This is an important book. Studies of the Hussite period have increased exponentially in the past 25 years. This one stands out. What Martin Pjecha achieves is a new intellectual history advancing from revolt to revolution and reform to reformation. Eschewing the well-worn paths of Waldensian, Free Spirit, Joachite, Wyclifite, or Marxist explanations, Pjecha proposes a political theology of the Hussite movement. Of special note is the role of Christian Platonism in the intellectual dimensions of the Czech experiment, drawing well-deserved attention to Matěj of Janov and succeeding in elaborating a convincing argument for its significance. Most importantly, the pessimistic Augustinian world view recedes and is eclipsed by a Platonically-inspired Hussite emphasis on individual activism, historical optimism, and confidence in human ability. This is a dramatic shift. Pjecha argues that Hussitism cannot be limited to leaders like Jan Hus, Jerome of Prague, Jakoubek of Stříbro, and others. Instead, a bevy of secondary figures deserve careful consideration.

The fundamental question is this: "What is the intellectual context which Hussite radicals draw from, and what are the norms, symbols, and assumptions that they inherit" (13)? What drifts from the center is the ambivalent intellectual legacy of Augustine and his reluctance to assign meaningful roles to human agency in terms of cultural advance, religious reform, or soteriological outcomes. For all the emphasis upon Scripture, the ontological identity of cosmic truth resides in the Eucharist. Janov departs from the Augustinian emphasis on sin and draws attention to the Incarnation that provides a connection between creation and the law of God. In vain, one searches the corpus of Janov's work for traces of predestination and arguments for pathological sin within humanity. Instead, Janov comes close to the idea of apocatastasis found in Christian Platonism. Creation is imprinted with divine will. The disruption of sin is temporary. Incarnation, Scripture, and Eucharist produce everything required for renewed humanity.

Pjecha argues that many Hussites reflected these convictions. Coupled with traditions of realism within philosophy and theology, and embracing Christian Platonism more broadly, Hussite thinkers settled upon ideas of social order, paradigms of authority, and solutions aimed at reforming corruption in faith, politics, and the church. This results in a theo-political revolution. Wyclif's lex dei and Janov's regula principalis are central motifs, bypassing the sola fide Biblicism of other reformers and proposing the law of God as a theological, social, and political program. Truth is dynamic rather than static. Continuing biblical authority is interpreted in a sense that may be significantly different from the original. Hussite reformers maintained confident in the human capacity to know God, with a commensurate impatience for human (including ecclesiastical) traditions thought to be responsible for the corruption of faith. This included traditional exegesis and dogmatics. Put into practice, Hus and his followers undermined the foundations of medieval order. Allegations of antinomianism and heresy followed, but the path to reform had been charted.

Jakoubek declared that collective punishment might befall entire communities for tolerating sin and ignoring the law of God in its fullest dimensions. Other ideologues, fixated on purity and pollution, echoed a similar refrain. But sin was not solely individual. The Wyclifite theory of top-down reform is insufficient. Kings as much as bishops required correction, political and ecclesiastical transgressions amounted to sin, and the latter constituted crime that had to be treated as such. Pjecha identifies key battlegrounds as hermeneutics, theology, and concepts of authority. Privileging Augustine's pessimistic anthropology led the Latin church to hereticate the main thrust of Hussitism. Utraquism could not simply be a spiritual consideration; it was symbolic and significantly political. Did Hussites envision apocatastatic outcomes? The mere idea sent a shudder through the church hierarchy.

A program of individualism and voluntarism emerges. Failure to appreciate this dimension of their socio-religious existence overlooks the political significance of utraquism. Pjecha underscores this as an historiographical lacuna. Once more, the ideas of Janov are crucial, especially his rejection of the secular nature of politics. The facile separation of sacred from secular finds no resonance in Hussite thought. Against Wyclif, Janov promoted reform from the ground up; an impulse permeating all of life equally. Preaching is subordinated to Eucharistic devotion. The text is important as a signifier and guide but unity with God is achieved in the sacrament. Politics assume sacral dimensions, opposition to these core emphases amounted to "useless questions" and the "shit of Antichrist" (168).

Detractors worried that the Hussite program had veered out of Christianity altogether. Polemicists rejected the ideas in theory and in practice. One hostile source accused Hussites of resorting to violence when persuasion failed. When words falter, they employ the violence of fists, clubs, swords, and cudgels, and by these weapons assert the rectitude of their program. The Hussite revolution failed partly as a result of its own success. Wyclif's ideas, frail as they eventually became in Bohemia, continued to command a modicum of support. It remains an unresolved historiographical Gordian knot to explain the rise of the Táborite movement within Hussitism. The story is well-known and has often commanded the lion's share of scholarly attention; the best account is Howard Kaminsky's 1967 monograph. [1] Pjecha reckons there is more to the story. He is right to stake that claim, drawing attention to the exaggerated role of the priest Jan Želivský and suggesting a more careful evaluation of the authentic "Hussite" dimension to the Táborite phenomena which consistently proclaimed that Word and Sacrament could restore the imago dei within humanity. The idea was sufficiently salutary to resist the fire and sword of alien crusaders, ecclesiastical interdict, excommunication, and execution. More than that, it justified holy war. This was a natural response to an optimistic view of the future: a radicalized eschatological vision. This was the Hussite program.

There was a downside. The confidence in anthropological optimism may have contributed to a cooling of sacramental devotion and Eucharistic fervor. The idea may seem foreign to Hussite religious practice, but one looks for an explanation to satisfy the absence of the kingdom of God in Hussite Bohemia. One of the Táborite prophets suggested the advent had occurred but Christ found the faithful asleep. On a more positive side, the theo-political program required participation in politics as a means to human progress.

Pjecha has elaborated a passionate and persuasive argument that seeks to overcome previous deterministic histories that account for the Hussite / Táborite moment as a result of desperation and deteriorating existential conditions. He maintains an intellectual continuity from Janov to Tábor within Hussite thought, including a vibrant Christian Platonic component and an underappreciated mysticism, arguing both belong at the center of analysis. He builds this case on careful analysis of primary sources. What is urgently required now is a thorough assessment of Janov's confident humanism amongst the Táborites and an up-to-date intellectual elaboration of Matěj of Janov; an essential factor hitherto minimized. Pjecha recognizes that more research is required, but this need not detract from his considerable achievement.

Note:

[1] Howard Kaminsky: A History of the Hussite Revolution, Berkeley, CA et al. 1967.

Thomas Fudge