You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The Death of Kenneth Lambert on 5th October, 1986 is, and will continue to be, a great loss to the Society of Analytical Psychology and to analytical psychology as a whole. He was a vivid personality, generous, witty, sometimes dramatically outspoken but firm in his conceptions and beliefs. His gift for personal relationships brought him many friends and I knew, from personal experience, how deep and loyal that experience could be.
His value to the Society had many facets, so I will just pick out three of them: his cultured style, wide knowledge and his good judgement. He came to analytical psychology from theology and philosophy, which he studied at Oxford. Following this he became ordained as a priest with a successful future before him. While a priest in the Anglican Church he became interested in pastoral psychology; this brought him into contact with Kathleen Kitchen at the Guild of Pastoral Psychology, which she was then forming. He entered analysis in the course of which he withdrew from the Church and took the new training at the Society of Analytical Psychology, where he became a keen and active member.
When I was editor of The Journal of Analytical Psychology I wanted to pursue, study and evaluate the relation of theology and analytical psychology. I had learned by then that theology demanded a highly sophisticated mental skill and that I needed the help of somebody who could write with authority on that subject and on our own discipline. Lambert's contributions both in the Journal and at the Guild were invaluable. His ‘Can theologians and analytical psychologists collaborate?’ together with his Critical Notices on Jung and the Problem of Evil by H. L. Philp and Victor White's Soul and Psyche were all definitive essays. In them he showed a unique mastery of his subject matter and a rich enjoyment of controversy: clear definition of his opponent's position was combined with cogent criticism mixed with occasional scathing and witty conclusions.