The making of a Laudian polemicist?

Mera chimaera: the Reformed and conformist ecclesiology of John Prideaux (1578–1650)

“…As Milton has shown, this is untrue. 53 Prideaux insisted that Reformation "does not erect a new Church, but correct a corrupt one." 54 The Church can be distinguished from the Popery that infected it; and that Church was the same, in essence, as the Protestant Church now is.…”

“…He was also famously irascible, and he had already crossed swords with Heylyn over the Church, at a disputation in 1627. 4 Between that earlier altercation, and the 1633 Act, Prideaux's position in Oxford had weakened considerably. He had opposed Laud's election as Chancellor in 1630, supporting Philip Herbert, Fourth Earl of Pembroke, instead.…”

“…As Anthony Milton has indicated, "It is impossible to know precisely what transpired at the 1633 Act." 15 Peter Heylyn published one account of it, as an appendix to his Examen Historicum. 16 He suggests that Prideaux opened the disputation, by asserting that Heylyn's theses did not represent the public doctrine of the Church.…”

“…15 Peter Heylyn published one account of it, as an appendix to his Examen Historicum. 16 He suggests that Prideaux opened the disputation, by asserting that Heylyn's theses did not represent the public doctrine of the Church. To justify this claim, Prideaux allegedly read out a version of Article XX, in which the phrase "The Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith" was missing.…”

Royal policy and local initiative in challenges to autonomy under James VI and I: church and state in Jersey and Guernsey

“…91 From a contrary perspective, the islands were subject to the creation of a powerful narrative by Peter Heylyn, who spent time there in 1629 as chaplain to the governor, the earl of Danby, at a formative stage in Heylyn's development as one of the most influential anti-Calvinist polemicists of the following decades. 92 Yet the initiatives of the 1610s which de la Place and de la Marche experienced and of which Heylyn provided a compelling account did not have the coherence which they might have appeared to possess in retrospect. 93 We may have come in the past couple of decades to appreciate the degree to which the conflicts of the period were the stuff of propaganda and the media of a newly powerful public sphere.…”