Part 62

NOTE.--It appears from several ancient writers, that the Waldenses, or, at least, people who held the same belief, existed long before the year 1170, yea, before 1160; seeing that already in the year 1160 they had increased to such an extent, that they were summoned to Rome before a synod, and were condemned there as obstinate heretics. _Johan. de Oppido._ The same occurred A. D. 1164, in the synod of Tours, _Bapt. Hist., p. 676_. Hence, when their beginning is fixed A. D. 1170, this must not be understood of their origin, but of their rising, progress, and greatest prosperity.

OF THE DISPERSION AND THE VARIOUS NAMES OF THE WALDENSES OR FOLLOWERS OF PETER WALDO.

When Peter Waldo with his adherents, through the cruel hatred of the papists, had to leave the city of Lyons, on account of his faith, they became distributed and scattered into different parts of the world, and, hence, received various appellations, with regard to the places where they resided, as well as with regard to their faith, and to the accusations brought against them, especially by the Romanists.

In the _History of the Waldenses_, by _D. Balthasar Lydius, 1st book of the first part, cap. 3, page 4, col. 2_, and _page 5, col. 1_, the following account is found of the various names of said people:

“They, in the first place, called them Waldenses, after Waldo, who was a citizen of Lyons; and, after the district of Albi, they called them Albigenses.

“And because those who adhered to the doctrine of Waldo, left Lyons, stripped of all human means, having had to leave behind the most of their goods, they were derisively called, _The Poor Men of Lyons_.”

“In Dauphine they were by way of derision called _Chaignards_, that is, _Dogs_.

“Also because a part of them crossed the Alps, they were called _Transmontani_.

“After Joseph, one of Waldo’s disciples who preached in the bishopric of Dije, Lower Dauphine, they were called _Josephists_.

“In England they were called _Lollards_, after Lollardus, one of those who preached there.

“After two priests, Henry and Esperon, who taught the doctrine of Waldo in Languedoc, they were called _Henricians_ and _Esperonists_.

“After Arnold, one of their pastors or teachers, who preached in Albigeois, they were called _Arnoldists_.

“In Provence they were called, in an unknown tongue, _Siccars_.

“In Italy they were called _Fratricellii_, that is, _Little Brothers_, because they lived like brothers in true unity.

“Also, as they observed no other day of rest or holiday, than Sunday, they were styled _Insabbathi_ or _Insabbathas_, that is, _Sabbathless_, or not observing Sabbaths.

“Because they were continually subject to, and underwent sufferings, they were called _Patarins_ or _Patariens_, that is, _Sufferers_, from the Latin word _pati_, to suffer.

“Because they, as poor wanderers, fled and traveled from country to country, they were termed _Passagenes_, that is, _Travelers_ or _Vagrants_.

“In Germany they were called _Gazares_, which signifies, _Accursed_ and _Abominable_; but thus the Pope of Rome has always been accustomed to call those who oppose the Roman faith.

“In Flanders they were called _Turilupini_, that is, _Dwellers with Wolves_, because, on account of persecution, they were often compelled to hide and live in wildernesses and forests, in close proximity to wolves.

“Sometimes they were named after the region or district where they lived, as Albigenses, from Albi; Toulousians, from Toulouse; Lombards, from Lombardy; Picards, from Picardy; Lyonists, from Lyons; Bohemians, from Bohemia.”

Thereafter, the origin and cause of said names, according to Jean Paul Perrin Lyonnois, who has noted the same, is further explained by D. Balthasar Lydius, in his treatise on the _Various names of the Waldenses, 3d chapter of Perrin_, from _page 48, col. 1, to page 82, col. 2_; in which the true innocence and uprightness of said people, though they were sometimes called bad names, is demonstrated in all simplicity and clearness.

But that nothing may be wanting here, we will, for additional information, subjoin several other names of the Waldenses, passed over by B. Lydius (from J. P. Perrin), but mentioned by _Abr. Mellinus_, in his _History of the Persecutions and Martyrs_, for _A. D. 1619, fol. 449, col. 3, 4_, by misprint, but, properly, _fol. 439, col. 3, 4_, and some of them, further explained. For, among other things, he writes there, that said people were also “called _Catharists_, that is, _Heretics_, because they were called heretics by their opponents.

“They were called _Publicans_, because they were compared by the Romanists to publicans or open sinners.

“From the Latin word _lolium_, signifying weed, they were called _Lollards_; though, as stated above, this name was also given them from Lollardus, a teacher; however, they were likened to _lolium_, a weed that grows among the corn, because they, (the papists said) ought to be rooted out like the tares from among the corn; this name they also retained in Germany, Sarmatia, Livonio,” etc.

“They were called _Runcari_ because they lived near Runcalia, not far from Piacenza.

“They were called _Barrini_, from Mount Barrio or Barian, a place in the district of Crema, in Italy. Also _Cotterellos_, because they lived on the mountains known as the Cottian Alps. They were also called _Comists_, because they lived in the city of Como, in Italy.

“In Germany they were called _Grubenheimer_, that is, _Cave-dwellers_, because necessity compelled them to live underground, in pits and caves.

“In France they were termed _Texerants_, that is, _Weavers_, because there were many weavers among them.”

These and similar names have been given the Waldenses in former times; which we have deemed necessary to notice briefly, in order that the readers, in the sequel of our history, whenever these or similar persons are spoken of, may know who and of what belief they were.

OF THE WALDENSES WHO IN ALL RESPECTS WERE OF ONE BELIEF WITH THE BAPTISTS (ALSO CALLED ANABAPTISTS); OF WHOM WE SHALL SPEAK THROUGHOUT OUR ACCOUNT.

Although Peter Waldo, from whom the Waldenses derived their name, was enkindled with a true zeal for the divine and evangelical truth; yea, so that in the beginning very many, through his doctrine and life, burned as with a heavenly fire, and were zealous with him for God and the pure truth; yet not all remained steadfast in the truth; which appears to have been caused from their being dispersed into different countries and becoming separated from one another, by reason of the persecutions.

Some were also called Waldenses though they had no fellowship with them, and never were true brethren with these people.

Others, though they had once been members of that church, had joined themselves to others, thus forsaking, either from fear of death, or for some other reason, their former confession, especially in the article of the meekness and patience of Jesus.

Others, notwithstanding that they filled worldly offices, yea, even engaged in war, were sometimes, though perversely, as shall be shown in the proper place, called Waldenses or Albigenses; only (as can be inferred) for the reason, that some Waldenses or Albigenses lived under their protection, who were tolerated by connivance, or otherwise countenanced by them.

We shall therefore pass over all those concerning whom there is evidence that they only bore the name of Waldenses, but were not such in deed; and turn to those of whom ancient history testifies that they confirmed the name by the deed, in faith as well as in doctrine.

Sebastian Franck, in _Chron. van de Ord. en Sect. der Rom., fol. 153, col. 3_, writes, that the Waldenses were divided into two, or, as some maintain, three divisions, one of which, in all points, held the same tenets with the Anabaptists (Baptists), having all things in common. They baptize no infants, and do not believe at all in the presence of the Lord’s body in the sacrament. A little before this, he says: “They invoke no saints or creatures, but only God. They do not swear at all, yea, they regard this as improper for a Christian. They also have no images, and do not bow before or worship them. They allege, that the sacrament ought not to be worshiped, but Christ, at the right hand of his Father, and God, in Spirit and in truth. They suffer no beggars among them, but help and assist each other as brethren.” See concerning them, _Seb. Franck, Chron. Rom. Ketter, fol. 121, col. 2. Introduction, page 50, col. 2. H. Mont. Nietigh., page 86, Jac. du Bois contra Montanum, page 158._

These are the true Waldenses, whom we have chosen, and who shall be the aim of our whole account.

HOW THE WALDENSES WERE CALLED ANABAPTISTS BY THE ROMANISTS THEMSELVES.

This is stated by Jacob Mehrning in different places, after he has declared, upon the testimony of ancient writers, that they were called by the peculiar names of those who were previously already termed Anabaptists. “From Berengarius,” says he, (_Bapt. Hist., page 666_), “they were called Berengarians; from Peter de Bruis, Petrobrusians; from Henry, Henricians; from the apostles, Apostolics; from Peter Waldo, Waldenses, and so forth. Among us Germans,” he writes (_pp. 695, 696_), “the papist, Lutheran, and Calvinistic pedobaptists still contemptuously call them Anabaptists; in the Netherlands they are called Mennists, from Menno Simons, one of their principal teachers.”

Thus, according to this testimony, the ancient Waldenses agreed in faith not only with Berengarius, Peter Bruis, Henry Tholossanus, and the Apostolics, of whom we have given an account before; but also with the Mennonites or Baptists of the present day, who by nearly all the rest in so-called Christendom are stigmatized with the contemptuous appellation of _Anabaptists_, even as their former brethren, the abovementioned Waldenses, were called by those from whom they were separated, namely, the papists.

On _pages 677_ and _678_, these Waldenses are several times called Anabaptists, with the statement, that long before the time of John Huss, they lived in Poland and Bohemia, as well as in France, as is noted in that place. From _Hagecus_, _Dubravius_, _Micchovius_, _Cromerus_, _Jacob Usserius_, _Jounetus_, _M. Glaneus_, _Keyser’s Car. Edict._

It is true, that by some of said papistic authors these people are represented in a very bad light, with regard to their faith, as well as their life; however, the writer of the History of Baptism refutes said representation, saying (_p. 679_, from _M. Flaccius and Cent. Magd._), that they were slandered by their accusers, and that in doctrine and life they were very pious, orthodox, and godly Christians.

Although we might stop here, as having sufficiently proved, that the ancient Waldenses were one people with the Baptists of the present day, yet, since this is a much assailed point, we will add, for further confirmation, a few more testimonies from papistic writers. Abbot Peter Cluniacensis, in the first article of Peter Bruis and Henry Tholossanus, makes mention of the belief of the Waldenses, and says, that “they (with said two men) denied that infants in the years of their irrationality can be saved by the baptism of Christ, and maintained, that the faith of another cannot help them, because they cannot use their own faith.” Hence, they said: “Though the infants are baptized by the papists, yet, since they cannot believe, their infancy preventing them, they are by no means saved by baptism. But we choose a proper time of faith, and do not rebaptize men, as is alleged against us, since they know their God, and are prepared to believe on him; but we then baptize them aright, lest it might be said, that they are rightly baptized, who, though baptized in infancy, are not baptized with the baptism by which sin is washed away.” This the Waldenses are wont to say, says the writer. _Bapt. Hist., page 687._

The writer of the _History of Baptism_ makes the following comments on the twelfth of the _Magdeburg Centuries, pp. 428, 429_: “Concerning the origin of the Waldenses, who sprung from Peter Waldo, Mellinus relates all that has been given above from Flaccius. Hence it came, that all his disciples, followers and adherents were at that time called _Anabaptists_ by the malicious papists; and also, _Poor Men of Lyons_, of which name they needed not to be ashamed for Christ’s sake, who also, for our sakes, became poor, that through his poverty he might make us rich. But when they subsequently, through persecution, became dispersed from France into other countries, as, England, Poland, Livonia, etc., other names were given them.” _B. H., p. 695._

Here it is expressly stated that the Waldenses, from ancient times were designated by the papists by the name of Anabaptists; doubtless, because they baptized those who had been baptized in their infancy again, or, at least, aright, afterwards, when they had attained to the faith; for these are words of the Waldenses themselves, as has been shown above. Moreover, that said people were scattered from France not only into England, Poland, and Livonia, but also into many other countries, yea, almost over the whole known world, has previously been proven in part, and shall hereafter, if necessary, be demonstrated still more fully.

_Bapt. Hist., page 710._ D. Vicecomes (_lib. 2, cap. 2_), gives evidence from Bernhard, that the Waldenses were anabaptists, as the ungodly now call the Christian baptists (the Baptists), who did not believe in infant baptism.

It is certainly clearly and plainly said, that the Waldenses were anabaptists, or, at least, that they were called by that name; the reason why is also shown, namely, because they, like the Baptists of the present day, did not believe in infant baptism.

Jacob Mehrning, having noted that the Waldenses were called anabaptists, says (_p. 696_): “But their right, proper, and true name is, and should be, by rights, _Christians_ and _Christian-baptists_; because they, according to the command and ordinance of Christ, baptize none but those who, according to Christ’s baptismal ordinance, know Christ from his holy Gospel, believe on him, and upon such faith, are rightly baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.”

VARIOUS TESTIMONIES THAT THE WALDENSES REJECTED INFANT BAPTISM.

In _Jacob Mehrning’s History of Baptism_ there is introduced the testimony of Reinerius, in former times a priest of the order of Dominicans, who lived in and about the time of the rise of the Waldenses, and who gives the following with regard to their belief: “They (the Waldenses) say, that the washing of baptism given to infants is of no use.” See concerning this, _Bibliotheca Patrum, Tom. 13, page 300_. Also, _H. Montan. Nietigh., page 86_, which also agrees with the confession that Jean Paul Perrin relates in his _History of the Waldenses, art. 7_.

On _pages 618_ and _619_, several articles are quoted from a very ancient book, which, in papistic manner, are imputed to them as errors, though they spoke correctly and according to truth with regard to them.

1. They reject all the sacraments of the church (that is, as they were administered according to the Romish custom).

2. Of the sacrament of holy baptism they say, that the questions of the catechism are put in vain [that is, to infants, who do not comprehend such questions, and do not have the ability to reply to them; whereby they sufficiently rejected infant baptism, which it was not customary to administer without putting said questions to the unintelligent infants.]

3. That the absolution which is pronounced over infants (at baptism) is useless.

4. That the sponsors (who were accustomed to recite the creed as out of the child’s mouth) do not understand what they answer to the priests.

By the fourth as well as the third article, not only is infant baptism itself abolished, but also its appurtenances of absolution and sponsors are derided and declared a vain, useless, and ridiculous performance. But in the first article already, where it is said, that they rejected all the sacraments of the (Roman) church, among which sacraments infant baptism was not one of the least, but one of the chief ones; it is plainly taught, that they did not believe at all in infant baptism, but like other ancient papal institutions, trampled it under their feet and rejected it.

From said ancient book, which is ascribed to Reinerius, the Waldenses are charged with various other things respecting their faith; of which, in the ninth and tenth charge, the following is said with reference to baptism (_page 629, art. 9_): “As regards baptism, some (he means the Waldenses) err, saying: ‘Infants are not saved by baptism, Mark 16:16. But he that believes and is baptized, shall be saved; but the child does not believe, and, hence, is not saved (by baptism).’ Thereupon the priest Reinerius replies: ‘The child is baptized upon the faith of the parents;’ _ergo_.”

_Art. 10_ confirms the preceding; only it treats also of something more, namely, of the imposition of hands, which was customarily done among the Waldenses, at baptism, to the adult candidates. They also reprove therein the practice which the priests had, of interrogating the sponsors who would come with children to baptism, in an unknown tongue, to which the sponsors then replied, without knowing, however, what they had been asked. This the Waldenses also take as a reason for rejecting infant baptism and the pedobaptistic superstitions. However, to this, said Reinerius replies: “Suffer little children to come unto me.” Matt. 19.

On _page 733, de Centuria XIII., cap. 5, fol. 216, 217_, it is stated from Cesarius, that the Waldenses and Albigenses rejected baptism and said that baptism possessed no virtue and was of no use; which they understood of infant baptism, which is administered without doctrine and faith; for otherwise the Waldenses esteemed the baptism of Christ, which is administered according to his ordinance, very highly.

P. J. Twisck, beginning to write of the Waldenses for the year 1100, calls them by the name of _Brethren_, and says that they opposed infant baptism. His words are these: “It is evident from the writers, that in these times and shortly after, there existed the Waldensian or Albigensian Brethren, who opposed the papal errors and infant baptism.” _Chron., page 423, col. 1._

This is confirmed by the writers of the _Introduction to the Martyrs Mirror, page 50, col. 1_, who say, With, or from, Baronius, that among other things they held, that infant baptism is not necessary to salvation.

We finally come to the testimony of Jean Paul Perrin Lionnoys, who, according to the translation of B. Lydius, also confirms the foregoing, although the translator, Lydius, as well as J. M. V., after the manner of pedobaptists has endeavored to give said belief of the Waldenses a different appearance; however, it will appear sufficiently from the matter itself, who has been the more honest, the author or the translator. We will therefore enter upon our work and commit this to the judgment of the reader.

In the third chapter of the first book of the _History of the Waldenses_, various things of which the papists accused the Waldenses are related, some of which were true, and some false. Among them, mention is made of their views against infant baptism, which is expressed in these words: “The fourth calumny was, that they rejected infant baptism.” _Lib. 1, part 1. Hist. Waldenses, cap. 3, page 6, col. 1_, from _St. Bernh., Hom. 66 on Cant._

These things, B. Lydius (_page 10_) endeavors to refute, as though the Waldenses deferred the baptism of their children, not in consequence of their belief, but from necessity through want of teachers; in which he agrees with his colleague, Abraham Mellinus, preacher of the Calvinists, in St. Anthony’s Polder; who, remarking that various writers testify that the Waldenses left their children unbaptized, says (_Hist. Mart. 435, col. 3_): “That the children of the Waldenses often got to be rather old, before they could receive baptism, was not a voluntary matter on their part, but was owing to the lack of teachers; for the harvest among them was great, but the laborers few, who could administer the sacraments, especially baptism, which they held in great esteem. Hence, as their ministers were frequently scattered far and wide, through the violence of persecution, or had gone into other countries to preach, they were often compelled to postpone the baptism of their children, and thus it happened that their children not seldom got to be almost of age, before they could obtain baptism.” Thus far, A. Mellinus.

But who does not see, that this is only a fabrication, yea, an artifice, by which not only Lydius, but also Mellinus, both strong Calvinists, seek to force it upon the Waldenses that they omitted infant baptism not as a matter of faith, but of necessity. For, that they needed not to omit it from necessity, or through want of teachers who administered baptism, if, otherwise they had held infant baptism to be right, appears from various authors; for they had their churches, which could not well be without teachers, not only in kingdoms, principalities, earldoms, and provinces, but even in nearly every city, as we shall show more fully in the proper place. Who, then, can believe, that they from necessity, through want of teachers, left their children unbaptized, yea, suffered them to grow up until they became of age, without baptism?

It is evident, therefore, that they did not leave their children unbaptized from necessity or through want of teachers, but because of their belief; as holding that baptism without faith could not conduce to salvation, as is manifest from the confessions which they professed in those times already. Thus both B. Lydius and A. Mellinus have committed no small blunder, in endeavoring to force infant baptism upon the Waldenses, of which they apparently never thought in such a light, and to deprive them of baptism upon faith, which they had confessed so many times.

But, as the compass, though its point be turned East, West, or South, ultimately returns to North; so it is also with the truth: though she be forced from her proper place, she will eventually return to it. This is the case here; for, said translator, who first intended to prove, that the Waldenses administered baptism not only upon faith, but also without faith, to infants, states in another place, that it was always administered with faith and repentance. For, what else is indicated by the words, that they received the sacraments (that is, not only the Supper, but also baptism) with faith and repentance, and this invariably? as is stated in the first book of the third part of the _History of the Waldenses, cap. 9, page 138, col. 1, art. 8_.

If, then, not only the second, but also the first sacrament, as it is called, namely baptism, is received with faith and repentance, it cannot be said that it was administered to infants, seeing these have neither knowledge nor ability either to believe, or to manifest repentance, and, hence, lack the whole foundation upon which baptism was administered by the Waldenses.

In the tract of the Waldenses, as to which are the works of antichrist, several reproaches against the Pope of Rome and the Roman church are treated of; among other things, it is said, after the second article has been treated: “The third work of antichrist consists in this, that he ascribes the renewing of the Holy Ghost to the external, dead faith (namely, to the creed which the sponsors used to recite at baptism, as from the mouth of the children), and that he baptizes the children in that faith, pretending that by it baptism and regeneration must be obtained.” _History of the Waldenses, 3d book, 3d part. Tract against Antichrist, Art. 3, page 162, col. 1, page 163, col. 2._