presence at conservative Oxford, where so few of either humanist or
Reformer resided, touched off bitter controversy. Two matters stand out
in particular: the Eucharistic debate of 28 May to 1 June 1549 and the
events leading up to it,^68 and the conspicuous presence in Oxford of
Martyr’s spouse.^69 Martyr had the backing of both crown and
convocation in both of these: with respect to the Eucharist, he explicated
little other than Cranmer’s doctrine; as to his wife, the marriages of
priests were not formally validated by parliament till early 1549, albeit,
convocation had earlier sanctioned clerical marriage in December of
1547.^70 Already under the influence and a known associate of Parkhurst,
Jewel now became not only closely associated with Martyr, but clearly
his leading protégé at Oxford. Written records of the time provide little
about their relationship; information must be garnered from Jewel’s
post-exilic correspondence, where he wrote only in the most adulatory
terms.^71 Though certainly not the focus of controversy that Martyr was,
nonetheless Jewel became a partaker of Martyr’s sins; doubtless
fraternization with so visible a Protestant led to his discomfiture upon
Edward VI’s death.
The evidence for Jewel’s life during the reign of Edward VI presents a
clear picture of what Jewel believed, and the direction in which his
thought was taking him even then. This can be gathered not only from
his associations with Peter Martyr, the nature and intentions of his
several benefactors, including the ensconced Parkhurst, but also from
those few written pieces surviving from this time. Under Henry VIII
explicitly Protestant notions were often quite brutally discouraged by the
king’s conservative religious enactments. Even Cranmer, whom Henry
admittedly knew was a heretic, kept his mouth shut, and was only
preserved in his post by the king’s good pleasure. Dickens relates how
several Canterbury canons, apparently acting under the prompting of
Stephen Gardiner, accused Cranmer of heresy. Henry, paying a visit to
the archbishop at Lambeth palace, promptly took him on his barge and
remarked ‘Ah, my chaplain, I have news for you. I know who is the
JEWEL TILL 1558 23
(^68) For the content and theology of the disputation, see Joseph McLelland, The Peter
Martyr Library, Vol 7, The Oxford Treatise and Disputation, Vol LVI, Sixteenth Century
Essays and Studies, trans. and ed. with introduction and notes by Joseph C. McLelland
(Kirksville, 2000), and also his Visible Words, pp. 17–24. For dissent from McLelland’s
and most other Martyr scholars, see M.A. Overell, ‘Peter Martyr in England 1547–1553:
An Alternative View’, Sixteenth Century Journal, XV.1 (1984), pp. 87–104.
(^69) McNair, ‘Martyr in England’, pp. 96–100, 104.
(^70) Cf.Documents Illustrative, p. 366.
(^71) There are several lacunae in the catalog of Jewel’s correspondence with Martyr, as
some letters that Jewel alludes to, even by number, no longer exist. All the correspondence
of 1561 is missing. See Works, IV, pp. 1196–256. By contrast, there are only ten extant
letters of those Jewel wrote Bullinger over almost 13 years.