A counterblast to M. Hornes vayne blaste against M. Fekenham Wherein is set forthe: a ful reply to M. Hornes Answer, and to euery part therof made, against the declaration of my L. Abbat of Westminster, M. Fekenham, touching, the Othe of the Supremacy. By perusing vvhereof shall appeare, besides the holy Scriptures, as it vvere a chronicle of the continual practise of Christes Churche in al ages and countries, fro[m] the time of Constantin the Great, vntil our daies: prouing the popes and bishops supremacy in ecclesiastical causes: and disprouing the princes supremacy in the same causes. By Thomas Stapleton student in diuinitie.

About this Item

Title
A counterblast to M. Hornes vayne blaste against M. Fekenham Wherein is set forthe: a ful reply to M. Hornes Answer, and to euery part therof made, against the declaration of my L. Abbat of Westminster, M. Fekenham, touching, the Othe of the Supremacy. By perusing vvhereof shall appeare, besides the holy Scriptures, as it vvere a chronicle of the continual practise of Christes Churche in al ages and countries, fro[m] the time of Constantin the Great, vntil our daies: prouing the popes and bishops supremacy in ecclesiastical causes: and disprouing the princes supremacy in the same causes. By Thomas Stapleton student in diuinitie.
Author
Stapleton, Thomas, 1535-1598.
Publication
Louanii :: Apud Ioannem Foulerum. An. 1567. Cum priuil.,
[1567]
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Horne, Robert, 1519?-1580. -- Answeare made by Rob. Bishoppe of Wynchester, to a booke entituled, The declaration of suche scruples, and staies of conscience, touchinge the Othe of the Supremacy, as M. John Fekenham, by wrytinge did deliver unto the L. Bishop of Winchester -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Feckenham, John de, 1518?-1585.
Royal supremacy (Church of England) -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A12940.0001.001
Cite this Item
"A counterblast to M. Hornes vayne blaste against M. Fekenham Wherein is set forthe: a ful reply to M. Hornes Answer, and to euery part therof made, against the declaration of my L. Abbat of Westminster, M. Fekenham, touching, the Othe of the Supremacy. By perusing vvhereof shall appeare, besides the holy Scriptures, as it vvere a chronicle of the continual practise of Christes Churche in al ages and countries, fro[m] the time of Constantin the Great, vntil our daies: prouing the popes and bishops supremacy in ecclesiastical causes: and disprouing the princes supremacy in the same causes. By Thomas Stapleton student in diuinitie." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A12940.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 14, 2024.

Pages

Stapleton

Here are two things: The one that Cōstantine sendeth his letters to Arius and the B. of Alexādria, to pacify ād ap∣pease the cōtention begun with Arius. The other that he la∣bored to pacify an other schism at Antioch, about the cho∣sing of the B. of Antioch. Neither of these draw any thing nigh to the new primacy ye would establish. And such let∣ters might any other good zealous mā haue sent to thē, beīg no Emperour. And as for elections in those dayes, not only

Page [unnumbered]

the Emperour, but the people also had some interest ther∣in. Wherefore here is no colour of your supremacie. And therefore to helpe foreward the matter, and to vndershore and vnderproppe your ruinouse building withall, ye inter∣lace of your owne authoritie these wordes (as one that had the care and authoritie ouer all) which your author Socrates hath not, and likewise (as one that had authoritie ouer them) which Eusebius hath not.

And here by the way, I woulde aske of you, for eache matter a question. If these of Alexander and Arius, were vaine and triefling questions, as ye alleage, why doe ye call Arius his errour, an horrible heresie? And why say yee their dissention was about a necessary article of the Faith?* 1.1 I moue it for this, that hereby we may vnderstād, as wel the great necessitie of Generall Councels, as the Supreme gouern∣ment of causes Ecclesiasticall, to haue remained in the Bi∣shops there assembled.* 1.2 For Constantine that tooke not at the beginning, these questions to be of so great importāce, after the determination of the Councel, tooke Arius to be a very obstinate heretique: and his heresie to be an horrible heresie, as ye cal it. Concerning the second, as we graunt the Prince had to doe with election, and yet not proprely with election, but with the allowinge and approbation of Spirituall mens election: so I demaund of you, what inter∣est the people hath in either election or approbation nowe in England?* 1.3 Againe I demaund, whether in the auncient Church the Prince might (as he may in England) not onely nominate a person to be elected of the Deane ād Chapter, but if they doe not elect within certaine daies, miserablye to wrappe them in a premunire? I make most sure accōpt ye shal neuer be able, to shew this. See then that euen in

Page 89

your election, which is beside and out of our chiefe mat∣ter, ye are quyte out from the like regiment ye pretende to proue.

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.