appears

quoted it that Palladius was sent by the Pope to Ireland, yet this mission does not seem to have established any dependence on the Pope or Church of Rome; for we learn from Bede, as will be seen presently, that, at the commencement of the seventh century, the Irish (Scoti) were as averse to the Church of Rome, as the Britons were. When Ninian, who was educated at Rome, converted the Picts in Britain, and Palladius was sent to the Scots in Ireland, Popery did not exist. The religion of Rome was then the religion of the Church universal.

But the independence of their church was" not "the chief object of their solici tude * " It is evident from the testimony of the old Chronicle quoted by Bishop Davies

دو

Hiberniam Palladium. An Anonymous writer of the acts of Patricius says: Celestinus ordinavit Palladium et ad Scotos convertendos ad Christum in Hiberniam misit.-Est autem Hibernia insula omnium insularum

post Britanniam maxima. Hæc jam insula proprie Scotorum est patria. The distinction between Scotia major (Ireland) and Scotia minor (Scotland) is illustrated by Usher, p. 797, 798. Bede says, (Eccl. Hist. L. II. c. 4.) Veterum Britanniæ incolarum, nec non et Scottorum, qui Hiberniam insulam Britanniæ proximam incolunt. Camden says, Nomen Scoticum non potuit alicui Britanniæ genti competere ante annum 855, (Epistolæ p. $62.)

Lingard's Anglo-Saxon Church, Vol. I. p. 67.

in his Letter to Archbishop Parker*, that the Britons not only rejected the authority. of Austin, but the doctrines and usages of his Church. The Chronicle says, that they would hold no communication with the Saxons, when converted by Austin, because "they corrupted with superstition, images, and idolatry, the true religion of Christ." This is surely a rejection not only of the authority of Austin, but of his Church, and therefore of the Pope.

The account, which the Chronicle gives of the sentiments of the British Church is consonant with the testimony of Bede, respecting the conduct of the Irish as well as of the Britons. "That primitive plainness and simplicity of worship was still retained, at the arrival of Austin by the Britons, by the Scots, [Irish] and the Picts, who were so shocked at the many pagan superstitions and ceremonies introduced by that Monk into the Saxon worship, that they looked upon it as no better than Paganism; and avoided, as

*Letter to the Clergy of the Diocese of St. David's,

p. 46.

+ Bede makes no mention of the Picts in the passage, which Bower professes to follow. The Picts seem to have been inconsiderately added by Bower, on the supposition, that by the Scots were meant the North Britons.

Bede informs us, the communion of those, who came from Rome to establish it, as they avoided the communion of Pagans; nay so great was the aversion, that the Scots [Irish] in particular bore to all the Roman Missionaries, that Daganus, a Bishop of that nation, not only declined sitting with them at the same table, but would not even lodge with them under the same roof*." The words of Bede are: 66 Quippe cum usque hodie moris sit Brittonum, fidem religionemque Anglorum pro nihilo habere, neque in aliquo eis magis communicare quam paganis. (L. II. c. 20.) Scottos vero per Daganum Episcopum in hanc, quam superius nominavimus, insulam, et Columbanum Abbatem in Gallos venientem, nihil discrepare a Brittonibus, in eorum conversatione didicimus. Nam Daganus Episcopus ad nos veniens non solum cibum nobiscum, sed nec in eodem hospitio, quo vescebamur, sumere voluit. (L. II. c. 4)

Bede gives this account on the authority of Laurentius, who was one of the missionaries that accompanied Austin, and was his immediate successor in the See of Canterbury; and better authority we need not seek for the entire independence of the British

* Bower's Hist. of the Popes, Vol. II. p. 527.

and Irish Churches on the Church of Rome, and their alienation from it."

Humphrey Lloyd, therefore, had good reason for saying of the period, of which we are now speaking, that "in those daies the Brytames refused the doctrine of Augustine, as erroneous and corrupt;" and that "the Brytaines did abhorre the Romish doctrine taught in that time, which doctrine, (I am sure,) is little amended now in the church of Rome; and that may be a mirrour to us to see our owne follie, if we do degenerate from our fore-fathers the ancient Brytaines in the sinceritie of true religion *.

In the fourth Century, as we have before seen, the Church of Britain was one of many equal and independent parts of the universal Church. The Church of Rome was then content with her priority in rank, (as the Church of the imperial city,) and in learning. An ancient and frequent intercourse had subsisted between the Churches of Rome and Britain, as long as Britain was a part of the Roman empire, and for some years afterwards. For the churches of

Historie of Cambria, p. 184, 185. ed. 1811.

Rome and of Britain were then the same doctrine at least, if not in discipline. Fet two centuries made a great difference

the progress of error and innovation. And the church of Britain, which in the urch Century was an independent Church, พ.18 was also, at the commencement of the sem a truly PROTESTANT Church, prosusting against the corruptions of superstion, images, and idolatry, and refusing all communion with the Church of Rome.

O! for the warning voice of the Apocape to impress the sentiments of the ancient Brush and Irish Churches on the minds of their posterity, who are now members of Glas Church, which their ancestors

gly condemned; that they might view all submission to a foreign jurisdiction in the same light, which their ancestors did; and extricating themselves from the magic bonds of Popish supremacy and infallibility, might emancipate their minds from all impediments to the knowledge of the truth, and return to their ancient simplicity and independence. Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast not kept thy first love. Remember therefore fiom whence thou art fallen, and repent,