A term used sometimes, such as in these examples: People sometimes have different conceptions of what they mean by the stool, which is why I want to quote Hackney Hub's excellent article on this subject: See more below at the link itself. http://solideogloria10.blogspot.com/2012/06/anglican-myths-hookers-three-legged.html
I used the term, thus I will come to its defense--somewhat. To begin, although I have read a few Anglican books and leaflets, I do not want anyone to think I am an authority on the history of Anglican theology. Because if you do think I am an authority on Anglican theology, you will probably find yourself without any leg to stand upon. (Chuckle, Chuckle.). Upon reading the OP of this thread, I scanned the Internet for what appears to be at issue with the term "three legged stool of scripture, tradition, and reason." What I found is the term has become one of those icons separating conservative (old Anglican) and liberal (Episcopal) positions. The conservatives are distancing themselves from the term because the liberals have a history of using the term. OK, that makes some sense. I first ran across the term in an Episcopal leaflet. And then, sometime later, I ran across a similar term in Methodist circles: Wesleyan Quadrilateral. Since I spent some time within the walls of that theological house, let me quote Whole Reason, a Methodist blog and podcast. You also can read about the Wesleyan Quadrilateral at Wikipedia and other websites. Frankly, I think the Wesleyan Quadrilateral (4 legs) makes more sense than what is now portrayed as the Episcopal (not Anglican) three legs. In my own journey here on earth, I find the fourth leg (experience) is how I frequently receive the leading of the Holy Spirit. And I consider the leading of the Holy Spirit to carry more weight than either tradition or reason in the way I understand Scripture. I remember reading somewhere that the third leg of reason was introduced to offer a theological alternative to the Catholic two-legged stool of Scripture and tradition. But, I will not go on about that, because I do not feel led to take on that debate at this time. For me, and my use of the term, I consider the authority of Scripture to be primary, the highest court in the land, carrying the most weight, most important, etc., etc., etc. I do not consider the second leg of tradition, the third leg of reason, or the fourth leg of experience to be as authoritative as the one leg of Scripture. For me, there has to be a primary source in living my life and making my decisions, and I believe the Anglican canon of Scripture to be that primary source. But. . . why does there always have to be a "but"? But, I do not subscribe solely to Sola Scriptura, which I sometimes equate to someone scanning a concordance to find a Bible verse to justify their actions. So, Anglican brothers and sisters, let me go on record as saying that I place primary authority with Scripture in matters of authority and theology--however, I rely upon both the Jewish and Christian tradition of interpreting Scripture, the ability to reason that I learned in graduate school courses, and the leading of the Holy Spirit that I receive when I pray about matters of biblical interpretation and theological decisions. I hope this clarifies my position. ...Scottish Monk
I chuckled too. The "welcome pack" I received, when I first visited my Episcopal Church, contained a "leaflet" explaining that Anglicanism is based on Scripture, Tradition, Reason (Holy Spirit). This is actually very similar to the Wesleyan Quadrilateral (4 legs), of which you speak, in that it acknowledges the role of the Holy Spirit in illuminating Holy Scripture, and that would include "our personal and communal journey in Christ." At the same time, we are taught that we must consider the wisdom of the Early Church and not fall into thinking, "It's just Jesus, the Bible, and me," isolated from our Christian brethren and isolated from the rich Tradition we have inherited. Well said, and I agree. Holy Scripture is the highest source of authority, and all things necessary for salvation are contained therein. Thank you, Scottish Monk, Anna
Stalwart... Yes, I see now the three-legged stool image does miss the mark. Please forgive my jangling. ...Scottish Monk