The Church of England and Islam:

Hospitality and Embassy - Theologies of Religion in Process

2. Lambeth 1988 and 1998

By Richard Sudworth

Part II of IV (see part I, III,IV)

It is with the Lambeth Conference of 1988 that a more systematic attempt was made to order Anglican interfaith relations and to provide a theological rationale for the encounter with Judaism and Islam, in particular. The key text in this regard, proposed to the Conference in Resolution 21 is Jews, Christians and Muslims: The Way of Dialogue. The significant starting point for The Way of Dialogue is in the statement that “we recognise a special relationship between Christianity, Judaism and Islam”.¹ For The Way of Dialogue, “All three of these religions see themselves in a common relationship to Abraham, the father of the faithful, the friend of God.”² Michael Ipgrave analyses the particular indebtedness of this document to Vatican II’s Nostra aetate, the seminal account of the Roman Catholic Church’s interfaith relations.³ As Adrian Hastings observes, “in speaking of Moslems and Jews, the Council stresses our common father in faith, Abraham.”⁴ As with Vatican II, the political realities of churches in majority-Muslim contexts beyond Europe influenced the conception of The Way of Dialogue as a document that was instigated to explicate Christian-Jewish relations but necessarily evolved into an articulation of relations between the three faiths.⁵

While non-Abrahamic faiths, in contrast to Nostra aetate, are excluded from The Way of Dialogue, the Lambeth Conference seems to continue the pattern of privileging the understanding and consonance of revelations in Judaism and Islam. Nostra aetate famously shuns an assessment of the status of the Qur’an or Muhammad⁶. Similarly, The Way of Dialogue prefers to hold up the Abrahamic schema as an apologia for the significance of good relations and dialogue between Christians and Muslims without making a judgment on the prophethood of Muhammad, for example. There are ways in which the Anglican proposal goes somewhat further than Vatican II, though. In Nostra aetate, Muslims are described as those who “submit wholeheartedly…just as did Abraham, with whom the Islamic faith is pleased to associate itself.”⁷ Lumen Gentium admits “the plan of salvation” which “includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place among these there are the Moslems, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God”.⁸ Where The Way of Dialogue accedes to a “common relationship to Abraham”, Vatican II merely notes that Muslims profess to hold the faith of Abraham and are pleased to associate their faith with the submission modelled by Abraham.

Following Vatican II, the theological rationale underlying the concept of the Abrahamic faiths has been the subject of extensive discussion that suggests that the premise of the Lambeth Conference document of 1988 may be anachronistic. It seems clear that both Vatican II⁹ and The Way of Dialogue admit that Muslims and Christians worship the same God. It is rather less clear whether Vatican II goes as far as accepting the Abrahamic theologoumenon as proposed by Massignon, who had such an influence on the conciliar interfaith documents. The “father of the faithful” as described in The Way of Dialogue, need not be merely the literal progenitor of Jews and Muslims, even though there are serious scholarly objections to the assumption of Islamic lineage traced back to Ishmael.¹⁰ Taking a Pauline understanding for Christians of Abraham as the model of faith in the one God, Muslims might be seen to relate as heirs of Abraham “by faith”. Thus, Paul, in Romans 9, includes Gentiles in the promises of Yahweh despite their lack of genetic lineage to Abraham. Their qualification is merely that of “faith”; the very qualification of the first Jew, Abraham the patriarch, who was compelled to leave the land of Ur in simple obedience. In a parallel fashion, it could be argued that Muslims “by faith” inherit from God, explicitly drawing, as they do, from the originating monotheism of Abraham.

In this regard, though, the Israeli scholar Alon Goshen-Gottstein has commented on the tendency of the Abrahamic faiths motif to work most effectively for Christians and Muslims, “while the Jews tend to watch from the margins.”¹¹ Abraham as the “man of faith” is a tenable concept in Pauline theology but it works to negate the fullness of covenant obligation in Judaism. For the English context, this is a particularly pertinent observation noting the dangers of an exclusive Christian-Muslim dialogue forum that seems to work at the expense of other religious groups.¹² This was highlighted in 2007 with the publication of a document by the Hindu Council UK that criticised the privilege given to Abrahamic faiths within interfaith dicussions. A more accommodating outlook was argued for by the author, Anil Bhanot, that was genuinely “respectful of the other” according to the Hindu principles of Dharma.¹³ The potential for the Abrahamic fold to be an interfaith clique is evident in Anil Bhanot’s submission but his line of reasoning betrays the essential problematic of finding an all-embracing religious theme that has integrity beyond the source community. Dharma has no more weight as an understanding of right religion to a Christian than Abraham does to a Hindu. It is worth noting from this particular debate that there are implications that go beyond Christian-Muslim relations for this theological rationale that undermine the potential of the Church of England to fulfil its vocation to the whole nation.

The Way of Dialogue thus follows the lead of Vatican II in stressing the particular confluences between the Abrahamic faiths but is suggestive of a rather more controversial and questionable synchronicity that is avoided in the conciliar documents.¹⁴ It is noteworthy that the considerable controversy generated by The Way of Dialogue¹⁵, especially amongst bishops from Asia and Africa, is focussed more on the interpretation of historical precedence, Islamic theology and the practical application to interfaith relations rather than to the underlying theological schema itself.

Taking this Abrahamic foundation, three theological principles are then used to inform the content of The Way of Dialogue: understanding, affirmation, and sharing. Michael Ipgrave identifies the influence of Max Warren, a former general secretary of the Anglican Church Mission Society (“CMS”), and his concept of “Christian Presence” in the outworking of interfaith understanding as “affective entry into the world of the other”.¹⁶ Max Warren and John V. Taylor, another advocate of “Christian Presence” and former general secretary of CMS, and Bishop of Winchester respectively, brought a missionary sensibility to this incarnational approach to inter-religious encounter. Graham Kings identifies Temple Gairdner of Cairo¹⁷ and Kenneth Cragg as two key influences on Max Warren and John V. Taylor¹⁸ and the idea of Christian Presence. Both these towering figures of Anglican engagement with Islam have clearly continued a legacy that has informed the encounter with Islam and a general theology of religions back into the British context.

Relations with Islam are set in a historical perspective, noting the historic enmity evinced in the Crusades, but also in the positive cultural contributions from Islamic to Christian civilisations.¹⁹ The principle of understanding is embodied by offering correctives to stereotypes of Islam such that the burden is on redressing negative Christian patterns towards Muslims and challenging stereotypes of, for example, sharia law treatment of women²⁰, jihad²¹ and traditional Islamic understandings of the crucifixion.²² Lucinda Mosher’s analysis of the Conference discussions notes Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali’s particular dissatisfaction with the emphasis of these correctives.²³

Allied to the perceived “glossing” of Islamic theology, concerns were also voiced at the insufficient treatment of the evangelistic mandate of the Church.²⁴ Evangelism, or proclamation in the language of Vatican II and subsequent Roman Catholic encyclicals, is only mentioned incidentally to The Way of Dialogue: “if we are truly to share our faith we must not only affirm what we can but share our own deep convictions, even when these appear irreconcilably opposed to our partner’s faith and practice. In the case of Islam particularly, Christians must first understand Islam if this witness is to be effective.”²⁵ The conditional “if” posits evangelism as an optional practice subservient to the wider thrust of dialogue, even if the respective integrities of traditions are affirmed robustly within The Way of Dialogue. It is notable, though, that issues of human rights in Muslim societies, the doctrine of apostasy as it affects minority Christian communities and the challenge to Muslims to correct distorted images of Christians and Jews provide elements of reciprocal obligation in The Way of Dialogue.

The feeling, especially amongst evangelicals, that too much was being given away and presumed positively of Islam can be traced back in some of the preparatory documents to Lambeth 1988. Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue²⁶ was published as a report to the General Synod of the Church of England by the Inter-Faith Consultative Group of the Board for Mission and Unity. This report was circulated as advance reading for Lambeth 1988 and introduces the contemporary experience of British plurality as an opportunity to explore a renewed understanding of the theology of religions, seen through the prism of the “threefold typology” of religions.²⁷ Within TTID, pluralism is regarded as a developing, innovative response to the challenge of religious diversity. It is presented on a par, in terms of theological legitimacy, with inclusivism, while exclusivism is viewed as an inhibition to the affirmation of spiritual truths in other faiths.²⁸ Additionally, the Filioque clause in the Nicene Creed is offered as a possible limitation on fruitful resources for a theology of religions. An Orthodox understanding of the Spirit speaking and acting “in other religious cultures”²⁹ flowing from the Father-Creator are tentatively noted as providing a doctrinal foundation that can embrace Trinitarianism, and a corresponding high Christology, and the grace of God beyond the church.³⁰

TTID provoked a response by Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, included in the 1986 edition, redolent of his objections to The Way of Dialogue. Paying particular attention to the Christian-Muslim milieu, Nazir-Ali corrects the sense of novelty that he sees in the exploration of interfaith relations in TTID, reminding readers of the longstanding traditions of dialogue, co-existence and mission in non-Western Anglican contexts. Again, Nazir-Ali criticizes the seeming compromise of the “scandal of particularity”³¹ of the Gospel in the service of dialogue. The ignorance of the global precedents of interfaith relations and the overarching narrative of salvation for Christians in TTID makes, for Nazir-Ali, a “fleeing of history”. This abnegation renders the work of the Holy Spirit (described in TTID as “unpredictable, culturally and historically indeterminate”³²) somehow less than biblical.³³

The emphasis on the Church’s need to rethink its attitudes, actions and theology in TTID informs Christopher Wright’s robust critique in an Anvil journal edition of 1984. There is an important distinction to be made between the challenge to the individual Christian obtained in the encounter with truth within another tradition and a challenge to Christian revelation itself. For Wright, this distinction is blurred in the text of TTID³⁴ as well as an unbiblical qualifying of the Great Commission in the service of interfaith dialogue.³⁵ It is interesting to note Christopher Lamb, one of the authors of TTID, responding to Wright’s critique by expressing his admission that “Though we wanted to see people moving in a certain direction we had no illusions that we were producing a definitive report”.³⁶ The impression is given of a discussion document that is deliberately tipped toward dialogue as a provisional redress of balance for a Church of England insufficiently open to inter-religious encounter.

This impression is supported by the feedback given to TTID by the Anglican Consultative Council meeting in Nigeria in 1984 and published in their report Bonds of Affection. In their view, “the book needed a greater emphasis on the doctrine of redemption, and we questioned some of its biblical exegesis, as well as the selectivity of biblical texts. People from non-Western societies especially found the approach too academic and cerebral, and thus it was classified as largely irrelevant to them.”³⁷ There are efforts at practical application in TTID but they all, revealingly, denote the responsibility of Christians as the holders of power and privilege to change and adapt to the new economy of diversity. Thus,

“It is no longer with someone out there, at a distance, that we engage in conversation, but with those with whom we share in a way quite other than any previous generation. Nevertheless, we ought not to minimize the fact that numerically those of other faiths are few compared with the number of practising Christians in Britain. The relative size of communities has a profound effect on our self-understanding, and conditions the way we relate to others. Adherents of different faiths seldom meet as equals, and isolation and cultural dominance are hard to overcome.”³⁸

Perhaps the “irrelevance” observed by Anglicans outside of Europe is in the language of cultural dominance assigned to the Christian faith and reflected upon from experiences of longstanding diversity or even Islamic cultural dominance. The presumption of both The Way of Dialogue and TTID is that the Church is in a prior position of host to those of other faiths. For TTID, and subsequently The Way of Dialogue, there is a recognition of the importance of dialogue, especially with Muslims, but, for many, an incomprehension of the language of host to guest and a discomfort at the relegation of evangelism.

Roger Hooker and Christopher Lamb combined to publish a significant resource for Church of England parishes in 1986, Love the Stranger: Ministry in Multi-Faith Areas.³⁹ Love the Stranger sought to encourage an irenic encounter with other faiths, providing stories and anecdotes and highlighting some of the theological challenges of dialogue and evangelism. It is redolent of the mood of The Way of Dialogue and TTID in its provisional tone. There is a reluctance to define and assess evangelism or dialogue at a time of such rapid cultural and religious diversity: “Are such incidents to be described as dialogue, witness, service, evangelism or what? The answer is that we do not yet know”.⁴⁰ A picture of transition is conveyed that posits the primary obligation on the Christian “hosts” who “bear the burden of the our collective past. We bear the burden of present misunderstanding.”⁴¹ The shadow of colonialism looms over the book’s emphasis on the Church’s need to reach out to the “stranger”, even allowing for the gospel imperative to service. Indeed, it is telling that a Church of England priest who may be regarded as a specialist in interfaith matters is likely to have “served in India, Pakistan or Bangladesh, and has some knowledge of the background, religion, culture and language of a particular Asian group.”⁴² It seems that for the Church of England in the 1980’s, Islam may well have been “over here”, but “here” was still Anglican and “they” were still from elsewhere. What is particularly noticeable about the concluding chapter of Love the Stranger, though, is the beginnings of a discussion about an anticipated challenge from Islam to political theology, the nature of nationhood, politics and the common good.⁴³ It would seem, then, that Love the Stranger exemplifies some of the Anglican interfaith motifs of the time whilst also prefiguring more contemporary debates.

The extent of the controversy occasioned by Lambeth 1988 was perhaps behind the extensive sharing of stories from around the Communion of encounters with Islam for the Lambeth Conference of 1998, as opposed to the pursuit of any theological investigation.⁴⁴ Gambia, Northern Nigeria, the Middle East, Pakistan and Bradford were all contexts providing stories of constructive Anglican-Muslim engagements, all notably Muslim-majority in complexion. The “major issues” identified included dialogue, conversion, basic freedoms, working ecumenically and monitoring.⁴⁵ Pointedly, in “Monitoring”, the Network for Inter-Faith Concerns is sanctioned with resources in “monitoring Christian-Muslim relations as they affect the different provinces of the Anglican Communion”, recognising “both the opportunities for inter-faith encounter and the difficulties”.⁴⁶

Of additional note for the 1998 Lambeth Conference is the address by Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali specifically on inter-faith relations, providing perhaps his preferred approach where TTID and The Way of Dialogue may have failed in his view. Nazir-Ali provides a number of practical illustrations that flesh out the objections expressed to TTID and the apparent concerns over The Way of Dialogue. He does this by way of affirming Kenneth Cragg’s espousal of the missionary values of “embassy” and “hospitality”⁴⁷. Hospitality may be demonstrated by Christians in the West opening up their homes to people of other faiths who have recently arrive in the country or making church halls available for social functions. However, “The use of church buildings is a classic situation where Western Christians can learn from the history of Christianity elsewhere. In the early days of the expansion of Islam into the Christian countries of the Middle East, for example, the new rulers sometimes took over a part of a church for their worship, leaving the rest to the Christian community. In many cases, however, the whole building was eventually taken over.”⁴⁸ This illustration is elicited as an example of ill-considered and naïve hospitality that pays insufficient attention to that dimension of mission, embassy: “going out to them and sharing the Gospel with them”.⁴⁹ In Nazir-Ali’s view, it is the very history of privilege and dominance of the Western Church that has stymied the full expression of mission as embassy but now “The situation is changing”.⁵⁰ A more equitable balance of power between the faiths, and especially with Muslims, is being highlighted, one that needs to be cognisant of the breadth of encounters in history and across the Communion.

Conclusion

The Way of Dialogue remains the most recent authoritative statement on the theology of interfaith concerns in relation to Islam for the Anglican Communion.⁵¹ There is an evident indebtedness to Vatican II and in particular to Nostra aetate in the situating of relations with Islam in the context of the Abrahamic faiths. The Way of Dialogue goes somewhat further than Vatican II in how the relationship between the Abrahamic faiths is framed, though, and one wonders how this may be appropriately applied to the Church of England’s interfaith relations beyond Christianity and Judaism.

For critics of The Way of Dialogue, the document is weak in not presenting the full particularity of the Gospel and paying insufficient attention to the vocation of evangelism. It is perhaps ironic that the evident use of resources from a missionary tradition that includes Temple Gairdner, Kenneth Cragg, John V. Taylor and Max Warren in the articulation of its theology is seen in this light. It must be noted that the thrust of the document was dialogue and the overarching tone was one that sought to open up the Anglican Communion to constructive relations with Jewish and Muslim neighbours in dialogue and partnership. This emphasis on dialogue can be seen to be part of a continuity with the preparatory document Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue where the Church is seen as host and Muslims, and those of other faiths, as guests. For many evangelicals and Anglicans beyond Europe, both documents display an unrecognisably positive portrayal of the realities of Christian-Muslim coexistence and an exaggeration of the power of the Christian community.

Moving to Lambeth 1998, a clear effort to hear the stories of Christian-Muslim coexistence from beyond Europe was made and an appreciation of the positive and negative realities of interfaith engagement. This commitment to the lived reality of the interface between Christianity and Islam was institutionalised for the Communion in 1998 through the responsibilities given to the Network for Inter Faith Concerns (“NIFCON”) to disseminate such information and resources. Additionally, the recurring motifs of Christian Presence, hospitality and embassy, that run through The Way of Dialogue and originate in the missionary theologies of Kenneth Cragg and Max Warren among others, were presented anew to embrace both dialogue and evangelism in the British context.

Footnotes

¹“Jews, Christians and Muslims: The Way of Dialogue”, Appendix 6, The Truth Shall Make You Free: The Lambeth Conference 1988: The Reports, Resolutions and Pastoral Letters from the Bishops (London: Anglican Consultative Council, 1988), pp. 299-308, p. 299

²“The Way of Dialogue”, p. 299

³Ipgrave, M. “Understanding, Affirmation, Sharing”

⁴Hastings, A. A Concise Guide to the Documents of the Second Vatican Council, Volume One (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1968), p. 198

⁵Ipgrave. M. “Understanding, Affirmation, Sharing: Nostra Aetate and an Anglican Approach to Inter-Faith Relations”, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Volume 43, No. 1, (Winter 2008): 1-16,”, p. 6

⁶For two summary analyses of Vatican II assessments of Islam see Unsworth, A. “The Vatican, Islam and Christian-Muslim relations.” In, Christian Responses to Islam: Muslim-Christian Relations in the Modern World, edited by O’Mahony, A. and Loosley, E. (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2008) and “Louis Massignon, The Holy See and the Ecclesial Transition from “Immortale Dei” to “Nostra Aetate”: A Brief History of the Development of Catholic Church Teaching on Muslims and the Religion of Islam from 1883 to 1965”, ARAM Periodical, 20 (2008): 299-316

⁷“Nostra aetate 3”, The Documents of Vatican II: With Notes and Comments by Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox Authorities, edited by Abbott S.J., W. M. (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1966), p.663

⁸“Lumen Gentium 16”, The Documents of Vatican II, p. 35

⁹Unsworth, A. “The Vatican, Islam and Muslim-Christian Relations”, p.61

¹⁰O’Mahony, A., “Catholic Theological Perspectives on Islam at the Second Vatican Council”, New Blackfriars, Volume 88, Issue 1016 (June 2007): 385-398, p. 392

¹¹Quoted in Valkenberg, P., “Does the Concept of “Abrahamic Religions” have a Future?”, Concilium, Islam and Enlightenment, New Issues 2005/5: 103-111, p. 108

¹²“In Britain, Christian-Muslim relations cannot be isolated from a context of religious diversity, which encompasses both the oldest religious minority – the Jews – and Sikh and Hindu communities formed since the Second World War, part of that larger flow of migrants from former British colonies invited to fill the labour shortages….Much of the institutionalisation of Christian-Muslim relations is part of this larger reality.” Lewis, P. “Christian-Muslim Relations in Britain: Between the Local and the Global”, in Christians and Muslims in the Commonwealth: A Dynamic Role in the Future, edited by O’Mahony, A. & Siddiqui, A., (London: Altajir World of Islam Trust, 2001), p. 182

¹³Bhanot, A., The Advancement of Dharma: A Discussion Paper for Faith Leaders, (London: Hindu Council UK, 2007), p. 10

¹⁴See Arnaldez, R., Three Messengers for One God, (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994) for a Catholic reflection of the Abrahamic faiths motif that shuns the reductionism of a “common core” theology. For an alternative advocacy of a complementary and unitary core Abrahamic theology see Kuschel, K-J. Abraham: A Symbol of Hope for Jews, Christians and Muslims, (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1995)

¹⁵For an annotated commentary of The Way of Dialogue informed by contemporaneous notes of discussions and the records of the principal drafter, Bert Breiner, I am indebted to Lucinda Mosher’s unpublished thesis of 1997 for the General Theological Seminary, New York: “Christ and People of Other Faiths” and “Jews, Christians and Muslims: The Way of Dialogue,” the Statements on Interfaith Relations of The Anglican Communion prepared by The Dogmatic & Pastoral Concerns Section, Lambeth Conference 1988

¹⁶Ipgrave, M. “Understanding, Affirmation, Sharing”, p. 7. This “affective” identification with the faith of the author, as Ipgrave points out, was famously described in Max Warren’s introduction to Bishop Kenneth Cragg’s Sandals at the Mosque, (London: SCM, 1959) a part of Warren’s “Christian Presence” series: “Our first task in approaching another people, another culture, another religion, is to take off our shoes, for the place where we are approaching is holy. Else we may find ourselves treading on men’s dreams.”, p. 9

¹⁷For an account of Temple Gairdner’s own influence on the work of Bishop Kenneth Cragg see Lamb, C. The Call to Retrieval: Kenneth Cragg’s Christian Vocation to Islam, (London: Grey Seal, 1997)

¹⁸Kings, G. “Mission and the Meeting of Faiths: The Theologies of Max Warren and John V. Taylor”. In, The Church Mission Society and World Christianity, 1799-1999, edited by Ward, K. & Stanley, B., (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans, 2000), pp. 285-318

¹⁹The Way of Dialogue §8, pp. 300-1

²⁰The Way of Dialogue §9, p. 301

²¹The Way of Dialogue §11, p. 302

²²The Way of Dialogue §19, p. 303-4

²³Mosher, L. Christ and People of Other Faiths, p. 14

²⁴Mosher, L. Christ and People of Other Faiths, p. 15

²⁵The Way of Dialogue §33 & §28 , pp. 305-6

²⁶Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue, (London: Anglican Consultative Council, 1986 edition), hereafter designated “TTID”

²⁷Exclusivism, inclusivism, pluralism. This typology originates with Alan Race in Christians and Religious Pluralism, (London: SCM, 1983)

²⁸Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue, pp. 7-10

²⁹Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue, pp. 20-21

³⁰See Dupuis S.J., J. Christianity and the Religions: From Confrontation to Dialogue, (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 2002), pp. 178-82 for a brief discussion of the Orthodox challenge to Latin Christian theologies of religions. For a classic Orthodox text on the understanding of God in perichoresis see Lossky, V. The Vision of God, (London: The Faith Press, 1963)

³¹Nazir-Ali, M. “That Which is not to be Found but which Finds us”, in Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue, p. 47

³²Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue, p. 20

³³Nazir-Ali, M. “That Which is not to be Found but which Finds us”, p. 48

³⁴Wright, C. J. H. “Interfaith Dialogue”, Anvil, Volume 1, No. 3, (1984): 231-258, p. 256

³⁵Wright, C. J. H. “Interfaith Dialogue”, p. 257

³⁶Lamb, C. “Interfaith Dialogue”, Anvil, Volume 1, No. 3, (1984): 259-60, p. 259

³⁷“Extracts from “Bonds of Affection”, Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue, (London: Anglican Consultative Council, 1986 edition), p. 39

³⁸Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue, pp. 5-6

³⁹Hooker, R. & Lamb, C. Love the Stranger: Ministry in Multi-Faith Areas, (London: SPCK, 1986)

⁴⁰Hooker, R. & Lamb, C. Love the Stranger, p. 47

⁴¹Hooker, R. & Lamb, C. Love the Stranger, p. 12

⁴²Hooker, R. & Lamb, C. Love the Stranger, p. 35

⁴³“What is the controlling image of that which is great, and good and desirable, for men and for women and for nations? There is no avoiding religious language and religious issues here” Hooker, R. & Lamb, C. Love the Stranger, p. 117

⁴⁴Ipgrave, M. “Understanding, Affirmation, Sharing”, p. 4

⁴⁵The Official Report of the Lambeth Conference 1998, (Harrisburg: Morehouse Publishing, 1999), pp. 268-327

⁴⁶The Official Report of the Lambeth Conference 1998, p. 273

⁴⁷“Hospitality he describes as “surely the closest of all analogies to the meaning of the Gospel””, Christopher Lamb describing Kenneth Cragg’s Christian vocation to Islam, Lamb, C., The Call to Retrieval: Kenneth Cragg’s Christian Vocation to Islam, (London: Grey Seal, 1997), p. 102. Kenneth Cragg saw the Christian mission to Islam “conceived in terms of residence, hospitality, embassy and retrieval”, p. 114

⁴⁸Nazir-Ali, M. “Embassy, Hospitality and Dialogue: Christians and People of Other Faiths”, The Official Report of the Lambeth Conference 1998, p. 312

⁴⁹Nazir-Ali, M. “Embassy, Hospitality and Dialogue”, p. 312

⁵⁰Nazir-Ali, M. “Embassy, Hospitality and Dialogue”, p. 315

⁵¹Ipgrave, M. “Understanding, Affirmation, Sharing”, pp. 4-5

Bibliography

Abbott S.J., W. M. (ed.) The Documents of Vatican II: With Notes and Comments by Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox Authorities, (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1966)

Arnaldez, R., Three Messengers for One God, (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994)

Bhanot, Anil. The Advancement of Dharma: A Discussion Paper for Faith Leaders, (London: Hindu Council UK, 2007)

Cragg, K. Sandals at the Mosque, (London: SCM, 1959)

Hastings, A. A Concise Guide to the Documents of the Second Vatican Council, Volume One (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1968)

Hooker, R. & Lamb, C. Love the Stranger: Ministry in Multi-Faith Areas, (London: SPCK, 1986)

Ipgrave, M. “Anglican Approaches to Christian-Muslim Dialogue”, Journal of Anglican Studies, Volume 3, No. 2, (2005): 219-236

Ipgrave, M. “Understanding, Affirmation, Sharing: Nostra Aetate and an Anglican Approach to Inter-Faith Relations”, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Volume 43, No. 1, (Winter 2008): 1-16

Kings, G. “Mission and the Meeting of Faiths: The Theologies of Max Warren and John V. Taylor”. In, The Church Mission Society and World Christianity, 1799-1999, edited by Ward, K. & Stanley, B., (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans, 2000)

Kuschel, K-J. Abraham: A Symbol of Hope for Jews, Christians and Muslims, (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1995)

Lamb, C. “Interfaith Dialogue”, Anvil, Volume 1, No. 3, (1984): 259-60

Lamb, C., The Call to Retrieval: Kenneth Cragg’s Christian Vocation to Islam, (London: Grey Seal, 1997)

Lamb, C. “Kenneth Cragg’s Understanding of Christian Mission to Islam.” In, A Faithful Presence: essays for Kenneth Cragg, edited by David Thomas with Clare Amos, (London: Melisende, 2003)

Lewis, P. “Christian-Muslim Relations in Britain: Between the Local and the Global”, In Christians and Muslims in the Commonwealth: A Dynamic Role in the Future, edited by O’Mahony, A. & Siddiqui, A.(London: Altajir World of Islam Trust, 2001)

Lossky, V. The Vision of God, (London: The Faith Press, 1963)

Mosher, L. “Christ and People of Other Faiths” and “Jews, Christians and Muslims: The Way of Dialogue,” the Statements on Interfaith Relations of The Anglican Communion prepared by The Dogmatic & Pastoral Concerns Section, Lambeth Conference 1988, unpublished thesis for the General Theological Seminary, New York, 1997

Nazir-Ali, M. “That Which is not to be Found but which Finds us”. In, Towards a Theology for Inter-Faith Dialogue, (London: Anglican Consultative Council, 1986 edition)

Nazir-Ali, M. “Embassy, Hospitality and Dialogu