Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-q6k6v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T09:42:56.162Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Whose Supremacy? King, Parliament and the Church 1530–1640

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2008

Conrad Russell
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In October 1993, I had to decide whether it was proper for me, as an unbeliever, to go to Parliament to vote in favour of a Church of England measure. Was it proper that laymen, not members of the church, not involved in the decisions taken, should be allowed to sit in Parliament to decide what the law of the church should be? After some discussion, I was persuaded it was proper, and cast my vote accordingly. In that decision, I recognized the triumph of one version of the Royal Supremacy over another. It is the triumph of Christopher St. German over Bishop Stephen Gardiner, of Sir Francis Knollys over Queen Elizabeth I, of Chief Justice Coke over Lord Chancellor Ellesmere, and of John Pym over Archbishop Laud. That triumph took a century to arrive after Henry VIII's Act of Supremacy, and, like many other triumphs, it threw out a promising baby with its mess of popish bath-water.

Type
Research Article
Information
Ecclesiastical Law Journal , Volume 4 , Issue 21 , July 1997 , pp. 700 - 708
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical Law Society 1997

References

1 Cardwell, E.. Synodalia. Oxford (1842). 1, 166–7.Google Scholar

2 Gilbert Overall's Convocation Book (1690). p. 5.Google Scholar

3 Calendar of State Papers. Domestic 1603–1610. vol. xiii, no.61.

4 Bodleian Library Ms Barlow 9. ff. I 2.

5 Public Record Office. S.P. 16 288/88.

6 Birmingham Reference Library, Coventry Mss. Pardons, no. 6 (6 June 4 Car.).

7 Dorset, R.O., Bankes of Kingston Lacey Mss. Vol. L. pp.1–2.Google Scholar

8 SirCoke, Edward. Twelfth Report. 50.Google Scholar

9 H.M.C. House of Lords, vol. XI. pp. 125–6.Google Scholar

10 Knafla, L. A., Law and Politics in Jacobean England, Cambridge (1977). p. 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Ms Barlow 9. ff. 28. 36.

12 Coke. Twelfth Report. 73.

13 Ibid., p. 60.

14 Ibid., p. 55.

15 SirCoke, Edward, fifth Report, 9.Google Scholar

16 SirCoke, Edward, Twelfth Report, 64.Google Scholar

17 MacHwain, C. H., The Political Works of James 1. Cambridge (Mass.) 1918, p. 331.Google Scholar

18 Ibid., p. 335.

19 S.P. 12 199 2.

20 Bodleian Ms Tanner 280. f. 64.

21 Bodleian Ms Barlow 9. f. 51.

22 Ms Barlow 9. f. 53.

23 Russell, Conrad, Parliaments and English Politics 1621–1629, Oxford (1979), p. 411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 Foster, Elizabeth Read, Proceedings in Parliament 1610, New Haven (1966) 1, 231–2.Google Scholar

25 Ibid., 1, 221.

26 C.J., i, 1010.

27 C.J., i, 972.

28 The Parliamentary Diary of Robert Bowyer, ed. Willson, D. H., Minneapolis (1931). p. 52.Google Scholar

29 The Journal of Sir Symonds D'Ewes. vol. I, ed. Notestein, Wallace, New Haven (1923), p. 152.Google Scholar

30 Ibid., p. 155.