deny. Hooker, then, and many later English Reformed theologians, insisted that it was wrong to speak of a “limited redemption,” in which Christ only died for some, even if in practice the benefits of the atonement did not take effect for all.18 If Hooker was, in fact, of a similar view to later moderate Calvinists like John Davenant or James Ussher, then he falls well within the Reformed consensus—indeed, some would argue closer to the earliest Reformed19—although certainly not within the form (so-called