This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Waldensians article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have watched this page get battered back and forth for several years now between those who declare that the Waldensians started with Waldo and those who declare that it goes back to the first/second century. I will make a proposal (based upon my understanding/interpretation): Why not allow space for both interpretations as to their origins? It was popular in early and mid-Protestant centuries for Protestant writers to "claim" the Waldensians as their forerunners. However, many (most?) current historians no longer accept the 18th and 19th century Protestant histories as correct, but rather as an (well-intentioned and honest?) effort to try to get history to validate their positions.
The issues at stake in Waldensian history are not easy to distinguish many hundreds of years later, with extremely limited source documents. Yes, there were pre-Waldo churches that were similar to what Peter Waldo and his closest followers eventually morphed into. But the issue is that the Waldensian movement linked with Peter Waldo did not directly originate from these pre-Waldo churches (i.e. Waldo was not a convert of theirs, but started separately from them, likely unaware that they existed). Later, there was some interaction between Waldo and these pre-Waldo congregations (as I understand it). Added to the confusion is that many Waldensians never left the Catholic Church.
So you have connections both ways, that is, some Waldensians had interactions with (and some of them possibly originated from) pre-Waldo churches that were not Romanized. At the same time, you had some Waldensians who officially stayed within the Catholic Church and held private meetings on the side.
So two theories exist as to the origins of the Waldensians: 1) They came from the pre-Waldo congregations and Waldo joined with that movement. 2) They were a new movement and had some associations with pre-Waldo non-conformist congregations, but never really joined the pre-existing movement, thus becoming a distinct movement that had a large chunk of adherents who remained (officially) within the Catholic fold.
My proposal is that both of these theories of origins (and both have some credibility to them) have a space here, rather than one side wiping out the other side's ideas, then later the other side wiping the first side's ideas off the page. The outline could be:
Origins
Or something similar. Mikeatnip ( talk) 13:19, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
UPDATED. Catholic section. The claim that Pope Innocent VIII ordered extermination needs to be supported by some primary source. The Wikipedia page on Innocent VIII has the same paragraph. I raised an issue there.
I found a link to the bull (Latin and French). It does not seem to order extermination of people, rather the heresy. This is not to deny that excommunication etc would leave a population outside the church's protection by overzealous or tyranical princes, and that this could indeed be bad for them. I have added a link to the bull, and added the words "of the heresies of" into exterminate the Voudois Rick Jelliffe ( talk) 09:19, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
The introduction/background info section has unclear meaning in the following two sentences:
“Upon finding the ideas of other reformers similar to their own, they quickly merged into the larger Protestant movement. In 1532, with the Resolutions of Chanforan of 12. September 1532, they formally became a part of the Calvinist tradition.”
Was the “Resolutions of Chanforan of 12” a specific citation (i.e., “of 12”), or was the period separating these sentences a typo (i.e., the 12th of September)? Samfoe ( talk) 13:41, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
You understandy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.226.48 ( talk) 19:52, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
How can the Waldenses have been created by Peter Waldo born in 1140 when the Monk Bernard de Foncald wrote about the heretics who were known as "Valdensis" who were condemned during the pontificate of Pope Lucius II in 1144 when Peter Waldo was 4 years old — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:2E3E:7B00:FC43:9565:9976:68B7 ( talk) 14:25, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Thankyou I will locate the actual citation book and then publish — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.191.132.91 ( talk) 01:31, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
I am not interested in a work dated 1886 but the original work by this Monk which does exist and will be found. You should check your facts instead of writing like trash Bernard as you state did not write anything in 1180 as he died in 1153. I have done my research and found this from late 12th century...From the book Histories of Alexander the 3rd it states that after they were summoned by Bernard at Narbonne they instituted the treatise and were condemned This is in relation to the heretics known as the Vaudois. I want this paragraph placed in the histories section someone can do it or ill do it myself — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.191.132.91 ( talk) 04:14, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
What is the name of the Catholic cleric who supposedly translated the latin vulgate for Peter Waldo upon rish of death, this would have taken many years to complete when did it start and when did it finish ? secondly another major problem with Waldo is that he was known as the Poor men of Lyons who gave away all his property and wealth but the Valley people the Waldenses were businessmen they did not follow the way of life and teachings of Waldo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:2E3E:7B00:E425:7CB2:3C2D:6A77 ( talk) 02:45, 31 January 2019 (UTC) It is impossible for a Catholic cleric to have been hired by Peter Waldo to translate the Vulgate into the Waldensian Romance tongue which would have taken years of this cleric being secreted away from his Catholic peers to have not discovered him. There is further evidence that the name Waldo was added about 150 years later. Further if Waldo had followers they would have followed him but the Waldenses were all businessmen employed in many trades. It is also mathematically impossible for a sect created in 1180 to take 500 years of inquisition to virtually extinguish. Using Oczams razor of reasoning the only conclusion is this that the written story of Peter Waldo relating to the valley people is fictious, that Peter of Lyons did exist but was not Waldensian, that the valley people possessed an ancient Bible in their tongue and that a 500 year inquisition mathematically proves that this was not a newly formed sect in the late 12 century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.191.132.91 ( talk) 03:16, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
I require an historical citation for the name Peter Waldo from the 12th century thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:2E3E:7B00:BD50:8B35:DD69:63C7 ( talk) 08:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
So the name Peter is a complete Catholic invention. This now casts serious doubts on the whole Peter Waldo story because it doesnt make sense how the writers of his supposed history keep telling us he was a rich merchant who gave away his property had a wife children etc but did not know his name so they added his name 150 years later to make him appear real and human. The Catholic historians write that Peter Waldo gave away all his money and lived a life of poverty so when did he as they say give away all his money before he payed the scribes to write a bible or after ? This question once again raises doubts to the written story a Catholic history as it proves that if true he didn't give away all his money and the Catholic story is a complete white wash. The truth is if this Waldo character even existed he already had the Waldensian scriptures at hand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:2E3E:7B00:8B3:E5B7:BBC7:BFAB ( talk) 01:12, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
The only words I have read in the book (The Elizabethan Jesuits, by Francis Edwards), happen to be on leaf 87 (whereupon I made 'leaf-fall' on my first and thus far only interaction with the said book) and thus read...
"Once he had been an enthusiastic follower of John Foxe, the man who compiled a huge volume on the Waldesians, the Poor of Lyons, the Hussites, and Wycliffites, and other..."
Has the hereinabove foreshows, "the Waldesians" and "the poor of Lyons" ARE LISTED APART.
In 1975 the italian Waldensian Evangelical Church merged with the Methodist Evangelical Church in Italy to form the Union of Methodist and Waldensian Churches. However, this agreement between methodists and waldensians did not happened on an international level. The other Waldensian organizations from the world, even if they are not independent from the italian church, are not in union with the methodist churches in their countries, so it is factualy wrong to say that the Waldensian movement in itself is part of the Methodist tradition.
Even inside the italian merger church, the theology of the churches did not change. The Methodist congregations are separate from the Waldensian ones even if they entered communion with one another. So, in the same organization, you have churches that preach Calvinism (from the Waldensian heritage) and others that preach Methodism. That is because the theology of Methodism and Calvinism cannot be merged as they are mutually exclusive (one affirms what the other denies).
Moreso, this page refers to the history and characteristics of the Waldensian movement as a whole. Most of the page focuses on the waldensians during the Late Middle Ages and Early modern period, and to say in the infobox that this movement is part of the Methodist tradition is a horrible misrepresentation, as Methodism did not exist until the end of the 18th century, and Waldensian theology was, and still is, nothing like Methodism. We say they are part of the Reformed tradition because the theology of the waldensians until the 16th century was similar to that of calvinists and after the Protestant Reformation they actually adhered to Calvinist theology (their theology was shaped to be more aligned with Calvinism to the point of being completely taken over by it).
In conclusion, the merger of the italian organization with the methodists in the 20th century is only as important as to be mentioned in the "Italy" section. – Barumbarumba ( talk) 16:5, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
Minimize the number of links.
access dates are not appropriate in the external links section. Do not use {{ cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section.
Disputed links should be excluded by default unless and until there is a consensus to include them.-- Otr500 ( talk) 21:27, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Britannica as far as I know is a reliable source, and it states that "Eventually, the elements of the Eucharist (bread and wine) were understood as symbols only, and the Waldenses denied the doctrine of transubstantiation. ". I see no reason to delete this, and it does not conflict with the references mentioning belief in real presence, as Britannica uses the language of "eventually", which means that Britannica is claiming that their theology developed from a belief in real presence to Memorialism. -- ValtteriLahti12 ( talk) 14:57, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Waldensians article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have watched this page get battered back and forth for several years now between those who declare that the Waldensians started with Waldo and those who declare that it goes back to the first/second century. I will make a proposal (based upon my understanding/interpretation): Why not allow space for both interpretations as to their origins? It was popular in early and mid-Protestant centuries for Protestant writers to "claim" the Waldensians as their forerunners. However, many (most?) current historians no longer accept the 18th and 19th century Protestant histories as correct, but rather as an (well-intentioned and honest?) effort to try to get history to validate their positions.
The issues at stake in Waldensian history are not easy to distinguish many hundreds of years later, with extremely limited source documents. Yes, there were pre-Waldo churches that were similar to what Peter Waldo and his closest followers eventually morphed into. But the issue is that the Waldensian movement linked with Peter Waldo did not directly originate from these pre-Waldo churches (i.e. Waldo was not a convert of theirs, but started separately from them, likely unaware that they existed). Later, there was some interaction between Waldo and these pre-Waldo congregations (as I understand it). Added to the confusion is that many Waldensians never left the Catholic Church.
So you have connections both ways, that is, some Waldensians had interactions with (and some of them possibly originated from) pre-Waldo churches that were not Romanized. At the same time, you had some Waldensians who officially stayed within the Catholic Church and held private meetings on the side.
So two theories exist as to the origins of the Waldensians: 1) They came from the pre-Waldo congregations and Waldo joined with that movement. 2) They were a new movement and had some associations with pre-Waldo non-conformist congregations, but never really joined the pre-existing movement, thus becoming a distinct movement that had a large chunk of adherents who remained (officially) within the Catholic fold.
My proposal is that both of these theories of origins (and both have some credibility to them) have a space here, rather than one side wiping out the other side's ideas, then later the other side wiping the first side's ideas off the page. The outline could be:
Origins
Or something similar. Mikeatnip ( talk) 13:19, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
UPDATED. Catholic section. The claim that Pope Innocent VIII ordered extermination needs to be supported by some primary source. The Wikipedia page on Innocent VIII has the same paragraph. I raised an issue there.
I found a link to the bull (Latin and French). It does not seem to order extermination of people, rather the heresy. This is not to deny that excommunication etc would leave a population outside the church's protection by overzealous or tyranical princes, and that this could indeed be bad for them. I have added a link to the bull, and added the words "of the heresies of" into exterminate the Voudois Rick Jelliffe ( talk) 09:19, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
The introduction/background info section has unclear meaning in the following two sentences:
“Upon finding the ideas of other reformers similar to their own, they quickly merged into the larger Protestant movement. In 1532, with the Resolutions of Chanforan of 12. September 1532, they formally became a part of the Calvinist tradition.”
Was the “Resolutions of Chanforan of 12” a specific citation (i.e., “of 12”), or was the period separating these sentences a typo (i.e., the 12th of September)? Samfoe ( talk) 13:41, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
You understandy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.226.48 ( talk) 19:52, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
How can the Waldenses have been created by Peter Waldo born in 1140 when the Monk Bernard de Foncald wrote about the heretics who were known as "Valdensis" who were condemned during the pontificate of Pope Lucius II in 1144 when Peter Waldo was 4 years old — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:2E3E:7B00:FC43:9565:9976:68B7 ( talk) 14:25, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Thankyou I will locate the actual citation book and then publish — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.191.132.91 ( talk) 01:31, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
I am not interested in a work dated 1886 but the original work by this Monk which does exist and will be found. You should check your facts instead of writing like trash Bernard as you state did not write anything in 1180 as he died in 1153. I have done my research and found this from late 12th century...From the book Histories of Alexander the 3rd it states that after they were summoned by Bernard at Narbonne they instituted the treatise and were condemned This is in relation to the heretics known as the Vaudois. I want this paragraph placed in the histories section someone can do it or ill do it myself — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.191.132.91 ( talk) 04:14, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
What is the name of the Catholic cleric who supposedly translated the latin vulgate for Peter Waldo upon rish of death, this would have taken many years to complete when did it start and when did it finish ? secondly another major problem with Waldo is that he was known as the Poor men of Lyons who gave away all his property and wealth but the Valley people the Waldenses were businessmen they did not follow the way of life and teachings of Waldo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:2E3E:7B00:E425:7CB2:3C2D:6A77 ( talk) 02:45, 31 January 2019 (UTC) It is impossible for a Catholic cleric to have been hired by Peter Waldo to translate the Vulgate into the Waldensian Romance tongue which would have taken years of this cleric being secreted away from his Catholic peers to have not discovered him. There is further evidence that the name Waldo was added about 150 years later. Further if Waldo had followers they would have followed him but the Waldenses were all businessmen employed in many trades. It is also mathematically impossible for a sect created in 1180 to take 500 years of inquisition to virtually extinguish. Using Oczams razor of reasoning the only conclusion is this that the written story of Peter Waldo relating to the valley people is fictious, that Peter of Lyons did exist but was not Waldensian, that the valley people possessed an ancient Bible in their tongue and that a 500 year inquisition mathematically proves that this was not a newly formed sect in the late 12 century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.191.132.91 ( talk) 03:16, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
I require an historical citation for the name Peter Waldo from the 12th century thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:2E3E:7B00:BD50:8B35:DD69:63C7 ( talk) 08:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
So the name Peter is a complete Catholic invention. This now casts serious doubts on the whole Peter Waldo story because it doesnt make sense how the writers of his supposed history keep telling us he was a rich merchant who gave away his property had a wife children etc but did not know his name so they added his name 150 years later to make him appear real and human. The Catholic historians write that Peter Waldo gave away all his money and lived a life of poverty so when did he as they say give away all his money before he payed the scribes to write a bible or after ? This question once again raises doubts to the written story a Catholic history as it proves that if true he didn't give away all his money and the Catholic story is a complete white wash. The truth is if this Waldo character even existed he already had the Waldensian scriptures at hand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:2E3E:7B00:8B3:E5B7:BBC7:BFAB ( talk) 01:12, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
The only words I have read in the book (The Elizabethan Jesuits, by Francis Edwards), happen to be on leaf 87 (whereupon I made 'leaf-fall' on my first and thus far only interaction with the said book) and thus read...
"Once he had been an enthusiastic follower of John Foxe, the man who compiled a huge volume on the Waldesians, the Poor of Lyons, the Hussites, and Wycliffites, and other..."
Has the hereinabove foreshows, "the Waldesians" and "the poor of Lyons" ARE LISTED APART.
In 1975 the italian Waldensian Evangelical Church merged with the Methodist Evangelical Church in Italy to form the Union of Methodist and Waldensian Churches. However, this agreement between methodists and waldensians did not happened on an international level. The other Waldensian organizations from the world, even if they are not independent from the italian church, are not in union with the methodist churches in their countries, so it is factualy wrong to say that the Waldensian movement in itself is part of the Methodist tradition.
Even inside the italian merger church, the theology of the churches did not change. The Methodist congregations are separate from the Waldensian ones even if they entered communion with one another. So, in the same organization, you have churches that preach Calvinism (from the Waldensian heritage) and others that preach Methodism. That is because the theology of Methodism and Calvinism cannot be merged as they are mutually exclusive (one affirms what the other denies).
Moreso, this page refers to the history and characteristics of the Waldensian movement as a whole. Most of the page focuses on the waldensians during the Late Middle Ages and Early modern period, and to say in the infobox that this movement is part of the Methodist tradition is a horrible misrepresentation, as Methodism did not exist until the end of the 18th century, and Waldensian theology was, and still is, nothing like Methodism. We say they are part of the Reformed tradition because the theology of the waldensians until the 16th century was similar to that of calvinists and after the Protestant Reformation they actually adhered to Calvinist theology (their theology was shaped to be more aligned with Calvinism to the point of being completely taken over by it).
In conclusion, the merger of the italian organization with the methodists in the 20th century is only as important as to be mentioned in the "Italy" section. – Barumbarumba ( talk) 16:5, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
Minimize the number of links.
access dates are not appropriate in the external links section. Do not use {{ cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section.
Disputed links should be excluded by default unless and until there is a consensus to include them.-- Otr500 ( talk) 21:27, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Britannica as far as I know is a reliable source, and it states that "Eventually, the elements of the Eucharist (bread and wine) were understood as symbols only, and the Waldenses denied the doctrine of transubstantiation. ". I see no reason to delete this, and it does not conflict with the references mentioning belief in real presence, as Britannica uses the language of "eventually", which means that Britannica is claiming that their theology developed from a belief in real presence to Memorialism. -- ValtteriLahti12 ( talk) 14:57, 10 November 2023 (UTC)