obliterated – at least to his own mind – unity as a prerequisite of true
religion, he then proceeds to defend the divisions that do exist among the
Protestants:
And as for those persons, whom they upon spite call Zuinglians and
Lutherians, in very deed they of both sides be Christians, good
friends, and brethren. They vary not betwixt themselves upon the
principles and foundations of our religion, nor as touching God, nor
Christ, nor the Holy Ghost, nor of the means to justification, nor yet
everlasting life, but upon one only question, which is neither weighty
nor great; neither mistrust we, or make doubt at al, but they will
shortly be agreed.^143Jewel has essentially moved from decrying unity as necessary to true
religion, to saying that regardless Protestants possess it, that the only
division among them is one touching a minor point, for in reality
Protestants were charitably living in the greatest of unity. Jewel’s
persistent refrain that unity and charity existed among Protestants as a
whole, that it was also a reality in England, centered on his belief that
what they affirmed univocally was a core of faith, his de re vero ipsa.
The palpable flaws in Jewel’s assertions, both respecting his
theological logic and his opaque appraisal of Protestant unanimity, begs
a question: why does Jewel slight unity as a mark of the Church and then
proffer this ironic apparition of Protestant charity with respect to their
various understandings of the sacrament of communion? Jewel had been
in Strasbourg when Martyr was forced to leave because of his
disagreement with the city council on this matter (they had now
affirmed, in light of the Peace of Augsburg, a Lutheran understanding of
the Eucharist). He also knew that any hope of a rapprochement between
England and the German princes depended on a trivializing of English
ties with Martyr.^144 He himself was violently opposed to any Lutheran
Eucharistic notions – he always termed them by the phrase ubiquitarians
- being given a theological place in England, much less allowing them the
epithet of friend: ‘That volatile ubiquitarian doctrine is unable in anyway
to establish itself among us, though not for lacking initiative by those
who had this matter greatly to heart.’^145 In one sense, it is a question that
pertains to Jewel’s audience: to whom was he making his appeal?
Though the Apologiawas published initially in Latin, thus connoting an
educated audience, it was quickly followed by two translations into
English. That Jewel addressed a theological audience – the various
92 JOHN JEWEL AND THE ENGLISH NATIONAL CHURCH
(^143) Jewel,Apologia, Works, III, pp. 69–70.
(^144) Cf. Jewel’s letter to Peter Martyr 28 April 1559, in Works, IV, pp. 1206–9.
(^145) ‘Volatica illa doctrina ubiquitaria non potest apud nos consistere ullo modo: etsi non
deerant ab initio, quibus ea res magnopere curae fuerit.’ Jewel’s letter to Martyr, 6 Nov.
1560,Works, IV, p. 1240.
http://www.ebook3000.com