Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

σενέγκων Ευάγγελιoν επανελθε. (Ιn Philipp. Ι. 25.) Pearson, following these authorities, says: Adveniente Timotheo, ex Italia profectus est in Hispaniam : quo iturum se dixerat in Epistola ad Romanos. (Annales Paulini, p. 20.) P. 274. He

Grotius, in his zeal to prove that it was agreeable to the wisdom of Providence to give the widest circulation to the best of doctrines, includes (besides England) America, and the inmost recesses of the North, in his catalogue of the countries which received the Gospel, either by the means, or, at least, in the days of the Apostles. As there can be little doubt that neither America nor Ireland [Iceland were known to the ancients, we may venture to exclude them at once; and perhaps we shall be inclined to consider as equally fabulous and heroic, &c."-Without consulting the original it might be at once affirmed, that Grotius can never have included America among the countries, which “ received the Gospel, either hy the means, or in the days of the Apostles.” But here are his words : Conveniebat divinæ providentiæ id efficere, ut, quod optimum esset, pateret quam latissime. Id autem contigit Religioni Christianæ, quam ipse videmus per Europam omnem, ne Septentrionis quidem recessibus exclusis, doceri; nec minus per Asiam omnem, etiam ejus insulas in Oceano, per Ægyptum quoque, per Æthiopiam, et alias aliquot Africæ partes, postremo et per Americam. Neque id nunc tantum fieri, (Christianam religionem latissime patere,] sed et olim factum, [latissime patuisse] osten

says,

[ocr errors]

dunt omoium temporum historiæ, &c. (De Veritate, Relig. Chr. I. ii.) Grotius mentions America as a proof of the present extent of Christianity; and includes the Britons among the Christians of the second century, when Tertullian lived. P. 209, he says,

“ Fox, in his hatred of Popery, is very unwilling to allow Lucius the honour of introducing Christianity into England by means of Pope Eleutherius.” If Fox had

any

hatred of Popery, it is evident that H. N.T. S. has not. But it is not very candid to suppose, that Fox was governed in his opinion by his hatred of Popery rather than by the love of truth. For my own part, I do not believe that Christianity was introduced into Britain by means of Pope Eleutherius. I hope I have shewn in the preceding Letter, that it.was introduced here more than a century before his time, and without the aid of any Pope. But I am lead to think this, not from any hatred of Popery, but from a perfect conviction that St. Paul preached the Gospel in Britain, and that the church of Britain was fully established before the church of Rome.

1

A SECOND LETTER FROM THE BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'S

TO THE CLERGY OF HIS DIOCESE ;

ON

THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE ANCIENT BRITISH CHURCH ON ANY FOREIGN JURISDICTION:

WITH A

POSTSCRIPT ON THE TESTIMONY OF CLEMENS ROMANUS.

ADVERTISEMENT.

BRITISH subjects entitle themselves to all the privileges of the British Constitution by conformity to the laws of their country. By these laws it is declared, that the King is the suprerne temporal head of the church in this United Kingdom; and that no foreign Sovereign, Prelate, or Potentate, ought to have any jurisdiction, ecclesi astical or spiritual, within this realm. Conformir.g subjects bind themselves by an oath to this purpose. Our Roman Catholick brethren decline si ich conformity; they decline it on account of conscie! ace; and yet they claim a right to the highest privile: ges of conforming subjects. If it can be proved, th at their scruples of conscience, respecting the Pope's Supremacy, * have no foundation in scripture,--or in the primitive history of the church, or in reason, this should induce such recusants to conform to the laws of their country, but if we cannot convince them, that their scruples are unfounded, Protestants, who know them to be unfounded, can have no doubt, that groundless scruples are not a sufficient reason for dispensing with the constitution of our country.

* See an account of other scruples at the end of the Postscript,

page 389.

Reverend Brethren,

The discourse, to which my letter, lately addressed to you, is an introduction, has for its principal object to illustrate one branch of the external evidences of Christianity, namely, the Apostolical origin of the British Church, and its seven Epochs from the first introduction of the Gospel into Britain, to the rejection of Popery by the British Bishops at the commencement of the seventh century. These Epochs are Cent. 1. St. Paul's preaching of the Gospel in

Britain.
Cent. 3. Lucius's publick protection of Chris-

tianity.
Cent. 3.-4. The Diocletian persecution.
Cent. 4. The Councils of Arles, Sardica, and

Ariminium.
Cent. 5. The suppression of Pelagianism.
Cent. 6. The Synod of Llanddewi Brefi.
Cent. 7. The rejection of Popery by the Bri-

tish Bishops.

[blocks in formation]

In these seven Epochs we bave very ample and substantial evidence of Christianity,—a Christian church in Britain founded by St. Paul, and subsisting for near six centuries before the arrival of Austin, the Monk,—and in that subsistence a proof of its entire independence on any foreign jurisdiction.

Foreign jurisdiction is so obviously inconsistent with the independence of any nation, that nothing can be more surprising, than that

any considerable portion of the subjects of a civilized and free country should adhere to such authority; nothing more reasonable, than that effective barriers should be proyided against its dangerous influence. For though (thanks to a kind Providence, and to the barriers provided by our Protestant constitution) that influence is at present dormant in this country, as to any civil consequences ; yet we cannot forget what it wås for the four centuries preceding the Reformation ; and we cannot but know, that the church of Rome has renounced none of those principles, which were the causes of our separation.

The Roman Catholicks of this Empire, who conscientiously acknowledge the Pope's supremacy, and believe, that he and his church are infallible, have, probably, in that conscientious profession and belief a bias more than equal to any arguments that Pro. testants can bring against it. But if we cannot persuade them to renounce this unnational and anti-british jurisdiction, we are at least bound to strengthen our own consciences, and to maintain our own duty, by holding up to their view, as well as to our

fellow

« PoprzedniaDalej »