I 24 Adam Pálka The Key Formulation in Cedula A In order to fully grasp the Catholic party’s point of view, we need to consider how the first part of the Compactata (Cedula A) addresses the lay chalice, specifically its permission to Bohemian and Moravian men and women accustomed to receiving communion in both kinds (illi et illae, qui talem usum habent). According to Cedula A—a document primarily included in Litterae super recognitione et firmatione compactatorum of July 5, 1436—such people will receive communion under both kinds provided that they “accept ecclesiastical union and peace truly and effectively and conform to the faith and rite of the universal church in everything else except for communion in both kinds.”3 In other words, it is necessary that Bohemians and Moravians intending to receive Christ’s blood from the chalice do not differ from the Catholics in anything but this very practice; those not having reached such a unity will not be worthy of the chalice. In addition, the key section of Cedula A is not the only one to mention the acceptance of full ecclesiastical unity from the Czech side. For instance, it is possible to find them in the Litterae executoriae issued by the general diet of Bohemia and Moravia. Here, the issuers claim that they accept ecclesiastical unity except for the chalice and promise to observe it in concordance with Litterae super recognitione et firmatione compactatorum.4 Concerning the legates of the council, there are actually two references in their Litterae executoriae to the Bohemians and Moravians being united with the Church.5 Similarly, the requirement in question appears in the legates’ Mandatum archiepiscopo Pragensi et Olomucensi ac Luthomysslensi episcopis.6 Naturally, the aforementioned passages also found their way into the two ratifications of the Compactata by the Council of Basel from January 15, 1437.7 Therefore, those wishing to remind the Utraquists of the “ecclesiastical unity requirement” could refer to a relatively large number of documents pertaining to the Compactata. An Overview of Catholic Statements As already mentioned, several Catholic intellectuals challenged their Utraquist counterparts by claiming that the chalice had never gained a legal status in Bohemia and Moravia, since the provision regarding ecclesiastical unity had never been fulfilled. In order to comprehend this better, we shall list all relevant Catholic utterances that have been discovered so far. Apart from one anonymous treatise, where the precise dating remains unknown, the list covers works written in the 1450s–60s. Still, further research may enlarge the list. into them.” Blanka Zilynská, “The Utraquist Church after the Compactata,” in A Companion to the Hussites, eds. Michael Van Dussen and Pavel Soukup, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition, 90 (Boston, 2020), 241: “Yet the formulation of the Compactata was not unambiguous: both sides argued for their own interpretation of their contents, and thus the Compactata remained a source of controversy between the Hussites and Catholics both within the kingdom and abroad.” 3 Šmahel, Die Basler Kompaktaten, 172, 183: “Suscipientibus ecclesiasticam unitatem et pacem realiter et cum effectu, et in omnibus aliis, quam in usu communionis utriusque speciei, fidei et ritui universalis ecclesie conformibus.” 4 Ibid., 192. 5 Ibid., 197, 198. 6 Ibid., 201. 7 Ibid., 208, 210, 215.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTMyNjA1