书籍之争:复辟时期的正版和公祷书

D. Bagchi
{"title":"书籍之争:复辟时期的正版和公祷书","authors":"D. Bagchi","doi":"10.7228/MANCHESTER/9780719089688.003.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the theme of disruption and continuity in English religious life at the Restoration with reference to the differing fortunes of those twin pillars of the Anglican establishment, the Authorized Version of the Bible and the Book of Common Prayer. The AV had commanded broad acceptance under the Commonwealth and its re-authorization in 1660 was unproblematic. The BCP, by contrast, had long been reviled by hotter Protestants for its conservatism, especially in Archbishop William Laud’s 1637 version which had helped trigger civil war. Its re-introduction in 1662 occasioned the resignation of one-fifth of the clergy. This chapter challenges the characterization of the 1662 Prayer Book (in contrast with the AV) as solely divisive, however. It argues that universal acceptance of the book was impossible under the circumstances but that, by rejecting the most offensive Laudian innovations, Convocation successfully minimized the inevitable backlash and avoided any larger-scale secession or civil unrest.","PeriodicalId":106168,"journal":{"name":"From Republic to Restoration","volume":"121 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The battle of the books: the Authorized Version and the Book of Common Prayer at the Restoration\",\"authors\":\"D. Bagchi\",\"doi\":\"10.7228/MANCHESTER/9780719089688.003.0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter examines the theme of disruption and continuity in English religious life at the Restoration with reference to the differing fortunes of those twin pillars of the Anglican establishment, the Authorized Version of the Bible and the Book of Common Prayer. The AV had commanded broad acceptance under the Commonwealth and its re-authorization in 1660 was unproblematic. The BCP, by contrast, had long been reviled by hotter Protestants for its conservatism, especially in Archbishop William Laud’s 1637 version which had helped trigger civil war. Its re-introduction in 1662 occasioned the resignation of one-fifth of the clergy. This chapter challenges the characterization of the 1662 Prayer Book (in contrast with the AV) as solely divisive, however. It argues that universal acceptance of the book was impossible under the circumstances but that, by rejecting the most offensive Laudian innovations, Convocation successfully minimized the inevitable backlash and avoided any larger-scale secession or civil unrest.\",\"PeriodicalId\":106168,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"From Republic to Restoration\",\"volume\":\"121 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"From Republic to Restoration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7228/MANCHESTER/9780719089688.003.0007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"From Republic to Restoration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7228/MANCHESTER/9780719089688.003.0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章考察了英国宗教生活在复辟时期的中断和连续性的主题,并参考了圣公会两大支柱的不同命运,即《圣经授权版》和《公祷书》。投票制在英联邦时期得到了广泛的接受,1660年的重新授权是没有问题的。相比之下,英国共产党长期以来一直因其保守主义而受到狂热新教徒的抨击,尤其是在1637年威廉·劳德大主教的版本中,这一版本引发了内战。1662年它的重新引入导致五分之一的神职人员辞职。然而,本章挑战了1662年祈祷书(与AV相反)的特征,认为它只是分裂的。它认为,在这种情况下,普遍接受这本书是不可能的,但是,通过拒绝最令人反感的劳德创新,集会成功地将不可避免的反弹降到最低,避免了任何更大规模的分裂或内乱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The battle of the books: the Authorized Version and the Book of Common Prayer at the Restoration
This chapter examines the theme of disruption and continuity in English religious life at the Restoration with reference to the differing fortunes of those twin pillars of the Anglican establishment, the Authorized Version of the Bible and the Book of Common Prayer. The AV had commanded broad acceptance under the Commonwealth and its re-authorization in 1660 was unproblematic. The BCP, by contrast, had long been reviled by hotter Protestants for its conservatism, especially in Archbishop William Laud’s 1637 version which had helped trigger civil war. Its re-introduction in 1662 occasioned the resignation of one-fifth of the clergy. This chapter challenges the characterization of the 1662 Prayer Book (in contrast with the AV) as solely divisive, however. It argues that universal acceptance of the book was impossible under the circumstances but that, by rejecting the most offensive Laudian innovations, Convocation successfully minimized the inevitable backlash and avoided any larger-scale secession or civil unrest.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信