Abstract

The aim of this article is to examine the dichotomy between “Hussite” and “Catholic” through the lens of how sinfulness was perceived by the Hussites (Czech Utraquists) and their military and political Catholic opponents. The study focuses on the unique perception of sinfulness as a distinctive feature of Hussite ideology compared to anti-Hussite views. The sources used include theological and polemical writings of Hussites such as Jan Želivský, Mikuláš of Pelhřimov, and Petr Helčický, as well as their ideological predecessor Jan Hus. Additionally, the study examines the Hussite program known as the “Four Articles of Prague” in its various forms, which were supported by both the radical Taborites and the more moderate Prague Hussites. Traditional Catholic theological criticism, notably from figures like Ferdinand of Lucca and Gilles Charlier, and other sources reconstructing fifteenth-century Catholic norms and perceptions, particularly in Hungary, are also considered. The analysis identifies two key features of the perception of sinfulness in Hussite ideology: sin as a social offense, and the belief that all people are equal in front of sin, implying that a ruler’s sin justifi es disobedience, including armed resistance. The author concludes that the dichotomy between “Hussite” and “Catholic” is only partially evident in this context. Gilles Charlier, a Catholic theologian, considered only those sins that directly harmed the state and society (e.g., theft , murder) as social crimes, while he did not classify “simple fornication” as such a crime. In contrast, fornication among the Catholic opponents of the Hussites, particularly in fifteenth-century Hungary, continued to be regarded as a suppressible social offense under the laws established by Saint Stephen (997–1038). Charlier advocated for tolerance towards the sins of monarchs and infl uential individuals to avoid severe unrest. The Hungarian kingdom in the fifteenth century retained the legal right for the estates to resist the monarch if he violated the Golden Bull of 1222. This conclusion, highlighting the similarities between the views of the Hussites and their opponents, is unprecedented in historiography. While R. Novotný noted the similarity between the estates of the Hungarian and Czech kingdoms, the recognition of these ideological parallels is a new contribution.

References

Bartoš F.M. Z bratislavské schůzky krále Zikmunda s husitskými vůdci r. 1429 [From the Bratislava Meeting of King Sigismund with the Hussite Leaders in 1429] // Časopis Matice moravské. R. 49. 1925. S. 171–195.

Heymann F. John Žižka and the Hussite Revolution. New York: Russell & Russell, 1969. 521 p.

Jánosi M. A Szent István törvényeit tartalmazó kodexek [Codices Containing the Laws of Saint Stephen] // Magyar könyvszemle. 94. évf. 1978. 3–4. sz. 225–254. l.

Kalivoda R. Husitská ideologie [Hussite Ideology]. Praha: Nakladatelství Československé akademie věd, 1961. 560 s.

Kalivoda R. Husitské myšlení [Hussite Thought]. Praha: Filosofia, 1997. 367 s.

Knauz N. Az MCCCXCVII-kiországgyűlés végezménye [The Proceedings of the Diet of 1397]. Pest: Landerer és Heckenást, 1856. 54. l.

Novotný R. Sociální, institucionální a konfesionální aspekty vývoje české šlechty v pozdním středověku. Disertační práce [Social, Institutional, and Confessional Aspects of the Development of the Czech Nobility in the Late Middle Ages. Dissertation]. Praha: [s. n.], 2008. 206 s.

Novotný V. Hus v Kostnici a česká šlechta. Poznámky a dokumenty [Hus in Constance and the Czech Nobility. Notes and Documents]. Praha: Společnost přátel starožitností českých v Praze, 1915. 100 s.

Palacký Fr. Die Geschichte des Hussitentums und Prof. Constantin Höfl er. Kritische Studien. Prag: Friedrich Tempsky, 1868. 168 S.

Pekář J. Žižka a jeho doba [Žižka and His Times]. D. 3. Praha: Vesmír, 1930. 343 s.

Sedlák J.M. Jan Hus. Přílohy [Jan Hus. Appendices]. Praha: Děditství svatého Prokopa, 1915. 370 s.

Seibt F. Hussitenzeit als Kulturepoche // Historische Zeitschrift . Jg. 195. 1962. S. 21–62.

Šmahel F. Husitská revoluce [The Hussite Revolution]. D. 2. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, 1993. 364 s.

Szent István törvényeinek XII. századi kézirata az Admonti kódexben [hasonmás kiadás] [Th e Twelft h-Century Manuscript of the Laws of Saint Stephen in the Admont Codex [Facsimile Edition]] / Szerk. Bartoniek E. és Gyöff ry Gy. Budapest: Helikon kiadó, 1988. 92 l.

Toman H. Žižkův duch, povaha a listy [Th e Spirit, Character, and Letters of Žižka] / Upravil F.M. Bartoš. Praha: Státní nakladatelství, 1924. 87 s.

Tsaturova S.K. “Korol’ — chinovnik, svyashchennaya osobа ili osel na trone?”: predstavleniya ob obyazannostyakh korolya vo Frantsii XIV–XV vv. [“Is the King an Official, a Sacred Person, or a Donkey on the Throne?”: Representations of the Duties of the

King in France in the Fourteenth and Fift eenth Centuries] // Iskusstvo vlasti. Sbornik v chest’ N.A. Khachaturyan [The Art of Power. A Collection in Honor of N.A. Khachatryan] / Ed. by O.V. Dmitrieva. Saint Petersburg: Aletheia, 2007. P. 99–131.

Urkundliche Beiträge zur Geschichte des Hussitenkrieges vom Jahre 1419 an / Hrsg. von F. Palacký. Bd. 1. Prag: Friedrich Temsky, 1873. 655 S.

Závodszky L. A Szent István, Szent László és Kálmán korabeli törvények és zsinati határozatok forrásai [Th e Sources of the Laws and Synodal Decrees from the Times of Saint Stephen, Saint Ladislaus, and Coloman]. Budapest: Szent-István Társulat tudományos és irodalmi osztálya, 1904. 215 l.

Želivský J. Dochovaná kázání z roku 1419 [Surviving Sermons from 1419] / Vyd. A. Molnár. Praha: Nakladatelství České akademie věd, 1953. 282 s.

Zilynská B. Recenze na: Opatrný D. Zachránit lidi od hříchů. Etika v teologii mistra Jana Husa [Review of: Opatrný D. Saving People from Sins. Ethics in the Theology of Master Jan Hus]. Jihlava: Mlýn, 2018 // Acta universitatis Carolinae. Historia universitatis Carolinae Pragensis. T. LIX. Fasc. 1. 2019. S. 193–194.