Curtis Bostick studies a topic that has long been in need of careful scholarly attention: the Lollard understanding and use of the concept of Antichrist. For purposes of review, the book's seven chapters may be divided into four sections. The first is introductory and includes a brief discussion of apocalypticism in general (chapter 1) and a cursory overview of the traditional medieval notion of Antichrist (chapter 2). The next two chapters are central to the book's purposes. They analyze Wyclif's eschatological beliefs (chapter 3) and examine at length the one major text of Lollard apocalypticism, the Opus Arduum, a commentary on the Book of Revelation written in 1390 by an imprisoned Lollard (chapter 4). Two subsequent chapters deal with the dissemination of Lollard apocalypticism (chapter 5) and orthodox responses to it (chapter 6). A disappointing conclusion (chapter 7) briefly surveys the legacy of Lollard apocalypticism into the sixteenth century.
What's best about this book is that it focuses intensely on a topic that has been largely ignored, both by scholars such as myself, who have discussed the medieval understanding of Antichrist as evident in both orthodox belief and popular culture, and by scholars such as Anne Hudson who have greatly contributed to our understanding of Lollardy. Bostick makes it clear that apocalyptic expectations, as well as the polemical use of apocalyptic language, were extremely important to the Lollard movement.
So, although the book delivers no startling revelations, its emphasis is new and valuable. It is also valuable in emphasizing the continuing vitality of the traditional understanding of Antichrist, although, like many works focusing on alternative forms of apocalyptic thought, it fails to recognize how long such traditional views held sway: the traditional Antichrist was still being portrayed on stage in Chester into the 1570s! Finally, Bostick is to be commended for stressing that Lollard apocalypticism is not "reformist" in the sense in which that term is used by scholars such as E. Randolph Daniels and Kathryn Kerby-Fulton -- that is, in Joachite terms, in which ecclesiastic reform and renewal are expected to follow the downfall of Antichrist. Bostick is particularly good in drawing distinctions between such views and Wyclif's eschatological thought, noting how often Wyclif, the author of the Opus Arduum, and other Lollard sources disagree with Joachite views: "The Antichrist has so despoiled the visible church that it is no longer salvageable. The Devil has penetrated into the very heart of the church; hence Joachite visions of renewal are inane" (p. 91).
The book's weakness is its tendency to see Wyclif, fifteenth-century apocalypticism, and the late medieval church from the perspective of the Reformation. Given the conclusions of several recent historical studies that stress popular spirituality and the diversity of late medieval religious thought and practice, it seems odd to state: "Thus, ecclesiastical jurisdiction exerted control over much more than just manors of bishops and abbots; it represented a state-wide system of control. In sum, the late medieval church in England constituted a hegemonic institution" (p. 103). The medieval-Reformation binary is once again reinscribed, and, as is true with all binaries, one pole is negative, the other positive. I agree with Bostick's conclusion that "Continental conceptions reinforced, but did not create, apocalypticism in sixteenth-century England; rather, English perceptions of the Antichrist influenced continental exegetes. Above all, apocalypticism in England did not have to be revived -- it never died" (p. 56). Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that the legitimacy of Lollard and other late medieval forms of apocalypticism in this account seems to be dependent upon their influence on sixteenth-century reformers. Wyclif and the Lollards may be the "missing links in English apocalypticism" (chapter 3), but their views are significant in their own right as a variety of late medieval apocalypticism. Thus chapter 4 is the book's best and its greatest contribution because it focuses in depth on the Opus Arduum, a fascinating work worthy of much greater attention than it has received to date.
Antichrist and the Lollards would have been strengthened by further development and careful revision. It was written as a dissertation at the University of Arizona under the direction of the editor of the series in which this book appears, and it reads too much like a dissertation, with the usual methodological taxonomies and the obligatory survey of scholarship -- most, naturally, found wanting. Greater care with proofreading would also have helped. Finally, the concluding chapter most definitely should have been developed at much greater length or simply deleted. The issue of Lollard influence on the Reformation is complex and should not be broached at all if it can't be dealt with in depth. A few pages, for example, surveying the work of John Bale -- and not even considering the role of Antichrist in his crucial dramatic works such as King Johan -- hardly makes a start. Strictly speaking, the term "Reformation" in the title is misleading in terms of the book's content, if not in its author's perspective. Nevertheless, the book fills an important gap in scholarship on late medieval English apocalypticism and Lollard theology and will be a useful source for further study. For highlighting this important topic, for putting Lollard apocalypticism within the context of late medieval thought, and for studying the Opus Arduum in depth, Bostick is to be thanked.