The Drama of The Lost Disciples

THE DRAMA OF
THE LOST DISCIPLE’S
By
GEORGE F. JOWETT
(Easier Reading, Floating References, and Repagination)

(2023 AI Grammar, Large Print, No Facing Pages. )

(Unique Reference Sitings with Sources Closer to the Listings )

Reformatted

“Basilica di S. Pudenziana” (Rome)

Exterior of “The Mary Oratorium”

Introduction
By The Rev. Ansley Rash

I
t was Edmund Burke who wrote, 'People will not look forward to posterity who never looks backward to their ancestors', and it is
certainly true to say that only very real knowledge of what God has done for and through the British race in the days that are past can
give con dence and courage with which to face the unknown in this era of crisis and tragedy. This is one of the major reasons for my
satisfaction and pleasure in the privilege accorded to me of introducing this most interesting and instructive book to all those who are
concerned with facts, not fancies.
So much rubbish has been written concerning Britain's pagan past and so many attempts have been made to destroy our justi able
pride in the very real achievement of our race that we welcome unreservedly one more book devoted to the purpose of informing our
people of the glorious Christian heritage that was bequeathed to us in the rst four centuries. Here the faith of Christ was rmly founded
soon after the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord and here also the rst Christian Church in all the world outside of Jerusalem was
erected by the original disciple and followers of the Incarnate Word.
It is fashionable these days for our leaders in Church and State to make the pilgrimage to Rome to seek economic security and
ecclesiastical unity, but this book reminds us very forcibly that in those early days, while the Roman Empire was still pagan, men braved
the fury of the elements and the peril of the sword to journey to the Britannic Isles in order to proclaim the Gospel of love, light, and liberty,
and then as the Heralds of the Cross to bear it from Glastonbury and Iona, Bangor and Lindisfarne, to the far places of the earth, for
Britain, not Rome, was then the Lighthouse of Europe.
The author of this book, a Canadian of British birth, a man of many parts and varied talents, has put us in his debt by reminding us once
again of our glorious privilege and solemn responsibility as God's servants and witnesses. He has obviously spent a great deal of time in
travel and research in order to collect and collate the wealth of valuable material here presented to the reader. With a well-arranged
bibliography, the book contains treasures both new and old and should without doubt appeal to all those who love and value the truth
concerning our illustrious past. Observing all that God has wrought in the generations long ago, the reader will nd faith strengthened and
hope renewed for the future.
September 1961
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
Page 1 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples

CHAPTER 1

THE SCANDAL OF THE CROSS

N
INETEEN hundred and (P.11) twenty-nine years ago last April, in the year A.D. 32, the most power-packed drama in the history of
mankind was enacted when the Roman soldiery nailed Christ to the Cross, on the Hill of Golgotha. With this ignominious death
specially reserved for the meanest criminals by the Romans, the powerful, fanatical Sadducean leaders of the Sanhedrin and the
Roman Procurator of the Province of Palestine hoped they had rid the selves of the great disturbing religious in uence which, by their
acts, clearly indicated they recognized as a dangerous challenge to their authority.
From a material point of view, the supreme sacri ce of Jesus might have been the grand nale of His mission, ending in a futile gesture
but for the existence of one man. This man, but eetingly mentioned in the tragedy of the cross, passed out of scriptural mention under a
mantle of mystery in the fateful year of A.D. 36. From that year onward secular history takes up the theme.
Ancient documents carefully preserved, and others recently recovered from the dusty, long-forgotten archives referring to that epochal
year, record him as having been cast upon the seas with a few faithful companions by their remorseless enemies, in an open, oarless boat
without sails, on an ebbing tide over which they drifted far from the shores of their shadowed Judean homeland, to which they were never
to return.1
(1 J. W. Taylor, The Coming of the Saints, pp. 126-127)
In order to grasp the signi cant, historical importance of this particular person, and the considerable power he wielded, we must retrace
our footsteps and examine more closely the soul-stirring events that began with the accursed kiss of Judas in the Garden of
Gethsemane, to the aftermath of the Cruci xion. In doing so one cannot help but experience amazement at the revolting series of extra-
legal actions that pursued the course from the arrest of Christ to His death, indicated by the bitter, bestial hatred of the corrupt ruling
Priesthood of the Jewish Sanhedrin.
On that dark night in the torch-lightened garden, it did not need the pointing nger of Judas, or his betraying kiss, to identify Christ.
Jesus forestalled the traitor by calmly walking to meet the ( P. 1 2 ) guard, asking them if He was the one they sought. Undoubtedly, the
soldiers knew Jesus by sight but the law required a civilian to make the identity in order for them to make the arrest.
For this historic act of treachery, Judas was paid thirty pieces of silver by the Sanhedrin to betray his Master. Contrary to popular
belief the Roman guard did not make the arrest. It was executed by the priest's guard upon the authority of the Sanhedrin. The
arrest was illegal. The Sanhedrin had not the authority to arrest a citizen. The power belonged exclusively to the Roman court which
then ruled over Judea. It could only be carried out by the Roman guard on orders issued by Roman authority on a recognized
complaint.
Jesus o ered no resistance. Quietly He walked between the guards, who had feared to lay hands on Him, through the darkened
streets to the Temple of the Sanhedrin where its legislative members had been called to an emergency session at midnight for the
sole purpose of trying Christ before its priestly court. Here again, we note an extraordinary breach of t h e judicial process. Roman law
did not permit court hearings to be held after sunset.1
(1 Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England.)
Even under an emergency measure no trial for life could be held after dark. Moreover, a trial for life was exclusively the prerogative of
the Roman court, to be held only before the Roman Procurator. Yet we nd Caiaphas, High Priest of the Sanhedrin, deliberately aunting
the all-powerful Roman authority in a trial for life as late as midnight.
O -hand, one is apt to obtain the impression that the Jews were a powerful people whom the Roman authority feared su ciently to
extend to them certain legal extenuations.
This was far from being the case. The Jews were subjects of the Roman State and looked upon with the contempt and scorn a
dictatorship reserves for its meanest vassals.

Page 1 of 122
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
fl
m­
fi
fi
fi
fl
ffi
fl
 Page 2 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The extra-legal practices of Caiaphas reveal two forms of circu stances which, even under casual investigation, appear quite
evident.
It reveals the desperate position in which the Sanhedrin viewed the insecurity of their own situation by the popularity of Christ's
teachings, or it indicates that Caiaphas possessed some damaging secret political knowledge whereby he dared to thwart retaliation by
the Roman governor. Into the crowded assembly of the Sanhedrin, the tall, stately Christ ( P. 1 3 ) was led to face His arch-enemies,
Caiaphas and his fathe in-law Annas who, as the reigning High Priests of Judaism, also represented the powerful, despotic Sadducean
families, of which they were members. Never before, or since, has a court trial been charged with so much con icting emotion. Hate, in all
its seething virulence, spewed its evil venom upon the tense assemblage, a bal ful challenge to any member who dared oppose the
predetermined decision of the Sadducees. Malevolence was so potent that even at this late day one is readily convinced that any person
who dared to stand for the defense of the prisoner must have known he was a doomed man.
Contrary to the common belief that Jesus was completely surrounded by enemies at that strange midnight trial, the light of recent
ndings proves it to have been very much otherwise.
That Jesus was encompassed by a vengeful, hostile group who sought His total extinction is substantiated, but the brilliant battle for
the defense against the savage demands for destruction has, unfortunately, never been su ciently reported. Today, we know the trial for
life was fought out on the oor of the Sanhedrin with all the stormy violence of a bestial, prejudiced fury on one side and the granite
uncompromising courage of the defense by men who knew that by the very act of their challenge they had signed and sealed their own
death warrant.1
(1 cf. Gospel of Nicodemus, 5:6.)
At this late date, we who are Christians should bow our heads in reverent silence to the memory of that heroic group of d fenders,
unmentioned in history, who gave their all in a gallant attempt to save Christ from the agony of the cross.
The prosecution was led and conducted throughout by men whose vicious bigotry was all the more devastating by reason of
their undeniable intelligence. Cruelly aided by Those who bore false witness, a more suitable prosecution could not have been
chosen.
Out of all this unreasonable prejudice, it staggers the imagination to realize the imagination of the man then blazing with hatred who
led the violent persecution of the Christians, within the next few years would be blazing with the zeal of Christ. The Bible names him Saul
of Tarsus, but posterity was to (P.14) remember him as the great Apostle to the Gentiles, St. Paul.
On this particular occasion, we see the opposition potent with prejudice, slashing at Christ with their verbal darts, subtly fanning the
ame of antagonism against Him. On the other side, we see the (P.14) champions of the defense striking back with rapier swiftness. The
history of the Trial, as it has come down to us, shows that the defense fought back with all the resolute heroism of fearless warriors,
invincible in the courage of their rm convictions.
The vindication of Christ must have been brilliant, a classic in legal annals, as proven by the amazing vote cast that night in the
Sanhedrin. Dauntlessly, they carried their advocacy with an o e sive vigor that overwhelmed the bigoted prosecution. Emotions became
unleashed in a tempestuous foment of con icting opinions. In this confusion, Caiaphas saw danger in his covert acts. Not to be thwarted,
he cast prudence to the winds, causing a legal travesty that was not permitted in Jewish jurisprudence. He took the prosecution into his
own hands, completely ignoring his prosecuting Counsel and the Counsel for the Accused. Probably for the rst time in Jewish legal
history, Caiaphas personally conducted a vindictive cross-examination of the Prisoner, after all the evidence had been presented and the
testimony of the opposing witnesses broken down by the superb resistance to their evidence.
Throughout the proceedings, Jesus remained unperturbed, serene in His righteousness. He o ered no defense to save Himself, on
the grounds that that which is right needs no defense. He a rmed His status calmly before friend and foe, knowing beforehand He was
destined to die.
The vote was cast and the triumphant defense was established. The amazing fact is that out of the seventy-one legislative members of
the Sanhedrin, forty voted for the dismissal of the case and the freedom of Jesus.
This was not to be. Foiled within the Sanhedrin, Caiaphas played a trump card that he knew could not be vetoed. He demanded that
Jesus be tried before Pontius Pilate, the Roman Procurator of the Roman Province of Palestine, on the charge of treason.

Page 2 of 122
fi
fl
r­
fl
fi
fl
ffi
ff
n­
m­
e­
ffi
ff
fl
fi
e­
 Page 3 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
It must not be thought that the classic defense alone swayed the vote of the Sanhedrin. What it did do was pour courage into many
hearts, inspiring them to stand by a religious conviction already instilled within them. Actually, for three years previous to this infamous
trial by midnight, the Sanhedrin had been split on religious policy. Many had been heated debates within the assembly, with the
Sadducees clinging to an emasculated Judean faith into which they had injected their own corrupt personal policy. These were the old
ultra-conservatives led by Annas and Caiaphas. Ranged against them was the new Liberal Party who ( P. 1 5 ) had openly declared for the
new spiritual order. They could not win. The dice were loaded against them. The Sadducees controlled the wealthy ruling power in Jewry,
with the exception of a single individual whose in uence was so great it stretched beyond the boundaries of Jewry into the high places of
Roman administration1 He is the man who at this stage of events quietly moves into the scene. He was the power behind the throne who
backed up the exhortations of the Liberal Party in the Sanhedrin, and the man who stood behind the defense of Jesus with his
resourceful support on that fateful night2
( 1He is referred to as ‘nobilis decurio’ by Maelgwyn of Llanda .
2See Nicodemus 11:5, etc.)
The only man whom the Sadducees dared not oppose was Joseph, the uncle of Jesus, known scripturally and in secular history as
Joseph of Arimathea.3
(
St. Joseph has the same word applied to him as to St. John the Evangelist-paranymphos - or attendant to the Blessed Virgin.’ - Rev.
3

L. Smithett Lewis, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury (quoting John of Glastonbury), p. 42; also The Magna Glastoniensis Tabula, at
North Castle, refers to the Apostle John, then working in Ephesus, appointing St. Joseph of Arimathea as paranymphos.
To most people he is passingly remembered as the rich man who kindly o ered his private sepulcher for the burial of Christ; the man
who boldly claimed the body of Jesus from Pilate, who, with Nicodemus, took the body from the cross, providing the clean linens to
make the shroud that enclosed the tortured, cruci ed form. In the scriptural record, at the most, he appears but a transitory gure at
the trial and the cruci xion, seldom mentioned, and then with no evident stress of importance, silently passing out of the scriptural
picture four years after the passion of Christ.
In our own time, Joseph of Arimathea is but slightly referred to, skimmed over as a person of little signi cance.
Why he has been indi erently by-passed, along with historic events covering that epochal period is both perplexing and surpri ing. The
part he played in preserving The Word, and in paving the path for the proclamation of 'The Way' to the world, is as fascinating as it is
inspiring. He was the protector of that valorous little band of disciples during the perilous years (P. 1 6 ) following the cruci xion, the
indefatigable head of the Christian underground in Judea, and the g uardian of Christ's only earthly1 treasure - His mother.
Startling as it may appear to most Christians, and particularly to the Anglo-American world, the dominant role he performed in laying
the true cornerstone of our Christian way of life should thrill (P. 1 6 ) our hearts with undying gratitude. His story is exclusively the story of
Britain and, in consequence, America, and all Christian people wherever they may be.
In actuality, Joseph of Arimathea was the Apostle of Britain, the true Apostle rst to set up Christ's standard on that sea-girt little isle,
ve hundred and sixty-two years before St. Augustine set foot on English soil. He, with twelve other disciples of Christ, erected in England
the rst Christian church above ground in the world, to the glory of God and His Son, Jesus Christ.

Page 3 of 122
fi
fi
ff
fi
fl
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
s­
fi
fi
Page 4 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER II

THE NOBILIS DECURIO

J
oseph of Arimathea ( P. 1 7 ) was a man of re nement, well-educated, and possessed many talents. He had extraordinary political
and business ability and was reputed to be one of the wealthiest men in the world at that time. He was the Carnegie of his day,
a metal magnate controlling the tin and lead industry which then was akin in importance to that of steel today.
Tin was the chief metal for the making of alloys and was in great demand by the warring Romans.
Many authorities claim that Joseph's world control of tin and lead was due to his vast holdings in the famous, ancient tin mines of
Britain.1 This interest he had acquired and developed many years before Jesus was baptized by His cousin, John the Baptist, and before
He began His brief but glorious mission.
(1 See St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, pp.31-32.)
The world's major portion of tin was mined in Cornwall, smelted into ingots, and exported throughout the then-known civilized world,
chie y in the ships of Joseph. He is reputed to have owned one of the largest private merchant shipping eets a oat which traversed the
world's sea lanes in the transportation of this precious metal.
The existence of the tin trade between Cornwall and Phoenicia is frequently referred to by classical writers and is described at
considerable length by Diodorns Siculus as well as Julius Caesar.
In the Latin Vulgate of the Gospel of St. Mark 15:43, and St. Luke 23: 50, we nd both referring to Joseph of Arimathea as 'Decurio'.
This was the common term employed by the Romans to designate an o cial in charge of metal mines.
In St. Jerome's translation, Joseph's o cial title is given as 'Nobilis Decurio'. This would indicate that he held a prominent position in
the Roman administration as a minister of mines. For a Jew to hold such high rank in the Roman State is rather surprising, and goes far to
prove the remarkable characteristics of Joseph. We know he was an in uential member of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish religious body that
ruled Roman Jewry, and a legislative member of a provincial Roman senate. His nancial and social standing can well be estimated when
we consider he owned a palatial home in the holy city and a ne country residence just outside Jerusalem.
Several ( P. 1 8 ) miles north of the ancient city he possessed another spacious estate at Arimathea, which is known today as Ramalleh. It
was located on the populous caravan route between Nazareth and Jerusalem. Everything known of him points to him as a uent and as a
person of importance and in uence within both the Jewish and Roman hierarchies.
According to the Talmud, Joseph was the younger brother of the father of the Virgin Mary. He was her uncle, and therefore a great
uncle to Jesus. Chie y from the secular reports we claim that Joseph was a married man and his son, Josephs, left a mark of distinction in
British history.
During the lifetime of Jesus there constantly appears reference to his association with a relative at Jerusalem. Profane history is more
positive on the matter, identifying the connection with Joseph. As we study the old records we nd there is a valid reason for the close
association of Jesus and his family with Joseph. It is quite obvious that the husband of Mary died while Jesus was young. Under Jewish
law, such a circumstance automatically appointed the next male kin of the husband, in this case, Joseph, the legal guardian of the family.
This fact explains many things. History and tradition report Jesus, as a boy, frequently in the company of His uncle, particularly at the time
of the religious feasts, and declares that Jesus made voyages to Britain with Joseph in his ships. Cornish traditions abound with this
testimony and numerous ancient lan marks bear Hebrew names recording these visits.
Even during the short period of the ministry of Jesus there is de nitely shown to exist a close a nity between them, far greater than one
would expect from an ordinary guardianship. It was fatherly, loyal, with a mutual a ection death could not sever.
We know that Joseph never forsook his nephew. He stood by Him as a bold, fearless defender at the notorious trial, and de ed the
Sanhedrin by going to Pilate and boldly claiming the body when all others feared to do so. His arms were the rst to cradle the broken
corpse when taken from the cross and place it in the tomb. After death, he continued to protect the mutilated body of Jesus from the
conspiring minds of the Sadducees. He risked his all, wealth, power, and position in Those crucial years ful lling his obligation as guardian
of Jesus and of the family of Mary. He loved Jesus dearly. The disciples spoke of Joseph with an a e tionate regard. They wrote he was
a 'just man', a 'good man', 'honorable', and a disciple of Jesus. The latter clearly indicates that through their association Joseph must
Page 4 of 122
fl
fl
fl
d­
ffi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fl
fi
ff
fi
ffi
fi
ff
c­
fl
fi
fi
fl
ffl
fi
Page 5 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
have encouraged Jesus ( P. 1 9 ) in His great work and that he was aware of the mystery of his birth and probably His destiny. All evidence
proves that Joseph believed in the validity of all Jesus taught and ultimately su ered for.1
(1 cf. Joseph’s testimony, Gospel of Nicodemus, 9:5-11.)
It is commonly taught that Jesus was poor and of obscure relatives. His relationship with the a uent Joseph of Arimathea proves
otherwise. In His own right, He was a property owner but long before He took up His mission He forsook all material wealth.
It should be remembered that Jesus was a true lineal descendant of the Shepherd King, David, and of Seth, son of Adam, who was the
son of Goel.

Page 5 of 122
ff
ffl
 Page 6 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER III

WHO MOVED THE STONE AT THE TOMB?

D
enied the power of the ( p . 2 0 ) vote Caiaphas lost no time in co tacting Pilate, fully prepared to play his ace with the pressure of
blackmail if Pilate hesitated to institute the charge of treason against Jesus. Under Roman law treason was a capital o ense
which, if proven, was punishable by death. Only the Roman Procurator could try such a case and only he could legally impose
the death penalty. This Caiaphas demanded and silence was his price.
The High Priest possessed positive knowledge that Pontius Pilate had been an active party to a secret, futile plot to assassinate
Tiberius Caesar.1 Armed with this knowledge Caiaphas imposed his will on the Procurator, who trembled with fear of exposure, disgrace,
and the threat to his life.
(1 Carlo Franzen, Memoirs of Pontius Pilate.)
It is with certainty we can assume that Joseph pleaded with Pilate not to interfere in a new trial of Jesus. Joseph was unaware of the
deadly secret Caiaphas held over the Spanish-born Pr curator. Neither his pleadings nor his in uence could prevail. Nor could the
earnest. supplication of Pilate's wife avail, who, disturbed by the potency of a dream the night before, begged him to have nothing to do
with the trial of 'that just man'.
Pilate deferred to his wife. He owed his exalted position to the social eminence his marriage had brought. His wife was Claudia Procula,
the illegitimate daughter of Claudia, the third wife of Tiberius Caesar, and the granddaughter of Augustus Caesar. Pilate knew that the
Emperor, against whom he had plotted, was very fond of his step-daughter and, being an astute politician, Pontius Pilate deferred to her
every whim. For him to deny Claudia's urgent request is but to prove how serious Pilate considered the hold Caiaphas had on him. At
heart, Pilate was not in sympathy with the demands of the Sadducees. He found no foundation for their charges. Four times Jesus was
pronounced innocent but Pilate in his evasive gesture called for a bowl of water to signify he washed his hands of the whole matter, and
acceded to the murderous demands of the Sanhedrin.
Nevertheless, he permitted the Roman guard (21) to carry out the tragic act historically known as 'The Scandal of the Cross.The
dream that tortured Pilate's wife on the previous night foretold disaster to him if he judged Jesus. The dream came ( P. 2 1 ) true. Later
Pontius Pilate committed suicide.1
From the beginning to the end, the arrest and dual trial was a vicious frame-up, a betrayal, a travesty of justice. From that dark hour
in the garden to the cruci xion, the plot was hurried to its conclusion. It had to be. The murmurings of the people had been growing louder,
as evidenced at the nal trial. Following the fatal verdict the whole city seethed with fear and unrest. Caiaphas and his fanatical
collaborators had triumphed but the Romans held the lash and would not hesitate to use it unmercifully on the slightest provocation or
interference. So greatly did terror prevail thoug out Jerusalem that all known to have been associated with Jesus in even the slightest way
ed into hiding.
Nine of the twelve disciples had ed the city directly after the arrest in the garden, leaving only three standing by. Judas was no longer
numbered among the faithful. Only Peter, John, and Nic Demos remained. Even though Peter had denied his Master he, with the beloved
disciple John, had followed Jesus into the crowded courtroom of the Sanhedrin. There for the third time, Peter denied association with his
Lord. After the fatal circumstances had arisen Peter, overwhelmed with self-torment and ashamed of his denials, despondently went into
seclusion within the city. He did not witness the cruci xion. Of Those present, ( P. 2 1 ) the Scriptures refer by name only to John and Mary,
the mother of Jesus, witnessing the tragedy at the foot of the cross, and the three women, Mary Magdalene, Mary the wife of Cleophas,
and Salome who watched from a respectful distance.2
(1 cf. Eusebius.
‘But all those who were the acquaintance of Christ, stood at a distance, as did the women who had followed Jesus from Galilee,
2

observing all these things.’-Nicodemus 8:11)

Wonderment is often evinced at the omission of the Bethany sisters, Martha and Mary, whom Jesus loved. The impression gathered is
that they were not present. This does not seem conceivable. The name of Joseph is not mentioned but it seems safe to say they were all
present. The record says, 'all the women who followed Him, and others were mingled among the crowd'. The speed with which Joseph

Page 6 of 122
fl
fi
fi
fl
h­
fi
o­
o­
n­
fl
ff
Page 7 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
called on Pilate after the demise indicates that he was present. Pilate appears to be surprised at hearing the swift news, asking those near
him if it were true Jesus was dead.
'But all those who were the acquaintance of Christ, stood at a distance, as did the women who had followed Jesus from Galilee,
observing all these things.’
It ( P. 2 2 ) is doubtful if the beloved John and the Blessed Mother witnessed the expiration on the cross. We are told that after Jesus
committed His mother to the care of John, the disciple led her away to spare her the last dark hours of su ering.
Probably the average Christian of today fails to realize the extent of the physical and mental torture borne by the sensitive Jesus
through this agonizing period. From the hour of the Last Supper to the time of His death, He had not touched food or drink. He had been
'third degreed' from the moment He stood in the torch-lit Sanhedrin, until after His trial before Pilate. Then, following the heckling, the
crowning of Thorns, and the reviling by His enemies, who had placed the mocking sign on Him- 'King of the Jews'.
Following His condemnation to death, He had been brutally ogged by His Roman executioners, His back slashed to ribbons. Even
today it is conceded that the Roman ogging was the most cruel ever to be in icted on a human being. This we can well believe as we scan
the Roman records which attest to the fact that only one out of ten ever survived the ghastly scourging.
His su ering was intensi ed when the reviling Roman soldier pressed the bitter sponge of hyssop to His parched lips when He called
for water as He hung on the cross.
All this He endured apart from the terrible torment He su ered as He slowly expired on the cross. Weighing all this as we must, we are
not left in doubt that Jesus was as physically superb as He was mentally and spiritually.
According to both Jewish and Roman law, unless the body of an executed criminal be immediately claimed by the next of kin the body
of the victim was cast into a common pit with others where all physical record of them was completely obliterated.
Why did not Mary, the mother of Jesus, as the immediate next of kin, claim the body of her beloved Son?
Perhaps John, fearing for the safety of Mary, restrained her, leaving it to Joseph, the family guardian, to make the request. We do know
that Joseph was the one who personally went to Pilate and obtained the Procurator's o cial sanction to claim the body, remove it from the
cross, and prepare it for burial in his private sepulcher which was within the garden of his estate.
You will likely agree that this was in order. But consider the circumstances.
A reign of terror continued to prevail within the city of Jerusalem. No follower of Christ was safe from the evil machinations of the
Sanhedrin, who were then enjoying a Roman holiday in the persecution ( P. 2 3 ) of the followers of 'The Way'. As already stated, all but two
of the disciples had ed the city and gone into safe seclusion in fear for their lives. However, as we shall see, there was yet another,
Nicodemus, who had not ed the city. But Joseph, the Roman senator and the legislative member of the Sanhedrin, also a disciple, was
the only close associate of Christ who dared to walk openly on the street without fear of molestation. Was he too powerful and prominent
for either side to harm? Yet Joseph knew he was dealing with dynamite, and from the circumstances that followed it appears that Joseph
did fear interference, not personally, but in his intentions.
Actually, why did he go to Pontius Pilate?
Why did he not claim the body in the ordinary way, according to custom?
Certainly, it was not a common occurrence to seek permission from the highest authority in the land in order to obtain the body of an
executed criminal.
Why had he not sought permission from the Sanhedrin? They were in exible in their rule that a body must be claimed and buried before
sunset. Actually, under normal circumstances, there was no need to go further than the Sanhedrin. Jesus was regarded as a Jew. Joseph
was a Jew and a high-ranking member of the Jewish Sanhedrin. There was only one reason why Joseph preferred to make the claim for
the body to Pilate. He knew that the fanatical Sadducean Priesthood sought the total extinction of Jesus, even in death.
Annas and Caiaphas had succeeded in their diabolical, murde ous scheme by having Jesus cruci ed as a common criminal. Does it
not stand to reason that they would seek to carry out the ignominy to its fullest extent?
Would they not have preferred that the body of Jesus be disposed of in the common criminal pit so that His extinction would be total
and all memory steeped in shame?
Page 7 of 122
ff
fl
fi
fl
fl
ff
fl
r­
fl
fl
ffi
fi
ff
Page 8 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Certainly, it would have been in the best interest of the Sanhedrin. To have Jesus decently interred within a respectably known
sepulcher was but to erect a martyr's tomb for the multitude to ock to in an ageless pilgrimage. That would have doomed the Sanhedrin
more surely than anything else. Therefore, reason would indicate that the High Priesthood was bent on interfering with the claim of the kin
of the cruci ed Christ. With Mary, the Sanhedrin could interfere, but not with Joseph. He did not fear them and was determined ( P. 2 4 ) to
thwart them in their designs. The Scripture says he went 'boldly' before Pilate and successfully asserted the kin rights of his niece.
Between Caiaphas and Pilate there still existed an armed truce, but the latter played a skillful game. He played both sides to his own
advantage. Pilate had already satis ed the Sanhedrin. No matter how they opposed him thereafter, at the moment they could not deny him
the right of ful lling this particular part of the law to which both the Jew and the Roman subscribed in the disposal of the body. Pilate
needed Joseph's friendship and there was no easier way of securing it than by recognizing Joseph's claim to the murdered body of his
favorite nephew.
By this act of interference, Joseph became a doubly marked man by the High Priesthood of Jewry.
Returning from his mission with Pilate, Joseph's acts are again shown to be hurried as though fearing interception. He returned to
the scene of the tragedy followed by Nicodemus, who carried one hundred pounds of mixed spices with which to prepare the body,
prior to burial. Premature darkness had set in following the phenomenal storm that broke loose upon the land as Jesus expired on the
cross rending in twain the curtain in the temple and scatte ing the spectators abroad. Only two remained, Mary Magdalene, and the wife
of Cleophas, sister of the Blessed Mary. They watched as Joseph, with the help of Nicodemus, lowered the body from the cross, laid it on
the ground, and wrapped the mortal remains of Jesus in the burial linen which Joseph had personally provided. It was dark and time
appeared precious. Again we are impressed with the evidence of hurriedness. Without any further preparation, they carried the body to
the sepulcher in the garden of Joseph and laid it within the tomb, while the two women who had followed, watched nearby.
Joseph and Nicodemus had too little time properly to anoint the body and dress it according to the custom in the linen shroud. Yet
the surprising thing is that they sealed the entrance to the tomb with a 'great' stone.
Why? Did Joseph have other intentions?
Common sense alone tells us that Joseph would not have allowed the body of his beloved nephew to remain in the ghastly state it was
when lowered from the cross, bloody, sweaty, grimy, and torn.
Then what happened in between the few dark hours from the time the sealing stone was rolled to close the entrance to the tomb, and
early dawn on the third day, when the second great drama took place - the ( P. 2 5 ) disappearance of the body of Jesus from the sepulcher?
We Christians accept without any reservations the Biblical version of the disappearance, but it should be remembered that in those
days there was no Biblical version to go by, and Jesus was barely known outside His native land. Not then was He the accepted
Messiah; therefore, as we keep this in mind, we can better understand the impact, pros, and cons, this startling incident created among
the populace, friends, and foes.
The discovery was made on the sabbath dawn when Mary Magdalene, Mary, the mother of James, and Salome appeared on the scene
at the break of day, bringing with them spices with which to clean and anoint the body of Christ. Their intentions are evident. They knew
the body had been hastily interred without the proper burial preparation. The two Marys had been witness to this. They had watched
Joseph and Nicodemus take the body from the cross and hurriedly wrap it in the linens at the foot of the cross. They had followed the
two men into the garden of Joseph, standing nearby, as the body was placed on the ledge within the tomb, and witnessed the sealing of
the entrance to the tomb with the 'great' stone.
They were not likely to anoint the body twice within a few hours. On approaching the tomb, the scriptural record tells us that the rst
experience of the three women was one of shock. They saw that the great stone was completely removed from the entrance. This
shock was followed by another as the drama unfolded. To their astonishment, they saw a young man dressed in white, seated in an
unconcerned manner on the very ledge within the tomb on which the body of Christ had been laid.
From a study of the Marean Manuscript, which relates the story with vivid realism, all evidence tends to prove that this particular young
man was a complete stranger to the women and his attitude towards them was calm and unperturbed. He did not rush out to meet them
excitedly. Before they had time to speak he told them Jesus was not there. The body was gone. They must go to Galilee, where they would
meet Him. He told the stunned women the facts in the simple manner of one relating an incident he believed they should have known. But
they did not know. Neither did they know the stranger within the tomb. All they were conscious of was that the body of their Lord was gone.
Without questioning the stranger, the frightened women hastened back to the city, with Mary Ma dalene, the youngest and most active of
Page 8 of 122
fi
fi
fi
r­
fl
g­
fi
Page 9 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
the three women, hurrying. in advance to inform Peter and John of the startling news. Evidently ( P. 2 6 ) the two disciples were just as
ignorant and bewildered over the disappearance of the body, if not doubtful. We nd them tending to the tomb and, on arriving,
investigating the interior. On entering the sepulcher John stooped to pick up the discarded linen that lay collapsed, but intact, supported
only by the spices.
But where was the young stranger in white?
He was not there for the two disciples to interrogate.
Who was he? What was he doing there? Where had he gone?
What did he know? Why was he never found?
History would give us a great deal to know the answers to these puzzling questions. The records are silent.
Following the entombment the Sadducees, suspicious of the disciples, determined to prevent any possible tampering with the body.
They requested Pilate to post a guard over the tomb, remin ing him that Jesus had claimed that on the third day, He would rise from
the dead. They did not believe this and instead, considered it a ruse of the disciples to steal the body. Pilate atly refused. He had already
washed his hands of the matter and told them to arrange their own guard, which they did.
In this case, where was the guard?
The tomb was unguarded when the three women arrived.
Why had the guards left so early, and where was the change of guards?
Surely, the Sanhedrin, who had assumed full responsibility for posting the guards, would have taken every possible precaution. It was in
their best interest to do so. To do otherwise was to invite the roused anger of the populace and of Pilate. They dare not have placed
themselves in such an uncompromising position.
We can well believe that the Sadducees had nothing to do with the disappearance of the body. If they had caused the body to be
removed they would never have unwrapped it, leaving the linen there. Neither would they have left the entrance to the tomb open with
their position there was no need for haste. The guards were theirs. Certainly, they would have concealed their crime by replacing the stone
at the entrance and giving orders to the guard forbidding anyone entry.
Again, everything points to haste.
Much has been said, pro and con, in reference to the story of the guards, with the general assumption being that it was not true, but a
whitewashed alibi of the Sanhedrin. A common opinion is that even if the guards had fallen asleep at their post, a stone so large and
heavy that sealed the tomb could never have been moved away ( P. 2 7 ) without awakening them. If they had fallen asleep at their post of
duty they would have been punished by death, as was the military custom of that time. In this, general opinion errs. it’s, generally
assumed that the guards had to be Roman. If it were true the Roman penalty for dereliction of duty would undoubtedly have been
imposed. But the guards belonged to the priestly Sanhedrin, whose discipline did not include the death penalty.
The story given by the priests’ guards is most probable.
They admitted they had fallen asleep and, on awakening, were surprised to see that the huge stone had been rolled away. On further
investigation, they saw that the tomb was empty and straight away hurried to the Sanhedrin with the news. Caiaphas bribed them, giving
them money to say that the disciples had stolen the body and to leave it to him to convince Pilate that such was the case.
Nevertheless, they were deeply concerned over the disappearance and the Jewish record informs us that Caiaphas ordered Joseph to
appear before the Sanhedrin for questioning. Another stormy scene occurred before the Assembly. Caiaphas openly accused Joseph of
being the prime instigator of the plot and demanded to know where the body was reposed. To all their questioning Joseph maintained a
stony silence. He refused to talk, de ant in the knowledge that he was beyond their power to prosecute.
Why did they not interrogate Mary, the mother of Jesus, or Peter, John, or Nicodemus, whom the Sanhedrin knew were the only
associates of Christ present in the city at that time? Why were the other women not questioned? Perhaps the Sanhedrin considered such
simple people incapable of carrying out such a delicate operation. Perhaps the genuine agitation of the disciples, and of the women
concerning the mystery, was enough to satisfy the pries hood that they had no knowledge of what had happened.

Page 9 of 122
fi
t­
d­
fi
fl
Page 10 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The di erence between the members of the Sanhedrin and the disciples was - the Jewish priests insisted that the body of Jesus was
stolen and secretly buried by Joseph or the disciples. The latter believed Christ had risen according to His word, on the third day, to be
the rst fruits of all who slept. Therefore, it matters not who moved the stone at the tomb.
Sorrow turned into triumph and an unquenchable zeal to preach the Gospel to all the world. Joseph of Arimathea, the uncle of Jesus,
was no longer guardian over His corporeal existence but over a greater treasure - Christ's sacred mission on earth. Henceforth he was
( P. 2 8 ) to be the guardian of all the beloved against the arch-enemy, and ultimately their leader. He began to dedicate himself to his amazing
destiny, which later was to make it possible for Peter and Paul to accomplish their great work in the service of the Lord. Joseph himself
was to plant the roots of Christianity in fertile soil where it would ourish and never perish from the earth.

Page 10 of 122
fi
ff
fl
Page 11 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER IV

THE SAULIAN GESTAPO AND THE EXODUS A.D. 36

F
ollowing the ( P. 2 9 ) disappearance of the body and the Ascension of Christ, an evil, brooding passion for vengeance seized upon
the ruling Priesthood of the Sanhedrin. In t h e secret conclave, they plotted and planned a campaign of unremitting persecution
against the followers of 'The Way'. Maliciously, they determined to exte minate all who failed to escape their bloody hands.
There is no greater hatred than in a divided house or brother against brother. In the main, the victims of the Sanhedrin were of their own
race. The hatred they bore for the followers of 'The Way' was far greater than the implacable hatred that had divided the kingdom of
Israel before the captivity. At that time, the Ten Tribes under Ephraim had drawn north into Samaria, while the two tribes of Judah and
Benjamin, with a few Levites, remained at Jerusalem. A wall of bitterness existed between them that was never removed. After each
regained their freedom, the Ephraimites commenced their long march beyond the Euphrates, disappearing from scriptural history, to
become known by other names.
Now, it was more than a bitterness. It was a blind, cruel, u reasonable, black hatred.
The 'Gestapo' the Sanhedrin formed was specially organized under the appointed leadership of the vengeful Saul. He wasted no time.
He struck quickly and viciously. Followers of 'The Way' found in Jerusalem, be they Greek, Roman, or Jew, were openly, or in secret alike
struck down. No mercy was shown. The records of that time state the prisons were overcrowded with their victims.
The rst notable victim Saul seized upon was the man whom he considered to be his inveterate foe, Stephen, the courageous leader of
the Liberal Party who led the brilliant defense of Jesus on that fateful night in the court of the Sanhedrin. Along with Peter, John, and
others, Stephen had taken up the scepter, defying the Sa ducees by victoriously preaching the Word throughout the holy city. Thousands
were daily converted and later, according to St. Luke, reached the spectacular number of three to ve thousand daily. This testimony
dissipates the idea that the Jews were unresponsive to the magic appeal of 'The Way'. The Jews were the rst converts, a ( P. 3 0 ) fact that
further infuriated the corrupt Sadducean Priesthood. Fate caught up quickly with Stephen. The Jewish minions of the Sanhedrin
stoned him to death in a manner peculiar to the Jews, as Saul looked on. He perished by the gate that still bears his name.
St. Stephen was the rst martyr for Christ, A.D. 33.
So erce was Saul's ( P. 3 0 ) vindictive purge that he wrought havoc within the Church at Jerusalem. The boundaries of Judea could not
con ne him. Illegally, he trespassed far within the Roman territory where he hounded the devotees without censure or interference from the
Roman administration. No doubt the Romans felt Saul was doing them a service, and a good job in ridding them of what they considered
an undesirable religious pestilence.
Throughout this reign of terror, Joseph remained the stalwart, fearless protector of the disciples and of the women. On every possible
occasion, he stood between them and their enemies, a veri able tower of strength. Saul's fury knew no bounds. Strive and scheme as
they may, Joseph's position as an in uential Roman o cial de ed the Saulian Gestapo from molesting its persons, or those whom he
defended. Nevertheless, it became a losing battle. Within four years after the death of Christ, A.D. 36, many of the devotees were
scattered out of Jerusalem and Judea. There is little doubt that the ships of Joseph, co-ordinating with the Christian underworld, carried
numerous of the faithful in safety to other lands. He spared neither his help nor his wealth in aiding all whom he could.
Calloused as the Romans were with their own speci c brand of brutality, even they were shocked by the ferocious atrocities of the
Sanhedrin Gestapo. Out of this evil sprung the cause of their own ultimate doom. Later the Romans turned into a two-edged sword,
becoming the rabid persecutors and executioners of both Jews and Christians. Saul was to meet a cruel death at their hands.
For the Judean Jews, the culminating catastrophe occurred in the year A.D. 70, when Titus, son of the Roman Emperor, Vespasian,
massacred them at Jerusalem and put the ancient city to the torch, leveling it to ashes, as Jesus had foretold. Those who escaped were
Scattered to the four comers of the world, despised and hateful, forced to live in ghettoes, and never to return to Judea. The Chri tian
persecution was to continue for centuries in an increasing, diabolic form. Tiberius proclaimed an edict, making it a capital o ense to be a
Christian. Claudius and other Roman Emperors repeated the edict.
The Romans, noting with alarm the rise of Christianity, began to consider Christians a menace to their empirically; ( P. 3 1 ) therefore a
class of people to be exterminated. History proves with a mass of bloodstained evidence, how they strove their level best to crush the

Page 11 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
ffi
n­
d­
t­
fi
r­
fi
fi
ff
s­
Page 12 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
evangelistic movement. It was like striving to push back the waves of the sea with the palms of their hands. It was not to be. As
prophecy proclaimed, and history has ful lled, the cross was to triumph over the sword.
According to Acts 8: 1-4, in A.D. 36, the Church of Jerusalem was scattered abroad. Even the Apostles were forced later to ee.
This was the year of the epochal exile when the curtain descended darkly upon the lives and doings of so many of that illustrious
band. Modem Christians are chie y familiar with the New Testament record of the favored few - Peter, Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and
John, with passing reference to but a few others. What became of the rest of the original twelve Apostles, the seventy whom Christ rst
elected, then what of the later one hundred and twenty? They are the lost disciples on whom the scriptural record is as silent as the grave,
particularly the two most outstanding characters, Joseph of Arimathea, and Mary, the mother of Jesus. The sacred pages close upon
them in that fateful year of A.D. 36, leaving not a trace or a shadow of their mysterious passage into permanent exile. Ponder the facts.
Christ's mission lasted but three years. Four years later the Elect had ed into exile. The great crusade ended in but six years. True,
some disciples labored later there in Judea, but the e ects were transitory. Roman rule tightened down with a mailed st on both
Jews and Christians. Within thirty- ve years the holy city was to be a rubble of ruins and thereafter largely occupied by the heathen and
unbelievers. Christianity had its birth in Christ in the Holy Land, but not its growth that flourished to convert the world. Thus sprang to
its full glory in another land. How could this happen? You may search the Scriptures in vain for records of Matthew, Mark·, Luke,
and John ever being near this distant country. The journeys of Peter and Paul as described in the Bible do not seem to give any clue.
Then who performed this mon mental Christian evangelistic work?
Jesus Himself provides the answer as He denounces the Sadclucean Jews, telling them that the glory shall be taken away from them
and given to another.1 A g a i n when He says He came not to the Jews, but to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.2 He knew He would
not ( P. 3 1 ) convert the Sanhedrin and its following, so it had to be others - the ( P. 3 2 ) lost sheep. Who were they? The answer lies in His
commission to Paul, the converted Saul, whom he commands to go to
(1 Matt. 21:43.
2 Matt. 15:24)
the Gentiles. To what Gentiles did Paul go apart from the Romans? Or did Paul commission others of the illustrious band as
missionaries? The answer has to be somewhere. The Romans did not Christianize the world. They were the greatest enemies of the
Christian Gospel for over three hundred years after the death of Christ. Who crushed this Roman opposition that made Rome Christian?
Many are intriguing questions that can be asked, all of which would seem to deepen the mystery that revolves around those who can
be truly called the Lost Disciples. We nd the answers by stud ing ancient writings, the old martyrologies and menologies, the age-old
parchments that have reposed in great libraries for many centuries, led away, and for almost as many centuries, completely forgotten.
These, and the works of eminent scholars who have explored the great scrolls, and deciphered the contents, reveal the astonishing facts.
That is the object of this work, which at best can only b e quoted brie y from the mass of data available. Where scriptural history ends
secular history begins and in using the word 'history', we d greater faith and strength in understanding the original meaning of the word.
As one great writer stated, 'There are Se mons in Stones'. Equally so, there is the revelation in words.
The Bible was God's Book of History, the Word of God. In the Old Testament, history is given to us in prophecy, and in the New
Testament demonstrated in ful llment. Therefore viewed in this light, the true explanation of the word ‘history' we employ the word is:
'Prophecy is history [His-Story] foretold, and history is prophecy ful lled.' Ful llment of His story began in the advent of Christ and will
continue until the whole world accepts Him. Even we Christians have yet much to learn, but Jesus said it would become known unto us all
as we are ready to receive.
All Those who are inclined to consider the Gospel of Christ a mystical, intangible, or incredible story founded on myth and supe St.
John with no substance to His existence will nd solid evidence in tracing the footsteps of the Lost Disciples from the exodus of A.D. 36
when they passed out of ( P. 3 3 ) Biblical history into secular history, particularly the events concerning Joseph of Arimathea. While there are
many learned minds dating from the era of Christ onward who provide the same record, there is a special advantage in quoting a more
modern authority with the eminent ecclesiastical bac ground of Cardinal Baronius, who is considered the most outstan ing historian of
the Roman Catholic Church. He was the Curator of the famous Vatican Library, a man of learning, and a reliable, facile (33) writer.
Quoting from his Ecclesiastical Annals referring to the exodus of the year A.D. 36, the mystery is solved as to the fate of Joseph of
Arimathea and others who went into exile with him. He writes:
'In that year the party mentioned was exposed to the sea in a vessel without sails or oars. The vessel drifted nally to Marseilles and
they were saved. From Marseilles Joseph and his company passed into Britain and after preaching the Gospel there, died.'
Page 12 of 122
u­
fi
fl
fi
fi
r­
fi
fi
k­
ff
y­
fi
fi
fl
fl
fi
fi
d­
fi
r­
fl
fi
Page 13 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
No doubt, this event in British history will come as a surprise to many Christians, but there is a mass of corroborative evidence to
support this historic passage by many reliable Greek and Roman authorities, including a rmation in the Jewish Encyclopedia, under
'Aries'.
The studious pronouncement made by Cardinal Baronius, derived from delving into the treasured archives of the Vatican at Rome,
has proved to be as incontrovertible as it is revealing. To my mind, the Vatican would be the rst to repudiate any testimony from their
archives to support the priority claim of Christian Britain, if it were untrue.
The interesting part of the Baronius report is that the date coincides with that given in the Acts of the Apostles.
The expulsion of Joseph and his companions in an oarless boat without sails would be in keeping with the malicious design of the
Sanhedrin. They dared not openly destroy him and, instead, conceived an ulterior method hoping their ingenious treachery would
eventually consign Joseph and his companions to a watery grave. Little did they realize that, by this subtle act of ridding themselves of the
outstanding champion of Christ, their very hope for destru tion would be circumvented by an act of providence. Their per dy made it
possible for the forgotten Fathers of Christianity to congr gate in a new land where they would be free of molestation.
The Saulian Gestapo had failed dismally and for the last time. It began to collapse completely when vengeful Saul, on the road to
Damascus, was stricken blind. The incredible happened. Saul heard the voice of Christ speak to him and had his sight restored. He was
converted to the faith of 'The Way'. The news stunned the Sa hedrin, infuriating them beyond measure. Immediately, they ordered an all-
out drive to seize Saul and kill him on sight, a reversal of circumstances. The hunter was hunted. He went into hiding appealing for aid from
Christ's disciples. Their reluctance to save him is understandable. They were lled with suspicion, ( P. 3 4 ) much as with surprise. Finally, they
complied, lowering him over the wall of the city with a rope 1, making his escape in the company of the disciples.
(1 Acts 9:25.)
From then on he became famous as “Paul”. The rest is well known. He took up the cross with his great commission as given to him
by His Redeemer, Christ, and with all his heart. Finally, he gave his all to his Master, in martyrdom, leaving behind an unblemished record
that marked him as St. Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles.

Page 13 of 122
e­
c­
n­
fi
ffi
fi
fi
Page 14 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER V

LET THERE BE LIGHT

W
e have identi ed ( P. 3 5 ) the sterling character of the Noblis Decurio, his eminence in religious, political, and commercial a airs
in both the Jewish and Roman hierarchy, his intimate association with the family of Christ, and particularly the powerful
in uence he exercised in the last tragic days of Jesus, from the scene of the illegal trial for life to the time Joseph, with his
companions, were banished from Judea to their arrival at Marseilles, in Gaul. It will be helpful if we pause to consider the world of A.D. 36,
before beginning the fascinating story of Joseph's landing in Britain with his companions and what followed.
Due to the historic discrepancies that commonly exist concerning this era, it is important that one becomes familiar, if but slightly, with
the histories of the peoples of the various nations who played an active part in the Christian drama. We commonly nd much confusion
and misunderstanding caused by the random translation of names and places into the various languages that then prevailed. Historians do
not quote, or even refer, to the language then spoken by the original Britons and Gauls. Reference is generally given piecemeal from Greek
or Latin, which had not the slightest a nity with the Cymric tongue.
Perhaps unwittingly, historians have been the worst o enders in erecting barriers to the truth, subscribing to the unsupportable belief
that Britain, for centuries before and after A.D. 36, was an island populated by wild savages, painted barbarians completely devoid of
culture and religious conscience. Nonchalantly, the reporters wrote o those majestic years as being steeped in myth, legend, and
folklore.
The strange distortion of ancient Britain is the most incredible paradox in history. One could be forgiven for thinking that certain
academic minds had deliberately entered into a joint conspiracy to defame the history of the islands and their inhabitants. It is not as
though the truth were hidden. They had but to read the classical histories of Rome, Greece, and Gaul, as their course a ected Britain, and
compare notes with the early British Triads. It required but a mite of e ort on their part to search the old church records and the stored
( P. 3 6 ) tomes in the British Museum Library and other libraries at hand, replete with concrete evidence contradicting the spurious
writers. ( P. 3 6 ) In addition, thousands of Cymric Triads and monastic documents exist, particularly in the Vatican Library, as well as the
historic versions of the earliest British historians, Celtic and Saxon. A few enlightened historians did cast gleams of light on the truth, but
it was darkened and made obscure by the mass of irresponsible literature foisted on the public.
The truth was lost in unbelievable error.
Strange as it may seem, it was the enemies of ancient Britain who wrote at length with candor the most faithful description of the early
Britons, showing that they possessed an admirable culture, a patriarchal religion, and an epochal history that extended far beyond that of
Rome. Modem writers also con rm their testimony. (E. 0. Gordon, in Prehistoric London, states that the city of London (Llandn) was
founded two hundred and seventy years before Rome, in 1020 B.C.)
The famed British archaeologist, Sir Flinders Petrie, discovered at Old Gaza gold ornaments and enamelware of Celtic origin, dated
1500 B.C., and in reverse found Egyptian beads at Stonehenge.
The art of enameling is early identi ed with Britain as is the production of tin. The ancient Briton was the inventor of ename ling.
He was so perfect in this craft that relics reposing in the British Museum, and the Glastonbury Museum, such as the famous Glastonbury
bowl (over two thousand years old), and the beautiful Desborough mirror are as perfect as the day they were made. They are magni cent
examples of "La Tene" art, as the Celtic design is named, their geometric beauty and excellence being beyond the ability of modern
craftsmen to duplicate.
In Early Britain, by Jacquetta Hawkes, page 32, we read: 'These Yorkshire Celts, beyond all other groups, seem to have been
responsible for establishing the tradition of La Tene art.
Nearly all the nest pieces are luxuries re ecting the taste of warriors who enjoyed personal magni cence and the trapping out of their
wives and horses. Brooch to fasten the Celtic cloak, bracelets, necklaces, pins, hand mirrors, harness ttings, bits and horse armor,
helmets, sword scabbards, and shields were among the chief vehicles of La Tene art. They show on the one hand strong plastic modeling,
and on the other decorative design incised, in low relief, or picked out in colored enamel. Both plastically and in the at the Celtic work
shows an extraordinary assurance, often a kind of wild delicacy, far surpassing its Greek ( P. 3 7 ) prototypes. In these, the nest artists
achieved a marvelous control of balanced symmetry in the design and equally in its related spaces.’ (S. E. Winbold, in Britain B.C., writes:
Page 14 of 122
fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fl
ff
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
fl
ff
ff
fi
l­
fi
Page 15 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
'The Celtic curvilinear art, circa 300 B.C. and of which the famous Glastonbury bowl is a good example, reached its zenith development in
Britain.’)
Roman testimony states that captive Britons taught the Romans the craft of enameling.
Herodotus, father of profane history, circa 450 B.C., wrote1 of the British Isles and its people, under the name of Cassiterides,
remarking on their talent in the metal industry. Julius Caesar, following his campaign in Britain, 55 B.C., wrote 2 with admiration for their
culture, their sterling character, ingenuity in commerce, and
(1 Book 3:115.
2 . Commentaries, Book IV.)
craftsmanship. He refers in amazement to the number of populous cities, the architecture, universities of learning, the numerical
population of England, and particularly to their religion with its belief in the immortality of the soul.
Ancient historians record the exploits of the Kimmerian Kimmerii-Keltoi-Kelts, in their migrations through Europe into Britain.
Modem historians refer to their passage and somehow leave and lose them on the European continent. Yet modem ethnologists have
correctly charted their migrations from their ancient source in the East to their nal destination in Gaul and Britain, which lands were
uninhabited before their arrival. Archaeologists have uncovered their past from Crimea to Britain as factually as they have substantiated
the historic existence of Babylon and Chaldea.
Long before they were known as Kimmerians, the prophet Isaiah addressed himself plainly to the inhabitants of 'The Isles'.
Why historians have mutilated the facts, submerging in myth and mystery the antiquity of Britain, is a tragedy that ba es the mind.
While it is stated that the ancient Phoenician script is an ancestor of our own, philologists assert that the Keltic or Cymric tongue is the
oldest living language. Its root words have a basic a nity with ancient Hebrew. In making this statement it should be pointed out that the
original tongue of the Biblical characters had little associ tion with modem Hebrew. The ancient language was devoid of vowels.
Modem Hebrew was not formulated until the sixth century. To the modem Jew, the original Hebrew is a lost tongue.
In the Bible ( P. 3 8 ) we read of Ezra bewailing the fact that his brethren could not understand their native language and, therefore, on their
return to Jerusalem from the Babylonian captivity, in 536 B.C., Ezra was obliged to read the law to them in the Assyrio-Chaldean language.
Modem Hebrew is like Greek and Latin, a classical language.
The Jew of today reads and speaks in Yiddish, a conglomeration of several languages.
In the same manner, as many modernists prate the dead, false theory of evolution, the prejudiced, and uninformed continue to regard
the ancient British language as a mixture of several, regardless of philologic contradiction.
Abundant proof exists today that the ancient language is still alive. It is frequently spoken in Wales, Cornwall, Ireland, and Scotland.
and in Brittany and Normandy. Available are many old Bibles written in the Celtic languages. One of the most prominent Scottish
newspapers is published in the old tongue, and an adaptation of the Celtic is the o cial language of Eire.
It is interesting to know the important part the ancient language played in World War I. When the Allied Command could nd no other
method to prevent German Intelligence from deciphering the Allied wire messages, it was Lloyd George, Britain's wartime Prime Minister,
who suggested that the ancient language, which he spoke uently, be employed. Its use completely ba ed German Intelligence,
preventing further code interception. This could not have been possible if the Cyrnric tongue was garbled. It had to be grammatically
organized and intelligible.
Even today, nothing is more distorted than the modem histories of world nations. They are either subject to political chauvinism, or
glori ed idolatry by super-patriots. The historic truth seems to be unpopular. Reporters seem to revel in biased national opinion, with an
inclination to judge from the materialistic level of intell gence. Anything di erent is ignorant, medieval, or prejudiced. They tend to describe
their own native history according to their Party philosophy, ignoring its transition in name and language from the past. They fail to
recognize the signi cant fact that language and geography are no criterion of race. There is a change in everything. Language changes,
and so does the geographical habitation of people, but not race. To evaluate the history of any race we must recognize the progress
changes as they appear in language, religion, social custom, and their adaptation to geographical residence.

Page 15 of 122
fi
fi
ffi
i­
a­
s­
fl
ff
fi
ffi
ffl
ffl
fi
Page 16 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
We ( P. 3 9 ) must ever be on guard against the distorters, the irresponsible, the charlatan, and the atheist. Their warped minds are
motivated by bigotry, prejudice, intolerance, religious and racial hatred. They delight in destroying the champions of the truth. What they
do not understand they sco ngly label as tradition. Actually, they do not understand the meaning of the word. To them, it means a myth.
Disraeli eloquently said: 'A tradition can neither be made nor destroyed.'
A tradition is truth, garnished with degrees of exaggeration in the passage of time from the repetitive retelling. It can be clearly
elucidated by separating the cha from the wheat.
Through the common practice of generalizing, we are prone to use terms loosely, which easily side-track us into forming faulty
conclusions. Arising out of this habit we have come to generalize the meaning of the word 'Christian', insinuating that all followers of
Jesus were known by that name from the beginning. In actual fact, the name 'Christian' had not then been coined. It was not created until
years after His death. To the Judean, Greek, and Roman world, the early adherents to the new Gospel were known as 'Followers of The
Way'. Jesus had said, 'I am The Way.' To all His devotees He was 'The Way'. In their devotions, they referred to Christ and His spiritual
philosophy as 'The Way'.
The title, 'Christian', is claimed to have originated at Antioch, 1
(1 Acts 11:26.)
following the enthusiastic reception given to the disciples who ed there in A.D. 36. It is nearer to the truth that the inhabitants of this
ancient city referred to the converts as 'Little Christs', and, 'Little men of Christ'. These labels are by no means the correct interpr tation of
the name 'Christian'. The word is a composite of Greek and Hebrew. 'Christ' is the Greek word meaning 'consecrated', and 'ian' is from
the Hebrew word 'am', meaning a person, or people. Therefore, the true meaning of the word 'Christian' and 'Christians' would be
consecrated person', or 'consecrated people'.
Early ecclesiastics and historians de nitely state that the word is of British origin. Philologists also support its claim to British inve tion,
created by the British Priesthood, among whom the Christian movement gained its rst and strongest impetus.
Substantiation is found in the statement by Sabellus, A.D. 250, who wrote: 'The word Christian was spoken for the rst time in Britain,
by Those who rst received The Word, from the Disciples of Christ.’
It is ( P. 4 0 ) interesting to note that the Bethany group who landed in Britain, was never referred to by the British Priesthood as Chri tians,
nor even later when the name was in common usage. They were called 'Culdees', as were the other disciples who later followed the
Josephian mission into Britain.
There are two interpretations given to the word 'Culdee', or 'Culdich', both words purely of the Celto-British language, the rst
meaning 'certain strangers’, and the other as explained by Lewis Spence, who states that 'Culdee' is derived from 'Ceile-De', mea ing,
'servant of the Lord'. In either case, the meaning is appropriate. This title, applied to Joseph of Arimathea and his companions, clearly
indicates that they were considered more than ordinary strangers. The name sets them apart as somebody special. In this case, since
they arrived in Britain on a special mission with a special message, we can fairly accept the title meant to identify them as 'certain
strangers, servants of the Lord'.
In the ancient British Triads, Joseph and his twelve companions are all referred to as Culdees, as also are Paul, Peter, Lazarus, Simon
Zelotes, Aristobulus, and others. This is important. The name was not known outside Britain and therefore could only have been assigned
to Those who actually had dwelt among the British Cymri. The name was never applied to any disciple not associated with the early British
missions. Even Though Gaul was Celtic, the name was never employed there. In later years the name Culdee took on an added
signi cance, emphasizing the fact that the Culdee Christian Church was the original Church of Christ on earth. It became a title applied
to the church, and to its High Priests, persisting for centuries in parts of Britain, after the name had died out elsewhere in favor of the more
popular name, Christian. Culdees are r corded in church documents as o ciating at St. Peter's, York, until A.D. 936. And, according to
the Rev. Raine, the Canons of York were called Culdees as late as the reign of Henry II. In Ireland a whole county was named Culdee,
declared with emphasis when reference was heard at a court hearing in the seventeenth century, as to its laws. The name Culdee, and
Culdich, clung tenaciously to the Scottish Church, and its prelates, much longer than elsewhere.
Campbell ( P. 4 0 ) writes in Reullura :
'The pure Culdees were Alby's [Albion] earliest priests of God,
are yet an island of her seas by the foot of Saxon monk was trod.'
Page 16 of 122
fi
fi
ffi
f
fi
e­
fl
ffi
fi
fi
s­
e­
n­
fi
n­
Page 17 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
In the days ( P. 4 1 ) of Christ, the popular language of the East was Greek, more so than Roman. Aramaic and Hebrew were chie y
con ned to the Judeans. Jesus was, in all probability, uent in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. And, if what we are told is factual, He
was also versed in the Celtic language. The cultured people of the Roman province of Palestine were conversant with Greek, Hebrew, and
Latin.
The Septuagint translation of the Old Testament was written in Greek at Alexandria, in 285 B.C. It is interesting to note that this work
was compiled by seventy Jewish scholars, and not Greek, as was generally supposed.
Centuries before Christ, the Greek language was well known to the ancient British, from commercial association with the Phoen cians,
Greek tin traders, and sailors. Julius Caesar tells us that the Druids employed the Greek script in all their commercial transa tions.1 At
(1 Gallic War, vi, 13.)
this particular period of British history, the island was more commonly referred to by its industry than by its British name. Known as the
Cassiterides, meaning 'Tin Island', it was for many centuries the only country in the world where tin was mined and re ned. Aristotle, 350
B.C. is one of the rst writers to name Britain, the 'Tin Islands'. Herodotus uses the name earlier, circa 450 B.C. (Bk. 3: 115).
Julius Caesar writes of his visit to the famous Spanish tin mine at Talavera, in 50 B.C. Many centuries before tin was discovered at
Talavera the tin trade ourished in Britain. In fact, Spanish history tells of a close association with Cornwall and it appears that the Spanish
Government sought the skilled miners of Cornwall, to instruct them in obtaining the wolfram and in constructing the mines. Many Comish
names appear in Talaveran tin mining hi tory of men who were instructors, superintendents, overseers, foremen, and experts in assaying
the rock. Proof of British superiority in the tin industry and its a uent worldwide trade is referred to by Herodotus 450 B.C., Pytheas 353
B.C., Aristotle 350 a.c., Polybius 150 B.C., Diodorus Siculus, Posidonius and others, most of whom wrote long before the Christian era.
Each deals at length with the British tin industry in Cornwall and Devon, explai ing ( P. 4 2 ) t h e paths of transportation from Britain, overland
and by sea to the various ports on the Mediterranean and elsewhere in the known world of that time.
The ancient ships of biblical Tarshish were the rst navigators to transport tin and lead from Britain to the nations of the empiric
world. Their navy controlled the seas and later became known in history as the Phoenicians. The tin that garnished the splendor of the
Palace of Solomon, 1005 B.C., was mined and smelted into ingots at Cornwall and thence shipped by the Phoenicians to Palestine.
Creasy, the eminent British historian, in his History of England, ·writes: 'The British mines mainly supplied the glorious adornment of
Solomon's temple '
For many years the Phoenicians held a monopoly on the transportation of British tin over the sea lanes. They guarded their secret
jealously. It is well known that when followed by another seacraft, seeking to learn the source of their trade, their mariners would
deliberately strike a false course, and in extremity would purposely wreck their vessel. This sacri ce was reimbursed out of the Phoen cian
treasury. For con rmation of this it is interesting to quote Strabo, who died A.D. 25 :
'Anciently the Phoenicians alone, from Cadis, engrossed this market, hiding the navigation from all others. When the Romans followed
the course of a vessel so that they might discover the situation, the jealous pilot willfully stranded the ship, misleading those who were
tracing him to the same destruction. Escaping from shipwreck, he was indemni ed for his losses out of the public treasury.'
The Phoenicians of Carthage were more successful. Anxious to share in the trade of Cadis, an expedition under Hamilco passed the
Straits about 450 B.C., and sailing to the north, discovered Tin Island.
Ptolemy and Polybius, vigorously support Diodorus, writing of the friendliness of the people of Cornwall and of Dammonia, which was
the name then applied to Devon. These locales were where tin mining chie y existed. In the making of bronze, tin was the main alloy. Thus
it can be safely said that the Bronze Age had its inception in Britain. Knowledge of this fact alone is su cient to refute all malicious
insinuation that the ancient Britons were barbarian.
By necessity, to excel in mining and smelting tin and lead, to be pro cient in casting metal, and expert in enameling, a people must be
intelligent in the science of mineralogy and metallurgy.
The worldwide demand for these precious metals beat a sea lane to Britain's shores, bringing its inhabitants in close contact with the
ancient powers. Consequently, it is quite understandable why the British, w i t h the ( P. 4 3 ) foundation of their own language; steeped in
Ancient Hebrew and their knowledge of Greek could be responsible for coining the word 'Christian·. Also, we can understand why many
of the oldest landmarks in this area of Britain abound in Hebrew names.

Page 17 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fl
s­
fi
fl
ffl
fi
fl
n­
fi
fi
ffi
fi
c­
i­
fl
i­
Page 18 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The association of Joseph of Arimathea with the tin industry in Cornwall is positive. F ragments of poems and miners' songs, handed
down through the centuries, make frequent reference to Joseph. It has long been customary for the miners to shout when they worked,
'Joseph was a tin man', 'Joseph was in the tin trade.'
These were their chief trade slogans which identi ed Joseph as a prominent person in the British tin industry.
At the time of our story, the islanders were known racially as Kelts, derived from their historical racial name Kimmeria Kimmerii
Kymry Keltoi-Kelt. The letter 'C' began to substitute the letter 'K' in spelling the name, but the pronunciation is the same. Even in
Thoseremote times, the name Kelt took on a di erent enunciation and spelling, arising out of native patois. Then, as t day, we nd the
descendants of this ancient person in England and Wales referred to as Celts, the inhabitants of Hibernia - Ireland - as Kelts, Gaels, in
Scotland, and the people of Gaul, now France, as Gauls - Gallic. Ethnically they are all the same people. The meaning of the word in
each case is 'stranger', indicating that a Celt, Kelt, Gael or a Gaul were strangers to the land in which they dwelt, not an aborigine as
some would have us suppose. It is impo tant to note, Though they were strangers to the land, they were its rst settlers, securing their
new homeland in peace, and not with the sword, since there were no people to conquer.
They were truly colonizing strangers in a virgin land.
We know they were strangers to Britain and Gaul, Though very ancient, but, like a silver thread woven in a dark woof we can trace their
wanderings as one people from their original homeland beyond the Euphrates River, for over three thousand years B.C. to their new
domicile in the Mystic Isles, and in Gaul.
Francis Guizot, the authoritative French historian in his Histoire de la Civilisation en France, writes: 'The Gauls, or Celts, had the honor
of giving their name FIRST to this land.'
The name of the Gaul persisted until about the middle of the fth century, when the Gothic Franks, under the leadership of
Meroveus, invaded, and settled the land, displacing the Gaul in numbers and in name.
The national name 'France' is derived from the tribal name of Frank, meaning ( P. 4 4 ) 'Freeman'. Yet, the Gaul left his impression on the
land in his co-British name in the rst province he founded. Today it is still known by its original ancient name - Brittany.
At one time the Continent had been landlocked with Britain until a natural upheaval caused the present separation. Evidently, for a
considerable length of time, the separation was not too widely marked. In the ancient Druidic Triads, we read of a Gaulish bishop, walking
over the divide across a plank as he journeyed from Gaul to pay the annual tithe to the mother Druidic Church in Britain.
Despite the washing of the lands by the seas for many centuries, the distance between Dover and Calais today is only twenty-four
miles.
Separated, the island became geographically known as Britain, and the nearby Continental section as Gaul.

Page 18 of 122
fi
r­
ff
fi
fi
fi
o­
n­
fi
Page 19 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER VI

THE GLORY IN THE NAME

A
fter the Kimmerians ( P. 4 5 ) had settled in the Isles of the West they were known to the rest of the world by another name.
The name held no a nity with the racial title by which ancient ethnologists identi ed them. In many respects, the name was
more of a sobriquet which they appeared willing to accept.
They became referred to as British. Why were they so named?
What was so di erent about the Kimmerii, or their way of life, that actuated other nations to christen them with this strange surname
that was ever to identify them before the world, both ancient and modern, even to the subjection of their racial name?
Ancient chroniclers leave no doubt that it was the religious beliefs and customs of the Kimmerians that set them markedly apart from all
other faiths. It was diametrically opposed to all other religions of that time. They believed in One Invisible God and the coming of a
Messiah. They had no graven images, abhorring the sight of idols. They always worshipped in the open, facing the east. They had a
passionate belief in the immortality of life, to such an extent that both friend and foe claimed this belief made them fearless warriors,
disdainful of death. 1
The religious ritual that appeared to make the greatest impre sion on the foreign historians was their custom of carrying a replica of the
Ark of the Covenant before them in all religious observances, as did their forefathers in old Judea. For centuries, as the Kymri passed
through foreign lands in migratory waves on their march to the Isles of the West, the chroniclers noted that this custom was never omitted.2
(1 Caesar on the Gauls; Aristotle on the Celts.
2. C. C. Dobson, The Ark of the Covenant.)
It was this ritual that gave birth to their British surname.
The name British is derived from the ancient Hebrew language, with which the old Cymric language was contemporaneous. Formed
from two words,
'B'rith' means 'covenant', and 'ish' means a man or a woman. Joined as one word the meaning is apparent: 'British' means a 'covenant
man or woman'. The ancient word ‘ain' 'Caesar on the Gauls; Aristotle on the Celts. 'C. C. Dobson, The Ark of the Covenant attached (46)
to the word 'B'rith', signi es 'land', therefore the inte predation of the word 'Britain', as then and still employed, ( P. 4 6 ) is 'Covenant Land'.
Unknowingly, the ancients named the Keltoi rightly. They were, and still are, the original adherents of the Covenant Law. With the later
adoption of Christianity, and the name Christian, a startling new interpretation presented itself. The 'Covenant People' became the
'Consecrated People', living in the 'Covenant Land'. This carries the implication that by the vicarious atonement, the British were
consecrated in the Covenant Law and initiated to be the advance guard of Christianity, to evangelize the world in the name of Jesus Christ.
From a close study of their religious beliefs, everything points to the fact that the Kimmerians held fast to the patriarchal faith of the
Old Testament. Many eminent scholars point out the great similarity between the ancient Hebrew patriarchal faith and the Druidic of Britain.
Sir Norman Lockyer, in Stonehenge and Other British Stone Monuments ( p . 252), writes:
'I confess I am amazed at the similarities we have come across.' Edward Davies, in MyThornlogy and Rites of the British Druids (Pref.,
p. 7), states: 'I must confess that I have not been the rst in representing the Druidical as having had some connection with the
patriarchal religion.'
Wm. Stukcley, in his book Abury (Pref., p. 1), a rms after a close study of the evidence: 'I plainly discerned the religion pr fessed by the
ancient Britons was the simple patriarchal faith.'
Earlier testimony also a rms this. Procopius of Caesarea, in his History of the Wars (A.D. 530), says: 'Jesus Taran, Bel - One only
God. All Druids acknowledge One Lord God alone' (De Gothicis, bk. 3).
Julius Caesar wrote, i n 54 B.C.: "The Druids make the immortality of the soul the basis of all their teaching, holding it to be the
principal incentive and reason for a virtuous life' (Gallic War, VI, 14).
Page 19 of 122
ff
ffi
ffi
fi
ffi
r­
fi
s­
fi
o­
Page 20 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
It is a curious fact that the British title was never conferred on their Keltic kinsmen in Gaul, Ireland, and Scotland. Historically the
people of Gaul were even referred to as Gauls - Gallic and the land was known as Gaul-Gallica, and Galatia, until the coming of the Franks.
It is believed that the Biblical version of the Epistle to the Galatians was addressed to the Gauls of Galatia.1 The inhabitants of Hibernia
(Ireland) and Caledonia ( P. 4 6 ) (Scotland) retained
(1 Bishop Lightfoot on Galations.)
both their geographical ( P. 4 7 ) and original racial names. The peoples of what is now England and Wales actually never lost either. The
land was always Britain and the inhabitants were documented as British Celts. The Irish perpetuated the name Kelt but the Scottish,
while known to be Kelts, were called Gaels. One immediately recognized the similarity between the name Gaul and Gael - Gallic
and Gaelic. Incidentally, the Gaels were the original inhabitants of Iberia. After centuries of domicile in Iberia, a large host migrated
into Cal donia (Scotland), making way for the constant ow of Kelts from the Continent, to Iberia (or Hibernia), who retained the Irish title.
Even t hough this distinction in names has always persisted, the a nity between them was recognized. The islands were always
referred to as the Brittanie Isles even in ancient times Not until the reign of James I when the Irish and Scottish began to be blended into
a central Parliament, were the islands known as the British Isles and the United Kingdom. Of later date is the name Great Britain.
This may appear confusing to some who more commonly speak of the people of Britain as English and Welsh, and the race as Anglo-
Saxon. The national name English was never shared, or employed to designate, the other inhabitants of the Isles. To this day they each
retain their Celtic clan title of Welsh, Irish, and Scottish, in spite of the fact that they all shared the title of British citizens.
The name Britain continued to name England and Wales, long after the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons in A.D. 426. Not until the invading
Normans began to be domestically absorbed by the British Kelts and Saxons did the Anglican title obtain ascendancy. From the lesser-
used name Angle, the national name took the form to label the land and its people, England. Strange as it may appear on First Thought,
yet there are no misnomers in the various names and titles. Racially the Kelts, Anglo-Saxons, and Normans were but separate tribal
branches of the same Keltic race. This also includes the Danes, who had invaded Britain in A.D. 787. Ethnologically the whole Keltic race
is composed of the Keltic-Saxon-Scandinavian stock. Historically the arrival of the Danes, Saxons, and Normans is referred to as an
invasion, but actually, it was a converging of one race into their predestined homeland, which to them and to the world became their
Motherland, Britain. Together they have grown in stature, wearing the British title like a badge, in honor and with glory.
The fact that the British name was singularly identi ed with the people ( P. 4 8 ) of England and Wales is more curious than mysterious. As
the history of ancient Britain unfolds before us we can understand the reason more clearly. Irrevocably they were bound together by the
ties of language and religion. Cymric was their mother tongue and each practices the Druidic religion. Britain was the central headquarters
of Druidism, to which all paid tithe. It was by far the most populous and by its commerce and industry was world-renowned. What
London is to Great Britain today, Ottawa to Canada, and Washington to the United States, and so was Britain to the whole Keltic race.
Largely, this was the reason for other nations identifying the British name with England. From the religious point of view, out of which the
British name arose, this island was entitled by priority to the title. England was the rst of the British Isles to be inhabited. Before the Kelts
arrived it was a virgin land devoid of human habitation. It is claimed that the · rst settlers arrived c. 3000 B.C. Druidism was nationally
organized under the capable leadership of Hu Gadam, circa I800 B.C., the period given for the erection of Stonehenge, which is also
ascribed to Hu Gadarn. He was contemporaneous with Abraham. Like Abraham, Hu Gadam was the chief patriarch of the people, known
as Hu the Mighty.
Looking back over the many centuries we see the deep signi cance of the aisle being named Britain and its people British. We see
destiny motivating these people in their course; a greater will than their own subconsciously directing them to a predestined land where,
as Jeremiah had prophesied, they would 'plant the seed'. The climax was reached with the arrival of Joseph of Arimathea and the Bethany
group. From then on the meaning of the word Motherland became apparent. England is the only country in history to be naturally known
as the Motherland. The long centuries had prepared it for its Christian destiny. From its womb, the Christian cause was born, cradled, and
carried into the world.
We know that the Kelts were by commandment and custom not given to commit anything religious to writing. Neither were they
permitted to build altars with the use of metal, or nails. They were the true people of the Biblical 'Stone Kingdom'.
A traditional custom that indelibly bound the Kelts with the old patriarchal faith was the building of altars wherever they rested on their
trek to the Isles, a religious custom as marked as the carrying of the Ark of the Covenant before them. Today their passage across the
world into the Isles can be clearly traced by the relics of the altars ( P. 4 9 ) they raised in stone, enduring memorials. to their great pilgrimage.

Page 20 of 122
e­
fi
fl
fi
ffi
fi
fi
Page 21 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
This custom outlasted the ritual of the Ark, which was abandoned with the acceptance of Jesus Christ. It lingers today and, as then,
only among the Keltic-Saxon people. In our times the custom of erecting these memorials to some great historic event is chie y practiced
by the Scottish and the Canadians. They comprise pyramids of stones piled to a peak and are known as cairns. This is the Keltic name
for the word used in the Bible, 'heaps', 'stones of witness'.
The rst stone altar in the Biblical record was erected by Jacob, after his signi cant dream of the ascending ladder between heaven
and earth, known to all Christians as Jacob's Ladder. He built it as a witness to his contact and covenant with God on that occasion.
Even after the erection of such altars, or cairns, became a religious custom of the wandering Hebrews and Keltoi, as they passed through
strange lands; a declaration and a witness to their belief and faith in the covenant with the One and Only Invisible God.
Despite the evolution of names that identi ed the people nally named British, the names have always been synonymous with their
heritage and religion. The name Kymri originated from King Omri, the founder of Samaria, the capital of Israel. The Assyrians called their
Israelite captives Beth-Omri, Beth Kymri, and the People of the Ghomri, after their king. The Greeks called them Kimmerioi. The Welsh are
the only people today retaining the ancient title of the people of the Cymri.
In the British Museum can be seen the famous Black Obelisk of Shalrnaneser II. This important relic bears reference to the captivity
and to all kings subject to the King of Assyria. Amongst these rulers so subject was Jehu, called the 'son of Omri', king of Israel. The
obelisk is a series of twenty small reliefs with long inscriptions. The second relief depicts 'the son of Omri' on his knees, paying tribute in
gold and silver in ( P. 4 9 ) obeisance to the Assyrian ruler. 1
(1 cf. A Guide to the Babylonian and Assyrian Antiquities (British Museum), p. 46.)
In Keltic, the word Kymri is still pronounced with the vowel sound, K'Omri, and easily became Kymri, from which Kimmerii, Kir merians,
Keltoi, Keltic, and Cymri have evolved. Crimea, by which that land is still known, is a corruption of Cimrneri. Vast cemeteries have been
disclosed in Crimea in recent years producing nu erous monuments identifying the Kymry in name, religion, and character with that area
where they remained centuries before marching. ( P. 5 0 ) It is interesting to know that the Welsh are the only members of the Keltic race that
retained throughout time to the present the original name Kymri. Today it is usually spelled Cymri, and their ancient language is Cymric.
The Welsh have perpetuated their ancient racial characteristics more than any member of the great
Celtic-Saxon-Scandinavian race. The people of ancient England later became more Saxon in type. This could be due to the vast
in ux of Engles, Frisians, Jutes, and Saxons that settled in the land following their invasion. Of these, the Engles or Angles and Saxons
were by far the most numerous. However, each acted according to their native disposition. All of them originated from the northern
kingdom of Samaria, where they were rst led by Ephraim.
It should be remembered that the Ephraimites were the legal inheritors of the title Israel and not Judah, or the Jews. In the
Bible, the southern kingdom at Jerusalem and the northern kingdom of Samaria are always addressed separately under di erent
names, Judah and Israel. Even God in His instructions refers to them as such: 'Judah was His sanctuary and Israel His
dominion' (Psa. 114:2). Consequently, as to be expected, the Ephraimites continued to govern according to the patriarchal law.
Originally, Judah was part of the priestly sect, with the Levites, the latter being the true dispensers of religious jurisdiction who were
divided between Judah and Israel, in service. Among the Kelts are the descendants of the priestly group that served Ephraim, or Israel,
which is manifested throughout the ages by their deep religious disposition. They also represented the professional class - scientists,
d o c t o r s , lawyers, etc. which we nd so vigorously demonstrated m ancient Britain, religion, industry, and commerce.
The Ephraimites were the true warrior tribe of Israel, the Defenders of the Faith, as they are today. The Levites were not permitted
to bear arms or serve in war· neither were the Druids. Nevertheless, the Keltoi were famed as valiant warriors. This was because there
were enough of the warrior Ephraimite clan among them to protect the Priesthood d associates in the professions. It has been stated
that the major warrior legions of the Ephraimites were the last to leave Samaria, protecting the westward trek of their brothers. This could
be that History shows that even Though the Kymri were engaged in con ict during their passage they did not experience one fraction of,
the combat as fought by the Ephraimites.
The question arises, How do we connect the Saxons with the Ephraimites and as brethren of the Kelts?
It is ( P. 5 1 ) aptly said that the Bible is the truest history book ever written, to which the writer subscribes. Within Scripture, we nd the
clues that modem scientists, particularly the detectives of science, and the archaeologists, have proved to be real.
When Isaac was born, God made a strange statement to Sarah. He said: 'In all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her
voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called' (Gen. 21: 12). Nowhere in the Biblical record are God's people so known. Theologians either
Page 21 of 122
fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
m­
fi
fl
fi
n­
fl
fi
ff
Page 22 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
evaded the explanation or were blind to the meaning and to other statements later given by the prophets and by our Lord on the matter.
Isaiah and Jeremiah not only strongly emphasized the fact but gave positive clues to their identity. Jesus said He had come to 'the lost
sheep' - Ephraim. He told the Jews their inheritance was to be taken away from them and given to another. Jesus could only give such
an inheritance to God's own people since from the beginning they were bound within the Covenant Law to carry out God's purpose on
earth through Christ. His strongest commi sion He gave to St. Paul, to go to the Gentiles who would receive Him. While St. Paul went to
the Gentiles, more directly and positively he went to the people of Britain and ordained the rst Christian Bishop in Britain, in the
name of Jesus.
Jesus had said that the old law was nished in His sacri ce. He came to ful ll the Law - the Covenant between God and man. Until
the British Druidic church and its peoples were consecrated in 'The Way', they were Gentiles. But of all the peoples of the earth the only
existing faith that was prepared beforehand to accept Christ, and the only people to know His name, and to speak it before Christ was
born, were the British Druids.
Christ knew to whom He was addressing Himself. St. Paul knew to whom he was speci cally directed, as we shall show by historic
fact. Joseph of Arimathea, from longer and closer association with Jesus, knew, and to these people, both these great Apostles went.
The Christian elect was to be known in the name of Isaac.
Are they so known? Most certainly they are, and the name is Saxon.
Equally, the excavated monuments and artifacts from the Royal Cemeteries of the Crimea have positively identi ed the Kymri by their
actual name, and so have the ancient historians documented the evolution of the Saxon name from Isaac in their records.
Let us check farther back in history. These important facts are necessary to prove God's course and purpose, as later demonstrated by
Joseph of Arimathea and St. Paul.
The ( P. 5 2 ) name Semite is derived from Shem, who was the son of Noah, and of whom it is said in Genesis 9: 26, 'Blessed be the Lord
God of Shem.' From Shem is descended the special seed elected to be the chosen race. Until the exodus of Abraham from Chaldea the
Covenant People were known as Shemites. Under Abraham, they became known as Hebrews. This term derives from Eber, who
was a descendant of Shem. The word Hebrew does not speci cally designate a race. It means 'colonist or colonizer', applied in the
same manner as it was once associated with the Americans and Canadians. Like the Americans and Canadians, the people were spoken
of as colonists until they were nationalized. Nationalization of the Covenant People was acquired under the dying Jacob, grandson of
Abraham, and the son of Isaac. Then they became a nation formed of twelve tribes to be so known by the Will of God as Israel, meaning
'Ruling with God'. Later, when the tribes revolted under Ephraim, the son of Joseph, they became divided into two kingdoms, that of the
north and of the south, being known as Judah and Israel.
Both went into captivity. A fra ment of Judah returned to Jerusalem but Israel, as Ephraimites, never returned or was ever again
mentioned in scriptural history. During this long existence from Shem to the vanishing Ephraimites, the name Jew never occurred in history
and was unknown to the Shemites, Hebrews, Israelites or Ephraimites. Nevertheless, it is true that some of the Jews who later sprang from
the remnant of Judah that returned to the Holy City after the Babylonian captivity are Shemites, or Semites, as we now use the name, and
they were part of Israel, but only a fragment. In fact, they had become so ( P. 5 2 ) mixed from intermarriage with other peoples during their
captivity, it is doubtful how clear their native claim to Israel could be. However, they are recognized as part of Israel, but only in the same
manner as we would say all Pennsylvanians are Americans and all Ontarians are Canadians, but all Americans and Canadians are not
Pennsy vanians or Ontarians. Consequently, it is a serious misnomer to consider the Jews of today as the only surviving Semites or
Israelites. The major portion of both Judah and Ephraim had long passed out of their original homeland to be known by other names, some
of which have already been explained.
Now we come to the mysterious promise of God to Sarah, ‘In Isaac shall thy seed be called (Gen. 2 I: I 2 ). The prophets had said they
would dwell afar o and be known by another name, one representing their racial heritage. On being questioned by the people whose
lands they passed, the Israelites (Ephraimites, and ( P. 5 3 ) the many of Judah who had joined up with them in their march} explained that
they were the Sons of Isaac.
The ethnological chart shows that they were divided into two groups, each taking a di erent route that was ultimately to lead them
into the Isles of the West - Britain. The Kymri we have already established but the warrior Ephraimites became more markedly referred to
as Sons of Isaac. In writing this name it took on di erent vari tions according to language but the pronunciation was the same, leaving no
doubt as to their identity. Ancient documents and monuments refer to them as I-Saccasuns, I-Sak-suna, Sakasuna, Saksens, and
Page 22 of 122
l­
ff
g­
fi
s­
ff
fi
a­
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
 Page 23 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
nally Saxons. It is true, historically, they are also known collectively as Scythians, but it must be remembered it was not the name by
which the amalgamated tribes called themselves but the name applied to them by the Greeks. For about seven hundred years they lived
in the districts known to the Greeks as Scythia, to the Romans as Dacia (now Roumania), and Thrace. Just as the Kymri of
Britain assumed the name, British, so did the old Ephraimite Israelites elect to be known as Saxons, the name which both
concealed and revealed the name of Isaac.
The Anglo-Saxons were the chief and most powerful among the associated tribes, hence the accepted leaders. As Saxons, on the
invitation of the British chieftain Vortigem, they rst entered Britain.
After the Saxon settlement in Britain, observers of other nations would have noticed what they might have termed a strange breach of
Saxon policy. They began to intermarry with the British Kelts.
Whether or not the fair, ( P. 5 3 ) blue-eyed Saxons and the darker Kelts realized their racial a nity, mutually they blended together. In all
their migratory wanderings the Keltic and Saxon peoples steadfastly refused to intermix or intermarry with the people of other
races. To do so was a serious tribal o ense recognized by both. In this they were more loyal to the patriarchal law than were their
brethren of Judah during their Babylonian captivity. As prophesied, for this overt act this section of Judah was to be branded by 'the
shew of their countenance'. This is markedly shown, even today, in their descendants by the Hittite cast of black hair and the hooked
nose.
Not only did they refuse to intermix, but they were also true to the ancient command to 'dwell together'. History informs us
whenever they began their next migratory step they left few behind, empt ing the land. Contrary to the custom of other people who
either left behind the aged, the too-young, and the in rm or slew them, Kymri ( P. 5 4 ) and the Saxon tribes took all with them. This was
more particularly related to the Anglo-Saxons, whose migrations were more numerous and longer spaced in reaching the eventual
'Homeland'. This fact is historically stated in the mass migration of the Saxon peoples into Britain. Dr. Latham writes in his Ethnology of
the British Islands:
'Throughout the whole length and breadth of Germany there I not one village, hamlet, or family which can show de nite signs of descent
from the Continental ancestors of the Anglo-Saxons of England.'
Professor Sayce writes:
'All the branches that owed into Britain are branches of the self-same stock. Not a single pure Saxon is to be found in
any village, town, or city in Germany. We once came there, but came out again in our wanderings to these British
Islands.'
That they all were kinsmen, Briton-Kelt, Gaels, Anglo-Saxons, Jutes, Frisians, Danes, and Normans is emphasized by Freeman in The
Norman Conquest: 'It is di cult to realize the fact that our nation which now exists is not really a mixed race in the sense which popular
language implies.'
Professor Huxley, writing of the political tumult in Ireland in 1870, when agitators tried to make a racial di erence an issue, wrote: 'If
what I have to say in a matter of science weighs with any man who has political power, I ask him to believe that the arguments about the
di erence between ( P. 5 4 ) the Anglo-Saxons and the Celt's are a mere sham and delusion.'
In referring to the characteristic of the Kelt, like the Saxon, to 'dwell alone', he states that during the Roman occupation of Britain,
Romans, and Kelt led a separate life from each other. And when the Romans withdrew permanently from Britain i n A.D. 410, the
population was as substantially Celtic as they had found it.
In the name of Isaac, the promised Seed of God was to be found. As I-Sax-Sons, they became Israelites, to be lost, punished for
their sin in worshipping the golden calf, scattered throughout the nations, But as corn winnowed in a sieve' would nally be gathered
together into a place appointed by God Himself (2 Sam. 7: 10) where they would settle and move no more, and where no weapon formed
against them should prosper (Isa. 54: 17).
The validity of these facts cannot be overlooked, nor the other ancient custom among them of keeping the Sabbath.
In Exodus 31 we read ( P. 5 5 ) to whom the command to observe the Sabbath was given :
'Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual
covenant' (v. 16). 'It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever' (v. 17).
Page 23 of 122
fi
ff
fl
ffi
ff
fi
fi
y­
ffi
ff
fi
fi
Page 24 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The Anglo-Saxon race were and are the only people to observe this sign. In the past, when foreigners were questioned as to what
impressed them most about English and American customs they replied, 'Your English Sunday.' While all places were wide open in
foreign lands, in Britain and America the Sabbath was observed. Even at the great Paris Exhibition, only the British and United States
sections were closed on Sunday.
Voltaire, the extraordinary intellectual in del, said: 'Whether Englishmen know it or not, it is the English Sunday which makes England
what England is.'
This is equally true of America, and the British Commonwealth of Nations.
Dr. Ryle, Bishop of Liverpool, said:
'I assert without hesitation that the only countries on the face of the globe in which you will nd true observance of the
Sabbath are Great Britain, the ( P. 5 5 ) Commonwealth nations, and America. No other nations can possibly be said to
ful ll this sign.’1
(1 AIsaiah 58:13-14.)
However, the warning is sounded in the announcement that when we begin to forsake the Lord's Day, which all Anglo-Saxon
people have been doing in various degrees over the years, our prosperity will depart from us.
A few years ago a foreigner visiting England made the remark in the Press: 'You have in England something which we have always
longed to have, and never could attain - Sunday - and you are losing it almost without protest.'
America has always been the greatest desecrator of the Sabbath, more so than the other Anglo-Saxon nations. We all should heed the
warning.
England derived its name from the Engles (Angles). The meaning of the name is again signi cant. Engles means 'God-Men'. This name
was not conferred upon them because of any special righteousness but because instead of worshipping idols of stone, as (‘Isaiah 58:
13-14) others did, they ( P. 5 6 ) worshipped God. The idolaters called them Go Men - Engles (Angles).
The story is told that one day when Pope Gregory was walking along the streets of Rome, he encountered a group of Roman soldiers
with several British (Yorkshire) captive children. He paused in wonderment, enamored by their unusual countenance: golden hair, blue eyes,
and fair skin, something he had never seen before. He asked the soldiers who they were. On being told they were Engles, from England,
he remarked on their beauty, replying, 'They are well named. They look like angels.' From this encounter, it is claimed Pope Gregory
became persuaded of himself to send Augustine to Britain on his mission.
The religious habits, customs, and characteristics that so de nitely marked the Kymri and the Saxons from the rest of the peoples of
the earth cannot be charged to mere coincidence with the ancient patriarchal law. They are too deeply signi cant. Regardless of how the
Keltic-Saxon people may have deviated from full adherence to the Law, in their wanderings, the Covenants were the core of their spiritual
life, directing their material policies. The Covenan meaning name, British, would never have been conferred upon them by other peoples if
they had not been more than duly impressed by their religious observances. As one studies the Druidic Triads, a greater association with
the Covenant ( P. 5 6 ) Law is shown with startling clarity. Considering these Hebraic religious customs and the acquisition of interpretative
names, one can readily realize how simply and e ectively the wedding between the old Druidic religion and the New Covenant of
'The Way' took place, providing a fertile eld and a safe sanctuary for Joseph of Arimathea and his companions.
This was not an accident. It was the beginning of the new destiny long before prophesied, which was brought to birth in the great
sacri ce of Jesus Christ, our Savior.
There are still people who insist that the British story is a superstitious myth without foundation, just as they continue to debate that
the Bible is untrue. They are as mentally fogbound as the Victorian historians who could not understand how, why, or where there could be
any connection between the ancient British and the continental races and less with the prophecies and people of the Bible. Unfortunately,
at that time the historic past was not so well revealed to them as archaeology has disclosed it in modem times.
Even as the amazing discoveries in the caves of the Dead Sea, during the ( P. 5 7 ) years 1955-56, have brought to the light of day
thousands of stored documents secreted therein by the Essenes, substa tiating the books of the Bible in every instance, equally so, during
the last twenty- ve years, archaeologists have supplied the modem ethnologist and historian with indisputable evidence to vindicate the
historic age-old story of the people of Britain.
Page 24 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
t­
ff
fi
n­
d­
fi
fi
fi
Page 25 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The Essenes were the most cultured and learned religious order existing before the birth of Christ, free of the contamination of power
politics, or orthodox religion. They were the greatest truth-seekers of their time. Most of the discovered documents were written before
Christ and much after His advent. Every day tran lators are disclosing material that has long puzzled theologians concerning both the Old
and New Testaments. Much of this testimony proves the historic validity of the facts given herein. Archaeologists unearthing monuments,
tablets, coins and various other artifacts name and trace the Covenant Peoples of our story from their ancient birthplace to the Isles of the
West and the British and Americans to their place in modem history.
Crushed beyond revival are the diatribes of the atheists and the mocking voices of the Higher Critics of Germany. Authority has been
stripped from irresponsible historians.
It is not so well known ( P. 5 7 ) that H. G. Wells's Outline of History, which sold by the million copies, was most severely criticized by an
angry group of scientists and scholars who dubbed Wells' work as 'a gross mass of medieval historic error'. Wells was obliged to abridge
the next edition. Although he corrected a number of his agrant errors he was unable to make a complete correction without writing the
whole work, which he did not do.
The devil is ever alert to use the in del mind and careless writers to divert all whom he can from the truth. In the end, truth always wins.
There is ever a fascination to be found in a name. It seldom fails to intrigue the mind, creating a curious desire to learn what it may
mean and how it was derived. In names, as shown herein, invariably is found the key that unlocks the door to an age-old mystery. No
names can equal the drama of Kymri, Saxon, and British, and of them all the name British is the most enthralling name in all history.

Page 25 of 122
fi
s­
fl
Page 26 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER VII

GALLIC TESTIMONY

T
he religious ( P. 5 8 ) spirit of the Gaul diminished with the coming of the Franks but the re never ickered in Britain. It amed like
a volcano, ery in its evangelism and bursting forth ercely at foreign interference. Even when resting., its complacency was
deceptive as the Nazis found out in World War II. To strike at her Christian institutions and sacred edi ces is to pierce her heart,
causing her people to ght back with that invincible fury that has ever astonished the world, as it nally shattered her enemies.
Long before the arrival of the Bethany castaways at Marseilles, Guizot informs us that the south of France was known as the
Provence Viennoise, populated by Gauls, Phoenicians, and Greeks, 'with the Gauls are most populous everywhere'. The signi cance of
this is quite important. The Phoenicians and the Greeks had a long association with the south of France, particularly the Phoenicians,
who were the leading mariners before the Grecian seafaring ascendancy. The ancient port of Marseilles was the chief port of call for
both the comings and goings in the transportation of tin and lead from Britain. Over the centuries a common friendship had developed
between them and the Gauls; consequently, it is understandable how Phoenician and Grecian colonies came to be founded in Gaul.
Marseilles is reputed to be the oldest city in France and its oldest seaport. It was a port long before either settled there but it was the
Greeks who developed the port to its peak of prominence and gave it the name it bears. However, we should never lose sight of the fact
that the port had its rst association with the biblical ships of Tarshish, commanded by the Danites, of the tribe of Dan. They were the rst
great sea power in history and the rst to know intimately the inhabitants of Britain, and to trade with them. The Phoenicians and
Greeks were very largely Danites. At the time of our story, the port of Marseilles was familiar with the ships of Joseph. To the Gallic
populace, his name was well known as are the names of Carnegie, Schwab, and Bethlehem Steel to us today. Therefore, it can be well
assumed that Joseph had many in uential friends at Marseilles, who would gladly welcome him amongst them.
Among the ( P. 5 9 ) Gauls there existed a deep receptivity for the persecuted followers of 'The Way'. Between the Gauls and the Judean
advocates of Christ, there ( P. 5 9 ) was mutual sympathy. The Gauls were Druidic, and their faith held sway over all Gaul, which explains more
than anything else why the land was a safe haven for Joseph and the Bethany family, as well as the many other converts who had
previously found refuge there, after a safe escape from Judea in the ships of Joseph.
Those who have been indoctrinated by the false stories describing the Druidic religion may pause in consternation. The malevolent
infamy heaped upon the Druidic Priesthood, their religion, with the practice of human sacri ce, is just as untruthful, vicious, and vile as the
other distortions stigmatizing the ancient Britons. On close examination, it will be found that Those who uttered the vindictive maledictions
stand out in Roman history as the dictators of the Roman Triumvirate. Their bestial hatred for everything that was British and Christian
deliberately promoted the insidious prop ganda to defame the people they could neither coerce nor subdue. In our own time, among
others, none other than the eminent archaeologist Sir Flinders Petrie, on examination of the ground around and under the altar at
Stonehenge, completely exploded the infamous accusations. He found only the fossilized bones of sheep and goats which more rmly
established the a nity with the patriarchal faith of the East. In each case, the sacri cial burnt o erings were as stated in the biblical record.
The in uence Druidism had upon the rest of the ancient world, and its peaceful and ready reception of the Christian faith, proves its
noble structure. Hume, the high-ranking British historian acknowledged for his impartiality and the lack of bias in his reporting, wrote:
'No religion has ever swayed the minds of men like the Druidic.'
It prepared the way for Christianity by its solid acceptance of 'The Way'. But for Druidism Christianity might never have ourished. It
drove the rst nails into the Christian platform that held it fast through all its early stresses, giving it the vigor to endure for all posterity.
The Roman persecutors, despising Druidic opposition, intensi ed their malignancy with the British conversion to Christianity. The
Emperors Augustus, Tiberius, and the Claudian and Diocletian decrees made acceptance of Druidic and Christian faith a capital o ense,
punishable by death. Some have claimed that this persecution by Rome drove both religions together to form the solid phalanx of ( P. 6 0 )
Christianity. This is far from being the case. It has been already pointed ( P. 6 0 ) out how the ancient Kymry were bonded in the ancient
patriarchal faith even before they arrived in Britain. Organized by Hu Gadam (Hugh the Mighty) the faith took on the name of Druid, a
word some claim derived from the Keltic word 'Dreus', meaning 'an oak', arising out of the custom of worshipping in the open within
the famous oak groves of the island. A more likely derivation is from 'Druthin' - a 'Senrant of Truth'. The motto of the Druids was 'The
Truth against the World.' A casual study of the Triads emphasized the old Hebrew faith with positive clar cation. The British Mother
Druidic Church continued to teach the immortality of the soul, the omniscience of One God, and the coming of the Messiah. They
were aware of the prophesied vicarious atonement and, extraordinary as it may seem, the actual name of Jesus was familiar to them long
Page 26 of 122
fl
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fl
fi
a­
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fl
fi
fi
i­
fi
fl
fl
fi
ff
fi
fi
Page 27 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
before the advent of Christ. They were the only people to know it and say it, a fact that has astounded students of theology. From this, it
can clearly be seen that there existed a mutual understanding between the Druid and the converted Judean on religious principles that
readily opened the door to general acceptance of 'The Way'. From this, we can believe it was no accident whereby the refugee followers of
'The Way' found a natural haven in Gaul, and their apostolic leaders a safer sanctuary in Britain. At that period in history, Britain
was the only free country in the world. Gaul had received its baptism of Roman persecution long before the Caesars turned their
atte tion upon the British. It was the constant aid given to the Gaulish brethren by the warriors of Britain which brought about the invasion
of the Isles. The rst attack, led by Julius Caesar, in 55 B.C., was purely a punitive expedition against the Britons for thwarting his arms
in Gaul. Contrary to the general opinion that Caesar's attack was a conquest, it was a dismal failure. Within two weeks his forces were
routed and pulled back into Gaul. On his return to Rome Caesar was openly ridiculed by Pompey's Party in the Triumvirate. His famous
legend, 'Veni, Vidi, Vici' ('I came, I saw, I conquered') was satirized by the pens of the Roman elite. They ·wrote in rebuke, 'I came, I saw,
but failed to stay.' Over the ten years that followed, to 43 B.C., the mightiest armed forces of Rome, led by its ablest generals, fought to
establish a foothold in Britain. In this, Caesar failed to penetrate farther than a few miles inland.
It was not until the reign of Hadrian, A.D. 120, that Britain was incorporated (by treaty- not conquest) within the Roman do inions, as
described by Spartans in Vita Hadriani. By this treaty the Britons retained their kings, ( P. 6 1 ) lands, laws, and rights, accepting a Roman
nucleus of the army for the defense of the realm.
Surely no one can misconstrue this conquest or support the belief the naked barbarians could defy and defeat the Roman legions,
during t h e t h o u s a n d years led by its Emperors and greatest generals. The invasions were repelled by the famed British Pendragon,
Caswallen, who reigned for seven years after the invasion.
For Gaul, it was not to last. They lacked the security of the seas which protected the British Isles. Unhappily Gaul, later to be known as
France, was destined to be the world crossroads of co tinental invasion, and on its soil, up to our own time, some of the bloodiest battles
in all history have been fought. Until the coming of the Franks, the Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, a n d the Gauls for centuries w re to
carry on the great evangelizing work of Christianity, laying the foundation of the Church by the great leaders who stemmed from Britain,
with carefully formed plans. It was to be immortalized with the presence and great work of Philip, Lazarus, Mary Magdalene, and the other
Marys, each of whom left an enduring mark in the name of their Saviour. 1 As the story of Joseph
(1 cf. J. W. Taylor, The Coming of the Saints.)
of Arimathea is brought forth to the light of day, so are thousands, who labored under his instruction, lifted out of the obscure darkness
of the past to thrill us with their devotion and sacri ce.
The record shows that Joseph frequently journeyed to Gaul to confer with the disciples, particularly with Philip, who had arrived at
Marseilles ahead of Joseph and was awaiting him and the Bethany family.
It must not be forgotten that Joseph, by his tin mining, interests in Cornwall and Devon, had a long association with the British.
Consequently, the comings and goings of his ships most certainly would have kept the British up to date with world happenings and also
with Gaul.'
Long before Joseph arrived in Britain, the scandal of the cross was known to them and had become a cause of grave concern to the
Druidic Church. By similarity of patriarchal faith and kno ledge of prophecy, the Druidic prelates recognized in the death of Christ the
ful llment of prophecy. The swiftness with which the Druidic delegates journeyed to Gaul to meet Joseph shows how concerned
they were to obtain rst-hand information. Contrary to the fallacious story of later historians, there was no argument civil or religious,
and no bloodshed. It was an open acceptance that elected (‘cf. J. W. Taylor, The Coming of the Saints.) Joseph of Arimathea to ( P. 6 2 ) the
head of the Christ-converted British Church.
From then on the Druidic name and the old religion in Britain and Gaul began to be superseded by the Christian name, which the
British created to identify the accepted Christ faith, formerly known as 'The Way'.
The miraculous safe arrival of Joseph and his companions at Marseilles, and thence to Britain, surely was the Will of God working out
His inscrutable purpose gradually to ful ll the pr phetic words of Jesus, to come to the lost sheep of Israel. From that time
commenced the organization of the Christian clan, the marshaling of their forces into determined action. Thus began the epochal drama
that was to change imperial destiny and lead the peoples of the world to a better way of life. Yet, before this was to be fully achieved,
millions were to wade their way through an unbelievable tragedy, defying tyranny in its basest and most terr fying form, wholesale

Page 27 of 122
fi
n­
fi
fi
fi
fi
o­
n­
w­
i­
m­
Page 28 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
massacre and endish torture, su ering the brutalities of the Colosseum, the horrors of the fetid prison of the Mamertine, and the
dreadful scourging wars in which the British were to make the most colossal sacri ce in blood and life known to history.

Page 28 of 122
fi
ff
fi
Page 29 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER V I I I

ST. PHILIP CONSECRATES JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA IN FRANCE

T
his is not ( P. 6 3 ) di cult to visualize the joyous meeting that took place between old, tried, and trusted friends when the Bethany
group arrived at Marseilles. Every record scrutinized points to the closeness that banded the disciples and followers of 'The
Way' to Joseph. In him they possessed an intelligent, intrepid leader, a born organizer with the cold, calm reasoning of the
shrewd, successful business mind; truly a much-needed asset to guide them in t h o s e crucial years. Throughout his lifetime he was to
continue to be their salvation against the new and rising storm of Roman persecution that was soon to be loosed upon all followers of
'The Way', with a murderous fury that overshadows the brutalities of Hitler and Stalin. He was to be the means of raising the rst
Christian army to battle for Christ on the shores and elds of Britain that sent the bestial Romans reeling on their heels.
Joseph was ever the unseen power behind the throne, as he had been on that black night in the Sanhedrin and the following four years
in Judea. All rallied around him eager to begin proclaiming the Word to the world.
How many of the disciples were with him during his short stay in Gaul it is di cult to say. It is amazing how nonchalantly the records
deal with this important matter. Various existing records agree in part with the Baronius record, 1 naming among the occ pants of the
castaway boat Mary Magdalene, Martha,
(1 Annals Ecclesiastici, vol. 1, p. 327, quoting Acts of Magdalen and others manuscripts.)
the han maiden Marcella, Lazarus whom Jesus raised from the dead, and Maximin the man whose sight Jesus restored. Then non-
committally the report read, 'and others'. Other records state that Philip and James accompanied Joseph. Others report that Mary, the wife
of Cleopas, and Mary, the mother of Jesus, were occupants of the boat. That there were many congregated at this time is obvious by the
manner in which the various names appear in the early Gallic church records. It is well known that a great number of converts had
preceded Joseph to Marseilles. Banded together they formed a (‘Annales Ecclesiastici, vol. 1, p. 327, quoting Acts of Maidalen and other
manuscripts.) godly ( P. 6 4 ) company of eager, enthusiastic workers in the Christian vineyard.
Philip, one of the original twelve Apostles, was certainly present. There is a wealth of uncontroversial testimony asserting his
commission in Gaul, all of which alike state that he received and consecrated Joseph, preparatory to his embarkation and
appointment as the Apostle to Britain.
Some have misconstrued this act of consecration as an act of conversion to the Christ Way of Life, chie y because Joseph's name is
not mentioned as being one of the seventy elected by Jesus on His second appearance. In fact, few names are mentioned, and none
of the latter one hundred and twenty. They overlook the facts of the biblical record which states that during the last tragic days of Jesus,
the Apostles at Jerusalem referred to Joseph being a disciple of Christ. This pronouncement antedates the enlistment of the two later
elected groups of disciples; therefore it was not necessary for Joseph to be named among them. His devotion to Jesus, and the apostolic
reference shows that he was one of the early disciples of Christ.
In order to be properly ordained to an apostolic appointment it was necessary for the consecration to be performed by the laying on
of hands by one of the original Apostles. Strange as it may seem, thrice within thirty years Philip performs this special consecration for
Joseph, the third time for a very peculiar reason that will be related in its order.
St. Philip is referred to in the early Gallic church as the Apostle of Gaul. Undoubtedly he was the rst acknowledged Apostle to Gaul
but, as we shall later see, the unceasing evangelizing e ort in Gaul stemmed from Britain, with Lazarus, i n p a r t i c u l a r, dominating
the Gallic scene during his short lifetime.1 Due to
(1 W. Taylor, The Coming of the Saints, pp. 238-240.)
Philip's apostolic authority it might be more correctly said that while in Gaul he was the accepted head of the Gallic Christian Church.
The biblical and secular records show that he did not remain constantly in Gaul. There is frequent record of his being in other lands,
in the company of other Apostles and disciples. Scriptural literature ceases to mention him circa A.D. 60. Evidently he returned to Gaul at
various intervals. Many of the early writers particularly report Philip being in Gaul A.D. 65, emphasizing the fact that it was in this year
that he consecrated Joseph, for the third time. Philip did not die in Gaul nor were his martyred remains buried (J.W. Taylor, The
Coming of the Saints, pp. 238-240.) there.
Page 29 of 122
d­
ffi
fi
ff
ffi
fi
fl
u­
fi
Page 30 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
He was ( P. 6 5 ) cruci ed at Hierapolis at an advanced age. Two notable church authorities report his death.
Isidore, Archbishop of Seville, A.D. 600-636, in his Historia, writes:
'Philip of the city Bethsaida, whence also came Peter, preached Christ to the Gauls, and brought barbarous and neighboring nations,
seated in darkness and close to the swelling ocean to the light of knowledge and port of faith. Afterward, he was stoned and cruci ed
and died in Hierapolis, a city of Phrygia, and having been buried with his corpse upright along with his daughters rests there.'
The Dictionary of Christian Biography refers to Isidore as undoubtedly the greatest man of his time in the Church of Spain. A
voluminous writer of great learning.'
The eminent Cardinal Baronius, in his Ecclesiastical Annals, Writes:
’Philip the fth in order is said to have adorned Upper Asia with the Gospel, and at length at Hierapolis at the age of 87 to have
undergone martyrdom, which also John Chrysostom hands down, and they say that the same man traveled over part of Scythia, and for
some time preaching the Gospel along with Bartholomew. In Isidore, one reads that Philip even imbued the Gauls with the Christian faith,
which also in the Breviary of Toledo of the school of Isidore is read.'
Julian, Archbishop of Toledo, A.D. 680-690, whom Dr. William Smith in his biographical work states was 'the last eminent Churc man
of West Gothic Spain, and next to Isidore of Seville, perhaps the most eminent', along with the Venerable Bede, A.D. 673, declare that
Philip was assigned to Gaul. The talented Archbishop Ussher also asserts: 'St. Philip preached Christ to the Gauls.' Further testimony is
found in the MS. Martyrology of Hieronymus.
Finally, to substantiate Philip's mission and presence in Gaul, I quote, Freculphus, Bishop of Lisieux, France, A.D. 825-851 :
'Philip of the City of Bethsaida whence also came Peter, of whom in the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles praiseworthy mention is
often made, whose daughters also were outstanding prophetesses, and of wonderful sanctity and perpetual virginity, as ecclesiastical
history narrates, preached Christ to the Gauls.'
At this time it is quite in place to discuss the recently revived belief that the Epistle to the Galatians was addressed, as the ancient (P.66)
writers claim, to the inhabitants of Gaul, and not the small colony of Gauls in Asia, particularly since the testimony is related by various
authoritative writers discussing Philip's mission in Gaul in the same breath. This evidence is quite important to consider, substantiating the
great Christian evangelizing e ort in Gaul and supporting the mass of evidence associating Britain with Gaul in those dramatic years.
Cardinal Baronius writes :
'We have said in our notes to the Roman Martyrology that, "to the Galatians" must be corrected in the place of "to the Gauls".'
St. Epiphanius, A.D. 315-407, wrote:
'The ministry of the divine word having been entrusted to St. Luke, he exercised it by passing into Dalmatia, into Gaul, into Italy, into
Macedonia, but principally into Gaul, so that St. Paul assures him in his epistles about some of his disciples - "Crescens", said he, "is in
Gaul.'' In it must not be read in Galatia as some have falsely Thoughout, but in Gaul. 1
Pere Longueval remarks that this sentiment was so general in the East that Theodoret, who read 'in Galatia', did not fail to unde stand
'Gaul' because as a matter of fact the Greeks gave this name to Gaul, and the Galatians had only thus been named because they were a
colony of Gauls (Memoire de l' Apostolat de St. Mansuet (vide p. 83), par l'Abbe Guillaume, p. II).
No better authority may be quoted in discussing this matter than the learned Rev. Lional Smithett Lewis, M.A., late Vicar of
Glastonbury, considered the foremost church historian of our times.
The Rev. Lewis writes: 2
(1 “Crescens to Galatia”; 2 Timothy 4:10.
2 Lewis, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, pp. 75-76.)
'Perhaps it may be permitted to point out that Edouard de Bazelaire supports this view of Crescens being in Gaul, and not in Galatia. He
traces St. Paul about the year 63 along the Aurelian Way from Rome to Arles in France (Predication du Christianisme dans les Gaules, t. IX,
p. 198). He names his three companions: St. Luke who had just written the Acts, Tropbimus whom he left at Aries, and Crescens whom
he had sent to Vienne (Gaul).' He quotes de Bazelaire who goes on to say, 'On his return he retook Trophimus with him and was not able to
Page 30 of 122
fi
fi
ff
r­
h­
fi
Page 31 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
keep him as far as Rome, for he wrote (St. Paul) from there to Timothy, "Hasten and come (1 "Cresccns to Galatia"; 2 Timothy 4: to.
Lewis, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, pp. 75-76.) and join me as soon ( P. 6 7 ) as possible. Crescens is in the Gauls. I have; left
Trophimus sick at Millet (Miletus).'' The Abbe Maxime Latou, referring to Trophimus being in Gaul says, "In 417 the Pope Zommus
recognized in the Church of Arles the right of being Metropolitan over all the district of Narbonne because Trophimus its rst Bishop had
been for the Gauls the source of life whence owed the streams of faith.'
The Rev. Lewis also states,
'All this goes to prove that Gaul was known as Galatia, and their chronicling St. Paul's and his companions' journey does not in the
least mean that they deny St. Philip's.
For the same reason M. Edouard de Bazelaire quotes
M. Chateaubriand as saying, "Peter sent missionaries into Italy, in the Gauls, and on the coast of Africa." The part that St. Peter
played is duly emphasized by many illustrious Roman historians, and without St. Peter in the least exercising any primacy this ardent and
potent man might well have in uenced his compatriot from Bethsaida (St. Philip).'
'It is quite important to know that the Churches of Vienne and Mayence in Gaul claim Crescens as their founder. This goes far to
corroborate that Galatia in II Timothy iv, 10, means Gaul, and not its colony Galatia in Asia, and that Isidore meant to say that St. Philip
preached to the Gauls, and not to the Gal tians of Asia.'
'We have seen that the "Recognitions of Clement" (2nd Century) stated that St. Clement of Rome, going to Caesarca, found St.
Joseph of Arimathea there with St. Peter, Lazams, the Holy Women and others, a quite likely place for the start of the voyage of
St. Joseph and the Bethany Family and others to Marseilles. Caesarea was the home of St. Philip in the Bible story. Aftcnvard
tradition, supported by secular records, brings him to France, whence he sent St. Joseph to Britain. William of Malmesbury, quoting
Freculphus, calls Joseph St. Philip's "dearest friend". They must have been in close association. Tradition brings the Holy Women and St.
Joseph to France. All the way up the Rhone Valley, as we have seen, from Ma seilles to Morlaix, we nd constant memories of the
occupants of that boat without oars and sails. From Morlaix in Brittany, it is a short step to Cornwall in Britain. The route from Marseilles
must have been known well to Joseph. It was that of his fellow traders, seeking ore. From Cornwall, an ancient road leading to the mines of
Mendip, remains of which exist. A vigorous reception of St. Joseph suggests a very possible previous acquaintance.
Testimony from ( P. 6 8 ) the Early Fathers and varied branches of the Church shows that the Church was here in earliest days.'
In discussing reference to the Gauls of France and the Gauls of Asia, Archbishop Ussher sternly rebukes contemporaneous writers for
creating the misunderstanding through their inaptitude to examine the ancient documents and compare the records. As we have seen from
the few quotations provided, apostolic reference is indicated to the Gauls of France, and not the Gauls of Asia. The presence of St. Philip
is established in Gaul and as his rst allotted mission. Other Apostles are mentioned working in Gaul, some of whom we shall see
journeyed with Joseph of Arimathea to Britain. St. Clement throws historic light on the illustrious gathe ing at Caesarea, about the time of
this exodus, which tends to support the statement by many that Philip, as the dearest friend of Joseph, with James, was an occupant in
the castaway boat along with the Holy Women and others. It is on record that St. Philip baptized Josephes,1 the son of Joseph, and later,
when Joseph r visited Gaul, Philip sent Josephes to Britain with his father and ten other disciples. Evidently, the Saints arrived in Britain
in groups. It is ultimately stated that one hundred and sixty had been sent to Britain at various intervals by St. Philip to serve Joseph in
his evangelizing mission. 2
(1 Magna Blastoniensis Tabula.
2 From early manuscript quoted by John of Glastonbury, William of Malmesburg and Capgrave.)
Joseph did not linger long in Gaul. A British Druidic delegation of Bishops arrived at Marseilles to greet him and extend an enth siastic
invitation to Joseph, urging him to return to Britain with them and there teach the Christ Gospel. This magnanimous inv tation was
enlarged upon by the Druidic emissaries of the British Prince Arviragus, o ering Joseph lands, a safe haven, and protection against Roman
molestation. Arviragus was Prince of the noble Silures of Britain, in the Dukedom of Cornwall. He was the son of King Ounobelinus, the
Cymbeline of Shakespeare, and cousin to the renowned British warrior-patriot, Caradoc, whom the Romans named Caractacus. Together
they represented the Royal Silurian dynasty, the most powerful warrior kingdom in Britain, from whom the Tudor kings and queens of
England had their descent.

Page 31 of 122
e­
fl
fi
a­
fl
ff
r­
r­
fi
fi
i­
u­
Page 32 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The invitation was gladly accepted and Joseph made ready to embark for Britain, with his specially elected companions imm diately
after his dearest friend, St. Philip, had performed the 'Magna Glastoniensis Tabula. (From early manuscript quoted by John of
Glastonbury, William of Malmc bury, and Capgrave.) ( P. 6 9 ) consecration (69) in the year A.D. 36. From then on Joseph of Arimathea
becomes known in history as 'the Apostle to Britain'.
Undoubtedly Joseph was attracted to the Sacred Isle for other reasons apart from welcoming the opportunity of proclaiming 'The Way'
to the British populace. We are informed that Arviragus and Joseph were well known to each other long prior to the invitation;
consequently, we can well believe he had acquired many in uential friends in the south of Britain during the years he had administered his
mining interests in Cornwall and Devon. He would be as well known to the common folk as he was to the aristocracy. In one sense it would
be a homecoming to the uncle of Jesus. On the other hand, the land held for him many tender memories which he would hold most
precious.
In the traditions of Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, Wiltshire, and Wales, it has ever been believed and de nitely claimed, that Jesus as a
boy accompanied His uncle to Britain on at least one of his many seafaring trips; then later, as a young man. During Those silent years
preceding His ministry, it is avowed that Jesus, after leaving India, journeyed to Britain and there founded a retreat, building a wattle altar
to the glory of God.
The ancient wise men of India assert that He had dwelt among them. It is mentioned in the Vishnu Purana that Jesus had visited the
Himalayan Kingdom of Nepal. Moreover, the religious teachers of India were familiar with the Isles of Britain. Wilford states that the books
of old India describe them as 'The Sacred Isles of the West'. One of the books refers to 'Britashtan, the seat of religious learning'. They
employed the term used by Isaiah and others: 'Isles of the West', and 'Isles of the Sea.' The British Isles are the only islands lying to the far
west of Palestine.
Centuries after Joseph's time, St. Augustine con rms the trad tion of the wattle altar built by Jesus in a letter to the Pope, 1 stating that
(1 Epistle ad Gregoriam Papam.)
the altar then existed. Consequently, we can believe the records in the ancient Triads that the altar was standing when Joseph, with his
twelve companions, arrived in Britain. We can well understand why Joseph made this sacred spot his destination, settling by its site, and
there building the rst Christian church above ground in all the world, to the glory of God in the name of Jesus and co tinuing the
dedication to Mary, the mother of Jesus.
Who were the twelve companions of Joseph that embarked with him from Gaul to Britain? This is a question one may ask with eager
interest. It holds a ‘ (Epistle ad Gregorian Papam.) fascination ( P. 7 0 ) all of its own which becomes exciting as we ponder over the names
of the men and women so closely associated with Jesus during His earthly ministry. Our interest is increased as we realize that all of them
are lost to the Biblical record following the Exodus of A.D. 36. Truly they are the lost disciples destined to write Christian history with their
lives in letters of blood, re, and gold.
Because the personalities of Peter, Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John so greatly dominate the scriptural spotlight and illumine
the historic scene, one cannot help but feel thrilled as we meet again the beloved of Christ, long lost to the sacred record and, of all
places, on the shores of the Sacred Isle- historic Christian Britain.
Here is the list of them, the Champions of Christ as selected by St. Philip and St. Joseph, following the latter's consecration in Gaul.
Cardinal Baronius in his great work, quotes from Mistral, in Mireio, and another ancient document in the Vatican Library. He names
them one by one, and by the names all Christians know them best.
St. Mary, wife of Cleopas St. Mary Magdalene
St. Martha Marcella, the Bethany sisters’ maid
St. Lazarus St. Maximin
St. Eutropious St. Martial
St. Salome St. Trophimus
St. Clean St. Sidonius (Restitutus)
St. Saturninus St. Joseph of Arimathea
Page 32 of 122
fi
fi
s­
fi
fl
i­
fi
n­
e­
Page 33 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples

All the records refer to Joseph and their twelve companions. Here are listed fourteen, including Joseph. Marcella, the handmaiden to the
Holy women, is the only one not bearing the title Saint, cons quently she is not considered as one of the missionary band. Probably
Marcella went along in her old capacity of handmaiden to the Bethany sisters. Many other writers insist there was another member of this
party not recorded in the Mistral report - Mary, the mother of Jesus. Along with tradition, a great deal of extant documentary testimony
substantiates the presence of the Christ Mother being with Joseph, he having been appointed by St. John as 'para-nymphos' to the
Blessed Virgin Mary. Being 'paranymphos' she had to be with him, and we know Mary remained in Joseph's safekeeping until her
death.
What tender memories these illustrious names conjure in the mind!
What ( P. 7 1 ) tales of tragic experiences they brought with them relate to the sympathetic Druidic Priesthood! Here were the people
most closely associated with Jesus in the drama of the cross: Joseph, the fearless, tender guardian who embraced the torn body in his
arms; the su ering mother whom John led away from the nal agony; the women who had di covered the deserted tomb; Lazarus, whom
Jesus raised from the dead to walk out of the sepulcher into the Glory and follow Christ; and Restitutus, now known as St. Sidonius, whom
eyes had never seen the light of day until Jesus touched them whose rst vision was the Light of the World.
Is there any wonder that the little isle of Britain became commonly spoken of as 'the most hallowed ground on earth,' 'The Sacred Isle',
and 'The Motherland’?

Page 33 of 122
ff
fi
e­
fi
s­
Page 34 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER IX

JOSEPH BECOMES THE APOSTLE OF BRITAIN ARRIVES ON THE SACRED ISLE OF AVALON

T
aking their ( P. 7 2 ) farewell of Philip and the faithful in Gaul, Joseph and the Bethany group of missionaries set sail for Britain
in company with the Druidic delegation. Reaching its shores the illustrious band sailed up the waterway of the west, the Severn
Sea, until they came within sight of a lofty green hill, as Dean Alford writes, 'most like to Tabor's Holy Mount', known to this
day as Glastonbury Tor. They made their way up the estuary of the Brue and the Parrot, arriving at a cluster of islands about twelve miles
inland from the coast. The most inspiring of these was the
'Sacred Isle of Avalon', its shores sheltered in apple orchards.
The isle derived its name from Aval, Celtic for Apple, which is the sacred fruit of the Druids, the emblem of fertility. Thus its name
applied a special symbolic signi cance to the spot destined to become the Mecca of Christendom.
This was the manner of the arrival of the Saints in Britain.
On this fruitful Isle of Avalon Joseph of Arimathea and his dedicated companions were met by another assemblage of the friendly British
Druidic Priesthood, King Guiderius and his brother Arviragus, Prince of the royal Silures of Britain, and an entourage of nobles. The rst act
of Arviragus was to present to Joseph, as a perpetual gift, free of tax, twelve hides of land, a hide for each disciple, each hide representing
1 60 acres, a sum total of 1,920 acres.
This was the rst charter given to any land to be dedicated in the name of Jesus Christ, de ning them as the Hallowed Acres of
Christendom, A.D. 36. It was the rst of many charters this historic sacred spot was to receive, during its sacred existence, from the
kings and queens of Britain. We nd these charters o cially r corded in the British Royal archives; many are extant today, and over one
thousand years later we nd in remarkable detail record of the original charter embodied in the Domesday Book, on recognition of
William I, t h e rst Norman king of England, A.D. 1066. Throughout the reigns of the British sovereigns these charters were the ( P. 7 3 )
means of settling state, political and religious disputes in refusing to recognize Papal authority,1 proclaiming Britain's seniority to
unbroken apostolic succession through its Bishops, dating from St. Joseph, ( P. 7 3 ) the Apostle to Britain, appointed and co secrated by the
Apostle St. Philip and, as we shall see, on orders arising from St. Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles. Incidentally, the British claim of
seniority was never denied by the Vatican Popes and was a rmed by Papal statements as late as 1936.
With the chartered gift of land to the Josephian Mission, Arviragus promised his protection. With his brother, he led the rst army in
battle against Roman Christian persecution as Defender of the Faith, A.D. 43. King Lucius, A.D. 156, grandson of Arvir gus, who
renewed and enlarged the charter, was baptized many years earlier at Winchester by St. Timotheus 2 his uncle, who then proclaimed him
'Defender of the Faith’ At this time Roman Catholicism was not
founded. It remained for the intrepid Queen Elizabeth, lineal descendant of Arviragus, to make the worl shaking declaration for the
Reformation, when challenging the threats of the combined forces of France, Spain, and Rome, by Pope Pius V, A.D. 1570, to subject
Britain to Roman Catholicism. In her famous address from the throne, she rebuked and denounced Papal authority. Alluding to the
charters, she pronounced Britain's priority in the Christian Church. She made it a royal decree for the sovereigns of England on their
coronation o cially to take oath as the 'Defender of the Faith'3
(1 Ussher, Britannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates, ch.2.
2 Morgan, St. Paul in Britain, p. 182.
3 The title was conferred on Henry VIII and confirmed by Parliament in 1544.)
Personally, she declared, as her ancient ancestors had done, that only Christ was the Head of the Church. Ever since, their coronation,
the sovereigns of Britain have taken this oath, as did the present Queen of the British Commonwealth, Elizabeth II, on her accession to the
British Throne, A.D. 1953. On this occasion, the Roman Catholic Church petitioned for this oath to be omitted. It was stoutly refused,
stating the British Kingdom was the Defender of the true Christian Cause with Christ at its Head.
It is stated that following their disembarkation the travelers made their way up the hill where it is reputed that Joseph, weary from his
travel, stopped to rest, thrusting his sta ( P. 7 4 ) into the ground. Tradition tells us that the sta became part of the earth, taking root, and in
time blossoming. Historically it is known as the 'Holy Thorn'. From ancient times it is referred to as a phenomenon of (nature, being the
Page 34 of 122
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
f
ffi
ffi
e­
ff
fi
d­
n­
fi
a­
fi
Page 35 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
only Thorn tree in the world to bloom at Chris mas time and in May. It endured throughout the centuries as a perpetual, living monument to
the landing of Britain's Saintly Disciples of Christ, and a reminder of the birth of Jesus in far-away Bethlehem.
To this day this spot bears the name it received in Joseph's time 'Weary All Hill'.
For centuries the ( P. 7 4 ) phenomenon of the blooming Thorn was looked upon as a miracle by the early devout Christians of Britain
and, as one could expect, the Holy Thorn provided a critical opportunity to the nineteenth-century sco ers. Modem science shows their
igno ance. Tree experts a rm it is not only possible but a natural process, under favorable conditions, for such sta formed from the limb
of a tree to take root and develop into a live, thriving tree. The strange blooming propensity of the Thorn tree at Chris mas as well as in
May is something di erent, but one we can accept as an Act of God to remind us of the ful llment of Divine prophecy.
The Holy Thorn continued to be world-famous for its strange blossoming habit until the regime of Oliver Cromwell, A.D. 1649-60.
During these years it was cut down by a fanatical Puritan when the Cromwellian desecration of holy places by his blind, bigoted
followers was in operation. But the sacred phenomenon did not die. Its scion, already planted, lived to thrive and bloom as had the mother
Thorn tree. It can be seen today, a healthy, fertile tree, blooming gloriously at the same appointed seasons, in the hallowed churchyard of
St. John, at Glastonbury, where the noble ruins of the Mother Church of Christendom stand. Nowhere in the world is there another similar
tree enacting the same blossoming ph nomenon. Its lovely snow-white petals spread out like a beacon in the midst of dead nature, its
immaculate beauty looking skyward and mutely proclaiming that God still reigns in the heavens. Other shoots taken from this tree, and
grafted to wild stock, bloom in the same manner.
Within a mile of the Sacred Isle of Avalon was another smaller island known as Inis Wytren, or Glass Island, a name some claim derived
from the pure glassy waters that once surrounded it. Archaeologists provide the more probable answer. Excavations have revealed that it
was once a busy site of the glass industry for which the ancient Britons were famous. Later the Saxons named it Glastonbury, by which
name it has continued to be known. During the Saxon period, the famed Isles ceased to exist. The monks drained ( P. 7 5 ) the land,
making where the islands once stood a dry plain, Though it is yet below water level and swampy in wet weather.
Today as you wander ( P. 7 5 ) among the noble ruins of the glorious old Abbey, you cannot escape the feeling of entrancement that
touches your heart as you realize you are standing in the center of the hallowed twelve hides of land which the Silurian prince deeded to
St. Joseph and his twelve companions. The beauty of the scene in this quiet little English town of Glastonbury, encircled by verdant
meadows, all part of the dedicated 1920 acres of Christendom, makes it di cult to get down to reality and comprehend the fact that one
is walking on the same holy ground on which they trod; where they communed together, including Mary, the mother of Jesus; the beautiful
Mary Magdalene; the Bethany sisters whom Christ loved; their brother Lazarus; Peter and Paul, Philip and James, Trophimus, Mary
Cleopas and Mary Salome, Aristobulus, the father-in-law of Peter, and Simon Zelotes, among a multitude of others, and where tradition
asserts that Jesus built His wattle chapel, where He talked with God.
Here countless pilgrims from all parts of the world made their vows. Here illustrious converts were con rmed and went forth into the
world to preach the Word and die gruesome deaths for the Christian cause. Here, for over a thousand years, mighty kings bowed in
reverence and were buried with the elect in Christ, within God's Acre. You see embedded in the walls the ancient weather-worn stone
which has mysti ed so many, causing centuries of controversy, mutely bearing the two sacred names, 'Jesus - Maria',: rst hewn and
placed within the outer wall of the original stone church by the hands of the faithful Saints. You see the ruined Altar of St. Joseph of
Arimathea and just across the way the ancient cemetery which contains more famous characters and more dramatic history than all the
cemeteries in the world put together.
These magni cent ruins of Glastonbury Abbey are the remains of the beautiful church erected over the very spot where the uncle of
Jesus and our Lord's own disciples built their rst altar in a church of wattle, thatched with reed, as was the custom of that time. This was
the rst Christian Church erected above ground to the glory of God and His Son Jesus, dedicated to the Blessed Mary, His mother.
Wattle was the common building material of the ancient Britons, used in the construction of their homes, just as cabins of log and mud
and houses of sod were commonly built in the colonizing years of America and Canada. Therefore Joseph and his companions, in ( P. 7 6 )
building the First Church of Christ of Wattle, did not employ unusual or inferior materials for the purpose, but only that which was then of
the common order. We ( P. 7 6 ) nd proof of this in the book The Church in These Islands before Augustine, written by the Rev. G. F.
Brown, a former Bishop of Bristol. Herein the Rev. Brown refers to the excavations of Arthur Bulleid, L.R.C.P., F.S.A., at Godney Marsh, in
1892 :
'This wattle church survived till after the Norman invasion when it was burned by accident. Wattle work is very perishable material
and of all things of the kind, the least likely would seem to be that we in the nineteenth century should, in con rmation of the story,
Page 35 of 122
fi
r­
fi
fi
ff
ffi
fi
e­
t­
fi
ffi
fi
fi
ff
ff
fi
t­
fi
Page 36 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
discover at Glastonbury an almost endless amount of British wattle work. Yet this is exactly what happened. In the low ground, now
occupying the place of the impenetrable marshes which gave the name of the Isle of Avalon to the higher ground, the eye of the local
antiquary had long marked a mass of dome-shaped hillocks, some of them of very considerable diameter, and about seventy in
number, clustered together in what is now a large eld, a mile and a quarter from Glastonbury.
Peat had formed itself in the long course of time, and its pr servative qualities had kept safe for our eyes that which it had enclosed
and covered. The hillocks proved to be the remains of British houses burned by re. They were set on the ground made solid in the midst
of the waters, with causeways for approach from the land. The faces of the solid ground and the sides of the causeways are revetted with
wattle work. There is wattle all over, strong and very well made. The wattle when rst uncovered is as good to all appearances as the
day it was made. The houses of the Britons at Glastonbury, as a matter of fact, as long tradition tells us, and their church were made
of wattles.'
Soon after Joseph and his apostolic company had settled in Avalon painstakingly they began to build their wattle church. It was
sixty feet in length and twenty-six feet wide, following the pattern of the Tabernacle. The task was completed between A.D. 38 and 39.
To Those who followed after every particle of clay and every reed was held sacred. To protect it from dissolution it was encased in lead and
over it, St. Paulinus, A.D. 630, erected the beautiful chapel of St. Mary's. It remained intact until the year
A.D. 1184, when the great re gutted the whole Abbey to the ground, and with it perished the structure of the rst Christian Church
above ground.
The ( P. 7 7 ) pattern of the wattle church was the model employed in the architecture of all the early British churches and perpetuated in
many up to the present time. Within ( P. 7 7 ) that humble wattle church, the rst Christian instructions were given and the rst prayers
and chants of praise to the glory of God and to His Son Jesus rang forth over the Island. Sanctuary at last! Safe and free from the
persecution of the Sanhedrin and the tyranny of pagan Rome, Thornse's faithful, fervent hearts taught the Gospel of Love and Truth in
all its original Christian beauty and humble simplicity. Protected by the valiant might of the invincible Silures, before whom the might of
Rome was to tremble and crumble, the Apostle of Britain and his noble companions dedicated their lives and e orts in fu lling the Word of
God, through the teachings of the cruci ed Jesus, in the quiet, restful sunlight of the English vales.
British peoples the world over, Americans whose roots are British, and Christians wherever they may be, should take a hear
throbbing pride in this monumental event. No wonder England is known as the Motherland to the world. Hers is the womb of Christianity,
out of which has sprung the world's most humane democracies. Proudly they proclaim the source. America and Britain are the only two
nations that permit another ag to y above their own national standard and that ag is the Flag of Christ - the Church Flag, more
commonly known as the Flag of St. George. By this act, they proclaim to the rest of the world that they acknowledge Christ and the
Law of God.
Back of the little wattle church rose the great Tor, which was a Druidic Gorsedd, 01' 'High Place of Worship, a hand-piled mound
of earth vaster in its dimensions than the Pyramid of Egypt. To this day the terraces that wind around the Gorsedd to its summit can be
traced. On such eminences, the Druids had their astronomical observatories from which they studied the heavens. With this knowledge,
Greek and Romans alike extolled the Druids as the greatest teachers of this complicated science.
There are many who maintain that the reason for the heartfelt, friendly welcome extended to the Josephian Mission was because
the Druids, simultaneously with the wise men of Persia, had di covered in the heavens the Star of Prophecy, which heralded the long-
expected 'Day Spring' that was to lighten the world with the new dispensation - the glory of 'The Star' that should rise out of Jacob.
This could be so - prophecy has a strange way of revealing itself in which ( P. 7 8 ) case, to the Druidic priesthood, the discovery was
but the revelation of the great event which they knew, equally with the Israelites of old, was to ( P. 7 8 ) happen. The astounding fact is that
whereas the Sadducean Judeans were never familiar with the name of the Messiah, His name was known to the British long before the
memorable event transpired on Golgotha's Hill. It was a name familiar on the lips of every Briton. 1 The indisputable fact is that the Druids
(1 ef. Procopius, De Gothici, bk. 3.)
proclaimed the name rst to the world. A translation from a reading in the ancient Celtic Triads is :
'The Lord our God is One.
Lift up your heads, 0 ye gates, and be
ye lift up, ye everlasting doors and the
Page 36 of 122
fi
fi
fl
fl
fi
fi
e­
s­
fi
fi
fi
fl
ff
fi
l­
fi
fi
t­
 Page 37 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
King of Glory shall come in.
Who is the King of Glory? The Lord Yesu;
He is the King of Glory.'
How the Druidic Priesthood knew the consecrated name so long beforehand is indeed a mystery in itself. The name 'Yesu' was
incorporated into the Druidic Trinity as the Godhead. In Britain, the name Jesus never assumed its Greek or Latin form. It was always the
pure Celtic 'Yesu'. It never changed.
The more researchers study the Celtic Druidic religion the more astonished are they with its similarity with that of old Israel. They
taught it as a gospel of peace more faithfully than did their brethren in Israel. Wars, hatred, persecution, and family separation had never
divided them as it had the Israelites of Judea. To the members of the Arimathean Mission, the British environment must have appeared as a
time haven of happiness after all their bitter experiences.
To the Druids, the advent of the Josephian Culdees was but a
con rmation of the Atonement. They did not need to take up the Cross. It was already with them, a familiar symbol in their religious
rituals. The early British Christians never employed the Latin Cross. Their Cross combined the Druidic symbol with the Cross. Even today,
the Celtic Cross appears on the peaks and spires of many Anglican churches thoughout the world. The Druidic circle embracing the
Cross is the symbol of eternity. The Cross is the symbol of victory over the grave, though salvation bought by the vicarious atonement.
The merging of the British Druidic church with Christianity was a normal procedure, peacefully performed. Those who state that (‘ cf.
Procopius, De Gothic, bk. 3.) Christianity ( P. 7 9 ) was bitterly opposed by the Druids speak falsely. Nowhere in the Celtic records is there any
mention of opposition? The Druidic Archbishops recognized that the old order ( P. 7 9 ) was fu lled according to prophecy and with the
coming of Christ and His atonement the new dispensation had arrived. In this light of understanding Druids and Judean Apostles marched
forward together rmly wedded in the name of Christ. It was never marred with the persecution, bloodshed, and martyrdom that
accompanied the teaching of the Christ Gospel in Rome.
The former President of the United States, Franklin Roosevelt, truly said, 'All histories should be rewritten in truth.' School history books
still erroneously teach that the Augustan Mission, sent by Pope Gregory, A.D. 596, marked the introduction of Christianity into Britain.
Actually, it is the date of the rst attempt to introduce the Papacy into Britain. Therein lies both error and confusion.
The Vatican has always been more emphatic in correcting this mistake than the Protestant denominations. Baronius and Alford, the two
foremost historians of the Vatican, each referring to ancient documents in the Vatican Library, a rm St. Joseph as the Apostle of Britain
and the rst to introduce Christian teachings on the Island. The Popes also have substantiated this statement.
In 1 9 3 1 Pope Pius XI received at the Vatican the visiting English Roman Catholic Mayors of Bath, Colchester, and Dorche ter, along
with a hundred and fty members of The Friends of Italy Society. In his address to them, the Pope said that St. Paul, not Pope Gregory,
rst introduced Christianity into Britain. (This statement is quoted from the report made in the London Morning Post, March 27th, 1931.)
The Pope spoke the truth; in fact, St. Paul was authoritatively the rst to deliver the Message from Rome, Though actually his
appointed representative, Aristobulus, preceded him. The important point to remember here is that St. Joseph did not go to Britain from
Rome. He went direct from Palestine, via Marseilles, and preceded St. Paul in Britain by twenty years.
At the Ecclesiastical Councils of the Roman Catholic Church, the religious representatives of each country were accorded the honor of
place at the Council, in the order that each had received Christianity. Due to the bitter envy some of the countries bore towards the British,
they vigorously sought to dispute Britain's precedence in priority but on each occasion, Britain's position was defended by Vatican
authority.
Theodore Martin, of Lovan, writes of these disputes in Disputoilis super Dignitatem Anglis it Gallioe in Councilio Constantiano, A.D.
1517: (‘Three times the antiquity of the British Church was a rmed in Ecclesiastical Councila. 1. The Council of Pisa, A.D. 14 1 7; 2.
Council of Constance, A.D. 1419; 3. Council of Siena, A.D. 1423. It ( P. 8 0 ) was stated that the British Church took precedence of all
other Churches, being founded by Joseph of Arimathea, immediately after the Passion of Christ.’)
The erudite Bishop Ussher writes in Brittannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates:
'The British National Church was founded A.D. 36, 160 years before heathen Rome confessed Christianity.'
Page 37 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
l­
fi
ffi
s­
Page 38 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The founding of Christianity in Britain through the Josephian Mission was truly the beginning of the British National Church. Conversion
spread rapidly through the Isles. It is recorded, A.D. 48, that Conor Mac Nessa, King of Ulster, sent his priests to Avalon to commit the
Christian law and its teachings into writing, which they named 'The Celestial Judgments’. 1 However, it was not until A.D.
(1 cf. Lewis, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury; also Old History of Ulster, Irish Tourist Bureau.)
A D . 156 that Britain, by the royal edict of King Lucius, o cially proclaimed the Christian Church to be the national Church of Britain, at
Winchester, then the royal capital of Britain. (Quoting from Augustinicio Mission, A.D. 597, it reads:
'Britain o cially proclaimed Christian by King Lucius, at National Council at Winchester, 156 A.D.’)
Winchester was the ancient capital of Britain where its kings were crowned for over fteen hundred years. It was founded in 500 B.C.
There is no lack of evidence among the earliest writers, many of whom were citizens of nations hostile to Britain. Con rmation of the
facts by them and by prelates of a powerful religion opposed to the British Church, cannot be denied on any pretext.
St. Clement of Rome, A.D. 30-100, refers to the disciples in Britain in The Epistle to the Corinthians. (As we turn the pages of the
Demonstratio Evangelica by Eusebius, of Caesarea, we read the potent passage :
'The Apostles passed beyond the ocean to the Isles called the Brittanie Isles.’ 'cf. Lewis, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury; also
Old History of Ulster, Irish Tourist Bureau.)
Tertullian ( P. 8 1 ) of Carthage, A.D. 208, tells us that in his time the Christion Church 'extended to all the boundaries of Gaul, and parts
of Britain inaccessible to the Romans but subject to Christ'.
Sabellius, A.D. 250, writes ( P. 8 1 ) this important passage:
'Christianity was privately confessed elsewhere, but the rst nation that proclaimed it as their religion and called it Christian, after the
name of Christ, was Britain.' Origen, in the third century, wrote:
'The power of our Lord is with Those who in Britain are separated from our coasts.'
The famed and benevolent St. Jerome, A.D. 378, writes:
'From India to Britain all nations resound with the death and resurrection of Christ.'
Arnobius, A.D. 400, adds his trenchant message, writing :
'So swiftly runs the Word of God that within the space of a few years His Word is concealed neither from the Indians in the
East nor from the Britons in the West.'
Chrysostom, the venerable Patriarch of Constantinople, A.D. 402, potently pens in his Sermo De Utilit:
'The British Isles which are beyond the sea, and which lie in the ocean, have received virtue of the Word. Churches are there
found and altars erected. . . . Though thou should go to the ocean, to the British Isles, there thou should hear all men
everywhere discoursing matters out of the Scriptures, with another voice indeed, but not another faith, with a di erent
tongue, but the same judgment.'
In later years the con rmation continues undenied and unabated.
Polydore Vergil, an eminent Roman Catholic divine, wrote during the denunciations and quarrels between the Pope and Henry VIII of
England: 'Britain partly through Joseph of Arim thea, partly though Fugatus and Damianus, was of all kingdoms the rst to receive the
Gospel.’ (Another Roman Catholic leader, the Rev. Robert Parsons, de nitely states in his book The Three Conversions of England:
'The Christian religion began in Britain.’)
Sir Henry Spelman, the eminent scholar, writes in his Concilia: 'We have abundant evidence that this Britain of ours received the faith,
and that from the disciples of Christ Himself, soon after the Cruci xion.'
And the famed Taliesin, A.D. 500-540, one of Britain's greatest scholars ( P. 8 2 ) , Celtic Arch Druid, and Prince Bard, forthrightly declares
that Though the Gospel teaching was new to the rest of the world it was always known to the Celtic British. He writes: 'Christ, the word
from the beginning, was from the rst our teacher, and we never lost His teachings. Christianity was a new thing in Asia, but there never
was a time when the Druids of Britain held not its Doctrines.'
Page 38 of 122
ffi
fi
fi
a­
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
 Page 39 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Gildas, A.D. 520, Britain's ( P. 8 2 ) foremost early historian, wrote in his De Exidio Brittannioe: 'We certainly know that Christ, the True Son,
a orded His Light, the knowledge of His precepts to our Island in the last year of Tiberius Caesar.'
He also wrote the following most important statement: 'Joseph introduced Christianity into Britain in the last year of the reign of
Tiberius.'
Tiberius was the Roman Emperor against whom Pontius Pilate plotted, and with others, the secret knowledge of Caiaphas had been
used to compel Pilate to carry out the evil will of the Sadduccan Sanhedrin to crucify Jesus. Tiberius reigned for twenty-two years. The
cruci xion of Christ took place in the seventeenth year of his reign, A.D. 32, according to the reckoning of their time, and A.D. 33 according
to our present reckoning. The last year of Tiberius's reign being his twenty-second, would be, according to the respective calendars, A.D.
37 and A.D. 38. Thus the general agreement that the Gospel was transplanted to Britain within ve years of the Passion is in accord with
the dates recorded.
To all this is added absolute con rmation that Joseph of Arimathea was the one who rst brought Christianity to Britain and was the
rst and truly appointed Apostle to and of the British.
Probably the statements quoted herein will appear revelatory to many, particularly Those saturated with the unreliable, impotent
theories of school-book historians. The references are beyond dispute and are only a fraction of the mass available. They substantiate the
fact that Joseph and the Arimathean Mission in Britain were known the world over, and in all cases accurately reported long before the
Roman Catholic Church was founded at Rome. Later, when the Vatican had become established, Popes, prelates, and historians of the
Roman Catholic See freely con rmed the record. From the dates given, it will be seen that many of the authorities quoted, both secular
and ecclesiastical, lived before and during the epochal period of our story.
Others quoted lived close enough to the era to be familiar with Britain and its inhabitants. The eve rising mass of con rmation from
the tum of this century to the present ( P. 8 3 ) time is proof of the zealous research of scholars and scientists in rea rming the ancient truth
and lifting the curtain of error and misinformation which unquali ed and indi erent writers of the last century had clouded with the
unstable dogma of myth and legend. Undoubtedly they acted under the in uence of atheism which staggered religious ( P. 8 3 ) belief during
the Victorian era, and to a certain extent still lingers to mislead too many. The vicious invectives of the Higher Critics of Germany are
squelched along with the fraudulent distortions of Darwin's treatise of evolution by Henrich Haerlik, a pseudo-scientist, nakedly exposed
by the German Institute of Science and the Lutheran Church, along with the destructive interpretation of socialism by Karl Marx, from
which Communism has sprung. Today Communism gives the old prop ganda a new dress but it is the same villain, deliberately distorting
the true principles of the Western Democracies.
The Britons of our Lord's time were no more barbarian, or 'painted savages', than are the modern English-speaking nations 'war-
mad barbarians', as the Soviet press describes us. Educatio ally the Celtic British ranked among the highest to be found anywhere.
Each city had its university apart from the special Druidic seats of learning. In A.D. 110 Ptolemy states that there existed fty-six large
cities. Marcianus says there were fty-nine, and Chrysostom wrote, with the acceptance of the new order of 'The Way', a greater
impetus was given to the erection of seats of learning. To this great work the converted British Prince Arviragus, then a young unmarried
man, along with the rest of the royal Silurian families in England and Wales, gave the fullness of their support. Quoting from the ancient
British Chronicles, we obtain an interesting picture of the conversion of Arviragus by Joseph:
“Joseph converted this King Arviragus
By his preaching to know ye laws divine
And baptized him as write hath Nennius
The chronicler in Britain tongue full ne
And to Christian laws made hym incline
And gave him then a shield of silver white
A crosse and long, and over thwart full perfected
These Armes were used throughout all Britain
For a common syne, each man to know his nation

Page 39 of 122
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
n­
fi
a­
fl
ff
fi
fi
r­
ffi
fi
fi
 Page 40 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
And thus hie Armes by Joseph Creation
Fill long afore Saint George was generate
Were worthiest here of mycelia elder date.” 1
(1 Hardynge’s Chronicle.)
It is interesting ( P. 8 4 ) to note in this verse that Joseph, on the conve sion of Arviragus, gave him as a sign for all nations to know, 'the
long cross' as his coat of arms, ( P. 8 4 ) then customarily worn on the shield of the chieftain. This is the rst record of the cross o cially
becoming the symbol of a king. The reason is plain. It was given to King Arviragus as a sign and declaration that he was the elected
Christian king, and of added interest, given as the writer states long before St. George, the Patron Saint of England, was born. This
symbol, representing the Flag of St. George and known as such today, was inherited from Arviragus. Its religious signi cance is still
dominant, being the accepted Church ag of the present Protestant Church. Since the time of Arviragus, it has always been the Christian
ag of the British Church. Protestantism had nothing to do with it. Actually, it is a mistake to name all Christian denominations separate
from the Roman Catholic Church Prote tants. The name arose out of other religious sects appearing later in Britain, which protested
against the ritualism of the original British Church. In fact the name applies to the religious sects still holding to the Christian faith, who
are known today as the Free Churches, meaning free of ritualism of any kind. Up to, and during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, there was
only one religion in Britain. Throughout the Isles, it was known as the British Church and so known to the rest of the world.
It was also known as the Holy Catholic Church and never Roman Catholic. When Elizabeth and her Parliament struck back at the
powerful forces of the Papal States, France, Spain and Rome, the Papal See was so determinedly denounced that a cleavage was created
that left no doubt in the minds of people for all time to come that the British Church, as at the beginning, had no association with the
Roman Catholic hierarchy. Both the British Church and the State determined a reformation within the British Church to exclude anything
and everything that bore any comparison with the Roman Catholic Church in Liturgy and in ritual. Certain Roman innovations had crept
into the British Church over the years. The order to reform began, returning to the original concept. Therefore it was not a protest, creating
Protestantism, it was as the historic act declares - a cleansing reformation of the British Church.
Since then the separation has been positive. The British Church was still the national religion of the Isles. Shortly after, the religion
began to take on its own native national title, becoming the Church of England, the Church of Wales, the Church of Scotland, and the
Church of Ireland, all holding the same communion, all designating ( P. 8 5 ) themselves as Holy Catholics as separate from Roman
Catholics. The word 'Catholic' means 'universal'; thus Holy Catholic ( P. 8 5 ) means a universal, holy, Christian Church, with Christ alone
being the sole Head of the Church. The Roman Catholic Church designates itself as the universal Christian Church of the Romans, with the
Pope as its head. This the British Church would never recognize. In the United States of America, prior to the Revolution, the established
Church was the Church of England. Following the Revolution, the name was changed to the Episcopal Church of America of the Anglican
Communion.
It is still so known, maintaining the original service and co munion of the Mother Church. The German Lutheran Church service also
observes a great similarity. All the named churches are Episcopalian, meaning a church government by bishops. In this manner, the
original Christian Church was created by the Apostles, who appointed Bishops to govern the Christian Church. The present Mother
British Church is the only Christian Church that has maintained an unbroken apostolic succession of Bishops from the beginning, with
all the named Episcopal Churches sharing in this distinction. Protestantism is claimed by many to have arisen with the protests of Martin
Luther against the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church. In this case, the word could be applied, for at that time Germany had long
been part of the Holy Roman Empire, with the Emperor of Germany the appointed represent tive of the Pope. Britain was never part of
this Empire and never nationally under the domination of the Vatican. It was from the beginning to this day - British - the Church of
the Covenant People.
Christianity was founded in Britain A.D. 36. The rst Christian Church above ground was erected A.D. 38-39. The Roman Catholic
hierarchy was founded circa A.D. 350, after Constantine, and not until centuries later was the Papal title created. Until then, the head of the
Roman Catholic Church was still a Bishop. The title of Pope, or universal Bishop, was rst given to the Bishop of Rome by the wicked
Emperor Phocas, in the year A.D. 610. This he did to spite Bishop Ciriacus of Constantinople, who had justly excommunicated him
for his having caused the assassination of his predecessor, Emperor Mauritus. Gregory I, then Bishop of Rome, refused the title but
his successor, Boniface III, rst assumed the title of Pope. Jesus did not appoint Peter to the headship of the Apostles and expressly
forbade any such notion, as stat«d in Luke 22 : 24-26; (Ephesians r : 22-23; Colossians r : 18; and r Corinthians 3: r 1.)

Page 40 of 122
fl
fi
fl
s­
fi
m­
r­
fi
a­
fi
fi
ffi
Page 41 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Returning ( P. 8 6 ) to the history of the cross as the Christian symbol of Royal heraldry and given to Arviragus by Joseph, the cross on the
shield up to the present time has remained the special symbol of the sovereigns of Britain. In later times the Lion was superimposed on
the shield, as shown today. The Lion was the emblem of Judah, Keeper of the Sanctuary but, as Christ said, it would be taken away from
them and given to another who would keep the Law. This symbol appearing on the British Royal Arms, with the cross, is signi cant. The
cross denotes that the British were the rst to accept Christ and by keeping the Law inherited the Kingdom of God taken from the nation of
the Jews.
Arviragus was to carry the banner of the Cross though the most bitterly fought battles between the Britons and the Romans. In spite
of the fact that the early Christian and Roman records abound with the name and warrior fame of Arviragus, he is entirely lost to the later
histories. His fame is overshadowed by his famous cousin Caractacus. In spite of this, Arviragus was the most powerful representative of
the royal house of the Silures and the most famous Christian warrior in history, not excepting his illustrious descendant, the Emperor
Constantine.
The royal boundaries of the Silureswere divided into two sections. Arviragus ruled over the southern part of England and Caradoc, or
Caractacus, over Cambria, the region that is now wales. Each was king in his special domain but in time of war, they united under a
Pendragon or Commander-in-Chief, agreed upon by the people. At that time they represented the most powerful warrior clan in Britain.
Arviragus ruled as Pendragon, while his cousin Caractacus was captive in Rome, conducting the war against the Empire for years1 in
(1 Tacitus, Annals, bk. 5, ch. 28.)
Britain in a manner that gained him immortal fame exceeding that of Caractacus.
Juvenal, the Roman writer, in his works clearly indicates how greatly the Romans feared Arviragus, stating that his name trembled on
the lips of every Roman and that no better news could be received at Rome than the fall of this Royal Christian Silurian. He writes,
asking: 'Hath our great enemy Arviragus the car-borne British King, dropped from his battle throne?'
Edmund Spencer adds his tribute: 'Was never king more highly magni ed nor dread of Romans was than Arviragus.'
Despite the fact that the Romans were the implacable foe of the British, and sought by every means at their command in their vicious
hatred to exterminate the Christian faith at its source, they (Tacitus, Annals, bk. 5, ch. 118.) held the ( P. 8 7 ) British warriors in high esteem,
holding that their religion was the reason for their fearlessness in battle and disdain of death.
Julius Caesar wrote, circa 54 B.C.: 'They make the immortality of the soul the basis of all their teaching, holding it to be the principal
incentive and reason for a virtuous le. Believing in the immortality of the soul they were careless of death.’ 2
(2 Gallic War, ch. 1, sec. I.)
Lucanus, A.D. 38, writes in Pharsalia that the Britons' indi erence to death was the result of their religious beliefs, and Pomponius
Mela, A.D. 41, in his works, describes the British warrior in astonishment. He also ascribes the extraordinary bravery of the Britons to their
religious doctrine, based on the immortality of the soul. Such was the invincible spirit of the ancient Britons who formed a living wall
around the sacred boundaries of Avalon in the domain of Arviragus. No Roman army ever pierced it. These were the lands that Roman
writers referred to as 'territory inaccessible to the Romans where Christ is taught'.
Behind this heroic warrior wall of protection, Joseph and the disciples of Christ were safe from harm, free to preach and teach the
glorious faith on the Sacred Isle of Avalon. To the Britons, this was hallowed ground and they died willingly to preserve the rst planting
of the Christian Way so that it might thrive and blossom to bless the whole world. There was to be a second separate planting of the
Christ Seedin Britain about twenty years after Joseph's arrival. Independent of the Josephian Mission it was also to be sponsored by the
Royal Silurian House, in Wales, by the father and family of Caractacus, under the commission of St. Paul. It originated in Rome, where
this same family was to be the divinely ordained instruments of St. Paul in developing his great mission as directed by Christ. After
contact with them, he declares it in his statement, 'I turn henceforth to the Gentiles.’ This Royal British family in Rome was to provide the
Christian story with its greatest romance, its greatest drama, and its most terrible tragedy. They were destined to be the rst martyrs to
su er for Christ in the Gentile Church and millions more were to follow later.
Believe it or not, the British have paid the greatest blood sacri ce in all history in the defense and for the preservation of the Christian
Church, more so than all other nations put together. The (Gallic War, ch. 11 sec. 1.) underground ( P. 8 8 ) cemeteries of Rome, the Catacombs,
are packed with their tortured, murdered bodies - men, women and children. The soil of Britain is saturated with their blood, eternal
testimony to their undying faith.
Page 41 of 122
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
Page 42 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Knowing that Christ died for them, they were fearless in dying for Christ.

Page 42 of 122
Page 43 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER X
EDICT OF EMPEROR CLAUDIUS, A.D. 42:
'EXTERMINATE CHRISTIAN BRITAIN

T
he past is so remote ( P. 8 9 ) it seems inconceivable and perhaps insigni cant to the indi erent Christians of today, basking
in luxury and the comfort of security, that it is nineteen hundred and fteen years ago when as the rst armed challenge of a
powerful world-conquering nation it was o cially decreed to destroy Christianity at its core by the extermination of the Island
British.
It was ten years after the Scandal of the Cross had taken place and less than six years since Joseph, the Noblis Decurio, had pr
claimed the Christ Way throughout Britain from his sanctuary on the Isle of Avalon.
The Holy Crusade had spread so rapidly from Avalon to beyond the seas that Rome was so disturbed it could no longer ignore the
challenge to its own pagan policies and imperial security.
In the year A.D. 42 Claudius, Emperor of the Romans, issued the fateful decree to destroy Christian Britain, man, woman, and child,
and its great institutions and burn its libraries. To this purpose, Claudius equipped the largest and most e cient army ever sent by Rome
to conquer a foe and led by its most able generals.
In this edict, Claudius proclaimed in the Roman Senate that acceptance of the Druidic 2 or Christian faith was a capital o ense,
(1 not listed O’Reiley, The Martyrs of the Colosseum.
2 Suetonius.)
punishable by death by the sword, the torture chamber, or to be cast to the devouring lions in the arena of the Colosseum. It is
interesting to note that this ruling also included 'any person descended from David'. This meant the Jew, making no exceptions as to
whether he was a converted Jew or one holding to the orthodox Judean faith. This indeed was a paradox. While the converted Jew
embraced Gentile followers of 'The Way' as brethren, regardless of race, and died with them with equal courage, the orthodox Jew
perishing in the arena by the side of the Christian, never relented in his bitter hatred. With his dying breath, he spat on the Christian in
malevolent scorn. (‘O'Reiley, The Martyrs of the Colosseum ‘Suetomus.)
In ( P. 9 0 ) this peculiar manner British Christians and Jews now had one thing in common, the penalty of death.
The Romans had not previously held any special enmity to the British. Actually, and perhaps grudgingly, they had held the Briton in
respect. Association in commerce and culture had drawn them together for centuries and it was not uncommon for the children of the
nobility on both sides ( P. 9 0 ) to seek education in the institutions of each. It was the impetus the British had given to the new Christian faith
that had cast the Romans to die.
The Romans had always despised the Jews, and oppressed though the Jews were under Roman domination, they hated the
Romans with a burning vehemence which they displayed on the slightest pretext. They would never willingly break bread with a Roman,
nor share their home, and on the street would not allow their clothing to touch that of their enemy. When ogged, the unfo giving Jews
would spit out vile epithets at their torturers as they writhed or died in agony.
The Romans could never understand why the Jewish religion could incite such hatred against members of other faiths, nor could they
understand the disdainful contempt the Jews held for women. From the time of Abraham, the marital life of the Hebrews was
polygamous. While one woman would be named the wife, and be head of the household., Abraham had several concubines, sometimes
referred to as handmaidens. At the time of our Lord, it is stated that marital conditions among the Jews were at their lowest ebb. Women
were regarded as mere chattels.
Divorce was prevalent and declared at will without resorting to law, with seldom any provision made for the divorced woman. It is
recorded that it was common for a Jew to consort with several women to the knowledge of his so-called legal wife. It amused and angered
the Romans to note the hypocritical, puritanical attitude of the Jewish male toward adultery. A woman, be it one of his own consorts or
not, was apt to be stoned to death if found guilty of adultery. The suspicion of it would cause her to be branded.

Page 43 of 122
ffi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ffi
fl
ff
r­
o­
Page 44 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The Jewish brand of adultery was to cause the woman to wear her hair in braids to be reviled and shunned by both Jewish sexes.
There was no forgiveness in the Jewish male heart. Realizing these co ditions at the time of our Lord, we can better understand the
signi cance of the test of the cohorts of the Sanhedrin put to Jesus when they led before Hirn the adulteress to be judged.
Under the circumstances our hearts can swell with pride at the courage of Jesus and the magni cent manner in which He made the
decision by writing in the sand with His nger, 'He that is without sin among ( P. 9 1 ) you, let him rst cast a stone at her.' With these
words, Jesus challenged each and every man present to prove his right to stone the woman to death. They slunk away. It was Jesus
who set women free from this male bondage. He freely forgave the adulteress and simply told her to sin no more.
Contrary to the common ( P. 9 1 ) belief o f the Romans, though granted to be licentious, abhorred divorce. The wealthy Romans had
many co sorts, including the Emperors, but the wife held a sacred place as the head of the house which could not be disputed. Consorts
were the common practice of the Romans, which found little ill-favour in the eyes of the legal wife. For centuries a divorce could not be
obtained. The rst record of a Roman divorce occurred ve hu dred and twenty years after the founding of the Roman dynasty. It was
obtained by Spurius Carvilius Rugo on the grounds of sterility. The act so shocked the people that Rugo was shunned by all and so
completely disgraced that he was obliged to leave Rome. Even Though divorce was not recognized long before Christianity entered Rome,
we can understand the attitude of the Roman Catholic Church towards divorce, being so embedded in the original Roman law. The attitude
of the British Holy Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, stems from the words of Jesus.
All this added to the Roman hatred of the Jews. Now a new hatred had developed, manifested in the Claudian Edict which
accused them of being responsible for the Advent of Christ and for the rise of the new faith which had found its rst converts among
the people of Judea.
The e orts of the Sanhedrin to eradicate 'The Way', in the calumny of the Cross and the terrifying persecution of the Fo lowers by
the Saulian Gestapo, were completely overlooked by the Roman Senate or ignored.
Further to seek to in ame the populace against Christians and Jews, the Romans were the rst to create the false slander that
Christians and Jews alike practiced human sacri ce in their religion. They knew better. They knew that the burnt o erings of Judean and
Druids were animals, chie y sheep, goats, and doves. The Romans spread the ridiculous propaganda that the Jews devoured Gentile
babies. Communist distortions of the truth and insinuating fabric tions are not new. They are merely imitating the vile trickery of the
Romans of Caesar's time.
Probably because the Jews were unorganized and not militant like the British, the Roman campaign of extermination was not so
widespread, less determined, and never as constant. The Jews were driven ( P. 9 2 ) into ghettoes, where they could do no harm. The
British were a dominating problem. They were a warrior nation skilled in the art of warfare on land and on the sea. They were guided by
intelligent rulers and commanders, all of whom were steeped in the invincibility of the spirit created by the passion in their faith that
declared all men should be free. One of the earliest battle hymns of the Britons was 'Britons never shall be slaves'.
The overwhelming rise of Christianity in populous Britain and Gaul was viewed with grave consternation in Rome. Britain was the
seeding ground where an ever- owing stream of neophytes was tutored and converted by Apostles and disciples of Christ and sent out
into other lands to teach the Gospel. This the Romans declared had to be stopped. To them, as to all dictatorships, might alone was
right. Nevertheless, from past experience with British military ability, they had good reason to fear this stubborn, valorous race, now
inspired by the zeal of Christ. Forewarned, Rome built the mightiest army in its history to enforce the Claudian Edict to destroy Britain.
The decree of Claudius was inspired by fear and sadistic intentions. Rome believed from the experience of her other co quests that
only violent persecutors would terrify the Briton into ultimate submission.
How wrongly they judged their opponents they were soon to learn.
Defamers of ancient Britain should turn back the pages of history and read the works of Geo rey of Monmouth, who describes how in
the year 390 B.C. Belinus and Brennus, sons of the most famed British King Dunwall, assaulted and captured Rome with a British army.
And from 113 to 1 of B.C. European observers a rm that the Cimbri-Keltoi of Britain were the terror of Rome and could have brought
that Empire under their own subjection if they had so desired. They point out with emphasis that British aggressions were not inspired
by wars of conquest but were punitive expeditions arising out of Roman depredation against their Gaulish brethren. Looking back on the
pages of Those bloodstained years the heart recoils in horror at the savagery, murder, massacre, rape, and destruction in icted upon
the inhabitants and the land of the Sacred Isle.

Page 44 of 122
fi
ff
n­
fi
fl
fl
fl
fi
fi
ffi
fi
n­
a­
n­
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
n­
l­
fl
Page 45 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The Romans, who had ground so many nations under their despotic heel, looked upon aU other nations with scorn as inferiors, labeling
every enemy as barbarian, no matter how magni cent their culture. The records attest to the indisputable fact that the
Romans ( P. 9 3 ) of all people were the most barbarous and brutal in history. The people of the Christian democracies still shrink in horror
at the blood-chilling viciousness of the Communistic purges. The soul faints before the terrifying pictures of the vile concentration camps,
the gas ovens, and the endish modes of torture in icted upon the Jews, other peoples, and the Allied war prisoners by the diabolic
Nazis and Japanese. It makes one feel as if the Devil himself had scraped the bottom of his foul satanic barrel. But vile as it all was, the
Nazis, the Japanese, and the Reds could have learned more dreadful forms of torture by studying the methods of Roman persecution
during the pagan centuries.
The slaughter of the British Kelts was not con ned to the short but too-long period of War II. It endured from the time of the Claudian
invasion, A.D. 42, to the close of the horrible, infamous Diocletian savagery of A.D. 320, nearly three hundred years. Where was the
invincibility of the great Roman Caesars?
Numerous as were the lives ravished in the Russian, Nazi, and Japanese purges and incredible tortures, the loss of life is small
compared with the total sacri ce of British lives given entirely in the Cause of Christ during Those three hundred years. Strange as it may
seem, Though Gaul was at various times invaded by the Romans and su ered great loss of life, no mass campaign was ever directed
against them and never on religious grounds. Britain alone was the chief culprit and against them, the vengeance of the bestial Roman
knew no bounds. Britain is the only nation in history ever attacked by the full might of another powerful people in an e ort to purge
Christianity o the face of the earth. Rome sent her very best against the British legions. As they failed to subdue the British, Rome
recalled many brilliant generals who had gained fame for the double-headed eagle in other foreign conquests, as she determinedly
sought to wipe out one defeat after another to her armies.
From the Claudian to the Diocletian persecution, the extermination of Britain and all that was Christian was a Roman
obsession. How satanic it was can be estimated in the brutal act which touched o the Diocletian campaign. The nest warrior battalions
in the Roman army were the famed Gaulish Legions. On the order of Maximian, co-ruler with Diocletian, the Christian Gaulish veterans
were slaughtered to a man in cold blood. His hatred of the Christian is stated to have exceeded that of Diocletian and to satiate it he
butchered his nest soldiers.
The martyrologies state that during the rst two hundred years of Christianity, over six million Christians were entombed within the
catacombs ( P. 9 4 ) of Rome - murdered. How many more were buried within the other unexplored catacombs is di cult to say. The total
number would be appalling. It is claimed that if the passages of the catacombs of Rome were measured end to end they would extend to a
length of 550 miles, from the city of Rome into the Swiss Alps. It seems almost incredible that while only about one million Christians today
walk the streets of Rome, under their feet are over six million mutilated bodies that had testi ed for Christ.
Let free men and women wherever they may be today, take stock of the price their Christian ancestors paid to obtain and make
secure the freedom which they now enjoy. The ancient Britons appear to have better realized than does the present-day shirking Christians
that Christianity sets men free and freedom can only be maintained in preserving the Christian faith. The present demo racies of the
English-speaking world owe all they have or ever will have to their Christian ancestors.
Let us remember that, when it seemed as Though Christianity was crushed on the Continent by the murderous Diocletian persecution,
it was a British king with an army of Christian British warriors who crossed the seas and smashed the Diocletian-Maximian armies with
defeat so catastrophic they never rose again. That British victory ended all-time Roman Christian persecution. Following the victory this
British king marched his army of Chri tian warriors into Rome and there declared Rome Christian. From thence dates Roman national
acceptance of Christianity.
It was not Peter who nationally Christianized Rome but Constantine, the great-grandson of Arviragus, and son of the famous
Empress Helen, a British princess.
Surely we cannot a ord to forget.

Page 45 of 122
f
fi
ff
fi
fi
s­
fi
fi
fi
fl
ff
ff
fi
fi
ffi
c­
ff
Page 46 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER XI

JESUS OR JUPITER?

T
he Commander-in-Chief selected by Emperor Claudius to carry, out his edict was none other than the famous Aulus Plautius,
called the Scipio of his day. He stands in Roman history as one of the most brilliant commanders and conquerors in her
military record. He arrived in the area of Britain, and we now know as England, A.D. 43, making his headquarters at
Chichester.
Plautius lost ( P. 9 5 ) no time in sending his veteran Legions into action, directing his campaign to the south against the Silmians, thus
cutting o the powerful Brigantes in the remote north, who were the Yorkshire Celts. Both armies clashed with appalling violence and in
this rst con ict with the Romans, probably underestimating the quality of their opponents, were forced to retreat. In the various battles
that followed, to his surprise the Roman General realized he was confronted with a military intelligence that matched his own and an
army of warriors, though greatly outnumbered, were undaunted and fought back with a fearless ferocity that had never before been
encountered by the veteran soldiery of Rome.
For the rst time, the Romans found they were not opposing a race of people who could be terrorized by numbers or brutalities. To
their dismay, as reported by Tacitus, and like the Nazis in World War II, they found that the destruction of the British sacred altars increased
their anger, making them blind to odds and circumstances. The more destructive and brutal the Roman persecution the more determinedly
did the Briton strike back.
At the onset, the British Silurian army was led by Guiderius, the elder brother of Arviragus, who was second in command. Guiderius had
succeeded his father to the kingdom of the Silures. Arviragus, as Prince, ruled over his Dukedom of Cornwall. In the second battle with
the Romans Guiderius was killed in action. Arviragus succeeded his slain brother in command of the army and to the kingdom of the
Silurcs. At this time the second branch of the Silurian kingdom lying further south in what now is Wales, had not entered the con ict.
Caradoc, King of the Welsh Silures, was the rst cousin to Arviragus, a much older man and an experienced military leader. A few years
before this record his father, known as 'the Good King Bran', had ( P. 9 8 ) abdicated his throne voluntarily in favor of his son Caradoc. Bran
was a deeply religious ( P. 9 8 ) person and had resigned his kingship to become Arch Druid of Siluria.
He and his family had accepted the new faith and some of the me bers of the family had been already converted and baptized by
Joseph by the laying on of hands, but Bran and Caradoc had not received this nal act of conversion. Now as the con ict between Roman
and Briton increased in vigor and territorial scope, Caradoc realized the seriousness of the situation, particularly since the death of his
cousin Guiderius. It was agreed that more concerted and determined military action was needed against the Romans. Arviragus, by
necessity, was only substituting in command for his slain brother. It was a law among the British that the supreme leader of the army,
especially when more than one clan was involved, could only be appointed by general acclamation of the people, the military council, and
the Arch Druids. The election to such a command was known by the o cial title of Pendragon, meaning Commander-in-Chief. By popular
election Caradoc, better known in history by the name the Romans gave him - Caractacus - was created Pendragon.
Caractacus, as we shall now call him, was a man of great vigor, intelligent, a n d versed in the arts of politics and warfare. As is to be
elected, being raised in a religious household, he had deep religious convictions. He had received his education chie y in British
universities and partly in Rome. He was an able administrator of noble mien and outstanding stature. His countenance was described by
Roman writers as 'bold and honorable'. Such was the man who was elected Pendragon to conduct the war against the invading
Romans. He began the continuation of the strife with all his natural energy. Out of this bitter con ict his outstanding military genius his
indomitable character and invincible courage carved for an immortal name in history that was never to perish in British and Roman
annals. In them, he stands out as one of the greatest examples of all that is grand and noble. A magni cent patriotic representative of the
unconquerable valor of his race. Feared by the foe, it is said that Roman mothers used his name to quiet their children. His military merit
won the unstinted admiration of the enemy who named him 'the Scourge of the Romans'.
Historically his achievements are well known, but not so well the reasons for them. Modem historians in dealing with the Roman
invasions completely ignore the reason for the great Roman invasion of Britain. Never once do they mention the Edict of Claudius, or
explain that ( P. 9 7 ) it was a war of religious extermination, designed to crush Christianity at its source. Evidently, they were totally ignorant of
the true reason. They could easily have been enlightened by reading the Roman records of that time. They write o the nine years of
ceaseless warfare between Roman and Briton, led by Caractacus and Arviragus against the greatest Roman generals, as though it was of
no signi cance. They give the impression that the British armies were driven like wild sheep before the Roman Legions. Surely it takes but
Page 46 of 122
fi
fi
fi
f
fl
fi
m­
ffi
fi
fl
fi
fl
ff
fl
fl
 Page 47 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
little imagination from even a casual perusal of this campaign to realize that it would not take nine years for the Roman Empire to subdue
opponents who were merely 'wild, painted barbarians'. By this time Rome had conquered all the world except Britain. They had defeated
mighty armies skilled in warfare and led by brilliant kings and generals. The conquered nations they had enslaved in Africa, Asia and Europe
testify to their despotic brutality. The same Roman generals who had acco plished these conquests led the Roman army in Britain and
failed, one after the other.
With such a far- ung Empire to protect the Roman emperors could not a ord to keep their greatest army and best commanders in
Britain for nine years. Less could they a ord the decimation of their veteran Legions in useless combat. The enormous loss of lives on both
sides sustained in many of the battles in Britain, according to the records, was larger than the loss in most of the battles in World War I and
World War II. Such losses do not indicate a leisurely Roman campaign in Britain. In some of the battles, several of the greatest Roman
generals were engaged in conducting battle strategy at one time.1 This was an experience never before called for of Roman
generalship.
(1 Tacitus, Agricola, ch. 14 and 17.)
In World Wars I and II, when the full forces of the Allies were engaged, their numbers greatly outnumbered the enemy. It was the
absolute reverse in the British-Roman, Claudian campaign. Common sense shows there could only be one reason for this long con ict.
The Romans had met their match in military genius and in man-to-man combat a warrior ferocity that outmatched their tough
veterans. The erce, fearless spirit of the British soldiery appalled the Romans. Their bravery and disdain for death shocked them. The
great Agricola, engaged in the British campaign, stated that it would be no disgrace if he fell in battle among so brave a people.
This had to be more than a defense of the shores could (‘Tacitus, Agricola, ch. 14 and 17.) have been ( P. 9 8 ) readily ended by coming to
terms with the Romans. It was a battle against the extermination of all the Britons held dear and, as Winston Churchill promised the
Nazis, would happen again. They fought on the sands, on the elds, in the streets and the lanes and by-ways, to very death.
On these elds the Cross the Christ was unfurled as given to Arviragus by St. Joseph, so 'all nations should see', for the rst time in
military history. This alone proclaimed what the British were ghting in defense of their new faith, Christianity, the Gospel of Jesus, with the
freedom it gave to all who believed in Him.
Caractacus is given o cial credit as being the rst general to lead a Christian army in battle in defense of the faith. As
Pendragon of the British, elected by them in an open council, this is true. But it was Guiderius and Arviragus who led the rst battle
against the Romans. It was they who rst stopped Aulus Plautius in his tracks. Guiderius was the rst British king to fall for Christ. Before
Caractaus was elected Pendragon the British battalions had marched towards the foe ying the coat of arms bequeathed to Arviragus
by Joseph, on their battle standards and painted on their war shields, and this, long before St. George was born.
Fearlessly they met the full force of unconquered Rome and defeated them. This is the imperishable record of the valiant British in
the Claudian nine-year war. Throughout the entire campaign, Arviragus fought as the right-hand man of the Pendragon, Caractacus, and
for years after when Caractacus no longer led the British forces against the plundering, murdering Romans, he conducted the con ict.
Though the Romans destroyed every altar in their path, not once were they able to pierce through to their objective, the Isle of Avalon, the
Sanctuary of Christendom. St. Joseph and his Bethany companions were never molested nor was their shrine ever violated by Roman
intrusion.
No better picture can be obtained of the relentless manner in which this war was fought, with victory swinging from one side to the
other, than by reading the reports of the foremost Roman writers, Tacitus, Martial, Juvenal, and others. The story chronicled by the pens of
the enemy gives more substance to the truth than if it were written by our own. With ungrudging admiration, they tell how the Silurian
warriors, led by Caractacus, Arviragus and the Arch Priests, swept onward in irresistible waves over the bodies of their dead and dying
comrades with battling savagery that appalled the hardened, war-scarred veterans of the Roman Legions. Their erce outcries of de ance
rang over the din and clash of sword and ( P. 9 9 ) shield. For the rst time, the Romans met women warriors ghting side by side with their
men in righteous combat. Tacitus states that their long- owing axen hair and blazing blue eyes were a terrifying sight to behold.1 For the
rst time the Roman soldiery heard the amazing motto of the ancient Druidic Priesthood transferred into a clarion Christian battle cry: 'Y
gwir erbyn y Byd', meaning 'The Truth Against the World'. No ner battle cry was ever employed with equal truth. It has never died. It
has lived through the ages and today it is the motto of the Druidical Order in Wales.

Page 47 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fl
ffi
fi
ff
fi
fl
fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
ff
m­
fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
fl
Page 48 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Truly the British stood alone against the world, fought alone and died alone, even as they did in the most hazardous early years of the
last two world wars, battling for the Great Truth and the preservation of its principles of freedom, in the name of their accepted Saviour,
Jesus Christ.
Tacitus, the Roman historian, writing of the Claudian campaign that lasted for nine years, except for one brief six months pause,
dismally wrote that, although Rome hurled at the British the greatest army in her history, it failed to prevail against the military genius of
Caractacus and the reckless erceness of the British warrior. Many drawn battles were fought and the famed Legions of Rome frequently
su ered defeat with terrible slaughter. On occasions when the British su ered severe reverses, Tacitus said, 'The erce ardour of the British
increased.'
After two years of ceaseless warfare Claudius, recognizing the futility of the struggle and the terrible drainage on his nest Legions,
took advantage of a reverse against Caractacus, at Brandon Camp, A.D. 45, to seek peace through an armistice. A si month truce
was declared in which Caractacus and Arviragus were invited to Rome to discuss the possibilities for peace. The facts that followed
prove that Claudius went to great lengths to come to satisfactory terms with the obstinate British leaders.
Hoping to clinch the peace the Emperor Claudius o ered to Arviragus, in marriage, his daughter, Venus Julia. And, amazing as it
appears, they were married in Rome during the truce period, A.D. 45. 2
(1 Tacitus, Annals, 14:30.
2 Venus Julia, named after Venus, mother of Aeneas, and of the Julian family, therefore of Trojan stock.)
Here we have the strange instance of a Christian British king becoming the son-in-law of the pagan Roman Emperor Claudius, who had
sworn to exterminate Christianity and Britain. (‘Tacitus, Annals, 14: 30. 'Venus Julia, named after Venus, mother of Aeneas, and of the
Julian family, therefore of Trojan stock.)
Surely one ( P. 1 0 0 ) is justi ed in asking would the Emperor of a nation, then the most powerful in the world, high in culture and intellectual
pursuits, has sacri ced his natural daughter in marriage to be the wife of a 'crude barbarian', just for the sake of peace? Impossible. There
had to be some other valid reason and, as we shall see as time moves on, the unseen Hand of God was writing the script. The
circumstances refute the later pernicious propaganda of the Christian-hating Romans who in their benighted prejudice sought to label
their most noble foe - barbarian.
It is inconceivable.
This marriage was but the beginning of other similar strange circumstances that were swiftly to arise. They were to have a tremendous
in uence on the Christian movement in Rome, with the British dominating the entire scene. For sheer drama and stirring romance,
these incidents have no equal in the pages of history.
During the six months truce while Caractacus and Arviragus were at Rome discussing peace terms and the latter was getting
married, Aulus Plautius, the Roman commander, remained in Britain maintaining the truce, on behalf of Rome. During this interval,
another strange alliance took place in Britain. Gladys (Celtic for Princess), the sister of the British warlord Caractacus, was united in
marriage to the Roman Commander-in-Chief, Aulus Plautius! Again we witness the amazing spectacle of a member of the Silurian royal
family, a Christian, married to a Roman pagan. Gladys had been personally converted by Joseph of Arimathea, together with
her niece, Eurgain, Guiderius, Arviragus, and other members of the British aristocracy. Like her father, the ex-King and present Arch
Druid, she was devoutly religious, completing her religious instruction at Avalon and in association with the Bethany women.
Considering all this, one is immediately intrigued by this unusual situation. It is made more exciting as we realize that her brother
and husband were wartime opponents.
The marriage of Gladys and Plautius is brought into the Roman limelight by Tacitus in his Annals, 1 wherein he relates with humor the
(1 Tacitus, Annals, 13:32.)
peculiar circumstances and results of a Roman trial in which Gladys, the wife of Plautius, is accused of being Christian. On her
marriage, Gladys took the name of Pomponia, according to Roman custom, which was the name of the Plautium clan. Later the name
Graecina was added so that she is thereafter known as Pomponia Graecina Plautius. The added name was a distinctive academic
Tacitus, Annals, 13: 3) honor conferred ( P. 1 0 1 ) upon her in recognition of her extraordinary scholarship in Greek.

Page 48 of 122
fl
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
x­
Page 49 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
As we shall see, the truce fell though and hostilities were resumed between the British and Romans. Following the marriage of the
Roman Commander Aulus Plautius, to the British Princess, it appears as Though Emperor Claudius distrusted leaving further operation of
the war in Britain to Plautius. He is recalled to Rome,
A.D. 47, Though honorably relieved of his command. Reference to these events and the trial of Gladys is well covered by Tacitus, as
will be noted from the following quoted text :
'Pomponia Graecina, a woman of illustrious birth, and the wife of Plautius, who, on his return from Britain, entered the city with
the pomp of an ovation, was accused of embracing the rites of a foreign superstition. The matter was referred to the jurisdiction of her
husband. Plautius, in conformity to ancient usage, called together a number of her relations, and in her presence, sat in judgment on the
conduct of his wife. He pr nounced her innocent.'
From our point of view, the method of the trial provides a humorous situation.
It was the custom, by Roman law, to give priority to the nobility to judge and settle any legal disputation where the family was
concerned. Consequently, it was in order for Plautius to judge his wife. Next, we note that Pomponia is judged in the presence of her own
relations, all immediate members of the Royal Silurian Chri tian household undoubtedly acting in her defense.
It is quite certain that not much defense was needed. Plautius knew his wife Gladys was Christian before he married her, as were all the
immediate members of her family, as well as her royal relatives. Theirs was a love marriage, free of all political signi cance on either side.
The fact that they were married in Britain makes it certain that the bond of holy matrimony was sealed by the Pries hood of her Christian
faith. Evidently, Plautius had a sympathetic leaning toward the new faith, for we are later informed that he also became a Christian. Viewed
in the light of these circumstances it was a forgone conclusion that Plautius would judge his wife guil less, which he did.
The Rev. C. C. Dobson, M.A., a keen student of Celtic-Roman history, in his learned works, goes into much detail covering this
whole situation, pointing out that Tacitus refers to Pomponia as 'a woman of illustrious birth' - an aristocrat. Her marriage to the
Roman nobleman ( P. 1 0 2 ) bears this out. Plautius certainly recognized her social station to have been equal to his Roman dignity. That she
was unusually talented, as well as highly cultured, is borne out by the honor of her Roman-conferred title, 'Graecina'. The Rev. Dobson
writes, 'For forty years she was a leader of the best Roman society.' A brilliant woman of wide cultural learning, she was a past scholar in
classical literature and wrote a number of books of prose and poetry in Greek and Latin as well as in her native language, Cymric. Their
home was a meeting place for the talented and they were to be as intimately acquainted with the Apostles, Peter and Paul, as Gladys had
been with Joseph, Lazarus, Mary Magdalene, and the rest of the missionaries at Avalon.
The Roman records state that when the Roman General Aulus Plautius was recalled to Rome, A.D. 4 7, 'He took his foreign wife with
him.' This statement clearly indicates that his wife was not Roman and, since Plautius was unmarried when he arrived in Britain and was
never absent during the years of his command, his wife had to be British.
Gladys and Plautius remained in Britain almost eighteen months after their marriage. The armistice had proved fruitless. The British
leaders considered the peace terms unsatisfactory. Caractacus and Arviragus did not linger in Rome; but they returned to Britain and with
Arviragus went his Roman wife, Venus Julia. All were faced with an unpleasant situation: Plautius in conducting the war against his in-
laws, Caractacus against his sister and brother-in-law, and Arviragus opposing his father-in-law, Emperor Claudius.
What Claudius and the Roman Senate had underestimated was the unbending temper of the Britons. He was quick to learn that it
was an impossibility for the British to make any compromise where their religion was concerned. His faith was his most precious treasure
for which, as he has long proved, he would willingly die but never relinquish. His religion had taught him that his earthly life was but a
stepping-stone to the eventual goal of immortality. Following the Atonement, in the Ascension of Christ, he had obtained satisfactory proof
of the ful llment of the promise that death transcended the grave. It made him both faithful and fearless. Yet he did not willingly seek death.
He fully understood that his earthly sojourn was a necessary preparation for the afterlife. He recognized that Christ had set him free and
was solidly convinced that Christianity could only be practiced in absolute freedom. Interference with this freedom is what made him the
indomitable warrior as the Romans described him. Normally the Briton was a man of ( P. 1 0 3 ) peace and a respecter of other peoples'
rights. History proves that the ancient Britons were never engaged in territorial conquest or war by invasion except in their own defense, or
for punitive reasons.
Ostorius Scapula had replaced Plautius and the war continued for another seven years. Finally, after many bloody battles, the British,
under the Pendragon Caractacus, met disaster at Clune, Shropshire, A.D. 52, by a strange trick of circumstance.

Page 49 of 122
fi
o­
s­
t­
fi
t­
Page 50 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Caractacus was not outmaneuvered in this last battle by the one General, Scapula. He opposed four of the greatest commanders in
Roman history in this action and more. Up to this point, things had been going badly against the Romans on the eld of battle, as
shown by the fact that Emperor Claudius himself, with heavy reinforcements, came to Britain to support his generals in the eld which
climaxed the action at Clune.
Opposing Caractacus in the Claudian campaign, in allied command with Aulus Plautius, was the great Vespasian, future Emperor of
Rome, his brother and his son Titus who a few years later was to put Jerusalem to the torch, destroy its inhabitants and scatter the
survivors of Judah over the face of the earth. Added to this illustrious military assemblage was Geta, the conqueror of Mauritania. As
matters became desperate, an urgent appeal for help was sent to Emperor Claudius. He hastened to Britain, taking with him the 2nd and
14th Legions, with their auxiliaries, and a squadron of elephants. He landed at Richborough, joining his other generals on the eve of the
battle of Clune, personally directing the battle which saved the day for Rome.
It took the combined military genius of four great Roman generals, together with the Emperor and an army that vastly ou numbered the
British, to bring about this victory. This in itself is the greatest tribute that could be given to the military excellence of Caractacus, the
valorous British warrior.
It was a disastrous defeat.
Not only was Caractacus captured but his entire family was taken as hostage to Rome. It was the most complete subjection of any
royal house on record by an enemy.
The British Triads commemorate the event as follows :
'There were three royal families that were conducted to prison, from the great, great grandfather to the great-grandchildren without
permitting one to escape. First the family of Llyr Lllediaith, who was carried to prison in Rome by the Caesaridae.
Not one or ( P. 1 0 4 ) another of these escaped. They were the most complete incarcerations known to families.'
Arviragus and his family were not numbered among the captives. Evidently, he was more successful than his cousin Caractacus in
making his escape at Clune, for we read of him reorganizing the British army and carrying on the war against Rome for many more years.
Among the captives were the wife of Caractacus and his daughter Gladys, as well as his brother who had remained on the battle
scene to receive the terms of the victor. Caractacus had been urged to ee so that he might later continue the con ict. However, fate was
against him.
Caractacus sought sanctuary from Aricia, the Cartismandua of Tacitus, queen of the Brigantes, and a grand-niece of the treacherous
traitor, Mandubratius, who acquired infamy during the Julian war. By order of the traitorous queen, Caractacus was taken prisoner while
asleep, loaded with irons, and delivered to Ostorius Scapula, to be numbered with the many other royal captives and shipped to Rome.
Tacitus, in his Annals (bk. XII, ch. 36), writes that the news of the capture of the famed British warrior sped like wild re thoug out
Rome. The event was received by the people with greater jubilation than had climaxed any other Roman conquest, including the victories
of Publius Scipio, when he brought Syphas to Rome in chains, and Lucius Paulus, who led the proud Perses into captivity.
He further states that three million people crowded the streets of Rome to view the captive British King and the Senate convened to
celebrate.
Another Roman historian wrote :
'Rome trembled when she saw the Briton, though fast in chains.’ 1
(1 ef. Morgan, St. Paul in Britain, p. 99.)
What had this great 'barbarian' chief achieved to cause such a sensation among the high and the low of the conquering Empire?
Why was he so feared that the people trembled and shrank from him as he passed by helpless in irons? Fear and respect must have been
well deserved to make the Romans cringe in their shoes. Being so dreaded, why did they not dispose of this 'barbarous Christian leader'
according to their usual brutal custom?
One is inclined to ponder on the mysterious workings of Providence (1 cf. Morgan, St. Paul in Britain, p. 99.) as ( P. 1 0 5 ) we learn from
the contemporary Roman reporters that Caractacus was the rst captive kingly enemy not cast into the terrible Tarpcian dungeons. Why?
The Roman conquerors were never noted for their clemency. They delighted in humiliating their adversaries, satiating their bestial nature in
Page 50 of 122
fi
fl
fl
t­
fi
fi
fi
h­
Page 51 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
the most endish forms of torture. The greater the renown of their unfortunate victim the less chance he had of escaping the horrors and
incarceration of the Tarpeian. This evil experience was specially reserved for the captive kings, princes, and great war generals, who were
terribly maltreated, starved and nally strangled to death. Their dead bodies su ered a further indignity. With hooks pierced through the
broken body, it was kicked and spat on as the mocking soldiery dragged it through the streets of the city, nally to be cast into the nearby
river-like o al. Yet here was a captive king, leader of the hated Christians, who had conducted a devastating war against R o m e o v e r a
p e r i o d of years exceeding that of any other opponent, during which tune he had in icted many disastrous defeats upon the mightiest
Roman army ever to march on the eld of battle· a warrior who had repeatedly outmaneuvered the ablest combination of Roman military
strategy alone, still feared and looked upon with awe mixed with admiration.
Neither he nor any member of the British royal family was subject in the least to any physical indignities. 1
In Those nine years of con ict, Eutropius reports in his Roman Records that thirty-two pitched battles were fought with victory swaying
from one side to the other. The British Annals report that thirty-nine pitched battles were fought. Is there any wonder, as Tacitus remarks,
that people from all parts of Europe poured into Rome to gaze upon this valiant warrior who had so seriously decimated the crack Roman
Legions in combat? The record further. states. that Caractacus, heavily chained, walked proudly with his relatives and family behind the
chariot of the Emperor, through the crowded streets of Rome. With this scene before us, we can cease to wonder at the series of startling
events that transpired from the beginning of the famous trial onward. 2
(1 Tacitus, Annals, 12:37.
2 Tactitus, Annals, 12:36.)
On the day of the trial, Tacitus tells us that his daughter Gladys refused to be separated from her father, Though it was against the
Roman law for a woman to enter the Senate. Voluntarily she walked by the side of Caractacus, up the marble steps into the Senate, as
brave and as composed as her father. (The report continues, the Pendragon stood before the Emperor 'Tacitus, Annals, 12: 37. •
Tacitus, Annals, 12: 36.) full chest, a noble ( P. 1 0 6 ) gure, fearless, calmly de ant, unconquered in spirit. The Senate was crowded to
capacity and here again, we note another breach of Roman law in the presence of another woman. History tells us that the great Queen
Agrippira sat on her throne, on the far corner of the Dais, a fascinating witness to the most famous trial in Roman history.
This man who should have been the most hated as the leader of the Christian army drew admiration from all sides as he stood poised
before his sworn enemy, the Emperor Claudius.
Such was the fame of the gallant Christian Briton - Caractacus. As the trial proceeded he spoke in a clear voice, trenchant with the
passion of righteous vigor, as he vindicated the rights of a free man. He replied to his prosecutors with words that have lived down though
the ages. Probably it is the only episode in this great Christian warrior's life that is remembered by posterity. Free men the world over
may read his epic address with blood-wanning pride as the pen of Tacitus worded it.
In the words of Tacitus, 1 Caractacus addressed the Senate :
(1 Tacitus, Annals, 12:37.)
'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, stripped 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, and wealth; what wonder if at your dictation I refused to
resign them? Does it follow, that because the Romans aspire to unive sal domination, 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 is 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.'1
Never before or after was such a challenging speech heard by a Roman Tribunal in the Roman Senate. It is the one solitary case in
history. Spoken by a Briton, vibrant with the courageous conviction of a free man. (1 Tacitus, Annals, Ill:37.)
This noble ( P. 1 0 7 ) address was once the proud oration of every British schoolboy; now, like the Songs of Tara, heard no more.
How cheaply today Christians hold this cherished heritage.

Page 51 of 122
fi
ff
fl
fi
fi
fi
r­
fi
ff
fl
fi
Page 52 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
For many years students of Roman history puzzled their brains seeking a reason or motive that caused Emperor Claudius to render his
remarkable verdict. Why, they ask, did not Claudius demand the customary Roman revenge? The pages of history are full of their brutal
'triumphs' dragging their unfortunate victims behind chariots; trampling them to death under the feet of elephants as they were forced to
lie prostrate along the avenue of triumph; thrown to the starving lions in the arena; torn apart on the wrack, strangled, burnt or con ned
to the horrible pit of the Mamertine where they went stark raving mad.
Did the strange intermarriages between princely Britons and Roman aristocrats, which was also to penetrate into his own family, induce
Claudius to make his extraordinary decision?
Historians de nitely declare to the contrary. Emphatically they a rm that the Roman law was so embedded in the conscience 0f the
Romans, that they would not think, let alone dare to avert traditional ruling.
Nevertheless there and then by order of the Claudian Tribunal, Caractacus, with all the members of the royal Silurian family, were
immediately set free. As the decision was rendered, we are told that the whole Senate applauded loudly. And the famed Queen
Agrippira rose from her dais, approaching the Pendragon, and his daughter Gladys, shaking hands with each according to British fashion,
then embracing them, according to the Roman. This display of emotion was another strange deviation from custom.'1
The only restriction imposed in the pardon of Caractacus was that he must remain in Rome, on parole for seven years, and neither he
nor any member of his family was ever to bear arms against Rome. To this Caractacus agreed and never once thereafter did he break his
pledge. When he returned to Britain seven years later, even Though war was then raging between Briton and Rome, led by the unrelenting
Arviragus, Caractacus, and his family remained aloof, honor bound. While he remained in Rome he enjoyed all the privileges of a freeman.
With his family, he resided at the Palatium Britannicum - 'the Palace of the British' - which was soon to become world famous in
Christian deeds and history. A son2 had been permitted to return to Britain and rule over the kingdom of the
(1 Tacitus, Annals, 13:37.
2 St. Cyllinus, Records of Justin ap Gwrangant.)
Welsh Silurians in the stead of his father. During (’ Tacitus, Annals, 12: 37. ' St. Cyllinus, Records of '}estyn ap Gwrgant.) the seven
( P. 1 0 8 ) y e a r s of parole Caractacus was allowed to receive regular income from his British estates so that he and his family might
continue to live in state, as be tted a royal household. Why Claudius bestowed such generous clemency upon the royal Britons, knowing
full well he could never force them to recant their faith, is something that cannot be reasoned in material form. A greater in uence was at
work in which all these characters were but pawns on the Divine chessboard, moved in their actions by the inscrutable will of the
Almighty, as the astounding events that follow prove so clearly, with St. Paul and this branch of the
Silurian royal family holding the spotlight at Rome.
In concluding the chapter on the valiant Caractacus, it should prove of interest to consider the validity of the remark he made in his
address before the Roman Tribune, in which he states he was 'betrayed - not conquered'.
Do the facts support his contention? Undoubtedly they do.
It was the unpredictable conditions that brought about the defeat of the British. Overwhelmed by numbers, as they were, it was
circumstance and not arms that wrought the catastrophe.
As stated before, Claudius had brought over to Britain a squadron of elephants, with other reinforcements, to bolster the distressed
Legions of Aulus Plautius. This was the rst time these strange creatures had been seen in Britain. They were introduced into the ght with
the hope that their massive charging weight would o set the havoc wrought upon the Roman army by the British war chariots, armed with
scythes on their wheels.
Neither the size nor the charges of these monsters dismayed the British. It was the o ensive odor of the elephants that distracted and
panicked the horses( P. 1 0 8 ) and drove the British chariots of war. Going completely out of control the horses and chariots wrought more
havoc within the British lines during the battle than did the arms of the Romans. 1
(1 Dion Cassius.)
Added to this dilemma was the treachery of the Coraniaid, a clan long known for their traitorous dealings. The Romans had
succeeded in buying them over. Unknown to Caractacus this insurgent army was hidden in his rear. The enemy had shaped up into the
form of a letter L on the eld of battle, with the Roman cavalry attacking the British ank. Striving to concentrate on this attack while the
Page 52 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
ffi
ff
fl
fl
fi
fi
Page 53 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
frenzied horses ran amok in the center, the Pendragon was taken by surprise when the hidden Coraniaidci attacked ( P. 1 0 9 ) into the rear.
The defeat was inevitable. Seeing all was lost, Caractacus was urged by his brother and others to ee the eld before it was too late. He
made good his escape but the betrayal of the Pendragon by his cousin Aricia prevented him from co necting with Arviragus, to carry on
the con ict. Thus, by the unhappy accident that attends the fortunes of war, Caractacus stated in truth that he was betrayed and not
conquered.
Later Arviragus avenged the treachery of the Coraniaid, warring through their domain and taking a terrible vengeance.
It is of peculiar interest to note that during the nine-year Claudian campaign the Silurians did not receive any reinforcements from
the north, nor from Gaul, to whose defense the British had gone on many occasions over the past years. Neither did help come from
Hibernia (Ireland) or Caledonia (Scotland). The fact is that help was almost impossible. The Romans used Gaul as a jumpin o place to
invade Britain, thus Gaullish aid was prevented. The Roman navy would block the Hibernians and Caledonia was too sparsely inhabited. At
that time the migration of the Scots from Hibernia into the Caledonian highlands had not yet taken place. The powerful northern Brigantes
were under the in uence of their traitorous Queen who sold out Caractacus to the Romans. Aricia was later deposed and the powerful
Yorkshire Britons from then on played an important part in rmly rooting the new Christ faith in Britain. In fact, many years after, when the
faith appeared to weaken, it was the Yorkshire Britons who strengthened the found tion of Christianity that ensured its enduring
perpetuation in Britain.
These can be the only reasonable conclusions for the Silurians bearing the brunt of the Roman prosecution. If the whole Celtic nation
could have marched as one it is certain that the Romans would have been quickly and decisively defeated and expelled from the Island.
With an odd exception, which is ever the rule, there was no unfriendliness among the Celtic peoples. They were staunchly Druidic to begin
with, and all showed their eagerness to absorb the instruction of the Christ faith. Throughout the Claudian campaign, the Irish and Pictish
records tell of an ever- owing stream of neophytes and delegates from the various kingdoms, journeying to Avalon to receive rst-hand
instruction from the Arimathean Culdees.
It was a greater authority than that of man which decided the Claudian issue. If it had been otherwise St. Paul would most certainly
have been seriously handicapped in carrying out the responsibility placed ( P. 1 1 0 ) upon him by our Lord to preach to the Gentiles.
The historic tribute to Caractacus is, that without the aid of his Christian allies, he had proven his sterling ability against the
Montgomerys and Eisenhower's of his day. By valor of arms and military strategy, he had outmatched them. In the quality of his address
before the Roman Tribune, we see a man of high integrity and intelligence. His oration is worthy of a Winston Churchill. Yet this is the
Briton whom short-sighted historians refer to as 'ba barian'. It could be of interest to the despoilers of historic truth to learn that
Caractacus addressed the Roman Tribunal in their own language - Latin. This vernacular, not being that of the British, had necessarily to
be culturally acquired. We are authoritatively informed that the Celtic Priesthood employed their own common language in compiling their
sacred works, using Greek exclusively for civil transcriptions. Latin was not adopted in British ecclesia tical liturgies until centuries later, yet
Latin was as familiar to their tongue as was Greek and Hebrew. The long association Britain had with Rome in commerce, culture, and
social a airs had made each conversant with the other on common grounds.
Following the Julian campaign of 55 B.C., we learn that British citizens were the only people permitted to walk the streets of Rome as
freemen. Actually, this privilege was older than the Julian report; nevertheless, by this act and statement, it is clearly shown that the only
people in the world who were truly freemen and free women were the British. Freedom was an all-consuming passion with them as Titus,
the son of Emperor Vespasian, was to learn on other elds of battle than that at Clune. Titus fought thirty battles to subdue the short
coastal areas of ( P. 1 1 0 )
Anglesey and the Isle of Wight without gratifying results.
No Briton ever entered the Temples of Jupiter but, in the ensuing years, thousands of Roman soldiery who served in Britain turned
to Jesus, kneeling before the Christian altars with the Christian British.
The banner of the Cross under which Caractacus led the British troops for nine years was to be unfurled at Rome and accepted by
the Romans as their national insignia. It was the family of Caractacus who rst unfurled that standard at Rome and the family of Arviragus
who made it steadfast.
In the end, the Silureans conquered Rome for Christ.

Page 53 of 122
ff
fl
fl
fl
r­
fi
fi
fi
a­
fl
s­
n­
fi
g­
ff
fi
 Page 54 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples

CHAPTER XII

THE ROYAL BRITISH FOUNDERS OF THE FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH AT ROME, A.D. 58

F
ollowing the famous trial and release of Caractacus, with the rest of the royal ( P. 1 1 1 ) Silurian family, we nd them settled in the
family residence at Rome, on the part of the Mons Sacer, called Scaurus.
Here the British King begins his seven-year parole in absolute freedom.
Caractacus alone is subject to parole. It was not required of any of the other royal captives. They were free to leave Rome had they so
desired. Over a period of time, most of them returned to Britain. The rst to leave, almost immediately following their pa don, were
the two sons of Caractacus: his eldest and his youngest sons, Cyllinus and Cynon. Cyllinus returned to Britain, particularly to take over
the reins of government, acting as regent during the absence of his father. Cynon entered the Silurian theological university. The
home of the remainder was established in the palatial Roman residence known as the Palatium Britannicum - 'the Palace of the
British', or, 'the British Palace'.
At that time it was unlikely that any one of them realized the dramatic part they were to play, under the instruction of St. Paul, in laying
down the foundation of Christianity at Rome. They were well aware that the situation was fraught with danger. On it with characteristic
British stubbornness, they turned their back. They cast the die and un inchingly dedicated their lives to the Christian service. For this, they
were to pay with their lives and with their fortunes.
It is an unhappy fact that, as the centuries sped by with their turmoils, these monumental events in our Christian history, with its stark,
heart-breaking tragedies, in the main became forgotten. It seemed as Though a dark curtain shrouded their glory in somber shadows.
Nevertheless, it is certain that St. Paul's fruitful work could never have been achieved among the Gentiles but for the sacri ces of these
noble Britons. The old Greek and Roman Marty ologies, preserved to the present, are most illuminating. Therein are recorded the
h a p p e n i n g s and dates, in many cases but brie y detailed, ( P. 1 1 2 ) but more than enough to give us the story of the pitiful endings of
Those rst great soldiers of Christ. Many of the disciples are completely lost to the record. Nowhere are their names and achievements
found. The ( P. 1 1 2 ) silence of the grave enfolds them. Many of the tortured bodies never even found a grave.
The Vatican states that there are many thousands of ancient documents in the archives of the Vatican library that have never been read:
therefore, it is with pleasure we read of the splendid e ort of the Vatican, during the last two years, to micro lm every document, to study
and better preserve them. Recently it was announced that copies of these micro lms would be distributed among the various Christian
theological centers for cooperative study. In the U.S.A. the Knights of Columbus raised a large fund to purchase a special center to house
these precious records. They are responsible for supplying the Vatican in the rst place with the funds that enabled them to produce the
rst micro lms. It is to be hoped that copies will be as generously distributed among the various Protestant Theological Institutes of
learning. Like the mass of ancient manuscripts recently found in the caves of the Dead Sea, it will take years and require the combined
intelligence of all to complete this titanic task.
The famous British Museum Library in London, the largest in the world, and other great libraries, in Edinburgh, Belfast and Dublin,
Marseilles, Rauen, Paris, and many others, apart from the vast accumulation of ancient Church records in England have been most
generous in providing co-operation for research. Therein is contained a mass of informative material not possessed by the Vatican. An
example is the famous Myvyrean Manuscript, a giga tic work exceeding one thousand volumes. It reaches into the dim centuries
antedating the record of this story. It is written in the ancient Cymric language of the British and is housed in the British Museum, often
referred to as the Bible Museum for the wealth of rst-hand Biblical reference it contains. The Magdalen College, at Oxford University, is
named for the famous Magdalen Manuscript it contains, written by the Archbishop of Mayence,1 A.D. 776-856. It brings to life the
beautiful story of Mary Magdalene's wonderful work in the service of our Lord in Britain and particularly in Gaul, as told by one of the
earliest bishops of the Christian faith.
Just as archaeology has proven the historic facts of the Old Testament, which formerly were regarded as fantasy, so has it with the
study of the old tomes lifted the majestic story of the ancient1 Britons and the work of the Apostles in Britain,
( 1 Rabanus Maurus.)
Page 54 of 122
fi
fi
fi
r­
fi
fl
ff
n­
fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
r­
Page 55 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
out of the realm of legend, myth, and superstition into the light of reality. The most ( P. 1 1 3 ) important part of the founding of the Gentile
Christian Church in Britain and Rome is available to us, and the facts regarding the First Church in Rome begin with the Royal Cymric
family, dom ciled in that city, under the instruction of St. Paul
Twenty years after the Cruci xion the trial and pardon of the British royal captives took place, in the year A.D. 52.
Peter rst went to Rome twelve years after the death of Jesus, in the year A.D. 44, eight years after Joseph and his Bethany
companions arrived in Britain, and two years after the Claudian campaign of persecution began against Christian Britain. Paul did not
arrive at Rome until A.D. 56. This is the date given by St. Jerome, and considered the most authentic. This does not mean that there were
no Christians in Rome before the two Apostles arrived, or even before the British Silurians came as captives. There were a number of them
present and they are scripturally referred to as 'the Church'. This must not be taken too literally. It did not refer to a material institution; it
was a spiritual body in Christ. The number of Christians then at Rome were unorganized, treading in fear. They met secretly in small
groups at the homes of various converts to worship, Though most of them went underground. The Tiberian and Claudian ban that in icted
death on all who professed the Christian faith was still in e ect.
The Bible refers to two Christian churches in Rome: the Jewish Church of Circumcision and the Gentile Church of Non-circumcision
presided over by Hermas Pastor; the rst being composed of Jewish converts retaining the old practice of circumcision. This group met
in secret at the house of Aquila and Priscilla, referred to in Romans 16: 5. The separation of the two converted groups was in the main
the cause of the heated discussion on circumcision between St. Paul and the other Apostles. The Apostle to the Gentiles won the
argument, making it plainly known that neither made any di erence where salvation was concerned. The Jewish Church did not last.
Gradually it became absorbed into the Gentile Christian Church, as proved by the fact that we later nd many Jews functioning within the
Gentile Church, a number of whom are mentioned as going to Britain with various missions.
At this time bands of converts met in grottoes, but mostly in the catacombs among the dead. The Roman law, perhaps with satirical
cynicism, had sought t to recognize these underground cemeteries with the decree of sanctuary. However, when Christian persecution
was at its ( P. 1 1 4 ) worst, the Roman soldiery would waylay the worshippers on entering or leaving the catacombs. To avoid capture the
Chri tians made secret entrances and outlets.
Such were the conditions that prevailed in Rome at the time of our story, but unconsciously the tide had begun to tum against the
Romans, with the marriage of Arviragus, the Christian King, to Venus Julia, daughter of the Emperor Claudius, A.D. 45. Venus, known as
Venissa, in the British records, had been converted by Joseph after her arrival in Britain with her husband. Since his recall from Britain,
Aulus Plautius had resided in Rome with his wife, Pomponia Graecina, the sister of Caractacus, and they are referred to as a Christian
family. Plautius, with his position as a nobleman of great wealth, and Pomponia, with her brilliance and golden beauty and as a leader of
Roman society, certainly would exert considerable in uence. Now, the most important and by far the most extraordinary event was to take
place which was eventually to swing the tide in favor of the Christian cause at Rome. Strange as it may seem, this incredible situation was
created by the Emperor himself, the very man who had sworn by his Edict to exterminate Christianity. Probably it is the most astounding
incident in Christian history, showing how God can use even His bitterest enemies to work out His divine purpose.
Following the pardon of Caractacus, a close relationship developed between the two former enemies and their households evolving
into a startling climax. Claudius greatly admired the character and extraordinary beauty of Gladys, the daughter of Caractacus. It grew into
a deep paternal a ection with the result that Emperor Claudius adopted Gladys as his own daughter, a girl who was an exceptionally
devout Christian!
Caractacus had two daughters, Eurgain, the eldest, and Gladys, the youngest child. Eurgain had been o cially converted by Joseph,
the Apostle of Britain, at the same time as her brother Linus. Eurgain was not only the rst British woman to be converted to the faith,
she is also recorded as being the rst female Christian saint in Britain, the reward for her outstanding missionary work to which she
devoted her life.1 Gladys, the younger, was born A,D. 36, therefore
(1 St. Prydain, Genealogies of the Saints of Britain.)
she would be an infant when Joseph and his saintly entourage arrived in Britain, following the Judean exodus of the same year. Joseph
baptized Gladys and later con rmed her into the faith with the laying on of hands. Both girls were profoundly spiritual, devoted to the
Christian faith with all the zeal of a Mary (‘St. Prydain, Genealogies of the Saints of Britain.) Magdalene. Both ( P. 1 1 5 ) had been taken to
Rome as hostages, with their father and all the other aforementioned members of the royal Silurian families, and had been party to all the
unusual circu stances. One wonders with what feelings did Eurgain witness the extraordinary adoption of her younger sister by Emperor
Claudius. The next unusual event was Gladys' taking the name of her adopted parent.
Page 55 of 122
s­
fi
i­
m­
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
ff
ff
fi
fi
ffi
fl
Page 56 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Henceforth Gladys was known as Claudia.
The Emperor was well aware of the strong Christian convictions of Gladys, and what strikes one forcibly is the fact that the record
states that the terms of her adoption did not require her to recant from her faith.
Gladys was not to remain long under the royal roof. The year after her adoption was to see a beautiful romance destined to culminate
later in a heart-breaking tragedy. In her teens, Claudia was betrothed and married. In the year A.D. 53, she became the wife of Rufus
Pudens Pudentius, an epochal event history could well mark as momentous.
Pudens, as he is most commonly referred to, was a Roman Senator and former personal aide-de-camp to Aulus Plautius. Pudens
went to Britain with the Commander-in-Chief at the co mencement of the Claudian campaign A.D. 42.1
(1 Morgan, St. Paul in Britain, pp. 103-107.)
What could be a stranger circumstance than that of the British
Pendragon Caractacus permits his favorite daughter to become adopted by the remorseless enemy who had brought about his defeat
at Clune and see his sister and daughter married to the leaders he had opposed in the battle for nine long years, Plautius and Pudens.
Truly the Hand of God works in a mysterious way to perform His Will.
Claudia was seventeen years of age when she married Rufus Pudens. The nuptials did not take place at the Imperial Palace of her
adopted father, as one might expect, but at the palace of her natural father, the Palatium Britannicum, a Christian household. It was a
Christian marriage performed by the Christian Pastor, Hermas, which proves that Pudens was already a Christian convert. It is interesting
to note that they continued to live at the Palatium Britannicum; interesting because Pudens was an extremely wealthy man, owning vast
estates in Umbria, but he chose to live at the Palace of the British, where their four illustrious children were born. On the marriage of his
daughter to Pudens, Caractacus bestowed the Palace as a bridal gift upon them, with all its spacious grounds. (Morgan, St. Paul in
Britain, pp. 103-107.)
An idea can ( P. 1 1 6 ) be gained of the vast scope and opulence of the British Palace by referring to the domestic routine required to
operate the household. The Roman Martyrology, referring to the Pudens, states that Rufus brought his servant sta from Umbria to
manage the palatial home. It declares, 'There were two hundred males and the same number of females, all born on the hereditary estates
of Pudens at Umbri.'
Adjoining the Palace of the British were two magni cent baths, the largest in Rome. They were named after the children of Claudia
and Rufus Pudens, known as the Thermae Timotheus and the Thermae Novatianae. Later the Palace and all the spacious grounds of
this great estate were deeded to the First Christian Church at Rome by Timotheus, the eldest son of the Pudens. He was destined
to be the second last surviving member of this family and the second last to be martyred. It is recorded that these were the only
properties owned by the Christian Church at Rome up to the time of the Emperor Constantine.
Pastor Hennas refers to this muni cent home as 'arnplissimus Pudentes domus' the 'hospitium', or home of hospitality for Chri tians
from all parts of the world. It was more than this. For many years it was to be Sanctuary, in the true sense of the word, wherein no
Roman soldier dare set foot to arrest any member or guest of the Pudens' household.
Such was the home in which the bridal pair began their marital life in the year A.D. 53.
Many students have puzzled over these extraordinary marriages. Some considered them political alliances. This can be ruled out on
two scores. If they were political, the war would not have continued but, as history shows, the con ict of arms between Briton and
Romans continued, with rare interludes, for over three hundred years. On the other hand, the Roman writers state that the 'British could
not be coerced by force of arms or persuasion'. They, more than any other, a rm the unbending nature of the Briton where his
hereditary rights were concerned, particularly his religion. Practically all armistices ended in Treaty Alliances, wherein the British kings
retained their sovereignty, privileges and freedoms. If con ict had ended in true conquest these privileges would never have been
recognized. The Romans imposed their full authority on all the nations they conquered. There must be a valid reason why it was never
fully imposed on the British. History shows an u broken line of kingly successions which alone proves that they were never conquered.
Even in the case of Caractacus we see that he retained his sovereignty, ( P. 1 1 7 ) his hereditary estates, and privileges, and this in spite of
the fact that Arviragus conducted the war against the Romans without abatement.

Page 56 of 122
fi
n­
fi
m­
fl
ffi
fl
f
s­
Page 57 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Centuries later, when the church acquired political power, it strongly supported kingly succession in the blood strain. It was the very
opposite in the Roman Catholic Hierarchy. The Pope made and broke kingdoms subject to the Roman Catholic faith. He alone approved
or disapproved of royal marital alliances. The parties involved obeyed or were threatened with excommunication. In this manner, the Papal
See controlled and expanded the Holy Roman Empire throughout Europe until the time of Martin Luther and the Reformation.
The British never were subject to this interference. To do so was to incite immediate rebellion. British royal marriages and succession to
the throne have ever been governed by the iron precepts of the British Christian faith. Even today the same law is still adamant, as
shown in the circumstances that brought about the abdication of Edward VIII, and more recently in the public declaration of Princess
Margaret in her rejection of any marriage that opposed or broke the law of the hereditary rights as declared and set forth in the Christian
faith that rules the succession to the British throne.
In the events of our story, we have positive proof that the British-Roman marriage alliances were truly an a air of the heart, as shown
in each instance, the pagan becoming Christian.
Strange as these marriages appear under extraordinary circumstances, Martial, particularly, extols them as romances, and his pen is
lavish in describing the nuptials of Claudia and Pudens. Martial writes: 'The foreign Claudia marries my Rufus Pudens, she calls him
Rufus her Holy husband.’1
(1 Vol. 4. p. 18.)
Undoubtedly the attachment between Claudia and Pudens began in Britain, Though one wonders how such a friendly social status
could develop when Briton and Romans were engaged at war. No doubt Rufus Pudens Pudentius met Gladys for the rst time during the
truce period of A.D. 45, when his chief, Aulus Plautius, married the sister of Caractacus, the aunt of Gladys. Both girls, before assuming
their Roman surname, were named Gladys - Princess. At this time the niece would only have been nine years old. It is stated that her
extraordinary beauty, which was to make her world-renowned, even exceeding the fame of her illustrious aunt, was then evident. Pudens,
then a young man, became attracted to Gladys despite the di erences in their ages. Evidently, the attraction (‘Vol. 4, p. 18.) lingered and
( P. 1 1 8 ) prospered over the ensuing years. We know that Pudens did not accompany Plautius to Rome on his recall by the Emperor, A.D. 47.
Today there exists positive proof in the Chic ester Museum that Rufus remained in Britain, to the close of the Caradoc-Claudian campaign,
A.D. 52.
While in Britain, Pudens was stationed by Aulus Plautius in command at Regnum, the name for the Roman encampment at Chichester.
In the year A.D. 1723 workers, while excavating some old foundations there, discovered a large stone tablet, which since has been known
as the 'Chichester Stone'. Fortunately, the inscri tion it bore had been deeply carved and when restored by the rm of Horseley and Gale
the Latin memorial could clearly be read. Translated the inscription is as follows :
'The College of Engineers, and ministers of religion attached to it, by permission of Tiberius Claudius Cogidunus, the king, legate of
Augustus in Britain, have dedicated at their own expense in honor of the divine family, this temple to Neptune and Minerva. The site
was given by Pudens, son of Pudentinus.’
This inscription contains a wealth of corroborating support of the presence of the husband of Claudia in Britain at a later date than
A.D. 47, apart from other matters of historic interest. This pagan temple was erected about A.D. 50, two years before the close of the
Claudian war and the return of Pudens to Rome, A.D. 52. This indicates that Pudens remained in Britain ve years after his
commander-in-chief had returned to Rome. It also shows that at the time Pudens made the gift of this site he was still a worshipper of
the Roman pagan gods; therefore his conversion to Christianity did not take place until a later date. We can be certain that Pudens'
recantation from the Roman pagan gods and declaration for Christ took place before his marriage to Claudia. It could not have been
otherwise. Their marriage took place within the Palace of the Royal British. The ( P. 1 1 9 ) o ciating minister was a Christian convert, a
kinsmen of Pudens, who also made his home at the Palatium Britannicum. He was known to St. Paul and St. Peter as Pastor Hermas.1
(1 Romans 16:14.)
The other note of interest introduced in this inscription is the name and title 'Codigunus, the king'. He was not a Roman, Though he
pre xes his name with Roman title - Tiberius Claudius. The rulers of the Roman Empire never employed the title 'King'. It was always
Emperor - Caesar or Augustus. He was a British king but nowhere in the British Triads is his name mentioned. He was (‘Romans 16:
14.) an arch-traitor, one of the very few who defected to the Romans. It was he who treacherously betrayed Caractacus in the
Claudian campaign. For this despicable act, he was honored by the Roman titles he appends to his own name. His family and estates were
guaranteed Roman protection. To the British his name was anathema. He was branded by the most disgraceful name that could be

Page 57 of 122
fi
h­
p­
ff
ffi
ff
fi
fi
fi
Page 58 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
applied to a Briton - 'bradwr', meaning 'traitor'. Accor ing to Celtic law death was the penalty for this act and his name was forbidden to
be spoken. His identity was completely erased from the historic record and the Bards assigned him to oblivion.
While some Britons may have been indi erent Christians, then as now, their patriotism was ever beyond question. Then as now, it
burned ercely within them. No disgrace was so great as di loyalty. They never forgave, stripping the culprit of all honor and mention in
their history. This intense patriotism, coupled with severe punishment for military disgrace, continued to be observed within the British
Army up to World War I. Military disgrace was a public spectacle. To be 'drummed out' was the one thing every British soldier dreaded.
Following conviction by court-martial, he was arraigned before his paraded regiment, then, one by one, the buttons were tom o his
uniform by a common soldier in rank; his insignia ripped in shreds until he stood completely despoiled before all. Then his ri e or sword
was broken. This done, he was ordered to depart. All the while the mu ed drums throbbed out the tattoo of his disgrace. O cers and
soldiers so disgraced were also sent to 'Coventry', an expression meaning that no one who knew him would ever speak to him. Their
shame went so deep that they usually left Britain, migrating to some foreign country or to the Colonies, where they changed their ( P. 1 1 9 )
name in a futile e ort to hide their stigma. But it is said that the ignominy was so deeply etched in their heart that none succeeded in living
it down. Many have been known to have committed suicide after being 'drummed out'. Such a traitor was Cogidunus. Tacitus knew him
and his pen shared the disdain of the British.1
(1 Tacitus, Agricola, 14.)
As previously stated, among the British hostages to Rome was Llyr Llediaith, the grandfather of Caractacus. He died shortly after his
arrival at Rome. As a result of his death his son, 'the Blessed Bran', the Arch Druid Silurian monarch who had abdicated in favor of
his son Caractacus, voluntarily o ered himself as hostage to replace his father, Llyr, the King Lear of Shakespeare. Thus we see the
necessary characters gradually assembling in Rome in pre- (‘Tacitus, Agricola, 14.) preparation ( P. 1 2 0 ) for (120) the role they were all to play
in the world's greatest drama, under the direction of St. Paul.
We now see residing at the Palatiurn Britannicum the High Priest Bran, King Caracatacus and the Queen, his wife; his daughter,
Princess Eurgain and her husband, Salog, lord of Salisbury; her brother, the immortal Prince Linus, now a Christian priest; the Emperor's
adopted daughter, Claudia, and her husband the Senator Pudens; his mother, Priscilla;1 Pastor Hermas, kinsman of
(1 Morgan, St. Paul in Britain.)
Pudens. Cyllinus and Cynon, the eldest and youngest sons of Caractacus had already returned to Britain. There were other members of
the Pudens' Christian household dedicated to the faith but those mentioned are the important gures to remember. The talented sister of
Caractacus, the ex-Princess Pomponia Graecina, and her in uential husband Aulus Plautius, resided nearby. All were spiritually con rmed
Christians except Caractacus and Bran, who were soon to experience the laying on of hands by St. Paul, climaxing their con rmation in
the faith in the same manner as is performed by the Priesthood today in the Church of the Anglican Communion.
The following ve years, apparently, were years of tranquillity at the Palatium Britannicum.
From the works of the Roman writers of that period, we read that the home of Pudens rapidly became the most fashionable and
cultural center in Rome. Martial, the Roman epigrammatist, of Spanish birth, was a constant visitor who valued the scholarship of the
Pudens so highly that ( P. 1 2 0 ) he freely submitted his works to them for their constructive criticism. In his works, which have been handed
down to us, he delights in extolling Claudia's axen, blu eyed beauty, and her literary talent. He says, 'Since Claudia, wife of Pudens,
comes from the blue-set Britons, how is it that she has so won the hearts of the Latin people?' He explains that for wit and humor,
she had no equal, and her beauty and scholarship exceeded that of her august aunt, Pomponia. Claudia was a uent linguist and, like her
aunt, wrote many volumes of odes and poetry in Greek, Latin, and her native Cymric. For over a Thousand years her works were
treasured in the great Glastonbury library but perished in the great re, A.D. I184. Copies of her hymns, elegies, etc., were contained at
Verulum as late as the 13th century. Her British ancestry was never forgotten. A ectionately she was named by the Roman populace,
Claudia Britannica Pudentius. Of her, Martial wrote: (‘ Morgan, St. Paul in Britain.) 'Our Claudia, named ( P. 1 2 1 ) Ru na, sprung we know
from blue-eyed Britons; yet behold, she vies in grace with all that Greece or Rome can show. As bred and born beneath their glowing
skies.'
Ru na was the feminine vernacular for her husband's rst name, Rufus. It was a common custom to refer to a married woman
personally by replacing her own rst name with his. Names then were used rather indiscriminately, which tends to confuse us who retain
throughout our lifetime our given name and family name. Consequently, it can be bewildering to read of the British Princess by so many
names. Gladys-Claudia-Britannica, Ru na-Pudens, and Pudentius.
Page 58 of 122
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
fi
ff
fl
d­
e­
fi
fl
s­
fi
ffl
ff
fi
fl
fi
fl
fi
ffi
fi
f
Page 59 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The dark-haired Romans admired the golden-haired, blue-eyed, pink-complexioned women of Britain. Again Martial sings with praise:
'For mountains, bridges, rivers, churches and fair women, Britain is past compare.'
Martial wrote a long poem describing the nuptials of Claudia and Pudens. He wrote another on the birth of Claudia's daughter,
Pudentiana.
In the four years following her marriage Claudia, at the age of twenty-one, was the mother of three children. A fourth child was later
born. Timotheus the eldest, and Novatus the youngest, were boys. Pudentiana and Praxedes, born in between, were girls. Names should
never be forgotten. They should be written in red and spiked with nails of gold ( P. 1 2 1 ) on the walls in every Christian home. All were
martyred.1
(1 Roman Martyrologies.)
These four children, added to the family list of names mentioned, residing at the Palace of the British, represent the chief assembly of
personalities who o cially and openly rst declared for the Christian faith at Rome. Fearlessly and with zeal they de ed the edicts that
were to follow. They befriended and defended all followers of 'The Way', who sought their sanctuary. Their numbers were legion, apostles,
disciples, priests, and neophytes.
In Matthew I0: 11, Jesus said, 'Into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go hence.'
Where was there a safer or more worthy home than the Palace of the British? The name it acquired, 'Home of the Apostles', shows it
to have been the most popular meeting place of the Apostles among others.
Claudia's rst-born, Timotheus, was named after one of her
'Roman Martyrologies. Favorite Apostles who ( P. 1 2 2 ) frequented her home, St. Timothy, Bishop of Ephesus. He was closely
associated with St. John and St. Paul. To Timotheus, St. Paul refers to 'The beloved son in Christ'. All her children were baptized in
Christ and brought up in the presence of apostles, disciples and converts. Cardinal Baronius wrote that Justin Martyr made his home with
them.
Even Though St. Paul had his residence provided for him in Rome by the Christian following, the Scriptures state that he only resided
for two years in it during his ten years' association with the city. The common inference is that St. Paul rst arrived at Rome in the year
A.D. 58 but, as before stated, St. Jerome placed his arrival at A.D. 56. He writes, 'St. Paul went to Rome in the second year of Nero.' Nero
succeeded Claudius as Emperor.
St. Jerome held a unique place in the post-Christian era of the Catholic Church. By request of the Church, he wrote the rst most
important dissertations of the Christian record. His documentation of the early years of the faith stands unquestioned. A man of intense
convictions, he was profoundly devout. Honest and sincere in his writings he was assiduous as to detail. Because of his tremendous
knowledge of Christian history and his scholarly excellence, he was specially elected by the Church Fathers to produce the historic literary
record; therefore ( P. 1 2 2 ) the date he sets for St. Paul's arrival at Rome can be accepted. Moreover, the date is supported by such eminent
authorities as Bede, Ivo, Platina, Scaliger, Capellus, Cave, Stilling eet, Alford, Godwin, Rapin, Bingham, Stanhope, Warner, and Trapp, to
name a few. This being the date preferred, it allows eight years of contact with Rome in which St. Paul did not reside in his personal
home. This fact supports the statements of the contemporary writers who state that St. Paul had his abode with the Pudens. There is a
special and particular reason as to why he would prefer to reside with the Pudens at the British Palace, apart from its Christian
environment.
Startling as it may be to the reader, facts will prove that living with the Pudens family was the mother of St. Paul and that
Claudia Britannica was the sister-in-law of the Apostle to the Gentiles.
St. Paul, writing in his Epistles to Thoseat Rome prior to his coming, says, 'Salute Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother and
mine.'
Some have sought to suggest that the woman was St. Paul's spiritual mother. This is entirely out-ruled by the facts. A spiritual mother,
or father, was one who had converted another. As we all know, Christ ( P. 1 2 3 ) had converted Paul on the road to Damascus, and Paul had
not been to Rome since before the Judean persecution of Christ's followers, A.D. 33. Thus twenty- ve years had elapsed before his
arrival at Rome as an Apostle of Christ. By deduction, Pudens must have been in his late twenties when he married the seventeen-
year-old British Princess, and at the time of St. Paul's salutation he must have been near his mid-thirties, which shows a long separation
between 'his mother and mine'.
Page 59 of 122
fi
ffi
fi
fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
 Page 60 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Pudens was born on the family estate at Umbri, a Roman state. His father was a Roman Senator, of a long illustrious ancestry. Paul,
in describing his Roman citizenship, states that he was a Jew (Benjamite) by race; therefore his parents must have been Jewish
Benjamites1 From this it is obvious that his mother was probably
(1 Romans 11:1)
married a second time, and to a Roman of distinguished birth. Rufus Pudens was born of this marriage. His mother was not a
Roman consort as Pudens inherited his father's estates as the legitimate son. If he had been an illegitimate son, born of a consort, the
licentious pens of that time, ever ready to declare such an incident, would have ( P. 1 2 3 ) said so. On the contrary, Pudens senior and his
family are written o in high esteem. Therefore all facts point to a legal marriage, with Rufus as legal o spring. If it had been otherwise,
Paul would not have addressed his mother and Rufus with the a ection he did.
At the time Pudens donated the ground in Britain for the erection
of the temple to Neptune and Minerva at Chichester, he was pagan, following his inherited family religion subject to the Roman gods.
This does not prove that his Jewish mother was a pagan worshipper. Born in the Judean faith she may have remained neutral or indi erent.
However, it is certain, between the year A.D. 50 and the nuptial year A.D. 53, that both mother and son must have been converted, for we
nd Priscilla, his mother, a member of the British household, directly following the marriage of Rufus Pudens to Claudia. On the other hand,
Paul would not have sought associ tion with his mother and Rufus if he knew they had remained pagan. His salutation proves that Paul
knew beforehand that both were then con rmed Christians. He salutes Pudens, 'chosen in the Lord'. This is further supported by the
Roman writers of that time who attest that 'all' of the Pudens household at the Palatium Britannicum were Christian.
From all this we realize that St. Paul and Rufus Pudens Pudentius were half-brothers, each having the same mother. In (‘ Romans 1 1 :
1) turn this made ( P. 1 2 4 ) the British Princess Gladys the Emperor Claudius's adopted daughter, now known as Claudia Britannica Ru na
Pudens Pudentius, sister-in-law to the Apostle of the Gentiles!
Recognizing the facts we can well understand why the ancient writers a rmed that St. Paul, by preference, spent most of his time with
the Pudens at the Palatium Britannicum while at Rome. This substantiatrs other important facts cited in the Roman Martyrol gies that,
'The children of Claudia were brought up at the knee of St. Paul.'
Many students of the Biblical history of St. Paul are commonly confused by the scriptural report which states that St. Paul spent but
two years at his provided home out of the ten years he was associated with Rome. They are conscious of the eight-year gap and ask,
'Where was he?'
If they had su ciently considered British and Roman history of that time they would have known and also known that when St. Paul
was not residing with the Pudens at Rome, he was absent in Britain, Spain, Gaul, and elsewhere.
It is interesting to note ( P. 1 2 4 ) that St. Paul had other relatives in Rome whom he addressed in his salutations, notably Andronicus,
Junea, and Herodian. They also became partakers of the Pudens' Christian hospitality. They had been converted long before St. Paul
arrived in Rome. They are mentioned in Scripture as being members of the rst Christian church in the Imperial City. We can well
imagine what a wonderful occasion the arrival of St. Paul must have been at the Palatium Britannicum, A.D. 56, and the happy reunion
between the mother and her two brothers, with Claudia, her children whom he loved so dearly, and other relatives and converts. From
the swiftness of events that followed it is seen that St. Paul lost no time in putting into action his bold plan to erect at Rome, on an
indestructible foundation, the rst Christian Church among Gentiles above ground. This was the rst need and was made possible
by a bold act of the British royal family, Claudia, and Pudens, in donating their home, the Palace of the British, to be openly
declared to be the established Christian Church in Rome. The sacri cial act is made more courageous in the fact that, a mad
Emperor, then sat on the throne of the Caesars.
This was the birth of the rst Church of Christ above ground at Rome.
Prior to the coming of St. Paul, the Palatium Britannicum for several years, dating from the marriage of Claudia and Pudens, had
been the center for the Christian gathering to worship. Hermas conducted the ( P. 1 2 5 ) services. He was the rst minister to the Christian
ock in secret sessions. Now the challenge was openly declared. It was glory or the grave.
St. Paul planned his two greatest adventures in the home of the Pudens; the rst, establishing the Church of Rome, which was, as we
note, accomplished in part. The second was a notable co tribution in Britain in which Bran, Caractacus, and Eurgain, his daughter, were to
have the leading roles. When St. Paul came to Rome there remained three years of parole for Caractacus to complete. We are told St.
Page 60 of 122
fi
fl
ffi
f
fi
fi
a­
fi
n­
ff
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
o­
f­f
fi
Page 61 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Paul con rmed Bran and Caractacus shortly after he arrived at the home of the Pudens, but this is another story to be told in another
chapter. Our attention now is still on the action at Rome. A Bishop had to be consecrated to lead the church to its destiny.
Whom would this great (P.125) and grave honor be conferred upon?
Linus, the son of Caractacus, ( P. 1 2 6 ) who had remained at Rome, had long before been baptized and con rmed by St. Joseph of Arirna-
thea in Britain. He was a priestly instructor. It was Linus whom St. Paul chose and personally consecrated to be the First Bishop of the
Christian Church in Rome. A Prince of the royal blood of Britain, he is the same Linus whom St. Paul addressed in his Epistles.
This fact has never been disputed, Though seldom brought forth in the light of this reading. St. Peter a rms this fact. He says:
'The First Christian Church above ground in Rome was the Palace of the British. The First Christian Bishop was a Briton, Linus, son of a
Royal King, personally appointed by St. Paul, A.D. 58.'
The church still stands and can be seen in what was once the palatial grounds of the Palatium Britannicum, a memorial to the
Christianizing endeavors of St. Paul and the expatriate royal British family at Rome with Rufus Pudens. The church is recorded in Roman
history under four di erent names: 1. Palatium Brita nicum; 2. Titulus; 3. Hospitium Apostolorum; 4. Lastly, as St. Pudentiana, in honor and
memory of the martyred daughter of Claudia Pudens, by which name it is known to this day.
Further corroboration is given to Linus, as the brother of the lovely Claudia and of his appointment to be the First Bishop of the
Christian Church of Rome, and is provided in the following extract from The Apostolic Constitutions:
'Concerning Those Bishops who have been ordained in our lifetime, we make known to you that they are these; Of Antioch, Eudius,
ordained ( P. 1 2 6 ) by me, Peter, Of the Church of Rome, Linus, brother of Claudia, was rst ordained by Paul, and after Linus's death,
Clemens, the second ordained by me, Peter.
In this statement, Peter himself declared that Linus is the brother of Claudia and the rst Bishop of the Church at Rome. He further
states that Paul performed the ordination and not him. In another statement herein given Peter a rms that Linus was a Briton, son of a
royal king. In these statements the common belief that Peter founded the church at Rome and that the rst church there was
Roman Catholic in origin, is confounded by the words of St. Peter himself.
The Roman Catholic Church was not founded until about three hundred and fty years later. Clearly, Peter states that the rst
church was ( P. 1 2 6 ) established by Linus, through the ordination of St. Paul. He gives the correct year, A.D. 58.
Clemens Romanus, the second Bishop of Rome, appointed by Peter, a rms the relationship between Linus and Claudia, writing :
'Sanctissimus Linus, Frater Claudiae' (St. Linus, brother of Claudia).2
Clemenus Romanus knew them all intimately, not only as an intimate guest of the Pudens. He knew of Claudia in Britain, for he
was St. Clement of the twelve companions of Joseph.3
Within twelve years after the martyrdom of Linus, he was consecrated a s the second Bishop of the Church by Peter.4 St. Paul
had already su ered his martyrdom. In his works, still extant, Clement tells us that St. Paul was in constant residence at the
Palatium Britannicum and personally instructed Linus for his consecrated o ce. He further writes that the First Church of
Rome was founded by the British royal family and that St. Paul personally preached in Britain. 5
lrenacus, A.D. 180, who was also personally acquainted with the rst Church, wrote: 'The Apostles having founded and built up the
church at Rome, committed the ministry of its supervision to Linus. This is the Linus mentioned by Paul in his Epistles to Timothy. 6
This saint was born in Asia and became a disciple of Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. Afterward, he became a presbyter of Lyons, in Gaul.
From Lyons he was sent as a delegate to the Asiatic churches .
(1 Not listed Bk. 1, ch.46.
2 Epistola ad Corinthios.
3 Clement in an English context Clemens in the Latin.
4 Apostolici Constitutiones, 1:46. (The interval of twelve years was filled by Cletus. He was not appointed by the Apostles;
therefore Clement is described in the Apostolic Constitutions as the second.
5 ‘The extremity of the west’, Epistola, ch.5.
Page 61 of 122
fi
ff
ff
n­
fi
ffi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
ffi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
Page 62 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
6 Irene Opera, 3:I.)
He succeeded ( P. 1 2 7 ) Photinus in the Bishopric and was martyred under the order of Severus.
Linus, the First Bishop of the First Christian Church at Rome was also its rst martyr. Of this royal Christian family, Claudi was the
only one to die a natural death. She saw her brother Linus murdered and, years later, her faithful husband Rufus Pudens
Pudentius. He was martyred A.D. 96. Claudia Di’d the following year, A.D. 97, in Samruum. This beautiful, glorious woman was spared the
agony of seeing her four noble children butchered for Christ. The beloved Pudentiana, immortalized in The Roman Martyrologies, and
by Martial, was executed on the anniversary of the death of her father, A.D. 107, ( P. 1 2 7 ) during the third Roman Christian
persecution. After her martyrdom, the name of the Palatium Britannicum was changed and consecrated by name to her memory.
His brother Novatus was martyred during the fth Roman persecution, A.D. 137, while his elder brother Timotheus was absent in
Britain, baptizing his nephew, grandson of Arviragus, Kmg Lucius, at Winchester. Shortly after his return from Britain to Rome Timotheus,
in his goth year, su ered martyrdom along with his fellow worker Marcus. Later that same year, in which The Martyrologies state, 'Rome
was drunk with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus', Praxedes, the youngest daughter of Claudia and Pudens and the last surviving
member of the family, was also executed. Thus, by the year A.D. 140, all of this glorious family were interred by the side of St. Paul, in
the Via Ostiensis, their earthly mission m Christ nished.
Priscilla, the mother of St. Paul and Rufus Pudens, reposed in the underground cemetery nearby, named for her memory the
Catacomb of St. Priscilla.
In the year A.D. 66, we are told that Claudia with her husband and children, rescued the murdered body of St. Paul a n d interred it in
the private burial grounds on the Pudens estate, where they were all to rest together. It was truly a dangerous operation. Christian
persecution was again at a fever-pitch. One may wonder why the name of others was not mentioned in claiming the body. In a way, It was
a repetition similar to the circumstances in which Joseph claimed the body of Jesus. Pudens was a Senator and Claudia was still
respected as the adopted daughter of the late Emperor Claudius. any things had happened to show they still had in uence with the
Imperial Senate. They used it to claim the mutilated remains of St. Paul. Others of the Christian clan, not having in uence and being under
the Caesarian ban, dared not make the ( P. 1 2 8 ) e ort. At that time the eldest children of Claudia would only be twelve and thirteen years old
respectively. The children being party to the act shows the great devotion they held for the Apostle, who was in all probability their uncle.
The last salutation St. Paul sent out from prison before his execution was to St. Timothy, requesting him to deliver his last fond
farewell to the ones he loved dearest on earth, to his siste in-law, Claudia, and her husband; his half-brother, Pudens; to their children and
to his nieces and nephews, whom he had taught with a ection at his knee; the beloved ( P. 1 2 8 ) Linus, whom he had co secrated and
appointed First Bishop; to Eubulus, ( P. 1 2 8 ) cousin of Claudia 'and them which are of the household of Aristobulus'. In only ten years
faithfully he carried out the mission to 'go to the Gentiles' as commissioned by his Saviour Jesus Christ. In Those years he had
established the First Christian Church in Rome and undertaken another mission in Britain, to collaborate with the Josephian Mission at
Avalon. In each case, his instruments in the divine work were the members of the British royal Silurian family. How short a time for such
a stupendous, noble work. Now it was all over and left for posterity to carry on.
So su ered all Those who helped in founding the First Gentile Church at Rome, their glory sealed in Christ and the spot wherein they
labored and were martyred steeped in their courageous British blood.
No disclaimer can challenge these historic events. In our own time, the Encyclopaedia Britannica names Linus as the First Bishop
of Rome. The Vatican has never endorsed the facts herein and has kept alive the glorious story. Probably the most authentic record of this
great drama is that which can still be seen and read on the wall of the ancient former Palace of the British, the sancti ed church of St.
Pudentiana. The memorial was carved on its walls following the execution of Praxedes in second century, the last surviving member of
the original Christian band and the youngest daughter of Claudia and Pudens.
Inscribed in these few words is told the noble, tragic story : 'In this sacred and most ancient of churches, known as that of Pastor
(Hennas), dedicated by Sanctus Pius Papa (St. Paul), formerly the house of Sanctus Pudens, the Senator, and the home of the holy
apostles, repose the remains of three thousand blessed martyrs which Pudentiana and Praxedes, virgins of Christ, with their own hands
interred.'
How many ( P. 1 2 9 ) tourists visiting the Imperial City of Rome take time out to go along the Mons Sacer Way to view this tragic memorial
to their faith and humbly breathe a prayer of thanksgiving for the thousands who lie beneath, martyred for our sake?

Page 62 of 122
ff
ff
fi
ff
fi
r­
ff
fi
fl
fi
fl
n­
Page 63 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Eyes fascinated by the splendor of the Vatican Palace and other sumptuous buildings, not one Christian stops to view this hallowed
place that played such a majestic part in making the faith they profess theirs to enjoy. All the riches combined in the Vatican cannot equal
one iota of the wealth of devotion and sacri ce made for us within these (P.129) time-weathered walls. Within its sacred precincts trod two of
the greatest of Christ's Apostles, Peter and Paul; this was ( 1 2 9 ) the first Christian church in Rome to be established and the second
church built above the ground to be created by the British and the Apostles of Christ. They represent the greatest gifts of the British
to mankind and to posterity. Unlike the Josephian church erected at Glastonbury (Avalon), the church at Rome is drenched with the
blood of martyrs. The valor of the British arms prevented the Roman or any other foreign invader from violating the Glastonbury
sanctuary. This protection was denied, by understandable circumstances, to the church in Rome. They could only die. Theirs is the
greatest treasure in blood and sacri ce the British race gave to the people of the world - their cross for Christ that preserved the Word
that set men free and saved their souls. How little do modern Christians realize that it was the Royal House of Britain, united with the
noble Pudens, that actually made it possible for St. Paul to accomplish his mission, ful lling the destiny Jesus ordained for him in
establishing the faith permanently among the Gentiles. How few know of Those gentlewomen, Claudia, Pudentiana, and Praxedes,
who gave their all for Christ, their beauty, their talents, their fortunes, and their lives. What courage! No wonder the Romans proclaimed in
awe: 'What women these British Christians have - what women !' Those gentle hands alone had laid at rest the staggering total of three
thousand butchered martyrs within the precincts of their church, the old Palace of the British at Rome. How many more they secreted and
buried within the underground catacombs is not known. As one ponders on this dreadful tragedy the soul is shocked.
Now only crumbling, uncared-for walls remain to remind us of its triumph and tragedy yet the modern Christian by-passes it without a
look, without a twinge of gratitude or admiration, or a prayer, to be thrilled by the glamour of the Vatican and its cathedrals, basking in
wealth and luxury, which had no part in the original ( P. 1 3 0 ) planting of the faith, or in establishing and preserving our democratic freedoms.
The inscription on the walls of St. Pudentiana sets the truth squarely before our eyes, with its incomparable drama. To this are added
the words of Cardinal Baronius, who writes the following comment in his Annales Ecclesias : 1
'It is delivered to us by the rm tradition of our forefathers that the house Pudens was the rst that entertained St. Peter at Rome, and
that there the Christians assembling formed the Church, and that of all our churches the oldest is that which is called after the name
Pudens.’
The eminent Jesuit Father, the Rev. Robert Parsons, in The Three Conversions of England, adds his testimony:2
(1 ad 19 Main.
2 Vol. 1, p. 16.)
'Claudia was the rst hostess or harbourer both of St. Peter and St. Paul at the time of their coming to Rome.'
Who with an atom of intelligence dare deny the authenticity of this dramatic record in Christian history, against the ass of corroborative
evidence, simply because their glory has been ove shadowed by the ages, lost in antiquity to thoughtless minds? One can search in vain
for the modem church Calendars of Martyrs for illustrious names. Once their names led that Calendar of Martyrs with red-letter dates. Of
recent years their names have been omitted, giving precedence to others a t housand times less worthy of the honor. Yet we can still tum
to the pages of the Martyrol gies of Rome, The Greek Menologies, and the Martyrologies of Ado, Usuard and Esquilinus, and therein
read their glorious stories, noting the Natal Days of each, therein described.
They are as follows :
May 17. Natal Day of the Blessed Pudens, father of Praxedes and Pudentiana. He was clothed with Baptism by the Apostles,
and watched and kept his robe pure and without wrinkle to the frown of a blameless life.
May 17. Natal Day of St. Pudentiana, the virgin, of the most illustrious descent, daughter of Pudens, and Disciple of the Holy
Apostle St. Paul.
June 20. Natal Day of St. Novatus, son of the Blessed Prudens, brother of St. Timotheus the Elder and the Virgins of Christ,
Pudentiana and Praxedes. All these were instructed in the faith by the Apostles. (1 ad 19 Maii. 'Vol. 1, p. 16.)
August 22. Natal Day (131) of St. Timotheus, son of St. Pudens, in the Via Oatiensis.
September 21. Natal Day of St. Praxedes, Virgin of Christ in
Rome.
Page 63 of 122
fi
fi
o­
fi
fi
r­
fi
fi
Page 64 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
November 26. Natal Day of St. Linus, rst Bishop of Rome.
Such is the hallowed record of the illustrious royal British martyrs at Rome:
First to house and openly ( P. 1 3 1 ) protect the Apostles. First openly to teach the Christian faith in Rome. First to found the Christian
Church at Rome.
First to su er martyrdom for the Christian faith at Rome.
Therein lies the glory and the tragedy, the drama and the triumph of t h o s e born to the purple, who died in the purple for Christ; royal
princes and princesses, born of a fearless race, co verted in Britain by St. Joseph of Arimathea, the Apostle to the British, selected and
ordained by St. Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, in the name of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to carry out His mission to the world
and to be an un ickering light. Nobly the royal Silurians of Britain sealed their pledge to Christ with their lives; to the last unfalteringly
proclaiming the deathless motto of their ancient Druidic ancestors - 'The Truth Against the World.'
It can truly be said that the rst church at Rome was the British church, in the true meaning of the word British - 'Covenant People'.
Their Covenant in Christ was untarnished.

Page 64 of 122
ff
fl
fi
fi
n­
Page 65 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER XIII

DID THE VIRGIN MARY LIVE AND DIE IN BRITAIN?

I
n the ( P. 1 3 2 ) meantime what about Mary, the mother of Jesus?
Once again we are faced with drama as exciting as it is intriguing. O hand, one feels tempted to ask the doubtful question, Is it true
that the Virgin Mary nished her earthly travail in Britain? It seems almost incredible to give an a rmative answer. Circumstances,
rather than evidence, would appear to be to the contrary. Yet when one stops to think one quickly realizes how little is generally known
about her and how silent the scriptural record is concerning her existence following the Cruci xion of Jesus. One can easily be forgiven for
thinking it is too wonderful to be true. Yet the information presented herein appears to provide su cient evidence to discount any doubt.
However, we are entitled to our own personal reservations. In this case, it could easily be one of those amazing examples in which truth
is stranger than ction.
Documentary testimony, by no means British, informs us with conviction that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was an occupant of the
castaway boat that arrived at Marseilles with the others before mentioned. Other reports take up the story in Gaul, attesting to the
fact that Mary was a member of the Josephian Mission that arrived in Britain A.D. 36. Testimony will be advanced b y giving a special
valid reaction for her being with Joseph, her uncle. Other writers take up the theme in Britain, referring to her presence at Avalon with
Joseph, Mary Magdalene, the Bethany sisters, and others, as unconcernedly as thought it were a common matter of fact that should be
well understood by all; her life, death, and nal resting-place is described with a nonchalance that is breath-taking.
But, we ask, did not Jesus entrust His mother, with His dying breath, to the care of His beloved disciple, John?
Yes, He did.
The scriptural record tells that as Jesus hung on the Cross He tenderly committed His mother into John's safekeeping. John, accepting
the charge led Mary away from the tragic scene before her Son expired.
Scripture states: 'From ( P. 1 3 3 ) that hour that disciple took her to his own.’ 1
(1 John 19:27, ‘eis ta idia’ (Lidia is a possessive pronoun. The word ‘home’ is not on the text.)
As we ponder the text we can read in it a qualifying di erence over what is commonly understood by general assumption. The point of
importance in the text is the statement that John 'took her to his own'. Most critics have de ned the text to imply that John took her as his
own, thereby meaning he took Mary to his own home to remain there under his care.
This quali cation does not stand up even under a casual study. At that time John, like all followers of 'The Way', was a hunted man.
For many years to come, long after the death of Mary, he had no home. The intention, as stated in the text, seems quite plain. John took
Mary 'to his own'. His own were the intimate disciples of Jesus, of whom Joseph was the protecting shield, and the Bethany sisters,
whose home had been a common meeting place for Jesus and His disciples.
There is a world of di erence between entrusting the care of a person 'to his own', and one requiring the care to be ever personal. The
latter is restricted only to the individual. 'To his own' implies a broader meaning, which recorded events corroborate. If it did not it would
indeed be strange that such an auspicious trust was not frequently mentioned by John in his writings during his extremely long lifetime. He
died at the age of 101.
The facts are that at no time does John ever refer to Mary, nor even in his report of that rst greater Easter morning. This omission of
his trust is strange and t h e lack of reference to her by John could only mean one thing: the beloved Mary was not with him.
Jesus de nitely entrusted His mother to the care of John but the request did not mean she was to be always in John's personal care
as much as it meant that John would see her safely provided for. In this case, it seems quite reasonable to expect John to turn to
Joseph of Arimathea for the necessary protection. We know how greatly his family responsibilities had increased from the time of the
infamous trial. Since his lot was henceforth indubitably cast in with that of the apostles and disciples of Christ, there is every reason to
believe that Joseph would continue his guardianship of the Nazarene family with a keen awareness. That all the faithful depended on the
protection of Joseph while they remained at Jerusalem is well established. Therefore we can reasonably concur that John would entrust
his charge to a safekeeping more secure none of the ( P. 1 3 4 ) faithful could guarantee their future with any degree than his own. In Those

Page 65 of 122
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ffi
ffi
Page 66 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
turbulent days, with persecution rampant, of assurance. At that time it is quite doubtful if John knew that his selected eld of teaching at
Ephesus would be less dangerous than the places in which other disciples were to labor.
It must be remembered that despite the hatred borne towards him by the Sanhedrin and possibly dissatisfaction in the local Roman
Senate, Joseph remained in a position too powerful for either to contend with. Up to the time of his banishment from Judea, A.D. 36, he
continued to retain his o cial status as a legi lative member of the Sanhedrin, a Provincial Roman Senator, and Noblis Decurio. So
important was this o ce considered within the Roman Empire that Cicero remarked ironically, it was easier to become a Senator of Rome
than a Decurio in Pompeii.
Consequently, the intrepid Joseph could be the only choice.
There are several early documents that bear this out. One reads: 'St. John, while evangelizing Ephesus, made Joseph Paranymphos.'1
(Paranymphos means to be 'the Guardian’.)
(1 Magna Glastoniensis Tabula, at North Castle)
We read in pp. 42 and 71, the statement that St. John and St. Joseph were alone called 'Paranymphos' to the Blessed Virgin.
The Cotton. MS. Titus also relates the same facts. British testimony is supplied by Capgrave.
From this we can safely judge that, in the rst place, Joseph was the protector of all the faithful band, and later he was o cially
appointed by St. John to be the guardian of Mary, in which case the mother of Jesus could be ever in his custody and go wherever he
went until the end, which the records a rm.
In the last account given of Mary in the New Testament, after the Ascension, we nd her 'dwelling among the disciples in Jerusalem.
This would indicate that Mary lived among the families of the faithful, moving from one to the other as safety required. Undoubtedly the
watchful eyes of her uncle would know when a change should be made to safeguard her person. As we shall see in the stirring events
that followed, Joseph, her Paranymphos, was faithful to the end when he personally laid her to rest, as he had formerly done with the
tortured body of Jesus.
Capgrave, in Novo Legende Anglia, particularly informs us that John gave Mary into the trust of Joseph, under the peculiar title of
being her 'brides man'; that he was present at her death, as were other apostles and disciples who came at her bidding to be by her side
as Mary breathed her last. (‘Mag,ia Glastoniensis Tabula, at Naworth Castle.)
Many are ( P. 1 3 5 ) the places claimed for her resting place, particularly the one in more modem times by the Roman Catholic Church, at
a spot near Jerusalem named the Chapel of the D o r m i t o n . For many years the priests have pointed out to visitors a ledge, stating that
was where Mary's Koimesis, falling asleep, took place. Ho ever, none of the places in the East have withstood the probe of investigation.
None of the disciples mention her tomb. St. Jerome, recording the sacred places of the East during the fourth century, by a special
commission of the Church at Rome, makes no reference to the resting place of Mary, Joseph, or many others, for no other reason than that
he knew they were not interred in Judea, or in Rome.
We can be sure that Mary, of her own desire, would never have wished to be left all alone in the land that held for her nothing but
danger and memories of the stark tragedy. The only happiness left to her on earth was in being associated with those who had been near
and dear to her beloved Son. It is impossible to believe that Joseph, her uncle, and guardian, would have left her alone in Judea at the
mercy of the hateful Sanhedrin. Equally so, it is impossible to believe that the Sanhedrin, when it expelled all the faithful from Judea in the
exodus of A.D. 36, would have allowed Mary to remain. Thus it is only reasonable to believe that the bond of association that held Joseph
with Mary and her family since the childhood of Jesus, would be a natural continuance. It gives strength to the documentary evidence
which de nitely states that Mary remained with Joseph and lived out her life among her dearest friends. Only among them would one
expect to nd her.
On the other hand, if Mary had wished for her remains to be taken back to Judea for burial, St. Jerome would have known and recorded
the fact. He would never have overlooked the important memorial of one held in such a ectionate memory, who years later was to become
so glori ed by the Roman Catholic Church, as to almost overshadow the glory of her Son, Jesus. The Virgin Mary was dei ed by the
Roman Catholic Church in A.D. 600. She was never dei ed by the British Church. Christ alone, from the begi ning and to date, is the only
deity of the Church.
Further contradiction is given to the claim that Mary remained and died in Jerusalem, in the Glastonbury tradition of 'Our Lady's Dowry',
bequeathed to her by Jesus Himself, the 'Dowry' being the little wattle temple Jesus built with His own hands at Avalon, wherein He
Page 66 of 122
fi
fi
fi
ffi
ffi
ffi
fi
s­
fi
w­
fi
ff
n­
fi
fi
ffi
 Page 67 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
communed with the Father, and which He dedicated to the a ectionate memory of His mother. It was to this hallowed ( P. 1 3 6 ) spot that
Joseph led Mary with his missionary band when they rst embarked in Britain. When Joseph built the rst church at Avalon he continued
the dedication, as did St. David when he erected the rst stone church, A.D. 540, over the hallowed wattle temple of Christ, which he had
encased in lead for preservation. These points are important to know because the dedications of churches to the Virgin Mary began during
the twelfth century, the memorial to Mary at Avalon being the only exception. It could only have been so for a very special reason,
particularly since the British never o cially dei ed Mary. It had to be for a speci c record.
Actually, there is far more substantial evidence to support the Marion residence and demise in Britain than there is to prove Jesus
once dwelt on the Sacred Isle, and this is in spite of the strength of opinion. Nevertheless, the antagonists of the Marion story base their
denials on the premise that Jesus was never in Britain; in consequence, they claim He could not have erected the wattle temple for her
'dowry'. How the critics can claim intelligence in reasoning to this conclusion is not understandable. The fact is that neither the absence
nor the presence of Jesus in Britain has a bearing on the subject.
Mary's going to Britain with Joseph was a matter of valid circumstances. The atheistical mind jeers in its nal challenge, 'Why should
Jesus go to Britain? Why should He go to a barbarian country?' The bigotry of the critic is always the same. They never provide an answer
to substantiate their challenge. Never once have they attempted to ll in the eighteen-year gap in the life of Jesus, from the age of twelve
when He confounded the Pharisees in the Temple, to the age of thirty when He began His ministry. The destructive critic never assumes
that what he does not know about could not have happened. Their minds are cluttered with intellectual weeds.
Let us dwell for a moment on those silent years of Jesus, and see if we can rationalize the circumstances of His life to t into this unique
relationship in Britain, 'twixt mother and Son.
Jesus is frequently referred to as the Carpenter of Nazareth. Being a carpenter, as the Bible infers He was, He must have served an
apprenticeship, which likely began at an early age. Apprentic ships in Europe and Britain, well within the last one hundred years, often
began at the age of fourteen. How long He worked plying His trade is unknown, but we can safely assume that being aware of His
destiny, He must have abandoned His trade early in order to prepare Himself for His great Mission. This being the case He would
naturally ( P. 1 3 7 ) be attracted to the foremost centers of religious wisdom of His day. One may rightfully inquire why He did not study under
the Rabbis of the Sanhedrin. Jesus provides the answer in the contemptuous manner in which He accused them of 'kno ing not the Law'.
The facts are readily conceived.
The Pharisees were a sect founded by Pharez, who created the School of Predestination. The Sadducees were founded by Sadoc,
a disciple of Antigonus Scohaeus, known as the School of In dels. These are the fanatics who ruled the Sanhedrin of Jesus's da
Those whom Jesus called 'whited sepulchers', full of dead men's bones. He could nd no wisdom among them. Where He could nd
wisdom there He would be certain to go.
The Rig-Vedas, the ancient religious books of India, were written 1 500 B.C. and the Druidic religion antedated that of India, circa
800 B.C. The wise men of India record the visit of Jesus among them, stating that He dwelt in Nepal. They also make several references to
Britain as a great center of religious learning; ther fore, on several scores, Jesus would know of the eminence of Druidic religious wisdom.
He would know from His uncle Joseph, who frequently visited Britain on his tin-mining excursions. It was popular knowledge among the
Greeks and Romans who heavily populated Judea. He would know from His association with the wise men of India and, if tradition is true,
He would know from personal contact with Britain, made when His uncle Joseph took Him on his seafaring trips to that country.
Eastern and Western traditions claim Jesus completed His studies in Britain. This could be possible. At that time the Druidic universities
were the largest in the world, both in size and in attendance, with a listing of sixty large universities and an average attendance of over sixty
thousand students. 1 This is
(1 Gildas, Cottoning MS.; also Morgan, History of Britain, pp. 62-65)
a rmed by Greek and Roman testimony which states that the noble and wealthy of Rome and other nations sent their children to study
law, science, and religion in Britain.
One can well pause to grasp the fact that ancient Britain then had acquired a stature with institutions of learning and attendance
rivaling that of the U.S.A. today, in its principal universities. Consequently, one is not left in doubt as to why Jesus might have elected to
have studied in Britain.
That Jesus had been absent from Judea for more than an ordinary length of time is proven by the tax incident related in Matthew 17:
24. The tax collector accosts Jesus and Peter on their (‘ Gildas, Cottonian MS.; also Morgan, History of Britain, pp. 62-65.) arrival at
Page 67 of 122
ffi
ffi
fi
e­
fi
fi
e­
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
w­
fi
y­
 Page 68 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Capemaum, and ( P. 1 3 8 ) asks Peter if his Master has paid Hia tax, indicating Jesus to be a stranger subject to tax. Actually, Jesus did not
need to pay taxes. Capemaum was His domicile, to which the family of Jesus had moved from Nazareth early in His life. Jesus put up no
argument, advising Peter to pay the 'stranger' tax, thereby inferring He had been absent for so long that He could be regarded as a
stranger. By this act, Jesus admits an absence of years from His homeland.
Tradition and written testimony assert that Jesus did abide in Britain, and whilst there created a Temple of loving testimony to His
mother. This was 'Our Lady's Dowry', to which Joseph, the 'Paranymphos' -'Bridesman', led her and where she lived her life out in its
sanctity. A wealth of ancient writers, ecclesiastical and secular, a rms it. For over a thousand years it was commonly spoken of as 'the
church built not by human art'. St. Augustine, during his presence in Britain, was quite familiar with the facts and the existence at that time
of this hallowed memorial. Of it, he writes with delight and at great length to Pope Gregory, in a letter still extant. He writes with devout
acceptance, a part of which reads as follows, from Epistolae ad Gregorium Papam ;
'In the Western con nes of Britain, there is a certain royal island of large extent, surrounded by water, abounding in all the beauties of
nature and necessaries of life. In it the rst Neophites of Catholic Law, God beforehand acquainting them, found a church constructed by
no human art, but divinely constructed, or by the hands of Christ Himself, for the salvation of His people. The Almighty has made it
manifest by many miracles and mysterious visitations that He continues to watch over it as sacred to Himself, and to Mary, the Mother of
God.'
In this brief extract, St. Augustine assembles and declares all the salient facts. He identi es it as the 'royal island, Silurian, where the
rst disciples of Christ, declaring the Catholic law (Universal Law, not Roman) found a sacred Temple built by the hands of Jesus, and that
it was held sacred to Himself and the memory of Mary. This alone is trenchant testimony and written nearly six hundred years after
Joseph, Mary, and the Bethany group arrived in Britain.
The hallowed sanctity of 'Our Lady's Dowry' is descriptively corroborated by the Saxon historian, William of Malmesbury, who wrote his
outstanding works in the twelfth century. He wrote two histories covering the religious subject matter related herein. His last work, De
Antiquitate Glastoniae, is ( P. 1 3 9 ) the most authentic. He was specially commissioned by the Abbot of Glastonbury to write the complete
history of the famous church from its beginning at Avalon and was invited to live at the Abbey where he had full access to the world-
famous Glastonbury Library.
Therein were contained all the original documents from Druidic times, consequently, he wrote his history with the bene t of rst-hand
material, long before the great re completely destroyed the Abbey and its wonderful library, then considered one of the largest in the
world. Consequently, his historic literary work completed at the Abbey, under his commission, is probably the most precious document of
the British Christian Church in existence. There are other outstanding works on this subject one can refer to with pro t, such as Deorigine
Ecclesiae Britannicae by Elvan of Avalon, an illustrious British scholar who had been educated in the School of Joseph of Arimathea at
Avalon,
A.D. 180. He is referred to by the eminent Roman Catholic ecclesiastic Pitsaeus, and Cardinal Baronius. Relat. Hist. de rebus Anglicis
Act, by Pitsaeus; Capgrave's De Sancto Joseph at Aram thia; The Magna Tabula of Glastonbury, at Haworth Castle; Hearne's John of
Glastonbury; Bede's Ecclesiastical History; Gildas and Geo rey of Monmouth, among many others, particularly Glastonbury, The Mother of
Saints, by the Rev. L. Smithett Lewis; Hewin's Royal Saints of Britain; Rees' Welsh Saints, of our own times.
The most interesting reading in William of Malmesbury's great work as it concerns this story is where he recites the authentic, well-
known story of St. David, A.n. 540, when he came to Glasto bury to rededicate the new church and his mind was changed by a dream.
During the rst night, St. David ( P. 1 3 9 ) s l e p t at Glastonbury, the vision of Jesus appeared to him in a dream telling David that
rededication was unnecessary, saying, 'He Himself had long before dedicated the church in honor of His mother and the sacrament ought
not to be profaned by human repetition.' St. David obeyed and the original consecration to Mary stood.
In order to perpetuate the historic beginnings of the church and that no mistake should be made at any future time as to its exact site,
St. David, A.D. 546, erected a new stone addition to the old church, over the grave of Mary, and enclosed the original wattle church
encased in lead. He caused a pillar to be erected on the site with a brass tablet bearing a record to the fact. At the time of the
Dissolution, under the edict of Henry VIII, it was still standing. The edict robbed this ancient church, as well as many ( P. 1 4 0 ) others, of
its ancient privileges, and later, during the Puritan desecrations, the historic Abbey fell into disrepair and decay. Fortunately, the brass
tablet was recovered in an excellent state of preservation and, according to Archbishop Ussher, 1639, it was treasured in the possession of
Sir D. Thornas Hugo at Wells. Later it came into the possession of Sir Henry Spelman, who describes it in his book Concilia. The tablet
reads:
Page 68 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
a­
ff
n­
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
Page 69 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
'The rst ground of God, the rst ground of the saints in Britain, the rise and foundation of all religion in Britain and the burial place of
the Saints.'
Dean Armitage Robinson excavated the base of the original pillar in 1921. Thus the memorial erected by St. David is today preserved
for all to see and to read.
The Rev. Lionel Smithett Lewis, Vicar of Glastonbury, was indefatigable in his research to prove the validity of Jesus and His Mary
residing in Britain, and painstaking in disclosing the history of Glastonbury from its saintly beginnings at Avalon. In the spring of I953 he
wrote to the writer stating that in the past few years, he had recovered much more authoritative information from rare old documents he
had discovered concerning Jesus and Mary that would prove revelatory on the subject, his one wish then being that he would be
privileged to publish this, his last and best work before he died. He stated, once and for all, that he would prove the validity of the old
traditions with incontestable evidence. Unfortunately, he died suddenly, a week after writing to the writer, at the age of eighty-six. ( P. 1 4 0 )
However, his widow, co-helper and Curate, the Rev. Stacey, have carried out his last request. 1
(1 This is now published under the title St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, by James Clarke, and is available from Covenant Books.)
This redoubtable researcher for the truth points out the unique place of honor occupied by the Virgin Mary in the Roman Catholic
Church from earliest times to date, and states :
'No one better than they (the Roman Catholic Church) know the facts of her (Mary's) life, and no one better than they espouse them.
And over the ages, the holy ground at Glastonbury has been constantly referred to by them as "Our Lady's Dowry''. As such it has always
been recognized by the Roman Catholic Sisterhood, who never ceased to pray daily for this hallowed spot at Glastonbury- Our Lady's
Dowry.'
This was the spotless legacy Jesus left to His mother Mary, the inheritance ( P. 1 4 1 ) bequeathed and built by His own hands and
sancti ed by his prayers. It was here that Joseph nally laid her to rest, A.D. 48, while the Claudian campaign was still raging in Britain,
four years before the historic events began to happen at Rome at the Palatium Britannicum.
From the earliest times, ecclesiastical and secular chronicles substantiate the story, long before the Roman Catholic Church was
founded. It has been carried on through the ages and, apparently, more particularly by the Roman Catholic Church, to present times, as
the Rev. Lewis relates above, not only in England but also in France. E. Hutton, in his Highways and Byways in Wiltshire, states that it is so
referred to in Italy at Assisi. An old English lady, Mrs. Cottrell, of Penwerris, Cornwall, educated at a French convent in Alexandria
conducted by nuns who were members of the old French nobility, was taught that St. Joseph of Arimathea took the Blessed Virgin with
him to Britain and that she died there.
Why would this story persist through the ages if it were not true? The fact that modem Roman Catholics continue to espouse it is
rather amazing under present circumstances. Why should they declare the historic facts and daily pray for her resting place at
Glastonbury as 'Our Lady's Dowry' and at the same time show pilgrims and sightseers the stone ledge in the Chapel of the Dormitron?
Then, nearly nineteen hundred years after, they decided her death to have been a physical translation so celebrated by the Roman
Catholics throughout the world in declaring 1 9 5 4 as the Marion year. To Christians, other than Roman Catholics this intense glori cation
of the Virgin Mary seems strange. It is s great in the South American countries that this continent is commonly named 'The Land of Mary'.
The Christian faith of the Celto-Anglo-Saxon Protestants remains rmly entrenched in its original fountain-head-Jesus Christ. The Virgin
Mary is regarded as but an instrument in the Divine pu pose. There is no passage in the Bible that shows that Jesus regarded His mother
as Divine. On the occasion when His disciples told Him that His mother and brethren were present, He asks, 'Who is My mother', and gives
the explanation. Naturally, He regarded her dearly, as proven by the dedication and heritage He bequeathed to her at Avalon and,
consequently, any evidence brought forth to substantiate her life and death in Britain is of prime interest to all Christians.
When printing was invented, the rst book to come o the press was the Bible, and then Wynkyn De Warde printed the life story of St.
Joseph. At ( P. 1 4 2 ) the same time Pynson printed two accounts of the Arimathean story, copying from old documents, one of which carried
these interesting lines :
‘Now here how Joseph came into Englande;
But at that tyme it was called Brytayne.
Then XV yere with our lady, as I understand.

Page 69 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
r­
fi
fi
 Page 70 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Joseph wayted styli to serve hyr he was fayne.’
The intriguing feature of this verse is contained within the last two lines. The chronicler states that Joseph came to Britain, then clearly
informs us that Mary was with him and that he cared for her for fteen years. This !ength of time closely approximates the number of
years Joseph was Mary's Paranymphos, or Bridesman, from A.D. 32 to A.D. 48. The old ecclesiastical records of Glasto bury, con rmed
by many other ancient writers, state that the Virgin Mary departed this life in the year A.D. 48. Coinciding with this, the Abbey records
o cially declare that St. Mary's Chapel, erected by St. David, was built over her remains.
Melchinus, a native of Avalonia, known also as Maelgwyn, Celtic bard, historian, and philosopher, who lived circa A.D. 450, writes :
'Ye ealde chyrche was built over the grave of the Blessed Mary.'
William of Mahnesbury wrote in his Acts of the Kings of the English (bk. 1, ch. 2):
'The church of which we are speaking (Glastonbury) from its antiquity called by the Angles, by way of distinction, "Ealde Chiche", that is
the "Old Church" of wattle work at rst, savored somewhat of heavenly sanctity even from its very foundation, and exhaled it over the
whole country, claiming superior reverence, Though the structure was mean. Men of that province had no oath more frequent, or more
sacred than to swear by the Old Church, fearing the swiftest vengeance on their perjury in this respect. In the meantime, it is clear that the
depository of so many saints may be deservedly called a heavenly sanctuary upon the earth . . . who there more especially chose to await
the day of resurrection under the protection o f the Mother of God.'
In these words, the writer shows the deep veneration in which St. Mary's Church of Glastonbury was held by all, in the fact that they
swore the most fervent oath by the Old Church just as we today, in court, ( P. 1 4 3 ) swear our oath on the Holy Bible. The plain meaning in
the last passage is that the Blessed Mary was buried there.
From the time of her death and for centuries after we are constantly confronted with the desire of holy men and women, disciples,
pilgrims, kings, and princes from all parts of the world who sought interment in the ancient cemetery at Glastonbury to, as phrased,
'await the day of resurrection under the protection of the Mother of God'.
The list of recorded names, still extant, buried at Glastonbury, is the most illustrious and unique, superior to any other cemetery in
the world. This in itself is the greatest testimony to the sacred remains enclosed in that hallowed ground. This ground has always, from
time immemorial, been called 'the holiest ground on earth'; 'the most hallowed spot in Christendom'; 'the burial place of the Saints'.
The mass of testimony supporting this historic incident appears to overwhelm any argument to the contrary. One nds it di cult to
believe all this is but a prayerful tribute to a legend without substance. Where there is smoke there is always re.
There are other historic facts to be considered to support this amazing record that can be seen to this day, as irrefutable evidence.
One of the most unique monuments that remain from olden times is the ancient stone that silently stares down on the beholder from the
standing outside wall of the Lady Chapel. It bears but two names, 'Jesus- Maria.' This time- and weather-worn tablet has puzzled
scholars for centuries. Devoid of any other inscription it has ever been recognized as a signi cant marking, with a de nite meaning.
It is commonly asked, 'Why was it put there?' 'What does it mean?'
It has all the hallmarks of a very ancient piece of masonry preserved from the original stone church and replaced in the second new
stone church after the disastrous re of A.D. 1 1 8 4 .
The late Rev. L. Smithett Lewis, ( P. 1 4 3 ) Vicar of Glastonbury, declared that the meaning of Thornoe's two noble names is no riddle.
It 1 repr sents the signature of Jesus, naming the Dowry
(1 St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, p. 59.)
He had provided for His mother Mary. Truly an amazing document in stone, revea ing for all time and to all peoples the ancient title to
this hallowed spot at Avalon.
Centuries before Avalon was renamed Glastonbury, by the Saxons, two ( 1 4 4 ) names that were frequently found documented in the
writings of the old scribes, de nitely referred to something of great importance. Usually, no explanation was given, indicating that titles and
places were as commonly known to the people of t h o s e years as today. Confederation is known to Canadians and the Statue of Liberty
to Americans. To the Priesthood and historians of those enthralling years, the two names employed designating the pa ticular place were
'Secretum Domini' and 'Domus Dei'. The rst title means 'The Secret of Our Lord' and the second, 'The House, or Home of God'. The
Page 70 of 122
ffi
e­
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
l­
fi
fi
fi
fi
r­
n­
ffi
fi
Page 71 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
explanation given is that the little wattle Temple was the House, or Home of God, because therein He dwelt, and the Secret of the Lord
was the Dowry and dedication of the same to His mother. In substance, the ancient stone registers the record and site of 'Our Lady's
Dowry'.
This is not myth, legend, or unsupported tradition. The title is o cially recorded in the ancient names in the famous Domesday Book,
A.D. I 086, which reads as follows :
‘The Domun Dei, in the great monastery of Glastonbury, called The Secret of Our Lord. This Glastonbury Church possesses in its own
Ville XII hides of land which has never paid tax.”1
Not only is this particular evidence o cially recorded in the historic Domesday Book, it also corroborates the original deed of the twelve
hides of land - 1,920 acres - and its tax-free grant as given to St. Joseph of Arimathea and his companions by the British Prince Arviragus
of the royal Silurians when the Bethany group rst landed in Britain.
It should be borne in mind that the date given above, A.D. 1086, is not the date on which the Domesday Book was rst written. It
represents the date on which the Norman King William had all the historic events recorded within the ancient book rechecked and
brought up to date ( P. 1 4 4 ) to his reign as King of England. The original date and name of this great book is The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle,
2

(1 ‘Domesday Survey Folio, p. 249b.

2 Parts
of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle overlapThe period of the Domesday Book. The four manuscripts ending with the following
dates: A- 1001, B-977, C-1066, and D-079. The later Laud MS. Ends in 1154. Domesday Book could be a confusion of the Anglo-
Saxon Chronicle.)
preserved in the British Museum. It was created by King Alfred the Great, A.D. 871, who commissioned monastic scholars to tran
late into the Saxon tongue the ancient British history from documentary evidence. T he British historians Capgrave and Kemble both
wrote that Alfred was given great credit in history for creating laws, institutions ( P. 1 4 5 ) , and reform. What he did was restore and enforce
the ancient British practices of law, order, and religion in existence many centuries before his time. This is borne out by an old record
which states that Alfred ordered the ancient laws of Dunwal to be codi ed into the Saxon tongue. Dunwal, or Dunwallon, was the greatest
of early British kings and certainly the greatest lawmaker in British history.1 H e is recorded as Dunwal, the Law Maker. He lived and
reigned in 500 B.C.
(1 E. O. Gordon, Prehistoric London, pp. 101-104; Morgan, History of Britain, pp. 42-46.)
However, one cannot help but be impressed by the act of William the Conqueror, Duke of Normandy, hostile to the Saxons by his
claim to priority to the British crown, in recognizing the validity of the record of this ancient church and causing the facts to remain
perpetuated in the famous historic Domesday Book. Not only this, but he openly declared his respect for the sacred Abbey by endo ing
the church with another Charter, and his royal protection.
Over fty years before this act of William, another foreign invader, the Danish King Canute, had journeyed to Glastonbury Abbey, 'with
a great entourage', and knelt beside the tomb of the former British king, Edmund Ironside, whom he so greatly admired. The historic
record is lavish in detail, telling us that the pilgrimage of the Danish king was conducted in splendor, and with 'peacock feathers'. He
bestowed on the church muni cent gifts and gave it to his enlarged Charter, A.D. 1032.
It is an astonishing fact to remember that, despite the bitter determination of the Roman Empire to persecute and uproot and destroy
everything that was Druidic and Christian in Britain, despite the pillaging and ( P. 1 4 5 ) ravishing of monasteries, churches and libraries by
Roman, Saxon, Dane and Norman, not once was the sanctity of the Abbey de led. ( P. 1 4 5 ) Excepting the Romans, the leaders of the
Saxons, Danes, and Normans held the old church in awed respect. Under pain of punishment, they forbade any of the soldiers to de le its
sacred precincts or molest its occupants. Sad as it is to relate, what de lement this hallowed British institution was to su er was done by
its own countrymen and a royal descendant of the famed Christian warrior, Arviragus, none other than King Henry VIII. This despotic
monarch not only stole all its precious possessions but robbed it of all its ancient privileges and brutally mu dered the last Abbot.
Abbot Whiting was hung, his body quartered and his head stuck on the spike of the church gate, and his other parts stuck elsewhere,
( P. 1 4 6 ) a dire threat to all who dared challenge the king's despotic will. The Puritans performed the nal desecration.

Strange as it may seem, when we consider the unbridled despoi ing during the Dissolution, A.D. 1539-40, and the fanaticism of
Cromwell's Puritans, A.D. 1653-58, the ancient tablet escaped mutilation.
Page 71 of 122
fi
fi
ffi
fi
ffi
l­
fi
fi
fi
fi
r­
fi
ff
fi
w­
s­
Page 72 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
No church in the world has been favored so many times by Royal Charters as Glastonbury Abbey. Each regal seal declared its sacred
historic beginning, attesting to the worldwide reverence held for this sacred memorial to Christ, each a magni cent test monial to the great
truth.
We know that this ancient tablet bearing those two's immortal names was hewn by the builders of the rst stone church, replacing the
one built by Joseph and his saintly companions.
Five years before Mary died she saw the shadow of the persecuting hand of Rome which cast its baleful maw over the Sacred Isle of
Britain in the Claudian invasion of A.D. 43. This time the Bethany family viewed the rising tide of Roman oppression from behind the
fearless barricade of British Christian faith and valour. She saw the British army led by its British Pendragons, Guiderius, Caractacus and
Arviragus, meet the Roman challenge with the greatest Christian crusading spirit in history, one that has never since been repeated. She
heard the clarion call of the British Arch Priests exhort the people to rise in the defense of righteousness. Like the Levites of old, the British
Arch Priests, according to ancient Druidic custom, marched in the front ranks of the soldiery, without arms. On their white-shirted breasts,
they wore the ancient sign of Aaron, the three golden rods, ( P. 1 4 6 ) and the insignia of the Trinity. Meeting the foe with their deathless
slogan, 'The Truth against the world', they were, as even Julius Caesar had said of them a century before, 'careless of death’. 1
(1 ETacitus also, Agricola xi: ‘The Britons, however, not yet enfeebled by a long peace, are possessed of superior courage.’)
In all probability, Mary saw the Christian Mission rise at Avalon, like a fruitful tree, with converts pouring in in an ever-rising wave, and
saw them, as well as members of the original Bethany band that came with Joseph to Britain, stem out into other lands to preach the
Word, and in many cases die the death of martyrs. At Avalon, she would frequently meet the beloved in Christ as they convened with
Joseph and his companions to plan their crusading campaigns to Christianize the Gentile world. What a glorious privilege was hers!
It is interesting ( P. 1 4 7 ) to know that this sacred burial spot that was to inter a multitude of holy men, kings, and martyrs, has been called
the British Vale of Jehoshaphat. 1 To the Biblical people the Valley of
(1 Lewis, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, p. 44 (6th edition).)
Jehoshaphat was the valley of nal judgment. What is more interesting is that Avalon was earlier known as Avilion. This Celtic word has
the same word meaning as Jehoshaphat- 'The Isle of Departed Spirits.'
With all the mass of tradition and documentary evidence from Gaul, Brittany, Normandy, Spain, Italy, Constantinople, Rome and Britain,
and the great number of name places associating Mary and Jesus with Britain, one feels in his heart it is not possible for it all to be only a
beautiful legend without foundation.
How tenderly and lovingly the inspired British poet William Blake 1757-1827, asks the appealing question in his magni cent poem,
'Jerusalem', so popularly sung in Christian communities.
JERUSALEM
And did Those feet in ancient time
Walk upon England's mountains green?
And was the Holy Lamb of God
On England's pleasant pastures seen?
And did the Countenance Divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among Thosedark Satanic mills?

Bring me my bow of burning gold!

Bring me my arrows of desire!

Page 72 of 122
fi
fi
fi
i­
fi
Page 73 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Bring me my spear!
0 clouds unfold!
Bring me my chariot of re!
I will not cease from mental ght,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England's green and pleasant land.

William Blake was born in London in 1757, but was familiar with the stories associated with Glastonbury and steeped in its ancient
history. He expressed his heartfelt prayers for this, 'the Holiest Ground on Earth', in his beautiful poem, which immed ately became
adopted as a hymn, familiar to us all.1
(‘Lewis, St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, p. 44 (6th edition))
This hymn ( P. 1 4 8 ) was a great favorite of King George V. On special occasions of national signi cance he would ask for it to be played
and sung. He was familiar with the historic story. The Royal Library contains many ancient treasures, including the extraord nary
genealogical chart showing the British royal line to be in direct descent from ln the royal kings of ancient Israel.

Page 73 of 122
fi
fi
fi
i­
i­
Page 74 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER XIV

SIMON ZELOTES MARTYRED IN BRITAIN DURING THE BOADICEAN WAR

F
ollowing the ( P. 1 4 9 ) defeat of Caractacus at Clune, A.D. 52, and his exile at Rome, Arviragus speedily reorganized the Silurian
forces, striking back at the Romans with a fury that exceeded any former combat. Ostorius Scapula was still in command of the
Roman armies in Britain, but his forces had become greatly demoralized by the succession of defeats and the terrible
savagery of the British onslaughts. In the year A.D. 53 Scapula su ered a staggering defeat at Caervelin, near Caerleon. Discouraged
and broken in health from the years of harrowing warfare, he petitioned Nero to be relieved of his command and return to Rome. This
was the year Nero succeeded Claudius as Emperor of the Romans. Nero accepted Scapula's resignation and he was immed ately
replaced by Aulus Didius, 1 also known as Didius Gallus. Didius founded the city of Cardi , which is still known by the Welsh as Caer
Dydd - 'The Castle of Didius'.
It is interesting to learn that one of the rst acts of Didius on arriving in Britain was to depose Cartismandua, Queen of the Brigantes,
whom they thoroughly distrusted. Her treacherous b trayal of her cousin, Caractacus, had caused her to be held in disdainful contempt by
both the Romans and the British. As it was, her own clan had expelled her for adultery. 2
Didius was impotent in dealing with Arviragus on the eld of battle. He su ered repulse and defeat in rapid succession. After a brief
command he was replaced by Veranius, A.D. 57. The latter had no better success, in fact, worse. Arviragus drove the Roman forces
behind the Plautian wall of fortresses and bottled up Veranius at Verulam. Matters in the eld had become so bad for Roman arms that, in
desperation, Nero ordered huge reinforc ments to be rushed to Britain, under the superlative relieving co mand of Suetonius Paulinus,3
then regarded as the ablest tactician in the Roman army.
(1 Tacitus, Annals, 12:40.
2 Tacitus, Annals, 3:45.
3 Tacitus, Annals, 14:38-39.)
He took with him the Second Augusta Legions and the famous Ninth, Fourteenth and Twentieth Legions who carried the (150)
victorious legend 'Vicesima, Valens, Victrix'. They were unequal to the occasion. Disaster ( P. 1 5 0 ) continued as the British drove the enemy
before them, asking no quarter and giving none.
Tacitus bitterly expresses the feeling at Rome which required their most capable generals and nest legions to combat the 'ba barous'
British. He writes :
'In Britain, after the captivity of Caradoc, the Romans were repeatedly defeated and put to rout by the single state of the Silures alone.'1
The clemency shown by the royal British captives at Rome by Emperor Claudius did not mollify the Silurians in the least. Men, women,
and priests without discrimination took the eld to avenge and arrest the continued tyrannical persecution of Roman savagery. Ruefully
Tacitus observes: 'The race of the Silures are not to be changed by clemency or severity.'2
Mercilessly they fought pitched battles, stormed forts and Roman encampments, putting Roman settlements to the torch. The record
reads: 'The plains and streets ran with Roman blood.'
The more the Romans were defeated the more excessive were their vicious depredations. The culminating climax came under orders
from Suetonius Paulinus, to carry out a scorched-earth program, to destroy everything in their path, and particularly to exterminate the
seats of Christian learning and all therein. This eventuated in the horrible Menai massacre.3 Entering the community
(1 Tacitus, Annals, 12:38-39.
2 ibid., 2:24.
3 ibid., 14:29-31)
under the pretext of peace, with concealed arms, the Roman soldiery suddenly set upon the inhabitants. Thousands of unsu pecting
priests and priestesses and a multitude of people were treacherously butchered in cold blood, men, women, and children. The aged and
the infants were alike hewn down without mercy.
Page 74 of 122
fi
e­
fi
e­
fi
ff
ff
fi
ff
fi
m­
r­
s­
i­
 Page 75 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
According to Tacitus, this horrible campaign raged at its worst from A.D. 59 to 62.
In the year A.D. 60 the avaricious Roman Prefect, Catus Decianus, had broken the Claudian Treaty with the Iceni, on a false pretext
fomented by Seneca, the Stoic philosopher, who at that time held great in uence with Nero. Seneca, while renowned as a
philosopher of sorts, was better known as the wealthiest man in Rome, who had obtained his vast fortune by trickery and promoting
usurious loans. He had advanced the huge sum of ten million dollars to Prasutagus on the security of the public buildings of the Iceni.
Prasutagus, the king, was also an extremely wealthy man. Tacitus ( P. 1 5 1 ) says his wealth was rated in Rome as being fantastic.
However, the nancial transaction was a private matter between Seneca, Prasutagus, and his family. Having no political involvement it
was outside the authority of Decianus. Nevertheless, Seneca conspired with Decianus to act on the recent death of Prasutagus, completely
disregarding the valid claims of the estate. The Roman Prefect needed no second invitation to satiate his greed from the pillage and
plunder that would follow. This act of treachery was made more simple for Decianus by reason of an existing Peace Treaty made between
Rome, the Iceni, and the Coraniaid. This political agreement permitted the Romans to enjoy freedom of travel and residence in the domain
of these two British clans. This privilege provided a n opportunity for Decianus to take the populace by surprise. He struck suddenly with
violence, inciting his soldiers to unwarranted brutalities which appalled and drew severe censure from the Senate and Roman writers.
They sacked the British Palaces and public buildings of all treasure, stripping the Iceni nobles of their estates and personal
wealth formerly guaranteed to them by the Claudian Pact. To add to the infamy of the act, licentiousness ran rampant.1 The two
daughters of Queen Boadicea, widow of Prasutagus, were publicly raped and Boadicea was whipped. The Menai massacre, already
referred to, followed closely on the heels of this bestiality. These combined monstrosities infuriated the British beyond restraint. 2
(1 Tacitus, Annals, 14:31.
2 Tacitus, Annals, 14:31-35.)
Their anger swept the length and breadth of the Island with the frenzy of a vendetta. The Roman writers graphically reported that
the Roman generals and soldiery alike were stunned by the avalanche of British reaction. In fright the Romans con ned their forces within
their own encampments.
Despite the fact that the Iceni and the Coraniaid were branded as traitors for deserting Caractacus during the Claudian campaign,
these atrocities brought the British clans together in a solid phalanx. The British Queen Boadicea, in amed by the personal indignities
perpetrated upon her daughters and her people, rose in militant de ance to avenge the insults. Her warriors swarmed around her eager for
the fray. She was to lead them into battle with a deva tating o ensive that has caused her name to ame throughout British history as the
nest embodiment of Britannia.
To this day Britannia is displayed on the face of British coins in the form of a woman.
Boadicea, the British name meaning Victoria, was a cousin of
Claudius Pudens, thus ( P. 1 5 2 ) closely related to both Caractacus and Arviragus.
To Arviragus Boadicea sent Venusius, the Pendragon of the Iceni, in an urgent appeal, o ering to place the combined forces of the
Iceni and Coraniaid under his command. Whether he accepted or not is unstated, probably because the historic record is overshadowed
by the brilliant stature of the valorous Queen. We do know that her own Pendragon, Venusius, led the two warrior tribes, but only as
second-in-command. Boadicea was Commande in-Chief and led her warriors personally into battle. Boadicea was a born warrior
chieftainess, undoubtedly the greatest warrior Queen in all history. She had acquired her name, Victoria, through her valor in former
military campaigns. Boadicea had always despised the Romans, now she hated them with a chilling bitterness that hungered for
vengeance. Historians tell us that in appearance she was a most dramatic, striking gure. The Roman writer, Dion Cassius, states :
'Boadicea ascended the general's tribunal; her stature exceeded the ordinary height of women; her appearance itself carried
terror; her aspect was calm and collected, but her voice became deep and pitiless. Her hair falling in long golden tresses as
low as her hips were collected around her forehead by a golden coronet; she wore a tartan dress tting closely to the
bosom, but below the waist expanding in loose folds as a gown; over it was a chlamys, or military cloak. In her hand she
bore a spear. 1
(1 Xiphilinus Excerpta, p. 176.)

Page 75 of 122
fi
fi
r­
s­
ff
fi
fi
fl
ff
fl
fi
fl
fi
Page 76 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Such is the portrait of the majestic Boadicea, as she stood surrounded by the 120,000 warriors who had responded to her blazing call
for vengeance. To them, she delivered an address as challenging and to be as immortal as the one given by her famous relative,
Caractacus, before the Roman Senate. Dion Cassius records this address as follows :
'I appeal to thee a woman. I rule not, like Nitocris, over beasts of burden, as are the e eminate nations of the East, nor like
Semiramis, over tradesmen and tra ckers, nor like the ma woman Nero, over slaves and eunuchs - such is the precious
knowledge these foreigners introduce among us - but I rule over Britons, little versed in craft and diplomacy, but born and
trained in the game of war, men who, in the cause of liberty stake down their lives, the lives of their wives and children, their
lands and property. Queen ( P. 1 5 3 ) of such a race, I implore thine aid for freedom, for victory over enemies infamous for the
wantonness of the wrongs they in ict, for their perversion of justice, for their co tempt of religion, for their insatiable greed;
a people that revel in unmanly pleasures, whose a ections are more to be dreaded and abhorred than their enmity. Never let
a foreigner bear rule over me or these my countrymen; never let slavery reign on this island. Be Thou forever O goddess of
manhood and victory, sovereign and Queen in Britain.'
Having exhorted her followers, the famous Boadicean war began in A.D. 60. Always in the fore, ercely inspiring her warriors, Boadicea,
with her two daughters riding beside her, led her armies from one devastating victory to another, the scythes on the wheels of her war
chariot slashing deep into the enemy lines. Colchester was the rst to fall. The Temple, forti ed by Roman veterans, held out f o r two days;
then disaster overtook them. The Ninth Legion, under Petilius Cerealis, was slaughtered at Coggeshall. Cerealis and a few horsemen were
the only ones to escape. The Roman hea quarters at Verulam was burnt to the ground and its defenders were cut to pieces. It seems
as Though nothing could stop the furious o slaughts of the British Queen. The Roman populace ed in terror on news of her armed
approach. Tacitus states that one Roman Legion that dared to stand its ground was cut down to the last man.1 Her forces had by then
swelled to the enormous number of 230,000, clearly
(1 Tacitus, Annals, 14:32.)
indicating that more than the two clans were supporting her punitive cause. It can be fairly assumed that the Silurians, under
Arviragus, were participating in this concerted action since the eld of battle had extended into their territory. We do know that the
powerful Trinobantes, the warlike clan with whom Julius Caesar signed the Peace Pact of September 26th, 54 B.C., had cast in their lot
with Boadicea.
Tacitus declared that the Silurian state alone had in icted one defeat after another upon the Romans. Now with at least four of the
most powerful warrior clans in Britain massed together under the one standard of baneful vengeance to the number of more than a
quarter of a million, there is no need for wonder why the Romans were swept ruthlessly before them. Never before had the British been so
deeply wounded and angered by the violation of their native privileges, their religious institutions, and personal dignity. The desecration
charged them with superhuman determination to
(Tacitus, Annals, 14:32.)
avenge. Tacitus ( P. 1 5 4 ) reports that over 80,000 Roman soldiers perished in these sanguinary battles, and Catus Decianus, terri ed by
the violence of the con ict and the horrible carnage he witnessed, took ight, escaping into Gaul.
The greatest single carnage followed the attack on London. At that time it was a populous city, the trade center in Britain for
international commerce. It was lled with Roman merchants and was protected by a powerful Roman garrison.
The assault and destruction of the city is one of the most appalling war records one can read. It was little short of a massacre and
shows how intense the merciless British fury, steeped in a hatred so unnatural to the general British character. Some may consider the
quarterless slaughter performed by the British in the Boadiccan campaign as unwarranted and diametrically opposed to Christian
principles. One should remember, however, that since the Claudian Edict for Christian extermination, beginning A.D. 42, up to and
including the Boadicean war of A.D. 60, the people and the land of Britain had su ered persecution at the hands of the Romans for
eighteen years which no other nation had experienced. Their towns, religious institutions, libraries, and seats of cultural learning had been
burnt to the ground with a barbaric insolence unequaled. The defenseless had been massacred. Licentiousness, pillage and plunder of
wealth, crops, and cattle had been conducted unabated in the vicious Roman pledge to crush the Christian faith and spirit in Britain.
People can stand only so much, then anger gets the better of them, often leading to what we may term an excess of violence. The
British were only paying the Romans back in their own barbaric coin and unquestionably they saved Christ anity for posterity with the
sacri ce of their lives and property.

Page 76 of 122
fi
fl
fi
fl
ffi
d­
n­
ff
fl
n­
fi
fi
fl
n­
ff
ff
fi
fi
fl
i­
fi
Page 77 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Some historians claim that Suetonius Paulinus, Commander-i Chief of the Roman forces, terri ed at the determined onslaught on
London, ed the scene with a few of his troops. This is hardly conceivable. The chroniclers report that the battle for supremacy was waged
savagely for several days, indicating that the British encountered organized military resistance. Paulinus probably made good his escape
when he saw the battle was lost, leaving the destruction of ( P. 1 5 5 ) the city, its inhabitants, and such Legionnaires that remained to the
sword of the pitiless British.
Tacitus states that 40,000 of the Roman defenders of London and its inhabitants were put to the sword and the city to the torch. Next,
Boadicea leveled the important city of Verulam, now St. Albans, driving the enemy before her. Such of the inhabitants of Regnum and
Rutupium ( P. 1 5 5 ) could ee before her armies arrived. It is said that the destruction of lives on both sides was so great that the burning
towns and cities were quenched in blood. The British Amazon swept westward in an e ort to intercept Paulinus. Dion reports many battles
fought with the heavy balance of disaster borne upon the Romans. The climax to the victorious Boadicean war ended in a most
unpredictable manner at Flintshire, A.D. 62, where the modern town of Newmarket stands. The contesting armies had met in a savage
con ict that was fought from dawn to darkness, with the battle swaying in favor of one side and then the other. As dusk set in a section of
the British army, led by Boadicea, was separated from the main body. Believing herself trapped and fearing capture (even though the
record states the British forces had reorganized, preparatory to a nal major assault), rather than fall into the hands of the despoilers and
the rapine she knew would follow, the valorous Queen Boadicea, in a last gesture of de ance, committed suicide on the eld of battle. As
the tragic news swept through the ranks of both sides, it is recorded that Briton and Roman alike were stunned by the calamity of this
extraordinary climax. Fighting immediately ceased with each side withdrawing into their own encampment with unbidden consent. The
death of this great British queen settled like a pall over all. The woman who had terri ed the Romans in life awed them in death. A great
sadness descended upon her people. And the Romans, quick to seize an opportunity, took advantage of the situation to come to
peace terms with the Iceni.
Under the terms of this new Peace Pact, the Romans restored all the con scated wealth of the royalty, the nobles and the people. The
stolen estates were returned to the surviving members of the royal household and to the nobility with all their original privileges. The
treacherous transaction of Seneca was canceled and a heavy indemnity was paid to the Iceni.
How truly the ( P. 1 5 6 ) Roman historian wrote: 'Every peace with the British was a signature of defeat.'
The Royal Boadicea, majestic in appearance, rich in eloquence, dauntless in war, endowed with the military genius which for two years
had outmatched the ablest strategists of Rome, drove their Legions before her arms like sheep to the slaughter. The British heroine who
preferred death rather than sacri ce her freedom, a warrior queen with no equal in the colorful pages of history, the avenger of womanly
indignities, and a champion of the Christian faith. was now no more than a glorious memory.
The Romans ( P. 1 5 6 ) wrote that her funeral obsequies were the most magni cent ever bestowed on a monarch. So lavish in pomp and
assemblage they gazed in wonder on its splendor, awed and silenced in both shame and fear. Her unhappy death, Though spectacular,
was an incomparable sacri ce for the preservation of the ancient British freedoms for which she stood.
Boadicea's monumental record is immortalized and enshrined in the magni cent statue erected on Westminster Bridge to her memory.
It is one of the nest statues to be seen anywhere in the world. Everyone who views it is impressed with its illustrious majesty. It is created
exactly as the ancient Roman writer, Dion Cassius, described her. She stands erect, spear in one hand, and with the other hand holding in
check the two rearing chargers, a coronet on her brow, with her long hair owing to the breeze. Her two daughters are kneeling beside her
on the oor of her war chariot. Her noble features proudly portray the cast of her fearless character. On the wheels of her chariot are shown
the terrible scythes, which were a deadly, slashing war weapon peculiar to the British armaments, dreaded by the Romans.
The sculptor who executed the statuary was truly inspired with the commission. It depicts Christian Britannia on the shores of
England, defying the evil powers of the world.
The scene of battle and its tragedy over the centuries are commemorated by place names known to this day as 'Cop Paulinus', 'Hill of
Arrows', 'Hill of Carnage', 'Hollow of No Quarter', 'Hollow of Woe', 'Hollow of Execution', 'Field of the Tribunal', 'Knoll of the Mclee'. On
the scene still exists a monolith called 'The Stone of Lamentation', described as the spot where the great Queen took her life. On the
road to Caerwys was 'The Stone of the Grave of Boadicea', since moved to Downing.
The con ict against the Romans did not cease with her death. The Roman peace made with the Iceni had no e ect on other British
clans. It is written that her tragic death did not abate the punitive spirit and campaigning determination of the Britons in the north and the
west. Under the invincible leadership of Arviragus, Venusius, and the gallant new Pendragon, Galgacus,1 hostilities ( f ro m 1 5 7 ) vigorously
continued against the Romans.
Page 77 of 122
fl
fl
fl
fl
fi
fl
fi
fi
n­
fi
fi
fl
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
Page 78 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
(1 Tacitus, Agricola, 30-32, 14:32.)
To all this calamity Joseph and his missionary co-workers were sorrowful spectators. But through it all they glimpsed triumph,
strong in their faith that the Cause of Christ was safe for all time in the embattled Island realm. Greater sacri ce and heroism was
'Tacitus, Agricola, 30-32.
yet to be su ered for Christian welfare but the Flag of Christ was never to dip into any pagan power.
In Pynson's metrical Li/e of St. Joseph, the following lines occur referring to the death of Mary, the Mother of Jesus:
'So after Hyr Assumpcyn, the boke telleth playne;
With Saynt Phylyp he went into France.
Phylyp bad they go to Great Brytayn fortunate.'
These lines inform us that after the death of Mary Joseph returned to Gaul with Philip, his clearest friend. The last line rather implies
that Philip was fortunate in prevailing on Joseph to return to Britain. This would suggest that Joseph bowed in sorrow, was loath to part
from the man who was so close to him that he could understand his grief. Knowing that work was the best antidote for sorrow, Philip
urged his friend to return to his mission in Britain where he was so greatly needed. Not only was Philip fortunate in persuading Joseph;
Britain was fortunate to receive him back.
It will be noticed that the word 'them' is employed in the last line. Who were 'them'? The word is plural. The answer is provided in the
Magna Tabula Glastoniae, cited by Bishop Ussher. Every time Joseph went to Gaul he returned with more missionary helpers.
On this occasion, we are told that among them was his son Josephes, whom Philip had baptized.
How long Josephes stayed in Britain with his father is not stated, but from various records it is quite evident that the son of Joseph
journeyed as an emissary between Gaul and Britain. Facts show that Josephes returned to Gaul after arriving in Britain with his father at
Philip's request. Joseph remained in Britain as the head of the missionary band at Avalon. In the year A.D. 60 Special mention is made of
Joseph going to Gaul and returning to Britain with another band of recruits, among whom is particularly mentioned Simon Zelotes, one of
the original twelve disciples of Christ. This is the second time it is specially mentioned that Philip consecrated Joseph and his band of c
workers prior to embarking for Britain. Probably the inclusion of Simon Zelotes indicated an important missionary e ort, hence the
consecration. This was the second journey to Britain for Simon Zelotes and his last. According to Cardinal Baronius and Hi polytus,
Simon's rst arrival in Britain was in the year A.D. 44, during the Claudian War. Evidently, his stay was short, as he returned to the
continent.
Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople,and Byzantine historian, A.D. 758-829, writes:
'Simon born ( P. 1 5 8 ) in Cana of Galilee who for his fervent a ection for his Master and great zeal that he showed by all means
to the Gospel, was surnamed Zelotes, having received the Holy Ghost from above, traveled through Egypt, and Africa, then
through Mauretania and all Lybia, preaching the Gospel. And the same doctrine he taught to the Occidental Sea, and the
Isles called Britanniaen. 1
In the Bible, Simon is often referred to as Simon the Canaanite, because he came from Cana. The Hebrew word for 'zealous' has a
similar sound to that of the name of his hometown, being 'canna'. The Greek translation of the word is 'Zelotes', the name by which he is
best known. His enthusiastic preaching of the Word earned him his zealous surname.
Simon arrived in Britain during the rst year of the Boadicean war, A.D. 60, when the whole Island was convulsed in a deep, burning
anger against the Romans, which was never equaled before or after in the long years of con ict between the two nations. Tacitus states
that from A.D. 59 to 62 the brutalities of war were at their worst. Atrocities occurred on both sides but the Romans carried their vicious
perpetrations to such an extent that even Rome was shocked. Bearing this in mind we can readily understand that any Christian
evangelizing outside the British shield would be fraught with imminent danger. At all times the disciples of Christ were oblivious to danger,
but when the pressure became too severe invariably they ed the land until matters quietened down. In the year A.D. 44, a Claudian
Edict expelled the Christian leaders from Rome. Many of them sought sanctuary in Britain. Among Those who ed to Britain from

Rome was Peter. 2 This was the year Simon rst went to Britain. He did not come from Rome but from Gaul, where he had been
Page 78 of 122
fi
ff
fi
fi
ff
fl
fl
fi
fl
ff
p­
o­
Page 79 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
(1 See also Dorotheus, Synod de Apostol.
2 Cornelius Lapide, Argumentum Epistle St. Pauli di Romanos ch. 16.)
assisting Philip. Moreover, Simon was directly associated with the Arimathcan Mission of Avalon in both his missionary e orts in Britain. As
we shall later see it made quite a di erence to the British in their acceptance of him whether the missionary came from Rome or
Jerusalem.
Simon was ( P. 1 5 8 ) unusually bold and fearless, as his surname implies. In spite of the volcanic turmoil seething through Britain during
the Boadicean war, Simon openly de ed the barbaric Edict of Paulinus, and the most brutal Catis Decianus, to destroy anything and an
one Christian. He decided to conduct his evangelizing campaign in the eastern part of the Island. This section of Britain was the most
sparsely ( P. 1 5 9 ) inhabited by the native Britons and consequently more. heavily populated by the Romans. It was far beyond the strong
protective shield of the Silurian arms in the south and the powerful northern Yorkshire Celts. In this dangerous territory, Simon was
de nitely on his own. Undeterred, with in nite courage, he began preaching the Christian Gospel right in the heart of the Roman domain.
His ery sermons brought him speedily to the attention of Catus Decianus, but not before he had sown the seed of Christ in the hearts of
Britons and many Romans who, despite the unremi ting hatred of Decianus for all that was Christian, held the secret of the truth locked
in their hearts.
The evangelizing mission of Simon was short-lived. He was nally arrested under the orders of Catus Decianus. As usual, his trial was a
mockery. He was condemned to death and was cruci ed by the Romans at Caistor, Lincolnshire, and there buried, circa May 10th, A.D.
61.
The day of the martyrdom of Simon Zelotes, the devoted disciple of Christ, is o cially celebrated by the Eastern and western
churches on May 10th and so recorded in the Greek Menology. Cardinal Baronius, in his Annales Ecclesiastici, gives the same date in
describing the martyrdom and burial of Simon Zelotes in Britain.
Of Simon Zelotes, Dorotheus, Bishop of Tyre, A.D. 300, writes in his work Synopsis de Apostol:
'Simon Zelotes traversed all Mauretania, and the region of the Africans, preaching Christ. He was at last cruci ed, slain, and buried in
Britain.'
There are some who think because Simon Zelotes perished in Britain he must have been slain by the British. This could not be at all
possible. Only the Romans practiced cruci xion. In the rst place, this form of death was reserved as a gesture of contempt in executing
their meanest criminals. During the Christian era, it was more viciously employed on the Christians in de ant mockery of all the Cross
stood for to all Christians. To the British, and indeed to all Christians, cruci xion was a profanity of the Cross. The historic record leaves
no doubt as to who cruci ed Simon Zelotes.
Some also entertain the belief that Simon Zelotes was the rst British Christian martyr. Of the elect, he was the second British martyr.
Aristobulus, brother of Barnabas and father-in-law of Peter, was the rst to be martyred in Britain. Aristobulus preceded Simon to his
reward at what is now St. Albans by a couple of years. The record states ( P. 1 6 0 ) he was martyred 'in the second year of Nero'. This would
be circa A.D. 59.
Unknown to many, the remains of Simon Zelotes, with many more of the saintly elect, are buried in England, creating the saying
uttered the world over, 'Britain, the most hallowed ground on earth.'
The year before the Boadicean war and the two years of its existence, admitted by Rome to be marked with unparalleled horror, are
the darkest, most bloodstained years in British history through Roman infamy. Yet they are epic years in British Christian annals,
resplendent with noble sacri ce and heroic deeds, ou matching the terror and stark tragedy those years contained. To this notable
period, the martyrdom of Simon Zelotes added luster in his last devotional act in serving his Master, with Whom he rst walked on the
shores of Galilee.
Nearby where this noble martyr perished was the ancestral home of Abraham Lincoln, the great American Christian President. His
ancestors migrated from England in the rst waves of English colonists to settle in Virginia. The church in which Lincoln worshipped was
made an American sanctuary by patriotic, Christia minded American soldiers of World War II. They made various beautiful contributions
to this ancient little church in Boston, Lincolnshire, to the ( P. 1 6 0 ) memory of the family, particularly to their illustrious American
descendant.

Page 79 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
n­
t­
fi
t­
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
ff
y­
Page 80 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Eighteen hundred years after the martyrdom of Simon Zelotes, in the land of the Lincolns, in America, Abraham Lincoln became a
martyr for his humane Christian principles, the same principles which Simon Zelotes taught, for which he was cruci ed and gave his all in
the glorious service of his beloved Jesus.

Page 80 of 122
fi
 Page 81 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER XV

THE GLORIOUS CAVALCADE

H
uman nature can ( P. 1 6 1 ) be very perverse on occasion, being completely oblivious to experience and sound judgment. It
is surprising to hear of people with intelligence so easily victimized by suave tongues and extravagant claims deliberately
conceived to misinform and misguide. This human weakness might possibly indicate that people are more prone to accept ction
than truth. Perhaps this is what has given rise to the old slogan that 'truth is stranger than ction'. To such an extent does this condition
exist that truth becomes a matter of serious education in constant con ict to disprove the untruthful who are ever seeking to prove their
spurious claims.
Christians are so indoctrinated with the scriptural apostolic records, rightfully, that they would never dream of arguing the point that the
Apostles preached Christ in Jerusalem, Egypt, Greece, Rome and Asia, but to mention that they taught in Britain is to tax their credulity.
To state that Christianity was brought rst to Britain is almost to have them inquire as to the state of one's mental health. The average
person is so well inoculated with the belief that Christianity was rst established by the Roman Catholic Church in Rome and that Britain
rst received the faith though St. Augustine, A.D. 597, that they take it for granted.
Incredulity is quickly dissipated when one asks, What happened to Christian teaching during the centuries that followed the death of
Christ, to the establishment of the Roman Catholic Church in the fourth century? This church was not founded until years after the
death of Constantine the Great. Then there is the period that followed to the time when Augustine arrived in Britain.
One has but to turn the pages of the Bible and ask what became of most of the original Apostles, on whose lives Scripture is silent.
Where did the unrecorded ones go and where did they die? What of the seventy elect and the following one hundred and twenty elected
in Christ and the many that followed, stemming from the teachings of the original Christian multitude?
The Biblical travel record of the elect is but brie y given. They all had to be somewhere and achievement certainly followed the sowing
of the seed, otherwise where did the Roman Catholic Church obtain ( P. 1 6 2 ) the substance to found its own organization? It is only in
recent years that the Roman Catholic Church began to sco at the British record and its claim to priority, but they are 'hoist upon their own
petard'. For nineteen hundred years the Roman Catholic Church was the stoutest champion of British priority. It is futile at this later date
for them to dispute priority and apostolic succession. The mass of documentary evidence su plied by their greatest ecclesiastics and
historians, and even the Popes, substantiates the facts, refuting all modern challenges. For fteen hundred years the Popes and the
ecclesiastical councils sustained British priority whenever it was challenged. For more than six hundred years after the founding of Avalon
by Joseph, until the time of the famous Oaks conference, and the equally famed Whitby Council, when the rst o cial cleavage took place
between the two churches, the British and the Roman church existed as sister churches, with Britain accepted as the elder sister, for
approximately three hundred years. The British church steadfastly refused to recognize the recently instituted authority of the Pope, A.D.
6ro, atly denying the worship of Mary or the use of the term 'Mother of God', proclaimed by the Roman church A.D. 431, at the
Council of Ephesus, or the doctrine of Purgatory, established by Gregory the Great about the year A.D. 593, they shared the same
communion. The Mass had not as then been developed. It was not introduced into the Roman church as an obligatory attendance until the
eleventh century. The British church still retained its primitive interpretation of the Christ faith, veh mently declaring in the two councils
mentioned that only Christ was the Head of the church and the only means of intercession between man and God, and with no recourse to
Purgatory. Though the worship of images and material concepts were being introduced into the church though Roman in uence, it still
retained a great deal of the original primitive simplicity of worship.
The rst six hundred years following the Passion of Christ can truly be called the Golden Age of Christianity, in spite of the fact that
these centuries were saturated in drama, romance, tragedy and sacri ce.
The brief glimpse we have taken of the perilous wars and of the violence of the persecutions that swept the sea-girt Isle leaves us in
no doubt as to the invincible courage and unbendable determination of the Christian elect in carrying out the work of our Lord,
regardless of consequences. In World War II we were daily thrilled with the heroic exploits of the patriots of the oppressed nations who
comprised ( P. 1 6 3 ) the Underground. Comparing this record with that of the Apostolic Crusaders of the Cross of that glorious era, the
Christian heart must be thrilled though and though as we realize that theirs was no underground operation. Surrounded by evil foes and
forces they walked openly into the midst of their enemies, declaring the Word with resonant voices to friend and foe alike, and only too
often paying the supreme price, but fearlessly. The record tells us of an endless ow of men and women pouring into Avalon to be
Page 81 of 122
fi
fl
fi
fi
fl
f
fi
fi
fl
fl
fi
p­
fi
e­
fi
ffi
fi
fl
Page 82 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
converted and baptized, then remaining for instru tion to go forth preaching the Word in hostile territory and repla ing the glorious ones
who had fallen.
Some idea of how great was the multitude of converts who remained for instruction can be gleaned from the record which states that
from Gaul alone Philip sent a total of a hundred and sixty disciples to assist Joseph and his companions.' That there were others that
came from other sources we know, apart from the mission that formed the second church in Britain, sent by St. Paul into Wales. Their ery
zeal was kept a ame by the frequent arrival of others of the Lord's original Apostles, who stayed awhile before setting forth into other
lands. Not all of the Bethany band that arrived at Avalon stayed on with Joseph. Some of the most illu trious of his companions he sent
back into di erent parts of Gaul to assist Philip in founding churches, as others quali ed to take over their place on the Isle of Avalon.
The rst man to be sent back to Gaul by Joseph was Lazarus, but not before the man whom Jesus had raised from the dead had left
his timeless imprint on Britain in the work he wrote outlining his rules for living the Clu-istian life. In Celtic MSS. they are known as The
Triads of Lazarus. No better memorial could he have left to prove his identity with Britain. Nowhere else are his laws recorded and nowhere
else but in Britain was the word 'Triad' employed, not even in Gaul. The word is Celtic for Law. The Triads of Lazarus are still preserved in
the ancient Celtic records of Britain.
He went direct to Marseilles, where he had rst arrived at Gaul in the drifting boat with Joseph, and their other companions.
Roger of Hovedon, writing of Marseilles, remarks :
'Marseilles is an episcopal city under the domination of the King of Aragon. Here are the relics of St. Lazarus, the brother of St. Mary
Magdalene and Martha, who held the Bishopric for seven years.’
(' Capgrave, De Santo Joseph ad Aramathea, quoting
Ancient manuscript and the Book of the Holy Grail)
The ancient ( P. 1 6 4 ) church records at Lyons con rm the same facts: 'Lazarus returned to Gaul from Britain to Marseilles, taking with
him Mary Magdalene and Martha. He was the rst appointed Bishop. He died there seven years later.'
It is further stated that Lazarus was Bishop of Cyprus before he made the voyage to Britain. This would indicate he was teaching at
Cyprus, before the exodus from Judea, A.D. 36, and having returned to Judea became a member of the Bethany group who occupied the
oarless boat on that fateful voyage. He was the rst Bishop of Marseilles and built the rst church on the site where the present
cathedral stands.1 In the few years he lived to teach at Marseilles he
(1 AJ. Burr, Remarkable Biblical Characters. See The Coming of the Saints, by J.W. Taylor, p. 239, for the inscription in the Church of St.
Victor.)
founded other churches. His zealous preaching and kindly disposition left a deep impression in Gaul, to such an extent that he is better
remembered in France than is Philip, regardless of the latter's long sojourn in Gaul. In many quarters he is regarded as the Apostle of
Gaul and his relics are greatly treasured to this day. At Marseilles, Lyons, Aix, St. Maximin, La Sainte Baume, and other places there still
remain numerous monuments, liturgies, relics, and traditions to his immortal memory. He was the rst of the original Bethany band
associated with Joseph to die. As the records state, he died a natural death seven years after returning to Ma seilles. His stay in Britain is
reported to have been short, which would place the date of his death between A.D. 44 and 45.
An interesting report was published in the London Morning Post, on May 28th, 1923, marking the date of the annual pilgrimage of the
French gypsies to St. Maries de la Mer at the mouth of the Rhone. Their tradition maintains that the barque of Lazarus came ashore
there with three holy women who remained. From time immemorial to present times the French gypsies make their annual pilgrimage to this
sacred spot to venerate the relics of Marie Salome, Marie Jacobs and in particular their black servant, Sara. Mary Salome was another
member of the original Josephian band who had been sent forth to preach the Word, known in the British record as St. Salome. Her two
other women companions were probably among the unrecorded converts who went to aid St. Salome on her mission. Evidently, as the
name suggests, Marie Jacob was also a Judean refugee who had drifted to Gaul and Britain. Mention of the black Sara is quite
interesting. At odd intervals her name crops up, and in each case shows she was held in special esteem. We note that while the French
gypsies made their annual pilgrimage to the spot 'J. Burr, Remarkable Biblical Characters. See The Coming of the Saints by to venerate
( P. 1 6 5 ) the memory of the three women missionaries Sara the black maid, IS the one to whom they paid special consideration.

As will be seen by the record it is stated that Mary Magdalene and Martha went with Lazarus from Britain to Marseilles to begin their
missionary work in Gaul. 1 There is an interesting statement made by
Page 82 of 122
fi
ff
fl
fi
fi
fi
c­
fi
fi
fi
s­
fi
r­
c­
fi
 Page 83 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
(1 The identity of Magdalene with Mary of Bethany is a subject of controversy, but the French Church regards them as one.)
one of the early Bishops of Mayence said, referring to the many arriving in Gaul from Britain, that each went forth to specially appointed
places in Gaul, where they taught and founded churches. Under the direction of St. Philip, each followed out their particular assignment in
the service of our Lord. Cons quentJy we can understand why Mary Magdalene and Martha did not remain at Marseilles with Lazarus.
Martha, the practically minded head of the Bethany household, which had been the favorite resting place of Jesus and point of assembly
for His disciples at Bethany during His Mission, was directed to Aries. With her went the faithful handmaid, Marcella. Martha did not remain
long there. Trophimus was sent to Gaul by Joseph and, under the direction of Philip, replaced Martha at Arles. He was consecrated as the
rst Bishop of Aries and there performed an outstanding service. He was energetic, practical, and an intelligent organizer. His
Christianizing endeavors embraced a large area that formed the district of Narbonne. He became the rst Metropolitan of the Narbonne,
with Aries as his Bishopric. For centuries it continued to be a prominent stronghold of the Christian faith in Gaul.
Martha and Marcella moved to Tarascon where they settled, spending the rest of their lives preaching, teaching, and administe ing.
They both died a natural death, Martha being the rst of the two to pass on her everlasting reward. The record states 'Marcella was with
Martha at her death.' A few years late; Marcell , the faithful handmaiden of the glorious Bethany sisters, and their brother Lazarus,
entered into her well-deserved rest. She, too, had waited on the Lord in the pleasant Bethany home in Judea. She had seen the miracle
performed on Lazarus and watched the Cruci xion. Her devotion to her mistresses had carried her with them to Gaul, thence to Britain,
and back again to Gaul where she helped Martha to plant the Cross of Christ and nurture it with their love.
The early records show Maximin, Eutropius, Trophimus and Parmena leaving Britain for Gaul, joining with Thosealready mentioned.
Parmena is not listed among the original companions
of Joseph ( P. 1 6 6 ) a t Avalon. The other three are named among the twelve companions. As we have seen, Trophimus joined Martha at
Aries, where she later left for Tarascon. Maximin is described as joining Mary Magdalene at Aix where both spent their life. Both died a
natural death. Maxirnin was the rst Bishop of Aix, and there are found numerous memorials and relics of Maximin, particularly of Mary
Magdalene. The area is saturated with her memory. Mary's classic beauty and her rich voice, extolled in reverence and pleasure by all who
knew her, endeared her so deeply to the hearts of the people among whom she labored that she was adored as a Saint before she died.
Her undying devotion to her Lord throbbed though her teachings of the Word. The most hardened soul melted to her preaching, and she
converted, as we are told, 'multitudes to the faith'. The ancient documents resound with her glory.
One, if not the most outstanding document treating of her life, was written by the famed Maurus Rabanus, Archbishop of Mayence, 1
( 1M i l l i n z . )
A . D . 776-856, Life of Mary Magdalene. This precious MS. is owned by Oxford University, where it is preserved and treasured in the
College Library bearing her name, the Magdalen College Library. There are many manuscripts older than the Rabanus MSS., some written
about the same time, but none as illuminating. In his Prologue the eminent Archbishop states that his information was written 'according to
the accounts that our fathers have left us in their writings'.
In his work he supports all the earlier records of the gathering in Gaul, the Josephian entourage arriving in Britain, con rming the
date. He tells of many of Joseph's companions returning to Gaul to preach and teach. He writes :
'Therefore the chief, St. Maximus, the blessed Parmenas the archdeacon Trophimus and Eutropius, bishops, and the rest of the
leaders of his Christian warfare, together with the Go renowned Mary Magdalene and her sister, the most blessed Martha, departed by
way of the sea. hey came near to the city of Marseilles, in the Vienoise province of the Gauls, where the river Rhone is received by the sea.
There, having called upon God, the great King of all the world, they parted, each company going to the province where the Holy Spirit had
directed them, presently preaching everywhere, "the Lord with them", and con rmed the Word with signs following.'
Eutropius was the rst Bishop of Aquitaine. Here we have ( P. 1 6 7 ) eight of the original Josephian band that arrived in Britain back in
Gaul, after receiving their nal instructions from Joseph, who consecrated them before they left the sacred Isle of Avalon.
Some are inclined to think that Marie Jacob, one of the three venerated women to whom the French gypsies paid reverence at St.
Maries de la Mer, was none other than the Mary Cleopas, recorded in the British Bethany band. It is quite possible. We note in the Biblical
records that names are changed and interchanged. Mary was the wife of the Roman whom Jesus converted. Since there is no record of
him, following the exodus, he probably had died, in which case it was not uncommon for a woman to revert to her ancestral family
name. Being a Judean and a near relative of the Virgin Mary, her claim could be of the family branch of Jacob, and so be known as Mary

Page 83 of 122
fi
fi
fi
e­
fi
fi
fi
d­
fi
fi
fi
r­
 Page 84 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Jacob. 1f this is the case, this would make nine of the original Bethany band sent forth by Joseph to preach and found missions and
churches in Gaul.
The Gaulish and Celtic chronicles a rm that most of the ancient
French Bishoprics were founded by the companions of Joseph, other Culdees, and former neophytes, all stemming from the sacred
sanctuary at Avalon. Sidonis, Satuminus, and Cleon are reported as teaching in Gaul on various occasions, supporting other missio
aries, and returning to Britain. Joseph also contributed in like manner and his name is well associated with the founding of the church at
Morlaix and Limoges.
It is stated that St. Martial, of the elect twelve, was the only one who never left Avalon to go abroad. He remained thoughout his
lifetime converting and teaching neophytes, as the right hand of Joseph. 1 I n the same report it is interesting to note the statement
(1 Old French Continue refers to Eutrope et Martial, Sidonie avec Joseph.)
that with Martial there remained at Avalon his parents, Marcellus and Elizabeth, and also St. Zacchaeus. The mention of the latter three
names proves the illustrious assemblage of faithful Judeans nally domiciled in Britain, aiding Joseph at Avalon in his great work while
great battles between Britons and Romans were being fought around them. From time to time we nd other Judeans, many relatives of
the twelve disciples of Jesus, arriving at the sacred stronghold in Britain, bending their e orts in the evangelizing mission.
Parmena, who accompanied Maximin, Eutropius, and Trophimus into Gaul from Britain, was a disciple of Joseph. He was appointed
the rst Bishop of Avignon. Drennalus was also a disciple of Joseph.
He rst went ( P. 1 6 8 ) to Gaul in company with Joseph to found the church at Morlaix. This done, Joseph appointed Drennalus to Treguier,
where he remained after being installed as the rst Bishop of Treguier.
The British crusaders in Christ were not limited to Gaul. They journeyed into other lands founding missions and erecting churches. Three
of Avalon's missionaries were responsible for founding the three great mother churches in Gaul, Helvetia (Switzerland), and Lotharingia.
The illustrious Beatus, who founded the church in Helvetia, received his baptism and education at Avalon. He was the wealthy son of a
prominent British noble, his pre-baptismal name being
Suetonius. It is of interest to note that Beatus was baptized at Avalon by St. Barnabas, the brother of Aristobulus, sent in advance by St.
Paul to Britain to represent the Apostle to the Gentiles. In the scriptural record, he is referred to as Joses the Levite who changed his
name to Barnabas, meaning 'Son of Consolation', the same Barnabas who, together with St. Paul, founded the church at Antioch, A.D.
43 (Acts 11: 22). Barnabas combined with St. Paul, Joseph and his brother in expanding the church in Britain, partic larly in Wales. His
stays were short but e ective. It was on one of these excursions into Britain after his brother Aristobulus 1 was martyred,
(1St. Ado, Archbishop of Vienne, Adonis Martyrologic, March 17.)
that he baptized the noble Beatus who, on nishing his novitiate, was consecrated a Bishop. He selected Helvetia as his missionary
eld. Before he left Britain he disposed of all his wealth and used it to ransom prisoners of war on the continent, making his headquarters
at Under Seven (Unterseen) on Lake Thun. Beatus introduced Christianity into Switzerland, erecting hospitals and churches, and building a
band of devoted missionaries who continued his great work throughout the centuries. It was in the humble dwelling he rst built on his
arrival in Helvetia that he spent his last days. He died in his cell, A.D. 96. This ancient cell is preserved and can be seen today on the shore
of Lake Thun. The Venerable Bede and Cardinal Alford mention his noble missionary work in their writings, and he is commemorated in the
Roman Martyrol gies.
Another extraordinary ( P. 1 6 8 ) British zealot who graduated from Avalon was Mansuetus. He went to Glastonbury (Avalon) from Hibema
(Ireland) where he was born, a member of the Celtic aristocracy. His evangelistic career was profoundly notable. He had journeyed to
Avalon three years before the Claudian campaign began and, St. Ado, Archbishop of Vienne, Adonis Martyrologia, March 17 according
( P. 1 6 9 ) to Arnold Minnannus, Mansuetus was converted and baptized by Joseph, A . D . 40. At Avalon he became closely associated
with the intrepid St. Clement, also forming a great friendship with St. Peter, when he sought sanctuary in Britain, A.D. 44.
Only death was to break these endearing connections. Later he was sent to Rome with St. Clement on his rst mission. On the request
of St. Philip, he went to Gaul where he founded the great Lotharingian Church, frequently referred to as the Mother Church of Gaul.
Cardinal Alford, in Regia Fides Britannica, writes that Mansuetus was consecrated the rst Bishop of the Lotharingians A.D. 49, with his
See at Toul. He also founded the church at Lorraine.
Page 84 of 122
fi
fi
fi
o­
ff
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
u­
fi
n­
Page 85 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
His missionary zeal was indefatigable. He traveled far and wide mee in a great number of the original Apostles and disciples of 'Christ,
with whom he labored. Probably for this reason, he is referred to as 'the friend of all the disciples, and their pupil', and a disciple of -
Peter’. Mansuetus had mingled with the royal Silurian families while at Avalon, therefore it is but natural to know he was a constant
visitor at the Palace of the British at Rome after Claudia had married Pudens.
He was a friend of Linus the rst Bishop of Rome, and brother of Claudia. After the death of St. Clement, Mansuetus became the
third o cial Bishop of the British Church in Rome. Thus we have three disciples of Avalon, instructed by St. Joseph, to become, in
succession, Bishops of Rome. Ma extended his preaching into Illyria, where he was martyred A.D. 1 1 0 , thirty years before the last
member of the royal family of Claudia Pudens was slain. This record is reported in Mersaeus De Sanctis Germaniae and con rmed by
L'Abbe Guillaume. 1
(1L’Abbé Guillaume, L’ Apostolat de S. Manouel, p. 38)
The Natal Day of Mansuetus is given in the Gallican Martyrol gies on September 3.
The eminent St. Clement, in the British Bethany record named St. Clemens, was another outstanding British missionary, stemming from
Avalon, and the friend of Mansuetus, already referred to, with whom he was associated in the early evangelizing of Illyria. He perished
long before Mansuetus received his martyrdom. St. Clement succeeded Linus as the second Bishop of Rome. In this document, there is a
curious record of succession which states: 'Clemens became Bishop twelve years after Linus.'
Iltigius, in De Patribus Apostolicis, quotes St. Peter as saying: 'Concerning the Bishops who have been ordained in our lif time, we
make known to you that they are these. Of Antioch Eudoins, ordained by me, Peter. Of ( P. 1 6 9 ) the Church of Rome, Linus,’ son of
Claudia, ( P. 1 7 0 ) was rst ordained by Paul, and after Linus’s death, Clemens the second, ordained by me, Peter. 1
In every case but one the records of succession as given above have all agreed that Clement was the second Bishop. The one
exception states that Cletus succeeded Linus and agrees that Clement followed twelve years after Linus was martyred, as the third Bishop
of Rome. While the twelve-year gap is commonly sustained, all other references place Linus, Clement, and Mansuetus as rst, second, and
third, and with no mention of Cletus.
My conclusion in the case is that Cletus, functioning in the British church in Rome, along with the children of Claudia Pudens, was not in
an o cial capacity due to the grave Christian distur ance at that time. The three related were o cially appointed by apostolic
consecration. After Clement was lodged in Rome he became known as Clemens Romanus and is the one referred to by St. Paul in his
Epistle.2 All records state he was ordained by St. Peter.
The life and works of St. Clement are referred to in the Oxford edition of Junius in Son of Claudia, and by Iltigius.
Another noble Briton, born to the Silurian purple, was Marcellus. He received his conversion and baptism at Avalon, a number of years
after Joseph had passed on to his eternal rest, by the hands of Those who followed. He also went to Gaul, and there founded the
church at Tongres, being its rst Bishop. He later founded the princely archbishopric at Treves, over which he ruled. For centuries this
diocese dominated the Gallican church. Some records confuse this Marcellus as being the teacher of Linus before the latter went to Rome
as one of the royal captives with his father Caractacus. This is a mistake, as the date is far too late. Linus was taught at Avalon by
Marcellus, the father of Martial of the original Beth ny band. Marsseus and Pantalin both state that Marcellus the Bnton was martyred A.D.
166. The Tungrensian Chronicles con rm this fact.
The Gallic records state that for centuries the Archbishops of Treves and Rheims were all Britons supplied by the mother church at
Glastonbury-Avalon.
St. Cadval, another famed British missionary, going out from Glastonbury, founded the church of Tarentum, Italy, A.D. 170. The
cathedral at Taranto is dedicated to him and his achievements are reported in the Vatican Catologue of Saints. 3
(1 Apostolic Constitutions, 146.
2 Philippians 4:3.
3 Morons de Ecclesia Tarentina.)
It is impossible ( P. 1 7 1 ) to catalog the list of devoted British disciples and missionaries who went out of Avalon to preach the Gospel in
other lands. Their names are legion, many of them laying down their lives in the nal sacri ce, to be buried in unknown graves in foreign
lands. During the golden Christian era, centuries after the Roma Catholic Church was established, the British missionaries comprised the
Page 85 of 122
ffi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
n­
fi
b­
o­
t­
fi
fi
ffi
fi
e­
fi
Page 86 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
bulk of the Christian army of crusaders. They, more than any others, established the Christian faith on its rm found tion, and against the
deadliest opposition and persecution on record. Their ery zeal amed across the known world like an unquenc able re. As one fell a
hundred more were ready to step into the martyr's footsteps proclaiming the faith with a challenging insistence.
Despite the erce con icts that raged throughout Britain against Roman tyranny, Avalon was ever a safe sanctuary for t h e apostle or
neophyte. To this hallowed haven, many of our Lord's original disciples came: Lazarus, Barnabas, Zaccheus, James, Luke, Simon, Paul,
and Peter, of whom we have positive records, leaving only three not de nitely chronicled, Matthew, Mark, and John, Though It is
recorded that at the death of Mary, all the living original band were present at her request. Their names were unmentioned in the record but
we know Stephen and James, the brother of John, couldn't be present. Judas Iscariot had been banned for his betrayal of his
Master and had committed suicide. Stephen was the rst martyr, being stoned to death at Jerusalem, A.D. 33. James, brother of
John, both sons of Zebedee, was beheaded A.D. 44, 1 by order of Herod Agrippa. It is ironic to believe that the executioner of James was
probably Herod, King of the Chalcis, the father of Paul's companion and co-worker, Aristobulus. 2
(1 Acts 12:1.
2 Prof. W. H. S. Hewin in Royal Saints of Britain, p. 29.)
Of James the Just, ( P. 1 7 1 ) the brother of Jesus, Flavius Dexter, quoting the ecclesiastical Benedictine historian, Cressy, in his Church
History of Brittany, states: 'In the one and fortieth year of Christ (A.D. 41) St. James, returning out of Spain visited Gaule and Britain.’
Other records con rm this date of his rst visit to Britain and some records claim he was present at the death of Mary at Avalon, A.D.
48. James was the rst Bishop of Jerusalem, calling together the rst Apostolic Church there. This is the rst Council of the Appointed on
record. The next Council was called by Constantine the Great, three hundred years later. James was closely associated 'Apostolic
Constitutions, I: 46. Moronus de Ecclesia Tarentina. Philippians 4: 3. with Paul, preaching to the Gentiles. While the record and (P.171) his
memorial (P.172) tablet state he worked mostly among the Greeks, he is given credit for founding the Spanish Church. 1 One can notes note
his great interest in working among the Gentiles by reading the Acts of the Apostles. Acts 15:14 it tells how Paul meets James, the
brother of Jesus, to whom he speaks of the great wor God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. The text rn Acts 15: 14 is of
curious interest. James tells his brethren that Simeon had said, 'God at the rst did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for
His name', and so had declared the prophets.
James was stoned to death at Jerusalem by the Jews nearby whereas Stephen met the same fate, A.D. 62, four years before Paul
su ered martyrdom. 2
(1 Sant Iago, Patron Saint of Spain.
2 Josephus, Antiquities, xx 9:1.)
Of St. Luke, Professor ( P. 1 7 2 ) Smith in Dictionary of Christian Biography says that St. Luke taught in Gaul, Dalmatia, Italy, and
Macedonia, principally in Gaul, and that he made frequent trips to Britain, visiting the sainted company at Avalon. The Rev. Morgan, in his
marvelous work. The Saints in Britain gives a remarkably detailed insight into the travels and work of the apostles and disciples as they
came in contact with Britain and labored there.
Barnabas was to meet his death in Cyprus, where he was stoned to death. He was buried by St. Mark, his young kinsman, outside the
city. The record says that, as he laid Barnabas in his grave, Mark placed on his breast a copy of the Gospel of St. Matthew.
Each life is a part of the indestructible chain of 'The Way', welded link by link by the unswerving devotion and fearless sacr ces of the
apostles, the disciples, and the countless followers of Christ. Forged on the anvil of persecution ( P. 1 7 2 ) and purged in the crucible of
Christian blood, this golden chain links us with the marvelous past with the assurance that God still reigns in the heavens and Christ is ever
the bond between our Father and His earthly children.
It is strange to note the ( P. 1 7 2 ) passage in Martyrs of the Colosseum, by the Roman Catholic priest, A. J. O'Reilly, wherein he states
that St. Ignatius is recognized by the Roman Catholic Church as being the rst Christian martyr, A.D. 107. St. Ignatius was a disciple of
St. John, who consecrated him the third Bishop of Antioch. It is he who is supposed to have been the child Jesus took on His knee
when He made the reference to become as little children, related in Matthew 1 8 : 3 . St. Ignatius was martyred on the order of Trajan,
cast to the wild beasts in the Colosseum and devoured

Page 86 of 122
ff
fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
h­
a­
fi
i­
fi
Page 87 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The claim made ( P. 1 7 3 ) by the Rev. O'Reilly is incongruous. Nowhere does the Roman Catholic Church support the statement. What
about all the other Christians murdered in the Colosseum? What about the martyrdom of all the Apostles and disciples recorded herein and
t h o s e not recorded? What of the martyrdom of Pudens and his children? What of Peter and Paul, whom the Roman Catholic Church
claim to be the foundation of their church? They, too, were brutally martyred. What of the early martyrs cataloged in The Vatican
Catalogue of Saints, The Roman Martyrologies, the Ecclesiastical Annals of Cardinal Baronius, Regia Fides by Cardinal Alford, and many
others? The records herein of Those who died for the faith are all supported by the o cial document tion of the Roman Catholic Church
and its top-ranking authorities. It shows how in some cases the Reverend Fathers of the Roman Catholic Church are as innocent of the
historic record as many of the Protestant ministry.
Such ignorance reminds one of the recent polls taken of the students in American universities, asking them to name the Fathers of the
Revolution and other outstanding historic events in American life that one would expect to be commonly known. The answers were an
appalling record of ignorance. Only too plainly it teaches us how easily Those raised in the indulgent security of a prosperous age forget
their national heritage to such an extent as to rate it almost meaningless.
It would seem only when the glory has departed from them do people remember, when it is too late. To remember is to appreciate and
stoke the res of loyalty.
Little known, or little remembered, as the related incidents in this book may be, probably the knowledge that St. Peter labored in
Britain with the Josephian-Jerusalem Mission as Avalon is less known.
There is an interesting and curious record chronicled by Cardinal Baronius, who writes : 'Rufus the Senator received St. Peter into his
house on Viminalis Hill, in the year A.D. 44.'
One is apt to confuse the name with that of Rufus the Senator who, nine years later, on his return from Britain to Rome, married
Claudia, the adopted daughter of Emperor Claudius, the natural child of Caractacus. The latter went to Britain with his commander at
the beginning of the Claudian campaign, A.D. 43, and remained there until A.D. 52. Therefore, he was absent in Britain when St. Peter
visited his parental home A.D. 44. As w have seen, after ( P. 1 7 4 ) his marriage to Claudia he forsook his parental home on Viminalis Hill, and
also his estates in Umbria, to live at the Palace of the British. He also became a Senator, but in this record, it is obvious that St. Peter
visited the father of the younger Rufus. This is curious, as we recall that, while in Britain, Rufus the younger donated the land at
Chichester for the pagan temple, evidence that he was not then converted. Under these circu stances one can reasonably ask why Peter
went to the parental house on Viminalis Hill.
The answer is obvious. The royal British family, not having then been taken into captivity, were not resident in Rome. Peter would go at
least to visit the home of a friend, while Rufus Pudens may have been an indi erent supporter of the Roman pagan religion, as indicated
by his second marriage. Priscilla, the wife of Rufus, would be known to Peter as the mother of Paul and sympathetic to his visit. We
know later she is recorded as a Christian in the household of her son at the Palatium Britannicum. It is an interes ing record, more so since
it was in that year Peter rst arrived in Rome. It was also the year of the banishment decree when all Jews in Rome were forced to ee to
escape the Claudian persec tion administered to them as well as to the Christians.
Peter ed directly to Britain. This is a rmed by Cornelius a Lapide in his work Argumentum Epistolae St. Pauli ad Romanos, in
which he answers the question as to why St. Paul does not salute St. Peter in his Epistle to the Romaru, He replies: 'Peter, banished with
the rest of the Jews from Rome, by the edict of Claudius, was absent in Britain.'
Peter, acting as a free-lance missionary, stemming from Avalon, preached in Britain during the Caradoc-Claudian war. While in Britain
he became well acquainted with the members of the two branches of the Royal Silurian House of Arviragus and Caractacus. He knew the
children of Caractacus years before they went into Roman captivity. Years after, when the British family became well-established in Rome,
he was naturally attracted to the home of the Pudens at the Palatium Britannicum. The visits of both Peter and Paul, with the family of the
Pudens, are referred to in Scripture. Other ancient records state that the children of Claudia and Rufus Pudens were raised at the knees of
Peter and Paul and other disciples, particularly naming St. Paul, for reasons stated in a former chapter.
There is plenty of evidence to show that Peter visited Britain and Gaul several times during his lifetime, his last visit to Britain taking
place shortly ( P. 1 7 5 ) before his nal arrest and cruci xion in Nero's circus in Rome.
In Gaul Peter became the Patron Saint of Chartres, by reason of hIS preference to preach in the famous Druidic rock temple known as
The Grotte des Druides. This is considered to be the oldest Druidic site in Gaul, on which is built the oldest cathedral in France.

Page 87 of 122
fl
fi
fi
u­
fi
ffi
fi
ff
ffi
m­
a­
t­
fl
Page 88 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Of his visits in Britain, we have the corroboration of Eusebius Pamphilis, A.D. 306, whom Simon Metaphrastes quotes as saying: 'St.
Peter to have been in Britain as well as in Rome.'
Further proof of Peter's sojourn in Britain was brought to the light of day in recent times when an ancient, time-worn monument was
excavated at Whithorn.1 It is a rough-hewn stone standing 4 feet high by 15 inches wide. On the face of this tablet is an inscription that
reads: 'Locvs Sancti Petri Apvstoli' (The Place of St. Peter the Apostle).
The eminent Dean Stanley, writing in his works of the beloved Apostle, claims that the vision that came to St. Peter, foretold his doom:
'Knowing that shortly I must put o this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hast shewed me' (2 Peter 1 : 14), appeared to St.
Peter on his last visit to Britain, on the very spot where once stood the old British church of Lambedr (St. Peter's), where stands the
present Abbey of St. Peter, Westminster. Shortly afterwards Peter returned to Rome, where he was later executed.
The rst dedicated to Peter was founded by King Lucius, the Bnas King, who was the rst by royal decree to proclaim Christianity the
national faith of Britain at ( P. 1 7 5 ) Winchester A.D. 156.
The church was ( P. 1 7 5 ) erected A.D. 179, to the a ectionate memory of St. Peter, in commemoration of his evangelizing labors in
Britain. It is still known as 'St. Peter's of Cornhill bears the legend on its age-worn walls relating the historic fact and dates by the order of
King Lucius, the descendant of Arviragus, preserved to this day for all to see and read.
During his lifetime Peter was the Apostle who su ered most for his Master. One can believe how his heart must have ached with remorse
whenever he recalled the tragic scene in the Garden the shocking betrayal by Judas and the realization of his Master’s prophetic words
that before the cock crowed he would have denied Him thrice. In his heart, he had never denied his Lord. He loved Jesus too dearly. We
can only believe that in the panic of the fea ridden events, the weakness of the esh momentarily ( P. 1 7 5 ) prevailed. We fellow ( P. 1 7 6 )
humans, possessing the same seeds of frailty, can understand and better admire and love Peter as he rose above all storm and persecution,
spiritually and physically triumphant, vindicating his verbal lapse of loyalty.
The anguish he endured as a spectator at the infamous midnight trial in the Sanhedrin must have been soul-wracking and the dis
appearance of the body of Christ from the tomb must have stunned him as he looked in on its emptiness. How gloriously he redeemed his
character!
As he took leave of the sceptered Isle of Britain to return to Rome to climax the last chapter of his splendid life, emotion must have
touched him as he said his nal farewells to the beloved Joseph and the remaining old Bethany comrades at Avalon. He feared not what
might occur to him in the remaining time. He weighed the glory of his reward in soon being with the One he adored and his life magni ed.
In the long period of incarceration that followed his arrest at Rome, he was to su er dreadfully.
Maliciously condemned, Peter was cast into the horrible, fetid prison of the Mamertine. There, for nine months, in absolute darkness, he
endured monstrous torture manacled to a post. Never before or since has there been a dungeon of equal horror. Historians write of it as
being the most fearsome on the brutal agenda of mankind. Over three thousand years old, it is probably the oldest torture chamber extant,
the oldest remaining monument of bestiality of ancient Rome, a bleak testimony to its barbaric i ( P. 1 7 6 ) humanity, steeped ( P. 1 7 6 ) in
Christian tragedy and the agony of Thousands of its murdered victims. It can be seen to this day, with the dungeon and the pillar to which
Peter was bound in chains.
This dreaded place is known by two names. In classical history, it is referred to as Gemonium or the Tullian Keep. In later secular history
it is best known as the Mamertine. At this time it is not out of place to pause in our story to describe this awesome pit, if only to provide
us who live so securely today with a slight reminder of what the soldiers of Christ su ered for our sake, so we may be quickened the
better to appreciate the substance of our Christian heritage.
The Mamertine is described as a deep cell cut out of the solid rock at the foot of the capitol, consisting of two chambers, one over the
other. The only entrance is through an aperture in the ceiling. The lower chamber was the death cell. The light never entered and it was
never cleaned. The awful stench and lth generated a poison fatal to the ( P. 1 7 7 ) inmates of the dungeon, the most awful ever known.
Even as early as 50 B.C. the historian Sallust describes it in the following words:
'In the prison called the Tullian, there is a place about ten feet deep. It is surrounded on the sides by walls and is closed above by a
vaulted roof of stone. The appearance of it from the lth, the darkness and the smell is terri c.'
No one can realize what its horrors must have been a hundred years later when Peter was imprisoned in its noisome depths.

Page 88 of 122
fi
fi
f
fi
r­
ff
fi
ff
fi
ff
fl
ff
fi
fi
n­
fi
 Page 89 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
In this vile subterranean rock, the famed Jugurtha was starved and went stark raving mad. Vereingitorix, the valorous Druidic Gaulish
chieftain, was murdered by the order of Julius Caesar.
It is said that the number of Christians that perished within this diabolic cell is beyond computation - such is the glory of Rome.
One can re-read the denouncing words of the noble Queen Boadicea, with pro t. She branded them for what they were. These
people of the Roman purple, who scorned all their enemies as barbarians, were the greatest and most cruel barbarians of all time.
How Peter managed to survive Those nine long dreadful months is beyond human imagination. During his entire incarceration, he was
manacled in an upright position, chained to the column, unable to lay down to rest. Yet, his magni cent spirit remained undaunted. It
amed with the immortal fervor of his noble soul proclaiming the Glory of God, though His Son, Jesus Christ. History tells ( P. 1 7 7 ) us the
amazing fact that in spite of all the su ering Peter was su jected to, he converted his gaolers, Processus, Martinianus, and forty-seven
others.
It is a strange and curious circumstance that the chair, or throne of Pius IX, at the Vatican Council, was erected directly over the altar
of Processus and Marinianus.
Peter, the Rock, as he predicted, met his death at Rome by the hands of the murderous Romans, who cruci ed him, according to their
endish manner. He refused to die in the same position as our Lord, declaring he was unworthy. Peter demanded to be cruc ed in the
reverse position, with his head hanging downward. Ironically enough, this wish was grati ed by the taunting Romans in Nero's circus A.D.
67.
Such was the timbre and mettle of the valiant, glorious cavalcade of saints who permeated the hallowed Isle of Britain, with their
presence and their devotion to Christ.
Amid the tragedy of wars and persecutions in which the bloodiest battles for Christendom were fought on British ( P. 1 7 7 ) soil, repelling
the hated Romans, ( P. 1 7 8 ) the carnival of blood and death in the Roman arenas reached abnormal proportions. The popular sport of the
Roman pagans was the torture, mutilation, and destruction of the Christians. They screamed with moronic delight as the famished lions
tore and mangled the kneeling, praying Christians, old and young, women, children, and babies in arms. They made wagers on the staying
ability of the British warrior in his ght to the death. As one Roman Gladiator was slain another took his place until, overcome with fatigue
from continuous combat, the British Christian warrior was nally butchered. Roman writers reporting these carnivals of murder wrote that
the courage of the Briton was indomitable. With their dying breath and last mite of strength, they would hurl the selves upon their foe in
a last superhuman e ort to avenge. They stated that it was not an uncommon sight for Briton and Roman to die together, impaled on
each other's weapons.
The teachers of the faith, the elderly, the women, and the children, met their end serenely with quiet prayer on their lips, proudly de ant.
It is said that the mothers would push their children forward to die rst so that they following were sure life was extinct and their children
spared the agony of being dragged around the arena by the mauling animals. The courage of the women awed the (P.178) Romans,
causing them to whisper, 'What women these Chri tian Britons have. What women!'
The sadistic ( P. 1 7 8 ) Roman could never understand or analyze the cold, remorseless courage of the Christian British with its silent,
savage ferocity. It made their craven hearts quaver. Not understanding immortality, they could not understand a faith that made its
believers 'fearlessly indi erent to death', as Julius Caesar wrote.
The valor of the British evoked Roman admiration and at the same time increased their fears which forbade them to o er one mite of
mercy. The pitiless nature of the Romans against the Briton was born out of cowardly fear more than anything else.
In Christianity the Roman Caesars began to see the handwriting on the wall, proclaiming their imperial doom, and it was the Britons that
sealed it by their faith.
Following the death and interment of Mary, the mother of Jesus, at Avalon, it became a passionate desire of the disciples, holy men,
pilgrims, kings, and other notables to be interred within 'the hallowed acres of Glastonbury' (Avalon) where, with Mary and the other
apostles and disciples, it is recorded that they : 'Especially choose to await the day of resurrection.'
There are many records still in existence reporting the claim that many of the ( P. 1 7 9 ) martyred were brought to Britain to be buried in
the sancti ed haven at Avalon and elsewhere in Britain.

Page 89 of 122
fl
fi
fi
ff
ff
fi
ff
s­
fi
b­
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
m­
ff
i­
fi
fi
 Page 90 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The heroic Constantius, of Lyons, who saved the city of Clermont, in Auvergne, from Euric, the Goth, A.D. 473-492, tells in his work
Life of St. Germanus, how he took the relics of all the Apostles and martyrs from Gaul, to place in a special tomb at St. Albans in
Britain.
This record is of particular interest, supplying the one link missing in earlier records and con rming to a point much later records.
The earlier records are cited by Maelgwyn of Avalon, who
writes: 'Joseph of Arimathea, the noble decurion, received his everlasting rest with his eleven associates in the Isle of Avalon.'
Here, as can be seen, is one missing. Twelve companions arrived in Britain and thirteen if we count Marcella, the handmaid of Martha,
as reported by Cardinal Baronius. Which one is missing? It is thought to have been Lazarus, who was the rst of the illu trious band to
( P. 1 7 9 ) die.

The later records ( P. 1 7 9 ) say that all of them were interred in Britain, which would indicate that the missing one was among the relics
of t h o s e whom Constantius returned to Britain from Gaul, where Lazarus had died at Marseilles.
But what of Peter and Paul?
Did they remain buried at Rome, in the grave where the loving hands of Claudia, Pudens, and their children had placed them?
We do know that the martyred Pudens family were never di turbed from their nal resting place beneath the oors of the rst Christian
Church at Rome, which before was the famed Palace of the British.
Of Peter and Paul, there is confusion, mystery, and deliberate misinformation concerning the place where their bodies found their last
resting place.
The Martyrologies inform us that the Pudens, after retrieving the body of Paul, interred it on their estate on the Via Ostiensa road. We
know from the historic records of Emperor Consta tine, t h e rst Christian Emperor of Rome, that he, knowing where the mutilated body
of Paul lay, caused it to be excavated. He had it placed in a stone co n, and over the spot built a church, still known as St. Paul's
without the walls, meaning the church and his body are outside the city walls of Rome. The original church perished and a larger one
was built on the site. Fire destroyed this in 1823. In the present church was built after the re, but still bearing its ancient ( P. 1 8 0 ) name, a
Benedictine priest is ever on guard before a grille on the oor of the High Altar. On occasion, for the bene t of special visitors, the priest
moves the grille, lowering a light through the oor into a cell beneath, revealing to the eyes a crude slab stone on the oor bearing the
name 'Pauli'. But there is no stone casket to be seen.
What happened to it and to the body?
The positive answer is found in a document written by Pope Vitalian to the British King Oswy, A.D. 656. The latter is still in existence.
Probably to the astonishment of many, the letter states that Pope Vitalian permitted the remains of the bodies of St. Paul and St. Peter,
with the remains of the martyrs St. Lawrence, St. John, St. Gregory, and St. Pancras, to be removed from Rome to England and re-
interred in the great church at Canterbury. This historic record is beyond refutation.
From St. Pancras, ( P. 1 8 0 ) one of the large railroad terminals in London is named St. Pancras Station. At one time on this site, there
stood a cross erected to the memory of St. Pancras who preached on that same spot.
The full facts concerning this amazing incident are related by the Venerable Bede, A.D. 673-735, in his Ecclesiastical History of the
English Nation. 1 Learned British historian Bede was held in high
(1 Book 3, ch. 29.)
esteem by both the British and the Roman Catholic Church. While he was a sincere advocate of the novel papal faith, introduced by
St. Augustine, A.D. 596, he was dogged in his support of the British church and to its claim of priority in establishing the Christian faith
rst in Britain, a fact not disputed by St. Augustine nor by Pope Gregory at Rome. Bede is recorded as the 'Father of English learning',
being the rst to translate the New Testament into English. All Christians are familiar with the beautiful story of Bede translating the last
chapter to his scribe as he lay dying in his barren cell, expiring within a few minutes after concluding the last verse in the Gospel of St.
John, reciting the 'Gloria'.
Regardless of the preservation of the letter sent from Pope Vitalian to King Oswy, Bede, being a man of devout character and erudition
would never make a false report on such an important matter as the transfer of Those saintly bodies from the care of the Roman Catholic
Page 90 of 122
fi
fi
fl
n­
fl
s­
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
fl
fi
s­
Page 91 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
hierarchy at Rome to England if it were not so. His stature in the Augustinian church is noted in the record that the Venerable Bede is a
canonized saint in the Roman Catholic Calendar.
The common ( P. 1 8 1 ) belief was, and still is among the Roman Catholic laity, that the body of St. Paul rests beneath th_e gh altar in e
cathedral at Rome, erected to his honor; but It is well known in the high places in both Christian churches that for many centuries only his
empty stone sarcophagus remains in the vault.
Professor Kinnaman the learned American scholar and archaeologist, in recent Tim Hasan his book Diggers for Facts, this reference to
St. Paul's life work, writing:
'The real earthly remains of the Apostle to the Gentiles sleep in the soil of England beyond the reach of the arm of the Roman law.'
What of the tablet seen in the vault at St. Paul's without-th walls? Is it the lid of the stone co n, supplied and inscribed by order of
Constantine? The stone sarcophagus is in St. Paul’s Cathedral at Rome, but his body rests with St. Peter and the many other saints in
England, described by ( P. 1 8 1 ) historians as 'the most hallowed ground on earth'.

Page 91 of 122
e­
ffi
Page 92 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER XVl

ST. PAUL'S MISSION IN BRITAIN 182

S
ince the ( P. 1 8 2 ) beginning of time when the peoples of the earth amalgamated into kingdoms, the pages of history are lled
with the spectacular conquests of ambitious kings and mighty Caesars who, by military subjection, built mighty empires to their
name. Backed by powerful, organized armies, with the wealth and resources of the nation behind them, the conquerors
slaughtered and trampled underfoot the peoples of other nations whose only o ense was to defend their land and homes.
Even as history extols their despotic fame it writes their pitiful obituary, exemplifying the words Jesus spoke in rebuke to Peter when he
had slashed the ear o an o ending servant's head with his sword: 'All they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.’1
(1 Matt. 26:52.)
History books are the graveyard of military dynasties which rose and fell by the sword to satiate the ambitious greed of so many
murderous conquerors. Such is the record of the Empire, Thousands of years before Christ, and in the two thousand years that have
followed.
In comparison, imagination is staggered as we contemplate the achievements of that handful of apostles and disciples who rst stood
for Christ.
Penniless, su ering poverty, incarcerated, tortured, exiled, and without a weapon in their hands, each stood alone in the midst of
imperial hostility as they conquered the world for Christ, a conquest that has endured and thrived for two thousand years. Empires have
come and gone with the ag of Christ waving over their dust as majestically as the day it was unfurled when the British armies, led by
Guiderius and Arviragus, defeated the Romans in the rst battle of the Claudian campaign, A.D. 43.
Thus are the words of Jesus vindicated. Yet, in spite of the glaring truth, a major portion of the world today, more than ever, believes
the sword is mightier than the Word. We see it as the Communistic regime seeking to bring the rest of the world under their tyrannical
heel of slavery. Despite their faults and frequent backsliding for two thousand years, it has been the Christian Angl Saxon world that has
stood against the evils of material despotism and won. Often alone and overwhelmingly ( P. 1 8 3 ) outnumbered, they have fought for the
freedom of man's spirit wherever it was challenged. God has said, 'Ye are My people. Ye shall not perish from the face of the earth.' In
the same breath, God warns us that we shall be scourged with rods for our backsliding, meaning that we shall pay a price for our
waywardness. We shall be punished with Pearl Harbor and Dunkirk. Then He says, when we are on the verge of disaster He will 'put
hooks in their jaws and turn them back’ so that we may triumph.
What a bitter price we unnecessarily will pay.
Read carefully the reports written by our great commanders in battle who could report no other explanation for victory, when all seemed
lost, but a miracle.
The Third World War is bound to come. Win we shall, but at
a price. We have asked for it. The punishment can be minimized if we but open our ears and hearts to the Word of God and our
Saviour Jesus Christ; if we will but listen to the words of the apostles and disciples of our Lord, as our forefathers did in ancient Britain,
and gird ourselves with the strength of divine promise, as they did.
St. Paul labored among the Gentiles to ful ll the promise which James said Simeon had declared, that God would take a people out
of the Gentiles for His name, who would keep His Word, His Laws, and the Sabbath.
Are we those people? Scientists, scholars, and ecclesiastics think so. St. Paul certainly believed so. His founding of the rst Christian
church in Rome and implementing the British royal converts was his triumph, to be culminated in his special mission to Britain by other
members of this same royal family of Christians. Before he had gone to Rome he had sent his representative to Britain, in Arist bulus the
father-in-law of St. Peter. He was one of the original seventy elected by Christ and was the brother of Barnabas. It was his wife on
whom Jesus wrought the miracle as recorded in St. Matthew's Gospel. In his epistles, St. Paul sends his greeting 'to the household of
Aristobulus'. It is stated that Aristobulus was in Britain before St. Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans.

Page 92 of 122
ff
f
fl
ff
fi
fi
ff
o­
fi
fi
fi
o­
 Page 93 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Aristobulus was ostensibly Pau!'s forerunner in Britain, sent by the Apostle to the Gentiles to prepare the way for his own particular
mission, which was to follow later, and to be separated from the Josephian Mission. In the preparatory stages, Aristobulus was
associated with Joseph but never attached to the mission at Avalon. He labored in the part of Britain now known as Wales. In Those far-
o centuries the whole island, ( P. 1 8 4 ) now divided into England, Scotland, and Wales, was covered by one name - Britain. The brother of
Barnabas was exclusively connected with the most southern branch of the royal Silurians, the family of Caractacus, in Wales. Previous to
the coming of Aristobulus to Wales, the father and grandfather of Caractacus had already planted the Christian seed in their own particular
domain. As we have seen, when Joseph and his companions arrived in Britain, A.D. 36, Bran, the father of Caractacus, had abdicated his
throne in favor of his son in order to assume his o ce as Arch-Druid of the Silures. His seat was at Trevnan, where Caractacus was born,
in the parish of Llan-Ilid, Glamorganshire. Llyr Llediath, father of Bran, the King Lear of Shakespeare, founded the rst Christian church in
Wales at Llanda , after his conversion and baptism by Joseph. On the nerging of the Druidic with the Christian faith all the members
of the Bran-Caradoc dynasty were converted by Joseph.
The Princess Eurgain, eldest daughter of Caractacus, was the rst to be baptized, and immediately following the order was her
grandfather, the Arch Druid Bran, her great-grandfather Llyr Llediath, then her brother Linus, who later became the rst Bishop of Rome and
then her husband Salog, Lord of Salisbury, all at the hands of St. Joseph.
Her father Caractacus, and his son Cyllinus, who became regent in his father's stead during the latter's captivity at Rome, and Cynon
the youngest son, were baptized in Rome by the hands of St. Paul.
Of Cyllinus, it is interesting to note that during his reign he is given credit for introducing into Britain the christening of infants with
Christian names. Prior to this, the British followed the old Hebrew method of naming a person by one name only, and adding the word 'ab',
meaning 'of', or 'son of. Tracing the lineage of a person under the old Hebrew principle was a di cult matter.
Support for the credit given to Cyllinus is evidenced in the following extract from the family genealogy as given by his descendant,
Jestyn ap Gwrgant, Prince of Glamorgan, in the eleventh century :
'Cyllin ab Caradoc, a wise and just king, In his days many of the Cymry embraced the faith in Christ through the teachings of the saints
of Cor-Eurgain, and many godly men from the countries of Greece and Rome were in Cambria. HE FIRST OF THE CYMRY GAVE
INFANTS NAMES; for before, names were not given except to adults, and then from ( P. 1 8 5 ) something characteristic in their bodies, minds
or manners.'
The quotation in capitals is by the author to draw attention to the historic fact. Incidentally, Cyllin and Caradoc are the true Celtic
names of father and son. Caractacus and Cyllinus are the Roman versions.
All the children of Cyllinus were baptized in the faith. In later years he also abdicated his throne, in favor of his younger brother, Cynon.
Like his grandfather, Bran, he took up the Cross, becoming a priest in the Christian faith. In the British Celtic Annals, he is registered as St.
Cyllinus.
Llyr Llediaith, the grandfather of Caractacus, was among the group of royal captives taken to Rome, A.D. 52. Shortly after the famous
trial of the British Pendragon before Emperor Claudius in the Roman Senate, Llyr died at Rome. His son Bran, being an Arch Priest, was
not subject to the surrender but, voluntarily, on hearing of his father's death, o ered himself as a hostage in place of the deceased Llyr.
After the parole of his son, Caractacus, he remained with the Silurian family, dwelling at the Palace of the British in Rome. With the
exception of the sons of Caractacus, who had returned to Britain to take over the reins of government, they were all residing in the Empire
City when Paul arrived, A.D. 56.
Then followed two years of instruction under St. Paul of the royal group who was to establish his mission in Britain. Aristobulus had
journeyed to Rome from Britain to meet Paul and plan the evangelizing commission. From years of former service with Paul, Aristobulus
was well acquainted with Paul's intentions. He knew he was to be an important factor in this great work among the selected Gentiles and
his previous experience in Britain had given the aged disciple a good insight into the groundwork, most of which he personally had laid,
with the aid of Llyr, Bran, and Joseph. Nevertheless, Paul's mission was designed to be distinctly separate from the Avalon Mission.
Perhaps herein lay the weakness, for Paul's mission to Gentile Rome was not to endure.
While the royal house of Caractacus sponsored the mission, it was Eurgain, the eldest daughter of Caractacus, who actually was the
chief sponsor, endowing the mission with muni cent gifts and lands. 1
(1 St. Prydain’s Genealogy, which refers to Eurgain as the first female saint of Britain.)

Page 93 of 122
ff
ff
fi
ffi
fi
ff
ffi
fi
fi
Page 94 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
In the year A.D. 58, the Paulian mission was ready to leave Rome to begin their work in Britain, in the territorial section known as
Cambria, the ancient name of the Caradoc domain now known as Wales.
Only Caractacus was ( P. 1 8 6 ) subject to the seven-year parole, the rest of the British royal hostages were free to leave at any time they
wished. The record states that Bran, after being consecrated by St. Paul at Rome, left one year before his son Caradoc, whose parole
did not expire until the following year, A.D. 59. With Bran went Aristobulus, who had been consecrated the rst Bishop of Britain by
St. Paul, his sons Manaw, Brennus, Ilid, and Cyndaw as su porting missionaries. The last two named were Judeans. With them was
Eurgain and her husband Salog, Lord of Caer Salog, or old
Sarum, Salisbury. He is described as being a Roman patrician who had man-ied the daughter of Caractacus prior to the disaster at
Clune, A.D. 52. Again we see a mingling of the Roman aristocracy with the royal British.
They arrived at Llan-ilid (meaning 'consecrated enclosure'),
Glamorganshire, erecting a church as a memorial.
Eurgain is recorded as the Patroness of the Paulian Mission at Llan-ilid, and for that reason, it became more commonly known as the
Cor-Eurgain Mission. There she founded the rst Cor, or choir, and from that time onward it was considered the nest choir in the world.
This magni cent tradition has been continued over the centuries in unbroken sequence by the Welsh, being the basis of the world-
famous Eisteddfod held every year by the Druidical Order of Wales when they congregate in Druidic costume and ceremony to renew the
glorious past with the present. There the famous choirs can be heard singing by the descendants of those courageous noble Christians. In
the annual choir contests held throughout the world, the Welsh Eisteddfod has never lost pride of place.
Once yearly, the famous Welsh choir visits the United States and Canada where, in a series of recitals, their magni cent voices
delight and thrill all who hear them. Yet how little is it known by the audiences that this wonderful choir is a distinct link with St. Paul's
mission to Britain nearly two thousand years ago.
Aristobulus was installed as the rst Bishop at Llan-ilid, with Bran remaining as chief High Priest of Siluria at Llanda .
In the Cymric language, Aristobulus is known as Arwystli-Hen and Arwystli-Senex. Hen is Celtic for aged, just as Senex is the Roman
term. 1
(1 ‘Triads. Myroyrian Arch., vol. 2)
Unfortunately, the ( P. 1 8 7 ) aged Aristobulus was to meet with a tragic end within a year of his return to Britain with his loyal companion.
Unlike the Paulian Mission, which had come direct from Rome, the Josephian Mission had come direct from Jerusalem. It had no
contact with Rome. Joseph also had the advantage of being well-known to the British for his former interests in the tin mining of
Cornwall and Devon. He was so well received by them that he was considered one of them. On the other hand, the inveterate hatred of
the British for Rome, and anything associated with it, persisted with an unrelenting detestation. Anything tinged with the Roman stigma
was cause for grave suspicion.
The Blessed Bran, writing in his journals, said they were hard put to induce the British to accept anyone or anything that came from
Rome. It was only their love for the devout Bran and the lovely Eurgain, and their proud loyalty to Caractacus, that made them willing to
meet halfway the Roman religious delegates. Aristobulus was well respected by the Silurians; he had come to them from Jerusalem,
through Spain, and was known to be loved by Joseph and the Avalon band.
Aristobulus in his preaching zeal journeyed far beyond the territory of the Silurian shield into the lands of the British Ord vices, whose
hatred for the Romans was bitter and black. This blinded them to the facts, and he was unknown to them. Aware of the many ruses the
Romans had instigated against the Britons in order to trick them into submission, they allied the presence of the aged elder brother of
Barnabas to some form of Roman political treachery, in which religion played a hypocritical part in the scheme. They rose and slew him,
given as the year A.D. 58 or A.D. 59, according to present reckoning.1
(1 Alford. Ruia Fides, p 41.)
Aristobulus was the rst British bishop and the only one martyred by them. St. Alban, however, was regarded by Rome as the rst
British martyr at what was ancient Verulamium, still to be seen thanks to archaeological restoration. A church existed in Alban's time and,
after his martyrdom, O a, king of the Mercians, founded the Monastery of St. Albans, to his memory, in A.D. 793, Roman bricks from

Page 94 of 122
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
p­
fi
fi
ff
o­
fi
fi
Page 95 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
ancient Verulamium being used in its structure. The pre-Roman Belgae foundations, and the early Christian witness, instituted continuous
worship in this spot.
Centuries later the Romish church criticized the British for their great lack of martyrs as compared to their own record. The leaders of
the British church informed them that the disciples of the British church lived to preach and teach the Gospel and not die for it
unnecessarily for ( P. 1 8 8 ) their life had to be the only sacri ce, that they would gladly give. We know they gave it abundantly, but at
the hands of the enemy and not by the hands of their own countrymen except in this one tragic circumstance. It was well known that
the priests of the Romish church viewed martyrdom as a notable worthwhile gesture to such an extent they became fanatic. Man;
deliberately sought martyrdom before they had achieved anything worthwhile.
There is another popular claimant to the honor of Being- the rst Christian martyr in Britain identi ed with the church of St. Alban. It
is a Christianized Roman soldier, named Alban, during the Diocletian persecution in Britain two hundred and fty years later, who
aided a hunted British priest to escape by wearing his robe, drawing pursuit to himself. On being recognized, the Roman o cer ordered a
soldier standing nearby to execute the culprit. The soldier refused, admitting that he, too, was a Christian, with the result that both
soldiers were immediately beheaded. Tradition claims they were buried together on the spot where they were killed and a church erected
on the site was named St. Albans.
Alban was the rst Christian Roman soldier martyred in Britain by the Romans but by no means the rst Christian martyr in Britain.
Al authentic records, including The Genealogies of the Saints in Britain, name Aristobulus as the rst of our Lord's disciples martyred in
Britain, with Simon Zelotes being a second martyr shortly after. 1
(1 Dorotheus, Cyod de Apostol.
The rst church erected on the site of St. Albans was built, as stated earlier, by the remorseful Ordovices to the memory of Aristobulus.
Following the death of the Roman soldier Alban and his companion two hundred and fty years later, the old church was
reconstructed, enlarged, and renamed St. Albans by which it is known to this day.'
Of the aged, beloved friend of St. Paul and father-in-law of St. Peter, Aristobulus, there exists an abundance of authentic records from
which the following are quotations from the original.
Cardinal Alford, who ranks second only to the erudite Cardinal Baronius as an authoritative historian of the Vatican, was one of the
very few British ecclesiastics to achieve a high position in the Roman Catholic Church. He was a native-born Briton whose original name
was Gri ths. He changed his name to Alford on joining the Jesuit Order. In fact, one can look in vain for the name of a British Pope
during the years when the two churches were somewhat in ( P. 1 8 9 ) agreement. None would accept the o ce, de nitely refuting any
mortal claim to being Christ's appointed Head of the Church. Only He was the Headstone.
Alford writes :
'It is perfectly certain that before St. Paul had come to Rome, Aristobulus was absent in Britain.'
In the Martyrologies of the Greek Church, we read:
'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 them. He was chosen by St. Paul to be the missionary bishop to the land
of Britain. He was there martyred after he had built churches and ordained deacons and priests on the island.'
Dorotheus, Bishop of Tyre, writes A.D. 303 :
'Aristobulus who is mentioned by the Apostle in his Epistle to the Romans, was made Bishop in Britain.'
Haleca, Bishop of Augusta, adds :
'The memory of many martyrs is celebrated by the Britons, especially that of St. Aristobulus, one of the seventy
disciples.'
In the Adonis Martyrologia we read:
'March 15. 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.'

Page 95 of 122
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
ffi
Page 96 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The reference in the above to the ordination of Aristobulus as Bishop by his younger brother Barnabas, was a much earlier
appointment and did not apply to Britain. Following this ordination he rst went into Britain, with Barnabas, as an exploratory agent of
St. Paul. The consecration conferred on Aristobulus at Rome a Bishop of Britain, came much later, A.D. 58.’
Some may surmise that St. Paul's appointment of the aged disciple was in con ict with St. Joseph's o ce and mission. This is not so.
Joseph is never referred to as Bishop of Britain. His title is more outstanding than the Apostle of Britain. His mission preceded the
Paulian Mission under Aristobulus by twenty-two years. The year following the demise of Aristobulus, St. Philip reconsecrated Joseph as
Chief Priest in Britain, A.D. 60.
The title, Bishop of Britain, was not again conferred on any missionary who followed after Aristobulus.
Of his coming ( P. 1 9 0 ) to Britain, the British Achau, or Genealogies of the Saints, has this to say :
Of his coming ot Britain, the British Achau, or Genealogies of the Saints, has this to say:
‘There came with Bran the Blessed from Rome to Britain, Arwstli Hen (Senex-old) Ilid. Cyndaw, men of Israel, and Maw, or
Manaw, son of Arwystll.’
The Greek Menology also gives March 15 as the day of the martyrdom of Aristobulus.
Thus is established in brief form the positive evidence that Aristobulus actually labored and was slain in Britain corrobora ing the
contention that St. Paul did establish a working Christian mission in Britain.
The year of the death of the Bishop of Britain was the same year that saw the end of the parole of Caractacus at Rome, A.D. 59.
He said his farewell to his beloved youngest daughter Gladys now Claudia Pudens, and to her noble husband Rufus and their four
children. The parting with his eldest son Linu; now the rst Bishop of Rome, must have been sad, for war w a s still raging in Britain,
with his cousin, the valorous Arviragus, carrying the assault against the greatest commanders in Roman military history. The rest of his
family had all returned to Britain. The famed Palace of the British at Rome would no longer house him. He had given it as a dowry to is
daughter at her marriage to Rufus Pudens, along wIth its magni cent estate and baths. There is no record that he ever returned to Rome.
That was hardly possible. He had taken an oath never to lift arms against the Romans as long as he lived. This oath.h kept, but he was
still a dominant gure in British authority and It is understandable that any visits he may have wished to make to Rome may have been
misconstrued by either side. The mad Nero had succeeded the Emperor Claudius in the Roman hierarchy, and Christian persecution was
blazing with renewed malice.
On his return to his native land, he built a castle at Aber Gweryd, now St. Donat's Major, in Glamorganshire. Unlike his father his
grandfather, or his children, he did not take any religious vows or o ce. It appears he aided his sons in governing his people and
strongly supported the Christian movement without jeopardizing his oath. He ended his days peaceably, dying a natural death. This noble
Briton, who had shaken Imperial foundations was laid to rest by his wife, his father Bran, and grandfather L l y r., in the Cor of Ilid in
Siluria, where ( P. 1 9 1 ) later were to be gathered Cyllinus, Cynon, Eurgain, and Salog, all heroes in Christ, all of whom died a natural death in
the light and joy of their Lord.
Following the death of Aristobulus, Princess Eurgain became the chief in uence in the Paulian Mission. The famous Solo MS. states
that Eurgain founded twelve colleges of Christian Druids for Culdee initiates at Gaer Urgan or Cor Eurgain. These colleges she
endowed bountifully, developing them to the highest estate in theological learning. The greatness of Cor-Eurgain endured for centuries
after her death, the only great memorial to endure to the testimony of St. Paul's Mission in Britain. From here many of the greatest teachers
and most able missionaries owed out in a constant stream, into the tenth century. Her love for music and excellent talent created the rst
Christian choirs. Eurgain was as talented as her younger sister, Claudia, and her famed aunt, Pomponia, writing hymns and anthems
that rang throughout the land in chants of praise and glory. Her attention to the education of the young in the many schools she
provided is a noble record. The beautiful Princess Eurgain devoted her entire wealth and life in the service of Christ. The records state
that she was the most beloved woman in Britain. Eurgain was the rst female convert in Britain and the rst Christian female saint.
Her illustrious life is chronicled in the Genealogy of the Saints in Britain, a beautiful woman, a noble princess, and a shining star in the
diadem of Christ.
On the death of Aristobulus, Ilid, 'a man of Israel', who had gone with Bran and Aristobulus to Cambria, took charge until Paul
arrived. Prior to his membership in the Paulian Mission little is known of him except he was a Judean convert out of Rome. In the Cymric
Triads, he is shown as a very capable, energetic leader. His devout, e cient administration endeared him to the Silures. He spent many
years of his life in Cambria, espousing the original plan St. Paul had conceived with the aged Bran and Aristobulus. Financed by the royal
Page 96 of 122
fi
fl
fi
fi
fi
ffi
ffi
fi
fl
fl
ffi
fi
t­
fi
Page 97 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Silurian family, and by the personal e orts of Princess Eurgain and her brother, the abdicated Cyllinus, there was built a magni cent
church and university and many new schools in Cambria. The Lolo MS. says, 'He afterward went to Glastonbury, where he died and
was buried, and Ina, king of that country, raised a large church over his grave.' King Ina's church at Glastonbury Abbey, built A.D. 700,
was excavated in recent years. By neglect, it has since been covered. It is interesting to note that he is numbered rst on the long list of
Cambrian saints, listed in the Genealogy of the Saints in Britain.
In some of the ancient ( P. 1 9 2 ) records, Ilid is claimed to have been a son of the Decurian Joseph of Arimathea, the Apostle of the
British. The loss of his aged friend was a grievous blow to St. Paul. He had sent his salutations to his f riends at Rome, including ‘the
household of Aristobulus'.
It is claimed that Paul landed at what is now a suburb of the great naval port of Portsmouth, known over the ages and to present time as
'Paul's Grove'. From there he evidently made his way into Cambria, where it is claimed he founded the famous Abbey of Bangor. The
doctrine and administration of the Abbey were known as Pauli Regula - 'The Rule of Paul'. Over each of its four gates was inscribed his
motto: 'If a man will not work, neither let him eat.' All the Abbots that followed considered themselves as the direct successors of Paul.1
(1 Morgan, St. Paul in Britain, p. 177.)
Each was specially elected and was usually of royal descent. It later developed into a monastery and is named by St. Hilary and St.
Benedict as the 'Mother of Monasteries'. Its educational curriculum was of the highest order, attracting tho sands of scholars. Its
membership is stated by Bede to have risen to two Thousand one hundred. Its twentieth Abbot was the famous Pelagius who fought so
strenuously against the novel papal teac ings. They described his defense of the ancient British simple faith as the Pelagian Heresy.
It is doubtful if Paul stayed long enough in Britain to see the famous Abbey of Bangor completed. He knew his time was short and he
sought to make the best use of it in his fervent evangelizing mission, chief of which was his special attention to his British Mission. While
there he left his impression in writing his rule for a godly Christian life, recorded in Ancient British Triads as 'The Triads of Paul the
Apostle'. Nowhere else are they recorded and nowhere else is the term 'Triads' employed outside Britain, which favors acceptance of their
Pauline origin. They are as follows:
There are three ( P. 1 9 3 ) sorts of men: The man of God, who renders good for evil; the man of men, who renders good for
good and evil for evil; and the man of the devil, who renders evil for good. 'Three kinds of men are the delights of God:
The meek; the lovers of peace; the lovers of mercy.
'Thereare three marks of thechildren of God: Gentle deportment; a pure conscience; patient su ering of injuries.
'There are three ( P. 1 0 1 ) chief duties demanded by God: Justice to every man; love; humility.
‘In three places will be found the most of God: Where He is mostly sought; where He is mostly loved; where there is least
of self.
'There are three things following faith in God: A conscience at peace; union with heaven; what is necessary for life.
'Three ways a Christian punishes an enemy: By forgiving him; by not divulging his wickedness; by doing him all the good
in his power.
'The three chief considerations of a Christian: Lest he should
displease God; lest he should be a stumbling block to man; lest his love to all that is good should wax cold.
'The three luxuries of a Christian feast: What God has pre• pared; what can be obtained with justice to all; what love
to all may venture to use.
'Three persons have the claims and privileges of brothers and sisters: The widow; the orphan; the stranger
The preservation of the Triads of Paul the Apostle is due to the Cor of Ilid, of which Ilid, the 'man of Israel', was the chief architect
and chief priest.
In Merton College, Oxford, there is an ancient MS. which purports to contain a series of letters between St. Paul and Seneca. In
them are several allusions to St. Paul's residence in Siluria. It is known as the Paulian MS.
Bishop Burgess writes :
Page 97 of 122
ff
h­
ff
u­
fi
fi
Page 98 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
'Of Paul's journey to Britain, we have as satisfactory proof as any historical question can demand.'
A casual study of the life and works of St. Paul, after his arrival in Rome, shows blank periods which Scripture does not explain. They
h a d total silence for six years. The general opinion, supported by the secular records, is that those years were spent in Gaul, and
principally in Britain. We know he returned to Rome from Cambria, A.D. 61, and was imprisoned there. Again he returned to Britain and
Gaul. Edouard de Bazelaire traces the path of Paul's travel, circa A.D. 62, along the Aurelian Way from Rome to Aries, in Gaul. With him
was Trophimus, one of the original Josephian bands, previously referred to, and Crescens, whom he sent to Vienne, where he found the
church at Mayence, being the rst Bishop there. Scriptural records support this in which Paul refers to the sickness of one of his
disciples whom he was obliged to leave in Gaul.
The Rev. ( P. 1 9 4 ) R. W. Morgan writes:
'There are six years of St. Paul's life to be accounted for, between his liberation from his rst imprisonment and his
martyrdom at Aquae Salviae in the Ostian Road, near Rome. Part certainly, the greater åpart perhaps, of this period was
spent in Britain, in Siluria or Cambria, beyond the bounds of the Roman Empire; and hence the silence of the Greek and
Latin writers upon it.1
(1 Morgan, St. Paul in Britain, p. 175.)
1 Acts 9:25. In Wales, as in Gaul, the memory of Paul's work among them is almost entirely lost. The only enduring memorials to
Paul's presence in Britain, of note, are to be found in England.
Llandin - London is referred to as the 'Areopagus' of Britain, arising out of the instance that St. Paul preached from the summit of
Ludgate Hill. The famous St. Paul's Cathedral is erected on the site, and the ancient St. Paul's Cross may well mark the spot where St.
Paul stood as he preached the Gospel to the British.
This, and much more, is con rmed in the Long Lost Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles (The Sonnini MS.).
The presence and preachings of St. Paul in London became so deeply associated with that city that he was made the Patron Saint of
London, and his emblem, the sword of martyrdom, is incorpo ated in the coat of arms of this great metropolis.
A common question often arises in discussions of the ability of the Apostles to preach understandably to people of di erent tongues. In
what language did St. Paul address the British? Did be speak the Celtic tongue or Latin? It is an interesting but di cult question to
answer.
Philologists have pointed out the great similarity of the ancient Celtic language with the ancient Hebrew, in which case it would not
have been di cult for Paul to have preached to the British in the Cymric language. We know that the ancient British on a large scale were
familiar with Greek, which was as common an inte national language of Those days as English is today. Paul wrote all his epistles in
Greek, and for a long time after the apostolic age Greek was the language of the Church of Rome. Among the educated, Latin was well
known. Caractacus addressed the Roman Senate at his famous trial in Latin; therefore neither side would experience any di culty in
speaking or hearing.
Moreover, it was the common practice of Christians from the beginning to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue. It had ever 1
Corinthians 14:9, the ( P. 1 9 5 ) Word of God forbids praying and preaching in an unknown tongue. Paul emphasized this in the canon he laid
down for the Corinthian Church. He says :
'If I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a
barbarian unto me I had rather in the church speak ve words with my understanding ... than ten thousand words in an
unknown tongue.'
It was not till the reign of Charlemagne that Latin became the language of church services. Latin as the language of prayer and
worship was also imposed by Pope Gregory I in the year A.D. 600.
The British church ever opposed this practice and was the rst to demand its abolition, and the rst to print and preach the Bible in
their own language.
Bishop Ussher, in his Historia Dogmatica, writes:

Page 98 of 122
ffi
fi
fi
r­
fi
fi
r­
fi
fi
ff
ffi
ffi
Page 99 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
'No two causes contributed so much to the declension of Christianity and the progress of Mohammedanism, as the
suppression by the Church of Rome of the vernacular scriptures, and her adoption of image worship.'
Worship of images and relics was rst introduced in the Roman Church Council by Pope Hadrian I, A.D. 788. In the Bible, this is
called idolatry and is severely condemned (Exodus 20 : 4, 5; Deut. 27: 15; Psa.115).
Probably the place where Paul is most commemorated is Malta, where he was shipwrecked. At Valletta stands the beautiful church of
St. Paul Shipwrecked, erected to his memory and rescue from the sea.
It is certain that, if it had not been for the vigorous support of the Paulian Mission in Cambria by Princess Eurgain and her relatives,
his e orts would have completely failed. We cannot help but feel regret that so little was perpetuated, even during the activity of the Cor
Eurgain, to his memory and those faithful workers who issued through Rome. It can be well said that the success of his mission during its
existence and presence in Cambria was due to the magni cent e orts of the Caradoc Silurian family and had a profound in uence on the
promotion of Christianity in Wales. Following the death of Paul the Cambrian church renewed its close ties with Avalon.
The deep a ection Eurgain and her relatives ( P. 1 9 6 ) held for Joseph who rst converted and baptized many of them always remained.
Among the common people, their allegiance never deviated from Joseph or the Mother Church at Avalon. They could not or would not
accept that which came from Rome. In this alone is found the answer. Yet they could not and did not fail to recognize the deep a ection
Paul held for the children of Caractacus and the children of Claudia. It was too evident. His love for Linus was unbounded. We see this
preserved in an unusual relic in the Vatican Museum. It is in the form of a glass medallion depicting a contemporary portrait of the heads of
Linus and Paul, proclaiming their undying friendship and close association during Those drama-packed years.
Paul ful lled the mission of his Saviour, Jesus Christ, to go 'far hence unto the Gentiles, the merit of which has throbbed and thrived for
two thousand years, and will continue to live rm in, the hope of the great promise, till He shall come again.
Eloquently St. Clement sums up the magnitude of the achievements of the Apostle to the Gentiles. Being one of the original Bethany
bands that dwelt at Avalon with Joseph, he knew St. Paul intimately and long before he followed in the o ce of his beloved friend Linus, as
Bishop of Rome. He writes :
'To leave the examples of antiquity, and to come to the most recent, let us take the noble examples of our own times. Let us place
before our eyes the good Apostle, Peter, though unjust odium, underwent not one or two, but many su erings; and having undergone his
martyrdom, he went to the place of glory to which he was entitled. Paul, also, having seven times worn chains, and been hunted and
stoned, received the prize of such endurance. For he was the herald of the Gospel in the West as well as in the East and enjoyed the
illustrious reputation of the faith in teaching the whole world to be righteous. And after he had been in the extremity of the West, he su ered
martyrdom before the sovereigns of mankind; and thus delivered from this world, he went to his holy place, the most brilliant example of
steadfastness that we possess.'
'Extremity of the West' was the term used to indicate Britain. Capellus, in History of the Apostles, writes:
'I know scarcely of one author from the time of the Fathers downward who does not maintain that St. Paul, after his libera-
tion, preached in every country of the West, in Europe, Britain included.'
Theodoret, fourth ( P. 1 9 7 ) century, writes: 'St. Paul brought salvation to the Isles in the ocean.'
Ventanius, sixth century, Patriarch of Jerusalem, speaks very de nitely of St. Paul's visit and work in Britain, as does Irenaeus,
A.D. 125-189; Tertullian, A.D. 122-166; Origen, A.D. 185-254;
Mello, A.D. 256; Eusebius, A.D. 315; Athanasius, A.D. 353; and many other chroniclers of church history.
If further con rmation is needed it is supplied in the records of the Roman, Eastern, Gallic, and Spanish churches, all of which attest
to the fact that St. Paul evangelized in Gaul and Britain.

Page 99 of 122
ff
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
ffi
fl
ff
ff
Page 100 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER XVII

GOOD KING LUCIUS NATIONALIZES THE FAITH

B
y the year A.D. 140 all ( P. 1 9 8 ) the original apostles, disciples, and all Those who had been associated with them had passed
on into their eternal rest; the last being the noble children of the glorious Claudia and Rufus Pudens. St. John had outlived all
the original three groups elected by Jesus. He lived to the remarkable old age of 101 years. 1 Joseph, the Apostle of the
British, had died A.D. 82, at Avalon. 2 A few of them had lived to
(1 Irenaeus speaks of him as still living in A.D. 98, and Jerome dates his death as sixty-eight years after the Crucifixion.
2 July 27, A.D. 82, according to Cressy.)
see t h e ful llment of the command to go to all corners of the world and preach the Gospel and had seen the Christian platform on
which each had labored rmly established. Their lives were the nails that held it fast. It seems almost impossible to believe that this
handful of men and women could have achieved such a formidable conquest in so short a time.
Undoubtedly (198) it is the greatest and most enduring world conquest in the history of time. Unarmed, these gentle, valorous
champions of goodwill conquered the evil forces of the mightiest armies of the ancient world, their only weapon was the promise of Christ.
Within sixty-six years after the Incarnation prominent Christian centers were strongly entrenched in many foreign lands. In the
foregoing chapters we have seen, like the roots of a bay tree, bow the endless ow of Christian workers streaming out of Britain into Gaul,
Rome, Germany, Switzerland, and other countries, evangeli ng and building sturdy Bishoprics in numerous cities of importance. Apart from
Those listed can be added Jerusalem Samaria Caesarea Lydda, Antioch, Damascus, Antioch of Pisidia, Iconiu'm, Lystra’, Ephesus,
Smyrna, Sardis, Thyatira, Pergamos, Philadelphia, Caesarea in Cappadocia, Laodicea, Colosse, Galatia, Athens, Corinth, Thessalonia,
Berae, Philippi, Cyprus, Crete, Alexandria, Rome, Malta, and Spain. Britain and Gaul have been discussed.
In comparison, the missionary progress made by the Christian world in the last one hundred years is minute. In spite of the vast sums of
money provided and expended, under far more favorable conditions, the impress made by our churches and missionaries in
India, China, Japan, ( P. 1 9 9 ) Africa and elsewhere are not heartening. Since the middle of the last century ungodliness and atheism have
developed alarmingly within the Christian nations. The Gallup polls claim that the majority of the Christian world believes in God and
worship, but the empty churches and pitiable nancial support given to them hardly substantiate the claim. The di erence between the
teachers and the people of the Christian golden era and the present luxurious Christian era is that our ancestors gave heart service.
Today it appears to be purely lip service. Virtually the Lord's Day is lost and is nothing more than a Roman holiday. As the wings of death
swept the spirits of the glorious cavalcade to their well-earned reward, other disciples stemmed from the many Christian centers in an
ever-growing army to take their place, preaching the Word with ery tongues. The missionary band that owed from Britain still provided
the greatest number in the eld. Avalon was still the citadel of the Christian faith. For the churches laboring in other foreign elds,
particularly Rome, the task was lled with grave personal danger. They lacked the invincible pr tection of the British warriors; they stood
alone and were to continue to do so for more than one hundred and fty years before a British army, led by its royal warrior chieftain, was
to smash the Gates of Rome and crush pagan opposition forever.
In Britain, there had long been peace between Roman and British armies. Recognizing the futility of the strife and the decimation of her
Legions from the war in Britain, Rome found her military defense so weakened that she was hard put to defend her own frontiers. Tacitus
states that from A.D. 43 to A.D. 86 sixty major battles had been fought on British soil. From A.D. 86 to A.D. I 18 only one Roman name
appears in British history, Neratius Marcellus. The great Roman commander, Agricola, who had experienced the mettle of British valor on
many a battle eld, was more broa minded than any of his predecessors. 1 He was convinced that the Britons were oblivious to
(1 For his character, Tacitus, Agricola, ch. 4.)
persecution and war. Like Julius Caesar, he realized that defeat or privation had the adverse e ect of di couragement on this warrior
nation, inspired by the re of the Cross. He e ected a more humane policy by inaugurating a treaty that held no chains. Wisely he
incorporated the British as allies of the Roman Empire, recognizing all their native freedoms and kingly prerogatives. In A.D. 120 Emperor
Hadrian enlarged the treaty, which merely permitted the Romans to hold certain military bases in Britain. The peace treaties of Agricola and
Hadrian created the long ( P. 2 0 0 ) peace between Rome and Britain that lasted up to the Diocletian persecution, circa A.D. 300.

Page 100 of 122

fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
d­
fi
ff
z­
fi
fi
fl
o­
ff
fl
s­
ff
fi
Page 101 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
In the year A.D. 137 St. Timotheus, son of Claudia Pudens, had journeyed from Rome to baptize his nephew King Lucius at
Winton (Winchester), at the same time consecrating him, Defender of the Faith, as legal, royal successor to his ancestor, Arviragus, upon
whom Joseph had conferred the original honor. This began a new wave of evangelism in Britain which, it is said, had somewhat waned
since the death of Joseph. To a certain extent this can be understood: rarely do we nd the successor of a strong, vigorous founding
leader equally as dominant; nevertheless, as one reads the long list of teachers that continued to pour from Avalon and Cor Eurgain, lling
new Bishoprics at home and abroad, there appeared to be little ickering of the light.
However, there is no doubt that the enthusiastic religious zeal that Lucius now supplied infused a vigor more akin to the energy that
inspired the founders of the Josephian Mission at Avalon and the Pauline Mission in Cambria, particularly knowing that he was a direct
descendant of the royal Silurian kingdoms of Cornwall and Cambria.
According to his genealogy, Lucius was son of Coel, son of St. Cyllinus, son of Caractacus, son of Bran, son of Llyr. By inte marriage
he was also directly descended from Arviragus, of the Cornish-Devon Silures. This made Lucius the great-grandson of both Caractacus
and Arviragus, truly a majestic heritage.
It is strange how the Roman names of the early British kings cling to the pages of the English history books, in preference to their
original Celtic names. Because of this, the writer nds himself obliged to concur in order to avoid any confusion in the reader's mind in
referring to historic data.
His native name was Lleurug Mawr. Because of his exemplary religious life and his outstanding achievements in church and state, he
was termed in Celtic Lleuver Mawr, meaning the 'Great Light'. However, the name by which he is best known is the Latin interpretation,
Lucius. The Romans Latinized his name to Lucius from the Latin 'Lux', which carries the same implication as the Celtic to the Romans,
the 'Great Luminary'.
It is interesting to note that Lucius made his royal seat at Caer Winton, romanized to Winchester, as it is still known. The city was
founded by the brilliant British king, Dunwal Molmutius, renowned in British history as one of 'the Three Wise British Kings', the Great
Numa, or Law-maker. He made Winchester ( P. 2 0 1 ) his royal capital, in 500 B.C., instead of the older capital London. It was also known
as the 'White City', due to the white chalk walls with which he surrounded the city. Even after, when London was re-established as the
royal capital of Britain, Winchester continued to be known as the 'Royal City'. The city was founded on an ancient Druidic Gorsedd site.
Some of the stones are still preserved in the old public buildings. Many great British kings made royal Winchester their capital. William the
Conqueror refused to consider his rst coron tion valid until crowned a second time at Winchester, 'to justify his rightful claim to
the British throne, where all true British kings had been crowned'.
The most notable event in the meritorious reign of King Lucius was performed in the year A.D. 156 when, at the National Council at
Winchester, he established Christianity as the National Faith of Britain.
By this act, he solemnly declared to the world that Britain was o cially a Christian nation by Act of Parliament. This Act is described in
the British Triads as follows:
'King Lucius was the rst in the Isle of Britain who bestowed the privilege of country and nation and judgment and validity
of oath upon Those who should be of the faith of Christ.'
In so few words is described as one of the most momentous events in Christian history, o cially establishing Lucius as the rst
Christian king by a national act of the Council. His great grandsires, Caractacus and Arviragus, were Christian kings in person but they had
not proclaimed it by a national order in Council over the realm. The time then was not propitious. Their era was the period of
acceptance, conversion, organization, and the vanquishment of their mortal enemy, the Romans, in defense of the faith; years of
preparation by the diligence of the apostles, their disciples, and Those that followed after. The great British Edict was joyously welcomed
by Christians in other lands. Sabellius, A.D. 250, shows this national establishment was acknowledged elsewhere beyond the con nes of
Britain. He writes :
'Christianity was privately confessed elsewhere, but the rst nation that proclaimed it as their religion, and called itself
Christian, after the name of Christ, was Britain.'
Genebrand declares :

Page 101 of 122

fi
fi
a­
fi
fi
fl
ffi
fi
ffi
r­
fi
fi
fi
Page 102 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
'The glory of Britain consists not only in this, that she was the rst country which in a national capacity publicly professed
herself ( P. 2 0 0 2 Christian, but that she made this confession when the Roman Empire itself was pagan and a cruel persecutor
of Christianity.'
This statement by Genebrand is important, proving the invalidity of the claim by the Roman Catholic Church, centuries later, that this
epochal act of legislature was brought about by the Pope Eleutherius of Rome. In striving to justify their claim, Romish writers of the
seventh century sought to confuse the dates. The ironical fact is that no allusion was made to this claim by the church at Rome until after
the Italian-Augustinian Mission in Britain, A.D. 597, over four hundred and forty years after the Act had been declared. Why the centuries
of silence if it were true?
The at rejection by the British Bishops on their rst meeting with St. Augustine, who sought to coerce the British church into the
novel Papal system, so angered him and his Romish retinue that he began to institute a rejection of all British priority to her native claims
in being the rst to accept and establish the Christ faith. They had said :
'We have nothing to do with Rome. We know nothing of the Bishop of Rome in his new character of the Pope. We are the
British Church, the Archbishop of which is accountable to God alone, having no superior on earth.'
Blackstone, the great English jurist, wrote :
'The ancient British Church was a stranger to the Bishop of Rome, and all his pretended authorities.'
Sir Francis Bacon, writing in Government of England, says : 'The Britons told Augustine they would not be subject to him, nor let him
pervert the ancient laws of their Church. This was their resolution, and they were as good as their word, for they maintained the liberty of
their Church ve hundred years after this time, and were the last of all the Churches of Europe that gave up their power to the Roman
Beast, and in the person of Henry VIII, that came of their blood by Owen Tudor, the rst that took that power away again.'
A number of writers in modern times have supported many of the statements made by Augustine and his followers, taking for granted
what they read from the Romish writings. They could not bother to check the record.
Actually, the spiteful Augustine and his cohorts outsmarted themselves. Gregory I, who ( P. 2 0 3 ) commissioned Augustine to go to
Britain, was not o cially Pope. The slovenly historians dishonored him. The title of Pope, or universal Bishop, was rst given by
Emperor Phocas, A.D. 610. He created the o ce to demote and spite Bishop Ciriacus of Constantinople, who had justly
excommunicated him for his having caused the assassination of his predecessor, Emperor Mauritius. Phocas rst o ered the title to
Gregory I, who was then Bishop of Rome. Gregory refused the o ce. It was accepted by his successor, Boniface III. He was the rst
to assume this false title.
One has but to read Luke 22: 24-26; Ephesians 1 : 22, 23; Colossians 1: 18; and I Corinthians 3: 11 to see that Jesus did not
appoint Peter to the headship of the Apostles and expressly forbade any nation to do so.
In later years it became a habit with many Roman Catholic writers to refer to all the former Bishops of Rome as Pope, even to Linus
and Paul. The Apostles of Christ never heard the term and Peter and Paul in making their elections speci cally nominate the elected as
Bishops only. As Bishops, they were all known in Rome until the inauguration of the Papacy, A.D. 610, and in Britain even during the
alliance with Rome the heads of the British church were never anything but Bishops, and they alone inherited apostolic succession in an
unbroken line from the original Apostles of Christ.
In their e orts to sway the minds of the people Augustine, and a few who followed later, sought to debase the facts and confuse the
dates, in a futile e ort to convince those not allied with the Roman Catholic hierarchy that all Christianizing eminence was created by
them. Due to the record of the correspondence issued between King Lucius and Eleutherius, Bishop of Rome, the spurious claim was
made that Lucius pleaded with the Bishop to send his representatives to Britain to convert him and nationally proclaim Britain Christian.
All British and Roman records attest to the fact that Lucius was con rmed and baptized in the faith by his uncle, St. Timotheus, as
stated before. He was baptized in the famous Chalice Well, at the foot of the Tor at Avalon, o n May 28, A.D. 137. In the year A.D.
167, he commemorated the event by building St. Michael's on the summit of the Tor, which was the largest Druidic Gorsedd in Britain.
This memorial was destroyed in the earthquake that shook Glastonbury, A.D. 1275. The present St. Michael's was erected on the same
site. It is a most imposing monument. It can be seen for miles before one enters the ancient town of Glastonbury. Standing on its ( P. 2 0 4 )
high eminence it reaches into the sky like a giant nger, proclaiming to all who see it the monumental events of the auspicious life of King
Lucius. 1
Page 102 of 122
fl
ff
fi
fi
ffi
ff
fi
fi
ffi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
Page 103 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
(1 Vide Capgrave, John of Teignmouth, Book of Tello, and William of Malmesbury.)
In the year A.D. I 70 Lucius founded the majestic church at Winchester, now known as Winchester Cathedral, and familiar to
Thousands of Canadian soldiers in World War II garrisoned at Winchester as the Battle Abbey of the British Empire. Therein repose its
greatest warriors and therein is preserved the elaborate casket of the grandfather of Alfred the Great. Also, the Round Table of King
Arthur's fame is preserved in the County Hall.
Twenty-seven years after Lucius had nationalized Britain in the Christian faith he sent his two emissaries, Medwy and Elfan, to Rome to
obtain the permission of Bishop Eleutherius for the return to Britain of some of the British missionaries aiding Eleutherius in his evangelizing
work within the Roman Empire, in order that he, Lucius, could better carry out his expansive Christian program in Britain.
Gildas, Geo rey of Monmouth, Bede, Urban, John of Tei mouth, and Capgrave, referred to 'as the most learned of English
Augustinians whom the soil of England ever produced', support the date of return of the emissaries of King Lucius from visiting Bishop
Eleutherius at Rome, as that given in the British annals, A.D. r 83, over a century and a half before the Roman Catholic Church was
founded. Cardinal Baronius not only denounces the Augustinian claim but in detail recites the whole record from the year A.D. 36
onward.
Bishop Eleutherius, in his letter to King Lucius, A.D. 1 83, plainly shows that he is aware that Lucius possessed all the necessary
knowledge of the Christian teachings beforehand and needed no advice from him, and that he had no part in the nationalizing of Britain in
the Faith, or in converting or baptizing the British king, otherwise, he would have referred to the matter that had occurred twenty-seven
years previous to his letter. By this, he shows how unjusti ed the claim of the Church of Rome, let alone the Roman Catholic Church, was
not yet dreamed of. John Foxe, the talented author of Acts and Monuments, reproduces the controve sial letter as Eleutherius wrote it to
King Lucius :
'The Roman laws and the Emperors we may ever reprove, but the law of God we may not. Ye have received of late though God's
mercy in the realm of Britain the Law and Faith of Christ.
Ye have ( P. 2 0 5 ) within you within the realm of both the parties of the Scriptures. Out of them, by God's grace, with the
council of your realm, take ye a law that can, though God's su erance, rule your kingdom of Britain. For ye be God's Vicar
in your kingdom, according to the saying of the Psalm, "0 God, give Thy Judgment to the King."'
Medwy and Elfan returned to Britain with Dyfan and Fagan, both British teachers who had rst received their schooling at Avalon.
Elian, Dyfan, and Fagan were appointed Bishops in Britain. Elfan succeeded Thcanus, the rst Bishop of London, who died i n
A.D. 185. The Welsh authorities state that he presided over a congregation of Christian Culdees at Glastonbury (Avalon), before he was
sent to Rome with Medwy. Pitsaeus, the Roman Catholic Canon, in his Relationes Historicae de Rebus Anglicis, says that Elfan, known as
Elvanus of Avalon, was brought up at Glastonbury and was educated in the school of St. Joseph of Arimathea and that he wrote· an
informative work concerning the origin of the British church. On being elected as the second Bishop of London, Elfan was the rst
prelate to occupy the new church erected by King Lucius in memory of St. Peter, a church which has remained famous throughout the
centuries of Christian history as St. Peter's of Cornhill, London.
Medwy was made a Doctor of Theology by the king.
It seemed that the three newly-appointed Bishops shared Lucius's deep a ection for Avalon and sought to restore it to its original
conception, as rst founded by St. Joseph with his twelve companions. 1 From Winchester they journeyed to the Sacred Isle of
(1 Lewis, Glastonbury, Her Saints, pp. 10-11.)
Avalon, of which Geo rey of Monmouth writes as follows:
'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 afterward 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 were scattered throughout the world. St. Philip came to France with a host of Disciples and sent twelve of them to Britain to
( P. 2 0 6 ) preach, and there, taught by revelation, they constructed the said chapel which the Son of God afterward dedicated to the honor of
His Mother, and that to these same twelve were given twelve portions of land for their sustenance.

Page 103 of 122

ff
fi
ff
fi
g­
ff
ff
fi
fi
r­
fi
Page 104 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
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 rst 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 diverse spots as anchorites - in the same spots, indeed, which the rst twelve inhabited. Yet they used to meet
together continuously in the Old Church in order to celebrate Divine worship more devoutly, just as the kings long ago granted the said
island with its surroundings to the twelve former Disciples of Christ, so the said Phagan (Fagan) and Deruvian (Dyfan) obtained it from King
Lucius for these twelve companions and for others to follow thereafter. And thus, many succeeding these, but always twelve in numbers,
abode in the said island during many years up to the coming of St. Patrick, the Apostle of the Irish.'
In this manner, at Avalon, the beautiful past was renewed by Fagan and Dyfan, following in the steps of the Noblis Decurio and his
twelve saintly companions, and the many others of the illustrious company of Christ.
Returning to the famous letter of Eleutherius to Lucius we note the remarkable statement naming Lucius 'Vicar of God'. This is the rst
time that title was ever bestowed on a king and that a British king and by the Bishop of Rome. By this act the church at Rome declai·ed
Lucius to be the head of the church and not they. However, Lucius did not accept or use this honorable title.
He recognized the admonition of the Bishops of the British church and of all Christian Britons injured in the faith, that Christ alone
was the Head of the Church and the true representative of the Father. Instead, Lucius was named, 'the most religious King', a title
which every British ruler since who has sat on the British Throne has held.1
(1 ALewis, Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, 6th edition, pp. 14-15.)
Lucius also established the three famous Archbishoprics at London, York, and Caerlon on Usk. In the year A.D. 179, he built the
historic St. Peter on Cornhill. This church is often referred to as the rst Christian church erected in London, of which Elian was
installed as the rst Bishop. During the ensuing centuries, this church was enlarged but was destroyed in the Great Fire of
London which almost ( P. 2 0 7 ) completely leveled the ancient city. The tablet telling the history of this great church, embedded in the
original walls, survived the Great Fire and has since been preserved over the mantel of the replace in the vestry. It bears the following
inscription :
'Bee it known to all men that the year of our Lord God 179, Lucius, the rst Christian King of the land, then called Britaine,
founded the rst church in London, that is to say, the church of St. Peter upon Cornhill. And h e founded there an Archbishops
See and made the church the metropolitan and chief church of the kingdom; and so endured the space of 400 years unto the
coming of St. Austin the Apostle of England, the which was sent into the land by St. Gregoire, the doctor of the church in the time
of King Ethelbert. And then was the Arc bishops See and Pall removed from the aforesaid church of St. Peter upon Cornell into
Dorobernia that now is called Canterbury and there it remaineth to this day. And Millet a monke which came into this land with St.
Austin, Bee was made Bishop of London and his See was made in St. Paul's church. And this Lucius king was the rst founder of
St. Peter's church upon Cornehill. And Bee reigned in this land after Brute 1245 years. And in the year of our Lord God 124, Lucius was
crowned king, and the years of his reign were 77 years.'
Among other wonderful churches, King Lucius founded were the church at Llanda and the church at Cardi , known today as St.
Mellors, which is still referred to as Lucius's Church. He also founded the beautiful church of St. Mary de Lode in the city of Gloucester,
where he was interred. In a later year, A.n. 679, this church was enlarged and beauti ed by the Christian king of the British Mercians,
Wolphen.
It is commonly stated that Emperor Constantine was the rst to have the coin of the realm stamped with the sign of the Cross. The
statement is an error. King Lucius, the ancestor of Constantine, was the rst to mint his coins displaying the sign of the Cross on
one side and on the other side his name 'Luc'. In the collection in the British Museum exist two coins depicting the reign of King Lucius,
bearing the motifs as stated. Of interest is the fact that Arviragus, maternal ancestor of Lucius, was so bitterly opposed to all that was
Roman that he made acceptance, or circulation of Roman coins among the British, a capital o ense. This refusal to accept Roman
coinage by the British lingered well into the reign of Lucius.
From ( P. 2 0 8 ) Claudius, whom Arviragus rst opposed on the eld of battle, to the reign of Emperor Hadrian, no coins of inte vening
Roman Emperors are to be found in Britain. From Hadrian onwards, complete series of Roman coins are found. An examination of the
coinage exhibit in the British Museum substantiates these facts and the notable omission. The coins of Arviragus are co sidered to be the
most magni cent minted. An eminent numismatic expert made the remark :
'Wherever a coin of the British King Arviragus is shown in any coin collection, it stands out as a gem.'
Page 104 of 122
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
h­
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
f
fi
fi
fi
ff
ff
n­
fi
r­
fi
Page 105 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The coins of Cunobelinus bear the inscription on one side of his name 'Cuno', and on the reverse side a galloping charger and the
plume of three ostrich feathers.
The interesting part is that the coins of these three famed British kings were all minted at Colchester. Historians pay little attention to
this ancient city. The focus is all on the great centers such as London, Winchester, York, Edinburgh, Canterbury, and others. Few are as
steeped in the British tradition, where so many notable events had their beginnings, events that are milestones in the destiny of nations
and, in particular, Christianity, as we shall see as we pursue our story. Colchester is a quiet little city today, but what a mass of startling
history it contains for Those who have the energy to part the curtains of time and examine the records.
Of all the great disciples of Christ, King Lucius is in all prob bility the least known. To the average person, his name has no meaning.
All he did to solidify the Christian foundation is not even considered, let alone remembered. Historians bypass him as though he never
existed, in spite of the wealth of information describing his life and achievements at hand. The talented Foxe, in his Acts and Monuments,
wrote:
'The said Lucius after he had founded many churches, and given great riches and liberties to the same, deceased with great tranquillity
in his own land, and was buried at Gloucester.'
King Lucius died December 3, in the year A.D. 201, after a long reign of seventy-seven years. The learned Alban Butler
states that
1

Lucius was buried rst at St. Mary de Lode, the lovely church he founded at Gloucester, then later was reinterred in the other church he
built, St. Peter's upon Cornhill, for which church he had a deep a ection. Much later, his remains were again translated to Gloucester,
cester, where ( P. 2 0 9 ) they were placed in
( ‘The Lives of the Saints (1756).)
the choir of the Franciscan church by the Earls of Berkley and Cli ord, which church, the Church of the Grey Friars, was founded by these
two famous families.
There is another record concerning the death of King Lucius, chronicled in the Roman Martyrologies, which states that Lucius
abdicated his throne and with his sister, St. Emerita, traveled as a missionary through Bavaria, Rhoetia and Vindelicia, meeting a martyr's
death near Curia in Germany. According to an old transcript recorded circa A.D. 685, Lucius, king of the British, and his sister Emerita, is
buried in the crypt of the old cathedral at Chur (Coire), the capital of the Grisons Canton, Switzerland. Cressy the Benedictine, who wrote
following the Reformation, quoting from these old chronicles, recites the above in his book Church History of Brittany. Students of the life
of the illustrious King Lucius state that the Roman Martyrologies have the British king confused with the religious Bavarian King Lucius,
who was martyred near Curia in Germany.
In A Guide to the Cathedral, compiled by the Rev. H. Haines in 1867 at Gloucester, he writes :
'King Lucius was baptized on May 28, A.D. 137, and died on December 3, 201. His feast has been kept on both these days,
but the latter is now universal.’
There exists a wealth of material extolling the exemplary life of Good King Lucius, among which are the writings of Bede, Nenni.us,
Elian, Geo rey of Monmouth, Cressy, William of Malmesbury, Ussher, who states he had consulted twenty-three works on Lucius: Rees,
Baroni.us, Alford, The Book of Llandafj, Welsh Triads, The Mabinogion, Achau Saint Prydain, and many other reliable works, all of which
pay noble tribute to this famed Christian monarch, who devoted his entire life as a disciple in Christ's service, to the bene t of the
Christian world which has forgotten him.
The lasting bene ts of the wonderful achievements of King Lucius on the realm endured for well over one hundred years after his
death. The people and the land thrived in peace and prosperity.
The Venerable Bede, writing A.D. 740, sums up the picture in a few brief words, but in his characteristic eloquence:
'The Britons preserved the faith which they had nationally received under King Lucius uncorrupted and entire and co tinued in peace
and tranquillity until the time of Emperor Diocletian' (Bk. 1, ch. 4).
The savage ( P. 2 1 0 ) Diocletian persecution broke the peace and produced the conquering Constantine, known to history as the
Emperor Constantine the Great, a direct descendant of Lucius, Arviragus, and Caractacus, a stalwart champion and disciple of
the Christian faith.

Page 105 of 122

ff
fi
fi
a­
ff
ff
n­
fi
 Page 106 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
The seed never perished, enduring from one generation to another. In times of peace, its strength coursed beneath calm waters, ever
ready to crash to the surface in stormy con ict to defend the priceless heritage as circumstances demanded. In every case, it was a prince
of royal blood who stalwartly and often heroically stood forth to meet the challenge of battle oppression. And in each case, the Defender
of the Faith was a true lineal descendant of those valiant British kings and queens of so many centuries ago, even as is today Elizabeth II
of the United Kingdom and the British Commonwealth.
Publisher's Note.
Despite the agreement of authorities that King Lucius was baptized by his uncle, St. Timotheus, in the year A.D. 137, there
seems uncertainty as to the place of baptism, Winchester, Glasto bury and, by implication, Gloucester, being listed in this
chapter. The Gloucester reference implies baptism there but could be a reference to that at Glastonbury, thus narrowing the
eld to two. The place, however, is not the important factor here; the fact of baptism is.

Page 106 of 122

fi
fl
n­
Page 107 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER XVIII

THE EMPEROR OF CHRISTENDOM CONSTANTINE THE GREAT.

T
he great peace which had settled over the Island, beginning with the Treaty of Agricola, A.D. 86, continued for a period
of two hundred years. During these two centuries, there w a s no mention of any British-Roman ( P. 2 1 1 ) con ict. Historians are
silent, leaping the two-hundred-year gap as though nothing had occurred in the tight little island of Britain; then they take up the
record in the year A.D. 287, to recite the usurping of the Roman Emperor's crown when Carausius a Menapian by birth, who was then the
Admiral of the Roma eet, landed in North Britain, marching to York where he had himself proclaimed Emperor.
Since the fall of London, under the arms of Queen Boadicea, the city of York had become a popular resort for the Romans. From
this ancient British city, rst known as Caer Evroc, several Roman Emperors had functioned, probably deemed it a safe haven to rule
from than the city of Rome, rife with Jealousy, intrigue, and assassination. Several Roman Emperors are buried within the walls of this age-
old citadel of the Brigantes.
It was at Caer Evroc - York, where Caractacus was betrayed and delivered to the enemy by his relative, Aricia, Queen of the Brigantes,
and where she was denounced and dethroned by her own people. For centuries before Christ, It had been the center of enameling
craftsmen and the La Téne art.
Brie y, profane history tells us that Carausn reigned as Emperor from York for seven years and was then assassinated by Allectus,
his minister, A.D. 294.. The assassin reigned for two years and then fell in battle against the forces of Constantius Chlorus, who
succeeded Allectus as Emperor. He also ruled his Empire from York for ten years. With him began one of the most momentous
chapters in Christian history, beginning in - a maelstrom of persecution and slaughter exceeding the brutal Menai bloodbath of the
Christians by Suetonius Paulinus and the Boadicean atrocities under the malignant direction of Catus Decianus, A.D. 6o to A.D. 62.
Actually the stupendous events that began to be enacted with the reign of the Emperor Constantius Chlorus had their start in the lovely
city of Colchester, thirty-one years before Constantius assumed the Roman purple.
The old Celtic ( P. 2 1 2 ) name for Colchester is Camu]odunum, the city where Cunobelinus and his son Arviragus minted their excellent
coinage. It was also the royal seat of King Coel.
King Coel reigned at Colchester, once the royal seat of Cunobelinus, his ancestor, endowing the churches with muni cent gifts. The
remains of King Coel's castle can still be seen at Lexdon, a suburb of Colchester.
In the year A.D. 265, a daughter was born to King Coel in his castle at Colchester who was to become world-renowned as Empress
Helen of the Cross. Helen was the Graeco-Roman interpretation of the British name Elaine. As the Empress-Auguste Helena she is best
known and so recorded in the brightest annals of Roman history. This beautiful, accomplished woman was a noble counte part of her
famous predecessors, Princess St. Eurgain and the beloved Claudia (Gladys) Pudens. Raised in a Christian household and educated in its
religious principles, her natural talents were developed to a high degree by the best scholars and administrators in the land. Steeped in
the traditions of the faith, she espoused all that is Christian with intelligence and with courage. Helen possessed one attribute greater than
either of her famous royal female pr decessors, her capacity for political administration. While her regal husband and son stood out
eminently in the art of diplomacy, all facts and records prove that her capacity in this direction played a prominent part in their imperial
destiny. The Christianizing of the Roman Empire would undoubtedly have been delayed centuries but for her energy and devotional
support.
As usual, profane history merely describes Helen in her role as Empress. No mention is given of her ancestry and brilliant heritage.
To all Roman historical records, Empress Helena is made to appear as a Roman native, the wife of a Roman, and the mother of
an illustrious Roman son, none of which is true. They were British to the core.
MelancThornn writes: 'Helen was unquestionably a British Princess' (Epistola, p. 189).
Even to many academic intellectuals, the statement that Empress Helen and her eminent son were Britons could appear startling. Yet
none would deny that the rst record of Constantius Chlorus 1 and Helen began in Britain. Before Constantius defeated Allectus at York
( P. 2 1 3 ) was the recognized Emperor of Britain, Spain, and Gaul. At that

(1 Chorus’ means ‘pale’ and could be a reference to descent from a blond family, his Darwinian ancestry being Trojan.)
Page 107 of 122
fl
fl
fi
fi
e­
fl
fi
r­
Page 108 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
time the boundaries of Gaul extended far into the European continent, embracing Belgium, Holland, and part of Germany. Treves (Trier)
was long the capital of Belgium. With this record historians begin the Constantinian story, becoming more profuse following the
proclamation of Constantius at York as Emperor of Rome. He was the rst monarch to be legally reco nized as Emperor over the
fourfold domain by the populace of the four countries. Only he, and his extraordinary son, Constantine the Great, were ever to acquire
imperial sway over this vast Empire, an amazing fact which historians have strangely ove looked.
Six years before Constantius became world Emperor, at the request of his wife Helen he renewed and enlarged the Arc bishopric of
York, A.D. 290. After that York became an outstanding royal and religious city in Britain. In the pre-Chnstian era, as Caer Evroc, it was one
of the Druidic centers, continuing so under the Josephian Mission until King Lucius nominated London, York, and Caerlon on Usk as the
three great Archbishoprics of Britain. Later, Caerlon on Usk was displaced for the city of Canterbury, which replaced London as the chief
ecclesiastical seat. These three Arc bishoprics have remained throughout centuries until now the great Anglican religious centers, in the
following order: Canterbury, London, and York.
Canterbury, with its Archbishop, is still recognized throughout the world as the head of the Protestant Anglican Communion.
Its Bishops, wherever they may be, are the only ecclesiastics that have inherited and hold true, unbroken succession from the original
Apostles, Paul, Peter, and Joseph the Apostle of the British.
Empress Helen is given credit for founding the rst cathedral at Treves after the elevation of her husband to be Emperor of
Rome. I t became her favorite continental residence and because of her manifold gifts to the city, she was held in the highest esteem
and made the patroness of Treves. The f o r m e r British princess became titled 'Helen of the Cross', due to the claim that she found the
cross of Christ buried near Jerusalem, A.D. 326. One of the greatest art treasures still in existence is the one entitled 'Helena' created by
the renowned artist Cima da Congliane, 1
(1 AGiovanni Batista da Conegliano.)
A . D . 1459, showing the beautiful royal daughter of King Cod of Co chester with the cross of Christ.
Due to her association with Treves, and that of her.Emperor Giovanni Batista da Conegliano. husband Constantius ( P. 2 1 4 ) a n d
their noble son Constantine, this city had closer contact with the early British monarchs than any other on the continent. The present
cathedral is built on the site of the palace her husband, Constantius Chlorus, built. Indeed, the basilica of the palace forms the actual
walls of the cathedral. Her son, Constantine the Great, erected at Treves an imperial palace on the same pattern as that of his grandfather's
castle at Colchester, the ruins of which can still be seen.
It is said that anyone who has seen the ruins of King Coel's castle in the suburbs of Colchester, and later viewed the ruins at Treves, is
so intrigued with the similarity they bear that the picture of one is easily mistaken for that of the other.
Of further interest is the claim that the original castle now known as Edinburgh Castle was erected by Constantius for Queen Empress
Helen, and that a great portion of the present walls were part of the walls of the original castle.
With the exception of the church dedicated to Mary, the Mother of Jesus, at Avalon, Glastonbury, the practice of making church
dedications to women did not begin until about the twelfth century. However, we know that Cor Eurgain was erected and consecrated to
the daughter of Caractacus during the lifetime of the Princess Eurgain and Joseph of Arimathea. It was chie y a university of learning and
choral training, with a chapel in its enclosure. To Helen is given the distinctive honor of being the rst woman to have a church erected to
her glory, several hundred years before the practice began in the twelfth century, and being proclaimed a Saint.
The church of St. Helen was built at Colchester, her birthplace. From ancient times to the present this city has, for its coat of arms,
home to the symbol of Helen of the Cross. It is in the form of a cross with three crowns for its arms. Thus, in silent form, is the noble record
perpetuated in the city in which she was born and also her son Constantine, the champion of Christendom.
With devout pride the descendants of British Christians in the British Commonwealth, America, and elsewhere may point to the fact
that the only sainted female dedications made between the one to Mary at Avalon, and Those appearing a thousand years later, were to
the royal ancestors of their own race, relatives to each other in the royal blood strain: rst, the dedication of the church formed from the
British Palace at Rome to Pudentiana, the daughter of Claudia and Rufus Pudens, following bis martyrdom; second, Cor Eurgain in Wales,
dedicated to the Princess Eurgain, aunt of Pudentiana; and, ( P. 2 1 5 ) thirdly, to St. Helen at Colchester, daughter of King Coel, Queen
Empress of Rome.

Page 108 of 122

h­
fi
l­
fi
fi
r­
fi
fl
g­
h­
Page 109 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Strangely enough, some have stated that Helen was n e v e r Empress of Rome but a concubine of the Emperor, Constantius Chlorus.
There are ever-twisted minds seeking to debase the noblest. However, written records, and they are legion, 1 confound them beyond
t h e remotest question. Certainly, no person who was not a reigning king or queen would have coins struck with their n3:1:1e, declaring
them as such. In the Vatican Museum and the British Museum can be seen coins struck with her name, proving that she was Empress
by the title of Augusta. The coins read, 'Flavia Helena Augusta.'2 Sulpicius Severus says: 'Helen reigned as
(1 Archbishop Ussher lists twenty authorities; ef. Morgan, St. Paul in Britain, pp. 164-165.
2 Lewis, Joseph of Arimathea, 6th edition, p. 91 (note).)
Empress with her son.’ Helen lived seventy-one years. She died A.D. 336. The later years of her life were spent working diligently for the
faith at Constantinople, the city which her son founded, and for him named. Helen was assiduous in collecting and preserving relics of the
early Apostles found in and around Jerusalem. Posterity can be eternally grateful to this gracious woman who contributed so abundantly of
her fortune in searching for and restoring ancient manuscripts and documents as well as the personal e ects of the Apostles.
Her husband, Emperor Constantius Chlorus, had died thirty years before her in A.D. 306 at the city of York, where he is buried. Prior to
the ascent of Constantius to the throne of the Roman Empire, tragic storm clouds had gathered on the continent, particularly in Rome,
where revolution and assassination had been disposing of one Emperor after the other. There was a confusing medley of predatory
Romans who raised armies, laying claim to the throne of the Caesars.
The infamous Diocletian held the reins at Rome and on his orders began what is often described as the worst persecution of the
Christians in the year A.D. 290. In his Edict, he ordered churches to be pulled down, the sacred scriptures to be gathered together and
burnt, along with other Christian literature on which they could lay their hands. libraries, schools of learning, and private homes were
equally destroyed. Again the lions roared in the Colosseum.
The prisons were lled and streets ran with the blood of martyrs. No Christian was spared, regardless of age or sex. Even the babes in
the arms of Christian parents were cruelly destroyed. The Diocletian persecution is described as the tenth Christian persecution,
beginning with the Claudian Edict, A.D. 42. Emperor Diocletian ( P. 2 1 6 ) struck with sudden appalling savagery at the Christians. He
blamed them for the series of disasters over the years that had decimated the Roman arms to such an extent that they were no longer
able to defend their own frontiers successfully, let alone conquer as formerly.
Rome was on the decline; her glory was fast waning. Diocletian sought to avert national disaster by ordering the extermination of
the Christians, their churches, and other possessions. This bestial cruelty lasted for eighteen years. The persecution amed across
Europe for several years before it struck the shores of Britain. Again the Romans were frustrated by the incredible zeal of the
martyrs who died with prayer on their lips, or ringing exhortations.
They saw the common people destroyed, showing the same disdain for death as their Christian forbears. This infuriated Diocletian to
more endish practices, which he later was aided by Maximian, who became co-ruler with him over the continental Roman Empire.
Brutal as was Diocletian, it is written by the Romans themselves that Maximian was worse. His ferocity and atrocities are claimed to be
beyond description. He caused his nest Legions, exclusively composed of Gauls, to be butchered to the last man because they
were Christian. He was blind with maniacal hate.
The Diocletian persecution reached Britain, A.D. 300, where again the Romans sought to destroy Christianity at its source. The
Emperor poured a huge army into Britain, while Maximian carried on his destructive course on the continent. Constantius Chlorus had
already been proclaimed Emperor of Rome at York. The British kingdoms were better united.
As one they responded to the battle call of Constantius. Previously the British had fought for years in deciding each Roman con ict,
with victory swaying from one side to the other. Yet, within one year, Constantius terminated the Diocletian persecution in Britain,
in icting staggering defeats on the Roman arms, and driving them back to the continent, A.D. 302. However, before victory crowned the
British armies, the Romans had in icted great destruction, leveling churches, universities, and libraries, and sacking towns. The slaughter
was terri c, totaling a list of British martyrs that far exceeded the total in icted by all the former persecutions combined. It is stated that the
loss of British lives was beyond computation, not so much on the eld of battle as in the slaughter of the harmless, defenseless people and
priesthood.
Gildas, the early British historian, informs us that the British church lost the following eminent prelates by martyrdom: Amphibalus,
Bishop ( P. 2 1 7 ) of Llanda ; Alban of Verulam; Aaron and Julius, citizens and presbyters of Chester; Socrates, Bishop of York; Stephen,
Bishop of London; Argulius, his successor; Nicholas, Bishop of Penrhyn (Glasgow); Melior, Bishop of Carlisle; and about ten thousand
Page 109 of 122
fl
fi
fi
fi
ff
fl
fi
fi
fl
ff
fl
fl
Page 110 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
communicants in di erent grades of society. The Thousands of others who perished in Britain will never be known, any more than is known
of the countless multitude of Christians who were slaughtered on the continent for the sake of the faith.
Following the expulsion of the Romans, we are told that Emperor Constantius and his Queen Empress diligently began to restore
the destroyed churches. It was a titanic task, speaking highly for the Christian devotion of this royal family who poured their personal
fortune into the restoration. During this process of rehabilitation Emperor Constantius Chlorus died at York, A.D. 306, and there he was laid
to rest. Immediately, his son Constantine assumed the purple and at York declared himself Emperor of the Roman Empire. For the
next six years, Constantine remained in Britain, building many new churches and institutions of learning after he had completed the
restoration of those destroyed. During this time Diocletian, and particularly Maximian, continued their destruction of Christian lives on the
continent.
Peace restored in Britain, Constantine, the famed son of famous royal Christian parents, began to prepare to cross the seas to the
continent where his dramatic destiny was to unfold. He massed a powerful army in Britain, composed wholly of British warriors. With
them he sailed, landing in what today is Germany. The two armies clashed together on the banks of the Tiber where the British, under the
generalship of Emperor Constantine, won an overwhelming victory. Maximian was completely routed and pe secution ended.
Constantine, with his British warriors, marched victoriously onto Rome, where he met with an uproarious welcome. Amid great rejoicing,
he ascended the Imperial throne, o cially acclaimed by the Senate and the populace of Rome as Emperor.
By hereditary right, he was Emperor over Britain, Gaul, and Spain, succeeding his father's claim to power in Rome by virtue of
conquest at York, which he con rmed by victory over Maximian on the banks of the Tiber.
This was the greatest territorial dominion over which one Roman Emperor reigned, alone and at peace. It was also the last time.
His rst act as Emperor of Rome was to declare Rome Christian, ending forever Christian persecution within the Empire, circa A.D.
312. Henceforth Rome began her history as a Christian nation. In nationalizing the ( P. 2 1 8 ) faith, Constantine had done for Rome what King
Lucius had done for Britain one hundred and fty years later. In the great Christianizing work that followed, the gracious Helen, his
mother, stood by his side and, as Severus said, reigned with her son as Empress.
As we sum up the picture one may well exclaim, 'What a paradox!'
The rst Christian church was founded in Rome by the British royal family! The same family under Arviragus is the rst to be given the
sign of the Cross for their emblem. In order, their descendants under Lucius nationalized the faith in Britain and planted the sign of the
Cross for the rst time on coinage; the grand-daughter of Lucius, Princess Helen of Colchester, preserved the faith in her homeland, her
husband smashed the Diocletian persecution and, nally, her illustrious son, backed with a British army, conquering the city of Rome;
Constantine, a Briton, nationalizing the faith in Rome. What irony of fate! The Romans who rst set out to destroy Britain and Christianity
are nally converted to the faith, nationalized in Christ by the same British, with a Briton reigning on the Imperial throne and British
warriors defending the faith where, for three hundred years, persecution of the Christians had prevailed.
History has no counterpart to this strange drama. The Divine pattern was now almost complete, and Constantine was to seal it.
Forgotten is this long train of disciples but the majesty of their great deeds lives with us in the Christian democracies sprung from them.
How many today realize that Constantine the Great was a Briton? Few, if any, except for the seekers of truth who have read the
scrolls. Many think the fact is too fantastic to be true and discount it without searching. To them, the eminent Cardinal Baronius speaks :
'The man must be mad who, in the face of universal antiquity, refuses to believe that Constantine and his mother were
Britons, born in Britain.'
Over twenty European authorities a rm this fact. The descent of Constantine is listed in The Panegyrics of the Emperors, and the
genealogy of his illustrious lineage was given by his descendant, Constantine Palaeologus, wherein is provided in detail all the records
and proof and circumstances of his wonderful career. Polydore Vergil, ( P. 2 1 9 ) in his History of England, exclaims: ‘Constantine born in
Britain, of a British mother, proclaimed. Emperor in Britain, beyond doubt, made his natal soil a participator in his glory.'
Sozomen, in Ecclesiastical History, writes:
'The Great Constantine received his Christian education in Britain.'
And says in his Brief Britannia :

Page 110 of 122

fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ffi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
r­
Page 111 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
'Christ showed to Constantine the Briton, the victory of the Cross for his scepter.'
The Emperor Maximus Magnus, with his victorious British army, overran the continent A.D. 387, then withdrew into Gaul, where they
peopled Brittany, and sprang from the Great Constantine. Quoting from Hewin's Royal Saints of Britain, we read :
'The Emperor Maximus Magnus or Maxen Wledi was a Roman-Spaniard related to the Emperor Theodosius, and of the
family of Constantine the Great, and of British royal descent on his mother's side.'
All records prove that Constantine was t h e heir and legal representative of the royal Christian dynasty of Britain, a true represent tive
of the royal church which he permanently established by Imperial Edict in the pagan city of Rome. He made land gifts to the church
at Rome, whose only previous gifts were Those bequeathed to the church by the Caradoc-Pudens royal family: the Palace of the
British and its estate, reminiscent in the church known as St. Pudentiana, the rst church at Rome above ground.
The objects of Constantine the Great's life are clearly exempli ed by him in one of his Edicts, wherein he says :
'We call God to witness, the Saviour of all men, that in assuming the government we are in uenced solely by these two
considerations: the uniting of the empire in one faith, and the restoration of peace to a world rent to pieces by the
insanity of religious persecution.'
He bent all his e orts to this end. Two years after he was hailed Emperor at Rome he created and commanded the rst Christian church
council since the one recorded by St. James in the Acts of the Apostles. This important church council took place at Aries, A.D. 314.
The second great council was held at Nicaea, A.D. 325.
Constantine ( P. 2 2 0 ) personally presided at this council, of which it is recorded, out of three hundred and eighteen Bishops present, only
ten were Latin-speaking. The third great council was held at Constantinople, A.D. 337. It is known as the Council of Byzantium or
Constantinople. Although the Bishop of Rome was present, it is interesting to note it was the Bishop of Constantinople who presided. At
every council, the representative of each country took his seat in the order in which each land had received Christianity. At all times, at
every convention that ever followed, the British Bishop retained the rst seat. Nearly a thousand years later, when Italy and Spain
challenged the priority of Britain, it was the Pope who vetoed the complaint by stating that Britain held priority of place by reason of her
being the rst nation to accept the faith of Christ.
For twenty years Constantine labored to extend the system of constitutional Christianity, long established in his native land. Like his
mother, Queen Empress Helen, he had inherited the British sympathy for the Eastern church rather than the Romans. For them, British
faith stemmed from Jerusalem, not Rome. For this reason, he, with his mother, set up his government at Constantinople and there
transferred the Imperial Throne of the Caesars. It is stated that during his long reign, he only made two short visits to the Italian capital.
Constantinople, York, and Colchester were his favorite places of residence. As Vergil wrote, 'he made his native soil a participator in his
glory'.
There is documentary evidence in existence that reports that he restored lands and the ancient forest rights of the Diocese of London,
together with the Gorsedd lands of his grandfather King Goel, son of Lucius, in the royal city of Camulodunum - Colchester, the city being
in the Diocese of London. In this manner, he followed the practice of his regal predecessors, Arviragus to Lucius. In the British Triad III, he
is recorded as being the rst Emperor to extend royal patronage to all who assembled in the Faith. This fact is again mentioned in
connection with the three Archbishoprics of the Isle of Britain.
There are some remarkable similarities between the practice and observance of Christianity which, as we have seen, was a ower
planted and ourishing on Druidic soil, and the Israelitish 'church' or 'congregation in the wilderness'.
The Levites, in the old patriarchal system, were charged with the service of the Tabernacle and the Temple. They, being in charge of
the Sanctuary, had no inheritance in the land as had all the other Tribes of ( P. 2 2 1 ) Israel. They were not paid for their services. It was
provided for them out of the tithe. The tribe of Levi is known as the Priestly Tribe, but all Levites were not priests. Apart from performing
the ecclesiastical functions of the Temple, they performed the functions of civil servants. As one modem writer puts it:
'The Levites include not only Those who waited about the altar; but the educational or teaching sta of the nation, as well
as judicial o cers represented by judges and magistrates. The administration of justice, or at least the whole legislative side
of it, the provision for the poor, the system of national education, as well as the custody and transmission of the Scriptures,
besides the conduct of sacri cial worship and the songs and services of the Temple, were in the hands of the Tribe of Levi.'

Page 111 of 122

fi
ffi
fl
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
f
fi
fl
a­
Page 112 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
In addition, the Levites furnished the majority of the judges, clerks, registrars, censors, keepers of the records, geometricians,
genealogists, and superintendents of weights and measures. The tithe represented the divine economic system, through the law of
righteousness, including the principle of distributive justice.
The Druidic economic law was exactly the same and naturally continued in the merging of the Druidic with the Christian pri ciples of
the faith. For thousands of years, this practice was so embedded in the minds of the people it was normally carried on throughout the
Golden Era of the church in Britain. The magni cent gifts of the British kings to the church were simply an enlargement of the tithe on
their part to the glory of God for the advancement of the Christian faith.
The Queen Empress Helen and her son, Constantine the Great, were probably the greatest contributors of wealth to the Christian
cause.
The Harvest Feast, better known today as Thanksgiving, was the time when the people brought to the church in early Druid and
Christian times their gifts of the eld. The decoration of churches with the products of the eld is but a modem gesture of the age-old
harvest tithing custom.
Following the Golden Era, circa A.D. 600, the tithe began to lose some of its original substance, chie y caused by the Danish
invasions and desecration of the holy places by the Norsemen. Again we see a British king stand forth to preserve an ancient godly law. In
A.D. 854 King Ethelwulf, a Christian Saxon king, by order of a Royal Charter in Parliament, caused the state and the church to recognize
( P. 2 2 2 ) the tithe as a national institution. Quoting from this Royal Charter, which is in the British Museum, we read :

'The tenth part of the land of the Kingdom to God's praise and His own eternal welfare.'
This deed was written at Winchester and the Charter w a s placed on the Cathedral altar in the presence of St. Swithun and the
assemblage of the Witan (Saxon Parliament), and consecrated to the service of Christ. Thus was the patriarchal law of Israel, and
of the Druids, re-established.
The years of the reign of Constantine the Great and Empress Helen are the brightest pages in Roman history. Constantine freed the
Christians forever from further persecution. The horrible pit of the Mamertine was closed. The blood-soaked arena of the Colosseum
was dry and the great walls began to crumble into decay from disuse. It was an era of peace quietly maintained by Constantine's
British Legions.
The apostolic claim to the heirship of Peter is inconceivable. Peter was never addressed as Bishop of Rome, let alone Pope, by St.
Paul, or any of the Apostles or early Bishops of the church. Yet the impressive text which appears in gorgeous blue letters around the
golden dome of St. Peter's deliberately seeks to proclaim the heirship to visitors to Rome, who see the text :
'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.'
Linus and Clement, the rst and second Bishops of Rome, knew Peter intimately, along with the apostolic throng. Quite obviously they
were also unaware of the claim of Peter's supposed election. St. Paul, addressing the church at Rome in his Epistles, makes no
reference to Peter as Bishop, or as having any direct association with the Gentile church. The crowning fact is that if St. Peter had been
known as the 'Supreme Head of the Church and Vicar of Christ on Earth', the Council of Jerusalem, A.D. 46, which met to settle a
heated dispute between Peter and Paul, ending in the latter's favor, never would have accepted St. James, brother of Jesus, and
Apostolic Bishop of Jerusalem, as its presiding chairman. And certainly, Peter could not have been on trial if he were Pope.
Gore, in his Roman Catholic Claims, dispenses the claim, along with the present charge that no one belongs to the true church unless
under the authority of the Bishop of Rome. The argument is worthless. The Papacy as we know it, and as William the Conqueror, Henry
VIII, and Elizabeth I knew it, is not in and of the Primitive Church ( P. 2 2 3 ) of Christ. It is devoid of all scriptural recognition. It evolved out of a
combination of circumstance and pressure politics, based on a series of documents proven by all historians to be 'the Forged Decretals'.
Constantine, steeped in the heritage of the primitive faith in Britain, would be the last man to suggest, let alone endorse such a
sacrilegious act. Gregory the Great, who sent Augustine to Britain, rejected the title of Pope, claiming to be no more than ' rst among
equals', which is the position today existing among all Bishops stemming from apostolic succession in the Anglican Communion.
The sons of Constantine preserved the Christian principles of their great parents. They were the founders of the Byzantine Empire
but their august lives do not a ect our story except in the case of one descendant. Oddly enough, he is best known as 'the Prince of the
Sanctuary'. Professor Rhys says that Ambrosius Aurelianust 1 was the grandson of Constantine the Great. He was the

Page 112 of 122

fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fl
n­
fi
Page 113 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
(1 See also Prof. Hewing, Royal Saints of Britain, pp. 52-56.)
son of Jovin, who married a daughter of the Emperor and became King of the British Cotswolds. He was brother to Uther Pendragon,
uncle of the romantically famed King Arthur. It is strange how these ancient religious responsibilities appear in Britain and are always
within the o ce of the British royal family. The subject becomes more intriguing when we learn that the standard of this grandson of
Constantine bore the sign of the lion. This takes us a long way back into Old Testament history.
When the dying Jacob nationalized the twelve tribes under the name of Israel, the two chief o ces representing the power of the
government and authority of the Temple were bestowed on two members of the twelve tribes of Israel. To Judah was given the Sanctuary-
the Temple; and to Ephraim the Dominion - gover mental power. Judah thus became the Keeper of the Sanctuary and his son the
Prince of the Sanctuary. His ensign was a lion, still known as of old as the Lion of Judah. The sign of the ten tribes under Ephraim
was the bull. They were known historically as the 'Bull Tribe'. Their standard bore the insignia of a white bull. Finally, Thousands of years
later we nd these same insignia all appearing in Britain and are demonstrative of the same ancient royal religious authority. First, the
bull sign of Ephraim, employed by the Druids; then the cross under Arviragus; now we have the lion as the emblem of the Prince of
the Sanctuary, and today all these signs are combined on the royal standard of the British monarchs.
In all sincerity we may ask the profound question, Is it all a
coincidence, or is it ( P. 2 2 4 ) the working of divine destiny as proclaimed by the prophets?
Only time will tell the fullness of the hidden scroll.
Little is left to us today reminiscent of the life and great Christian achievements of Constantine the Great and his devout mother,
Empress Helen. For nearly fourteen hundred years the Sword of Constantine was a treasured relic among the British Coronation regalia. As
the king was crowned and the ring of the Church was placed on his nger, the Sword of Constantine was handed to him as a symbol of
his heritage as the defender of the Christian faith. During the Cromwellian desecration of the churches, the fanatical Puritans seized,
among many other treasures, the coronation crowns, jewels, and other regalia. Many precious jeweled ornaments were never returned.
Some that were returned had been robbed of priceless stones.
For many years a worldwide search was made to recover the Sword of Constantine, with rich rewards o ered, all to no avail.
The sword which Constantine drew from its scabbard to defeat Maximian on the Tiber and crush the Diocletian persecution once and
for all is gone, but the character of its ideals lives and burns as strongly as ever in the hearts of true Christians. No longer is the sword
needed in spite of its historical importance. We possess a more potent power, a power that has never failed us as long as we held fast and
true, the unconquerable spirit of Christ, the same that inspired Constantine the Great, the same imperishable spirit that spake through
the lips of Jesus to all who believed in Him: 'Lo I am with you always.'
What more could we need?
While few may remember or know of the incidents herein related of Constantine the Great and his family as associated with Britain, a
memorial still exists.
In the churchyard of ( P. 2 2 4 ) the ancient parish church of St. Cuthbert, now in the city of York, stands near the main entrance a large stone
cross on which is inscribed the following words :
'From this Parish Constantine, the Great was declared E peror, 306 A.D.’
Incontrovertible testimony to the astounding historic truth as stated by Cardinal Baronius, and to the glory of the great Christian
achievement that stemmed from York, led by the great British Christian Constantine, and his British army that conquered Rome and
proclaimed it Christian.

Page 113 of 122

fi
ffi
n­
m­
fi
ffi
ff
Page 114 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER XIX

THE MYSTERY OF THE CUP OF THE LAST SUPPER

W
e are still intrigued ( P. 2 2 5 ) by the mystery of the original Cup of the Last Supper, which we believe, from a study of the
traditions was preserved. What was its ultimate fate?
The answer may lie in the ancient British tradition which associates the original Cup with Joseph of Arimathea at Avalon. Of the three
Apostles most closely attached to Jesus it is generally assumed that Peter, the Rock, would be the one most likely to have accepted the
dangerous assignment for its safety. On the other hand, Peter's commission was lled with danger to himself. The Edicts of Tiberius and
Claudius had made it a capital o ense for any person to embrace the teachings of T he Way and called for the destruction of anything
pertaining to the Christian Cause. With the sword hanging over their heads, the Apostles would most ce tainly have wished to place any
sacred object where it would be safe.
As the record proves, the church at Antioch could at best be but a temporary haven for the treasured relic. As we know, John had
previously transferred the safekeeping of Mary to the guardianship of her uncle, Joseph. All inference is that he took her, along with his
other companions, to Britain, where she died and was buried. In this case, it is logical to assume there would be no better haven for the
Cup than in Joseph's possession at Avalon, presuming Peter was the temporary guardian. We know that Peter probably labored in
Britain three or four years before he went to Rome, and within ten years after the arrival of the Bethany group on the Sacred Isle of
Avalon. Under the dangerous circumstances, it is quite possible that Peter conveyed the original Cup with him to Britain, transferring it
to the care of Joseph.
The ancient British tradition has it that the sacred Cup was in Joseph's possession when he rst arrived at Avalon, and when the rst
Christian persecution in Britain took place under the Claudian invasion, A.D. 42. After consulting with the elect Joseph secretly buried it
so that it would be forever safe from the touch of profane hands. If there is any merit to this persistent age-old tradition the original Cup
of the Last Supper was buried within the cloaking earth of Chalice Hill. It is quite signi cant that at the foot of the Tor where Joseph and
his companions erected their wattle church is located a terraced garden ( P. 2 2 6 ) known as Chalice Hill. Therein is a wonderful well of water
that still bears the name of Chalice Well. From the earliest Christian times, the hill and the well have been known by their particular
name, with the well often referred to as the Holy Well.
In the waters of this well King Lucius and countless other notable converts were baptized in the Christian faith. In this hill, Joseph is
claimed to have burned the Cup, and the springs owing out of the h1ll to form the well gave the name to both Chalice Hill and Chalice
Well. While the well was always known as the Chalice Well, and the Holy Well, centuries later Anglo-Saxon monks named it Blood Spring
on account of the reddish stains that marked wher ever its waters washed. They evolved the superstitious belief that the stains were the
blood of Christ arising out of the buried Cup in Chalice Hill. The waters were never known as the Blood Spring by the early British Church.
To them and to date it has always been the Chalice Well.
In 1 8 8 3 the well was cleaned of the broken masonry and debris that had clogged it for centuries and the water was analyzed, which
proved it to be fed by mineral springs of iron content; consequently wherever the mineral deposits of iron dried there were left the reddish
stain that gave the appearance of blood, giving rise to the old monkish legend.
It is interesting to note that there is another well of famed antiquity near Padstow, in Cornwall, which from ancient times has been
known as Jesus's Well.
That the Cup was buried by Joseph in Chalice Hill was rmly believed for over a thousand years and was the theme of the search of
King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table for the Holy Grail.
How strongly the belief that Joseph buried the Holy Cup has persisted over the ages to modem times is shown in the many
poems, songs, and stories that abound. Tennyson immortalized the tradition of the Cup in the following verses he wrote:
'The cup, the cup itself from which our Lord
drank at the last sad supper with His own;
This from the blessed land of Amamat,

Page 114 of 122

ff
e­
fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
r­
fi
Page 115 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
After the day of darkness, when the dead
went wandering over Moriah - the good Saint
Arimathea Joseph, journeying brought to Glastonbury.'
Well, might ( P. 2 2 7 ) we ask, If there is no substance to the story of the Cup of the Last Supper, as herein related, how is it that the two
places of interest were named Chalice Hill and Chalice Well nearly two thousand years ago by the founders of the rst Christian church
above ground in Britain? A place is never named without reason. It is a label or an index to something plainly signi cant. Unlike some
historic place names, these two have never been challenged as to veracity. They have endured and endeared to the human heart as a
living testimony to a sacred event. Today, in this astounding age of scienti c materialism, to all Christians the Holy Communion is a
hallowed ceremony. Jesus asked that it be done in lasting remembrance of Him. From time immemorial the communicants of the British
Church have held steadfast by this lovely act of remembrance. In present times all Christian denominations stemming from the Mother
Church at Avalon, no matter in what part of the world they may be, are most loyal in keeping faith with their Redeemer in practicing the
act of remembrance in devout reverence and in humility. Interesting as it may be to know and see the sacred Cup, it really does not matter;
it is the signi cance of the memory that counts for the most and that lives ercely in all true Christian hearts today, as it did nearly two
thousand years ago.

Page 115 of 122

fi­
fi
fi
fi
fi
 Page 116 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
CHAPTER XX

THE END OF THE GOLDEN TRAIL

J
oseph, the Apostle of Britain, lived ( P. 2 2 8 ) within four years of witnessing the second expulsion of the persecuting Romans from
the Sceptred Isle. During Those years the soil of Britain had become saturated with the blood of friend and foe in numerous battles
and not once had the foot of the invader penetrated through the lines of the British warriors to set foot on the sacred Isle of
Avalon, and none ever would. The desperate e orts of Imperial Rome to crush the power of the Word had succeeded in fanning the
ame into an unquenchable re that was then sweeping from Britain and Gaul into many other lands. The Christian spark Joseph had
fostered was to be his enduring monument. The life of no Apostle, not even St. Paul, was more lled with high purpose, enterprise, and
achievement than was the life of the uncle of Jesus; therefore, there is no regret in stating that Joseph was not privileged to live to see
the two memorable Christian conquests that were to follow his demise.
In spite of the many sorrows that had shadowed his life, his personal triumphs in spreading the teachings of 'The Way' from Britain far
outweighed the tragedies he had shared and witnessed. He had viewed the rst Christian army raised which shattered the Claudian
Legions in the rst pitched battle in defense of the new faith and the death on the eld of the rst Christian king, replaced by the noble
Arviragus. The mass war continued under the dual leadership of the Pendragon Caradoc and Arviragus, in which the Flag of the Cross
was rst own. The non-compromising armistice was between the Roman Emperor and the two dauntless British leaders. The British
defeat at Brandon and the treacherous betrayal of Caractacus into captivity with all his royal family, followed by the Roman pardon of the
British king, and the strange alliances between the scions of Rome with the royal British prince and princesses were unusual. The slaughter
of the defenseless and the atrocious Menai massacre was avenged in the triumph and tragedy of the Boadicean campaign. Through it all
there was an eve owing stream of converts a ame with the re of the Gospel, spreading from Avalon into the land and camp of the
enemy, valorously (229) de ant. The martyrdom of Aristobulus and Simon Zelotes in Britain must have wrung his heart, but the founding
of the rst Christian church at Rome and the mission of St. Paul in Wales with the royal British must have soared his stalwart
heart.
Joseph lived to see all but ( P. 2 2 9 ) one of the original Apostles of Christ go to their immortal reward. The fate of most of them has been
recited. James, brother of St. John, had been put to the sword by Herod, A.D. 64. And James, the brother of Jesus, was hurled from a
pinnacle of the Temple to his death, A.D. 62. 1 On his monument
(1 Eusebius, quoting Hegesippus.)
is written: 'He hath been a true witness both to Jews and Greeks, that Jesus is the Christ.' St. John outlived Joseph. Apparently, he was
one of the very few apostles and disciples of Christ to die a natural death at the extreme age of 101 years.
Fifty years after Joseph had placed the body of Jesus in His tomb he laid down the scepter of his mortal life on July 27, A.D. 82.
Loving hands and heart laid him to rest among the saintly company that had preceded him, close beside the grave of the Virgin Mary, near
the little wattle church which he and his twelve companions had built over forty years before after setting foot on British soil.
Cressy, in Church History of Brittany, writes: 'Joseph was buried near the little wattle church he built.'
Across the stone lid of the sarcophagus on which his bones were later buried, under the initials of Joseph of Arimathea are inscribed
these immortal words: 'Ad Brittanos veni post Ch tum Sepelivi. Docui. Quievi.' (To the Britons I came after I buried the Christ. I taught, I
have entered my rest.)
In these few simple words are contained more tragedy, romance, and drama than in any other inscription ever written; words so
characteristic of all the faithful Apostles of Christ, seeking no sel justi cation, merely a simple record of duty performed.
Maelgwyn of Avalon, who wrote about A.D. 450, describes the place of burial in these words :
'Joseph of Arimathea, the noble decurion, received his eve lasting rest with his eleven associates in the Isle of Avalon. He
lies in the southern angle of the bifurcated line of the Oratorium of the Adorable Virgin.'
Long before the time of Maelgwyn, a magni cent Abbey had risen over the original site, enclosing the wattle church encased in lead
for its preservation, and the relics of the sainted group. In the early ( P. 2 3 0 ) and later authorities refer to the same resting place of Joseph, as

Page 116 of 122

fl
fi
fi
fl
fi
r­
fl
fi
fi
fi
fl
ff
r­
fi
f­
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
Page 117 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
cited by Maelgwyn, and rarely do they fail to quote the inscription as it appeared on Joseph's tomb. Among the notable historians who
make special reference to the inscription are John of Teignmouth, Leland, Hearne, and Morgan.
Gildas the Wise, A.D. 425, who modem historians refer to as the rst British historian of reliable reportage, lived for quite a time at
Glastonbury. He had access to all the records and original documents in the famous Abbey. His reference to the coming of Joseph to
Britain, his life there, and his death were written from examination of the old records.
William of Mahnesbury is held in the highest esteem as an exacting, honest writer. His worthiness was so great that he was invited by
the Abbot of Glastonbury to dwell among them and write a faithful history of the Abbey from a study of the ancient MSS. In A.D. 1121 he
wrote his Antiquity of Glastonbury. In corroboration of his ne work he refers to the Eleutherian Mission at Glastonbury, A.D. 183, quoting
from the record they had left. He writes:
'They also found the whole story in ancient writings how the holy apostles, having been scattered throughout the world, St.
Philip the Apostle coming into France with a host of disciples, sent twelve of them into Britain to preach, and that - taught by
revelation - constructed the said chapel which the Son of God afterward dedicated to the honor of His Mother. Their leader,
it is said, was Phillip's dearest friend, Joseph of Arimathea, who buried our Lord.'
The learned Archbishop Ussher refers to William of Malmesbury as 'our chief historian'. Leland and others call him 'an elegant,
learned, and faithful historian'. William dwelt twice at the famous Abbey in order to complete his splendid MSS. At that time, before the
great re, all the treasured records and manuscripts were in existence and at his disposal. He also con rms the time and place of
Joseph's death and interment.
The original MSS. of William of Malmesbury's Antiquity of Glastonbury is in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. A translation
from the original Latin was made from it by Thornas Heam in 1727. Hearn adds to the record the death of William of Malmesbury in 1142,
details of the great re which destroyed the Abbey in 1184, with a listing of all the Abbots to the time of the Dissolution in 1539.
Archbishop ( P. 2 3 1 ) Ussher, church historian, writes in his carefully detailed work of 'St. Joseph's burial in the bifurcated line next to the
comer of St. Mary's Chapel and of the silver and white cruets containing the sweat and blood of Christ buried with him. He recites the
presentation by St. Joseph of the Flag of the Cross to Arviragus, 'for the insignia of the British race'. The Archbishop provides a copy of the
license, copied from the royal archives in the Tower of London, given by Edward III in 1345, to one John Bloom of London, with the right
to excavate the body of St. Joseph beneath the enclosure of the monastery, and his nding of the body exactly where all had stated it
rested. The document was signed by King Edward on June 8, 1345. Ussher also quotes from the 'Record of the burial of St. Joseph and
his companions', from The Great Register of the Monks of Glaston.
William Goode, the Jesuit, born at Glastonbury and educated there during the reign of Henry VIII, con rms the old records, further
stating 'There was in existence at Glastonia inscribed tablets to pe petuate St. Joseph's memory, chapels, crypts, crosses, arms, and the
observance of the feast of St. Joseph for six days at the Kalends of August, as long as the Monks enjoyed most securely the King's
charters.'
He also reports seeing the brass plate on an overturned cross in the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. He relates the arrival of Joseph with
the Bethany group, the gifts of land to Joseph by King Arviragus, the silver cruets, the size of the wattle church, and the stone bearing the
strange words 'Jesus-Maria', the arms of the abbey, the cross on the shield, and burial of Joseph at Glasto bury.
For over one thousand years annual pilgrimages were made to the tomb of St. Joseph by pilgrims from all parts of the Christian world
in the month of August.
The conversion of Britain by Joseph, and his establishment of the rst Christian church above ground at Avalon, was not only the
challenge of the British church in refuting the Papal claim to seniority as Christ's vice-regent on earth; it extended into the important
matters of state when dealing with nations subject to Vatican control. British kings, queens, and ambassadors de ed Papal interference,
refusing to treat with him or his emissaries. They would cite the record that Britain held seniority as being the rst Christian nation, and
that church was ruled by its Bishops, with Christ ( P. 2 3 2 ) alone as the recognized Head of the Church.
The kings and queens, by the terms of their Christian oath at the coronation, gave allegiance to God, through Jesus Christ, and not to
man or a church founded on a usurped authority. Strangely enough, the Vatican never denied British priority even when seeking to make
alliances or bring the British Church within t ( P. 2 3 2 ) the Roman Catholic fold. Royal and ambassadorial replies were pregnant with the
Christian claim by Britain based on the life and death of Joseph in that country, St. Paul, and others of Christ's elect who had dwelt
among them.
Page 117 of 122
fi
fi
fi
r­
fi
fi
fi
fi
n­
fi
fi
fi
Page 118 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
When controversy and antagonism were at their height between the Vatican and Britain during the reigns of Henry VIII and his daughter
Elizabeth I, Sir Robert Wing eld, English Ambassador to Spain, personally compiled the records of the Council of Constance in a book,
proving that at the four great church councils, British Bishops had been accorded seniority as head of the councils: Pisa 1409, Constance
1417, Sienna 1424 and Basie I 434, on the grounds that 'Joseph of Arimathea brought the faith to Britain immediately after the Passion of
Christ'. Wing eld named the presiding British church dignitaries at Pisa: Robert Hallam, Bishop of Salisbury; Henry Chicele; and Thornas
Chillenden, Prior of Christ Church, Canterbury; Hallam was the leader at Pisa and at Sienna. Others were Nicholas Bubwith, Bishop of
Bath and Wells; the famed Cardinal Beaufort, Bishop of Winchester; and Nicholas Frame, Bishop of Glastonbury, who was chief delegate
at Basle in 1434. This record was published at Louvain in 15 I 7, a copy of which is in the Royal Library, and another in Sir Henry
Wooton's. It was republished in the reign of Elizabeth I and again under the Stuarts. The title of the work is 'A Brief Abstract of the
Question of Precedency Between England and Spain', employed by Sir Henry Nevile at the commission of the French king in an e ort to
bring peace between England and Spain, in 1579.
It is of special notice that no book could be published without a royal license. Charles I, provided another license for printing in
1642. This book was entitled Precedency of England in Respect to the Antiquity of Christian Religion Immediately after the Passion of
Christ in this Realm. In I651 Oliver Cromwell gave a licence substantiating the same claim.
In recent years Lord Queenborough discovered and purchased a copy of the 1642 edition, which he presented to the Royal Society
of St. George.
Throughout the ages to present times such has been the power of the story of Joseph of Arimathea that kings, queens, and
people of Britain ( P. 2 3 3 ) have defended the sovereignty of the Christian faith against all usurpers and aggressors.
What a triumphant history!
Every time I visited Glastonbury and stood before the Altar of St. Joseph amid the ruins of this glorious Abbey, my mind became
crowded with the circumstances and incidents in the life of the Apostle of Britain. I seemed to sense the spirit of the noble decurio and
his wonderful companions and felt in my heart that the prophecy of Abraham, of Jacob, Isaiah, Jesus, and St. Paul, had been
ful lled to the people of 'the Isles', though the medium of the uncle of Jesus.
Further reference to the tomb of St. Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury cannot be more ttingly presented than by reciting the
words of the Rev. Lionel Smithett Lewis, former Vicar of Glastpnbury, who devoted most of the eighty-six years of his life to searching the
age-old archives, examining ancient tomes, o cial documents, and yellowed manuscripts to substantiate the validity of the story of the life
and death of St. Joseph and the Bethany family at Avalon, and in preserving the fascinating record of the most historic Christian church in
the world. He writes :
'The body of St. Joseph, whose burial at the wattle church of St. Mary was recorded by Maelgwyn of Avalon, writing
about A.D. 450, lay undisturbed till the year 1345, when Edward III gave his license to John Bloom of London to dig for
the body if the Abbot and monks permitted, and just as the discovery of the bones of King Arthur at Glastonbury in 1190
was recorded in far-away Essex by the monk Ralph de Coggeshall, so in a far-away monastery in 1367 we nd a monk
recording that ''the bodies of Joseph of Arimathea and his companions were found at Glastonbury''.
'The remains of St. Joseph were put in a silver casket which could be raised at will from a stone sarcophagus, the base of a
shrine to which the frequent pilgrimage was made. This stone altar tomb, the base of the shrine, like the Holy Thorn,
survived the Reformation.
'Holinshed, in his ''Chronicle'', A.D. 1 5 7 7 , speaks of St. Joseph's sepulcher as being still at Glastonbury, and the learned
John Ray in his ''Itinerary'' records that on June 2, 1662, ''We saw Joseph of Arimathea's tomb and chapel at the end of
the church''. As we have seen, the Holy Thorn was cut down in the Great Rebellion. The a f t e r m a t h of the same period
saw the altar tomb of St. Joseph ( P. 2 3 4 ) leave its shrine. During the Commonwealth, a Nonconformist divine was put in as
incumbent of the Parish Church. In 1662 this interloper was turned out and a Churc -man was instituted. It was that very
same year, in which by God's Providence John Ray came to Glastonbury and saw the tomb in the ruined chapel. Later in
the year, tradition says, from fear of Puritanical fanaticism like that which destroyed the Holy Thorn, silently, hastily at night,
the altar tomb was removed from the ruined shrine in St. Mary's Chapel at the Abbey, and placed in the churchyard of the
Parish Church for protection outside of the East end of St. Mary's Chapel in that Church. There it remained until the autumn
of 1928, when loving hands brought it reverently into the Church, and placed it in the ancient St. Katherine’s Chapel, the
North Transept.
Page 118 of 122
fi
fi
fi
ffi
h­
fi
fi
ff
Page 119 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
'Moreover, there is a plinth inside to receive the silver ark with the Saint's remains. A glass top was put on the tomb that
all generations might see what was found.'

As a matter of fact, it was the Rev. Lewis who accidentally rediscovered the stone sarcophagus of Joseph. One autumn day, while
walking by the ancient cemetery, he saw a large stone object, evidently lifted by the frosts, protruding from out of the earth. On
examination, it was recognized as being the stone sarcophagus of St. Joseph. Willing hands helped to excavate the stone, and as the Rev.
Lewis says in his report, it was re-inshrined in St. Katherine's Chapel, where it can be seen today.
It is indeed remarkable that it should be preserved undamaged from the rains, frost, and snow, after reposing for two hundred and sixty-
six years in its hastily constructed grave, where it had been placed in the dead of night to protect it from the desecrating hands of the
fanatical Puritans.
Nearly nineteen hundred years have passed since the uncle of Jesus was laid to his everlasting rest at Glastonbury, yet as recent as
thirty years ago this sacred relic that contained his remains is almost miraculously raised from its centuries-old grave by an act of nature,
to remind us, by the Will of God, of the trenchant drama of 'The Way', and our long Christian inheritance, out of which the most powerful
democracies in history founded their constitutions - the Commonwealth of the British nations, and the great republic of the United States
of America.
In many ancient histories describing the life of St. Joseph in Britain there is constant reference to the Holy Cruets. The story is that the
two ( P. 2 3 5 ) cruets contained the blood and sweat of Jesus and were brought by Joseph to Britain and were buried with him in a niche
carved into his stone co n. The old records indicate that the two cruets were held in the highest reverence by the Abbey throughout its
existence. They are assigned as part of the coat of arms of Joseph. The cruets are shown imposed on a shield, one on each side of a
Thorny cross, with liquid droplets covering the rest of the space on the shield, symbolizing the blood and sweat of Jesus entering the
cruets. They were the arms of the Abbey and appeared in one of the large stained-glass windows of the church. The cruets and the
Arthurian cross are much in evidence in the church records. King Arthur adopted the Cross of St. George as his kingly badge which can
still be seen carved in the stone over one of the standing doorways.
The story of the search for the Holy Grail by the Knights of the Round Table carries a double meaning. It is generally believed that the
search was for the Cup of the Last Supper, which Joseph is claimed to have concealed in Chalice Hill. On the other hand the word Grail in
old English means 'elements', which some writers indicate meant the lost cruets, in a few instances named vials. The record hardly bears
out this belief, as all the early writings centuries prior to the time of King Arthur clearly state that the cruets, or vials, were placed within
the sarcophagus of Joseph at his death and buried with him. The word Grail is also employed to mean a container, a chalice or a cup,
which might better indicate that the se ch of the Knights of King Arthur was directed to nd the Cup, which seems to be the most popular
opinion. Mention of the Cup is shrouded in silence following the record of its concealment, but the cruets persist so strongly though the
ritual of the old church and as associated with Joseph, that there is no doubt that they repr sented an important memorial to the Bethany
mission, perpetuated in tradition and ritual during Those dramatic years.
In the report of Maelgwyn, reference is made to the fact that Joseph was buried with his eleven associates near to the Virgin Mary. Later
records mention twelve associates and Leland 1 who held a
(1 Notes made as King’s Antiquary.)
license from Henry VIII to search the records of all the cathedrals abbeys and places of learning in 1534, checked the library of
Glastonbury Abbey. He reports thirteen associates laid to rest with Joseph, exclusive of the Mother of Jesus, and many records state that
all the associates of Joseph and many other martyrs and saints were nally gathered together by his side and that of the gentle Virgin.
As we know, ( P. 2 3 6 ) there were twelve companions who came to Britain with Joseph on his rst arrival. If we add Marcella, the maid of
the Bethany sisters, and Mary, we have fourteen members in the Bethany group. The last mention by Leland, the King's Antiquary, would
indicate that all had been brought to Avalon, who had not died there, to be together as they had originally requested. We read of King Ina,
A.D. 700, having a large number of martyrs reinterred at Avalon, and among them was the son of Joseph, who had labored at Cor
Eurgain, and died at Glastonbury, over whom King Ina erected a church.
Not many years ago the church of King Ina was excavated at Glastonbury, but from lack of funds to maintain it has since become
covered over again.

Page 119 of 122

ffi
fi
fi
fi
e­
Page 120 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
Roger of Hovedon, writing of the church at Marseilles, founded by Lazarus, states that after serving the church for seven years, he died
there and that his relics are at Marseilles. However, relics do not necessarily mean the body. Relics were associated with personal
belongings which were preserved and treasured by the church. It is quite likely that the body of Lazarus was later transferred to
Glastonbury. King Oswy, A.D. 840, was very active in transporting the bodies of martyrs and disciples from abroad to be reburied either
at Glastonbury or Canterbury. Leland writes:
'The Isle of Avalon greedy of burials received thousands of sleepers among whom Joseph of Arimathea by name, entered his
perpetual sleep. And he lies in a bifurcated line next the southern angle of the oratory by 13 inhabitants over the
powerful adorable Virgin. Joseph had with him moreover in his sarcophagus, two white and silver cruets lled with the
blood and sweat of Jesus. When his sarcophagus shall be opened it will be seen whole, and untouched in the future,
and will be open to the whole world. From then neither water nor dew from heaven shall fail Those inhabiting this most noble
island. For much time before the Day of Judgment, these things shall be open in Josaphat and declared to the living.'
The statement by William of Malmesbury in Acts of the Kings, Book I, is also interesting and illuminating :
'The Church of which we are speaking - from its antiquity called by the Angles by way of distinction "Balde Churche" that is "old Church"
of wattle work at rst, savored somewhat of heavenly sanctity even from its foundation, and exhaled it over the whole ( P. 2 3 7 ) country,
claiming superior reverence Though the structure was mean. Hence, here arrived whole tribes of the lower orders, thronging every path;
here assembled the opulent of their pomp; and it became the crowded residence of the religious and the literary… This church then is
certainly the oldest I am acquainted with in England, and from this circu stance derives its name.
In it are preserved the mortal remains of many saints, some of whom we shall notice in our progress, nor is there any comer of the
church destitute of the ashes of the holy. The very oor is inlaid with polished stone, and the sides of the altar, and even the altar itself
above and beneath, are laden with the multitude of relics. The antiquity and multitude of its saints have endued the place with so much
sanctity that, at night, scarcely anyone presumes to keep vigil there, or during the day spit upon its oor; he who is conscious of pollution
shudders through his whole frame. No one ever brought hawk or horses within the con nes of the neighboring cemetery who did not
depart injured either in them or in himself. It is su ciently evident that the men of that province had no oath more frequent or more sacred
than to swear by The Old Church, fearing the swiftest vengeance on their perjury in this respect.
'In the meantime, it is clear that the repository of so many saints may be deservedly called a heavenly sanctuary on earth.
There are a number of documents, Though I abstain from mentioning them for fear of causing weariness, to prove how
extremely venerable this place was held by the chief persons of the country, who there more especially chose to await the
day of resurrection under the protection of the Mother of God.'
It is impossible to enumerate herein even a partial number of the Thousands of illustrious names of kings, queens, apostles, disciples,
saints, and martyrs buried within the great Abbey and in its cemetery, in addition to St. Joseph and his twelve consecrated members of the
Bethany band, and of Mary the Mother of Jesus. The illustrious host buried therein gave to this site the title of the most hallowed ground
on earth. In addition, it bears the name of the only royal cemetery dedicated in Christ.
We may mention in passing that King Coel, father of the famed Empress Helen, mother of Emperor Constantine the Great, is buried in
the old cemetery at Glastonbury.
Queen Victoria had in her possession in the Royal Library a genealogical chart showing the kings and queens of Britain who were
( P. 2 3 8 ) descended in a direct line from the Shepherd King David. The genealogical chart prepared by the Rev. Milner is considered to
be the greatest masterpiece in proving the same fact. Through Joseph of Arimathea, this strain was greatly strengthened. John of
Glastonbury, historian, and genealogist, shows that the children of Joseph married into the royal British families. For this reason, King
Arthur and the Tudor line claimed to be descended from Joseph. John of Glastonbury also asserts that the twelve Knights of the
Round Table were descended from the line of Joseph, and their number of twelve was formed to perpetuate the existence of the original
twelve companions who arrived in Britain with Joseph. The knights long ago passed into legend and folklore, but the famous Round Table
is preserved today in Winchester County Hall, still wearing some of the green paint as decorated by Henry VIII when he entertained the
French king.
The original memories are still vivid of the chivalrous knights, the Quest for the Holy Grail, King Arthur, and the beautiful Queen
Guinevere, descendants of the Noblis Decurio. The Thorn which Joseph planted on Weary All Hill grew to be a twin. The despoiler
cut one down. The other part was saved because a splinter pierced the eye of the destroyer. He died from the wound. For thirty years it
lived, long enough to see a new generation revolt against the hypocritical Puritans who had come to be hated for their desecrations and
Page 120 of 122
fi
ffi
fl
m­
fi
fl
fi
Page 121 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
displace them. Fortunately, a number of Thorn trees had been budded from the surviving part of the original Holy Thorn, which botanists
agree was a Levantine Thorn. Every Christmas the blossoms are gathered to decorate the altar of the Parish Church of St. John the
Baptist, Glastonbury, keeping alive the signi cance of the ancient Josephian story.
St. Ninian, a British missionary out of Avalon, educated in Rome, founded Candida Casa, Whithorn, Scotland, A.D. 397. He was a
great scholar, having served under St. Martin at Marmontier. In his travels, he found St. Jerome's original translations of the New
Testament, the Psalms, and t h e Mosaic Laws. These, with many other important religious writings in the old British-Celto language, he
took with him to Candida Casa, along with a copy of the Vulgate. Later, St. Columbanus, the great Celtic missionary, who died A.D. 615,
with his Celtic co-worker St. Gall, went to Italy, where he founded Bobbio. He took with him a large quantity of the treasured MSS. from
Candida Casa and from other Celtic church libraries. Remaining today are about seven hundred MSS. in the original British-Celtic
language, which can be seen in the famed church libraries at ( P. 2 3 9 ) Bobbio, Turin, and Milan. On the margins of many appear notes
made by St. Columbanus, in the same language, as readable today as when rst written. At Bobbio are many beautiful illuminated works
from Candida Casa and MSS. of Irish Bangor. St. Gall left Bobbio to found the great monastery of St. Gall, Switzerland, and the monastery
at Luxeuil in the Vosges, with their magni cent libraries containing numerous early British-Celtic manuscripts.
The famed library of St. Gallen was taken to Switzerland by the Irish disciples of St. Gallus. Among them is the religio-historical Irish
MS. written A.D. 612 by St. Gallus, with considerable sevent century Irish MSS. and other treasured ancient documents. In fact, one nds
more of these antique Irish treasures on the continent than in Ireland.
The chief data concerning the early Christian British missions are found in the British libraries, particularly in the Welsh Triads, the
Psalter of Cashal, and Chronicum Regum Pictorum.
How deeply rooted the lives and works of Joseph of Arimathea and the Bethany group in the early Christian workers is shown by the
great wealth of documentation written by them during the six hundred years of the Golden Christian Era. The drama of the introduction of
Christianity into Britain by Joseph was not con ned to the British chroniclers. There are in existence many early works written by saints,
scholars, and church dignitaries who labored on the continent during his lifetime and the years that followed. Some of the MSS.
produced in Gaul and Britanny make startling reading. All tell the same story in di erent forms and the deep reverence in which Joseph
was held by them is manifest in every word. The story never grew old. The rst two books o the newly invented printing press, after the
Bible, were on the Life of St. Joseph.
The scholarly and historical works written of Joseph, the Apostle to the British, far outnumber the works written on the life of any one of
the Apostles of Christ, St. Paul and Peter not excepted. Most of them were written by the best scholarly minds, historians, and church
authorities of those centuries. National disputes for over sixteen hundred years were settled on the validity of Joseph's existence in Britain
with the Bethany Mission. Opposing nations recognized the validity of the claim.
Disputes in the highest international church councils bowed to the belief, supported by the Popes and the Vatican into the twentieth
century. Under such close scrutiny a myth, legend or tradition would have been disposed of in the rst century A.D. Instead, the
keenest intellectuals ( P. 2 4 0 ) over the centuries solidly propounded the historic fact that Joseph of Arimathea and the Bethany band did
live, teach and die in Britain; that Joseph was the actual Apostle to the British, who founded the rst Christian church above ground in
Britain; that Britain was the rst nation to accept the Christ Faith and from her shores stemmed the great army of missionaries that
Christianized the world; and that the Covenant People are represented in Celto-Anglo-Saxondom.
How signi cant that everything appears to fall in line with prophecy!
The words of Isaiah as he addressed the people 'afar in the Isles of the West' become trenchant with positive meaning, as does the
prophecy of Jeremiah. The prophets proclaimed that the Star of Jacob would spring from the line of David, the Shepherd King. Jesus,
the Messiah, was descended from David, as also was His greatest banner-bearer, Joseph of Arimathea. Jesus, the Light of the World,
directed His message to the 'lost sheep' whom He foretold would receive Him and His Word, and keep it. To Paul He gave His
commission and the Apostle of the Gentiles went to the 'lost sheep of Israel', the Gentiles of the Isles.
Joseph, the uncle of Jesus, went ahead under divine inspiration to prepare the way, converting and teaching the royal Gentiles, whom
Paul established in Rome, to found the rst Christian church by the uncircumcised. Joseph prepared the royal family in Britain, from
whom Paul established his mission to Wales after Joseph had laid the foundation.

Page 121 of 122

fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
h­
fi
fi
ff
f
fi
fi
fi
Page 122 of 122 The Drama of The Lost Disciples
It was foretold that the redeemed lost sheep would keep the faith. They proved it as no other nation did by making the greatest blood
sacri ce in history as they smashed the would-be destroyers of 'The Way'. They produced the man who conquered Rome with the Cross
- Constantine the Great, who nationalized Rome in the faith.
One hundred and fty years before him his ancestors, the kings of Britain, were the rst to nationalize their nation in the name of
Christ, take their coronation oath, and build their Parli mentary Constitution on the Christian platform. The sons and daughters of
Manasseh founded Britain the great republic of America, a prophecy ful lled by Britain and America, founding God’s Commonwealth on
which the sun never sets.
What a magni cent heritage and legacy the peoples of the Anglo-Saxon world possess and all because of one man who came to them
in the beginning in the name of the Beloved One, as their Apostle. As such he remains today a successful instrument of divine guidance,
Joseph of Arimathea, the Noblis Decurio, uncle of Jesus and guardian ( P. 2 4 1 ) of the Blessed Virgin, the Apostle of Christian Angl
Saxondom in God's Commonwealth.
In striving toward the ultimate goal in His service, we can draw strength from the historic achievements of Joseph and his illustrious
band, and the glorious company of the faithful who followed after making their supreme sacri ce, where necessary, in the name of Christ.
We may bow our hearts in humble appreciation of all they did for our sake to make us free men and women in the righteousness of
the teachings of 'The Way'. May we arise in strength to hold aloft against His enemies the banner of the Cross Joseph rst gave to
Arviragus, as a sign and symbol of our race, to unite all mankind in the brotherhood of love.
The story of Joseph can never die. It is in the blood of our veins, immortalized. Joseph the Saint ended his glorious trail at Avalon, only
to take up another more golden, in heaven.
Anyone who doubts the veracity of this majestic story does so in the face of irrefutable evidence. As Sir Henry Spellman in Concillia
truly writes: 'For anyone to longer doubt the historic authenticity of Glastonbury, and the Mission of Joseph, is ridiculous.'

Page 122 of 122

fi
fi
fi
a­
fi
fi
fi
fi
o­
Page 1 of 1 The Drama of The Lost Disciples

Comparative Bibliography for Further Reference & Study

The Holy Bible (Scofield and King James versions).

Short History of the English People, J. R. Green. The History of England, Ross.
The History of France, De Witt. The History of Gaul, Guizot.
Analytical Concordance to the Bible, Young.
The Oxford Biblical Dictionary and Concordance.
Dictionary of the Bible, Dr. W. Smith.
Roman Martyrologies.
Greek Martyrologies. Roman Menologies.
Greek Menologies.
The Martyrs of the Colosseum, Rev. A. J. O'Reilly.
The Victims of the Mamertine, Rev. A. J. O'Reilly. The Talmud.
The History of the Jews, Milman. The Commentaries of Julius Caesar.
The Bible is True, Sir C. Marston.
*Prehistoric London, E. 0. Gordon.
Remarkable Characters and Places in the Holy Land, Elliott.
The Cathedrals of England and Wales, F. Bumpus.
Ancient Abbeys and Castles of England and Wales (Times & Gunn).
The Covenant Law, Collier.
The Twelve Lessons of the Covenant Law, Collier. The English Abbey, Crossley.
England's Greater Churches, Nicholson. The Bible Comes Alive, Sir C. Marston.
*Celt, Druid and Culdee, I. Hill Elder.
The Wonder Race, G. E. Altree Coley. Diggers for Facts, Prof. Kinnaman.
Turning Points in Church History, Cutts.
The Psalms in Human Life, Rev. Prothero.
Chronicles of
William of Malmesbury.
Geoffrey of Monmouth.
Matthew of Paris.
Robert of Gloucester.

Page 1 of 1