# Bruno, Bishop Of Angiers, And Berengarius, His Deacon, Condemned In Several Councils, Through The Roman Pope, On Account Of Their Views Against Infant Baptism, Transubstantiation, The Mass, Etc.; The First Time, A. D. 1059, The Last Time, A. D. 1079. 1059 · Historical source Source: Martyrs’ Mirror. Original heading: BRUNO, BISHOP OF ANGIERS, AND BERENGARIUS, HIS DEACON, CONDEMNED IN SEVERAL COUNCILS, THROUGH THE ROMAN POPE, ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR VIEWS AGAINST INFANT BAPTISM, TRANSUBSTANTIATION, THE MASS, ETC.; THE FIRST TIME, A. D. 1059, THE LAST TIME, A. D. 1079. Source heading; not independently verified In our account of holy baptism for the year 1060, we made mention of Bruno, Bishop of Angiers, and Berengarius, his deacon, and showed, according to the accounts of different writers, that they, in opposition to the common belief of popery, denied infant baptism and transubstantiation, with all that pertains to it, as has been shown in said place. Of Bruno we find no further account, only that when he was examined he answered as has been related; and that his doctrine, together with that of Berengarius, was condemned by Pope Leo IX., in two different synods, the one of which was held at Rome, and the other at Versailles. But what further happened to him after said papal condemnation, is not mentioned by the ancients, or, at least, has not come to our knowledge. But of Berengarius it is stated, that besides the aforementioned two condemnations by Pope Leo 259 the Ninth, which he suffered together with Bruno, he was subjected to three examinations and as many condemnations, in three successive Synods, once at Tours, and twice at Rome. But to our sincere regret we cannot omit mentioning that in the last three examinations, either from fear of death or for some other reason, he did not acquit himself altogether manfully or in a Christianlike manner; inasmuch as in each examination, if what the ancients have written concerning it is correct, he denied his belief before men; though after each denial, upon regaining his freedom, constrained in his conscience, he reavowed the same. His denial, from whatever cause it may have proceeded, was a fault of such magnitude that it could not be tolerated even in an ordinary Christian, much less in a martyr, unless it be that the name of a good Christian or martyr be withheld from him. However, when, against this, there is taken into consideration, the heartfelt sorrow and grief which he manifested every time, and that he again taught the people as before, and this, as is stated by many, to the end of his life; the name of a Christian, yea, even of a martyr (though in weakness), on account of the manifold troubles he met with because of his belief, may still be accorded him. The holy apostle Peter, after his threefold denial of Christ, though this was a dreadful sin, was not rejected by Christ, when he manifested sincere repentance; seeing the Lord afterwards commanded him to feed his lambs and sheep, yea, foretold him that he should be bound, for his name’s sake, and glorify God by his death, that is, that he should have to die as a martyr, which also happened to him in the reign of Nero, as is shown in the first century, A. D. 69. Berengarius lived to the age of about ninety years, according to the papist Baronius, who says that he remained separated from the Roman church,153 as a schismatic, to the end of his life, though Bellarmine thinks differently, which we leave to him, till better proof than the opinion of a monk of Malmsbury, from whom, it seems, Bellarmine has derived his opinion, can be furnished. Compare Bellarm., in Chron., A. D. 1058, with Hist. Angl., lib. 3, touching the opinion of the monk of Malmsbury. As regards the time of his death, it is fixed A. D. 1088, on the day of Epiphany. The last words which he is said to have uttered, are adduced by a certain bishop of Cenomana, called Hildebert, in the third book of the English History, where he says that Berengarius, sighing deeply, said: “To-day, on this day of Epiphany, my Lord Jesus Christ will appear to me, as I hope unto glory, because of my repentance, or, as I fear, on account of other things unto punishment.” A. Mell., fol. 395, col. 1. These words, it seems, are misinterpreted by the monk of Malmsbury, as though Berengarius, in speaking of his penitence and good hope, had intended to imply that, in the aforesaid articles, he had returned to the Roman church; and that, in mentioning his fear of punishment, he had reference to the punishment of which he might have stood in fear, because of the views which he had maintained against the Pope and the Roman church. But, besides that we see no clear proof in the opinion of said monk, this utterance of Berengarius can very fitly be taken in another and better sense, namely, thus: That Berengarius, when he spoke of his repentance and good hope in the appearance of Jesus Christ, was confident, that the merciful Jesus, his beloved Savior, because he had now repented, and was sorry for his denial, to which the papists had compelled him, would graciously forgive his sins; since the Lord, when his disciple Peter had fallen into a like, or still greater sin of denial, forgave him when he repented of it. Yet, on the other hand, that he was not entirely without fear, because he had committed said denial against his conscience, and because the Lord is as just as he is merciful, especially in punishing sins that are committed against the conscience, or with premeditation. Nevertheless, from his words (if they have been quoted correctly), it is evident, that his hope was greater than his fear, since he speaks first of the former, as well as of his sorrow or repentance, yea, of the glory of the blessed; for what else could he mean to indicate, when he said: “To-day, on this day . . . my Lord Jesus Christ will appear to me, as I hope unto glory, because of my repentance?” As to the words that follow, they seem to have been added from Christian carefulness and humility, since no living man could stand before the justice of God, if he were not merciful; much less one who had notably sinned against his most divine and holy majesty; which agrees with Job 9:2; Ps. 130:3; and 143:2. In the mean time, men had very different views respecting the decease of Berengarius; for some, namely, those who were rigid Romanists and papists, had, it seems, an evil opinion of him; hence they knew nothing good to say of him, as appears from the account of Papirius Massonius, who, in his history of France, for the year 1088, says: “In this year, on the day of Epiphany . . . that corrupt arch-heretic, Berengarius, who so often deceived the (Roman) church by feigning to repent of his views, departed this life.” Annal. Franc., lib. 3. But others, who were his good friends, had a better opinion of him. Among these, the above mentioned Hildebert was not the least; he, as some have observed, composed a very beautiful epitaph upon his death, the last words of which were as follows: “He (Berengarius) was truly a wise man, and, in every respect, perfectly blessed; who enriched heaven with his soul, and the earth with his body. God grant, that after my death I may live and rest with him, and that my lot or inheritance may be no better than his.” See the above cited book, compared with Abr. Mell., fol. 395, col. 1, 2. We will close here, and commit his cause to God. Meanwhile, the church of God, or, at least, the little flock of believers, sustained a great loss in his death. Hence, we may say, as was lamentingly said by one of old: “The day when Berengarius died was an evil day.” Sam. Veltius., Geslacht-register, page 128. 260 --- Page: http://history.truechristian.church/stories/mm-bruno-bishop-of-angiers-and-berengarius-his-deacon-condemned-in-several-councils-through-the-roman-pope-on-account-of-th/ [Contribute a correction or addition](https://github.com/trueChristian/history.truechristian.church/issues/new?title=Correction%3A+Bruno%2C+Bishop+Of+Angiers%2C+And+Berengarius%2C+His+Deacon%2C+Condemned+In+Several+Councils%2C+Through+The+Roman+Pope%2C+On+Account+Of+Their+Views+Against+Infant+Baptism%2C+Transubstantiation%2C+The+Mass%2C+Etc.%3B+The+First+Time%2C+A.+D.+1059%2C+The+Last+Time%2C+A.+D.+1079.&body=%23%23+Page+or+topic%0ABruno%2C+Bishop+Of+Angiers%2C+And+Berengarius%2C+His+Deacon%2C+Condemned+In+Several+Councils%2C+Through+The+Roman+Pope%2C+On+Account+Of+Their+Views+Against+Infant+Baptism%2C+Transubstantiation%2C+The+Mass%2C+Etc.%3B+The+First+Time%2C+A.+D.+1059%2C+The+Last+Time%2C+A.+D.+1079.%0A%0APage%3A+http%3A%2F%2Fhistory.truechristian.church%2Fstories%2Fmm-bruno-bishop-of-angiers-and-berengarius-his-deacon-condemned-in-several-councils-through-the-roman-pope-on-account-of-th%2F%0A%0ARecord%3A+mm-bruno-bishop-of-angiers-and-berengarius-his-deacon-condemned-in-several-councils-through-the-roman-pope-on-account-of-th%0A%0ADate+currently+shown%3A+1059%0A%0A%23%23+Correction+or+addition%0A%0A%0A%0A%23%23+Sources+and+evidence%0APlease+include+book%2Fpage+references%2C+archive+links%2C+or+first-hand+documentation.%0A%0A%0A%0A%23%23+Image+credit+%28if+applicable%29%0ACreator%2C+source%2C+and+permission+or+public-domain+basis.%0A%0A%0A%0ASubmitted+for+review%3B+this+issue+does+not+publish+changes+automatically.)