Note: Images of the original pages are available through
Internet Archive. See
https://archive.org/details/albigensianheres00warnuoft
Transcriber's note:
Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
Small capitals have been replaced by full capitals.
Studies in Church History
THE ALBIGENSIAN HERESY
by
THE REV. H. J. WARNER. M.A.
London:
Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge
New York & Toronto: the Macmillan Co.
1922
A Dissertation approved for the
B.D. Degree, Cantab.
Printed in Great Britain at
The Mayflower Press, Plymouth. William Brendon & Son Ltd.
INTRODUCTION
The interest and importance of the so-called Albigensian Heresy[1] lie in
the fact that while it bears "a local habitation and a name," its actual
habitation was not local, and its name is misleading. Its origin must be
traced back to pre-Christian Ages, and its fruits will remain for ages to
come. Its current title is inexact and incomplete; _inexact_, because
Albi was not the _fons et origo_ of a movement which, although it took
deepest root in Southern France, was sporadic throughout Central and
Western Europe; _incomplete_, because the movement was not one heresy, but
many, defying rigid classification, heterogeneous, self-contradictory,
yet united in opposition to the Church of Rome. It is a mere accident of
history that the name is derived from Albi, for Albi was but one, and
that by no means the most important town infected. The storm-centre was
the great city of Toulouse, which Peter de Vaux-Sarnai describes as
"Tolosa, tota dolosa," being, as he adds, seldom or never from its
foundation free from heresy, fathers handing it on to their sons. The
impact came at a time when the Church of Rome was putting forth all its
power to extend its spiritual supremacy northward, and the Kingdom of
France its territorial domains southward, and it suited their respective
interests to unite their forces in a home-crusade against Southern
France. Between the upper and nether millstones the body was crushed, but
"its soul goes marching on." Its enemies declared it to be rank paganism
(Manicheism)[2]: its adherents the purest form of Christianity
(Catharism). An impartial investigation will, we think, show that neither
claim can be substantiated. Impartiality, however, is not easily
preserved. Most of the documentary evidence which has come down to us is
biassed. The Church considered it its sacred duty to destroy all
heretical literature as pestiferous: the heretics, equally, the archives
of the early inquisitions, whenever they fell into their hands in their
few military successes, on the ground that they were dangerous to their
members and distortive of their doctrines. "No person," observes Francis
Palgrave in his "History of the Anglo-Saxons," "ever can attempt any
historical inquiry who does not bring some favourite dogma of his own to
the task--some principle which he wishes to support--some position which
he is anxious to illustrate or defend, and it is quite useless to lament
these tendencies to partiality, since they are the very incitements to
labour." It is because this is true of many who, with political and
ecclesiastical predilections, have sought to confirm them by this
controversy, that a fresh endeavour should be made to get at the facts of
the case. On the one hand we must avoid reading into Homer what Homer
never knew. On the other hand we must carefully precipitate the prose
which is in solution in the poetry, and separate historical fact from
fanatical fiction.
[1] The word "heresy" (αἵρεσις) originally carried with it no censure,
but rather approval. In classical Greek it means (1) "free choice"
(abstract), (2) "that which is chosen," (3) "those who make the choice, a
sect or school." In ecclesiastical Greek (LXX) it is used to render
נְדָבָה, "a free-will offering" (Lev. xxii. passim); in the N.T. it
means "an opinion," whether true, false or neutral, or "those who hold
such opinions." The Pharisees (orthodox), the Sadducees (rationalist),
the Christians (schismatic) are alike described as "heresy," where
perhaps "school" or "party" would be the more modern rendering (Acts
v. 17, xv. 5, xxiv. 5, 14, xxvi. 5, xxviii. 22). St. Paul's use wavers
between an opinion which is the outcome of legitimate freedom of thought,
and positive schism. (Cf. 1 Cor. xi. 19 with Gal. v. 20, where αἵρεσις is
classed with διχοστασία.)
[2] Ricchini, editor of Moneta's great work, begins his Dissertation:
"Manichaeorum haereseos quae tertio Ecclesiae Seculo ex impuris Ethniorum
ac Gnosticorum lacunis Manete Persa antesignato emergens, diu lateque
pervagata est, sobolem et propaginem fuisse Catharos seu novos xii et
xiii seculi Manichaeos nemo dubitat, qui utriusque Sectae dogmata, mores
et disciplinam diligenter contulerit."
CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION 5
CHAPTER I
THE SOURCE 9
CHAPTER II
THE SOIL 19
CHAPTER III
THE SEED 30
CHAPTER IV
THE SYSTEM 65
CHAPTER IV (_continued_)
RITES AND CEREMONIES 80
CHAPTER V
A SUMMARY 88
THE ALBIGENSIAN
HERESY
CHAPTER I
THE SOURCE
The origin of the Albigensian heresies was not indigenous, but imported,
although the raw imports were quickly combined with the home products.
Their vigorous growth and wide popularity were due to the peculiarly
favourable conditions of the country at the time of their introduction.
§ 1. NOT MANICHEAN
The Church commonly labelled the heresy "Manichean," but the label was a
libel. The word suited well the purpose of the Church, because the name
"Manichean" had had for centuries sinister associations, aroused the
utter detestation of the orthodox and brought down upon those accused of
it the severest penalties of Church and State. It recalled the conflicts
of the early Church with Gnosticism. It exercised a subtle fascination
over Augustine, and although he afterwards combated it, yet even as
Bishop, according to Julian of Eclanum--no mean critic--"he was not
entirely free from its infection." The aggressiveness of Manicheism,
albeit characteristically insidious and secretive, had, at the appearance
of Catharism, become a spent force. The contrary opinion is based on
inference, not historical data. The Dualism of the Manichees was not the
Dualism of the Catharists, and there were other differences even more
separative. No Manichean writer or leader or emissary has left the
slightest trace of his name or influence upon Catharist propaganda. The
eagerness with which this weapon was forged by the Church and the success
with which it was wielded make us suspicious of its justice. Even Bernard
of Clairvaux denies that the Catharists originated from Mani.[3]
§ 2. NOT PRISCILLIAN
Much the same may be said of the view, less widely held, that Catharism
was a resurgence of Priscillianism, of the survival of which we have
evidence as late as the beginning of the seventh century. It passed the
Pyrenees into France. There was undoubtedly a close connection between
Aragon and Toulouse. In their Dualism and Asceticism, in their study and
canon[4] of the Scriptures the two movements had points of resemblance,
but this is the utmost that can be said in favour of the theory. The
Catharists neither claimed to have had their origin in Spain nor
attempted to find there a favourable soil for planting their tenets. The
slight support that they received was given for political or family
reasons only. They used its nearer valleys and mountains as places of
refuge, not spheres of propaganda.
§ 3. NOT DONATIST
The resemblance between the Donatists and Albigenses, in their attitude
on the unworthiness of ministers affecting the validity of sacraments and
even of the Church itself, affords no historical ground for the theory
that that Schism left any seeds in France to germinate only after several
centuries. That Schism was confined to North Africa. Apart from the
presence of five Gallic Bishops, or assessors with the Bishop of Rome in
the trial, Caecilian _v._ Donatus, ordered by the Emperor in A.D. 313,
and the Council held at Arles in the following year, France had no
interest in the Donatist controversy. The opposite was the case, for the
Gallic Bishops were directed to intervene, and the Council was held in
Gaul, because Gaul was immune from it, and its doctrinal isolation
presumed an impartial platform for the disputants. Another point of
resemblance between Donatists and Albigenses was that both alike objected
to the coercive interference of the State in Church affairs.[5] But this
and the unworthiness of ministers are "marks" of a Church which have been
discussed in all ages, and are no evidence of historical connection.
§ 4. PARTLY PAULICIAN
We reach firmer ground in seeking a connection between the Catharists and
the Paulicians. We cannot go so far as to say with Reinéri, himself once
a Catharist, that the movement sprang from Bulgaria and Dalmatia, but
there is evidence to show that the Catharists themselves did not dispute
_some_ affinity. Paulician (corrupted into poplican, publican, etc.)[6]
was an early appellation of the Catharist; and a comparison of their
tenets and organization proves that there was too much in common to be
ascribed to mere accident. In the ninth century the Paulicians of Armenia
saw that circumstances were favourable for the dissemination of their
creed among the Slavonic people. For in the early part of that century
the Greek monks, Methodius and Cyril, had converted Bulgaria to
Christianity, and its King, Boris, who wished to be on friendly terms
with both the Frankish Kingdom and the Byzantine Empire, was baptized,
and took the name of Michael after his godfather Michael III, the
Byzantine Emperor. A special feature to be remembered in this work of
conversion is that these two monks translated the New Testament from the
Greek into the Bulgar language, and drew up a liturgy. They relied not
only upon the spoken word, but also upon the written word "in a tongue
understanded of the people"--a method of evangelization common to the
Paulicians, Albigenses and Waldenses. Not only so, but the version
current amongst the Western heretics can be shewn to be based upon the
Greek and not upon the Vulgate. The Doxology of the Lord's Prayer is
found in the New Testament of the Slavs and of the Catharists, derived
from the later Greek MSS., but does not occur in the earliest codices or
in the Vulgate. In Prov. viii. 22 the Catharists read ἔκτισε ("created")
with the LXX, but the Vulgate (possedit) ἐκτήσατο ("possessed"). The
Hebrew קָנָה may be rendered by either, but the former, frequently quoted
by the Arians, to the alarm and perplexity of Hilary, against Athanasius,
furnished the Church with grounds upon which to base a charge of Arianism
against the Catharists. In the archives of the Inquisition of Carcassonne
is a Latin version of the Apocryphal Narrative of the Questions of St.
John and the Answers of Jesus Christ, at the end of which is a note:
"This is a secret document of the heretics of Corcorezio, brought from
_Bulgaria_ by Nazarius their Bishop, full of errors."
The insistence upon the right of every nation to have the word of God in
its own language was a principle common to Paulicians and Catharists,
while the Papacy, holding that such a practice contributed to schism as
well as heresy, endeavoured to thrust one version, the Latin, upon the
whole Church, and refused permission to any but the clergy to read the
Scriptures. The Oriental Church was scarcely more compliant. Sergius, of
Tavia in Asia Minor, one of the ablest of the apostles of Paulicianism,
was won over to the sect by a personal study of the Scriptures which, he
had been taught, were to be read only by the clergy.[7] The story which
comes from the Paulicians of Galatia of Asia Minor might be transferred
almost word for word to describe similar conversions to Catharism in
Gallia of France.
Reverting to Bulgaria, Boris had desired to give Christianity an
authoritative and organized position in his dominions, and for this
purpose applied to Constantinople for a Bishop. Being refused, he
appealed to Rome. But from the Pope he received an even sterner rebuff.
However, jealousy gave what justice denied; for the Patriarch of
Constantinople, on hearing of Rome's refusal, altered his tone and gave
the King more than he asked, viz. one Archbishop and ten Bishops. We may
be certain that these Greek prelates would do nothing to mitigate the
antipathy which the Slavo-Greeks would feel towards Rome, and this
antipathy deepened into a settled hatred when Rome, later, denied them
the right to have the Scriptures in any language but Latin. These
troublous times the Paulicians of Armenia, ever zealous propagandists,
seized upon for spreading their doctrines. Their asceticism appealed
strongly to monks in Bulgaria, Thrace, etc., and in many a monastery
Paulicians were welcomed. Persecution also drove them westward, and when
in A.D. 969 the Emperor Tzimisces established them in Philippopolis, it
was a comparatively easy matter for them to transmit their doctrines
along the great trade routes through Bosnia and Dalmatia across and
around the Adriatic to Lombardy and France.
At Philippopolis the Paulicians would find a sect called the Euchites
already in possession, and, as the latter professed both an absolute and
a mitigated Dualism, the two bodies would readily fraternize. The
Euchites derived their name from εὐχή, because they regarded prayer as
superior to all other Christian duties. But their Slavonic name was
Bogomile, which, according to Euthymius, means "God, have pity,"[8] owing
to their frequent use of this phrase in worship. Now "Bogomile" was a
name frequently applied to the Catharists, nor did the Catharists
repudiate it. Moreover, as will be shewn later, there is a close
correspondence between the doctrines and practices of the Paulicians and
Bogomiles and those of the Albigenses. These prevailed everywhere
throughout the Byzantine Empire, and Crusaders and pilgrims could not
fail to come across them. What more probable, then, than that Crusaders
straggling and struggling homeward from defeat and disaster in Palestine,
to which they had gone at the summons and with the blessing of Holy
Church, should lend a sympathetic ear to those whose doctrines were
commended by personal asceticism and communal philanthropy? The blessing
had turned to a curse. They returned with the loss not only of health and
wealth, but of reverence for and faith in Rome. The Pagan had beaten the
Christian. Is it surprising that Catholicity should succumb to
suggestions for a new version of Christianity which gave them a plausible
and picturesque solution of the conflict between good and evil? Is it
surprising that the soldiers of the conquered Cross should be the
channels by which this concept flowed over those very countries from
which these disgruntled warriors had set forth? Nor must we overlook the
pilgrims and the Western mercenaries in the employ of the Eastern
Emperors bringing back with them at least information of these sects,
even though they did not agree with them.
Again, there is some evidence that the Cathari were prepared to show
deference, if not actual subordination, to the Paulicians. At the Synod
held A.D. 1167 in St. Felix de Caraman[9] near Toulouse, at which were
present Catharists from Lombardy and Italy, as well as France, Nicetas,
the Paulician "Bishop" of Constantinople, attended by request and
presided. His ruling that an absolute and not a relative Dualism was the
true Creed of Catharism was accepted. The consecration which certain
"Bishops" had received from Bulgaria he declared to be invalid, and he
reconsecrated them by the imposition of his hands. The "Perfects,"
fearing lest the Consolamentum[10] which they had received from such
"Bishops" might also be invalid, received the rite again from this
"Bishop" of the strict Paulicians. He instituted to the Sees of Toulouse,
Carcassonne and the Valley of the Aran three "Bishops" whom these
Dioceses had respectively elected. Lastly, he was consulted as to the
delimitation of the Dioceses of Toulouse and Carcassonne, and his
arbitration was accepted by all parties. His decision was avowedly based
upon Eastern and primitive precedent, viz. of the Seven Churches of
Asia--not by following the existing municipal and political boundaries of
the State, but by considering solely the spiritual interests of the
Church. The courtesy of inviting an eminent co-religionist to preside
over the Synod's deliberations, and the impartiality to be expected from
a disinterested stranger, fail to satisfy the terms of the equation. The
authority which Nicetas exercised, acceptance of his consecration and
consolamentum in place of the previous ones acknowledged as invalid
through a doctrine, erroneous because out of harmony with that of the
East, can only be explained on the ground that this Paulician Bishop of
the East came to the West as the duly accredited representative of a
foster-mother to her daughter Churches.
The title by which the heretics were most widely known was that of
Cathari. Unquestionably[11] derived from καθαρός, "pure," it points to
Eastern associations. First met with in the second half of the twelfth
century, it is the only appellation used of the heretics by Reinéri and
Moneta.
That a Gnostic element, undefined and indefinable, underlay and mingled
with the Catholicism of the working classes cannot be denied, and if we
can identify the sources of one or two strong streams feeding the
Albigensian heresy, these do not necessarily exclude others whose sources
evade us. In A.D. 890 Agobard, Archbishop of Lyons, discovered Gnostic
elements in his antiphonary. The Declaration of Belief which a century
later (A.D. 991) Gerbert published on his appointment to the
Archbishopric of Rheims was obviously called forth by the prevalence of
Docetic and Dualistic teaching in his Province: "I believe that Christ
was the Son of God, that He took a human form from His mother, and in
that body suffered, died and rose again. I believe that one and the same
God was the originator of both the Old and New Testaments, that Satan was
not originally evil, but had fallen into evil; that our present body and
no other would rise again; that marriage and eating meat were both
allowable."
In A.D. 1016 an _Armenian_ anchorite was detected in Rome and denounced
as a heretic, and scarcely escaped with his life. As "Armenian" became
synonymous with heretic, we may assume that Armenians were frequent
visitors to other places in the West, and that their heresy was Paulician.
§ 5. PARTLY INDIGENOUS
It is not therefore to Spain or Africa that we must look for the origin
of the Albigensian heresy, but rather to the East, for in that direction
the names Manichean, Bogomile, Bulgar, Paulician, Poplican[12] and
Catharist point, but we can only speak in generalities. We cannot say of
this heresy: "In the year ---- a band of missioners under ---- came to
France to convert it to Catharism," as we can say of the English Church:
"In the year 597 a band of missioners under Augustine came to England to
convert it to Christianity." When we have stretched our historical data
to their utmost capacity, when we have made full allowance for the
devastation wrought by friend and foe--by friend in the destruction of
the records against themselves of the Inquisition, by foe in the
destruction of heretical literature--we are convinced that the imports
from the East fail in quantity and quality to account for the Albigensian
heresies as we find them in full vigour and variety. Their germs might
have been found almost anywhere in Western Christendom in the Middle
Ages, but the stimulus to growth came not from without, but from within.
It was a spontaneous outburst of a profound discontent with a Church
which by its Ultramontanism opposed all national independence, and by its
unspirituality forfeited all respect for its creed. Just as the Church
turned back to Aristotelian and Platonic philosophy to illuminate the
mystical element--the relationship between the outward and the inward--in
its own entity and in its Sacraments--a philosophy which had long lain
dormant in her midst--so the Catharists turned back to Dualistic
Gnosticism to illuminate the origin of good and evil, and its bearing
upon ecclesiastical organization. But whereas the students of the North
were attracted to dialectics, the light-hearted of the South of France
were drawn to picturesque myths. It was an age when men everywhere, and
especially in France, were devoting themselves to a reconsideration of
the Church, in its essence, its doctrines and its activities; but while
the Church forced facts to suit philosophic theories, the Catharists
adopted and devised Dualistic theories to suit the facts. The Church
claimed that its doctrines, such as that of the Holy Roman Empire or of
Transubstantiation, were not new, but inherent in and developed from the
authority and teaching of its Divine Head. The Catharists maintained that
they were corruptions and profanities, weeds not fruit, and only when
they were swept away would the Christian Church be pure and therefore
powerful. How far circumstances favoured them falls now to be considered.
[3] Sermones in Cant. LXVI.
[4] Priscillianists rejected the Pentateuch but highly esteemed the
Apocryphal "Ascension of Isaiah," and the "Memoirs of the Apostles."
[5] Quid est imperatori cum ecclesia? ('Optatus,' III, _c._ 3.)
[6] _v. infra_, p. 17, note.
[7] Neander, "Ch. Hist." Vol. V pp. 346 _seq._ (Bohn).
[8] This has been questioned. The word probably means "The friend of God"
(Theophilus). So Gieseler, who says that the complete sentence in
Slavonic for "Lord, have mercy" (Kyrie eleison) would be "Gospodine
pomilui" (Schmidt Vol. II, pp. 284 _seq._).
[9] A significant connection with Asia Minor.
[10] _v. infra_, p. 83.
[11] In Lombardy called Gazari. Mosheim thought Gazari to be the original
form (and Cathari a corruption) from Gazar, the ancient Chersonese of the
Taurus. But there is nothing to show there were Dualists there. Neander,
while deriving Gazzari from the same place, distinguishes them from
Cathari. Ketzer is the common German word for "heretic."
[12] To the several solutions proposed of this word (_v._ Du Cange
_s.v._), I would add the suggestion that it is a popular abbreviation of
Philippopolicani, Philippopolis being the most active and most western
centre of Paulician propagandism. Such popular abbreviations of
cumbersome words are found in all languages.