But, lest I weary my readers by a multiplication of testimonies, I shall add but one more quotation, which contains a concession that, coming from the quarter and at the time it does, I consider important. Mr. Benedict, in his History of the Baptists, says, that during the progress of his historical inquiries, he has met with many facts, where it seemed as if the heretics, so called, were unsound on the doctrine of the Sabbath, as established by law; but, he goes on, it is not certain that all whom the ancient inquisitors accused of being Sabbath-breakers, would come under the head of Sabbatarians.[26] It appears to me morally certain that the Seventh-day Baptists may trace through the Waldenses, at least that portion of them who were never united to the Church of Rome, an uninterrupted succession to the apostolic age. Indeed, of all the multitude of writers who have treated of this people, all, without exception, are unanimous in declaring that they rejected all the feasts and festivals of the church, as well as infant baptism, and would not observe any ordinance which they did not read of in Scripture. Others, especially the ancient Catholics, accuse them of Judaism, because, according to their testimony, they kept the Jewish Sabbath. The Council of Lombez derided the Good Men of Lyons as Sabbatharians. They were condemned by the Lateran Council of 1139 for refusing to observe the festivals of the church,[27] and the same accusation was brought against them in canons, synods, chronicles, conferences, decrees, sermons, homilies, bulls, confessions, creeds, liturgies, &c. It is hardly possible that all this concurrent testimony, published at different times and in different countries, could have been fabricated. It is barely possible that such men as Evervinus, of Steinfield; Peter, Abbot of Clugny; Ecbertus Schonangiensis, a very celebrated author in his day; Ermengendus, a ruler both spiritual and temporal; Alexander III., in council; Alanus Magnus; Izam, the troubadour, and an inquisitor; Favin, Mazeray, Reineirus Saccho, etc., could have been mistaken upon this point. But we are not to conclude that no persons bearing the name of Waldenses saw and imitated the practices of the Catholics, in the observance of the holydays of the church. That many of them, particularly those branches that seceded from the Church of Rome, paid a superstitious veneration to the Dominical day, we are ready to admit. We have no data for tracing the extent of those persons who held the truth unsophisticated. A considerable portion of the writers to whom reference has been made were Catholics,—men high in office in that church, and justly distinguished for natural and acquired abilities. As this class of men placed great reliance upon tradition and custom for the defence of their forms and ceremonies, and laid no claim to Scripture testimony or command to sanction the rites of their church, it is not strange that they should be open and unreserved