North Carolina Newspapers

I * M PUBLISHED WEEKLY. m A Religtm* and Miscellaneous Newspaper, devoted to Religion, Morality, Literature, General Intelligence, and the support of'the Principles of the Christian Church. “THE LORD GOD IS A Still AND SHIELD/ ..... ,,i.-..■:.—4— ■.t"'" >1:50 PER ANNUM, IN ADVANCE. VOLUME IX. RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA. SEPTEMBER 1, 1852. NUMBER 35. ^ CHURCH HISTORY, BY N. 8UMMERBELL. (Continued.) . i — A. D. 482. The British Christians, who opposed Pelagias, little versed in these things, applied to Gaul for assistance, and finally obtained it from Rome. St. Germ anus was sent, whose argument was found on a miracle—be opening the eyes of a blind girl by laying a box of relics which he always carried, about him on her eyes, while invoking the Trinity, her eyes were opened, (Reeves, 168,) and the British ministers were thus confuted.. A. D. 696, England Convrbtkd to Popeby. The Catholics, and many Protestants also data the introduc tion of Christianity in the latter part of the sixth, and the be ginning of the seventh century, and the patron St. of England, 8t. George, (notorious as the red cross,) was Gregory the Pope the 7th, who sent Austin, prior of a monastery and forty Monks to convert England A. D. 696. A. D. 60. Ancient Christian* of England. “Christianity had obtained early and perhaps general reception in Britain, when it was suddenly swept away by the Saxons.”—-Wadding ton, 188. Waddington is incorrect in the above sentence, as farther shown below: , A. D. 446. “A number of Britons having been expelled from their country by the arms of the Anglo-Saxons A. D. 446, crossed the sea, Slid settled in the adjacent parts of France. Hence the origin of tho French province of Britanny. With them the faith of the Gospel was preserved, as well as with their brethren in Wales and Cornwall, and some parts of Scot land and Ireland, while the imtfor part of England was covered with Saxon idolatry.”—Milner, 1: 496. Sampson, Dol, Heltat, Malo, Gildas, and other preachers and Bishops are celebrated. Giljlar'was born at Dumbarton, in ^Scotland—he preached with much success. Two of his dis courses on the ruin)kf fireat Britain are still extant, in which be deplores the vices and calamities of the times—ascribes the desolations made by the Saxons, to the depravity of his coun trymen, and with honest vehemence exhorts six British princes o repentance.” Of what we are.certain “from these hints, J>ese things ore evident; viz: that there had been a considera ble degree of pure religion-among the Britons, before the inva Ision of the Saxons; that after the declension and decayfthere were still faithful Pastors.”—-Milner, 1: 497. A. D. 600. Arrival of the Roman Monks. “In the year 600,” #ays Le Bas, “Ethelbert was apprised of the arrival in his dominions, of certain strangers, habited in a foreign garb, and practising several strange and mysterious ceremonies. “They bore,” says Bede, “a silver cross by way of a stan dard ; and a representation of our Lord painted on a board, at the same time singing litanies.—Lib., 1: 25. Bede further re cords that seven Bishops of the Britons and many other of the most learned men of the nation, who listened to Austin pro posing his new religion of Monkish foolery, replied: “ We will perform none of them, nor at all admit you for our Arch-Bisli op.—[See Milner, 1: 619.) Bede, 2: 2. “Tho Culdees of Scotland, and Ireland also rejected Popery at this time, holding to the written word,of* God.”—See Brews ters Ency’a. Art. Culdees. “ Beds. The venerable Bede, Roman Catholic A. D. 731 re cords: “The Scots do nft all differ from the Britons in their conversation, for Daganus (one of the old preachers,) coming among us )Roman Catholic,) not only refused to eat with ns, but would not even partake of provisions in the same lodging.” “Even to this day it is the custom of trie Britons (Welsh) to hold the faith and the religion of the Anglo-Saxons, in no sort of estimation.”—Bede, lib. 2, chap. 4 & 20. . M Dea© complains ut uic wuviuoivu “*u —- — placable hatred of ti)e Britons (Christians) against the English nation and the Catholic Church.” Bat why complain? Can we love savages, who delight in oppressing us, and regard them as brethren. It is acknowledg ed, that “the West Saxons and Mercians continued their Brit ish conquests after they became Christians"; tliat is, after the Saxons became Catholics, they still made war upon the Chris tians. But what better could bo expected of those who “ sold Jhelr own children into perpetual and foreign bondage.”—Gib bon, 8: 601. There is no doubt in my mind,#but that Constantines first favorable notions of the Christian" religion were obtained in England. His father's portion of the Roman Empire was Spain and Gaul, including Britain. r ■. , “ Constantine, who with his father had ever favored the Christians, now openly appeared their protectors.” Hawies, 1: 250. " Thus it seems that* Constantine’s father favored the Chris tians ; again, “ Constantine Chlorus, (Constantine’s father) draw ing near his end in Britain &c., sent for his son, whose arrival at York was but just announced, when the dying Constantine expired.”—lb., 1:241. $ The residence then was at York, in England. Gibbon con tinues the narativeThe mild and humane temper of Con stantius, who died at York, was averse to the oppression of any part of his subjects. The principal officers of his palaoe were Christians. He loved their persona; esteemed their fidelity, en tertained not any dislike to their^eligious principles.”—Gib “The son of Constantins immediately repealed the edicts of persecution, (enacted by Maximus) and granted the free exer cise of their religious ceremonies, to all those who had already professed themselves members of the Church. They were soon encouraged, [Alas the day 1] to depend on the favor, as well as the justice of a Sovereign, who had imbibed a “nd S1“' cere reverence for the name of Christ, and for the God of the Christians."—lb., 2: 198. i*‘ , But more noble than the Bishops of the continent, when they attended their council, they nobly refused to receive the Empe ror’s bounty. Alas! alas! That they should ever have been supplanted, and Jbelr names oast out as evil by the Papist Church. A. D. 411. Pelagius or Brito, a Briton and Oeleetiua a ns tive of Ireland, or a Scot, traveled extensively in the Empire daring the fifth century. As the Roman Catholics had not sent their new doctrines there yet; they of course knew little or nothing about them, hfilner says that his doctrine differed but little from Socinianism, from which we only learn that he was not a Trinitarian. “They lived at Rome in the greatest reputation, and tfrere so unlike the fathere of the new tect as. to be universally esteemed for their extraordinary piety and virtue.”—Moshiem, 1: 154. “Pelagius, is admitted to be a man of irreproachable charac ter, an able and subtle disputant.” St. Augustin acknowledges that he “ had made great progress in virtue and piety, that his life was chaste, and his manners blameless; and this indeed, la the truth.”—lb., 1: 164. “Pelagius was a native of Briton, probably Wales; the asso ciate of his travels was Celestius an Irishman, both were Monks (at least the former)—-both, too, were men of considerable tal ents, and no jttst suspicions have ever been thrown on the sanc tity of their moral conduct, they arrived in Rome in the begin ning of the fifth century, and remained undisturbed til!410.” Waddington, 160. At Carthage, Pelagius was condemned, but John, Bishop of Jerusalem favored him, and although “St. Augustin occasioned him to be accused at two councils. The first at Jerusalem, where, being asked if he really maintained opinions which Au gustin had condemned, he replied: “A. D. 415, what is Augustin to me? Many were offended, for Augustin was the most -rcnorafele authority of the See ; and some were for immediately excommunicating the rebel! But John, Bishop of Jerusalem averted the blow, and kindly ad dressed Pelagius—‘It is I who am Augustin here,’ it is to me that you shall answer.” The second was at Dospolis, and “ he was acquitted in both, in spite of the violent opposition of Je rome.” St. Augustin however called another council in Africa, (of the Romans of course,) end again condemned him. Next the decision was refered to Rome, where Sosimus the Pope, de cided in favor of the Britons. Augustin then reassembled his Bishops and condemned him, appealing also to the Pope very earnestly against him. Iu the meantime, an imperial edict A. D. 418, from the Emperor at Constantinople, decided his banishment. The Pope, who had before justified, now con demned him, and from this time the poiiMfcondemned were called Pelagianism; as near as we can judge ^mm their enemies, they were as follows: 1. “ Infant baptism is not a Bign or seal of remission of sins. 2. “ But a mark of admission into the kingdom of heaven, open only to the pure in heart. 8. “ Good works are meritorious,—Mosh. 1:155. 4. “Denied, that in consequence of any prenestination, di vine grace was given to one more than another. 6. “Affirmed that Christ died alike, and equally for all men. 6. “ The same grace necessary for salvation, was offered alike to all men. 7. “ That a man without graoe was capable of faith, and holy desires. 8. “Every man is born in a state of perfect freedom of will, equally capable of resisting the influence of grace, as of com plying with its suggestions.—Hawies, 1: 821. 9. “ Denied original sin. 10. “ Infants have no need of remission, but needed baptism. 11. “He preached a perfection attainable in this life.”—Mil ner, 1:413. See also Moshiem, 1: 155. Wad., 161. Haw les, i: Great allowances are to be made for this account, some part of what was attributed to him even while alive he denied, and all is reported by enemies, and no two scarcely agree. Yet I “ far prefer his anathematized faith and virtuous life, to the cor ruption and immorality opposed to him. The celebrated letter attributed to him as written to a widow, containing unscriptu; le denied having written, (Mil., 1; 413.) Milner saysf so tar as it respects the doctrines of sanctifying grace, his doctrine was the same as that now called Sopinianism”— i. e. Unitarianism.—Milner, 1: 416. St Augustin maintained the doctrines of 1. “ Original sin.—Wad., 163. ». .--ft,. 2. “ An eternal purpose of God, or predestination, with re» gard to those who shall be saved, and 3. “ They, and they only, will finally obtain it.”—Haw., 1:823. Sixth century. In consequence of the reigh of the Saxons, who had invaded and settled in England; “for near a century and a half the Gospei had been declining in Britain, and for the greater part of that time had been as we have seen, confined to Wales, and Cornwall, or to the mountains of Scotland. Ireland ; too, still preserved something of the light.” The English Ohurcherare acccused of “ not taking the least pains for the conversion of the Saxons,” “of being inattentive to the propa gation of truth in the Island.”—Milner, 1: 515. ^^■Whioh' Was doubtless Popish fiction, designed to blind pos %s'lerity The contrary is admitted at the commencement of this chapter . ■•■**'* ' “Some very handsome youths were exposed for sale In -•Rome”! “Of what country are they”? Said Gregory afterwards Pope. “ Of the Island of Britain, was the reply.” “Are the inhabitants of that Island Christians or Pagans?” said the very learned Gregory. “ They are Pagans, was the reply.” The Pope sighed!! 1 “ What is the name of the nation ?” said he. “ Angli, (Angel) it was said.” “In truth they have angelic oountenanoeSy atyl it is a pity they should not be oo-heirs with the angels in heaven ”! • “ What is the province from whence they scame ?” “Doy*, (Northumberland) was„the reply.” “It is well De ira, snatched from the wrath of God! and called to the mercy of Christ.” “ What is the name of their King?” “ Ella, wa^ the reply.” « Alleluia should be song in those reigious.”—Milner, 1: 615. This Gregory soon became Pope, and “ sent St. Austin and - forty Monks ” to convert those natural Angels into Catholic Saints. ’ *CnABACTKE OF THE Hew ClTOBCH. Hume asserts, that “ the Priests, who succeedeft jto the first Missionaries, were almost as ignorant and barbarous as the Laity, received their doctrine through the corrupt channels of Rome, with a mixture of credulity and superstition equally de structive to the understanding and to morals; that their rever > ence for the saints seems to have supplanted their adoration of the Supreme being; monastic observances were esteemed more meritorious than active virtues, bounty to the Church atoned for all violence against society, remorse for the more robust vices was appeased, not by amendment of lifS, but by penances, by servility to the Monks, and abject devotion, &c.”—Recorded by Reeves, 238. But conversions multiplied rapidly,ten thousand were bap tized in one day.”—lb., 193. i CoBBtPTIONS OF THE NEW RELIGION. Hume says that, “ the Priests in the Heptarchy after the first Missionaries were wholly Saxon, and almost as ignorant and barbarous a/ the Laity; that they received their doctriqg through the corrupt channels of Rome, with a mixture of cre dulity and superstition, equally destructive to the understand ing and the morals; that their reverence for the Saints seems to have supplanted the adoration of the Supreme being; that the monastic observances were esteemed more meritorious than the active virtues; that bounty to the Church atoned for all violence against society Lthat remorse for the most robust vices were appeased not by -- Ajf», »•, - ~j—'■’J'‘ servility to the Monks, and abject devotion; that a supersti tious attachment to Rome, and the gradual subjection of the kingdom to a foreign jurisdiction, disgraced the religion of the Saxons; that the Britons had never acknowledged any subor dination to the Roman Pontiff; but that Wilfrid, Bishop of Lindisfarne, the haughtiest and most luxuriant prelate of the age, gave a finishing stroke to this subjection, by his appeal to Rome against the decision of an English Synod.—Hume Hist. Eng. TJt1. TJmany wl^the scourge of the world, whether Pagan or Pap«f3Vei..blesgf to her principles, ever aimed at the subjuga tion of the world; and thus the horns gave their power to the beast. “ Many historians ffirm that St. Austin neglected the lessons of humanity,” “and proceeded Jo assert with great insolence the spiritual supremacy, not only over his own converts, but also over the faithful portion who still maintained among the Cambrian mountains the doctrine and practice transmitted from their forefathers.” It appears indeed that those simple believ ers rejected several points of doctrine of late condemned at Rome, and among others the “ Papal authority, even after they had been enlightened by the exhortations of St. Austin.”—Wad dington, 134. “ The Christianity which this pretended apostle, and sancti fied ruffian taught us, says an English historian—seemed to consist principally in two things, in keeping Easter upon a pro per day, and to be slaves to our Sovereign Lord God, the Pope, and to Austin hi6 deputy and vicegerent.”—Jorton’s Ec. His tory, 4: 417. Twelve hundred of the ancient Christians were slain, in es tablishing the now religion in England.—Waddington, 134. “ Austin the Monk, if he had been less eager after Arch Bish oprics, and less chargeable with lying miracles, would have more credit for the numerous conversions of which he boasted.” Waddington attempts to defend Austin from reproachfon ac count of the slaughter of the twelve hundred Christians, on the ground of his having died previous to that time; but Reeves admits that there is an uncertainty concerning the date of his death, some dating it 603, and some 615, while he places it 608. If those are correct who place it 615 then he lived two years after the slaughter of the Christians in 613.-—(See Reeves, 192.) Waddington is too sanguine. Bede indeed says that Austin was dead. But had he not threatened war and death to the Christians!—See Milner, 1: 520. I cannot! I cannot joiu with Protestant historians in ex cusing spiritual wickedness in high places. Their zeal for the new creed, betrays them into a constant defence of the man of sin. The conversion of Britain to Popery was not strange. Ethelbert had married a Papist, the Priest ruled the wife, and the wife had no great difficulty in persuading her husband 4m adopt a worldly religion—especially as he had been before eon- - yjnoed of the truth of revelation by those whom he oppressed and despised. Roman Catholic's charges against the ancient Christian’s endeavors, are not worth a groat to me. I cannot believe them except when they, praise their enemies and re proach themselves. Falsehood for the good of their institu tion is too fashionable. “ The mountains of Cambria still afforded a race, (if not of primitive Christians, though it is to be hoped that many such ' were among them yet) of men who refused to obey Gregory and Austin.”—Hawies, 1: 352. Moshiems statement: “In iint&in, several circumstances concured to favof the propogation of Christianity. EtKelbert, King of .Kant, the most considerable of the Anglo-Saxon prin ce#, married Bertha, daughter of the King of France, (a Catho lic) who by her influence, and the pious efforts of the Clergy who followed her into Britain, gradually formed in the mind of the King an inclination to the Christian (Catholic) religion, while the King was in this favorable disposition, Gregory the Groat A. D. 586, sent over forty Monks with Austin at their head, in order to bring to perfection what the pious Queen had so hapily began. This Monk seconded by the seal and asrist ance of the Queen, converted the King and the greatest part of the inhabitants of Kent, laid a new foundation of the British . Church; and was made Arch Bishop of Canterbury.”—Moshi ern, 1:157. “ The Anglo Saxon Kings in England, entered the pale of the Church, many of them at the instigation of their fhir oonsorts, easily ordered their subjects to be of their master's religion.”—• Hawke, 1: 864. Thx last or rax Ancient Christian Caracas# nr Emlamb os Briton. 8t Austin by miracles and conferences, and other mean#, efl deavored to snbjagate the -Ancient Christians in Wales; bnt “ the Britons were inexorable, and refused to acknowledge his authority.” “ If you will not have peace with brethren said the Arch Bishop of Canterbury, roused at length into an unbecoming warmth, you will have war with enemies, and if you will not preach to the English the way of life (Popish new doctrine,) you will suffer death at their hands.” “It happened afterwards, that, in an invasion of the Pagan Saxons of the North, (it is disputed that they were Pagans) the Bsngorian Monks—(the primitive Christians of Wales to the number of twelve hundred,) were cruelly destroyed.” “Writers <fec., tell us that when Austin came into England, he fotind seven Bishops and an Arch Bishop supplied with good ly governors, and Abbots, and that the Church was in goodly order—that Dinoth the Abbot, showed, Austin that they owed him no stitgection—that their Bishops had been independent of Borne—that the Bishops of Rome had no more right to their obedience fibah other Christians had, and that the Bishops of Caerleon Upon Usk, was their proper superior; and that in re venge for this honest assertion of their independence, the Kent ish Kidfep procured the invasion and slaughter of the Monks above mentioned. , “ What could be the meaning of his wishing to ba* and borne down by the Saxon Pagans, one of whom having „ married a Catholic Queen, introduced Popery first from France, and afterwards from Rome into England. Fourth—that the new religionists continued to persecute, op press, and endeavored to exterminate the ancient Christians. 'That Protestants true to their birth, join in anathematizing those ancient Christians as “ Schismatics ” and “ Pelagians.”— Milner, 1: 530. •While the Arians were declining, the Semi-Pelagians main tained a sharp warfare with Augustin and his disciples in Gaul and Briton.”—Hawies, 1: 370. A. D. 735. “ Our author complains (Bede) that up to his time, 672 to 735, (Mil. 1: 530) the British Christians, i. e. tho first Christians, looked on the English Christians only as Pa gans.” “ Attempts were made all this time by the Bishops of Rome, to induce the Irish to unite themselves to the English Catholic Church, but in vain. John, the Bishop of Rome, wrote letters also into Ireland against the Pelagian heresy, which was reviv ing there. Edwin, Catholic'King of the Northumbrians, after having six years served the cause of Christ (or of the Pope.) was slain in a battle which he fought with Carduella, a British Prince, a Christian by profession. The British Christians look ed on the English (Catholics) only as Pagans," as Bede testifies. —Milner, 1: 529. The attentive reader has discovered in the new Church a con tinual course of perfidy, a violation of every moral sentiment, a total blank of all Christian spirit, and a lack of all virtue; endeavors to proselyte by instigating children to resist the au thority of their parents; Princes to rebel against their fathers; subjects to take up arms against their Sovereigns, and citizens against their governments. Barbarous pirates, public robbers, half converted and baptized Pagans, were armed against the Saints of God. Each Catholic Monarch was a butcher of the Christians^ and each Priest, . “ Those vassal slaves, “ Of bloody Rome, was an accuser of our brethren. It cannot be amiss to inquire into the character of those Catholic saints, Bishops, Monks and Popes; and this will soon be our unenviable duty, when the reader will discover the “fathers” were the same in their reli gious character, as discovered in their ordinary principles of virtue and morality, that we might expect from the manifesta tion of their public spirit—they themselves being judges. Britanny in France aero its Doctrine. A. D.-448:-®-^ AabkcBce^titod, “a number of Britons expelled - * by the Saxons A . D. 446, crossed into France, and gave the name of the province Britanny.” “ With them the faith of the Gospel was preserved, as well as with their brethren in 'Wales — and Cornwall, and some parts of Scotland and Ireland.”—Mil ner, 1: 496. Let us now cross over to France with them and see whether the good seed has died out by their conjunction with the Catho lics, and subjection to their laws. A. D. 1079. “Peter Abelard. „ Bernard, in hie turn Of controversy, was confronted with the most ingenious scholastlo of the age, Peter Abelard. This celebrated doctor was born in Britanny, in 1079; it may suffice to say, that he was charged " with being at the same time, an Arian, a Hestorian, and a Pela gian, and with as much justice perhaps, as such charges were usually advanced by the Roman Catholics. “ The history of the crimes and the misfortunes of Abelard is unknown to every one."—Waddington, 270. He was first attacked by St. Bernard, and Abelard charged him to make good his charges of heresy before an assembly Of Clergy A. D. 1140. “The chargee were not entirely read through, when Abelard appealed to the Pope.”—Wad., 271. Hon. “The reason of Abelard’s sudden appeal to a higher court, was unquestionably his distrust of that before which he stood, he might doubt its impartiality, or he might certainly have discovered its determined prejudice against him j and that it waa in /act very provident in him, to appeal betimes from its decision, is clearly proved by a passage in the ioeount, which certain Bislmps of France addressed to the Pcq>e, Via: Bernard convinced the Bishops that his tenets were not only false, but heretical, and they sparing hie vermn out <f defence tothe apottolic «*, Condemned hi* opin&nt, A. D. 1142. It fa' tfeW fee manifest that this Appeal saved him from personal mfito tlon.”—Waddington, 207. (To te continued.)