Truth Unites - The Waldensians: Forerunners of the Reformation

Episode Date: November 24, 2021

People sometimes claim that Protestant views were new to the 16th  century, but in fact there were many proto-Protestant groups throughout  the medieval era that anticipated Protestant concerns. Here I give an  overview of one such group, the Waldensians, followers of Peter Waldo  (12th century). I cove a bit of their history and some of the  persecutions they faced, and then a bit of their theology. Truth Unites is a mixture of apologetics and theology, with an irenic focus. Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) serves as senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Ojai. SUPPORT: Become a patron: https://www.patreon.com/truthunites One time donation: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/truthunites FOLLOW: Twitter: https://twitter.com/gavinortlund Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthUnitesPage/ Website: https://gavinortlund.com/

One of the claims that's often made against Protestants is that our beliefs are new to the 16th century. You know, it's put in different ways with different nuances by different people, but there's often this appeal, kind of like, where were you guys, you know, for 1,500 years, this kind of way of thinking. Was the Holy Spirit asleep for a millennium and a half, and this kind of thing? And I really sincerely do try to receive and incorporate that criticism as much as I can, because I think there's a reason why people, make that appeal, it's certainly true that many, especially evangelical, low church, Protestants today are disconnected from church history, and we need to do better at studying church history, being engaged in church history. That's a lot of what I see my ministry is trying to help with, and some of my books is trying to help call evangelicals to theological retrieval and more rootedness

in the past and so forth. But anybody who watches my channel and has seen some of my videos knows I'm also trying to help defend Protestantism and help people conceptualize Protestantism in its best light, if that makes sense. Truly, I mean this, my main motive in, when I get into these ecumenical things, you know, Protestantism versus Catholicism versus orthodoxy and the other non-Protestant traditions, the main motive is not to attack an alternative. That does, of course, happen. I recognize I'm criticizing an alternative. That's unavoidable. But the main originating motive is simply this, that there's a lot of ignorance about historic Protestantism out there.

There's so many anti-Protestant slogans and arguments that are just being bandied about and no one's responding to them. There's a lot of Protestants ignore these conversations. And whatever conclusions someone arrives at, I would like for people to be aware of historic Protestant views and arguments and so forth. So I'm trying to paint a picture of Protestantism as it's historically being been conceived by Protestants, namely the removal of accretions, not the starting of something new. That's the most succinct little pithy way I can make the contrast between the caricature and the actual thing. So in my previous videos, I've drawn a lot of

patristic lines of support and precedent for certain Protestant views and practices. And this one, I want to draw attention to medieval support and precedent. The Protestant reformers were not the first to protest various practices and beliefs in the Church of Rome. They inherited a long tradition of dissent. And this is a fascinating area of research for people to explore. I mean, there's so much. I mean, it would be fascinating if somebody out there is looking for a doctoral dissertation or an article, you know, a shorter project you want to study

at an academic level. There's so much to explore here because there's not, there's not been as much done as you'd hope in some of these groups. There's so many different proto-Protestine groups. So you think of, of course, the Bohemian Reformation and Jan Hus. But sometimes people don't realize how large scale that was. That lasted over 200 years. There's so much to that reform effort in what we call kind of central Europe, kind of what we would call the Czech Republic today and a little bit outside of that. There's so much to that, so many other figures beyond just Jan Hus. And I've made a video on Jan Hus. He's one of my personal heroes. I relate to Jan Hus in some ways more than any of the reformers. I really admire him. And then of course, you think of John Wickliff, too. And all

of his followers in England. But outside of those two groups, there's so many other proto-protestant groups. Now, when we say proto-Protestant, we don't mean identical to Protestantism in every way. Some of them are really close. Like I'm going to mention in a moment with the Waldensians, others are further. But they anticipate Protestant concerns in many ways. And you can, I just Google some of these and do some research. Again, there's so much to explore here. Arnold of Brescia in northern Italy in the 12th century. Huge movement. I mean, so many of these things I never knew about until you start to look into it and you realize how many different movements like this there are. So many of these movements are criticizing the wealth or excess of the

Catholic Church, but they're also criticizing various Catholic doctrines like infant baptism. Arnold and his followers called the Arnoldists opposed infant baptism. The Tondrakeans in Armenia, 8th century, 9th century, 10th century, I think that somewhere in that rough ballpark kind of early to high Middle Ages. There's an article about the Tondrakeans that calls them the medieval hippies. So again, some of these groups are going to be a little bit further removed even from Protestant views today, but they rejected apostolic succession. They were accused of self-conferred priesthood. They rejected the high sacramentalism of the Catholic Church. They were rejected practices like venerating the cross.

They had lots of points of continuity with Protestant concerns. Peter of Brie in southeastern France in the 12th century, another figure who sought to reform the church, whole movements brings up, rejects clerical celibacy, rejects transubstantiation, rejects infant baptism, rejects praying for the dead. Henry of Lausanne, also in France, also 12th century, very similar concerns, rejects infant baptism,

rejects transubstations. substantiation. By the way, this is an example where people will often say, have you heard this, before the Protestants came along, everybody thought that the bread and wine was the literal body and blood of Christ, right? That is a slogan that is thrown about, and people just keep repeating it because, again, a lot of Protestants aren't standing up to protest these ideas, but the truth is it's a little more complicated than that. You do have dissent and disagreement on the manner of real presence all the way up among some. I'm not saying this is common, but it's there. It's happening all the way up to the 9th century. And I've talked about in my response to Francis

Chan that video, the debate between Red Burtis and Retromnis and Retromnis's view for which he was not disciplined. This was within the church. Then you get further on into the Middle Ages and you do have those who advocate for something less than real presence like Barangar of Tours brought into discipline for that view. He had many followers, called the Beringarrians. And then you have these separatist groups also that are questioning transubstantiation.

So, you know, I'm not saying it's super, super common, but the idea that everybody thought, that just portrays ignorance of people like Peter of Brie and Henry of Lausan and Retromnis in the 9th century and so forth. It's not true. So, aside over on transubstantiations, back to the proto-Protterian groups, the Dulcinians later on in Italy. I'm going to stop recounting these.

Just Google proto-Protestine groups and do some research. Again, there's a lot more to be explored here. It's fascinating. Savonarola, of course, Juralamo Savonarola, 15th century Italian reformer. There's many others, the spiritual Franciscans. You could look up. Now, again, some of these groups are going to be further from Protestants than others, but they're all anticipating Protestant concerns in many ways.

And here I want to talk about the Waldensians. This is the group I admire the most of these groups. I really identify with them. I appreciate them. They're very similar to Protestants. In fact, Pope Francis himself, in his 2015 apology, called the Waldensians the first evangelicals, which is interesting terminology.

They had very similar theology to Protestants. They got two sacraments. They reject transubstantiation. They reject purgatory. I mean, I'll go through some of their theology in a minute. Why don't I start by talking about a little bit of the history? And by the way, just to reiterate, the sole purpose of this video is to combat the charge

that Protestant beliefs are novel to the 16th century. I am not seeking to justify or establish Waldensian views here. A subsidiary goal for this video would just be to generate interest in the Waldensians and encourage people to do more research about them. But the main purpose is simply to a historical one to say, It wasn't like all of a sudden out of nowhere in the 1500s, people started to say, hey, I don't know about purgatory, I don't know about transubstantiation, I don't know about the height of papal power, I don't know about the church having the power of the temporal sword.

So many of these concerns, there's a long tradition of dissent. So let's talk, just don't, I'm going to go faster so this doesn't go too long, because I'm recording this and it's 4.50, and I told my wife I'd be home at 5. So we'll see how I do. A little bit of the history. Peter Waldo, also 12th century, also France, like some of the other figures I've mentioned. He gains a following, preaching against excesses and the wealth of the Catholic Church. Huge emphasis among the Waldensians is voluntary poverty, simplicity of life, personal piety.

But he also opposes many Catholic doctrines. He opposes purgatory. I've mentioned transubstantiation several times now. He commissioned a translation of the New Testament in the 1170s, so sometimes he's credited with the first translation into a modern language outside of Latin of the New Testament. And he came into conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. He was excommunicated in the 1180s, and then after his death in 1215 at the fourth lettering council, Waldensians as a group were considered.

heretical. Now, one of the important historical facts about the Waldensians that is very painful to consider, and I will try truly to be sensitive and careful and helpful in how I gesture toward this, but I cannot avoid it. It dishonors their legacy. We don't talk about this. And I'm concerned that it's often overlooked or ignored or downplayed. And that is, this particular group was savagely persecuted. Now, my commitment when I talk about these things, and I'm sure I don't do this perfectly, is to never speak in a triumphalistic way about these things,

always to speak with grief and to look for healing where these things have happened. I also seek to be ready and willing on a dime to acknowledge Protestant sins. Okay. But we've got to have historical actions. and if I could just make a plea for these events not to be downplayed. And starting in the 13th century, you do have brutal, brutal persecutions against the Waldensians. So, you know, burning at the stake, there's an episode, I think it's in like, I don't know, early 13th century,

and then you have these flare-ups at several points. Now, rather than canvas all of these, let me simply encourage people to do their own research. Do not take my word for it. Also, I'd encourage you not just to listen to a Catholic perspective on it, simply because sometimes the truth is both sides, the Protestants exaggerate these things and the Catholics downplay these things sometimes. Of course, there's also honest people on both sides. Look at a non-Christian historian. Look at an Eastern Orthodox historian. Get a relatively objective look on these things and do your own research. A starting point could just be to Google some of these, you know, Google 1655 massacre and just be warned that it is brutal.

And these events, the women and children were not spared, and they were terrible. And that's all I'm going to say about that. You can do your own research on that. I do need to say two of the things to protest against their being minimized. One is it's not true when people say, oh, it wasn't the Catholic Church that was involved. It was just others or just the civil authorities or something like this. That's not true. For some of these events, like the 1487 massacre, Pope Innocent VIII himself wrote a bull against the Waldensians

and promised indulgences to those who participated in a crusade against them. Okay? I'm not making that up. I don't think that's a point that's in dispute among historians. Again, do your own research. Another way people try to downplay these things is what aboutism, where it's like, well, that happened, but what about this?

And I want to encourage us not to do that. I don't think that helps, partly because the Waldens, none of these proto-Protestine groups in any of the persecutions you try to link them with, or even just Protestantism as a whole, it's not to scale. This is not a 50-50.

You know, if you add up the Waldensians and the Hussites and the Albugencian crusade and the Inquisition and all of these events, there's a massive amount of persecution. and the other way it's different is this was a part of the official Catholic theology at the time. Again, don't get mad at me, okay? I'm not making this up.

There was a theology of the extermination of heretics, and that's not my language. You can look to the Unum-Songdom where the Catholic Church claimed the power of the temporal sword, and people with Jan Hus, people sometimes push back, like, oh, it was the civil authorities. At Jan Hus' trial, The Roman Catholic Archbishop himself preached the sermon on Roman 6th,

that the body of sin must be put to death. That was the theology at the time. I believe to the best of my sincere ability to investigate this, that is historically accurate. People can push back in the comments if you think I'm missing something there. But my appeal is, let's not downplay these things, because I really admire these people, and it hurts when people downplay. You could understand it if, like, you lost an uncle in a war or something like that. and then someone like downplays says, oh, the war wasn't that bad or something like that. It hurts,

you know. So, and, okay, enough said on that. Do your own research on that. Let me do this. Let me draw attention to Waldensian theology because it's fascinating to see points of continuity and how amazingly similar it was to Protestant theology. And the fact is, we have a surviving early 12th century confession of faith among all densities. It's so fascinating. So let me finish off this video here, knowing I'll be home a few minutes late. My wife might even text me while I'm finishing off. Just reading some of these articles, absolutely fascinating. Here's Article 1 from the Confession of Faith. We believe and firmly hold all that is contained in the 12 articles of the symbol, which is called the Apostles Creed, accounting for heresy whatsoever is disagreeing,

and not consonant to the said 12 articles. Article 2 is about the Trinity. They affirm the Trinity. So the 12 articles of the symbol, that's basically just the Apostles' Creed. So the Waldensians are saying, we affirm the Apostles' Creed, and we think disagreeing with the Apostles' Creed is heresy.

Okay. So this group was not radically revisionist. They do try to situate themselves within Trinitarian Christianity, within the Apostles' Creed. Article 3 is on the canon, and they basically go through and affirm the 66 Protestant book, or 66 book Protestant canon, and then they say, here follows the books apocryphal, which are not received of the Hebrews, but we read them as St. Jerome, essay at St. Jerome,

his prologue to the Proverbs, for the instruction of the people, not to confirm the authority of the doctrine of the church, and then they list all the Deutero-canonical books. That was the classic patristic distinction, the books for dogma, the books for, the books for edification. This is why sometimes people really miss the nuances of, in these issues, discussions of canon. They don't realize there's a two-tier canon for the early church. You've got the canon for dogma, canon for writings for edification. So they affirm a Protestant canon. Here's an interesting article. Article 8. In like manner, we firmly hold that there is no other mediator and advocate with God the Father, save only Jesus Christ. And as for the Virgin Mary, that she was

holy, humble, and full of grace. And in like manner, do we believe concerning all the other saints, that being in heaven, they wait for the resurrection of their bodies at the day of judgment. So they honor Mary, but they insist on the soul mediatorship of Christ. As many other articles I could read from here, I printed off on purgatory and other things like this, feasts, holy water, relics, they oppose many of these Catholic practices. Here I'll just read one more. Article 12 is interesting on the sacraments. They write, we do believe that the sacraments are signs of the holy thing or visible forms of the invisible grace, accounting it good that the faithful sometimes use the said signs or visible forms if it may be done. However, we believe and hold

that the above said, faithful, may be saved without receiving the signs aforesaid, in case they have no place nor any means to use them. And the next article affirms only two sacraments, baptism and the Lord's Supper. Let me read just one other bit from a catechism of the Waldensians used for the instruction of their youth, which picks up on their concern about the sacraments that you just heard from there, opposing the high sacramentalism of the Catholic Church, but not necessarily ruling out any kind of sacramalism. This catechism is fascinating. It affirms a distinction between what they call the substance of the church and the, and the ministry of the church. So they talk about the substantial church and the ministerial church.

Basically maps on pretty much exactly to the later Protestant distinction between visible and invisible church. Like that distinction, this is often misunderstood as though the Waldensians were denying the visible church or the ministerial church. They were not. They were simply distinguishing it. So the catechism says, minister, by what marks is an undue administration of the sacraments known. Answer, when the priests, not knowing the intentions of Christ in the sacrament, say that the grace and truth are included in the external ceremonies, and persuade men to the participation of the sacrament without the truth and without faith. And then it lists a bunch of scriptures about why this is a problem. It goes on, minister, by what way oughtest thou to communicate with the Holy Church?

Answer, I ought to communicate with the church in regard to its substance by faith and charity, as also by deserving the commandments, and by a final persevering and well-doing. Note that phrase by the substance of the church. That relates to this distinction between substance and ministry of the church. So what they're essentially opposing is an externalism, where membership in the church or the efficacy of the sacraments is reduced to the external ceremonies, the external institutional boundaries. They're wanting to say, no, it's the substance of the church, it's the faith of the church, that by which you relate to the church, and that the sacraments should be conducted with the understanding and the consent and the faith of their recipients.

obviously there's a lot of resonance between Protestant concerns and the Waldensians and there's so much more we could say about this but let me sum it up by just saying this again to bring it back to the point the point isn't to say ah we have all got to agree with the Waldensians on everything just to say two things first to encourage people to give more attention to these proto-Protestant groups such as the Waldensians I think it's appropriate actually for us to honor them myself and second of all to say to push against the claim that Protestant concerns arose in the 1500s, just like all of a sudden people started having these concerns. That's not true. The Protestants inherited a long tradition of dissent, and many of those dissenters were persecuted.

And that helps explain a little bit when someone says, where was your church in the Middle Ages? Maybe this video could help you understand how I feel about that. Because, boy, what I feel like saying is saying it more forcefully, I'll just say more gently here is maybe there would have been more. if there hadn't been those persecutions of them. So I hope that you could receive that concern in the spirit in which I intend it, which is said in love and not in a desire to just poke at something and stir something up. Again, don't take my word on any of this. Do your own research. There's a lot you can find out about these fascinating points of history.

Thanks for watching this. Let me know what you think in the comments. If anything's unfair, give me some pushback. don't forget to like the video subscribe hit the bell we can stay in touch i'm going to have my next video is going to be on my new book that comes out i know a lot of my videos are on things that divide christians but this is really fun to talk about because it's basically a book about the existence of god so it's hey this is something all christians can agree upon because that at least we have in common so hey thanks for watching this video let me know what you think in the comments God bless you.