hat personal significance should be attached to it?

As it stands, the long tractate or sermon (partly adapted from a
popular French religious manual), which bears the name of the "Parson's
Tale," is, if not unfinished, at least internally incomplete. It lacks
symmetry, and fails entirely to make good the argument or scheme of
divisions with which the sermon begins, as conscientiously as one of
Barrow's. Accordingly, an attempt has been made to show that what we
have is something different from the "meditation" which Chaucer
originally put into his "Parson's" mouth. But, while we may stand in
respectful awe of the German daring which, whether the matter in hand
be a few pages of Chaucer, a Book of Homer, or a chapter of the Old
Testament, is fully prepared to show which parts of each are mutilated,
which interpolated, and which transposed, we may safely content
ourselves, in the present instance, with considering the preliminary
question. A priori, is there sufficient reason for supposing any
transpositions, interpolations, and mutilations to have been introduced
into the "Parson's Tale"? The question is full of interest; for while,
on the one hand, the character of the "Parson" in the "Prologue" has
been frequently interpreted as evidence of sympathy on Chaucer's part
with Wycliffism, on the other hand, the "Parson's Tale," in its extant
form, goes far to disprove the supposition that its author was a
Wycliffite.

This, then, seems the appropriate place for briefly reviewing the vexed
question--WAS CHAUCER A WYCLIFFITE? Apart from the character of the
"Parson" and from the "Parson's Tale," what is the nature of our
evidence on the subject? In the first place, nothing could be clearer
than that Chaucer was a very free-spoken critic of the life of the
clergy--more especially of the Regular clergy,--of his times. In this
character he comes before us from his translation of the "Roman de la
Rose" to the "Parson's Tale" itself, where he inveighs with significant
earnestness against self indulgence on the part of those who are
Religious, or have "entered into Orders, as sub-deacon, or deacon, or
priest, or hospitallers." In the "Canterbury Tales," above all, his
attacks upon the Friars run nearly the whole gamut of satire, stopping
short perhaps before the note of high moral indignation. Moreover, as
has been seen, his long connexion with John of Gaunt is a
well-established fact; and it has thence been concluded t