THE ATTITUDE TOWARDS SINFULNESS IN THE HUSSITE AND ANTI-HUSSITE IDEOLOGY IN THE FIRST THIRD OF THE 15th CENTURY

Th e aim of this article is to examine the dichotomy between “Hus-site” and “Catholic” through the lens of how sinfulness was perceived by the Hussites (Czech Utraquists) and their military and political Catholic opponents. Th e study focuses on the unique perception of sinfulness as a distinctive feature of Hussite ideology compared to anti-Hussite views. Th e sources used include theological and polemical writings of Hussites such as Jan Želivský, Mikuláš of Pelhřimov, and Petr Helčický, as well as their ideological predecessor Jan Hus. Ad-ditionally, the study examines the Hussite program known as the “Four Articles of Prague” in its various forms, which were supported by both the radical Taborites and the more moderate Prague Hussites. Traditional Catholic theological criti-cism, notably from fi gures like Ferdinand of Lucca and Gilles Charlier, and other sources reconstructing fi ft eenth-century Catholic norms and perceptions, partic-ularly in Hungary, are also considered. Th e analysis identifi es two key features of the perception of sinfulness in Hussite ideology: sin as a social off ense, and the be-lief that all people are equal in front of sin, implying that a ruler’s sin justifi es dis-obedience, including armed resistance. Th e author concludes that the dichotomy between “Hussite” and “Catholic” is only partially evident in this context. Gilles Charlier, a Catholic theologian, considered only those sins that directly harmed the state and society (e.g., theft , murder) as social crimes, while he did not classify “simple fornication” as such a crime. In contrast, fornication among the Catholic opponents of the Hussites, particularly in fi ft eenth-century Hungary, continued to be regarded as a suppressible social off ense under the laws established by Saint Stephen (997–1038). Charlier advocated for tolerance towards the sins of mon-archs and infl uential individuals to avoid severe unrest. Th e Hungarian kingdom in the fi ft eenth century retained the legal right for the estates to resist the monarch if he violated the Golden Bull of 1222. Th is conclusion, highlighting the similari-ties between the views of the Hussites and their opponents, is unprecedented in historiography. While R. Novotný noted the similarity between the estates of the Hungarian and Czech kingdoms, the recognition of these ideological parallels is a new contribution.