Part 63

In another place there is quoted, from Reinerius, this accusation against the Waldenses: “They also censure many things in the (papal) sacraments, and say that the baptism of infants is of no avail to them.” _B. Lydius, Tractaet van de Kerke, page 86, col. 1._

Having, then, sufficiently proved, that the true Waldenses were not only called Anabaptists, but that they also actually rejected infant baptism, we will proceed to other articles of their doctrine, which they had in common with the present Baptists.[155]

[155] _Doopsgesinde_, German, _Taufsgesinde_.

THE BELIEF OF THE ANCIENT WALDENSES RESPECTING THE OFFICE OF THE SECULAR AUTHORITY.

It is altogether manifest, that the true Waldenses, in their beginning as well as in their progress, did not accept of secular power and authority, but forsook, yea, fled from it. This appears, in the first place, from those who were the originators, or at least, no insignificant representatives of their religion, namely, Peter Waldo and John of Lyons, both of them influential and very wealthy men, who voluntarily abandoned their riches, and taught their followers to do likewise--to resign not only authority, but also the means which furnished occasion thereto, and to be content with such things as might be needful to them for a modest and sober manner of life. For this reason they were called not only Waldenses, but also Poor Men of Lyons. See _Bapt. Hist., page 599_. _H. Mont., page 85._

To this belongs also, that, though their number was great, they suffered themselves to be martyred like sheep for the slaughter, after their expulsion from Lyons, to which they had not offered the least resistance; concerning which, ancient history affords an abundant evidence, and which, God granting us time, we shall notice more fully in the proper place.

As regards what the Waldenses, long after they had left Lyons, believed and taught with reference to this point, it is expressed in one of their articles as follows: “But he (Christ) also exercised no temporal jurisdiction or authority, in the state of his humiliation.” _Abr. Mell., 2d book, fol. 446, col. 2._

By these words the Waldenses indicate that even as Christ exercised no temporal authority in the state of his humiliation, so his followers also, here, ought not to exercise any such authority, but that they themselves should be subject to secular authorities, as the whole article shows, both in the preceding and in the following words.

In another article they say, that they are truly poor in spirit, and, for righteousness and faith’s sake do not exercise authority, but suffer persecution. _Bapt. Hist., page 617_, in the fourth error of their first article, as the Romanists call it.

THE VIEWS OF THE ANCIENT WALDENSES AGAINST WAR.

Their departure from Lyons, their wandering about in foreign countries and cities, their innocent and patient suffering, their steadfastness unto death, and all this without any resistance, retaliation, or self-defense, sufficiently indicated the faith they had, and by what spirit they were actuated. But in order to treat this subject in a proper manner, we will here add what they, as regards this matter, believed and, themselves or in the name of others, indicated.

In an old book of parchment, supposed to have been written three hundred years ago, by a certain priest called Reinerius, various matters are alleged as charges against the Waldenses, which he, in a certain place, comprises in three articles, each of which he then divides into sections. In the tenth section he says, “That the Pope and all the Bishops are murderers, because of the war that they carry on.” _Bapt. Hist., page 617. B. Lydius, 3. Tract of the Faith of the Waldenses, page 85, col. 1, Art. 10._

This he gives as an article of the faith of the Waldenses, calling it, however, an error or heresy; but how can he, who has not learned otherwise, speak differently?

Jean Paul Perrin Lionnoys, or his translator, charges the Waldenses also with the following, which accords well with the preceding: “Seventhly, (he says) that they (the Waldenses) maintained, that the Pope commits mortal sin, when he sends forth to make war upon the Turks; and that they likewise commit mortal sin, who obey him in waging war against the heretics.” _History of the Waldenses, 1st part, 1st book, cap. 3, page 6, col. 1._

Who cannot see, that this article of the Waldenses opposes war and everything that can be called warfare? yea, in such a manner, that it does not admit of it at all.

For, if one should look for a just cause to wage war, how could he find one more just, than against the Turks? howbeit, it is unjust against all men; but we speak by way of comparison. How could one find greater reason to wage war, than against those whom he considers heretics? for of such it was customary to say that they were worse than murderers, seeing murderers kill only the body, but they, it was said, souls. Nevertheless, the Waldenses reproved the Pope for such action, yea, declared, that he committed mortal sin thereby; as well as those who allowed themselves to be used as instruments by the Pope for this purpose.

What is added by the translator (_lib. 1, part 1, Hist. Wald., cap. 4, page 11_), for explanation, which however, serves much more to obscuration, we pass by, as unworthy of consideration and which will fall of its own accord.

Yea, it seems, that the Waldenses not only held that they themselves might not wage war or kill any one, but that they also denied the right of secular authorities who wished to be called Christians, to kill, even if the persons whom they should put to death were malefactors. Concerning this, we find in _P. J. Twisck’s Chronijk_, that the “Poor Men,” “Insabbathi,” or “Waldenses,” taught, that no judge who would be a Christian, might put to death any one, not even a malefactor. _Chron., page 534, col. 2_l and _page 535, col. 1_, from _Chron. Seb. Fr., fol. 202_, and _Enca. Sylvio._

Moreover, in the account of Gabriel Prateolus and Guilielmo Reginaldus, who have noted the accusations regarding the doctrine of the Waldenses, also this charge is found against them: _Art. 17_. “They (the Waldenses) teach that no judge may condemn any one to any punishment; to which end they adduce that it is written: ‘Judge not, that ye be not judged.’” _A. Mell. 2d book, fol. 434, col. 1, Elench. Haeres. Tit. Paup. de Lugd. Calvin. Turcismi., lib. 2, cap. 5._

Touching what G. Prateolus and G. Reginaldus add by way of accusation, we let them answer for it. It suffices us that in this they came very near the truth; but they went too far in what the Waldenses understood with regard to capital punishment, namely, that authorities may punish no one with death; this they applied to every kind of punishment, as though the Waldenses had censured the authorities for punishing any one, even a great offender, in any wise; which we are not aware that the Waldenses ever opposed in any formal article, unless some particular one among them held such views.

In the mean time it appears, from the last as well as from the preceding testimonies, how exceedingly fearful these people were in the matter of punishing any one with death; so that they not only desired to be clear from it themselves, but also spoke against the same in the secular authorities. Still more did they reprove open warfare, in which not only a few, but very many are killed, and this for trifling reasons. This being true, we will proceed to other points of their faith, which they had in common with the Baptists.

NOTE.--That the Albigenses also, who were one with the Waldenses, were defenseless, peaceable, and meek people, living in quiet under certain papistic authorities, who protected them. See, among others, _Introduction, page 50, col. 2, and page 51, col. 1, from Baron, in Annal._

THE VIEWS OF THE ANCIENT WALDENSES AGAINST THE SWEARING OF OATHS.

In regard to this point the Waldenses were of the same opinion with us, teaching that the fathers of the Old Testament were permitted, when necessity required it, to swear an oath, in or by the name of the Lord; but that for Christians it is quite unlawful, according to the teaching of our Savior, who says: “Ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: but I say unto you, Swear not at all.” Matt. 5:33,34.

In the first book of the first part of the History of the Waldenses, written by Jean Paul Perrin Lionnoys, and translated by _J. M. V., chap. 3, page 6, col. 1_, the following point, among others, is adduced as an accusation against the Waldenses: “The sixth (tenet) which they (the Waldenses) maintained, was, that men should not swear on any account.” From _Albert de Capit. and Reiner_. Also, _P. J. Twisck, Chron., page 534, col. 2, page 535, col. 1_.

How the compiler of these things seeks to explain said matter, we here pass over, as this is not the proper place to speak of it. But when necessary, we shall consider it our duty to give an account of it.

Far more pertinent and important, however, is that which is recorded in _Bapt. Hist., page 624_, where it is stated that in regard to the swearing of oaths they believed thus: “_Art. 9_. That every oath is a mortal sin; saying: _Swear not at all; but let your communication be, Yea, that is yea; Nay, that is nay._” Extracted from an old book of parchment, ascribed to Reinerius. Also, _A. Mell., 2d book, fol. 432, col. 4_.

In the articles ascribed by G. Prateolus and G. Reginaldus to the Waldenses, as having constituted their faith, mention is made of their views in regard to the swearing of oaths, concerning which, the eighteenth article contains the following: “They (the Waldenses) say that all manner of swearing is unlawful for Christians, so that it is nowhere lawful to swear, not even before the judge, when he constrains one thereto, to testify to the truth.” _A. Mell., 2d book, fol. 434, col. 1. Elench. Haeres. Calv. Turcism., lib. 2, cap. 5._

It is true, Mellinus, after the manner of the Calvinists, of whom he was a leader, endeavors to explain, as it were, this article of the Waldenses, as though thereby they did not prohibit all swearing of oaths, but only frivolous swearing. His words are these: “The eighteenth article has reference only to unjust and perjurious swearing, as said author owns, (he means the author who charges them with those articles) saying: ‘The occasion which led them into this belief, was the fact that they so often and continually heard the people swear for trifling reasons, and because thereby one easily falls into perjury.’”

But hear what he further says, as he adds a jeering comparison, saying, “That the heretics, who never swear, are like the devil, of whom we do not read that he ever swore.” _Page 434, col. 3._

I pray thee, beloved reader, see now, by what author Mellinus seeks to establish his case. It is true, he first quotes this author when presenting the articles of the Waldenses, and this for the reason that the latter has presented them in such a manner that they in every part militate against the Roman church; but now, seeing that said author has presented the article respecting the swearing of oaths (in which the Waldenses deny all swearing) in such a way that it militates against the Calvinistic church, he begins, in order to make the matter doubtful, and to deprive the Waldenses of the article relative to non-swearing, to quote from said author again, and this, in mocking and impious language.

But, becoming more discreet, he commences to extol that which is expressed in the eighteenth article, relative to the swearing of the Waldenses, above the manner of the papists, saying: “But they (the Waldenses) who have learned from Christ, ‘Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil’ (Matt. 5:37), will judge, that the papists, among whom the practice of daily swearing so frivolously is in vogue, are more like that Evil One, that is, the devil, than the Waldenses, who guarding against lying and swearing, and in their daily conversation, are wont to say only, Yea, yea; Nay, nay; as this same writer acknowledges in regard to them. They guard against back-biting, foul words, lying, and swearing, and, as another inquisitor has said: They are prudent in their words, avoid all lying and swearing; also, they teach to avoid all lying, back-biting, and swearing.” _A. Mell., 2d book, fol. 434, col. 3_, from _Frehed. Hist. Bohem., page 232_.

With these and like passages from the preceding authors, Mellinus has sought to embellish the Waldenses, to indicate, that they were pious, upright and moral people; but in the mean time he forgot himself, not once thinking that thereby he abundantly establishes that which in other places he endeavors to refute, namely, _that the Waldenses rejected all swearing of oaths_.

Here we see how excellent truth is, that it cannot remain hid, but is brought to light even by its opponents, either unintentionally or otherwise. I should here leave this subject, but as Mellinus has helped me on the way to show him his perverted zeal, I find it necessary to enter more deeply into the matter. This good, but perversely zealous man, having put all his arguments aside, plainly relates, from an old papistic work of three hundred years ago, that the Waldenses believed all oaths to be mortal sins; yea, that they considered him who would compel another to swear, worse than a murderer. _A. Mell. 2d book, fol. 432, col. 4_, from _Illyrie. Catal., lib. 15, Tit. Waldens._ See also, _Conferedit. Freher. in Hist. Bohem. and Gretser. Sweluc. Tudens._

Of such and similar passages the writers who present the views of the Waldenses, are full to overflowing, so that it is as clear as the sun, that these people rejected the swearing of oaths and everything that resembles it, even to the saying of the word, _Verily_, or _Certainly_, etc.; of which the aforesaid writer also makes mention, saying: “They (the Waldenses) do not say to one another, _Verily, Certainly, or the like_.”[156] _Fol. 432, col. 4._

[156] P. J. Twisck, in his Chronijk, shows expressly that the Waldenses would not swear, etc. _Book 14, page 743, col. 2. from Henr. Boh., fol. 27._

All this was done from fear of swearing in any wise, because the Lord had so expressly said, “_Swear not at all._” Matt. 5:34; hence, they avoided all manners which bore any resemblance to the swearing of oaths.

But, lest any should think that the Albigenses, who were one people with the Waldenses (though others distinguish between them), differed from them in their views, belief, and practice as regards this point, let him read what is noted in the _Martyrs Mirror, edition of 1631, page 51, col. 2_; where it is stated, from _Baronius, for A. D. 1178, num. 3, 4_: “That many of the Albigenses, from fear of severe punishment, feigned return to the Roman church; but when an oath was demanded of them, they refused to swear; hence they were pronounced heretics and solemnly, with burning tapers, excommunicated, with an injunction to all Catholics, to shun them; and to all (Romanistic) princes, to expel them from their dominions.

OF THE VIEWS OF THE WALDENSES AGAINST NEARLY ALL ARTICLES OF THE ROMAN CHURCH.

Reinerius, who has written against the Waldenses, gives the following testimony respecting them, as the Jesuits confess in their own print.

_Cap. 2, Ingolstadt edition, page 54._ “Among all the sects that ever were and still are, there is none more pernicious for the church than the sect of the Lyonists (thus he calls the Waldenses), and this for three reasons.

“_Firstly_, because it is the most ancient; for, some say that it has existed from the time of Sylvester; others say, from the time of the apostles.

“_Secondly_, because it is more general (that is, more widely diffused) than other sects; for there is no country where this sect is not found.

“_Thirdly_, because, whereas all other sects, by their abominable blasphemies against God, cause those who hear them, to loathe their belief, this sect, on the other hand, has a great semblance of godliness, because they lead a godly life before men, have a true belief in all things concerning God, and hold correct views in regard to all the twelve articles of the faith; only they condemn the Roman church and the clergy, in which the unlearned too readily credit them.”

In the fifth chapter he says that their doctrine can be brought under these three heads: 1. Invectives against the Roman church and her institutions. 2. Errors against the sacraments and the saints. 3. Rejection of all church usages.

He then specifies their doctrine in the following manner:

1. That the Roman church is not the church of Christ, but the church of malediction; and that she decayed in the time of Sylvester, when the poison of temporal riches insinuated itself.

2. That all sins and defects are in the Roman church, and that they (the Waldenses) alone live holily.

3. That almost no one observes the doctrine of the holy Gospel, except they (the Waldenses).

4. That they, in truth, are poor in spirit, and suffer persecution for righteousness and faith’s sake.

5. That they are the church of Jesus Christ.

6. That the Roman church is the whore described in John’s Revelation.

7. That they contemn all the statutes of the (Roman) church, because of their multiplicity and laboriousness.

8. That the Pope is the head of all errors.

9. That the prelates are scribes, and the religions, or members of orders, Pharisees.

10. That the popes and bishops, with respect to the wars they carry on, are murderers. (This article is treated of in another place.)

11. That God alone is to be obeyed, and not the prelates.

12. That one is not greater than another (before the Lord), but that all are brethren. Matt. 23.

13. That no one may bow his knees before the priests; because the angel said to John, “See thou do it not: for I am thy fellow servant.” Rev. 22:9.

14. That men should not give tithes (to the papistic clergy), because it was not customary formerly to give tithes to the church.

15. That the clergy ought not to have property of their own; because it is written, “The priests the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel ... the Lord is their inheritance, as he hath said unto them.” Deut. 18.

16. That the inmates of monasteries ought not to have prebends.

17. That bishops are not entitled to the regalia; these being things which are the prerogative of kings and rulers.

18. That no churches and monasteries ought to be founded and endowed.

19. That wills ought not to be drawn up by ecclesiastical persons.

20. They reject the clergy, on account of their idleness, and because they do not labor with their hands, as the apostles did.

21. They reject the names, pope and bishop.

22. They will not admit that any one should be compelled to the faith.

23. They reject all ecclesiastical (papistic) offices, and pay little regard to ecclesiastical privileges.

24. They do not admit, that churches and ecclesiastical persons should be exempt from the power and punishment of the secular authorities, for, under that cover of liberty the clergy used to do as they pleased.

25. They hold in contempt councils, synods, and all (papistic) ecclesiastical assemblies.

26. They say, that all human rules respecting persons in orders, are Pharisaical institutions.

These and various other articles respecting the belief of the Waldenses, all directed against the Pope, the clergy, and the whole Roman church, were found in an old parchment written three hundred years ago, and ascribed to Reinerius. It was afterwards followed by various authors. See _Balth. Lyd. 3, Tract of the Waldens., page 84, col. 1_, and _page 85, cols. 1, 2. A. Mell., 2d book, fol. 430, col. 4, fol. 431, cols. 1–4. Bapt. Hist., pages 616, 617, 618. P. J. Twisck, Chron., page 451, col. 2._ Also, _Nicol. Eymeric._, printed at Rome, A. D. 1585.

THE CONFESSIONS OF THE WALDENSES, OR THEIR OWN CREEDS.

Since the Waldenses were very ancient, and were spread over very many parts of the world, it came that they, from time to time were compelled, by the demand of those with and among whom they lived, to give an account of their faith; hence it is, that different creeds of the Waldenses were made and are still extant. However, it is not our intention, to relate them all, but simply to present to you one or two, which have been celebrated from ancient times, and are judged to be of the best.

Jean Paul Perrin Lionnoys, in his _History of the Waldenses_, translated from the French into Dutch, by _J. M. V., first part, first book, page 43_, makes mention of a certain confession of the Waldenses, in which they speak of various matters of faith, particularly of the holy Scriptures. It reads thus:

_Article I._ We believe and hold fast all that is contained in the twelve articles of the Apostolic Creed; and regard as error all that differs therefrom, and does not agree with said twelve articles.

_Article II._ We believe that there is one God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

_Article III._ We confess and hold as holy canonical Scriptures, the books of the Holy Bible, namely these: The five books of Moses, called Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. The books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth. The historical books, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther. The didactic books, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, The Song of Solomon. The greater prophesies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel. The lesser prophets, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi.

Then follow the books of the Apocrypha, which were not received by the Hebrews; hence we read them, as Jerome says, in the preface to the Proverbs, for the edification of the people, but not for the purpose of confirming church doctrines. They are: 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom; Ecclesiasticus, or Jesus Sirach; Baruch, with the letter of Jeremiah; the additions to the book of Esther, from the tenth chapter to the end; the Song of the Three Men in the Fiery Furnace; the History of Susanna; of the Dragon at Babel; the three books of the Maccabees.

Then follow the books of the New Testament. The Gospels, by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John. The Acts of the Apostles. The epistles of Paul, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John. (How it comes that 3 John is not mentioned, we do not know). The epistle of Jude, the Revelation of John.

_Article IV._ The aforementioned books teach this: That there is one God, who is omnipotent, all-wise, and alone good, who has created all things according to his goodness; for he created Adam after his image and likeness; but that, through the envy of the devil and the disobedience of Adam, sin came into the world, and that we are sinners in and through Adam.

_Article V._ That Christ was promised to the fathers, who received the law, that by it they might know their sin, unrighteousness and unfitness, and long for the coming of Christ; to which end he atoned for sin and himself fulfilled the law.

_Article VI._ That Christ was born at the time appointed by his Father; namely, when all manner of wickedness abounded; and this not for the good works’ sake, for they were all sinners; but to show us grace and mercy, as being the true and faithful one.

_Article VII._ That Christ is our Way, Truth, Peace, Righteousness, Shepherd, Advocate, Sacrifice, and High Priest; who died for the salvation of them that believe, and was raised for our justification.