SECTION Origin of the names WALDENSES and ALBIGENSES, with some account of Peter Waldo of Lyons, and the sanguinary edict of pope Lucius III against the disciples of Waldo. HAVING sketched the more prominent features of the Christian Church, for the first ten centuries, and arriving at that period in which we are to give the reader some account of the Waldenses, it will be proper to introduce the subject by an attempt to ascertain the origin of their distinguishing appellation. The learned Mosheim contends with considerable pertinacity that they derived their name from Peter Waldo, an opulent merchant of Lyons, whose history will presently come under our notice; but in this he is contradicted by his learned translator, and, I believe, I may truly add, by most writers of authority since his time.

The most satisfactory definition that I have met with of the term Waldenses, is that given by Mr. Robinson, in his Ecclesiastical Researches; and, in the confidence that it is the true one, and that I may not unnecessarily trespass on the reader’s time and patience, I submit it to his consideration.

From the Latin word VALLIS, came the English word valley, the French and Spanish valle, the Italian valdesi, the Low Dutch valkye, the Provencal vaux, vaudois, the ecclesiastical Valdenses, Ualdeases, and Waldenses.

The words simply signify rallies, inhabitants of rallies, and no more. It happened that the inhabitants of the rallies of the Pyrenees did not profess the Catholic faith; it fell out also that the inhabitants of the valleys about the Alps did not embrace it; it happened, moreover, in the ninth century, that one Valdo, a friend and counselor of Berengarius, and a man of eminence who had many followers, did not approve of the papal discipline and doctrine; and it came to pass about an hundred and thirty years after, that a rich merchant of Lyons, who was called Valdus, or Waldo, openly disavowed the Roman Catholic religion, supported many to teach the doctrines believed in the valleys, and became the instrument of the conversion of great numbers; ALL THESE PEOPLE WERE CALLED WALDENSES. 1 This view of the matter, which to myself appears indisputably the true one, is also supported by the authority of their own historians, Pierre Gilles, Perrin, Leger, Sir S. Morland, and Dr. Allix.

To the preceding account of the derivation of the term Waldenses, I shall now add the explanation given by these writers of various other appellations, that were bestowed on this class of Christians, and particularly that of Albigenses.

The names imposed on them in France by their adversaries, they say, have been intended to vilify and ridicule them, or to represent them as new and different sects. Being stripped of all their property, and reduced by persecution to extreme poverty, they have been called “the poor of Lyons.” From their mean and famished appearance in their exiled and destitute state, they have been called in provincial jargon “Siccan,” or pickpockets. Because they would not observe saints’ days, they were falsely supposed to neglect the Sabbath also, and called “Inzabbatati or Insabbathists.” 2 As they defiled transubstantiation, or the personal and divine presence of Jesus Christ in the host, or wafer exhibited in the mass, they were called “Arians.” Their adversaries, premising that all power must be derived from God through his vicegerent the pope, or from an opposite and evil principle inferred, that the Waldenses were “Manichaeans,” because they denied the pope’s supremacy over the emperors and kings of the earth.

In Languedoc, the Catholics affirmed that the origin of these heretics was recent, and that they derived their name of Vaudois, or Waldenses, from Peter Waldo, one of their barbes or preachers, whose immediate followers were called Waldenses; but this was rather the renovation of the name from a particular cause than its original: accordingly it extended over that district only, in France, where Peter Waldo preached; for in other districts the people who were branches of the same original sect, as in Dauphine, were, from a noted preacher called Josephists—in Languedoc, they were called Henricians — and in other provinces, from Peter Bruys, they were called Petrobrusians. Sometimes they received their name from their manners, as “Catharists,” (Puritans) and from the foreign country whence it was presumed they had been expelled, they were called “Bulgarians” or Bougres. In Italy they were commonly called Fratricelli, that is, “men of the brotherhood;” because they cultivated brotherly love among themselves, acknowledging one another as brethren in Christ. Sometimes they were denominated “Paulicians,” and, by corruption of the word, “Publicans,” considering them as sprung from that ancient sect which, in the seventh century, spread over Armenia and Thrace, 3 and which, when persecuted by the Greek emperor might migrate into Europe, and mingle with the Waldenses in Piedmont. Sometimes they were named from the country or city in which they prevailed, as Lombardists, Toulousians, and Albigenses. All these branches, however, sprang from one common stock, and were animated by the same religious and moral principles. ALBIGENSES became latterly their common name in France, from the great number of them that inhabited the city of Alby, and the district of Albigeois, between the Garonne and the Rhone: but that name was not general and confirmed till after the council of Alby in the year 1254, which condemned them as heretics. Their number and prevalence in that country are ascribed to the patronage and protection which they received from Roger, Count of Alby, after they had been persecuted in other countries.

Some writers have labored to prove that the Waldenses and Albigenses were quite different classes of Christians, and that they held different principles and opinions: but there seems no solid ground for maintaining such a distinction. When the popes issued their fulminations against the Albigenses, they expressly condemn them as Waldenses; their legates made war against them as professing the faith of the Waldenses; the monks of the Inquisition formed their processes of indictment against them as being Waldenses; the people persecuted them as such; and they uniformly adopted the title when it was given them, and even thought themselves honored by it. To this may be added, that historians do not trace their origin to any local causes in Albigeois, and about Toulouse, but represent them as emigrants from other regions. Neither do they represent their origin as recent before the council of Alby, but as strangers from adjacent countries about a hundred years before.

Farther, the provincial councils of Toulouse, in 1119, and of Lombez, in 1176, and the general councils of Lateran in 1139, and 1179, do not treat of them, nor condemn them as Albigenses but as heretics, and when they paricularize them, they denominate them “bons hommet”—(i.e. good men)—“Cathari”—“Paterini”—“Publicani,” etc. which shows that they existed before they were generally known as Albigenses. It is also proved, from their books, that they existed as Waldenses, before the times of Peter Waldo, who preached about the year 1160. Perrin, who wrote their history, had in his possession a New Testament in the Vallese language, written on parchment, in a very ancient letter, and a book entitled in their language, “Qual cosa sia l’Antichrist”—that is, “What is Antichrist?” under date of the year 1120, which carries us back at least twenty years before Waldo. Another book entitled, “The Noble Lesson” —is dated A.D. 1100.

Their enemies confirm their great antiquity. Reinerius Saccho, an inquisitor, and one of their most implacable enemies, who lived only eighty years after Waldo, admits that the Waldenses flourished five hundred years before that preacher. Gretzer, the Jesuit, who also wrote against the Waldenses, and had examined the subject fully, not only admits their great antiquity, but declares his firm belief that the Toulousians and Albigenses condemned in the years 1177, and 1178, were no other than Waldenses. In fact, their doctrine, discipline, government, manners, and even the errors with which they have been charged (by the Catholics,) show that the Albigenses and Waldenses were distinct branches of the same sect, or that the former were sprung from the latter. From the death of Claude, bishop of Turin, who may not improperly be termed the Wickliff of that city, to the times of Peter Waldo of Lyons, a considerable period intervened, during which, the history of the disciples of that great man is involved in much obscurity. They seem to have had no writers among themselves capable of detailing their proceedings during this period; or, if any records of their ecclesiastical history were committed to writing, the zeal of their opponents hath prevented their transmission to our times. In the writings of their adversaries, indeed, we have abundant proof of their existence, as a class of Christians separated in faith and practice from the catholic church, and of the multiplication of their numbers; but of their proceedings in the formation of churches, and of their order, worship, and discipling, we are very imperfectly informed.

Of the Catharists, in Germany, and of the Paterines, in the duchy of Milan, etc. during this period, both of which held the same principles as the Waldenses, we have already taken some notice in the preceding chapter. But it was not till the twelfth century that the Vaudois appear in ecclesiastical history as a people obnoxious to the church of Rome. And even then it seems, in great measure, to have been occasioned by the indefatigable labors, the ardent zeal, and the amazing success which crowned the ministry of Peter Waldo of Lyons, whose followers first obtained the name of Leonists, and who, when persecuted in France, fled into Piedmont, incorporating themselves with the Vaudois. The following is the account which Mr. Robinson gives of this intricate article of ecclesiastical history, and as it appears to myself more probable than any other that I have seen, I incline to admit it as the true one. “In the twelfth century, towards the close, a great reformation was begun at Lyons, under the auspices of a merchant there, who procured a translation of the four Gospels from Latin into French, and who both preached in person, and engaged others to do so in various parts of the country. Reinerius Saccho thought all the believers (Credenti) sprung from this stock; and he therefore calls them all Leonists. Whether the merchant received his name (Valdus) from the Vaudois, or whether they received theirs from him, is uncertain; the former is the more, probable opinion of the two, and the fact seems to be, that till then the Vaudois were (comparatively speaking) few and obscure, and the Leonists at once numerous and popular; that the Vaudois and Leonists soon incorporated themselves together; that the Vaudois communicated their name, which passed for that of a low, rustical, and obscure people to the Leonists; and that the Leonists emboldened the Vaudois to separate openly from the church. This view of things in part reconciles the opinion of the catholic bishop, Bossuet, with that of Dr. Allix and other Protestants. Bossuet says, the separation of the Vaudois was for a long time a mere schism in the church, and that Waldo was their parent. Protestants deny this, and say that the Vaudois were the parents of the Leonists. It should seem the Vaudois were the first, and that they continued in the church a sort of party till Waldo emboldened them to separate, and so became not the founder of the party, but the parent of their separation.”

But the history of Peter Waldo, his exemplary life, his zeal in the cause of truth and virtue, the noble sacrifices which he made to religious principle, and the extraordinary success which crowned his labors in the promulgation of the gospel of peace, entitle him to somewhat more than an incidental mention in the history of the times it, which he lived. He was an opulent merchant in the city of Lyons—a city which, in the second century of the Christian era, as we have formerly seen 5 was blessed with the clear light of divine truth—where Christ had planted a numerous church to serve as a pillar on which his truth was inscribed, or a candlestick on which he had placed the lamp of life. But the lamp had long been extinguished, and the pillar removed. Lyons, in the times of Peter Waldo, was sunk into a state of the grossest darkness and superstition.

About the year 1160, the doctrine of transubstantiation, which some time afterwards pope Innocent III confirmed in a very solemn manner, was required by the court of Rome to be acknowledged by all men. A most pernicious practice of idolatry was connected with the reception of this doctrine. Men fell down before the consecrated wafer and worshipped it as God; an abomination, the absurdity and impiety of which forcibly struck the mind of Waldo, who opposed it in a most courageous manner. But although the conscience or common sense of Waldo revolted against this novel piece of superstition, he seems not to have entertained, at that time, the most distant idea of withdrawing himself from the communion of the Romish church, nor indeed to have had much sense of religion upon his mind. God, however, who hath the hearts of all men in his hands, and who turns them as the rivers of water, had destined him for great usefulness in his kingdom. To him, also, whatever means seem necessary for effecting his purposes in the world, are equally at command. An extraordinary occurrence in providence was the means of awakening the mind of Peter Waldo, to the “one thing needful.” One evening after supper, as he sat conversing with a party of his friends, and refreshing himself among them, one of the company fell down dead on the floor, to the consternation of all that were present. Such a lesson on the uncertainty of human life, and the very precarious tenure on which mortals hold it, most forcibly arrested his attention. The Latin Vulgate Bible was the only edition of the Scriptures at that time in Europe; but that language was inaccessible to all, except one in an hundred of its inhabitants. Happily for Waldo, his situation in life had enabled him to surmount that obstacle. “Being somewhat learned” says Reinerius Saccho, when speaking of him, “he taught the people the text of the New Testament in their mother tongue.” The sudden death of his friend led him to think of his own approaching dissolution, and under the terrors of an awakened conscience, he had recourse to the Holy Scriptures for instruction and comfort. There, in the knowledge of the true character of God, as the just God and the Savior, he found the pearl of great price— the way of escape from the wrath which is to come. The belief of the testimony which God hath given of his Son, diffused peace and joy into his own mind, raised his views and conceptions above “the smoke and din of this dim spot which men call earth,” and led him to look for glory, honor, and immortality, even eternal life, in the world to come. But Christian love is an operative principle. It expands the mind in which it dwells, and fills it with generous sentiments—with supreme love to God, and the most disinterested benevolence to man. Waldo was desirous of communicating to others a portion of that happiness which he himself enjoyed. He abandoned his mercantile pursuits, distributed his wealth to the poor as occasion required; and, while the latter flocked to him to partake of his alms, he labored to engage their attention to the things which belonged to their everlasting peace.

One of the first objects of his pursuit was to put into their hands the word of life; and he either himself translated, or procured some one else to translate the four Gospels into French; and the next was to make them acquainted with their sacred contents. Matthias Illyrius, a writer who prosecuted his studies under Luther and Melancthon, and was one of the Magdeburgh Centuriators, speaking of him, says, “His kindness to the poor being diffused, his love of teaching and their love of learning growing stronger and stronger, greater crowds came to him, to whom he explained the Scriptures. He was himself a man of learning; so I understand from some old parchments—nor was he obliged to employ others to translate for him as his enemies affirm.” But whether Waldo himself translated these Scriptures or employed others to do it, or, which is most probable, executed it himself with the assistance of others, certain it is, that the inhabitants of Europe were indebted to him for the first translation of the Bible into a modern tongue, since the time that the Latin had ceased to be a living language—a gift of inestimable value.

As Waldo became more acquainted with the Scriptures, he began to discover that a multiplicity of doctrines, rites, and ceremonies which had been introduced into the national religion, had not only no foundation in the word of God, but were most pointedly condemned in that book.

Inflamed with zeal for the glory of God, on the one hand, and with concern for the souls of his fellow-sinners on the other, he raised his voice loudly against them, condemning the arrogance of the pope, and the reigning vices of the clergy. Nor did he satisfy himself with mere declamation against what was wrong in others. He taught the truth in its simplicity, and enforced its practical influence on the heart and life; and by his own example, as well as by an appeal to the lives of those who first believed in Christ, he labored to demonstrate the great difference that existed between the Christianity of the Bible and that of the church of Rome.

The consequence of all this may be easily supposed by a reflecting mind.

The archbishop of Lyons heard of these proceedings, and became indignant. Their tendency was obvious; the honor of the church was involved in them, and, in perfect consistency with the usual mode of silencing objectors among the Catholic party, he forbade the new reformer to teach any more on pain of excommunication, and of being proceeded against as an heretic. Waldo replied, that though a layman, he could not be silent in a matter which concerned the salvation of his fellow-creatures.

Attempts were next made to apprehend him; but the number and kindness of his friends, the respectability and influence of his connections, many of whom were men of rank; the universal regard that was paid to his character for probity and religion; and the conviction that his presence was highly necessary among the people whom he had by this time gathered into a church, and of which he had taken the oversight, all operated so strongly in his favor, that he lived concealed at Lyons during the space of three whole years. 7 Information of these things was then conveyed to pope Alexander III who no sooner heard of such heretical proceedings than he anathematized the reformer and his adherents, commanding the archbishop to proceed against them with the utmost rigor. Waldo was now compelled to quit Lyons; his flock in a great measure followed their pastor; and hence a dispersion took place not unlike that which arose in the church of Jerusalem on the occasion of the death of Stephen. The effects were also similar. Waldo himself retired into Dauphiny, where he preached with abundant success; his principles took deep and lasting root, and produced a numerous harvest of disciples who were denominated Leonists, Vaudois, Albigenses, or Waldenses; for the very same class of Christians is designated by these various appellations at different times, and according to the different countries or quarters of the same country in which they appeared. Persecuted from place to place, Waldo retired into Picardy, where also success attended his labors. Driven from thence, he proceeded into Germany, carrying along with him the glad tidings of salvation; and, according to the testimony of Thuanus, a very authentic French historian, he at length settled in Bohemia, where he finished his course, in the year 1179, after a ministry of nearly twenty years. He was evidently a man of very singular endowments; and one of those extraordinary persons whom God in his providence occasionally raises up and qualifies for eminent usefulness in his kingdom; but he has met with no historian capable of doing justice to his talents and character. Numbers of his people fled for an asylum into the valleys of Piedmont, taking with them the new translation of the Bible. In the ensuing section, we shall have an opportunity of examining their doctrinal sentiments; and their history in that country, as well as in the south of France, and wherever else we can trace them, will occupy, in one way or other, the remaining pages of this volume.

The persecution of Waldo and his followers, with their flight from Lyons, is a remarkable epoch in the annals of the Christian church. Wherever they went, they sowed the seeds of reformation. The countenance and blessing of the King of kings accompanied them. The word of God grew and multiplied, not only in the places where Waldo himself had planted it, but in more distant regions. In Alsace and along the Rhine, the doctrines of Waldo spread extensively. Persecutions ensued—thirty-five citizens of Mentz were burned in one fire at the city of Bingen, and eighteen at Mentz itself. The bishops of both Mentz and Strasburgh breathed nothing but vengeance and slaughter against them; and at the latter city, where Waldo himself is said to have narrowly escaped apprehension, eighty persons were committed to the flames. In the treatment, and in the behavior of the Waldenses, were renewed the scenes of martyrdom of the second century.

Multitudes died praising God, and in the confident hope of a blessed resurrection. But the blood of the martyrs again became the seed of the church; and in Bulgaria, Croatia, Dalmatia, and Hungary, churches were planted, which flourished throughout the thirteenth century, and which are said to have owed their rise chiefly to the labors of one Bartholomew, a native of Carcassone, a city not far distant from Toulouse, in the south of France, and which may be not improperly termed the metropolis of the Albigenses. In Bohemia, and in the country of Passau, it has been computed that there were not less than eighty thousand of this class of Christians in the year 1315. In short we shall find in the sequel, that they spread themselves throughout almost every country in Europe; but they were everywhere treated as the filth of the world, and as the offscouring of all things. It call excite no surprise that their increasing numbers should rouse the court of Rome to adopt the most vigorous measures for suppressing them.

The inquisition had not yet been established; but council after council had been convened in France; and about twenty years after Waldo had been driven from Lyons, the following persecuting edict was issued from Rome.

THE DECREE OF POPE LUCIUS III AGAINST HERETICS, A.D. “To abolish the malignity of diverse heresies which are lately sprung up in most parts of the world, it is but fitting that the power committed to the church should be awakened, that by the concurring assistance of the Imperial strength, both the insolence and mal-pertness of the heretics in their false designs may be crushed, and the truth of Catholic simplicity shining forth in the holy church, may demonstrate her pure and free from the execrableness of their false doctrines. Wherefore we, being supported by the presence and power of our most dear son, Frederic, the most illustrious Emperor of the Romans, always increaser of the empire, with the common advice and council of our brethren, and other patriarchs, archbishops, and many princes, who from several parts of the world are met together, do set themselves against these heretics who have got different names from the several false doctrines they profess, by the sanction of this present general decree, and by our apostolical authority according to the tenor of these presents, we condemn all manner of heresy, by what name soever it may be denominated.” “More particularly, we declare all Catharists, Paterines, and those who call themselves “the Poor of Lyons;” the Passignes, Josephists, Arnoldists, to lie under a perpetual anathema. And because some, under a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof, as the apostle saith, assume to themselves the authority of preaching; whereas the same apostle saith, “how shall they preach except they be sent” — we therefore conclude under the same sentence of a perpetual anathema, all those who either being forbid or not sent do notwithstanding presume to preach publicly or privately, without any authority received either from the Apostolic See, or from the bishops of their respective dioceses: As also all those who are not afraid to hold or teach any opinions concerning the sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, baptism, the remission of sins, matrimony, or any other sacraments of the church, differing from what the holy church of Rome doth preach and observe: and generally all those whom the same church of Rome, or the several bishops in their dioceses, with the advice of their clergy, or the clergy themselves, in case of a vacancy of the See, with the advice if need be of neighboring bishops, shall judge to be heretics. And we likewise declare all entertainers and defenders of the said heretics, and those that have showed any favor or given countenance to them, thereby strengthening them in their heresy, whether they be called comforted, believers, or perfect, or with whatsoever superstitious name they disguise themselves, to be liable to the same sentence.” “And though it sometimes happens that the severity of ecclesiastical discipline, necessary to the coercion of sin, is condemned by those who do not understand the virtue of it, we notwithstanding by these presents decree, That whosoever shall be notoriously convicted of these errors, if a clergyman, or one that endeavors to conceal himself under any religious order, he shall be immediately deprived of all prerogative of the church orders, and so being divested of all office and benefice, be delivered to the secular power to be punished according to demerit, unless immediately upon his being detected he voluntarily returns to the truth of the Catholic faith, and publicly abjures his errors, at the discretion of the bishop of the diocese, and makes suitable satisfaction. And as for a layman who shall be found guilty either publicly or privately of any of the aforesaid crimes, unless by abjuring his heresy and making satisfaction he immediately return to the orthodox faith, we decree him to be left to the sentence of the secular judge, to receive condign punishment according to the quality of the offense.” “And as to those who are taken notice of by the church as suspected of heresy, unless at the command of the bishop they give full evidence of their innocence, according to the degree of suspicion against them and the quality of their persons, they shall be liable to the same sentence. But those who after having abjured their errors, or cleared themselves upon examination to their bishop, if they be found to have relapsed into their abjured heresy—We decree that without any further hearing they be forthwith delivered up to the secular power, and their goods confiscated to the use of the church.” “And we further decree, That this excommunication, in which our will is that all heretics be included, shall be repeated and renewed by all patriarchs, archbishops, and bishops, in all the chief festivals and on any public solemnity, or upon any other occasion to the glory of God and the putting a stop to all heretical pravity: ordering by our apostolic authority, that if any bishop be found wanting or slow herein, he be suspended for three years from his episcopal dignity and administration.” “Furthermore, with the counsel and advice of bishops, and intimation of the emperor and princes of the empire, we do add, That every archbishop or bishop, either in his own person or by his archdeacon, or by other honest and fit persons, shall once or twice in the year visit the parish in which it is reported that heretics dwell, and there cause two or three men of good credit, or, if need be, the whole neighborhood, to swear that if they know of any heretics there, or any that frequent private meetings, or that differ from the common conversation of mankind, either in life or manners, they will signify the same to the bishop or archdeacon:

The bishops also or archdeacon shall summon before them the parties accused, who, unless they at their discretion, according to the custom of the country, do clear themselves of the guilt laid to their charge; or if, after having so cleared themselves, they relapse again to their former unbelief, they shall be punished at the bishop’s discretion. And if any of them, by a damnable superstition, shall refuse to swear, that alone shall suffice to convict them of being heretics, and liable to the punishments before-mentioned.” “We ordain further, That all earls, barons, governors and consuls of cities and other places, in pursuance of the commonition of the respective archbishops and bishops, shall promise upon oath, that in all these particulars, whenever they are required so to do, they will powerfully and effectually assist the church against heretics and their accomplices; and endeavor faithfully, according to their office and power, to execute the ecclesiastical and imperial statutes concerning the matters herein-mentioned.” “But if any of them shall refuse to observe this, they shall be deprived of their honors and charges, and be rendered incapable of receiving others; and, moreover, be involved in the sentence of excommunication, and their goods be confiscated to the use of the church. And if any city shall refuse to yield obedience to these Decretal Constitutions, or that contrary to the episcopal commonition they shall neglect to punish opposers, we ordain the same to be excluded from all commerce with other cities, and be deprived of the episcopal dignity.” “We likewise decree, That all favorers of heretics, as men stigmatized with perpetual infamy, shall be incapable of being attorneys or witnesses, or of bearing any public office whatsoever.

And, as for those who are exempt from the law of diocesan jurisdiction, as being immediately under the jurisdiction of the apostolic see; nevertheless, as to these constitutions against heretics, we will, That they be subject to the judgment of the archbishop and bishops, and that in this case they yield obedience to them, as to the delegates of the apostolic see, the immunity of their privileges notwithstanding.”

Ildefonsus, king of Arragon, also testified his zeal against the Waldenses, by an edict published in the year 1194, from the tenor of which we are authorized to infer, that the doctrine of Waldo had not only found its way into Spain, but that it had got such footing there as to create no little alarm, and call forth the determined interference of the government. The following is a copy of this severe edict, as given by Pegna, in his notes on the “Directory of the Inquisitors.” “ILDEFONSUS, by the grace of God, King of Arragon, Earl of Barcelona, Marquis of Provence, to all archbishops, bishops, and other prelates of the church of God, earls, viscounts, knights, and to all people of his kingdom, or belonging to his dominions, wisheth health, and the sound observance of the Christian religion.” “Forasmuch as it hath pleased God to set us over his people, it is but fit and just, that according to our might we should be continually solicitous for the welfare and defense of the same; wherefore we, in imitation of our ancestors, and in obedience to the canons which determine and ordain heretics, as persons cast out from the sight of God and all Catholics, to be condemned and persecuted everywhere, do command and charge that the Waldenses, Inzabbati, who otherwise are called “the poor of Lyons,” and all other heretics who cannot be numbered, being excommunicated from the holy church, adversaries to the cross of Christ, violaters and corrupters of the Christian religion, and the avowed enemies of us and our kingdom, do depart out of our kingdom and all our dominions. Whosoever, therefore, from this day forward, shall presume to receive the said Waldenses, and Inzabbati, or any other heretics of whatsoever profession, into their houses, or to be present at their pernicious sermons, or to afford them meat, or any other favor, shall thereby incur the indignation of Almighty God, as well as ours, and have his goods confiscated, without the remedy of an appeal, and be punished as if he were actually guilty of high treason. And we strictly charge and command, that this our edict and perpetual constitution be publicly read on the Lord’s days by the bishops and other rectors of churches, in all the cities, castles, and towns of our kingdom, and throughout all our dominions: and that the same be observed by vicars, bailiffs, justices, etc. and all the people in general; and that the aforesaid punishment be inflicted on all transgressors.” “We further will, that if any person, noble or ignoble, shall in any part of our dominions find any of these wicked wretches, who shall be known to have had three days notice of this our edict, and that do not forthwith depart, but rather are obstinately found staying or lingering; let such know that if they shall any way plague, despitefully use or distress them, wounding unto death and maiming of them only excepted, he will in so doing perform nothing but what will be very grateful and pleasing to us, and shall be so far from fearing to incur any penalty thereby, that he may be sure rather to deserve our favor. Furthermore, we give these wicked miscreants respite, though that may seem somewhat contrary to reason and our duty, till the day after All Saints day: but that all those who either shall not be gone by that time, or at least preparing for their departure, shall be spoiled, beaten, cudgeled, and shamefully ill-treated.”

SECTION Some account of the doctrinal sentiments and religious practices of the Waldenses, collected from the writings of their adversaries. IT is intended, in this and the two following sections, to lay before the reader a more detailed account of the principles and practices of the Waldenses, than hath hitherto been given; and there appears no method of doing this more satisfactory, than by first hearing the charges alleged against them by their adversaries of the Romish church; and then attending to the apologies, reasonings, and confessions of faith which, from time to time, the ever laudable principle of self-defense necessarily extorted from them. This is the plan, therefore, which I intend to pursue, and the present section shall be devoted to the testimony of their adversaries. REINERIUS SACCHO, whose name I have had occasion more than once to mention, was for seventeen years of the earlier part of his life, in some way or other, connected with the Waldenses; but he apostatized from their profession, entered the catholic church, was raised in it to the dignified station of an inquisitor, and became one of their most cruel persecutors. He was deputed by the pope to reside in Lombardy, in the south of France; and about the year 1250, published a catalogue of the errors of the Waldenses under three and thirty distinct heads. The reader who wishes to peruse the original Latin, may find it in Dr. Allix’s Remarks upon the Churches of Piedmont, p. 188-191. The following is a faithful translation. “Their first error,” says he, “is a contempt of ecclesiastical power, and from thence they have been delivered up to Satan, and by him cast headlong into innumerable errors, mixing the erroneous doctrines of the heretics of old with their own inventions. And being cast out of the Catholic church, they affirm that they alone are the church of Christ and his disciples. They declare themselves to be the apostles’ successors, to have apostolical authority, and the keys of binding and loosing. They hold the church of Rome to be the whore of Babylon, (Revelation chapter 17) and that all that obey her are damned, especially the clergy that have been subject to her since the time of pope Sylvester. 1 They deny that any true miracles are wrought in the church, because none of themselves ever worked any. They hold, that none of the ordinances of the church, which have been introduced, since Christ’s ascension, ought to be observed, as being of no value. The feasts, fasts, orders, blessings, offices of the church, and the like, they utterly reject.

They speak against consecrating churches, church-yards, and other things of the like nature, declaring that it was the invention of covetous priests, to augment their own gains, in spunging the people by those means of their money and oblations. They say, that a man is then first baptized when he is received into their community. Some of them hold that baptism is of no advantage to infants, because they cannot actually believe. They reject the sacrament of confirmation, but instead of that, their teachers lay their hands upon their disciples. They say, the bishops, clergy, and other religious orders are no better than the Scribes and Pharisees, and other persecutors of the apostles. They do not believe the body and blood of Christ to be the true sacrament, but only blessed bread, which by a figure only is called the body of Christ, even as it is said, “and the rock was Christ,” etc. Some of them hold that this sacrament can only be celebrated by those that are good, 2 others again by any that know the words of consecration. This sacrament they celebrate in their assemblies, repeating the words of the gospel at their table, and participating together, in imitation of Christ’s supper. They say that a priest who is a sinner, cannot bind or loose any one, as being himself bound; and that any good and intelligent layman may absolve another, and impose penance. They reject extreme unction, declaring it to be rather a curse than a sacrament. Marriage, say they, is nothing else but sworn fornication, unless the parties live continently, and account any filthiness preferable to the conjugal rites. They praise continence indeed, but in the meantime give way to the satisfying of burning lust by any filthy means whatsoever, expounding that place of the apostle, “It is better to marry than to burn,” thus: that it is better to satisfy one’s lust by any filthy act, than to be tempted therewith in the heart. 3 But this they conceal as much as possible, that they may not be reproached therewith. If any honest woman among them that has the repute of chastity, is brought to bed of a child, they carefully conceal it, and send it abroad to be nursed, that it may not be known. They hold all oaths to be unlawful, and a mortal sin, yet they dispense with them when it is done to avoid death, lest they should betray their accomplices, or the secret of their infidelity. They hold it to be an unpardonable sin to betray an heretic, yea the very sin against the Holy Ghost. They say that malefactors ought not to be put to death by the secular power.

Some of them hold it unlawful to kill brute animals, as fishes, or the like; but when they have a mind to eat them, they hang them over the fire or smoke till they die. Fleas and such sort of insects they shake off their clothes, or else dip their clothes in hot water, supposing them thus to be dead of themselves. 4 Thus they cheat their own consciences in this and other observances. From whence we may see, that having forsaken truth, they deceive themselves with their own false notions. According to them there is no purgatory, and all that die, immediately pass either into heaven or hell. That therefore the prayers of the church for the dead are of no use, because those that are in heaven do not want them, nor can those that are in hell be relieved by them. And from thence they infer, that all offerings made for the dead are only of use to the clergymen that eat them, and not to the deceased, who are incapable of being profited by them. They hold, that the saints in heaven do not hear the prayers of the faithful, nor regard the honors which are done to them, because their bodies lie dead here beneath, and their spirits are at so great a distance from us in heaven, that they can neither hear our prayers nor see the honors which we pay them. They add, that the saints do not pray for us, and that therefore, we are not to entreat their intercession, because, being swallowed up with heavenly joy, they cannot attend to us, nor indeed to any thing else. Hence they deride all the festivals which we celebrate in honor of the saints, and all other instances of our veneration for them. Accordingly, wherever they can do it, they secretly work upon holy days, arguing, that since working is good, it cannot be evil to do that which is good on a holy day.

They do not observe Lent, or other fasts of the church, alleging that God does not delight in the afflictions of his friends, as being able to save without them. Some heretics indeed afflict themselves with fasting, watchings, and the like, because without these they cannot obtain the reputation of being holy among the simple people, nor deceive them by their reigned hypocrisy. They do not receive the Old Testament, but the Gospel only, that they may not be overthrown by it, but rather be able to defend themselves therewith; pretending that upon the introduction of the gospel dispensation all old things were to be laid aside. 5 In like manner they select the choicest sayings and authorities of the holy fathers, such as Augustine, Jerome, Gregory, Chrysostom, and Isidore, that with them they may support their opinions, oppose others, or the more easily seduce the simple, by varnishing over their sacrilegious doctrine with the good sentences of the saints, at the same time very quietly passing over those parts of the writings of the holy fathers that oppose and confute their errors. Such as are teachable and eloquent among them, they instruct to get the words of the gospel, as well as the sayings of the apostles, and other holy men by heart, that they may be able to inform others, and draw in believers, beautifying their sect with the goodly words of the saints, that the things they persuade and recommend may pass for sound and wholesome doctrine;—thus by their soft speeches deceiving the hearts of the simple. And not only the men, but even their women also teach 6 amongst them, because women have an easier access to those of their own sex, to pervert them, that afterwards, by their means, the men may be perverted also, as the serpent deceived Adam by means of Eve. They teach their disciples to speak in dark and obscure words, and instead of speaking truth, to endeavor to speak lies; that when they are asked about one thing, they might perversely answer about another, and thus craftily deceive their hearers, especially when they fear that by confessing the truth, they should discover their errors. In the same dissembling manner they frequent our churches, are present at divine service, offer at the altar, receive the sacrament, confess to the priests, observe the church fasts, celebrate festivals, and receive the priest’s blessing, reverently bowing their heads, though in the meantime they scoff at all these institutions of the church, looking upon them as profane and hurtful. They say it is sufficient for their salvation if they confess to God, and not to man.”

Such is the view which Reinerius gave of the principles of the Waldenses, about eighty years subsequent to the times of Peter Waldo; and we must understand this description as applicable to one general class of Christians, scattered throughout the south of France, the valleys of the Pyrenean mountains, the valleys of Piedmont, and the country of the Milanese; though probably distinguished in different places by the different names of Puritans, or Catharists, Paterines, Arnoldists, Leonists, Albigenses, or Waldenses, the last of which ultimately became their more general appellation. 7 No doubt there were shades of difference in sentiment among them on points of minor importance, even as there are among Christians in the present day; and it is very certain that the catholic writers sometimes class under the general name of Waldenses or Albigenses, persons whose theological sentiments and religious practices were very opposite to those which were professed by the followers of Peter Waldo. “The practice of confounding heretics of all kinds in one common herd,” says Mr.

Robinson, “hath been an ancient custom with ecclesiastical historians, and it hath obscured history.” 8 This is a very just remark, and the reader who would not be imposed upon by those writers, will find it of great importance to attend to it. He himself, however, tells us that the Albigenses were Manichaeans, 9 or nearly so, and that they differed from the Vaudois and Waldenses. That individuals, or even a sect, holding those wild and extravagant opinions, may have existed at that time, and been classed by the catholic writers under the head of Albigenses, is not impossible, though I have met with no evidence that puts the fact beyond dispute; and the historians of the latter give a very easy and natural solution of the reason of their being accused of Manichaeism. But, whatever may be in this, the following facts are indisputable; that the general body of the Albigenses received the doctrines of Peter Waldo—that these doctrines had no connection with Manichaeism—and that the Waldenses and Albigenses were two branches of the same sect, inhabiting different countries, each deriving its appellation from its local residence.

In the sketch which Reinerius has furnished of the principles of the Waldenses, it is to be remarked, that there is not the slightest allusion to any erroneous opinions maintained by them, regarding the faith and doctrines of the gospel, and this is a noble testimony to the soundness of their creed. For having himself been connected with them,—a man of learning and talents, he doubtless was intimately acquainted with their doctrinal sentiments; and, having apostatized from their profession and become their determined adversary, he did not want inclination to bring forward any accusation against them which could be done with the smallest regard to decency on his own part. The errors of which he accuses them (a few instances excepted, and on which they repelled his slanderous charges) are such as no protestant dissenter of the present day would shrink from the odium which is connected with holding, since they will all be found in one way or other to resolve themselves into the unfounded claims of the clergy, or the introduction of human traditions and the basest superstition into the worship of God.

It will be recollected that, towards the close of the former section, it was stated that Peter Waldo, after disseminating his doctrines in France and Germany, was at length driven into Bohemia, where he spent the last years of his life in preaching the gospel, which he did with the most astonishing success. That kingdom comprehended what is now included in the duchy of Silesia, and the marquisate of Moravia. The country is about three hundred miles long, and two hundred and fifty broad, almost wholly surrounded with impenetrable forests and lofty mountains. The soil, where it is cultivated, is fruitful, and yields corn enough for the use of its inhabitants, which are computed at three millions in number, leaving a considerable surplus frequently for exportation. Its pasture-lands produce abundance of cattle, particularly horses fit for war. They have inexhaustible mines of gold, silver, copper, tin, iron, lead, sulfur and niter; and their carbuncles, emeralds, and other precious stones, are rended all over Europe. Crantz, who wrote the history of the Bohemian brethren, mentions a colony of Waldenses as obtaining permission to settle at Saltz and Lun, on the river Eger, so early as the twelfth century, which the coincidence of time renders it highly probable, refers to the persecuted Waldo and his brethren. Certain it is, that his labors were crowned with great success in that country; and we have two noted authors who have left us a particular account of the faith and practices of the Waldenses in Bohemia, during the fourteenth century, at which time their numbers had increased very considerably, and they had to sustain the fire of papal persecution. The first is an inquisitor of the church of Rome, who says “he had exact knowledge of the Waldenses,” at whose trials he had often assisted, in several countries. The other is AEneas Sylvius, who wrote the history of Bohemia, and afterwards ascended the pontifical chair with the title of pope Pius II. Thus, writes the inquisitor concerning the Waldenses of Bohemia.

The first error of the Waldenses, says he, is, that they affirm the church of Rome is not the church of Jesus Christ, but an assembly of ungodly men, and that she has ceased from being the true church, from the time of pope Sylvester, at which time the poison of temporal advantages was cast into the church—That all vices and sins reign in that church, and that they alone live righteously—That they are the true church of Christ, and that the church of Rome is the whore mentioned in the Revelation. They despise and reject all the ordinances and statutes of the church, as being too many and very burdensome. They insist that the pope is the head and leader of all error—That the prelates are the scribes and seemingly religious pharisees—That the popes and their bishops, on account of the wars they foment, are murderers—That our obedience is due to God alone, and not to prelates, which they found on Acts 4:9. — That none in the church ought to be greater than their brethren, according to Matthew 20:25, etc.—That no man ought to kneel to a priest, because the angel said to John (Revelation 19:10.) “See thou do it not”—That tithes ought not to be given to priests, because there was no use of them in the primitive church—That the clergy ought not to enjoy any temporal possessions, because it was said in the law, “The tribe of Levi shall have no inheritance with the children of Israel, the sacrifices being their portion” (Deuteronomy —That it is wrong to endow and found churches and monasteries, and that nothing ought to be bequeathed to churches by way of legacy. They condemn the clergy for their idleness, saying they ought to work with their hands as the apostles did. They reject all the titles of prelates, as pope, bishop, etc. They affirm that no man ought to be forcibly compelled in matters of faith. They condemn all ecclesiastical offices, and the privileges and immunities of the church, and all persons and things belonging to it, such as councils and synods, parochial rights, etc., declaring that the observances of the religious are nothing else than pharisaical traditions.

As to the second class of their errors—They condemn all the sacraments of the church. Concerning the sacrament of baptism they say, that the catechism signifies nothing, that the absolution pronounced over infants avails them nothing—that the godfathers and godmothers do not understand what they answer the priest. That the oblation which is called A1 wogen is nothing but a mere human invention. They reject all exorcisms and blessings. Concerning the eucharist they say, that a wicked priest cannot celebrate that sacrament—that transubstantiation is not performed by the hands of him who celebrates unworthily, and that it (the eucharist) may be celebrated on our common tables, alleging for this the words of Malachi 1:11. “In every place shall a pure offering be offered to my name.”

They condemn the custom of believers communicating no more than once a year, whereas they communicate daily. 10 That the mass signifies nothing: that the apostles knew nothing of it; and that it is only done for gain. They reject the canon of the mass, and only make use of the words of Christ in the vulgar tongue—affirming that the offering made by the priest in the mass is of no value. They reject the kiss of peace, that of the altar, of the priest’s hands, and the pope’s feet. They condemn marriage as a sacrament, saying, that those that enter into the state of marriage without hope of children, are guilty of sin. They have no regard to the degrees of carnal or spiritual affinity in marriage which the church observes, nor the impediments of order and public decency, or to the prohibition of the church in that matter. They contend that a woman after child-birth doth not stand in need of any blessing or churching. That it was an error of the church to forbid the clergy to marry. They disallow the sacrament of extreme unction — they hold the sacrament of different orders of the clergy to be of no use, every good layman being a priest, and the apostles themselves being all laymen. That the preaching of a wicked priest cannot profit any body, and that which is uttered in the Latin tongue can be of no use to those laymen who do not understand it. They deride the tonsure of priests and reproach the church that she raiseth bastards, boys, and notorious sinners to high ecclesiastical dignities.—Whatsoever is preached without scripture proof, they account no better than fables. They hold that the Holy Scripture is of the same efficacy in the vulgar tongue as in Latin, and accordingly they communicate and administer the sacraments in the vulgar tongue. They can say a great part of the Old and New Testament by heart. They despise the decretals, and the sayings and expositions of holy men, and cleave only to the text of scripture. They contemn excommunication, neither do they value absolution, which they expect alone from God. They reject the indulgences of the church, and deride its dispensations. They admit none for saints except the apostles, and they pray to no saint. They contemn the canonization, translation, and vigils of the saints. They laugh at those laymen who choose themselves saints at the altar. They never read the liturgy. They give no credit to the legends of the saints, make a mock of the saints’ miracles, and despise their relics. They abhor the wood of the cross, because of Christ’s sufferings on it; neither do they sign themselves with it. They contend that the doctrine of Christ and his apostles is sufficient to salvation without any church statutes and ordinances, and affirm that the traditions of the church were no better than the traditions of the Pharisees—insisting, moreover, that greater stress is laid on the observation of human tradition, than on the keeping of the law of God. They refute the mystical sense of scripture, especially as delivered in sayings and actions, and published by the church, such as that the cock upon steeples signifies the pastor!

Their third class of errors is as follows. They contemn all approved ecclesiastical customs which they do not read of in the gospel, such as the observation of Candlemas, Palm-Sunday, the reconciliation of penitents, and the adoration of the cross on Good-Friday. They despise the feast of Easter, and all other festivals of Christ and the saints, and say that one day is as good as another, working upon holy-days, where they can do it without being taken notice of. They disregard the church fasts, alleging Isaiah 58: “Is this the fast that I have chosen?” They deride and mock at all dedications, consecrations, and benedictions of candles, ashes, palmbranches, oil, fire, wax-candles, Agnus Dei’s, churching of women, strangers, holy places and persons, vestments, salt and water. They look upon the church built of stone to be no better than a common barn, neither do they believe that God dwells there, quoting Acts 7:48. “God doth not dwell in temples made with hands” — and that prayers offered up in them are of no more efficacy than those which we offer up in our closets, according to Matthew 6:6. “But thou when thou prayest, enter into thy closet.”

They set no value on the dedication of churches, and call the ornaments of the altar “the sin of the church,” saying, that it would be much better to clothe the poor than to decorate walls. Of the altar they say, that it is wastefulness to let so much cloth lie rotting upon stones; and that Christ never gave to his disciples vests, or rockets, or miters. They celebrate the eucharist in their household cups, and say that the corporal, or cloth on which the host is laid, is no holier than the cloth of their breeches.

Concerning lights used in the church, they say that God, who is the true light, stands in no need of light, and that it can have no further use than to hinder the priests from stumbling in the dark. They reject all censings; estimating holy water no better than common water. The images and pictures in the church they pronounce to be idolatrous. They mock at the singing [chanting] in churches, saying that the efficacy is in the words and not in the music. They deride the cries of the laymen, and reject all festival processions, as those of Easter, as well as mournful processions at Rogation-week and at funerals. They laugh at the custom of bringing sick persons on a bench before the altar. They dissuade people from going on a pilgrimage to Rome, and other places beyond sea, though they themselves pretend to go on pilgrimage, whereas it is only with a design to visit their bishops who live in Lombardy. They express no value for the Lord’s sepulcher, nor for those of the saints, and condemn the burying in churches, which they found on Matthew 23:29. “Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, because ye build the tombs,” etc. and would prefer burying in the field to the church-yard, were they not afraid of the church. They maintain that the offices for the dead, masses for the deceased, offerings, funeral pomps, last wills, legacies, visiting of graves, the reading of vigils, anniversary masses, and similar suffrages, are of no avail to departed souls. They condemn watching with the dead by night, because of the folly and wickedness which are practiced on those occasions.

They hold all these errors because they deny purgatory, saying that there are only two ways, the one of the elect to heaven, the other of the damned to hell, according to Ecclesiastes 11:3. “Which way soever the tree falleth there it must lie.”

They contend that a good man stands in no need of intercessions, and that they cannot profit those that are wicked— That all sins are mortal, and none of them venial—That once praying in the words of the Lord’s prayer is of more efficacy than the ringing of ten bells, yea, than the mass itself.

They think that all swearing is sinful, because Christ says, Matthew 5:34. “Swear not at all, but let your communication be yea, yea, and nay, nay.”

They are against punishing malefactors with death, which they found on Romans 12:19. “Vengeance is mine; I will repay it, saith the Lord.” —Thus far the testimony of this inquisitor; to which I shall now subjoin the short account which the celebrated Aeneas Sylvius gives of the Waldenses of Bohemia, in his history of that Kingdom.

They hold, says he, that the Pope of Rome is not superior to bishops, and that there is no difference (as to rank or dignity,) for that grace and virtue alone give the preference — That the souls of the deceased are either immediately plunged into hell, or advanced to eternal joys [in heaven.] — That there is no purgatory fire—that it is a vain thing to pray for the dead, and merely an invention of priestly covetousness — That the images of God and of the saints ought to be destroyed— That the blessing of water and palm-branches is ridiculous—That the religion of the Mendicants [begging Friars] was invented by evil spirits—That priests ought to be poor, and content themselves with alms—That every one has liberty to preach [or instruct.] — No capital sin ought to be tolerated under pretense of avoiding a greater evil—That he who is guilty of mortal sin, ought not to enjoy any ecclesiastical dignity—That the confirmation which is celebrated with anointing and extreme unction, is none of the sacraments of the church of Christ — That auricular confession is a piece of foppery—that every one ought, in his closet, to confess his sins to God — That baptism ought to be administered without the addition of holy oil—That the use of church-yards is vain, and nothing but a covetous invention, and that it signifies nothing in what ground the bodies of the dead are laid — That the temple of the great God is the universe, and that to build churches, monasteries, and oratories to him under the supposition that the divine goodness could be more favorably found in them than in other places, is a limiting the Divine Majesty—That the priestly vestments, altar, ornaments, pall, corporals, chalices, patins, and other vessels, are of no efficacy—That it is vain to implore the suffrages of the saints reigning with Christ in heaven, because they cannot help us—That it is to no purpose to spend one’s time in singing and saying the canonical hours— That we are to cease from working on no day except the Lord’s day — That the holidays of saints are to be rejected, and that there is no merit in observing the fasts instituted by the church. CLAUDIUS SEISSELIUS, was archbishop of Turin, towards the close of the fifteenth century, a little before the time of the Reformation, and wrote a treatise against the Waldenses. His residence in the very heart of the valleys of Piedmont must have furnished him with the best opportunities of becoming acquainted with the principles and practices of his nonconformist neighbors, and he has transmitted to posterity a narrative sufficiently circumstantial and explicit to enable any impartial person to form a tolerably correct judgment of them. His testimony is, therefore, of too much importance to be omitted: but I must entreat the reader to bear in mind that it is the testimony of an adversary, whose papal zeal he will perceive to blaze forth against them occasionally with no little fury.

Alluding to the churches of the Waldenses in Piedmont, and those scattered throughout the diocese of Italy, he tells us, that the most cruel persecutions had not been able to extirpate them, or hinder them from a constant defense of that doctrine which they had received from their ancestors. “All sorts of people,” says he “have repeatedly endeavored, but in vain, to root them out; for even yet, contrary to the opinion of all men, they still remain conquerors, or at least wholly invincible.” He then proceeds thus to describe them. “The Pope of Rome, and the rest of the prelates and priests of that church,” these Waldenses affirm, “neither follow the life nor the precepts of Christ, but do quite the contrary; and that not only in secret, but so openly and manifestly that it can no longer be disguised, because they chiefly value themselves on things that are contrary to religion, and not only contemn but even mock at the precepts of the apostles. The latter lived in great poverty, humility, chastity, continence as to carnal things, and contempt of the world; whereas we prelates and priests live in great pomp, luxuriousness, and dissoluteness.

We think it a brave thing to excel in royal power rather than in sacerdotal sanctity; and all our endeavors and studies tend only to the acquisition of glory amongst men, not by means of virtue, holiness, and learning, but by the abundance of all [temporal] things; by arms and warlike magnificence, and by vast expense in equipage, furniture of horses, gold, and other things of that nature. The apostles would not possess any thing as their own, neither would they receive any into their society who had not forsaken all and laid it in common: whereas we, not contented with what we already possess, fish for other people’s goods more greedily and impudently than heathens themselves. Hence it is that we make wars, and incite Christian princes and people to take up arms. The apostles traveling through towns and villages, and sowing the word of God with power, exercised many other offices of charity, according to the several gifts they had received: whereas we, not only do nothing like this, and give no good examples of holy conversation, but on the contrary frequently resist and oppose those that do, thus opening the way to all manner of dissoluteness and avarice.

They, as it were, against their wills and with reluctance, by the divine command or inspiration of God, received ordination to promote the salvation of others: whereas we buy benefices and preferments for money, or procure them by force, or through the favor of princes and other indirect means, merely to satiate our lusts, to enrich our relations, and for the sake of worldly glory. Moreover, they spent their lives in manifold fastings, watchings, and labors, terrified neither by trouble nor danger, that they might show to others the way of salvation: whereas we pass our time in idleness, in pleasures, and other earthly or wicked things. They, despising gold and silver, as they had freely received the divine grace, so they freely dispensed it to others; whereas we set all holy things to sale, and barter with the heavenly treasures of God himself, and, in a word, confound all things both divine and human. So that the church of Rome cannot be said to be the spouse of Christ, but that common prostitute described by Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and St. John. in the Revelations, in such lively colors. For Christ hath joined his church to him to be his bride, holy, pure, fair, adorned with the ornaments and jewels of every virtue, without spot or wrinkle, such as the Holy Spirit figuratively describes her in the Canticles. Far be it, therefore, that Christ should ever think of changing this his beautiful and loving bride for such a stinking, loathsome harlot.”

Further, Seisselius thus proceeds. “We do not deny,” say the Waldenses, “that God alone is the searcher of hearts, for, as the Scripture saith, ‘He searcheth the heart and trieth the reins;’ and therefore that he alone knows whether the works of men are pleasing unto him and obtain his favor, which others can only know by conjecture. But he himself hath taught us how to form our judgment when he saith, “Ye shall know them by their fruits; for an evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit, nor a good tree evil fruit.” Hence, though it be a difficult thing to judge of good works, because they receive their value from the intention of the doer, yet wicked works discover themselves, and the intention cannot make them good, especially when they are open, barefaced, and obviously repugnant to the law of God. Therefore, if I see the bishops and priests every day living in dissoluteness and luxury, robbing others of their goods, smiting their neighbors, persecuting those that are good, blaspheming the name of God, prodigally wasting the patrimony of the church in voluptuousness and damnable crimes, may I not undoubtedly affirm, that they who commit these things are not the ministers of God, but his public and avowed enemies? Surely such they are, though we should suppose them created or confirmed by an universal synod of Christians, or by the pope, or by Peter himself. But how much more may we conclude them such, when those that ordained them are worse than themselves, and their works obviously worse than theirs? What shall we say, if it appear that they have publicly and notoriously bought the papacy—that they openly set to sale sacerdotal functions, and that they set over the churches, not by mistake, but out of malice, those who are known to be wholly unworthy of that charge, and who never in all their lifetime did any thing worthy either of a priest, or even of a Christian? Shall we obey such priests and prelates who lead us the way to salvation neither by word nor work, but rather endeavor all they can to drag us into the same pit of destruction as themselves?

Doth not our Savior tell us that we must not suffer ourselves to be led by blind guides, lest when one blind man leads another, they both fall into the ditch? Hath he not declared that such as these are cut off from the life of the church and the body of Christ, and destined to the fire? How can he be the vicegerent of Christ, who is not so much as a Christian, or a member of the mystical body of Christ, but whom he commands us to avoid as a heathen and publican, so long as he continues incorrigible? “The apostolic authority, the faith of Peter, which Christ said should not fail the catholic church, and with which church he promiseth to abide forever, is to be found amongst us who walk after the example of the apostles, and according to our weak measure, observe the commands and ordinances they have given us.

We are those of whom the apostle Paul speaks in his Epistle to the Corinthians, ‘Brethren consider your calling, that ye are not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; but God hath chosen the foolish things of this world to confound the wise; and the weak things of this world to confound the things that are mighty; and the base things of this world, and things that are despised, yea, and the things that are not, to bring to naught the things that are.’ And the same apostle tells us, that he was sent to preach the gospel, not in the mightiness of man’s wisdom, but in plainness and simplicity; alleging to this purpose what the Lord saith elsewhere, ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to naught the prudence of the prudent.’” Such is the description given us, by the archbishop of Turin, of the Waldenses of Piedmont, before Luther was born, or Calvin thought of, or the term reformation even mentioned. And yet the Catholics have had the effrontery to ask us, “Where was your religion before Luther?” But let us further attend to the account which he gives us of the articles of their faith.

On this particular he thus writes. “They receive only what is written in the Old and New Testaments. They say that the popes of Rome and other priests have corrupted the Scriptures by their doctrines and glosses—that they owe neither tithes nor first-fruits to the clergy—that the consecration of churches, indulgences, and similar benedictions, are the inventions of false priests. They do not celebrate the festivals of the saints. They say that men do not stand in need of the suffrages of the saints, Christ abundantly sufficing in all things.

They affirm that marriage may be contracted in any degree, excepting only one or two at the most; as if the popes had no power to prohibit marriage in any other degree! They say that whatever is done to deliver the souls of the dead from the pains of purgatory is useless, lost, and superstitious—that our priests have not the power of forgiving sins. They say that they alone observe the evangelic and apostolic doctrine, on which account, by an intolerable impudence, they usurp the name of the catholic church!

Their barbs [pastors] do greatly err,” saith Seisselius, “because they are neither sent of God, nor by the pastors of the [catholic] church, but of the devil, as appears from their damnable doctrine.

They say that the authority of hearing confessions belongs to all Christians that walk according to the apostolic precepts, (which their barbs attribute to themselves) because the apostle James saith, ‘Confess your faults one to another.’ They say that we ought not to have any kind of [set form of] prayer, except it appear that it was composed by some certain [inspired] author, and approved of God. Their barbs have often preached this doctrine to abolish the service of the glorious Virgin and of other saints. They do not think that Christians ought to say the angelical salutation to the mother of God, alleging that it has not the form of a prayer, but a salutation: but that they do only that they may rob the Virgin of this service, saying, that it is not lawful to worship or serve her any more than the rest of the saints. They affirm that the blessings of the priests are of no virtue at all. Did not Christ bless the bread in the desert? When the apostles sat down to eat bread, they blessed what was set upon the table. They say there is no need of holy water in the churches, because neither Christ nor his apostles either made it or commanded it: as if we ought to say or do nothing but what we read was done by them. They say, that the indulgences allowed of by the church are despicable, useless things:— that the souls of the dead, without being tried by any purgation, immediately on their parting from the body, enter into happiness or misery; and that the clergy, blinded by their covetousness, have invented purgatory. They say that the saints cannot take notice of what is done here below. They detest and abhor all images, and the sign of the cross, much more than we honor them. They make no distinction between the worship of Latria, which is due to God only, and that of Dulia, which belongs to the saints. As to the fasts which the catholic church has instituted for the honor of God and the saints, they have yet less reason to object these to us. They affirm that a lie is always a mortal sin, because David says, ‘God shall destroy all liars.’” And as to transubstantiation he tells us, “that the Waldenses made a mock of all the artifices which the Catholics had recourse to with the view of making it appear to them more plausible.” Upon this part of their conduct, the reflections of the learned archbishop are sufficiently pertinent to be here introduced. “1 think,” saith he, “that those took pains to little purpose, who, when writing against this sect, made it their chief business to insist upon the difficulties about the sacrament of the eucharist, and who, in order to clear them, have spoken so sharply and subtly, not to say confusedly, that I have great reason to doubt whether they ever understood the thing themselves. Yet I will not say that because I do not myself comprehend it, (for that I ingenuously confess) I think it also to surpass the capacity of others; but because it has always appeared to me to be a point of that difficulty, that the ablest have been ready to own that the strength of human understanding must in this case be subject to faith.”

SECTION A view of the doctrinal sentiments and religious practices of the Waldenses, collected from their own writings. HAVING in the former section laid before the reader the sentiments imputed to the Waldenses by four of their avowed adversaries, there can be no reasonable objection to our now permitting them to make their own apology. Their historian, John Paul Perrin, in his “Histoire des Vaudois,” published at Geneva in 1619, has furnished us with two of their “Confessions of Faith,” of which the following are faithful translations. Sir Samuel Morland has fixed the date of the first of them in the Year 1120. THE CONFESSION OF FAITH OF THE WALDENSES. 1. We believe and firmly maintain all that is contained in the twelve articles of the symbol, commonly called the apostles’s creed, and we regard as heretical whatever is inconsistent with the said twelve articles. 2. We believe that there is one God,—the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. 3. We acknowledge for sacred canonical scriptures the books of the Holy Bible. (Here follows the title of each, exactly conformable to our received canon, but which it is deemed, on that account, quite unnecessary to particularize.) 4. The books above-mentioned teach us—That there is ONE GOD, almighty, unbounded in wisdom, and infinite in goodness, and who, in his goodness, has made all things. For he created Adam after his own image and likeness. But through the enmity of the devil, and his own disobedience, Adam fell, sin entered into the world, and we became transgressors in and by Adam. 5. That Christ had been promised to the fathers who received the law, to the end that, knowing their sin by the law, and their unrighteousness and insufficiency, they might desire the coming of Christ to make satisfaction for their sins, and to accomplish the law by himself. 6. That at the time appointed of the Father, Christ was born—a time when iniquity everywhere abounded, to make it manifest that it was not for the sake of any good in ourselves, for all were sinners, but that He, who is true, might display his grace and mercy towards us. 7. That Christ is our life, and truth, and peace, and righteousness—our shepherd and advocate, our sacrifice and priest, who died for the salvation of all who should believe, and rose again for their justification. 8. And we also firmly believe, that there is no other mediator, or advocate with God the Father, but Jesus Christ. And as to the Virgin Mary, she was holy, humble, and full of grace; and this we also believe concerning all other saints, namely, that they are waiting in heaven for the resurrection of their bodies at the day of judgment. 9. We also believe, that, after this life, there are but two places—one for those that are saved, the other for the damned, which [two] we call paradise and hell, wholly denying that imaginary purgatory of Antichrist, invented in opposition to the truth. 10. Moreover, we have ever regarded all the inventions of men (in the affairs of religion) as an unspeakable abomination before God; such as the festival days and vigils of saints, and what is called holy-water, the abstaining from flesh on certain days, and such like things, but above all, the masses. 11. We hold in abhorrence all human inventions, as proceeding from Antichrist, which produce distress,2 and are prejudicial to the liberty of the mind. 12. We consider the Sacraments as signs of holy things, or as the visible emblems of invisible blessings. We regard it as proper and even necessary that believers use these symbols or visible forms when it can be done.

Notwithstanding which, we maintain that believers may be saved without these signs, when they have neither place nor opportunity of observing them. 13. We acknowledge no sacraments (as of divine appointment) but baptism and the Lord’s supper. 14. We honor the secular powers, with subjection, obedience, promptitude, and payment. ANOTHER CONFESSION OF FAITH The Centuriators of Magdeburgh, in their History of the Christian Church, under the twelfth century, recite from an old manuscript the following epitome of the opinions of the Waldenses of that age.

In articles of faith the authority of the Holy Scriptures is the highest; and for that reason it is the standard of judging; so that whatsoever doth not agree with the word of God, is deservedly to be rejected and avoided.

The decrees of Fathers and Councils are [only] so far to be approved as they agree with the word of God.

The reading and knowledge of the Holy Scriptures is open to, and is necessary for all men, the laity as well as the clergy; and moreover the writings of the prophets and apostles are to be read rather than the comments of men.

The sacraments of the church of Christ are two, baptism and the Lord’s supper: and in the latter, Christ has instituted the receiving in both kinds, both for priests and people.

Masses are impious; and it is madness to say masses for the dead.

Purgatory is the invention of men; for they who believe go into eternal life; they who believe not, into eternal damnation.

The invoking and worshipping of dead saints is idolatry.

The church of Rome is the whore of Babylon.

We must not obey the pope and bishops, because they are the wolves of the church of Christ.

The pope hath not the primacy over all the churches of Christ; neither hath he the power of both swords.

That is the church of Christ, which hears the pure doctrine of Christ, and observes the ordinances instituted by him, in whatsoever place it exists.

Vows of celibacy are the inventions of men, and productive of uncleanness.

So many orders [of the clergy,] so many marks of the beast.

Monkery is a filthy carcass.

So many superstitious dedications of churches, commemorations of the dead, benedictions of creatures, pilgrimages, so many forced fastings, so many superfluous festivals, those perpetual bellowings, [alluding to the practice of chanting] and the observations of various other ceremonies, manifestly obstructing the teaching and learning of the word, are\parDIABOLICAL INVENTIONS.

The marriage of priests is both lawful and necessary.

About the time of the Reformation, the Waldenses who resided in the South of France, and who of course were subjects of the French king, were persecuted with the most sanguinary severity, particularly those resident in the country of Provence. In the year 1540, the parliament of Aix, the chief judicature of the province, passed a law, that “they should all of them promiscuously be destroyed, that their houses should be pulled down, the town of Merindole be leveled with the ground, all the trees cut down, and the country adjacent converted into a desert.” Voltaire, speaking of this cruel decree, says, “The Waldenses, terrified at this sentence, sent a deputation to cardinal Sadoletus, bishop of Carpentras, who at that time was in his diocese. This illustrious scholar, this true philosopher, this humane and compassionate prelate, received them with great goodness, and interceded in their behalf, and the execution of the sentence was for a time suspended.” 4 The sentence, nevertheless, was executed in all its rigor five years afterwards, as will be related in a future section. In the preceding year, however, (1544) as we are informed by Sleiden, in his history of the Reformation, p. 347, the Waldenses, to remove the prejudices that were entertained against them, and to manifest their innocence, transmitted to the king, in writing, the following confession of their faith.

THIRD CONFESSION 1. We believe that there is but one God, who is a Spirit—the Creator of all things—the Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all; who is to be worshipped in spirit and in truth—upon whom we are continually dependent, and to whom we ascribe praise for our life, food, raiment, health, sickness, prosperity, and adversity. We love him as the source of all goodness; and reverence him as that sublime being, who searches the reins and trieth the hearts of the children of men. 2. We believe that Jesus Christ is the Son and image of the Father—that In Him all the fullness of the Godhead dwells, and that By Him alone we know the Father. He is our Mediator and advocate; nor is there any other name given under heaven by which we can be saved. In His name alone we call upon the Father, using no other prayers than those contained in the Holy Scriptures, or such as are in substance agreeable thereunto. 3. We believe in the Holy Spirit as the Comforter, proceeding from the Father, and from the Son; by whose inspiration we are taught to pray; being by Him renewed in the spirit of our minds; who creates us anew unto good works, and from whom we receive the knowledge of the truth. 4. We believe that there is one holy church, comprising the whole assembly of the elect and faithful, that have existed from the beginning of the world, or that shall be to the end thereof. Of this church the Lord Jesus Christ is the head — it is governed by his word and guided by the Holy Spirit. In the church it behooves all Christians to have fellowship. For her He [Christ] prays incessantly, and his prayer for it is most acceptable to God, without which indeed there could be no salvation. 5. We hold that the ministers of the church ought to be unblameable both in life and doctrine; and if found otherwise, that they ought to be deposed from their office, and others substituted in their stead; and that no person ought to presume to take that honor unto himself but he who is called of God as was Aaron — that the duties of such are to feed the flock of God, not for filthy lucre’s sake, or as having dominion over God’s heritage, but as being examples to the flock, in word, in conversation, in charity, in faith, and in chastity. 6. We acknowledge, that kings, princes, and governors, are the appointed and established ministers of God, whom we are bound to obey [in all lawful and civil concerns.] For they bear the sword for the defense of the innocent, and the punishment of evil doers; for which reason we are bound to honor and pay them tribute. From this power and authority, no man can exempt himself as is manifest from the example of the Lord Jesus Christ, who voluntarily paid tribute, not taking upon himself any jurisdiction of temporal power. 7. We believe that in the ordinance of baptism the water is the visible and external sign, which represents to us that which, by virtue of God’s invisible operation, is within us — namely, the renovation of our minds, and the mortification of our members through [the faith of] Jesus Christ.

And by this ordinance we are received into the holy congregation of God’s people, previously professing and declaring our faith and change of life. 8. We hold that the Lord’s supper is a commemoration of, and thanksgiving for, the benefits which we have received by his sufferings and death—and that it is to be received in faith and love—examining ourselves, that so we may eat of that bread and drink of that cup, as it is written in the Holy Scriptures. 9. We maintain that marriage was instituted of God that it is holy and honorable, and ought to be forbidden to none, provided there be no obstacle from the divine word. 10. We contend, that all those in whom the fear of God dwells, will thereby be led to please him, and to abound in the good works [of the gospel] which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them— which are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, sobriety, and the other good works enforced in the Holy Scriptures. 11. On the other hand, we confess that we consider it to be our duty to beware of false teachers, whose object is to divert the minds of men from the true worship of God, and to lead them to place their confidence in the creature, as well as to depart from the good works of the gospel, and to regard the inventions of men. 12. We take the Old and the New Testament for the rule of our life, and we agree with the general confession of faith contained in [what is usually termed] the apostles’ creed. (See Perrin’s Hist. des Vaudois, ch. 13.)

Amongst the writings of the ancient Waldenses that have reached our times, is “A Treatise concerning Antichrist, Purgatory, the Invocation of Saints, and the Sacraments.” 5 Their historian, John Paul Perrin, to whom we are indebted for rescuing it from oblivion, informs us that the original manuscript, in which are also many sermons by their pastors, bears date, A.D. 1120; which is nearly half a century before the time of Peter Waldo, and about the period when Peter de Bruys was discharging his ministry in France. The treatise has indeed been attributed, and not without probability, to the pen of Peter de Bruys. Perrin says, it was carefully preserved among the inhabitants of the Alps, from whence he procured it.

If we could depend with certainty upon the correctness of the date of this manuscript, it would be a very important document in the history of the Waldensian churches, because it bears internal evidence of having been written for the express purpose of exhibiting a public declaration of their reasons for separating from the communion of the church of Rome, and consequently it would throw much light upon the question of their antiquity. But it is proper to apprise the reader of one circumstance attending it, which ought to excite a doubt upon the subject; and that is, that the Scriptures are quoted in it as divided into chapters and verses, which we know was not done until after the middle of the thirteenth century. 6 If, therefore, the original was written at the period fixed by Perrin, the chapters must have been added by a copyist. The treatise, nevertheless, whensoever written, is very interesting, and though the whole of it be too long for insertion, I shall submit to the reader a few extracts. Thus it describes Antichrist: — “ANTICHRIST is a falsehood, or deceit varnished over with the semblance of truth, and of the righteousness of Christ and his spouse, yet in opposition to the way of truth, righteousness, faith, hope, charity, as well as to moral life. It is not any particular person ordained to any degree, or office, or ministry, but it is a system of falsehood, opposing itself to the truth, covering and adorning itself with a show of beauty and piety, yet very unsuitable to the church of Christ, as by the names, and offices, the Scriptures, and the sacraments, and various other things, may appear. The system of iniquity thus completed with its ministers, great and small, supported by those who are induced to follow it with an evil heart and blind-fold—this is the congregation, which, taken together, comprises what is called Antichrist or Babylon, the fourth beast, the whore, the man of sin, the son of perdition. His ministers are called false prophets, lying teachers, the ministers of darkness, the spirit of error, the apocalyptic whore, the mother of harlots, clouds without water, trees without leaves, twice dead, plucked up by the roots, wandering stars, Balaamites and Egyptians. “He is termed Antichrist, because being disguised under the names of Christ add of his church and faithful members, he opposes the salvation which Christ wrought out, and which is truly administered in his church —and of which salvation believers participate by faith, hope, and charity. Thus he opposes the truth by the wisdom of this world, by false religion, by counterfeit holiness, by ecclesiastical power, by secular tyranny, and by the riches, honors, dignities, with the pleasures and delicacies of this world. It should therefore be carefully observed, that Antichrist could not come, without a concurrence of all these things, making up a system of hypocrisy and falsehood—these, must be, the wise of this world, the religious orders, the pharisees, ministers, and doctors; the secular power, with the people of the world, all mingled together. For although Antichrist was conceived in the times of the apostles, he was then in his infancy, imperfect and unformed, rude, unshapen, and wanting utterance, he then wanted those hypocritical ministers and human ordinances, and the outward show of religious orders which he afterwards obtained. As he was destitute of riches and other endowments necessary to allure to himself ministers for his service, and to enable him to multiply, defend, and protect his adherents, so he also wanted the secular power to force others to forsake the truth and embrace falsehood. But growing up in his members, that is, in his blind and dissembling ministers, and in worldly subjects, he at length arrived at full maturity, when men, whose hearts were set upon this world, blind in the faith, multiplied in the church, and by the union of church and state, got the power of both into their hands. “Christ never had an enemy like this; so able to pervert the way of truth into falsehood, insomuch that the true church, with her children, is trodden under foot. The worship that belongs alone to God he transfers to Antichrist himself—to the creature, male and female, deceased — to images, carcasses, and relics. The sacrament of the eucharist is converted into an object of adoration, and the worshipping of God alone is prohibited. He robs the Savior of his merits, and the sufficiency of his grace in justification, regeneration, remission of sins, sanctification, establishment in the faith, and spiritual nourishment; ascribing all these things to his own authority, to a form of words, to his own works, to the intercession of saints, and to the fire of purgatory. He seduces the people from Christ, drawing off their minds from seeking those blessings in him, by a lively faith in God, in Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Spirit, and teaching his followers to expect them by the will and pleasure and works of Antichrist.

He teaches to baptize children into the faith, and attributes to this the work of regeneration; thus confounding the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration, with the external rite of baptism, and on this foundation bestows orders, and indeed grounds all his Christianity. He places all religion and holiness in going to mass, and has mingled together all descriptions of ceremonies, Jewish, Heathen, and Christian; and by means thereof, the people are deprived of spiritual food, seduced from the true religion and the commandments of God, and established in vain and presumptuous hopes. All his works are done to be seen of men, that he may glut himself with insatiable avarice; and hence every thing is set to sale. He allows of open sins, without ecclesiastical censure, and even the impenitent are not excommunicated. He does not govern, nor does he maintain his unity by the Holy Spirit, but by means of the secular power, making use of the same to effect spiritual matters. He hates, and persecutes, and searches after, and plunders, and destroys the members of Christ. These are some of the principal of the works of Antichrist against the truth, but the whole are past numbering or recording.

On the other hand, he makes use of an outward confession of faith; and therein is verified the saying of the apostle—“They profess in words that they know God, but in works they deny him.” He covers his iniquity by pleading the length of his duration, or succession of time, and the multitudes of his followers—concerning whom it is said in the Revelation, that “power is given him over every tribe, language, and nation, and all that dwell on the earth shall worship him.” He covers his iniquity by pleading the spiritual authority of the apostles, though the apostle expressly says, “We can do nothing against the truth”—and “there is no power given us for destruction.” He boasts of numerous miracles, even as the apostle foretold—“Whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all miracles and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness.” He has an outward show of holiness, consisting in prayers, fastings, watchings, and alms-deeds, of which the apostle testified, when he said, “Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.”

Thus it is that Antichrist covers his lying wickedness as with a cloak or garment, that he may not be rejected as a pagan or infidel, and under which disguise he can go on practicing his villanies boldly, and like a harlot. But it is plain from both the Old and New Testaments, that a Christian stands bound by express command to separate himself from Antichrist. [Here the following scriptures are quoted at large from the Old Testament, Isaiah 52:11,12, Jeremiah 1:8, Numbers 16:21, and verse 6, Leviticus 20:24-27, Exodus 34:12,15, Leviticus 15:31, Ezekiel 2, Deuteronomy 20.] Now it is manifest from the New Testament, John 12 that the Lord is come, and hath suffered death that he might gather together in one the children of God; and it is on account of this unity in the truth, and their separation from others, that it is said in Matthew 10, “I am come to separate a man from his father, and to set the daughter against the mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, and those of a man’s own household shall be his enemies.” Christ hath enjoined this separation upon his disciples, when he said, “Whosoever doth not forsake father and mother, etc. cannot be my disciple.” And again, “Beware of false prophets, which come unto you in sheep’s clothing.” Again, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees—and take heed lest any man seduce you, for many shall come in my name and seduce many.” And in the book of the Revelation he warns by his own voice, and charges his people to go out of Babylon, saying, “Come out of her, my people, and be not partakers of her sins, that ye receive not of her plagues; for her sins are come up unto heaven, and the Lord remembereth her iniquity.” The apostle says the same, “Have no fellowship with unbelievers, for what communion hath righteousness with iniquity, or what agreement hath light with darkness, or what concord hath Christ with the devil, or what part hath a believer with an infidel, or the temple of God with idols? Wherefore, come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you, and be a father unto you, and you shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.”

From what has been said, we may learn wherein consist the perverseness and wickedness of Antichrist, and that God commands his people to separate from him, and to join themselves to the holy city, Jerusalem. And since it hath pleased God to make known these things to us by his servants, believing it to be his revealed will, according to the Holy Scriptures, and admonished thereto by the command of the Lord, we do, both inwardly and outwardly, depart from Antichrist. We hold communion, and maintain unity, one with another, freely and uprightly, having no other object to propose herein, but purely and singly to please the Lord, and seek the salvation of our own souls. Thus, as the Lord is pleased to enable us, and so far as our understandings are instructed into the path of duty, we attach ourselves to the truth of Christ, and to his church, how mean soever she may appear in the eyes of men. We therefore, have thought it good to make this declaration of our reasons for departing from Antichrist, as well as to make known what kind of fellowship we have, to the end that, if the Lord be pleased to impart the knowledge of the same truth to others, those that receive it may love it together with us. It is our desire also, that if peradventure, others are not sufficiently enlightened, they may receive assistance from this service, the Lord succeeding it by his blessing. On the other hand, if any have received more abundantly from him, and in a higher measure, we desire with all humility to be taught, and instructed better, that so we may rectify whatever is amiss.

The Treatise then proceeds to sketch and succinctly to confute the numerous abominations of popery, and to show how they all tend to subvert the faith of Christ, and destroy the souls of men; but my limits will only allow of a very abridged view of this masterly statement. “Be it known,” say they, “to all in general, and to every one in particular, that these are the reasons of our separation, viz. It is for the truth’s sake which we believe—for the knowledge which we have of the only true God, and the unity of the divine essence in three persons, a knowledge which flesh and blood cannot communicate — it is for the worship due to that only true God — for the love we owe him above all things — for the sanctification and honor which are due to him supremely, and above every name—for the lively hopes which we have in God through Christ—for regeneration and the renewing of our minds by faith, hope, and charity — for the worthiness of Jesus Christ, with the all-sufficiency of his grace and righteousness—for the communion of saints—the remission of sins—an holy conversation—for the sake of a faithful adherence to all the commands in the faith of Christ—for true repentance—for final perseverance, and everlasting life.” “A various and endless idolatry, in opposition to the express command of God and Christ,” say they, “marks the genius of Antichrist—divine worship offered, not to the Creator, but to the creatures, visible and invisible, corporeal and spiritual, male and female—unto which creatures they present the worship of faith and hope, works, prayers, pilgrimages, and alms, oblations and sacrifices of great price—honoring and adoring them in various ways, by hymns and songs, speeches and solemnities, and celebration of masses, vespers peculiarly appropriated to them, with vigils and feast-days, hoping thereby to obtain that grace which is essentially in God alone, which is meritoriously in Christ, and which is obtained only by faith through the Holy Spirit.” “Another feature which characterizes Antichrist is the excessive love of the world, whence springs an endless train of sin and mischief in the church, as well in those that govern, as in them that officiate—both of whom sin without control. With this is connected the false hopes which Antichrist holds out, of pardon, grace, justification, and everlasting life, as things not to be sought from and obtained in Christ, nor in God through Christ, but in men, living or dead—not by that true and living faith which worketh by love, producing repentance, and influencing the mind to depart from evil, and give itself up to God.”

These extracts will give the reader some notion of the manner in which the subject is handled in this Treatise; and it is unnecessary to indulge in more copious extracts. The articles entitled, “The Dream of Purgatory,” and “The Invocation of Saints,” are discussed with equal judgment; and in the latter, especially, the doctrine of the mediation of Jesus Christ— the perfection and all-sufficiency of his sacrifice for sin—his office as high priest, advocate, and intercessor of his church, are most clearly and nobly maintained, in opposition to the papal worship and invocation of saints. “Christ alone,” say they, “hath the prerogative of interceding for his guilty people, and he obtains whatsoever he requests in behalf of those whom he hath reconciled by his death. He is the only and sole mediator between God and man, the advocate and intercessor with the Father for sinners; and so sufficient is he, that God the Father denies nothing to any one which he asks in his name. For, being near unto God, and living of himself, he prays to God continually for us; and “such an high-priest became us, who was holy, harmless, separate from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.”

Hence they argue, that as there is nothing attainable at the hand of God but through Jesus the mediator, how great is the folly of seeking any other intercessor! He having made expiation for the sins of his people, and having approached unto God for them, where he ever lives to intercede. “No man comes to the Father but by him.” Hence he himself says, “Whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, I will do it.” — “Thou, O Lord, art worthy to receive the book and to unloose the seals thereof, for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood, out of every tribe and tongue, and hast made us kings and priests unto our God.” In the year 1508, about ten years before Luther began the Reformation, and during the reign of Ladislaus, king of Hungary and Bohemia, a dreadful persecution broke out against that class of his subjects, who held the principles of the Waldenses. The latter, to justify themselves from several charges erroneously imputed to them by their adversaries, drew up an apology addressed to the king, which was still extant in the time of Perrin, and as he has handed down to us the substance of it, I shall here extract a few of the more interesting particulars. 1. It was said of them, by their adversaries, that a man might leave his wife when he pleased. On which they reply, that “matrimony is a bond which nothing but death can dissolve, except the crime of fornication, as saith the Lord Jesus Christ;” and also the apostle Paul, 1 Corinthians 7, saith, “Let not the wife depart from her husband, nor the husband put away his wife.” 2. A second calumny regards a community of goods and wives—to which they reply, “that marriage was of old ordained by God in Paradise; that it was designed as an antidote against adultery; and that it is recorded by the apostle, when speaking of this subject, “Let every man have his own wife, and every woman her own husband.” Also, that “the husband ought to love his wife as Christ loveth the church,” and that such as are married ought to live holily together with their children in the fear of God. That as for goods, every one hath possessed his own at all times and in all places—they never having had any such intercommunity among them, as tended in the smallest degree to derogate from that lawful propriety which every one has by right to his own estate. 3. Another scandalous charge was, that they worshipped their barbs or pastors. The grossness of this calumny, indeed, sufficiently refuted itself.

At one time they are represented as setting aside the necessity of the pastoral office altogether, and making its peculiar duties common to every member—at others they are charged with holding their pastors in such estimation, that they paid them divine honors. The Waldenses refer, on this subject, to their own writings, in which they have shown that God alone is the object of worship, and that they never intended to give that to any creature. And that as to their pastors, regarding them as those by whom they have heard the word of reconciliation, they consider themselves as bound in conscience and duty to treat them with kindness, and to esteem them in love for their work’s sake. 4. They have been accused of maintaining that it was in no instance lawful to swear. In reply to that, they say that “some oaths are certainly lawful, tending both to the honor of God and the edification of their neighbor,” instancing Hebrews 6:17. That “men swear by a greater than themselves, and an oath made for confirmation is an end of all strife.”

They also allege that it was enjoined upon the people of Israel, Deuteronomy 6, to swear by the name of the Lord—and also the oath made betwixt Abimelech and Isaac, Genesis 26, and that of Jacob, Genesis 31. 5. Another calumny was, that they showed no reverence to sacred places, maintaining that it is not a more grievous sin to burn a church than to break open another house. To defend themselves against this charge they say, “That neither the place nor the pulpit makes a man holy—and that those are greatly deceived who think the better of themselves because of the dignity of the place. For what was greater than Paradise, or what more pure than heaven.” Notwithstanding which, man was driven out of Paradise, because he sinned there; and the angels were expelled from heaven, that they might be an example to all succeeding ages, teaching us that it is neither the place, nor its grandeur and dignity, but innocence of life that makes a man holy.” 6. Again; they were charged with holding, that the civil magistrate ought not to sentence any one to death. To which they answer, “that it is written, a malefactor shall not be suffered to live; and that without correction and discipline, doctrine serves to no purpose, neither would judgments be known or wickedness punished. That therefore, just anger is the mother of discipline, and patience without reason the seed of vices, encouraging the wicked to proceed in their excesses.” True it is, that they complained of the conduct of the magistrates in delivering them up to death, without any other knowledge of them than they had obtained from the priests and monks who pretended to discover errors in them, and then exclaiming against them as abuses which they had introduced into the church, condemned them as heretics, and delivered them up to the secular power. Moreover, they regarded it as both unwise and cruel, on the part of the magistrates, to give credit to men so carried away with passion as were the priests, and that they should put to death so many poor innocent persons without having either heard or examined them. 7. Allied to the foregoing was another slander, tending to render them odious to kings and princes, namely, “that a layman in a state of grace hath more authority than a prince living in mortal sin.” In reply to that imputation, they said, “that every one ought to be subject to those who are placed in authority—that it is their duty to obey them, to honor them with double honor, to be subject to them with allegiance, and promptly paying them tribute,” etc. 8. The next charge was, that the Waldenses affirmed the pope had no authority over the kings and princes of the earth, who derived their authority from God alone; and on which account they took occasion to call them Manichaeans. They replied, “We believe that the holy Trinity created all things, both visible and invisible, and that [Jehovah] is Lord of all things in heaven, earth, and hell, as it is written, ‘All things were created by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.’” 9. It was further alleged against them, that they objected to the payment of tithes—that priests might lawfully be put to death, or dispossessed of their tithes, which any one might retain without scruple of conscience.

And it is certain, says their historian, that could the Waldenses have appropriated their tithes to any other purpose than the maintenance of those whom they regarded as “dumb dogs,” drowsy watchmen, slow bellies, deceivers, and deceived, they would have done it; but as they had not power to detain them, none of them made any disturbance about the matter. It indeed appears, that in what depended upon their own voluntary choice, they gave nothing to such persons, nor cared for any of their helps after death, of which the priests complained, and thence took occasion to accuse them as heretics. But let us hear them upon the subject of revenge. “The Lord knowing that we should be delivered up, said ‘Beware of men.’

But he never teaches or counsels his elect to slay any one, but on the contrary, to ‘love their enemies.’ When the disciples said to him, ‘shall we call for fire from heaven and consume them?’ Christ answered, ‘Ye know not what spirit ye are of.’ Also the Lord said to Peter, ‘Put up thy sword into its place,’ etc. Besides, temporal distresses ought to be despised and sustained with patience, for in them nothing happens that is new. Whilst we are here, we are the Lord’s threshold, to be, beaten like corn when it is separated from the chaff.” 10. Claude de Rubis, a virulent catholic writer, who compiled the history of the city of Lyons, defames them by saying, that, having retired from the city of Lyons, and taken refuge among the Alps, the Waldenses, like the rest of the inhabitants of the rallies had become sorcerers — and indeed, says he, there are two things which commonly accompany each other, that is heresy and sorcery, as hath been verified in the cities and provinces which have admitted heresy amongst them. To justify themselves against this foul aspersion, they say, “Those act against the first precept of the decalogue, who believe the planets can control the free-will of man. Such do, in effect, esteem the planets to be gods; for they attribute to the creature that which is the peculiar province of the Creator. Against such the prophet Jeremiah saith, “Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not afraid of those things at which the heathen are dismayed.” Paul also says to the Galatians, “Ye observe days and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed on you labor in vain.” They also act against this commandment who believe in sorcerers and diviners, for such believe the demons to be gods. The reason is, because they ask that of demons which God alone can grant, viz. to discover things that are secret, and to reveal the truth of things to come, which is forbidden by God.

Leviticus 19. “Thou shalt not regard them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards. Moreover, thou shalt not divine nor give any heed to dreams. Thou shalt not be an enchanter, neither take counsel with familiar spirits, or wizards, nor inquire the truth among the dead, for all these things are an abomination to the Lord.”

And as to the punishment which God, in a way of vengeance, inflicts upon such, we read in the book of Kings, that “Elijah demanded of Ahaziah, saying, What! is there no God in Israel, that ye go to inquire of Baalzebub, the god of Ekron? Now, therefore, thus saith the Lord, Thou shalt not come down from that bed on which thou art gone up, but shalt surely die.”

Saul died, because he had prevaricated with the commandment that God had given him: he kept it not, neither put his trust in the Lord, but asked counsel of a witch: wherefore the Lord slew him, and transferred his kingdom to David the son of Jesse. It is also said, in the book of Leviticus, that, “whosoever shall turn aside to enchanters and wizards, I will lay my hand upon him, and cut him off from the midst of his people.” Every one ought to know that all enchantment, or conjuration, or charms, or spells, carried for a remedy to men or beasts, are of no avail, but on the contrary a snare and ambush of the old adversary the devil, through which he endeavors to deceive mankind. 11. One more charge against them is, that they compelled their pastors to follow some trade. Their answer to this is surely a very satisfactory one. “We do not think it necessary, say they, that our pastors should work for their bread. They might be better qualified to instruct us if we could maintain them without their own labor; but our poverty has no remedy.” The catholic writers frequently reproach them with making little or no account of the pastoral office—affirming that they made the duty of preaching the gospel common to every member of the church, both male and female; and that they allowed persons who had not the suffrages of the church, to administer the ordinances of gospel worship. That this was an unfounded accusation has been very satisfactorily shown by Dr. Allix, whose researches into the history of those churches entitle him to the gratitude of posterity. I subjoin the substance of his defense of them against this charge. 1. Bernard, abbot of Foncaud, in his Treatise against the sect of the Waldenses ch. 6, accuses only some of them of having no pastors; which shows, as he very properly remarks, that the body of that church had a fixed ministry before the end of the twelfth century. There is, therefore, nothing in this to support the charge of their making light of the pastoral office; for it is only what has happened to societies of Christians in every age of the world, to be for a time without presbyters or pastors, until the great Head of the Church raises up among them persons properly qualified by age, experience, and gifts, to take the oversight of their brethren, to labor in the word and doctrine, and rule the church of God. It is plain that it was so with the first churches for a time. Acts 14:23, Titus 1:5. 2. Reinerius Saccho, who lived about the year 1250, acknowledges that in Lombardy, where he himself resided, they had their bishops or pastors; “Lombardiam intrantes, visitant episcopos suos,” are his words, chap. 5, that is, “when they come into Lombardy they visit their elders.” Again, Matthew Paris (under the year 1243) speaks of a bishop of the Paterines in Cremona, who was deposed by them for fornication. And, further, Pilickdorf, a writer quoted by Bossuet in his history of the Variations, p. 223, says, “they do not approve of a layman’s celebrating the eucharist,” ch. 1, which sufficiently proves, says Dr. Allix, that they made a signal difference between the people and their pastors. 9 3. Commenius, who published a Synopsis of the discipline of the churches of Bohemia, dwells particularly upon this article; and shows that “a stated ministry was always considered as a matter of great importance among the Waldensian churches.” A dreadful persecution broke out against the Bohemian brethren, in the days of Commenius, which produced such havoc among them, that he himself was “The only surviving bishop that escaped.” The scattered brethren, in process of time, elected three persons as qualified for the pastoral office, but “found themselves greatly perplexed about their ordination.” Having understood that there were some Waldensian churches on the confines of Moravia and Austria, to satisfy their own scruples, as well as those of others, they resolved to send Michael Zambergius, one of their pastors, with two other persons, to find out those Waldenses, and give them an account of what had passed among them, and especially to ask their advice upon the matter in hand. They met with one Stephen, a Waldensian bishop, who sent for others also residing in that quarter, with whom they had a conference upon the doctrines of the gospel and the state of their churches, and by them the said three pastors were ordained by the imposition of hands. “Hence,” says Dr. Allix, “it is abundantly evident, that as the Waldenses have preserved the faith that was committed to them, so have they been as careful to preserve entire amongst them the ancient discipline of the church — and, hence it will follow, that nothing can be more false than what is pretended, viz. that they had no kind of lawful ministry among them, but that laymen took upon themselves the power of preaching, of ordaining ministers, and administering ordinances.” 10 SECTION Additional testimonies in favor of the principles and practices of the Waldenses, collected from the writings of both friends and foes; with miscellaneous remarks in illustration of their character and history. HAVING, in the two preceding sections, endeavored to lay before the reader a fair and impartial representation of the doctrinal sentiments, and social religious practices of the Waldenses, and especially as these stood in opposition to the whole prevailing system of popery, I shall, before proceeding to a detail of their general history, adduce a few additional particulars of a more miscellaneous nature than hath been hitherto submitted to his consideration.

The enemies of the Waldenses, while they stigmatize them as heretics, and think no cruelties too horrid to be inflicted upon them, on account of their opposition to the whole system of the papal hierarchy, are, nevertheless, constrained by the force of truth, to bear the most honorable testimony to the integrity, uprightness, and exemplary deportment, which so conspicuously characterized this denomination of Christians. In proof of this, let us attend to the testimony of their adversaries.

An ancient inquisitor, to whose writings against the Waldenses, I had occasion to refer in a former section, thus describes them. “These heretics are known by their manners and conversation, for they are orderly and modest in their behavior and deportment. They avoid all appearance of pride in their dress; they neither indulge in finery of attire, nor are they remarkable for being mean or ragged. They avoid commerce, that they may be free from deceit and falsehood. They get their livelihood by manual industry, as day-laborers or mechanics; and their teachers are weavers or tailors. They are not anxious about amassing riches, but content themselves with the necessaries of life. They are chaste, temperate, and sober. They abstain from anger. Even when they work, they either learn or teach. In like manner also, their women are very modest, avoiding backbiting, foolish jesting, and levity of speech, especially abstaining from lies or swearing, not so much as making use of the common asseverations, “in truth,” “for certain,” or the like, because they regard these as oaths — contenting themselves with simply answering “yes” or “no.” Claudius Seisselius, archbishop of Turin, from whose Treatise against the Waldenses I have quoted largely in a former section, is pleased to say, that “their heresy excepted, they generally live a purer life than other Christians. They never swear but by compulsion, and rarely take the name of God in vain. They fulfill their promises with punctuality; and, living for the most part in poverty, they profess to preserve the apostolic life and doctrine. They also profess it to be their desire to overcome only by the simplicity of faith, by purity of conscience, and integrity of life; not by philosophical niceties and theological subtleties.” And he very candidly admits, that “In their lives and morals they are perfect, irreprehensible, and without reproach among men, addicting themselves with all their might to observe the commands of God.” Lielenstenius, a Dominican, speaking of the Waldenses of Bohemia, says, “I say that in morals and life they are good; true in words, unanimous in brotherly love; but their faith is incorrigible and vile, as I have shown in my Treatise.” Samuel de Cassini, a Franciscan friar, speaking of them in his “Victoria Trionfale,” explicitly owns in what respect their faith was incorrigible and vile, when he says, “That all the errors of these Waldenses consisted in this, that they denied the church of Rome to be the holy mother church, and would not obey her traditions.” Jacobus de Riberia, who published a work entitled, “Collections of the city of Toulouse,” and who, in his time, assisted in persecuting the Waldenses, nevertheless acknowledges, that for a long time they had obtained the highest esteem in Norbonne, 5 as well as in the diocese of Alby, Rhodes, Cahors, and Agen; and that those who would be styled priests and bishops [in the catholic church] were then but little accounted of, which he resolves into their ignorance and unworthy conduct, by reason of which, says he, it was an easy matter for the Waldenses to obtain the preference among the people for the excellency of their doctrine. He acknowledges that they were so well instructed in the Holy Scriptures, that he had seen peasants who could recite the book of Job verbatim, and several others who could perfectly repeat all the New Testament.

Cardinal Baronius, in his Ecclesiastical Annals, tom. 13, styles the Waldenses of Toulouse “good men,” and acknowledges that they were “peaceable persons,” though he elsewhere falsely lays to their account many heinous accusations. In the time of a great persecution of the Waldenses of Merindol and Provence, a certain monk was deputed by the bishop of Cavaillon, to hold a conference with them, that they might be convinced of their errors, and the effusion of blood prevented. But the monk returned in confusion, owning that in his whole life he had never known so much of the Scriptures, as he had learned during those few days that he had been conversing with the heretics. The bishop, however, sent among them a number of doctors, young men, who had lately come from the Sorbonne, which, at that time, was the very center of theological subtlety at Paris.

One of these publicly owned, that he had understood more of the doctrine of salvation from the answers of the little children in their catechisms, than by all the disputations which he had ever before heard. FRANCIS I, king of France, being informed that the parliament of Provence brought very heavy charges against the Waldenses, whom they were then severely persecuting at Merindol, Cabriers, and other neighboring places, was desirous of ascertaining the truth of those accusations. With a view to this, he commanded one of his nobles, the Lord of Langeai, who was at that time his lieutenant in Piedmont, to investigate this matter, and report to him the true state of things. His lordship consequently sent into Provence two clergymen, giving them a strict charge to inquire into the lives and religious principles of the Waldenses, and of the proceedings of the parliament against them. On their return, they reported that “they were a laborious race of people, who, about two hundred years ago, had emigrated from Piedmont, to dwell in Provence, — that betaking themselves to husbandry and feeding of cattle, they had restored many villages destroyed by the wars, and rendered other desert and uncultivated places extremely fertile by their industry. That by the information given them in the said country of Provence, they found they were a very peaceable people, beloved by their neighbors—men of good behavior, of godly conversation, faithful to their promises, and punctual in paying their debts. That they were a charitable people, not permitting any among them to fall into want. That they were, moreover, liberal to strangers and the traveling poor, as far as their ability extended. And that the inhabitants of Provence affirmed, they were a people who could not endure to blaspheme, or name the devil, or swear at all, unless in making some solemn contracts, or in judgment. Finally, that they were well known by this, that if they happened to be cast into any company, where the conversation was lascivious or blasphemous, to the dishonor of God, they instantly withdrew. LOUIS XII, king of France, being informed by the enemies of the Waldenses, inhabiting a part of the province of Provence, that several heinous crimes were laid to their account, sent the master of requests, and a certain doctor of the Sorbonne, who was confessor to his majesty, to make inquiry into this matter. On their return, they reported that they had visited all the parishes where they dwelt, had inspected their places of worship, but that they had found there no images, nor signs of the ornaments belonging to the mass, nor any of the ceremonies of the Romish church; much less could they discover any traces of those crimes with which they were charged. On the contrary, they kept the sabbath-day, observed the ordinance of baptism, according to the primitive church, instructed their children in the articles of the Christian faith, and the commandments of God. The king having heard the report of his commissioners, said with an oath that they were better men than himself or his people. The same monarch having been told that in the valley of Fraissiniere, in the diocese of Ambrun, and province of Dauphiny, there was a class of people who lived like beasts, without religion, and strongly opposed to the Romish worship, deputed one of his confessors and the official of Orleans to investigate the truth or falsehood of this report. The confessor, with his colleague, accordingly repaired to the place, where he examined the Waldenses who inhabited the valley, respecting their faith and conversation. The archbishop of Ambrun, well knowing that the goods of the Waldenses were liable to confiscation for the crime of heresy, and that they would be annexed to the domains of his archbishopric, strongly pressed the commissioners to condemn them as heretics. They, however, not only resisted his application, but even expressed their admiration of the Waldenses, insomuch that the king’s confessor publicly declared, in the presence of a number of his friends, who were with him at his lodgings at the Angel in Ambrun, that he wished he was as good a Christian as the worst of the valley of Fraissiniere. These are, unquestionably, very important testimonies to the Waldenses who resided in France; but I shall now lay before the reader a still more interesting document; it is the testimony which is borne to these people, by that eminent historian Thuanus—an enemy indeed to the Waldenses, himself being a catholic; but he was, nevertheless, a fair and candid one.

Quoting the words of Guy de Perpignan, bishop of Elna, in Roussillon, who exercised the office of inquisitor against the Waldenses, he informs us that “their fixed opinions are said to be these—that the church of Rome, because she hath renounced the true faith of Christ, is the whore of Babylon, and that barren tree which Christ himself hath cursed and commanded to be rooted up; therefore we must by no means obey the pope and the bishops who cherish his errors—that the monastic life is the sink of the church, and a hellish institution; its vows are vain, and subservient only to the filthy love of boys—the orders of the presbytery are the marks of the great beast mentioned in the Apocalypse—the fire of purgatory, the sacrifice of the mass, the feast of the dedications of churches, the worship of saints, and propitiations for the dead, are the inventions of Satan. To these the principal and certain heads of their doctrine, others were fictitiously added concerning marriage, the resurrection, the state of the soul after death, and concerning meats.”

Again, describing the inhabitants of the valley of Fraissiniere, he thus proceeds—“Their clothing is of the skins of sheep—they have no linen.

They inhabit seven villages, their houses are constructed of flint stone, having a flat roof covered with mud, which, when spoiled or loosened by the rain, they again smooth with a roller. In these they live with their cattle, separated from them, however, by a fence. They have also two caves set apart for particular purposes, in one of which they conceal their cattle, in the other themselves when hunted by their enemies. They live on milk and venison, being, through constant practice, excellent marksmen.

Poor as they are, they are content, and live in a state of seclusion from the rest of mankind. One thing is very remarkable, that persons externally so savage and rude, should have so much moral cultivation. They can all read and write. They know French sufficiently for the understanding of the Bible and the singing of Psalms. You can scarcely find a boy among them, who cannot give you an intelligible account of the faith which they profess. In this, indeed, they resemble their brethren of the other valleys.

They pay tribute with a good conscience, and the obligation of this duty is peculiarly noted in their confession of faith. If, by reason of the civil wars, they are prevented from doing this, they carefully set apart the sum, and at the first opportunity pay it to the king’s tax-gatherers.” But of all the catholic writers, who have treated of the Waldenses, there is none whose testimony is more important than that of Reinerius Saccho.

He had himself been one of their number, and consequently could speak of them from personal knowledge. He had apostatized from their profession; was “by merit raised to the bad eminence” of an inquisitor in the catholic church; and of course was become one of their bitterest persecutors. He wrote a book against them, (A.D. 1258) from which I have already quoted largely in a former section. But that extract is almost wholly confined to an enumeration of the articles on which they did not agree with the catholic church. Let the reader now remark his unsought testimony in their favor. “Of all the sects that have risen up against the church of Rome,” says he, “the Waldenses have been the most prejudicial and pernicious, inasmuch as their opposition has been of very long continuance. Add to which, that this sect is become very general, for there is scarcely a country to be found in which this heresy is not planted. And, in the third place, because while all other sects beget in people a dread and horror of them on account of their blasphemies against God, this, on the contrary, hath a great appearance of godliness; for, they live righteously before men, believe rightly concerning God in every particular, holding all the articles contained in the [apostles’] creed—but hating and reviling the church of Rome, and on this subject they are readily believed by the people.” “The first lesson,” says he, in another place, “that the Waldenses teach those whom they bring over to their party, is to instruct them what kind of persons the disciples of Christ ought to be; and this they do by the doctrine of the evangelists and apostles, saying, that those only are the followers of the apostles who imitate their manner of life. Inferring from thence,” says he, “that the pope, the bishops, and the clergy, who possess the riches of this world, and make them the object of their pursuit, do not tread in the footsteps of the apostles, and therefore are not the true guides of the church; it never having been the design of the Lord Jesus Christ to commit his chaste and well-beloved spouse to those who would rather prostitute her by their bad example and abominable works, than preserve her in the same state of purity in which they at first received her, a virgin chaste and without spot.” The same author has furnished us with an interesting account of the manner in which the Waldenses privately disseminated their principles among the gentry; and a proper attention to it will sufficiently explain to the reader the amount of various charges brought against them, from time to time, by the catholic writers, viz. that they allowed their women to teach. It seems to have been a common practice with their teachers, the more readily to gain access for their doctrine among persons in the higher ranks of life, to carry with them a small box of trinkets, or articles of dress, something like the hawkers or peddlers of our day, and Reinerius thus describes the manner in which they were wont to introduce themselves. “SIR, Will you please to buy any rings, or seals, or trinkets?MADAM, will you look at any handkerchiefs, or pieces of needlework for veils? I can afford them cheap.” If after a purchase the company ask, “Have you any thing more?” the salesman would reply, “O yes, I have commodities far more valuable than these, and I will make you a present of them, if you will protect me from the clergy.” Security being promised, on he would go. “The inestimable jewel I spoke of, is the word of God, by which he communicates his mind to men, and which inflames their hearts with love to him.” “In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee named Nazareth”—and so he would proceed to repeat the remaining part of the first chapter of Luke. 14 Or, he would begin with the thirteenth of John, and repeat the last discourse of Jesus to his disciples. If the company should seem pleased, he would proceed to repeat the twenty-third of Matthew. “The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’s seat — Woe unto you; ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

Woe unto you, ye devour widows’ houses.” — “And pray,” should one of the company say, “Against whom are these woes pronounced think you?” he would reply, “Against the clergy and the monks. The doctors of the Roman church are pompous, both in their habits and their manners—they love the uppermost rooms, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and to be called Rabbi, Rabbi. For our parts, we desire no such Rabbis. They are incontinent; we live each in chastity with his own wife. They are the rich and avaricious, of whom the Lord says, “Woe unto you, ye rich, for ye have received your consolation;” but we, “having food and raiment are therewith content.” They are voluptuous and devour widows’ houses—we only eat to be refreshed and supported. They fight and encourage wars, and command the poor to be killed and burnt, in defiance of the saying, ‘he that taketh the sword shall perish by the sword.’ For our parts, they persecute us for righteousness’ sake. They do nothing, but eat the bread of idleness. We work with our hands. They monopolize the giving of instruction, and ‘woe be to them that take away the key of knowledge.’

But among us, women teach as well as men, and one disciple, as soon as he is informed himself, teaches another. Among them, you can hardly find a doctor who can repeat three chapters of the New Testament by heart—but of us there is scarcely man or woman who doth not retain the whole. And because we are sincere believers in Christ, and all teach and enforce a holy life and conversation, these Scribes and Pharisees persecute us to death, as their predecessors did Jesus Christ.” The plan adopted by the Waldenses, for engaging the attention of others to the word of God, as described by Reinerius in the foregoing extract, is both simple and striking, and deserves the attention of missionaries in the present day. It seems to have been prosecuted for several centuries, even beyond the times of the Reformation, as appears from the following circumstance:—The first editor of the complete book of Reinerius, was Father Gretzer, who published it in the year 1613. In the margin of that work, opposite to the passage above quoted, he has placed these words: “This is a true picture of the heretics of our age, particularly of the Anabaptists.” 16 There are few of the Baptists of the present day, it is to be hoped, who would blush to own an alliance with either the old Waldensian preachers, or the heretical Baptists referred to by this father of the catholic church, at least in this part of their conduct; and, indeed, it would be well if all our Missionaries and private Christians of the present day were as conversant with the word of God as the Waldenses even in that dark age appear, from the testimony of their very enemies, to have been. But not to enlarge, I close this section by laying before the reader a few of the testimonies that were borne to the Waldenses, by our first Protestant reformers and earlier historians, who, as most of them lived about three hundred years nearer to their times than we do, may reasonably be supposed so much better qualified for appreciating their true character.

In the year 1880,ECOLAMPADIUS, one of the reformers, then resident at Basle, in Switzerland, was visited by George Morell, one of the pastors among the Waldenses, by whom, on his return to Provence, he addressed a letter “to his well-beloved brethren in Christ, called Waldenses,” and it is as follows: — “We have learned with great satisfaction, by your faithful pastor, George Morell, the nature of your faith and religious profession, and in what terms you declare it. Therefore, we thank our most merciful Father, who hath called you to so great light in this age, amidst the dark clouds of ignorance which have spread themselves over the world, and notwithstanding the extravagant power of Antichrist. Wherefore we acknowledge that Christ is in you: for which cause we love you as brethren; and would to God we were able to make you sensible in effect of that which we shall be ready to do for you, although it were to be done with the utmost difficulty. Finally, we desire that what we write may not be regarded as though through pride we arrogated to ourselves any superiority over you, but consider it as proceeding from that brotherly love and charity which we bear towards you. The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ hath imparted to you an excellent knowledge of his truth, beyond that of many other people, and hath blessed you with spiritual blessings. So that if you persevere in his grace, he hath much greater treasures wherewith to enrich you, and make you perfect, according to your advancement in the measure of the inheritance of Christ.”\parLUTHER, in the year 1588, published the Confessions of the Waldenses, to which he wrote a preface. In that preface he candidly acknowledges that, in the clays of his popery he had hated the Waldenses, as persons who were consigned over to perdition. But having understood from their confessions and writings the piety of their faith, he perceived that those good men had been greatly wronged whom the Pope had condemned as heretics; for that, on the contrary, they were rather entitled to the praise due to holy martyrs. He adds, that among them he had found one thing worthy of admiration, a thing unheard of in the Popish church, that, laying aside the doctrines of men, they meditated in the law of God, day and night; and that they were expert, and even well versed in the knowledge of the Scriptures; whereas, in the papacy, those who are called masters wholly neglected the Scriptures, and some of them had not so much as seen the Bible at any time. Moreover, having read the Waldensian Confessions, he said he returned thanks to God for the great light which it had pleased him to bestow upon that people; rejoicing that all cause of suspicion being removed which had existed between them and the reformed, they were now brought together into one sheepfold under the Chief Shepherd and Bishop of souls. THEODORE BEZA, the contemporary and colleague of Calvin, in his “Treatise of the famous pillars of learning and religion,” says; “As for the Waldenses, I may by permitted to call them the very seed of the primitive and purer Christian Church, since they are those that have been upheld, as is abundantly manifest, by the wonderful providence of God, so that neither those endless storms and tempests by which the whole Christian world has been shaken for so many succeeding ages, and the western parts at length so miserably oppressed by the bishop of Rome, falsely so called; nor those horrible persecutions which have been expressly raised against them, were ever able so far to prevail as to make them bend, or yield a voluntary subjection to the Roman tyranny and idolatry. On another occasion the same writer remarks that “The Waldenses, time out of mind, have opposed the abuses of the Church of Rome, and have been persecuted after such a manner, not by the sword of the word of God, but by every species of cruelty, added to a million of calumnies and false accusations, that they have been compelled to disperse themselves wherever they could, wandering through the deserts like wild beasts. The Lord, nevertheless, has so preserved the residue of them, that, notwithstanding the rage of the whole world, they still inhabit three countries at a great distance from each other, viz. Calabria, Bohemia, and Piedmont, and the countries adjoining, where they dispersed themselves from the quarters of Provence about two hundred and seventy years ago.

And as to their religion, they never adhered to papal superstitions; for which reason they have been continually harassed by the bishops and inquisitors abusing the arm of secular justice, so that their continuance to the present time is evidently miraculous.” BULLINGER, in the preface to his Sermons on the Book of the Revelation, (1530) writes thus concerning the Waldenses. “What shall we say, that for four hundred years and more, in France, Italy, Germany, Poland, Bohemia, and other countries throughout the world, the Waldenses have sustained their profession of the gospel of Christ; and in several of their writings, as well as by continual preaching, they have accused the pope as the real Antichrist foretold by the apostle John, and whom therefore we ought to avoid. These people have undergone divers and cruel torments, yet have they constantly and openly given testimony to their faith by glorious martyrdoms, and still do so even to this day. Although it has often been attempted by the most powerful kings and princes, instigated by the pope, it hath been found impossible to extirpate them, for God hath frustrated their efforts.” MONSIEUR DE VIGNAUX, who was forty years pastor of one of the Churches of the Waldenses, in the valleys of Piedmont, and died at the age of eighty, wrote a Treatise concerning their life, manners, and religion, in which he says; “We live in peace and harmony one with another, have intercourse and dealings chiefly among ourselves, having never mingled ourselves with the members of the church of Rome by marrying our sons to their daughters, nor our daughters to their sons. Yet they are so pleased with our manners and customs, that Catholics, both lords and others, would rather have men and maid servants from among us, than from those of their own religion; and they actually come from distant parts to seek nurses among us for their little children, finding, as they say, more fidelity among our people than their own.” He then gives a summary of their doctrinal principles, for the sake of which they have been persecuted; such as “that the Holy Scriptures contain all things necessary to our salvation, and that we are called to believe only what they teach, without any regard to the authority of man—that nothing else ought to be received by us except what God hath commanded—that there is only one mediator between God and man, and consequently that it is wrong to invoke the saints. That baptism and the Lord’s supper are the only standing ordinances in the church of Christ—that all masses are damnable, and ought to be abolished — that all human traditions are to be rejected. That the saying and recital of the office, fasts confined to particular days, superfluous holy-days, differences of meats, so many degrees and orders of priests, monks, and nuns, so many benedictions and consecrations of creatures, vows, pilgrimages, and the whole vast and confused mass of ceremonies, formerly invented, ought to be abolished. They deny the supremacy of the pope, and more especially the power that he has usurped over the civil government, and admit of no other degrees than bishops and deacons. They contend that the See of Rome is the true Babylon—the marriage of the clergy lawful, and that the true church of Christ consists of those who hear the word of God and believe it.” JOHN CHASSAGNON, who wrote a History of the Albigenses, says, “It is recorded of the Waldenses, that they rejected all the traditions and ordinances of the church of Rome as being superstitious and unprofitable, and that they made light of the whole body of the clergy and prelates. On which account, having been excommunicated and expelled their country, they dispersed themselves in different places, viz. into Dauphiny, Provence, Languedoc, Piedmont, Calabria, Bohemia, England, and elsewhere. Some say, that a part of the Waldenses retired into Lombardy (in Italy) where they multiplied to such an extent that their doctrine spread itself throughout Italy, and reached even into Sicily. Nevertheless, in all their dispersions they maintained among themselves some union and fraternity, during the space of four hundred years, living in great simplicity and the fear of God.” To these numerous testimonies, I shall now add that of our great poet\parMILTON, who seems to have diligently studied the character of the Waldenses, and to have well understood their principles and the constitution of their churches. Of this the reader will find abundant evidence hereafter in the numerous letters which he wrote in their behalf to the Protestant princes of Europe, pleading their cause against their popish persecutors. What I have at present in view is, the account given by him of the constitution of their churches, and the simplicity of their worship. He wrote a Tract, entitled, “Considerations touching the likeliest means to remove hirelings out of the church,” addressed to the Parliament of England; in which he shows the pernicious effects arising from the endowing of churches with tithes; refutes, in the most convincing manner, the various pleas which were urged by Episcopalians in favor of that practice as founded on the Jewish law; and frequently adduces the happy poverty and purity of the Waldenses, as forming a stalking contrast to the corruptions that abound in national churches. “For the first three hundred years and upwards,” says he, “in all the ecclesiastical story, I find no such doctrine or example, [as that of supporting the pastors of Christian churches by the imposition of tithes] though error by that time had brought back again priests, altars, and oblations; and in many other points of religion had miserably Judaised the church.”—“The first Christian emperors, who did all things as bishops advised them, supplied what was wanting to the clergy, not out of tithes, which were never mentioned, but out of their own imperial revenues; as is manifest in Eusebius, Theodoret, and Sozomen, from [the times of] Constantine to Arcadius. Hence, those most ancient reformed churches of the Waldenses, if they rather continued not pure since the apostles’ days, denied that tithes were to be given, or that they were ever given in the primitive church, as appears by an ancient Tractate inserted in the Bohemian history. The [pastors of the] poor Waldenses, the ancient Stock of our reformation, without the help (of tithes) bred up themselves in trades, and especially in physic and surgery, as well as in the study of scripture, which is the only true theology, that they might be no burden to the church; and after the example of Christ might cure both soul and body, through industry adding that to their ministry which he joined to his by the gift of the Spirit. So Peter Gilles relates, in his history of the Waldenses of Piedmont. But our ministers scorn to use a trade, and count it the reproach of this age that tradesmen preach the gospel. It were to be wished they were all tradesmen; they would not then for want of another trade make a trade of their preaching: and yet they clamor that tradesmen preach, though they preach while themselves are the worst tradesmen of all.”—“Seeing the Christian church is not national, but consists of many particular congregations, not determined by any outward judge in matters of conscience; those pretended church revenues, as they have ever been, so they are likely to continue, matters of endless dissension between the church and the magistrate, and the churches among themselves; there will, therefore, be found no better remedy for these evils, otherwise incurable, than (after the example of) the most incorrupt counsel of those Waldenses, our first reformers, to remove them as a pest — an apple of discord in the church; for what else can the effect of riches be, and the snare of money in religion? and to convert them to more profitable uses; considering that the church of Christ was founded in poverty rather than in revenues, stood purest, and prospered best without them, received them unlawfully from those who both erroneously and unjustly, sometimes impiously, given them, and so was justly ensnared and corrupted by them.”—“The Waldenses, our first reformers, both from the Scriptures and primitive example, maintained those among them who bore the office of ministers by alms alone, Take their very words, ‘Our food and clothing is sufficiently administered and given to us by way of gratuity and alms, by the good people whom we teach.’ As for church endowments and possessions, I meet with none considerable before Constantine, but the houses and gardens where they met, and their places of burial: and I persuade myself, that from thence the ancient Waldenses, whom I deservedly cite so often, held that, ‘to endow churches is an evil thing,’ and that the church then fell off and became the whore sitting on that beast mentioned in the book of the Revelation when, under pope Sylvester, she received those temporal donations. So the forecited Tractate of their doctrine testifies.”

Thus far Milton; on which it may be observed, that to such as have studied the annals of the Christian church, and are in any tolerable degree aware how much the avarice, pride, and ambition of the clergy, have in all ages contributed to promote the corruptions that have prevailed in it, both in doctrine, discipline, and worship; the view that he gives us of the humble and self-denied deportment of the Waldensian pastors, must be considered as one of the strongest evidences that can be afforded of the purity of the communion of their churches, and of their close adherence to the pattern left them for imitation in the approved examples of the New Testament. But Milton was not singular in the commendation that he has given to the confessors of Piedmont; for thus writes the candidJORTIN, in perfect consistency with our great poet. “The Waldenses taught that the Roman church departed from its former sanctity and purity in the time of Constantine the Great; they therefore refused to submit to the usurped powers of its pontiff. They said that the prelates and doctors ought to imitate the poverty of the apostles, and earn their bread by the labor of their hands. They contended that the office of teaching, confirming, and admonishing the brethren, belonged in some measure to all Christians, etc.

Their discipline was extremely strict and austere; for they interpreted Christ’s discourse on the Mount according to the literal sense of the words, and they condemned war, law-suits, the acquisition of riches, capital punishments, oaths, and [even] self-defense.” Again, the same writer remarks, that “THE HONEST WALDENSES very plainly discerned that the powers usurped by the popes and ecclesiastics were tyrannical and antichristian; and consequently that the decretals which established some of those notions must have been impudent forgeries. Why could not the popes discern the same? Because profaneness, pride, ambition, and avarice, hardened their hearts, and blinded their eyes; because they would neither examine, nor let other people examine.” 23 But not to enlarge further on this particular, I shall close this section with a few general remarks.

An impartial review of the doctrinal sentiments maintained by the Waldenses; the discipline, order, and worship of their churches, as well as their general deportment and manner of life, not to mention their determined and uniform opposition to the church of Rome, affords abundant evidence of the similarity of their views and practices to those held by Luther, Calvin, and the other illustrious characters, whose labors, in the sixteenth century, contributed so eminently to effect the glorious Reformation. Most of the catholic writers, who lived about the time of the Reformation, and the age which succeeded it, clearly saw this coincidence between the principles of the Waldenses, and those of the reformers, and remarked it in their works. The following are instances of this.

Cardinal Hosius , a learned and zealous champion for the papacy, who presided at the council of Trent, lived during the Lutheran reformation, and wrote a history of the heresies of his own times, in which he says, “the leprosy of the Waldenses spread its infection throughout all Bohemia — and following the doctrine of Waldo, the greatest part of that kingdom separated itself from the church of Rome.”

Lindanus , a catholic bishop of the see of Ghent, who wrote in defense of the tenets of the church of Rome, about 1550, terms Calvin “the inheritor of the doctrine of the Waldenses.”

Mezeray , the celebrated historiographer of France, in his Abridgement of Chronology, speaking of the Waldenses, says, “They held nearly the same opinions as those who are now called Calvinists.”

Gualtier , a Jesuitical monk, in his chronographical tables, drew up a catalogue consisting of seven and twenty particulars, in which he shows that the principles of the Waldenses, and those of the Calvinists coincided with each other.

Thomas Walden , who wrote against Wickliff, says, that the doctrine of Peter Waldo was conveyed from France into England—and that among others Wickliff received it. In this opinion he is joined by Alphonsus de Castro, who says that Wickliff only brought to light again the errors of the Waldenses. Cardinal Bellarmine, also, is pleased to say that “Wickliff could add nothing to the heresy of the Waldenses.”

Ecchius reproached Luther, that he only renewed the heresies of the Waldenses and Albigenses, of Wickliff and of Huss, which had long ago been condemned. With him may also be classed Claude Rubis, who wrote the History of the city of Lyons, in which, adverting to the principles of Luther, he says, “the heresies that have been current in our time are founded upon those of the Waldenses,” and he calls them “the relics of Waldo.”

Aeneas Sylvius (afterwardsPOPE PIUS II) declares the doctrine taught by Calvin to be the same as that of the Waldenses. In this opinion he was followed by John de Cardonne, who, in his life of the Monk of the valleys of Sernay, thus quaintly expresses himself, “What the sect of Geneva doth admit, The Albigenses did commit.” To these impartial testimonies, which are more than sufficient to settle the question of family likeness, I shall only add that of the learned Limborch, professor of divinity in the university of Amsterdam, and that of Dr.

Mosheim, the ecclesiastical historian. The former, comparing them with the Christians of his own time, says, “To speak candidly what I think, of all the modern sects of Christians, the Dutch Baptists most resemble both the Albigenses and Waldenses.” 25 The latter, notwithstanding the flimsy, confused, and, in many instances, the erroneous account which he has given of the Waldenses, yet has expressly owned, that “before the rise of Luther and Calvin, there lay concealed, in almost all the countries of Europe, persons who adhered tenaciously to the principles of the modern Dutch Baptists.” 26 SECTION Some account of the rise and establishment of the Inquisition, with reflections on its general spirit and operation. THE preceding sections will have enabled the reader to form a tolerably correct judgment concerning the religious principles and general character of that denomination of Christians called Catharists, Paterines, Albigenses, or Waldenses; and I should now proceed to a more detailed account of their history, subsequent to the times of Peter Waldo, and especially of the dreadful persecutions and complicated sufferings which came upon them in consequence of their adherence “to the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus;” but it will be proper, in this place, to take a glance at the origin, the establishment, and the operation of that monstrous system of cruelty and oppression, gently called by the Catholics “the holy office,” though better known among Protestants by the name of the Inquisition. It was not until about the year 1200, the papal chair being then filled by Innocent III that the terms “Inquisition into heresy,” and “Inquisitor,” were much, if at all, heard of. The bishops, and their vicars, being, in the pope’s apprehension, neither so fit nor so diligent in the discharge of their duty respecting the extirpation of heresy as he thought necessary, two new orders of regulars were at this time instituted, viz. those of St.

Dominic and St. Francis, both zealously devoted to the church, and consisting of persons with whom the advancement of Christianity, and the exaltation of the pontifical power, were always synonymous terms. To St.

Dominic, indeed, the honor of first suggesting the erection of this extraordinary court is commonly ascribed. It was not, however, at first, on the same footing on which it afterwards settled, and on which it has since continued. The first inquisitors were vested with a double capacity, not very happily conjoined in the same persons; one was that of preachers, to convince the heretics by argument; the other that of persecutors, to instigate magistrates to employ every possible method of extirpating the refractory—that is, all who were so unreasonable as not to be convinced by the profound reasoning of those merciless fanatics and wretched sophisters.

DOMINIC descended from an illustrious Spanish family of the name of Guzman, was the son of Felix and Joanna, and born at the village of Cabaroga, in the year 1170, in the diocese of Osma. His mother during her pregnancy, is said to have dreamed that she was with child of a pup, carrying in its mouth a lighted torch; that after its birth, it put the world in an uproar by its fierce barkings, and at length set it on fire by the torch which it carried in its mouth. His followers have interpreted this dream, of his doctrine, by which he enlightened the world; while others, if dreams presage any thing, think that the torch was an emblem of that fire and faggot by which an infinite multitude of persons were burnt to ashes. 2 He was educated for the priesthood, and grew up the most fiery and the most sanguinary of mortals. Before his time every bishop was a sort of inquisitor in his own diocese; but Dominic contrived to incorporate a body of men, independent of every human being except the pope, for the express purpose of ensnaring and destroying Christians. He was well aware, that however loudly the priests declaimed against heresy, the lords of the soil would not suffer them to butcher their tenants under any such vain pretenses. In Biscay, the priesthood was at a very low edd, in the eleventh century, and the clergy complained to the king of Navarre that the nobility and gentry treated them very little better than their slaves, employing them chiefly only to breed up and feed their dogs. Nearly a century after that time, in a neighboring state, when the renowned St.

Bernard began, in a sermon to a crowded auditory, to inveigh against heresy, the nobility and gentry all rose up and left the church, and the people followed them. The preacher came down and proceeded to the market place, where he attempted to harangue on the same subject; but the populace, wiser than the preacher, refused to hear him, and raised such a clamor as drowned his voice, and compelled him to desist. Only one expedient remained,—Bernard recollected that Jesus had ordered his apostles, in certain cases, to shake off the dust of their feet, and as though he were an apostle and had received the same command, he affected to imitate the example. He left the city, shook his feet, and cursed the inhabitants by exclaiming, “May the Almighty punish this city with a drought.” Thus far went the rage of Catholicism at the beginning of the twelfth century, and here its proud waves were stayed; but at the commencement of the thirteenth, about the year 1215, Dominic broke down the dam, and covered Toulouse with a tide of despotism stained with human blood. Posterity will scarcely believe that this enemy of mankind, after forming a race like himself, first called preaching, and then Dominican friars, died in his bed, was canonized for a saint, worshipped as a divinity, and proposed as a model of piety and virtue to succeeding generations. 3 Never says Dr. Geddes, was there such a rabble in the world as a Spanish saint-roll. The first class of them are ideal beings, or pagans, or enthusiastics; but the last are saints with a vengeance, for all their steps to Paradise are marked with human blood.

The inquisitors, at first had no tribunals; they merely inquired after heretics, their number, strength, and riches. When they had detected them, they informed the bishops, who at that time, had the sole power of judging in ecclesiastical affairs, urging them to anathematize, banish, or otherwise chastise such heretical persons as they brought before them. It is true, says bishop Burnet, adverting to these times, the church pretended that she would shed no blood; but all this was insufferable juggling. For the churchmen declared who were heretics, and the secular arm was required to be always in readiness to execute their sentence. This was not only claimed by the bishops, but it was made a part of their oath at their consecration, “that they should oppose and persecute heretics to the utmost of their power.” 4 Nor were they contented to proceed by the common rules of justice, upon accusations and witnesses; but all forms were superseded, and by virtue of their pastoral authority, as if that had been given them to worry their sheep and not to feed them, they objected articles to their prisoners upon suspicion, requiring them to purge themselves of them by oath. And because bishops were not perhaps all equally zealous and cruel, that bloody man Dominic, took this work to task, and his order has ever since furnished the world with a set of inquisitors, compared to whom all that had ever dealt in tortures, in any former times, were mere bunglers. Sometimes they excited princes to arm their subjects against them, and at other times they inflamed the rabble, whom they themselves headed, to take up arms and unite in extirpating them. Such as they could prevail upon to devote themselves to this service, obtained the title of crusaders, and were distinguished by a cross of cloth affixed to their garments. This badge operated like a charm upon the deluded populace, who, if they were inflamed before, now became infuriate, and, as one happily expresses it, were raised to a super-celestial sort of virtue, which defies all the restraints of reason and humanity. Things remained pretty much in this state till about the year 1250; that is, for half a century.

During this period the efforts of the inquisitors were greatly assisted by the emperor of the Romans, Frederick II who in the year 1224, promulgated, from Padua, four edicts against heretics, of the most ferocious and sanguinary description, addressed to his beloved princes, the venerable archbishops, bishops, and other prelates of the church; to the dukes, marquises, earls, barons, governors, judges, ministers, officials, and all other his faithful subjects throughout the empire. In these edicts he takes the inquisitors under his protection, imposes on obstinate heretics the punishment of being burnt to death, and of perpetual imprisonment on the penitent, committing the cognizance of the crime to the ecclesiastical, and the condemnation of the criminals, as well as the infliction of the punishment, to the secular judges. As the object of all these bloody edicts was chiefly to destroy the Waldenses or Albigenses, it may not be foreign to our purpose to give a specimen of the spirit that breathes throughout the whole of them. “The care of the imperial government,” says his Majesty, “committed to us from heaven, and over which we preside, demands the material sword, which is given to us separately from the priesthood, against the enemies of the faith, and for the extirpation of heretical pravity, that we should pursue with judgment and justice those vipers and perfidious children who insult the Lord and his church, as though they would tear out the very bowels of their mother. We shall not suffer these wretches to live who infect the world by their seducing doctrines, and who, being themselves corrupted, more grievously taint the flock of the faithful.” He then proceeds to pronounce the most dreadful sentence against all persons convicted of heresy, against all who may be employed as advocates for them, and against all who may be detected in receiving and abetting them, condemning their persons, disinheriting their children, and confiscating their property.

The second edict, though not less sanguinary, was more definite in its object, since it professes to have directly in view the destruction of the sect of the Paterines, of whom, it will be recollected, a particular account has been given in a former section. The reader shall have a specimen. “The heretics are endeavoring to rend the seamless coat of our God, and raging with deceitful words, strive to divide the unity of the invisible faith itself, and to separate the sheep from the care of St. Peter, to whom they were committed by the Good Shepherd, to be fed. These are the ravenous wolves within, who put on the meekness of the sheep, that they may the better enter into the Lord’s sheepfold. These are the worst angels—the sons of naughtiness, of the father of wickedness—appointed to deceive simple souls. These are adders who deceive the doves—serpents which crawl in private, and under the sweetness of honey, vomit poison; so that whilst they pretend to administer the food of life, they sting with their tail, and mingle the most bitter poison into the cup of death.—They call themselvesPATERINES, after the example of the martyrs. 6 These miserable Paterines, who do not believe the eternal Trinity, by their complicated wickedness offend against three, viz. God, their neighbor, and themselves.

Against God, because they do not acknowledge the Son and the true faith—they deceive their neighbors, whilst under the pretense of spiritual food, they minister the delights of heretical pravity—but their cruelty to themselves is yet more savage, since, besides the loss of their immortal souls, they expose their bodies to a cruel death, being prodigal of their lives and fearless of destruction, which by acknowledging the true faith they might escape, and, which is horrible to express, their survivors are not terrified by their example. Against such enemies to God and man we cannot contain our indignation, nor refuse to punish them with the sword of just vengeance, but shall pursue them with so much the greater vigor, as they appear to spread wider the crimes of their superstition, to the most evident injury of the Christian faith, and of the church of Rome, which is adjudged to be the head of all other churches.” The edict then proceeds to denounce every one convicted of belonging to the sect of the Paterines, as guilty of the crime of high treason—to be punished with the loss of life and of goods, and their memory rendered infamous. It enjoins that strict inquiry be made by the officials, after all such as commit those crimes, and wherever the smallest suspicion exists, that such be examined by the ecclesiastics and prelates, and if found to err in one point from the Catholic faith, they are, in case of obstinacy, by that edict condemned to suffer death,—to be committed to the punishment of the flames, and to be burned alive in public view—forbidding any, on pain of incurring the imperial indignation, to intercede for such persons.

The third law is as follows— “We condemn the receivers, accomplices, and abettors of the Paterines, to forfeiture of their goods, and perpetual banishment, who by their care to save others, have no fear or regard for themselves. Let not their children be in any wise admitted to honors, but always accounted infamous, nor let them be allowed as witnesses in any causes in which infamous persons are refused.

But if the children of those who favor the Paterines shall discover any one of them, so that he shall be convicted, let them, as the reward of their acknowledgment of the faith, be entirely restored by our imperial favor, to their forfeited honor and estate.”

In the fourth edict his Imperial Majesty is pleased thus to proceed,— “We condemn to perpetual infamy, withdraw our protection from, and put under our ban, 7 the Puritans, Paterines, Leonists, Arnoldists, Passignes, Josephines, Albigenses, Waldenses, etc. and all other heretics of both sexes, and of whatsoever name; and ordain that their goods may be so confiscated as that their children may never inherit them, since it is much more heinous to offend the eternal than the temporal majesty.” It then proceeds to condemn all suspected persons, as heretics, if they do not purge themselves within a year — commands the officials to exterminate heretics from all places subject to them—orders that the lands of the barons shall be seized by the Catholics, if they do not purge them from heretics, within a year after proper admonition, and ordains various punishments against all the favorers of heretics—thus closing the dreadful catalogue: “Furthermore, we put under our ban those who believe, receive, defend, and favor heretics; ordaining that if any person shall refuse to give satisfaction within a year after his excommunication, he shall be, ipso jure, infamous, and not admitted to any kind of public offices—let him be intestable, and let him not have the power of making a will, nor of receiving any thing by succession or inheritance. Moreover, let no one answer for him in any affair, but let him be obliged to answer others. If he should be a judge, let his sentence be of no affect, nor any causes be heard before him. If an advocate, let him never be admitted to plead in any one’s defense. If a notary, let no instruments made by him be valid. We add, that an heretic may be convicted by an heretic, and that the houses of the Paterines their abettors and favorers, either where they have taught, or where they have laid hands on others, shall be destroyed, never to be rebuilt.” 8 —Dated at Padua, February 22, 1224.

Any thing more infamous than these edicts, in the way of spiritual tyranny, it would be difficult to imagine; and although, by reason of the circumstances of the times, and the differences which soon arose between the pope and the emperor, they had not all that effect which might have been expected, it is, nevertheless, certain that the inquisition was greatly promoted by them. They were approved and confirmed by the pope, and inserted in his bulls, and in process of time, the persecuting spirit which pervades them, came gradually to be incorporated into the laws of almost every country in Europe.

After the death of Frederick, which happened about the middle of the century, pope Innocent IV remaining sole arbiter of the affairs of Lombardy and other parts of Italy, set himself diligently to extirpate heresy, which of late had exceedingly increased; and considering the labor which had been employed in his service by the Franciscan and Dominican friars, whose zeal, unrestrained by either respect of persons or the fear of dangers—by any regard to justice or the feelings of humanity, had recommended them highly to the pontiff, he cheerfully availed himself of their ardor to second his efforts. Preaching was found of little avail, and even the enlisting of crusaders and inflicting military execution was suspended for the sake of erecting in different countries standing tribunals armed with tremendous authority, but charged solely with the purgation of heretical pravity. To the establishment of these novel tribunals there were, however, two objections started. The first that it was an encroachment on the authority of the ordinary bishop of the place, and the second that it was unprecedented to exclude the civil magistrate from the trial and punishment of heretics, on whom it had hitherto devolved. To remove the first of these difficulties, an expedient was soon devised—the pope enacted that the tribunal should consist of the inquisitor, with the bishop of the place also, but so managing the affair, at the same time, that the inquisitor was not only to be the principal, but, in reality, everything, and leaving the bishop little more than the name of a judge. To remedy the second inconvenience, and to give at least the appearance of authority to the secular powers, they were allowed to appoint the subordinate officers to the inquisition, yet still subject to the approbation of the inquisitors; they were also allowed to send with the inquisitor, when he should go into the country, one of their assessors, whom the inquisitors should choose. Of all the property belonging to heretics which they should be enabled to confiscate, a third part was to go to the community, in return for which, the community was to defray the whole expense of keeping the prisons, and supporting the prisoners. The infliction of the legal punishment was also vested in the magistrate, after trial and condemnation by the inquisitors; but that was a matter so much of course, and which he well knew he could not avoid executing, without incurring the vengeance of the church, that, in fact, it only converted him into a spiritual judge’s executioner: and thus, to use the language of Dr. Jortin, “the priest was the judge, and the king was the hangman. Such was the footing on which “the holy office” was placed in the year 1251, in the ecclesiastical states of Italy, which were under the pope’s immediate inspection. It was afterwards extended to more distant provinces, and every where entrusted to the management of Dominican friars. Thirty-one rules or articles, defining their jurisdiction and powers, and regulating the procedure of this spiritual court of judicature, were devised; and all rulers and magistrates were commanded, by a papal bull, issued for the purpose, to give, under pain of excommunication, the most punctual obedience, and every possible assistance to this holy court.

It should, however, be remarked, that the attempts which were made to introduce the inquisition, did not prove equally successful in all Roman catholic states, nor even in the greater part of them. It was never in the power of the pope to obtain the establishment of this tribunal in many of the most populous countries that were subject to the See of Rome. In France it was early introduced, but soon afterwards expelled, in such a manner, as effectually to preclude a renewal of the attempt. The difficulties arose partly from the conduct of the inquisitors—their inordinate severity, their unbounded extortion and avarice, and the propensity they showed, on every occasion, to extend beyond measure, their own authority; insomuch that they were making rapid strides to engross, under one pretext or another, all the criminal jurisdiction of the magistrate; for under the head of heresy, they insisted, were included, infidelity, blasphemy, perjury, sorcery, poisoning, bigamy, usury!

Another reason was, that the tribunal was found to be so expensive, that the community refused to sustain the burden of it. Nor has it been alike severe in every place into which it has been introduced. In Spain and Portugal this scourge and disgrace to humanity has for centuries glared, monster like, with its most frightful aspect—in Rome it has been much more tolerable. Papal avarice has served to counterbalance papal tyranny.

The wealth of modern Rome has arisen very much from the constant resort of strangers from all countries and of all denominations, and chiefly those of the higher ranks. Nothing could have more effectually checked that resort, and of course the influx of riches into that capital, than such a horrid tribunal as that which existed at Lisbon and Madrid, and which diffused a terror that was felt to the utmost confines of those unhappy kingdoms.

Exclusive of the cruel punishments inflicted by the holy office, says a late writer, it may be truly affirmed, that the inquisition is a school of vice.

There the artful judge, grown old in habits of subtlety, along with the sly secretary, practices his cunning in interrogating a prisoner to fix a charge of heresy. Now he fawns, and then he frowns; now soothes, and then looks dark and angry; sometimes affects to pity and to pray, at other times insults and bullies, and talks of racks and dungeons, flames, and the damnation of hell. One while he lays his hand upon his heart, and sheds tears, and promises and protests he desires not the death of a sinner, but would rather that he would turn and live; and all that he can do he will do for the discharge, aye, for the preferment of his imprisoned brother.

Another while he discovers himself deaf as a rock, false as the wind, and cruel as the poison of asps. In no country has the operation of this dreadful court of spiritual despotism been more strikingly exemplified than in Spain. The subject has been placed in the most instructive point of view by two accurate and elegant modern historians, 12 and their reflections upon it are so just and natural, that as it cannot be unacceptable to the reader, I shall give the substance of what they have said.

The court of inquisition, which although it was not the parent, has been the nurse and guardian of ignorance and superstition in every kingdom into which it has been admitted, was introduced into Spain by Ferdinand and Isabella, and was principally intended to prevent the relapse of the Jews and Moors, who had been converted, or who pretended to be converted, to the faith of the Church of Rome. Its jurisdiction, however, was not confined to the Jews and Moors, but extended to all those who in their practice or opinions differed from the established church. In the united kingdoms of Castile and Arragon, there were eighteen different inquisitorial courts, having each of them its counselors, termed apostolical inquisitors; its secretaries, sergeants, and other officers; and besides these there were twenty thousand familiars dispersed throughout the kingdom, who acted as spies and informers, and were employed to apprehend all suspected persons, and commit them for trial, to the prisons which belonged to the inquisition. By these familiars, persons were seized on bare suspicion, and in contradiction to the established rules of equity, they were put to the torture, tried and condemned by the inquisitors, without being confronted, either with their accusers, or with the witnesses on whose evidence they were condemned. The punishments inflicted were more or less dreadful, according to the caprice and humor of the judges. The unhappy victims were either strangled or committed to the flames, or loaded with chains, and shut up in dungeons during life — their effects confiscated, and their families stigmatized with infamy.

This institution was, no doubt, well calculated to produce an uniformity of religious profession, but it had a tendency also to destroy the sweets of social life; to banish all freedom of thought and speech; to disturb men’s minds with the most disquieting apprehensions, and to produce the most intolerable slavery, by reducing persons of all ranks in life to a state of abject dependence upon priests; whose integrity, were it even greater than that of other men, as in every false profession of religion it is less, must have been corrupted by the uncontrolled authority which they were allowed to exercise. By this tribunal a visible change was wrought in the temper of the people, and reserve, distrust, and jealousy became the distinguishing characteristics of a Spaniard. It confirmed and perpetuated the reign of ignorance and superstition; inflamed the rage of religious bigotry, and by the cruel spectacles to which, in the execution of its decrees, it familiarized the people, it nourished in them that ferocious spirit, which in the Netherlands and America they manifested by deeds that have fixed an indelible reproach upon the Spanish name.

Authors of undoubted credit affirm, and without the least exaggeration, that millions of persons have been ruined by this horrible court. Moors were banished, a million at a time. Six or eight hundred thousand Jews were driven away at once, and their immense riches seized by their accusers, and distributed among their persecutors, while thousands dissembled, and professed themselves Christians only to be harassed in future. Heretics of all ranks and of various denominations were imprisoned and burnt, or fled into other countries. The gloom of despotism overshadowed all Spain. The people at first reasoned, and rebelled, and murdered the inquisitors—the aged murmured and died— the next generation fluttered and complained, but their successors were completely tamed by education; and the Spaniards are now trained up by the priests to shudder at the thought of thinking for themselves. That honor to his country and of human nature, the late Mr. Howard, says, when he saw the inquisition at Valladolid, “I could not but observe, that even the sight of it struck terror into the common people as they passed.” “It is styled,” he adds, by a monstrous abuse of words, “the holy apostolical court of inquisition.”

A simple narrative of the proceedings of the inquisition has shocked the world, and the cruelty of it has become proverbial. Nothing ever displayed so fully to the eyes of mankind the spirit and temper of the papal religion. “Christians,” says Tertullian, “were often called, not Christiani, but Chrestiani, from the gentleness of their manners, and the sweetness of their tempers. Jesus himself was the essence of mildness. His apostles were gentle, even as a nurse that cherisheth her children. But what an awful contrast is exhibited in this horrid court of papal inquisition.” Let us hear the description which Voltaire, a very competent witness, gives of it. “Their form of proceeding,” says he, “is an infallible way to destroy whomsoever the inquisitors wish. The prisoners are not confronted with the accuser or informer. Nor is there any informer or witness who is not listened to. A public convict, a notorious malefactor, an infamous person, a common prostitute, a child, are in the holy office, though no where else, credible accusers and witnesses. Even the son may depose against his father, the wife against her husband.” The wretched prisoner is no more made acquainted with his crime than with his accusers. His being told the one might possibly lead him to guess the other. To avoid this, he is compelled, by tedious confinement in a noisome dungeon, where he never sees a face but the jailer’s, and is not permitted the use of either books or pen and ink—or should confinement alone not be sufficient, he is compelled, by the most excruciating torture, to inform against himself, to discover and confess the crime laid to his charge, of which he is often ignorant. “This procedure,” says our historian, “unheard of till the institution of this court, makes the whole kingdom tremble. Suspicion reigns in every breast. Friendship and quietness are at an end. The brother dreads his brother, the father his son. Hence taciturnity is become the characteristic of a nation, endued with all the vivacity natural to the inhabitants of a warm and fruitful climate. To this tribunal we must likewise impute that profound ignorance of sound philosophy in which Spain lies buried, whilst Germany, England, France, and even Italy, have discovered so many truths, and enlarged the sphere of our knowledge.

Never is human nature so debased, as where ignorance is armed with power.” But these melancholy effects of the Inquisition are a trifle when compared with those public sacrifices, called Auto da Fe, or Acts of Faith, and to the shocking barbarities that precede them. A priest in a white surplice, or a monk who has vowed meekness and humility, causes his fellow creatures to be put to the torture in a dismal dungeon. A stage is erected in the public market place, where the condemned prisoners are conducted to the stake, attended with a train of monks and religious confraternities. They sing psalms, say mass, and butcher mankind. Were a native of Asia to come to Madrid upon a day of an execution of this sort, it would be impossible for him to tell whether it were a rejoicing, a religious feast, a sacrifice, or a massacre; and yet it is all this together! The kings, whose presence alone in other cases is the harbinger of mercy, assist at this spectacle uncovered, seated lower than the inquisitors, and are spectators of their subjects expiring in the flames. The Spaniards reproached Montezuma with immolating his captives to his gods; what would he have said, had he beheld an “Auto da Fe?” It is but doing justice, however, to many Roman catholic states, and to thousands of individuals belonging to that church, to say, that they abhor this infernal tribunal, almost as much as protestants themselves do. This is sufficiently evinced by the tumults which were excited in several parts of Italy, Milan, and Naples in particular, and afterwards in France, as well as in other Catholic countries, by the attempts that were made to introduce it at first, and by its actual expulsion from some places, where, to all appearance, it was firmly established. It is, indeed, matter of regret that any among the members of that church should have their minds so enslaved by prejudice, as to imagine, for a moment, that a despotism which required for its support such diabolical engines, could possibly be of heavenly origin. There is something in the very constitution of this tribunal so monstrously unjust, so exorbitantly cruel, that it must ever excite one’s astonishment, that the people of any country should have permitted its existence among them. How they could have the inconsistency to acknowledge a power to be from God, which has found it necessary to recur to expedients so manifestly from hell, so subversive of every principle of sound morality and religion, can be regarded only as one of those contradictions, for which human characters, both in individuals and nations, are often so remarkable. The wisdom that is from above is pure, peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy. But the policy of Rome, as displayed in the inquisition, is so strikingly characterized by that wisdom which is earthly, sensual, and devilish, that the person who needs to be convinced of it, seems to be altogether beyond the power of argument.

Never were two systems more diametrically opposed in their spirit, their maxims, and effects, than primitive Christianity, and the religion of modern Rome; nor do heaven and hell, Christ and Belial, exhibit to our view a more glaring contrast. 14 SECTION History of the persecution of the Albigenses in France, during the thirteenth century. THE flight of Peter Waldo from Lyons, and the consequent dispersion of his flock throughout the south of France, took place in the year 1163. As nothing lay nearer the hearts of the popes, than an anxious desire to crush in its infancy every doctrine that opposed their exorbitant power, they were seldom remiss in adopting such measures as appeared to them best calculated for promoting that favorite object. Accordingly we find that in the same year (1163) a synod was convened at Tours, a city of France, at which all the bishops and priests in the country of Toulouse, were strictly enjoined “to take care, and to forbid, under pain of excommunication, every person from presuming to give reception, or the least assistance to the followers of this heresy; to have no dealings with them in buying and selling, that thus being deprived of the common necessaries of life, they might be compelled to repent of the evil of their way.” And, further, that “whosoever should dare to contravene this order, should be excommunicated as a partner with them in their guilt.” And, lastly, that “as many of them as could be found, should be imprisoned by the Catholic princes, and punished with the forfeiture of all their substance. It is very natural to suppose that these cruel precautionary proceedings, if followed up with much rigor, must drive the friends of Waldo to seek an asylum in more hospitable climes; and of course, many of them took refuge in the valleys of Piedmont, while others proceeded to Bohemia, and not a few migrated into Spain. Hence, in the year 1194, in consequence of some of the Waldenses coming into the province of Arragon, king Ildefonsus issued a severe and bloody edict, by which “he banished them from his kingdom and all his dominions, as enemies of the cross of Christ, profaners of the Christian religion, and public enemies to himself and kingdom.” Yet, notwithstanding these inhuman proceedings, both in France and Spain,” so mightily grew the word of God and prevailed, “that in the year 1200, both the city of Toulouse, and eighteen other principal towns in Languedoc, Provence, and Dauphine, were filled with Waldenses and Albigenses. This, no doubt, was owing, under God, to the protection that was afforded them by the Counts of Toulouse and Foix, the Viscount of Beziers, and several other of the French nobility. It can excite no surprise, therefore, that their numbers and growing influence should spread universal alarm at Rome, and that the most spirited exertions should be determined on for subduing them.

The first measures resorted to were the issuing of papal canons and sentences of excommunication. Not only was the whole sect anathematized, but also every one who should receive them into their houses, and protect them, or hold any intercourse with them. The archbishops and bishops of Guienne and other provinces of France, as well as the clergy throughout their different dioceses, were enjoined to banish the Waldenses, Puritans, and Paterines from their territories; to mark them, and take care that they should neither enjoy Christian privileges while living, nor burial when dead. Kings, princes, and magistrates, were called upon to support and assist the Catholic clergy with the power of the sword; to confiscate the property, and raze to the foundation the houses of these heretics, and of all that countenanced them. To give efficacy to these measures, pope Innocent III sent two of his legates into France, viz. the famousREINERIUS, (whom we have already had frequent occasion to mention) andGUIDO, the founder of the order of Hospitallers, to stimulate the clergy to greater diligence, to watch the conduct of the nobles, and on the detection of any of the heretics, to demand the most summary proceedings against them—enjoining his legates to transmit him by messenger or letter, the fullest information they could procure; that thus, being more particularly informed, he might the better know how to proceed against them.

Our learned countryman, Archbishop Usher, to whom we are under great obligations for the pains he took to explore the affairs of this dark period, and to illustrate the history of the Waldensian churches, gives us a very amusing account of the strain of preaching which prevailed throughout those Catholic countries at that period. The preachers had one favorite text, viz. Psalm 94:16. “Who will rise up for me against the evil doers? or who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity?” and it is probable that the sermon was as uniform as the text; for we are told they generally concluded thus: “You see, most dear brethren, how great the wickedness of the heretics is, and how much mischief they do in the world. You see also, how tenderly, and by how many pious methods the church labors to reclaim them. But with them they all prove ineffectual, and they fly to the secular power for their defense. Therefore our holy mother, the church, though with reluctance and grief, calls together against them the Christian army. If then you have any zeal for the faith; if you are touched with any concern for the honor of God; if you would reap the benefit of this great indulgence, come and receive the sign of the cross, and join yourselves to the army of the crucified Savior.”

As the country of Toulouse was the principal place of rendezvous for the Albigenses, and as they abounded there in immense numbers, the pope evinced the utmost solicitude to prevail upon Count Raymond to expel them from his dominions. But all his entreaties to induce the latter, either to banish so large a number of his peaceable subjects, or even to persecute them, proving fruitless, he ordered him to be excommunicated as a favorer of heretics. He sent his legate with letters to many of the prelates, commanding them to make inquisition against the heretical Albigenses in France, to destroy them and convert their protectors. He also wrote to Philip, king of France, reminding him that it was his duty to take arms against those heretics, and to use all his power to suppress them, that by thus laboring to stem the progress of heresy, he might purge himself from all suspicion of being tainted therewith in his own person. Twelve abbots of the Cistercian order, accompanied by the pope’s legate, went preaching the cross against the Albigenses, and promising, by the authority of his holiness, a plenary remission of their sins, to all who took on them the crusade. The famous, or, more properly speaking, the infamous Dominic, the founder of the Inquisition, joined himself to this association, and, while engaged on this murderous expedition, he is said to have digested the plan of that iniquitous court.

The efforts of Reinerius and his associates, not answering the sanguine expectations of the pope, and the scheme of Dominic for establishing the Inquisition being communicated to him, the latter, in the year 1216, transmitted his letters patent, creating Dominic inquisitor general, which was confirmed by the council of Lateran in the same year. Having received these letters, and being thus armed with authority, Dominic, on a certain day, in the midst of a large concourse of people in the church of St.

Prullian, announced, in one of his sermons, that “he was raised by the pope to a new office; adding, that he was resolved to defend, with his utmost rigor, the doctrines of the faith; and that if the spiritual and ecclesiastical arms were not sufficient for this end, it was his fixed determination to call in the aid of the civil magistrate, to excite and compel the Catholic princes to take arms against heretics, that the very memory of them might be entirely destroyed.”

A nobleman in the vicinity of Narbonne, having about this time been converted to the Catholic faith, the inquisitors obtained possession of his house or castle, where they fixed their court, and commenced the operations of that iniquitous system. On the one hand, they offered to their converts the remission of all their sins, plenary indulgences, and various other privileges; and on the other, the obstinate were branded, imprisoned, and tortured. Multitudes were allured by these deceitful pretexts to enroll themselves under the banners of St. Dominic, vainly imagining, that they could thus make compensation for their crimes.

Dominic framed a code of regulations for the preservation and proper government of this crusading fraternity. One was, that such as entered upon this warfare should take an oath, that they would endeavor with all their might to recover, defend, and protect the rights of the church, against all who should presume to usurp them; and that they would expose themselves and their estates in defense of the ecclesiastical immunities, by taking up arms as often as they should be called upon to do it, by the prelate of the war,—an honor at that time vested in Dominic himself, and subsequently in the masters general of the Dominican order. If any of them were married, an oath was required from their wives, that they would not persuade their husbands to forsake the war for the support of the ecclesiastical privileges, promising them eternal life as the reward of so pious a service. To distinguish them from laics, a peculiar dress was devised for both the men and their wives, consisting of white and black colors, but of different formation. No one was to be admitted to this sacred warfare, without a previous rigorous examination of his life, manners, and faith—whether he had paid his debts, forgiven his enemies, and made his will, that he might be the more ready for the battle, and also whether he had obtained leave from his will before a notary and proper witnesses. The wives of those that were slain in the expedition promised that they would never marry again. All this, no doubt, was highly ridiculous; but it imposed an air of sacredness upon the thing which took with the vulgar, and rendered the crusade so popular, that numbers entered into it with avidity, hoping by the slaughter of heretics, and the plunder of their goods, to ensure their admission into heaven. With all this, however, the cause proceeded but slowly. The pope was dissatisfied. The measures of Dominic and his adherents seemed to him but as the sprinkling of water, which only aggravated and extended the flame of heresy. He, therefore, denounced open and more violent war; invited the catholic princes and nobles to take up arms, and commissioned his ministers to preach the same indulgences, and to offer terms of every kind, as advantageous as those that were granted when levies were made for crusading to Asia. The court of Rome, however, with a view to preserve at least the semblance of decency, thought it expedient, before proceeding to compulsory measures with the Albigenses, to try to reclaim them to the church by the more gentle and reasonable methods of persuasion, and the latter formed the resolution of defending their own principles. They consequently gave the bishops to understand that some of their pastors were ready to discuss the subject with them in open conference, provided the thing could be conducted with propriety. They explained their notions of propriety by proposing that there should be moderators on each side, vested with authority to prevent tumult and preserve order and regularity — that the conference should be held in some place to which all parties concerned might, have free and safe access; and lastly, that a particular subject should be agreed upon between the disputants, which should be steadily prosecuted until it was fully discussed and determined, and that the party which could not maintain it by an appeal to the Scriptures, the only standard of faith to Christians, should own themselves vanquished.

The proposal was so reasonable that it could not with decency be rejected; it was therefore accepted by the bishops and monks. The place of conference agreed upon was Montreal, near Carcassone, in the year 1206.

The umpires on the Catholic side were the bishops of Villeneuse and Auxere — and on that of the Albigenses, R. de Bot, and Anthony Riviere.

On the part of the latter, several pastors were appointed to manage the debate, of whom Arnold Hot was the principal. He arrived first at the appointed place. A bishop of the name of Eusus met him on behalf of the papacy, accompanied by the renowned Dominic, two of the pope’s legates, and several other of the catholic clergy. The points which Arnold undertook to prove were, that the mass and transubstantiation are idolatrous and unscriptural—that the church of Rome is not the spouse of Christ — and that its polity is of a pernicious and wicked tendency.

Arnold drew up certain propositions upon these points, which he transmitted to the bishop, who required fifteen days to answer them, which was granted. On the appointed day, the bishop appeared, and produced a large manuscript, which was read in the public assembly.

Arnold requested that he might be permitted to reply by word of mouth, only entreating their patience if he took a considerable time in answering so prolix a writing, and fair promises were made him of a patient hearing. He then discoursed for the space of four days upon the subject, with such fluency and readiness, such order, perspicuity, and forcible reasoning, that a strong impression was produced on the audience. Arnold, at length, called upon his opponents to defend themselves. What they said on the occasion we are not informed, but the cause of the abrupt termination of the conference is a fact allowed on all hands, and may possibly suggest what was the real state of the controversy. For, while the pope’s legates were disputing with Arnold, the umpire of the papal party, the bishop of Villeneuse, declared that nothing could be determined, because the army of the crusaders was at hand. 6 What he asserted, alas, was but too true; the papal armies advanced, and, by fire and faggot instantly decided all the points of controversy; and if we may place any reliance upon writers of unimpeachable veracity, “the armies employed by pope Innocent III destroyed above two hundred thousand of them in the short space of a few months.” 7 Arnold and his brethren, indeed, might have been fully assured that it never was the intention of the pope to submit to any decision of the controversy by argument, which might happen to be unfavorable to his party. The acquiescence of his holiness in the proposal to discuss the differences between the parties in a public disputation, was in all probability, a mere maneuver, intended only to amuse the Albigenses and gain time, till the armies that were preparing with a view to destroy them might be in readiness. Platina, one of their own writers, in his Life of Innocent XIII seems to insinuate as much, when he tells us, that “there was need, not only of disputations, but of arms also; to such a pitch was the heresy grown.” The bull which the pope had already issued, in consequence of the death of Peter de Chatineau, had also made that sufficiently apparent. He had dispatched preachers throughout all Europe, to collect an army which should revenge the blood of that man, promising paradise, and the remission of all their sins, to those who should bear arms forty days in that holy warfare; and, after telling them that “they were not to keep faith with those who do not keep faith with God,” he thus proceeds, “We exhort you, that you would endeavor to destroy the wicked heresy of the Albigenses, and do this with more rigor than you would towards the Saracens themselves; persecute them with a strong hand; deprive them of their lands and possessions; banish them and put Roman Catholics in their room.” RAYMOND, the sixth count of Toulouse, in whose territories the Albigenses chiefly abounded, still humanely extended to them his protection and patronage. Pope Innocent, by a bull, had excommunicated him as a favorer of heretics — he was prohibited the communion of holy things and of the faithful—all his subjects were absolved from their oath of allegiance, and power was dispensed to any catholic man not only to act against his person, but to seize his dominions, and dispossess him of them, under the pretext that by the prudence of the one, they might be effectually purged from heresy, as they had been grievously defiled by the wickedness of the other. Yet he does not appear to have been in the least diverted from his purpose by these horrid proceedings. His character is variously represented by the friends and enemies of his party. The former describe him, not only as generous and brave, but as pious and virtuous; while the latter revile him as a hypocrite. The true account of him seems to be, that whether he had adopted the sentiments of the Albigenses or not, he humanely sympathized with them—that he understood the spirit of true religion to be a spirit of tolerance; that he studied to promote the real interests of his country; and with these views, at least, that he was desirous to protect all such as were useful members of society, whatever might be their peculiar religious tenets. Under such patronage their numbers rapidly increased, but it proportionally inflamed the indignation of the fierce and bloody inquisitors. While affairs remained in this critical posture, it unfortunately happened that Peter de Chatineau, one of the inquisitors, was assassinated, and Count Raymond was suspected of being, at least, privy to the murder. The catholics loudly inveighed against the crime as of the deepest eye. The Count protested his innocence, affirming that he was in no respect guilty of the death of that friar—that he had been killed at St. Giles’s by a certain gentleman whom Peter had pursued, and who immediately afterwards retired to his friends at Beaucaire—that he had done every thing in his power to apprehend the manslayer; and in fine, that even were it true that he had been in any respect accessory to the murder, the ordinary course of justice ought to be pursued, and not to revenge it upon his subjects who were innocent. To all this the catholic party were deaf; Raymond was loaded with infamy, and with the highest censures of the church; and, in a little time, an expedition of more than one hundred thousand cross-bearers (crusaders) was actually equipped against him. Raymond was justly alarmed—he offered to submit, promised obedience, and as a proof of his sincerity, delivered up into the hands of the pope seven fortified places in Provence. But that was not a sufficient sacrifice to ecclesiastical pride and malignity. He was required to present himself before the gates of the church of St. Agde, in the town of that name. Upwards of twenty bishops and archbishops were present, convened for the purpose of receiving his submission. He was required to swear upon the holy solemnities of the eucharist and the relics of the saints, which were exposed with great reverence before the gates of the church, and held by several prelates, that he would obey the commands of the holy Roman church. When he had thus bound himself by an oath, the legate ordered one of the sacred vestments to be thrown over his neck, and, drawing him by means of it, he was brought into the church, where after scourging him with a whip, he was absolved. It is added, “that he was so grievously torn by the stripes in scourging, that he was unable to go out by the way in which he had entered the church, but was forced to pass quite naked as he was, through the lower gate. He was also compelled to undergo the same degrading process at the sepulcher of St. Peter the martyr, at New Castres.” 10 The immense array of crusaders, however, being now in motion, it was not to be reduced to a state of inactivity because the Earl of Toulouse had effected his reconciliation with the see of Rome. On the contrary, they everywhere attacked the Albigenses, took possession of the cities in which they were known to be, filled the streets with slaughter and blood, and committed to the flames numbers whom they had taken prisoners.

Raymond had a nephew of the name of Roger, who was more bold and determined than his uncle. He was at the head of seven fiefs, or baronies, dependent, however, upon the Earl of Toulouse, and he evinced no disposition to yield all implicit obedience to the orders of Rome, nor abandon the people who had put themselves under his protection. Among the humiliating stipulations imposed upon the Earl of Toulouse, the one most repugnant to his feelings was, that he himself should lead the crusading army against Beziers, the capital of his own nephew’s dominions; which was in effect now to make him the instrument of the destruction of the Albigenses, as he had hitherto been their protector, and indeed the destruction of his nephew also. This has ever been the detestable policy of the court of Rome, never to be satisfied with reasonable offers of submission, without degrading the wretched suppliant, even in his own eyes. The Earl continued with the army a few days and then took his leave of the legate, choosing rather to take a journey to Rome, in order to humble himself before the pope, a privilege which could not be denied him, than continue with it to be a spectator of the murder of thousands of peaceable and virtuous men, and the ruin of his own nephew.

When the army advanced towards the neighborhood of Beziers, the fate of the city was easily foreseen, and the nephew of Raymond, fully sensible that it could not be defended against an hundred thousand men, went out of the city, threw himself at the feet of the pope’s legate, and supplicated his mercy in favor of his capital, beseeching him not to involve the innocent with the guilty, which must be the case if Beziers were taken by storm—that there were many Roman Catholics in the city, who would be involved in one indiscriminate scene of ruin contrary to the intentions of the pope, whose object was understood to be, solely the punishment of the Albigenses. Numerous other topics of entreaty were urged by the young prince; but the answer of the legate to all he could plead was, that “all his apologies and excuses would avail him nothing, and that he must do the best he could for himself.” Thus foiled in his object, the Earl of Beziers returned into the city, convened the inhabitants, to whom he explained the ill success that had attended his mission; and particularly, that the only condition upon which pardon would be granted by the pope’s legate was, that the Albigenses should abjure their religion, and promise to live according to the laws of the Roman church.

The catholic inhabitants of Beziers now interposed, using every entreaty with the Albigenses to comply with that stipulation, and not be the occasion of their death, since the legate was resolved to pardon none, unless they all consented to live in subjection to one rule of faith.

The Albigenses replied, that they never could consent to purchase a prolongation of this perishing life at the price of renouncing their faith— that they were fully persuaded God could, if he pleased, protect and defend them:—but they were as fully persuaded, that if it were his good pleasure to be glorified by the confession of their faith, it would be an high honor conferred upon them to sacrifice their lives for righteousness’ sake—that they much preferred displeasing the pope, who could only destroy their bodies, to incurring the displeasure of God, who is able to destroy both soul and body together—that they hoped never to be ashamed of, nor forsake a faith by which they had been taught the knowledge of Christ and his righteousness, and, at the hazard of eternal death, barter it for a religion which annihilated the merits of the Savior, and rendered his righteousness of none effect. They, therefore, left it to the Catholics and the Earl of Beziers to make the best terms they could for themselves, but entreated that they would not promise anything on their behalf inconsistent with their duty as Christians.

Finding the Albigenses inflexible, the Catholic party next sent their own bishop to the legate, to entreat him not to comprehend in the punishment of the Albigenses, those that had always been constant and uniform in their adherence to the church of Rome. In this interview the bishop explained to him that he was their prelate; that he knew them well; and that as to the Albigenses, he did not think them so irrecoverable as to be past all hopes of repentance — that, on the contrary, he trusted a becoming mildness on the part of the church, which does not delight in blood, might yet reclaim them.

The sanguinary ecclesiastic, however, was wholly deaf to the voice of humanity. Transported with rage, he gave vent to the most terrible threatening; and swore that unless all who were in the city acknowledged their guilt, and submitted to the church of Rome, they should every individual be put to the sword, without regard to religious profession, age, or sex—giving instant orders for the city to be summoned to surrender at discretion. Under these circumstances resistance was vain; the assailants were immediately in possession of it, and its inhabitants, to the number of three and twenty thousand, were indiscriminately massacred, and the city itself destroyed by fire. Caesarius informs us, that when the crusaders were about to enter the city, knowing that there were many Catholics mixed with the heretics, and hesitating how they should act in regard to the former, application was made to Arnold, the Abbe of Cisteaux, for advice, who instantly replied, “Kill them all—the Lord knoweth them that are his.” The Earl of Beziers, foreseeing the ruin which threatened his capital, made his escape, and withdrew to the neighboring city of Carcassone. This place was much more strongly fortified, both by nature and art, than Beziers, and consequently more defensible. The city, or upper town, stands upon a hill, surrounded by a double wall; the lower town or borough is in the plain, about two miles distant from the city. Numbers of the Albigenses resided there, and many more fled to it for security. The young Earl, who had now been fully instructed, by the horrible proceedings at Beziers, into the motives and determination of the Catholics, resolved, as far as was practicable, to defend Carcassone. He, therefore, convened his subjects, reminded them of the treatment which the inhabitants of Beziers had received, and that they had to do with the same enemies, who had indeed changed the place of siege, but not the cruelty of their disposition, nor their wish to destroy them if they could effect it. He therefore gave it as his opinion, that it was preferable to die in defense of their city and privileges, rather than fall into the hands of such cruel and relentless enemies. That for his own part, he professed the Roman Catholic religion, but he was fully aware that the present was not a war of religion, but a system of robbery, contrived for the purpose of getting possession of the dominions of his uncle, the Earl of Raymond, and all that were related to him. He therefore urged the inhabitants to defend themselves like men, and to recollect that both their lives and the free exercise of their religion were at stake, pledging himself that he would never forsake them in so honorable a cause as that of defending themselves against their common enemies, who, under the mask of dissembled piety, were, in effect, nothing better than thieves and robbers. This manly address infused courage into the hearts of his subjects—they pledged themselves to defend their sovereign and the city of Carcassone with whatever concerned them.

In the meantime the army of the crusaders had been augmented by the arrival of fresh levies from every part of France, as well as from Italy and Germany, to upwards of three hundred thousand men, (some writers make them five hundred thousand) and had advanced to the walls of the town, where they rushed furiously upon the first rampire, filling the ditch with fascines, and making themselves sure of an easy conquest of the place. But they met with so valiant a repulse, that the ground was covered with the dead bodies of the pilgrims (as they called themselves) round about the city. The following day the legate ordered the scaling ladders to be applied, and a general assault to be made on the town, but the inhabitants made a resolute defense. They were, however, at length overpowered with numbers, and beat back from the walls, when the enemy entered and gave the inhabitants of the Borough much the same treatment they had lately done to those of Beziers, putting them all to the sword.

The city, or upper town, however, was yet secure, but the besieging army lost no time in proceeding to its reduction. The legate commanded them to play all their engines of war upon it, and to take it by assault. But he had the mortification to see his soldiers of the cross fall by thousands— the ground covered, and the ditches filled, with the dead bodies of his pilgrims.

This immense army, in a little time, began to experience the want of forage, which the soldiers were driven to the necessity of seeking about the fields—add to which, that the term of forty days, for which they had originally enlisted, and in which time they were to purchase the bliss of paradise, was now accomplished; contenting themselves therefore with that great object, they refused to enter upon any further conquest, and withdrew by thousands from the legate’s standard. The latter, alarmed at the reduction of his army, and not finding the conquest of the city so practicable as he at first apprehended, had recourse next to stratagem for effecting his purpose. Amongst those who had joined his army with fresh auxiliaries under the walls of Carcassone, was the King of Arragon, in Spain. A plot was formed between this monarch and the legate to try the effect of a negotiation with the Earl of Beziers, and the former was deputed to solicit an interview and manage the whole affair.

An interview accordingly took place, at which the King of Arragon expressed his wish to know what could induce the Earl to shut himself up in the city of Carcassone against so vast an army of the pilgrims. The latter replied, It was the justice of his cause—that he was fully persuaded the pope, under the pretext of religion, had formed the design of ruining both his uncle, the Earl of Raymond, and himself—of this he had had the most convincing proof when he undertook to intercede for his subjects, the inhabitants of Beziers. The popes legate had refused to spare such of them as were Catholics, and had even butchered the priests themselves, though clothed in their sacerdotal vestments, and though they had ranged themselves under the banner of the cross. That that horrible instance of cruelty and wickedness, added to their proceedings in the borough of Carcassone, where his unoffending subjects had been exposed to fire and sword without regard to age or sex, had taught him the folly of looking for any mercy at the hands of the legate or his army of pilgrims; that consequently he preferred to die in his own defense rather than be exposed to the mercy of so relentless and inexorable an enemy. He acknowledged to the King, that many of his subjects in the city of Carcassone professed a faith very different from that of the church of Rome, but they were persons who never did wrong or injury to anyone, and that in requital of their good services to himself, he was resolved never to desert them. He also expressed his hope that God, who is the protector and defender of the innocent, would support them against that misinformed multitude, who, under the mistaken notion of meriting heaven, had left their own houses to plunder, burn, and destroy the houses of other men, and to murder without reason, mercy, or discretion.

The King of Arragon retired from this parley, and, in an assembly, consisting of the legate, the lords and prelates, reported the particulars of what had passed between himself and the Earl of Beziers. He declared that he had found his good ally, the Earl of Beziers, extremely scandalized at their inhuman proceedings against his subjects both of Beziers and Carcassone; and that he was now fully persuaded, seeing that they had not spared the Roman Catholics, nor even the priests themselves, that it was not a religious war, as was pretended, but a system of plunder under the pretext of religion: that the Earl hoped God would be so favorable to him as to make his innocence and the justice of his cause, which was purely that of self-defense, sufficiently apparent: that it was in vain to expect them to surrender at discretion, since they had found by experience they had nothing to expect at their hands but an indiscriminate slaughter. He then apprised the pope’s legate, that it had always proved bad policy to drive an enemy to despair; wherefore if he would condescend to propose any terms of compromise that were tolerable to the Earl of Beziers and his subjects, mildness would be found a much more effectual means of reducing the Albigenses, than extreme severity; and that it should not be overlooked that the Earl of Beziers was still a young man, possessing much of the confidence of his subjects; and, consequently, had it in his power to render essential services in reducing them to the communion of the church of Rome, to which he was himself attached.

When the King of Arragon had delivered this address, he was requested by the legate to withdraw a little while, on which a consultation took place; and being again called in, he was commissioned to return to the Earl and propose to him, that, at his intercession, the legate had consented to receive him into mercy, upon the following terms: He should be permitted to come out of the city, and to bring with him eleven others, with their bag and baggage. But with regard to the rest of the inhabitants, they should not leave the city except at his discretion, of which they ought to entertain the most favorable opinion, because he was the pope’s legate. That all the inhabitants both men, women, maidens, and children, should come forth without so much as their shirts or shifts on, or the smallest covering to hide their nakedness; and that finally, the Earl of Beziers should be kept in strict custody and confinement, and that all his possessions should remain in the hands of such a successor as should be chosen for the preservation of the country.

The Spanish monarch was fully persuaded, that propositions so degrading as these, it were needless to offer to the Earl of Beziers; he, nevertheless, complied with the legate’s request, and submitted them to the Earl, who gave an immediate reply that he would never quit the city upon conditions so dishonorable and unjust, and that he was resolved to defend both himself and his subjects by every means that God had put within his power.

Finding himself thus foiled in his attempt to move the Earl of Beziers, the legate soon had recourse to a less honorable, and much more deeply laid plot. He insinuated himself into the graces of one of the officers of his army, telling him that it lay in his power to render to the church a signal instance of kindness, and that if he would undertake it, besides the rewards which he should receive in heaven, he should be amply recompensed on earth. The object was to get access to the Earl of Beziers, professing himself to be his kinsman and friend, assuring him that he had something to communicate of the last importance to his interests; and having thus far succeeded, he was to prevail upon him to accompany him to the legate, for the purpose of negotiating a peace, under a pledge that he should be safely conducted back again to the city. The officer played his part so dexterously, that the Earl imprudently consented to accompany him. At their interview, the latter submitted to the legate the propriety of exercising a little more lenity and moderation towards his subjects, as a procedure that might have the happiest tendency in reclaiming the Albigenses into the pale of the church of Rome; he also stated to him that the conditions which had been formerly proposed to him were dishonorable and shameful, and highly indecorous in those whose eyes ought to be as chaste as their thoughts: that his people would rather choose to die than submit to such disgraceful treatment. The legate replied that the inhabitants of Carcassone might exercise their own pleasure; but that it was now unnecessary for the Earl to trouble himself any further about them, as he was himself a prisoner until Carcassone was taken, and his subjects had better learnt their duty!

The Earl was not a little astonished at this information; he protested that he was betrayed, and that faith was violated: for that the gentleman, by whose entreaties he had been prevailed upon to meet the legate, had pledged himself by oaths and execrations to conduct him back in safety to Carcassone. But appeals, remonstrances, or entreaties, were of no avail: he was committed to the custody of the Duke of Burgundy, “and, having been thrown into prison, died soon after, not without exciting strong suspicions of being poisoned.”

No sooner had the inhabitants of Carcassone received the intelligence of the Earl’s confinement, than they burst into tears, and were seized with such terror, that they thought of nothing but how to escape the danger they were then placed in; but blockaded as they were on all sides, and the trenches filled with men, all human probability of escape vanished from their eyes. A report, however, was circulated, that there was a vault or subterraneous passage somewhere in the city, which led to the castle of Caberet, a distance of about three leagues from Carcassone, and that if the mouth or entry thereof could be found, Providence had provided for them a way of escape. All the inhabitants of the city, except those who kept watch upon the rampires, immediately commenced the search, and success rewarded their labor. The entrance of the cavern was found, and at the beginning of the night they all began their journey through it, carrying with them only as much food as was deemed necessary to serve them for a few days. “It was a dismal and sorrowful sight,” says their historian, “to witness their removal and departure, accompanied with sighs, tears, and lamentations, at the thoughts of quitting their habitations and all their worldly possessions, and betaking themselves to the uncertain event of saving themselves by flight: parents leading their children, and the more robust supporting decrepit old persons; and especially to hear the affecting lamentations of the women.” They, however, arrived the following day at the castle, from whence they dispersed themselves through different parts of the country, some proceeding to Arragon, some to Catalonia, others to Toulouse and the cities belonging to their party, wherever God in his providence opened a door for their admission.

The awful silence which reigned in the solitary city excited no little surprise on the following day among the pilgrims. At first they suspected a stratagem to draw them into an ambuscade; but on mounting the walls and entering the town, they cried out, “the Albigenses are fled!” The legate issued a proclamation, that no person should seize or carry off any of the plunder—that it should all be carried to the great church of Carcassone, whence it was disposed of for the benefit of the pilgrims, and the proceeds distributed among them in rewards according to their deserts. The crusade against the Albigenses had hitherto been conducted by an ecclesiastic, the Abbe de Cisteaux; but having been prolonged beyond the period at first calculated upon, and the entire reduction of the heretics being found not quite so easy a task as was first expected, the supreme command was now vested in the hands of Simon, Earl of Montfort, a person of some military talents, but of a fierce and ungovernable temper.

He was appointed governor of the whole country, both of what had been already conquered, and what should be conquered in future. This nobleman, under the mask of piety and zeal for religion, gratified a relentless and covetous disposition. He plundered, assassinated, and committed to the flames the poor Albigenses, without regard to character, sex, or age. Dazzled by his success, he set no bounds to his rapacious cruelty; and, encouraged by the papal legate, he insolently proposed that the Earl of Toulouse should absolutely surrender to him all his castles and territories as conquered by the catholic army. Raymond refused, and appealed to Philip, king of France, his lord paramount. The haughty Count, however, began to execute his threats, and laid siege to the castle of Minerba, (or Minerva) a place strongly fortified by nature, in the territory of Narbonne, on the confines of Spain. “This place (said he) is of all others the most execrable, because no mass has been sung in it for thirty years” — a remark which gives us a striking idea of the number of the Waldenses; the very worship of popery, it seems, was expelled from the place. On the surrender of the castle, which was defended by Raymond, Earl of Termes, and compelled to capitulate for want of water, they exerted all their influence to induce him to recant his religion and turn Catholic; but finding him inflexible, they shut him up in a close prison, where he soon after died.

They then seized his wife, sister, and virgin daughter, with other females of distinguished rank, all of whom they labored to convert, both by flattery and frowns, by fair speeches and cruel threats; but finding that nothing could prevail upon them to recant, they made a large fire, into which they were all thrown and consumed to ashes.

After the castle had been taken, the Earl of Montfort caused the Abbe de Vaux, a friar, to preach to the inhabitants, exhorting them to acknowledge the pope and church of Rome: but they interrupted him, exclaiming, “we will not renounce our religion; you labor to no purpose, for neither life nor death shall induce us to abandon our profession.” On this the Earl and the legate commanded a hundred and eighty men and women to be committed to the flames! These went, it is said, with cheerfulness, blessing God that he was pleased to confer on them the honor of dying for his sake; at the same time warning the Earl of Montfort that he would one day pay dear for his cruelties towards them. All who witnessed their courage and constancy were astonished. But I must not attempt to prosecute, in minute detail, the history of this religious crusade, which was carried on against the Albigenses, during almost the whole of the first thirty years of this century, and with varied success; for besides that it could administer to the reader little of either profitable instruction or edification, it would carry me far beyond the limits prescribed by my publication. The reader who has never had an opportunity of exploring the history of this period, can scarcely conceive the scenes of baseness, perfidy, barbarity, indecency, and hypocrisy, over which Pope Innocent III and his immediate successors presided. The bare reflection of three hundred thousand men, actuated by the motives of avarice and superstition, filling the country of the Albigenses with carnage and confusion, during a period of twenty years, is, in itself, sufficient to harrow up the soul; but to go into any thing like a circumstantial detail of all the multifarious atrocities which belong to it, would only be to impose upon the reader an obligation to throw aside the book, from a regard to his own feelings. I must content myself with an outline.

Having got possession of the castle of Minerva, Earl Montfort next laid siege to that of Preissan, or, as it is often called, Termes, in the district of Narbonne, a place which seemed invincible to human force; but the garrison being reduced to great distress for want of water, abandoned the place by night, and made good their retreat undiscovered by the enemy.

The castle of La Vaur was next besieged, and after a siege of six months taken by assault, when all its brave defenders were put to the sword, except eighty gentlemen, whom the Earl caused to be ignominiously hanged, and Lord Almeric on a gibbet higher than the rest. The lady of Lavaur was cast alive into a pit, and there stoned to death. And with respect to the other inhabitants, it was put to their option whether they would conform to the church of Rome, or perish by the flames. They almost without exception chose the latter, and about four hundred persons thus precipitated themselves into the flames, joyfully yielding up their spirits into the hand of God. 14 The Count de Foix, who had been peculiarly interested in the defense of Preissan, was very favorably disposed towards the Albigenses, and consequently much disconcerted at the loss of the place. The Earl of Toulouse, also, began to be much alarmed at the successes of Montfort, and, apprehensive for his own safety and that of his subjects, roused many of the neighboring barons, and collected a considerable force, which he brought to the assistance of the Count de Foix. Their united exertions suddenly changed the aspect of affairs. Montfort was stripped of almost all his conquests, and a complete revolution was nearly effected; but in a general engagement, which took place in the valley of Theniere, they were defeated, and the courage of the party began again to droop.

Success raised the pride and demands of the inquisitors. Conditions were now prescribed, to which no man of spirit could agree—“That Earl Raymond should lay down his arms, without retaining one soldier or auxiliary; that he should not only submit absolutely and for ever to the church, but that he should repair and refund whatever losses the church might have sustained by the war—that in all his territories, no one should ever eat more than two kinds of flesh—that he should expel all heretics, and their allies and abettors from his dominions—that within a year and a day he should deliver up to the Count de Montfort, every person whom he should name or require, to be punished or disposed of as the Count might think fit—that his subjects should never wear any jewels, nor fine clothes, nor caps, nor bonnets, of any other color than black—that all his fortifications should be demolished; that no relative, or friend of his, should reside in any city, but in the country only—that no new tax should be levied by him, but that every head of a family in his territories should annually pay four deniers to the pope’s legate—that the tiends should be paid over all his lands—that the papal legate should never be required to pay any toll, or other impost, while traveling through the country under his jurisdiction—that Raymond should associate himself with the knights of St. John, and go into voluntary exile as a crusader to the Holy Land, never to return without leave, and finally, that he should not have his lands restored until he had complied with all these demands.”

In the year 1215, pope Innocent III convened the famous council of Lateran, at which Dominic was present, and many decrees against heretics were enacted. To this council both the Earl of Toulouse and his son Raymond had recourse, and urged their plea against Montfort, who had usurped their dominions. The council, however, decreed, Earl Raymond to be for ever excluded from his dominions, which he had governed in, and ordered him to remain in some convenient place out of his dominions, with a view to his giving suitable proofs of his repentance. Four hundred marks of silver were, nevertheless, assigned him annually out of his revenues, as long as he behaved himself with an humble obedience; but his possessions were adjudged to Montfort. Upon this decree, the Earl went into Spain, and his son into Provence, where they raised auxiliary forces, and were not only enabled to continue the war against Montfort, but actually recovered some part of the Earl’s dominions, and even his capital, the city of Toulouse. Whilst Montfort was endeavoring to retake it, he was struck on the head by a stone which instantly killed him, in the year 1218, and the city was delivered from the siege.

In the course of the war the castle of Minerva having surrendered to the Catholic army, the Abbe de Cisteau, who, ever since the election of Montfort to its command, had continued the chief councilor of the crusaders, hesitated for some time, how he should dispose of the garrison and inhabitants. “He sincerely desired the death of the enemies of Jesus Christ,” says the author of the history of the Albigenses, “but being a priest and a monk, he could not agree to the slaughter of the citizens, if they would be converted. Robert Mauvoisin, a zealot in the army, dissatisfied with this appearance of humanity and condescension, insisted that they had come there, not to favor heretics, but to exterminate them. In this dilemma, the blood-thirsty monk was relieved from his embarrassment, by the higher tone, not the fiercer spirit, of a third person, who exclaimed, ‘Fear not, probably not one of them will accept of the alternative!’ The event proved the correctness of his judgment; for, the piles being kindled, they mostly precipitated themselves into the flames. Earl Raymond did not long enjoy the possession of his dominions, which he had reconquered, for he died in the year 1221, and was succeeded by his son, the young Raymond, who soon after banished the inquisition from the country of Toulouse. Pope Innocent III also died about the same time, and was succeeded by Honorius III who was no sooner elevated to power than he issued his denunciations against all heretics, and violators of the ecclesiastical immunity, in the following rescript, which was sent into France. “We excommunicate all heretics of both sexes, and of whatsoever sect, with their favorers, receivers, and defenders; and, moreover, all those who cause any edicts or customs, contrary to the liberty of the church, to be observed, unless they remove them from their public records in two months after the publication of this sentence. Also we excommunicate the makers and the writers of those statutes, and moreover, all governors, consuls, rulers, and counselors of places where such statutes and customs shall be published and kept, all those who shall presume to pass judgment, or to publish such judgments, as shall be made according to them.”

The conduct of the young Raymond had rendered him peculiarly obnoxious to the new pontiff, who took care to inform him, that unless he returned to his duty, he should be stripped of his dominions, as his father had been; and by letters, bearing date the 8th of November, 1221, he confirmed the sentence of the legate, by which he deprived him of all his right in every country that had ever been subject to his father; and that this sentence might want nothing of its full force, he commanded the Dominicans to proclaim a holy war against heretics, to be called the penance war. At the sound of this horrid trumpet, multitudes rushed to the standard, enrolling themselves in this holy society, as they presumptuously imagined it to be, wearing a black cloak over a white garment, and receiving the sacrament of the eucharist for the defense of the catholic faith.

The more effectually to subdue the Earl of Toulouse, the pope transmitted his letters to Louis, king of France, exhorting him to take arms against the Albigenses, in the following extraordinary words. “‘T is the command of God, who says, If thou shalt hear say in any one of thy cities which the Lord thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying, let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known, thou shalt smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword. Although you are under many obligations already to God, for the great benefits hitherto received from him, from him comes every good and perfect gift, yet you ought to reckon yourself more especially obliged courageously to exert yourself for him against the subverters of the faith, by whom he is blasphemed, and manfully to defend the catholic purity, which many in those parts, adhering to the doctrines of devils, are known to have cast off.”

This profound logic was too irresistible to be withstood by Louis, who began to collect an army of crusaders, at the head of which he placed himself, and sat down before the city of Avignon. Raymond, at that time, held several cautionary lands of the King of England; and the pope, suspecting that he might possibly apply for assistance to our English monarch to enable him to defend them, wrote to caution him not to take up arms against the French king, in these words, “Make no war, either by yourself, or your brother, or any other person, on the said king, so long as he is engaged in the affair of the faith and service of Jesus Christ, lest by your obstructing the matter, which God forbid you should do, the king with his prelates and barons of France, should be forced to turn their arms from the extirpation of heretics to their own defense. As for us, since we could not excuse such a conduct, an instance of great indevotion, we could not impart to you our paternal favor, which, under other circumstances, at all proper seasons, should never be wanting to you. And as we are not only ready to do you justice, but even to show you favor, as far as God enables us, we have taken care, that whatever becomes of heretics and their lands, your rights and those of other catholics shall be safe.”

The city of Avignon was defended by Earl Raymond with great bravery, and multitudes of the French army fell during the siege. For, besides those that were killed in the ordinary mode of warfare, the army was afflicted with a dysentery and other diseases, which carried off numbers, and among the rest the French monarch. The pope’s legate, for some time, concealed the death of the king, lest the army should break up with disgrace from the siege of a single city, without being able to take it. Finding, however, that it was not to be conquered by force, the legate had recourse to fraud; and even these measures for some time failed him. He then desired that he might be admitted into the city, in company with his prelates, under the pretense that he would examine into the faith of the inhabitants, and affirming with an oath, that he put off the siege of the city for no other cause than the welfare of their souls. He added, that the cry of their infidelity had ascended to the pope; and that he wished to inquire whether they had done altogether according to the cry that had come up before him.

The too credulous citizens, not suspecting the fraud, and especially relying upon the sacredness of his oath, opened their gates, on which the soldiers of the French army, as had been previously determined, rushed violently into the city, seized the citizens, bound them in chains, plundered their houses, killed numbers of the inhabitants, and having thus, by treachery, got possession, they brake down the towers, and destroyed the walls of that noble city. Such is the narrative handed down to us of these sanguinary proceedings by the monk of St. Albans, Matthew Paris.

Avignon being thus taken, the crusaders next bent all their forces against Toulouse. This city, which was most gallantly defended, maintained a long siege, but it was at length taken, in 1221, and young Raymond compelled to submit to terms even more severe than those which were proposed to his father in the council of Arles. From this period the Albigenses declined greatly in France. For, being no longer permitted to find an asylum under any of the reigning princes, such of them as escaped the edge of the sword, and the vengeance of their adversaries, fled for refuge into the valleys of Piedmont and other places, dispersing themselves in every direction, as will be shown in the ensuing section, wherever they could enjoy quietness and the liberty of worshipping God agreeably to the exercise of a good conscience.

As to the ordinary manner of proceeding with such as fell into their hands captives of war, a single extract from Limborch’s history may suffice to show. “A person of the name Robert,” says he, quoting the Annals of Bzovins, and of Raynaldus, 1207, etc. “who had been of the sect of the Albigenses, but afterwards joined the Dominicans, supported by the authority of the princes and magistrates, burnt all who persisted in their heresy. Within two months he caused fifty persons, without distinction of sex, either to be burnt or buried alive, whence he was called ‘the manner of the Heretics.’ In 1211 they took the city of Alby, and there put numbers to death. They took La Vaur by storm, and burnt in it multitudes of the Albigenses. They hanged Almeric, the governor of that city, who was of a very noble family; and beheaded eighty of the inferior rank, not sparing the females. They threw the sister of Almeric, who was the principal lady of the sect of the Albigenses, into a well, and covered her with stones.

Afterwards they conquered Carcum, and put sixty men to death. They seized on Pulchra Vallis, a large city near Toulouse, committed four hundred Albigenses to the flames, and hanged fifty more.” Thuanus, that impartial Catholic writer, in the History of his own Times, book 6, confirms this dreadful statement in its general results, and further adds, “that after the capture of La Vaur, the towns of Les Cures, Rabastains, Gaillac, St. Marcel, St. Anthonin, Causac, and Moisac, were stormed, and a great massacre made of the townsmen by the conquerors. The castle, of Perre in the Agenois having after a long siege capitulated, seventy of the soldiers were hanged, and the others who adhered to their errors were burnt alive. Nor was Paris itself exempt from this contagion; for fourteen persons, most of whom were priests (teachers among the Albigenses) being convicted of this error, expired in the flames. In England they were handled with more mildness, if loss of life be the measure of punishment, but with more ignominy; the convicted persons being branded with a hot iron on their shoulders, or even on their foreheads.”

But, independent of those that fell by the edge of the sword, or were committed to the flames by the soldiers and magistrates, the inquisition was constantly at work, from the year 1206 to 1228, and produced the most dreadful havoc among the disciples of Christ. Of the effects occasioned by this infernal engine of cruelty and oppression, we may have some notion from this circumstance,—that in the last-mentioned year the archbishops of Aix, Arles, and Narbonne, found it necessary to intercede with the monks of the Inquisition, to defer a little their work of imprisonment, until the pope could be apprised of the immense numbers apprehended—numbers so great, that it was impossible to defray the charge of their subsistence, or even to provide stone and mortar to build prisons for them. Their own language, indeed, is so remarkable, that it deserves to be laid before the reader, and here it is. “It has come to our knowledge,” say they, “that you have apprehended so many of the Waldenses, that it is not only impossible to defray the charges of their subsistence, but also to provide stone and mortar to build prisons for them. We, therefore, advise you to defer for a while augmenting their number, until the pope be apprised of the great multitudes that have been apprehended, and until he notify what he pleases to have done in this case. Nor is there any reason you should take offense hereat; for as to those who are altogether impenitent and incorrigible, or concerning whom you may doubt of their relapse or escape, or that, being at large again, they would infect others, you may condemn such without delay.” 16 Such is the representation given us by writers of unimpeachable veracity, of the merciless treatment which the Albigenses received from the Catholics at this period, purely on account of their religious profession. Before I dismiss the subject, it may be proper to notice a difficulty which will strike the minds of reflecting readers. It has been intimated both by the friends and enemies of the Waldenses, that they had religious scruples against bearing arms, and even shedding the blood of animals unnecessarily.

The question, therefore, naturally presents itself, “Were they at last driven to the necessity of taking up the sword in defense of their religion and lives?” Upon the lawfulness or unlawfulness of doing so, when pressed by dire necessity, I shall offer no opinion in this place. My business is to state facts as I find them; and that the reader may not suspect me of a wish to misrepresent their principles and conduct in the instance referred to, I shall quote the words of Mr. Robinson, who had much better means of information than have fallen to my lot. “The difficulty here is,” says he, “how such people as bore no arms, and shed no blood, could be said to bring large armies into the field to defend their rights. The proper answer is—the pious were named from the provinces, the provinces and princes from the pious; for one common principle, that all mankind had a right to be free, brought together Goths and professors of the gospel. Both loved liberty—the latter paid for it by taxes, the knits of their industry, and the former fought for it, and, by defending one, preserved both parties. The church of Rome having adopted clerical dominion as an article of orthodox belief, it followed of course, that resistance to that, was heresy both political and religious. Too many historians take up the affair in the gross, lay it down as they took it up, and gravely say, the Lord, by a course of miracles, assisted his dear servants the Catholics to drown, stab, and burn, forty thousand heretics—because they (the catholics) were afraid of their lives, in a society of people who had such an aversion to the taking away [even] of animal life, that they never killed a bird, from a sparrow to an eagle; or a quadruped, from a weasel to an elephant; 18 and who perpetually exclaimed against penal laws, and thought it wrong to take away the life of man.”

A proper attention to this matter, may help us to solve several things in the writings of the catholics themselves, which must otherwise prove extremely perplexing. Thus for instance, several of their own writers describe the battle which proved so fatal to the cause of the Albigenses. “In the year 1213, the Christian army of eight hundred horse and one thousand foot, near Toulouse, being divided into three corps, in honor of the Holy Trinity, the first under the command of Simon, count of Montfort, the second commanded by the Lord Bishop of Toulouse, and the third by the Lord Bishop of Cominge, attacked the army of the heretics, consisting of an hundred thousand fighting men, and defeated them. The Catholics lost about a hundred men, but of the Albigenses, two and thirty thousand were either killed or drowned in the river Garonne.” This they call the battle of Murat, 20 and they add, that after this victory many of the surviving heretics fled into the valleys of Piedmont, where their descendants resided, till two hundred years after, when Huss revived the same heresy in Bohemia, and Luther in Germany, about a hundred years after him. The explanation of all this miracle is, that the cities and towns that were attacked by the crusaders were peopled with mechanics, manufacturers, and husbandmen of the kind described by the inquisitors— an industrious and virtuous people, who took no oaths, objected to wars of every kind, and refused to shed the blood of a fellow-creature, even in defense of their own lives. Such appears plainly to have been the case with the Albigenses. The Count of Toulouse, and the barons and vassals that constituted his army, no doubt acted upon different maxims; for, had they followed out the principles of these Albigenses, they would have dissolved the whole feudal system; but they approved of the conduct of these people in dissenting from the communion of the church of Rome, admired the simplicity of their doctrine and worship, and, to the utmost of their power, protected them from the rage of their bigoted and sanguinary persecutors. 21 SECTION Some account of the state of the Waldenses, from the period of the suppression of their churches in France, to the middle of the fourteenth century, A.D. 1230—1350. WHILE the demon of persecution was raging with resistless fury against the Albigenses in the southern provinces of France, the inhabitants of the valleys of Piedmont appeared to have enjoyed a large portion of external peace: — their churches had rest, and walking in the fear of the Lord and the comforts of the Holy Spirit, were edified and multiplied. The kind providence of God appeared in blessing them with a succession of mild and tolerant princes, in the Dukes of Savoy, 1 who, continually receiving the most favorable reports of them, as a people simple in their manners, free from deceit and malice, upright in their dealings, loyal to their governors, and ever ready to yield them a cheerful obedience in every thing but the concerns of religion, turned a deaf ear to the repeated solicitations of priests and monks, and, from the beginning of the thirteenth century until the year 1487, a period of nearly three hundred years, peremptorily refused to disturb or molest them.

An effort was made to introduce the Inquisition into Piedmont, but the proceedings in France had sufficiently opened the eyes of the inhabitants to the spirit and principles of that infernal court, and they wisely resisted its establishment among them. An inquisitor of the name of Peter of Verona, had been deputed by the pope to carry the project into effect; but we are told by Ludovicus a Paramo, a Spanish writer of those times, that “the people made a martyr of him either at Turin or Susa.” 2 At Milan, also, the united power of pope Pius IV and Philip II of Spain, was found insufficient to introduce the Inquisition; the mob rose at the bare proposal of it and flew to arms, exclaiming that it was a system of tyranny, and not of religion. Even the senate protested against it as inimical to trade, repugnant to the free constitution of the cities of Italy, and incompatible with the Milanese forms of law, on which grounds they opposed its introduction. Naples and Venice also successfully resisted the inquisitorial scheme; and, as the populace in almost every part of Italy formed insurrections against the inquisitors, evincing the most determined spirit of hostility against them, the states prudently availed themselves of this temper of mind, and pretended they were afraid of exasperating the people should they introduce the independent power of the holy office.

The scenes of slaughter and devastation which had been carried on against the Albigenses, in the southern provinces of France, for more than twenty years during the former part of the thirteenth century, in which time it has been computed that a million of persons bearing that name were put to death,3 had occasioned many of them to cross the Pyrenees and seek a shelter from the storm in the Spanish provinces of Arragon and Catalonia.

Matthew Paris, in his History of the reign of Henry III notices this circumstance, and informs us that in year 1214, during the pontificate of Alexander IV there were great numbers of the Waldenses in these provinces, of which the pope bitterly complained in one of his bulls, saying, that they had permitted them to gain such a footing, and given them such time to increase and multiply, that the evil called loudly for a remedy. He further adds, that they had several churches duly set in order with their bishops and deacons, in which they publicly and boldly preached their doctrine. Thither the vigilance of the inquisitors traced their steps, and accordingly in the year 1232, the Inquisition was brought into Arragon. A further indulgent, indeed, to this was, that the bishop of Huesca, a considerable city of Arragon, was reported to err in matters of faith, and in all probability had so much humanity in his composition, as led him to connive at the residence of heretics in his diocese. The office of making inquisition against them, was committed by pope Gregory IX to a friar of the order of Predicants, named Peter Caderite; and James, the King of Arragon, was magisterially enjoined not to permit him, or any of his assistants, to be molested in the discharge of the duties of the Inquisition.

A commission was at the same time given to the archbishop of Tarragona, the metropolitan city of Catalonia, and his suffrages, to constitute a court of inquisition there also, against heretical pravity. The following is a copy of the bull which was issued for that purpose. “Since the evening of the world is now declining, we admonish and beseech your brotherhood, and strictly command you by our written and apostolic words, as you regard the Divine judgment, that with diligent care you make inquiry against heretics, and render them infamous, by the assistance of the friars Predicants, and others whom you shall judge fit for this business; and that you proceed against all who are culpable and infamous, according to our statutes lately published against heretics, unless they will from the heart absolutely obey the commands of the church—which statutes we send you enclosed in our bull; and that ye also proceed against the receivers, abettors, and favorers of heretics, according to the same statutes. But if any will wholly abjure the heretical plague, and return to the ecclesiastical unity, grant them the benefit of absolution, according to the forms of the church, and enjoin them the usual penance.” Soon after the establishment of the Inquisition in Arragon, a synod was convened at Tarragona, when many severe decrees were passed against heretics, and the holy office was erected there also; and, for the space of a century and a half, measures of the greatest rigor were incessantly carried on against the Waldenses in that quarter, before their entire extinction could be effected. The Catholic writers themselves avow these facts, and acknowledge that they owed their ultimate success, in subduing the heretics in that quarter, to the superior talents and exertions of Nicholas Eymeric, a Predicant monk, and author of the directory of the inquisitors, who was created inquisitor-general, about the year 1858, and died January 4th, 1392, having kept up the office of the Inquisition against heretics forty four years in succession.

The flight of Waldo from the south of France into Germany, and the success that attended him in preaching the gospel in the different cities which are situated on the banks of the Rhine, have been already noticed.

We are informed that about the year 1213, Germany and Alsace were full of the Waldenses. 5 Two considerations may enable us to account for this.

One is, the destructive war that was waged against the Albigenses in France, supported by the terror of the Inquisition, which would necessarily drive the disciples of Christ to seek security in other countries.

The other is, that a violent quarrel arose about this time between the pope and Frederic II, Emperor of Germany. This latter prince, on his first accession to the throne, had gone eagerly into all the measures of the court of Rome, and issued the most horrid and sanguinary edicts against the Waldenses, as hath been shown in a former section. 6 But he had now, by some means, incurred the displeasure of Gregory IX who, at the moment that Frederick was prosecuting a war against the Saracens in the east, excited the emperor’s own son Henry, who had been elected king of the Romans, to rebel against his father, in consequence of which, the cities of Lombardy had revolted. The rebellion was, however, suppressed, the prince was confined, and Frederic triumphed—but his troubles were not ended. The pope excommunicated him, and, to sow division between him and the princes of the empire, he (A.D. 1237) transmitted a bull into Germany, in which were the following words, referring to the emperor. “A beast of blasphemy, abounding with names, is risen from the sea, with the feet of a bear, the face of a lion, and members of other different animals: which, like the proud, hath opened its mouth in blasphemy against the holy name; not even fearing to throw the arrows of calumny against the tabernacle of God, and the saints that dwell in heaven. This beast, desirous of breaking every thing in pieces with his iron teeth and nails, and of trampling all things under his feet, hath already prepared private battering rams against the wall of the Catholic faith; and now raises open machines, in erecting soul-destroying schools of Ishmaelites; rising, according to report, in opposition to Christ, the Redeemer of mankind, the table of whose covenant he attempts to abolish with the pen of wicked heresy. Be not, therefore, surprised at the malice of this blasphemous beast, if we, who are the servants of the Almighty, should be exposed to the arrows of his destruction. This King of plagues was even heard to say, that the whole world has been deceived by three imposters, Moses, Christ, and Mohammed; but he makes Jesus far inferior to the other two. ‘They,’ says he, ‘supported their glory to the last, whereas Christ was ignominiously crucified.’” Frederick, on the other hand, drew up an apology to the princes of Germany, in which he terms Gregory, The Great Dragon and Antichrist, of whom it is written, “and all other red horse arose from the sea, and he that sat upon him took peace from the earth.” In the year 1245 pope Innocent IV convened the famous council of Lyons, concerning which the following inscription is preserved in the Vatican library at Rome. “The thirteenth general council, and the first of Lyons:

Frederic II is there declared an enemy to the church, and deprived of the imperial diadem.” To this council Frederic did not fail to send ambassadors to defend his cause, well knowing that he was there to be publicly accused. The pope, who had set himself up as judge at the head of the council, acted also the part of his own advocate; and after strenuously insisting on his right to the temporalities of Naples and Sicily, and to the patrimony of the Countess Matilda, he charged Frederic with having made a peace with the Mahometans — with having had Mahometan concubines—with not believing in Christ—and, in a word, with being a heretic. 8 The emperor’s orators harangued in his defense with great spirit and resolution, and in their turn accused the pope of having been guilty of usury and rapine. Ambassadors from England were also sent to attend at this council, and represent the grievances which their countrymen were groaning under from the enormous exactions of the court of Rome. They complained as loudly of the pope as the pope had done of the emperor. “You draw,” said they, “by means of your Italian emissaries, above sixty thousand marks yearly out of the kingdom of England; you have lately sent us a legate, who has given away all the church livings to Italians. He raises excessive taxes upon all the religious houses, and excommunicates every body that complains of his extortions. Let these grievances, therefore, be instantly redressed, for we will no longer endure them.” The pope blushed, and made no answer, but proceeded to pronounce sentence against the emperor, by which he deprived him of his crown. While the pontiff was pronouncing the sentence, the fathers of the church held in their hands the lighted wax candles, which were immediately extinguished on the sentence being pronounced. As one party signed the decision, the other went out, giving vent to their groans.

The emperor was himself at Turin during these transactions, and, according to report, was greatly agitated on hearing of them. He, however, called for his strong box, which was brought him, and taking out of it the imperial crown, he added “This the pope and his council have not been able to take from me, and before they strip me of it much blood shall be spilt.” He then proceeded to write to all the princes of Europe, urging them to support him against the pope. “I am not the first,” says he, in his letters, “whom the clergy have treated so un-worthily, and I shall not be the last. But you are the cause of it, by obeying these hypocrites, whose ambition, you are sensible, is carried beyond all bounds. How many infamous actions, shocking to modesty, might you not, if you were disposed to it, discover in the court of Rome? While they are abandoned to the vices of the age, and intoxicated with its pleasures, the greatness of their riches stifles in their minds all sense of religion. It is, therefore, a work of charity to deprive them of these pernicious treasures which are their ruin, and it is your duty to assist me in so doing.”

These extracts sufficiently show the state of deadly hatred that existed between the pope and emperor, and it produced a flame that raged, with more or less violence, throughout the empire, until the death of the latter in the year 1250. “It was dreadful,” says a late writer, “to see the misery to which many thousands were reduced in Germany, by a new and illegal election of another emperor, and by the violences committed in the revolted cities of Italy; in all which the pope was the only one insensible to the operations of Divine justice. In the midst of this confusion, (1254) the Almighty summoned him before his tribunal.” 9 One beneficial result of this long-pending quarrel was, that it retarded the establishment of the inquisition in different parts of the German empire, and consequently gave the Waldenses an opportunity of propagating their sentiments more extensively. The clergy, no doubt, were generally upon the alert in quest of heretics, and wherever they were discovered, means of one kind or other were not wanting to persecute them, and render their dispersion necessary to avoid its fury. But these things always turned out to the furtherance of the gospel, “because many learned preachers were thereby dispersed abroad to make known the purity of their religion to the world.” But after the death of Frederic, the establishment of the Inquisition met with less obstruction. The affairs of Germany had been left by him in great disorder. Italy was without a prince, and the Milanese under the control of the pope. “The latter,” says Limborch, “now determined to extirpate all heresy, which had greatly increased during the preceding war.” About the year 1880, the Waldenses were grievously harassed and oppressed, in several parts of Germany, by an inquisitor of the name of Echard, a Jacobin monk. The circumstance is related by Vignier, in his Historical Library, part the third, where he also records an anecdote of this Echard that is worth mentioning. After inflicting cruelties with great severity, and for a length of time, upon the Waldenses, he was at length induced to investigate the causes and reasons of their separation from the church of Rome. The force of truth ultimately prevailed over all his prejudices — his own conscience attested that many of the errors and corruptions, which they charged on that apostate church, really existed; and, finding himself unable to disprove the articles of their faith by the word of God, he confessed that truth had overcome him, gave glory to God, and entered into the communion of the Waldensian churches, which he had long been engaged in punishing and persecuting even to death. The news of his conversion was soon spread abroad, and reached the ears of the other inquisitors, whose indignation was roused by his apostasy.

Emissaries were dispatched in pursuit of him, and he was at length apprehended and conveyed to Heidelberg, where he was committed to the flames. His dying testimony was a noble attestation to the principles and conduct of the Waldenses; for he went to the stake charging it upon the church of Rome as a monstrous and iniquitous procedure, to put to death so many innocent persons, for no other crime but their steadfast adherence to the cause of Christ, in opposition to the delusions of Antichrist. The Waldenses, however, continued to increase throughout Germany, during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Four hundred and fortythree were apprehended by the inquisitors in Saxony and Porecrania, in the year 1391, who confessed that their teachers came from Bohemia, and that they and their ancestors before them had been instructed in the principles they then held. In 1457, a great number of the Waldenses were discovered by the inquisitors in the diocese of Eistein in Germany, who were put to death, and who confessed that they had among them twelve barbes, or pastors, who labored in the work of the ministry. In short, Trithemius relates it as an acknowledged fact, that in those days the Waldenses were so numerous, that in traveling from Cologne to Milan, the whole extent of Germany, they could lodge every night with persons of their own profession, and that it was a custom among them to affix certain private marks to their signs and gates, whereby they made themselves known to one another. In the year 1210, twenty-four persons of the sect of the Waldenses were seized in the city of Paris, some of whom were imprisoned, and others committed to the flames. In the year 1334, the monks of the inquisition, who were deputed to search after the Waldenses, apprehended one hundred and fourteen of them at Paris, who were burnt alive, sustaining their torture with admirable fortitude. It is also related by the author of a work entitled “The Sea of Histories,” that in the year 1378, the persecution against the Waldenses continuing, a vast number of them were burnt in the place de Grave, in Paris. 14 These sanguinary proceedings, however, it would seem, were far from eradicating the heresy. For, two years after this, viz. in 1380, we find Francis Borelli, an inquisitorial monk, armed with a bull of pope Clement VII undertaking the persecution of the Waldenses in the same quarter. In the space of thirteen years, he delivered into the hands of the civil magistrates of Grenoble a hundred and fifty persons to be burned as heretics. And in the valley of Fraissiniere, he apprehended eighty more, who were also committed to the flames. 15, About the year 1370, a colony of the Waldensian youths of Dauphine sought a new settlement in Calabria, probably hoping there to enjoy, with less molestation, their religious privileges. Finding the soil fertile, and the region thinly peopled, they applied to the proprietors of the lands, and stipulated for a settlement among them. The lords of the country cheerfully granted their request, gave them the kindest reception, agreed with them on equitable terms, and let out to them parcels of land for cultivation. By their superior industry, the new colonists speedily fertilized and enriched their respective districts; and by their probity, peaceable manners, and punctuality in the payment of their rents, they ingratiated themselves with their landlords and neighbors in general. The priests alone were dissatisfied. They found they did not act like others in religious matters; they contributed nothing to the support of the church by masses for the dead, or other popish innovations, and they were offended.

In particular, they were chagrined at finding that certain foreign schoolmasters, who educated the children of these strangers, were highly respected and preferred to themselves—and that they received nothing from them except tithes, which were paid according to contract with their landlords. Concluding, therefore, that they must be heretics, they signified their intention to complain of them to the pope. The gentry, however, resisted that. “They are just and honest,” said they, “and have enriched all the country. Even ye priests have received important advantages from their industry. The tithes alone, which ye now receive, are so much greater than those which were formerly produced from these countries, that you are more than compensated for any losses you may sustain on other accounts. Perhaps the country from whence they came is not so devoted to the ceremonies of the Roman church; but as these people fear God, are generous to the poor, just and beneficent to all men, it is illiberal on your parts to force their consciences. Are they not a temperate, sober, discreet people, and peculiarly decent in their speech? Does any person ever hear them utter a blasphemous expression?”

This prudent counsel was not without its use. The priests, indeed, who felt, or imagined their interests were undermined by these new settlers, murmured, and gave vent to their mortification in private. But the lords of the country had sufficient discernment to estimate the value of their new tenants; and they protected them from the indignation of the clergy. The consequence was, that the Calabrian Waldenses enjoyed security, and the benefits of toleration, until the year 1560, when they formed an union with the church of Geneva, of which Calvin was then pastor. Their history previous to that union is dreadful, on account of the scenes of papal persecution that ensued; but it belongs to a subsequent period, and we must not here enter upon it.

During the period of which we are now treating, the Netherlands (Flanders) exhibited many shocking scenes of slaughter of the Waldenses.

It seems probable that when persecuted in France they retreated into that country, where also the intolerant zeal of inquisitors followed, and made dreadful havoc of them. Here they obtained a new appellation, viz. Turilupins, that is, the wolves of Turin. The explanation which their own friends give us of this term is, that being banished from the society of men, and driven to dwell with the beasts of the forest, they, in reference to the place whence they originated, designated them Turlupins, or Turilupins.

Our historian, Matthew Paris, informs us, in his Life of Henry III that one Robert Bougre, who had lived among the Waldenses, and professed their faith, apostatized from them, became a Dominican, and was appointed by the pope inquisitor general. This man, knowing their usual places of concealment, apprehended more than fifty of them, in the year 1236, and caused 161 them all to be burned or buried alive. But of the extremes to which this miscreant carried his cruelties, a tolerable notion may be formed from the singular occurrence, that even the court of Rome complained of his abusing the power with which he had been entrusted. He was accused of perverting the authority of his office, of punishing the innocent with the guilty, and of committing various atrocities, in consequence of which he was deprived of his office of inquisitor, and condemned to perpetual imprisonment. We are told by Le Sieur de la Popeliniere, who wrote a History of France, that the religion of the Waldenses spread itself throughout all the countries of Europe, even into Poland and Lithuania; and that ever since the year 1100, they had been propagating their doctrine, which differed but little from that of the modern Protestants. He adds that, notwithstanding the vigorous efforts that have been resorted to, by different princes and powers to suppress their doctrine, they had, even to his times, boldly and courageously maintained it. Vignier, before quoted, mentions, that when the Waldenses were driven from Picardy, through the violence of persecution, several of them retired into Poland. Hence we find, that in the year 1330, the Inquisition followed them there, and that numbers of them were put to death. Matthias Illyrius, in his “Catalogue of the Witnesses of the Truth,” says, he had lying before him the forms of the Inquisition made use of on that occasion. From these same writers, to whom may also be added the inquisitor Reinerius Saccho, we learn, that the persecutions which took place in the south of France, during the former part of the thirteenth century, drove the Waldenses also into various other countries. “In 1229 they had spread themselves in great numbers throughout all Italy. They had ten schools in Valcamonica alone, which were supported by pecuniary contributions in all their societies, and which contributions were transmitted into Lombardy.” Reinerius adds, that about the year 1250, the Waldenses had churches in Albania, Lombardy, Milan, in Romagna, Vincenza, Florence, and Val Spoletine; and, in the year 1280, there were a considerable number of Waldenses in Sicily. In all these places the sanguinary edicts of the Emperor Frederic II were continually suspended, like the sword of Damocles, over their heads. To these, also, were now added the rage of inquisitors and of papal constitutions, through which they were continually exposed to sufferings and misery. In Sicily in particular, the imperial fury raged against them—they were ordered to be treated with the greatest severity, that they might be banished, not only from the country, but from the earth. And throughout Italy, both Gregory IX and Honorius IV harassed and oppressed them with the most unrelenting barbarity, by means of the Inquisition — the living were, without mercy, committed to the hands of the executioner, their houses razed to the ground, their goods confiscated, and even the slumbering remains of the dead were dragged from their graves, and their bones committed to the flames. We are further informed by Reinerius Saccho, that in his time, the Waldenses had their churches at Constantinople and Philadelphia, in Sclavonia, Bulgaria, and Diagonitia. Yignier reports, that after the persecution of Picardy, they dispersed themselves into Livonia and Sarmatin. And, it is added by Matthew Paris, that they had spread themselves as far as Croatia and Dalmatia, where their profession prevailed to that degree, that they had won over several (Catholic) bishops to their party.

It is pleasing to find, that while the Waldenses were thus carrying the light of the gospel of Christ throughout the whole continent of Europe, a gleam of its celestial brightness burst upon our own country, and, in some small degree, served to irradiate the gloom in which it was enveloped. In a former section, we have noticed the emigration of thirty of the Waldenses into England, who were cruelly persecuted and destroyed at Oxford in the year 1166. John Bale, in his Chronicle of London, mentions a person who was burnt at London, in 1210, whose only crime was, that he was tainted with the faith of the Waldenses. But the wars that were carried on against the Albigenses in the south of France about this time, contributed very much to the propagation of the principles of the Waldenses in this country, as indeed, appears from the testimony of Thuanus, lately adduced. For, independent of the contiguity of the two countries, there were circumstances of a political nature that tended very much to keep up the intercourse between them. Guienne was at that time in the possession of the English — to which may be added, that Raymond, Earl of Toulouse, the great patron and protector of the Albigenses, was brother-in-law to the King of England; in consequence of which alliance, our countrymen were frequently employed in assisting the subjects of Raymond in their wars.

That the doctrines of the Waldenses had begun to spread themselves here about the close of the thirteenth century, is sufficiently obvious from a fact noticed by Archbishop Usher, viz. that in the reign of Henry III “the orders of the Friars Minorites came into England to suppress the Waldensian heresy.”

The most remarkable character that appears in the annals of the English ecclesiastical history during this period, was Robert Greathead, 20 bishop of Lincoln. He was born about the year 1175, at Stradbrook, in the county of Suffolk, and appears to have been a person of obscure parentage. His studies, however, were prosecuted at the University of Oxford, where he acquired an intimate acquaintance with the Greek and Hebrew languages; after which he went to Paris, at that time the first seminary in Europe, where he became a perfect master of the French language. Returning to his native country, he was, in the year 1235, elected, by the dean and chapter, bishop of Lincoln, and King Henry III, ratified the choice. He seems to have possessed, even from his youth, much seriousness of mind; and though at that period of life, immersed in the darkness and superstitions of the age, he was no sooner inducted to his office than he began to reform abuses. He convened the clergy of his diocese at stated times, to whom he preached, and urged them to the duties which devolved upon them from their office. But as the latter had no ear to give to these things, the bishop soon began to be involved in litigations with the monks and other popish agents. In the year 1247, two persons of the Franciscan order were sent into England to extort money for the pope. They applied to the prelates and abbots, but, as it would seem, not with all the success that was wished. Greathead was amazed at the pomp and insolence of these friars, who demanded six thousand marks as the contribution of the diocese of Lincoln, at the same time giving him to understand that they were vested with the pope’s bull. “Friars,” said he, “with all reverence to his holiness be it spoken, the denland is as dishonorable as it is impracticable. The whole body of the clergy and people are concerned in it equally with myself. To give a definite answer, in an instant, to such a demand, before the sense of the kingdom is taken upon it, would on my part be rash and absurd.”

Circumstances of this kind, in process of time, began to open the eyes of the bishop to the domineering influence of the court of Rome. Another thing which struck his mind forcibly was, that in going through his diocese, he found the pope had, by means of his letters, introduced into all the churches, where opulent benefices were to be enjoyed, a set of lazy Italians, who neither understood the language of the country, nor possessed either ability or inclination to instruct the people. These enormities became the objects of his detestation. When the papal bulls, intended to introduce some new evil, were put into his hands, he would indignantly cast them from him, and absolutely refuse compliance with them, saying, that he should prove himself the friend of Satan, were he to commit the care of souls to foreigners. Pope Innocent, however, persevering in the same line of conduct, magisterially ordered him to admit an Italian, totally ignorant of the English language, to a very rich benefice in the diocese of Lincoln; and the bishop refusing to comply, the former suspended him from his functions. But Greathead treated the papal mandate with contempt, and continued to discharge his episcopal duties.

In the year 1253, the pope was desirous of preferring his own nephew, an Italian youth, to a rich benefice in the cathedral of Lincoln; and, for this purpose, he, by letter, enjoined the bishop to give him the first canonry that should be vacant. This was to be done by provision, for that was the term employed by the pontiff when he undertook to provide beforehand a successor to a benefice; and on this occasion he seems to have been determined to intimidate the bishop into compliance. He declared that any other disposal of the canonry should be null and void, and that he would excommunicate every one that should dare to disobey his injunction. But Greathead, resolving not to comply, wrote a letter on this occasion, which reflects the highest honor on his memory. “Next to the sin of antichrist,” says he, “which shall be in the latter times, nothing can be more contrary to the doctrine of Christ, than to destroy men’s souls, by defrauding them of the benefit of the pastoral office. Those who minister to their own carnal lusts, by means of the milk and wool of the sheep of Christ, and do not strive to promote the salvation of the flock, in the pastoral office, are guilty of destroying the souls of men. Two atrocious evils are in this way committed—they sin against God himself, who is essentially good, and also against the image of God in man, which, by the reception of his grace, becomes partaker of the divine nature. For the holy apostolic see to be accessory to such wickedness, would be a monstrous abuse of power, and argue an entire separation from the glorious kingdom of Christ, and a participation with the two powers of darkness, (meaning probably the devil and Antichrist.) No man can obey such mandates with a good conscience, even though they were seconded by the high order of angels themselves; on the contrary, every faithful Christian ought to oppose them with all his might.”

When this epistle reached the hands of the pope, it roused his indignation to the highest pitch. “Who,” said he, “is this old dotard, that dares to judge my actions.” By Peter and Paul, if I were not restrained by my generosity, I would make him an example and a spectacle to all mankind. Is not the King of England my vassal and my slave? And if I gave the word, would he not throw him into prison and lead him with disgrace?” The cardinals, however, who saw the danger into which the pontiff was about to plunge himself by his rashness, strove to moderate his resentment. One Giles, a Spanish cardinal, in particular, thus addressed him. “It is not expedient for you to proceed against the bishop in that violent manner; for, what he says is certainly true, nor can we with decency condemn him. He is a holy man—much more so than we ourselves are—a man of admirable genius, and of the most exemplary morals—no prelate in Christendom is thought to excel him. It is probable, that by this time the truths expressed in his letter are known to many, and they will excite many against us. The clergy, both in France and England, know the character of the man, nor is it possible to fix any stigma upon him. He is understood to be a great philosopher, an accomplished scholar in Latin and Greek literature, zealous in the administration of justice, a theological lecturer in the schools, a popular preacher, a friend to chastity, and the enemy of simony.” In these sentiments Giles was seconded by others, and the whole conclave of cardinals advised the pope to wink at these transactions, lest a tumult should arise in the church; for, said they, “it is an evident truth that a revolt from the church of Rome, will one day take place in Christendom.”

But the rage of Innocent IV was not to be allayed; he excommunicated the bishop of Lincoln, and appointed Albert, one of his nuncios, to succeed him. Greathead, supported by a conviction of the rectitude of his conduct, referred his appeal to the tribunal of Christ, and paid no regard to the decree; and what the cardinals foresaw, was realized in the event—the pope’s mandate was universally neglected, and the bishop remained in quiet possession of his dignity.

But this venerable prelate was now fast advancing towards the end of his labors, and in the year 1258, he died (Oct. 9th) at his palace at Buckden.

When the pope heard of his death, he exultantly exclaimed, “I rejoice, and let every true son of the church of Rome rejoice with me, that my great enemy is removed.” He ordered a letter to be written to the King of England, requiring him to cause the bishop’s body to be taken up, cast out of the church, and burned. The cardinals, however, resisted his project; and the letter, though written, was never sent, owing, probably, to the declining state of the pontiff’s health, for he died in the following year.

Matthew Paris, the monk of St. Alban’s, though superstitiously attached to the See of Rome, and not a little prejudiced against the Bishop of Lincoln, on account of the severity with which he treated the monastic orders, has furnished a character of Greathead so honorable, that it deserves to be recorded. “The holy bishop Robert,” says he, “departed this world, which he never loved, and which was always to him as a place of banishment. He was the open reprover of my lord the pope, and of the king, as well as of the prelates. He was the corrector of monks, the director of priests, the instructor of the clergy, the patron of scholars, a preacher to the laity, the punisher of incontinence, the diligent investigator of various writings, and the scourge of lazy and selfish Romanists, whom he heartily despised. In regard to temporal concerns, he was liberal, copious, polite, cheerful, and affable — in spiritual things he was devout, humble, and contrite— in the execution of his episcopal office he was diligent, venerable, indefatigable.” Greathead’s doctrinal sentiments, considering the darkness of the age in which his lot was cast, appear to have been remarkable for their purity and simplicity. The following is his view of the important article ofDIVINE GRACE. “Grace,” says he, “is that good pleasure of God whereby he is pleased to bestow upon us what we have not deserved, and the gift is for our advantage and not his. Hence it is very clear, that all the good we possess, whether it be natural, or freely conferred afterwards, proceeds from the grace of God; because there is no good thing, the existence of which he does not will; and for God to will anything is to do it; therefore there can be no good of which he is not the author. He turns the human will from evil, and converts it to good, causing it to persevere in the same.”

Several of his manuscript sermons, it seems, are still extant in the cathedral church of York. One of them is founded upon Luke 6:20. Blessed are ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of heaven. In discussing the subject, he undertakes to describe the poverty recommended in the text; which, by comparing the words with the parallel place in Matthew 5:8, he finds to be poverty of spirit. This poverty, he tells us, is wrought in the heart of the elect, by the Holy Spirit — its foundation is laid in real humility; which disposes a man to feel that he has nothing but what he has received from above. But that is not all — for, as he observes, humility in this view belonged to Adam before he fell — the humility of a sinner hath a still deeper root. The humble man not only sees that he has nothing in himself, but he is stripped of all desire to possess in himself the springs of selfexaltation.

Self-condemned and corrupt before God, he despairs of help from his own powers, and finds all he wants in Him, who is the true life, wisdom, and health, and indeed his all in all, even the incarnate Son of God, who condescended to come into our vale of sin and misery, that he might raise us from their depths. By leaning on him alone, every real Christian rises into true life and peace and joy. He lives in his life—sees light in his light—is invigorated with his warmth— grows in his strength — and leaning upon the Beloved, his soul ascends upwards. The lower he sinks in humility, the higher he rises towards God. He is sensible that he not only is nothing in himself, but that he also has lost what he had gratuitously received, has precipitated himself into misery, and so subjected himself to the slavery of the devil; and lastly, that he has no internal resources for recovery. Thus he is induced to place his whole dependence on the Lord Jesus Christ, to abhor himself, and always to prefer others as better than himself. This leads him “to take the lowest seat” as his own proper place.

He then calls upon the man who professes to be the subject of humility, earnestly to examine himself, how far he demonstrates in his temper and conduct, this fruit of the Spirit; and even should he find some evidences of it in his soul, to beware that he be not inflated with the discovery, because he ought to know that it is only of God that he is what he is— and that he ought no more to boast of himself, than the refulgent colors of the prism should glory in that splendor which they derive wholly from the solar rays. He observes that the temptations to self-complacency are the effect of Satanic injections—and that it behooves him who would not be deceiving himself to see whether he has the genuine marks of humility in his practice—whether, for instance, he can bear to be rebuked by an inferior—whether he is not rendered insolent by honors—whether he is not inflated by praise—whether among equals he is the first to labor, and the last to exalt himself—whether he can recompense blessings for curses and good for evil. By such methods of self-examination he is to check the ebullitions of vain glory, with which the tempter is apt to inspire those who seem to have made some proficiency in the divine life. If that proficiency be real, let them take care never to conceive of it as something separate from Christ. He alone, dwelling in them by his Spirit, produces all that is good, and to Him alone the praise belongs.

SECTION A view of the state of Religion in England and Bohemia during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, with sketches of the history of Wickliff, the Lollards, John Huss, and Jerome of Prague; including a concise account of the “Unitas Fratrum,” or United Bohemian Brethren, till the times of Luther. AN attentive reader of the preceding pages will have observed that when the governments of France and Spain lent their aid to second the views of the court of Rome, in expelling the Waldenses and Albigenses from their respective countries, the persecuted followers of Jesus Christ found an asylum in Bohemia, where their principles took deep root, and their numbers multiplied exceedingly. 1 As it is intended in this section to notice a little more particularly the progress of these principles, both in that kingdom and in our own country, at this interesting period, I must trespass upon the reader’s patience by laying before him a short extract from the impartial Thuanus, which, while it serves to refresh his memory by a recapitulation of what has already been related, will also furnish an introduction to what is to follow. “PETER WALDO, a rich citizen of Lyons, about the year of Christ 1170, gave name to the Vaudois or Waldenses. This man (as has been recorded by Guy de Perpignan, bishop of Elna, who exercised the office of inquisitor against the Waldenses) leaving his house and estate, had entirely devoted himself to the profession of the gospel, and had procured the writings of the prophets and apostles to be translated into the language of the country, together with several testimonies from the primitive fathers; all which having well fixed in his mind, and trusting to his natural parts, he took up the office of preaching, and interpreted the gospel to the common people in the streets. And when in a short time, he had got about him a good number of followers, he sent them out into all parts, as disciples, to propagate the gospel. They, as being generally unlearned, having easily fallen into various errors, were cited by the archbishop of Lyons; and though they were, as he reports, convicted, yet they fortified themselves with mere obstinacy, saying, that in religious affairs, God, and not man, was to be obeyed. Being for this cut off from the church, and appealing to the pope, they were, in the council immediately preceding that of Lateran, condemned as altogether pertinacious and schismatical: from whence, becoming hated and execrated by all men, they wandered about without a home, and spread themselves up and down in Languedoc, Lombardy, and especially amongst the Alps, where they lay concealed and secure for many years. They were charged with these tenets—that the church of Rome, because it renounced the true faith of Christ was the whore of Babylon, and that barren tree which Christ himself cursed, and commanded to be plucked up— that consequently no obedience was to be paid to the pope, or to the bishops, who maintain her errors—that a monastic life was the sink and dungeon of the church; the vows of which were vain, and served only to promote the vile love of boys—that the orders of the priesthood were marks of the great beast mentioned in the Revelation—that the fire of purgatory, the solemn mass, the consecration-days of churches, the worship of saints, and propitiations for the dead, were the devices of Satan. Besides these principal and authentic heads of their doctrine, others were pretended, relating to marriage, the resurrection, the state of the soul after death, and to meats. Peter Waldo, therefore, their leader, quitting his country, came into the Netherlands, and having gained many followers in that province, which is now called Picardy, he removed from thence into Germany; and after a long abode amongst the Vandal cities, settled at last in Bohemia, where, even at this day, the professors of that doctrine are from thence called Picards.

Waldo had a companion named Arnold, who by a different rout fell into Languedoc, and fixed himself at Alby, formerly called Alba of the Helvians, from whence came the Albigenses, who in a little time spread themselves amongst the people of Toulouse, Rovergue, Le Quercy, and Agen. Arnold was succeeded by Esperon and Joseph, and from these Gregory IX denominated them Arnoldists, Esperonites, and Josephists, and also Gazars, as all heretics at this day are called throughout Germany and the northern countries; which name is supposed to be taken from the emperor Leo III named Gazar, whom the Roman pontiffs accused beyond all other men of sacrilege and erroneous principles; though in other books they are styled the Pure, (Puritans) which name is also given to such as pretend to a purer doctrine in England. The same people are also called Leonines, from that Leo, who is nevertheless represented as a just and prudent prince, by Zonaras himself, who yet charges him with heretical pravity. He, at the persuasion of Theodotus a monk, had removed out of the churches all pictures and statues, which he considered as the fuel of impiety, and as traps to catch the ignorant multitude, by which God was offended; for which reason he was called the enemy of images. Though others imagine them to be rather called Leonines from one Leo, a Frenchman, of that sect, because Leo the emperor was too far distant from those times and places. Thus, however, they were nicknamed, either from their authors or favorers. From the place they were also styled Poor Men of Lyons, Albigenses, and in different quarters, for different causes, Tramontanes, Paterines, Lollards, Turlupins, and lastly Chaignards. As they carried divers faces, though their tails were tied together, (as pope Gregory IX expresses it, because they inveighed too vehemently against the wealth, pride, and vices of the popes, and alienated the people by degrees from their obedience to them) Innocent III used at first the spiritual sword against them, sending to the Albigenses twelve abbots of the Cistercian order, and after them Diego, bishop of Oxford, who carried with him that Dominic who afterwards founded the Dominican order. But when he found little success that way, laying aside the spiritual sword he drew the iron one, and made Leopold the sixth, Duke of Austria, for Germany, and Simon of Montfort, for France, commanders in the holy war, to whom many others joined themselves. Though from that time they were persecuted from place to place, yet at intervals there appeared some who frequently revived their doctrine; as John Wickliff, in England, John Huss, and Jerome of Prague, in Bohemia. And in our age, since the general reception of Luther’s doctrine, their scattered remains began to re-unite, and with the increase of Luther’s name to gather strength and authority, especially in the regions of the Alps and the adjacent provinces.” 2 Thus far Thuanus: we now proceed.

The usurpations of the court of Rome had reached their highest pitch about the thirteenth or fourteenth century. That astonishing system of spiritual tyranny had drawn within its vortex almost the whole government of England. The pope’s haughty legate, spurning at all law and equity, made even the ministers of justice to tremble at his tribunal; parliaments were overawed, and sovereigns obliged to temporize, while the lawless ecclesiastic, entrenched behind the authority of councils and decrees, set at naught the civil power, and opened an asylum to any, even the most profligate, disturbers of society. In the mean time, the taxes collected under various pretexts, by the agents of the See of Rome, amounted to five times as much as the taxes paid to the king!

The insatiable avarice and insupportable tyranny of the court of Rome, had given such universal disgust, that a bold attack made about this time on the authority of that court, and the doctrines of that church, was, at first, more successful than could have been expected, in that dark and superstitious age. This attack was made by the famous John Wickliff, who was one of the best and most learned men of the age in which he flourished. His reputation for learning, piety, and virtue, was so great, that Archbishop Islep appointed him the first warden of Canterbury college, Oxford, in 1865. His lectures in divinity which he read in that university, were much admired, though in these lectures he treated the clergy, and particularly the mendicant friars, with no little freedom and severity. A discourse which he published against the pope’s demand of homage and tribute from Edward III for the kingdom of England, recommended him so much to that prince, that the latter bestowed upon him several benefices, and employed him in several embassies. In one of these embassies to the court of Rome, in 1374, he discovered so many of the corruptions of that court, and of the errors of that church, that he became more bold and more severe in his censures of those errors and corruptions. He even proceeded so far as to call the pope antichrist, to deny his supremacy, and to expose his intolerable tyranny and extortions in the strongest colors. This, as might naturally have been expected, drew upon him the indignation of his holiness, and involved him in various troubles. Pope Gregory XI published several thundering bulls against him, in 1377, commanding him to be seized, imprisoned, and brought to trial for his damnable heresies. The affection of the people, and the favor of the court, protected him from imprisonment; but he found it necessary to appear before Simon Sudbury, archbishop of Canterbury, and William Courthey, bishop of London, who had been appointed his judges by the pope. At this appearance he had the honor to be accompanied by two of the greatest men in the kingdom, John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, and Lord Henry Percy, marshal of England.

These two lords demanded a chair for Wickliff; which being denied by the bishop of London, some very angry words passed between that prelate and the Duke of Lancaster; which excited so violent a tumult in the court, that it broke up in great confusion, without doing any business. Wickliff made a second appearance before the papal commissioners at Lambeth, where he was attended by so great a body of the citizens of London, that his judges were deterred from pronouncing any sentence against him; and their commission soon after terminated by the death of the pope, March 27, 1378.

It is very difficult to discover, with certainty and precision, what were the real sentiments, in some particulars, of this illustrious champion of truth and liberty, against the errors and tyranny of the church of Rome; because he seems, in some things, to have changed his mind; and because certain tenets were imputed to him by his adversaries which he did not hold. It very plainly appears from his writings, that the doctrines which he taught were very nearly the same with those which were propagated by our more successful reformers in the sixteenth century.

The prosecution against Wickliff was suspended for some time, by the schism in the papacy which succeeded the death of Gregory XI and by the insurrection of the Commons in England, which threw all things into confusion. In this tumult, archbishop Sudbury, one of his most zealous adversaries, was beheaded by the insurgents on Tower-hill, June 14, 1381.

William Courtney, bishop of London, was promoted to the primacy by a bull of pope Urban VI (who had been acknowledged in England to be the lawful pope,) dated the 8th of September in the same year. As soon as the insurrection of the Commons was quelled, and the public tranquillity restored, the new primate applied with great zeal to the suppression of the heretical opinions, as he esteemed them, which were propagated by Wickliff and his followers. With this view, he assembled a council of the bishops of his province, and many doctors of divinity, and of the civil and canon law, in the priory of the preaching friars, London, May 17, 1382.

Before this council he submitted twenty-four opinions, extracted from the writings of Wickliff, for their examination; and the council unanimously declared ten of these opinions heretical, and fourteen of them erroneous.

Several suspected persons were then brought before the council, particularly Nicholas Hereford and Philip Rapyngdon, doctors in divinity, and John Ayshton, A.M. and commanded to declare their sentiments of these opinions. Their declarations appearing to the council evasive and unsatisfactory, they were pronounced to be convicted of heresy. The ancient historian Henry Knyghton relates, that Wickliff was brought before this council, and that he made a kind of recantation of his heretical opinions. But as nothing of this appears in the record, it is probably a mistake, if not a calumny. On the day after the conclusion of this council, there was a solemn procession in London; after which Dr. Kinyghan, a Carmelite friar, preached to the people, and published the doctrines which had been condemned; declaring, that all persons who taught, favored, or believed any of these doctrines, were excommunicated heretics. To give the greater weight to the decrees of this council, the clergy prevailed upon the king to publish a proclamation, July 12, authorizing and commanding the bishops to seize and imprison all persons who were suspected of holding any of the doctrines which had been condemned.

The doctrines of Wickliff had for some years made a mighty noise in the university of Oxford, where they were first published, and where they had many violent opposers, and many zealous advocates. Dr. Berton, who was chancellor of the University in 1381, and Dr. Stokes, were at the head of the former, and Dr. Hereford and Dr. Rapyngdon at the head of the latter.

The Archbishop of Canterbury sent the decrees of his late council to Oxford, commanding Dr. Stokes to publish them at St. Frideswyde’s church, on Corpus-Christi day; and Dr. Rigge, the chancellor of the University, to assist and protect him in performing that office. Dr. Philip Rapyngdon had been appointed to preach at that church on that day, and he declaimed with great vehemence against the corruptions of the church, and in defense of the doctrines of Wickliff; and his sermon was heard with approbation. But when Dr. Stokes attempted to publish the decrees of the council of London, he was interrupted with clamors and reproaches, which obliged him to desist, without having received any countenance or protection from the chancellor or proctors, who were secret favorers of the new opinions. For this negligence they were summoned to appear before Archbishop Courtney, who treated them very roughly, and by threats prevailed upon them to return to Oxford, and to publish the decrees of the council of London, both in Latin and English, first in St. Mary’s church, and afterwards in the schools.

While the doctrines of Wickliff were propagated and opposed with so much zeal, at Oxford and other places, he, being in a declining state of health, resided, during the two last years of his life, at his living of Lutterworth, in Leicestershire, employed in finishing his translation of the Bible, and other works. Being seized with a stroke of the palsy, which deprived him of his speech, December 28, 1384, he expired on the last day of that year. 3 As the clergy had hated and persecuted him with great violence during his life, they exulted with indecent joy at his disease and death, ascribing them to the immediate vengeance of Heaven for his heresy. “On the day of St. Thomas the Martyr, Archbishop of Canterbury, says Walsingham, a contemporary historian, that limb of the devil, enemy of the church, deceiver of the people, idol of heretics, mirror of hypocrites, author of schisms, sower of hatred, and inventor of lies, John Wickliff, was, by the immediate judgment of God, suddenly struck with a palsy, which seized all the members of his body, when he was ready, as they say, to vomit forth his blasphemies against the blessed St. Thomas, in a sermon which he had prepared to preach that day.” But these reproaches do honor to his memory, as they were brought upon him by his vigorous efforts to deliver his countrymen from the errors, superstitions, and extortions of the Church of Rome.

Though the joy of the clergy at the death of Wickliff was very great, it was not of long duration. They soon found, that his doctrines had not died with him, but were propagated with great zeal, and no little success, by his followers, who were commonly called Lollards. 4 Many of those who were preachers traveled up and down the country on foot, in a very plain dress, declaiming with great vehemence against the corruptions of the church, and the vices of the clergy. These preachers were not only admired and followed by the common people, but were favored and protected by several persons of high rank and great power, particularly by the Duke of Lancaster, the lords Percy, Latimer, Clifford, Hilton, and others. By the zeal, activity, and eloquence of the preachers, under the protection of these great men, the new doctrines, as they were called, gained ground so fast, that, as a contemporary historian of the best credit affirms, “more than one half of the people of England, in a few years, became Lollards.” The same historian, who was a clergyman, and a most inveterate enemy to the Lollards, acknowledges, that as Wickliff excelled all the learned men of his age in disputation, so some of his followers, in a very little time, became very eloquent preachers and very powerful disputants; which he ascribes to the assistance of the devil, who, he says, took possession of them as soon as they became Lollards.

The clergy, alarmed and enraged at this rapid progress of the new opinions, attempted to put a stop to it by violence and persecution, which have been often employed by power against truth. They procured, or at least promulgated, a statute, which still appears in our statute-book, (though the Commons, it is said, never gave their assent to it,) empowering and commanding all sheriffs to seize and imprison all preachers of heresy.

They also prevailed upon the king, in 1887, to grant a commission to certain persons to seize all the books and writings of John Wickliff, Nicholas Hereford, John Ayshton, and other heretical writers, and to imprison all who transcribed, sold, bought, or concealed such books. By these methods the clergy hoped to interrupt the preaching and writing of the reforming teachers, by which they chiefly propagated their opinions.

But the contemporary historian Knyghton observes, with regret, “that these laws and edicts were but slowly and faintly executed, because the time of correction was not yet come.”

Though the violent factions amongst the nobility, and the general animosity of the laity against the clergy, on account of their excessive power and riches, prevented for a time a rigorous execution of the penal statutes against heretics; several persons were apprehended and tried upon these statutes. Some of them, as particularly Hereford, Ayshton, and Rapyngdon, who had been the most zealous propagators of Wickliff’s doctrines, were, by threats and promises, prevailed upon to make a kind of recantation, and to desist from preaching these doctrines. Others escaped with slight censures, by giving artful, evasive explanations of their tenets.

In general it may be observed, that the followers of Wickliff were not very ambitious of the crown of martyrdom; and none of them were capitally punished in the reign of Richard II.

In spite of all the laws that had been made in England against the tyrannical usurpations of the court of Rome, they still continued, or rather increased.

When a clerk had obtained a sentence in favor of his presentation to a church in the king’s court, and the bishop of the diocese had inducted him in consequence of that sentence, it was usual for the pope, on the complaint of the losing party, to excommunicate the bishop. When an English bishop had by any means offended his holiness, he sometimes punished him, by translating him to a foreign see, without his own consent, or that of the king. Upon a complaint of these papal usurpations by the Commons, in a parliament at Winchester, in 1392, a very severe law was made for the punishment of those who solicited, or brought into the kingdom, any papal bulls of excommunication, translation, or other thing against the rights and dignity of the crown. These contests between the king and parliament of England and the court of Rome, encouraged the Lollards to make a bold and direct attack on the established church.

Accordingly, they presented to a parliament, which was held by the Duke of York, the king being in Ireland, at Westminster, in 1394, a remonstrance containing twelve articles of complaint against the church and clergy; praying for redress and reformation. In this remonstrance, they complain chiefly of the exorbitant power, excessive wealth, and profligate lives of the clergy, which last they ascribe chiefly to their vows of celibacy;—of transubstantiation and the superstitious practices which the belief of it produced; — of prayers for the dead;—of the worship of images;—of pilgrimages;—of auricular confession, and its consequences;—and of several other particulars in which the present Protestant churches differ from the church of Rome. What reception this remonstrance met with from the parliament, we are not informed. About the same time the Lollards published several satirical papers, painting the deceitful arts, abominable vices, and absurd opinions of the clergy in very strong colors; which excited both the contempt and hatred of the people against them. Some of these papers, written with much asperity, and no little wit, were pasted up on the most public places in London and Westminster.

The clergy were so much alarmed at these bold attacks, that they dispatched the archbishop of York, the bishop of London, and several other commissioners, to the king then in Ireland, to entreat him to return immediately into England, to protect the church, which was in danger of destruction. “As soon,” says a contemporary historian, “as the king heard the representation of the commissioners, being inspired with the Divine Spirit, he hastened into England, thinking it more necessary to defend the church than to conquer kingdoms.” On his arrival, he called before him the lords Clifford, Latimer, Montague, and other great men who favored the Lollards, and threatened them with immediate death, if they gave any further encouragement to heretical preachers. Intimidated by these threats, they complied with the king’s desire, and withdrew their protection.

Several of the Lollard preachers, discouraged by this defection of their patrons, soon after recanted their opinions, and returned into the bosom of the church. Thomas Arundel, archbishop of York, who was a most violent enemy to the Lollards, obliged those in his province who recanted, to take the following curious oath, which is given in the original language and spelling: “I—, before you, worshipful fader and lord archbishop of Yhork, and your clergy, with my free will and full avysed, swere to God and all his seyntes, upon this holy gospel, that fro this day forthword, I shall worship images, with praying and offering unto them, in the worship of the saints, that they may be made after; and also, I shall never more despise pylgremage, ne states of holy chyrche, in no degre. And also I shall be buxum to the laws of holy chyrche, and to yhowe as to myn archbishop, and myn other ordinaries and curates, and keep the laws up my power and meyntein them. And also, I shall never more meyntein, ne techen, ne defenden, errors, conclusions, ne techeng of the Lollards, ne swych conclusions and techengs that men clopeth Lollards doctrine; ne shall her books, ne swych books, ne hem or ony suspect or diffamed of Lollardary, receyve or company with aft, willingly, or defend in tho matters: and if I know any swych, I shall, with all the hast that I may, do yhowe, or els your nex officers, to wyten, and of ther bokes, etc.” The kingdom of Bohemia, is, in point of territorial surface, the most elevated ground, the most mountainous, and by nature the strongest in Germany. Its inhabitants too have ever been distinguished by the loftiness of their spirit, and the rigor and success of their struggles for civil and religious liberty. The country is almost surrounded by the mountains of the famous Hyrcanian forest, whose sides, broken into many sloping ridges, intersect this lofty and spacious amphitheater, and form a landscape bold, various, and of great beauty. The metropolis of the country is Prague, a city of great extent, stretching along the banks, and on either side of the river Mulda, adorned with many sumptuous edifices, and particularly two strong castles, one of which was the residence of the ancient Bohemian kings. The ancient inhabitants are represented by contemporary historians, as a people of a ruddy complexion, and of enormous stature and muscular strength; in their dispositions intrepid, fierce, proud, quick in resenting injuries, of a haughty deportment, lovers of a rude magnificence and pomp, and naturally addicted to revels and intemperance. The native language of Bohemia is the Sclavonic, which also appears to have been the mother tongue of the Tartars, and their offspring the Turks, and of all the nations inhabiting those regions which extend from the northern parts of Russia to Turkey in Europe. The authority of the church of Rome was never so great and general as entirely to banish from the nations of Europe a spirit of inquiry, or the love of knowledge. During the thickest darkness of the middle ages, a star appeared here and there in the firmament, which reflected the light of ancient times, and formed a presage, that although the sun of science was set, it would return to enlighten bewildered nations. We have seen that so early as the eighth century, Claude of Turin sowed the seeds of reformation in the valleys of Piedmont, whence they were gradually transplanted into other countries. In the thirteenth century, the Waldenses or Albigenses, names almost indiscriminately applied to the disciples of Claude, were multiplied throughout France to an astonishing degree; and when scattered by the persecuting power of Rome, they were driven into Bohemia, Livonia, and Poland, in the former of which places we learn that there were no less than eighty thousand of them at the commencement of the fourteenth century.

We are informed by Sleidan, that the Bohemians were divided, on the article of religion, into three classes, or sects. The first were such as acknowledged the pope of Rome to be head of the church, and vicar of Jesus Christ; the second were those that received the eucharist in both kinds, and in celebrating mass, read some things in the vulgar tongue, but in all other matters differ nothing from the church of Rome; the third were those who vent by the name of Picards or Beghardi —these called the pope of Rome and all his party antichrist, and the whore that is described in the Revelation, (chapter 17) They admitted, says he, of nothing but the Bible, as the ground of their doctrine; they chose their own priests and bishops, denied marriages to no man, performed no offices for the dead, and had but very few holidays and ceremonies. 7 It is obvious, therefore, that the latter class alone were the genuine Waldenses, and that the second were a species of dissenting-conformists, differing but little from our English episcopalians. It is proper the reader should keep this distinction clearly in view; he will otherwise fall into a mistake which is very prevalent, respecting the principles of John Huss and Jerome of Prague, who are generally supposed to have belonged to the sect of the Waldenses, though, in fact, they ranked with the second class mentioned by Sleidan, and never gave up the communion of the church of Rome. They were in Bohemia what Wickliff was in England, members of the established church, dissatisfied with its corruptions, and strenuous advocates for a reform both in its doctrine and discipline, like many of the evangelical clergy in our day, but without the virtue of dissenting from its communion, and of bearing a public and decided testimony to its antichristian spirit and constitution. The whole of the history of these Reformers, which is so circumstantially given by L’Enfant, in his history of the council of Constance, and with such demonstrable impartiality, affords unquestionable proof of the truth of this observation. When or by whom the gospel was first preached in Bohemia, is a very doubtful point. That Paul preached the Gospel in Illyricum, and that Titus visited Dalmatia, are things capable of proof from Romans 15:19—2 Timothy 4:10. And hence the Bohemians infer, that it was preached in all the countries of Sclavonia in the first ages of Christianity. 9 They say that St. Jerome, a native of Illyricum, translated the Scriptures into his native tongue, and that all the nations of Sclavonian extraction use that translation to this day, just as the Latin church use the Vulgate; and further, that their bishops and martyrs are mentioned in the early ages of the church. But whatever of truth there may be in this, it is certain that Bohemia partook of the general corruption, and was immersed in darkness and superstition, when Waldo and his friends sought an asylum in that kingdom, and in the year 1176 formed a colony at Saltz and Laun, on the river Eger. These Waldenses found the Bohemians tenacious of the rites and ceremonies of the Greek church, which are scarcely less superstitious than those of the church of Rome; but they endeavored to convince them of their defects of the religious exercises, and introduced among them the knowledge of the Christian faith in its purity, according to the word of God. 10 Popery was not fully established in Bohemia till the fourteenth century, and then not by the consent of the Bohemians, but by the power and artifice of the Emperor Charles IV. Two of his chaplains endeavored to persuade his Majesty to curb the pope and reform the church, but they were both banished for their officious zeal. One of them, whose name was Janovius, and had studied at Paris, being a person of piety and erudition, was a very hearty friend to reform, and both preached and published against the antichristian hypocrisy of the times: but as he knew the world, and, by residing at court, thoroughly understood the motives and views of great men, he comforted his friends with these remarkable words just before he expired. “The fury of the enemies of truth now prevails against us, but it will not always be so: a mean people will arise without sword or power, and against them they will never be able to prevail.” A saying full of wisdom, and confirmed by the experience of ages; for reformation of abuses rarely proceeds from those that are in possession of power. By the banishment of these two eminent men, the voice of reform was silenced.

Ignorance, profligacy, and vice, prevailed amongst all orders of men in the national church: the Inquisition was introduced for the purpose of enforcing despotism in the civil government, and uniformity of opinion in matters of religion. The consequence was, that multitudes withdrew themselves from the public places of worship, and followed the dictates of their own consciences by worshipping God in private houses, woods, and caves. Here they were persecuted, dragooned, drowned, and killed; and thus matters went on till the appearance of John Huss, and Jerome of Prague. It was in the latter part of the life of Wickliff, that king Richard II of England married Ann, the sister of Winceslaus, king of Bohemia; and in consequence of this family alliance, a free intercourse was opened between the two kingdoms. About the same time John Huss, who had been a student in the University of Prague, where he had taken his degrees, became a zealous disciple of Wickliff. He was born in the village of Hussinetz, in 1378, of parents not in affluent circumstances; at the age of twenty he was raised to the dignity of professor in the University of Prague, and in 1400 appointed preacher in one of the largest churches of that city. He was a person of eminent abilities, and of still more eminent zeal; his talents were popular, his life irreproachable, and his manners the most affable and engaging. He was the idol of the populace; but in proportion as he attracted their esteem and regard, he drew upon himself the execration of the priests.

Peter Payne, principal of Edmund Hall, in the University of Oxford, a man equally distinguished for his talents and his inflexible opposition to the friars, appears to have been the instrument of first conveying into Bohemia the writings of our countryman Wickliff, of which he was a great admirer.

Payne is said to have been a good disputant, and to have signalized himself in a controversy with Walden, the Carmelite, on the subjects of pilgrimage, the eucharist, images, and relicts, etc., etc. — in consequence of which he became so obnoxious to the clergy, that he was obliged to quit the University and flee into Bohemia, where he carried with him a number of Wickliff’s tracts, which were highly esteemed by Huss, Jerome, and the greater part of the University of Prague. The introduction of Wickliff’s writings, however, into that University, gave great offense to the Archbishop of Prague, who issued his orders that every person that was in possession of them should bring the books to him, in order that such as contained any thing heretical might be burnt! And we are accordingly told that two hundred volumes of them, finely written, and adorned with costly covers and gold borders, probably belonging to some of the nobility, were committed to the flames, by Archbishop Sbynko; a conduct which excited great disgust in the minds of the students of the University of Prague, and of Huss in particular, who took every opportunity to persuade the members of the University that the conduct of the archbishop was an infringement on the rights, liberties, and privileges of their Seminary, whose members had a right to read all sorts of books without molestation.

Huss and his friends consequently appealed from the mandate of the archbishop to Gregory XII who was then acknowledged pope in Germany; and the latter cited the archbishop to Rome. The prelate, however, informed his holiness how deeply the writings of Wickliff had taken root in Bohemia, on which he obtained a bull authorizing him to prevent the propagation of Wickliff’s doctrine in his diocese; at the same time condemning them in the most pointed manner as heretical, and issuing processes against four eminent doctors of the university, who had refused to deliver up the writings of Wickliff which were in their possession, and prohibiting them, notwithstanding their ecclesiastical dignities, from preaching in any congregation. Huss, and the members of the university, entered a protest against these proceedings, and on the 25th of June, 1410, appealed from the sentence of the archbishop to the court of Rome. The affair was carried before pope John XXIII who granted a commission to Cardinal Colonna, to cite Huss to appear personally before him at Rome, and there answer to the accusations laid against him of preaching both errors and heresies. Huss desired to be excused a personal appearance, and so greatly was he favored in Bohemia, that king Winceslaus, his queen, the nobility, and the University at large, joined in a request to the pope, that he would dispense with such an appearance; and moreover, that he would not suffer thy kingdom of Bohemia to be subject to the imputation of heresy, but permit them to preach the gospel with freedom in their places of worship; and that he would send legates to Prague to correct any presumed abuses, the expense of which should be defrayed by the Bohemians. Three proctors were dispatched to Rome to tender Huss’s apology to his holiness; but the excuses alleged were deemed insufficient, and Huss being declared contumacious, was accordingly excommunicated. This excommunication extended also to his disciples and friends; he himself was declared a promoter of heresy, and an interdict was pronounced against him! From these proceedings he appealed to a future council; and notwithstanding the decision of the court of Rome, he retired to Hussinetz, the place of his nativity, where he boldly continued to propagate his sentiments both from the pulpit and by means of his pen. The letters which he at this time wrote, are very numerous; he also drew up a Treatise defending the character and writings of Wickliff, and justifying his own conduct in reading his works.

The extraordinary state of affairs at this juncture, in reference to the chair of St. Peter, tended for awhile to screen Huss from the vengeance of his adversaries, by diverting their attention from him. In the year 1378, Pope Gregory XI died, and was succeeded by the archbishop of Barri, a Neapolitan, who assumed the name of Urban VI. This pontiff, a man of a haughty temper, began his reign in so arbitrary a manner, that he alienated from him the affections of his subjects; and his own cardinals so highly resented his behavior that they set aside his election, and chose Clement VII in his room. The consequence was, that Urban refusing to vacate his office, there were two popes, laying an equal claim to St. Peter’s chair, each strenuously exerting himself to strengthen his party; their quarrel immediately became, in the opinion of their deluded votaries, the cause of God; each found adherents in every part of Europe, and much human blood was spilt in the contest. During a period of more than twenty years were these ambitious prelates roaming up and down Europe, like wolves or beasts of prey, until at length, to put a termination to this disgraceful schism, Alexander V was elected to the popedom, in hopes that by this event the other two popes would relinquish their claims. But restless ambition intervened: neither of them would give up his power, and from this time the church was governed, if such a state of anarchy may be called government, by three popes at a time—their names now were John, Gregory, and Benedict. With a view to heal this fatal schism, and repair the disorders that had sprung up during its continuance as well as to bring about a reformation of the clergy, which was now loudly and generally called for, in the year 1414, the Emperor Sigismund convened the council of Constance. Hither, from all parts of Europe, princes and prelates, clergy, laity, regulars and seculars flocked together. Fox, the martyrologist, has given us a humorous catalogue of this grotesque assembly. “There were,” says he, “archbishops and bishops 846; abbots and doctors 564; princes, dukes, earls, knights, and squires 16,000; prostitutes 450; barbers 600; musicians, cooks, and jesters 820.”

The council of Constance was assembled November 16, 1414, to determine the dispute between the three contending factions for the papacy, and thither Huss was cited to appear, in order to justify his conduct and writings. The Emperor Sigismund, brother and successor of Winceslaus, encouraged Huss to obey the summons, and as an inducement to his compliance, sent him a passport with assurance of safe conduct, permitting him to come freely to the council, and pledging himself for his safe return. Huss consented, and in all the cities through which he passed he caused placards to be issued, stating that he was going to the council to answer all the accusations that were made against him, inviting his adversaries to meet him there.

No sooner had Huss arrived within the pope’s jurisdiction, than, regardless of the emperor’s passport, he was arrested and committed close prisoner to a chamber in the palace. This violation of common law and justice was noticed by the friends of Huss, who had, out of the respect they bore his character, accompanied him to Constance. They urged the imperial safeconduct; but the pope replied, that he never granted any safe-conduct, nor was he bound by that of the emperor. JEROME OF PRAGUE was the intimate friend and companion of Huss; inferior to him in age, experience, and authority, but his superior in all liberal endowments. He was born at Prague and educated in that university. Having finished his studies, he traveled into many countries of Europe, where he acquired great esteem for his talents and virtues, particularly for his graceful elocution, which gave him great advantages in the public seminaries. The universities of Prague, of Paris, of Cologne, and of Heidelberg, conferred upon him the degree of master of arts: and having made the tour of the continent, he visited England, where he obtained access to the writings of Wickliff, which he copied out, and returned with them to Prague. As Jerome had distinguished himself by an active cooperation with Huss in all his opposition to the abominations of the times, he was cited before the council of Constance on the 17th April, 1415, at the time his friend Huss was confined in a castle near that city. Arriving shortly afterwards in Constance, or the neighborhood, he learnt how his friend had been treated, and what he himself had to expect; on which he prudently retired to Iberlingen, an imperial city, from whence he wrote to the emperor and council, requesting a safe-conduct, but not obtaining one to his satisfaction, he was preparing to return into Bohemia, when he was arrested at Hirschaw and conveyed to Constance. Every one knows the fate of these two eminent men. They were both condemned by the council to be burnt alive, and the sentence was carried into effect. Huss was executed on the 7th July, 1415; and Jerome on the 20th May, 1416. The former sustained his fate with the most heroic fortitude, praying for his merciless persecutors. Previous to his execution he wrote letters to his friends in Bohemia, which afford a gratifying representation of the frame of his mind.

The following is an extract from one of them. “My dear friends, Let me take this last opportunity of exhorting you to trust in nothing here, but give yourselves up entirely to the service of God. Well am I authorized to warn you not to trust in princes, nor in any of the children of men; for there is no help in them. God alone remaineth steadfast: whatever he promises he will undoubtedly perform. For myself, on his gracious promise I trust.

Having labored as his faithful servant, I am not afraid of being deserted by him. ‘Where I am, says the gracious Redeemer, there shall my servant be.’ May the God of heaven preserve you! This is probably the last letter I shall be enabled to write, having reason to think I shall to-morrow be called upon to answer with my life.

Sigismund (the emperor) hath in all things acted deceitfully. I pray God to forgive him! You have heard in what severe terms he hath spoken of me.”

If we may credit the catholic writers, Jerome at first displayed less magnanimity than his friend Huss. The dread of suffering intimidated him, and he showed a disposition to concede his opinions to his catholic interrogators, who, perceiving symptoms of this compliant temper about him, craftily availed themselves of it, and by procrastinating his trial from month to month, they hoped ultimately to recover him from his heresy. In this however, they were disappointed. His mind gradually resumed all its wonted rigor; and instead of yielding his principles to his persecutors, he avowed them in the boldest manner, and supported them with increasing confidence to the last. Poggio Bracciolini, the Florentine secretary, who attended the council, and was a spectator of all he relates, gave a pretty circumstantial account of the whole of this tragical affair, in a letter to his friend Aretin, the pope’s secretary, and it is too interesting to be omitted.

LETTER FROM POGGIO OF FLORENCE TO LEONARD ARETIN. “In the midst of a short excursion into the country, I wrote to our common friend; from whom, I doubt not, you have had an account of me.” “Since my return to Constance, my attention has been wholly engaged by Jerome, the Bohemian heretic, as he is called. The eloquence and learning which this person has employed in his own defense, are so extraordinary, that I cannot forbear giving you a short account of him.” “To confess the truth, I never knew the art of speaking carried so near the model of ancient eloquence. It was, indeed, amazing to hear with what force of expression, with what fluency of language, and with what excellent reasoning, he answered his adversaries: nor was I less struck with the gracefulness of his manner, the dignity of his action, and the firmness and constancy of his whole behavior. It grieved me to think so great a man was laboring under so atrocious an accusation. Whether this accusation be a just one, God knows: for myself, I inquire not into the merits of it; resting satisfied with the decision of my superiors. But I will just give you a summary of his trial.” “After many articles had been proved against him, leave was at length given him to answer each in its order. But Jerome long refused, strenuous, contending that he had many things to say previously in his defense; and that he ought first to be heard in general, before he descended to particulars. When this was overruled, ‘Here,’ said he, standing in the midst of the assembly, ‘here is justice—here is equity. Beset by my enemies, I am already pronounced a heretic; I am condemned before I am examined. Were you gods omniscient, instead of an assembly of fallible men, you could not act with more sufficiency. Error is the lot of mortals; and you, exalted as you are, are subject to it. But consider, that the higher you are exalted, of the more dangerous consequence are your errors. As for me, I know I am a wretch below your notice; but at least consider, that an unjust action, in such an assembly, will be of dangerous example.’” “This, and much more, he spoke with great elegance of language, in the midst of a very unruly and indecent assembly: and thus far, at least, he prevailed; the council ordered, that he should first answer objections, and promised that he should then have liberty to speak.

Accordingly all the articles alleged against him were publicly read, and then proved; after which he was asked, whether he had ought to object? It is incredible with what acuteness he answered; and with what amazing dexterity he warded off every stroke of his adversaries. Nothing escaped him: his whole behavior was truly great and pious. If he were, indeed, the man his defense spoke him, he was so far from meriting death, that, in my judgment, he was not in any degree culpable. In a word; he endeavored to prove, that the greater part of the charges were purely the invention of his adversaries. Among other things, being accused of hating and defaming the holy see, the pope, the cardinals, the prelates, and the whole estate of the clergy, he stretched out his hands, and said, in a most moving accent, ‘On which side, reverend fathers, shall I turn me for redress? whom shall I implore? whose assistance can I expect? which of you hath not this malicious charge entirely alienated from me? which of you hath it not changed from a judge into an inveterate enemy? It was artfully alleged indeed! Though other parts of their charge were of less moment, my accusers might well imagine, that if this were fastened on me, it could not fail of drawing upon me the united indignation of my judges.’” “On the third day of this memorable trial, what had passed was recapitulated: when Jerome, having obtained leave, though with some difficulty, to speak, began his oration with a prayer to God; whose assistance he pathetically implored. He then observed, that many excellent men, in the annals of history, had been oppressed by false witnesses, and condemned by unjust judges. Beginning with profane history, he instanced the death of Socrates, the captivity of Plato, the banishment of Anaxagoras, and the unjust sufferings of many others: he then instanced the many worthies of the Old Testament, in the same circumstances — Moses, Joshua, Daniel, and almost all the prophets; and lastly those of the New— John the Baptist, St. Stephen, and others, who were condemned as seditious, profane, or immoral men. An unjust judgment, he said, proceeding from a layic was bad; from a priest, worse; still worse from a college of priests; and from a general council, superlatively bad. These things he spoke with such force and emphasis, as kept every one’s attention awake.” “On one point he dwelt largely. As the merits of the cause rested entirely upon the credit of witnesses, he took great pains to show, that very little was due to those produced against him. He had many objections to them, particularly their avowed hatred to him; the sources of which he so palpably laid open, that he made a strong impression upon the minds of his hearers, and not a little shook the credit of the witnesses. The whole council was moved, and greatly inclined to pity, if not to favor him. He added, that he came uncompelled to the council; and that neither his life nor doctrine had been such, as gave him great reason to dread an appearance before them. Difference of opinion, he said, in matters of faith, had ever arisen among learned men, and was always esteemed productive of truth, rather than of error, where bigotry was laid aside. Such, he said, was the difference between Austin and Jerome: and though their opinions were not only different, but contradictory, yet the imputation of heresy was never fixed on either.” “Every one expected, that he would now either retract his errors, or at least apologize for them; but nothing of the kind was heard from him: he declared plainly, that he had nothing to retract. He launched out into a high encomium of Huss, calling him a holy man, and lamenting his cruel and unjust death. He had armed himself, he said, with a full resolution to follow the steps of that blessed martyr, and to suffer with constancy whatever the malice of his enemies could inflict. ‘The perjured witnesses,’ said he, ‘who have appeared against me, have won their cause: but let them remember, they have their evidence once more to give, before a tribunal where falsehood can be no disguise.’” “It was impossible to hear this pathetic speaker without emotion.

Every ear was captivated, and every heart touched. But wishes in his favor were vain; he threw himself beyond a possibility of mercy. Braving death, he even provoked the vengeance which was hanging over him. ‘If that holy martyr,’ said he, speaking of Huss, ‘used the clergy with disrespect, his censures were not leveled at them as priests, but as wicked men. He saw with indignation those revenues, which had been designed for charitable ends, expended upon pageantry and riot.’” “Through this whole oration he showed a most amazing strength of memory. He had been confined almost a year in a dungeon: the severity of which usage he complained of, but in the language of a great and good man. In this horrid place he was deprived of books and paper. Yet, notwithstanding this, and the constant anxiety which must have hung over him, he was at no more loss for proper authorities and quotations, than if he had spent the intermediate time at leisure in his study.” “His voice was sweet, distinct, and full: his action every way the most proper, either to express indignation or to raise pity; though he made no affected application to the passions of his audience.

Firm and intrepid, he stood before the council, collected in himself; and not only contemning, but seeming even desirous of death. The greatest character in ancient story could not possibly go beyond him. If there is any justice in history, this man will be admired by all posterity. I speak not of his errors: let these rest with him.

What I admired was his learning, his eloquence, and amazing acuteness. God knows whether these things were not the groundwork of his ruin.” “Two days were allowed him for reflection; during which time many persons of consequence, and particularly my lord cardinal of Florence, endeavored to bring him to a better mind. But persisting obstinately in his errors, he was condemned as a heretic.” “With a cheerful countenance, and more than stoical constancy, he met his fate; fearing neither death itself, nor the horrible form in which it appeared. When be came to the place, he pulled off his upper garment, and made a short prayer at the stake; to which he was soon after bound, with wet cords and an iron chain, and enclosed as high as his breast in faggots.” “Observing the executioner about to set fire to the wood behind his back, he cried out, ‘Bring thy torch hither. Perform thy office before my face. Had I feared death, I might have avoided it.’” “As the wood began to blaze, he sang a hymn, which the violence of the flame scarce interrupted.” “Thus died this prodigious man. The epithet is not extravagant. I was myself an eyewitness of his whole behavior. Whatever his life may have been, his death, without doubt, is a noble lesson of philosophy.” “But it is time to finish this long epistle. You will say I have had some leisure upon my hands; and to say the truth, I have not much to do here. This will, I hope, convince you, that greatness is not wholly confined to antiquity. You will think me, perhaps, tedious; but I could have been more prolix on a subject so copious. — Farewell, my dear Leonard.” Constance, May 20.

The news of these barbarous executions quickly reached Bohemia, where it threw the whole kingdom into confusion, and a civil war was kindled from the ashes of the martyrs. As to Winceslaus, the king, he was seldom sober, and paid no regard to the condition of his subjects. The nobility were divided into factions; some zealous to resent the insults that had been offered to the nation by the proceedings at Constance, and to repel the forces that had been introduced into the kingdom by the authority of the pope, with a view to the suppression of heresy in Bohemia, and to, compel that fierce nation to establish uniformity in religion. Sigismund, the emperor, had many respectable qualities; but he had lent himself wholly to the papacy at the council, and in consequence of the disgust which his conduct had excited, the Bohemians revolted, and under the banners of a very intrepid leader, John Ziska, defended their opinions not only with arguments but with arms also. At first the populace were only a harmless inquisitive staring multitude; but as the catholic priests proceeded to publish in the churches, bulls from the pope, exhorting all kings, princes, dukes, lords, citizens, and others, to take up arms against heresy, conjuring them by the wounds of Christ to extirpate heretics, and promising the forgiveness of all sins to any person who should kill a Bohemian heretic, the people seceded in great multitudes, retired to the distance of about five miles from Prague, where they held meetings for public worship, elected their own teachers, and had the Lord’s supper administered to them at three hundred tables, formed by laying boards upon casks, the number of communicants amounting to forty thousand.

Their leader,JOHN ZISKA, was of a noble family, brought up at court, and in high reputation for wisdom, courage, the love of his country, and the fear of God. Fugitives daily resorted to him from all parts, and put themselves under his protections. At one time four hundred poor men, who had lived in the mountains for the sake of enjoying religious liberty, came down to Prague, with their wives and children, and ranged themselves under the banners of Ziska. It is highly probable that these were Waldenses, the descendants of those who had settled in remote parts of the kingdom more than two hundred and fifty years before. Freedom from the Austrian yoke, deliverance from the tyranny of Rome, and the full enjoyment of civil and religious liberty, were the objects for which Ziska avowedly contended, and his army presently consisted of forty thousand men.

Aeneas Sylvius, who afterwards ascended the pontifical chair under the title of Pius II had traveled over the whole empire; and by him we are informed that the churches and religious houses in Bohemia, were more numerous, more spacious, more elegant and sumptuous, than in any other part of Europe; and that the images in public places, and the habits of the priests, were covered with jewels and precious stones. Ziska commenced his work of reform with attacking these. He demolished the images, discharged the monks, who he said, were only fattening like swine in sties, converted cloisters into barracks, conquered several towns and garrisoned Cuthna, defeated the armies of the emperor in several battles, and gave law to the kingdom of Bohemia till the time of his death, which happened in 1424. He encamped his followers on a rocky mountain about ten miles from Prague, which he soon after fortified with a wall, and within that the people built houses. This mountain he called Tabor (after Mount Tabor in the Holy Land) and thence his followers obtained the name of Taborites.

When Ziska found himself dying he gave orders that a drum should be made of his skin; and what is equally extraordinary, his orders were faithfully obeyed. Ziska’s skin, after undergoing the necessary preparations, was converted into a drum, which was long the symbol of victory to his followers. Procopius, a catholic priest, converted by the writings of one of the disciples of Huss, revived the spirits of the Bohemian brethren, many of whom after the death of Ziska, had retreated to caves and mountains. Uniting the military with the sacerdotal character, this champion supported the cause of his party with great courage and bravery, but fell in a battle with the Catholics. Yet so terrible had the name of the Hussites become to the emperor Sigismund, that, despairing to reduce them by the power of his arms, he entered into a compromise, allowing them the use of the cup in the eucharist, the deprivation of which had been a principal source of complaint; together with a general amnesty, and a confirmation of their privileges. But verbal and even written promises are easily retracted, where there exists no power of enforcing their accomplishment; and a right avails nothing without a remedy. The dispersed brethren ceased to be formidable. Sigismund renewed his tyranny. His immediate successors on the imperial throne were, like himself, zealous Catholics, and the friends and followers of Huss continued to be the subjects of frequent persecutions till the times of Luther.

Crantz, in his history of the Bohemian brethren informs us, that after the death of Ziska, his followers divided themselves again, according to the diversity of their opinions and views, into Calixtines, Taborites, and Orphans; while, such as, with a distinguished zeal urged an entire reformation, were termed Zealots. In times of distress, however, they all united against their common enemy; and the latter, unable to carry the point against them, granted to their deputies, at the council of Basil, in 1433, the terms contained in the following four articles, which goes by the name of The Bohemian Compactata, or terms of agreement. 1. That the word of God shall be freely preached by able ministers, according to the Holy Scriptures, without any human invention. 2. That the Lord’s supper shall be administered unto all in both kinds, and divine worship performed in the mother-tongue. 3. That open sins shall be openly punished, according to the law of God, without respect of persons. 4. That the clergy should exercise no worldly dominion, but confine themselves to preaching the gospel. But notwithstanding these concessions, it appears evident that matters remained in a very unsettled state among the Bohemians about the middle of the century. The leading person in ecclesiastical affairs was Rokyzan, archbishop of Prague, a man of no principle whatever. The contentions of parties ran high; and this metropolitan wearied with perpetual applications for reformation, which he found it quite impracticable to carry into effect, at length advised such as were dissatisfied with the existing order of things to retire to the lordship of Lititz, between Silesia and Moravia, about twenty miles from Prague;—a place which had been laid waste by the ravages of war, where they might establish their own regulations respecting divine worship, choose their own ministers, and introduce their own discipline and order, according to their own conscience and judgment.

Numbers adopted his suggestion, and in 1457, they formed themselves into a society bearing the name of theUNITAS FRATRUM, or United Brethren, binding themselves at the same time to a rigorous church discipline, and resolving to suffer all things for conscience sake; and instead of defending themselves, as the Taborites had done, by force of arms, their only weapons were to be prayer and reasonable remonstrance against the rage of their enemies. It is highly probable that when the archbishop offered them this indulgence, he had little expectation that they would be able to carry the project into effect; it was merely an alternative which relieved him from a momentary embarrassment, and probably that was all he was concerned about; but if so, he found himself disappointed. Three years had not elapsed ere their numbers were considerable; pious persons flocked to them, not only from different parts of Bohemia, but even from every distant quarter of the whole empire; and churches were gathered everywhere throughout Bohemia and Moravia. Many of the ancient Waldenses, who had been lurking about in dens and caves of the earth, as well as upon the tops of mountains, now came forward with alacrity, and joining themselves to the “United Brethren,” became eminently serviceable to the newly-formed societies, in consequence of their more advanced state of religious knowledge and experience. Many of the new converts renounced the baptism of infants, and were baptized by the pastors before they received them into church communion. The archbishop had not foreseen the consequences of settling these people on the crown lands. The multiplication of their numbers, and their growing influence, soon drew upon them the attention, and excited the rancor of the catholic party. A clamor against him ensued; and the Waldenses, Picards, and other opprobrious names, by which they were stigmatized, became too numerous and too scandalous for an archbishop to patronize; he therefore found it necessary to treat them with indifference and keep them at a distance. Scarcely had three years transpired from the establishment of the society of “The United Brethren,” than a terrible persecution arose against them in Bohemia and Moravia, and they were called to prove “what manner of spirit they were of.” They were declared by the state unworthy of the common rights of subjects; and, in the depth of winter, expelled from their houses in towns and villages, with the forfeiture of all their goods. Even the sick were cast into the open fields, where numbers perished through cold and hunger. They threw them into prisons, with a view to extort from them, by means of the severity of their sufferings, a confession of seditious designs, and an impeachment of their accomplices: and when nothing could be extorted from them, they were maimed in their hands and feet, inhumanely dragged at the tails of horses and carts, and quartered or burnt alive. During this persecution, those who had it in their power to do so, retired into woods, fortresses, and caves of the earth, where they held their religious assemblies, elected their own teachers, and endeavored to strengthen and edify one another. The parent society at Lititz, being less molested than those in other places, did not cease to send messengers and letters to their persecuted brethren, with the view of strengthening their faith and exhorting them to patience. In process of time the storm subsided, though not until nearly every society of the Brethren in Bohemia was scattered or dispersed, and both the king and archbishop were removed from the stage of life. Uladislaus, prince of Poland, was now elected to the crown of Bohemia, and being a mild and tolerant prince, little inclined to persecution, the exiled brethren returned to their own homes, and resumed their occupations. Under this amiable monarch they cultivated their lands, applied themselves to literature, and for some years enjoyed prosperity as well as peace. According to the testimony of one of their bitter enemies, “They took such deep root, and extended their branches so far and wide, that it was impossible to extirpate them.” In the year 1500, there were two hundred congregations of the United Brethren in Bohemia and Moravia.

Many counts, barons, and noblemen joined their churches, who built them meeting houses in their cities and villages. They got the Bible translated into the Bohemian tongue, and printed at Venice; when that edition was disposed of, they got two more printed at Nuremberg, and finding the demand for the Holy Scriptures continuing to increase, they established a printing office at Prague, another at Bunzlau in Bohemia, and a third a Kralitz in Moravia, where at first they printed nothing but Bohemian bibles.

Although the king of Bohemia was extremely anxious to preserve peace and harmony among his subjects, whether Catholics, Calixtines, or the United Brethren, he found it no easy task to accomplish his wishes in that respect. “Every morning when he rose,” says a late writer, “and every evening when he retired to rest, he put up this petition to God, ‘Give peace in my time O Lord!’ A prayer worthy of a king, but Uladislaus did not know that to attain the object of his prayer he ought to discharge his chaplains.” The clergy were perpetually teasing him for an edict against heretics, and poisoning his mind with false representations of their sentiments and conduct; and they, at length, succeeded in obtaining a severe edict against them. The Brethren immediately drew up an apology, which they presented to the king; and he, with his usual lenity, ordered his clergy to converse with the Picards, and endeavor to reclaim them by reason; but by all means to maintain peace among themselves. An order was consequently issued, requiring the principal ministers of the Brethren in Prague to hold a conference, on an appointed day, with some of the catholic clergy; but early on the morning of that day, Martin Poczatecius, the principal enemy of the Brethren, died suddenly, and the conference was postponed.

As the king was understood to be tolerant in his principles, the Brethren thought that a confession of their faith might probably produce some good, and they accordingly drew one up and sent it to his majesty, who was then in Hungary. It did not, however, answer the end at court; for the catholic bishops had recourse to a stratagem, which unhappily succeeded to their wishes. The king was passionately fond of his queen, who was at this time in an advanced state of pregnancy; and the bishops and prelates having a great ascendancy over the queen, they, therefore, most humbly and earnestly entreated her to obtain from the king an edict to suppress the Picards, for they assured themselves that, at such a time, he would not deny her majesty any request, or occasion her a moment’s pain. The king one day entering her apartment, the queen mildly asked the favor. The monarch looked sad and sorrowful, but remained silent. Bossack, an Hungarian bishop, began instantly to write in the king’s presence; and the edict was soon prepared and signed. The moment, however, that the humane monarch had put his name to the instrument, he quitted the room, retired to his closet, fell on his knees, burst into tears, and besought the Almighty to forgive him, and to frustrate the sanguinary purposes of these bishops against innocent men. At first the States would not allow this edict the force of law, so jealous were the Bohemians of their liberties; and it took four years to bring them to consent to a statute which prohibited the “United Brethren” from holding any religious assemblies, public or private; commanded that their meeting-houses should all be shut up: that they should not be allowed either to preach or print; and that within a given time they should all hold religious communion with either the Calixtines or the Catholics.

Although the catholic party had so hr succeeded as to obtain this persecuting edict, they did not immediately reap from it all the happy fruits that they expected. The Bohemians were a bold and intrepid race of men, and not easily daunted. The king and wiser part of the magistrates, did not go heartily into the clerical measures of depopulation and destruction; and though the dominant party were so strong that the king durst not openly protect the Brethren, he was obliged to wink at the cruel use that was made of this persecuting statute by some bigoted magistrates; but, upon the whole, the pacific inclination of the court was generally understood, and people acted accordingly. Some emigrated; others retired and worshipped God as formerly, in remote places and in small companies; some ran all risks, and many fell into the hands of their enemies and were punished. A Bohemian nobleman caught six poor men at their devotions, in a small village: he accordingly had them taken up, and brought before the parish-priest to be examined. The latter asked but one question, namely, whether they would submit to him as a shepherd of souls? they answered to this, that “Christ was the shepherd of their souls” —upon which they were convicted on the statute against heresy, made in the twentieth year of their sovereign lord the king, and instantly committed to the flames. This is a fair specimen of their proceedings, and it is needless to enlarge or multiply instances.

In this manner the affairs of the Brethren proceeded, until Luther began the Reformation in Germany; at which time it would appear, that a continued series of persecutions had wasted the churches, and nearly exhausted the survivors of their fortitude and patience; insomuch that the Brethren appear to have been meditating a compromise with the catholic church, under certain modifications; and actually wrote to Luther for his advice on the subject, in the year 1522. Sleidan has furnished us with the substance of the letter which Luther returned in reply, and it is of sufficient interest to merit insertion.

He informs them that the name of Bohemians had been some time very odious unto him, so long as he had been ignorant that the pope was Antichrist: but that now, since God had restored the light of the gospel to the world, he was of a far different opinion, and had declared as much in his books; so that at present the pope and his party were more incensed against him than against them; that his adversaries had many times given it out that he had removed into Bohemia, which he oftentimes wished to have done; but that lest they should have aspersed his progress, and called it a flight, he had altered his resolution. That as matters now stood, there were great hopes that the Germans and Bohemians might profess the doctrine of the gospel, and the same religion; that it was not without reason that many were grieved to see them so divided into sects among themselves; but that if they should again make defection to popery, sects would not only not be removed, but even be increased and more diffused, for that sects abounded no where more than among the Romanists; and that the Franciscans alone were an instance of this, who in many things differed among themselves, and yet all lived under the patronage and protection of the church of Rome. That his kingdom was, in some manner, maintained and supported by the dissensions of men; which was the reason also that made him set princes together by the ears, and afford continual matter of quarreling and contention; that, therefore, they should have special care, lest whilst they endeavor to crush those smaller sects, they fell not into far greater, such as the popish, which were altogether incurable, and from which Germany had been lately delivered. That there was no better way of removing inconveniences, than for the pastors of the churches to preach the pure word of God in sincerity. That if they could not retain the weak and giddy people in their duty, and hinder their desertion, they should at least endeavor to make them steadfast in receiving the Lord’s supper in both kinds, and in preserving a veneration for the memory of John Huss, and Jerome of Prague; for that the pope would labor chiefly to deprive them of these two things; wherefore if any of them should relent, and give up both to the tyrant, it would be in done of them. But that though all Bohemia should apostatize, yet he would celebrate and commend the doctrine of Huss to all posterity. That, therefore, he prayed and exhorted them to persevere in that way which they had hitherto defended with the loss of much blood, and with the highest resolution, and not cast a reproach upon the flourishing gospel by their defection. That although all things were not established among them, as they ought to be, yet God would not be wanting, in time, to raise up some faithful servants of his, who would reform what was amiss, provided they continued constant, and utterly rejected the uncleanness and impiety of the Romish papacy. Mr. Robinson thus recapitulates the history of the Bohemian brethren. “Authentic records in France assure us, that a people of a certain description were driven from thence in the twelfth century.