by
Brian Williams
CHAPTER TWO
JOSEPH OF ARIMATHAEA AT GLASTONBURY
NOT only do the Twelve Apostles vanish from the Scripture
record but the Bible is also strangely silent concerning what
happened to Joseph of Arimathaea, the rich man mentioned in all
four Gospels, who buried the Lord in his own new tomb. Matthew
states, "When the even was come, there came a rich man of
Arimathaea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus' disciple:
he went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate
commanded the body to be delivered. And when Joseph had taken the
body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his
own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a
great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed "1
Mark tells us, "And now when the even was come, because it
was the preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph
of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for
the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and
craved the body of Jesus. And ... he gave the body to Joseph. And
he bought fine linen, and took Him down, and wrapped Him in the
linen, and laid Him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock,
and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre".2
Luke's record reads, "And, behold, there was a man named
Joseph, a counsellor; and he was a good man, and a just: (the
same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them;) he was
of Arimathaea, a city of the Jews: who also himself waited for
the kingdom of God. This man went unto Pilate, and begged the
body of Jesus. And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and
laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man
before was laid "3
Finally, John says, "And after this Joseph of Arimathaea,
being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews,
besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and
Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of
Jesus "4
Thus was the prophecy fulfilled of Jesus that "He made His
grave with the wicked, and with the rich in His death."5
It was prophesied that Jesus should be buried in the tomb of
a rich man, and it was Joseph of Arimathaea who was to fulfil
that prophecy. The Bible says that Joseph "begged the body of
Jesus ... and laid it in his own new tomb."
Who was this man Joseph of Arimathaea? The Bible indicates
that he was a man of social distinction and official rank, for he
was "an honourable counsellor". It also tells us that he was a
good and just man and he was rich. Moreover we are told that he
"had not consented to the counsel and deed of them" so that he
was evidently a member of the Sanhedrin. More explicitly it tells
us that "himself waited for the kingdom of God" and that he was
"a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews".
It must have taken real courage then for Joseph to approach
Pilate. Consider for one moment. Having been treacherously
betrayed, Jesus had been taken by the priest's guard which had no
powers of arrest and had then been illegally tried after dark.
After all the evidence had been heard, Caiaphas had taken upon
himself to conduct a vicious cross-examination of the prisoner,
finally demanding that Jesus be tried in the morning before the
Roman governor of Palestine, Pontius Pilate, on a false charge of
treason. (Remember, Palestine was at this time part of the Roman
Empire. The Jews had no jurisdiction in such matters and only the
Roman governor had the power to condemn a man to death.) Pilate
had given way to the demand of the mob howling for Jesus' death
and had - literally- washed his hands of the affair. Thus
condemning Jesus to the ignominious death of a criminal. Such was
the wickedness of those who would destroy Jesus, and such the
suffering of Him who "poured out His soul unto death: [who] was
numbered with the transgressors ",6 and whom God "made ... to be
sin for us, who knew no sin ".7
So Joseph "went in boldly unto Pilate and craved the body of
Jesus ... and [Pilate] gave the body to Joseph ". This is
strange. One can scarcely believe that Jesus' enemies would have
been willing for His body to be taken down and privately buried
and for His tomb to become the shrine of a martyr. The fact that
Joseph obtained his request would seem to indicate that he had
some rightful claim to the body of Jesus which would only be the
case if he were a relative. And this seems to be the case, for
the Jewish Talmud describes Joseph of Arimathaea as being the
younger brother of the father of the virgin Mary, in other words,
Joseph of Arimathaea was Jesus' great-uncle.
Now, strangely, the Bible has nothing further to say about
Joseph following the Crucifixion. What would have been Joseph's
reaction when on the third day the stone was rolled away from the
tomb and the grave was empty? Surely this man who was waiting for
the Kingdom of God, who was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for
fear of the Jews, who had shown rare courage in begging the body
of Jesus, now became the close follower of our Lord. Yet the
Bible never mentions him again.
For the disciples of Jesus the transforming experience came
at Pentecost. "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they
were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a
sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all
the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them
cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And
they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with
other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance ".8
Immediately after Pentecost there began a great persecution
of the Church. Those who had hounded Christ to His death now
directed their fury against Jesus' disciples. The Bible records
the death of the Church's first martyr - Stephen - and then tells
us, "And at that time there was a great persecution against the
church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad
throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the
apostles. And devout men carried Stephen to his burial, and made
great lamentation over him. As for Saul, he made havock of the
church, entering into every house, and haling men and women
committed them to prison. Therefore they that were scattered
abroad went every where preaching the word".9
But where was Joseph? Traditions of great antiquity tell us
that JOSEPH OF ARIMATHAEA BROUGHT THE GOSPEL TO BRITAIN within a
very few years of the Crucifixion. In fact, there is reason to
believe that Joseph was already familiar with the British Isles
long before he became a disciple of Jesus. The Latin Vulgate
renders "honourable counsellor" as 'nobilis decurio.' 'Decurio'
was the name given to a town counsellor and also to an officer in
the Roman Army. But since one Dr.C.R.Davey Biggs wrote in a
little booklet 'Ictis and Avalon' that the officer in charge of a
tin mine was also called a 'decurio,' there has been much
speculation as to the possibility that Joseph of Arimathaea was
involved in tin-mining. This would certainly explain the source
of Joseph's wealth referred to in the Bible.
But what makes the possibility even more interesting is the
fact that there has long been a tradition in the tin-mining area
of South-western England that - "Joseph was in the trade". It so,
then it may be said with certainty that Joseph would have come to
Britain, and probably not once but many times. Britain was the
main source of tin. The British Isles were referred to by
classical writers as the Cassiterides - tin-bearing islands. In
fact, while we have been at work on this book it has been
announced that more tin mines are to be opened in Cornwall. The
Sunday Telegraph, 21st September, 1969, has said, "There is still
probably as much tin under the Cornish ground as ever came out of
it". How then did Joseph of Arimathaea come to return to this
land with which he was already familiar, not as a merchant of tin
but as a messenger of the Cross?
Tradition tells us that at this time of great persecution
Joseph of Arimathaea and eleven others were cast adrift from
Joppa in an open boat, and that they drifted across the
Mediterranean to Marseilles. We find this account recorded by
Cardinal Baronius, the 16th century Roman Catholic historian, who
spent thirty years writing his 'Annales Ecclesiastice,' and had
access to the archives of the Vatican Library. Baronius states
that it was in the year A.D.35 that Joseph of Arimathaea, (5
years after Jesus was put to death and raised to immortal life -
Keith Hunt). Lazarus 10 (whom Jesus raised from the dead and whom
the Jews sought to kill 11, Mary and Martha, Lazarus's sisters,
also Marcella their maid, and Maximin a disciple, were put into a
boat without sails or oars, and that they eventually came to
Marseilles in France and afterwards crossed to Britain.
A glance at the map facing page 61 will show the route
travelled by Joseph. His companions are also stated by the poet
Mistral to have included Trophimus 12 Cleon, Eutropius,
Restitutus whom we know from the Bible as "the man born blind",13
Martial, Saturninus, Mary the wife of Cleophas 14 and Mary
Magdalene 15 Whatever the exact complement of Joseph's party,
Lazarus is to this day recognised as having become first Bishop
of Marseilles while the names of these other saints are
perpetuated in the records of the Gallic Church.
And so Joseph and his little party came to Britain, sailing
inland to the Isle of Avalon which we now know as Glastonbury. In
those days the sea which is now fourteen miles away came much
further inland and lapped the foot of Glastonbury Tor, the
500-foot high hill which dominates the countryside for miles
around - see the photograph facing page 21. Joseph is said to
have planted his staff in the soil of Wearyall Hill, and there it
took root and grew into a thorn tree. Of this thorn tree more
will be said later.
Joseph and his companions were met by King Arviragus who
granted them tax-free twelve hides of land. A hide is thought to
have been 160 acres, so that the total area represented 1,920
acres. We find this Royal Charter recorded in the official
archives from that day to this! Domesday Book, published in 1087,
tells us of: "The Domus Dei, in the great monastery of
Glastonbury, called the Secret of the Lord. This Glastonbury
Church possesses, in its own ville X11 hides of land which have
never paid tax" and the twelve hides may still be traced today,
as will be seen in the reproduction, facing page 53, of "A Map of
the Hundreds of Glaston XII Hides" from Phelps' "The History and
Antiquities of Somersetshire," published in 1836.
This charter of land was often referred to in succeeding
centuries whenever disputes arose as to the seniority of the
British Church above the claims of Rome. In fact, the primacy of
the Church in Britain was never held in question until at the
Council of Pisa in 1409 it was disputed by the Ambassadors of
France and Spain. It was then contended that the French and
Spanish Churches must yield precedence to the British Church as
this had been founded by Joseph of Arimathaea immediately after
the Passion of Christ. This ruling was further upheld by the
Councils of Constance 1417, Sienna 1424 and Basle 1434.
Archbishop Ussher (1581-1656) states that the basis of this claim
was the burial of Joseph of Arimathaea at Glastonbury and the
donation of twelve hides of land.
Joseph and his companions now erected what must certainly
have been the first Christian church above ground. Of course, we
know from the Bible that it was the custom for Christians to
gather for fellowship in their homes. The Church, the Greek word
'ekklesia' meaning the 'called out ones', was the PEOPLE, not the
building. Notice, Paul says, "Greet Priscilla and Aquila ...
likewise ... the CHURCH that is in their house" 16 "Aquila and
Priscilla salute you ... with the CHURCH that is in their
house" 17 "the CHURCH which is in [Nymphas'] house" 18 and
"Archippus our fellow-soldier, and ... the CHURCH in thy
house" 19
During the time of intense persecution by the Roman Empire
the Christians at Rome met in the catacombs underground.
Gradually, the place where Christians met became known as the
church instead of the PEOPLE.
So here, if the tradition be true, we have Joseph and his
companions constructing the first church building above ground.
It was made from wattles daubed with mud, and was thatched with
reeds, and when completed it measured sixty feet long and
twentysix feet wide, approximately the same dimensions as the
Tabernacle in the wilderness 20
For hundreds of years this sacred building was preserved. In
the year 630 Paulinus encased it in lead and built over it a
beautiful chapel. Unhappily, in 1184 there was a disastrous fire,
and the little Wattle Church was completely destroyed. However, a
Norman chapel was built over the same spot immediately afterwards
and, though ruined, this remains today. Thus we can say with
reasonable certainty that St.Joseph's Chapel at Glastonbury Abbey
stands today exactly where the Wattle Church was erected only a
few years after the Resurrection, and where Joseph himself was
buried. John Leland tells us, quoting Maelgwyn of Avalon's
Historia de Rebus Britannicis, written about A.D. 540:
"The Isle of Avalon greedy of burials ... received thousands
of sleepers, among whom Joseph de Marmore from Aramathea by
name, entered his perpetual sleep. And he lies in a
bifurcated line next the southern angle of the oratory made
of circular wattles by thirteen inhabitants of the place
over the powerful adorable Virgin ".
This would suggest that Mary the mother of Jesus was buried
at Glastonbury. Is this why, long before such dedications became
the custom, St.Joseph's Chapel was also called St.Mary's? And is
this why ... there is a stone set in the South wall of the Chapel
bearing the simple inscription JESUS MARIA? It is curious that
William of Malmesbury in his "Magna Tabula Glastoniaea" refers
alike to Joseph as to John 21 as the paranymphos or guardian of
Jesus' mother.
The tomb of Joseph was inscribed with a simple epitaph:
"AD BRITANNOS VENI POST CHRISTUM SEPELIVI. DOCUI. QUIEVI ".
Translated this reads:
"I CAME TO BRITAIN AFTER BURYING CHRIST. I TAUGHT. I REST".
Nothing now remains of Joseph's grave. But there is an empty
stone sarcophagus in St.John's Parish Church. There, according to
tradition, and in circumstances we have not space to tell, his
remains were placed.
And so he who buried Jesus in his own new tomb found a
resting place in Britain. The honourable counsellor who in the
days of Jesus' earthly life had been His secret disciple was he
who brought the gospel to these shores.
It is a wonderful story we have begun to tell!
1.Matthew 27:57-60
2.Mark 15:42-46
3.Luke 23:50-53
4.John 19: 38
5.Isaiah 53:9
6.Isaiah 53:12
7.2 Corinthians 5: 21
8.Acts 2:1-4
9.Acts 8:1-4
10.John 11:1-46
11.John 12:10-11
12.Acts 20:4
13.John 9:1-38
14.John 19:25
15.Mark 16:9
16.Romans 16: 3-5
17.1 Corinthians 16:19
18.Colossians 4:15
19.Philemon 2
20.Exodus 26: 1-37
21.John 19: 26-27
...................
TO BE CONTINUED
How the Gospel came to Britain #2Interesting Histories of Glastonbury by
Brian Williams
(1970)
CHALICE WELL AND THE SOMERSET ZODIAC
AM writing this in a corner of the delightful gardens of the
Chalice Well at Glastonbury. A few yards in front of where I am
sitting is the famous well covered over today by the lid bearing
a symbolic design that was made for it fifty years ago. Below me
and to my right the garden slopes away, a blaze of colour with
wall-flowers and forget-me-nots, aubretias and tulips, and a
flowering cherry tree. A couple of trees sprung from the
Glastonbury Thorn are in full flower. A little to my left are two
yew trees, and I am reminded that in 1961, quite close to this
well, the stump of a yew tree was found twelve feet below the
present ground level: scientific examination showed it to have
been alive in A.D.300. Through the branches of the yew trees I
can see the Tor with St.Michael's tower outlined against the sky,
while Chalice Hill rises up behind me.
This is a beautiful spot. The heavy rain earlier in the day
has given way to brilliant sunshine. All around the air is filled
with birdsong, pigeons cooing in the trees, a blackbird chinking
a little way off, and a thrush is singing in the distance. A
brimstone yellow butterfly has flitted across the path and
cabbagewhites flutter among the flowers, and the slight breeze
wafts a lovely fragrance from the mass of flowers. At this moment
it is hard to think of a more delightful spot.
Just out of sight, a little lower down the garden, the water
gushes out of a pipe, flowing down a little channel and into a
pool, and colouring the stone red from its iron content. The
spring which feeds the well rises on the slope of Chalice Hill
and pours forth 25,000 gallons of water per day. That been doing
so for thousands of years and has never been known to fail. In
1921 and 1922 it was this spring and Chalice Well that saved the
little town of Glastonbury from drought.
It was here at the foot of the Tor and around this well that
Joseph of Arimathaea and his companions must have built their
wattle huts more than nineteen hundred years ago, and here, we
believe, a Christian settlement continued until about A.D.400
when Patrick instituted the monastic life on a site adjacent to
the Wattle Church eight hundred yards away. Those early settlers
and those who took their place were called anchorites, and the
name was perpetuated in the Anchor Inn, an early building in the
vicinity of the well. William of Malmesbury (1080-1143) mentions
the well and here, if his record is to be accepted, the first
Christian baptisms were held, and King Lucius, who did so much to
spread the faith after the initial flush of enthusiasm had died
away, was himself baptised.
King Lucius, also known as Llewrug Mawr, was the grandson of
Cyllinus and the great-grandson of Caratacus whom we shall write
about later. He was king towards the end of the 2nd century and
is said to have sent emissaries to Eleutherius, the Bishop of
Rome, with the request that missionaries be sent to Britain.
Eleutherius sent four missionaries, Dyfan and Fagan and Medwy and
Elfan (or it may have been that he sent only two, Medwy and Elfan
being the returned British emissaries), and the date of their
mission was probably A.D.183.
William of Malmesbury in his "Antiquities of Glastonbury"
tells how these missionaries journeyed through Britain and came
to Glastonbury:
"There, God leading them, they found an old church built as 'twas
said, by the hands of Christ's disciples, and prepared by God
Himself for the salvation of souls, which Church the Heavenly
Builder Himself showed to be consecrated by many miraculous
deeds, and many mysteries of healing ... And they afterwards
pondered the Heavenly message that the Lord had specially chosen
this spot before all the rest of Britain as the place where His
Mother's name might be invoked. They also found the whole story
in ancient writings, how the Holy Apostles, having been scattered
throughout the world, St.Philip coming into France with a host of
disciples sent twelve of them into Britain to preach, and that
there, taught by revelation they constructed the said chapel
which the Son of God afterwards dedicated to the honour of His
Mother; and, that to these same twelve, three kings, pagan though
they were, gave twelve portions of land for their sustenance.
Moreover, they found a written record of their doings, and on
that account they loved this spot above all others, and they
also, in memory of the first twelve chose twelve of their own,
and made them live on the island with the approval of King
Lucius. These twelve thereafter abode there in divers spots as
anchorites - in the same spots, indeed, which the first twelve
inhabited. Yet they used to meet together continuously in the Old
Church in order to celebrate Divine worship more devoutly, just
as the three pagan kings had lone ago granted the said island
with its surroundings to the twelve former disciples of Christ,
so the said Phagan and Deruvian Fagan and Dyfan obtained it from
King Lucius for these their twelve companions and for others to
follow thereafter. And thus, many succeeding these, but always
twelve in number, abode in the said island during many years up
to the coming of St.Patrick, the apostle of the Irish " (Chapter
11).
Lucves is mentioned by many other authorities, including
Bede (670-735) who tells us in his "Ecclesiastical History of the
English Nation":
"Lucius, king of the Britons, sent a letter to (Eleutheriusl),
entreating that by his command he might be made a Christian. He
soon obtained his pious request, and the Britons preserved the
faith, which they had received, uncorrupted and entire, in peace
and tranquility until the time of the Emperor Diocletian" (J. M.
Dent, Everyman's Edn., page 9).
It is to King Lucius that the national conversion of Britain
to the Christian faith is usually attributed. Four centres of
early British Christianity - Glastonbury, London, Llandaff and
Gloucester - have traditional associations with him and the story
of the Eleutherian mission survives in the names of three
churches in Glamorganshire, Llanfedwy (i.e. Medwy's), Merthyr
Dyfan (Dyfan the Martyr), and St.Fagan's, also Llanlleirwg
(Llewrug's or Lucius') Church, now St.Mellon's, near Cardiff.
The association of King Lucius with London has come down to
us through the Church of St.Peter's, Cornhill, which claims to be
London's oldest church foundation, the first seat of the Bishops
of that city, and founded by King Lucius himself. There was a
plate in the vestry of the church which read:
"Bee it known to all men that in the year of Our Lord God 179
Lucives, the first Christian king of this land, then called
Britaine, founded ye first Church in London, that is to say, ye
Church of St.Peter-Upon-Cornehill and bee founded there an
Archbishop's See and made that Church ye Metropolitane and Chiefe
Church of this kingdome and so it endured ye space of 400 years
and more, unto the coming of St.Avstin the Apostle of England,
the which was sent into this land by St.Gregorie, ye Doctor of ye
Church, in the Time of King Ethelbert and then was the
Archbishop's See and Pall removed from ye said Church of St.
Peter-Upon-Cornehill unto Dorobernia that now is called
Canterburie and there it remaineth to this day and Millet, a
monke which came into this land with St.Avstin, hee was made the
first Bishop of London and his See was in St.Paul's Church and
this Lucives king was the first founder of St.Peter's Church-
Upon-Cornehill and hee reigned king in this land after Brute
(Brutus of Troy) 1245 years and in the year of Our Lord God 124
Lucives was crowned king and hee was buried (After some
Chronicles hee was buried at Gloucester in that Place where ye
order of St.Francis standeth now)."
This plate was put up after the Great Fire of London in 1666
and is a modernised translation of a much older plate, which is
quoted by Archbishop Ussher (1581-1656) and must have been put up
between 1268 and 1313. (The 'Place where ye order of St.Francis
now standeth' at Gloucester was not founded until 1268, but Ralph
de Baldoc, a Bishop of London, mentions a copy of the plate and
he died in 1313).
But the name of King Lucius is also associated with
Glastonbury Tor as he is reputed to have built a church dedicated
to St.Michael at its summit. In the last Chapter we showed that
the Christian faith replaced the former pagan worship, it was the
natural thing to erect a church on those "high places"1 where
formerly pagan rites were practised, and this was what King
Lucius did.
No one knows exactly how old Chalice Well is or even how it
got its name. The well is evidently of Druidic origin and must
have played an integral part in ancient pagan rituals of sunlight
and water, with the Tor rising above it as the 'high place' and
focal point of a great pagan sanctuary. Today the well shaft is
built of massive stones and appears to have been constructed in
the early 12th century. That would have been only a few years
after the great Abbey fire of 1184 and it must have been
constructed to provide an improved water supply to the Abbey.
One of the curious features of the well is the fact that at
the foot of the western wall of the well shaft is an archway
leading into a pentagonal chamber. The purpose for which this was
built we can only speculate at the moment. There is so much that
has still to be found out. The stones of the well are even
ripplemarked like those of Stonehenge according to Sir Flinders
Petrie, and Stonehenge has yet to yield up all its secrets. When
some of these questions are answered we shall know a lot more
about the origins of this Island race and it will confirm what
the revelation of the Bible already tells us.
No one knows for certain how Chalice Well got its name. The
name does not appear in any document before the early thirteenth
century, and then as 'Chalcivelle', and the entrance to the well
is still today in Chilkwell Street. Perhaps it is a corruption of
the word 'chalybeate,' i.e. "iron-bearing" - which describes the
mineral content of the water. The water has curative properties
and Chalice Well drew enormous crowds of people in the
mid-eighteenth century when a certain Matthew Chancellor reported
how he had been healed of asthma after drinking a glass of this
water on seven successive Sundays. Many other healings were
reported and some still are today.
Here, as so often in Glastonbury, history, tradition and
romance are inextricably woven together. The usually accepted
belief is that Chalice Well derives its name from the chalice or
cup of the Lord's Suppers 2 which Joseph of Arimathaea is
supposed to have brought with him and which he is alleged - for
reasons we can only surmise - to have buried in Chalice Hill. But
there seems to be no historical foundation for the story, and
certain it is that legends of the chalice or graal were current
long centuries before the Christian era. In Eastern tradition it
was the pagan cup of plenty, the fount of life, health and
blessing, and it had its origin in ancient vegetation rites.
However, mention of the chalice or graal naturally brings to
mind not only Joseph of Arimathaea but also King Arthur and his
Knights of the Round Table. Arthur was a British general who
lived in the sixth century and died A.D.540. He was buried at
Glastonbury, his Queen Guinevere beside him, and their tomb was
discovered there in 1191. In the coffin was a leaden plate in the
form of a cross with the inscription in Latin, "Hic jacet
sepullus inclytus Rex Arthurus in Insula Avalonia," which means,
"Here lies interred in the Isle of Avalon the renowned King
Arthur". The remains of King Arthur and Queen Guinevere were
reinterred in the Great Church of the Abbey and the fragmentary
remains of the shrine were discovered in 1934; this spot is still
marked in the turf today.
Camelot, the traditional seat of King Arthur, is now firmly
established as South Cadbury, only twelve miles from Glastonbury.
Excavations there in 1967 revealed that a prehistoric rampart had
been refortified in the 5th-6th century for military use. Digging
was re-commenced in 1968 and will continue in 1969.
Now in "La Queste del Saint Graal," we read the following
statement concerning King Arthur's Round Table:
"The Round Table was constructed, not without great significance,
upon the advice of Merlin. By its name the Round Table is meant
to signify the round world and round canopy of the planets and
the elements in the firmament, where are to be seen the stars and
many other things."
And what is truly astonishing is that here in the Somerset
countryside, a huge representation of the Zodiac has been
artificially constructed by means of prehistoric earthworks and
water-courses. This enormous map of the stars modelled against
the hills and river beds of Somerset, must have been laid down
nearly 5,000 years ago, but was only discovered in 1925 when
aerial photographs revealed for the first time the huge effigies
resembling Zodiacal creatures, arranged in a circle ten miles
across and more than thirty miles in diameter. Evidently the
reason why we can still trace them is because the land on which
they lie was the property of the Abbey, and the monks were
scrupulously careful to preserve the ancient landmarks and
waterways. But who constructed the Somerset Zodiac? And who was
responsible for Stonehenge?
The Zodiac, by which we mean the apparent path traversed by
the planets across the heavens, seems to find its chief
connotation today in the daily horoscopes published in the
newspapers. Notice God's condemnation of Babylon with its
"astrologers ... stargazers ... monthly prognosticators"3 - but
it was not always so. The true spiritual significance of the
Zodiac is that it is the divine plan of the ages written in the
stars.
The writers of the Bible recognised and understood the
revelation of God in the heavens. Notice, in the oldest book of
the Bible, the Lord asks Job, "Canst thou bind the sweet
influences of PLEIADES, or loose the bands of ORION? Canst thou
bring forth MAZZAROTH in his season? or Canst thou guide ARCTURUS
with his sons?"4
These refer, of course, to well-known star groups. But
notice the word 'Mazzaroth.' In the margin it is translated "the
twelve signs" and it means the ZODIAC.
The Zodiac, when correctly interpreted, starting from Virgo
the Virgin and ending with Leo the Lion, tells the whole wondrous
story of man's creation and redemption. These twelve signs and
their supplementary constellations tell us of the setting aside
and training of the chosen Israel race, and of its becoming, by
the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the nucleus of the Kingdom of
God upon earth. So, though little known or understood today,
there is a revelation of God in the Zodiac, and that same
revelation has been incorporated in the Great Pyramid,5 and most
especially in the Bible, the inspired Word of God.
But the story Which the Bible tells, and the Pyramid also,
was written in the stars aeons before either had come into
existence. And that is why the psalmist says, "The heavens
declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth His
handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night
sheweth knowledge. THERE IS NO SPEECH NOR LANGUAGE, WHERE THEIR
VOICE IS NOT HEARD. Their line is gone out through all the earth,
and their words to the end of the world. In them hath He set a
tabernacle for the sun, which is as a bridegroom coming out of
his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His
going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto
the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof"6
It is to this witness and revelation of the stars that Paul
alludes. "But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias
saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh
by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. But I say, HAVE THEY
NOT HEARD? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and
their words unto the ends of the world".7
It is not surprising to learn that, according to Josephus
(Jewish Pharisee historian of the first century A.D. - Keith
Hunt) the signs of the Zodiac were emblazoned on the standards of
the twelve tribes of Israel, and these same Zodiacal signs were
incorporated in the floor of the Chapel of St.Mary at
Glastonbury!
And so this wonderful Glastonbury Zodiac laid out over a
vast tract of land ten miles across also witnesses, not to the
return of King Arthur the Sun King, but to THE RETURN OF THE LORD
JESUS CHRIST,8 and the Quest for the Holy Graal tells not of a
legendary chalice but of ETERNAL LIFE IN CHRIST JESUS 9 who one
day soon will come again to set up His Kingdom and to RULE this
earth.10
I began by writing of a WELL and a MOUNTAIN, Chalice Well
and Glastonbury Tor. Let me conclude this Chapter with another
Mountain and another Well.
The Bible says, "And it shall come to pass in the last days,
that the MOUNTAIN of the LORD's house shall be established in the
top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and
all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say,
Come ye, and let us go up to the MOUNTAIN OF THE LORD, to the
house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and
we will walk in His paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the
law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And He shall judge
among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall
beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into
pruninghooks : nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
neither shall they learn war any more".11
"And in that day thou shalt say, O LORD, I will praise Thee
though Thou wast angry with me, Thine anger is turned away, and
Thou comfortedst me. Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust,
and not be afraid: for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my
song; He also is become my salvation. Therefore with joy shall ye
draw water out of the WELLS OF SALVATION. And in that day shall
ye say, Praise the LORD, call upon His name, declare His doings
among the people, make mention that His name is exalted. Sing
unto the LORD; for He hath done excellent things: this is known
in all the earth. Cry out and shout, thou inhabitant of Zion: for
great is the Holy One of Israel in the midst of thee".12
Jesus said, "If any man thirst, let him come unto Me, and
drink. He that believeth on Me, as the scripture hath said, out
of his belly shall flow RIVERS OF LIVING WATER".13
"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will
give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the WATER OF
LIFE freely ".14
"And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that
heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And
whosoever will, let him take the WATER OF LIFE freely".15
May you TODAY know the reality of those RIVERS of living
water!
1.Numbers 22:41
2.Matthew 26:27
3.Isaiah 47:13
4.Job 38:31-32
5.Isaiah 19:19-20
6.Psalm 19:1-6
7 Romans 10:16-18
8.Acts 1:11
9.1 John 5:11-12
10.Luke 1:32-33
11.Isaiah 2:2-4
12.Isaiah 12:1-6
13.John 7:37-38
14.Revelation 21:6
15.Revelation 22:17
....................
TO BE CONTINUED
How the Gospel came to Britain #4More revealing Histories by
Brian Williams
ST. PAUL IN BRITAIN
THERE was no greater enemy of the infant Church than Saul of
Tarsus. When, shortly after Pentecost, Stephen had been stoned to
death by the Jews to become the first Christian martyr, "the
witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose
name was Saul ... and Saul was consenting unto his death".1
Consumed by religious zeal and impelled by the same spirit
of which Jesus spoke, "yea, the time cometh, that whosoever
killeth you will think that he doeth God service",2 Saul "made
havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men
and women committed them to prison".3
As he Was later to testify, Saul was "a Jew, born in Tarsus,
a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city [Jerusalem] at the
feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of
the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God ... and I
persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into
prisons both men and women "4
The day came when Saul of Tarsus would go up to Damascus to
extend the field of his activities yet further. "And Saul, yet
breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of
the Lord, went unto the high priest, and desired of him letters
to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this
[Christian] way, whether they were men or women, he might bring
them bound unto Jerusalem".5
So much for Saul's plan, but God had other plans in mind!
"And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there
shined round about him A LIGHT FROM HEAVEN: and he fell to the
earth, and heard a VOICE saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why
persecutest thou Me? And he said, Who art Thou, Lord? And the
Lord said, I AM JESUS WHOM THOU PERSECUTEST: it is hard for thee
to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said,
Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him,
Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou
must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless,
hearing a voice, but seeing no man. And Saul arose from the
earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led
him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus. And he was three
days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink"6
"And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named
Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he
said, Behold, I am here, Lord. And the Lord said unto him, Arise,
and go into the street which is called Straight, and inquire in
the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus" - notice that
the Lord has given Ananias the exact name and address! "for,
behold, he prayeth, and hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias
coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his
sight".7
"Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this
man, how much evil he hath done to Thy saints at Jerusalem and
here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that
call on Thy name. But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way:for he
is a chosen vessel unto Me, to bear My name before the GENTILES,
and KINGS, and the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL for I will shew him how
great things he must suffer for My name's sake"8
"And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and
putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even
Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath
sent me, that thou mightiest receive thy sight, and be filled
with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as
it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose,
and was baptized. And when he had received meat, he was
strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which
were at Damascus. And straightway he preached Christ in the
synagogues, that He is the Son of God"9
There we have the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, the
arch-persecutor of the Church of God, who became Paul, the great
Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ. What a WONDERFUL story this is!
Be sure to read it again from the Bible, and also read the story
in Paul's own words as he told it before the Jews at Jerusalem 10
and before King Agrippa at Caesarea. May we say this. JESUS
CHRIST IS ALIVE. His power is REAL. He still has power to change
men's lives, as He changed this writer's life sixteen years ago
(that would have been 1954, as Williams was writing this book in
1970 - Keith Hunt). If you ever see Jesus, your life will be
changed. If you ever meet the Lord, you will never be the same
again!
Now we read in the Bible of the missionary journeys of Paul
to Ephesus, Philippi, Corinth, Thessalonica, Colosse, Cyprus,
Athens and Malta and the Acts of the Apostles leaves him in Rome.
Paul is always thought of as the 'Apostle to the Gentiles', but
how many people have noticed the commission he received of the
Lord at the commencement of his ministry? Notice what the Lord
told Ananias, "Go thy way: for he [Paul] is a chosen vessel unto
Me, to bear My name before the GENTILES, and KINGS, and the
CHILDREN OF ISRAEL"11
Now we know how Paul fulfilled his commission to the
Gentiles. Paul himself said, "For He that wrought effectually in
Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision [Jews], the same was
mighty in me toward the GENTILES "12 He spoke also of "the grace
that is given to me of God, that I should be the minister of
Jesus Christ to the GENTILES ... to make the GENTILES obedient,
by word and deed, through mighty signs and wonders, by the power
of the Spirit of God ".13
We can see, too, how Paul was used of God to bear Christ's
name before kings. We read of his appearance before Felix 14,
Festus 15, and King Agrippa.16 We know that the Lord assured him,
"Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Caesar"17
But when did Paul minister to the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL? We
know that Paul did preach to the Jews, but as we saw in Chapter
One, when Jesus sent His apostles "to the LOST SHEEP OF THE HOUSE
OF ISRAEL",18 they understood that their ministry was not
confined to the Jews in Palestine, but would take them "unto the
UTTERMOST PART OF THE EARTH".19 And Paul received exactly the
same commission. He was to bear Christ's name before the CHILDREN
OF ISRAEL. Moreover, lest there be any confusion in our minds as
to whether it was the Jews who were thus designated, Paul himself
tells us that it was Peter who was specifically the apostle of
the circumcision [Jews]20 and he, Paul, "strived to preach the
gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon
another man's foundation".21 So, if Paul was specially
commissioned to preach to the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL who were not the
Jews, how and when did he do so, and why does the Bible have
nothing to say about it?
Notice how The Acts of the Apostles ends and bear in mind
that this is the only inspired history we have of the early
Church. "And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house,
and received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of
God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus
Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him".22 There the
record ends. Nothing more is said. There is not so much as
an 'Amen' to conclude the record. We find Paul still preaching
the gospel of the Kingdom, the same Kingdom about which Jesus
taught His apostles and concerning which "they asked of Him,
saying, Lord, wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to
Israel?", the same Kingdom of God which Jesus said would be
"taken from [the Jews], and given to a nation bringing forth the
fruits thereof" - we find Paul still preaching the same message,
and then the Bible record ends abruptly, almost as though the
writer had been cut short lest he give vital information away.
Now there are only three books in the New Testament which
end without an Amen'. They are, as we have just seen, the Acts of
the Apostles, the General Epistle of James, and the Third Epistle
of John. (Check this fact for yourself - don't just accept our
word for it!) This is significant, for we know that "holy men of
God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost",23 and "All
scripture is given by inspiration of God",24 and so even what the
Bible leaves unsaid is of the greatest importance.
The reason that these three books lack an 'Amen ' is that we
might understand that they are incomplete. That is to say, they
are incomplete not in the sense that anything relevant to
personal salvation is concerned, but that they contain unspoken
information which is not immediately apparent but which, if we
are willing for the Holy Spirit to teach us, God Himself will
bring to our understanding. In other words, where a book of the
New Testament ends without an 'Amen', the Lord intends us to
search its pages to seek out the hidden information which He has
reserved for those who will diligently study His Word.
Thus in 3 John we hear of "Diotrephes, who loveth to have
the preeminence among them, [and] receiveth us not ... prating
against us with malicious words: and not content therewith,
neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them
that would, and casteth them out of the church".25 Here, if we
will permit the Holy Spirit to open God's Word unto us, is
evidence of "the mystery of iniquity", which, Paul said, "doth
already work".26 We remember how Paul warned the elders at
Ephesus, "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the
flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to
feed the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own
blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous
wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your
own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw
away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by
the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and
day with tears ".27
So this third epistle of John, short as it is, contains most
vital information which it is essential for us to have if we are
to understand the apparent division of the supposed Church of
God, and the multitudinous sects which we have today. In fact,
the historical protestant denominations have their origin, so far
as organization and doctrine are concerned, in the Church of
Rome, the counterfeit church so clearly revealed in the Bible and
which had begun to be evident in the apostle John's day....
Similarly, James gives us hidden information in his epistle
which significantly is addressed "to the TWELVE TRIBES which are
scattered abroad".28 Later he asks, "From whence come wars and
fightings among you?".29 If we are to take these words literally
(and there is no reason why we should not), we infer that,
wherever the tribes of Israel were, there was war there. The
astonishing fact is that at the time when James wrote his
epistle, about A.D. 60, there was warfare only in Parthia and
Britain!
We do not suggest that this fact alone is conclusive
evidence of the re-appearance of the tribes of Israel in Britain
but it is at least significant. What is important to note is that
James does not state the exact location of the twelve tribes. If
he had done so, the world would have known the identity of God's
Israel people, but His chosen race,30 "His servant nation,"31 had
to be hidden from view, themselves completely unaware of their
destiny, until such time as the veil should be taken away from
their eyes, a day which is fast approaching as Britain learns the
hard way that her present humiliation before the world is the
result of her abandonment of her sacred trust from God.
To return to the Acts of the Apostles. We have noted that
far from telling us the acts of the Twelve Apostles, the book has
very little to say about them. They very early vanish from the
narrative and, as we have already seen, there is much evidence to
prove that some, at least, of the Apostles came to Britain.
Now we suggest that since there is no 'Amen' at the close of
the book of Acts, there must be internal evidence within that
book of an important development in the history of the primitive
Church, and we suggest that it has to do with Paul's apparently
unfulfilled commission to preach the gospel to the children of
Israel. As was the case with the Twelve Apostles, and as was the
case with "the twelve tribes scattered abroad" mentioned by
James, so, we suggest, is the case with Paul. If we knew where
the Twelve Apostles went, and if we knew where Paul eventually
got to, we should know where GOD'S ISRAEL PEOPLE WERE. That
information had to be restricted that the purposes of God
be not frustrated, but now it can be revealed. Notice What the
Lord told Daniel, "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and
seal the book, even to the TIME OF THE END: many shall run to and
fro, and knowledge shall be increased [and] THE WISE SHALL
UNDERSTAND"32
So, what happened to Paul? The Acts of the Apostles ends
like this, "And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired
house, and received all that came in unto him, preaching the
kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord
Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him".33
It is widely believed that Paul was afterwards set free and
that it was at a much later date that he suffered martyrdom in
the city of Rome. Meanwhile, six years of his life are
unaccounted for.
We do know that Paul was intending to visit Spain, for he
wrote to the Christians at Rome, "Whensoever I take my journey
into Spain, I will come to you: for I trust to see you in my
journey ... When therefore I have performed this ... I Will come
by you into Spain".34 Did Paul visit Spain, and did he visit the
British Isles?
Now there is in existence a document known as the 29th
Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. Personally, we do not for
one moment believe this to have been written by Luke, nor do we
accept it as bearing the marks of divine inspiration. The present
writer does not believe that anything needs to be added to the
canon of Scripture as we have it, nor yet anything taken away
from it. The Bible says, "If any man shall add unto these things,
God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of
life".35
This document is interesting, however, inasmuch as it
purports to describe a visit of the apostle Paul to Britain. The
document, called the "Sonnini Manuscript" is supposedly the
translation of an original Greek manuscript said to have been
found in the archives of Constantinople. There is some question
as to the authenticity of this document, but whoever its writer
was, he was at least familiar with the tradition that Paul came
to London. (see this chapter reproduced for you on this Website -
Keith Hunt).
Certainly the first fourteen verses of this "Long Lost
Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles" are most striking. Mount Lud
is, of course, the site of St.Paul's Cathedral and has indeed
been the place where people from many nations have worshipped the
Lord. "The seventh numbering of the people "could refer to the
seventh National Census which was taken in 1861 and it is
certainly true that from about that time the scriptural identity
of the British people began to be understood. (Write for Our FREE
book "Britain in Prophecy" - reproduced for you on this Website -
Keith Hunt)
The tradition Paul came to Britain is a strong one. He is
said to have preached from the summit of Ludgate Hill where St.
Paul's Cathedral now stands. The ancient St.Paul's Cross is said
to mark the spot where the apostle stood as he preached the
gospel. The reputed presence of Paul in London is said to account
for his having been made patron saint of that city. Today, his
emblem, the sword of martyrdom, is incorporated in the Coat of
Arms of the City of London. Why, if Paul was never here?
Quite apart from these centuries-old traditions, we have
abundant evidence in ancient writings of Paul's visit to Britain.
It is specifically stated that he came here by Theodoret, Bishop
of Cyprus, writing about A.D. 435
"Paul, liberated from his first captivity at Rome, preached
the gospel to the Britons and others in the West. Our fishermen
and publicans not only persuaded the Romans and their tributaries
to acknowledge the Crucified and His laws, but the Britons. also
and the Cymry" (De Civ. Graec. Off., lib. ix).
In his commentary on 2 Timothy 4: 16, the same writer says,
"When Paul was sent by Festus on his appeal to Rome, he
travelled, after being acquitted, into Spain, and thence extended
his excursions into other countries, and to the islands
surrounded by the sea".
Then Clement of Rome (A.D.30-100) who is mentioned 36 by
Paul in his epistle to the Philippians and is said to have been
third Bishop of Rome - Linus was first and Anacletus second -
also implies that the apostle visited Britain
"But not to insist upon ancient examples, let us come to
those worthies that have been nearest to us; and take the brave
examples of our own age. Through zeal and envy, the most faithful
and righteous pillars of the church have been persecuted even to
the most grievous deaths. Let us set before our eyes the holy
Apostles; Peter by unjust envy underwent not one or two, but many
sufferings; till at last being martyred, he went to the place of
glory that was due unto him. For the same cause did Paul in like
manner receive the reward of his patience. Seven times he was in
bonds; he preached both in the East and in the West; leaving
behind him the glorious report of his faith: and so having taught
the whole world righteousness, and for that end travelled even to
the utmost bounds of the West; he at last suffered martyrdom by
the command of the governors, and departed out of the world, and
went unto his holy place, being become a most eminent pattern of
patience unto all ages" (1 Clement 3:10-15).
Notice that Clement speaks of Paul having taken the gospel
to the utmost bounds of the West, clearly implying the British
Isles.
There can be no reasonable doubt that Paul visited and
preached in Britain. Such is the testimony of Irenaeus (A.D.
125-189), Tertullian (155-222) and Origen (185-254), of Mello in
256, Eusebius in 315 and Athanasius in 353. The records of the
Roman, Eastern, Gallic and Spanish Churches all confirm that Paul
preached in Britain, and Capellus in his History of the Apostles
sums it up by saying,
"I scarcely know of one author, from the times of the
Fathers downwards, who does not maintain that St.Paul, after his
liberation, preached in every country in Western Europe, Britain
included".
We conclude this Chapter with a remarkable report which
was published in the Morning Post, 27th March, 1931.
"The mayors of Bath, Colchester and Dorchester, and 150
visiting members of the Friends of Italy Society were received
today in special audience by the Pope, Pius XI. His Holiness, in
a specially prepared address, advanced the theory that it was St.
Paul himself and not Pope Gregory who first introduced
Christianity into Britain".
That a Pope of Rome should in recent times concede that Paul
brought the gospel here and that the Church in this land must
therefore be of Apostolic and not of Roman origin is remarkable
indeed. But we believe that claim to be absolutely TRUE! It is
the conclusion that the Bible leads us to, and history confirms
it.
In the next Chapter we shall show the remarkable
circumstances behind Paul's visit to Britain and how the British
Royal Family embraced the faith of Christ.
1.Acts 7:58; 8:1 - 2.John 16:2 - 3.Acts 8:3 - 4.Acts 22:3-4
5.Acts 9:1-2 - 6.Acts 9:3-9 - 7.Acts 9:10-12 - 8.Acts - 9:13-16
9.Acts 9: 17-20 - 10.Acts 22:1-21 - 11.Acts 9:15
12.Galatians 2:8 - 13.Romans 15:15-19 - 14.Acts 24:1-27
15.Acts 25:1-27 - 16.Acts 26:1-32 - 17.Acts 27:24 - 18.Matthew
10:6 - 19.Acts 1:8 - 20.Galatians 2:7-8 - 21.Romans 15:20
22.Acts 28:30-31 - 23.2 Peter 1:21 - 24.2 Timothy 3:16
25.3 John 9-10 - 26.2 Thessalonians 2:7 - 27.Acts 20:28-31
28.James 1:1 - 29.James 4:1 - 30.Deuteronomy 7:6 - 31.Isaiah 41:8
32.Daniel 12:4,10 - 33.Acts 28:30-31 - 34.Romans 15:24-28
35.Revelation 22:18-19 - 36.Philippians 4:3
CHAPTER SIX
THE BRITISH ROYAL FAMILY AT ROME
THE circumstances of Paul's coming to Britain present a most
wonderful and dramatic story, and throw light upon an era in
early British history about which comparatively little is
understood today.
At the time of Christ, the Roman Empire had reached the
zenith of its power. It occupied the whole of Europe, Northern
Africa and Asia. However, Britain remained undefeated. Julius
Caesar had, it is true, carried out a reconnaissance raid in
August, 55 B.C., and had stayed two weeks, and had attempted an
invasion in July of the following year, this time staying for two
months. Five small tribes in Kent had promised submission,
hostages had been taken, and the Trinovantes had, out of fear of
their neighbours the Catuvellauni, become allies of Rome. But
that was all. Britain was left alone for almost a century.
Then in A.D. 43,i.e., ten years after the Crucifixion and only
six years after the coming of Joseph of Arimathaea, Claudius the
Roman Emperor launched a full-scale invasion of Britain, des-
patching four legions, the II Augusta, IX Hispana, XIV Gemina and
XX Valeria Victrix - some 25,000 men in all - under the command
of Aulus Plautius. The map facing page 37 shows the tribes of
Britain at about this time (not reproduced here - Keith Hunt).
This was the commencement of a bloody and protracted war in
which the might of Rome was completely unable to subdue the
stubborn British people. The British forces led by Caradoc, King
of the Silures, put up an indomitable resistance for more than
seven years. Caradoc, better known as Caratacus, was the son of
Bran the Blessed, and grandson of King Lear. He is usually
described as the son of Cunobelinus, confusion having arisen out
of the fact that following the death of Cunobelinus it was
Caratacus who became military leader of the British tribes.
Then in A.D.51, Caratacus was defeated in North Wales and
fled to the North where, presumably, he intended to rally the
support of the Brigantes. But their Queen, Cartimandua, had
entered into a treaty with Rome, Caratacus was handed over, and
he and his wife, his daughter Gladys and his father Bran, were
taken captive to Rome.
It was the Roman custom to put their defeated enemies to
death, but such was the fame and renown of Caradoc that he was
received in Rome like a hero and was permitted to speak in his
own defence before the Emperor Claudius and assembled Senate, His
great oration has been preserved for us in Tacitus' Annals. "Had
my government in Britain been directed solely with a view to the
preservation of my hereditary domains, or the aggrandizement of
my own family, I might long since have entered this city an ally,
not a prisoner; nor would you have disdained for a friend a king
descended from illustrious ancestors, and the dictator of many
nations. My present condition, stript of its former majesty, is
as adverse to myself as it is a cause of triumph to you. What
then? I was lord of men, horses, arms, wealth: what wonder if at
your dictation I refused to resign them? Does it follow, that
because the Romans aspire to universal dominion, every nation is
to accept the vassalage they would impose? I am now in your power
- betrayed, not conquered. Had I, like others, yielded without
resistance, where would have been the name of Caradoc? Where your
glory? Oblivion would have buried both in the same tomb. Bid me
live, I shall survive for ever in history one example at least of
Roman clemency".
So Caradoc and his family were not only spared but were
permitted to make their home in Rome, though not being allowed
for the time being to return to Britain. We shall return to
Caradoc in a moment.
Meanwhile the war in Britain continued unabated. A new
offensive was launched in Wales having as its objective the
destruction of the Druids' stronghold on Mona (Anglesey). The
Druids were fiercely nationalistic, a unifying force amongst the
tribes of Britain, and regarded by Rome as a dangerous subversive
movement. They were ruthlessly massacred and their groves
destroyed.
While the legions were still in North Wales the British
tribes revolted. This was in the year A.D.60 when we hear for the
first time of the famous Queen Boudicca, better known (though in
correctly) as Boadicea. Her husband Prasutagus, King of the
Iceni, had died leaving his considerable wealth to Nero (who had
succeeded Claudius as Emperor) and to his own daughters,
evidently intending to secure their protection. However, the
Roman procurator Catus Decianus confiscated the estate and began
to seize the property of the nobles. Boadicea was flogged and her
daughters raped.
The Iceni, hitherto the most submissive of the British
tribes, revolted. So did the Trinovantes, their neighbours and
former enemies, who had been suffering under the heavy burden of
taxation for the maintenance of the Temple at Camulodunum
(Colchester) where the Emperor Was worshipped. Boadicea found
herself at the head of a great army, perhaps 100,000 strong,
nearly all the Britons within reach rallying to her support. We
are reminded of Deborah who also led an army into battle in Bible
days.1
Camulodunum was laid waste. So too were Londinium (London)
and Verulamium (St.Albans). Nothing and no one connected with the
hated Roman power was spared, and recent excavations have
disclosed in these cities a layer of ash giving some idea of the
extent of the destruction that took place. However, the might and
skill of Roman arms eventually triumphed. The British were
defeated, and Boadicea, rather than fall into enemy hands,
committed suicide (well she was defeated in a certain battle only
- Keith Hunt).
We feel sure that this brief mention of the illustrious
British Queen will be of interest to our readers. There is a
magnificent statue of Boadicea on Westminster Bridge, London, and
she exemplifies the spirit of Christian Britannia, defying the
powers of evil, as portrayed on our coins even today.
But we must return to Caradoc, or as he was now known,
Caractacus, living in exile in Rome with his family. His daughter
Gladys would have been about seven years of age at the time of
their being taken to Rome and we understand that the Emperor
Claudia adopted her into his household, giving her the name
Claudia. Claudis eventually married a noble Roman senator whose
name was Refus Pudens, married a noble Roman senator whose name
was Rufus Pudens.
This is especially interesting because Rufus was the friend
of the poet Martial in whose Epigrams he features. One of them
says, "Claudia, the fair one from a foreign shore, is with my
Pudens joined in wedlock's band" (iv,32), and another, "Our
Claudia, named Ruffina, sprung we know from blue-eyed Britons "
(xi,40).
It is, we believe, this Rufus Pudens whom Paul greets in his
letter to the Romans where he says, "Salute Rufus chosen in the
Lord, and his mother and mine".2 This almost suggests that Rufus
and Paul might have had the same mother (though not the same
father), that is to say they could have been half-brothers. It is
certain that no one could claim to have been Paul's mother in the
spiritual sense. As we have already seen, there was no human
agency in Paul's conversion, nor did he have a human teacher.3
So far we have the interesting circumstances of how the
British Royal Family was exiled in Rome. But the astonishing
thing is that PAUL WAS AT ROME AT THE SAME TIME! Notice it in
your Bible, the last two verses of Acts of the Apostles, "And
Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and
received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God,
and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ,
with all confidence, no man forbidding him".4
How remarkable this is. As Paul himself remarked on another
occasion, "How unsearchable are His judgments, and his ways past
finding out! For who path known the mind of the Lord? or
who hath been His counsellor?"5 Here is Paul, the great apostle,
a prisoner in Rome, and here is Caratacus, King of Silurian, also
a prisoner in the same city. Paul, with a commission as yet
unfulfilled to take the gospel to the children of Israel,6 and
Caratacus, a British King whose life has been miraculously spared
waiting in due course to return to Britain!
Here we have the most wonderful illustration of one of the
greatest truths of the Christian life. "And we know that ALL
THINGS WORK TOGETHER FOR GOOD to them that love God, to them who
are the called according to His purpose".7 If it seemed a sad
restriction on Paul for him to be imprisoned at Rome, and a
tragedy for Caradoc for him to have been betrayed in Britain, yet
a purpose was being worked out through it all, the legacy of
which remains to this day.
Now we know from the Bible that although a prisoner at Rome,
yet Paul enjoyed a measure of freedom. He "dwelt two whole years
in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him ".
Similarly, Caradoc and his family lived in the Palatum
Britannicum or British Palace, now known as St.Pudentiana. In
much later years Pudens and his four children, Timotheus,
Novatus, Pudentiana and Prassedis, were all to suffer martyrdom;
Claudia predeceased them, possibly martyred too.
Now it is surely without question that Caradoc, coming from
Britain which had received the gospel only a few years under
Joseph of Arimatthaea, would be anxious to hear the gospel from
the apostle himself. Would the British King and the famed apostle
have become intimately acquainted? And did not the Lord say of
Paul, "He is a chosen vessel unto Me, to bear My name before the
Gentiles, and KINGS, and the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL"?8 Was not
Caratacus a KING and were not his people of ISRAEL stock?
Notice the letter Paul wrote from Rome when he sends
greetings to Timothy, "Do thy diligence to come before winter.
EUBULUS greeteth thee, and PUDENS, and LINUS, and CLAUDIA, and
all the brethren" 9 We said in Chapter Two that the Church met in
the house. The Pudens, Linus and Claudia mentioned here could be
no other than the son-in-law, son and daughter of Caratacus, and
"all the brethren" other Christians meeting in the same house.
Thus, if they were not already converted, the British Royal
Family embraced the faith of Christ while yet at Rome.
This, we believe, is the background to Paul's visit to
Britain. That such a visit was made seems irrefutable: we quoted
some of the historical evidence in the last Chapter. Notice again
Theodoret's testimony, about A.D. 435:
"Paul, liberated from his first captivity at Rome, preached
the gospel to the Britons and others in the West. Our fishermen
and publicans not only persuaded the Romans and their tributaries
to acknowledge the Crucified and His laws, but the Britons also
and the Cymry" (De Civ. Graec. Off., lib. ix).
Then notice what Alford says in his "Regia Fides":
"It is perfectly certain that before St.Paul had come to Rome,
Aristobulus was absent in Britain, and it is confessed by all
that Claudia was a British lady" (Volume I, page 83).
Who was Aristobulus? He is mentioned by Paul in his Epistle
to the Romans, written from Corinth about A.D.60. Paul says,
"Salute Apelles approved in Christ. Salute them which are of
Aristobulus' household". 10 Clearly Aristobulus was absent from
Rome at that time, and the earliest writers indicate that he came
to Britain and was martyred here.
Dorotheus, writing about A.D. 303, says:
"Aristobulus, who is mentioned by the Apostle in his Epistle to
the Romans, was made bishop in Britain".
Haleca, Bishop of Augusta, says:
"The memory of many martyrs is celebrated by the Britons,
especially that of St.Aristobulus, one of the seventy disciples".
The Martyrologia of Adonis tells us under 17th March:
"Natal day of Aristobulus, Bishop of Britain, brother of St.
Barnabas the Apostle, by whom he was ordained bishop. He was sent
to Britain where, after preaching the truth of Christ and forming
a Church, he received martyrdom ".
The Martyrologies of the Greek Churches inform us under
15th March:
"Aristobulus was one of the seventy disciples and a follower of
St.Paul the Apostle, along with whom he preached the Gospel to
the whole world and ministered to him. He was chosen by St.Paul
to be missionary bishop to the land of Britain, inhabited by a
very warlike and fierce race. By them he was often scourged and
repeatedly dragged as a criminal through their towns, yet he
converted many of them to Christianity. He was there martyred
after he had built churches and ordained deacons and priests for
the island".
Then, according to the Genealogies of the Saints of Britain,
"These came with Bran the Blessed from Rome to Britain-Arwystli
Hen (Senex) [i.e. Aristobulus the Aged], Ilid, Cyndaw, men of
Israel; Maw, or Manaw, son of Arwystli Hen ".
Thus it was that the apostle Paul came to Britain. The way
was opened up through the auspices of the British Royal Family at
Rome. Though Caradoc was compelled to remain is Rome until the
expiration of his seven years detention, his family were free to
return whenever they wished. The Welsh Triads tell us that Bran,
the father of Caradoc, after being baptised in Rome, returned to
Britain and thereafter fostered the Church in Silurian (South
Wales). Bran was accompanied by Aristobulus.
And so twice within the quarter century following the
Crucifixion, the gospel was carried to Britain and received Royal
patronage. Joseph's mission to Glastonbury was fostered by King
Arviragus, and Paul's mission to the Silures was sponsored by
Caradoc. And so, in ministering to the people of these islands,
the final part of Paul's commission "to bear My name before the
Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel" was fulfilled.
The British Church has always been a royal one. Its first
converts were members of the British Royal Family. Its nominal
head has always been the reigning Sovereign, and today as head of
Church and State, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II sits upon the
Throne of David 11 established over God's Israel people in these
British Isles. How MARVELLOUSLY God's Word has been fulfilled.
"Listen, O ISLES, unto Me ... Thou art My servant, O ISRAEL,
in whom I will be glorified ... It is a light thing that thou
shouldest be My servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to
restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a
light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be My salvation unto THE
END OF THE EARTH".12 "KINGS shall see and arise, PRINCES also
shall worship ... Behold, these shall come from far: and, lo,
these from the NORTH and from the WEST ".13 "And KINGS shall be
thy nursing fathers, and their QUEENS thy nursing mothers".14
"Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD
is risen upon thee ... and the Gentiles shall come to thy light,
and KINGS to the brightness of thy rising ... Thy sons shall come
from far, and thy daughters shall be nursed at thy side".15 "And
the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their KINGS
shall minister unto thee", 16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of
the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of KINGS".17
"And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that
escape of them unto the nations ... to the ISLES AFAR OFF ... and
they shall declare My glory among the Gentiles".18
"Thy people also shall be all righteous: they shall inherit the
land for ever, the branch of My planting, the work of My hands,
that I may be glorified. A little one shall become a thousand,
and a small one a strong nation: I the LORD will hasten it in his
time".19
1.Judges 4:4-24 - 2.Romans 16:13 - 3.Galatians 1:11-12
4.Acts 28:30-31 - 5.Romans 11:33-34 - 6.Acts 9:15
7.Romans 8:28 - 8.Acts 9:15 - 9.2 Timothy 4:21 - 10.Romans 16:10
11.Jeremiah 33:17 - 12.Isaiah 49:1-6 - 13.Isaiah 49:7-12
14.Isaiah 49:23 - 15.Isaiah 60:1-4 - 16.Isaiah 60:10
17.Isaiah 60:16 - 18.Isaiah 66:19 - 19.Isaiah 60:21-22
...............
TO BE CONTINUED
How the Gospel came to Briatin #5Some clear historical records by
Brian Williams
of Britain (1970)
THE EARLY CHURCH IN BRITAIN
PERHAPS this is a good point to sum up what we have learned
so far. We have shown that the Twelve Apostles were commissioned
to preach the gospel of the Kingdom,1 to the lost sheep of the
house of Israel,2 and we have seen that their commission took
them "unto the uttermost part of the earth",3 to the British
Isles. We have seen that Paul himself with a similar commission
"to bear [Christ's] name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the
children of Israel",4 also came "to the utmost bounds of the
West".5 We have shown that even before these arrived in Britain,
Joseph of Arimathaea had been sent here by the Apostle Philip,
and that twice within the first quarter century after the
Resurrection the faith of Christ had received Royal patronage in
these islands. We have shown also that while there was a true
company of God's people in Rome to whom Paul wrote,6 there was
also in that city a counterfeit church which has come down to us
today as the Roman Catholic Church.
Some years ago the B.B.C. in a schools' broadcast
stated that St.Augustine was the first person to introduce
Christianity to Britain in A.D.597. Augustine was sent to Britain
by Pope Gregory I, and so it has become a matter of general
belief that Britain was always Roman Catholic until the time of
the Reformation. However, NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE
TRUTH.
Britain was the FIRST of all peoples NATIONALLY to embrace
the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ. The national conversion of
Britain to Christianity may perhaps be attributed to King Lucius.
We do NOT suggest that the PURE faith was widely maintained
in the centuries that followed. Jesus said, "Fear not, little
flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the
kingdom",7 and Paul warned that "after my departing shall
grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock".8
It has always been the REMNANT within the 'Church' which has
sought to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once
delivered unto the saints"9
Nevertheless, Britain had become a Christian nation LONG
before Augustine reached these shores, and in fact, long before
there was a 'pope' in Rome. (The bishops of Rome were never
styled 'popes ' until the sixth century).
When Augustine landed on these shores he was met by
bishops of the British Church who told him:
"Be it known and declared that we all, individually and
collectively, are in all humility prepared to defer to the Church
of God, and to the Bishop of Rome, and to every sincere and godly
Christian, so far as to love every one according to his degree,
in perfect charity, and to assist them all by word and in deed in
becoming the children of God. But as for any other obedience, we
know of none that he, whom you term Pope, or Bishop of Bishops,
can demand. The deference we have mentioned we are ready to pay
to him as to every other Christian, but in all other respects our
obedience is due to the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Caerleon,
who is alone under God our ruler to keep us right in the way of
salvation" (Spelman, Concilia, pp.108-9).
We may well ask, if Augustine introduced Christianity to
these islands, who were these bishops by whom he was met? The
fact is, the gospel had been preached in this land for
five-and-a-half centuries already. There was a flourishing Church
in Britain; indeed hundreds if not thousands of British
Christians were martyred during the Diocletian persecution when
the Roman Emperor determined to exterminate Christianity. Today,
the City of St.Albans is named after the best-known martyr of
that period.
Gildas (516-570), the noted historian, tells us:
"There were martyred in Britain, Stephen and Argulius, both
Bishops of London; Socrates, Bishop of York; Amphibalus, Bishop
of Llandaff; Nicholas, Bishop of Penrhyn; Melior, Bishop of
Carlisle; St.Alban; Julius and Aaron, priests of Caerleon; and
889 communicants in different grades of society" (De Excidio
Britanniae, Sec.10, p.10).
So there was a British Church at that time, but it was not
Roman Catholic!
The word 'catholic' means simply universal. The Church in
this land was 'catholic' in-as-much as it embraced the universal
faith of the gospel. That faith has its origin in the New
Testament Scriptures and not in Rome. The Church in Britain could
also claim to be 'apostolic', i.e. it was founded by the original
Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ. It can, in fact lay far more
claim to being truly apostolic than can the Roman Catholic Church
which, as we explained, was not founded by Peter but by an
imposter masquerading as the apostle of Christ.
Then today the Church of England is also described as
'protestant,' i.e. it is opposed to the claims of the Pope and
protests against them. However, protestantism is no mere nega-
tive belief but a positive assertion that the Scriptures contain
all that is requisite for salvation, that "by grace are ye saved
through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
not of works, lest any man should boast ".10
Unhappily, we are living in days of deepening apostasy so
that many of these distinctions have been deliberately ignored,
and the very truths for which men gave their lives are being
compromised and treated with contempt.
We mentioned the Diocletian persecution in which so many
died, but the Church has always thrived in persecution: the blood
of the martyrs has ever been the seed of the Church. Within ten
years the British Church was sufficiently flourishing as to send
three bishops, Eborius of York, Restitutus of London, and
Adelfius of Caerleon, to the Council of Arles, convened in A.D.
314 by the Emperor Constantine. British bishops were also present
at the Council of Nicaea in 325 (when the Nicene Creed was
formulated), at the Council of Sardica in 347, and the Council of
Ariminium in 359.
Now notice the testimony of the greatest Church historians
of early days.
Tertullian(155-222) informs us:
"The extremities of Spain, the various parts of Gaul,the regions
of Britain which have never been penetrated by Roman arms have
received the religion of Christ" (Tertullian Def. Fidei, p.179).
Eusebius (265-340), the Church's first great historian,
says:
"The Apostles passed beyond the ocean to the isles called the
Britannic Isles" (De Demonstratione Evangelii, Lib.111).
Chrysostom (347-407), who was the Patriarch of
Constantinople, tell us:
"Though thou shouldest go to the ocean to the British Isles,
there thou shouldest hear all men everywhere discoursing matters
out of the Scriptures with another voice, but not another faith,
with a different tongue but the same judgment" (Chrysostomi Orat.
O Theos Xristos).
Gildas (516-570), whom we have already quoted, writes:
"Christ, the True Sun, afforded His light, the knowledge of His
precepts, to our island during the height of [or, the last year
of] the reign of Tiberius Caesar" (De Excidio Britanniae, Sec. 8,
p.25).
Tiberius Caesar died in A.D.37, and, as we have shown in
Chapter Two ... in this year that Joseph of Arimathaea came to
Britain.
Theodoret; writing in A.D.435 Says:
"Paul, liberated from his first captivity at Rome, preached the
Gospel to the Britons and others in the West. Our fishermen and
publicans not only persuaded the Romans and their tributaries to
acknowledge the Crucified and His laws, but the Britons also and
the Cymry" (De Civ. Graec. Off., lib. ix).
Bede (670-735) in his "Eclesiastical History of the English
Nation," tells us:
"The Britons preserved the faith which they had received,
uncorrupted and entire, in peace and tranquility until the time
of the Emperor Diocletian" (J.M.Dent Everyman's Edn., p.9).
Bede was, of course, a Roman Catholic, and he has given us a
most telling account of the faith of the Church in Britain at the
coming of Augustine:
"For they did not keep EASTER Sunday at the proper time, but from
the FOURTEENTH to the TWENTIETH moon; which computation is
contained in a revolution of eighty-four years. Besides, they did
several other things which were against the unity of the Church .
... After a long disputation, they did not comply with the
entreaties, exhortations, or rebukes of Augustine and his
companions, but preferred their own traditions before all the
churches in the world ... They could not depart from their
ancient customs without the consent and leave of their people"
(J.M.Dent, Everyman's Edn., pp,65-66).
This testimony is most important, since it shows us
again that the Church had been in existence in Britain long the
coming of Augustine in 597, and also because it reveals the
British Churches' refusal to accept the rule of Rome. The Church
of this nation would from its earliest days have observed the
Passover on the fourteenth day of the month, in common with
Eastern Church. The Roman Catholic 'Easter' which was later
introduced had its origin in paganism.
Thus the evidence is irrefutable, The Church in Britain
ante-dates the coming of Augustine by more than five-and-a-half
centuries. Moreover, it is only in comparatively recent times
that the great antiquity of the British Church seems to have been
lost sight of. The primacy of the Church in Britain was taken for
granted until the matter was raised by ambassadors of France and
Spain in 1409, and then at four successive Church Councils, Pisa
1409, Constance 1417, Sienna 1424 and Basle 1434, the French and
Spanish churches conceded that they must yield precedence to the
British.
Archbishop Ussher(1581-1656) informs us that the basis of
the British claim was the burial of Joseph of Arimathaea at
Glastonbury, and the donation by Arviragus of the twelve hides of
land. Ussher, who is best remembered for his system of Bible
Chronology incorporated in the margin of many Bibles even today,
tells us:
"The Mother Church of the British Isles is the Church in Insula
Avalonia, called by the Saxons 'Glaston'".
Robert Parsons, the Jesuit, states in his "Three Conversions of
England":
"Christian religion began in Britain within fifty years of
Christ's Ascension".
Polydore Virgil (1470-1555), Archbishop of Wells, who was from a
literary family, was steeped in English history, and had special
access to sources of the Glastonbury tradition, tells us:
"Britain, partly through Joseph of Arimathaea, partly through
Fugatus and Damianus [Fagan and Dyfan], was of all kingdoms the
first that received the Gospel".
Sir Henry Spelman in his 'Cancilia,' wrote:
"It is certain that Britain received the faith in the first age
from the first sowers of the Word. Of all the churches whose
origin I have investigated in Britain, the Church of Glastonbury
is the most ancient ... we have abundant evidence that this
Britain of ours received the faith and that from the disciples of
Christ Himself, soon after the Crucifixion of Christ".
Cardinal Pole said:
"The See Apostolic [Rome] from whence I come hath a special
respect to this realm above all others, and not without cause,
seeing that God Himself, as it were, by providence hath given to
this realm prerogative of nobility above all others, which to
make plain unto you, it is to be considered that this island
first of all islands received the light of Christ's religion".
The occasion of this speech was the Assembly of the Lords
and Commons before Philip and Mary in Whitehall for the Act of
Reconciliation, the acceptance by the British Church of the Pope
of Rome. In a speech made the following day at Westminster Abbey,
Cardinal Pole said:
"Once again God hath given a token of His special favour to the
Realm, for as this nation in the time of the primitive Church was
the first to be called out of the darkness of heathenism, so now
they are the first to whom God has given grace to repent of their
schism".
Having then established the fact that the Church in Britain
can lay claim to apostolic foundation, 11 and does not owe its
origin to Augustine, it will be profitable for us to say a few
words about the native Church in the earliest centuries.
During the first three centuries of the Christian era there
were bands of Christians in various parts of Ireland. However, it
is to Patrick that the conversion of Ireland is usually
attributed.
The centuries have obliterated every clue as to the
birthplace of Patrick, but it seems likely that he was born in
Western Britain, a Roman citizen of Christian parentage. The date
may have been 385. When he was about 16 years of age he and his
family were taken captive to Ireland by raiders who came in from
the sea. After seven years he escaped to Britain but later
returned as Bishop of Ireland in 432. Patrick now evangelised the
whole of Ireland, and from schools founded by him, missionaries
took the light of the gospel to every part of Europe. Patrick
died on 17th March, 461.
It was from Ireland that Columba passed into Scotland.
Columba was born in Ireland on 7th December, 521. He was of
royal parentage, his father being a member of the reigning house
in Ireland, descendants of Niall of the Nine Hostages, the king
who was reigning in Ireland at the time when Patrick had been
brought from Britain as a slave. His mother Eithne belonged to
the royal house of Leinster. Thus Columba might well have been
King of Ireland had not divine providence decreed otherwise.
In circumstances which need not concern us here, Columba
left Ireland in May, 563, and came to Iona, the tiny island off
the Atlantic coast of Scotland. From here he converted almost the
whole of Scotland, and missionaries were sent forth into the
north of England and much of Europe. The number of churches which
Columba founded in Scotland alone is variously estimated at from
53 to more than 300. He died in 597, the very same year that
Augustine arrived in Britain.
Here we should explain that during the fifth and sixth
centuries, Britain had been invaded by pagan Jutes, Saxons and
Angles - all Israelite people nonetheless - with the result that
the native British Church had been driven into the West and
North. It was now the Celtic Church, the legacy of such as
Patrick and Columba, which was destined to rekindle the light of
Christ, and not the Augustinian mission which met with little
success outside of Kent.
Oswald, King of Northumbria had become a Christian during a
period of exile on the island of Iona. Aidan was now sent from
Iona to aid Oswald in the conversion of his people, and estab-
lished himself on the island of Lindisfarne which now became a
wellspring of Christianity in the North. Aidan has been called
the apostle of the English.
Thus it was the Celtic Church which was responsible for the
evangelisation of these islands, becoming the lantern of the
West, and sending forth missionaries all over Europe. During the
seventh century Iona was at the height of its fame.
It was during this century however, that Roman influence,
first introduced by Augustine (who had died in 604) began to make
itself felt. As we have seen from the statements of Bede already
quoted, there was marked resentment on the part of the British
Church to the encroachment of Rome. In 664. a Synod was convoked
at Whitby, presided over by Oswy, King of Northumbria, for the
purpose of settling the date of Easter. This ended with the
defeat and resignation of Colman, Bishop of Northumbria. Roman
usage was accepted on three points, and the Church now moved
towards Rome, thus paving the way for that complete domination
which lasted until the middle of the sixteenth century.
The native Church, both British and Celtic, which until this
time had been distinguished for its piety and evangelistic zeal,
now began to acquire centralised control, and a unified system of
Church Government was established under Theodore of Tarsus who
became the first Archbishop of Canterbury in 667. But this
usurpation by Rome was long resented, and four centuries later we
find William, the Norman Conqueror of England, refusing to
acknowledge the claims of the Pope, "Fealty I have never willed
to do, nor will I do it now. I have never promised it, nor do I
find that my predecessors did it to yours".
We have told but a little of the wonderful story of the
early Church in Britain. From its earliest days it has been bound
up with the origin, the growth and the development of the nation.
The rival kingdoms existing in these Isles at the time of
Christ - were brought into spiritual and national unity. The
pagan Jutes, Saxons and Angles became peace-loving and civilised.
And in the centuries which followed, it was the Church which
established schools where children might be taught, and hospitals
and alms-houses where the sick and aged might be cared for. It
covered the land with cathedrals and churches of unexampled
beauty. It translated the Scriptures which are able to make men
"wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus".12
It made the Bible an open book, and taught successive
generations the knowledge and love of God. Thus it was the Church
which became the strongest element in the formation of the
national character. The respect for authority, the concept of
service, the love of freedom - ideals which were to become
Britain's greatest contribution to the world - were fostered by
the Church.
But this moulding of the national character, the preparation
of the British people for a role in which they were destined to
bless the world, could never have taken place unless the faith
which was planted here in Bible days had been preserved
continuously all down the centuries. This island home of ours can
truly claim that its Church was founded by the Apostles, that it
recognises the Scriptures as its sole rule of faith and doctrine,
and that it is subject to no other Church on earth. Moreover, it
has reason to believe that the Saviour of the world Himself
visited the place of its foundation. This shall be the subject of
our next Chapter.
1.Matthew 4:23
2.Matthew 10:6
3.Acts 1:8
4 Acts 9:15
5 1 Clement 3:14
6.Romans 1:7
7 Luke 12:32
8.8.Acts 20:29
9.Jude 3
10.Ephesians 2:8-9
11.Ephesians 2:20
12.2 Timothy 3:15
.................
TO BE CONTINUED
You will find more histories of the British or Culdee church on
this Website as recorded in the book "Celt, Druid, and Culdee" by
Elder - Keith Hunt
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment