IT has already
been indicated that the Paulicians came from Armenia, by the way
of Thrace, settled in France and Italy, and traveled through,
and made disciples in, nearly all of the countries of Europe.
The descent of the Albigenses has been traced by some writers
from the Paulicians (Encyclopedia Britannica, I. 454. 9th
edition). Recent writers hold that the Albigenses had been in
the valleys of France from the earliest ages of Christianity.
Prof. Bury says that "it lingered on in Southern France," and
was not a "mere Bogomilism, but an ancient local survival." Mr.
Conybeare thinks that it lived on from the early times in the
Balkan Peninsula, "where it was probably the basis of
Bogomilism" (Bury, Ed. Gibbon, History of Rome, VI. 563).
They spread
rapidly through Southern France and the little city of Albi, in
the district of Albigeois, became the center of the party. From
this city they were called Albigenses. In Italy the Albigenses
were known by various names, like the Paulicians, such as "Good
Men," and others. It is difficult to determine the origin of all
of the names; but some of them came from the fact that they were
regarded as vulgar, illiterate and low bred; while other names
were given from the purity and wholesomeness of their lives. It
is remarkable that the inquisitorial examinations of the
Albigenses did not tax them with immoralities, but they were
condemned for speculations, or rather for virtuous rules of
action, which the Roman Catholics accounted heresy. They said a
Christian church should consist of 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 the officers of justice to be converted; the
benefits of society belong alike to all 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 for
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. They
baptized by immersion and rejected infant baptism (Jones, The
History of the Christian Church, I. 287). They were decidedly
anti-clerical.
"Here then,"
says Dr. Allix, "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 Vercelli, had complained of such a people eighty years
before, and so had others before him, and there is the highest
reason to believe they had always existed in Italy (Ibid, I.
288). The Cathari themselves boasted of their remote antiquity
(Bonacursus, Vitae haereticorum... Cathorum, ap. D’Archery,
Scriptorum Spicilegiam, I. 208).
In, tracing the
history and doctrines of the Albigenses it must never be
forgotten that on account of persecution they scarcely left a
trace of their writings, confessional, apologetical, or
polemical; and the representations which Roman Catholic writers,
their avowed enemies, have given of them, are highly
exaggerated. The words of a historian who is not in accord with,
their principles may here be used. He says:
It
is evident, however, that they formed a branch of
that broad stream of sectarianism and heresy which rose
far away in. Asia from the contact between Christianity
and the Oriental religions, and which, by crossing the
Balkan Peninsula, reached Western Europe. The first
overflow from this source were the Manichaeans, the next
the Paulicians, the next the Cathari, who in the tenth
and eleventh centuries were very strong in Bulgaria,
Bosnia, and Dalmatia. Of the Cathari, the Bogomils,
Patoreni, Albigenses, etc. . . were only individual
developments (C. Schmidt, Schaff-Hersog, I. 47).
That is to say,
these parties were all of the same family, and this connection
is rendered all the more forceful on account of the terms of
reproach in which this writer clothes his language.
It has already
been indicated that the Paulicians were not Manichaeans, and the
same thing may probably be said of the Albigenses. The
Albigenses were oppressed on account of this sentiment, which
accusation was also made against the Waldenses. Care must be
taken at this point, and too prompt credence should not be given
to the accuser. The Roman Catholic Church sought diligently for
excuses to persecute. Even Luther was declared by the Synod of
Sens to be a Manichaean. The celebrated Archbishop Ussher says
that the charge "of Manichaeanism on the Albigensian sect is
evidently false" (Acland, The Glorious Recovery of the Vaudois,
lxvii. London, 1857). It would be difficult to understand the
Albigenses from this philosophical standpoint. They were not a
metaphysical people. Theirs was not a philosophy, but a daily
faith and practice, which commended itself to the prosperous
territory of Southern France.
They held to
the division of believers into two classes -- the perfect and
the imperfect. This was the common classification of the
Paulicians, Waldenses and Anabaptists. The most elaborate
accounts are given of the initiation of the perfecti by a
single immersion into the body of believers (Beausobre, Historic
du Manichaeanism, II. 762-877).
The Waldenses
were also found in the city of Albi and they were also called
Albigenses because they resided in that city (Martin Schagen,
The History of the Waldenses, 110). It was from Italy that the
movement extended to Southern France; and the soil was
wonderfully well prepared for the seed. The country was the most
civilized portion of France, rich, flourishing, and independent;
the people gay, intellectual, progressive; the Roman Catholic
Church dull, stupid and tyrannical; the clergy distinguished for
nothing but superstition, ignorance, arbitrariness, violence and
vice. Under such circumstances the idea of a return to the
purity and simplicity of the apostolic age could not fail to
attract attention. The severe moral demands of the Albigenses
made a profound impression, since their example corresponded
with their words. They mingled with their tenets a severe zeal
for purity of life and were heard with favor by all classes. No
wonder that the people deserted the Roman Catholic priests and
gathered around the Boni Honiness. In a short time
the Albigenses had congregations and schools and charitable
institutions of their own. The Roman Catholic Church became an
object of derision (Scliaff-Herzog. I. 47).
This state of
affairs greatly alarmed and aggravated the pope. In the year
1139 they were condemned by the Lateran Council; by that of
Tours in 1163, and mission after mission was sent among them to
persuade them to return to the Roman Catholic Church. Cardinal
Henry, in 1180, employed force. Pope Innocent III. published a
crusade against them. Says the Historian Hume:
The
people from all parts of Europe moved by their
superstition and their passion for wars and adventures,
flocked to his standard. Simon de Monfort, the general
of the crusade, acquired to himself a sovereignty of
these provinces. The Count of Toulouse, who protected,
or perhaps only tolerated the Albigenses, was stript of
his dominions. And these sectaries themselves, though
the most inoffensive and innocent of mankind, were
exterminated with the circumstances of extreme violence
and barbarity (Hume, History of England, II. ch. xi).
In the second
crusade the first city captured was that of Braziers, which had
some forty thousand inhabitants. When Simon de Monfort, Earl of
Leicester, asked the Abbot of Ceteaux, the papal legate, what he
was to do with the inhabitants, the legate answered: "Kill them
all. God knows His own." In this manner the war was carried on
for twenty years. Town after town was taken, pillaged, burnt.
Nothing was left but a smoking waste. Religions fanaticism began
the war; rapacity and ambition ended it. Peace was concluded in
1229, and the Inquisition finished the deadly work.
The proof is
overwhelming that the Albigenses rejected infant baptism. They
were condemned on this account by a Council held at Toulouse, A.
D. 1119 (Maitland, Facts and Documents Illustrative of the
Albigenses, 90. London, 1832), and that of Albi in 1165 (Allix,
The Ecclesiastical History of Piedmont, 150). The historians
affirm that they rejected infant baptism. Chassanion says: "I
cannot deny that the Albigenses, for the greater part, were
opposed to infant baptism; the truth is, they did not
reject the sacrament as useless, but only as unnecessary to
infants" (Chassanion, Historie des Albigeois. Geneva, 1595). Dr.
Emil Comba, of the Waldensian Theological College, Florence,
Italy, the latest of the Waldensian historians, says that the
Albigenses rejected "all the sacraments except baptism, which
they reserved for believers" (Comba, History of the Waldenses,
17. London, 1889).
The story is a
pathetic one. "We live," says Everwin, of Steinfeld, "a hard and
wandering life. We flee from city to city like sheep in the
midst of wolves. We suffer persecution like the apostles and
martyrs because our life is holy and austere. It is passed
amidst prayer, abstinences, and labors, but every-thing is easy
for us because we are not of this world" (Schmidt. Hist. et.
Doct. de la secte des Cathares, II. 94). Dr. Lea, the eminent
authority on the Inquisition, has said that no religion can show
a more unbroken roll of victims who unshrinkingly sought death
in its most abhorrent form in preference to apostasy than the
Cathari.
Peter of Bruys,
a well-known Baptist preacher of those times, sought, about the
year 1100, a restoration of true religion in Languedoc and
Provence, France. He considered that the gospel ought to be
literally understood and he demanded Scripture and not tradition
from those who attempted to refute him. He was a pupil of the
celebrated Abelard. Dollinger thinks he learned his doctrines
from the Cathari and presents many reasons for his opinion.
Others think that he presupposes the existence of the old
evangelical life for several hundred years in Italy and Southern
France. "There is much evidence," says Prof. Newman, "of the
persistence in Northern Italy and in Southern France, from the
early time, of evangelical types of Christianity" (Newman,
Recent Researches Concerning Mediaeval Sects, 187).
His principal
opponent was Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Clugni, and it is
from Peter’s book (Contra Petrobrusianos, Patrologia Let,
CLXXXIX. 729) that we must judge of the doctrines of Peter of
Bruys.
He held
that the church was a spiritual body composed of
regenerated persons. "The church of God." says Peter of
Bruys, "does not consist of a multitude of stones joined
together, but in the unity of believers assembled." He
held that persons ought not to be baptized till
they come to the use of their reason. Thus be
rejected infant baptism referring to Math. 28: 19 and
‘Mark 16:16. He denied that "children, before they reach
the years of understanding, can be saved by the baptism
of Christ [the Roman Catholic statement of his belief],
or that another faith could avail those who could not
exercise faith since, according to them (the
Petrobrusians) not another’s but their own faith saves,
according to the Lord’s word. He who shall believe and
be baptized shall be saved, but he who shall not believe
shall be condemned." "Infant," he continues, "though
baptized by you [Roman Catholics], because by reason of
age they cannot believe, are not saved [that is by
baptism] and hence it is idle and vain at that time to
plunge them in water, by which they wash away the filth
of the body, and yet cannot cleanse the soul from sin.
But we wait for the proper time, and when one can know
and believe in him, we do not (as ye accuse us),
rebaptize him who can never be said to have been
baptized -- to have been washed with the baptism by
which sins are washed away" [symbolically]. In respect
to the Lord’s Supper he not only rejected the doctrine
of transubstantiation, but he also denied the
sacramental character of the rite.
On account of
his great popularity he was with difficulty banished from
Languedoc. He then appeared in the diocese of Narbonne and
Toulouse, where he preached for twenty years with great success.
In the year 1126 he was seized by the authorities and burnt at
St. Gilles.
He had a great
company of followers, who after his death were called
Petrobrusians. They held the same views on baptism that he did.
Deodwinus, Bishop of Liege, writing to Henry I., of France, says
of the followers of Peter of Bruys: "They as far as in them lies
overthrow infant baptism" (Wall; The History of Infant Baptism,
I. 478).
It will be seen
from the extracts given above that Peter of Bruys and his
disciples rebaptized, and were, therefore, in the eyes of their
opponents, Anabaptists. Jacquest Benigne Bossuet the
distinguished Bishop of Meaux and the great Roman Catholic
controversialist, 1704, complained of the followers of Calvin
that they sought apostolic succession through the Waldenses. He
says: "You adopt Henry and Peter of Bruys among your
predecessors, and both of them, everybody knows, were
Anabaptists." Faber says: "The Petrobrusians were only a
sort of Antipedobaptists, who rejected not baptism itself, but
who denied simply the utility of infant baptism" (Faber, The
Vallenses and Albigenses, 174. London, l838). J. A. Fabricius
says: "They were the Anabaptists of that age" (Fabricius,
Bibliographia, c. xi. 388).
Henry of
Lausanne, A. D., 1116-1148, was a disciple of Peter of Brays,
and was so successful in his work of reformation that he left a
large number of followers who were called Henricians. He is
described as "a man of great dignity of person, a fiery eye, a
thundering voice, impetuous speech, mighty in the Scriptures."
"Never was there a man known of such strictness of life, so
great humanity and bravery," and that "by his speech he could
easily provoke even a heart of stone to compunction." He came
out of Switzerland to Mans and other cities of France. So great
was his success that whole congregations left the churches and
joined with him. When he had come, in 1148, to Toulouse, Pope
Eugene III. sent Bernard of Clairvaux, the great heresy hunter,
to that city to preach against him. Bernard describes the effect
of Henry’s preaching, saying that the churches were deserted,
"the way of the children is closed, the grace of baptism is
refused them, and they are hindered from coming to heaven;
although the Saviour with fatherly love calls them, saying,
"Suffer little children to come unto Me." Henry was compelled to
flee for his life. Within a short time he was arrested in his
retreat, brought before the Council of Rheims, committed to a
close prison in 1148, and soon afterwards finished his days in
it.
Like Peter of
Bruys, he rejected infant baptism. Georgius Cassander, who, at
the instance of the Duke of Cleves, wrote against the
Anabaptists, says of Peter of Bruys and Henry of Lausanne: "They
first openly condemned infant baptism, and stiffly asserted that
baptism was fit only for the adult; which they both verbally
taught, and really practiced in their administration of baptism"
(Cassander, Do Baptismo infantium. Coloniaqqe, 1545).
Arnold of
Brescia was born in the beginning of the twelfth century and
died about A. D. 1148. He was a student of Abelard, in Paris,
and returned with lofty notions of reformation in Italy. From
one country to another he was driven by persecution. He finally
returned to Borne and led a patriotic attempt for the freedom of
the country against the pope. He was taken prisoner, hanged, his
body burned, and the ashes thrown into the Tiber.
Otto Freising,
the contemporary Roman Catholic bishop, remarks: "That he was
unsound in his judgment about the sacraments of the altar and
infant baptism" (Freising, De Gentis Frid., II. c. 20). So he
was condemned by the Lateran Council under Innocent II., A. D.,
1139. Dr. Comba, in making a record of his opinions, says: "With
the Albigenses, he condemned the above mentioned superstitions,
as that also of the salvation of children by the sprinkling of
water" (Comba, History of the Waldenses, 16).
Arnold had his
followers, for he was very popular in Lombardy. "He founded," so
his enemies said during his stay in Rome, "a sect of men which
is still called the heresy of the Lombards" (Johannes
Saresberensis, Historia Pontificalis. See Breyer, Arnold von
Brescia). They had great congregations of laboring men which
formed such an important feature of the work of the Waldenses
and Anabaptists.
The Arnoldists,
like their leader, rejected infant baptism. Of these men,
Guillaume Durand, A. D., 1274, says: "The Arnoldists assert that
never through baptism in water do men receive the Holy Spirit,
nor did the Samaritans receive it, until they received the
imposition of hands" (Bull of Pope Lucius III. Hist. Pon.
Prestz, 515).
By the year
1184 the Arnoldists were termed Albigenses, a little later they
were classed as Waldenses. Deickhoff, one of the German writers
on the Waldenses, affirms: "There was a connection between the
Waldenses and the followers of Peter of Bruys, Henry of Lausanne
and Arnold of Brescia, and they finally united in one body about
1130 as they held common views." (Dieckhoff, Die Waldenser im
Mittelalter, 167, 168. Gottingen, 1851). This is the general
opinion of the authorities. M. Tocco does not hesitate to affirm
that "the Poor of Lombardy (the Waldenses) descended in a direct
line from the Arnoldists" (Tocco, L’Eresia nel medio Evo. Paris,
1884).
Berengarius,
who was born at Tours, and died in the adjacent island of St.
Cosme, was accused of holding Baptist views. He was a
representative of that craving for spiritual independence, and
opposition to Roman Catholicism, which came to the surface all
through the Middle Ages. In 1140 he became director of the
Cathedral schools of Tours, but his departure from Romanism
caused his condemnation by many councils until he closed his
troubled career in deep solitude. HIS great learning both in the
Fathers and in classical literature, together with his profound
study of the Scriptures, led him to the conclusion that the
doctrine of transubstantiation was false, and that it was
necessary for him to distinguish between the symbol and the
thing symbolized in the Lord’s Supper. Deodwinus, Bishop of
Liege, a contemporary, states that there was a report out of
France that the Berengarians "overthrew the baptism of infants."
This view is accepted by quite all of the historians.
|