Amalrician
The beginnings of medieval pantheistic Christian theology lie in the early 13th century, with theologians at Paris, such as David of Dinant, Amalric of Bena, and Ortlieb of Strasbourg, and was later mixed with the millenarist theories of Gioacchino da Fiore.
In 1210, Peter of Nemours, Bishop of Paris, and the Chevalier Guérin, an adviser to the French King Philip II Augustus, obtained secret information from an undercover agent called Master Ralph.
Besides his being included in the condemnation of his disciples, a special sentence of excommunication was pronounced against him in the council of 1210, and his bones were exhumed from their resting-place and cast into unconsecrated ground.
[3] The doctrine was condemned again by Pope Innocent III in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) "as insanity rather than heresy", and in 1225 Pope Honorius III condemned the work of Johannes Scotus Eriugena, De Divisione Naturæ, from which Amalric was supposed to have derived the beginnings of his heresy.
He was notorious for challenging traditional beliefs and advocating for bold, outsider perspectives, amassing a significant following of students.
Thijssen and Paolo Lucentini hold a different perspective, deeming the tradition to be trustworthy and citing this as the earliest documented instance of teaching disputes at the University of Paris.
The Amalricans had a reputation for their strong moral character (vitae gravitas) and leading a life of honor and integrity (honestas).
Amalric's teachings were recorded in manuals, such as the "sum de doctrina Amalrici", which served as the movement's theoretical foundation.
However, it is believed that the Amalricans did not rigidly adhere to these teachings and instead continued to develop and introduce new ideas following Amalric's death.
According to Guillelmus Brito, the Amalricans underwent a significant change after the death of Amalric, resulting in the emergence of new and controversial beliefs that were deemed heretical.
The first was documented by Guillelmus Brito, while the second, more detailed account can be found in Caesarius von Heisterbach's Dialogus miraculorum (Dialogue about Miracles), written in 1223.
According to Guillelmus, news of the heresy was quietly brought to the attention of the Bishop of Paris, Peter of Nemours (also known as[Pierre II de la Chapelle).
In order to gather further information, the two dignitaries send Radulf von Namur, a skilled master, to secretly infiltrate the Amalricans under the guise of a follower.
Described by Guillelmus as a cunning and devout Catholic, Radulf successfully gained the trust of the group and was able to gather incriminating evidence through confidential conversations.
According to his writings, a man named William “the Goldsmith”, a follower of the Amalrician movement, approached Rudolf (also known as Radulf) of Namur and falsely claimed to be a messenger from God.
It is important to note that the title of 'Goldsmith' was most likely an epithet for William's work in alchemy and not an indication of his profession as a trained theologian.
Upon recognising the potential threat this heresy posed to the church, Radulf reported his encounter with William to the Bishop of Paris and prominent theologians.
Along with Amalrican itinerant preachers, they journeyed through the dioceses of Paris, Langres, Troyes and the Archdiocese of Sens, encountering many followers of the movement.
In an effort to gain the trust of these individuals, Radulf would occasionally look upwards and feign a spiritual experience, later recounting his supposed visions to the group.
Rather than taking a violent approach, the church worked closely with theologians from the university to assess and understand the heresy being spread.
Guillelmus Brito reports that the bishop of Paris refrained from prosecuting or punishing the women or common people who had been deceived by the maiores.
Due to their status as clerics, the distribution of powers between state and church required a degree of sensitivity in regards to taking action against them.
Pope Innocent III had established guidelines for conducting trials for heresy in papal decretals, which were later included in the Church's legal code of 1210 in the "third collection" of canon law known as the Collectio tertia.
With this, Bernhard was referring to the belief that divine authority can be found within humans, which makes up the essence of the person and remains unchanged by the vicissitudes of fate.
Due to the gathered confessions and the open profession of heretical beliefs by some Amalricans, the guilty verdict was inevitable – leaving no doubt that the crime committed was indeed heresy and required condemnation.
