xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E97DN4WX1_BX5R11 INGEST_TIME 2014-10-03T22:00:13Z PACKAGE UFE0046477_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
JAN HUS AND LATE MEDIEVAL HOMIL ET I CS By REID S. WEBER A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2014
2014 Reid S. Weber
4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are numerous people who m I must acknowledge and thank for their roles in the creation of this document. I could not have reached this point without the assistance and input from many people and organizations in the United States and the Czech Republi c. Initial financial assistance for language study and early research came through a Foreign Language and Area Studies Grant through the University of Florida Center for European Studies. The bulk of the research was conducted in Prague through a Fulbright Grant in 2011/2012. I need especially to thank the Czech Fulbright successful and enjoyable. I am also thankful for support from the University of Florida Graduate School i n the form of a dissertation completion grant for spring 2014 to relieve me from teaching responsibilities in order to bring the writing of this dissertation to a conclusion. Finally, thank you to Melanie Davis and her interlibrary loan staff at the Univer sity of Florida George A. Smathers Library. It is not easy locating books in Czech that can be over a century old, but their willingness to try and high success rate allowed this work to progress far more smoothly. Trying to add to a cultural history that one is not born into requires the welcome and guidance of those who have already entered and established themselves in the field. I am in significant debt to numerous scholars from Prague. Dr. David Holeton, my Fulbright host, supplied not only numerous cu ps of tea but also suggestions, advice, and an introduction to the wider field of Bohemian Reformation studies. Dr. Peter More generously provided me a place to research and write in Prague, as well as guidance lick teolgick fakulta. I am also in debt to the staff and scholars of the Center for Medieval Studies at the Philosophical Institute in
5 Prague, who graciously welcomed me into their library and offices, accommodated me with unfettered access to their res ources, advice, encouragement, and when it became apparent I was confused, directed me to the room. In particular, Dr. Pavel Soukup was extremely generous of his time and ideas, and aided me with his remarkable mastery of the source material and the particulars of fifteenth century Bohemian Latin and Czech. Within the United States, I would like to thank Lydi a Ingram, who proof read and edited many of the early drafts of chapters and was instrumental in helping me translate my own often scattered obse rvations into recognizable argument s. I must also thank Deb Ensz for her proof reading and editing the early chapter drafts as well. I would like to thank Dr. David Mengel and Dr. Philip Haberkern for their willingness to discuss and advise me on several t opics within the dissertation both while at conferences and through emails. Their expertise and encouragement has been invaluable. I would like thank my undergraduate advisers Dr. Linda Taber and Dr. Doug Taber from Wayne State College. It was through thei r teaching that I first encountered Jan Hus as they set me on my path through Bohemian History. I would like to thank Dr. Carol Lily who supervised my semester abroad in Olomouc, Czech Republic and for whom I wrote my first paper on the Hussites. I must al so offer my thanks for the continued encouragement and support of my MA adviser at Northern Illinois University, Dr. Valerie Garver. Even though when she inherited me in the fall of 2005 she did not know who I was or why I was in her office she has since become one of my greatest allies. At the University of Florida I have had the joy of being a member of a remarkable group of young scholars who have provided seven years of inspiration, assistance, and
6 community. In particular, I need to acknowledge the fr iendship, advice, and editing skills of Robert Mc e achnie and Anna Lankina, who have been my stalwart companions at the University of Florida. I must also thank Miller Krause and Daniel Conigliaro for their willingness to share their remarkable talent with Latin by assisting me with some of my more unwieldy translations. I need to thank the doctoral candidates of the history and three as well as a place to commiserate and share ideas concerning the dissertation process. I must also thank Jan Volek, who despite the short time we shared at the University of Florida, has provided significant assistance in navigating ancillary Czech sourc es and has aided me in correcting my sometimes unfortunate use of Czech diacritical marks. Of the professors at the University of Florida, I must acknowledge the remarkably unselfish gift of time and assistance provided by Dr. Nina Caputo and Dr. Andrea S terk who were absolutely critical in determining the direction and content of this work. Both played significant roles in shaping my understanding of preaching through their seminars and as members of my committee. I must thank Dr. Will Hasty and Dr. Alice Freifeld for being willing to serve on the dissertation committee and for their insightful and challenging comments since the outset of this project. I would like to thank Dr. Stuart Finkel for his willingness to listen and offer advice as well as for the use of his office during my final year of writing. I also need to acknowledge Dr. Florin Curta, who despite his repeated proclamations that I am not his student, has encouraged me and shown interest in my work throughout my time at the University of Flori da. His honest
7 None of this project would have been possible without the tireless assistance of my adviser and mentor Dr. Howard Louthan. I am indebted to Dr. Louthan for his generous gift of time and effort over the last seven years on my behalf. He has been unceasingly optimistic while offering challenging and valuable critique in pu shing me not helping me work through many of my own short comings. I believe this dissertation reflects his expertise, patience, and guidance as much as my own research and writing. Finally, I must thank my family who has sacrificed so much that I could pursue my ambitions. I am eternally grateful to my parents who have provided years of support both emotionally and financially while encouraging me to pursue the doctoral deg ree. I would like to thank my two daughters, Nina and Adela, who although not quite able to read this dissertation, need to know how much joy and love they have provided me over the course of this project. In the research and writing of this project I have missed one birth, several vacations, and countless bed time stories. Yet when I read this between the lines that tells of the shared adventures of a father and his dau ghters in wife Katrina, who has sacrificed so many of her own goals to accompany me through this process. When we married, I naively believed I could achieve the PhD i n five or six years. Ten years later, I owe her more than a meager dedication can ever repay. Without her love and support, this document would have simply been impossible.
8 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ........................... 10 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 11 CHAPTERS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 13 Prag ue 1370 1415 ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 24 The Life of Jan Hus ................................ ................................ ................................ 36 Chapter Synopses ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 54 2 ESTABLISHING AUTHORITY: HUS ON PREACHERS AND PREACHING .............. 60 Hus and the Medieval Sermon ................................ ................................ ................ 61 Hus on Preaching and Preachers ................................ ................................ ........... 77 An Alternative Path to Martyrdom ................................ ................................ ......... 101 3 PRIESTS AND PHARISEES ................................ ................................ .................... 107 A St ern but Empathetic Warning: 1404 1407 ................................ ........................ 116 Hus and the Clerical Audience ................................ ................................ .............. 130 A Growing Vitriol: 1410 1412 ................................ ................................ ................ 137 A Frustrated Priest ................................ ................................ ................................ 142 4 THREAT S TO THE FLOCK: HUS AND THE DEVIL ................................ ................ 145 The Devil ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 153 5 THREATS TO THE FLOCK: THE ANTICHRIST AND EARTHLY SINNERS ........... 178 The Antichrist ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 178 Women, Sodom ites, Jews, and Heretics ................................ .............................. 188 6 SIN AND REPENTANCE ................................ ................................ ......................... 210 Sin ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 215 Contrition ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 230 Repentance ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 242 Satisfaction ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 253 7 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 260
9 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 278 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 299
10 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS BRRP Bohemian Reformation and Religious Practice Collecta Sermones de t empore qui Collecta Dicuntur FRB Fontes Rerum Bohemicarum MGH Monumentum Germaniae Historica MIHOO Magistri Iohannis Hus Opera Omnia Sermones Sermones in Capella Bethlehem 1410 1411
1 1 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy JAN HUS AND LATE MEDIEVAL HOMILE T I CS By Reid S. Weber May 2014 Chair: Howard Louthan Major: History Jan Hus (d.1415) is arguably the most famous individual in the history of the Czech nation and one of the most prominent personalities of the late Middle Ages. Beginning with his 1415 execution for heresy at the Counci has been an ideological battleground for Hussites, Protestants, Catholics, nationalists, Marxists and historians of the medieval and modern period s alike. They have all claimed his memory from the moment of his martyrdom, with each group shaping, and in many cases, twisting the narrative to meet the ideological needs of their specific agendas. Often overlooked in the historiographical discussion is the value and content of the roughly 800 published sermons attributed to Hus, far more than any contemporary figure from the fourteenth and fifteenth century and one of the richest yet most neglected sources of late medieval C entral Europe. Too frequently historians have picked through these sermons to support one agenda or another wit hout closely examining their function as a whole. Yet, Jan Hus provides historians a unique opportunity to examine a preacher and his context over an entire career. dated bet ween his becoming the rector of Bethlehem Chapel in 1402 and his expulsion from Prague in 1412 to
12 reflected not the concerns of the heretic, reformer, or nationalist, as generations of historians have characterized him, but rather his sermons illuminate the priorities and concerns of a late medieval priest shaped by the political and religious turmoil that swirled around early fifteenth century Prague. The dissertation illustrates how Hus shaped his sermons to reflect his understanding of his audience and how his approach evolved due to localized and external pressures towards the end of his ten year career. Examining Hus the preacher undermines the all too common genera lization of Hus the religious radical. The picture of Hus as preacher and priest deeply involved in the spiritual life of his congregation, as reflected in his sermons, stands in marked contrast to the traditional renderings of Hus as a popular nationalist and religious zealot. Too message. It is that message from the pulpit that molded his celebrity long before history witnessed the creation of Hus the martyr.
13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODU CTION Theology and fable, compassion and anger, the ways of heaven and the ways of the street ; the medieval world expected its preachers to understand and communicate all these things. A preacher needed to proclaim confidently the spectrum of Christian theology, doctrine, faith, and emotion to his audience in order to move the audience to spiritual conversion and renewal. The words of the preacher served as a bridge between the priest and the laity, the educated and the ignorant, and God and his people. Serving as that bridge, the secular preacher, as opposed to a cloistered monk or even a scholastic theologian, existed in an ever changing environment in which the preacher both shaped and was shaped by the surrounding religious, political, and cultural milieu. The scholar Peter Francis Howard describes late medieval Florentine sermons as developing from among the coteries of academies, but in the piazzas of t 1 From 1402 1412, the Bohemian priest and academic Jan Hus preached in the similar ly dynamic religious milieu of Prague. He functioned both as an academic and as a priest; consequently, his sermons reflected the concerns of both while still expres sing sensitivity for the spiritual significantly influenced his words at the pulpit, and much of his preaching certainly focused on local and regional issues. The P olitics of the E mpire, the schism of the c hurch, the tensions between Slavs, Germans, and Jews, the struggle between the mendicant orders and parish priests, the falsification of miracles, the spread of 1 Peter Francis Howard, Beyond the Written Word: Prea ching and Theology in the Floren ce of Archbishop Antoninus, 1427 1459 (Florence: I n stituto Nazionale di Studi Sul Rinascimento, 1995) 2.
14 all h ad significant influence s on the city and its preach ers career as a preacher reflected not only the religious and political turmoil of Prague at the turn of the fifteenth century, but also the fact that his message was analogous to his contemporarie s throughout Christendom, and he preached in a city closely linked to the concerns of the later medieval world. 2 The purpose of th is dissertation is to illustrate the evolution of over the course of a decade (1402 1412) and to reveal the homi letic foundation of his popularity as a preacher heretic, reformer, or nationalist, as generations of historians have characterized him, but rather his sermons illuminate the priorities and co ncerns of a late medieval priest shaped by the political and religious turmoil that swirled around early fifteenth century Prague. I demonstrate various ways Hus shaped his sermons to reflect his understanding of his audience and how his approach evolved d ue to localized and external pressures towards the end of his ten year career. The picture of Hus as preacher and priest deeply involved in the spiritual life of his congregation, as reflected in his sermons, stands in marked contrast to the traditional re nderings of Hus as a 2 John Van Engen rightly uses Hus as an example of the growing decentralization of the fifteenth century religious milieu into regional religious initiatives. Yet, prior to the departure of much of Prague g in 1409, Prague and the university were remarkably international in their focus and active participants in debates on the schism and broader theological discussions. One need only examine the remarkable reception and debate of the works of the English Ox ford professor John Wyclif to recognize the external and broad focus of the university masters. Sources reflect a remarkable movement into and out of the university, with perhaps (d.1393) travels between the Universities of Prague and Pari s being the most famous example of the Church History 77 2 (June 2008): 257 284. For a detailed examination of Mat j of Janov see: Vlastimil Kybal, M. Janova: je ho ivot, s pisy, a u (Prague: Nauk, 1905). A more recent examination of his works in Matj of Janov and His Work Regulae Veteris et Novi Testamenti : The Significance of Volume VI and Its Relation to the Previously Published Volumes BRRP 2 (1998): 15 24.
15 radical leanings, ignoring his complete message. It is that message from the pulpit that molded his celebrity long before history witnessed the creat ion of Hus the martyr Historians have linked many medieval sermons and their preachers to their surrounding context, but they often treat sermons themselves as unique and independent events. Treating sermon texts in isolation removes them from their conte xt and often leads to the exaggeration of themes that, when examined within the greater context, appear either more or less significant to understanding the preacher and audience Naturally, not all sermons existed within a liturgically based collection as many preachers, including Jan Hus, occasionally preached at synods, universit y functions, church councils, or simply as guest preachers. Yet, it is important to distinguish isolated sermons from those that survive as part of a larger continuous collection Historians have the ability to extract on specific matters. Sermon collections tell how a preacher and an audience changed together. There is no other source in the l ate Middle Ages that exemplifies the long term re lationship between preacher and audience as the sermons of Jan Hus. H istorians have nearly ten contiguous sermons at their disposal, which gives car eer as well as the ways his career influenced the whole of Christendom. Hus is most remembered for heretic al beliefs and a martyr Nevertheless, the significance of his life, not just his death, is bound up in the way he exemplified the medieval preacher as the bridge bet ween the clergy and the laity. Furthermore, only through Jan Hus can historians witness how a preacher constructed that bridge over an extended period of
16 crisis. Unlike many of his contemporaries throughout Europe, the sheer volum surviving sermons allows for historians to uncover contradiction, inconsistency, and even moments of doubt that reflect not the triumphant martyr, but the priest struggling to protect his flock from the terrors of uncertainty. 3 rpretation of Hus ha s been a contentious issue for centuries From the late fifteenth century Utraquist manuscript of the Jena Codex to the Vatican led attempted to clarify meaning to Bohemia. 4 W hen considering his place in the context of Europe, however, historians have taken a limited perspective. 5 Francis Oakley, for doctrinal formulations and the fact that he did not represent the truly radical wing of the 3 In his forthcoming chapter in the Brill Companion to Jan Hus (expected 2014), Pavel Soukup provides a detailed examination of just how many sermons can be attributed to Hus. He states that fourteen col publication. In terms of sure volume, none of his contemporaries have such a surviving corpus. Pavel A Companion to Jan Hus ed. Franti ek mahel (Leiden: Brill, forthcoming 2014). 4 The Jensk kodex a ntithesis Christi et a ntichristi, 1490 1510 or Jena Codex was created during a period of tension between the Kingdom of Bohemia and the Kingdom of Hungary and depicted images of the Hussite Movem ent, beginning with Jan Hus, as the true righteous Church. Prague, Knihovna Nrodnho muzea v Praze IV.B.24 For a complete narrative in English of the conferences surrounding the possible rehabilitation see Thomas A. Fudge, Jan Hus: Religious Reform and Social Revolution in Bohemia (London: I.B. Tauris, 2011) 227 240. 5 Relatio which provides a passio n like Its English translation can be found in Matthew Sinka, John Hus at the Council of Constance (New York: Columbia University Press, 1965). The first historical approach demonizing Hus is Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini Historia Bohemica ed. Joseph Hejnic and Hans Rothe, v ol. 1 (Cologne: Bhlau Verlag. 2005) The most notable works on Hus in the Czech language are Vclav Novotn, M. Jan Hus I: ivot a d lo (Prague, 1919 1921) ; Vlastimil Kybal, M. Jan Hus II: ivot a u (Prague: 1923 1931) ; Husitsk r evoluce (Prague: Univerzita Karlova, 1996) ; Jan Sedlk, M. Jan Hus (Prague : Tiskem B. Stba 1915) ; Josef Macek, Jan Hus (Prague : Svobodn slovo 1961 ) The two most important non Czech works on Hus in the last fifty years are Paul de Vooght (Louvain : 1960) ; Matthew Spinka, (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1966)
17 6 the remarkable amount of survivi ng evidence of how valuable Hus can be to understanding the l ate Middle Ages. H is surviving writings and sermons not only tell the story of a martyr and living icon but they invite the reader into the community of Prague and the br oader Christian world at a time of tremendous tension and stress. scholars still push the narrative to its heroic and almost mythological end. Thomas Fudge, one of the most active recent scholars of the Bohemian Reformation, for example, places been determined to show that Hus actively strove for martyrdom, inte written tracts, sermons, and actions in the light of his future condemnation and death 7 F Fudge still Th is radical legacy and violent end has been a relatively common theme in the historiography. The discrepancy between Hus the pastor and Hus the radical e ven frustrated the leading Czech scholar [the sermons] for the critical attacks and daring assessments mentioned in various denunciations and 6 Francis Oakley, The Western Church in the La ter Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1979), 295. 7 Fudge, Jan Hus 4.
18 8 by asserting surviving sermons reflect his desire to teach, b ut he never suggests in this work that teaching may have actually been the primary purpose Instead, suggests that during their less polemical imp lying that dramatic and controversial content must have been removed 9 Even if the recorded versions reflect a desire to teach, why should historians believe that their original oral presentation was dramatically different? For many historians it remains a polemical at times, do not consistently reflect a fiery radical bent on social upheaval and martyrdom. suggest that und erstanding his life is of equal value to historians. The val is that he sheds a light on the relationship between priest and laity, church and state, Slav and German, and to some extent even Christian and Jew. His preaching serves as a wind ow, albeit of imperfect glass, into his primary concerns and his understanding of his own audience. He undoubtedly knew well the culture, hopes, and fears of his audience and approached them in the manner he thought would best profit their spiritual lives. 10 8 Heresy and Literacy, 1000 1530 eds. Anne Hudson and Peter Biller (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994): 243 244; Fudge makes a similar point. Fudge, Jan Hus 60. 9 y and Heresy in Hussite Bohemia, 244. 10 perspective on Prague is just beginning to be explored b y scholars, and will lead to a renewal of and a wider appreciation for Hus in medieval scholarship. Two recent scholars have been culture including: Marcela : John Hus and the Hussite movement Pavel Soukup, Reformn kazatelstv a Jakoubek (Prague: Filosofia, 2011)
19 specifically as it relates to his relationship with his audience. Through his sermons it is possible to examine specific ways in which he shaped and altered his preaching to sermons also allow cultural and social historians to look from the pulpit through his eyes to glim pse the audience that filled ocation for a decade of preaching in Prague. Investigating the audience in this indirect manner is Any knowledge obtained about his audience is critical as it was th eir reaction to Hus that later played such a key role in creating his legacy and elevation and his de facto canonization by the Utraquist C hurch. 11 The atmosphere and audience of the Chapel ped his status as a popular charismatic preacher. The surviving sermons, although providing neither an objective nor a complete image of the residents of Prague, instead offer valuable insight into how Hus approached and adjusted to the needs of his audien ce. The sermons illustrate what themes he felt his audience needed and his conscious decisions on what approaches would best educate his listeners. Preaching was the primary activity of Jan Hus for nearly a decade, from the time of his appointment as recto r of the Bethlehem Chapel in 1402 until his expulsion from Prague in 1412. During that time, historians credit Hus with preaching between 3,000 11 Studia Liturgica 25, 1 (2005): 32 59; Craig Atwood, The Theology of the Czech Brethren from Hus to Comenius (University Park: Pennsylvania University Press, 2009), 101.
20 3,500 sermons, sometimes as many as three different sermons a day 12 The chapel itself could contain an audience of roughly 3,000 and although attendance numbers do not exist, evidence suggests that not even excommunication could stop the residents of Prague from gathering to hear Hus preach. 13 The exact number of sermons preached will never be known, but large numbers survive in collections of postils and fragmented were intended for the Bethlehem Chapel audience. H istorians are fortunate to have such remarkable collections of sermons with which to work. None of the surviving sermons attributed to Hus survive in his other texts to pres erve them as models The survival of so many collections reflects contemporary and later respect for his admirable talent in the pulpit. Historians believe that at the end of every year Hus edited his sermons into Latin collections commonly known as postil s. He intended these books to serve as preaching guides for his students to emulate in their own sermons. Although it is impossible to know how much 12 Vidmanov Communio Viatorum 19 (1976): 66 67. Spinka, John Hus 51 Hus as Preacher somewhat difficult to assess as Spinka suggests that an assistant often preached a number of sermons John Hus Concept of the Church 43. Souku p 13 Obviously it is difficult to prove this point as Bethlehem Chapel never took roles or attendance Bethlehem Chapel be torn down as well to make it impossible for his followers to continue to meet. Fudge, Jan Hus 118 followers recorded and kept his sermons and letters from this period. Admittedly s ignificantly fewer witnesses exist from this period, but those that do still suggest a healthy church body and interest enough to record the sermons. Finally, the success of the preachers replacing and following Hus in the Bethlehem Chapel such as Jerome o f Prague and Jakoubek of St number of people continued to attend services at the chapel despite the threat of interdict and the expulsion of Hus. Soukup, 134
21 Hus may have changed a sermon between the preaching event and its editing, th e postils follow the liturgica l calendar and known events fairly closely They do not necessarily include every sermon for a year, and they tended to vary widely on how many sermons were included. Some collections appear to be a combination of individually themed sermon series such as Lenten sermons or on a common theme such as the Passion of Christ. 14 Although sermons exist in which specific dates and locations have not been identified most useful to this survey are those sermons which have reliable dates. The earliest sermons attribut ed to Hus come shortly after his ordination in 1400. The so called Puncta collection consists of sermons from Advent 1400 through most of 1401, probably given as an assistant pastor at St. Michael s Church in Old Town Prague before Hus took over his positi on at Bethlehem Chapel. These sermons still have not been published in a critical edition, but can be found in eight different manuscripts 15 Collecta The sermons date from the l iturgical year 1404 1405 and survive in nine manuscripts. 16 Following the Collecta are the sermons of the Passio domini nostri Iesu Cristi which includes some sermons that are believed to date to 1404 but primarily include sermons beginning in Advent 1405 t hrough 1406. The Passio survives in 14 15 Ibid., 12. 16 Magistri Iohannis Hus Sermones de t empore qui Collecta Dicuntur M IHOO 7 ed. Schmidtov ( Prague: Academiae Scientiarum Bohemoslovenicae, 1959 ), 8 12 Many of these manuscripts are now digitized online at www.manuscriptorium.com
22 twenty two manuscripts. 17 The Lectionary Bipartitum covers much of 1406 1407 and survives in eleven manuscripts. 18 The twenty sermons of the Sermones de Sanctis date to 1407 and probably 1408, and this short collection sur vives in a remarkable 30 manuscripts. 19 is not a postil at all. Rather the collection known as the Sermones in Bethlehem 1410 1411 is in fact the closest document historians have to a fi rst preaching. The sermons exist in two manuscripts that are similar to reportationes, or the word for word transcription of the sermon event. Somewhat ironically, however, the manuscripts present two different versions of the same se rmons, suggesting that they to fill in the outlines. The basic structure and content for the sermon remained the same, but they have two substantially different styles of language. 20 The only complete different manuscripts together into what he believed best represented the actual event. 21 Adumbrata which was assembled at the end of 17 Magistri Iohannis Hus Passio domini nostri Iesu Cristi MIHOO 8 ed. ( Prague, Academiae Scientiarum Bohemoslovenicae 1978 ) 18 Magistri Iohannes Hus Leccionarium Bipartitum. Pars Hiemalis MIHOO 9 ed. Ane ( Prague: Academiae Scientiarum Bohemoslovenicae 1988 ) Soukup, Jan Hus 19 Sermones de Sanctis, Spisy M. Jana Husi 7 8 ed. ( Prague: Nkladem Jos. R. Vilmka, 1907 ). 20 Eva Kam nkov Husova Betlmsk k zn a j ejich d r ecense (Prague, Universita Karlova, 1963), 75 77. 21 did delineate changes in the published sermons to show differences between the two manusc ripts. These differences have been taken into account when used and compared with the manuscripts as much as possible. Mag. Io. Hus Sermones in Capella Bethlehem 1410 1411, vol. 1 5 ed. ( Prague: Nauk, 1938 1941 ).
23 1412, and the two surviving manuscripts included sermons from just before and after his expulsion from Prague. 22 A significant number of sermon collections also survive outside of the Bethlehem Chapel context. Published editions of Iohannes Hus Magister Universitatis Carolin ae: Positiones, Recommendationes, Sermones 23 or more commonly referred to simply as the Postil Completed in 1413 while in exile t he Czech Sunday Postil is essentially a Czech literary work adapted from previous sermons The sermons lack the strong s criptural anchor of his earlier sermons as he appears to have had few of the glosses and texts previously available to him in Prague Instead, these sermons are considerably more pol emical than those from Bethlehem and do not directly relate to the community he left in Prague. 24 The final surviving sermon of Jan Hus is the sermon he was never able to preach. He prepared his Sermo de Pacis to preach before the Council of Constance. He i ntended the sermon to denounce his critics as disturbers of the peace of Christ and to defend his innocence 22 Magistri Iohannis Hus P ostilla A dumbrata MIHOO 13 ed. Bohumil Ryba (Turnhout: Brepols, 1975 ) 23 Iohannes Hus Magister Universitatis Carolinae: Positiones, Recommendationes, Sermones e ( Prague: Sttni Pedagogick Nakladatelstv, 1958 ) 24 Magistri Iohannis Hus MIHOO 2, e d ( Prague: Academiae Scientiarum Bohemoslovenicae, 1995 ). y and Heresy in Hussite Bohemia, 244
24 T he opportunity to preach one last time never came as the council had no intention of letting him speak freely 25 I focus on two of the most compl (the Collecta ) and 1410/11 (the Sermones in Bethlehem ) respectively. These collections represent the most comprehensive Chapel The two liturgical periods from w hich they originated provide the starkest preaching style and homiletic content. Hus produced the Collecta during a time of relative peace when he enjoyed a cordial w orking relationship with clerical and secular authorities The Sermones, where the archbishop and pope take the first dramatic steps against the perceived heresies in Bohemia, and Hus bec a me the t arget for the enemies of philosophical realism, Wyclifite ideas, and the Czech reform movement These sermons represent significantly different contexts for Hus, and yet they illustrate how his priorities remained fundamentally the same The sermons illust rate how a medieval preacher reacted to his changing world, and through the life of Hus w e can see how that world reacted to the preacher. Before we can analyze the sermons, first brief descriptions of Prague and Prague 1370 1415 Jan Hus was born early in the 1370s in the village of Husinec (Goose Town) in southern Bohemia at a time of remarkable growth and stability in the kingdom. The 25 Jan Hus eds. and Amedeo Molnr ( Prague: Kalich, 1963 ) Soukup, Jan Hus as Preacher 11.
25 opportunities he had in life were due in large part to Emperor Charles IV (1316 1378) Roman Empire at the heart of his lands and authority. 26 Prague developed along the banks of the Vl tava ( Mo l dau) river in a topographical bowl surrounded by overlooking hills and bluffs. To the North of the city the river makes a dramatic double curve which narrows the waterw ay enough to provide a suitable location for a bridge just to the south. In that location, several different structures ha ve stood from at least the late tenth century and turned Prague into a strategic location on East/West trade routes At the start of t he reign of Ch arles IV, only the oldest area later known as the Old Town was Prague proper In the distance to the south from Old Town was the fortress of the built atop steep cliffs overlooking the river Across the river stood Prague Castle, t he seat of Dukes, King s, and now Emperors w ith the rapidly growing Lesser Town situated at the end of the bridge and directly below the castle. Villages, monasteries and estates were scattered around the fortifications of Old Town Prague. The town had se rved as the center of power for the duke s and kings from the reign of B o l eslav I (935 972). The city became the seat of a Bishop in 973, and rapidly grew into the ecclesiastical and spiritual center of the kingdom. The castle and town served as the seat of power of the Kingdom of Bohemia and expanded slowly through 26 Many scholars point out that Prague was not really even a city before the reign of Charles. For more detailed studies on the transformation of Prague then what I am going to offer here see: David Bones, Stones, and Brothels: Religion and Topography in Prague under Charles IV (1346 1378) University of Notre Dame, 2003; Smahel, Renesenc (Prague: Argo, 2002); Lisa Wolverton, Hastening Towards Prague: Power and Society in the Medieval Czech Lands Die Nationen Bildung der West Slawen im Mittlealter (Sigmaringe n: Thorbecke, 1980) among numerous others.
26 the tumultuous dynasty The arrival of the Luxembourg Dynasty initiated rapid expansion to make it the capital of the E mpire. 27 Charles was the child of a union of the powerfu l Luxembourg family and one of of Bohemia from his father John of Luxembourg in 1346, he had already been the de facto ruler of the kingdom for two years. His father, more of a knight errant than a sitting monarch perished both courageously and somewhat foolishly, fighting for the King of Fr ance at the Battle of Crcy. 28 Bohemian royal bloodline and established his rule f rom the safety of his familial seat of power. 29 cultural center of the E mpire. He began construction of a cathedral, lobbied for an archbishop, and oversaw the foundation of a u niversity. The city expand ed as people streamed through its gates from all corners of the Kingdom of Bohemia and Europe in general. 30 Charles worked to link all parts of his e relics from churches and monasteries ou 27 Zden k M nsk and Jaroslav Mezn Bohemia in History ed. Mikula Teich (Cambridge: Cambridge University Pre ss, 1998), 41 43. 28 King John of Bohemia (Luxembourg) associated closely with the French court, and often traveled Europe fighting in whatever wars he could join, generally on the side of the King of France. At Crcy, after he was reportedly wounded he com manded his retainers to tie him onto his horse to continue Luxemburger und der Hussitischen Revolution (1306 Handbuch der Geschichte Der Bhmischen Lnder vol. 1 ed. Karl Bosl (Stuttgart: A. Hiersemann, 1976 74): 378 379. 29 Bohemia in History Teich (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998): 60. 30 In Memoriam Josefa Macka (1922 1991)
27 in an effort to create a city representative of the E mpire and, of course, to benefit financially from pilgrims traveling to his newly constructed holy shrines. 31 In order to house his collected relics he imported artisans to create reliquaries and architects to design new churches and chapels. The city eventually even produced a unique Europe. 32 To find space for the new immigrants, workshops, markets, and houses of monasteries into the largest walled urban area north of the Alps. The city, which pol itically functioned as four distinct cities, included more fortified space than Paris, London, or Florence. 33 Population estimates for the city from this period range anywhere from 30,000 to roughly 100,000 people, which would have made Prague one of the te n largest cities in Europe. 34 cities, and a microcosm of the E mpire formed within its walls. When Hus arrived in 1390, many of the institutions and building projects that Charles ha d planted had grown to maturity, with the exception of the cathedral which towered above the city but remained only half completed until the 1930s. In particular, the combination of the 31 Austrian Histo ry Year Book 41 (2010): 15 29, 22 26 BRRP 6 eds. David Holeton and Z. David (Prague, 2004): 17 32. 32 Typical of this style were human figures with expressive robust bodies, oval faces, prominen t foreheads, and thin lips. Prague: Crown of Bohemia 1347 1437 (New York: Yale University Press, 2005), 54, 16. 33 The cities were identified as Old Town, the area under the Castle was known as Lesser Town, the area enclosed by Charles became New Town, and the Castle and environs was known as Hrad any. Bones, Stones, and Brothels 34 David Mengel pro vides a brief historiography of these numbers in his dissertation. Ibid., 38. Also see: Petr ornej, Velk d jiny zem koruny esk vol. 5 (Prague: Paseka, 2000), 32.
28 Viennese celebrity Conrad Waldhauser, led to a fertile environment and open atmosphere for popular preaching throughout his reign and a population that was used to the spectacle e later emergence of Hus. Founded in 1347, the University of Prague attracted young students like Jan Hus from all over Bohemia and Christendom. The university was the first founded north of the Danube River and east of the Rhine, and it influenced the fou nding of numerous other universities in the E mpire and Poland. Charles IV largely based Prague U niversity on the University of Bologna as he brought in several Italian masters to conduct the first lectures. He created the university, however, to allow his subjects access to higher 35 Charles, being one of the most aggressive political schemers of the age, naturally had ulterior motives for his university as well; it was, of course, an integral part of his pro gram to centralize imperial power and prestige in his new capital. 36 Charles was also interested in luring the best scholars and students to Prague especially those of German, French, and Italian origin, although students and professors enrolled from as fa r away as England and the Low Countries. 37 the regions from which the students came. For example the local Czech speakers were 35 The Caroline University, 1348 1948 (Prague: Orbis, 1948), 14; also ci ted in 36 Herbst des Mittlealters: Fragen zur Bew ertung des 14 und 15 Jahrhunderts eds. Jan A. Aersten and Martin Pickave, Miscellanea Mediaevalia 31 ( Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004): 149 50; Seibt, 410 411. 37 rger und der Hussitischen Revolution (1306 454 455.
29 udents from the kingdom of Hungary and points farther east. The other three nations were the Bavarian nation, the Saxon nation, and the Polish nation. 38 To lure the best students and scholars from abroad, Charles gave a three to one voting advantage to thos de facto control of the university with the power to dictate courses of study. 39 This strategy successfully enticed scholars from across Europe to study and teach in the city and transformed Prague into a vibrant center for learning. 40 Between the founding of the u niversity and 1415, Prague became one of roduction and a focal point of the international transmission of ideas. 41 Along with new opportunities for education, Charles IV in conjunction with the historians have general 42 Bohemia 38 The Caroline University 16. 39 Spinka, John Hus: a Biography (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968) 26. 40 the required scribes, copyists, and clerks necessary for the royal court, university, and numerous other religious institutions in Liber O rdinacionum C leri a list of clerics achieving the lowest rank of acolyte in the diocese form 1395 1416, as identifying roughly 13,261 240. and Hussite transformation in comparison to broad European trends in his article Zrozen m tu: d va ivoty h usitsk e pochy Rob 41 Van Dussen, who carefully examined the transmission of ideas between Bohemia and England. Michael Van Dus sen, From England to Bohemia: Heresy and Communication in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 3. 42 For recent studies examining and in general promoting the concept of the Bohemian Reform s d
30 witnessed a renewed emphasis on effective preaching as Charles invited foreign preachers to his capital and founded numerous mendicant houses t hat gather ed clerics from throughout his empire. One su ch preacher, the Augustinian canon Conrad Waldhauser (d.1369), came to Prague from Vienna to preach in German for the moral reform of the wealthy and the clergy. 43 His preaching inspired young priests and scholars from the fledgling university to take up th e call for moral reform. 44 Inspired by Conrad, t he priest Jan Mil (d.1374) left his bureaucratic position with the e foundation of the religious house of 45 Here he gathered a religious community of reformed prostitutes and clerics under his tutelage Mil emphasized asceticism, the practice of frequent communion within the house and the house became an important preaching center His extremism and criticism of local mendicants eventually brought about his denunciation as a heretic to the pope in Avignon. He departed for Avignon to d efend himself in person but died from 113 121; Amedeo Molnar, Jan Hus: Testimone della Verit (Torino: Editrice Claudiana, 1973) 81; Kavka, For a reexamination of the question of Bohemian Reformation explicitly based on preaching see: Pavel Soukup, or Pavel ser Erneuerung B B hmen und das Deutsche Reich: Ideen und Kulturtransfer im Vergleich 13 16 Jahrhundert ed. Eva Schlotheuber and Hubertus Seibert (Munich: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 2009): 235 264. 43 Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution (Berekley: University of California Press, 1967), 8. 44 1378) as the Architect of Local Religion in Prague 22 26 ; Von Karl Bosl Handbuch der Geshichte der Bhmischen Lnder vol 1: Die Bhmischen Lnder von d er Archaischen Zeit bis zum Ausgang Der Hussitischen Revolution (Stuttgart: Anton Heirsemann, 1967), 467. 24 Mengel, Peter More, Preaching in Fourteenth Century Bohemia: The Life and Ideas of Milicius de Chremsi r and His Significance in the Historiography of Bohemia ( Slavkov: Eman, 1999 )
31 illness shortly after his arrival. The community at Jerusalem failed to survive their 46 lem experiment faltered his former supporters and disciples provided land adjac ent to Jerusalem for the construction of the Bethlehem Chapel. 47 on preaching and the burgeoning reform movement the city saw a dramatic increase in the construction of chapels and houses of wo rship which provided new spaces for preaching in Latin and vernacular tongues. 48 Bohemia. His hold over the E mpire, however, was not firm Wenceslas IV exhibited neither the energy nor the authority of his father, and as a result, the nobles of the E mpire stripped him of his t itle in 1400. The nobility imprisoned Wenceslas twice, in 1394 and 1402, allow ing him to re tain the throne of Bohemia each time, though only after making considerable concessions to his rivals. 49 By the time Hus arrived in Prague in 1390, the apex of the begun to flow out o f Bohemia. 50 As Prague stagnated, many of the bureaucratic positions as well as the possibility of imperial patronage evaporated. That meant fewer artisans came to the city, and many others moved away seeking patronage 46 Kaminsky, A History of The Hussite Revolution 12 13. 47 Spinka, 42 3. 48 Soukup, Reformn k 159 Mengel, 1378) as the Archit ect of Local Religion in Prague 22 26 49 trans. James J. Heaney, In the Reformation in Medieval Perspective Steven Ozment ed, (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1971) 97. 50 Jaroslav Meznik, 1990), 88 89.
32 elsewhere. 51 To make matters worse, two experienced its worst plague epidemic of the fourteenth century, having previously only experienced intermittent and relatively limited outbreaks. 52 Ten years later Bohemia witnessed a rebellion of the nobility imprisonment and marked tensions separating the inhabitants of Old Town and New Town. 53 1419 1437. 54 The German scholar Melchior Vischer went so far as to say Prague rapidly became a backwater within a 55 Although political unrest, economic decline, and pestilence devastated the kingdom, two key components of Pra were ethnic tensions during the time of Wenceslas and the broad crisis in Christendom caused by the papal schism. Although Prague had long contained considerable German speaking and Jewish nd faster decline led to considerable ethnic tensions between German, Slavs, and Jews. 56 Prague, like many Central European cities contained a large German minority that had begun arriving in the eleventh 51 Salzburg at this time and attribute s it to the movement of Prague artisans. Boehm and Fajt, Prague: Crown of Bohemia 1347 1437 50. 52 Past and Present (2011) 211: 3 34, 20. 53 Meznik, H usitskou R evoluc 93 54 55 Melchior Vischer, Jan Hus. Aufruhr wider Papst und Reich (Frankfurt: Societts Verlag, 1955). 10. 56 Transactions of the Roy al Historical Society Vol. 9, (1999): 327 352
33 century. A large community of Jews had also begun se ttling in the Old Town during the reign of Charles IV, but many of the sources explored by historians tend to place more emphasis on German and Slavic relations. 57 By the late fourteenth century, sentiment ority concerning those perceived as outsiders; the distrust was particularly directed at speakers of German. 58 In the fourteenth century, German speaking mendicant orders and their Slavic counterparts had spread throughout Prague and the rest of Bohemia, wh ile maintaining linguistic separation 59 Modern scholars frequently fail to agree on just which ethnic group was, in fact, dominating the other; the mere fact that there is such disagreement suggests that a dichotomy of oppressor an d oppressed is insufficient to describe ethnic relations and identity. 60 An opposing view point, however, is that the majority of the people of the 57 The first recorded Jewish settlement in Bohemia was in the year 968, but the population increased considerably under Charles. On the Jews in Medieval Bohemia see: Passion of the Jews in Church History vol. 81 (March 2012):1 26; (Prague: Sefer, 2001) 58 Graus, 59 Robert Bartlett, The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), 227 228. 60 The arguments concerning the split between German and Slav in Bohemia are numerous. Czech scholarship, since the works of has tended to promote a narrative of Czechs striving against German speaking oppressors, while his rival Constantin Hfler described the Hussites as barbarically reacting against German culture. N rodu (Prague: Nakladatel B. Ko 1845); Constantine Hfler, Magister Johannes Hus und der Abzug der Deutschen Professoren und Studenten aus Prag 1409 (Prague: F. Tempsky, 1864). For a detailed analysis of the rivalry of these anta Jan Hus as a Threat to the German Future i n Central Europe: The Bohemian Reformer in the Controversy BRRP 4 (2002): 295 307. Interestingly the scholarship of a clear Sudeten German school has worked to place the Slavs and Ger mans on more equal standing. These scholars, including Ferdinand Seibt, Peter Moraw, and Graus, have worked to create a balanced image of ethnicity in Prague that emphasizes a predominately harmonious cultural relationship between German and Slav See : Kirche im Osten 13 (1970): 74 103; Ferdinand Seibt, Deutschland und die Tschechen: Geschichte einer Nachbarschaft in der Mitte Europas. Aktualisierte Neuausgabe (Munich: Piper Verlag GmbH, 1993); Peter Moraw, Von offener Verfassung zu gestalteter Verdichtung: das Reich im spten Mittelalter, 1250 bis 1490 ( Berlin : Propylen, 1985). Robert Bartlett in his influential work on European colonization held Prague University as an exception, as he stated that most universities served to create cultural homogeny, but Prague University seemed to have an opposite
34 allows for a possible hybridization of culture and langu minority of agitators have possibly hidden this identity from historians as education and literacy would have solidified recognizable identities among the literati. 61 It is clear, however, that Hus entered a heter ogeneous city and university setting that, despite the efforts of the crown, on many levels remained divided by cultural and ethnic identity. 62 To add to the general unrest in the city, in 1378 the C ollege of Cardinals precipitated the Western Schism. The c ardinals, claiming to be under threat from a Roman mob, selected Urban IV (1378 1389) as the new pope in September. Regretting their choice, the cardinals withdrew from Rome and in September of that same year elected Clement VII (1378 1394) who took up res idence in Avignon. 63 This sudden choose a pope to re cognize and then justify their decision Among the laity, who were perhaps less concerned with the rivalry betwe en Avignon and Rome, it meant an unclear apostolic succession. T he schism called into question the legitimacy of the priests and thus the legitimacy of the sacraments they administered. The common from his superiors in the effect. Robert, Bartlett, The Making of Europe: Conquests, Colonization and Cultural Change, 950 1350 289. Leonard Scales, argues in his 1998 article that, rather than a dominating minority, the German community was actually marginalized in that the German speaking population itself was not unified and, for the majority of the fourteenth century, had actually 352. 61 In The Man of Many Devices, Who Wandered Full Many Ways. Festshrift in Honor of Jnos M. Bak Balzs Nagy and Marcell Sebk (Budepest: Central European University Press, 1999), 394. 62 Elizabeth Wiskemann, Czechs and Germans: a Study of the Struggle in the Historic Provinces of Bohemia and Moravia (London: St. Martin's P ress, 1967) 63 Oakley, The Western Church in the Latter Middle Ages 55 67.
35 church hierarchy. Confusion at the apex of earthly church authority meant every individual parish had the potential for a sacramental crisis, and the validity of baptisms, reconciliation, the Eucharist, and the blessings of marri age remained uncertain for nearly forty years. 64 Wenceslas, for his part, stayed loyal to Rome until the Council of Pisa in 1409 1410. At Pisa, the cardinals attempted to force both popes to resign, and heal the schism by electing a third pope. Many Europe an rulers were willing to support the as Emperor 65 Ironically, neither of the previous popes agreed to abdicate, me aning Christendom now had a third pontiff leading to wi n papal allegiance. 66 Hus, as one of the more vocal members of the Czech nation, was well known and popular enough to be elected rector of the university taking the position in the fall semester of 1409. T his change of papal allegiance, however, meant that once 64 Extra Ecclesia Salus non est Sed Quae Ecclesia ? Ecclesiology A Companion to the Great Western Schism (1378 1417) Jo lle Rollo local level (excluding Bohemia) see: Philip Daile In A Companion to the Great Western Schism (1378 1417) Jolle Rollo Koster and Thomas M. Izbicki (Leiden: Brill, 2009): 89 121; Renate Blumenfeld Kosinski, Poets, Saints, Visionaries of the Great Schi sm 1378 1417 (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2006); Alison Williams Lewin, Negotiating Survival: Florence and the Great Schism, 1378 1417 (Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press Arts and Politics in Renaissance Italy George Holmes, ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993):19 40; Robert Swanson, Universities, Academics,and the Great Schism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979). 65 Oakley, The Western Church in the Later Middle Ages 62. 66 Spinka, 91, 92; Thomas A. Fudge, The Magnificent Ride: The First Reformation in Hussite Bohemia (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1998), 5 11.
36 again the Archdiocese of Prague had to reevaluate the validity of the sacraments from the previous thirty five years and convince the laity that the king and university were justified in their action s. As Wenceslas tried to maintain his prestige and position in the E mpire Prague was rapidly turning into a tinder box of social, political, and religious unrest. Many historians have in essence described Hus as casting a match from his pulpit that would set the city and his own pyre aflame. 67 The Life of Jan Hus mysterious despite the hints he left in his surviving corpus of sermons, tracts, and other writings. 68 As mentioned, Hus was born around 1370 in the village of Husinec in southern Bohemia, into a family of what scholars frequently describe, without evidence, as being of humble means. 69 of education, however, almost certainly excludes the family from peasant status; rather they may have had free status with som e funds at their disposal. It remains unclear as to whether Hus began his education in the nearby town of Prachatice as some historians suggest (despite any evidence that a school ever existed in the town), or whether the family moved to Prague in 1386 so that Hus could attend grammar 67 This type of explication generally belongs to the nationali st perspective. Some recent scholars and European history. Fudge fully acknowledges the long line of reform predating Hus in Bohemia, but he also places The Magnificent Ride s that Hus may have been intending social and spiritual revolution through much of his career. Fudge, Jan Hus 4. 68 Fudge, Jan Hus 9. 69 Matthew Spinka, John Hus: a Biography 21.
37 school. 70 Historians, however, are at least certain that Hus began his university education at the University of Prague in 1390. 71 Beginning in 1390, Hus took three years to complete his Bachelor of Arts, with his studies cent ering on Scripture and Aristotle. 72 In 1393, he began working toward his Master of Arts degree. By 1398, he was a full member of the Prague faculty and began his pursuit of a doctoral degree in theology. Almost as a side project, Hus earned a Bachelor of Di vinity in 1404. 73 His relative youth was the only factor slowing his otherwise rapid rise as Prague University awarded no doctorates of philosophy to individuals younger than thirty five. By the time Hus reached that milestone he had taken on considerable preaching responsibilities at the Bethlehem Chapel and was already embroiled in the scandal and politics that prevented him from earning a doctorate. 74 pulpit of the Bethlehem C after his ordination as a priest, Hus became the rector and primary preacher at Bethlehem Chapel. The responsibility for choosing the priest for the chapel fell to the oldest three Czech professors a t the university, which suggests Hus already had considerable notoriety as he was ordained only in 1400. 75 The founders of the chapel, 70 Spinka, 7; Fudge, Jan Hus 9. 71 Spinka John Hus a Biography 25. 72 Fudge, Jan Hus 11. 73 Spinka, 74 Spinka, John Hus a Biography 54; Fudge, Jan Hus 12. 75 Spinka, John Hus a Biography 39.
38 followers and admirers of the Czech preacher Mil it in order that a priest could preach directly to the people in the vernacular tongue. The chapel, founded in 1391, enclosed a space combining three previously standing walls and covering a well, square, and a cemetery. The space could hold roughly 3,000 pe ople and the founders gave it the name Bethlehem, meaning the house of bread, as they intended it to continue the Eucharistic and preaching ideals of Mil Control of its pulpit was ceded to the masters of the Czech university nation, who appo inted the 76 It was from this location that Hus gained remarkable influence within the community, and his reputation as a great orator spread through the city. As rector of the chapel, Hus maintained a remarkably busy schedule. Scholars gene rally believe he preached at least twice a day and occasionally as much as three times daily along with lectures and duties for the university. It is also possible that at times he preached as a guest at other pulpits within and outside of the confines of Prague. 77 An accurate account of his total preaching activities is further complicated by the fact that Hus was assisted for at least a portion of this period by an assistant, Master 78 Historians can also pinpoint one possible prolonged t rip in the spring of 140 3 to the Brandenburg town of Wilsnack when Hus was part of a 76 Betlmsk k aple. o jejch ochovanch z bytcch 9 21; Wiener Archiv fr Geschichte des Slawentums und Osteuropas ( Graz Kln : Hermann Bhlaus 1956): 125 141. 77 Communio Viatorum 19 (1976) 65 81, 66; Pav Jan Hus Studie a t exty k n d 3 ( Olomouc: Arcibiskupsk K nihtiskrna, 1915 ), 77 85. 78 es s 9 21.
39 commission from Prague to investigate the reported occurrence of miracles. 79 For ten years, however, i t seems Hus kept up an exhausting preaching schedule, even a fter the a rchbishop of Prague, preaching, writing, and career through his tenure at the Bethlehem Chapel. In many politically and financially motivated clerics whom Hus so often chided in his sermons. urteen as a prior of a religious house at then also became a canon in St. Vitus Cathedral in Prague. With family wealth and prominence won 80 This purc hase was an obvious example of simony; a practice reviled by Hus, but typical in the medieval church. 81 Despite this, years. Perhaps largely due to the favor that the king grant ed reform preachers, the new reform stance of the Czech portion of the university. The controversy over Wilsnack stands as the most dramatic example of the early allian ce between the Archbishop and the university masters In 1383, t he priests of 79 Unfortunately few details of commission survive in the records, including when it occurred and how long the commission took to give their recommendation concerning Wilsnack, and most importantly whether anyone on the commission actually went to Brandenburg. Hus preached frequently on false dated from the time of the commission in 1403, which supports the possiblit y that Hus was absent for much of that time. Fudge, Jan Hus 27. 80 Spinka, 55. 81 Fudge, Jan Hus 13.
40 in the wake of the church being pillaged and damaged by marauders. Within a few months, tale s began to spread of candles miraculously lighting on their own, candles refusing to be put out, people being healed, and at least three resurrections of the dead. The local bishop of Havelberg confirmed the miracles and incorporated the site into his dioc ese and established it as a pilgrimage site. As large numbers of the faithful arrived in the town, t he church quickly acquired the necessary income to not only repair earlier damage, but also to construct a massive new structure to make room for the incoming waves of pilgrims. Many of the surrounding dioceses and newly founded universities looked at Wilsnack with concern, and the site became a source of debate for over a century. It was repeatedly denounced and affirmed by subsequent bishops and popes well into the Reformation. The rise of protestant Germany in the sixteenth century, however, saw Wilsnack vilified once and for all as an example of superstition and clerical corruption. 82 on Wilsnack stood on common ground with Hus as the archbishop declared the Wilsnack miracles fraudulent and instructed all priests of the archdiocese to denounce them from the pulpit. 83 This agreement between the a rchbishop and the university led Hus to write perhaps the earliest academic denunciation of the Wilsnack mira c l es between 1405 and 1407; his Tractus d e sanguine Christi denounced the miracles on philosophical grounds 82 Although with Archdiocese of Prague appears to be the first to denounce the miracles at Wilsnack in 1405, in 1412 the S ynod of Magdeburg drew up ten articles questioning the truth of Wilsnack, the University of Erfurt denounced the site in 1451, and around 1450 aloneover 50 documents analyzing the miracles were produced. Caroline Walker Bynum, Wonderful Blood: Theology and Practice in Late Medieval Northern Germany and Beyond (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007), 26, 28, 44 83 Fudge, Jan Hus 27.
41 rather than any analysis of the evidence In this document Hus argue d against the va lidity of Wilsnack on realist principles that if Christ was made whole after the resurrection and ascended bodily into heav e n, then no pieces of Christ could be left on earth. 84 Hus referred to the so called blood as the Creator should be glorified and not the creation. 85 Within the next two years, however, tensions between university scholars over the works of John Wyclif and papal concerns over heresy in Bohemia placed the archbisho p and Hus on opposite sides of an increasingly vitriolic debate. 86 Historians papal schism, royal indecisiveness, and the fierce debates over the works of the English scho lar John Wyclif which dominated discussion at the university. 87 actions made opponent. Englishman and Oxford professor John Wyclif (d.1384). Wyclif was a prolific preacher and writer who wrote notable academic tracts on realist philosophy. Wyclif was also harshly critic al of clerical excess papal authority and most famously the doctrine of the Eucharist. 88 Unlike Hus, Wyclif became isolated because of his radical opinion and was 84 Jan Hus, De sanguine Christi ed. Spisy M.Jana Husi vol. 3 (Prague: Jaroslav Burs ka, 1903). Bynum, Wonderful Blood 36 39 85 Bynum, Wonderful Blood 37. 86 Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 61. 87 Spinka, 55 88 texts for before 1391. Spinka, 35. Wyclif studies have become an industry of
42 compelled to leave Oxford in 1381 Wyclif was never officially branded as a heretic during his lifetime, but his writings carried with them considerable infamy, even before their official censure by the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1411. 89 It is not entirely clear university, but even those works previously denounced as heresy by Rome and Canter 1403. 90 Hus and his fellow scholars, therefore, had free license to discuss, dispute, ideas the various tracts un der pressure from Rome. The majority of the texts were philosophical, biblically oriented, and free from heresy, a fact leading Hus and most Czech scholars to assume heret ic. 91 debated f iercely for well over a century. Many Protestant texts proudly asserted that the their own over the last fifty years. Wyc lif, like Hus, was once relegated to proto reformer status. Scholars considerable rate. Some of the best and most recent scholarship on Wyclif include: Ian Christo pher Levy ed. A Companion to John Wyclif : Late Medieval Theologian (Leiden : Brill 2006 ); Ian Christopher Levy, John Wyclif: Scriptural Logic, Real Presence, and the Parameters of Orthodoxy ( Tempe Arizona: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies 2001); Stephen E. Lahey, Philosophy and Politics in the thought of John Wyclif (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2003) ; Mishtooni Bose and J. P. Hornbeck, Wycliffite Controversies (Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, 2011); Edwin D. Craun, Ethics and Power in Medieval English Reformist Writing (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010). 89 Wyclif in his Times ed. Anthony Kenny (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), 105 107. 90 Fudge, The Magni ficent Ride Bohemia see: Michael Van Dussen, From England to Bohemia: Heresy and C ommunication in the later Middle ( h and Early Fifteenth Studies in Church History Subsidia vol. 5 Anne Hudson and Michael Wilks eds. (Oxford: Ecclesiastical History Society by B. Blackwell, 1987):397 Church History 32 (1963): 57 Communio Viatorum 32 (Winter 1989): 209 229. 91 Spinka, 35.
43 path to the Reformation passed through England, Prague, and Wittenberg. 92 Johann Losserth In response to this assertion numerous Czech and international scholars have worked to distance him from Wyclif. Yet the 93 clear that Hus showed remarkable erudition and caution when incorporating the ideas of the Oxford scholar in his own works. In fact, many of the most radical ideas of Wyclif, s ome which the Council of Constance convicted Hus of holding, he actually rejected completely. 94 rejection of transubstantiation and interpretation of the Eucharist as symbolic ) and he r epeatedly supported and promoted the sacred nature of the Eucharist in his sermons 92 Perhaps one of the most interesting English Protestant books linking Wyclif and Hus is: William Gilpin, Lives of John Wicleff and of the Most Eminent of his Disciples: Lord Cobham, John Huss, Jerome of Prague and Zisca (London: J. Robson, 1765). This book Acts and Monuments Hus and his indebtedness and gratitude to Wyclif for opening his eyes. A second common example is mile De Bon nechose, The Reformers before the Reformation (New York: AMS Press, 1980; reprint of 1844). 93 Johann Losserth, Wiclif and Hus primary opponent was Jan Sedlk who accused Losserth of outright aca demic fraud in: Jan Sedlk M. Jan Hus Enrico Molnar, in his important article, connections between Hus and W Wyclif, that such theologians as Masilius of Padua and of Janov were actually far more influential. Jan Hus: Zwi schen Zeiten, Vlkern, Konfessionen ed. Ferdinand Seibt (Munich: Oldenburg, 1997) 168 170. 94 Fudge, Jan Hus, 103 108, 142 Lex Christi, Dominium und Kirchlic h Hierarchie b ei Johnnes Hus im Vergleich mit John Wyclif In Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten, Vlkern, Konfessionen ed. Ferdinand Seibt (Munich: Oldenburg, 1997) : 157 167 BRRP 2 (1998): 25 37; Vilm Herold BRRP 4 (2002): 15 30.
44 and writings. 95 as the role those writings played in dividing the university into two warring factions of nominalist and realist scholars. context of the University as along with his preaching responsibilities, Hus was prominent amon g the leadership of the Czech nation and he oversaw numerous students H istorians often describe tensions at Prague University as a split between Czechs and Germans, although in reality the divide was not nearly so clean. 96 Realism, as promoted in the writi ngs of Wyclif and generally accepted by Hus and the Czech faction, describe d all matter in terms of 97 This philosophical approach to existence states that all objects are a reflection or 95 Spinka, 74; Fudge, Jan Hus 51.For more detailed analyses of Helena K K k vestie d e S anguine Christi s ub s pecie v ini. Sbornk prac Filosofi ( Brno, Filosofick F akulta B U niversity, 1999, vol. 1998 ): 79 101 ; e BRRP 4 ( 2002 ) : 107 126 119; Olivier Marin BRRP 6 (2007): 45 76 54 96 but was the fruit of a great faith in reason as a The Caroline University of Prague: A Short History (Prague, Universita Karlova, 1962), 16. Many scholars point to the exist ence of multicultural appeal, however, there is currently considerable discussions occurring on whether the school was any more than just one or two German scholars. On the Dresden School see: Ferdinand Seibt, und wir Deutschen. Zum 600, 103; Fudge, The Magnificent Ride 67. I am looking forward to the BRRP Disseminating the F allacy: The S historiography through close textual analysis and questions numerous generalities made by historians in 97 BRRP 2 (1998), 49 56, 53.
45 perfection), so too then does a tree, bird, or keg of ale reflect a perfect design by God. 98 This adaptation of neo platonic metaphysics relied on faith to accept the existence of things that could not be seen or necessarily understood. T his allowed that the substance or what a thing actually is could be different than how something appeared which is known as its accidents. A significant part of Wycl is rooted in his extreme interpretation of realist philosophy. When the Communion host became the body of Christ through transubstantiation, two typical understandings were that either the substance was changed without aff ecting the accidents or the substance was destroyed and became something else without affecting the accidents. Wyclif believed that this idea went against the principle of universals, as God would have to change or destroy the universal archetype of bread and consequently change all bread in substance 99 existence could not accept the changing of those universals without the total disruption of creation. Nominalism, on the other hand, a s best described by scholars such as William of Ockham, viewed existence in terms of singulars rather than universals. This worldview relied on reason to prove existence; for example, if something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duc k, reason dictates that it is in fact a duck. This view which prevailed throughout much of the Middle Ages, in a simplified form meant that something only exists if the senses can perceive it. 100 It also, allowed fo r God to change 98 Genesis 1: 26 27 ( Saint Joseph Ed .) 99 Wyclif in His Times (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1986), 7 9. 100 Journal of Religion 11: 1 (1931): 86 116.
46 reality at will Nominalis t philosophers saw their realist counterparts as imposing limits therefore, reason was necessary t o comprehend creation, as God was free to alter reality at will. 101 Within Prague University, the realist philosophy of Wyclif found greater acceptance among the Czech nation than the other university nations Although the crown and bishop initially met the philosophical split with indifference, the radical nature hierarchy of the church as the Antichrist, meant that the controversy soon drew in civil and ecclesiastical authorities 102 O pen dialogue unraveled into petty name calling as the different parties made accusations of heresy against those of different philosophical inclination. 103 When word of heresy in Bohemia reached Pope Gregory in Rome and the ears of King Wenceslas, both put pressure on Zb the papacy. 104 101 Oakley, The Western Church 145. 102 113. 103 The Caroline Uni versity In BRRP 1 (1996):13 17. For a discussion of Wyclifite stereotypes on the broader historiography in BRRP 8 (2011):21 32. 104 Mishtooni Bose and J. Patrick Hornbeck Wycliffite Controversies 2011
47 Bohemia free of heresy and to ig factions. 105 In 1409, the situation between the Czech and German factions along with the a me to a critical point in the flurry of negotiations leading up to the Kutn Ho ra decree. In 1408 Christendom was preparing for a new general council in Pisa, with the intention of finally resolving the papal schism. Wenceslas, who despite a long family alliance with French crown, had sided with the Roman pope over the French suppor ted pope in Avignon. In order to push for an amicable resolution to the schism, diplomats crisscrossed Europe negotiating a possible solution. Pressure from French diplomats and the opportunity to snatch the imperial title back from Ruprecht swayed Wencesl as to throw his support behind the council. sway against the archbishop, Wenceslas decided he needed the backing of the university and summoned delegates from the four uni versity nations to join him at his s various arguments, Wenceslas discovered that only the Czech nation would actually support his decision to change loyalties, and a univers ity vote might actually undermine his proposed change of papal adherence To preempt the university condemning the Council at Pisa, Wenceslas issued the Ku tn Hora decree on January 18, 1409 to give the Czech nation governing power over the university by g ranting it three votes and This act united the Czech university masters and the crown in defiance of the 105 Spinka, 8 4 87
48 archbishop. 106 In reaction to the passing of the decree an est imated one thousand German masters emigrated from Prague and the university. Clearly out of favor with the king, having had their privileges revoked, and with the university arguably in the hands of realist and Wyclifite heretics, many of the German master s departed and helped establish a new university in Leipzig in May of 1409. 107 In the wake of the scholarly exodus Jan Hus remained as one of the most prominent figures of the Czech nation, and the faculty promptly elected him rector of Prague University in October of 1409. Yet, Hus only served a matter of months as rector, as the elevation of Alexander V to pope archbishop, now with the support of the new pope, renewed his efforts to root out heresy. Jan Hus, as the newly installed leader of the university, became a clear target as a symbol of Wyclifite heresy and infidelity to the archbishop 108 teachin gs became more intense as the university and the archdiocese stood at odds. From spring 1410 through 1412, Prague witnessed repeated attempts by Jan Hus and other inf luential university masters to overturn papal bulls first from Alexander and then from Jo hn XX III intent on eradicat ing the Wyclifite heresies The point of no return came 106 Fudge, The Magnificent Ride 70; Spinka, Concept of the Church 91 92; Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 66 67. 107 The Caroline University History of Universities 4 (1984): 153 66. 108 Fudge, Jan Hus 14; Spinka, 93.
49 chapels, an act clearly targeting Bethlehem Chapel. 109 The chapel was designated as a private chapel, despite its royal charter and its university affiliation, because it was independent from parish control Hus was one of the leading opponents to the bull, and his letters of appeal and his open defense of public discussion concerning ideas, led to his first excommunication This condemnation initiated a five year legal process that concluded with his martyrdom at Constance. 110 With numerous appeals ou along with other Czech masters repeatedly and attempted to place the whole city of Prague under interdict. By the summer of 1411, King Wenceslas was thoroughly annoyed by the proceedings, and he simply commanded that th e archbishop be ignored. To force to drop his charges, already burned under his authority The king proceeded to bully the archbishop into relinquishing his position as arbiter over the university dispute and forced him to write to Pope John XXIII that there was no heresy in Bohemia outside of the disputed Wyclifite works currently being debated. Unwilling to remain in submission to the king and angered at being repri died unexpectedly later that year at the age of 34. 111 Hus, as an array of opponents continued to bring charges against him before Pope John XXIII, the papal curia, and 109 Spinka, 94 95 110 An observation aptly made and defended by Fudge. Fudge, Jan Hus 118. 111 Kaminsky, A Histo ry of the Hussite Revolution 73 75; Fudge, Jan Hus 15 16; Spinka, Jan 99 104.
50 enemies of Hus continued to work for his destruction. An array of cardinals and bishops s in Vienna and at the papal curia in Bologna conducted legal proceedings against him in absentia beginning in 1411. 112 Perhaps most surprising is that after the Kutn Hora decree i n 1409, the majority of university under a single nation effectively splintered into chaos. Former allies of Hus p been champions of realist philosophy turned against Hus and the Wyclifite enthusiasts after being imprisoned in 1408 on a journey to argue the realist case before Pope Gregory in Rome. These two prominent Czech theologians returned in 1411 and became some critics accusing Hus of holding Wylciffite heresies Another prominent critic of Hus was his services to various cardinals and Pope John XXIII. Hus c ountered accusation after accusation, but De Causis continued to restate, and in several cases invent, heresies that aligned Hus with Donatism, W aldensianism, or the extreme Wyclifite ideas such as the denial of transubstantiation. 113 Although one might ment ion a host of other names, these three repeatedly appear in the sources and ensured that even with royal protection and favor, Hus in his writing and preaching was rarely off the defensive from 1410 to 1415. 114 112 Fudge, Jan Hus 118 ; ( Praha ), 59 60. 113 Fudge, Jan Hus 38, 50 114 Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten, Vlkern, Konfessionen
51 ally led to the souring of his relationship with King Wenceslas. On September 9, 1411, Pope John XXIII declared a crusade against King Ladislas of Naples in an attempt to destroy one of the few this crusade, John authorized the sale of indulgences and sent representatives to those areas that adhered to him. 115 Hus openly condemned the sale of indulgences from the pulpit in Bethlehem in far more combative terms than earlier in his career. 116 A few mon ths later in 1412, Hus also wrote the treatise De indulgentiis in which he condemned the sale of indulgences and used the example of indulgences to demonstrate the possibility of papal error. 117 The combination of the arrival of indulgence preachers in May a open resistance to their sale resulted in an outbreak of riots in the streets of Prague. 118 The ensuing violence cost numerous lives, and King Wenceslas, who supported the papal bull, blamed Hus for the lawlessness and violence in the city. 119 When J ohn XXIII threatened Prague with interdict in early autumn for harboring Hus, Wenceslas removed his protection, and Hus left the city. 120 (Munich: Oldenburg, 1997 ) ,91 of Crusading Indulgences BRRP 8 (2011): 77 97. 115 Spinka, 109. 116 comparison between indulgences to the preferred choic e of true repentance. By 1411, Hus has begun Fudge, Jan Hus 11. 117 Ibid., 36. 118 Spinka, 110. 119 Ibid. 120; Fudge, Jan Hus 102 120 Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 75. The relationship between Hus and John XXIII consisted of several letters as well as vitriol. Eustace Kitts conducted a study on the two men in
52 With Prague under interdict as long as he remained within its walls, Hus withdrew to the countryside where, despite the edict of excommunication, he found nobles willing to give him refuge and a place from which to work. It was while in exile that he composed the most controversial and polemical of his writings. Away from resp onsibility for the Bethlehem Chapel and the tensions of Prague, Hus began synthesizing his ideas in an attempt to garner support and clearly express his concerns for the wider Christian C hurch. The most famous of these works is his De Ecclesia a controver sial work which borrowed heavily from Wyclif and redefined C hurch along the lines of a spiritual elect as opposed to the hierarchy governed by the pope. The most controversial of his statements, was his assertion that any pope, even when Christend om only had one, may not necessarily be part of the elect, and therefore not a true member of the C hurch. Within this work he also disputed the accusations of his enemies, and through the employment of scripture, the words of the C hurch fathers, and logic, Hus attempted to discern the works of his superior to be virtuous, he [the inferior] is not bound to believe that he[the superior] is a member of the c ense of his refusal to obey papal summons as well as a direct challenge to the authority of his accusers. 121 A second key work Hus produced in exile was De Simonia his scathing critique of church practice also closely linked to a Wyclif work of the same na me. 122 Hus produced 1910 in his work: Eustace J. Kitts, Pope John the Twenty Third and Master John Hus of Bohemia ( New York: AMS Press, 1978 ) 121 Unde si subditus non cognoscit sui prepositi sua virtuosa opera, non tenetur credere. Jan Hus, De Ecclesia, trans. David Schaff (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1915 ), 50; Jan Hus, Tractus De Ecclesia S. Harrison Thomson ed. (Cambridge: University of Colorado Press, 1956 ), 38. 122 Spinka, John Advocates of Reform (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 195 3).
53 numerous other works while in exile and free from the time constraints of his preaching duties, including yet another collection of sermons to serve as examples for other preachers. 123 Yet, not surprisingly, it was these more confrontationa l works that for his detractors drew heavily from them at trial. 124 Hus finally faced his accusers at the much discussed Council of Constance in 1415. 125 Upon the death of Rupr Sigismund became Holy Roman Emperor. Sigismund immediately turned his attention to finding a solution for the schism and called for a general church council to meet at the town of Constance. Along with t he delicate negotiations concerning settling the schism, the council also moved to deal with a number of accused heretics. Sigismund invited Hus to the conference with a promise of safe conduct, but upon his arrival the cardinals e, claimed jurisdiction, and imprisoned Hus. He languished in a prison cell for nearly a year as his accusers worked to assemble their case. During this time Hus sent numerous letters to Bohemia, but was unable to produce much other 123 Postil exile, their original survival explicitly in Czech, and that scholars see them as representative of Hus at his most theologically mature, obviously and ironically shortly before death. I, however, avoid these sermons in this dissertation because their cont ext is fundamentally different than the other collections and do not reflect Hus as the priest of Bethlehem Chapel. Pavel Soukup agrees with me and defends this interpretation in his forthcoming be considered an exclusively literary work. 124 Spinka, Concept of the Church 252. 125 Numerous books have been written fully focused on and analyzed Hus at the Council of most frequently cited works is Paul de Vooght, Hus which argues that although Hus was generally orthodox, his writings in De Ecclesia pushed him into heresy. A second important work is hings and the legal tradition of the period.
54 work. 126 He hoped for a c hance to address and dialogue wi th the council directly. His trial, however, consisted of myriad separate accusations, and he was given only one single opportunity to recant of all of the charges combined in total. Many of the accusations were simply untru e, and were actually positions held by Wyclif but denied of the writings was impossible, and Hus was found guilty. 127 Although he had a sermon written and prepared for the council, the cardinals never gave him the chance to preach a final time. 128 On July 6, 1415, Hus burned at the stake in Constance, and the council ordered that his ashes be spread out on the lake to prevent any of his disciples from taking relics to honor hi s memory. Chapter Synopses This dissertation examines some of the least recognized th homiletic legacy by develop ing four previously ignored critical topics These themes provide insight into orld. The surviving sermon texts provide a tool through which to examine the priorities that Hus felt fulfilled his responsibilities to his flock and best fulfilled their needs. When the sermons are examined as a corpus, the evolving religious and social c oncerns of both preacher and audience stand forth prominently. 126 For the collection of letters see either in Vclav Novatn ed., M. Jana Husi Korespondence a Dokumenty the letters translated into English in Spinka, Letters of John Hus (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1972). 127 For the list of charges see: Matthew Spinka, Jan Hus at the Council of Constance (New York: Columbia University Press, 1965 ). 128
55 Chapter 2 established his authority from the p ulpit. Historians primarily cast Hus as a fiery preacher who challenged a corrupt papacy and subsequently perished in flames at the through whom he was officially licensed t o preach, meant that Hus needed to justify his continued presence in the pulpit through alternative means Nevertheless, even after excommunication in 1410, his popularity as a preacher remained strong While in exile Hus continued to preach throughout sou thern Bohemia, corresponded frequently with Bethlehem Chapel and his allies in Prague, and produced many of his most copied works. 129 However, without the authority of the papacy behind him, Hus was forced to defend and define his position in the pulpit on h is own. The purpose of this chapter is two preaching and how his rhetorical strategies compared to approaches of his d standards for an ideal preacher, his declared ability to live up to his own standards, and his defense of his own authority as a preacher. By means of calculated strategies of self promotion, he both asserted his authority to preach to his audience and polemically defended his pulpit from outside attack. I argue that by regularly referencing his own homiletic style, behavior, and purpose, he established himself as the exemplum of the proper and godly preacher, and on this basis he subsequently drew his own authority. I argue that, Hus never deliberately sought martyrdom Rather he merely understood that in order to fully 129 Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 95 96.
56 defend his position, he would ha ve to face the very real possibility of death at the hands of his foes. As that possibility became a greater threat, his sermons began to reflect an increasing comparison with Christ. Hus utilized a messianic image of one who accepted death as part of the road he was born to walk. This inflammatory preaching in response to his critics, created an expectation of the ultimate sacrifice from which he was unwilling or unable to withdraw. He effectively preached himself into a corner, and saving his own life th rough recantation would have meant assuming an unacceptable level of hypocrisy. Chapter 3 common simplification of Hus as a mere critic of clerical immorality. Although this description is fitting at times in his career, historians have often exaggerated his negative position on his fellow clergy in anticlerical terms. When taken out of context, critical o f sinful priests. This assessment of his fellow clergy, however, was inseparably linked to a broader clerical dissatisfaction in Christendom as well as common and ancient tropes rooted in S and pole mical use of rhetoric concerning priestly corruption, but a general interpretation career stance and shifting position on clerical corruption I first examine the evidence historians have relied on to portray Hus as a fierce critic of the clergy. Second, I compare his 1404 1405 sermons along with two of his university sermons to create a closer and more n uanced
57 criticism of clerical sin began with homilies on pre assigned scriptural readings over which he had little influence, those homilies were not inherently anticleri cal His 140 4 140 5 sermons reveal that, with some exceptions, he criticizes clerics in a pattern consistent with tropes based on S cripture or popular stereotypes of medieval clerics, rather than some deep seated prejudice that had been waiting to find an o utlet. In contrast to the dominant narrative of Hus as anticlerical, he in fact shows considerable intense and polemical critique of the clergy later in his career. Chapte r 4 and Chapter 5 are Threats to the Flock Although historians have primarily remembered Hus for his clerical admonitions, he described a wider array of villains as a warning to his listeners. Hus frequently referenced beings both human and supernatural that were all too eager to aid the sinner on the path to hell, not the least of which was the Devil himself. Although all studies on Hus to date. Wh en references to the Devil appear, they have either been broader eschatological tropes; the wider implications have been ignored. In my estimation, historians have all but too medieval in his thinking, a view that would seem unattractive to the majority of scholars who have a ttempted to fram e him in a context more enlightened to modern sensibilities Yet as unappealing as it might be to some scholars, it is intellectually
58 over mankind. Furthermore, it is, at best, a gross over simplification and at worst, fallacious reasoning to assume all mentions of the Devil are simply references to the understanding of Hus a piece I hope to supply. Through the examination of his explicit and literal references to the Devil, the Antichrist, and various other perceived threats such as Jews and women, I seek to illustrate the wider context of the vision of spiritual warfare that Hus described ta king place outside the walls of Bethlehem Chapel. In Chapter 6 fears of damnation by referring to the penitential process. The need for and achievement of forgiveness was a significant and c onsistent thread woven throughout the topics of sin and repentance reveals that Hus engaged his audience with an interpretation that was simple and distinctly non sacramental in order to encourage his audience toward personal moral reform. In this way his sermons differed greatly from his commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, the Super IV Sententiarum, in which he presented a far more orthodox view of sacramental confession. In all matters of sin, repentance, and satisfaction, Hus called his listeners to true conversion and repentan ce by pointing directly to God as opposed to the service of his fellow priests. Since the Western Schism (1378 1417) undermined the foundations of sacramental authority by disrupting the apostolic succession, this reinterpretation of repentance provided a certain path to forgiveness and salvation that may have been met with considerable favor on the part of
59 daily concerns of his flock, his position in the community gain ed even more significance.
60 CHAPTER 2 ESTABLISHING AUTHORITY : HUS ON PREACHERS AND PREACHING s priests do not obey this call, because now they are not sent to preach or to collect men, but rather they go forth to fill up the purse. Jesus sent preachers who consider the welfare of the people and honor of the Lord. If truly a priest preaches for the purse, accepting money, he is sent not f rom Jesus but from Mammon. If truly on account of the gullet, so he may live luxuriously, he is sent from Belial; if truly he preaches to bring himself glory, he is from Satan. October 28, 1411. 1 Jan Hus preached on this theme in his last recorded sermon of the 1411 liturgical year. In the face of excommunication and the threat of interdict against Prague, Hus never strayed from his duties as a preacher to his congregation. Through repeated controversy and scandal Hus maintaine d a rigorous preaching schedule, and historians who often agree on little else can at least agree that he was a prolific preacher. 2 Hus 1 Cuius nunc fit oppositum, quia nunc ad visitandum mittuntur, non ad predicandum, non eciam ut aggregent homines, sed bursas impleant. Jesus illum mittit, quem saulus populi et honor Domini ad predicandum ducit; si vero pro pera predicat, ut pecuniam accipiat, no n a Jesus, sed a Mamone mittitur. Si vero propter gula m, ut delicate vivat, tunc a Bee le mittitur; si vero propter superbiam, tunc a Sathana. M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 5, 132. He certainly continued preaching at the Bethlehem Chapel until mid 1412. 2 One need only open a book on Jan Hus to read that he was a successful preacher. Works that o more general studies. M. Jan Hus and Vclav Novotn and Josef Kybal, Sedlak analyzed each set of sermons in minimal detail, but he did look at how they coinci Perhaps the most useful part of Novotn and Kybal themes found in the primary sermon collections, which is ci ted in a ma jority of later publications on Hus Kybal, however, tends to over This rather short article provides a useful overview of the sur viving manuscripts collections, published material, and some observations made from the surviving texts. The recent works of Thomas Fudge have also been heavily based on the surviving sermon collections and are greatly concerned with Hus as a preacher. Fud ge, Jan Hus: Religious Reform and Social Revolution in Bohemia ( 2010) 126. Also of value is Olivier 76. Marin conducts a narrowly focused but use ful textual analysis to illustrate the role the medieval Bohemian liturgy played in Soukup. His forthcoming chapter for the 2014 Brill, A Companion to Jan Hus
61 was a master of his craft, and much of his corpus of sermons was clearly constructed to convince his audience of that f act. authority through the medieval sermon au thority through function and style. Second, it illustrates how Hus utilized content concerning preachers and preaching to portray himself as the ideal preacher. By tracing both the construction of his sermon and the content of his preaching about the preac through the sermons, one get s a sense of how Hus created the sermons to solidify and protect his authority in the Bethlehem C hapel. Hus and t he Medieval Sermon Preachers throughout Christendom commonly stressed the significance of the homileti c art, and medieval sermon guide books, known in the Latin as ars praedicandi, often expressed in detail the critical role of preachers in leading people to salvation. 3 How a priest then relayed that importance to the audience, however, varied depending on the orator. Preachers such as Hus often established their own styles for promoting their preaching talent and authority. One possible way for a preacher to stress the importance of the sermon was through a humility trope, which expressed his unworthiness. These tropes illustrated a reliance on the Holy Spirit, and also directed attention to the divine inspiration of the sermon. 4 On the complete opposite end of the published sermons at 770, this is not including the sermons of the Puncta that are still waiting critical editing and an establishment of an accurate number. 3 The Preaching of the Friars: Sermons diffused from Paris before 1300 (New York: Clarendon, 1985/repr. 2002), 8. 4 W aters, Angels and Earthly Creatures 59; Howard, Beyond the Written Word 43.
62 spectrum, other famous preachers, such as the two Florentine preachers Giovanni Dominici (d.1 420) and Bernardino of Siena (d.1444), likened their voices to the voice of God. Rather than rely on expressions of humility, Bernardino, for example, famously Fra Bernardino 5 Hus attempted to tread a careful path between self exaltation and self deprecation while promoting his preaching to his audience in Bethlehem Chapel. Hus certainly never stated that his was his o wn skill at sharing that message. These were common and powerful portions of authority at the Bethlehem Chapel. led the sermons of his more mobile charismatic contemporaries. Many charismatic preachers traveled from place to place with invitations from civic institutions to preach temporarily in a city. 6 Few charismatics had opportunities to develop roots or to preach long term to the same audience. In large part, this was due to the predominance of the mendicant orders in promoting popular, almost revivalist, preaching events. 7 Bernardino of Siena, for e xample, frequently relocated from city to city in Northern Italy, often with only limited opportunities to impress his audience. To insure he had the greatest possible impact, he 5 Nirit Ben Aryeh Debby, Renaissance Florence in the Rhetoric of Two Popular Preachers : Giovanni Dominici (1364 1419) and Bernardino da Siena (1380 1444) (Turnhout: Brepols, 2001), 37. 6 Ott S Charisma and Religious Authority ed. Katherine L. Jansen and Miri Rubin. (Turnhout: Brepols, 201 0): 149. 7 The Preaching of the Friars Medieval Religious Rationalities 104 105
63 commonly boasted of his preaching skill and reputation in each new location. 8 John of Capistrano (d.1456) also moved throughout Italy and Central Europe preaching with a similar need to introduce himself and establish his authority as far from his birth place as Poland. 9 The Dominican friar, Vincent Ferrer (d. 1419), left the papal court of Benedict XIII in 1399 and wandered Europe as a prophet for nearly two decades. 10 Indulgence preachers, begging friars, and Waldensians crisscrossed Christendom, attempting to gain the notice of audiences large and small throughout the later Middle Ages. 11 Jan Hus, on the other hand, generally stayed within the confines of the city. Despite the fame of many itinerant preachers, t he majority of preaching in the Middle Ages was done by priests in their own parishes Hus however, is one of the few to gain considerable notoriety as a preacher while remaining in a single venue for nearly a decade. The Bethlehem Chapel, founded in 1391 from the walls of three other buildings and a roof which covered a formerly open air cemetery and well, served as the sit e for 8 Cynthia Polecritti, Preaching Peace in Renaissance Italy 21, 66; Debby, Renaissance Florence in the Rhetoric of Two Popular Preachers 52; Gecser, 157. 9 The most detailed biography of John of Capistrano is Hofer, Johannes, Kapistran: Ein Leben im Kampfum die Reform der Kirche, 2 vols 2 nd ed. Ottokar Bonman ed. (Heidelberg: Kerle, 1964 65). Oakley, The Western Church in the Later Middle Ages 125; 148 159. 10 Renate Blumenfeld Kosinski, Poets, Saints, Visionaries of the Great Schism, 1378 1417 (University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2006), 78. 11 Taylor Soldiers of Christ 19; Van Engen, Sisters and Brothers of the Common Life: The Devotio Moderna and the World of the Later Middle Ages (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), 45. For more general studies of the late medieval religious mil Options: The World of the Fifteenth The Western Church in the Later Middle Ages 179. Herbert Grundmann, Religious Movements in the Middle Ages: The Historical Links between Heresy, the Mendicant Thirteenth Century, With Historical Foundations of German Mysticism. Trans. Steven Rowan (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1995), 163; and Malcom Lambert, Medieval Heresy: Popular Mov ements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation (Oxford and Maldon: Blackwell Publishing, 2002).
64 his pulpit for ten years. 12 This meant that many people probably heard Hus repeatedly, pulpit, he was able to promote and build on his reputation as an authoritative p reacher over time. His sermons reflect an environment where he did not need to blatantly assert his authority in every sermon. Hus had the luxury of using a variety of themes and strategies to insure that the audience gave his words the utmost respect. The refore, to examine how he intentionally constructed his authority through his preaching, one needs to look beyond individual sermons to witness how his sermons functioned as a collective whole. Hus derived a part of his authority through expounding on the technique and profession to t he audience, which consequently established his position to listeners as the ideal preacher. Hus consistently expressed the importance of his wo rds to his audience, and through his preaching he demonstrated his attributes of humility and authority from his own pulpit. In this respect, Hus differed little from his contemporaries led him to emphasize his authority to a far greater extent as his career progressed. Indeed, as his authority to preach increasingly came under attack, his self promotion became more a matter of justifying his place at the pulpit rather than convincing lis teners of the efficacy of his preaching. Hus, however, is remarkably consistent in his message, and one witnesses common themes and similar preaching strategies between the sermons of the Collecta of 1404 1405 and those of the Sermones in Bethlehem from 14 10 1411. 12 Jan Sedl k, M. Jan Hus 95.
65 Hus proclaimed his authority through interconnecting rhetorical strategies that buttressed his position at the pulpit. Despite the dramatic change of tone resulting from the instability of his life in 1411, his self promotion consistently drew on similar themes and tropes. 13 expressed motivations and strategies for promoting his sermons r eveals the larger purpose that he assigned to them. More simply stated, understanding why Hus preached brings clarity to what major themes concerning the promotion and authority of the preacher. First, Hus perceived his preaching of the Gospel as critical to the spiritual life of the church. Therefore, he devoted significant attention to addressing the proper way to preach. Second, Hus argued his authority derived from scriptural mandate that the primar y task of the followers of Christ is to preach. This call to preach played an even greater role Hus linked effective preaching to a life devoted to preaching in imitation o f Christ and himself in related but ever more radical ways played a critical role in establishing his pointing out his use of the vernacular or his immersion in controversy. Perhaps most frustrating was that scholars, until recently, failed to question why Hus gained such 13 Donum eciam Dei est sciencia et eloquencia sacerdotis M. Hus Sermones in Beth lehem vol 3, 26.
66 notoriety i n the first place. Famous and frequently cited twentieth century scholars of Paul De Vooght, used the sermons to investigate doctrinal issues rather than focusing on the s ermons themselves. They saw Hus as a leader of a movement already in motion with popular interest present at its inception. 14 This may be true, but the sermons themselves functioned within a more complex context, and until recently, no one had tried to unde of reformati which discusses Hus as a force of change while failing to take account of the mundane. 15 To better understand how Hus promoted his preaching, my focus is to illustrate how Hus described his value as a preacher, his stated reasons for success, and how t hey established his position in defiance of authorities. Through his consistent emphasis on the power of his preaching, Hus defended his place at the pulpit both before and after his own excommunication. 16 Hus desired that his audience accept him as the exe mplum of the ideal preacher, and the surviving evidence and his enduring legacy suggest he succeeded. To his audience, Hus personified the ideal preacher called by Christ. 14 More teleological than simply linking Hus to an organized Bohemian reform movement, inspired interpretation that Hus promoted far more than simple religious m orality and reform. Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 52. 15 16 Hus explicitly lays out his defense of preaching in his letter written to John Barbatus and the People of Krumov located in V clav Novatn ed. M. Jana H usi Korespondence a Dokumenty (Prague: N kladem Komise Pro Vyd v n and translated in Spinka, Letters of John Hus 50 53.
67 Of course, Hus was but one figure in the vibrant world of late medieval preaching, of which Bohemia was a small but active part. Fourteenth and fifteenth century Prague saw a remarkable number of prominent preachers. 17 Bohemia witnessed a renewed emphasis on effective preaching because of the actions of the Emperor Charles IV (1346 137 8) who invited charismatic preachers to his capital. Preachers, such as Conrad Waldhauser (d. 1369), entered an ideal environment to building program and his new emphasis on preaching, the city saw a dramatic increase in the construction of chapels and churches that provided new spaces for preaching in both Latin and the vernacular. 18 i mperial c apital along with its rapid decline, the city witnessed a dramatic revival and general emphasis on public preaching. Preachers such as (d. 1374), Mat j Janov (d.1394), of (d.1401) all made considerable names for themselves before Hu s Others such as Jerome of Prague (d.1416) br o ( d.1420 ) (d.1416) Nicholas of Dresden (d.1416) and the orchestrator of the first defenestration Jan (d.1422) were all contemporaries of Hus or gained notoriety in the wake of his death. 19 Although many preachers gained fame in this era, numerous others left only anonymous sermons or are forgotten to history. Roughly 140 sermon collections survive 17 Church History 77 (June 2008): 257 284; Mor e, Preaching in Fourteenth Century Bohemia 77; Soukup, Reformn k azatelstv a Jakoubek ze St bra 68 18 Soukup, Reformn k 159. Austrian History Year Book 41 (2010): 22 26 19 There are a fair number of preachers whose names are know for this period of Prague, but those without significant surviving material will not be mentioned here.
68 with Bohemian origins from 1350 1450; a dramatic increase considering what little exists from Bohemia before this time. 20 As a result, Jan Hus began his career as one preacher in a city of many, and as a late comer to a city that had seen decades of fervent charismatic and reform minded preachers. 21 At the start of his career, little distinguished Hus from other preachers as his contemporaries in Prague and throughout Christendom held similar inspirations, sources, and models. 22 The medieval sermon and the practice of preaching have recently drawn considerable interest from hi storians. 23 The re examination of sermon texts has opened new inquiries concerning both what the documents can reveal and how they correspond to the public act of preaching. Various theoretical approaches have pushed the limits of what sermons can tell the historian. Recent applications of performance theory, medieval psychology, and sociology have generated both new questions and new answers concerning the value of medieval sermons to European religious life. These theoretical innovations have become common in the last two decades as historians examine medieval homiletics with new perspectives that illuminate the relationship 20 2 21 Mor e, Preaching in the Fourteenth Century Bohemia 15. Ru dolf an, (Prague: Nakl dem Vlastn m, 1930), 9 11. 22 ser Erneuerung B B hmen und das Deutsche Reich: Ideen und Kulturtransfer im Vergleich 13 16 Jahr hundert ed. Eva Schlotheuber and Hubertus Seibert (Munich: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 2009): 263. 23 The most fundamental text in recent medieval homiletic studies was assembled under the direction of Beverly Mayne Kienzle for Brepols in 2000. The volume, The S ermon combines many of the premier scholars in sermon studies to analyze medieval sermons as a genre by period and geographic location. Although it discusses medieval sermons from Italy, Spain, England, France, Germany, and Scandinavia, the volume makes no att empt to engage with Bohemian preaching. Much of its analysis, however, is relevant due to the common influences shared throughout Europe. Beverly Mayne Kienzle, The Sermon (Turnhout: Brepols, 2000).
69 between the medieval preacher and his audience. 24 The vocalized sermon was a common point of contact between the laity and clergy and a critical component of medieval religious instruction. Priests could be heard throughout the day in fourteenth and early fifteenth Bethlehem Chapel. 25 Recently historians have examined the sermons from many late medieval preachers for new details o n medieval religion and society. 26 Historians, with some and political reform if at all 27 rmons, however, will create a better understanding not only of Hus and Prague, but also of what he shared with 24 Max Weber on Charisma and Institution Building: Selected Papers ed. Shmuel Noah Eisenstadt (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968). Other excellent recent approaches to p reaching include: Claire M. Waters, Angels and Earthly Creatures: Preaching Performance and Gender in the Late Middle Ages (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004) ; Communal Italy, 1300 in Katherine L. Jansen and Miri Rubin, ed Charisma and Religious Authority: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Preaching, 1200 1 4 50 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2010) ; Carolyn Muessig ed., Preacher, Sermon and Audience in the Middle Ages ( Bos ton: Brill, 2002 ). 25 Spinka, 13 1378) as 26, Fudge, Jan Hus 22 23. 26 Examples include: eving the Medieval Preacher, Sermon and Audience in the Middle Ages ed. Carolyn Muessig (Boston: Brill, 2002) : 89 125, 14. Franco Mormando, Social Underworld of Early Renaissance Italy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999) Nancy Van Deusen, Dreams and Visions: an Interdisciplinary Enquiry (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010) Peter Francis Howard, Beyond the Written Word, 1995) 27 Although this is a common theme in the historiography, the most recent works to primarily Jan Hus 57 73; Thomas Krzenck, Johannes Hus Theologe, Kirchenreformer, M rtyrer (Z rich: Muster Schmidt Verlag, 2011), 56 79; Peter Hilsch, Johannes Hus. Prediger Gottes und Ketzer (Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1999) Surprisingly, numerous recent studies of medieval preaching have ignored this wealth of sources. Along The Sermon no Bohemian sermons were exam ined in the recent edited works: Katherine L. Jansen and Miri Rubin ed., Charisma and Religious Authority 2011 ; Thomas L. Amos; Eugene A. Green; Beverly Mayne Kienzle ed. De Ore Domini: Preacher and the Word in the Middle Ages (Kalamazoo: Medieval Insti tute Publications, 1989 ); or Carolyn Muessig ed. Preacher, Sermon and Audience in the Middle Ages, (Boston: Brill, 2002)
70 contemporary preachers throughout Christendom. Hus utilized and continued many general medieval trends, while he simultaneously adapted the tradi tional model to suit wide growing deviation from the idealized form as exemplified in typical preaching handbooks. 28 Hus, at times, follows medieval sermon conventions, but mor e often his sermons and homilies vary radically in length and style. The format of the ideal medieval sermon changed little in theory between the thirteenth and fifteenth centuries An examination of the form of the typical Sunday sermon, as highlighted i n the Ars Praedicandi of Thomas of Salisbury (c. 1210) for example, lists seven major components. 1. Prayer for divine aid 2. Protheme 3. An introduction of the theme 4. Theme (Generally a s criptural quotation) 5. Statement of parts/divisions of the Theme 6. The development of the parts/divisions 7. Conclusion 29 The organizational scheme changed little in three centuries in comparison to the 1. Verse (Text of the Day) 2. Protheme (Either a prayer or second text) 3. Intro to the theme use of the theme 4. Announcement of the divisions (usually in three parts) 5. Amplification of the parts; including subdivisions 6. Summary 7. Final Exhortation 30 28 Phyllis B. Robert points out that fifteenth century teaching manuals show considerably more concern for relating to the audience an d for vernacular preaching than their predecessors, which Preacher, Sermon and Audience in the Middle Ages ed. Carolyn Muessig (Boston: Brill, 2002) 52. 29
71 umber of divisions and the lengths of individual sections. How close Hus came to the model sermon often depended on the context of the sermon, the date in the church calendar, ly, but theme without subdivisions. When considering the manuscripts, especially those from 1410 1411, it is critical to recognize that the organization of the sermon also dep ends on the accuracy of the students who recorded it. 31 generally followed closely to the scholastic model with a more formal and structured format, including a series of required p roof texts. 32 A scholastic sermon is organized more in the manner of: Introduction Division (three parts) Part A Sub Division 1 Proof from authority Proof by reason Subdivision 2 Proof by exemplum Proof by allegory 30 D. Catherine Brown Pastor and Laity in the Theology of Jean Gerson (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 12 14. Also used as example of a typical late medieval sermon in Preachers and People in the Reformation and Early Modern Period ed. Larissa Taylor (Leiden: Brill, 2001): 4. 31 Soukup, Reformn k azatelstv a Jakoubek ze 134; Kam nkov manuscripts of the Sermons in Bethlehem 1410 1411, for example, illustrates how the same sermon could be recorded in different styles and with different types of language leaving a question as to which man uscript was actually more accurate. Eva Kam nkov Husova Betlmsk k zn a j ejich d r ecense (Prague, Universita Karlova, 1963) 75 77. 32 Examples of these sermons are assembled in the collection: Jan Hus, Iohannes Hus Magister Universitatis Carolinae: Positiones, Recommendationes, Sermones ed. Ane ka Schmidtov (Prague: St tni Pedagogick Nakladatelstv, 1958).
72 Division 2 (repeat form of Subdivisions) D ivision 3 (repeat form of Subdivisions) Conclusion 33 R sermons, in fact, expected them to be adjusted for time and place and designed the models so that their function and 34 These sermon models might have been the base, but the expectations and necessities of the context led to actual recorded sermons appearing rather different. es from his combination of the homily and sermon genres. In general, historians refer to surviving records of his preaching as sermons, although that label is not entirely accurate because the surviving sermons are more complex than that label suggests. In preaching a sermon, the medieval preacher was expected to follow a short textual quotation and carefully divide it while providing useful exegesis on all subsequent parts. A homily on the other hand was less formal. It often was so informal that histori ans differ significantly on how to define the term homily. W hat a historian sees as the primary purpose of the homily dictates the subsequent definition. Phyllis B. Robert, for example, describes the medieval homilia simply as a broad explanation of a text explained phrase by phrase. 35 James L. Murphy, however, describe s it as preaching intended to retain a feeling of conversation between the preacher and audience. He styles simply at any point without detracting from 33 Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages Speculum 70, No. 2 ( April, 1995): 305 29, 311. 34 The Preaching of the Friars 35
73 the theme. 36 the sermon can lead to sweeping generalizations or painstakingly detailed elaborations 37 In the end, the nuances of the two formats make their precise labeling a postils as a collection of sermons, the fact is that Hus utilized both approaches and combined aspects of the two, me aning that either label is applicable to the source material. uch 38 T he primary evidence of Hus actually preaching in the vernacular is the Bethlehem Chapel charter itself, which designates the spacious building for that purpose. Historians commonly mention that one could only hear Czech preaching in Prague at either the Wenceslas Chapel in Saint Vitus Cathedral or at the Bethlehem Chapel across the river in Old Town. 39 Quite likely, although generally unexplored, is that mendicant preachers in the city may also have preached in the vernacular. The fact that Hus used Czech hardly seems adequate to explain his popularity and charismatic reputation. Preachers commonly used at least some form of the local vernacular throughout Europe as early as the twelfth century in 40 This deliberate form of speech would have utilized shared or utilitarian words to form a synthesis of common 36 Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages 298 99. 37 Kienzle, The Sermon 162. 38 Vidmanov 39 Spinka, 43 ; Fudge, Jan Hus 58 40 The Preaching of the Friars 8.
74 tongues. Historians have eventually considered successful medieval preachers, in Scholars have also noted that preachers who are cultural outsiders and without knowledge of the vernacular are routinely ridiculed in popular literature. 41 Another possibility is that Prague had an abnormally high level of Latin literacy in the early fifte enth century closely linked to the disproportionate number of clerics which suggests the possibility that the vernacular was unnecessary for much of 42 language he actually used, as scribes occasionally recorded certain words and phrases in Czech or Latin. In some instances they are in direct apposition while in others they continue the sermon in a different language It is impossible to know if Hus used both languages in th ose instances left the vernacular or Latin as a note for himself, or if the aberrations reflect insertions by the copyists 43 ns in what scholars commonly 44 Historians tend to believe that Hus compiled many of the postils himself at the end of the liturgical year and distributed them for 41 The Preaching of the Friars 7; Waters, Angels and Earthly Creatures 57 59, 63. 42 Fudge, The Magnificent R ide 32; Foreign scholars such as the English born Lollard, Peter Payne, (or has he was known in Prague: Petr ong the Hussites despite severe limitations in his ability to speak Czech. His example clearly shows the value and utility of the Latin language for communication in Prague. Fudge, The Magnificent Ride 67. 43 This commonly appears in the texts of the Sermones in Bethlehem for example on the second species dicitur mollicies miekost et patet bene inferius Mollicies and miekost are both referring to a weakness or softness. M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol 2, 30. Visible in manuscript form : Knihovna N rodn ho Muzea, XVI F 4, 295r 44 Autograf M. J. Husi i ntro ( Prague: Sttn Pedagogick Nakladatelstv, 1954 ), 28
75 copying as models for other preachers, but tracing any of the surviving manuscripts to an original by Hus is impossible. 45 because students and admirers in the audience would either attempt to record a sermon verbatim or assemble it later from notes into a reportacio o f the sermon. 46 The result is multiple versions of individual sermons, each reflecting different tones, styles, and cannot be certain which transcription is more accurate. 47 W hat is generally consistent in the manuscript tradition is the incipits and themes discussed in the sermons; but any argument based on the details of language is generally untenable because of inherent uncertainty. As previously mentioned, the majority of postils. These postils usually contain a collection of sermons preached over the course of a liturgical year, and their compilers intended them to serve as examples for the benefit of other preachers. Substantial colle ctions remain in both Czech and Latin, and many have been published. 48 They do not exist for every year Hus preached, nor do those that exist necessarily contain every sermon from a specific year. In many circumstances, the creators of the various postil s a 45 46 Reformn k azatelstv a Jakoubek ze 131. 47 Eva Kamnkov in her brief study concludes that one may reliably assume the more interesting and exciting manuscripts were probably recorded closer t o the actual event, either present or shortly and ignores the notion that sermons could be made more exciting after the fact. It also assumes that we have some idea about what the audience would respond to, which is simple speculation. Kam nkov 75 77. 48 Please see the introduction or bibliography for complete listing of published sermon texts.
76 involvement in their creation remains a mystery. Surviving postils are copies from earlier compilations or notes with generally obscure origins. The most likely explanation is that students and followers copied and distributed sermons attributed to Hus. Likely, they translated Czech postils into Latin to reach a larger audience, specifically among the non Czech speaking students and scholars at the university or for wider circulation across Christendom. 49 These postils vary from manuscript to manuscript, suggesting that they cannot be treated as literal transcriptions of the sermons and, therefore, require caution from historians. Despite these challenges associated with homiletic source material, gathering significant evidence fr om the sermons is possible. Even though a careful linguistic promotion from the pulpit. He commonly discussed the necessary components for proper preaching, which he represented, while criticizing in general terms an ineffective and uninspired alternative. Yet, Hus described a far greater purpose for his preaching than the condemnation of clerical opponents or pro blematic church practices. To Hus, preaching the Gospel was mission to the apostles and a rejection of Christ himself. This loss of focus, according to Hus, had grave repercussions in a church fractured by schism and under growing influence of the devil among both the laity and the clergy. 50 Hus summarized this point 49 Vidmanov Jan Hus 50 Spinka, Concept of the Church 261.
77 desired in preachin g to obey only God rather than the pope or the archbishop and the 51 Hus did not hide his intentions for his sermons, and he often spoke with great simplicity and clarity as to why he felt his preaching was of utmost importance. In the wake of charges of heresy and excommunication in 1410, Hus frequently justified his continued preaching in the context of his and to cure diseases, and he sent them out to p roclaim the kingdom of God and to 52 a command to him as well. The result is a correlation between the promotion of his work as a preacher and the buttressing of his authority to preach. This trend di d not start in 1410, but it can be polemical style as his critics became bolder. Hus on Preaching and Preachers Hus considered proper and effective preaching as a sign that a authority derived from God. In particular, Hus illustrated his authority to his audience by describing his own competency. Therefore, by teaching his audience how to identify proper preaching, Hus seems to have intended that others recognize him as the model. On February 14, 1405, in the afternoon sermon of Sexagesima (the second Sunday 51 Translated by Matthew Spinka in Spinka, The Letters of John Hus (Manchester: Rowan and Littlefield, 1972), 53. 52 Luke 9, 1 3 Saint Joseph Edition New American Bible.
78 before the start of Lent), Hus explained to his audience how a priest should plan a good sermon. Hus provided his six cautelae (cautions) to follow when preaching 53 He explained that caution is necessary to preach the Gospel correctly and to ensure that Do not argue in falsehoods; they murder the spirit of the listener. Do not make fal se accusations in order to make yourself a modern apostle. Think well before you speak. Do not use noxious words; the sermon should be pleasing and useful. Flee from wordiness. As for speaking in time, measure the place and the listeners, because in Eccles At the end of this list, Hus in ou r preachers S ome fabricate false indulgences and reliquaries for deceiving people, while others deceive through visions and miracles, some even praise their life only as if pseudo 54 The rest of the rather short sermon The first half of this sermon, however, revolved around the presentation of the cautions and the scriptural exemplum that suppor t them. The list serves as an example of the may have invoked any number of smiles, smirks, and further interactions with his audience, especially if they appreciated the i 53 Schmidtov, Collecta 10 4 109. 54 Has condiciones heu non observamus nos presertim predi catores, alii falsas indulgencia s et reliquias pro decipiendo populo, alii vision es et miracula fab ricantes, vel ud pseudoapostoli magnificantes eciam vitam propriam et vituperantes nequiter alienam Ibid., 106, 107.
79 considerably long. The witnesses of the sermon (both the audience present and content itself generates numerous questions. In this sermon, Hus included some of, although certainly not all, the characteristics of good and poor preaching. He discussed preaching in detail within the context of the sermon, while telling his audience what they should expect from both him and other preache rs. Hus did summarize this list with serious, albeit vague, complaints of priestly failures, such as promoting false indulgences and relics, along with such generalities as fabricated visions and miracles. However, without specifics, as appear in his later sermons, one is left to assume Hus has tapped into both a common trope associated with the late medieval clergy and the specific rhetorical need for a negative example to create a foil with which to compare the qualities of the Apostle Paul. 55 ons illustrated his concern for his primary craft at the Bethlehem C hapel and his goal of effectively preaching the Gospel to his audience. Many late medieval preachers employed a humility trope in the pro theme of a sermon. The expectation of a medieval p rotheme was that it set the stage and purpose of a sermon. 56 reliance on inspiration from God and the authority of the scriptures. 57 Likewise, Hus often asserted 55 s and Contempt for Jews in Late Friars and Jews in the Middle Ages and Rennaissance e d. Steven J. McMichael and Susan E. Meyers (Leiden: Brill, 2004): 119 145, 125; Taylor, Soldiers of Christ 19, 122; Waters, Angels and Earthly Crea tures ,143 166. Hus provided in his later sermons specific examples of priests around him. 56 More Preaching in Fourteenth C entury Bohemia 50, Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages 325. 57 Howard, Beyond the Written Word 43.
80 his authority to preach in his pro themes. This most commonly appears in the form of immediate references to the scripture and exemplum from authorities. In the example of the cautions, Hus immediately based his sermon on the authority of the Apostle Paul through the citation of Second Cori Apostle teaches these words to every man, so that they might not preserve uncertainty over certainty ; s o they might unite the unkn owing with the knowledge of God; s o they might not presume to preach their 58 Citations of this type then typically continue throughout the sermon, rooting all major statements from Hus in the authority of scripture, the patristic fathers, and doctors of the church. This common authority on the words of scripture, church fathers, and well known theologians. In this commonly to the words of Jesus Chris t himself. 59 Hus relied heavily on this approach in every sermon and homily, yet in conjunction with the use of citations he deviated at times from strict scriptural citation and included references such as the cautions that supported his position at the pu 60 In the example of the cautions, Hus highlighted his own aptitude for preaching as evidence of his authority. The first two cautelae focus on the truthful authority of the preacher, and the final f our discuss characteristics of the effective sermon. By stating 58 Hiis verbis Apostolus docet singulos homines, ut incerta pro certis non asserant et incognita sciencie Dei comittant et de se magn a lia non predicent nec presumant Schmidtov Collecta 106. 59 Waters, Angels and Earthly Creatures 14 60 In thi s way, Hus is similar to, but perhaps more modest than Bernardino of Siena and Giovanni Dominici. Nirit Debby shows that these preachers quite openly equated their voice with the voice of God. A level of promotion Hus never reached. Debby, Renaissance Fl orence in the Rhetoric of Two Popular Preachers 39.
81 these points, Hus shared his personal standard in preaching and informed his audience why his preaching was superior to an assumed ineffective alternative. For example, by placing significant emphasis on not telling lies, Hus obviously must be telling the truth. By stating the importance of brevity in speaking, Hus suggested his sermons must be an appropriate length to avoid wordiness. By stating that one must preach at a proper time, Hus impli ed that times exist when pulpits should be silent and preachers should consider the audience in that decision. Hus may be simply pointing out with this statement that preaching serves no purpose when the intended audience is not present to listen. By defin ing bad preaching through the cautions, Hus effectively draws attention to his own preaching prowess. other attributes necessary for proper preaching. One common ingredient Hus stat ed as without love ( karitate 61 clearly in his early sermons than in the later polemical ones. Hus undoubt edly was aware of the need to express love within his sermons. Caritas as a rhetorical device did not exist in classical oratory; rather, it was introduced through the Church fathers in works frequently cited by Hus. One of the primary preaching concerns f or the likes of Augustine and later Gregory was that the rhetorical preaching techniques employed in Christian sermons often originated in the works of Cicero and other classical pagan ut the Christian 61 Ostendit autem primo Apostolus, quod sermo non est fructuosus sine karitate, cum dicit: Si lingwis hominum loquar et angelorum Collecta 112.
82 Christian love as the bridge between the preacher and his listeners which led to conversion. 62 Hus was clearly aware of this requirement and spoke quite be autifully, love ( caritas 63 A separate requirement for proper preaching is humility. Hus stated on March 1, 64 on March 15 in a sermon discussing the powers of Satan and demons. Here, Hus described the devil as a wolf lunging to kill by t he throat (meaning temptations of speech) because it is by the throat that the preacher spreads the Word of God. 65 Although Hus considered humility a key aspect in any component of imitating Christ, he specifically asserted its necessity for preaching. In this respect, humility is a critical part ideal preacher, his emphasis on humility need not contradict his self promotion. The sermons suggest that Hus did not decla re himself above any other specific priest, nor did he declare himself above the Gospel. 66 Hus displayed his humility not through grandiose statements of piety, but through his emphasis on the Gospel and his projection of Christian morality. As a form of se lf promotion, Hus hoped by emphasizing 62 Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages 291. 63 Sed sicut solis claritas claritatem aliorum excedit siderum, sic caritatis debitum Omnia debita an te Schmidtov Collecta 96. 64 oracio, ut sicut superbia est inic i um omnis peccati Eccli X et quia est aliquando peccatum, ideo penitencia eius est humilis oracio M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem. vol. 3, 21. 65 Ibid., 99 66 Fudge, Jan Hus 63 64.
83 the value of humility that his audience would recognize his own modesty. This approach, although not unique, stands in sharp contrast to certain previously mentioned medieval charismatics. Yet another concern for Hus was the content of a sermon, in particular that a preacher should never lose the Gospel message. As previously illustrated in the Sexigesima sermon containing the cautelae Hus decried the preaching of fables and fabricated revelation. He addressed this p oint again in his sermon on the eleventh Gospel, not a show or a fable, nor of false spoils, but that people with eager mind might receive the Gospel, and that those pr eaching and listening both stand in faith of the 67 significant characteristics concerning the preacher and his audience. First, Hus definitively stated that the power of his preaching comes directly from the power of the message drew in his listeners. For example, in the afternoon sermon on Sunday, May 16, 1405, Hus addressed that power and how his audience should receive it. The sermon survives with vibrant imagery and an emphasis not on the preacher, but rather on the listener. Hus referred to the promise of the Gospel as delightful, and he called 67 Iste namque est ordo predicacionis, ut predicator predicet evangelium, non ludicra, non fabulas, non spolii mendacia, et populas intent a mente accipiat evangelium, et quod predicans et audiens stet pre fidem evangelio, et tercio, quod uterque bene operans secundum evangelium salvetur. Schmidtov Collecta 425 426 seems to have indulged in non scriptural narratives when he preached. Spoils, when appearing in scripture, are often interchangeable with a prize. In this case, Hus is probably re ferring to earthly rewards for faith as opposed to heavenly gifts.
84 the listener s 68 This use of sensory language, attempted to evoke a sensory response to the Gospel a nd to Christ himself. The invocation of the senses when referencing the suffering of Christ is quite common throughout medieval sermons and is certainly not unique to Hus. 69 Yet, this is a notable he application of the When referring to the use of the senses, Hus may also be implying the literal, allegorical, tropological, and anagogical senses that had long o ccupied an essential place in scholastic university educations. 70 was his emphasis on preaching as necessary for a point of the sermon, and Hus commonly alluded to himself as a conduit of that message. To illustrate that point, Hus offered up numerous scriptural examples. Repentance is a major recurri ng theme throughout his sermons, and he often referred 68 Quid ergo hi i amen, dico vo b is: Si quid pecier i sensum, ut puta quis, quomodo, quid, per quem et a quo petat Schmidtov, Collecta 225 26. 69 De Ore Domini: Preacher and the Word in the Middle Ages ed. Thomas L. Amos; Eugene A. Green; Beverly Mayne Kienzle (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1989 ): 151 2, 159 Rachel F u lton provides a broad analysis of emotional and sensory language in relation to Christ in the Middle Ages. She argues that w riters of religious texts in the Middle Ages intended their readers to slowly process each word and to apply their senses and emotion to evoke a strong reaction to the exper ience of reading. I would argue that preachers such as Hus might have intended a si milar response to their preaching of the Word, especially as Fulton clearly shows it as a common expectation throughout the High Middle Ages. Rachel Fulton, From Judgment to Passion: Devotion to Christ and the Virgin Mary 800 1200 (New York: Columbia Unive rsity Press, 2002), 156. 70 Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages Speculum vol. 4. No. 3 July (1924): 283 284.
85 to the value of preaching in the context of sin and conviction. Hus invoked John the sermon. 71 On the fifth Sunday after Easter 1405, Hus preached on James 1 and similarly highlighted the necessity of pre aching to lead sinners to repentance. Reflecting received is able to save the spirit. In this it is shown, however, that the word having been received justifies nothing, if not 72 Hus used this opportunity to explain how the faithful are to act upon the messages of sermons, and implied the importance of repentance among other themes. One unusual interpretation is his insertion of preaching into the well known parable of the wise and foolish builders from Luke 6. This parable describes two bu ilders, one who builds a house on sand and another on solid rock. Naturally, the building on rock weathers the flood while the flood destroys the other. By explaining the parable of the wise and foolish builders, Hus implied that the building should be con structed on the preaching of Jesus Christ. He rock, above which he erects four walls of hope. First, the builder hopes to conquer all 71 clamor sive vocacio ad penitenciam in opera Schmidtov, Collecta 54, 56. 72 In superiori epistola ostendit Iacobus, quod verbum Dei susceptum potest salvare animas. In hac autem ostendit, quod verbum susceptum non iustificat, nisi oper e conple Omnis, qui venit ad me et audit sermon e s meos, et facit eos, ostendam vobis, cui similis sit. Ibid., 220.
86 bad virtue from the beginning, secon to accomplish all merits of Christ himself and fourth finally hoping to remain with Christ 73 Hus made the rejection and conquering of sin the first step of acting on the preaching of Christ. Th e sermon continued by expounding on the sin of those who failed to build the first wall upon the foundation. The necessity of preaching for repentance is only one of many tasks entrusted to the preacher and is of particular importance in what Hus commonly Hus described to his listeners a clear mandate from scripture for preaching. He explained that God demands that his followers preach, and failure to do so had dire consequences. In a sermon on Matthew 21, given as the second sermon for Palm Sunday 1405, Hus exhorted his fellow preachers, referring to priests in and away from 74 Hus based t entry into Jerusalem as told in Matthew 21, fulfills the prophecy of the Messiah entering Jerusalem, as foretold in Isaiah 62. The chapter, steeped with eschatological imagery, foretells the coming of the Messiah. Hus, however, fo cused not on the coming of Christ or even the waiting of the church but rather placed his emphasis on the need for the people to hear of the coming of the kingdom. 75 This sermon sheds light on how Hus considered his role in the c hurch to be militant. Hus an d his fellow priests must 73 Sic enim point fundamentum supra petram, super quo spem secundum quatuor par i etes erigit, primo sperans o mnia mala virtute fundamenti vincere, secundo in adversis stabiliter permanere Tercio sperans o mnia merita Cristi sibi ad vitam proficere et quarto sperans cum Cristo in Gloria finaliter permanere. Ibid. Collecta 221 74 O predicatores, dicite et nolite silere 75 Ibid., 170 71.
87 announce the coming of the Lord. Their duty was to inform and warn the people of Prague to prepare for the arrival of the king. Just as good sermons could lead people to God, Hus often put considerable emphasis on the role of bad preaching or the absence of preaching to lead people astray. To cite an early example, Hus preached on Sunday July 17, 1405: Notice how the crowds gathered and listened fervently to the word of God. So that they could hear, they knocked one another over i n attempts to get close to Jesus. Their zeal was caused by the power of the Word of God as well as by their love for it. Today, however, hearers of the Word falter. The clergy preach myths and lies that the crowds like to hear. But because the people are n ot hearing the Truth of God, they can neither see him, nor time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their 76 Hus argued that if priests will preach the Gospel, the people will come to hear them, but in the absence of sound preaching, the people will turn to the fables mentioned by Paul. relics or possibly popular superstitions 77 Also quite likely is that Hus referenced his personal encounter with priests deceiv ing the laity from the pulpit. Historians generally consider this statement as 76 Et nota, quomodo ferventer audiebant populi verbum Dei, quia ita, ut irruerent ad Iesum, id est cumulatim se trudendo prosternerent, Causa fuit veritas verbi Dei et bonus affectus populli. Et quia hec due cause defici u nt, nam c lerus predicat fabulas et popul us excellencius quam verbum Dei audiat illas, ergo fervor audicionis verbi Dei et sic amor Dei deficit in populo et in clero impletur vox Pauli 2 Thim. 4 t empus, cum sanam doctrinam non sustinebunt, sed ad sua desideria coacerbabunt si bi magistros, prurientes auribus et a veritate quidem auditum avertent, ad fabulas autem convertentur Ibid., 337 338. 77 Recent scholarship has begun to uncover late medieval superstitous beliefs such as magical remedies and protections. Although little e vidence seems to have been uncovered for popular superstition in Prague itself, documents in Germany such as the Tractus de S uperstistionibus M agica, S ortilegiis, etc are dated to c.1400 and suggest clerical concern for superstitions in neighboring Bavari a. Michael D. Bailey, Fearful Spirits, Reasoned Follies: The Boundaries of Superstition in Late Medieval Europe (Ithica: Cornell University Press, 2013), 8, 36.
88 of reported miracles in Brandenburg. The priests of Wilsnack had declared that their eucharistic hosts were shedding the blood of Christ and as a result had profited considerably from flocks of pilgrims hoping to witness the miracle themselves. The investiga tion concluded that the priests had been falsely claiming miracles in order to lure pilgrims for financial gain. 78 Hus illustrated that along with a failure to combat false doctrines, the absence of proper preaching is problematic to the Christian life. In 1405, he, on occasion, pointed out the danger of the absence of preaching for both the laity and the clergy. For example, on the sixteenth Sunday after the Feast of the Trinity, Hus discussed the spiritual failures of the people of Ephesus who, upon the d spiritual journey having been deprived of so great an apostle and preacher who 79 Following that thought, Hus, a mere two weeks later, chided priests who avoided the pulpit. He decried the failure of priests and the danger to priests who stray from preaching the Gospel by th ose who crave silence, they do not preach, they place the light of knowledge un der the bed of destruction under the way of avarice, and under the worldly vessel of fear and in secret 78 Vidmanov Jan Hus 27; Spinka, Concept of the Chur ch 59 ; Sedlak, M. Jan Hus 104 05; Oakley, The Western Church 240. For a more general discussion of Wilsnack without significant mention of Bohemia see: Bynum, The Wonderful Blood 2007. 79 Et tunc tercio potuissent deficere a spirituali ambulacione, privati tanto apostolo et predicatore, qui eos inambulacione spiritus instruens confortabat Schmidtov Collecta 485.
89 80 Criticism for priests who did not preach was common throughout the Middle Ages, as writings from Guibert of Nogent (c.1084) and Tho mas Aquinas (d.1274) 81 Prague itself was in the midst of a revival, and the renewed emphasis on preaching may have resonated with his audience as part of the current atmosphere of reform. 82 By underscores his own commitment to preaching. In 1411, with Hus excommunicated and forbidden from preaching, he dedicated more of his sermons to defending his r ight to preach With the removal of his official authorization to preach, Hus worked harder to demonstrate his authority. 83 He went so e devil opposes the way and does not wish us to hear the word on Sunday. Others who do not wish this are limbs ( membra ) of the D 84 Hus used the biblical calling to preach as a shield, defending himself against both the official prohibition, as well as charges of disobedience. By placing himself under the higher calling to preach, Hus justified his own disobedience of the 80 Ista verba notare debent docti clerici, qui quietem querunt, ne predicent qui lucernam sciencie ponunt sub lecto accidie, sub modio av aricie et sub vase mundan i timoris et in abscondito religionis private. Ibid., 517. 81 Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages 275. 82 For the most recent compilation and reconsideration of the growing emphasis on preaching in late medieval Bohemia see Soukup, Reformn k 68 92. 83 Clair M. Waters discusses the conflict between authorization and authority in more general terms with a gendered component. Waters, Angels and Earthly Creatures 2. 84 Et dyabolus opposite modo non vult no s verbum Dominicum audire, ne illud implentes salvemur. Qui ergo aliis sic volunt, sunt membra dyaboli M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 3, 63.
90 ecclesiastic al injunction banning him from the pulpit. 85 Furthermore, his continued presence at the Bethlehem Chapel demonstrated to the congregation his willingness to defy the authorities for the sake of the Gospel. From the beginning of his public career, Hus consis tently emphasized the necessity of preaching. The 1410 1411 sermons show how little his opinion on that matter had changed. Later sermons merely reflect an ever more hostile environment, which compelled him to address th e issue of authority directly. The sermons penned during He went so far as to suggest in 1411 that the primary action of any priest should be the preaching of the Word. This may seem somewhat surprising, especially as Hus was a stalwart defender of the sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist. In this context Hus seems to have been primarily critical of votive masses done specifically for the financial gain of the clergy. 86 Hus considered those activities as mere distractions from preaching the Word. He stated on July 12, 1411: stray from those two mandates, we stray from Christ. We priests are intended t o preach. Yet we abandon the Word of God on account of ceremony, the mass (missacionem), and the desire for earthy riches. If you have not renounced this sin, you are putting yourself in even greater danger. Some of you believe greatly in our mass and you speak of riches that do not compare to the way and the Word of God and in doing so you 85 Fudge, Jan Hus 71 72. 86 Preaching on the sacraments can be found throughout Hus preaching, for example. A number Stanislav Soused k, U en o e ucharistii v d le M. Jana Husa (Prague: the Bohemian Reformation BRRP 5 Part 1(2002 ): 89 115 ;
91 instruction to preach, have withdrawn from your responsibilities. 87 Hus beg an to tie the mandate to preach explicitly with the preaching and imitation of because they hold no order, for that reason they go where nothing is ordered, and And why? Because we are not imitating Christ, 88 This statement concludes a lengthy sermon on preaching and the failure of corrupt priests. Hus borrowed extensively from Gregory and Bernard throughout this sermon to describ e a people without the guidance of a worthy always linked explicitly to an absence of preaching, one may easily recognize repentance as a primary goal of his preaching. The pr evious passage also serves to introduce another major theme that he used to support his authority to preach: the example of Christ. Scripture is full of examples of individuals preaching, and Hus commonly linked himself to the qualities of well known prea chers from the Old and New Testament He often drew examples from biblical and early church figures, specifically to reference the 87 Cum turbe irruerent etc. Si enim hec duo pensaremus iam dicta, boni christani essemus. Quia vero ab his duobus mandatis Christi decli namus, nos sacerdotes propter cerimonias, missacionem et cupidinem lucr i temporalis verbum Dei, quod predica re nobis precepit delinquimus. Similiter vos, non derelinquentes peccata et in illis periclitantes estimatis, vos tantum nostris miss a cionibus confi dentes et oracionibus, quas precio non modico comparatis et verbum Dei et eius audicionem negligitis, ymmo vos sic dotantes a verbi retrahitis predicacione. M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 4, 26 5. The word missacionem in this text is probably referring to votive masses or masses given for financial gain. It is unlikely that Hus is belittling the liturgical mass for the laity. 88 Quia Christum non imitamur, qui laborans pro nostra salute M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 4, 26 5.
92 number of places in his sermons. He military captain exhorting his soldiers. Describing preaching in military terms as motivation for fighting against evil is a technique Hus commonly employed in his wider corpus I n 1405, however, the theme appeared only occasionaly and like many themes in volving threats to the faithful it gr ew 89 On Quadragesima Sunday in 1405, Hus described Paul in these military terms: The Christian soldier trains to march into battle against the wickedness of demons and the sharp blade of vice. For this reason, the Apostle in the epistle, just as a high captain, leads prudently with exhortation to the soldiers of the highest king. Thus the Lord most high speaks to prepare his legitimate soldiers f 90 By likening Paul to a military commander, Hus elevated the status of all proper preachers, and thus promoted himself. Although Hus mentioned the preaching careers of both Paul and John the Baptist on multiple occasions in 1405, direct refere nce to the preaching of Christ is sparse. In through his preaching, which Jeremiah 16 describes as a chase to give blessing. But the Devil hunts for the purpose of giving dam 91 This sermon, however, was predominately concerned with themes of repentance and only has a rather weak connection to the model of Christ and his preaching as the sermon continued. By 1410, 89 the Spiritual Struggle Early in the Bohemian Reformation: The Exegesis of the Arma Spiritualia in Hus, Jakoubek, and Chel ick BRRP 6 (2007), 87 110. 90 Quia nunc cristane milicie exercitus ad pugnam egreditur contra nequ i cias demonum et acies viciorum, ideo Apostolus tanquam capitaneus summi ducis prudenti exhortacione animat in epistola milites summi regis. Sic enim precepit supremus Dominus loqui suis militibus legitime pugnantibus Schmidtov Collecta 121 91 Nam Cristus venatur animas per predicatores suos, de quibus ai is multos venators et venabuntur eos de o m ni mon o m ni colle avarice de cavernis Schmidtov Collecta 441.
93 recorded words and acts of Christ. This is not to say that a Christ centered model was absent from his previous preaching, for it is not unusual to find it referenced in the context of humility and resistance to temptation, but his explicit connection bet ween the example of Christ and preaching remained unrefined. 92 After his excommunication in 1411, he relied mostly on explicit parallels with Jesus Christ to illustrate what and how a preacher preaches. Hus self comparison to Christ clearly developed afte r his life became the center of controversy. H is sermon of July 12, 1411, focused entirely on how a cleric should preach in comparison to Christ. Hus placed his primary focus on the example of Christ and gave a sermon that explained how imitating Christ af fected preachers and their continue preaching, despite being forbidden by the ecclesiastical authorities. The scriptural basis of this text is Luke 5, which describes a sc grew so large that he was forced to preach from a boat off the shore. He drew two general conclusions from this passage: First, the words of Christ were attentively heard by the people; you likewise press forward to hear the Word of God. Second, Luke shows that Christ was diligent in regular preaching. These two interpretations are compassion, so that you may be fulfilled by work in him, so that by the sermon you may bel ieve, and so that together we may teach and preach everywhere using that example of Christ, the one who preaches standing in the sea! 93 92 Ibid., 143. 93 Primo quia verbum Chirsti diligenter auditor a populo: hoc teneatis, ut similiter exemplo istorum pro verbi Dei audicione instetis. 2 ostenditur, quod Christus fuit diligens inassidua predicacione. Hec duo ex utraque parte tamquam nobis memorabilia derelicta teneamus, ut benivole vos verbum Christi audiatis (et hoc est, ut id impleatis opera, quod creditis sermone) et ut similiter ex caritate illud doceamus et predic a mus ubique exemplo Christi, qui illud in mari stans predicavit. M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 4, 264.
94 Hus said that although evil attempts were made to hinder him from fulfilling his duties, the presence of a large and enth usiastic audience vindicated his preaching. He good farmer is the barn having been filled, a sign of good preaching is the c hurch full of listeners. Therefore, because C hrist is the best preacher in word and sermon, because from nothing he is able to mend, for that reason listeners and the crowd press forward, as they listen to him. From the power of his word therefore, is the preacher so great; he is worthy of our imita 94 Following Chrysostom, Hus concluded that the size of to himself and the size of his own audience. The insistence that the presence of so many listeners is the sign of good preaching is a remarkable addition to his expectations of a good preacher and one of his most obvious references to his own rhetorical abilities and the context of Bethlehem Chapel. To accuse Hus of pride in pointing to his own success as justifi cation for his defiance of superiors is tempting. Yet Hus, at least in preaching, is consistent in crediting the presence of his audience of the Bethlehem Chapel to his preaching the f his audience by accusing priests of failing to preach the Word of God and of failing to follow Christ. The necessity of preachers to imitate Christ is a repeated theme throughout erical immorality, and a considerable portion of that critique was concerned with how 94 Signum bon i a gricole est theca komara fer ta; signum boni predicatoris est ecclesia auditoribus plena Ibid. vol. 4, 26 4 65.
95 preachers failed to model the life of Christ. 95 whom each minister of Christ should himself first, conform however much he is able, s o he might imitate Christ well and to teach as he lives, so that he is humble, chaste, 96 Later, on rs and preachers are imitators of Christ. So if one from pure intentions wishes good to men, 97 The claim that preaching authority derives from personal morality is hardly new to Hus. Personal morality was a cornerst one of mendicant preaching in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries as well as justification for preaching by such groups as the Waldensians. 98 He elaborates on the older tradition by negatively asserting that those preachers not leading moral lives have no authority and are leading the flock astray. Hus placed the immoral preachers in direct opposition to righteous telling his audience that the moral preacher to the point of death, preach against the evil priests, who are not preaching to bring the people [to repent] of their sins from their failure those priests are given over in the end 95 Fudge, Jan Hus 63; Spinka, John Hus 62; Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 40. 96 Unde quilibet primo min i stro Christi debet se, quantaum potest, conformare, ut vivat bene et Christum imitetur, ut sit humilis, castus, paciens et sic de aliis sicut Christus, non tamen totaliter et eque perfecte sicut Christus. M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 3 28. 97 Et ergo cognoscendi sunt imitator e s Christi, auditor e s et predicatores, ut si unus predicat pura intencione propter salute m hominum, tunc sciat quia a Deo missus est. M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 3 137. 98 Waters, Angels and Earthly Creatures 6. It is also one of the reasons that many historians have looked for Waldensian influence in the Bohemian reform, with inconclusive results. See: Soukup, 44 67; Kaminsky, A History of the Huss ite Revolution 125; Fudge, The Magnificent Ride 37 41.
96 to death They are placed in the dung heap and having been disgraced and bound together 99 One witnesses the compl late May, 1411. The first was a sermon and the second was a letter dated by Spinka to the following day that further defended his place at the pulpit. 100 On May 24, the sixth Sunday after Easter, Hus preach comes, whom I will send to you from the Father the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father 101 to his a postles concerning how t hey would be hated by the world. This is a powerful message, and Hus developed the verse into a long sermon concerning the persecution of the faithful. He returned to many of his previous arguments explaining how the world hates those who speak the truth a nd how those speaking the truth inspired by the Holy Spirit need not fear. This is a polemical and defensive sermon where Hus, without explicitly naming his enemies, countered charges against himself while focusing heavily on questions of authority. The se rmon began by setting the biblical context leading to Pentecost. Hus describe d the mental and emotional state of the a postles explaining that they were certain persecuti on, that Jesus Christ had foretold to them, ignorant because they did 99 De patet, quod stetit usque ad mortem, quia predicans contra sacerdotes malos, qui non peccata populis predicabat, postea ab eis est morti datus et in sterquilinio positus et fedatus et concathenat us et finaliter lapidatus M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 3, 124. 100 Spinka ed., The Letters of John Hus 50. 101 Cum autem venerit paracletus quem ego mittam vobis a Patre Spiritum veritatis qui a Patre procedit ille testimonium perhibebit de me Vulgate John 15, 26.
97 not know scripture perfectly, fearful because they did not believe they would receive 102 He closely followed the theme of truth from this point forward in the sermon. He explained that the Holy Spirit speaks through the mouths of the faithful before earthly authorities and that the faithful need not fear to speak the divinely inspired truth. The forces of evil, on the therefore from the opposite position the Devil is the fighter of the truth. Therefore they who pursue the defense of the truth, they are from the Holy Spirit and thus of God, those who pursu e truly so that the truth of the law of God might be oppressed and might be crushed, they brought forth from the ir leader the 103 Slowly through the sermon, Hus began to speak more in the first person and relate the sermon explicitly t o the present. For example, he referenced his own my preaching and works, you see my bodily profession of truth and will give to me the 104 He re he has interjected himself in place of the a postles as one being directly inspired by the Holy Spirit. It was common for medieval preachers to insert contemporary examples into their sermons. In the past, he inserted examples of Christendom, Bohemia, Pr ague, the university, and even Bethlehem Chapel while often 102 persecucionem. Quam eis predixis Deus Christus, ignari, quia scripturam perfecte nesciebant, timidi, quia se in assis t encia veritatis Christi p erseverare non credebant et hec o mnia sunt defectus M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 4 135. 103 Et ergo ab opposite dyabolus est inpugnator veritatis. Qui ergo instant pro veritatis defensione, sunt ex parte Sprititus S. et sic Dei, qui vero i nstant, ut veritas legis Christi conculcetur et opprimatur, sunt ex parte ductoris dyaboli et Antichristi Ibid. 13 6. 104 Quia ab inicio mecum estis, sc. m e e predicacionis, laboris et veritatis professionis me corporaliter videntes et mi c hi conversantes tes timonium perhibebitis M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 4, 13 7.
98 alluding to his own role. In this sermon, at a time where he certainly could relate to feeling persecuted by the Devil and Antichrist, Hus is applying the Gospel example directly and explicitly to himself. discussed with the strong connections he drew between himself and the a postles, along with a forthright denial of ecclesiastical power to excommunicate him or any other C hristian Hus developed these themes while drawing his audience into his own suffering as he transformed them into apostles and himself into the role of Christ. He described a direct corollary between himself and his audience as he explains that the follow 105 Hus followed this train of thought: command that there be preaching everywhere. These people cast the faithful out of the Synagogue; they cast the faithful out of the wicked assembly. But those faithful who have been cast out should not be afraid of this happening to them, for if it does, t hey will not feel ashamed, even though evil confuses their hearts. The first element of Excommunication is being denied communion. That is followed by de facto expulsion. The fact is that Christ, our head, was himself cast from a community of evil. He was treated as harshly as a seducer or a vagrant, and then he was cast out from the gates of the city, and hung on the wood of the cross. This was similarly done to his apostles. Thus and now, excommunication, no matter what words are used to label it, means o nly that one is separated from communion with the Church. 106 105 Qui sermons eius visitabat, e x comunicabatur Ibid., 13 8. 106 Sic et nunc, qui habent zelum suorum statutorum, sc. Ut non predicetur in locis privatis, non secundum scienciam Dei, qua ubique iubet predicari, Christi fideles faciunt extra synagogas, que sunt ecclesia malignancium, eiciunt. Non tales timeant, quia finaliter non verecundabuntur, quamvis nunc coram malis confunduntur. Excommunicacio est extra comunionem primo verbo e iec cio et deinde facto expulsio Quod factum est Christo, capiti nostro, quii primo verbis est eiectus extra malorum comunitatem tamquam seductor et eroneus et deinde facto, quia ipsum extra portas civitatis eicienctes in lingo cruces suspenderunt. Similiter suis apostiolis hoc fecerunt. Sic et nunc dicitur ex c omunicacio i. e. extra comunionem ecclesie separacio Ibid. 138 39.
99 Hus explicitly illustrated how especially under excommunication his life and preaching continued to imitate Christ. Just as the world rejected Christ, so too did the Christ. He declared to his audience that becau se he spoke the truth and because his listeners hear the truth they must be prepared to face persecution and excommunication He even asserted the lack of mortal sin in his own life, declaring his own total innoce nce as an ultimate defense against his critics. The other form of excommunication is physical, people who have been excommunicated find that, consequently, others avoid speaking to them. They are denounced on account of manifest sin. If, however, they have committed no mortal sins, then excommunication does not have that ostracizing effect. Therefore, if on account of the Word of God one is excommunicated yet does not have mortal sin present within him, then he should not fear frivolous denunciation, becaus e that is not the law. He will be cast from the synagogue, you will be expelled, just as they expelled me 107 Hus described excommunication in terms of his imitation of Christ, providing key evidence that he, like Christ, preached the truth and like Christ wa s being persecuted in his own time. As a final component to this sermon, Hus turned the tables on his accusers by declaring that they are excommunicated themselves. He denied the authority of those attempting to drag him from the pulpit by arguing that they are excommunicate d are not able to excommunicate, not if he has in himself mortal sin, 107 Alia est excomunicacio moralis, qua quis excomunicatur ab hominibus: denuncciatur propter peccatum manifestum sic, ut homines devite nt ab illius conversacione. Qui si non ha b et in se peccata mortalia, excomunicacio non nocet illi. Et ergo si propter verbum Dei quis excomunicatur et no habet in se manifesta peccata, non debet timere illam frivolam denuncciacionem, quia illa non ligat, s ibi introitum regni celorum claudendo. Et ergo hic dicit Christus de illa excomucicacione frivola, que fulminari debebat Ibid. 139.
100 108 of Krumlov and may have been written the following day of May 25. Hus summarized his reason for his continued preaching. In the letter he declares: It is obvious from this that those who prohibit preaching are false witnesses and guilty of sacrilege, and consequently excommunicated by the Lord, according to the declaration of the prophet pronouncing As far as my case is concerned, Jerome says in his letter to puffed up with envy of diabolical temptation, be angry when the priests occasionally exhort the people, or when they preach i n churches as has been said if they pronounce blessings upon the people. For I would answer him, who would refuse me these things: whoever does not wish that priests do what God enjoins them to do, let him declare that he is 109 Here, o nce again, Hus compares himself with Christ and takes a further step that those declaring him excommunicated are themselves excommunicated and deprived of their authority. In his sermons, Hus seems to have moved from defending his preaching authority to si mply promoting his superiority over other preachers to the point of 108 Et hac peccatum, quia Ysai 59 dicitur: a M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 5 139. 109 Ex his videtur, quod prohibentes praedicare sunt falsi testes et sacrilege et per consequens a domino excommunicati juxta dictum prophetae excommunicationem pronuntiantis: Maledicti, qui declinant a mandatis tuis. Et quoad meum propositum Hieronymus ad Rusticum Narbonensem episcopum dicit: Nemo hinc epsicorporum invidia diabolicae tenntationis infletur, irascatur, si plebem interdum presbyteri exhortentur, si in ecclesiis praedicent, si plebi, ut dictum est, benedicant; etenim abneganti mihi ista sic dicam: Qui non vult facere presbyeros, quae jubentur a deo, dicat, quod majus est, Christo. Novatn places this date dur ing the month of May, Spinka on the other hand gives this letter a more precise date, but it is unclear whether he based this dating off of the sermon Novatn M. Jana Husi Korespondence a Dokumenty 91. Translated in Matthew Spinka ed., The Letters of Jo hn Hus 50.
101 rejecting the notion that he could be removed from the pulpit, for he declared that the mere attempt would result in the excommunication of the one who tried. An Alternative Path to Martyrdom Examining how Hus promoted his pulpit at Bethlehem Chapel places his defiant statements of 1411 in the context of his entire preaching career. Hus built his preaching reputation, as many preachers before him did on the examples of Christ and Scr ipture. relatively standard rhetorical analogies into more dramatic and forceful sermons. He continued to promote his style of preaching and adapted it to defend his place as a virtuous preacher. A looming question is whether Hus intentionally increased the defiance within his preaching to promote a situation where the controversy could only result in victory or martyrdom. Did he want to die for his belief? Did he want his listen ers to die for his belief? The historian must not push Hus too quickly to martyrdom at Constance. Placing Jan Hus on an inevitable path to the stake may be easy, but no one can be completely vel at his willingness to describe himself in a role that would seem to have no alternative but to end in martyrdom. However, Hus wa s hardly the first or only preacher to highlight his willingness to die for his beliefs. What must not be forgotten is that he was quite capable of adapting to the situation and context of his audience. His self promotion from the came under increasing pressure from his enemies, Hus descri bed himself in a way that brought him ever closer to the place of Christ before his audience. Especially tempting such as that of
102 Saint Lawrence, and to jump to the conclusion that he was prophesying his own fiery end. 110 Hus remarked on martyrdom numerous times in his career, but it seems unlikely that earlier references are synonymous with the desire to die. 111 When a historian ermons on martyrs seem to give evidence that he was seriously considering putting his feet on the path to martyrdom early in his career. 112 Yet, his sermons reveal a priest who built on Christian rhetoric that glorified and employed martyr stories frequently in the liturgical year. In fact, tales and images of martyrdom permeated medieval Christian culture, with the most common examples dating to earliest Christian martyrs. Brad Gregory goes so far as to suggest that in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, 113 Richard Kieckhefer even 114 Hus probably was even fully aware that Wyclif perished from natural causes, despite his 110 Examples of sermons discussing martyrdom include: The ninth Sunday after the Trinity 1405, in Schmidtov, Collecta 400; the first Sunday after Easter 1411 in M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 4 M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 2, 168 but according to it also appears nearly in its entirety in the collections of the Puncta manuscripts and Sermones de Sanctis 111 Br ad Gregory, Salvation at the Stake: Christian Martyrdom in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999), 65. 112 Jan Hus 4. 113 Greg ory, Salvation at the Stake 27. 114 Richard Kieckhefer, Unquiet Souls: Fourteenth Century Saints and Their Religious Milieu (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), 67; 66.
103 yet that hardly reflects a desire to die. 115 Thomas Fudge believes that Hus did have an expectation of death, as there may have been frequent e xecutions linked to the inquisitorial trials of suspected Waldensians in Southern Bohemia and provides estimates for the burning of heretics throughout Europe. 116 Alexander Patchovsky, in his study of the inquisition states that Bohemia saw roughly 200 exec utions of heretics in the fourteenth century but that number seems rather exaggerated 117 S ome may reasons. First, foreign and past instances of fiery deaths would have not likely been widely remembered, as few reports would have circulated and the events, outside of the actual location, were probably quickly forgotten. Second, Hus would have identified himself with the Christian martyrs praised in hagiographic vitae and art of the period. Although certainty is difficult, he probably felt nothing in common with foreign heretics who did not support the truth of the Word of God, but rather perished in error. Hus never considered himself a heretic. Even though he probably would not have condoned their deaths, he likely did not identify with those who most closely shared his fate. 118 reverence for martyrdom reflected a desire to conform to the examples of Christ, the 115 De patet, quod stetit usque ad mortem, quia predicans contra sacerdotes malos qui non peccata populis predicabat, postea ab eis est morti datus et in sterquilinio positus et fedatus et concathenatus et finaliter lapidatus M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 3, 124. 116 Fudge, Jan Hus 139 117 Alexander Patschovsky, Quellen zur B hmischen Inquisition im 14. Jahrhundert ( Weimar: Herman B hlaus Nachfolger, 1979), 21. 118 Fudge, Jan Hus 109.
104 Apostles, the saints, and the Christian fathers as those wer e the images and tales on which he preached and those examples permeated Christian and Bohemian society. 119 In front of the Bethlehem audience, the turbulent context of Prague pushed Hus to develop his early forms of promotion to more dramatic lengths than the previous suggested a similar conclusion waited for him. This, however, does not suggest that Hus was actively seeking that fate at Bethlehem Chapel. Rather, his well d ocumented reaction to his detractors was to refuse compromise. 120 Compromise or recantation at the council would have clearly deviated from the words of his sermons and tainted his own legacy with the same hypocrisy he frequently decried in others. Rather, Hus created his own persona in imitation of Christ that effectiv ely trapped him into an ending of either acquittal or death. This is not to suggest his ideas might not have changed after interdict and exile, but to burden Hus with a martyr complex is to disregard the complexity of his preaching and his position in the that he wanted to die for his beliefs, although willingness to die may be a different matter. If death was his goal, then why not present himself for judgment at the papal curia in Rome when summoned for trial in 1411? 121 Unfortunately, attempting to argue what Hus thought is a challenging proposition. 119 This desire in the late medieval context is perhaps best illustrated by the hagiography of Saints in imitation of Christ. See Richard Kieckhefer, Unquiet Souls: Fourteenth Century Saints and their Religious Milieu 1984; and the large amount of saintly ic ons and relics being produced and brought to Prague, See David Mengel, and Stejskal, Karel, and Karel Neubert ( Praha: Artia 1978 ) 120 Fudge, Jan Hus 131 32. Spinka, John Hus cept of the Church 148 49. 121 Kej Hus v Proces 59; Fudge, Jan Hus 118.
105 One may also rightfully question how far Hus expected his audience to follow his action s while his disciples faced death. In May of 1412, Prague authorities arrested three young students for protesting and rioting against the sale of indulgences. Sources from the period suggest that Hus attempted to plea for their lives. The officials at the Old Town Hall assured him they would face only minor punishment, but after Hus left the 122 The sources suggest, at the very least, that when his followers had the opportunity for reveal a preacher caught up in the moment, then likely his audience may have been as well. In conclusion, the sermons of Jan Hus provide a critical insight into how his popularity developed. Today, historians attest to his fame as a preacher, without fully understanding how his sermons and homilies functioned as a whole. If one takes the persona imitation of Christ served to position him as a priest who followed the law and Gos pel of Christ. Therefore, he presented himself as a worthy successor to the Apostles. Hus was a masterful preacher, and his sermons attest to his ability to shape, and meet, his 122 Primary source attributed Dr. John N z translated in Spinka, John Hus at the Council of Constance 219 220. Spinka, 120; Fudge, Jan Hus 102.
106 statement in the most appropriate, eloquent, and knowledgeable way possible.
107 CHAPTER 3 P RIESTS AND PHARISEES No more damning sentence could have been pronounced ag ainst the territorial power of the popes, or the temporal power of the clergy. Five centuries after the Hussite sermons the Catholic clergy has mended none of its ways. 1 --Benito Mussolini John Huss the Veracious Whether as an outspoken and harsh criti c of priestly hypocrisy or a moral crusader calling for fellow priests to imitate Christ fully, Jan Hus has been linked indelibly in both history and mythology to criticism of the clergy. Numerous h istorians have employed Hus as a prime example o f the call for clerical reform in the early fifteenth century. Descriptions of his relationship with the clergy ranged from the 2 Other scholars such as David Atwood, have combined his anticlericalism with his anti institutional church the vulgar opinions of Catholics at 3 Regardless of how his critique of the themes of his career. His criticism of the practices of simony, his irritation at blatant clerical hypocrisy, and his doubts concerning papal legitimacy support a compelling 1 Benito Mussolini, John Huss the Veracious (New York: The Italian Book Company, 1939), 31. 2 whose 1913 book, Giovanni Huss il Veridico served as a scathing indictme nt of the Catholic church and a mirror for turn of the century Italian society, with significant revisions and a comical El Duce revering preface added in a 1939 edition Pavel Helan analyzes the text and relevant historiography in his article, Pavel Hela BRRP 4 (2004): 309 316. Oakley, The Western Church in the Later Middle Ages 294 3 Atwood, The Theology of the Czech Brethren 75. Josef Kybal, M. Jan Hus: ivot a u Dl. II u n apsal adem Jana Laichtera 1919 1921) 179.
108 argument to label Hus as an outright opponent to the ecclesiastical structure of the medieval church and as a thorn in the side of a sinful church 4 In fact, finding generalized statements summarizin rgy is not uncommon. Statements c hurch lay in comparisons between the early and later source material. 5 Scholars have often other themes and the gradual and rational expressed views. Yet the evidence does not support these extreme, but all too common oversimplifications scholars need to readjust their expectations of Hus in the pulpit. 6 This chapter illustrates the nuance that many historians have overlooked concerning critic as it has never been examined giving full consideration to the scriptural context or his evolvi ng position over time. Studies of Jan Hus over the centuries have tended to fall into one of two distinct historical narratives: nationalist and Reformation, both of which strongly emphasize opposition to the Roman Catholic Church. Historians writing in a nationalist narrative 4 Matthew Spinka (Phillidelphia: Westminster Press, 1953); Jan Hus, De Ecclesia : The Church trans. David. S. Schaff (Westport: Gree nwood Press, 1915). Matthew Spinka is the most prominent English 3. This idea is also heavily promoted by both Marxist and nationalist narratives. 5 Kitts is one of many examples of a reform Pope John XXIII and Master John Hus of Bohemia 34. 6 44.
109 have often highlighted Hus condemnation of a sinful clergy, claiming that it represents the moral superiority of the Czechs in their struggle against the sinful foreign influences of the fractured papacy and the higher clergy. 7 Scho lars writing within the Reformation narrative have emphasized Hus as a reforming voice among the morally bankrupt clergy and as a martyr to the cause of reform in Europe. 8 Certain writings of Hus alon e and isolated from the overall time li n e of his preachi ng career certainly reflect a controversial and condemning tone against a sinful clergy the B ooklet of the P M aster C ook replies to charges against Hus by pointing out his hypocrisy from the perspective of a priests cook 9 Yet, these theological and polemical writings, mostly originating after his ex ile, present a limited picture of the reformer and reflect a static 7 BRRP vol. 4 (2002): 300 303. One of the key and dominant texts in this narrative was wr itten by the first Czech president. T.G. Masaryk, Jan Hus: n o r eformace (Curych: Konfrontace, 1979). Tightly bound with the nationalist narrative is the Marxist narrative which took a similar view to Hus as the leader of a proto communis papal power. Karl Kautsky, Communism in Central Europe in the time of the Reformation (New York: Russell and Russell, 1959), 2 3. 8 Attempts to portray Hus as the prog enitor of the Protestant Reformation are generally ignored i n recent scholarship, although many historians and theologians have placed the origins of Reformation movements with Hus and his contemporaries Examples of the Hussites in the Reformation narrati ve include: Herbert Brook Workman, The Dawn of the Reformation. Vol. 2: The Age of Hus (London, AMS Press, 1902) ; Renate Riemeck, Jan Hus. Reformation 100 Jahre vor Luther (Fr ankfurt am Main: Stimme Verlag, 1966) M ost recently historians have been keeping Hus in the context of a Bohemian Reformation which often continues through Comenius and the battle of White Mountain. Craig D. Atwood links Hus to the Czech Brethren in, The Theology of the Czech Brethren from Hus to Comenius (University Park, Pa.: Penns Moravian context, it still uses Hus as the start of a future reform movement ra ther than a product of his time s preaching is Vclav Novotn and Josef Kybal, M. Jan Hus 1921). Perhaps the most useful part of collectio ns, which is cited in the majority of later publications. Kybal, however, tends to over emphasize as a predecessor of the Reformation and ignores more general themes. 9 in Drobn spi MIHOO 4 (Prague: Academiae S cientiarum Bohemoslovenicae, 1985 ).
110 10 H is sermons over a wide variety of subjects drew in his audience, and they won for Hus a leading role among Bohemian reformers He also adapted his sermons according to the changing religious and political climate and attempts to classify his sermons through only static generalizations miss the remarkable evolution illuminated by these sources. Hus can serve as an excellent exam ple for late medieval preaching, and the narrower anti clerical and reform labels diminish the broad historical value of his sermons. anticlericalism as too diverse and complex to define in general terms. 11 Despite not seem to draw significant counter criticism from the wider clergy until after he had become entangled in Wyclifite theology and r oyal politics 12 In fact, historian Christoph er Bellitto, goes so far as to suggest that W yclif, Hus, and the Waldensians could be reinterpreted their higher expectations for the clergy 13 Many late medieval critics of the clerg y commonly set expectations so high as to be nearly impossible to achieve. 14 in a 10 In addition to De Ecclesia and On Simony this generalization. 11 John van Engen points out that Anticlericalism is a nineteenth century creation. But the attitude, if not the Anticlericalism in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe ed. Peter A. Dykema and Heiko A. Oberman (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995) 19. 12 Fudge, Jan Hus 14; Spinka, 93. 13 A Companion to the Great Western Schism (1378 1417), Jolle Rollo Koster and Thomas M. Izbicki (Leiden: Brill, 2009) 317 14
111 remark to Hus said 15 contemporaries shared many of these same characteristics and expectations through much of his career. an wide call for reform in the fifte enth century. A n analysis of his sermons reflects his employment of common, late medieval tropes concerning a sinful priesthood that were familiar to the laity and clergy within the Bohemian and European context. These tropes are rooted in scripture and ar e not unique to Hus, fifteenth century Bohemia, nor Canterbury Tales Divine Comedy but also numerous less well known texts. 16 the claims of the c roughly five centuries. 17 The clergy commonly employed tropes either in self critique or in confli ct among themselves, such as the rivalry between mendicant friars and parish priests. 18 Throughout Christendom, criticisms of the priesthood originated from within their own ranks and were expressed from the pulpit. Preaching critically against a sinful 15 Iohannes Hus, nemo sine crimine vivit Relatio FRB 8: Petri de n ec n on Alia de M. Iohannes et M. Hieronymo Pragensi Relationes et Memoriae 16 Historians have done similar regional studies on anticlericali sm throughout Europe. A small in the Middle Dutch Dit es de Frensie Church History & Religious Culture 89, 4 (2009): 431 453; Daran Barrow, The S ter eotype of the Priest in the Old French Fabilany: Anticlerical Satire and Lay Identity (Oxford: Peter Lang, 2005 ) Urban Anticlericalism and Waldensianism in Late Fourteenth Century Mainz The Catholic Historical Review 92 no. 3 (July 2006): 197 224. 17 Moore, The Formation of a Persecuting Society 114. 18 Anticlericalism in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe ed. Peter A. Dykema and Heiko A. Oberman (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995) 85.
112 pri esthood is widespread throughout French and English sermons dating to the later fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries. 19 Geert Grote, the famous Dutch preacher, became a deacon in order to preach, but openly refused ordination as a priest because he decl ared that most clerics who took vows were hypocrites. 20 Often, the same scandalous revelations and accusations were adapted and proclaimed from the pulpit over the course of generations. In the early fifteenth century, numerous tropes were reinvented and re peated in light of the over arching crisis of the papal schism. 21 Calls for reform originating from clerics themselves were typically conservative in nature and securely grounded in the writings of the Church fathers and scripture. 22 The call to reform and repent among clerics had been standard practice since the eleventh century, and those calls appear unceasingly in the sources. 23 The clergy never denied the need for a clerical caste, and John van Engen even questions whether they could conceive of a world without a priest. 24 19 Larissa Taylor points out effectively that contemporary sermons from France also reflect concerns of clerical sin and also denounce such practices as indulgences. She also states th at abuses mentioned in sermons were often exaggerated, but also frequently based on legitimate complaints. Larissa Taylor, Soldiers of Christ: Preaching in Late Medieval and Reformation France (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), 19, 122, 142. Claire Waters suggests that self criticizing clerics may have employed these tactics in order to gain a sense of unity with the audience by suggesting empathy with lay people in a shared disgust in the state of the Church. Claire Waters, Preaching Performance and Gender in the Later Middle Ages 144. The fourteenth century Bohemian morality play Mastika makes several A Sacred Farce from Medieval Bohemia: Mastik (Ann Arbor: Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies: The University of Michigan, 1985), 375. 20 22 23. 21 303 331. Fran Anticlericalism in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe ed. Peter A. Dykema and Heiko A. Oberman (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995), 68. 22 Cameron, The European Reformation 39. 23 24 26.
113 clergy, especially early in his career, were an echo of centuries of Christian reform, including the previous half century in Bohemia. 25 Hus was one of a number of clerics 26 The reform legacy of Jan Hus and the anticlerical nature of the Hussite Wars (1419 1437) have meant that the faults of Pr scrutiny from historians clerics received criticism from contemporaries and from historians for the luxury of their buildings, the scandal of their greed, and their failure to practice celibacy. Studies ha ve estimated that between 1379 and 1382 roughly 20% of the priests of the archdiocese maintained a concubine. 27 Marxist historians, managed by clerics as further evidence of their corruption and exploitation of the people 28 M ore recent scholarship by David Mengel parishes actively worked to end prostitution but magistrates that kept the brothels in busi ness 29 Despite the clerical reputation for greed and luxury, many young priests had little income themselves. The rapid expansion of parishes and benefices under Charles IV came to an end during the reign of Wenceslas leaving many young priests to languish without an appointment. The two 25 De Vooght, 71; Soukup, Reformn k azatelstv 68 26 85. 27 K oruny esk vol. 5, 62; mahel, Husitsk revoluce vol. 1 252. 28 Josef Macek, The Hussite Movement in Bohemia (Prague: Orbis, 1958) 15 16. 29 of Prostitution in Fourteenth Speculum 79. 2 (2004): 407 442 414.
114 principal way s for a new priest to support himself was to either serve at a parish in place of an absentee priest for a fraction of the normal compensation or hope that death created a vacancy 30 Of course, poor pri ests could rarely afford the payments often required to obtain a single benefice while many of the wealthier prelates could hold multiple parishes and benefices while collect ing income from all. This meant that the reviled practice of simony not only corru pted the souls of the established clerics, but the holding of multiple positions left many priests destitute. F ew priests had the acumen and connections within the university to gain a pulpit by reputation in the manner of Hus. 31 he Liber o rdinacionum cleri which maintained a record of students from the archdiocese who achieved the lowest priestly rank of acolyte, to deduce that form 1395 1416 nearly 13,261 new priests we re ordained, at a rate of roughly 630 ordinations a year. 32 This numbe r does not include the large number of mendicants foreign trained priests and university scholars who were also present in the city and part of the clergy The problems of the clergy simply could not be ignored and their activities are a prominent theme in texts from the era The desire to reform the clergy c hurch faced a much broader crisis as well. career was also encompassed by one of the most divided times in the history of the Western Church. Prague, much as Charles IV intended, became a microcosm of the E priests and the university into different factions. These factions were often loyal to the papal 30 vol. 5, 61. 31 240. 32 Ibid., 240.
115 claimant representing their points of origin which added to the already tense relationship between the Bohemian university nation and the German nations before the Kutn Hora decree in 1409. As the clergy of the city reflected the diversity o f the E mpire and university, a wedge certainly existed regardless of the official stance of King Wenceslas 33 Along with the schism, tradition since the time of Conrad Waldhauser is rooted in clerical ref orm. Many of the noteworthy Bohemian preachers of the era infused their sermons with clerical critique, creating an environment in which priests with questionable morals were being shamed before the laity. 34 F urther tensions revolved around the Bethlehem Ch apel itself, as parishioners away from their local parishes which reduced attendance and created tension with the parish priests. 35 The fact that Hus was highly critical of the clergy is well documented and indisputable. As expect ed, considering his reputation, Hus spoke openly and frequently about the clergy within his sermons. Historians, however, have rarely considered his preaching about the clergy and their failings within the context of a group of sermons or even within the context of a single sermon, choosing instead to focus on sing le lines taken out of context. Hus could be exacting and cold in his accusations, but for him the saving of souls was something that he, and those who influenced him, did not take lightly. I substantial empathy with and concern for the spiritual well being of his fellow priests and students Several times in his preaching Hus alluded to the difficulties of the 33 Husitsk revoluce vol. 1 256 258 34 Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 8 35 9.
116 priesth ood, such as in his sermon from February 7, 1405 informing clerics of the difficulty of their call to go from a life of leisure to the location of the Devil. 36 Throughout his career, he commonly linked his clerical critique to the examples provided by the G ospels. Whe re one sees significant change from his sermons from 1405/1406 that illustrate a reserved admonishment of clerical sin based exclusively on general scriptural examples, to his later works that offer condemnation for his fellow clerics er sermons in 1410/ 14 11 on the other hand, reflect increasing frustration and anger with clerics who aligned themselves against him. Hus was clearly scathing in his criticism of his opponents, but he consistently remained tethered to his scriptural prompts stemming from the liturgical calendar, and assaults upon the priesthood were hardly his sole purpose for the sermons. critique of the clergy before the gener al audience of Bethlehem Chapel began in far less radical terms than historians often portray In his early sermons, Hus compared the contemporary clergy to New Testament Pharisees. This critique, which intensified over the c ourse of his turbulent career, rejects the changing context in which he delivered his exposition. A Stern but Empathetic Warning: 1404 1407 simply do not reflect attitudes of 37 Though the words of the sermons were almost completely his choice, much of his preaching was based on themes and scriptural readings that he was required to 36 Schmidtov, Collecta 104. 37 De Vooght, 64.
117 explain to his audience. Hus as a rel atively young and inexperienced priest naturally kept his critique of all sin, not just clerical, tethered to the s criptural readings. Between n critique often reflected the employment of carefully constructed analogies between the New Testament and f ifteenth c entury Prague. His rational decision to make the Gos pel relevant to his audience. The image of the one clear contemporary parallel for late medieval Christians: the priest. The Pharisees of the New Testament represented a corrupt spiritual authority that Hus commonly employed to show examples of hypocrisy and sin. Any individual could easily apply this 38 A significant question, however, is whether that descriptio n should be applied in all cases. s about the spiritual failures of his fellow clergy appear as a common theme among the relatively early collections of his sermons. words reveal a growing distress and a changing attitude toward clerical sin over the A zealous reformer against the failings of the clergy would not be expected to miss clear opportunities to point out ec clesiastical sin. O vert criticism of the clergy however, only appears sporadically during 1405, and as we will see, a number of sermons in which one might expect a mention of clerical corruption avoid the topic altogether 38
118 s for the sins of the clergy expressed in his sermons for the liturgical year 1404 1405 are conspicuous and they are clearly an intricate part of his general message to his audience. Yet direct co ndemnations of sinful priests before the diverse audience of the Bethlehem Ch apel are rather sparse and often merely a part of a broader theme, and directly relate to the scriptural reading. A fitting example is his sermon during the fourth week of Advent in 1405 when Hus describe d John the Baptist as references to the clerg y, the warriors, and the King. Hus use d pervasive need for penitence in even the most powerful men of society. Hus cite d Matthew 3: A nd seeing the many Pharisee s and Sadducees arriving to be baptized, John the Baptist s aid to them rogeny of vipers, who warned you to flee the coming wrath? Therefore make true fruit of repentance. In his sermon Hus observed the calling of repentance to the clerics. For the Pharisees and Sadducees were of the 39 T h ese lines appear as a stark reminder to clerics to repent Unfortunately, the words on the page give no indication as to how Hus may have spoken these words Hus may have made this comment emphatically as a stern and explicit warning to the clerics or since it falls at a clear break in the text, perhaps it was included merely as an afterthought. Without really considering the rest of the sermon, this single l ine seems menacing. But Hus does not mention the clergy again until nearly two pages later in the text. When Hus return ed to clerics in his conclusion, he stated 39 s ad baptismum suum dixit eis: Progenies vipperarum, quis demonstravit vobis fugere a ventura ira? Facite ergo dignum fructum religiosi Collecta 55.
119 repent in common, except for the most sharp of clerics, since he names them the 40 Here, Hus specifically condemn ed the most sharp ( acerrima ) of clerics, a label that the audience could have interpreted in any number of ways Hus ma de clear his connection between t he Pharisees of the New Testament and his contemporaries, but he hardly ma de a blanket condemnation and dr ew no other specific parallels. because his audience undoubtedly included a significant number of students and priest stern warning he issued to the clerics, he discussed a wide range of other sinners before mentioning clerics again. Hus included the clergy in the call for repentance that he meant for all people; that general message continued throughout the liturgical year. With the words of John the Baptist Hus shap ed his own general call for penitence. Despite his sharp warning for clerics, he intended to have a broader audience for his message. This sermon simply does not place a singular focus on the condemnation of clerics as seen in later sermons. Along with warnings for soldiers, tax collectors, and others, he also dr e condemnation of Herod which he offered as a warning t o all royalty. He state d testifies, how he [John the Baptist] called Herod to penitence and especially through his sermons Herod was moved to repentance.. 41 In these texts Hus echo ed the words of S cripture as well as the prejudices and concerns of Mark, and from his own words, he offers only a warning without personal condemnation. 40 Ecce vocacio ad penitenciam communiter omnium, sed acerrima clericorum, cum et pro g eniem vipperarum eos nominnat et igne inextingwibili eis de proximo comuniatur 41 Ecce testatur plane Marcus ewangelista, quomodo vocabat Herodem ad peni tenciam et qualiter Herodes eius sermonibus fuerat ad penitenciam inclinatus, si in proposito perstitisset Ibid., 56.
120 isees and others mentioned in Scripture. In regard to the clergy, Hus chose to direct his critique at anonymous contemporary priests. His reliance on the clerical critique to frame the s criptural Pharisees suggests that he considered the vast majority of b iblical criticisms of Pharisees as applicable to at least contemporary clergy is substituted in place of Pharisees, plenty of references to sinful clerics are evident. These examples serve as contemporary comparisons that Hus utilized in a variety of contexts to make the words of Jesus applicable to medieval Christendom. In the Collecta especially, of the s criptural texts which includ ed but were ha rdly dominated by the Pharisee analog y, illustrates his broader pastoral concerns For a preacher whom many historians described as almost obsessed with clerical reform, it is remarkable that Hus d id not specifically address concerns about the clergy again for nearly five months. In July of 1405, Hus addressed clerical failings with a brief statement. Anchored securely in proof texts from Augustine he ma de a standard rhetorical argument of cause and effect concerning the correlation between hearing the Wor d of God and internalizing the Word Hus laid the majority of the blame for humanit s failure to accept the Word not on the clergy, but on the pervasiveness of sin. Hus does, however, briefly criticize clerics for failing to teach properly He state d : People convert because of the true word of God and their love of good. Yet both of these reasons fail because the clergy preach fables with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit t heir own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears
121 want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside 42 Hus clearly equate d the preaching of myths with contemporary pr eachers ; he opined that as a result of those preachers not focusing on the Gospel, the peop le turn ed away from repentance references to myths as examples of church practice or ritual not deriving from Scripture 43 Reformation issues that historians have long linked to anticlericalism, such as relics and indulgences may come first to mind, but there is no concrete evidence that Hus was overly concerned about those matters in 1405 44 Indulgences, in parti rarely appear in sermons before 1410. 45 Linking him to indulgences and traditions not based in Scripture serves as a convenient, but too often exaggerated, link to the Reformati on. Likely, Hus simply link ed his sermon to his text from Second Timothy Also possible, of course, is that Hus may have been referring to prevalent superstitions 42 Causa fuit veritas verbi Dei et bonus affectus populli, Et quia hec due cause deficient, nam clerus predicat fabulas et populas excelle ncius quam verbum Dei audiat illas, ergo fervor audicionis verbi sanam doctrinam non sustinebunt, sed ad sua desideria coacerbabunt sibi magistros, p rurentes auribus et a veritate quidem auditum avertent, ad fabulas autum convertentur 43 and [entrance into] monsastic orders wishing to be pious by the Concept of the Church, 48 49. Kybal, ivot a u eni 179. This link is also often added in large part due to Hus being considered in conjunction with the focus on scripture of the later Utraquist/Hussite movement. Hus, however, never attested to Sola Scriptora only its preeminence. Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 338. Also there is an early misconception that Hus actually followed the doctrine of remanence as promoted by Wycliff, and therefore included the Eucharist among believed myths. Loserth, Wiclif and Hus 103 104. 44 Numerous scholar Hus 223; Novotn and Kybal, M. Jan Hus: ivot a u 273; Fudge, Jan Hus 11, 13. 45 In the whole of the C ollecta indulgences are mentioned a single time. Schmidtov, Collecta 107
122 in the context of medieval Prague or referencing the Wilsnack miracles, but he decline d to p rovide any specifics. 46 Hus continued the sermon with a comparison of the sea and the world of sin by expounding on the Apostles experiences on the Sea of Galilee and on ever moving and swirling whirlpools of sin He constructed these observations from Luke 5 where the men in two boats attempt to gather in the fish as Jesus commanded Hus employ ed Bede and Augustine to illustrate how the boats r epresent the church of Jews and Gentiles, and the fish being pulled into the boats are the elect being t aken from the turbulent water of sin. 47 Hus explained that the image of Peter and the apostles bringing the fish from the water represents the responsibility of the c hurch perhaps as a reminder to the clergy of their responsibilities in the apostolic tradi tion. 48 Collecta to clerical corruption are relatively common and easily linked to the s criptural context, there are also numerous sermons where obvious bridges to clerical sin exist but are left unexplored. For example, in the previous sermon, Hus briefly describe d the Apostles abandonment of their wealth and possessions in order to follow Jesus. 49 This might seem an opportune time to needle priests concerning luxury, and yet the text suggests that Hus let it pass without an y explicit correlation to excess or hypocrisy in the clergy On the other hand he rarely misse d opportunities to point out the failure of priests to fol low the example of Christ in 46 The Miracles at Wilsnack play an important role in Late Medieval Bohemia and the Empire at large. For a detailed study of the broader reaction to the hoax see: Bynum, Wonderful B lood: T heology and P ractice in L ate M edieval N orthern Germany and B eyond 2007. 47 Schmidtov, Collecta 338 339. 48 Ibid., 340 341. 49 Ibid., 339 340.
123 his later sermons 50 The absence of such an admonishment in this particular sermon priorities were simply more diverse than clerical reform. An alternative interpretation, however, might suggest that Hus did not need to address clerical sin explicitly to have it still reach the audience. Perhaps Hus employed subtlety at this stage in his career by leaving criticisms unsaid with the understanding that many of the audience both lay and cleric could have deduced the correlation themselves. Yet attempting to read between the lines of a sermon to add an absent theme does not provide real evidence, and the more secure interpretation is that Hus was simply un concerned with chiding clerics at that time. The point is that reading unvoiced critique but generally if Hus wanted to make a point concerning clerical greed he usually made it overtly An examination of a sermon the following week, however, illustrates that Hus was not above subtle and unvoiced criticism especially when it pushed the boundaries of orthodoxy O n the sixth Sun day after Trinity Sunday, Hus preached from Romans 6 :3 His purpose in the sermon wa s to expound on the close relationship between Jesus death and the sacrament of baptism To that end he employ ed numerous quotations from Ambrose and Remi gius of Auxerre, describ ing the powers of heaven present in baptism. Obviously priests are included and Hus quote d Remigius : But this is noteworthy because surrounding baptism are three visible entities, obviously the priest, the physical body to be baptized, and the water. There are also three invisible entities: faith, spirit, and the absolution of sins through remission granted by the Holy Spirit. The priest 50 entire sermon is about the crowds rushing to hear Jesus speaking and the failure of the clergy to imitate Christ in preaching the word as will be discussed la ter on. Flaj ans, Sermons in Beth lehem vol. 4, 264.
124 administers the baptism whi le the angel of the Lord does the work and makes the promise [that the sins are forgiven]. 51 Hus also quote d Ambrose saying: Renounce the devil and his works, the world and its luxury, so that your voice is held with delight not in the tomb of death, but i n the book of life. Consider those Levites, consider the priests, and consider the highest priest. Do not reflect on the figure of the body, but instead consider the mystery of grace. The angel at hand has announced that grace, just as it is in scripture. The lips of the priests, however, guard knowledge and they create the law from their own words. The angel does not deceive anyone, nor does it deny anyone. The angel, who announces the kingdom of Christ and life eternal, is not announcing hope just to you; it is announcing and beckoning to all. 52 Taken together, t hese two major citations illustrate how Hus was shifting attention to the role of God in the sacrament instead of the priests. These statements d o not necessarily pertain to an anticlerical position but rather are a reaction to the p roblematic schism of the c hurch rather than an affront to the clergy, may also reflect his attempts to address his audience s concerns about the validity of their clergy. The texts in the sermon, although incl uding priests, place a far greater emphasis on the spiritual powers present powers derived from the authority of the Trinity Hus presented God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit as the primary actors in baptism with the priest simply officiating. The Ambrose quotation also minimizes the value of the priest w hile the angel is the one who shares 51 Sed et hoc est notandum, ut ait Remigius, quod circa baptismum tria sunt visibilia, scilicet sacerdos, corpus baptisandum tria sunt visbilia, scilicet sace r dos, corpus baptisandum et aqua, et tria in visibilia: fides, anima, que abluitur a peccatis, et Spiritus sanctus, quo angelus Domini operator et promissionem a baptisando suscipit. Scmidtov, Collecta 344. 52 Renuncciasti dyabolo et operibus eius, mundo et luxurie eius, ac voluptatibus tenetur vox tua, non in tumulo mortuorum, sed in libro vivencium. Vidisti illic levitam, vidisi sacerdorum, vidisti summum sacerdotem. Noli te considerare corporum finguras, sed misteriorum graciam, presentibus angelis locutus es, sicut scriptum est, quia labia sace r dotis custodiunt scienciam et le gem exquirunt ex ore ipsius, quoniam angelus Domini est omnipotentis. Non est fallere, non est negare. Angelus est, qui regnum Crisiti et vitam eternam anuncciat, non spem tibi anuncciandus sit anunccians, sed innuere d., 345
125 the message. Hus shed some light on what he hoped his audience would gain from these texts : have from these venerable words is that the visible work of the priest is to hold the place of the high bishop, namely the place of the Lord Jesus 53 This is c suggestion that the priest gua rds the truth with his lips, Hus never expounds on it or even mentions it again in the remainder of the sermon. This seems less like anticlericalism and more like a reaction to the broader context of a divided Christendom as will be further explored in cha pter six Like the July sermon, this sermon may or may not have had an unspoken clerical relate to numerous unspoken ideas which could be understood by the audience. These connections might originate from the shared experience of the preacher and audience or a common understanding of the topic. In other words, Hus need not be explicit in lead ing the listeners to conclusions, but he may have rel ied on their shared context to achieve his point. 54 have interpreted his reference to the priest as something akin to an inside joke amon g the listeners, but the simplest explanation suggests that Hus was more concerned with convincing listeners of the power of baptism rather than with convincing them of the 53 Ex verbis huius sancti haves, quid visibilis operator sacerdos, tenens locum summi episcopi, Ibid., 345. 54 Medieval Religious Rationalities: A Weberian Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2 010) 31.
1 26 sinfulness or faults of the officiating clergy. 55 One aspect is absent in both of t hese example s is any mention whatsoever of Pharisees. Without any mention of the New most common clerical villain, Hus offered no direct allegory concerning clerical sin. In the course of the Collecta the link between Pharisees and the clergy returned sixth Sunday after the feast of the Trinity. He used Matthew 5 as his text, in which the Pharisees served as an example of false piety and hypocrisy: It had been u nderstood that since the Pharisees wrote the law, they are also the ones who explain ed the letter of the law. The Pharisees, however, were declared to be above all others. Because they fulfill ed the law in the eyes of the people, they were seen as separate from the people. For the Pharisees were divided from the community of ordinary people through custom and work. They hid their faces so that they might appear to men as having fasted, as truthfully told in Matthew 6. And they praise d [God] dramatically, gl ad that they were not like other men. These included those Pharisees, who in the temple might be heard to speak to themselves as the g the Sabbath, I your justice abounds more than that the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the 56 55 Spinka was convinced that Hus was fully capable of using subtle tactics to criticize his enemies. 1410. Spinka claims that his sermon reflec preaching it in front of them to the glee of his allies. Spinka, Jan Hus and the Czech Reform 40. Flaij ans claimed the existence of a sermon concerning baptism exactly five years later f or the sixth Sunday after Trinity Sunday with the same biblical verse. Unfortunately, the title and verse is all that remains of the sermon making a comparison impossible. 56 Ubi sciendum, quod scribe errant, qui legis literam exponebant, pharisei autem dic ebantur, qui ultra alios legem ad oculum populi inpleant et inde dicti sunt pharisei quai divisi. Phares enim idem est quod divisio. Divis enim errant a conmuni plebicula per habitum et opera. Exterminabant enim facies suas, ut apparerent hominibus ieiun antes, ut dicit Veritas Matth. 6, et gaudebant pompatice, quod non qui vite singularitas. De illis ergo scribis et phariseis pretendens Dominus dixitdisci pulis suis: Nisi habundaverit iusticia vestra plus quam scibarum et phariseorum, non intrabitis in regnum celorum. Schmidtov, Collecta 351 52.
127 shown in the earlier examples, references to the Pharisees in the text often led Hus to apply the analogy to his contemporaries. He did not provide a simple and immediate connection, as he did in the earlier Advent sermon, but his pattern suggests that the audience could assume that a reference to the Pharisees allowed for a direct link to themes of justice and the dangers of evil thoughts. Hus borrowed substantially from Augustine and Jerome, among others, to illustrate his major points. Finally, in the conclusion of the sermon, Hus makes the expected link between the clergy and the scribes and Pharisees: Therefore, most blessed, and especially we of the priesthood, who not only offer but also accept the sacred offering at the altar, which is truly the body of the Lord Jesus Christ, we should flee the hatred of our brothers, we should clear our hearts of anger. If we do not we may be with Judas Iscariot in perpetual damnation. However, we give and accept the [Eucharistic] offering of eternal life and we are overflowing with justice greater than the scribes, since we have been blessed by our S avior in t he secular affairs of the world 57 In the context of the sermon, Hus is explicitly using the Pharisees, or the interchangeable label scribes, to warn clerics how not to behave preaching, he did not necessarily equate the pri esthood with New Testament Pharisees, but he offered the allegory to serve as a warning to the priests in the audience. As in his previous sermons, Hus employed the Pharisees of S cripture as a warning of what priests had the potential to become. The Pharis ees are an example that Hus specifically directed at his fellow priests and literati He frequently used minimal but significant 57 Quare, karissimi, et presertim nos, presbiteri, qui non solum offere, sed magis accipere volumus munus sacra tissimum de altari, scilicet corpus Iesu Crisit Domini, guiamus fratrum odia, mundemus corda ab ira, ut non cum Iuda Scarioth in dampnacionem perpetuam, sed pro vita eternal munus illud offerramus et accipiamus habundantes in iusticia supra scibas et phari seos prestante Salvatore nostro in secula seculorum benedicto Ibid. 363
128 statements that could appear pages apart in a sermon. These lines perhaps served to remind those priests and students in his au dience, who may be ordained or better educated than the laity, to not think they are free from the need for repentance. The reference to Judas Iscariot, despite being mentioned only in the conclusion of the sermon, may also be noteworthy. Hus frequently used the Apostles as examples of how one was to serve Christ, and consequently also as examples of good clerical conduct. Judas is an obvious stain on the apostolic tradition and the authority of the s a powerful metaphor for the Hus may have intended his use of Judas as a warning to the clergy to not have too much pride or security in their sanctity as priests. It may have also been a subtle insinuation that those priests who have failed to follow Christ are as guilty as Judas. clergy, but it should not overshadow the fact that Hus sti ll wrote the majority of the continuous, but only insofar as the message o f repentance and resistance to sin was relevant to the entire audience. Once again, despite strong langu age and a severe warning against the snares of sin and Satan, Hus did not directly condemn anyone, but instead offered the opportunity for repentance and eternal life. Luke 18 as th e primary liturgical inspiration. The reading is the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector. According to most interpreters the former represents pride and the latter humility. Hus pointed out the natural difference between the two and provided a
129 re noster phariseus Boh emia. Hus stated: Our Pharisees clearly excel in these things: they approve the robbery of widows by means of depriving them, they plunder the sacrament through performances and lies, they steal the bread and they consume it, they illicitly scatter the des titute and the patrimony of Christ. They do not consider that they themselves are the source of injustice, and if they are lightly admonished, they assault the heavens with clamoring protests. And ee in Scripture and fasts much. But our Pharisee should see that what he gives is insignificant or nothin g ; he receives much but rarely or never fasts 58 In this sermon, Hus clearly engaged with issues of adultery, greed, and charging for sacraments and compared at least some clerics to the Pharisees, although the comparison need not be limited to priests alon contemporary and New Testament Pharisees is more directly stated in this sermon than in any other from this liturgical year. This is not, however, a blanket condemnation nor necessarily a general description. At the end of the sermon, Hus differentiated between two types of clergy. His conclusion created an image of penitence and conversion in action. He stated: Truly, if all modern Pharisees were ascending like the second, perhaps Christ might judge against them. But n ow Pharisees priests, brothers, and monks hear that the prayer of the tax collector is more acceptable to 58 In quo videtur nostros phariseos excellere, qui rapinam viduarum per devolucionem approbant, propter sacramenta spoliant, per ludicra et mendacia panem diripiunt egencium et prarimonium Cristi dispergunt illicite et consumunt, injusticiam, quam ipsi faciunt, non considerant, et si leviter tacti fuerin t clamoribus celos pulsant. Et de adulterio, quo ad proximorum u x ores hiniunt, quid Ierimias dixer it, volo silencio pertransire Ille dixit: D ecimas do omnium, que possideo. Dicat noster phariseus: Decimas re cipio omnium, que non possideo. Ille m ultum dedit, multum ieiunavit. Videat Phariseus, qui modicum vel nichil dat, multum re c ipit et raro aut nunquam ieiunat. Ibid., 431 2.
130 the Lord than that of the Pharisee. Therefore, the clergy might agree with the tax collector, they might come as children, so they might be received they come as children. They come as the sick to a doctor. Those of perdition come to redemption. They come! No one may hinder them, for ax collector descended from the temple, forgiven because of his troubled confession of sin; the Pharisee, meanwhile, is falsely secure in the act of enumerating his merits. 59 Those clerics who repent humbly in recognition of their sin may be likened to the forgiven tax collector. Hus incorporated priests and monks in what he described as an ongoing movement toward repentance; nevertheless, the generic labels force one to consi der definitely recognized a link between Pharisee and priest, which he provided for his audience as a direct link between the Scriptures and the large clerical community of co ntemporary Prague. 60 Hus and the Clerical Audience When faced with an audience of his fellow clergy, Hus changed his approach significantly in tone. This change of genre is more evident with two university sermons given three years apart, in 1407 and 1410. These sermons, both with Matthew 5 as the 59 Vere si omnes pharisei moderni duos ascendentes, priusquam Cristus docuerat vidissent, Cristo contrarie forsitan iudicasent. Sed iam discant pharisei, sacerdotes, fratres et monachi, quia plus publicani quam pharisei oracio Domino est accepta. Ergo acceda nt publican i veniant parvuli, audiatur e niant langwidi ad medicum, veniant perditi ad redemptorem, veniant! Nemo prohibeat, nam magis iustificatus descendit de temple publicanus il le peccatorum confessione sollicitus quam phariseus meritorum enumeracione secures, quamvis ectiam gracias Deo egerit diens. .. Ibid., 433 434. 60 century mendicant serm ons. This meant that many preachers were trying to create as many analogies out of The Preaching of the Friars: Sermons Diffused from Paris Before 1300 9. In a similar way, Robert Scribner describes the common employment of a binary structure in popular preaching which For the Sake of Simple Folk 56.
131 scriptural base, discuss the role of the clerics within the community, highlighting the expectations of the clergy and the severe penalty for those who meet judgment for having failed in their duties. The Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 5 7) serve d as a cornerstone of preaching career and of medieval preaching in general. 61 Hus return ed to the Sermon on the Mount repeatedly, especially when discussing the ed Hus to illust rate both proper preaching and proper behavior for clerics He are the light of the world on multiple occasions, bu t only two sermons exist with Vos Estis Sal Terre as the scriptural inspiration, and both were given at the university and addressed to students and his fellow clergy 62 When faced with an audience comprised exclusive ly of clergymen, Hus changed his approach to praise explicitly the good priest and blame the bad priest in simple terms with little room for innuendo. In his university sermon Vos Estis Sal Terre Hus described the expectations of the laity and the clergy. After a brief explanation of the properties of salt courtesy of Isidore of Seville (d. 636) Avicenna (d. 1037) Hugh of St. Victor (d. 1141) and Saint Jerome (d. 420), H us proceed ed to illustrat e those biblical figures Hus highlight ed the Roman Centurion who asked Jesus to heal his servant in Matt hew 8 and the woman at the well from Matt hew 15 ; he praises Zac c h ae us from Luke 19 for repenting of his sins as a tax 61 Within the 90 sermons of the Collecta Schmidtov marked the use of 97 proofs from Matthew chapters five through seven. Schmidtov Collecta 607. For a broader study of the use of the Sermon on the Mount, including significant i nfluences on Hus see: Jaroslav Pelikan, Divine Rhetoric: The Sermon on the Mount as Message and as Model in Augustine, Chrysostom, and Luther (Crestwood, NY: St 62 Jan Hus, Iohannes Hus Magister Universitatis Carolinae: Pos itiones, Recommendationes, Sermones Ed. Ane ka Schmidtov (Prague: St tni Pedagogick Nakladatelstv, 1958), 114,149.
132 collector, Mary Magdalene for her repentance and devotion, and finally the thief crucified next to Christ. 63 These examples represe nted for what Hus described as the laity of the early Church. These people are outsiders and sinners but show great faith and serve as examples for the clergy in his audience. For Hus the examples of Christ praising the laity serve as a stark contrast to the numerous criticisms Christ lays at the fe et of his own chosen apostles. Hus begins his own litany of accusations : [Christ] has praised the actions of worldly men, b 64 This indictment of the clergy and of the Pharisees, in particular, initiated a systematic discourse concerning both praise and conviction t hat dominates the majority of his sermon The message is fairly uniform and simplistic as Hus explain ed the power and prestige of the priesthood while cautioning the clerics in attendance against the dangerous heresy resulting from misunderstanding that power He caution ed against the corruption of the priests w ho we re responsible for administering the sacraments. 65 Despite the obvious concern for sinful priests, this sermon struck a delicate balance of critique and praise as Hus expound ed on the joy and privilege of the priesthood t hrough quotations from Augustin e only you lived life joyously! Oh heavenly ministry, that through you the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit work through your indescribable ministry, at one and the same moment that same God, who presides in heaven, he is the s d: 63 Schmidtov, Iohannes Hus Magister 114 64 Ecce, quomodo laudavit seculars homines ab effectu, sed nunquam eos tam expresse ad tantum vituperavit sicut spirituales 65 Ibid 116
133 should beware diligently, their eyes which see the one seeing all, they should not be inclined to living with vanity, nor should the tongue of those men, which through thei r words brings down the Son of God from heaven, speak falsehoods or other things against God or a harmful word, nor should the hand, which is dyed in the blood of Christ, be 66 Hus also borrow ed from Chrysostom: clothe our selves in Christ through them [the priests] ; they are joined through the Son of God himself and are made a member of his blessed head. Therefore we must reverence them more than king and judges and more honorable are they than parents, because they are the authors of divine regeneration and they reconcile us to God, who 67 Hus conclude d blame of the ba 68 This sermon given during his ascent to public prominence illustrate d Hus as a growing public figure carefully maintaining vague neutrality that condemns no one directly and is safely dominated by proof texts w ith little of his own analysis. The Hus who wrote this text ha d not yet faced the charge of heresy over his defense of Wyclif n or faced interrogation by the inquisition. At this time Hus ha d few enemies and wa s 66 O felices sacerdotes, si feliciter vixeritis! O celeste ministerium, quod per vos Pater et Filius et Spiritus sanctus operator super tam ineffabili ministerio vestro, quod uno eodemque moment oidem Deus, qui preidet in cello, in minibus vestris est in sacrficio! Cavere ergo debent sacerdotes digenter, ne oculi eorum, qui vident Omnia videntem, inclinentur ad videndum vanitatem, ne lingua euorum, wue loquendo deponit e cello Dei Filium, loquatur menda cium vela liquid cotra Deum vel proximum aut inutile verbum, ne manus, que intinguntur sanguine Cristi, pollunantur sorde peccati 67 Per ipsos Cristum induimur, per ipsos Dei Filio coniungumur et membra illius beati capitis efficimur. Quomod o ergo isti nobis non solum reverend magis sunt quam reges aut quam iduces, sed et magis erunt honorabiliores quam parentes, quia nobis sunt divine regeneracionies auctores et ipsum Deum frequenter iratu sua nobis itercessione conciliant et placatum reddun t 68 De laude boni sacerdotis et de vituperio mali patet in sermone sinodali, qui incipit Sate succincti Ibid., 118.
134 part of a large university commun ity of ordained priests with an exciting f uture ahead 69 At the time of this sermon he ha d been a priest for seven years and was only beginning his rise to prominence Perhaps because of his relative youth and inexperience, Hus kept this sermon carefully anchored in proof texts and avoided specifi c details of clerical transgressions that might have ruffled feathers. Within three years, however, Hus matured into a confident and more belligerent preacher with the tone of his sermons changing dramatically. In summary, Jan Hus clearly used scriptural r eferences about the Pharisees to voice criticism concerning clerical failings during 1404/1405. When faced with an audience of all clerics, as in his university sermon of 1407, Hus spoke directly to the point and chided the clerics directly while urging th em to repent of their lust, avarice, and apathy. Despite oversimplifying him as disenchanted with the clergy in general would be wrong. repentance and aversion to sin. The clergy att ending Bethlehem Chapel were part of reflected the venomous language Hus would later use. He, like many preachers throughout Bohemia and Europe, attacked clerical immoralit y at various times, but exegesis. This link between scripture and clerical critique is quite common among many 70 He chooses instead to focus on his primary concern 69 Spinka, 8. 70 Jean Gerson is the most famous contemporary vocal critic of clerical abuse as evidenced by
135 of repentance. The fact that Hus can describe clerics as accepting the role of the tax collector and coming down from the temple forgiven may reflect a belief that the clergy is returning to Christ. Nevertheless evidence is cl ear that the events and betrayals him to be more combative and assertive when preaching because of his growing disgust. re complex environment surrounding him. This trend is reflected in many of his topics, such as his self promotion from the pulpit as well as his treatment of the clergy. Hus wa s in a different position within Prague U niversity and the E mpire. In the pre ced ing three years Hus bec a me the symbol of a Bohemian reform movement and his opponents accused him of holding and teaching the heresies of John Wyclif. He served briefly as the rector of Prague University in late 1409 and early 1410 but pressure from the inquisition and the accusations of heresy, of which he was acquitted in June forced him from the position 71 In 1410, Hus was in a stronger pl ace of leadership; cleared by the inquisition, highly regarded by stude nts and professors alike, and enjoying royal protection. He had also unfortunately developed considerable enemies among the Jean Gerson and the Last Medieval Reformation (University Park : Pennsylvania State University Press, 2005), 182 183. For an interesting summation of contemporary French examples see: Larissa Taylor, Soldiers of Christ 121 22. 71 ity as the 1620. It was also believed by Palack and other Czech historians that Hus may have been rector also as early as 1402, but this probably resu lted in confusion from the documents when Hus became rector of Bethlehem Chapel. Spinka, John Hus. A Biography 102 footnote 27.
136 clerics within Bohemia and at the papal curia 72 This changing religious milieu elicited from Hus a complex response to his fellow clerics that became m ore personal, combative, and urgent as h i s career and popularity waxed. ne may look at his university sermon Vos Estis Sal Terr e, preached in August of 1410 and only three eventful years after hi s 1407 sermon and mere months after his acquittal by the inquisition. Hus gave this sermon in not only a different tone but also with a much stronger presence of his own voice, along with a considerable amount of material borrowed directly from John Wycli f. 73 Hus beg a n this sermon in the same m anner as his earlier version with a detailed explanation of the qualities of salt He initially maintained a similar ly neutral tone to the early sermon as he began the sermon with an explanation of the physical prop erties of salt by quoting Isidore of Seville and Avicenna. This sermon, however, bec a me significantly more polemical as Hus describe d their office. Hus declare d the failure of the c lergy as a root cause of sin: the prelates of the c hurch. For in such a circumstance the mediator between God and the people the one who makes satisfaction for the sin of the people and the one who educates ignorance is deficient. 74 72 Hledkov n Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten Vlkern, Konfessionen (Munich: 97. 73 Matthew Spinka points out that multiple paragraphs of this sermon are taken directly from the wr itings of Wyclif, and he supposes that Hus chose these passages to taunt his opponents with the that even though large parts are borrowed, Hus should rec eive full credit for the presenting the ideas Spinka, John Hus and the Czech Reform 37. 74 Radicalis itaque causa regnacionis dyaboli super gentes est peccatum prelatorum ecclesie. Deficit enim tunc inter Deum et populum mediator, pro peccato populi satifactor et ignorancium informator Schmidtov, Iohannes Hus Magister 151.
137 He offer ed no gray area or excuses as he accus ed the priesthood of pouring fo rth lies and of knowing the truth while simultaneously attacking those who preach ed the truth. 75 Hus promise d retribution against sinful and destructive priests equal to that of Sodom and he invoke d the case of the Sodomites is almost of a more forgivable sort 76 Perhaps most security and his recognition of growing opposition is that he conclude d by appealing to the authority of King Wenceslas and Emperor Sigismund to enforce reform and stifle the sinful power of errant priests. 77 Wenceslas was consistently the protector of the Czech reform movement, in the tradition of Charles IV, as long as local reformers could rebuff charges of heresy and did not conflict with his program s 78 Hus appealed for help to powers above the contentious local Arch bishop Zbyn and Pope John XXIII who gue and oversaw the charges of heresy against Hus. Hus conduct ed a war of words with his ecclesiastical superiors and his sermon to the university reflect ed his frustration with the environment in Prague and his perception of the D evil s work accomplished through the clergy and threatening the spiritual life of the c hurch. A Growing Vitriol: 1410 1412 his popular sermons of the period. Contentious events and a menacing atmosp here His 75 Ibid., 154. 76 Racio autem est pene premissibilioris Sodomitarum, quia illi inpediebant generacionem filiorum naturalium, quorum aliqui nascerentur forsitan dyaboli filii Ibid. 154 77 Ibid., 156 78 Spinka, John Hus and the Czech Reform 40
138 sermons reflect a growing antagonism that plays a prominent role for him while he preached roughly twice a day and almost without interruption from November 1410 until October 1411. Within this context listeners might expect the sermons from the pulpit in mentioned in the beginning of the chapter, numerous historians have illustra ted 79 Yet his criticism of clerical sin continues to be overstated by many scholars. Possibly, the exaggerations occur because the texts present his critiques in such colorful language that they stand out in sermons, but it remained only part of his broader message. in their denunciation s of sins among the clergy beginning in 1410. His employment of Pharisee tropes also continued in conjunction with his growing concern with the clergy. By t continued reference to the Pharisees it becomes clear he reinforce d the trope as commo n theme but with far more vitriol specificity, and frequency words from 1410 1411 were often polemical to the extreme and predominantly dominated by the reform narra tive. 79 Once again Thomas Fudge serves as the most recent example of this common conclusion. In only summarizes 268 sermons located in Flaj hans edition with eight one sentence examples begs the question of what the specific context of those statements is and on what other topics Hus might have been preaching. Fudge, Jan Hus 63.
139 sermon closely follows the theme of the Gospel passage in illuminating the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and in pointing out that although they are washed on the outside, they are unclean in spirit. The sermon is roughly divided into three parts: the first part disc usses the hypocrisy of presenting an appearance of holiness to disguise a sinful existence; the second part focuses on the laws of man versus the laws of God; and the final paragraphs of the sermon address the failure of the Pharisees to teach and lead bec ause they are blinded to true righteousness. Parts one and two, although with significant specific references to the Pharisees, are applicable to all Christians. Hus 80 This citation along with several others, targets a general audience by condemning false piety in general When Hus provided his own words he perhaps inferred a more specific target for his criticism. disguise iniquity, then you transgress the laws of God, as your purses are enriched and 81 This statement i s charging for sacraments a fairly common practice denounced as simony by John Wyclif in his text De Simonia and preachers in Prague since the sermons of Waldhauser and obviously Hus 82 This 80 Bonam mulierem vis haber animam tuam calige tue Sermones in Bethlehem vol 4, 120. 81 Ypocrite, sc. Qui sub specie simulate sanctitatis paliastis iniquitatem: tunc mandatum Dei transgredientes erra nt, ut suam bursam ditent et impleant Sermones in Bethlehem vol 4 120 82 Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 8, 11. Hus most famously addresses the selling On Simony by Matthew Spinka. In it he by some sign: What will you give me for consecrating your church, or for celebrating a Mass, or for granting you absolu Advocates of Reform 208.
140 simple statement is somewhat buried within citations (from scripture, Gregory, and Ambrose against the failings of the Pharisees), yet it clearly illustrates that Hus was linking his contemporaries to the biblical Pharisees. Many of the later critiques in the Sermones allow for colorful translations and reflect the views of a severe critic of the clergy. Thomas Fudge selected eight genuinely strong insults from the Sermones to illustrate the tone of the period. These insults included comparing sinful priests to swine, bulls in heat, and parasites, as well as various allusions to greed. Perhaps one of the most violent images Fudge included was 83 A larger segment of the sermon provides some of the conte x t for th e quotation. Thus there are many spiritual pastors who say they are delighted to die for their sheep because the good do not withdraw from offering their lives. Surely, those that are not faithful to his Lord Jesus Christ, should therefore be suspended in the inferno. Christ is the shepherd over all the faithful sheep, who feed principally on that green pasture of the word and his body and blood. 84 This statement appeared in the sermon of April 26, 1411. Like so many others, the statement was a part of a di scussion prompted by the assigned reading of the day. The reading from John 9 was concerned with the blind man who was healed by Jesus but rejected by the Pharisees. Hus focused the early portion of the sermon on the faults of the Pharisees. When he made t his statement, it was not part of some tirade against the clergy, but rather part of his broader pastoral message to the audience. 83 Fudge, Jan Hus 63 64. 84 Numquid illi non sunt in inferno suspendent. Debent igitur f idelis esse Domino suo Jesu Christo, qui est pastor pro omnium ovium fidelium, quos principaliter ille pascit pastu verbi et corporis et sangwinis sui Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 4 78.
141 Hus harshly denounced sinful clerics also within the pastoral context of his preaching. With a harsher tone for his contempo raries, one also witnesses severe labels attached to New Testament Pharisees: Therefore just as Christ having been rejected proved to be the true shepherd to those sheep the Pharisees having been thieves and robbers proved themselves not to be shepherds. After Jesus now it is, that you imitators of the Pharisees preach their evil as to try to label as demons those who have discerned the simple truth and speak truthfully. The words and the voice are from the H oly Spirit and not from demons. 85 Similar to the 1404 1405 se rmons in the Collecta he continued to echo his more degrading and certainly intended to catch the attention of the clergy still primarily stemmed from the Pharisaical trope and linked the present to the New Testament. This link has been essentially missed by scholars and left out of analyses of the sermons. 86 Without considering the s criptural prompt, scholars have placed too much emphasis on insults and present pastoral duties at the Bethlehem Chapel. Yes, Hus showed more anger and frustration after 1410, but too often the focus on this emotion has overshadowed the fact that Hus was continuing in his primary mission of caring for his flock. This disti nction is 85 Ut ergo Christus ostendat se verum esse pastorem illius ovis eiecte, ceci nati, et phariseos esse fures et latrones et n on pastores, locutus est presens ewangelium et post illud subdi, quod cum hec dixisset, Sic ut nunc f it, quod imitators phariseourum predicatores eorum maliciam urgentes deomnium habere dicunt, simplices vero agnita veritate dicunt, quod verba, que locuntur, sunt a Spiritu S. et non a demonio. Ibid 77 86 De Vooght, 149, 150, 152,1 53,154, 171. Spinka, of the Church 113 114 ; Kybal, M. Jan Hus: ivot a u vol. 2.2, 278, 312 97.
142 even clearer when one compares the university sermons and witnesses how Hus directly address ed his peers. His tone changed dramatically in a mere three years. Scholars of Hus have latched onto that personal, combative, and urgent response and far too often have used it to define Hus and define his entire career. A Frustrated Priest preaching career. If one examine s that critique within the context of the greater corpus of sermons, any generalization about anticlericalism fails to include the far ranging topics of interest for the diverse audience at the Bethlehem Chape l. Hus was not a n anticlerical zealot calling for an end to the clergy, nor did he mock and criticize without purpose. If examined in isolation from his academic writings polemical writing, and his sermons in exile Bethlehem sermons reveal the public persona of a shepherd deeply concerned for the welfare of all his flock. This flock included clerics, especially the students and young scholars of the nly brought attention to clerical sin, but also occasionally served to express hope and optimism as doctor. Comments on priests repenting of their sins become noticeably absent in 1410 1411. 87 Hus did not arbitrarily decide to deride and insult clerics. As was expected of most medieval preachers, Hus constructed his sermons and homilies to educate his tapped into wide spread tropes 87 Schmidtov, Collecta 434
143 reach his audience This included his frequent correlat ion of the Pharisees and scribes with contemporary ical statements should be interpreted as being one part of his varied approach to preaching, and not a stand alone agenda. His parallel construction between priests and Pharisees commonly utilized tropes that were familiar to a Bohemian audience, and also could be found in from preaching throughout Europe, and should not be examined disproportionately from his larger message. Even within the broader purpose of Hus se rmons, by 1410 the belligerent language used by Hus is impossible to ignore. Despite his more combative tone, he does not abandon his pastoral responsibilities to his audience. Much like the evolution of his self promotion and authority discussed in the s econd chapter, his rhetoric becomes more extreme, but continues to rely on the same framework and concepts as nearly always part of a larger message and commonly linke d to the scriptural prompt. because of his struggles with the Archbishop and the mult iple impositions of anathema. inly encapsulates a significant
144 88 Over the course of his career, such criticism should be considered in its proper context and acknowledged as neither pervasive nor arbitrary. Throughout his ca reer, Hus employed his criticisms as part of an effort to convert souls His rhetoric of criticism or clerical reform is continuous throughout his corpus of sermons, but his sermons are not defined by that critique. been dominated by narratives that pigeonhole Hus as an anticlerical reformer. Hus pointed out the errors of those who shamed the bride of Christ, but he preached on so much more. Looking past the components of the supposed reform agenda allow s Hus ing to provide remarkable insight regarding how sermons, in general, functioned. Without the reform or anticlerical label, Hus can serve as one of the most prolific preachers of the Middle Ages and provide insight to the preaching ritual that dominate d med ieval religion and society. 88 This quotation of John Paul II is attributed by David Holeton to a sermon given in Czech and Italian on March 12, 2000. Holeton, who was in attendance, gives the quotation in his Introduction to BRRP 3 (2000), 11. Thomas Fudge calls the quotation into que stion as that sentiment is not expressed in the written transcript of the sermon, and he has found no corroboration for the quotation. Fudge, Jan Hus 320.
145 CHAPTER 4 THREATS TO THE FLOCK : HUS AND THE DEVIL For Christ hunts the soul through his preaching, which Jeremiah 16 describes as a chase for blessing. But the Devil hunt s for the purpose of damnation. 1 Awareness and discussi on of the forces of evil were a major part of medieval culture in art, literature, and, of course, sermons from the pulpit. 2 In much the same way authority, his sermons also maintain a consistent focus on the spiritual threats to his eated medieval preaching. 3 Her trinity consists of devils, women, and Jews, but in the context of early fifteenth adversaries covered an even broader range of threats. s preaching, but several other significant foes can be identified during Prague, redesigned by Charles IV to be a microcosm of the E mpire, reflected the E Tensions between Christians and Jews, Germans and Slavs, secular and mendicant priests, and the wealthy and poor all contributed to distrust between groups within the city walls. Add broader issues such as the schism of the church, Ottoman gains to the Sou th, and 1 Schmidtov, Collecta 441 2 The most complete study of the Devil and other evil forces is that of Jeffrey Burton Russell, Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1984). A recent useful study of evil in medieval art is Nathalie Nabert, Le Mal et le Diable: Leurs Figures la Fin du Moyen Age ( Paris : Beauchesne 1996). 3 Joan Young Gregg, Devils, Women, and Jews: Reflections of the Other in Medieval Sermon Stories (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997), 4.
146 recent outbreaks of plague and widespread concern for the end times and the reign of the Antichrist seems justified. The spiritual adversaries, about whom Hus chose to warn his flock, reflect of Prague while he prepared his sermons to influence that environment in turn. Obviously, the chief threat to the faithful was the Devil, as understood from S cripture and context of his preaching remain unexamined. Historians have typically ignored the wide range of diabolical force analysis to the development of the previously discussed anticlerical narrative, rather 4 contemporary c hurch is of great importance during this period, but unfortunately when t he discussion of the Devil and the variety of spiritual threats appears in studies of Hus, they are referenced only as a figurative part of his critique of the c hurch, rather than as a literal message about the power of Satan. An evil priesthood was just o ne foe in a considerable list of enemies that Hus implied were waiting outside the doors of Bethlehem Chapel. Hus summarized this world of spiritual conflict in dramatic fashion of Christ, it is necessary that he should fight in order to conquer his foe, so that his head might be crowned by Christ, who is the head of all the elect while the Devil is the head of all the 4 For example, Matthew Spinka only mentions the Devil only twice and both times in reference to iticism of the Church. Spinka, 148, 246. Similarly, Thomas scuss how Hus employed diabolical imagery. Fudge, Jan Hus 36 40, 93.
147 5 Why did Hus employ such a wide range of spiritual threats and diabolic references in conjunction with his preaching? What effect did he hope it would have? The imagery of the Devil, Antichrist, and assorted foes played a pivotal role in giving g sermons do not convey the words of a great storyteller or that of a man describing a mystical encounter with God. 6 prepare themselves to resist the attacks of internal and exte rnal spiritual foes. His sermons describe the opponents with whom his flock must contend. One of the great motivators of late medieval communities seems to have been the 7 Social, political, and economic outsiders could, and frequen tly did, find themselves as targets of religious condemnation throughout the Middle Ages. 8 Preachers across Europe used the images of both human and supernatural foes as obstacles to salvation that needed to be resisted and overcome. 9 The use of what Thoma later Middle Ages and exemplified in the preaching of a figure such as Bernardino of 5 Qui ergo vult esse fidelis miles Christi oportet, ut pugnet, ut vincat et ut coronetur a capite suo Christo, qui est caput omnium electorum et dyabolus similiter est caput omnium damp nandorum Flaj hans, Sermones in Bethlehem, vol. 3, 21. 6 Perhaps the clearest contrast in this regard is between Hus and the popular preacher Bernardino of Siena. Bernardino is described as having been both a remarkable story teller as well as one who inc Preaching Peace in Renaissance Italy: Bernardino of Siena and his Audience ( Washington D. C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2000 ), 62, 82. 7 R.I. Moore, The Formation of a Persecuting Society (Oxford, UK; New York : B. Blackwell, 1987), 70, 72, 100; Soukup, : The BRRP 6 (2007), 105. 8 n the Vanity of Women and its De Ore Domini: Preahcer and Word in the Middle Ages eds. Thomas L. Amos, Eugene A .Gren, Beverly Mayne Kienzle, (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1989), 346. 9 Gregg, Devils, Women, and Jews 20 21.
148 Siena ( d. 1444) and Girolamo Savonarola ( d. 1498) with their vivid descriptions of divine wrath and fearful demons. 10 Hus also used similar imagery in his preaching. Perhaps in contrast to an abstract message of terror, Hus gave his audience corporeal and relevant threats to salvation such as sinful authorities, clergy, and any unrepentant persons clinging to m ortal sin He then imbued those earthly foes with the supernatural qualities of the Devil and the Antichrist. Hus never addressed these terrors solely with the purpose to frighten his listeners, although he certainly could have utilized fear alone as a pow erful incentive. Rather, he seems to have intended them to motivate his audience to engage in spiritual warfare, and he encouraged them to pick a side in the struggle for souls between Christ and the Devil. rhaps, in part, due to his frequent descriptions of the earthly and supernatural foes trying to destroy them. Hus gave his flock common enemies, a common purpose, and united them in the spiritual battle against evil. 11 By defining the enemies of the faithfu l in his sermons, Hus 12 As described in Chapter 3 scholars have critique of a corrupt clergy Yet, in addition, Hus also devoted signific ant time in his sermons to warn against demons, the Antichrist, fallen women, Jews, heretics, schismatics, witches, and, of course, the Devil himself. 10 220. 11 Sociologist Phillip predicated on hatred of the evil against which they fight, and indeed will be magnified as this perceived O ne cannot have a cha rismatic leader without the presence of evil as well. Essentially, for a salvation narrative to exist, a people must need saving. whom to unite under his leadership. Smith, 12 M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol 4, 50.
149 references to spiritual warfare and the critical role that theme played in his sermons Th e next two chapter s examine how Hus employed spiritual opponents at the Bethl ehem Chapel to motivate his audience and how his use of these foes evolved over his career. preaching is relatively unsurprising as the Devil had begun to disappear from seriou s theological and philosophical discussions in the Late Middle Ages. 13 Jeffry Burton Russel points out that theologians had nearly abandoned the topic of the Devil by the thirteenth century, and by the late fourteenth century, the topic had been virtually expelled from serious theological consideration altogether. The great s cholastic thinkers and realis t philosophers down played the Dev il, and late medieval religious sources, typically dominated by nominalism, mysticism, and humanism ignored Satan complete ly. 14 By the turn of the fifteenth century, Erasmus was already arguing that the 15 Late Medieval theologians, however, can be a poor indicator of popular religious beliefs, as their inte llectual exercises tended to push them farther from the general beliefs of society. 16 13 Pavel Soukup discusses the broader use of the military imagery against the Devil in Bohemian preaching in his article, Pavel the Spiritual Struggle Early in the Bohemian BRRP 6 (2007), 87 110. 14 Russell, Lucifer 275. Peter Stanford, The Devil: A Biography (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1996), 150 152. 15 Stanford, The Devil 184. 16
150 Hus was certainly an academic in the scholastic tradition that de emphasized the Devil, but that image must be reconciled with the reality that Hus preached on the diaboli c menace in a majority of his sermons. Historians of the nationalist and P rotestant tradition such as Palack, Masaryk, and Spinka frequently ignored this medieval superstition 17 It is encouraging that historians have recently placed far more emphasis one these previously ignored categories For example, Heiko Oberman claim that the Protestant Reformation led to the 18 also needs to be understood in a way that includes the context of not just philosophy and theology but wider medieval culture and popu lar belief in a present and active Devil 19 17 The works of Palack and Masaryk represent perhaps the epitome of a National and Protestant Hus, as both men described Hus as a Czech wor king against the foreign Catholic influences. T.G. Masaryk, Jan Hus: n o r eformace ( Curych: Konfrontace, 1979 ) Fudge observes that teachin gs, and instead described him in terms of a political and social reformer. Fudge, Jan Hus 215. This treatment of Hus influenced dozens of following historians, who continued to ignore this component m, although with far less of a national agenda, but even Spinka conducted much of his work just before the formation of the German protectorate and after the war leading to a decided stance of Czech exceptionalism 18 Heiko Oberman, Luther: Man between God and the Devil trans. Eileen Walliser Schwarzbart (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989) 102 106. 19 Studies of this sort have been conducted concerning the Reformation, including: Peter Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe 2 nd ed. (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1987, 1994) 133 135; Robert Popular Culture and Popular Movements in Reformation German (London: Hambledon Press, 1987), 49 79; P. G. Maxwell Religion and Superstition in Reformation Europe eds. Hellen Parish and William G. Naphy (Manchester: Manchester University The Devil in Society in Premodern Europe Richard Raiswell and Peter Dendle eds.(Toronto:Center for Reformation Witches Sabbaths: Anabaptists a The Devil in Society in Premodern Europe Richard Raiswell and Peter Dendle eds.(Toronto:Center for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2012) There is significantly less for the late Middle Ages: Michael D. Bailey, Fearful Spirits,
151 Despite late medieval theological disinterest in the Devil, preachers concerned with the salvation of the masses frequently utilized diabolic imagery. The threat of the Devil and his minions was a common theme in popular preaching of Italy and Central Europe. 20 was a standard method for effecting conversion. Robert de Basevorn, the influential fourteenth century schola r of Oxford and Par is, included tale and in conjunction with a variety of other rhetorical techniques in his Ars Praedicandi of the mid fourteenth century. 21 Bernardino of Siena kept the Devil horrors of plague, war, and other tragedies 22 as an internal destroyer of the soul that ne eded to be battled on the personal level. 23 Hus certainly drew on many of the same influences and rhetorical devices. In this manner, of a fifteenth century academic and more closely aligned with the sensationalism of p opular medieval preachers. Hus interpreted the uncertainty of the age through the metaphor of spiritual warfare. With his own embattlement and excommunication, his desire to persuade his Reasoned Follies: The Boundaries of Superstition in Late Medieval Europe (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013), 230 232. This remains a considerable void in Bohemian scholarship. 20 Russell, Lucifer 275, Larissa Taylor suggests that the Devil was greatly minimized in French preaching, predominantly due to the influence of scholasticism at the University of Paris, Taylor, Soldiers of Christ 117 21 Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages 346, 349; Anne T. Thayer, Penitence, Preaching and th e Coming of the Reformation ( Aldershot, Hants, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2002 ), 72. 22 Marmando, 2. 23 Mor e, Preaching in Fourteenth Century Bohemia 150.
152 audience of the spiritual threat to their salvation increased in sev erity and urgency. The challenges Hus faced within the political and spiritual milieu of Prague seem to have had a tremendous impact on his preaching. evolved in much the same way as his promotion of his authority and his approach to clerical corruption. who m he chose to represent as the employed certain threats h the earthly manifestations of evil personified in the Devil and his followers. Tracking these terms as he worked towards the salvation of his flock at Bethlehem. 24 To highlight the complext approach Hus had to this topic, I am dividing his treatment of the powers of evil into t wo chapters : the Devil In many cases, these terms are used in close conjunction, but to better analyze each, they will be addressed thematically while noting specific relationships among them. By describing multiple classifications of spiritual antagonists, Hus preached about a frightening world filled with foes, a flock in need of the salvation, and the redemption that Ch congregation a belief that individuals 24 Fudge uses the term radicalization of his sermons. I am not convinced this term is completely deriving from the events occurring around him. Fudge, Jan Hus ough this also may be too sharp, as all references to violence seem to refer to spiritual conflict. Paul de Vooght 64 essential or radical change in his views throughout his public ministry. Altho ugh I acknowledge remarkable consistencies in Hus approach I disagree with Spinka and recognize that Hus does change his tone and to his views to some extent. Spinka, 384. Essentially, therefore, I argue that Hus did chang e his views and perspective over his career, but extremist words circumstances.
153 Such a belief could help motivate the audience to return day after day. Furthermore, thi s may have been part of the reason listeners were so eager to defend their gallant preacher from criticism, excommunication and threats from 1410 onward especially if they perceived attacks on their priest and inspiration as the active interference of Sa tan. The Devil destroying humanity and with works that ience, this supernatural villain provided an overarching nemesis which they viewed as the origin of evil. Unlike a corrupt clergy or many of the other terrors of the world, the Devil could be actively fought through spiritual means. More importantly, Hus c ould assure his audience of victory over the Devil, as Christ had already accomplished this task. In his unsettled world of early fifteenth century Christendom, he could apply the Devil to any number of topics relevant to his audience in Prague. He present ed the Devil as the foe that every individual was required to fight for their personal salvation and preached to encourage his listeners in their struggle against evil Hus derived his imagery of the Devil from a wide variety of scriptural, patristic, and popular sources 25 herefore, frequently touched on ideas concerning the role and authority of the Devil as he found them in the writings of Augustine, Gregory the Great, and Bede. Specifically the question of who bears responsibility for the surrounding evil of the world. 26 Hus also incorporated several of 25 Gregg, Devils, Women, and Jews 42 26 theologians named here are frequently cited by Hus concerning theology of the Devil and are singled out
154 never expressed W Critics accused Wyclif of stating that installed all earthly authorities for them to be obeyed regardless of morality, including the Devil as the prince of the world. 27 Hus varied widely in the roles he assigned the Devil. Some sermons focus squarely on the great spiritual adversary, while others relegate the Devil to a brief, rmons. He referred to the Devil by many names and used the terms Devil, Satan, and Lucifer interchangeably, generally labeling in accordance with names given in his proof texts. Hus most commonly employed references to this most destructive foe in four pri mary forms. First, he described the Devil as a near equal opposite to Christ, often as either a king or as a metaphorical body incorporating all sinners Second, Hus relied on images of the Devil as a beast which devour s and co nsumes Third, he often spoke of the Devil in the context of sin either as the tempter or instigator, and fourth, as the inevitable companion and tormentor of the unrepentant. All these descriptions of the Devil are described the Devil as a foe to be conquered. A prominent question for Christian theologians before Hus was what exactly was At the root of this dilemma is whether the Devil is the by Russell for being three of the most influential fig ures in the medieval understanding of the Devil. Russell, Lucifer 98 100. 27 statement giving it some credence. Russell, Lucifer 238.
155 prince of this world and has dominion over humanity because of original sin, or whether the Devil works with the permission of God as exemplified in the book of Job. 28 In many him, depending on his desired emphas is, to depict either a terrifying, unstoppable force or a diminutive nuisance compared to the far greater power of Christ. The role and powers of the Devil, as detailed in any given sermon, depended on its specific goal and message. The flexibility of diab olical references, therefore, meant that he presented his audience with a variety of manifestations of the Devil. Hus frequently described the Devil as the opposite of Christ. The lordship and authority of the Devil, over both sinners and evil forces, was a fundamental relationship 29 For Hus this was an ideal text to expand upon the threat of the Devil to the are two opposing kings, fighting continuously for t he kingdom. Certainly the first is Christ, who is the King of Kings reigning with humility. The second is the Devil, the king 30 Hus continued by describing the destruction the Devil may cause as the ruler of the soul, and the restoration occurring in a soul ruled by Christ. This is an example of how he frequently utilized the typical 28 Ibid., 99. 29 Schmidtov, Coll ecta 145. 30 Cum sint duo reges opposite, pro regno continue decertantes, videlicet Cristus, qui est rex Ibid., 145.
156 rhetorical approach of presenting a simple dichotomy that could be easily understood by the audience 31 Therefore, when he discussed example s of good actions, thoughts, or beliefs they almost always warranted corresponding evil examples This should not be confused with the dualistic approach of the Manicheans or Bogomils in relation to the Devil. Hus never suggested that a strict equ ality exis ts between the Devil and Christ. I nstead he commonly described the two in an adversarial relationship with each other 32 In this sermon, Hus went to considerable lengths to construct suitable dichotomies to illustrate the impending threat to his souls. H e supported the sermon, l oosely based on Luke 11, with only an exemplum he attributed to Bernard of Clairvaux. 33 He focused throne. With considerable detail, he described Chri st and the Devil competing for the title of king, with one affecting the spirit for good and the other for evil. Hus portrayed will of prudence, temperance, fortitude, and justice, and finally depleting the senses that sound preaching. 34 This analogy, especially with the incorporation of the Gospel 31 Perhaps one of the most interesti Cura P astoralis which provides thirty six rhetorical pairs to be considered by the preacher. Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages 294 95. 32 Among other sources specifically on the Manicheans or Bogomils, the most useful description of these supposed beliefs is that of Russell, Lucifer 43 48. 33 Schmidtov points out that the citation which Hus attributed to Bernard of Clairvaux does not actually appear in any of the known works of Bernard. Schmidtov Collecta 14 7 34 Ibid., 145 147. Without evidence to suggest otherwise, Hus, himself, possibly invented this long analogy. This makes it a relatively rare example of an analogy not attributed to one of the Church fathers.
157 message of how Jesus can repair all of the damage inflicted upon the kingdom, seems to be particularly apt for a royal city, su ch as Prague. The people of Prague, only four years prior in the summer of 140 1 had been be siege d by an army from Me isse n as the city was caught in the various conflicts revolving around imperial politics 35 The rest of the sermon reflected a city at war a nd included a call to arms. Hus exclaimed that as the manner that all are united in their duty. And when Christ in this way guards t he highest kingdom with strong arms, 36 equals forced his audience to choose a side. This remained true throughout the Collecta In the course of the liturgical year, Hus described the Devil and Jesus in semi d ualistic terms three more times but never again did this theme dominate a sermon as happened that third week in Lent, 1405. The following week, Hus preached on Christ as the Lord of servants and the Devil a s the lord of slaves. Two final descriptions of the relationship between Christ and the Devil came much later in the liturgical year in two different sermons. The first showed how one cannot serve two masters (Matthew 6), and the second illustrated the Pha risees as having been inspired by the Devil, the 37 These final two sermons reflect considerable influence, and nearly all of the diabology in the texts are direct quotations. 35 489. ornej, K oruny esk vol. 5 72. 36 Sic enim Cristus rex colligit regnicolas ut secundum eius imperius taliter in officiis sin uniti. Et dum Cristus fortis armatus taliter custodit regni atrium, in pace sunt omnia colligate vincula caritatis. Schmidtov Collecta 146. 37 Ibid., 150, 477. Qui s enim poterat dare consilium contra Cristum nisi dyabolus, qui erat adversaries Cristi? Ibid., 594.
158 The words of Chrysostom, as attributed by Hus, clearly mark the dichotomy between Christ and the Devil by listing the many ways where Christ and the Devil oppose each do not have the ability to serve two lords the same and therefore certain ly there are two Lords and as contrary as God and the Devil, of virtue and vice, sprit and flesh, heaven 38 The use of this rhetorical dichoto my allowed Hus to create an image of good versus evil that called on the preaching strateg y. Considerably different than the lordly Devil, Hus also used an alternative scriptural description of a savage and devouring Devil. The most obvious scriptural example of the Devil as a consuming beast is found in 1 Peter 5: 8 where Peter states, opponent the Devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to 1406. 39 Hus stated during the fourth week altogeth 40 Hus used the same passage on the thir d Sunday after Trinity in 1406 with greater detail: 38 O utinam audirent hanc vocem Domini: Nemo potest duobus dominis simul et semel bene servire, dominis quidem duobus et sic contrariis us Deo et dyabolo, virtuti et civio, spiritui et carni, cello et mundo, liberalitati et avaricie Deo et mamone Ibid., 478. 39 1 Peter 5 Saint Jospeph ed. 40 In hoc deserto seva bestia habitat, dyabolus, que cunctos devorat peccatores, de quo 1 Pet. 5 Schmidtov, Collecta 58 59.
159 Be sober, as not to ruin the entire body, and watch so that the spirit may not fall asleep and thus be consumed by the Devil. For in fact the word Devil is from dya, that is two, and from bolus which is bites, for he bites man two fold in body and in spirit, while he clearly defiles both through suggestion. For when he brings mortal sin in the spirit, he kills it sharply, and when he forces the flesh into the exter nal act of sin, he kills the flesh itself more sharply than the teeth of a lion 41 In a similar vein, H us often linked the Devil with the image of a wolf. T he antagonist in the form of a wolf coincides well with every description of Jesus as th e Good Shepherd correspondingl y necessitates mention of a wolf One example is from the third Sunday after Trinity, when Hus stated: Ponder, therefore, oh sinner, especially because the Good Shepherd crying tears, he searches in the place of dread on the Mount of Olives H e searches in this world of vast solitude. He found him in the desert that is hell, where the wolf had thrown him [the sheep] but he was not able otherwise to rescue the found [sheep] except as a shepherd The sheep mig ht be executed and while placed in the shackle of the cross, the approaching wolf would be seized so that the sheep would be snatched away from the jaws of the wolf by means of the sheep 42 The Devil as wolf meta phor appeared yet again on the seventeenth Sunday after the Trinity when Hus addressed the issue of even now the Devil deceives clerics through these snares and he retains much of the 41 Sobrii estote, ne corpus illecebrose corruat, et vigilate, ne spiritus obdormiat et suc dy abolus utraque mordeat. Dicitur numque dyabolus a dya, quod est duo, et bolus morsus, quia dupliciter mordet h ominem, in corpore et anima, dum videlicet utraque per suggestionem comaculat. Dum enim peccatum mortale in animam inducit, ipsam mordaciter mortificat, et dum carnem ad actum peccati extrinsecum inge rit ipsam dente leonis acrius ferit Ibid., believe the second sheep in the passage is actually a reference to the Lamb of God. It is also a reference to Jesus taking the form of a man to sav e us. Therefore, Hus is saying that the sheep (Jesus as human) saved the sheep (mankind). 42 Pensa ergo, o peccator, qualiter ovem bonus pastor quesivit, ubi quesivit et ubi invenit. Quesivit sudans sanquine, plorans lacrimis, quesivit in loco horroris monte Oliveti, in loco vaste sollitudinis huius seculi. Invenit in deserto, id est in inferno, ubi lupus eam deicerat, sed inventam aliter erripere non poterat, nisi ut pastor. Efficeretur ovis, et dum in pedica cruces poneretur, lupus accedens caperetur, ut si c ovis per ovem a lupi faucibus erriperetur Ibid., 317.
160 whole world in his traps The wolf, by knife and snare, deceives the mouse. And would 43 The Devil as a beast is consistent with scriptural imagery and patristic sources, but the image of the devouring Devil is also starkly found in forms of popula r religion and art throughout medieval and e arly m odern Europe. 44 the deceiver and tempter. As one might expect, Hus closely linked the Devil with temptation and sin. 45 He descr ibed Satan as both an active tempter as well as a passive entity waiting on the choices of the sinner. Hus used the Devil at times merely as a location or in conjunction with hell. One example from 1405 is a sermon on the theology No one sinning mortally has been buried with the Lord, for the 46 He often used examples of this sort to illustrate the value of repentance and the consequences of a sin than the Devil. More frequently appearing than descriptions of of an active tempting Devil certainly provided a more vivid threat and fear for the audience. H us commonly described the Devil as either lea ding or tempting a soul into 43 Re vera iam clericos dyabolus per hanc decipulam decipit et retinet plures quam totus mundus aves laqueo, lupos falcastro et decipulam decipit et retinet plures quam totus mundus aves laqueo, lupos falcastro et decipula decipti mures. Et utinam me Dominus custodiret Ibid., 512. P erhaps in this context falcastro means tooth, rather then knife, as the word choice is questionable. 44 Russell, Lucife r, 79 254. 45 Richard Kieckhefer explains the presence of the Devil in much of the hagiography of Saints in the high and late Middle Ages. The common theme in many of these reports is the constant harassment by the Devil and the joy that saints had in their torment. Kieckhefer, Unquiet Souls 53. 46 Et patet, quod nullus peccans mortaliter est cum Domino consepultus, nam ut sic vivit peccato, et sic in supulcro dyaboli cum dyabolo sepelitur Schmidtov Collecta 346.
161 mortal sin. Various sermons included the Devil as one who hardened hearts, tempted through lust, clothed with pride, and sought out curious souls to ensnare through suggestions. He e ven described a conniving and patient Devil who waits unwearyingly may return at any time with great curses, so that he might lead the [ sinner] having done wrong in to warmer and greater sin s 47 This is in regard not only to clerical sin, but in 1405 near constant warnings of ever present temptation. 48 The value of this terrifying diabolic threat was that Hus kept his audience constantly on guard as a righteous community under siege by the evil of the world. Hus often addressed the traps, temptations, and corrupting influences of the Devil in terms of martial conflict. The use of military metaphor s was common both in the general Christian preaching tradition and in the specific Bohemian context by preachers such as Mil For Mil h the Devil was one that was individual and personal; this was an internal battle that all individuals must face to free their lives from sin. 49 Although Hus would in large part agree, much of his preaching added an external component the Devil attempting to deceive and conquer the individual and the community as a whole. The individual may face internal battles, but Hus often described a war for the souls of all Christendom. 47 Ibid., 79, 241, 247, 453. Quod autem ait Dominus: abierunt, ostendit, quod dyabolus aliquan do cessat a magna vexacione, ut calidius inducat in maiora peccata Ibid. 453. 48 Et cum quais omnes homines ad etatem racionis pervenientes fuering in laqueis dyaboli, etsi non omnes tamen quam pl u res Ibid., 549. 49 Mor e, Preaching in Fourteenth Century Bohemia 150.
162 The struggle against Satan and his allies could appear in the sermons as both an internal and external battle. Hus, however, subtly shift ed his use of the imagery of spiritual warfare over time. In the sermons of the Collecta the Dev il was undoubtedly the principal foe confronting the faithful. In no sermon does Hus address this spiri tual battle more explicitly than in the sermon for the 21st Sunday after Trinity. This sermon 50 The analogy of the armor of God served as the pretext to preach an e xceedingly long sermon focused on spiritual warfare against the Devil. Hus began by listing eight ways that God equips and supports his soldiers in battle, and he followed each with a presence on examples. The military allegory continued in great detail before t he foe finally appeared: With the arms of God, however, comes virtue and no one is able to put on moral virtue, if not clothed in the Lord Jesus Christ, because [Paul] shows that Christ requires those virtues to be put on as the base. And with love itself, because through God is love to be equipped for sharp cuts and by love is one armed in the safest defense. Paul shows this in respect to Christ himself and thus is total victory having been written through love. Man should with the garment having been put on, that garment being is still not the best way because the Devil himself is the strongest creature fighting against Christ, who conquered him. [The Devil], therefore, seeks to pa y lavishly, and because he has the experience of first having been overcome [by Christ]; he invades anywhere where he might create a second outpost with the proper conditions to interfere in the temporal 51 50 Epeshians 6, 10 17, Saint Joseph ed. 51 Ubi precipit Apostolus arma induere, non quelibet, sed Dei. Cum autem Dei armature sit virtus et nemo potest virtutem morale induere, nisi inuderit Dominum Iesum Cristum, patet, quod oportet Cristum il lam virtutem fundamentaliter induere. Et cum ipse sit caritas, qui Deus, et caritas sit armature invasive acutissima et armature defensive tutissima, patet, quod ipsi Cristo et sic caritati tota Victoria est
163 Hus continued his sermon by addressing the w ays in which the Devil attacks the soldiers of Christ and how the soldiers of Christ are further equipped for victory. The damnable sins. Hus also briefly described the Devi 52 Hus concluded with a broad allusion concerning spiritual warfare in the context of the blatant corruption of the fractured early fifteenth century c hurch. In the last lines, he chose to address the place of the papacy and clergy in this army of Christ. After addressing the sin of pride and describing the useless weapons of the world, Hus advised the papacy on how to fight evil: Therefore the pope and his clerics may fight that one (the Devil) by the sword, having put on the earlier arms. And without a doubt they will be able to resist all adversaries and all battalions of the Devil, because thus God will fight principally in such a way among them, with the sword that is the Word of God and the Holy Spirit .. 53 He also insinuated that the clergy may not be prepared for spiritual battle, an easy conclusion to make considering the clerical disorder during time of the schism. Hus expounded on this critical view of the papacy considerably more in successive years ascribenda. Debet autem homo huiusmodi indumento scilicet Cristo, indutus consequenter tam secundum animam quam secundum corpus virtutes indurere gracia superacionis diaboli. Nec hoc est modicum, quia ipse spiritualiter pugnando con t ra Cristum creatura potissima, quem qui vicerit, mercedem largissimam consequentur, et quia habet consuetudinem primo hostem prosternendi, quem invadit, ideo stacio secundum rectitudinem affectus spritualium et temporalium Schmidtov Collecta 561. 52 Quasi diceret Apostolus: Qua m vis pugnare debemus contra carnem, mundum et hominem, tamen illa pugna est levis contra insultum dyaboli. Ibid 562. 53 Illo ergo gladio pugnt papa et sui clerici, armis induti prioribus. Et sine dubio non poterint eis resistere omnes adversarii et pentrabunt omnes cuneos dyaboli, quia ut sic pugnabi t in eis principaliter Deus, cum ille gladius sit verbum Dei et Spiritus sancti, qui est secula gloriosus Ibid 566.
164 and offered far harsher criticism as he developed the theology on which he based his most controversial work, De Ecclesia, in 1413. In this 1405 sermon, however, Hus did not necessarily express any deep resentment, but rather he concluded with a stern ded to a instructed his listeners on how to spiritually prepare for the damaging blows from the weapons of the Devil. If the battle was lost, Hus also offered hope to tho se who failed in their struggle and were conquered by the the one who is captive to the 54 The papacy and the clergy were not the only ones included in the allegory as sol diers of God. Hus described the laity as the foot soldiers and promised rewards for their faithful service in battle. Conversely, those who served the enemy would receive the payment reserved for those who are soldiers of Christ and those who are soldiers of the Devil. This serm on borrowed heavily from a discussion on justice attributed to Bede which reiterated that those who decide to serve the Devil would receive just re wards for putrefaction third the fire of combustion, fourth the frigid severity, fifth the image of terror, sixth the shame of confusion, seventh the duration of all eternity. Behold, soldiers of the Devil, witness your many payments, drill with courage so as to later descend into Gehenna. 55 54 Si ergo quis est captivus a dyabolo, ipse liberabit, quia Cristus rex potentissimus Ibid., 137. 55 Primum enim stipendium erit carencia divine visionis, secundum vermis eterne corrosionis, tercium ardor conbustionis, quartum austeritas frigoris, quantum terror ymaginis, sextum rubor confusionis, septimum in omnibus eternitas duracionis. Ecce, miles dyabolis, cernis multa stipendia, exerce miliciam, ut descendas postmoum in gehennam Ibid., 367
165 As for the alternative payment to the soldiers of Christ, Hus stated, quoting directly from Bede tha the elect accept from the grace of God: faith, or love, or whatever good 56 Once again, Hus employs a dichotomy, by comparing the wretched payment of the soldiers of the Devil with the blessings of the faithful. Using the Collecta imagery Hus often illustrated the way that the Devil could be defeated. For example, on February 28, the First Sunday of Lent in 1406, Hus stated: The traveler of this world is taught the example of his leader Jesus Christ to struggle with manly vigor against the Devil, as having been bathed in sacred baptism and confession conquers the Devil, just as the Christ having been baptized conquered temptat ion of appetite, of vain glory, of avarice in the desert, in the temple, and on the high mountain. For this Christ leaves this example behind for his soldiers, so coming near to service of the Lord they prepare their spirit for the temptations of the Devil 57 In 1405, Hus often described the religious reality around him in terms of conflict, with the central role played by the Devil and his minions. The Devil, as either the stately lord or ravenous beast, was put to flight by the armies of God. Hus clearly i ncluded all true Christians in that army and his audience may have accepted their own role by listening to their captain exhorting them from the pulpit to do battle with the forces of the Devil. 56 Ideo, quia illi, qui militant, propriam mercedem accipiunt, quidquid autem electi habent, totum a gracia mercedem accipiunt, quidquid autem electi habent, totum a gracia Dei accipiunt: sive fidem, sive caritatem seu quodcunque opus Dei accipiunt: sive fidem, sive caritatem seu quodcunque opus bonum habeant. Ibid., 367 Although Bede is cited many times in this sermon, Schmidtov suggests that whatever works Hus took these from is unknown. 57 Docetur v iator exemplo ducis sui Iesu Crisit contra dyabolum dimicare viriliter, ut lotus baptismo sacre confessionis vincat dyabolum, sicut Cristus baptizatus vicit temptantem de gula, de vana Gloria, de avaricia, et hoc in derto, intemplo et in monte excelso. Cri stus suis miitibus, ut accedentes ad servitutem Domini animas suas ad temptacionem dyaboli preparent Ibid., 127
166 In the Sermones in Bethlehem collection of 1410 1411, a num ber of themes continue to be recognizable from the Collecta Sermones reflects a period of considerable stress through his employment of a wider variety of diabolic imagery and an approach that seems far more polemical and eschatol ogical than just four years prior. With frequent accusations against him in Prague and at the papal curia and the first excommunication being placed against Hus presented a far bleaker picture of spiritual battle. He portrayed accusations and attacks as t he work of the Devil and Antichrist attempting to silence him. In doing this, he revisited a number of common themes from his earlier sermons, along with new approaches. His new preaching strategies reflect not only his participation in a political and spi ritual war of words between the university and Archbishop but also possibly reflect a greater desire to employ Wyclifite theory at the pulpit as only the pro Wyclif party remained in power in the university 58 Overall, Hus continued to employ the Devil as the foe against whom he was personally engaged and leading his listeners against. 1411 was similar to his earlier works is in the frequent application of the relationship between Christ and the Devil. Hus con tinued to refer to the Devil in terms of being the opposite of Christ, including the frequent employment of martial language. For example, he briefly mentioned in his the Devil is t he 58 Some scholars suggest that Hus purposefully began inserting non contentious orthodox ideas of Wyclif in order to goad his critics. This is ev idenced in the well study W ic lif and Hus rightly W i clif and Hus 110 11; 282; Oakley, The Western Churc h in the Later Middle Ages 298.
167 59 Hus, of course, was not limited to martial imagery but also used the spiritual analogy of the heart as the home of Christ or of Satan. Hus stated on March rom him and he is in fact the home for Christ. When truth falls in mortal sin, then immediately the 60 Hus continued to express this near dualistic relationship in the sermons, but he also began to prefer different metaphors and analogies over those he used in 1405 1406. For one reason or another, Hus began referencing the soldiers of the Devil less while putting a greater emphasis on the analogies of the limbs and sons of the Devil instead Perhaps he interpreted the troubling environment around him less in terms of armies and more in terms of the direct influence of the Devil and Antichrist in the words and actions of his enemies The contrasting description of the limbs of Christ and the limbs of the Devil appear more frequently in the Sermones with relatively specific references to context. The body of the Devil was a common Christian motif at the time, drawn from the patristic sources that incorporated all sinners into union with the Dev il standing in both 61 A similar metaphor is that of the sons or children of Christ opposing the sons of the Devil. Hus seemed to have found considerable use for the motif as it appe ars frequently in his later 59 Qui ergo vult esse fidelis miles Christi oportet, ut pugnet, ut coronetur, a capite suo Christo, qui est caput omnium electorum et dyabolus similter est caput omnium dampnandorum M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehe m vol. 3, 21. 60 Et sic quicunque homo est sine mortali peccato, iam dyabolus exivit ab eo et factus est domus Christi. Quando vero incidit in peccatum martale, tunc statim dyabolus intrat in cor illius et factus est domus dyaboli 42. 61 Russell, Lucifer 81.
168 preaching. Fewer references are made to these metaphors of body and family in 1405. The one primary exception from the Collecta after Trinity: Anyone following the spirit of God, is guided, led, or driven to work in virtue, these [individuals] are adopted by the Son of God through grace from God. In contrary, someone driven by the spirit of the Devil to work evil, is the son of the Devil. For just as the spirit of God drives the good to do go 62 On March 14, 1411, Hus closely reflected the earlier passage in a sermon vehemently denouncing a sinful c hurch. The sermon began with reflections on Luke 15, the parable of the prodigal son, and here he began his exegesis by placing Christ in the role of the The second son represents a pile of sinn ers, that despite being his creation, they will not have a place in the house of the Father in eternity and it follows that these contrary ones are called such sons. First they are the malignant c hurch ( ecclesia ), second the city of Babylon, third the syna gogue of Satan and thus to others the appropriation of evil. 63 Although Hus began with mortal sinners as sons of Christ, through proof texts from Augustine and the Epistles of Paul, he united them into being one with the Devil: And [Jesus] comes from God th e Father A nd with all the Saints he adheres tightly to one city of that region. The Devil is in the city of Babylon, and that is his city, and should he himself finally enter the kingdom, he will rule in it spirit 62 Quicunque enim spiritu Dei aguntur, id est reguntur, ducuntur or inpelluntur in virtutum opera, hi filii Dei sunt adoptive per graciam ex Deo geniti, sicut e contrario quicunque s piritu dyaboli aguntur in malo opere, hii filii dyaboli sunt Schmidtov Collecta 378. 63 innocentem et peccatorem mortaliter; et allegorice: populum Judaicum et gentilem. Secundus autem filius, peccatorum cumulus, quamvi s sit filius eius creacione, tamen non manebit in domo patris sui in eternum et secundum hoc diversimode nominator talis filius. Primo de aliis appropriacionibus malorum. M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol 3, 90.
169 and he who adhe and thus the Devil 64 This sermon, building off the familiar theme of the city of God is a perfect example of alle in relation to his rejection of the summons to Rome to stand trial. 65 Whereas in 1405 Hus warned of the onslaught of the Devil, by this point in 1411 he no longer preached ho pe for the c hurch of the papacy, but he had begun explicitly associating them in general terms with the Devil as his children and followers. References to the sons of the Devil also appear in connection with those in guilty of mortal sin, and at times specifically referring to a corrupt clergy. Hus gave this title to those guilty of pride, envy, lust, and numerous other sins that, in some cases, he described as sins that tran 66 The assumption may be that those sinners who merited damnation served as examples of how individuals are corrupted; but Hus went a step further in a number of examples, 64 Et abiit a Deo Patre et sic a b omnibus sanctis et adhesit uni civium regionis illius i. dyabolo, qui et qua adheret dyabolo, fit f ilius eius et sic dyabolus incarnatus M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol 3, 92. 65 Joachim of Fiore first links the Babylon of the Antichrist to Rome in the late twelfth century. Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages : A Study of Apocalypticism Art, and Literature (Seattle: The Western Church in the Later Middle Ages 38. The frequent late medieval references to Babylon also sprang out of the expectation of an imminent false pope and the impending fulfillment of the book of Revelation. Bernard McGinn, Antichrist : Two Hundred Years of the Human Fascination with Evi l (New York: Harper Collins, 1994), 174. 66 M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol 2 55, 246; vol. 4, 114
170 going so far to state that these pe ople were actually the incarnate flesh of the Devil. 67 By linking sons of the Devil to the living flesh of humans, Hus combined analogies to contrast the body of the Devil with the body of Christ and gave his audience a physical representation of evil to de feat. Hus used the imagery based on the limbs of the body of the Devil more often in the Sermones, Collecta 68 s of them should we fight? When they become the infected limbs of the Devil, they finally a re expelled as members of the sons of Jesus Christ, and yet now they nevertheless 69 He again used the metaphor on March 8, 1411 in reference to the hear the Wor membra 70 In this respect, all sinners are not just spiritual threats to the audience of Bethlehem Chapel, as inte rmingled with the faithful and intended to corrupt and lead to damnation. Hus 67 Ex quo ergo Deus nos ita dignificavit, ve ergo illi homini, qui sic existens dingus se indignificat per peccata moratalia et filius dyaboli e fficitur, ymmo fit dyabolus incarnates M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol. 4, 114. 68 Schmidtov, Collecta 573. 69 Quanto magis fugere debemus illos, qui sunt infecti lepra peccati mortalis in anima, quia tales, cum sunt membra infecta dyaboli, f inaliter a membris Jesu Christi filiis eicientur, qui tamen nunc latent inter ipsos. M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol 2, 224. 70 Et dyabolus opposite modo non vult nos verbum Dominicum audire, ne illud implentes salvemur. Qui ergo aliis sic volunt, sunt membra dyaboli M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol 3, 63.
171 described those in mortal sin as having not only a close relationship with the Devil, but also a shared identity and purpose. His descriptions of those in sin imbu ed the fallen w exemplifies to corrupt the faithful parallels and opposes the mission Hus eplicitly gave to his audience. As he did in his sermons from 1404 05, H us saturated many of his 1411 sermons with martial language and imagery. Many of these later images are markedly similar to considerably more emphasis on the need to fight and conquer the influence of the corrupt clergy on the Holy Mother Church. A specific example of his later use of the military analogy is his sermon from the First Sunday after Easter, April 19, 1411. This sermon is based on John 20, where Jesus appeared to his disciples twice inside their with the conflict revolving around Hus n He defined the peace of Christ as something that is only attainable after personal victory over the world: He offers peace, he who comes on account of peace. For if there is discord among men and angels and God none of them would be able to end it. For if Christ was not born, reconciling man to God and angels, th e n no o ne could be sanctified. He came so that n o one is detained in darkness after death, as he showed to S t John the Baptist. Christ gives peace to everyone and from their pur gatory the holy fathers were le d out. Therefore, these are our enemy. We conquer the flesh, the world, and the Devil, so that we arrive to that peace. 71 71 Discordia enim fuit inter homines et angelos et Deum et nullus illam potuit sedare, nisi Christus nasceretur, hominem reconciliando nullus illam potuit sedare, nisi Christu s nasceretur, hominem reconciliando Deo et angelis, quia nullus tam sanctus fuit prius, quin non in tenebris detineatur post mortem, ut patet de S. Joohanne Baptista. Quibus Christus pacem dedit et de purgatorio sanctos patres educendo suos. Ergo hic inimi cos nostros, carnem, mundum et dyabolum vincamus, ut ad pacem illam perveniamus M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol 4, 50.
172 Hus clearly emphasized that peace is only attained by enduring the struggles of the physical world. He then linked conte mporary corrupt priests and their sins explicitly to the persona of the Devil. In this sermon, he posed a rhetorical question to the audience: And because he says, Just as the Father sent me, I send you. This so that you might confess the truth, you might not proclaim judicial dominion, not to pursue avarice, but so you might suffer in my likeness. Therfore in what manner does he now send evil priests? Surely he does not send them for accumulating positi ons and pursuing avarice. Who from these reasons are gaining from the priesthood? Certainly nobody. Because the devil Mammon sends such. Who therefore perspires of Avarice, they are sent from Mammon, who of pride, they are sent from Satan and Lucifer, who of luxury, they are sent from Asmodeus, who in truth are sent for the gullet, they are sent from Bale, the devouring idol. 72 Hus concluded the sermon by borrowing extensively from Bernard of Clairvaux, linking the failures of the clergy with the ongoing spi ritual battle, which Hus commonly referenced: Therefore, Holy Mother Church does not have peace from the persecution of heretics, from the persecution of Jews, no it does not have peace from oming, but now that he comes the time is fulfilled. Behold my bitterness in peace with heretics, most bitter now in the morals of the house, but also of f alsehood of Christi ans and false sons, rectors of the Church posing themselves as the militant. They do not fight, they are not able to fight, therefore they grow stronger, therefore they having multiplied are above us, they are an intestinal and incurable plague of the Chur ch, and difficultly cured 73 72 dominionum iudicaliter non avariciam sectemini, sed ad instar mei paciamini. Qualiter ergo misit nunc sacerdotes malos? Numquid ad accumulandum prebendas et avaricie insitendum, qu i ea de causa sacerdocium sunt adepti? Certe non, quia Mamon dyabolus misit tales. Qui ergo insud ant avaricie, missi sunt a Mamone; qui superbike missi sunt a Sathana superbo et Lucipero; qui luxurie, missi sunt ab Azmodeo; qui vero gule, missi sunt a Be e le, voraci ydolo Ibid., 51. 73 Non habuit ergo s. mater ecclesia pacem ab hereticorum persecucione a Judeorum predictum est, nunc tempus implecionis advenit. Ecce in pace amaritudo mea amarissima. Amara prius in nece martirum, amarior post in conflict her eticorum, amarissima nunc in moribus domesticorum, sed fictorum, christanorum et false se filios rectores ecclesia fingencium militantis. Non fugare, non fogere eos
173 This sermon also helped illustrate the complexity of the web of foes Hus described. The a lone alluded to Jews, heretics, and evil priests as simultaneously Hus also tried to assure them of their preordained victory. To achieve When he chose to console his audience, he comforted them in the fact that their victor y was essentially assured by elaborating on the complex relationship between God and the Devil. In two separate Lenten sermons from 1411, Hus expounded far more explicitly on the authority and power of the Devil in relationship with God. In 1411 Hus wade d into the traditionally muddy philosophical waters of nominalism and realism to preach on Hus carefully trod between two of the great influences in his theological development: John Wyclif (d.1384) and Peter Lombard (d.1160) He generally adhered to a realist position on the Devil, which granted God ultimate authority and unrestrained power in the universe. 74 This meant that God allowed evil and the acts of the Devil to occur. Wyclif, however, was a far more ra dical realist who took realist principals to extremes, often reaching dangerous heretical positions in the eyes of established c hurch. Since Wyclif ascribed a total omnipotence and the subsequent responsibility for all evil to God God has the ultimate potest, ita invaluerunt, ita multiplicati sunt super nos, intestina et insanabilis plaga ec celsie, que difficulter curator et ideo in pace amaritudo eius amarissima Ibid., 53. 74 Russell, Lucifer 279.
174 res ponsibility for the Devil, evil, and sin. 75 c hurch leaders condemned as heretical stem from his realist stance on theology. This includes his denial of transubstantiation and his controversial assertion that because God gra nts the Devil authority over the earth, God should obey the Devil. 76 A doctrine of predestination is also a ready by product of this theological stance which, since God is all knowing, counters the generally nominalist principle of free will. 77 Peter Lombard on the other hand, viewed the Devil as one who chose an evil path with free will, and he concluded that all humans also have the free will to choose evil or good. 78 1410. Prior to Kutn Hora in 1409 Prague University was divided between nominalist and realist factions, which also closely corresponded to a divide between German and Czech speakers. By 1410, many of the German nominalist scholars had abandoned Prague, leaving Hus surr ounded by likeminded colleagues who generally agreed with realist principles 79 This gave Hus an opportunity to begin experimenting with ways to With the departure of the German nominalis ts, Hus seems to have been more inclined to preach 75 76 Russell, Lucifer 283. 77 Russell, Lucifer 282. Wyclif expla ins the theology for this choice in De Domino Divino where he Philosophy and Politics in the thought of John Wyclif 68. Ex quo sequitur quod dominum Dei mensurat, ut prius et presuppositum, Omnia alia assignada: si enim creatura haet dominum super quid quum, Deus prius habet dominum super idem; ideo ad quodlibet creature domin um sequitur dominum divinium, et non econtra Iohannis Wycliffe, De Dominio Divino Libri Tres ed. Reginald Lance Poole (London: Tr bner and Co, 1890), III, 19. 78 Russell Lucifer 175. Peter Lombard Libri IV Sententiarum (Florence : C laras Aquas, 1916 ), 2 89, 416. 79 Kaminsky A History of the Hussite Revolution 24.
175 with moderate elements of realist theology concerning the Devil in his sermons to the Bethlehem audience In particular, r ather than completely and unequivocally denying free will, as Wyclif did, Hus caref ully tempered realism with the semi nominalism of Peter Lombard. In effect, Hus serves as a fascinating hybrid of the two schools of thought, for he generally tried to apply and rectify both approaches. Ivana D o describes Hus, as having come from a background in realist thought which allowed him to epistemologically stand as both realist and nominalist This is because of the broad realist view of authority that all beliefs, traditions, and scriptures could transcend from God. Pure nominalists, on th e other hand, held a rigid view of the unquestioned authority of the c hurch and council s as the current manifestation of divine authority If the c hurch and the councils wielded divine authority, than there could be no transcendent authority in other word s the power and authority the Devil wielded were illusion and false 80 Consequently God as that would also contradict the authority of the c hurch. The first example of his moderate position is a se rmon dated from March 8, 1411. In this warning 81 Hus acknowledges that the Devil is too powerful for man to repel but neither does he 80 Fudge, Jan Hus 30 ; Ivana Dolej ov Authority: Pale and Hus 54. 81 Non enim dyabolus est illius potestatis, quod potest illabi ipse a nime, quia nichil potest illabi ipsi anime, nisi solus eus. Sed per peccatum habet potestatem a Deo sibi datam propter tale peccatum, ut vexet hominem illum assistentem sibi. M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol 3, 61.
176 self reliance, in man, Hus showed a further unwillingness stance on predestination, at least in his sermons. 82 Hus addressed the power of the Devil again with an analogy on March 15, 1411: on Earth, who thus is crea his is a magnitude of strength, yet he is not able to hurt man, if man himself does not wish to consent. And t he Devil is comparable to a dog that is powerless to bite, if he is not approached if approache d he may bite. For thus the Devil is not able to conquer anyone with sin without that sin first being consented to. 83 Whereas in 1405, the Devil was a lion or monster looking to devour, in 1411 this sermon Hus reduced Satan to a mere chained dog. Again, he put considerable emphasis on the free will of the sinner to, in effect, pet the dog. Simply stated, the Devil remains ever present, but those in mortal sin have not necessarily been consumed by a prowling Devil, as Hus suggested in 1405; rather he would have said they made a choice to serve the Devil and sin. This is a revealing standpoint for Hus to have taken, and alth ough in the end this made the Devil less of an immediate threat to the faithful, it made those misguided sinners who surrounded the faithful that much more menacing to the listening audience. The emphasis shifted onto the sinners who, of their own volition chose sin and the service of the Devil. Hus intended his audience to be much more aware of sin and the sinners around them. 82 Although predestination is a rare topic in his sermons, it does play a prominent role in his work De Ecclesia He essentially cites Augustine in his development of his idea of the predestinate, but avoided the topic in his sermons. Among detailed discussi on, Hus defines predestination in his 1413 De Eccle sia 4. 83 n est potestas supra illum in terra, qui factus est ita, ut nullum comparator dyabolus cani in cathena, qu nullum mordere potest, nisi quis accedat ad il lum extunc mordet eum. Sic eciam dyabolus neminem vincere potest peccatis, nisi quis consenciat illi M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem. v ol 3, 101.
177 actively working towards his excommunication and destruction. His diminishment of the power placed the blame for the ongoing disruption squarely on the sinful choices of the Archbishop and others working against Hus. These sinners threaten ed the faithful in many forms, and Hus gave them a larger role as his preaching became more polemical prominent is the Antichrist.
178 CHAPTER 5 THREATS TO THE FLOCK: THE ANTICHRIST AND EARTHLY SINNERS The Antichrist Hus describ ed the primary opponent of his flock as the Devil, but hi s preaching on the Antichrist added a physically present and terrifying entity to his warnings for the Hus concept of the Antichrist combined interwoven threads o f humanity and divinity that mimicked the nature of Christ. In the mysterious person(s) of the Antichrist, Hus portrayed a physically present evil that was corrupting the c hurch and was partly responsible for the tribulations that befell Hus and others of the Czech reformers beginning in 1410. Although the entity of the Antichrist may appear side by side with the Devil within marti his own resistance to the Archbishop and the papal curia In addition to calling upon his audience to resist the Devil, the Antichrist became a foe wh om Hus could frame as an example of his own defiance and action against the forces of evil. Antichrist is a word that frequently appeared in medieval eschatologic al discussions. Theologians, preachers, and others generally referenced Antichrist in two overlapping ways. One may encounter the term in reference to the nominal Antichrist, denoting the name of the final single enemy of Christians at the time of the Apoc alypse. The other meaning, perhaps more commonly used by preachers such as Hus, was as a broad label for anyone working against the faithful or leading a faithless life, a use which dramatically diminished eschatological implications. 1 Usually one can deci 1 Richard Kenneth Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages : A Study of Medieval Apocalypticism, Art, and Literature (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1981). 4.
179 use of the word from the context of the sermon, although at times it is entirely possible Regardless, the word Antichrist is synonymous with evil. 2 Before the Protestant theologians of the sixteenth century redefined the term to refer almost exclusively to the papacy, it had a myriad of designees in the Middle Ages, including Muslims and heretics. 3 Medieval writers also frequently applied the label of Antichris t to all false and hypocritical Christians. 4 Although this word has its origins in the first and second epistles of John, the Latin Church fathers used the term sparingly, with only few references in western theological texts (outside of Ireland) before th e early twelfth century. 5 Twelfth century Christian writers increasing concern for Antichrist was one aspect of the unsettled nature of society in the wake of the dynamic changes in social and political structure of the High Middle Ages. 6 By the time of H us, the Antichrist had played a significant part in the religious discussion in Europe an print culture, popular culture, and preaching. 7 2 McGinn, Antichrist 2. 3 conceived antichrist, as Catholics often maintained the medieval broad concept while Luther and other reformers commonly made the identification of the pope a s antichrist a primary tenant of belief. It is interesting, however, that by the Late Middle Ages Jews were nearly exempt from the antichrist concerns. McGinn, Antichrist 199 201. 4 Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages 63. 5 The Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle Ages Mediaevalia Lovaniensia Series 1 Studia 15 (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1988), 15. Richard Kenneth Emmerson views the growing concern over antichrist as developing a century later. Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages 62. 6 McGinn, 16. 7 Jan Wyclif, Operis Evangelici liber tertius et quartues sive De Antichristo liber primus et secundus ed. Johann Losserth (London: Trbner, 1896); other works entitled De Antichristo were also written by Anselm (12 th century). The most famous Bohemian representation of the Antichrist appeared in the late fifteenth century, in the Jena Codex which uses imag ery of Hus and the Hussite Wars to illustrate
180 predictions concerning the arrival of the Antichrist gained traction in Europe in the years 1346, 1347, 1348, 1360, 1365, 1375, 1387, 1396, 1400, 1417, and 1418. 8 The idea of the Antichrist was a prominent part of the Bohemian religious conversation prior to Jan Hus. It appears in the texts of numerous Bohemian sources ove r roughly two centuries. 9 A clear example can be seen in the illustrations of the Velisla v Bible created circa 1340. 10 This illuminated Bible dedicates several pages to contrasting a charming, beautiful, and deceptive Antichrist, who with evil intent, imitates Jesus and looks nearly identical to the adjacent figure of Christ. The Velisla v Bible first depicts the Antichrist as a tonsured monk leading his flock of goats and demons with a jagged and fierce The mendicant orders had been a target of reform preachers in Prague since Waldhauser denounced a number of their practices, including their hypocritical claim of poverty. 11 The mendicants also remained a source of irritation for local preachers through the time of Hus. The Antichrist is not portrayed as a bishop or member of the high clergy, but rather appears as a mendicant, and the image quite possibly reflects urban tensions between par ochial clergy and the transient mendicant orders usurping local preaching authority and stealing parishioners. 12 the Bohemian struggle against the Antichrist in the fifteenth century.It is offically known as the Jensk kodex antithesis Christi et antichristi, 1490 1510 Prague, Knihovna Nrodnho muzea v Praze, IV.B.24. 8 McGinn, Antichrist 173. 9 Peter Nejedl points out in his philological analysis of the term Antikristus that outside of the Peter Nejedl voji Substantiva Antikrist(us) ve Staro esk Zrozen Mtu: Dva 10 Prague, XXIII.C.124 fol. 146r. 11 Kaminsky, A His tory of the Hussite Revolution 8. 12 McGinn,
181 Successive images show the actions, but recognizable by the ever present demons stand ing with the on lookers or whispering inspiration in the 13 The idea of Antichrist played a considerable role in the life of Mil who wrote the Libellus de Antichristo as a defense against the Roman inquisition, which had impr isoned him for his eschatological preaching concerning the Antichrist and the papacy. Mil and corrupting the c hurch, traveled to Rome not to condemn, but to warn the pope of the Anti c hurch. Mil highlighted scandals and corruption that he believed disseminated directly from the inquis ition allayed many of his fears, and upon his return from Rome, he never again preached or wrote concerning Antichrist. 14 Later that century, Mat of Janov (d. 1394) included a biography of Mil Regulae Veteris et Novis Testamenti described Mil Antichrist in the form of Charles IV. also believed the Antichrist was present in his time, and he used Mil piece for his own concern that the high clergy a nd impe rial authorities were all in his clutches. Mil readily provided an answer. 15 Hus, a late entry into the Bohemian discussion on Mendicants and Secular Prie Brill Companion to Jean Gerson ed. Brian Patrick McGuire (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 250. 13 Ibid. 18. 14 Mor e, Preaching in Fourteenth Century Bohemia 37. 15 Ibid., 29 40.
182 Antichrist, had to engage with the same questions. His eventual descriptions of t he Antichri st were similar to those of the Bible, Mil Contrary to the path of Mil about the Antichrist increased substantially as his career progressed. Most biographies of Hus draw attention to the fact that one of the false accusations adversaries repeatedly made against him was a belief that he had explicitly referred to the pope as the Antichrist, a charge he denied: No I did not say that, but I did say: If the pope sells benefices, if he is proud, greedy, and in othe r ways contrary to Christ, then he is the Antichrist. For if they are lacking, in so far as they seek to be, then all these popes are the Antichrist; for there are good popes, such as Saint Gregory H e was not the Antichrist, nor was he at any time, as I e stimate. 16 Although many biographies absolve Hus of his outright portrayal of the pope as Antichrist, one can clearly see, if the record is accurate, that Hus certainly insinuated that the current pope(s) was (were) the Antichrist, for he accused the papacy on multiple occasions of greed, pride, and sin. 17 Despite his denial of calling the pope the Antichrist, references to Antichrist abound in his works, and Hus was adept at making implications. His interest and concern for Antichrist, however, become a lat e addition to his preaching. In the sermons of the Collecta the Latin antichristus makes only a single appearance. In August of 16 Non dixi, sed dixi: Si papa vendit beneficia, si est superbus avarus et ali ter in moribus Christo contrarius, tunc est ant ichristus. Sed absit, quod exin d e sequatur, quod omnis papa sit Antichristus; bonus enim papa, ut S. Gregorius, non est Antichristus, nec fuit umquam, ut aestimo Documenta Mag. Johannis Hus (Prague, F. Tempsk, 1869), 170. 17 Of the English works on Hus, Spinka, 84 85; Fudge, Jan Hus 15 16; Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution and essentially absolve Hus
183 own righ teousness: And you know, since the time of the ascension of the Lord and to the day of judgment one is called to following his singular duty to whatever end of the world, for as a response to the final age of the world we should take our morals seriously, so that as we approach nearer to the end, we might undertake to be great without the world and we might resist the force of the D evil and the laws of the Antichrist, because Paul says concerning sho uld take 18 This passage clearly highlights an eschatological context for the Antichrist which called for the listener to beware the day of judgment. The purpose of this passage, along with the bulk of the sermon, is to explain the scriptu ral passage. It does not offer any significant additional insight than a relatively simple explication of the text. In addition, this is the only point in the sermon where the word antichristus appears, and the significance of the laws probably refers to C hapter 7 of the book of Daniel where Daniel has visions of four great beasts that are given dominion over the earth. 19 This could also be a reference to the commands of the beasts from Revelation 13. 20 The sermon does, however, have the brief call for resist sermons referencing the Devil and will remain prominent in his career. His general disinterest in expanding on these connections suggests that the single reference to the Antichrist was negligible for achieving his actual goals for the sermon. 18 Et scias, quod totum tempus ab ascensione Domini usque ad diem iudicii vocatur secundum singulas partes eius finis alicuius seculi, nam corespondenter ad etatem ul timam seculi debemus gravitatem servare in moribus, ut, de quanto accedimus ad finem propinquius, de tanto minus secularia curemus et forcius dyaboli et Anticristi resistamus legibus, quia dicit pro cautela Paulus: Itaque qui se existimat stare, videat, ne cadat Schmidtov, Collecta 401 19 Dn 7: 7 14, New Jerusalem Edition 20 Ibid.,Rv. 13,
184 The limited use of the Antichrist in the Collecta could probably be linked to any number of factors Yet, just as Hus preach ed on authority, priesthood, and his relation to local and broader and religious currents, he obviously did not yet feel a need to emphasize eschatological portents. This may relate to either his personal understanding of the world or possibly his understanding that stressing eschatological ideas would be ineffective with his audience. Unlike the ever prese nt Devil and the human failures of priests, warnings of Antichrist generate a much darker tone that judgment is imminent. case. 21 In the Sermones in Capella Bethlehem refer ences to the Antichrist are more frequent with at least fifteen different sermons referencing this evil. Although these numbers pale in comparison to the proliferation of references to the Devil, the polemical context of 1410 1411 clearly influenced Hus t o address the dangers of the Antichrist in a number of specific ways an earthly physical foe that worked to corrupt the c hurch in correlation with human sinners. In particular, Hus used two recurring and related concepts: false authority and hypocrisy. Hus used the idea of law and authority several times to illustrate that those individuals acting as the Antichrist issued laws contradictory to the law of God and Christ. For example, on March 8, 1411, in a sermon on the laws of God and the laws of the Devil, Hus stated: 21 The case has been made by Peter More that the very act of preaching itself had deep eschatological implications. More Preaching in Fourteenth Century Bohemia 151 153. Although, I tend sermons that lead me to believe that a generalized statement of that sort does not allow for dramatic shifts in emphasis from se rmon to sermon.
185 You know or you should know which precepts I gave to you, to serve the living God and to expect his day of judgment, because he wrote much on the day of judgment and Antichrist. For it say s in 1 John, 2, Now Antichrist exalts in his members. And it says in Isidore, that whoever does not accept the faith of Christ but is only imitating, he is now in fact the Antichrist. 22 On March 18, 1411, Hus revisited the topic again: Therefore, you who transgress the law of God and are great authorities, whichever of your traditions were handed down from God, they are the most wise, most prudent, and most benevolent. God, in giving his law to his faithful, will not oppress them. Therefore, whoever may sa y tha t any legislation in itself supersede s the law of Christ, he is in fact the Antichrist. 23 preaching ban of February, 1411 to these sermons. Although Hus did not mention the ban directly, it is entirely possible that these sermons 24 This is clearly a reference to the clerical misuse of authority as well as an explanation of his defiance of the preaching ban. Yet, the similarity betwe en this 1411 reference and the 1405 reference cannot be ignored. Both highlight the misuse of authority as an evil behavior common to Antichrist Hus may deliberately have emphasized it in relation to the events of February, 1411. 25 His explanation together with his open defiance against the 22 Scitis aut scire devetis que precept dedi vobis, sc. servire Deo vivo et expectare diem eius ad Antichristus in suis membris mirifi imitator, iam eo facto est Antichristus M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem v ol. 3 64. 23 Quare et vos transgredimini mandata Dei que sunt maioris auctoritatis, quam tradiciones v estre, cum sint tradita a Deo sapientissimo, prudentissimo et benivolentissimo, qui in dando legem suis fidelibus suos non agravabit. Quincunque ergo dicere quod ipse in legislacio ne aaliquid superadderet legi Christi, eo facto ipse est Antichristus Ibid. 121. 24 Spinka, 103. 25 Emmerson suggests a number a common medieval understanding of the Antichrist is his creation of new laws. Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages 90 91. An interesting link between law and antichris t made by McGinn is a fifth century text Testament of the Lord written in Syriac it describes Antichrist 69.
186 Antichrist may have served as a powerful example for his audience, thus making them aware of their immersion in the battle against evil. This relation between the Antichrist and false authority continues through 1411 wit h two other significant references that link corrupt prelates to Antichrist. In June, Hus placed t hose guilty of simony on the same level of sin with heretics, schismatics, and 26 On August 24, 1411, H us again mentioned evil prelat e s links humblest, poorest, and most chaste, in the manner of Christ, that person will be the heart Whoever contradicts the life of Christ is 27 In addition to the recurring concept of false authority, Hus also regularly 28 Hus expounded rather indiscriminately against sinful clerics with the label of Antichrist. For example in early March, 14 11 he preached: For Matthew 24 says, Pseudochrists will arise and give great signs, as if that were possible, for the elect of God will be lead into error. Pseudochrists come and the members of Antichrist lie hidden from sight and simulate religion. For just as Christ came into the world in humility he alone is able to be known as an apostle through his humility n ot the 26 M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 4, 166. 27 In ewangelio ergo ostendit Christus, quod qui fuerit humillimus, pauperrimus, c h astissimus, sicud Christus, quod talis erit maximus prelatus et dignissimus coram Deo. Qui vero Christo vita contriaretur talis non eius esset prelatus, sed dyaboli et Antichristi M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 5 4. 28 Qui fratres sic facientes vere sunt fratres imitators Christi; quodsi non, sunt membra Antichristi. Quid ergo de falsis fratribus, non Chrisiti sed Antichristi, dicetur, qui nedu m seminant, sed semen volunt conculcare. M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 1 89.
187 Pharisees and scribes F or just as n ow those that are known as great prelates are in fact of the Antichrist. 29 Sermones seem deliberately targeted against his critcs and the Archbishop One reason for this may simply be that by early 1411, Hus could no longer endure the corruption and hypocrisy of those attempting to silence him. Perhaps some of the more radical individuals around Hus may also have influenced his preaching at this time. Individuals such as Jerom had begun generating far more subversive ideas than those of Hus. 30 Jakoubek even openly declared the pope to be the Antichrist, signaling the imminent apocalypse. 31 label may have amounted to little more than petty name calling. 32 Perhaps to add more significance to the label of Antichrist, Hus also offered some caution to his audience about On Easter Sunday 1411, he preached a lengthy Easter sermon, with a clear warning that even those of faith may still turn away from God and serve evil He stated: Therefor e, not all follies of Antichrist are They go forth excelling in mortal sin, because through 29 Qui Pseudochristi et membra Antichristi latenter veniunt sub specie religiounis simulate: nam sicut Christus veniens in mundum venit humiliter, qui solum fuit cognitus ab humilibus apostolic suis, non a phariseis et scribis, sicut eciam nunc facta Antichristi non cognoscuntur a magnis prealtis, se dab humilibus solum M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 3, 41. 30 McGinn, Antichrist 184; Kaminsky, A His tory of the Hussite Revolution 55; Soukup, Reformn k azatelstv 225 226, Fudge, The Magnificent Ride 79 80, 136 137. 31 misattributed at Constance to Hus. Fudge, The Magnificent Ride 79. 32 K Vvoji Substantiva Antikrist(us) 89.
188 their sins they are excommunicated, sentenced while alive if not from man then from God, as said by the prop they are cursed who stray f 33 Despite an increased emphasis on the powers and presence of Antichrist, Hus does not fail to remind his flock that other threats are lurking to destroy their souls. The Antichrist represented those disguised as Christians, but also exhibited traits that clearly reflected his direct critics. Hus, however, also addressed numerous others wallowing in obvious mortal sin They Women, Sodomites, Jews, and Heretics d as imminent warnings to his audience, he also described a wide array of sinners that exemplified the fallen among the faithful He warned listeners of the sup ernatural Devil or the eschatological Antichrist, yet these two tropes hardly address all temptation and woe that permeated the physical world. The Devil works in many ways, and Hus attempted to keep his audience informed about the wide variety of corporea l threats that could lead to sin. His sermons also reflected the daily interaction of the audience of Bethlehem Chapel with those whom devoted Christians considered outsiders or concerning women, Jews, heretics, sodomites, and even the rare mention of a witch. 34 His approach to these groups involved numerous inconsistencies and conflicting 33 Non ergo omnes fulminaciones Antichristi sunt a Christi fidelibs advertende, nisi ille, que procedunt ex precendecia peccati motalis, quia viva sentencia qui dicit per Prophe tam Psalm 118, M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 4, 9. 34 Although not found within the Sermons of the Collecta or the Sermones an explicit mention of Mistr Jan Hus esk s k zn 67.
189 generalizations in a manner common to medieval preaching. 35 Yet, those under the sway of sin p defeated many, and now, mired in earthly sin, vanquished sinners would attempt to take the faithful with them to hell. Hus could characterize the Devil and Antichrist as absolutely e vil, but mortal and familiar sinners within the confines of Prague necessitated a more complex rhetorical approach Hus was inconsistent from sermon to sermon in generalizing mortal sinners ncerning temptresses, sodomites, and Jews, his dramatic language of spiritual warfare was generally absent from these topics. Although he still called for resistance to these evils, he did not employ the rhetoric of warfare in relation to these groups. Ins tead, Hus mortal sin. Within his sermons he set mortal sinners apart from the faithful flock of the Bethlehem Chapel and through that symbolic removal of the ungodly, he affir med the righteous position of his audience as a moral community separated from the evils of the world. 36 Any attempt to generalize about problematic. His descriptions of the two groups ranged between evil and saintly and were, as such, inconsistent from sermon to sermon. Hus rarely differentiated his 35 ely contradictory statements concerning the generalization of groups of people are not uncommon in the The Preaching of the Friars 30. 36 Max Weber described this separation as one of the critical components of a charismatic leader/di capable of being called into action. Max in Max Weber: On Charisma and Institution Building ed. S. N. Eisenstadt (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968) 253 Philip Smith, elaborates on this point be suggesting that an evil must be present for a charismatic leader to be
190 terminology; and although both the Latin and vernacular had specific terms for even varying ranks of prostitute, he seems to have rarely employed them in his survi ving sermon texts. 37 Likewise, there is no defining vocabulary that distinguishes between the Jews of the Old or New Testament and those contemporary Jews in Prague. In other words, his references generally lacked precision leavi ng the listener unclear whet her he The listener would have had to pay close attention to the context of the sermon to understa Therefore, any attempt to assign a general interpretation of the words woman and J ew are problematic, as they took on different meanings depending on the requirements and goals of a given message. heavil y clerical and male dominated context, the opposite sex provided an especially difficult challenge in the pulpit. Women certai nly attended his preaching, but his portrayal of them as good and evil suggests that he may have been ill at ease in which he wrote to a community of religious women to serve as a spiritual guide. 38 groups of women (including Queen Sofia, who famously, if not necessarily factually, regularly attended his preaching), and 23 others were addre ssed to broad audiences that may have included women. 39 Hus certainly did not exist in a male only world, but 37 sermons. Mengel, 421 22. 38 Jan Hus In Iohannis Hus Opera Omnia: d robn s pisy esk v ol 4 (Prague: Acad. S cientiarum Bohemoslovenicae 1985): 163 186. 39 Fudge, Jan Hus 58. Spinka, The Letters of John Hus 8, 20, 116.
191 his perception of women in his preaching is difficult to ascertain between his frequent use of tropes concerning female sinfulness and his repeated praise of the women of Scripture. Hus showed a complex and often contradictory approach to women in a similar way to that of Bernardino of Siena, whom historians have described as being at times both respectful and misogynistic. Both of these men preached within a medieval co 40 among so saw a dramatic increase in theological misogyny. Graus suggested that clerical misogyny was closely linked to the growing prominence of female spiritual leaders that coincided with the growth of the Beguines, various powerful abbesses, and the rising infl uence of female mystics, such as Catherine of Siena. 41 It is unclear to what degree this growing female presence affected Hus, as few contemporary female spiritual leaders gain ed significant notoriety in Bohemia. 42 Perhaps more significant than threats to male authority is the clerical view of women as t emptation. Clerical guidebooks, advisory sermons and letters throughout Europe 40 Marmando, 33. Thomas M. Izbicki also writes with considerable detail on the use of women in preaching in fifteenth century Italy in terms of sinful vanity when compared to the idea De Ore Domini: Preacher and Word in the Middle Ages Thomas L. Amos, Eugene Green, Beverly Mayne Kienzle eds. (Kalama zoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1989). 41 42 John Klassen discusses women acting as dissidents in his work on women in Hussite Bohemia, but there are no examples of female spiritua typical roles for women. John Klassen, Warring Maidens, Captive Wives, and Hussite Queens : Women and Men at War and at Peace in Fifteenth Century Bohemia (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999).
192 warned priests of the inherent dangers of seeing to the spiritual needs of women. 43 In the Bohemian context, Czech historian Jana Nechutov has labeled several precursors to Hus, such as Mil Jano v as generally seeing women as substantial threats to spirituality. Nechutov describes the existence of a common misogynist satire emanating from Bohemian preachers beginning towards the second half of the fourteenth century. Unfortunately, this discovery may simply be a consequence of the exponential increase in homiletic sources originating from the preaching refor ms of Charles IV. 44 shared many of the same stereotypes, contradictions, and misogyny of his contemporaries. 45 Holy women, of course, received an entirely different treatment than women in mortal sin. Sim ilar to many other medieval priests, Hus readily praised and idealized 46 He, like his contemporaries, frequently praised Mary Ma gdalene and her per fect repentance. 47 He preached on how 43 Bet hlehem Allison Barr, The Pastoral Care of Women in Late Medieval England (Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2008) 20. Hus himself in a sermon warned young priests of the possibility of temptation through impure thoughts with women in confession. 44 Jana Nechutov Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten, Vlkern, Konfessionen Ferdinand Seibt, ed. (Munich: Oldenburg, 1997), 73 79. Nechutov remains the only specific work linking Hus to questions of ge nder to date. Unfortunately, the word um 45 sexua lity in Ruth Mazo Karras, Sexuality in Medieval Europe: Doing u nto Others (New York: Routledge, 2005). 46 M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 3, 131. 47 Schmidtov, Collecta 365; M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 4, 3, 26, 37. For detailed explanation on the use of Mary Magdalene see: Jansen, The Making of Mag d alene: Preaching and Popular Devotion in the Later Middle Ages 2000.
193 48 Naturally, Hus also f preaching with surprising tenderness. His Christmas Eve sermon from 1410 focused on Hus described their fears and highlighted their need to repent of their sinful uncertainty. 49 frequent preaching on Mary, to the point of describing him as a devotee. 50 Yet, al l of these praiseworthy women represent tropes common to medieval preachers. Preachers frequently used the example of female saints to illustrate doctrine and clerical attributes, rather than any specific feminine identity. 51 Susanna differs little from the meta theme of saints as examples of the repentant sinner becoming holy. 52 Although he offered positive female spiritual role models, he added little to established utilitarian preaching on the women of scripture. 53 On the oth Along with the frequent employment of examples illustrating feminine holiness, Hus also 48 Schmidtov Collecta 174. 49 Schmidt ov Collecta sermon on the bitterness and repentance of Mary is in M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 2, 126 reaction to her pregnancy and in not completely trusting God. 50 Fudge, Jan Hus 60; Spinka, 47. 51 Waters, Angels and Earthly Creatures 102, 120; Jansen, The Making of Magdalene 8, 86, 106. 52 Jansen, The Making of Magdalene 231. 53 G regg, Devils, Women, and Jews 85.
194 described women in menacing and dangerous terms. Rarely did Hus generalize directly concerning w omen, but one of his most common themes is spiritual damage brought on by sexual immorality. In particular, fornication and adultery are frequent topics. Even marital sex seemed problematic in light of his promotion of celibacy For example, in his sermon on the Feast of the Holy Innocents in 1410, he stated: But this epistle is read now on the [feast of the] Innocents, because it reminds us of the holy martyrs, who finally will sing a song with God, for they were not polluted by women. And when they are so great those Holy Innocent Martyrs, that on their day this epistle is read. Today, therefore, we are mindful of the feast of the Innocents, because their virginity is mentioned because they were virgins and they were without pollution .. 54 This passage states that the women themselves are not necessarily the problem ; rather their association with intercourse made them a pollutant. Hus essentially implied that avoiding sex with women was the Innocents most holy attribute and their most notable accomplis hment after martyrdom. For Hus, and perhaps all priests with vows of celibacy after the twelfth century, women represented a dangerous temptation. 55 Fornication and a sin for which the l ocal clergy was regularly chided It appears dozens of times in the Collecta and the Sermones Since he was also quite specific in his discussions on homosexuality, his explication on fornication should be understood explicitly to mean the temptation emanating from women and the act of fornication. That temptation 54 Sed legitur iam hec epistola de Innocentibus, qui a in ea mencia fit de sanctis ma rtiribus, qui fina l iter cum Deo canticum cantabunt, qui eciam cum mulieribus non sunt coinquinati. Et cum tales fuerunt sancti martires Innocentes, ideo in die ipsorum hec epistola legitur. Hodie igitur memoramur festum Innocencium quia tangitu r de virginibus; quia virgine s er ant et sine macula errant, igitur legitur de eis M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 2, 168 9. 55 Karras, Sexuality in Medieval Europe 44; Barr, The Pastoral Care of Women 19 20.
195 Human temptation is to think evil and to have temptation continuously in the heart. True diabolical temptation is temptation being overcome by action and to bring about evil. To desire a woman is human temptation, distinction is not seen to suffice. To lust for forbidden women, following Matth a woman with near lust than in fact to lust for her. View a woman first as my beloved, and then lust follows. Therefore, it is possible to be said of human temptation, that when man i s tempted by sin he shows stimulation in the temptation. But even if he does not consent, the temptation is still truly diabolical. At the time [of temptation] many immediately consent to the influence of temptation. 56 The concept of sexual sins can be trac preaching, and at times he went into great detail on the various forms that such sins take. Explicit mentions of women were relatively rare in connection with fornication, yet the topic of fornication still implies their p resence and the danger they pose to spiritual purity. Female lustfulness is a common trope in medieval literature, but Hus did not mention lust as a uniquely female attribute, but often discussed it in gender neutral terms. 57 Hus does not precisely blame wo men for the sin of fornication, as his focus often seems to highlight male culpability. A acquiescence to the act of fornication seems to be simply taken for granted in fornication suggests a belief that a wom was so obvious that it did not need 56 temptacio est certamine temptacionis in opere superari et malum perficere. Concupiscer e mulierem non videtur ista disti nccio sufficere. Concu piscere enim mulierem illicite secundum v eritatis testimonium Matth. 5 dyabolicum est. Minus enim e st videre mulierem ad concupiscendum quam de facto concupiscere, et cum primum sit mechari, ideo et secundum. Potest ergo dici humana temptacio, quando homo temptatus peccato patitur titillacionem in temtacioine, sed non consentit, dyabolica vero, quando s tatim consentit ad tactum temptacionis. Schmidtov, Collecta 401 402. 57 Karras, Sexuality in Medieval Europe 87.
196 mentioning The exception in this case are those specific female saints that overc a me their sinful nature 58 sodom y His mention of sodom ites often appear in lists of sins and, when linked to the Sermones Hus has a single full sermon dedicated to warning against the sin of sodomy. His sermon for December 6, 1410, transitioned f rom a protheme containing the story of Saint Nicholas 59 Throughout the sermon, Hus provided numerous proof texts from the Old Testament, 1 Corin thians, and the c hurch fathers, followed by a thorough synopsis of the Gibeah incident from Judges 19 20, where people of the city of Gibeah, wanting to abuse a male stranger, instead rape and abuse his concubine to death. The result of their action was wa r between the tribes of Israel and the tribe of Benjamin. Hus used this example to show how the sin of sodomy and the presence of sodomites can lead to the wrath of God and the destruction of whole cities. He stated: Because he overthrows all enemies and c onsumes all cities with fire, slaughtering more than seventy thousand men on account of that worst and most wicked sin, therefore all the faithful of Christ are to beware. God has hatred for no other sin like that of sodomy, if only because it annuls and d estroys nature at the root. 60 58 s sermon for Sunday during Epiphany describes the rape of the soul. Schmidtov, Collecta 79. Generally the idea of sex in the Middle Ages was not seen as a shared act, and therefore the man is primarily responsible for the act alone, although certainly no t the guilt of the sin. Karras, Sexuality in Medieval Europe 9, 87, 112. 59 be considered as hedonism, as they are nearly all sexual in nature. These seven do no t correlate with the M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 2, 21. 60 quod omnes inimicos prostraverunt et combusserunt civitatem occiderunt plus quam septuaginta milia virorum propter illud peccatum pessimum et scel eratissimum, quod ab omnibus Christi
197 Between the cities of Gibeah and Sodom, he had plenty of examples to warn the people victory, but punishment from God. Unlike the Devil and the Antichrist, however, Hus is are warned of the danger of sodomites, but Hus makes no apparent call for even spiritual action to remove the threat. Sodomites simply existe d, and although Hus punishment This lack of a call for action represent s a significantly different approach than the persecutions of homosexuals from the thirteenth century which frequently called for burnings. Hus on ly points to divine punishment rather than secular punishment. 61 Just as Hus simultaneously praised and vilified women, he also portrayed non Christians as both future brothers waiting to be shown the truth and as poisonous influences who serve Satan in per quite magnanimous in his preaching, calling for restraint and love for unbelievers to bring them into the flock. He stated in late October 1405: He is a pagan today. Do you know whether he may be a future Christian? He is an unfaithful Jew today, what if after today he believes in Christ? He is a heretic today, what if tomorrow he follows c atholic truth? He is a schismatic today, what if tomorrow he is surrounded in c atholic peace? Anyone you refer to, in whatever sort of notable error, if you condemn the most desperate, before they end their life, may they not repent and come to true life in the future? So then, brothers, for this I remind you, that the 62 fidelibus est cavendum. Non alia ergo de causa Deus exosa havet peccata illa sodomitica, nisi quia sunt nature annullancia et destructive in radice Ibid. 24. 61 Moore, The Formation of a Persecuting Society 94. 62 Pa g anus est hodie. Unde scis utrum sit futurus cristianus? Iudeus infidelis est hodie, quid, si cras creddat in Cristo? Hereticus est hodie, quid, si cras sequitur katholicam veritatem? Scismaticus est hodie, quid si cras amplectitur katholicam pacem? Quid si isti, quos in quocunque genere erroris notas et
198 Although certainly not arguing for total acceptance, in this early sermon, he seems to be calling for peaceful coexistence. This sermon is one of only a handful in which Hus preached in a calming manner His list of those who should not be too quickly condemned reflects the diversity of Prague and the complex state of the c hurch. It also makes no reference to the supernatural Devil or Antichrist. Hus echoed this statement e you to patiently desire [repentance] with regard to all the faithful, infidel, gentile s and Jew s on account of God. Whoever among you inflict s violence, then you descend into sin with [the sinful ones] ... This [violence] is the law of the pagans, heathe 63 During a period of intense polemic, he continued to call for patience and to condemn violence. This call for civic peace places the audience s focus on the spiritual battle at hand. Hus kept the audience focused on foes that could be conquered from within the soul and called for patience with those without. Similar to his cautious acceptance of women and intolerance of sodomites, Hus could preach harshly against the Jews and heretics one day and describe them as future brothers on study of how he preached on those he understood to be outside the flock. The history of Jews in Prague, like the history of Jews in many cities, consisted of times of plenty and prosperity, a long with tumultuous times of violence and persecution. Charles IV readily welcomed Jews to his expanding capital and even attempted to maintain the population tamquam desperatissimos dampnas, antequam istam vitam finiant, agunt penitenciam et inveniunt veram quenqu am iudicare Schmidtov Collecta 545 63 Hortamur vos, fratres, pacientes esuri ad fideles, infidels, gentiles, Iudeos propter eum, si quam ethnicorum et p ublicanorum M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol 3, 54 55.
199 of the Old Town Jewish Quarter while encouraging Jewish settlers to fill space in his growing ad dition of New Town. Although hardly without incident, when compared to many other European major cities, the Jews of the mid fourteenth century encountered far less violence and persecution. 64 In 1389, however, a minor street scuffle led to charges of host desecration and a major outbreak of violence against the Jewish community. The pogrom stemmed from broad discontent with King Wenceslas, whom population and used the services of money lenders. 65 With Wenceslas away from the city, the Jews became targets and scapegoats for growing dissatisfaction. The violence against the Jews ignited due to an apparent incident in the Jewish Quarter. The Christian chronicles of the incident accu se the Jews of hurling insults and rocks at a passing priest carrying the communion host to a shut in living just inside the Jewish quarter. Apparently, this act resulted in a brawl between some unnamed Jews and the Christian procession. In response, Chris tians entered the Jewish quarter and proceeded to massacre the population. 66 Exact numbers of people killed in the attack are unclear. Most records vastly exaggerate deaths as high as 3,000, although probably only 750 Jews actually lived in the quarter. Per haps the most accurate estimates place the dead at three to four hundred. 67 64 Wolverton ed. rty Five Years of Teaching (Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press, forthcoming 2014). 65 37. 66 Barbara Newman has recently published an excellent analysis of the chronicles describing the 1389 pogrom and the mocking Christ Church History 81 (2012): 1 86, 2 6. 67 Newman,
200 Unfortunately, little evidence exists concerning the Jewish population during the time Hus preached in Prague. The violence against the community occurred roughly a decade before H us arrived in Prague. The Jewish population did not cease to exist, although it was probably severely diminished. Records attest to at least one Jewish individual who was charged with blasphemy in 1399, suggesting that Jews were either still in residence i n Prague or had returned a decade after the massacre 68 However, little evidence exists concerning their numbers or status prior to 1419 and the outbreak of the Hussite Wars. Hussite texts mentioned cooperation between the Jews of Prague and Hussites in def iance of the crusaders, both in the construction of fortifications and in financing the Hussite war effort. Violence that occurred in 1421 under the leadership of attests to a Jewish community remainin g in the city. Unfortunately, almost no details of the event remain. 69 A considerable and frustrating thirty year gap is evident in the historiography of Jewish life in Prague that aligns with the life and career of Jan Hus. Due to their frequent mention in the Bible and position as outsiders in Bohemian predecessors and contemporaries preached sermons concer ning the Jews. Janov labeled the J and wrote texts demonizing the Jews for usury and other issues. 70 Nothing, however, highlights these homiletic references to Jews as anything other than the employment of common tropes. 68 H 42. 69 Ibid. 42 70 Ibid., 46.
201 Hus, likewise, frequently referenced th e Jews in his sermons If descriptions of Pharisees are separated from Jews and the Pharisees are acknowledged as predominately an allegory for corrupt Christian priests, then the amount of homiletic material on Jews dec reases dramatically. Hus, however, still had many of the expected condemnations of the New Testament Jews scattered through his sermons. His sermon for Passion Sunday, 1405 contained the typical denigration of the Jews as found in the sermons of other prea life and the truth of doctrine are made to be on account of those of the Jews that 71 Hus describe d Jews as perverse and odious, but he makes no explicit connection between the Jews of the New Testament and the Jews of Prague. 72 1405 appears to have been dictated by th e calendar based liturgical readings. When discussing Jews outside the scriptural context, he occasionally built upon stereotypes and negative tropes, but also preached an Augustinian style of tolerentia 73 Of note is some of the most notorious descriptions 71 Sanctitas ergo vite et veritas doctrine cause fuerunt, propter quas Iudei Cristum Dominum occiderunt Schmidtov, Collecta 164. 72 It is also interesting that Hus seemed to have not preached on Good Friday in both 1405 and 1411, common days to find anti Jewish rhetoric. 73 t olerentia different than the modern concept of tolerance, which implies acceptance. Hus was not preaching that Christianity and saved from their ignorance. For a detailed article on American Catholic Philosophy Quarterly 74 (2000): 63 76.
202 attributed by preachers to medieval Jews, such as the blood libel, ritual child murder, unmitigated carnality, or the accusation of host desecration. 74 As with many medieval Christians, however, Hus personally may h ave known little about his actual Jewish neighbors and he rarely offered any information that distinguish ed the Jews of Prague from the Jews of the New Testament. 75 His sermons Christians and Jews; mention of Jews is mostly limited to common tropes of the Jews 76 He likely built his concepts concerning the Jews almost completely from S cripture, patristic writings, and kilome ter ; but Despite his detachment from the reality of fifteenth century Judaism, he preached on the Jews to his audiences and used Jews as a physically visible spiritual op ponent whose proximity to the Bethlehem Chapel would have made them quite useful for his audience as examples of ungodliness. to accept the Christian faith. For example, in the Gospel at hand tests the limits of faith, which neither the Jews nor the pagans are able to accept. Jews are not able to take hold of the idea that an un violated virgin might 74 Gregg, Devils, Women, and Jews 188; Newman, 2. 75 Steven Kruger, The Spe ctral Jew: Conversion and Embodiment in Medieval Europe (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005), 167, 170. 76 These are two stereotypes offered by Gregg that fit the common paradigm employed by Hus. Gregg, Devils Women and Jews 180.
203 conceive and might give birth to a 77 Similarly, Hus preached earlier on December 19, 1410: On the other hand, you might say that Christ is the stone. Matthew 21 builders rejected, this is in fact the corner truth and the Jews reject it to their damnation, having excommunicated and abandoned Christ to death. Th us Christ is in fact the corner stone because the walls of Gentiles and Jews combine in one faith and Christian religion, just as the corner stone combines two walls. Christ is the stone which should join together all, but he is rej ected, despite being the corner stone of the walls, i.e. Jews and Gentiles. 78 Both of these examples utilize the Jews not as a t hreat but as a group who fail to words, he seems to be simply telling his audience not to be like the Jews, yet within his sermons, the Jews can appear far more sinister. So me Devil. The moral comparison becomes more ominous in sermons where Hus explicitly linked Jewish resistance or failure to accept Christian doctrine to diabolical influence. For example on June 7, 1411, Hus stated: All men are disciples of Christ or disciples of the Devil and just as Christ gives his doctrines to the young learners ( abecdearii ) the Devil also teaches his. Principally, therefore, the doctrine of the Christian faithful is faith and through faith the letters are learned, and these proceed from the heart, so from the heart the Trinity creates blessing. But likewise the Devil 77 Quia igitu r evangelium presens est quasi littus fidei, ad quod Judei neque pagani fidem applicare possunt, quia Judei non possunt hoc capere, quomodo virgo inviolate conciperet et pareret filium manens virgo. Nam si hoc possint concipere tunc quasi omens alios artic ulos fidei faciliter acceptarent. M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol 3, 148. 78 predicantem veritatem, Judei reprobaverunt zawrhly su, ipsum excommunicantes et morti exponents. Hic Christus factus est in caput anguli quia muros gentilium et Judeorum in unam fidem et religionem Christa nam, tamquam lapis ang ulus combinavit. Christus est lapis, qui conpaginari debent Omnia, sed reprobatus est; ipse autem est lapis angularis parietum, i.e. Judee et gentilitas M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol 2, 88.
204 teaches letters first to his disciples, meaning the Jews, heretics, and p agans, and the alphabet is u nfaithfulness, that is in the hearts of Jews and pagans, who do not believe in the blessed Trinity. 79 Hus linked the Devil and the inability of the Jews to accept Christian doctrine, but he also made the Jews legitimately threatening to his audience. Althou gh probably a excommunicated, and executed by the King in the summer of 1405 for on various charges including stating that Judaism was superior to Christianity. This event, occur drawing Christians away from the faith. 80 At times, Hus certainly alluded to Jewish influence on Christians. For example, he makes vague allusions to the danger of the Old Testament understood, just as Remigius says. On the other hand the Jews infest us through their Jewish law, rather 81 He used considerably harsher anti Jewish polemic in March, 1411: ha d two sons, one who wa s innocent and the other a mortal sinner. Allegorically these are the Jews and gentiles. First, the innocent son represent s the people of salvation, those who at the end stay for 79 Ewanglium presens legitur in die s. Trinitatis ideo, quia in eo est mencio de s. Trinitate. In ewangelio igitur docet Christus Nycodemum principium salvacionis nostre, sc. fidem congnoscere, sine qua inpossiblile ut salvari hominem. Et quia omnis homo vel est discipulus Christi vel dyaboli et sicud Chr istus dedit suis doctrinam abecedarii, sic et dyabolus suis. Principium ergo doctrine christianorum fidelium est fides, que per litteram designator, que a corde procedit, ut ex corde Trinitatem creant benedictam. Sed eciam dyabolus docet literam primam suo s discipulus, sc. Judeorum paganorumque, qui non credunt benedictam Trinitatis M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol 4, 177. 80 Petr ornej over looks the pro Jewish charges, and states that Huler was executed for counterfeit, embezzlement, and taking part in a conspiracy which led to the murder of a mistress of Wenceslas IV at Karlstein Castle in 1397. ornej, Velk d jiny zem K oruny esk vol. 5, 78. Newman, 81 M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 3, 42.
205 eternit y in the home of their father. The second s on represents a pile of sinners; although he is the son of his creation, nevertheless he will not stay eternally in the house of his father for etern ity and according to this the son is named in many ways. First he is the congregation of the wicked second he is the city of Babylon, and third he is the synagogue of Satan and other adoptions of the wicked 82 most common use of contemporary Jews within his preaching. This example is seen again in April, 1411, as Hus included the Jews as threats to the c hurch: T he holy Church of Christ never experiences peace in this world, because he says to him in Matthew 10, I come not to send peace but the sword. Therefore Holy Mother Church does not have peace from the persecution of heretics, from the persecution of Jews, nor does it have peace from hypocrites simulating holiness. Whence Bernard says, Once it was foretold now comes th e time of fulfillment Behold my bitternes s in peace most vile. F irst, the bitter murder of the martyr I am more bitter in the conflict of heretics, now in most bitter in the customs of the domestic, so called Christians posing themselves a s fals e sons and rectors of the C hurch militant. He is able to neither rout nor flee from them Therefore t hey are so strengthen ed and so multiplied to be above us, they are an internal and incurable plague of the Church, and it will be cured with difficulty and for that reason his bitter ness it is most vile in peace 83 Hus, borrowing heavily from Matthew and Bernard of Clairvaux, presented a bleak image of the contemporary c hurch. The Jews in conjunction with heretics and 82 Judaicum et gentilem. Primus ergo filius innocens est populous salvandorum, finaliter, qui manebit in domo patris sui in eternum. Secundus autem filius, peccatorum cumulus, quamvis sit filius eius creacioine, tamen non manebit in domo patris sui in eternum et secundum hoc diversimode nomi nat u r talis filius. Primo ecclesia malignancium, 2 civitas Babilon, 3 synagoga Sathane et sic de aliis appropriacionibus malorum. Ibid., 90. 83 mitte re pace, sed glad ium. Non habui t ergo s. mater ecclesia pace ab hereticorum persecucione, a Judeorum perecucione, iam habet pacem ab yporitarum sanctitate simulata predictum est nunc tempus implecionis advenit. Et in pace amaritudo mea amarissi ma. Amara prius nece martire amarior post in conflict u hereticorum, amarissima nun in moribus a d omesticorum sed fictorum, christianorum et false se filios rectores ecclesia fingencium militantis. Non fugare, non fogere eos potest, ita invalueraunt ita mu ltiplicati sunt super nos intesntina et insanabilis plaga ecclesie, et diffic i l i ter curator M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol 4, 52.
206 false Christians, however clearly differ from the Devil or Antichrist. Hus does not call for their d estruction. Here, along with other earthly destroyers of the Holy Mother Church, they are explained in terms of a regrettable peace. The war is to be fought in the hearts and souls of the audience conquer. According to Hus, the Jews persecute the Church of Christ, but Hus, by avoiding a call for action, absolved the audience of their part in the struggle against earthly foes. Their battle of the spirit was against the powers of Satan. Women, Jews, h eretics, and sodomites were evidence of battles already lost. In conclusion, Hus presented his audience evil after evil in a dramatic litany of with a considerable number of sermons that appear reasonable and tolerant to a modern perspective, Hus commonly bombarded his listeners with images of terrifying foes with the potential to destroy. The Devil prowled like a lion, the Antichrist corrupted the c hurch from within and sinners who failed their spiritual tests looked for ways to drag the faithful with them to hell. Why should historians investigate this rhetoric of terror? Few preachers did not have this reputation following the Fourth Lateran Council of 12 15 which sanctioned the persecution of Jews, heretics, and lepers as threats to the faithful. 84 Hus repeatedly expounded on the threats to the faithful, and despite the fact that in many ways he exemplified the medieval stereotype, his own version of W arnings and threatening imagery appear so frequently, they must be considered part of the audience experience at Bethlehem C 84 Moore, Persecuting Society 88.
207 common tropes. The se tropes had considerable value in understanding the function of proclaimed to his audience: the threats solidified core values, they further solidified his position as leader, and finally they gave purpose and agency to his audience. First, the use of terrifying imagery helped reinforce core values at a time when Prague seemed in decline. The Devil, the Antichrist, and the hosts of sinful mortals that aligned against the people of the Bethlehem Chapel represented not just the spiritual destroyers of souls, but also a reason for the social, political, and economic destabilization of late medieval Prague. The glory of the Emperor had come and gone; popes had increased in number, splitting the family of Christ; plagues struck repeatedly; and the winters grew colder and longer. From his pulpit, Jan Hus told the people about Christendom, th 85 Hus, although rarely drawing the link explicitly, gave the people of his audience scapegoats for blame, while he simultaneously buttressed their position as well as his own as the righteous and loved of God. 86 Second, t hrough his preaching of spiritual vigilance, Hus clearly positions himself as the charismatic leader of his flock. Sociologist Philip Smith argues that one cannot have a charismatic leader without the presence of evil. Essentially, for a salvation must recognize their need to be saved. 87 85 Gregg, Devils, Women, and Jews 20. 86 87
208 this purpose. He filled his sermons with the Devil, demons, the Antichrist, corrupt priests, and any number of forces ready to deny his listeners salvation. Beyond simply belonging to or leading the community, Hus used martial imagery and symbols of evil in an attempt to motivate his followers. Within the e arly sermons, much of his emphasis was on the threats of the Devil and sin, with a growing emphasis on clerical reform. In the two years leading up to the indulgence riots of 1412, Hus spoke in terms of spiritual conflict as he encouraged his listeners to fight for their souls against the forces of evil with ever harsher statements. 88 often seems to be predicated on hatred of the evil against which they fight, and indeed will be magnified as this perceived 89 terrifying, ever present, a nd corrupting Devil against whom one could hope for victory only with obedience to Christian teaching, as preached by Hu s. He presented clear message that if they foll owed Christ and their priest in combating these foes, they would strengthen their faith and achieve salvation. pose. The sermons in their recorded form do not reveal Hus as a great story teller and certainly not as a consoler. Instead, his preaching gave his audience the purpose of combating the forces that 88 Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution 81. 89
209 seemed to be tearing apart their world and their faith. Hi s emotional appeals attempted to bring his audience to spiritual action to defeat supernatural foes. 90 His sermons served to harness popular anxiety, not just to wards terrifying spiritual foes but also away from violence and activities detrimental to the pe ace of Prague, the c hurch, and their souls. Th e s e extreme threats were also easily recognized and understood by his audience as they built off of tropes and imagery that would have been quite familiar to his listeners. rnatural threats along with the outsiders of the c hurch it becomes clear that he was primarily interested in internal spiritual conflict, as Jews, sodomites, heretics, and corrupt women all appeared as those who have failed in their struggle against the D evil. These groups were still threats and fundamentally important as witnesses to surrounding spiritual battle, but Hus made no call for their destruction. The battle that his listeners needed to fight was for their own souls. 90 Gavin I. Langmuir, History, Religion, and Antisemitism (B erkeley: University of Cal ifornia Press, 1990 ) 266.
210 CHAPTER 6 SIN AND RE PENTANCE Corrupt clerics, political scandals, simony, indulgences, forces of evil, and doers surviving sermons. Yet when one pushes the cacophonous political, cultural, and theological context of early fifteenth century Prague into the background and focuses on repentance and his concern for the salvation of souls, preferring instead to examine more controversial topics. conte x t of his preaching sale preaching bent on the reforming of 1 passing, but then he quickly moved to Hus trial. 2 in an article examining ideas on repentance and confession in the context of the reflect typical medieval belie 3 work, M. Jan Hus: ivota a u as including 1 Spinka, John Hus: Concept of the Church 60. 2 Fudge, Jan Hus, 40. 3 90, 93. He uses a sermon from January 1411 to show Hus c onfession as indispensable but needing to be in
21 1 repentance were preferable to the purchase of indulgences. 4 Historians have clearly but none has seen fit to examine it as a central To discern how Hus chose to preach on th e topic of sin and repentance his academic tracts can help to illustrate how he altered doctrine and theology for the pulpit His academic wr iting, t heological writing and public preaching certainly supported and influenced each other, but a considerable difference existed in audience and context between the pulpit of Bethlehem Chapel and the masters of the University of Prague. Therefore, ana lyses of Hus and repentance that focus on only one or the other of these two formats are fundamentally incomplete. A comparison on the other hand reveals conscious decisions Hus made depending on the audience and the immediate context. Studies have shown t meant full disclosure was unnecessary because the audience knew quite well what was revolved around pastoral and p ractical issues critical to the spiritual life of his audience. Perhaps the most unavoidable issue before the faithful at Bethlehem was the rarely mentioned issue of two and in 1410, three popes Combined with the frequently noted hypocrisy of a severely discredited clergy Hus frequently found himself addressing disruptions in the c This concern should not be artificially combined with a broad call for refo r m in the c hurch; rather Hus treated this matter in a way that would have allayed some of his s concerns Hus never 4 89. Kybal, vota a u eni vol. 3, 268 73.
212 explicitly addressed the multitude of popes and their relation to repentance, other than to point out their relative powerlessness in the pro cess After introducing the context for understanding of repentance, as they developed in two different genres: theological writings and sermons. This context of apostolic confusion is was a particular problematic thread for To effectively preach his message of repentance to a broad audience, Hus had to have a keen awareness of his context. Two clear factors, among many schism and his developing ideas concerning the elect. He preached during a time when the apostolic succession to the papacy was in doubt. Consequently, the validity of priestly absol ution was in question. 5 Hus had the choice either to preach around this delicate subject or to address it directly. His contemporaries also grappled with how to handle the state of the c hurch S uch a widespread struggle resulted in a variety of different s trategies for explaining how the schism affected the spiritual lives of the laity. The Florentine preacher Giovanni Dominici (d.1419), for example, assumed the responsibility to act as a substitute for the position of the pope, attempting to guide his Flor entine listeners in the absence of a clear papal authority. 6 Jean Gerson, on the other hand, appealed to divine law and conciliar theology to anchor the continued authority of the clergy among the laity. 7 In his sermon Quomodo Stabit Regnum Gerson 5 Extra Ecclesia Salus non est Sed Quae Ecclesia ? Ecclesiology and Authority in the 337 ; 6 Debby, Renaissance Florence in the Rhetoric of Two Popular Preachers 218. 7 Companion to Jean Gerson ed. Brian Patrick McGuire (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 193 194.
213 comfort ed the laity trapped between multiple popes, telling them they would not be held responsible for supporting a false pope when papal validity was unclear. 8 Hus also had to preach to the complexity of the papal schism, and this context is reflected in his ca ll for repentance. developing perspective concerning the definition and authority of the c hurch. Undoubtedly influenced by the thoughts of Wyclif Hus produced his most famous work, De Ecclesia while in exile from Prague in 1413. Within this text, Hus rejected the idea of a hierarchical church based on apostolic authority and redefined the Church as the chosen elect. One of the more controversial arguments in De Ecclesia of c hurch in the 1411 sermons, but at that time, he may already have been convinced the priest was the definition proposed by Wyclif and later explored by Hus in De Ecclesia which 9 This definition of the Church essentially insinuates that the clergy may not even be members of the Church if not of th e elect. If not part of the elect, how could a priest have the authority to hear confession or grant absolution? In the text of De Ecclesia, Hus argued concerning priests: Hence it is to be noted, that guilt enters in the soul of him who sins mortally and grace is corrupted or ceases to be, for which reason he who sins mortally is under the debt of eternal damnation, provided he does not do penance, and, if he persists in this guilt, he is separated from the companionship of pilgrims in grace. But in penan ce there is a remedy, by which guilt is deleted, grace conferred, the chain of damnation broken, 8 Referenced i 9 Jan Hus, De Ecclesia trans. by David Schaff, (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1915), 11.
214 and a man reunited with the church. This penance is performed by salvation. 10 Hus cited alone died for us. The Word of God forgives sins. The priest is the judge. The priest performs his function and does not exercise the way of any power Hus continued to argue that Christ f orgives those who repent in their hearts, while the priest forgives those who repent with their mouths; only repentance in the heart is required. 11 Clearly, Hus arrived at a point where he completely denied the necessity of the priest, and while preaching o n repentance just two years prior to writing those statements, he may have already been in the process of arriving at that conclusion. have been considering an open denial of t he priesthood in the penitential process. His preaching on the topic of sin and repentance, however, shows that Hus effectively remained ambiguous as to the necessity of confession. Of interest is that sin and mained relatively constant in the wake of discussions on the topic; no dramatic differences exist between those in 1404 and those adical and eschatological in the latter group of sermons, it does not noticeably alter the tone of his concern for educating 10 Ibid., 98 99. 11 Ibid., 101.
215 remains, despite the changes in his personal ci rcumstances and the addition of his polemical responses to challengers. Sin Obviously, without sin no one would need repentance; these two concepts are counterparts and are clearly co necessary before forgiven ess was even possible. 12 Therefore, the sinner had to four broad categories: types of sin, consent to sin, descent into sin, and consequences of that sin. Rarely are t hese categories mutually exclusive, and Hus never addressed sermons focused on sin was to bring his flock to re pentance, but before that could occur, he felt he must make his audience aware of their sinful state. Sin has been an ever present concern in the history of the Christian C hurch. Having been preceded by fourteen centuries of Christian thought on the subje ct, Hus had innumerable sources to draw from; yet he cited no single influence with such frequency as the works of Augustine of Hippo. 13 Augustine taught that the world was a battleground ruled by the Devil, one where Christians must strive to overcome the evil of 12 Tentler, Sin and Confession 24. 13 No comprehensive study of the influence of Augustine on Hus as yet exists. Vilem Herold has BRRP 7, (2007) pp. 744 53.
216 this world to achieve the crown of victory in the next. 14 Jan Hus, who often employed the phrase. When Hus preached on sin, he frequently supported his warnings with proofs from Augustine. He cited a variety of other sources 15 Hus stated his view of the world, with proofs from Augustine, on the second Sunday after the feast of the Trinity in 1405: hates you the whole world was placed in wickedness, that is, in the Devil, since t he evil fire was set because of hatred and lust Therefore, you who are not placed in that fire, do not be surprised, if the world hates you. Hear, for this reason the Lord says in John 15 world, because it was its own, would love you; because you truly are not from this world, but I chose you from the world, on account of this the consolation [comes] to the members from the head. Whereby the head is held in hatred, the members are consoled, thence, dearest ones, do not be surprised if the world hates you, you truly are not from the world. And your head was first held in hatred so th at the head would fortify the members. Therefore, do not be surprised, if the world hates you. If, therefore, the world hates itself, for according to Augustine it loves itself falsely and hates truly, because it hates nature and loves vice, through which nature is spoiled and pruned by the eternal fire, then do not be surprised because the world hates you, because the world is the heir of the kingdom of Babylon, [but] you [are heirs] of the heavenly father. 16 14 Peter Brown, Augustin e of Hippo : A Biography (Berekley: University of California Press, 2000), 244. 15 In the 90 sermons of the Collecta alone Hus cited Augustine roughly 150 times. 16 Et talis invidia est peccatum secundum mortale: primum superbia, secundum invidia. Mortale di citur, quia mortificat animam a gracia Dei qua prius erat gracia Dei vivificans, quia si inpenitens decederet, eternaliter dampnaretur. Secundum est mortale peccatum, quia nascitur ex superbia et est filia primogenita superbie apostotantis angeli, sequenti s vestigia illius. Nam Luciper videns se pulcrum in Trinitate sancta, quasi in speculo, habuit conplacenciam in se et sic superbiam, quia sibi ipsi placuit. Et icium peccati sunt ex parte eius. Mors enim sic intravit in orbem. Nam si Adam non peccasset et Eva, dyaboli invidia
217 Hus emphasized that greed for the vices of the world had lured mankind into the depths of sin. Hus also saw the world as a perfectly evil place and sin as the outcome of encouraged his listeners to renounce the world and a ll luxuries that lead to sin and damnation. 17 Two weeks after that sermon, he urged listeners to deny the desires of the practice carnal works evilly, such as to c ommit adultery, to steal, to kill unjustly, to desire and solicit ( ambire 18 Hus believed these sins were the result of living in and of the flesh and were rooted in love of the world. 19 y devoted large parts of sermons to analyzing ways that sin was manifest. Hus insisted on identifying and labeling sins for his listeners so that this might change their lives and find redemption. Hus, of course, did not grant all sins the same level of severity, a typical medieval position, as historians have repeatedly pointed out. 20 Hus and the decepti, non fuissent mortui. Et igitur invidet homini, qui potuit mori et potuit non mori: potuit mori, quia potuit peccare. Igitur dyabolus videns, quod debent extolli powyzeny byti in beatitudine super eum, quam ipse amisit, et illam beatitudinem habere, quam ipse debuit habere et sic invidebat ipsis et ideo ad transgressionem precepti dominici seduxit eos in peccatum et in mortem primam parentum. Igitur peccatum invidia est peccatum dyaboli et qui sunt invidi, sequaces sunt dyaboli et filii iniquitatis dicuntur. M. Hus Sermo nes in Bethlehem, vol. 2, 55 56. 17 Renuncciasti dyabolo et operibus eius, mundo et luxurie eius, ac voluptatibus tenetur vox tua, non in tumulo mortuorum, sed libro vivencium Ibid., 345. 18 Carnaliter enim vivere est carnis opera sinistree exercere, ut udulterari, furari, iniuste occidere, vouptari et ambire Ibid., 376 77. 19 Interestingly, Hus does not use any references to the sinful world during the season of Lent in 1405. Although the sermons are laden with references to sin and repentance, he abando ns referencing the world in favor of more direct references to the Devil. 20 Gerson published the treatise De Differentia on the difference between venial and mortal. Tentler, Sin and Confession historians orthodox position, especially as it was a point of contention at Constance. Fudge, Jan Hus 115; Spinka, 78,156, 230.
218 majority of Christian theologians believed that certain sins were more easily forgiven than others. He deemed venial sins, such as sleeping too much or simply fe eling annoyed, almost completely involuntary and unlikely to result in damnation. 21 Other sins, however, were severe enough to be labeled mortal and drove a wedge between views on mortal and venial sins is the Super IV Sententiarum; but as previously mentioned, Hus never cited the work directly in his preaching. 22 Historians have rarely inco mplete when compared with his academic writings. This focus on his academic tracts has led to oversimplified, general statements concerning his thoughts on sin underst and and what information Hus most valued. 23 A key example from his sermons is that Hus almost never addressed venial sin, choosing instead to preach almost exclusively on what he perceived the far more pressing matter of mortal sin. To educate his audienc e about mortal sin, Hus used a typical and relatively simple, straight forward approach. He often compiled a numbered list of types of sins and would then proceed to expound upon each sin, one at a time. 24 This style of numerical organization most often cons isted of short lists in his popular preaching and 21 Fudge, Jan Hus 40. Fudge provides no footnote as to where he found these examples. 22 Both Fudge and Spinka rely on Super IV Senteniarum while generally neglecting the sermons on this subject. Fudge, Jan Hu s 40, Spinka, Concept of the Church 76 8; Kybal, ivota a u vol. 3 97 106. 23 Fudge, Jan Hus 40 24 Preaching of the Friars 251 255. Pavel Soukup has also pointed out that this was common practice among other reforming preachers surrounding Hus in Bohemia such as Peter Chel icky and Jakoubek of St 97.
219 extended more complex organization in more formal sermons on important feast days or in his addresses to the Bohemian Synod. 25 One such occasion was the third Sunday in Advent, 1404. Hus assembled this lengt hy and commonly cited sermon using the analogy of sins as chains dragging an individual to hell. 26 Hus explained that a state of repentance could lighten the burden of those metaphorical chains and that the grace of Jesus Christ could remove them completely 27 Hus, in his typical manner, cast his aspersions on the sinful world by directing his audience to control their physical bodies, state of innocence the body is of glor y ; described the seven punishments of hunger, thirst, cold, fever, toil, sorrow, and death that the corrupted body suffers as punishment for its sin. Hus described these bodily sensations as chains pla ced on humans as the penalty for corruption. 28 Hus began this sermon with the symptoms of being imprisoned in the chains of sin. Later in the sermon, he described the proverbial material of the individual chain links, or specific sins. Hus addressed the li nks of sin in a way that was vague enough to be applicable to nearly the first is lust James 1 is deligh t in the sin, third is consent to the sin, fourth is the deed, fifth to endure in the deed, sixth to harden ( induracio ). But be free from the seventh, which is to be 25 6. 26 sin and salvation. Spinka, Concept of the Church 58; Fudge, Jan Hus 41 27 These concepts are found at the beginning and end of the sermon. Schmidtov, Collecta 39, 45. 28 Status ergo penitentis est in carcere corporis, quod in statu innocencie erat corpus glory, post peccatum cepit esse carcer miserie Schmidtov, Collecta 39.
220 29 Hus used it in this sermon as part of a wider discussion on all mortal sin. Hus never addressed the sin of fornication directly in this sermon, though he did in numerous other sermons; therefore, sexual impurity was probably meant to stand as only one of many possible interpretations for that particular s criptural reference. This specific sermon also reminds sinners that Scripture gives examples of how to overcome their chains; but more important is the fact that Christ sent his apostles to forgive the sins of those who repented. Although this is a likely allusion to absolution thr ough confession, Hus mentioned neither priests nor the sacrament of confession; instead, he kept Christ as the actor throughout the sermon, reinforcing the idea that all mercy and forgiveness is through Christ. 30 Hus used a similar list style format in his sermon for December 13, 1410, when he argued that pride and envy should be considered mortal sins. Hus listed both pride and envy before explaining why these two sins lead to damnation. Included in this sermon is an explanation of mortal sin for his audie nce: And such envy is also a mortal sin: first [comes] pride, then envy. It is called mortal because it removes the soul from the grace of God, [the soul] which was first made alive by the grace of God, because if it would die impenitent, then it would be eternally damned. Second, it is a mortal sin, because it is born out of pride and is the first born daughter of pride of the apostate angel, following in his footsteps. For Lucifer, seeing himself [to be] beautiful in the holy Trinity, as if in a mirror, h eld delight, and thus pride, in himself, because it itself was pleasing him. And thus he was jealous of God, since [God] was more beautiful than him and was above [him]. Therefore, it is said in Ecclesiasticus 10:15, that the beginning of sin is pride. [ And] from Wisdom 2: Death entered the world through [by means of] the envy of the devil. And they who are part of him imitate him. Death, indeed, thus entered into the world. For if Adam and Eve had not 29 Sec ondum est delectiacio, tercium consensus, quartum opus, quantum consuetudo in opera, sextum induracio. Sed absit septimum, quod est obstinacio Ibid., 44. 30 Ibid., 45
221 sinned, deceived by the envy of the D evil, they wou ld not be dead. And therefore he envies man, who was able to die and [who] was able not to die: he could die, because he was able to sin. Therefore the D evil, seeing that because they ought to be extolled powyzeny byti in blessedness above him, which he hi mself lost, and they [ought] to have that blessedness, which he himself ought to have and thus was envying them and for that reason, he seduced them into sin to a transgression of Therefore, the sin of envy is the sin of the devil and those who are envious, are the followers of the D evil and are called the sons of iniquity 31 When mental concepts as common as pride and envy are labeled as mortal sin, it reveals just how insignificant venial near involuntary acts as mortal sin, leaving only what seem like trivial character flaws as venial. Hus addressed many of humanities most noticeable failings as mortal sins, which were far more significant to address than the serious but simultaneously uncontrollable problems connected with sinful human nature. 32 A week earlier, on December 7, 1410, Hus also addressed mortal sin of a se xual nature, but he used the labeling and numbering of these sins to transition to another major component of his preaching on sin and repentance: the question of consent. rd 31 Et talis invidia est peccatum secundum mortale: primum superbia, secundum invidia. Mort ale dicitur, quia mortificat animam a gracia Dei qua prius erat gracia Dei vivificans, quia si inpenitens decederet, eternaliter dammpnaretur. Secundum est mortale peccatum, quia nascitur ex superbia et est filia primogenital supervie apostotantis angeli, sequentis vestigial illius. Nam Lucipe videns se pulcrum in Trinitate sancta, quasi in speculo, habuit conplacenciam in se et sic superbiam, quia sibi ipsi placuit. Et sic invidebat Deo, quod esset pulcrior eo et super esset. Igitur Ecclesiastici dicitur, sunt ex parte eius. Mors enim sic intravit in orbem. Nam si Adam non peccassetet Eva, dyaboli invidia decepti, non fuissent mor tui. Et igitur invidet homini, qui potuit mori et potuit non mori: potuit mori, quia potuit peccare. Igitur dyabolus videns, quod debent extolli powyzeny byti in beatitudine super eum, quam ipse amisit, et illam beatitudinem habere, quam ipse debuit habere et sic invidebat ipsis et ideo ad transgressionem precept dominic seduxit eos in peccatum et in mortem primam parentum. Igiture peccatum invidia est peccatum dyaboli et qui sunt invidi, sequaces sunt dyaboli et filii iniquitatis dicuntur. M. Hu s Sermones in Bethl ehem, v ol 2 55 56. The Czech phrase powyzeny byti is simply used in apposition. 32 Fudge, Jan Hus 40.
222 Sunday of Advent, 1404. T he nature of consenting to sin appeared quite commonly on which his audience neede d frequent clarification. Much as he did in forming his opinio ns of the sinful nature of the world, Hus drew many of his ideas about consent body, first themselves are found to sustain persecution in heart and in spirit. And theref ore greater are the punishments of the soul than of the body b ecause the spirit first consent s to sin and then the body 33 By bringing attention to the detrimental effect of consent to sin, Hus reassures his audience that those in mortal sin, including bu t not limited to clerics wallowing in luxury, suffer spiritually and separate themselves from sin, although some historians argue that his focus became dominated by a corr upt priesthood. 34 In the sermons of 1410 not necessarily change in respect to his urgency and need for identification, but rather he began to focus more openly on the faults of his critics, especially priests and bishops he perceived to be living in mortal sin. As Hus became more polemical, he sp ent more time defining sin and detailing the finer points he deemed necessary for the correction of his 33 In inferno enim maius supplicium sustinebunt in anima mali, quam in corpore, quia anima prius consnsit ad peccatum, quam corpus; plus peccaverunt in anima, quam corporis, ideo plus punietur etc. Nam primum consentit peccato et post facit opera M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem vol. 2 169. 34 Fudge, Jan Hus 63 64. Kybal, ivota a u 50 51.
223 audience but his sermons also clearly targeted his opponents. In particular, Hus often cited clerics as greedy and false prophets. 35 Hus did not always m aintain a predominantly critical tone, and many of his sermons maintained a definitive focus on his pastoral duties. His sermon for December 7, 1410, is an excellent example of how Hus was mindful of explaining right and wrong to his listeners, while tryin g to explain the subtler gray areas in his theology for the lay audience. This gray area especially existed around the question of consent. A fall from a state of righteousness into a state of mortal sin required consent, for if one did not consciously cho ose to give in to temptation, then one did not sin. 36 The finer details of the concept, however, remained unclear when applied to sinful thoughts and uncontrollable functions of the body. This sermon began with a typical numbering of sexual sins, including 37 Hus continued in the sermon, however, by explaining that not all sexual impulses are necessarily similar. In a remarkable sermon from early 1411, Hus humanized the priestly office and offers o ne of the most sympathetic examples in his sermons. He explain ed the temptation of sin with an example from the confessio nal. Sometimes it happens at the urging of the devil, because he disquiets nature at night or even in the daytime one suffers the flowing of nature; and for the one to whom this happens it is not a sin, provided that it is not [done with] his consent; and the outpouring of seed is produced from co 35 See Chapters 2 and 4 for a ful l illustration of Hus criticism of his opponents. 36 Fudge, Jan Hus 40; Tentler, Sin and Confession 150 151. 37 Similiter quando mulier superponitur et vir supponitur, eciam est turpisssimum peccatum. M. Hus Sermones in Bethl ehem, vol. 2, 30.
224 habitable, vicious conversation, even if it happens to the priests in confession, just as when young women come to confession bearing different sins of luxury, the man is aroused by passion and if he does not cons ent, he conquers; however, if he consents, he sins and thus priests should be careful in confessions;...many times the young priest hearing confession [and] delicate wo men relating their deformities, may then suffer the attack of the flesh against his wil l; if he does not stand fixed in reason and somehow consents to the former movement of the flesh, from that sin then and now he sinned; if he does not truly consent to the motions of the flesh, he has not sinned, but conquering, he is rewarded. 38 Hus might have chosen any number of scenarios to illustrate his point that sin is located in the act of consenting. Nevertheless, he gives an example of a young priest and a choice between sin and salvation, even in the midst of the sacrament of penance. Although th tendency to minimize the sacramental act of confession. This sermon is one of few in eaching that explicitly mentions the act of confession to a priest, and in this description the priest, rather than the penitent, is caught up in the spiritual turmoil of having to deny the urges of the flesh. 39 The passag e and sermon clearly illustrated ho w an individual may either consent to sin or resist in matters as basic as bodily functions. Even though the image of a 38 Aliquando fit dyaboli instigacione, quod naturam conturbat in nocte vel in die unus nature fluxum patitur; et hoc non est peccatum, dum non est consensus illius, cui accidit; vel contingit ex conversacione viciosa cohabitabili effusio seminis, ut in confes sione sacerdotibus accidit, sicut cum veniunt iuvenes mulieres ad confessionem, referentes diversa peccata luxurie, homo accenditur ardore et si non consentit, vincit; si autem consentit, peccat et sic presbiteri debent esse cauti in confessionibus; puta quod multocies sacerdos iuvenis audiens confessionem, mulieres delicates suas deformitates referentes, quod tunc contra suam voluntatem patitur impetum carnis; qui si non stat racione fixus et quomodocunque consentit illi motui carnis, extunc iam peccato i llo peccavit; si vero carnis motibus non assentit, non peccavit, sed vincens premiatur Ibid., 31 39 Claire M. Waters points out that the use of women as tempters in medieval preaching is not ten portrayed as a common root of temptation while men struggle with their inherent weaknesses. This particular case is interesting, however, since the female is doing exactly as she is supposed to do by confessing her sins and seeking forgiveness, and sti ll is the source of temptation for the priest. Waters, Angels and Earthly Creatures 38.
225 compromised priest is an atypical example for Hus, it is still an indication that Hus strove to place the clergy and laity on nearly equ al footing. This is significant when him to his audience. By using an example of a cleric to illustrate how sin only occurs 40 The use of clerical examples was certainly common in the Middle Ages, as indicated in well known examples from medieval literature such as Chaucer or Dante. This is not an example of a broad critique, but rather Hus, the ordained priest, chose an example that illustrated the possible trials he himself might endure. This may also reveal information about presence of young clerics and students from the university in the audience; perhaps the example was given as a warni ng to them in particular. Hus may have chosen this example so he could reach both the clerics and the laity in his audience, which was his primary goal. Hus again addressed the topic of consent in his sermon of December 28, 1410. Hus significantly borrowed from Augustine, stating: himself first known to sustain persecution in his heart and in his spirit. And when the punishment of the soul is greater than that of the body, then those puni shing and holding punishment in the heart suffer more than the suffering. In hell, they will sustain greater punishment in a spirit of evil than in the body....because the spirit consented to sin before the body....For he first consents to sin and then doe s it in an act. Whence Isaiah [says] in the tine supplied... 40 Ibid., 63.
226 41 Just as in the previous example, Hus showed that consent is the first step on a path to damnation. Here he borrowed Augustinian imagery of injustice, depicting the way earthly sin corrodes and leads to the destruction of the soul. Although consent is a critical component for the commission of individual sins, Hus focused on bringing more significant change to his listeners. He desired to convert his audience to lead a life pleasing to God and meriting salvation; therefore, Hus gave significant attention to the larger context of his audience and necessary generalities. many subsequent steps were possible. Even as one may attain a life pleasing to God, one could also follow a path in the opposite direction. Hus used another numbered list to denounce influences that could impede people on their journey to heavenly rewards. In a sermon in 1405, Hus focused on and provided scriptural references identif ying three major factors that the Devil could use to draw people away from a righteous life: through coming near, steals through suggestion and consensus, and rapes th rough 42 decline into sin as one in which a rather mundane human emotion, such as curiosity, 41 persecucionem in corde, i. in anima, sustinere congnoscitur. Et cu m maior sit pena anime, quam corporis...quia anima prius consensit ad peccatum, quam corpus...Nam primum consentit peccato et post gaudiis eternis est privatu subdit Augustinus. Vermis swyedomye twklywost welyka. Gaudium eciam multo maius est, quam in iniuste, iam vol. 2 169. 42 Sic dyabolus animam curiosam primo adamat per approximacionem, rapit per suggestionem et consensum e tdormit per operis exsecucionem Schmidtov Collecta 80
227 can lead to such violence f (to convert to the Lord, to value the Lord, to fear the Lord, to praise the Lord), should turn us 43 At the end of a lifetime of sin, of course, comes the inevitable judgment. In his preaching, Hus frequently used the second coming of Christ as a frame of reference or a deadline. Th sinners to change their lives Because, from the beginning of the world, this divided generation of evil and good always hastens, and will hasten up to the day of judgment, where first they will be separated; the sheep should be placed on the right in eternal joy and the foul smelling goats on the left....And pertaining to these things [ rales ] if they w ill continue impenitent, they will be eternally damned. 44 Hus always gave his audience another chance for conversion and repentance, but he frame and that leading an unrepentant life had dire c onsequences. Hus frequently referenced this conclusion with words that invoked images of an afterlife of fear and pain for those who spurned the opportunities granted to them in life. hat described judgment. Yet, he used many of those threatening images in proximity to the 43 Et has quatuor affeccione ut ad ipsum Deum convertamus, quibus opponuntur quatuor i n pedimenta M. Hus Sermones in Beth lehem vol 3, 8. 44 Quia a mundi principio semper currit duplex generacio, malorum sc. et bonorum, et curret usque ad diem iudicii, ubi primo seperabuntur oves a dextris in eterna leticia et edi a sinistris fetidi liter dampnabuntur. Ibid., 40.
228 call for repentance and conversion. For example, Hus stated on the first Sunday of For you warn that not all are changed from sin to grace and thus not all changed from misery to glory, none in the inferno are redeemed and therefore the wicked do not rise at judgment neither do sinners rise at the council of the just 45 the repeated threat that the audience had to consider if refusing to repent In effect, fire torments of hell. Fire was typically an adequate persuasion for his audiences. Despite the pervasiveness of references to the inferno, Hus generally discussed such references in close relation to the themes of repentance and justice. Hus typically presen t ed judgment as something for sinners to avoid, much like the fires of Hell. In fact, Hus use d the threat of j udgment much like the inferno. Justice as a threat preaching. On the Secon d Sunday of Advent in 1406, for example, Hus devoted a sermon to the end times as described in Luke 21. After discussing the various signs, such as eclipses, pressure, and wars, Hus turned his focus to the impending judgment. Hus concluded by quoting Grego think with all purpose correct life, change behavior conquer temptation by resisting or you will be punished and weep forever. Advent is always of eternal judgment 46 The 45 A sompno mortis corporalis resurgunt omnes; a sompno mortis spiritualis resurgunt quidam; a um ad duos postremos, nam non mones inmutabuntur de peccato in impii in iudicio neque peccatores in consilio iustorum Schmidtov, Collecta 29 46 Ill um ergo diem, fratres karissimi, tota intencione cogitate, vitam corigite, mores mutate, mala temptancia resistendo vincite, perpetrate autem fletibus punite. Adventum namque eterni iudicis tanto
229 theme of ju dgment continu ed the following week as Hus focused on the chains of sin and the penalties that come with judgment compared with earthly punishment. Hus, The truly penitent one humbly endures these chains so that, expecting to be freed by the Lord, he might be saved....However, the sinner makes haste to release himself, unwilling to endure justly the chains and willing to be freed unjustly from the chains. 47 than face damnation. H e implored his audience to run to the Lord in repentance, rather than flee, because flight from God leads to eternal death and more chains. 48 Hus proclaimed to his audience the way to avoid a regrettable last judgment. Hus attempted to convince them that if they persisted in sin and the ways of the world, they would be damned to eternal fire. Yet, to bring about conversion, Hus always reminded sinners of the way out, as he stated on the third Sunday after the Trinity: Oh sinner, humble thyself because the ha return to the obedience of the creator. Because you having been deformed through sin but are reformed through grace, be humble and return praise to God. Because you are richly endowed, be thankful; be humble to the glory of G od. Because you will be punished for sin, be humble; go repent, so that you may not hear the judgment and sentence of damnation. 49 securiores quandoque videbitis, quanto nunc districcionem il lius timendo preventitis Hec Gregorius Ibid., 38. 47 Hec autem se ipsum festinat solver e nolens iuste pati vincula et volens iniuste a vinculis liberari Ibid., 40. 48 Nec mors finem, quia morte perpetua morientur. O libera, Domine de morte eternal et sic a vinculis hic iam dictis Ibid 41. 49 O peccator, quia es potenter creates ex nichilo, humilare, redde obsequium Creatori. Quia deformatus perccatum reforamtus es per graciam, humiliare et redde laudem Deo. Quia es multis dotatus, gratus esto, humilare da golriam Deo. Quia puniendus es pro peccato, humilare, age penitenciam, ne sentenciam dampnabilem audias iudicantis. Ibid., 309 310.
230 threat of sin and to make them aware of their vulne rability. These key components naturally emphasized those dangers that primarily concerned him. His concerns about the identification of sin, consent to sin, and potential punishment for sin permeated his lude to his greatest concern: the salvation of his audience through true repentance. In order to reach true repentance, first one must feel true sorrow for their sins. Contrition versus Confession One canno t blame historians for avoiding the use of sermons for defin ing Hus in broad terms as Hus seems to have co nfused his contemporary critics concerning his thoughts on repentance turned opponent, accused Hus of denying the role of the priest in the penitential cycle. S of suggesting that only contrition was necessary for forgiveness, an idea which undermined the commonly held process of contrition, confession, and satisfaction. The implication of this was to degrade the necessity of the pri est, who was relegated to announcing absolution while God, in fact, granted it. 50 If Hus truly believed that all the could argue that Hus was usation was correct or not depends entirely on the source material examined Compared to his best known academic writings before 1412, Hus dramatically minimized the role of the priest in his preaching, while still consistently maintaining accepted doctrin es of the church; yet, he also unquestionably pushed the limits of acceptable orthodoxy within his sermons. The 50 92; Sedlak, Miscellanea Husitica, 160.
231 rmons emphasized contrition in a way that, depending on the context, certainly sounded subversive, yet Hus often uine. Yet, for those in the audience of Bethlehem Chapel who did not ha ve the ability or privilege to examine To examine how Hus preached on the topic of contrition and confession one must scrutini message of repentance may stem from the daunting number of sermons relating to the subject of sin a message of repentance in general terms, but to synthesize every sermon into a 51 H is sermons usually appear in complete, as Hus simplified his message with only certain aspects of repentance. This simplification often took the form of purposeful omission, meaning 52 concepts of sin and repentance illustrates this point, where he routinely minimizes, or even omits, the role of priests in the sacrament of confession. 51 ll be further illustrated in this chapter. 52 Peter Francis Howard referred to differences between academic theology and popular Beyond the Written Word 3.
232 are thorough and formulaic applications of reason illustrating dense, comprehensive easy generalities especially on those topics where only one or two documents exist discussing his position. The advantage for historians working with these documents is that Hus was exhaustive in his approach, and one need not draw from multiple sources. Therefore, in academic tracts, theological omissions are few, and alternative approaches to ideas are rare. Hus made every effo rt to ensure that no idea was inadequately dealt with from a scholarly perspective, thus allowing for easy summarizing of his arguments. also permeate his preaching corpus, as exemplified in the sermons of the Collecta (1404 1 405) and Sermones in Bethlehem Capella (1410 1411). Hus shaped his message to reach his audience, and these sermons and homilies reveal the myriad ways Hus conveyed the message of repentance at the Bethlehem Chapel. Presenting an analysis of how Hus preach ed on the topics of sin and repentance, reveals that Hus emphasized a view of repentance that was simplified and non sacramental in order to encourage personal moral reform in a distinctly different way than he explained in his most well known academic tra ct the Super IV Sententiarum (1407). Hus assembled this considerable work after his series of lectures on the Sentences of Peter Lombard from 1404 Lombard serves as his primary academic and theological contribution prior to De Ecc lesia in 1412. 53 By directly, but not necessarily uniformly, addressing matters of sin, 53 Fu dge, Jan Hus 12 13; Spinka, John Hus: Concept of the Church 74 77.
233 repentance, and satisfaction, Hus called his listeners to true conversion and repentance by pointing directly to God This almost certainly concious decision discretely minimiz ed In contrast to both Dominici and Gerson, Hus tended to promote the direct authority of God. In this time of confusion, Hus effectively preached around priestly authority by promoting an almost perfe its successful conclusion, could render confession obsolete. In effect, his message is for the sinner to stop sinning altogether, which would leave an individual with no need of sacramental confession or th e assistance of the priest. Hus, unfortunately, never stated this idealistic solution plainly, and whether he actually believed this to be possible is questionable. Yet the clear message of his preaching was to convert his audience to life without sin, a m essage all the more poignant while the authority of the priesthood and the effectiveness of confession was in question. Although Hus almost certainly believed in the validity of the sacrament of de emphasized the clerical therefore, his sermons serve as a critical link between Hus and the population. Certainly both his academic writings and his sermons had a large and ove rlapping audience, yet population of Prague during his lifetime, while his written tracts were of greater significance for his trial and legacy. 54 repentance allows 54 forty val at Constance, he presented an additional twenty articles which he claimed were taken from De Ecclesia Spinka suggests that Gerson never actually saw a complete copy of De Ecclesia, but actually had
234 historians an opportunity to examine how Hus presented his primary message to his flock. One of the most noteworthy points of departure between and academic writing is the seldom mentioned priestly confession Hus thoroug hly discussed the sacramental act of confession in his academic work Super IV Sententiarum When Hus did reference confession, it was not to call the sinner to confession with a priest, b ut rather to confess to God. The noteworthy absence of a direct mention of the priest is apparent in a number of examples. In one instance on March 2, 1406, Hus mentioned confession in a sermon on keeping oneself sanctified. He stated: What, moreover, may be the will of God, the Apostle illustrates this, saying: according to towards the state of glory, for on the first day, that is state of penitence, a man is cleansed from vices, on the second day, that is the state of justice, for he is decorated with good works and on the third day, certainly he is in the state of glory, c rowned with a stole of the spirit and body. This is illustrated in 1 st Maccabees 4, where it is read, how Judas and his brothers first cleansed the temple, which was polluted by foreigners, second they made new vessels, third they dedicated the temple and decorated it with golden crowns. Judas is interpreted as confessing. Look confession, brothers of confession, contrition and satisfaction. These ought to protect the temple 55 examined statements sent to him that reportedly came from De Ecclesia Either way, little consideration Spinka, Church 351. Thomas Fudge provides the most recent synopsis of Pale Jan Hus 134 35. 55 Que autem sit voluntas Dei, manifestat Apostolus ita dicens: Hec est autem voluntas Dei, e, nam primo die, id est in statu iusticie, decorator operibus bonis et in tercio die, scilicet statu glorie, coronatur stola anime et corporis. Hoc figuratum est 1 Mach. 4, ubi legitur, quod Iudas et fratres eius primo mundaverunt templum, quod era tab al ienigenis polutum, secundo fecerunt vasa nova, tercio dedicaverunt ilud et ornaverunt choronis aureis. Iudas interpretatur confitens. Ecce confession, fratres confessionis contricio et satisfaccio. Hii debent mundare templum cordis a luxuria dicente Aposto lo: Abstineatis vos a fornicacione, ut sciat unusquisque vas suum possidere in sanctificacione et honore, non in passion desiderii sicut gentes, que ignorant Deum. Schmidtov, Collecta 132
235 Hus focused the rest of the sermon o n the way sin, fornication in particular, sullies the temple of the heart. The sermon, however, also provided a warning against those artisans, liars, and rustici is the thre offer a blessing to the people, that is actually 56 In this sermon, Hus did not mention any priests in a because Jesus 57 Hus clearly inferred that Christ saves and redeems, without the help of a priest. A later example of Hus mentioning confession is from February 26, 1411, when Hus told his listeners: Yesterday, the holy prophet Joel exhorted us in the person of Christ, t hat we might turn toward the Lord, because [we may esteem] God himself better above all thing s that we may finally fear, that we may rejoice in the spirit, because we will gain the greatest good of the kingdom of heaven, so that we suffer greatly because we disturb our Lord. And these four emotions, so that we may turn toward God himself, are opposed by four hindrances, 1 delight of sin is opposed by the delight of the divine, 2 shame of sin is opposed by fear, because fearing to lie in the presence of God to whom chiefly sin has been confessed, they choose to recite their sins. 3 hope of pardon and the hope of future confession are opposed by turning toward God, because first they wish to confess, when called by punishment, 4 d esperate for the remission o f sins 58 Just as he did in the previously mentioned sermon, Hus clearly indicated here that the one confessing is speaking to God. That lying to God is what one should fear. Once 56 Presbiteri eciam dicunt populum beatum, cum sit maledictus Ibid. 135 36. 57 Si perditus, ipse redimens salvabit, quia Iesus Salvator Ibid. 137. 58 Heri sanctus Johel proheta in persona Christi nos, ad Dominum ut convertamur, hortabatur, quia ut ipsum Deum melius super Omnia diligamus 2 ut finaliter timeamus, 3 ut in anima gaudeamus, quia maximum bonum regni celorum adipiscemur, 4 ut summe doleamus, quia comovimus Dominum nostrum. Et has quatuor affecciones, ut ad ipsum Deum convertamus, quibus opponuntur quatuor impedimenta: 1 delactacio peccati opponitur dileccio ni divine; 2 pudor peccati oponitur, quia verentes peccata sua recitare bolunt mentiri coram Deo, cui inprimis est confessus timori oppnitur; 3 opponitur conversioni ad Deum spes venie et spes future confessionis, quia primo volunt confiteri, cum pulsacion e vocantur; desperacio remissionis peccatorum. M. Hus Sermones in Beth lehem v ol. 3, 8
236 again, the role of the priest is neither explained nor mentioned to the audie nce; mention of a priestly intercessor is noticeably absent. In the texts of the Collecta and the Sermones in Bethlehem I have found only one instance of Hus actually telling his flock to tell their sins to a priest, On Quadragesima 1405, Hus told his aud ience: The one who set this forth, who wrote this and who writes it in the heart of the sinner, is the grace of the Holy Spirit, so that [the sinner] may enumerate, weigh out, and separate his sin. [The sinner] will enumerate them before the priest, how many he committed and how often, so that he considers carefully ho w grave they are and under what circumstances they were committed. He may distinguish the time in which he lied in sin and served the Devil 59 This s this context though Hus still presents the priest in more of an advisory role and says not hing of absolution. Christians as particularly out of place, this concept was fairly radical at the time. Rather than admitting fault and then focusing on lifestyle changes, the m ost common way for sinners to find forgiveness in the Middle Ages was through the practice of the penitential process. At its simplest level, it consisted of three steps: contrition, confession, and satisfaction, as Hus expressed in the sermons of March 6, 1406 and January 3, 1411. 60 First, through contrition, sinners acknowledged and recognized their sinful state and 59 Articulus, qui hoc scribebat, est Spiritus sancti gracia, que in corde peccatoris scribit, ut numeret, appendat et dividat peccata sua; numeret coram sacer dote, quot et quociens comisit, appenat ponderans, quam gravia sunt et quibus circumstanciis aggravavit, dividat tempus, quo in peccato iacuit et dyabolo servivit. Schmidtov, Collecta, 156. 60 Ibid., 132 and M. Hus Sermones in Beth lehem v ol. 3, 23.
237 their need for forgiveness. Second, sinners confessed their sins at least once a year to their local priest to receive absolution. The final s tep was for sinners to provide satisfaction, or the complete atonement for those sins, through penance prescribed by the priest. This usually took the form of penitential acts, such as prayers or pilgrimages. 61 Medieval theologians saw the role of the cleri c as absolutely essential to two of the three steps in the process, and to remove the priest as the facilitator was clearly a dangerous suggestion. 62 Despite the existence of a simple three part system of repentance, nearly every aspect of this process was subject to varying interpretations over a multiplicity of details. Questions abounded concerning repentance. Was contrition or attrition necessary? 63 Which confessors had jurisdiction? What constituted adequate contrition? Could one confessor hear all sins ? Should some sins be confessed directly to God? What penance was necessary for suitable satisfaction? Scholars and theologians throughout Christendom frequently debated these and other questions. 64 Mil example, used sin as an overarching theme for the majority of his preaching, emphasizing the importance of striving to live a moral life in a world of evil and the 61 Thayer, Penitence, Preaching, and the Coming of the Reformation 4. Jansen, The Making of Magdalene 203. Kej 62 92 95 63 the superiority of contrition in the penitential process was Abelard (Attrition, on the other hand, is an inning but can legitimately begin in fear of Sin and Confession on the Eve of the Reformation ( Princeton: P rinceton University Press, 1977),18, 26. 64 See: Tentler, Sin and Confes sion, 57 130; Jane Dempsey Douglass, Justific ation in Late Medieval Preaching: A Study of J ohn Geiler of Keisersberg, Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought Probl History 36 (1951): 213 226; Paul F. Palmer, ed. Sacr aments and Forgiveness. History and Doctrinal Development of Penance, Extreme Unction and Indulgences Sources of Christian Theology, vol. 2 (London: Newman Press, 1959 ).
238 65 Important contemporary figures, such as Jean attempted to simplify and instruct the clergy on the proper application of confession through academic treatises. 66 The works of the scholastic theologians and their plethora of answers to the aforementioned questions reached the laity through preachers suc h as Jan Hus. In his own academic writings, Hus addressed a number of questions concerning sin and repentance. Hus, borrowing heavily from Peter Lombard, went into great detail concerning justification, salvation, and the need for repentance in Super IV S ententiarum 67 Within Super IV Sententiarum he systematically engaged in a drawn out discussion of the interconnectedness between the Grace and authority of God and its correlation to the sacramental authority of the Apostles and the successive Apostolic C hurch. 68 Hus wrote specifically concerning the priest: [Point] Four : that it is necessary first to God and then to the priest to offer confession for in no other way is the entry of paradise able to be reached if the faculty is present Five : that having sinned first with God if then the priest is deficient he is joined with God despite having been separated N ot from necessity, but so that they are of harmony. Six : that although in contrition sin is deleted nothing little is necessary to confess, because only some sins are punished, just as with works of satisfaction because by the sinner is more humble and more cautious. 69 65 More Preaching in Fourteenth Century Bohemia 146, 150. 66 Gerson addresses confession in his works Opus Tripartitum and De Differentia as addressed in Tentler, Sin and Confession 137, 146. 67 Fudge, Jan Hus 12 13; Spinka, John Hus: Concept of the C hurch 74 77. 68 M.J. Hus Super IV Sententiarum (Prague: Nkladem Jaroslav Burska, 1904), 588 69 4. Quod oportet premium Deo deinde sacerdote offerre confessionem nec aliter posse pervenire ad ingressum paradisi, si adsit facultas 5. quod peccata primo Deo, deinde sacerdoti, qui si defuerit socio pandenda sunt, sed non de necessitate, sed de congruitate est. 6. quod licet in contricione peccatum sit deletum, nichilominu s est necesssaria confessio quia est quedam punicio peccati sicud
239 Although diffe concerning the role of the c hurch, Hus was careful to avoid straying too far from the common belief of how sins are remitted. In Super IV Sententia rum Hus thoroughly analyzed the priestly authorit y for forgiving sins. In distinccio 18, Hus stated: Therefore, you should believe universally because whoever was duly ordained a priest has sufficient power of conferring whatever sacrament, through following true contrition in that time and place of abso lving you according to the use of his authority from whatever sin ; neither can the pope absolve in any other way, for all priests are equal by the power of the order according to blessed Jerome, although the power of the inferior priest may have been bound in accordance with reason 70 about penance, he was criticized at his trial for suggesting contrition alone was necessary for salvation. In works such as De Ecclesia and H us asserted that priests were instruments of God, they were certainly not the source of absolution. 71 This m and the Eucharist, as well. 72 Worth restating, however, is that Hus never completely denied the 73 satisfaccio operis et quia per eam sacerdos scit iudicare de crimine et peccator per eam fit humior et caucior. Flaj M. J. Hus Super IV Sententiarum 601. 70 Ergo catholice credi debe, quod quilibet sacerdos rite ordinatus havet potestatem sufficientem quelibet sacramenta conferendi, et per consequens vere contritum loco et tempore pro usu auctoritatis a peccato quolibet absolvendi, nec aliter papa potest absolvere, nam quantum ad potest atem ordinis secundum b. Jeromnimum omnes sacerdotes sunt pares, licet potestas sacerdotis inferioris racionabiliter sit ligata. M.J. Hus Super IV Sententiarum 607 71 93. 72 consideration of the sacraments see: p k vestie d e s anguine Christi s ub s pecie v ini dans la Prdication de Jean Hus 54 73 Schmidtov, Collecta 344 45.
240 excommunication, his written works on the topic of sin and salvation continue d to conform to conventional medieval understanding, while simultaneously pushing the limits of the orthodox status quo. The differences between the academic tracts and dependin g on whether he addressed his fellow theologians or the diverse audience of Bethlehem C hapel prior to 1412. Hus did not approach his sermons in the same way he approached his scholastic writings. Perhaps the simplest point of contrast is the length. His se rmons display an element of brevity that his academic long winded at times, historians have noted their average length is minimal when compared to Super IV Sententiarum 74 They also differ in respect to the tho roughness and complexity of thought required in scholastic analysis, as opposed to popular attributed the difference to the intended purpose of the two media. He suggested that emphasized the Word of God, or the role of the c hurch and personal belief. 75 partic ular was interested in connecting Hus to the Protestant view concerning works and faith in his preaching, while suggesting that his written tracts typically aligned to a 74 Spinka described the Sentences a John Hus: Concept of the Church 64. 75 Hussens Schriftbegriff in Seinem Predigten Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten, V lkern, Kofessionen ed. Ferdinand Seibt (Munich: O ldenb o urg, 1997), 128 130.
241 medieval doctrine of justification by works. 76 This argument creates an unnatural and u nfortunate dichotomy, as Hus certainly preached on the Law of God; this subject was a common theme. The same can be said about his discussion of the role of the c hurch in his writings. addr e ssed different themes, as dictated by the conte xt and audience of each medium. This required some variation between the academic tracts and preaching in order to maximize efficacy. At the pulpit, Hus did not have time to systematically lay out his conclusions, at least not to the extent expe cted in academic writing. This was perhaps most obvious when he preached on sin and repentance. In general, priests concerned with saving the souls of their audience often ignored theological schools of thought and obtuse formulas for identifying the sever ity of specific sins. They did this to effectively pass along basic, understandable information that they deemed necessary for the audience to escape damnation. In simplistic terms, f he is to rid 77 Hus chose a simple, engaging approach to calling sinners to repent, an approach he undoubtedly felt could effectively explain his point. As Thomas Tentler at was helpful and 78 Anne T. Thayer came to a similar conclusion concerning the general preaching of penitence which is ge in the 76 Ibid.,134. 77 Tentler, Sin and Confession 235. 78 Ibid., 234.
242 79 Because of the practical purpose of his sermons, Hus, like his contemporaries throughout Christendom, emphasized what the audience needed to hear. His approach bore his own d esign, while remaining anchored in the proof texts of the past. 80 Repentance their sins. In S uper IV Sententiarum, Hus devoted ten distinc t io to theology concerning how man should seek forgiveness through the penitential process. 81 Hus carefully analyzed repentance, drawing heavily from Peter Lombard, the C hurch fathers, and Scripture. As previousl y mentioned, his conclusions are explicitly orthodox. Hus summarized the topic: it corrects wickedness, because it truly corrects the wickedness and odious crimes that have been committed and those th at will be committed along with the desire to produce satisfaction. 82 Repentance, therefore, is the point of change in the individual within the context of the penitential process the point from which one endeavors to atone for past wickedness and to si n no more. 79 Thayer, Penitence, Preaching, and the Coming of the Reformation 9. 80 Hus frequently cited the words of Augustine, Bede, and Thomas Aquinas among others and although his words were often rooted in centuries of tradition, the theology itself was in a constant state of debate among the medieval clergy. 81 Mag. Joannis Hus Super IV. Sententiarum 5 88 633. 82 Quod illa est vera penitencia, que peccatum abolet, quod solum illa facit, que scelus corrigit, illa vero scelus corrigit, que odium commissi criminis et committendi cum desiderio satisfaciendi affert Ibid. 593.
243 Hus exhorted his audience to repent by frequently explaining motivations for repentance in a myriad of ways that differed from the ones he mentioned in his writing. Although he did write on the topic, Hus preached on repentance far more than he wrote on it. Though the subject is present in Super IV Sententiarum, it appears on only a handful of pages. One might even suggest that Hus hid it. The subtopic of the origin of repentance, for example, is only mentioned in a mere two paragraphs at the en d of a broader section. Hus described the origin of repentance: Who brings about repentance and for what reason ? It is said that as long as we accept that repentance is a s acrament, then God is the cause and he is the principal agent. T he priest is the instrumental cause, just as in other sacraments, and being sorry is the subjective cause T he remission of sins and the achievement of glory is the final cause But in repentance, like virtue, God is the cause, because through him virtue is poured. God him self alone is effectively the direct cause, but he causes his power to be shared. For repentance is as if man reverses from sin, from the devil, and from the world and comes to God T herefore first it is necessary for man to consider his sin and from what he must flee. Second, he must consider the Devil whose power from which he is to flee Third, he must consider the punishment that he wishes to evade A nd finally consider God whom he should approach. To these thoughts however, man is only set through th 83 Hus, although pointing to God as the clear origin of repentance, also emphasized that many different stimuli can prompt repentance. In his academic work, Hus offered little other commentary on what sparks repentance in the human soul; ye t, at the pulpit he described a plethora of ways that such a spark might be transmitted to his listeners. 83 Dubitatur: quis est effectu s penitencie et que causa? Dicitur quoad secundum, quod accipiendo penitenciam u test sacramentum, tunc Deus est causa eius principalis efficiens, sacerdos est causa instrumentalis, sicud in aliis sacramentis, et penitens est causa subiectiva, et remissio peccatorum et adepcio glorie est causa finalis; sed penitencie, u test virtus, Deus est causa effective, quia cum, ut sic sit virtus infusa, ipsam solum Deus principaliter effective causat, sed causa eius dispositive potest esse multiplex. Nam quia peniten cia est quasi reversion hominis a peccato, a dyabolo et a mundo ad Deum, ideo necesse est hominem cogitare peccatum, a quo debet recedere, dyabolum, cuius potestatem effugere, penam, quam vult evitare, et Deum, ad quem debet accedere. Ad hoc autem homo dis ponitur pre lumen fidei Ibid., 592
244 merit a broad examination in the Super IV Sententiarum This clearly illustrates the critical difference in the audience and the purpose of the two media. Hus wanted his sermons to bring about the repentance of his audience; therefore, he explicitly made it the focus of his preaching. It was not, however, central to his writing, which suggests the topic was either troubling or, by contrast irrelevant to the university audience. favorable to more radical, reforming, and even revolutionary i deas. 84 They may have been the ideal audience for Hus to expand on his ideas of repentance, perhaps even preaching on repentance is taken at face value, it creates an im age of a complex range 1404. In a typical enumerating style, Hus described seven reasons why one s hould repent: first, because of offending the creator; second, because of the confusion of angels; third, because of the mockery of demons; fourth, because of the spirit of prostitution and the demon of adultery; fifth, because of the worthlessness of sin; sixth, because of the loss of all that is good; and seventh, because of evil aggression. 85 To support this list, he inserted proof texts that he drew primarily from Scripture. The remainder of the sermon focused 84 Fudge, Magnificent Ride 58 59. 85 Leprosi mundantur, qua deves per lacrimas a lebra spirituali menundari in figura Naaman, de quo 4 Reg. 5. Septem enim sunt cause, quare debet homo penitens lacrimari: 1 propter Creatoris Ysa 33, 3 propter demonum irrisionem prostitucionem demonis adulterio, 5 propter peccati vilitatem vilitate peccti, 6 propter omnium bonorum amissionem Schmidtov, Co llecta 43.
245 on s criptural references that provided examp les of Christ redeeming sinners. As is often outside of the list. Hus rarely touched again on many of these issues within the context of stimuli for repentance. In a se cond sermon from the fourth week of Lent 1405, Hus approached the repenting. 86 Hus, paraphrasing from Ephesians 4, stated that repentance requires a pure mind; adherence to the unity of one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God, one father of all; and finally satiety because God removes the desires of those who follow him. 87 Again, Hus goes into great detail with numerous proof texts to develop these points in the larger co ntext of the sermon, but these requirements do not appear in 1405 or 1410 to 1411. In 1411, Hus preached another sermon providing stimuli for repentance, with imagery rooted in Exodus: Grief bears down on you on account of sins. Micah lastly [said]: Yo ur sins are thrown into the depths of the sea and are submerged in the harshness of the heart. In that sea the Egyptians are submerged, i.e. the demons, as is well known in Exodus 14, where the people of the Lord were standing in the sea on dry f ee t and the people of Pharaoh were submerged in the sea, just as by doing penance you will ford across the sea of penitence, because your contrition will lead you without nuisance and the devil will be submerged. However, penitence brings forth Christ in the mind of men. Whence Matt. 12: He who does the will of my Father, who is in heaven, this one is my mother etc. (do not understand this 86 The context in this sermon is somewhat unclear. It may be explicitly referring to the actual giving of satisfaction or doing penance 87 Secundo in penitente requiritur unitas, qui dicitur: Est puer unus, per quam unitatem debet quilibet proxim Deus, per quem create, unus Pater omnium, per quem in gracia spiritua liter generate Schmidtov, Collecta 154 155.
246 carnally, but spiritually!) Therefore, if you grieve concerning your sins and wish not to sin, then you have born Chri st in your heart 88 Rather than generating a list, within this sermon Hus focused on a single, all encompassing emotion that might also lead to repentance. Hus offered no single motivation for repentance, other than God; yet, as Scripture provides numerous examples of external forces driving man to return to God, so too does Hus give num erous different examples to motivate hi s audienc e. Therefore, rather than analyzing per vasiveness of grief, a broader view of his preaching on repentance suggests that two Although Hus frequently returned in his preaching to the topics of the spirit of prost itution and the demon of adultery, they were not central in his call to repentance. his key themes tended to fall into two major groups. First, he commonly called his audie nce to repent to the Lord, a call for all time that God himself continued and Hus repeated. Second, Hus often described repentance in terms of personal choice and presented his listeners with the choice to repent. Much like his generalized thoughts on sin, Hus never actually addressed repentance explicitly within these two straightforward categories. Nevertheless, they incorporate much of his message to his audience to 88 et submerguntur in amaritudine cordis. In illo mari submerguntur Egipcii i. e. demones, ut patet Exodi 14, ubi pop ulus Domini stabat in mari sicco pede et populus Pharaonis submersus est in mari, sc. eciam penitente transvadato in mari penitencie, quia contricio tua deducet te sine nocumento et dyabolus submergetur. Gignit autem penitencia Christum in mente hominum. U M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vo l. 2, 126
247 of tho se in his audience call and act upon it. Christ in the Gospel. During the week of the third Sunday after the feast of the Trinity, Hus preached a significant part of his sermon on the Good Shepherd in Luke 15. He expounded on the words attributed to Christ: Ponder, therefore, oh sinner, especially because the Good Shepherd ith blood, crying tears, he searches in the place of dread on the Mount of Olives. He searches in this world of vast solitude. He found him in the desert, that is hell, where the wolf had thrown him [the sheep], but he was not able otherwise to rescue the found [sheep] except as a shepherd. 89 In the actions of Christ, Hus rooted the call for repentance, and he utilized convertimini Convert! says the Lord, who is able to punish and knows everything...who also is able t Convert to me, away from sin, from the devil, and from the world, I who am your safety, liberator, and the one who rewards [premiator]. And this is the first of all our good actions. For just as a man is unable to sin unless he is turned away from his God, so he is unable to repent worthily unless he is converted to the Lord God. 90 Hus paid particular attention to the authority of the one calling sinners to repent. He frequently cited from Scripture and the Church fathers. He scattered references in 89 Pensa ergo, o peccator, qualiter ovem bonus pastor quesivit, ubi quesivit et ubi invenit. Quesivit sudans sanguine, plorans lacrimis, quesivit in loco horroris mont e Olive t i in loco vaste sollitudinis huius seculi. Invenit in deserto, id est in inferno, ubi lupus eam deiecerat, sed inventam aliter erripere non poterat nisi ut pastor Schmidtov, Collecta 317. 90 securitas, liberator et premiator. Et hoc est principium accionum nostrarum bonarum omnium. Nam sicut homo non potest peccare, nisi a Deo suo avertatur, sic nec digne penitere potest, nisi convertatu r ad Dominum Deum. M. Hus Sermones in Bethlehem vol. 3, 4
248 his sermons to John the Baptist, to the Apostle Paul, and most importantly to Christ, calling for humanity to repent. 91 Hus portrayed this call as one intended for the church militant and as instructions for proselytizing For example, on March 13, 1411 he said, c hurch encourages three things in the Gospel firs t repentance, so that anyone might stab the conscience for the purpose of atoning second to intimate love of divine piety, third to the fear of divine justice, so that we may know, how just he is in him self so much is he merciful and for the sake of the converted 92 The next day, March 14, Hus reemphasized the purpose of the c hurch because the intention of Holy Mother Church is always to lure others from sin to God 93 He preached that the c hurch must both repent and lead others to repentance. As previously discussed in Chapter 2 Hus was critical in his preaching about those whom he viewed as failing in their duty to preach. 94 Hus frequently served as his own example of calling to repentance. The surviving sermon texts record him in the first person plural as he speaks broadly t o his audience, which is not unusual. 95 For example, on the first Sunday after the Feast of the Epiphany, because our weeping is converted to praise in Jesus Christ our Savior in worldly 91 See chapter two on scriptural examples of the mandate to preach. 92 Sic ergo ad tria in evangelio hortatur ecclesia: 1 ad penitenciam, ut quilibet fodiat conscienciam, ipsam expiando, 2 ad pietatis intimam dileccionem divine, 3 ad divine iusticie timorem, ut sciamus, quod in se quantum est iustus, tantum misericors et e converso Ibid. 87. 93 Evangelium istud hodie legitur, quia intencio s. matris ecclesie est semper alios a peccatis allicere ad Deum et ad penitenciam 94 See Chapter three. 95 inclusion reflects that Hus did not have a self righteous attitude. I suggest in chapters two and three on the other hand that Hus was conscious of his appearance and used this as a necessary rhetorical strategy to connect wit h his audience. Fudge, Jan Hus 64.
249 96 More often in the sermons, however, Hus explicitly called for repentance by using proof texts filled with the imperative mood which emphasize d his direct call to his audience. Once the audience heard the call to repent Hus sought to persuade his audience purpose that demanded audience participation. These shared calls may have both nurtured a sense of community and agency in the congregati on, as well as further established Hus as the authoritative role model for his listeners. An important part in this is the formation of choices that allow individuals to be a part of the collective audience, not just listeners, but part of the community. T he call for his listeners to actively choose to repent was a central aspect of his message to Bethlehem. What is clear is that he calls on his audience to convert and, in particular, to choose repentance over a sinful life. Part of this choice was practica l in scope. Hus may have often spoken in rather mystical terms on topics such as temptation and sin, but when addressing his audience he often gave his audience clear instructions for working to make their lives pleasing to Christ. An example of this is fr om a homily concerning Psalm 24, presented on the First Sunday of advent in 1404 After the invocation Hus continued to teach his audience and to call attention to key components of the psalm. He stated: Observe the three things first who he lifts up th at is the repentant man, second what raises, that is the soul, third to whom it raise s that is to the Lord, and the fourth on account of what, lest he be ashamed or confused. And fifth he begs so that because of this pursuing, the Lord may 96 Sed nos, fratres, habitemus in domo penitencie, in fletu et planctu, quia fletus noster in gaudium convertetur prestante Iesu Cristo Salvatore nostro in seculorum secula benedicto Schmidtov, Collecta 83
250 demonstrate the ways of his commands and he teaches them the path s of his council s Observe the first one that there are three things necessary for the repentant one wishing to lift their spirit to the Lord certainly removing iniquity, hum iliation of the heart and the faithful moderation of the mouth. He orders the first act ion exter nal ly the second act ion inter nal ly the third act ion of course is to moderate a ct ions of the mouth 97 H is advice to repent on the exterior is rather straightforward and gave the audienc e a practical benchmark towards setting themselves right with God. Essentially, Hus was telling his audience to correct what they could control on the exterior by concret e step could have united them in action and empowered them with the opportunity to take direct control over their salvation. In a similar fashion, Hus offered them the choice to repent. On the sixth Sunday after the feast of the Trinity, Hus called for his voice is held with delight. N 98 Again, Hus gave his audience the opportunity to take the first steps towards salvation. The choice to repent, however, was simply a starting point on a longer journey, one not entirely within the control of the repentant sinner. foundation, not as the ultimate goal. He expounded upon the journey that starts at repentance in the afternoon of Quadragesima, 1405. Hus preached this for the 97 Nota tria: primo quis levat, quia penitens, secundo quid levat quia animam, tercio ad quem levat, quia ad Dominum, et quarto propter quid, quia ut non erubescat et confundatur. Et quinto petit, ut ad hoc consequendum Dominus demonstret sibi vias suas, scilicet manda torum suorum, et doceat eum semitas suas, scilicet suorum consiliorum. Quantum ad primum, nota, quod tria sunt necc essaria penitenti volenti levare animam suam ad Dominum, scilicet iniquitatis remocio, cordis humiliacio et devot a oris moderacio. Primum act um e x teriorem ordinat, secundum actum interiorem, tercium vero actum medium, scilicet oris Ibid., 21. 98 Renuncciasti dyabolo et operibus eisus, mundo et luxurie eius, ac voluptatibus tenetur vox tua, non in tumulo mortuorum, sed in libro vivencium Ibid., 345.
251 repentance of female sinners and described the path to heaven that one trapped in a sinful lifestyle could follow. First, therefore, if the sinner herself changes by the spirit through repentance to true conversion, as she may give herself to her God and God will also give himself to her. The change proceeds however by the spirit of the sinner from guilt into grace, from grace into great j ustice, from justice into perseverance and from perseverance it is changed into glory. For this fortunate change will be of the most high. 99 Although repentance could be the start of a journey towards salvation, it could also serve as yet another gateway i nto damnation. Hus showed considerable concern that those who heard his message of repentance did not turn from sin. Hus warned often of false repentance as a possible pathway leading from a failed repentance. Several warnings concerning false repentance a 1411. now in the law of Christ, at this time we should repent fruitfully, otherwise if someone neglects to repent at this time they will be cas t in to the inferno for unfruitful repentance. However, who is truly and perfect ly and fruitfully repentant, they are called to remain 100 Within the context of false repentance, once again Hus briefly brings up confession. In a sermon for March 3, 1411, Hus focused his attention on the severity he also referred to the possibility of forgiveness. Hus stated: 99 Primo ergo mutet se peccatrix anima per penitenciam in conversion vera, ut det se et sua Deo et Deus dabit ei se et sua. Procedat autem mutacio peccatricis anime a culpa in graciam, a gracia in maiorem iusticiam, a iusticia in perseveranciam et a p erseverancia mutabitur in gloriam. Hec enim erit mutacio dextre excelsi Ibid., 139. 100 Ecce nunc tempus acceptabile sc. penetendi, nunc in lege Christi, ubi penitere debemus fructifere, alioquin si quis hic penitere neglexerint, inferno penitenciam agent infrucuesam. Quid autem sit vera ac perfecta et fructuosa penitencia, dictum est mane. M. Hus Sermones in Beth lehem v ol. 3 27.
252 Certainly, they live the way of luxury, avarice, pride and behave as such in regards to others Those who persist in this sin up to death pass through the wide way in to the fire. T herefore if a man wishes to achieve mercy it is necessary that he desire to extract all his sin from the roots. For if one confesses while in tending to relapse, even if confessing to the pope and even with all bulls imposed abov e him, his sin is not remitted without proposing firmly not to sin. But others say that it is better not to confess than to confess with the intention to relapse. I say that it is not better, because neither of those is good. For if it is better, than it is good to confess when proposing to relapse, which nevertheless is false, for such sin is not remitted. 101 Obviously, once again Hus is warning his audience about the dan ger of false repentance, but with an added example of papal and priestly impotence in confession. By this period of 1411, as mentioned previously, Hus argued with ecclesiastical authorities concerning indulgences, and his critique coincided with his advice to his audience. He pointed out, naturally, that if the one confessing intends to relapse, that is not the fault of the priest. Yet, part of the reason the fault is not of the priest is that neither the priest nor pope is responsible to forgive the truly repentant; this is reserved for God alone. Therefore, even when absolving the priests of any responsibility for unrepentant confessions, Hus still points out their limitations. The following day, Hus again addressed false repentance in his sermon; however he was far more implicit about his criticism of the clergy and their hypocrisy concerning repentance. He stated early in the sermon: Othe rs are hardened toward conversion while still others fall into sin with diminishing virtue, for at the end they repe nt falsely. F irst those who are 101 Certe hic viam habent in luxuria, avaricia, superbia et sic de aliis, qua perseverantes usque ad mortem ibunt per latam viam ad infernum. Et ergo oportet, quod homo, si vult misericordiam assequi, quod de radice voluntatis Omnia peccata eiciat. Nam si confitens havet intencionem recidviandi, confiteatur eciam pape et omnes bulle inponantur super eum, non remittentur e i peccata sua, nisi meilus, tunc bonum esset con fiteri cum proposito recidivandi, quod tamen est falsum, cum tali non remittentur peccata Ibid., 36.
253 curious say to the Lord, Master, And th ose are such that do not wish to convert if not convinced through a sign. That corrupt and adulterous generation call to Christ who think like many today that now ask for a visible sign in the sacrament of body and blood of Those who have hardened their hearts are unable to be converted through miracles nor through words of divine wisdom, nor through the out pouring of the blood of Christ. Those who fall after beginning good work s often desert penitence and fall into sin. And if they become such as this they m ay continue impenitent and be eternally damned. 102 rmon, where he this generation of scribes and Pharisees compares to homes having been purged because they are completely superficial, inside they are full of evil. And each of these 103 As in the case of consent, Hus focused on a clerical example. By chastising priests for false repentance, he established a model of failure and hypocrisy among the clergy that was perhaps easily recognizable for the audience. period in 1411, many of Hus sermons tore at the reputation of immoral pries ts. Satisfaction Once the sinner had repented and confessed to either God or to a p riest, the final step was to provide satisfaction to atone for sins. Hus provided a formal explanation in Super IV Sententiarum and explained that satisfaction is worthless unless done with the 102 Alii sunt duri ad convertendum, alii recidivantes in peccata finaliter in virtutibus non permanents, quamvis aliquando ficte penituerunt. Primi, qui sun adulteram appellat Christus, qui nunc simi es habent multos, qui querunt signa visibilia in sacramento corporis et effusionem sangwinis Christi convertuntur. Alii recidivantes, qui incipientes bene operari deserunt peritenciam et reddeunt in peccata. Et rales si sic continuaverin t inpenitentes eternaliter dampnabuntur. M. Hus Sermones in Beth lehem v ol. 3, 40. 103 Hic iam generacionem scribarum et pahriseorum comparat domui purgate quoad superficiem extrinsecam, que purgata est, et intus pleni sunt malicia. Et sic quilib et mortalis peccator est domoniacus. Ibid., 42.
254 grace of God, because mankind is not able to atone for mortal sin. 104 Hus also discussed in detail ways to achieve satisfaction, ways to atone for menial sins, and 105 Although at times discussed in detail, satisfaction is not a dominant subject within Hus texts when compared with the subjects of sin and repentance. Neither does it play more than a nominal role in De Ecclesia; as Hus stated, since God only requires perfect contrition for forgiveness, satisfaction is unnecessary although possible. 106 Hus did, however, address satisfaction a number of times, either briefly in the context of the penitential process or as a link to larger issues. His preaching on satisfaction became another topic where he either discussed the process while ignoring the ro le of the priest, or he used the step of satisfaction as a way to critique clerical sin. When compared to equal terms. Hus twice raised the questions concerning satisf action and explicitly linked them to the role of the priest as early as 1405. On the Sunday after the feast of the Epiphany, he examined the apostolic role in assigning penance: The A postle beseeches in the manner of a prudent physician, urging the sick t o receive an austere cure. He prays but does not command, for he knows that the free spirit wishes to be the principal doctor [and will resist force] O ne hopes that austerity quickly corrects t he charming tongue having erred. Pr The soo thing From Gregory: he urges benevolence rather than severity, and encouragement rather than domination, and love rather than power, nor from this must correction be forsaken, because through correction the ste rn mind frequently is made soft, but through benevolence 104 Mag. Joannis Hus Super IV. Sententiarum 594. 105 Ibid. 447. 106 Hus, De Eccelesia 97.
255 it M oreover the a postle beseeches through mercy a nd not through power or justice. It is said on account of this: First [that he is] of God. Second, he may revea l that particular kindn ess so that they might be wakened to the hope of pardon, because of how the A postle from blasphemy has snatched away mercy among [ those ] that you set up in apostolic dignity T he n through that mercy be rescued from blasphemy. Whence in 1 Even thou gh before I was a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, but I have followed the mercy of God Third, he says these things to strongly awaken them to good. For nothing admonishes the sinner so powerfully to good works than their consideration o f the mercy of their God. And from this admiring the mercy of God the Psalmist said: What is returned to the lord and what does he However, the consideration of divine power and judgment brings one back from evil, on account of what the P salmist says: If you will not convert, he may brandish his that is he positions his words. That is held in Matt. 25: 107 Although Hus did not mention satisfaction by name, he used the example of Paul to advise priests o f how they should prescribe penance and treat sinners. Hus explicitly mentions priests twice in the sermon, once by referring to the priests of the sacrificial altar of the Old Testament and then by splicing lines from Leviticus 6 to make them relevant to burn will 108 Hus addressed the role of the priest in this text, but once again, his emphasis could be questioned. By explaining how 107 Apostolus more prudentis medici, suadentis auster a recipere remedia egroto, obsecrat, non imper at, sciens, quod in voluntate libera spiritualis consistit principaliter medicina. Unde cicius sepe itas, plus hortacio quam dominacio plus karitas quam potestas, nec tamen ex hoc debet dimitti correccio quia dura mens per correccionem sepe mollis efficitur, que per pot enciam vel iusticiam, dicitur, quod propter hoc: ut primo Dei, secundo propriam mansuetudinem ostendat, secundo ut eos ad spem venie ex consideracione misericordie Dei comoveat, per quam misericordiam a blasphemia erreptus est in dignitate apostolica const itut u eos ad bonum forcius accendat. Nichil enim peccatorem monet ad bene operandum fo r cius quam consideracio misericordie De i sui. Et hinc admirando de misericordia Dei psalmist a i deracio autem divine potencie et iusticie retrahunt a i in ignem eternum Schmidtov, Collecta, 77 78. 108 Ibid., 78.
256 priests should approach the assignment of penance, Hus was teaching students in the au dience how to prescribe penance as well as highlight ing the possible failures and self interest of their contemporaries. with the c hurch appeared again in 1405, with Advent approaching on the twenty third Sunday after the feast of the Trinity. Hus preached an expansive sermon on repentance and the failure of the pope and the clergy to grasp the concept of true repentance in particular. Early in the sermon, cross for all separately, but a pleasant and light yoke, which is not like being under the cross of Christ but unique h for journeying, but whoever has taken their [cross] imitates Christ the Lord. 109 This reference does not begin to reflect ideas of repentance until he links it to the arrogance of and dissatisfaction with sinful church leadership. He stated sarcastically cidly declares his holiness, narrating his own strength of holy virtue, not for the purpose of prais ing him self but for 110 Hus then linked the pope and the chu rch to repentance: It shows from this, since he disagrees with the statute of the Apostle and it follows closely to being proud, glorious, luxurious, or greedy. Therefore our clerics, these criminals of the purse work to separate us from our 109 Non enim Cristus equalem crucem per o mnia singulis inposuit, sed iugum suave et onus leve, sub quo viantes iuxta vires proprias non crucem Cristi, sed quilibet propriam accipiens Cristum Dominum imitat u r Ibid., 586. 110 Ecce, quam lucide declarant iste sanc tus papa, quod viri sancti virtutes narrantes proprias non ad laudem sui, sed ad utilitatem proximi ac propriam non peccant Ibid., 589.
257 glory, are damned in the end and we with them if n ot cleansed by true repentance. 111 discussion of the light and easy burden imposed by Christ, compared to the vanity and greed o f the priesthood. Hus, a well known critic of simony throughout his career, described to his audience the sin of those who would unjustly assign penance. He began his sermon with statements describi ng the light burden that Christ himself assigns. This link though not explicit, suppor ts an understanding of how and why Hus minimized the priests in repentance when taken in the larger context of his sermons. Not just the act of forgiveness, but the advice and guidance in satisfaction was suspect with a corrupt ed priesthood. repentance to his audience. al abuse, and his defense against criticism. the central theme of his preaching H e con structed his preaching on repentance around the central phases of sin, contrition, repentance, and satisfaction. T hese, in turn, highlight three particular distinct aspects First, some academic writings in particular the Super IV Sententiarum and his recorded sermons. Specifically Hus both upholds a nd undermines the role of the priest in sacramental confession. This contradiction is hardly absolute and only becomes apparent on examination of sermons individually to realize 111 Ex quo patet, quod repugnant apsotolorum statui et eorum sequacium esse superbos, gloriosos, luxuriosos, vel avaros. Ergo ve nobis clericis, qui sumus his criminibus infiscati nam Gloria nostra in confusion finis vero dampnacio, si non per veram penitenciam fuerimus expurgati Ibid., 590.
258 how rarely Hus mentions priestly action in the context of finding forgiveness for sins. Second, Hus shaped his message to simplify the penitential process for the proper context He was selective of which sins he warned his audience, for example his focus on mortal sins or his willingness to illustrate the challenges of sin even amo ng the clergy. For Hus, identifying sins that threatened the flock was of utmost importance to bring them to repentance. Finally, Hus provided an alternative route for forgiveness to his audience that eased concerns regarding the legitimacy of their parish priests. By preaching Christ centered repentance as opposed to the confessional, Hus moved towards the fringe of orthodoxy but was careful not to venture to o far. the clerical role in the penitential process. The evidence clearly shows that Hus maintained, or at least paid lip service to, the penitential process in his preaching at Bethlehem Chapel. Yet, the s literature, there is enough evidence to illustrate his orthodoxy. Yet if one divides that corpus by respective genre, one sees Hus, in response to pastoral concerns, push ed the boundaries of orthodoxy. Without a clear apostolic succession Hus carefully suggested that his parishioners look beyond the priest for forgiveness The analysis of these sermons indicates that Hus made conscious rational and long term decisions as he correlated and assembled them. Historians have never had any re ason to doubt his abilities and competence within the preaching field. Therefore, if the sermons create d only a narrow or partial image of such an important and permeating topic as the penitential process, the logical conclusion is that Hus intended his au dience to receiv e that image specifically. One might still suggest that any
259 reference to penance may have assumed the role of the priest as confessor; and therefore its absence is inconsequential. prevalent in th e preaching, and his decisions so carefully calculated to push the boundaries of orthodoxy but remain free from heresy, that they should be considered
260 CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION These problems have been bedeviled by the prejudices of modern own day. It would take a whole book to straighten things out to the point, as yet unreached by modern schol arship, where the true figure of the historical Hus would begin to emerge. 1 amidst the historiographical battlefield A History of the Hussite Revoluti on in 1967, five full biographies and dozens of journal articles, edited volumes, and thematic monographs have attempted to make definitive statements on the meaning and significance 2 Despite ever increasing nuance, they have continued to evidence and arguments for certain interpretations of Hus are often compelling, and yet he remains a figure that stubbornly resists generalities Scholars have typically admitted as much, but th en frequently as a reformer, revolutionary, or proto nationalist Historians have made vague references to his orthodoxy or medieval identity and then focus ed on the narrative they desire d to promote. Perhaps the ideal approach to understanding Hus is not to argue a generalized character, but to acknowledge and utilize the fact that he existed within multiple frameworks during his abbreviated life. My goal with this dissertation i s not to define or des 1 Kaminsky, A History of the Hussite Revolution, 36 2 The four most recent biogra phies of Hus are: Krzenck, Johannes Hus Theologe, Kirchenreformer, Mrtyrer 2011; Fudge, Jan Hus 2009; Hilsch, Johannes Hus. Prediger Gottes und Ketzer 1999 ; Amede o Moln r, Jan Hus. Testimone Della Verit ( Torino: Claudiana, 1973 ).
261 was a student, professor, administrator, victim, priest, preacher, and of course, a martyr. An examination of Hus in all of these roles would be of enormous value, but his significance to European history started living role was that of a preacher, but he was not just any preacher in overcrowded religious s c en e Hus was a prominent local celebrity in his lifetime a nd his sermons, perhaps more than any other source, attest to how that recognition and fame developed in the context of Prague from 1402 to 1412 Historians have long recognized the wealth of material within the surviving sermons, but too often their use has been limited to carefully selected lines and paragraphs that illustrate a particular point of view. On the other hand, to engage with the entire homiletic corpus alone is a daunting challenge that not all historians are able to tackle Scholar s have co mmonly st recorded sermons of the Sermones (1410 1411) and the Czech Postil (1412) as they are easily his most polemical and most closely linked to his death. They also represent the most theologically mature Hus, and essentially provide, along with his tracts written in exile, his final positions on many of the prominent issues of the era. Yet these sermons in isolation only support an incomplete picture of Hus, and even that picture can be influenced when viewed in the light of martyrdom as a unique illustration of medieval preaching are martyrdom takes preceden ce s limited use of the sermons may also reflect the liturgical and formulaic nature of many of the sermons majority of feast days, and although he often buil t elaborate sermons from the liturgical
262 calendar, they generally provide little controversial content. Commonly the start of all com plete liturgical sermon collections begins with the season of Advent. 3 The Collecta begins with six Advent sermons and a sermon for Christmas Eve, while the Sermones contains thirty four sermons from Nov ember 30 the first Sunday of Advent secon can certainly be rewarding, in the context of the larger body of sermons they tend to be reaso ns for joy among faithful Christians. These themes have been present in Christmas sermons since the preaching of Augustine, and Hus attempted little original material for the holidays. 4 radical profile, the formulaic provide little in terms of controversy Christmas is not the only example of the often mundane nature of sermon collections context of ot her sermons, often appears ordinary and orthodox far more often than it appears charismatic and exceptional. Of course, more problematic than the sermons occasionally formulaic nature is s can only guess at his vocal qualities, intonation, gestures, improvisation and most significantly his exact words. His sermons are either postils such as the Collecta (1404 1405) or reportationes such as the Sermones in Bethlehem (1410 1411) Neither of these genres is an exact 3 The Sermones actually begin on the Feast of All Souls and fifteen sermons given before the first Sunday in Advent. 4 Allthough no focused studies on Christmas sermons exist for the Late Middle Ages, one can see many of the same themes reflected in the Christmas sermon s of Saint Augustine. Augustine and Thomas Comerford Lawler Sermons for Christmas and Epiphany ( Westminster, Md: Newman Press 1952 )
263 cop y of the sermon on the day it was preached. It is rare that sermon notes survive in any circumstance. A famous exception are the notes of the fiery Bohemian preacher that include explosive and angry margi nal comments in the hand of the author that provide a significantly closer understanding of what the preacher may have improvised 5 Bernardino of Siena on the other hand, traveled with an entourage of scribes who attempted to faithfully record every utter including replies to hecklers, attempts to quiet people talking in the rear of his audience, and even hesitant stuttering 6 Scholars of Hus have no such luxury. With enigmatic sermons, historians might attempt to create an accurate context by using reports and discussions that describe the act of preaching. For Giovanni D ominici ha d a considerable trail of admirers who praised his preaching. 7 Famous Renaissance preachers, especially those who went through the process of canonization have significant documentation describing their activities with varying degrees of reliabi lity. Frustratingly, only a single description of Hus preaching exists from before his Causis described a full chapel of over three thousand listeners and goes into great depth d etailing heresies with which Hus allegedly deceived his audience. The 5 6 Marmando, 16, 45; Debby, Ren aissance Florence in the Rhetoric of two Popular Preachers 42 43. 7 Debby, Re naissance Florence in the Rhetoric of two Popular Preachers 198.
264 skepticism. 8 rarely treat his testimony with the nec essary caution that they should Even de Causis s claim of a full chapel is problematic s to make Hus appear a s a threat to authorities and to the peace 9 Hus provided in his P ostil a single description of one event at Bethlehe he was preaching. The attack was turned away by his audience without loss of life, which on the other hand, supports the presence of significant numbers in the building 10 With such a limi ted number of explicit descriptions scholars remain ignorant of every With these inherent pitfalls in the sources it is not surprising that historians have consistently retreated from a comprehensive analysis of this material With t he reform driven sermon analysis, no historians have attempted to comprehensively understand the content as a whole clergy. Hus 11 Mathew Spinka on the other hand ignored th e majority of the sermons in order c hurch reform and his concept of the 12 Thomas Fudge 8 Palack, Documenta 169 70. 9 Thomas Fudge cites de Causis Jan Hus 58 9. 10 Translation of the sermon appears in Spinka, John Hus at the Council of Constance 244 45. 11 Jan Sedlak, Studie a texty k i votopisu Husovu II 1915), 397. 12 Spinka, 45.
265 polemical notions of Hus shouting heresies from the pulpit of Bethlehem Chapel are clearly unwarranted heretic and follows that thread consistently through his text. 13 Fudge devotes significant space to explicit analysis of how the other them es Hus addresed in the pulpit. Despite an acknowledgment of a more complex preaching agenda, Fudge reiterate s the common Reformation narrative of Hus the anticlerical radical. The alternative approach, of which I believe I have only began to scratch the s urface with this dissertation, is to truly set the sermons in their context by limiting their chronological scope. merely providing quotations that situate Hus in a reform or national narrative. Sc holars of late medieval Italian preaching in particular have shown the remarkable relationship between preaching and its urban context. Prague in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth century, although unique in many respects, share d a variety of traits with Florence and Paris, most significantly a dynamic academic and clerical population well integrated in the urban framework. 14 demonstrated a similar social and cultural empathy to that of the more frequently studied Italian preachers. 15 Yet, advantage as a source is the sheer number of sermons delivered from a single location. 13 Fudge, Jan Hus 60, 4. 14 Howard, Beyond the Written Word, 2. For an examination of mendicant preach ing in Florence see Daniel R. Lesnick, Preaching in Medieval Florence: The Social World of Franciscan and Dominican Spirituality (London: The University of Georgia Press, 1989), 176 77; Debby, Renaissance Florence in the Rhetoric of Two Popular Preachers 60 63. 15 Debby, Renaissance Florence in the Rhetoric of Two Popular Preachers 92 102.
266 His sermons illustrate how a preacher approaches his audience over an extended period of time. Therefore, as I have argued in this dissertation, if one look s at those perspective on wider c hurch reform, but also the cares and concerns of the audience. Rather than only providing the sermons provide concerns and how he expresse d those concerns to his flock. It also demonstrates the interplay of original expression and the reliance on tropes present in many sermon colle ctions throughout the Middle Ages As previously illustrated, the existence of sermons from a relatively peaceful time in 1404 through the growing pressures of the Wyclif ite controversies demonstrates some of the ways he negotiated his pastoral duties in t he dynamic context of Prague. Hus adapted his message of repentance to rather than that of the priest. He employed the rhetoric of spiritual warfare in motivating his audi ence to fight against the forces of damnation. Yet in the long shadow of the 1389 violence against the Jews Hus avoided topics of earthly violence. He focused his audience s fear and anger elsewhere when concerned with sinners in the city walls. He tapped into old and widespread currents of frustration with contemporary clerics when preaching on the Pharisees to make the text rel evant to his audience. Finally, Hus recognized his tenuous position due to his place at a university controlled pulpit separated from the protection of an established parish or religious order and later under the swirling accusations of heresy. To address these insecurities, Hus presented himself to his flock in the role of ideal preacher, good shepherd, and at the darkest
267 moments Christ on his way to crucifixion. The development of these themes and their evolution only becomes apparent when examining the greater corpus as a whole Along side distinctive approach to his audience, th is dissertation explore d significant them e s t hat characterize his career and provide an additional explanation for his popularity. These themes function together as a corpus and fit the theoretical framework of the flock, and his emphasis on repentance as a means of salvation all closely fit Max observations concerning charisma Charismatic theory might allow for a better explana tion o popularity and historians have begun to apply it to various preachers in hopes of gaining insight into the phenomena of charismatic preaching. 16 The observations of German sociologist Max Weber are foundational here. Weber defined charisma a which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, 17 Weber stated unequivocally that it is the follow 16 Previously cited in this dissertation is the edited volume of Katherine L. Jansen and Miri Rubin ed., Charisma and Religious Authority Medieval Rel igious Rationalities 2010. Also of interest is an article by Ayelet Even Viator vol. 44, 1 (2013). Weberian Charismatic Theory has been applied to Hus previously. Pavlna Rchterov Das Charisma: Funktionen und Symbolishe Reprsentationen (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2008). Pavlna Rchterov constructed her chapter almost entirely from Peter of Mla Relatio Rchterov his audience Relatio with caution. It seems foolish to ismatic persona only from the context of his death, and yet the majority of evidence from his disciples originated during and after Constance. 17 Weber, Theory of Social and Economic Organization 329; Einstadt, Max Weber on Charisma and Institution Buildin g xviii.
268 conjunction with intense communally shared feelings such as enthusiasm, despair, or hope. 18 Naturally, however, Weber refined that simple explanation and constructed an ever more complex framework to investigate the causes, conduct, and consequences of the charismatic individual. Unfortunately, charismatic theory as scholars understand it, evolved from multiple tangents in ambitious and comprehensive works that indirectly add to the theory, le aving others later thoughts on the topic. 19 charisma are, therefore, generally in relation to broad sociological questions such as economy, religion, and authority rather than for the sake of charisma itself. Historians and sociologists have tended to highlight several fundamental topics, notably the relationships between charisma, authority, and religion. 20 the context of relig Sociologist Philip Smith 21 Weber was vaguely aware of the cultural links that connected the charismatic leader to his audience, and historians of homiletics have pointed out the failure of certain preachers attempting to engage 18 Weber, Theory of Social and Economic Organization 354. 19 110. 20 Max Weber: On Charisma and Institution Building (Chi cago: University of Chicago Press, 1968). A the three volume Max Weber, Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology ed. Guenther Roth and Clause Wittich (New York: Bedmi nster Press, 1968). 21 Acta Sociologica vol. 43, No. 2 (2000): 101 111.
269 audiences without understanding the vernacula r and the local culture. 22 Smith claims 23 In other words, Weber never gave the cultural link between a charism atic and his followers any real significance. Yet, it is through cultural familiarity that the charismatic is able to know what proof his followers require and how to gain the trust of his audience by means of what the sociologist Edward A. Tiryakian calle 24 This concept of work of mile Durkheim who described environment could lead to success with the audience. 25 that ex ample, and although he became increasingly isolated during his time in Prague he was able to relate culturally to his audience precisely because he was an insider and and community. His use of images, symbols, and preacher and audience. charisma, Smith laments t 22 transformative power of Charismatic symbols and activities and of their power t his focus on what symbols the followers attach to the charismatic rather than the charismatic utilizing symbols to connect with the audience. Eisenstadt, Max Weber on Charisma and Inst itution Building xlv. See chapter 2 for discussion of the cultural awareness required for successful preaching. 23 24 International Sociology vol. 10 (Sept. 1995): 269 280, 270. 25 mile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life ( New York: Free Press 1965), 241.
270 26 Smith notes that Weber devoted most of his energy to explaining how charisma transforms institutions and then disperses through routinization to their followers. Smith suggests, in addition, that that strand may well be found in the disciples share. 27 He argues for a revised cultural model: focus on interpersonal and group relationshi ps is reaffirmed. In arguing that charisma is linked to the quest for salvation and issues of purity, sacrality, profanity, and pollution, the nascent cultural dimensions of specifying the pres ence of codes and narratives with formal and internally consistent systems of signification, the model endows the cultural system with relative autonomy from the social and psychological systems. Finally, while arguing for the importance of the individual as leader, the model also maintains strongly cultural and therefore, collectivist rather than origin. 28 and one early fifteenth century Prague. He wove them throughout his sermons. Perhaps most significant p sychology of individual members of the audience. individual is impossible to say, and yet the social implications of his preaching are fairly evident in the chain of dramatic and bloody events that beg a n with his death 26 27 Ibid., 109 110; 103. 28 Ibid., 105.
271 If on to late medieval charismatic preaching we find that Hus fits his parameters closely If we accept that sermons are formed in dialogue rooted in his statu s as the spokesperson culturally relevant rhetoric. 29 One may argue, therefore, that Hus was expressing the opinions and concerns of his audience, and that they listened as their collective concerns were vocalized in an open forum. It is essentially irrelevant to question who had the great er impact on the preaching environment, the audience or the preacher, but it should be understood as both individual and listeners influencing each other. Especially with the case of Hus, the themes and cultural context with which he was engaging reflect t he establishment of reform preaching in Prague by Charles IV and even hearken back to the reforms of Pope Gregory the Great (d.604). 30 Neither Hus nor his audience began the discussion that formed their charismatic relationship; rather Hus was on stage, or more appropriately, in the pulpit, when events in Prague reached their pivotal climax and the message was able to have its greatest effect. the recurring themes he developed in the pulpit contributed to his emerging reputation as a charismatic preacher. 29 30 Preaching of the Friars 17.
272 31 described in chapter two, established the preache r as the ideal righteous leader for the community of the Bethlehem C hapel I n chapter four and five we saw how Hus employed the language of spiritual warfare, exhorting his followers to victory as a great captain. In addition, Hus employed a number of othe r recognizable rhetorical approaches in motivating his audience including application of emotion and reason. 32 Along with establishing his authority and leadership, Hus provided his audience with a diabolical foe to fight. Smith argues that that one cannot have a charismatic leader without the presence of evil as well. F or a salvation narrative to exist, a people must need saving. 33 Hus frequently reminded his listeners of the threats awaiting them outside the doors of the Bethlehem Chapel, as Hus filled his sermons with the Devil, demons, the Antichrist, corrupt priests and any number of forces ready to deny his listeners salvation. Beyond simply belonging to or leading the community, it is with his threatening imagery and symbols of evil that Hus attempted to motivate his followers. of the evil against which they fight, and indeed will be magnified as this perceived evil 34 Hus for m uch of his career was 31 Charisma, History, and Social Structure R. Glassman and R. Swatos ed. (New York: Greenwood Press, 1986): 55 70, 64. Cited in 32 Medieval Rationalities 97; Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages 4, 327. 33 34
273 not comba s minds they strug gled against the actual Devil, who was corrupting the broken world around them. Through his sermons Hus created a terrifying and ever present Devil that could only be defeated with obedience to Christian teaching, as interpreted and pr oclaimed by Hus. By 1410, those who challenged his authority to preach with the excommunication, his enemies had taken the place of the Devil and were the enemy The final aspect of an analysis of Hus through charismatic theory is the critical salvation narra tive promoted by the charismatic individual. Weber defined salvation as 35 narrative was essentially that of Jesus Christ, the Apostles, and Christendom as a whole, but its place as the central point of Christianity does not mean it should be disregarded as formulaic Far too often, Hus has been generalized as promoting a pseudo revolu tionary message that encouraged social and political change. 36 Yet, his critique of luxury and sinful authorities to reject that which wa s ungodly. Hus preached salvation from sin, the establishment of a righteous New Jerusalem on Earth, and of course life eternal. Hope was a common 35 36 The portrayal of Hus as a rebel and instrument of social change has continued for a considerable time and been heavily present in German and Marxist historiography. Most re cently Thomas Fudge takes this position in Fudge, Jan Hus 2011. Also of note for this perspective is Peter Hilsch, Johannes Hus: Prediger Gottes und Ketzer ; Richard Friedenthal, Ketzer und Rebell: Jan Hus und das Jahrhundert der Revolutionskriege (Munich: R. Piper Verlag, 1972); Charles H. George, ed. Revolution: European Radicals from Hus to Lenin (Glenview, ILL.: Scott, Foresman & CO., 1971); Melchior Vischer, Jan Hus. Aufruhr wider Papst und Reich (Frankfurt am Main: Societts Verlag, 1955).
274 follows the words of our savior and Lord, Jesus Christ, how greatly those words can exa lt the spirit with joy, because sinners are able to have hope for justice, grace, and 37 Hus called for repentance from the threat of sin and the Devil and offered the reward of paradise to those who changed their lives. Hus of fered a path of salvation and in the troubled context of early fifteenth century Prague, the success of preachers such as Jan Hus and others suggests that that message of salvation mattered to the laity. 38 There is little doubt that Hus was a popular preach er, and although it is impossible to know how successful he was at turning hearts to God, the sure volume of enduring evidence suggests he must have connected with his audience culturally, spiritually or intellectually. Preachers who developed sermons in an urban environment had little alternative if they hoped to be successful but to address local concerns and had to bring theological concepts to the level of his audience. 39 Therefore, it is possible to suggest aspects of his preaching that met the expecta tions of both his clerical and lay audience. In turn, converts the sermons into a useful tool for understanding the social and religious concerns of the audience. F irst Hus followed in the footsteps of several noteworth y preachers who gained widespread recognition in Prague. The emphasis on effective preaching, started by 37 Hec verba Salvatoris nostri et Domini nostri Iesu Cristi homines si diligenter perpenderent, quantis animi gaudiis exultarent, com peccatores possunt spem ha b ere de gracia et iusti securitatem de vita eterna. Schmidtov, Collecta 225 38 Unfortunately, there is litt le explicit evidence of lay reaction outside the same indicators that some way with his audience. 39 Howard, Beyond the Written Word 13, 144.
275 Charles IV, laid the ground work an individual such as Hus. For roughly half a century, Prague had seen exceptional preachers pass through its chapels monasteries and squares Hus continuation of a tradition that included Waldhauser, Mil tin and the vernacular as his predecessors and has been frequently described as a continuation if not a fulfillment of that legacy 40 The context of course, predecessors preached while Prague was ascending in power and stature under the long reign of Charles IV Those predecessors also preached un der a unified line of apostolic succession situated in Avignon, and although the exile of the papacy from Rome was quite problematic to those who witnessed it, the stress it placed on the church paled in comparison to the schism s sermons represented continuation in the ears of his listeners. Hus was also well aware of his place in the line, as he commented in a letter to his ally On account of this, of those who preach ed contrary to the clerics, only I, as I see it, have been excommunicated. For instanc e, those from ancient times, Mil Conrad, Sczenka, and many others all preached against the clerics S till only I have b een subject to this sentence of excommunication. 41 Hus took on the mantl e of religious reform that was characteristic of his predecessors and themes such as immorality, eschatology, and repentance would have been readily recognizable to his listeners. Second, of clerical sin reflects long held frustrations with clerical wealth. Marxist historians have viewed his preaching on this theme as reflective of the 40 Fudge Magnificent Ride 58 64. 41
276 steady undermining of social order, an order that was buttressed by the wealthy c hurch. 42 s salvation in general and he targeted his attacks against luxury not only a t clerical excess but also the wealth of a capital city. Prague was certainly not as prosperous as during the reign of Charles IV, and there was a significant divide between rich and poor in the city. Hus sermons called for the rejection of excess, among the laity and clergy. A call that undoubtedly played a role in the social violence of the subsequent Hussite wars as a call for shared wealth and voluntary lay and clerical poverty were a commo n trait of more radical wings. In particular, adherents of the famous community and order. 43 s challenge to the hierarchy of the c hurch derives from the shameful example of the papal schism. His sermons that touch on the schism express concerns for the role of the c hurch in their salvation Debate continues on just how large an impact the schism had on the la ity of E urope frequent sermons discussi ng clerical issues and his careful critique and circum vention of priestly authority suggests that the concern must have been present among his audience. 44 sometimes directly and other times obliquely the uncertainty his audience had for the validity of the S acraments. 42 Macek, The Hussite Movement in Bohemia 20 21. 43 mahel, Husitsk r evoluce vol. 2, 114. 44 Although the schism is an important point for scholars discussing the Bohemian Reformation, few studies have actually questioned its relationship to the laity, but it was a frequent topic among the Prague literati. See Chapter 5 for a more complete examin ation.
277 Hus closely fith the mold of those reform pr eachers who came before and he also met the expectations requ ired of him as a representative of Prague U niversity appoint ed to the Bethlehem Chapel His sermons are demonstrations of his erudition as they are firmly anchored in an impressive array of quot ations. Hus, in loose mimicry of scholastic models, attach ed link after link to the golden chain of citation. His authority and knowledge were on display in nearly every sermon and his audience would have been left with no doubt concerning his mastery of theology and scripture. His sermons also made clear his purpose to feed them the bread of the word as expected in the 45 Hus not only met these expectations but reinforced them by shaping the expectations of the audience. addressing his audience. Considering him as a priest concerned for his flock need not totally replace the images of Hus a s the fiery reformer. Instead, analyzing the se rmons as a corpus makes Hus all the more significant to his era and understanding the daily message of all preacher s 45 Husitsk r evoluce vol. 2 211.
278 LIST OF REFERENCES Select Manuscripts Prague XXIII.C.124 (Velisla v Bible ) Prague k republiky IV B 24 (Jena Codex) III B 20 (Sermones in Bethlehem) KNM XVI F 4 (Sermones in Bethlehem) XIII F 20 (Collecta) Pragu IV B 2 (Collecta) Prague. Nrodn k r epubliky IV.F.23 ( elivsk Sermons) Primary Sources Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini Historia Bohemica Edited by Joseph Hejnic and Hans Rothe, Vol. 1. Cologne: Bhlau Verlag. 2005. Jan Hus. Autograf M. J. Husi Nakladatelstv, 1954. Edited by Edited by MIHOO 3. Prague: Academiae Scientiarum Bohemoslovenicae, 1995. : De Eccle sia: The Church. Translated by David S. Schaff Westport: Greenwood Press, 1915. De sanguine Christi Edited by Spisy M.Jana Husi V ol. 3 Prague: Jaroslav Burska, 1903 ed. MIHOO 4. Prague: Academiae Scientiarum Bohemoslovenicae, 1985. Documenta Mag. Joannis Hus Vitam, Doctrinam, Causam in Constantiensi Concilio Actam et Controversias de Religione in Bohemia Annis 1403 1418 Motas Illustrantia Edited 1966.
279 Historia et Monumenta Ioannis Hus atque Hieronymi Pragensis 2 vols. Nrnberg: 1715. Iohannes Hus Magister Universitatis Carolinae: Positiones, Recommendationes, Sermones. Edited by Ane Pedagogick Nakladatelstv, 1958. Magistri Iohannes Hus Leccionarium Bipartitum. Pars Hiemalis MIHOO 9. Prague: Academiae Scientiarum Bohemoslovenicae 1988. Mag. Io. Hus S ermones in Capella Bethlehem 1410 1411, 4 vols. Edited by 1941. .M. Jana Husi korespondence a dokumenty. Edited by Vclav Novotn S.l: Nkl. Komise pro vydvn pramen nboenskho hnut eskho, 1920. Magistri Iohannis Hus Postilla adumbrata MIHOO 13. Edited by Bohumil Ryba. Turnhout: Brepols, 1975. Magistri Iohannis Hus Passio domini nostri Iesu Crisi. Bohemoslovenicae, 1978 M. J. Hus Super IV Sententiarum. Nkladem Jaroslav Burska, 1904. Advocates of Reform. Library of Christian Classics, Vol. 14 Philadelphia: The Westm inster Press, 1953. 196 278. Sermones de Sanctis, Spisy M. Jana Husi 7 Prague: Nkladem Jos. R. Vilmka, 1907. Sermones de t empore qui Collecta Dicuntur MIHOO 7. Edited by Schmidtov. Prague: Academiae Scie ntiarum Bohemoslovenicae, 1959. Edited by and Amedeo Molnr Prague: Kalich, 1963 The Letters of John Hus. Translated by Matthew Spinka. Rowman and Littlefield: Manchester University Press, 1972. Veltrusk, Jarmila F. ed. Ann Arbor: Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies University of Michigan, 1985. Secondary Sources
280 Anderson, Roger, ed. Constructing the Medieval Sermon. Sermo: Studies on Patristic, Medieval, and Reformation Sermons and Preaching. Turnhout: Brepols, 2007. Armstrong Partida, Michelle. "Conflict in the Parish: Antagonistic Relations between Clerics and Parishioners." In A Companion to Pastoral Care in the Late Middle Ages (12 00 1500) 173 212. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Atwood, Craig D. The Theology of the Czech Brethren from Hus to Comenius University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2009. Bailey, Michael David. Fearful Spirits, Reasoned Follies: The Boundaries of Superstition in Late Medieval Europe Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013. Barr, Bethlehem Allison. The Pastoral Care of Women in Late Medieval England. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2008. Bar row, Daran. The Stereotype of the Priest in the Old French Fabilany: Anticlerical Satire and Lay Identity. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2005. Bartlett, Robert. The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change, 950 1350 Princeton, N.J: Princeton Un iversity Press, 1993. Ze Prague: Edice Kalich, 1959. des Gestandten der Karls Festschrif t fr Hermann Heimpel zum 70 Geburtstag Vol. 2 (1972): 652 85. 39 (1970): 126 132. esk Sbornk Historick 38 (1969): 99 118. Communio Viatorum 8 (1965): 65 75. zbytcch 9 nost Husova Musea, 1922. A Companion to the Great Western Schism (1378 1417), edited by Jolle Rollo Koster and Thomas M. Izbicki, 303 331. Leiden: Brill, 2009. Birnbaum, Henrik. The Man of Many Devices, Who Wandered Full Many Ways. Festshrift in Honor of Jnos M. Bak edited by Balzs Nagy and Marcell, 384 396. Sebk, Budepest: Central European Universit y Press, 1999.
281 Blumenfeld Kosinski, Renate. Poets, Saints, Visionaries of the Great Schism 1378 1417. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2006. Charisma and Religious Authority: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Preaching, 1200 1500 edited by Katherine L. Jansen and Miri Rubin, 215 234.Turnhout: Brepols, 2010. Prague: The Crown of Bohemia, 1347 1437 New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; Yale University Press, 2005. Bonnechose, Franois Paul mile Boisnormand de. The Reformers before the Reformation New York: AMS Press 1980. Brch, Marianne. Text and Voice: The Rhetoric of Authority in the Middle Ages. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2004. Bose, Mishtooni and J. P. Hornbeck. Wycliffite Controversies Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, 2011. Bosl, Karl and C ollegium Carolinum. Handbuch der Geschichte der Bhmischen Lnder Stuttgart: A Hiersemann, 1967. Boureau, Alain. Satan the Heretic: The Birth of Demonology in Medieval West Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006. and Popular Culture. The Example of Preaching in Poland during the Late Middle Ages. Sermones Dominicales et Festivales from Quaestiones Medii Aevi Novae 8 (2003): 105 131. Brown D. Catherine. Pastor and La ity in the Theology of Jean Gerson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Brown, Peter. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography Berekley: University of California Press, 2000. Giornale Sto rico della letteratura Italiana 184:124:608 (2007): 598 605. Burke, Kathryn L. and Merlin B. Brinkerhoff. "Capturing Charisma: Notes on an Elusive Concept." Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 20, no. 3 (Sep., 1981): 274 284. Burke, Peter. Popul ar Culture in Early Modern Europe Aldershot: Ashgate, 1994.
282 and 121. R, 1999. Bynum, Caroline Walker. Wonderful Blood: Theology and Practice in Late Medieval Northern Germany and Beyond Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007. Cameron, Averil. Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire: the Development of a Christian Discourse Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. Cameron, Euan. The European Reformation Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991. Speculum 4, n o. 3 (July 1924): 283 284. World, Image, Number: Communication in the Middle Ages edited by John Contreni and Santa Casciani, 247 262. Florence: Sismel, 2002. Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 95: 3 4 (2002): 433 436. Cohn, Norman. Europe's Inner Demons: The Demonization of Christians in Medieval Christendom Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. ornej, Pe tr. Velk d jiny zem Koruny esk Volume 5 1402 1437. Prague: Paseka, 2000. Craun, Edwin D. Ethics and Power in Medieval English Reformist Writing Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Cruel, Rudolf. Geschichte der Deutschen predigt im Mittelalt er Detmold: Mener'sche Hofbuchhandlung, 1879. Cunningham, Mary B. Preacher and Audience: Studies in Early Christian and Byzantine Homiletics Leiden; Boston: Brill, 1998. Dargan, Edwin C. A History of Preaching : from the Apostolic Fathers to the Great Re formers A.D. 70 1572 New York: A.C. Armstrong, 1905 12. Past and Present 59 (1973): 51 91. A Companion to the Great Western Schism (1378 1417) edited by Jolle Rollo Koster and Thomas M. Izbicki, 89 121. Leiden: Brill, 2009.
283 D'Avray, D. L. Medieval Religious Rationalities: A Weberian Analysis Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. The Preaching of the Friars: Se rmons Diffused from Paris before 1300 Oxford: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press, 1985. Debby, Ben Aryeh. Renaissance Florence in the Rhetoric of Two Popular Preachers: Giovanni Dominici (1356 1419) and Bernardino da Siena (1380 1444). Turnhout: B repols, 2001. Deane, Jennifer Kolpacoff. "Archiepiscopal Inquisitions in the Middle Rhine: Urban Anticlericalism and Waldensianism in Late Fourteenth Century Mainz." The Catholic Historical Review 92, no. 3 (Jul., 2006): 197 224. Debby, Nirit Ben Aryeh. Renaissance Florence in the Rhetoric of Two Popular Preachers: Giovanni Dominici (1356 1419) and Bernardino Da Siena (1380 1444) Turnhout: Brepols, 2001. B RRP 2 (1998), 49 56. Douglass, Jane Dempsey Justification in Late Medieval Preaching: A Study of John Geiler of Keisersberg, Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought Vol. 1. Edited by Heiko A. Oberman. Leiden: Brill, 1966. Durkheim, mile. The Elementa ry Forms of the Religious Life. New York: Free Press 1965. Emmerson, Richard Kenneth. Antichrist in the Middle Ages: A Study of Medieval Apocalypticism, Art, and Literature Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1981. Even Ezra, Ayelet. "The Conceptual ization of Charisma in the Early Thirteenth Century." Viator 44, no. 1 (2013): 151 168. Nicholas of Cusa and His Ages: Intellect and Spirituality, edited b y Thomas M. Izbicki and Christopher M. Bellitto, 89 103. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Charisma and Religious Authority: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Preac hing, 1200 1500 edited by Katherine L. Jansen and Miri Rubin, 163 176. Turnhout: Brepols, 2010. Extra Ecclesia Salus non est Sed Quae Ecclesia ? A Companion to the Gre at Western Schism (1378 1417) edited by Jolle Rollo Koster and Thomas M. Izbicki, 333 374. Leiden: Brill, 2009.
284 De Ore Domini: Preacher and word in the Middle Ages edited by Thomas L. Amos, Eugene A. Green, and Beverly Mayne Kienzle, 169 184. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1989. Fudge, Thomas. A. The Trial of Jan Hus: Medieval Heresy and Criminal Procedure New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 2013. The Memory and Motivation of Jan Hus, Medieval Priest and Martyr Turnhout: Brepols, 2013. Jan Hus: Religious Reform and Social Revolution in Bohemia London: I. B. Tauris, 2010. The Magnificent Ride: The First Reformation in Hussite Bohemia Aldershot: Ashgate, 1998. BRRP 4 (2002): 107 126. Fulton, Rachel. From Judgment to Passion Devotion to Christ and the Virgin Mary, 800 1200 New York: Columbia University Press, 2002. Significance of Communion: Eucharistic Preaching in the Fifteenth Century Hugarian Sermon Collection Sermones Dominicales Annual of Medieval Studies at the Central European University 7 (2001): 113 134. trano and the Making of his Charisma and Religious Authority: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Preaching, 1200 1500 edited by Katherine L. Jansen and Miri Rubin, 145 163. Turnhout: Brepols, 2010. Late Medieval Central Europe: St John Capistrano in Medieval Sermon Studies 47 (2003): 5 20. Herbst des Mittlealters: Fragen zur Bewertung des 14 und 15 Jahrhunderts edited by Jan A. Aersten and Martin Pickave, 147 56. Miscellanea Mediaevalia 31. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004. Gilpin, William. Lives of John Wicleff and of the Most Eminent of his Disciples: Lord Cobham, John Huss, Jerome of Prague and Zisca. London: J. Robson, 1765. Goldstein, Adina S. "The Temptation of Saints in Latin Narrative: England, France, and the Low Countries, 1100 -1230." PhD diss, City Univers ity of New York, 2009. Proquest 3344974
285 Graus, Anticlericalism in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe edited by Peter A. Dykema and Heiko A. Oberman, 65 82. Translated by Dorothea A. Christ. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995. Heaney, In The Reformation in Medieval Perspective edited by Steven E. Ozment, 76 103. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971. Die Nationen Bildung der West Slawen im Mittlealter Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1980. Gregg, Joan Young. Devils, Women, and Jews: Reflections of the Other in Medieval Sermon Stories. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997. Gregory, Brad S. Salvation at Stake: Christian Martyrdom in Early Modern Europe Cambridge, Mass: Harva rd University Press, 1999. Grundmann, Herbert. Religious Movements in the Middle Ages: The Historical Links between Heresy, the Mendicant Orders, and the Women's Religious Movement in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Century, with the Historical Foundations of German Mysticism Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1995. Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 93 (2000): 261 339. The Presence of the Past: History Memory, and the Making BRRP 4 (2004): 309 316. BRRP 4 (2002): 15 30. RRP 2 (1998): 25 37. BRRP 1 (1996):13 17. History 36 (1951): 213 226. Hilsch, Peter. Johannes Hus. Prediger Gottes und Ketzer Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1999. Europa und die Wel t der Geschichte. Festschrift zum 60. Geburtstag von Dieter Berg, edited by Raphaela Averkorn, Winfried Eberhard, Raimund Haas and Bernd Schmies, 660 669. Bochum: Winkler, 2004.
286 Hledkov G egner und F Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten, Vlkern, Konfessionen, edited by Ferdinand Seibt, 91 103. Munich: Oldenburg, 1997. Hofer, Johannes. Johannes Kapistran: ein Leben im Kampf um die Reform der Kirche Heidelberg: Kerle, 1964 1965. Hfler, Constantine. Magister Johannes Hus und der Abzug der Deutschen Professoren und Studenten aus Prag 1409. Prague: F. Tempsky, 1864. Studia Liturgica 25, 1 (2005): 32 59. Communio Viatorum 32 (Winter 1989): 209 229. Arts and Politics in Renaissance Italy edited by George Holmes, 19 40. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993. Crusading in the Fifteenth Century: Message and Impact edited by Norman Housley, 94 115. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. Howard, Peter Francis. Beyond the Written Word: Preaching and Theology in the Florence of Archbishop Antoninus, 1427 1459 Florence: L.S. Olschki, 1995. Renaissance Quarterly 61:2 (2008): 325 369. Medieval Sermon Studies 48 (2004): 29 44. De Ore Domini: Preacher and Word in the Middle Ages edited by Thomas L. Amos, Eugene A. Green, and Beverly Mayne Kienzle, 147 168. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1989. Jerome of Prague. Preaching and Reform in Early Fif teenth Analecta Praemonstratensia 80:1 4 (2004): 5 42. Medieval Sermon Studies 51 (2007): 22 32. Israls, Machtelt I Tatti Studies, 11: Essays in the Renaissance. Edited by Caroline Elam. Florence: Villa I Tatti, 2007. 77 114.
287 Izbicki, Thomas M. Reform, Ecclesiology, and th e Christian Life in the Late Middle Ages. Variorum Collected Studies Series Aldershot: Ashgate 2008. De Ore Domini: Preahcer and Word in the Middle Ages e dited by Thomas L. Amos, Eugene A .Gren, Beverly Mayne Kienzle, 211 234. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1989. Theologisch praktische Quartalschrift 118 (1970): 163 168. Kalivoda, Robert. Husitsk i deologie Kamnkov, Eva. Prague: Universita Karlova ve Sttnm pedagogickm nakl, 1963. Kaminsky, Howard. A History of the Hussite Revolution Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967. Church History 32 (1963): 57 74. Kank, Miloslav. Prague: Blahoslav, 1965. Karras, Ruth Mazo. Sexuality in Medieval Europe: Doing Unto Others. New York: Routledge, 2005. Franciscan Studies 63 (2005): 443 460. Franciscan Studies 62 (2 004): 31 66. Kautsky, Karl. Communism in Central Europe in the Time of the Reformation. New York: Russell and Russell, 1959. Kavka, Frantisek. The Caroline University of Prague: a Short History Prague: Universita Karlova, 1962. Bohemia in History edited by 78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. In Memoriam Josefa Macka (1922 1991) edited by Miroslav Polvk a, 65 75. BRRP 5. Part 1(2002): 89 115.
288 Wyclif in His Times. Oxford: Claredon Press, edited by Anthony Kenny. 127 146. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986. Kieckhefer, Richard. Unquiet Souls: Fourteenth Century Saints and Their Religious Milieu. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 198 4. Preacher, Sermon and Audience in the Middle Ages edited by Carolyn Muessig, 89 125. Boston: Brill, 2002. The Sermon. Turnhout: Brepols, 2000. Kitts, Eustace J. Pope John the Twenty Third and Master John Hus of Bohemia New York: AMS Press, 1978. Klassen, John M. Warring Maidens, Captive Wives and Hussite Queens: Women and Men at War and at Peace in Fifteenth Century Bohemia Boulder; New York: East European Monographs; Distributed by Columbia University Press, 1999. In 79 101. Brno, nsk University, 1999. Kruger, Steven F. The Spectral Jew: Conversion and Embodiment in Medieval Europe Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2006. Krzenck, Thomas Johannes Hus Theologe, Kirchenreformer, Mrtyrer Zrich: Muster Schmidt Verlag, 2011 Tiroler Heimat 71 (2007): 37 47. Stani Annual of Medieval Studies at the Central European University 10 (2004): 53 64. Kybal, Vlastimil. 1931. Prague: Nauk, 1905. La hey, Stephen E. Philosophy and Politics in the Thought of John Wyclif Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
289 Lambert, Malcolm. Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from Bogomil to Hus New York: Holmes & Meier Publishers, 1977. Langmuir, Gavin I. Hi story, Religion, and Antisemitism Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990. Wyclif in his Times edited by Anthony Kenny, 105 125. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986. Wyclif and Hus: A Do ctrinal Comparison. Manchester: John Rylands Library, 1968. Lenz, Antonn. Lesnick, Daniel R. Preaching in Medieval Florence: The Social World of Franciscan and Dominican Spirituality Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1989. Levy, Ian Christopher. A Companion to John Wyclif: Late Medieval Theologian Leiden: Brill, 2006. John Wyclif: Scriptural Logic, Real Presence, and the Parameters of Orthodoxy. Milwuakee: Marquette University Press, 2003. Lewi n, Alison Williams. Negotiating Survival: Florence and the Great Schism, 1378 1417. Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2003. Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten, Vlkern, Kofessionen, edited by F erdinand Seibt, 12 138. Munich: ldenburg, 1997. Loserth, Johann. Wiclif and Hus Translated by M. J. Evans. New York: AMS Press, 1980. Historica 13 (1966): 51 80. Jan Hus Prague: Svobodn slovo, 1961. The Hussite Movement in Bohemia Prague: Orbis, 1958. Zeitschrift fr Religions und Geistesgeschichte 18 (1966): 163 170. Machovec, Milan. BRRP 6 (2007): 45 76.
290 Masaryk, T.G. o brozen a n r eformace. Zurich : Konfrontace, 1979. Companion to Jean Gerson edited by. Brian Patrick McGuire, 249 291. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Christianity and Five Years of Teaching, edited by David C. Mengel and Lisa Wolverton. Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press, 2014. Past and Present (2011) 211: 3 34. of Prostitution in Fourteenth Speculum 79. 2 (2004): 407 442. Austrian History Year Book 41 (2010): 15 29. BRRP 6. (2004): 17 32. the Czech state: Bohemia and Bohemia in History 58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Meznik,Jaroslav. demie McGinn, Bernard. Antichrist: Two Hundred Years of the Human Fascination with Evil. New York: Harper Collins, 1994. The Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle Ages, Werner Verbeke et a l eds., Mediaevalia Lovaniensia Series 1 Studia 15, 1 48. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1988. McGuire, Brian Patrick. Jean Gerson and the Last Medieval Reformation University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2005. Midelfort, H. C. E. Wit ch Hunting in Southwestern Germany, 1562 1684; the Social and Intellectual Foundations Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1972. Speculum Sermonis: Interdisciplinary Reflection s on the Medieval Sermon, edited by Georgiana Donavin, Cary J. Nederman and Richard Utz, 157 179. Turnhout: Brepols, 2004.
291 Italy, 1300 Charisma and Religious Au thority: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Preaching, 1200 1500 edited by Katherine L. Jansen and Miri Rubin, 235 252. Turnhout: Brepols, 2010. Communio Viatorum 8 (1965): 95 105. 14 (1966): 1 14. Jan Hus. Testimone Della Verit Torino: Claudiana, 1973. Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten, Vlkern, Konfessionen edited by Ferdinand Seibt, 167 177. Munich: Oldenburg, 1997. Nouvelle Revue Thlogique 83 (1961): 960 966. Moore, R. I. The Origins of European Dissent Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994. .The Formation of a Persec uting Society: Power and Deviance in Western Europe, 950 1250 Oxford, UK; New York: B. Blackwell, 1987. Moraw, Peter. Von offener Verfassung zu gestalteter Verdichtung: das Reich im spten Mittelalter, 1250 bis 1490. Berlin : Propylen, 1985. More, Peter C.A. BRRP 4 (2002): 295 307. Preaching in Fourteenth Century Bohemia: The Life and Ideas of Milicius De Chremsir (+ 1374) and His Significance in the Historiography of Bohemia Slavkov, Czech Republic: EMAN, 1999. Mormando, Franco. Underworld of Early Renaissance Italy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. The Devil in Society in Premodern Europe edited by Richard Raiswell and Peter Dendle, 350 373. Toronto: Center for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2012. Muchembled, Robert. A History of the Devil: From the Middle Ages to the Present Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2003.
292 Preacher, Sermon and Audience in the Middle Ages edited by Carolyn Muessig, 255 276. Boston: Br ill, 2002. Mussolini, Benito. John Huss the Veracious. New York: The Italian Book Company, 1939. BRRP 8 (2011): 21 32. Murphy, James Jerome. Rhetoric in the Middle Ages: A History of Rhetorical Theory from Saint Augustine to the Renaissance Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974. Rhetoric in the Middle Ages: A History of the Rhetorical Theory from Saint Augustine to the Renaissa nce Tempe, Arizona: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2001. Nabert, Nathalie. Le Mal et le Diable: Leurs figures la fin du Moyen Age Paris: Beauchesne, 1996. Naphy, William G. and Helen L. Parish. Religion and Superstition in Refor mation Europe Manchester; New York: Manchester University Press, 2002. The Significance of Volume VI and Its Relation to the Previously Published BRRP 2 (1998): 15 24. Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten, Vlkern, Konfessionen edited by Ferdinand Seibt, 73 79. Munich: Oldenburg, 1997. Nelson, Brent. Holy Ambition: Rhetoric, Courtship, and Devotion in the Sermons of John Donne. Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2005. Church History 81 (March 2012): 1 26. Nickel, Incunabula and Their Readers: Printing, Selling and Using Books in the Fifteenth Century, edited by Kristian Jensen, 153 158. London: British Library, 2003. Novotn, Vclav. M. Prague, 1921. Oakley, Francis. Companion to Jean Gerson edited by. Brian Patrick McGuire, 179 204. Leiden: Brill, 2006.
293 The Western Church in the Later Middle Ages Ithaca, N.Y: Cornell University Pr ess, 1979. Oberman, Heiko Augustinus. Luther: Man between God and the Devil New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. Otakar. Wiener Archiv fr Geschichte des Slawentums u nd Osteuropas, 125 141. Graz Kln: Hermann Bhlaus, 1956. The Caroline University, 1348 1948 Prague: Orbis, 1948. Medieval Friars and Jews in the Middle Ages and Renn aissance, edited by Steven J. McMichael and Susan E. Meyers, 119 145. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Praise and Blame in Renaissance Rome: Rhetoric, Doctrine, and Reform in the Sacred Orators of the Papal Court, 1450 1521 Durham: Duke University P ress, 1979. Paces, Cynthia. Prague Panoramas: National Memory and Sacred Space in the Twentieth Century. Pittasburgh, Pa.: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2009. Prague: 07 (Facsimile print, Prague: Nakladatelstv Erika, 1998). Palmer, Paul F. ed. Sacraments and Forgiveness. History and Doctrinal Development of Penance, Extreme Unction and Indulgences Sources of Christian Theology, Vol. 2. London: Newman Press, 1959. Par sons, Ben Jongenelen, Bas. "Better than a Sack Full of Latin: Anticlericalism in the Middle Dutch Dit Es De Frenesie." Church History & Religious Culture 89, no. 4 (12, 2009): 431 453. Patschovsky, Alexander. Quellen zur B hmischen Inquisition im 14. Jahr hundert MGH 11. Weimar: Hermann B hlaus Nachfolger, 1979. Movement." PhD Diss. University of Notre Dame, 2009. Prague: Sef er, 2001. Polecritti, Cynthia. Preaching Peace in Renaissance Italy: Bernardino of Siena & His Audience Washington, D.C: Catholic University of America Press, 2000. Beyond Flor ence: The Contours of Medieval and Modern Italy, edited by Paula
294 Findlen, Michelle M. Fontaine and Duane J. Osheim, 147 159. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003. Prague: Komenskho Evang. Fakulta, 1966. Prague: Nakldem Vlastnm, 1930 Riemeck, Renate. Jan Hus. Reformation 100 Jahre vor Luther Frankfurt am Main: Stimme Verlag, 1966. Preacher, Sermon and Audience in the Middle Ages edited by Carolyn Muessig, 41 62. Leiden: Brill, 2002. und Prophet. Das Charisma im Das Charisma: Funktionen und Symbolische Reprsentationen, e dited by Pavlna Rychterov, Stefan Seit and Raphaela Veit, 423 448. Oldenburg: Akademie Verlag, 2008. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 19 (1956): 174 177. Samuel, Harrison Thomson. "The Philosophical Basis of Wyclif's Theology." The Journal of Religion 11, no. 1 (Jan., 1931): 86 116. Sanford, Peter. The Devil: A Bio graphy. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1996. Papers of the American Society of Church History 2: 6 (1921): 43 69. John Huss. His Life, Teachings and Death after Five Hundr ed Years New York: 1915. Scales, Leonard E. "At the Margin of Community: Germans in Pre Hussite Bohemia." Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 9, (1999): 327 352. Scribner, Robert. Popular Culture and Popular Movements in Reformation Germany Lon don: Hambledon Press, 1987. Sedlk, Jan. M. Jan Hus 1919. 3, 77 85. Olomouc: Arcibiskupsk Knihtiskrna, 1915.
295 Sedlar, Jean W. East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000 1500 London: University of Washington Press, 1994. Seibt, Ferdinand. Jan Hus. Das Kons tanzer Gericht im Urteil der Geschichte Munich: Carl Friedrich von Siemens Stiftung, 1972. Kirche im Osten 13 (1970): 74 103. volution (1306 Handbuch der Geschichte Der Bhmischen Lnder, vol. 1 edited by Karl Bosl, 349 580. Stuttgart: A. Hiersemann, 197 4 7 6 Prague: Argo, 2002. ideje Praha: Lidov noviny, 2001. Husitsk r evoluce. Prague: Univerzita Karlova, 1996. Anticlericalism in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe edited by Peter A. Dykema and Heiko A. Oberma n, 83 90. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995. Heresy and Literacy, 1000 1530 edited by Anne Hudson and Peter Biller, 222 254. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. wal of the German Students from History of Universities 4 (1984): 153 66. Smith, Philip. "Culture and Charisma: Outline of a Theory." Acta Sociolgica 43 (2000): 101 111. Sousedk, Stanislav. Prague A Brill Companion to Jan Hus edited by Prague: Filosofia, 2011. BRRP 8 (2011): 77 97. Bhmen und Das Reich: Ideen und Kulturtransfer im Vergleich (13. 16 Jahrhundert) edited by Eva Schlotheuber and Hubertus Seibert, 235 264. Munich: Oldenbourg Verlag, 2009.
296 Exegesis of the Arma Spiritualia BRRP 6 (2004): 87 110. Spin ka, Matthew. John Hus, a Biography Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 1979. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1966. John Hus and the Czech Reform Hamden: Archon Books, 1966. .John Hus at the Council of Constance New York: Columbia University Press, 1965. Stejskal, Karel, and Karel Neubert. Pra gue : Artia 1978. voty husitsk epochy edited by Robert Novotn 49. Prague: Paseka, 2011. Swanson, R. N. Universities, Academics and the Great Schism Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Taylor, Larissa. Soldiers of Christ: Preachin g in Late Medieval and Reformation France New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Tentler, Thomas N. Sin and Confession on the Eve of the Reformation Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977. ange, and Charisma: International Sociology 10 (Sept. 1995): 269 280. Thayer, Anne T. Penitence, Preaching, and the Coming of the Reformation Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, 2002. ing: Retrieving the Medieval Sermon as Preacher, Sermon and Audience in the Middle Ages edited by Carolyn Muessig, 89 125. Boston: Brill, 2002. Journal of Religion 11 : 1 (1931): 86 116. Lex Christi, Dominium und Kirchlich Hierarchie Bei Johnnes Hus im Vergleich mit John Wyclif Jan Hus: Zwischen Zeiten, Vlkern, Konfessionen, edited by Ferdinand Seibt, 157 167. Munich: Oldenburg, 1997. Van Deus en, Nancy. Dreams and Visions: an Interdisciplinary Enquiry. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010.
297 Van Dussen, Michael. From England to Bohemia: Heresy and Communication in the Later Middle Ages Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Van Engen, Jo hn H. Sisters and Brothers of the Common Life: The Devotio Moderna and the World of the Later Middle Ages Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008. "Late Medieval Anticlericalism: The Case of the New Devout." In Anticlericalism in Late M edieval and Early Modern Europe, edited by Peter A. Dykema and Heiko A. Oberman, 19 52 Leiden: Brill 1993. Church History 77:2 (June 2008), 257 284. Religion in the History of the Medieval West. By John Van Engen (Variorum Collected Studies Series, 793). Aldershot: Ashgate (2004): 492 522. American Historical Review 91(1986): 519 552. Husitsk Tbor 13 (2003): 81 95. Antiqui und Moderni: Traditionsbewutse in und Fortschrittsbewutsein im spten Mittelalter, edited by Albert Zimmerman and Grudrun Vuillemin Diem, 383 93. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1974. Communio Viatorum 19 (1976): 65 81. Vischer, Melchior. Jan Hus Aufruhr wider Papst und Reich. Frankfurt am Main: Societts Verlag, 1955. Vooght, Paul de. tion Heretics and Witches Sabbaths: The Devil in Society in Premodern Europe edited by Richard Raiswell and Peter Dendle, 195 220. Toronto: Center for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2012. Walsh, Kather Studies in Church History Subsidia Vol. 5, edited by Anne Hudson and Michael Wilks, 397 417. Oxford: Ecclesiastical History Society by B. Blackwell, 1987.
298 Waters, Claire M. Angels and Earthly Creatures: Preaching, Performance, and Gender in the Later Middle Ages Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. Weber, Max. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology Edited by Guenther Roth and C lause Wittich. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978. Max Weber on Charisma and Institution Building: Selected Papers Edited by Shmuel Noah Eisenstadt, Chicago: Unive rsity of Chicago Press, 1968. Speculum 70, No. 2 (April, 1995): 305 29. ______. Macaronic Sermons: Bilingualism and Preaching in Late Medieval England Ann Arbor: University o f Michigan Press, 1994. Wiskemann, Elizabeth. Czechs and Germans: a Study of the Struggle in the Historic Provinces of Bohemia and Moravia. London and New York: St. Martin's Press, 1967. Wolverton, Lisa. Hastening Towards Prague: Power and Society in the Medieval Czech Lands. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001. Preachers and People in the Reformation and Early Modern Period, edited by Larissa Taylor, 3 29. Leiden: Brill, 2001. The Dawn of the Reformation edited by Herbert B. Workman. New York: AMS Press, 1978.
299 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Reid S. Weber completed his P h.D. at the University of Florida in May of 2014 under the direction of Dr. Howard Louthan. Weber holds a Master of Arts in History from Northern Illinois University. He spent the 2011/2012 academic year in Prague, Czech Republic on a Fulbright research grant conducting dissertation research. He also has a Bachelor of Arts from Wayne State College, Nebraska.