CHAPTER VI. NEW CHARGES AGAINST JEROME. CONFERENCE WITH BENE DICT. VINCENT FERRARA. MORE LENIENT FEELING TOWARD JEROME. -NASON'S TAUNT. - RESIGNATION OF THE DEC. 19, 1415-FEB. 16, 1416. IN the council there were those who were decidedly in favor of treating Jerome with leniency. They doubtless, and wisely, imagined that it was the most prudent course to be satisfied with his retraction. More would thus be gained for the authority of the council than by sending him to the flames. There might, moreover, be danger in offering a new provocation to the Bohemians. But the enemies of Jerome were bent on burning him. They professed to have no faith in the retraction he had offered, and probably they were sincere. They knew that he had been "convinced against his will," if convinced at all, and they did not intend that he should thus escape. They therefore busied themselves in raking together CH. VI.] NASON'S TAUNT. 175 new accusations. Causis and Paletz distinguished themselves by their zeal in the matter. They urged his enemies at Prague to draw up new accusations.1 Charges that before had not been thought of, were now devised. His enemies insisted that he should be called to undergo a new trial. His judges, the cardinals of Cambray, Ursinis, Aquilea, and Florence, opposed the application. They represented-with prudence, if not some lingering of conscientious feeling-that such a course would be unjust, and that Jerome, having shown obedience to the council, must be set at liberty. But this show of clemency only irritated the enemies of Jerome. Nason, the president of the German nation, whom we have seen urging the condemnation of the prisoner, is said to have replied to these representations with much asperity. "We are much surprised, most reverend fathers," said he, "that you are willing to intercede for this wicked heretic, who has done us so much mischief in Bohemia, and who might yet do you the same. I am quite apprehensive that you have received presents from these heretics, or from the king of Bohemia." Such language was extremely irritating. The cardinals regarded it as an insult. Unwilling to be driven by such invidious accusations or suspicions to further process against Jerome, they chose to throw up their office, and ask as a commission to be discharged. Their request was granted. The enemies of Jerome triumphed in securing the appointment of a new commission. At the head of it stood the Patriarch 2 Ib., 341. 8 Mon. Hus., ii. 352, 1 1 L'Enfant, 340. 8 1 of Constantinople, who had shown the spirit of an unrelenting persecutor, in urging forward the sentence and execution of Huss. Gerson, moreover, joined the assailants of Jerome. On the twentyninth of October he had produced a treatise on the subject "Of Recanting and Protesting in Matters of Faith." Jerome's name is not mentioned in it, but it is evident that it was aimed at him. Its whole scope is to show, that though a man may recant, he may do it in such a way; or it may be accompanied with such evidences, as to leave him still under suspicion of heresy. Gerson thus volunteered to become the casuist of the enemies of Jerome. He maintains that there are men with whom ignorance is crime; and among these he classes those whom he describes in drawing the picture of Jerome himself-men possessed of natural vivacity of mind, a shrewd judgment, the faculty of discernment, remarkable learning, extensive acquaintance with scripture, or with canon and civil law. Moreover, the question is asked, May not a man sin against his conscience by recanting? "The answer," says Gerson, "is plain. He must lay aside his conscience in the case supposed, of his obstinacy." The treatise of Gerson is a fine piece of casuistry. He evidently disliked boldly to arraign the case of Jerome; but he weaves his web skilfully around it, and overlays it with suspicions. The tendency of his argument would be to encourage Jerome's assailants. Gerson's dislike of the man seems to have been even greater than that which he felt toward Huss. Undoubtedly he was conscien 1 Van der Hardt, iii. 40. CH. VI.] NEW CHARGES AGAINST JEROME. 177 tious in considering him a dangerous heretic. He was, perhaps, the only man in Europe who could fairly be considered Gerson's rival in those very arts in which he excelled. As a disputant, he would have hesitated on no occasion to challenge the great chancellor himself. The two men were, moreover, opposed in their philosophical views, and Jerome had shown himself an able champion of the Realists. Could Gerson's mind have been warped by these considerations? It is more than possible. The fervency of his feelings sometimes blinded his judgment. The noble bearing and matchless cloquence of Jerome won him friends in the council, but Gerson was not among them. The generosity of his heart was seared by prejudice, and in cherishing that prejudice he thought to do God service. But the most diligent efforts were made, by persons even less disinterested than Gerson, for Jerome's condemnation. Intelligence of his retraction had reached Prague, and his enemies there became apprehensive lest, after all, he might escape. The monks especially, who had been stung by his insults and contempt, were resolved to spare no effort to secure the doom of their destined victim.1 New charges were drawn up against him and forwarded to the council, where the sincerity of his abjuration was already strongly suspected. The bearers of the new list of accusations were Carmelite friars from Prague. They demanded that Jerome should again be put upon his trial, and required to answer to the charges which they should present.2 In spite of the protest of Jerome against this new 1 Mon. Hus., ii. 351, 852. VOL. II. * L'Enfant, 340, 380. 12 injustice, and the objections of the commission who had hitherto conducted his case, the monks, aided by Paletz and Causis, and especially by Gerson, finally succeeded in carrying their point. In this they were materially aided by the sympathies of the new commission, composed of members more of their own stamp. On the twenty-ninth of January, 1416, the ambassadors who had accompanied the emperor to Spain, returned to make their report to the council.1 The king of Aragon had died; but Ferdinand, his successor, had manifested a disposition to comply with the views and sustain the policy of the emperor. He resolved to withdraw obedience from Benedict, unless he would abdicate the pontificate. But the old man was not to be moved by any such terrors. He still refused to recede from his terms. He demanded the rejection of the council of Pisa, the dissolution of that of Constance, the convocation of another near his own obedience, his own confirmation as pope, and provision for his honorable maintenance on his resigning his dignity. He maintained, throughout all the conferences, that he was the true pope, and that though this might reasonably have been doubted before, it could be doubted no longer, since one of his rivals had resigned, and the other had been deposed. He maintained that it was not he who was guilty of keeping up the schism, but the council of Constance, since, in order to end it, it was only necessary to recognize his claims; that to proceed to a new election would be only to renew 1 Van der Hart, iv. 583. 2 De Vrie, apud. Van der Hardt. i. 203, 204. 1 |