»Češka gos«, Božji bojevniki, obstranci: češka »reformacija pred reformacijo« in njeni evropski ter slovenski konteksti, ideariji in imaginariji

Abstract

Text and context: De Ecclesia – M. Jan Hus’s fateful text and its historical “context” The chapter focuses on the historical and textual circumstances surrounding the most important work of the Czech theologian Jan Hus – the Latin treatise De Ecclesia (1413). This comprehensive work, comprising 23 chapters (about 240 typed pages), was not only the medium that brought Hus’s name to the church dignitaries gathered at the Council of Constance but also proved to be fatal for the author himself. For the bill of indictment and finally the sentence on the Czech theologian presented before the Council was mainly composed on the basis of what he articulated in De Ecclesia. Another factor contributing to the fame of this text was certainly the slogan created at this Church Council that Hus’s critical thinking on the Church “demolishes the papacy just as much as Christianity demolishes the Koran”, while up to the time of the first textual criticism research into Hus’s writings at the end of the 19th century, De Ecclesia was considered the most important and most original of his works. It was essentially influenced by at least two treatises by the English theologian, Biblical scholar and university professor John Wycliffe (1331–1384), namely De Ecclesia (1378) and De potestate papae (1378), while noticeable textually genealogical links with Wycliffe’s other writings – De civili dominio, De blasphemia, De fide catholica, De paupertate Christi, Ad argumenta aemuli – and with his sermons have been established. Such a textual genealogy on the level of Wycliffe\xadHus theology about the Church and its structure, indulgences and papal power signalizes the reproductive reception of Wycliffism and thus through the semantic and operative fields of resistance against the supreme authority of the papal throne reveals the intellectual historical link between Wycliffe, Hus and his Bohemian and German historical successors – the Lutheran Reformation of the 16th century. Like Hus in his treatise De Ecclesia, Martin Luther in his Resolutiones disputationum de indulgentiarum virtute (1518), in comparable historical conditions, also primarily based his intellectual arguments on the discussion concerning indulgences and on criticism of the shameless brokering with the power of the keys. For like Václav Tiem and his commissioners with the indulgences of Pope John XXIII, a hundred years later Tetzel and the Fuggers right at the be\xad ginning gave the indulgences of Pope Leon X (or rather Archbishop Albrecht of Brandenburg) a bad reputation – and gave Luther grounds for thinking not only about indulgences but also such fundamental matters as the “ex\xad treme conditions” for God’s grace and salvation (by faith alone). Czech Brethren as outsiders: Between the commitment of the Hussite break with Rome and the challenge of the German Reformation The Unity of the Brethren (Unitas Fratrum/Jednota bratská/the Czech/ Czech Brethren) can be considered in their activity as well as their theology as an original European Reformation preceding Martin Luther. The referential framework for the birth of the Czech Brethren, historically and in terms of church organization, differed considerably from the origin and establishment of the Lutheran Reformation in Germany. The basic difference, apart from the noticeably greater age of the Czech religious reform, is that in the lands of St Václav (Wenceslaus) the concept of church reform is closely linked with the pre\xadReformation striving for a good spiritual pastor and the idea that church reform is primarily a matter of practical everyday morality, and not (necessarily) of theology. The call for church reform means primarily the correction of the individual and that applies first of all to the head of medieval society, i.e. the preacher or priest. The Czech Reformation (the Utraquist Church and after that the Czech Brethren) was above all a broad folk movement “from the bottom up”, which gains through its own develop\xad ment a theological articulation and reflection, while with Luther it was first of all an intellectual current “from the top down”, a dissemination of the in\xad sights and reflections (including intuitive ones) of a highly educated professor, a member of a learned culture, which at a certain moment – on the question of church authority – becomes the subject of debate and identification in the vernacular folk culture, and then develops into a movement and finally into a new church. After accepting the Compactata of Jihlava (1436), the Hussite party spoke with a single, unified political voice, which was not the case in practical religious life. For although the Taborites with their rad\xad ical anti\xadRome theology were also pressed into a subordinate position and the Utraquist Church at least outwardly acted in a unified way, there remained groups and circles that were not satisfied either with adjusting with Catholics or with the situation in which the Church, including the Hussite Church, actually found itself. Consequently they clustered around individual preachers and tried, at least within a narrow circle of fellow thinkers, to practise a Christianity which would be as similar as possible – in its morals and Christian life – to the early apostolic church. The first such circles and groups began to form in Prague around 1450. At the very beginning, the Czech Brethren were beyond the law, for in their theology and their behaviour they were far away from the dogmas of the Roman Church, which was true also of the Utraquist Church in the Czech kingdom: 1) they repudiated the dogma of the Roman Church concerning the transubstantiation of the bread and wine at the Lord’s supper; 2) they did not wish to bow before the host; 3) they did not believe that a priest living in sin, merely through handing out the sacrament (ex opere operato), would be consecrated; 4) because of their literal understanding of the Sermon on the Mount they did not wish to give oaths. Most of all, they were far from agreement with the Utraquist and Catholic Churches, and thus outside the rights granted by the Compactata of Jihlava on the question of the in\xad vestiture of priests. Here, it seems, they broke with the tradition of apostolic succession and the consecration of priests in the Roman Church, since they thought there could not be true priests in that church. The Czech Brethren therefore wanted to separate from such a type of priesthood. Since they did not find a model for their own manner of consecration either in the Orthodox Church or the Waldensian Church, they finally decided on the consecration of priests who were selected by lot from among the believers, although taking into account their functions, knowledge, gifts, and especially their exemplary Christian life, all of which ought to indicate the capability of these people for priestly service. Even before Luther, the Christian Renaissance influenced the Czech Brethren; this developed in Italy as a part of humanism and then easily spread through Europe. The Czech Brethren were not unknown to Luther even before 1517, since their writings were published from 1511 in the German\xadspeaking region, either as independent books or as parts of larger volumes, but in most cases such editions represented a considerable theological sensation, which increasingly turned the attention of German theologians to theology and the defence of the small, persecuted, but independent and persevering Czech Reformed Church. Luther’s direct contacts with the Czech Brethren came about through the role of Jan Hus’s key text in Luther’s historical appearance as a reformer. This was because Hus’s crowning work De Ecclesia became the handbook for all those in the German lands who, after the Leipzig dispute between Luther and Eck (1519), took part in the heated debates about papal authority and stood up against the worldly power of the Holy Father; it became a real Noah’s ark of anti\xadpapal arguments, which Luther as well as his fellow thinkers drew from Hus’s work. Hus thus became an intellectual patron, a saint and protector, the leading intellectual authority of critics of the dealings of the pope, the Roman Curia and the Roman Church, and especially the predecessor of Martin Luther’s similar kind of writings. After Luther’s appearance – between reform and politics After Luther’s appearance in 1517 the Czech Brethren were faced with sever\xad al important issues. They had to define their attitude towards the reformed movement near at hand, in Saxony, which in the decade since its beginnings had developed into a church with its own confession (1530). They had to tackle the challenges of Lutheran theology, especially concerning their own consideration of justification. They needed to define afresh their own teaching on the sacraments. And they had to determine over again the position of the church in society and the position of the aristocracy and the intelligentsia within itself. All these changes began to happen after the death of Bishop Lukáš of Prague (1528). The Czech Brethren accepted Luther as the leading religious teacher and officially turned away from the theological views of Lukáš of Prague and his predecessors. In 1535 they first published their own confession, in which the main emphasis on justification by faith shows Luther’s influence. Moreover, they no longer recognized seven sacraments, but only two (the Lord’s Supper and baptism). After 1543 the Church of Czech Brethren also “returned to society” – it ceased to build the life of a secluded Christian community on the fringe of society or even beyond it and its order. From then on its members could be found in numerous professions where previously they had not participated (due to the strong theological emphasis on the importance of works, i.e. “the true Christian life” for salvation): they were involved in civic and provincial administration, and the Czech Brethren nobility accepted military command responsibilities. The position of the aristocracy an