Hooker's theology permeates everything about who we are as Anglicans, and how we approach the life of faith in the way that we do. His work is as relevant today as it was in the 16th century, and his arguments find echoes in many of the conflicts we have today in the Church.
To give you a bit of necessary history, you may recall that the English Reformation began with Henry VIII wanting a divorce, and breaking away from Rome to get it. That unleashed a bloody purge of the church in England, and a backlash after he died from his daughter, Mary, who attempted to re-establish Roman Catholicism. She did not live long enough to succeed.
When Mary's half-sister, Elizabeth, became Queen, the new monarch sought an end to religious conflict while preserving the Church of England as independent from Rome. Her solution was the "Elizabethan Compromise," inscribed in the Articles of Religion – or "39 Articles." You can find the articles beginning page 867 of the Book of Common Prayer. The articles, for their time, were a barebones statement of faith and church polity that left much to the eye of the interpreter.
Elizabeth looked to a brilliant priest, Richard Hooker, to give theological teeth to the English Reformation. He wrote eight books, The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, in which he fleshed out a “middle way” between radical Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. His theology became known after his lifetime as the “three-legged stool.” The metaphor was meant to symbolize Hooker's method of how to examine theological questions; such issues should be examined by looking at Scripture, Reason and Tradition. No question should be examined separately or in a vacuum.
Implicit in Hooker's method was that ambiguity could be the result, and successive generations might come to a new result. Even so, Hooker's method was inherently conservative; change was not to be taken lightly or done hastily. Scripture should be interpreted through the lens of reason and experience, and tested against the long tradition of the Church. Hooker came up not with a straight highway, but a curvy road with shoulders on each side.
His masterpiece, The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, is not an easy read. I do not recommend it for bedtime devotional reading. The first four books were published in 1594, and fifth in 1597. The final three books were published after his death. I have two copies, both rare, including a copy published in 1632 that contains all eight books.
Hooker argued that the church was not dependent on governments and monarchs, but was alive in the faith of the people. He maintained that Christianity is knit together by two sacraments -- baptism and eucharist.
His interpretation of sacraments cut through the morass of medieval arguments; he maintained that the question was not how the bread and wine are changed, but how we are changed by receiving the bread and wine. "The real presence of Christ's most precious Body and Blood is not to be sought for in the Sacrament, but in the worthy receiver of the Sacrament," he wrote.
Hooker saw bishops as instruments of unity, but he also argued that bishops had no other purpose but ministry to their people. When they cease to serve ministry, they cease to serve as instruments of unity.
Such views may seem commonplace now, but we radical notions in his day. It is a measure of his success that many of his views still underpin who we are as Episcopalians and Anglicans.
The Collect for the day sums it up well:
O God of truth and peace, you raised up your servant Richard Hooker in a day of bitter controversy to defend with sound reasoning and great charity the catholic and reformed religion: Grant that we may maintain that middle way, not as a compromise for the sake of peace, but as a comprehension for the sake of truth; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
1 comment:
"Hooker saw bishops as instruments of unity, but he also argued that bishops had no other purpose but ministry to their people. When they cease to serve ministry, they cease to serve as instruments of unity."
When the actions and lifestyle of a bishop then sows disunity and schism within the church, should he be removed of the bishopric?
Post a Comment