NO LOOSE CANON

Abstract

H. DAN BEEBY [*] Asked to write about and authority of in Lesslie Newbigin's work, I turned of course not only to his writings but also to recollections of countless hours when we discussed Bible. How could one talk with Lesslie without discussing Bible? Both reading and recollecting produced apparently contradictory conclusion that during his long life there was little change in his view of scriptural authority but considerable development. Reared Northumberland Presbyterian, both in Newcastle and Rothbury churches, Lesslie heard Sunday lessons prefaced with Hear word of God. Consequently, even through early years of questioning, conviction that was divine discourse held firm, and when later he doubted, it was doubt within scriptures and not about their Status. Yet always there was struggle and change. His early writings reveal Bible believer who rarely quoted Old The Household of God, [1] saturated with quotations, has only four from Old Testament; fewer than quotations from Hebrews. The Reunion of Church [2] has about same number of Old Testament quotes as there are from Colossians. Before his return to Britain in 1974, Lesslie sometimes referred to norm with such expressions as biblical vision but usually he says the New Testament. Steeped in whole and as remote from Marcion as it is possible to be, his norm for mission, ecclesiology and theology, as well as his faith, life and deeds was New Testament and its authority was unquestioned. It was given from childhood and assumed throughout his work in India. Change appeared on his return to West as he gradually discovered that assumptions in Europe were different. There, scriptures he took for granted were everywhere threatened; in academia, in culture and even in church. His new mission field was now whole Western world, including Western church and even Bible. In midst of modernity and postmodernity church required reclaimed scripture in order to address pagan culture. [3] One significant indication of nature of his struggle is to be found in book which gave rise to The Gospel and Our Culture movement, The Other Side of 1984: Questions for Churches. The original draft of forty-eight pages, circulated widely, came back heavily criticized with result that after much re-writing WCC edition was sixty-two pages. As I remember, and as comparison of two texts bears out, heaviest criticism was of his use of vocabulary and canon concept. Lesslie, increasingly influenced by American writers such as Brevard Childs and James Sanders, had assumed too much for British audience. So major changes were made. Out came expressions such as criticism, shaping, decanonizing, Bible is canonical from pp. 38-45 of draft, and new (and very significant) material added in pp. 43-54 of WCC edition. Further, five questions for churches found now in chapter V of WCC ed ition (pp. 55ff.) all began with expression a community for which is canonical in original draft. What was tantamount to definition of church was discarded and other words found. Was Lesslie spelling things out for less sophisticated audience? Did he do it reluctantly or was he convinced that end result was an improvement? This I hesitate to say, but I do recall my own feeling of regret at this radical decanonization. Of course, what mattered most was that new clarion call for new mission was clearly heard and some verbal sacrifice was secondary matter if this was achieved, and it was. What is quite certain though, is that in all his succeeding thoughts and writing, irrespective of nomenclature, it was canon, whole council of God in scripture, on which new mission was built. …