vestments had not affected the peace or doctrine of the Church of
England; and though on matters of adiaphora some in the Church
of England dissented from the Settlement, concerning the true material
substance of religion, de re vero ipsa, the English stood united.^100 Jewel’s
apologetic demeanor ostensibly faced one direction: Rome. But
Collinson notwithstanding,^101 Jewel’s Apologyis hardly bankrupt of the
means necessary for a defense of the Settlement from those who thought
it wanting. Having been at Frankfurt during the conflict between Knox
and Cox, it would be remiss to think that Jewel’s work carried with it no
answer to the Knoxians.
Given Jewel’s part in the troubles at Frankfurt and his circle of
associations which included such as Whittingham, Humphrey and
Sampson, it may be wondered why he seemingly defined the terms of his
apology only in view of Rome. That some of his own country would
fault 1559 could only be taken as a given, especially as those whom
Jewel had offended at Frankfurt had not even been satisfied with the
seemingly more rigorous Reforms and order of 1552. John Hooper had
already raised the matter of vestments within the Edwardian Church.
But this formal oversight on Jewel’s part was not some charitable wreath
for those who did not wish to worship ‘as they did in England’. Indeed,
silence on this point was crucial within the context of his polemical
work. The basic accusations the Catholics hurled against the Protestants
cited them not only for their schism from the one true Church, but also
that they stood estranged even from one another, equivocal on matters
pertaining to their doctrine, ceremony and order. It would score Jewel
few polemical points to assert the purity and unity of the English Church
while simultaneously acknowledging that fellow Protestants, members of
his own communion, saw the English Church as but half reformed. Thus
the Church of England Jewel presented to the public stood united, not
only in doctrine, but behind its monarch. The silence, far from some
concession to Puritan notions, instead served the debate against Rome.
In Jewel’s public pronouncements – sermons, books, tracts, injunctions,
letters with others in the English Church – he never questioned the
Elizabethan Settlement, or the right and duty of the prince to defend and
reform the Church when necessary. Only within the happy confines of
his personal epistles did Jewel cross this boundary, though there was one
exceptional incident, that of the crucifix in Elizabeth’s royal chapel.
Jewel was prepared to jeopardize his episcopal office before
consenting to this idolatry, for him perhaps an evil portent of things to
come: ‘That ill-omened, miscreant little silver cross, still remains in the
184 JOHN JEWEL AND THE ENGLISH NATIONAL CHURCH
(^100) Booty, Jewel as Apologist, Appendix, Epistola, p. 218.
(^101) Collinson,Elizabethan Puritan Movement, p. 61.
http://www.ebook3000.com