Works in ChatGPT, Claude, or Any AI
Add semantic quote search to your AI assistant via MCP. One command setup.
The tumults in Scotland, about the Service-Book offered to be brought in, began Julii 23, 1637, and continued increasing by fits, and hath now brough… - William Laud
" "The tumults in Scotland, about the Service-Book offered to be brought in, began Julii 23, 1637, and continued increasing by fits, and hath now brought that kingdom in danger. No question, but there's a great concurrence between them [the Covenanters<nowiki>]</nowiki> and the Puritan party in England. A great aim there to destroy me in the King's opinion.
English
Collect this quote
About William Laud
William Laud (7 October 1573 – 10 January 1645) was an English archbishop and academic. He was Archbishop of Canterbury from 1633, during the personal rule of Charles I. Arrested in 1640, he was executed in 1645. In matters of church polity, Laud was autocratic. Laudianism refers to a collection of rules on matters of ritual, in particular, that were enforced by Laud in order to maintain uniform worship in England and Wales, in line with the king's preferences. They were precursors to later High Church views. In theology, Laud was accused of being an Arminian and opponent of Calvinism, as well as covertly favouring Roman Catholic doctrines (see Arminianism in the Church of England). On all three grounds, he was regarded by Puritan clerics and laymen as a formidable and dangerous opponent.
Also Known As
Alternative Names:
William Laud Archbishop of Canterbury
•
William, Archbishop of Canterbury Laud
Related quotes. More quotes will automatically load as you scroll down, or you can use the load more buttons.
Additional quotes by William Laud
[M]y care was against all underminings, both at home and abroad, of the established doctrine and discipline of the Church of England, for which I am now like to suffer. And I pray God that point of Arminianism, libertas prophetandi [the right to proclaim different opinions], do not more mischief in short time, than is expressible by me.
There is a great deal of difference, especially as Romanists handle the question of the Church, between the Church and a Church; and there is some between a true Church and a right Church, which is the word you use, but no man else that I know: I am sure not I. For “the Church” may import in our language “the only true Church;” and, perhaps, as some of you seem to make it, “the root and the ground of the Catholic.” And this I never did grant of the Roman Church, nor ever mean to do. But “a Church” can imply no more than that it is a member of the whole. And this I never did nor ever will deny, if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a “true Church,” I granted also; but not a “right,” as you impose upon me.
And one thing more I will be bold to speak out of a like duty to the Church of England, and the "house of David." They, whoever they be, that would overthrow sedes Ecclesiæ, the "seats of ecclesiastical government," will not spare, if ever they get power, to have a pluck at the "throne of David." And there is not a man that is for "parity," all fellows in the Church,—but he is not for monarchy in the State.
Loading...