throughout the Roman empire by Constantine, The Emperor was a native of Britain*; his mother, the Empress Helena, was also a native of Britain; his father, the Emperor Constantius, lived many years in Britain, and died at York; and Constantine, on his father's death, was proclaimed Emperor by the army in Britain. Constantius was favourable to the Christians, though, when in the subordinate capacity of Caesar, he was compelled to execute the rigorous edicts of Diocletian. The persecution closed with his accession to the empire. His son, inheriting his father's benignant disposition, became a convert to Christianity, and esta blished the Gospel throughout the Roman world. Under the Emperor's favour and protection, the British Church could not fail to enjoy peculiar privileges. An authentic evidence of our Church appeared early in the fourth century by the presence of three British Bishops at the Council of Arles, which was convened by the Emperor. British Bishops were also present at the Councils of Sardica and Ariminum in the same century, and, probably, at the celebrated Council of Nice t

Usher's Eccles. Britan. p. 173-192. See Note, p 24, 25.

+ Stillingfleet's Orig. Britann. p. 74.089. 135.0

In the course of this century Jerome delivered his valuable testimony to the independence of the British Church, and to her sufficiency for salvation*.

5. The sanguinary devastation of Britain, first by the Scots and Picts, and afterwards by the Saxons, in the first half of the fifth century, reduced the British Church to great difficul ties, and must have deprived her of many of her ablest and most learned advocates. It is no wonder, therefore, that when Pelagianism began to make a formidable progress in Britain, recourse should be had to the Churches and Bishops of Britany for assistance. The assistance was given; and Pelagianism was, for a considerable time, suppressed. One fortunate consequence of this religious conflict, was, the establishment of schools and religious houses for the support of the Christian faith. I need not add, that the suppression of Pelagianism, and the renovation of Christian learning are sufficient evidences of the continuance of the British Church in this century.

6. In the sixth century began a new, æra of the British Church. The Metropolitan

* A Second Letter to the Clergy of the Diocese of St David's, p. 8, 9.

Church was removed from Caerleon to Llandaff, and then to Mynyw, or Menevia, afterwards called St. David's, from the holy and venerable man who first presided over it. DAVID was a disciple of one of those learned schools, which had been established in the preceding century. He travelled to Egypt and Palestine, and brought home with him the rules of that austere discipline, which he instituted at Menevia. He established many monasteries and schools for the cultivation of religion and learning. He was a powerful and successful opposer of Pela gianism; and the Synod of Llanddewi Brefi affords an illustrious proof of the ability of DAVID, and of the efficacious sexistence of the British Church-in the sixth century from the preaching of St. Paul.

7. We come now to a very memorable period of our Church. Down to the end of the sixth century we hear of the Church of Britain only under the general character of a Christian Church. But from the mission of Austin, the Monk, to this country, we find her in a hew character; we see her, not only an Apostolical and independent, but also a PROTESTANT Church, distinguished by her rejection of the Pope's authority, and of all communion with the Church of Rome.

A remarkable evidence of the sentiments of the British Church, recorded in an old chronicle, is preserved in a letter from Bishop Davies to Archbishop Parker, in which we are informed, that when the Britons were conquered by the Saxons, they did not refuse to treat with them amicably, as occasion served, so long as the latter continued Pagans. But after they were converted by Austin, or in the words of the Letter," after that by the meanes of Austin, the Saxons became Chris tians in such sort as Austin had taught them, the Bryttayns wold not after that nether eate nor drynke wyth them, bycause they cor rupted with superstition, ymages and ydolas trie, the true religion of Christ *."

The history of Christian Churches and Institutions is a most substantial evidence of

Christianity. To prove that from the days of the Apostles there never has been any period without a Christian Church, is to establish a chain of evidence, which all the subtleties of unbelievers about particular difficulties of revelation, cannot shake. To possess such a proof in the history of our own Church, and from the coincidence of British records with foreign testimony, to

MS. CXIV. Art, 175. Benet, Coll. Cam,

.

know that the Church of Britain was coeval with the age of the Apostles, is to build our faith on grounds most solid and interesting. But to extend that proof to the individual labours of one of the Apostles *, and to

* It may not be improper to recapitulate here the evidences of St. Paul's journey to Britain.

(1.) We know from incontestible foreign authority (Tertullian, Origen, &c.) that the Gospel was preached in Britain in the earliest days of Christianity; our oldest native historian (Gildas) says, before the year 61. We likewise know from indisputable authority (Eusebius) that the Gospel was preached in Britain by some of the Apostles. And if by some of the Apostles we may be sure that the Apostle of the Gentiles must have been one : I say must, because the conversion of the Gentiles was St. Paul's special commission,-because before he went to Rome, he had expressed his intentions of travelling to the west (Spain)-because he thus more completely fulfilled Christ's special commission (Acts xxii. 21. 2 Tim. iv. 17.) -because, (as will appear in the following paragraph) we have evidence, indirect and direct, that he did go both to Spain and Britain; and because we have no credible evidence, that any other Apostle ever was in Britain.

(2.) We know from unquestionable authority (Athanasius, Jerome, &c.) that St. Paul preached in Spain, and in the West; and that he went from Ocean to Ocean, and to the islands that lie in the Ocean, after his release from his first imprisonment at Rome. We also know from the best authority (Clemens Romanus,) that he went to the utmost bounds of the West. Britain was called the utmost islund of the West, (Catullus,) and the utmost part of the West, (Theodoret); and no other country, as far as yet