BABYLON VERSUS GOD: TEACHING THE CLASH BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND RELIGION (FROM MEDIEVAL TO MODERN) by Rhett Cannon Cook A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION IN CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY Ogden, Utah August 7, 2020 Approved ____________________________________________ Vincent C. Bates, Ph.D. ____________________________________________ Kathryn L. MacKay, Ph.D. ____________________________________________ Nathan S. Rives, Ph.D. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................... 3 Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................4 NATURE OF THE PROBLEM.......................................................................................................5 Literature Review............................................................................................................................6 PURPOSE .....................................................................................................................................20 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................21 Historical Case Studies ..................................................................................................................22 Instructional Plans ..........................................................................................................................24 HISTORICAL CASE STUDIES ...................................................................................................28 The Cathars ........................................................................................................................28 The Hussites .......................................................................................................................55 The Vendée Uprising .........................................................................................................79 The War of Canudos ........................................................................................................106 The Cristeros ....................................................................................................................133 The Students of the Seven Seals ......................................................................................159 Case Studies Conclusion ..................................................................................................196 INSTRUCTIONAL PLANS ........................................................................................................201 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................211 Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 3 Acknowledgements My project chair, Dr. Vincent Bates, Ph.D., was extremely patient in giving feedback and offering insights on how best to edit my content. Dr. Bates took the time to carefully read through my work and identify what I was missing and taught me what to do to move forward. Thank you, Professor Bates, for answering my endless emails. This project was an unconventional marathon and I could not have finished without your tireless support. Thank you, Dr. Nathan Rives, Ph.D., for opening my eyes to the importance of presenting the motivations of the opposing sides in the case studies and pointing out inconsistencies in my work. Thank you, Dr. Kathryn McKay, Ph.D., for agreeing to this project, meeting with me, and pointing me in the right direction for sources. I would also like to thank Dr. Louise Moulding, Ph.D., for instilling extra motivation to complete my project and understanding the challenges inherent in balancing the duties of being both a student and a teacher. I am forever indebted to my father, Carter Cook, for being my role model as a coach, a storyteller, and a teacher, including sharing his Vietnam war stories. Thanks Dad! Thank you, Mom, for teaching me the power of faith, putting up with my attitude, and still believing in me. Finally, I want to thank my wife, Allana, for supporting me through decades of History addiction, homework, late-night study sessions, and stress which led to a career change and yet more homework. Agua mole em pedra dura, tanto bate, até que fura. Muito obrigado Gatinha! Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 4 Abstract The clash between government and religion has happened for centuries. It is a power struggle between the state and the religious, generally over a government law that the faithful believed comprised some aspect of their faith. While the government or the religion endorsed by the state have drawn a hard line to enforce their will, the opposing religion refused to obey the law because it violated their most sacred beliefs and a desire for some form of political autonomy. Committed to living their faith, the religious resolved to pay the price by fighting a war against government forces. During these historic clashes, the government demonized the noncompliant religious, calling them crazy, heretics, and rebels. The religious often labeled the government antichrist, Babylon, and the devil. Both sides justified atrocities against their opposition based on political or religious worldviews or a combination of both. During the Medieval to late Medieval periods, the government enforced the state religion of Roman Catholicism against those who were practicing a minority religion and were thus deemed heretics. From the Enlightenment to modern times, the State practiced atheism, marxism, or secularism against folk Catholicism, mainstream Roman Catholicism, or apocalyptic biblical fundamentalism. The State had vast resources at its disposal to wage war. This included not only economic, legal, and military capital but also mass media to monopolize and amplify the rectitude of their cause and reinforce the wickedness of their enemies. Despite the overwhelming odds against them, the underdog religious believers saw themselves on the side of truth and God against an evil authoritarian government that was fighting for the forces of darkness. For the State, the rule of law is the highest sovereign while for the religious, the sovereignty of God is absolute and must be obeyed, even when the State says otherwise. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 5 NATURE OF THE PROBLEM Connecting historical context with contemporary events makes current issues relevant for students and helps them answer the oft repeated question, “Why are we studying this?” To make history come alive, teachers need to make history interpretive and allow for multiple perspectives from their students (Barton & Levstik, 2003). It is important, in other words, that teachers and students approach topics with an open mind, considering both sides of historical cases and allowing for various opinions and viewpoints. Such an approach can engage students in meaningful and memorable discussions and teach them to consider the opposing side to their own beliefs and opinions. Making history come alive also involves using texts that let students both reflect about what they are learning and connect with the content. Connecting vocabulary words and ideas with artwork, for example, helps students create meaningful concepts and understand what is being taught on a personal level. This also helps teachers to connect with students on a personal level (Hansen, 2009). At every stage in the process, the teacher should encourage students to challenge biased, incomplete, and incorrect information in the textbook (Patterson & Speed, 2007). Teaching practical methods to help students be actively involved in their own learning should be the focus of the modern teacher. In middle and high school classrooms, teaching history and social studies has been taught typically using lectures by the teacher, whole class discussions, textbook derived content, memorization of facts, an emphasis on the histories of the majority White culture, and multiple-choice tests (Zemelman, Daniels, & Hydge, 2005). Conversely, student centered learning is taught with an emphasis on involving the students in the emotional and intellectual side of history. An effective teacher will engage students in sharing Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 6 their feelings and reactions (Barton & Levstik, 2003). Role playing and simulations can also be fun and informative— providing a first-person perspective with the material (Laroche & Maloy, 2010). To understand the cyclical nature of history, students need access to primary and secondary sources. Written by real people dealing with the complex issues and problems of their times, primary sources have a unique capacity to engage students in the study of the past (Schur, 2007; Veccia, 2003). Because the language of primary sources can be difficult to read, teachers must carefully analyze each document and explain the context so students have a good starting point (Laroche & Maloy, 2010). Literature Review Education seems to be undergoing a transformation from passive to active learning. School districts are phasing out textbooks due to high costs and low student engagement. In the digital classroom of the 21st century there are many tools to choose from, but the job of effectively connecting with students and linking the events of the past to demonstrate their relevance in the present remains a major challenge for the history teacher. The focus of this literature review is a three-fold approach to student engagement: making history come alive for students through inquiry learning and storytelling, teaching practical methods to help students be more involved in their learning, and using primary and secondary sources to teach the cyclical nature of history. Inquiry Learning Emphasizing the role of the student in the learning process is called inquiry-based learning. Instead of the teacher telling students what they need to know, students are given opportunities to explore the material, share ideas, and ask questions. Put simply, students learn Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 7 by doing rather than memorizing facts and material (gradepowerlearning, 2019). The purpose of inquiry-based learning is to engage students in a process of discovery (Pedaste et al., 2015). Inquiry cycles are conducted from instructional models and represent a contemporary point of view. The first phase in the inquiry cycle is orientation. The main focus of orientation is to consider a specific problem, then stimulate interest and curiosity. The topic can be introduced by the teacher or chosen by the student (Scanlon, Anastopoulou, Kerawalla, & Mulholland, 2011). The next phase in the inquiry cycle is conceptualization. In this step of the process, one must understand a stated problem and a concept or concepts that belongs to the stated problem. Following conceptualization, investigation is the phase where curiosity is transformed into action, as a response to the chosen research questions (Scanlon et al., 2011). Blumenreich (2012) asserted, “given the changes in the national educational system over the last two decades, exposing today’s pre-service teachers to inquiry is vital to the development of teacher learners who can draw on such experiences when they are teachers themselves” (p. 2). In inquiry-based curriculum, after becoming familiar with a topic, the students are supported in exploring and finding significant questions to ask about the topic that can help them to make new discoveries. Blumenreich’s study focused on an oral history project with 21 students in an inquiry in education course. Each of these students selected their own community to learn about the topic, interviewed friends and relatives in their own community to learn about the topic, and conducted library or internet research to provide a historical context for the work. This reflected a central notion in inquiry-oriented learning, that the learning evolves from the learner’s questions. Blumenreich concluded after she read the students assignments that the students liked controlling their own work, discovered new ways to see the world because of their work, and wanted to learn more. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 8 Alfieri, Brooks, Aldrich, and Tenenbaum (2011) conclude: “Discovery learning occurs whenever the learner is not provided with the target information or conceptual understanding and must find it independently and with only the provided materials” (p. 1). They conducted two meta-analyses using a sample of 164 studies. The focus of the first meta-analysis was to see the effects of assisted discovery. After conducting 580 comparisons between explicit instruction and unassisted discovery learning, the results favored explicit instruction. The second meta-analysis consisted of 360 comparisons. The comparison was between enhanced discovery and other forms of instruction. Overall, unassisted learning was found to be of no benefit. Feedback, working examples, and scaffolding, on the other hand, were found to benefit students significantly. Interaction with materials, manipulation of variables, exploration, and attempting to apply principles will lead the student to observe patterns while they learn (Alfieri- et al., 2011). The authors make the distinction between unassisted discovery and assisted discovery to show there is still an important role for the teacher to give direction and guide students. Problem-based historical inquiry (PBHI) “focuses instructional activities on the examination of persistent societal problems in a particular historical context” (Brush & Saye, 2014, p. 40). PBHI is unique because it takes the historical content and uses inquiry to consider societal issues. This can engage students because they will learn to identify problems and look for a solution within the timeframe of the unit. PBHI can also be used to discuss contemporary current events and social problems, including building instruction around ethical questions. Ethical questions are relevant because they apply to the problems of modern society (Brush & Saye, 2014). Problem based learning presents problems without a clear cut, easy solution. The teacher must provide a context and then guide students through the process of problem solving. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 9 In the end, because problem-based learning is student-centered, the student must contribute by offering a solution (Brush & Saye, 2014). Storytelling Stories, as “a way of knowing and thinking” are particularly relevant to teaching (Carter, 1993, p. 6) and should occupy an important place in the history classroom. “Story is the very stuff of teaching, the landscape within which we live as teachers and researchers” (Elbaz, 1991, p. 3). Stories are attractive with teachers and teacher education because a story represents different ways to know and to think. Stories help to analyze and develop contemporary issues. In the work of a teacher, stories make sense. Teaching true stories featuring famous people overcoming obstacles or stories of youngsters who made a difference in the world is the answer to both questions (Unkovich, 2011). A teacher’s knowledge is conveyed through a story because it is the medium that works best to convey such knowledge (p. 3). The following are some of the many approaches to storytelling that teachers can use to stimulate curiosity and maximize differentiation in the classroom. Short Stories. A very effective form of teaching history is the short story. Using short stories in the history classroom has several benefits. Short stories provide a context to help students understand history more clearly. In addition, interest in history can increase when students realize the more personal and human aspect of the subject. Short stories can serve as a tool to help students develop and practice reading and writing skills. “By using short stories as a tool to teach history, teachers can enrich their classrooms and make learning more enjoyable and meaningful for students” (White, 1993, p. 305–306). The purpose of telling short stories is to explain big ideas. According to Gudmundsdottir (1999), the story the teacher tells is an attempt to progress beyond an incomplete textbook: “These stories are part of a narrative way of Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 10 knowing that is basic to the ways in which human beings understand the world and communicate that understanding to others” (Gudmundsdottir, 1999, p. 207). Folklore. Folklore in the classroom means the teacher tells and performs their version of the textbook. Stories told in the classroom are a balance of the teacher’s own stories and the national history in the textbook. The stories the teacher tells present both personal knowledge and local history along with academic knowledge. Although teachers must present the standard curriculum, they also must teach their own subjective versions. Subjectively taught history makes the subject come alive for the students. (Hamer, 1999). Teachers must wear the hat of a performer and teach a version that is meaningful to the student in their current situation. The importance of folklore storytelling is that it moves the teachers and students away from an emphasis on standardized tests and textbooks. People have come to associate learning and knowledge with institutions. Institutions have come to describe and define knowledge and the practices to attain knowledge but they have forgotten the basics of storytelling: community-based narratives (Hamer, 1999). StoryPath. McGuire (1997) taught using StoryPath, which is “both a process for facilitating learning and a structure for organizing curriculum” (p. 70). StoryPath is made up of five steps: reading a description of the environment; discussing geography, climate, and types of vegetation; creating a mural; meeting in groups to agree on the placement of geographic features; and developing vocabulary. StoryPath serves to strengthen student abilities in cooperative work, negotiate solutions, experience the lesson content, analyze their work, and to reflect on prior knowledge and beliefs (McGuire, 1997). Visualization. Visualization is a learning technique with many benefits. Lis (2014) describes the basics of visualization as a “mental process occurring while thinking and as an Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 11 iconic representation” (p. 111). Multimedia learning theory assumes the human brain receives information and learns through two channels: a verbal channel and a visual channel (Lis, 2014). Fredericks (1986) addresses how visualization can be used by students: “One strategy students can use is visualization or mental imagery. Mental imagery is the creation of pictures in the reader’s mind prior to, during, or after reading” (p. 78). Mental imagery has value in the classroom as a form of comprehension exercise. Fredericks gives specific ways that imagery can aid students: teachers give opportunities to create visual images of concrete objects, visualize scenes, past experiences, and familiar objects, students listen to stories with high imagery that utilizes common knowledge or experiences, students creates their own images as they read stories. Digital Storytelling. Technology is changing how we interact with others and create and record history. There are differences between oral history and digital. Oral history is when somebody tells what happened or their feelings regarding what happened. Oral history is told on a personal level, usually with just two or more people. Digital story telling contrasts with oral history because it can involve more than one storyteller (Bazley & Graham, 2012). In digital storytelling, all of the participants can be heard in the recording. When one listens to the digital recording, the dialogue stays the same. Oral history is very flexible because the details can change each time a story is told. They are not fixed like a digital story (p. 109). Digital storytelling is a one stop process. The storytellers have creative control over every step of the story. They write the script then record the story. When the story is recorded, they edit the content. They have the option of choosing photographs and scanning them in. An option called iMovie lets them develop the story. This option eliminates the need to have somebody edit the Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 12 digital story. The storytellers are in control of the entire process from beginning to end (Bazley & Graham, 2012). Increasing Student Involvement For students to be actively involved in their learning the content must be relevant. Corso, Bundick, Quaglia, and Haywood (2013) advocated three specific ways to use relevance to increase classroom engagement. The first step is for the content to be relevant to the current interests of the student. When the content is relevant, students can make connections to current events and pop culture, as well as other classes and student interests. When students are able to see how the content is relatable to them, their interest will increase. This relationship could give them increased motivation to engage in class (Corso et al., 2013). The content must also be relevant to future goals. When the content is relevant to the current interests and future goals of a student, they might gain the attention of a student for a brief time. However, current interests and future goals are subject to change. Finally, the content must be relevant to the participant’s identity or sense of self. When the content is relevant to the identity of the student, it is more likely to create a long-term connection. Passing interests are transitory but the identity is long term as a stable source of relevance (Corso et al., 2013). Laroche and Maloy (2010) outlined some student-centered teaching models in history, including group work or cooperative learning, primary sources, writing, controversy, dialog, and debate, as well as drama, role-plays or simulations. The idea behind group work is to get students to think together about central ideas. Issues with implementing group work/cooperative learning include gaining the attention of students, helping them think about ideas, students refusing to participate, students not getting along, and one person doing all the work for the group. A good insight to avoid the trap of one student doing the work of the group is to make each student Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 13 responsible for a portion of the group activity. Although group work can be a good way for students to engage with their classmates to learn, the teacher must monitor individual participation so the work does not devolve into socializing (Laroche & Malloy, 2010). Laroche and Malloy (2010) underscore the importance of using primary sources. The idea behind primary sources is that these “first-hand accounts give a more enriched understanding of how life was lived in the past. They give students the sense of being there as events happened” (p. 54). Students may encounter difficulty understanding the language structure of primary sources. In this case, Laroche and Maloy (2010) suggest that teachers provide directions to students by giving them questions to answer during their reading. Controversy, dialog, and debate focus on current events such as social problems. This includes the origins and problems of democracy, as well as resistance to oppression and controversial issues. Drama, role-plays and simulation engages students through plays, social simulations, and historical re-creations. Role plays and simulations offer a wide variety of activities such as re-enacting key events, dramatizing pivotal moments and even conducting mock trials. Simulations are important because they give space for students to learn the material from a first-person perspective (Laroche & Maloy, 2010). Steiner, Bruzy, Gerdes, and Hurdle (2003) addressed the need for students to study diversity. They advocated for students to learn about people from various backgrounds in the class. This learning can happen through interviews and presenting information about a specific group. Although it is important to learn about diverse groups, students should “confront their own cultural biases and judgments” (Steiner et al., 2003, p. 56). Beyond diversity, conflict and structured controversy have a place in the classroom. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 14 Instructors sometimes fear they will not be able to contain a controversial conversation and students often do their best to avoid conflict. Conflict can be included into the classwork, however, if properly structured (Steiner et al., 2003). These same researchers endorsed the use of a type of cooperative learning strategy known as structured controversy. Structured controversy enables students to be comfortable with conflict. It gives them a platform to engage in conversation and have a constructive disagreement that can increase their understanding of diversity. Students are often reluctant to discuss diversity issues and cultural differences for fear of exposing ignorance. Structured controversy gives them room to grow and learn about their differences (Steiner et al., 2003). Teaching local history through a student-chosen research project can help personalize history and make it relevant to the students (Swiderek, 1997). Some of his suggestions to personalize history include: compile a photo album about a relative, research the land where one’s house is located (tell a story about people who lived there); visit the local cemetery and record the details of an ancestor’s grave; report where your ancestors were during the U.S. Civil War (or any other war); or interview local historians or visit a town museum (p. 75). Weible and Fisher (2018) argued that increased student involvement occurs through jigsaw. Jigsaw consists of collaborative learning in groups. Each group will learn about one empire, for instance. They will then teach the information they learned about their empire to their classmates. These researchers’ study was made up of fifty-six students from two AP World History classes. Students were divided into six groups per class. Each group was assigned a different empire: Byzantine, Tang/Song, Abbasid, Mongol, Aztec, Holy Roman, and Mali. Students researched given themes for their assigned empires and identified connections with two other empires. The groups then collaborated by making a poster that included digital resources Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 15 that could be shared. Specific requirements included images, primary source documents, video, and webpages. When the posters were completed, the teacher had the students go on a virtual gallery walk. Students were given a graphic organizer which they used to study and classify the different empires. They could offer feedback and ask questions to the other groups regarding their posters (Weible & Fisher, 2018). Using Primary and Secondary Sources Kirby (1999) discussed the use of primary sources through government records: “The Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) was established in 1898 by Congress to ensure public access to government information” (p. 60). There are 1,400 depository libraries that are federally designated. Many forms of primary source information such as autobiographies, diaries, interviews, letters, oral histories, and journals are kept in these libraries featuring a wide variety of subjects. Some of the subjects include pencil-and-ink drawings made by Lakota chief Sitting Bull; the United States Senate’s investigation of the Titanic sinking; General George Kenney’s (commander of U.S. Army and Allied air forces against Japan) World War II narrative of the war in the Pacific; testimonies of survivors of the Ukraine famine of 1932-33; testimonies of Holocaust survivors; and numerous first person accounts from the diaries and journals of otherwise unknown Americans such as fur traders, Civil War soldiers, sea captains, military engineers, explorers, Senators, and military attaches (Kirby, 1999). Cyclical History. As an example of cyclical history, Goldstone (1991) devised a theory on the state breakdown of societies. His specific focus was on agrarian societies. Goldstone’s theory is known as the structural-demographic theory. Turchin (2012) tested Goldstone’s theory; he constructed a database and then digitized existing data. The data were previously compiled by many researchers and then augmented by a methodical search of electronic media archives. The Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 16 archives consist of 1,590 documented cases of political violence. A dramatic fluctuation of political violence (categorized as riots, terrorism, and incidents of lynching) occurred over the 230-year historical period. The structural-demographic theory starts with the premise that agrarian societies reach a stage of population growth beyond what the land can support. The increasing population growth contributes to additional problems including inflation, diminished value of wages, and a mass movement of the rural population moving to cities. The overpopulated cities then experience unrest such as riots over food and protests over the wage. Because the population is competing for limited state resources and government jobs, the state must increase taxes which leads to civilian and elite resistance to government policies. Increased taxation does not cover government expenses which leads to a financial crisis and then devolves into financial collapse. The economic collapse leads to a disintegration of military forces, followed by local, regional, and national rebellion. All of these upheavals concluded with the dissolution of central governmental authority (Turchin, 2012). Narrative History. Roberts (1996) contended that historians have the task of reconstructing the reasons for the past actions of people. This is done through referencing existing evidence of past human thinking. Historians must take that evidence and interpret meaning by connecting past decisions to action. This perspective to the study of history is called the human action approach. The human action approach places importance on the participant’s point of view, and considers the role that accidents, unintended consequences, and miscalculation play in determining historical outcomes (Roberts, 1996). Roberts analyzed narrative history. Narrative history takes stories which connect a series of thoughts and actions. These narratives described details that are crucial to the story such as moral and political judgments regarding what happened. They may also include meanings and patterns that relate to Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 17 contemporary events or attitudes. The point is to determine why historical figures did what they did. Roberts (1996) states, “The validity of this kind of account of the past rests on its correspondence with the direct and indirect evidence of the perceptions, motivations, goals, calculations and intentions which result in specific decisions and actions” (p. 222). Methodological Approaches. Britt and Aglinskas (2002) identified four key factors in helping students identify and use source information: contextualization, corroboration, evaluation of source, and author evaluation. They addressed the importance of studying context to enable students to learn something for themselves. Studying documents can help reconstruct events. Corroboration compares information from different sources to determine agreed upon statements, which statements are unique, and which statements contain discrepancies. Source information must be evaluated to identify critical features. An author’s occupation, profession, or credentials can be used to indicate educational training, institutional organization, authority, and status. Reasons for why an author may have written what they did help to determine their motivation. Source information can be analyzed to place the author of a historical document as a participant in one of the activities that was written about. Author evaluation gives students an opportunity to state their opinion of the author (Britt & Aglinskas, 2002). According to Lindquist (2011), a teacher has five methodological approaches they can use to teach the Holocaust to middle and high school students. They are primary sources, film, interdisciplinary units, the internet, and survivor testimony though these strategies can be used to teach other historical issues as well. Dhand (1992) claimed that “teaching using primary sources will enhance students’ historical skills as they: (a) develop investigative skills (b) learn how to evaluate information (c) gain practice in distinguishing information from various types of Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 18 sources (d) experience opportunities to evaluate information from conflicting sources” (pp. 165–169). Film can be a useful medium but the historical veracity must be questioned and weighed with the intended audience. Because historical accuracy is often sacrificed to gain a wider audience, showing a film in the classroom can potentially be unrealistic and is viewed as entertainment. Interdisciplinary units are those that merge history and language arts. Literature must be chosen due to an accurate portrayal of historical context. Although the internet provides volumes of research for both students and teachers, this must be weighed and balanced by questioning the motivation of the internet sites and judging for accurate information (Lindquist, 2011). Conclusion Unique challenges exist for the 21st century teacher, especially student engagement—finding ways to make history come alive. Fortunately, many practical tools aid the teacher to meet this challenge. To make history come alive, teachers must move away from giving direct lectures and requiring passive learning of their students. Inquiry learning addresses this problem by giving students the freedom to explore the material, ask questions, and come up with ideas. Problem based historical inquiry (PBHI) stresses societal problems in a historical context. History can also come alive for students when stories are told in the classroom. History best understood through researching and studying primary and secondary sources. Stories are a way to know and think; the beliefs and dilemmas of the historical characters allow for numerous interpretations and opinions. Oral history allows for flexibility in the version being told while digital history creates primary sources and gives creative control to the students. Folklore is the Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 19 teacher’s version of the textbook. It allows for teachers to personalize their individual knowledge to local community values and viewpoints and relate it to the curriculum. Increasing involvement begins by teaching what is relevant to the current interests, future goals, and the identity of the student. Individual involvement happens by student centered cooperative learning which stresses thinking about ideas. Researching and studying primary sources give students a first person, grass roots narrative of the historical events they are studying. Structured controversy allows for individual interpretation, constructive disagreement, and increased understanding of opposing viewpoints. Local history can be studied to connect with the community and to teach students history happens in their neighborhoods too. Students can also learn this through narrative histories that supply details that are crucial to make moral and political judgments. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 20 PURPOSE The classroom of the 21st century demands differentiation and engagement, sound academic learning, old school storytelling, and the use of technology to engage and inspire young students. Teaching history requires telling engaging stories that help the teacher to connect with students. Projects and inquiry-based assessments serve to increase student involvement in their learning, and the use of primary and secondary documents allow the students to discover historical cycles. The purpose of this project is two-fold: (a) document a series of historical episodes on the common theme of the clash between government and religion from medieval to modern times; and (b) to develop informative and engaging teaching strategies relative to these episodes. Students have the essential capacities to unlock the timeless lessons that history contains. However, traditional history classroom settings are teacher-centered. This style of teaching is unfortunate for both the teacher and the students. A student focused classroom, on the other hand, will equip students with the essential tools to unlock the many fascinating organizations, people, ideas, and events that history contains. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 21 OVERVIEW High school students taking courses in United States and world history need to be better informed regarding the current issue of the separation of church and state. National and local headlines highlight the modern church and state clash with a litany of stories. Hot topic issues include church tax-exempt status with the government caveat that church leaders will not advocate political positions from the pulpit (26 U.S.C. § 501(c)3;Weber, 2016), prayer and religious gatherings in the public square (Greece v. Galloway, 2014), prohibition of prayer and Bible reading in public schools (McCullough, 2015), as well as division over religious statues and the display of Christian Crosses (Totenberg & Montanaro, 2019) and the Ten Commandments in government buildings (Ballotpedia, 2019) and public parks (Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, 2009). There is also an increase in cultural and political pressure (Lybrand, 2019) for Christian churches to discard Biblical beliefs on traditional marriage and sexual relations (Catechism of the Catholic Church; Explaining Religious Freedom, 2015; Southern Baptist Convention, 2012) to conform to the LGBTQ agenda. Prominent Christians campaign for political office, and lawmakers attempt to use government coercion to legislate morality (Key Abortion Rulings, 2013; National Prohibition Cases, 1920). These divisions will continue to have a major impact on culture, politics, and religion. It is also important that students consider historical clashes between the opposing camps of government and religion beginning in Europe in medieval times and culminating in North and South America during the 19th and 20th centuries. Orthodox Christians share an individual and collective identity that defines and sets them apart from what they view as the corrupt State. During these historical clashes, specific Christian churches and their members were persecuted because they were viewed as the other by the dominant society. Because these Church members Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 22 experienced firsthand persecution from the State for their beliefs, the Church saw the State through the Biblical lens of Judeo-Christian eschatology such as Anti-Christ, Babylon, Satan, and The World (Verney, 2009). Hard line proponents of the State, or the government, perceived the Church as crazy, a cult, fanatics, and rebels (Reavis, 1995). If an agreement is not achieved through a balance of the rule of law and religious freedom, these diametrically opposed worldviews inevitably lead to internecine warfare. Connecting the historical context with contemporary events makes current issues relevant for students and helps them answer the oft repeated question, “Why are we studying this?” It is important that teachers and students approach this topic with an open mind, considering both sides of the historical cases and allowing for various opinions and viewpoints. Such an approach will engage students in meaningful and memorable discussions. As the clash between government and religion continues into the 21st Century, we must look to the past to learn the necessary lessons to strike the correct religio-legal balance. Doing so will protect the life, liberty, and property of all. Historical Case Studies The first portion of the project is narrative history. My plan is to research, write, and teach about the following groups; the Cathars, the Hussites, the Catholic Royal Army of the Vendée, the community of Canudos, the Cristeros, and the Branch Davidians. An understanding of the contemporary clash between government and religion is incomplete without students understanding the origins of the clash; beginning first in Europe during the Medieval period and culminating in North and South America during the late 19th to the late 20th centuries. The Cathars. Beginning in the 12th century in southern France, religious practitioners known as Cathars were labeled heretics by the Roman Catholic Church for their mysterious, dualistic Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 23 beliefs. The Pope declared a crusade against them. After nearly a century of waging largely ineffective crusades against the Cathars, the Church initiated the very first Inquisition against them in the 14th century. The Hussites. The martyr Jan Hus and his Bohemian followers, the Hussites, preceded Martin Luther by a century in their desire to reform the Roman Catholic Church. Their reformation mindset quickly shifted to fighting bloody battles for self-preservation and religious freedom against the combined might of the Pope and his ally, Emperor Sigismund of the Holy Roman Empire. The Vendée. The Catholic Royal Army of the Vendée were traditional Roman Catholic monarchists that defied the policies of the atheist government of revolutionary France in the 1790s. Given the choice between military conscription or total annihilation, they chose to risk everything to fight against the new Republic. Community of Canudos. In the 1890s, members of the autonomous community of Canudos, Brazil owed their allegiance to a messianic folk preacher named Antonio Conselheiro. Upon rejecting an ultimatum from the newly formed government of the Republic of Brazil to pay taxes, they fought an apocalyptic war of attrition against waves of federal troops in the arid backlands of the Northeast. Both sides gave no quarter. The Cristeros. When the atheist federal government of Mexico nationalized the property of the Church in the 1920s and suspended religious services, the Cristeros refused to comply because they were deeply religious Roman Catholics. Operating in the city and the countryside, the Cristeros fought a grueling civil war against their government for the heart and soul of Mexico. The Branch Davidians. Known as the Branch Davidians, a small religion consisting of about 100 believers lived on private property they called Mt. Carmel, located roughly 10 miles outside of Waco, Texas. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) worried leader David Koresh Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 24 was breaking federal firearms laws. When ATF agents raided the Davidian property and attempted to arrest their prophet Koresh, a gunfight erupted between the Davidians and the federal agents. The media chronicled the 51-day siege as the FBI and ATF squared off against Koresh and his followers. Instructional Plans The second part of this project outlines the teaching approaches that will be used to make the case studies come alive for my history students. The case studies of the Cathars and the Hussites occurred in Medieval Europe. The Roman Catholic Church declared both groups heretics for their beliefs. The Cathars and the Hussites both had crusades declared against them. During the Medieval Europe unit in second term, I teach my students about the Cathars. They learn about the Hussites during the Reformation unit during the second term. Storytelling will be used to teach students about the unique beliefs of the Cathars. Inquiry coupled with the use of primary and secondary sources will be applied by my students as they study the words, actions, and lives of people from both sides of the conflict. Drama will be employed as the students will recreate the infamous massacre at Beziers. Based on the beliefs and actions of each side, the class will then be divided in half and assigned the task of defending one of the two sides. They will do a small group discussion (2 vs. 2) before doing a whole class debate on the subject of killing in defense of one’s religion. This is meant to create controversy, and elicit emotional and intellectual responses from my students. Finally, to check for understanding, students will write which side they believed was correct based on their personal beliefs and using historical evidence. For the unit on the Hussites, students will compare and contrast primary and secondary source quotes from Jan Hus and Emperor Sigismund. Using inquiry, they will also compare and contrast the beliefs of the Hussites versus those of the Roman Catholic Church. Storytelling and drama will be used to teach them about the trial and death of Jan Hus at the Council of Constance. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 25 Hus. Students will analyze the legal treatment of heretics under the law and make a judgment call on Emperor Sigismund’s behavior. They will discuss and debate this in small groups (2 vs. 2) before being divided in half and debating as a class. Finally, storytelling will be used to teach about General Jan Zizka and the Hussites fighting against the Holy Roman Empire. Both sides committed atrocities during the heat of battle. Based on historical sources and personal beliefs, students will determine which side they would have supported and justify why in a written essay. Students will learn about the French Revolution during third term. Inquiry with the use of primary and secondary sources will guide them in their understanding of the beliefs, goals, and actions of the leaders and members of the Catholic Royal Army of the Vendée. Students will compare and contrast inhabitants of the Vendée that fought for the Revolution with those that fought for the Catholic Royal Army. Which side would they choose and why? Considering the terrible tortures and murders the Catholic Royal Army (and regular civilians) were forced to endure, would they be willing to risk everything for their beliefs? Why? Based on the atheist beliefs of the revolutionaries and the Roman Catholic beliefs of the counter-revolutionaries, which side would they support? Students will write to verify their understanding and justify their allegiance. During the third term unit on Latin American revolutions, students will use inquiry to study about the conditions of drought, famine, poverty, theft, class and religious divisions that existed in late 19th century Brazil. They will study primary and secondary sources to understand the words, actions, religious and political beliefs of Antonio Conselheiro and his followers in Canudos. I will use storytelling to make the extreme conditions of poverty and drought in the backlands of northeastern Brazil come alive for my students. They will also study the words and actions of leaders of the Republic of Brazil. Students will learn about and define civil war and genocide. They will be divided into two groups. Using historical sources and their understanding of the events, they will Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 26 argue in a written essay if they believed the war was a civil war or a genocide. They must justify which side they believed was correct and why. During third term, I will also teach about Mexico’s struggle for independence. I will use storytelling to help the students understand the tough political and economic conditions that continued to be part of Mexico’s reality into the 20th century. Both the Cristeros and the federal troops committed atrocities. Was either side justified in doing so? They will also compare and contrast the policies of the Mexican government, the US government, and the Vatican during the war. What role did diplomacy, the media, and religion play in the war? Students will discuss in small groups, debate as a class, and justify their beliefs in a written assignment. Students will use inquiry and primary and secondary sources to understand David Koresh and the Branch Davidians and the ATF and the federal government. Storytelling will be used to explain the religious background and eschatology of the Davidians. Students will debate the response of both groups. Was deadly force by the federal government justified? Was deadly force by the Branch Davidians justified? Did the federal government violate the rights of the Davidians? Did the Davidians break federal laws? Students will discuss in small groups, debate as a class, and write their opinion to show understanding based on the evidence discussed in class. The Social Studies standards for the Davis School District are known as Davis Essential Skills and Knowledge (DESK). The Skills portion of the standards are: (a) concept and content understanding (b) chronological reasoning (c) source analysis (d) data analysis (e) comparing and contextualizing and (f) effective communication. All six of these standards will be applied with all six historical case studies. Concept and content understanding and source analysis are directly related to the study of primary and secondary sources. Comparing and contextualizing is rooted in stories and narratives written by both sides during and after the conflicts. Chronological Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 27 reasoning is related to the cause and effect that occurs within cyclical history. Students will learn about effective communication as they study the actions, beliefs, and motivations of both sides and demonstrate meaning and understanding to the teacher upon completion of each case study. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 28 HISTORICAL CASE STUDIES The Cathars Origins The Cathars were a distinctive religious minority that inhabited the Languedoc region of southern France during the 12th to 14th centuries. The Languedoc bordered the Pyrenees mountains on the frontier with Spain. The genesis of the Cathar theology remains uncertain. However, specific historical figures offer important insights into the probable geographic origins of the Cathars. Centuries earlier, in southeastern Europe, a man called Cosmas the Priest wrote Discourse or Treatise against the Bogomils, sometime around 969 and 972 (Barber, 2000). Speaking of the heretics, Cosmas asked how they should be forgiven when “they claim the devil as creator of mankind and all the divine creation?” (Barber, 2000, p. 13). During the reign of Tsar Peter (927–969), Cosmas claimed the dualist heresy was preached by a priest named Bogomil in Bulgaria. Between 940 and 950, Theophlylact Lecapenus, the Patriarch of Constantinople, wrote a letter confirming a dualist heresy had been troubling to Tsar Peter. Over two centuries later, during the reign of Byzantine Emperor Alexius I (1081–1118), his daughter Anna Comnena recognized the city of Philippolis and also Constantinople as significant locations of heresy in the empire (Barber, 2000). The Emperor conceived of a plan where he pretended to be interested in the Bogomil doctrine and invited a monk named Basil to the royal palace. Basil taught the Emperor that communion had not merit (Comnena, 2011) and said Catholic churches were “temples of devils” (Comnena, 2011, p.7152). Comnena believed Basil was wicked and called him “Satanael’s arch satrap” (Comnena, 2011, p.7138). Emperor Alexius imprisoned Basil, his twelve disciples, and many followers for their heretical dogma. The Emperor issued a decree stating they would be burned on a pyre. When the Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 29 fateful day arrived, they were taken outside and given a choice between two pyres: one with a cross and one without. Those who were Christian would choose the cross and die as martyrs. Those that chose the pyre without the cross were heretics. Those who chose the cross were believed to be Christians, reprimanded, and released. Those who did not, were spared from being burned and put back in prison so they could have a chance to abandon their “Bogomilian heresy” (Comnena, 2011, p. 7213). Those that accepted Catholicism (Comnena, 2011) were released from prison and those that refused died “in their heresy” (Comnena, 2011, p. 7213). In time, the dualism, or a belief in two supreme opposed powers or gods, (Stefon & Bianchi, 2016) spread to the regions of Lombard and Tuscany in Italy, and then to France (Barber, 2000). The faith of the Cathars was based on Bogomil teachings, and modified over time by its devotees (Burl, 2002). Cathars were also called Albigensians because of their many adherents in a town called Albi (Tsiamis, Tounta, Poulakou-Rebelakou, 2016). Beliefs Lay members of the Cathar Church were known as credentes, or believers (Barber, 2000). Cathar priests were known as “Good Men” (Barber, 2000, p. 44) or Perfecti (O’Shea, 2001). Devout Catholics sarcastically called the Good Men Parfaits, “the oh-so-perfect ones.” A Good Man lived a life of chastity and avoiding physically touching women (Burl, 2002). Three years of study in a community of Good Men was required to become a Good Man. They worked manually in crafts such as weaving. Flesh was considered evil. All food from animals was forbidden: butter, cheese, eggs, and milk. Fish was approved for consumption because they bred in water and were cold blooded (Burl, 2005). Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 30 Of the Cathar’s beliefs, Barber (2000) adds: “Then Lucifer came down and was led astray by this evil spirit, then returned to heaven seduce others” (p. 8). Lucifer and his cohorts were cast out of heaven. Lucifer and a tetrad faced demon wished to separate the elements but could not. They asked and God and gave them a good angel as an assistant who helped them separate the elements. Lucifer accomplished this task in six days, and is in reality the God mentioned in the Book of Genesis that created the earth (Barber, 2000). The Cathar doctrine saw the world in terms of light and darkness. The Roman Catholic Church was darkness and the Cathars were light. This belief was taken from the book of St. John. Cathars also believed in reincarnation and thought many souls were wandering the earth awaiting salvation (Tsiamis, Tounta, Poulakou-Rebelakou, 2016). The foundation of the Cathar faith was repulsion and rejection of the physical world, which was evil. They refuted the Roman Catholic dogma of transubstantiation and the Eucharist, because they believed although Christ appeared to have a body, he came to the earth as a spirit and could not have eaten the Last Supper or suffered for the sins of humanity in Gethsemane and died on the cross through crucifixion. Likewise, Christ could not have resurrected without a body. Cathars disparaged the Catholic custom of making the sign of the cross and ridiculed Marie Magdeleine as the concubine of Christ (Burl, 2002). They rejected John the Baptist, the cross, icons, the role of prophets, relics, saints, and the Virgin Mary. They held the devil was the creator and refused to admit that Christ had performed any miracles. Catholics compared Cathars to the Jews when they rejected Christ (Barber, 2000). Consolamentum and Endura The rite of baptism was called the consolamentum. To prepare for the consolamentum, a credentes was required to abstain from eating animal meat for one year. The consolamentum was Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 31 performed by an Ordinatus, or high priest, who placed a book (the gospel of St. John) on the credentes head while the Ordines (lower priests) laid their hands on the same person who “took the baptism of the Holy Ghost.” This laying on of hands caused the initiate to receive “the Spirit his fallen soul had left in heaven and ensured his salvation” (Tsiamis, Tounta, Poulakou-Rebelakou, 2016, p. 176). This rite was held with such reverence that “Nothing could be allowed to corrupt and cancel the other-worldly grace bestowed by the consolamentum” (Burl, 2002, xvii). Following the consolamentum, the endura, meaning to endure, was a fasting ceremony required for the spiritual cleansing of the soul of the Cathar to die and enter into heaven. The endura was a process that could last “from 3-4 days to 7-12 weeks” (Tsiamis, Tounta, Poulakou-Rebelakou, 2016, p. 177). The fear of death caused Cathars to initially reject the endura until family members encouraged their participation in the act. An Italian inquisitor named Jacobo de Capellis (who persecuted Cathars in the Lombardy region) explained that during the endura the hands of the patient were tied but that a lie had been spread “ that they choke by beating, to become witnesses of confessors, which we advise you not believe that they commit something so despicable (Tsiamis, Tounta, Poulakou-Rebelakou, 2016, p. 178). In times of extreme emergency such as castle sieges, Cathar priests would conduct “a modified massive baptism of the besiegers” (Tsiamis, Tounta, Poulakou-Rebelakou, 2016, p. 176). Believers who were terminally ill would receive the two rites in reverse, receiving the consolamentum before the endura. A Cathar doctor would monitor the gravity of illness in their patients to determine the time remaining until death and was prohibited from take their life. Ultimately, Cathar leaders were responsible for the endura being performed in their communities (Tsiamis, Tounta, Poulakou-Rebelakou, 2016). Based on Cathar theology, the endura was the Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 32 means for the final cleansing and preparation of the soul beginning with physical death and culminating in heaven. It was not viewed as sinful or suicide but could be considered as a necessary form of “ritual euthanasia” (Tsiamis, Tounta, Poulakou-Rebelakou, 2016, p.174). A Contest for Bodies and Souls A man who had converted to Catharism told the Catholic Bishop of Alet-les-Bains, said everything in the world was evil “because all physical matter was the work of the Evil One. “God is perfect. The world is imperfect. Therefore, nothing in the world was made by God” (Burl, 2002, xiii). Catholic Priest Dominic Guzman (later known as Saint Dominic) was informed by Cathar Arnold Oth that the Roman church was Babylon, founded by the Devil Which St. John called the mother of fornication and abomination, drunk with the blood of the Saints and of Christ’s martyrs. Christ and his Apostles never ordained or laid down the Canon of the Mass as it now existed. (Burl, 2002, p. 23) Local opinion was heavily in favor of the Cathars in the region even by people who did not practice Cathar beliefs. Pons Adhemar, a Catholic knight told Foulques de Marseilles, the Bishop of Toulouse, he would not expel heretics from his lands. Pons said, “We cannot. We have grown up amongst them. We have relatives among them, and we see them living good, decent lives of perfection” (Burl, 2002, p. 20). Troubadours Although most of the records of the Cathars were destroyed, we can still get a glimpse into what they believed regarding their Catholic neighbors and the events of the war with the songs of the troubadours. Troubadours were lyrical poets from northern Italy, southern France, and northern Spain. The golden age of the troubadours was from the 11th to the 13th centuries. They enjoyed freedom of speech and customarily performed at royal courts (“Troubadour,” Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 33 2020). Troubadour musicians often used comedy, plain speech, and sarcasm to criticize those in power or to talk about the important events of the time. The following are examples of Troubadour songs giving evidence of the Cathars: Churchmen pass for shepherds But they’re murderers. Dressed in their robes They seem so saintly. —Peire Cardenal (Burl, 2002, p. xviii) Beziers has fallen. They’re dead. Clerks, women, children. No quarter. They killed Christians too. I rode out. I couldn’t see or hear A living creature. I saw Simon de Montfort His beard glistened in the sun. They killed seven thousand people. Seven thousand souls who sought sanctuary In Ste. – Madeleine. [cathedral] The steps of the altar Were wet with blood. The church echoed with their cries. Afterwards they slaughtered the monks Who tolled their bells. Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 34 They used the silver cross As a chopping – block to behead them. —Guiraut Riquier of Narbonne (Burl, 2002, p. 44) When Frenchmen attack Toulousains whom they think are heretics And the Roman legate Leads them and incites them. To me it is wrong because I know, There are good and bad in all places. —Anonymous (Burl, 2002, p.168) Rome, you traduce yourself By carrying so many evils. the ills you are accused of are self – evident because you derisively martyr Christians. —Guilhelm de Figueira, (Burl, 2002, p. 204). Deceitful Rome, your greed Leads you astray You shear too much off your Flock, May the Holy Spirit who took On human form Hear my prayer And smash your beak! Rome, you have killed many Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 35 People without reason And I hate to see you take so Bad a path For in this way you are shutting the door to salvation. Ill-advised the man Summer and winter, Who walks in your steps- The Devil carries him off to the fires of hell. —Guilhelm de Figueira (O’Shea, 2001, p. 171) Although most troubadours in the south of France were male and supported the Cathars, this was not always the case. Gormonda de Montpelier was a woman, a staunch defender of Rome and thought to be a former Cathar (Burl, 2002). Here are two songs attributed to her: It’s hard to bear it When I hear such false belief Spoken and spread around . . . May God hear my plea; Let those, young and old, Who cackle viciously Against the law of Rome Fall from its scales. —Gormonda de Montpelier (Burl, 2002, p. 11) It’s hard to bear it When I hear such false belief . . . Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 36 Rome may the Glorious One who pardoned Mary Magdalen . . . kill the rabid fool who sows so much false speech, he and his treasure and his evil heart; and when he dies may he die in the torments suffered by heretics. —Gormonda de Montpelier (Burl, 2002, p. 43) A Catalyst for War Universally respected by his fellow priests, to the local Cathars, Father Pierre Castelnau’s conduct was viewed as unacceptably worldly because he dressed in lavish robes and traveled with an entourage of bodyguards and servants. In 1207, Pope Innocent III had sent Castelnau to the Languedoc on a mission of conversion. Preaching sermons in Latin failed to convert simple peasants who mostly spoke the Occitan language. Castelnau took communion before dawn on January 14, 1208. A short time later, while sitting on his mule and waiting for the arrival of a ferry, a mounted assassin galloped by, stabbing Castelnau between the ribs with a lance. The priest quickly bled to death as the assassin escaped (Burl, 2002). As a landowning baron, Raymond was legally obligated to help priests eliminate heresy in and around his lands. The clergy believed Raymond was protecting heretics and as a result, he was excommunicated the year before Castelnau’s murder by Pope Innocent for failure to fulfill the oath to eliminate heresy in his kingdom (O’Shea, 2000). A serf of Raymond the VI was suspected of killing Castelnau (Barber, 2000). Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 37 The First Crusade Castelnau was mourned as a martyr, canonized, and buried on March 10th. The Pope held Raymond to be directly responsible for the death of Father Castelnau (Barber, 2000). That same day, Pope Innocent III ordered a crusade, commanding the faithful: Forward then soldiers of Christ! Forward, brave recruits to the Christian army! Let the universal cry of grief of the Holy Church arouse you, let pious zeal inspire you to avenge this monstrous crime against your God! Attack the followers of heresy, more fearlessly even than the Saracens—since they are more evil—with a strong hand and a stretched out arm. (Wiesner-Hanks, Evans, Wheeler, 2014, p. 180) The Pope was very open regarding his hatred towards the Cathars. In a letter to the King of France, Philippe-Auguste, he called them “A monstrous breed,” and commanded, “You must eliminate such filth” (Burl, 2002, p. 62). A forty-day period of service was required of those enlisted in the Crusader army. This was based on the forty-days of service serfs gave their lords during the summer. The forty-day time period served to attract a large number of recruits. It is possible this time of service was because “forty was the number of days in Lent” and military service, like Lent, required sacrifice (Marvin, 2002, p.88). This time of service was unlike serving a crusade in the Holy Land, which often required a commitment of indefinite time. Pope Innocent III guaranteed exemption from taxes, immunity from lawsuits, safeguarding from confiscation of their lands by others (Marvin, 2002), suspension of debts, and cancellation of debts to Jewish bankers (Burl, 2002). However, the biggest incentive was the granting of an indulgence, which became the most practical benefit for all crusaders (Marvin, 2002). By late June, a motley army consisting of clergy, mercenaries, knights, lords, and a mob of locals gathered at Lyons (Burl, 2002). William of Tudela, was a poet who witnessed the Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 38 crusading army on their march. Tudela wrote the massive army consisted of 200,000-foot soldiers and 20,000 knights. This is undoubtedly an exaggeration, but it was supposedly the largest army ever seen in Christian Europe (Wiseman, 1999). By July, the Crusaders moved to Béziers, a city between eight and nine thousand inhabitants (Barber, 2000). The commander of the Crusader army was the Abbot of Citeaux, Arnaud Amaury. While preaching in the Languedoc years earlier, Amaury had been laughed at and mocked by the Cathars. He never forgot this and was fanatical in his persecution of the Cathars. Amaury’s long harbored rage led to tragic results for the people of Béziers (Burl, 2002). On July 22, 1209, in the course of the Feast Day of Marie Magdeleine, the Cathar defenders were overpowered by the vicious Crusaders who attacked people in their homes, stabbing many to death in their own beds. Others were murdered trying to escape in the street. As previously stated, Cathar doctrine mocked Mary Magdeleine. In a twist of irony, Cathar and Catholic survivors instinctively crowded into the church of Ste. Marie Magdeleine, hoping for sanctuary (Burl, 2002). Cathars dressed just like their Catholic neighbors and also owned and read the New Testament. The Crusaders had the nearly impossible task of identifying Cathars among the Catholic population (Marvin, 2002). Mounted knights asked Amaury how they should distinguish between Catholic and Cathar (Burl, 2002). According to legend, Arnaud Amaury replied with the infamous command, “Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eis” or “Kill them all. God will know his own” (Burl, 2011, p. 215). The massacre was over before noon. Many estimate the deaths to have been nearly 20,000 (Wiseman, 1999) while others say the figure cannot be higher than 700 (Barber, 2000). Regardless of the number of casualties, the reality of a massacre is indisputable. Centuries later, bones of victims were found under the church floor while renovations were being made in the Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 39 year 1840 (Burl, 2002). Under the rules of engagement of medieval warfare, in the event of an unconditional surrender, only mercenaries were to be killed. Women and children were supposed to be excluded from the slaughter, but this rule was not applied to the innocent victims of Béziers (Burl, 2002). In a letter to Pope Innocent III, Arnaud Amaury reported, “Neither age, nor sex, nor status had been spared” (Ralls, 2014, p. 101). Carcassonne Having destroyed Béziers, the Crusaders marched west towards Carcassonne. They wanted the city to use as a supply base for future operations (Wiseman, 1999). The city was formidable; set on a sheer hill and enclosed with thick, high walls. The landscape offered no natural cover for the crusaders and they decided their best strategy was a long siege (Chalk, Jonassohn, 1990). Raymond Roger Trencavel VI, the Viscount in charge of the fortress, refused to surrender (Wiseman, 1999). Raymond planned to resist until the fall and outlast the supplies of the Crusaders. Unfortunately, his resources were stretched thin by dispossessed residents from local villages that had taken refuge in Carcassonne. It was summer and Raymond did not have the water he needed for the suddenly overcrowded castle. Raymond feared his people would suffer the same terrible fate as that of Béziers (Chalk, Jonassohn, 1990). He contacted his ally, King Peter of Aragon. Peter was Catholic but nevertheless negotiated on behalf of Raymond Roger and his people. King Peter pledged that Roger and twelve comrades would be given a free pass to leave the city. As for the rest of the inhabitants of Carcassonne, they were spared from being murdered in exchange for taking only the clothes on their backs and leaving all property for the crusaders. The crusaders did not honor their agreement towards Viscount Roger, who was thrown into prison and died a few months later. Considering that the massacre at Béziers had occurred less than a month prior, the lifting of the Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 40 siege at Carcassonne worked out well for many people, including Catholics, who returned a short time later to their undamaged homes, and Cathars who left with their lives (Chalk, Jonassohn, 1990). Attrition Since the beginning of the Crusade in 1209, Simon de Montfort had commanded the Crusader army. Montfort dealt with large scale attrition due to the short period of enlistment. Although the forty- day service was advantageous for poor peasants, it also allowed wealthy nobles who could afford to serve longer the opportunity to leave. Many clerics and nobles left the battlefield during campaigns while the outcome of a battle or siege was still in doubt. This led to the chronic shortage of troops. Montfort protested to the Pope that he had to pay soldiers double to retain their services. Knowing the enlistment timetable of their enemies, the Cathars resolved to wait them out. Pope Innocent had issued the short forty-day period of service not to upset the more important recruiting efforts of the ongoing Baltic crusades or the centuries old Reconquista of Spain against Muslim armies (Marvin, 2002). As if the Albigensian crusade did not face enough obstacles, by 1213 Pope Innocent was recruiting for what would become the Fifth Crusade. He discontinued the guaranteed indulgence so the ongoing campaign in the Languedoc would not overshadow recruitment efforts to the Holy Land. The caused a dramatic decline but it eliminated “the incentive for people to leave their homes, families, and livelihoods” (Marvin, 2002, p.90). The mood changed among the Roman Catholic leaders and by 1215, the Fourth Lateran Council stated the crusade against Cathars was on the same level as that against Muslims in the Holy Land. Once again, the reward offered for service was an indulgence (Marvin, 2002). Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 41 Cathar Reprisals Despite numerical inferiority, the Cathars defended their land against the crusaders whenever an opportunity presented itself. Cathars were not pacifists but typically found themselves under siege with little hope against the massive crusading army. After Beziers, a southern knight defected and ambushed three crusaders. He cut out their eyes, slashed their noses, lips, and ears, and then threw them out in the winter weather to die of exposure. Two were rescued, but one was found frozen to death in a manure pile. In the town of Pamiers, a Good Woman was escorted by her sons (two knights) to protect her from the ongoing crusade. Soon after, they learned an abbot had expelled her from town. One of the sons returned and murdered a priest at the altar of the village church for revenge. The altar was stained in blood. This same man then gouged out the eyes of a monk at St. Antonin’s monastery (Burl, 2002). This violence emboldened Cathar supporter Count Raymond-Roger, who went to the monastery and seized the keys from the clergy. Raymond locked the abbot, laymen, monks, and priests inside the church for three days. The clergy were deprived of food and water and resorted to drinking their own urine to survive. Count Raymond stole valuables from the library and the treasury. Raymond and his men desecrated the monastery library with prostitutes, dismantled part of the church (to reinforce his own castle walls), then robbed all the valuables of the monastery at St. Marie before receiving a ransom payment of 50,000 sous (Burl, 2002). The Secular Arm In 1233, Pope Gregory IX chose the Archbishop of Vienne, a man named Stephen de Burnin to extinguish heresy (Oldenbourg, 2015). Known to history as the Inquisition, a more apt name is investigation (Burl, 2002). Archbishop Burnin chose two Dominican friars named William Arnalad and Peter Seila to be the first Inquisitors. These men were ceded complete Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 42 authority in their quest and were given “armed bodyguards, men-at-arms, various gaolers, notaries, assesors and counsellors” (Oldenbourg, 2015, p. 5768). In August of 1234 in Toulouse, an old Cathar woman lay on her death bed told her servants she wanted a Perfect. Her servants left in search of a Cathar, whom they shortly found. The Perfect performed the consolamentum, then quickly departed. All the while, one servant went straight to the Dominican monastery and informed William Pelhisson. Pelhisson was a Dominican friar and an Inquisitor. The servant led the Bishop of Toulouse, Raymond du Fauge along with Pelhission and other friars from the cathedral to the woman’s house (O’Shea, 2001). The friars knew the elderly woman was the mother-in-law (Barber, 2002) of a man named Peytavi Borsier, a credentes who served his fellow heretics as “a liaison officer” (Oldenbourg, 2015, p. 5838). Her family attempted to warn her by saying the “Lord Bishop” was visiting but she misunderstood, thinking he was the Cathar Perfect, Guilhabert of Castres (O’Shea, 2001, p. 192). Bishop Raymond spoke like a Cathar and she responded in a positive way to his teachings (Barber, 2002). Bishop Raymond encouraged her to share her faith, “The fear of death should not make you confess anything other than that which you hold firmly and with your whole heart” (O’Shea, 2001, p. 193). She complied, and the Bishop revealed his identity and immediately condemned her to death as a heretic. The friars tied the decrepit woman to her bed (O’Shea, 2001) and carried her to “Pré-du-Comte, or Count’s Field” where a horror-struck crowd observed her fiery death (Oldenbourg, 2015, p. 5853). Satisfied by their work against Cathar filth, the clergy returned to the monastery, gave thanks to God, and ate a hearty meal (O’Shea, 2001). Upon arrival in a town or village, the inquisitors met with the clergy before assembling all females aged twelve and above and all males aged fourteen and older. The townspeople were then encouraged to declare their faith. Suspicion fell on any that did not testify their belief in the Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 43 Catholic Church. Typically, an Inquisitor would give a speech asking all present to come forward and indicate any knowledge of heresy from family, friends or neighbors. A climate of fear hovered over the people during a one-week grace period (O’Shea, 2001). The authorities crafted over twenty legal penalties to speed the destruction of the Cathars. Those condemned to die would have these houses razed, property confiscated, and their children subject to eviction and disinheritance. Helping a Cathar would result in the loss of one’s possessions. The word death was not mentioned, just the chilling phrase, “Delivering the criminal to the secular arm” (Burl, 2002, p. 175). The Inquisitors were in search of Perfecti and when discovered, they would be put to death immediately. Suspicion fell on people who did not provide names under questioning. The most corrupt seized the opportunity to betray their enemies for personal advantage. Those named often supplied names of innocent neighbors to survive the ordeal. Others pled guilty to a momentary lapse in judgment such as giving food to a Cathar years earlier. Credentes gave many names of long deceased persons. The Inquisitors were relentless, and followed these leads to cemeteries, where the dead were disinterred and burned in bonfires on the streets as clergy warned, “Qui aytal fara, aytal pendra” (Whoso does the like, will suffer a like fate) (O’Shea, 2001, p. 200). If Inquisitors learned those corpses that were immolated had housed Cathars during mortality, their former houses were destroyed as a warning, with no pity for the people that happened to live there. With the full wrath of the Inquisitors leveled against them, they did not lack names. Of course, blowback against Inquisitors also happened. In the Cathar stronghold of Albi, locals seized and pummeled an inquisitor named Arnold Cathala to death’s doorstep for exhuming corpses. Cathala was saved at the last minute from being thrown to a watery grave in Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 44 the River Tarn by the Bishop’s bodyguards. The furious village folk of Cordes killed two inquisitors in a well. However, 210 people burned as heretics by the notorious inquisitors William Arnald and Peter Seila in Garonne was the dreadful norm of the age (O’Shea, 2001). Jean Tisseyre lived on the outskirts of Toulouse and belonged to the working class. He began making bold declarations in the streets against Catholic officials, saying: Listen to me, citizens! I am no heretic: I have a wife, and sleep with her, and she has borne me sons. I eat meat, I tell lies and swear, and I am a good Christian. So don’t believe it when they say I’m an atheist, not a word of it! They’ll very likely accuse you too, as they have me: these accursed villains want to put down honest folk and take the town from its lawful master. (Oldenbourg, 2015, p. 5783) When Tisseyre spoke of swearing he was addressing claims made against Cathar heretics who were prohibited from swearing oaths or lying. Rebellious speech against the clergy was not tolerated and Tisseyre was arrested for suspicion of heresy. The people rioted before the local Magistrate could sentence him. Local officials in Toulouse pressured for Tisseyre’s freedom from jail. He was an industrious, married man. While waiting for the resolution of his situation, Tisseyre met perfecti and eagerly accepted their teachings including receiving the consolamentum. Tisseyre admitted his newfound faith and was burned at the stake as a heretic. Family, friends, and townspeople were mystified by his conversion and Catholic officials were angered and embarrassed by the Cathar influence in Toulouse (Oldenbourg, 2015). The Cathar Revival Good Women were called perfecta. The most famous of the Cathar Good Women was Esclarmonde. She was a widowed mother of six children. In 1204 she became a perfecta (Burl, 2002) when she was ordained by Guilhabert of Castres in a court scene with fifty-six nobles Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 45 attending the ceremony (Barber, 2000) including her brother, Count Raymond Roger (Burl, 2002). Count Raymond Roger of Foix persecuted Catholics without mercy while supporting Good Men and Women. Roger’s wife, Philippa was also a Good Woman and Count Roger provided her with a house in Pamiers. The Bishop of Toulouse, Cité Foulques de Marseilles, told the lords that Count Roger and his fief was a major center of heresy and that he had fortified Montségur to protect and harbor Cathars (Burl, 2002). Raymond-Roger refused to accept this insult and told the locals that Bishop Foulques had destroyed the bodies and souls of over five hundred good people. “In his deeds, words and his whole conduct, I promise that he is more like Antichrist than a messenger from Rome” (Barber, 2000, p. 138). After becoming a Perfecta, Esclarmonde founded a house for Cathar women in Pamiers. It was rumored Raymond Roger kept a group of heretics including his wife and her two sisters in a house he had built for them on the property of St. Antonin (Barber, 2000). In 1207, a heated debate took place at St. Antonin between Cathar and Roman Catholic clergy. Highly educated, Esclarmonde expressed herself articulately. She was scolded by a Cistercian monk named Frere Etienne de Minsericorde: “Go back to your distaff and spinning Madame, it is not proper for you to speak in a debate of this nature” (Burl, 2002, p. 6). Less than a decade later, Esclarmonde was the perfecta in charge of the Cathar house at Montségur (Burl, 2002). She was very influential in the community and even her enemies said she converted many “through her evil doctrines” (Oldenbourg, 2015, p. 6351). Raymond-Roger passed away in 1223 (Barber, 2002) and eventually Esclarmonde was pursued by the Inquisition. It was said that Esclarmonde resisted the bounty hunters sent by the inquisitors by hiding and sleeping in caves. She traveled from towns to villages giving information to the Cathar people, offering encouragement, and teaching Cathar doctrine. “She Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 46 became so elusive, so wraithlike, that in time the crusaders were to call her La Renarde de Foix (the Fox of Foix); the Occitans called her La Grande Esclarmonde (the Great Esclarmonde)” (d’Honore, 2007). She traveled and hid for more than 30 years and was last seen in public when she was 78 years old in the year 1232 for the marriage of Roger-Bernard, her nephew. Although the exact place and time is unknown, Esclarmonde was rumored to have died while hiding in a cave (d’Honore, 2007). Massacre at Avignonet The infamous Dominican Inquisitor William Arnald was partnered by a Franciscan friar named Stephen de Saint-Thibery on a new Inquisition. Pope Innocent IV had recently appointed Saint- Thibéry to the region. These men were joined by Franciscan Raymond Carbonier (representative to the Bishop), Dominicans Garsias d’Aure and Bernard de Roquefort and the Archbishop of Lézat, a former troubadour named Raymond Costiran. These six men were charged with rooting out heretics in the area and stopped in Avignonet, a hotbed of heresy (Oldenbourg, 2015). They had traveled throughout the region obtaining confessions but did not have bodyguards (O’Shea, 2001). Avignonet sat between Carcasonne and Toulouse. The group of cruel inquisitors often sent men to the dungeon of Toulouse which was known as the wall for its constricted spaces and starving prisoners on a diet of bread and water. The tired priests were relieved to be shown to their quarters in the castle of Avignonet by the bailiff Raymond d’Alfaro. It is doubtful they know that d’Alfaro was the brother-in-law to Raymond VII, the Count of Toulouse. Raymond VII protected the Cathars and despised the Catholic clergy (O’Shea, 2001). Once the men were situated, they enjoyed dinner and were introduced to William-Raymond Golairan, a personal friend of d’Alfaro. Shortly after, Golairan excused himself and left the castle and Avignonet. He returned a few hours later to confirm with d’Alfaro that the Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 47 priests were sleeping before leaving to meet with men at Antioch Wood (O’Shea, 2001). “Fifteen knights and forty-two men-at-arms” (Oldenbourg, 2015, p.6654) were assembled with Pierre Roger of Mirepoix. Pierre had traveled with his men from Montségur. Pierre chose twelve men for the mission and waited in the forest (Oldenbourg, 2015). Upon confirmation there were no French knights traveling on the road, the men walked to the outskirts of town and hid behind a slaughterhouse (O’Shea, 2001). With twelve men (Oldenbourg, 2015) and under cover of darkness, Golairan opened the gate to Avignonet to the men. They were joined by roughly thirty townspeople armed with cudgels and knives (O’Shea, 2001). With flame in hand, d’Alfaro guided the men through the corridors of the castle and to the door of the inquisitors. Along with more than a dozen men of Avignonet, they broke down the door and d’Alfaro yelled, “This is it!” (Oldenbourg, 2015, p. 6681). Some priests started praying the Salve Regina and were quickly killed with axes, daggers, maces, and clubs. The assassins looted the possessions of the murdered monks before quickly leaving the town. When they returned to Pierre in the forest, he asked for Arnald’s cup, to which one of the men replied that it was broken. Pierre queried why the man had not brought the broken pieces of Arnald’s skull and stated matter-of-factly, “I would have bound them together with a circlet of gold, and drunk wine from this cup all the days of my life” (Oldenbourg, 2015, p. 6703). Montségur Montségur, meaning mountain of safety, was a mountaintop fortress and a thriving Cathar community that existed from 1209 to 1244 (Burl, 2002). Montségur itself sat on a high mountain with an elevation of 3,500 feet. It was the headquarters of the Cathars for the Languedoc region. The fortress itself was quite small and most of the people lived in a village below the castle keep. Montségur functioned as an arms depot, and a depository of gold, silver, Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 48 and Cathar religious literature. The village below contained a market (Oldenbourg, 2015). The Cathars referred to Rome as “the Synagogue of Satan.” The Catholics returned the insult and called Montségur by the same title (Oldenbourg, 2015, p. 6520). At a conference held in Béziers in 1243, Roman clergy decided Montségur must be wiped off the face of the earth to avenge the massacre of priests at Avignonet and to strike a decisive blow against the last Cathar stronghold (O’Shea, 2001). The command post of Montségur held between 120 to 150 soldiers and the families of the Cathars numbered about 200 men, women, and children and at least 150 to 200 perfecti (Oldenbourg, 2015). It was besieged for almost ten months, beginning in mid-summer 1243 and ending in March 1244 (Barber, 2000). The base of the mountain was more than two miles wide, which made it difficult for a siege due to lack of soldiers (O’Shea, 2001). Cathar merchants were able to sneak past the siege and smuggle in food and additional soldiers to the top of the mountain (Oldenbourg, 2015). Water was accessed through deep wells (Burl, 2002). As the sieged dragged on, the Catholic army began to feel demoralized and quickly lost faith in their ability to overcome the Cathar heretics during the cold winter. Commander Hugh of Arcis decided it was time to change tactics when he noticed the Roc de la Tour, the most eastern peak of Montségur. While the Cathars slept, a handful of mercenaries, Basques (Oldenbourg, 2015) from Gascon scaled the perilous cliff under cover of darkness and killed all the citadel defenders when they summited. The mountaineers used winches to pull trebuchets from the main army on the ground into position facing west and began pummeling the walls of the main keep at Montségur (O’Shea, 2001). Cathar engineer Bertrand de La Baccalaria quickly deployed a trebuchet to counter the Catholics but was spread thin with less than 200 soldiers against 6,000 (Oldenbourg, 2015). Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 49 Around Christmas (Burl, 2002) four men slipped out of the fortress under cover of darkness and escaped with gold and silver from the Cathar treasury (O’Shea, 2001). Realizing that a breakout or victory was impossible, the people of Montségur surrendered. They were granted peace from March 2 until March 15. The French imposed specific conditions to the surrender. The Cathars must release any hostages and stay inside their fortress for fifteen days. Those guilty of the murders at Avignonet would be pardoned. The Cathar soldiers would be allowed to leave with their property and weapons but would be required to confess before officers of the Inquisition. If the remaining people inside Montségur chose to recant, they would survive. If not, they would be burned at the stake. Finally, Montségur would be the property of the King of France and the Church (Oldenbourg, 2015). Although it is not certain, some think the Cathars negotiated this grace period to celebrate one of their religious feasts that coincided with Easter. On March 13, Perfecti Bertrand Marty performed the consolamentum among twenty-one credentes. On March 16, the French army led Bertrand Marty and about 220 followers (O’Shea, 2001) in chains from the castle to “Prat dels crematz” the burning field, where they were burned inside a fence with posts and stakes (Burl, 2002, p. 197). Perfecti Brothers The Autier brothers were the last of the bonhommes, or Cathar Good Men. While Good Women were known as perfecta, Good Men were called perfecti (Barber, 2000). Peter and William Autier of Ax-les-Thermes made great personal sacrifices to follow the Cathar religion. Peter, nearly fifty years old, was a wealthy notary. He was married with three sons and four daughters with his wife Azalais. William had a son and daughter with his mistress, Moneta Rouzy. Peter’s brother William was about twenty years younger. William was courteous and Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 50 good natured. Like his brother, he was also a notary. He had two sons with his wife Gaillarda. The brothers gave up their children, wives, and property to become Good Men (Burl, 2002). While reading the book of St. John, Peter asked William what he thought of the book’s teaching (Burl, 2002). “It seems to me that we have lost our souls.” To whch Peter responded, “Let us leave, then, brother, and go seek the salvation of our souls” (Sullivan, 2005, p. 18). In October, 1296, they left Ax-les-Themes and traveled to Cuneo, Italy to attend the Cathar seminaries. To become ordained as Good Men, they were required to spend three years in training that was both physically and spiritually demanding. Following three years of intensive training, the brothers returned from Italy along the Catholic pilgrim routes. Being a Good Man at the turn of 15th century France was dangerous. There had been as many as fifteen hundred Good Men preaching openly fifty years earlier. By 1300, their numbers were only fifteen or sixteen. They traveled at night, on guard against the Inquisition (Burl, 2002). Stealthy Seekers Their modus operandi was for Peter’s son James to read while Peter “explained what it meant in the vernacular” (Barber, 2000, p. 100). They taught about the Devil rebelling against God and falling from heaven. The Devil made bodies but could not make them move, so he asked for God to do this. God agreed, provided that what he put inside the bodies belonged to him. “Since then souls are of God and bodies are of the Devil” (Barber, 2000, p. 101). Their teaching included the transmigration of souls. This meant the spirit of a deceased person would pass from body to body until they had received the laying on of hands, or consolamentum of the Cathars. The Autiers taught that a woman was repulsive and Jesus was not born from a woman’s body. Christ only appeared to be crucified and did not die or suffer, but ascended back to the Father. Peter Autier saw himself as a successor to Christ’s apostles. They used safe houses Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 51 whenever possible. According to Peter Autier, in Chateauverdun they had three houses of friends (Barber, 2000). Martyrdom Constantly on the move, the lives of the Autier’s depended on the silence of those closest to them. Peter of Luzenac was the son of one of Peter Autier’s neighbors in Ax-les-Thermes. Luzenac had moved to Toulouse to study at the university. Years earlier, before traveling to Italy, Peter Autier had tried to convert Peter of Luzenac. Luzenac recognized them in Toulouse and knew they were Cathars. The Autier’s bought his silence by feeding him, lending him money and hoping he would not inform the authorities (Burl, 2002). A credentes named William-Peter Cavaillé was imprisoned yet maintained silence about fellow Cathars. Eventually, he gained his freedom. Now homeless and penniless, Cavaillé asked the Autiers for a loan (Burl, 2002) to repay a debt he owed his former prison guard (O’Shea, 2001) but was refused. Cavaillé then played the part of a false friend when he informed them that a Cathar woman was dying in Limoux in an attempt to set them up for arrest by inquisitors. In September 1305, James Autier and Prades Tavernier were arrested in Carcassone and imprisoned, yet managed to escape (Burl, 2002). Two years later, a new Inquisitor named Bernard Gui was appointed over Toulouse. Gui offered money for the arrest of any Good Man and declared that the capture of Peter Autier was the priority for the Catholic Church. The search for the men became so great that they were forced to hide for eight months. In September 1309, Peter Autier and Peter Sanche were betrayed by Peter of Luzenac and taken by the Inquisition. Imprisoned in the dungeons of Carcassone, Philip d’Alayrac, James Autier, Peter Autier, Pons Bayle, Raymond Fabre, Amiel of Perles, Peter Raymond, Peter Sanche, Peter Sans, and Prades Tavernier were sentenced and burned as Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 52 heretics. Against Cathar beliefs, Sans Mercadier committed suicide to avoid the fire (Burl, 2000). In December, William Autier was arrested and tortured for months before he was burned at the cathedral of St.-Sernin. His final request was for permission to speak to the people, because he believed “he would convert them to his faith.” William was denied (Burl, 2000, p. 210). The Last Perfecti William Bélibaste was a shepherd in the Languedoc. In the fall of 1306, while leading his flock to lower pastures, he got in a fight with another shepherd and beat the man to death. He fled the area with his brother, who was wanted by officials of the Inquisition. The two men met Cathars who were hiding from inquisitors. Perfecti Philip d’Alayrac began teaching Bélibaste and soon after was administered the consolamentum. For suspicion of practicing Cathar beliefs, they were arrested in 1309 and imprisoned in Carcassonne but managed to escape and travel over the Pyrenees mountains to Catalonia (O’Shea, 2001). Perfecti d’Alayrac could not resist returning to France to help his small congregation but was captured and burned at the stake. Bélibaste was now the final Perfecti but for his own safety preferred to quietly build up followers in Aragon and Catalonia. He was constantly on the move to avoid the agents of the Inquisition. For nearly a decade Bélibaste had an affair with his housekeeper, a woman named Raymonda Piquier. Raymonda was married but had fled the Languedoc to avoid arrest by the Inquisition and had lost contact with her husband. Bélibaste and Raymonda posed as a married couple to the outside world. Such a relationship violated the vows of celibacy Bélibaste took when he became a perfecti, but it worked as a mutually beneficial cover (O’Shea, 2001). The couple had a child together but avoided questions when Bélibaste had a shepherd friend named Peter Maury pose as Raymonda’s husband. Despite all of this, Bélibaste was a Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 53 diligent perfecti who preached to his credentes followers. He knew he had violated his oath and would not administer the consolamentum. This was promised to them in the next life. Meanwhile, the remained Cathars in his care settled in Morella and Sant Mateu, about 200 miles from the Languedoc (O’Shea, 2001). In 1317, Bélibaste met a man named Arnold Sicre, from Ax-les-Thermes. Sicre claimed his brother was Pons Bayle, follower of Perfecti Peter Autier. Sicre’s mother was Sibyl Bayle, a strong believer who died as a martyr at the stake. Although this was true, a few credentes told Bélibaste that Sicre’s father had rejected Cathar teachings and even aided inquisitors in a raid against the faithful in Montaillou. This caused suspicion but Sicre dispelled the doubts by living the Cathar creed for years among the people. However, he expressed remorse for leaving his relatives in Languedoc: a single sister had stayed to take care of their wealthy aunt. The two women were alone (O’Shea, 2001). Sicre knew the Cathar community was struggling financially and showered them with gifts during Christmas in the year 1320. Sicre’s elderly aunt had paid for the presents and her final desire was to receive the consolamentum at the hands of Bélibaste. Sicre’s sister wanted to be married when her aunt passed away. The Cathar community told him it would be dangerous and foolish to return to the Languedoc, where he was still wanted after eleven years. Arnold Bélibaste quieted the fears of the community by telling them the trip would be short and they needed the money (O’Shea, 2001). Arnold Bélibaste, his loyal friend the shepherd Peter Maury, Arnold Marty, and Arnold Sicre left in the spring of 1321. Marty was promised to marry Sicre’s sister. Still not sure about Sicre’s story, Bélibaste and Maury decided to celebrate their trip by drinking wine. Their goal was to get Sicre intoxicated so he would reveal his true intentions. Sicre perceived their plans, faked drunkenness, and disposed of various glasses of wine without being observed. In a private Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 54 conversation, Maury suggested to Sicre they should betray Bélibaste and collect bounty. Sicre feigned shock and declared he would never do such a thing. Maury believed the act and confirmed to Bélibaste that Sicre was trustworthy (O’Shea, 2001). A few days later, armed men invaded the house where they were staying and arrested them. Arnold Sicre worked for Jacques Fornier, Bishop of Pamiers and inquisitor. All of his funds and the cover story of a rich aunt and single sister had come from Bishop Fornier, who later became Pope Benedict XII. In 1321, Bélibaste was burned at the stake, the last Cather Perfecti (O’Shea, 2001). Conclusion In an age when pretenders grasped in vain at the specter of political and religious freedom, the Cathars dared to think, believe, and act in accordance with their supposed heretical beliefs. They were centuries ahead of their time in fighting to live independent of the monopoly of power wielded by the Roman Catholic Church. Unlike later “heretics” in Europe, they did not assemble vast armies or proselytize openly to convert the multitudes to their faith. It is unlikely that even in an era of religious liberty where the masses were not intimidated and obliged to follow the faith of the sovereign, they would ever have converted the masses to their unique worldview. They were centuries ahead of their time in welcoming religious freedom when doing so was considered heresy against the Church and treason against the State. Marvin stated (2002): “The Albigensian Crusade did eventually succeed in checking the spread of Catharism in Languedoc. It did not, however, succeed in stamping it out” (Marvin, 2002, p. 94). The Catholic Church treated them as an enemy because they could not allow the peasants to think and believe independent of the state. Religious dissent would lead to a loss of too much power and wealth. This would open the door for new churches and threaten the hold Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 55 the church had on the various European political kingdoms. Despite the risk of harassment, torture, and death, the Cathars should be admired for the necessary courage and daring to believe and live in accordance with their consciences. Even though they survived, the Cathars never again had large numbers of practitioners or influence. Another two centuries would pass before the religious dominion of Rome would again be seriously challenged in Europe. The Hussites Humble Roots Jan Hus was born to peasant parents in the small farming community of Husinec (Czech for ‘goose pen’) in southern Bohemia (today the Czech Republic) about 1370. Jan “learned to pray at the feet of his mother. It was she who prompted young Jan toward the priesthood, where he might find, among other benefits, the money and prestige to escape his family’s poverty” (Foxe, 2019, p. 93). Jan later shortened his surname to Hus (‘goose’). From the time Jan was a young pupil in what would today be elementary school, he was a brilliant student. With help from a local priest he excelled and was accepted into Charles University of Prague in 1390. Such an achievement was rare for someone from the peasant class (Verney, 2009). Hus rapidly ascended the academic ladder while earning his “Bachelor of Arts degree in theology in 1393, Bachelor of Divinity in 1394 and Masters of Divinity in 1396” (John Huss Biography, 2017). By the year 1400, Hus was ordained as a priest and then dean of the philosophical faculty the following year (Verney, 2009). Initially, it appears Hus did not have entirely spiritual motives for entering the priesthood: Before I became a priest I often, and gladly, played chess. I wasted my time. I bought fashionable gowns and robes with wings, and hoods trimmed with white fur. I thought that I would become a priest quickly in order to secure a good livelihood, and dress well, Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 56 and be held in great esteem. Alas! The goose was plucked of its virtue by the devil. (as cited in Rabb, 1993, p. 20) Hus became the curate of Bethlem chapel in 1402, which proved to be a great harbinger of positive change in his life. Unlike most chapels of the time, this one was constructed in 1391 by citizens of Prague to encourage sermons in the Bohemian vernacular. “This deeply influenced Hus, who experienced a spiritual awakening around the age of thirty, regretted his materialistic ways, and committed himself to serious theological pursuits” (Verney, 2009, p. 34). A Sharp Tongue Following his spiritual awakening, Hus began to stand apart from the status quo of loyalty to the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church typically on display with most priests. Hus’ sermons in the Bethlehem chapel “attracted attention by their scriptural fervor and their attacks upon the abuses of the clergy” (Hus, 1915, p. v). Around 1405, Hus openly criticized clergy he saw as sinful. The Bohemian church claimed the blood of Christ was appearing on communion wafers. Hus was straightforward in condemning the priests teaching such doctrine: “These priests deserve hanging in hell” for they are “fornicators,” “parasites,” “money misers,” and “fat swine.” “They [priests] are gluttons whose stomachs are overfilled until their double chins hang down” (as cited in Foxe, 2019, p. 94). These were dangerous words in such a volatile climate, yet Hus was willing to put himself at risk to speak against corrupt practices by the Church. Three Problems in Prague Hus became embroiled in three problems: the writings of John Wycliffe, the German academics in Prague, and the sale of indulgences (Hus, 1915). A young cleric and scholar from a wealthy Prague family named Jerome returned to Prague in 1408 from his studies at the University of Oxford. Jerome returned with copies of John Wycliffe’s books, which he translated Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 57 into the Czech language (Foxe, 2019). Shortly after meeting, Jerome introduced the works of Wycliffe to Hus and they quickly became faithful friends. In time, Jerome was one of Hus’s main supporters (Verney, 2009). Pope Gregory XI declared Wycliffe’s teachings heretical and it was forbidden to read or teach Wycliffe’s writings. Alexander V told the Archbishop of Prague to take action against those involved in Wycliffite heresy. Czech priest John Korvik reported to the archbishop of Prague that anyone who criticized clerical behavior was arrested and labeled a heretical follower of Wycliff (Fudge, 2016). In 1410, 200 of Wycliffe’s writings were seized and burned in Prague. Hus publicly defended one of Wycliffe’s tracts on the Trinity (Hus, 1915). “I accept everything that Wyclif had right, not because it is Wyclif’s truth, but because it is Christ’s truth” (as cited in Soukup, 2017, p. 198). The Prague clergy’s denunciation of Hus’s preaching asserted that the Kingdom of Bohemia was considered heretical by Rome because of support for Wycliff’s ideas (Fudge, 2016). A change in the charter of Charles University in 1409 proved to be the second problem for Jan Hus. Charles IV founded the university and set it up to be an international institution to prevent any single kingdom or nationality from becoming dominant. Charles IV divided its administration into four “nations”: Bavarian, Czech, Pole, and Saxon. Power was to be shared equally on a rotating basis. In reality, Bavarian, Saxon, and Pole became “a hegemonic German bloc” (Foxe, 2019, p. 38). The Germans banned Wycliffe’s books. Despite Czech protests, they were outvoted three to one by the German bloc in the administration. In 1409, King Wenceslaus issued the Decree of Kutna Hora which reversed the balance of power. The Czechs now held three votes and the others only had one. Most Germans left Prague in protest and soon founded Leipzig University in response. Charles University became the intellectual and spiritual heart of the Czech nation, Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 58 no longer serving as an international campus of learning. Hus was now the rector (Verney, 2009) and felt threatened by the Germans due to his involvement (Hus, 1915). The third problem with which Hus was involved was his attack on the sale of indulgences authorized by John XXIII. The sale of the indulgences financed a crusade against Ladislaus, King of Naples (Hus, 1915). When Hus was warned to keep quiet on the selling of indulgences, his reply was “Shall I keep silent? . . . God forbid” (as cited in Foxe, 2019, p. 94). In an era known as the Great Schism (Verney, 2009), the Church hierarchy and the faithful were divided in their loyalty to three separate Popes at the same time: Gregory XII (1406–1415), Alexander V (1409–1410) and John XXIII (1410–15). Excommunication In 1413, Jan Hus bemoaned former colleagues turned adversaries that called them cursed, deviant, infidels, insane, and Wycliffites (Fudge, 2016). Eventually, one of Hus’s adversaries, the Archbishop of Prague, decided to put pressure on Hus. The Archbishop, Zbynek Zajic, bribed Pope Alexander into declaring a prohibition on preaching in private chapels such as Bethlehem. As expected, Hus refused to comply and Zbynek excommunicated him (Spinka & Bartos, 2019). When this failed to work, Zbynek denounced Hus before the Czech inquisitor, but this also failed to stop Hus from preaching. Hus appealed to Pope John XXIII. Zbynek later appealed to Pope Gregory XII, who ordered Hus to answer charges of heresy in Rome. Hus rejected the order by saying What reason have I . . . to put myself through the extraordinary difficulty of going a great distance, passing through the midst of my enemies, to place myself before witnesses and judges who are my enemies? What is still worse, I would be compelled to worship the Pope on bended knee! (as cited in Verney, 2009, p. 41) Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 59 King Wenceslaus of Bohemia received a percentage of the sales of indulgences from his subjects. The King warned him: “Hus, you are always making trouble for me. If those whose concern it is will not take care of it, I myself will burn you” (as cited in Verney, 2009, p. 42). Surprisingly, Hus had a supporter in Queen Sofia, King Wenceslaus’ wife. She appealed to Pope Gregory: We request that, for the honour of God and the welfare of our people, you will establish as soon as possible the liberty of Jan Hus... so as to end the popular commotion over his condemnation... the word of God ought not to be hindered but rather preached in the streets, from the rooftops, and anywhere it has listeners. (as cited in Rabb, 1993, pp. 25–26) Interdict and Exile The religious authorities punished Hus’s disobedience of the Pope by placing an interdict on Prague and any place that would give Hus a place to live (Spinka & Bartos, 2019). An interdict closed churches and was an official prohibition on baptism, burial, and marriages being performed by the clergy for the local population. It “threatened residents with eternal damnation” (Verney, 2009, p. 42). Hus was excommunicated four times in all. Hus wanted to spare the city of Prague and those that helped him (Foxe, 2019), so he voluntarily left the city in 1412 and spent the next two years living in the castles of his supporters in the south of Bohemia. He wrote many treatises, the most important of which was De ecclesia (The Church). De ecclesia (Hus, 1915) criticizes many corrupt practices of the Roman Catholic Church (Spinka & Bartos, 2019). Safe Conduct Sigismund, King of Hungary and Germany pressured his half-brother, King Wenceslaus of Bohemia, to do something about Hus. Pope John XXIII convened the Council of Constance in Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 60 October 1414 and invited Jan Hus to attend (Foxe, 2019). The Council focused on eliminating all traces of heresy from Europe and ending the papal schism. Hus was promised safe conduct (meaning no harm would come to him). He accepted the invitation joking that “the goose is not yet cooked and is not afraid of being cooked”’ (as cited in Foxe, 2019, pp. 94–95). Upon his arrival in Constance, the papal court did not honor the safe conduct promised by Sigismund, telling Hus he would not be allowed to explain and defend his teachings and would be on trial as a heretic. Although it appears Hus had been naïve to trust the promise of safe conduct, he had anticipated the possibility of his own death and made a will before leaving for Constance (Verney, 2009). Trial The Council denied Hus an advocate for his defense and he was accused of heretical teachings he had not preached. He was imprisoned in chains during trials which lasted seven months (Verney, 2019). “The term Hussite first appeared during Hus’s trial at Constance. North German towns preferred ketzer (heretics), and the imperial chancery under Sigismund insisted on the term Wycliffites” (as cited in Soukup, 2017, p. 197). Probably sensing he would not survive the trial, Hus wrote the following letter on July 1, 1415: I, Jan Hus, in hope a priest of Jesus Christ, fearing to offend God, and fearing to fall into perjury, do hereby profess my unwillingness to abjure all or any of the articles produced against me by false witnesses. For God is my witness that I neither preached, affirmed, nor defended them, though they say that I did. I say I write this of my own free will and choice. Written with my own hand, on the first day of July. (as cited in Hus, 1904, pp. 275–276) Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 61 On July 5, Hus met once more with the Council. The conversation went as follows: “Master John,” said honest Chlum, “we are laymen, and cannot advise you. Consider, however, and if you do realize that you are guilty concerning any of the charges, do not be ashamed to receive instruction and recant.” Hus replied, “if I was conscious that I had written or preached aught against the law, gospel, or Mother Church, I would gladly and humbly recant my errors. God is my witness.” Hus invited the men in the council to show him in the scriptures what doctrine he had taught that was heretical saying, “But I am anxious now as ever that they will show me Scriptures of greater weight and value than those which I have quoted in writing and teaching. If these be shown me, I am prepared and willing to recant.” “Do you desire to be wiser than the whole Council?” retorted a bishop. “Than the whole Council, no, but give me a portion, however small, of the Council to teach me by Scriptures of greater weight and value, and I am ready to recant” (as cited in Hus, 1904, p. 277). “We take from you the cup of redemption,” the prosecutors solemnly intoned before sentencing. Hus replied, “I trust in the Lord God Almighty . . . that He will not take away from me the cup of his redemption, but I firmly hope to drink from it today in His kingdom” (as cited in Foxe, 2019, p. 93). The charges for which Hus was accused and sentenced included dangerous heretic, teacher of a fourth person in the Godhead, unworthy of the name Christian, and wicked man. Hus was prohibited from replying to the charges (Foxe, 2019). He was pronounced a heretic and given the punishment of burning at the stake. Hus knelt in front of the Council and prayed, “Lord Jesus, pardon all my enemies for Thy great mercy’s sake, I beseech Thee, for Thou knowest that Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 62 they have falsely accused me. Pardon them for Thy great mercy’s sake” (as cited in Hus, 1904, p. 278). Execution The next day, July 6, the Council again urged him to recant. Hus lamented, “These bishops urge me to recant. I fear to do this lest I be a liar in the sight of God, and offend my conscience and God’s truth” (as cited in Hus, 1904, p. 278). Hus was then sentenced to death not for being a disciple of Christ, but for being a disciple of heretical leader John Wyclif (Soukup, 2017). The bishops stripped Hus of his clothes but could not decide to use a razor or scissors to remove his tonsure. Hus remarked to a nearby Sigismund: “See, these bishops cannot even agree in their blasphemy” (Hus, 1904, p. 278). A yard-high paper crown painted with three demons and the word “Heresiarch” was placed on Jan’s head (Hus, 1904, p. 278). A heresiarch is the founder of a heresy or the leader of a heretical sect (Meaning of Heresiarch, 2020). Sigismund commanded Hus be taken away. Hus said, “Do not believe that I have taught anything but the truth. I have taught no error. The truths I have taught I will seal with my blood” (as cited in Foxe, 2019, p. 95). He continued God is my witness that the evidence against me is false. I have never taught nor preached save with the intention of winning men, if possible from their sins. In the truth of the gospel I have written, taught, and preached to-day I will gladly die” (Hus, 1904, p. 279). A crowd pushed Hus through the streets where he was led to a stake where his neck was wrapped into place and the fire was ignited (Foxe, 2019). He told the multitude, “You are now going to burn a goose, but in a century, you will have a swan which you can neither roast nor boil” (as cited in Forbush, 1967, p. 143). In his final moments before death, Jan Hus was Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 63 reported to be singing, “Jesus, Son of the living God, have mercy on me” (as cited in Foxe, 2019, p. 95). Emperor Sigismund The younger son of Charles IV, the Holy Roman Emperor, Sigismund was born and raised in Prague (Verney, 2009). Sigismund perceived himself as the second Charlemagne and was the last emperor from the royal Luxembourg family. His titles included king of Bohemia, king of Germany, king of Hungary, king of Lombardy, and Holy Roman emperor. He was only ten years old when his father died in 1378 and he was sent to live in the Hungarian court of King Louis I of Hungary and Poland. Sigismund was pledged in marriage to Mary, the king’s daughter. Years later, a power struggle developed between Sigismund and his would-be father-in-law King Louis, because the King attempted to revoke the marriage agreement. Realizing diplomacy was not an option, Sigismund raised an army to force Louis to honor the agreement he had made years earlier with the now deceased Charles IV. The threat of war forced King Louis’ hand and Mary and Sigismund were married. When King Louis died, Mary became the Queen of Hungary and five years later, Sigismund was made King consort (Drees, 2001). This was a time of war between Islam and Christianity. The Turks had invaded Serbia and Bulgaria. In 1396, Sigismund responded by leading a counterattacking European army, which was soundly defeated. He barely managed to escape with his life. Following his horrible defeat, Sigismund was convinced of the threat posed by Islam to Europe and certain that only a united Christian army could fight and defeat the invaders. This became one of the goals of his life (Drees, 2001). This explains why Emperor Sigismund was so alarmed by what he viewed as the rise of heresy in the kingdom of Bohemia, because it would divide and weaken Christian Europe against Turk invaders. In 1419, four years after the martyrdom of Jan Hus, the people of Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 64 Prague and large parts of Bohemia were still furious about the events of the Council of Constance. In 1418, the Council had formally concluded with the confirmation of Sigismund as the Holy Roman Emperor. Sigismund pledged an oath to Pope Martin V: I Sigismund, king of the Romans, promise and swear to you, Lord Martin V, through the Father, and Son and Holy Spirit and through the wood of the life -giving cross and by the relics of the saints, that I will lift up the Roman Church and you, as the leader of it, as high as I can. (as cited in Fudge, 2016, p. 17) Hussites Bohemia had a population of two million people, mostly ethnic Czech but with a sizeable German speaking minority. About one- third of the land of Bohemia was the property of the Church. The Germans were loyal to Emperor Sigismund and the Pope (Griffith & Dillon, 1999, 07:46). Most Czechs favored Hus and 452 Czech barons voiced their indignation by officially protesting the Council of Constance and the trial and sentence of Hus, just two months after his death (Fudge, 2016). The Czechs that supported the views of Jan Hus now proudly called themselves Hussites (Turnbull, 2004). They were a strong religious minority. Czech historian Frantisek Smahel tells us what set them apart from Roman Catholicism: To the early Czech reformation, the Chalice was a link between heaven and earth, the sacral sphere. Participation on the sacral was mediated by the body and the blood of Christ; that is by communion. And only priests participated in communion (as cited in Griffith & Dillon, 1999, 16:34). Strict religious law known as Canon Law governed how the lay members should take communion. “When the congregation took Holy Communion during the celebration of Mass, they received only the consecrated bread, with the clergy alone partaking of the wine” (Turnbull, Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 65 2004, p. 7). The priests who followed Hus were outraged by the Roman Catholic practice of withholding the wine and responded by giving their congregation ‘Communion in both kinds.’ The Hussites also forced priests out of their congregations that would not give communion in both kinds. Pope Martin V interpreted the events in Bohemia as a challenge to his papacy, and decided to destroy the Hussites (Turnbull, 2004). Emperor Sigismund put pressure on his half-brother King Wenceslaus, telling him to take action or “his position as King of Bohemia would be under threat” (Turnbull, 2014, p.7). The First Defenestration of Prague Although Queen Sofia had once been a strong supporter of Jan Hus, she feared noncompliance in suppressing the Hussite faith would lead to an invasion by Emperor Sigismund’s army to overthrow her and her husband. She convinced King Wenceslaus to restrict religious meetings to only three Hussite churches in Prague. Hussite clergy began open air meetings outside the city. Hussite mobs responded by interrupting Roman Catholic churches that were in the middle of ceremonial re-consecrations (Verney, 2009). King Wenceslaus removed anyone suspected of being a Hussite from the town government and ordered the closure of all schools that did not follow a Roman Catholic. Police actions were also taken against the Hussites (Verney, 2009). Just as it had done when Jan Hus was alive, the Church issued an interdict upon the Hussites of Prague. “No marrying, no burying, no baptizing of babies. No religious services at all. This had severe consequences for medieval people. To be cut off from the Church was to be cut off from God” (as cited in Griffith & Dillon, 1999, 04:57). Due to the interdict, Jan Zelivsky was one of only three remaining Hussite preachers in Prague. He preached against the loss of light from the “night of antichrist” (Fudge, 2016, p. 8). Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 66 Ignoring the interdict, on July 30, 1419 he was preaching at Our Lady of the Snows in the New Town of Prague. He preached about Christ multiplying the loaves and the fishes and then said many ate the bread unworthily including “kings, princes, judges or other idlers of the courts who avoid work and flaunt themselves.” Among this group were prelates, ministers, and Catholic monks and nuns. “Even a thief works with great effort while thieving just as those do who earn their bread sinfully and without faith.” Zelivsky listed “craftsmen, the goldsmiths, painters, butchers, bakers, and stonemasons” were “among those who acquire their bread through unjust means” (Fudge, 2016, p. 22). Following Mass, Zelivsky led his fiery fellow Hussites in a protest march through the streets. The group was joined by many armed men while Zelivsky marched with the Sacred Host. Stopping in front of the Town Hall, the Hussite leaders demanded to negotiate the release of Hussite prisoners. The councilors talked with the angry crowd behind the safety of locked doors from an upstairs window. They refused to discuss the release of the prisoners. Somebody claimed a rock had been thrown at the Sacred Host from one of the councilors. This enraged the mob, who broke through the locked doors, seized the town councilors and threw them from the windows onto the spears of the Hussites below. These murders were known as the ‘First Defenestration of Prague’ (defenestration is from “the Latin de fenestra, ‘from a window’” or to throw from a window) (Turnbull, 2004, p. 8). King Wenceslaus was furious when he learned of the murder of his self-appointed town councilors. He suffered a massive stroke and “died, ‘roaring like a lion”’ after which Emperor Sigismund “saw his opportunity and claimed the crown of Bohemia for himself.” (Turnbull, 2004, p. 8). Though it was Sigismund’s right to become King (Verney, 2009), the Hussites Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 67 believed Sigismund was responsible for Jan Hus’s death and began to prepare for war (Turnbull, 2004). The Rise of Jan Zizka The Hussites were in desperate need of a clever leader with real military experience that could quickly prepare them to go to war in defense of their families and their faith. They needed a miracle. They got it in the form of a man named Jan Zizka (Verney, 2009). “Jan Zizka was a small landowner from the very bottom tier of nobility. He was born sometime around 1360. Over his career he worked as a soldier, a hunting guide, and a mercenary sent to terrorize enemies of the King” (Griffith & Dillon, 1999, 06:10). Zizka had served as a captain in King Wenceslaus’s palace guard. He also fought as a mercenary on the side of the Poles against the Prussian order of Teutonic Knights (Swan, 1993) in Poland and may even have been present at the Battle of Tannenberg in 1410 (Turnbull, 2004). Zizka was blind in one eye (zizka means “one- eyed”) since childhood. By medieval standards, he was a very old man (60 years old) when he assumed command of the Hussite armies in 1419 (Swan, 1993). Peasant Army Zizka had the nearly impossible task of facing the best mounted cavalry in Europe with craftsmen and peasant farmers. Because of the skill required to train an archer, it was necessary to begin training a young boy for a period of many years. Zizka did not have the luxury of time and knew he would need to adapt the military tactics he would teach to simple peasants to reflect what they knew (Griffith & Dillon, 1999, 15:00). The peasants knew agriculture having worked as farmers (Verney, 2009). “Every peasant knew how to separate the wheat from the chaff by hitting it with what amounts to a club.” This club was a farm implement known as a hinged flail. Peasants worked all their lives with a flail in the fields. “The hinged flail is something that Jan Zizka as part of his military genius adapted from peasant culture to military purposes” (Griffith Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 68 & Dillon, 1999, 15:00). Besides using the long-handled flail, the peasant soldiers also used the hooked halberd, a pole arm (A Companion Guide, 2005, p. 8). Thousands of men volunteered. Most could provide their own weapons (Swan, 1993). Estates of nobles from Bohemia and Moravia proclaimed that anybody who claimed the Czechs were heretics was “himself a malicious heretic” (Swan, 1993, p. 44). Enemies and Symbols The Hussites chose two symbols that expressed their deepest beliefs. Hussite flags featured a chalice or a white goose. The chalice symbolized the importance of the communion cup and taking communion in both kinds. The white goose was in reference to Jan Hus (Turnbull, 2004). The Hussites were convinced of the righteousness of their cause. Their motto became “Pravda Vitezi” or “Truth Prevails” (Pike, 2011). Despite their faith, the Hussites could not help but be fearful of what would happen to them if they lost to the approaching enemy army. Roughly 40 miles from Prague, in the town of Kutna Hora, was one of the wealthiest silver mines in the world. The majority of the mining town’s inhabitants were German (Griffith & Dillon, 1999, 08:50). In 1416, a German preacher named Hermann told the citizens of Kutna Hora to kill those who partook of the communion chalice. A few years later, the city council followed Hermann’s example by offering incentives of one groschen for any captured Hussite layperson and five groschen for any captured Hussite priest (Fudge, 2016). A horrendous fate awaited the unfortunate Hussites captured by the German miners of Kutna Hora. “With great blasphemy they tortured them and inhumanly threw them, especially at night, into the deepest pits and mine shafts” (Fudge, 2016, p. 41). Around 1,600 Czechs were killed in the mineshafts (Fudge, 2016). Teaching the Clash Between Government and Religion 69 Of Heretics and Martyrs In medieval times an accepted meaning of heresy was “a willful and persist