Talk:Waldensians

First Translation of the Bible into French

"The first French Bible translated by Pierre Robert Olivétan with the help of Calvin and published at Neuchâtel in 1535 was based in part on a New Testament in the Waldensian vernacular. "

Olivétan's translation was not the first translation of the bible into French. There were several translations into French in the middle ages Wikipedia, and the first printed translation was in 1530. According to this entry he was the first to translate the Bible into the French language starting from the Hebrew and Greek texts.

Recommend that the sentence be modified to remove "first", ie. "The French bible translated by...". Possibly mention that this was the first translation starting from the Hebrew and Greek texts, but I think this is too much detail for this section, which is about the Waldenseans, not (primarily) French bible translation.

[Edit] Deleting the word "first", as notified here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Javaman59 (talk • contribs) 06:37, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

"the Waldensian vernacular" what is the Waldesian vernacular? - was it the from the Italian Alps or from Lyons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.175.73.12 (talk) 10:26, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

the Waldensian vernacular and the churches in Waldensia - so come on, folk want to know what is the vernacular? and where on earth is Waldensia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.29.26.111 (talk) 09:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

First Protestant movement

It would be useful, in order to stress the importance of the Vaudois movement in the context of the early stages of European Reformation movements (Lollards, Hussites, etc), to state explicitly in this article that the Vaudois formed indeed historically the first Protestant movement. Of course this statement has to be backed with a reliable source but I'm convinced there are such sources out there because it is most likely this statement is in fact correct. If you do find a statement to that effect in a reliable source please add it to the article. Thanks. Contact Basemetal here 18:11, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Right now at UMass Amherst I'm doing a thesis project on the Waldensians (focusing on the roles of women in the movement), and I can tell you that while they did influence the Lollards and Hussites, they were definitely NOT proto-Protestant. They essentially were Catholic in doctrine, but were excommunicated due to their preaching and Scripture translation. They did subsequently challenge the authority of the Church and established themselves as a counter-church, but unless you're going to consider groups like the Cathars Christian, I would not consider establishing a counter-Church to be proto-Protestant. The Waldensians could be seen as an early example of, and by far the longest lasting, challenging Church practice (and later its very authority), but that's not quite the same as proto-Protestant.--¿3family6 _contribs 18:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Are you saying that the term "Protestant" (as used in English at least) can only be used to describe groups that have in addition theological differences with the Catholic church? Contact Basemetal here 18:49, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

In short, yes. But more because they aren't really considered that. There's discussion about it, certainly, and that can be mentioned here - I myself will try to improve this article once I am done with my semester - but it isn't something that's really definite. The Lollards definitely would be considered proto-Protestant, and probably the Hussites (I don't know about them 'cause I haven't studied them much). What I'm trying to say that if we take Protestant to mean any group which differed and ultimately split off from the Catholic Church, than pretty much every heretical group would be included. While the Waldensians certainly influenced the Hussites and then the Protestants in later years, they preceded those movements by a few centuries, and aren't really considered proto-Protestant by scholars. I think the big factors considered by scholars are A) Theological and intellectual tradition, B) Influence, and D) Timeframe. There's a direct, noticeable influence of the Lollards and Hussites that grew into the Protestant movement, and those two heresies also had theological and intellectual systems similar to the later Reformation (Wycliffe and the Lollards in particular expressed ideas that later appeared in the Reformation, such as unconditional election, consubstantiation, and a "church within a church"). Along with that, they appeared in a certain chronological timeframe (late-Middle Ages/early-Rennaissance).--¿3family6 _contribs 21:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for the insight. Since you've studied this topic I defer to you. If you can improve the article please do. Cheers, Contact Basemetal here 23:49, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not an expert, by any means, but yes, I have studied it. There are some Protestant writers who try to establish the Waldensians as proto-Protestant, but that really isn't accurate.--¿3family6 _contribs 02:29, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

One last comment as an afterthought. Something to think about. In 1532 at the Synode of Chanforan the Vaudois decided to become a Calvinist Church. If one can in no case see the Vaudois as a proto-Protestant movement, it is somewhat puzzling that they seemed to be able to fit so quickly and easily into the Calvinist Reform movement. Contact Basemetal here 20:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

They joined the Calvinists to avoid persecution, and had to majorly overhaul their theology. By that point, the Waldensian movement was quite different from what it started out as. But they still were quite Catholic up until the merger. I don't know as much about this stage of the movement, because my research focuses more on the early stages.--¿3family6 _contribs 22:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

So interesting mathematical probability discounts the sect starting in the late 12th century as the persecution lasted for nearly 500 years. I also find it strange that Peter Waldo vanished without a trace and all we have is a signed statement declaring his Catholic vows — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.166.75.87 (talk) 14:40, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

See WP:No original research and WP:Verifiability. Osama bin Laden managed to evade one of the best funded military forces in the world for about a decade of them focusing on him, and a few before that in an era with satellite tracking, heat sensing, radar, and so on. Waldo lived in an era where the best tracking consisted of "someone who knew the area with a hunting dog." Ian.thomson (talk) 17:28, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what this original comment is even trying to say. Catharism survived for hundreds of years despite persecution, as well. There's a lot of scholarship analyzing how Waldensianism continued to have adherents amidst intense persecution. There are some scholars who question whether later groups that claimed to be Waldensian were actually Waldensians, but it seem unanimously accepted that Peter Waldo existed and, if he didn't found it, at least highly energized a religious movement. He didn't "vanish without a trace," and the year of his death is known to within approx. five years.--¿3family6 _contribs 01:28, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

I just enhanced the article with the German aspacts and I agree with Basemetal. The Waldenisans they were definitely deemed proto-Protestant, there is a wide range of (german) sources on that, at least starting in the 17th century.

• Italienische Waldenser und das protestantische Deutschland 1655 bis 1989 Barbro Lovisa Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1994 (Italian Waldensian and protestant Germany 1655 till 1989)
• Gustavus Adolphus Union GAW journal / website http://glauben-verbindet.blogspot.de/2013/01/gemeinsame-projektforderung-der.html http://glauben-verbindet.blogspot.de/search/label/Waldenser
• Der Armutsbegriff der Waldenser: eine sozialphilosophische Annäherung von Paul R. Tarmann
• Geschichte der Waldenser F. Bender
• Johan Legers algemeine Geschichte der Waldenser oder der evangelischen Kirchen in den Thälern von Piemont: in zwey Büchern mit vielen Kupfern. B.1-2 Jean Léger, Siegmund Jacob Baumgartens, Johann Jacob Korn, 1750
• Rückblicke auf die Geschichte der Reformation, oder, Luther in Leben und That: zur Erinnerung an die dreihundertjährige Augsburgische Confessions Heinrich Gottlieb Kreussler beim Verfasser, 1830

Fact is that the high independence of the communities, lay preaching, voluntary poverty and strict adherence to Bible are among the treats that allow to do such an assumptions. Furthermore, Peter Waldo as being credited with providing to Europe the first translation of the Bible in a 'modern tongue' outside of Latin is definitely a highly protestant asset. Its been and is of importance, as differences between Protestants and Catholics refers to Ecclesiology, and the Waldesian strive for their own church was taken to prove an ancient origin of protestantism as true interpretation of the faith. On that base, the German Protestants have been helping the Italien protestant minorities by aid, loans, exchange of priesters and communities and supportin legal and theological issues is a continuous story since the 17th century. The 1948 centenary festivitations of the Savoy civil rights declaration have been used by the EKD (top level) to allow for German Italian reconcialiation after WWI, with waldensian delegates pioneering. So far for that. Serten II (talk) 14:18, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what those German sources have to do with establishing the Waldensians as proto-Protestant, as by the 17th century they had acceded to the Protestants. I did a g-books search, and there are numerous sources calling them proto-Protestant. However, that still is not the same as calling them the first Protestants, as Basemetal first suggested.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:07, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree that that Basemetals wording may lead to misunderstandings. But that applies as well to your "acceding the Protestants". To say the Waldensians as proto-Protestant, is a mere historical view. Leger and others faith and the theology related view is different. They saw the Waldensians as only and true Christians, which kept the faith (held the candle) in dark times, against the catholic antichrist. The German protestant interested in the case used it to claim that real christians ever have been like them and insofar denied the apostolic succession. With the Waldensians going under the Protestant roof, they stayed being Waldensians. I will correct the wording, thnx for the input. Serten II (talk) 18:00, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The only reason I said "acceding to the Protestants" is because the Waldensians had to reform much of their theology, especially with regard to unconditional election. They stayed Waldensian, but had to transform some of their theology and lifestyle in a short period of time.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:06, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The Waldensians in Württemberg belong to (pietist) lutheran, in Baden and Hesse they belong to United and uniting churches, that said they might not have been changed to Calvinism (unconditional election) radically. I think you might overstrech an aspect which is due to the interaction with Switzerland. Serten II (talk) 18:20, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I can only speak from what I read during my thesis project. I did not focus that much on the differing groups throughout Germany in early modern era, as that was outside the scope of my project. I concentrated on the roles of women in the movement, up to the merger with the Protestant movement. So I really don't know much about the movement after the merger with Protestantism, other than a very brief overview.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:46, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

See, my family comes direct from the region around Maulbronn and Bretten (partnercity of Wittenberg) so I have some impressions from the current state. With regard to women, I had the overall impression in school that the "Waldensians" were more mediterrenean lookswise - maybe due to the impression given by some ravishing beauties ;) Serten II (talk) 20:04, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Joseph of Aramathea

I call for the inclusion of the document discovered by Caesar Boronius the Vatican librarian of 1596 who wrote the Annals Ecclesiasticci stating the discovery of the ancient manuscript concerning Joseph of Aramathea and many others forced onto an oarless and sailess boat settling in Southern France. This is relevant and needs to be mentioned in article otherwise this wikipedia article is a farce. I suggest possibly something as The Vatican Librarian Caesar Boronius in 1596 who wrote the Annals Eccleisistici stated that Joseph of Aramathea and others were forced onto a boat which settled in Southern France I leave this to other editors here to maybe rewrite this paragraph. 2 primary sources have been mentioned previously but as a poster mentioned a modern day source is required which there are several qualified scholars who have commented on this discovery — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.4.211 (talk) 01:32, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

If this is to be included in Wikipedia, someone will need to give specific data for the sources: book, page number, etc. To insert the sentence as suggested has no more weight than if I would say that "Barney the Clown wrote in 1987 that Joseph of Aramathea had three legs." That could be a fact. It could be that Barney made it up. It could be that Barney was repeating hearsay that has no other source to back up the statement. That is where scholarship comes into play. If you want it included, I would suggest that you do the research and cite the sources since since so far no other editor has taken it upon himself to check into the matter. If solid sources are given, and it is shown that this incident is indeed connected to the Waldensians, other editors will be likely to assent to inclusion in the article. As it stands, the sources are very vague, and the incident does not appear to be directly connected to the Waldensians. If you can show otherwise, that would be great. Thanks for trying to improve Wikipedia! Mikeatnip (talk) 04:09, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)As has been explained in detail on your account's talk page and in the article's edit summaries, you need to cite academic sources. Caesar Baronius's Annales Ecclesiastici are full of what we would now call legends (to be polite about it), and you're wrong about the contents, following a total blunder made by the 1961 pseudohistorical fiction book "The Drama of the Lost Disciples." The Annales say that Joseph of Arimathea went to Britain (not that any evidence is provided for that, either).

You have also not provided any evidence of relevance -- you suggested edit is therefore absolutely useless, if not nonsensical, unless you suggesting some that the Waldensians are descended from folks from a completely different part of France who were supposedly converted by Joseph of Arimathea despite there being no evidence he was ever actually there. Occam's unplugged and clogged electric shaver still goes through that like a cinderblock through an old cracked window. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:21, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Robert Olivetan writes: "Since the time of the apostles, or their immediate successors, the torch of the gospel has been lit among the Vaudois, and has never since been extinguished." this is not in the article

J. A. Wylie, Presbyterian historian, in his History of Waldenses (1860), on p. 3 writes: "Their traditions invariably point to an unbroken descent from the earliest times, as regards their religious belief. The Nobla Leycon [Noble Lesson], which dates from the year 1100, goes to prove that the Waldenses of Piedmont did not owe their rise to Peter Waldo of Lyons he was the leader of The Poor men of Lyons and a lapsed Catholichis confession of faith is totally different spiritually and religiously from the three known actual confessions of faith of the Waldenses. This article is totally Catholic biased and quite frankly a disgrace of truth upon all who read it, we are not living in the inquisition I call for a complete overhaul and inclusion of all the relevant missing historical documments to give a true picture — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stetson7 (talk • contribs) 10:42, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Those "sources" are extremely outdated propaganda, not modern academic history. The article is not biased toward Catholicism, it's merely not biased towards a WP:FRINGE attempt by a few protestants to try and claim the Cathlic doctrine of Apostolic succession through a group that claims to have been founded by Peter Waldo. WP:GEVAL means that Wikipedia is under no requirement to give revisionist history equal footing with what mainstream academia (which is not merely Catholics, but every scholar who isn't trying to claim apostolic succession through the Waldo-enisians). Ian.thomson (talk) 14:23, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

And the Didache Ian which the ancient Waldenses claim as their only rule of faith attested by modern day scholars to be first century and authentic how does this bring light to the situation and is also missing from this article, no you are wrong this article is totally Catholic based and a fraud, I call for its entire removal and to start again— Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.4.211 (talk • contribs)

The Waldensians themselves and secular (i.e. non-Catholic) academia trace the Waldensians to Peter Waldo. The only people who trace the Waldensians to before Waldo are a few fringe non-Waldensian Protestants who try to claim apostolic succession (a concept the Waldensians don't care about) through the Waldensians. It makes about as much sense as a Wiccan trying to trace their religion to Moses through Muhammad.

Claiming that the Waldensians used the Didache to prove any age of theirs is like trying to trace Seventh Day Adventism to Moses because they accept the Pentateuch.

The article is not Catholic biased, it is merely not supporting your favorite conspiracy theory. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:33, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Wrong again Ian about the Waldensians themselves agreeing we came from Waldo....I AM Waldensian and know the Waldo story is a fraud and a lie. Waldo founded Poor men of lyons and had nothing to do with us. Modern day Waldensians have been corrupted with mainstream protestantism,— Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.4.211 (talk • contribs)

• Waldensian.info - "There simply could not have been a continuous group," and "Historians now agree that the Waldensian movement began in Lyons, France about 1170."
• American Waldensian Society - "The Waldensian Church originated with the preaching of the merchant Valdo (Waldo of Lyons, from whom the church’s name originates), 1140-1217."
• Waldensian Evangelical Church - "L'aggettivo "valdese" prende origine dalla vicenda di un mercante di Lione vissuto nel XII secolo che decise, al termine di una profonda crisi spirituale, di vivere l'esperienza cristiana seguendo l'esempio degli apostoli" or 'The adjective "Waldensian" originates from the story of a merchant of Lyons lived in the twelfth century, who decided, at the end of a deep spiritual crisis, to live the Christian experience, following the example of the apostles.'

If you are a Waldensian, you have been "corrupted" by mainstream protestantism, particularly the 1931 Baptist work The Trail of Blood.

Wikipedia does not care about what you or anyone else "knows," it only cares about what is verifiable. There is no verified evidence of the Waldensians before the 12th century. There are Waldensians who trace their movement to Waldo. They predate Protestants who hijack the movement's name to try and claim apostolic succession (a Catholic doctrine that anyone who accepts "sola scriptura" has no reason to care about). Secular academia (i.e. non-Catholic) also goes with Waldo, and what reason would they have to side with Catholicism? If anything, debunking Catholic claims of apostolic succession would be more ideologically acceptable for secularism, and yet secular academia cannot in all honesty do so.

Believe whatever what you want, but don't get your conspiracy theories mixed up with what everyone else observes. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

We have some reason to include The Trail of Blood as part of the continuity legends, but the rest is fringe, agreed Ian.thomson Serten II (talk) 23:52, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

The sources you site Waldensian .ifo states that the name of Peter was added 150 years after his death, so Peter never existed where did the name Peter come from, it was invented. The American Waldensian Society you also site is not original Waldensian it is Waldensian / Methodist society also mot original and lastly as I will not reply anymore so have your last say Ian. Revelations states the true church would be protected in the mountains for 1260 years, the woman being the church, this is not the Empire of Roman Catholicsm which was not hidden or persecuted but did the persecuting. If one accepts these facts that are being presented here that there was never any other group of Christians that existed down the ages who as written in also Revelations persecuted by satan who kept the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ then the espounders of this history created here in this article has declared the God who wrote the bok of Revelations to be a liar.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.4.211 (talk • contribs)

And the Quran condemns the worship of Jesus, the Upanishads say that existence is an illusion, Richard Dawkins says all religion is wrong, and Scientology's OT3 says Jesus was just part of a brainwashing program by the alien psychologist Xenu -- Do you see why Wikipedia doesn't cite any of those texts or any other religious texts (especially one as intentionally cryptic as Revelation) to determine article content? Do you invite Muslims to rewrite articles in line with Sharia law? Do you invite atheists to rewrite the Jesus article to say that there was no historical figure? No? Then don't be a hypocrite, and don't try to force your personal religious beliefs onto articles.

Your interpretation of Revelation is just your personal interpretation of Revelation. There are plenty of others by other people beyond the idea that Revelation is a commentary on all history since it was written. There are some who think that few (if any) of its events have started yet, there are some who think that the only events that did not finish before the fall of the Roman Empire are the resurrection of the dead and the second coming, there are some who think that the majority of the work is a metaphor for a gradual social improvement brought by Christian charity, and everything inbetween. By denying them, are you saying that the author of Revelation was a liar? No, because those interpretations (like yours) are attempts to understand an intentionally cryptic work whose author did not leave a commentary explaining it. In fact, to pretend that countering one's interpretation is to call John of Patmos a liar is to claim that one's interpretation supersedes the actual book of Revelation, which is to claim that one's subjective opinions trump the word of God.

And again, with that variation of belief, the only position Wikipedia can take is neutrality. That does not mean giving equal validity to claims that run counter to mainstream academia, but it does mean that this site will not be forced to hold a particular position because a new self-appointed Inquisition tells us that our articles are heretical.

If you are not here to build a neutral encyclopedia but are promote your religious beliefs, remove content that doesn't support your beliefs, and otherwise crusade against anything that offends you, you are not welcome here. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

What the hell happened to the: Poor of Lombardy?

Under History, it reads: Because of the shunning of the wealth of the Roman Catholic Church clergy, the movement was early known as The Poor of Lyon and The Poor of Lombardy. - unlike the so-called Poor of Lyons and even though Lombardy being bigger both in terms of area and population, why are The Poor of Lombardy at no further point mentioned in the article? Indeed, why does this writeup lack an explanation as to why the Waldenses happen to go by two sundry names and places?

THE NAME: 'WALDESIANS' IS TAKEN FROM 'VALLEYS' NOT PETER WALDO!

EARTH TO TALKPAGE

THE NAME: 'WALDESIANS' IS TAKEN FROM 'VALLEYS' NOT PETER WALDO — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.243.97 (talk) 04:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Capslock is not cruise control for cool, Wikipedia summarizes published mainstream academic sources, and Wikipedia does not use original research. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

The Biblica Italica which was distributed by the Waldenses in scripture for hundreds of years prior to the mysterious Peter Waldo proves they had the original Bible scriptures. This should be mentioned in the article. Why hasn't the testimony of the Catholic Inquisitor Reinerous Sacco stating the Waldenses went as far back as the 4th century with Pope Sylvestor and even to the Apostles not mentioned in the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.191.102.177 (talk) 15:55, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

If there are reputable sources, feel free to add the information into the article. I would suggest signing up for a Wikipedia account so that discussion could go along with the suggested edits as you make them, if you do add the material. Mikeatnip (talk) 16:03, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Britannica on the Waldensians

@Stetson7: As can be seen at http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/634415/Waldenses , the EB does not say or even imply that "there was another church movement highly advanced and in existance prior to Peter Waldo." It was original research to claim so, and we do not use original research (as has been explained before). Claiming that the EB supports that claim is like saying that Luke 6:29 proves Jesus supported assault. Also, a single source does not trump the majority of mainstream academics. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:20, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

@Stetson7: Again, Wikipedia does not use original research. If you want to add something, every single piece of information must be directly supported by the source cited. Where in the EB does it say that the Waldensians predate Waldo, without interpretation or inserting material? It does not say that anywhere. Therefore, you in any honesty or competency pretend that the EB "proves" there was a movement predating Waldo. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:56, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

The Encyclopedia Britannica mentions that Peter Waldo was releasing scripture not of the Latin Bible but from another Bible which was the Biblica Itala this is very important as it proves the existance of another Christian group which the dishonest editors of this article are wanting to hide. The Biblica Itala bible is known as the only other Bible in existance at the time and for me to say a highly advance group with respect to the article by me not even mentioning they were Waldenses was quite noble and respectful of me. Biblica Itala must be mentioned as the scriptures PW was releasing thankyou