of arbitrary power, would have only led to still greater violence. The burning of the books had no other effect than to expose the archbishop to contempt and ridicule; and it was a great shock to his authority. Ribald and satirical songs, of which he was made the subject, were openly sung in the streets of Prague, to the purport, "the archbishop has yet to learn his A B C; he has caused books to be burned, without knowing what was in them!"* King Wenceslaus himself, though no friend of the archbishop, believed it necessary to put some check on these proceedings; and is said to have forbidden, on pain of death, these satirical songs on the archbishop.t Two contemporaries, belonging to the opposite parties, are agreed in stating that by this burning of his books, the enthusiasm for Wickliff was increased rather than diminished. One was Huss's zealous opponent, the abbot Stephen of Dola, who at the same time was blind enough to trace the origin of all the troubles to the disobedience of Huss. This writer cites, from the lips of one of Wickliff's adherents, the following words: "The archbishop has burnt many famous writings of Wickliff; yet he has not been able to burn them all. For we have still quite a number left; and we are continually searching in all quarters for others to add to this number, and to supply the place of those lost. Let the archbishop

* Pelzel, Gesch. Wenceslaus, Thl. II. s. 568.

The abbot of Dola describes the impression produced by the burning of the books, in the words presently to be cited, but unjustly lays the blame of all, not on the caprice and folly of the archbishop, whom he designates as a man of God, but to the mischievous influence of Huss, though the whole was a natural consequence of the affair, and such as by the laws of human nature always take place under similar circumstances. The abbot of Dola says of the archbishop: Factus fuit ex inobedientia et rebellione illius Mag. Hus velut contemptibilis et pæne fabula in populo, ita ut plerique insolentes vulgares ac ironicas de eodem viro Dei confingerent et decanerent cantiones publice per plateas contra justissimam et zelo catholicæ fidei commodam combustionem librorum istius hæretica pravitatis. Cujus cum frequentationem et irreverentiæ Christi odiosam multiplicationem lenocinantis cantici didicisset serenissimus et magnificus princeps Romanorum et Bohemiæ rex Wenceslaus, divino edoctus spiritu, volens tam stolidam et publicam irreverentiam devota et debita recompensare reverentia, regio publicæ vocis statuit decreto, ut nequaquam quisquam amplius eandem dementia cantilenam non solum sub facultatum forensiumi, sed et sub capitalis sententiæ pœna audeat decantare. Stephen of Dola in Antihussus, by Petz, IV. 2. pp. 417 and 418.

again bid us deliver them up to him, and let him see whether we will obey him!" The second is Huss himself, who says: "I call the burning of books a poor business. Such burning never yet removed a single sin from the hearts of men (if he who condemned could not prove anything), but has only destroyed many truths, many beautiful and fine thoughts, and multiplied among the people disturbances, enmities, suspicions, and murders."* When now the news of the death of Alexander V. and of the accession to the government of John XXIII. arrived in Prague, Huss followed up his earlier appeal, already mentioned, by another addressed to this new pope. In this appellatory document he endeavoured to point out what was arbitrary and unreasonable in the conduct of Zbynek, that he had caused books to be burnt which contained no theological matter whatever, but which related simply to worldly sciences, quite contrary to the example of holy men of old, as, for example, Moses and Daniel, who appropriated to themselves the knowledge of unbelieving nations. Paul cited verses from Grecian poets; the church had always sanctioned the practice of studying the books of heretics for the purpose of refuting them; and at the universities provided with papal privileges, the writings of Aristotle and Averrhoes were studied, though they contained much that was contrary to the truths of faith. The writings of Origen were not burned, and yet heresies were to be found in them; and in the short space of time occupied by the commission, it was impossible that so many books could be so thoroughly read and examined as to enable the members to pass judgment upon them. Against the prohibition to preach in Bethlehem Chapel, he contends that Christ, who left behind him the seed of his word as the provision for souls, did not mean to have it bound. Christ himself preached everywhere, in the streets, in the fields, and on

*Pez, Thes. IV. 2, p. 386.

† Malum dico combustionem librorum, quæ combustio nullum peccatum de cordibus hominum (nisi condemnatores probaverint) sustulit, sed veritates multas et sententias pulchras et subtiles in scripto destruxit, et in populo disturbia, invidias, diffamationes, odia multiplicavit et homicidia. Hus, pro defensione libri de trinitate Joann. Wiclef, Opp. I. fol. 106.

the lake. For if he had not left behind, for us, the seed of his word, we should have been even as Sodom and Gomorrah. After his resurrection, he had transferred the office of preaching to his disciples forever. With this commission. of Christ, and the ordinances of the fathers, this prohibition of Zbynek stood in direct contradiction. And he cites the rule that, in things necessary to salvation, one should obey God rather than man. Huss made this appeal in conjunction with many other masters and preachers.* The language which he employs in it was little suited indeed to be understood or appreciated by the monster John XXIII. and the court which he had gathered. Huss, from this time onward, composed several writings, which seem to have had their origin in public disputations held by him in the university; and in these productions he expounded, more at length, the reasons why he could not obey the archbishop in those ordinances, and defended many doctrines and writings of Wickliff against the condemnation that had been passed on them. These papers evince the Christian temper of his mind at that time: they show how firmly resolved he was already to suffer the loss of all things for the cause of Christ, and that even then martyrdom was not far absent from his thoughts; and they also show with what enthusiastic confidence, inspired by a Christian sense of the force of truth, he looked forward to the ultimate triumph of the truth he defended. We may mention here his tract De Trinitate, which he wrote in the year 1410. He begins the public academical act, from which that paper proceeded, by explaining, that it had never entered into his mind to persist in obstinately maintaining anything which was contrary to the Holy Scriptures, or in any way erroneous; but if he asserted anything of this sort, from ignorance or inadvertency, he would cheerfully and humbly retract it. And if any person of the church, whoever he might be, would teach him better by quotation from Scripture, or rational argument, he was perfectly ready to concur with him. "For," he says, " from the earliest period of my

* Appellatio Joann. Hus ab Archiepiscopo ad sedem apostolicam. Opp. I. fol. 89.

As we infer from the words with which his tract De Trinitate begins: Cathedram ascendo. Opp. I. fol. 105.

studies until now, have I laid it down as a rule, that whenever I heard a more correct opinion on any subject whatever advanced, I would, with joy and humility, give up my earlier opinion; being well aware that what we know is vastly less than what we do not know." * In a later paper on Tythes, of the year 1412, he points out three different sources of the knowledge of that truth which is always to be held fast-holy Scripture, reason, and of the senses experience. Not as though Huss meant to place these truths on a level, as to their substance and matter; but as truthfulness, and steadfastness in maintaining that which had been made out as true, belonged among the fundamental traits of his character, so he was resolved never to give up, at any price, a truth which he had gained whatever it might be, or from whatever source it might have come. We see how, in the soul of Huss, it was a principle already formed and firmly established, to derive all the truths of faith directly from Scripture, and to acknowledge nothing to be such truth which did not appear to rest on that foundation. As Christ was the great centre of his faith and of his life, so he had determined to adhere only to his word as the rule of faith and life. But with this he could still join a firm adherence to the existing doctrines of the church, being not as yet conscious of any contradiction between them and the sacred Scriptures; because his whole theological development had sprung out of the practical element. As he had not the remotest idea of deserting the actual church and forming a new one, so he could still seek to unite the two things together; though he was already firmly resolved to sacrifice everything to the truth as clearly gathered from the Scriptures, and to reject all that stood in conflict with it, or which he clearly made out to be such. He still clung to church tradition; but it appeared to him

* Nam a primo studii mei tempore hoc mihi statui pro regula, ut quotiescunque sanioren sententiam in quacunque materia perciperem, a priori sententia gaudenter et humiliter declinarem, sciens, quoniam illa quæ scimus, sunt minima illorum, quæ ignoramus. Hus, De Trinitate, Opp. I. fol. 105.

+ Videlicet in veritate in scriptura sacra explicita, in veritate ab infallibili ratione elaborata et in veritate experimentaliter a sensu cognita. Hus, De Decimis, Opp. I. fol. 125, 2.

only as the historical evolution of the truth contained, as to its essence, in the sacred Scriptures, an evolution of the germs therein contained, as he expresses in his tract De Decimis,* mentioned just above, where he says: “Law, as determined by the prelates, is styled canonical law; and its purpose is to restrain, within due limits, whatever stands in conflict with the holy laws of the church. It may be compared with the evangelical law, the latter being the articles of faith which have been determined by the holy synods. As the man remains the same, though he may appear in a different dress, and under different, changeable and accidental characters, so it is in the same law or the same evangelical truth which is contained implicitly, or unfolded in the gospel, and is afterwards expounded by the church in another but not contradictory manner." He declares, in reference to the forty-five propositions of Wickliff, "Because it tends to prejudice too much the interests of salvation, to condemn any truth without examination, as our Lord says, Judge not, that ye be not judged, the university of Prague demands, so far as it does not concur in the condemnation of those forty-five articles, the proof, from the appointed doctors, of the reasonableness of that condemnation, and that they should show wherein each of those articles is false by the authority of Scripture, or by arguments of infallible reason.

In reference to the prohibition directed against preaching in Bethlehem Chapel, he says: Where is there any authority of Holy Writ, or where are there any rational grounds for forbidding preaching in so public a place, fitted

*Hus, Opp. I. fol. 128, 2.

Jus canonicum vocatur jus a prælato vel prælatis institutum et promulgatum ad rebelles sacris regulis coercendum. Et potest etiam intelligi, ut communicans juri evangelico, ut sunt articuli fidei, in sanctis synodis sive conciliis explanati. Sicut enim idem est homo in vestibus aut accidentibus notitiam inducentibus varians, sic eadem est lex vel veritas evangelica in evangelio implicita vel detecta, et per ecclesiam postmodum aliter, sed non contrarie explanata.

In the edition lying before us we find, it is true, exanime condemnare veritatem; but we think we may take it for granted that this, as many other passages in this edition of the works of Huss is incorrect, and that the text should read, sine examine. Defens. Quor. Art. J. Wicleff, Opp. I. fol. 111.