Resources on the Albigensians?

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
I've been seeing some people online point to the Albigensians as proto-Protestants, yet they haven't cited reputable sources. I don't want to condemn them unnecessarily (not that my condemnation really means anything), yet I am also suspicious of Trail-of-Blood type theories. What are some good, scholarly resources on them?
 

ZackF

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I’m curious too. This was something that Spurgeon had more than a fleeting interest in if I remember correctly. I think the Albigensians have clumsily been employed as an apologetics tool against Rome. That seemed to be more of an “enemy of my enemy” thing over anything verifiable.
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Gentlemen,

Here are some sources (no ISBNs on the volumes) :

Church History from the Birth of Christ to the 18th Century, 2 Vols., by William Jones (London, 1826; reprinted 1983 in USA by Church History Research & Archives; reprinted by Triangle Press, Conrad MT) (deals extensively with the Albigenses and Waldenses / Vaudois in both volumes)
The Ecclesiastical History of the Ancient Church of Piedmont and of the Albigenses, by Peter Allix (Oxford, at the Clarendon Press; reprinted 1989 in USA by Church History Research & Archives, Gallatin, TN, Publishers of Ecclesiastical Histories.)
The History of the Ancient Vallenses and Albigenses, by George Stanley Faber (Pub. by R.B. Seeley and W. Burnside, London; reprinted 1990 in USA by Church History Research & Archives)
The History of the Waldenses, 4th Ed., by J.A. Wylie, LL.D (Cassell & Co., London, Paris & New York; reprinted 1985 in USA by Church History Research & Archives)
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I think their orthodox pedigrees are well documented and attested; it was their enemies, the Church of Rome, who wrote much about them, slandering them. No Cult, these folks, particularly the Waldenses.
 

SeanPatrickCornell

Puritan Board Sophomore
I was pretty sure that the Cathars / Albigensians were a type of Gnostic heretic sect that believed in weird stuff.

I think the believed in the "Bad Old God" of the Old Testament and the "Good God" of the New Testament.

I believe they denied the physical resurrection of Christ.
 

Gwallard

Puritan Board Freshman
Gentlemen,

Here are some sources (no ISBNs on the volumes) :

Church History from the Birth of Christ to the 18th Century, 2 Vols., by William Jones (London, 1826; reprinted 1983 in USA by Church History Research & Archives; reprinted by Triangle Press, Conrad MT) (deals extensively with the Albigenses and Waldenses / Vaudois in both volumes)
The Ecclesiastical History of the Ancient Church of Piedmont and of the Albigenses, by Peter Allix (Oxford, at the Clarendon Press; reprinted 1989 in USA by Church History Research & Archives, Gallatin, TN, Publishers of Ecclesiastical Histories.)
The History of the Ancient Vallenses and Albigenses, by George Stanley Faber (Pub. by R.B. Seeley and W. Burnside, London; reprinted 1990 in USA by Church History Research & Archives)
The History of the Waldenses, 4th Ed., by J.A. Wylie, LL.D (Cassell & Co., London, Paris & New York; reprinted 1985 in USA by Church History Research & Archives)
Can't help much, but at least I can do this:


History of the Christian Church: From the Birth of Christ to the 18th Century (2-Volume Set) (Church History)

ISBN-10 : 1583391665

ISBN-13 : 978-1583391662

Download here free (I think)

https://books.google.com/books/about/The_History_of_the_Christian_Church_from.html?id=Syw_AAAAYAAJ

PDF:

http://nashpublications.com/wp-cont...-of-the-Christian-Church-by-William-Jones.pdf


Kindle edition for $2.99 here:

https://www.amazon.com/HISTORY-CHRISTIAN-CHURCH-Christ-Century-ebook/dp/B00BCQ2HSY



The Ecclesiastical History of the Ancient Church of Piedmont and of the Albigenses

No ISBN, as far as I can see. But the OCLC number is 904349940 (see https://www.worldcat.org/title/eccl...bigenses/oclc/904349940&referer=brief_results)

The chapter especially on the Albigenses can be found here: http://www.giveshare.org/churchhistory/allix/albigenses.html

The whole book can be found here:

https://archive.org/details/someremarksupone00alliuoft


The History of the Ancient Vallenses and Albigenses

1838 edition

PDF:

http://media.sabda.org/alkitab-8/LIBRARY/FAB_HAVA.PDF

Or here:

https://archive.org/details/FaberGe...ncientVallensesAndAlbigenses/page/n5/mode/2up


1990 edition

ISBN-10 : 0685453480

ISBN-13 : 978-0685453483

2015 edition

ISBN 10: 1331054184

ISBN 13: 9781331054184

The History of the Waldenses

PDF of 1860 edition (I think): https://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/the_history_of_the_waldenses.pdf

4th edition is from the 1920’s, but here is a newer, cheaper 2016 reprint.


ISBN-10 : 1519095171

ISBN-13 : 978-1519095176
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
Are the Waldenses being lumped in with the Cathars? That's what it looks like. I'm willing to grant that the Waldenses might have been good guys, but the Cathars' dualism seems fairly well established.
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Grant, in providing digital sources (and ISBNs) for these works you have done a great service to researchers into the reality of the Waldenses / Vaudois and the Albigenses, and those who slander them — namely Rome, in its seeking to justify its horrendous persecution of the dissenters to Romish doctrine and practice! Thank you! (Even though I have the hard copies, I downloaded the digital versions, 'cause one never knows when one will have to travel light!)
 

arapahoepark

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Are the Waldenses being lumped in with the Cathars? That's what it looks like. I'm willing to grant that the Waldenses might have been good guys, but the Cathars' dualism seems fairly well established.
I've heard both sides. Much ignorance in this area but, I think they may have taken their inspiration from them. So they make for interesting role models.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
Hello Sean,

On what basis do you assert "The Albigensians are Cathars" (Cathari) ?

I think Peter Allix exonerates them of this Romish calumny well in his Chapters 13, 14, and on, in his Remarks Upon the Ecclesiastical History of the Ancient Churches of the Albigenses.

Reading through it he seems just to assert that the Albigensians are the proto-Reformers without really giving thorough historical analysis for it. Furthermore, I am not so sure you can draw a straight line from Irenaeus's teachings in the 2nd century to the Albigensians 1000 years later. And then, almost without warning, he brings the Waldensians into it. Nobody is questioning the Waldensians here, so I am not sure what that serves.
 

Charles Johnson

Puritan Board Sophomore
I checked Hottinger and he also asserts that the Albigenses were Waldenses. That does seem to be the simplest possible explanation, and it would explain why no distinctly "albigensian" records survive. But I'd hardly consider myself an expert on the matter.
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Both Faber in his work, and Jones in his, exonerate the "Cathari"-labeled Albigenses from accusations against them — accusations made by their persecutors and murderers, Rome, to justify themselves.

Edit: I would add to this that J.A. Wylie, in his book (noted above), concurs as well — that the Albigenses were a sister church to the Waldenses, only separated geographically.
 
Last edited:

SeanPatrickCornell

Puritan Board Sophomore
Seems weird to me that there's such a huge split in opinion between "Albigensians were neo-Gnostic Cathar / Bogomil heretics" on one side and "Rome was lying, the Albigensians were good proto-Protestants" on the other side.

Until I came to saving faith and understood orthodox Triune Christianity, the only people I knew who stuck up for the Albigensians were "Trail of Blood" type Restorationists (for example Herbert W. Armstrong / WWCG) who pointed to any group outside of the Roman papacy as evidence that the "true Church" was alive and (relatively) well through history.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
Seems weird to me that there's such a huge split in opinion between "Albigensians were neo-Gnostic Cathar / Bogomil heretics" on one side and "Rome was lying, the Albigensians were good proto-Protestants" on the other side.

Until I came to saving faith and understood orthodox Triune Christianity, the only people I knew who stuck up for the Albigensians were "Trail of Blood" type Restorationists (for example Herbert W. Armstrong / WWCG) who pointed to any group outside of the Roman papacy as evidence that the "true Church" was alive and (relatively) well through history.

That's sort of my take. I can grant that there isn't evidence that the Albigensians were sexually depraved dualists, but by the same token I don't see any reliable evidence that they were true Protestants.
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Hello Sean,

You said there's a "huge split in opinion" — but the side accusing the Albigensians, who are they, and where is their documentation? Before I looked into the matter, I would have agreed with you, for I heard bad comments regarding them also — though it now appears the source is only Rome.

Jacob,

Are not the historians above reliable? Regarding Jones it is held against him by some that he is a Baptist, and interprets things from that view, though I've not heard critiques of him other than that. The others, I've not heard any reproach of them except from Rome, and Rome defenders.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
Hello Sean,

You said there's a "huge split in opinion" — but the side accusing the Albigensians, who are they, and where is their documentation? Before I looked into the matter, I would have agreed with you, for I heard bad comments regarding them also — though it now appears the source is only Rome.

Jacob,

Are not the historians above reliable? Regarding Jones it is held against him by some that he is a Baptist, and interprets things from that view, though I've not heard critiques of him other than that. The others, I've not heard any reproach of them except from Rome, and Rome defenders.

The Jones works doesn't deal much with primary documentation of the Albigensians. It trades on the fact that they were hated by Rome and then throws in phrases like "Thw word of God grew mightily." It seems like circular reasoning to me.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
And the testimonies of Allix, Faber, and Wylie? Any sources for your opinions besides Rome? These are not "Trail-of-Blood type theorists."

That's part of the problem: paucity of primary sources. I grant that Rome did bad things in her history, but to dismiss her history because she is Rome is the genetic fallacy. The authors you cite don't provide documentation (that I can recall) showing what the average Albigensian assumed himself to believe.
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Jacob, you can read the PDFs Grant provided in post #6, which are searchable, and give documentation. Rome, the habitation of devils, lies, especially in such matters as justifying her murdering of those who righteously dissent with her abominations.

This thread is valuable precisely because of this documentation.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
Jacob, you can read the PDFs Grant provided in post #6, which are searchable, and give documentation. Rome, the habitation of devils, lies, especially in such matters as justifying her murdering of those who righteously dissent with her abominations.

This thread is valuable precisely because of this documentation.

I did. It was light on primary documentation per the Albigensians. Your second sentence is a genetic fallacy.
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
A saying I have in my files, re your “genetic fallacy”: “an old prosecutorial rule—one lie, all lies” — (from a former Marine Corps intelligence officer). If Rome is your sole source of information, I rest my case.
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
When the “genetic fallacy” is used to overrule valid common sense judgment — that is, if a claim is based simply or solely on its origin, rather than looking at the actual merits of the claim, then the so-called “genetic fallacy” is seen to violate its own terms.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
When the “genetic fallacy” is used to overrule valid common sense judgment — that is, if a claim is based simply or solely on its origin, rather than looking at the actual merits of the claim, then the so-called “genetic fallacy” is seen to violate its own terms.

No it isn't. It is quite simple. You said Rome is bad when I asked for primary sources from the Albigensians themselves. All of the sources linked are secondary or tertiary sources.
 
Top