THE DESCENT INTO HELL: AN ELIZABETHAN CONTROVERSY By PATRICIA WEIGHTMAN STEWART M.A., Cambridge University, 1980 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of History We accept this thesis as conforming to the^ required standard THE UNIVERSITY'OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1984 ® Patricia Weightman Stewart, 1984 '6 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of #/s7~rt/ty The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 DE-6 (3/81) ABSTRACT The Protestant schism with Rome involved a rejection of Catholic beliefs about the nature of hell. As a result it was imperative that Protestants reinterpret)? a central article of Christian belief. This article was Christ's descent into hell which had long been accepted in the Apostles' Creed as having followed the death and burial of Christ. Debate about the meaning and purpose of Christ's descent grew in England during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. The Protestant emphasis on the Word as the all important foundation of faith meant that the Scriptures and the Church Fathers were consulted to establish the meaning of the article. Original Greek and Hebrew texts of the Scriptures were analysed. Calvin had propounded a radically different interpretation of the article which some Englishmen accepted. Others employed "reason" to "prove" the validity of one interpretation or another. These different methods employed to ascertain the true interpretation of the article produced widely divergent results. The authorities of the Church of England were faced with disagreement and dissention which they were unable to subdue. As a result, by 1607 the Church was retreating from maintaining authority over the content of belief in this article. The theological inclination of Church authorities on this issue contradicts the views which some modern historians hold about the beliefs and motivations of these men. The debate also undermines the impression sometimes given of a solid, theologically stable, "Calvinist" Church in England. - iv - TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ii-iii List of Tables v Acknowledgement vi I THE CONTROVERSIALISTS: A GROWING PROBLEM 1 II CHRIST'S DESCENT INTO HELL: A THEOLOGICAL PROBLEM . .' 24 (i) The Continental Background 24 (ii) From Protestant versus Catholic to Protestant versus Protestant 37 (iii) The Threat of "Reason" 57 III AUTHORITY CURTAILED: AN INSOLUBLE PROBLEM 82 NOTES 96 BIBLIOGRAPHY 108 - V - LIST OF TABLES TABLE I A Table of Tracts Published on Christ's Descent into Hell 10 - vi - ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The modern distinction between religious belief and intellectual activity has tended to inhibit the exploration of the latter in Tudor England. For the fundamental insight that such a distinction is unwarranted in this period I am deeply indebted to my supervisor, Prof. M. Tolmie. In addition, I have benefited from and am most grateful for all of his advice and assistance throughout the year. I appreciate the help and guidance of other members of the Faculty and Staff of the Department of History. Also, I would like to thank my husband whose constant support and understanding have been much needed and greatly appreciated. CHAPTER ONE THE CONTROVERSIALISTS: A GROWING PROBLEM Christ's descent into hell was an article of Christian doctrine in mid-sixteenth century England. The article was included in the Apostles' Creed as prescribed by the Edwardian Prayer Book of 1552 and by the Elizabethan Prayer Book of 1559: "Jesus Christ ... suffered under Ponce Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried, He descended into hell."1 On certain feast days the Quicunque Vult, or Athanasian Creed, was prescribed for Evensong; this also made reference to Christ's descent into hell: "Christ ... suffered for our salvation: descended into hell, rose again the third day from 2 the dead." Thus, the accepted creeds established Christ's descent into hell as an integral part of Christian doctrine. The Forty-Two Articles of 1552 provided the official Edwardian interpretation of Christ's descent. The third article declared that: As Christ died and was buried for us: so also it is to be beleved, that he went downe into Hell. For the bodie laie in the sepulchre, untill the resurrection: but his Ghoste departing from him, was with the Ghostes that were in prison or in Helle, and didde preache to the same, as the place of St. Peter dooeth testifie.3 The Forty-Two Articles carried all the weight and authority of the Edwardian Church, having been "agreed on by the Bishoppes, and other learned menne in the Synode at London, ... for the avoiding of controversie in opinions, and the establishement of a godlie concorde in certeine matiers of Religion." The Elizabethan Church produced a corresponding document, the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563, which were also intended "for the auoydyng of the diversities of opinions, 5 and for the stablishyng of consent, touchyng true religion." Again, the third article dealt with Christ's descent into hell but the coverage was extremely cryptic: "As Christe dyed and was buryed for vs: so also it is to be beleued that he went downe into hell." The 1552 Articles had provided an explanation of how and why Christ descended into hell; the 1563 Articles provided none. This omission was to have serious implications. The absence of an authoritative interpretation of Christ's descent into hell presented the Church of England with substantial problems in maintaining authority over the interpretation of this article. The omission added fuel to controversy to come: however, it was itself the result of controversy which already surrounded the article by 1563. Over a decade before, in 1552, Christopher Carlile, a member of Clare Hall, Cambridge, and a Hebrew scholar, had gone so far as to deny that Christ had 7 descended into hell in either body or soul. He had denied Christ's descent at his commencement for Bachelor of Divinity at Cambridge University; this was a public disputation, attended and judged by eminent and influential men. In Carlile's case, some of those involved were Dr. Perne, the Vice- Chancellor of the University; Bishop Ghest of Salisbury; Dr. Younge, the master of Pembroke Hall (appointed Vice-Chancellor - 3 - of the University in 1553 and Regius Professor of Divinity in 1555); and perhaps most important of all, Sir John Cheke, a renowned Greek scholar and prominent courtier who was to become both a Privy Councillor and the Secretary of State in 1553.8 These men made pronouncement against Carlile's views, "determining that Christes bodye laye in the graue, but his q soule wente into hell," but Carlile's views had received a public airing, and possibly at least one important adherent. In the work which he published later about Christ's descent into hell, Carlile claimed that Sir John Cheke had been convinced by his arguments. Supposedly, Sir John was the author of some rhyming couplets quoted by Carlile: For wayghing al his /Carlile's7 words of waght which did his cause pursue, I Sir lohn Cheeke do here aduouch his iudgement to be true: And firmelye with him do confesse and do beleue it well, That Christ in body nor in soule descended into hell.1^ Cheke's authorship of this verse cannot be substantiated,11 and clearly Carlile would have had a vested interest in claiming such an eminent convert. However, if the evidence about converts is dubious, the evidence of reaction to Carlile's views is not. In 1562, Richard Smith, an Oxford divine who was in exile by this time due to his Roman Catholic persuasion, published a refutation of Carlile's and Calvin's 12 interpretations of Christ's descent into hell. Carlile's views may have been denounced at his commencement, but - 4 - obviously they had not been forgotten. Neither was Carlile's commencement the only expression of dissent over the article during this period. In 1563, the Bishop of Exeter sent a petition to the Convocation in London (the same Convocation which was responsible for compiling the Thirty-Nine Articles) pleading for the settlement of contro• versial issues in order to achieve uniformity of doctrine. He wrote that "tragedies and dissensions" were resulting from disagreements about Christ's descent into hell: "There have been in my diocese great invectives between the preachers, one against the other, and also partakers with them," and these invectives were causing "dissensions, contentions, and 13 strifes." The Bishop of Exeter had been confronted with an outbreak of popular unrest over the meaning of this article. He placed the problem first in his petition of issues requiring settlement by the Convocation. He informed the Convocation members that "your grave, wise, and godly learning might do well and charitably, to set some certainty concerning 14 this doctrine." The Convocation completely failed to do this. Its members reaffirmed that Christ's descent into hell was a true article of faith, but they removed the interpret• ation of the article which had been provided in 1552; and they put nothing at all in its place. In The Life and Acts of John Whitgift, John Strype suggested a possible reason for the omission of an interpret• ation of the article in 1563: It was the wisdom of the famous Synod at London, 1562, /156-37 to set down this article barely, without the explication that went with it in the articles, as it stood under King Edward the Vlth, 1552; on purpose to avoid, as it seems, all caviling and disputation, and to allow a liberty to men's judgments and understand• ings in such disputable points, wherein the essence of faith was not concerned.