paragraph would be too long for my present limits. St. Paul suffered martyrdom in the year 68 or 69, and Clemens, his " fellow-labourer," * in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, speaks of St. Paul preaching to the utmost bounds of the west," a term which includes BRITAIN, according to every authority, both ancient and modern.† even I shall also pass over, for the sake of brevity, the historical accounts of King Lucius, which refer to the second century, and shall content myself with quoting the testimony of Tertullian, who flourished a. D. 192, and of Origen, who lived a. d. 230. The former, in his treatise against the Jews (c. vii.), relates that— "The extremities of Spain, the various people of Gaul, the parts of Britain inaccessible to the Romans, had received the religion of Christ.' Whilst Origen, in his sixth homily upon the first chapter of St. Luke, observes : "The divine goodness of our GoD and Saviour is equally diffused amongst the Britons, the Africans, and other nations of the world." The authority is abundant to show, that from this period, the Church of England was greatly enlarged and consolidated; inasmuch, as during the persecution of Dioclesian, which raged A, D. 300, England became the scene of martyrdom. Fuller has preserved the names of some of these early Church of England martyrs, amongst whom, we may commemorate JULIUS and AARON, two substantial citizens of Caerleon, and AUGULIUS, Bishop of London.‡ The Saxon invasion was now at hand; and those fierce and idolatrous hordes were employed from A. D. 449 to a. D. 582, in subjecting the island to their sway. The whole kingdom was divided amongst their chiefs, and the fanes of idolatry triumphed to a frightful extent, over the temples of Christianity. Its professors in many instances were reduced to the most cruel oppression whilst the greater number of its bishops and clergy, fled into Wales or Scotland. was It was at this time, that Gregory, the Bishop of Rome, conceived the design of converting the English Saxons to Christianity; and for this end, despatched a band of Missionaries, at the head of which, Augustine the monk, or St. Austin. I am obliged to omit many interesting particulars. They landed on the Isle of Thanet, A. D. 597; were favourably received by Ethelbert, king of Kent; and met with very considerable success in the conversion of the Saxons. The king himself was baptized, and his whole people followed his example. St. Austin's ambition was excited by his success, and he desired a conference with the British Bishops and Clergy, for the purpose of bringing them to a conformity with the Church of Rome, as well as for procuring to himself the acknowledgment of his appointment of archbishop, which had been conferred upon him by Gregory. Many interesting particulars connected with this conference are preserved by Bede, which our space will not allow us to quote. The British bishops and clergy reject the demands of St. Austin, and he threatens them with destruction. Austin * Philip. iv. 3. Stillingfleet's Antiq. of the British 1710, vol. iii. pp. 3, 4, and pp. 24, 25. dence of the Ancient British Church; Church Hist. Cent. iv. p. 20. Churches in his Collected Works; London, Burgess's Tracts on the Origin and IndepenLondon, 1815, p. 72. 1 shortly after died, but not before he had secured the accomplishment of his denunciation. For this purpose, Ethelfred, a king of the Anglo Saxons, had been put in motion, and at the head of a great army, attacked and overthrew the Britons at Carlegeon, the present Chester; at which time, twelve hundred of the British clergy were massacred in cold blood !* These circumstances, which are not inventions, but the solid FACTS of history, must prove, not only the existence of the Church of England before the coming of the Roman Missionaries, but its DISTINCTION and INDEPENDENCE. But we have something further to advance. The Church of England was not extinct amongst the Saxons. Far from it. St. Kentigern preached Christianity to the Saxons in Cumberland. It is related of Gildas-" that the northern parts of Britain flocked to his preaching; and the Saxons, forsaking the errors of Gentilism, destroyed their idols, and were baptized into the Christian faith."+ Cerdic, the king of the West Saxons, permitted the Britons, who were Christians, to live quietly under his government. The king of Wessex also permitted the inhabitants of Cornwall, by paying a small tribute, to enjoy the exercise of their religion. To which I shall only add the triumphant fact, on the authority of Bede, that ETHELBERT himself was not unacquainted with the Christian religion; for Bertha, his queen, was a Christian; and brought to England, Luidhard, a French bishop, who preached to her and her court in the church of St. Martin's, Canterbury, for a length of time before St. Austin's arrival. These facts are adduced to shew, that St. Austin did not find the ground unoccupied, but that there was a British episcopal church actually in existence among the Saxons. appears also that Offa, the son of the king of Northumberland, was not only acquainted with the Gospel, but, prompted by his zeal, had become a missionary to the Germans. It There is a great deal more proof to the same purpose; but this is amply sufficient to show, that, so far from the Church of England owing its existence to Popery-not even the revival of Christianity amongst the heathen Saxons, is attributable solely to the labours of the Roman missionaries; but that many of the British fathers ardently engaged in the work, and that it was completed by a union of their labours. intermingling of the members of the Roman and English Churches, must not be considered as detrimental to the scope of my argument, for two important reasons. This First, because Popery, in the strict sense of the word, was not yet established. "It is generally agreed," says Mosheim, "that Boniface engaged Phocas, that abominable tyrant, who waded to the imperial throne through the blood of the Emperor Mauritius, to confer upon the Roman Pontiff the title of Universal Bishop." But Boniface did not come to the bishopric of Rome till A. D. 604; and St. Austin, who came to England A D. 597, died before the assumption of POPE or Universal * Bædæ Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ Gentis Anglorum, lib. i. c. 27, p. 65; Interrog. 7, lib. ii. c. 2, p. 80. Two of the discourses of this ancient BRITISH bishop on the ruin of Great Britain, are still extant. Parker de Vetustate Ecclesiæ Britannica, p. 12. Bishop, by Boniface. But should any super-refined objector, notwithstanding, intimate that the errors of the Roman Church were at this time sufficient to stamp it with the character of Antichrist, I answer, Next, that it was not a VOLUNTARY subjection on the part of the Church of England; but, as we have seen, on the part of the Roman missionary, a barbarous and cruel USURPATION. It is true, indeed, after the slaughter of the TWELVE HUNDRED! that the Roman religion, with the errors of that and a subsequent day, became triumphant; yet it can never be regarded but as an unrighteous violation of all sacred principle. Many of the British Christians, as we have seen, remained amongst the idolatrous Saxons, and many of the bishops laboured successfully, in establishing the truths of their religion; but the Papal influence was too strong against them; and all was soon swallowed up in the vortex of Popish ambition; and it is painfully true that the Church of England continued under a long moral night, in the midst of increasing darkness, unheard-of impositions, abominable idolatries, and unparalleled crimes, till the Reformation. It is also worthy of PECULIAR NOTICE, that the Romish episcopacy, not many years after the death of Augustine the monk, became almost extinct; and that the Church of England was upreared on the foundation of the ancient Scottish and British episcopacy.* I have thus brought down the argument from the earliest date, in proof of the existence and ancient independence of the Church of England, which sufficiently demonstrates the identity of the present Church of England with the British and Apostolic Church as far as LOCALITY is concerned; but before I can establish the position at which I aim, I am aware it will be necessary for me to prove the UNITY of the Church of England in other respects, and that at the Reformation she abjected nothing essential to that unity. This I shall attempt in my next; and hope to shew, that in throwing off the tyranny and errors of the Romish Church, it was more a transition than a creation," and that the Church of England came out, from the long night of usurpation, to shine in her OWN original LIGHT, and resume her ancient and PROPER authority. The British public, I mean in the best sense of the word, is awakening to the necessity of making some grand effort for the salvation of every thing dear and valuable; and on every side, we hear the emphatic cry"The Ark of our Faith shall not be abandoned." Let every Briton, whose heart beats free within his bosom, be determined to vindicate the rights of this ancient inheritance, which has descended to him from the earliest times; let him aspire to hand it down, unimpaired, to his posterity, and let him " first die," rather than be himself, in any way, the means of ignobly selling the best and dearest institution that God has given him, into the hands of the enemies of mankind. It would be impious and cowardly to desert his post, and abandon the best interests of his country; and it would be a relegation of all moral principles, to allow the fiends of anarchy, and the legion of infidelity, to tear down the SACRED STANDARD, which has been unfurled since the days of Caractacus! t * Vid. Lloyd's Historical Acct. Bede, Stillingfleet, Jones, and Spelman. † He was led captive to Rome by Ostorius, in the reign of Claudius, about A.D. 47. THE IDENTITY OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND WITH THE ANCIENT BRITISH AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. The Government of the Church of England is EPISCOPACY, in which it agrees with the ancient British and Apostolical Church. The following passages, to which many others might be added, are from the works of Saint Ignatius, who was BISHOP of Antioch thirty-six years during the life of ST. JOHN. Αἰδεῖσθε δὲ καὶ τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ὑμῶν, ὡς χριστὸν καθ' ἡμῖν οἱ μακάριοι διετάξαντο ἀπόστολοι. "See that ye reverence your BISHOP, as Christ, as the blessed apostles have given us commandment." Ὁ τιμῶν ἐπισκόπον, ὑπὸ θεοῦ τετίμηται. Ὁ λάθρα He that transacteth any "Whoever honoureth the bishop is honoured of GOD. thing without the privity of the bishop, ministers to the devil." "We can prove, as we maintained, that in the Church founded by the apostles and their immediate successors, an episcopal government was always established; and that for nearly two hundred years no church was thought a true church which had not a bishop-an individual who was selected from the priests, superintending them, and possessing the power of enforcing certain offices, which no one of inferior rank performed. Such a bishop we declare Titus to have been, whom St. Paul left in Crete, that he might ordain elders in every city. And from the bishops ordained by the Apostle, we are ready to prove, by a series of historical documents, that our own bishops derive their authority to ordain ministers. A point which, however lost sight of or ridiculed in a day when men think no authority necessary, provided they have a little turn for public speaking, and can persuade themselves of an inward illumination, set up as preachers, and then call themselves ambassadors-this point, we say, of the apostolical succession of the ministry of our Church, is one of the weightiest that can be agitated in a Christian community. I could as soon believe that Christ is not the head of his Church, as believe that he has made no provision for a succession of ordained ministers; and unless this provision be found in an episcopal order, my firm conviction is, that it exists not on the broad face of the earth." Melvill. HAVING, in my last Letter, established the apostolical existence, and ancient independence, of the Church of England, by which its local identity is secured, the next step of the argument is to shew, that the present Church of England is identical in its form and structure, with the British Church before the time of St. Austin; and that its unity has not been destroyed by the temporary usurpation of the Romish Church. In order to accomplish this, it will be further necessary to substantiate two things-that the Church of England retains the same functional institution, or form of government; and, that she maintains the same doctrines. If these two points be clearly ascertained, all minor objections will be unworthy of any candid reasoner to offer, and will be allowed to vanish of themselves. Without controversy, it will be granted, that the Church of England is, in her form of government, EPISCOPAL; by which is meant, that her religious administration is under the government of Bishops. This I take to be the essential FORM of the Church, and that which fixes its character, in prominent distinction from the various forms of religion which surround her. Like the peaked and snowy top of Chimborazi amongst the mountains of the earth, so that Church rears her sacred and hoary head over the diversified forms of Christendom. The form of government, then, in the Church of England is Episcopacy; and all that we have to do, at present, is to shew that the same form existed in the ancient British Church. Of course the proof of this is founded on historic evidence, to which, therefore, we must now refer. The ancient records of the British Church, which have been collected by the authorities to which I have before alluded, and to which must now be added the name of Sir H. Spelman, inform us, that bishops have existed in the island from the earliest dawn of Christianity. We have the names of many, in a long continued succession, who have filled various bishoprics. I shall give, as a literary curiosity, the names of the primitive bishops of London and York. We begin with those of York; Sampson, about A. D. 170; Eborius, 314; Taurinus, appointed by Constantius Chlorus, 300; Pyramus, appointed by King Arthur, about 520; Todiacus, who fled into Wales, 586. Of London, the names of a greater number have been preserved: Theanus, about A. D. 170; his church was founded on the spot now occupied by St. Peter's, Cornhill ; Elvanus, Cador, Obinus, Conan, Palladius, Stephanus, Itutus, Theodwinus, Theodredus, Hilarius, Restitutus, Guitelinus, A. D. 435; Fastidius, who was a considerable writer, 420; Vodinus, 439, destroyed by means of Hengist, because he opposed the marriage of Vortigern with his daughter; Theonus, 553; fled into Wales, 586. Our limits will not allow us to give the names of the other bishops on record; we shall, therefore, content ourselves with mentioning the names of the three bishops who were delegated by the Church of England to attend the Council of Arles, in France, A.D. 314.* These were, Eborius, of York; Restitutus, of London; and Adelfuis, of Caerleon: and it may be mentioned in connexion with this historical fact, as an important corroborative proof of the agreement of the ancient with the modern British Church, that Bishop Adelfuis was accompanied in his mission by Sacerdos, a priest, and Arminius, a deacon. To conclude this portion of proof, I shall only further quote the words of Gregory, in answer to an inquiry of St. Austin, as to the manner in which he should conduct himself towards the bishops of Gaul and Britain. We give thee no power over the bishops of Gaul, they being under the Bishop of Arles ; but all the BISHOPS of the BRITONS we commit to thy paternal care." -Bede, B. 1. c. 7. This is conclusive evidence of fact. These are the names of bishops of the Church of England who existed many hundred years before the Church of Rome gained a footing on our shores! The government of the ancient British Church was episcopacy; and the Church of England at the present day maintains the same discipline. The identity, therefore, of the two churches, is fully established as it respects their form of government. The proof which I have just adduced would be sufficient for my present purpose; but, to give it the highest possible authority, I shall attempt to shew, on similar grounds, that this form of government is of apostolical appointment. On this subject I would speak with humility, inasmuch as I know how many wise and good men have * Fuller, Church Hist. Cent. iv. p. 24. |