Priscillian of Avila:

Heretic or Early Reformer?

by Brian Wagner

Introduction
The Lord J esus Christ said, For by your words you will be justified, and by
your words you will be condemned (Matthew 12:37).
1
Though He was
speaking of the last judgment, the principle of letting someone be judged,
even in this life, by his own testimony is a sound one. The Bible also speaks
of establishing ones testimony in the mouth of two or three witnesses
(1 Timothy 5:19), which is to be a safeguard against a false witness damaging
someones reputation.
History is a study of testimony. The primary source material written by an
individual is often the best evidence by which to judge what that person
believed and taught. Other contemporaries to that individual could also be
used to evaluate whether he was presenting a consistent and coherent message
at all times and whether his actions matched his words. As with all historical
judgment of this kind, the testimony by friends or foes must be weighed with
at least some suspicion of bias.
Priscillian of Avila, from the fourth century, has been designated by most
of history as a Christian heretic. This conclusion, made by many of his
contemporary foes, led to his beheading by the civil authorities. After his
death in A.D. 365, his writings were searched out for destruction, along with
anyone promoting his teaching. Copies of some of his writings still survive.
Very early ones, judged as possibly made within just a century of Priscillians
martyrdom, were recovered at the University of Wrzburg by Georg Schepss
in 1885. These still are without translation into English, and thus the
opportunity for Priscillian to defend himself in an unfiltered way before a
wider jury in Christendom remains unavailable. This paper is an attempt to
provide an overview of the historical testimony concerning Priscillian, along
with some of the more recent contributions that have taken Priscillians own
words into account. The hope is to provide help to the modern student as he
reexamines whether Priscillian was indeed a heretic or possibly, instead, an
early reformer of Christianity.

Biographical Sketch of Priscillian

Almost all biographical sketches of the life of Priscillian rely exclusively
upon the account of Sulpitius Severus, a Roman Catholic historian who was in
his early twenties when Priscillian was executed. According to Severus,
Priscillian was . . . a man of noble birth, of great riches, bold, restless,

1
New King James Version (Atlanta: Nelson, 1992).
CTS Journal 12 (Fall 2006) 88
eloquent, learned through much reading, very ready at debate and
discussionin fact, altogether a happy man, if he had not ruined an excellent
intellect by wicked studies.
2
The wicked studies to which Severus was
referring supposedly concerned Gnosticism, which will be discussed below.
Not much else is known of Priscillians earlier years. His story picks up when
the conflict begins between some bishops of Spain who began following
Priscillians teachings and those bishops who opposed them. The principal
contestants were bishops Instantius and Salvianus, who sided with Priscillian,
and bishops Ithacius and Ydacius (sometimes spelled Idacius), who, together
with the council of Sargossa held in 380, excommunicated the Priscillian
party.
After the excommunication, Priscillian was appointed bishop of Avila.
This appointment was reportedly made by Instantius and Salvianus. Their
opponents appealed to Gratian, the Roman Emperor, and received from him a
decree authorizing the banishment of the Priscillian party. Priscillian,
Instantius, and Salvianus then took a journey to Rome
3
and then Milan to
appeal to Damasus and Ambrose, the powerful bishops of those cities, seeking
their help to have the decree removed. Both Damasus and Ambrose refused to
have an audience with them. However, the Priscillianists were then able to
secure, supposedly by large bribes, the overturn of the decree of their exile
and the return to them of their bishoprics.
Their opponent, Ithacius, was briefly forced to flee to Gaul, but under the
administration of the new Roman Emperor, Maximus, he was able to present
at Trier his petition that the Priscillianists once again be judged. Martin, the
famous monastic of that time, also bishop of Tours, though not agreeing with
what he knew of Priscillians teachings, did not cease to importune Ithacius,
that he should give up his accusations, or to implore Maximus that he should
not shed the blood of the unhappy persons in question.
4
The Ithacius party,
however, won the day. Priscillian lost his appeal and was interrogated by the
emperors prefect, Evodius, who concluded that Priscillian was guilty of
magic arts, a capital offense. Priscillian was beheaded along with four other

2
Sulpitius Severus The Sacred History of Sulpitius Severus, bk. 2, chap. 46, The
Complete Collection of Early Church Fathers Writings in WinHelp Format, ed.
Maged Nabih Kamel (1996), http://www.reformedreader.org/history/ecfcollection
.htm. All biographical information for this paper has been synthesized from this work
of Severus.
3
Severus History, bk. 2, chap. 48. Severus reports that during this journey, the
Priscillian band spread the seeds of their heresy and had a great reception in
Aquitania (now southern France), but also that Priscillian supposedly had an illicit
affair with Procula, a woman in their party, who then procured an abortion in an
attempt to conceal the matter.
4
Severus History, bk. 2, chap. 51.
Priscillian of Avila 89
associates. His friend, bishop Instantius, was banished to the island of Sylina
(now called Scilly Isles, off the southwest coast of England).
5
Priscillians
body, along with those of the others, was transported back to Spain, where it
received a martyrs welcome.

Opinion of Him by His Contemporaries

At the time of Priscillians death, the soon-to-be ecclesiastical historian
Sulpitius Severus was not yet converted to Christianity, but he was shortly
thereafter. He considered Martin of Tours as his spiritual father.
6
Most
likely, Martin was the main source of information for Severus concerning
Priscillian. Severus was closely associated with Martin and must have
received firsthand information of Martins successful persuasion of Emperor
Maximus to recall his forces, which, after the execution of Priscillian, were
being sent into Spain. These forces were to search out heretics, and, when
found, to deprive them of their life or goods.
7
Severus said that Martin felt a
pious solicitude not only to save from danger the true Christians in these
regions, who were to be persecuted in connection with that expedition, but to
protect even heretics themselves.
8
There is no doubt that Severus accepted
Martins view of the Priscillians as heretics. As to what their heresy actually
was, it appears that Severus, along with all of Catholicism outside of Spain,
believed Ithacius accusations of Manichaeism and Gnosticism as the
premiere heresies of Priscillian.
As mentioned above, Severus had introduced Priscillian in his history as
one who held to wicked studies. He continued in that section to reveal that
the mentors of Priscillian had been a noble woman named Agape and a
teacher named Helpidius, who had both been students of an Egyptian Gnostic
named Marcus. Henry Chadwick, a modern historian and author of Priscillian
of Avila: The Occult and the Charismatic in the Early Church, demonstrates
that this accusation of Priscillians connection with Marcus began with
Ithacius, the chief opponent to Priscillian. Comparing Severus account with
Ithacius accusations which were preserved by a seventh-century archbishop
Isidore of Seville, Chadwick concludes that it is as good as certain that

5
Salvianus had died earlier on the return journey from Rome.
6
Elgin Moyer, Severus Sulpicius, in Wycliffe Biographical Dictionary of the
Church, rev. Earle E. Cairns (Chicago: Moody Press, 1982), 367.
7
Sulpitius Severus, chap. 11 of Dialogue III: The Virtues of Martin Continued, in
The Dialogues of Sulpitius Severus, The Complete Collection of Early Church
Fathers Writings in WinHelp Format, ed. Maged Nabih Kamel (1996),
http://www.reformedreader.org/history/ecfcollection.htm.
8
Ibid.
CTS Journal 12 (Fall 2006) 90
Sulpicius Severus was drawing upon Ithacius book as a main source.
9

Isidores account of Ithacius charges also associated Priscillianisms
progenitor, Mark of Memphis, with sorcery and Manichaeism. It is this
prominent label of Manichaeism that became linked with Priscillianism more
than any other indictment.
Ten short years after Priscillians death, Augustine, himself a convert
from Manichaeism, boldly affirmed that Priscillianists were a sect very like
the Manichaeans.
10
And J erome in 415 also linked the two with the same
invectives, saying, Then there is Priscillian in Spain, whose infamy makes
him as bad as Manichus.
11
Vincent of Lerins in 434 chooses to recall the
charge of sorcery, and places Priscillian in the lineage of Simon Magus of
Acts 8.
12


Opinion of Him by Other Voices in Church History

The charge of Manichaeism has remained with Priscillianism until the present
day. The official Roman Catholic opinion, as seen in the article on
Priscillianism in the Catholic Encyclopedia, maintains, A form of
Manichaean heresy, Priscillianism was introduced into Spain from Egypt in
the fourth century.
13
The reformed opinion has been the same, as seen in the
Puritan divine J ohn Owen. Owen utilized the Priscillian condemnation to
argue for religious freedom in his day. However, he still labeled Priscillian a
Manichee and a Gnostic.
14
Notable Lutheran historians, Augustus Neander
and Philip Schaff, both held to the same view in their writings.
15


9
Henry Chadwick, Priscillian of Avila: The Occult and the Charismatic in the Early
Church (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976), 21.
10
Augustine of Hippo, Letter 36: To Casulanus, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers
First Series, vol. 1, ed. Philip Schaff, The Ages Digital Library Collection (Albany,
OR: Ages Software, 1997), 501.
11
J erome, Letter 133: To Ctesiphon, in The Letters of St. Jerome: Letters CXXX to
CXLIII, The Complete Collection of Early Church Fathers Writings in WinHelp
Format, ed. Maged Nabih Kamel (1996), http://www.reformedreader.org/history/
ecfcollection.htm.
12
Vincent of Lerins, The Commonitory of Vincent of Lerins, for the Antiquity and
Universality of the Catholic Faith Against the Profane Novelties of All Heresies,
trans. C. A. Heurtley, The Complete Collection of Early Church Fathers Writings in
WinHelp Format, ed. Maged Nabih Kamel (1996), http://www.reformedreader.org/
history/ecfcollection.htm.
13
Priscillianism, in The Catholic Encyclopedia, ed. Robert C. Broderick (New
York: Nelson, 1987), 493.
14
J ohn Owen, Of Toleration, in The John Owen Collection, The Ages Digital
Library Collection (Rio, WI: Ages Software, 2004), 9:208.
15
Augustus Neander, General History of the Christian Religion, trans. J oseph Torrey,
(London: Bohn, 1850), 4:491502. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church,
Priscillian of Avila 91
However, in 1931 a Plymouth Brethren historian Edmund H. Broadbent,
after extensive personal research, including his own interpretation of the
previously uncovered Priscillian tractates in 1885 (discussed below),
concluded that Priscillian was an evangelical reformer, and not a Manichaean
heretic. He published his findings as part of an evangelical history
compendium titled The Pilgrim Church. What Broadbent discovered in the
Priscillian tractates concerning Priscillians doctrine is still so exceptional in
English-speaking circles that it bears reproducing in its entirety.

The style of Priscillian's writing is vivid and telling, he constantly quotes
Scripture in support of what he advances and shows an intimate
acquaintance with the whole of the Old and New Testaments. He
maintained, however, the right of the Christian to read other literature, and
this was made the occasion of accusing him of wishing to include the
Apocrypha in the Canon of Scripture, which he did not do.
He defends himself and his friends for their habit of holding Bible
readings in which laymen were active and women took part, also for their
objection to taking the Lord's Supper with frivolous and worldly minded
persons. For Priscillian the theological disputations in the Church had little
value, for he knew the gift of God, and had accepted it by a living faith. He
would not dispute as to the Trinity, being content to know that in Christ the
true One God is laid hold of by the help of the Divine Spirit.
He taught that the object of redemption is that we should be turned to God
and therefore an energetic turning from the world is needed, lest anything
might hinder fellowship with God. This salvation is not a magical event
brought about by some sacrament, but a spiritual act. The Church indeed
publishes the confession, and baptises, and conveys the commands or Word
of God, to men, but each one must decide for himself and believe for
himself. If communion with Christ should be broken it is for each one to
restore it by personal repentance. There is no special official grace, laymen
have the Spirit as much as clergy.
He exposes at length the evil and falsity of Manichaeism [emphasis
added], and his teaching, from the Scriptures, is entirely opposed to it.
Asceticism he regarded not as a chief thing in itself, but as a help towards
that entire union of the whole person with God or Christ, from which the
body cannot be excepted, because of its being the habitation of the Spirit.
This is rest in Christ, experience of Divine love and leading, incorruptible
blessing. Faith in God, who has revealed Himself, is a personal act which
involves the whole being in acknowledgment of dependence on God for life
and for all things. It brings with it the desire and the decision to be wholly
consecrated to Him. Moral works follow of themselves because in receiving
the new life the believer has received into himself that which contains the
very essence of morality. Scripture is not only historical truth, but is at the

vol. 4 (Cedar Rapids, IA: Parsons Technology, 1999; electronic ed. STEP files,
Omaha, NE: QuickVerse, 2003), bk. 1, chap. 9, para. 133.
CTS Journal 12 (Fall 2006) 92
same time a means of grace. The spirit feeds upon it and finds that every
portion of it contains revelation, instruction, and guidance for daily life. To
see the allegorical meaning of Scripture requires no technical training, but
faith. The Messianic-typical meaning of the Old Testament and the historical
progress of the New are pointed out, and this not only for the sake of
knowledge, but as showing that not some only, but all the saints are called to
complete sanctification.
16


Broadbent concluded that the reading of these, Priscillian's own writings,
shows that the account handed down of him was wholly untrue.
17

But one only has to open any modern reference work on church history,
even those from evangelical circles, to see that the label of Manichaeism is
still associated with Priscillianism. The Wycliffe Biographical Dictionary of
the Church, for instance, states that Priscillian, combining various elements
of Gnosticism and Manichaeism and other esoteric teachings with
Christianity, developed a sect of his own.
18
R. E. Webber, in his article on
Martin of Tours in Whos Who in Christian History,
19
mentions Priscillian as
a Gnostic heretic. And Peter Toons article in The New International
Dictionary of the Christian Church follows closely the outline given by
Severus account, but allows a little room for doubt, describing Priscillian as
seemingly influenced by Gnostic doctrines brought to Spain by an Egyptian
named Marcus.
20
He also concludes his article by noting that modern
scholarship is divided on the question of whether Priscillian was a heretic or
merely an eccentric enthusiast.
21

Two modern scholars have concurred with the opinion that Priscillian was
not a heretic, or at least not Manichaean, though some of his habits may have
vaguely resembled those of the Manichaean faith. Henry Chadwick, with
some literary flair, after his own investigation of the usual historical evidence,
but also including Priscillians own tractates, believes the Wrzburg tractates
leave no doubt that Priscillian, although he has a sombre view of the
earthbound fallen condition of man, disclaims Manicheism with great
vehemence; and there is not the slightest hint to suggest that behind the mask
of the anathemas there lies a secret radical dualist putting up a smokescreen of

16
E. H. Broadbent, The Pilgrim Church (Grand Rapids: Gospel Folio Press, 1999),
6061.
17
Ibid.
18
Moyer, Priscillian, 334.
19
R. E. Webber, Martin of Tours, in Whos Who in Christian History, ed. J . D.
Douglas and Philip W. Comfort (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1992).
20
Peter Toon, Priscillian, in The New International Dictionary of the Christian
Church, ed. J . D. Douglas (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978).
21
Ibid.
Priscillian of Avila 93
verbiage to conceal his real beliefs.
22
Chadwick also believed that Priscillian
had an evangelical bent, summing up such a view of him in the opening
statement in the Preface of his book, Priscillian, bishop of Avila 3815, led
an evangelical [emphasis added] ascetic movement in the Spanish churches,
which encouraged charismatic prophecy among both men and women, with
the study of heretical apocrypha.
23

Virginia Burrus is another modern scholar who denies a connection
between Priscillian and Manichaeism. In her recent book, The Making of a
Heretic: Gender, Authority and the Priscillian Controversy, she critiques
Chadwicks work and thoroughly investigates the major texts relating to
Priscillian, including his words in the Wrzburg tractates. She agrees with
Chadwick, saying that the tractates disrupt the heresiological tradition
transmitted by Severus and others: the anticipated indications of blatant
gnostic, Manichaean, or monarchian errors are elusive, if not altogether
absent.
24
Both Burrus and Chadwick rely heavily upon Priscillians own
words as proof positive that he and his teachings have been falsely maligned
by the majority report of history.

His Orthodoxy in His Own Words

It was thought that Priscillian had written voluminously but that all his
writings had been summarily destroyed. Providentially, in 1886 Georg
Schepss recovered eleven of Priscillian's works in the library of the University
of Wrzburg. The Latin used in writing these texts is very old, and the codex
containing them is one of the oldest Latin manuscripts in existence, being
perhaps from the mid- to late fifth century. Of the eleven tracts found, the first
three contain a defense of his teachings, and the last seven cover some of that
teaching. Broadbent protests that these tractates prove concerning Priscillian
that he was a man of saintly character, sound in doctrine, and an energetic
reformer, and that those associated with him were companies of men and
women who were true and devoted followers of Christ.
25

The titles of the eleven tractates are as follows:

1. Liber apologeticus (Book of Apology)
2. Liber ad Damasum Episcopum (Letter to Bishop Damasus)
3. Liber de fide et de Apocryphis (Book about the Faith and about the
Apocrypha)
4. Tractatus Paschae (Tract concerning Passover)

22
Chadwick, Priscillian of Avila, 98.
23
Ibid., vii.
24
Virginia Burrus, The Making of a Heretic: Gender, Authority and the Priscillian
Controversy (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1995), 3.
25
Broadbent, The Pilgrim Church, 60.
CTS Journal 12 (Fall 2006) 94
5. Tractatus Genesis (Tract concerning Genesis)
6. Tractatus Exodi (Tract concerning Exodus)
7. Tractatus Primi Psalmi (Tract concerning the First Psalm)
8. Tractatus Psalmi Terti (Tract concerning the Third Psalm)
9. Tractatus ad populum I (First Tract to the People)
10. Tractatus ad populum II (Second Tract to the People)
11. Benedictio super fideles (Blessing upon the Faithful)

They have not yet been translated into English in one volume. The third
tractate, Liber de fide et de Apocryphis, has been recently translated by
Andrew S. J acobs and is included in Christianity in Late Antiquity, 300450
C.E.: A Reader, by Bart D. Ehrman and Andrew S. J acobs, published in 2004
by Oxford University Press.
26
A translation of the eleventh tractate into
English is available in The Eucharistic Prayer in the Orthodox West, by
Stephen Combs, published by Poundbury Press in 1987.
Of course, the works of Chadwick and Burrus mentioned above provide
translations for numerous phrases and sentences from a number of the
Priscillian tractates, plus a good synopsis of what they felt Priscillian was
teaching in them. Yet their worthy contributions still cannot give to the
English-speaking evangelical community the same confidence that Broadbent
had of Priscillians orthodoxy. This confidence, perhaps, can only be gained
after a full English translation of all his works. Such a translation could very
well clear Priscillian of the charge of Manichaeism in the wider Christian
community.
As a demonstration of what one may find to that end, here is one very
interesting sentence from the first tractate, Liber apologeticus. It declares
clearly Priscillians position concerning Manichaeism. Priscillian writes,
Anathema sit qui Manetem et opera eius doctrinas adque instituta non
damnat; cuis peculiariter turpitudines persequentes gladio, si fieri posset, ad

26
Andrew J acobs provides a detailed discussion of this tractate in the article The
Disorder of Books: Priscillians Canonical Defense of the Apocrypha, HTR 93 no. 2
(2000): 135159. This writer asked Professor J acobs if he thought Priscillian could be
considered an evangelical in the modern sense. He replied in an e-mail dated
November 28, 2005, As for Priscillian's orthodox bona fidesI guess evangelical in
the modern sense could mean a lot of things, none of which are my area of expertise.
If in the most modern sense you mean an interpretation of Christian life based on a
fairly straightforward reading of the gospelsclose to literal, evenI think I'd say
no; but then again, I don't think many fourth-century Christians, canonical or
otherwise, would fit that bill. But in an older senseperhaps what Luther and his
cohort meant by evangelicalI suppose a case could be made. But, again, my area
of specialty is really early Christianity.
Priscillian of Avila 95
inferos mitteremus ac si quid est deterius gehennae tormentoque peruigili, ubi
neque ignis extinguitur neque uermis emoritur.
27

The following is a loose translation: Let Manes be Anathema and his
works of doctrine, though (his) custom is not damnable, whose baseness
pursue with the sword. Hopefully he might come nearby, so that we might
send (him) below, that he might go down into hell and be tortured always,
where neither the fire is being quenched nor the worm is dying.
This brief statement by Priscillian either fairly represents his stand against
Manichaeism, or as a false profession, it would truly undercut his integrity
before his own followers, if they were indeed Manichaean.

His Influence on Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism

Augustine and others may have thought that Priscillian was lying about his
orthodoxy,
28
but the Priscillian tractates stand as a testimony to that
orthodoxy, according to Broadbent and others. Severus says that after
Priscillians death not only was the heresy not suppressed, which, under him,
as its author, had burst forth, but acquiring strength, it became more widely
spread.
29
It is commonly held that Priscillianism lasted in Spain and southern
France late into the sixth century. Of course, like the label Manichaeism
which was falsely attached to Priscillianists, the label Priscillian was falsely
attached to any in that region who were meeting apart from the Catholics.
Severus pointed out that this smear tactic was bishop Ithacius habit, saying,
I certainly hold that Ithacius had no worth or holiness about him. For he was
a bold, loquacious, impudent, and extravagant man; excessively devoted to
the pleasures of sensuality. He proceeded even to such a pitch of folly as to
charge all those men, however holy, who either took delight in reading, or
made it their object to vie with each other in the practice of fasting, with being
friends or disciples of Priscillian.
30

Yet for those who desire to trace a nonmagisterial, nonsacramental, free
church testimony down through the ages since Pentecost, it appears the
Priscillianists provided in themselves, or at least under the cover of their
influence, such a testimony for at least two hundred years in Spain and
southern France. And who knows what further investigation may reveal

27
Priscillian, Liber apologeticus, in Priscilliani Quae Supersunt, ed. Georg Schepss,
in Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, vol. 18 (Vindobonae: Tempsky,
1889), 22.
28
Augustine wrote his largest treatise against Priscillian, Contra mendicum (Against
Lying), based on his acceptance of the charge that was made against the
Priscillianists, i.e., that they feigned orthodoxy to win adherents away from
Catholicism.
29
Severus History, chap. 51.
30
Ibid., chap. 50.
CTS Journal 12 (Fall 2006) 96
concerning the influence of Priscillianists like bishop Instantius upon the
western shores of Britain as a result of him being exiled on the isles of Scilly,
which were close by those shores.
Another fascinating fact pertaining to the effect that Priscillian has had on
evangelicalism concerns the importance of his testimony to what has been
called the J ohannine Comma. Priscillians Latin text is the earliest witness to
this much disputed portion of 1 J ohn 5:78, which reads, in heaven, the
Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one. And there are
three that bear witness on earth. A. T. Robertson suggests that some Latin
scribe caught up Cyprians exegesis and wrote it on the margin of his text, and
so it got into the Vulgate and finally into the Textus Receptus by the stupidity
of Erasmus.
31
The New Commentary on the Whole Bible states it this way: It
came from a gloss on 1 John 5:8 which explained that the three elements
(water, blood, and Spirit) symbolized the Trinity. This gloss, evidently, found
its way into the text in the form quoted above. The passage has a Latin origin.
Its first appearance was in the work of Priscillian, a fourth-century Spanish
heretic.
32

A rough translation of this passage as found in Priscillians first tractate,
Liber apologeticus, reveals some interesting details. It reads, As J ohn has
said, There are three who give testimony upon the earth: the water, the flesh,
and the blood and these three are in one; and there are three who give
testimony in heaven: the father, the word, and the spirit, and these three are
one in Christ J esus.
33
It is noticeable that Priscillian had placed what is now
the disputed phrase after the location where it is presently found in Erasmus
Greek Text and the King J ames Version. Also, Priscillian has added the
concluding phrase in Christ J esus to the Trinitarian formula and has the
word flesh instead of spirit in the earthly triune witness.
Whatever Latin or Greek manuscript evidence of 1 J ohn 5:7, 8 Priscillian
may have had available to him in his day, it is certain in the context of this
tractate that he was truly professing his faith in the trinity and in the divinity
of Christ. Those are two prime doctrines usually used to delineate Christian
orthodoxy. By that standard, Priscillian was certainly protesting in his
writings that he was indeed an orthodox Christian.


31
A. T. Robertson, General Epistles and Revelation, Word Pictures in the New
Testament, vol. 6 (Nashville, TN: Broadman, 1933; electronic ed. STEP files, Omaha,
NE: QuickVerse, 2003), 1 John 5:7.
32
1 J ohn, in The New Commentary on the Whole Bible, ed. J . D. Douglas
(Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1990; electronic ed., Cedar Rapids, IA: Parsons 1998), 1 J ohn
5:7, 8.
33
Priscillian Liber apologeticus 6.
Priscillian of Avila 97
Conclusion

Priscillian has been held in bondage to the label of heretic, and more
specifically, to the label of Manichaeism for over fifteen hundred years.
Ever since the day of his wrongful execution in 365, Priscillians name has
not been able to be universally rid of that association. For a relatively brief
time his name did have some positive connection, for to swear by Priscillian
became an esteemed religious act among his harassed followers. However,
that only lasted for a couple of centuries and was used as an affirmation of
faith only within a few hundred miles of Avila, the city where he had
ministered.
34
At least since the discovery of his works in the Wrzburg
University Library in 1885, it has become possible, at least in academic
circles, to challenge the heresy charges linked with Priscillians name.
It is evident that Priscillian was at first united with catholic orthodoxy and
desired to remain connected with such, as seen in his appeals to Damasus of
Rome and Ambrose of Milan. One can only conjecture what may have been
the outcome for evangelicalism in fifth-century Spain, if the more favorable
Emperor Gratian had not died, if Martin of Tours petitions had been
successful in staying Priscillians execution, or if Ithacius and Ydacius and
the Council at Sargossa had united with Priscillian and the bishops supporting
him. Spain may have perhaps become an evangelical nation, an independent
witness of biblical Christianity, separate from the sacramental gospel of
Rome.
And yet, perhaps it became just that, for two hundred years at least.
Though the founder of the movement had been martyred and the other main
leaders either executed or exiled, Priscillianism, and the independent
evangelicalism that it may have represented, spread throughout Spain. The
council of Toledo issued its last anathema specifically against the
Priscillianists in 447. It read, Si quis in his erroribus, Priscilliani sectam
sequitur vel profitetur, ut aliud in salutare baptismi contra sedem sancti Petri
faciat, Anathema sit.
35
This is roughly translated as follows: Whoever
follows the path in these errors of Priscillian, or professes to, in order that he
may make another baptism for salvation, contrary to the seat of Saint Peter, let
him be Anathema. This not only shows how threatened Roman Catholicism

34
Severus History, chap. 51.
35
Stephen McKenna, Paganism and Pagan Survivals in Spain up to the Fall of the
Visigothic Kingdom (The Library of Iberian Resources Online),
http://libro.uca.edu/mckenna/pagan3.htm. Stephen McKenna paraphrases this as a
condemnation of those who follow the teaching of Priscillian and who seek for
salvation in opposition to the chair of St. Peter. However, he leaves out any
mention of baptism which is clearly pointed to in this curse.

CTS Journal 12 (Fall 2006) 98
in Spain felt by the still young Priscillianist movement, but it also shows that
the Priscillianists were most likely baptizing converts from Catholicism. Such
baptisms may point to the Priscillianists as spiritual forefathers of modern
Baptists, Brethren, Pentecostals and other nonsacramental congregations
within Christendom.
Much more waits to be translated, edited, and published for the
encouragement of Christian laymen concerning the testimonies of other early
evangelical witnesses that have lain hidden in Latin texts or documents still
untranslated from other ancient languages. There are probably many other
testimonies which have been scandalously misrepresented through the
centuries. Unscrupulous and often unregenerate historians did not recognize
true Biblical evangelical faith but labeled it as heresy in the same way that
the Sadducees of J esus day did not recognize the orthodoxy of His teachings
and called him a blasphemer. Even believing historians too often do not
evaluate carefully enough the evidence which has been passed on to them by
the magisterium of Roman Catholicism.
Lord willing, more will take up this task of allowing those previously
labeled as heretics to speak for themselves to the modern world. By his own
words, Priscillian will stand justified, or by his own words he will stand
condemned. The results of the survey produced above can aid the jury to lean
in the direction of declaring Priscillian an early evangelical reformer, much
like Tertullian. But the decision is still not final. Only with a more complete
translation of Priscillians works will anyone be able to adequately judge
whether Priscillian was indeed an evangelical reformer or just another heretic.

Brian Wagner was ordained at Limerick Chapel, Limerick, PA, in 1983. He has
served as a church planter in Ireland with Biblical Ministries Worldwide and is
presently pastoring at Mt. Carmel Baptist, Haywood, VA. He is also presently a
fulltime instructor of Church History and Theology at Virginia Baptist College. Brian
recently received a Th.M. in Church History at Liberty Baptist Seminary and is
currently working on a Ph.D. in Biblical Studies at Piedmont Baptist Graduate
School. His wife of thirty years is Lori, and their two grown daughters are J essica
and J eanette. His e-mail address is blwagner77@netzero.net.