The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe/Volume 3/History of the Bohemians (continuation)

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Mischievous counsel of the popish band.The fifth day of June, the cardinals, bishops, and the rest of the priests, almost all that were in Constance, assembled to a great number, at the covent of the Franciscans in Constance; and there it was commanded, that before John Huss should be brought forth, in his absence they should rehearse the witnesses and articles which they had slanderously gathered out of his books; which articles, with John Huss's answer, we will hereafter repeat. By chance there was then present a certain notary, named Peter Mladoniewitz, who bare great love and amity unto the said Huss; who, as soon as he perceived that the bishops and cardinals were already determined and appointed to condemn the said articles in the absence of John Huss, went with all speed unto Master Wencelate de Duba, and John of Clum, and told them all the matter, who incontinent made report thereof to the emperor, who, understanding their intent, sent Louis, the county Palatine of Heidelburgh, and the lord Frederic, Burgrave of Nuremberg, to signify unto them who ruled the council, that nothing should be resolved or done in the case of John Huss before it were first heard with equity, and that they should send him all such articles as were laid against the said Huss, which were either false or heretical; and he would do so much, that the said articles should be examined by good and learned men. Then, according to the emperor's will, the judgment of the principals of the council was suspended, until such time as John Huss were present.

The crafty counsel of the papists stopped by the emperor.In the mean season, these gentlemen, Master Wencelate of Duba, and John of Clum, did give unto the two princes, whom the emperor had sent, certain small treatises which the said John Huss had made, out of which they had drawn certain articles to present unto them who ruled the council; under this condition, that they would render them again, when they should demand them. The intent and meaning of these barons was, that by this means the adversaries of John Huss might the more easily be reproved, who, of a naughty and corrupt conscience, had picked corrupt sentences out of the said books of John Huss. The books were delivered unto the cardinals and bishops; and, that done, John Huss was brought forth, and the princes who were sent by the emperor, departed back again. Afterwards, they showed the books to John Huss, and he confessed openly, before the whole assembly, that he had made them; and that he was ready, if there were any fault in them, to amend the same.

Now hearken a little to the holy proceedings of these reverend fathers; for here happened a strange and shameful matter. John Huss forced to keep silence by outrage of the bishops and priestsWith much ado they had scarcely read one article, and brought forth a few witnesses upon the same against him, but, as he was about to open outrage his mouth to answer, all this mad herd or flock began so to cry out upon him, that he had not leisure to speak one only word. The noise and trouble was so great and so vehement, that a man might well have called it a bruit or noise of wild beasts, and not of men; much less was it to be judged a congregation of men gathered together, to judge and determine so grave and weighty matters. And if it happened that the noise and cry did ever so little cease, that he might answer any thing at all out of the holy Scriptures or ecclesiastical doctors, by and by he should hear this goodly reply upon him: "That maketh nothing to the purpose."[1]

An outrageous council.Besides all this, some did outrage in words against him, and others spitefully mocked him; so that he, seeing himself overwhelmed with these rude and barbarous noises and cries, and that it profited nothing to speak, determined finally with himself to hold his peace and keep silence. From that time forward, all the whole rout of his adversaries thought that they had won the battle of him, and cried out all together; "Now he is dumb, now he is dumb: this is a certain sign and token, that he doth consent and agree unto these his errors." Finally, the matter came to this point, that certain of the most moderate and honest among them, seeing this disorder, determined to proceed no further, but that all should be deferred and put off until another time. Through their advice, the prelates and others departed from the council for that present, and appointed to meet there again on the morrow after, to proceed in judgment.

A great eclipse of the sun.The next day, which was the seventh of June, on which day the sun was almost wholly eclipsed, somewhat after about seven of the clock, this same flock assembled again in the cloister of the friars minor, and by their appointment John Huss was brought before them,

'They went forth with swords and staves, as it had been to take a thief.

Peter and John follow Christ into the bishop’s house.

Matter made against John Huss.

False witness against John Huss.

His answer.

accompanied with a great number of armed men. Thither went also the emperor, whom the gentlemen, Master Wencelate, of Duba, and John of Clum, and the notary named Peter, who were great friends of the said Huss, did follow, to see what the end would be. When they were come thither, they heard that in the accusation of Michael de Causis, they read these words following: "John Huss hath taught the people divers and many errors both in the chapel of Bethlem, and also in many other places of the city of Prague, of which errors some of them he hath drawn out of Wickliff's books, and the rest he hath forged and invented of his own head, and doth maintain the same very obstinately and stiffly. First, that after the consecration and pronunciation of the words in the Supper of the Lord, there remaineth material bread." And this is proved by the witness of John Protyway, parish priest of St. Clement's in Prague; John Pecklow, preacher at St. Giles in Prague; Benise, preacher in the castle of Prague; Andrew Brode, canon of Prague; and divers other priests. Unto this John Huss, taking a solemn oath, answered that he never spake any such word; but thus much he did grant, that at what time the archbishop of Prague forbade him to use any more that term or word 'bread,' he could not allow the bishop's commandment; forasmuch as Christ, in the sixth chapter of John, doth oftentimes name himself the bread of angels, which came down from heaven, to give life unto the whole world. Naming of bread forbidden by the archbishops.But as touching material bread, he never spake any thing at all. Then the cardinal of Cambray, taking a certain bill in his hand, which he said he received the day before, said unto John Huss: "Will you put any universalities 'a parte rei,' i. e. 'as touching the thing?'" When John Huss answered, that he would, because St. Anselm and divers others had so done, the cardinal did proceed to gather his argument in this manner: "It followeth then," said he, "that after the consecration is made, there remaineth the substance of material bread; and that I do thus prove: that the consecration being done, while the bread is changed and transubstantiated into the body of Christ, as you say, either there doth remain the common substance of material bread, or contrariwise. If the sustance do remain, then is our purpose at an end. The cardinal sophisticateth with John Huss.If contrariwise, then doth it follow, that by the decision of the singularity, the universal ceaseth any more to be."—John Huss answered, "Truly it ceaseth to be, in this singular material, bread, by means of this transubstantiation, when it is changed and transubstantiated into the body of Christ; but notwithstanding in other singularities it is made subject."

The disputation of the Englishmen.Then a certain Englishman by that argument would prove out of the first position, that there remained material bread. Then said John Huss, "That is a childish argument, which every boy in the schools knoweth:" and thereupon gave a solution. Then another Englishman would prove, that there remained material bread in the sacrament, because the bread after the consecration was not annihilated. Unto whom John Huss answered, "Although," said he, "the bread be not annihilated or consumed, yet singularly it ceaseth there to be, by means of the alteration of its substance into the body of Christ." Another Englishman.Here another Englishman stepping forth, said: "John Huss seemeth unto me to use the same kind of crafty speech which Wickliff used, for he granted all these things which this man hath done, and yet in very deed was fully persuaded that material bread remained in the sacrament after the consecration." Which when John Huss had denied, saying, that he spake nothing but only sincerely and uprightly, according to his conscience; the Englishman proceeded to demand of him again, whether the body of Christ be totally and really in the sacrament of the altar. Whereunto John Huss answered: John Huss agreeth with that blind time in the sacrament."Verily, I do think that the body of Christ is really and totally in the sacrament of the altar, which was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered, died, and rose again, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty." When they had disputed a good while to and fro, as touching universalities, the Englishman, who before would prove that material bread remained in the sacrament, because the bread was not annihilate, interrupting and breaking their talk, said: "To what purpose is this disputation upon universalities, which maketh nothing to the purpose, as touching faith? For as far as I can perceive or hear, this man holdeth a good opinion as touching the sacrament of the altar." Stokes, an Englishman.Then another Englishman, named Stokes, said: "I have seen at Prague a certain treatise, which was ascribed unto this man John Huss, wherein it was plainly set forth, that after the consecration there remained material bread in the sacrament." "Verily," said John Huss, "saving your reverence, that is not true."

False witness.Then they returned again unto the witnesses of them who were spoken of a little before, who, every man for himself, affirmed, with an oath, that which he had said; among whom John Protyway, parish priest of St. Clement's in Prague, when he should come to confirm his testimony, John Huss falsely accused for calling St. Gregory a rhymer.added more, that John Huss should say, that St. Gregory was but a rhymer, when he did allege his authority against him. Unto whom John Huss answered, that in this point they did him great injury, forasmuch as he always esteemed and reputed St. Gregory for a most holy doctor of the church.

These contentions and disputations being somewhat appeased, the cardinal of Florence turned himself towards John Huss and said: The cardinal of Florence. Twenty witnesses prevailed against John Huss, but the testimony of all Bohemia could not serve on his part."Master, you know well enough that it is written, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses, all witness is firm and stable; and here you see now almost twenty witnesses against you, men of authority and worthy of credit, amongst whom some have heard you teach these prevailed things themselves, the others by report and common bruit or voice do testify of your doctrine; and all together, generally, bring firm reasons and proofs of their witness, unto the which we are forced and constrained to give credit; and, for my part, I see not how you can maintain and defend your cause against so many notable and well learned men." Unto whom John Huss answered in this manner: I take God and my conscience to witness, that I never taught any thing, neither was it ever in my mind or fantasy to teach in such sort or manner, as these men here have not feared to witness against me that which they never heard. And albeit, they were as many more in number as they are, for all that, I do much more esteem, yea, and without comparison, regard the witness of my Lord God, before the witness and judgment of all mine adversaries, upon whom I do in no point stay myself."

The cardinal of Cambray.Then said the cardinal again unto him: "It is not lawful for us to judge according to your conscience; for we cannot choose, but that we must needs stay ourselves upon the firm and evident witness of these men here. For it is not for any displeasure or hatred, that these men do witness this against you (as you do allege), for they allege and bring forth such reasons of their witness, that there is no man that can perceive any hatred in them, or that we can, in any case, be in doubt thereof. And as touching Master Stephen Paletz, whereas you say, you do suspect him that he hath craftily and deceitfully drawn certain points or articles out of your books to betray them afterwards; it seemeth that in this point you do him great wrong, for in mine advice he hath used and showed a great fidelity and amity toward you, in that he hath alleviated and moderated many of your articles much more than they are in your own books. I understand, also, that you have like opinion of divers other notable men, and especially you have said, that you do suspect He meaneth Gerson.Master Chancellor of Paris, than whom there is no more excellent and christian man in all the whole world."

Another accusation for defending Wickliff's articles.Then was there read a certain article of accusation, in which it was alleged, that John Huss had taught, and obstinately defended, certain erroneous articles of Wickliff's in Bohemia. Whereunto Huss answered, that he never taught any errors of John Wickliff's, or of any other man's. "Wherefore, if it be so that Wickliff hath sowed any errors in England, let the Englishmen look to that themselves." But to confirm their article, there was alleged, that John Huss did withstand the condemnation of VVickliff's articles, which were first condemned at Rome. And afterwards also, when the archbishop of Swinco, with other learned men, held a convocation at Prague for the same matter, when they would have there been condemned for this cause, that none of them were agreeing to the catholic faith or doctrine, but were either heretical, erroneous or offensive; he answered, that he durst not agree thereunto, for offending his conscience, and especially for these articles: that Silvester the pope, and Constantine, did err in bestowing those great gifts and rewards upon the church. Also, that the pope or priest, being in mortal sin, cannot consecrate or baptize. Certain articles of Wicliff that John Huss stood to."This article," said he, "I have thus determined, as if I should say, that he doth unworthily consecrate or baptize, when he is in deadly sin, and that he is an unworthy minister of the sacraments of God." Here his accusers, with their witnesses, were earnest and instant that the article of Wickliff was written in the very same words of the treatise which John Huss made against Stephen Paletz. "Verily," said John Huss, "I fear not to submit myself, even under the danger of death, if you shall not find it so as I have said." When the book was brought forth, they found it written as John Huss had said. He added also, moreover, that he durst not agree unto them who had condemned Wickliff's articles, for this article," The tenths are pure alms."

Whether tenths be pure alms.Here the cardinal of Florence objected unto him this argument, as touching the alms: "It is required that it should be given freely without bond or duty. But tenths are not given freely without bond or duty; therefore are they no alms." John Huss, denying the major of this syllogism, brought this reason against him: "Forasmuch as rich men are bound, under the pain of eternal damnation, unto the fulfilling of the six works of mercy, which Christ repeateth in Matthew xxv., and these works are pure alms; Alms stand of duty.ergo, alms are also given by bond and duty." Then an archbishop of England, stepping up, said : "If we all be bound unto those six works of mercy, it doth follow that poor men, who have nothing at all to give, should be damned." "I answer," said Huss, "unto your antecedent, that I spake distinctly of rich men, and of those who had wherewithal to do those works. They, I say, are bound to give alms under pain of damnation."

He answered moreover, unto the minor of the first argument, that tenths were at first given freely, and afterward made a bond and duty; and when he would have declared it more at large, he could not be suffered. The mind of John Huss touching the condemnation of Wickliff's articles.He declared also divers other causes why he could not, with safe conscience, consent unto the condemnation of Wickliff's articles. But howsoever the matter went, he did affirm and say, that he did touching never obstinately confirm any articles of Wickliff's, but only that he did uot allow and consent that Wickliff's articles should be condemned, before sufficient reasons were alleged out of the holy Scripture for their condemnation.

 
'And of the same mind,' saith John Huss, 'are a great many other doctors and masters of the university of Prague; for when Swinco the archbishop commanded all Wickliff's books to be gathered together in the whole city of Prague, and to be brought unto him, I myself brought also certain books of Wickiiff's, which I gave unto the archbishop, desiring him, that if he found any error or heresy in them, he would note and mark them, and I myself would publish them openly. Wickliff's books burned in Prague by the archbishop Swinco.But the archbishop, albeit that he showed me no error nor heresy in them, burned my books, together with those that were brought unto him, notwithstanding he had no such commandment from pope Alexander V. But, by the notwithstanding, by a certain policy, he obtained a bull from the said pope by means of Jaroslaus, bishop of Sarepta, of the order of Franciscans, that all Wickliff's books, for the manifold errors contained in them (whereof there were none named), should be taken out of all men's hands. The archbishop, using the authority of this bull, thought he should bring to pass, that the king of Bohemia and the nobles should consent to the condemnation of Wickliff's books; but therein he was deceived. Yet nevertheless, calling together certain divines, he gave them in commission to sit upon Wickliff's books, and to proceed them by a definitive sentence in the canon law.

The university of Prague maketh supplication to the king for saving of Wickliff's books.

Wickliff's books burned in Prague against the king's will.

These men, by a general sentence, judged all those books worthy to be burned; which when the doctors, masters and scholars of the university heard report of, they, all together, with one consent and accord (none excepted but only they, who before were chosen by the archbishop to sit in judgment), determined to make supplication unto the king to stay the matter. The king, granting their request, sent by and by certain unto the archbishop to examine the matter. There he denied that he would decree any thing, as touching Wickliff's books, contrary unto the king's will and pleasure. Whereupon, albeit that he had determined to burn them the next day after, yet for fear of the king, the matter was passed over. In the mean time Wickliff's pope Alexander V. being dead, the archbishop, fearing lest the bull which he had received of the pope, would be no longer of any force or effect, privily calling unto him his adherents, and shutting the gates of his court round about him, being guarded with a number of armed soldiers, consumed and burned all Wickliff's books. Besides this great injury, the archbishop by means of his bull aforesaid, committed another no less intolerable; for he gave out commandment,A decree that no man should teach any more in chapels. that no man after that time, under pain of excommunication, should teach any more in chapels. Whereupon I did appeal unto the pope; who being dead, and the cause of my matter remaining undetermined, I appealed likewise unto his successor John XXIII.: before whom when, by the space of two years, I could not be admitted by my advocates to defend my cause, I appealed unto the high judge Christ.'
 

John Huss appeleth to the pope, and from the pope to Christ.When John Huss had spoken these words, it was demanded of him, whether he had received absolution of the pope or no? He answered, "no." Then again, whether it were lawful for him to appeal unto Christ or no? Whereunto John Huss answered: "Verily I do affirm here before you all, that there is no more just or effectual appeal, than that appeal which is made unto Christ, forasmuch as the law doth determine, Whether it be lawful to appeal to Christ or no.that to appeal, is no other thing than in a cause of grief or wrong done by an inferior judge, to implore and require aid and remedy at a higher judge's hand. Who is then a higher judge than Christ? Who, I say, can know or judge the matter more justly, or with more equity? when in him there is found no deceit, neither can he be deceived; or, who can better help the miserable and oppressed than he?The popish church derideth Christ. While John Huss, with a devout and sober countenance, was speaking and pronouncing those words, he was derided and mocked by all the whole council.

Then was there rehearsed another article of his accusation in this manner; that John Huss, to confirm the heresy which he had taught the common and simple people out of Wickliff's books, said openly these words: "That at what time a great number of monks and friars, and other learned men were gathered together in England, in a certain church, to dispute against John Wickliff, and could by no means vanquish him, or give him the foil, suddenly the church door was broken open with lightning, so that with much ado Wickliff's enemies hardly escaped without hurt." Huss accused for trusting that Wickliff's sould is saved.He added moreover, that he wished his soul to be in the same place where John VVickliff's soul was. Whereunto John Huss answered, that a dozen years before any books of divinity of John Wickliff's were in Bohemia, he did see certain works of philosophy of his, which, he said, did marvellously delight and please him. And when he understood the good and godly life of the said Wickliff, he spake these words: "I trust," said he, "that Wickliff is saved; and albeit that I doubt whether he be damned or no, yet with a good hope I wish, that my soul were in the same place where John Wickliff's is." Then again did all the company jest and laugh at him.

Sedition laid to his charge.It is also in his accusation, that John Huss did council the people, according to the example of Moses, to resist with the sword against all such as did gainsay his doctrine. And the next day after he had preached the same, there were found openly, in divers places, certain intimations, that every man, being armed with his sword about him, should stoutly proceed; and that brother should not spare brother, neither one neighbour another. John Huss answered, that all these things were falsely laid to his charge by his adversaries; for he at all times, when he preached, did diligently admonish and warn the people, that they should all arm themselves to defend the truth of the gospel, according to the saying of the apostle, "with the helmet and sword of salvation;" and that he never spake of any material sword, but of that which is the word of God. And as touching intimations, or Moses’ sword, he never had any thing to do withal.

Huss accused for moving certain tumults against the clergy, and division in the university of Prague.

A story of popes.

It is moreover affirmed in his accusation and witness, that many offences are sprung up by the doctrine of Huss. For first of all, he sowed discord between the ecclesiastical and the politic state: whereupon followed the persecution, spoiling and robbery of the clergy and bishops; and moreover, that he, through his dissension, dissolved the university of Prague. Hereunto John Huss briefly answered, that these things had not happened by his means or default; for the first dissension that was between the ecclesiastical politic state, sprang up and grew upon this cause, that pope Gregory XII. promised at his election, that at all times, at the will and pleasure of the cardinals, he would depart from, and give over his seat again: for under that condition he was elect and chosen. This man, contrary and against Winceslaus king of Bohemia, who was then king of the Romans, made Louis, duke of Bavaria, emperor. A few years after, it happened, when pope Gregory would not refuse and give over his seat and office at the request of the cardinals, that the whole college of cardinals sent letters to the king of Bohemia, requiring him, that, together with them, he would renounce and forsake his obedience unto pope Gregory; and so it should come to pass, that by the authority of a new bishop he should recover again his imperial dignity. For this cause the king consented to the will of the cardinals as touching a neutrality; that is to say, that he would neither take part with pope Gregory, neither yet with Benedict XII., bishop of Avignon, who was then named pope, as it doth appear by chronicles. Why Swinco and other of the clergy did fly out of Prague.In this cause then, forasmuch as the archbishop Swinco with the clergy were against the king, and abstaining from the divine service, many of them departed out of the city, and the archbishop himself, breaking down the tomb of the lord Wincelate, contrary and against the king's will, did also take Wickliff's books and burn them. Thereupon the king, without any gainsaying, suffered that certain goods of theirs, who of their own wills were fled away, should be spoiled; because they should not consent or accord with the bishop. Whereupon it is easy to be understood and known that John Huss was falsely accused for that matter. Howbeit a certain man, one Naso,[2] rising up, said: "The clergy do not abstain from the divine service, because they will not swear to consent unto the king, but because that they are spoiled and robbed of their goods and substance." And the cardinal of Cambray, who was one of the judges said: "Here I may say somewhat which is come into my mind. When I came from Rome, the same year that these things were done, by chance I met on the way certain prelates of Bohemia; of whom, when I demanded what news they had brought out of Bohemia, they answered, that there was happened a wonderful cruel and heinous fact; for all the clergy were spoiled of their substance, and very ill entreated and handled."

Then John Huss, alleging the same cause which he did before, went forward unto the second part of the article which was objected against him, denying also that it happened through his fault, that the Germans departed from the university of Prague. "But when the king of Bohemia, according to the foundation of Charles IV., his father, A declaration how the Germans departed from the university of Prague.granted three voices unto the Bohemians, and the fourth unto the Germans; whereat the Germans grudging that they should be how exempted from their voices, of their own accord departed and went their ways; binding themselves with a great oath, and under a great penalty,[3] both of their fame, and also money, that none of them should return again unto Prague. Notwithstanding, I am not ashamed to confess, that I did approve and allow the doings of the king, unto whom of duty I owe obedience for the commodity and profit of my country. And because you shall not think that I have spoken any untruth, here is present Albert Warren Trapius, who was deacon of the faculties, who had sworn to depart with the rest of the Germans; he, if he will say the truth, shall easily clear me of this suspicion."

The slander of the unshamefast sycophant.But when Albert would have spoken, he could not be heard. But this Naso, of whom before is made mention, after he had asked leave to speak, said: "This matter do I understand well enough, for I was in the king's court when these things were done in Bohemia, when I saw the masters of the three nations of the Germans, the Bavarians, Saxons, and Silesians, amongst whom the Polonians were also numbered, most humbly come unto the king, requiring that he would not suffer the right of their voices to be taken from them; then the king promised them that he would foresee and provide for their requests: but John Huss and Jerome of Prague, with divers others, persuaded the king that he should not so do. Whereat the king at first being not a little moved, gave him a sore check, that he and Jerome of Prague did so much intermeddle themselves, and moved such open controversies, insomuch that he threatened them, that except they would foresee and take heed, he would bring it to pass that the matter should be determined and decreed by fire. Wherefore, most reverend fathers! you shall understand that the king of Bohemia did never favour with his heart these men, whose unshamefastness is such, that they feared not even of late to treat me evil, being so much in the king's favour and credit." After him stepped forth Paletz, saying, Paletz speaketh against John Huss."Verily most reverend fathers, not only the learned men of other nations, but also of Bohemia itself, are, through the counsel of John Huss and his adherents, banished out of Bohemia, of which number some remain yet in exile in Moravia." Hereunto John Huss answered: "How can this be true," said he, "since I was not at Prague at that time, when these men you speak of departed and went away from thence? These things were thus debated the day aforesaid as touching John Huss.

Huss commited to custody.This done, the said John Huss was committed to the custody of the bishop of Reggio, under whom Jerome of Prague was also prisoner. But before he was led away, the cardinal of Cambray, calling him back again in the presence of the emperor, said, "John Huss, I have heard you say, that if you had not been willing of your own mind to come unto Constance, neither the emperor himself, nor the king of Bohemia, could have compelled you to do it." Unto whom John Huss answered: "Under your license, most reverend father! I never used any such kind of talk or words. But this I did say, that there were in Bohemia a great number of gentlemen and noblemen, who did favour and love me, who also might easily have kept me in some sure and secret place, that I should not have been constrained to come unto this town of Constance, neither at the will of the emperor, neither of the king of Bohemia." The cardinal of Cambray.With that the cardinal of Cambray, even for very anger began to change his colour, and despitefully said: Do you not see the unshamefastness of the man here? And as they were murmuring and whispering on all parts, John de Clum.John the lord John de Clum, ratifying and confirming that which John Huss had spoken, said, that John Huss had spoken very well ; "for on my part," said he, "who, in comparison of a great many others, am but of small force in the realm of Bohemia, yet always, if I would have taken it in hand, I could have defended him easily by the space of one year, even against all the force and power of both these great and mighty kings. How much better might they have done it who are of more force or puissance than I am, and have stronger castles and places than I have?" After the lord de Clum had spoken, the cardinal of Cambray said, "Let us leave this talk; and I tell you, John Huss! and counsel you, that you submit yourself unto the sentence and mind of the council, as you did promise in the prison; and if you will do so, it shall be greatly both for your profit and honour."

And the emperor himself began to tell him the same tale, saying:

 
The emperor's oration to John Huss.Albeit that there be some who say, that the fifteenth day after you were committed to prison, you obtained of us our letters of safe-conduct; notwithstanding, I can well prove, by the witness of many princes and noblemen, that the said safe-conduct was obtained and gotten of us by my lord de Duba and de Clum, before you were parted out of Prague, under whose guard we have sent for you, to the end that none should do you any outrage or hurt, but that you should have full liberty to speak freely before all the council, and to answer as touching your faith and doctrine; and, as you see, my lords the cardinals and bishops have so dealt with you, that we do very well perceive their good will towards you; for which we have great cause to thank them. And forasmuch as divers have told us, that we may not, or ought not, of right to defend any man who is a heretic, or suspected of heresy; therefore, now we give you even the same counsel which the cardinal of Cambray hath given you already, that you be not obstinate to maintain any opinion, but that you do submit yourself under such obedience as you owe unto the authority of the holy council, in all things that shall be laid against you, and confirmed by credible witnesses: which thing if you do according to our counsel, we will give order that for the love of us, of our brother, and the whole realm of Bohemia, the council shall suffer you to depart in peace, with an easy and tolerable penance and satisfaction. Which thing if you, contrariwise, refuse to do, the presidents of the council shall have sufficient wherewithal to proceed against you. And, for our part, be ye well assured, that we will sooner prepare and make the fire with our own hands, to burn you withal, than we will endure or suffer any longer that you shall maintain or use this stiffness of opinions, which you have hitherto maintained and used. Wherefore our advice and counsel is, that you submit yourself wholly unto the judgment of the council.
 

Answer of John Huss unto the emperor.Unto whom John Huss answered in this sort; "O most noble emperor! I render unto your highness most immortal thanks, for your letters of safe conduct." Upon this lord John de Clum did break him of his purpose, and admonished him that he did, in no point, excuse himself of the blame of obstinacy. Then said John Huss: "O most gentle lord! I do take God to my witness, that I was never minded to maintain any opinion ever obstinately; and that for this same intent and purpose I did come hither of mine own good will, that if any man could lay before me any better or more holy doctrine than mine, I would then change mine opinion without any further doubt." After he had spoken and said these things, he was sent away with serjeants.

 

The morrow after, which was the eighth day of June, the very same company which was assembled the day before, assembled now again at the covent of the Franciscans. And in this assembly were also John Huss's friends, lord de Duba, and lord de Clum, and Peter the notary. Thirty-nine articles laid to John Huss.Thither was John Huss also brought; and in his presence there were read about thirty-nine articles, which, they said, were drawn out of his books. Huss acknowledged all those that were faithfully and truly collected and gathered, to be his; of which sort there were but very few. The residue were counterfeited and forged by his adversaries, and specially by Stephen Paletz, the principal author of this mischief: for they could find no such thing in the books, out of which they said they had drawn and gathered them; or at least, if they were, they were corrupted by slanders, as a man may easily perceive by the number of articles.

These be the same articles in a manner which were showed before in the prison to John Huss, and are rehearsed here in another order. Howbeit there were more articles added unto them, and some others corrected and enlarged. But now we will show them one with another, and declare what the said Huss did answer both openly before them all, as also in the prison, for he left his answers in the prison briefly written with his own hand in these words.

 
  1. The like practice, in these later days, was used at Oxford against the godly fathers.
  2. This doctor Naso was counsellor to king Winceslaus.
  3. The penally of money was a hundred silver shock.