LXVIII. Master Jomw Hus ro THE “FATHER”
(Without date: middle of June 1415)
The Council hath often made all these demands of me; but it is for the reason that they involve my recantation, abjuring, and the undergoing of penance, in which case I should have to give up many truths. Secondly, I should be forced to abjure, and so be a perjurer by admitting the errors which have been falsely laid to my charge. Thirdly, I should be a stumbling-block to many of God’s people to whom I have preached; for which cause it were fitting that a millstone were hanged about my neck and I be cast into the depths of the sea! Fourthly, if I took this course in my wish to escape a brief confusion and punishment, I should fall into the deepest confusion and punishment of all, unless I humbly repented before death. Therefore for my comfort I have bethought me of the seven Maccabean martyrs, who desired rather to be cut into pieces than to eat flesh contrary to the law of the Lord.? I recall too the holy Eleazar, who, as it is written, refused only to say that he had eaten flesh forbidden by law, lest he should offer a bad example to posterity, but rather endured martyrdom. How, then, with the holy men and women of the gospel before my eyes, who gave themselves up to martyrdom rather than consent to sin, could I, who have preached on patience and constancy for so many years, be guilty of many falsehoods and of perjury, and so seandalise the children of God? Far be it from me; for Christ the Lord will abundantly reward me, by granting me strength to endure in
Matt, xvi. 6. Of, 240, 3
this present life and glory in that which is to come.
The next letter of Hus is remarkable for the boldness with which Hus asserted his position, and the strong sarcasms it contains upon the actions of the Council in their treatment of Pope John, The reader will remember that Hus had attempted a diversion on this matter at his trial (see p. 217), and had been frustrated by Sigismund. Nor does Hus forget to expose the logical inconsistency of Palecz and Stanislaus. From first to last the letter contains no note of doubt or hesitation. Hus has faced the issues and decided. At one time he was willing to leave himself in the hands of the Council. Now he is convinced that the Council is not a trustworthy guide. In other respects the reader will note the growing decision and firmness of tone of his letters as the end draws nigh.
The letter is undated; nevertheless it contains some evidence of time. The last copy of the articles,’ to which Hus refers on p. 244, were ’ the articles read against the doctrine and person of Hus on June 18 in public congregation, a copy of which, with Hus’s corrections in writing, has been preserved for us by Mladenowie (Doc. 225-33). Another mark of time will be found in the reference in the last paragraph to the decree of the Council forbidding the cup. “This fatal decree, which deluged Bohemia with blood, was formally passed on June 15, 1415.
← 68. Letter LXVII. To the father · Contents · 70. Letter LXIX. To his Friends in →