Richard Hooker

alexanderjames

alexanderjames

Puritan Board Sophomore
I keep hearing this name, alongside the Davenant Institute, his ecclesiastical laws.. Wikipedia says he was Church of England and opposed the extremes of puritanism.

What is the general and different views of Richard Hooker? What impact has he had on the church?
 
Wikipedia, the most scholarly source of all knowledge, says this:

Scholars disagree regarding Hooker's relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.  However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism. The term "Anglican" is not found in his writings and indeed first appears early in the reign of Charles I as the Church of England moved towards an Arminian position doctrinally and a more "Catholic" look liturgically under the leadership of Archbishop William Laud.​
 
Taylor said:
Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism. 
Click to expand...
To the extent that Hooker taught a via media, it is a via media between the Lutheran and Reformed understanding of Scripture, Liturgy, & Ecclesiology
 
Standard classical Anglicanism. He was a very important thinker. True, he rejected Puritanism but he was also a strong opponent of Romanism. He was a very important thinker on issues like natural law.
 
My knowledge of Hooker is mediated through Brad Littlejohn, in his little work on two kingdoms, as well as a lecture of his on natural law. I found his "via media" on natural law, between Zanchi and Aquinas, solid. His views on 2 kingdoms rejected the extremes of the biblicism of Puritanism as well as the zealous conformists. Again, I'm in agreement with him on it.

I was in the intention of reading Davenant's modernised version, but I've been bogged down by other things.
 
Last edited:
Jacob's reviews are always helpful:

Richard Hooker (W. Bradford Littlejohn)

Littlejohn, W. Bradford. Richard Hooker. Wipf & Stock. I wish I had something like this in 2008 when I was wrestling with claims of “what is the true church?” The conservative Protestant publishing world had lost giants like Hooker and Chemnitz. Turretin had been recently translated and...
www.puritanboard.com www.puritanboard.com

Volume 1 of Richard Hooker's Laws

Divine Law and Human Nature: Book I of Hooker’s Laws: A Modernization by Richard Hooker, W. Bradford Littlejohn (Editor), Brian Marr (Editor), Brad Belschner (Editor) Purpose for writing: Hooker sought to vindicate “the Laws of the Church which have guided us for so many years….which are now...
www.puritanboard.com www.puritanboard.com
 
Tychicus said:
Jacob's reviews are always helpful:

Richard Hooker (W. Bradford Littlejohn)

Littlejohn, W. Bradford. Richard Hooker. Wipf & Stock. I wish I had something like this in 2008 when I was wrestling with claims of “what is the true church?” The conservative Protestant publishing world had lost giants like Hooker and Chemnitz. Turretin had been recently translated and...
www.puritanboard.com www.puritanboard.com

Volume 1 of Richard Hooker's Laws

Divine Law and Human Nature: Book I of Hooker’s Laws: A Modernization by Richard Hooker, W. Bradford Littlejohn (Editor), Brian Marr (Editor), Brad Belschner (Editor) Purpose for writing: Hooker sought to vindicate “the Laws of the Church which have guided us for so many years….which are now...
www.puritanboard.com www.puritanboard.com
Click to expand...

Thank you.
 
Hooker was for the imposition of the English popish ceremonies (see George Gillespie's dispute of that name). Hooker is the extremist in this regard, not mainstream puritanism and presbyterianism which opposed the ceremonies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top