(ABRIDGED VERSION)
- TMB Compilation -
Discussion regarding the FALSE ‘connection’
between the 2x2 church and the Waldensians.
COMPILED
from TMB August 17, 2008.
From the thread “Why do workers act funny about their history” on the “Truth Meetings Board” website, I “JUSTWONDERINGG” abridge the entire discussion between “what” and myself on that thread.
- In this abridged version, I have not corrected even my own spelling errors and typos – this is as it was on the TMB yesterday when the discussion was suddenly closed by “what.”
There is some evidence on the TMB today, that editing of “what’s” posts are in progress today – But I have a contemporary archive of the whole thread right up until last night – so I still copied these posts off the TMB today – complete with the edit notation on one of “what’s” posts below. I will allow “what” to save face with minor word changes, but if the posts are changed in any significant manner as to the meaning of his posts I will ask "VOT" to add such notices as I feel necessary on this publication of the discussion.
Please understand that I still consider “what” highly as an honorable opponent. Thankfully “what” or “JUSTWONDERINGG” does not identify the personal identity, therefore this work can be presented publicly without impugning any identifiable persons – in fact the entire discussion is public domain on the “truth meetings board” already.
This abridgment is done here to eliminate the many offshoot diversions caused by other posters on the thread, so that here the discussion and its continuity are made clear.
I do this not out of pride, but because the discussion may help struggling 2x2s to understand the importance of the true history of their church – as painful as that is and was for most of us who lived through it.
Many former 2x2s have left that group to go off into non-Christian beliefs – mainly out of reaction to a lifetime of believing a huge LIE told by people they accepted as the voice of God (and so trusted implicitly).
So it is my prayer that this abridged discussion could be of help to all who have and will have the same difficulties that I had on my exit from the 2x2 “Fellowship.”
To God be the glory for ever and ever, amen.
WALDENSIAN REBUTTALS TO “nathan9’s” ASSERTIONS REGARDING CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE 2X2 SECT AND THE WALDENSIANS (apostolic succession)
- NOTE: All of “nathan9’s posts that I have read border on logical asininity and will therefore not appear here because they only serve to misinform, redirect or confuse the issues at hand. If the reader wishes to see his posts, go to the “truth meetings board.” where they remain (at least those which nathan9 has not himself deleted, as “sillies.”)
“come to my church Wrote;
Brother Nathan! I grew up in the 2x2 but now attend a Waldensian congregation. You are welcome any time.
You can read about our church here:
http://www.waldensianpresbyterian.org/
I don't find us at all similar to the 2x2--but of course that is just my opinion.
“Waldensians” Wrote;
If anyone is interested in the Waldensians I am sorry to say that I cannot recommend Nathan's website. I have looked it over and saw lots of false assertations that do not jive with known and documented historical facts. Moreover, these wild assertations have no references to back them up.
I can recommend however recommend these books--they are well-researched, documented, contain references and facts.
(deleted for brevity here - list of books re Waldensians)
“link to the apostles” Wrote;
BTW, it mystifies me when Nathan says that the Waldensians claim to descend from the apostles--we do not claim any such thing.
It is true that there have been nutcases throughout history who have said things like this--mostly crazy Baptist sects, but these people have been completely discredited by historical facts.
us Waldensians are PROUD of the history that we have--we have no need to embellish, and lie , and pretend that we have a longer history than we do.
We date back to Peter Waldo. My pastor would tell you that--anyone in my congregation would tell you that. We do not hide our history, we do not lie about it. In this respect alone we are miles above the average 2x2.
We have retained reminders of our history--such as the Waldensian Emblem and The Waldensian Costume. These things do a very good job of "dating" us as they have been around from the beginning of our church--and they do not date back to Rome.
“you are alone” Wrote;
You are the only person I know who says we began in the 3rd century. Perhaps you should convince our pastor and our congregation and all the expert historians, and all the historical records--tell them all that they are wrong and that the date we believe our church was founded is wrong and that you (a non-Waldensian, non-historian, but self-proclaimed expert) are the sole authority on our church history.
I have no desire to embellish. Our origin in the Middle Ages is spectacular. Much better than trying to lie and exaggerate and look foolish.
“the Walds Wrote;
Nathan, you choose to follow a line put forth by Broadbent which is not true about the Waldensians church. The Waldensians deny that they go back to Jesus in teh way you say.
I have seen too much of the stuff you have twisted on the message board the last few days.
“you are still welcome” Wrote;
You are always welcome to come to our church forum.
I doubt any of our church leaders would come here--as I am likely the only one who has ever heard of the 2x2, I don't see why any would be particularly interested in coming to a 2x2 site?
“Waldo” Wrote;
hey Nate,
it is true that for a brief period there were several folks who thought that our group may have had older roots. However, in the 1980's new primary source materials came to light and this theory has been completely discredited. None in our community believe in it.
The family I married into traces their roots back quite a ways—they have old family bibles, burial grounds, diaries etc.I can tell you that even though there may have been superficial similarities between our groups--these are very superficial indeed!
We have had a well-developed litergy from the beginning--due to our Catholic roots. This includes special confirmation ceremonies where white is worn etc. We have used special ceremonial robes, altars etc from the earliest of confirmed times. BTW, we only met in homes for approx 300 years. Once the persecution stopped, we began to build
church buildings. The bible says we should not hide our light under a bushel. Churches need to be out in the open so that all who search can find. It does not make sense to hide a church in times of freedom and acceptance.
Can't hang around here--I am on a lunch break but must work today. All I can say is this theory of antiquity is now known to be completely false. Also--our groups have nothing in common as far as methodology or beliefs.
ENTER “what”
“what” Wrote;
A few observations from these most recent posts:
(1.) I've not seen Nathan argue for a true apostolic succession but more the succession of a concept or idea of how the NT church was INTENDED by Christ to continue through the ages. This is a very different thing. I hate to put words in Nathan's mouth if not correct, but the reason I do is his interest in the line of ideas from Faith Mission to the current fellowship. Clearly some ideas came from FM but they did not practice "meeting in the home", so this was not a person-to-person succession.
(2.) The current day Waldensians have little in common with the Reformation precursors that were largely wiped out by the Catholics. (Not an educated opinion, but from my limited understanding).
(3.) Cornelius Jaenen made a very serious and in depth attempt to trace this succession of ideas through historical records. I believe that originally he did seek to find a kind of apostolic/worker succession, and according to one testimony became dissuaded that such a thing existed.
(Deleted for brevity here – promotion nonetheless of numerous books by C.J.)
(“JUSTWONDERINGG” Note: There has been no such “testimony” that I am aware of stating that C,J, “became dissuaded” – to my knowledge C,J, still promotes apostolic/worker succession via Waldensians, Cathars, and many other groups of history that were deemed “heretical” by the universal church.)
- NOTE: There was a brief bantering with “what” regarding his promotion posts for C,J,’s book. Then ENTER “JUSTWONDERINGG”
"JUSTWONDERINGG” wrote;
Quote of “what”
"Also, I haven't placed my hat anywhere. I have no final opinion on the book. I have no reason to reject the credibility of the writer out of hand without a hearing though."
Now isn't this interesting in light of the opposing facts documented in many other scholarly history books as well as the words on this thread written by a Waldensian. When might you give that "hearing through?"
“what Replied;
You mean in opposition to Nathan or in opposition to Jaenen? In any case, there is a ton of information there, and I'll save it for a rainy Saturday. Not to mention another book called Waldenses, also on my shelf.
My point above is that I think we all benefit if we stick to the subject matter instead of maligning personalities.
“what” Wrote;
Arrogant as heck too.
Look up Waldenses in the Encyclopedia Britannica or Reader's Digest Book of the Bible as I did tonight, and you will see that the resemblance to the fellowship is more than passing co-incidental.
The established church had become very authoritarian and corrupt.
- Persecuted by the mainstream church (Catholics).
- Workers/ preachers travelled and ministered in pairs.
- Meetings in the home.
- Preached about works, not "faith without works".
- Lived an austere life.
There were only two sects of any size against Rome during the Middle Ages, pre-Reformation. These were Waldenses and Cathars.
Look it up.
“JUSTWONDERINGG Replied;
You are replying to a college student of church history. I don’t feel that my courses entitle me to classify myself as a scholarly historian, but I did learn a great deal from my studies.
Yet in spite of having mentioned my college courses previously in this thread, you instruct me to go look up “Waldensians” and “Cathars” in the “Encyclopedia Britannica” and the “Readers Digest Book of the Bible.” No thanks.
In college we did not use such textbooks that were written for the cursory interests of people in general – our texts were very detailed and full of technical words particularly where theology was concerned. For example, the Waldensians were completely opposed to the Cathars on a theological as well as a lifestyle level. Yet you piece them together here as if they were great buddies. No, I will not go to the Encyclopedia Britannica to even check to see if it indeed presents that view, or whether you have formulated a view that the encyclopedia does not support that is of little interest to me. I already know better from more detailed texts. Now if that is being “Arrogant as heck too,” so be it – I had no choice – I learned arrogance from my childhood teachers (the 2x2 Workers) and may well struggle with that for the rest of my life.
Further, let me now deal with your list given above. By your context this list is evidently your rendition of similarities between the Waldensians, Cathars and the present day 2x2s.
- “The established church became very authoritarian and corrupt.” I agree – the 2x2s have become very authoritarian and corrupt.
- “Persecuted by the mainstream church (Catholics).” The 2x2s are only recently known to exist to the Catholics and the Roman Catholics – and are certainly not persecuted by either (yet).
- “Workers/ preachers travelled and ministered in pairs.” The Waldensians and Cathars had no such ministers called
“Workers/preachers.” However, Willis Propp of the Alberta 2x2s has this almost to a “T” in his Incorporation by laws of 1995. There he calls them “Apostles/preachers.” But in the early years of the Waldensians (for a short time) they did travel short distances under persecution preaching in pairs. The 2x2s have never been persecuted, and in recent years they have built church buildings.
- “Meetings in the home.” The common belief is that while the Waldesians were under persecution they met in homes, but during that time their history is very sketchy indeed, and no solid historical record states this. But it is a likely place for them to meet during that period. And as soon as the persecution ceased, they built church buildings just like their Roman Catholic roots would indicate. In fact, Innocent 111 made efforts to reconcile the Humiliati, as well as large numbers of the Waldensians, whom he received back into the church of Rome. But the Cathars, who were dualistic in theology, were never so entreated by the Waldensians, the Humiliati or the Roman church. The 2x2s theologically share more with the dualist Cathars in – i.e., doctrines that were violently rejected by the Waldensians, Humiliati as well as the church of Rome.
- Preached about works, not "faith without works". This is purely speculative of the Encyclopedia Brittannica, if that’s where you got it. The Waldensians and the Humiliati held and taught the same central doctrines as the Roman church. The 2x2s reject all of the doctrines of all three groups.
Lived an austere life. The Waldensians and the Humiliati lived austere lives. That is mainly why they were initially viewed by Rome as ‘heretics.’ However, after Innocent 111, even the Roman church had orders within it that lived austere lives, such as the order of Franciscan monks. The first 2x2 ministers also lived austere lives, but in the present day they do NOT – in fact the finances they have available outstrip many churches. And in most cases the paid clergy of most churches could not afford even a smattering of the range and frequency of travels that go on in the 2x2 group every year.
So, evidently you either misread the Encyclopedia Brittannica, the encyclopedia is inaccurate, or you formulated your own ideas claiming the encyclopedia as the source. You evidently have no knowledge of the doctrines or financial conditions of the 2x2 group presently, or maybe you are just as arrogant as you state that I am.
“what Replied;
To JUSTWONDERINGG,
(1.) Where do I say the Cathars and Waldenses were 'buddies'? I went to college too and never even saw the word 'buddies' used, but I did not learn all the sophisticated theological terms like you did.
(2.) The characteristics listed are those as described for the Waldenses. The reader can decide if they fit for the 2x2s since we all have experience with them. You are certainly entitled to your opinion if you think the workers are not 'austere'. Likely not as austere as the Waldensians.
(3.) What are your sources? You don't say.
(4.) Both of my sources are excellent, well regarded tertiary sources. No, tertiary sources are not used in college study. So what.
(5.) In your history courses, do they still use dates? Dates are important especially if you are trying to refute tertiary sources with additional detail. Then we can see how long the Waldensians did have dual itinerant ministers. Maybe, I'm old fashioned, but back when I took history, dates were pretty important.
If you like I can type in the Readers Digest Bible guide article verbatim.
I don't find you article convincing in refuting what I've read even in the lowly Reader's Digest. Perhaps with some more detail and documented sources I would trust you over the Reader's Digest. Incidentally, did you go to a secular school or a church school?
“JUSTWONDERINGG” Replied;
To what,
First things first – there is an order to history and there must be that same order in reverse if discussion of any meaningful nature are desired.
First of all, it is I who responded to the assertions, implications etc. that you have made on this topic on this thread. So, first of all, the thread is titled “Why do Workers act funny about their history.” We are now discussing church history – not why Workers act funny about THEIR history. So to bring my responses back into plausible line with the topic of the thread, I propose that we start discussing the documented history of the Workers and friends church. And while you may not accept these texts, they are (for now) the best history texts available on the topic. And the best of these texts is “The Secret Sect” by Doug and Helen Parker – a text that contain its own proof text, referring and in many cases quoting briefly from contemporary texts such as newspaper articles.
Now I’m not too sure just how much of that text we could post here without copy right infringement, but I believe that “Fair Usage” law in the USA would allow us to make short quotations specific to our discussion – allowing any who follow along to go read the rest of the text via our proper credits in any such posts. But without paying attention to the documented history of the F&W “Fellowship,” we cannot make any meaningful points beyond 1897 – there you have a historical date. To start from the first century and work forward with the desire to find a group which did not exist prior to 1897 is not a good method of studying the Workers funny actions regarding THEIR history.
If you want to discuss church history alone, perhaps you will start a new thread reflecting that in its title – and if I choose, based upon your opening remarks I may participate in such a discussion.
As to your question regarding the college I studied in – you have not offered any equivalent -- and one thing I have learned when discussing things with 2x2s is that it is best to keep the ‘playing field’ rigidly level. And there you have a reason why JUSTWONDERINGG is an anonymous handle that will not be registered by me at any time – simply because the 2x2s traditionally hide their true identity behind the ‘no name’ falsehood, while they are registered as the “Christian Conventions” in the USA and have been for over fifty years.
“what Replied;
Personally, I like threads that wander all over the place. These modern day computers hold gigabytes and gigabytes.
Me saying what I want to say does not stop you from saying what you want to say.
Signed - Just wanderingggg.
Suit yourself. In general terms, my degree is in liberal Arts from a secular college/university.
I applaud you for using the same signature as it establishes a consistent persona. I think you would find that if you now registered that handle your anonymity would be no better or worse, while providing some additional functionality. You would no doubt find the ability to edit messages useful; I know I do.
“JUSTWINDERINGG” Replied:
Thank you what -- let me repeat, when the "Christian Cinventions" church begind to openly identify itself, I will not need to register as "JUSTWONDERINGG" or any other such anon handle -- I will register under my proper name here.
And thank you for revealing that you studied "liberal Arts" in a "secular college." I didn't. I studied church history -- and if any secular college ever offered such a course, I have never heard of such a college.
View the Original and the Edited Posts Here:
(Yesterday at 11:38pm, Reply #423)
JUSTWONDERINGG wrote:
(To what -- fair notice)
“NOTE: DOING A MAJOR EDIT ON THIS POST AS THE WORDING IS HORRIBLE.”
I have noticed the note of "major editing" on one of your posts on page 13.
It is only fair that I warn you that while we were discussing things, as each page turned, I archived the completed page. I will therefore be watching your edit –
I won't say a word if the meaning of the text remains as was, but change the meaning and I will expose it right here as well as on VOT where the entire discussion in abridgement is on from page as I write. I am now glad that being unregistered, I don’t have the ‘edit’ capability to even modify my spelling and typos!!!
I'll let you explain this edit to everyone before placing this post in the abridged version on VOT. Of you can satisfactorily explain here how each sentence that has been changed in the edited version corresponds with the sentences in the original version, I might let your edited version remain alone in the ABRIDGED discussion on VOT.
Re: Why do the workers act funny about their history?
« Reply #512 Today at 10:37pm » (After Post Deletions on the TMB - Reply #424)
(ORIGINAL POST)
“Many do. Anyway, I take it you don't find a ready fit between Waldenses and '2x2's. Both are very reactionary movements. I'd like to know more about the social conditions that led so many to join the 2x2s in a few short years in Ireland. But if we say "Protestant and Catholic churches in Ireland" and with only a little general knowledge of the history, is it any surprise that someone would want to do something different than those two?
My thought is that if one takes a more literal interpretation of the NT, you only get so many options, don't you? Any time the establishment of the day appears to be going off line, you will go back to the 'text' (Bible) and see what it says.
This is why similarities between Waldenses and 2x2s don't surprise me; superficially it seems plausible.”
19 of 32 8/16/2008 12:29 AM
NOTE: DOING A MAJOR EDIT ON THIS POST AS THE WORDING IS HORRIBLE.
Many do. Anyway, I take it you don't find a ready fit between Waldenses and '2x2's. Both were movements that reacted against the main stream of the do. We can read of corruption in the Catholic church that motivated the Waldensians to re-examine their Biblical roots. And if we know just a little of the history of the "Protestant and Catholic churches in Ireland", is it any surprise that some Christians would say "a pox on both your houses"? So both movements had similar motivations, to correct the corruption in the mainstream churches. And both turned back to the NT to find a more literal interpretation of living a Christian life. Both would read about meetings in the home, and ministers sent out 2 by 2. This is why similarities between Waldenses and 2x2s don't surprise me; superficially it seems plausible.
("what responded"Reply #428)
What is this - a kindergarten?
« Last Edit: Today at 10:37pm
“JUSTWONDERINGG” Replied;
It is quite impossible to separate church history from theology. The church defines herself through certain doctrines biblical historically. So, while I studied church history I also had to study Christian theology (at least enough to follow church history).
First of all let me confirm that in recent times (in particular) a handful of 2x2s have begun to refer to their Church as “Christian Conventions.”
And some have spoken out against the ‘no name’ falsehood. Some confess that Jesus is God (privately) and that includes a few Workers. Unfortunately that is not yet the consensus and those who I know personally who have openly spoken this way are no longer fully accepted as members in the “Christian Conventions” church. Others have shared these views with me privately, but have told me that they dare not share these beliefs openly in any meetings for fear that they will be kicked out of that group.
So, what I am saying here (to be perfectly clear) I know some Christian brothers and sisters that are in the “Christian Conventions” “Fellowship.” Unfortunately they are unable or perhaps simply uncomfortable to share their beliefs openly in “Fellowship” meetings. Yet the Bible clearly says we believe with our heart and confess with our mouth “to salvation.” Those unfortunate people have to confine their confession of Jesus to a few private talks where they feel “safe” from “discipline” from the ruling Workers.
You are correct – there is no historical connection whatsoever between a group founded by William Irvine in 1897 and the Waldensians. Even their doctrines are completely different. The only similarities are superficial and if you are going to ‘make’ a connection between them, you must make the same connection with the Roman Catholic Franciscan monks who were founded on the very same verses of Matthew 10 – only they kept central Christian doctrine while Willian Irvine rejected all Christian doctrines.
The social conditions in 1897 are detailed elsewhere and I have not the time to hunt those up for you here – perhaps you can find them documented on line a TTT. Brian Wilson mentioned in The Secret Sect wrote a book that does a fine job of giving those details, but I can’t recall the title right now – but if I come across it later I’ll share it here for you.
As to where a Christian may gather -- The churches generally have waxed and waned throughout church history with regard to lifestyle they accepted as “godly.” However, the doctrines of the Christian church have remained static for about 1700 years (off the top of my head). Christianity does not define itself by lifestyle – it has always defined itself doctrinally. And certainly in our times there is such a wide variety of lifestyles accepted by various doctrinally sound churches that you can easily (within reasonable limits of course) choose your own lifestyle and remain doctrinally Christian. You can remain in the 2x2 “Fellowship” and hold Christian doctrines, but (as yet) you better be careful in that “Fellowship” who and where you confess your Christian doctrines – if you want to stay there.
So, seeing superficial similarities between the Waldensians and the 2x2s may be no surprise, but as soon as you take a look at the respective doctrines, to claim even unity with Waldensians is as faulty as for a 2x2 to claim unity with Roman Catholicism.
“JUSTWONDERINGG” Wrote;
I thought this small excerpt from a paperback peripheral text recommended as "side reading" in my course might help you understand my views somewhat better than my own words could. The subtitle of the book is "The image of Christ in the mirror of heresy from the Apostles to the present."
"Early Christian preaching proclaimed Jesus Christ: crucified, risen, ascended, and coming again. It proclaimed his resurrection as the guarantee and model for our own. His disciples were told that they must be prepared to suffer for him, but that they could be confident of rising and reigning with him. Paul said it very simply: "If Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain" (1 Cor. 15:14). For the first Christians, salvation was not something they had to earn; in fact, they could not earn it. It had already been purchased for them by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Their entry into eternal life was assured by their identification with Christ through faith, baptism, and participation in the communion.
It is important to note the difference between the early Christian conception of eternal life and the widespread Hellenistic assumption of the immortality of the soul. Although the Bible speaks, like classical paganism, of man as having a soul as well as a body, it does not see him as consisting essentially of a soul imprisoned in a fleshly body, as Platonism and much Hellenistic spirituality did. It sees him as a unity of soul and body. The great creeds speak of the resurrection "of the body" (Apostles' Creed) or "of the dead" (Nicene Creed), not of the immortality of the soul. Because Christianity saw the human being as a soul-body unity, when it tried to understand the meaning of God becoming man in Christ, it ultimately had to acknowledge that Christ possesses a human soul as well as mere human flesh. Those from the Hellenistic world who did not recognize man as essentially a soul-body unity, but rather as a spirit temporarily embodied in flesh, found this interpretation of Jesus unattractive, and frequently diminished his full humanity, sometimes denying it altogether."
(Heresies, by H.O.J. Brown, Page 31)
- AFTER ALL OF THE ABOVE!
“what Replied:
However, you have not indicated what the differences are between 2x2 and Waldensians - early Waldensians, that is. Not even one difference, actually.
"Some confess that Jesus is God (privately) and that includes a few Workers." What country are you in? I heard this preached just on Wednesday at a gospel meeting - three aspects of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit were the exact words.
“Waldensian 1” Wrote;
A little bit about me---I was born in what you call a 2x2 home, but I did not profess. I knew a little bit about the history growing up, as I would spend summers visiting my grannies in Oregon (one in Salem, the other in Eugene). Both my grannies had professed through Cooney, back in the days when Irvine was still part of the fellowship. My grams in Eugene was extremely close to me--out of all her 9 grandchildren I was her favorite. She confided in me quite a bit about what she knew about the history--she did not want to see me get entrapped in this way as she had been. She told me that “a lot of people call us Cooneyites” and also about how the head worker had bullied her, telling her to “burn” old letters etc that referenced the early leaders and to keep quiet about the history. Years afterwards she still wept to me about it--she was quite a packrat and hated giving up her memories.
To the horror of my parents, I was the recipient of a full scholarship to a Catholic University--Santa Clara and once I left home I never attended a meeting again, so it has been many years. At Santa Clara, I met my wife to be--she has a Waldensian background. There was an entire community of Waldensian students at college with us. I have found that many Waldensians prefer a Catholic education for their children as it is closest to their own beliefs. I sent my own children to Catholic prep schools and then Catholic colleges. Two of them went to my old Alma Mater, Santa Clara!
Nicole (or Nick) as I call her came from a very old Waldensian family, and I was intrigued by them (and her)! Her family is extremely cosmopolitan, and she was raised in France. One thing that few outsiders realize about the Waldensians is that the history of the church is intertwined with the history of winemaking. If you look at maps of Europe, you will find that the church thrived in the areas known for their exceptional viticulture and enology. Nick’s family has been winemakers throughout many centuries and they now own many vineyards. They also have a castle that dates back to the early middle ages. Owning a family castle may sound grand--but it is not a place that many people would want to live. It is extremely old--mostly in rubble--few modern conveniences and unlivable except for one section. However, every summer the family spends some time there and I have to say that the one great benefit of the place is that it is full of family (and thus Waldensian) history.
My favorite part is the chapel--which is actually still quite beautiful due to a great-great-great-great-great grandmother of Nicole’s who funded a restoration in the 1700‘s. The chapel has served the local Waldensian community since the 1500’s and it is adjacent to a family/Waldenisan community cemetery that dates even further back than the chapel -- some of the graves date back to the 1300‘s! This cemetery has many graves that are marked “moine” that is the French word for “monk”. In the early days of the church, those who devoted their lives to church service were called monks. The gravestones are decorated with Waldensian symbols. In the chapel, we have artwork, including a magnificent stained glass that is over 500 years old which depicts not only Waldensian church history, but also the stories of several family members who were prominent in the church. We also have several statues, my favorite is of the Virgin Mary--when my wife and I were married part of the Waldensian ritual was to place flowers in front of this statue--asking the Virgin to bless our marriage. Our own children have followed this beautiful old Waldensian tradition at their own marriage ceremonies.
We also have a little museum. Most Waldensian churches--including my local one that I have provided a link to have a museum (and a winery--our local churches winery is a huge tourist attraction--visit us!), because we cherish and preserve our history. I admit that this was difficult in the times when there were not many written materials, but we still have a wealth of historical riches. Confirmation gowns, pendants and pins, family portraits--containing symbols that are rich in hidden meaning!
And from the 1600’s on we have written history. We have family bibles, diaries, written accounts. I love flipping through those old family bibles (even though I cannot understand them--the very old bibles are the Vulgate--the bible that we use now is the “Catholic Living Bible“ because it reads like a novel--very easy!) and looking at the names of those who have gone before! Some of the important family stories have been passed on--first through the oral tradition for many years--then written out centuries later.
According to family history, three members of Nick’s family were persecuted by the Catholic church. Interestingly enough, family tradition holds that these people were persecuted because wealthy bishops wanted their vineyards, religious differences were used merely as a flimsy excuse to provide cover for a bold land-grab. All three eventually went back to the Catholic church in order to retain their family lands.
What I love best about the church are the wonderful little traditions and French sayings that have become part of our life through the centuries. We just finished having a family reunion--as the Waldensians like to say, we bathed ourselves in family (nous avons pris un bain de famille). This is similar to how the Jewish people have Hebrew sayings, and the Catholics have Latin--French is the language of our church and we have many little everyday French sayings that have come down to us due to that association.
Above, someone said that the Waldensians have conventions. Well, the closest thing in my experience is that we have a Waldensian Festival every August, but this festival is a very new development, it only dates back to 1976. It is fantastic--we have lots of good wine, we show off our crafts, have food vendors, entertainers and games. It is very similar to a fair. I don’t see any similarities to convention, but you are welcome to come and see for yourself! It is certainly a lot of fun--and our family sells quite a bit of wine each year there….
I had heard of the 2x2 trying to make a connection between themselves and our church many years ago--my father pulled out a paper written by that Cornelius guy about a dozen years ago (on fete le Thanksgiving!). We all thought it was quite silly (even my 2x2Cooneyite parents) and took little stock in it.
More recently my wife saw Nathan’s ramblings on the web--and came to me saying--someone is interested in the Church! She was very excited--saying that she didn’t know people were interested in the church anymore--so she begged me to come here and tell about our church. Well--after checking it out--most here are NOT interested in our church. They are interested in proving that there is one “true” church and that the Waldensians were it for a brief time--but that now it is the 2x2/cooneyites. Good luck with that!
Most Christians understand that the true church is the believers. There have always been believers throughout history. Doesn’t matter what their church affiliation was. In 1600, there were true believers in the my group, there were also Catholics who were true believers. And there were people in both churches who were NOT true believers. There was not, never has been, and never will be a true church (where people are saved just by membership alone) and a false church (where people are doomed regardless of their relationship with God). It is a very very dangerous idea to believe that you need to find this true church to be saved. I am not interested in this train of thought.
If anyone is interested in Waldensians--you are welcome to come to our forums--both at my church and others. I have little interest in the 2x2/Cooneyites. They have been in my rear view mirror for many years--and that is where I intend to keep them. I wrote out my history in response to Cherie--who has done such a great research job--she deserves to have this history if she wants it. If anyone wants to use it, they are welcome to it.
Chris
IN SPITE OF ALL THE ABOVE EVIDENCE
“what” Wrote;
What I see in these various Waldensian posts is a fairly dismissive attitude to any similarities between the two groups.
Rather than exploring or admitting what the touch points between 1200 and 1890 might be, no matter how specious.
Almost like someone is afraid of something.
It's an open question to me. No-one other than Nathan seems in command of very much data on the subject.
“what” Wrote:
Interesting background to this and I think your remarks are accurate insofar as the fellowship.
But I'm not sure our Waldensian friend has that much historical insight either.
I think the one to look to would be Jaenen who doesn't really have an axe to grind as far as the Waldensians are concerned, his earlier writings notwithstanding.
“what” Wrote;
Not what I think at all. My position is that there is no worker/ apostolic succession traceable before 1890. At the same time I do not accept Irvine as founder. My statement is very clear, " the present day fellowship grew out of a preaching movement in Ireland at the beginning of the 20th C".
I reserve opinion on the respective roles of Irvine, Cooney, et al, because I have not studied that question specifically.
Regarding the Waldensians, again I do not think there is a worker/ apostolic succession linking Waldenses to the fellowship.
At the same time I think both Waldenses and the fellowship grew out of a similar socio-historical context that led both groups to explore a more literal and devout treatment of NT teaching and practices.
As I learn more, I may sharpen my viewpoint but that's where it is at the present time.
“JISTWONDERINGG” Wrote; (to “what”)
In case you didn't notice it, what, the Waldensian went to some detail regarding his knowledge and interest in his church history. It is beginning to look like you either do not read well, or you have little comprehension from what you do read.
That's all the time I have today -- see you soon.
“what” Replied;
Justwondering,
Now don't take offence at my response. Both yours and his are interesting posts, but not convincing to those needing convincing, at least not convincing to me.
Let's look at this point, then:
WG: “Even their doctrines are completely different. The only similarities are superficial and if you are going to ‘make’ a connection between them, you must make the same connection with the Roman Catholic Franciscan monks who were founded on the very same verses of Matthew 10 – only they kept central Christian doctrine while Willian (sic) Irvine rejected all Christian doctrines.”
You'll notice that you begin with a conclusion. Their doctrines (2x2 vs Waldenses) are different. How are they different? Okay, you say the Waldenses are similar to the Franciscans. But the Waldenses were persecuted by Rome and the Franciscans not. How come?
And I don't know anything about the specific doctrines of either group, so how does this help me?
So 2x2 are different, "because Irvine rejected all Christian doctrines". Really? Would an atheist or a Hindu say that he did? Now you've inserted a contentious and wildly general hypothesis on which to hang your hat. That statement would require an extensive exposition to support, why didn't you just stick to the original point.
I'm still left wondering this, "How is Waldenses doctrine different from doctrine of the fellowship?", which is where your paragraph began.
“JUSTWONDERINGG” replied;
Thanks what,
I believe I not only have a thick skin that will sustain many blows and return volley for villey, but I also have a warm heart towards the 2x2s (believe it or not). The only time I give up entirely on them is an individual case where it becomes abundantly clear that I have wasted my time on someone who WILL not hear and does not want to hear anything other than total agreement with 'their' views. I respect your studies and simply want to add to them out of mine -- if you will.
With regard to the doctrinal differences between the Waldensians and the 2x2s (generally speaking) is that the Waldensians have always held to the same central doctrines as the Roman Catholic church. They were persecuted because the Roman church assessed them as 'heretics' based upon their lifestyle of simplicity. Here we might compare the Roman reaction to the Waldensians to the current day reaction of the US government to terrorism -- the Roman church went beyond reason in its view of 'heresy' -- beyond a theological error that threatened the very existance of the Christian church -- to condemning people for 'different lifestyle.' -- a witch hunt if you will. And while we in our day of religious tolerance find that extremely inhuman, consider the Cathars and their doctrines that indeed would have wiped out Christianity and was spreading FAST in that time period. We of our day cannot excuse the Roman church for its excesses and cruelty -- even Roman Catholics of today cannot excuse that. But it is possible for us to understand how the Roman church got to that point -- and because we can understand that, we have the possibility to avoid doing the very same thing in our times -- evidently we are doing little better in spite of that as we plunge into witch hunts head long.
Here is a small excerpt from Heresies by HOJ Brown that gives a brief overview of the Waldensian doctrines and why they were deemed 'heretics' by Rome.
"most important of all the heretical movements in the Middle Ages was a very complex ferment, primarily dualistic, with direct ties to Bogomilism, known as Catharism. The Cathars were the medieval heretics per se, and they deserved that appellation. They should not be confused with another medieval religious group often mistaken for a variety of Catharism because like the Cathars they led a simple and separated life. The Waldensians, or Poor Men of Lyons, were forerunners of Reformation Protestantism, and were neither dualistic nor otherwise heretical in our sense; at the time of the Reformation, they associated themselves with it and became Protestants." (p. 253)
If that is not enough to show the Waldensians sharing the same doctrines as Roman Catholicism, I can give you more. But most of my textbook are presently buried in storage and would need to be brought out to do the topic any greater justice that "Heresies," which I have right at hand. So hopefully we can satisfy any need you have out of that book, as until winter I am far too busy to do a major on the topic.
With regard to the similar (to Waldensians) Franciscan monks and why they 'were not similarly persecuted by Rome,' let me say that the Franciscan monks did not have an easy start either. But right now I am on a short break and must sign off again until I have a bit more time.
“what” Wrote;
Perhaps we can leave this now until we both study some more. I understand your point is that the Waldenses were aligned doctrinally with Rome, and were persecuted for essentially non-doctrinal differences. But I leave you with this thought.
If you read the Roman Catholic catechism which numbers some hundreds of pages, how many points of difference do you think you'd find with Fellowship doctrine. There are the obvious ones: Purgatory, divinity of Mary (distorted by Protestants anyway), infallibility of the Pope (also distorted by Protestants). Other areas, like the authority of preachers, you would find the fellowship leaning more to Catholic doctrine than Protestant. I have not read it by the way, but I've read John Henry Cardinal Newman, and I have this one (the RC Catechism) on my lifetime "to do but will probably never get around to it" list.
I take it also that you are suggesting that Waldensians believed in, in order: Purgatory, the divinity of Mary, and the infallibility of the Pope in Rome?
Hey, great you have a warm heart, it does show.
“JUSTWONDERINGG” Replied;
Thanks what, and welcome to your interest clearday,
The central (essential) doctrines that define Christianity and have for some 1700 years are not a huge (hundreds of pages) Roman catechism. Of the top of my head they are these -- starting from the most important of them;
- The Deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.
- The personal nature of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
- The inspiration of Holy Scripture.
- The gospel of the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
These are probably not all of them -- like I said this is off the top of my head and rushed. However, the list is far smaller than hundreds of pages, but thousands of books have been written about them and continue to be written about them.
Roman doctrines of 'deity' of Mary etc. are not central Christian doctrines -- the do not define Christianity.
I must go immediately, but leave you with this much of a brief attempt to answer your question.
And I will ask you to similarly list the essential doctrines of the "Christian Conventions" church -- I can do so, but it is only fair here that a person from that group do that.
“JUSTWONDERINGG” Wrote;
For those who may have difficuly navigating to the site themselves, I take the liberty to bring the facts here for you, as follows;
"The Waldensian Church is the oldest evangelical church in existence, dating back at least to the 12th century and thus anticipating the Reformation by at least four hundred years. Beginning in the 13th century and extending through the 18th century severe persecutions diminished the Waldensian population. On February 17, 1848, King Charles Albert of Sardinia finally granted the Waldenses civil liberties. The population growth that followed forced many to leave their native valleys in the Cottian Alps of northern Italy, due to overcrowding. In 1893, twenty-nine Waldenses arrived in Burke County to prepare a place for several hundred other immigrants. In 1897, the settlers began work on a Romanesque-style church that would resemble those found back in the valleys of Italy. Two years later, the church sanctuary was completed and dedicated on July 4, 1899.
In the New World, the importance of the Scriptures remained. In the Waldensian Valleys in the Alps, it was most unusual to find a family who had not memorized at least one book of the New Testament, based on their fear that persecution might deprive them of the written word. In the New World, they continued the practice of having children memorize one chapter of the Bible.
The church also assumed responsibility for education. Many mission teachers assisted in the work of the Church. Since there was no money available for books, either in the church or at school, many long hours were spent copying materials.
Ministers who were sent from the Valleys assisted the Church and helped direct the activities of the colony, such as running the sawmill, building roads, obtaining supplies, and so forth.
In the beginning, the Church received much financial and religious assistance from different religious leaders and groups, particularly several from the north. On July 9, 1895, the pastor and 220 members, decided to unite with the Presbyterian Church, U.S. (Southern) since its beliefs and form of government most closely resembled those of the Waldenses. In 1983, with the reunion of the Northern and Southern branches, the Waldensian Presbyterian Church became a part of the new denomination, Presbyterian Church, USA.
- Many customs brought from Italy were retained in the Church until 1921 when changes began, including:
- The offering was collected in the pews during the service instead of at the door as the congregation departed
- The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper would be celebrated while the congregation remained seated in the pews, being waited on by elders. Formerly, partakers would present themselves at the altar two-by-two, drinking from the same cup, with the pastor reciting a different verse of Scripture to each person. Sometimes a verse particularly appropriate for that individual was used.
- Men and women would no longer sit on opposite sides of the Church.
- Previously, all services were conducted in French. Now one service each month was held in English. Gradually, English services replaced French and after 1941, all services were in English.
From June 1923, the Church minutes were to be recorded in English.
Not only has the Church modified its practices to keep consistent with modern times, but its facilities have undergone a number of changes as well. The last century has seen several structural modifications, including:
- The addition of Tron Hall in 1921.
- Construction of Pioneer Hall, with classrooms, a kitchen, and a fellowship area in 1940.
- A three-story Education/Office building in 1955.
- Renovation of the Sanctuary and Education Building in 1978-79.
- Enlargement of the Sanctuary, installation of an elevator to Pioneer Hall, and covered walk-ways in 1990.
Acquisition of an adjacent home (Tron House) for present and future ministries to the community in 1997.
The history of the Waldensian Presbyterian Church is so intertwined with the history of the town of Valdese, it is impossible to study one without learning of the other. One example of this is the fact that when it was apparent that the community could not economically survive based on agriculture, the Church lent money to help start industry. In education and industry, as well as in the religious life of the community, the Church served and serves today as the center of the Waldensian life in Valdese.
In essence, the Waldensian Presbyterian Church is blessed with people - all kinds of people - worshiping together, learning together, and serving together. We are a church family of individual members and families who care for one another.
This is Waldensian Presbyterian Church. Welcome Home...
The Waldensian Emblem
The Waldensian Emblem dates from the year 1640.
The lighted candle denotes "The Word of God." The blue field or night blue sky represents darkness. The seven stars represent the "Seven Churches in the Book of Revelation." The Latin motto Lux Lucet In Tenebris signifies "A Light is Shining in the Darkness of Night," or "The Burning Word of God is Bringing Light and Splendor Among Men."
The two branches, one of oak normally on the right and one of green laurel on the left, tied together at the bottom, indicates, "Hope and Strength and Power." The green laurel stands for "Hope and Glory." Thus we have Hope, Power, and the Glory of God.
The Waldensian Costume
- The dress is made from dark material with the collar edged in white lace.
- The shawl is usually of silk, synthetic fabric, or light wool. It may be brightened with either painted, screen printed, or embroidered flowers.
- The apron, like the shawl, is an important, decorative part of the costume. This too, may be varied in fabric with use of iridescent, silk-like fabric, or other, according to taste and color coordination.
- The Waldensian Coiffe is basically of starched material in lace or embroidered fabric and is worn only for church functions. When young girls begin courses in Catechism, coiffes are worn to church in black or navy. When they join the church and receive their first communion, they are privileged to wear the white coiffe. Traditionally, the white coiffe is an important item of bridal attire. Legend has it that the white ribbon on the coiffe is draped over the left shoulder and after the wedding vows is transferred to the back.
The Stained Glass Windows
- The original windows were part of a renovation to the Church that occurred in 1946-47. Designed and constructed by P.J. Reeves and Company of Philadelphia, PA, these windows symbolize some of the reformed churches around the world.
- Representing thirteen nations, PC-USA, and important events or symbols in Waldensian history, these windows add to the beauty of the sanctuary but also serve as a timeless tribute to our heritage.
The Waldensian Valleys
The adjacent map is a sketch of the Waldensian valleys in the Cottian Alps of northern Italy. You may click on the map to view an enlarged and more legible picture, but the image is approximately 130K and may take a few minutes to display.
The Presbyterian Church
Waldensian Presbyterian Church has been a proud member of the Presbyterian Church, USA, since 1895."
(Waldensian Presbyterian web site, Heritage")
“what” Wrote;
I really don't have anything else to say. If JW comes up with something I will be glad to answer.
All I will say is read Nathan's posts. In the meantime I am reading Euan Cameron's work on the subject
“JUSTWONDERINGG” Replied;
Yesterday at 3:48pm, JUSTWONDERINGG wrote:
On the meantime, this is where our discussion is at -- your court.
“what” Replied;
I would suggest we both time-out on this for a while. I confess I'm quite out of my element to discuss anything at a detailed level on this subject. Perhaps in a week or so.
"JUSTWONDERINGG” Replied;
Thanks what -- great suggestion. In a week's time I'll look for at least the four most important doctrines of the "Christian Conventions" church here -- by either yourself or any professing person who could give them here.
This is important -- the discussion stagnates right there if there are no comparable 2x2 doctrines provided for comparison to these.
“what” Replied;
Whoa, I say, whoa, chicken hawk. Let's reconsider that item once we've read some more. I'm not even sure that listing '2x2' doctrine will be useful, maybe yes, maybe no. This too can wait.
“JUSTWINDERINGG” Replied;
Woea nothing -- you asked me for the differences in doctrine between the Waldensians and the 2x2s. If you don't know the 2x2 doctrines there are others already on this thread who do and can help you out on it. But we stop dead at the comparrision of doctrines that you requested -- and I am not going to fill in that blank myself -- U gave you our doctrines -- you give me yours -- level playing level playing field, remember?
“what” Replied;
You'll see when I submit a precis of Cameron's book in a week. If it is necessary I will provide a summary of doctrine. Of course, I could just give it to you anyway. Here it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_conventions
Scroll to: "Distinguishing doctrines and practices"
(NOTE: when others are cited by “what” for not supplying their proof material for him when they have given him links, now he gives a link just so he (thinks he) doesn’t ‘need’ to write out just four 2x2 doctrines.)
“JUSTWONDERINGG” Replied;
I don't often repeat myself, what, but here I will -- stidy whatever else you like for as long as you like, but unless at least four central doctrines of the 2x2 church appear on this thread in one week, you will be considered to have chosen to back out of this dicussion of your own free will. I will not hop-scotch all over the place - we are on your question regarding the differenced between Waldensian doctrine and 2x2 doctrine -- your court. I will not repeat.
“what” Replied;
I am sorry I won't submit to being bullied on the terms of the discussion.
The discussion is over. I submitted the doctrine for consideration above.
I also smell a rat here. I know that JW and the Waldensian man have not made a single actual point about Middle Ages Waldensian history. They appear to know nothing about the subject, and I admit I'm pretty much in the same camp. Yet they've attracted a little peanut gallery including Cherie, Ann and a few anons.
Is this stupid or what? Why is anyone wasting their time on this drivel. Why am I participating in it?
“JUSTWONDERINGG” Wrote;
So, now that what has backed out of his own question, are there any professing folk who can provide four central doctrines of their church -- surely this is not a tough request for a chirch that evangelizes.
“ckirkhsm unlogged” Wrote;
I just wanted to say please stick around. I can understand limiting your time here and setting some boundaries--but this has been a good conversation.
much higher level than most of the discussions involving current members.
- doctrine--
- the only things i can see that they believe are
- 2x2 ministry
- itenerant ministry
- mtgs in home
- conventions
(NOTE: deleted portion containing many good Christian doctrines for brevity here)
“JUSTWONDERINGG” Wrote;
The comparison 2x2 doctrines according to a viewer:
”the only things i can see that they believe are:
- 2x2 ministry
- itenerant ministry/
- mtgs in home
- conventions”
Doctrines of the historical Christian church:
- The Deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.
- The personal nature of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
- The inspiration of Holy Scripture.
- The gospel of the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
So, if the 2x2 doctrines are not Christian doctrines might their “gospel” also be a different gospel?
The Apostle Paul’s GOSPEL:
1 CORINTHIANS 15:1-3 (KJV) “Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received,
how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:”
