VII. Conclusions

The testimony of the leading sources is obviously contradictory in parts, and incomplete as a whole. But an analysis of the chart shows that the almost solid block of testimony for origin from Waldo is applicable specifically to the French Waldenses; only two specifically attribute the Italian Waldenses likewise to Waldo. A few imply it through not defining the term Waldenses, or by referring to the leadership of Waldo. This is not the same as stating that he originated the Italian group.PFF1 951.14

On the one hand the derivative aspect of Waldo’s name weakens the argument that the name Waldensian must be accounted for by origin from him; on the other hand, the scattered evidences that point unmistakably to derivation from, or at least affinity with, earlier periods in Italy exist to an extent that is surprising, considering that it came from enemies who had not only a natural tendency but a controversial interest in emphasizing Waldo as the founder. This is highly significant.PFF1 951.15

Now that the battle smoke has cleared somewhat from the Catholic-Protestant polemics of a century ago over this issue, it is becoming more apparent that the sources, which the contestants once flung at each other, are less contradictory than was supposed, if considered in relation to the whole body of evidence. If later scholarship has declined to accept as proved a literal Waldensian apostolic succession, it has recognized the existence of evidences which point to older roots than Waldo for the more evangelical branch in Italy. Thus Adeney says:PFF1 952.1

“Neither is it right to say that the Waldenses are simply the followers of Waldo of Lyons. It does not appear that he simply founded the community de novo, or that its evangelical and Protestant character is entirely due to his influence. The ideas were in the air, the spirit was alive and awake, when Waldo and his Poor Men came with apostolic fervour to embrace them and blend them with their own version of the teaching of Jesus. There were Arnoldists, Petrobru-sians, and Henricians before Waldo, existing as scattered religionists. But it was his movement that gathered in the harvest of their lives and brought about the formation of a Waldensian Church....PFF1 952.2

“[About 1180] Bernard of Fontcaude wrote a book entitled Adversus Val-lenses et Arianos. It seems that these discussions arose out of the union of the Petrobrusians and Henricians with the Poor Men of Lyons in Provence. About the same time Waldo’s followers united with the Arnauldists in Lombardy. Thus the Waldenses of France and Italy were united, and their union was cemented by persecution.... Division between the two parties arose out of the teaching of the Italian Waldenses that the sacraments could not be efficacious if administered by priests of unworthy character, while the French Waldenses did not accept this view. Holding the Roman Catholic priests to be morally wrong in many of their practices, because unscriptural, the Italians repudiated all their sacraments. At the same time this branch of the Waldenses insisted most strongly on close adhesion to NT teaching and practice generally and on rejection of everything in the Church which lacked that authority. Thus they were the more thoroughgoing anti-Romanists.... Nevertheless fraternal intercourse came to be established in course of time between these two branches of Waldenses.” ^{66Adeney, op. cit., pp. 666, 667.}PFF1 952.3

And Preger asserts, “We found that the Italian branches cannot be traced back only to Waldez [Waldo] and the Waldenses, but that they must have an independent history apart from Waldez.” ^{67Translated from Preger, “Beiträge,” p. 209.}PFF1 952.4

As a result of the modern studies of medieval heresies and reform movements, the conclusion seems to be general that, whatever Waldo and his French Waldenses may have contributed in the way of organization and impetus, the whole movement known as Waldensian must be accounted for as a fusion of his group with others of older rootage in north Italy.PFF1 952.5