Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Gli hussiti come (mancata) minoranza conciliare al Concilio di Basilea (1431–1433)

Gli hussiti come (mancata) minoranza conciliare al Concilio di Basilea (1431–1433) AbstractIn 1433 the hussite delegation in Basle wanted to discuss the Four Articles according to the pacts of Eger (the “judge of Eger”), i.e. primarily according to the Bible. The delegates insisted on persuading the other party or on being persuaded by it; they weren’t willing to become a conciliar minority because the decision-making processes were based on the majority-principle. Furthermore, the Council offered a different “judge”: It was the Council itself, because the infallible Church beheld the “monopoly” of the Bible exegesis and transmitted this monopoly to the Synod. In this way it became less relevant to discuss the specific topics of the Four Articles. The Hussites, however, remained outside this doctrine, which was fundamental for the legitimacy of the conciliar decision-making process: they didn’t recognize this new judge and didn’t subdue to him. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum Brill

Gli hussiti come (mancata) minoranza conciliare al Concilio di Basilea (1431–1433)

Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum , Volume 49 (2): 30 – Aug 17, 2020

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/gli-hussiti-come-mancata-minoranza-conciliare-al-concilio-di-basilea-5Nf4G0OSgA
Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0003-5157
eISSN
2589-0433
DOI
10.30965/25890433-04902005
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractIn 1433 the hussite delegation in Basle wanted to discuss the Four Articles according to the pacts of Eger (the “judge of Eger”), i.e. primarily according to the Bible. The delegates insisted on persuading the other party or on being persuaded by it; they weren’t willing to become a conciliar minority because the decision-making processes were based on the majority-principle. Furthermore, the Council offered a different “judge”: It was the Council itself, because the infallible Church beheld the “monopoly” of the Bible exegesis and transmitted this monopoly to the Synod. In this way it became less relevant to discuss the specific topics of the Four Articles. The Hussites, however, remained outside this doctrine, which was fundamental for the legitimacy of the conciliar decision-making process: they didn’t recognize this new judge and didn’t subdue to him.

Journal

Annuarium Historiae ConciliorumBrill

Published: Aug 17, 2020

There are no references for this article.