The Controversy on the Authenticity and the Legitimate Narrative about Royal Supremacy:Centered on the Debates between Thomas More and Christopher Saint-Germain
The"Royal Supremacy"has been considered as the theoretical expression of England as a sovereign state due to its legitimate narrative of England's separation from the universal Christian empire.However,little attention has been paid in past research to the objections of the senior officials in the Tudor Government to the Act of Supremacy.Thomas More,for instance,who refused to take an oath to the Succession Act,presented arguments which exposed the flaws in the authenticity of the theory of"Royal Supremacy"when he was in the trial of treason.Prior to that,Thomas More had engaged in a debate with Christopher Saint-Germain on such issues as the composition of church members,the nature of the Church,and the legislative authority of the Parliament.The above issues were just the"preunderstanding"that More used to evaluate the authenticity of the"Royal Supremacy".Saint-Germain regarded the church as a collective of both clergy and laymen,and equated the concept of"King-in-Parliament"(王在议会)as the integrated representative of the Kingdom of England with its supremacy,thus demonstrating that the Parliament had the jurisdiction over the church and the power to grant the king as"supreme head"of the Church of England.However,the ambiguity of the"King-in-Parliament"determined that the"Royal Supremacy"only proved the legitimacy of England's separation from the Catholic Church(大公教会),but was unable to determine whether the jurisdiction over the spiritual affairs in England rested with the sole king or the Parliament.
royal supremacythe debates between Thomas More and Christopher Saint-Germain(莫尔与圣·杰曼的论战)church-state relationsHenrician Reformation(亨利八世宗教改革)
NETL
NSTL
万方数据
