surrounding the various prolegomena and canon of dogmatics and
polity. His argument begins by asserting that truth has never enjoyed
wide acclaim, indeed has itself been an émigré and despised by those who
claim a love of verity and true religion; ironically truth sounds very much
like Jewel and many of the other English Protestants. Jewel’s language fit
with other well known descriptions, if not of truth, than still of the
Church. Petrarch at the beginning of his Liber sine nominedescribes the
Church as a ship with no one at the helm. Erasmus in his Naufraugium
gives a similar picture to Petrarch’s, only by now the ship is breaking
apart. Regardless, for Jewel the Roman Church was bereft of sure
guidance, in that truth was treated as a beggar and a vagabond, without
which the ship would surely wreck.^135
The work in brief is divided into six sections, presenting little by way
of formal argumentation for the Protestant Settlement. The whole first
section is largely taken with delineating traditionalist accusations that
the Protestants were heretics, apostates whose new learning had carried
them to schism, revivers of old heresies, schismatics, deniers of the
authority of councils and fathers, novel and seditious. The only
substantive point Jewel makes in the first section concerns the ground of
the debate: ‘Wherefore, if we be heretics, and they (as they would fain be
called) be catholics, why do they not as they see the fathers, which were
catholic men, have always done? Why do they not convince and master
us by the divine scriptures?’^136 Jewel’s stated reliance on Scripture alone
becomes the one new, formal canon by which both regional synods and
princes were guided. Jewel defined the English faith in section two,
employing a somewhat amplified version of the Athanasian Formula and
a prolonged Protestant explication of the power of the Christian ministry
(which for Jewel resided in deacons and priests, bishops only existing for
the good order of the Church). The Apologia embraced only two
sacraments, with its Eucharistic doctrine relying heavily on Martyr and
Zurich that the Eucharist signified and sealed grace, and that it held
before the eyes of the faithful the mysteries of salvation.^137
THE STRUGGLE FOR THE ELIZABETHAN CHURCH 89
(^135) The opening words of the Apologiaread, ‘It hath been an old complaint, even from
the first time of the patriarchs and prophets, and confirmed by the writings and testimonies
of every age, that the truth wandereth here and there as a stranger in the world, and doth
readily find enemies and slanderers amongst those that know her not’. Works, III, p. 54.
(^136) Ibid., III, p. 58.
(^137) Jewel,Works, III, p. 63. That Jewel embraced Martyr’s views on the Eucharist, views
strongly akin to Bullinger’s, and not those of Bucer or Calvin, is betrayed by his use of
certain words and phrases such as ‘by faith, by understanding and by (the) spirit’, III,
p. 64 {the definite article is an addition of Lady Anne Bacon’s and is not contained in
Jewel’s subsequent Defense of the Apology}. For Martyr’s Eucharistic doctrine see Joseph
McClelland, Joseph C. McLelland, The Visible Words of God: An Exposition of the
Sacramental Theology of Peter Martyr: A.D. 1500–1562(Edinburgh, 1957). For Calvin