"Recant first, and then you will be informed!" Thus ended the first hearing.

XIV.

Hus Again Before the Council.

When a synod would condemn Wiclif's writings in May, 1382, an earthquake delayed the decision, and when the Council on June 7, 1415, would condemn Hus, a total eclipse of the sun delayed the proceeding. At one o'clock the sky was clear and Hus was again brought in, again in chains, and under guard. He was accused of denying the presence of Christ's body in the sacrament. Hus repelled the charge and stuck to it against the famous Pierre d'Ailly of Cambray and many other French and Italian prelates, and he did it so stoutly that the British objected: "This man, so far as we see, has right views as to the sacrament of the altar."

Violent disputes arose. As the Roman captain had to interfere when Paul stood before the factions of the Jewish Sanhedrin, so the Emperor Sigismund had now to exercise his authority and command and compel order in the grave and reverend holy Council. Hus could not with a good conscience condemn all of Wiclif's writings until they were proven against Holy Scriptures, and such was his admiration of the stainless life of the man, that he wished his soul might be where Wiclif's was.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE INTERIOR OF THE CATHEDRAL]

Renewed jeers and derision. Pierre d'Ailly advised Hus to submit to the Council; the Emperor likewise, since he would not protect a heretic; rather would he with his own hands fire the stake.

"I call G.o.d to witness ... that I came here of my own accord with this intent--that if any one could give me better instruction I would unhesitatingly change my views."

XV.

Hus Once More Before the Council.

In the final hearing, on June 8, thirty-nine articles from his books were brought against Hus, twenty-six of them from his "On the Church."

He was charged with teaching that only the electing grace of G.o.d made one a true member of the Church, not any outward sign or high office.

This G.o.d's truth was condemned as false by the Council.

Hus held the Pope a vicar of Christ only as he imitates Christ in his living; if he lives wickedly, he is the agent of Antichrist.

The prelates looked at one another, shook their heads and laughed. If Hus was to be burned for only saying that, what did they deserve for actually imprisoning the Pope?

Hus held the Pope's temporal power came from the (forged) donation of the Emperor Constantine, not from Christ, and stoutly stuck to it against the great Cardinal of Cambray.

Hus had spoken and written plainly against the wicked lives of prelates and popes, and for this he was to be burned, although d'Ailly and Gerson also had done so, and this very Council had deposed a vile wretch, Pope John XXIII.

Another heresy of Hus was this: "A heretic ought to be first instructed kindly, justly, and humbly from the Sacred Scriptures," then he may be burned.

"All those who give up to the civil sword any innocent man, as the scribes and Pharisees did Christ," are like the Pharisees.

[Ill.u.s.tration: HUS BEFORE THE COUNCIL, BY BROZIK]

The Prelates felt the thrust. "You mean to condemn the dignitaries of the Church!" For this they would burn Hus.

Hus said an evil nature cannot do good. In a state of grace, however, the man, whether he eat or drink or sleep, does everything to the glory of G.o.d. This plain truth of G.o.d was d.a.m.ned as heresy!

Hus was charged with calling an unjust excommunication a benediction.

"In truth, I say the same thing now, according to that Scripture, 'They shall curse, but Thou shalt bless'."

Another heresy ran thus: "If pope, bishop or prelate be in mortal sin, then is he no longer pope, bishop or prelate." Hus defended it by asking pointedly: "If John XXIII was a true pope, why did you depose him from his office?"

Hus said the Church did not need an earthly head, a pope; Christ, the true head, can rule His church better without the popes, who were often monsters of iniquity. Shouts of derision!

Hus calmly added the telling point: "Surely the Church in the times of the Apostles was infinitely better ruled than now. At present we have no such head at all."

He could not be answered, and so he was derided.

An Englishman correctly pointed out that this was the teaching of Wiclif. That was ample to d.a.m.n Hus as a heretic.

Pierre d'Ailly said to the Emperor Sigismund: "Almost all the articles are based on Wiclif, so that the Englishman John Stokes was right in saying Hus had no right to boast of these teachings as his property, since they all demonstrably belonged to Wiclif."

In order to embitter the Emperor against Hus, they tried to show his teachings to be dangerous to the civil government. Finally d'Ailly advised Hus to submit to the Council. Hus again said he was open to conviction. He only asked for a hearing to explain and prove his doctrines. If his reasons and Bible proofs were not sufficient, he would be ready to be taught better.

The Cardinal said: "You have only to perform the three conditions required of you--to confess your errors, to promise not to teach them hereafter, and to renounce all the articles charged against you."

Sigismund also again urged Hus to submit, and said, in effect: "Recant now, or die."

Hus humbly but firmly refused to do anything against his conscience; he asked for proof from G.o.d's word, then he would submit.

"I stand before the judgment of G.o.d; He will judge me and you in righteousness, as we deserve it."

As Hus was led back to prison, John of Chlum, a Bohemian n.o.bleman, shook hands with him, just as Frundsberg comforted Luther at Worms.

Sigismund hounded on the prelates to make an end of Hus, even if he recanted. This lost him the Bohemian crown for ever.

XVI.

Hus Prepares for Death.

Hus had about a month after the trial to await the end. He remembered his and his friends' forebodings, and wrote bitterly: "Put not your trust in princes. I thought the Emperor had some regard for law and truth; now I perceive that these weigh little with him. Truly did they say that Sigismund would deliver me up to my adversaries: he has condemned me before they did. Would that he could have shown me as much moderation as the heathen Pilate."

He wrote a touching farewell letter to his beloved flock in the Bethlehem Chapel and another to the University at Prag.

After Hus had left Prag, Jacobellus of Mies began to give the cup as well as the bread to the lay communicants. The General Council on June 15, admitted Christ had inst.i.tuted the Lord's Supper in the two species of bread and wine, yet it decreed to burn as heretics all who did as Christ commanded.

Hus on June 21, writes to Gallus (Havlik), preacher at the Bethlehem Chapel: "What wickedness! Behold, they condemn Christ's inst.i.tutions as heresy!"

Till the end of June they made many efforts to get Hus to recant; he firmly refused: "I cannot recant; in the first place, I would thereby recant many truths, and in the second place, I would commit perjury and give offence to pious souls. I stand at the judgment-seat of Christ, to whom I have appealed, knowing that He will judge every man, not according to false witness, but according to the truth and each one's deserts." Against the authority of men Hus a.s.serted the authority of his conscience enlightened by the Holy Scriptures.

On July 1, Hus was brought out again to recant his heresies. He replied in writing: "I, John Hus, fearing to sin against G.o.d, and fearing to commit perjury, am not willing to abjure ... any of them."

On July 5, a deputation of some of the most eminent members of the Council made a final effort to get Hus to recant. Wenzel of Duba said: "Behold Master John, I am a layman and cannot give advice. Consider then if thou feelest thyself guilty of any of the things of which thou art accused. If so, do not hesitate to accept instruction and recant. But if thou dost not feel guilty of these things that are brought forward against thee, be guided by thy conscience, do nothing against thy conscience, nor lie before the face of G.o.d; rather hold unto death to the truth as thou hast understood it."