It was Hooker's intention in Laws to write a document which reflected in its form and content the possibility of a reasonable Church. He believed the Church of England to be such a Church. He argued that the polity and liturgy of the Church was defined, enlivened, and sustained through God's presence and work through the sacraments. As toe find in the Laws, the sacraments were critically important points of real mystical contact with God. This insight is reflected in his exposition of the relation of the sacraments to the Church and Christian life, and in the architecture of Laws itself.

A system of theology is constructed of numerous parts which fit together to make a coherent, clear whole. The focus of this study will be to ask how sacramental theology fits into Hooker's systematic work, of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity.[1] Laws is not a Thomistic Summa; rather, it is a systematic ecclesiology. We can isolate within this ecclesiology a section on the sacraments of the Church (V.5O-68). It is, therefore, legitimate to ask how these chapters function with regard to the overall architecture of the work in order to understand Hooker's sacramental theology. The basic argument here will be one of concentric circles; that is, that within Book V, Hooker's sacramental theology serves as the inner core of Book V, which McGrade has argued to be the hinge of Laws itself.[2] Inevitably when considering the structural aspects of a work, the question of overall coherence is raised. The history of criticism of Laws includes extended debate on its coherence. I am persuaded that there is both a structural and conceptual coherence in Laws, and assume that to be the case in this discussion. The argument here is for the centrality of the sacraments, viewed systematically, within Laws for its coherence.

Whether this work is polemical or apologetic is still an open question. It appears to be both. Clearly, Hooker was engaging in the debate of his time over the course and structure of the Elizabethan Church of England. He did have polemical concerns.[3] However, the often vitriolic quality of the previous generation is absent from Hooker's work. He wrote within the context of a public debate with the Puritan wing of the Church of England who wanted the church to extend and deepen its reforms in the direction of the Genevan REformation.[4] The development of Laws and its use escaped Hooker in the end, and this reality certainly affected the architecture of the argument of the treatise and its content. As Hill observes, observes,

The Laws, then, had begun as a vindication of Hooker and Hooker's church against the Attacks by Travers at the Temple upon his integrity as a scholar and teacher; it took the form of a systematic treatise on the polity and practices of the church as a whole; but it ultimately became subordinate to the demands of an essentially political controversy.[5]

Therefore, in the history of the study of this work, there have been those, e.g., kearney[6] and Troeltsch,[7] who have argued that Laws, taken on the whole, lacks coherence. There are others, e.g., McGrade and Luoma, who argue that there is a structural coherence to the work.

Luoma argues his perspective from the standpoint of the agenda set by Thomas Cartwright. That is, Laws is seen expressly as a response to a pre-determined set of questions, issues, and arguments raised by the Puritans against the practice and structure of the Church of England and its relationship to the Crown. McGrade's[8] structural analysis, on the other hand, both acknowledges Hooker's audience/antagonists, and implies a clearer degree of independent thought and agenda on the part of Hooker in terms of what he has to say. That is, rather than being solely or principally a polemical piece, as implied in the Luoma structure, McGrade examines Laws as also, and perhaps even principally, an apologetic work. From McGrade's perspective, Laws can be seen as an attempt to present to the Puritans a rational explanation of why, on the one hand, the Puritans may not (have to) agree with the Church of England, but on the other hand, why there is no rational reason why they either cannot accept or must oppose the Church of England.[9]

Luoma has argued that the specific major influence on the structure of Laws is Thomas Cartwright.[10] Luoma cites three charges leveled by Cartwright againts the Church of England in his Reply to an Answer:

The offences whych are taken herein / by eyther in respecte of the cause / or in respecte of those / whych seek to defende / and promote the cause. The cause is charged first with newnes / and strangenes then I as author of confusion and disorder / and last of all as enemy to princes / magistrates / and commonwealths. [emphases added][11]

Hooker's seven assertions about the Church are organized around Cartwright's three charges. Before addressing Cartwright directly, Hooker establishes who his audience is in Laws, Preface. He also establishes the operative understanding of his organizing principle, law, in Laws 1. Hooker addresses the argument for the restoration of the primitive Church in Laws II and III. Laws IV and V respond to the charges that the polity and practice of the Church of England has been corrupted with "confusion and disorder" and "with manifold popish rites and ceremonies."[12] Laws VI-VIII address the third charge regarding the proper relationship between Church and state. This schema focuses clearly the polemical dimension of Laws. [13]

McGrade delineates a tripartite structure of Laws: Books I-IV, Book V,and Books VI-VIII.[14] The first part of Laws addresses the philosophical and theological grounding for the discussion of the Church in Book V and the relationship between Church and Crown in Books Vl-VIII.I would argue that McGrade, although primarily working on the level of the juridical, viz., of law or structure, more clearly presents a progressive coherence of Laws which is grounded both in Hooker's own words[15] and McGrade's perception of how the three parts of the work are intentionally inter-related by Hooker. The structure of Laws is linked to the fundamental concept which is Hooker's focus: law (and order). He contends that Hooker understands law and order in the ecclesiastical and secular worlds to be related. For its part, religion provided for the best order, or at least contributed to the best possible order of the commonwealth. Here, Hooker cites the polemic against the Puritans, who, for religious reasons argue that religion in general, and the Church in particular, properly have no special place within the world. Arguing at the juridical level, McGrade seeks to demonstrate that the properly ordered Church, according to Hooker, shapes a properly ordered society. In this scheme, McGrade sees that the Church is a microcosm of society and the commonweal of both Church and society are intimately linked by Hooker. Thus, from the structural point of view, the goal of Book V and Books VI-VIII are particular applications in the real world of the basic philosophical and theological foundations established in Books l-IV. In this structure, Book V provides the hinge precisely as the particular application of the theological structure of law grounded in God within the Church of England, and as an application to a society of men and women, who by their nature must be structured in an effective and appropriate way which promotes the greatest good for the society as a whole. Books VI-VIII, then, are the application of these same principles to the realm of society, Parliament and Crown, which Hooker understands, in the case of England to be co-terminus to the society of the Church of England.

Hooker defends the Church of England as a reformed Catholic Church[16] in such a way that the apologetical aspect of this work is especially reinforced and tempered by this profound commitment to reason and persuasion. The conciliatory approach which is encountered in Laws, Preface, and throughout the work, is genuine. In this approach we see the intersection in Hooker's thought on the operation of rational law and its consequent operative effect of order. Law defines the manner of order. Rational persuasion, discussion, and examination can and ought to enable all parties to reach consensus on the most proper and rational polity for the Church. In Hooker's mind, the most reasonable praxis and polity of the Church is found in the Church of England.

In sum, Luoma and McGrade provide two viable ways of seeing the coherence of Laws[17] which also enable the evaluation of the place of sacrament and sacramental theology in this work. Luoma makes clear the polemical aspect of Laws, aligning the structure and argument with the charges put by Cartwright. McGrade's structural perspective shows more clearly Hooker's apologetical concerns, allowing Hooker's own agenda and concerns to be seen more clearly. That is, Hooker was not merely engaged in a polemical refutation of Puritan charges. He was concerned at least equally, if not more so, with a positive and constructive presentation (defense) of the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Church of England, as well as a proper theological understanding of the relationship between Church and State.[18] Within the historical context of Laws, the polemical and apologetic dimensions of Laws are inseparable, though distinct. The sacraments were certainly a major focus of debate. Luoma provides a lens for seeing Hooker's response to the Puritan charge of papist tainting of the doctrine, discipline, and worship, focused in the sacraments and public worship as well as in terms of the question of Church and State. From the structural analysis of McGrade, one can see the fundamentally constitutive place of sacraments and sacramental theology in Hooker's ecclesiology and the Church-State issue as they emerge from the principles established in Laws I-IV.

Three further notes must be made. First, the sources to which Hooker appealed need to be kept in mind. Secondly, we must remember that while Hooker's active adult life as a priest was during the peak of the Renaissance of the Elizabethan era, he was nonetheless a product of a medieval mindset and spiritual formation.[19] Thirdly, in Laws Hooker renders what is generally accepted as the classical articulation of Anglican theological method which is characterized by the via media and the triad of Scripture, Tradition, and Reason.[20]

Hooker's sources, aside from contemporary points of reference and Scripture, are essentially patristic.[21] Just as Cranmer was particularly fond of citing Chrysostom, Hooker frequently cites Augustine, Cyprian, and Tertullian. Methodologically, he generally cites his sources at some length, avoiding mere proof-texting for his argument. Hooker seems clearly to have valued establishing an adequate context for his citations, though this is not to deny that he used them to further his argument. Significant marginalia in this regard are found in Hooker's hand in the MSS. The consequence of his having been so steeped in patristic thought is especially important for his understanding and use of figurative language and concepts. It is further noteworthy that Hooker demonstrates a remarkable sense of history in his understanding and use of historical sources. His sense of historical development and change at least suggest (even if only in nascent form) a critical concept of history. The Fathers, for example, are authoritative, but they are not the last word. one cannot simply transfer literally what they said and did into the present. Hooker also applies this principle to Scripture. Therefore, the Tradition itself must be understood as developmental and open-ended. History, Scripture, and Tradition, when employed rationally, are essential resources for guidance in the present. However, they are not, when properly understood and used, confining shackles for the present. As Hooker perceives the Church's history, it is natural and reasonable for the Church to adopt a polity and praxis which is consistent with Scripture and emerging needs and understandings of the Church in the present.[22] Hooker insists upon intellectual responsibility and integrity in this adaptive process. It is through the rational analysis of the interplay of Tradition, viz., the ongoing, living reality of the Church with Scripture (the Ur-text) that one is able to discern both what the Church is and how it is to be structured.

Thus, the development of the form of polity of the Church of England, to the extent that it was not contrary to Scripture and was consistent with Tradition, and met the perceived needs of the times as discerned through the Holy Spirit, was a legitimate and orthodox polity. This consistent methodology lends an overall coherence to Laws insofar as it provides a consistent criteria by which each issue is examined and evaluated. Implicitly, therefore, Hooker points to both a formal and real connection among the issues raised by the Puritans and among the issues of his own agenda. The matter under consideration are not merely discrete unrelated units. Hooker's methodology reinforces the structured and therefore orderly relationship proper to and among matters of law and order as reflected at the levels of the person, the Church, and society. Christianity in general, and the Church in particular, are living, developing realities. This absence of intellectual rigidity lends an important fluidity and flexibility to Hooker's method and commitment to reason and the truth.[23]

Like Cranmer, Hooker's primary methodological and hermeneutical paradigm is that of Scripture, Tradition, and Reason.[24] These three aspects of Christianity, held together in dialectical tension, are the ground for Hooker's rejection of the Puritan demand that what the Church does and how it is organized must be explicitly found in Scripture. Hooker understands that Scripture does not exist in isolation; there can be no sofa scriptura.[25] While denying that Scripture can or ought to be the only canon for validity of the teaching, praxis, or polity of the Church, it is, nonetheless, the primary authority. What one requires and maintains must be consistent with Scripture. Hooker is emphatic that one cannot be required to believe or hold as necessary anything which is not scriptural, e.g., the acceptance of transubstantiation as necessary for salvation.

The concept of order and its implementation in law form the framework within which Hooker addresses the issues at hand. It is beyond the scope of this study to discuss in detail Hooker's concept and understanding of order and law. However, we do need to understand that more than mere legalism is at stake. order and law are rational, social, and theological matters. In Book 1, Hooker "lays the foundations upon which he built his political system.... It is an acknowledged fact that at the heart of the controversy between Hooker and the Presbyterians lay the polemical question concerning the constitution and government of the Church."[26] What Hooker understands to be the very means through which the Church (and hence its members) are most fully able to fulfill their vocations is precisely what the Puritan wing finds to be the greatest obstacle. Hooker sees law and polity functioning for the person, Church, and society with the same power and sacredness as the Law of Moses (and subsequent Hebrew religious laws, e.g., dietary laws) functioned within the ancient Hebrew religion and culture. They were at once both the means of engraced contact between God and human, and the reasonable product of the experience of relationship with God.

L. S. Thornton points out the Thomistic influence of the first principle of law in Book I: God is the ground and source of all law; and, God functions within the context of laws which God first established in absolute freedom for God's self.[27] Hooker, therefore, defines law as, "That which cloth assign unto each thing the kind, that which cloth moderate the force and power, that which cloth appoint the form and measure, of working, the same we term a Law."[28] There are three classes of laws: natural law, which governs the non-voluntary agents of creation, animate and inanimate (Laws I.3), celestial law, the law of angels (Law I.4), and human law (Laws I.5-15).[29] Under the category of human law, we find three further classifications: moral law of reason (Laws I.6-9), supernatural or Scriptural law (Laws I.11-15), and positive human law (=civil and criminal law on national and international levels; Laws I.10). Ecclesiastical polity is in the class of human laws and is addressed in detail in Laws III and IV.[30]

Hooker's architecture of the discussion of sacraments in Laws gives some insight into the proper interpretation of both his ecclesiology and his sacramental theology. Clearly, the foundation upon which Hooker's polity is built is law. Grounded in the medieval understanding, the initial locus of law, order, and chaos is cosmological. The cosmos exists in and because of God. Law is the absolutely free structuring of reality on the divine level, and subsequently on the human level, which creates and maintains order over against chaos. This is the absolutely critical and essential function of law. Within human society, law, properly constructed and employed, reflects the natural order of the cosmos, and ultimately the order within God. Law itself, therefore, is a fundamental link with God; its ground and meaning is profoundly theological, and only derivatively, juridical.

We see that Hooker maintains a profoundly positive understanding of law. At every level, including the ecclesiastical, the purpose and meaning of law is found in its capacity to order reality properly and protect it from dissolution into chaos. only through such proper order can creation in general and the Church in particular reflect the order of God and fulfill the divine purpose for both. Therefore, a proper polity is necessary for the Church. As we shall see, the sacraments function within the proper polity as an essential component.

In the discussion in Book V on the ordering of the Church's public liturgical life, especially in Baptism and Eucharist, we come to realize that law and polity are multi-dimensional, possessing a concrete reality and a a symbolic and metaphysical reality for Hooker. With regard to the Church, ecclesiastical polity is the manner of properly structuring the Church in order for it to achieve in general, and here specifically through the sacraments, the greatest degree of similitude to Christ and therefore, fulfill its purpose.[31] Law and polity, in whatever form, are never ends in themselves. They are always and only vehicles for the journey Godward.

Within the Church, a sacrament is celebrated by the gathered people of God, lay and ordained, and is an explicit act of faith which effects what it signifies. Hooker is emphatic that it is essential for a sacrament to manifest, effect, and sustain the active relationship between God and God's people, and the relationships among God's people.[32] A fundamental effect of the Eucharist is the unity of the people as Body of Christ. From the understanding of the sacraments as effective, Hooker criticizes, therefore, those who regard them as merely instructional tools.[33]

Hooker's theological concept of a sacrament is found in the "Articles of Religion" and in the spirit of the definition which was first formally stated in the Catechism of the Book of Common Prayer (1604):

Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they be certain witness, and effectual signs of grace, and God's good will towards us, by the which he cloth work invisibly in us, and cloth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in him (Art. XXV).

The Sacraments are outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual grace, given by Christ as sure and certain means by which we receive that grace ("Catechism," BCP, 1604).[34]

Hooker develops the definition of sacrament in Laws. He clearly regards sacraments as essential and necessary to the Christian Church.

Instruction and prayer whereof wee have hitherto spoken are duties which serve as elements parses or principles to the rest that followe, in which number the sacraments of the Church are chiefe. The Church is to us that verie mother [Gal. 4:26] of' our new birth in whose bowels wee are all bread, at whose brestes wee receyve nourishment. As many therefore as are apparentlie to our judgment born of God, they have the seede of theire regeneration by the ministries of the Church, which useth to that ende and purpose not only the word but the sacramentes, both having generative force and vertue. As oft as wee mention as sacrament properlie understood (for in the writings of the ancient fathers all articles which are peculiar to Christian faith, all duties of religion conteigninge that which sense of natural! reason cannot of it selfe descerne are most commonly called sacraments) our restraint of the word to some fewe principal! divine ceremonies importeth in everie such ceremonie two "hinges, the substance of the ceremonie it selfe which is visible, and besides that somewhat els more secret in reference whereunto wee conceive the ceremonie to be a sacrament. For wee all admire and honor the holie sacramentes, not respecting so much the service which wee do unto God in receivinge them, as the dignitie of that sacred and secret guift which we thereby receave from God.[35]

The sacraments are effective of the grace they signify, the "matter whereof they consist is such as signifieth, figureth, and representeth theire ende." The necessity of a sacrament is known only through the discernment of the grace effected. The grace effected sacramentally, in the end, is precisely the "grace that worketh salvation." "Sacramentes are the powerful! instruments of God to eternal! life."[36]

In Laws V.50-68, Hooker situates the sacraments carefully within a larger theological scheme. The first eight chapters devoted to the sacraments define them within the eternal economy of salvation as a constitutive part.[37] Therefore, in the theological stucture of Hooker's thinking, the proper starting place for doing sacramental theology as such is to demonstrate that God the Father is the author of the Sacraments which he gives in the Church through Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. As gift of God, the sacraments are part of the ordering of God's relationship with the Church. The sacraments are part of ecclesiastical law and polity which reveal the structure of the economy of salvation and, therefore, are reasonable and reflect God's reasonableness.

The proof of God's commitment to the salvation of humanity through God's self-gift (not merely something about God) is ultimately demonstrated in the Incarnation.[38] The Incarnation may be understood, therefore, as the Ur-sakrament interpreted in orthodox Chalcedonian terms.[39] The purpose of the Incarnation is soteriological. Christ, as Risen Lord, is omnipresent, but not corporally present. He is especially present in the Church, which is his body, and particularly in the sacraments, through which the Church and Christ participate in one another's life. For the human person, being a part of the Church and participating in the sacraments is necessary for participation in the life of Christ.[40] It is precisely this sacramental participation which effects participation in salvation.

The architectural location of the sacraments within Laws V might at first glance appear minor. Certainly in a four-volume work, to devote only eighteen chapters of the longest volume to the sacraments seems to suggest that Hooker did not regard the sacraments as being of central importance. Such a reading, however, misleads. Hooker's understanding of sacrament is a piece of his total understanding of the nature of God, Christology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. Thus Hooker writes at the beginning of his consideration of the sacraments:

For as our naturall life consisteth in the union of the bodies with the soule; so our life supernaturall in the union of the soul with Cod. And for as much as there is no union of God with man without the meane between both which is both, it seemeth requisite that we first consider how God is in Christ, then how Christ is in us, and how the sacraments doe serve to make us pertakers of Christ. In other things wee may be more brief, but the weight of these requireth largeness.[41]

Therefore, Hooker begins with God to trace these relationships in a logical, rational, and intelligible manner.[42] His methodology is to consider the matters at hand in terms of the triad of Scripture, Tradition, and Reason. This triad, which is often associated with Anglican theological method is not original to Anglicanism. Anglicanism has, however, especially appropriated it as the primary paradigm for doing theological work. We must also note that this methodological framework is a hermeneutical principle. Christian faith has meaning precisely as it is experienced and interpreted in relationship to the content and methods of Scripture, Tradition, and Reason, taken all together.

Hooker addresses the sacrament of Baptism and related issues first. Clearly related to Baptism is the one chapter on Confirmation after Baptism.[43] The esse of Baptism is the Trinitarian formula and water. Anything else may be of the bene esse at most. The important thing is that the sacrament effects the grace of forgiveness of sins and incorporation into the Body of Christ (= Christ's life). The necessity of Baptism for Hooker rests in the simple fact that Christ requires it of us (Mt. 28. 18-20). He notes that even the Pelagians baptized and acknowledged that Baptism was necessary to enter the Kingdom of God.[44] Hooker affirms Baptism by desire, the possibility of receiving real grace outside Baptism, and that infant baptism is valid on the grounds that the state of birth, especially into a Christian family, presumes that "faithful parentage is holie from the verie birth."[45]

The sacrament of Baptism is rightly discussed within an ecclesiology because at its heart, Baptism is an ecclesial matter. on this basis, citing various Fathers,[46] Hooker argues for the validity, in an emergency of Baptism administered by any Christian who does what the Church intends with water and the Trinitarian formula. Indeed, contra Calvin and the Genevan school, Hooker explicitly, and at length, argues for the validity of Baptism administered by a woman.[47]

The topics which Hooker discusses under Baptism and Eucharist are parts of a whole which is characterized by a mutual participation of each part in and with the other. The range of consideration is from the purely theological to the very pragmatic. There is no apparent tension in this range. Rather, for Hooker, to the extent that things theoretical and things practical are interrelated, they have a legitimate place in the discussion. We are dealing with a living, practiced faith in which praxis and theology are opposite sides of the same coin.

The Eucharist is the means through which the new life entered into through Baptism is sustained and enabled to grow and develop. Through the Eucharist, the faithful are fed on the Body and Blood of Christ. Hooker understands that Christ is truly and really present in the sacrament, but emphatically not in any corporal manner whatever.

I see not which waie it should be gathered by the woordes of Christ when and where the bread is the bodie or the cup is the blood but onlie in the verie harte and soule of him which receaveth them. As for the sacramentes they reallie exhibit, but for ought wee can gather out of that which is written of them they are not reallie nor do reallie conteine in them selves that grace which with them or by them it pleaseth God to bestowe.[48]

Hooker evidences his indebtedness to the Fathers in his symbolic or figurative understanding of Christ's real presence.[49] "The fruite of the Eucharist is the participation of the bodie and blood of Christ.... who thereby imparteth him selfe even his whole intire person as a mysticall head unto everie soule that receiveth him. . . ."[50] The justification and necessity of the sacrament in Hooker's mind is that Christ commanded that this be done, gave it as promise of his continued presence in the Church and to the faithful, and that is sufficient. Precisely how this is effected is not Hooker's question.

But seeinge that by openinge the serverall opinions which have bene held, they are growen (for outh I can see) on all sides at the lengthe to a general agreement, concerning that which alone is materiall, Namelye thee reall participation of Christe and of life in his bodie and bloode by means of this sacrament, wherefore should the world continewe still distracted, and rent with so manyfold contentions, when there remainethe now no controversie savinge onlie about the subjecte where Christ is? . . . All thinges considered and compared with that successe, which truth hathe hitherto had, by so bitter conflictes with errours in this point, shall I wishe that men would more give them selves to meditate with silence what wee have by the sacrament, and lesse to dispute of the manner how?[51]

Hooker's focus is on the sacrament as a whole. He acknowledges, addresses, but attempts to avoid, becoming entangled in the divisive morass of what he regards as unfruitful particulars such as a "consecratory moment or the details of the theologies of' transubstantiation and consubstantiation (both of which he rejects), but without denying absolutely the possibility of either. The grace of the Eucharist is not effected or localized in a particular part of the liturgy. The whole sacramental celebration necessarily includes both the presence of the faithful and the receiving of the sacrament by the faithful.[52]

This ecclesiological orientation grounds an understanding of sacrament as communal and participatory. Hooker maintains that God has always intended to give God's self to humanity, "oure beinge in Christ by eternal! foreknowledge saveth us not without our actuall and real adoption into the fellowship of his sainctes in this present world."[53] We are adopted into the Church through Baptism.[54] Therefore, to be in Christ is to be in community. The symbol of the vine and branches explains what it means to participate in the life of Christ through baptism.[55] The identity of the Church as the Body of Christ is so complete, that Hooker appeals to the making of Eve from the rib of Adam as an old Testament analog for the relationship between Christ and the Church. "For which cause the wordes of Adam may be fitlie the wordes of Christ concerninge his Church, Flesh of my flesh and bone of my bones, a true native extract out of my bodie."[56]

Hooker casts the critically important relational aspect of the Eucharist in terms of "participation." The notion emphasizes not only God's action, but also that of the community of faith. Loyer correctly underscores the participatory nature of sacrament for Hooker by emphasizing receiving the Eucharist. Presence, and therefore, participation, is always for, to, or in someone or something.[57] This echoes the principle of Thomas Aquinas that "receiving is of the very nature of the sacrament."[58] Hooker's own understanding of participation was broad, yet clear, arguing that insufficient attention was given to the purpose of the Eucharist, participation in the life of Christ. The sacrament was not an end in se, rather it had meaning and effect within the relationship between God and God's people.[59] Hooker's position excludes the more typical Anglican penchant for ambiguity, as he argues in Laws V.67.12 "that the sacrament becomes that which it is meant to be in the use of it, as the faithful receive the body and blood of Christ, transforming them to participate ever more fully in Christ's life, death, and resurrection and continuing work in the world."[60]

Participation is not only the fundamental fruit or grace, but also the essential dynamic of the Christian life.[61] To be Christian is to participate in the Spirit through the Son in the life of the Father, i.e., "that mutuall inward hold of which Christ hath us and wee of him, in such sort that ech passeth other log waie of special! interest propertie and inherent copulation" (Laws 56.1). Thus, the mutual participation is effected and sustained through the bi-polar orientation of the Eucharist. on the one hand, there is the action of the Father in the Son through the Spirit which is redemptive self-gift and expression ad extra to God's children in the Body and Blood of Christ.[62] on the other hand, the action of the Eucharist simultaneously includes faithful reception of the Father's gift and the human movement in faith and grace toward the Father through the Son as expressed in the offering of the symbols of our life and labor, the bread and wine.[63] This mutual, personal encounter of God and human persons crystallizes and effects right-relationship between God and people at the individual and corporate (ecclesial and social) levels.[64] Therefore, the sacraments, particularly the Eucharist, may be understood as the quintessential structure through which right-relationship between God and humanity is effected and maintained.[65] Within this mutual participation, and ultimate union, it is crucial to remember that both the invitation to participate in God's life and the participation itself are grace, as is the capacity of the person to respond.[66]

Therefore, to the extent that one may claim that the sacraments are the center of gravity or core of Laws V, and, with McGrade, that Laws V is the center or hinge of the entire work, then one may also claim with Booty that participation is the key to Hooker's theology in general, and more specifically, to his sacramental theology.[67] The critical texts are found in Laws V.56 and 57.[68] Hooker takes his starting point from the New Testament vocabulary of participation. Booty argues that Hooker rejects the two extremes, viz, theosis (deification) and sungeneia (mere kinship). Hooker's understanding of participation, at least here on earth, is most accurately expressed by koinonia and menein.[69] Thus, Hooker's understanding of participation is as a state of being in communion and community which is dynamic and concrete. Such an understanding is consonant with Cranmer's use of John 6.54 in the Eucharist of the Book of Common Prayer.[70]

Hooker's own conclusion was that presence of Christ in the Eucharist effected participation in Christ. This presence and participation were real and not merely spiritual, and a sine qua non about which Hooker believed there existed a real consensus among Christians, regardless of the form of presence espoused.[71] Hence, it was possible to articulate the meaning of participation as "a reall participation of Christe and of life in his bodie and bloode" (Laws V.67.2). Through the sacrament, Christ is present in the soul of the faithful (Laws V67.2). "The bread and cup are his bodie and bloode because they are causes instrumentall upon the receipt whereof the participation of his body and bloode ensueth" (Laws V.67.5).

Participation, however, does not carry within it a collapse of the divine and human into oneness. There is real, mystical union, but always the necessary distinction between human and divine is maintained. In this understanding, Hooker echoes the ancient understanding of theosis: that we become by grace what God is by nature. That is, through the relationship between God and person, nurtured by the grace of the Eucharist, one is enabled to fulfill one's human nature. From this perspective, we may go beyond Booty's claim that Hooker rejects theosis as a definition of participation. Booty is correct, I think, in arguing that for the earthly process, koinonia and menein are more apt words. However, if one distinguishes between the earthly process of grace, and its final end, then I would argue that theosis or deification[72] are consistent with the spirit and thought of Hooker for our final end. Such is reasonably what he means by the life-long process in which the Eucharist works, "a kind of transubstantiation in US."[73]

The essence of participation, then may be summarized as the real, dynamic, and personal relationship, between God and God's people, effected through Baptism and sustained through the Eucharist. It is a concrete relationship lived in the created world and which is fundamental to the subsequent relationship among people within society. I fence, also, as Loyer observes, participation and real, personal presence are one and the same.[74] However, Hooker makes an essential distinction in this presence of Christ so that it remains intellectually reasonable. He distinguishes the reality of sacramental presence, and corporal presence, which he insists is absent. What he affirms is that sacramental reality is a real, structured and ordered reality, but it is not precisely the same as earthly, created, corporal reality. Nonetheless, Christ's full personal presence as fully divine and fully human can be and is really present in the sacramental reality of the Eucharist.[75]

Out of this understanding of participation, one can see more clearly both the structural and conceptual centrality of the sacraments in Laws. Within a theological and ecclesiological context, Hooker uses the notion of participation to describe the dynamic which, on the civil level issues in a coherent society of law and order, and ecclesially sustains the Body of Christ with the Body of Christ in order that the faithful may live in union with the Father through the Son by the Holy Spirit.[76] The structural order of the State and Church find their most complete paradigm, therefore, in the sacramental structure and order of the Eucharist. Hence the underlying architecture and effect of the sacraments within the economy of salvation is that of the Summary of the Law, "Here what our Lord Jesus Christ saith: thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and all thy soul and all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment, and the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."[77] Here one sees the intersection of the ecclesiastical and civil within a theological framework wherein religion, embodied in the Church, supports and promotes the common good of society as a whole [78]

Within this context, we can come to see the architectural position of the sacraments in Laws. Whether one uses the basic structural designations of Luoma or McGrade, Laws V.50-68 form the heart of Hooker'. ecclesiology, a center of gravity which is consistent with the fundamental principles of law and order which he has established in Laws I-IV.[79] The sacraments are "most necessarie"[80] to the life of the Christian and the Church, making God visible in the world,[81] and through which Christ and the Holy Spirit enter into the soul of a person, in a manner incomprehensible to us. We recognize the same in the sacraments which are God's visible means of communicating God's ineffable blessings.[82] Structurally, Hooker situates the question of Church within the prior questions of a doctrine of God, Christology, and soteriology.

We have only to examine the tables of contents of the books in Laws to see clearly the outline of Hooker's ecclesiology. Secondly, in his specific discussion of the sacraments (Laws V.50-68), Chapters 50-56 begin with and proceed through Christ to the Church to the faithful. only after this discussion does Hooker consider the specific sacraments (V.57 (necessity of the sacraments), V. 58-66 (Baptism), V. 67-68 (Eucharist)). While the discussion of sacraments is relatively short in the overall work, we must not forget the explicit importance Hooker assigned to sacraments and their necessity within the life, and hence, structure, of the Church.[83] Because God is the way God is, and because God's will for us is salvation extended through the Incarnation; and, because through Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit, we come to participate in the life of God, which is to participate in salvation; and, because humans require concrete, sensible vehicles through which to express both this gift of salvation and the means through which we are enabled to participate in the divine life, the Father has given in the Son through the Spirit to his people, in the Church, the sacraments.[84]

Faithful to the Reformed Tradition, Hooker acknowledges only the two dominical sacraments of the Gospels, Baptism and Eucharist. Typically, Hooker does not expend great energy in polemical debate on the number of sacraments. Elsewhere he treats the other five rites in the context of the Articles of Religion.[85]

Through the Sacrament of Baptism, we are brought into the Church. This sacrament of initiation effects both the forgiveness of sin and the grafting of the newly baptized into Christ himself.[86] We become participants in the very life of the Father through Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit.[87] In a manner characteristic of the Patristic period, Hooker's discussion of Baptism is more than three times as long as that of Eucharist This is not because the Eucharist is less important, but that Eucharist has no meaning outside incorporation into the Body of Christ, the Church.[88] Therefore, the primary focus is on initiation into the Church, which pre-supposes the Eucharist as both the logical and necessary sacramental means by which one's life in Christ is sustained.

In the Eucharist,[89] Christ is truly and really present precisely in order to feed the faithful spiritually and thus maintain and deepen life with the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit. This feeding, participation, and communion takes place within the whole act of the Eucharist: offering of bread and wine, thanksgiving for Christ and salvation, receiving the sacrament, and feeding on Christ in one's "heart by faith with thanksgiving."[90] Hooker has, I believe, recovered a broader sense of what constitutes the Eucharist, which had its roots in the Patristic period, and did so in a manner appropriate and intelligible to the Elizabethan Church. He has also intentionally and explicitly moved away from a more exclusive focus on the elements and the objective reality of Christ's presence apart from the ecclesial gathering and liturgical participation. In terms of the sacraments, a characteristic example is Hooker's conception of Christ's presence in the Eucharist which was real, but not corporal. Hooker was not particularly concerned about how Christ was present, but that He was present: "I wishe that men would more given them selves to meditate with silence what wee have by the sacrament, and lesse to dispute of the manner how."[91] Christ's presence was a sine qua non.

In conclusion, the architecture of these sacraments in a properly ordered Church reflects and effects right order. Beginning with the general categories of moral law of reason and supernatural or Scriptural law, Hooker gives an apologia for the polity of the Church of England in the context of polemical concerns vis-a-vis the Puritans. He argues positively and rationally from Scripture and the Fathers. His concerns in ecclesiastical polity are essentially divided into three categories: the general structure of the Church (Laws IV), the definition and praxis of jurisdiction (vis-a-vis Holy orders, Laws VI) and episcopacy (Laws VIII).

Sacraments form the core of Laws V and of the entire work insofar as the sacraments represent the form (law) or order which is explained by sacramental theology, and insofar as sacraments may be seen as the fullest and most nearly perfect expression of law and order on earth. Hence, sacraments are the earthly paradigm, found within the Church, of that structure (law) and effect (order, grace) which is understood (theology) by Hooker as mode and means of our participation in the life of the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit, and therefore, the ecclesial, social, and theological fulfillment of the principles established in Laws l-IV. The dynamic of this paradigm is participation which effects right-relationship between God and God's people and among God's people on earth. Sacraments make explicit the theological dimension of all law and order, viz., sacraments reveal through specific, concrete means the grace already always present in creation. The proper end of law and order, and explicitly so through the sacraments, is union with God which is mutual personal presence and therefore participation. In the end, this mystical union may be termed theosis or deification.

What emerges with regard to the sacraments is how deeply Hooker regarded them to be of the esse of the Church. one may rightly argue that the sacraments are, in terms of the Church's capacity to be and become what God calls it to be and become, the hinge. However the Church may be organized and necessary, one comes into the Church through a sacrament, Baptism. one is sustained in the living of baptismal faith through the sacrament of the Eucharist. Without the sacraments, there is no participation in the life of the Father through the Christ in the Spirit. Therefore, we may conclude that the ecclesial life for which Hooker is arguing is accessed and sustained through the sacraments, and has meaning precisely as sacramental.

The strong emphasis on the importance of the Incarnation is foundational to this concept of the Church and sacrament. The Church, in a general sense and through the particular sacraments, is the explicit mode and means of Christ's presence in the world, and of human access to the Father through the Son in the power of the Spirit, and hence to salvation. To claim for the Church an essentially incarnational nature, is, in effect, to claim that the Church itself is the primary sacrament. We may reasonably conclude, therefore, that Hooker's concern for polity and law is generally sacramental as well. That is, through the earthly means of law and polity, guided and ordered rightly by the Spirit, the Triune God becomes present really and concretely, though not corporally.

Through this rightly ordered Church which, therefore, is most fully able to convey God's grace and presence, the grace of reconciliation and participation in the life of the Father through the Son in the Spirit is made available and effective for God's people. Participation in Christ is specifically realized and sustained through the sacraments which are a part of the right ordering of the Church.

It was Hooker's intention in Laws to write a document which reflected in its form and content the possibility of a reasonable (intellectually acute and responsible) Church. His conviction was that such a Church subsisted in the Church of England in his day. I would argue that he also clearly believed that the vitality of the polity of the Church both liturgically and judicially, was defined, enlivened, and sustained through God's presence and work through the sacraments. The sacraments were for Hooker effective instruments, and therefore, critically important points of real mystical contact with God. He is clearly successful in his attempt in terms of his intention (at least in the possibility of a reasonable Church, even if perhaps not the Church of England), and in developing a sacramental ecclesiology which becomes explicit and focused in the sacraments of Baptism and Eucharist.

[1] Richard Hooker. of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity. 4 vols. The Folger Library Edition, Gen. Ed. W. Speed Hill: Preface, Books l-IV (vol. 1). Ed. by Georges Edelen (1977); Book V (vol. 2). Ed. by W. Speed Hill (1977); Books VI-VIII (vol. 3). Ed. by P. G. Stanwood (1981); Attack and Response (vol. 4). Ed. By John E. Booty (1982). (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press). All citations are from this critical edition and employ its notation: Laws 1.2.3. = Book.chapter.section. General reference hereinafter, Laws.

[2] Cf. Arthur S. McGrade. "The Public and the Religious in Hooker's Polity" Church History 37/4(1968): 404-22; also McGrade, "The Coherence of Hooker's Polity: the Books on Power" Journal of the History of Ideas 24/2(1963): 163-82.

[3] See A Christian Letter (1599) in Attack and Response, vol. 4 of Laws.

[4] Laws I.1ff; see III.1.10. See Hardin Craig. "Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity--First Form" Journal of the History of Ideas 5(1944): 91-104. Craig discusses at some length the editorial influences and different agendas of Hooker's principal sponsors, George Cranmer and Edwin Sandys. As Craig points out, the purposes of Hooker and his sponsors were not always the same, particularly in terms of the polemics within the Church of England. Cranmer and Sandys were far more interested in a clearly skewed polemic than Hooker, who seems to have at least desired to resist any sharp turn right or left, opting for the rout of the via media. Also see W. Speed Hill. "Evolution of Hooker's Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity" in Studies in Richard Hooker, Ed. by W. Speed Hill. (Cleveland: The Press of Case Western Reserve University, 1972) [hereafter, Studies], esp. p. 124, and pp. 132-33 on Hooker's agenda and subsequent development of Laws. Hill discusses the political use to which Laws was submitted by such as Sandys, Cranmer and Burleigh against the Barrowists and Brownists (See pp. 141ff.). Hill's own conclusion concurs with Craig.

[5] Hill. "Evolution of Hooker's Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity" p. 146.

[6] H. F. Kearney. "Richard Hooker: A Reconstruction" Cambridge Journal 5/5 (1952): 300-11.

[7] Ernst Troeltsch. The Social Teaching of the Christian Church. Trans. by Olive Witon. (London: Allen and Unwin; New York: Macmillan, 1931), vol. 2, p. 367.

[8] See Arthur S. McGrade. "The Public and the Religious in Hooker's Polity" Church History 37/4(1968): 404-22 (herein after, "Public and Religious"); and, "The Coherence of Hooker's Polity: the Books on Power" Journal of the History of Ideas 24/2(1963): 163-82 (herein after, "Coherence").

[9] McGrade, "Public and Religious," p. 406.

[10] John K. Luoma. "Restitution or Reformation? Cartwright and Hooker on the Elizabethan Church" Historical Magazine of the Episcopal Church 46(1977): 85-1O6. This influence is further corroborated by the fact that Cartwright is cited more often than any other source in Laws.

[11] Qtd. Luoma p. 90.

[12] Laws VII.5.1.

[13] This constitutes a departure from the conventional form of polemical debate in the sixteenth century. Normally, one responded nearly sentence by sentence, proposition by proposition, vigorously proving one's opponent wrong, and then proclaiming what was correct. This form produced many roundly tedious works marked by unexcelled thoroughness. See Rudolph Almasy, "Richard Hooker's Address to the Presbyterians" Anglican Theological Review 61/4(1979): 462-74.

[14] Cf L. S. Thornton. Richard Hooker: a Study of His Theology. (London: SPCK 1924), ch. 3. Thornton makes a similar structural division and argument for the coherence of Laws.

[15] "I have endeavored throughout the body of this whole discourse, that every former part might give strength unto all that follow, and every later bring some light unto all before. So that if the judgements of men do but hold themselves in suspense as touching these first more general meditations, till in order they have perused the rest ensue; what may seem dark at first will afterwards by found more plain, even as the later particular will appear I doubt not more strong, when the other have been read before." (Laws 1.1.2, qtd. McGrade. "Coherence" p. 165).

[16] See C. W. Dugmore. The Mass and the English Reformers, Part 11. (London: Macmillan, 1958), passim. Dugmore uses the term "reformed Catholic" to denote the ecclesiology of the "Catholic Party" within the Church of England.

[17] Oliver Loyer. L'Anglicanisme de Richard Hooker. (University of Paris III Doctoral Dissertation, 1977), "Conclusions," pp. 940ff. Loyer's conclusions in this dissertation offer another mode of assessing and understanding the coherence of Laws, arguing that it is Hooker's methodology which holds the work together. That is, while there may appear to be incoherence from the perspective of determining the logical links among the topics, issues and arguments, there is nonetheless a real, and characteristically Anglican coherence in terms of the method of examination of the various topics and issues in the form and logic of argumentation. Put graphically, Loyer argues that the important coherence is vertical, within each topic or section, rather than horizontal across the entire work. Thus, he identifies coherence with the consideration of an issue through the lenses of Tradition, Scripture, and Reason, which effects an intellectual coherence throughout the work. In terms of the architectonic question which is raised in this essay, the clear problem with Loyer's conclusion is that it begs the question of"horizontal" structural coherence, and indeed makes the question essentially irrelevant. While this approach has merit insofar as it goes, it does not go far enough. Moreover, it is basically an a-historical view, which is problematic, e.g., when one takes into account both Luoma and McGrade. Booty has also noted this ahistorical problem (See Booty, "Hooker's Understanding of the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist" in The Divine Drama in History and Liturgy. (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1984), pp. 141f., esp. 142 [Hereafter, "Hooker's Understanding of the Presence"]). The strength of Loyer's argument is the correct recognition that essential to Anglicanism is a way of thinking which is consistent, and therefore contributes to the coherence of Laws.

[18] Again, Hardin Craig's article is instructive here. The approaches of Luoma and McCrade enable another view of different agendas operative directly and indirectly in Laws which is consonant with the agenda issues Craig discusses. See Craig. "Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity-First Form" Journal of the History of ideas 5(1944): 91-104.

[19] See E. M. W. Tillyard. The Ehzabethan World Picture. (New York: Vintage Books n.d. [first published, c. 1944]). Tillyard offers a lucid and concise essay on the relationship between the mentality of the middle ages and the Elizabethan era. His thesis is that intellectually, the Elizabethan period was profoundly medieval. of particular relevance to a consideration of Hooker are the notions of chaos and order vis-a-vis Hooker's understanding of law. For Hooker, law was not merely a device for organizing society; it carried symbolic content of order grounded in reason, and ultimately God. The influence of a medieval mentality in Hooker is also seen in his skill as a dialectician, and in the reflection of Thomas Aquinas in his methodology and categories.

[20] See Egil Grislis. "The Hermeneutical Problem in Hooker" in Studies. pp. 159-2O6. Grislis points out two specific hermeneutical problems: subjectivity and the principles of Scriptural interpretation. From the perspectives of these two problems, Grislis discusses throughout the essay the components of this paradigm and its use by Hooker. He particularly focuses on reason, the Puritan charges against the Church of England (and Hooker) and Hooker's response and scriptural exegesis. He concludes, in part, that Hooker's goal and method was to maintain a "careful balance" methodologically and theologically, which was true to Scripture, consonant with reason, and consistent with tradition (p. 195f.). See also John Booty. "Hooker and Anglicanism" in Studies. pp. 207-39 and Olivier Loyer. "Aux origines de [a Theologie anglicane" Irenikon 33/3(196O): 321-43.

[21] At least Hooker believed his sources to be authentically patristic. One notable exception is Laws, V. 67, in which Hooker makes numerous references to a work attributed to Cyprian, De coena Domini. The text referred to is actually taken from a larger work of Arnold of Bonneval (twelfth century abbot of Bonneval) Liber de cardinalibus operibus Christi, cap. VI: De coena Domini, et prima institutione consumantis omnia sacramenta. PL

189:1641-50. The issue is ostensibly one of authorities, but also, for Hooker, one of taking seriously the teaching and experience of the Tradition of the Church as such to be authoritative for the theology and praxis of the Church in one's own time. See John Booty. "Hooker's Understanding of the Presence" p. 14O. The text of Arnold of Bonneval which Hooker used was extensively annotated by the Calvinist humanist, Simon Goulart, a contemporary of Hooker.

[22] See Laws 11.4-6, esp. 4.7;1.14.5;1.15.'3, concept of"things indifferent."

[23] Laws III.1.10. One sees evidence here also of the influence of Augustine and Thomas Aquinas in Hooker's understanding of the role of the intellect (ratio) and its relationship to God Who is Perfect Reason.

[24] Cf. Egil Grislis. "The Hermeneutical Problem in Hooker" in Studies. pp. 159-206.

[25] Laws III.1.2; also III.5.4; II.5.7; II.7; Preface, passim.

[26] Thornton. pp. 25-26.

[27] Ctd. in de Lara p. 382, see p. 385; Laws 1.2. This stance exemplifies an important difference between Hooker and the Presbyterians and the theology of Duns Scotus. Hooker is definitely not anti-intellectual, nor does he share the Reformer's suspicion and contempt for reason, as for example, is found in Luther's Babylonian Captivity of the Church.

[28] Laws 1. 2.1.

[29] Laws 1.2-15;III.

[30] See Laws III.1.14. In this section Hooker discusses diversity and unity within the Church, making provision for both. Hooker's choice of the word "politic" over "government" exemplifies his flexibility and breadth. The "name of Church-politie will better serve, because it conteyneth both government and also whatsoever besides belongeth to the ordering of the Church in publique."

[31] Laws III.1.14.

[32] The ecclesial emphasis is not described by Hooker in terms of "relationship." However, the concept is accurately descriptive of the theology and praxis of the Church of England since 1549. The sacrament as communal was protected by rubric which forbade "Private Masses." The Book of Common Prayer (1549) required that there be "some" other people present. The 1552 and 1559 Prayer Books, which Hooker knew, required "foure or at least three" people.

[33] Laws V.57.1.

[34 see E. J. Bricknell. The Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England, rev. by H.J. Carpenter. (London: Longmans, 1955), pp. 351-67; Book of Common Prayer (16O4) in Liturgicae Britannicae. edited by William Keeling. (London William Pickering, 1842), p. 282.

[35] Laws V.50.1-2

[36] Laws V.50.3.

[37] Hooker's anthropology is essentially positive, echoing Augustine (cf. Laws V.56.7). Hooker is profoundly aware of sin and the effect of alienation or separation of humanity from God because of sin. Contrition is no stranger to Hooker's thought (see John E Booty. "Contrition in Anglican Spirituality: Hooker, Donne and Herbert" in Anglican Spirituality. Ed. by William J. Wolf. [Wilson, CT: Morehouse-Barlow co., Inc., 1982], pp. 25-48).

[38] Laws V.50-52.

[39] Laws V.51; 56; 57.

[40] Laws V.54-57.

[41] Laws V.50.3.

[42] Cf. Loyer. L'Anglicanisme de Richard Hooker. pp. 483-94; 527-37.

[43] Laws V. 66.

[44] Laws V.60..4.

[45] Laws V.60..6. This is also an example of Hooker's positive anthropology.

[46] Laws V.60.-61. Hooker's patristic citations include Leo the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, Cyprian, basil, Irenaeus, Theodoret, Augustine, and Tertullian. He also cites in this regard the medieval theologian, Hugh of St. victor.

[47] Laws V. 62.

[48] Laws V. 67. 6.

[49] Especially in Laws V.67.11. Hooker cites Tertullian, Irenaeus, theodoret, Cyprian/ Arnold of Bonneval, Eusebius, Leo the Great, and Cyril. see also Thornton Richard Hooker. . ., ch. 3.

[50] Laws V.67.6,7.

[51] Laws V.67.2,3; see also V.67.12.

[52] Laws V.67.7ff Hooker is especially concerned about the Eucharist as sacrament of unity. we partake of the Body of Christ to become the Body of Christ ( = the Church) viz., the notion of participation is the operative dynamic of the effect of the sacrament. Cf. Laws V 68. Also see Booty, "Hooker's Understanding of the Presence . . ." cited supra, and Booty, "Richard Hooker," esp, pp. 17-21; and, Loyer. L'Anglicanisme de Richard Hooker. p. 527, Pp. 531-39.

[53] Laws V.56.7.

[54] See Laws III.1.6.

[55] See John 15.5,6.

[56] Laws V.56.7. Cf. Augustine, In Evangelii Johannis XXIV-XXVII, passim, PL, 35 1592-1628.

[57] Loyer cited in Booty. "Hooker's Understanding of the Presence" p. 140.

[58] ST, III.79.7 and 3. See Booty. "Hooker's Understanding of the Presence . . ." p. 140; 142. It is not surprizing, then, that Hooker was drawn to the theology of Cyril of Alexandria who understood the Eucharist as the primary means of mutual participation between Christ and the believer, a participation which transforms the believer.

[59] Laws V.67.5 and V.67.12.

[60] John E. Booty. "Richard Hooker" p. 32.

[61] Laws V.56.1.

[62] Booty. "Richard Hooker." pp. 24-26. Laws 1.7.6; V.56.7.

[63] Loyer. L'Anglicanisme de Richard Hooker. "Cette participation est double, ou plutot elle a deux aspects joints: elle est invitation de Dieu par l'etre cree; mais elle est aussi presence de Dieu dans sa creature et de la creature en Dieu, presence de la cause en son effet et inversement" (p. 669).

[64] Ibid., p. 662.

[65] This parallels the relationship and principles of law (structure) and order (effect) set out in Laws I-IV.

[66] Loyer. Ibid. It permits one to take a view of the mysteries as a whole as mysteries of faith and to see "I'efficacie de ['action redemptive, I'inherence de la grace donee, la reelle possession par l'homme du don divin."

[67] Booty. "Richard Hooker" p. 17 and p. 12. Booty also notes that Laws V follows the outline of the Book of Common Prayer, but focuses on the sacraments. "The sacraments are treated as means toward participation in Christ, which is salvation (V.50.1, 57.5). It is this end which Hooker has in mind throughout the book . . ." (p. 12).

[68] One should note that in this most theological section at the heart of Laws, Hooker rises above the political and polemical whirlwind. There is no mention of the Puritans, not even Thomas Cartwright.

[69] Koinonia focuses on mutual sharing and giving. The term draws on the dimension of primitive religions dealing with the reception of divine power (mana) in eating and drinking. The logical connection with Eucharist is clear. Menein means to abide in, to be in union with, as in Jesus' expression of "l in you and you in me" (Jn. 6.54). It connotes not only the relationship between the Father and the Son, but also of that between the faithful who do Christ's work and the Father through Christ. See Booty, "Richard Hooker" p. 18.

[70] Booty, "Richard Hooker" p. 18.

[71] Booty. "Hooker's Understanding of the Presence" p. 131. See also Laws V.67.2, 5, and 12.

[72] Theosis is not Hooker's vocabulary. He does use the terms deification and divinization, which are consonant with the vocabulary of St. Augustine, whose works he knew. See Laws 1.5.1-2, 11. See also, John Booty. "The Judicious Mr. Hooker and Authority in the Elizabeth Church" in Authority in the Anglican Communion. Ed. by Stephen Sykes. (Toronto: Anglican Book Center, 1987), p. 108; and, Booty, "Richard Hooker" pp. 18-19 and Laws V.54.5, 56.2 and 3.

[73] Laws V.67.l11 See also, Laws V.56.10. See Booty. "Hooker's Understanding of the Presence" pp. 136ff. for discussion of the Eucharist as instrumental cause of participation.

[74] Loyer. L'Anglicanisme de Richard Hooker. pp. 535-37.

[75] "For the person of Christe is whole, perfect and God and perfect man wheresoever, although the parts of his manhoode beinge finite and his dietie infinite wee cannot say that the whole of Christ is simplie every where . . ." (Laws V.55.7). See also, Booty. "Hooker's Understanding" pp. 133f See Laws V.55, esp. sec. 7; cf. V.56.9, 53.1, and 54.5.

[76] Both the Church and civil society are societies of human persons. Hooker conceives of them as intimately related, with priority of order and effect given to the society of the faithful for the effecting of decent order. Hooker is also aware of the negative possibilities of this relationship. In both cases, the foundation for understanding the proper order of each society is theological, i.e., grounded in the relationship between God and creation.

[77] Book of Common Prayer (1979), p. 324.

[78] See Laws 1.8.4, 6-7; V.25.1. See also McGrade, "Coherence" p. 410. On the moral and social implications of the relationship between law and order and religion (and sacraments in particular) cf. Booty. "Richard Hooker" p. 35; Laws V.56.10, 57.4-5, 56.11; "Sermon on Pride" in Works (1888) 3.617.

[79] McGrade. "The Public and the Religious in Hooker's Polity" p. 409.

[80] Laws V.57.2.

[81] Laws V.57.3.

[82] Laws V.57.4.

[83] Laws V.50, esp. 50.3; V.57.5,6.

[84] See Laws V.57.3; also V.50.3; 51.3; 54.5; 55.1.

[85] The other five sacraments of the Roman Church were regarded in the English Church as "sacramental rites" and acknowledged to be beneficial to the faithful. However, they did not have status as sacraments in the full sense of the word because they were not "sacraments of the Gospel" Art. XXV, Book of Common Prayer, p. 872.

[86] Laws 111.1.6; V.56 9.

[87] Laws V.56.1-2; echoes here also of Augustine's theology of illumination of the soul, especially in Hooker's use of illumination language, e.g., V.56.6.

[88] While this is the principle theological concern, Hooker always works within a real, pragmatic, and pastoral context. He therefore takes up such concrete issues as the validity of the Interrogations of the parents and Godparents for an infant, and the question of who may validly baptize. He also addresses the question of the necessity of Baptism, and the validity of baptism (in extremis) by a woman (which he holds to be valid).

[89] Laws V. 67-58.

[90] Book of Common Prayer (1979). p. 338.

[91] Laws v.67.3.

~~~~~~~~

By WILLIAM O. GREGG[*]

[*] William O. Gregg is a Candidate for the Ph.D. in systematic theology at the University of Notre Dame. He is currently engaged in research on the theological foundation of Hooker's Laws.