ENGLAND. 95 English Funning (London, 1880); Escott, Eng- land, Her People, Polity, ami Pursuits (New York, L886) : W Iward, The Geology o] England ami Wales (London, 1887) : Cunningham, Growth of English Indus/rial History and Commerce (Cambridge, 1890) ; id., Outlines of English Industrial History (ib., 1895); Rogers, Indus trial and Commercial History of England (Lon- don, 1894)) ; Borgeaud, The Rise of Modern De- mocracy in Old and New England (New York, 1894) ; Traill, Social England (6 vols., London. IS!);; 1)7) ; Timbs and Gunn, Abbci/s, Castles, ami Ancient Halts in England and Wales (New York, ]H<)2.) ; Cook, England, Picturesque ami Descrip- tive (Philadelphia, 1899) ; McCarthy, Modern England (London, 1899) ; Patten, The Develop- ment of English Thought (New York, 1899) ; Dorman, The Mind of the Nation (London, 1900). For ethnology, see paragraph Ethnoi.oov. For the history of England, consult the authori- ties referred to under Great Britain. ENGLAND, Church of. The dominant re- ligious body in England, for the greater part of her history the established Church of the country. Tt is necessary to bear in mind the prior exist- ence of a British Church, which — like the British nation — was subsequently either uprooted, sub- dued, or assimilated in part, a fact which has an important bearing upon the claims which are made as to its antiquity and continuity. The exact date of the introduction of Christianity into Britain is not known. Gildas, a British author of the sixth century, believes that it was as early as the year 37. Legends assert that the island was visited by one and another of the Apostles. Even Eusebius inclines to this opin- ion, and Theodoret confirms it. There is more ground for believing that the new religion was found there about 170, having come from Gaul or from Rome. When we reach the fourth century we are treading on firmer ground. The records of the Council of Aries, 314. actually give us the names of three bishops as present from Britain: Ebo- rius of York, Restitutus of London, and Adel- pheus or Adelfius, either of Caerleon in Wales or of Lincoln. If the Caerleon theory be ac- cepted, these sees would correspond with the Roman provinces into which the country was divided. In the early days of eager controversy, it is evident that the British Church adhered in doctrine and discipline to the orthodox side, al- though, of course, there were some who were tainted wilh heresy. Indeed, there seems to be no doubt that Pelagius was a native of Britain. It is difficult to determine whether the Britons appealed to Rome or to the bishops of Gaul for assurance as to the true doctrine. To whichever the appeal was made a matter not within the scope of this article to determine, the fact makes evident the anxiety of the British Christians to guard their orthodoxy. After the overthrow of Pelagianism, a more dreadful foe was encountered in the persons of the Saxons mid Angles, whose successful invasion reduced the main part of the island to heathen- ism. The outlook for the Church at the end of the sixth century was gloomy enough. Then it was that Gregory the Great, moved by the sight of the English lads in the slave-market at Rome, ENGLAND, CHURCH OF. undertook the conversion of the island, and sent thither, in 597, Augustine and his fellow mission- aries. I pon their arrival thej found several bishops, whom thej endeavored, but in vain, to bring into submission to Hie Pope. Much i- due to them, for doubtless their mission wrought greal changes in behalf of Christianity. Bj death of the Christian King Ethelbert of Kent (baptized by Augustine, possibly through the in- fluence of his Christian Queen, Bertha), and the succession to the throne of his irreligious -on. Eadbald, the Church received a severe blow, fr< which his conversion enabled it to rally, lor many years her historj was one of varied successes and failures. Largely by means of Irish and Scotch missionaries (among whom were Colomba, Aidan, and Finan) and of Mer- cians and Saxons, commissioned by Irish horn enthusiasts, the Church had been planted more or less firmly in all the English kingdoms. At this lime there was no national unity — no one Kingdom of England. Likewise there had not been as yet in the Church any fusion of the British and Roman parties, each of them main- taining with great tenacity its own ecclesiastical uses. One of the chief points of dispute was the proper date for Easter (q.v.). At length, in the conference at Whitby (664), the Roman party gained the ascendency. Thus it was made more easy for Theodore (who, in 668, succeeded to the primacy, and was one of the great men of his day) to unite the churches of the several king- doms into what, may properly enough lie .ailed the National Church of England. It follows, therefore, that the Church is in no way in- debted to the State for its original establish- ment and independence — being really the older institution of the two, by three centuries. In- stead of the State establishing the Church, it may more fairly be said that through its uni- fication the Church established the State. The Council of Hertford in 673 was not only the first ecclesiastical gathering, but the first assembly of any kind for the whole of England. Theodore had not long succeeded in effecting this confederation before he began to act al- most as an English pope. In Wilfrid. Archbishop of York, he met a prelate of consummate talents and determination, who would not allow the claims of any one to supremacy over him. When Theodore undertook, without his consent, al- though supported by King Egfrid. to carve new dioceses out of his jurisdiction, he at once ap- pealed to Rome. This is the first of such appeals from England of which we have any record. He obtained from the Pope an order to Theodore for the rectification of these diocesan lines, with the threat of deprivation or excommunication for any clergyman or layman who might disobey the mandate.' The King, however, imprisoned il- frid. and allowed Theodore to go unchecked in his schemes of organization, for which In- to have had uncommon genius. To him is at- tributed the origin of the parochial, or perhaps, rather, of the diocesan system, as well as the lii-t regular provision for tie' payment of tithes and offerings, not to the bishop, hut to churches which the laity had built: and, further, i iiii: to such laymen the right of patronage, t of present ins clergymen to certain cures. An. r hi- death, the relations between the Church and the 'state grew more distinct and defined, the latter agreeing to protect the former in i.
