In the eighth book of his treatise "Of the Lawes of Ecclesiasticall Politie," Richard Hooker defends the royal headship of the Church of England in a remarkable series of theological arguments. His apologetic intention was 'to resolve the consciences' of the Disciplinarian-Puritan critics of the Elizabethan Settlement by a demonstration that the Royal Supremacy was wholly consistent with the principles of doctrinal orthodoxy as understood and upheld by the Magisterial Reformation. This study commences with a look at some current problems of interpretation and then examines Hooker's apologetic aim and methodology. Subsequent chapters demonstrate Hooker's reliance on the teaching of the Magisterial Reformers in the formulation of both the soteriological foundations of his political thought and his ecclesiology. Hooker's appeal to the authority of Patristic Christological and Trinitarian Orthodoxy in support of the Royal Supremacy is also discussed. The purpose of this book is to uncover the theological roots of a central aspect of Hooker's political thought, and thereby to attempt to shed new light on an important Elizabethan controversy.

Richard Hooker and his Early Doctrine of Justification explores the doctrine of justification, the doctrine of faith and grace, and the doctrine of Scripture and use of reason in the early theology of Richard Hooker. In order to prove that Hooker was a Protestant Reformed theologian, Simuþ concentrates on Hooker‘s doctrine of justification as reflected in his Learned Discourse of Justification, which is the most important work of his early theology. Unlike previous books on Hooker which use primarily the theology of Luther and Calvin to draw conclusions, this book brings together quotations and ideas from the works of Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli, Bucer, Calvin and Beza to show that Hooker was a Protestant Reformed theologian. Simuþ also discusses the theological context of Hooker‘s career by offering an analysis of the doctrine of justification in the theology of John Jewel, John Whitgift (Hooker‘s patrons), and Thomas Cartwright and Walter Travers (Hooker‘s Puritan opponents).

This specialist work in historical theology deals with the doctrine of salvation in the early theology of Richard Hooker (1554-1600) from the perspective of the concept of faith and with Hooker’s connections to the early English Reformers (W. Tyndale, J. Frith, R. Barnes, T. Cranmer, J. Bradford and J. Foxe) in crucial teachings such as justification, sanctification, glorification, election, reprobation, the sovereignty of God, and salvation of Catholics. The study proves that Hooker’s theology is firstly Protestant (to counter the views which picture it as Catholic) and secondly Calvinist.

Although by common consent the greatest theologian of the Anglican tradition, Richard Hooker is little known in Protestant circles more generally, and increasingly neglected within the Anglican Communion. Although scholarship on Hooker has witnessed a dramatic renaissance within the last generation, thus far this has tended to make Hooker less, not more accessible to general audiences, and interpreters have been sharply divided on the meaning of his theology. This book aims to draw upon recent research in order to offer a fresh portrait of Hooker in his original historical context, one in which it had not yet occurred to any Englishman to assume the label "Anglican," and to bring him to life for all branches of the contemporary church. Part One examines his life, writings, and reputation, puncturing several old myths along the way. Part Two seeks to establish Hooker's theological and pastoral vision, exploring why he wrote, how he wrote, whom he was seeking to persuade, and whom he was seeking to refute. Part Three analyzes key themes of Hooker's theology--Scripture, Law, Church, and Sacraments--and how they related to his late Reformation context. Finally, the concluding chapter proposes Hooker's method as a model for our confused contemporary age, combining fidelity to Scripture, historical awareness, and a pastorally sensitive pragmatism.