The Wikipedia article for Jan Hus says that to this day, the Christians in Bohemia (part of Czechia) follow the four articles of condemned heretic Jan Hus. Is this true?
Actually its one of the most atheistic regions on earth. If i remember from my geography classes, it’s 40% athiest, 30% Catholic and maybe 20% protestant
That’s sad. My Patron Saint comes from Bohemia (St. John Neumann), and the Infant of Prague must be in tears about this
Yes, its the most atheist country in the European Union, and rising.
This is from a May 2012 news article about the government’s plan to return lands seized by the Communists back to the churches.
In a 2010 Eurobarometer study, 37 percent of Czechs said “no” when asked whether they believed in God, the highest percentage in the European Union and up from 30 percent five years earlier. In neighboring Poland, that number is 5 percent, and in Slovakia 14 percent.
A 2011 census showed the number of Catholics shrank to 1.1 million from 2.74 million a decade earlier. The total number of Christians is estimated at about 11 percent of the 10.5 million population.
Wow, i didn’t know it was that bad. That makes me sad since I am of czech descent. We must pray for not only the people of Europe, but also the Czech Republic
My great grandfather was born in “Bohemia” His father came to the USA in 1863.
They were very devout Catholics. My love for the Church came from my “Bohonk” family.
I have been praying for the Czech Republic for many years. It is sad they are not longer a beautiful Catholic country.
The overwhelming majority of Chzechs in Texas are Catholics.
They love polkas, kolaches and and beer.
My family settled in Nebraska. Farm is on the historical register.
Same here in Nebraska my friend. I actually live in between two towns named Bruno and Prague, both named after Brno and Prague in the Czech REpublic
We have a Praha in TX, with a beautiful “painted church”.
My original question has never been answered. Are the Catholics in Bohemia “Hussites”?
:ouch: There are many Catholics there. As far as Protestants, go, yes there probably are Hussite churchs, but they may not call themselves that anymore. There may also be Lutherans and Presbyterians there as well.
Oh yes, I know about Praha and some of the other painted churches east of San Antonio.
High Hill was founded by Germans, Holman I think was founded by Czechs,and there are other little towns around there founded by Czechs and Germans . If interested in the painted churchs, www.texasescapes.com has an article on these towns and churches.
Haven’t driven out that way in years from San Antonio.
Hussites aren’t Protestants, they follow a 15th century heretic from Bohemia named Jan Hus. He taught that Christians must receive Holy Communion under both kinds (utraquism) and that people should be punished by the state for sins, as opposed to receiving penances from the clergy. Supposedly, then, a ‘Hussite Mass’ would look almost exactly like a contemporary Latin-rite Catholic Mass.
he day of his execution, July 6, is a public holiday in the Czech Republic and he seems to be considered a national hero.
Czech Protestants tend to claim Hus as a spiritual ancestor even if they aren’t directly connected to the original Hussite churches. The Hussites were mostly absorbed by Protestantism after the Reformation, or reconciled with Catholicism. I just learned, in researching your question, that there is a modern “Hussite” church which split away from Catholicism in the early 20th century, and is more or less like the “Old Catholic” churches found elsewhere in Europe. The Hussite term there is really unhistorical. The actual spiritual descendents of the Hussites, as far as I can tell from cursory Internet research , are found in the “Evangelical Church of Czech Brethren,” a united Lutheran/Reformed church. The remnants of the Hussites apparently joined either the Lutherans or Reformed in the late 18th century.
Thank you. God bless!
After the Hussite wars and the Diet of Kutna Hora (1485) a personal choice of Catholicism or Utraquist (moderate) Hussitism was given to the people of Bohemia. This lasted until the Battle of the White Mountain in 1620 when the Catholic Emperor Ferdinand routed the Hussite Bohemian King Frederick. Ferdinand then set about re-Catholicizing the country.
The Hussitism reappeared in the 19th century with the growth of Czech nationalism. Hus is more than a religious leader for the Czechs, he is a nationalist hero. He preached in Czech and was formative in the development of a written Czech language. Many of his opponents (including religious ones) were part of the German faction in the country. Ferdinand was a German Emperor. Czech nationalists saw him and his followers as fighters of German oppression and this nationalism was reinforced in 1938 when the Germans once again oppressed the Czechs. Hus was later picked up by the Communists who ignored the religious nature of the wars. His birthday is still a national holiday celebrated by Catholic, atheist and Hussite alike.
As for Hus the man, he saw himself as a true Catholic, objecting to the abuse of power by the Catholic church hierarchy, such as the sale of indulgences. He did not argue for transubstantiation This was a time when there were three popes all claiming to be Peter’s heir. He argued for a return to Christ’s teachings and the bible. He went to the Council of Constance naively believing that if only his accusers heard what he had to say they would realise that he was right and no heretic. He was wrong and burned for it.
There is a Hussite church in the Czech Republic, which split from the Catholic church after World War I. Like the Anglican church, it shares aspects of doctrine and liturgy with both the Catholic and Protestant churches. The Moravian Brethren was founded in 1457 and was more “protestant” than the moderate Utraquists. Both churches can argue to be Hussite.
As has been indicated in other comments the Czech Republic is predominantly atheist. But arguably the country is Hussite. In that Hussitism is more than a church, it’s part of a national identity.
I’m new to this thread, so forgive me. I haven’t heard what Hus did that was heretical. All I’m really aware of is that he demanded that the two parts of the Eucharist, body and blood, be administered together. I also have heard that he was invited Council of Konstanz in Hungary under an offer of safe passage from the king, which the clerics ignored and had him imprisoned. The council convinced the king that he could ignore an offer of safe passage to a heretic, an action that seems utterly repugnant.
Wikipedia says this was the content of a Hus pamphlet based on the writings of Wyclif:
"The pamphlet stated that no pope or bishop had the right to take up the sword in the name of the Church; he should pray for his enemies and bless those that curse him; man obtains forgiveness of sins by true repentance, not money. "
Could someone please tell me what Hus did or said that was heretical?
He was accused of teaching, like Wyclif, that the true Church was made up only of the elect, so that if a Pope or bishop showed himself not to be a member of the elect (by his unrighteous life) he wasn’t a true bishop and should not be obeyed. In other words, a revival of Donatism. I believe that Hus in fact took a more moderate position on this and other matters compared to Wyclif, and that there is serious reason to doubt whether he was actually a heretic. Bear in mind that he was condemned as part of the same Council that deposed two alleged Popes and accepted the resignation of a third–it was a time of deep ecclesiological confusion, and from the Council’s perspective Hus was adding to the confusion by undermining people’s confidence in the institutional Church (already at a low ebb).
You can read the actual condemnations here. Scroll down to “Session 15,” which first contains a set of condemnations of Wyclif’s teaching, and then the condemnations of Hus. You might want to skip through the lengthy preambles and look at the actual condemned propositions.
Only on paper.
Contarini , alredy explain why Hus was considered the heretic , but that was not the reason to burn him at the stake. He was burned because the Hussites under his rule took over real control of the Czech Republic and introduced a reign of terror there. Such “crimes” as gluttony, adultery, failure to post was punishable by death and the “police” could go to every house to see if the law is followed. This makes the Hussites precursors of Protestantism, which was even more radical in their fanaticism.
If Hus lived in the twentieth century, his views have been called Nazi. But since he lived before ,so is considered a national hero and a victim of the Church.
Since my name was invoked, let me just say that these claims about Hus seem bogus to me. Hus was certainly a late medieval reformist who had strict ideas about immorality, and some of what you say sounds a lot like Savonarola–or Counter-Reformation bishops such as St. Charles Borromeo for that matter. But I’d like to see what good historical sources bear out your rather extreme-sounding claims.
And none of what you describe is Nazism. . . .
When you say “failure to post”–I presume you mean “failure to fast.”
The Council of Constance does not list this “reign of terror” as the reason for Hus’s condemnation. I am going to follow the historical sources until I am shown that the ones I have are wrong or inadequate.