William Wolf's book explores the diversity of theological development in the Anglican Communion by bringing together descriptions and analyses of three major Anglican thinkers'Hooker, Maurice, and Temple'to illustrate both historical development and breadth of range of what can be classified as 'Anglican' theology. Wolf concedes that there are many other theologians who might have been included; the Anglican Communion doesn't have a definitive person (apart from Jesus Christ)''the Anglican Communion sets aside no special authoritative place for a great reforming figure such as Luther or Calvin'' (p. 137) Wolf also states that 'the Communion has unfortunately produced no systematic theologians of the first rank.' (p. 137). That being said, the theological thoughts and development presented for Hooker, Maurice, and Temple illustrate the branching streams that feed Anglicanism today, a stream that continues to branch forward.

Richard Hooker
Hooker was alive and active as a theologian during a tumultuous period in the development of the Church of England as a distinct body. Politics entered into church affairs on a grand scale; the idea that church and state issues were one in the same was as strong in England in the sixteenth century as it ever was in any continental kingdom or empire. Religious tolerance was a new concept, imperfectly conceived; the idea that each kingdom must be united in religious practice was strong. Hooker was an active apologist for the Church of England, his main opponent being the Puritan factions. 'Hooker's magnum opus was addressed to Puritans who attacked the church of England in the name of a purer, more scriptural ecclesiastical settlement.' (p. 9)

F.D. Maurice
Maurice would agree with Hooker that prayer is social action. Working in the nineteenth century, Maurice was exposed to the social ills that befell England as an imperial power in simultaneous growth and decay. The situation in society was deteriorating. 'Maurice saw that this social breakdown was rooted in a theological breakdown.' (p. 50) Maurice was unique in that he lived a prophetic life (and, like many prophetic persons, was often disliked for his prophecy). He made 'Christology the starting point of all Christian theology and ethics' and made Christ the central focus of all he said and did. (p. 49) Maurice made the Gospel the centrepoint of his educational philosophy, as well as the call not for revolution, but for regeneration of English society upon a truly Christian foundation. (pp. 64-67)

Maurice's view of theology is, like Hooker and Temple, rooted firmly in the communal action of the Book of Common Prayer. 'The Prayer Book becomes the key for understanding the views of the Church of England on the six signs of the Catholic Church,' these six signs being baptism, creeds, forms of worship, eucharist, ordained ministry, and the Bible. (p. 61) This practical and tradition approach was in keeping with the general spirit of the English society. 'Maurice expressed both English empiricism against the conceptualism of continental thinkers and the Anglican's respect for historical institutions as points of departure for theological analysis.' (p. 72)

William Temple
Temple was, in the words of G.B. Shaw, 'a realised impossibility.' A man born and raised in the church, he rose to the position of Archbishop of Canterbury and made the broad church appeal for Anglicanism that renewed its spirit for the mid-twentieth century. 'The general tendency of his faith and theology was toward a more catholic or orthodox position. But this was always balanced by his concern for freedom in doctrine and by his generally liberal attitude of mind.' (p. 104) Temple saw an intimate connection with God through Jesus Christ, perhaps thinking in proto-process theological terms by believing that 'because of Jesus' perfect union and communion with God, it can be asserted that in him God has a real experience of human life, suffering and death.' (p. 112) For Temple, this communion and experience is worked out both individually and communally''the inner unity of complete personality and the outer unity of a perfected fellowship as wide as humanity.' (p. 117)

Temple felt it important to be open to new ideas and developments modernity (perhaps a reaction to having been raised in an era with the expectation of long-term stability and subsequently living in a world turned upside-down by warfare and other social change). Temple felt that freedom of churches and freedom of individuals for inquiry and development, with the guidance of the Spirit, was more important than a rigid adherence to tradition. 'Temple was quite open to the new truth and insights of the modern world and to the critical and constructive use of reason in Christian faith and life. this can be seen clearly in his commitment to philosophic truth.' (p. 133) This, coupled with his call to social action by the church and the working out of Christian faith in everyday life and action, made Temple a major ecumenical figure.

The Current Spirit of Anglicanism
A key word for the current spirit of Anglicanism is comprehensiveness. Anglicanism incorporates catholics and protestants, literalists and agnostics, high church, low church, broad church, in all ways these terms can be defined. 'The Anglican synthesis is the affirmation of a paradoxical unity, a prophetic intuition that Catholicism and Protestantism'are not ultimately irreconcilable.' (p. 143)

The current spirit of Anglicanism is largely based upon Scripture, tradition and reason, with definitions of these three varying a great deal. The authority of Scripture is important, but this does not mean a literalist view. The authority of tradition, best summed up by adherence to the Book of Common Prayer's liturgical forms, is locally adaptable. Reason is used to interpret both the authority of Scripture and of tradition, but must be held in restraint by these as well. 'The spirit of Anglicanism ought in its rich resources to find the wisdom to retain its identity and yet to develop through constructive change to meet the demands of the fast-approaching world of the twenty-first century.' (p. 187)