Chaucer clearly describes the pardoner as a parody, using satirical language to represent the corruption of the fourteenth century Church. This is evident through his immoral intentions, “I preche of no thyng but for coveityse” highlighted by this candid tone and repetition. This is particularly evident as he admits to his own hypocrisy and deceit, “For myn entente is nat but for to wynne, and nothing for correccioun of synne” emphasised by the rhyming of the juxtaposed nouns.
The discourse marker “Is al my prechyng, for to make hem free to yeven hir pens, and namely unto me” clearly displays these corrupt motivations and glee at his own trickery. This satirising of pardoners and in turn the church is emphasised further as he repeatedly denounces, whilst ironically partaking in avarice, “Thus kan I preche agayn that same vice which that I use, and that is avarice… ” Chaucer’s corrupt images of the Pardoner, particularly through the vicious tone, graphic biblical and animalistic serpent imagery “Thus spittel out my venym under hewe… , “… stinge hym with my tonge smerte” highlights his parody of the traditional pardoner, emphasised by harsh ‘T’ sounds. This would have been particularly important due to the oral tradition during the Medieval period. A rhyming couplet is also used here”… trewe” to draw attention to the contrast between the seemingly holy and the corrupt reality, reflecting the corruption of the fourteenth century church. Chaucer’s deviation from the traditional confessio presents a candid and unrepentant account of corruption, reflected in the fourteenth century church.
Similarly the deviation from the anglo-vernacular, by repeating first Timothy, “Radix malorum est cupiditas” displays the pardoner’s immorality by hinting at his attempts to trick, “By this gaude have I wonne… ” and perform to the “lewed people”. Chaucer’s continuous use of trickery language, “hundred false japes” emphasises this corruption as he deceives the common people. This reflects the corruption of the fourteenth century Church as they continued to teach through literature and Latin which were almost entirely confined to the ecclesiastical order.
Such cruelty is displayed through the inverted commas, condescending tone “… whan the lewed peple is doun yset… ” and rural imagery”… goon ablakeberied! ” as he specifically targets the poor, young and uneducated who are considered more naive and innocent. This is highlighted through the exclamatory and callous tone, “AL sholde hir children sterve for famine… ” Chaucer’s similar, repeated use of idiomatic language and reference to country life through the ironic simile, “As dooth a dowve sittinge on a berne… ” further reflects his goal to appeal to common folk.
This idea that pardoner’s were primarily performers is displayed through his negative portrayal using grotesque and graphic, bodily imagery “Thanne peyne I me to strecche forth the nekke and est and west upon the peple I bekke”. This is emphasised by the rhyming couplet and harsh consonant sounds revealing his disingenuous nature. These would also have been very important due to the oral tradition. Chaucer’s continued use of rhyming couplets foregrounds the Pardoner’s corruption of the ars praedicandi and he idea that preaching should glorify God, “For certes, many a predicacioun/Comth ofte time of yvel entencioun”.
Furthermore, this format highlights his aim to make literature more easily accessible. This is emphasised by the Host’s framed narrative which provides the common man’s perspective on the Pardoner’s corrupt exploitation of the Church’s teaching. Also, because the Pardoner symbolises the fourteenth century church, these negative physiognomic descriptions through grotesque, bodily imagery, “Myn hands and my tonge goon so yerne” reflects the church’s corruption.
The following ironic, metaphor, religious connotation and image of purity, “as dooth a dowve sittinge on a berne”, highlights this further as it is juxtaposed to the previous comical and farcical image. The Pardoner himself seems to admit to his theatrical tactics, “… in Latyn I speke a words fewe, to saffron with my predicacioun… ” emphasised by the boastful tone and proclamation of his “joye” found in his corruption. These descriptions clearly reflect the religious corruption and hypocrisy of the fourteenth century Church, whilst questioning whether an immoral person can tell a moral tale.
This was commonly asked during the medieval period, “… though myself be gilty… I maken oother folk to twynne” for example by the Wycliffites. Chaucer’s portrayal of the Pardoner’s material spirituality, displayed through his “Relikes” reflects the exact immoral behaviour that John Wycliff condemned. This corrupt approach to spirituality is emphasised further by the disrespectful verb “Ycrammed” and mortal, material descriptions”… cloutes and of bones… ” of relics whilst omitting to describe their spiritual significance.
This clearly presents the deceit and corruption of the fourteenth century church embodied in the Pardoner, emphasised through his vast income, “… hundred mark… ” This reiterates Wycliff’s accusations of the Church’s corruption which led to the Lollard movement, “… our prelates in granting indulgences do commonly blaspheme the wisdom of God. Our clerics neither evangelize like the apostles, nor go to war like the secular lords… ” Furthermore, William Langland’s description of pardoners in Piers, “There prechide a pardoner as he a prest were…
Lewide men levied hym wel and likide his speche… ” aligns with Chaucer’s description suggesting it is an accurate, rather than fictional, portrayal of the Church’s corruption in the Medieval period. This continuous portrayal of the Pardoner’s materialism reflects the church’s corrupt idea of The Treasury of Grace which suggested the only way to be forgiven is through true penitence, “… soore to repente” and the payment of money or goods, “… yeven hir pens… ” Therefore, this superficial approach to sin brings an intrinsic sense of corruption regarding the fourteenth century Church.
The use of possessive pronouns in the simile, “I stonde lyk a clerk in my pulpet” portrays the Pardoner to be usurping the role of the priest as they were prohibited from preaching. This is emphasised by Chaucer’s use of a confident tone, possessive pronouns and the sermon form which was the most important structure of literature during the Medieval Age. However, the Pardoner’s use of the verb “preching” may potentially separate his corruption from the church, displayed through Pope Pius IV at the Council of Trent abolished the role of pardoner as part of the church reform of discipline.
This emphasises the contrasting corruption of the fourteenth century Church which used the art of preaching in a more complicated way, making the religious message less accessible. Similarly, the corruption of pardoners is displayed through their attempts at absolving sins, despite their limited ability to offer absolution a poena but not a culpa, demonstrating their corrupt disobedience. This is historically displayed in 1340 when the Bishop of Durham wrote of pardoners who “absolve the perjured, homicides… and other sinners… Historical accuracy reiterates this spiritual deviancy as the pardoner is said to work for the particularly corrupt Rouncivalle house,”… ther rood a gentil Pardoner of Rouncival… ” This would have been suspicious because in the 1380’s warrants were issued to arrest anyone claiming to collect alms for the Rouncivalle Hospital but converting their receipts for their own use.
This reflects the corruption of the fourteenth century Church which employed these pardoners, highlighted by Pope Boniface IX who exposed these abuses by false pardoners, “… rom the court of Rome… “. He believes they”… affirm that they are sent by us (Rome)… to receive money” but”… carry further their impudence by mendaciously attributing to themselves dales and pretended authorisations… ” The Pardoner’s corruption is reflective of the fourteenth century Church by highlighting the medieval view of the interdependence of sin, “Of avarice and of swich cursednesse… ” This may have been used as a corrupt scare tactic to encourage people to give more penance, reflecting the further immoral actions of the medieval church.
This corrupt approach toward deceit, regardless of their methods or outcome for others, is repeatedly displayed through the Pardoner’s admittance, “I | rekke nebere, whan that they have been beryed”, emphasised by the harsh consonants, “rekke” and alliteration “been beryed”. He even attempts to justify this corruption, “For certes, many a predicacioun comth ofte tyme of yvel entencioun… ” suggesting his approach is even more shameful, despite his own lack of shame.
The use of listing, “Som for pleasance of folk and flaterye… om for veyne lorie, and som for hate” emphasises the vast corrupt behaviours of the fourteenth century church. Similarly, Chaucer lists different religious documents, “telle I forth my tales, Bulles of popes and of cardinales, Of patriarkes, and bishoppes… “reveals how the Pardoner attempts to deceive his audience, emphasising the corruption of his role. This is emphasised as pardoners needed to have an episcopal licence, but many of these were forged which the Pardoner strongly suggests here. For example, in 1378 a Thomas Pardoner was arrested as a “forger of the seal of the Lord of the Pope”.
Chaucer highlights the historic, topical issue,”… my bretheren or to me… ” by reiterating Pope Boniface’s accusations toward quaestores of forming an association to better deceive the public, displaying the corruption of the fourteenth century Church body. Here, his selfishness, reflecting the corruption of the church, is revealed through personal and possessive pronouns, indicating widespread corruption amongst pardoners.
Such corruption is emphasised through the sinister tone, revealing the pardoner’s secular, vengeful nature whilst connoting evil, “Thus quyte I folk that doon us displesances… The boastful description of the Pardoner’s preaching, “it is a joye to se my bisynesse… ” also emhpasises the corruption of the ars praedicandi. Repetition of “assoille” emphasises the corruption of absolving sins a culpa. Specificity and detail in describing and listing of the Pardoner’s sensuous pleasures, “money, wolle, chese, and whete… ” emphasises his worldliness and corruption. Similarly, the Host’s scatological language shows his outrage at the Pardoner’s corruption, “Thou woldest make me kisse thyn olde breech/And swere it were a relik of a seint”.
This combination of poetic methods may subtly reflect the church’s attempts to transform preaching into a performance, displaying their corruption of the Bible. For example manipulation of metre and word order is used to emphasise significant ideas such as the stressed “Ycrammed” which emphasises the Pardoner’s abundance of “holy relics” reinforcing his corrupt nature. The Pardoner’s persuasive language and tone, “He shal have multiplying of his grain” also reflects the corruption of the 14th century Church, by demonstrating the aim of pardoners to trick people out of money, using any possible method.
His corruption is also evident through the angry and dismissive tone, “I wolde l hadde thy coillons in my hond… ” emphasising his ironic lack of concern for his audience. Ultimately, Chaucer uses a variety of poetic methods such as the listing of sins”… hazard, stywes… ,” alliteration, “doon the devel” and rhetorical markers, “Now wol l yow deffenden hasardrye” to display a corrupt parody of the fourteenth century Church. He similarly uses various exemplum, “A capitayn sholde lyve in sobrenesse… ” as well as boastful, condemning and hyperbolic language, “Hasard is verray mooder of lesynges… ” to portray such Medieval corruption.