The One-Eyed Heretic? An Introduction to the Ethics of Jan Hus

Abstract

Prague university master and theologian Štěphán Páleč denounced the teachings of Jan Hus as "false, erroneous, scandalous, reckless, seditious, disturbing to the peace of the church, undermining the jurisdiction of the church, insane, against holy scriputire and the universal church, in conflict with the conclusions and writings of the holy fathers, and otherwise heretical." As devastating as the charges were, it could have been worse. Among accused heretics in the Middle Ages Jan Hus is one of those few defendants whose personal life was not attacked and whose conduct was not assailed by even his most vociferous opponents. Inasmuch as the canonical detinition of heresy applied equally to beliefs as well as practices, it is remarkable that Jan Rus was not also denounced on moral grounds. Associations between heresy and immoral conduct were well-established by the fifteenth century. For example, in south Germany 'ketzerei' implied either heresy or soldomy. The history of the word "bugger" has roots in medieval heretical denunciations. As early as the eleventh century, heretics were sometimes considered immoral or perverts, almost as a matter of course. Other interesting theories advanced the notion that heresy could be transmitted through semen. Cathars were to reported hold to the conviction that one could not sin below the waist, and Bishop Luke of Tuy, in thirteenth-century northwest Spain, said that the licentiousness of heretics in his own time made Sodom and Gomorrah appear remarkably pure.