194 



dius goes no such length, he only says* that Caelestius was at a 

 monastery, from which he wrote three letters to his parents, whence 

 it has been more naturally inferred that this monastery was not in Ire- 

 land ; some say it was that of Pelagius at Bangor, others, of whom 

 Doctor O'Conor himself is one, think it was that of Saint Martin at 

 Tours : but all agree it was not in Ireland. 



The second objection is in the same track. Because Palladius 

 was sent in 430 " ad Scotos in Christum credentes," therefore Saint 

 Patrick could not in 432 be Ireland's Apostle. The whole ecclesi- 

 astical history of Ireland shews the fallacy of this argument! There 

 were undoubtedly some scanty believers in Ireland before Palladius, 

 travellers or captives without a Church, or who had only heard the 

 word faintly from foreign countries ; but the failure of Palladius suf- 

 ficiently evinces that Christianity had no preacher, no delegated mis- 

 sionary, no legitimate apostle, to whom Ireland should be so indebted 

 before his time. The third objection is, that Athanasius, in his second 

 Apology against the Arians, mentions that bishops from the British 

 islands attended the Council of Sardis in 347, but while it would be 

 an ignorant absurdity for any bishop from the Irish Scots, to be then 

 self-styled as from a British isle, the text of Athanasius by no means 

 warrants such an interpretation. He says bishops attended " sk 

 ^iravitt)v, raWiiav, BpsTTuvKov, &c. ;" thus calling Spain, Gaul, and 

 Britain, by the same phrase of amplification, possibly injustice to the 

 numerous provinces they contained. And if even Gennadius and 

 Athanasius were to be received as witnesses of a Hierarchy in Ireland 

 before Palladius, (whom all writers call the first bishop,) yet their 

 texts would by no means reach those '• centuries " that Sir William 



• Jnte, p. 92. 



