Back to History ReportsBack to the Way of Life Home PageWay of Life Literature Online
Catalog
Back to History Reports
Back to the Way of Life Home Page
Way of Life Literature Online
Catalog
THE
HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, from the birth of Christ to the
18th Century: including the very interesting account of the
Waldenses and Albigenses
By William Jones
First Edition 1812
Fourth Edition 1819
Fifth Edition 1826
London: Printed for the Author by W. Myers, 7, Took’s Court,
Castle Street, Holborn
[Note from the publisher. This valuable out-of-print book was carefully formatted for electronic publication by Way of Life Literature. For a catalog of other books, both current and old, in print and electronic format, contact us at P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, fbns@wayoflife.org (e-mail), http://www.wayoflife.org (web site).]
[Table of Contents for "A History of the Christian Church" by William Jones]
SKETCH OF THE STATE OF THE CHRISTIAN PROFESSION FROM THE DEATH OF CLAUDE OF TURIN TO THE TIMES OF PETER WALDO
A.D. 843-1160
During the dark ages which succeeded the invasion of Europe by the barbarous nations, when feudal anarchy distracted the civil governments, and a flood of superstition had deluged the church, Christianity, banished from the seats of empire, and loathing the monkish abodes of indolence and vice, meekly retired into the sequestered valleys of Piedmont. Finding there a race of men unarrayed in hostile armor, uncontaminated by the doctrines and commandments of an apostate church, unambitious in their temper, and simple in their manners, she preferred their society, and among them took up her abode. The turbulence of the times, which drove many from the more fertile plains of France and Italy, in search of freedom and tranquillity, greatly augmented the population of this remote district; and, in the ninth century, the doctrine of the kingdom of heaven had been held forth among them with considerable clearness and ability by Claude, bishop of Turin. [See chap. 4, sect. 1, and 1 See chap. 4, sect. 1, and L’Hist. Generale des Eglises Vaud. par. Giles Juan Leger, ch. 20, 21, 22, 28. Rankin’s Hist. France, vol. 3.]
Remote from the influence of noisy parties, and little conversant with literature, we can scarcely expect any notice of them, until their increase and prosperity excited the attention of ambition and avarice, and occasioned it to be rumored in the neighboring ecclesiastical states, that a numerous people occupied the southern valleys of the Alps, whose faith and practice differed from those of the Romish church; who paid no tithes, offered no mass, worshipped no saints, nor had recourse to any of the prescribed means for redeeming their souls from purgatory.
The archbishops of Turin, Milan, and other cities, heard this report with anxiety, and the necessary measures were accordingly adopted for ascertaining its truth or falsehood; the former turning out to be the result, and finding that these people were not to be controlled by the authority and denunciations of the church of Rome, the aid of the civil power was demanded. The princes and nobles of the adjacent countries at first refused to disturb them; they had beheld with pleasure their simple manners, their uprightness and integrity, their readiness to oblige, and their fidelity in the discharge of all the duties of civil and social life. The clamor of the Romish clergy, however, ultimately prevailed, and the civil power was armed against the peaceable and inoffensive inhabitants of the valleys. Scaffolds were erected and fires kindled at Turin and other cities around them. The fortitude and confidence of the martyrs, however, increased as their faith and constancy were tried. "Favor me," said Catalan Girard, who was one of their number, as he sat upon the funeral pile at Reuel -- "favor me with those two flint stones," which he saw near him. Being handed to him, he added, as he threw them to the ground, "Sooner shall I eat these stones, than you shall be able by persecution to destroy the religion for which I die" [Perrin’s History of the Vaudois, part 2, b. 2, ch. 4].
Multitudes, however, fled like innocent and defenseless sheep from these devouring wolves. They crossed the Alps; and traveled in every direction as Providence and the prospect of safety conducted them, into Germany, England, France, Italy, and other countries. There they trimmed their lamps and shone with new lustre. Their worth every where drew attention, and their doctrine formed increasing circles around them. The storm which threatened their destruction, only scattered them as the precious seeds of the future glorious reformation of the Christian church. [Dr. Rankin’s History of France, vol. 3, p. 193-198.]
In the present section, we shall endeavor to mark their dispersions into different countries, and the treatment they met with during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, prior to the appearance of Peter Waldo of Lyons. Our materials of information are scanty, and even those we must be content to receive chiefly from their implacable enemies; but by a little patient research, and the aid of a discriminating judgment in selecting the probable from the fictitious, we shall be furnished with some interesting information relative to this obscure portion of their history.
But before we proceed, it may be proper to remark, that about the middle of the eleventh century, and during the pontificate of Pope Leo IX (A.D. 1050) rose up BERENGARIUS, a person of great learning and talents, who denied the doctrine of the real presence, as it was then commonly termed; and by writing against it, called forth all the learned of the church of Rome to defend the doctrine of transubstantiation. Berengarius was a native of France, educated under Fulhert, bishop of Chartras, a very learned man; and taking orders in the church, became deacon of St. Maurice, and ultimately archbishop of Angers, in the province of Anjou. He was also principal of the academy of Tours. The prevalent sentiment of his day relative to the eucharist was, that the bread was the identical body, and the wine the very blood of Christ -- not only figuratively, but substantially and properly. Berengarius, on the contrary, insisted that the body of Christ is only in the heavens; and that the elements of bread and wine are merely the symbols of his body and blood. Several of the bishops wrote against him, most bitterly complaining of his heresy; but not feeling the force of their arguments, Berengarius remained unmoved, and defended his opinions with the utmost pertinacity. He wrote a letter on the subject to Lanfrank, who was at that time at the head of the convent of St. Stephens, at Caen, in Normandy, and called from thence by William the Conqueror to be archbishop of Canterbury, which being opened while the latter was from home, was officiously transmitted by the convent to Pope Leo. The pontiff, shocked at its heretical contents, summoned a council at Vercelli, at which Berengarius was commanded to be present. His friends, however, advised him against going, and he consequently sent two persons to attend the council, and answer in his behalf. Lanfrank also was present and pleaded for Berengarius, but the latter was condemned, the two persons who appeared for him imprisoned, and Lanfrank commanded by the Pope to draw up a refutation of the heresy of Berengarius on pain of being himself reputed a heretic; with which injunction he thought it prudent to comply. This example was followed also by the council of Paris, summoned the very same year by Henry I, in which Berengarius and his numerous adherents, were threatened with all sorts of evils both spiritual and temporal -- evils which were in part executed against the heretical prelate, for the monarch deprived him of all his revenues. But neither threatenings nor fines, nor the decrees of Synods, could shake the firmness of his mind, or oblige him to retract his sentiments. In the mean while, the opinions of Berengarius were every where spreading rapidly, insomuch that if we may credit contemporary writers, "his doctrine had corrupted all the English, Italian, and French nations." Thuanus adds, that "in Germany were many of the same doctrine, and that Bruno, bishop of Treves, banished them all out of his diocese, sparing only their blood." During the remainder of the life of Leo IX, Berengarius and his friends enjoyed a temporary respite, but no sooner had Victor II succeeded to the pontifical chair, than the flame of religious discord was rekindled, and a council was assembled at Tours, in 1055, to examine anew the doctrine of Berengarius. At this council the famous Hildebrand, who was afterwards created Pope Gregory VII, appeared in the character of legate, and opposed the new doctrine with the utmost vehemence. Berengarius was also present at this assembly, and overawed, by threats rather than convinced by argument, he professed to abandon his opinions, solemnly abjured them in the presence of the council, and made his peace with the church. In this, however, he appears to have been insincere, for soon after this period he taught anew, though with more circumspection, the opinions he had formerly professed. The account of his perfidy reaching Rome, he was summoned to attend a council which was convened there in 1059, and on this occasion, so terrified was Berengarius, that he declared his readiness to embrace and adhere to the doctrines which that venerable assembly should think proper to impose upon him. A confession of faith was accordingly drawn up, which he publicly signed and ratified by an oath. In that confession the following declaration was contained, -- that the bread and wine after consecration were not only a sacrament, but also the real body and blood of Jesus Christ; and that this body and blood were handled by the priests, and consumed by the faithful, not sacramentally, but in reality and truth, as other sensible objects are. This doctrine was so monstrously absurd; it was such an impudent insult upon common sense and the very first principles of reason, that it is impossible it should impose upon the acute mind of Berengarius for a moment, nor could it possibly become the object of his serious belief; and his conduct, almost immediately after, proved that his profession of it was an odious act of dissimulation; for no sooner was he returned into France, than he expressed the utmost detestation and abhorrence of the doctrines he had been obliged to profess at Rome, solemnly abjured them in his discourse and writings; and returned zealously to the profession and defense of his former real opinion.
The controversy, however, was still prolonged during many years, and a multitude of writings on both sides of the question, were continually issuing, and the followers of Berengarius every where increasing. His adversaries now had recourse to the seducing influence of soft and friendly expostulation, to engage him to dissemble anew; or, in other words, to return from his pretended apostasy; but these proved ineffectual. At length, Gregory VII was raised to the papal chair, a man whose enterprising spirit no difficulties or opposition could discourage. This prelate, resolving to put an end to this wide-spreading controversy, sent an order to Berengarius to repair to Rome in the year 1078. Gregory had a high esteem for the latter, and though to silence the clamors of the multitude he found it necessary to oppose him, he did it with all possible mildness. He permitted Berengarius to draw up a new confession of his faith, and to renounce that which he had formerly sworn to abide by.
This new confession not proving satisfactory to his enraged adversaries, though Gregory himself approved it, a second was drawn up, which was indeed less vague and equivocal, but then it contained all the quintessence of absurdity which characterized the original one; for he now professed to believe, that "the bread and wine were, by the mysterious influences of the holy prayer, and the words of Christ, substantially changed into the true, proper, and vivifying body and blood of Christ." No sooner had he made this strange declaration than the pope loaded him with caresses and sent him back to France, graced with the most honorable testimonies of his liberality and friendship. Solemn, however, as the declaration had been at Rome, Berengarius had no sooner returned to his residence than he began to compose an elaborate refutation of his last confession, which excited afresh the flames of theological controversy. Berengarius, however, amidst the clamors of his enraged adversaries, from this time observed a profound silence. Disgusted with a controversy in which the first principles of reason were so impudently insulted, and exhausted by an opposition which he was unable to overcome, he abandoned all his worldly concerns and retired into solitude, to pass the remainder of his days in fasting, prayer, and the exercise of piety. "In the year 1088 death put a period to the affliction which he suffered in his retirement, occasioned by a bitter reflection upon the dissimulation he had been guilty of at Rome; leaving behind him, in the minds of the people, a deep impression of his extraordinary sanctity, and his followers were as numerous as his fame was illustrious" [Mosheim, vol. 2, Cent. 11, part 2].
This controversy was too remarkable to be wholly passed over in this place, but having said thus much of it, I now pass on to a more pleasing and profitable subject.
A little before the year 1140, Evervinus, of Stainfield, in the diocese of Cologne, in Germany, addressed a letter to the celebrated Saint Bernard, concerning certain heretics in his neighborhood. This letter has been preserved by Mabillon, and the learned Dr. Allix has furnished us with a translation of it in his Remarks on the Ancient Churches of Piedmont, p. 140. A few extracts from it will enable us to form some judgment concerning this class of men. Evervinus was much perplexed in his mind about them; and to obtain a solution of his doubts, he wrote as follows, to the renowned Bernard, whose word, at that time, was as law throughout Christendom.
"There have lately been some heretics discovered among us near Cologne, of whom some have with satisfaction returned again to the church. One that was a bishop among them and his companions, openly opposed us in the assembly of the clergy and laity, the lord archbishop himself being present, with many of the nobility, maintaining their heresy from the words of Christ and his apostles. But finding that they made no impression, they desired that a day might be fixed, upon which they might bring along with them men skillful in their faith, promising to return to the church, provided their teachers were unable to answer their opponents; but that otherwise they would rather die than depart from their judgment. Upon this declaration, having been admonished to repent for three days, they were seized by the people in their excess of zeal, and burnt to death; and, what is most astonishing, they came to the stake, and endured the torment of the flames, not only with patience, but even with joy. In this case, O holy father, were I present with you, I should be glad to ask you, how these members of Satan could persist in their heresy with such constancy and courage as is rarely to be found among the most religious in the faith of Christ.
"Their heresy is this: -- They say that the church is only among themselves, because they alone follow the ways of Christ, and imitate the apostles, not seeking secular gains, possessing no property, following the pattern of Christ, who was himself perfectly poor, nor permitted his disciples to possess any thing. [We shall see reason hereafter to believe that, in this particular, Evervinus misrepresented them. Author] Whereas ye, say they to us, join house to house, and field to field, seeking the things of this world, -- yea, even your monks and regular canons possess all these things -- describing themselves as the poor of Christ’s flock, who have no certain abode, fleeing from one city to another, like sheep in the midst of wolves -- enduring persecution with the apostles and martyrs; though strict in their manner of life, abstemious, laborious, devout and holy, and seeking only what is needful for bodily sustenance, living as men who are not of the world. But you, say they, lovers of the world, have peace with the world because ye are of it. False apostles, who adulterate the word of God, seeking their own things, have misled you and your ancestors. Whereas we and our fathers having been born and brought up in the apostolic doctrine, have continued in the grace of Christ, and shall continue so to the end. ‘By their fruits ye shall know them’ saith Christ; and our fruits are the footsteps of Christ. The apostolic dignity, say they, is corrupted by engaging itself in secular affairs, while it sits in the chair of Peter. They do not hold the baptism of infants, alleging that passage of the gospel, ‘He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.’ They place no confidence in the intercession of saints; and all things observed in the church which have not been established by Christ himself or his apostles, they call superstitious. They do not admit of any purgatory fire after death, contending that the souls as soon as they depart out of the bodies, do enter into rest, or punishment, proving it from that passage of Solomon, ‘Which way soever the tree falls, whether to the south or to the north, there it lies,’ by which means they make void all the prayers and oblations of believers for the deceased.
"We, therefore, beseech you, holy father, to employ your care and watchfulness against these manifold mischiefs; and that you would be pleased to direct your pen against these wild beasts of the reeds, not thinking it sufficient to answer us that the tower of David, to which we may betake ourselves for refuge, is sufficiently fortified with bulwarks, that a thousand bucklers hang on the walls of it, all shields of mighty men. For we desire father, for the sake of us simple ones, and that are slow of understanding, you would be pleased by your study, to gather all these arms into one place, that they may be the more readily found, and more powerful to resist these monsters. I must inform you also, that those of them who have returned to our church, tell us, that they had great numbers of their persuasion scattered almost every where, and that amongst them were many of our clergy and monks. And as for those who were burnt, they, in the defense they made for themselves, told us, that this heresy had been concealed from the time of the martyrs - and that it had existed in Greece and other countries."
The letter of Evervinus had all the effect upon Bernard that he could desire. The mighty champion immediately prepared himself for the combat. He was then publishing a set of sermons on the Canticles, and in the 65th and 66th of them he enters the lists most vehemently with these heretics. He is extremely offended with them for deriding the Catholics because they baptized infants, and prayed for the dead, and asserted purgatory -- condemns their scrupulous refusal to swear at all, which, according to him, was one of their peculiarities -- upbraids them with their secrecy in the observance of their religious rites, not considering the necessity which persecution imposed upon them -- finds fault with a practice among them of dwelling with women in the same house without being married to them, by which we are no doubt to understand, that they did not think it necessary to solemnize their marriages according to the ceremonies of the church of Rome, though he expresses himself as knowing very little of the manners of the sect; and from the numberless rumors propagated against them, he suspects them of hypocrisy. Yet his testimony in favor of their general conduct seems to overbalance all his invectives. "If," says he, "you ask them of their faith, nothing can be more Christian; if you observe their conversation, nothing can be more blameless, and what they speak, they prove by deeds. You may see a man, for the testimony of his faith, frequent the church, honor the elders, offer his gift, make his confession, receive the sacrament. What more like a Christian? As to life and manners, he circumvents no man, over-reaches no man, and does violence to no man. He fasts much, and eats not the bread of idleness, but works with his hands for his support. The whole body, indeed, are rustic and illiterate, and all whom I have known of this sect are very ignorant." Such was the testimony of the great Saint Bernard in their behalf.
[Dr. Haweis loses all patience with his brother Milner, for attempting to introduce the great Bernard into the calendar of saints. "I am astonished," says he, "at his attempt to enroll Bernard in his catalogue of evangelical religion. Saint added to such a name would be impious. However orthodox some of his sentiments may be, can false miracles, lying prophecies, bloody persecutions of the faithful, and servitude to the papacy and her dominion, constitute a saint of the first water? A protestant divine disgraces his page by these commendations, and renders even the truths which he supports, and contends for as evangelical, suspicious." Impartial Hist. vol 2, p. 230. In all this I fully agree with Dr. Haweis; but then it furnishes me with a powerful plea against his own consistency, who has no scruple to enroll in his catalogue the names of Athanasius and Augustine -- men equally renowned for their lust of power, their persecuting principles, their false miracles, their lying prophecies, and abject servitude to the prevailing corruption of their respective times. To the character of Bernard, however, let us not be unjust. He was not a blind and slavish supporter of the court of Rome, even in those days. On the contrary, he used the greatest freedom of speech in lashing the vices of the clergy of his time, and made himself extremely obnoxious to them by his free remonstrances. "Who at the outset," says he, "when the order of monks began, would ever have imagined that monks would become so wicked as they since have? Oh, how unlike are we to those in the days of Anthony? Did Macarius live in such a manner? Did Basil teach so? Did Anthony ordain so? Did the fathers in Egypt carry themselves so? How is the light of the world become darkness? How is the salt of the earth become unsavory? I am a liar," says he, "if I have not seen an abbot having above sixty horses in his train! When ye saw them riding, ye might say, ‘These are not fathers of monasteries, but lords of castles - not shepherds of souls, but princes of provinces!’ -- Oh, vanity of vanities! the walls of churches are glorious, while the poor are starving." Even the popes themselves were not spared by Bernard. He wrote to Eugenius and to Innocent the Second, imputing to them the blame of all the wickedness in the church, -- though he approved of its constitution, and defended all its rights and ceremonies. This inconsistent conduct gave rise to a saying which passed into a proverb, and was common for centuries after, viz. Bernardus non vidit omnia -- Bernard does not see every thing.]
We have some additional information concerning these people, given us by Egbert, a monk, and afterwards abbot of Schonauge, who tells us that he had often disputed with these heretics, and that he had learned still more of their opinions from those who had through the force of torments and the threat of being burned, renounced their communion. He says, "they are commonly called Cathari, [Puritans] a sort of people very pernicious to the catholic faith, which, like moths, they corrupt and destroy." He adds, that they were divided into several sects, and maintained their opinions by the authority of scripture. He takes particular notice of their denying the utility of baptism to infants, which, say they, through their incapacity, avails nothing to their salvation; insisting that baptism ought to be deferred till they come to years of discretion, and that even then those only should be baptized who make a personal profession of faith, and desire it. [See his Sermon against the Cathari in Bib. Pat. tom. 2, p. 99, 106. D’Anver’s Hist. Bapt. p. 249.] "They are armed," says he, "with the words of the holy scripture which in any way seem to favor their sentiments, and with those they know how to defend their errors, and to oppose the catholic truth; though in reality they are wholly ignorant of the true meaning couched in those words, and which cannot be discovered without great judgment. They are increased to great multitudes throughout all countries, to the great danger of the church for their words eat like a canker, and, like a flying leprosy, runs every way, infecting the precious members of Christ. These, in our Germany we call Cathari; in Flanders they call them Piphles; in French, Tisserands, from the art of weaving, because numbers of them are of that occupation" [Dr. Allix’s Remarks, p. 150].
Thus by comparing together these several fragments of information, we may acquire some distinct notion of these Cathari. They were a plain, unassuming, harmless, and industrious race of Christians, patiently bearing the cross after Christ, and both in their doctrine and manners condemning the whole system of idolatry and superstition which reigned in the church of Rome, placing true religion in the faith, hope, and obedience of the gospel, maintaining a supreme regard to the authority of God, in his word, and regulating their sentiments and practices by that divine standard. Even in the twelfth century their numbers abounded in the neighborhood of Cologne, in Flanders, the south of France, Savoy, and Milan. "They were increased," says Egbert, "to great multitudes, THROUGHOUT ALL COUNTRIES," and although they seem not to have attracted attention in any remarkable degree previous to this period, yet, as IT IS OBVIOUS THEY COULD NOT HAVE SPRUNG UP IN A DAY, IT IS NOT AN UNFAIR INFERENCE THAT THEY MUST HAVE LONG EXISTED AS A PEOPLE WHOLLY DISTINCT FROM THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, THOUGH, AMIDST THE POLITICAL SQUABBLES OF THE CLERGY, IT WAS THEIR GOOD FORTUNE TO BE ALMOST ENTIRELY OVERLOOKED.
The same Egbert, speaking of them, says, "Concerning the souls of the dead, they hold this opinion, that at the very instant of their departure out of the body, they go to eternal bliss or endless misery, for they do not admit the belief of the universal church, that there are some purgatory punishments, with which the souls of some of the elect are tried for a time, on account of those sins from which they have not been purified by a plenary satisfaction in this life. On which account they think it superfluous and vain to give alms for the dead and celebrate masses; and they scoff at our ringing of bells, which, nevertheless, for pious reasons, are used in our churches, to give others warning that they may pray for the dead, and to put them in mind of their own death. As for masses, they altogether despise them, regarding them as of no value, for they maintain that the sacerdotal order has entirely ceased in the church of Rome and all other catholic churches, and that true priests are only to be found in their sect" [Serm. 1, p. 889, in Bib. pp. Colon. ed. quoted by Dr. Allix, p. 152].
Throughout the whole of the twelfth century, these people were exposed to severe persecution. The zeal of Galdinus, archbishop of Milan, was roused against them to such a pitch, that after making them the objects of unrelenting persecution, during a period of eight or nine years, he, at length, fell a martyr to his own zeal, dying in the year 1173, in consequence of an illness contracted through the excess of his vehemence in preaching against them.
Towards the middle of the twelfth century, a small society of these Puritans, as they were called by some, or Waldenses, as they are termed by others, or Paulicians, as they are denominated by our old monkish historian, William of Neuburg, made their appearance in England. This latter writer speaking of them, says, "they came originally from Gascoyne, where, being as numerous as the sand of the sea, they sorely infested both France, Italy, Spain, and England." The following is the account given by Dr. Henry, in his History of Great Britain, vol. viii p. 338. Oct. ed. of this emigrating party, which, in substance, corresponds with what is said of them by Rapin, Collier, Lyttleton, and other of our writers.
"A company, consisting of about thirty men and women, who spoke the German language, appeared in England at this time (1159), and soon attracted the attention of government by the singularity of their religious practices and opinions. It is indeed very difficult to discover with certainty what their opinions were, because they are recorded only by our monkish historians, who speak of them with much asperity. They were apprehended and brought before a council of the clergy at Oxford. Being interrogated about their religion, their teacher, named Gerard, a man of learning, answered in their name, that they were Christians, and believed the doctrines of the apostles. Upon a more particular inquiry, it was found that they denied several of the received doctrines of the church, such as purgatory, prayers for the dead, and the invocation of saints; and refusing to abandon these damnable heresies, as they were called, they were condemned as incorrigible heretics, and delivered to the secular arm to be punished. The king, (Henry II) at the instigation of the clergy, commanded them to be branded with a red hot iron on the forehead, to be whipped through the streets of Oxford, and, having their clothes cut short by their girdles, to be turned into the open fields, all persons being forbidden to afford them any shelter or relief under the severest penalties. This cruel sentence was executed in its utmost rigor; and, it being the depth of winter, all these unhappy persons perished with cold and hunger. These seem to have been the first who suffered death in Britain, for the vague and variable crime of heresy, and it would have been much to the honor of the country if they had been the last."
There is an account of the punishing of these Waldenses, in the Archaeologia, vol. 9, p. 292-305, written by the Rev. Mr. Denne, of Wilmington; from which I shall here give a short extract by way of supplement to the preceding narrative.
"These persons, having been believers of the essential doctrines of Christianity, (as is admitted by the bishops) and, as it may be inferred from the silence of the historian, that these sectaries were in their manners inoffensive, nothing but the evil spirit of persecution could have prompted their judges to deliver them up to the civil magistrate. It was the more culpable in the prelates, because there was so little ground for an alarm of their propagating with success their peculiar tenets. For though they seem to have resided for some time in England, they only converted one woman of inferior rank, and she was so slightly attached to them, that she was soon prevailed on to recant and forsake their society. And as they were not disturbers of the public peace, it is somewhat strange that the king, whose disposition was humane, should think those people merited branding and exile. But it was during the contest between Henry and Becket, in support of the just rights of the crown, that this occurrence happened; and his hard usage of these foreigners has been attributed to an unwillingness of affording a pretext to the pope and his adherents to charge them with profaneness, or an inattention to the cause of religion. By the council of Tours, held in 1163, princes were exhorted and directed to imprison all heretics within their dominions, and to confiscate their effects. Of this injunction Henry could not be ignorant, and he might be actuated by it to treat the delinquents with more rigor than he otherwise would have done."
Mr. Denne has fixed the sitting of the council at Oxford in the year 1166.
But the Cathari, or Puritans, were not the only sect which, during the twelfth century, appeared in opposition to the superstition of the church of Rome. About the year 1110, in the South of France, in the provinces of Languedoc and Provence, appeared PETER DE BRUYS, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of heaven, and exerting the most laudable efforts to reform the abuses and remove the superstitions which disfigured the beautiful simplicity of the gospel worship. His labors were crowned with abundant success. He converted a great number of persons to the faith of Christ, and after a most indefatigable ministry of twenty years continuance, he was burnt at St. Giles’s, a city of Languedoc in France, in the year 1130, by an enraged populace, instigated by the clergy, who apprehended their traffic to be in danger from this new and intrepid reformer. His followers were called PETROBRUSIANS; but of his doctrinal sentiments the following are those alone which we can, be sure of at this remote period -- that the ordinance of baptism was to be administered only to adults -- that it was a piece of idle superstition to build and dedicate churches to the service of God, who in worship has a peculiar respect to the state of the heart, and who cannot be worshipped with temples made by hands -- that crucifixes were objects of superstition, and ought to be destroyed -- that in the Lord’s supper the real body and blood of Christ were not exhibited, but only represented in the way of symbol or figure -- and lastly, that the oblations, prayers, and good works of the living, could in no respect be beneficial to the dead. [Mosheim’s Church History, vol. 3, cent. 12 part 2, ch. 5 and the authors there referred to.]
A few years after the death of Peter Bruys, rose up an Italian by birth, of the name of HENRY, said to have been his disciple, and who was the founder of a sect called the HENRICIANS. He had been both a monk and a hermit; but having received the knowledge of the truth, he labored to reform the superstitions of the times. Quitting Lausanne, a city of Switzerland, he traveled to Mans, and being banished from thence, removed successively to Poictiers, Bourdeaux, and other cities in France; and at length, in the year 1147, to Toulouse, preaching the gospel in all those places with the greatest acceptance, and declaiming with vehemence and fervor against the vices of the clergy, and the superstitions introduced by them into the Christian church. At Toulouse he was warmly opposed by the great St. Bernard, that luminary of the Catholic church, who, though he wrote against him with great bitterness, is nevertheless constrained to admit that Henry was a learned man, and greatly respected by his numerous followers. The latter, however, to avoid his fury, was compelled to save himself by flight. He was, nevertheless, seized in his retreat, and carried before Pope Eugenius III, who assembled a council at Rheims, in which he presided in person, and having received a number of accusations against Henry, committed him in the year 1158 to a close prison, in which he soon ended his days. His doctrinal sentiments have not been handed down to us in a manner so full and explicit as could be wished. "All we know is, that he rejected infant baptism; censured with severity the corrupt and licentious manners of the clergy; treated the festivals and ceremonies of the Catholic church with the utmost contempt; and held private assemblies, in which he explained and inculcated his peculiar sentiments" [Mosheim, vol. 3, cent. 12, part 2, ch. 5].
I feel some hesitation in adding to the list of reformers who arose during this benighted period, the name of ARNOLD OF BRESCIA, because Mosheim and other writers have described him as a man of a turbulent and impetuous spirit; and, though he is universally allowed to have been possessed of extensive erudition, and remarkable for the austerity of his manners, he is represented by those writers as not confining himself to the apostolic weapons of the Christian warfare. Yet, the spirit of candor and fairness would seem to require that allowance should be made for those exaggerations which the malignity of his enraged adversaries prompted them to vent against him. There are few things more difficult than to combine the leniter in modo with the fortiter in re, and gentleness seems almost incompatible with the zeal of a reformer. I shall, however, adduce a few impartial testimonies to the character of Arnold, and leave the reader to his own reflections on them. The following account of him is given in a recent publication of great merit.
"Arnold, at an early period of life traveled into France, and became the disciple of the celebrated Abelard. Having imbibed some of the heretical sentiments, and a portion of that freedom of thought, which distinguished his master, he returned to Italy, and in the habit of a monk, began to propagate his opinions in the streets of Brescia. The zeal of this daring reformer was at first directed against the wealth and luxury of the Romish clergy. Insisting that the kingdom of Christ is not of this world, he maintained that the temporal power of the church was an unprincipled corruption of the rights of secular princes, and that all the corruptions which disgraced the Christian faith, and all the animosities which distracted the church, sprang from the power and overgrown possessions of the clergy. These bold truths were propagated not as mere points of speculation, or as an explanation of the various calamities which then affected the church; they were held as the foundation of a system of reform which the people were excited to carry into execution; and the clergy were called upon to renounce their usurped possessions, and to lead a frugal and abstemious life on the voluntary contributions of the people. The inhabitants of Brescia were roused by the eloquent appeals of their countryman. They revered him as the apostle of religious liberty, and rose in rebellion against their lawful bishop. The church took alarm at these dangerous commotions, and in a general council of the Lateran, held in 1139, by Innocent II, Arnold was condemned to perpetual silence. He sought for refuge beyond the Alps, and found an hospitable shelter in the Canton of Zurich. Here he again began his career of reform, and had the ability to seduce from their allegiance the bishop of Constance, and even the pope’s legate. The exhortations of St. Bernard, however, reclaimed these yielding ecclesiastics to a sense of their duty, and Arnold was driven by persecution to hazard the desperate expedient of fixing the standard of rebellion in the very heart of Rome.
"Protected, perhaps, if not invited, by the nobles, Arnold harangued the populace with his usual fervor, and inspired them with such a regard for their civil and ecclesiastical rights, that a complete revolution was effected in the city. Innocent struggled in vain against this invasion of his power, and at last sunk under the pressure of calamity. His successors, Celestine and Lucius, who reigned only a few months, were unable to check the popular frenzy. The leaders of the insurrection waited upon Lucius, demanded the restitution of the civil rights which had been usurped from the people, and insisted that his holiness and the clergy should trust only to pious offerings of the faithful. Lucius survived this demand but a few days, and was succeeded by Eugenius III, who, dreading the mutinous spirit of the inhabitants, withdrew from Rome, and was consecrated in a neighboring fortress. As soon as Arnold was acquainted with the escape of the pontiff, he entered Rome, and animated with new rigor the licentious fury of the populace. He called to their remembrance the achievements of their forefathers -- he painted in the strongest colors, the sufferings which sprung from ecclesiastical tyranny; and he charged them as men and as Romans, never to admit the pontiff within their walls, till they had prescribed the limits of his spiritual jurisdiction, and fixed the civil government in their own hands. Headed by the disaffected nobles, the frenzied populace attacked the cardinals and clergy, who still continued in the city. They set fire to the palaces, and forced the inhabitants to swear allegiance to the new system of things.
"The Roman pontiff could no longer view with patience the excesses of this ungovernable mob. At the head of his troops, chiefly composed of Tiburtines, he marched against the city, and after some trifling concessions on his part, was reinstated on the papal throne. Notwithstanding the triumph over the malecontents, the friends of Arnold were still numerous, and continued to disturb the peace of the city, till our countryman, Adrian IV was raised to the chair of St. Peter. On the first appearance of a riot, during which a cardinal was either killed or wounded in the street, Adrian held an interdict over the guilty city, and from Christmas to Easter deprived it of the privilege of religious worship. This bold and sagacious contrivance gave a sudden turn to the minds of the people. Arnold and his followers were banished from the city, and fled for protection to the viscounts of Campania. His holiness, however, was not satisfied with restoring peace to his capital. A spirit of revenge burned within him, till he instigated Frederic Barbarossa to force Arnold from his asylum in Campania. This intrepid reformer was immediately seized by cardinal Gerard in 1155, and was burned alive in the midst of a fickle people, who gazed with stupid indifference on the expiring hero, who had fallen in defense of their dearest rights, and whom they had formerly regarded with more than mortal veneration; his ashes were thrown into the Tiber; but though no corporeal relic could be preserved to animate his followers, the efforts which he made in the cause of civil and religious freedom were cherished in the breasts of future patriots, and inspired those mighty attempts which have chained down and finally destroyed the monster of superstition.
It is impossible not to admire the genius and persevering intrepidity of Arnold. To distinguish truth from error in an age of darkness, and to detect the causes of spiritual corruption in the thickest atmosphere of ignorance and superstition, evinced a mind of more than ordinary stretch. To adopt a plan for recovering the lost glory of his country, and fixing the limits of spiritual usurpation, demanded a degree of resolution which no opposition could control. But to struggle against superstition entrenched in power, to plant the standard of rebellion in the very heart of her empire, and to keep possession of her capital for a number of years, could scarcely have been expected from an individual who had no power but that of his eloquence, and no assistance but what he derived from the justice of his cause. Yet such were the individual exertions of Arnold, which posterity will appreciate as one of the noblest legacies which former ages have bequeathed. Every triumph that is gained over ecclesiastical power stretched beyond its just limits, in whatever country it is sanctioned, and under whatever system of faith it is exercised, is the triumph of right reason over the worst passions of the heart. It is the greatest step which the human mind can take in its progress to that knowledge and happiness to which the Almighty has destined it to arrive" [Brewster’s Edinburgh Encyclop. Art. ARNOLD].
"We may truly say," says Dr. Allix, "that scarcely any man was ever so torn and defamed on account of his doctrine as was this Arnold of Brescia. Would we know the reason of this? It was because, with all his power, he opposed the tyranny and usurpation which the popes began to establish at Rome ever the temporal jurisdiction of the emperors. He was the man who, by his counsel, renewed the design of re-establishing the authority of the senate in Rome, and of obliging the pope not to meddle with any thing but what concerned the government of the church, without invading the temporal jurisdiction: -- this was his crime, and this indeed is such an one as is unpardonable with the Pope, if there be any such" [Allix’s Remarks, p. 169].
"But there was a still more heinous thing laid to his charge, which was this: Praeter haec de sacramento altaris et baptismo parvulorum, non sane dicitur sensisse! that is, "He was unsound in his judgment about the sacrament of the altar and infant baptism" -- (in other words, he rejected the popish doctrine of transubstantiation and of the baptism of infants.) And this alone was sufficient ground for his condemnation; for as he set himself industriously to oppose the accumulating errors in the church of Brescia, his native place, in which he was supported by Maifredus, the consul of that city, accusations against him were transmitted to pope Innocent II, who immediately imposed silence upon him, lest such pernicious doctrine should spread further. On this, Arnold retired from Italy, and settled at Zurich, in the diocese of Constance, where he continued to disseminate his doctrine until the death of the Pope, at which time he returned to Rome."
Otho Frisingensis, a Catholic bishop, gives the following account of the death of this great man. "Being entered into the city [Rome] and finding it altogether in a seditious uproar against the Pope, he was so far from following the advice of the wise man, not to add fuel to the fire, that he greatly increased it, proposing to the multitude the examples of the ancient Romans, who, by the maturity of their senators’ counsels, and the valor and integrity of their youth, made the world their own. He therefore advised them to rebuild the capital, to restore the dignity of the senate, and reform the order of knights. He maintained that the civil government of the city did not belong to the Pope, who ought to confine himself to matters purely ecclesiastical. And so far did the mischief of this infectious doctrine prevail, that the mob pulled down several of the houses of the nobility and cardinals, treating the latter with personal abuse, and even violence. He could not hope to escape long, after committing so heinous a crime against persons so extremely jealous of their tyranny. Having persisted for a length of time, incessantly and irreverently, in these and similar enterprises, contemning the sentence of the clergy justly and canonically pronounced against him as altogether void, and of no authority; he at length fell into the hands of some, on the borders of Tuscany, who took him prisoner, and being preserved for the prince’s trial, he was at last, by the praefect of the city, hanged, (Mosheim says he was crucified) and his body burnt to ashes, to prevent the foolish rabble from expressing any veneration for his body, and the ashes of it cast into the Tiber" [Dr. Allix’s Remarks, p. 172].
Such was the end of Arnold of Brescia, whose memory, however, was long and fondly cherished by the people of Rome, whose interests he had so courageously advocated against the tyranny of the popes, and whose hatred he had thereby incurred. His tragical end occasioned deep and loud murmurs; it was regarded as an act of injustice and cruelty, the guilt of which lay upon the bishop of Rome and his clergy, who had been the occasion of it. The disciples of Arnold, who were numerous, and obtained the name of ARNOLDISTS, separated themselves from the communion of the church of Rome, and long continued to bear their testimony against its numerous abominations.
This seems to be the proper place for introducing some particular mention of the sect of the PATERINES. The most copious account of them that I have met with, is that given by Mr. Robinson in his Ecclesiastical Researches; and as it appears to be well supported by the authorities which he has adduced, and to correspond with what is said of the same people by Dr. Allix, Mosheim, and others, I present it to the reader mostly in his own words.
Much has been written on the etymology of the word PATERINE; but as the Italians themselves are not agreed on the derivation, it is not likely foreigners should be able to determine it. In Milan, where it was first used, it answered to the English words, vulgar, illiterate, low-bred; and these people were so called, because they were chiefly of the lower order of men; mechanics, artificers, manufacturers, and others, who lived of their honest labor. GAZARI, is a corruption of Carthari, Puritans; and it is remarkable that in the examinations of these people, they are not taxed with any immoralities, but were condemned for speculations, or rather for virtuous rules of action, which all in power accounted heresies. They said a Christian church ought to consist of only good people; a church had no power to frame any constitutions; it was not right to take oaths; it was not lawful to kill mankind; a man ought not to be delivered up to officers of justice to be converted; the benefits of society belonged alike to all the members of it; faith without works could not save a man; the church ought not to persecute any, even the wicked: -- the law of Moses was no rule to Christians; there was no need of priests, especially of wicked ones; the sacraments, and orders, and ceremonies of the church of Rome were futile, expensive, oppressive, and wicked; with many more such positions, all inimical to the hierarchy.
As the Catholics of those times baptized by immersion, the Paterines, by what name soever they were called, as Manichaeans, Gazari, Josephists, Passigines, etc. made no complaint of the mode of baptizing, but when they were examined, they objected vehemently against the baptism of infants, and condemned it as an error. Among other things, they said, that a child knew nothing of the matter, that he had no desire to be baptized, and was incapable of making any confession of faith, and that the willing and professing of another could be of no service to him. "Here then," says Dr. Allix, very truly, "we have found a body of men in Italy, before the year one thousand and twenty-six, five hundred years before the Reformation, who believed contrary to the opinions of the church of Rome, and who highly condemned their errors." Atto, bishop of Verceulli, had complained of such people eighty years before, and so had others before him, and there is the highest reason to believe that they had always existed in Italy. It is observable that those who are alluded to by Dr. Allix, were brought to light by mere accident. No notice was taken of them in Italy, but some disciples of Gundulf, one of their teachers, went to settle in the Low Countries, (Netherlands) and Gerard, bishop of Cambray, imprisoned them, under pretense of converting them.
From the tenth to the thirteenth century, the dissenters in Italy continued to multiply and increase; for which several reasons may be assigned. The excessive wickedness of the court of Rome and the Italian prelates was better known in Italy than in the other countries. There was no legal power in Italy in these times to put dissenters to death. Popular preachers in the church, such as Claude of Turin, and Arnold of Brescia, increased the number of dissenters, for their disciples went further than their masters. The adjacency of France and Spain too, contributed to their increase, for both abounded with Christians of this sort. Their churches were divided into sixteen compartments, such as the English Baptists would call associations. Each of these was subdivided into parts, which would be here termed churches or congregations. In Milan there was a street called Pataria, where it is supposed they met for divine worship. At Modena they assembled at some water-mills. They had houses at Ferrara, Brescia, Viterbe, Verona, Vicenza, and several in Rimini, Romandiola, and other places. Reinerius says, in 1259 the Paterine church of Alba consisted of above five hundred members; that at Concorezzo of more than fifteen hundred; and that of Bagnolo of about two hundred. The houses were they met seem to have been hired by the people, and tenanted by one of the brethren. There were several in each city, and each was distinguished by a mark known by themselves. They had bishops, or elders, pastors and teachers, deacons, and messengers; that is, men employed in traveling to administer to the relief and comfort of the poor, and the persecuted. In times of persecution they met in small companies of eight, twenty, thirty, or as it might happen; but never in large assemblies, for fear of the consequences.
The Paterines were decent in their deportment, modest in their dress and discourse, and their morals irreproachable. In their conversation there was no levity, no scurrility, no detraction, no falsehood, no swearing. Their dress was neither fine nor mean. They were chaste and temperate, never frequenting taverns, or places of public amusement. They were not given to anger and other violent passions. They were not eager to accumulate wealth, but content with the necessaries of life. They avoided commerce, because they thought it would expose them to the temptation of collusion, falsehood, and oaths, choosing rather to live by labor or useful trades. They were always employed in spare hours either in giving or receiving instruction. Their bishops and officers were mechanics, weavers, shoemakers, and others, who maintained themselves by their industry. About the year 1040, the Paterines had become very numerous at Milan, which was their principal residence, and here they flourished at least two hundred years. They had no connection with the [Catholic] church; for they rejected not only Jerome of Syria, Augustine of Africa, and Gregory of Rome, but Ambrose of Milan; considering them, and all other pretended fathers, as corrupters of Christianity. They particularly condemned pope Sylvester as Antichrist. They called [the adoration of] the cross the mark of the beast. They had no share in the state, for they took no oaths and bore no arms. The state did not trouble them, but the clergy preached, prayed, and published books against them with unabated zeal. About the year 1176, the archbishop of Milan, an old infirm man, while preaching against them with great vehemence, dropped down in a fit, and expired as soon as he had received extreme unction! About fourteen years afterwards, one Bonacursi, who pretended he had been one of these Paterines, made a public renunciation of his opinions, and embraced the Catholic faith, filling Milan with fables, as all renegades do. He reported that cities, suburbs, towns, and castles, were full of these false prophets -- that it was the time to suppress them, and that the prophet Jeremiah had directed the Milanese what to do, when he said, "Cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood!" Advice which we shall presently see was but too implicitly followed. [Robinson’s Ecclesiastical Researches, p. 407-412. and p. 455. As it may afford satisfaction to some readers to know from what sources of authority Mr. R. has drawn his account of the PATERINES, I here subjoin them. MURATORI, Antiq. Ital. tom. 5. GREGORII, contra Manichaeos, qui Paterini dicuntur, opusculi specimen, cap. 6. SICARDI Episcopi Cremonensis chronicon, ad. An. 1213. BONACURSI Vitae haereticorum. Manifestatio haeresis Catharorum D’ARCHERII Spicilegium, tom. 1. 208. De Catharis monitum.]