…with folks wanting to claim that their doctrines and particular church organization are found in certain popular (infamously diabolical) medeival sects!!
Like, Baptists “claim” the Albegensians, Waldensians, and the Paulicans, and more. Now I found out that there are church of Christ people doing the same! Whose next, the Mormons? Why not?? How much more different can you be (Baptist vs. Church of Christ?) which were they?
Ok, I’m not particularly angry, I should say that. But I wonder, what are some good solid, contemporary to the times writings that speak of those groups? There have to be some. I just haven’t looked hard. I don’t want to be terribly misled.
Well, here are some referenced from newadvent’s piece
TER-MKRTTSCHIAN, Die Paulicianer im byzantinischen Kaiserreich und verwandte ketzerische Erscheinungen in Armenien (Liepzig, 1893);
DOLLINGER, Beitrage zur Sektengeschichte des Mittelalters, I (Munich, 1890), 1-31;
LOMBARD, Pauliciens, Bulgares et Bonshommes (Geneva, 1879);
HERGENROTHER, Photius, III (Ratisbon, 1869), 143-53:
GIBBON, Decline and Fall, ed. BURY, VI London, 1898), liv, and appendix 6;
ADENEY, The Greek and Eastern Churches (Edinburgh, 1908), v.
Does it do any good to tell folks that Albegensians preferred abortion to childbirth, or that the Paulicans apparently rejected St. Peter’s writings, or that Berengerius not merely disbelieved transubstantiation, but believed consubstantiation (as I understand at least)? Like, that’s not a good guy to claim for a symbolic view of the Lord’s Supper.
Allright, gotta cool down, have a good weekend everyone!