12 Conferences, Chapel and Tours: 1966–70
Conferences, Chapel and Tours: 1966–70
From 21 May to 29 June 1966, Leon travelled to the USA, where he had been invited to speak at a critical conference, the ‘Seminar on Scripture’.
His first stop was San Francisco, to visit Frank Andersen who was now working at the Church Divinity School of the Pacific. Leon noted: ‘It is depressing to see the magnificence of their set up. But I guess life is like that!’1 He then travelled to Pasadena, where he spent time with George Ladd who asked for his opinion on some New Testament theology, much to Leon’s surprise. He felt that he could not help Ladd much, but he was still glad of the compliment. Hubbard gave his paper for the Seminar on Scripture to Leon to read, concerned that the more conservative brethren would have reservations about it. Leon’s response? ‘We shall see.’2 Leon spent an evening with the 1960 Fuller staff – including the Wallaces, Ramms and Hubbards – and noted that it was ‘a grand, grand evening’.3 Not long after, he spoke at the Fuller Baccalaureate Service on 29 May on ‘The Preaching of the Cross’ to five hundred people. ‘I did not feel that my address went 100% but the warm hearted Americans shook my hand furiously afterwards and said nice things.’4
After Pasadena, Leon travelled to Washington, where he had a contract as a guest editor of Christianity Today beginning on 1 June. Leon wrote two initial editorials and later commented on how pleased he was with staff journalist Frank Gaebelein’s5 editorial improvements. In one editorial Leon had suggested that ‘Christianity is not tied to capitalism but will outlast it’, and he was not surprised when the team suggested this would offend some readers and mused to himself that he did not expect it to get through. Near the end of his time, Carl Henry, the editor of Christianity Today, spoke warmly to Leon and intimated that he was sorry they had not had more time together.
While in Washington, Leon managed to find some time to explore the Capitol museums and Kennedy’s grave at Arlington Cemetery. He pondered the obvious devotion paid to the assassinated president, given such a short a time in office. Determined to see a baseball game, he caught a Number 47 bus to the stadium to watch the Senators playing the Cleveland Indians, delighted to see Ortego and Siebert pitch.
Leon continued to accept invitations to speak, and in Washington he spoke at All Souls Memorial Episcopal Church on ‘Should the Church Keep up with the Times?’6 Leon noted the simple service and commented that no one turned east for the Glorias, something he thought theologically unnecessary in stating the faith. The choir thrilled him: ‘It is a long time since I heard a choir outside the Cathedral sing like these blokes.’7
Mildred remained home on this trip and it showed in his diary references where he used his affectionate name for her. One Saturday he observed that he had not spoken to anyone, other than to buy food. ‘It wouldn’t do my Charlie, but I’ve enjoyed the quiet.’8 The cleaning lady told him his room was ‘very neat … very neat’ and he remarked, ‘I’m sure Charlie would approve.’9 When Christianity Today gave a well-wrapped gift to farewell a staff member, ‘My Charlie would have approved the gorgeous ribbon, done up in an elaborate bow.’10 He was missing Mildred, being separated from her for their first lengthy period. While he never wrote of his loneliness, Mildred was always on his mind.
Love and Truth in Scripture
The Conference on the Authority of Scripture was held in Boston for ten days. The matter to be debated was the exact nature of Scripture – that is, was it without error?
The ‘inerrancy’ question had the potential to divide evangelicals at a conceptual and therefore at a ministry level. The conference was weighted with US delegates, but scholars from across the evangelical world with an interest in the text of Scripture attended.11 Leon was there because the truth of the Bible mattered deeply to him and it had occupied over ten years of his research time.
As he was neither American nor British, Leon was able to claim outsider status even though he had worked in both countries. People trusted that he had no particular viewpoint to support but his own. Being out of the limelight in Australia now proved to be a benefit although initially he was unsure how he would fit into the debate.
At the start he commented: ‘Few people who have spoken to me think it will accomplish much interestingly for two reasons: 1. Everyone will be saying the same thing so how will there be fruitful discussion? 2. There will be too great a diversity of opinion with some affirming and some rejecting the Bible.’12
Kenneth Kantzer began with an overview of evangelical views of Scripture, which Leon believed was an honest straightforward presentation. In making a distinction between what the Scripture writers taught and what they touched, Earle Ellis then set a big argument going. This was to be expected within this gathering, considering the exact nature of the Scriptures. Leon noted: ‘It took us through all the subsequent sessions.’13 In Leon’s view, the next paper, by Donald Wiseman, on recent trends in Old Testament work, was ‘a really good piece of work’.14 Although the liberal and more conservative members argued vigorously over points of view about the nature of Scripture, Leon reckoned they were not that far apart conceptually. He did note that some of the brethren wanted to see errors admitted in Scripture, or so it seemed that night. He lamented that Herman Ridderbos and Bruce Metzger had said little and by implication others had said too much.
Leon’s Conference Paper
Leon gave his own paper on Wednesday. In his own mind it was about the Bible’s view of itself. Leon noted that many modern scholars stripped the Bible of inspiration. He proposed not to debate the merits of an evangelical or a modern approach, but to argue for the approach of the Bible itself. It proved to be a very important paper at the conference.
The Old Testament, he said, recorded words that it claimed were God’s words – for example, statements such as ‘And God said’ occur 3,808 times. Where some other scholars believed that the Bible’s words just explained some God ‘events’, and the words themselves were not that important, Leon argued that the words used in the Old Testament were not just explanations of revelatory events. Rather, God had put these exact words in the prophets’ mouths, and therefore these words were important and inspired.
He developed the point that no passage in the Old Testament deals with inerrancy and addressed the claims of errors in the Old Testament. For example, in 2 Samuel 24:1, God’s anger is kindled against the people so he moves David to number the people, while in 1 Chronicles 21:1, Satan stands against Israel and moves David to number the people. While Leon observed the ‘inconsistency’, he raised the possibility that God had moved Satan to act.
In the New Testament he noted that the writers uniformly regarded the Old Testament as completely authoritative. Jesus and his followers quote it as a way of ending discussion. The New Testament makes far-reaching claims such as those found in Acts 1:16; 28:25; 1 Peter 1:10f.; 1:20f. and 2 Timothy 3:16. As the New Testament is not inferior to the Old Testament, as declared in 2 Corinthians 3:7–11, by inference the New Testament’s writings are not inferior. Leon went on to note that Jesus spoke with authority – ‘My words shall not pass away’15 – and clearly implied his teaching was of divine origin.16 Furthermore, he gave authoritative directions on an equal footing with Scripture itself – ‘You have heard that it was said … of old … but I say to you’.17 Leon pointed out that it is impossible to regard such directions as having any less authority than the Old Testament. He also noted those instances where words from God himself were recorded in the New Testament18 as well as passages affirming the divine origin of the Christian message.19 Furthermore, Paul viewed Scripture’s authority in terms of divinely given sufficiency and claimed his message was from God or of God.20
Leon argued that if the written message was from the commandment of God (e.g. 1 Cor. 14:37) and the oral preaching was from God (e.g. 1 Cor. 2:4; cf. 1 Thess. 1:5), it is hard to see on what grounds we should deny that those writings which embody the message are the very word of God. If the Holy Spirit gave words to those on trial to speak, for example when Peter and John faced the Jewish leaders (Acts 4:8–22), why would he not also give words to those who were to write the authoritative Christian documents?21
The importance of words, Leon contested, is overlooked in much modern writing. When it comes to ‘deeds’, some are revelational while others are not. However, words are always necessary for revelation. For example, in Exodus 24 words of revelation are emphasized over deeds. On other occasions, deeds plus inspired words equal revelation. In the end, he said, if words cannot be trusted we have nothing.
Leon considered a number of problem passages in the New Testament. For example, Jesus says in Mark 14:22 (RSV), ‘This is my body’ and in Luke 22:19 (RSV), ‘This is my body which is given for you.’ It is legitimate to say that the differences are unimportant, but is this inerrancy? There are also parallel accounts of the same incident – for example, Mark 6:8 says to go out with a staff while Matthew 10:10 and Luke 9:3 say to go out but a staff is forbidden. Or what about when Jesus quotes his own words inaccurately, such as John 6:44 and 6:65? It is of course legitimate to say the original thought is reproduced, but does this deal with the problem of inerrancy? These look like problems, but how do we deal with them alongside strong statements about the authority of the writings?
He concluded with three points:
1. The Bible does not come to us as a bare word and nothing more. God’s Spirit still witnesses and applies the word to the devout reader’s need. Final authority is not just paper and ink. God uses his word to effect his purpose.
2. The Bible’s witness to itself must be taken with full seriousness. The difficulty is that the Bible’s writers did not use our categories, never speaking in terms of inerrancy and seldom of inspiration. They were not concerned that all their statements were obviously consistent, yet they regarded what they had written as fully authoritative.
3. We need a way of looking at the Bible that holds it to be fully authoritative but is not distracted over minor points. While consistently regarding what they have written as reliable, the Bible writers do not speak of inerrancy. Our concern is not to prove inerrancy by lining up every statement in harmony; our concern is to show the Bible is eminently trustworthy. It is important that we think biblically.
Finally, Leon suggested that Christ’s quotations of his own words in John’s Gospel may be a clue. In no case is the quotation verbally identical with the original. In no case is the sense distorted. We cannot look for more than the Bible writers give us, nor should we settle for less. We must not impose an inerrancy of our own making on the Bible. The inerrancy the Bible teaches is compatible with variant reports of the words used on a given occasion. So the Bible is reliable. It will not lead us astray. As we accept it, it gives us true knowledge of God.
Leon’s paper was well received by conservative scholars and it was also appreciated by those who were less conservative in their theology.
The Conference Continues
The Thursday was ineffectual until the evening debate on the merits of accepting evolution or Genesis 1 – 2. Leon himself was phlegmatic about the issue of origins and would comment that as none of us were there to see the beginning, it was better not to be too dogmatic on any reconstruction.22
On Friday, Leon was told by another delegate that the conference had been arranged because of the split in views between Fuller Theological College and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School – he might notice that one point of view from a Fuller person was always challenged by a Trinity delegate. This depressed Leon. He had hoped that the conference would end by agreeing to a statement that would help some evangelical seminaries not to split over their view of Scripture. If the delegate was right, the hopes for any agreement were slim.
At one point the conference’s focus turned away from inerrancy, and Leon managed to get the debate back on track by publicly asking Jim Packer: ‘How can we bring the evangelical contribution into the centre of the modern theological debate?’23
On the last Sunday, most of the delegates worshipped together at Harold John Ockenga’s Park Street Church. It was something of a privilege and responsibility that Leon was the invited preacher at the 10.30 a.m. service. He spoke on ‘The Meaning of the Cross’24 and the sermon was broadcast live on a radio network.
Leon’s frustration at the conference stemmed from his view that ‘evangelicals have too much in common to fight one another and there are too many enemies’.25 He felt that his American brethren were caught up with the inerrancy debate and this fixation was preventing them from a deeper understanding of the truth. The conference did produce some agreed statements, and Leon commented that ‘despite the difficulty there is an impressive measure of agreement. Those who arranged it must be well satisfied.’26 However, he felt that any agreement would dissipate because of the underlying tensions that remained.
Ten years later the inerrancy debate reached extreme levels when Harold Lindsell’s book, The Battle for the Bible (1976),27 was published. He took issue with evangelicals who would not describe the Bible as inerrant in the way he wished to describe it. One scholar illustrated the deep hurt felt over the way Lindsell treated people and cited Leon for a more balanced approach:
The real test of whether we hold to the doctrine of inspiration is not to be found in man’s inadequate attempts to define the mysteries of God’s revelation in the Scriptures but in our willingness to live according to the teachings of the Word of God … Leon Morris, who has been a staunch defender of a high view of inspiration, writes in his recent book, I Believe in Revelation, ‘It is authority that is important, rather than inerrancy’ (p. 137). Obviously an errant Bible could be no authority for us; but the real ‘battle for the Bible’ is fought in the daily life, where the believer either lives by the Word of God or according to human standards. Lindsell’s book is of no help in this arena. Indeed, the reader can easily be deceived into thinking that if only he has the right definition of inerrancy, he is already a true and faithful follower of Jesus, the Lord of the Scriptures.28
Back Home
During this American trip, Mildred’s letter reached him about Archbishop Gough’s resignation in Sydney. Another arrived from close friend Livingstone, asking if Leon could be nominated to the synod as a candidate. He noted, ‘I guess it matters little for I can’t imagine that there is any possibility of me being elected.’29 Others told him that Loane would win but that it would be good for Loane to have defeated Leon! Leon fared better than he thought. In July he led the votes for the final list of three. Those votes were Leon Morris 494, Marcus Loane 490 and Stuart Barton Babbage 475.30 The next day Loane was easily elected as archbishop. If a few more peas had rolled the other way for Leon, one can only imagine the plight of Ridley’s Council in having to search for yet another principal.
The Ridley campus as Leon knew it spread along The Avenue, Parkville, from Walker Street to St Andrews Hall.31 A magnificent Victorian double-storey residence called Cumnock occupied the south-west corner. An L-shaped double-storey building called Baker faced inwards. The smaller and poorer-quality double-storey buildings Aicken and Arundel, once used for stables and storage, were located on the edge of the property adjacent to Mile Lane. There was plenty of open space for new buildings, and Leon’s first major project was to build a chapel on the Walker Street side of the campus.
Ridley’s Chapel
Leon was the major driving force in the appeal for the required funds and the chapel opened debt-free.32 He also had a strong hand in its design. According to Williams:
The Ridley Chapel is round (strictly, octagonal), with the Lord’s Table at the centre overhung by a plain wooden cross. Behind the Table, but standing higher than the Table, is the pulpit/lectern. In this arrangement is encapsulated the theology which has informed the whole of Morris’s Christian life: the centrality of the cross; that is, of the saving grace of God in the person and work of Christ, and the authority of the Scriptures.33
A lady supporter wrote after attending the consecration and chapel opening: ‘I cannot end the day without telling you what a thrilling occasion this afternoon was for the many of us who were there; everyone seemed delighted with the finished Chapel and both without and within it is most pleasing – it is I think an extraordinarily masculine Chapel!’34
Worship was an important part of the life of the college. Leon started services on time. He entered the chapel just before the scheduled time, knelt in prayer, eyes down and then checked his watch. To the second, he would stand and announce the hymn. An unintended consequence of Leon’s design of the chapel was that he could look around the octagonal structure and spot anyone who arrived late through the double front doors. Latecomers scurried like rats to the nearest available seat.
Chapel was compulsory during Leon’s entire time as principal, although the rules became less onerous towards the end of his time at Ridley. If you missed chapel you apologized in person to the principal. One student, Peter Adam, was a dreadful attendee and devised a plan:
I used to save up my missed chapels, knock on the door [gowned, of course]: ‘Dr Morris, I have come to apologize for missing chapel on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday mornings.’
The reply was always the same, ‘Have you an effective waking device?’
I would reply, ‘Yes, Dr Morris.’
His reply, ‘Use it.’
My reply, ‘Thank you, Dr Morris.’35
Another student, Peter Crawford, got engaged one weekend and missed the next chapel service. He apologized to Leon for missing chapel, offering his somewhat watertight excuse of getting engaged. Leon paused, contemplated what he had heard, looked up, and said, ‘Don’t let it happen again.’36
Worship in the chapel was a reverent and learning atmosphere. The hymns were always carefully chosen to fit the Anglican liturgy and theme, often commencing with a hymn on the holiness of God and of the need to come to confession before God’s throne. Leon would preach with a ‘distinctive voice … a crooked half smile’.37 As he stood in the central raised pulpit, he would rock slightly back and forth as he made his points, sometimes taking a step or two backwards – to the consternation of those listening, as the pulpit was open-sided with rear steps. But he was relaxed, balanced and in control, like Alex Rodriguez facing a rookie pitcher, and he engaged people with his winsome demeanour.
The enduring memory of his sermons was of three points and a well-chosen joke from the Reader’s Digest. The memory is valid, although he did preach with more variety. His only aid was his Greek New Testament, from which he translated as he went along. He usually used notes with points; very occasionally he brought full printed notes although no one recalls ever seeing him look at them in the actual process of preaching.38 He ended with a challenge, calling his listeners to respond to God speaking within them. His closing prayers revealed a deep personal devotion directed to his God.
At Communion services, Leon preached on an aspect of the death of Christ. He then moved around the circular area in the middle, reverently handing out the bread accompanied by the words of reception. He counted the communicants in his head for noting in the registers. When resident in college, he preached or led at the main services – around fifty times to ninety times a year.
Leon and the Students
University students were becoming a more important part of the life of Ridley College. One student turned up in 1967, girlfriend in tow:
It was about 100oF in the shade. We knew Ridley College was on The Avenue, and if we started at number one, we would find it sooner or later … We knew nothing of the College, except that it was Anglican, trained clergy and filled empty rooms with homeless men university students. We were asked to wait until the Principal could see us … ‘Who?’… ‘Doctor Morris’, whispered the middle-aged secretary, as if she was referring to royalty. The name meant nothing to me, and I was still wondering if we were wasting our time on a day when the surf was up at Torquay.
We were ushered into this large room. Bookshelves on each wall suggested that this was a library. However a big desk showed that the room was an office. Seated behind the desk was a man whose key features were big glasses, matched by an equally big smile. Dressed in sports trousers and open-necked shirt was the Principal, Doctor Morris. He seemed genuinely keen to have me join the College. My first year … was spent in a room that was scarcely the size of a broom cupboard …
I always valued Dr. Morris’s sermons … In the space of four years I experienced a lot of biblical teaching, and this laid the foundation of the rest [of] my theological education, and life’s commitment to the received faith of the church. I would see him carefully analyze the text, searching for an array of meanings and consequences. If only one result was possible, he would make this clear. If a range of answers was possible, he would leave the range with the listener to deal with, adding, with a twinkle in his eye ‘You pay your money and you take your pick.’ Twenty-five years later, I worked on a PhD. I started writing up my methodology chapter, and started pondering where I had first learned the skills of careful text analysis. Then I realised that it was in Ridley College chapel, listening to Leon Morris.39
Another student recalled:
Leon was very important to me as an immature Christian secular student in 1967. He took time out to follow me up personally and in one amazing interview he told me that the youth group at (nearby) St Michael’s Nth. Carlton needed an assistant leader … and I was it! The fact that I was already teaching Sunday school elsewhere on Sunday mornings didn’t seem to wash! Perhaps he knew I needed to leave home really! He was a larger than life figure to me. For the past two years I have carefully read his Matthew commentary every morning and I often felt I could hear him speaking to me directly in his succinct and wonderfully clear way.40
Leon also accepted a theological student who had been refused a place at Moore College. Moore felt the student could not cope with the Greek language. When the student passed his Greek and was in the room, Leon called the Moore principal, Broughton Knox, to tell him the good news!
With regards to studying Greek at Ridley, one student reminisced:
I could get a good view of Dr. Morris, and especially of how he spoke and why he spoke the way he did … despite his great intellect he was able to communicate at a level appropriate for the simplest student … As we were working through the Greek text of Mark I noticed that the young man in the empty tomb was wearing a white stole [Mark 16:5]. I asked, ‘Would this be the first occasion on which a white stole was worn at an Easter celebration?’ ‘Yes’, replied Leon, ‘Notice they were surprised to see it.’41
Many Ridley students have also commented on Leon’s extraordinary ability to expand a viewpoint with which he did not agree so dispassionately that they took notes thinking this must be the right answer. At the end of the exposition, Leon would say ‘on the other hand’ and refute the viewpoint with five brief but powerful sentences. The students would then furiously take more notes hoping the next version was the right answer. Leon showed ‘a remarkable combination of clarity and conviction on the one hand and the ability to be fair in describing the views for which he didn’t agree on the other’.42
Ridley was still modest enough in size that students’ particular situations became known:
While we were living in the old army huts, before the married students accommodation was built, Alison gave birth to our first child Pamela. Born 1968 it was in the middle of winter, and at that time men had to use the student bathroom, and ladies had to use a separate bathroom – both some distance from our three unheated rooms in the army huts. Leon and Mildred kindly invited Alison to use their heated kitchen in their upstairs unit, to bathe Pamela. This lasted for many months until the new married students’ accommodation was built. We particularly valued this sensitive and loving expression of care for us, especially as we had no relatives living in Melbourne at the time.43
The welfare of theological and secular students concerned Leon. In particular, the cold damp weather of July and August was a consistent problem in Melbourne. Each year, ‘second-term depression’ set in among the students. Leon and the staff, both academic and administrative, had their pastoral care work cut out to keep the students, mostly single in Leon’s first ten years as principal, motivated and positive.
Leon’s 1967 letter to the students noted life’s rapid progress and applauded it. He reminded the students that the human spirit, while seeking progress, is not content with just progress: ‘Some things like love never change. Or for that matter evil and cruelty … It still is worth making our best effort in life, mindful that Christ’s atoning death is the effectual means of overcoming evil and that those who trust him manifest qualities of life and faith and hope which are relevant to the modern situation.’44
The Next Billy Graham Crusade
In 1967, Leon, with others, was instrumental in setting up the Evangelical Alliance Relief Fund in Australia (TEAR). The story goes that Leon took a bank note out of his pocket and placed it on the board table at an Evangelical Alliance Board Victoria meeting, of which he was the chair,45 thereby making the first donation to the Relief Fund. Bayston commented: ‘Leon claimed credit for TEAR Fund but I think it was an exaggeration. Others worked out the Constitution. It became an arm of the Victorian Alliance and later a wing of Australian Evangelical Alliance. Leon was the TEAR Chair so in that sense he could claim credit.’46 Later that year SU asked him to prepare some Bible study notes on Timothy to James for publication. He indicated in early January 1968 that he would do it, but was busy writing the final sections of his books on John, Revelation and the Doctrine of God.47 He managed to complete the SU book by April 1968, well ahead of his deadline.48
Back in 1966, the American Dan Piatt had approached Leon to discuss the possibility of another Graham crusade in Australia and, beginning in 1967, Leon chaired the Graham crusade committee in Melbourne and co-chaired the Church of England committee to encourage local Anglican participation.49 Plans were made to hold the crusade in Sydney in 1968 and Melbourne in 1969. One minister fondly recalled the meetings that Leon chaired:
Leon was the Chair of the committee and I was a lowly member representing youth matters. This committee was full of evangelical luminaries and heavy hitters and I remember the first meeting he chaired; he announced at the beginning that the meeting would finish sharp at 10.00 pm. A few seconds before 10.00 pm some important person was in full flight, Leon rose to his feet and said ‘Gentlemen I shall now close in prayer’. The dumbfounded speaker stood there with his mouth open as Leon prayed and then left the chair. From then on everyone wound up very promptly before the guillotine fell! Very effective. He disliked committee meetings that rambled on.50
For the Sydney crusade, Leon travelled north and gave a paper to the Christians assembled for training on ‘The Call to Christian Ministry’. The talk incorporated the need for all Christians in any occupation to know God’s specific call and be willing to share God’s good news. The Melbourne crusade was shorter in duration than the one in 1959 and ran from 14 to 23 March 1969. Leon was on leave in America during the Melbourne crusade, but his small date diary recorded his pleasure on hearing how well it was going.51
Leave in America
On 6 December 1968, Leon and Mildred went on leave to America. Leon had been awarded a Fulbright Scholarship to work at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (TEDS) and Fuller for part of 1969.
Trinity had offered Leon a position back in 1963 but he had decided to return to Ridley. TEDS had a Scandinavian background and over 115 years had evolved into an influential evangelical institution with a reputation for rigorous scholarship and a wide reach. While at TEDS, Leon lectured on the New Testament and John.
On 13 March 1969, Leon and Mildred drove west from Chicago along Route 66 to Pasadena,52 reaching Fuller on 22 March. At Fuller, Leon lectured on the atonement and on Romans. While at Fuller, Leon wrote numerous articles, including some twenty for the New Bible Dictionary, and finished his commentary on The Revelation of St John. He also accepted speaking invitations to Wheaton, Moody, Dallas, Columbia, Calvin Seminary and in Boston.
When there was a chance to do so, Leon and Mildred would go driving on Thursdays. Some days they would cross Los Angeles from Pasadena to Long Beach. On other days they travelled to wherever they fancied. The trouble was that Leon was an appalling driver. On one occasion, he was stopped on an interstate by a police officer who asked him why he was driving so slowly. Much to Mildred’s amusement, the officer threatened to fine Leon if he did not keep closer to the speed limit. Leon also fuelled his developing passion for baseball, managing to attend several games at Anaheim Stadium. Still in his possession at the end of his life were two Los Angeles Dodgers match-day programmes. Both were 1969 Official Dodger Scorecard twenty-five-cent programmes. These forty-page black-and-white publications with splashes of blue or red had Leon’s handwritten teams on the blank middle-page scorecards.
Midway through 1969, Leon took part in some translation work for the New International Version of the Bible, spoke at a conference at Laity Lodge and taught at Pensacola Institute’s summer programme.53 He was impressed with the resolve of summer programme participants to help recent Hurricane Camille victims through a special collection netting US$3,500. Returning to California, he and Mildred attended a Visiting Fulbright Scholars’ October Dinner at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Throughout this time, Leon continued to write and correspond with Ronald Inchley of IVP, England. Mostly it was about the progress of Leon’s manuscripts, with occasional personal reflections. On one occasion, sending news that The Gospel According to John was being typed out, Leon added that he was praying for Inchley every day.54
Leon had also written to Inchley suggesting the necessity of a book on ‘Authority and Scripture’. He stated that while the church at large was not that concerned about this topic, evangelicals were, and he recounted the differences of opinion observed at the 1966 Boston Conference. Leon felt that someone needed to write a definitive treatment of the issues of inerrancy, meaning and relevance.55 Eventually he wrote I Believe in Revelation in the ‘I Believe’ series.56 By starting with how God reveals himself to humanity, Leon then moved to a consideration of where God speaks and acts in Scripture and life. He later mused with Inchley about the late arrival of his royalties statement and noted that it was connected to the introduction of computers. ‘I am fascinated to see how in many directions in life the introduction of the computer has slowed things down. Such, I guess, is progress.’57 On another occasion, after Inchley asked Leon when IVP could expect to hear from him about a certain matter, Leon replied, ‘Ronald, Ronald’, and pointed out the irony of a publisher asking the question ‘when?’ about anything. Later to Inchley, ‘I congratulate you on the way you are persuading the public to buy my unworthy scribblings.’58
On 12 November, Leon received an unsolicited invitation to apply for the position of principal at St John’s Durham. After five years at Ridley, Leon had already entertained thoughts about leaving: the Cambridge research reserves had been exhausted and he was not, in his assessment, getting much writing done. He shared his concerns with IVP’s Inchley in England, telling him that he was inclined to consider Durham.59 He submitted an application three days after the offer came but was not sure if he could or should accept the position. Pondering the invitation raised the question: was it worth moving just for the sake of a bit more writing time? Letters arrived from Australia. The most important was from George Pearson, a missionary strategist and clergyman, who got wind of Leon’s disquiet and urged Leon to stay at Ridley. Leon respected Pearson’s60 opinion and withdrew his application. When Leon finished at Fuller, the John class erupted into spontaneous applause at the end of the last lecture, much to his surprise. On 13 December, he and Mildred sailed from Long Beach and berthed in Sydney in early January 1970.
Home Again
Back at Ridley, Leon’s pattern of work included the Ridley meetings plus Bishopscourt with Woods, the Melbourne College of Divinity, the Australian College of Theology (ACT), the Heads of Colleges, and by the late 1970s the Melbourne University Council.
Throughout this time, Leon kept up his commitments to fifteen other bodies and groups. The most time-demanding were the Evangelical Alliance, the Toorak Convention, the Evangelical Fellowship of the Anglican Communion Australia, SU Victoria and Australia, IVF groups, the Tyndale Fellowship, the Doctrine Commission of the Anglican Church, the Appellate Tribunal and Anglican–Roman Catholic joint meetings.
In addition to preaching and visiting, he continued to do translation work for the New International Version of the Bible, wrote regular editorial and occasional articles for Christianity Today and other publications, and wrote book reviews. His book writing continued in his own writing time while at Ridley and when he was away on teaching trips, and in the 1970s another six books appeared. One was a small booklet, This Is the Testimony, on the idea of witness, which discussed his view of evidence in the New Testament.61 Not widely disseminated, it nevertheless strengthened those who bought or received it. The remaining books were two major commentaries on John and Luke, the important I Believe in Revelation volume and a book on the Holy Spirit.62
On top of all the tasks required of the principal, Leon’s administrative commitments continued to increase. More than once he was unable to do any writing during the first term of the year. The growing administrative burden now weighed heavily on Leon. He had kept his frustration at bay for some years, but like a territorial wombat the administration took up permanent residence in his life and kept growing. He now craved freedom from administration and confessed in letters to friends how much he still missed Tyndale House. Leon’s unsettled state put Mildred on edge too. However, a solution was not found until the mid-1970s. In the meantime, Leon got on with his job with his typical discipline and focus.
David Williams, who observed Leon at work more closely than perhaps anyone besides Mildred, recalled Leon’s iron discipline and mechanical timeliness with mixed emotions:
I had a little ‘office’ in the porch near the Cumnock stairs on the Walker St side. It was in off under the stairs – and I’d be working there. Then you’d hear dut … dut … dut … dut … dut … as Leon went up the stairs, the toilet would flush, and then down he’d come. And you could set your clock by this, say at 9.00 pm. Precisely the same moment every night … It used to grate after a while – waiting for him!63
Leon’s discipline is notable, and it is worth a closer look at his style and pattern of work. The basis was a time of personal Bible reading. Sometimes he used a commentary or notes. At that time he also prayed. He prayed for many people consistently. Once a person or cause was on the list, they remained on it. His pattern was to work solidly when it was work time, never wasting a minute, and getting the day’s work done as quickly and efficiently as he could. He worked for fifty-five minutes at a time then took a five-minute break, and he kept the door open for visitors. He maintained his work pattern at every stage of life as far as possible, even when he and Mildred were travelling.
Leon never refused an invitation to contribute a study or a paper unless the topic was completely out of his areas of expertise. At any one time he could be preparing radio broadcasts, sermons, Bible study notes, interview notes, papers for conferences, journal articles of various length for general or academic publication, and book chapters plus at least one major project such as the commentary on John.
Leon’s efforts to improve the college were paying dividends. One sign was college life. In reading the responses to a survey for exiting students, Leon was pleased to read that they had appreciated the ‘fellowship’ and ‘caring community’ at Ridley.64 Another sign was the launch of a second appeal during his time as principal, this time to build a proper dining-hall and adequate library.
Another positive sign was the increasing numbers of prospective theology students that came to Leon for advice. He would allocate each one an interview, answer questions about the college and encourage them to seek God’s call for their life before coming to Ridley. He also encouraged young ministers to pursue further study opportunities. As one recalled: ‘He was very encouraging of me going to Fuller for a summer school and wrote a kind letter of introduction to the then President to assure me a place. It was a great experience that significantly shaped my ministry.’65
Love and Truth in Mission
Normal commitments took Leon to Easter of 1970, when he appeared on the ABC television programme, This Day Tonight.66 At the other end of the scale he continued to encourage the Ridley sporting teams. Being a small college, it seldom won against bigger colleges. In early May at Melbourne University’s main oval, the Ridley team was short on athleticism, but they had the most precise timekeeper one could want in Leon.
Not long after, Leon flew to Manila to give studies at the Manila Congress on Evangelism, which took place from 12 to 20 May at the Faith Academy, Cainta, Rizal.67 He upgraded his seat to first class for an additional fee so that he could do more work on the flight. It was the first time in the history of evangelical Christianity in the Philippines that such a conference on evangelism was held. Some five hundred church leaders attended, double the number expected.68 It was hoped that the five-year plan of evangelism to be launched would facilitate in-depth evangelism across the archipelago of islands and that Billy Graham would visit for a national crusade during that period.69 Leon had been invited to give seven forty-minute daily Bible studies to anchor the conference and spoke on ‘The Missionary Message of Acts’ with selections from Acts 1 – 13.
Leon’s first study (Acts 1) began with his observation that the early church, while waiting, appeared to be doing nothing. This allowed him to develop the idea of obedience in doing whatever God required. The atoning work of Christ was finished and so the disciples waited for the Holy Spirit. We are called to do what we can by way of extensive prayer and preparation. He stressed again and again that the work of evangelism is God’s, the power is God’s and we, though seemingly unimportant in the world, are to be the witnesses of God’s good news.
On Day 2 (Acts 2), Leon reminded the participants that the church did not appear to be a going concern until the Spirit of God came down upon the group of believers. Leon directed attention to the inclusive nature of the Spirit in Peter’s speech – sons and daughters, young and old, slaves despised in the ancient world and free citizens all receive the Spirit. As at Pentecost some mocked, so some will mock the church today – we are in good company. Furthermore, he asserted that God cannot be defeated by the evil deeds of people. Leon then linked the salvation of redemption to the reception of the Holy Spirit – that is, you cannot have the one without the other. He noted that the Holy Spirit brought conviction within people and there was a response of genuine repentance, conversion and baptism. It is the Spirit of God who does the transforming work in a non-Christian’s life. He compared the 120 gathered believers of Acts 1 with the crowd of three thousand converted on the day of Pentecost through the work of the Holy Spirit, noting the difference the Spirit made – the same Spirit who works in us.
On Day 3 (Acts 3), Leon discussed how the healing of a lame man was of a kind not normally reported in the ancient world and he linked this powerful healing to the spiritual healing all need. He lamented the spiritual reality that the Prince of Life was killed, but God reversed the verdict and brought life in raising Jesus. Live by the name of Jesus, by all that he achieved in his atonement and by all that he stands for now. Lovingly call people to repentance, to the radical renewal of turning back to God. He referred to the certainty of the second coming but was unwilling to tie himself to one particular interpretation of the end times.70 Most importantly, God was in control.
On Day 4 (Acts 6 – 7) Leon spoke about the persecuted church and how the message of the gospel and the messenger are often rejected. God sent his messengers time and time again, but the people rejected them. When Stephen was killed, Leon noted how he had no hatred in his heart and prayed, ‘Lord, do not let this sin stand against them.’71 This prayer graphically illustrates the difference that Christianity makes and Leon urged his listeners to exhibit the same Christ-like spirit.
On Day 5 (Acts 8), Leon showed how the scattering of the persecuted Christians helped the cause of proclamation. God used the sin of those bringing persecution to achieve his purposes. He also drew attention to the dramatic change in those saved from demon possession and the subsequent joy they experienced. In terms of the delicate issue of those who believed but had yet to receive the Spirit, he favoured a view that they had received the Spirit to be called believers, for without the activity of the Spirit a person is not a Christian at all, but here was evidence of further activity of the Spirit. He returned to the value of obedience to the Holy Spirit, clearly seen in the story of Philip and the Ethiopian. True evangelists keep moving on to do the work of sharing the good news wherever the Spirit leads them.
On Day 6 (Acts 9), Leon looked at the converting church through the conversion of Saul. He maintained that the church is important in directing people to their need for conversion and in praying God will bring it about. Conversion, he maintained, is not necessarily apparent to those in the world. He contrasted the apostle with the lowly Ananias to encourage the ordinary listener that God can use us. Lessons from Paul’s early days also show us ways of advancing the faith. Just as Paul found companions at Damascus, so also Christians need fellowship to do God’s work over the long term. We also need to proclaim the Jesus who can save, from as much or as little as we know, not waiting to be perfect: ‘None else and none less can meet the deep needs of the heart of man.’72 Lastly, just as persecution followed Paul, pressure will be exerted on us when the faith cannot be refuted in other ways.
Leon’s final study on Day 7 (Acts 13) concerned the missionary church. This is not just a church sending out people, but the work of the Holy Spirit. In detail, Leon worked through the sermon Paul gave in Antioch. He noted that Christ was placed on a ‘tree’ (Acts 13:29) to show us that God’s curse for us has been dealt with by Christ. He then reminded his listeners that the grace of God was effective in gospel work. However, he warned, not all will accept the good news. Where it is accepted, there is joy, belief and eternal life, and God is glorified. He concluded his seven talks by saying that ‘the joy the world never gave the world can never take away’.73
Over seven days, Leon took the five hundred congress attendees through a massive amount of material. This experience in Asia was yet another facet of his engagement with love and truth in a world wider than academia, and it was one that would expand his sphere of influence in the coming years.