archbishop to prohibit the discussion. Huss’s statement about antichrist was ascribed to his dependence upon Wyclif. The Wyclifite articles had led to bitter dispute and discords not only in the university but among the people. The petition laid down the principle that the pope has the right to give full remission of all sins-and that he might call upon the people to defend the Roman city against heretics and schismatics. The document also forbade bachelors of theology to discuss the papal bulls. Stephen Palecz, dean of the faculty, was one of the signers.
In spite of this resistance of the theological faculty, the discussion was held in the university, June 7, 1412. The attendance was large. The rector, Marcus of Königgrätz, presided. Huss’s treatment was embodied in one of his most elaborate writings and is equal to any of them in clearness and force of statement. It is declared by Loserth to stand as the pre-eminent work among his writings and to be in its style a model of acute and telling argument.[1] This judgment, however, is not to be taken as inconsistent with the author’s estimate of the Treatise on the Church, which, Loserth says, has “always been regarded as Huss’s most important piece of writing by friends and foes alike.” Here are set forth at length Huss’s views on indulgences and the temporal authority of the pope.
In his opening words he declares that the honor of God, the good of the church and his own conscience—propria conscientia—were involved in his attitude to the transaction of John XXIII. He protested that he wished to say nothing contrary to the law of Christ, which was the narrow way of life and the truth. Against the fallacy of giving obedience to John’s bulls, he brought considerations from the limited authority of the papal office, from the wrong of using bad measures for the defense of the church, and from the error that gifts of money constitute no valid claim to plenary ab-
- ↑ Wiclif and Hus, p. 141. Huss’s Treatise, Mon. 1: 215–235.
