HUSCHKE, GEORG PHILIPP EDUARD: Jurist and authority on church government; b. at Munden June 26, 1801; d. at Breslau Feb. 7, 1886. In 1817 he went to Gottingen and studied law. He was attracted by Savigny in Berlin, but returned to Gottingen and established himself as privat-docent, lecturing on the orations of Cicero, on Gaius and the history of law; then he was appointed professor in Rostock. He accepted a call to Breslau as professor of Roman law in 1827. Soon after his arrival he became interested in the dissensions caused by the Evangelical Union which were forced upon the orthodox Lutherans by the state rulers, and took a prominent part in them. Huschke tried to solve the problem practically as soon as he came to Breslau. Out of the dispute originated the independent Lutheran Church, and Huschke, as the defender of its rights, was appointed head of the supreme church college. He was intensely hostile to the papacy, in which he saw the realization of a demoniac power. He was an eager student of the apocalypse. The fruit of his studies was a work entitled Das Buch mit sieben Siegeln (Dresden, 1860). His exegesis, however, is not always sound. His ideas on church government are laid down in Die streitigen Lehren von der Kirche, dem Kirchenamt, dem Kirchenregiment und der Kirchenregierung (Leipsic, 1863). He published many important writings on law.
(R. ROCHOLL.)BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Feldner, Die Verhandtungen der Kommission xw Er6rterunpderPrinxipianderKirchenverfaasunp, Halls, 1880; J. F. von Schulte, Oeaehichte der Quellen and Literatur du eanoniaehen Rechts, iii. 241 eqq., Stuttgart. 1880; J. H. Iteinkene, Melchior von Diepenbrock, p. 333. Leipeic, 1881; J. Nagel, Wider Wange»wnn, Cottbus, 1882.
I. The Life and Work of Huss.
Early Life and Studies (§ 1).
Influence of Wyclif in Bohemia (§ 2).
The Papal Schism (§ 3).
Indulgences (§ 4).
Further Dissensions (§ 5).
The Council of Constance (§ 6).
Trial of Huss (§ 7).
Condemnation and Execution (§ 8).
Huss' Character, Writings, and Teachings (§ 9).
Source of his Influence (§ 10).
II. The Hussites.
Effect in Bohemia of the Death of Huss (§ 1).
Two Parties in Bohemia (§ 2).
The Four Articles of Prague (§ 3).
Calixtinesor Utraquists, and Taborites (§ 4).
The Hussite Wars (§ 5).
The Council of Basel and Compactata of Prague (§ 6).
Final Disappearance of the Hussites (§ 7).
After the marriage of King Wenceslaus' sister, Anne, with Richard II. of England in 1382, the philosophical writings of Wyclif became known in Bohemia. As a student Huss had been greatly attracted by them, particularly by his philosophical realism. His inclination toward ecclesiastical reforms was awakened only by the acquaintance with Wyclif's theological writings. The so-called Hussism in the first decades of the fifteenth century was nothing but Wyclifism transplanted into Bohemian soil. As such it maintained itself until the death of Hues, then it turned into Utraquism, and with logical sequence there followed Taboritism (see below). The theological writings of Wyclif spread widely in Bohemia. They had been brought over, as is said, in 1401 or 1402 by Jerome of Prague, and Huss was greatly moved by them. The university arose against the spread of the new doctrines, and in 1403 prohibited a disputation on forty-five theses taken in part from Wyclif. Under Archbishop Sbinko of Hasenburg (from 1403), Huss enjoyed in the beginning a great reputation. In 1405 he was active as synodical preacher, but on account of his severe attacks upon the clergy the bishop was compelled to depose him.
The development of conditions at the University of Prague depended to a great extent on the question of the papal schism (see SCHISM). King Wenceslaus, who was on the point of assuming the reins of
|
416 |
The archbishop was then isolated and Huss at the height of his fame. He became the first rector of the Czech university, and enjoyed the favor of the court. In the mean time, the doctrinal views of Wyclif had spread over the whole country. As long as Sbinko remained obedient to Gregory XII., all opposition to the new spirit was in vain; but as soon as he submitted to Alexander V., conditions changed. The archbishop brought his complaints before the papal see, accusing the Wyclifites as the instigators of all ecclesiastical disturbances in Bohemia. Thereupon the pope issued his bull of Dec. 20, 1409, which empowered the archbishop to proceed against Wyclifism-- all books of Wyclif were to be given up, his doctrines revoked, and free preaching discontinued. After the publication of the bull in 1410, Huss appealed to the pope, but in vain. All books and valuable manuscripts of Wyclif were burned, and Huss and his adherents put under the ban. This procedure caused an indescribable commotion among the people down to the lowest classes; in some places turbulent scenes occurred. The government took the part of Huss, and the power of his adherents increased from day to day. He continued to preach in the Bethlehem chapel, and became bolder and bolder in his accusations of the Church. The churches of the city were put under the ban, and the interdict was pronounced against Prague, but without result.
Sbinko died in 1411, and with his death the religious movement in Bohemia entered a new phase-- the disputes concerning indulgences arose. In 1411 John XXIII. issued his Cruciata against King Ladislaus of Naples, the protector of Gregory XII. In Prague also the cross was preached, and preachers of indulgences urged people to crowd the churches and give their offerings. There developed a traffic in indulgences. Huss, following the example of Wyclif, lifted up his voice against it and wrote his famous Cruciata. But he could not carry with him the men of the university. In 1412 a disputation took place, on which occasion Huss delivered his Quaestio magistri Johannis Hus . . . de indulgentiis. It was taken literally from the last chapter of Wyclif's book, De ecclesia, and his treatise, De absolutione a pena et culpa. No pope or bishop, according to Wyclif and Huss, has a right to take up the sword in the name of the Church; he should pray for his enemies and bless those that curse him. Man obtains forgiveness of sins by real repentance, not for money. The doctors of the theological faculty replied, but without success. A few days afterward the people, led by Wok of Waldstein, burnt the papal bulls. Huss, they said, should be obeyed rather than the fraudulent mob of adulterers and simonists. Under the pressure of the opposing party, the long was forced to punish every public insult of the pope and all opposition against his bulls. Three men from the lower classes who openly contradicted the preachers during their sermons and called indulgences a fraud were beheaded. They were the first martyrs of the Hussite Church. The theological faculty requested Huss to present his speeches and doctrines to the dean for an examination, but he refused. In the mean time the faculty had condemned the forty-five articles anew and added several other heretical theses which had originated with Huss. The king forbade the teaching of these articles, but neither Huss nor the university approved of this summary condemnation, requesting that the unscripturalness of the articles should be first proved.
The tumults at Prague had stirred up a sensation, unpleasant for the Roman party; papal legates and Archbishop Albik tried to persuade Huss to give up his opposition against the bulls, and the king made an unsuccessful attempt to reconcile the two parties. In the mean time the clergy of Prague, through Michael de Causis, had brought their complaints before the pope, and he ordered the cardinal of St. Angelo to proceed against Huss without mercy. The cardinal put him under the great church ban. He was to be seized and delivered to the archbishop, and his chapel was to be destroyed. Stricter measures against Huss and his adherents, the counter-measures of the Hussites, and the appeal of Huss from the pope to Jesus Christ as the supreme judge only intensified the excitement among the people and forced Huss to depart from Prague, in compliance with the wish of the king; but his absence had not the expected effect. The excitement continued. The king, being grieved by the disrepute of his country on account of the heresy, made great efforts to harmonize the opposing parties. In 1412 he convoked the heads of his kingdom for a consultation, and at their suggestion ordered a synod to be held at Bohmisch-Brod on Feb. 2, 1412. It did not take place there, but in the palace of the archbishops at Prague, Huss being thus excluded from participation. Propositions were made for the restitution of the peace of the Church, Huss requiring especially that Bohemia should have the same freedom in regard to eccIesiastical affairs as other countries and that approbation and condemnation should therefore be announced only with the permission of the state power. This is wholly the doctrine of Wyclif (Sermones, iii. 519, etc.). There followed treatises from both parties, but no harmony was obtained. "Even if
|
417 |
To put an end to the papal schism and to take up the long desired reform of the Church, a general council was convened for Nov. 1, 1414, at Constance. The Emperor Sigismund, brother of Wenceslaus, and heir to the Bohemian crown, was anxious to clear the country from the blemish of heresy. Huss likewise was willing to make an end of all dissensions, and gladly followed the request of Sigismund to go to Constance. From the sermons which he took along, it is evident that he purposed to convert the assembled fathers to his own (i.e., Wyclif's) principal doctrines. Sigismund promised him safe-conduct. Provided with sufficient testimonies concerning his orthodoxy, and after having made his will as if he had divined his death, he started on his journey (Oct. 11, 1414). On Nov. 3 he arrived at Constance, and on the following day the bulletins on the church doors announced that Michael of Deutschbrod would be the opponent of Huss, the heretic. In the beginning Huss was at liberty, making his abode at the house of a widow, but after a few weeks his opponents succeeded in imprisoning him, on the strength of a rumor that he intended to flee. He was first brought into the residence of a canon, and thence, on Dec. 8, into the dungeon of the Dominican monastery. Sigismund was greatly angered at the abuse of his letter of safe-conduct and threatened the prelates with dismissal, but when it was hinted that in such a case the council would be dissolved, there was nothing left for him but to accommodate himself to the circumstances. Thus the fate of Huss was sealed. On Dec. 4 the pope had entrusted a committee of three bishops with a preliminary investigation against him. The witnesses for the prosecution were heard, but Huss was refused an advocate for his defense. His situation became worse after the catastrophe of John XXIII., who had left Constance to evade the necessity of abdicating (see John XXIII.). So far Huss had been the captive of the pope and in constant intercourse with his friends, but now he was delivered to the archbishop of Constance and brought to his castle, Gottlieben on the Rhine. Here he remained seventy-three days, separated from his friends, chained day and night, poorly fed, and tortured by disease.
On June 5 he was tried for the first time, and for that purpose was transferred to the Franciscan monastery, where he spent the last weeks of his life. He acknowledged the writings on the Church against Palecz and Stanislaus of Znaim as his own, and declared himself willing to recant, if errors should be proven to him. Huss conceded his veneration of Wyclif, and said that he could only wish his soul might some time attain unto that place where Wyclif's was. On the other hand, he denied having defended Wyclif's doctrine of the Lord's Supper, or the forty-five articles; he had only opposed their summary condemnation. The king admonished him to deliver himself up to the mercy of the council, as he did not desire to protect a heretic. At the last trial, on June 8, there were read to him thirty-nine sentences, twenty-six of which had been excerpted from his book on the Church, seven from his treatise' against Palecz, and six from that against Stanislaus. Almost all of his articles may be traced back to Wyclif. The danger of some of these doctrines as regards worldly power was explained to the emperor to incite him against Huss. The latter declared himself willing to submit if he could be convinced of errors. He desired only a fairer trial and more time to explain the reasons for his views. If his reasons and Bible texts did not suffice, he would be glad to be instructed. This declaration was considered an unconditional surrender, and he was asked to confess (1) that he had erred in the theses which he had hitherto maintained; (2) that he renounced them for the future; (3) that he recanted them; and (4) that he declared the opposite of these sentences. He asked to be exempted from recanting doctrines which he had never taught; others, which the assembly considered erroneous, he was willing to revoke; to act differently would be against his conscience. These words found no favorable reception. After the
|
418 |
The condemnation took place on July 6 in the presence of the solemn assembly of the council in the cathedral. After the performance of high mass and liturgy, Huss was led into the church. The bishop of Lodi delivered an oration on the duty of eradicating heresy; then some theses of Huss and Wyclif and a report of his trial were read. He protested loudly several times, and when his appeal to Christ was rejected as a condemnable heresy, he exclaimed, "O God and Lord, now the council condemns even thine own act and thine own law as heresy, since thou thyself didst lay thy cause before thy Father as the just judge, as an example for us, whenever we are sorely oppressed." An Italian prelate pronounced the sentence of condemnation upon Huss and his writings. Again he protested loudly, saying that even at this hour he did not wish anything but to be convinced from Holy Scripture. He fell upon his knees and asked God with a low voice to forgive all his enemies. Then followed his degradation--he was enrobed in priestly vestments and again asked to recant; again he refused. With curses his ornaments were taken from him, his priestly tonsure was destroyed, and the sentence was pronounced that the Church had deprived him of all rights and delivered him to the secular powers. Then a high paper hat was put upon his head, with the inscription Haeresiarcha. Thus Huss was led away to the stake under a strong guard of armed men. At the place of execution he knelt down, spread out his hands, and prayed aloud. Some of the people asked that a confessor should he given him, but a bigoted priest exclaimed, a heretic should neither be heard nor given a confessor. The executioners undressed Huss and tied his hands behind his back with ropes, and his neck with a chain to a stake around which wood and straw had been piled up so that it covered him to the neck. Still at the last moment, the imperial marshal, Von Pappenheim, in the presence of the Count Palatine, asked him to save his life by a recantation, but Huss declined with the words "God is my witness that I have never taught that of which I have been accused by false witnesses. In the truth of the Gospel which I have written, taught, and preached I will die to-day with gladness." Thereupon the fire was kindled. With uplifted voice Huss sang, "Christ, thou Son of the living God, have mercy upon me." When he started this for the third time and continued "who art born of Mary the virgin," the wind blew the flame into his face; he still moved lips and head, and then died of suffocation. His clothes were thrown into the fire, his ashes gathered and cast into the nearby Rhine.
The Czech people, who in his lifetime had loved Huss as their prophet and apostle, now adored him as their saint and martyr. He possessed high virtues, but in his struggles with the University of Prague and his ecclesiastical opponents he can not be freed altogether from the reproach of slander and abuse. His learning was not of a universal range; wherever he goes beyond Wyclif, he falters and becomes dull or verbose. He left only a few reformatory writings in the proper sense of the word, most of his works being polemical treatises against Stanislaus and Polecz. It is doubtful whether he knew all the works of Wyclif. He translated the Trialogus, and was very familiar with his works on the body of the Lord, on the Church, on the power of the pope, and especially with his sermons. The book on the Church and on the power of the pope contains the essence of the doctrine of Huss. According to it, the Church is not that hierarchy which is generally designated as Church; the Church is the entire body of those who from eternity have been predestined for salvation. Christ, not the pope, is its head. It is no article of faith that one must obey the pope to be saved. Neither external membership in the Church nor churchly offices and dignities are a surety that the persons in question are members of the true Church. What he says in his sermons on the corruption of the Church, clergy, and monks, on the duties of secular powers, etc., he has taken almost literally from Wyclif. His three great sermons, De sufficientia legis Christi, De fidei suae elucidatione, and De pace, with which he thought to carry away the whole council at Constance, are exact reproductions of Wyclif's sermons. He claims not to have shared Wyclif's views regarding the sacraments, but this is not certain. The soil had been well prepared for this very doctrine in Bohemia. There are reasons to suppose that Wyclif's doctrine of the Lords' Supper had spread to Prague as early as 1399. It gained an even wider circulation after it had been prohibited in 1403, and Huss preached and taught it, although it is possible that he simply repeated it without advocating it. But the doctrine was seized eagerly by the radical party, the Taborites, who made it the central point of their system.
The great success of Huss in his native country was due mainly to his unsurpassed pastoral activity, which far excelled that of the famous old preachers of Bohemia. But even here Huss was the docile pupil of the Englishman. Huss himself put the highest value on the sermon and knew how to awaken the enthusiasm of the masses. His sermons are often inflammatory as regards their contents; he introduces his quarrels with his spiritual superiors, criticizes contemporaneous events, or appeals to his congregation as witness or judge. It was this bearing which multiplied his adherents, and thus he became the true apostle of his English master without being himself a theorist in theological questions. In the art of governing and leading masses he was unexcelled. Huss' warm friend and devoted follower, Jerome of Prague, shared his fate, although he did not suffer death till nearly a year later.
|
419 |
The arrest of Huss had excited considerable resentment in Bohemia and Moravia. In both countries the estates appealed repeatedly and urgently to Sigismund to deliver Huss. On the arrival of the news of his death disturbances broke out which were directed at first against the clergy, especially against the monks. Even the archbishop saved himself with difficulty from the rage of the populace. In the country places conditions were not much better. Everywhere the treatment of Huss was felt as a disgrace inflicted upon the whole country, and his death was looked upon as a criminal act. King Wenceslaus, prompted by his grudge against Sigismund, at first gave free vent to his indignation at the course of events in Constance; and his wife openly favored the friends of Huss. Pronounced Hussites stood at the head of the government. A league was formed by certain lords who pledged themselves to protect the free preaching of the Gospel upon all their possessions and estates, and to obey the power of the bishops only in case their orders accorded with the injunctions of the Bible. In disputed points the decision of the university should be resorted to. The entire Hussite nobility joined the league, and if the king had entered it, its resolutions would have received the sanction of the law; but he refused, and approached the Roman Catholic league of lords, which was now formed, the members pledging themselves to cling to the king, the Roman Church, and the Council. Signs of the outbreak of a civil war began to show themselves. Pope Martin V., who, while still Cardinal Otto of Colonna, had attacked Huss with relentless severity, energetically resumed the battle against Hussism after the enactments of the Council of Constance. He intended to eradicate completely the doctrine of Huss. For this purpose the cooperation of King Wenceslaus had to be obtained. In 1418 Sigismund succeeded in winning his brother over to the standpoint of the council by pointing out the inevitableness of a religious war if the heretics in Bohemia found further protection. Hussite statesmen and army leaders had to leave the country, and Roman priests were reinstituted. These measures caused a general commotion which hastened the death of Wenceslaus by a paralytic stroke in 1419. His heir was Sigismund.
Hussism had organized itself during the years 1415-1419. From the beginning two parties were found: the closer adherents of Huss clung to his standpoint, leaving the whole hierarchical and liturgical order of the Church untouched; the radical party identified itself more boldly with the doctrines of Wyclif, shared his passionate hatred of the monastic clergy, and, like him, attempted to lead the Church back to its condition during the time of the apostles, which necessitated the removal of the existing hierarchy and the secularization of ecclesiastical possessions. The radicals among the Hussites sought to translate their theories into reality; they preached the sufficientia legis Christi--only the divine law (i.e., the Bible) is the rule and canon for man, and that not only in ecclesiastical matters, but also in political and civil matters. They rejected therefore, as early as 1416, everything that has no basis in the Bible, as the adoration of saints and pictures, fasts, superfluous holidays, the oath, intercession for the dead, auricular confession, indulgences, the sacraments of confirmation and extreme unction, admitted laymen and women to the preacher's office, chose their own priests. But before everything they clung to Wyclif's doctrine of the Lord's Supper, denying transubstantiation, and this is the principal point by which they are distinguished from the moderate party.
The program of the more conservative Hussites is contained in the four articles of Prague, which were agreed upon in July, 1420, and promulgated in the Latin, Czech, and German languages: (1) Freedom in preaching; (2) communion in both kinds; (3) reduction of the clergy to apostolic poverty; (4) severe punishment of all open sins.
The views of the moderate Hussites were represented at the university and among the citizens of Prague; therefore they were called the Prague party; they were also called Calixtines or Utraquists, because they emphasized the second article, and the chalice became their emblem. The radicals had their gathering-place in the small town of Austie, on the Luschnitz, south of Prague. But as the place was not defensible, they founded a city upon a neighboring hill, which they called Tabor; hence they were called Taborites. They comprised the essential force of Hussism. Their aim was to destroy the enemies of the law of God, and to extend his kingdom by the sword. For the former purpose they waged bloody wars, for the second purpose they established a strict jurisdiction, inflicting the severest punishment not only upon heinous crimes like murder and adultery, but also upon faults like perjury and usury, and tried to apply the conditions required in the law of God to the social relations of the world.
The news of the death of King Wenceslaus produced the greatest commotion among the people of Prague. A revolution swept over the country; churches and monasteries were destroyed, and the ecclesiastical possessions were seized by the Hussite nobility. Sigismund could get possession of his kingdom only by the power of arms. Martin V. called upon all Christians of the Occident to take up arms against the Hussites, and there followed a twelve-years' war which was carried on by the Hussites at first defensively, but after 1427 they assumed the offensive. Apart from their religious aims, they fought for the national interests of the Czechs. The moderate and radical parties were united and they not only repelled the attacks of the army of crusaders, but entered the neighboring countries.
At last their opponents were forced to think of an amicable settlement. A Bohemian embassy was invited to appear at the council of Basel. The discussions began on Jan. 10, 1432, centering chiefly in the four articles of Prague. No agreement was
|
420 |
The Utraquists had retained hardly anything of the doctrines of Huss except communion in both kinds. In 1462 Pius II. declared the Compactata null and void, prohibited communion in both kinds, and acknowledged George of Podiebrad as king under the condition that he would promise an unconditional harmony with the Roman Church. This he refused, but his successor, King Vladislaus II., favored the Roman Catholics and proceeded against some zealous clergymen of the Calixtines. The troubles of the Utraquists increased from year to year. In 1485, at the diet of Kuttenberg, an agreement between the Roman Catholics and Utraquists was obtained which lasted for thirty-one years. But it was considerably later, at the diet of 1512, that the equal rights of both religions were permanently established. Luther's appearance was hailed by the Utraquist clergy, and Luther himself was astonished to find so many points of agreement between the doctrines of Huss and his own. But not all Utraquists approved of the German Reformation; a schism arose among them, and many returned to the Roman doctrine, while the better elements had long before joined the Unitas Fratrum. Under Maximilian II., the Bohemian state assembly established the Confessio Bohemica, upon which Lutherans, Reformed, and Bohemian Brethren agreed. From that time Hussism began to die out; but it was completely eradicated only after the battle at the White Mountain (Nov. 8, 1620) and the Roman Catholic reaction which fundamentally changed the ecclesiastical conditions of Bohemia and Moravia.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: An edition of the works which shall distinguish between the works of Huss and those of Wyclif which he used and translated has long been a desideratum; of an ed. of the works of Huss by J. R. Vilímek, Opera omnia, the following have appeared: Expositio decalogi, ed., W. Flajšhans, Prague, 1903; De corpore Christi, ib. 1904; De sanguine Christi, ib. 1904; Super IV. Sententiarum, ed. W. Flajšhans and W. Kominkova, ib. 1905; Sermones de sanctis, ib. 1907-08; the works in Bohemian were published by B. J. Ermen, Prague, 1865-1868; other sources are K. Höfler, Geschichtsschreiber der Husitischen Bewegung in Böhmen, in Fontes rerum Austriacarum, 3 vols., Vienna, 1856-66; Historia et monumenta J. Hus atque Hieronymi Pragensis, 2 vols, Nuremberg, 1715; the most available and so far the best source is Documenta Magistri Johannis Hus, ed. F. Palacký, Prague, 1869 (contains essays on the life and teachings of Huss); a volume of Letters attributed to John Huss has been edited with introduction and notes by H. B. Workman and R. M. Pope, London, 1904 (the one Eng. transl. direct from the originals).
On the life and teachings and contemporary history consult: J. Dobneck (Cochlaeus), Hist. Hussitarum, Mainz, 1549; F. Palacký, Geschichte von Böhmen, 5 vols., Prague, 1836-67; idem, Beiträge zur Geschichte des Hussitenkrieges, 2 vols., ib. 1873-74; F. P. E. Boisnormand de Bonnechose, Les Réformateurs avant le réforme, Paris, 1845, Eng. transl., New York, 1844; J. A. van Helfert, Hus und Hieronymus, Prague, 1853; G. L. Herman, John Huss, Dublin, 1854; A. Jeep, Gerson, Wiclefus und Hus, Göttingen, 1857; C. Becker, Die beiden böhmischen Reformatoren und Märtyrer, Nördlingen, 1858; J. Friedrich, Die Lehre des Johann Hus, Regensburg, 1882; E. L. T. Henke, Johann Hus und die Synode von Constanz, Berlin, 1886; E. H. Gillett, Life and Times of John Huss, 2 vols., New York, 1870; L. Krumml, Johannes Hus, Heidelberg, 1870; W. Berger, Johannes Hus, und König Sigmund, Augsburg, 1871 (a careful study); F. van Bezold, König Sigismund und die Reichskriege gegen die Husiten, 3 vols., Munich, 1872-75; idem, Zur Geschichte des Husitenthums ib. 1874; E. Denis, Huss et la guerre des Hussites, Paris, 1878 (reproduces Palacký's studies); A. H. Wratislaw, John Hus, London, 1882; G. V. Lechler, Johannes Hus, Halle, 1889; idem, John Wiclif and his English Precursors, London, 1884; J. Loserth, Hus und Wiclif, Prague, 1884, Eng. transl., London, 1884; D. Nasmith, Makers of Modern Thought, vol. i., New York, 1892; K. Müller, König Sigismund's Geleit für Hus, 1898; H. B. Workman, The Dawn of the Reformation, vol. ii., The Age of Hus, London, 1902; Neander, Christian Church, vol. v. passim; Milman, Latin Christianity, vii. 433-506; Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, vol. viii. passim; Pastor, Popes, i. 181-163; Creighton, Papacy, vols. i.-ii (contain much valuable matter). Ausgewählte Predigten of John Huss were published by W. van Langsdorff, Leipsic, 1894. Consult the literature under BASEL, COUNCIL OF; CONSTANCE, COUNCIL OF.
| Calvin College. Last modified on 10/03/03. Contact the CCEL. |  |