“At least these two reviewers don’t appear to give the Catholic Church a ringing indorsement nor do they seem to agree with your conclusion.”
indorsement?
“But, it’s rather odd that a work by a Pentacostal is considered evidence to support the Catholic Church’s position.”
No, the facts are clear: Huss was a heretic. His trial was conducted according to understood procedures for the time.
Look, Thomas Fudge has written two books on Huss that I know of. He clearly is, according to what other historians (whom I have read) have said, essentially pro-Huss but he makes it plain that Huss was a heretic and was tried by the procedures of his day. Why is that so hard for you to accept?
I have not read either book. Yet. But I have decided to get one or both of them in a few weeks. I’ll probably just get the one on the trial since the other is over a $100. Either way I am getting rid of three books on the Jan Hus and the Hussites on Thursday (I’m getting rid of almost 500 books so far, no shelf space left). That new book looks worthwhile. There are some books I just can’t afford: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/9004290389?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=ox_sc_sfl_title_1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER
So you're basing your assessment on what someone else has stated that Fudge stated? I have found that to be a very dangerous practice. I've looked on the Internet but have not found very much on Fudge, his doctrinal beliefs, or what he thinks of Hus. His books are very expensive and right now I have over 40 books on my shelf that I'm trying to read through.