views that sometimes came to carry semi-official status; the most famous was Richard Hooker (c. 1554-1600). When the eight books of his Laws ofEcclesiastical Polity were first printed together in 1662, edited for anti-Laudian ends by the new Bishop of Exeter, John Gauden, Book VII's endorsement of episcopacy in other than divine right terms and Book VIII's constitutional restrictions on monarchy were embarrassments. Hooker's work was therefore republished in 1666 on the instructions of Archbishop Gilbert Sheldon, this version re-edited by Isaak Walton, prefaced by a new life of Hooker and containing prominent editorial doubts as to the authenticity of the last three books. Hooker himself had looked charitably on non-episcopal churches and had not denied the validity of their orders, but his work could now be read as that of a Caroline High Churchman, insisting that civil and ecclesiastical authority were linked because they were equally communicated by divine appointment. After the Restoration Hooker enjoyed his greatest vogue, hailed by churchmen as an antidote to the new phenomenon of separated denominations of Protestant Dissenters on the strength of his demolition of the old Puritan claim to a right of private judgement.
To justify the role of the prince in non-Roman churches, Hooker had implicitly ignored the Apostolic succession and argued instead that 'Truth of Religion is the proper difference whereby a Church is distinguished from other Politique societies of men'. If the church was not separately grounded on its Apostolicity, it could follow that church and state were the same: 'We hold that seeing there is not any man of the Church of England but the same man is also a member of the Common-wealth; not any, member of the Common-wealth, which is not also of the Church of England', whether one called the body a church or a commonwealth was determined by 'chance'.8 Having made that anti-papal point, Hooker had then said little about the rest of the issues that were later to be subsumed under the question of'establishment'. Others now did so for him.
A High Church ecclesiology was clearly defined between about 1660 and 1725 by the need to respond to two powerful threats: Protestant and Roman Catholic Dissent. The first of these was the major challenge in the 1660s and 1670s, in the aftermath of the sectarianism of the interregnum. Simon Patrick, later Bishop of Ely, provided one among many critiques of schism that identified the key points at issue: private conscience, unlicensed ministry, extemporary prayer and pretences to personal revelation. Against them he advanced a defence of Apostolical ordinations and the lawfulness of the official regulation of things indifferent.9 Archbishop Sheldon's chaplain, Samuel Parker, later Bishop of Oxford, provided an influential restatement, commissioned by Sheldon, of
Was this article helpful?