UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The descent into Hell : an Elizabethan controversy Stewart, Patricia Weightman 1984

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1984_A8 S74.pdf [ 6.51MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0096329.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0096329-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0096329-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0096329-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0096329-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0096329-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0096329-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0096329-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0096329.ris

Full Text

THE DESCENT INTO HELL: AN ELIZABETHAN CONTROVERSY By PATRICIA WEIGHTMAN STEWART M.A., Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y , 1980 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department o f H i s t o r y We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the^ r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY'OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1984 ® P a t r i c i a Weightman S t e w a r t , 1984 '6 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. I t i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of #/s7~rt/ty  The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 DE-6 (3/81) ABSTRACT The P r o t e s t a n t s c h i s m w i t h Rome i n v o l v e d a r e j e c t i o n o f C a t h o l i c b e l i e f s about the n a t u r e o f h e l l . As a r e s u l t i t was i m p e r a t i v e t h a t P r o t e s t a n t s r e i n t e r p r e t ) ? a c e n t r a l a r t i c l e o f C h r i s t i a n b e l i e f . T h i s a r t i c l e was C h r i s t ' s d e scent i n t o h e l l w hich had l o n g been a c c e p t e d i n the A p o s t l e s ' Creed as h a v i n g f o l l o w e d the d e a t h and b u r i a l o f C h r i s t . Debate about the meaning and purpose o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t grew i n E n g l a n d d u r i n g the r e i g n o f Queen E l i z a b e t h I . The P r o t e s t a n t emphasis on the Word as the a l l i m p o r t a n t f o u n d a t i o n o f f a i t h meant t h a t the S c r i p t u r e s and the Church F a t h e r s were c o n s u l t e d t o e s t a b l i s h the meaning o f the a r t i c l e . O r i g i n a l Greek and Hebrew t e x t s o f the S c r i p t u r e s were a n a l y s e d . C a l v i n had propounded a r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e w h i c h some Englishmen a c c e p t e d . O t h e r s employed " r e a s o n " t o "prove" the v a l i d i t y o f one i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o r a n o t h e r . These d i f f e r e n t methods employed to a s c e r t a i n the t r u e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e p r oduced w i d e l y d i v e r g e n t r e s u l t s . The a u t h o r i t i e s o f the Church o f England were f a c e d w i t h disagreement and d i s s e n t i o n w h i c h they were unable t o subdue. As a r e s u l t , by 1607 the Church was r e t r e a t i n g from m a i n t a i n i n g a u t h o r i t y o v er the c o n t e n t o f b e l i e f i n t h i s a r t i c l e . The t h e o l o g i c a l i n c l i n a t i o n o f Church a u t h o r i t i e s on t h i s i s s u e c o n t r a d i c t s the views which some modern h i s t o r i a n s h o l d about the b e l i e f s and m o t i v a t i o n s o f these men. The debate a l s o undermines the i m p r e s s i o n sometimes g i v e n o f a s o l i d , t h e o l o g i c a l l y s t a b l e , " C a l v i n i s t " Church i n E ngland. - i v -TABLE OF CONTENTS A b s t r a c t i i - i i i L i s t o f T a b l e s v Acknowledgement v i I THE CONTROVERSIALISTS: A GROWING PROBLEM 1 I I CHRIST'S DESCENT INTO HELL: A THEOLOGICAL PROBLEM . .' 24 ( i ) The C o n t i n e n t a l Background 24 ( i i ) From P r o t e s t a n t v e r s u s C a t h o l i c t o P r o t e s t a n t v e r s u s P r o t e s t a n t 37 ( i i i ) The T h r e a t o f "Reason" 57 I I I AUTHORITY CURTAILED: AN INSOLUBLE PROBLEM 82 NOTES 96 BIBLIOGRAPHY 108 - V -LIST OF TABLES TABLE I A Ta b l e o f T r a c t s P u b l i s h e d on C h r i s t ' s Descent i n t o H e l l 10 - v i -ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The modern d i s t i n c t i o n between r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f and i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y has tended t o i n h i b i t the e x p l o r a t i o n o f t he l a t t e r i n Tudor England. F o r the fundamental i n s i g h t t h a t such a d i s t i n c t i o n i s unwarranted i n t h i s p e r i o d I am d e e p l y i n d e b t e d t o my s u p e r v i s o r , P r o f . M. T o l m i e . I n a d d i t i o n , I have b e n e f i t e d from and am most g r a t e f u l f o r a l l o f h i s a d v i c e and a s s i s t a n c e t h r o u g h o u t the y e a r . I a p p r e c i a t e the h e l p and guidance o f o t h e r members o f the F a c u l t y and S t a f f of the Department o f H i s t o r y . A l s o , I would l i k e t o thank my husband whose c o n s t a n t s u p p o r t and u n d e r s t a n d i n g have been much needed and g r e a t l y a p p r e c i a t e d . CHAPTER ONE THE CONTROVERSIALISTS: A GROWING PROBLEM C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l was an a r t i c l e o f C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e i n m i d - s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y England. The a r t i c l e was i n c l u d e d i n the A p o s t l e s ' Creed as p r e s c r i b e d by the Edwardian P r a y e r Book o f 1552 and by the E l i z a b e t h a n P r a y e r Book o f 1559: "Jesus C h r i s t ... s u f f e r e d under Ponce P i l a t e , was c r u c i f i e d , dead and b u r i e d , He descended i n t o h e l l . " 1 On c e r t a i n f e a s t days the Quicunque V u l t , o r A t h a n a s i a n Creed, was p r e s c r i b e d f o r Evensong; t h i s a l s o made r e f e r e n c e t o C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l : " C h r i s t ... s u f f e r e d f o r our s a l v a t i o n : descended i n t o h e l l , r o s e a g a i n the t h i r d day from 2 the dead." Thus, the a c c e p t e d c r e e d s e s t a b l i s h e d C h r i s t ' s d escent i n t o h e l l as an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e . The Forty-Two A r t i c l e s o f 1552 p r o v i d e d the o f f i c i a l Edwardian i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t . The t h i r d a r t i c l e d e c l a r e d t h a t : As C h r i s t d i e d and was b u r i e d f o r us: so a l s o i t i s t o be b e l e v e d , t h a t he went downe i n t o H e l l . F o r the b o d i e l a i e i n the s e p u l c h r e , u n t i l l the r e s u r r e c t i o n : but h i s Ghoste d e p a r t i n g from him, was w i t h the Ghostes t h a t were i n p r i s o n o r i n H e l l e , and d i d d e preache t o the same, as the p l a c e o f S t . P e t e r dooeth t e s t i f i e . 3 The Forty-Two A r t i c l e s c a r r i e d a l l the weight and a u t h o r i t y o f the Edwardian Church, h a v i n g been "agreed on by the Bi s h o p p e s , and o t h e r l e a r n e d menne i n the Synode a t London, ... f o r the a v o i d i n g o f c o n t r o v e r s i e i n o p i n i o n s , and the e s t a b l i s h e m e n t o f a g o d l i e concorde i n c e r t e i n e m a t i e r s o f R e l i g i o n . " The E l i z a b e t h a n Church produced a c o r r e s p o n d i n g document, the T h i r t y - N i n e A r t i c l e s o f 1563, which were a l s o i n t e n d e d " f o r the auoydyng o f the d i v e r s i t i e s o f o p i n i o n s , 5 and f o r the s t a b l i s h y n g o f c o n s e n t , touchyng t r u e r e l i g i o n . " A g a i n , the t h i r d a r t i c l e d e a l t w i t h C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l but the coverage was e x t r e m e l y c r y p t i c : "As C h r i s t e dyed and was bury e d f o r v s : so a l s o i t i s t o be b e l e u e d t h a t he went downe i n t o h e l l . " The 1552 A r t i c l e s had p r o v i d e d an e x p l a n a t i o n o f how and why C h r i s t descended i n t o h e l l ; t he 1563 A r t i c l e s p r o v i d e d none. T h i s o m i s s i o n was t o have s e r i o u s i m p l i c a t i o n s . The absence o f an a u t h o r i t a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l p r e s e n t e d the Church o f E n g l a n d w i t h s u b s t a n t i a l problems i n m a i n t a i n i n g a u t h o r i t y o v e r the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h i s a r t i c l e . The o m i s s i o n added f u e l t o c o n t r o v e r s y t o come: however, i t was i t s e l f t he r e s u l t o f c o n t r o v e r s y which a l r e a d y s u r r o u n d e d the a r t i c l e by 1563. Over a decade b e f o r e , i n 1552, C h r i s t o p h e r C a r l i l e , a member o f C l a r e H a l l , Cambridge, and a Hebrew s c h o l a r , had gone so f a r as t o deny t h a t C h r i s t had 7 descended i n t o h e l l i n e i t h e r body o r s o u l . He had d e n i e d C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t a t h i s commencement f o r B a c h e l o r o f D i v i n i t y a t Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y ; t h i s was a p u b l i c d i s p u t a t i o n , a t t e n d e d and judged by eminent and i n f l u e n t i a l men. I n C a r l i l e ' s c a s e , some o f those i n v o l v e d were Dr. P e r n e , the V i c e -C h a n c e l l o r o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y ; B i s h o p Ghest o f S a l i s b u r y ; Dr. Younge, t h e master o f Pembroke H a l l ( a p p o i n t e d V i c e - C h a n c e l l o r - 3 -o f the U n i v e r s i t y i n 1553 and R e g i u s P r o f e s s o r o f D i v i n i t y i n 1555); and perhaps most i m p o r t a n t o f a l l , S i r John Cheke, a renowned Greek s c h o l a r and prominent c o u r t i e r who was t o become b o t h a P r i v y C o u n c i l l o r and the S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e i n 1 5 5 3 . 8 These men made pronouncement a g a i n s t C a r l i l e ' s v i e w s , " d e t e r m i n i n g t h a t C h r i s t e s bodye l a y e i n the graue, but h i s q s o u l e wente i n t o h e l l , " but C a r l i l e ' s v iews had r e c e i v e d a p u b l i c a i r i n g , and p o s s i b l y a t l e a s t one i m p o r t a n t a d h e r e n t . I n the work w h i c h he p u b l i s h e d l a t e r about C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l , C a r l i l e c l a i m e d t h a t S i r John Cheke had been c o n v i n c e d by h i s arguments. Supposedly, S i r John was the a u t h o r o f some rhyming c o u p l e t s quoted by C a r l i l e : For wayghing a l h i s / C a r l i l e ' s 7 words of waght wh i c h d i d h i s cause p u r s u e , I S i r l o h n Cheeke do here aduouch h i s iudgement t o be t r u e : And f i r m e l y e w i t h him do c o n f e s s e and do b e l e u e i t w e l l , That C h r i s t i n body nor i n s o u l e descended i n t o h e l l . 1 ^ Cheke's a u t h o r s h i p o f t h i s v e r s e cannot be s u b s t a n t i a t e d , 1 1 and c l e a r l y C a r l i l e would have had a v e s t e d i n t e r e s t i n c l a i m i n g such an eminent c o n v e r t . However, i f the e v i d e n c e about c o n v e r t s i s d u b i o u s , the e v i d e n c e o f r e a c t i o n t o C a r l i l e ' s v iews i s n o t . I n 1562, R i c h a r d S m i t h , an O x f o r d d i v i n e who was i n e x i l e by t h i s time due t o h i s Roman C a t h o l i c p e r s u a s i o n , p u b l i s h e d a r e f u t a t i o n o f C a r l i l e ' s and C a l v i n ' s 12 i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f C h r i s t ' s d escent i n t o h e l l . C a r l i l e ' s v i e w s may have been denounced a t h i s commencement, but - 4 -o b v i o u s l y t h e y had not been f o r g o t t e n . N e i t h e r was C a r l i l e ' s commencement the o n l y e x p r e s s i o n o f d i s s e n t o v e r the a r t i c l e d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d . I n 1563, the Bis h o p o f E x e t e r s e n t a p e t i t i o n t o the C o n v o c a t i o n i n London ( t h e same C o n v o c a t i o n which was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r c o m p i l i n g the T h i r t y - N i n e A r t i c l e s ) p l e a d i n g f o r the s e t t l e m e n t o f c o n t r o -v e r s i a l i s s u e s i n o r d e r t o a c h i e v e u n i f o r m i t y o f d o c t r i n e . He wrote t h a t " t r a g e d i e s and d i s s e n s i o n s " were r e s u l t i n g from d i s a g r e e m e n t s about C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l : "There have been i n my d i o c e s e g r e a t i n v e c t i v e s between the p r e a c h e r s , one a g a i n s t the o t h e r , and a l s o p a r t a k e r s w i t h them," and t h e s e i n v e c t i v e s were c a u s i n g " d i s s e n s i o n s , c o n t e n t i o n s , and 13 s t r i f e s . " The B i s h o p o f E x e t e r had been c o n f r o n t e d w i t h an o u t b r e a k o f p o p u l a r u n r e s t o v e r the meaning o f t h i s a r t i c l e . He p l a c e d the problem f i r s t i n h i s p e t i t i o n o f i s s u e s r e q u i r i n g s e t t l e m e n t by the C o n v o c a t i o n . He i n f o r m e d the C o n v o c a t i o n members t h a t "your g r a v e , w i s e , and g o d l y l e a r n i n g might do w e l l and c h a r i t a b l y , t o s e t some c e r t a i n t y c o n c e r n i n g 14 t h i s d o c t r i n e . " The C o n v o c a t i o n c o m p l e t e l y f a i l e d t o do t h i s . I t s members r e a f f i r m e d t h a t C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l was a t r u e a r t i c l e o f f a i t h , b u t t h e y removed the i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e w h i c h had been p r o v i d e d i n 1552; and they p u t n o t h i n g a t a l l i n i t s p l a c e . I n The L i f e and A c t s o f John W h i t g i f t , John S t r y p e s u g g e s t e d a p o s s i b l e r e a s o n f o r the o m i s s i o n o f an i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e i n 1563: I t was t h e wisdom o f the famous Synod at London, 1562, /156-37 t o s e t down t h i s a r t i c l e b a r e l y , w i t h o u t the e x p l i c a t i o n t h a t went w i t h i t i n the a r t i c l e s , as i t s t o o d under K i n g Edward the V l t h , 1552; on purpose t o a v o i d , as i t seems, a l l c a v i l i n g and d i s p u t a t i o n , and t o a l l o w a l i b e r t y t o men's judgments and u n d e r s t a n d -i n g s i n such d i s p u t a b l e p o i n t s , w h e r e i n the essence o f f a i t h was not concerned. T h i s e x p l a n a t i o n says f a r more about the b e n e f i t s o f h i n d -s i g h t , and about the outcome o f the debate, than i t does about t h e s i t u a t i o n i n 1563. The Creed was "the essence o f f a i t h " and the B i s h o p o f E x e t e r ' s p e t i t i o n p r o v i d e s a v i v i d e x p r e s s -i o n o f the chaos a r i s i n g from disagreement about the meaning o f a p a r t o f i t . The o m i s s i o n o f an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l was due more t o the c o m p l e x i t y o f the arguments a l r e a d y s u r r o u n d i n g the a r t i c l e i n 1563, t h a n t o t h e d e s i r e t o p r o v i d e " l i b e r t y t o men's judgments and u n d e r s t a n d -i n g s , " as S t r y p e had s u g g e s t e d . The p r o d u c t i o n o f A l e x a n d e r N o w e l l ' s C a t e c h i s m b e a r s out t h i s argument. The C a t e c h i s m was t h e outcome o f a recommendation by the 1563 C o n v o c a t i o n t h a t " t h e r e s h o u l d be a u t h o r i z e d one p e r f e c t C a t e c h i s m f o r the 16 b r i n g i n g up o f t h e y o u t h i n g o d l i n e s s . " I t was not p u b l i s h e d u n t i l 1570 because o f i n t e n s e problems i n v o l v e d i n c l a r i f y i n g 17 d o c t r i n e d u r i n g t h i s u n s e t t l e d p e r i o d , but the i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t u l t i m a t e l y p r o v i d e d i n the C a t e c h i s m was s p e c i f i c and f u l l y s u p p o r t e d by s c r i p t u r a l r e f e r e n c e s . The 18 views o f N o w e l l , and so by i m p l i c a t i o n , o f the B i s h o p s , were c l e a r and uncompromising, and c e r t a i n l y not i n c l i n e d towards freedom o f judgement. The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n p r o v i d e d was t r a d i t i o n a l and a u t h o r i t a t i v e : C h r i s t descended t o v a n q u i s h - 6 -h e l l , and t o complete the r edemption of the g o d l y who had " 19 d i e d b e f o r e him. There was no s u g g e s t i o n t h a t the meaning o f the a r t i c l e was open t o i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . A n o t h e r i n c i d e n t r e i n f o r c e s the i m p r e s s i o n t h a t a u t h o r i t i e s were m a i n t a i n i n g a f i r m s t a n c e o v e r the i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e . The e p i s o d e concerned W i l l i a m Hughes, a m i n i s t e r i n L e i c e s t e r , whose sermons on C h r i s t ' s d escent i n t o h e l l caused p o p u l a r d i s t u r b a n c e s i n 1567. Hughes was e ducated 20 f i r s t a t O x f o r d ( a l t h o u g h some doubt e x i s t s o v e r t h i s ) and l a t e r a t Queen's C o l l e g e , Cambridge. He had m a t r i c u l a t e d i n 1554 and so was p r o b a b l y a contemporary o f C a r l i l e (who m a t r i c u l a t e d BD i n 1552 but l a t e r became DD, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t he remained a t Cambridge f o r s e v e r a l more y e a r s ) . Hence, Hughes's c o n c e r n w i t h C h r i s t ' s d escent i n t o h e l l c o u l d have o r i g i n a t e d i n h i s Cambridge days, perhaps w i t h C a r l i l e ' s commencement. But i t was not t i l l 1567 t h a t he r e ached the a t t e n t i o n o f the U n i v e r s i t y a u t h o r i t i e s f o r p r e a c h i n g a sermon a t L e i c e s t e r c o v e r i n g the "Decensu C h r i s t i ad i n f e r o s . " U n f o r t u n a t e l y , no account o f Hughes's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e i s e x t a n t . S t r y p e was u n a b l e t o shed any l i g h t on the m a t t e r : "whether he /Hughes7 e x p l a i n e d i t / C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l 7 the P o p i s h o r the C a l v i n i s t i c a l way, i t i s un-21 c e r t a i n . " The i n h a b i t a n t s o f L e i c e s t e r were s u f f i c i e n t l y o u t r a g e d by Hughes's sermon t o a p p e a l t o the u n i v e r s i t y a u t h o r i t i e s (Hughes was s t i l l s t u d y i n g t h e r e , m a t r i c u l a t i n g DD i n 1570). At f i r s t , the U n i v e r s i t y Senate r e a c t e d by - 7 -e s t a b l i s h i n g a committee of the "Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Stokes, Dr. W h i t g i f t , and some others" to decide the i s s u e , and the Senate denied Hughes the r i g h t of appeal to the E c c l e s i a s t -i c a l Commission, or any other f o r e i g n c o u r t , t h i s being a 22 course members o f t e n took "when censured by the Heads." When no d e c i s i o n was reached and no a c t i o n was taken by t h i s committee, the i n h a b i t a n t s of L e i c e s t e r appealed again, t h i s time to the E a r l of L e i c e s t e r , "complaining to him of t h i s p u b l i c Preacher of the U n i v e r s i t y , f o r preaching among them 23 c e r t a i n i n s i n c e r e and unsound d o c t r i n e s of r e l i g i o n . " C l e a r l y , Hughes's preaching had caused a severe p u b l i c r e a c t i o n . Rather than t a k i n g d i r e c t a c t i o n h i m s e l f , the E a r l r e f e r r e d the matter back to the U n i v e r s i t y , but w i t h the recommendation that perhaps i t should be d e a l t w i t h by " S i r W i l l i a m C e c i l the Chancellor /of Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y / , and the Archbishop of Canterbury /Parker7: which the U n i v e r s i t y 24 a c c o r d i n g l y y i e l d e d t o . " I t was from Parker that the d i s c i p l i n a r y measures came: r e s t r a i n t from preaching, or l o s s of o f f i c e . The l a t t e r of these two measures was never enforced (records s u r v i v e o u t l i n i n g Hughes's career as a r e c t o r , and 25 l a t e r the Bishop of St. Asaph), but another f i r m d i s c i p l i n -2 Q ary measure was d r a f t e d by C e c i l , and sent to the Univers-i t y : as much as i n him l a y , ... no manner of person there, should i n any sermon, open d i s p u t a t i o n , or reading, move any question or doubt upon the a r t i c l e de descensu C h r i s t i ad i n f e r o s . 2 7 - 8 -Thus, i n 1567, not o n l y was the i s s u e o f C h r i s t ' s d e scent i n t o h e l l c r e a t i n g f o r c e f u l p u b l i c r e a c t i o n , but a l s o i t was a t t r a c t i n g the a t t e n t i o n o f b o t h s p i r i t u a l and l a y a u t h o r i t i e s ; P a r k e r , the A r c h b i s h o p o f C a n t e r b u r y , and C e c i l , t he C h a n c e l l o r o f Cambridge. The man who was t o become A r c h -b i s h o p o f C a n t e r b u r y l a t e r i n E l i z a b e t h ' s r e i g n had a l s o been i n v o l v e d i n t h i s e p i s o d e . John W h i t g i f t had been a member o f the committee a p p o i n t e d by the U n i v e r s i t y Senate t o hear Hughes's ca s e . W h i t g i f t was t o be i n v o l v e d w i t h the c o n t r o v e r s y i n h i s o f f i c i a l c a p a c i t y as A r c h b i s h o p o f C a n t e r b u r y i n the y e a r s t o come; f o r i f the a u t h o r i t i e s i n 1567 had"hoped t h a t d i s c i p l i n i n g Hughes would be an end t o the m a t t e r , t h e y were s a d l y m i s t a k e n . The c o n t r o v e r s y c o n t i n u e d . I n the 1570's, the debate s p i l l e d o v e r i n t o p r i n t f o r the f i r s t t i m e . I n 1571 John N o r t h b r o o k e , a m i n i s t e r i n B r i s t o l , p u b l i s h e d a t r a c t s p e c i f i c a l l y a d d r e s s i n g the i s s u e of C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l . S p i r i t v s E s t ... A b r e e f e and 2 8 p i t h i e summe o f the C h r i s t i a n f a i t h , was the f i r s t t r a c t p u b l i s h e d i n E n g l a n d d u r i n g the E l i z a b e t h a n p e r i o d w h i c h f o c u s e d on t h i s t o p i c . There were two l a t e r e d i t i o n s o f the 29 work, b o t h p r o b a b l y i n 1582. T h i s was the same y e a r t h a t C a r l i l e p u b l i s h e d A D i s c o v r s e C o n c e r n i n g two d i u i n e P o s i t i o n s , a work which c o v e r e d the t o p i c he had f i r s t d i s p u t e d i n Cambridge t h i r t y y e a r s e a r l i e r . From t h i s b e g i n n i n g , the momentum o f p u b l i s h e d c o n t r o v e r s y grew s t e a d i l y . T a b l e I - 9 -p r o v i d e s d e t a i l s of the works p u b l i s h e d on the s u b j e c t of C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l during E l i z a b e t h ' s r e i g n and beyond. However, because Table I covers only w r i t t e n t r a c t s , i t does not i n c l u d e another important i n s t a n c e of disagreement over C h r i s t ' s descent. In 1586, John Udal, a Cambridge d i v i n e whose pr e a c h i n g had been causing u n r e s t i n h i s p a r i s h 30 (Kingston-upon-Thames), was i n t e r r o g a t e d i n the Court of High Commission. W h i t g i f t (who had been appointed Archbishop of Canterbury i n 1583) sat on the bench. He c h a l l e n g e d Udal t h a t "When you /Udal7 spoke of C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l , 31 t hat which you s a i d i s most absurd." The exchange which f o l l o w e d p r o v i d e s a d i r e c t statement of W h i t g i f t ' s own views on the meaning of C h r i s t ' s descent. I t a l s o demonstrates the d i f f i c u l t y i n h e r e n t i n e s t a b l i s h i n g and then e n f o r c i n g the meaning of the a r t i c l e when no i n t e r p r e t a t i o n had been s t i p u l a t e d i n the T h i r t y - N i n e A r t i c l e s of 1563: A /Archbishop7 The human s o u l of C h r i s t a f t e r h i s death, • -descended i n t o the p l a c e of the damned; and whosoever b e l i e v e t h not t h i s , but d e n i e t h i t , i s an h e r e t i c . U /Udal7 The Church of England i s taught, and a l s o b e l i e v e t h , t h a t which you account heresy. A No matter f o r t h a t . We r e c e i v e nothing f o r the d o c t r i n e of the church of England, but that which i s a u t h o r i z e d by act of p a r l i a m e n t . U Then your d o c t r i n e i s not the d o c t r i n e of the church. For one of her a r t i c l e s s a i t h only, t h a t C h r i s t descended i n t o h e l l , without e x p r e s s i n g how.* A You speak of unpreaching m i n i s t e r s being f o i s t e d i n by satan, that you may d i s g r a c e a u t h o r i t y . 32 (* s i g n i f i e s my i t a l i c s ) The a u t h o r i t y of the Churclv of England was i n a TABLE I: A Table o f T r a c t s P u b l i s h e d on C h r i s t ' s Descent i n t o H e l l . DATE AUTHOR 1571 Northbrooke,J. 1582? N o r t h b r o o k e , j . 1582 Northbrooke,J. 1582 C a r l i l e ^ C . 1592 H i l l , A . 1593 Hume,A. 1595 Perkins,W. 1596 Perkins,W. 1597 Perkins,V/. 1598 Jacob,H. 1599 B i l s o n . T . 1599 Broughton.H. 1600 Jacob,H. 1600 Broughton.H. 1602 H i g g i n s . J . 1603 Broughton.H. 1604 Broughton.H. 1604 B i l s o n . T . OPPONENT Harding,T, Harding,T, Harding,T, Smith,R. Hume,A. H i l l , A . B i l s o n . T . Jacob,H. B i l s o n . T . Perkins,W. B i l s o n . T . B i l s o n . T . Jacob,H. SHORT TITLE S p i r i t v s E s t ... S p i r i t v s E s t ... 2nd Ed. S p i r i t v s E s t ... 3rd Ed. A D i s c o v r s e Concerning two D i u i n e P o s i t i o n s ... Defence o f the A r t i c l e .. . Reioynder t o Doctor H i l .. An E x p o s i t i o n o f the Symbole o r Creed ... An E x p o s i t i o n ... 2nd Ed. An E x p o s i t i o n ... 3rd Ed. A T r e a t i s e o f the S v f f e r i n g s ... The e f f e c t of c e r t a i n e Sermons ... Master Broughtons L e t t e r s ... about Sheol ... Defence of a T r e a t i s e ... Master Broughtons L e t t e r s ... 2nd Ed. Answere to Master P e r k i n s D e c l a r a t i o n o f g e n e r a l l c o r r u p t i o n o f R e l i g i o n . . . D e c l a r a t i o n of g e n e r a l l c o r r u p t i o n . ... 2nd Ed. A Svrvey o f C h r i s t s S v f f e r i n g s ... PLACE OF  PUBLICATION London London London London London Edinburgh Cambridge Cambridge Cambridge Middelburg London London Middelburg London Oxford Middelburg Middelburg London SIZE f o l s . 2 6 6 f o l s . 2 6 6 f o l s . 1 7 3 f o l s . 7 0 pp.159 pp.544 pp.775 pp,174' pp.420 pp.211 * pp.52 pp.678 1604 Parkes.R. 1604 W i l l e t . A . 1604 Broughton.H. 1605 Broughton.H. 1605 Brougnton.H. 1605 Broughton.H. 1607 Parkes.R. 1607 W i l l e t . A . 1608 Broughton.H. 1611 Perkins,W. 1613 Parkes.R. 1615 Perkins,W. 1621 Perkins,W. Reynolds,J. Parkes,R. B i l s o n . T . W i l l e t . A . Parkes,R. Bancroft,R. Reynolds,J. B r i e f e Answere vnto C e r t a i n e o b i e c t i o n s ... Limbomastix ... Two l i t t l e workes .. . An E x p l i c a t i o n o f the A r t i c l e ... A R e p l i e upon the r.R.F. Th.Winton ... P o s i t i o n s of the Word Hades ... An A p o l o g i e ... Loido r o m a s t i x .. . P e t i t i o n t o the Lords . . . An E x p o s i t i o n ... 4 t h Ed. B r i e f e Answere vnto C e r t a i n e o b i e c t i o n s .... Another i s s u e An E x p o s i t i o n ... 5th Ed. An E x p o s i t i o n ... 6th Ed. Oxford London Middelburg Mi'ddelburg? Amsterdam London Cambridge ? London Oxford London London pp. 58 PP•60. f o l s . 2 8 1 pp.195 : pp. 58 * s i g n i f i e s pamphlets o f under f i f t y pages i n l e n g t h . T h i s t a b l e does not i n c l u d e t r a c t s i n which C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l was d i s c u s s e d but In which i t was not a main theme. - 10 -d i f f i c u l t p o s i t i o n , and y e t the need f o r a s e t t l e m e n t o f the c o n t r o v e r s y was more p r e s s i n g t h a n e v e r . Adam H i l l , a p r e b e n d a r y o f S a l i s b u r y C a t h e d r a l , d e d i c a t e d h i s work on C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t (The Defence o f the A r t i c l e : C h r i s t descend-ed i n t o H e l l , p u b l i s h e d i n 1592) t o W h i t g i f t , c l a i m i n g t h a t one o f h i s r e a s o n s f o r w r i t i n g the t r a c t was t h a t t h e r e i s l i k e t o be as g r e a t s t r i f e about the t r u e v n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h i s A r t i c l e i n E n g l a n d , as t h e r e was i n Germany about the t r u e meaning o f ( T h i s i s my body.) ... I f t h e r e f o r e t h i s c o n t r o u e r c i e be not s h o r t l y by the p r o u i d e n c e o f a l m i g h t y God, and y o u r g r a c e h i s m i n i s t e r y , d e c i d e d : t h e r e w i l l grow among vs enuy, s t r i f e , s e d i t i o n , and a l manner of e u i l l workes. S i t h t h e n as t h e r e i s but one God, so t h e r e i s but one t r u t h . 3 3 Indeed, the background t o the p u b l i s h i n g o f t h i s t r a c t d emonstrates c o n s i d e r a b l e p o p u l a r t u r b u l e n c e and u n r e s t over the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t . There are two a c c o u n t s o f t h i s u n r e s t : one p r o v i d e d i n H i l l ' s work; and one p r o v i d e d i n the work o f H i l l ' s opponent, A l e x a n d e r Hume, a S c o t t i s h s c h o o l m a s t e r who wrote A R e i o y n d e r t o D o c t o r H i l c o n c e r n i n g 34 the Descense o f C h r i s t i n t o H e l l , i n 1593. A l t h o u g h t h e s e a c c o u n t s v a r y i n p l a c e s , they b o t h c o n f i r m two o u t b r e a k s o f c o n t r o v e r s y o v e r t h i s a r t i c l e o f f a i t h . The f i r s t o u t b r e a k was i n the mid 1580's i n Sarum, W i l t s h i r e , when "M. Connam, a 35 man b o t h l e a r n e d , and Chaplane t o my L. o f Pembroke," had e x p r e s s e d o p i n i o n s w h i c h were r e j e c t e d by the a u t h o r i t i e s . H i l l c l a i m s t h a t i t was the B i s h o p o f S a l i s b u r y who subdued the c o n t r o v e r s y , a l t h o u g h Hume s u g g e s t s t h a t i t was H i l l h i m s e l f who had s e t t l e d the m a t t e r . - 12 -T h i s o u t b r e a k had not been f o r g o t t e n when i n 1589 ( f o l l o w i n g an o r d e r by the Bisho p o f S a l i s b u r y t h a t p r e a c h e r s s h o u l d l e c t u r e i n town m a r k e t - p l a c e s ) , a p r e a c h e r named Wisdome gave a l e c t u r e on C h r i s t ' s d escent i n t o h e l l i n t h e m a r k e t - p l a c e a t Chippenham, W i l t s h i r e . Wisdome's i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n was i m m e d i a t e l y opposed by "one C h a l f o n t V i c a r o f t h a t towne /who 7 s t o o d vp, and p r o t e s t e d t o the p e o p l e , t h a t hee — T 36 /Wisdome/ had t a u g h t f a l s e d o c t r i n e . " C h a l f o n t s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e crowd s h o u l d r e t u r n the f o l l o w i n g week t o hear h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e ; and r e t u r n they d i d . A c c o r d i n g t o Hume, C h a l f o n t d e l i v e r e d h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t b u t i t was accompanied by a v i c i o u s , u n d i g n i f i e d a t t a c k on Wisdome w h i c h c r e a t e d more d i s c o n t e n t among the p a r i s h o n e r s : T h i s e x c l a m a t i o n , ( f o r sermon I cannot c a l l i t ) b e i n g ended, the p e o p l e d e p a r t e d some s a y i n g t h i s , and some s a y i n g t h a t ; and a l l ( s a u i n g such as l o u e , o r m a l i c e d i d c a r r i e more then t r u t h o r m a t t e r ) condemning C h a l f o n t s impudencie. That day. =seuen-night, the p e o p l e meets a g a i n e , h o p i n g t o heare M. Wisdome r e p l y , f o r t h a t was h i s day by the B i s h o p s o r d e r . 3 7 I n s t e a d o f M. Wisdome, the p e o p l e were p r e s e n t e d w i t h the more w e i g h t y a u t h o r i t y o f H i l l , t he prebendary from S a l i s b u r y . H i l l d e l i v e r e d a sermon on C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t , but t h i s d i d not pu t an end t o t h e p u b l i c c o n t r o v e r s y because Wisdome gave a f u r t h e r sermon a t Cosham, and H i l l d e l i v e r e d a n o t h e r a t O Q Leycocke. C l e a r l y o p i n i o n s were i n f l a m e d . Hume h i m s e l f i s an e x c e l l e n t i n d i c a t i o n o f the k i n d o f u n r e s t t h a t t h i s p u b l i c c o n t r o v e r s y , was c r e a t i n g . He hea r d and was not c o n v i n c e d by - 13 -H i l l ' s sermon i n Chippenham, b u t was s u f f i c i e n t l y i n c e n s e d t o w r i t e a l e t t e r t o H i l l , e x p r e s s i n g h i s o b j e c t i o n s . Thus, a v i s i t i n g S c o t t i s h s c h o o l m a s t e r who had p u b l i s h e d no work b e f o r e , became i n v o l v e d w i t h , and p u b l i s h e d on C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l . The p o w e r f u l s e n t i m e n t s g e n e r a t e d o v e r C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t a r e e v i d e n t i n t h e works o f H i l l and Hume. T h a t Hume d i s l i k e d H i l l c a n be s e e n i n t h e a s p e r s i o n s w h i c h he c a s t on H i l l ' s m o t i v e s f o r be c o m i n g i n v o l v e d i n t h e d e b a t e . Hume a c c u s e d H i l l o f w i s h i n g o n l y t o advance h i s c a r e e r , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t H i l l h ad s e t t l e d t h e p r o b l e m s i n Sarum i n t h e mid 1580's, and t h e n d e l i b e r a t e l y i n t e r v e n e d i n t h e d e b a t e i n Chippenham. H i l l had p u b l i c i z e d Hume's l e t t e r t o him when i t was i n t e n d e d f o r p r i v a t e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e : s p e a c h e s were g i u e n o u t , t h a t I /Hume7 had ans w e r e d h i s sermon, t h a t he had r e p l i e d , and I r e c a n t e d . T h e s e s p e e c h e s grew d a i l i e , and l i f t e d h i s h e a r t a s h i g h as h i s name. Whereon hee r e s o l u e d t o d i s p u t e i n O x e n f o r d f o r a s c a r l e t hood .... I n t h i s s t o r y ( t h o u m a i e s t see good R e a d e r ) t h a t my a d v e r s a r y d i d t h r u s t h i s hooke i n an o t h e r man's h a r u e s t a t C h i p p i n h a m e ... T h a t he b a r e t h e s i m p l e i n hand, t h a t a l l t h e l e a r n e d o f t h e V n i u e r s i t i e were o f h i s mind. T h a t he f e d an v n t r u e rumour, t h a t I had r e c a n t e d ... And t h a t t o t r o u b l e t h e s i m p l e w i t h i t , he p u b l i s h e d t h a t i n e n g l i s h , w h i c h I w r o t e i n l a t i n e . 3 9 H i l l ' s v e r s i o n o f e v e n t s was c o m p l e t e l y d i f f e r e n t . A c c u s a t i o n s t h a t he had i n t e r v e n e d a t Chippenham f o r t h e sake o f h i s c a r e e r were u n f o u n d e d . He i n s i s t e d t h a t he had o n l y become i n v o l v e d b e c a u s e he was a s k e d " t o d e l i u e r my iu d g e m e n t i n t h e m a t t e r , n o t by M. C h a l f o u l t , b u t by one R i c h a r d Woodlands /presumably a p a r i s h o n e r 7 t o s e t u n i t y b e t w i x t my 40 b r e t h e r e n . " The s t r o n g a n i m o s i t y between these men, and the p o p u l a r i n v o l v e m e n t w h i c h t h e i r a c c o u n t s d e s c r i b e , show the s t r e n g t h o f r e a c t i o n which the i s s u e o f C h r i s t ' s d escent i n t o h e l l was g e n e r a t i n g . A n o t h e r example o f t h i s r e a c t i o n i s the case o f John 41 H i g g i n s , who p u b l i s h e d a s h o r t t r a c t i n 1602. Sources d i s a g r e e about h i s i d e n t i t y , but i t can be a s c e r t a i n e d t h a t a layman o t h e r w i s e u n i n v o l v e d i n t h e o l o g i c a l i s s u e s p u b l i s h e d 42 work on t h i s one t h e o l o g i c a l problem o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t . H i g g i n s ' s work was w r i t t e n i n response t o the voluminous c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the debate by W i l l i a m P e r k i n s . The 1590's saw a number o f t r a c t s b e i n g p u b l i s h e d s p e c i f i c a l l y on the descent o f C h r i s t i n t o h e l l , and the a c t i v i t y c o n t i n u e d t h r o u g h i n t o the 1600's. T h i s b u r s t o f p r o d u c t i o n i s i l l u s t r a t e d and summarized i n T a b l e I . Two o f the most voluminous c o n t r i b u t o r s were W i l l i a m P e r k i n s and Hugh Broughton, b o t h o f whom were educated a t Cambridge. However, t h e y were voluminous i n d i f f e r e n t ways. P e r k i n s , who had remained i n u n i v e r s i t y l i f e as a t e a c h e r a t Cambridge a f t e r g r a d u a t i n g MA i n 1584, wrote o n l y one work which was d e v o t e d t o C h r i s t ' s d escent i n t o h e l l , An E x p o s i t i o n 43 of the Symbole o r Creed o f the A p o s t l e s , f i r s t p u b l i s h e d i n 1595. This-was a h e f t y tome, the f i r s t e d i t i o n o f w h i c h r a n t o 544 pages. There were s i x e d i t i o n s i n a l l , the l a s t o f w h i c h was not p r i n t e d t i l l 1621. Broughton, on the o t h e r hand, c produced s h o r t works, none o f which were more than f i f t y pages l o n g , and none of w h i c h r a n t o more t h a n two e d i t i o n s ; but he produced seven o f them. There were c o m p i l a t i o n s o f l e t t e r s t o i n f l u e n t i a l p e o p l e on the s u b j e c t o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t ; t h e r e were t r a c t s a g a i n s t t h o s e who a d v o c a t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s w h i c h d i f f e r e d from h i s own; and t h e r e were t r a c t s t o expound and j u s t i f y h i s own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Nor were t h e s e works Broughton's o n l y c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the debate. He had f i r s t made known h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f 44 C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l i n 1579, and S t r y p e r e c o r d s t h a t i n 1594, he was i n disagreement w i t h A r c h b i s h o p W h i t g i f t , Dr. B a n c r o f t and Dr. Reynolds o f O x f o r d about how the word " h e l l " 45 s h o u l d be u n d e r s t o o d i n the c r e e d a l c o n t e x t . I n 1597, he d i s p u t e d w i t h Ben Armara, a Jew, on t h i s same t o p i c , c l a i m i n g by t h i s time t o have W h i t g i f t ' s s u p p o r t f o r h i s i n t e r p r e t - . - .-• 46 a t i o n . Broughton expended c o n s i d e r a b l e time and e f f o r t t o g a i n a c c e p t a n c e f o r h i s views on C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l , and he d i d so o v e r t h r e e decades (1579 t o 1608, when h i s l a s t work c o v e r i n g the t o p i c was p u b l i s h e d ) . Hence, h i s c o n t r i b u -t i o n t o the debate must be c o n s i d e r e d as even more s u b s t a n t i a l t h a n h i s e x t e n s i v e p u b l i s h i n g r e c o r d would suggest. The a f o r e m e n t i o n e d Dr. R e y n o l d s , who d i s a g r e e d w i t h Broughton i n 1594, was a n o t h e r s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e i n the c o n t r o v e r s y . He wrote but never p u b l i s h e d a t r e a t i s e on C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l w i t h w h i c h s e v e r a l o f the p r o -47 t a g o n i s t s were f a m i l i a r . Reynolds was an eminent O x f o r d t h e o l o g i a n and h i s work was g r e a t l y r e s p e c t e d by some w r i t e r s . R e f e r r i n g t o Reynold's work on C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t , Hume had e x p r e s s e d g r e a t a d m i r a t i o n : " I f t h e r e were any hope, t h a t t h a t worke would come out s h o r t l i e , I would b u r i e my pa p e r s i n the 48 d u s t e . " Thus, even though h i s work was not p u b l i s h e d , Reynolds s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d as an i m p o r t a n t c o n t r i b u t o r t o the debate. Yet a n o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l who was i n v o l v e d i n the d e b a t e , even though he a l s o n e v e r p u b l i s h e d a book on the s u b j e c t , was L a n c e l o t Andrewes, C h a p l a i n o f A r c h b i s h o p W h i t g i f t . Broughton had c h a l l e n g e d Andrewes t o a d i s p u t a t i o n on C h r i s t ' s descent 49 t o be h e l d i n Cambridge i n 1594. There i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t the c h a l l e n g e was a c c e p t e d , and c l e a r l y Broughton was not 50 s a t i s f i e d , because i n 1597 the same c h a l l e n g e was r e p e a t e d . A g a i n , t h e r e i s no r e p o r t t h a t the d i s p u t a t i o n t o o k p l a c e , but S t r y p e r e c o r d s t h a t Andrewes h e l d " another o p i n i o n " than 51 Broughton o v e r C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l . The examples o f Reynolds and Andrewes i n d i c a t e t h a t o p i n i o n s on C h r i s t ' s descent were b e i n g e x p r e s s e d by more p e o p l e than t h o s e who went i n t o p r i n t about i t . The s c a l e o f the c o n t r o v e r s y was s p r e a d i n g , and i n Lent o f 1597, i t had reached the p o i n t t h a t B i s h o p B i l s o n , p r e a c h i n g a t S t . P a u l ' s C r o s s : thought f i t t o d i s c o u r s e on t h i s s u b j e c t . But f i r s t communicated h i s purpose t o our A r c h b i s h o p ; who a l l o w e d and encouraged him t h e r e u n t o ; f o r the b e t t e r q u i e t i n g and s e t t l i n g t he minds o f the p e o p l e , who were now r u n i n t o d i f f e r e n c e s and d i s c o r d s about i t . 5 2 A g i t a t i o n about the meaning o f the a r t i c l e was s u f f i c i e n t l y p r e v a l e n t t h a t B i l s o n f e l t the need t o c o n s u l t W h i t g i f t b e f o r e p r e a c h i n g on the s u b j e c t . C l e a r l y W h i t g i f t endorsed h i s sermon, a l t h o u g h u n f o r t u n a t e l y f o r W h i t g i f t the sermon d i d not q u i e t e n the c o n t r o v e r s y , as he had hoped, but r a t h e r h e l p e d t o i n f l a m e i t : So d i s p l e a s e d were some w i t h the B i s h o p /Bilson7 ... t h a t a young man took the c o n f i d e n c e soon a f t e r , i n the same p u l p i t , t o c o n f u t e what the B i s h o p had s a i d . T h i s was so much n o i s e d abroad, t h a t i t was thought a d v i s -a b l e t o a c q u a i n t the L o r d T r e a s u r e r w i t h the whole b u s i n e s s . 5 3 Thus, i n 1597 b o t h the h i g h e s t s p i r i t u a l a u t h o r i t y ( W h i t g i f t ) and the h i g h e s t l a y a u t h o r i t y ( t h e L o r d T r e a s u r e r ) i n the l a n d a s i d e from the Queen h e r s e l f , were i n v o l v e d i n t r y i n g t o s e t t l e the c o n t r o v e r s y . B i l s o n wrote a l e t t e r t o the L o r d T r e a s u r e r ( W i l l i a m C e c i l , who as C h a n c e l l o r o f Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y had t r i e d t o p r e v e n t d i s c u s s i o n o f the a r t i c l e i n 1567) i n w h i c h he o u t l i n e d h i s attempt t o p r o v i d e a c l e a r and s c r i p t u r a l l y s u p p o r t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s descent i n h i s sermons. As a r e s u l t o f t h i s l e t t e r , C e c i l a u t h o r i z e d a c o m p i l a t i o n o f a l l the d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f the a r t i c l e , as he was " d e s i r o u s t o be i n f o r m e d more p a r t i c u l a r l y o f the o p i n i o n s o f the l e a r n e d i n t h i s so 54 m i g h t i l y c o n t r o v e r t e d a r t i c l e . " S t r y p e r e c o r d s t h a t t h i s c o m p i l a t i o n was i n d e e d p r oduced, d e s c r i b i n g i t as "a p r e t t y l a r g e d i s c o u r s e , w i t h many q u o t a t i o n s out o f the F a t h e r s . " I t c o n t a i n e d the " d i f f e r e n t o p i n i o n s o f l e a r n e d men" and o u t l i n e d 55 a l l the p r e v a l e n t o p i n i o n s about the a r t i c l e . A l t h o u g h t h e r e i s no r e c o r d o f f u r t h e r a c t i o n b e i n g t a k e n by C e c i l (he d i e d i n 1598), b o t h Church and S t a t e i n t e r e s t s c o n t i n u e d t o be i n v o l v e d i n the debate. B i l s o n ' s sermons a t S t . P a u l ' s C r o s s had i n f l a m e d the problem because "some ... misremembred, some m i s c o n s t r u e d , and some m i s l i k e d " what he had p r e a c h e d , "whereupon I / B i l s o n / was b o t h a d u i s e d and i n t r e a t e d by men o f g r e a t e r p l a c e t h e n I w i l l name; t o put 56 the e f f e c t of t h a t w h i c h I had d e l i u e r e d i n w r i t i n g . " But the p r i n t i n g o f the t r a c t w h i c h B i l s o n c o m p i l e d , (The e f f e c t  o f c e r t a i n e Sermons Tovc h i n g the F v l l Redemption o f mankind) was d e l a y e d . B i l s o n had had the work ready by S t . B a r t h o l o m -ew's day, 1597, but the c a l l i n g o f P a r l i a m e n t meant t h a t men were " o t h e r w i s e i m p l o i e d " so he was a d v i s e d by those "men o f g r e a t e r p l a c e " t o s t a y from p u b l i s h i n g . I n a d d i t i o n , a g r e a t h u s t l e r a i s e d a g a i n s t i t by c e r t a i n e p o p u l a r p r e a c h e r s i n t h a t c i t i e , t h r o u g h whose mouthes the c o n t r a r i e had o f t e n p a s s e d t o the p e o p l e as c u r r a n t , I was d e s i r e d by the same p e r s o n s againe t o s t a i e , t i l l t h a t t ime o f . b u s i n e s s were ouer p a s t , t h a t heat o f c o n t r a d i c t i o n somewhat a l a i e d , and r e s p i t e g i u e n t h a t i t might be t r a n s l a t e d i n t o L a t i n . 5 7 Peace and c o - o p e r a t i o n i n the p a r l i a m e n t a r y s e s s i o n were c o n s i d e r e d by someone i n a u t h o r i t y t o be more i m p o r t a n t t h a n the s e t t l e m e n t o f r e l i g i o u s c o n t r o v e r s y . Someone r e a l i z e d t h a t B i l s o n ' s work was l i k e l y t o i n f l a m e r a t h e r than t o s o l v e the problem, w i t h the r e s u l t t h a t the work was not p u b l i s h e d t i l l 1599. C e c i l was the p e r s o n most l i k e l y t o be i n t e r v e n i n g i n t h i s way, b u t the i d e n t i t y o f the i n d i v i d u a l concerned must remain c o n j e c t u r a l . - 19 -In the p e r i o d w h i c h e l a p s e d b e f o r e h i s work was p u b l i s h e d , B i l s o n ' s opponents had been busy. B i l s o n ' s sermons had prompted Henry Jacob t o w r i t e and p u b l i s h i n 1598 A T r e a t i s e o f the S v f f e r i n g s and V i c t o r y o f C h r i s t . 5 8 A t t h i s p o i n t , the debate r e a c h e d the e a r s o f the v e r y h i g h e s t a u t h o r i t y i n the l a n d , the Queen h e r s e l f . I n Athenae Oxonienses , Anthony a Wood r e l a t e s t h a t "the m a t t e r o f the c o n t r o v e r s i e /came/ t o the Queen's knowledge, (she b e i n g a t 5 9 Farnham c a s t l e b e l o n g i n g t o the B. o f W i n c h e s t e r ) . " B i l s o n was a p p o i n t e d B i s h o p "of W i n c h e s t e r on May 1 3 t h 1597, and so i t i s l i k e l y t h a t i t was he who i n f o r m e d the Queen o f the c o n t r o v e r s y . There can be no doubt about E l i z a b e t h ' s s e n t i m e n t s on the m a t t e r : she s i g n i f i e d h e r p l e a s u r e t o B i l s o n , t h a t he s h o u l d n e i t h e r d e s e r t the d o c t r i n e , n o r s u f f e r the F u n c t i o n , w hich he had e x e r c i s e d i n the Church o f E n g l a n d , t o be tr o d d e n and t r a m p l e d under f o o t by u n q u i e t men, who b o t h a b h o r r e d the t r u t h and d i s p i s e d a u t h o r i t y . Upon wh i c h command, the Bisho p d i d s e t h i m s e l f upon the w r i t i n g o f t h a t l e a r n e d T r e a t i s e ( c h i e f l y a l s o d e l i v e r e d by him i n Sermons) e n t i t u l e d A Survey o f C h r i s t ' s S u f f e r i n g s . . . 6 0 T h i s s u b s t a n t i a l second t r a c t o f - B i l s o n ' s (678 pages) was n o t 61 p u b l i s h e d t i l l 1604, by w h i c h time Jacob too had c o n t r i b u t -ed a n o t h e r t r a c t t o the debate, A Defence o f a T r e a t i s e 6 2 Tovchi n g the S v f f e r i n g s and v i c t o r i e o f C h r i s t , p u b l i s h e d i n 1600. As the disagreement between th e s e two men c o n t i n u e d , Wood r e l a t e s t h a t t h e y were n o t a l o n e i n t h e i r argument: Which c o n t r o v e r s i e , / C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o _ h e l l 7 though e a g e r l y b a n d i e d t o and f r o between them, '/Jacob and - 20 -Bilson7 y e t i t was a f t e r w a r d s p l y e d more h o t l y i n b o t h the U n i v e r s i t i e s , i n 1604 and a f t e r ; where B i l s o n 1 s d o c t r i n e was m a i n t a i n e d and h e l d up, y e t p u b l i c k l y opposed by many o f our Z e a l o t s , b o t h a t home and abroad. A t home by Gabr. P o w e l l ... and abroad by Hugh Broughton and Rob. P a r k e r .... There were two more b r e t h e r e n a t l e a s t o f the s e p a r a t i o n , who opposed B i l s o n ' s d o c t r i n e , b u t t h e i r names I cannot now j u s t l y t e l l y o u . 6 3 C e r t a i n l y , Broughton was c o n t i n u i n g t o w r i t e d u r i n g the e a r l y y e a r s o f James's r e i g n , and so were two o t h e r p r o t a g o n i s t s , Andrew W i l l e t , and R i c h a r d P a r k e s . The work o f t h a t same Dr. Reynolds w i t h whom Broughton had d i s a g r e e d i n 1594, and whom 64 Hume had l a u d e d , l a y b e h i n d the d i s p u t e between W i l l e t and Pa r k e s . P a r k e s had g a i n e d a c c e s s t o the work, and d i s a g r e e d w i t h Reynold's argument. T h e r e f o r e , i n 1604, P a r k e s p u b l i s h e d A B r j e f e Answere v n t o C e r t a i n e o b j e c t i o n s and Reasons a g a i n s t 65 The d e s c e n s i o n o f C h r i s t i n t o h e l l . I n the cours e o f the work, P a r k e s o b j e c t e d t o t h e views w h i c h W i l l e t had a l r e a d y propounded on C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l , i n an e a r l i e r work e n t i t l e d S y n o p s i s P a p i s m i . W i l l e t responded r a p i d l y t o P a r k e s ' s a t t a c k , p u b l i s h i n g Limbomastix ... C o n t a i n i n g a l s o a b r i e f e r e p l i e t o so much o f a Pamphlet l a t e l y p u b l i s h e d . . . 6 7 p e r s o n a l l y d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t some w r i t e r s o f our Church, i n 1604. A f t e r a l u l l o f t h r e e y e a r s , they b o t h p u b l i s h e d works a g a i n s t each o t h e r on the same s u b j e c t o f C h r i s t ' s descent 6 8 i n t o h e l l , i n 1607. Both o f th e s e works were d e d i c a t e d t o A r c h b i s h o p B a n c r o f t , i n the hope t h a t he would s e t t l e the debate once and f o r a l l . P a r k e s c o n s i d e r e d t h a t m a t t e r s o f - 21 -such weight ought t o be judged by the h i g h e s t a u t h o r i t y , t h a t the t r u e d o c t r i n e s h o u l d be embraced, "the impugners t h e r o f s i l e n c e d , & t h e i r Bookes as a b o r t i u e b r a t s , not s u f f e r e d t o 69 see the Sunne, whose l i g h t t h ey seeke t o o b s c u r e . " W i l l e t was e q u a l l y vehement i n h i s address t o B a n c r o f t : I m a r u e l , how your r e l i g i o u s e a r e s can endure t o heare such s t r i f e o f wordes, w h i c h a u a i l e more f o r the s u b u e r s i o n , t h e n f i n d i n g out o f the t r u t h : c o r r e c t t h i s e u i l l v s e , and s t a y such v a i n e tongues, &c. you h o l d the whip, l e t the money chaungers f e a r e t o t r u s t t o t h e i r ( c o u n t e r f e i t ) c o y n e . 7 0 These d e d i c a t o r y e p i s t l e s demonstrate t h a t by 1607 t h e r e was a s e v e r e and e n t r e n c h e d disagreement over the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l , w i t h s t r i d e n t a p p e a l s b e i n g made t o the A r c h b i s h o p o f C a n t e r b u r y £or s e t t l e m e n t o f the problem. I n the p r e c e d i n g y e a r s the c o n t r o v e r s y had i n v o l v e d b o t h the p r o m i n e n t and p o w e r f u l , (Queen E l i z a b e t h , A r c h b i s h o p W h i t g i f t , and L o r d T r e a s u r e r C e c i l ) and the obscure and p o w e r l e s s ( t h e i n h a b i t a n t s o f L e i c e s t e r i n 1567, and o f W i l t s h i r e i n the l a t e 1580's). The c o n t r o v e r s y had reached from the m a r k e t - p l a c e i n Chippenham t o the P a l a c e a t Lambeth and the C a s t l e a t Farnham. I t had prompted a s t e a d y f l o w o f t r a c t s , many w r i t t e n by the s c h o l a r l y t h e o l o g i a n s o f O x f o r d and Cambridge; and y e t , i n 1607, the i s s u e remained u n r e s o l v e d . I t i s u n r e w a r d i n g t o t u r n t o modern h i s t o r i a n s f o r i n s i g h t i n t o the n a t u r e o f t h i s i n t r a c t a b l e debate. They m a i n t a i n a p r o f o u n d s i l e n c e about the whole s u b j e c t . G i v e n the scope o f the problem as o u t l i n e d above, i t i s s u r p r i s i n g t o f i n d t h a t most h i s t o r i a n s have not even r e c o g n i z e d the e x i s t e n c e o f the debate, l e t a l o n e a n a l y s e d i t s c o n t e n t . 71 H.C. P o r t e r ' s R e f o r m a t i o n and R e a c t i o n i n Tudor Cambridge does not mention the i s s u e d e s p i t e the many l i n k s between the U n i v e r s i t y and the debate: C a r l i l e ' s d i s p u t a t i o n ; the i n v o l v e m e n t o f the U n i v e r s i t y a u t h o r i t i e s i n Hughes's case i n 1567; P e r k i n s ' s t e a c h i n g and p r e a c h i n g t h e r e t h r o u g h o u t the 1580's and 90's, and Broughton's c o n t i n u e d attachment t o the U n i v e r s i t y . James Bass M u l l i n g e r ' s e x t e n s i v e h i s t o r y o f 72 Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y f a i l s t o mention the debate e i t h e r . Works c o v e r i n g the Church of E n g l a n d and the r e l i g i o u s problems o f the l a t e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y a l s o n e g l e c t the t o p i c , For example, no mention o f c o n t r o v e r s y about C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l can be found i n P h i l i p Hughes's work The Reform-73 a t i o n i n England . L i k e w i s e , P e t e r Lake's Moderate p u r i t a n s 74 and the E l i z a b e t h a n c h u r c h n e g l e c t s the t o p i c , d e s p i t e the d e v o t i o n o f a c h a p t e r t o "The t h e o l o g i c a l d i s p u t e s o f the 1590's." John F.H.New i g n o r e s the debate i n A n g l i c a n and 75 P u r i t a n , even though one c h a p t e r d e a l s w i t h o p p o s i t i o n s u r r o u n d i n g the "Sacraments and E s c h a t o l o g y . " P a t r i c k C o l l i n s o n does not c o v e r the c o n t r o v e r s y i n The R e l i g i o n o f • 7fi P r o t e s t a n t s . R . T . K e n d a l l ' s C a l v i n and E n g l i s h C a l v i n i s m t o 77 1649 omits:.', the i s s u e , as does D.P.Walker's The D e c l i n e o f H e l l . 7 8 The debate has s u f f e r e d from n e g l e c t and y e t t h i s n e g l e c t i s not j u s t i f i e d . The t h e o l o g i c a l c o n t e n t o f the debate o f f e r s i n s i g h t s and r a i s e s q u e s t i o n s w h i c h bear d i r e c t l y upon the c o n c l u s i o n s of s e v e r a l o f t h e s e h i s t o r i a n s , 7 9 p a r t i c u l a r l y t h o s e o f P o r t e r , Lake, and C o l l i n s o n . I f s t u d y o f t h e o l o g i c a l c o n t r o v e r s y i s n e g l e c t e d i t becomes a l l too easy f o r i n a p p r o p r i a t e o r i n a c c u r a t e c o n c l u s i o n s t o be drawn. A b r i e f example of t h i s may be seen i n M.M.Knappen 1s Tudor SO P u r i t a n i s m . Knappen does p r o v i d e a b r i e f a n a l y s i s o f the debate about C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l , but because the t h e o l o g y i s not examined i n d e t a i l , he draws i n a c c u r a t e c o n c l u s i o n s about the debate. He s u g g e s t s t h a t the d i s p u t e between Jacob and B i l s o n was a " f u r t h e r s i g n o f the b e g i n n i n g s o f t h e o l o g i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s between the two g r e a t p a r t i e s o f 81 E n g l i s h P r o t e s t a n t s . " For Knappen, B i l s o n and Jacob are the b e g i n n i n g s ' of " A n g l i c a n " and " P u r i t a n " . As an e x a m i n a t i o n o f the t h e o l o g y w i l l show, the s e l a b e l s are i l l - f i t t i n g , and s e r v e more t o c o n f u s e than t o c l a r i f y the arguments. C o n s e q u e n t l y , i t i s t o t h e t h e o l o g y o f the c o n t r o v e r s y about C h r i s t ' s d escent i n t o h e l l t h a t a t t e n t i o n must be t u r n e d . - 24 -CHAPTER TWO CHRIST'S DESCENT INTO HELL: A THEOLOGICAL PROBLEM ( i ) The C o n t i n e n t a l Background The o u t b r e a k o f c o n t r o v e r s y i n England o v e r the descent o f C h r i s t i n t o h e l l i s f i r m l y l i n k e d w i t h the P r o t e s t a n t R e f o r m a t i o n i n Europe. I t was s i m p l y i m p o s s i b l e f o r P r o t e s t -a n t s t o h o l d the same i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h i s a r t i c l e o f the Creed as the C a t h o l i c s d i d . To u n d e r s t a n d why t h i s was the c a s e , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o u n d e r s t a n d the C a t h o l i c i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s descent i n the s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y . I n h i s Summa T h e o l o g i c a , A q u i n a s had l a i d out the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d escent w h i c h p r e v a i l e d w i t h i n the C a t h o l i c C h u r c h . 1 The C a t e c h i s m o f the C o u n c i l o f T r e n t f o l l o w e d A q u i n a s ' s view, and l a t e r C a r d i n a l B e l l a r m i n e s u p p o r t e d the l i k e i n t e r p r e t -2 a t i o n i n h i s Ample D e c l a r a t i o n o f the C h r i s t i a n D o c t r i n e . Though the s t a t e m e n t s o f Tr e n t and o f B e l l a r m i n e p o s t - d a t e d the P r o t e s t a n t a t t a c k , t hey may be t a k e n as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the o r t h o d o x p r e - R e f o r m a t i o n C a t h o l i c p o s i t i o n , as t h e y p r o v i d e d r e i t e r a t i o n and r e i n f o r c e m e n t o f A q u i n a s ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n response t o a t t a c k . The o r t h o d o x C a t h o l i c e x p l a n a t i o n p r o v i d e d c l a r i f i c a t i o n o f f o u r s e p a r a t e i s s u e s c o n c e r n i n g C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l : how, when, where, and why. The most e a s i l y d e a l t w i t h was - 25 -"when", because C h r i s t ' s descent was a c c e p t e d as h a v i n g o c c u r r e d between h i s death and r e s u r r e c t i o n . How C h r i s t descended, i n o t h e r words the form i n which he d i d s o , was a l i t t l e more c o m p l i c a t e d . C h r i s t was b e l i e v e d t o have had not o n l y body and s o u l , b u t a l s o a d i v i n e p e r s o n , n a t u r e , o r s p i r i t . C h r i s t ' s body was not b e l i e v e d t o have descended; the p l a c i n g o f h i s body i n the s e p u l c h r e and the number o f b i b l i c a l r e f e r e n c e s t o i t s h a v i n g remained t h e r e f o r t h r e e days p r e c l u d e d t h i s . H i s s o u l descended, but the " d i v i n e n a t u r e " p r e s e n t e d problems. On the one hand, h i s body c o u l d not be l e f t i n a n o n - d i v i n e s t a t e w i t h o u t i t ; on the o t h e r , the s o u l c o u l d n ot descend w i t h o u t i t ; f u r t h e r m o r e , t o suggest a s p l i t and hence two d i v i n e n a t u r e s was h e r e t i c a l . As a r e s u l t , the o r t h o d o x i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was t h a t C h r i s t ' s d i v i n e n a t u r e was o m n i p r e s e n t , so t h a t the one s p i r i t c o u l d be b o t h w i t h the body i n the g r a v e , and w i t h the s o u l i n i t s d e s c e n t . C a r d i n a l B e l l a r m i n e e x p l a i n e d t h a t : Death had f o r c e t o s e p a r a t the s o u l e o f C h r i s t from h i s b o d i e , b u t i t c o u l d n ot s e p a r a t e e i t h e r the s o u l e , o r the b o d i e from the D i u i n e p e r s o n o f the same C h r i s t . And t h e r e f o r e we be l e u e t h a t the D i u i n e p e r s o n o f C h r i s t remained w i t h h i s b o d i e , i n the s e p u l c r e , and t h a t the same p e r s o n , descended w i t h h i s s o u l i n t o h e l . 3 U n f o r t u n a t e l y , "where" was not q u i t e as e a s i l y d i s -m i ssed as might be e x p e c t e d e i t h e r . C l e a r l y , C h r i s t ' s descent was t o h e l l , b ut the C a t h o l i c b e l i e f i n v a r i o u s compartments o r l e v e l s o f h e l l made a more d e t a i l e d e x p l a n a t i o n n e c e s s a r y . 4 E i t h e r t h r e e o r f o u r compartments o f h e l l were r e c o g n i z e d : the l o w e s t was the p l a c e o f the damned, a l s o known as Gehenna, o r the abyss where "the proud D i u e l s , and the men w h i c h 5 i m i t a t e d them" were t o be found s u f f e r i n g e t e r n a l torment; above t h i s came p u r g a t o r y "ou l e s ames des j u s t e s se p u r i f -i e n t dans des' s o u f f r a n e e s q u i d u r e n t un temps d e t e r m i n e , en a t t e n d a n t q u ' e l l e s s o i e n t d i g n e s d ' e n t r e r dans l ' 6 t e r n e l l e p a t r i e ; " the compartment above t h i s was the l i m b o o f the s o u l s o f c h i l d r e n who had d i e d w i t h o u t b a p t i s m ; • and f i n a l l y the h i g h e s t l e v e l was Limbus Patrum, o r Abraham's Bosom. Here r e s t e d the s o u l e s o f the P a t r i a r c h s P r o p h e t s & o t h e r h o l i e men, t h a t d i e d b e f o r e the coming o f C h r i s t . F or a l b e i t , t hose h o l i e s o u l e s had not a n i e t h i n g t o be purged, y e t they c o u l d not e n t e r i n t o g l o r i e , b e f o r e C h r i s t by h i s d e a t h , had opened the gate o f e t e r n a l l i f e . . . . t h ey s u f f e r e d no p a i n e s a t a l , but e n i o y e d a swete r e p o s e , e x p e c t i n g the coming of our L o r d w i t h g r e a t i o y . ' I n the C a t h o l i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , C h r i s t descended t o the g h i g h e s t l e v e l o n l y ; the r e a s o n s f o r t h i s become c l e a r when the purposes o f C h r i s t ' s descent are examined. C h r i s t d i d not descend t o h e l l t o s u f f e r any torment; the Son o f God was w i t h o u t s i n and t h e r e f o r e i t was h e r e t i c a l t o suggest t h a t he s h o u l d s u f f e r the torments o f the w i c k e d : thus he d i d not descend e i t h e r t o Gehenna, o r t o p u r g a t o r y . E s s e n t i a l l y , the purpose o f the d e s c e n t was t h r e e f o l d : he went t o r e l e a s e the s o u l s o f the p a t r i a r c h s from Limbus Patrum and t a k e them up w i t h him t o s a l v a t i o n and p a r a d i s e ; s e c o n d l y , he d i d not v i s i t o r s u f f e r any o f the p a i n o f p u r g a t o r y and Gehenna, but he "made h i m s e l f a l s o scene vnto a l the o t h e r p a r t s o f h e l : . . , c o m f o r t i n g the s o u l e s i n P u r g a t o r i e , as t h e i r A duocate, and d e l i u e r e r . " T h i s purpose o f h i s descent h e l p e d t o f u l f i l l t h e b i b l i c a l passage i n I P e t e r 3: 18-20, where i t was w r i t t e n t h a t " C h r i s t ... b e i n g put t o dea t h i n the f l e s h , b ut qu i c k e n e d by the S p i r i t ... went and pre a c h e d unto the s p i r i t s i n p r i s o n ; which were d i s o b e d i e n t , when once the l o n g -s u f f e r i n g o f God w a i t e d i n the days o f Noah, w h i l e the a r k was a p r e p a r i n g , w h e r e i n few, t h a t i s e i g h t s o u l s were saved by wat e r . " The f i n a l purpose o f C h r i s t ' s descent was f o r him t o be seen by those i n Gehenna, the damned and the d e v i l s a l i k e . He v a n q u i s h e d h e l l , " t e r r i f y i n g t he D i u e l s , as a v i c t o r i o u s Triumpher: t h r e a t e n i n g the damned; as a supreme i u d g e . ""^ The C a t h o l i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was u n t e n a b l e f o r the P r o t e s t a n t s . T h e i r i n i t i a l s chism from Rome had a r i s e n o v e r the s a l e o f i n d u l g e n c e s f o r the r e m i s s i o n o f punishment i n p u r g a t o r y . I n r e j e c t i n g the e f f i c a c y o f i n d u l g e n c e s , the P r o t e s t a n t s a l s o r e j e c t e d the whole n o t i o n o f p u r g a t o r y , and o f l e v e l s w i t h i n h e l l . F o r them, h e l l was s i m p l y the p l a c e o f the damned and o f e t e r n a l torment. C o n s e q u e n t l y , C h r i s t c o u l d not have descended t o comfort o r t o h e l p t o d e l i v e r the s o u l s i n p u r g a t o r y f o r t h e r e was no such p l a c e . I P e t e r 3: 18-20 would have t o be i n t e r p r e t e d d i f f e r e n t l y . I n the same way, C h r i s t c o u l d n o t have descended t o redeem the P a t r i a r c h s because t h e r e f o r m e r s d e n i e d t h a t Abrahams Bosom was a l e v e l o f h e l l , the m a j o r i t y p r e f e r r i n g t o see i t as a p l a c e c l o s e t o heaven, o r p a r a d i s e . For example, C a l v i n chose t o d e a l w i t h t h e two problems as one, c l a i m i n g t h a t I P e t e r 3: 18-20 - 28 -r e f e r r e d t o the p l a c e where the s o u l s o f the f a i t h f u l r e s t e d . However, he d e n i e d t h a t t h i s p l a c e was a " p r i s o n " , o r l e v e l o f h e l l . F o r him the s u g g e s t i o n t h a t t h e r e was a p l a c e c a l l e d Limbus Patrum under the e a r t h was n o t h i n g e l s but a f a b l e . F o r t o e n c l o s e the s o u l e s o f dead men as i n a p r i s o n , i s v e r y c h i l e d i s h . And what nede was i t t h a t C h r i s t e s s o u l e s h o u l d go downe t h i t h e r t o s e t them a t l i b e r t i e . I do i n dede w i l l i n g l y c o n f e s s e , t h a t C h r i s t s h i n e d t o them by the power o f h i s s p i r i t e , t h a t t hey might know t h a t the g r a c e which t h e y had o n e l y t a s t e d o f by hope, was t h e n d e l i u e r e d t o t h e w o r l d . And t o t h i s purpose may the p l a c e o f P e t e r be p r o b a b l y a p p l i e d , where he s a y t h , t h a t C h r i s t came and p r e a c h e d t o the s p i r i t e s t h a t were i n a dongeon o r p r i s o n , as i t i s commonly t r a n s l a t e d . F o r the v e r y p r o c e s s e o f the t e x t l e a d e t h us t o t h i s , t h a t the f a i t h f u l l w h i c h were dead b e f o r e t h a t t i m e , were p a r t a k e r s o f the same grace t h a t we were: bycause he d o t h t h e r e b y a m p l i f y the f o r c e o f C h r i s t e s d e a t h , f o r t h a t i t p e a r c e d euen t o the dead, when the Godly s o u l e s e n i o y e d the p r e s e n t s i g h t o f t h a t v i s i t a t i o n w h i c h t h e y had c a r e f u l l y l o k e d f o r : on the o t h e r s i d e i t d i d more p l a i n l y appeare t o t h e r e p r o b a t e t h a t t h e y were e x c l u d e d from a l l s a l u a t i o n . T h i s passage i l l u s t r a t e s a fundamental problem f o r the r e f o r m e r s when t h e y d e n i e d t h a t Limbus Patrum was a l e v e l o f h e l l . They c o u l d not adopt the s i m p l e s o l u t i o n o f c l a i m i n g t h a t t h e s e good s o u l s had gone s t r a i g h t t o heaven, because t h i s would have made C h r i s t ' s d e a t h f o r the s a l v a t i o n o f man-k i n d s u p e r f l u o u s and m e a n i n g l e s s . I f good s o u l s went t o heaven even b e f o r e C h r i s t had d i e d t o redeem them from the c u r s e o f o r i g i n a l s i n , what was the p o i n t o f h i s death? Hence the s o l u t i o n o f C a l v i n t h a t t h e s e good men were i n a s t a t e o f g r a c e , but o n l y r e c e i v e d f u l l s a l v a t i o n t h r o u g h C h r i s t ' s d eath; i f l a y e r s o f h e l l were d e n i e d , l a y e r s w i t h i n heaven had t o be a l l o w e d ! G i v e n the r e f o r m e r s ' v i e w o f h e l l , the o n l y p a r t o f the C a t h o l i c e x p l a n a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t w h i c h was s t i l l p l a u s i b l e f o r them was t h a t he descended t o v a n q u i s h , o r harrow h e l l . C h r i s t ' s r e s u r r e c t i o n was seen as a g l o r i o u s v i c t o r y o v e r d e a t h and s i n , but such a t r i u m p h would have been i n c o m p l e t e w i t h o u t the f u l l f l e x i n g o f h i s power and dominion o v e r the d e v i l . Hence C h r i s t c o u l d have descended t o h e l l i n h i s s o u l a f t e r d e a t h i n o r d e r t o harrow h e l l . On the o t h e r hand, i f t h e r e were no l e v e l s o f h e l l , t h i s h a r r o w i n g c o u l d n ot have been p e r f o r m e d from the upper l e v e l where t h e r e was no s u f f e r i n g (as the C a t h o l i c s b e l i e v e d ) ; but C h r i s t must have descended t o Gehenna, the p l a c e o f the damned, i n o r d e r t o p e r f o r m the v a n q u i s h i n g . T h i s was a p r o p o s i t i o n w h i c h some r e f o r m e r s were t o f i n d u n a c c e p t a b l e , a l t h o u g h i t remained as a p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h r o u g h o u t the debate w h i c h f o l l o w e d . The d e n u n c i a t i o n o f p u r g a t o r y was not the o n l y i s s u e w h i c h caused problems f o r t h i s a r t i c l e o f the Creed d u r i n g the f i r s t h a l f o f t h e s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y . Erasmus had w r i t t e n two works i n w h i c h he c o n s i d e r e d the d e s c e n t o f C h r i s t i n t o h e l l . I n them he r a i s e d s e v e r a l major problems which the P r o t e s t -a n t s were t o c o n f r o n t l a t e r . Erasmus's f i r s t work, p r i n t e d i n 1524, was e n t i t l e d An E x a m i n a t i o n C o n c e r n i n g F a i t h , and the 12 second was Symbolum A p o s t o l o r u m , p r i n t e d i n 1533. B o t h took the form o f a c a t e c h i s m , examining each a r t i c l e o f the Creed. I n the E x a m i n a t i o n , Erasmus r a i s e d a problem by q u e s t i o n i n g - 30 -the a u t h e n t i c i t y o f "he descended, i n t o h e l l " as an a r t i c l e o f the Creed. The q u e s t i o n was posed: Do you b e l i e v e h i s / C h r i s t ' s 7 s o u l descended t o h e l l ? An a f f i r m a t i v e answer was g i v e n , b u t not b e f o r e some doubt had been c a s t : C y p r i a n b e a r s w i t n e s s t h a t f o r m e r l y t h i s a r t i c l e was not a p a r t o f the Roman c r e e d o r o f t h a t o f the E a s t e r n c h u r c h e s ; n o r i s i t mentioned i n T e r t u l l i a n , a v e r y a n c i e n t w r i t e r . N e v e r t h e l e s s I m y s e l f f i r m l y b e l i e v e i t , b o t h because i t agrees w i t h the prophecy o f the psalm, "Thou w i l t n o t l e a v e my s o u l i n h e l l , " ... and because the a p o s t l e P e t e r , ... wrote t h u s : "... he went and p r e a c h e d unto the s p i r i t s i n p r i s o n . " B u t , as I b e l i e v e he descended t o h e l l , so I do n o t b e l i e v e he s u f f e r e d a n y t h i n g t h e r e ; f o r he descended not t o be tormented t h e r e but t o s h a t t e r the Kingdom o f S a t a n f o r u s . 1 3 T h e r e f o r e Erasmus had d e t r a c t e d from r a t h e r than added t o the a u t h o r i t y o f t h e a r t i c l e by i n d i c a t i n g t h a t i t was not i n c l u d -ed i n a l l t he e a r l y Church c r e e d s , i t i s a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t when employing s c r i p t u r e t o s u p p o r t the v a l i d i t y o f the a r t i c l e , Erasmus d i d n o t use any passage which s t a t e d word f o r word "He descended i n t o h e l l . " T h i s was because no s c r i p t u r a l passage makes t h i s c l a i m . There a r e a l l u s i o n s t o the d e s c e n t and p r o p h e c i e s about i t , b ut no u n e q u i v o c a l statement t h a t C h r i s t d i d i t . The absence o f d i r e c t b i b l i c a l a u t h o r i t y f o r the d e s c e n t was t o add t o the r e f o r m e r s ' doubts about the a r t i c l e because o f the P r o t e s t a n t emphasis on the Word as th e supreme a u t h o r i t y i n m a t t e r s o f b e l i e f . Erasmus c o v e r e d t h i s problem a g a i n i n the Symbolum  A p o s t o l o r u m , r e i t e r a t i n g the r a t h e r shaky f o u n d a t i o n s o f the a r t i c l e . A l s o i n t h i s work he p r o v i d e d f u r t h e r grounds f o r - 31 -c o n t r o v e r s y c o n c e r n i n g the a r t i c l e . Doubt was r a i s e d about the t r u e meaning o f the word " h e l l " : F o r the S c r i p t u r e dothe o f t e n t y m e s c a l l deathe and the graue by t h i s name i n f e r o s whiche same worde i s e n g l y s h e d o t h e r w h i l e s h e l l e ... Howe be i t t h e r e semeth t o be t h e same s t r e n g t h e o f t h e worde: i n t h a t t h a t he i s sayde t o haue ben b u r i e d . . . . As who s h o l d e saye t h a t descendere ad i n f e r n a were noughte e l s : but t o be bu r y e d i n the graue which our l o r d e speakynge o f h i s owne b u r y a l l c a l l e d t o be the h e r t o f the e a r t h . 1 4 T h i s doubt ( w h i c h can be p a r a p h r a s e d as a problem o f t r a n s -l a t i o n ) r a i s e d q u e s t i o n s about the d e s t i n a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e scent ( t h e grave o r h e l l ) , and a l s o about how he descended, .because i t seemed s a c r i l e g i o u s t o suggest t h a t the s o u l , w hich remained a l i v e a f t e r the c r u c i f i x i o n , was b u r i e d i n the g r a v e . These t r a n s l a t i o n problems were t o become the ground o f vehement c o n t r o v e r s y l a t e r . The f i n a l p r o b lem r a i s e d by Erasmus concerned the d e s t i n a t i o n and the purpose o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t . Having a l l u d e d t o some contemporary c o n t r o v e r s y s u r r o u n d i n g the purpose o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t , Erasmus " u t t e r l y e r e i e c t e d and r e f u t e d " one i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t Because o r y g y n a l l synne dyd not o n e l y brynge the deathe o f body, but a l s o the tormente and payne o f s o u l e s , t h a t by the reasone o f i t they s h o l d e wante the uysyon and syghte o f godes f a c e : t h e r e f o r e t hey do suppose i t t o be conuenyente and accordynge t h a t lykewyse as C h r i s t e by the deathe o f h i s bodye dyd a b o l y s h e and t a k e awaye b o d y l y payne: euyn soo by s u f f r y n g e i n h i s ^ g o u l e he s h o l d e t a k e awaye the payne o f the s o u l e s . Erasmus was d e n y i n g t h a t C h r i s t descended i n t o h e l l t o s u f f e r i n h i s s o u l t h e r e b y s a v i n g the s o u l s o f men, i n the same way t h a t he had s u f f e r e d b o d i l y torment on the c r o s s t o save the b o d i e s o f men. Such a dichotomy was h e r e t i c a l s i n c e , i n the C a t h o l i c b e l i e f , the d e a t h o f C h r i s t on the c r o s s was the complete s a c r i f i c e w hich p r o v i d e d the means o f s a l v a t i o n f o r man, body and s o u l . However, d e s p i t e t h i s o u t r i g h t d e n i a l t h a t C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l e n t a i l e d the s u f f e r i n g o f h i s s o u l t h e r e , Erasmus made an o b s e r v a t i o n w h i c h deserves a t t e n t i o n . I n a c a r e f u l l y worded passage, he s u p p o r t e d the b e l i e f s "whiche the r e l y g y o u s e contemplacyon o f good and g o d l y men hathe t a u g h t e j " and one o f t h e s e was t h a t C h r i s t by the r e a s o n o f the c o m p l e x i o n o f h i s humane body (whiche t h e y w y l l t o haue ben i n hym f a r r e moste s u b t y l e , and so t h e r e f o r e o f moste q u i c k e and sharpe f e l y n g e ) dyd s u f f r e more greuouse and b y t t e r paynes than any man may p o s s i b l y s u f f r e , the payne o f them o n e l y e x c e p t e d whiche a r e p e r p e t u a l l y e damned i n h e l l e . 1 6 Erasmus was s u g g e s t i n g immense s u f f e r i n g on C h r i s t ' s b e h a l f i n the "complexion o f h i s humane body". Whether by t h i s Erasmus meant the s o u l as w e l l as the f l e s h i s not e n t i r e l y c l e a r . However, t h i s s u g g e s t i o n p r o v i d e s a h i n t o f an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t o come: t h a t the de s c e n t i n t o h e l l r e a l l y 17 meant the s o u l s u f f e r i n g o f C h r i s t . I t was C a l v i n who p u t f o r w a r d t h i s i m p o r t a n t t r e a t m e n t o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t . S i n c e h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was t o be c r u c i a l i n the E n g l i s h debate, not o n l y h i s view o f the a r t i c l e ' s meaning must be o u t l i n e d , but a l s o h i s r e a s o n s f o r r e j e c t i n g o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . He d e a l t w i t h the same problems w h i c h Erasmus had r a i s e d : the q u e s t i o n o f the a u t h e n t i c i t y o f the a r t i c l e ; the d i f f i c u l t y i n t r a n s l a t i n g i t ; - 33 -and the i s s u e o f the s u f f e r i n g o f C h r i s t ' s s o u l . C o n c e r n i n g i t s a u t h e n t i c i t y , he conceeded t h a t i t a p p e a r e t h by the w r i t i n g e s o f the o l d e F a t h e r s , t h a t t h a t p a r t e which i s re a d i n the Crede, was not i n o l d e time so much used i n the C h i r c h e s : y e t i n e n t r e a t i n g o f the summe o f our d o c t r i n e , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t i t haue a p l a c e a l l o w e d i t , as a t h i n g t h a t c o n t e i n e t h a v e r y p r o f i t a b l e and not t o be d e s p i s e d mystery o f a r i g h t w e i g h t y m a t t e r . A c c o r d i n g t o C a l v i n , "by whome, o r a t what tyme i t was f i r s t added, maketh l i t t l e t o the pur p o s e , " the i m p o r t a n t p o i n t b e i n g t h a t i f any w i l l n o t f o r p r e c i s e c u r i o s i t i e admit i t i n t o the Crede, y e t s h a l l i t s t r e i g h t way be made to appeare p l a i n l y , t h a t i t i s o f so g r e a t importaunce t o the summe o f our red e m p t i o n , t h a t i f i t be l e f t o u t , t h e r e i s l o s t a g r e a t p a r t e o f the f r u i t e o f the dea t h o f C h r i s t . 1 9 T h e r e f o r e , a l t h o u g h C a l v i n reached the same c o n c l u s i o n as Erasmus ( t h a t the a r t i c l e ought t o be i n c l u d e d i n the C r e e d ) , i t was not because o f the a u t h o r i t y o f the s c r i p t u r e s and/or 20 the Church, as Erasmus had su g g e s t e d , but because C a l v i n saw the de s c e n t as an i m p o r t a n t p a r t i n the redemptive p r o c e s s . T h i s the C a t h o l i c Church had d e n i e d . I n c o n s i d e r i n g the t r a n s l a t i o n o f the word " h e l l " , C a l v i n was q u i t e p r e p a r e d t o admit t h a t i t was f r e q u e n t l y t o be u n d e r s t o o d as "g r a v e " , but he o f f e r e d two reasons why t h i s was n ot i t s t r u e meaning i n the c r e e d a l c o n t e x t . I t would have been r e p e t i t i o u s t o say "he was c r u c i f i e d , dead and b u r i e d ; he descended t o the gr a v e " . C a l v i n argued t h a t i t i s not l i k e l y t h a t such a s u p e r f l u o u s v a i n r e p e t i c i o n c o u l d haue c r e p t i n t o t h i s a b r igement, where i n the - 34 -chief pointes of our f a i t h aye summarily noted i n as few wordes as was possible. In addition, a q u a l i f y i n g phrase should c l a r i f y rather than confuse a statement: For when two maners of speaking that expresse one thing be ioyned together, i t behoueth that the l a t e r be an exposition of the former. But what an exposition were t h i s , i f a man should say thus: Wheras i t i s sayd that Christ was buried, thereby i s meant that he went down to H e l . 2 2 Calvin's authority f o r dismissing t h i s t r a n s l a t i o n was not the scriptures, the Church Fathers, or the Catholic Church i t s e l f (understandably enough); he r e l i e d on his own sense of language and l o g i c , concluding that "I dout not that so many as s h a l l haue somewhat d i l i g e n t l y weyed the matter i t 23 s e l f , w i l l e a s i l y agree with me." Concerning the t h i r d issue, the suffering of Christ's soul, Calvin expressed an opinion which was to have r a d i c a l repercussions. A l l the Catholic interpretations of the a r t i c l e were passed over; i t s meaning was that Christ suffered h e l l i s h torments i n his soul: Christes death had bene to no e f f e c t , i f he had suffered onely a corporall death: but i t behoued also that he should feele the r i g o r of Gods vengeance: that he might both appease his wrath and s a t i s f y his i u s t iudgement. For whiche cause also i t behoued that he should as i t were hand to hand wrastle with the armies of the helles and the horror of e t e r n a l l d e a t h . 2 4 Calvin believed that these torments were suffered during Christ's agony and on the cross. Although the above passage could leave doubt as to the timing of this suffering, any such doubt was removed by his response to an objection which - 35 -had been made t o h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n : t h e i r e x c e p t i o n i s v e r y f o n d , yea and t o be s c o r n e d , w h i c h say, t h a t by t h i s e x p o s i t i o n the o r d e r i s p e r u e r t e d , bycause i t were an a b s u r d i t y t o s e t t h a t a f t e r h i s b u r i a l l w h i c h went b e f o r e i t . For a f t e r the s e t t i n g f o r t h o f those t h i n g e s t h a t C h r i s t s u f f e r e d i n the s i g h t o f men, i n v e r y good o r d e r f o l o w e t h t h a t i n u i s i b l e and i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e iudgement w h i c h he s u f f e r e d i n the s i g h t o f Cod: t h a t we s h o u l d know t h a t not o n e l y the body o f C h r i s t was geuen t o be the p r i c e o f our r e d e m p t i o n , but t h a t t h e r e was an o t h e r g r e a t e r and more e x c e l l e n t p r i c e payed i n t h i s , t h a t i n h i s s o u l e he s u f f r e d the t e r r i b l e tormentes o f a damned and f o r s a k e n man. 2 5 Thus, the essence o f C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was t h a t the c r e e d a l d escent i n t o h e l l was C h r i s t ' s agony o f s o u l d u r i n g the p a s s i o n and c r u c i f i x i o n . I n s u p p o r t o f t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n C a l v i n c i t e d s e v e r a l b i b l i c a l r e f e r e n c e s : Matt.26:39 " F a t h e r , i f i t be p o s s i b l e , l e t t h i s cup d e p a r t from me", r e p e a t e d t h r e e t i m e s by C h r i s t , w h i c h C a l v i n saw as e v i d e n c e o f C h r i s t ' s b i t t e r n e s s o f h e a r t and the extreme torment o f h i s d e a t h ; John 13:21, and Matt.26:37 w h i c h i n d i c a t e d t h a t C h r i s t was t r o u b l e d i n s p i r i t i n the garden; and the u l t i m a t e f o r s a k i n g and s u f f e r i n g on the c r o s s as i n d i c a t e d by C h r i s t ' s p r a y e r i n Matt. 27:46, "My God, my God, why h a s t thou f o r s a k e n me?" There i s one f i n a l p o i n t c o n c e r n i n g C a l v i n ' s v iew w h i c h needs c l a r i f i c a t i o n because i t was t o cause problems l a t e r . Even by the time t h a t he wrote The I n s t i t v t i o n o f C h r i s t i a n  R e l i g i o n , some p e o p l e must have o b j e c t e d t h a t the s o u l s u f f e r i n g o f the damned s h o u l d - n o t be a t t r i b u t e d t o C h r i s t , 2 6 who was w i t h o u t s i n . What was more, C h r i s t was God and man, - 36 -so how c o u l d he be s u f f e r i n g such agonies o f the s o u l because he f e l t f o r s a k e n by God? C a l v i n ' s c l e a r e s t t reatment o f these problems was i n h i s Catech i sme: We muste unders tande t h a t he /Christ7 was i n suche d i s t r e s s e one lye as touchynge~hys h u m a n i t i e . And to the entente t h a t he myghte f e e l e these panges i n hys manhode, hys Godheade dyd i n the meane tyme f o r a l y t t l e space kepe i t s e l f e c l o s e , t h a t i s to say , i t dyd not showe the myghte t h e r e o f . . . . Hereby then we see the d i f f e r e n c e betwene the g r i e f e o f mynde, which C h r i s t e dyd s u f f e r , and t h a t which the i m p e n i t e n t e synners doe abyde, . . . f o r t h a t verye payne , whych C h r i s t e sus teyned f o r a tyme, the wycked muste i n d u r e c o n t y n u a l l y e : and t h a t whych was unto C h r y s t e but a p r i c k e , i s unto the wycked i n s teade o f a g l a i u e to wounde theym to d e a t h . 2 , 7 In t h i s passage C a l v i n was making two i m p o r t a n t p o i n t s about the n a t u r e and the ex tent o f C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g . C h r i s t c o u l d not have s u f f e r e d i n h i s d i v i n i t y , and ye t he c o u l d not have been wi thout i t . T h i s e x p l a i n s C a l v i n ' s c a r e f u l wording t h a t C h r i s t ' s d i v i n i t y kept " i t s e l f e c l o s e " but "dyd not showe the myghte t h e r e o f . " The o t h e r p o i n t which C a l v i n made concerned the ex tent o f C h r i s t ' s s u f f e r i n g . Because C h r i s t was w i thout s i n C a l v i n d i d not wi sh to suggest t h a t C h r i s t s u f f e r e d as the damned s u f f e r : hence , C h r i s t ' s s u f f e r i n g was a " p r i c k e " i n comparison w i t h the d e a t h l y gashes o f the damned. Some o f C a l v i n ' s f o l l o w e r s were to o v e r l o o k these l i m i t a t i o n s , and c l a i m t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g s were v e r y much more s u b s t a n t i a l . I t i s obv ious t h a t C a l v i n was i n t e r p r e t i n g t h i s a r t i c l e o f f a i t h i n a way t h a t d i f f e r e d f u n d a m e n t a l l y from the C a t h o l i c v i e w p o i n t . H i s t h e o l o g y was to be o f c o n s i d e r a b l e - 37 -importance i n the debate i n Engla n d . The names o f o t h e r c o n t i n e n t a l r e f o r m e r s were c i t e d as s o u r c e s o f a u t h o r i t y by the E n g l i s h p r o t a g o n i s t s as w e l l ; B u c e r , Beza, B u l l i n g e r and P e t e r M a r t y r V e r m i g l i were a l l r e f e r r e d t o . The debate i n England was t o r e v o l v e around the same f o u r f o c u s e s as had been r a i s e d on the C o n t i n e n t : the d e n u n c i a t i o n o f p u r g a t o r y and l e v e l s o f h e l l ; doubt o v e r the a u t h e n t i c i t y o f the a r t i c l e ; t he t r u e meaning o f the word h e l l i n the c r e e d a l c o n t e x t ; and whether the des c e n t was r e a l l y C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g on the c r o s s . However, even though the f o c u s e s were the same, the p r e o c c u p a t i o n s and co n c e r n s o f the a u t h o r s were o f t e n q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from each o t h e r . So too were the t e c h n i q u e s w h i c h they used t o s u p p o r t t h e i r p o s i t i o n s . I t was t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s i n t e c h n i q u e and p r e o c c u p a t i o n w h i c h ensured t h a t the E n g l i s h c o n t r o v e r s y was not s t a t i c , but r a t h e r one i n whi c h a fundamental s h i f t i n the n a t u r e o f b e l i e f may be seen. * * * * * * ( i i ) From P r o t e s t a n t v e r s u s C a t h o l i c t o P r o t e s t a n t v e r s u s  P r o t e s t a n t The f i r s t E n g l i s h t r a c t on the s u b j e c t o f C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l came from John N o r t h b r o o k e . H i s main p r e o c c u p a t i o n was t o denounce the C a t h o l i c b e l i e f t h a t C h r i s t - 38 -descended to f r e e s o u l s from purgatory, or Limbus Patrum. The 1571 e d i t i o n of S p i r i t v s E s t ... A b r e e f e and p i t h i e summe of the C h r i s t i a n f a i t h claimed to show t h a t a l l the s o u l s of the r i g h t e o u s , that d i e d before C h r i s t e s comyng i n the f l e s h e , were i n heaven, and not i n any P u r g a t o r i e , Limbo, or H e l l . That C h r i s t e s soule should not neede to goe downe t h i t h e r to f e t c h them out ... t h a t h i s soule (departyng from h i s bodie) wente s t r a i g h t i n t o heaven, and not i n t o h e l l , the p l a c e of the dampned. I t appears t h a t t h i s work drew the c r i t i c i s m t h a t he was 29 denying an a r t i c l e o f the Creed, and so the l a t e r e d i t i o n s were changed somewhat to defend h i s p o s i t i o n . The a n t i - P a p i s t polemic d i d not change, however; the e p i s t l e d e d i c a t o r y b r i s t l e s w i t h s u s p i c i o n of those who draw n i e w i t h tongue and pen vnto vs, but t h e i r h a r t s are at Roome: a number of them haue Gospel t a l k e , but y e t a Romish f a i t h , an E n g l i s h f a c e , but Spanish h a r t s . . . . a l l t h i s whyle they run i n t o hugger mugger, a wh i s p e r i n g i n c o r n e r s , s a y i n g to the simple people: beleeue not t h i s new d o c t r i n e , i t i s naught, i t w i l not long endure ,... 30 When c o n s i d e r i n g C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l , North-brooke consequently seems more c e r t a i n of how the a r t i c l e should not be i n t e r p r e t e d , than of how i t should. The descent was not f o r the p o p i s h purpose of r e l e a s i n g the f a i t h f u l F a thers from Abraham's Bosom, because t h i s was a p l a c e of " i o y , r e s t , and comfort, such a space beeing betwixt i t , and 31 h e l l , t h a t the one can haue no accesse unto the o t h e r . " I n t e r e s t i n g l y , the descent was not i n order t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n h e l l a f t e r h i s death. Northbrooke claimed t h a t some supported t h i s argument from a few of the Church Fathers - 39 -( O r i g e n , Jerome, and T e r t u l l i a n ) who had b e l i e v e d t h a t C h r i s t had t o s u f f e r as we s u f f e r i n o r d e r t o save us. A c c o r d i n g t o them, C h r i s t had t o ..suffer i n body and s o u l ; t h u s , he s u f f e r e d i n body here on e a r t h , and t h e n i n h i s s o u l i n h e l l , a f t e r h i s d e a t h . Northbrooke d e n i e d t h i s f o r t h r e e r e a s o n s . C h r i s t ' s f e a r i n h i s p a s s i o n i n d i c a t e d t h a t he must have been s u f f e r i n g h e l l ' s t orments i n h i s s o u l t h e n , because o t h e r w i s e the o n l y p o s s i b l e c o n c l u s i o n was t h a t C h r i s t f a c e d d e a t h l e s s b r a v e l y t h a n many o t h e r m a r t y r s ; he would o n l y need t o s u f f e r t h e s e torments once, and so h a v i n g done t h i s w h i l e a l i v e , he would not have descended t o h e l l i n h i s s o u l a f t e r death. But most i m p o r t a n t l y , Northbrooke found f a u l t w i t h the a ssumption t h a t C h r i s t had t o s u f f e r as the w i c k e d s u f f e r i n o r d e r t o save mankind. He argued t h a t i f t h i s was the r e q u i r e m e n t o f r e d e m p t i o n , C h r i s t would have needed t o s u f f e r f u l l and e v e r l a s t i n g damnation, a n o t i o n u n a c c e p t a b l e t o any t r u e C h r i s t i a n . T h i s l i n e o f r e a s o n i n g was t o appear i n the debate w h i c h f o l l o w e d , f r e q u e n t l y b e i n g used a g a i n s t C a l v i n ' s argument t h a t C h r i s t needed t o s u f f e r i n h i s s o u l on the c r o s s t o complete an o t h e r w i s e " b o d i l y " s a l v a t i o n . A l t h o u g h N o rthbrooke was vehemently anti-Roman, i t cannot be c o n c l u d e d t h a t he was a d i e - h a r d , o r t h o d o x " C a l v i n i s t " . Whether i n t e n t i o n a l o r n o t , he had used t h i s argument which c o u l d be p r o b l e m a t i c f o r C a l v i n i s t s , and a l t h o u g h s e v e r a l o f h i s views were i n l i n e w i t h C a l v i n ' s ( t h e d escent b e i n g i n the s o u l and - 40 -w h i l s t C h r i s t was on the c r o s s ) , he a c c e p t e d some o p i n i o n s w h i c h C a l v i n had r e j e c t e d . F or example, b o t h Northbrooke and C a l v i n a c c e p t e d t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g on the c r o s s d i d p e r f o r m the r o l e o f s p o i l i n g , o r v a n q u i s h i n g h e l l , a l t h o u g h c l e a r l y i n a m e t a p h o r i c a l sense. Thus Northbrooke c o u l d c l a i m t h a t C h r i s t d i d descend i n t o h e l l i n power and i n s p i r i t , but he went on t o a c c e p t an argument w h i c h C a l v i n had d e n i e d . C h r i s t a l s o descended " i n p e r s o n , when as he was l a y d e i n the 33 graue ... as the manner o f the Jewes i s t o b u r y . " C a l v i n had 34 d e n i e d t h i s t o be a c o r r e c t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e . N o r t h brooke was p r e p a r e d t o a c c e p t s e e m i n g l y c o n t r a d i c t o r y a l t e r n a t i v e s , p r o v i d e d t h a t the d e s c e n t t o Limbus Patrum and 35 the d e s c e n t o f the s o u l t o s u f f e r h e l l f i r e were d e n i e d . One may c o n c l u d e t h a t the 1582 e d i t i o n s were aimed a t denouncing t h e s e two i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f the a r t i c l e , and a l s o a t c o u n t e r i n g a c c u s a t i o n s t h a t N o r thbrooke had d e n i e d the a r t i c l e o f the Creed: " r e p o r t n o t , t h a t I doo deny any A r t i c l e o f the F a i t h (God f o r b i d I s h o u l d ) "°° The o t h e r work p u b l i s h e d i n 1582 on the s u b j e c t o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l was C h r i s t o p h e r C a r l i l e ' s A D i s c o v r s e C o n c e r n i n g two d i u i n e P o s i t i o n s . The f i r s t o f t h e s e two p o s i t i o n s seems s i m i l a r t o N o r t h b r o o k e ' s because C a r l i l e wanted t o show t h a t "the s o u l e s o f the f a i t h f u l l f a t h e r s , 37 deceased b e f o r e C h r i s t , went i m m e d i a t e l y t o heauen," thus denouncing the C a t h o l i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t . But a p a r t from t h i s p o i n t o f common ground, t h e i r approaches - 41 -and c o n c l u s i o n s a r e v e r y d i f f e r e n t . C a r l i l e ' s aim was t o denounce the a r t i c l e o f the Creed c o m p l e t e l y , and he employed e v e r y a v a i l a b l e t e c h n i q u e t o do so. He used a s y s t e m a t i c argument combined w i t h a s t r i c t , l i t e r a l adherence t o c e r t a i n passages o f s c r i p t u r e t o h i g h l i g h t the i n c o n g r u i t y o f some e x p l a n a t i o n s o f the d e s c e n t . F o r example: I f C h r i s t e descended i n t o H e l , e i t h e r he must descende ' i n Body o r i n S o u l e , o r i n h i s Godheade, o r i n a l l : but i n Bodye hee d i d n o t : f o r i t l a y e i n the graue t h r e e dayes, as t h e s e p l a c e s i n the margent do t e s t i f y e /Math. 26.61; i o h n 2.19. Ionas 2.1. Mat 12.43. G l o s s upon Act.27. Moreouer a body t h a t i s deade, w i t h o u t s e n s e s , w i t h o u t l i f e , w i t h o u t s o u l e , can n e i t h e r descende, n o r ascende, moue, s t i r r e , o r r y s e , ... n e i t h e r c o u l d e h i s s o u l e descende. C o u l d t h a t descende, whiche d i d ascend? or t h a t descend i n t o h e l l , t h a t was i n p a r a d i s e , i n f e l i c i t y , i n the Kingdme o f God? But C h r i s t e h i s s o u l e was i n heauen, euen so soone as y t d e p a r t e d out of the bodye /Luke 23.42; Esay 66.1; A c t . 7.497. As f o r h i s godhead, i t can n e i t h e r ascend, nor descende. Can t h a t ascend, o r descend, t h a t i s euery where, t h a t f i l l e t h a l l p l a c e s , t h a t i s i n heauen, e a r t h and h e l l , a l l a t once? Ergo h i s godhead was not i n h e l l , more a t one tyme then a t a n o t h e r . 3 8 T h i s k i n d o f argument o c c u r s t h r o u g h o u t the work, but i t was not C a r l i l e ' s o n l y t e c h n i q u e . A t t i m e s he was p r e p a r e d s i m p l y t o r e l y on w eight o f e v i d e n c e . H i s opponent, R i c h a r d S m i t h , had a t t e m p t e d t o argue t h a t the i n c l u s i o n o f the a r t i c l e i n . the Creed was s u f f i c i e n t t o r e q u i r e the a c c e p t a n c e o f i t : Smithe: I f n o t h i n g e can p r e u a y l e w i t h you, t h a t I haue s e t downe o r a l l e a d g e d , n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g , i t i s ynough t h a t i t i s i n our Crede. C a r l i l : I denye t h a t i t i s i n our Crede ... Of t h i s f a b l e t hey /^he A p o s t l e s , P a u l and P e t e r / make no mention, i t i s e x c l u d e d as i m p e r t i n e n t , o m i t t e d as not e x p e d i e n t e , n e g l e g t e d as an i n c o n u e n i e n c e , and contempned as an a b s u r d i t i e . 3 9 He c o n t i n u e d t h a t R u f i n u s , Chrysostom and s e v e r a l e a r l y Church Creeds a l l l e f t i t o u t , and f i n a l l y l i s t e d s i x t y - f i v e Creeds and Church C o u n c i l s w h i c h had e x c l u d e d i t , t h e r e b y s u g g e s t i n g t h a t the w e i g h t o f e v i d e n c e was on h i s s i d e . U s e f u l though t h e s e arguments were t o C a r l i l e , h i s main t h r u s t was not s i m p l y t o deny the a u t h e n t i c i t y o f the a r t i c l e r e l y i n g on o t h e r s ' d e n i a l o f i t ; r a t h e r i t was t o pursue a n o t h e r o f the problems w h i c h Erasmus had r a i s e d , namely the i s s u e o f t r a n s l a t i o n . C a r l i l e had been a Hebrew s c h o l a r a t Cambridge, and h i s work d i s p l a y s a marked c o n c e r n w i t h the importance o f t r u e t r a n s l a t i o n from o r i g i n a l t e x t s . T h i s c o n c e r n p r o v i d e d a f o u n d a t i o n f o r h i s con c e r n w i t h the a r t i c l e , and he denounced many o f the reas o n s g i v e n f o r the de s c e n t by showing t h a t t h e y were based on m i s - t r a n s l a t i o n s . F o r example, he denounced the C a t h o l i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t C h r i s t descended t o l o o s e the sorrows o f h e l l , o b j e c t i n g t h a t : A f a l s e p r i n c i p l e b r y n g e t h f o r t h many a b s u r d i t y e s : an u n t r u e t r a n s l a t i o n deceueth the r e a d e r : Not t o searche the f o u n t a i n e and Greeke t e x t c a u s e t h e r r o u r e . The b l i n d e e a t e t h many a f l y e . I t i s not i n Greke, t h a t C h r i s t l o u s e d the sorowes o f h e l l but t h a t the f a t h e r euen God h i m s e l f e l o u s e d the sorrowes o f deathe.^0 C a r l i l e examined the views and t r a n s l a t i o n s o f Erasmus, B u c e r , Beza, and C a s t e l l i o , t o name but a few. He was i n b e t t e r agreement w i t h Beza t h a n w i t h anyone e l s e , because Beza u s u a l l y s u p p o r t e d b i b l i c a l t r a n s l a t i o n s t h a t were a c c e p t a b l e t o C a r l i l e . 4 1 However, w h i l e t r a n s l a t i o n was C a r l i l e ' s main p r e o c c u p a t i o n and p r o v i d e d the a u t h o r i t y f o r most o f h i s - 43 -v i e w s , i t c o u l d c r e a t e as many problems as i t s o l v e d . I n p a r t i c u l a r , passages r e f e r r i n g t o C h r i s t ' s s o u l i n h e l l were awkward. Even i f the word " h e l l " was t r a n s l a t e d as "grave" (as i t had been i n the Geneva B i b l e ) the t r a n s l a t i o n remained u n a c c e p t a b l e t o C a r l i l e because i t was imp i o u s t o suggest t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l was e v e r b u r i e d . The o n l y s o l u t i o n was t o t r a n s l a t e the word " s o u l " as "body", and t h i s C a r l i l e a d v o cated: What a t r a n s l a t i o n i s t h i s t o say t h a t the S o u l e i s e n c l o s e d i n the graue, and b u r i e d w i t h the bodye, whiche i s an i m p i e t y e t o Imagine? For the s o u l e dyethe n o t , i t l i u e t h e alwaye n e t h e r i s i t b u r i e d , f o r t h a t i s t he body: ... Wherefore o f n e c e s s i t y t hey s h o u l d haue t r a n s l a t e d Nephes the bodye, which d y e t h , and i s b u r i e d . 4 2 T h i s was not t h e end o f the problem because, as o t h e r s we-re t o p o i n t out l a t e r , t h i s t r a n s l a t i o n had the d i s a d v a n t a g e o f making some b i b l i c a l passages seem r e p e t i t i v e . A c t s 2: 27 and 31, and Psalm 16: 9 became p a r t i c u l a r l y c o n t r o v e r s i a l . They were a l l passages w h i c h r e l a t e d t h a t " h i s / C h r i s t ' s 7 s o u l was not l e f t i n h e l l , n e i t h e r h i s f l e s h d i d see c o r r u p t i o n , " a l t h o u g h the e x a c t wording v a r i e d i n p l a c e s . The a l t e r n a t i v e " h i s body was not l e f t i n the grave-, n e i t h e r h i s f l e s h d i d see c o r r u p t i o n " was r e j e c t e d by some because the two c l a u s e s 43 were s a y i n g the same t h i n g . I n t h i s way disagreement de v e l o p e d r a t h e r t h a n d i m i n i s h e d t h r o u g h the e x a m i n a t i o n o f o r i g i n a l t e x t s . One p a r t i c i p a n t who was f a m i l i a r w i t h C a r l i l e ' s work and views on t r a n s l a t i o n s was Adam H i l l ; and he was a t g r e a t - 4 4 -p a i n s t o r e j e c t C a r l i l e ' s c o n c l u s i o n s . He d e n i e d the v a l i d i t y o f C a r l i l e ' s o t h e r arguments as w e l l . For example, c o n c e r n i n g C a r l i l e ' s argument t h a t some o f the Church F a t h e r s and a n c i e n t c r e e d s had o m i t t e d the a r t i c l e and hence i t s h o u l d n o t be a c c e p t e d as an a r t i c l e o f f a i t h , H i l l r e t o r t e d t h a t , t r u e though t h i s was, So A t h a n a s i u s c r e e d l a c k e t h the b u r i a l l . Hieroms ad Damas. l a c k e t h i t a l s o , T e r t u l l i a n l e a u e t h out i n h i s Creede the c a t h o l i q u e Church, the r e s u r r e c t i o n o f the f l e s h , and l i f e e u e r l a s t i n g . . . . I t i s no good r e a s o n i n g from the a u t h o r i t y o f man n e g a t i u e l y . 4 4 Thus, i n the disagreement over the a u t h e n t i c i t y o f the a r t i c l e , H i l l argued t h a t i t s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d i n the Creed. He d e n i e d t h a t the " s o u l " s h o u l d be t r a n s l a t e d as "body" and " h e l l " as the "grave" i n the b i b l i c a l passages concerned, but some o f h i s re a s o n s f o r m a i n t a i n i n g t h i s p o s i t i o n a re n o t e -worthy. He p l a y e d on b o t h s u s p i c i o n and p e r c e i v e d a n t i p a t h y between the J u d a i c and C h r i s t i a n f a i t h s when he wrote t h a t some D i u i n e s t h e r e a re l o u i n g ouermuch J e w i s h f a b l e s , doo embrace t h i s t r a n s l a t i o n ( o f S h e o l i n t o a graue) and by t h e i r own f o o l i s h n e s c o n f i r m e the dreames o f the Jewes & enc r e a s e t h e i r e r r o r , and doo make the a r t i c l e o f d e s c e n d i n g i n t o h e l l s u s p e c t e d t o the u n s k i l f u l l and weaker s o r t o f p e o p l e . J C a r l i l e ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s had r e s u l t e d from s t u d y i n g Hebrew and Greek, and so d i d those o f a n o t h e r p r o t a g o n i s t , Hugh Broughton, whose views w i l l be examined l a t e r . H i l l a t t e m p t e d t o undermine t h e t r a n s l a t i o n s by l i n k i n g them w i t h J u d a i s m and w i t h the n o t i o n o f a J e w i s h c o n s p i r a c y t o undermine C h r i s t i a n i t y . These a n t i - S e m i t i c r e f e r e n c e s p e r s i s t t h r o u g h -out h i s work. S i n c e one o f the key a r t i c l e s o f C h r i s t i a n - 45 -b e l i e f was coming i n t o d i s r e p u t e because i t s meaning was i n c r e a s i n g l y u n c l e a r , the r a l l y i n g c r y o f " J e w i s h c o n s p i r a c y " was employed, presumably t o g a l v a n i z e s u p p o r t b e h i n d the a r t i c l e . An e x p r e s s i o n o f the c o n f u s i o n and c o n c e r n s u r r o u n d i n g the a r t i c l e by t h i s time was p r o v i d e d i n H i l l ' s d e d i c a t o r y e p i s t l e t o A r c h b i s h o p W h i t g i f t : I see d i u e r s M i n i s t e r s whome f o r t h e i r l e a r n i n g and l i f e , I do honor, v e r y o f t e n p r e a c h a g a i n s t the t r u e i n t e r p r u t a t i o n o f t h i s branche o f our Creed, wherby the P a p i s t r e i o y c e t h , the A t h e i s t i s hardned: and the common s o r t o f p e o p l e d e u i d i n g themselues as th e y a f f e c t i o n . The P r e a c h e r s do vpon t h i s o c c a s i o n s t r i u e more b i t t e r l y one a g a i n s t a n o t h e r , t h e n e i t h e r o f b o t h do a g a i n s t our common a d u e r s a r y e . ^ 6 T h i s passage p r o v i d e s the key t o H i l l ' s p o s i t i o n . No l o n g e r was a " P r o t e s t a n t " p o s i t i o n b e i n g defended a g a i n s t the p o p i s h v i e w , w i t h the d e n u n c i a t i o n o f Limbus Patrum b e i n g an i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f the work, as had been the case w i t h b o t h Northbrooke and C a r l i l e ; h e r e , one P r o t e s t a n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n had t o be defended i n o p p o s i t i o n t o o t h e r s . H i l l ' s v i e w was what might be c a l l e d a " t r a d i t i o n a l " one: s o u l was s o u l , h e l l was h e l l ( o f t h e damned), C h r i s t descended t h e r e a f t e r h i s de a t h , he descended i n h i s s o u l , but he d i d n o t s u f f e r i n t h i s d e s c e n t . The purpose o f the desc e n t was the v a n q u i s h i n g o f h e l l , t o pr o v e C h r i s t ' s power o v e r d e v i l s , t o " u p b r a i d e them t h a t a r e i n h e l l , t h a t euery knee may be bowed unto him b o t h i n heauen, e a r t h , and i n h e l . . . . t o t r i u m p h ouer the d i u e l l , t o s t r i k e p e r p e t u a l l t e r r o r s i n t o them and t o d e l i u e r 47 us from the f e a r e o f t h e i r t y r a n n y . " - 46 -C l e a r l y t h e n , the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C a l v i n and the t r a n s l a t i o n s o f B u c e r and Beza were b e i n g r e j e c t e d , and so i t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t H i l l t o o k e v e r y a v a i l a b l e o p p o r t u n i t y t o emphasize the P r o t e s t a n t a u t h o r i t y f o r h i s v i e w p o i n t , t o a v o i d a c c u s a t i o n s o f popery. H i l l ' s " t r a d i t i o n a l " i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n bore a c l o s e resemblance t o the p o p i s h e x p l a n a t i o n o f 48 C h r i s t ' s d escent as b e i n g t o v a n q u i s h h e l l , and so he needed t o show t h a t o t h e r r e f o r m e r s had f o l l o w e d t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as w e l l . Hence, f o r example, he c l a i m e d t h a t "Pomeranus, Westmerus, Lucas L o s s i u s ... Vrbanus Rhegius ... a l l w h i c h were s i n g u l e r l e a r n e d M i n i s t e r s i n the Churches of 49 Germany" agreed w i t h him c o n c e r n i n g t r a n s l a t i o n s ; • t h a t M o l l e r u s "a l e a r n e d M i n i s t e r o f Germany" and Musculus and Hemingius agreed w i t h him t h a t C h r i s t descended f o r v i c t o r y • 50 o v e r d e v i l s ; and t h a t A e p n i u s , L u t h e r , Pomeranus and P e t e r M a r t y r a l l agreed t h a t the a r t i c l e r i g h t f u l l y b e l o n g ed i n 51 the Creed. H i l l even t r i e d t o use C a l v i n t o s u p p o r t him a t one p o i n t c o n c e r n i n g the l i t e r a l d e scent of C h r i s t ' s s o u l t o h e l l , but where t h e i r o p i n i o n s d i f f e r e d he i m m e d i a t e l y denounced C a l v i n as f o l l o w i n g a J e w i s h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ! H i l l wrote t h a t C a l v i n ' s wordes be t h e s e : I c o n f e s s e ( s a i t h C a l u i n ) t h a t the o l d e I n t e r p r e t e r s b o t h Greek and L a t i n haue drawen those woordes t o a n o t h e r meaning: t h a t the s o u l e o f C h r i s t was b r o u g h t from h e l l , but i t i s b e t t e r t o t a r r y i n the n a t u r a l l s i m p l i c i t y o f the wordes, t h a t we be not mocked o f the Jewes. For as much then as C a l u i n can not deny t h a t a l l the o l d e I n t e r p r e t e r s b o t h Greek and L a t i n haue c o n s e n t e d i n t h i s p o i n t e o f d o c t r i n e , I m e r u a i l e t h a t M . C a l u i n would draw i t t o a J e w i s h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . 5 H i l l , t h e r e f o r e , was c l a i m i n g t o f o l l o w an a u t h o r i t a t i v e , . P r o t e s t a n t v i e w p o i n t i n o p p o s i t i o n t o o t h e r s who he thought p r e a c h e d a " n e g a t i u e d o c t r i n e " w h i c h had c r e a t e d a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h " d i u e r s o t h e r s now l i u i n g among us ... w i l l not 53 r e p e t e t h i s b r a n c h o f the c r e e d . " H i l l ' s opponent, the S c o t t i s h s c h o o l m a s t e r A l e x a n d e r Hume, f l a t l y d e n i e d t h a t any o f " h i s s i d e " would not r e p e a t the a r t i c l e : You / H i l l 7 s a y , you know manie t h a t w i l l n o t r e p e a t t h i s a r t i c l e , by meanes o f the n e g a t i u e on our s i d e . I t h i n k e i t i s l i k e t r u e , t h a t you know a n i e s u c h , and t h a t we hol d e t h i s a r t i c l e n e g a t i u e l i e . ^ T h i s ( t h a t t h e y h e l d the a r t i c l e n e g a t i v e l y ) he went on t o d i s p r o v e . I n o r d e r t o do t h i s , Hume c l a i m e d t h a t he was f o l l o w -i n g an a u t h o r i t a t i v e P r o t e s t a n t v i e w p o i n t , j u s t as H i l l had done. Thus he p o s t u l a t e d a c o h e s i o n amongst other... r e f o r m e r s by r e f e r r i n g t o a u n i f i e d "we". The men whom he c i t e d may have agreed o v e r o t h e r i s s u e s , but c o n c e r n i n g C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l t h e i r v e r d i c t was by no means unanimous. Even i n an i n t r o d u c t o r y a n a l y s i s o f the " S t a t e o f the Q u e s t i o n " , Hume was o b l i g e d t o admit two d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n s : We say, t h a t s e i n g euery a r t i c l e o f our f a i t h must haue an undoubted sense c o n f i r m e d by the S c r i p t u r e s , i t / C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t ^ must needs s i g n i f i e the h e l l i s h t o rments t h a t he s u f f e r e d f o r our rede m p t i o n , o r the dar k n e s s o f d e a t h , which swallowed him the t h r e e d a l e s t h a t he was i n the g r a u e . 5 5 Hume named a s i z e a b l e group o f t h e o l o g i a n s opposed t o H i l l ' s v i e w p o i n t , i n c l u d i n g C a l v i n , Beza, P e r k i n s , Rogers, W i l l e t - 48 -and R e g i n a l d Pecock; However, th e s e men's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f the a r t i c l e d i f f e r e d w i d e l y . Of the two p o s i t i o n s o u t l i n e d by Hume i n the above q u o t a t i o n , C a l v i n s u p p o r t e d the former and P e r k i n s the l a t t e r ; Beza, Rogers and W i l l e t a l l h e l d s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t v i e w s , and Pe^c'oeicv (who had been concerned w i t h the problem a c e n t u r y and a h a l f b e f o r e ) was a f o r e -r u n n e r o f C a r l i l e i n b e l i e v i n g t h a t the a r t i c l e d i d not b e l o n g 56 i n the Creed a t a l l . A t one p o i n t , Hume even t r i e d t o defend C a r l i l e , c l a i m i n g C a r l i l e ' s l e a r n i n g t o be o f s u p e r i o r q u a l i t y t.a; v \ H i l l ' s . T h i s was i n response t o H i l l ' s a c c u s a t i o n t h a t C a r l i l e and S e r v e t u s had d e n i e d the a r t i c l e . Hume quoted H i l l as h a v i n g w r i t t e n t h a t " o n e l i e some p o s s e s s e d ... w i t h D i v e l s , as the Iewes, S e r v e t u s and C a r l i l l d e n i e i t . " Hume responded t h a t C a r l i l l , ( e x c e p t i n g h i s f a u l t ) was a man f o r judgement and l e a r n i n g , manie degrees b e f o r e y o u r s e l f : He made a s l i p , i n d e e d e , as who h a t h n o t ? Though you throwe the f i r s t s tone a t him, you are not c l e a r e y o u r s e l f . 5 7 Thus, i n o r d e r t o b u i l d u n i t y and a u t h o r i t y i n t o h i s p o s i t i o n , Hume was p r a i s i n g men 'with v e r y d i f f e r e n t o p i n i o n s t h a n h i s own. Hume's p e r s o n a l c h o i c e o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n f a v o u r e d C a l v i n ' s v i e w, r a t h e r than the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t the "darkness o f d e a t h " swallowed C h r i s t f o r t h r e e days. Hume's own b e l i e f was i n l i n e w i t h C a l v i n ' s i n two i m p o r t a n t r e s p e c t s : the t i m i n g o f t'he d e s c e n t , and i n i t s i m p o r t a n c e i n the redemptive p r o c e s s . However, Hume was one o f those who c o m p l e t e l y o v e r l o o k e d some o f the l i m i t a t i o n s and r e s t r i c t i o n s - 49 -w h i c h C a l v i n had p l a c e d on C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g . F o r Hume, C h r i s t a c t u a l l y s u f f e r e d the torments o f h e l l i t s e l f w h i l e he was on the c r o s s . I n a d d i t i o n , C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g had become o f more importance i n the redempti v e p r o c e s s than h i s b o d i l y s a c r i f i c e : wee a r e perswaded, t h a t t h e r e can be no s u r e r argument, n e i t h e r o f H e l , n o r o f the c e r t a i n t i e o f our redemption; t h e n t h a t he s u f f e r e d a l l the tormentes o f H e l l vpon the c r o s s e , and made a f u l l s a t i s f a c t i o n f o r a l l our o f f e n c e s : i t i s as sure (as what i s most su r e ) t h a t vpon the t r e e , t h a t i s , vpon the c r o s s e , hee descended i n t o the lowermost H e l l : t h a t i s , i n t o the h e a u i e s t torments t h a t H e l l c o u l d y e e l d : ' a n d t h i s , e x c e p t you c o n f e s s e , you must g r a n t t h a t the Symboll (as we c a l l i t ) o f the A p o s t l e s , and doe so r e u e r e n t l i e embrace, i s v n p e r f e c t . For s e e i n g the g r e a t e s t p a r t o f our redemption con-s i s t e t h i n C h r i s t s s u f f e r i n g i n s o u l e , f o r our s o u l e s : i t was more n e e d f u l l i n t h a t symbol t o make mention o f them, then o f the deth-"of h i s body ... 5 8 Hume went on t o r e i t e r a t e t h a t because the s o u l s u f f e r i n g o f C h r i s t was such an i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f the redemptive p r o c e s s , i t must be what "he descended i n t o h e l l " meant; o t h e r w i s e the Creed would be i m p e r f e c t . Thus, Hume had d e v i a t e d from c;- \ - . •., C a l v i n ' s p o s i t i o n , a d d i n g t o the v a r i e t y o f arguments about the a r t i c l e . The debate was a l s o expanding i n terms o f the b i b l i c a l r e f e r e n c e s used and the p r o o f s r e q u i r e d . A c r u c i a l i s s u e between H i l l and Hume was the s t r e n g t h o f s c r i p t u r a l p r o o f f o r an ad v o c a t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . I n the absence o f a d i r e c t b i b l i c a l s t a tement o f how, why, o r even i f C h r i s t descended i n t o h e l l , the meaning o f passages t a k e n t o r e f e r t o the descent c o u l d always be q u e s t i o n e d . Even when s c r i p t u r a l " p r o o f s " were p r o v i d e d , an opponent c o u l d show them t o be - 50 -" d o u b t f u l l , the words, d r i f t e s , and c i r c u m s t a n c e s , o f f e r i n g o t h e r senses b o t h p l a i n e r , and b e t t e r f i t t i n g t he p l a c e s , and 59 a g r e e a b l e t o the r e s t o f the S c r i p t u r e s . " An example o f how s c r i p t u r a l p r o o f s o p e r a t e d can be seen i n the r o l e o f Luke, 23:43 and 46 w i t h i n the argument. These two v e r s e s had been c i t e d i n s u p p o r t o f C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n because b o t h r e f e r r e d t o C h r i s t ' s s o u l o r s p i r i t g o i n g t o p l a c e s o t h e r than h e l l on h i s death. V e r s e 43 was C h r i s t ' s comment t o the p e n i t e n t t h i e f on the c r o s s n e x t t o him t h a t "Today s h a l t thou be w i t h me i n p a r a d i s e " , and v e r s e 46 c o n t a i n e d C h r i s t ' s d y i n g words, " F a t h e r , i n t o t h y hands I commend my s p i r i t " . To Hume, th e s e v e r s e s were c l e a r s t a t e m e n t s t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l c o u l d n o t have descended t o h e l l , b ut was r a t h e r i n heaven. The " t r a d i t i o n a l " i n t e r p r e t -e r s employed two arguments a g a i n s t t h i s : t h a t t h e r e was n o t h i n g i n c o n g r u o u s i n C h r i s t recommending h i s s o u l t o God's c a r e even though he was about t o descend t o h e l l , so t h a t v e r s e 46 was l i k e a p l e a f o r s a f e passage t h r o u g h h e l l ; and s e c o n d l y , t h a t when t a l k i n g about the t h i e f b e i n g w i t h him i n p a r a d i s e , C h r i s t was r e f e r r i n g t o h i s Godhead r a t h e r than t o h i s s o u l . T h i s Godhead was om n i p r e s e n t , and so i t s b e i n g i n p a r a d i s e d i d not e x c l u d e i t from a l s o b e i n g w i t h the body i n the grave and w i t h the s o u l w h i c h was f r e e t o descend t o h e l l . Hume's r e t o r t t o thes e arguments was t h a t the f i r s t went a g a i n s t "the t r u e and common use of these words v s e d by Stephen, A c t 7 and a l l o t h e r g o d l i e men, t h a t craue t o be i n heauen," and t h a t the second was " c o n t r a r i e t o the n a t u r e o f the pronoune (me) w h i c h doeth a l w a i e s note the whole p e r s o n t h a t s p e a k e t h . " 6 0 A p a r a l l e l p roblem was emerging w i t h the use o f the Church F a t h e r s as a u t h o r i t i e s . I f C a l v i n and Beza d i s a g r e e d w i t h A u g u s t i n e and Jerome, then one group had t o p o s s e s s more a u t h o r i t y t h a n the o t h e r . H i l l c o n s i d e r e d t h a t the Church F a t h e r s s h o u l d command r e s p e c t , not l e a s t f o r the a n t i q u i t y and t r a d i t i o n o f t h e i r a u t h o r i t y . Hume r e t o r t e d t h a t I see no cause why you s h o u l d t h i n k e b e t t e r o f A u g u s t i n e and Ierome, t h e n o f Beza and C a l u i n e , f o r they were a l l but men, and th e y which now are o l d , were sometimes new. 6 H i l l was a b l e t o p o i n t out t h a t Hume was s i m p l y making h i s own argument i n r e v e r s e , but he r e a l i z e d t h a t a p p e a l i n g t o the Church F a t h e r s was not p r o v i n g s u c c e s s f u l i n add i n g a u t h o r i t y t o h i s p o s i t i o n . T h e r e f o r e he backed away from the i s s u e , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t "because men a r e v a i n e , and the time 6 2 c o r r u p t , we must b e l e e u e no man." He s t r e s s e d t h a t b e l i e f s h o u l d be o n l y i n the word o f Cod. w h i c h s i m p l y r e t u r n e d the debate t o the s c r i p t u r a l a r e n a . The c o n f r o n t a t i o n between H i l l and Hume i s i m p o r t a n t i n t h a t i t i l l u s t r a t e s s e v e r a l f e a t u r e s w h i c h dominated the development o f the debate: the c e n t r a l i mportance o f s c r i p t u r a l a u t h o r i t y and y e t the inadequacy o f t h i s a u t h o r i t y i n cases o f disagreement; the l i k e problem w i t h the a u t h o r i t y o f the Church F a t h e r s ; the attempt t o r e l y on custom and t r a d i t i o n t o e n f o r c e the meaning o f a passage (as i n Hume's response t h a t the " t r u e and common use" o f a passage s h o u l d be adhered t o ) ; the demand f o r s t r i c t i n t e r n a l l o g i c a l coherence among b i b l i c a l p a ssages: f o r example, i f C h r i s t was i n one p l a c e ( p a r a d i s e ) he c o u l d n o t be i n a n o t h e r ( h e l l ) ; and l a s t l y , t h a t grammar and s e m a n t i c s were f r e q u e n t l y r e s o r t e d t o ( t o t r y t o s e t t l e d i s a g r e e m e n t s ) , as i n d i s c u s s -i o n o f the pronoun "me" i n the passage "Today s h a l t thou be w i t h me i n p a r a d i s e " . R e l a t e d t o t h e s e developments i n the n a t u r e o f the debate came the w r i t t e n e x p r e s s i o n o f a d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f the d e s c e n t i t s e l f . P e r k i n s ' s An E x p o s i t i o n o f the  Symbdle o r Creed o f the A p o s t l e s , f i r s t p r i n t e d i n 1595, i s noteworthy because i t p r o v i d e d some new responses t o i s s u e s p r e v i o u s l y r a i s e d by o t h e r s , and a l s o because i t c o n t a i n e d s u p p o r t f o r a v i e w s i m i l a r t o the second i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o u t l i n e d by Hume, t h a t the descent meant t h a t C h r i s t was h e l d c a p t i v e i n the grave and l a y i n bondage under death f o r the space o f t h r e e d a y s . 6 3 P e r k i n s ' s s u p p o r t f o r t h i s i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n i s p a r t i c u l a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t g i v e n h i s u s u a l l a b e l as a 64 t r u e devoted " C a l v i n i s t " . He saw h i m s e l f i n t h i s l i g h t , w i s h i n g t o " c l e a r the t r u t h , t h a t i s (as they c a l l i t ) the C a l v i n i s t s ' d o c t r i n e " , and making r e f e r e n c e t o " M a s t e r C a l v i n 65 o f b l e s s e d memory." K e n d a l l , i n h i s C a l v i n and E n g l i s h C a l v i n i s m t o 1649, c a s t s some doubt on t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f P e r k i n s ' s t h e o l o g y , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t on some i s s u e s t h e r e was - 53 -a g r e a t e r a f f i n i t y between P e r k i n s and Beza, than between . P e r k i n s and C a l v i n . K e n d a l l ' s v i e w i s t h a t P e r k i n s f a i l e d t o r e c o g n i z e the d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e o l o g y between the two Swiss r e f o r m e r s and so saw h i m s e l f as a t r u e C a l v i n i s t even when e x p r e s s i n g the t h e o l o g y o f Beza. The i n f l u e n c e o f C a l v i n i s c l e a r i n P e r k i n s ' s t r e a t m e n t o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t but h i s f i n a l v e r d i c t on the a r t i c l e was n e i t h e r C a l v i n ' s n or Beza's. P e r k i n s was o b l i g e d t o g i v e r e a s o n s f o r r e j e c t i n g the " t r a d i t i o n a l " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the descent ( t h a t C h r i s t descended i n s o u l a f t e r h i s de a t h t o v a n q u i s h h e l l ) . He f o l l o w e d the same l i n e o f argument w h i c h C a r l i l e had used, t h a t i t was i m p o s s i b l e f o r C h r i s t t o have descended g i v e n t h a t h i s body was i n the g r a v e , h i s s o u l was i n p a r a d i s e , and 6 8 h i s Godhead was omni- p r e s e n t . P e r k i n s then added-two o t h e r d e n u n c i a t i o n s o f t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w h i c h employed the a u t h o r i t y o f s c r i p t u r e and o f the e a r l y Church. He took the E v a n g e l i s t s ' o m i s s i o n o f the a r t i c l e t o mean t h a t a l i t e r a l d e s c e n t c o u l d n o t have happened. S i n c e they p r o v i d e d an ex a c t n a r r a t i o n o f the l i f e and d e a t h of C h r i s t , "no doubt they woulde not haue o m i t t e d C h r i s t e s l o c a l l descent i n t o 6 9 the p l a c e o f the damned, i f t h e r e had bene any such t h i n g . " L i k e w i s e , the o m i s s i o n by some o f the e a r l y Church c o u n c i l s showed t h a t t h e y d i d not acknowledge any r e a l l d e s c e n t , and t h a t the t r u e meaning o f the s e words, he descended, was s u f f i c i e n t l y i n c l u d e d i n some o f the former a r t i c l e s , & - 54 -t h a t may appeare because when they s e t downe i t , they omit some o f the former: as A t h a n a s i u s i n h i s c r e e d s e t t i n g downe the s e words, he descended, e t c . , o m i t s the b u r i a l l , p u t t i n g them b o t h f o r o n e . 7 0 T h i s passage n ot o n l y used an argument s i m i l a r t o C a r l i l e ' s , 71 but i t got round H i l l ' s o b j e c t i o n t o C a r l i l e ' s p o s i t i o n . P e r k i n s went on t o examine t h r e e o t h e r p o s s i b l e meanings o f the a r t i c l e : t h a t i t meant C h r i s t ' s b u r i a l i n the g r a v e , a g a i n s t w h i c h he used C a l v i n ' s arguments t h a t i t made the Creed r e p e t i t i o u s and t h a t an e x p l a n a t o r y phrase s h o u l d 72 c l a r i f y r a t h e r than confuse the o r i g i n a l s tatement; C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n he d e s c r i b e d as "an v s u a l l e x p o s i t i o n r e c e i u e d o f the Church, ... T h i s e x p o s i t i o n i s good and t r u e , 73 and whosoeuer w i l l may r e c e i u e i t . " However, he went on t o ex p r e s s doubts about i t on the grounds t h a t the meaning d i d not f i t w i t h the o r d e r o f the a r t i c l e s i n the Creed. He d i d not want t o deny t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r e d h e l l i s h torments on the c r o s s , but o n l y t o q u e s t i o n whether t h i s was what the c r e e d a l a r t i c l e meant. So c o n v i n c e d was he t h a t the d e a t h of C h r i s t was t e r r i b l e and must have c o n t a i n e d the h e l l i s h t o r m e n t , o f C h r i s t ' s s o u l , t h a t he thought the torment was n a t u r a l l y i n c l u d e d i n the c r u c i f i x i o n and death o f C h r i s t : For t h e s e words, was c r u c i f i e d , dead and b u r i e d , must not be v n d e r s t o o d o f any o r d i n a r i e d e a t h , but o f a c u r s e d d e a t h i n which C h r i s t s u f f e r e d the f u l l w r a t h o f God, euen the pangs o f h e l l b o t h i n s o u l e and b o d i e : s e e i n g then t h i s e x p o s i t i o n i s c o n t a i n e d i n the former words, i t cannot f i t l y s t a n d w i t h the o r d e r o f t h i s s h o r t Creede, v n l e s s e t h e r e s h o u l d be a d i s t i n c t a r t i c l e o f t h i n g s r e p e a t e d b e f o r e . Thus C a l v i n ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g on the c r o s s was f u l l y a c c e p t e d - 55 -as something w h i c h took p l a c e , but P e r k i n s doubted t h a t t h i s was the meaning o f the a r t i c l e i n the Creed. He p r e f e r r e d t o t h i n k t h a t i t meant the t h i r d o f t h e ' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s which he c o n s i d e r e d , namely t h a t when C h r i s t was dead and b u r i e d , "he was h e l d c a p t i u e i n the graue, and l a y j;n>bondage vnder 75 d e a t h f o r the space o f t h r e e d a i e s . " H i s reasons f o r t h i s were " g a t h e r e d from S c r i p t u r e " , but a l s o he c o n s i d e r e d t h a t the t h r e e degrees o f C h r i s t ' s h u m i l i a t i o n would then c o r r e s p o n d w i t h the t h r e e degrees o f h i s e x a l t a t i o n : i n o t h e r words, "he d i e d " was the c o n t r a r y o f "he r o s e a g a i n the t h i r d day": "he was b u r i e d " was the c o n t r a r y o f "he ascended i n t o heaven": and "he descended i n t o h e l l " was the c o n t r a r y o f "he s i t t e t h a t the r i g h t hand o f Cod". A c c o r d i n g t o H . C . P o r t e r , i n h i s R e f o r m a t i o n and  R e a c t i o n i n Tudor Cambridge, t h i s b e l i e f i n God's use of c o n t r a r i e s was a f a v o r i t e argument o f P e r k i n s , and one t h a t he took from C a l v i n . P o r t e r goes so f a r as t o c l a i m t h a t " I f one p o i n t a l o n e were t o be made about C a l v i n and P e r k i n s i t would be t h i s : t h ey b o t h of them b e l i e v e d t h a t ' a l l the works of God are done i n c o n t r a r y means'." I n t h i s c a s e , t h e n , P e r k i n s was employing C a l v i n ' s approach t o s u p p o r t an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o t h e r than C a l v i n ' s , and was i n t r o d u c i n g new arguments c o n c e r n i n g the a r t i c l e i n the p r o c e s s . He c l a i m e d t h a t C a l v i n ' s meaning was "commonly r e c e i u e d " as was h i s own, "and we may i n d i f f e r e n t l y make c h o i c e o f e i t h e r : but the l a s t (as I t a k e i t ) i s most a g r e e a b l e t o the o r d e r and words o f the Creede." Hence, i t i s i m p o r t a n t t o be aware t h a t i n c a l l i n g P e r k i n s , and o t h e r s l i k e him, a " C a l v i n i s t " . r e g a r d i n g C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l , the term i s employed v e r y l o o s e l y . " C a l v i n i s t " c o v e r s b o t h those who b e l i e v e d C a l v i n ' s own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , and those who b e l i e v e d t h i s o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w hich had n o t h i n g t o do w i t h C a l v i n but which h i s f o l l o w e r s a c c e p t e d as a l e g i t i m a t e a l t e r n a t i v e t o C a l v i n ' s own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . T h e r e f o r e the d i s t i n c t i o n w i l l be made, i n the a n a l y s i s t o f o l l o w , between those who f o l l o w e d C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and those who were " C a l v i n -i s t s " i n t h a t t h e y a c c e p t e d one o f t h e s e two a l t e r n a t i v e s . Only one work was w r i t t e n i n d i r e c t o p p o s i t i o n t o P e r k i n s . T h i s was John H i g g i n ' s An Answere t o Master W i l l i a m  P e r k i n s , C o n c e r n i n g C h r i s t s D e s c e n s i o n i n t o H e l l (1602). I t p r o v i d e d a n o t h e r c l e a r defence o f the t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f the d e s c e n t : C h r i s t ' s human s o u l descended l i t e r -a l l y a f t e r his. d e a t h t o the h e l l o f the damned; the purpose o f the d e s c e n t was the v a n q u i s h i n g o f the d e v i l , f o r i f he ( C h r i s t ) had not descended i n h i s s o u l , "the D e v i l and the damned might haue bragged o f the f o r c e o f t h a t t h e i r 7 8 kingdome." The main p o i n t o f i n t e r e s t about t h i s work i s t h a t i t p r o v i d e s i l l u s t r a t i o n s o f the s t r e t c h i n g and t w i s t i n g o f the meaning o f b i b l i c a l passages which the debate was n e c e s s i t a t i n g . T h i s was done i n the hope o f " p r o v i n g " a p o i n t o f view. For example, H i g g i n s d e a l t w i t h C h r i s t ' s words t o the t h i e f about p a r a d i s e (Luke 23:43), c l a i m i n g - 57 -t h a t t h e s e words were spoken by C h r i s t "as God, who o n l y h a t h power t o g i u e P a r a d i s e , and whose t o d a i e as A u g u s t i n e 79 s a i t h i s e t e r n i t y . " Thus, "today" i n t h i s c o n t e x t was not t o be u n d e r s t o o d l i t e r a l l y because i t meant s i m p l y " i n the f u t u r e " . By u s i n g t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , the problem t h a t C h r i s t descended i n t o h e l l when he had i m p l i e d t h a t he would be i n p a r a d i s e c o u l d be c i r c u m v e n t e d . Those i n v o l v e d i n the debate were o b l i g e d to i n s i s t upon s t r i c t , l i t e r a l meanings of b i b l i c a l passages when those passages s u p p o r t e d t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , and to a l l o w more s y m b o l i c , a l l e g o r i c a l o r n o n - l i t e r a l meanings f o r t h o s e passages w h i c h c o n f l i c t e d w i t h t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g s . ( i i i ) The T h r e a t of "Reason" B i s h o p B i l s o n ' s works p r o v i d e a r e a c t i o n a g a i n s t the extremes t o w h i c h the a l l e g o r i c a l , n o n - l i t e r a l meanings were b e i n g t a k e n . By the time o f h i s w r i t i n g , he was h a v i n g t o c ontend w i t h s u g g e s t i o n s t h a t even the f i r e s o f h e l l were a l l e g o r i c a l . Because C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the d e s c e n t suggested t h a t the word " h e l l " r e a l l y meant the " h e l l i s h p a i n s " w h i c h C h r i s t s u f f e r e d on the c r o s s , some s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h i s i n t e r n a l torment was the t r u e n a t u r e o f h e l l i t s e l f . B i l s o n was o b l i g e d t o r e t a l i a t e t h a t - 58 -H e l l f i r e , w h ich the damned and d e u i l s do and s h a l l s u f f e r , i s a t r u e and e t e r n a l l f i r e p r e p a r e d by the m i g h t i e hand o f God t o p u n i s h a s w e l l s p i r i t s as b o d i e s ; and t h i s e r r o u r , That the f i r e o f h e l l was o n l y an i n t e r n a l l o r s p i r i t u a l l f i r e i n the s o u l e s and c o n s c i e n c e s o f men, was l o n g s i n c e condemned i n O r i g e n by the Church o f C h r i s t . 8 0 B i l s o n r e t u r n e d t o the same t o p i c l a t e r i n h i s work, and warned h i s r e a d e r s about a fundamental problem which was s e r i o u s l y a d d i n g t o the scope and t o the i m p l i c a t i o n s o f the debate: i t i s a m a t t e r o f no s m a l l moment b o t h t o C h r i s t i a n r e l i g i o n and t r u e g o d l i n e s s e , whether i t s h a l l be l a w f u l l f o r euery v n s t a b l e w i t , a t h i s p l e a s u r e t o a l l e g o r i z e whatso euer l i k e t h n ot h i s humour i n the s a c r e d S c r i p t u r e s . For i f the f i n a l l and e t e r n a l l Iudgement o f God a g a i n s t the w i c k e d be a l l e g o r i c a l ; t h e n s u r e l y the reward o f the f a i t h f u l l from the same Iudge at the same time must l i k e w i s e be a l l e g o r i c a l l . And i f we once b r i n g a l l t h a t i s t h r e a t e n e d and p r o m i s e d i n the w o r l d t o come t o be f i g u r e s and ^ a l l e g o r i e s , we endanger the power, and i u s t i c e o f God.-The random a l l e g o r i z a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e t h r e a t e n e d not o n l y the meaning o f C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l , but the e x i s t e n c e o f h e l l and heaven and the v e r y n a t u r e o f God. I n the l i g h t o f B i l s o n ' s o b j e c t i o n to t h i s a l l e g o r i z a t i o n , i t comes as no s u r p r i s e t o f i n d t h a t he s u p p o r t e d the " t r a d i t i o n a l " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e o f the Creed: I r e t a i n e i n expounding t h i s A r t i c l e , t h r e e t h i n g s ; DISTINCTION o f m a t t e r ; CONSEQVENCE of o r d e r ; & PROPRIETY o f words;- and t h o s e t h r e e c o n s i d e r e d , the sense o f the A r t i c l e maie and must be, t h a t C h r i s t , a f t e r h i s BODY was BURIED, i n SOVLE DESCENDED VNTO Q 2 t h a t p l a c e , v/hich the s c r i p t u r e p r o p e r l y c a l l e t h HEL. c For B i l s o n , the meaning of the a r t i c l e had t o f i t the words as they were w r i t t e n . He went on t o e x p l a i n t h a t the purpose o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t was t o s p o i l o r d e s t r o y h e l l . Thus he - 59 -adhered t o the t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n which c l a i m e d t o i n t e r p r e t the a r t i c l e as i t s t o o d i n the Creed, a v o i d i n g a l l the d i f f i c u l t i e s o f the o r d e r o f the a r t i c l e s o r r e p e t i t i o n o f p h r a s e s w h i c h a r o s e from the o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . However, t h e r e was a problem i n h e r e n t i n B i l s o n ' s p o s i t i o n . I f a u t h o r i t y l a y i n the l i t e r a l a c c e p t ance o f t h e Word, then the l a c k o f a c l e a r b i b l i c a l statement about C h r i s t ' s d escent made the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e some-what l e s s than c e r t a i n . As a r e s u l t , t h e r e i s a c a u t i o n and a l e n i e n c y t o be found i n B i l s o n ' s work. T h i s c a u t i o n may be i l l u s t r a t e d by h i s p o s i t i o n r e g a r d i n g those who b e l i e v e d t h a t the d e s c e n t was r e a l l y C h r i s t e n d u r i n g the s t a t e o f the dead. B i l s o n thought t h a t many l e a r n e d men c l u n g t o t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n "because they would auoyde Limbus Patrum; d i s l i k i n g by a l l meanes t h a t the s o u l e s o f the r i g h t e o u s and f a i t h f u l l b e f o r e C h r i s t e s s u f f e r i n g shoulde be kept i n a r e g i o n o r p a r t o f h e l l ; and thence d e l i u e r e d by h i s descent' 8"* To a s s e s s the v a l i d i t y o f t h i s argument, B i l s o n a g a i n t u r n e d to S c r i p t u r e , examining the passages i n w h i c h the c o n t r o v e r s i a l Hebrew word " s h e o l " was f o u n d , and he c o n c l u d e d t h a t i f a n i e man t h i n k e good i n some such p l a c e s , as t h e s e are t o i n t e r p r e t the SOVLE f o r L I F E , ... and SHEOL f o r the GRAVE, where l i f e endeth; I w i l l not u t t e r l i e condemne h i s e x p o s i t i o n , so l o n g as he l e a u e t h a d i f f e r e n t power o f S h e o l ouer the i u s t and u n i u s t , ... and do not make the s o u l e s o f the r i g h t e o u s DESCEND TO SHEOL a f t e r d e a t h . 8 4 I n l i k e manner, B i l s o n d i d not t o t a l l y r e j e c t the n o t i o n t h a t C h r i s t s u f f e r e d the p a i n s o f h e l l on the c r o s s . He was p r e p a r e d t o a c c e p t t h a t the torment C h r i s t endured was s e v e r e and t h e r e f o r e might be c a l l e d the " p a i n e s of h e l l " i n a m e t a p h o r i c a l sense. However, he would not a c c e p t t h a t t h i s was the meaning o f the a r t i c l e o f the Creed because i t 8 5 c o n f l i c t e d w i t h the o r d e r o f the a r t i c l e s as w r i t t e n . A f i n a l example o f the way i n w hich B i l s o n t r i e d t o r e l y on the Word f o r h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s descent may be seen i n h i s a t t i t u d e t o h i s own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e . When S c r i p t u r e c o u l d e n f o r c e the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i t was t o be b e l i e v e d , when i t c o u l d n o t , then he would p r e s s e n o t w i t h the l i k e vehemencie, because i t h a t h not l i k e c e r t a i n t i e . So l o n g as we c o n f e s s e (which the S c r i p t u r e s do c o n f i r m e ) t h a t C h r i s t s humane n a t u r e a f t e r h i s extreame h u m i l i a t i o n on the C r o s s e , & b e f o r e h i s r e s u r r e c t i o n , conquered & s p o y l e d not d eath o n l y , but h e l l & S a t a n a l s o , o f a l t h e i r power & r i g h t ouer the f a i t h f u l , w i t h the p r e c i s e maner and hower I w i l l not burden a n i e mans c o n s c i e n c e , t h a t cannot be perswaded by r e a d i n g the l a t t e r p a r t o f t h i s t r e a t i s e . Thus, B i l s o n ' s l e n i e n c y was r e l a t e d t o the l a c k o f c l a r i t y o f the Word on the i s s u e o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t . On a d i f f e r e n t i s s u e w h i c h B i l s o n c o n s i d e r e d , t h e r e wa no room f o r l e n i e n c y a t a l l . There was a s h i f t i n the c e n t r e o f the c o n t r o v e r s y i n B i l s o n ' s works. No l o n g e r was the a r t i c l e o f the Creed the main f o c u s ; the n a t u r e of the redemptive p r o c e s s was now a t s t a k e . B i l s o n ' s main c o n c e r n was t o denounce C a l v i n ' s b e l i e f t h a t the d escent i n t o h e l l ( w h ich f o r C a l v i n meant the s o u l s u f f e r i n g o f C h r i s t on the c r o s s ) was a n e c e s s a r y p a r t o f the redemptive p r o c e s s . There - 61 -was u n e q u i v o c a l s c r i p t u r a l a u t h o r i t y which s t a t e d t h a t the b l o o d o f C h r i s t was the p r i c e p a i d f o r human redemption. The s u f f e r i n g o f C h r i s t ' s s o u l , and hence the des c e n t i n t o h e l l , however i t was u n d e r s t o o d , was not i n v o l v e d . I n o u t l i n i n g the cause o f h i s con c e r n over t h i s i s s u e , B i l s o n p r o v i d e d an i l l u m i n a t i n g d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f the ways i n which C a l v i n ' s o r i g i n a l s tatement had been expanded, developed and d i s t o r t e d t o produce a l a r m i n g r e s u l t s : A t the f i r s t , men c o n t e n t e d themselues t o t h i n k e C h r i s t s u f f e r e d the p a i n e s o f h e l ....Some o t h e r s a f f i r m e , t h a t C h r i s t , i n s u s t a i n i n g the w r a t h o f God due t o u s , w r a s t l e d w i t h the v e r i e powers o f h e l l t h a t sought t o f a s t e n on him, and howsoeuer b e h o l d i n g the t e r r o r of Gods vengeance prouoked by our s i n n e s , he d i d sometimes t r e m b l e , y e t by f i r m e f a i t h a l w a i e s f i x e d on God, he r e p e l l e d and r e p r e s s e d those a s s a u l t s o f S a t a n , and so saued not h i m s e l f e o n e l y , but us a l s o . T h i s might be i n d u c e d i f men c o u l d s t a y h e r e ; & i t were to be w i s h e d , t h a t i n m a t t e r s o f so g r e a t weight and danger, we would r a t h e r t r y where we a r e , then h a s t e n t o go onward. But as water b r e a k i n g her bankes s t i l l r u n n e t h and neuer s t a y e t h ; so some l i g h t i n g on o t h e r mens i n u e n t i o n s neuer l e a u e a d d i n g t i l l t hey marre a l l . I n the case which we haue i n hand, the name o f h e l l p a i n e s b e i n g once a d m i t t e d i n t o the worke o f our re d e m p t i o n , some i n our d a i e s w i l l no nay, but t h a t C h r i s t on the c r o s s e s u f f e r e d the s e l f e same p a i n e s i n s o u l e , w h i c h the damned do i n h e l l , and endured euen the death o f the s o u l e ; yea o t h e r s auouch t h a t hee s u s t a i n e d f a r r e g r e a t e r torments then a n i e a re i n h e l l , t o w i t , as much p a i n e i n 15 ho u r e s , as a l l the f a i t h f u l l s h o u l d haue s u f f e r e d e u e r l a s t i n g l i e , and t h a t as w e l l i n body as i n s o u l e . To the s e dangerous d e u i s e s a re some men s l i p t i n our t i m e . And because I knowe not when o r where they w i l l make an ende, I t h i n k e i t n e e d f u l l f o r d i s c h a r g e o f my d u t i e , and d i r e c t i o n o f y o u r f a i t h , as w e l l t o s e t downe c e r t a i n e l i m i t s beyond which you may not go, as a l s o t o r e i e c t such e x t r e m i t i e s as by no meanes may be c l o s e d i n the c r o s s e o f C h r i s t , w i t h o u t apparant i m p i e t i e . 8 7 B i l s o n had t o deny t h a t s o u l s u f f e r i n g was any p a r t o f the redemptive p r o c e s s because o f the impious and h e r e t i c a l b e l i e f s t h a t were a r i s i n g from i t . Men had been a p p l y i n g a s t r i c t " t i t - f o r - t a t " p h i l o s o p h y t o C a l v i n ' s s t a tement. Hence they suggested t h a t i f the redemption of the b o d i e s o f men had r e q u i r e d the b o d i l y d e a t h o f C h r i s t , then the r e d e mption o f s o u l e s must have r e q u i r e d the d e a t h o f 8 8 C h r i s t ' s s o u l . T h i s was blasphemy. I n the same v e i n , i t had been s u g g e s t e d t h a t i f C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g was i n p l a c e of the s u f f e r i n g which human s o u l s s h o u l d have undergone, t h e n i t would have been of q u i t e f e r o c i o u s s e v e r i t y : a God o f j u s t i c e would have demanded t h i s . The c o u n t e r argument was t h a t a God o f l o v e c o u l d n o t and would not i n f l i c t such torment on h i s o n l y son. And so the arguments s p r e a d from a n a l y s i s of the n a t u r e o f C h r i s t ' s s a c r i f i c e , t o s e e m i n g l y i r r e v e r e n t and (more i m p o r t a n t ) i n s o l u b l e a n a l y s i s o f the n a t u r e o f God h i m s e l f . B i l s o n d i d attempt t o get around t h i s 89 problem i n h i s second work, but the main damage was a l r e a d y done. There was no such t h i n g as a s o l u t i o n which c o u l d be p r o v e n a g a i n s t t h o s e who h e l d a c o n t r a r y o p i n i o n . B e i n g aware of t h i s , B i l s o n even h i n t e d t h a t t o h o l d a p e r s o n a l i z e d , non-conforming o p i n i o n t o o n e s e l f was b e t t e r t han the o v e r t u n d e r m i n i n g o f a c c e p t e d b e l i e f : i f any man t o m a i n t e i n e h i s d e u i c e , would i n u e n t a new h e l l , and a n o t h e r d e a t h o f the s o u l e then e i t h e r S c r i p t u r e s o r F a t h e r s euer h e a r d , o r spake o f , they s h o u l d keepe t h e i r i n u e n t i o n s t o themselues: i t s u f f i c e d me t o beleeue what I r e a d , and c o n s e q u e n t l y , not t o b e l e e u e what I d i d not reade i n the Word o f God. w h i c h i s and ought t o be the f o u n d a t i o n o f our f a i t h . ^ A c c o r d i n g t o B i l s o n , the a t t a c k on the n a t u r e o f the - 63 -redemptive p r o c e s s j e o p a r d i z e d b e l i e f i n S c r i p t u r e . S c r i p t u r e and b e l i e f because i t undermined was the c o r n e r - s t o n e o f f a i t h , i f we s u f f e r the mayne f o u n d a t i o n o f our f a i t h and hope i n C h r i s t t o be wrenched neuer so l i t t l e a w r i e ; the whole b u i l d i n g i s more endangered than wee are ware of . I n Gods ca u s e s , l e t Gods booke t e a c h vs what t o b e l e e u e , and what t o p r o f e s s . I f t h o u t h i n k e i t t h y d u t i e i n m a t t e r s o f f a i t h t o beware o f v n w r i t t e n v e r i t i e s , i n the g r e a t e s t p o i n t o f a l l , w h ich i s our redemption by C h r i s t ; take heede thou e a s i l y admit not v n w r i t t e n a b s u r d i t i e s . As when we runne downe h i l l we can h a r d l y s t a i e ; so i n m a t t e r s o f r e l i g i o n when we f a l t o i n u e n t i n g beyond the s c r i p t u r e s we q u i c k l y misse and seldome r e c o u e r the t r u t h . 9 1 B i l s o n r e a l i z e d t h a t the a l l e g o r i z a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e e n t a i l e d more t h a n j u s t a r e j e c t i o n o f the Church's a u t h o r i t y i n i n t e r p r e t i n g the Word. I t e n t a i l e d a t h r e a t t o the n a t u r e of b e l i e f i t s e l f . I f S c r i p t u r e (as i n t e r p r e t e d by the Church of England) was n o t a c c e p t e d as a l i t e r a l a u t h o r i t y , then b e l i e f o r f a i t h had t o be " j u s t i f i e d " i n some o t h e r way. I f b e l i e f was p l a c e d i n a d e f e n s i v e p o s i t i o n where i t s " j u s t i f i c a t i o n " v i s a. v i s o t h e r b e l i e f s was demanded, then the n a t u r e o f b e l i e f i t s e l f was l o s t . B e l i e f r e q u i r e d a c c e p t a n c e ; a t t e m p t s t o j u s t i f y b e l i e f i n t r o d u c e d the language o f " p r o o f s " and " r e a s o n s " w h i c h was a n t i t h e t i c a l t o a c c e p t a n c e . B i l s o n ' s works e x p r e s s an overwhelming c o n c e r n w i t h the f r a g m e n t a t i o n and d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f b e l i e f w h i c h t h i s k i n d o f c h a l l e n g e was p r e c i p i t a t i n g . The two works of Henry Jacob d i s p l a y e x a c t l y the k i n d of a t t i t u d e towards s c r i p t u r a l a u t h o r i t y , and the a u t h o r i t y of the Church F a t h e r s , w h i c h B i l s o n had been denouncing. - 64 -Jacob was s p u r r e d i n t o w r i t i n g by B i l s o n ' s sermons at S t . P a u l ' s C r o s s ; c o n s e q u e n t l y , i t i s i r o n i c t h a t B i l s o n ' s attempt t o denounce t h i s form o f argument a c t u a l l y p r e c i p i t a t e d some o f the c l e a r e s t w r i t t e n examples o f i t . Jacob c l a i m e d r e p e a t e d l y t h a t r e a s o n s c o u l d prove i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n s : a l s o , he a l t e r e d the meanings of words t o s u i t the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n r e q u i r e d . An example o f t h i s can be seen i n Jacob's coverage o f the words " f l e s h " and " s o u l " . The b i b l i c a l p assages w h i c h r e f e r r e d t o C h r i s t ' s s u f f e r i n g under P i l a t e and on the c r o s s d e s c r i b e d h i s s u f f e r i n g as b e i n g in., the f l e s h , o r body. I f t h e s e passages were t o be used t o s u p p o r t C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g on the c r o s s (as Jacob wanted t o d o ) , t h e n the f l e s h o r body had t o be u n d e r s t o o d t o i n c l u d e the s o u l as w e l l . Jacob i n s i s t e d t h a t These p l a c e s o f s c r i p t u r e are not p r o p e r and l i t e r a l , but f i g u r a t i v e i n deede: t h e y doe note but the p a r t e f o r the whole, sometimes C h r i s t e s body, sometimes h i s f l e s h , sometimes h i s b l o o d , when the whole man C h r i s t i s p l a i n l i e v n d e r s t o o d e c o n s i s t i n g b o t h o f a body hauinge f l e s h and b l o o d , and a l s o of a s o u l e . ^ 2 Jacob went on t o p r o v i d e the " r e a s o n " why i t must be c o r r e c t t o i n c l u d e the s o u l i n the word f l e s h : The r e a s o n wherof, e s p e c i a l l y i n C h r i s t s s u f f r i n g , d o t h seeme t o be t h i s , because the wounds of h i s body & s h e a d i n g f o r t h o f h i s b l o o d , are most a p a r a n t & e u i d e n t t o sense: and t h e r e f o r e are they so commonly named i n s t e a d o f the whole s u f f e r i n g e s , the r e s t whereof were n o t open t o our senses. The language o f Jacob's works was dominated by the need t o " r e a s o n " and t o "prove". Examples o f t h i s a re l e g i o n : t h e r e was a " G e n e r a l l Reason ... e u i d e n t by the S c r i p t u r e , - 65 -That C h r i s t s u f f e r e d p r o p e r l y & i m m e d i a t l y i n h i s s o u l e " , f o l l o w e d by "more S p e c i a l l Reasons p r o o u i n g t h a t C h r i s t s u f f e r e d f o r vs the Wrath o f God." That C h r i s t s u f f e r e d 94 h e l l i s h sorrows "we proue by many r e a s o n s . " E l s e w h e r e , Jacob c o n c l u d e d t h a t "the S c r i p t u r e s haue bene examined, and n o t h i n g i n them i s found t o proue C h r i s t s S o u l e s g o i n g 95 t o H e l l . " Reasons c o u l d p r o v e , and so c o u l d the B i b l e , and the B i b l e c o u l d show "a r e a s o n which can neuer be r e f u t e d by 96 the w i t t o f man." Sequences of r e a s o n i n g were f o l l o w e d and then r e i n f o r c e d by b i b l i c a l q u o t a t i o n s , a l l o f w h i c h "proved" the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w h i c h Jacob had f o r w a r d e d . An example o f t h i s p r o c e s s was Jacob's d i s c u s s i o n o f the " r e a s o n " why C h r i s t had a human s o u l : Now he / C h r i s t j assumed ( a l l men know) our humane s o u l e a s w e l l as our f l e s h , and he saued our s o u l e a s w e l l as our f l e s h , ergo he s u f f e r e d b o t h i n s o u l e and i n . f l e s h : ... T h i s r e a s o n i s b e t t e r c o n c l u d e d t h u s : I f he assumed our whole humane n a t u r e t o t h i s v e r y end & purpose t h a t he might s u f f e r i n i t , and by s u f f e r i n g i n i t , saue i t : Then he a l s o s u f f r e d b o t h i n body and i n s o u l e . But t h i s i s t r u e , Hee assumed our whole humane n a t u r e t o t h i s v e r i e end and purpose t h a t he might s u f f e r i n i t , and by s u f f e r i n g i n i t , saue i t , Ergo t h i s i s t r u e a l s o , t h a t hee s u f f e r e d b o t h i n s o u l e and f l e s h e . Heere o n e l y the assumption can be doubted. I t c o n t e y n e t h i n i t t h r e e p o i n t s . 1. He assumed our whole n a t u r e . 2. That w h i c h he assumed he d i d assume t o t h i s v e r y end  & purpose; t h a t he might s u f f e r i n i t . 3. That by s u f f r i n g i n i t , he might saue i t . These t h r e e p o i n t e s b e i n g p r o u e d , the whole Assumption b e f o r e i s e u i d e n t and f i r m e . But t h e y are a l l prooued i n t h e s e v e r s e s ... 9 7 Jacob went on t o c i t e the b i b l i c a l passages w h i c h "proved" h i s "assumption", but s u f f i c e i t t o show the dominance o f the language o f " r e a s o n " and " p r o o f " w i t h i n h i s work. The - 66 -arguments o f o t h e r s were d i s m i s s e d because they had "no r e a s o n " i n them. For B i l s o n , a l l o f t h i s added up to no more than an "example what i t i s f o r a man i n m a t t e r s o f f a i t h t o d e s p i s e b o t h a u t h o r i t i e and a n t i q u i t y , and t r u s t o n e l y t o h i s own 98 f a n c i e . " B i l s o n o b j e c t e d to Jacob's p r o p e n s i t y f o r f i g u r a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ; once a d m i t t e d , t h e r e was no end to them. On the s u b j e c t o f C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g on the c r o s s , Jacob had remarked: why might not the Crosse conteyne h i s S o u l e s s u f f e r -i n g e s , yea a l the S u f f r i n g s o f C h r i s t s whole l i f e ? What l e t t e t h but h i s Soule might be sayd t o be C r u c i f i e d , & not the F l e s h o n l y ? Any b i t t e r a n g u i s h & sharp a f f l i c t i o n i s commonly c a l l e d , a C r o s s e . And though C h r i s t s C r o s s e p r o p e r l y & s t r i c t l y t a k e n was s e n s i b l e & outward i n deed, y e t who s e e t h not but i t i s most f a m i l i a r l y & o f t e n v s e d i n a l a r g e r meaning, t o conteyne a l l C h r i s t e s g r i e u o u s S u f f e r i n g e s what so e u e r , when so euer, & how so euer.99 T h e r e f o r e , not o n l y might the s o u l have been c r u c i f i e d , but the c r o s s i t s e l f c o u l d have a f i g u r a t i v e meaning. Such p r o p o s i t i o n s were a l a r m i n g t o the " t r a d i t i o n a l l y " and " l i t e r a l l y " i n c l i n e d B i l s o n . J a cob's s u g g e s t i o n s d i s r e g a r d e d a l l a c c e p t e d a u t h o r i t y a t w i l l . Where i t s u i t e d h i s argument, he i n s i s t e d e q u a l l y vehemently t h a t passages must be t a k e n l i t e r a l l y , 1 0 0 but the d e c i s i o n o v e r the l i t e r a l o r non-l i t e r a l n a t u r e o f a passage o f the B i b l e was e n t i r e l y h i s own, f o r "Wee haue l e a r n e d C h r i s t I e s u s o t h e r w i s e , then t o s t a y our h o l y f a i t h on the c r e d i t o f any man, o r men." 1 0 1 T h i s meant t h a t Jacob r e j e c t e d any a p p e a l which B i l s o n made t o the a u t h o r i t y o f the Church F a t h e r s . B i l s o n had - 67 -a c c u s e d Jacob o f " m i s t a k i n g o r p e r v e r t i n g " h i s ( B i l s o n ' s ) arguments, and B i l s o n had defended h i m s e l f by c l a i m i n g t h a t h i s arguments were those o f the F a t h e r s . Jacob's response was d e r i s o r y : I marveyle then why he t r o u b l e t h him s e l f e and vs w i t h them /the arguments/ i f they be not h i s ; s p e c i a l l y i f he propound them not t o be receaved? Why l a b o u r e t h hee so t o d i s t r a c t vs w i t h such v a r i e t i e s ? And then t o t e l l vs they are not h i s , but o t h e r mens. Yet such mens he t e l l e t h vs t h e y a r e , as t h a t i t must not be f o r our C r e d i t t o r e f u s e them. Thus the poore p e o p l e are s t r a n g e l y t a u g h t : thus the w o r l d s h a l b e f i l l e d f u l l o f a m b i g u i t i e s , d o u b t f u l n e s , v a r i e t y o f o p i n i o n i n m a t t e r s o f R e l i g i o n : and w i t h a l l f o r b i d d e n t o r e s t vpon any c e r t a i n e and p a r t i c u l a r reason.^02 I n t h i s way, Jacob d i s m i s s e d the Church F a t h e r s , r e g a r d i n g them as a s o u r c e o f a m b i g u i t y r a t h e r than o f a u t h o r i t y . At one p o i n t he not o n l y o v e r t h r e w the a u t h o r i t y o f the F a t h e r s but a c t i v e l y reprimanded them f o r i n t r o d u c i n g e r r o r s : I t i s a t h i n g too r i f e w i t h the F a t h e r s , yea w i t h some o f the a n c i e n t e s t of them t o a l t e r and chaunge the a u t h e n t i k e vse o f words, whereby c o n s e q u e n t l y i t i s ^ e a s i e f o r e r r o u r s and g r o s s e m i s t a k i n g s t o creepe i n . A n o t h e r example o f the way i n which Jacob d i s r e g a r d e d t r a d i t i o n and the a u t h o r i t y o f S c r i p t u r e can be seen i n h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f h e l l . He was one o f those whom B i l s o n had denounced f o r q u e s t i o n i n g the r e a l , m a t e r i a l e x i s t e n c e o f f i r e i n h e l l . The s c r i p t u r a l passages which had always been used t o s u p p o r t b e l i e f i n the l i t e r a l f i r e o f h e l l a l s o r e f e r r e d t o b r i m s t o n e , worms, c h a i n s and wood. Jacob was a b l e t o t u r n t h i s i n t o a r e a s o n f o r r e j e c t i n g these s c r i p t u r a l a u t h o r i t i e s : y o u r S c r i p t u r e s ... v t t e r l y prove n o t h i n g a t a l l : f o r they shew no more any c o r p o r a l l , o r m a t e r i a l l , o r t r u e f i r e t o be now i n H e l l , t hen a «corporall worme, m a t e r i a l l b r i m s t o n , and much wood, & t r u e c h a i n e s . V/hich you say i s a s l e e v e l e s o b j e c t i o n , but n e i t h e r y o u r s e l f e , n or A u s t i n whom you c i t e a g a i n s t i t , d oth any where answer i t . . . . F or my p a r t e I see no reason to b e l i e v e t h a t now t h e r e i s c o r p o r a l l f i r e i n H e l l . Whether t h e r e would be such l i t e r a l f i r e i n the f u t u r e was ano t h e r m a t t e r , but to have r e j e c t e d the a u t h o r i t y o f S c r i p t u r e and the Church F a t h e r s , and t o have c a s t doubt upon the l i t e r a l f l a m e s o f h e l l was i n n o v a t i o n enough! Even where he. a c c e p t e d t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , Jacob sometimes sowed seeds o f doubt about them. From h i s work i t i s easy t o see how the range o f dogma a f f e c t e d by the debate was expanding r a p i d l y . An i l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h i s was Jacob's d i s c u s s i o n o f the o r i g i n : v o f the s o u l . S i n c e he was c l a i m i n g t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r e d t o save human s o u l s , then C h r i s t must have had a t r u e "human" s o u l i n which t o s u f f e r . T h i s l e d Jacob on t o d i s c u s s the o r i g i n o f human s o u l s . These had always been b e l i e v e d t o have come from God, and hence Jacob b u i l t h i s arguments " g r a u n t i n g t h a t mens s o u l e s are not d e r i u e d by p r o p a g a t i o n from t h e i r p a r e n t e s " ; but t h e n , the doubt was r a i s e d because he d e c l a r e d t h a t ' i f anyone c l a i m e d t h a t human s o u l s were d e r i v e d from t h e i r p a r e n t s and not from God " t h e r e c o u l d f o l l o w no i m p i e t i e n o r a b s u r d i t i e : 105 n e i t h e r r e a s o n n o r r e l i g i o n can w e l l ouerthrowe i t . " Jacob went so f a r as t o h i g h l i g h t the problems i n h e r e n t i n the t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t the s o u l came from God. S i n was a q u a l i t y o f the s o u l , f o r "where t h e r e i s no l i u i n g s o u l e , t h e r e neuer was nor can be any s i n n e o r d i s o b e d i e n c e 106 a t a l l . " But i t was a c c e p t e d dogma t h a t a l l s i n came from Adam, and was p r o p a g a t e d from g e n e r a t i o n t o g e n e r a t i o n . T h e r e f o r e , Jacob drew a t t e n t i o n t o the d i f f i c u l t y o f s i n b e i n g p r o p o g a t e d i n t o a s o u l which came not from man, but from God. Having r a i s e d the problem, Jacob i m m e d i a t e l y backed away from i t , s t a t i n g h i s a l l e g i a n c e t o the t r a d i t i o n a l b e l i e f , and a d d i n g , " L e t t vs not bee c u r i o u s i n t h i s harde p o i n t , w h i c h 107 needeth more P h i l o s o p h i e t h e n D i u i n i t i e t o d e c l a r e i t . " I f a t t e n t i o n i s t u r n e d to the t h e o l o g i c a l c o n t e n t o f Jacob's argument, one p o s i t i o n i s c l e a r . Jacob was s u p p o r t i n g C a l v i n ' s p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t the s u f f e r i n g s o f C h r i s t i n h i s s o u l d u r i n g the agony were a n e c e s s a r y p a r t o f the redemptive p r o c e s s . T h i s B i l s o n d e n i e d e m p h a t i c a l l y . However, u n l i k e C a l v i n , Jacob d i d not c o n s i d e r t h a t t h i s s o u l s u f f e r i n g was 108 the "descent i n t o h e l l " of the Creed. Jacob began by s t a t i n g h i s " v n f a i n e d " s u p p o r t f o r the a r t i c l e o f f a i t h : Here t h e n , l e t a l l men knowe, we d e n i e not t h i s A r t i c l e o f our Creede, but wee embrace i t v n f a i n e d l y , and doe h o l d i t t o haue bene p r o f i t a b l y added, when i t was f i r s t e p u t i n t o the Creede.-*-0 But t h i s a c c e p t a n c e was soon q u a l i f i e d . Jacob b e l i e v e d t h a t C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l r e a l l y meant t h a t he descended t o the s t a t e o f the dead. He c o n s i d e r e d t h a t the Greek word "Hades" had been m i s t r a n s l a t e d as " H e l l " and t h a t i t p r o p e r l y meant "the dead". Other " C a l v i n i s t s " i n the debate had s u p p o r t e d t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e b e f o r e , o r a t l e a s t o u t l i n e d i t as a p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (Hume and P e r k i n s ) , but Jacob - 70 -wanted t o push i t a s t e p f u r t h e r . He d i d not r e a l l y a c c e p t the a r t i c l e as i t s t o o d i n the E n g l i s h Creed. I f i t meant t h a t C h r i s t descended t o the s t a t e o f the dead, then i t s h o u l d say so: But now i t w i l l be o b i e c t e d , how then s h o u l d wee t r a n s l a t e the Hebrue and the Greeke S h e o l & Hades, t o f i t t hose words i n our language.... t h i s i s e u i d e n t , t h a t w h i c h i s commonly vsed & namely i n our v u l g a r e Creedes, H e l l , i s a word to p a r t i a l l , t o v n f i t t , y e a c o r r u p t , and s t a r k e nought. I t i s s u t e a b l e t o the l a r g e n e s o f the Hebrue and Greeke meaning, ... to say i n E n g l i s h , the Dead. As i n the Creede, He went  v n t o the Dead: o r Hee descended among the Dead. 1 1'-' Thus Jacob d i d not a c c e p t the w o r d i n g o f the Creed as i t s t o o d . The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e w h i c h he f o l l o w e d had an i n h e r e n t c o m p l i c a t i o n which he e x p l o r e d . C h r i s t was w i t h o u t s i n ; t h e r e f o r e i f he "descended t o the s t a t e o f the dead", then h i s s o u l would go t o the p l a c e o f good s o u l s . T h i s was heaven. Jacob a c c e p t e d t h a t C h r i s t went t o heaven, 1 1"'" but i f t h i s was the c a s e , s u r e l y C h r i s t s h o u l d have ascended, not descended. Jacob d i s m i s s e d t h i s c o m p l i c a t i o n by e x p l a i n i n g t h a t t h i s worde Descending o r Going downe, i s n o t h i n g e l s i n t h i s m a t t e r , but a •-'decaying, a f a l l i n g downe, o r a coming t o an ende i n t h i s l i f e . - H 2 Jacob's f i n a l word on how the a r t i c l e s h o u l d be u n d e r s t o o d took t h i s c o m p l i c a t i o n i n t o account because he s u g g e s t e d t h a t 113 C h r i s t "went v n t o the Dead": he no l o n g e r descended. Jacob a t t a c k e d B i l s o n ' s argument t h a t C h r i s t had made a l i t e r a l d e s c e n t i n h i s s o u l t o v a n q u i s h h e l l : Our t r e a t i s e I hope b e f o r e grounded wholy on Gods word, h a t h s u f f i c i e n t l y c l e e r e d t h i s p o i n t /the l i t e r a l d e s c e n t / t o be but a d e u i s e o f men, a'meer f o r g e r y , & no t r u t h i n R e l i g i o n a t a l : yea and so much the more h a t e f u l l , as t h a t i t i s v r g e d t o be t a k e n as one o f the A r t i c l e s o f f a i t h . I n w h i c h our d e n i a l l n e i t h e r want we the c o n s e n t o f men.114 But a l t h o u g h B i l s o n and Jacob d i d not agree on the i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e , t h i s was not the main p o i n t o f the d i s p u t e between them. C a l v i n ' s argument t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g was p a r t o f the redemptive p r o c e s s was more i m p o r t a n t . B i l s o n had conceeded a c e r t a i n l a c k o f c l a r i t y i n S c r i p t u r e c o n c e r n i n g C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t , but t h e r e was none c o n c e r n i n g the redemption t h r o u g h the b l o o d o f C h r i s t . T h e r e f o r e B i l s o n ' s main c o n c e r n was the d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f b e l i e f w h i c h h o l d i n g d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s e n t a i l e d . J acob's t e c h n i q u e s were seen as a t h r e a t which undermined u n i t y o f b e l i e f , and hence b e l i e f i t s e l f . B i l s o n was not a l o n e i n h i s f e a r o v e r the t h r e a t i n -v o l v e d i n arguments l i k e J a c o b ' s . R i c h a r d P a r k e s was aware o f Jacob and h i s works, and he saw a v e r y r e a l t h r e a t i n the a i r i n g o f o p i n i o n s such as J a c o b ' s . I n h i s d i s p u t e w i t h Andrew W i l l e t o v e r the meaning o f C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l , P a r k e s was concerned t h a t i t was no l o n g e r j u s t one a r t i c l e o f f a i t h t h a t was i n j e o p a r d y , b u t the Church, and b e l i e f i t s e l f . Even a l l o w i n g f o r r a t h e r e x p a n s i v e use o f language, and the p o s s i b l e e x a g g e r a t i o n o f c o n d i t i o n s , P a r k e s d e s c r i b e s a more fundamental a t t a c k than t h o s e who had w r i t t e n b e f o r e . - 7 2 -The a d d r e s s t o the C h r i s t i a n Reader i n P a r k e s ' s f i r s t work s t a t e s : What d i s p u t e s & c o n t e n t i o n s the d e n i a l / o f the a r t i c l e 7 h a t h tared o f l a t e y e a r s , & d a y l y n o u r i s h e t h even i n ~ the bosome o f our Church, no man ( I t h i n k e ) i s i g n o r a u n t ; b e i n g so n o t o r i o u s t h a t they cannot be s u p p r e s s e d and so vehement, o r r a t h e r v i r u l e n t t h a t they w i l l not be p a c i f i e d i n so much t h a t the s t r o n g i n f a i t h a re t h e r e b y weakened, the weake g r e a t l y s c a n d a l i z e d , the c u r r e n t o f the G o s p e l l h i n d e r e d , and the b u i l d i n g vp o f Gods house n e g l e c t e d by w r a n g l i n g about the f o u n d a t i o n . . . . f o r as v n i t y i s the band of peace and p e r f e c t i o n i n the Church: so c o n t r a r y w i s e i s d i s s e n t i o n the bane o f d i s c i p l i n e & d o c t r i n e t h e r e i n . . . . Atheisme can s p r o u t and spreade abroade f a s t i n o u g h o f i t s e l f e , (as l a m e n t a b l e e x p e r i e n c e d a y l y t e a c h e t h , ) though i t haue no f a v o r i t e s o r a b e t t o r s t o promote and p r o p a g a t e i t ; & t h e r e f o r e e i t h e r t o p l a n t e by w r i t i n g , o r t o w a t e r by s p e a k i n g the c u r s e d r o o t e s and seedes t h e r o f , i s n e i t h e r the p a r t o f a P a u l e , nor o f an A p o l l o . 1 1 5 The tone o f t h e d e d i c a t o r y a d d r e s s i n P a r k e s ' s second work was even more vehement and f e a r f u l o f the e f f e c t s o f the debate: my purpose i s t o speake c h i e f l y o f d i s s e n t i o n , and namely,... c o n c e r n i n g C h r i s t e s d e s c e n s i o n i n t o h e l l , w h i c h h a t h b r e d , and d a i l y n o u r i s h e t h g r e a t t r o u b l e and d i s q u i e t n e s s e , t h r o u g h o u t t h i s whole Church of England . Wherein, not o n l y t h e i r f a c t , w h i c h do impugne i t , i s prophane, and i r r e l i g i o u s , i n d e n y i n g an a r t i c l e o f C h r i s t i a n f a i t h : but the e f f e c t t h e r o f a l s o h e a t h e n i s h , and p e r n i t i o u s , i n making way f o r Atheisme and I n f i d -e l i t y . F o r as the end o f Schisme, i s h e r e s i e , so i s the end o f h e r e s i e , Atheisme: whereunto t h e s e c o n t e n t i o n s are no s m a l l p r e p a r a t i u e s . i f S e c t a r i e s , and S c h i s m a t i c k e s s h o u l d be s u f f e r e d . t o c o i n e & r e c o i n e what t h e y l i s t , i n the Forge o f t h e i r owne f a n c i e s w i t h o u t r e s t r a i n t o f E c c l e s i a s t i c a l c ensure ... not o n l y f a c t i o n would d e u i d e , but i n f e c t i o n a l s o deuoure the whole C h u r c h . 1 1 6 P a r k e s was c o n v i n c e d t h a t W i l l e t was one who had such - 73 -" f a c t i o u s m o t i u e s " and t h a t W i l l e t was a " s p e c i a l l i n s t r u m e n t " 117 i n the p r o m o t i n g o f schism and d i s s e n t . I t i s not at a l l c l e a r t h a t such a l a b e l was j u s t i f i e d . W i l l e t e x p r e s s e d e x a c t l y the same con c e r n as P a r k e s had over the s e t t i n g f o r t h o f " s t r a n g e and uncouth d o c t r i n e s , e x o r b i t a n t from the c u r r e n t d o c t r i n e among P r o t e s t a n t s " and made a p l e a f o r "one u n i f o r m -118 i t y o f d o c t r i n e . " W i l l e t was a s u p p o r t e r o f C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and had produced w r i t t e n s t a t e m e n t s t o t h a t 119 e f f e c t as e a r l y as 1594 i n h i s S y n o p s i s P a p i s m i . However, as the t i t l e o f t h i s work s u g g e s t s , W i l l e t ' s i n t e n t i o n was t o defend the " P r o t e s t a n t " f a i t h a g a i n s t the C a t h o l i c one, and hence he was more i n t e r e s t e d i n p r e s e n t i n g a u n i f i e d P r o t e s t a n t f r o n t a g a i n s t C a t h o l i c i s m .than he was i n d i s c r i m i n a t i n g between P r o t e s t a n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the d e s c e n t . As a r e s u l t , h i s d e s c r i p t i o n o f the meaning o f the a r t i c l e p r o v i d e s " u m b r e l l a - l i k e " coverage o f P r o t e s t a n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g the v a n q u i s h i n g o f h e l l , the h e l l i s h t orments upon the c r o s s , and the e n t r y o f C h r i s t i n t o the s t a t e o f the dead: That C h r i s t our S a u i o u r by v e r t u e o f h i s d e a t h , d i d ouercome h e l and the d i u e l , we do v e r i l i e b e l e e u e , which may be c a l l e d a descent i n t o h e l : t h a t he a l s o s u f f e r e d the torments o f h e l vpon the c r o s s e , and so descended 'into h e l l f o r v s , t o a b i d e t h a t b i t t e r p a i n e w h i c h we had deserued to s u f f e r e t e r n a l l y , we doe a l s o h o l d and t e a c h : . . . F u r t h e r m o r e , i f des c e n d i n g i n t o h e l l be t a k e n a c c o r d i n g t o the Hebrue P h r a s e , For e n t r i n g i n t o the s t a t e o f the dead: so we g r a u n t , t h a t C h r i s t descended i n t o h e l l ... But f o r the de s c e n d i n g o f C h r i s t i n t o h e l l , a f t e r y o u r / C a t h o l i c 7 sense, t o d e l i u e r the P a t r i a r c h e s from t h e n c e , when you can 1 2 Q proue i t out o f S c r i p t u r e , we w i l l y e e l d v n t o you. - 74 -A l t h o u g h W i l l e t a d m i t t e d the v a n q u i s h i n g o f h e l l as a f u n c t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t , i t s h o u l d be n o t i c e d t h a t he was d e s c r i b i n g a f i g u r a t i v e a c t i o n , and thus a d m i t t i n g t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n d i d not c o n f l i c t w i t h h i s p r e f e r e n c e f o r C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . W i l l e t ' s c o n c e r n w i t h the " p o p i s h " t h r e a t c o n t i n u e d i n t o h i s l a t e r works. A l t h o u g h Limbomastix c o n t a i n e d a r e p l y t o P a r k e s ' s work, i t t o o k the form o f the r e f u t a t i o n o f the arguments of B e l l a r m i n e c o n c e r n i n g Limbus Patrum. The passages of S c r i p t u r e w h i c h B e l l a r m i n e had used t o s u p p o r t the Roman i n t e r p r e t a t i o n were p r e c i s e l y the same t h r e e v/hich P a r k e s used as the framework f o r h i s argument. Thus, i n W i l l e t ' s o p i n i o n , P a r k e s was s u r r e p t i t i o u s l y a d v o c a t i n g the p o p i s h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , j u s t as i n P a r k e s ' s o p i n i o n W i l l e t was s u r r e p t i t i o u s l y t r y i n g t o advocatetfehe 1 2 1 views of J a c o b , B r o w n i s t s , F a m i l i s t s , and s c h i s m a t i c s . S i n c e C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was seen as the s o u r c e o f arguments l i k e J a cob's (because o f the f i g u r a t i v e i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f the d e s c e n t l e a d i n g t o f i g u r a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f o t h e r p a r t s o f the B i b l e ) t h e r e was a f i r m l i n k between the two i n P a r k e s ' s mind. That W i l l e t saw h i m s e l f as s u p p o r t i n g such v i e w s seems u n l i k e l y . He made a f i r m p l e a f o r u n i t y among P r o t e s t a n t s : s e e i n g we a l l h o l d the f o u n d a t i o n , The a r t i c l e o f . C h r i s t s d e s c e n s i o n , we s h o u l d not r a i s e any c o n t e n t i o n , o r mooue q u e s t i o n s about the manner, nor breake the peace o f the Church, s e e i n g t h e r e are most r e u e r e n d l e a r n e d men o f b o t h o p i n i o n s . . . . They w h i c h h o l d n o t the l o c a l l descent o f C h r i s t s s o u l e t o h e l l , s h o u l d not condemne the o t h e r as P o p i s h o r s u p e r s t i t i o u s men, t h a t are so perswaded: They wh i c h a f f i r m e i t , ought not account them as enemies o r a d u e r s a r i e s o f the t r u t h t h a t d i s s e n t from them t h e r i n ; t h e y b o t h h o l d i n g the f o u n d a t i o n . 1 2 2 Whatever W i l l e t ' s s t a t e d i n t e n t i o n s o r m o t i v a t i o n s , the r e a l i t y was t h a t u n i t y and a c c o r d c o u l d not be e s t a b l i s h e d when d i f f e r e n t p i c t u r e s e x i s t e d o f the form w h i c h the u n i t y s h o u l d t a k e . Hence, a l t h o u g h he c l a i m e d s i m p l y t o r e f u t e B e l l a r m i n e , W i l l e t d i d so by a d v o c a t i n g C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t -123 a t i o n and by denouncing P a r k e s ' s " t r a d i t i o n a l " view. The cause o f P a r k e s ' s c o n c e r n about W i l l e t can be seen i n the extremes t o w h i c h W i l l e t was p r e p a r e d t o go t o s u p p o r t h i s argument. For example, W i l l e t was p r e p a r e d t o a l l o w f i g u r a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f b i b l i c a l p a s s a g e s . C o n c e r n i n g the t r a n s l a t i o n s o f the words " h e l l " and " s o u l " , W i l l e t t ook the v i e w t h a t i n many b i b l i c a l p a s s a g e s , the words "grave" and " l i f e " were p r e f e r a b l e : But i f i t were a d m i t t e d , t h a t t h e s e words p r o p e r l y s h o u l d not be so t a k e n here f o r the l i f e and the g r a u e , as y e t i t i s prooued b e f o r e , and c o n f e s s e d by the Answerer /Parkes7: y e t i n r e g a r d o f the m a n i f o l d i n c o n u e n i e n c e s , t h a t would ensue vpon t h e ^ o t h e r sense, a f i g u r a t i u e speech s h o u l d be a d m i t t e d . The " m a n i f o l d i n c o n u e n i e n c e t h a t would ensue vpon the o t h e r sense" was t h a t i f the t r a n s l a t i o n s o f " h e l l " and " s o u l " were used, the passages i n q u e s t i o n c o u l d be used e f f e c t -i v e l y by t h e P a p i s t s as b i b l i c a l s u p p o r t f o r Limbus Patrum. T h i s W i l l e t w i s h e d t o a v o i d a t a l l c o s t s . A n o t h e r cause f o r P a r k e s ' s a n x i e t y o v e r W i l l e t can be seen i n the l a t t e r ' s d i s c u s s i o n o f a t o p i c which Jacob had broached. W i l l e t - 76 -• f o l l o w e d an argument s i m i l a r t o Jacob's c o n c e r n i n g the d i v i n e o r human o r i g i n o f the s o u l . He s u p p o r t e d the ort h o d o x b e l i e f t h a t the s o u l came from God, but a t the same t i m e , 125 d i s c u s s e d the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t the s o u l came from man. W i l l e t ' s second work s p e c i f i c a l l y on C h r i s t ' s descent s u p p o r t e d the same i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as h i s f i r s t , b ut i t was more o v e r t i n i t s o p p o s i t i o n t o P a r k e s . L o i d o r o m a s t i x , p u b l i s h e d i n 1607, bore a s u b t i t l e w h i c h made t h i s c l e a r ; i t was "A- scourge f o r a r a y l e r ; C o n t a i n i n g a f u l l and s u f f i c i e n t Answer v n t o the V n c h r i s t i a n r a y l i n g s ... v e n t e d o f l a t e by one R i c h a r d P a r k e s ... a g a i n s t the a u t h o r o f Limbo-m a s t i x . " The s t a t e o f the impasse i s q u i t e c l e a r from t h i s work. W i l l e t r e a s s e r t e d h i s b e l i e f i n C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and c o n s i d e r e d t h a t the descent i n t o h e l l was "no s m a l l 126 f o r c e t o the e f f e c t o f our Redemption." He was p r e p a r e d t o b e l i e v e "whatsoeuer can be prooued out o f S c r i p t u r e , and t r u l y c o l l e c t e d from t h e n c e , " but a t the same time he a s s e r t e d t h a t "the l o c a l l d e s c e n s i o n o f C h r i s t s s o u l e t o h e l l , cannot n e c e s s a r i l y be co n c l u d e d " f r o m b i b l i c a l 127 s o u r c e s . A g a i n W i l l e t c l a i m e d t o be i n s e a r c h o f u n i t y , but h i s a t t a c k upon P a r k e s was o v e r t . He i n t e n d e d t o c o r r e c t the more t h a n t h r e e hundred e r r o r s i n P a r k e s ' s work: h i s / P a rkes ' s 7 e r r o r s b e e i n g more th a n the l e a u e s , and almost e q u a l l t o the pages o f h i s booke: i f hee had had the l i k e aduantage a g a i n s t me, he would not haue doubted t o vse t h a t sentence o f Hierom a g a i n s t me ... " I w i l l propound the a d u e r s a r i e s s e n t e n c e , and out o f h i s darke bookes I w i l l drawe the s e r p e n t s , as out o f t h e i r h o l e s ; n e i t h e r w i l l I s u f f e r h i s venemous - 77 -head t o l i e l u r k i n g w i t h i n the windes o f h i s s p e c k l e d b o d y . 1 2 8 Thus, even though the o r i g i n a l a d v e r s a r y had been Rome, t h e r e was no doubt t h a t by 1607 i t had become those w i t h i n the Church o f England who h e l d an o p p o s i n g v i e w t o C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the descent i n t o h e l l . One l a s t p a r t i c i p a n t i n the debate d e s e r v e s a t t e n t i o n , t h i s b e i n g Hugh Broughton. Broughton was p r o p o u n d i n g h i s 129 views about the a r t i c l e from 1579 onwards, a l t h o u g h h i s f i r s t work on the s u b j e c t was not p u b l i s h e d u n t i l 1599. Broughton's t r e a t m e n t o f the a r t i c l e was d i f f e r e n t from any o u t l i n e d p r e v i o u s l y , a l t h o u g h t h e r e i s a s t r o n g l i n k between h i s v i e w and the view w h i c h c l a i m e d t h a t C h r i s t had descended t o the dead. Broughton was a s c h o l a r o f Hebrew and Greek, and h i s s t u d i e s had':..led him t o b e l i e v e t h a t ''Hades" s h o u l d be u n d e r s t o o d as the p l a c e o f the dead, and not as h e l l . However, he t o o k t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n even f u r t h e r than Jacob had. The p l a c e o f the dead, o r " w o r l d o f s o u l e s " as Broughton c a l l e d i t , c o u l d be e i t h e r the s t a t e o f heaven o r h e l l depending on t h e d e s e r t s o f the p e r s o n concerned. Even though i t c o n t a i n e d b o t h heaven and h e l l , Broughton d e s c r i b e d and e x p l a i n e d Hades as b e i n g a l l one p l a c e , w h i c h r a i s e d the problem o f i t s l o c a t i o n : s o u l e s i n Hades h o l i e and c o n t r a r i e know a l l t he o t h e r s c a s e , as men here that.haue but a g r e a t d i t c h b e t w i x t them: and t h e y are much- deceaved who t h i n k e H e l l t o be i n t h i s w o r l d , lowe i n ' the e a r t h . B e f o r e Gods t h r o n e the w i c k e d are tormented f o r euer and euer. So b o t h s i d e s know one the o t h e r s case: t h a t w i t h o u t coming t o them, they see what i s done. Thus Broughton s o l v e d the problem o f the l o c a t i o n o f Hades i n a way w h i c h c o m p l e t e l y d i s r e g a r d e d p r e v i o u s b e l i e f s about the l o c a t i o n o f h e l l . L i k e w i s e , h i s c o n c l u s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g the Creed e n t a i l e d a t o t a l r e j e c t i o n o f p r e v i o u s b e l i e f s . I f "Hades the g e n e r a l , by d i f f e r e n c e o f the p e r s o n , i s Heauen, and i n the w i c k e d H e l l " , o b v i o u s l y f o r C h r i s t , who was w i t h o u t s i n , i t must have been heaven; and so, i n accordance w i t h the " Z u r i c k C o n f e s s i o n " Broughton a d v o c a t e d t h a t " d e s c e n d i n g must be g r a u n t e d t o be A s c e n d i n g , and H e l l t o be 131 P a r a d i s e . " The a r t i c l e o f the Creed needed t o be reworded a c c o r d i n g l y : Here s t a n d e t h the A r t i c l e : Our L o r d b e i n g i n body c r u c i f i e d , dead and b u r i e d , had a s o u l i m r n o r t a l l , as a l l men, which went hence t o God: & b e i n g i n Hades, h o l y , had not h e l l but heauen.132 Broughton even c l a i m e d t h a t i n i t s a c c e p t e d form, the Creed c o n t a i n e d a h e r e s y . I n a p u b l i s h e d l e t t e r To a l l the n o b i l i t y o f E n g l a n d he suggested t h a t " A l l may w e l l here c o n s i d e r .., whether one h e r e s y i n the Creed be t o l e r a b l e f o r the goodnes of the r e s t o r r a t h e r c o r r u p t e t h the d i g n i t y o f the whole: as one dead f l y m a r r e t h an whole box o f 133 p r e c i o u s o i n c t m e n t . " A l l who b e l i e v e d and t a u g h t the Creed as i t s t o o d c o u l d be, and were, l a b e l l e d h e r e t i c s by him, and what was more, t h e i r t e a c h i n g s tended towards and r e s u l t -ed i n a t h e i s m . Thus, Broughton ended up i n the i n c o n g r u o u s 134 p o s i t i o n o f c a l l i n g A r c h b i s h o p B a n c r o f t a h e r e t i c . The most s i g n i f i c a n t p o i n t about Broughton's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was t h a t i t p r o v i d e d a u t h o r i t a t i v e arguments a g a i n s t b o t h the C a t h o l i c and C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . I f the whole n o t i o n o f C h r i s t d e s c e n d i n g t o h e l l was a f a l l a c y -based upon a m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a n c i e n t Greek, t h e n debate over the t i m i n g , purpose and method o f t h a t d escent was s u p e r f l u o u s and m i s g u i d e d . Broughton p r o v i d e d a f u l l d e s c r i p t i o n o f the way i n which h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n undermined Limbus Patrum, p u r g a t o r y , and"Geneua", i n h i s P o s i t i o n s o f /^v, 135 the word Hades, p u b l i s h e d i n 1605. Broughton c l e a r l y t hought he had the answer t o the whole problem and h i s t r a c t s d i s p l a y vehement resentment a t tho s e i n a u t h o r i t y who p e r s i s t e n t l y i g n o r e d h i s s o l u t i o n . But as t h i s a n a l y s i s o f the t r a c t s w r i t t e n on C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l has demonstrated, Broughton's i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n was one among many. The f a i l u r e t o e s t a b l i s h one P r o t e s t a n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e , and the r e s u l t a n t e x p r e s s i o n o f d i v e r g e n t o p i n i o n s o v e r i t s meaning, p l a c e d a l l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s i n a d e f e n s i v e p o s i t i o n . The v a l i d i t y o f one i n t e r p r e t a t i o n had t o be j u s t i f i e d o v e r o t h e r s . The s o u r c e s c o n s u l t e d i n an e f f o r t t o s e t t l e the i s s u e made m a t t e r s worse r a t h e r t h a n b e t t e r : Greek and Hebrew, the Church F a t h e r s and S c r i p t u r e i t s e l f o n l y s e r v e d t o r a i s e more p o s s i b i l i t i e s r a t h e r t h a n t o p r o v i d e answers. S i n c e t h e s g a u t h o r i t i e s c o n f l i c t e d , t h e i r c l a i m s t o adherence were undermined. The a u t h o r i t y o f some o f the Church F a t h e r s c o u l d be p r e f e r r e d o v e r o t h e r s ; l i k e w i s e some r e f o r m e r s - 80 -could' be more a u t h o r i t a t i v e than o t h e r s . Some b i b l i c a l p assages c a r r i e d more weight than o t h e r s ; some were t o be t a k e n l i t e r a l l y , some f i g u r a t i v e l y . As d i f f e r e n t b i b l i c a l p assages were drawn i n t o the debate, so o t h e r i s s u e s became i n v o l v e d and were open t o f i g u r a t i v e , and e v e n t u a l l y p e r s o n a l i z e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . I f the debate had begun w i t h the need t o e s t a b l i s h a P r o t e s t a n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e a g a i n s t the C a t h o l i c one w h i c h i n v o l v e d Limbus Patrum and p u r g a t o r y , i t became the s u b j e c t o f deep d i v i s i o n amongst P r o t e s t a n t s : those who s u p p o r t e d the " t r a d i t i o n a l " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , w a n t i n g as s t r i c t adherence as p o s s i b l e t o the words as w r i t t e n ; those who s u p p o r t e d a " C a l v i n i s t " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n - , e i t h e r t h a t o f C a l v i n h i m s e l f ( t h a t the descent was C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g d u r i n g the agony), o r the o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w hich was a c c e p t e d as " C a l v i n i s t " ( t h a t i t meant C h r i s t ' s g o i n g t o the s t a t e o f the dead); and those s u p p o r t i n g o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , o r employing methods o f argument which b o t h the " t r a d i t i o n a l i s t s " and the " C a l . v i n i s t s " r e j e c t e d . Jacob was one o f t h i s l a s t group. He was an e x t r e m i s t from the p o i n t o f view o f b o t h the " t r a d i t i o n a l i s t s " and the " C a l v i n i s t s " i n the debate over C h r i s t e s d e s c e n t . T h e r e f o r e M.M.Knappen i s not j u s t i f i e d i n c a l l i n g h i s t h e o l o g y "the b e g i n n i n g s " o f the t h e o l o g y o f " P u r i t a n i s m " . Jacob and h i s f o l l o w e r s would not become p a r t o f e i t h e r o f the "two g r e a t 136 p a r t i e s o f E n g l i s h P r o t e s t a n t s " ; t h e y would remain - 81 -o u t s i d e r s f o r m i n g a s m a l l , s e m i - s e p a r a t i s t c h u r c h i n T ^ 137 London. The a u t h o r i t y o f the Word had not p r o v i d e d an u n e q u i v o c a l answer. But what of the a u t h o r i t y o f the Church o f England? A f t e r a l l , i t had produced a r t i c l e s i n 1563 138 " f o r the auoydyng of the d i v e r s i t i e s o f o p i n i o n s . " I t i s r e v e a l i n g t o examine the response of the Church when fa.ced w i t h d i v e r s i t y r a t h e r t h a n the d e s i r e d u n i t y . - 82 -CHAPTER THREE AUTHORITY CURTAILED: AN INSOLUBLE PROBLEM The a u t h o r i t y o f the Church o f England f a r e d no b e t t e r than t h a t o f the Word. An e x a m i n a t i o n o f the a t t e m p t s o f a u t h o r i t i e s t o stem o r s o l v e t h i s c o n t r o v e r s i a l i s s u e o f f e r s i n t e r e s t i n g i n s i g h t s i n t o the b e l i e f s o f some o f t h o s e i n v o l v e d , and a l s o i n t o the growing i n a b i l i t y o f the Church t o e x e r t a u t h o r i t y o ver the c o n t e n t o f b e l i e f i n t h i s a r t i c l e . A t t e m p t s a t e s t a b l i s h i n g the meaning o f the a r t i c l e were hampered by the coverage i t had been g i v e n i n the a l l i m p o r t a n t T h i r t y - N i n e A r t i c l e s o f 1563. C a r l i l e ' s c o n c l u s i o n t h a t C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l d i d not b e l o n g i n the Creed c o u l d be denounced w i t h a u t h o r i t y s i n c e the t h i r d o f the T h i r t y - N i n e A r t i c l e s s t a t e d t h a t " i t i s t o be b e l e u e d t h a t he /Christ7 went downe i n t o h e l l . " 1 But the same t h i r d a r t i c l e o f f e r e d no purpose o r meaning f o r the descent and c o n s e q u e n t l y c o u l d not be i n v o k e d t o s e t t l e disagreement over t h e s e i s s u e s . B o t h those f o l l o w i n g the " t r a d i t i o n a l " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and t h o s e f o l l o w i n g C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n s i s t e d t h a t t h e y were m a i n t a i n i n g the t r u e , a c c e p t e d and p r e s c r i b e d meaning and t h a t t h e i r opponents were the i n n o v a t o r s . Those f o l l o w i n g C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n c o u l d i n s i s t t h a t as e a r l y as 1562 an e d i t i o n o f C a l v i n ' s The - 83 -I n s t i t v t i o n o f C h r i s t i a n R e l i g i o n ( w h i c h c o n t a i n e d a f u l l e x p o s i t i o n o f C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e ) was t r a n s l a t e d from L a t i n i n t o E n g l i s h and then p u b l i s h e d as "Seen and a l l o w e d a c c o r d i n g t o the o r d e r a p p o i n t e d i n the 2 Queenes M a i e s t i e s i n i u n c t i o n s . " They c o u l d emphasize t h a t C a l v i n ' s v iew was f u l l y a c c e p t e d by the Church o f England by r e f e r r i n g t h e i r opponents t o Thomas Rogers' E x p o s i t i o n o f 3 The E n g l i s h Creed. T h i s work was p u b l i s h e d i n two p a r t s , the f i r s t i n 1579 and the second i n 1585. A second e d i t i o n , a l s o i n two p a r t s , was p u b l i s h e d i n 1585 ( p a r t I ) and 1587 ( p a r t 4 I I ) . The f i r s t e d i t i o n seems t o be l o s t , but the second 5 e d i t i o n was d e f i n i t e l y " A l l o w e d by A u c t o r i t i e . " The work endorsed C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t , c l a i m i n g t h a t /the7 word H e l l i n t h i s A r t i c l e , as we tak e i t , s i g n i f i e t h : not the p l a c e o f e v e r l a s t i n g torments ... I n w h i c h p l a c e C h r i s t as man was n o t , forasmuch as (1) H i s body l a y i n the grave ...; (2) H i s s o u l was commended i n t o t he hands o f God the F a t h e r ^ ... /and was7 i n P a r a d i s e ... and not i n H e l l ... /But i t signifies7 The t e r r o r s and torments o f the body and s o u l w h i c h C h r i s t s u f f e r e d . 6 . Thus a u t h o r i t y had a l l o w e d t h a t the desc e n t t o h e l l was not t o l i t e r a l h e l l , b ut t h a t i t was C h r i s t ' s agony. On the o t h e r hand, those s u p p o r t i n g the t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n were n ot w i t h o u t o f f i c i a l l y a c c e p t e d s t a t e -ments o f t h e i r view. The 1563 Book o f H o m i l i e s c o n t a i n e d a h o m i l y f o r Good F r i d a y w h i c h c o v e r e d C h r i s t ' s p a s s i o n and death. I n i t the redemptive r o l e o f C h r i s t ' s c r u c i f i x i o n was examined: - 84 -t h e r e i s none o t h e r t h i n g t h a t can be named under heauen t o saue our s o u l e s , * but t h i s o n e l y worke of C h r i s t s p r e c i o u s o f f e r i n g o f h i s body* upon the a l t a r o f the c r o s s e . 7 (* s i g n i f i e s my i t a l i c s ) T h i s passage d e n i e d C a l v i n ' s p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l had t o s u f f e r t o save human s o u l s ; i n t h i s h o m i l y human s a l v a t i o n was s i m p l y t h r o u g h C h r i s t ' s b o d i l y s a c r i f i c e . A l t h o u g h the d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l was not c o v e r e d d i r e c t l y , the n e x t h o m i l y f o r E a s t e r Sunday c o n t a i n e d a heavy emphasis upon the way i n w h i c h C h r i s t ' s d eath " d e s t r o y e d h e l l , w i t h a l l the damnation t h e r e o f ; " h e l l was " s p o y l e d f o r e uer" by the- •• g v i c t o r y o f C h r i s t . Such comments were f u l l y i n tune w i t h the t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s descent t o v a n q u i s h h e l l , and t h e r e f o r e the Book of H o m i l i e s c o u l d be, and was, t a k e n as s u p p o r t i n g the t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n 9 o f the a r t i c l e . The w e i g ht o f a u t h o r i t y w h i c h t h i s work c a r r i e d was c o n s i d e r a b l e , g i v e n t h a t i t was s e t out by the a u t h o r i t y o f the Queen and was " t o be r e a d i n euery P a r i s h Church a g r e e a b l i e . " 1 (^ More d i r e c t s u p p o r t f o r the t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was t o be found i n N o w e l l ' s C a t e c h i s m. There were many e d i t i o n s o f t h i s work (two i n 1570, r e p r i n t s i n 1571, 1574, 1576 and perhaps i n o t h e r i n t e r m e d i a t e y e a r s ) 1 1 and i t c a r r i e d a u t h o r i t y : we l e a r n from the v a r i o u s i n j u n c t i o n s , &c. p u t f o r t h a t t h a t t ime by p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s , t h a t no C a t e c h i s m s were a l l o w e d t o be used by clergymen and s c h o o l m a s t e r s except one.or o t h e r of N o w e l l ' s . 1 2 - 85 -The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n g i v e n t o the a r t i c l e i n t h i s C a t e c h i s m was t r a d i t i o n a l i n the extreme i n t h a t , i n o r d e r t o s a t i s f y a l l the b i b l i c a l passages w h i c h r e f e r r e d t o C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l , N o w e l l a l l o w e d a purpose f o r C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t w h i c h was r e m i n i s c e n t o f the t a k i n g up o f the a n c i e n t f a t h e r s from Limbus Patrum: as C h r i s t i n h i s body descended i n t o the bowels o f the e a r t h , so, i n h i s s o u l s e v e r e d from the body, he descended i n t o h e l l : and t h a t t h e r e w i t h a l s o the v i r t u e and e f f i c a c y o f h i s d e a t h , so p i e r c e d t h r o u g h t o the dead, and t o v e r y h e l l i t s e l f , t h a t b o t h the s o u l s o f the u n b e l i e v i n g f e l t t h e i r most p a i n f u l and j u s t damnation f o r i n f i d e l i t y , and Satan h i m s e l f , the p r i n c e o f h e l l , f e l t t h a t a l l the power o f h i s t y r a n n y and d a r k n e s s was weakened, v a n q u i s h e d , and f a l l e n t o r u i n . On the o t h e r s i d e , the dead, which w h i l e t h e y l i v e d , b e l i e v e d i n C h r i s t , u n d e r s t o o d t h a t the work o f t h e i r r e d e m p t i o n was now f i n i s h e d , and u n d e r s t o o d and p e r c e i v e d the e f f e c t and s t r e n g t h t h e r e o f w i t h most sweet and a s s u r e d c o m f o r t . 1 3 Thus, w i t h i n the f i r s t t w e n t y - f i v e y e a r s o f E l i z a b e t h ' s r e i g n , a u t h o r i t y had been g i v e n t o b o t h the t r a d i t i o n a l , and t o C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , and the a c t u a l s e n t i m e n t s o f t h o s e i n a u t h o r i t y remain o b s c u r e . I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o unscramble t h i s s i t u a t i o n . I n the i n t r o d u c t i o n t o the P a r k e r S o c i e t y e d i t i o n o f Rogers' E x p o s i t i o n , J.J.S.Perowne has s u g g e s t e d t h a t " C a l v i n ' s v i e w had i n d e e d been v e r y g e n e r a l l y r e c e i v e d , more perhaps from d e f e r e n c e t o h i s a u t h o r i t y , than from any c a r e f u l 14 i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the s u b j e c t . " T h i s comment h i n t s a t an e x p l a n a t i o n . C a l v i n ' s I n s t i t v t i o n o f C h r i s t i a n R e l i g i o n and C a t e c h i s m were a c c e p t e d out o f d e f e r e n c e t o h i s a u t h o r i t y , w i t h o u t t h o r o u g h e x a m i n a t i o n o f h i s p o s i t i o n on C h r i s t ' s - 86 -d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l . The c i r c u l a t i o n and s t u d y o f these works would mean t h a t by the 1580's t h e r e was e s t a b l i s h e d s u p p o r t f o r h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t . On the o t h e r hand, the c a r e f u l l y c o n s i d e r e d statement o f N o w e l l ' s C a t e c h i s m (which was the p r o d u c t o f the 1563 C o n v o c a t i o n ) as w e l l as the i n j u n c t i o n s e n f o r c i n g the use o f t h i s C a t e c h i s m , i n d i c a t e t h a t the s e n t i m e n t s o f the Church a u t h o r i t i e s on t h i s s u b j e c t were v e r y t r a d i t i o n a l i n d e e d . T h i s s u g g e s t i o n i s s u p p o r t e d by the Bishop o f E x e t e r ' s v i e w o f the a r t i c l e . He had a p p e a l e d t o the 1563 C o n v o c a t i o n 15 f o r s e t t l e m e n t o f the meaning o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t , but He p e r s o n a l l y argued f o r the views o f ' a l l the f a t h e r s ... b o t h o f the Greeks and the L a t i n s ' a g a i n s t t h o s e o f 'Erasmus and the Germans, ... Mr. C a l v i n and Mr. B u l l i n g e r . 1 6 A r c h b i s h o p W h i t g i f t d i s p e l l e d any o b s c u r i t y about h i s own o p i n i o n i n 1586 when he commented d u r i n g the examin-a t i o n o f John U d a l t h a t "The human s o u l o f C h r i s t a f t e r h i s d e a t h , descended i n t o the p l a c e o f the damned; and whosoever 17 b e l i e v e t h not t h i s , b u t d e n i e t h i t , i s an h e r e t i c . " W h i t g i f t was i n s i s t i n g upon a l i t e r a l d e scent a f t e r C h r i s t ' s d e a t h and i t i s c l e a r t h a t he s u p p o r t e d the l i t e r a l , t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n r a t h e r t h a n the m e t a p h o r i c a l one o f C a l v i n . I t ' i s w o r t h p o i n t i n g out t h a t i n t h i s i n t e r c h a n g e w i t h Udal Whitgift also e x p r e s s e d o p p o s i t i o n t o the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l descended to the grave e x c l a i m i n g "How can the s o u l go i n t o the grave?-What an - 87 -a b s u r d t h i n g i s t h a t . " 1 8 N e i t h e r was W h i t g i f t a l o n e i n h i s o p p o s i t i o n t o the s e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . Other members o f the H i g h Commission (the Bish o p o f W i n c h e s t e r and Mr. H a r t w e l l ) s u p p o r t e d h i s p o s i t i o n . I n h i s L i f e o f W h i t g i f t , S t r y p e c o n f i r m s t h a t W h i t g i f t s t i l l h e l d t h i s " a n t i - G e n e v a " p o s i t i o n i n 1597,•,and t h a t he was not a l o n e i n h i s o p i n i o n s . On the o t h e r hand, S t r y p e i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e was a l s o w i d e s p r e a d s u p p o r t f o r C a l v i n ' s p o s i t i o n : the o p i n i o n o f Geneva too k p l a c e w i t h a g r e a t many h e r e , (as d i d the o t h e r d o c t r i n e s o f t h a t c i t y , ) namely, t h a t C h r i s t s u f f e r e d i n h i s s o u l the p a i n s o f h e l l . Which was a d o c t r i n e a l s o t h a t our A r c h b i s h o p and the l e a r n e d e s t D i v i n e s o f the Church would by no means admit. F o r the o p i n i o n o f the Church o f England now was, t h a t C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l was, t h a t a f t e r h i s d e a t h he triumphed over the d e v i l s . B i s h o p B i l s o n , p r e a c h i n g a t S t . P a u l ' s t h i s L e n t , thought f i t t o d i s c o u r s e on t h i s s u b j e c t . But f i r s t communicated h i s purpose t o our A r c h b i s h o p ; who a l l o w e d and encouraged him t h e r e u n t o . 1 9 Not o n l y was W h i t g i f t b e h i n d the Church o f England's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , but he was s u p p o r t i n g B i l s o n i n the l a t t e r ' s p r e a c h i n g on t h e s u b j e c t . Any c l a i m t h a t W h i t g i f t was c o n s i s t e n t i n a d h e r i n g t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s c o m p l i c a t e d by a c o n t r a -d i c t o r y s u g g e s t i o n t h a t W h i t g i f t and B i l s o n were won o v e r by Broughton's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e ( t h a t C h r i s t went t o Hades, w h i c h f o r good s o u l s and hence f o r C h r i s t 20 meant p a r a d i s e ) . S t r y p e r e c o u n t s t h a t he found Broughton " w r i t i n g about t h i s time /1597/ o r not much a f t e r ; r e c k o n i n g - 88 -t h a t Bishop above mentioned /Bilson7, and the A r c h b i s h o p , t o 21 have been now o f h i s o p i n i o n i n t h a t a r t i c l e . " The v e r a c i t y o f t h i s c l a i m i s not e a s i l y a s c e r t a i n e d . The o n l y s u g g e s t i o n s t h a t W h i t g i f t changed h i s p o s i t i o n come from Broughton h i m s e l f . H i s t o r i a n s have d e s c r i b e d Broughton as " e c c e n t r i c " 22 and " c h o l e r i c " , and h i s c o n t e m p o r a r i e s a l s o had v e r y mixed f e e l i n g s about him. For example, S c a l i g e r found him " f u r i o s u s e t m a l e d i c u s " and " f o r t v e r s e dans l a langue 23 H e b r a i q u e , mais un peu f o u . " I f such a low o p i n i o n i s j u s t i f i e d , t h e n h i s c l a i m s o f c o n v e r t i n g V / h i t g i f t and B i l s o n c o u l d be d i s m i s s e d . However, t h e r e a r e i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t t h i s p i c t u r e o f Broughton i s o n e - s i d e d . I n The A p o c a l y p t i c T r a d i t i o n i n R e f o r m a t i o n B r i t a i n , 1530-1645, K a t h a r i n e F i r t h has s u g g e s t e d t h a t Hugh Broughton may not have been an easy man t o g e t a l o n g w i t h , but the a n t i p a t h y he s t i r r e d up a g a i n s t h i m s e l f i n O x f o r d and Cambridge owes something t o the t h r e a t h i s p o s i t i o n posed t o r e s i d e n t c l a s s i c a l s c h o l a r s . 2 4 The f r e q u e n c y o f the e n c o u n t e r s o r communications between W h i t g i f t and Broughton w h i c h S t r y p e d e s c r i b e s b e a r s out F i r t h ' s s u g g e s t i o n t h a t even i f Broughton was e c c e n t r i c , he 25 c e r t a i n l y was not i n s i g n i f i c a n t . W h i t g i f t p r e s i d e d as umpire o v e r a debate between Broughton and Reynolds ( t h e 2 6 p o w e r f u l O x f o r d t h e o l o g i a n ) and the d i v i n e s o f Geneva 27 a l s o debated w i t h Broughton. The p i c t u r e g i v e n by S t r y p e of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between Broughton and V / h i t g i f t i s c o m p l i c a t e d and o f t e n i n c o n s i s t e n t c o n c e r n i n g the o p i n i o n s - 89 -w h i c h they h e l d o f each o t h e r . T h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p cannot be a s s e s s e d w i t h o u t d e t a i l e d e x a m i n a t i o n . However, an e x p l a n a t i o n o f Broughton's c l a i m can be found e l s e w h e r e . I n The e f f e c t o f c e r t a i n e Sermons Tovc h i n g the F v l l Redemption o f mankind, B i l s o n had been p r e p a r e d t o conceed t h a t C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t t o t h e s t a t e o f the dead was an e x p l a n a t i o n 2 8 t o w h i c h "a number o f l e a r n e d men i n c l i n e . " He was more l e n i e n t towards t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n than towards C a l v i n ' s . S i n c e the d e s c e n t t o the s t a t e o f the dead was the f o u n d a t i o n o f Broughton's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , i t i s q u i t e c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t Broughton t o o k l e n i e n c y towards t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t o be a c c e p t a n c e o f h i s whole i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Thus Broughton c l a i m e d s u p p o r t f o r h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n when t o l e r a t i o n o f o n l y i t s p r e m i s e had been s u g g e s t e d . However, an i m p o r t a n t c o n c l u s i o n can be drawn even i f the t r u t h o f B r o u g h t o n 1 s c l a i m cannot be f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d . W h i t g i f t d i d not s u p p o r t C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e a r t i c l e . He had not i n 1586, and he s t i l l d i d not i n 1597. The c r e e d a l a r t i c l e d i d not mean what C a l v i n had s a i d t h a t i t d i d . B o t h t h e t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and Broughton's were " a n t i - G e n e v a " . As Broughton had commented: Geneva s a y i n g : To descend t o H e l l i s t o haue the torments o f H e l l : would be r e d i c u l o u s t o t h r e e thousand y e a r e s Greek: none euer tooke i t so. T h e r e i n they do t h e m s e l v e s e x c e e d i n g g r e a t i n i u r y : shewing t h a t t h e y misse i n w e i g h t y m a t t e r : a g a i n s t the P e r p e t u a l l vse o f speach. I n a d d i t i o n , W h i t g i f t ' s s u p p o r t f o r B i l s o n ' s work shows t h a t W h i t g i f t d i d not a c c e p t C a l v i n ' s v i e w t h a t C h r i s t ' s s o u l - 90 -s u f f e r i n g was p a r t o f the redempt i v e p r o c e s s . W h i t g i f t ' s s t a n c e a g a i n s t C a l v i n on the s e i s s u e s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t i n g i n view o f some modern debate c o n c e r n i n g the n a t u r e o f W h i t g i f t ' s t h e o l o g y . C o n t r o v e r s y has a r i s e n o v e r the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f some d i s p u t e s i n Cambridge i n the 1590's. These d i s p u t e s concerned the i s s u e s o f p r e d e s t i n a t i o n , a s s u r a n c e o f s a l v a t i o n , and r e p r o b a t i o n . W h i t g i f t became i n v o l v e d i n t h e - d i s p u t e s but h i s t o r i a n s .have ' f a i l e d t o agree o v e r the n a t u r e o f and the i n t e n t i o n s b e h i n d h i s i n v o l v e m e n t . I n h i s R e f o r m a t i o n and R e a c t i o n i n Tudor Cambridge, H.C.Porter has su g g e s t e d t h a t W h i t g i f t ' s concerns i n the 30 d i s p u t e were m o r a l , d o c t r i n a l and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . P o r t e r c o n s i d e r s t h a t W h i t g i f t ' s t h e o l o g y was a t v a r i a n c e w i t h t h a t o f a group o f s t a u n c h C a l v i n i s t s i n the U n i v e r s i t y . T h i s group had e x p e c t e d W h i t g i f t ' s d o c t r i n a l s u p p o r t , but 31 a c c o r d i n g t o P o r t e r , "They were wrong" t o do so. P o r t e r does n o t c o n s i d e r W h i t g i f t ' s s t a n c e t o have been " a n t i -C a l v i n i s t " p e r se, but p o i n t s out t h a t W h i t g i f t c o n s i d e r e d C a l v i n ' s judgements s h o u l d be used "as ... the judgements o f 32 o t h e r l e a r n e d men:" w i t h r e s p e c t , but not as i n f a l l i b l e . T h e r e f o r e , P o r t e r a d v o c a t e s t h a t t h e r e were genuine t h e o l o g -i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s between W h i t g i f t and the Cambridge C a l v i n i s t s and t h a t W h i t g i f t d e s i r e d t h a t the s e t t l e m e n t o f these i s s u e s s h o u l d be " l e s s uncompromising and more 33 s c r i p t u r a l " t han t h a t w h i c h the C a l v i n i s t s had proposed. - 91 -P e t e r Lake has e x p r e s s e d d i f f e r e n t o p i n i o n s i n Moderate P u r i t a n s and the E l i z a b e t h a n Church. He d i s a g r e e s w i t h P o r t e r on two p o i n t s : W h i t g i f t ' s m o t i v e s , and h i s t h e o l o g y . Lake c o n s i d e r s t h a t the c o n f l i c t between W h i t g i f t and the C a l v i n i s t s was not e s s e n t i a l l y o f a d o c t r i n a l n a t u r e . F o r Lake, W h i t g i f t was f a r more concerned w i t h e s t a b l i s h i n g a u t h o r i t y than he was w i t h t h e o l o g y . W h i t g i f t needed t o p r e v e n t the " i m p l i c i t a s s i m i l a t i o n o f the d o c t r i n a l p o s i t i o n 34 o f the E n g l i s h c h u r c h t o the o p i n i o n s o f f o r e i g n d i v i n e s , " and a l s o t o a s s e r t h i s own p e r s o n a l a u t h o r i t y o v e r t h i s group o f C a l v i n i s t s . Thus, f o r Lake, W h i t g i f t was m a n u f a c t u r i n g a t h e o l o g i c a l d i f f e r e n c e o f o p i n i o n between h i m s e l f and t h i s group o f men i n o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h h i s own p r i m a c y and t h a t o f the Church o f Engl a n d . Lake s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e s e men b e l i e v e d " W h i t g i f t was d o c t r i n a l l y on t h e i r s i d e , " and t h a t 35 " I n the event t h a t was how i t p r o v e d . " T h e r e f o r e Lake sees W h i t g i f t ' s m o t i v e s as more m a n i p u l a t i v e than t h e o l o g i c a l and W h i t g i f t ' s t h e o l o g y as s o l i d l y and " r e c o g n i z a b l y C a l v i n -i s t " , r a t h e r t h a n P o r t e r ' s c o n c l u s i o n t h a t W h i t g i f t was 36 t r y i n g t o m a i n t a i n a t h e o l o g i c a l "middle p a t h . " W h i t g i f t ' s s t a n c e c o n c e r n i n g the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t i n t o h e l l adds w e i g h t t o P o r t e r ' s a n a l y s i s o f the d i s p u t e s o f t h e 1 5 9 0 ' s W h i t g i f t r e j e c t e d . , • C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t , and h i s s u p p o r t f o r B i l s o n ' s t r a c t s shows t h a t t h e r e was genuine c o n c e r n over t h e t h e o l o g i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . - 92 -However, the d i f f e r e n c e between the a n a l y s e s o f P o r t e r and Lake s t r e t c h e s beyond the l i m i t e d scope o f Cambridge i n the mid 1590's. They do not agree about the t h e o l o g i c a l tone o f the p e r i o d . Lake s u g g e s t s t h a t W h i t g i f t ' s s e t t l e m e n t w i t h the Cambridge C a l v i n i s t s was "a t r i b u t e t o the s t r e n g t h o f h i s / W h i t g i f t 1 s 7 assumption t h a t the b road C a l v i n i s t 37 consensus o f the 1560's and 1570's was s t i l l i n t a c t . " P o r t e r , on t h e o t h e r hand, s t r e s s e s t h a t i t i s i m p o r t a n t t o emphasize t h a t the s t o r y o f the t h e o l o g y o f the E l i z a b e t h a n Church o f England was t h a t o f a d ebate, and not o f an u n c h a l l e n g e d C a l v i n i s t o r a t i o n . . . . The " v e i n s o f d o c t r i n e ' r a n s i d e by s i d e ; . . . The C a l v i n i s t s d i d not win the day i n the Cambridge of 1595, n o r d i d they do so i n the E n g l i s h Church. The m o d e r a t i o n o f A r c h b i s h o p W h i t g i f t p r e v e n t e d t h e i r demanding o r a c h i e v i n g u n c o n d i t i o n a l s u r r e n d e r . 3 8 The tone o f the E l i z a b e t h a n Church was e i t h e r one o f b r o a d C a l v i n i s t consensus, o r one o f c h a l l e n g e and debate. I t would be i l l - a d v i s e d t o draw any c o n c l u s i o n s about the tone o f the E l i z a b e t h a n Church from the s t u d y o f one c o n t r o v e r s y about C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l , but t h i s debate c e r t a i n l y h e l p s t o r e i n f o r c e P o r t e r ' s views r a t h e r than Lake's. I n a d d i t i o n , an o b v i o u s c o n c l u s i o n can be made: the t h e o l o g y o f the p e r i o d needs t o be s c r u t i n i z e d b e f o r e judgements about i t s n a t u r e are p a s s e d . And y e t t h i s p r o c e s s i s o f t e n o v e r -l o o k e d . No such s c r u t i n y i s t o be found i n P a t r i c k C o l l i n s o n ' s The R e l i g i o n o f P r o t e s t a n t s . T h i s might not be o f c o n c e r n i f the book d i d not draw c o n c l u s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e o l o g y : but i t does. A main theme o f C o l l i n s o n ' s book i s t h a t t h e r e was a - 93 -s o l i d C a l v i n i s t consensus i n the Jacobean Church: 'Orthodox' meant C a l v i n i s t . C a l v i n i s m can be r e g a r d e d as the t h e o l o g i c a l cement o f the Jacobean Church, i n Tyacke's phrase 'a common and a m e l i o r a t i n g bond' u n i t i n g c o n f o r m i s t s and moderate p u r i t a n s . 3 9 A second i m p o r t a n t theme i n C o l l i n s o n ' s work i s t h a t t h r o u g h -out E l i z a b e t h ' s r e i g n , the e d u c a t i o n a l s t a n d a r d o f the E n g l i s h c l e r g y was i m p r o v i n g : between 1559 and 1625 ... the m i n i s t r y o f the Church o f E n g l a n d became w h a t ' i t would remain u n t i l f a r i n t o the t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y : a g r a d u a t e m i n i s t r y , r e c r u i t e d from the c o l l e g e s o f O x f o r d and Cambridge. 0 I f the u n i v e r s i t i e s were the s u p p l i e r s o f m i n i s t e r s , t h e n they would p l a y a l a r g e r o l e i n the e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f the t h e o l o g i c a l tone o f the Church. Hence, i t i s i n c o n g r u o u s t o f i n d t h a t C o l l i n s o n p r o v i d e s no a n a l y s i s a t a l l o f the t h e o l o g y i n the u n i v e r s i t i e s , n o r o f the d i s p u t e s o f the mid 1590's w h i c h are s i m p l y d i s m i s s e d as "the c o e r c i o n o f a n t i -41 C a l v i n i s t s by C a l v i n i s t s ... i n Cambridge i n the 1590's." Such a f a i l u r e t o examine the t h e o l o g i c a l d i sagreements undermines the c r e d i b i l i t y o f C o l l i n s o n ' s c o n c l u s i o n t h a t by James's r e i g n the "common and a m e l i o r a t i n g bond" o f C a l v i n i s m was c r e a t i n g a u n i f i e d , s t a b l e Church. T h i s s u g g e s t i o n i s f u r t h e r undermined by the Church's s t a n c e o v e r the meaning o f C h r i s t ' s d escent i n t o h e l l i n the e a r l y y e a r s o f James's r e i g n . As a r e s u l t o f the c o n f u s i o n and arguments i n the 1590's, and the i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f " p r o v i n g " one i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o r a n o t h e r t o be the t r u e meaning o f t h i s a r t i c l e o f f a i t h , the a u t h o r i t y o f the Church o f - 94 -E n g l a n d was b a c k i n g away from t r y i n g t o e s t a b l i s h how the a r t i c l e s h o u l d be u n d e r s t o o d . B i l s o n had a l r e a d y e x p r e s s e d 42 a c e r t a i n h e s i t a n c y about i t , and t h i s grew under A r c h b i s h o p B a n c r o f t . A new and r e v i s e d e d i t i o n o f Rogers': E x p o s i t i o n was p u b l i s h e d i n 1607, b e a r i n g the t i t l e The C a t h o l i c  D o c t r i n e o f The Church of E n g l a n d , an E x p o s i t i o n o f the  T h i r t y - N i n e A r t i c l e s , by Thomas Rogers, C h a p l a i n t o A r c h -b i s h o p B a n c r o f t . The work was "perused, and by the l a w f u l 43 a u t h o r i t y o f the Church of E n g l a n d , a l l o w e d t o be p u b l i c . " As J.J.S.Perowne i n d i c a t e s i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n t o the P a r k e r S o c i e t y e d i t i o n , "the c h i e f d i f f e r e n c e between the two e d i t i o n s /1585 and 16077 l i e s i n the a l t e r e d e x p o s i t i o n o f 44 the T h i r d A r t i c l e . " The change i s d r a m a t i c . From C a l v i n ' s 45 i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n 1585, a complete change i s made t o the " m e n t i o n i n g /otj d i f f e r e n t views t h a t had been e n t e r t a i n e d o f the d o c t r i n e " w h i l e the work "does not s t r o n g l y advocate „46 any. " The T h i r d A r t i c l e i n the 1607 e d i t i o n p r o v i d e s a summary o f the t e x t s from S c r i p t u r e w h i c h s u p p o r t C h r i s t ' s d e s c e n t as an a r t i c l e o f f a i t h : t h e n i t c o v e r s t h r e e d i f f e r e n t b e l i e f s c o n c e r n i n g the meaning o f the d e s c e n t . V a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f the descent are c o n s i d e r e d : when and how C h r i s t descended, whether on the c r o s s , a f t e r death} whether t o the g r a v e , o r t o l i t e r a l h e l l ) o r whether the descent was m e t a p h o r i c a l ; whether C h r i s t descended i n h i s Godhead, h i s manhood, h i s body o r h i s - s o u l ; and y e t , no i n d i c a t i o n i s - 95 -given r e g a r d i n g which of these i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s i s to be 47 b e l i e v e d . The c o n c l u s i o n of the a r t i c l e i s p a r t i c u l a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t : But t i l l we know* the n a t i v e and undoubted sense of t h i s a r t i c l e , and mystery of r e l i g i o n , p e r s i s t we a d v e r s a r i e s unto them which say:...48 (•^ s i g n i f i e s my i t a l i c s ) Then f o l l o w s a l i s t of views which were s t i l l c o n s i d e r e d h e r e t i c a l , i n c l u d i n g C a r l i l e ' s , Hume's, and b e l i e f s connected with Limbus Patrum; but the Church was no longer c l a i m i n g to know what the a r t i c l e meant. There was no "common and a m e l i o r a t i n g bond" of C a l v i n i s m r e g a r d i n g t h i s a r t i c l e of f a i t h ; i n s t e a d there was only u n c e r t a i n t y and i n s e c u r i t y . Both Rogers' d e s c r i p t i o n of the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s allowed, and of the h e r e s i e s r e j e c t e d , i n d i c a t e t h a t the o p i n i o n s h e l d concerning C h r i s t ' s descent were even more d i v e r s e than those expressed i n the w r i t t e n t r a c t s . Where they had o r i g i n a l l y hoped f o r u n i t y , the a u t h o r i t i e s of the Church of England were co n f r o n t e d w i t h q u i t e overwhelming d i v e r s i t y . Thus, i n 1607, the Church c u r t a i l e d i t s own a u t h o r i t y by f a i l i n g to p r o v i d e an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s a r t i c l e . The Word had not e s t a b l i s h e d an answer, n e i t h e r d i d the Church of England. The nature of b e l i e f i n C h r i s t ' s descent i n t o h e l l was allowed to be a matter between the b e l i e v e r and h i s God. - 96 -NOTES CHAPTER ONE 1. The Two L i t u r g i e s w i t h o t h e r Documents s e t f o r t h by- A u t h o r i t y i n the r e i g n o f K i n g Edward the S i x t h , P a r k e r S o c i e t y (Cambridge, 1844), p.224; L i t u r g i e s and  o c c a s i o n a l forms o f P r a y e r s e t f o r t h i n the Re i g n o f -Queen E l i z a b e t h , P a r k e r S o c i e t y (Cambridge, 1847), p.61. 2. L i t u r g i e s , Edward, p.231; L i t u r g i e s , E l i z a b e t h , p.68. 3. Edward C a r d w e l l , S y n o d a l i a . A C o l l e c t i o n o f A r t i c l e s  o f R e l i g i o n , Canons, and P r o c e e d i n g s o f C o n v o c a t i o n s , 2 v o l s . ( O x f o r d , 1842), I , 19. 4. C a r d w e l l , S y n o d a l i a , I , 18. 5. I b i d . , I , 53. 6. I b i d . , I , 55. 7. C h r i s t o p h e r C a r l i l e , A D i s c o v r s e C o n c e r n i n g two d i u i n e  P o s i t i o n s (London, 1582), S i g . A v i i r . 8. John S t r y p e , The L i f e o f the Learned S i r John Cheke, K t . ( O x f o r d , 1821), p.91. 9. C a r l i l e , D i s c o v r s e , S i g . A v r . 10. I b i d . , S i g . A v i i r . 11. The commencement i s co v e r e d by S t r y p e , Cheke, pp.89-90, but no mention i s made o f the outcome, o r o f Cheke's own views on the s u b j e c t . Anthony a Wood, Athenae  Qxonienses, 2 v o l s . (London, 1691), I , c o l . I l l , s t a t e s t h a t C a r l i l e was "opposed" i n d i s p u t a t i o n by S i r John Cheke. 12. R i c h a r d S m i t h , R e f u t a t i o l u c u l e n t a e , c r a s s a e , &  e x i t i o s a e , h a e r e s i s l o a n n i s C a l v i n i , & C h r i s t o p h o r i  C a r l i l i , A n g l i , qua a s t r u u n t C h r i s t u m non d e s c e n d i s s e  ad i n f e r o s a l i o s , quam ad i n f e r n u m infimum, q u i e s t  l o c u s damnatorum p e r p e t u u s , aut ad sepulchrum / p r i n t e d a b r oad/, 1562, as c i t e d i n P e t e r M i l w a r d , R e l i g i o u s  C o n t r o v e r s i e s o f the E l i z a b e t h a n Age (London, 1977), p. 67. 13. John S t r y p e , A n n a l s o f the R e f o r m a t i o n , 4 v o l s . ( O x f o r d , 1824) I , p ' t . l , 519. 14. I b i d . - 97 -15. John S t r y p e , The L i f e and A c t s o f John V / h i t g i f t , D.D._, 3 v o l s . ( O x f o r d , 1822), I , 25. 16. A Ca t e c h i s m w r i t t e n i n L a t i n by A l e x a n d e r N o w e l l  t o g e t h e r w i t h the same C a t e c h i s m t r a n s l a t e d i n t o  E n g l i s h by Thomas N o r t o n , P a r k e r S o c i e t y (Cambridge, 1853), p . i v . 17. N o w e l l , C a t e c h i s m , p p . v - v i . See a l s o S t r y p e , A n n a l s , I , p t . l , 525-9. 18. When f i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d the Ca t e c h i s m d i d not c l a i m s y n o d a l a u t h o r i t y , b ut l a t e r i n j u n c t i o n s show the h i g h e s t i m a t i o n i n which the Ca t e c h i s m was h e l d . See N o w e l l , C a t e c h i s m , p p . v - v i i . That the Ca t e c h i s m was viewed as a u t h o r i t a t i v e a t the time i s demonstrated by Adam H i l l , The defence o f t h e A r t i c l e : C h r i s t descended i n t o H e l l (London, 1592), f o l . 2 4 r , and by Henry J a c o b , A Defence  of a T r e a t i s e T o v c h i n g the S v f f e r i n g s and v i c t o r i e o f  C h r i s t i n the worke o f o v r Redemption ( M i d d e l b u r g , 1 6 0 0 ) ^ p . 1 4 2 . 19. N o w e l l , C a t e c h i s m , pp.160-1. 20. D i c t i o n a r y o f N a t i o n a l B i o g r a p h y /D . N. B/J , . s. v. W i l l i a m Hughes. 21. S t r y p e , W h i t g i f t , I , 24. 22. I b i d . 23. I b i d . 24. I b i d . 25. D.N.B., s.v. W i l l i a m Hughes. 26. T h i s measure was p r o b a b l y t a k e n by C e c i l on P a r k e r ' s recommendation. A l e t t e r from " S i r W i l l i a m C e c i l t o A r c h b i s h o p P a r k e r , " dated 12 Se p t . , 1567 commences " I t may p l e a s e y o u r Grace t o r e c e i v e my humble thanks f o r y o u r c a r e t a k e n i n the d i s c r e e t a d v i c e g i v e n t o me c o n c e r n i n g the ap p e a s i n g o f the u n p r o f i t a b l e r a s h c o n t r o v e r s y newly r a i s e d , upon the a r t i c l e o f the desce n t o f C h r i s t t o h e l l . " Correspondence o f Matthew  P a r k e r P.P. A r c h b i s h o p o f C a n t e r b u r y , P a r k e r S o c i e t y (Cambridge, 1853), p.305. 27. S t r y p e , W h i t g i f t , I , 25. 28. John N o r t h b r o o k e , S p i r i t v s e s t ... A B r i e f e and P i t h i e  Summe o f the C h r i s t i a n F a i t h (London, 1571), as c i t e d i n M i l w a r d , E l i z a b e t h a n C o n t r o v e r s i e s , p.164. 29. There i s doubt about the date o f one o f thes e e d i t i o n s ; see A S h o r t - T i t l e C a t a l o g u e o f Books P r i n t e d i n England ... 1475-1640 /S.T.C.7, s.v. John N o r t h b r o o k e . - 98 -30. Benjamin Brook, The L i v e s o f the P u r i t a n s , 3 v o l s . (London, 1813), I I , 1. 31. Brook, P u r i t a n s , I I , 4. 32. I b i d . I I , 5. 33. H i l l , Defence o f the A r t i c l e , S i g . A i i i r _ v . 34. A l e x a n d e r Hume, A R e i o y n d e r t o D o c t o r H i l c o n c e r n i n g . the Descense o f C h r i s t i n t o H e l l ( E d i n b u r g h , 1593). 35. Hume, A R e i o y n d e r , S i g . B i i r . 36. I b i d . , S i g . B i r - V . 37. I b i d . , S i g . B i i . 38. I b i d . , p.150. 39. I b i d . , S i g . B i i i r _ V . 40. H i l l , Defence o f the A r t i c l e , f o l . 3 3 v . 41. John H i g g i n s , An Answere t o Ma s t e r W i l l i a m P e r k i n s , C o n c e r n i n g C h r i s t s D e s c e n s j o n i n t o H e l l ( O x f o r d , 1602). 42. See D.N.B. s.v. John H i g g i n s , and M.M.Knappen, Tudor  P u r i t a n i s m ( C h i c a g o , 1939), p.371; c f . S.T.C. s.v. John H i g g i n s , and M i l w a r d , E l i z a b e t h a n C o n t r o v e r s i e s , p.67. 43. W i l l i a m P e r k i n s , An E x p o s i t i o n o f the Symbole o r Creed  o f the A p o s t l e s (Cambridge, 1595). 44. Thomas Rogers, The C a t h o l i c D o c t r i n e o f The Church o f  En g l a n d , An E x p o s i t i o n o f the T h i r t y - N i n e A r t i c l e s , P a r k e r S o c i e t y (Cambridge, 1854), p . x i i i . 45. S t r y p e , W h i t g i f t , I I , 220, 46. I b i d . I I , 366. •p 47. For example, see Hume, A R e i o y n d e r , S i g . A i v where he r e f e r s t o "M. D.Reynoldes, ( t h e l o a d s t a r r e o f O x e n f o r d ) ; and R i c h a r d P a r k e s , An A p o l o g i e : of Three T e s t i m o n i e s of h o l y S c r i p t u r e ( O x f o r d , 1607), the f i r s t book o f whic h p r o v i d e d an "Answer t o c e r t a i n O b i e c t i o n s " : those " O b j e c t i o n s and Reasons" had been the t i t l e o f Reynold's t r a c t . 48. Hume, A R e i o y n d e r , S i g . A i v V . 49. S t r y p e , W h i t g i f t , I I , 221. 50. I b i d . , I I , 360. 51. I b i d . , I I , 359. 52. I b i d . , I I , 361. 53. I b i d . - 99 -54. I b i d . , I I , 364. 55. I b i d . , I I , 365. 56. Thomas B i l s o n , The e f f e c t o f c e r t a i n e Sermons T o v c h i n g  the F v l l Redemption o f mankind (London, 1599), S i g . A i v r . 57. I b i d . , S i g . A i v V . 58. Henry J a c o b , A T r e a t i s e o f the S v f f e r i n g s and V i c t o r y  o f C h r i s t ( M i d d e l b u r g , 1598). 59. Wood, Athenae Qxonjenses, I , c o l . 3 4 4 . 60. I b i d . 61. Thomas B i l s o n , The Svrvey o f C h r i s t s S v f f e r i n g s f o r  Mans redemption (London, 1604). 62. Henry J a c o b , A Defence o f a T r e a t i s e Tovching the  S v f f e r i n g s and v i c t o r i e o f C h r i s t i n the worke o f o v r  Redemption ( M i d d e l b u r g , 1600). 63. Wood, Athenae Oxonienses, I , c o l . 3 9 4 . 64. See above, pp.15-6. 65. R i c h a r d P a r k e s , A B r i e f e Answere v n t o C e r t a i n e  o b i e c t i o n s and Reasons a g a i n s t the d e s c e n s i o n o f C h r i s t  i n t o h e l l ( O x f o r d , 1604). 66. Andrew W i l l e t , S y n o p s i s P a p i s m i (London, 1594). 67. Andrew W i l l e t , Limbomastix (London, 1604). 68. Andrew W i l l e t , L o i d o r o m a s t i x (Cambridge, 1607). R i c h a r d P a r k e s , An A p o l o g i e ( O x f o r d , 1607). 69. P a r k e s , An A p o l o g i e , S i g . ^ v i i r . 70. W i l l e t , L o i d o r o m a s t i x , S i g . ^ i v V . 71. H . C . P o r t e r , R e f o r m a t i o n and R e a c t i o n i n Tudor Cambridge (Cambridge, 1958). 72. James Bass M u l l i n g e r , The U n i v e r s i t y o f Cambridge from  the R o y a l I n j u n c t i o n s o f 1535 t o the A c c e s s i o n o f  C h a r l e s the F i r s t (Cambridge, 1884). 73. Philip. ;vHughes, The R e f o r m a t i o n i n E n g l a n d , 3 v o l s . (London, 1954). 74. P e t e r Lake, Moderate p u r i t a n s and the E l i z a b e t h a n  c h u r c h (Cambridge, 1982). 75. John F.H.New, A n g l i c a n and P u r i t a n : The B a s i s o f t h e i r  O p p o s i t i o n 1558-1640 ( S t a n f o r d , 1964). 76. P a t r i c k C o l l i n s o n , The R e l i g i o n o f P r o t e s t a n t s ( O x f o r d , 1982). - 100 -77. R . T . K e n d a l l , C a l v i n and E n g l i s h C a l v i n i s m t o 1649 ( O x f o r d , 1979^ 78. D.P.Walker, The D e c l i n e o f H e l l : S e v e n t e e n t h - C e n t u r y  D i s c u s s i o n s o f E t e r n a l Torment ( C h i c a g o , 1964). 79. See below, pp.90-4. 80. M.M.Knappen, Tudor P u r i t a n i s m ( C h i c a g o , 1939). 81. Knappen, Tudor P u r i t a n i s m , p.371. CHAPTER TWO 1. Thomas A q u i n a s , Summa T h e o l o g i c a l I I I , I i i , 2, 4-6, 8, as c i t e d i n John C a l v i n , I n s t i t u t e s o f the C h r i s t i a n R e l i g i o n , ed. John T . M c N e i l l ( P h i l a d e l p h i a , 1960) p.515, n.23. 2. Robert B e l l a r m i n e , An Ample D e c l a r a t i o n o f the  C h r i s t i a n D o c t r i n e , t r a n s . R i c h a r d Hadock ( D o u a i , 1604), pp.40-4. 3. B e l l a r m i n e , An Ample D e c l a r a t i o n , p.43-4. 4. Aqu i n a s had a l l o w e d f o u r compartments; Summa T h e o l o g i c a , I I I , suplementum l x i x , 4-7, as c i t e d i n C a l v i n , I n s t i t u t e s , ed. John T . M c N e i l l , p.514, n.20. B e l l a r -mine a l s o a l l o w e d f o u r ; An Ample D e c l a r a t i o n , pp.40-1; but the Ca t e c h i s m o f the C o u n c i l o f Trent o n l y a l l o w e d t h r e e : D i c t i ' o n n a i r e de T h e o l o g i e C a t h o l i q u e ,-,/D . T. C/J , eds. A.Vacant & E.Mangenot. s.v. "Descente de J e s u s aux E n f e r s , " pp.584-5. 5. B e l l a r m i n e , An Ample D e c l a r a t i o n 6. D.T.C. , p.5; 35. 7. B e l l a r m i n e , An Ample D e c l a r a t i o n 8. I b i d . , p.42 ; D. T.C. , p.585. 9. B e l l a r m i n e , An Ample D e c l a r a t i o n , pp.42-3. 10. I b i d . 11. John C a l v i n , The I n s t i t u t i o n o f C h r i s t i a n R e l i g i o n , t r a n s . T.N. (London, 1562), f o l . 1 6 3 v - 4 r . 12. Erasmus, "An E x a m i n a t i o n C o n c e r n i n g F a i t h , " The  C o l l o q u i e s o f Erasmus, t r a n s . C.R.Thompson ( C h i c a g o , 1965); Erasmus, A P l a y n e and Godly e x p o s i t i o n o r ... Symbolum A p o s t o l o r u m / p l a c e o f p u b l i c a t i o n unknown/, 1533. : - 101 -13. Erasmus, C o l l o q u i e s , p.184. 14. Erasmus, Symbolum, f o l . 8 1 V - 2 r . 15. I b i d . , f o l . 8 2 r . 16. I b i d . , f o l . 8 2 v - 3 r . 17. Others had suggested C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g b e f o r e Erasmus: see C a l v i n , I n s t i t u t e s , ed. John T . M c N e i l l , p.515, n.23, and the r e f e r e n c e s c i t e d t h e r e . 18. C a l v i n , The I n s t i t u t i o n , f o l , 1 6 3 r . 19. I b i d . , f o l . l 6 3 r _ v . 20. Erasmus, Symbolum, f o l . 8 2 V : "Yf the v n i u e r s a l l churche h a t h now r e c e i u e d i t : i t i s not l a w f u l f o r the not t o b e l e u e i t . I t i s s u f f i c i e n t e f o r the t o p r o f e s s e t h a t C h r i s t e dyd so descende as i n f e r o s : as the s c r i p t u r e and the churche dothe thynke and meane." 21. C a l v i n , The I n s t i t u t i o n , f o l . l 6 3 v . 22. I b i d . 23. I b i d . 24. I b i d . f o l . l 6 4 r . 25. I b i d . 26. I b i d . f o l . l 6 4 V - 5 r . 27. John C a l v i n , The Catechisme ... t o teache C h i l d r e n  the c h r i s t i a n r e l i g i o n (London, 1563) , s i g . B v v - v i 1 ' . 28. N o r t h b r o o k e , S p i r i t v s E s t , 1571 e d i t i o n , as c i t e d i n M i l w a r d , E l i z a b e t h a n C o n t r o v e r s i e s , p.164. 29. M i l w a r d , E l i z a b e t h a n C o n t r o v e r s i e s , p.164. 30. N o r t h b r o o k e , S p i r i t v s E s t (London, 1582), s i g . A i i i V -i v r . 31. I b i d . , f o l . l l V . 32. I b i d . , f o l . l 2 r - 1 4 r . 33. I b i d . , f o l . 1 6 V . 34. See above, pp.33-4. 35. N o r t h b r o o k e , S p i r i t v s E s t , f o l . 9 V - 1 2 r . 36. I b i d . , f o l . 1 6 V . r 37. C a r l i l e , D i s c o v r s e , s i g . A i . 38. I b i d . , f o l . 2 7 r _ v ; f o r o t h e r examples o f t h i s form o f argument, see f o l s . 3 7 v - 3 8 r and 8 6 v - 8 7 r . 39. I b i d . , f o l . 7 6 V - 7 r . 40. I b i d . , f o l . 4 5 r . - 102 -41. For example, d i f f e r e n c e s o f o p i n i o n a rose over the words Hades (Greek) and S h e o l (Hebrew), the p o s s i b l e t r a n s l a t i o n s b e i n g e i t h e r " h e l l " o r "the g r a v e " . Examples o f C a r l i l e ' s r e s p e c t f o r Beza: f o l s . 6 8 v - 9 r and 1 3 8 v - 9 r . 42. I b i d . , f o l . 1 1 8 r . 43. F o r example, H i l l , Defence o f the A r t i c l e , f o l . 15, and P a r k e s , A B r i e f e Answere, pp.12-3. 44. H i l l , Defence o f the A r t i c l e , f o l . 2 2 V - 3 r . 45. I b i d . , f o l . 3 V . 46. I b i d . , s i g . A i i . i V . 47. I b i d . , f o l . 8 V - 9 r . 48. See above, pp.27 and 29. 49. H i l l , Defence o f the A r t i c l e , f o l . 3 r . 50. I b i d . , f o l . 9 r . 51. I b i d . , f o l . 2 3 r - V . 52. I b i d . , f o l . 4 V . 53. H i l l as quoted i n Hume, A R e i o y n d e r , p.139. 54. Hume, A R e i o y n d e r , p.140. 55. I b i d . , . s i g . B v i i V . 56. C a r l i l e was aware o f Pecock's r e j e c t i o n o f the a r t i c l e ; see C a r l i l e , D i s c o v r s e , s i g . A v i i v . For Pecock's r e j e c t i o n o f t h e a r t i c l e see R e g i n a l d Pecock, The Donet, ed. E l s i e Vaughan H i t c h c o c k (London, 1921), p.103; a l s o p.220 where Pecock's Book o f F a i t h i s quoted, p r o v i d i n g h i s r e a s o n s f o r o m i t t i n g the a r t i c l e . 57. Hume, A R e i o y n d e r , p.142. 58. I b i d . , p.138. v r 59. I b i d . , s i g . B v i i - v i i i . r 60. I b i d . , s i g . B v i i i . 61. Hume as quoted i n H i l l , Defence o f the A r t i c l e , f o l . 3 3 v - 4 ^ . 62. I b i d . , f o l . 3 4 r . 63. P e r k i n s , An E x p o s i t i o n , p.302. 64. F o r example, Brook, P u r i t a n s , I I , 134-5. 65. P e r k i n s , T r e a t i s e o f P r e d e s t i n a t i o n , Works, 11,605 and 616, as quoted i n P o r t e r , R e f o r m a t i o n and R e a c t i o n , pp-. 289 and 311. -.103 -66. K e n d a l l , C a l v i n and E n g l i s h C a l v i n i s m , Chaps. 4 and 5, e s p e c i a l l y pp.55 , 60-6, 69-71, 74-6. 67. There i s some c o n f u s i o n s u r r o u n d i n g Beza's i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n o f the a r t i c l e , b ut no s u g g e s t i o n t h a t he advo c a t e d P e r k i n s '_, view. The E n g l i s h p r o t a g o n i s t s d i d not agree about Beza's o p i n i o n o f the a r t i c l e ; see, f o r example, W i l l i a m F u l k e , A Defence o f the S i n c e r e  and True T r a n s l a t i o n s o f the H o l y S c r i p t u r e s , P a r k e r S;ociety (Cambridge, 1848), pp. 278-9. C a r l i l e r e f e r r e d t o a t r a c t by Beza " e n t i t u l e d t h a t C h r i s t e neuer came i n H e l l , w r i t t e n i n L a t e n upon the f i r s t o f P e t e r 3 Chap, and 19 v e r s e , " C a r l i l e , D i s c o v r s e , f o l . 6 8 v ; but i n 1561, Beza produced An O r a t i o n made by Master  Theodore de Beze ( E d i n b u r g h , 1561), i n which he c l a i m e d : "we c o n f e s s e h i s N a t i u i t i e , h i s l y f e , h i s d e a t h , h i s b u r y i n g , h i s g o i n g downe i n t o h e l l . . . . " ( s i g . b i i i r ) . The c l e a r e s t i n d i c a t i o n o f Beza's v i e w a t the time o f P e r k i n s 1 s w r i t i n g comes from the P r o p o s i t i o n s and  P r i n c i p l e s o f D i v i n i t i e propounded and D i s p u t e d i n the V n i u e r s i t i e o f Geneva by c e r t a i n e s t u d e n t s o f  D i v i n i t i e under M.Theod. Beza and M.Anthonie F a i u s , t r a n s . John Penry / E d i n b u r g h / , 1595, which p r o v i d e s the Genevan v e r d i c t on the a r t i c l e . Pp.174-8 d e s c r i b e an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n l i n e w i t h C a l v i n ' s . 68. P e r k i n s , An E x p o s i t i o n , p.297. 69. I b i d . 70. I b i d . , p.298. 71. See above, p.44. 72. P e r k i n s , An E x p o s i t i o n , pp.300-1; c f . C a l v i n ' s s t a t e -ment, see above, pp.33-4. 73. P e r k i n s , An E x p o s i t i o n ,?.p . 301. 74. I b i d . , p.301-2. 75. I b i d . , p.302. 76. P o r t e r , R e f o r m a t i o n and R e a c t i o n , p.311, q u o t i n g from P e r k i n s , G r a i n o f mustard seed, Works, I , 644. 77. P e r k i n s , An E x p o s i t i o n , p.302. 78. H i g g i n s , Answere t o W i l l i a m P e r k i n s , p.9. 79. I b i d . , pp.11-2. 80. B i l s o n , S v r v e y o f C h r i s t s S v f f e r i n g s , s i g . A i i i V . 81. I b i d . , p p . 3 9 - 4 0 . 82. B i l s o n , The e f f e c t o f c e r t a i n e Sermons, p.154. 83. Ibid.I p.146. - 104 -84. I b i d . , p.151-2. 85. I b i d . , p.139. 86. I b i d . , s i g . B i r - V . 87. I b i d . , pp.8-9. 88. Such arguments c o m p l e t e l y i g n o r e d the p r e c a u t i o n s w h i c h C a l v i n h i m s e l f had p l a c e d on the e x t e n t o f C h r i s t ' s s o u l s u f f e r i n g ; see above, p.36. 89. B i l s o n . S v r v e v o f C h r i s t s S v f f e r i n g s ; see, f o r example, s i g . A i v r where B i l s o n s u g g e s t s t h a t "The s o u l i s p u n i s h e d i n t h i s l i f e by h e r v n d e r s t a n d i n g , w i l l , a f f e c t i o n s , and s e n s e s , a c c o r d i n g as t h e i r o b i e c t s , d i r e c t e d and s t r e n g t h e n e d by God, make v i o l e n t and vehement i m p r e s s i o n s ; the torment o f h e l l - f i r e b e i n g the iudgement o f a n o t h e r w o r l d . N e i t h e r i s God the t o r m e n t e r o f s o u l s i n h e l l w i t h h i s immediate hand, but by h i s wisdome and power h a t h o r d a i n e d e u e r l a s t i n g f i r e , as an e x t e r n a l l Agent aboue n a t u r e , t o t a k e vengeance o f damned men and d e u i l s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r d e s e r t s . " 90. I b i d . , p.2. r—v 91. B i l s o n , The e f f e c t o f c e r t a i n e Sermons, s i g . B i i 92. J a c o b , A T r e a t i s e , p.8. 'S3. I b i d . , pp . 9-10. 94. I b i d . , p.33. 95. I b i d . , p.148. 96. I b i d . , pp.45-6. 97. I b i d . , p.16. 98. B i l s o n , The e f f e c t o f c e r t a i n e Sermons, s i g . B i i r . 99. J a c o b , A T r e a t i s e , pp.31-2. A n o t h e r example o f Jacob's use o f t h e f i g u r a t i v e can be found i n h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f the meaning o f the J e w i s h s a c r i f i c e s o f a " s l a i n e & a Scapegoat." See J a c o b , Defence o f a T r e a t i s e , pp.37-8. 100. J a c o b , A T r e a t i s e , p.67. 101. I b i d . , p.170. 102. J a c o b , Defence o f a T r e a t i s e , pp.34-5. 103. J a c o b , A T r e a t i s e , pp.95-6. 104. J a c o b , Defence o f a T r e a t i s e , p.146. 105. J a c o b , A T r e a t i s e , p.20. 106. I b i d . , p.21. - 105 -107. I b i d . 108. I b i d . , pp.132-3. 109, I b i d . , pp.94-5. 110. I b i d . , pp.124-5. 111. I b i d . , p.130. 112. I b i d . , p.129. 113. I b i d . , p.130. 114. I b i d . , p.171. 115. P a r k e s , A B r i e f e Answere, s i g . A i i r _ V . 116. P a r k e s , r — v r An A p o l o g i e , s i g . ^ i i i and v . 117. I b i d . Bk.2, gig. A a i i i V . 118. W i l l e t , r L i m bomastix, s i g . A i v . 119. W i l l e t , S y n o p s i s P a p i s m i , pp.1034-40, e s p e c i a l l y p. f o r W i l l e t ' s a c c e p t a n c e o f C a l v i n ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . 1035 120. I b i d . , p.1039. 121. P a r k e s , An A p o l o g i e , Bk.1, s i g . n ' i v v and Bk.2, s i g . A a m . 122. W i l l e t , L i mbomastix, p.5. 123. For W i l l e t ' s d e n u n c i a t i o n o f "the h a r r o w i n g o f h e l l see Limbomastix , p. 38. II > 124. I b i d . , p.8-9. 125. I b i d . , pp. 27-8. 126 . W i l l e t , L o i d o r o m a s t i x , s i g . ^ Hii r. 127. I b i d . 128. I b i d . , s i g . i i i r . 129. Rogers, E x p o s i t i o n , p . x i . 130. Hugh Broughton, D e c l a r a t i o n o f g e n e r a l l c o r r u p t i o n o f R e l i g i o n ( M i d d e l b u r g , 1603). 131. Hugh Bro u g h t o n , Two l i t t l e workes d e f e n s i u e o f our  Redemption ( M i d d e l b u r g , 1604), i n "A l y e resumed o f D . B i l s o n " . 132. I b i d . , "To the Reader". 133. Hugh Broughton, An E x p l i c a t i o n o f the A r t i c l e o f our Lor d e s s o u l e s g o i n g from h i s body t o P a r a d i s e ( M i d d e l b u r g , 1605), p.46. 134. Hugh Broughton, A P e t i t i o n t o the L o r d s , t o examine  the r e l i g i o n and c a r i a g e o f D . B a n / c r o f t / Archb. / p l a c e o f p u b l i c a t i o n unknown/ 1608, p'.*9. - 106 -135. Hugh Broughton, P o s i t i o n s o f the word Hades / p l a c e o f p u b l i c a t i o n unknown/, 1605, pp.10-4. 136. Knappen, Tudor P u r i t a n i s m , p.371. 137. M.Tolmie, The Triumph o f the S a i n t s (Cambridge, 1977), C h a p t e r I , "The Jacob Church". 138. C a r d w e l l , S y n o d a l i a , I , 53. CHAPTER THREE 1. C a r d w e l l , S y n o d a l i a , I , 55. 2. C a l v i n , The I n s t i t u t i o n , : i T i t l e Page. 3. .Thomas Rogers, The C a t h o l i c D o c t r i n e o f the Church o f  E n g l a n d , An E x p o s i t i o n o f the T h i r t y - M i n e A r t i c l e s , P a r k e r S o c i e t y (Cambridge, 1854). 4. Rogers, E x p o s i t i o n , p.x. 5. I b i d . , p . x i . 6. I b i d . , p . x i i i . 7. C e r t a i n e Sermons o r H o m i l i e s , A F a c s i m i l i e R e p r o d u c t i o n o f the E d i t i o n o f 1623, i n t r o . by Mary E l l e n R i c k e y and Thomas B.Stroup ( G a i n s v i l l e , F l o r i d a , 1968), p.177. 8. C e r t a i n e Sermons o r H o m i l i e s , p.191. 9. See B i l s o n , S v r v e y o f C h r i s t s S v f f e r i n g s , P r e f a c e t o the K i n g s most E x c e l l e n t M a j e s t y , s i g . ^  i v r . 10. C e r t a i n e Sermons o r H o m i l i e s , The Second Tome, T i t l e page. 11. N o w e l l , C a t e c h i s m , p . v i i . 12. I b i d . , p . v i i ; see r e f e r e n c e s t'o C a r d w e l l , S y n o d a l i a , I , 128; and G r i n d a l l ' s Remains, P a r k e r S o c i e t y (Cambridge, 1853), pp.142, 152. 13. N o w e l l , C a t e c h i s m , pp.160-1. 14. Rogers, E x p o s i t i o n , p . x i i i . 15. See above, p.4. 16. W i l l i a m P.Haugaard, E l i z a b e t h and the E n g l i s h Reform-a t i o n (Cambridge, 1968), p.252. 17. Brook, P u r i t a n s , I I , ' 5 . - 107 -18. I b i d . 19. S t r y p e , W h i t g i f t , I I , 361. 20. See above, pp.77-9. 21. S t r y p e , W h i t g i f t , I I , 366. 22. Knappen, Tudor P u r i t a n i s m , p.371; M i l w a r d , E l i z a b e t h a n  C o n t r o v e r s i e s , p.167; C l a i r e C r o s s , The P u r i t a n E a r l : The L i f e o f Henry H a s t i n g s , t h i r d E a r l o f Huntingdon, 1536-1595 (London, 1966), p.261. 23. K a t h a r i n e R . F i r t h , The A p o c a l y p t i c T r a d i t i o n i n  R e f o r m a t i o n B r i t a i n 1530-1645 ( O x f o r d , 1979), p.156, c i t i n g S c a l i g e r a n a (Cologne, 169S). 24. F i r t h , A p o c a l y p t i c T r a d i t i o n , p.155. 25. See, f o r example, S t r y p e , W h i t g i f t , I I , 220-5, 320-7, 355-367, 388-393, 406-415. 26. I b i d . , I I , 112-8. 27. I b i d . , I I , 322-7. 28. B i l s o n , The e f f e c t o f c e r t a i n e Sermons, p.146. 29. Broughton, P o s i t i o n s o f the word Hades, pp.11-2. 30. P o r t e r , R e f o r m a t i o n and R e a c t i o n , p.356. 31. I b i d . , p.350. 32. I b i d . , p.351. 33. I b i d . , p.367. 34. Lake, Moderate P u r i t a n s , p.210.' 35. I b i d . , p.214. 36. P o r t e r , R e f o r m a t i o n and R e a c t i o n , p.413. 37. Lake, Moderate P u r i t a n s , p.226. 38. P o r t e r , R e f o r m a t i o n and R e a c t i o n , p.287. 39. C o l l i n s o n , The R e l i g i o n o f P r o t e s t a n t s , p.82. 40. I b i d . , p.94. 41. I b i d . , p.81. 42. See above, pp.59-61. 43. Rogers, E x p o s i t i o n , p.2. 44. I b i d . , p . x i i . 45. See above, p.83. 46. Rogers, E x p o s i t i o n , p . x i i i . 47. I b i d . , pp.59-61. 48. I b i d . , p.61. - 108 -BIBLIOGRAPHY PRIMARY SOURCES B e l l a r m i n e , R o b e r t , An Ample D e c l a r a t i o n o f the C h r i s t i a n D o c t r i n e , t r a n s . R i c h a r d Hadock, D o u a i , 1604. Beza, Theodore, An O r a t i o n made by Ma s t e r Theodore de Beze, E d i n b u r g h , 1561. P r o p o s i t i o n s and P r i n c i p l e s o f d i v i n i t i e , propounded and  D i s p u t e d i n the V n i u e r s i t i e o f Geneva by c e r t a i n e  s t u d e n t s o f D i v i n i t i e under M.Theod. Beza and M. A n t h o n i e Faiu"s"j t r a n s . John P e n r y , / E d i n b u r g h / , 1,595. B i l s o n , Thomas, The e f f e c t o f c e r t a i n e Sermons T o v c h i n g  the F v l l Redemption o f mankind by the d e a t h and  b l o u d o f C h r i s t J e s v s , London, 1599. B i l s o n , Thomas, The Svrvey o f C h r i s t s S v f f e r i n g s f o r Mans  redemption: and o f H i s Descent t o Hades o r H e l f o r  our d e l i u e r a n c e , London, 1,604. Brook, Benjamin, The L i v e s of the P u r i t a n s : c o n t a i n i n g A b i o g r a p h i c a l Account o f those D i v i n e s who D i s t i n g u i s h e d  themselves i n the cause o f R e l i g i o u s L i b e r t y , from  the R e f o r m a t i o n under Queen E l i z a b e t h , t o the A c t o f U n i f o r m i t y , i n 1662, 3 v o l s . , London, 1813. Broughton, Hugh, Mast e r Broughtons L e t t e r s , E s p e c i a l l y h i s l a s t Pamphlet t o and a g a i n s t the L o r d A r c h b i s h o p o f  C a n t e r b u r y , about S h e o l and Hades, f o r the des c e n t  i n t o H e l l , answered i n t h e i r k i n d , London, 1599. Broughton, Hugh, D e c l a r a t i o n o f g e n e r a l l c o r r u p t i o n o f R e l i g i o n , S c r i p t u r e and a l l l e a r n i n g ; wrought by D. B i l s o n . W h i l e he b r e e d e t h a new o p i n i o n , t h a t o ur  L o r d went from P a r a d i s e t o Gehenna, t o t r i u m p h o v e r  the D e v i l l s , M i d d e l b u r g , 1603. Broughton, Hugh, Two l i t t l e workes d e f e n s i u e o f our Redemption That our L o r d went t h r o u g h the v e i l e o f h i s f l e s h i n t o Heaven, t o appeare b e f o r e God f o r v s , M i d d e l b u r g , 1604. - 109 -B r o u g h t o n , Hugh, An E x p l i c a t i o n o f the A r t i c l e o f our Lordes  s o u l e s g o i n g from h i s body t o P a r a d i s e ; touched by the Greek, The w o r l d o f S o u l e s ; termed H e l by the o l d  Saxon, & by a l l our t r a n s l a t i o n s , / M i d d e l b u r g ? / , 1605. Broughton, Hugh, A R e p l i e upon the r.R.F.Th.Winton f o r heads o f h i s d i v i n i t y i n h i s Sermon and Survey: How  he t a u g h t a p e r f e c t t r u t h , t h a t our L o r d went hence t o P a r a d i s e : But a d d i n g t h a t he went thence t o Hades, &  s t r i v i n g t o prove t h a t , he i n u r i e t h a l l l e a r n i n g  & C h r i s t i a n i t i e , Amsterdam, 1605. Broughton, Hugh, P o s i t i o n s o f the Word Hades: That i t i s the g e n e r a l l p l a c e o f S o u l e s : and h o l d e t h as w e l l  the Godly w h i c h are i n P a r a d i s e , as the w i c k e d _ t h a t  are i n T a r t a r u s , / p l a c e o f p u b l i c a t i o n unknown/, 1605. Broughton, Hugh, A P e t i t i o n t o the L o r d s , t o examine the  r e l i g i o n and c a r i a g e o f D.Ban. A r c h b . , / p l a c e o f p u b 1 i c a t i o n unknown/, 1608. B u i s s o n , F e r d i n a n d , S e b a s t i e n C a s t e l l i o n sa v i e e t son  Oeuvre (1515-1563) . Etude s u r Les Q r i g i n e s du  P r o t e s t a n t i s m e L i b e r a l F r a n g a i s , 2 v o l s . , P a r i s , 1892. C a l v i n , J ohn, The I n s t i t v t i o n o f C h r i s t i a n R e l i g i o n , t r a n s . T.N., London, 1562. C a l v i n , John, I n s t i t u t e s o f the C h r i s t i a n R e l i g i o n , ed. John T . M c N e i l l , P h i l a d e l p h i a , 1960. C a l v i n , J ohn, The Catechisme o r maner t o teache C h i l d r e n  the c h r i s t i a n r e l i g i o n , London, 1563. C a r d w e l l , Edward, S y n o d a l i a . A C o l l e c t i o n o f A r t i c l e s o f R e l i g i o n , Canons, and P r o c e e d i n g s o f C o n v o c a t i o n s i n  the P r o v i n c e o f C a n t e r b u r y , from the y e a r 1547 t o the  y e a r 1717, 2 v o l s . , O x f o r d , 1842. C a r d w e l l , Edward, Documentary A n n a l s o f the Reformed Church  of England; b e i n g a C o l l e c t i o n o f I n j u n c t i o n s , D e c l a r a t i o n s , O r d e r s , A r t i c l e s o f I n q u i r y , &c. from the y e a r 1546 t o the y e a r 1716, 2 v o l s . , O x f o r d , 1844. C a r d w e l l , Edward, A H i s t o r y o f C o n f e r e n c e s and o t h e r P r o c e e d i n g s connected w i t h the r e v i s i o n o r tTTe Book o f Common P r a y e r ; from the y e a r 1558 t o the y e a r 1690,- O x f o r d , 1849. - 110 -C a r l i l e , C h r i s t o p h e r , A D i s c o v r s e C o n c e r n i n g two d i u i n e P o s i t i o n s . The f i r s t e f f e c t u a l l y c o n c l u d i n g , t h a t the  s o u l e s o f the f a i t h f u l l f a t h e r s , deceased b e f o r e C h r i s t , went i m m e d i a t e l y t o heaven. The second s u f f i c i e n t l y e  s e t t i n g foo.rth unto us C h r i s t i a n s , what we are t o  c o n c e i v e , t o u c h i n g the d e s c e n s i o n of our S a v i o u r C h r i s t  i n t o H e l l , London, 1582. C e r t a i n e Sermons or H o m i l i e s A p p o i n t e d t o be Read i n Churches  i n the Time of Queen E l i z a b e t h I (1547-1571). A f a c s i m i l i e r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the E d i t i o n o f 1623, i n t r o . Mary E l l e n R i c k e y and Thomas B.St r o u p , 2 v o l s , i n one, G a i n s v i l l e , F l o r i d a , 1968. Erasmus, A p l a y n e and Godly e x p o s y t i o n o r d e c l a r a t i o n o f the  comune Crede (which i n the L a t i n tonge i s c a l l e d  Symbolum Apostolorum) and o f the X commaundementes  o f goddes law, London, 1533. Erasmus, The C o l l o q u i e s o f Erasmus, t r a n s . C r a i g R.Thompson, C h i c a g o , 1965. F u l k e , W i l l i a m , A Defence o f the S i n c e r e and t r u e T r a n s l a t i o n s  o f the H o l y S c r i p t u r e s i n t o the E n g l i s h Tongue, a g a i n s t  the c a v i l s o f Gregory M a r t i n , ed. P a r k e r S o c i e t y , Cambridge, 1843. G r i n d a l , Edmund, The Remains o f Edmund G r i n d a l , ed. P a r k e r S o c i e t y , Cambridge, 1853. H i l l , Adam, The Defence o f the A r t i c l e : C h r i s t descended i n t o  H e l l . V/ith Arguments o b j e c t e d a g a i n s t the t r u t h o f the same d o c t r i n e : : o f one A l e x a n d e r Humes.All w h i c h reasons are c o n f u t e d , and the same d o c t r i n e c l e e r e l y defended, London, 1592. H i g g i n s , John, An Answere t o M a s t e r W i l l i a m P e r k i n s , Concern-i n g C h r i s t s D e s c e n s i o n i n t o H e l l , O x f o r d , 1602. Hume, A l e x a n d e r , A R e i o y n d e r t o D o c t o r H i l c o n c e r n i n g the  Descense of C h r i s t i n t o H e l l . Wherein the Answere t o  h i s sermon i s j u s t l i e defended, and the r o u s t o f h i s  r e p l y s c r a p e d from those arguments as c l e a n l i e , as i f  t h ey had neuer bene touched w i t h t h a t c a n k e r , E d i n b u r g h , 1593. J a cob, Henry, A T r e a t i s e o f the S v f f e r i n g s and v i c t o r y o f  C h r i s t , Tn the work o f our redemption: D e c l a r i n g by  the S c r i p u r s t h e s e two q u e s t i o n s : That C h r i s t s u f f e r e d  f o r us the w r a t h of God, which we may w e l l terme the  paynes o f H e l l , o r H e l l i s h sorrowes. That C h r i s t a f t e r h i s d e a t h on the c r o s s e , went not i n t o H e l l i n h i s - I l l -S o u l e . C o n t r a r i e to- c e r t a i n e e r r o u r s i n these p u b l i k l i e  p r e ached i n London: Anno 1597, M i d d e l b u r g , 1598. Ja c o b , Henry, A Defence o f a T r e a t i s e Tovching the S v f f e r i n g s  and v i c t o r i e o f C h r i s t i n the worke o f o v r Redemption. Wherein i s c o n f i r m e d , 1. That C h r i s t s u f f e r e d f o r u s , not o n l y B o d i l y g r i e f e , but a l s o i n h i s Soule an  i m p r e s s i o n o f the p r o p e r w r a t h o f Qod, whi c h may be . c a l l e d t he p a i n e s o f H e l l . 2. That a f t e r h i s death on  the C r o s s e he went not downe i n t o H e l l , M i d d e l b u r g , 1600-The Two L i t u r g i e s , A.D. 1549 and A.D. 1552: w i t h o t h e r Documents s e t f o r t h by A u t h o r i t y i n the Reign o f K i n g  Edward V I , ed. P a r k e r S o c i e t y , Cambridge, 1844. L i t u r g i c a l S e r v i c e s . L i t u r g i e s and O c c a s i o n a l Forms o f P r a y e r s e t f o r t h i n the Reign o f Queen E l i z a b e t h , ed. P a r k e r S o c i e t y , Cambridge, 1847. Nor t h b r o o k e , J o h n , S p i r i t v s E s t V i c a r i u s C h r i s t i i n t e r r a . A b r e e f e and p i t h i e summe o f the C h r i s t i a n f a i t h , made  i n forme o f a C o n f e s s i o n , w i t h a c o n f u t a t i o n o f the P a p i s t s o b i e c t i o n s and arguments i n sundry p o i n t e s o f  R e l i g i o n , repugnant t o the C h r i s t i a n f a i t h , London, 1582. N o w e l l , A l e x a n d e r , A Cate c h i s m w r i t t e n i n L a t i n by A l e x a n d e r  Nowel.l, t o g e t h e r w i t h the same Cate c h i s m t r a n s l a t e d  i n t o E n g l i s h by Thomas N o r t o n , ed. P a r k e r S o c i e t y , Cambridge, 1853. P a r k e r , Matthew, Correspondence o f Matthew P a r k e r , P.P. A r c h b i s h o p o f C a n t e r b u r y , c o m p r i s i n g l e t t e r s w r i t t e n by and t o him, from A.P.1535, t o h i s d e a t h , A.P.1575, ed. P a r k e r S o c i e t y , Cambridge, 1853. P a r k e s , R i c h a r d , A B r i e f e Answere v n t o C e r t a i n e o b i e c t i o n s  and Reasons a g a i n s t the d e s c e n s i o n o f C h r i s t i n t o  h e l l , l a t e l y s e t i n w r i t i n g unto a Gentleman i n the  Co u n t r e y , O x f o r d , 1604. P a r k e s , R i c h a r d , An A p o l o g i e : o f Three T e s t i m o n i e s o f h o l y  S c r i p t u r e , c o n c e r n i n g the A r t i c l e o f our Creed, "/He Pescended i n t o H e l l / . F i r s t impugned by c e r t a i n e  O b i e c t i o n s sent i n w r i t i n g by a M i n i s t e r v n t o a  Gentleman i n the C o u n t r i e : and l a t e l y seconded by a  P r i n t e d Pamphlet, masking vnder the name o f Limbo- M a s t i x l London, 1607. Pecock, R e g i n a l d , The Po n e t , ed. E l s i e Vaughan H i t c h c o c k , London, 1921. - 112 -P e r k i n s , W i l l i a m , An E x p o s i t i o n o f the Symbole o r Creed o f the A p o s t l e s , A c c o r d i n g t o the Tenovr of the S c r i p t u r e s , and the consent o f Orthodoxe F a t h e r s o f the Church, Cambridge, 1595. Rogers, Thomas, The C a t h o l i c D o c t r i n e o f The Church o f E n g l a n d , An E x p o s i t i o n o f the T h i r t y - N i n e A r t i c l e s , ed. P a r k e r S o c i e t y , Cambridge, 1854. S m i t h , R i c h a r d , R e f u t a t i o l u c u l e n t a e , c r a s s a e , & e x i t i o s a e  I o a n n i s C a l v i n i , & C h r i s t o p h o r i C a r l j l i , A n g l i , qua  a s t r u u n t C h r i s t u m non d e s c e n d i s s e ad i n f e r o s a l i o s ,  quam ad i n f e r n u m infimum, q u i e s t l o c u s damnatorum  p e r p e t u u s , aut ad s e p u l c h r u m , / p r i n t e d abroad/, 1562. S t r y p e , John, A n n a l s o f the R e f o r m a t i o n and E s t a b l i s h m e n t o f  R e l i g i o n , and o t h e r v a r i o u s o c c u r r e n c e s i n the  Church o f E n g l a n d d u r i n g Queen E l i z a b e t h ' s Happy R e i g n , 4 v o l s . , O x f o r d , 1824. S t r y p e , John, E c c l e s i a s t i c a l M e m o r i a l s , R e l a t i n g C h i e f l y t o R e l i g i o n , and the R e f o r m a t i o n o f i t , and the  Emergencies of the Church of E n g l a n d , under K i n g  Henry V I I I , K i n g Edward VI and Queen Mary, 3 v o l s . , O x f o r d , 1822. S t r y p e , John, The L i f e o f the L e a r n e d _ S i r John Cheke, K t . F i r s t i n s t r u c t o r , a f t e r w a r d s S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e , t o  K i n g Edward V I , O x f o r d , 1821. S t r y p e , John, The L i f e and A c t s o f John W h i t g i f t , P.P. the t h i r d and L a s t L o r d A r c h b i s h o p o f C a n t e r b u r y i n the  r e i g n o f Queen E l i z a b e t h , 3 v o l s . , O x f o r d , 1822. W h i t a k e r , W i l l i a m , A P i s p u t a t i o n on H o l y S c r i p t u r e , A g a i n s t  the P a p i s t s , e s p e c i a l l y B e l l a r m i n e and S t a p l e t o n , ed. P a r k e r S o c i e t y , Cambridge, 1849. W h i t g i f t , John, The Works of John W h i t g i f t , P.P., 3 v o l s . , ed. P a r k e r S o c i e t y , Cambridge, 1851. W i l l e t , Andrew, S y n o p s i s P a p i s m i , t h a t i s , A G e n e r a l l viewe of P a p i s t r i e : w h e r e i n the whole m y s t e r i e o f  i n i q u i t i e , and summe o f A n t i c h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e i s s e t  downe, v/hich i s m a i n t a i n e d t h i s day by the  Synagogue o f Rome, a g a i n s t the Church of C h r i s t , London, 1594. W i l l e t , Andrew, Limbomastix: That i s , A Canuise o f Limbus  Patrum, shewing by e u i d e n t p l a c e s o f S c r i p t u r e i n u i n c i b l e r e a s o n s , and pregnant t e s t i m o n i e s o f some - 113 -a n c i e n t w r i t e r s , t h a t C h r i s t descended not i n s o u l e  t o H e l l , t o d e l i u e r the F a t h e r s from t h e n c e , London, 1604. W i l l e t , Andrew, L o i d o r o m a s t i x : That i s , A scovrge f o r a R a y l e r ; c o n t a i n i n g a f v l l and s v f f i c i e n t Answer v n t o  the V n c h r i s t i a n r a y l i n g s , s l a u n d e r s , v n t r u t h s , and  other- i n j u r i o u s I m p u t a t i o n s , uented o f l a t e by one  R i c h a r d P a r k e s , master o f A r t s , a g a i n s t the a u t h o r o f  Limbomastix, Cambridge, 1607. Wood, Anthony a, Athenae Qxonienses. An E x a c t H i s t o r y o f a l l the w r i t e r s and B i s h o p s who have had t h e i r E d u c a t - i o n i n the most a n c i e n t and famous U n i v e r s i t y o f  Ox f o r d from the F i f t e e n t h Year of K i n g Henry the  Seve n t h , Pom. 1500, t o the end o f the Year 1690, 2 v o l s . , London, 1691. SECONDARY SOURCES Badcock, F . J . , The H i s t o r y o f the Cre e d s , second ed., New York, 1938. B e c k i n g s a l e , B.W., B u r g h l e y , Tudor Statesman 1520-1598, London, 1967. Booty, John E., D a v i d S i e g e n t h a l e r , John N.Wall, The Godly Kingdom o f Tudor E n g l a n d , G r e a t Books o f the E n g l i s h  R e f o r m a t i o n , ed. John E. Booty, N e w K H a v e n ^ C o n n e c t i c u t , 1981. C o l l i n s o n , P a t r i c k , The E l i z a b e t h a n P u r i t a n Movement, London, 1967. C o l l i n s o n , P a t r i c k , A r c h b i s h o p G r i n d a l , 1519-83: the s t r u g g l e  for-.a,;.reformed.'Church, London, 1979. C o l l i n s o n , P a t r i c k , The R e l i g i o n o f P r o t e s t a n t s : the Church  i n E n g l i s h S o c i e t y 1559-1625, O x f o r d , 1982. C r o s s , C l a i r e , The P u r i t a n E a r l : The L i f e o f Henry H a s t i n g s , t h i r d E a r l o f Huntingdon, 1536-1595, London, 1966. - 114 -C u r t i s , W i l l i a m A., A H i s t o r y o f Creeds and C o n f e s s i o n s o f  F a i t h i n Christe n d o m and Beyond, E d i n b u r g h , 1911. Dawley, Powel M., John W h i t g i f t and the E n g l i s h R e f o r m a t i o n , New York, 1954. D i c t i o n n a i r e de T h e o l o g i e C a t h o l i q u e contenant L 1 Expose des  D o c t r i n e s de l a T h e o l o g i e C a t h o l i q u e , L e u r s Preuves  e t L e u r H i s t o i r e . Commence sous l a D i r e c t i o n de A. Vacant e t E. Mangenot. C o n t i n u e sous c e 11 e •• d& E.Amann. P a r i s , 1930. The D i c t i o n a r y o f N a t i o n a l B i o g r a p h y , eds. S i r L e s l i e Stephen and S i r Sidney Lee, O x f o r d , s i n c e 1917. D i e t e l m e i e r , John A u g u s t i n , H i s t o r i a Dogmatis de Descensu  C h r i s t i ad i n f e r o s L i t e r a r i a , A l t o r f i i , 1762. F i r t h , K a t h a r i n e R., The A p o c a l y p t i c T r a d i t i o n i n R e f o r m a t i o n  B r i t a i n 1530-1645, O x f o r d , 1979. Gee, Henry, The E l i z a b e t h a n P r a y e r Book and Ornaments, London, 1902. G i b s o n , Edgar C.S., The Three C r e e d s , London, 1912. Haugaard, W i l l i a m P., E l i z a b e t h and the E n g l i s h R e f o r m a t i o n : the s t r u g g l e f o r a s t a b l e s e t t l e m e n t o f r e l i g i o n , London, 1968. Hughes, P h i l i p , The R e f o r m a t i o n i n En g l a n d , 3 v o l s . , London, 1954. H u r s t f i e l d , J o e l / " C h u r c h and S t a t e , 1558-1612: The Task o f the C e c i l s , " i n S t u d i e s i n Church H i s t o r y , V . I I , ed. G.J.Cuming, London, 1965. J o r d a n , W.K. , The Development o f R e l i g i o u s T o l e r a t i o n i n England from the A c c e s s i o n o f James I t o the C o n v e n t i o n  o f the Long P a r l i a m e n t (1603-1640), London,1936. K e n d a l l , R.T., C a l v i n and E n g l i s h C a l v i n i s m t o 1649, O x f o r d , 1979. Knappen, M.M., Tudor P u r i t a n i s m : A C h a p t e r i n the H i s t o r y  o f I d e a l i s m , C h i c a g o , 1939. Lake, P e t e r , Moderate p u r i t a n s and the E l i z a b e t h a n c h u r c h , Cambridge, 1982. L e C l e r , J o s e p h , T o l e r a t i o n and the R e f o r m a t i o n , 2 v o l s . , London, 1960. - 115 -McConica, James K e l s e y , E n g l i s h Humanists and R e f o r m a t i o n P o l i t i c s under Henry V I I I and Edward V I , O x f o r d , 1965. Makower, F e l i x , The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l H i s t o r y and C o n s t i t u t i o n  o f the Church o f E n g l a n d , London, 1895. Manning, Roger.B.,"The C r i s i s o f E p i s c o p a l A u t h o r i t y D u r i n g the R e i g n o f E l i z a b e t h I," i n "The J o u r n a l o f B r i t i s h S t u d i e s , v o l . X I , Nov.1971. M i l w a r d , P e t e r , R e l i g i o u s C o n t r o v e r s i e s o f the E l i z a b e t h a n  Age; a Survey o f P r i n t e d S o u r c e s , London, 1977. M i l w a r d , P e t e r , R e l i g i o u s C o n t r o v e r s i e s o f the Jacobean Age, A Survey o f P r i n t e d S o u r c e s , London, 1978. M u l l i n g e r , James Ba s s , The U n i v e r s i t y o f Cambridge from the  R o y a l I n j u n c t i o n s o f 1535 t o the A c c e s s i o n o f C h a r l e s  the F i r s t , Cambridge, 1884. N e a l e , J.E., E l i z a b e t h I and her P a r l i a m e n t s 1584-1601, New York, 1958. New, John F.H., A n g l i c a n & P u r i t a n ; The B a s i s o f t h e i r  Opposition 1558-1640, S t a n f o r d , C a l i f o r n i a , 1964. P o r t e r , H.C., R e f o r m a t i o n and R e a c t i o n i n Tudor Cambridge, Cambridge, 1958. Read, Conyers, M r . S e c r e t a r y C e c i l and Queen E l i z a b e t h , New York, 1955. Read, Conyers, L o r d B u r g h l e y and Queen E l i z a b e t h , New York, 1960. S c h a f f , P h i l i p , The Creeds o f C h r i s t e n d o m , w i t h a H i s t o r y  and c r i t i c a l n o t e s , 3 v o l s . , London, 1919. A S h o r t - T i t l e C a t a l o g u e o f Books P r i n t e d i n E n g l a n d , S c o t l a n d , and I r e l a n d and o f E n g l i s h Books P r i n t e d Abroad 1475- 1640. F i r s t c o m p i l e d by A . W . P o l l a r d and G.R.Redgrave, second e d i t i o n , London, 1976. T o l m i e , M., The Triumph o f the S a i n t s . The S e p a r a t e Churches  o f London, 1616-1649, Cambridge, 1977. Usher, Roland G., The R i s e and F a l l o f the H i g h Commission, O x f o r d , 1968. Walker, D.P., The D e c l i n e o f H e l l . S e v e n t e e n t h C e n t u r y  D i s c u s s i o n s o f • E t e r n a l Torment, C h i c a g o , 1964. - 116 -W i l l i a m s o n , George, S e v e n t e e n t h C e n t u r y C o n t e x t s , r e v i s e d e d i t i o n , C h i c a g o , 1969. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0096329/manifest

Comment

Related Items