After Huss had thus attacked the papal bulls with arguments calculated to impress every thinking mind that lay open to the truth, his friend Jerome came forward and delivered a glowing discourse, which kindled the greatest enthusiasm in the hearts of the youth. In the evening he was escorted home, in triumph, by large bodies of the students.* The excitement produced by the transactions of this day spread further; and, as it usually happens when the impulse has been given to some great movement, however pure and unobjectionable at the outset, that it no longer stands in the power of those who began it to control and keep it within bounds, but violent passions soon enter in, and with their fierce burnings vitiate the purity of the beginning, so it turned out on the present occasion. Jerome of Prague wanted the prudence and moderation of Huss. A mock procession was got up: the papal bulls, suspended from the necks of certain indecent women, were carried, in the midst of a vast concourse of people, through the principal quarters of the city. The chariot conveying the women was surrounded by armed men of the party, vociferating, "To the stake with the letters of a heretic and rogue!" In this way the bulls were finally conveyed to the Pranger, where a pile of faggots had been erected, upon which they were laid and burned. It was intended as a parody on the burning of Wickliff's books two years before. That every

*At the second hearing of Jerome of Prague at Constance, the subject was also brought up of his attack at this time on indulgences. Being asked what he held concerning indulgences, he declared: The indulgences of the pope and cardinals were legal, and such could be bestowed-wherein it was still left doubtful what notion he framed to himself of indulgences, and to what extent he would allow them-but a purchased indulgence, an indulgence made a matter of barter and sale by sellers of indulgences, quæstuarii, was no indulgence at all, but an abuse of indulgences. V. d. Hardt, IV. 2, pp. 752 et 753.

We join what we find stated in the articles of complaint against Jerome of Prague, in Constance (V. d. Hardt, IV. 2, p. 672), with Palatzy's representation, who appeals to the manuscript report of a student, who had himself borne a part in the procession, (Palatzy, III. 1, p. 278). At the council of Constance (where, however, the year 1411 is erroneously put down by V. d. Hardt, as it must have been the year 1412) Jerome of Prague is designated as the getter up of this whole thing. But Palatzy proves from the manuscript articles of complaint laid before the council of Constance against king Wenceslaus (III. 1,

foolish proceeding ought not to be laid to the charge of Huss, which the passionate leader of his adherents undertook, that he was far from approving of all that these persons either did or said, is evident from his own words in many of his letters, plainly intimating his dissatisfaction with many who professed to be of his party, but whose life did not correspond with the doctrines they supported, and his disapprobation of the violent language employed by many of his adherents. Thus in reply to Paletz, who had accused him of apostasy from the whole faith of Christendom, he says: "Verily, if I allowed this to be true of myself and of my Christian brethren, I should be as false as he is; for I hope, by the grace of God, that I am a Christian, departing in no respect from the faith, and that I should prefer to suffer a horrible death rather than to affirm anything contrary to the faith or to transgress the commandments of our Lord Jesus Christ. And the same I hope also of many of my adherents, though I observe with deep pain that some of them are blameworthy in their morals."* He also says, in this tract against Paletz, with regard to the abusive language which he used towards his adversaries, whom he styled heretics, "Hitherto, I have used no such language as this against my adversaries; and I should be sorry if any one of my party should brand his opponent as a heretic, or style him a Mohammedan, or ridicule or attack him in any other way that implied a disregard to the law of love."† Alluding to the same person, he says in another place: "He holds us all to be Wickliffites, and all therefore to be, in his opinion, reprobates; but I hope there is much which is good on both sides, and believe that there are sinners also on both sides; and it never was, nor will it ever be, agreeable to me, to hear any should style the party opposed to

p. 277 note) that not Jerome of Prague, but Woksa, of Waldstein, one of Wenzel's favourites, was the author of this buffoonery, though Jerome may not have been averse to it. Hence it is evident, that Jerome said nothing untrue, when on his second hearing at Constance he asserted, that he did not burn the bull, (V. d. Hardt, IV. 2, p. 753).

* Quamvis dolenter percipio aliquos in more deviare. Resp. ad Scr. Paletz, Opp. I. fol. 260, 1.

† Et doleo, cum aliquis de parte nostra aliquem hæreticat vel appellat Mahometistam, vel aliter infamat aut impugnat caritatis regula prætermissa. Ibid. fol. 262, 2.

them Mohammedans or seducers."* Great self-control and prudence were assuredly required to enable a man standing at the head of his party, in a time of such violent excitement, to judge so dispassionately of his opponents, including some who were once his friends, but who now indulged the most violent animosity towards him, and to pass so severe a criticism on the conduct of his own party. We cannot fail to recognise here the spirit of Him who knew how to distinguish blasphemers against the Son of man from blasphemers against the Holy Ghost. And this is one trait which distinguishes Huss from Wickliff.

The co-political ecclesiastical motives which governed king Wenceslaus did not leave him at liberty to contemplate these movements any longer without disquietude, though it was already too late to think of putting a stop to them by a single enactment. As the king had approved the papal bull, had ordered it to be proclaimed, and permitted the preaching of indulgences; as he wished to maintain a good understanding with pope John, he must look about for the means of asserting and carrying out what he had begun. He summoned around him the lords of counsel and the elders of the communities of all the three towns, out of which the great capital had arisen, and directed them to forbid for the future all public insult of the pope, as well as all public resistance of the papal bulls, on pain of death, and to be vigilantly careful that all occasions of excitement on both sides should be avoided. This royal edict was proclaimed by a herald through the whole city as a warning to all. It is probable, however, that the king after all was not so very solicitous that these measures should be rigorously executed in their whole extent; nor is it clear that he had power enough to enforce them. The getter up of the mock procession against the bull of which we have

*Ego autem ex utraque parte spero esse multos bonos, et ex utraque etiam parte æstimo esse peccatores, nec unquam mihi placuit, imo nec placebit, quod quidam vocant doctoris partem Mahometistas vel seductores. Resp. ad Scr. &c. fol. 264, 1.

† Palatzy, III. 1, p. 278, and Steph. Dolanus in his Antihussus : Dum enim Wenceslaus regio suæ potestatis imperio constituisset etiam voce præconis per civitatem Pragensem decreto publico, ut nequaquam aliquis audeat rebellare et contradicere occulte vel publice sub capitali pœna indulgentiis papalibus cæt. Pez, IV. 2, p. 380.

VOL. IX.

2 E

just spoken still retained his relations with the king.* Huss could not be prevented by any power on earth from fulfilling his vocation as a preacher of the gospel, and from saying to his congregation whatever his duty as a preacher and curer of souls made it incumbent on him to say. He could not keep silent concerning the errors connected with the subject of indulgences; he must point out the great peril to which a reliance on indulgences, as he had already demonstrated in his public disputation, exposed the souls of the people. And yet queen Sophia did not cease her attendance at the chapel of Huss; and this new contest could only serve to increase the number of his hearers and their enthusiasm. The large concourse of noblemen, knights, men and women of all ranks and conditions, who assembled around Huss, is described by his opponents; especially the thousands of pious women who were denominated Beguines-a nickname like the term Pietists in later times; and one which had been applied already to the followers of Militz.† Now, when the hearts of the laity, of men who belonged to the class of industrious artisans, among whom Huss had many adherents, were seized by the power of truth in his sermons, and then going into the churches heard the sellers of indulgences preaching up with shameless effrontery the value of their spiritual merchandise, in direct outrage to the gospel truth they had listened to in Bethlehem Chapel, nothing else was to be expected, especially in a state of so much excitement among the youth, than that violent scenes should ensue.

* Palacky, III. 1, p. 278.

† See above, p. 262. The words of the abbot of Dola in Antibussus : Nobilibus, militaribus, plebeiis, mulieribus, tuorum tibi conceptuum cumulum multiplicas. Pez, IV. 2, p. 390. The Beguines are mentioned, as followers of Huss, in Antihussus, Pez, IV. 2, p. 381, and in Dial. Volat. ibid. p. 492. In the trial at Prague we learn that over three thousand persons met around Huss in the Bethlehem Chapel. Vid. Depos. Test. in the Stud. u. Krit. 1836, I. p. 147. It was thrown out as a reproach against Huss, that he had no congregation of his own, but drew hearers to him from other parishes, and away from other parish priests. But to this he replied: No man was bound to listen to God's word nowhere else except in his own parish church; for else no monk could ever preach, and no parish priest or parish vicar could allow persons belonging to other parishes to hear the word of God in his own church. Ibid. p. 146.

A number of priests, distributed among the several parish churches, were engaged, on the 10th of July, in publishing the papal bulls and inviting the people to purchase indulgences. On this occasion three young men belonging to the class of common artisans, by the name of John, Martin, and Stasek, stepping forward, cried out to one of these preachers, "Thou liest! Master Huss has taught us better than that. We know it is all false." After a while they were seized, conducted to the council-house, and, on the next day, in pursuance of the royal edict,* condemned to death. Huss, on being informed of this, felt it to be his duty to interpose and endeavour to save these young men, doomed to fall victims to the gospel truth which they had heard from his lips, and which burned in their hearts. Accompanied by two thousand students he repaired to the councilhouse. He demanded a hearing for himself and and some of his attendants. At length he was permitted to appear before the senate. He declared that he looked upon the fault of those young men as his own, and that he, therefore, much more than they deserved to die. They promised him that no blood should be shed, and bade him tranquillise the excited feelings of the others. Hoping that they would keep their word, he left the council-house together with his followers. But some hours afterwards, when the multitude had, for the most part, dispersed, they ventured to proceed

* It is noticeable that when Dr. Nas of Prague had testified against Huss at his trial in Constance, that he himself was present cum rex mandasset, blasphemos ultimo supplicio affici, Huss directly declared this to be false. Yet, after what has been said, it cannot be doubted, that the king did issue such an edict against the disputers of indulgences. There was something then, we know not what, perhaps, in the form of that testimony, which led Huss to express himself in this way. Third hearing of Huss in Constance, V. d. Hardt, IV. 2, p. 327.

+ The abbot of Dola relates the transaction as follows: Facto siquidem prædictorum rebellium justo animadversionis excidio, accessisti vel misisti pluribus vallatus sociis ad maturum et discretum magnæ civilis prudentiæ Pragensium consulum concilium, et prædicatione pompatica ausus es clamosa voce, non solum ipsorum debitam executionem, sed et regiam et in hoc omnino sanctam maturi decreti jussionem, non solum reprehendere, sed et damnare. In quo utique crimen læsæ majestatis perpetrasti, asserente te et dicente: Injuste illi damnati sunt; ego feci et ego feram. Ecce ego et omnes qui mecum sunt, parati sumus eandem excipere sententiam. Steph. Dōl. in Antihussus, Pez, IV. 2, pp. 380 et 381.