- Bibleindepth
- +Hans-Georg Lundahl You said...As to Paulicians and Cathari, and Bogumils, clearly existing before 1100, these are not early Waldensians or Protestants, but early Albigensians....It is thought these are a mix of the same people, Christians. Including waldenses. Geneva sect,scandanavia,they were everywhere. They had no name.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- You are still missing that Albigensians, Cathari, Paulicians, Bogumils cannot really be thought of as Christians.
Waldensians (including the Henricians and Petrobrussians that arrived before Waldensians proper) came later than Paulicians, lots later. - Bibleindepth
- +Hans-Georg Lundahl Sorry but I havnt studied this far into history to a great depth yet .I am getting there as time permits. The albigenses were definitely christians. Cathari too. and probably boomils...but not sure yet. They were in the same region as the waldenses. None of these christian sects had names. You have to trace migration and persecutions which caused them to flee and other causes. I havnt completed who knew who yet or who absorbed who. Or how far and wide these christians dispersed. But they covered europe. Most of the websites and encyclopedias have catholic disinformation in them.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- Thank you for admitting you have not gone far into history. I have.
"The albigenses were definitely christians. Cathari too. and probably boomils...but not sure yet."
None of them, all of these (btw, Albigenses were a local branch of Cathari in S France), all of these were what St Thomas called Manichaeans and what St Ausgustine might somewhat loosely have recognised as Manicaeans : if not the exact same sect as the Manichaeans he had belonged ot before he became a Catholic and a Christian, at least the same doctrine in some basics.
"They were in the same region as the waldenses."
Not all of them. Albigenses coincided with Waldenses and were the bad company that caused Waldenses too to be persecuted, but some early pre-Waldenses had done their bad turn. The first of all these to be burnt on a a fire alive was a man who had burnt crosses and crucifixes on a bonfire on the excuse that Our Lord must be insulted by people bearing the instrument of his torture, and he was burnt by a lynchmob. But he did not have as bad a doctrine as the Albigenses, indeed, he had not very much doctrine at all.
"None of these christian sects had names."
Wrong again.
Cathari means "pure" in Greek and was their own name, implying that they considered Catholics as "impure".
"Most of the websites and encyclopedias have catholic disinformation in them."
Wonderful. Inquisitors who have interrogated them and converted lots of them and allowed some few to get burnt are, on your view, just providing "Catholic disinformation" BUT writers who wrote centuries after the last Albigensians either were burnt or recanted are providing us with the real truth about these fine Christians.
Well, I do not believe God leaves the history of His Church so much in the dark - even for a century.
XXth C. especially second half has been one of the darkest times. I have doubts about who is the real Pope. But there is no doubt that all factions within the Catholic Church are claiming to continue the Church of St Pius X, except those who are clearly not Catholic at all, but a kind of "intra-Catholic Protestants" like Bergoglio (who has called an Anglican pseudo-bishop "fellow bishop") or Küng (who is known to have said Trent and Vatican I were mistakes).
AND every man who spoke up for or against the Vatican during the last century can be traced who it was, why, what his doctrines are and so on.
"None of these christian sects had names. You have to trace migration and persecutions which caused them to flee and other causes. I havnt completed who knew who yet or who absorbed who. Or how far and wide these christians dispersed. But they covered europe."
It is not just a question of tracing names. These are important too, since they help us to trace differences of doctrine.
It is a question of tracing doctrine.
In the century of King Alfred or Charlemagne - who was in Europe a Waldensian, of any sort, under any name, detectable by doctrine?
Not just official records of Papacy from those days, there are also lots of Chronicles and other writings that were stuffed aside for centuries and would have survived any purge from the side of Papacy. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Celtic Chronicles in Wales and Ireland and Scotland. Writings of Viking Christians who were often curious and not always very zealous. Somewhere on Iceland or Ireland, Wales Scotland, or England before the Norman Conquest, including Southern Scotland after it ... some trace in some writing.
But if that had been the case, why did not Tolkien know of it? He was a specialist in Anglo-Saxon and close on in Icelandic and Welsh. And yet he considered the Catholic Church believable and this implies he would have considered yours unbelievable. - Bibleindepth
- +Hans-Georg Lundahl I dont quite follow, but writings are hard to come by. I am still interested in the paths the disciples of the apostles took in those areas. Then to seem to vanish after roman conquest of the north..
+Hans-Georg Lundahl I have done personal research and learned much more than is taught. Just wish I knew more languages. - Hans-Georg Lundahl
- "Roman conquest of the North"?
What exactly do you mean by that? Caesar had extended the Roman Empire about as far North as it ever went, except that Britain was conqured as far as it was (excepting Caledonia, then) somewhat later.
"I have done personal research and learned much more than is taught."
So have I. But if you had done it correctly, you would NOT have come to a conclusion like: "writings are hard to come by."
Unless you mean writings by Waldensians and Albigensians, where Inquisition protocols outnumber the protocols of a Cathar synod.*
I was asking for evidence of Waldensian doctrine in centuries previous to the historically known Waldensians.
We are not talking about a gap of contemporary historians like between Vellejus Paterculus (his last chapters covering 16 years of Tiberius' reign doesn't cover any specifical events) and Tacitus' prologue of Agricola saying that after death of Domitian one can once again write and speak the truth. Gap excepting Gospels and Acts, of course.
We are talking about centuries where there are writings about ecclesiastical matters, where in Britain for instance one can see how at the Synod of Whitby Easter was fixed at the Roman rather than the Irish calendar, because of Rome being where Sts Peter and Paul died, because of St Peter and not St Patrick being whom Our Lord gave the keys of Heaven. We are talking about centuries where a local synod of Tours during the pause defended using "homo/man" as "human being" rather than as "male adult" - such is the detail we know about. And you claim that for centuries there was another Church, like the Waldensians and Baptists later, and that it was never alluded to in writing? Sorry, but that is insane as a hypothesis.
[Later:]
I only saw just now that you claimed there were Waldensians in Scandinavia.
As a Swede, I know there were none. None recorded. One man was recorded as denying the Real Presence and burnt on the stake, his motive was "Christ wouldn't be present, since if someone were to eat me or parts of me, I would be angry." - Bibleindepth
- +Hans-Georg Lundahl Yeah not much though..just one or two citations that allude to visiting there or going that far. But nothing written of a presence of people yet. I am refering to christians and not catholics. They were in poland so its not far. But nothing of a people there yet.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- Nothing written of a presence of people yet?
Now, that means an admission that if Christianity was Waldensianism, either there was no Church or the Church was hidden.
Both ideas are against Holy Bible.
Church switching off and back on is against Christ's promise He was staying with His Church EVERY day.
Church's being present but to us invisible, undocumented, is against Christ's words that no one lighteth a lamp and puts it under the bushel. And also against its being "a city built on a mountain".
On the other hand, if Christianity is Catholicism, these conditions are respected, and the Church is well documented indeed. Alfred and Charlemagne were simple faithful, laymen, of the Church and there were lots of priests and bishops, abbots and monks, abesses and nuns too. - Bibleindepth
- +Hans-Georg Lundahl Thats not what I meant. There were plenty of christians over most of europe. Also there is no such thing as waldenses. They were plain christians. No name. No albigenses, No cathari, etc. Those are Gods people. No one can change that.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- The people who were indeed Christians over most of Europe were certainly not Waldenses, were certainly plain Christians and were as certainly Catholics. In aspect after aspect it is very well documented.
- Hans-Georg Lundahl
- +Hans-Georg Lundahl Yeah thanks for the laugh
- Bibleindepth
- If you get nothing else out of it, you are welcome.
* Added for readers of this blog: La Noble Leçon is accepted by Waldensians like a kind of either Patristic or NT book, but we cannot say for sure that the author was himself a Waldensian.
