Council of Constance towards John Hus and Jerome of Prague
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15633/ps.1599Keywords:
John Hus, Jerome of Prague, John Wycliffe, Council of Constance, excommunication, predestinationAbstract
The purpose of this article is to present the solution to the problem of Jan Hus and Jerome of Prague by the Council of Constance. The issues of both Czech theologians appear three times in the conciliar documents. Jan Hus bother leaving much to be desired lifestyle of the clergy, and at the same time their lust and greed. He spoke about the corruption of manners. In particular, he was critical of the papacy and denounced the trade in indulgences. The church was perceived him as a mystical body whose head is Jesus, the faithful and represent chosen by God righteous. It is not acceptable for him was the punishment of excommunication. He was accused of preaching of the many errors and heresies, and his erroneous thesis raised the questions of predestination, the ministry of the Pope, excommunication and the deeds of men. The Council judged him and found as a heretic. In turn, Jerome of Prague was involved in the emerging national movement in the Czech Republic and proclaimed publicly the views of J. Wycliffe, and he was an outspoken supporter of Hus. Council accused him of the crime of error and heresy regarding the Christian religion. First, he made a real explanation of recognizing the Catholic Church, but later he changed his mind and recanted his confession, consent and statement. Fathers of Constance declared him a heretic and excommunicated him.References
Baker, D., Schism, heresy and religious protest, Cambridge 1972.
Bernard, P., Jerome of Prague, Austria and the Hussites, „Church History” 27 (1958) 1, s. 3–22.
Bernard z Gui, Księga Inkwizycji. Podręcznik napisany przez Bernarda Gui, tłum. M. Pawlik, J. Zychowicz, Kraków 2002.
Betts, R., Jerome of Prague, „University of Birmingham Historical Journal” 1 (1947), s. 68–83.
Bredero, A., Christendom and Christianity in the Middle Ages, Minnesota 1994.
Hierarchia catholica medii aevi sive Summorum Pontificum, Monasteri-Regensberg 1913, vol. 1. ed. K. Eubel.
Evans. M., An illustrated fragment of Peraldus’s „Summa” of Vice: Harleian MS 3244, „Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes” vol. 45 (1982), s. 14–68.
Faustynus Luciferianus, De Trinitate, Turnhout 1999 (Corpus Christianorum. Series Latinorum, 69).
Fudge, T., Jan Hus: religious reform and social revolution in Bohemia, London 2010.
Fudge, T., The trial of Jan Hus: medieval heresy and criminal procedure, Oxford 2013.
Gilbert, P., Wprowadzenie do teologii Średniowiecza, tłum. T. Górski, Kraków 1997.
González, J., Hypostasis, [w:] J. González, Essential theological terms, Louisville 2005, s. 80–81.
Kelly, J. N. D., Początki doktryny chrześcijańskiej, tłum. J. Mrukówna, Warszawa 1988.
Lea, H., A history of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, Auckland 2012, t. 1.
Lubac, H., Medytacje o Kościele, tłum. I. Białkowska-Cichoń, Kraków 1997.
Mansi, J. D., Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio, Paris 1901, t. 27, s. 529–1240.
Manteuffel, T., Narodziny herezji, Warszawa 1963.
Missale Romanum, Città del Vaticano 2002.
Moskal, K., Aby lud był jeden – eklezjologia Jana Husa w traktacie „De Ecclesia”, Lublin 2003.
Oberman, H., Via Antiqua and Via Moderna, [w:] A. Hudson, M. Wilks, From Ockham to Wyclif, Oxford 1987, s. 445–463.
Petrus Pictaviensis, Summa de confessione, Turnhout 1980 (Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaevalis, 51).
Rees, A., The biography of distinguished reformers, Montana 2008.
Ryś, G., Jan Hus wobec kryzysu Kościoła doby wielkiej schizmy, Kraków 2000.
Schaff, D., John Huss: his life, teachings and death, after five hundred years, Harvard 1915.
Sobór Chalcedoński, Definicja wiary, [w:] Dokumenty Soborów Powszechnych: tekst grecki, łaciński i polski, t. 1: Nicea I, Konstantynopol I, Efez, Chalcedon, Konstantynopol II, Konstantynopol III, Nicea II: (325–787), układ i oprac. A. Baron, H. Pietras, Kraków 2001, s. 214–224.
Sobór Efeski, Formuła zjednoczenia, [w:] Dokumenty Soborów Powszechnych: tekst grecki, łaciński i polski, t. 1: Nicea I, Konstantynopol I, Efez, Chalcedon, Konstantynopol II, Konstantynopol III, Nicea II: (325–787), układ i oprac.A. Baron, H. Pietras, Kraków 2001, s. 176–179.
Sobór Laterański IV, [w:] Dokumenty Soborów Powszechnych: tekst grecki, łaciński i polski, t. 2: Konstantynopol IV, Lateran I, Lateran II, Lateran III, Lateran IV, Lyon I, Lyon II, Vienne: (869–1312), układ i oprac. A. Baron, H. Pietras, Kraków 2002, s. 214–324.
Sobór Konstantynopolitański IV, [w:] Dokumenty Soborów Powszechnych: tekst grecki, łaciński i polski, t. 2: Konstantynopol IV, Lateran I, Lateran II, Lateran III, Lateran IV, Lyon I, Lyon II, Vienne: (869–1312), układ i oprac. A. Baron, H. Pietras, Kraków 2002, s. 28–112.
Sobór Laterański III, [w:] Dokumenty Soborów Powszechnych: tekst grecki, łaciński i polski, t. 2: Konstantynopol IV, Lateran I, Lateran II, Lateran III, Lateran IV, Lyon I, Lyon II, Vienne: (869–1312), układ i oprac. A. Baron, H. Pietras, Kraków 2002, s. 168–206.
Sobór w Konstancji, [w:] Dokumenty Soborów Powszechnych: tekst łaciński, grecki, arabski, ormiański, polski, t. 3: (1414–1445): Konstancja, Bazylea–Ferrara–Florencja–Rzym, układ i oprac. A. Baron, H. Pietras, Kraków 2003, s. 30–268.
Sobór w Vienne, [w:] Dokumenty Soborów Powszechnych: tekst grecki, łaciński i polski, t. 2: Konstantynopol IV, Lateran I, Lateran II, Lateran III, Lateran IV, Lyon I, Lyon II, Vienne: (869–1312), układ i oprac. A. Baron, H. Pietras, Kraków 2002, s. 464–636.
Spinka, M., John Hus’ Concept of the Church, New Jersey 1966.
Spinka, M., John Hus at the Council of Constance, New York 1965.
Tractatus de Ecclesia Magistri Johannis Hus, Colorado 1956.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain the copyright and full publishing rights without restrictions, and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
