296
tions of nature in their endless variety are to him
a source of constant delight, of wonder and joy.
In seeking to uncover the Tao of one’s own
nature many Taoists are led into a kind of escapism.
They try to contract out of society and refuse
public responsibility. The search for union with
Tao leads the Taoist into the realm of mystical
religion. One finds in mysticism a certain illogi-
cality and inconsistency. Ultimate reality, whether
you call it God, Tao, Brahman or Nirvana, is
recognized as unknowable, the wholly other’.
For the Taoist, the Tao that can be named is not
the Absolute Tao, yet the goal of the Taoist’s
mystic striving, through trance, through interior
vision, in ecstasy, is this unattainable, unknowable
Tao. He returns again and again to the fount of
Gerhard von Rad—A Personal Memoir
BY PROFESSOR M. E. ANDREW, KNOX
GERHARD vONRAD, the great Old Testament
theologian, died on 3ist October 1971, just a few
days after his seventieth birthday and the pre-
sentation of his Fesischrift for that occasion. He
was probably best known in English-speaking
countries for his commentary on Genesis, and
among specialists at least, for his Old Testament
theology. But I do not have the impression that
he ever had a particularly ’ good press ’ in these
countries, or was very well known personally. He
was not an avid attender of conferences, and
certainly never sought publicity. He was, how-
ever, awarded honorary doctorates by the Univ-
ersities of Glasgow and Wales in 1953 and 1964,
and was also visiting professor at Princeton in
i96o-6i.
Gerhard von Rad was born on 2ist October 1901
in Nuremberg, the son of a doctor. He studied
first at Erlangen, still in his native Franconia, but
then moved into Swabia to Tubingen. It is inter-
esting to note that he knew Dietrich Bonhoeffer at
this time. He married in 1928 and had three
children. His first academic post was as a lecturer
at Leipzig, and he first became professor at Jena,
both cities now in the German Democratic Re-
public. I remember him in the late fifties actually
calling it by that name at a time when it was ’ bad
form ’ to do so, but I remember too that, after a
visit there, he called it a sad business. He evidently
found the barriers put up between the west and
the areas of his first teaching activity not only
academically but also personally and nationally
distressing.
In 194o at Jena, as Eberhard Bethge relates in
his biography of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, von Rad
Taoist inspiration, the Tao Tg Cling, and there he
reads :
There is something formlessly fashioned, that existed
before heaven and earth, without sound, without
substance, dependent on nothing, unchanging, all
pervading, unfailing. One might think of it as the
mother of all under heaven. Its true name we do not
know ; Tao is the by-name we give to it (ch. 25).
To return to the root is repose ; it is called going
back to one’s destiny. Going back to one’s destiny is to
find the Eternal Law. To know the Eternal Law is
Enlightenment.... He who knows the Eternal Law is
tolerant ; being tolerant, he is impartial ; being
impartial, he is kingly ; being kingly, he is in accord
with Heaven ; being in accord with Heaven is to be in
Tao ; being in Tao, he is eternal, and though his body
ceases he is not destroyed (ch. 16).
COLLEGE, DUNEDIN, NEW ZEALAND
offered the latter a house to live in during a difficult
period. I cannot recall ever hearing von Rad
speak of the war at all. I do seem to remember
someone once making a remark which suggested
that he was compulsorily retired from his Chair
and sent to an out-of-the-way parish somewhere.
What I do clearly remember is that he spoke with
warm gratitude of the way in which H. H. Rowley
had helped German scholars after the war.
In ig45, von Rad went as professor to G6ttingen,
and then in 1949, to Heidelberg, the university
with which he will always be associated. I was a
doctoral student of his there from 1957-59 while
he was at the height of his powers. It was also a
prime period both for the city and the theological
faculty of the university. It was long enough after
1945 for the worst struggles of the post-war period
to have been put behind, and in any case the old
city, always dominated of course by the castle to
which many visitors streamed, had been left
largely intact, and still existed as a fairly well-
defined unit. In the town, one had the feeling of
being at the centre of a business and tourist
activity, but it was not yet too crowded. The
theological faculty not only had von Rad, but also
(to mention just a few) Edmund Schlink, the
systematic theologian and well-known ecumenist ;
Heinrich Bornkamm, the eminent Luther scholar ;
his brother Giinther, the conscientious and friendly
New Testament scholar ; and Hans von Campen-
hausen, the boisterous church historian from the
Baltic lands. The students who had come to make
up the largest protestant faculty in Germany, if
not in Europe, came not only from all over
Germany but also from all parts of the world-

from Iceland to New Zealand and from America to
Japan. Commonwealth students of both Asian
and European descent once talked of forming a
cricket club, but the idea foundered on the failure
to obtain equipment. Thus I never saw a cricket
match in Heidelberg, though I did once see a game
of rugby.
Despite Heidelberg’s image, however (though I
never met a native who knew anything about the
student prince), most of the students, whether
German or foreign, were there to work academically.
My time at a New Zealand university, from 1950-
1956, had hardly been one of intense student life,
but I was still amazed at how little interest
students at Heidelberg took in politics, sport or
indeed anything much else but their own work.
The student corporations and other societies ex-
isted, but one was scarcely aware of them. I do
remember at least one demonstration in which
empty chairs were carried around to show that
some professorial vacancies were not being filled,
and certainly the conditions which were part of the
reason for the later student unrest were already
present to some degree, but such matters were
certainly not a live issue at the time. The emphasis
on work could lead to some rather arid academism
and to over-specialization, but on the other hand,
there was plenty of opportunity for intensive work
which was also fruitful.
Going to university lectures was certainly a part
of this work. They were attended by large
numbers, despite the fact that they were a very
solid fifty minutes, or even a double period with or
without a break in the middle. They started at
8 a.m. (or even 7 a.m. in the summer), but von Rad
had the choice time, 9 o’clock, and moreover
he always had the auditorium maximum ’ for his
main lecture course. I do not remember seeing any
lectures which regularly attracted such crowds :
there were between four and five hundred present,
including non-theologians and visitors from abroad
passing through. You had to be early if you wanted
a seat near the front. Those
sitting on one side
could look down the corridor leading to the
auditorium, and as soon as von Rad appeared,
bearing perhaps rather heavily but still very pur-
posively towards the door, an applause, which took
the form of knocking on the desks with the
knuckles, broke out and did not die down until he
was at the lectern and ready to
begin. I have no
memory of him ever receiving the shame of the
feet which signified disapproval. It was certainly
not that he himself sought popularity. On one
occasion when he mentioned that he would have
to cancel a lecture because he had been invited to
lecture in a neighbouring country and received
applause for this, he dismissed it with an im-
297
patient, but obviously genuine gesture. It was
characteristic of his concern for the particular
matter in hand : the one at that time happened
to be simply the cancellation of a lecture. He was
impatient with ceremony of any kind. At one
university function where the ceremony was some-
what overdone, I saw him continually wriggling
around in his seat, looking everywhere but where
the ceremony was taking place, and even trying
to make out the titles of books on a wall which
was just a little too far away. He was sensitive to
the right things being done at the right time and
place, and the sensitivity could on occasion be
applied too personally. In one lecture he made a
remark which was meant seriously, but it was mis-
understood as somewhat questionable humour, and
he looked up, hurt, with a remark like That’s
enough of that ’, and dropped that topic com-
pletely to go on to another one.
But these were just one or two incidents over a
period of three years. The completely dominant
feature of the lectures was one of smootitness, not
merely in the sense of lack of incidents, but much
more in the sense that von Rad was consistently
capable of giving lectures which were rounded
wholes. He could finish on a note which was a
conclusion but which at the same time left you
thinking. Von Rad himself obviously went on
thinking too. Like the Old Testament itself, he
was not rigidly bound to his own form and content
(beautiful as they often were), but, when starting a
new lecture, he would always give a recapitulation
of some of the salient points of the last one ; this
was not just a summary, but a demonstration that
he had been re-working it in his mind in the mean-
time, that he was concerned to take up the com-
munication process again in a way which might be
more effective than it was before. I did not use
the word ’ beautiful ’ above lightly ; there was an
individual literary style in von Rad’s lectures.
The words were carefuliy chosen, often vigorous
and original in combination. The sentence struc-
ture was necessarily simple, but always pur-
not
posively pressing towards a definite goal into which
even a foreigner with a good knowledge of German
could become completely absorbed. The lectures
were divided into clearly distinguishable sections,
but each led on to the next, and all fitted into a
whole. The literary style can of course also be
discerned in his writings, certainly in parts of the
Old Testament theology, but also in smaller com-
pass, for example, in the little book on the Story of
Joseph.
Gerhard von Rad also had more generally artistic
interests. One of them puzzled me a little at the
time : he was very fond of Galsworthy. But this
may have been because of his fondness for tradition,
298
his concern for the fortunes of great families even
though he waswell aware that they were breaking
up. I was not at all puzzled, however, when I saw
him one evening standing at the front of the town
hall in Heidelberg, totally lost in his applause for a
Beethoven performance by ~Vilhelm Kempff, a
man only a little older than himself, and in no
hurry whatsoever to leave, as he was from some
functions. He also read the German poet H61derlin
with deep appreciation, and I remember a sermon
von Rad preached in the university church where
he was successful both in expressing awe for
Holderlin’s world of the gods separated from man,
and in expressing a sharp contrast between this
and an essential of the Old Testament. The sermon
was on Dt 2929: The secret things belong to the
Lord our God ; but the things that are revealed
belong to us and to our children for ever ...’. Von
Rad may have had an awe for ’ the secret things ’,
but there was no doubt that his emphatic emphasis
was on ’the things that are revealed ’.
And he could reveal things to an audience which
was wider than that of the lecture room. His
sermons were an event which many who do not
regularly go to the university church did not like
to miss. There was a form in his sermons too, but
also a method of communication which was more
popular. He could introduce a matter which was
likely to be difficult for more conservative hearers
with a homely phrase which was not just a trick
but which, in speaking the living language of his
hearers, expressed a desire to be involved with
them in the difficulty and not just pontificate down
to them. He also gave Bible studies to the
equivalent of the Student Christian Movement,
and a student once told me that one of these, on
Jeremiah’s letter to the exiles (chap. 29), was ’ a
real treat’. It was anything but light-weight, yet
you could really enjoy it at the same time.
But von Rad also reached a wider audience in his
lectures as well, at least indirectly. The time I was
in Heidelberg was the formative period of his Old
Testament theology and, when this was published,
it was read not only by specialists and by theo-
logians in general but also by educated people of
all kinds. Something of this service to a wide
public was perhaps reflected in the fact that,
besides the honorary doctorates already mentioned
and those from the Universities of Leipzig and
Lund, he was also awarded the Federal Republic
of Germany’s Cross of Merit with Star and the
Order Pour le M6rite (Peace Class). It was
certainly not the case, however, that his work was
positively received by everyone in Germany. On
the contrary, it was the cause of a heated and
lengthy controversy. One scholar went as far as
to write that von Rad’s work was nothing less than
a catastrophe for students and ministers. But
despite disagreement, von Rad could not be
ignored in Germany ; even those who disagreed
violently knew that they had to enter into intense
discussion with him. It was this which did not
happen, at least to anything like the same degree,
in English-speaking countries. To a certain extent
this was only to be expected ; von Rad was not
on the same scene. To a certain extent too it will
have been because English speakers were even less
prepared than Germans were for an Old Testament
theology which was not constructed as a more or
less traditional system, but which developed a
theology, almost theologies, of various traditions
of Israel, differentiating sharply between the
traditions, and facing the problem of the dis-
crepancies between the history of Israel and her
faith-the matters which caused the controversy
in Germany. But I wonder whether the lack of
intense interest in English-speaking countries was
not mainly because of a reserve to what we know
as ’ form criticism ’. There does still appear to be
an attitude which regards this as only negative, as
out to destroy the historical basis of faith. The
very English term itself has its dubious aspects ;
the German word Formgeschichte means literally
’ form history ’ rather than ’ form criticism ’,
though the German term is not necessarily entirely
satisfactory either. But it gives an indication at
least that the method does have a historical
intention : that of defining a form as expressing a
certain content within a particular situation of
life, which was lived by the Israelites, even if it
does not turn out to be exactly the same as in the
traditional presentation of Israel’s history.
In any case there is no doubt that von Rad’s theo-
logy was form critical ’. It stemmed ultimately
from an earlier work on The Form Critical Problem
of tlae Hexateuch which was long out of print and
became almost a legendarily elusive work, the title
of which most scholars had seen many times, but
which they had often not been able to read. John
Bright writes in 1956 on p. 41, note 2 of his Early
Israel in Recent Histoyy Writing : I have never
been able to secure a copy of this book, so know it
only at secondhand ’. And then when an English
translation finally appeared, the crucial word was
left out of the title and it became simply The
Pyobleyn of the Hexateuch. I am reticent about the
following question because it may be over simplified
and because English language publishers like to sell
more of their books than German publishers
expect
to, but I cannot repress it : does this reflect a
schizophrenia on our part of desiring to be scholars
and yet at the same time of wanting to persuade
ourselves and others that we are not ? At any rate
the omitted word was crucial, because von Rad’s

express aim in this book was to proceed from the
individual forms of which the Hexateuch is com-
to the question of the final form of the work
posed
totality. Thus, for him, the ’ form critical ’
in its
approach did not imply a limitation to isolated
forms-a criticism sometimes rightly made of the
method-but had as its intention the use of
intensive examination of detail for the purpose of
building up connexions. This was the way in
which, whether in lectures or in his writings, von
Rad had the ability to hold you : there was the
drive towards the living if not systematic whole,
which could not be done without exposing the
fabric of the detail of specific faith which was
inextricably bound up with particular people,
times and events. The living world of the Old
Testament with all its continuity and vicissitudes
was actualized with an intensity and cohesiveness
which I have not found elsewhere. Like the Old
Testament itself, von Rad’s work was based on
form, but it was spared from the danger of rigidity
by being free to develop in the directions which the
material itself prescribed in being continually
re-adapted in new situations.
I think that von Rad did see a difference between
his own work in this respect and that of most
English-speaking scholars, though he did it with
reticence and with the greatest respect for their
own particular merits. He seemed to think that
they were too general in their approach without
enough attention to and discipline by difference in
detail within the Old Testament. When I once
expressed admiration for one such scholar only
because he had written a lot, he just smiled and
said, ’ Yes, perhaps too much ’. When he wrote in
a reference he gave me that I had familiarized
myself with the issues of our modern biblical
scholarship, I am sure he had particularly form
criticism ’ in mind. This emphasis was also
expressed in general when he would not let me do
a dissertation on ’ The Hermeneutics of the Old
Testament ’ but set me to trace the development
of a particular form. In the long run I have
probably been better equipped to deal with ques-
tions of interpretation because I did this. He was
amazed when another foreign student told him that
his dissertation topic was just a book from the Old
Testament. He could not understand how you
could get anywhere without having a theyne. In
the ’ rigorosum ’, the oral examination for the
doctorate, his questions to me circled for a good
part around the sanctuaries of Israel and the
particular traditions attached to them, though he
was also characteristically concerned about how
they came together and their wider significance.
The attention to detail and simultaneous enthu-
siasm for a theme was evident not only in von
299
Rad’s lectures and sermons but also in his seminars.
His main one, like those of most other professors,
was far too large, having as many as a hundred
students, though some of these were observers and
sat at the back. But even under these unsatis-
factory conditions, von Rad was able to maintain
a lively presentation and to involve a large number
of participants even if he could not do it for every-
one. The one and a half hours passed very quickly.
In any case, he usually had a smaller seminar of
about fifteen members for more senior students,
and was always willing to let the foreigners par-
ticipate in these even though they usually con-
tinued to make very little contribution. The sort
of thing which could happen in these was for a
stranger to come suddenly in the door about half
way through, announce himself as a Brazilian
lecturer in Old Testament and ask for permission
to take part. It was immediately granted. In
one semester at least, von Rad also had a special
seminar at his house for his foreign students from
about seven or eight countries. After giving us
coffee, cake and cigars, he did his best to get us
talking but was usually forced to remain rather
puzzled at our sluggishness.
There was one feature of his work in which he
was not intensive and that was as a doctoral
supervisor. He usually only gave an indication of
the kind of thing he wanted you to do in one or
two concise sentences. On the other hand, no
matter how much rubbish was given him, he always
read it, and then indicated briefly the method of
approaching the subject differently. This was
characteristic of him as a person : he was the
opposite of effusive, but he was always willing to
see you and try to start things going again. There
was no question of his friendship for anyone who
might turn up from anywhere. The second day I
was in Heidelberg I rang von Rad with some
trepidation, and though he had forgotten that I
had written to him and also that he had answered
my letter, he immediately invited me to lunch the
very next day. This was the first of many such
occasions at which Frau von Rad was also always
present with a quiet but warmly friendly manner.
There was no doubt about von Rad’s friendship for
and interest in people wherever they came from.
He was concerned, for example, about the place I
was living in, and went to the trouble of asking an
Australian student of his what he thought about
it. After lunch he would take you up to his study
and talk for quite a long time. He was also quite
ready to lend his books, even to an almost total
stranger. By doing this he had lost a lot over the
years, and when I first knew him, did not even
possess a copy of his own long out of print Form
Critical Problem of the Hexateuch. It was possible
300
to annoy him slightly by interrupting his routine.
I once committed the cardinal sin of ringing him
early in the afternoon and was told he was still
having his midday rest. But the next time he saw
me he asked, only a little awkwardly, if I wished
to see him. Anyway he got his own back on me
some years later when I returned to Germany by
making we go to bed after lunch before going out
for a brisk walk with him and his dog and returning
for coffee and more talk.
There was thus also a ’ form ’ to his conduct and
appreciation of life. He could speak almost with
awe not only of his own academic teachers (Ernst
Sellin, for example, was ’ the old master ’) but also
of long-established families in general. But, at the
same time, he was quite free to accept a rather raw
’
colonial ’ boy who, at that time at least, had little
appreciation of what meant so much to him. Nor
did the fact that his language in lectures and in
writings was so choice mean that he was not free
to use not just homely expressions but quite earthy
ones in conversation. I once heard him say of
someone that ’ Er hat tuchtig in die Suppe
gespuckt ’ (’ he spat in the soup with a vengeance ’
which means, I presume, something like he threw
a spanner in the works ’). Some people might have
thought this a bit coarse, but if you knew him, it
was just a natural part of his whole nature.
Because of his particular personal and academic
background, von Rad was perhaps just a little sad
in his last years at the restlessness among theo-
From Desk to
The Junior Church
The Sweet Pea Chancel
BY THE REVEREND JOHN R. GRAY, V.R.D., B.D.,
TH.M., DUNBLANE CATHEDRAL
IN the Borders of Scotland and England there is a
lovely parish called Sprowston, and in the middle
of the parish there is a little parish church.
In 19II, the minister of the parish was the
Reverend Denholm Frazer. At that time the
church was just a very plain oblong building. The
minister thought the church would look far nicer if
it had a little chancel for the Communion Table to
stand in. When he found out how much it would
cost, however, he was very depressed, because it
was a lot of money and the people of
Sprowston
did not have very much money.
When Mr. Frazer wasn’t visiting or preaching,
he used to work in his garden. He liked growing
flowers best, and most of all he liked to grow
sweet peas. One day a friend came in with a copy
of the Daily 1’.1 ail, in which there was news of a
logians. In this he was possibly partly right and
partly wrong. But he needed to have no fears
that his tradition would not be carried on. When
I try to think what von Rad meant particularly to
one who came from so far away and from a country
with little tradition, I find that it was, as well as
the multiplicity of all his individual insights,
learning to know where he came from but also
realizing that he was offering something which
could continue to be worked on in the future. The
formation of ’ schools ’ has its problems, but few
of von Rad’s pupils, who have taught Old Testa-
ment in at least four of the five continents, have
followed their teacher’s ways in a merely rigid
manner. He gave a sense of belonging somewhere
which went far beyond mere agreement or dis-
agreement in points of detail. There was a par-
ticularity about him which was free to expand.
The text chosen for his obituary card was from
Ps 3 18 : ’ You have set my feet in a broad place ’.
NOTE : Gerhard von Rad’s works mentioned
above are :
Das formgeschiclatliche Pyobleyra des Hexateuchs,
Stuttgart, 1938. (Eng. Tr., The Problem of the
Hexateuch and Other Essays, Edinburgh, 1966.)
Das erste Bucla Mose, G6ttingen, 1949-53. (Eng.
Tr., Genesis, London, ig6i).
Die josephsgeschichte, Neukirchen, 1954.
Tlaeologie des Alten Testaments, Munich, vol. I,
155 ; vol. II, 1960. (Eng. Tr., Old Testament
Tlaeology, Edinburgh, vol. I, I962 ; vol. II, 1965.)
Pulpit
competition for the best sweet peas in Great
Britain. The friend told Mr. Frazer that he should
enter. The minister laughed. He didn’t think he
could possibly win the competition, since there
would be so many very clever, professional
gardeners near London competing. However, he
was persuaded to have a try. Finally, he sent two
bunches all the way to London.
But he wasn’t the only gardener who thought
he’d have a try. There were no fewer than 38,000
bunches of sweet peas from all over Britain ! No
names were on the flowers-just numbers. The
judges worked away and after a few days they had
chosen the three best bunches. The first would
get a prize of ~1,000, the second £100 and the third
~50. When they opened the numbered envelopes
in which were the names of the competitors, they
discovered that the ist and the 3rd had come from
Sprowston Manse. A telegram was sent off, telling
Mr. Frazer of his win. When the post-mistress
delivered it, she was so excited that she fell down
in a faint!