maintenance of the pope and of the see of Rome, against the doctrine of Wickliff and John Huss. The names of the doctors of divinity were these: Stephen Paletz, Stanislaus de Znoyma, Petrus de Ikoyma, Johannes Heliæ, Andræas de Broda, Johannes Hildesen, Mattheus Monachus, Hermanus Heremita, Georgius Bota, Simon Wenda, &c. John Huss, thus departing out of Prague, went to his country, where he, being protected by the lord of the soil, continued there preaching, to whom resorted a great concourse of people; neither yet was he so expelled out of Prague, but that sometimes he resorted to his church at Bethlem, and there also preached unto the people.
Moreover, against the said decree of the doctors, John Huss, with his company, replied again, and answered to their articles, with contrary articles again as followeth.
The Objections of John Huss, and of his Party, against the Decree of the Doctors.
II. The doctors hereby do defame the kingdom of Bohemia, and do raise up new discords.
III. Let them show, therefore, those persons of the clergy, whom they call pestilent, and so let them verify their report, binding themselves to suffer the like pain, if they be not able to prove it.
IV. False it is that they say the pope and his cardinals to be the true and manifest successors of Peter and of the apostles, and that no other successors of Peter and of the apostles can be foimd upon the earth besides them: whereas no man knoweth whether he be worthy of hatred or of favour; and all bishops and priests be successors of Peter and of the apostles.
V. Not the pope, but Christ only is the head; and not the cardinals, but all Christ's faithful people be the body of the catholic church; as all holy Scripture and decrees of the holy fathers do testify and affirm.
VI. And as touching the pope, if he be a reprobate, it is plain that he is no head, no nor member also of the holy church of God, but of the devil and of his synagogue.
VII. The clergy of the gospellers, agreeing with the saying of St. Austin which they allege, and according to the sanctions of the fathers, and determinations of the holy mother church, do say and affirm laudably: that the condemnation and prohibition of the forty-five articles is unlawful, and unjust, and rashly done; and that not only because the doctors, but also all bishops and archbishops, in such great causes, namely, touching faith (as these articles do), have no authority at all, as appeareth, 'De baptismo et ejus effectu.' Cap. 'Majores.' Et in Can. 17. dist. cap. 'Hinc sedi,' &c.
VIII. The second cause of the discord which they allege also is most false; seeing the faith of whole Christendom, concerning the church of Rome, is divided in three parts by reason of three popes, who now together do reign; and the fourth part is neutral. Neither is it true, that we ought to stand in all things to the determination of the pope and of the cardinals, but so far forth as they do agree with the holy Scripture of the Old and New Testament, from whence the sanctions of the fathers did first spring, as is evident, 'De accusationibus,' cap. 'Qualiter,' &c.
IX. In the fourth article they burst out into a certain dotage, and are contrary to themselves; by reason that they doltishly have reprehended the gospellers, who in all their doings receive the holy Scripture, which is the law of God, the way of truth and life, for their judge and measure: and afterwards they themselves do allege the Scripture [Deut. xvii.], where all judges, both popes and cardinals, are taught to judge and discern between leper and leper, and