Asher Sisneros

Divine providence exists in history. An invisible hand guides the events of today, yesterday, and tomorrow. Anyone who looks through the pages of history can see the clear presence of this supernatural force. It is almost as if all lives are single chapters in a grander story that are all guided by this divine providence. When evaluated from a broader historical context, it becomes apparent that coincidences do not exist, and historical chaos is not accidental. When wars wage and economies plummet, humanity can rest assured that it is for a reason. The tumultuous 14th century is a marvelous example that illustrates the existence of divine providence in historical chaos. There was nothing accidental about the 14th-century crises. Each individual event was guided by providence. History is not the compilation of uncorrelated events—providentially correlated events come together to form the story known as history. 

The Black Death (1347-1350)

The Black Death was one of the most lethal epidemics in history. Approximately ⅓ of Europe’s population was slaughtered by the Bubonic plague and the Pneumonic plague. As a result of the plagues, numerous unqualified men took office in the Church to replace the dead incumbents. The widespread existence of unqualified church officials caused massive unrest. Many officials took office for personal gain. Such perversions caused wolves within the Church to lead the sheep astray. In addition to the ecclesiastical difficulties plaguing Europe during this era, there was also tremendous inflation and monstrous taxes that were levied for the State to recoup the revenue it lost from a shrinking (dying) tax base. (For a more in-depth analysis of the ramifications of the Black Death, click here.)

The Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453)

Under the leadership of William the Conqueror, Normandy successfully invaded England in 1066. By right of conquest, William inherited the English throne. However, he never forfeited his position as the duke of Normandy. This created an ambiguous relationship with the French monarchy. As the duke of Normandy with land holdings in France, he was a vassal to the French crown; as the king of England, France was an equal. While these bizarre technicalities under the feudal system were unprecedented, they did not cause any issues during William’s lifetime. However, this confusion had serious ramifications for his successors, resulting in a falling out between the two monarchies that culminated in the Hundred Years’ War.

Over time, the French monarchs worried about England’s growing power. As a means of punishing them, they slowly regained control of English-controlled lands within the French kingdom. Thus, as time progressed, France gained independence from English interests, and the English royal family had less political control over the French kings. By 1204, the French monarchy successfully pushed England out of all the lands within their borders except for Gascony in Aquitaine. 

In 1316 and 1322, French nobles concluded that women could not inherit the throne. That decree encompassed both daughters and wives. They concluded that if a monarch died, his closest male relative would ascend to the throne. Unfortunately, when Charles IV died, his closest male relative was Edward III, king of England. Edward attempted to sequester the crown as Charles’ nephew, but the French nobility abhorred the idea of an Englishman becoming the king of France. Under such measures, the two kingdoms would become one, and France would be subject to English rule. Naturally, the French viewed this as a problematic predicament. Citing the rulings of 1316 and 1322, French nobles rejected Edward’s claim to the throne, stating that he could not inherit the crown through a woman if the woman herself could not legally inherit the crown.

Edward consented and paid homage to Charles’ cousin, Philip VI, as the true king of France. This was not done out of the kindness of his heart. It was a political move to keep Gascony under his domain. However, in a miscalculation of horrible diplomacy, the Great Council of Paris stripped Gascony from Edward III in 1337. This act provoked Edward to a breaking point. With nothing else to lose, Edward declared war on France. But his ambitions exceeded retaking Gasony. He wanted the whole nation. 

Edward successfully obliterated French forces at the Battle of Crecy in 1346. Despite their overwhelmingly superior numbers, the French cavalry could not break through English archers. Warfare was changing. With technological innovations, old tactics needed to be reevaluated. The longbows used by English archers propelled arrows with enough force to break through the cavalry’s armor. Thus, the French forces were mowed down by English archers. The result of the battle was an overwhelming French defeat, and the English successfully captured the insignificant city of Calais. 

After England recovered from the effects of the Black Death, King Edward’s son, Edward the Black Price, led another invasion into France in 1355. One year later, the Black Price utilized flanking tactics to surround King John the Good at the Battle of Poitiers. By the battle’s end, the King was captured and sent to London, where he died as a prisoner of war. 

The war came to a temporary end in 1360. Both nations exhausted their resources. Moreover, France was dealing with the ramifications of the Jacquerie Revolt from two years earlier. Blaming the catastrophic losses—from the mass casualties to the capture of John the Good—on the cowardice of French nobility, the peasants or “Jacquerie” revolted. Because of these internal conflicts and compiling military losses, France could not continue fighting. Edward was also ready to negotiate after the Black Monday hailstorm that killed 1,000 of his troops. With no other options, France signed a treaty giving the English monarchy ⅓ of France. Despite the treaty, England never exercised true rule within those regions because King Charles V, John the Good’s son, used proxy fights and terrorism to weaken English control over those regions, all without a declaration of war. In short, Charles V hired mercenaries to chase English nobles out of France, all while presenting the facade that they were at peace. Through those tactics, Charles V successfully drove the English out of all of France, except for Calais and Bordeaux. 

However, it was also a two-way proxy fight. Castile was in a state of civil war during 1366, with Peter of Castile and Henry of Trastamara both fighting for rule in Castile. Despite the treaty, both France and England got involved and inadvertently fought each other. The Black Price supported Peter, and the French supported Henry. Peter gained control over Castile with English support. However, to pay for the debts incurred by the war, the Black Prince raised taxes in Aquitaine. This angered lords in Gascony who appealed to Charles V for help. Thus, the dispute in Aquitaine led to a broader conflict, resuming the war between France and England for a few decades. However, the war halted when the Black Prince died in 1376, Edward III died in 1377, and Charles V died in 1380. The death of both sides’ leaders resulted in an interlude of peace. 

But the peace was only temporary.  After Charles V died in 1380, his son Charles VI ascended the French throne. However, history would not remember him for any grand military accomplishments or cultural advancements. Instead, history would remember him by his late nickname Charles the Mad. 1392 marked the beginning of his degeneration into insanity. According to some reports, he went five months without bathing. Even in that instance, he only obliged his lords with bathing because they used brute force to restrain and bathe him against his will. On another occasion, his sanity degenerated to the point where he could not recognize his wife. Without a sane king, French politics was largely controlled by divisive princes and nobles who were too preoccupied with fighting each other to adequately prepare for the possibility of another English invasion. With the support of Burgundy, the English king, Henry V, restated his dominance over the French monarchy and demanded to marry Charles the Mad’s daughter Catherine. Henry faced the French in 1415 at the Battle of Agincourt, where the outnumbered English subdued the French. The French forces were so numerous that even after the battle was over, the French prisoners still outnumbered Henry’s soldiers. In response, Henry killed all the prisoners, and Charles the Mad was forced to concede to Henry’s terms. Henry married Catherine, and the Estates-General in Paris agreed that Henry’s son would become heir to the French throne. 

Joan of Arc had a profound influence on Charles the Mad’s son (Charles VII) by persuading him to disregard the treaty in 1429 and reclaim the throne for himself. She became the face of the French liberation movement and claimed to have visions from the archangel Michael. It is unclear whether she had such visions, but the Roman Catholic Church currently commemorates her as a saint. Regardless, her visions came true. With her help, Charles VII successfully reorganized the French military. He discarded the old feudalist militaries and created a single, centralized standing military that answered directly to the crown. He also implemented canons into his siege equipment. So, while England led the technological charge at the Battle of Crecy in 1346 by using longbows, France led the technological charge under Charles VII by using canon artillery. Joan the Arc was captured in 1430 and executed as a witch the following year. However, her death did not hinder Charles VII’s momentum. He proceeded to win battle after battle, reconquering Normandy and Gascony before winning the Battle of Castillon, the last formal battle of the war. 

Despite England’s upper hand during most of the Hundred Years’ War, ultimately, they could not sustain a military conquest in France. Their resources were stretched too thin. The French outnumbered the English in every battle. England should have lost the war immediately after Edward III’s invasion, but there were a few reasons for English victories during the earlier period of the war. On the one hand, Edward III and his son were marvelous military commanders. The way Edward used the longbow at the Battle of Crecy was genius, and the way the Black Prince captured John the Good by using flanks at the Battle of Poitiers cannot be ignored. But as Charles V proved when he hired privateers and mercenaries, the English lacked the resources to successfully defend their land holdings in France. Under minuscule pressure, their control dissipated almost entirely. Therefore, Joan of Arc and Charles VII were able to defeat the English after reorganizing the French military, finally bringing an end to the Hundred Years’ War. Fundamentally, the reason English attacks succeeded as long as they did was because French nobility was unorganized. That disorganization was largely because of the geopolitical chaos at the time resulting from the Black Death and the Western Schism. Regardless, initial French losses during the Hundred Years’ War were a result of disorganization. 

Great Western Schism (1378-1409)

The Great Schism between the Eastern Orthodox and the Western Roman Catholic Church occurred in 1054. The differences between the East and the West reached such a breaking point that their only solution was to disown each other. Three hundred years after the schism with the East, the West suffered an internal religious schism known as the Great Western Schism. 

Between 1309 and 1377, the popes resided in Avignon, France, instead of Rome. However, Rome was ready to reclaim dominion over the papacy. The Great Schism of 1054 took place because the Byzantine Empire rejected Rome’s control over the entire Church. But by the 14th century, France became the center of the Church’s operations, and Rome was completely undermined. This infuriated the Romans, and a dangerous mob stood outside of the College of Cardinals as they elected a new pope. With axes beating down the doors, the cardinals were rushed to pick a candidate rashly, particularly one who was Roman. However, they could not agree on one Roman and opted to elect the Italian Bartolomeo Prignano, who took the name Pope Urban VI. Though he was not a Roman, he also was not French, and that appeased the Roman mob and temporarily ended the Avignon Papacy. 

While Bartolemeo’s election ended the Avignon Papacy, it seldom mended the strife between Avignon and Rome. Their new pope, who was formerly known for his good temperament, suddenly suffered from erratic and violent behavior, going so far as to punch a cardinal in the face on one occasion. Therefore, the College of Cardinals quickly realized the rashness of their choice and sought to depose him. Seeking to deal with Urban VI’s unbecoming character, the College of Cardinals reassembled the conclave. After long deliberation and debate, they elected the Frenchman Clement VII. However, Urban VI refused to step down as pope, citing the legitimacy of his election. Clement VII opted to operate from Avignon because Urban VI would not step down. The existence of these two simultaneous papacies officially started the Great Western Schism. 

In their powers, both popes claimed to be the “true” pope. The cardinals were divided on the matter. Some sided with Clement VII, while others sided with Urban VI. Each side disowned the other as heretical. Each pope called their critics in the College of Cardinals illegitimate. The division between Avignon and Rome only widened when the popes became excommunicating each other and deposing cardinals. In the end, there were two sets of cardinals and two popes, resulting in absolute chaos within the Church. 

In 1409, the Council of Pisa made matters far worse. Trying to resolve the hostilities with an outcome each side could tolerate, they elected a third pope and said that both elections were illegitimate. However, this ruling had the opposite effect than what was intended. It only caused further strife. Both Avignon and Rome rejected the Pisan pope, and there was a brief period where three popes simultaneously ruled as “head of the Church.” 

The issue was finally resolved in 1415 when the Council of Constance elected Pope Martin V. All sides agreed he was the best choice, bringing an end to the Great Western Schism. However, the damage was already done. All the infighting tarnished the reputation of the Church. The Catholic Church was supposed to be the bastion of Christian principles. Christians were supposed to exercise love and grace towards each other, yet here they were fighting each other. However, the tarnished state of the Church was divinely providential, as it allowed to message of one man to spread. 

John Wycliffe (1328-1384)

John Wycliffe was the forerunner of the Protestant Reformation. As a priest and professor at Oxford, he made progress on doctrine that was highly controversial in the Catholic Church. John Calvin and Martin Luther are largely praised as the fathers of the Reformation, but John Wycliffe was the first scholar to argue for the doctrine of predestination and the invisible church. He also vocally refuted the belief that works could earn salvation, stating that works only reassure a person of their salvation, but they do not earn salvation. This was untread ground in the Catholic Church. What is more, Wycliffe controversially stated that all Christians were free to appeal directly to the Throne of Grace through Jesus Christ, without the intercession of a priest or saint. He also believed the Bible was the ultimate standard of truth—not the Pope. To allow laymen to read the Bible without needing a clergy to translate it, Wycliffe and his colleagues translated the Latin Bible into English, the language most commoners spoke and understood. This gave people the opportunity to (1) study the Bible themselves and (2) check if their clergy were actually teaching what was in the Bible. Translating the Bible into English was without a doubt Wycliffe’s greatest contribution to society. If it was not for Wycliffe translating the Bible into English and proclaiming that papal decrees should not be revered more than Scripture, the Protestant Reformation may have never happened. 

Despite the historical significance of John Wycliffe’s work, he was not revered by the Catholic Church. Much of his teachings were direct attacks on the Pope and the Catholic Church. In 1377, the Pope condemned him and commanded him to stop spreading heresies. In the following year, London Bishop William Courtenay summoned Wycliffe to appear before him. Wycliffe may have been tortured and killed if it was not for the intervention of the people. A mob rose up and physically protected Wycliffe, stating that Wycliffe would not be the victim of an inquisition. On a second occasion, Wycliffe was summoned to answer for his “crimes” at the Lambeth Palace, but Lewis Clifford stopped the inquisition in the name of the Queen. Though he at times had the support of the aristocracies who were also at odds with the Church, that was not enough to protect Wycliffe and his supporters. Bishop William Courtenay’s Earthquake Synod determined that Wycliffe’s “heresies” were prosecutable by law, but thankfully the bill was rejected by the House of Commons. He and his followers were hated, but they survived and thrived because of the turmoil plaguing the 14th century.  

The Conclusion of the Matter 

The 14th century was littered with crises. There was the Black Death, the Hundred Years’ War, and the Great Western Schism. One may look at the entire century and see individual catastrophes, all compounding to create a century of plague and death. That is a shortsighted view. When the 14th century is evaluated from a broader perspective, the poetic providence is clear. 

It would have been difficult to live through the 14th century. There was famine, followed by the Bubonic and Pneumonic plagues. But those plagues were providential. On the one hand, they created additional pressure on the monarchies and the Church, making it harder for them to prosecute John Wycliffe. But the plagues also exacerbated the investiture crisis in the Church. With so many clergy dying, even more unqualified and corrupt men took office in the Church. That may seem like a curse, and in many ways it was, but it also brought light to the corruption that had already existed. John Wycliffe started calling out that corruption, allowing the populace to be receptive when Martin Luther later called out the Catholic Church for selling indulgences. While the Black Death caused misery for many people, it was clearly part of a broader plan that was ordained by God. 

The Hundred Years’ War was no different. On the one hand, many nobles such as King Edward III loved Wycliffe for saying it was not unlawful for England to withhold sending payments to Rome. On the other hand, the war preoccupied the government, giving Wycliffe relative autonomy from State intervention. In fact, his opposition to clerical wealth made him a golden boy among many English nobles who longed to capture the absorbent wealth accumulated by some monasteries to fund their expensive war. As the Jacquerie Revolt in France and the Peasant’s Revolt in England proved, the populace was getting choked by the ramifications of the war. The people were burdened by the oppressive taxes and continual death. These revolts resulted in a French Revolution-style revolt against property owners. Though Wycliffe never condemned owning property, the political situation during that era enabled the people to warmly embrace Wycliffe’s criticisms of Catholic wealth. However, the political war fed the religious division that was occurring in the West. With strife between nations on a political front, it became easier for religious leaders within Western nations to grow disillusioned with each other. That disillusionment finally culminated in the Western Schism, an event with a direct impact on Wycliffe’s ministry. So while the Hundred Years’ War caused oppressive taxes and needless bloodshed, it was clearly part of a broader plan that was ordained by God. 

Finally, the Great Western Schism affected Wycliffe—and thereby the Protestant Reformation—more directly than any other crisis during the 14th century. First, the Church chaos resulting from the Western Schism tarnished the public’s perception of the Catholic Church. That had direct impacts on Wycliffe and later, the Protestant Reformation. Secondly and more importantly, the Western Schism was a tremendous distraction to the Church, allowing Wycliffe to translate the Bible into English and preach to the people with relatively low physical opposition. While the Pope condemned Wycliffe and the Anti-Wycliffe Statute of 1401 deemed him a heretic, he was never imprisoned and died of natural causes. As one can see, though the Western Schism caused disunity within the Church, it also gave Wycliffe immense liberty to preach the gospel and lay seeds for the Protestant Reformation. In short, the Western Schism was clearly part of a broader plan that was ordained by God.  

What is the conclusion of the matter? Put simply, everything in history is ordained by God. History is not a story about men. History is a story about God. It is a story of individuals who are seemingly uncorrelated to each other, participating in a divinely ordained plan. Some evaluate history as individual story, but they miss the poetry by doing that. History must be evaluated as one story to see the full picture. When history is evaluated through that lens, it becomes easy to see divine providence at work. Thus, the student of history should have more hope and optimism than anyone because where some see historical chaos, he sees providential order.