That by the bawling church singing of the priests and monks God is mocked, and not reconciled.

That flesh may be eaten on Sunday and other days.

That they do not receive all the books of the Old and the New Testaments, namely those which are called apocryphal; but the Gospel only.

That they believe only the holy Scriptures, but do not place the writings of the fathers on an equality with them.

This doctrine, and these articles, Peter Cluniacensus, who quoted them from the writings of Henry, undertook to refute; but the Centuriatores Magdeburgenses accept them for the most part, and refute Peter. See concerning this, Bapt. Hist., pp. 665, 666:

Page 275

Said articles certainly show of what faith and persuasion Henry was, and that he did not continue to adhere to monachism, although he had first embraced it; for, to be a monk and to make such a profession, are incompatible with each other. On this account he had to suffer much ignominy and calumny from Bernhard, who was regarded as a saint among the Romanists. The latter not only called him an ignorant fellow and an apostate from the Roman church, but also charged him with many unbecoming, and ungodly things, though by other writers, of greater note and credibility, he has been exempted, and acquitted of them.

We will close our remarks concerning Henry, and give, if necessary, a fuller account of the matter, when we shall speak of his sufferings for the truth; however, in reference to this, we refer the reader briefly, to Bapt. Hist., pages 685, 686, from A. M., fol. 423, 424, ex Petr. Cluniac. Duae, epist. 141 and 142, ad Comit. Tholoss. and Tholossanos, idem, Serm., 65, 66, super. Cant. vitae Bernh., cap. 3. Cent. Magd. X11., cap. 5, and Illyr. Cat. Test. Verit., lib. 15, tit. Petri de Bruis, etc.

A. D. 1155. This is the time in which, according to Nicholas Sander (but according to Caesar Baronius. A. D. 1147), there were in the vicinity of Toulouse, in France, certain humble people, who, by other writers, are called peasants, but who properly were termed Apostolics, that is, followers of the apostles. It is stated of them, that they would hold only to the apostolic writings, and that they therefore condemned infant baptism, as well as purgatory, praying for the dead, the invocation of the saints, etc.

More might be related here, but as some of them have attained to the martyrs' crown, and we consequently shall afterwards have to speak more fully with regard to them, we will leave the matter until then, being satisfied, meanwhile, that they professed this good profession, and rejected the evil. See concerning this, P. J. Twisck,. Chron., page 469, col. 2, from Nicol. Sand., Hist. der Mart. Doops-ges., A. 8, D. Anth. Jac., fol.118; also Bapt. Hist., page 599. H. Montan. Niehtigh., page 84, etc.

A. D. 1160.-This is the year which, of old, was noted with joy by many pious and well-meaning Christians, who detested popery; and in which, even to this day, not a few of the God-fearing rejoice. For then, and especially, shortly after, popery and her superstitions received the severest blow of which we read in history; and the divine truth, which, almost to this very time, seemed, in many respects, to be trampled under foot most atrociously, now joyfully raised her head and triumphed. The doctrine against infant baptism, the swearing of oaths, war, in short, against nearly all the evil practices and perverted worship of the Roman church, of which one formerly dared speak only with fear and trembling, and that often only in private, was now ~ boldly, yea, frequently, publicly preached and defended, and, notwithstanding he threats of the pope of Rome, maintained. This was first commenced chiefly by Peter Waldo at Lyons, in France, and carried out by his successors; however, in order to treat the matter systematically, we will begin with the conversion of Peter Waldo, and then go on to his successors.