Page:A history of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, volume 2.djvu/540

 524 THE HUSSITES. What were their views with respect to the Lord's Supper can- not be stated with precision. Laurence of Brezowa, a Calixtin bitterly hostile to them, says that they consecrated the elements in a loud voice and in the vulgar tongue, that the people might be assured that they were receiving the real body and the real blood, which infers belief in transubstantiation. In 1431 Frocopius the Great and other leaders of the Taborites issued a proclamation defining their position, in which they asserted their disbelief in purgatory, in the intercessory power of the Virgin and saints, in masses for the dead, in absolution through indulgences, etc., but said nothing against transubstantiation. When, in 1436, the leg- ates of the Council of Basle complained of the non-observance of the Compactata, one of their grievances was that Bohemia still sheltered Wickliffites who believed in the remanence of the sub- stance of the bread, but they said nothing about the existence of any worse form of belief. On the other hand, the Taborite Bishop, Mcholas of Pilgram, strongly asserted that Christ was only pres- ent spiritually, that no veneration was due to the consecrated elements, and that there was less idolatry in those who of old adored moles and bats and snakes than in Christians who wor- shipped the host, for those things at least had hfe. During the negotiations, in January, 1433, the legates of the council presented a series of twenty-eight articles, attributed to the Bohemians, and asked for definite answers, yea or nay. One of these was a denial of transubstantiation, and the Bohemians could never be induced to make the desired reply. Peter Chelcicky reproached the Ta- borites with conceaHng their belief on the subject, but it is probable that there was no absolute accord among them. The Chihast leaven doubtless spread the denial of transubstantiation; others probably adopted the Wickhffite doctrine of remanence ; others again may have preserved the orthodox faith, and all resented the appellation of Pikards, with which the Bohemians designated those who disbelieved in the absolute conversion of the elements. . Certain it is that the question did not come up with any prominence der Waldesier, pp. 68-71.— Laur. Byzyn. Diar. (Ludewig VI. 183-4, 194-202).— Johann. de Przibram Profess. Fidei (Cochlaei Hist. Huss. p. 507).— Huss, Sermo de Exequiis (Monument. II. 50). See also ^neas Sylvius's statement of the identity between the Waldensian and Hussite teachings (Hist. Bohem. c. 35).