During the 1980s, Tracy came to locate the heart and hope of reason in events of shareable manifestation and recognition of truth, beyond the bounds of mere argument and dialectic. Such events occur best, he suggested, amid the to-and-fro of questioning 'conversations' of participants with each other and their cultures' more capable historical products (named 'classics'). However, Tracy would also come to see that, left to itself, this account of reason could risk abandoning to obscurity the implicit and explicit religious and theological grounds of its own hopes. A thinker whose own earlier work had focused insistently on the question of God, Tracy then set about, from around 1990 forward, to explore the additional grounding of human aesthetic and ethical life in phenomena of incomprehensibility, otherness, impossibility, and infinity, which followers of 'mystical-prophetic' itineraries name as God. One of the fruits of this renewed turn to such phenomena after 1990 was in place of a panentheistic ontotheology of the 'religious classic' that mediates 'the whole by the power of the whole', which, in The Analogical Imagination (1981) guaranteed the theological drift of conversational reason and the theory of classics, instead later Tracy would develop the notion of fragments: the most powerful of which are really 'frag-events' which both fragment closed totality systems and open us graciously to Infinity. Theological classics of all eras are of this kind, suggests Tracy: frag-events that shatter idolatrous totality systems 'while simultaneously opening Christian thought and life to … Infinite Love'. The question at the heart of my paper is: if we follow Tracy sympathetically in all this - and in particular on classics and fragments - where might all this leave the phenomenon of Sacred Scripture, in general and in Christian view? How does Tracy's text-oriented hermeneutical theory account for the peculiar social and theological position of Scripture?