and Martin Lupac, leading Calixtine divines, the one afterward elected Archbishop of Prague and the other his Suffragan, were well disposed toward them, and esteemed Stephen especially as an excellent man.[1] Nor did such relations cease when the unprecedented route of the papal and imperial crusaders at Tauss, in 1431, which filled all Europe with amazement, forced Sigismund to confess that the Bohemians were invincible, and that the Council of Basle, then in session, must immediately open negotiations with them. On the contrary, the intimacy grew so close that the Waldenses turned it to their own advantage. It so happened that their priests had nearly all died, and that a renewal of their ministry was desirable. This the Calixtines could not only effect, but could thereby also give them a far more influential position than they had as yet enjoyed. The Calixtines lent a wiling hand, and upon their recommendation two Waldenses, Frederick Nemez and John Wlach, were ordained priests, on the 14th of September, 1433, in the Slavonian Convent of Prague, by Bishop Nicholas (Philibert), a Legate of the Council of Basle. In the summer of the following year (1434), these two priests were sent to Basle, where the Council was at open variance with the Pope, and in a full convocation of clergy consecrated Bishops by Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church. It was done again at the instance of the Calixtines and out of regard for them, the Council being anxious by all possible means to gain their confidence. Thus the Bohemian Waldenses obtained the apostolical succession, and Bishop Stephen and his colleague, who had been consecrated by Bishops Nemez and Wlach, could legitimately transfer it to the Brethren.
For this account of the origin and validity of the Bohemian Waldensian episcopate the following are the direct authorities:
1. A “Narrative of the origin of the Unitas of the Brethren,” in the Lissa Folios, written in the year 1605, and probably by Bishop Jaffet. It gives facts and dates as we have presented them above, and that under circumstances forming a most indisputable guarantee of their correctness. For, as clearly appears from internal evidences, this Narrative was one of the controversial writings with which the Bishops of the Brethren were, at that time, officially meeting the assaults of Wenzel Sturm, a learned and
- ↑ Palacky Geschichte v. Boehmen vol. vii, p. 494.
