recourse to an abiding magisterium. Southgate’s three assertions
combine to give us a moderate Anglican with patristic sensibilities who
was also a pragmatic Erastian, not carried away by the more extreme
elements of English Protestant piety.
Southgate was just getting his work published by the time that John
Booty was finishing his doctoral dissertation at Princeton University.
Consequently, Booty had access to Southgate’s doctoral dissertation,
though he did not have recourse to his book. Regardless, Booty made
only scant use of Southgate since his aim was more theoretical and
theological and less historical and heuristic. Booty’s work, having as its
central theme Jewel’s career as a polemicist, does necessarily treat
Southgate’s chief focus of doctrinal authority; but it concerns itself with
several other issues besides: the Challenge Sermon, the Apologia, Jewel’s
scholarship, Puritanism and obedience, Jewel on the Eucharist, Jewel’s
personal clash with Thomas Harding and the question of the Church of
England’s polity. Unlike Southgate’s Jewel, so concerned about some
supposedvia media, with Geneva on one end and Rome on the other,
with room in England for all those moderates of both camps who
wanted to live happily within her, Booty’s Jewel defended a commonality
of religion maintained by returning exiles; those who had been
confederate on the continent were now to be so back in England. Booty
does not identify these with some Puritan party, as had Sir J.E. Neale or
Christina Garrett; they were out for purity of religion, but not in that
strident sense which would identify them with the Knoxians of
Frankfurt.^32 To Southgate, Jewel had assumed his episcopal duties with
his theological positions already intact; he was a moderate. For Booty on
the other hand, Jewel progressed to his later, moderate understanding of
matters, and this is especially true in regard to the vestarian controversy.
To Booty, Jewel had returned to England from Zurich full of fervor, only
to realize that England’s tenuous political situation was threatened not
only by the violence of those from outside the fold, but also by the
carping of the Puritans. Seeing the Puritans as disorderly, putting too
much emphasis on indifferent things, Jewel, with a verve equal to that
which possessed him in his defense of England from the perils presented
by the traditionalists, turned to defend the Elizabethan Settlement from
those who would disturb it from within.^33 The external Catholic threats
to the formal English Settlement, of course, for Jewel were chronic: Jewel
published his A View of a Seditious Bullin 1570, just a year before his
THE IDENTITY OF THE ENGLISH NATIONAL CHURCH 235
(^32) Booty, Jewel as Apologist, pp. 19–21. Booty at least at the time of his writing, did
hold to Neale’s and Garrett’s thesis, that Elizabeth’s hand was forced by the returning
exiles. Cf. Booty, pp. 1–5.
(^33) Booty, Jewel as Apologist, Chapter IV, ‘Jewel, Puritanism, and Obedience to the
Queen’, pp. 83–103. See especially, pp. 92–95.