In Dependent Rational Animals Alasdair MacIntyre advances the case for a realist account of the moral life over against the unsituated Enlightenment account of the good. The normative foundation of his proposal is narratives of the dependent rather than autonomous character of human existence from birth through childhood to old age and death, and analogies between human biological and emotional dependence, and child development, and the rich moral lives, and nurturing behaviours of dolphins and some other animals. This approach represents a significant revision of MacIntyre’s earlier espousal of a principally Aristotelian - and hence heroic - account of the virtues. His setting of dependence as an ordering contingency of rationality brings him much closer to Christian narratives of the good life. The problem however with attempts to read off moral narratives from anthropological accounts of human embodied and social life, or from ethological narratives of other animals, is that they involve the attempt to found Christian theology and ethics on other than Christian foundations, and they therefore lack a true ontological foundation. In what follows I will suggest that narratives of the morality of embodiment, whether human or nonhuman, do find a legitimate place in Christian theological ethics but that this place is subject to the ordering narrative of the scriptures, and in particular the narratives of Christ crucified and risen. The narratives of the Incarnation, Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ teach Christians to interpret dependence, embodiment, illness and even death, as aspects of biological existence which find correlates in the vulnerability of God.

Though relatively unknown to twentieth-first-century students of literature, Hannah More was one of the most prolific and most read literary and religious figures of her day. Born February 2, 1745, near Bristol, she was educated by her schoolmaster father and began writing poetry and drama at an early age. On a visit to London in the 1770’s, she came to the attention of David Garrick, who introduced her to many of the leading personalities of the day, including Dr. Samuel Johnson. She continued her seasonal visits to London but became increasingly dissatisfied with its worldliness and frivolity. In 1789, at the urging of William Wilberforce, she began a school in Cheddar, one of twelve that eventually dotted the Mendip Hills in the west of England. The primary object of study was the Bible; her primary purpose, to improve the moral conduct of both the children and the adults, most of whom could not even read. She spent the rest of her life writing tracts, pamphlets, and, at least one novel — all of them moral, if not religious, in nature. She died in 1833 in Clifton, then a suburb of Bristol.

What have Advent Sunday and Holy Week in common? Which theological motif is present in Gospel readings both for Advent and Passiontide? In both Mark’s eschatological discourse and in his story of Gethsemane there is a repeated call to watch. The present imperative ‘gregoreite’ (keep awake, be watchful) occurs twice within a comparatively short section of the Gospel in 13.35,37 and 14.34,38, and the same verb is used also at 13.34 and 14.37. This repeated charge to watch seems to be a deliberate part of the evangelist’s theological design. Mark’s repetition here is often not noticed because of our usual practice of reading such short sections of text. Yet the evangelist’s narrative sequence may become for us a rich spiritual resource, not only on Advent Sunday and in Holy Week, but throughout the year, if we are attentive to his textual repetition in these chapters.

Given that the article “Preparing the Way for the Lord” was published in its unrevised form, it seems necessary to provide some orientation for readers concerning the substantive differences between that draft and the intended final manuscript. Initially, when seeking to describe the relationship between science and religion- specifically between evolution and Christianity-I chose the metaphor of a boxing match, to convey the conflict and tensions that existed between the two camps. As my explicit aim in the article was to promote conciliatory dialogue between the two parties, the “fight” metaphor no longer seemed appropriate and was excised from the revised version. In the printed article, however, fossils from the earlier metaphor remain, e.g. “This is a mighty punch to pack” (p.522) should read “This is a formidable assertion” and “the bout” (p.526) is reconceived of as “the engagement” with the world.