Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Supr
emum
Caput:
Ric
hard
Hoo
ker’
sT
heol
ogy
ofE
ccle
sias
tica
lD
omin
ion*
W.J
.T.
Kirb
y
Inth
efi
nal
book
ofhis
trea
tise
indef
ence
ofth
eE
liza
bet
han
reli
gio
us
sett
lem
ent,
Of
the
Lazv
esof
Ecc
lesi
asti
call
Poli
tic,
Ric
har
dH
ooker
const
ruct
san
elab
ora
teth
eolo
gica
ldef
ence
ofth
e‘t
itle
ofH
eadsh
ipw
hic
hw
egiv
eto
the
kin
gs
ofE
ngla
nd
inre
lati
on
unto
the
churc
h’.
(LE
P8.4
.1.)
The
argum
ent
ofth
ech
apte
rta
kes
the
form
ofa
resp
onse
toa
seri
esof
fundam
enta
ldoct
rinal
ob
ject
ions
rais
edag
ainst
the
royal
headsh
ipby
the
pre
-em
inen
t
*Thi
sar
ticl
eis
base
don
apo
rtio
nof
the
auth
or’s
doct
oral
diss
erta
tion
wri
tten
for
the
Fac
ulty
ofM
oder
nH
isto
ryin
the
Uni
vers
ity
ofO
xfor
d.It
will
appea
ras
ach
apte
rin
am
onog
raph
enti
tled
Ric
hard
Hoo
ker’
sD
octr
ine
ofth
eR
oyal
Supr
emac
yto
bepu
blis
hed
in19
89by
E.J
Bri
llof
Lei
den
inth
ese
ries
Stud
ies
inth
eH
isto
ryof
Chr
istia
nT
houg
ht,
edit
edby
Hei
koO
berr
nan.
1.A
llre
fere
nces
toO
fth
eL
awes
ofE
ccie
sias
tical
lPo
litic
(LE
Par
eta
ken
from
the
auth
orit
ativ
eFo
lger
Lib
rary
Edi
tion
ofth
eW
orks
ofR
icha
rdH
ooke
r,ed
.W
.S
peed
Hil
l(L
ondo
nan
dC
ambr
idge
,M
ass,
,19
77-)
,(E
LL
),ln
this
essa
y,th
eco
nven
tion
ofre
ferr
ing
toth
etr
eati
seas
the
‘Law
es’
isob
serv
ed.
Ref
eren
ces
indi
cate
the
subd
ivis
ions
ofH
ooke
r’s
text
into
book
,ch
apte
r,an
dse
ctio
nor
igin
ated
byJo
hnK
eble
inhi
sow
ncr
itic
aled
itio
nof
The
Wor
ksof
that
Lea
rned
and
Judi
ciou
sD
ivin
eM
r.R
icha
rdH
ooke
r,3
vols
,,7t
hed
,re
vise
dby
R.
W,
Chu
rch
and
F.P
aget
(Oxf
ord,
1888
),([
1W),
Whe
reth
esu
bdiv
isio
nin
the
Fol
ger
Lib
rary
Edi
tion
dep
arts
from
Keb
le,
nota
bly
inB
ook
VII
I,th
em
ore
rece
nted
itio
nis
foll
owed
,T
his
isa
smal
lpo
tent
ial
sour
ceof
conf
usio
nfo
rre
ader
sw
ithout
acce
ssto
the
mos
tre
cent
edit
ion,
Boo
ksI
thro
ugh
IVw
ere
firs
tpu
blis
hed
in15
93by
John
Win
det.
The
con
side
rabl
yla
rger
Boo
kV
was
not
issu
edun
til
1597
,A
publ
ishi
nghi
stor
yof
the
Law
esby
W.
Spe
edH
ill,
Gen
eral
Edi
tor
ofth
ene
wF
olge
rL
ibra
ryE
diti
onan
dG
eorg
esE
dele
n,ed
itor
ofth
efi
rst
volu
me
cont
aini
ngB
ooks
I-IV
,to
geth
erw
ith
ate
xtua
lin
trod
ucti
onto
the
sam
eby
Ede
len
are
tobe
foun
din
FLE
,vo
l.1,
xiii-
xxxv
iii.
Boo
ksV
Ian
dV
III
wer
eno
tpu
blis
hed
unti
l16
48,
and
Boo
kV
IIno
tun
til
1662
,th
efi
rst
year
inw
hich
the
Law
esap
pea
red
asa
who
le,
The
exce
llen
tre
sear
ches
ofP.
G.
Sta
nwoo
d,ed
itor
ofH
ooke
r’s
post
hum
ous
book
s,ha
vere
solv
edon
cean
dfo
ral
lth
edoubt
surr
oundin
gth
eau
then
tici
tyof
Boo
ksV
I-V
III.
The
auth
enti
city
ofth
ew
hole
trea
tise
isno
waf
firm
ed,
wit
hth
eon
equ
alif
icat
ion
that
the
post
hum
ous
book
sw
ere
left
unpo
lish
edan
dpa
rtia
lly
inco
mpl
ete.
See
Sta
nwoo
d’s
text
ual
intr
oduc
tion
to‘T
heT
hree
Las
tB
ooks
’in
FLE
,vo
l.3,
xiii
-bxv
.E
arli
erdi
scus
sion
sof
the
text
ual
prob
lem
sar
eto
befo
und
inR.
A.
Hou
k’s
intr
oduc
tion
toan
edit
ion
ofH
ooke
r’s
Ecc
lesi
astic
alPo
lity:
Book
VII
I(N
ewY
ork,
1931
);se
eal
soC
.J.
Sis
son,
The
Judi
ciou
sM
arri
age
ofM
r.H
ooke
ran
dth
eB
irth
ofth
eLa
wes
ofE
ccle
sias
tical
Polit
y(C
ambr
idge
,19
40);
and
fina
lly,
W.
Spe
edH
ill,
‘Hoo
ker’
sPo
lity:
The
Pro
blem
ofth
e“T
hree
Las
tB
ooks
”‘,
Hun
ting
ton
Lib
rary
Qua
rter
ly,
XX
XIV
(197
1),
317-
36,
Dio
nysi
us,
Vol
.X
II,
Dec
.19
88,
pp.
69-1
10
Dio
rus
70R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yot
Ecc
lesi
astic
alD
omin
ion
71
Dis
cip
lin
aria
n-P
uri
tan
divi
neT
hom
asC
artw
rig
ht.
Indee
d,
tow
ard
sth
een
dof
the
fam
ous
Ad
mo
nit
ion
Co
ntr
over
syof
the
1570
s,in
his
Seco
ndR
eplie
agai
nst
Mas
ter
Whi
tgif
te’s
Sec
ond
Ans
wer
,C
artw
right
had
esca
late
dth
ed
ebat
eover
the
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yto
ate
stof
bas
icdoct
rinal
ort
hodoxy.
He
char
ged
that
the
royal
hea
dsh
ip‘c
utof
fqu
ite!
that
par
tof
fth
eK
ingl
yof
fice
off
Chr
ist!
whi
chco
nsi
stet
hin
ow
twar
dgover
nm
ent
off
his
Churc
h...‘
(TC
2:44
1),
that
‘the
titl
eof
Hea
dof
fth
eC
hu
rch
[bel
ongs
]on
ley
toou
rS
avio
urC
hris
t’an
dth
eref
ore
‘the
cyvi
llm
agis
trat
eis
hea
dof
the
com
onw
ealt
he!
and
not
ofth
ech
urch
’.(T
C2:
411)
Car
twri
gh
tob
ject
edth
atth
eas
sert
ion
ofth
ero
yal
titl
eof
hea
dsh
ipw
asin
con
sist
ent
wit
hC
hris
tolo
gica
lan
dT
rini
tari
anort
hodoxy.
He
furt
her
chal
leng
edth
eR
oyal
Sup
rem
acy
asa
contr
adic
tion
ofth
ekey
stone
ofre
form
edec
cies
iolo
gica
lor
thod
oxy,
nam
ely
the
doct
rine
ofth
e‘T
wo
Kin
gd
om
s’or
‘Tw
oR
ealm
s’4
wit
hth
eir
corr
espondin
g‘T
wo
Reg
imen
ts’:
For
too
ver
thro
we
this
doct
rine
that
Chr
iste
alon
eis
Hea
dof
his
Chu
rch!
this
dis
tinct
ion
ishro
wghte
!th
atac
cord
ing
toth
ein
war
din
flue
nce
off
grac
e!C
hris
ton
ley
isH
ead:
bu
tac
cord
irig
toth
eo
wtw
ard
go
ver
nm
ent!
the
bein
gof
Hea
dis
com
men
wit
hhim
tooth
ers.
For
answ
er
wher
unto
!I
refe
rre
my
self
ein
par
tto
wh
atI
have
wri
tten
befo
re!
ofth
eab
surd
dis
tinct
ion
bet
wee
nth
ego
ver
nm
ent
ofth
eC
hu
rch
byth
em
yrti
ster
ieof
2.T
hepr
inci
pal
wor
ksof
Tho
mas
Car
twri
ght
inth
eco
urse
ofhi
sde
bate
sw
ith
Arc
hbis
hop
John
Whi
tgif
tin
the
Adm
onit
ion
Con
trov
ersy
are:
TC1.
.4R
epiv
eto
an,1
nstv
erM
ade
ofM
.D
octo
rW
hitg
ift,
(Wan
dsw
ort
h,
1574
);T
C2,
The
Seco
ndRL
’plie
agai
nst
Mas
ter
Whi
tgif
te’s
Seco
ndA
nszv
er,
(Zur
ich,
1375
);TC
3,T
heR
est
ofth
eSe
coud
eR
eplie
,(s
i,15
77).
Car
twri
ght
was
one
ofth
ele
adin
gD
isci
plin
aria
nor
pre
sby
teri
anid
eolo
gues
ofhi
sgen
erat
ion.
His
life
and
wor
ksar
eab
lyp
ort
ray
edby
A.
F.Sc
ott
Pear
son
inT
hom
astj
,irt
,’rz
!it
and
Eli
zabe
than
Pur
itan
ism
(Lon
don,
1925
).C
artw
righ
tha
sbe
enac
cord
eda
cert
ain
degr
eeof
atte
ntio
nby
mor
ere
cent
Eliz
abet
han
eccl
esia
stic
alhi
stor
iogr
aphy
.Se
ePa
tric
kC
olli
nson
,Th
eEl
izab
etha
nPu
rita
nM
oeen
ient
(Lon
don,
1967
)fo
ra
mor
ere
cent
stud
yof
Car
twri
ght’
sro
lein
the
Ad
mo
nit
ion
Con
trov
ersy
.S
tran
gely
litt
leha
sbe
enw
ritt
enby
Hoo
ker
scho
lars
onth
esu
bjec
tof
Hoo
ker’
spo
lem
ical
stru
ggle
with
Car
twri
ght
des
pit
eth
etr
equen
tap
pea
ran
cein
the
Law
esof
the
latte
r’s
argu
men
tsas
repre
senta
tive
otth
eD
isci
pli
nar
ian-P
uri
tan
case
.O
ne
nota
ble
exce
pti
on
isR
udolp
hA
lmas
y’s
‘The
Pu
rpo
seof
Ric
hard
Ho
ok
er’s
Pol
emic
’,Jo
urna
lof
the
1-fis
tory
ofId
eas,
39(1
978)
,25
1-27
0.3.
See
D.
j.M
cGin
n,T
heA
dmon
itio
nC
ontr
orer
sy(N
ewB
runs
wic
k,19
49)
pas
nn;
also
Patr
ick
McG
rath
,P
apis
tsan
dP
urit
ans
unde
rE
lizab
eth
I(L
ondo
n,l%
7,
133f
f.,an
dM
.M
.K
nap
pen
,T
udor
Pur
itan
ism
(Chi
cago
,19
39),
217-
247,
4.T
heon
lyth
oro
ugh
trea
tmen
tof
Cat
wri
gh
t’s
vers
ion
ofth
eR
efor
ma
tion
doct
rine
ofth
e‘T
wo
Kin
gdom
s’is
tobe
foun
din
A.
F.S
cott
Pea
rso
n,C
hurc
han
dSt
ate:
Polit
ical
Asp
ects
ofSi
xtee
nth—
Cen
tury
Pur
itan
ism
(Cam
brid
ge,
1928
)ch
.2.
men
/inst
itute
dof
our
Sav
iour
Ch
rist
/an
dhi
ssp
irit
ual
go
vern
men
t.(T
C2:
414)
Thu
sC
artw
rig
ht
elev
ated
the
contr
over
syov
erth
eci
vil
mag
istr
ate’
scl
aim
toth
eti
tle
‘Hea
dof
the
Chu
rch’
toth
ele
vel
ofa
pro
fou
nd
theo
logi
cal
dis
pu
teov
erfi
rst
prin
cipl
es.
At
stak
ein
the
contr
over
syw
asa
reputa
tion
for
stan
din
gon
the
high
gro
un
dof
refo
rmed
doct
rina
lor
thod
oxy.
Am
ore
radi
cal
atta
ckon
the
es
tabli
shed
ord
erof
the
Eli
zabe
than
Chu
rch
coul
dha
rdly
have
been
conc
eive
d.H
ooke
r’s
repl
yw
asas
radi
cal
asth
eat
tack
:he
sought
todem
on
stra
teth
atth
eD
isci
plin
aria
nsw
ere
them
selv
esdo
ctri
nall
yu
nso
un
din
that
thei
rth
eolo
gyw
asnot
that
ofth
e‘m
agis
teri
al’
ref
orm
atio
nof
John
Cal
vin
and
was
anat
tem
pt
toin
troduce
into
Eng
land
the
idea
sof
the
‘rad
ical
’re
form
atio
nof
the
Anah
apti
sts
and
Sec
tari
es.
5F
orH
ooke
r,C
artw
righ
t’s
insi
sten
ceon
aco
nfli
ctb
etw
een
the
‘sce
pter
ofC
hris
t’s
disc
ipli
ne’
and
the
auth
ori
tyof
the
Cro
wn
inec
cles
iast
ical
‘aff
avre
san
dca
uses
’w
asgro
unded
ina
theo
logy
whi
chw
asfa
ulty
byth
ete
stof
stri
ctC
alvi
nist
or
thod
oxy.
Indee
d,
inth
eco
urse
ofhi
sar
gum
ent,
Hooker
turn
edth
ech
alle
nge
aroun
dfu
ll-c
ircl
eto
dem
on
stra
teth
atC
artw
righ
t’s
own
argum
ents
agai
nst
the
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yw
ere
inco
nsi
sten
tin
the
firs
tin
stan
cew
ith
Chr
isto
logi
cal
and
Tri
nita
rian
orth
odox
y;”
seco
ndly
wit
hec
cles
iolo
gica
lnorm
ses
tabli
shed
byth
em
agis
teri
alre
form
ers;
7an
d,
thir
dly
wit
hth
efa
mou
sdi
stin
ctio
nof
the
two
real
ms
and
two
reg
imen
ts,
and
conse
quen
tly
inco
nsi
sten
tw
ith
the
enti
rest
ruct
ure
ofre
form
edso
teri
olog
y.-
9T
heco
mm
onas
sum
pti
on
whi
chunder
lies
the
usua
lgl
ibap
plic
atio
nof
the
labe
l‘E
rast
ian’
toH
ooke
r’s
arg
um
ent
isth
athe
him
self
conf
hund
ste
mpo
ral
and
spir
itual
auth
ori
ty.
9C
ontr
ary
toth
evi
ews
ofm
any
mo
der
nco
mm
enta
tors
,w
esh
all
argue
that
Hoo
ker
view
edth
e5.
Hoo
ker
very
seld
omem
ploy
edth
ete
rm‘P
urita
n’in
refe
rrin
gto
Car
twri
ght,
toW
alte
rT
rave
rs,
orto
any
of‘t
hem
that
seek
e(a
sth
eyte
arm
eit)
the
refo
rmat
ion
ofL
awes
,an
dor
ders
Ecc
lesi
astic
all,
inth
eC
hurc
hof
Eng
land
’(L
EP
Pref
.1.
1).
Muc
hha
sbe
enw
ritte
non
the
ori
gins
ofth
ete
rm‘P
urita
n’an
dits
pole
mic
alus
eis
ofso
me
sign
ific
ance
inth
ein
terp
reta
tion
ofH
ooke
r’s
apol
oget
icpu
rpos
e.Se
eP.
Col
linso
n,‘A
Com
men
tco
ncer
ning
the
Nam
ePu
rita
n’,
Jour
nal
ifE
ccle
sias
tical
His
tory
31(1
980)
,w
hich
isits
elf
aco
mm
ent
ona
larg
erpi
ece
byP.
Chr
isti
anso
n,‘R
efor
mer
san
dth
eC
hurc
hof
Eng
land
unde
rE
lizab
eth
Ian
dth
eea
ri’
Stu
arts
’,JE
H31
(198
0),
463-
482.
Car
twri
ght
him
self
condem
ns
the
‘her
esie
off
Ana
bapt
iste
s!D
onat
ists
/or
puri
tane
s’:
TC
2:si
g.)
()
(i.6.
LE
P8.
4.6,
7.LE
P8.
4.7.
8.L
EP
8.4.
8,9
and
10.
9.F
orex
ampl
e,se
eC
lair
eC
ross
,T
heR
oyal
Sup
rem
acy
inlii
i’L
lizab
eiha
nC
hurc
h(L
ondo
n,19
69),
27-3
7.
I I I I AL
II
V’,
I72
Ric
hard
Hoo
ker’
sT
heol
ogy
ofE
ccle
sias
tical
Dom
inio
n
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yas
the
prin
cipa
lm
eans
ofse
curi
ng
and
stab
lis
ing
ari
ght
,hti
iict
ion
bet
wee
nth
esp
irit
ual
and
tem
pora
lre
alm
s.In
the
firs
tch
apte
rof
Boo
kE
ight
,H
ooke
rre
sort
sto
the
cate
gori
esan
ddis
tinct
ions
ofsy
stem
atic
theo
logy
toex
plai
nth
eunio
nof
Churc
han
dC
om
monw
ealt
h‘i
na
free
Chri
stia
nst
ate
orki
ng-
dom
e’.
(LU
’8.
3.5;
FLE
3:35
5)T
hew
hole
purp
ose
ofth
ear
gum
ent
isto
dem
onst
rate
how
Churc
han
dC
om
monw
ealt
hto
get
her
con
stit
ute
asi
ngle
‘sta
te’
orpo
liti
que
soci
etie
and
vet
rem
ain
dist
inct
trom
one
anot
her.
’°T
hedi
ffic
ult
prob
lem
ofho
wto
unit
eth
ese
two
form
sof
asso
ciat
ion
insp
ite
ofth
eir
fundam
enta
ldit
fere
nce
sis
trea
ted
byi-
look
erac
cord
ing
toth
ean
cien
tpa
tris
tic
cate
gori
esot
Chr
isto
logi
cal
disc
ours
e:
Ac’
I,or
tI,
and
aC
omnw
naea
lth
‘ae
gra
unt
are
thin
ges
inna
ture
jrnv
ital
ics]
the
one
dis
tinguis
hed
from
the
oth
er,
aC
omm
onw
ealth
ison
ew
ay,
and
aC
hurc
han
oth
erw
aydefi
ned...
We
may
spea
ke
01th
emas
two,
we
may
sever
the
rights
and
caus
esot
the
one
wel
len
ough
trom
the
oth
erin
regar
dof
that
diff
eren
cew
hich
we
gra
unt
ther
eis
bet
wee
nth
em,
albe
itw
em
ake
nope
rson
al[m
yit
alic
s]di
tfer
ence
.F
orth
etr
uth
isth
eC
hurd
ian
dth
eC
onnn
onw
calih
are
nam
esw
hich
import
thin
ges
real
lydit
tere
nt.
But
those
thin
ges
are
acci
den
tes
and
such
ac
ciden
tes
asm
ayan
dsh
ould
al’
aaes
lovi
ngly
dwel
lto
get
her
inon
esu
bjec
t.(L
EP
8.1.
2,5;
FLE
3:31
8,32
4)
Ihe
languig
eof
‘per
son’
and
‘nat
ure’
quit
eex
plic
itly
hark
sba
ckto
Hoo
ker’
sca
refu
lsu
rvey
inhi
sfi
lth
book
ofth
ete
rms
and
defi
niti
ons
ofP
atri
stic
Chr
isto
logi
cal
ort
hodoxy.
Indee
d,
inth
atbo
okH
ooke
rhas
take
ngr
eat
pai
ns
tooutl
ine
the
fourt
h-c
entu
ryde
\elo
pm
ent
ofth
ech
urch
’sort
hodox
doct
rine
and
todem
onst
rate
that
the
cruc
ial
issu
eha
dbe
enth
em
anner
inw
hich
the
divi
nean
dhum
an‘n
atur
es’
are
unit
edin
the
one
‘per
son’
ofC
hri
st.
1’T
heC
hris
tolo
gica
lca
tego
ries
ofper
son
and
nat
ure
,an
dth
eir
at
tendan
tlo
gic
ofsu
bjec
tan
dac
cide
nt,
are
dep
loyed
thro
ughout
Iloo
ker’
sexam
inati
on
ofC
artw
right’
sob
ject
ions
toth
eunio
nof
Churc
han
dC
om
monw
ealt
hin
‘one
poli
tiqu
eso
ciet
y’:
tOIt
iin
tere
stin
gto
note
that
Hoo
ker
ne
erse
ts‘c
hurc
h’an
d‘s
tate
’in
oppo
siti
on,
lie
vie
ws
the
stat
e’as
a‘p
erso
nal
subs
iste
ncie
’w
hich
oN
t,:,
lw
ithin
itth
eC
hurc
han
dth
eC
omm
onw
ealt
has
‘acc
iden
tes’
.Se
eI
1’1’
8.1
5Ii
inhi
sD
edic
atio
n’of
the
titth
hook
ofth
eLa
wis
,H
ooke
rre
fers
toth
eio
urt
h-c
entu
rC
hri
stolo
gir
alcontr
oer
sies
.‘.
.,th
ew
aigh
ties
tco
nflic
tsth
e(h
urc
hha
thhad
wer
eth
ose
hich
touc
hed
the
head
,th
epe
rson
ofou
rSa
\,ciu
rC
hris
t.
..‘
PI.
PS
Ded
.3).
See
espe
cial
lyH
ooke
r’s
dis
cus
ion
inLI
P5.
53.1
-4.
See
also
LEP
5.32
13w
here
hedef
ends
the
publ
icte
c,ta
tion
ofth
eA
than
asia
ncr
eed:
‘So
man
iles
tlie
true
isth
atw
hich
one
Ut
the
anr,
ent
hat
hco
ncer
ning
Arr
iani
sme,
ylor
tu,s
auth
orib
ushu
jus
vene
ni‘,.t’,
1’rar,i
uuuc
ii,‘
,“i,
nido
ctr,n
a‘ia
n,i,
ort:
,r
The
y[t
heD
isci
plin
aria
ns]
hold
the
nece
ssit
ieof
pers
onal
!se
pa
rati
onw
hich
dea
ne
excl
udet
hth
epow
erof
one
man
sde
alin
gin
both
,w
eof
natu
ral!
whi
chdoth
not
hin
der
,bu
tth
aton
ean
dth
esa
me
pers
onm
ayin
both
bear
ea
prin
cipa
llsw
ay.
(I.E
P81.2
;FL
E3:
320)
By
his
studie
dus
eof
thes
eca
tego
ries
,H
ooke
rin
voke
da
pow
erfu
lan
dtr
adit
ional
theo
logi
cal
mod
elfo
rhi
sde
fenc
eof
the
Tu
dor
const
ituti
on
and,
byim
plic
atio
n,im
pugned
the
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
opposi
tion
toth
eunio
nof
Churc
han
dC
om
monw
ealt
has
itse
lfdo
ctri
nall
yunso
und.
Inth
eco
urse
ofth
ises
say
we
shal
lse
ekto
dem
onst
rate
that
this
Chr
isto
logi
cal
par
adig
mpr
ovid
esa
key
toth
ein
terp
reta
tion
ofH
ooke
r’s
doct
rine
ofth
eR
oyal
Sup
rem
acy.
(See
LE
P5.
51.1
-5.5
6.13
)T
hem
ost
curs
ory
per
usa
lof
thes
epas
sages
reve
als
that
the
term
sof
the
cont
rove
rsy
over
the
roya
lhea
dsh
ipar
eba
sica
lly
the
olog
ical
inch
arac
ter.
Car
twri
ght
and
Hoo
ker
wer
ecl
earl
yag
reed
atle
ast
onon
epr
inci
pal
poin
t,na
mel
yth
atth
edo
ctri
neof
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yw
asto
beunder
stood
and
judged
wit
hin
the
cate
gori
esof
conte
mpora
ryth
eolo
gica
ldi
scou
rse.
Wit
hbo
thdi
vine
sth
ere
isan
assu
mpti
on
that
poli
tica
lm
atte
rsco
me
wit
hin
the
spec
ial
spher
eof
the
trai
ned
theo
logi
an,
and
are
tobe
argued
theo
logi
call
y.N
or
man
Syk
eson
cere
mar
ked
that
:‘A
tth
isdi
stan
ceof
tim
ean
dam
idsu
chdif
fere
nt
condit
ions
ofec
cles
iast
ical
and
poli
tica
ldev
elop
men
t,th
eR
efor
mat
ion
apoth
eosi
sof
“the
godl
ypr
ince
”st
rike
san
unfa
mil
iar,
ifnot
actu
allj
unco
ngen
ial,
note
onou
rea
rs;
and
ther
eis
ast
rong
resu
ltan
tte
nden
cyto
dis
count
the
pro
min
ence
and
cent
rali
tyof
this
them
ein
the
theo
logy
,no
less
than
the
cc
cles
iolo
gyof
the
sixt
eent
hce
ntu
ry’.
’2
To
this
one
mig
htw
ell
add
that
the
them
e,st
rike
snot
only
anun
fam
ilia
rno
te,
but
that
ath
eo
logi
cal
basi
sfo
rpo
liti
cal
argum
ent
isin
dee
dqu
ite
alie
nto
moder
nas
sum
pti
ons
and
isad
mit
tedly
beyo
ndth
eco
mpet
ence
ofm
any
poli
tica
lth
eori
sts.
The
mos
tdi
ffic
ult
task
inou
rat
tem
pt
tounder
stan
dth
efu
llsi
gnif
ican
ceof
Hoo
ker’
sde
fenc
eof
the
roya
lhe
ad-
ship
ofth
eC
hurc
his
toyi
eld
ours
elve
sto
the
theo
logi
cal
scop
eof
his
argum
ent.
Apr
inci
pal
aim
ofth
ises
say,
ther
efor
e,is
tost
rive
for
asy
mpat
het
icunder
stan
din
gof
the
alie
nin
enta
lité
ofth
ela
teE
liza
beth
anw
orld
ofec
cles
iolo
gial
contr
over
sy.’
1T
hees
sent
iall
yth
eolo
gica
lch
arac
ter
ofH
ooke
r’s
appro
ach
toth
epro
ble
mof
the
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yis
now
her
em
ore
expl
icit
than
inhi
sdis
cuss
ion
ofth
e‘t
itle
ofH
eadsh
ipw
hich
we
give
toth
eK
ings
ofE
ngla
ndin
rela
tion
unto
the
Chu
rch’
inth
efo
urth
chap
ter
of12
.N
orm
anS
ykes
,O
ldPr
iest
and
New
Pres
hyte
r(C
ambr
idge
,19
57),
2,3.
13.
Inhi
sar
ticle
,‘M
eani
ngan
dU
nder
stan
ding
inH
isto
ryof
Idea
s’,
Firs
-to
ryan
dTh
eory
,8(
1969
),8,
Que
ntin
Skin
ner
disc
usse
sth
isim
port
ant
aspe
ctof
hist
oric
alm
etho
dolo
gy.
sin
’,74
Ric
hard
Hoo
ker’
sT
heol
ogy
ofE
cdes
iast
ical
Dom
inio
n
Boo
kV
III
ofth
eLa
zot’s
.E
hest
ruct
ure
ofth
ear
gum
ent
inth
ischap
ter
foll
ows
the
gen
eral
pat
tern
othooker
’sm
ethodolo
gy
thro
ugh
out
the
trea
tise
.H
ebeg
ins
byse
ttin
gdow
na
sum
mar
yof
cert
ain
prin
cipa
lobje
ctio
ns
rais
edby
the
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
refo
rmer
sas
rep
rese
nte
db
the
wri
tings
ofC
artw
right.
As
inth
epre
cedin
gbo
oks
ot
the
Lazt
’es,
I-lo
oker
conce
ntr
ates
his
atte
nti
on
upon
Car
twri
ght’
sS
econ
dR
ep1w
wri
tten
inre
sponse
toA
rchbis
hop
Whi
tgif
t’s
Def
ense
oJth
eA
nsw
erto
the
Adm
onit
ion.
‘In
this
essa
y,ou
rai
mis
toex
amin
eH
ooke
r’s
defe
nce
ofth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
hin
the
ligh
tof
his
theo
logic
alpri
nci
ple
s.A
sw
esh
all
see,
his
adher
ence
toth
ere
ceiv
ed,
ort
hodox
form
ula
tions
ofsy
stem
atic
doct
rine
,es
peci
ally
onIr
init
aria
nan
dC
hris
tolo
gica
lpoin
ts,
toget
her
wit
hhi
svie
ws
onher
men
euti
cal,
eccl
esio
logi
cal,
and
sote
riol
ogic
aldoc
tnne
are
cruc
ial
toth
eco
her
ence
ofhi
spoli
tica
lar
gum
ent.
The
dis
cuss
ion
ther
efore
beg
ins
wit
han
exam
inat
ion
ofH
ooke
r’s
anal
ysis
ofth
epr
inci
pal
theo
logi
cal
elem
ents
ofth
ehea
dsh
ipdeb
ate.
1her
efo
llow
sa
brie
fco
nsi
der
atio
nof
the
pole
mic
albac
kgro
und
ofth
eIs
sue
inth
eA
dm
onit
ion
Contr
over
sy.
Fin
ally
ther
eis
adis
cus
sion
ofI-
look
er’s
resp
onse
toC
artw
right’
sth
eolo
gica
lob
ject
ions
toth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ip.
Thi
sre
sponse
bre
aks
dow
nin
toth
efo
llow
ing
maj
orhea
din
gs:
firs
t,th
eIr
init
aria
npr
oble
m,
seco
ndly
the
Chri
sto
logi
cal
pro
ble
m,
thir
dly
the
ecde
siol
ogic
alpro
ble
m,
and
fina
lly
the
pro
ble
mof
the
spec
ies
ofre
gim
ent.
Car
twri
ght’
sin
itia
lob
ject
ion
toth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipis
gro
unded
ins
hat
I-lo
oker
inB
ook
IIof
the
Laz
ves
refe
rsto
asa
‘neg
ativ
ear
gum
ent’
from
Scr
iptu
re.
The
titl
e‘H
ead
ofth
eC
hurc
h’,
onth
isvi
ew,
isth
ought
tobe
appli
edex
clus
ivel
yto
Chri
stin
Scr
iptu
re,
from
whi
chC
artw
right
infe
rsth
atas
such
it‘c
anno
tbe
wit
hout
bold
pre
sum
pti
on
appli
edunto
any
mor
tall
man
’.(W
W2:
82;
LE
P8.
4.2)
.H
edef
ends
his
obje
ctio
nby
anap
pea
lto
the
pre
scri
pti
ve
auth
ori
tyof
div
ine
revel
atio
nin
mat
ters
conce
rnin
gth
est
ruct
ure
ofec
cles
iast
ical
gover
nm
ent.
’
14.
InIh
eP,
orks
ofJo
hnW
lntg
io.
I)I)
Arc
hbis
hop
ofC
ante
rbur
y,ed
.by
lohn
Ayr
ebr
the
Par
ker
Soc
iety
,(C
ambr
idge
,18
51),
(WW
).15
.S
eees
pec
iall
yLE
P2.
5.7.
wh
ere
Hooker
qu
ote
sC
artw
right’
sar
gum
ent
inT
C2:
81,
vi,
.‘t
hear
gum
ent
ofth
esc
riptu
res
nega
tivel
yhold
eth,
no
ton
lyin
doct
rine
and
eccl
esia
stic
all
dis
cipli
ne,
but
even
inm
atte
rsar
bit
rari
ean
dari
able
byth
ead
vic
eof
the
Churc
h.’
The
whole
inte
nt
ofB
ook
2of
the
Lizu
c’us
tosh
owth
eli
mit
sof
scri
ptur
alau
tho
rity
.Fo
ra
full
and
clea
rdi
scus
sion
ofth
epr
oble
mse
e1.
S.C
oolid
ge,
The
Patil
me
Ren
aiss
ance
inF
izyl
auzd
:Pu
rita
nism
and
the
Bib
le(O
xfor
d,19
70),
ch.
I,S
eeal
soEg
ilG
risl
is,
‘The
Iler
men
euti
cal
Pro
blem
inR
icha
rdH
ooke
r’,
Stud
ies
inR
icha
rdH
ooke
r,ed
W,
S.H
ill(L
ondo
n,19
72),
183-
198.
lb.
See
LE
P8.
4.2,
3fo
rH
ooker
’ssu
mm
ary
ofth
epr
inci
pal
scri
ptur
alre
ason
sur
ged
agai
nst
the
roal
head
ship
.H
ooke
rre
fers
chie
fly
toth
eiu
llow
ing
pas
sage
inC
artw
righ
t’s
Seco
ndR
eplu
’(T
C2:
411,
12):
Itis
the
hea
rtof
Car
twri
ght’
spo
siti
onth
atC
hris
t’s
titl
eof
hea
dsh
ipas
def
ined
byS
crip
ture
pre
cludes
the
poss
ibil
ity
ofan
yoth
ercl
aim
toth
eti
tle
what
soev
er.
Scr
iptu
reaf
firm
sth
eti
tle
sole
lyin
rela
tion
toC
hris
t;th
eref
ore
nooth
eraf
firm
atio
nsouts
ide
the
bounds
ofS
crip
tura
lau
thori
tyca
nbe
allo
wed
.T
his
foll
ows
the
so-c
alle
d‘n
egat
ive’
argum
ent
from
the
auth
ori
tyof
Scr
iptu
re:
that
whi
chsc
riptu
redo
esnot
posi
tive
lyaf
firm
conc
erni
ngth
epo
lity
ofth
eC
hurc
hm
ust
ther
efore
beden
ied.
Hav
ing
bro
ached
the
gene
ral
nat
ure
ofth
eco
ntro
vers
yov
erth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ip,
Hoo
ker
pro
ceed
sto
anan
alys
isof
the
spe
cifi
csc
riptu
ral
reas
ons
alle
ged
agai
nst
afi
nite
,te
rrit
oria
lan
dvis
ibl
ehea
dsh
ipdis
tinct
from
Chr
ist’
sin
fini
te,
univ
ersa
lan
din
visi
ble
rule
.C
artw
right
appea
lsto
the
auth
ori
tyof
St.
Pau
lfo
rw
hom
Chr
ist’
sti
tle
ofhea
dsh
ipsi
gnif
ies
His
elev
atio
nab
ove
‘all
pow
res/
rule
s!an
ddo
myn
ions
’(T
C2:
411;
LE
P8.
4.2)
;th
us
tote
rmC
hris
t‘H
ead’
ofth
eC
hurc
his
toac
know
ledge
the
spec
ial
char
acte
rof
his
pow
eras
‘div
ine’
and
ther
efore
asab
ove
all
deri
vati
veor
cre
ated
pow
ers.
Hen
ceon
this
view
the
roya
lcl
aim
toth
ehea
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
him
pose
san
exte
rnal
lim
itat
ion
upon
aun
iver
sal
pow
erw
hich
byit
sve
rynat
ure
cannot
adm
itof
any
exte
rnal
lim
its
what
soev
er,
For
Car
twri
ght,
the
titl
e‘H
ead
ofth
ech
urch
’is
iden
tifi
edpr
ecis
ely
wit
hw
hat
dis
tinguis
hes
Chr
ist’
sin
fini
te,
di
vine
pow
erfr
omal
lfi
nite
,hum
anpow
ers.
(TC
2:41
1)S
econ
dly,
heas
sert
sth
eex
clus
ive
appli
cati
on
ofth
eti
tle
ofhea
dsh
ipto
Chr
ist
onth
egro
unds
ofw
hat
heco
nsi
der
sto
bedo
ctri
nall
yim
poss
ibl
eco
nse
quen
ces
whi
chne
cess
aril
yfo
llow
from
the
appro
pri
atio
nof
the
sam
eby
anea
rthly
prin
ce.
For
bydo
ing
soth
epri
nce
Her
ere
mai
neth
onel
yto
prov
e!th
etit
leH
ead
off
the
chur
ch!
tobe
long
eon
ely
toou
rSa
viou
rC
hris
te.
,.
IfC
hris
tebe
onel
yhe
ad:
then
that
Ise
tdo
wne
!th
atth
ecy
vill
mag
istr
ate
ishe
adof
the
com
onw
ealth
e/an
dno
tof
the
chur
ch!
stan
deth
.B
utif
the
mag
istr
ate
behe
adof
fth
ech
urch
:th
enC
hris
teis
not
onel
ie.
How
beit
havi
ngfo
rfe
are
off
the
owtc
ryof
fal
l]m
ade
alit
lecu
rtes
ieun
toth
etr
uthe
:he
lie.
Arc
hbis
hop
Whi
tgif
tlfo
rthw
ithlif
teth
uphi
she
ele
agai
nst
it!an
dw
illha
veth
eci
vill
mag
istr
ate
head
also
off
the
chur
ch! w
heru
pon
mus
tefo
llow
ein
fyni
teab
surd
ities
.Fi
rste
the
doct
rine
off
the
Apo
stle
isby
this
mea
nsde
ane
over
thro
wen
/whi
chsh
ewet
hth
atth
isty
tleH
ead
ofth
ech
urch
!w
asgy
ven
toou
rSa
v[io
ur]
Chr
iste
!to
lifte
him
abov
eal
lpo
wre
s/ru
les!
and
dom
ynio
ns!
ether
inhe
aven
!or
eart
h.W
here
ifth
isti
tle
belo
nge
also
unto
the
cyvi
llm
agis
trat
e:th
enyt
ysm
anif
este
! tha
tth
ere
isa
pow
rein
eart
h!w
heru
nto
our
Sav
iour
Chr
iste
isno
tin
this
poin
tesu
peri
or.
And
byth
esa
me
rea
son
that
hem
aie
gyve
the
cyvi
llm
agis
trat
eth
isti
tle!
hem
aye
gyve
him
also
that
heys
the
fyrs
tebe
gott
enof
all
crea
ture
s!th
efy
rste
bego
tten
off
the
dead
]ye
ath
ere
dem
erof
his
peop
lew
hich
hego
vern
eth.
-.
Aga
irie
ifth
ech
urch
beth
ebo
die
ofC
hris
te! a
ndof
the
cyvi
llm
agis
trat
e!yt
shal
lha
vetw
ohe
ades
:w
hich
bein
gm
onst
erou
sis
toth
egr
eat
dish
onou
rof
fC
hris
tean
dhi
sch
urch
.[m
yita
licsl
See
also
TC3:
153
and
WW
3:18
9.
76R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
rheo
logy
ofE
ccie
sias
tkal
Dom
inio
n
ouId
appea
rto
arro
gat
eto
him
self
cert
ain
coro
llar
ypow
ers
as—su
cia
ted
byS
crip
ture
wit
hth
eti
tle
ofhea
d—
for
exam
ple,
the
titl
es‘f
irst
beg
ott
enof
all
crea
ture
s’,
‘the
Red
eem
erof
his
peop
le’,
the
consu
bst
anti
alW
ord
ofG
od’.
(LL
P8.
4.3;
TC2:
411f
f.)T
hus
Car
twri
ght
iden
tifi
esC
hris
t’s
titl
eof
hea
dsh
ipit
self
wit
hhi
specu
liar
dign
ity
asth
eR
edee
mer
.C
artw
right
ther
efore
repre
sents
the
Roal
Supre
mac
as
aden
ial
ofC
hris
t’s
pro
per
sover
eign
pow
erin
rela
tion
toth
eC
hurc
h.
I hir
dly,
Car
twri
ght
argues
that
St.
Pau
lre
ters
toC
hri
stas
svh’
hea
d01
the
Churc
h.
(TC
2:41
2)H
ence
the
com
munic
atio
nof
the
titl
eof
hea
dsh
ipto
the
civi
lm
agis
trat
eii
mpl
ies
ali
mit
atio
nof
the
abso
lute
univ
ersa
lity
ofC
hris
t’s
pre
sence
wit
hth
ew
hole
body
ofhi
speo
ple
.F
orC
’art
wri
ght,
Chri
stdo
esnet
rice
da
‘subord
inat
e!an
dm
rnst
eria
llhea
dof
fth
ech
urch
’:C
hri
ste
isnev
erse
ver
edfr
omhi
sb
od
y!
nor
from
any
par
teof
fvt
and
isab
le!
and
clot
hper
torm
eth
atw
her
fore
heis
call
edhe
ad!
unto
all
his
hurc
he.’
(TC
2.41
3)A
mong
those
quote
dby
Car
twri
ght
insu
pport
ofhi
sas
sert
ion
ofC
hris
t’s
‘sol
e’cl
aim
toth
ehea
dsh
ipof
the
Chu
rch
isJo
hnJe
wel
,B
isho
pof
Sal
isbury
and
F-lo
oker
’sone-
tim
epat
ron.
Jew
el,
asis
wel
lkno
n.pre
ferr
edth
eti
tle
of‘S
upre
me
Gov
erno
r’to
‘Hea
dof
the
Ch
urc
h’
when
appli
edto
the
roya
lpow
erof
eccl
esia
stic
aldom
inio
n,
and
vas
atso
me
pai
ns
toar
gue
the
unsu
itab
ilit
yof
the
titl
eof
hea
dsh
ipin
rela
tion
toth
eQ
uee
n.N
Wit
ha
cert
ain
eid
ent
ple
asure
Car
twri
ght
asab
leto
quote
inhi
sco
ntr
over
syw
ith
Wh
itg
ift
that
‘Cvp
rian
saith
,’th
ere
ishut
one
hea
dof
fth
ech
urch
.T
hebis
hop
off
Sal
sbur
ieaf
firm
eth
the
sam
e.A
pol.2
.2’.
(TC
2:41
3)A
ccor
ding
toB
isho
pJe
wel
,su
cha
titl
efo
rpr
ince
sw
as‘n
otto
befo
und
inH
oly
Scr
iptu
re’.
“It
was
per
hap
sto
beex
pect
edth
atin
the
heat
ofba
ttle
Car
twri
ght
should
choo
senot
toin
clud
ea
rete
rcnce
toJe
wel
’spro
vis
oim
med
iate
lyfo
llow
ing
this
rem
ark:
And,
notw
ithst
andin
gth
ena
me
ofH
ead
ofth
eC
hurc
hbe
long
pecu
liar
lyan
don
lyunto
Chr
ist,
ashi
son
iyri
ght
and
inher
ita
nce,
(for
,as
the
Churc
his
the
body
.so
Chri
stis
the
head
);ve
tm
ayth
esa
me
som
etim
esal
sohe
appli
edin
sobe
r
7.S
et’
tsp.
I C2:
317.
‘Let
ithe
cons
ider
edti
rst
that
our
Say.
Chr
iste
isin
on
ere
spe,
.tcr
eato
ran
dprc
sere
rof
man
kind
e/an
din
anot
her
redc
cm
er,
and
upho
lder
ofhi
sch
urc
h,
For
hecr
eate
don
ce/a
ndpr
esen
’eth
daily
as
Cud
cu-e
tlual
lw
ithhi
sFa
ther
and
Hol
ySp
irite
:hu
the
both
rede
emed
once
and
daily
gath
eret
hhi
sch
urch
ias
med
iato
urof
God
and
man
--‘
IS.
ini\
’rC
,/‘
i;z
frail
,t’d
.Jo
hnA
vre
,Pa
rker
Soci
ety
(PS
),(C
amb
rid
ge.
1h4-’
t))
4,97
4.C
om
par
el\
’h2.9
.S
eeJo
hnF.
Boo
ty,
John
Jew
eliN
Apo
Iogi
tin
tin’
Chu
rch
ofL
n,hi
iul
(Ien
don,
1963
)19
.Jeel.
P4:
74
mea
ning
and
good
sens
e,no
ton
lyto
prin
ces,
hut
also
un
toot
hers
far
infe
rior
topr
ince
s.It
isH
ooke
r’s
purp
ose
inB
ook
VII
Ito
expl
ore
mor
edee
ply
‘inso
ber
mea
ning
and
good
sens
e’th
em
anne
rin
whi
chth
etit
leof
head
-sh
ipm
ayla
wfu
lly
beas
crib
edto
the
civi
lm
agis
trat
e,ac
cord
ing
topr
inci
ples
ofor
thod
oxth
eolo
gica
lre
ason
ing
ackn
owle
dged
h’
both
part
ies
toth
edi
sput
e.T
his
aim
mus
tbe
inte
rpre
ted
wit
hin
the
cont
ext
ofth
ear
gum
ent
ofth
eL
awes
asa
who
le.
As
itis
Hoo
ker’
sge
nera
lpu
rpos
ein
each
ofth
eea
rlie
rb
oo
ks
todem
on
stra
teth
ees
sent
ial
agre
emen
tof
vari
ous
aspe
cts
ofth
eE
liza
beth
anec
cles
iast
ical
sett
lem
ent
wit
hth
epr
ecep
tsof
refo
rmed
doct
rina
lan
dec
cies
iolo
gica
lort
hodoxy,
soth
issa
me
gover
nin
gpri
nci
ple
can
bese
enin
the
cons
truc
tion
ofhi
sar
gum
ent
inde
fenc
eof
the
doct
rine
ofth
ero
yal
head
ship
.H
avin
gch
alle
nged
the
unde
rlyi
ngas
sum
ptio
nof
Car
twri
ght’
sob
ject
ions
—na
mel
y,th
atit
isne
cess
ary
toar
gue
‘neg
ativ
ely’
from
the
auth
orit
yof
Scr
iptu
rein
mat
ters
ofch
urch
poli
ty,
and
ther
eby
tore
stri
ctth
eap
plic
atio
nof
the
title
of‘H
ead
ofth
eC
hurc
h’to
Chr
ist
alon
e—
Hoo
ker
proc
eeds
todi
stin
guis
han
dan
alys
eth
ree
basi
cdi
ffer
ence
sbe
twee
nth
eti
tle
ofhe
adsh
ipas
appl
ied
onth
eon
eha
ndto
Chr
ist,
and
asap
plie
don
the
othe
rto
the
Civ
ilM
agis
trate
.21
For
Hoo
ker,
the
title
isno
tin
here
ntly
‘uni
voca
l’,
but
rath
er‘e
quiv
ocal
’;w
hat
isre
quir
ed,
inhi
svi
ew,
iscl
oser
anal
ysis
ofth
elo
gic
gove
rnin
gth
eap
plic
atio
nof
the
title
.T
hetit
lem
aybe
ap
plie
dto
both
Chr
ist
and
eart
hly
prin
ces
solo
ngas
the
theo
logi
cal
diff
eren
cebe
twee
nth
e‘t
wo
kind
sof
Hea
dshi
p’is
mad
ecl
ear
and
uphe
ld.
For
Hoo
ker,
ther
eis
ath
reef
old
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
the
‘tw
oki
nds
ofH
eads
hip’
whi
chfo
llow
sa
rigo
rous
logi
c;th
eyco
rre
spon
dto
the
cate
gori
esof
‘ord
er,
mea
sure
,an
dki
nd’.
(LE
P8.
4.5)
The
seth
ree
mod
esof
dist
inct
ion
corr
espo
nd,
asw
esh
all
see,
toth
eth
ree
rele
vant
bran
ches
ofth
eolo
gica
ldi
scou
rse,
nam
ely
sys
tem
atic
doct
rine
,ec
cles
iolo
gy,
and
sote
riol
ogy.
Inm
akin
gth
eca
sein
favo
urof
adi
ffer
ence
in‘o
rder
’be
twee
nC
hris
t’s
head
ship
and
the
eccl
esia
stic
alhe
adsh
ipof
eart
hly
prin
ces,
Hoo
ker
appe
als
toth
edi
stin
ctio
nsof
fund
amen
tal
Tri
nita
rian
and
Chr
isto
logi
cal
doc
trin
e.T
hein
trod
ucti
onof
adi
ffer
ence
of‘m
easu
re’
or‘d
egre
e’of
pow
erra
ises
fund
amen
tal
issu
esof
anec
cles
iole
gica
lna
ture
,w
ith
spec
ial
refe
renc
eto
the
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
the
mys
tica
land
visi
ble
Chu
rche
s.Fi
nally
,th
equ
esti
onof
the
‘tw
oki
ndes
ofpo
wer
’ra
ises
the
prom
inen
tso
teri
olog
ical
issu
eof
the
Ref
orm
atio
n,na
mel
yth
edo
ctri
neof
the
two
real
ms
and
two
regi
men
ts.
20.
Jew
el,
PS4:
975.
21.
LE
P8.
4.5.
78R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yat
Ecc
lesi
asti
cal
Dom
inhm
79li
ion\
sin
’.
Acc
ordi
ngto
Hoo
ker’
sfi
rst
cate
gorY
ofdis
tinct
ion
be’e
en
the
two
ord
ers
ofhea
dsh
ip,
Chri
stis
said
tobe
hea
dof
the
Churc
hac
cord
ing
tohi
spar
tici
pat
ion
ofdiv
ine
nat
ure
,w
her
eas
the
hea
d-
ship
ofth
epr
ince
isac
cord
ing
toa
fini
te,
hum
an‘o
rder
’:
Itis
not
sim
plie
the
title
ofH
ead
whi
chli
ftet
hou
rS
avio
urab
ove
all
pow
ers,
hut
the
title
ofH
ead
insu
chso
rtunder
stood,
asth
e.4
post
lt’hi
mse
lfm
ent
it,so
that
the
sam
ebei
ng
impar
ted
inan
oth
erse
nse
unto
oth
ers
tt.e
the
Civ
ilM
agis
trat
eldoth
not
any
vay
mak
eth
ose
oth
ers
ther
ein
equal
les
inas
much
asdiv
ersi
tie
ofth
inges
isusu
al
1to
heunders
tood,
even
when
ofw
ord
esth
ere
isno
dive
rsit
iean
dit
ison
lyth
ead
din
gof
one
and
the
self
sam
eth
ing
unto
dive
rse
per
sons
whi
chdoth
argue
equa
liti
ein
them
‘it
Ite
rme
Chr
ist
and
Cae
sar
Lor
dset
this
isno
equal
ling
ofC
aesa
rw
ith
Chr
ist,
bec
ause
itis
not
ther
eby
inte
nded
.To
term
eth
eE
mpe
rour
Lord
(say
thT
ertu
llia
n)I
for
no/n
own
part
will
not
refu
seso
that
Ihe
not
requ
ired
tote
rmhi
mL
ord
iii
the
soni
cse
nse
that
Cod
isso
term
ed.
(LE
P8.
4.3)
The
pow
erw
hic
hC
hri
sthold
sas
hea
dof
the
Churc
his
under
stood
byH
ooke
r,in
the
firs
tin
stan
ce,
rela
tive
tohi
spar
tici
pat
ion
inth
edi
vine
subs
tanc
e:
God
hat
hgi
ven
him
tohi
sC
hurc
hfo
rth
eH
ead
tf)
t(JV
ta,
above
all
Utp
(XV
U)
uosc
nc
àpic
,F
arr
abov
eal
lpri
nci
pal
itie
and
pow
erw
her
eas
the
pow
erw
hic
hoth
ers
hav
eis
subord
inat
edunto
his.
(LL
I’8
4.5)
The
div
ine
sover
eignty
isin
finit
eby
vir
tue
ofit
sbei
ng
enti
rely
5elf-
lim
itin
g:
‘the
bei
ng
ofG
odis
akin
dof
law
tohis
work
ing:
for
that
per
fect
ion
whic
hG
odis
giv
eth
per
fect
ion
toth
athe
doth
’.(L
iP
1.2.
2)A
lloth
erpow
ers
are
dis
tinguis
hed
by
‘ord
er’
from
the
div
ine
pow
erby
virt
ueof
bei
ng
conta
ined
and
lim
ited
byth
athig
hes
tpow
erw
hic
his
alone
self
-lim
itin
g.
Hooker
’sdis
cuss
ion
ofth
isdis
tinct
ion
of
‘ord
er’
sugges
tsth
ein
flue
nce
ofa
Neo
pla
tonic
logi
cco
nsi
sten
tw
ith
his
gen
eric
div
isio
nof
the
law
sin
Boo
kI.
Pow
eris
the
nec
essa
ryin
stru
men
tof
ord
eran
dw
her
eth
ere
isa
22.
lIe
sum
mon
ses
his
conc
eptio
nat
orde
rqu
itesu
ccin
ctly
atan
earl
ier
stag
ein
the
argu
men
tof
Boo
kV
III.
See
LEP
8.2.
1.,
for
exam
ple:
‘And
itth
inge
san
dpe
rson
she
ord
ered
this
doth
impl
ieth
atth
eyar
edis
tin
gui
5hed
byde
gree
s.Fo
ror
der
isa
grad
uall
disp
osit
ion.
The
who
lew
orld
cons
istin
g01
part
esso
man
icso
dit
fere
nt
isby
this
only
thin
gup
held
,he
uhi
chfr
amed
them
hath
sett
them
inor
der.
Yea
the
very
deiti
eit
self
both
kee
pet
han
dre
quir
eth
for
ever
this
tobe
kept
asa
law
,th
atw
here
soev
er,
ther
eis
aco
agm
enta
tion
ofm
any.
the
low
est
heknit
tto
the
hig
hes
tby
that
whic
hbe
ing
inte
rjac
ent
may
caus
eea
chto
clea
veun
toot
her
and
soal
lto
cont
inue
one.
’Fo
ran
anal
ysis
01th
isco
ncep
tof
‘ord
er’
see
W.
H.
Gre
enle
at,
Order.
E?np
iniL
isni
and
Polit
ics
Two
Tra
diti
ons
of
Engl
ish
Polit
ical
Tin
u)i
t11
15)
171)
1)(L
ondo
n,19
64)
cli.
2;se
eal
soD
avid
Litt
le,
Rel
igio
n,O
rder
and
law
;A
Stud
yin
Prc-
Rev
oiut
iOna
TVE
ngla
nd(O
xfor
d,19
70),
147-
66.
dis
tinct
ion
of‘o
rder
s’th
ere
isa
corr
espondin
gdi
stin
ctio
nof
‘pow
ers’
.T
hus
for
Hoo
ker
the
erro
rof
Car
twri
ght’
sfi
rst
obje
ctio
nto
the
roya
lhea
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
his
gro
unded
ina
fail
ure
todis
tin
guis
hth
eord
ers
ofbe
ing,
and
conse
quen
tly
thei
rre
spec
tive
and
dist
inct
pow
ers.
Solo
ngas
the
dist
inct
ion
ispre
serv
edbet
wee
nan
‘inf
init
e’pow
erco
rres
pondin
gto
anin
fini
tesu
bst
ance
ordi
vine
ord
eron
the
one
han
d,
and
afi
nite
pow
eron
the
leve
lof
afi
nite
,hum
anord
eron
the
othe
r,th
eti
tle
ofhea
dsh
ipm
ayre
ason
ably
beap
pli
edto
both
leve
lssi
mult
aneo
usl
y.
Thu
s‘i
nso
ber
mea
ning
and
good
theo
logi
cal
sens
e’th
ere
isa
dist
inct
ion
ofin
fini
tean
dfi
nite
,di
vine
and
hum
anhea
dsh
ips
acco
rdin
gto
thei
rdi
ffer
ence
oford
er.
The
seco
nddi
ffer
ence
bet
wee
nC
hris
t’s
infi
nite
and
the
civi
lm
agis
trat
e’s
fini
tehea
dsh
ipaf
firm
edby
Hoo
ker
conc
erns
‘mea
sure
ofpo
wer
’or
‘deg
ree’
.(L
EP
8.4.
5;FL
E3:
361)
.W
hils
tC
hris
t’s
auth
ori
tyre
ache
s‘o
ver
all
plac
es,
per
sons,
and
thin
gs’,
and
con
tinues
fore
ver
tobe
exer
cise
dby
him
,th
epow
erof
the
Mag
istr
ate
isli
mit
edby
the
terr
itor
yov
erw
hich
his
fini
teso
ver
eignty
exte
nds:
‘Chr
ist
issa
ydto
beun
iver
sall
yH
ead,
and
Kin
gno
furt
her
then
wit
hin
his
ow
ndo
min
ions
’.(L
EP
8.4.
7)Fo
rC
artw
right,
on
the
oth
ersi
de,
the
so-c
alle
d‘u
biqu
ity’
ofC
hris
t’s
pow
erit
self
render
sth
eci
vil
mag
istr
ate’
scl
aim
toth
eti
tle
ofhea
dsh
ipsu
per
fluous.
Furt
her
more
,he
argu
es,
itbe
long
s‘t
ohi
ski
ngly
offi
ce/ w
hich
god
his
hea
ven
lyF
athe
ran
noin
ted
hym
unto
’to
appoin
t‘t
heow
tw
ard
gover
nem
ent
ofhi
sch
urch
’.(T
C2:
440)
Inhi
sre
sponse
toth
isob
ject
ion,
Hoo
ker
dra
ws
upon
the
eccl
esio
logi
cal
prin
cipl
esdev
eloped
inth
eea
rlie
rbo
oks
ofhi
str
eati
sein
ord
erto
dem
on
stra
teth
enee
dto
dis
tinguis
hth
ehea
dsh
ipof
the
visi
ble
chur
chw
ithin
ali
mit
edte
rrit
ory
from
that
ofth
euniv
ersa
lvi
sibl
ech
urch
thro
ughout
the
worl
d.
23
He
sugges
tsth
atC
artw
righ
t’s
conf
usio
nof
the
‘tw
och
urch
es’
lead
sin
evit
ably
tohi
sre
ject
ion
ofth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ip.
At
issu
eis
the
doct
rine
ofC
hris
t’s
‘ubi
quit
y’,
aC
hri
sto
logi
cal
poin
tw
hich
bitt
erly
div
ided
the
mag
iste
rial
refo
rmer
sev
enam
ong
them
selv
es.
25
As
we
shal
lse
ein
our
consi
der
atio
nbe
low
ofth
eC
hris
tolo
gica
lim
plic
atio
nsof
the
hea
dsh
ipde
bate
,H
ooke
ruphold
sth
eort
hodox
Ref
orm
edte
achi
ngin
this
mat
ter,
The
thir
dan
dfi
nal
dist
inct
ion
posi
ted
byH
ooke
r,th
atw
hich
hehi
mse
lfca
lls
the
‘wei
ghti
est’
ofth
eth
ree,
conc
erns
‘the
very
kind
e
23.
See
TC2:
413:
‘Chr
ist
isne
ver
seve
red
from
his
body
!no
rfr
oman
ypa
rte
ofyt
!an
dis
able
!an
ddo
eth
perf
orm
that
whe
refo
rehe
isca
lled
head
!un
toal
lhi
sch
urch
.’24
.E
spec
ially
Boo
kIl
lof
the
Low
es.
25.
Fran
cois
Wen
del,
Cal
vin,
223-
4,34
5-50
.Se
eal
soF.
D.
Will
is,
Cal
in’s
Cat
holic
Chr
isto
logy
:Th
eFu
nctio
nof
the
soca
lled
extr
a-C
ahiin
istie
utn
inC
alvi
n’s
Theo
logy
(Lei
den,
1966
)9-
25.
[)k’l
,\so
Ric
hard
Hoo
ker’
sT
heol
ogy
otE
ccle
sias
tical
Dom
inio
n
ofth
eir
pow
er’.
(LET
’5.4
5)
Chr
ist’
spo
wer
isex
erci
sed
invi
sibl
y
and
spir
itu
alk
inso
far
as‘h
isco
rpore
all
resi
denc
eis
inhe
aven
’,
here
as
the
pow
erof
the
Civ
ilM
agis
trat
eis
visi
ble
and
outw
ard:
The
Hea
dsh
ipw
hich
egi
xeu
nto
Kin
gsis
alto
get
her
visi
bly
e\er
cise
dan
do
rder
eth
only
the
cti
’i
null
fram
eof
the
Churc
hes
aft
are
shee
ram
on
gst
us,
soth
atit
plai
nly
dif
fere
thfr
om
Chri
sts
een
inve
rynat
ure
and
kind
e.(L
EP
8.4.
5)[m
yit
alic
sj
1hi
last
diff
eren
ceb
etw
een
visi
ble
and
invi
sibl
epo
wer
,b
etw
een
two
kmd’
.of
Dom
inio
n’ba
sed
up
on
adis
tinct
ion
oftw
ore
alm
s—
the
spir
itual
and
the
exte
rnal
orth
efo
rlin
ico
iisci
c,it
nit
’an
dth
efo
rum
,‘ttc
rnw
n—
const
itu
tes
the
corn
erst
on
eof
Hoo
ker’
sat
tack
upon
the
site
rio
log
ical
assu
mpti
ons
ofC
artw
rig
ht
and
the
Dis
cipl
inar
i—
ans.
Th
rou
gh
ou
tth
ech
apte
rH
ooke
rap
pea
lsto
the
pn
nci
ple
sof
refo
rmed
ort
ho
do
xw
ith
rega
rdto
the
two
real
ms
doct
rine
inor
der
totu
inth
ed
isci
pli
nan
ans’
argum
ents
back
agai
nst
them
selv
es.
He
app
eals
yet
agai
nto
the
doct
rine
call
edth
e‘e
xtra
-Cal
v,ni
stic
um’
that
isto
say
that
Chr
ist’
s‘c
orpo
real
lre
side
nce
isin
heav
en’
,25
He
accu
ses
Car
twri
ght
ofco
nfu
sing
the
two
dis
tinct
kin
ds
ofpow
erin
his
asserti
on
ofC
hris
t’s
ruli
ng
pre
sence
inth
evi
sibl
ech
urc
h,
and
ther
eby
over
turn
ing
the
du
edis
tinct
ion
ofth
epro
per
ties
pecu
liar
toth
edi
vine
and
hum
annat
ure
sof
Chr
ist,
Tilt’
Adn
un
ition
Con
troz’
i’rsi
/an
dIh
’L)
oitr
inc
oftl
t’ad
ship
’
Fhe
prin
cipa
lth
eolo
gica
lel
emen
tsof
the
qu
esti
on
ofhea
dsh
ip
emer
ge
inth
eco
urs
eof
‘1h
om
asC
artw
ng
ht’
spo
lem
ical
exch
ange
s
wit
hA
rch
bis
ho
pW
hit
git
tin
the
so-c
alle
dA
dm
onit
ion
Contr
over
sy
1570
s.A
revi
ewof
the
dev
elopm
ent
ofth
eir
resp
ecti
veposi
tions
will
set
Hoo
ker’
san
alys
isof
the
issu
ein
the
cont
ext
ofco
nte
mpo
rarv
deb
ate.
Ihe
Adm
oniti
onto
tI;t’
Par)
iain
t’nt
of15
72had
iden
tifi
ed
the
esta
bli
shm
ent
ofth
eth
ree
esse
nti
al‘m
arks
’of
the
churc
h—
ord,
sacr
amen
ts,
and
disc
ipli
ne—
wit
hC
hris
t’s
ow
nju
risd
ic
tion
,T
heE
stab
lish
men
tis
urg
edby
the
Ad
mo
nit
ion
ers
‘to
go
forw
ard
toa
tho
rough
and
asp
eed
yre
form
atio
n’an
dto
‘alt
o
get
her
rem
ove
who
lean
ti-c
hri
st,
both
hea
d,
body,
and
bra
nch
,
and
perf
ectl
yp
lan
tth
atp
uri
tyof
the
wo
rd,
that
sim
plic
ity
ofth
e
sacr
amen
ts,
and
that
seve
rity
ofdi
scip
line
whic
hC
hri
sth
ath
co
m
man
ded
and
com
men
ded
tohi
sC
hurc
h,’
(WW
3:31
4).
Car
twri
gh
t
2r,.
Irn
cons
ider
ably
inde
bted
toE.
D.
Will
ri’s
anal
ysis
ofth
efu
nctio
nof
the
doct
rine
sona
med
inre
form
edth
eolo
gy
.Se
eC
alt’
ui’s
Cat
holic
Chris
—tt
’:t’
c/,
i-7.
27.
1he
reis
abr
ief
hut
succ
inct
dis
cuss
jon
ofth
equ
esti
onof
head
ship
inth
e.\
dm
onit
ion
Contr
over
syin
A.
FSc
ott
Pea
rson
,C
hurc
han
dSt
ate,
28—
35.
See
also
D.
J.‘d
cGin
n,[li
t’.‘
hty
,i’n
it:u
iiC
antr
ot’
ers
y,
(New
Bru
nsw
ick,
l’49
),ch
.7.
t’sp
.11
7.
expan
ds
upon
this
them
eof
the
‘thi
rdm
ark’
of‘d
isci
plin
e’in
AR
epl
yew
ith
the
stat
emen
tth
atth
ere
form
atio
nof
the
Chu
rch
cannot
beco
mpl
ete
unti
l
our
Sav
iour
Chr
ist
sitt
eth
who
lly
and
full
y,no
ton
lyin
his
chai
rto
teac
h,but
also
inhi
sth
rone
toru
le,
not
alon
ein
the
hea
rts
ofev
ery
one
byhi
sS
piri
t,but
also
gene
rall
yan
din
the
visi
ble
gover
nm
ent
ofhi
sC
hurc
h,
byth
ose
law
sof
disc
ipli
new
hich
heh
ath
pres
crib
ed.
(TC
1:15
5;W
W3:
315)
Car
twri
ght’
sin
sist
ence
onth
eju
risd
icti
onof
Chr
ist
inth
eex
ter
nal
go
ver
nm
ent
ofth
ech
urch
sets
the
stag
efo
rth
eco
nfli
ctov
erth
eti
tle
ofh
ead
ship
.W
hitg
ift’
sre
sponse
isdi
rect
edto
the
sote
riol
ogic
alan
dec
cles
iolo
gica
las
sum
pti
ons
impl
icit
insu
cha
view
.H
eap
pea
lsto
the
doct
rine
ofth
etw
ore
alm
san
dtw
ore
gim
ents
inord
erto
dem
on
stra
teth
atC
hris
t’s
hea
dsh
ipis
rest
rict
edto
the
inw
ard,
mys
tica
lg
over
nm
ent
ofth
echurc
h.
25
Car
twri
ght
reje
cts
this
trad
itio
nal
mag
iste
rial
inte
rpre
tati
on
of
the
two
real
ms
logi
c.T
heso
teri
olog
ical
sign
ific
ance
ofth
ed
isag
reem
ent
over
the
titl
eof
hea
dsh
ipis
read
ily
app
aren
tin
the
foll
owin
gpas
sage
from
his
Seco
ndR
eplie
:
For
too
ver
thro
we
this
doct
rine
that
Chr
iste
alon
eis
head
ofhi
sch
urch
!th
isdi
stin
ctio
nis
bro
wghte
/th
atac
cord
ing
toth
ein
war
din
flue
nce
off
grac
e!C
hris
teon
ely
ishe
ad:
but
acco
rdin
gto
the
owtw
ard
gove
rnem
entl
the
bein
gof
head
isco
mm
enw
ith
him
toot
hers
.F
oran
swer
wh
eru
nto
Ire
ferr
em
yse
lfin
part
eto
that
Iha
vew
ritt
enbef
ore
/off
the
absu
rde
dist
inct
ion
bet
wen
eth
eg
ov
ern
emen
tof
fth
ech
urc
he
byth
em
ynis
teri
eof
fm
en!
inst
itu
ted
off
ou
rS
av[i
our]
Chr
ist!
and
his
spir
itua
l!g
ov
ern
men
te.
For
that
ifth
ere
beno
hea
dbut
Chr
iste
!in
resp
ecte
ofth
esp
irit
uall
gover
ner
men
te:
ther
eis
nohe
adbut
hein
resp
ecte
ofth
ew
orde
/ sac
ram
ente
s!an
ddi
scip
line
adm
inis
tred
by
those
whom
hebat
hap
poin
cted
!fo
rasm
uch
asth
atis
also
his
spir
itua
ligo
vern
men
te.
..
ytfo
liow
eth
that
even
inth
eow
twar
deso
ciet
ie!
and
mee
tinge
sof
fth
ech
urch
!no
syin
pie
man
can
beca
lled
the
head
ofit.
See
ing
that
our
Sav
iour
Chr
iste
doin
geth
ew
hole
offic
eof
fth
ehe
adhi
mse
lfeal
one:
leav
eth
noth
ing
tom
en!b
ydo
ing
wher
off
they
mai
eob
tain
eth
atty
tle.
(TC
2:41
4)[m
yit
alic
sj
28.
See
WW
3:41
9.‘C
hris
tis
the
head
ofth
ech
urch
,an
dsp
iritu
ally
gove
rnet
hth
esa
me
inth
eco
nsci
ence
;bu
tbe
caus
eit
hat
han
outw
ard
and
visi
ble
form
,th
eref
ore
itre
quir
eth
anoutw
ard
and
visi
ble
gover
nm
ent,
whi
chC
hris
tdo
thex
ecut
eas
wel
lby
the
civi
lm
agis
trat
e,as
hedo
esby
the
eccl
esia
stic
alm
inis
ter;
and
ther
efor
eth
egm
ernm
ent
ofth
ech
urch
,in
resp
ect
ofth
eex
tern
alan
dvi
sibl
efo
rmof
it,is
not
only
spir
itu
al.
Chri
stgo
vern
eth
byhi
mse
lfsp
iritu
ally
only
,an
dby
his
min
iste
rsbo
thsp
irit
uall
’an
dex
tern
ally
.
Din
siu
82R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yof
Ecc
lesi
asti
cal
Dom
inio
n
Bot
hpar
ties
add
ress
the
prob
lem
ofth
evi
sibl
eh
ead
ship
init
ally
inre
lati
on
toir
chie
pis
copal
and
epis
copa
lau
tho
rity
.A
gai
nst
Whi
t-gi
ftan
din
suppo
rtof
the
Adm
onit
ione
rs,
Car
twri
ght
allo
ws
that
(hri
stal
one
is‘a
rch
-sh
eph
erd
’,an
dth
at‘h
eis
not
only
said
the
hea
d,
and
vet
notw
ithst
andin
gth
ere
isnot
mor
ehea
ds
ofth
ech
urch
but
he’.
(TC
1:61
)T
here
sas
nev
eran
ysu
ch‘s
up
erio
rit
yof
min
iste
rs’
pre
scri
bed
inth
eN
ewT
esta
men
t.In
defe
nce
ofth
isre
pudia
tion
ofec
cles
iast
ical
hier
arch
y,C
artw
rig
ht
reje
cts
the
wel
l-es
tabli
shed
dis
tinct
ion
ofre
form
edec
cies
iolo
gyb
etw
een
the
spir
itua
lan
dex
tern
alre
alm
sof
orde
r:rh
eD
[oct
or’s
]an
swer
unto
the
seco
ndp
rop
osi
tio
nby
dis
tinc
tion
isfu
llof
dis
ord
eran
dhat
hno
thin
gso
und.
Fir
stt
fault
eth
inth
atvt
ren
det
ha
sunder
thin
ges
whi
chca
nnot
bese
per
ated
!an
dth
attw
ow
aies
:on
ein
sep
arat
ing
the
gov
ernem
ent
of
the
chu
rch
bypa
stor
s!do
ctor
s!et
c.fr
omth
esp
irit
uall
.F
orw
hen
the
eccl
esia
stic
all
min
istr
ieh
ath
resp
ecte
toth
eso
wle
!an
dco
nsci
ence
:w
hen
yt
isca
lled
the
my
nis
teri
eot
tth
esp
irit
e/sp
irit
uall
:w
hen
they
whi
chex
ecut
eyt
!ar
eL
alle
dm
vn
iste
rsin
the
kin
gd
om
off
heav
en:
when
the
ow
tw
ard
pre
achin
g!
exco
mm
unic
atio
n!
and
oth
erdis
cipli
ne
wh
ich
they
use!
besp
irit
uall
:th
issep
erati
on
off
the
owtw
ard
gove
rnel
nent
oil
the
chur
chpr
omth
esp
irit
ual!
,an
dm
akin
gof
fth
emopposi
tem
ember
s!doth
not
dis
tinguis
he
but
dest
roie
the
gove
rner
nent
off
Chr
iste
.(T
C2:
409,
410)
Imy
ital
ics]
Whi
tgif
tst
rongly
oppose
dth
isco
nfu
sion
ofth
etw
oo
rder
sof
go
ver
nm
ent.
Inhi
sD
efi’n
seof
the
Ans
wer
hecl
arif
ies
this
dis
tinct
ion
late
rta
ken
up
byH
ooker
,nam
ely
bet
wee
ntw
odis
tinct
kin
ds
ofre
gim
ent:
]Chr
ist]
ison
ly‘A
rchb
isho
p’an
dB
isho
pin
resp
ect
ofhi
ssp
irit
ual
gove
rnm
ent,
whi
chhe
keep
eth
only
unto
him
self
,an
din
the
resp
ect
that
all
oth
erhe
un
der
him
,an
dh
ave
thei
rau
thori
tyfr
om
him
,B
utth
isnam
em
ayal
soap
tly
begi
ven
un
toth
ose
that
have
the
over
sight
ototh
erb
ish
op
sin
the
exte
rnal
gover
nm
ent
ofth
ech
urch
.(W
W2:
85)
‘Ihu
sep
isco
pal
reg
imen
tor
juri
sdic
tion
isan
alyse
dst
rict
lyin
ac
ord
ance
wit
hth
eec
cies
iolo
gica
ldis
tinct
ion
bet
wee
nth
eC
hurc
has
‘mys
tica
lbo
dy’
and
as‘p
olit
icbo
dy’
The
mys
tica
lep
isco
pal
po
wer
ofC
hri
stis
tohe
kep
tcl
earl
ydis
tinct
from
the
exte
rnal
juri
sdic
tion
of
bis
hops
inth
evi
sibl
ech
urc
h,
Inth
eco
urs
eof
this
dis
pute
wit
hW
hitg
ift
over
the
titl
e,ju
risd
icti
on,
and
hie
rarc
hy
ofbis
hops
and
arch
bis
ho
ps,
Car
twri
gh
td
evel
ops
the
theo
logi
cal
stan
dpoin
tfr
omw
hich
hew
asla
ter
toat
tack
the
roya
lh
ead
ship
ofth
eC
hu
rch
.F
orhi
mth
eco
ncep
tof
epis
copa
lhie
rarc
hy
dero
gat
esfr
omth
epec
uli
arm
edia
tori
alof
fice
ofC
hri
st.
29
Ind
eed
the
who
leco
ntro
vers
ybet
wee
nC
artw
right
and
Whi
tgif
tce
ntre
sup
onth
epr
ecis
em
anne
rin
whi
chC
hris
t’s
auth
orit
yov
erth
eC
hurc
his
exer
cise
d,th
atis
tosa
yw
het
her
itis
med
iate
dor
unm
edia
ted
byfi
nite
,ex
tern
alm
eans
and
per
sons.
Itis
ofgr
eat
cons
eque
nce
toth
eult
imat
eco
here
nce
ofth
eD
isci
plin
aria
nec
cies
iolo
gyth
atC
hris
t,an
dno
oth
er,
should
exer
cise
epis
copa
lau
thori
tyov
erhi
sbo
dyth
eC
hurc
h.
Chr
ist’
su
nm
edia
ted
hea
dsh
ipis
otsu
chgr
eat
impor
tanc
eth
atC
artw
right
sees
itas
am
atte
rof
fundam
enta
ldoct
rinal
orth
odox
y.So
also
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
resi
stan
ceto
the
Civ
ilM
agis
trat
e’s
clai
mto
the
titl
eof
eccl
esia
stic
alh
ead
ship
isde
eply
root
edin
thes
esa
me
theo
logi
cal
prin
cipl
es.
Dis
puta
tion
betw
een
Car
twri
ght
and
Whi
tgif
ton
the
subj
ect
ofth
ela
y-he
adsh
ipem
erge
dat
vari
ous
poin
tsin
the
cours
eof
the
Adm
onit
ion
Contr
over
sy.
The
ques
tion
isdis
cuss
edin
the
cote
xtof
the
defi
niti
onof
juri
sdic
tion
alpow
ers
clai
med
byth
eD
isci
plin
aria
nE
lder
ship
v,
inth
ede
bate
over
the
per
form
ance
ofci
vil
funct
ions
ofec
cles
iast
ical
pers
ons
3i,
and
inre
lati
onto
oth
er‘t
opic
s’of
the
contr
over
syas
wel
l.°
The
par
ticu
lar
elem
ent
ofth
atdeb
ate
whic
his
ofsp
ecia
lin
tere
stin
our
pre
sent
inqu
iry,
how
ever
,is
that
whi
chga
veri
seto
Car
twri
ght’
sap
pea
lto
the
auth
ori
tyof
cert
ain
dis
tinct
ions
ofre
ceiv
edT
rini
tari
anan
dC
hris
tolo
gica
lo
rth
odoxy
insu
pport
ofhi
sth
eory
ofth
ehea
dsh
ip.
For
Car
twri
ght,
the
stru
ctu
reof
auth
ori
tyin
the
Churc
his
ulti
mat
ely
ath
eolo
gica
lpr
oble
m.
Hoo
ker
evid
entl
yag
rees
wit
hC
artw
righ
t’s
esti
mat
ion
ofth
eth
eolo
gica
lnat
ure
ofth
eis
sue.
Indee
d,
hech
oose
sto
empl
oyC
artw
right’
sow
nth
eolo
gica
l-do
ctri
nal
fram
ing
ofth
eques
tion
asa
star
tin
g-p
oin
tfo
rhi
sow
nan
alys
isof
the
roya
lhea
dsh
ip.
As
we
have
show
n,
the
dis
pu
teov
erth
eau
thori
tyof
bis
hops
inth
eC
hurc
hpro
vid
edth
eoc
casi
onfo
rC
artw
righ
t’s
init
ial
the
olog
ical
obse
rvat
ions
onth
eco
ncep
tof
hea
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
h.
Car
twri
ght
insi
sts
that
‘the
titl
eof
anar
chbis
hop
ison
lypro
per
toou
rS
avio
urC
hris
t;th
eref
ore
none
may
take
that
unto
him
’.(T
C1:
61;
WW
2:81
)F
oll
ow
ing
the
lead
ofth
eA
dm
onit
ioner
s,
thos
eti
tles
whi
char
epro
per
toou
rS
avio
urC
hris
t;bu
tth
eti
tle
ofan
arch
bish
opis
only
pro
per
toou
rS
avio
urC
hris
t;th
eref
ore
none
max
’ta
keth
atu
nto
him
.T
hat
itis
prop
erto
our
Sav
iour
Chr
ist
appea
reth
byth
atw
hich
St.
Pete
rsa
ith,
whe
rehe
calle
thhi
mdpir
ovu
whi
chis
‘arc
h-sh
ephe
rd’,
orar
chbi
shop
;fo
rbi
shop
and
shep
herd
are
allone..,
whi
chtit
les
are
neve
rfo
und
tobe
give
nun
toan
y,bu
tun
toou
rS
avio
urC
hris
t,an
dar
epr
oper
title
sof
his
med
iatio
n,an
dth
eref
ore
cann
otbe
wit
hout
bold
pres
umpt
ion
appl
ied
unto
any
mor
tal
man
.’30
.W
W3:
I5O
ff.
31.
WW
3:40
4ff.
32.
See,
for
exam
ple,
Car
twri
ght’
san
dW
hitg
ift’
sop
pose
din
terp
reta
tion
sof
Mat
t.20
,‘w
heth
erC
hris
tfo
rbid
deth
rule
and
supe
rior
ity
unto
the
min
iste
rs’,
WW
1:14
8-17
4,29
.Se
eIC
1:h
l;iV
IV2:
81‘It
isun
law
tul
[or
any
man
tota
keu
po
nhi
m
84R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yof
Ecc
lesi
asti
cal
Dom
inio
n
Car
twri
gh
tgro
und
sth
isvie
sin
the
nega
tive
auth
ori
tyof
Scr
iptu
re.
(WW
279)
Car
twri
ght
cite
sa
vari
ety
ofsc
riptu
ral
text
sw
hich
refe
rto
Chr
ist’
sep
isco
pal
role
,sm
has
the
‘arc
h-le
ader
oflif
ean
dof
salv
atio
n’or
‘the
grea
tS
hep
her
dof
the
shee
p’.
(TC
1:61
;W
W2:
82i
\Vhit
gif
t’s
resp
onse
toth
isar
gum
ent
isto
insi
ston
acl
ear
dis
tin
ctio
nbet
wee
nth
esp
irit
ual
and
the
exte
rnal
regim
ent
ofth
eC
hurc
h:
Inth
esp
irit
ual
reg
imen
tC
hris
tis
only
the
Pas
tor;
and
all
oth
erbe
his
shee
p:in
the
exte
rnal
reg
imen
tth
ere
bem
any
oth
erpas
tors
.In
the
spir
itual
regim
ent
Chr
ist
ison
lyth
eA
rchbis
hop,
and
go
ver
net
hal
l,to
whom
all
oth
erm
ust
mak
eth
eir
acco
unt;
hut
inth
eex
tern
algover
nm
ent
ther
em
aybe
man
yar
chb
ish
ops.
asth
est
ate
ofev
er’
chur
chre
qu
iret
h.
(WW
2:83
,84)
Agr
eat
dual
inth
isdeb
ate
turn
su
po
nth
isdis
tinct
ion
ofth
esp
iri
tual
and
the
exte
rnal
real
ms;
this
isal
som
ost
cert
ainl
yth
eca
sefo
rH
ooke
r,as
‘use
shal
lse
e.In
deed
,W
hitg
ift
dis
ting
uis
hed
wit
han
alm
ost
Car
tesi
ancl
arit
ybet
wee
nth
esp
irit
ual
and
exte
rnal
real
ms,
bet
wee
nw
hat
late
rp
hil
oso
ph
ers
would
term
res
co
git
an
san
dre
sor
what
Cal
vin
him
self
refe
rred
toas
the
foru
mco
nscie
n
tiO
t’an
dth
efo
mul
ilt’
xtem
nuni
. ‘W
hitg
ift’
sde
fenc
eof
the
conc
ept
ofec
cles
iast
ical
hie
rarc
hy
ingen
eral
and
ofth
eof
fice
ofb
ish
op
san
dar
chb
ish
op
sin
par
ticu
lar
stem
sfr
omth
iscl
ear
sep
arat
ion
ofan
exte
rnal
real
mof
hum
anas
soci
atio
nsu
bjec
tto
coer
cive
law
and
outw
ard
rule
,on
the
one
han
d,
and
anin
tern
alre
alm
ofsp
irit
ual
asso
ciat
ion
gover
ned
byth
ein
war
d-w
ork
ing
ofG
race
and
the
Hol
yG
host
.‘
[his
shar
pd
isti
nct
ion
bet
wee
nth
em
ysti
cal
orin
war
dre
alm
and
the
poli
tica
lor
exte
rnal
real
mp
rov
ides
the
under
lyin
glo
gic
for
Whi
tgif
t’s
subse
quen
tdet
ence
ofth
eC
ivil
Mag
istr
ate’
sso
ere
ign
auth
ori
tyov
erth
eC
hurc
h.
C’a
rtw
righ
tre
spo
nds
toW
hitg
itt’
sar
gum
ent
byre
ject
ing
this
dis
tin
ctio
nbet
wee
nsp
irit
ual
and
exte
rnal
auth
ori
tyoutr
ight.
Inhi
svi
ewth
eex
tern
algover
nm
ent
ofth
eC
hu
rch
is‘s
piri
tual
’,an
dth
edis
tin
ctio
nbet
wee
nth
etw
ore
gim
ents
urg
edby
Whi
tgif
tu
nd
erm
ines
‘the
gover
nem
ent
ofC
hris
t’(T
C2:
410)
The
issu
eis
the
33R.
Des
cart
es,
‘Med
itat
ions
onF
irst
Ph
ilo
sop
hy
’in
The
Philo
soph
ical
Vvr
it:n
e,s
tran
slat
edby
John
Co
ttin
gh
am,
Rob
ert
Stoo
thof
f,an
dD
ugal
dM
urd
och
,2
ol,
,(C
ambr
idge
,19
84)
ii,1-
50.
34.
Imt.
i.1i
.13
.35
.13
l\1:
5‘It
isto
heunder
stan
ded
that
ther
eis
ado
uble
go
ver
nm
ent
ci
the
churc
h,
the
one
spi;
itual
,th
eo
ther
exte
rnal
.C
hris
ton
ly,
and
none
othe
r,h
thu
op
erat
ion
ofhi
sS
piri
tan
ddi
rect
ion
ofhi
sw
ord,
spir
itua
lly
ernet
hhi
sch
urch
,an
dre
igni
ng:n
flit e
oiis
ciel
ices
ofth
efa
ithf
ulguid
eth
thei
rm
inds
..
.T
heei
ti’ri
iilg
ov
ern
men
th
ath
both
asu
bsta
nce
and
am
atte
rab
out
whi
chit
isoc
cupi
ed,
and
also
afo
rmto
atta
inth
esa
me,
consi
stin
gin
erta
inof
fice
san
dfu
ncti
ons
‘[m
yit
alic
s].
man
ner
ofin
terp
reti
ng
the
prec
ise
nat
ure
ofth
edi
stin
ctio
nan
dco
nnec
tion
ofth
etw
ore
alm
s,T
heth
eolo
gica
lpr
oble
munder
lyin
gth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
har
ises
,fo
rC
artw
right,
inth
eco
ntex
tof
cont
rove
rsy
conc
erni
ngth
enat
ure
ofep
isco
pal
auth
or
ity.
He
mov
esdi
rect
lyfr
omhi
sat
tack
onth
ear
chie
pisc
opal
offi
cew
ithin
the
visi
ble
stru
cture
ofth
eC
hurc
hto
ques
tion
the
roya
lhea
dsh
ipit
self
.A
sw
esh
all
see,
ther
eis
ave
rycl
ose
conn
ecti
onw
ith
inC
artw
righ
t’s
theo
logy
bet
wee
nC
hris
t’s
past
oral
‘she
pher
din
g’ro
lean
dhi
sso
vere
ign
‘kin
gly’
role
,an
dhe
nce
bet
wee
nth
eco
nce
pti
ons
ofep
isco
pacy
and
roya
lsu
pre
mac
y,
inso
far
as‘P
rinc
esar
esa
ydto
beH
eads
un
der
Chr
ist’
asw
ell
asbi
shop
s:
And
,if
any
man
vil
lre
ply
and
say
that
itis
not
said
that
our
Sav
iour
Chr
ist
ison
lyar
chbis
hop,
Ian
swer
that
heis
not
only
said
the
hea
d,
and
yet
no
twit
hst
and
ing
ther
eis
no
mor
ehea
ds
ofth
ech
urch
but
he.
And
,if
itbe
furt
her
said
that
thes
ear
chbis
hops
are
but
under
and
asit
wer
esu
bord
inat
ear
chbis
hops,
Isa
yth
ata
man
may
asw
ell
say
that
men
may
beal
sounder
-hea
ds
ofth
ech
urch
;w
hich
isth
esa
me
whi
chis
alle
ged
for
the
pope
.(T
C1:
61;
WW
2:84
)
Inre
sponse
,W
hitg
ift
pre
sses
furt
her
wit
hhi
sdi
stin
ctio
nof
the
two
real
ms
and
dra
ws
into
the
disc
ussi
onth
efi
nal,
rem
aini
ngele
men
tin
the
deb
ate
over
the
adm
issi
bili
tyof
eccl
esia
stic
alhi
erar
chy,
viz,
the
civi
lm
agis
trat
eas
head
:
Chr
ist
is‘t
heon
lyH
ead
ofth
eC
hurc
h’:
ifby
the
head
you
under
stan
dth
atw
hich
give
thth
ebo
dylif
e,se
nse,
and
mot
ion;
for
Chr
ist
only
byhi
sS
piri
tdo
thgi
velif
ean
dn
utr
imen
tto
his
body
:he
only
dotl
ipour
spir
itua
lbl
essi
ngs
into
it,an
ddo
thin
war
dly
dire
ctan
dgo
vern
it.L
ikew
ise,
he
ison
lyth
eH
ead
ofth
ew
hole
chur
ch;
for
that
titl
eca
nnot
agre
eto
any
othe
r.B
ut,
ifby
‘the
head
’yo
uunder
stan
dan
exte
rnal
rule
ran
dgover
nor
ofan
ypar
ticu
lar
nat
ion
orch
urch
(in
whi
chsi
gnif
icat
ion
head
isus
uall
yta
ken)
,th
enI
dono
tpe
rcei
vew
hy
the
mag
istr
ate
may
not
asw
ell
beca
lled
the
head
ofth
ech
urch
,th
atis
,th
ech
ief
gover
nor
ofit
inth
eex
tern
alpo
licy
,as
heis
call
edth
ehea
dof
the
peop
le,
and
ofth
eco
mm
onw
ealt
h.
(WW
2:85
)
Thu
sth
efu
nd
amen
tal
doct
rina
ldi
stin
ctio
nof
the
two
real
ms
isst
abil
ised
and
up
hel
din
the
theo
ryof
hea
dsh
ipby
the
dist
inct
ion
bet
wee
nth
esp
irit
ual
rule
ofC
hri
stin
the
eccl
esia
stic
alfo
rum
con
scie
nti
ae
and
the
exte
rnal
,po
liti
cal
rule
ofth
ego
dly
prin
cein
the
eccl
esia
stic
alfo
rum
extL
’rum
.
Sofa
rw
eha
veex
amin
edC
artw
righ
t’s
posi
tion
asse
tfo
rth
inhi
sin
itia
lR
eply
eto
anA
nsw
erM
ade
ofD
octo
rW
hilg
ift
(TC
1).
Itis
,how
ever
,in
his
Seco
ndR
eplie
agai
nst
Mas
ter
Whi
tgift
e’s
Seco
ndA
nsw
er(T
C2
and
3),
wri
tten
inre
sponse
toW
hitg
ift’
sD
efen
ceof
86R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yot
Ecc
lesi
asti
cal
Dom
inio
n
the
Ans
wer
,th
atC
artw
righ
tex
poun
dsm
ost
fully
the
expl
icit
lydoc
trin
algro
unds
ofhi
sob
ject
ions
.H
edo
esso
ina
dire
ctre
spon
seto
the
posi
tion
argu
edby
Whi
tgif
tin
the
pass
age
from
the
Dc
feiic
equ
oted
imm
edia
tely
abov
e,w
her
ehe
urge
dth
atth
eC
ivil
Mag
istr
ate
may
bere
gard
edas
head
ofth
eC
hurc
h‘u
nder
Chr
ist’
acco
rdin
gto
the
cruc
ial
dist
inct
ion
ofth
esp
irit
ual
and
exte
rnal
real
ms
oror
ders
ofru
le.
(WW
2:85
)In
his
rejo
inde
r(T
C2:
411f
f.),
Car
twri
ght
accu
ses
Whtg
ift
ofac
hiev
ing
prec
isel
yth
eop
posi
teof
his
prof
esse
din
tent
ion
otho
ldin
gap
art
the
spir
itua
lan
dth
eex
tern
alre
alm
s.Ju
stas
inth
eca
seof
the
titl
ear
chbi
shop
,th
eti
tle
ofhe
adsh
ipis
,fo
rC
artw
righ
t,pr
oper
toC
hris
tal
one,
and
‘ther
efo
reca
nnot
bew
itho
utbo
ldpr
esum
ptio
nap
plie
dun
toan
ym
orta
lm
an’.
(TC
1:61
)In
orde
rto
esta
blis
hfi
rmly
his
asse
rtio
nof
Chr
ist’
sso
lehe
adsh
ipof
the
Chu
rch,
Car
twri
ght
laun
ches
adi
rect
atta
ckon
the
theo
logi
cal
foun
dati
onof
Whi
tgif
t’s
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
the
spir
itua
lan
dex
tern
alre
alm
san
dre
gim
ents
.Fo
rC
artw
righ
tth
isin
volv
esa
rem
arka
ble
re-d
efin
itio
nof
the
‘spi
ritu
al’
gove
rnm
ent
ofth
eC
hurc
h:
Sei
ngth
eref
ore
the
exte
rnal
lgo
vern
emen
tof
fC
hris
tin
his
chur
chis
spir
itua
ll!
and
even
that
inw
ard
tow
chof
fth
esp
irit
eof
God/i
sno
tor
dina
ril
/bu
tby
the
subo
rdin
ate
min
iste
ries
whi
chG
odha
thap
poin
cted
inhi
sch
urch
:yt
ism
anif
est
that
the
dist
inct
ion!
that
Chr
ist
hath
nosi
thor
dina
tepa
stor
sun
dern
eath
hini
insp
irit
ual
gove
rnm
ent,
isfa
lse.
(TC
2:41
0)
For
Car
twri
ght
itw
asW
hitg
ift’
ser
ror
toha
vetr
eate
dth
eex
tern
alm
inis
trat
ions
ofth
eC
hurc
h,in
clud
ing
itsgo
vern
men
t,as
not
spir
itu
al.
Thu
she
repu
diat
esW
hitg
ift’
sdi
stin
ctio
nby
emph
asiz
ing
the
imm
edia
teun
ion
ofth
esp
irit
ual
end
and
the
exte
rnal
mea
ns.
Car
twri
ght’
sju
stif
icat
ion
for
this
‘spi
ritu
alis
ed’
exte
rnal
mm
istr
v,under
the
‘unm
edia
ted’
head
ship
ofC
hris
t,is
sust
aine
dby
adi
rect
appe
alto
the
cate
gori
esof
Tri
nita
rian
and
Chr
isto
logi
cal
disc
ours
e.C
artw
righ
t’s
purp
ose
isto
esta
blis
hth
eD
isci
plin
aria
nvi
ewof
Chr
ist’
sso
lehe
adsh
ipof
the
Chu
rch
inth
est
rong
hold
ofba
sic
syst
emat
icdo
ctri
ne.“
Thu
shi
sar
gum
ent
proc
eeds
toch
alle
nge
Whi
tgif
t’s
basi
cC
hris
tolo
gica
las
sum
ptio
ns:
The
oth
erfa
ulte
ofth
isdi
stin
ctio
n[i
.e.
betw
een
spir
itua
lan
dex
tern
algover
nm
ent
ofth
eC
hurc
h]is
!th
atyt
conf
ound
eth
and
shuf
flet
hto
geth
erth
eau
tori
tie
ofou
rS
avio
urC
hris
t/as
heis
the
sonn
eof
fG
odon
ely
befo
real
lw
orid
es!
coeq
ual1
wit
hhi
sfa
ther
:w
ith
that
whi
chhe
hath
gyve
nof
fhi
sfa
ther
and
whi
chhe
exer
cise
thin
resp
ecte
heis
med
iato
rbe
twen
eG
odan
dus
.Fo
rin
the
gove
rnem
ent
off
the
chur
ch!
and
supe
rior
ytie
over
the
offi
cers
off
it!ou
rS
avio
urC
hris
thi
mse
lfe
hat
ha
supe
rior
!
whi
chis
his
fath
er:
but
inth
ego
vern
emen
tof
fki
ngdo
mes
/an
dot
her
com
mon
wea
lthe
s/an
din
the
supe
rior
ity
whi
chhe
hath
over
king
es!
and
judg
es!
heha
thno
supe
rior
!bu
tim
me
diat
eau
thor
itie
wit
hhi
sfa
ther
.T
herf
ore
the
mou
ldin
geup
pof
fth
etw
oes
tate
s!an
dgo
vern
emen
tes
toge
ther
!is
tola
yth
efo
unda
tion
sof
man
yer
rors
.(T
C2:
411)
By
mea
nsof
this
asso
ciat
ion
ofhi
sow
nin
terp
reta
tion
ofth
epro
ble
mof
head
ship
wit
hsu
chhi
ghdo
ctri
ne,
Car
twri
ght
impl
ies
that
the
Est
abli
shm
ent’
svi
ewis
grou
nded
infu
ndam
enta
lly
hete
rodo
xth
eolo
gica
las
sum
ptio
ns.
Thi
sis
the
high
est
poss
ible
leve
lof
ar
gum
ent
that
Car
twri
ght
coul
dha
vech
osen
tota
kean
dis
clea
rly
indi
cati
veof
the
theo
logi
cal
sign
ific
ance
atta
ched
byhi
mto
the
ques
tion
ofth
eR
oyal
Sup
rem
acy.
Acc
ordi
ngto
Car
twri
ght’
spo
siti
on,
then
,C
hris
tha
sa
doub
lero
leor
func
tion
asth
e‘G
od-m
an’.
On
the
one
hand
,he
isth
eso
urce
ofal
lau
thor
ity
inth
ese
cula
rpo
liti
cal
orde
rby
virt
ueof
his
bein
gth
eS
onof
God
;on
the
othe
rha
nd,
heex
erci
ses
ulti
mat
epo
wer
ashe
adof
his
body
,th
eC
hurc
h,th
roug
hhi
sM
anhood,
Car
twri
ght’
sba
ses
his
twof
old
dist
inct
ion
ofC
hris
t’s
ruli
ngfu
nc
tion
son
the
fund
amen
tal
Chr
isto
logi
cal
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
the
hum
anan
ddi
vine
natu
res
inth
esi
ngle
pers
onof
Chr
ist.
On
the
one
hand
,C
hris
tqu
aS
onof
Man
and
Red
eem
er,
that
isto
say,
ac
cord
ing
tohi
shu
man
natu
re,
isin
feri
orto
the
Fat
her.
(TC
2:41
7)Fo
rit
isth
roug
hhi
sas
sum
ptio
nof
the
hum
anna
ture
that
Chr
ist
isab
leto
med
iate
betw
een
God
and
men
.A
ndfo
rC
artw
righ
t,C
hris
t’s
med
iato
rial
role
asR
edee
mer
isid
enti
fied
wit
hhi
ssp
eci
fic
func
tion
ashe
adof
the
Chu
rch.
On
the
othe
rha
nd,
Chr
ist’
sre
lati
onof
equa
lity
wit
hth
eF
athe
rst
ems
from
his
part
icip
atio
nin
the
divi
ne,
natu
re.
Car
twri
ght
proc
eeds
toap
ply
this
dis
tinc
tion
ofth
etw
ona
ture
sof
Chr
ist
—th
ehu
man
and
the
divi
ne—
toth
equ
esti
onof
head
ship
and
toth
ecl
osel
yre
late
dm
atte
rof
the
natu
reof
the
asso
ciat
ion
betw
een
the
Chu
rch
and
secu
lar
poli
tica
lco
mm
unit
y.P
ower
and
auth
orit
yin
the
Chu
rch,
hear
gues
,ha
sits
ulti
mat
eso
urce
inC
hris
tas
the
Son
ofM
an,
the
Med
iato
r,an
dth
eref
ore
Chr
ist
ashe
is‘s
ubor
dina
teto
the
Fa
ther
’.B
yco
ntra
st,
auth
orit
yin
the
civi
lco
mm
unit
yis
not
deri
ved
from
Chr
ist
asm
anan
dm
edia
tor,
but
rath
erfr
omC
hris
tas
the
Div
ine
Son,
co-e
qual
wit
hth
eFa
ther
’.A
sth
esu
prem
eso
urce
ofal
lci
vil
juri
sdic
tion
,C
hris
tis
not
view
edas
subo
rdin
ate
toth
eF
athe
r.Fo
rth
eD
isci
plin
aria
n,C
hris
t’s
hum
anit
yis
the
sour
ceof
eccl
esia
stic
algo
vern
men
tw
here
asal
lot
her
wor
ldly
gove
rnm
ent
deri
ves
dire
ctly
from
his
deit
y.T
hus
Car
twri
ght
argu
esfo
ra
div
isi
onof
civi
lan
dec
cles
iast
ical
juri
sdic
tion
corr
espo
ndin
gdi
rect
lyto
the
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
the
divi
nean
dhu
man
natu
res
ofC
hris
t.T
heim
port
ance
ofth
isdo
ctri
nal
just
ific
atio
nto
the
unde
rsta
ndin
g3o
.S
eees
peci
ally
TC2:
41U
-419
;co
mpar
eTC
1:14
3,13
5an
dTC
3:15
1-70
.
88R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yot
Ecc
lesi
astic
alD
omin
ion
h9
otC
art
righ
t’s
inte
rpre
tati
on
ofth
ehea
dsh
ipques
tion
can
har
dly
heo’
eres
tirn
ated
.A
sw
esh
all
Hoo
ker’
sow
nan
alys
isof
the
ques
tion
otth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipin
Boo
kV
iii
isa
det
aile
dco
mm
enta
ryupon,
and
crit
icis
mof
,th
isth
eolo
gica
le’
Kcu
rsus
byC
artw
right
inth
eSt
’Lon
dR
i’pii
i’.
l-jo
okii
[‘‘5?i5
Cto
Car
tzvr
ogiit
’sT
heol
ogic
alO
bjec
tions
l-hi
okc’
r’s
resp
onse
toC
artw
right’
scl
aim
sco
nce
rnm
gth
eex
clus
ive
nat
ure
ofC
hris
t’s
hea
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
had
dre
sses
the
under
lyin
gth
eolo
gica
lcr
uxof
the
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yde
bate
Car
twri
ght’
sdis
tinct
ion
bet
wee
nC
hris
t’s
auth
ori
tyov
erth
eC
hurc
hfr
omhi
suniv
ersa
lau
thori
tyov
erse
cula
rpo
liti
cal
com
mu
niti
esac
cord
ing
toth
edis
tinct
ion
ofhi
stw
onat
ure
sis
vie
wed
byH
ooke
ras
the
theo
logi
cal
pivo
tof
the
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
obje
ctio
nto
the
roya
lhea
dsh
ip.
Wer
eth
ese
basi
cth
eolo
gica
las
sum
pti
ons
show
nto
hein
erro
rth
enth
een
tire
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
case
agai
nst
the
roya
lhea
dsh
ipw
ould
coll
apse
.S
uch
ach
alle
nge
ofort
ho
doxy
ispr
ecis
ely
1-lo
oker
’sap
pro
ach
toC
artw
right’
sar
gum
ents
.H
ooke
rbe
gins
byques
tionin
gth
eD
isci
plin
aria
npre
mis
eth
at‘f
orth
eC
ivil
Mag
istr
ate
his
offi
cebel
onget
hunto
kin
gdom
esan
dco
mm
onw
ealt
hs,
nei
ther
ishe
ther
ein
anunder
orsu
bord
inat
eH
ead
ofC
hris
tco
nsi
der
ing
that
his
auth
enti
cco
min
eth
from
God
sim
plie
and
imm
edia
tely
even
asou
rS
avio
urC
hris
t’s
doth
’.(T
C2:
418;
q.v.
FL
E3:
366)
Tha
tis
tosa
y,ci
vil
auth
ori
tyder
ives
from
the
Godhea
dw
ithout
the
med
iati
on
ofC
hris
t,th
e‘G
od-m
an’,
and
isth
us
fundam
enta
lly
dis
tinguis
hed
from
eccl
esia
stic
alau
thori
ty.
Cart
righ
t’s
asse
rtio
nof
a‘t
wof
old
supe
rior
itie
’in
Chri
stac
cord
ing
tohi
st
ofol
dnat
ure
ensu
res
that
eccl
esia
stic
alan
dci
vil
juri
sdi
ctio
nco
inci
deso
lely
inth
eper
son
ofC
hris
thi
mse
lf,
who
alon
eis
the
perf
ect
unio
not
Godhea
dan
dM
anhood.
Ecc
lesi
asti
cal
juri
sdic
tioi
iori
gin
ates
inC
hri
stac
cord
ing
tohi
shu
man
nat
ure
;ci
vil
juri
sdit
ion
ori
gin
ates
inC
hnst
sim
ply
ashe
isth
ese
cond
divi
nepers
on
of
the
Tri
nit
y.
Cart
wri
ght’
sass
ert
ion
of
such
adoctr
inal
basi
sfo
rth
eder
ivat
ion
ofau
thori
tyre
quir
esth
atec
cles
iast
ical
and
crii
iau
thori
tyre
mai
nw
holl
ydi
stin
ctan
dse
para
tein
the
wor
ld:
For
the
chur
chis
gove
rned
wit
hth
atki
ndof
gove
rnm
ent
whi
chth
eph
ilos
ophe
rsth
atw
rite
ofth
ebe
stco
mm
onw
ealt
hs
affi
rmto
beth
ebe
st.
For,
inre
spec
tof
Chr
ist
the
hea
d,
itis
am
onar
ch’.
;an
d,in
resp
ect
ofth
ean
cien
tsan
dpas
tors
that
gov
ern
inco
mm
onan
dw
ith
like
auth
orit
yam
ongs
tth
emse
lves
,it
isan
aris
tocr
at’,
,or
the
rule
ofth
ebe
stm
en;
and,
inre
spec
tth
atth
epe
ople
are
not
secl
uded
,bu
tha
veth
eir
inte
rest
inch
urch
-mat
ters
,it
isa
dem
ocra
ts’,
ora
popula
res
tate
.A
nim
age
wher
eof
appea
reth
also
inth
epo
licy
ofth
isre
alm
;fo
ras
,in
resp
ect
ofth
equ
een
her
maj
esty
,it
isa
monar
chy,
so,
inre
spec
tof
the
mos
thonoura
ble
coun
cil,
itis
anar
isto
crat
y,an
dha
ving
rega
rdto
the
parl
iam
ent,
whi
chis
asse
mbl
edof
all
esta
tes,
itis
ade
moc
raty
.(T
C1:
35;
WW
1:39
0)H
ere
the
civi
lan
dec
cles
iast
ical
poli
ties
are
para
llel,
each
wit
ha
com
plet
eco
nsti
tuti
onan
dhe
adof
itsow
n.C
artw
righ
tco
mpa
res
the
Chu
rch
and
the
Com
mon
wea
lth
‘unt
oH
ippo
crat
es’
twin
s,w
hich
wer
esi
ckto
geth
eran
dw
ell
toge
ther
,la
ughe
dto
geth
er,
and
wee
ped
toge
ther
,an
dal
way
slik
eaf
fect
ed’.
(WW
1:23
)‘r
heanal
ogy
sugg
ests
acl
ose
rela
tion
ship
ofC
hurc
han
dC
omm
onw
ealt
h,ye
tth
ere
isa
‘per
sona
l’se
para
tion
—tw
ohea
ds,
two
separ
ate
corp
orat
esu
bsis
tenc
es,
two
soci
etat
espe
rfec
tae.
’7
For
Hoo
ker
such
ase
para
tion
wit
hin
the
sour
ceof
auth
orit
y,an
dits
cons
eque
nt‘p
erso
nal’
sepa
rati
onof
the
civi
lfr
omth
eec
cles
iast
ical
com
mun
ity
impl
ies
anin
evit
able
de-C
hris
tian
isin
gof
the
secu
lar
polit
ical
orde
r.H
ese
eks
tosh
owhi
sop
pone
ntth
atth
isse
para
tion
isba
sed
upon
am
ista
ken
set
ofso
teri
olog
ical
,ec
cles
iolo
gica
lan
dC
hris
tolo
gica
las
sum
ptio
ns.
Hoo
ker’
sw
hole
cons
ider
atio
nof
Car
twri
ght’
sobje
cti
ons
toth
ero
yal
head
ship
,as
wit
hhi
str
eatm
ent
ofth
ere
lati
onof
Chu
rch
and
Com
mon
wea
lth,
isco
ncen
trat
edin
aco
mpre
hen
sive
anal
ysis
ofC
artw
righ
t’s
fund
amen
tal
doct
rina
lcl
aim
s.It
isH
ooke
r’s
purp
ose
toex
pose
Car
twri
ght’
sas
sum
pti
ons
resp
ecti
ngth
etw
ore
alm
sdo
ctri
neas
founded
upon
‘man
ifes
ter
rour
’,‘m
isco
ncei
pt’,
and
‘sli
ppof
judgem
ent’
(LE
P8.
4,6,
7)—
all
inre
lati
onto
his
appea
lto
the
auth
ori
tyof
basi
cdo
ctri
ne.
Hoo
ker’
san
swer
toC
artw
right’
s‘o
ppos
itio
nag
ains
tth
efi
rst
diff
eren
cew
her
eby
Chri
stbe
ing
Hea
dsi
mpl
ieP
rinc
esar
esa
ydto
beH
eads
under
Chr
ist’
begi
nsas
foll
ows:
Fir
stth
atas
Chr
ist
bei
ng
Lor
dor
Hea
dov
eral
ldoth
byver
tue
ofth
atS
over
aign
tie
rule
all,
sohe
bat
hno
mor
ea
super
iour
ingover
nin
ghi
sC
hurc
hth
enin
exer
cisi
ngso
vera
igne
Dom
inio
nupon
the
rest
ofth
ew
orld
besi
des.
Sec
ondl
y,th
atal
lau
thori
tie
asw
ell
civi
llas
Ecc
iesi
asti
call
issu
bord
inat
eunto
his:
And
thir
dly
that
the
Civ
illM
agis
trat
e.
..
isan
Hea
dev
ensu
bord
inat
edof
and
toC
hris
t.(L
EP
8.4.
6)T
heen
suin
gan
alys
isof
Car
twri
ght’
sap
pea
lto
the
fundam
enta
lpr
inci
ples
ofdo
ctri
nal
ort
hodoxy
brea
ksdow
nin
the
foll
owin
gm
anner
:fi
rst
Hoo
ker
consi
der
sth
eT
rini
tari
anim
plic
atio
nsof
the
ques
tion,
nam
ely
the
man
ner
inw
hich
God
isin
Chr
ist,
and
Chr
ist
inG
od;
seco
ndly
hem
oves
onto
the
Chr
isto
logi
cal
issu
eof
how
the
divi
nean
dhum
annat
ure
sar
eunit
edin
Chr
ist;
thir
dly
he
37.
Thi
san
alog
yis
disc
usse
dby
A.
F.Sc
ott
Pear
son,
inC
hinc
han
dSt
ati’
Polit
ical
Asp
ects
ofSi
xtee
nth-
Cen
tury
Puri
tani
sm,
(Cam
brid
ge,
1928
),19
,20
.Se
eTC
1:35
;W
W1:
390
whe
reC
hurc
han
dC
omm
onw
ealt
har
epo
rtra
yed
aspa
ralle
l‘m
ixed
’po
litie
s.
l)io
n\S
ill”
90R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
‘rhe
olog
yof
Ecc
lesi
astic
alD
omin
ion
91
anal
yse
sth
enat
ure
ofth
eunio
nbet
wee
nC
hri
stan
dhi
sbo
dy,
the
Churc
h;
and
fina
lly,
heco
nsi
der
sth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipin
ligh
tof
the
tso
real
ms
logi
c.O
nea
chof
thes
ele
vels
ofdoct
rine
—na
mel
yth
eIr
init
aria
n,
the
Chr
isto
logi
cal,
the
eccl
esio
logi
cal,
and
the
sote
riol
ogic
al—
Hoo
ker
aim
sto
expo
secr
itic
alfl
aws
inC
artw
righ
t’s
doct
rinal
ort
hodoxy,
By
mc’
ans
ofC
artw
right’
sow
npo1m
icaI
de
vice
,nam
ely
the
appea
lto
syst
emat
icdoct
rine,
Hoo
ker
sets
out
totu
rnth
ech
arge
ofhet
erodoxy
com
plet
ely
around.
Itis
his
pur
pose
tosh
ow
that
the
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
argum
ent
rest
supon
anex
trem
ely
dubio
us
doct
rinal
base
atbe
st;
atw
ors
t,C
artw
right
wil
lhe
expose
das
anunsc
rupulo
us
ideo
logue
wil
ling
todis
tort
the
ort
hodox
teac
hin
gof
the
Churc
hin
ord
erto
just
ify
apro
gra
mm
eof
par
tiso
npr
acti
cal
refo
rms.
For
both
Whi
tgif
tan
dH
ooke
r,th
ehal
lmar
kof
the
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
theo
logy
isa
confu
sion
ofm
atte
rs‘e
ssen
tial
’to
salv
atio
nw
ith
mat
ters
‘acc
esso
ry’.
(WW
1:18
5;LE
P3.
3.1-
4)T
his
argum
ent
iscr
ucia
lto
thei
rid
enti
fica
tion
ofth
eE
sta
bli
shm
ent’
sca
use
wit
hth
em
agis
teri
alR
efor
mat
ion
and
ofth
eD
isci
plin
aria
ns’
wit
hth
era
dica
lpo
siti
on.
TI,,
Ton/t
urb
oQ
ues
tion
Inhi
ss’
con
dR
,’
1ilic
Car
twri
ght
sets
out
toju
stif
yhi
sas
sert
ion
ofC
hri
st’s
sole
hca
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
hon
the
gro
unds
ofT
rinit
aria
nort
hodoxy.
Inhi
san
alys
isof
the
Tri
nita
rian
impl
icat
ions
ofth
ehea
dsh
ipques
tion,
he
isin
tent
onth
edem
onst
rati
on
ofth
ree
pri
nci
ples
.F
irst
hear
gues
that
Chri
stex
erci
ses
anes
senti
ally
div
ided
auth
ori
tyov
erhum
anco
mm
unit
y—
a‘t
wof
old
supe
rior
itie
’.(T
C2:
411)
On
the
one
han
d,
inhi
sgover
nm
ent
ofth
eC
hurc
h,
Chr
ist
rule
s‘i
nre
spec
tehe
ism
edia
tor
het
wen
eG
odan
dus
’,an
dth
us
‘hat
ha
super
ior!
whi
chis
his
fath
er’;
onth
eoth
erhan
d,
‘in
the
go
ernem
ent
off
kin
gdom
es/
and
oth
erco
mm
enw
ealt
hes’
,C
hri
stru
les
sole
lyby
vir
tue
ofhi
sbe
ing
‘the
sonne
off
God
onel
ybe
fore
all
worl
des
,co
equa
llw
ith
his
fath
er’.
(TC
2:41
1)T
hus
Chri
stexer
cise
son
eki
ndof
pow
eras
adi
vine
per
son
ofth
eT
rini
ty,
‘as
God
co-e
qual
lw
ith
his
Fat
her
and
the
Hol
yS
piri
t’an
dan
oth
er‘a
sm
e-
38.
Itsh
ould
beno
ted
here
that
hooker
sdi
visi
onof
the
prin
cipa
lth
eolo
gica
lis
suC
spa
rall
els
his
disc
ussi
onof
ke
prin
cipl
esof
syst
emat
icth
eol
ogy
imm
edia
tely
pre
cedin
ga
dis
cuss
ion
ofth
eS
acra
men
tsin
Boo
kV
.T
hecl
ose
logi
cal
connec
tion
bet
wee
nth
esy
stem
atic
theo
log
yof
Boo
kV
and
the
pro
ble
mof
hea
dsh
ips
illhe
..orn
ecl
eare
rin
the
ensu
ing
dis
cus
sion
.S
eeL
IP5.
51.1
for
the
Tri
nit
aria
nan
alys
is:
‘Tha
tG
odis
inC
hri
stby
the
per
sonal
lin
carn
atio
nol
the
Son
new
ho
isve
ryG
od’;
5.52
.1fo
rth
e(‘
hnst
olo
gic
alan
alysi
s:‘t
he
mis
inte
rpre
tati
ons
ishic
hh
eres
iehat
hm
ade
otth
em
aner
how
God
and
man
are
unit
edin
one
Chr
ist’
,an
dal
so5.
53-
55;
fina
lly,
5.S
h.I
tor
the
eccl
esio
logi
cal
anal
ysi
s‘T
heunio
nor
mu
tual
lpar
tici
pat
ion
whi
chis
bet
wee
ne
Chri
stan
dth
eC
hurc
hof
Chri
stin
this
pres
ent
wur
ide,
’
dia
tour
ofG
odan
dm
an!
inw
hich
resp
ect
even
yet
inhi
sin
fini
tegl
ory
heen
joyet
h/
heis
and
shal
lbe
under
his
fath
er,
and
holy
ghos
te’.
(TC
2:41
7)H
avin
gdra
wn
this
pri
mar
ydis
tinct
ion
ofpow
ers
wit
hin
Chri
stas
the
ult
imat
eso
urce
ofau
thor
ity’
inal
lfo
rms
ofco
mm
unit
y,C
artw
right
ded
uce
shi
sse
cond
prin
cipl
e:ci
vil
pow
eris
der
ived
from
the
divi
nenat
ure
imm
edia
tely
and
sim
ply
,w
hil
eec
cles
iast
ical
auth
ori
tyis
dep
enden
ton
Chr
ist
asa
par
tici
pan
tof
hum
annatu
re,
39
Inth
isre
spec
the
mak
esno
diff
eren
cebet
wee
npag
anan
dC
hri
stia
nci
vil
auth
ori
ty.
5’T
hird
ly,
Car
twri
ght
deni
esby
way
ofco
nclu
sion
from
thes
epre
mis
esth
atth
eC
ivil
Mag
istr
ate
may
clai
mth
ehea
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
hun
der
Chr
ist.
Chri
stH
imse
lfre
tain
sth
isro
leex
clus
ivel
yan
dst
ands
inth
esa
me
‘sub
ordi
nate
’re
lati
onto
God
qua
head
ofth
eC
hurc
has
the
Civ
ilM
agis
trat
edo
esqu
ahea
dof
the
Com
monw
ealt
h.
4’C
hurc
han
dC
om
mon
wea
lth
are
thus
unit
edhy
post
atic
ally
inC
hris
t’s
own
per
son,
inan
‘inv
isib
le’
monar
chy
whi
chal
one
unit
esth
edi
vine
and
hum
annat
ure
san
dco
nse
quen
tly
supre
me
eccl
esia
stic
alan
dci
vil
juri
sdic
tion
s.T
hus
Car
twri
ght
seek
sto
just
ify
the
separ
atio
nof
civi
lan
dec
cles
iast
ical
juri
sdic
tion
inth
evi
sibl
eC
hri
stia
nco
mm
unit
yon
the
high
doct
rina
lgro
und
ofpre
serv
ing
the
dist
inct
ion
bet
wee
nC
hris
tas
adi
vine
per
son
ofth
eT
rini
tyeq
ual
toth
eoth
ertw
oper
sons
and
Chr
ist
asun
equa
l!in
his
role
asR
edee
mer
.H
ooke
rim
pugns
Car
twri
ght’
sin
terp
reta
tion
ofT
rini
tari
anor
thod
oxy
onth
efo
llow
ing
gro
unds:
Tha
tw
hich
the
Fat
her
doth
wor
kas
Lor
dan
dK
ing
over
all
hew
ork
eth
not
wit
hout
but
byth
eso
nne
who
thro
ugh
coet
erna
llgen
erat
ion
rece
ivet
hof
the
Fat
her
that
pow
erw
hich
the
Fat
her
hat
hof
him
self
.(L
EP
8.4.
6)
39.
TC2:
417.
‘To
wyt
that
asG
odsi
mpl
yhe
hath
orde
ined
cert
ain
mea
nsto
serv
ehi
spr
ovid
ence
inth
epr
eser
vati
onof
man
kind
:so
asG
odan
dm
an!
heha
thor
dein
edot
her
cert
ain
for
the
gath
erin
gan
dke
epin
gof
his
chur
ch.
..
our
Say
.C
hris
tein
resp
ect
ofhi
sm
edia
tour
ship
tow
ards
usi
exer
cise
thno
tth
eci
vill
swor
d.’
40.
See
TC2:
417,
418,
‘And
inth
atth
eau
thor
itie
ofth
esw
ord
inhe
athe
npr
ince
s(a
lthou
ghno
tal
ike
used
)is
the
sam
eor
dina
nce
ofG
odas
that
inC
hris
tian:
the
one
proc
eedi
ngof
God
imm
edia
tely
/and
not
from
our
Say.
Chr
iste
asm
edia
tour
,th
othe
rdo
thlik
ewis
e.’
See
also
WW
3:29
7-8,
41,
See
TC1:
145;
WW
3:19
8.‘It
issu
ffic
ient
toad
mon
ish
you
that
,al
thou
ghit
begr
ante
dth
atth
ego
vern
men
tof
one
beth
ebe
stin
the
com
mon
wea
lth,
yet
itca
nnot
bein
the
chur
ch.
[i.e.
the
visi
ble
chur
chl
For
the
prin
cem
ayw
ell
bem
onar
chim
med
iate
lybe
twee
nG
odan
dC
omm
onw
ealt
h;bu
tno
one
can
bem
onar
chbe
twee
nG
odan
dhi
sch
urch
but
Chr
ist,
whi
chis
the
only
Hea
dth
erof
,T
here
fore
the
mon
arch
yov
erth
ew
hole
chur
ch,
and
over
ever
ypa
rtic
ular
chur
ch,
and
over
ever
ysi
ngul
arm
embe
rin
the
chur
ch,
isin
Chr
ist
alon
e.’
Din
\sin
..92
Ric
hard
Hoo
ker’
sT
heol
ogof
Ecc
lesi
astic
alD
omin
ion
As
ue
have
seen
.C
artw
rig
ht
asse
rted
inth
eSe
cond
Rep
lieth
atC
hris
t’s
erei
gnau
tho
rity
was
div
ided
intw
o.O
nth
eon
ehan
d,
Chr
ist
rule
sas
the
Son
ofM
anov
erth
eC
hurc
han
dth
eref
ore
as‘s
ubord
inat
eto
the
Fat
her’
;on
the
oth
erhan
dhe
rule
sas
God
over
all
the
rest
ofth
ew
orld
,ov
eral
lkin
gdom
s,w
her
ein
heac
tsas
coeq
ual
wit
hth
eF
athe
r’.
(IC
2:41
1f1>
For
Hoo
ker,
this
inef
fect
ren
der
sC
hris
t‘u
nequ
all
tohi
mse
lf’.
(IE
P8
4,6
,;FL
E3:
366)
He
resp
on
ds
that
‘all
pow
erin
hea
ven
and
eart
h’,
not
sim
ply
po
wer
over
secu
lar
poli
tica
lin
stit
uti
on
s,bel
ongs
toC
hris
tas
the
‘con
—su
bst
anti
alW
ord
ofG
od’.
Thi
suniv
ersa
lity
ofC
hris
t’s
auth
ori
tyder
ives
expr
essl
yfr
omhi
sdi
vine
nat
ure
.C
artw
right’
ssu
gges
tion
that
Chr
ist
exer
cise
shi
shea
dsh
ipof
the
Ch
urc
hap
art
from
his
divi
neS
onsh
ip,
sole
lyth
rough
his
subord
inat
ere
lati
onto
the
Fa
ther
/hii
Med
iato
r,u
nd
erm
ines
the
ort
hodox
doct
rine
ofth
eT
rin
itv.
Chr
ist’
sau
tho
rity
as‘k
ing’
isto
rH
ooke
ran
attr
ibu
teof
his
divi
nity
:
l’he
Fat
her
b’s,
the
Son
nebo
thdi
dcr
eate
and
guid
eal
l.W
her
efo
reC
/ins
tha
thsu
pre
me
do
min
ion
over
the
who
leun
iver
sall
wor
ldC
/ins
tis
God
,C
hris
tis
.b’,
’oth
eco
nsu
bst
anti
all
word
atG
od.
(liP
8.4.
6;I’
LL3:
364)
For
Hoo
ker,
Chr
ist’
su
niv
ersa
lhea
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
hca
nnot
hese
ver
edtr
omhi
sdiv
ine
pow
er.
Car
twri
ght’
ssu
gges
tion
that
Chr
ist
exer
cise
shi
sp
ow
erof
Dom
inio
nso
lely
thro
ugh
his
man
hood
and
not
his
div
ine
nat
ure
lead
sto
ad
isto
rtio
nof
basi
cT
rini
tari
ando
gma:
Vher
furt
’u
nle
sse
itca
nhe
prov
edth
atal
lth
ew
ork
esof
our
Sav
iour
sg
o\e
rmen
tin
the
Ch
urc
har
ed
on
eby
the
mee
ran
don
lyfo
rce
ofhi
sh
um
ane
nat
ure
,th
ere
isno
rem
edie
bu
tto
ackno
wle
dg
ita
man
ifes
ter
rou
rth
atC
hris
tin
the
go
ver
men
tof
the
orld
iseq
uall
unto
the
Fat
her
but
not
inth
eg
ov
erm
ent
otth
eC
/inre
/i,In
dee
dto
the
honour
ofth
isD
omin
ion
itca
nnot
hesa
ydth
atG
oddi
dex
alt
him
oth
erw
ise
then
only
acco
rdin
gto
that
hum
ane
natu
reheri
nhe
was
mad
elo
w.
For
asth
eS
onne
ofG
odth
ere
coul
dno
advan
cem
ent
orex
alta
tion
grow
unto
him
.A
ndve
tth
edo
min
ion
vh
eru
nto
hew
asin
his
hu—
inan
enat
ure
lift
edup
isno
tw
ithout
divi
nepow
erex
erci
sed,
(IE
P8.
4.6;
l-L
I3:
367)
Hooker
attr
ibute
sC
artw
nght’
ser
ror
inth
ism
atte
rto
his
mis
taken
pre
mis
eth
at‘C
hris
tas
Med
iato
ur’
isth
ew
ell-
spri
ng
of‘a
llth
ew
ork
sof
regi
men
t’in
the
Churc
h.
(LE
P8.
4.6;
FLE
3:36
4)T
his
pre
mis
eim
plie
sa
confu
sion
ofC
hris
t’s
rega
lp
ow
erw
ith
his
prie
stly
orm
edia
tori
alfu
ncti
on:
‘in
truth
go
ver
men
td
oth
be
long
tohi
sK
in,’h
;of
tice
,m
edia
tors
/tip
tohi
spr
iest
ly’.
(LE
P8.
4.6)
Bot
hci
vil
and
eccl
esia
stic
algover
nm
ent
are
incl
ud
edby
Hooker
inC
hris
t’s
king
ship
.W
hile
inhi
sro
leas
med
iato
rbet
wee
nG
odan
dm
an,
Chr
ist
acts
prop
erly
inhi
sch
arac
ter
as‘S
onne
otM
an’,
that
isto
say,
acco
rdin
gly
tohi
sh
um
annat
ure
;nev
erth
eles
s,ev
enin
this
case
,m
edia
tion
ispo
ssib
leon
lyby
virt
ueof
the
so-c
alle
d‘g
race
ofun
ion’
wher
eby
Chr
ist’
sm
anhood
isco
njoi
ned
tohi
sde
ity.
(LE
P5.
54.3
,4)
Hoo
ker’
sst
rong
emphas
isher
eu
po
n‘I
rini
tari
anor
thod
oxy
echo
esth
edi
scus
sion
inB
ook
V,
chap
ter
51.
Her
ehe
sets
dow
nin
clea
rte
rms
his
adher
ence
toth
edo
ctri
neof
Chr
ist’
sso
-cal
led
‘con
-su
bst
anti
aleq
uali
ty’
wit
hth
eF
athe
ras
defi
ned
inth
eT
hirt
i-N
ine’
Art
icle
sof
Rel
igio
nan
dth
eA
than
asia
ncre
ed
42:
For
the
subst
ance
ofG
odw
ith
this
pro
per
tie
tobe
ofno
nedo
thm
ake
the
per
son
ofth
efa
ther
;th
e‘e
rie
self
esa
me
subs
tanc
ein
nu
mb
erw
ith
this
pro
per
tie
tohe
ofth
eJu
t/icr
mak
eth
the
per
son
ofth
eS
onne
;th
esa
me
subst
ance
havi
ngad
ded
unto
itth
ep
rop
erti
eof
proc
eedi
ngc
from
the
othe
rtw
om
aket
hth
ep
erso
nof
the
holi
eG
host
.So
that
inev
erie
per
son
ther
eis
impl
ved
both
the
subst
ance
ofG
odw
hich
ison
e,an
dal
soth
atp
rop
erti
ew
hich
cause
thth
esa
me
per
son,
real
lie
and
trul
ieto
diff
erfr
omth
eoth
ertw
o.E
veri
eper
son
hat
hhi
sow
nesu
bsi
sten
cew
hich
nooth
erbes
ides
hat
h,
alth
ough
ther
ebe
oth
ers
that
are
ofth
esa
me
subst
ance
..
.N
oth
wit
hst
andin
ge
for
asm
uch
asth
ew
ord
ean
dde
itie
are
one
subj
ect,
wee
mus
tbew
are
wee
excl
ude
not
the
nat
ure
ofG
odfr
omin
carn
atio
nan
dso
mak
eth
eS
onne
ofG
odin
carn
ate
not
tobe
veri
eG
od.
For
undoubte
dly
even
the
nat
ure
ofG
odit
self
ein
the
only
per
son
ofth
eS
onne
isin
carn
ate
and
hat
hta
ken
toit
self
efl
esh.
(LE
P5.5
1.1
,2)
Just
asit
was
Car
twri
ght’
sow
nin
tenti
on
toim
pugn
Arc
hbis
hop
Whi
tgif
t’s
doct
rina
lort
hodoxy
inth
eSe
cond
Rep
lie,
sohe
rein
the
Lii
wes
Hoo
ker
him
self
sets
out
totu
rnth
ese
theo
logi
cal
obje
ctio
nsco
mpl
etel
yar
ou
nd
inord
erto
esta
blis
hth
eth
eolo
gica
lre
aso
nab
lene
ssof
the
Roy
alS
upre
mac
y.F
orit
isin
dee
dth
eth
eolo
gica
lre
aso
nab
len
ess
ofth
ero
yal
titl
eof
hea
dsh
ipof
the
Chu
rch
whi
chH
ooke
rai
ms
toes
tabl
ish
byhi
sca
refu
lre
sponse
toC
artw
righ
t’s
pole
mic
.H
ooke
r’s
appea
lto
the
fundam
enta
lsof
orth
odox
sys
tem
atic
doct
rine
pro
vid
esth
em
ost
conv
inci
ng,
iren
ical
argunw
nt
tow
inov
erev
enth
est
aunch
est
up
ho
lder
sof
the
Cal
vini
stD
isci
plin
ato
aco
nsc
ienti
ous
subm
issi
on
toth
eE
liza
beth
anE
stab
lish
men
t.H
ooker
does
not
retr
eat
from
empl
oyin
gth
ebi
gges
tgu
nsat
his
dis
posa
l.In
his
rebutt
alof
Car
twri
ght’
sob
ject
ions
toth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ip,
hese
eks
tocl
arif
yth
eco
nsis
tenc
yof
the
Roy
al
42.
See
artic
les
Ian
d2.
See
also
LEP
5.56
.2an
d5.
42.1
-13.
43.
Com
pare
LEP
5.54
.1,
2.
94R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yof
Ecc
lesi
astic
alD
omin
ion
Supre
mac
yw
ith
the
esta
bli
shed
no
rms
ofT
rinit
aria
nort
hodoxy
ackno
wle
dg
edh’
both
par
ties
toth
ed
isp
ute
.
The
Cii
rsto
lo,’
icaI
Que
stio
n
Inhi
sD
edic
atio
nof
Boo
kV
tohi
sp
atro
nA
rchbis
hop
Whi
tgif
t,H
oo
ker
obse
rves
that
‘th
ew
aig
hti
est
confl
icts
the
Ch
urc
hh
ath
had
wer
eth
ose
whic
hto
uch
edth
ep
erso
nof
our
Sav
iour
Chr
ist’.
Ina
fam
ous
seri
esof
chap
ters
late
rin
the
sam
ebo
ok,
Hoo
ker
ex
plor
esin
consi
der
able
deta
ilth
eco
urse
ofth
egre
atC
hris
tolo
gica
lco
ntr
ov
ersi
esof
the
Ear
lyC
hurc
h.”
And
for
asm
uch
asth
ere
isno
unio
nof
God
wit
hm
anw
ith
ou
tth
atm
eane
bêt
wen
eboth
whi
chis
both
,it
seem
eth
requ
isit
eth
atw
eefi
rst
con
sid
erhow
God
isin
Chri
st,
then
how
Ch
rist
isin
us,
and
how
the
sacr
amen
tes
doe
serv
eto
mak
eus
per
tak
ers
ofC
hri
st.
(LE
P5.
50.3
)
Chri
sto
cen
tris
man
dst
ron
gem
ph
asis
upon
the
cen
tral
do
gm
atic
trad
itio
nof
Chr
isto
logy
has
bee
nvi
ewed
byso
me
asth
e‘t
heo
log
ical
cent
re’
ofH
ooker
’sth
ought.
47
The
theo
log
ical
pre
cisi
on
ofth
eC
hri
sto
log
ical
dis
cou
rse
inB
ook
Vis
pre
suppose
dby
his
theo
logi
cal
anal
ysis
01th
epro
ble
mof
hea
dsh
ipin
Boo
kV
III.
Itought
tobe
kep
tin
min
dth
atth
ese
mat
ters
ofT
rinit
aria
nan
dC
hris
tolo
gica
lort
ho
do
xy
wer
eth
esu
bjec
tof
consi
der
able
contr
over
syam
ongst
the
Ref
orm
ers
gene
rall
y.C
alvi
nw
ashi
mse
lfa
gre
atdef
ender
ofth
ean
cien
tre
ceiv
edd
oct
rin
eof
the
Churc
hag
ainst
such
here
tics
asS
ervet
us
and
Soci
nus)
”A
ccor
ding
toF
ranç
ois
Wen
del:
Cal
vin
had
mad
eth
etr
adit
ional
trin
itar
ian
teac
hing
his
ow
nw
ith
ou
tth
esl
ighte
stre
serv
atio
n.
The
sam
eat
tach
men
tto
the
dogm
atic
trad
itio
nis
pro
min
ent
inhi
sC
hris
tolo
gy.
Wha
tis
ori
gin
alin
his
con
trib
uti
on
toth
isn
ever
touch
esth
efu
nda
men
tal
afti
rmat
ion
sof
the
Counci
lsof
the
anci
ent
Churc
h.
He
adopts
infu
llth
edogm
aof
the
two
nat
ure
sof
Ch
rist
and
the
curr
ent
exp
lan
atio
ns
ofth
ere
lati
onb
etw
een
the
two
natu
res.
49
44.
Tha
tH
ooke
r’s
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
criti
csac
know
ledg
eun
cond
itio
nall
yth
eau
thori
tyof
the
Art
icle
sof
Rel
igio
nin
mat
ters
ofsy
stem
atic
doct
rine
isre
veal
edby
the
tone
ofA
Chr
isti
anL
ette
rth
roug
hout
.Se
eFE
E4:
6ff.
45.
See
Hoo
ker’
sD
edic
atio
nof
the
fift
hbo
okof
the
Law
esin
FLE
2:2.
46.
LE
P5,
52.1
-5,5
5,9.
47.
For
exam
ple,
Lio
nel
Th
orn
ton
,R
icha
rdH
ooke
r:A
Stud
yof
his
Theo
logy
(Lon
don,
1924
),54
ff.
48.
Inst
.2.
14.5
-8.
Co
mp
are
LE
P5.
42.1
3w
here
Hoo
ker
impugns
the
Chr
isto
logi
cal
ort
ho
do
xy
ofth
ose
who
foll
ow‘t
heco
urse
ofex
trea
me
refo
rmat
ion’
.49
.C
alvi
n,21
5.
Cal
vin
appea
lsto
the
prin
cipl
esof
Chal
cedonia
nor
thod
oxy
insu
pport
ofhi
sow
nth
eolo
gica
ld
iffe
ren
ces
wit
hZ
win
gli
and
Lu
ther
onth
edo
ctri
neof
the
Sac
ram
ents
.51
As
Wen
del
clea
rly
dem
on
stra
tes,
itw
asC
alvi
n’s
purp
ose
toho
ldst
rict
lyto
the
dist
inct
ion
ofth
etw
on
atu
res
agai
nst
the
tenden
cyof
the
Luth
eran
sto
a‘E
ut
chia
nfu
sion
’(I
nst.
4.17
.30)
ofth
emin
the
cour
seof
thei
rde
fenc
eof
the
ubiq
uity
ofC
hris
t’s
nat
ura
lbo
dy:
Wha
tm
atte
red
abov
eal
lto
Cal
vin
was
toav
oid
anyth
ing
that
mig
htbe
inte
rpre
ted
asa
conf
usio
nof
the
divi
nity
wit
hth
ehum
anit
y,
even
atth
ece
ntre
ofth
epe
rson
alit
yof
Chri
st.
Alt
erna
tely
,ag
ainst
Zw
ingl
i’s
tenden
cyto
war
ds
a‘N
esto
rian
sep
arat
ion’
ofth
etw
on
atu
res
(Ins
t.4.
17.7
),C
alvi
nuphold
sth
eir
rad
ical
unit
yin
acco
rdan
cew
ith
the
trad
itio
nal
dogm
aof
the
coin
mu
nica
tioid
iom
atum
.52
InB
ook
V,
Hoo
ker
foll
ows
Cal
vin
ver
ycl
osel
yin
avoid
ing
the
Scyl
laof
aL
uth
eran
tenden
cyto
a‘E
uty
chia
n’
confu
sion
ofth
edi
vine
and
hu
man
nat
ure
sin
Chr
ist
and
the
Char
ybdis
ofa
Zw
ingli
ante
nden
cyto
a‘N
esto
rian
’se
par
atio
nor
‘hyp
osta
sisi
ng’
ofth
etw
onat
ure
s.In
dee
d,
we
mig
htw
ell
labl
eH
ooke
r’s
scru
ples
wit
hre
spec
tto
thes
eC
hris
tolo
gica
lni
ceti
esas
‘Cal
vini
an’
Itis
onth
ishi
ghg
rou
nd
oftr
adit
ional
Ch
rist
olo
gi
cal
ort
hodoxy
that
Hoo
ker
mo
un
tshi
sre
futa
tion
ofC
artw
righ
t’s
Nes
tori
anas
sert
ion
ofth
eper
sonal
divi
sion
ofC
hris
t’s
sove
reig
nty
over
the
Churc
han
dth
ese
cula
rpo
liti
cal
orde
r.C
ontr
ary
toth
isvi
ew,
Hoo
ker
up
ho
lds
the
unit
yof
Chr
ist’
sper
son
asth
eso
urce
ofal
lpow
er,
both
eccl
esia
stic
alan
dci
vil.
Thus
Chr
ist
asG
odan
dm
anis
the
sour
ceof
auth
ori
tyin
both
Churc
han
dC
om
mon
wea
lth.
Civ
ilau
thori
tyis
from
God
‘med
iate
lyth
rough
Chr
ist’
.(L
EP
8.4.
6),
and
ther
efore
dep
enden
tupon
both
his
hu
man
and
divi
nen
atu
tes
byth
eco
mm
unic
atio
idio
rnat
um.
Sim
ilar
lyec
cles
ias
tica
lju
risd
icti
on
isdep
enden
tupon
Chr
ist,
alth
ough
not
as‘i
nfe
riou
ru
nto
his
Fat
her’
,but
asco
equa
lin
the
divi
nenat
ure
.T
heC
om
monw
ealt
his
asm
uch
under
the
‘Dom
inio
nof
Chr
ist’
asis
the
Chu
rch:
He
raig
net
hov
erth
isw
orld
asK
ing
and
do
thth
ose
thin
ges
wher
inn
one
issu
per
ior
unto
him
wit
her
we
resp
ect
the
work
esof
his
pro
vid
ence
over
kin
gdom
esor
ofhi
sre
gim
ent
over
the
Chu
rch
..
.W
herf
ore
toth
een
dit
may
mor
epl
ainl
y
50.
See
also
E.D
.W
illis
,C
alvi
n’s
Cat
holic
Chr
isto
logy
,I.
51.
Wen
del,
Cal
vin,
220.
52.
Ibid
.,22
2.53
.In
st.
2.14
.1.
54.
Inst
.2.
14.4
.55
.T
hete
rm‘C
alvi
nist
’is
avoi
ded
delib
erat
ely
onac
coun
tof
itslo
aded
asso
ciat
ions
with
the
hist
ory
ofD
isci
plin
aria
nPu
rita
nism
.
96R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yof
Ecc
lesi
astic
alD
omin
ion
97
appea
rehow
all
auth
ori
tie
ofm
anis
deri
ved
from
God
thro
ugh
c’Ii
ri.t
and
must
byC
hri
tiu
nm
enhe
ackn
owle
dged
tobe
noo
ther
wis
ehe
ldth
enot
and
unde
rhi
m.
(LE
P8.
4.6)
Inre
spo
nse
too
ne
side
ofC
artw
righ
t’s
dist
inct
ion,
nam
ely
that
Chr
ist
ishea
dot
the
Churc
hin
subo
rdin
atio
nto
the
Fat
her,
and
ther
efor
eas
the
‘Son
neof
Man
’,H
ooke
rap
peal
sto
the
doct
rine
ofth
e‘c
om
munic
atio
nof
idio
ms’
:
the
dom
inio
nw
heru
nto
hew
asin
his
hum
ane
natu
reli
fted
upis
not
wit
hout
divi
nepo
wer
exer
cise
d.It
isby
divi
nepo
wer
that
the
Sonne
ofm
an,
who
sitt
eth
inhe
aven
doth
wor
k,as
lcnR
,’an
dL
ord
upon
usw
hich
are
onea
rth.
(LE
P8.
4.6;
FLE
3”67.
Ho
ok
eran
dC
artw
rig
ht
are
agre
edth
atal
lpo
wer
com
esfr
omG
od’,
The
ird
isag
reem
ent
focu
ses
rath
eron
the
man
ner
inw
hich
this
orig
inal
,div
ine
po
wer
isco
mm
unic
ated
tohum
anco
mm
unit
y.
For
Hooker
itis
contr
ary
toth
eac
cept
edn
orm
sof
Chr
isto
logi
cal
ort
ho
do
xy
that
,in
the
exer
cise
ofhi
sp
ow
er,
the
two
nat
ure
sof
Chri
stco
uld
bese
par
ated
insu
cha
way
that
civi
lru
lepro
ceed
sso
lely
from
his
divi
nity
and
eccl
esia
stic
alfr
omhi
shum
anit
y:
‘That
wh
ich
the
Fat
her
doth
sork
asL
ord
and
Kin
gov
eral
lhe
work
eth
not
wit
hout
bu
tby
the
sonne
who
thro
ugh
coet
erna
llgen
erat
ion
rece
ivet
hof
the
Fat
her
that
pow
erw
hich
the
Fat
her
hat
hof
him
self
’.(L
EP
8.4.
b;EL
E3:
364)
Chr
ist’
spow
erof
‘supre
me
Dom
inio
n’is
undiv
ided
just
ashi
sper
son
isundiv
ided
:‘S
essi
onat
the
righ
than
dof
God
isth
eactu
all
exer
cise
otth
atre
gen
cie
and
do
min
ion
wher
ein
the
man
ho
od
ofC
hri
stis
jovned
and
mat
chet
wit
hth
ede
itie
ofth
eS
onne
ofG
od’.
(LE
P5.
55.8
)T
heunit
yof
Chri
st’s
two
natu
res
ises
sent
ial
toth
euniv
ersa
lity
ofhi
spow
er:
‘Chr
ist
hath
supr
eme
dom
inio
no
ver
the
whole
univ
ersa
llw
orl
d.
Chr
ist
isG
od,
Chr
ist
isth
eco
nsu
bst
anti
all
word
ofG
od;
Chr
ist
isal
soth
atco
nsu
bst
anti
all
word
mad
em
an’.
(LU
’8.
4.6)
Onl
yin
ase
condar
yse
nse
can
this
un
div
ided
sover
eign
po
wer
—undiv
ided
asC
hri
st’s
per
son
isundi
vid
edhe
dis
tinguis
hed
into
the
two
regi
men
tspr
oper
toC
hurc
han
dC
om
monw
ealt
h,
Th
etw
ore
gim
ents
are
invi
sibl
yun
ifie
din
SoC
ompa
reIL
?5
53
3.
4w
here
Hoo
ker
rete
rsto
the
‘mut
ual
com
mu
tati
on’
or‘m
utua
lti
rcul
atio
n’ot
the
pro
per
ties
ofth
edi
vine
and
hu
man
na
ture
sw
hu.h
isth
eco
nseq
uenc
eof
the
pers
onal
’un
ion
inC
hris
t.H
ooke
r’s
inte
rpre
tati
onot
Cha
lced
onia
nor
thod
oxy
onth
isp
oin
tis
infu
llag
reem
ent
wit
hC
alvi
n’s
-se
eIn
st.
4,17
30.
57I
C.
IL?
S.So
.5:
‘So
that
all
thin
ges
whi
chG
odh
ath
mad
ear
ein
that
resp
edth
eof
spri
ngof
God
,th
eyar
ein
him
aset
fect
esin
thei
rehig
hes
tt,a
use,
heli
kew
ise
actu
allie
isin
them
thas
sist
ance
and
infl
uenc
eof
his
deit
ieis
tht’
ui’
lift’.
’
Chr
ist,
thei
rso
urce
;th
eyar
evi
sibl
yun
ifie
dth
roug
hth
eR
oyal
Sup
rem
acy.
Car
twri
ght’
ssh
arp
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
Chr
ist’
sre
gal
auth
orit
yov
erse
cula
rpo
liti
cal
com
mun
ity
thro
ugh
his
divi
nena
ture
onth
eon
eha
nd,
and
his
med
iato
rial
auth
orit
yov
erth
eC
hurc
hth
roug
hhi
shu
man
natu
reon
the
othe
r,ef
fect
ivel
yre
mov
esth
eC
hurc
hfr
omth
esp
here
ofC
hris
t’s
king
ship
.T
his
spir
itua
lki
ngsh
ip,
asC
alvi
nar
gues
inth
eIn
stit
utt’
s,’
can
only
bepe
rfor
med
bya
divi
ne,
mys
tica
lpo
wer
‘whe
rein
heha
thno
sup
erio
ur’
.59
On
this
Chr
isto
logi
cal
poin
tH
ooke
ris
alto
geth
eron
the
side
ofC
alvi
nan
dth
em
agis
teri
alR
efor
mat
ion
asag
ains
tth
era
dica
lD
isci
plin
aria
ns.
The
Chu
rch
and
secu
lar
polit
ical
com
mu
nity
are
both
subj
ect
toC
hris
t’s
king
lyof
fice
,an
dth
us
bo
thar
esu
bjec
tto
his
rule
asG
odan
dm
an.
Equ
ally
,on
the
othe
rsi
de,
Hoo
ker
obje
cts
that
itca
nnot
beth
eca
seth
atC
hris
tsh
ould
exer
cise
his
sov
erei
gn
pow
erov
erth
ese
cula
rpo
liti
cal
orde
rso
lely
as‘S
onne
ofG
od’.
Hoo
ker
appe
als
toth
eC
hris
tolo
gica
lpr
inci
ples
enun
ciat
edea
rlie
rin
the
argu
men
tof
Boo
kV
:
The
wor
kes
ofsu
prem
eD
omin
ion
whi
chha
vebe
ensi
nce
the
firs
tbe
gini
ngw
roug
htby
the
pow
erof
the
Son
neof
God
are
now
mos
ttr
uly
and
prop
erly
the
wor
kes
ofth
eS
onne
ofm
an.
The
wor
dm
ade
fles
hd
oth
sitt
for
ever
and
raig
nas
Sov
erai
gne
Lor
dov
eral
l.(L
EP
8.4.
6;FL
E3:
364,
5)
Thi
spa
ssag
ere
sem
bles
clos
ely
Law
es5.
55.8
quot
edim
med
iate
lyab
ove.
Ove
rag
ains
tC
artw
righ
t’s
Nes
tori
anse
para
tion
ofth
etw
ona
ture
s,H
ooke
rap
peal
sto
the
doct
rine
ofth
e‘c
omm
unic
atio
nof
idio
ms’
,an
dth
usto
the
unit
yof
the
natu
res
ofC
hris
t’s
pers
on,
inor
der
toaf
firm
the
prio
r‘p
erso
nal’
unit
yof
civi
lan
dec
cles
ias
tical
juri
sdic
tion
.B
ym
eans
ofth
e‘g
race
ofun
ion’
(LE
P5.
54.4
),at
trib
utes
whi
char
epr
oper
toC
hris
t’s
divi
nity
cann
otbe
who
lly
sepa
rate
dfr
omas
soci
atio
nan
dco
oper
atio
nw
ith
his
hum
anit
y.In
orde
rto
under
stan
dth
eth
eolo
gica
lde
pth
ofth
ear
gum
ent
atth
ispo
int
itis
usef
ulto
reca
llH
ooke
r’s
form
ulat
ion
ofth
isdo
ctri
nein
Boo
kV
:
The
setw
ona
ture
sar
eas
caus
esan
dor
igin
all
grou
ndes
ofal
lth
inge
sw
hich
Chr
ist
hath
don.
Whe
refo
reso
me
thin
ges
hedo
thas
God
,be
caus
ehi
sde
itie
alon
eis
the
wel
l-sp
ring
efr
omw
hich
they
flow
e;so
me
thin
ges
asm
an,
beca
use
they
issu
efr
omhi
sm
eere
hum
ane
natu
re;
som
eth
inge
sjo
intl
ieas
both
God
and
man
,be
caus
ebo
thna
ture
sco
ncur
reas
prin
cipl
esth
ereu
nto.
(LE
P5.
53.3
)
58.
Inst
.2.
15.3
.59
.LE
P8.
4.6;
FLU
3:36
7,60
.LE
P5.
53.3
.
98R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yot
Ecc
lesi
asti
cal
Dom
inio
n99
Hoo
ker’
sho
lear
gum
ent
isin
tendtd
todem
onst
rate
that
the
‘pow
erof
sup
rem
eD
omin
ion’
isex
erci
sed
byC
hri
st‘j
oint
lie
asbo
th(.
,od
and
man
’A
tth
esa
me
tim
eth
isco
oper
atio
nof
the
two
nat
ure
sto
war
ds
asi
ngle
end
nee
dnot
resu
ltin
the
‘confo
und
ing’
or‘s
huff
ling
toge
ther
’of
Chr
ist’
sdi
vine
and
hu
man
‘au
tori
tie’,
ofw
hich
Car
twri
ght
com
pla
ined
agai
nst
Whi
tgif
tin
his
Seco
ndR
L’pi
u’.-
Hoo
ker’
slo
gic
of‘u
nion
inan
dth
rough
dis
tin
ctio
n”'
3is
illu
stra
ted
byfu
rther
refe
renc
eto
the
sam
eC
hris
tolo
gica
ldi
scou
rse:
For
albe
itth
epro
per
ties
ofec
hna
ture
doe
clea
veon
lie
toth
atnat
ure
wher
eot
they
are
pro
per
ties
,an
dth
eref
ore
Chr
ist
can
not
izat
ural
lie
beas
God
the
sam
ew
hich
hena
tura
llie
isas
man
,ve
atbo
thn
ature
sm
ay\‘
erie
wel
lco
ncur
reu
nto
one
effe
ctan
dC
hris
tin
that
resp
ect
hetr
ulie
said
tozi
’ork
eboth
asG
odan
das
man
one
and
the
self
esa
me
thin
ge.
Let
tus
ther
efore
sett
itdow
ne
for
aru
leor
prin
cipl
eso
nece
ssar
ieas
noth
inge
mor
eto
the
plai
nedec
idin
ge
otal
ld
ou
bte
san
dq
ues
tio
ns
about
the
unio
nof
nat
ure
sin
Chr
ist,
that
ofbo
thnat
ure
sth
ere
isa
coo
fk’r
atu
)nof
ten,
anaso
cia
twn
alw
aves
,but
nev
eran
ym
utu
all
parti
Lip
atl
on
wher
eby
the
pro
per
ties
ofth
eon
ear
ein
fuse
din
toth
eo
ther
.(L
EP
5.53
.3)
Thu
sH
ooke
rse
eks
tosh
ow
that
ther
eis
noth
eolo
gica
lnec
essi
tyfo
rC
artw
righ
t’s
rigi
d‘p
erso
nal’
sep
arat
ion
ofth
ep
ow
ers
ofC
hris
t’s
two
nat
ure
sin
ord
erto
pre
serv
eth
eir
inte
gri
ty.
On
the
contr
ary,
such
ase
par
atio
nover
turn
sth
ere
ceiv
edan
cien
tfo
rmu
lati
onof
ort
hodox
Chr
isto
logv
.C
artw
rig
ht
div
ides
Chr
ist’
spow
erbet
wee
nru
leov
erth
eC
hu
rch
asS
onof
Man
,an
dru
leov
erci
vil
poli
ties
asS
onof
God
.hooker
saw
this
as‘m
anif
est
erro
ur.
MC
artw
rig
ht’
ssu
gg
esti
on
that
Chri
stw
aseq
ual
toth
eF
athe
rin
the
gover
nm
ent
ofth
ew
orld
and
subord
inat
eto
Him
inth
eg
ov
ernm
ent
otth
eC
hu
rch
isth
us
Chr
isto
logi
call
yunso
und,
Wit
ha
cert
ain
deg
ree
ofir
ony
Hooker
invit
esC
artw
rig
ht
tosh
ow
the
scri
ptu
ral
basi
sof
his
subtl
eC
hris
tolo
gica
lde
vice
:
inw
hat
Eva
ngel
ist,
Apo
stle
,or
Pro
phet
tis
itfo
und,
that
Chr
ist
Su
pre
me
Go’
erno
z4r
ofth
eC
hurc
hsh
ou
ldbe
sou
neq
ual
lto
him
self
ashe
issu
pre
me
Go
ver
no
ur
ofK
ingd
oine
s.
.,
asG
odan
dm
an
hew
ork
eth
inC
hurc
hre
gim
ent,
and
con
seq
uen
tly
hat
hno
mor
eth
erei
nam
’su
per
iour
then
ing
ov
erm
ent
ofC
om
mo
nw
ealt
hs.
(LE
P8
.4.6
;FL
E3:
366)
Hooker
ascr
ibes
the
pow
erof
supre
me
juri
sdic
tion
orD
omin
ion
over
men
toC
hris
t’s
Kin
gly
offi
ceas
dis
tinct
from
his
med
iato
rial
hi.
lIP
S.4
.i;
FLE
33
ot
h27C
2:41
1.o3
.“I
heir
dist
inct
ion
can
not
poss
ibli
ead
mit
tse
par
atio
n’,
LEP
5.56
.2.
54.
LL
P8.
4,6.
orpr
iest
lyof
fice
.In
full
agre
emen
tw
ith
Cal
vin
once
agai
n,he
dis
tin
gu
ish
esC
hris
t’s
offi
ceof
Kin
gshi
pfr
omth
eot
her
prin
cipa
lro
les
bel
ongin
gto
his
God-m
anhood:
‘Dom
inio
nbel
onget
hunto
the
Kin
gly
offi
ceof
Chr
ist
aspro
pit
iati
on
and
med
iati
on
unto
his
prie
stly
,in
stru
ctio
nunto
his
past
oral
lor
pro
phet
ical
offi
ce’.
(LE
P8.
4.6;
FLE
3:36
5)C
alvi
ndis
tinguis
hes
Chr
ist’
sth
ree
prim
ary
of
fice
sac
cord
ing
toth
esa
me
form
ula
ina
chap
ter
ofth
eIn
stit
utes
whi
chfo
llow
sim
med
iate
lyu
po
nhi
sow
ndi
scou
rse
onC
hri
stol
ogy.
65
Hooker
up
ho
lds
Cal
vin’
sdis
tinct
ion
inth
ism
atte
r,an
dsh
ow
sth
atth
e‘c
ause
ofer
rour
’beh
ind
the
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
obje
cti
ons
toth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipof
the
Chu
rch
stem
sfr
oma
conf
usio
nof
Chr
ist’
ski
ngly
and
prie
stly
offi
ces.
Car
twri
ght
inhi
sSe
cond
Rep
liear
gues
that
the
titl
eof
hea
dsh
ipin
rela
tion
toth
eC
hurc
hbe
long
sto
Chr
ist
asM
edia
tor,
and
ther
efore
tohi
spr
iest
lyof
fice
.(T
C2:
411)
Alt
hough
Chri
stth
e‘H
igh
Pri
est’
orM
edia
tor
betw
een
God
and
men
isvi
ewed
prim
aril
yin
the
aspe
ctof
his
so-c
alle
d‘s
ubord
inat
ion
toth
eF
athe
r’,
that
isto
say
thro
ugh
his
hum
ann
atu
re,
nev
erth
eles
s,in
his
offi
ceof
med
iato
r,C
hris
tca
nnot
act
sole
lyby
virt
ueof
his
man
hood.”
The
succ
ess
ofth
ep
rocu
rem
ent
ofdi
vine
favo
uron
beha
lfof
hum
anit
yd
epen
ds
upon
the
per
sonal
unio
nof
that
man
hood
tohi
sd
ivin
ity
.”E
qual
ly,
Chr
ist’
sre
gal
po
wer
isex
erci
sed
thro
ug
hth
eunit
yof
his
per
son,
asG
odan
dm
anto
get
her
.T
hus
Chr
ist
does
not
rule
inon
esp
her
eas
‘Re
deem
er’,
thro
ug
hhi
sh
um
annat
ure
,an
din
anoth
eras
‘Cre
ator
’,th
rough
his
divi
nenat
ure
.‘D
omin
ion’
belo
ngs
rath
erto
the
unit
yof
his
pers
on:
And
yet
the
dom
inio
nw
her
un
tohe
was
inhi
sh
um
ane
nat
ure
lift
edup
isnot
wit
hout
divi
nepow
erex
erci
sed.
Itis
bydi
vine
po
wer
.th
atth
eS
onne
ofm
an,
who
sitt
eth
inhe
aven
doth
wor
kas
Kin
gan
dL
ord
up
on
usw
hich
are
onea
rth.
(LE
P8.
4.6;
FLE
3:36
7)
Thu
sH
ooke
r’s
defe
nce
ofth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipbu
ilds
upon
the
pri
n
cipl
esof
ort
hodox
Chr
isto
logy
com
para
ble
toth
ose
enunci
ated
byC
alvi
nin
the
Inst
itute
s.H
ooke
r’s
insi
sten
ceupon
the
unde
rlyi
ngun
ity
ofth
etw
onat
ure
sin
the
per
son
ofC
hris
tin
the
exer
cise
of
65.
Inst
.2.
15.1
-6.
Cal
vin
trea
tsth
e‘p
roph
etic
alof
fice
ofC
hris
t’in
ss.
1.2,
the
‘nat
ure
ofth
eki
ngly
pow
erof
Ch
rist
inss
.3-
5,an
d‘t
heP
ries
thood
ofC
hris
t’in
sect
ion
6.S
eeE.
D.
Wil
lis,
Cal
vin’
sC
atho
licC
hris
tolo
gy,
78-9
8.66
.Se
eIn
st.
2.14
.3:
‘Let
us,
ther
efo
re,
reg
ard
itas
the
key
totr
uein
ter
pret
atio
n,th
atth
ose
thin
gsw
hich
refe
rto
the
offic
eof
Med
iato
rar
eno
tsp
oken
ofth
edi
vine
orhu
man
natu
resi
mpl
y.’
Com
pare
TC2:
416.
67.
Inst
.2.
15.6
:‘T
his
hono
urw
eex
tend
tohi
sw
hole
char
acte
rof
Med
iato
r,so
that
hew
how
asbo
rnof
aV
irgi
n,an
don
the
cros
sof
fere
dhi
mse
lfin
sacr
ific
eto
the
Fath
er,
istr
uly
and
prop
erly
the
Son
ofG
od.
68.
Com
pare
Inst
.2.
14.1
;2.
15.3
-5.
100
Ric
hard
Hoo
ker’
sT
heol
ogy
atE
ccle
sias
tica
lD
om
mio
n11
)1
his
‘kin
gi”,
offi
ce’
of‘s
upre
eme
dom
inio
n’is
clea
rly
set
fort
hin
the
mor
esy
stem
atic
theo
logi
cal
dis
cuss
ion
ofB
ook
V:
And
that
dciti
eot
Chr
ist
whi
chbe
fore
our
Lor
des
inca
rna
hon
wro
ught
all
thin
ges
a’itl
iout
man
doth
non’
wO
rke
noth
inge
wher
ein
the
nat
ure
whi
chit
hath
assu
med
isei
ther
abse
nttr
amit
orid
le.
Chr
ist
asm
anba
thal
lpo
wer
inhe
aven
and
eart
hgi
ven
him
,H
eha
thas
man
not
asG
odon
lysu
pree
me
do
min
ion
over
quic
kean
dd
ead
.F
orso
much
his
asce
nsi
on
into
hea
ven
and
his
sess
ion
atth
en
gh
th
and
ofG
oddo
eim
port
e.
.A
scen
sion
into
hea
ven
isa
plai
nelo
call
tran
slat
ion
ofC
hris
tac
cord
inge
tohi
sm
anh
oo
dfr
omth
elo
wer
toth
eh
igh
erpar
tes
ofth
ew
orld
.S
essi
onat
the
righ
th
and
ofG
odis
the
actu
all
exer
cise
ofth
atre
genc
iean
ddom
inio
nw
her
ein
the
man
ho
od
ofC
hri
stis
jovn
edan
dm
atch
etw
ith
the
deit
ieof
the
Son
neof
God
.(I
LP
S.55
.SO
)Im
yit
alic
s]
ltis
thus
thro
ugh
anap
pea
lto
the
per
sonal
unit
yof
the
divi
nean
dh
um
ann
atu
res
inC
hris
tth
atH
ooker
dem
onst
rate
sth
eun
ity
ofso
vere
ign
pow
eror
Dom
inio
nov
erbo
thC
hurc
han
dth
ese
cula
rpo
liti
cal
orde
r.H
isar
gum
ent
dis
pla
ys
aco
mm
itm
ent
toth
ean
cien
tfo
rmu
lati
ons
cif
Chr
isto
logi
cal
ort
hodoxy
whi
chis
the
hall
-mar
kof
the
mag
iste
rial
Ref
orm
atio
n,an
des
peci
ally
ofC
alvi
n’s
wri
tings.
69
Hoo
ker’
sar
gum
ents
for
the
nece
ssit
yof
a‘s
ubord
inat
ehe
ad’
tore
pre
sent
this
unif
ied
po
wer
ofD
omin
ion
visi
bly
and
exte
rnal
lyis
take
nu
pin
the
fina
lse
ctio
nsof
this
chap
ter.
We
must
ther
efore
exam
ine
intu
rnH
ooke
r’s
resp
on
seto
Car
twri
ght’
stw
ore
mai
nin
gob
ject
ions
agai
nst
avi
sibl
eH
eadsh
ipof
the
Churc
h.
Whi
t-gi
ftur
ged
the
dis
tinct
ion
‘whe
reby
Chr
ist
issa
ydto
beuniv
ersa
lly
Hea
d,
the
Kin
gno
furt
her
then
wit
hin
his
ow
ndo
min
ions
’.(L
EP
8.4.
7;FL
E3:
369)
Suc
ha
dis
tinct
ion
of‘d
egre
e’(8
.4.7
)be
twee
nu
niv
ersa
lan
dfi
nite
form
sof
hea
dsh
ippre
suppose
sa
who
lebo
dy
ofdoct
rinal
assu
mpti
ons
under
the
hea
din
gof
eccl
esio
logy
.H
ooke
r’s
thir
dd
isti
nct
ion
bet
wee
nth
e‘t
wo
kin
des
ofpo
wer
’(L
EP
8.4.
8),
uphel
dby
Whi
tgif
tan
doppose
dby
Car
twri
ght,
invo
lves
fun
dam
enta
lso
teri
olog
ical
assu
mpti
ons
ofR
efor
mat
ion
thought.
Hooker
trea
tsth
eec
cles
iolo
gica
lan
dso
teri
olog
ical
aspec
tsof
the
pro
ble
mof
hea
dsh
ipin
the
fina
lse
ctio
nsof
his
resp
on
seto
Car
twri
gh
tin
Law
es8.
4.
Ibc
Lc
I’si
olot
’icaI
Que
stio
n
Aw
eha
vesh
ow
nin
the
disc
ussi
onab
ove,
the
mai
nth
rust
otC
artw
righ
t’s
pole
mic
agai
nst
the
roya
lhe
adsh
ipof
the
Chu
rch
69.
FW
ende
l,C
alvi
n,2b
,12
5-6
See
Inst
.,4.
9.8
for
Cal
vin’
sex
plic
itaf
firm
atio
nof
the
doct
nne
def
ined
byth
egre
atg
ener
alco
un
cils
ofth
ean
uent
Chu
rch.
inth
eSe
cond
Rep
lieis
base
don
anappeal
toce
rtai
nfu
ndam
enta
lpr
inci
ples
ofsy
stem
atic
doct
rine
.H
ooke
ran
swer
shi
sopponen
t’s
atta
ckon
the
sam
ehi
ghth
eolo
gica
lgr
ound
.So
far
we
have
exam
ined
Car
twri
ght’
sT
rini
tari
anan
dC
hris
tolo
gica
lob
ject
ions
toth
edo
ctri
neof
the
Roy
alS
upre
mac
y.C
artw
righ
t’s
resi
stan
ceto
Whi
t-gi
ft’s
argu
men
tfo
ra
‘med
iate
d’he
adsh
ipth
roug
ha
dist
inct
ion
of‘o
rder
s’of
pow
eris
only
the
firs
tst
age
ofhi
sop
posi
tion
.A
tth
eou
tset
ofth
isch
apte
rw
ere
ferr
edto
Hoo
ker’
sth
reef
old
clas
sifi
cati
onof
Car
twri
ght’
sob
ject
ions
.In
addi
tion
tore
ject
ing
the
theo
ryof
asu
bord
inat
eor
med
iate
dhe
adsh
ip,
Car
twri
ght
obje
cts
also
to‘t
hese
cond
diff
eren
cew
here
byC
hris
tis
sayd
tobe
univ
ersa
lly
Hea
d,th
eK
ing
[Hea
d]no
furt
her
then
wit
hin
his
own
dom
inio
ns’.
(LE
P8.
4.7)
Thi
sse
cond
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
the
hea
dsh
ipof
Chr
ist
and
that
ofth
eC
ivil
Mag
istr
ate
asse
rted
b’
Whi
tgif
tre
sts
upon
the
ecci
esio
logi
cal
diff
eren
cebet
wee
nth
em
ysti
cal
and
exte
rna
lC
hurc
hes
.F
orH
ooke
r,C
hris
t’s
infi
nite
,un
iver
sal
dom
inio
nis
incl
usiv
eof
,ye
tdis
tinct
from
,th
efi
nite
,te
rrit
oria
ldom
inio
nof
the
Civ
ilM
agis
trat
e.In
his
Seco
ndR
eplie
toW
hitg
ift,
Car
twri
ght
appe
als
toth
eub
iqui
tyof
Chr
ist’
spo
wer
ashe
adof
the
Chu
rch
inor
der
tosh
owth
esu
perf
luit
yof
ahe
adw
ith
ali
mit
edju
risd
icti
on:
ifth
ech
urch
beth
ebo
die
ofC
hris
te!
and
ofth
eci
vill
mag
istr
ate!
ytsh
all
have
two
head
es:
whi
chbe
ing
mon
ster
ous
isto
the
grea
tdi
shon
orof
fC
hris
te!
and
his
chur
ch.
(l’C
2:4
12)
Inth
isse
cond
obje
ctio
nC
artw
righ
tco
ncen
trat
eson
the
issu
eof
de
gree
ofju
risd
icti
on,
the
quan
tita
tive
cate
gory
ofdi
stin
ctio
n.H
ere
asw
ell
Car
twri
ght
adam
antl
yre
sist
sth
ein
trod
ucti
onof
andis
tinc
tion
whi
chin
any
way
thre
aten
sC
hris
t’s
sole
,un
divi
ded
head
-sh
ipof
the
Chu
rch:
Chr
ist
does
not
need
‘asu
bord
inat
e!an
dm
ynis
teri
all
head
off
the
chur
ch’.
(TC
2:41
3)Fo
rW
hitg
ift,
onth
eot
her
side
,C
hris
tis
rega
rded
as‘H
ead
ofth
eC
hurc
hU
nive
rsal
’.T
his,
how
ever
,is
noba
rto
the
intr
oduc
tion
offi
nite
head
sfo
rfi
nite
cons
titu
ent
part
sof
the
univ
ersa
lC
hurc
h.C
artw
righ
tin
sist
sth
atth
eub
iqui
tyof
Chr
ist’
spr
esen
cew
ith
the
Chu
rch
obvi
ates
the
need
for
any
form
ofhe
adsh
ipw
ith
ali
mit
edsp
here
ofau
thor
ity:
But
fora
smuc
heas
Chr
iste
isne
ver
seve
red
from
his
body
!no
rfr
oman
ypa
rte
off
yt!
and
isab
le!
and
doth
perf
orm
eth
atw
herf
ore
heis
call
edhe
ad!
unto
all
his
chur
che:
ytow
ghte
not
tose
me
stra
nge
that
ther
em
aybe
asu
bord
inat
ehe
adin
the’
com
men
wea
lth!
whe
reth
ere
can
heno
nein
the
chur
ch.
(TC
2:41
3)[m
yita
lics]
Thi
spa
ssag
ein
trod
uces
the
core
ofth
eec
cles
iolo
gica
lpr
oble
mw
hich
lay
atth
ece
ntre
ofth
eA
dmon
itio
nC
ontr
over
syin
toth
eR
oyal
Sup
rem
acy
deba
te,
nam
ely
the
natu
reof
the
dist
inct
ion
be
twee
nth
etr
ueC
hurc
han
dth
evi
sibl
eC
hurc
h.
Din
xiu
102
Ric
hard
Hoo
ker’
sT
heol
ogy
of
Ecc
lesi
astic
alD
omin
ion
103
Car
twri
ght’
sop
posi
tion
toth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipof
the
Churc
his
foun
ded
onth
ep
rem
ise
that
Ch
urc
han
dC
om
mo
nw
ealt
har
ew
holl
ydi
stin
ctsp
ecie
sof
asso
ciat
ion.
Wher
eas:
the
mag
istr
ate
bein
gehe
adof
fth
eco
mm
enw
ealt
he/
hat
hoth
erw
hich
mav
ebe
call
edunder
head
esbe
neat
hhv
m:
hem
uste
un
der
stan
dth
atth
ose
head
esar
eap
poin
cted
/be
caw
seth
ech
eife
mag
istr
ate
can
not
hepr
esen
tew
ith
the
who
lebo
dyof
fhi
spe
ople
!no
rin
his
owne
pers
onpe
rfor
me
the
offi
ceof
ahe
adun
toth
emal
l.(T
C2:
413)
Chr
ist,
onth
eot
her
hand
,‘is
neve
rse
vere
dfr
omhi
sbo
dy/n
orfr
oman
ypa
rtof
fvt
.’(i
bid.
)In
rela
tion
toth
eC
hurc
h,C
hris
tper
form
s‘t
hew
hole
offi
ceof
fth
ehe
adhi
mse
lfe
alon
e’an
d‘l
eave
thn
oth
ing
tom
en!
bydo
ing
whe
roff
they
rnai
eob
tain
eth
atty
tle.
’(T
C2:
415)
Thus
for
Car
twri
ght,
the
supr
eme
sour
ceof
auth
orit
yin
the
Chu
rch
isin
divi
sibl
ean
dim
med
iate
lyco
mm
unic
ated
toal
lpa
rts.
The
reis
ther
efor
eno
need
todi
stin
guis
ha
lim
ited
sphe
reof
supr
eme
juri
sdic
tion
inso
far
asth
eun
iver
sal
Chu
rch
isun
ited
under
Chr
ist’
so
wn
supre
me
auth
ori
ty.
Car
twri
ght
den
ies
the
dist
inct
ion
ofun
iver
sal
and
terr
itor
ial
eccl
esia
stic
alsu
prem
acie
sor
‘Dom
inio
ns’
corr
espo
nden
tto
the
fund
amen
tal
ecci
esio
logi
cal
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
the
Chu
rch
asa
mys
tica
las
soci
atio
nan
dth
eC
hurc
has
avi
sibl
e‘p
olit
ique
soci
etie
’H
ede
nies
the
need
for
afi
nite
,li
mit
edhe
adsh
ipon
the
grou
nds
that
such
wou
ldim
ply
that
Chr
ist
was
not
actu
ally
‘eve
rie
wh
ere
pres
ent’
(LE
P5.
55.7
)w
ith
the
who
lebo
dyof
the
Chu
rch.
As
are
sult
Car
twri
ght
isdr
iven
byhi
sow
nlo
gic
tode
nyth
eva
lidi
tyof
the
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
Chr
ist’
sm
ysti
cal
hea
dsh
ipw
hic
his
univ
ersa
lan
dth
eli
mit
edhe
adsh
ipof
Arc
hbis
hops
orC
ivil
Mag
istr
ates
whi
chis
terr
itor
ial.
Chr
ist’
sal
l-in
clus
ive
pow
er,
exte
ndin
gto
all
part
san
dal
lm
embe
rsof
the
visi
ble
Chu
rch,
obvi
ates
the
need
for
any
lim
ited
pow
er:
And
even
inth
eew
twar
dso
ciet
ie/
and
asse
mbl
ies
off
the
churc
h!
wher
eon
eor
two
are
gath
ered
inhi
sna
me!
ethe
rfo
rhe
arin
gof
fth
ew
ord!
orfo
rpr
aier
oran
yot
her
chur
chex
erci
se!
our
Sav
iour
Chr
iste
bein
gin
the
mvd
dest
eof
fth
emas
mcd
iat
our/
mus
tene
edes
heth
ere
ashe
ad:
and
ifhe
beth
ere
not
idle
!hu
tdo
inge
the
offi
ceof
fth
ehe
adfu
lly:
ytfo
llow
eth
that
even
inth
eo
wtw
ard
soci
etie
/an
dm
eeti
nges
off
the
chur
chno
svm
ple
man
can
beca
lled
the
head
off
it.S
eing
that
our
Sav
iour
Chr
iste
doin
geth
ew
hole
offi
ceof
fth
ehe
adhi
mse
lfe
alon
e:le
avet
hno
thin
gto
men
bydo
ing
whe
roff
they
mai
eob
tain
eth
atti
tle.
(TC
2:41
5)
Hoo
ker’
sre
spon
seto
this
obje
ctio
nag
ains
tth
ero
yal
head
ship
draw
sup
onth
eec
cles
iolo
gica
lpr
inci
ples
set
fort
hin
Boo
kIll
ofth
eLa
wes
.In
subs
tanc
ehi
sre
spon
seto
thes
eob
ject
ions
cons
titu
tes
adi
rect
appe
alto
the
norm
sof
refo
rmed
ecci
esio
logi
cal
orth
odox
yas
agai
nst
the
‘man
ifes
ter
rour
’(F
LE3:
367)
ofC
artw
righ
t’s
do
ctr
inal
assu
mpt
ions
.H
ooke
rse
eks
tode
mon
stra
teth
atth
eD
isci
plin
aria
nm
ixes
toge
ther
and
conf
uses
the
spir
itua
l,in
visi
ble,
and
mys
tica
lch
arac
ter
ofth
eC
hurc
hon
the
one
hand
,w
ith
itste
mpo
ral,
visi
ble
and
exte
rnal
form
onth
eot
her.
Out
ofth
isec
cle
siol
ogic
alco
nfus
ion,
the
univ
ersa
l,m
ysti
cal
dom
inio
nof
Chr
ist
isin
corr
ectl
yde
emed
suff
icie
ntfo
rth
eor
deri
ngof
the
exte
rnal
stru
ctu
reof
the
Chu
rch
asa
‘vis
ible
,po
liti
que
soci
etie
’.T
his
inev
itab
lyle
ads
toa
conf
usio
nof
the
two
natu
res
ofth
eC
hurc
h,co
ntra
ryto
refo
rmed
eccl
esio
logi
cal
orth
odox
y.In
orde
rth
atC
hris
tm
aybe
‘eve
rie
whe
repr
esen
t’w
ith
his
Chu
rch,
itis
evid
ent,
Hoo
ker
argu
es,
that
this
pres
ence
can
only
beof
asp
irit
ual
orm
ysti
cal
char
acte
r.C
hris
t’s
univ
ersa
lpr
esen
ceas
the
one
supr
eme
head
ofth
een
tire
visi
ble
orde
rof
the
Chu
rch
rais
esce
rtai
nlo
gica
ldi
ffic
ulti
esco
ncer
ning
the
natu
reof
exte
rnal
eccl
esia
stic
alau
thor
ity:
Bes
ides
how
soev
erC
hris
tbe
spir
itua
lly
alw
aves
unit
edun
toev
ery
part
ofhi
sbo
dyw
hich
isth
eC
hurc
h:ne
vert
hele
ssw
edo
eal
lkn
owe
and
they
them
selv
esw
hoal
leag
eth
isw
ill(1
doub
tno
t)co
nfes
seal
soth
atfr
omev
ery
Chu
rch
heer
visi
ble,
Chr
ist
touc
hing
visi
ble
and
corp
oral
lpr
esen
ceis
rem
oved
asfa
nas
heav
enfr
omea
rth
isdi
stan
t.V
isib
lego
verm
ent
isa
thin
gne
cess
arie
for
the
Chu
rch.
And
itdo
thno
tap
pear
eho
wth
eex
erci
seof
visi
ble
gove
rnm
ent
over
such
mul
titu
des
ever
yw
here
disp
erse
dth
roug
hout
the
wor
ldsh
ould
cons
ist
wit
hou
tsu
ndri
evi
sibl
ego
vern
ours
who
sepo
wer
bein
gth
egre
ates
tin
thaf
kind
eso
farr
asit
reac
heth
they
are
inco
nsi
der
ati
onth
ereo
fte
rmed
sofa
rrH
eads
,w
herf
ore
notw
iths
tand
ing
that
perp
etua
llco
njun
ctio
nby
vert
uew
hero
fou
rS
avio
urre
may
neth
alw
ayes
spir
itua
lly
unit
edun
toth
epa
rtes
ofhi
sm
ys
tical
lbo
dy;
Hea
dsin
dued
wit
hsu
prem
epo
wer
exte
ndin
gun
toa
cert
aine
com
pass
ear
efo
rth
eex
erci
seof
visi
ble
regi
men
tno
tun
nece
ssan
e.(L
EP
8.4.
7;FL
E3:
370)
Just
ashe
resi
sts
the
Dis
cipl
inar
ian
tend
ency
tosp
irit
uali
seth
evi
sibl
eC
hurc
h,th
atis
byth
eas
sert
ion
that
itsna
ture
isw
holl
ydi
ffer
ent
from
all
othe
rfo
rms
ofpo
liti
cal
asso
ciat
ion,
sohe
real
soH
ooke
rre
sist
sC
artw
righ
t’s
spir
itua
lisi
ngof
eccl
esia
stic
alpo
wer
.C
artw
righ
t’s
oppo
siti
onto
adi
stin
ctio
nbe
twee
nth
eun
iver
sal
head
ship
exer
cise
dby
Chr
ist,
onth
eon
eha
nd,
and
ali
mit
edhe
ad-
ship
exer
cise
dby
the
Civ
ilM
agis
trat
eon
the
othe
r,is
show
nby
Hoo
ker
tobe
base
don
afa
ilur
eto
dist
ingu
ish
betw
een
mys
tica
lan
dm
erel
yex
tern
al,
coer
cive
auth
orit
y,be
twee
nth
ehe
adsh
ipes
sent
ial
tosa
lvat
ion
and
the
head
ship
over
mat
ters
eith
erac
cess
ory
70.
See
LEP
3.1.
14.
104
Ric
hard
Ho
ok
ers
The
olog
yof
Ecc
lesi
asti
cal
Dom
inio
n10
5
tosa
lvat
ion
or
indif
fere
nt.
The
prob
lem
ofec
cies
iolo
gypr
imar
ily
conce
rns
the
nat
ure
ofth
eco
nnec
tion
and
dist
inct
ion
ofC
hris
t’s
myst
ical
bo
dy
and
the
Ch
urc
has
avis
ible
,te
mpora
las
soci
atio
nof
men
:th
eq
uesti
on
ofth
etw
oC
hurc
hes
isth
usth
efo
unda
tion
ofth
eq
ues
tio
nof
the
two
hea
dsh
ips.
Whi
leH
ooker
allo
ws
that
the
Ch
urc
has
am
ysti
cal
body
is
one
and
indi
visi
ble,
the
Churc
has
avi
sibl
eb
ody
isdiv
ided
into
par
ts.
The
rule
ofdiv
erse
hea
ds
over
div
erse
par
tsof
the
visi
ble
body
can
no
tim
pair
the
uniq
uen
ess
and
univ
ersa
lity
ofC
hris
t’s
mys
tica
lhea
dsh
ipsi
nce
this
latt
eris
exer
cise
din
anoth
erre
alm
.
Chr
ist’
subiq
uit
yd
oes
not
abol
ish
the
need
for
‘Hea
dsin
du
edw
ith
sup
rem
ep
ow
erex
ten
din
gunto
ace
rtai
neco
mpas
se.
..
for
the
exer
cise
ofvi
sibl
ere
gim
ent’
.(L
EP
8.4.
7;FL
E3:
371)
Inm
akin
gth
is
eccl
esio
logi
cal
poin
t,H
ooker
app
eals
toth
efa
mou
sdoct
rine
call
edth
eL
’xtr
a-C
alz’
inis
ticui
nin
support
ofhi
scr
ucia
ldis
tinct
ion
oftw
o‘d
egre
es’
ofh
ead
ship
:
we
do
eal
lk
now
ean
dth
e’th
emse
lves
who
alle
age
this
will
ld
ou
bt
not)
conte
sse
also
that
from
ever
yC
hurc
hhe
ervi
sibl
e,C
hris
tto
uch
ing
visi
ble
and
corp
oral
lp
rese
nce
isre
moved
asfa
ras
hea
ven
from
eart
his
dis
tan
t.(L
EP
8.4.
7)
Chr
isto
logi
cal
ort
ho
do
xy
spel
lso
ut
clea
rly
the
dis
tance
ofC
hris
t’s
visi
ble
pre
sen
ce.
Itis
prec
isel
yth
isdis
tance
whi
chre
quir
esa
‘vis
ible
and
corp
oral
l’su
bord
inat
ein
the
per
form
ance
ofth
eof
fice
ofhea
dsh
ip.
As
we
have
seen
inoth
erin
stan
ces,
Hooker
isan
xiou
sto
mai
ntai
nhig
hst
andar
ds
otor
thod
oxy
wit
hre
spec
tto
all
mat
ters
ofba
sic
syst
emat
icdo
ctri
ne,
Itw
asco
nsis
tent
wit
hor
thod
oxC
hri
stolo
gy
toin
sist
that
ubiq
uit
yor
un
iver
sal
pre
sen
cear
ep
rop
erti
espec
uli
arto
Chr
ist’
sdi
vine
nat
ure
,an
dhe
nce
toth
esp
irit
ual
reaIm
.2
Cal
vin
was
high
lycr
itic
alof
the
ten
den
cyof
Lu
ther
ans
topre
ssth
eci
nnm
unic
atio
idio
mat
umbey
ond
the
acce
pted
bounds
ofpa
tris
tic
ort
hodox
v:
Whi
leL
uth
erhad
taken
the
unit
yof
the
per
son
ofC
hris
tas
his
poin
tof
dep
artu
rean
d,
byex
ten
din
gth
etr
adit
ional
no
tion
sof
com
mun
icat
ion
ofid
iom
san
dof
ubiq
uity
,fi
nish
edup
adm
itti
ngth
eub
iqui
tyno
tonly
ofth
edi
vine
,bu
tal
soof
the
hum
anna
ture
ofC
hri
st.
74
Cal
vin
thus
reje
cts
the
part
icip
atio
nof
the
hum
anna
ture
ofC
hri
stin
the
pecu
liar
lydi
vine
prop
erty
ofub
iqui
ty.
For
Hoo
ker,
Car
twri
gh
t’s
asse
rtio
nof
Chr
ist’
sex
clus
ive
hea
dsh
ipof
the
visi
ble
71.
LE
P5.
57.4
,72
.E.
D.
Will
is,
Cal
vin’
sC
atho
licC
hris
toIo
,cp,
61—
99.
73.
Inst
.4.
17.3
0.Se
eW
ende
l,C
alvi
n,21
9-22
4.74
.W
ende
l,22
4.
Chu
rch
cont
radi
cts
the
extr
a-C
alvi
nist
icum
byits
impl
ied
conf
usio
n
ofth
ete
mpo
ral
and
mys
tica
lsp
here
sof
Chr
ist’
sop
erat
ion.
Iron
ical
ly,
Car
twri
ght’
sin
sist
ence
upon
Chr
ist’
sso
le,
unm
edi
ated
head
ship
byvi
rtue
ofhi
sun
iver
sal
pres
ence
unde
rmin
eshi
spr
evio
usar
gum
ent
that
Chr
ist
ishe
adof
the
Chu
rch
as‘S
onne
ofM
an’.
Chr
ist’
sub
iqui
ty,
acco
rdin
gto
orth
odox
Chr
isto
logy
,is
a
prop
erty
ofhi
sdi
vine
natu
re.
As
Hoo
ker
poin
tsou
t:
To
conc
lude
,w
eeho
ldit
inre
gard
eof
the
fore
alle
aged
proo
fes
am
ost
infa
llib
letr
uth
that
Chr
ist
asm
anis
not
ever
iew
here
pres
ent
..
.H
ishu
man
esu
bsta
nce
init
self
eis
nat
ura
llie
abse
ntfr
omth
eea
rth,
his
soul
ean
dbo
die
not
onea
rth
but
inhe
aven
onli
e,(L
EP
5.5
5.7
)
Chr
ist’
sh
um
anit
yis
univ
ersa
lly
pre
sent
sole
lyby
virt
ueof
its
hy
po
stat
icunio
nw
ith
the
div
ine
nat
ure
:
Yea
t bec
ause
this
subst
ance
[the
hum
an]
isin
sep
arab
lie
joyn
edto
that
per
son
all
word
ew
hic
hby
his
veri
ediv
ine
esse
nce
ispr
esen
tw
ith
all
thin
ges,
the
natu
rew
hich
cann
otha
vein
itse
lfe
univ
ersa
llpre
sence
hat
hit
afte
ra
sort
eby
bei
ng
eno
whe
rese
vere
dfr
omth
atw
hich
ever
iew
her
eis
pre
sent.
(LE
P5.
55.7
)
Thu
sC
artw
righ
t’s
ecci
esio
logi
cal
obje
ctio
nto
the
roya
lhea
dsh
ip
ofth
eC
hurc
hon
the
grou
nds
ofC
hris
t’s
ubiq
uity
unde
rmin
esth
ear
gum
ent
ofhi
spr
evio
usC
hris
tolo
gica
lob
ject
ion.
The
Que
stio
nof
the
Tw
oR
ealm
san
dT
wo
Reg
imen
ts
Itre
mai
nson
lyto
exam
ine
the
thir
dan
dfi
nal
cate
gory
ofdis
tinc
tion
‘bet
wee
nth
eti
tle
ofH
ead
when
we
gave
itunto
Chr
ist
and
whe
nw
ega
veit
tooth
erG
ov
ern
ou
rs’.
(LE
P8.
4.8)
For
Hoo
ker,
this
‘las
tan
dth
ew
eigh
ties
tdi
ffer
ence
betw
een
him
[Chr
ist]
and
them
[Civ
ilM
agis
trat
es]
isin
the
very
kind
eof
thei
rpow
er’.
(LE
P
8.4.
5)[m
yita
lics]
Thu
sth
edi
scus
sion
mov
esfr
oman
ecci
esio
log
ical
pers
pect
ive
toa
mor
epu
rely
sote
riol
ogic
alco
nsid
erat
ion
ofth
e‘p
ower
ofD
omin
ion’
inth
eco
ntex
tof
the
fam
ous
two
real
ms
doct
rine
.O
nce
agai
n,C
artw
righ
tob
ject
sto
any
dist
inct
ion
whi
chde
roga
tes
from
Chr
ist’
sim
med
iate
and
excl
usiv
ete
nure
ofth
eti
tle‘H
ead
ofth
eC
hurc
h’.
Inth
isin
stan
ce,
the
dist
inct
ion
urge
dby
the
Est
abli
shm
ent
divi
nes
isbe
twee
n‘h
eads
hip
spir
itua
llan
dm
ysti
call
inJe
sus
Chr
ist,
Min
iste
rial
lan
dou
twar
din
othe
rsbe
side
sC
hris
t’.
(LE
P8.4
.8)
75.
Com
pare
WW
1:6;
2:84
,85
.
106
Ric
hard
Hoo
ker’
sT
heol
ogy
ofE
ccle
sias
tical
Dom
inio
n11
)7
Ina
very
real
sens
e,th
elo
gica
lco
reof
the
dis
pute
bet
wee
nE
stab
lish
men
td
efen
der
san
dD
isci
plin
aria
ncr
itic
sof
the
Roy
alS
up
rem
acy
issu
mm
ariz
edin
thei
rre
spec
tive
inte
rpre
tati
on
sof
the
doct
rin
eof
the
two
real
ms.
Hoo
ker
seek
sto
just
ify
the
roya
lhea
d-
ship
byan
app
eal
toth
em
agis
teri
alre
form
ers’
sote
riol
ogic
aldis
tinc
tion
ofth
etw
ore
alm
san
dth
eir
corr
espondin
gre
gim
ents
.In
dee
dth
eco
ncep
tof
the
cort
ius
Chr
isti
anum
,th
edoct
rine
ofth
etw
och
urc
hes
,an
dth
eso
teri
olog
ical
fou
nd
atio
ns
ofH
ooke
r’s
tho
ug
ht
are
clos
ely
link
edby
the
conc
ept
ofth
etw
ore
alm
s.In
the
fina
lse
ctio
nsof
his
trea
tmen
tof
the
qu
esti
on
ofhea
dsh
ipH
ooker
ap
plie
shi
sin
terp
reta
tion
ofth
ere
form
eddoct
rine
ofth
etw
ore
alm
sin
his
anal
ysis
ofC
artw
rig
ht’
sth
ird
maj
orob
ject
ion:
Chr
ist
isH
adas
bein
gth
efo
un
tain
eof
life
and
ghos
tly
nutr
im
ent,
the
wei
spri
ng
ofsp
intu
all
ble
ssin
ges
po
wre
din
toth
ebo
dyof
the
Chu
rch,
thes
eH
eads
asbe
ing
his
prin
cipa
llin
stru
men
tes
for
the
Chu
rcIi
eoutw
ard
go
ver
nm
ent.
(LE
P8.
4.8)
Inth
ispas
sage
Hooker
indic
ates
that
the
roya
lhea
dsh
ipis
just
ifie
dac
cord
ing
toth
edis
tin
ctio
nof
the
outw
ard
and
visi
ble
real
mfr
omth
ein
war
d,
invi
sibl
ere
alm
.C
artw
right’
sas
sert
ion
ofC
hris
t’s
ex
clus
ive
hea
dsh
ipof
the
Ch
urc
his
thus
show
nby
Hooker
toim
ply
aso
teri
olog
ical
lvu
nort
hodox
conf
usio
nof
the
mys
tica
lan
dex
tern
alre
alm
s.H
ooke
rar
gues
that
‘man
ifes
ttr
uth’
,na
mel
yth
eort
hodox
reto
rmed
doct
nne
ofth
etw
ore
alm
s,ought
not
tobe
rep
roac
hed
onac
count
otits
hav
ing
been
uphel
dbr
men
pro
ven
tohold
oth
er‘p
opis
h’er
rors
.(L
EP
8.4.
8;FE
E3:
375)
Hooker
affi
rms
the
dis
tinc
tion
ofki
nddra
wn
byth
ep
apis
tsT
hom
asH
ardin
gan
dA
lber
tus
Pig
hiu
sb
etw
een
the
‘hea
dsh
ipsp
irit
uall
and
mys
tical
lin
Jesu
sC
hri
st,
Min
iste
rial
and
outw
ard
ino
ther
sb
esid
esC
hris
t’:
By
this
dis
tin
ctio
nth
eyha
vebo
thtr
uly
and
suff
icie
ntly
pro
ved
that
the
nam
eof
Hea
dim
po
rtin
gp
ow
erof
dom
inio
nov
erth
eC
hurc
hm
igh
the
give
nunto
oth
ers
bes
ides
Chr
ist
wit
hout
pre
jud
ice
un
toan
yp
art
ofhi
sh
on
ou
r.T
hat
whi
chth
eysh
ould
have
mad
em
anif
est
was
that
the
nam
eof
Hea
dim
port
ing
the
po
wer
ofL
inw
ersa
lld
om
inio
nov
erth
ew
hole
Chu
rch
ofC
hris
tm
ilit
ant
doth
and
that
bydiv
ine
rig
ht
apper
tain
eunto
the
Pope
ofR
ome.
The
ydi
dpro
ve
itla
wfu
llto
gra
un
tu
nto
oth
ers
be
side
sC
hris
tth
ep
ow
erof
Hea
dshi
pin
adif
fere
nt
kin
de
from
his
The
irfa
ult
was
ther
efore
inex
acti
ngw
rongfu
lly
sogr
eat
po
wer
asth
eych
alle
ng
edin
that
kin
de
and
not
inm
akin
gtw
ok
ind
esof
pow
er.
..
(LE
P8.
4.8)
Hoo
ker’
sdet
ence
ofth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipis
thu
ses
tabli
shed
onan
app
eal
toa
clea
ran
dsh
arp
dist
inct
ion
bet
wee
n‘t
wo
kin
des
of
pow
er’.
On
the
one
han
d,
ther
eis
the
spir
itua
lpow
erpro
per
toC
hris
tal
one;
onth
eoth
erhan
d,
ther
eis
avi
sibl
ean
dex
tern
alpow
er.
The
rear
eth
us
two
kin
ds
ofD
omin
ion
and
two
dist
inct
hea
dsh
ips.
For
Hoo
ker,
the
exte
rnal
min
istr
yof
the
visi
ble
Chu
rch
embodie
din
‘Wor
d,S
acra
men
ts,
and
Dis
cipl
ine’
isno
ta
part
ofC
hris
t’s
unm
edia
ted
spir
itua
lru
le,
asth
eD
isci
plin
aria
nsar
gued
,but
bel
ongs
toth
eoutw
ard
adm
inis
trat
ion
ofsp
irit
ual
thin
gs.
(LE
P8.
4.9;
FLE
3:37
7)H
eca
stig
ates
the
Dis
cipl
inar
ians
for
such
acl
umsy
conf
lati
onof
the
two
real
ms:
Can
they
beig
nora
nt
how
litt
leit
boote
thto
over
cast
sodee
ra
ligh
tw
ith
som
em
ist
ofam
bigu
itie
inth
ena
me
ofsp
irit
uall
regi
men
t?T
om
ake
thin
ges
ther
efore
sopl
aine
that
hen
cefo
rth
aC
hild
esca
paci
tym
ayse
rve
righ
tly
toco
ncei
veour
mea
ning
,w
em
ake
the
Spi
ritu
all
regim
ent
ofC
hris
tto
bege
nera
lly
that
wher
by
his
Chu
rch
isru
led
and
gover
ned
inth
inges
spir
itua
ll.
Of
this
gene
rall
we
mak
etw
odi
stin
ctki
ndes
,th
eon
ein
vis
ibly
exer
cise
dby
Chr
ist
him
self
inhi
sow
nper
son,
the
othe
rou
twar
dly
adm
inis
tere
dby
them
whom
Chr
ist
doth
allo
wto
beth
eR
uler
san
dguid
ers
ofhi
sC
hurc
h.(L
EP
8.4.
9)[m
yit
alic
s]
Car
twri
ght’
sde
nial
ofth
ero
yal
hea
dsh
ipis
thus
show
nby
Hoo
ker
todep
end
onth
em
ista
ken
pre
mis
eth
atC
hris
t’s
spir
itua
lgover
nm
ent
isin
dist
ingu
isha
ble
from
the
exte
rnal
adm
inis
trat
ion
ofsp
intu
alth
ing
s.76
Hoo
ker’
sar
gu
men
the
reec
hoes
Lut
her’
sdi
stin
ctio
nb
etw
een
geis
tlich
esR
eich
and
wei
tlich
esR
eich
,th
em
ixin
gor
confu
sion
ofw
hich
isth
eso
urce
ofgr
ave
sote
riol
ogic
aler
ror:
‘Dup
lex
enim
est
foru
mpo
litic
u?n
etth
eolo
gicu
;n.’
(WA
39.1
,230
)H
ooke
r’s
logi
cem
brac
eseq
uall
yth
edi
alec
tic
ofth
etw
ore
alm
sas
rep
rese
nte
dby
Cal
vin
inth
eIn
stit
utes
,w
her
ehe
too
seek
sto
conso
lidat
eth
ecr
itic
aldis
tinct
ion
bet
wee
nth
efo
rum
cons
cien
tiae
and
the
foru
mex
tern
uni.
77
Hoo
ker
iscl
earl
yco
nce
rned
touphold
the
pivo
tal
dis
tinct
ion
ofre
form
edso
teri
olog
yon
this
ques
tion
ofth
elo
cus
ofec
cles
iast
ical
auth
ori
tyin
the
visi
ble
Churc
h.
Chr
ist
ishea
din
asp
ecia
lse
nse
—hi
sim
med
iate
go
ver
nm
ent
isge
istli
ch,
heru
les
inth
efo
rum
cons
cien
tiae,
‘as
bei
ng
the
founta
ine
oflif
ean
dgh
ostl
ynu
trim
ent’
(LE
P8.
4.8;
FLE
3:37
4):
Him
only
ther
efore
we
doe
acknow
ledg
tobe
that
Lor
dw
hich
dw
elle
thli
veth
and
raig
net
hin
our
har
tes;
him
only
tobe
that
Hea
dw
hic
hgi
veth
salv
atio
nan
dlif
eu
nto
his
body
;hi
mon
lyto
beth
atfo
unta
ine,
from
when
ceth
ein
flue
nce
ofhe
aven
lygr
ace
dist
ille
th.
..‘
(LE
P8.
4.9)
76.
TC2:
409.
77.
Inst
.3.
19.1
5;4.
10.3
-6.
Di)
nS
I.1
S10
8R
icha
rdH
ooke
r’s
The
olog
yof
Ecc
lesi
astic
alD
omin
ion
109
The
adm
inis
trat
ion
ofw
ord
,sa
cram
ents
and
disc
ipli
near
ein
dee
dsp
irit
ual
—bu
tth
eyar
eno
tuneq
uiv
oca
lly
so.
The
yar
esp
irit
ual
inso
far
asC
hris
tis
thei
rau
tho
r,hu
tth
eyar
eno
t‘S
piri
tual
!as
that
whi
chis
inw
ard
lyan
din
visi
bly
exer
cise
dno
rH
is,
asth
atw
hich
He
him
selt
ein
per
son
doth
exer
cise
’(L
EP
8.4.
9)Ju
stas
the
wor
d,sa
cram
ents
,an
ddi
scip
line
ofth
eC
hurc
hha
vebo
than
inw
ard,
spir
itua
lco
nten
tan
dan
exte
rnal
,vi
sibl
efo
rmth
roug
hth
epo
wer
ofor
der,
soal
soth
ere
isa
twof
old
char
acte
rin
the
pow
eran
dof
fice
ofhe
adsh
ip:
Aga
inth
atp
ow
erof
do
min
ion
whi
chis
ind
eed
the
poin
teof
this
Con
trot
’crs
wan
ddoth
also
belo
ngto
the
seco
ndki
nde
ofSp
iritu
al!
regi
men
t,nam
ely
un
toth
atre
gim
ent
wh
ich
isex
ter
nal!
and
vist
hie,
this
lik
ewis
ebei
ng
Spir
itual
!in
rega
rdof
the
mat
ter
abo
ut
whi
chit
dea
leth
and
bei
ng
His
inas
muc
has
He
appr
ovet
hw
hats
oeve
ris
done
byit,
mus
tno
twit
hsta
ndin
gbe
dist
ingu
ishe
dal
sofr
omth
atpo
wer
whe
rbv
hehi
mse
lfin
per
son
adm
inis
tret
hth
efo
rmer
kind
eof
his
own
spir
itua
llre
gim
ent
[tha
tis
tosa
y,th
ein
visi
ble,
mys
tica
lki
nd]
beca
use
hehi
mse
lfin
pers
ondo
thno
tad
min
iste
rth
is.
(LE
P8.
4.9)
[my
ital
icsl
The
rear
eth
us
two
clas
ses
ofpo
wer
whi
chm
ust
beke
ptw
holl
yse
para
tean
ddi
stin
ct,
for
they
are
‘sev
ered
inna
ture
’.O
necl
ass
isex
tern
al,
visi
ble,
and
hum
an;
the
othe
ris
mys
tica
l,in
visi
ble,
and
divi
ne,
‘l’he
form
erde
rive
sits
auth
orit
yfr
omth
ela
tter
,bu
tm
ust
not
beco
nfus
edw
ith
it.T
heC
ivil
Mag
istr
ate’
sec
cles
iast
ical
pow
eris
deri
ved
from
Chr
ist’
s,bu
tm
ust
bevi
ewed
assu
bord
inat
eto
his,
lim
ited
inth
eex
tent
orde
gree
ofits
sway
,an
dfi
nall
y,di
stin
ctfr
omC
hris
t’s
po
wer
inki
nd.
Car
twri
ght’
sth
eolo
gica
ler
ror
isto
have
conf
used
the
unm
edia
ted
spir
itua
lau
thor
ity
ofC
hris
tw
ith
that
spir
itua
lau
thor
ity
med
iate
dth
roug
hex
tern
alm
eans
,an
dkn
own
inits
seve
ral
form
sas
the
pow
erof
orde
r,th
epo
wer
ofsp
irit
ual
juri
sdic
tion
,an
dth
epo
wer
ofdo
min
ion
orsu
prem
eju
risd
icti
on.
Chr
ist’
sp
rop
ersp
irit
ual
pow
er‘w
orke
thse
cret
lyin
war
dly
and
invi
sibl
y’in
the
torn
,,,co
nsci
entt
oe,
inm
en’s
hear
ts.
Chr
ist
alon
eca
nex
erci
seth
isun
med
iate
dsp
irit
ual
pow
er.
The
Civ
ilM
agis
trat
eex
erci
ses
am
edia
ted
spir
itu
alre
gim
ent,
‘outw
ardly
adm
inis
tere
d’
inth
efo
rum
extt’
rnum
.T
hu
sin
answ
erto
Car
twri
ght’
so
bje
ctio
n,
Hoo
ker
resp
onds
wit
han
appe
alfo
rth
est
rict
appl
icat
ion
ofth
ere
form
eddo
ctri
neof
the
two
real
ms
and
two
regim
ents
:
We
doe
not
ther
efor
eva
inly
imag
ine
but
trul
yan
dri
ghtl
ydis
cern
ea
pow
erex
tern
all
and
visi
ble
inth
eC
hurc
hex
erci
sed
bym
enan
dse
vere
din
nat
ure
from
that
spir
itual
!po
wer
ofC
hris
tes
own
regi
men
t,w
hich
pow
eris
term
edsp
irit
ual!
be
caus
eit
wor
keth
secr
etly
inw
ardl
yan
din
visi
bly:
His
,be
caus
e
none
doth
orca
nit
pers
onal
lyex
erci
seei
ther
besi
des
orto
geth
erw
ith
him
.So
that
Him
only
we
max
’na
me
our
Hea
din
rega
rdof
this
and
yet
inre
gard
ofth
atot
her
pow
erd
iffe
rin
gfr
omth
is,
term
eot
her
also
besi
des
him
Hea
dsw
itho
utan
yco
ntra
dict
ion
atal
l.(L
EP
8.4.
9;FL
E3:
378)
One
ofth
epu
rpos
esof
this
stud
yw
asto
show
that
Hoo
ker’
sdo
ctri
neof
the
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yde
serv
esto
beex
amin
edin
the
full
ligh
tof
his
theo
logi
cal
assu
mpt
ions
.It
wou
ldbe
diff
icul
tin
deed
,if
not
impo
ssib
le,
toof
fer
aco
here
ntpo
rtra
itof
his
trea
tmen
tof
the
roya
ltit
leof
head
ship
wit
hout
ath
orou
ghin
quir
yin
tohi
sth
eolo
gy.
Tha
tth
equ
esti
onof
the
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yw
asp
rofo
undl
yth
eolo
gica
lfo
rbo
thH
ooke
ran
dhi
sco
ntem
pora
ryal
lies
and
oppo
nent
sap
pear
sno
wto
bebe
yond
disp
ute.
The
prin
cipa
lai
mof
this
essa
yha
sbe
ento
inqu
ire
furt
her
into
the
spec
ific
do
ctri
nal
elem
ents
inth
isep
isod
eof
the
grea
tE
liza
beth
anec
cles
iolo
gica
lde
bate
.W
eha
vese
enth
atH
ooke
ran
dhi
sD
isci
plin
aria
no
pp
one
nts
view
edth
eR
oyal
Sup
rem
acy
asth
efo
cus
ofa
test
ofth
em
ost
basi
cdo
ctri
nal
orth
odox
y.T
hequ
esti
ons
ofth
epr
ecis
ena
ture
ofth
ere
lati
onbe
twee
nC
hris
tan
dhi
sF
athe
ras
pers
ons
ofth
eT
rini
tyan
dbe
twee
nth
ehu
man
and
divi
nena
ture
sin
thei
rh
yp
ost
atic
unio
nac
cord
ing
toth
efo
rmul
atio
nsof
the
gene
ral
coun
cils
ofth
eea
rly
chur
chw
ere
undo
ubte
dly
cruc
ial,
inth
ees
tim
atio
nof
both
Hoo
ker
and
Tho
mas
Car
twri
ght,
inth
ede
term
inat
ion
ofth
ehe
adsh
ipis
sue.
The
sote
riol
ogic
aldi
stin
ctio
nbe
twee
nth
ere
alm
sof
pass
ive
and
acti
veri
ghte
ousn
ess,
and
henc
ebe
twee
nth
efa
mou
sT
wo
Kin
gdom
san
dT
wo
Reg
imen
tsof
Ref
orm
atio
np
oli
tica
lth
ough
t,al
sooc
cupi
esa
cent
ral
plac
ein
the
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yde
bate
.T
he.
eccl
esio
logi
cal
disa
gree
men
tov
erth
e‘m
arks
’of
the
chur
chan
dth
eau
thor
ity
ofsc
ript
ure
inth
ede
term
inat
ion
ofec
cle
sias
tica
lpo
liti
cal
stru
ctur
esw
asth
eth
ird
area
ofth
eolo
gica
lde
bate
whi
chin
flue
nced
Hoo
ker’
sap
proa
chto
the
doct
rine
ofth
eR
oyal
Sup
rem
acy.
Itha
sbe
enou
rin
tent
thro
ugho
utto
atte
mpt
tore
cons
truc
tth
ein
tell
ectu
alor
der
ofH
ooke
r’s
appr
oach
toth
ispo
liti
cal
ques
tion
,th
atis
tosa
ym
ovin
gfr
omhi
s‘g
ener
alth
eolo
gica
lm
edit
atio
ns’
toth
eir
appl
icat
ion
inth
e‘p
arti
cula
rde
cisi
on’
whi
chun
ites
inth
eC
row
nsu
prem
eju
risd
icti
onin
both
civi
lan
dec
cles
iast
ical
‘af
fayr
esan
dca
uses
’.In
this
atte
ntio
nto
the
orde
ran
dst
ruct
ure
ofH
ooke
r’s
thou
ght
ther
eis
are
spon
seto
the
mos
tre
cent
cri
bci
smw
hich
view
sth
eL
izve
sei
ther
aslo
gica
llyin
cohe
rent
oras
aun
ifie
dpo
lem
icw
itho
utan
yde
ep-s
eate
dph
ilos
ophi
cal
inte
grit
y.It
has
ther
efor
ebe
enon
eof
the
aim
sof
this
essa
yto
poin
tto
Hoo
ker’
sC
hris
tolo
gica
lpa
radi
gmas
apr
omin
ent
conn
ecti
ngde
vice
atvi
rtua
lly
ever
yim
port
ant
turn
ofhi
sar
gum
ent.
The
hy
po
stat
icun
ion
ofth
etw
ona
ture
sw
hich
yet
cont
inue
dist
inct
from
Dio
nysi
us
Ho
one
anoth
eris
the
para
doxi
cal
pat
tern
oflo
gic
whi
chco
ntin
uall
y
recu
rsin
Hoo
ker’
sso
teri
olog
y,ec
cles
iolo
gy,
and
ulti
mat
ely
inhi
s
anal
ysis
ofth
eunio
nof
civi
lan
dec
cles
iast
ical
juri
sdic
tion
inth
e
per
son
ofth
eP
rinc
e.T
heco
here
nce
ofH
ooke
r’s
doct
rine
ofth
e
Roy
alS
upre
mac
yw
ith
his
thought
inge
nera
lis
ulti
mat
ely
esta
b
lish
edupon
this
theo
logi
cal
foundat
ion.
Uni
vers
ity
ofK
ing’
sC
olle
ge
Hal
ifax
,N
S.
