In my research on Jan Hus, the Hussite Wars, and the early Unitas Fratrum, I kept running into references to a spiritual guide for women that Hus had written during his period of exile. It was titled Dcerka, the Czech word for “daughter” (pronounced “tzerka”). Intrigued, I went to find it – only to discover that, like so many documents of the early Bohemian Brethren, the piece had never been translated into English. I shrugged my shoulders and dropped the issue, especially since some of the (white male) scholars of the past dismissed it as not very important, just a “standard Medieval devotional,” which it is in many ways.
But then I read an article by Dr. Michèle Miller Sigg at Boston University, Trinity In A Woman’s Soul: Recovering A Women’s Spirituality For Mission In Jan Hus’s Dcerka,1 which made a powerful case for how uniquely special this forgotten little book was. While there had been other spiritual guides for women, they had all been written by women, for women. Meditations by Hildegard of Bingen or Julian of Norwich were certainly significant and powerful. But never before had a prominent male theologian written a guide for women that took women’s spirituality so seriously – at a time when most church leaders viewed women with disdain and derision.
Dr. Sigg writes: The uniqueness of The Daughter first lies in the fact that Jan Hus, a leading male Reformer, was writing exclusively to a female audience, to educate them. Furthermore, the text does not instruct women along the lines of their traditional gender roles in family or church, but instead functions as a spiritual instructional manual to equip them for an active public role, alongside their male counterparts.1
Add to this the fact that Hus’ Dcerka was written before Thomas a Kempis’ great and respected spiritual classic The Imitation of Christ, (to which Dcerka has often been compared), and its significance increases. I became interested in making Hus’ wisdom available to a modern, English-speaking audience.
Seeking translation
Now, I have done a lot of work with artificial intelligence, particularly for graphics and animation, but also for rudimentary, non-critical translations. A quick survey suggested this was not a viable route for translation of Bohemian (medieval Czech) because most AI translation engines, if they did Czech at all, were only trained on modern business Czech. However, I found that a respected German AI translation engine, DeepL, had included a large amount of early Bohemian literature in the training of its Large Language Model. I decided to give it a test – intending initially only to have DeepL do the rough translation, to be carefully cleaned up by a real human translator.
So, we obtained an academic copy of Dcerka in Czech and uploaded it to the AI translation engine. In a matter of minutes, we had a translation – but not quite what I was looking for! The DeepL engine, recognizing that Dcerka was medieval Czech, translated into Shakespearean English, filled with “thees” and “thous” and “verilies.” But—the result was clear and understandable to anyone who could read the King James Version of the Bible!
I took the Elizabethan-sounding rough DeepL translation to my friend and colleague, the Rev. Dr. Daniel Crews, former archivist of the Southern Province. Dr. Crews has had extensive experience translating documents from the early Unity, and is a respected expert on Hus. Expecting him to be working on the translation for weeks, I was astonished a few days later when he called me and said, “You don’t really need me. This translation is basically solid.”
There were some odd breaks and skips and a few places that the AI engine had chosen the wrong simile—but it was workable. There was only one serious problem spot, where Hus had quoted Aristotle from memory and didn’t quite get the quote right. A bit of human research turned up the likely original citation.
So we had a translation—in archaic KJV English. Not what I wanted to use to make Dcerka available to modern readers. I spent several weeks reading and rewriting the text in modern English, in some cases checking back to the Bohemian to clarify the meaning. Just as with Biblical translation, this is a far more tedious process than it might seem on the surface; and in every case, I wanted to make sure that the original meaning was properly conveyed to the modern reader. It was important for the text to read smoothly and clearly, but accurately represent Hus’ actual thoughts.
Words from 1413
Dcerka was written in 1413 during a period when Jan Hus was in exile. This was also the period when he wrote his most significant work, De Ecclesia, “The Church.” When Hus was excommunicated, the entire city of Prague was placed under interdict as well, so long as they protected him. Rather than allow his beloved followers to suffer, Hus voluntarily left the city and lived in hiding – under the protection of a wealthy supporter. During this period, Hus wrote and also preached often in the outdoors – famously under a Linden tree at Kozi Hradek.
Hus had a long-standing relationship with a group of lay religious communities in Prague known as the Beguines, many of whom attended regularly at Bethlehem Chapel. Apparently, their leaders asked Hus if he would write a spiritual guide for their members.
The Beguines were an order of lay women who voluntarily embraced the Vita Evangelica, the practice of the early church. They voluntarily lived a life of simplicity and chastity in service to the poor. While early on they did not have formal vows, by Hus’ time they did have a promise that while part of the Beguine community, they would remain celibate and would not marry. This was not a permanent vow, as it would be for a nun or priest. One thing that is intriguing (but impossible to document) is the suggestion that some of the Beguines in the Prague communities were in fact reformed prostitutes. This is in keeping with Catholic theology, that virginity could be restored by a true act of confession and contrition. But it is interesting to think that some of the Beguines Hus was addressing as “the virgins” might have formerly been reformed prostitutes from the very church-owned brothel in Prague that Hus condemned!
Hus’ attitudes about sexuality are typical of the time—any pursuit of sexual pleasure outside of the act of procreation was a sin. He had himself taken a vow of chastity that he took very seriously, and it is clear in Dcerka that he regards virginity and chastity to be important parts of a pure spiritual life. The piece is directed to “the virgins” and references to their virginity, and the value of virginity, are scattered throughout.
Interestingly, there is today a renewed interest in the idea of virginity and chastity as a spiritual discipline among some young people and asexuals, and some of these might find great value in Hus’ writings.
One thing that strikes me about Dcerka was how very countercultural it was for its day. Most theologians of the day contended that women were not made in the image of God—after all, they were only created from a rib!—and hence they had a subordinate role in all things. Only men could be spiritual leaders. Women were regarded as a temptation to sin and distraction for men. They were viewed as inherently weak and extremely prone to sexual sin as a result of Eve’s Original Sin. It was their temptation that weakened men and caused them to sin. While they were necessary for procreation and certainly had a role in homemaking and child rearing, they had little business – or even capacity – for spiritual pursuits. Does this sound familiar? There are still denominations teaching this appalling theology in modern times.
But Hus appears to have had a radically different view of women, particularly of women’s spiritual lives. Dr. Thomas Fudge says that Hus had written to these pious women “because of his conviction that women were sometimes more ardent proponents of religious truth than the theologians of Prague in the early fifteenth century.”2 His positive view of women may trace back to the love and respect he had for his mother, whom he frequently consulted for advice. But it may represent a generally more positive view among Bohemians of the day, as well.
Whatever the case, Dcerka clearly treats the women of the Beguine community with a respect uncommon in the era. Though speaking as a spiritual advisor, Hus is also treating them as equals in many ways. He reminds them that they are the walking and breathing images of God, due all the respect and awe that comes with that. He goes out of his way to remind them of this divinity, the Imagio Dei. And he holds them to the same spiritual standards and demands as men. He assumes their capacity for profound spiritual and theological awareness, and does not ever “talk down” to them. Instead, Dcerka addresses the women of the Beguine communities as worthwhile people made in the image of God, persons of spiritual agency and profound worth.
How much better would our world be if we all, men, women, all races, looked at one another and saw first the Imagio Dei, the image of God? Such is the ideal that Hus holds forth in Dcerka.
Dcerka is available from Interprovincial Board of Communication (IBOC) at store.moravian.org and on Amazon.com.
The Rev. John Jackman is the Executive Director of Comenius Foundation. He serves as pastor of Trinity Moravian Church in Winston-Salem, NC. Fetter Lane Books, an imprint of Comenius Foundation, focuses on publishing books that will enhance understanding of the Moravian Church’s teachings and traditions.
Footnotes:
1. Published in Sixteenth-Century Mission: Explorations in Protestant and Roman Catholic Theology and Practice by Robert L. Gallagher; Edward L. Smither Publisher: Lexham Press, 2021
2. Thomas A. Fudge, Jan Hus Between Time and Eternity: Reconsidering a Medieval Heretic. (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2015), 6
