DOCSLIB.ORG

Sub Utraque Specie: a Reformed Argument for Communion Under Both Kinds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sub Utraque Specie: a Reformed Argument for Communion Under Both Kinds SUB UTRAQUE SPECIE: A REFORMED ARGUMENT FOR COMMUNION UNDER BOTH KINDS __________________ A Research Paper Presented to Dr. D. Blair Smith Reformed Theological Seminary __________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for ST5250- Ecclesiology and Sacraments __________________ by Matthew Sparks May 13, 2020 SUB UTRAQUE SPECIE: A REFORMED ARGUMENT FOR COMMUNION UNDER BOTH KINDS On July 16, 1562 the Council of Trent decreed, “If any one saith, that, by the precept of God, or by necessity of salvation, all and each of the faithful of Christ ought to receive both species of the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist: let him be anathema.”1 The origins of the debate on partaking both elements of the Supper did not actually begin in the Reformation itself. Instead the theological discussions were debated centuries beforehand and continue still today. There are essentially two positions on the debate: (a) that the Supper must be taken of both elements by all the faithful, or (b) that only one is necessary for the faithful to partake.2 In the following, I will argue that the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper must necessarily be administered in both elements.3 To this end, some historical background of the debate must first be surveyed to find the origins of these doctrinal disagreements. Following the historical survey, I will present the classic Roman Catholic argument against the necessity of communion under both kinds. Finally, this argument will be refuted by the use of the Reformed understanding of the Supper. 1Council of Trent, Session 21, “Doctrine Concerning the Communion Under Both Species,” in Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker 1998), Canon 1. 2For the rest of the paper, I divide these two positions into the Reformed and the Roman Catholic due to the nature of the current debate that is clearly more polarized in the post-Reformation context. But to divide these positions to Reformed and Catholic would be anachronistic to pose before the polarization, which came about more clearly at the Reformation. Of course, the first position is not distinctly Reformed, but the Reformed do contribute more to this discussion I believe than other Protestant traditions. 3Continuing on I will use the term utraquism for the practice of administering both elements to both clergy and laity. As well, in this necessity of both signs I also acknowledge the fact of extreme circumstances when the practice might be hindered. 1 Historical Survey Concerning the Use of Both Elements To find the origins of the Eucharistic controversy concerning both elements is not an easy task. The complete history of these debates is dense and nuanced and outside of the bounds of this paper.4 Nonetheless this topic does need to be placed within its historical context to ground the debate in its historical dimensions, which have led to the current modern theologies that surround the Eucharist. Therefore in order to ground the debate in its historical context, the first section will cover the Hussite controversy in the 15th century. Next, the Protestant reception and response to the theological issues will be summarized. And the final section of historical context will give an overview of the Counter-Reformation development on the issue and its continuity with in modern Roman Catholic thought. The Hussite Controversy The controversies surrounding utraquism were already in motion before the 15th century. But these debates never came to a head like they did in Bohemia at that time. There is much that could be said about the politics of this historical account but the following will show the heart of the controversy surrounding utraquism. More particularly, the early theologies in favor of utraquism are of utmost importance to this discussion. By the 13th century, the Roman Church stopped administering the sacrament of the Supper to laity in both elements.5 Instead it was commonplace for the bread to be administered to the laity, and reserve the cup for clergy alone. By the time of Jan Hus, controversy raged in 4For a brief history of the Utraquist movement see Hieromonk Patapios, “Sub Utraque Specie: The Arguments of John Hus and Jacoubek of Stříbro in Defence of Giving Communion to the Laity under Both Kinds,” JTS, 53/2 (2002), 505-506. He notes that there is evidence of this controversy even in the 5th century with Pope Gelasius. 5Miri Rubin, Corpus Christi: The Eucharist in Late Medieval Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 70-72. 2 Bohemia over this practice, along with disagreements about the Eucharist generally, preaching, and clerical impurity.6 Of the Hussites, there were several major figures that brought forth reform through writings, preaching and otherwise but for the sake of this essay, two of them are of specific help: Jan Hus and Jakoubek of Stříbro.7 Both their differing theologies and their continuity concerning the topic of utraquism are insightful. The Eucharistic theology of Hus was in many ways unified with Rome and yet separate in some ways. Throughout his entire life Hus taught and affirmed the doctrine of transubstantiation.8 Not only did he affirm the corporeal presence of Christ in the elements, but Hus also affirmed the doctrine of concomitance. In the partaking of the sacrament, there is a natural concomitance of blood with the flesh and therefore when one partakes of the bread (that is, the body) he partakes of both body and blood.9 It may seem that the natural conclusion of affirming both transubstantiation and concomitance would lead to Hus denying the necessity of communion under both kinds, but yet at the end of his life he affirmed all three doctrines.10 To summarize his rationale for the affirmation of utraquism, he supported the doctrine because 6William R. Cook, “The Eucharist in Hussite Theology,” ARG 66 (1975), 24. 7I am aware of the anachronistic terminology of applying Hussite to Hus, and also of the theological nuances that did distinguish Hus from many Hussites. But with that being said, the term is still helpful for the purpose of distinguishing between those on each side of the Eucharistic controversy. For more on Hus being a Hussite see Patapios,“Sub Utraque Specie,” for continuity and discontinuity between Hus and his followers. 8Matthew Spinka, John Hus’ Concept of the Church (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1966), 74- 75. 9John Hus, Super IV Sententiarum, IV, dist. 8, qu. 11, in Opera Omnia, vol. 2, ed. Vaclav Flajshans (Osnabruck: Biblio-Verlag, 1966), 557. “Similiter sub specie vini est sangwis Christi sacramentaliter, quia vinum benedicitur in sangwinem Christi et non in corpus, et quia iterum Sangwis Christi non est sine corpore, ergo concomitanter est ibizı eciam corpus Christi.” 10Hus’s affirmation of the necessity of communion under both kinds was certainly a development in his doctrine. Before Hus’s first exile of Bohemia in 1412, there is little evidence to say that he affirmed the doctrine. Over time Hus’s writing seems to be at first partial to the practice of utraquism, then favorable with wisdom toward institution of the practice, and finally at the end of his life in 1415 Hus is completely for utraquism. See Patapios, “Sub Utraque Specie,” 510-519. 3 (1) both elements efficaciously aid in spiritual eating and (2) the express command of Scripture.11 On the other hand, Hus’s corresponding friend Jakoubek was quite different in his theology of the Eucharist. Unlike Hus, Jakoubek denied transubstantiation and affirmed remanentism.12 In this understanding, the bread still remains in the element and is not replaced by the body of Christ, but both exist in one place.13 Jakoubek affirmed the doctrine of concomitance insofar as Christ body is never present without its blood.14 Yet this is distinct from the logical deduction of transubstantiation wherein Christ’s body and blood would be present in each element concomitantly. Although his great disagreement with Hus on the nature of the sacrament is not minute, Jakoubek affirms the necessity of utraquism. And again, the rationale behind Jakoubek’s affirmation of utraquism is the command of the Scriptures. In his own words, “it must be believed that according to the Gospel precept, the faithful community of the people should spiritually and sacramentally receive the body of Christ under the form of bread and His blood under the form of wine.”15 11Patapios, “Sub Utraque Specie,” 516. Also see Cook, “The Eucharist in Hussite Theology,” 25. For more on Hus’s understanding of the nature of communion in the Eucharist, see Spinka, John Hus’ Concept of the Church, 46-47, 74-75, 320-324. Hus’s threefold communion (spiritual, sacramental, and spiritual-sacramental) in the Eucharist is in its addition to his conviction of both elements being “better”, in that the spiritual communion is in some sense tied to the sacramental communion, and without one you cannot have the other. At the same time there is no affirmation from Hus that one must take of both elements to be saved. 12Patapios,“Sub Utraque Specie,” 509. 13Stephen E. Lahey, “Late Medieval Eucharistic Theology,” in A Companion to the Eucharist in the Middle Ages, eds. Ian Levy, Gary Macy, and Kristen Van Ausdall (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 516. For remanentism in the thought of Wycliffe on the Eucharist, see Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994), 330 and 336-338. 14Ian Christopher Levy, “The Eucharist in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries,” in The Oxford Handbook of Sacramental Theology, eds. Hans Boersma and Matthew Levering (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 244. 15Patapios, “Sub Utraque Specie,” 521. 4 From these two figures it is clear that transubstantiation did not necessitate the anti- utraquist position.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Theological Journal•Xlv 2003•I
    Communio viatorumA THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL•XLV 2003•I Jan Hus – a Heretic, a Saint, or a Reformer? • The White Mountain, 1620: An Annihilation or Apotheosis of Utraquism? • Close Encounters of the Pietistic Kind: The Moravian-Methodist • Connection by Vilém Herold, Zdeněk V. David, Ted A. Campbell published by charles university in prague, protestant theological faculty Communio CONTENTS (XLV, 2003) Nr. 1 1 . DAVID HOLETON Communio Viatorum and International Scholarship on the Bohemian Reformation 5 . VILÉM HEROLD Jan Hus – a Heretic, a Saint, or a Reformer? 24 . ZDENĚK V. DAVID The White Mountain, 1620: An Annihilation or Apotheosis of Utraquism? 67 . TED A. CAMPBELL Close Encounters of the Pietistic Kind: The Moravian-Methodist Connection BOOK REVIEWS 81 . PAVEL HOŠEK Beyond Foundationalism 86 . TIM NOBLE Sacred Landscapes and Cultural Politics viatorum a theological journal Published by Charles University in Prague, Protestant Theological Faculty Černá 9, 115 55 Praha 1, Czech Republic. Editors: Peter C. A. Morée, Ivana Noble, Petr Sláma Typography: Petr Kadlec Printed by Arch, Brno Administration: Barbara Kolafová ([email protected]) Annual subscription (for three issues): 28 or the equivalent in Europe, 30 USD for overseas. Single copy: 10 or 11 USD. Please make the payment to our account to: Bank name: Česká spořitelna Address: Vodičkova 9, 110 00, Praha 1, Czech Republic Account no.: 1932258399/0800 Bank identification code (SWIFT, BLZ, SC, FW): GIBA CZPX Orders, subscriptions and all business correspondence should be adressed to: Communio viatorum Černá 9 P. O. Box 529 CZ-115 55 Praha 1 Czech Republic Phone: + + 420 221 988 205 Fax: + + 420 221 988 215 E- mail: [email protected] URL: http://www.etf.cuni.cz/cv.html (ISSN 0010-3713) IČO vydavatele (ETF UK, Černá 9, 115 55 Praha 1) 00216208.
    [Show full text]
  • Utraquism As a Commoners' Church
    Utraquism as a Commoners’ Church Zdeněk V. David (Washington, D.C.) This article is part of a triptych. I have dealt respectively with the liberal ecclesiology and with the universalist aspirations of the Utraquist Church.1 A third major intellectual legacy of Utraquism – in addition to its liberal‑ ism and universalism – which is discussed in this article was its plebeian character. The downgrading of social privilege would be in harmony with the spirit of the Austro ‑Bohemian Enlightenment, which rediscovered the Utraquist intellectual ambiance in the eighteenth century, as well as with the subsequent liberal political culture of Bohemia.2 In Utraquist Bohemia, cultural and scholarly creativity was carried on by the townspeople and its fruits reflected primarily their concerns and interests. The Utraquist Church by the mid ‑sixteenth century served by and large the urban and rural common folk, while the nobles turned predominantly to Lutheranism with a minority adhering to the Unity of Brethren or to the Roman Curia.3 The religious division reached into the formative period of the Utraquist Church when the towns had provided the main impetus behind the reli‑ gious reforms, while the interest of the nobles was rather lukewarm and their participation hesitant. The character of Utraquism as a commoners’ church fully crystallised during the religious discussions of 1575 around the so ‑called Bohemian Confession, which revealed the contrast between the quasi ‑democratic, plebeian culture of the townspeople, and the nobles’ culture of aristocratic privilege. On one side stood the nobles with their Lutheran (and a few Calvinist) chaplains, the sectar‑ ians (mainly the Unity of Brethren), and the Lutherans of the German enclaves; on the other side stood the bulk of the Czech ‑speaking commoners of Bohemia who remained loyal to Hus and to fifteenth ‑century Utraquism, as defined in basic confessional documents from the Four Articles of Prague (1419) to the Consistory’s critique of the Bohemian Confession in 1575 and in 1609.4 This 1 Zdeněk V.
    [Show full text]
  • Charles University: a History of Revolution
    Portland State University PDXScholar Young Historians Conference Young Historians Conference 2016 Apr 28th, 9:00 AM - 9:15 AM Charles University: A History of Revolution Matous Komers Riverdale High School Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/younghistorians Part of the European History Commons, Medieval History Commons, and the Political History Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Komers, Matous, "Charles University: A History of Revolution" (2016). Young Historians Conference. 20. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/younghistorians/2016/oralpres/20 This Event is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Young Historians Conference by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Komers 1 Matous Komers Laura Keldorf History 101 14 November 2015 Question: What role did Charles University play in the spread and survival of Hussitism in 14th and 15th century Europe? Charles University: A History of Revolution Charles University, otherwise known as the University of Prague, is considered one of the oldest and most prestigious academic institutions in Europe. Starting out as a religiously affiliated institution, it metamorphosed into a credible researched­based institutions as more common, secular schools of thought emerged throughout history. The university’s eminent reputation came under threat in 1948 with the rise of communism in Czechoslovakia. The new communist regime firmly censored the curriculum of Charles University to maintain the dominance of its political and social ideologies. The university was forced to sever most of the bonds it had established with its international colleagues and its research department suffered as a result.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hussite Movement: a Forerunner of the Reformation Or Its First Phase?
    PRZEGLĄD ZACHODNI 2018 JAROSŁAW NIKODEM Poznań THE HUSSITE MOVEMENT: A FORERUNNER OF THE REFORMATION OR ITS FIRST PHASE? In memory of Professor Stanisław Bylina In historiography, attempts at comparing or providing a common perspective on various distant events are undoubtedly needed. Often they provide valuable insights even if they evoke dispute;1 however, they should be approached with much caution. Most commonly, they are undertaken by authors who are not knowledgeable enough to competently discuss issues concerning different historical periods. This reservation also applies, perhaps in a particular way, to the author of this paper. This means that my observations are solely meant to draw attention to certain issues and to the exist- ence of hasty and sometimes unjustified historiographic judgements. The aforementioned pitfalls concern not only different historical periods, but also historians’ own interests. I fully share the reservations expressed by the late Jiří Kejř, a renowned expert on the life and work of Jan Hus and the history of the Hussite movement. He wrote that he could never understand why some historians writing about Hussitism referred to the crisis of feudalism and viewed Hussitism as the first phase of the bourgeois revolution or as a historical anomaly. Attempts to justify such claims, he argued, were doomed to failure, because primary sources would not sup- port them and far-reaching generalisations are typically unsafe. In this case, that par- ticularly applies to feudalism, which is difficult to define and had a number of forms.2 The question of what the relevance of the Hussite movement was to Protestantism3 1 Cf., e.g., A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Waldensians, the Hussites and the Bohemian Brethren
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 1976 Restitution and Dissent in the Late Medieval Renewal Movements: the Waldensians, the Hussites and the Bohemian Brethren Zeman, J K DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/xliv.1.7 Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-155206 Journal Article Published Version Originally published at: Zeman, J K (1976). Restitution and Dissent in the Late Medieval Renewal Movements: the Waldensians, the Hussites and the Bohemian Brethren. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, XLIV(1):7-28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/xliv.1.7 Restitution and Dissent in the Late Medieval Renewal Movements: the Waldensians, the Hussites and the Bohemian Brethren J. K. ZEMAN HE history of the Christian Church and its impact upon Western civilization has often been interpreted as an alternation between periods of 1L recession and resurgence. The motif of renewal thus serves as the organizing principle of the chronological unfolding of the story of the Church.1 When expressed in theological terms, it can become a rallying point for advocates of reform, whether in the history of Protestantism, or in the current Catholic aggiornamento: "Insofar as the Church is deformed, she has to be reformed: ecclesia [reformata atque semper] reformanda."2 However, the real dynamic of Christian renewal, whether individual, ecclesiastical or societal, cannot be generated by a mere awareness of the sequence of decay and revival. Rather, it consists in the ever-present tension between those who seek to attain an ideal and those who are willing to compromise.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bohemian Eucharistic Movement in Its European Context
    23 The Bohemian Eucharistic Movement in its European Context David R. Holeton (Toronto) When the subject of the Bohemian Reformation is raised in casual conversation, if people have heard of it at all they will usually remember Jan Hus and the chalice.1 In the popular mind as well as in reality, the eucharist (at least symbolically) was at the very heart of the reform movement in Bohemia. The chalice became the symbol emblazoned on the flags and shields of Hussite armies; Jan Žižka [of the Chalice]2 as well as catholic crusaders would send men, women and children to their deaths because of their eucharistic beliefs;3 debate about eucharistic rite and vesture remained a constant feature of Bohemian life from the time of Jan Milíè until well after the suppression of Utraquism following the Hapsburg victory at Bilá Hora4. While some of the achievements of the Bohemian eucharistic movement have been well studied, they have infrequently been put into the context of the 1) In a major recent study, Miri Rubin (Corpus Christi: The Eucharist in Late Medieval Culture [Cambridge, 1991]) completely ignores the eucharistic movement in Bohemia. 2) When, in 1421, Žižka captured the small fortress of Trebusín near Litomìøice, he appropriated the site for his own use, replaced the wooden structure with one made from stone and called the new castle “Kalich” (Chalice). Thereafter he styled himself no longer as Jan Žižka z Troconova but, instead, Jan Žižka z Kalicha. Frederick G. Heymann, John Žižka and the Hussite Revolution (New York 1955) 218–19. 3) Laurence of Bøezová [Historia Hussitica in Jaroslav Goll ed., Fontes Rerum Bohemicarum V (Prague 1893)] singles out eucharistic heresy as a principal reason for Žižka’s burning of the Adamites at Klokoty in 1421.
    [Show full text]
  • The Feast of Corpus Christi and Its Changes in Late Utraquism
    The Feast ofCorpus Christi and Its Changes in Late Utraquism Pavel Kolář (Prague) In the 1560s a priest from Litoměřice cited two reasons before the Prague Lower Consistory why he had not organised processions with the Lord’s Body and Blood for the feast of Corpus Christi. The procession, according to him, had not taken place in Litoměřice for more than forty years; many inhabit- ants were refusing to participate in the restored processions; some of them, leaning out of the windows of the surrounding houses greeted the procession with ridicule. Priest Jan, Dean of Český Brod, on his part, complained about the town markets held on Thursday, where most of the congregation was ir- resistibly attracted immediately after the liturgy without remaining in church and joining the solemn procession for Corpus Christi.1 Rather ironically, the waning of interest in the procession with the sacraments of the Lord’s Body and Blood affected, by the end of the sixteenth century, even the Chapel of Corpus Christi in the New Town of Prague.2 It seems that the feast of Corpus Christi – important for Utraquism and well established in the Utraquist liturgi- cal sources of the fifteenth and the sixteenth centuries3 – faced from the second half of the sixteenth century an increasing disinterest, even overt resistance. Was the traditional feast threatened by a gradual disappearance? I shall try to show that attempts were made to save the feast, although salvaging it brought about changes in the liturgical core of the feast of Corpus Christi itself. The Origin of the Feast of Corpus Christi The birth of the new liturgical feast was connected with the unique character of Liège and its religious atmosphere in the first half of the thirteenth century.
    [Show full text]
  • Concordia Theological Monthly
    CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY The Eclipse of Lutheranism in 17th-Century Czechoslovakia MARIANKA SASHA FOUSEK [he Martyrs of Christ - A Sketch of the Thought of Martin Luther on Martyrdom DOUGLAS C. STANGE Lutheran and Protest Vestment Practices in the United States and Canada: A Survey ARTHUR CARL PIEPKORN Homiletics Theological Observer Book Review Vol. xxxvn November 1966 No. 10 The Eclipse of Lutheranism In 17th-Century Czechoslovakia MARIANKA SASHA 1l0USEK THE AREA his article is concerned with the fate of like that of an annexed province. It also TLutheranism in "Czechoslovakia" in had its own diet and laws and its own way the 17th century. I am using the some­ of life. Nevertheless, Silesia was politically what anachronistic name "Czechoslovakia" much more dependent on Bohemia than for this area as a convenient symbol for was Moravia; the relations between the both the Czech lands, that is, the crown Silesians and the Bohemian Czechs were lands of Bohemia, and the Slovak territory not very cordial, since the Silesians resented under Hungary. The Czech lands, often the Czech sovereignty over their land. referred to also as the crown lands of St. Lusatia had a somewhat similar status and Wenceslas, included Bohemia, Moravia, was even worse off in its relationship of Silesia, and Lusatia. Slovakia on the other dependence on Bohemia than was Moravia hand belonged to the Hungarian crown of or Silesia. St. Stephen ever since the Magyar invasion Ethnically most of the population of of the Danube valley in the 11 th century. the Czechoslovak territory was Slavic, with Thus in spite of the close cultural and the Czechs living in Bohemia and Moravia ethnic ties, there was no political tie be­ and the Slovaks in Slovakia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Czechs and the Lands of the Bohemian Crown
    4 Kingdom of Heretics, or, Against All On July 6, 1415, the Council of Constance paused in its deliberations while sentence was carried out on a condemned heretic, Master Jan Hus of Bohemia. The pyre that ended Hus’s life ignited a flame that would spread through the Bohemian crownlands and transform the course of their history, remaining one of the most disputed themes in the Czechs’ evaluation of their own past. Was it only one among many medieval heretical or reform movements, or was it something uniquely Czech? Was it primarily a religious protest against an overworldly church, with strong chiliastic overtones, or was it a social revolutionary movement proclaiming freedom of conscience? Was it the Czechs’ greatest moment, or one of the darkest pages in their history?1 Today’s Czechs may not venerate the Hussite period the way the nineteenth-century nationalists did, but those nationalist images of the Hussites, expressed in Alois Jira´- sek’s historical novel Proti vsˇem (Against All), for example, remain part of the historical consciousness of the present.2 THE BOHEMIAN REFORM MOVEMENT The reform movement in Bohemia developed from stimuli similar to those that resulted in heretical movements in the towns and .......................... 10888$ $CH4 08-05-04 15:18:21 PS PAGE 39 40 THE CZECHS cities of Europe from the twelfth century onward. Some heretics may have joined the wave of colonists entering Bohemia, especially the Wal- densians, followers of a merchant from Lyons named Waldo or Valdes. Charles IV established the inquisition in Prague, and heresy was vigor- ously pursued.3 The devotio moderna (new devotion), emphasizing the significance of religious experience at the individual, inward level pro- vided another influence.
    [Show full text]
  • Scott, Between Two Kingdoms, MW April 2016
    Between Two Kingdoms: The Alienation of Moravia and the Definition of Bohemia Medieval Workshop, The University of Chicago Laura Scott April 18, 2016 Lisa Scott Between Two Kingdoms, Medieval Workshop April 2016 2 Dear Medieval Workshop, This paper is a combination of two chapters of my dissertation. The first section is the framework with which I begin chapter four. The next section is an excerpt from the background chapter of my dissertation, since much of this is crucial for understanding the stakes of my argument. The rest of the paper forms the first sections of chapter four, “Torn Allegiance: Assemblies and the Alienation of Moravia,” which will continue with a more detailed examination of assemblies in Moravia between 1467 and 1491. Currently, I include a summary of the sources and topics that will feature in this section, but not the section itself. Although this paper is part of two chapters, I welcome suggestions about organization as well, since most papers based on my dissertation will include a background section. I am also very interested in any connections to other polities that workshop attendees can suggest. My dissertation examines the role political assemblies played in the Czech lands in the fifteenth century, focusing on their overall structure and their function in three distinct contexts between 1436 and the 1510s. It consists of four chapters addressing specific developments in Bohemia, as well as an historiographic introduction, a chapter laying out the little-known background for the period, and a robust conclusion examining the broader understandings my dissertation reveals about these assemblies. My introduction will have two main aims.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bohemian Brethren and the Protestant Reformation "2279
    religions Article The Bohemian Brethren and the Protestant Reformation † Craig Atwood Theology Department, Moravian University, Bethlehem, PA 18018, USA; [email protected] † This article is built upon my book Theology of the Czech Brethren from Hus to Comenius (State College, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009). Abstract: The smallest, but in some ways the most influential, church to emerge from the Hussite Reformation was the Unity of the Brethren founded by Gregory the Patriarch in 1457. The Unity was a voluntary church that separated entirely from the established churches, and chose its own priests, published the first Protestant hymnal and catechism, and operated several schools. Soon after Martin Luther broke with Rome, the Brethren established cordial relations with Wittenberg and introduced their irenic and ecumenical theology to the Protestant Reformation. Over time, they gravitated more toward the Reformed tradition, and influenced Martin Bucer’s views on confirmation, church discipline, and the Eucharist. In many ways, the pacifist Brethren offered a middle way between the Magisterial Reformation and the Radical Reformation. Study of the Brethren complicates and enhances our understanding of the Protestant Reformation and the rise of religious toleration in Europe. Keywords: Brethren; Bohemian; Moravian; Luke of Prague; Michael Weisse; Martin Bucer; humanism; Utraquist; sacraments; Gregory the Patriarch; Poland; Martin Luther; catechism; Eucharist; pacifism; oaths; sermon Citation: Atwood, Craig. 2021. The 1. Introduction Bohemian Brethren and the Protestant Reformation. Religions 12: 360. Jan Hus was burned at the Council of Constance in 1415 as a heresiarch, and his https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12050360 followers in Bohemia and Moravia, especially the Bohemian Brethren, were condemned as schismatics teaching dangerous doctrines.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Utraquist Eucharistic Liturgy: a Textual Study
    97 The Evolution of Utraquist Eucharistic Liturgy: a textual study David R. Holeton (Prague) Introduction Controversy characterized the Bohemian eucharistic movement throughout its history. From the early attacks on Jan Milíè and his eschatologically charged frequent communion movement (which culminated in the dissolution of his “Jerusalem” community shortly after his death) until long after the defeat of the Bohemian Estates at Bílá Hora when the last Counter- Reformation tracts were written against the Utraquist eucharistic practices of the lay chalice and the communion of infants, there was rarely a moment when controversy did not figure large around both the theology and ceremonial of the eucharist. The restoration of frequent communion created a crisis in the theological language that could be used of the eucharist and lead to accusations of Wyclifite remenantism.1 The restoration of communion sub utraque was condemned at Constance and, of course, never ceased to distinguish Bohemia’s place in the western church until after the suppression of the practice during the years following Bílá Hora. The communion of the very young was never without its Romanist and, later, Protestant opponents. In its earliest period, Utraquism suffered reproach from the Táborites for 1) Because the Bohemian eucharistic movement was the first of many similar mediæval movements to be successful in its goal of restoring the practice of frequent communion, it was also the first to face the problems engendered by the paradox of the increasingly restrictive spectrum of “orthodox” sacramental language which evolved during the course of the middle ages. While the communion of the faithful remained primarily ocular rather than gustatory, there was no need to use the biblical or patristic language of “meal” or of its constitutive elements of bread and wine.
    [Show full text]