Several Persons Who Maintained the Doctrine of Berengarius, Burnt Alive at Treves and Utrecht, A. D. 1135.
We read in the ancient chronicles, that in the year 1135, several persons were burnt alive by the Emperor Lotharius, at Treves and Utrecht; concerning which the Chron. Sax., in particular, expressly mentions, that they were burnt as heretics. However, in what their alleged heresy consisted, is not clearly expressed. This, however, is certain: that they separated from the Roman church, and opposed her errors.
Abraham Mellinus concludes, from the circumstances mentioned with regard to them, that they were Berengarians, or followers of Berengarius. “For,” says he, “the reader must know, that after Berengarius’ death very many were condemned as heretics, simply because they had the same belief with Berengarius, respecting the Lord’s Supper, and opposed the bread-god of the mass.” Second book, fol. 395, col. 3, from Chron. Sax.
ARNALD, A LECTOR AT BRESCIA, AFTER MUCH PERSECUTION, BURNT AT ROME, FOR HIS VIEWS AGAINST INFANT BAPTISM, THE MASS, ETC., A. D. 1145.
In our account of those who opposed infant baptism, in the twelfth century, we made mention, for the year 1139, of one Arnald, a lector at Brescia, in Italy, and stated, that, having been instructed by Peter Abelard, he, besides the doctrine he maintained against the mass and transubstantiation, also taught against infant baptism; on account of which Pope Innocent II. commanded him to be silent. Thereupon he fled into Germany or Switzerland, where for a time he continued to teach. Thence, after the death of the aforesaid Pope, he came to Rome. But obtaining there an incredible number of followers, and being severely persecuted by the Popes Eugenius and Adrian, he fled to the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, who delivered him into the hands of the Pope; and thus he was finally, at Rome, placed to the stake, burnt to ashes, and the ashes thrown into the Tiber, lest the people should show him honor. It is recorded that this occurred A. D. 1145, after he had, as is reckoned, strenuously maintained the above doctrine for about six years. Bapt. Hist., page 598, from Baron., A. D. 1139, num. 3, and A. D. 1145, num. 3; also, H. Montan., Nietigh., page 84.
Abraham Mellinus, writing of the belief of Arnald, says: “He also taught quite differently concerning the sacrament of the altar, and (notice), of infant baptism, from that which was taught in the Roman church at that time. He doubtless, in this respect, held the views of Peter de Bruis and Henry of Toulouse (of whom we shall speak afterwards), rejecting transubstantiation, and denying that the mass is a sacrifice for the living and the dead, and that (notice again) either baptism or the faith of others saves infants.” Thus far, A. Mell., 2d book, page 425, col. 3.
Note.—Abraham Mellinus, who states this concerning the belief of Arnald, was a preacher of the Calvinistic church, in St. Anthony’s Polder, and, consequently, himself an advocate of infant baptism. Nevertheless, he distinctly says of Arnald, whom he recognized as a pious martyr, that he taught quite differently concerning infant baptism, and also that this baptism and the faith of others do not save children, etc., the opposite of which the Romanists maintained.
Further Observation.—As regards the manner in which he maintained, promulgated, and inculcated said doctrine, and himself kept it to the end, as well as what happened to him on this account; that is, all the circumstances, and also a summary of the matter, see Otto Friesing, lib. 1, cap. 27, 28, and lib. 2, cap. 20, de Gest. Frid. L. Imp. Gunth. Ligur., lib. 3, de Gest. Frid. 1. Bernhard. Epist., 196, 189, 195. Sigon. de Regno Ital., lib. 11, from A. D. 1139 until 1146. Abent., lib. 6. Annal. Boio Gerhohus Reichersp., lib. 1, de Invest. Antichrist. apud Gretser in Proleg. Script. contra Walden., cap. 4, Tom. 4, Concil. edition 1612, p. 23, compared with Bapt. His., p. 686.
PETER ABELARD, ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABOVEMENTIONED BELIEF, IS CONFINED, BY ORDER OF THE POPE OF ROME, IN THE DUNGEON OF A MONASTERY, AND DIES THERE, A. D. 1145.
H. Montanus states, from Cesar Baronius, that this Peter Abelard was the one from whom the aforementioned Arnald had obtained the doctrine against infant baptism, drawn, however, chiefly from the holy Scriptures; which is not contradicted, but sufficiently confirmed, by Mellinus, when he says: “That said Arnald was a disciple of Peter Abelard, from France, where he had pursued his studies.” Second book, page 425, col. 3.
He then adds this account: “That Pope Innocent, after the great synod which he had held, at Rome, against the abettors of this doctrine, wrote letters to Samson, Archbishop of Rheims, Henry, Archbishop of Sens, and Bernhard, abbot of Clairvaux, against Arnald of Brescia, and his teacher Peter Abelard; charging the former, that wherever they should find these two, they should confine them each separately, in a monastery, as originators of a perverted doctrine, and antagonists of the Catholic faith, and burn their books or writings wherever they should discover them.”
“As to what was the belief of Peter Abelard,” says Mellinus, “and in what points he assailed popery, can be seen and read in all his works, which have just been published in print in France; where it will also be found, in his letters, how much he had to suffer for his belief.”
Touching his belief and death.—Concerning Peter Abelard and his belief, especially how he opposed infant baptism, and instructed his disciple, Arnald, in this point, see Jacob Mehrn., Bapt. Hist., page 598. Baron., A. D. 1139, num. 3, and A. D. 1145. H. Montan. Nietigh., page 84. Also, Introduction, fol. 49.
Mellinus finally states, from ancient writers, that Peter Abelard, after much suffering, died in the monastery in which he had been confined, by order of the Pope, on account of his faith. This happened, according to our reckoning, about the year 1146, after the death of his disciple Arnald.
PETER BRUIS, BURNT AT ST. GILES; HENRY OF TOULOUSE APPREHENDED AND PUT OUT OF THE WAY, BY THE POPE’S LEGATE; AND MANY OTHER PERSONS PUT TO DEATH AT PARIS, FOR THE TRUE EVANGELICAL DOCTRINE; ABOUT THE YEARS 1145, 1147.
P. J. Twisck gives the following account in his Chronijck, for the year 1145: “About this time there were famous in France, Peter Bruis, formerly a priest, and his disciple, Henry of Toulouse; both had been monks, were learned men, and greatly censured the papal errors, sparing neither great nor small. They called the Pope the prince of Sodom, and the city of Rome the mother of all unrighteousness, abomination, and execration. They spoke against the mass, images, pilgrimages, and other institutions of the Roman church. They renounced infant baptism, saying that none but the believing were entitled to baptism.
When Peter had preached about twenty years, namely, from before the year 1126 until 1145, the people flocking to him in great numbers, he was finally publicly burnt in the city of St. Giles, also called St. Aegidius.
His disciple Henry, who followed him in the doctrine, was intercepted and apprehended some time after by the legate of the Pope, and put out of the way, so that his fate is not known. This is held to have occurred two years after the death of Peter Bruis, namely A. D. 1147.
After their death a cruel persecution arose against all those who had followed their doctrine, many of whom went joyfully to meet death. In short, however assiduously the popes with all their shaven heads aided by princes and secular magistrates, exerted themselves to exterminate them, first, by disputations, then by banishment and papal excommunications and anathemas, proclamation of crusades, indulgences, and pardons to all those who should do violence157 to said people, and, finally, by all manner of torment, fire, gallows, and cruel bloodshedding, yea, so that the whole world was in commotion on account of it; yet, could they not prevent this persuasion from spreading everywhere, and going forth into every country and kingdom, holding their worship secretly as well as openly, with great or small numbers, according to the tyranny, cruelty or persuasion of the times, and continuing until the year 1304; of whom over a hundred persons were put to death, or burnt, at Paris; and thus their descendants, as history states, continued, though under much tribulation, until this time. P. J. Twisck, Chron., page 450, from Philip Marnix Tafer, 3d part, cap. 12, fol. 141, 142. Merula, fol. 748, 853. Hist. Mart. Doopsg., fol. 15. Also, Introduction, page 49.
CERTAIN PEASANTS, CALLED APOSTOLICS, PUT TO DEATH FOR MAINTAINING THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOSTLES, NEAR TOULOUSE, IN FRANCE, A. D. 1155.
It is stated, that about A. D. 1155 there were in the above part of France, certain simple but truth-loving peasants, who, pointing to no other author of their doctrine or belief, than to the apostles, called themselves Apostolics, as though they would say, that their doctrine and belief were derived from the apostles. Bernard,158 abbot of Clairvaux, greatly inveighed against them in divers sermons, calling them a sort of despised, boorish rabble, ignorant and altogether weak. “They,” he says, “are boorish people, idiots, and completely sold; but they must not be dealt with imprudently.” “From this it appears,” writes Abraham Mellinus, “that they must not have been so very dull and ignorant after all.”
In the mean time, Bernard continues to rail against them, after papistic fashion. “Inquire,” says he, “for their author; of what sect they are? They will not be able to name any one. But what heresy is there, that has not its author from among men? The Manicheans had Manes as their head and master; the Sabellians had Sabellicus; the Arians, Arium; the Eunomians, Eunomium; the Nestorians, Nestorius; likewise every other similar pest had its separate master among men, from which it derived both its origin and name; but what name or title shall be given or accorded to these? None at all,” he says, “because they received their heresy neither from nor by men; nevertheless, far be it from us to say that they received it through the revelation of Christ.”
Continuing, he shows in what their so-called heresy consisted, saying: “They ridicule us, that we baptize infants; that we implore the intercession of the saints, and the like. It has been found, that they would rather die, than be converted (namely, to the Roman church). Many a time the believers (he means the papists), laid hands on some of them, drew them forth; and being asked concerning their faith, they would not confess their wickedness, but openly protested, that they taught the true godliness, and were ready to die for it. In the meantime, the people that stood by, were not less ready to put them to death: and falling upon them, they made these new heretics martyrs of their own faith.”
“Some wonder at this, that, when led forth to death, they were not only joyful, but also patient; but it is to be deplored, that not only secular princes, but also, it is said, some ecclesiastics, yea bishops, who ought much rather to have persecuted them, upheld them for lucre’s sake, saying: ‘Why should we condemn them as heretics, who have not been convinced of heresy, nor have confessed the same?’ ”
Thus far, Bernard, who was called, The Mellifluent, but who nevertheless poured forth nothing but bitter gall against these people. In Serm. 16 and 66, on Cant. Also, Epist. 240, oldest edition.
From this it is sufficiently apparent, writes Mellinus, that they persecuted these poor people unto death, not on account of Manichean doctrines, which Bernard unjustly and covertly imputes to them, but because they opposed the Roman church and her errors. Second book, fol 438, col. 1, 2.
Note.—These were the same people of whom we made mention, in our account of those who, in the twelfth century, opposed infant baptism, from Nicholas Sander, who states concerning them: “That they were called Apostolics, because they professed to walk in the footsteps of the apostles, and declared to hold themselves only to the apostolical writings; that they contemned infant baptism, purgatory, praying for the dead, invocation of the saints, swearing of oaths, etc.; that they accepted no evidence save from the New Testament; and went joyfully unto death.” Nic. Sand., lib. and Histor. Doopsg., A. 8. D. Anth. Jac., fol. 118. H. Montan. Nietigh., page 84. Introduction, page 50, Jacob Mehrning, Bapt. Hist., page 599. P. J. Twisck, Chron., page 469. B.
GERARD, WITH ABOUT THIRTY OTHERS, MEN AS WELL AS WOMEN, FOR MAINTAINING THE APOSTOLICAL DOCTRINE, AT OXFORD, IN ENGLAND, ARE BRANDED IN THE FOREHEAD, SCOURGED OUT OF THE CITY, AND MISERABLY PERISH WITH COLD, A. D. 1161.
It is recorded159 that A. D. 1161, in the eighth year of Henry II., King of England, about thirty persons, men as well as women, natives of Germany, sailed over to England. The papists called them erring spirits and publicans, saying that they had sprung from an unknown author;160 but others have called them Petro-brusians, Berengarians, Poor Men of Lyons, etc., because they, it appears, had their views against infant baptism, transubstantiation, and other errors of the Roman church, in common with Peter Bruis, Berengarius, and the Poor Men of Lyons.
“There were upwards of thirty of them,” says the papistic writer, “who, concealing their errors, had peaceably come into the land, in order to propagate their belief. Their principal leader was one Gerard, upon whom they looked as their lord and master; for he alone had a little learning, while all the rest were illiterate idiots, a very low and boorish class of people, and of the German nation and language. But they could not long remain concealed, since some made very diligent inquiries regarding them; and when it was found that they belonged to a strange sect, they were apprehended.”