# Some Pious Christians, Called Manicheans And Heretics By The Papists, Hanged For The Confession Of The Evangelical Truth, At Goslar, A. D. 1052.

1052 · Historical source

Source: Martyrs’ Mirror. Original heading: SOME PIOUS CHRISTIANS, CALLED MANICHEANS AND HERETICS BY THE PAPISTS, HANGED FOR THE CONFESSION OF THE EVANGELICAL TRUTH, AT GOSLAR, A. D. 1052.

Source heading; not independently verified

It grieves us to our very soul, that in regard to
the testimonies of the holy martyrs, we have to
resort to the writings of papists, their most inveterate
enemies, as well as to other writers who did not
hold the same faith with us, and who, consequently,
made the faithful records of the pious witnesses of
Jesus our Savior incline to their opinion, and explained
them according to their own views. This
mischief has met us before, and now again falls to
our lot; still, we hope that the intelligent and attentive
reader will distinguish light from darkness,
and judge impartially, and as a Christian.

Herman Contractus, Count of Veringen, writes at
the close of his life, hardly one or two years before
his death, of certain persons at Goslar, who were
accused by their adversaries, the Romanists, of being
Manicheans; for at that time no other or better
name was known for the true Christians, who were
opposed to the Roman church, notwithstanding
they had nothing at all in common with the Manicheans;
and thus this Herman Contractus, a strong
maintainer of the papal religion, also called these
persons, after Roman fashion, Manicheans, saying:
“The Emperor Henry III. (some say II.), A. D.
1052, celebrated, at Goslar, the Lord’s birthday,
and there caused some heretics (thus he calls the
true Christians), who, among other perverse opinions
according to the sect of the Manicheans, abhor
the eating of all kinds of meat (which he unjustly
imputes to these people, as shall be shown), and
who were condemned, by common consent (of the
bishops or lords of the realm), as heretics; to be
hanged on the gallows, in order that the contagion
should not spread further and contaminate many
others. Herm. Contr. Chron., A. D. 1052.

But they cared not so much (A. Mellinus writes),
about the eating of flesh, as about many other points
of doctrine, which Herman Contractus passes over
silently; namely, such as Radulph Ardens makes
mention of, relating that at the close of said century
there were some (so-called) Manicheans at Aix la
Chapelle in France. He there says (Homil. Dominical
8, post Trinit.): “Such are at the present
day the Manichean heretics, who have polluted our
country of Aix la Chapelle with their heresy; who
pretend to lead a true apostolical life, saying that
they do not lie; that they do not swear, and, under
the cloak of abstemiousness, they reject the eating
of flesh. They also maintain that the sacrament of
the altar is nothing but mere bread; they deny baptism
(namely, infant baptism, for this was the point
in question) and say that none can be saved but
those who are baptized by their hands.”

It is true that said papistic writer charges them
with several other things as belonging to their doctrines,
of which we deem it unnecessary to speak
here, since Mellinus to whom we referred above,
answers all these for us, saying (2d book, fol. 437):
“All these errors, except that of baptism and of the
mass or transubstantiation (that is, against the mass
and transubstantiation), are unjustly imputed to
them by these papistic authors, as Thuan, writing
of the Waldenses, himself confesses (Hist. sui temp.
A. D. 1550). He then quotes from Thuan the confession
of these people, in which no errors at all,
much less Manichean heresies, are found; but which
contains chiefly such things as are publicly taught
by us, at the present day, and maintained with the
power and authority of the holy and divine Scriptures,
against the superstitions of popery.

Having quoted the confession of these people,
from Thuan, Mellinus says: “This is certainly a
square and unfeigned confession of Thuan, which
alone is sufficient to refute all the preceding slanders
258
(namely, which had been flung against the holy
martyrs).”

Thus, even according to the testimony of the
papist Thuan, and the statement of the Calvinistic
Mellinus, the abovementioned martyrs were not
guilty of Manichean errors; they only spoke against
the Roman church, principally in the matter of
baptism (that is, infant baptism) and in regard to
the mass or transubstantiation; hence, they may be
reckoned among the true witnesses of Jesus Christ,
who testified to their living faith, not only with the
mouth, but also with their blood, yea, with their
death; and whom the Lord will hereafter, in the
resurrection of the just, reward and crown, according
to his promise. Rev. 2:10.

Note.—We here place one papist against another:
Thuan against Radulph. In the meantime,
we are induced to receive the best testimony concerning
said martyrs from these two differing writers;
since they both had no other purpose than to speak
to the detriment of said people. Thuan says: “Their
points of doctrine are said to be these: That the
Roman church has forsaken the true Christian faith;
that she is the Babylonian whore, and the dead tree
which Christ cursed and commanded to be cut down;
that therefore no obedience is to be rendered to the
Pope and the Bishops who consent to his errors;
that Monachism is a veritable sink of all the corruption
of the church, and an infernal pool; that all
monastic vows are vain and unavailing, and tend
only to lasciviousness; that the orders of the priesthood
are marks of the great beast, of which mention
is made in the Apocalypse; that purgatory, the
mass, church consecration, the worship of saints,
masses for the dead, etc., are genuine inventions
and institutions of Satan. These, says the writer,
are the principal and certain articles of their doctrine.
The others, concerning marriage (that they deemed
it evil), the resurrection (that they denied it), the
state of the soul after death (that they spoke improperly
of it), and concerning meats (that they rejected
all eating of flesh), are unjustly imputed to
them. Thuan in Hist. de Waldens. Temp., A. D.
1550, compared with A. Mell., 2d book, fol. 437,
col. 3.

We have shown this the more circumstantially,
to demonstrate the innocence of said martyrs, and
that their doctrinal points were not Manichean heresies,
but strictures upon the Roman church, which
stirred up the animosity of the papists, so that, as it
seems, they vented the spleen of their manifold
accusations against said people.





---

Page: http://history.truechristian.church/stories/mm-some-pious-christians-called-manicheans-and-heretics-by-the-papists-hanged-for-the-confession-of-the-evangelical-truth-a/

[Contribute a correction or addition](https://github.com/trueChristian/history.truechristian.church/issues/new?title=Correction%3A+Some+Pious+Christians%2C+Called+Manicheans+And+Heretics+By+The+Papists%2C+Hanged+For+The+Confession+Of+The+Evangelical+Truth%2C+At+Goslar%2C+A.+D.+1052.&body=%23%23+Page+or+topic%0ASome+Pious+Christians%2C+Called+Manicheans+And+Heretics+By+The+Papists%2C+Hanged+For+The+Confession+Of+The+Evangelical+Truth%2C+At+Goslar%2C+A.+D.+1052.%0A%0APage%3A+http%3A%2F%2Fhistory.truechristian.church%2Fstories%2Fmm-some-pious-christians-called-manicheans-and-heretics-by-the-papists-hanged-for-the-confession-of-the-evangelical-truth-a%2F%0A%0ARecord%3A+mm-some-pious-christians-called-manicheans-and-heretics-by-the-papists-hanged-for-the-confession-of-the-evangelical-truth-a%0A%0ADate+currently+shown%3A+1052%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.)