Though Richard Hooker (1554?–1600) aligned with a moderate Puritan like William Perkins (1558–1602) on the basic nature and some obligations of ministers in the Church of England, their differences over the source of a minister’s authority and responsibility to preach sermons rendered Hooker’s vision of the ministry fundamentally distinct from Perkins’. After the Restoration, historians framed Hooker as the architect of a via media Anglicanism whose Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity carved a unique Anglican path between the extremes of Puritanism and Catholicism. Starting with W. J. Torrance Kirby in the 1990s, however, several Hooker scholars situated him within the larger context of Reformed Orthodoxy and thus see him as less antagonistic towards moderate Puritanism. When placed alongside the writings of a moderate Puritan contemporary, William Perkins, Hooker’s views indicated a departure from moderate Puritanism regarding the nature and obligations of ministers. First, though Hooker and Perkins both understood the minister as God’s authoritative representative, they clashed on how the minister derived his authority. Second, though in some ways Hooker and Perkins aligned on the obligations of a minister, their definitions of preaching shaped their different understandings of the minister’s primary obligation. Ultimately, Hooker’s different conception of the nature and obligations of a minister offers a warning not to overemphasize his congruity with moderate Puritanism and Reformed Orthodoxy.