compiled from various chronicles and histories by F. H. H., A. D. 1611,
the following is contained in the account relative to the swearing of
oaths, _page 99_: “A. D. 1397, William Troppe, otherwise called W.
Thorpe, was much persecuted in England, on account of his religion. He
confessed that the sacrament of the altar remained true bread after
the consecration, and that men ought not to swear.”
_Touching the same matter._--P. J. Twisck writes: “William Thorpe, a
priest in England, disputed earnestly with the priests of antichrist.
He taught against images, _the oath_, the sacrament of the altar, and
like abuses.” _Chron., p. 758, col. 2._
_Conclusion._--Hence, it appears from the preceding testimonies, that
this man sincerely, plainly, and undisguisedly taught against oaths of
whatsoever kind, according to the words of the Lord. Matt. 5:34, and
James 5:12;[190] to which more could be adduced; but we think enough
has been said in the matter, and, hence, we will dismiss it.
[190] “But I say unto you, Swear not at all.” Matt. 5:34. “But above
all things, my brethren, swear not.” James 5:12.
_A. D. 1412._--The loss to the Roman, and the upbuilding of the true
Christian, church, were at this time facts existing in no small degree
in the French country, around Paris, but particularly in that city
itself; since various distinguished persons, and in point of learning
not the least, did not hesitate to attack the Italian Babylon, that
is, Rome, and her perverted worship; however, not with external, but
with spiritual and evangelical weapons. Notwithstanding the hatred of
the papal clergy, they dared openly reprove the errors and abuses of
the Roman church. But whether they expressly mentioned, or otherwise
included, the article of infant baptism among the number, is not
clearly stated by the ancients; hence we must content ourselves with
what they have written of it in a general way.
NOTE.--John of Ferrara,... in Italy, said about this time, among
many other articles, that the Pope, by sheer violence, and without
right, had seized countries and cities; that the clergy carried their
conscience in their caps, and that they were more avaricious and worse
than the laity; that the churches and monasteries of the clergy were
nets with which to draw to themselves the property of the laity, etc.
_P. J. Twisck, Chron. for the year 1412, p. 770, col. 2._
Concerning this there is the following account: “At this time (A. D.
1412), also at Paris, various excellent, learned men rose against
popery, pointing out the errors and abuses of the Roman church; by
which they gained small thanks from the clergy.” _Catal. Test., fol.
857, Meru., fol. 910_, compared with the _Chronijck van den Ondergang,
p. 771, col. 1_.
_A. D. 1415._--At this time John Huss lived, who, having examined and
studied the books and writings of John Wickliffe (of whom we said in
the preceding century, that he opposed infant baptism, and the swearing
of oaths), retained and accepted therefrom, among other articles, that
it does not become a Christian to swear.
How and in what manner the writings of John Wickliffe fell into the
hands of John Huss, and how eagerly he exercised himself therein,
is described by _A. Mellinus, 2d book, p. 495, col. 1_; but that he
ever, by this means or otherwise, learned the article of non-swearing,
Mellinus, as well as other Calvanists, would deny, saying: “That which
is imputed to him, regarding his unwillingness to swear, has respect
only to the abjuration of his faith, or religion, but not to the oath
itself.”
Besides that I have never found such an explanation in any credible
writer of that time, though I have earnestly sought to investigate it;
the circumstances of the matter itself, however, indicate that the
article of non-swearing was one of the articles of his faith.
TOUCHING THE ARTICLES OF FAITH WHICH JOHN HUSS HAD DERIVED FROM THE
WRITINGS OF JOHN WICKLIFFE.
Sebastian Franck writes as follows: “John Huss, a disciple and fellow
believer of this Wickliffe, received the Wickliffite doctrine from
Jerome of Prague, who carried it with him from England to Bohemia as a
sacred treasure.”
Continuing, he relates the articles which John Huss had learned and
adopted from Wickliffe’s writings.
1. “That the Roman church has no right to divide the sacrament, and has
wrongfully deprived the laity of one form.
2. “That the Roman bishop is just like other (ordinary) bishops.
3. “That under all circumstances there is no purgatory.
4. “To pray for the dead is vain and unavailing, and is invented by the
avarice of the priests.
5. “Images of God and the saints are not to be tolerated, and should be
abolished.
6. “The wicked devils have invented the unspiritual mendicant orders.
7. “The priests ought to be poor, and live only from alms.
8. “Outward, auricular confession is altogether false and man’s
invention. It is sufficient to confess one’s sins in the closet to God.
9. “The ceremonies and usages of the (Roman) church are vain things.
10. “Touching several things concerning the sacrament, etc.
11. “The time is uselessly consumed by the seven hours.[191]
[191] Prayers which the priests of the Roman Catholic church have to
read from the breviary at stated seasons of the year. _Trans._
12. “There is no merit in the fasts instituted by the church, and in
many other errors.
13. “Men shall not swear in any wise. Hence he said to those who urged
him vehemently to swear an oath: ‘I am afraid every way; if I swear,
eternal death is my portion; but if I swear not, I cannot escape your
hands; but it is better that I fall into your hands without sin than to
sin in the sight of God.’”
Here we certainly clearly see that the doctrine of not swearing in any
wise, was an article of his faith; and if it was the case that he was
requested to abjure his faith or religion, he refused to abjure it,
not only because he would not forsake his faith or religion, but also
because he held that one ought not to swear at all, as the 13th article
declares: “Men shall not swear in any wise,” that is, not at all.
_Seb. Fr. Chron., 3d part, fol. 105. Tract, van den Loop Werelt, fol.
100._ Also _P. J. Twisck, Chron., page 764. A._
NOTICE CONCERNING THE FOLLOWERS OF JOHN HUSS, WHO, ACCORDING TO THE
ACCOUNTS OF JACOB MEHRNING, WERE VERY DIFFERENT FROM THEIR LEADER.
When in the fifteenth century, John Huss began to teach in Bohemia, and
gained a great number of adherents, many Waldenses united with them;
who rejoiced, and hoped that thereby the light of the Gospel, which,
up to this time, had for so long a period been so abominably quenched
and persecuted by the papists, would begin to shine more clearly,
burn more vigorously, and proceed the more unobstructedly. But when,
after the death of John Huss and Jerome of Prague, who had both been
burnt by the papists, at Constance, on the Lake of Constance, contrary
to the safe conduct granted by the Emperor, the Hussites in Bohemia,
commenced an atrocious and bloody war against Emperor Sigismund and
the German electors, and other princes, which they, after carrying
it on for a long time, finally adjusted, and when said Hussites, as
totally estranged from their teacher and leader, John Huss, united with
the papists in many doctrinal points and church ceremonies, many of
the Waldenses, who had at first joined the Hussites, found themselves
shamefully deceived in their hope, and bethought themselves better,
that is, according to the doctrine of the holy Gospel, to have nothing
at all to do with such a bloody war. Again, they also began to protest
against it. They also turned away from the Hussites, in the points of
doctrine and church usages, and established a separate church, being
afterwards called _Taborites, Grubenheimer_[192] dwellers in caves, etc.
[192] These Grubenheimer are to be distinguished from others who also
bore this name.
This greatly grieved the so-called Hussites, and they, therefore,
through the instigation of M. John Rockenzahns and others, began to
dreadfully hate and persecute, not only the old faithful Waldenses,
who had never been united with them, but also these newer ones, who
separated from them. _Jac. Mehrn., Bapt. Hist., 2d part_, from _Lydius,
in the Hist. of the Waldensibus_.
FURTHER OBSERVATION CONCERNING THE MISDEEDS OF THE FOLLOWERS OF JOHN
HUSS.
From the above, we certainly clearly see that the orthodox Waldenses
had existence also in the fifteenth century; some of whom, having, from
a good intention, united with the Hussites, who followed their master
John Huss, neither meekly nor faithfully, were shamefully deceived by
them, seeing said Hussites commenced to take up arms and wage severe
wars against their enemies, something to which the Waldenses were
certainly not accustomed, as is shown by their own confession. Having
therefore separated from the Hussites, they, as well as their brethren,
the old Waldenses, with them, were severely persecuted by them; thus
indicating that the church of Christ on earth is not a kingdom of
triumph and victory, but a school of suffering and death for the name
of Christ.
THAT THE WALDENSES WHO HAD BEEN UNITED WITH THEM, CALLED TABORITES,
WERE NOT RECEIVED BY THEIR OLD BRETHREN, AND WHY.
Now when these Waldenses, called Taborites who, having been united
with the Hussites, had separated from them on account of war and other
errors, desired to re-unite with the old Waldenses, who had been
their brethren, these, from sorrow of mind, refused them, that the
unchristian conduct of the Hussites might not be laid to their charge,
seeing these seceders, as they thought, had been so intimate with the
Hussites.
See here, beloved reader, how pure, upright and unfeigned was the
conduct of these old Waldenses in this respect; how steadfastly and
blamelessly they practiced their confession, desiring to bear not even
the appearance of having fellowship with those who waged war and fought
against their enemies.
THAT THEY NEVERTHELESS PROFESSED A GOOD CONFESSION.
Nevertheless, these Taborites, because of their aversion to war and the
superstitions, had separated from the Hussites, and also truly held in
those times, as cannot be inferred otherwise, the true confession of
the Waldenses, although, as it is thought, some endeavored to force
in infant baptism among them; however, their confession in regard to
this article, delivered in the year 1431, at Prague, in Bohemia, to M.
John Rockenzahn, makes no mention at all of it, yea, they employ such
expressions therein as is utterly impossible to apply to infant baptism.
In _J. Mehrning’s History of Baptism, p. 611_, we read these words: “I
have before me the confession of the Taborites, drawn up A. D. 1431,
which in all respects agrees with our doctrine, and which I intend to
have printed at the proper time.”
Concerning the difference between the Hussites proper and Taborites,
who were united with them, D. Balthazar Lydius gives this explanation:
“The followers of John Huss were divided into two sects, the one called
_Praguers_, the other _Taborites_; of whom the Taborites were the
stricter. Tract entitled: ‘_Where the church was before the year 1160,
or before the time of the Waldenses;’ printed in the year 1624, p. 25_.”
Their confession is as follows: “First, concerning the sacrament of
baptism,--which is the first sacrament by which God imparts, especially
the first sacramental grace, if we are spiritually regenerated;
because it is a sign of the spiritual regeneration proceeding from
God,--we hold, according to the tenor of the holy Scriptures, and
sincerely confess from the heart, that the sacrament of baptism is the
ablution of man, performed by another with water, who pronounces the
words prescribed by Christ, which effectually signify the ablution
of the soul from sin, which is expressly founded in the Gospel; for
Christ, with words as well as by deed, taught that those who believe in
him should be thus baptized. He taught this with words when he said to
the apostles: ‘Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’
Matthew, 23:19. He taught it by deed when he himself was baptized by
John, in Jordan. Matt. 3. _Bapt. Hist._, second part, _pp._ 743, 744,
from _B. Lyd. Wald., pp. 10, 11_.
_A. D. 1431._--At this time, also Scotland, though otherwise very
superstitious, experienced no inconsiderable reformation in the true
worship of God, which was effected by various persons zealous for the
honor of God and the welfare of his church. So that some resolved
and endeavored to reform not only the article of baptism, which was
shamefully, and not less to the detriment of many innocent souls,
abused by the Roman church, but also various other articles which, from
sheer superstition, were maintained by them according to human opinion.
They were determined to retain the good, and abolish the evil.
Among those who at this time undertook the reformation of the same,
one Paul Craus is especially mentioned, who also opposed auricular
confession, the invocation of the saints, the idolatrous sacrament,
etc. For this he was condemned as a heretic; but how he finally ended
will be shown at the right time and place. Compare the account in the
fifteenth book _van den Ondergang, p. 796, col. 1_, _with Vinc. Cal.,
fol. 368, Georg. Pac. c. 11. Herm. Mod., fol. 274._
NOTE.--Whether this Paul Craus was fully enlightened in all other
articles pertaining to the worship of God, we cannot definitely prove;
even as, on the other hand, we have found nothing which might tend to
derogate his belief; though we have sought in good faith for that which
would be derogatory to him; as well as for that which would make him
acceptable; hence we have deemed it well to accord also to him a place
among the good confessors of the evangelical truth.
_A. D. 1455._--About this time there were many Waldenses (erroneously
called Wandois) in Germany, in the bishopric of Reichstadt, of whose
orthodox confession an account was given for the year 1170. They had
among them twelve preachers, or teachers, of their religion, who,
each in his district, went out secretly, on account of the severe
persecution, to preach. _P. J. Twisck, Chron., p. 829, col. 2_, from
_Henr. Boxh., fol. 27_.
NOTE.--A. D. 1460.--At this time Roderic Simotensus severely
reproved the human institutions and abuses of the papists, such as
excommunication, fasts, feasts, auricular confession, and the mass, as
appears from his book, entitled _The Mirror of Human Life. Chron., van
den Ondergang, p. 835, col. 1._
Again, same year as above; Nicholas Siculus said at this time, that
a believing person who rightly adduces the holy Scripture should be
believed more than the Pope, and a whole council that rejects the holy
Scripture. He further said, that a council may err; also, that some
of the popes lived as though they did not believe that there would be
a resurrection of the flesh after this life. See the aforementioned
chronicle, in the place indicated, taken from _Joh. Munst., fol. 190_.
Also, same year, Dionys. Rickel, a learned man, said that in the
primitive church the Sacrament (or Supper) was given to believers under
both forms, that is, with bread and wine; to which the Roman church
acted contrary at this time. Compare the author first indicated with
_Joh. Fabr., fol. 164_.
_A. D. 1465._--Nicholas Casanus now vehemently attacked the Pope with
the word of God; he called him antichrist, rejected human institutions,
etc. In his book on the Peace of the Faith, compared with _P. J.
Twisck, Chron. page 841, col. 1_.
_A. D. 1467._--Anthony Rosellus, an Italian doctor, writes that the
Pope is not to be regarded as the lord of the world; that he neither
can nor ought to command the Emperor; that he neither may nor ought to
wield the secular sword. _P. J. Twisck, Chron. page 845_, from _Joh.
Munst., fol. 295_.
_A. D. 1470._--At this time a book was issued, entitled _Spiegel des
heiligen kercken-Regements_, without the name of the author, in which
particularly the mendicant monks and the Pope were censured. The author
adduces Anthony the Hermit, and says that the monks have departed from
the word of God, and, from hypocrisy, have adopted all sorts of human
institutions. _Catal. Test. Verit., fol. 884_, compared with _P. J.
Twisck, page 847, col. 2_.
_A. D. 1471._--At this time, says a celebrated author, there were not
very many Waldenses in Bohemia, on account of the violent persecution;
but in Austria there were still some, who had also been dispersed for
the most part, through the cruelty of the torments, and the terror of
persecution.
But how they were afterwards united, as it is alleged, by one Peter
Textor, or (as Mellinus explains), Peter the Weaver, in the city of
Landskron, in Bohemia, with the Moravian and Bohemian brethren; so that
they subsequently held no separate church meetings, save only with the
Bohemian and Moravian brethren, is described by Mellinus, in the second
book of the _Persecutions, fol. 592, col. 4_, and _fol. 593, col. 1_.
NOTE.--The Bohemian brethren must here not be understood to mean the
Hussites, to whom the name of Bohemian brethren was also given; unless
it be said that the Waldenses had separated from them.
But that notwithstanding this opinion of Mellinus, many Waldenses still
remained scattered and persecuted in Germany and France, as well as
elsewhere, who, unchanged in faith and worship, endeavored steadfastly
to serve their Savior according to the rule of Christ and his holy
apostles, appears from various other authors. Yea, Mellinus, as though
he had forgotten himself, writes that A. D. 1475, in the bishopric of
Eichstaedt, in Germany, a great number of Christians were discovered
and apprehended, who professed the doctrine of the Waldenses. _Second
book, fol. 590, col. 4._ Yea, that even sixty-nine years afterwards,
namely A. D. 1544, the Waldenses of Merindol and Cabriere delivered a
confession of faith, at Paris in the parliament, to the King of France,
in defense of their innocence. Same book, _fol. 446, col. 1, 2_, etc.
Moreover, that said confession does not militate against, but well
agrees with, that of the Anabaptists, may be found in the same place.
NOTE.--_A. D. 1472._--J. Guitode,... now greatly reproved the Papal
haughtiness and idolatry; the running of pilgrims after images, and
miracles invented by avarice. He undisguisedly said that they were
viceregents, not of Christ, but of antichrist; yea, that they were
possessed with the presumptuousness and pride of lucifer. _Chron. van
den Ondergang, page 852_, from _Catal. Test. Verit., 883._
_A. D. 1481._--It is stated that in this year King Matthias, on the
solicitation of some evil-disposed persons, issued a decree against the
Moravians or Moravian brethren. Large Book of _Christian Martyrs, fol.
597, col. 2, from Joach Camer. Narr. Hist. Boh., page 118_.
These Moravian brethren are called Old Waldenses by Jacob Mehrning,
who also shows that various excellent and learned men reckoned among
the Anabaptists proceeded from them. His words are: “From among these
Bohemian and Moravian Old Waldenses afterwards several excellent men
proceeded; as, among others, Hans Koch and Leonhard Meister, who were
both put to death at Augsburg, A. D. 1527. Also, the very learned
Michael Sattler, who ministered to his church, A. D. 1527, at Horb, in
Germany. Also, Leonhard Keyser, who, in the year 1529, was martyred
in Bavaria; to whom, while in prison, Dr. Luther addressed letters of
consolation, although he (Keyser) did not agree with Luther in regard
to infant baptism.” _Bapt. Hist., 2d part, page 748._
CONCLUSION TO THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. A. D. 1500.
Thus it appears clearly, that the old true Waldenses existed, and
practiced their worship not only throughout the fifteenth century, but
also long afterwards, as will be seen from the sequel of our account.
But that the number of the witnesses which we have produced from the
Waldenses, has not been very great in this century, of this not we, but
the enemies of truth have been the cause, who have put the writings of
these people out of the way.
This the writer of the History of Baptism explains, when he says, _p.
749 to p. 750_:
1. “That there are so few public testimonies extant, of the faithful
old Waldenses, in this fifteenth century, that is, between the years
1400 and 1500 is the fault of their enemies and opponents, who, by
strategy and violence, as much as they alone could, suppressed their
writings and confessions.
2. “Besides, the Waldenses were always and everywhere most cruelly
persecuted by their opponents, without a hearing; which prevented them
from bringing anything to good light.
3. “Printing came into use only in the fifteenth century, and in its
beginning did not become common as it now is, for a long time; hence
the Waldenses and their successors could not avail themselves of it.
4. “Besides, it was not so indispensably necessary; since their
confessions regarding the true use, and abuse, of baptism sufficiently
came to light through their martyrs, and through the inquisitions and
examinations; which their enemies and murderers themselves had to copy
in their chronicles and chronologies, much of which has already been
adduced. From _Catal. Test. Verit. Flacc_.
5. “Moreover, God, in the midst of his enemies, miraculously preserved,
at all times, in the text of the New Testament, the right and true
baptismal ordinance of Jesus Christ (that is, baptism upon faith),
and also, in many, the Christian baptism of adults; to which they
obediently submitted, and suffered with patience all that befell them
on this account.
6. “Finally, the ancient writers throughout all the centuries from
the time of Christ until now, yea, the teachers of the Roman church
themselves, had to bear witness to the truth, in their books, and to
confess, by whom infant baptism and all other abuses of baptism have
been brought in and arbitrarily forced upon the church; and by whom
this has everywhere been opposed; as has hitherto been shown. Hence
it is neither profitable nor necessary, to write much about it; as it
serves to no purpose. Truth is praised also through the enemy.
This will suffice concerning the testimony of those who understood,
taught, and practiced baptism and other articles, in the fifteenth
century, according to the rule of the Anabaptists of the present day.
Hence we will leave this matter, and see what persons in those times
steadfastly testified with their blood and death to this confession.
AN ACCOUNT OF THOSE WHO SUFFERED IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY.
SUMMARY OF THE MARTYRS IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY.
[The beginning treats of the great distress in these times; some
definite information given, about some countries where the misery was
the greatest, as concerning England, France, Germany, Flanders, etc.
The first year of this century begins with a bloody decree published in
England against the confessors of the holy Gospel; in consequence of
which much innocent blood is shed.
William Swinderby is put to death by fire, for the faith, in the city
of London, A. D. 1401; some account is given respecting his belief and
death, according to different writers.
In a note, for the year 1405, mention is made of the belief of John
Wenschelberg, against a certain blood-red papistic host and the false
miracles of the Romanists.
William Thorpe, confessing his belief against the oath and other
articles of the Roman church, is put to death by violence and fire, at
Saltevoden, A. D. 1407.
Ten years after, A. D. 1417, Catharine of Thou, Lorraine, coming to
Montpellier, in France, and there offers up her life, by fire, to God,
for the faith.
A great number of Christians called Waldenses, also willingly, for
the faith, give their bodies to be burned, in the Flemish countries,
A. D. 1421. In a note, by way of parenthesis, the flood of Dort is
introduced, together with the destruction of seventy-two villages
which were inundated in that year; also, concerning Henry Gruenfelder,
Peter Torea, Jerome Savonarola, who, in the years 1423, 1425 and 1427,
opposed the errors of the Pope and the Roman church.