Читать книгу Elizabethan Controversialists - Peter Milward - Страница 5

In his magisterial survey, English Literature in the Seventeenth Century excluding Drama (Oxford, 1954), C.S.Lewis commends John Jewel for his important Apologia Ecclesiae Anglicanae, which was translated into English by Lady Anne Bacon, but not for his vernacular writings. Among the latter he even blames Jewel for the “jungle of controversies to which he rashly committed himself by his so-called Challenge Sermon in 1559”. On this point, however, different men may have different opinions. As for myself, I find the Sermon strangely moving in its eloquence and more even tempered than the Apologia, which descends to an unbecomingly low level of muck-raking and abuse in order to justify the Anglican position. In any case, the “two notable books” which their contemporary John Garbrand singled out for special praise in his 1583 edition of Jewel’s Sermons were neither the Sermon nor the Apology but the lengthy Reply to Harding’s Answer and the even lengthier Defence of the Apology. In Garbrand’s opinion, these were the “two double cannons prepared for the battery of error and superstition” and Jewel’s chief claim to the admiration and gratitude of posterity.

After the proceedings of Elizabeth’s first Parliament and the abortive conference held between the Catholics and the Protestants at Westminster, Jewel’s Sermon, which he first delivered at Paul’s Cross on November 26, 1559, while as yet bishop-elect of Salisbury, may be regarded as the first significant ecclesiastical event of the new reign. Taking as his text the words of St.Paul in I Corinthians xi, “Ego accepi a Domino”, he sharply criticizes the mediaeval Church “in this last age of the world” for its undue emphasis on the robes, ceremonies and sacrifices of Aaron, as opposed to “the institution and ordinance of Christ”. But now, he declares, “it hath pleased almighty God of his great mercy in these our days to remove away all such deformities, and to restore again the same holy mysteries to the first original”. Darkness had, in his opinion, descended upon the whole Church some six centuries after its foundation by Christ, but in these days, thanks to Martin Luther, “the glorious light of the Gospel of Christ is now mightily spread abroad”.

Such is the context in which he proceeds to make his famous challenge, in the form of a solemn promise that “if any learned man of all our adversaries, or if all the learned men that be alive, be able to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholic doctor, or out of any old General Council, or out of the holy Scriptures of God, and any one example of the primitive Church”, in support of any such point of doctrine or discipline as he goes on to enumerate, then he will “give over and subscribe unto him”. His enumeration includes such matters as the practice of private Mass, communion under one kind, the teaching of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the ceremony of elevating the host at Mass, the doctrine of transubstantiation, the worship of images, and the prohibition of laymen to read the Bible. All these things Jewel is sure, from his study of Church history and the Fathers under Peter Martyr at Oxford, were introduced for the first time in the mediaeval Church. Thus he isn’t merely criticizing that Church for abuses which might have crept in through human weakness and the lapse of time, in spite of official teaching. He is directing his criticism against the official teaching itself, for having allowed and even enforced these additions to the words of Christ for which (he claimed) the Catholics have “not one doctor, not one allowed example of the primitive Church to make for them”. In this criticism he is, moreover, taking his stand not only, like the majority of his fellow Protestants, on the plain words of the Gospel, but also on the writings of the Fathers and the practice of the Church in the first six centuries.

These challenging words of his were not allowed to remain unanswered for long, though the Catholics were labouring under certain practical difficulties in the way of response. Their bishops were all in prison, or at least under house arrest, and so, too, were many of their theologians who had remained in England, while others who had made their way to the Low Countries had no immediate means at their disposal to publish any answer. Nor for his part did Jewel himself give them any practical encouragement to take up his challenge. He was even accused by his former assistant, William Reynolds, of having had every corner of the realm searched for the Catholic books, of having had them publicly burnt at Paul’s Cross, of having procured a proclamation of the Queen against them, of having had old men and theologians imprisoned for possessing them. Still, it was one of those theologians who had remained behind, bound though he was “under recognizance” to refrain from theological disputation, who first ventured to respond to Jewel. This was Dr.Henry Cole, formerly Dean of St.Paul’s under Queen Mary, and one of the leaders of the Catholic party at the aborted conference held at Westminster.

Unable to state his case openly for fear of incurring the penalty of the law, Cole now presents his objections under the form of questions. “I come,” he pleads, “not to dispute but to learn.” What he particularly wishes to learn from Jewel is why the latter has offered disputation on these minor points rather than “in the chief matters that lie in question betwixt the Church of Rome and the Protestants”. In many such matters, he admits, “a General Council might take order that they should be practised as ye would have it”. He goes on to make a clear statement of his position as a Catholic in contrast to that of Jewel as a Protestant, “We continue in the faith we professed sith our baptism, ye pretend a change in the same. We have with us an apostolical Church, ye have none yet approved. We make no innovation… all new attempts are to be suspected. We are in possession, ye come to put us from it.”

In his replies to Cole’s private letters, which he published when the correspondence eventually petered out, Jewel rebuked his critic for having trespassed beyond his recognizance, but he still deigned to give him an answer. In the other’s letters he has, he declares, found “many words to little purpose”. In particular, he rejects Cole’s claim of Catholic antiquity and criticism of Protestant innovation, according to the main line of his Challenge Sermon. “He that will make any innovation, say you, must give a reason of his doings?” he questions. Then, turning to the attack, he notes with sarcasm, “O master doctor, this reason fighteth most against yourself, for you have misliked and put away the most part of the order of the primitive Church, and yet never gave any good reason of your doings.” As for Cole’s petition that the two parties might henceforth leave each other in peace, Jewel refuses to allow even this, retorting with heavy irony, in an argumentum ad hominem to be found recurring in the mouths of many Protestant apologists in the new reign, “If you of your part would have done so when time was, many a godly man had now been alive”. And so many a godly Catholic was sent to Tyburn under Queen Elizabeth, to make due atonement for many a godly Protestant who had been sent to Smithfield under Queen Mary.

From this little controversy between Cole and Jewel, as from the head waters of a great river, Jewel went on to compose his important work in justification of the newly established Anglican Church, first in the Latin of his Apologia Ecclesiae Anglicanae, as it was primarily meant to be read by men of learning across the sea, and then translated (twice) into English. Here he was not so much attacking the already defeated Catholic party in England as defending the Anglican cause before a wider, European audience. In particular, he recognized the need of justifying his party against the common accusation that they had departed from the one Church of Christ and thereby effected a schism in the unity of Christendom. Returning to the main lines of his Sermon, “We have not,” he claims, “without just cause left these men, but rather have returned to the Apostles and old Catholic Fathers.” “Before,” he asserts, “all the bishops of Rome’s sayings were allowed for Gospel, and all religion did depend only upon their authority.” But now, he continues, thanks to the invention of printing and Luther’s initiative in making use of it, “the holy Scripture is abroad, the writings of the apostles and prophets are in print, whereby all truth and Catholic doctrine may be proved”, and the dreams, inventions and traditions of the so-called Catholics disproved.

From these general words of defence Jewel proceeds to a detailed attack on the Church of Rome, for having accepted private Mass and communion under one kind, for having shamelessly indulged in the buying and selling of Masses, for having turned to the worship of mere bread under the newly invented name of “transubstantiation”, for having sought to apply the merits of Christ’s death on the cross at Mass, for having abused the doctrine of Purgatory to bring in a plentiful harvest for Mass-mongers, for having devised superfluous ceremonies without number, for having encumbered men’s consciences with the practice of confession, for having multiplied mediators between God and men in the persons of Mary and the saints, for having imposed prayers in a tongue unknown to the majority of the faithful. All these customs and traditions, brought in by the Popes, are (in Jewel’s opinion) mere human inventions not just added but opposed to the clear teaching of the Gospel, which has now at last been revealed. “Let them,” he again challenges his adversaries, “make a proof, let them give the Gospel free passage, let the truth of Jesus Christ give his clear light and stretch forth his bright beams into all parts, and then shall they forthwith see how all these shadows will vanish and pass away at the light of the Gospel, even as the thick mist of the night consumeth at the sight of the sun.” Returning, therefore, to the main point of his Apology, he concludes, “As touching that we have now done, to depart from that Church whose errors were proved and made manifest to the world… We have done nothing herein against the doctrine either of Christ or of his apostles.”

It was after his publication of these two relatively short writings that Jewel went on to engage in his celebrated controversy with the Catholic theologian, Thomas Harding, in defence of both works. Harding was by no means unknown to him, from their days together at Oxford. They had even for a time been united in acceptance of the new ideas of Luther. But Harding had been won back to the old faith in the reign of Queen Mary, and now under Queen Elizabeth he became his former friend’s leading opponent from the comparative safety of Louvain.

In the first place, Jewel found himself confronted with Harding’s impressive Answer to his challenge, which was at last published in 1564, though manuscript versions were already in circulation. This brought great delight to the Catholics, who now began to triumph over Jewel, prompting misgivings even in his fellow Protestants that their champion had gone too far in conceding the first six centuries as material for his challenge. Jewel, however, refused to shift from his chosen ground. Instead, he took a triple line not so much of defence as of attack. First, he warns his readers against the admitted beauty of Harding’s eloquence and his “majesty of words”, while reminding them of St.Paul’s warning against the devil who “can show himself as an angel of light”. Secondly, he presents a detailed list of Harding’s terms of abuse, his “glikes, nips and scoffs”, despite his profession to refrain from such language. Then, after parading them before his readers, Jewel addresses his adversary, “These words be yours, M.Harding, not only for that they be uttered by you, but also for that they pertain directly and properly unto yourself.” Thirdly, he goes on to the more substantial part of his task, criticizing the authorities alleged by Harding as “full of fog and false ground”, and consisting of nothing but “surmises, guesses, conjectures and likelihoods”. He even mocks his adversary with the demand, “Did you imagine, M.Harding, that your book should pass only among children, or that it should never be examined or come to trial?”

Scarcely had he completed this reply to Harding’s Answer, than Jewel found himself confronted with the other’s even more impressive Confutation of his Apology. What specially annoyed him was the discovery that his adversary had dedicated his book to the Queen herself. So while doing the same at the inception of his own Defence, he reminds the Queen of her position as “the only nurse and mother of the Church of God within these your Majesty’s most noble dominions”. Once again he warns his readers that “Satan transformeth himself into an angel of light”, and that “heretics have evermore appareled themselves with the name of the Church”. Once again, too, he presents a list of “the principal flowers of M.Harding’s honest speech”. And once again, with more sustained rhetoric, he maintains against the Church of Rome that “you have mingled your lead with the Lord’s gold, and have filled the Lord’s harvest full of your darnel, that you have broken God’s manifest commandments, to uphold and maintain your own traditions, that you have dammed up the springs of the water of life and have broken up puddles of your own, such as be able to hold no water”. At the same time, so far from having forsaken the Catholic Church, he insists that the Protestants have returned to that Church, “and have forsaken you because you have manifestly forsaken the ways of God”.

There, so far as Jewel was concerned, the controversy came to an end. He left his friend, Edward Dering, to publish a reply to Harding’s Rejoinder in 1568, while in reply to Harding’s Detection he merely issued an enlarged edition of his Defence in 1570. He had had enough of his controversial labours, and in 1571 he breathed his last, leaving the Church to which he belonged not only his literary labours but also a literary successor in the person of his former pupil Richard Hooker. In memory of Jewel the latter uttered words that may well stand as his epitaph, that he was “the worthiest divine that Christendom has bred for some hundreds of years”, no doubt, in Hooker’s intention, since the sixth century.

Bibliographical Note

1 The copy of a Sermon pronounced by the Bishop of Salisbury at Paul’s Cross the second Sunday before Easter in the year of Our Lord 1560, whereupon D.Cole first sought occasion to encounter, shortly set forth as near as the author could call it to remembrance, without any alteration or addition. 1560 (RC 1)

2 The True Copies of the Letters between the reverend father in God John Bishop of Sarum and D.Cole, upon occasion of a Sermon that the said Bishop preached before the Queen’s Majesty and her most honourable Council. 1560 (RC 2)

3 Apologia Ecclesiae Anglicanae. 1562 (RC 11)

4 An Apology, or Answer in Defence of the Church of England, concerning the State of Religion used in the same. Newly set forth in Latin, and now translated into English. 1562 (also translation by Anne Bacon, 1564) (RC 12)

5 A Reply unto M.Harding’s Answer, by perusing whereof the discreet and diligent reader may easily see the weak and unstable grounds of the Roman Religion, which of late hath been accounted Catholic. By John Jewel Bishop of Salisbury. 1565 (RC 7)

6 A Defence of the Apology of the Church of England, containing an Answer to a certain book lately set forth by M.Harding and entitled, A Confutation of etc. By John Jewel Bishop of Salisbury. 1567 (RC 15)

7 A Defence of the Apology of the Church of England… Wherein there is also newly added an Answer unto another like book written by the said M.Harding, entitled, A Detection of sundry foul errors etc. By John Bishop of Salisbury. 1570 (RC 17)

8 A Sparing Restraint of many lavish untruths, which M.Doctor doth challenge in the first article of my Lord of Salisbury’s Reply. By Edward Dering Student in Divinity. 1568 (RC 10)