dominant church and opposed to the heretics of his time.
He taught, as they had done, that the church, assembled in general
council, may judge and even depose a pope and reform abuses in the
church; that papal excommunications have no force unless conformed to
justice, and do not necessarily prevent a man who dies under them from
going to heaven. He sharply censured the vices of the Roman court, and
of the bishops and clergy of his time, particularly those of his native
land. He is especially severe in censuring their immorality and
ignorance; and, like Wycliffe, condemns the monks and friars for
inveigling into their order young novices who had no vocation for a
celibate life, and ought rather to have been encouraged to enter into
honest wedlock. But he was a stern opponent of heresy--Lutheran as well
as Wycliffite--a subtle defender of Roman doctrine; and in dedicating to
Archbishop Betoun his Commentary on St Matthew's Gospel, he
congratulated him on the success of his cruel measures against Hamilton
and the heretics.[13]

FOOTNOTES:

[1] As Lord Acton has so well said, "The modern age did not proceed from
the medieval by normal succession, with outward tokens of legitimate
descent. Unheralded, it founded a new order of things, under a law of
innovation, sapping the ancient reign of continuity. In those days
Columbus subverted the notions of the world, and reversed the conditions
of production, wealth, and power.... Luther broke the chain of authority
and tradition at the strongest link; and Copernicus erected an
invincible power that set for ever the mark of progress upon the time
that was to come.... It was an awakening of new life; the world revolved
in a different orbit, determined by influences unknown before. After
many ages, persuaded of the headlong decline and impending dissolution
of society, and governed by usage and the will of masters who were in
their graves, the sixteenth century went forth armed for untried
experience, and ready to watch with hopefulness a prospect of
incalculable change" (Lecture on the Study of History, 1895, pp. 8, 9).
"There are no true 'cycles' in human development; history never repeats
itself; the Greco-Roman world has only distant analogies with the
Feudal-Catholic world, just as this has only distant analogies with the
Revolutionary world. The great phases of human civilisation are
contrasted rather than compared; they differ as infancy, childhood,
manhood, and senility di