Copyright Notification Sheet: Fair Use

Online Course Readings

Anabaptist Mennonite Biblical Seminary

This electronic document is provided in accordance with the Fair Use provisions of U.S. Copyright law (title 17, section 107).

Complete Lash, Nicholas. Performing the Scriptures, Theology on the Way to Emmaus, (London, SCM Press LTD, 1986), 37-
Citation: 46.

Copyright Nicholas Lash 1986.

Notice:
If there is no statement, put the following the sentence in the box:
This material may be protected by copyright, Title 17 of the US Code.
Course
Name and BIB645/HTE640: What about the Bible? The Authority of Scripture
Number:

Notice for This document is only for the use of students enrolled in this course for purposes associated with this course and
Students may not be further disseminated.
Use of these materials by anyone not enrolled in this course may be an infringement of copyright law.

This document is provided to the AMBS students enrolled in this course so that they can achieve the educational goals of the course.
I selected these specific pages because they are the most appropriate, relevant and timely materials to meet those educational
goals.
_________________________ ___________________________ __, AMBS Professor

_________________ ___28 August 2015____________ Date Assessed for Fair Use

Complaints regarding AMBS use of copyrighted materials may be sent to [email protected]. AMBS staff will respond
promptly.
The wording of this document is based on the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries (January 2012), a publication of the
Association of Research Libraries.
 3
Performing the Scriptures

Open a copy of the New Testament, leaf through its pages.

What do we see? A letter from Paul to his friends in Corinth?
Matthew's account of the pas~ion of Jesus? John's reflections
on the significance of this one man whose words and fate, whose
particular flesh, 'speak' from beyond all timeand circumstance?
No, we don't see anything of the kind. All that we see is a set of
black mi'lrks on white paper.
What does one do with a set of black marks on white paper?
One could decide that they make so pleasing a pattern that
their best use would be to frame them and hang them on the
wall. (That is not a completely far-fetched suggestion: a friend
of mine, an expert i.n Hebrew calligraphy, once wrote a letter
in, Hebrew to.my wife; it hangs in the hall, not for its message,
but for its appearance. Family Bibles are sometimes like that,
decorative rather than functional.) But, confronted with a
pattern of black marks that we r~cognize as a form of notation,
what we usually do is to try to make sense of it, to read it, to
interpret it.
How does one 'read' or interpret a text? The activity is so
familiar that the question may seem foolish. And yet a moment's
reflection suggests that, for different kinds of text, different
kinds of activity count as what we might call the primary or
fundamental form of their interpretation,
Two random examples. A group of people tramping across
the hills, bits of paper in one hand, compasses in the other.
What are they qoing? They,,are engaged in what the army
calls a 'map-reading exercise'. Another group, in a pub; one
 38 Theology on the Way to Emmaus Performing the Scriptures 39

spea~ing, the. others listening, are taking part in a poetry incumbent upon us to read as competently and responsibly as
~ea~mg. (N,o.ttce that all of them, not just the speaker, are we can.
takmg part m the reading.) This raises another set of problems, because not just anybody
There are some texts the interpretation of which seems to be can readjust any text. I am useless at reading circuit diagrams,
a matter of, first, 'digging' the meaning out of the text and and I can't read Polish. Confronted by such texts, I have to
then, .subsequen~ly, putting the meaning to use, applying it in pass the buck to the appropriate expert.
practic~. That might be a plausible description of what someone Open a copy of the New Testament, leaf through its pages.
~as do1~~ who, armed with a circuit diagram, tried to mend If it happens to be a copy of the Greek text, most of us would
his telev1s.1on se~. Bu.tit would be a most misleading description be stuck from the start. We would need the help of the expert.
of ~hat a judge is domg when, in the particular case before him But do we also need his help in the case of texts that were
he mterprets the law. In this case, interpretation is a creativ~ written in, or have been translated into, a language with which
~c.t that.could not have been predicted by a computer because we are familiar? And, if the answer is 'Yes', what is the
it is the judge's business to 'make' the law by his interpretation relationship between the expert's contribution to the task of
of precedent. What the law means is decided by his application interpretation, and that of the 'general reader'?
of1t. At the time of the Reformation, the attempt was made to
What it me~ns to read or interpret a text depends in part ~escue the New Testament from the clutches of the ecclesiastical
then, on the ~md of t~xt that is being used. Different kinds of authorities, who claimed that they alone were competent to
text call.f~r.d1fferent kmds ofreading. And the reader must take interpret the text, and to place it once again in the har,ids of
~es~ons1b1!1ty for the reading, for deciding what kind of text it those for whom it w~s written. But a_lot has happened since the
I~ with which he or she is dealing. This does not mean that it is invention of the printing-press helped to bring about that
simply ~up to ~e' arbi~rarily to decide what to do with a text. particular revolution in the reading of the New Testament. We
(It would be sill~ to smg railway timetables, rather than use have become very conscious of the fact that there is no such
them to catch trams.) What it does mean is that it is the reading thing as what any text 'obviously' means. What a text obviously
of the text, rather than ~erely the text itself, the materiaiobject, seems to mean, at first sight, on examination may turnout to
the black ~arks on white paper, which embodies decisions as have little or nothing to do with what it meant to those who
to what kmds of reading are appropriate. -And the richer the produced it or to those for whom it was originally produced.
text, the more complex its relationship to the culture which (What did they make of the story of Christmas, or the Sermon
reads and re.member~ it, the more var.ied the range of more or on the Mount, or the trial before Pilate? And how do we know,
less appropriate readmgs which it evokes. without trying to find out?) This is by no means only true of
Thus (.briefly to anticipate the discussion of the New Testa- ancient texts, produced in cultural contexts whose patterns of
ment.which I sha.11 get round to eventually) it is possible, at thought and argument, illustration and imagery, memory
lea~t m some ve~s~ons, t~ read the scriptures for th'e beauty- of and expectation, were very different from our own. But it
their langu~~e; it. I~ possible to read them because they speak undoubtedly is true of such texts. And so, between the New
to our con.d1~10n; it ~s possible to readthem because they speak Testament and the ordinary Christian, who seeks so to read
of Jesus; It is possible to read them because they speak the these texts as to hear in them the Word of Life, there seem to
_my~t~ry of God. And however We decide to take them, the be set up thickets of expertise, insurmountable barriers of
decmon to t~ke them one way rather than another is ours, scholarship. And, as everybody knows, there is not a line in the
at each readmg. We cannot pass the buck. It is; therefore, New Testament concerning the interpretation of which the

1
 40 Theology on the Way to Emmaus Performing the Scriptures 41
experts are not deeply divided. If the New Testament once continuing history of Beethoven interpretation. The funda-
needed rescuing from the ecclesiastical authorities (some of mental form of the interpretation of Beethoven consists in the
whom have still perhaps too tight a grip on it) does it now need performance of his texts. The acade~ics ~ave an indisp~nsable
rescuing from the professors of theology? but subordinate part to play in contnbutmg to. the quahty and
.: So far, I have only tried to make>four simple points. In the appreciation of the performance.
first place, 'reading' is always a matter of interpreting a text, of Since the differences between a Beethoven score and the text
putting it to appropriate use. In the second place, what counts of the Gospel according to Matthew are more obvious than the
as an appropriate strategy of use or interpretation will depend similarities consider another example: a company of actors
upon the kind of text with which we are dealing. In the third '
and an audience performing King Lear. Once again, the act1v1ty
..
place, the reader cannot avoid Jaking personal responsibility upon which they are engaged is that ofinterpreting a text. And,
for the interpretative strategy whkh he or she employs'. In the once again, the quality of the interpret.ation depends partly
fourth place, there are difficulties concerning the relationship upon an element of creativity that is essential to the interpret-
between our use of the New Testament, as ordinary Christians, ative task. We look to the actors and the producer to enable us
and the responsibilities of 'authoritative' interpreters, whether in some measure freshly to experience and understand the play.
ecclesiastical authorities or academic experts. But, at the end of an outstanding performance of King Lear,
I suggested earlier that; for different kinds of text, different
is it only the play that we feel ourselves newly to have understood?
kinds of activity count as the fundamental form of their
Ifwe say, after the performance, 'I'd never seen that befor~', are
interpretation. I would now like to illustrate this suggestion
we referring only to something which we had never previously
and to indicate, at the same time, something of the relationships
seen in the 'text? Or are we also referring to an element of self-
that exist between such fundamental interpretative activity and
the interpretative tasks of the scholar and critic. discovery which the performance had helped us t? achie.ve?
There is a set of black marks on white paper which are And what is the relationship between these two d1scovenes?
recognizable as the score of one of Beethoven's late string Might it be t~at, in the performance of a great work of.art,. a
quartets. Consider four people playing the quartet. What 'classic', self-discovery and the discovery of fresh meanmg m
are they doing? They are interpreting the text. Even if the the text converge? Might it 'be that the 'greatness' of a text
performance is technically faultless (and is, in that sense, lies in its inexhaustible capacity to express, to dramatize,
a 'correct' interpretation) we might judge it to be lifeless, fundamental features of the human drama?
unimaginative. There is a creativity in interpretation which, Leaving such questions on one side for the time being, King
far from being arbitrary (the players cannot do whatever they Lear does seem to be another example of a te~t the fundamental
like with the score) is connected in some way with the fidelity, form of the interpretation of which consists in its performance.
the 'truthfulness' of their performance. As in the case of the musical analogy, the expertise required by
There is, undoubtedly, an expertise which the musicians actors and producer in order to perform well is of a different
need. Behind any great performance lie years of disciplined order from that required of the indispensable but subordinate
experience. But the particular expertise necessary for good academic interpreters: the textual critics, historians of Eliza-
performance is neither the same as, nor in competition with, bethan drama, literary critics and philosophers.
the academic skills of the- textual critics who make the score What both these examples suggest is. that there are at least
available through scholarly research and the critics and music- some text,s that only begin to delivei:: their meaning in so far as
ologists who have their own contribution to make to the
they are 'brought into play' through interpretative perform-
 Performing the Scriptures 43
42 Theology on the Way to Emmaus
ance. This is also true, I suggest, of such other 'works of art' as properly, Christian discipleship, the performative interpret-
the poem, the novel and the story. ation of scripture, needs Uust as.much as does the interpretation
Now, at last, we are getting to the point. Not all the texts of of Beethoven and Shakespeare) the services of scholarship and
the New Testament are stories but, taken together, they 'tell critical reflection.
the story' ofJesus and the first Christian communities. I want I have been at pains to emphasize that those who engage in
to suggest, first, that, altho-gh the texts of the New Testament the activity of reading a text bear personal responsibility for
may be read, and read with profit, by anyone interested in their reading. But to say that the responsibility is personal is
Western culture and concerned for the human predicament, not to say that it is executed by isolated individuals. Personal
the fundamental form of the Christian interpretation of scripture responsibility is not the same thing as 'privat~ judgment'. ,
is the life, activity and organization of the believing community. Christian living, construed as the interpretative performance
Secondly, that Christian practice, as interpretative action, of scripture is, for two reasons, necessarily a collaborative
consists in the performance of texts which are construed as enterprise.
'rendering', bearing witness to, one whose words and deeds, This is so, first, because (as I have pointed out already) the
discourse and suffering, 'rendered' the truth of God in human performers need the help of the 'experts'. The second reason
history. The performance of the New Testament enacts the arises from the nature of the texts: it takes two to tango and
conviction that these texts are. most appropriately read as the rather more to perform King Lear.
story ofJesus, the story of everyone else, and the story of God. For even the most dedicated.musician pr actor, the interpret-
In comparison with some other 'models' of the relationship ation of Beethoven or Shakespeare is a part-time activity. Off-
between interpretation and discipleship, Bible and ~heology, stage, the performers relax, go shopping, dig the garden. But
scripture and tradition, this suggestion,does at least have the there are some texts the fundamental form of the interpretation
merit of.reminding us that the poles of Christian interpretation ofwhich is a full-time affair because it consists in their enactment
are not, in the last analysis, written texts (the text of the New as the social existence of an entire human community. The
Testament on the one hand and, on the other, whatever appears scriptures, I sugge~t, are such texts. This is what is meant by
t?day in manuals of theology and catechetics, papal encyclicals, saying1hat the fundamental form of the Christian interpretation
pastoral letters, etc.) but patterns of human action: what was ofs"cripture is the life, activity and organization of the believing
said and done and suffered, then, by Jesus and his disciples, community. The performance of scripture is the life of the
and what is said and done and suffered, now, by those who seek church. lt is no more possible for an isolated individual to
to share his obedience and his hope. We talk of 'holy' scripture, perform these texts than it isfor him to perform a Beethoven
and for good reason. And yet it is not, in fact, the script that is qua.rtet or a Shakespeare tragedy. .
'holy', but the people: the company who perform the script. Anqther analogy m~y help. The fundamental form of the
Moreover, as my musical and dramatic analogies were political interpretation of the American Constitution is the life,
intended to indicate, the model has the further advantage of activity and .organization of American society. That society
keeping the experts firmly in their place while acknowledging exists (not without change, conflict and confusion) as the
their skills to be indispensable. To say that the fundamental
enactment o(its Constitution. Similarly, we might say that the
form of the Christian interpretation of scripture is the per-
scriptures are the 'constitution' of the church.
formance of the biblical text affords no licence to that 'funda-
Even in the case of societies that have a written constitution,
mentalism' which is still a depressingly widespread feature of
the interpretation of that constitution is an unending enterprise.
popular preaching and catechesis. In order to do the job
Times chan~, circumstances change. The 'meaning' of the
44 Performing the Scriptures 45
Theology on the Wqy to Emmaus
constitution is never definitively 'captured'; it is, ever and again, needs briefly to be considered. King Lear is ficj:ion; the Gospels
sought and constructed. Similarly, each new performance of are, in some sense, historical. They therefore carry a built~in
Beethoven or Shakespeare is a new event in the history of the reference to particular, completed past events which renders
meaning of the text. There is no such thing as an in(erpretation them resistant to th.e interpretative relativism to which fictional
that is 'final' and 'definitive' in the sense ofbringing that' history constructions are subjec~.
to an end. Once again, all I can do here is to offer some clues to the
But how can this be true of the New Testament? How can resolution of the dilemma. In the first place, we would not
we square the recognition ' that the history of the meaning of the bother to continue performing King Lear (except as a museum
text continues indefinitely with the ascription of.finality to God's piece} if we no longer believed in it, if we no longer found it
work ofrevelation injesus the Christ? This is a large.question; 'true to life'. Some people, I think, give up the practice of
all I can do is offer a couple of clues. Christianity for a similar reason.
In the ~rst place, the range of appropriate interpretations of In the second place, however, the New Testament texts
a dramatic or literary text is constrained by what the text do not simply give symbolic, narrative expression to certain
'originally meant'. This is what keeps the historians and textual fundamental and pervasive features of the human drama
critics in business. Good Shakespearean production, for (although Christians are apt 'to overlook the extent to which
example, presupposes an effective and abiding interest in what the fact that they do do this is part of their enduring power and
was originally meant. The author retains his authority if it is attractiveness). They also express their authors' confidence in
his text, and not some other, that we seek to interpret. one man in whom the mystery of divine action is seen to have
In the second place, in order to understand a text we have to been embodied and disclosed.
understand the question to which it is an answer. We may give We can perfortn King Lear even if the central chara~ter in the
up the enterprise: there are texts that we no longer bother to text had no particular prototype. But if we were to read the
read, or which we feel ourselves unable to make sense of. But New Testament on this supposition, or on the supposition that
so long as the enterprise continues, so long as we continue to the accuracy of the portrait did not matter, we should have
seek to perform these texts, we are continuing to endorse that excised a central element from what the text originally meant.
which we take the texts to have originally meant. We would be telling a different story.
And if the question to which the "text sought originally to Moreover, the texts of the New Testament not only purport
provide an answer was a question concerning the ultimate to express the fact and significance of one man but, in doing so,
and definitive chara:cter, outcome and significance of human they refer both fact and significance to the mystery of divine
history: and if .the answer (expressed in the text) consisted in action. It follows that, for the practice of Christianity, the
the ascription of ultimate, unsurpassable, effective significance performance of the biblical text, to be true, it must be not only
to the words and work and death of one man, then, to continue 'true tq life', but 'true to his life'; and not only 'true to his life?,
appropriately to perform this text is to continue to ascrioe such but 'true to God'. That it is so, and Dfay be made so, is at once
significance to this man. our responsibility, our hope and our prayer.
To put it very simply: as the history of the meaning of the I have been suggesting that the fundamental form of th.e
text continues, we can and must tell the story differently. But Christian interpretation of scripture is the life, activity and
we do so under constraint: what we may not do, if it is this text organization of the Christian community, construed as perform-
which we are fo continue to perform, is to tell a different story. ance of the biblical text. The best illustration of what this might
There is another oojection to the model I am proposing which mean is, of course, the celebration of the eucharist. Here, that
46 Theology on the Way to Emmaus Notes to pages 20-49 217
2. Ibid., p. 301.
interpretative performance in which all our life consists - all 3. Nor only in Catholicism. Protestant Christians are apt to overlook the
our suffering and care, compassion, celebration, struggle and fact that there are Protestant 'classicisms', the theological indicators ofwhich
obedience - is dramatically di~tilled, focussed, concentrated, include, for exampl~, certain forms of 'biblicism', and of the appeal to the
rendered explicit. In this context, the principal forms of principle of'justification by faith' or to the doctrine of the Atonement.
discourse are 'practical': in praise, copfession, petition, they 4.Cf. Nicholas Lash, Voices ofAuthority, Sheed & Ward 1976, pp. 84--100.
seek to enact the meanings which they embody. And if, i.n the 5. Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumt1n Gentium), art. I.
6. Cf. Nicholas Lash, A Matter ofHope: A Theologian's Reflections on the Thought
liturgy of the Word, the story is told,it is told not so that it may ofKarl Marx, Darton, Longman & Todd 1981, pp. 237, 252.
merely be relished or remembered, but that it may be performed, 7. Cf. Acts I I.IS.
in the following of Christ. 8. Anyone who supposes that the incarnation of the Word constitutes an
At the end of a performance of Lear, the actors leave the stage, exemption to this rule has overlooked distinctions drawn with great care by
remove their costumes, 'return to life'. But, for each Christian the Councils of the early church.
actor, the performance of the biblical text ends only at death. 9. Cf. R. Panikkar, 'Faith, a Constitutive Dimension of Man', Journal of
Ecumenical Studies, VIII, 197 l, pp. 223-54.
The stage on which we enact our performance is that wider IO. Even in 'the shadow of the bomb' these things are more easily said in a
human history-in which the church exists as the 'sacrament', climate ofrelative economic prosperity and political stability than they might
or dramatic,,enactment, ofhistory's ultimate meaning and hope. be elsewhere. Nevertheless, whatever one's situation, to refrain from saying
If the texts of the New Testament are to express that which them would be to refrain from acknowledging one's own need for forgiveness.
I I. K. Rabner, 'Reflections on the Problems Involved in Devising a Short
Christian faith declares them capable of expressing, the quality
Formula of the Faith', Theological Investigations XI, Darton, Longman & Todd
of our humanity will be the criterion of the. adequacy of the
1974, p. 233. On the general issue, cf. Rahner, 'Pluralism in Theology and
performance. And yet this criterion is, in the last resort, hidden the Unity of the Creed in the Church', Investigations XI, pp. 11-23; 'The
from us in the mystery of God whose meaning for man we are Foundation ofBeliefToday', Investigations XVI, 1979, pp. 3-23.
bidden to enact. 12. Cf. Nicholas Lash, 'Credal Affirmation as a Criterion of Church
Membership', Church Membership and Intercommunion, ed. J. Kent and R.
Murray, Darton, Longman & Todd 1973, pp. 51-73.
r 3. Cf. B. J. F. Lonergan, 'Theology in its New Con text', A Second Collection,
Darton, Longman & Todd 1974, pp. 55--67.
14. Cf. K. Rabner, 'Philosophy and Philosophising in Theology', Theological
Investigations IX, Darton, Longman & Todd 1972, pp. 46--63. .

PART II
3. Performing the Scriptures
Originally published in The Furrow, in 1982, as one of a series of articles which
were collected as Ronan Drury (ed.), The New Testament as Personal Reading,
Springfield, Illinois, Templegate Publishers 1983.

4. What Aut/iprity has our Past?

A revised version of a lecture originally given in Cambridge, in 1979, as one
ofa series of Open Lectures on the theme of'Revelation and Authority'.
I. H. Kiing, On Being a Christian, Collins 1977, p. 20, his stress.
2. M. Kahler, The So-Called Historical Jesus and the Historic Biblical Christ,
Fortress Press 1964, p. 118.