² Lash, , ‘Hollow Centres and Holy Places’, The Beginning and the End of ‘Religion’, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 183–98 (p. 194)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, henceforth BAEOR.

³ ‘Criticism or Construction? The Task of the Theologian’, Theology on the Way to Emmaus, (London: SCM, 1986), pp. 3–17Google Scholar (p. 9), henceforth TOWE.

⁴ A Matter of Hope: A Theologian's Reflections on the Thought of Karl Marx, (London: DLT, 1981), p. 208Google Scholar, henceforth MOH; also p. 133; ‘Doing Theology on Dover Beach’, Theology on Dover Beach, (London: DLT, 1979), pp. 3–23Google Scholar (p. 14), henceforth TODB; ‘Ideology, Metaphor and Analogy’, TOWE, pp. 95–119 (pp. 101, 103); ‘Theory, Theology and Ideology’, ibid., pp. 120–138 (p. 137). Lest the footnote references to Lash's writings appear unnecessarily extensive for the purposes of this essay, it is perhaps worth stating that my intention is to trace the relevant key movements of his thought in as systematic and comprehensive a way as possible in a manner previously not done and, by so doing, to provide a basis for any who might wish to take this further.

⁵ See Newman, ‘Letter to Emily Bowles’, May 19, 1863, The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, Volume XX, Dessain, Charles Stephen (ed.), (London: Thomas Nelson, 1970), pp. 445–8Google Scholar (p. 447); also ‘Letter to Henry Wilberforce’, Letters and Diaries, Volume XXIV, Dessain, Charles Stephen & Gornall, Thomas S.J., (eds.), (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), pp. 120–1Google Scholar (p. 120). I am grateful to Rev Dr Michael Sharratt of Ushaw College, Durham for drawing my attention to these references. The Congregatio de Propaganda Fide was renamed in 1967 as the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.

⁶ For just a few examples of Lash's keen nose (‘my suspicious nose’) for detail in criticism of others, see MOH, pp. 4 (n.5), 6–7; also ‘Observation, Revelation, and the Posterity of Noah’, BAEOR, pp. 75–92 (p. 92). This trait can be clearer still in face-to-face exchange, a product, perhaps, of the particular academic culture to which he is habituated. A notable example of this was the ‘D Society’– the Cambridge research seminar in philosophical theology chaired by the Norris-Hulse Professor – which had all the quaint gentility of a tea-party with a pack of velociraptors. On ‘elbow room’ in theology, see Newman, ‘Letter to Emily Bowles’, p. 447 and ‘Letter to W. J. O'Neill Daunt, June 17, 1863, Letters and Diaries, Volume XX, pp. 475–6 (p. 476).

⁷ On freedom as the responsible negotiation of finitude, constraint and mutual accountability, see ‘Incarnation and Determinate Freedom’, BAEOR, pp. 237–51; also ‘What Authority Has Our Past?’, TOWE, pp. 47–61 (pp. 58–61).

⁸ ‘Christianity is at once a philosophy, a political power, and a religious rite… As religion, its special centre of action is pastor and flock; as a philosophy, the [theological] Schools; as a rule, the Papacy and its curia.’ Newman, The Via Media of the Anglican Church, 3^rd edn., (London: Longmans, Green, & Co., 1877)., p. xlGoogle Scholar, cited by Lash in Easter in Ordinary: Reflections on Human Experience and the Knowledge of God, (London: SCM, 1988), p. 138Google Scholar, henceforth EIO; also pp. 136–40; ‘Life, Language and Organization: Aspects of the Theological Ministry’, TODB, pp. 89–108.

⁹ See The Via Media, xli, in EIO, p. 138; also pp. 137–9; ‘Life, Language and Organization’, pp. 89, 91, 99, 101–3, 107; MOH, p. 151.

¹⁰ See ‘Except theology springs from and reflects, the theologian's ‘endurance’, ‘passion’, ‘devotion’; except it be the critical, theoretical reflection of the ‘logic of the heart’, it is corrupted by its own misconceived autonomy: it becomes the language of Balaam.’‘Life, Language and Organization’, p. 98; compare ‘…there are no expressions of Christian faith – linguistic, pictorial, dramatic or institutional – which can claim immunity from theological criticism.’MOH, p. 208; also ‘Life, Language and Organization’, pp. 95, 103.

¹¹ See EIO, p. 137 citing and referring to Newman, ‘The Three Offices of Christ’, Sermons Bearing on Subjects of the Day, (London: Rivingtons, 1869), pp. 52–62 (pp. 54–6)Google Scholar.

¹² See ‘Life, Language and Organization’, pp. 103, 104.

¹³ For example, ‘The doctrine of redemption does not afford the Christian any licence to substitute a theory of reconciliation… for its practice…[It] articulates the form of Christian hope, but that hope has to be enacted– in individual and social existence, in marriage, technology, art and politics…’MOH, p. 193; also pp. 36–7, 44, 75, 132, 157, 183, 205; ‘Doing Theology on Dover Beach’, TODB, p. 18; ‘The Church and Christ's Freedom’, ibid., pp. 137–49 (pp. 137, 141, 144); ‘Continuity and Discontinuity in the Christian Understanding of God’, ibid., pp. 27–44 (p. 39); ‘Performing the Scriptures’, TOWE, pp. 37–46 (p. 42); ‘The Church's Responsibility for the Future of Humanity’, ibid., pp. 186–201; EIO, pp. 85–90; Believing Three Ways in One God: A Reading of the Apostles' Creed, (London: SCM, 1992), pp. 21, 25, 75, 88–9Google Scholar, henceforth BTWOG; ‘Creation, Courtesy and Contemplation’, BAEOR, pp. 164–82 (p. 178); ‘Hoping Against Hope, or Abraham's Dilemma’, ibid., pp. 199–218 (p. 208); ‘Eagles and Sheep: Christianity and the Public Order Beyond Modernity’, ibid., pp. 219–36; ‘Beyond the End of History?’, ibid., pp. 252–264; Holiness, Speech and Silence: Reflections on the Question of God, (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004)Google Scholar, pp. 25–6, 42–4, 52, 56, 65–6, 69, henceforth HSS.

¹⁴ Also HSS. This dual voice is also clearly evident in some of his earlier works, e.g. His Presence in the World, (London: Sheed & Ward, 1968)Google Scholar, but less so in the writings of the intervening period driven by the demands of world-class excellence in academic theology and, perhaps, the self-understanding of one who had moved out of ordained priestly ministry and into the role of lay professional theologian.

¹⁵ ‘Contemplation, Metaphor and Real Knowledge’, BAEOR, pp. 112–131 (p. 121), referring to Rahner, ‘Possible Courses for the Theology of the Future’, Theological Investigations, Vol. XIII, trans. by Bourke, David, (London: DLT, 1975), pp. 32–60 (pp. 40–2)Google Scholar.

¹⁶ ‘Contemplation, Metaphor and Real Knowledge’, p. 122.

¹⁷ See ‘Life, Language and Organization’, pp. 106–7.

¹⁸ ‘Preface’, TODB, p. ix; also ‘Doing Theology on Dover Beach’, pp. 21–2; ‘Continuity and Discontinuity’, p. 33; ‘Life, Language and Organization’, pp. 93, 96, 98; MOH, p. 208; ‘The Beginning and the End of ‘Religion’, BAEOR, pp. 3–25 (pp. 5–6). For Lash's programmatic statement of what is envisaged more generally in championing ‘the enterprise of critical theology’, see ‘Doing Theology on Dover Beach’, pp. 3–23; also ‘Criticism or Construction? The Task of the Theologian’, TOWE, pp. 3–17, particularly p. 15.

¹⁹ ‘Doing Theology on Dover Beach’, p. 15; also ‘Hoping Against Hope, or Abraham's Dilemma’, BAEOR, p. 208.

²⁰ ‘Up and Down in Christology’, in New Studies in Theology 1, Sykes, S. W. & Holmes, D. (eds.), (London: Duckworth, 1980), pp. 31–46 (p. 34)Google Scholar.

²¹ For Lash's use of ‘performance’, specifically in relation to the continually renewed task of interpreting the scriptures and seeking to live within their narratival framework, see ‘Performing the Scriptures’, TOWE, pp. 37–46; MOH, p. 1.

²² MOH, p. 5.

²³ ‘Doing Theology on Dover Beach’, p. 12; also p. 20; MOH, pp. 5, 6, 30, 149; ‘Introduction’, TOWE, pp. ix–xii (pp. ix–x); EIO, p. 219. This is a strategy concerning which Lash acknowledges having learned a great deal from his predecessor Donald M. MacKinnon, see MOH, p. xiii; ‘Ideology, Metaphor and Analogy’, TOWE, pp. 95–119. For further on MacKinnon's characteristic mode of theologising, see Murray, Paul D., Reason, Truth and Theology in Pragmatist Perspective, (Leuven: Peeters, 2004), pp. 163–89Google Scholar.

²⁴ Compare Kenneson, Philip, ‘Nicholas Lash on Doctrinal Development and Ecclesial Authority’, Modern Theology, 5 (1989), 271–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lamadrid, Lucas, ‘Is There a System in the Theology of Nicholas Lash?’, Heythrop Journal, 33 (1992), 399–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Heide, Gale Z., ‘The Nascent Noeticism of Narrative Theology: An Examination of the Relationship Between Narrative and Metaphysics in Nicholas Lash’, Modern Theology, 12 (1996), 459–81Google Scholar, particularly pp. 460–3; Nichols, Aidan, ‘Catholic Theology in Britain: The Scene Since Vatican II’, New Blackfriars, 80 (1999), 451–71 (p. 460)Google Scholar.

²⁵ See MOH, pp. 30, 31, 75, 84–7, 193, 285–6; Newman on Development: The Search for an Explanation in History, (London: Sheed & Ward, 1975), pp. 42Google Scholar, 142–5; ‘Life, Language and Organization’, pp. 98, 100, 102–3, 107; HSS, p. 21.

²⁶ See EIO, passim; also ‘These Things Were Here and but the Beholder Wanting’, TODB, pp. 150–63; ‘Eternal Life: Life ‘After’ Death?’, ibid., pp. 164–82 (p. 180) and ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, TOWE, pp. 141–57.

²⁷ See MOH, pp. 75, 237, 252; ‘Introduction’, TOWE, p. xi; ‘Theologies at the Service of a Common Tradition’, ibid., pp. 18–33 (pp. 23–6); HSS, p.41, all explicitly referring to Vatican II's description of the Church as the ‘sacrament of intimate union with God, and of the unity of all mankind’, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium), n.1; also ‘The Church and Christ's Freedom’, TODB, p. 138; ‘How Do We Know Where We Are?’, TOWE, pp. 62–74 (pp. 68–9); ‘The Church's Responsibility for the Future of Humanity’, p. 200; HSS, pp. 27–8.

²⁸ See MOH pp. 250–80; ‘The Church's Responsibility for the Future of Humanity’, TOWE, pp. 186–201; ‘All Shall Be Well: Christian and Marxist Hope’, ibid., pp. 202–215; ‘Hoping Against Hope, or Abraham's Dilemma’, BAEOR, pp. 199–218; ‘Eagles and Sheep: Christianity and the Public Order Beyond Modernity’, ibid., pp. 219–36; ‘Beyond the End of History?’, ibid., pp. 252–264; also EIO, pp. 48, 149, 241.

²⁹ MOH, p. 108; also ‘Theology on Dover Beach’, p. 20; ‘Reflections ‘On Being a Christian’’, TODB, pp. 122–33 (pp. 126, 133).

³⁰ ‘Second Thoughts on Walgrave's “Newman”’, Downside Review, 87 (1969), p. 340Google Scholar; MOH, pp. 93–4.

³¹ On the need for testing, provisionality and revision in Christian theology, see MOH, pp. 68–9; ‘What Authority Has Our Past?’, TOWE, pp. 47–61 (p. 52); EIO, pp. 164, 291; ‘Creation, Courtesy and Contemplation’, BAEOR, pp. 180–1; ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, ibid., pp. 49–72 (p. 49); ‘Contemplation, Metaphor and Real Knowledge’, ibid., pp. 112–131 (pp. 113–5, 127, 131); HSS, pp. 8–9, 17, 31, 51.

³² MOH, p. 107; also pp. 110, 150.

³³ Ibid., p. 106; also ‘…an essential precondition of responsible, faithful speech about God, witness to God, is a continual process of individual and corporate conversion, or metanoia.’‘Continuity and Discontinuity’, TODB, p. 38.

³⁴ MOH, pp. 5 & 150.

³⁵ Ibid., p. 149.

³⁶ Ibid., pp. 149–50; also ‘Theology on Dover Beach’, p. 18; ‘Continuity and Discontinuity’, TODB, p. 44; ‘Criticism or Construction?’, TOWE, pp. 10–11. As is explored in greater detail a little later, Lash handles the tension between the givenness and elusiveness of God that lies at the heart of Christian life through a creative reading of the Trinitarian dynamics of God's being and Christian faith. For related developments, see Williams, Rowan, ‘Trinity and Revelation’, On Christian Theology, (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), pp. 131–47Google Scholar; Murray, Reason, Truth and Theology, pp. 131–61.

³⁷ In Newman on Development (1975), ‘idolatry’ does not appear, although there is one use of ‘idolatrous’ (p. 8) in citation of Newman. In TODB (1979) ‘idolatrous’ appears once (p. 18) and ‘idolatry’ twice (pp. 18, 159). In MOH (1981) ‘idolatry’ appears six times in 312 pages (pp. 67, 119, 158, 167 twice, 168) and ‘idolatrous’ three times. There are also three occasions where the notion of idolatry is under discussion without the word being used (pp. 136, 150, 183). In TOWE (1986) ‘idolatry’ appears eleven times (pp. 9, 11, 16, 26, 134, 135, 154, 156, 162 twice, 163), ‘idolatrous’ seven times (pp. 11, 26, 116, 189 twice, 190, 191) and ‘idolatrously’, ‘idolater’ and ‘idolized’ once apiece (pp. 195, 10, 201 respectively). In EIO (1988) ‘idolatry’ appears sixteen times (pp. 49, 83, 104, 160, 208, 210, 258 twice, 261, 265, 267, 268, 269, 271, 290 twice), ‘idolatrous’ twice (pp. 83, 210) and ‘nonidolatrous’ and ‘idol’ once apiece (pp. 226, 203). There are again many other occasions where the notion of idolatry is under discussion (e.g., pp. 167, 169). In BTWOG (1992), ‘idolatry’ appears ten times in 136 pages (pp. 21 twice, 93, 94 three times, 100, 101 twice, 108), ‘idolatrous’ twice (pp. 21, 101) and ‘idolatries’ and ‘idols’ once apiece (pp. 21, 23). In BAEOR (1996) ‘idolatry’ appears thirty five times (pp. x, 8, 14, 19, 21 twice, 22, 27, 50 twice, 51, 57, 60 twice, 61, 63 twice, 64, 65, 70, 88, 100, 134 twice, 173, 178, 194, 196 twice, 245 three times, 246 twice, 253), ‘negative idolatry’ once (p. 187), ‘idolatrous’ three times (pp. 21, 50, 64), ‘idol’ three times (pp. 63 twice, 64), ‘idols’ once (p. 59), ‘iconolatrous’ and ‘iconolatry’, drawing upon the work of Raimundo Panikkar, once and four times respectively (p. 61 four times). In addition are the places where idolatry is under discussion but without explicit reference (e.g., pp. 244, 249).

³⁸ For direct scriptural reference, see MOH, p. 119; ‘Theory, Theology and Ideology’, TOWE, p. 135; BTWOG, p. 100. For citation of others, see Newman on Development, p. 8; MOH, p. 67, quoting Karl Popper in The Open Society (p. 271); also ‘Beyond the End of History?’, BAEOR, p. 253; ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, ibid., pp. 60–1, quoting Panikkar, The Trinity and the Religious Experience of Man: Icon-Person-Mystery (pp. 15–16).

³⁹ EIO, p. 258.

⁴⁰ Ibid., p. 290.

⁴¹ ‘When Did the Theologians Lose Interest in Theology?’, BAEOR, pp. 132–149 (p. 134); also ‘The Beginning and the End of ‘Religion’?’, p. 21; ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, pp. 60–1; ‘Observation, Revelation, and the Posterity of Noah’, BAEOR, p. 89; ‘Creation, Courtesy and Contemplation’, ibid., p. 173; ‘Incarnation and Determinate Freedom’, ibid., p. 245; BTWOG, pp. 21, 100; ‘The Church's Responsibility for the Future of Humanity’, TOWE, p. 191.

⁴² EIO, pp. 159–60; also p. 203.

⁴³ See ‘Criticism or Construction?’, TOWE, pp. 9, 10–11; ‘Theologies at the Service of a Common Tradition’, ibid., p. 26; ‘Ideology, Metaphor and Analogy’, ibid., p. 116; ‘The Church's Responsibility for the Future of Humanity’, ibid., p. 195; also ‘Doing Theology on Dover Beach’, p. 18; ‘Continuity and Discontinuity’, TODB, p. 39; ‘Understanding the Stranger’, ibid., pp. 60–76.

⁴⁴ ‘Criticism or Construction?’, TOWE, p. 16; ‘The Church's Responsibility for the Future of Humanity’, ibid., pp. 189–90.

⁴⁵ MOH, p. 132.

⁴⁶ Ibid., p. 158.

⁴⁷ Ibid., pp. 68, 150; also p. 59; Newman on Development, p. 1.

⁴⁸ MOH, pp. 132 & 158

⁴⁹ ‘‘Son of God’: Reflections on a Metaphor’, TOWE, pp. 158–66 (p. 163); also MOH, p. 136; ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, BAEOR, pp. 50–1; HSS, pp. 2, 10, 24, 51.

⁵⁰ EIO, pp. 166–72 (p. 169).

⁵¹ ‘The Beginning and the End of ‘Religion’, p. 20, citing Durkheim, Emile, ‘Concerning the Definition of Religious Phenomenon’, in Durkheim on Religion: A Selection of Readings and Bibliographies, (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1975), p. 88Google Scholar; also ‘Hollow Centres and Holy Places’, BAEOR, p. 190; ‘Hoping Against Hope, or Abraham's Dilemma’, ibid., p. 200; HSS, pp. 38–9.

⁵² BTWOG, p. 21; ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, p. 50.

⁵³ ‘The Beginning and the End of ‘Religion’, p. 21; also ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, p. 50; BTWOG, p. 21.

⁵⁴ ‘The Beginning and the End of ‘Religion’, p. 21; also MOH, p. 136.

⁵⁵ See EIO, pp. 231–2, 257; ‘Observation, Revelation, and the Posterity of Noah’, p. 86; ‘When Did the Theologians Lose Interest in Theology?’, BAEOR, p. 136; ‘Creation, Courtesy and Contemplation’, p. 169; ‘Should Christianity be Credible?’, TODB, pp. 77–85 (p. 84); MOH, p. 167; HSS, p. 14, 16–7, 18–9, 23

⁵⁶ ‘Criticism or Construction?’, TOWE, p. 13; also ‘How Do We Know Where We Are?’, TOWE, p. 72; ‘Can a Theologian Keep the Faith?’, TODB, pp. 45–59 (pp. 48–9).

⁵⁷ See EIO, p. 165

⁵⁸ Ibid., p. 196; also BTWOG, p. 21.

⁵⁹ ‘Criticism or Construction?’, p. 13; MOH, p. 141.

⁶⁰ ‘Beyond the End of History?’, BAEOR, p. 254 and ‘Criticism or Construction?’ p. 12, citing Aquinas, Summa Theologiæ, Vol. I, Theology, Gilby, T. (ed.), (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1964)Google Scholar, 1a.1.7 (pp. 26–7); also ‘The Church and Christ's Freedom, TODB, p. 140; ‘Should Christianity Be Credible?’, ibid., p. 79; ‘Introduction’, TOWE, p. xi; ‘Criticism or Construction?’, p. 13; EIO, p. 196; BTWOG, p. 21. Significant also here is Aquinas’ discussion of religion in Summa Theologiæ, Vol. 39, Religion and Worship, O'Rourke, Kevin D. O.P. (ed.), (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1964)Google Scholar, 2a2æ.81.1–2 & 82.1–2 (pp. 10–7 & 34–9).

⁶¹ BAEOR, p. i; also ‘Preface’, pp. ix; ‘Eagles and Sheep: Christianity and the Public Order Beyond Modernity’, p. 236 & passim.

⁶² Rahner, , ‘The Experience of God Today’, Theological Investigations, Vol. XI, trans. by Bourke, David, (London: DLT, 1974), pp. 149–65Google Scholar (p. 154), cited in ‘These Things Were Here and but the Beholder Wanting’, TODB, p. 156; compare EIO, pp. 219–53; also HSS, p. 93. Lash also works this theme out in relation to the writings of Friedrich von Hügel and Martin Buber, see ‘These Things Were Here…’, p. 156; ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, TOWE, pp. 151–3; EIO, pp. 141–198.

⁶³ ‘Criticism or Construction?’, p. 14; also ‘How Do We Know Where We Are?’, TOWE, pp. 66–9; ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, pp. 141–57. See also n.24 here.

⁶⁴ ‘Introduction’, TOWE, p. xi. See also n.25 here.

⁶⁵ BTWOG, p. 100; also ‘The Church and Christ's Freedom’, TODB, p. 141; EIO, p. 165; ‘Creation, Courtesy and Contemplation’, p. 173.

⁶⁶ ‘Prophecy and Peace’, BAEOR, pp. 26–48 (p. 38) and ‘Hoping Against Hope, or Abraham's Dilemma’, p. 211.

⁶⁷ MOH, pp. 141, 167; also pp. 168, 183; ‘Should Christianity be Credible’, TODB, p. 84.

⁶⁸ See ‘Doing Theology on Dover Beach’, pp. 3–23; ‘Ideology, Metaphor and Analogy’, pp. 103–5; ‘Theory, Theology and Ideology’, pp. 134, 138; EIO, pp. 104, 261, 265; ‘Considering the Trinity’, Modern Theology, 2 (1986), 183–96 (p. 187); ‘On What Kinds of Things There Are’, BAEOR, pp. 93–111 (p. 100); ‘Hollow Centres and Holy Places’, ibid., p. 194; ‘Incarnation and Determinate Freedom, ibid., p. 246.

⁶⁹ MOH, p. 168; also p. 183; ‘These Things Were Here…’, p. 159; EIO, pp. 49, 151; BTWOG, p. 21; ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, p. 62; ‘Contemplation, Metaphor and Real Knowledge’, p. 116; HSS, pp. 76, 84–5. Lash prefers phrases such as ‘via negativa’ or ‘apophatic theology’ over the more recent ‘negative theology’ which he views as failing ‘to indicate that… it is positive recognition of God's holiness which generates the insistent habits of denial, the different ‘methods of antagonism’’‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, pp. 54–5; also HSS, pp. 15, 17.

⁷⁰ ‘Ideology, Metaphor and Analogy’, p. 105; also ‘Criticism or Construction?’, p. 12; ‘Theory, Theology and Ideology’, p. 134; ‘Continuity and Discontinuity’, TODB, p. 30.

⁷¹ See ibid., pp. 106–114, drawing upon Burrell, Aquinas: God and Action, (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979); see also Burrell, , ‘Beyond Idolatry: On “Naming” the One – God’, in Finding God in All Things: Essays in Honour of Michael J. Buckley, Himes, Michael J. & Pope, Stephen J. (eds.), (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1996), pp. 28–37Google Scholar (pp. 31–2).

⁷² BAEOR, p. x; also pp. 21–2, 27, 35, 37, 50, 57, 60, 173, 208; EIO, pp. 241, 248, 258–9; BTWOG, pp. 21, 54, 77, 111; HSS, pp. 5, 10, 24, 39–40, 51. Lash acknowledges a debt to von Hügel in formulating this idea, see EIO, p. 167; also pp. 148–9, 162; ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, pp. 153, 156. Perhaps also significant here is Benedict's understanding of the monastery as a ‘school of the Lord's service’, see ‘Prologue’, The Rule of Saint Benedict, trans. by Parry, David, (London: DLT, 1984), p. 4.Google Scholar

⁷³ EIO, p. 167.

⁷⁴ Ibid. p. 271; also pp. 267–72; BTWOG, pp. 7, 93–4, 106–7; ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, pp. 155–6; ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, pp. 61–4; ‘When Did the Theologians Lose Interest in Theology?’, p. 135; ‘Hollow Centres and Holy Places’, pp. 196–7.

⁷⁵ EIO, p. 267; also ‘Observation, Revelation, and the Posterity of Noah’, pp. 84, 90.

⁷⁶ BTWOG, p. 93; also ‘Theologies at the Service of a Common Tradition’, TOWE, p. 26; ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, p. 155; EIO, p. 268.

⁷⁷ ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, p. 63 & BTWOG, p. 93; also p. 107; EIO, p. 269.

⁷⁸ ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, p. 63.

⁷⁹ See ibid.

⁸⁰ BTWOG, p. 94.

⁸¹ ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, p. 63; also ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, p. 156; EIO, p. 271.

⁸² BTWOG, p. 106 & ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, p. 155.

⁸³ BTWOG, p. 94.

⁸⁴ ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, p. 64; also ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, p. 155; EIO, pp. 267–8.

⁸⁵ ‘Reality, Wisdom and Delight’, p. 64; also p. 69; EIO, pp. 111, 172, 280–1.

⁸⁶ ‘Human Experience and the Knowledge of God’, p. 156.

⁸⁷ TOWE, p. 138.

⁸⁸ EIO, p. 275.

⁸⁹ MOH, p. 75; also ‘Theory, Theology and Ideology’, TOWE, p. 138.

⁹⁰ MOH, p. 75, citing Marx, ‘The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte’, Political Writings, II, Surveys from Exile, (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973), p. 174Google Scholar.

⁹¹ ‘Hollow Centres and Holy Places’, p. 196.

⁹² E.g., ‘On Not Inventing Doctrine’, The Tablet, (22 March 1997), p. 367; ‘A Papacy for the Future’, The Tablet, (11 December 1999), pp. 1678–9; also ‘Vatican II: Of Happy Memory – and Hope?’, in Unfinished Journey: The Church 40 Years After Vatican II – Essays for John Wilkins, (New York & London: Continuum, 2003), Austen Ivereigh (ed.), pp. 13–31.

⁹³ ‘The Church's Responsibility for the Future of Humanity’, TOWE, p. 191 & 200; also pp. 197–201; EIO, p. 215.

⁹⁴ See ‘Preface’, TOWE.

⁹⁵ See Healy, Nicholas M., Church, World and the Christian Life: Practical-Prophetic Ecclesiology, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.