Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T09:22:19.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jesus Christ – The Centre of Theology in Richard Hooker's Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Polity, Book V

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

Egil Grislis
Egil Grislis
Affiliation:
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Richard Hooker (1554–1600), while respected in his own time, has become famous in the twenty-first century. For a generally secular age of postmodernism, Hooker offers a remarkably coherent foundational methodology and presents a vigorous case for conservative Christianity. With central attention to Jesus Christ, he celebrates faith, appreciates tradition, and honours reason. Of course, Hooker wrote for his own times. But he has remained relevant, since he cherished truth that does not age. Of the eight books of his Lawes, in Book V Hooker recorded what may be called the most powerful witness for Evangelical and Catholic Christianity in a profound Anglican formulation. While the central orientation to Christ was characteristic of all of Hooker's works, Book V combined his methodological concerns with such central doctrines as the Church, the definition of prayer, Christology, and the holy sacraments. At the same time Hooker also reflected on the theological dimensions of a great variety of liturgical issues. This brief statement, however, precludes a detailed concern with all that is valuable, and focuses on the major doctrines. Moreover, Book V can also be viewed as a creative celebration and defence of the Book of Common Prayer.

Keywords

HookerAnglicanismBook of Common PrayerauthoritysacramentsChrist
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Anglican Studies , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , December 2007 , pp. 227 - 251
Copyright
Copyright © SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore) and The Journal of Anglican Studies Trust 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Polity, Book V, chapter 6, section 1; John Keble (ed.) 7th edn, revised by Church, R.W. and Paget, F., 1888, vol. 2, p. 29Google Scholar; The Folger Library Edition (FLE), General ed. W. Speed Hill, also for vol. 2 (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1977), p. 33, lines 11 and 15.

2. Lawes V.6.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.29Google Scholar; FLE 2.33.21–23, 25–26, 29–32.Google Scholar

3. Haugaard, William P., ‘Richard Hooker: Evidences of an Ecumenical Vision from a Twentieth-Century Perspective’, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 24.3 (Summer 1987), pp. 438–27.Google Scholar

4. Lawes V. Ded. 3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.3Google Scholar; FLE 2.2.Google Scholar

5. Lawes V. Ded. 2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.2Google Scholar; FLE 2.1.18, 21–22.Google Scholar At the Fifth Lateran Council in Rome (1512–17), Egidio da Viterbo (1469–1532), acknowledged that there was a desire for reform, but formulated it individually and subjectively: ‘Men must be changed by religion, not religion by men.’ Spitz, Lewis W., The Protestant Reformation 1517–1559. (New York: Harper & Row, 1983), p. 311.Google Scholar Such was also the conservative side of Desiderius Erasmus. Schoeck, R.J., ‘From Erasmus to Hooker: An Overview’, in McGrade, Arthur Stephen (ed.), Richard Hooker and the Construction of Christian Community (Tempe, AZ: Medieval and Renaissance Texts & Studies, 1997), pp. 59–73.Google Scholar

6. Lawes V.Ded. 2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.2Google Scholar; FLE 2.2.3–7.Google Scholar

7. Lawes V.Ded. 3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.2Google Scholar; FLE 2.2.19–20, 21–22.Google Scholar

8. Lawes V.Ded. 5Google Scholar; Keble, 2.4Google Scholar; FLE 2.3.31–32.1.Google Scholar

9. Lawes V.Ded. 6Google Scholar; Keble, 2.5Google Scholar; FLE 2.4.14.Google Scholar

10. Lawes V.Ded. 6Google Scholar; Keble, 2.5Google Scholar; FLE 2.4.20–21.Google Scholar

11. Lawes V.Ded. 8Google Scholar; Keble, 2.7Google Scholar; FLE 2.28–29.Google Scholar

12. Lawes V.1.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.13–14Google Scholar; FLE 2.16.25–27.Google Scholar

13. Lawes V.1.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.14Google Scholar; FLE 2.17.9–11.Google Scholar

14. Lawes V.1.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.14–15Google Scholar; FLE 2.17.23–18.1.Google Scholar

15. Lawes V.1.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.15Google Scholar; FLE 2.18.13–15.Google Scholar

16. Lawes V.1.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.16Google Scholar; FLE 2.19.22–25.Google Scholar

17. Lawes V.1.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.16Google Scholar; FLE 2.20.1–2, 4–5.Google Scholar

18. Lawes V.1.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.17Google Scholar; FLE 2,20.20–21.Google Scholar

19. Lawes V.1.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.17Google Scholar; FLE 2.20.28–31.Google Scholar

20. Lawes V.1.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.18Google Scholar; FLE 2.21.4–15.Google Scholar

21. Lawes V.1.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.18Google Scholar; FLE 2.21.21–23.Google Scholar

22. Lawes V.1.4Google Scholar; Keble, 2.18Google Scholar; FLE 2.21.29–32.Google Scholar

23. Lawes V.1.5Google Scholar; Keble, 2.18Google Scholar; FLE 2.22.14–17.Google Scholar

24. Lawes V.2.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.19Google Scholar; FLE 2.23.5–11.Google Scholar

25. Lawes V.2.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.19Google Scholar; FLE 2.23.14–16.Google Scholar

26. Lawes V.2.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.20Google Scholar; FLE 2.24.25–26.Google Scholar

27. Lawes V.2.2Google Scholar; Keble, . 2.21Google Scholar; FLE 2.24.27–25.1.Google Scholar

28. Lawes V.2.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.22Google Scholar; FLE 2.25.22–26.Google Scholar

29. Lawes V.2.4Google Scholar; Keble, 2.22–23Google Scholar; FLE 2.26.8–25.Google Scholar

30. Lawes V.3.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.4Google Scholar; FLE 2.27. 23–27.Google Scholar

31. Lawes V.3.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.24Google Scholar; FLE 2.28. 1–9.Google Scholar

32. Lawes V.3.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.24Google Scholar; FLE 2.28.17.Google Scholar

33. Lawes V.3.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.24Google Scholar; FLE 2.28.23.Google Scholar

34. Lawes V.3.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.25Google Scholar; FLE 2.29.6–7.Google Scholar

35. Lawes V.4.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.26Google Scholar; FLE 2.29.30.Google Scholar

36. Lawes V.4.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.26Google Scholar; FLE 2.29–32.Google Scholar

37. Lawes V.4.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.26Google Scholar; FLE 2.30.18–22.Google Scholar

38. Lawes Pref. 1.1; Keble, 1.125Google Scholar; FLE 1.1.9–13.Google Scholar

39. Gorle, J., An Analysis: The Fifth Book of Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity with Examination Questions (Cambridge: J. Hall & Son, 6th edn, 1896).Google ScholarNelson, George, An Analysis of the Fifth Book of Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity in the Form of Questions and Answers (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1890; New York: E. & J.Young, 1899), p. 144.Google ScholarYouens, F.A.C., Analysis of Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity Book V with Introduction, Notes, and Examination Questions (London: Robert Scott, 1912).Google Scholar

40. Walton, Izaak, ‘Preface to the First Edition of the Life of Hooker’Google Scholar, published in 1665; Keble, , 1.24 and 22.Google Scholar

41. Lawes V.8.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.34Google Scholar; FLE 2.39.8–14.Google ScholarGrislis, Egil, ‘The Role of Consensus in Richard Hooker's Method of Theological Inquiry’, in Cushman, Robert E. and Grislis, Egil (eds.), The Heritage of Christian Thought: Essays in Honor of Robert Lowry Calhoun (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), pp. 64–88.Google Scholar

42. Grislis, Egil, ‘The Hermeneutical Problem of Richard Hook’, in Hill, W. Speed (ed.), Studies in Richard Hooker: Essays Preliminary to an Edition of His Works (Cleveland: The Press of Case Western Reserve University, 1972), pp. 159–206.Google Scholar Cf. my forthcoming chapter, ‘The Scriptural Hermeneutics of Richard Hooker’, in J.W. Torrance Kirby (ed.), Introduction to Richard Hooker (to be published by Brill in 2007).Google Scholar

43. Lawes V.21.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.85Google Scholar; FLE 2.84.13–15.Google Scholar

44. Lawes V.21.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.85Google Scholar; FLE 2.84.16–18.Google Scholar

45. Lawes V.21.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.85Google Scholar; FLE 2.84.22–24.Google Scholar

46. Lawes V.21.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.85Google Scholar; FLE 2.85.11–14.Google Scholar

47. Cf. Grislis, Egil, ‘Providence, Predestination, and Free Will in Richard Hooker's Theology’, in Kirby, W.J. Torrance (ed.), Richard Hooker and the English Reformation (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003), pp. 79–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

48. Lawes V.10.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.41Google Scholar; FLE 2.46.23–29.Google Scholar

49. Hooker's use of this Renaissance term is rich. It can refer to (1) logical clarity and common sense coherence, (2) the consensus of educated and thoughtful people, and (3) the reasoning of those who have been redeemed by the Holy Spirit and thought in faith within the sanctified life of the Church.

50. Lawes V.10.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.41Google Scholar; FLE 2.47.3–9.Google Scholar

51. Lawes V.8.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.34Google Scholar; FLE 2.39.11–14.Google Scholar

52. Lawes V.8.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.34,35Google Scholar; FLE 2.39.14–16Google Scholar; Eccles. 4.9.Google Scholar

53. Lawes V.8.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.34–35Google Scholar; FLE 2.39.23–24.Google Scholar

54. For a concise and devotional summary, see Booty, John, Three Anglican Divines on Prayer: Jewel, Andrewes, and Hooker (Cambridge, MA: Society of St John the Evangelist, 1978)Google Scholar, and Reflections on the Theology of Richard Hooker; An Elizabethan Addresses Modern Anglicanism (Sewanee, TE: The University of the South Press, 1998), pp. 87–92.Google Scholar

55. Lawes V.23.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.115Google Scholar; FLE 2.110.7–16.Google Scholar For a splendid exposition, see Kirby, W.J. Torrance, ‘Angels Descending and Ascending: Hooker's Discourse on the “Double Motion” of Common Prayer’Google Scholar, in Kirby (ed.), Richard Hooker and the English Reformation, pp. 111–29.Google Scholar

56. Lawes V.25.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.119Google Scholar; FLE 2.114.13–19.Google Scholar

57. Lawes V.23.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.116Google Scholar; FLE 2.111.7–8.Google Scholar

58. Lawes V.23.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.116Google Scholar; FLE 2.111.16–19.Google Scholar

59. Lawes V.24.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.116Google Scholar; FLE 2.111.20.Google Scholar

60. Lawes V.24.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.117Google Scholar; FLE 2.111.25–27.Google Scholar

61. Lawes V.25.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.117Google Scholar; FLE 2.112.14–18.Google Scholar

62. Lawes V.25.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.18Google Scholar; FLE 2.113.28–29.Google Scholar

63. Lawes V.25.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.120Google Scholar; FLE 2.115.18 and 23,24.Google Scholar

64. Lawes V.33.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.149Google Scholar; FLE 2.140.3–9.Google Scholar

65. Lawes V.25.5Google Scholar; Keble, 2.121Google Scholar; FLE 2.116.26–30.Google Scholar

66. Lawes V.26.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.122Google Scholar; FLE 2.117.25,26.Google Scholar

67. Lawes V.26.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.124Google Scholar; FLE 2.2.118.29–119.1.Google Scholar

68. Lawes V.26.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.124Google Scholar; FLE 2.121.8–9.Google Scholar

69. Lawes V.34.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.149Google Scholar; FLE 2.140.18–29.Google Scholar

70. Lawes V.34.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.150Google Scholar; FLE 2.141.12 and 20.Google Scholar

71. Lawes V.34.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.151Google Scholar; FLE 2.142.7–17.Google Scholar

72. Lawes V.36.32Google Scholar; Keble, 2.157Google Scholar; FLE 2.148.15–18.Google Scholar

73. For an overview, see Grislis, Egil, ‘Richard Hooker and Mysticism’, The Anglican Theological Review 87.2 (Spring 2005), pp. 253–71.Google Scholar

74. Lawes V.37.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.159Google Scholar; FLE 2.150.21–26.Google Scholar

75. Lawes V.38.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.159Google Scholar; FLE 2.151.22–152.4.Google Scholar

76. Lawes V.38.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.160Google Scholar; FLE 2.152.6–7.Google Scholar

77. Rowan Williams has characterized it as ‘a beautifully lucid summary of patristic Christological teaching, designated to bring out as fully as possible the fact that the incarnation is not an isolated fact about Jesus but the ground for a renewing of the entire human race’ (‘Richard Hooker … Contemplative Pragmatism’, in Williams, Rowan, Anglican Identities [Cambridge, MA: Cowley Publications, 2003], p. 27)Google Scholar and Kirby, W.J. Torrance has noted that ‘Hooker's account of patristic Christological orthodoxy is succinct and precise…’ (Richard Hooker, Reformer and Platonist [Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005], p. 81).Google Scholar

78. Lawes V.50.1–3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.219Google Scholar; FLE 2.207.12–19 and 208.8–9.Google Scholar

79. Lawes V.50.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.220Google Scholar; FLE 2.208.19–20.Google Scholar

80. Lawes V.50.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.220Google Scholar; FLE 2.208.24–209.2.Google Scholar

81. Lawes V.51.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.220Google Scholar; FLE 2.209.9–15.Google Scholar

82. Lawes V.51.1Google Scholar; Keble, 220,221Google Scholar; FLE 2.209.20–24.Google Scholar

83. Lawes V.51.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.221Google Scholar; FLE 2.210.15–17.Google Scholar

84. Lawes V.55.8Google Scholar; Keble, 2.243Google Scholar; FLE 2.232.16–17.Google Scholar

85. Lawes V.52.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.224,225Google Scholar; FLE 2.213.29–214.3.Google Scholar

86. Lawes V.53.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.227Google Scholar; FLE 2.216.27–29.Google Scholar

87. Lawes V.53.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.230Google Scholar; FLE 2.218.30–219.3.Google Scholar

88. Lawes V.54.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.231Google Scholar; FLE 2.220.20, 21.Google Scholar

89. Lawes V.54.4Google Scholar; Keble, 2.234Google Scholar; FLE 2.223.6, 7.Google Scholar

90. Lawes V.54.5Google Scholar; Keble, 2.235Google Scholar; FLE 2.223.31, 32.Google Scholar

91. Lawes V.55.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.238Google Scholar; FLE 2.227.33–228.2.Google Scholar

92. Lawes V.52.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.222Google Scholar; FLE 2.211.29–32.Google Scholar

93. Lawes V.53.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.227Google Scholar; FLE 2.216.29–217.2.Google Scholar

94. Lawes V.54.7–8Google Scholar; Keble, 2.236Google Scholar; FLE 2.225.7–19.Google Scholar

95. Lawes V.54.6Google Scholar; Keble, 2.235Google Scholar; FLE 2.224.19.Google Scholar

96. Lawes V.55.6Google Scholar; Keble, 2.241Google Scholar; FLE 2.210.6.Google Scholar

97. Lawes V.54.6Google Scholar; Keble, 2.236Google Scholar; FLE 2.224.22–26.Google Scholar

98. Lawes V.54.9Google Scholar; Keble, 2.237Google Scholar; FLE 2.226.20–22.Google Scholar

99. Lawes V.55.8Google Scholar; Keble, 2.244Google Scholar; FLE 2.233.9–14.Google Scholar

100. Lawes V.55.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.239Google Scholar; FLE 2.228.21, 22.Google Scholar

101. Lawes V.55.4Google Scholar; Keble, 2.239,240Google Scholar; FLE 2.229.4, 5.Google Scholar

102. Lawes V.55.6Google Scholar; Keble, 2.241Google Scholar; FLE 2.230.30–31.Google Scholar

103. Lawes V.55.4Google Scholar; Keble, 2.240Google Scholar; FLE 2.229.20, 21.Google Scholar

104. Lawes V.55.5Google Scholar; Keble, 2.240Google Scholar; FLE 2.230.1–5.Google Scholar

105. Lawes V.55.7Google Scholar; Keble, 2.242Google Scholar; FLE 2.231.20.Google Scholar

106. Lawes V.55.7Google Scholar; Keble, 2.242,243Google Scholar; FLE 2.231.24–28.Google Scholar

107. Willis, E. David, Calvin's Catholic Christology: The Function of the So-Called Extra Calvinisticum in Calvin's Theology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1966).Google Scholar

108. Lawes V.54.9Google Scholar; Keble, 2.237Google Scholar; FLE 2.226.7–9.Google Scholar

109. Lawes V.55.7Google Scholar; Keble, 2.242,243Google Scholar; FLE 2.231.27,28.Google Scholar

110. Lawes V.55,7,8Google Scholar; Keble, 2.243Google Scholar; FLE 2.232.7,8.Google Scholar

111. Lawes V.55.9Google Scholar; Keble, 2.245Google Scholar; FLE 2.234.4–6.Google Scholar

112. Lawes V.55.9Google Scholar; Keble, 2.245Google Scholar; FLE 2.2.234.13,14.Google Scholar

113. Lawes V.56.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.245Google Scholar; FLE 2.234.29–31.Google ScholarBooty, John, ‘The Spirituality of Participation’, in his Reflections on the Theology of Richard Hooker, pp. 169–84.Google Scholar

114. Lawes V.56.9Google Scholar; Keble, 2.251,152Google Scholar; FLE 2.241.2–5.Google Scholar

115. Lawes V.56.9Google Scholar; Keble, 2.252Google Scholar; FLE 2.241.9–15.Google Scholar

116. Lawes V.56.10Google Scholar; Keble, 2.253Google Scholar; FLE 2.241.22, 23 and 242.5–6.Google Scholar

117. Lawes V.56.10Google Scholar; Keble, 2.253Google Scholar; FLE 2.242.17–26.Google Scholar

118. Lawes V.57.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.256Google Scholar; FLE 2.245.21Google Scholar; cf. Grislis, Egil, ‘Martin Luther's Concern with the Numinous in the Lord's Supper’, Consensus: A Canadian Lutheran Journal of Theology 30.2 (2005), pp. 35–53.Google Scholar

119. Lawes V.57.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.256, 257Google Scholar; FLE 2.245.29.30.Google Scholar

120. Lawes V.57.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.257Google Scholar; FLE 2.245.34–246.7.Google Scholar

121. Lawes V.57.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.257Google Scholar; FLE 2.246.13–20.Google Scholar

122. Lawes V.59.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.262Google Scholar; FLE 2.251.21–28.Google Scholar

123. Lawes V.59.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.263Google Scholar; FLE 2.252.5–9.Google Scholar

124. Lawes V.59.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.263Google Scholar; FLE 2.252.15–22.Google Scholar

125. Lawes V.60.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.264,265Google Scholar; FLE 2.254.4–9.Google Scholar

126. Lawes V.60.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.264Google Scholar; FLE 2.254.5–8.Google Scholar

127. Lawes V.60.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.265Google Scholar; FLE 2.255.5–10.Google Scholar

128. Lawes V.60.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.266Google Scholar; FLE 2.255.11.Google Scholar

129. Lawes V.60.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.267Google Scholar; FLE 2.256.22–23.Google Scholar

130. Lawes V.60.5Google Scholar; Keble, 2.269Google Scholar; FLE 2.258.21–27.Google Scholar

131. Lawes V.60.6Google Scholar; Keble, 2.270, 271Google Scholar; FLE 2.259.28–262.5.Google Scholar

132. Lawes V.67.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.348Google Scholar; FLE 2.330.14–17.Google Scholar

133. Lawes V.67.1Google Scholar; Keble, 2.348Google ScholarFLE 2.331.5–16.Google Scholar

134. Lawes V.67.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.349Google Scholar; FLE 2.331.19–24.Google Scholar

135. Lawes V.67.2Google Scholar; Keble, 2.349Google Scholar; FLE 2.331.30–35.Google Scholar

136. Lawes V.67.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.350Google Scholar; FLE 2.332.7–9.Google ScholarPayne, John B., Erasmus: His Theology of the Sacraments (Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1970), p. 144.Google Scholar

137. Lawes V.67.3Google Scholar; Keble, 2.350Google Scholar; FLE 2.332.20–22.Google Scholar

138. Lawes V.67.4Google Scholar; Keble, 2.351Google Scholar; FLE 2.334.5–8.Google Scholar

139. Lawes V.67.5Google Scholar; Keble, 2.352Google Scholar; FLE 2.334.11–18.Google Scholar

140. Lawes V.67.4Google Scholar; Keble, 2.351Google Scholar; FLE 2.333.10–12.Google Scholar

141. Lawes V.67.6Google Scholar; Keble, 2.352Google Scholar; FLE 2.334.30–32.Google Scholar

142. Lawes V.67.6Google Scholar; Keble, 2.355Google Scholar; FLE 2.336.6–10.Google Scholar

143. Lawes V.67.7Google Scholar; Keble, 2.355Google Scholar; FLE 2.336.5–15.Google Scholar Cf. also V.67.11; Keble, 2.358Google Scholar; FLE 2.339.7–340.1.Google Scholar

144. Grislis, Egil, ‘Reflections on Richard Hooker's Understanding of the Eucharist’Google Scholar, in Kirby (ed.), Richard Hooker and the English Reformation, pp. 207–23.Google Scholar However, it is also possible that Hooker's choice was further influenced by his reliance on a text, attributed to Cyprian but in actuality authored by Arnold, Abbot of Boneneval of the twelfth century, see Booty, John E., ‘Hooker's Understanding of the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist’Google Scholar, in idem. (ed.), The Divine Drama in History and Literature: Essays in Honor of Horton Davies on his Retirement from Princeton University (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1984), pp. 131–48.Google Scholar

145. Cf. Egil Grislis with the assistance of Stafford, John K., ‘Richard Hooker: A Selected Bibliography’Google Scholar, in Kirby (ed.), Richard Hooker and the English Reformation, pp. 298–318.Google Scholar The Companion to Richard Hooker (ed. Kirby, W.J. Torrance, to be published by Brill in Leiden in 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, will contain an updated version by Grislis and Stafford.

146. The observation is brilliantly presented by Booty, John E., in The Folger Library Edition of The Works of Richard Hooker (gen. ed. Hill, W. Speed; Vol. 6, 1 and 2, ed. W. Speed Hill, with the assistance of Egil Grislis; Binghamton, NY: Medieval & Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1993), pp. 183–231.Google Scholar