‘Vestiges of the Divine Light’: Girolamo Zanchi, Richard Hooker, and a Reformed Thomistic Natural Law Theory

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION Perichoresis Pub Date : 2022-05-09 DOI:10.2478/perc-2022-0009
Bradford Littlejohn
{"title":"‘Vestiges of the Divine Light’: Girolamo Zanchi, Richard Hooker, and a Reformed Thomistic Natural Law Theory","authors":"Bradford Littlejohn","doi":"10.2478/perc-2022-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article assesses Jerome Zanchi’s (1560-90) theory of natural law in relation to that of Richard Hooker’s (1554-1600) by arguing three theses. First, Zanchi’s view of natural law is generally Thomistic, but he expands upon it in a manner similar to his contemporaries, thereby providing further evidence against the increasingly discredited narrative of a Protestant voluntarism dominating early Reformed scholastic thought. Second, Zanchi’s commitment to the Reformed doctrine of total depravity does not represent as drastic a departure from Thomas as might first appear. Third, Hooker’s disagreement with Zanchi on this last point does not, as often argued, result from his own diluted commitment to total depravity, but denotes a more coherent and elegant way of reaching the same Reformed Thomistic synthesis. The historical record suggests that Hooker’s approach proved more influential than Zanchi’s.","PeriodicalId":40786,"journal":{"name":"Perichoresis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perichoresis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2022-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article assesses Jerome Zanchi’s (1560-90) theory of natural law in relation to that of Richard Hooker’s (1554-1600) by arguing three theses. First, Zanchi’s view of natural law is generally Thomistic, but he expands upon it in a manner similar to his contemporaries, thereby providing further evidence against the increasingly discredited narrative of a Protestant voluntarism dominating early Reformed scholastic thought. Second, Zanchi’s commitment to the Reformed doctrine of total depravity does not represent as drastic a departure from Thomas as might first appear. Third, Hooker’s disagreement with Zanchi on this last point does not, as often argued, result from his own diluted commitment to total depravity, but denotes a more coherent and elegant way of reaching the same Reformed Thomistic synthesis. The historical record suggests that Hooker’s approach proved more influential than Zanchi’s.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
《神圣之光的遗迹》:吉罗拉莫·桑奇、理查德·胡克和改革后的托马斯主义自然法理论
本文通过三个论点来比较杰罗姆·桑奇(1560-90)与理查德·胡克(1554-1600)的自然法理论。首先,桑奇对自然法的看法总体上是托马斯式的,但他以一种与同时代人相似的方式对其进行了扩展,从而提供了进一步的证据,以反对新教唯意志论主导早期改革宗经院思想的说法,这种说法越来越不可信。第二,桑奇对改革宗彻底堕落教义的承诺,并不像最初看起来的那样,代表着对多马的彻底背离。第三,胡克与桑奇在最后一点上的分歧,并不像人们常说的那样,源于他自己对完全堕落的淡化承诺,而是表明了一种更连贯、更优雅的方式,达到了同样的改革宗托马斯主义综合。历史记录表明胡克的方法比桑奇的更有影响力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Perichoresis
Perichoresis RELIGION-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Rev 3:10: Rapture or Preservation? Analyzing Professions of Faith in the Fourth Gospel: is Everyone Who Believes Saved? Sin and Perfection in 1 John Theological Affinities Between the Fourth Gospel and the Book of Revelation John and the Synoptic Gospels. What John Knew and What John Used
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1