Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

had made their way into Bohemia and were enthusiastically received by the reform party among the clergy. The cathedral chapter requested the university to oppose the dissemination of Wiclif's works and opinions; they met with a refusal from the Bohemian "nation" in the university which was practically led by Huss. The breach existing in the university and within the nation was widened.

The same opposition reappeared a few years later upon the question of concluding the papal schism. The Council of Pisa (1409) proposed to settle the question definitely by observing an ecclesiastical neutrality and refusing obedience to either Pope. In the University of Prague the idea commended itself only to the Bohemian "nation;" the three remaining nationalities in conjunction with the upper clergy adhered firmly to the Roman Pope Gregory XII. King Wenzel, in contrast to Ruprecht, declared for ecclesiastical neutrality, and the Czech party induced him to issue that fatal decree whereby the Bohemian "nation," though in the minority, was henceforward to have three votes in all university discussions and resolutions, while the three non-Bohemian nations were to have but one vote between them. This measure implied the despotic repression of Germans and foreigners. Their sole remedy was migration to other German universities. The studium of Leipsic owes its foundation to this circumstance (end of 1409).

Huss, who must be regarded as the prime mover in this momentous transaction, had shaken off his opponents with unusual success. He was the more emboldened for the struggle with the higher clergy, in particular with Archbishop Zbynek of Prague. This ecclesiastic had forcibly deprived the clergy of their Wicliffite books, which he condemned to be burnt, and had also taken measures against the license of the preachers in every direction, and was anxious to confine their activity to the parish churches. When Huss declined to obey these regulations and continued to preach reform from the pulpit of the Bethlehem chapel he was excommunicated. However, the bulk of the population, the university, the court, the queen Sophie (Wenzel's second wife from 1389), and the king himself were on the side of Huss, while the archbishop was supported only by his clergy and by the new Pope, John XXIII.

The further development of these divisions was largely influenced by general political events. King Ruprecht had died in the year 1410. The simultaneous choice of the two Luxemburg princes, Jost of Moravia and Sigismund of Hungary, was but a temporary danger, as the former died in January, 1411 (Vol. VII, p. 191). Of the many descendants of the house of Luxemburg there remained only King Wenzel of Bohemia and King Sigismund of Hungary, neither having male issue. They agreed without difficulty to share the inheritance of their Moravian cousin, and laid aside all previous grounds of dispute. Sigismund took the Mark of Brandenburg, which he forthwith mortgaged to the Burgrave Friedrich of Nuremberg; Wenzel added Moravia and Lausitz to Bohemia. Sigismund was then unanimously chosen king of Germany. Wenzel reserved to himself the right of acquiring the dignity of emperor at the hands of the Pope.

They attempted by similar means to conclude the schism in the Church, recognising John XXIII, then resident in Rome, as against the other two candidates who laid claim to the papal tiara. Hopes of a general recognition induced the Pope to modify his attitude to Huss and to refrain from summoning him to Rome; this policy was the more feasible because the chief opponent of Huss, the archbishop Zbynek, died in the year 1411, and his aged successor was a

[ocr errors]
[graphic]

THE BURNING OF JOHN HUSS BY THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE,

JULY 6, 1415

(From a sixteenth century MS. in the Bohemian Museum at Prague)

[ocr errors]

mere tool in the hands of King Wenzel. Huss, however, was stimulated to further invective in his preaching against ecclesiastical abuses by John XXIII's issue of indulgences to secure money for the struggle against his opponents, a proceeding which gave further ground for serious complaints. Once again the nation supported Huss, with his pupils and friends. On this occasion, however, Wenzel resolved to give vigorous support, for political reasons, to the minority who opposed reform. The result was the imprisonment and execution of certain persons who publicly opposed the proceedings of the papal commissioners, while further complaints were made in Rome against Huss, who consequently incurred a papal sentence of excommunication (1412). Huss retired from Prague, but continued his work throughout the country with increased zeal, while in the capital itself the tension between the two parties was in no degree diminished.

Sigismund then considered that it might be possible to make an end of the religious disputes which shook the Bohemian hereditary lands, Bohemia itself, and also Moravia, to their centre, by bringing Huss before the Council of Constance, where the most influential representatives of political and ecclesiastical Europe had gathered to conclude the schism and to introduce general measures of church reform. Huss arrived a fortnight before the first sitting of the council, on November 3, 1414, accompanied by several Bohemian nobles, under a safe-conduct from Sigismund. This fact, however, did not prevent the council from imprisoning Huss on November 28. Sigismund and Wenzel made no attempt to interfere, in spite of their express promise guaranteeing a safe passage and return for Huss. The nobility of Bohemia and Moravia pressed his case with increasing firmness, and sent letters of warning to the king and the council; but after more than six months' imprisonment in misery Huss was deprived of his spiritual office as an arch-heretic by the council on July 6, 1415, and the secular power then executed the sentence of death by burning.1

Huss died a true martyr to his religious zeal. The firmness, the love of truth, and the contempt of death which he displayed before his judges at Constance were a powerful incitement to his strong body of adherents in Bohemia and Moravia to cling the more tenaciously to his doctrines. Shortly before his death, his pupil, Jacobellus of Mies, came forward with a claim, based upon the commands of Holy Scripture, for communion in both kinds (sub utraque specie). Huss offered no objection, and his followers thus gained, to their great advantage, a tangible symbol of their divergence from the Catholic Church, which ultimately gave the Hussites the name of Utraquists. No priest was tolerated who would not dispense the sacrament in both kinds; and since the Council of Constance rejected this innovation as being opposed to the existing custom of the Church, occasion was given for the expulsion of the Catholic clergy in every direction. Nobles and knights, in accordance with the custom of the age, soon formed a league for the purpose of protecting communion in both kinds and freedom of preaching in the country. They were unanimously resolved to regard the University of Prague and not the Council of Constance as their supreme ecclesiastical authority until the choice of a new Pope.

Strong measures were taken against the apostates; the fathers of the council issued excommunications and an interdict without delay. Hussite disciples were

1 See the plate facing this page, "The Burning of John Huss by the Council of Constance on July 6, 1415."

VOL. V-17

burned in Olmütz when they attempted to preach the new doctrine in that city. A second magister of Prague, Hieronymus, was burned in Constance on May 30, 1416. Bishop Johann of Leitomischl, who was regarded as chiefly responsible next to Sigismund for the condemnation of Huss, was appointed bishop of Olmütz, and displayed great zeal for the extirpation of the heresy. But these measures served only to intensify the spirit of opposition after the death of Huss from year to year, and soon made the breach irremediable. The only measures which commended themselves to the new Pope, Martin V, were excommunication and anathema, which produced the smaller effect, as the Hussites themselves now began to break up into sects and parties, which went far beyond the doctrine of the magister of Prague. The most numerous, and afterwards the most important, of these sects was that of the Taborites, who took their name from Mount Tabor, where they originally held their meetings. As regarded religion, they professed a return to the conditions of primitive Christianity, and adherence only to the actual letter of the Bible. At the same time their political and social views and objects were marked by extreme radicalism. The more moderate opposition among the Hussites, or Utraquists, were known from their symbol as Calixtins (chalicemen) or as Pragers, as the Prague school was their spiritual centre.

King Wenzel, who had favoured the Hussites since the condemnation of their founder, was impelled by his brother Sigismund and the Pope to entertain seriously the idea of interference, in view of the dangerous and revolutionary spirit which animated an ever increasing circle of adherents. At the outset of the year 1419 he remodelled the Hussite council of the Neustadt in Prague by introHowever, ducing Catholics, and recalled the priests who had been expelled. mutual animosities had risen to such a pitch that on July 30, 1419, when the Catholics disturbed or insulted a procession, the Hussites, under their leader Žižka, stormed the parliament house in the Neustadt and threw some of the Catholic councillors out of the windows. The councillors were then beaten and stabbed to death by the infuriated populace. The excitement in the city and the country was increased a few weeks afterwards by the sudden death of King Wenzel on August 19, 1419, the consequence of a fearful access of fury at the outbreak of the revolution.

D. KING SIGISMUND; THE HUSSITE WARS

SIGISMUND, the last descendant of the house of Luxemburg, was now confronted with the difficult task of securing his accession to the heritage of his brother, Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia. In each of these three countries the political situation and the prospects of his recognition were different. In Bohemia he might expect a bitter opposition, as long as he maintained his hostility to the Hussite movement. In Moravia this movement had indeed obtained a firm footing among the nobility and the population. Here, however, there was a counteracting force in the bishopric of Olmütz and its numerous feudatories, led by Bishop Johann,“the man of iron," who strove vigorously for the suppression of the heresy. Further, the most important towns, such as Brünn, Olmütz, Znaim, Iglau, and others were populated by a majority of Catholic and German inhabitants, and neither they nor the nobility had any intention of opposing the rights of the Luxemburg claimant. Finally, Sigismund could be certain of meeting with ready submission in Silesia, which was entirely Germanised, and regarded the

« PredošláPokračovať »