort. For great virtue is formed in those who suffer, and yet remain

penitent before God, trusting that in exchange for their patience, God will comfort them. 163

This thread of thought, in which the role of Christ was transformed between the time of

Gregory the Great, through Grosseteste and thence to Wycliff—from that of a heavenly emperor

depicted in imperial gravitas to that of the Man of Sorrows, whose utterly miserable death

161 John Wyclif, and Thomas Arnold, Select English Works of John Wyclif, (Vol. II. III vols. Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1871), 233.



Terrell 80

evoked the Passion—displaced the severity expected of Christ the Judge with compassion. The

fear and terror associated with divine justice on the Day of Judgment could be displaced by

compassion and a shift in emphasis described in terms of “mercy, protection, intercession,

consolation, and hope” 164

Depending on his audience, Wycliff would sometimes emphasize

“the seriousness of divine judgment …the urgency of penitence… [or] the necessity of good

conduct for salvation.”165

In other circumstances his sermons would highlight the saving power

of grace shed by a merciful Christ, which compensated for one’s “moral failures and spiritual

weakness.”166

164 Hamm, 32.

165 Hamm, 53-54.

166 Hamm, 54.

Terrell 81

CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSIONS

Robert Grosseteste is a fascinating man. This study began as an effort to understand a

man who lived many centuries ago, and whose interests seemed to parallel the researcher’s own.

As this researcher examined Grosseteste’s letters, something of his nature and that of his

audience, became visible. However, the wisdom contained in Grosseteste’s letters proved

difficult to understand until this researcher had examined them in their totality, considered them

as a part of Grosseteste’s life, and thoughtfully pondered them for over a year in the context of

much additional reading. Only then was this researcher able to truly understand how vividly the

letters illustrated Grosseteste’s mode of thought.167

Grosseteste lived at a time in which European perceptions of the ancient world were

changing. He facilitated this evolution with his translations of the Greek texts arriving in Europe

in increasing numbers, after the Norman conquest of Sicily and Southern Italy, and because of

the increased commercial and diplomatic traffic between the momentarily Latin Constantinople

and the city states of northern Italy. 168

Additionally, Grosseteste contributed to the evolution of

High Middle Ages thought by his observations upon the natural sciences. 169

Early biographers depicted Grosseteste as a proto-reformer. However, he never

demonstrated rebellion against accepted church doctrine. Other assessments of Grosseteste have

varied from calling him a moderate theologian, “a representative figure of scholastic and

scientific thought,”170

to labeling him as an eccentric religious extremist, who sowed discord far

167 Southern, lxv.

168 Evans, 120; Haskins, 14.

169 Southern, 150.

170 Southern, 3.

Terrell 82

and wide. After his death, it was this latter view of Grosseteste—the image of the eccentric

oppositionist—that was prominent in the writings of individuals such as Matthew Paris and

Roger Bacon. It was also this view that Wycliff seized upon and, through which, he came to

view Grosseteste as a kindred spirit. However described, Grosseteste was foremost a man

inclined to examine Church doctrines in the light of Holy Scripture, the writings of church

fathers, and his own observations—often examining theological issues scholastically-ensconced

colleagues considered long settled. In this way, Grosseteste ignited a revisiting of church

doctrines, and their basis in scripture which, becoming widespread, eventually proved to shake

the foundations of institutionalized Christianity. 171

It is true, however, that Grosseteste, was aware that whatever strengths he possessed were

more than matched, in his eyes, by his weaknesses. In his favor, he approached theology with a

high degree of confidence, undertaking the most significant theological problems unhesitatingly

and speaking his mind without restraint; knowing that he did not have complete answers. This

researcher was favorably impressed with his willingness to speak plainly; to push the limits of

the problem as far as his means allowed—and then, having exhausted himself, to perform an act

of faith, leaving the problem in the hands of future researchers. Grosseteste spoke on many

things, to include Justice and Mercy; and, his positions were never wholly new. For example, in

relation to these issues, this researcher hopes to have illustrated a probable intellectual

connection between Grosseteste and Gregory the Great’s commentary on Job. However, rather

than accusing Grosseteste of any abject intellectual dependence, it is just to recognize that he

171 Southern, 320.

Terrell 83

offered his thoughts, however colored by what he had read, for the edification of his

correspondents, aware of both his own flaws and of others’ potential. 172

In the end, however, Grosseteste was solitary. He was no disciple of some contemporary

theologian or philosopher, and he created no school of thought in which later scholars would

extol his thoughts, pronouncements and opinions. This was both a disadvantage and an

advantage, as, on one hand, if his intellect failed him, he had no derived intellectual foundation

upon which to rely; on the other, this isolation allowed Grosseteste to ponder concepts outside of

any box, represented by conventional notions. Grosseteste, in his isolation, became accustomed

to examine the specifics of theological conundrums and then, inductively synthesize his own

opinions about the rightness of his solutions. After his life, his scientific work did not

significantly affect English scientists in the century after his death and, although his commentary

on Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics was commonly quoted, his theological and philosophical

works do not seem to figure in any major, subsequent academic development. What kept interest

in Grosseteste alive was the presence of his books and papers at the library at Oxford. This

action lodged his records in the intellectual center of England, where they were readily available

and occasionally be examined with interest—but, seemingly, never with deep interest until

Wycliff discovered them in the 1360s. 173

Gregory and Grosseteste.

Grosseteste believed that divine Justice and Mercy are exemplified by the two advents of

Christ. These events, one in his past and the other imminently expected, punctuated the middle

and end of God’s plan for humanity, which extended from the creation of the world, when God

created mankind, to the Last Judgment, when everything about mankind’s behavior will become

172 Southern, 214.

173 Southern, 230, 250, 297.

Terrell 84

known—the glorious acts of the Elect and the wickedness of the Reprobate. Instead of the

mainstream interpretation of Christ’s advents, which viewed the first as utterly merciful and

anticipating the second as wholly judgmental, Grosseteste derived from Gregory a

conceptualization that viewed divine Justice and Mercy as being integral to both advents. Justice

and Mercy were intimately related to one another, and a person could not have one without the

other. 174

Grosseteste learned, from Gregory, that the fundamental force balancing Justice and

Mercy is the experience of suffering. Suffering was unavoidable, given the fall of Adam, but

God uses it for the punishment, elucidation and sanctification of his children. Gregory and

Grosseteste combined this conceptualization with Augustine’s division of humanity into the

Elect and the Reprobate. For them, the two classes of humanity experience pain in the same way

but with different results. Suffering, for the Elect, leads to growth and sanctification; while, for

the Reprobate, it is only punishment. In his commentary on Job, Gregory outlines this paradigm,

built around the idea that God’s purposes regarding Justice and Mercy are always mixed. In

mortality, the Elect experience suffering to call them to repentance, while God causes the

Reprobate to suffer so as to demonstrate God’s Justice. However, Gregory and Grosseteste

realized that the Reprobate may not suffer such punishment, thereby being a recipient of God’s

mercy—for the time being—but both believed that, while such people receive mercy, they are

building up a judgment against themselves which Christ shall execute at the Last Judgment.

Grosseteste came to believe Gregory’s assertions that God’s forbearance towards the wicked

was, itself, a punishment; since unpunished sin in mortality would be judged strictly in the

eternities. With this understanding, Grosseteste believed that suffering satisfied God’s purposes

174 Hester, 135-136.

Terrell 85

by bringing a mortal closer to God and that Christians should open themselves to the potential

message from God hidden behind the suffering, as did Job. In every sense, Gregory and

Grosseteste tie whatever Justice and Mercy one experiences in mortality to the Justice and Mercy

each person faces in post-mortality. 175

Gregory’s reflections upon the Holy Scriptures deeply influenced Grosseteste. Gregory

has an absolute respect for the authority of scripture, considering them to be the absolute source

of knowledge and truth—and appropriate for all Christians, both the simple and the theologian.

He illustrates this metaphorically by describing the Scriptures as a river that was “both shallow

and deep, wherein both the lamb may find a footing, and the elephant float at large.”176

Gregory

communicated this love to Grosseteste and, in consequence, Grosseteste became acutely

conscious of his ignorance of Biblical languages and his relative ignorance of the works of the

Church Fathers, probably a result of his provincial schooling. He therefore learned Greek, and

spent the last three decades of his life translating Greek texts, that he could become closer to the

fundamental sources of scripture. To improve his knowledge, Grosseteste embarked on a serious

reading program, going first to the Bible and then to the principal church fathers and then to

Biblical commentators. We are fortunate that the list of the books Grosseteste owned at the time

of his death is extant. That it includes works by Augustine, Jerome, Gregory, Ambrose, Bede,

John Chrysostom, John of Damascus, and Origen is illustrative of Grosseteste’s broad

commitment to obtaining knowledge. 177

Grosseteste kept lists of theological subjects and indexed them to locations within his

books. The lists allowed him to return quickly to pages upon which subjects were mentioned

175 Hester, 73, 82, 84.

176 Hester, 11.

177 Southern, 181-187.

Terrell 86

and, it was from these lists that this researcher learned that Grosseteste was especially influenced

by Augustine, whose book, the City of God, appealed to him on many subjects. Following

Augustine, the author Grosseteste referenced most his lists is Gregory the Great. His still-extant

copy of Gregory’s Moralia, topically marked and commented upon, led to this researcher’s

realization that Gregory might have affected Grosseteste’s conceptualization of Justice and

Mercy. Examination of Grosseteste’s topical lists show Gregory dominating subjects relating to

moral conduct and scriptural symbolism, reinforcing this researcher’s confidence in the

preliminary thesis. Interestingly, after Augustine and Gregory, Grosseteste placed significant

emphasis on the works of Saint Bernard and Anselm of Canterbury, to the exclusion of almost all

other 12th century theologians. For example, Grosseteste hardly mentions Peter Lombard,

although he certainly knew of Lombard’s Sentences and he mentions no one Parisian teacher

later than Lombard. 178

Gregory clearly influenced Grosseteste, and both believed that the second coming of

Christ was at hand. This feeling of expectation caused Gregory to focus upon Christ the Judge,

and his writings, especially the commentary on Job, deeply influenced Grosseteste. Gregory’s

picture of spiritual progression begins when one comprehends the imminent arrival of Christ the

Judge, and fearfully begins to examine their behavior, motivations, and intents. The idealization

that Gregory passed to Grosseteste saw earthly life in terms of being a remarkably short

probation for a person’s eternal existence. For Gregory and Grosseteste, Job represented the

most appropriate example of how suffering—the imposition of pain—was used by God; and,

how it could be used by a sufferer to further their own salvation. Gregory’s conceptualization of

divine Justice and Mercy implied that Christians, in meditating upon their suffering, should

178 Southern, 45, 188, 198.

Terrell 87

become anxious about the sinful state of their lives and their meager prospects at the hands of

Christ the Judge. This anxious foreboding would be mitigated in the Elect by their realization of

God’s promise of Mercy, at the hands of Christ the Savior of mankind. Gregory did not see pain

as a good thing in itself, but rather as a product of sin, resulting from the fall of Adam, which is

turned to man’s benefit by an all-knowing and all-powerful God. Gregory asserts that God uses

pain to draw sinful humanity towards contemplation and redemption; to drive mankind from the

world without taking them out of the world. Through self-examination and the presence of

suffering, a sinner could judge themselves and make restitution, thus satisfying Justice. Gregory

also believed that the fear of suffering and judgment could increase a person’s virtue through

mild coercion, and the promotion of humility. In a real sense, Gregory saw pain and suffering as

a tool by which God could teach the Elect to become Christ-like. 179

Grosseteste and Wycliff.

According to Lahey, Grosseteste was “the guiding light and definitive force of mediaeval

English preaching”180

who, when compared to his academic and clerical contemporaries,

demonstrated independence and originality to an unusual degree—which was not always

welcomed with open arms. Grosseteste never followed the usual scholastic paradigm. He was

not one who examined the body of existing commentary, followed by a systematic effort to

compare, analyze, and reconcile their confused and often contradictory conclusions. Grosseteste

was not one to stand on the “shoulders of the past” in an attempt to see further. Grosseteste did

take his pastoral responsibilities extraordinarily seriously and set a significantly rigorous

standard for proper pastoral behavior; he knew his responsibilities as explained in the gospel, and

he could not imagine doing otherwise or, accepting less from others. He was intensely practical,

179 Hester, 2.

180 Lahey, 160.

Terrell 88

sharply direct in his dealings with his fellows, and prepared to give everyone advice, as befitting

a shepherd of a human flock. 181

Perhaps Grosseteste’s appeal as a preacher grew out of his use

of phrases rich in personal feelings, scriptural insights, and practical wisdom, rather than the

grave, formal language used by the scholastic theologian.

Therefore, it is essential to realize that Wycliff was not unique in his respect for

Grosseteste, or in his inclusion of entire paragraphs of Grosseteste’s work in his Sermons and

tracts. Grosseteste was the exemplar for Oxford-educated preachers until the mid-15th

century.

Wycliff’s regular references to Grosseteste were no departure from the norms of the time. 182

Wycliff discovered Grosseteste while at Oxford from the early 1350s through the 1370s. He

closely identified with Grosseteste’s desire to know the truth for himself, his wide reading

program as exemplified by the substantial personal library donated to the university, and his

effort to learn new languages when quite aged. Wycliff read Grosseteste’s annotated works,

seeking out the hints that lent him insight into the workings of Grosseteste’s mind; and, Wycliff

came to admire his willingness to read broadly, examine all information which interested him,

and create his own conclusions, expressing them with courage, in spite of any trepidation. Lahey

indicates that Wycliff was most sympathetic to Grosseteste’s emphasis upon Christ’s centrality

to the Bible, which emerged when Grosseteste traced “the evolution of God’s covenant with

humanity.”183

The conceptualization of Justice and Mercy is at the center of this covenant,

traceable to Jehovah’s covenant with Abram [Gen. 15], which instituted the agreement making

Abraham’s children the “Chosen People”; later modified by extension to include all humanity

[Acts 10 & 11].

181 Southern, 318.

182 Lahey, 160.

183 Lahey, 139.

Terrell 89

Wycliff would find in Grosseteste’s letters a conceptualization of Justice and Mercy that

would help him reconcile the “ideas of consolation and severity, tolerance and rigor, freedom

and control”184

that concerned him. Grosseteste encouraged his readers, including Wycliff, to

use Christ as an exemplar. Through suffering, one could discern the Elect from the Reprobate

from comparing their response to the example of Christ or of Job. Grosseteste assured his fellow

shepherds and his flock that they were, through suffering, being prepared against the Last

Judgment; and if they would make proper use of repentance, they would be happy with the Last

Judgment. Wycliff read, learned and, in his turn, taught others similarly.

Wycliff’s continuation of Grosseteste’s teachings contributed to the substantial change in

the conceptualization of Justice and Mercy that lead towards the Reformation by forcing

theologians to reassess the role merit and morality played with regard to salvation; an idea

previously thought firmly decided. The Grossetestean balance between Justice and Mercy,

“between compassion and strictness, between liberating Gospel and commanding Law”185

influenced Wycliff, and through him, continued to influence those preaching to Christians in

northern Europe.

Hester asserts that Gregory was prominent in the history of ideas moving from late

antiquity into their early medieval period. 186

As a link on the same chain, Grosseteste appears to

have absorbed Gregory’s theology and incorporated it into his writing; where Wycliff found it

and safely passed it to others, important in the later Protestant Reformation. It is said that

Gregory was no original theologian, that his gift was an understanding of earlier ideas and

184 Hamm, 86.

185 Hamm, 86.

186 Hester, 6.

Terrell 90

expressing them an updated language. It appears that Grosseteste and Wycliff were similarly

gifted, and respectively passed their ideas several centuries further into their futures.

So, remembering what the apostle says – If we judged ourselves, we would not thus be

judged – let each one of you himself judge whether he has faithfully discharged his duty

in this affair. Otherwise he will perhaps be found on the last day not to have paid what he

owed, and bound hand and foot he will be thrown into prison or the darkness outside

[Mt. 22: 13], and he will not come out until he has paid the last penny [Mt 5:26].

Farewell. 187

187

Grosseteste, Letters, 306. The closing of a letter written to the dean and chapter of Lincoln Cathedral in

late 1240 or early 1241, criticizing and correcting their conduct related to a royal prohibition forbidding

ecclesiastical judges from deciding matters between Grosseteste and the Kings Court.

Terrell 91

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

Aquinas, Thomas. "Summa Theologica." Internet Sacred Text Archive. n.d. http://www.sacred-

texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/index.htm (accessed April 29, 2011).

Aquinas, Thomas, and Ralph McInerny. "Commentary on the Sentences." Priory of the

Immaculate Conception at the Dominican House of Studies in Washington, D.C.

Dominican House of Studies, 487 Michigan Ave NE, Washington, DC 20017. n.d.

http://dhspriory.org/thomas/Sentences.htm (accessed May 5, 2011).

Gregory I. Morals on the book of Job. Oxford: J.H. Parker, 1844.

Grosseteste, Robert. The Letters of Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln. Translated by F.A.C.

Mantello, & Joseph Goering. Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2010.

Wyclif, Iohannis, and Iohann Loserth. Iohannis Wyclif Sermones Vol I. Vol. I. IV vols. London:

Wyclif Society, 1887.

—. Iohannis Wyclif Sermones Vol II. Vol. II. IV vols. London: Wyclif Society, 1887.

—. Iohannis Wyclif Sermones Vol. III. Vol. III. IV vols. London: Wyclif Society, 1887.

—. Iohannis Wyclif Sermones Vol. IV. Vol. IV. IV vols. London: Wyclif Society, 1887.

Wyclif, John, and Thomas Arnold. Select English Works of John Wyclif. Vol. I. III vols. Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1871.

—. Select English Works of John Wyclif. Vol. II. III vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1871.

—. Select English Works of John Wyclif. Vol. III. III vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1871.

Secondary Sources

Allison, Gregg R. Historical Theology: An Intorduction to Christian Doctrine. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 2011.

Bainton, Roland H. Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther. Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon

Press, 1950.

Brafman, Ori, and Rod A Beckstrom. The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of

Leaderless Organizations. New York: Penguin Books, 2008.

Brentano, Robert. Two Churches: England and Italy in the Thirteenth Century. Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1968.

Callus, D A (ed). Robert Grosseteste: Scholar and Bishop. Oxford: Oxford University Press,

1955.

Terrell 92

Dales, Richard C. "Robert Grosseteste's Scientific Works." Isis, 1961: 381-402.

Davis, Leo Donald. The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787): Their History and

Theology. Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1983.

Evans, Gillian Rosemary. Philosophy & Theology in the Middle Ages. New York: Routledge,

1993.

Ginther, James R. Master of the Sacred Page: A Study of the Theology of Robert Grosseteste, ca.

1229/30-1235. Aldershot, Hants: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2004.

Grun, Bernard. The Timetables of History. Third Revised Edition. New York: Simon & Schuster,

1991.

Hamm, Berndt Bast. Reformation of Faith in the Context of Late Medieval Theology and Piety:

Essays by Berndt Hamm. Edited by Robert James. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers,

2003.

Haskins, Charles Homer. The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century. Cambridge, Massachusetts:

Harvard University Press, 1927.

Hester, Kevin L. Eschatology and Pain in St. Gregory the Great: The Christological Synthesis of

Gregory's 'Morals on the Book of Job'. Bletchley: Paternoster, 2007.

Lahey, Stephen E. John Wyclif. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Levenson, Jon D. Sinai & Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible. New York: HarperCollins, 1985.

MacCulloch, Diarmaid. The Reformation. New York: Penguin Books, 2004.

Mackie, Evelyn A. "Scribal Intervention and the Question of Audience: Editing Le Chateau

d'amour." In Editing Robert Grosseteste: papers given at the thirty-sisth annual

Conference on Editorial Problems, University of Toronto, 3-4 November 2000, by Evelyn

A Mackie, & Joseph Goering, 61-78. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003.

Mackie, Evelyn A, and Joseph Goering. Editing Robert Grosseteste. Toronto: Toronto

University Press, 2003.

Mansfield, Mary C. The Humiliation of Sinners: Public Penance in Thirteenth-century France.

Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995.

McEvoy, James. Robert Grosseteste. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

McEvoy, James. "Robert Grosseteste: The Man and His Legacy." In Editing Robert Grosseteste,

edited by Evelyn A Mackie, & Joseph Goering, 3-30. Toronto: University of Toronto

Press, 2003.

Otto, Rudolf. The Idea of the Holy. 2nd Edition. Translated by John W Harvey. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1923, 1950.

Ozment, Steven. The Age of Reform 1250-1550. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980.

Terrell 93

Pantin, William Abel. "Grosseteste's Relations with the Papacy and the Crown." In Robert

Grosseteste: Scholar and Bishop, by D.A. Callus, 178-215. Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 1953.

Pegge, Samuel. The Life of Robert Grosseteste, the Celebrated Bishop of Lincoln. London:

Society of Antiquaries, 1793.

Pelikan, Jaroslav. Christian Doctrine and Modern Culture (since 1700). Chicago: University of

Chigago Press, 1989.

—. Reformation of Church and Dogma (1300-1700). Chicago: University of Chicago Press,

1984.

—. The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600). Chicago: University of Chicago Press,

1971.

—. The Growth of Medieval Theology (600-1300). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.

—. The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.

Perry, George G. The Life and Times of Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln. London: Society

for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1871.

Powicke, Maurice. The Thirteenth Century: 1216-1307. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962.

Sadler, Gregory B. "Mercy and Justice in St. Anselm's Proslogion." American Catholic

Philosophical Quarterly LXXX, no. 1 (2006): 41-61.

Smalley, Beryl. "The Biblical Scholar." In Robert Grosseteste: Bishop and Scholar, by D.A.

Callus, 70-97. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1953.

Southern, R W. Robert Grosseteste: The Growth of an English Mind in Medieval Europe.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.

Stevenson, Francis Seymour. Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln: A Contribution to the

Religious, Political and Intellectual History of the Thirteenth Century. London:

MacMillan & Co., 1899.

Terrell, David G. "Historical Evaluation of the First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787)."

Scribd.com Portfolio of David G Terrell. February 26, 2010.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/31886314/terrell-dg-historical-evaluation-of-the-first-seven-

ecumenical-councils-325-787-scribd (accessed June 26, 2011).

Trager, James. The People's Chronology: A Year-by-Year Record of Human Events from

Prehistory to the Present. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1992.