"...in Hooker or Aquinas..."

It looks like Hooker was probably Richard Hooker, a 16th century Anglican theologian who had some influence on John Locke.  Hooker was influenced by Aquinas, and thus Aristotle.

Aquinas is responsible for much of the influence of Aristotle on the church at that time.  This is actually an important part of the history of Christianity and western thought, and one of the reasons I became so interested in philosophy.  Many of the theologians/philosophers in Europe at the time were actually greatly influenced by a muslim philosopher named Averroes.  (Averroes lived in the 12th century, Aquinas in the 13th.)  At that time the muslims had a much more intellectual side than they do now.  Besides being involved in the develop of algebra (the word is an arabic word) muslims were responsible for saving many works of antiquity, particularly Greek works, including Aristotle's.  Averroes had written what was essentially muslim apologetical material using the ideas of Aristotle.  This had a significant influence on the thinkers in Europe.  So much so, in fact, that Christianity itself was being doubted by people in the universities and they were turning from it.  So, Thomas Aquinas came along to refute this.  To do so he had basically two options, either show that Aristotle was wrong, or show that Aristotle was not really consistent with islam, but with Christianity.  He did the latter, and did it so convincingly that he put an end to the influence of Averroes in Europe.  In fact, my own opinion is that he did it so convincingly he destroyed any intellectual effort within islam.  That is why Islam doesn't have any substantial intellectual influence any more, they just have jihad.  But my main point is, Aquinas basically turned the tide intellectually in Europe, and I think rightly so.

This emphasis did not set well with everyone in the church, however.  In 1277, shortly after Aquinas died, the bishop of France issued a condemnation and forbid the teaching of Aristotelian logic in the universities (Aristotle is basically the 'father of logic').   He was probably thinking that Aquinas should have attacked Averroes by attacking Aristotle, but he was certainly concerned that people understand that God's absolute power transcends any rules of logic that Aristotle had discovered.  So what appears to have happened was the teachers in the universities had their hands tied.  But Aristotle's logic was deductive logic.  He knew of inductive logic but didn't trust it.  But since inductive logic hadn't been part of Aristotle, it wasn't condemned by the church, and it seems inductive logic made its way into the university at that time.  That makes 1277 an important date in the history of modern science, because inductive logic is what allows for experimentation.  (Scientists use both deduction and induction, but without induction we wouldn't have science.)

In the end, however, the Aristotelians in the church won.  This was both good and bad, because Aristotle was right about many things, but not everything.  The church became so Aristotelian that what he said was almost Gospel for a while.  Understanding that is important for understanding what happened between Galileo and the church a few centuries later.