Full Text for CTM Theological Observer 2-1 (Text)

ie ptO- teftantifdjen @5eftenfitdjen bon @'it. 20uHl, follJeit fie in ber Metropolitan Church Federation of St. Louis bedteten finb, fotberlen au cinet liefon- beren mefotmationiSfeiet am 2. mobemliet b. ~. aUf. ~n bem .2ofaIlilatt The Oh1L1'ch at W01'k ljiet cB: "Reformation Day this year takes on a special significance in view of the fact that this is the four-hundredth anniversary of the issuing of the Augsburg Confession. That confession embodied the consensus of opinion of those who had discovered the sig- nificance of Martin Luther's entrance upon the freer domain of obedience to the Scriptures under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. What thus happened foul' hundred year ago has become momentous in the history of the world, has profoundly affectcd all thc generations since that day, and has left its mark indelibly upon human institutions." mUf bicfeB allgemein ge'f)aftene .200 ber mefotmation bet ~itdje butdj .2utljetB Stlienft fofgte nun abet biefer @5djful3paragraplj, 1lJ0rin aUf cine llJilnfdjenBllJette 1SottbHbung bciS .2utljettulllB ljingelt1iefen wit:b: "It is appropriate that, with the spiritual meaning of such occurrences in our minds, we should obscrve this day this year with particular thankfulness and with a re- newal of devotion to the ideals, pcrhaps not fully seen then by Luther and his associates, which come closcr to the mind and heart of Jesus Christ, our Lord." StlaiS iff sart awgebrilcH. @linaeTl)eiten llJerben nldjt genannt. . Stlanegen ljalien einigc (s)!ieber bet amerifanifdj.rutljerifdjen SHtdje in What Is Luthel'anismY baiS ,,3m:ilcf au .2utr)Cr unb BUill futljetifdjen me- fenniniB J" filr gana unmiigfidj etWitt, unb aluar unter mngabe einaelnet .2eljren, bie au unfeter 3eH nidjt meljt feftgeI}aHen llJetDen filnnten. @5ie nennen Die ~tttullliSfofigfeit bet ~emgen @5djtifi, bie giinafidje gJetbetlit. ljeit bet menfdjnu)en matUt, bie IDCitteilung bet gilttridjen @ligenfdjaften an Die menfdjIid)c matm Q;ljtifti, audj bie Iutljetifdje .2ef}te bOIll mbenbmalj!. Stlie melege finb mitgetei!t tm MONTHLY, im mobemflcrljeft b. ~., @5. 866 ff. llBenn wit unB nidjt inen, luat eB bet ".2utljedfdje ~eto1b", baiS offiaielle beutfdje Dtgan bet U. L. C., baB bem llBunfdje WUBbrucI gab, What Is Lu- theranism? mildjte gar nicljt etfdjienen fein. llBit finb ljinfidj±ridj biefe§ !$UnftcB anbetet imeinunn. .2aff en luit eB tJollig fiat untet un§ llJetben, llJie eB innetljaIli bet ametifallifdj.rutljetifdjen ~itdje in beaug aUf baB 1Seftljarten an bet fdjtiftgemiiten futljetifdjen .2eI}re fteljt. StlaB fann unb foll bie gJetanlaffung llJerben, butdj flare me1e!}tung unbGEtmaljnung ben @5djaben au ljeifen. 1S. ~. The Oversupply of Ministers. - The Lutheran of October 9, 1930, after investigating the situation which gave currency to the report that there will be an oversupply of ministerial candidates in the United Lu- theran Church, characterizes that report as a "disgraceful rumor." It writes editorially: "We recently met a young man who will be graduated from one of our theological seminaries in 1931. He knew that the num- ber of students now in training for pastorates in the United Lutheran Church is larger th!ln ever in the past, and he had heard the rumor that there are too few vacancies to provide them with places of labor. vVhere this TUJl10r originated he did not tell us, but that it has reached young men now studying theology, the conversation cited above makes evident. The Lutheran has sought to l'un down the report and hereby transmits the information received .. " It can also be declared without fear of con- 58 Theological Observer. - .rrird)lid):Seitgefd)ld)tlid)e~. tradiction that the U. L. C. would lack 'men right now if its program of expansion were in operation instead of on paper in the minutes of its boards. There has been a distinct slowing down in the rate of starting missions both at home and abroad during the past two bienniums. The Board of American Missions reports new missions, but it just about bal- ances these with 'congregations that have become self-supporting.' The Board of Foreign Missions makes an equivalent confession when it indi- cates only replacements instead of entrance into new fields. The problem of stUdent-pastors in non-Lutheran colleges and universities is no nearer solution now than it was two years 01' foul' years ago. Inner Mission calls for ordained men are not given in the clarion tones the ministry of mercy deserves. Yet when every thoughtful Christian realizes that a kind of crisis confronts the Church and when there is evidence that the supply of men available for sending is encouraging, the report gets currency that these young men may not be needed. We can tell you where this disgraceful rumor got its start. It came, not from lack of opportunities to use ministers, but from the Church's failure to finance a program of cxpansion. How can the Board of Foreign Missions com- mission missionaries when its rcceipts are insuffieient to extend the work under its care? How can the Board of American Missions realize on its opportunities when its financial resources are absorbed by a fixed number of pastors' salaries and its church extension capital is liquid only to the degrce that loans are repaid? Instead of being faced with an oversupply of ministcrs, we are in the midst of an underconviction of the opportunity to extend the kingdom of God. Let the churches meet their apportion- ments this year, and there will be plenty of plaecs for all the graduates in 1931 and in 1932. We 'feel' that that is how the situation will be met. We have too much confidencc in the faith of the membership of the United Lutheran Church to believe that those willing and able to be its pastors will lack parishes and pulpits." Every thonghtful Christian in our Synod, too, realizes that a crisis confronts us. Are we ready, while supporting the other minor and major activities of the Church, to restrict the one great activity of the Church, the spreading of the Gospel by means of preparing and placing ministers of the Gospel? E. A Presbyterian on Dr. Ferm's Symposium in "What Is Lu- theranism?" - While there havc been some Lutherans who have found nothing to criticize in the collection of essays made by Dr. Ferm except a few soundly and distinctively Lutheran statements made by some of the contributors, there is a Presbyterian who disccrns the chaff among the wheat and does not hesitate to draw attention to it. It is Dr. Samuel G. Craig, editor of Olwistianity To-day. Our readers will be interested in the following paragraph from his review on "What Is Lutheranism 1" "TIle least satisfactory of all is the foreword and conclusion by the editor of the book, Dr. Ferm, who, by the way, is the professor of philosophy in Wooster College, a fact that is not fitted to add to the reputation of that institution as a sound Presbyterian institution. The contributions by Drs. Evjen and Wendell are of doubtful value, while that by Dr. Weigle (who is no longer a Lutheran) is slight and not very significant. Those, however, by Drs. Offerman, Wcntz, Reu, lIefelbower, Scherer, lIaas, Dau, Theological Observer. -- .reitd)H(r)~8eit\'lefd)td)trtd)e§. and Rohne, while not of e(IUal value, are all of high value and breathe a spirit of genuine Lutheran culture and Il.cholarship. It is regrettable, it seems to us, that such worthy articles shOUld have been published under the auspices of one occupying not merely so un-Lutheran, but so unchris- tian a position as that of Dr. Ferm. Dr. Ferm has done what he could (unwittingly, of course) to destroy the value of this volume; but despite his efforts it has great worth and is to be commended to the attention of all those interested in learning about contemporary Lutheranism." Will the unionists in the Lutheran Chmch of America please take notice aud ask themselves whether it is in keeping with the principles of Holy Scrip- tUTe if men of negative views, like Dr. Ferm, are received as brethren by those who squarely stand on the SeriptuTes and the Lutheran Con- fessions 1 A. (Hue iUn\ueifllltll SUll! lueifett (\jefltlllldj bel5 !l1nbiJlI3 Ielcn ltJil: im II@C. meinbelilatt" ber !mi£lconfinfl)nobe. ~£l ~eiBt ba in ber mummer bom SO. mobemliet b.~.: ,,2fUe ~tfinbungen in bicfcr !melt, gcftem roie audj ~cute, bie ber medmitung bon @ebanfen bienen unb biefe au anbcm f)in. au£litagen, roetben bon aroei geltJaHigen WUidjten, bic in biefer !melt ~err. fdjen, balb nadjbem bie ~rfinbung gcmadjt ltJurbe, in i~ren 'Ilienft gefteUt. ~ie eine bicfcr .llRiidjte, bie erfte unb aUetlji:idjfte, ift unfer illott; bie anbere ift ber :iteufeI. Qleibe, ltJie fdjon gefagt, ergreifen, fobalb cine ber mer. breitung bon @ebanfen bienenbe ~rfinbung gemadjt ltJorbcn ift, bon i~r Qlefi!,}, um butdj fie i~te @ebanfen in aUe !melt ~inau£lauttagcn. @otte£l illebanfen finb immer gut, boUfommen, f)eiIfam unb fi:iftIidj, benn fie finb aUf unlet ~eiI gcridjtet; tvenn ba~er eine ~rfinbung bon illott in fcinen 'Ilienft gefteUt ift, fo ltJirb fie ben .llRen[djen aum @5egen. 'Ile£l. St'eufeI£l @ebanlen finb immcr Iii:ife, edogen, bcnn er iftcin ~liigner bon Wnfang; be£l St'eufeI£l @ebanfen finb immer nur batauf geridjtet, bie @5ilnbe au meI)ren unb bamit bie fSerbammnii.l. !menn nun ber XeufeI eine ~r. fin bung in feine ~anb nimmt, fo ltJirb fie ben .llRenfdjen aum lYIudj. !mie meden ltJir bai.l bodj an einer bet lllunberliarften ~rfinbungen unfeeer 3eit, bem mabio I illott flat e£l in feinen ~icnft gefterrt unb liitt babutdj fein feHgmadjenbe£l ~bangeIillm illiee bie ganae !melt fjin erfdjaUen. 'Ila ift ba£l mabio ein @5egen. Wliet bet St'eufcI braudjt ci.l audj unb iliJetfdjltJemmt bamit bie !men mit feinem illift, bai.l bie @)eeIc tote±. !ma£l foUen ltJir ba tun? 'Ila£l mabio alifcljaffen? @eltJit nidjt. 'Ilamit ltJilrben tvit ia ltJoljf betI)iiten, ban ba£l mabio un£l unb ben Unfrigen fdjabe, augIeidj aliee audj ben @5egen, ber bon @ott aU£lgcI)t unb ilbet bail mabio in lmfer ~au£l fommt, bon Hni.l fern~aIten. !mie braudjen ba£l mabio nicf)t aiJaufdjaffen, fonbern nut abaufteUcn, fob arb ltJit mcden, baB bai.l, ltJa£l bai.lfeIbe mit. teirt, aeg ift unb bom Steufer au£lgefanbt ift; ebenfo braudjen ltJir nur an3ufteUen, roenn @ott libet ba£l mabio au uM rebet. !mer ba£l tut, Iiraudjt f ein mabio tedjt; unb bief e f 0 tvertlJoHe, ~eute faft unentbe~tIidje ~r. finbung tuitb uni.l nidjt aum lYtudj, fonbern aUm @5egen geteidjen." lY. \{!. ~ie ~tutllftnu \matin aeaen hie ,,\miffoutier" ~tt .\)lffe aecttfclt. !mir Iefen im IISfitdjenblatt" bon !j3odo WleQrc, bern Organ unfet£l lBrafiHani. [djen ~iftrift£l, foIgenbei.l: ,,~ie Ie!,}te i)lllmmer bet ,llRonat£lmeinung', cine£l fat~oIifdjen lBIiittdjeni.l bet 'Iliiiae[c !j3otto WIegre, ltJibmet fidj befonbet£l ber 2IliltJe~r Ilroteftantifdjer IDUffionen in fat~oIifdjen Eiinbern. Eu bicfen fat~o. 60 Theological Observer. - ~itd)lid)'8eitgefd)id)t1id)e~. Iifdjen Qanbern redjnet bail R3fatt audj R3rafifien unb ,liefiagt cil, ba13 fo bide norbamedfanifdje SNrdjengemeinfdjaften ~ier iUCiHion treilien. Bu biefen 3a~ft ber @Sdjreioer audj unf ere .\'firdje. @:r erma~n± bie Qef er: ,@Sorgen ltJit nUt bafiir, ba13 unf ern ~farreien ber religiof e @:ifer er~aften lifeilie; bann ttJerben bie 2fmerifaner unb audj bie beutfdjen ~mffourianer fidj nidjt ~ineinttlagen. jffienn alier ie einer eil berfudjen foUte, aUf unfern jffieiaen. acrer Unfrau± au faen, regen ltJir i~m bail £)anbttJed mit aller @:nergie, o~ne iebodj mit ben @efeJ,?eilttJadjtern in @Streit au geraten.' ~ie .\'fat~o. men fdjeinen a1fo in gro13er @efa~r au ftc~en, ben @SjJrudj au bergeffen: ,~ie jffiaffen unferer 9Ut±erfdjaf± finb nidjt ffeifdjHdj', 2.\'for. 10,4, benn fonft ~atte ber @Sdjreilier fie ltJo~r nidjt geltJarnt bor ber 2fnttJenbung fofdjer iUCittel, bie fie mit ber ~oHaei in S~onffift liradjten. ~ail fat~onf dje R3fatt fragt ttJeiter: ,jffiie follen ttJir nun gegen biefe reHgiofe @efa~r anfampfen?' 2fntltJort: ,Bunadjft mit ben jffiaffen beil @elieieil, alier lie~arrIidjen @elieieil. @Sobann miiffen Inir in R3rafifien bie 2fnbadjt au iUCaria, ber R3efiegetin ber ~rde~ren, nidj± nUt er~aften, fonbern nodj me~r berlireiten unb ber±iefen.' jffiolIte @ott, bie .\'fat~omen ttJiirben ben ~~tigen nidjt cine iUCarienanbadjt empfe~fen, f onbern i~nen (Djdfti @:dofungilttJerf berfiinbfgen 1 2flier bet ~apf± ift ja ber 2fntidjtif±. .\'fein jffiunber, baB f cine 2fnljanger bie £)eifigen anrufen, um bail @:bangeIium bon fljnen fernilu~aften." lY. ~. Apostolic Succession. - How firmly the believers in the .Apostolic Succession believe in the reality of an apostolic succession and what great blessings they believe it confers on the Church that possesses it, is brought out in the sermon preached by Bishop W. T. Manning at the consecration of his suffragan bishop. "There has just now been much discussion as to the origin of episcopacy. In the light of all this discussion the report presented to the Lambeth Conference by the Committee on the Unity of the Church says: 'Without entering into the discussion of theories which divide scholars, we may affirm shortly that we see no reason to doubt the statement made in the preface to our ordinal that from the apostles' time there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's Church - bishops, priests, and deacons.' 'What we uphold,' this report states, 'is the epis- copate maintained in successive generations by continuity of succession and consecration as it has been throughout the history of the Church from the earliest times.' In common with all the ancient Catholic communions, which include to-day three-fourths of all Christendom, the Episcopal Church believes that, when our Lord founded His Church in this world, He Himself appointed a ministry and that this ministry has come down to the present time through the succession of the bishops. . .. The Epis- copal Church holds the Catholic doctrine of the priesthood. Noone who reads and understands her P1'aye1'-book can be in doubt as to this. It is this which constitutes the difference between the ministry of the Epis- copal Church and that of the Protestant churches; not that one is a real ministry and the other is not. - the Episcopal Church holds no such view, - but that one is a ministerial priesthood and the other does not 80 regard itself and definitely rejects the doctrine of the priesthood. This explains the fact that a priest of the Roman Catholic Church or of the Holy Orthodox Eastern Church or of any Catholic communion who comes into the ministry of the .Anglican communion is not reordained, whereas a minister of any Protestant communion ... must be ordained to the priest- Theological Observer. - mcd)lid)~3eitgef(I)lcl)md)ell. 61 1100d through the laying on of hands by a bishop. . .. The report pre- sented to the recent Lambeth Conferencc says: 'We hold the catholic faith in its entirety, that is to say, the truth of Christ contained in Holy Scrip- ture stated in the Apostles' and Nicene creeds, and safeguarded by the llistoric threefold order of the ministry.' . .. The unbroken succession of the episcopate, coming down to us from apostolic times, is the visible, living witness of God's coming into this world in the Incarnation; for the episcopate is the successor of the apostolate, and the apostolate was the direct representative of the risen and ascended Christ." (The Living OhU1'oh, November 8, 1930.) The story is continued in Time (November 17, 1930): "Several days were necessary for this high view to spread. Then, last week, the brick- bats began twirling. . .. The Protestant Episcopal Church League ordered its secretary to denounce 'am:lldng lack of scholarship. . .. The simple fact is that, in defiance of every scrap of historical evidence, about which, in reality, there is not the slightest ambiguity, he [Bishop Manning] faithfully follows a tradition which took its origin, not from Jesus or His apostles, but from Greek thinkers of the second and following cen- turies. It is not a matter of doubt that the early Church was neither Baptist, Presbyterian, Congregational, nor Episcopalian; it was a free brotherhood of the Spirit, where its members were all of one heart and mind. Obviously some simple organization soon became necessary in view of the growing number of converts. This assumed different forms in different centers, as, for instance, presbyterian [elders] at Rome, cpis- copalian [overseers, supervisors] in some parts of Asia, and congrcga- tional in other localities. It is also a matter of history that, as the centuries rolled on, the episcopalian form of government ultimately superseded all others until the Reformation. A building can be no stronger than its foundation. There is no evidence to show that Jesus instituted the episcopalian form of government o~' any particular from of govern- ment.' ... " To conclude the story, it is necessary to point out that, while Jesus certainly did not institute the episcopal form of government nor any apostolic succession, He certainly did institute the office of the ministry. It was not so much in view of the growing number of converts that some simple organization became necessary as it was by order of the Head of the Church, given through the apostles, that the Christians of any par- ticular locality formed communities and called pastors to minister to them, a form of "organi7-ation" maintained in the Lutheran Church to the present day. Paul and Barnabas "ordained them elders in every church," Acts 14, 23. And Paul gave these orders to Titus: "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting and ordain elders [v.7: "bishops"] in every city, as I had appointed thee," Titus 1,5. E. Marriage and Divorce. - The Presbyterian, criticizing a recent marriage-and-divorce plan suggested by Dean Inge, offers timely comment on the important question of marriage. We read: - "Gloomy Dean Inge hlts come forth again, this time on the subject of marriage. His plan is that marriages by the state shall be easily dis- solved, but marriages by the Church should be indissoluble. That has 62 Theological Observer. - .reird)Hd)'8eitoef n)in)trid)ell., the distinction of being new. A considerable company of the clergy seem bound to make over God's plan to suit the whims and lusts of men. Mar- riage is very irksome to a certain type of people, and it often happens that they want release. It is not now very difficult to secure freedom if people have the price. But high-minded people have' been quite unani- mous in the opinion that easy and frequent divorce works badly from every point of view. There is R Christian ground for divorce, and we to-dRY put no Rtigma upon the innocent party and very little on the guilty party. It often hRppens thRt there is no innocent party, both hRving violated the promise to keep self only for the other, 'so long as you both shall live.' We are not going to solve the difficulty by catering to human caprice. A majority of couples have a period when continuing true to each other is a hRrd and serious task, but a great majority of that ma- jority endure the strain and grow into a true unity. To be sure, some women are tied to very trying mcn, and men also hRve, ill some instances, wives who are far from perfect; but they entered into marriage of their own volition Rnd by God's help can live together until death shall part them. It happens so frequently that one who secures one divorce desires very much to secure another. It is a deep question with many perplexities when we follow human reason or human desires. The hest and safest way for family and society is to find God's ideal and stick to it. That there have heen tragic blunders no one will deny; hut we believe in every case it will be found that they Rre due to too much haste, too little listening to wise and loving coullselors, too little prayer to God for guidance before the event, and no prayer at all together after. "Dean lnge opens a way for sheer lust to have state sanction. Like thRt far less able American Ben Lindsay he is pandering to the lower rather than the higher in man. What it amounts to in both cases is that young people will gain a standing for the selfish desires, which are at times vcry strong. No, we cannot degrade our God-ordained institu- tion of marriage by any device. Once in it, we are to stay in spite of all the friction, burden, trial, thRt sometimes come, until death intervenes. Hard, you say? Yes, in some instances, very hard; but it is always hard to be fine, righteous, and noble. Shall we reduce the stRndard because it is hard? It is too bad that so many church leaders try so persistently to let unholy cravings havc approval. Let the standards alone. One man, one wonmn, joined in the most noble union until earthly life for one or the other is finished. Dean lnge is interesting, but very, very wrong." J.T.M. A Noted Biblical Scholar. - To all who :ue acquainted with the excellent work which Prof. Dr. R. D. Wilson, first at Princeton and then at Westminster Seminary, did to expose the fallacies and lies of destruc- tive higher critics, the notice of his death came as a severc shock. '1'he Slt1!da.y-so/tool Pi.lIles Rccords to him the following words of rare praise and appreciation: - "Biblical scholarship has had in the past thirty years no self -sacri- ficing devotee, no competent leader more distinguished or more learned than Robert Dick Wilson. 'l'housands of students and thousands outside seminary classrooms have been blessedly strengthened in the faith by the findings of that tireless scholar, whose amazing linguistic knowledge, Theological Observer. - .Ritd)nd)~3eitgefd)ic!)trtd)e~. 63 whole-hearted consecratioll, and mastery of factual evidence in support of the Biblical text have given him preeminence in the defcuse of the Scriptures. And now, in his seventy-fifth year, Dr. Wilson has been called to be with Christ, whom he so devotedly loved and so nobly served. He died after a brief illness in the Presbyterian Hospital, Philadelphia, on October 11. Two of his Illost significant books were published by the SUlHb,y-school Times Company: Is the Highej' OJ'itioism Soholu)'ly? and A Soientifio Investigation of the Old Testament. Dr. Wilson resigned from the faculty of Pl'inceton Theological Seminary in 1929, whel'e he had served for thirty years, and was olle of the leaders in organizing the new West- minster Seminary in Philadelphia, where he was Professor of Semitic Philology and Old Testament Criticism. He was widely known as a lec- turer here and abroad. '''hat he was to his associates, how he did his really prodigious work of linguistic research, and an appraisal of his place amollg' the foremost Biblical scholars of our time will be told in an early issue of the S1t1~day-sohool, Times by Prof. Oswald T. Allis, his coworker for many years in his chosen field." J. T. M. The American Anti~Bible Society. - The Sunday-sohool Times (September 13) reports: "The American Bible Society is in the old Dible House 011 Fourth Avenue in New York City. Not far away, 011 East Fourteenth Street, is the American Anti-Bible Society. 'If it's against the Biblc, we have it,' is the anllouncement of this 'headquarters for anti- Biblical literature.' 'Catalog frce on requcst.' The legal represclltative of the Soviet government in the United Sbltes sought incorporation for this society. The spirit of Moscow is seen in the announced purposes of the society: 'to bar the Bible from the public school j to dislodge it from the guest-room in hotels; to discourage its use at gubernatorial and presidential·inaugurations; to remove it from the witness stand; to check and ultimately stop its unsolicited distribution among soldiers, seamen, patients, and prisoners; to counteract the work of societics cir- culating it as the 'Word of God.' 'The American Anti-Bible Society,' we are told, 'offers ,a broad platform upon which Modernists, higher critics, Unitarians, evolutionists, rationalists, freethinkers, agnostics, and atheists may unite to discredit the Bible as an infallible book. . .. Liberals of every shade are eligible for membership." "These people 'desire the names and addresses of stUdents preparing for the ministry. Copies of current catalogs of preacher factorics will be gladly received.' This is obviously a move to break down or remove the future leadership of the Church. They continue: 'Most denominational schools are hotbeds of heresy as it is impossible for an educational insti- tution to maintain any degree of dignity without teaching evolution. Higher criticism produces skeptics. Whoever accepts evolution should &top preaching Christianity. The dcscendants of apes don't need a Savior. Christmas is more and more being cclebrated without refercnce to Jesus.' The call is sounded to establish forums wherever possible (wherever atheism can be popularimd). It is noticeable that among the vice-presi- del,ts of the Freethinkers of America are Prof. J1}llen Hayes of W elle~ley and l)rof. H. E. Barnes of Smith. Both colleges were founded by Chris- tians with specifically Christian purpose." J. T. M. Modernism and Prayer. - Some time ago the Ohristian Oentury Magazine conducted a symlJosium in which prominent American clergy- men were asked to express their vicws on the efficacy of praycr for rain. The replies which were made showed the great cleavage between positive Christian faithancl modernistic agnosticism. As the Presbyte1'ian re- ports, Dr. Mary Matthews of Seattle and Dr. James D. Gray of Chicago were among the minority in the symposium, declaring that God made the weather amI could change it. Dr. H. E. Fosdick of New York said: "No imaginable connection exists between man's inward spiritual atti- tude and a min-storm." Dr. W. P. Lemon of Minneapolis called praying for rain an attempt to "involve God in a cooperative scheme to maintain present Amcrican living standards." The P1'csbytm'ian comments on this: "Any utterance which leads men to think that any part of life can be safely divorced from God is very harmful. vVe would have been in the minority in the gathering referred to." vVe can well understand why modernistic preachers should affirm the futility of prayers for rain. Modernism denies both the creative and the sustaining providence of God. Its supreme god is either fate or chance, and neither leaves any room for prayer, just as it allows no trust in a gracious divinc providence. lViherever ModemislIl reigns, there is place only for thc Egyptian darkness of utter despair. J.T.M. A Blessing of the Tercentenary Celebration.-Therc are certain facts in the history which are being stubbornly overlooked; Ol1e of these pertains to our boasted liberty of conscience 01' religion, which certain school-text-book writers present as having existed even in the earliest New England colonies. TheWatohman-liJmami1w,l', among others, explodes this myth in an editorial 011 the recent Bay State Tel'Oentena1'Y OelebnJ,- tion. We read: "The Bay State Tercentenary Celebration reached its climax on September 17. On that day, three hundred years ago, Boston received its name. Over in Lancashire, England, there is another Boston, so aged that our Boston seems but a child. It was from that Lancashire Boston that our Boston received its name. . .. The intensive study of New England's history during the past year will prove a blessing to the multitudes who have been engaged in this study. The Puritans came here to escape persecution and thell became persecutors themselves. John Cotton in old Boston eoulu not stand interference. John Cotton in new Boston became an intolerant fan a tic. . .. The Puritans believed so pro- foundly in their interpretation of Christianity that they tried to force everybody else to accept that interpretation." It is well for us to keep this fact in mind, for it proved itself a potent factor in shaping many subsequent events. '1'he intolerant spirit of the spiritual descendants of those early settlers, which to-day crops out in Sunday-enforcement laws and insistence on political and economic reforms in the name of re- ligion, is a heritage of those early Colonial days. Yet there is another fact which must not be ignored. After all, no one can blame the Puritans for believing so profoundly in their re- ligious tenets th~t they whole-heartedly rejected all opposite views. True conviction lIever compromises with what it believes to be error. The con- fessional and missionary spirit of the New England colonists in itself Theological Observer. - .reitd)1id)<'lett()cf(~td)tlid)e~. 65 cannot be condemned. Earnest Christians have always tried to win others to their beliefs. But the great fault of those early settlers lay in their mingling of Church and State, so that l'ccourse was had to the policc power of the goverument to enforce religious submission. It is this fault that explains the religious persecutions of those early times; for wher- ever Church and State cooperate in the maintenance of certain religious tenets, persecution needs must follow. To-dllY thc mistaken ideas of thosc early settlers still prevail in the minds of our sectarian cllUrch- men, who, like their fathers, mingle ChIU'cll and State and in this way create confusion and cause antagonism to the Church. 'Ve certainly hopc that the intensive study of New England's history will prove a blcssing to th08c cngaged in this stndy. J. T. M. The Characteristics of Baptist Churches. - In un article entitled "Needed: A Harmony Church," published in the Oh1wohman (Septem- ber 13), Geralcl Cunningham discusses tIIC characteristics of several de- nominations, pal·ticularly the Roman Catholics, the MetllOdists, thc Bap- tists, the Presbyterians, and the Episcopalians. The Watohman-Ewaminer, taking issue with the writer's "farcical and untrue" description of these churches, chargcs him with "culpable ignorance" of the Baptist churches and criticizes especially the following paragraph:- "If the Methodist and Baptist churches had not found the liquor traffic ready to hand, they would have to invent some other 'social prob- lem.' Indeed, they are now beginning to turn to sex hygiene, not too frankly treated, of course, as the next reform program. The skilled mechanic who has bcgun to graduate into the Ahopkecper and smaller businesA-man group is grea,t on ethics. He ha,s not the cultural back- ground to grasp beauty or symbolism without a, very practical basis (which may be to his credit, for a11 we know). His dochinal approach is the Ten Commandments and morality. His delight is in numbers; his thrill is to slogans and crusades; his ritual is found in a secret order, but his religion is in reform." We arc not partial to the liberalistic, agnostic, and frivolous Ohm"oh- man; but in spite of the 1Vatohman-Ex(i1n'WIl'1"S protests it seelllA to us as if Mr. Cunningham's description of present-day sectarianism contains mOl'e than a modicum of truth. The intcrest of modern sectarian churches in "social problemA," their emphasis on ethics and momHty, their delight in numbers, slogans, and crusades, their toleration of, and often even attachment to, secret orders, and thcir mania for social reforms are too conspicuous to be denied. J. T. M. The American Lutheran Conference and the U. L. C. - When writing a,bout the American IJutheran Conference, the editor of the Lu- theYUIIl OOlnpanion makes a reference to the United Lutlrel'an Church in America which ought not to pass ullnoticed. It seems to us that it re- quires an explanation. The editor writes: H\VJlen we stop to consider that 'the new federation will devote its energies toward elimb,ation of overlapping of work of tlre various bodies which will compose it, treating the problems of the churches as a whole, without in any way encroaching upon individual prerogatives or indepcndence,' there is one Luthera,n body which, in our opinion, should be a part of this American Lutheran Con- 5 66 Theological Observer. - mtd)(id)~8eltoefd)id)md)ell. ference, namely, the United Lutheran Church in America. There should be no desire on tlle part of the new conference to see any part of tlle Lutheran Church in America isolated from the rest when the cause' of the whole Church is the object for wllieh we are striving. The U. L. C. does not desire, we believe, to stand alone, and in our mind there is no danger that its coming into the conference will in any way affect the comity that we expect to see ruling in the organization. Wllat we all desire is the growth of American Lutheranism and the extension of God's kingdom on earth and the fulfilment of that wish will depend, llOt only on the rank and file of the Lutheran Church, but also and primarily on Lutheran church leaders. If we cannot as yet expect the Synodical Conference to join in a larger J.Jutheran confederation, we can prevent that there shall be three instead of two large Lutheran groups." We are at a loss what to think of the declaration contained in the above remarks in which the editor of the Luthe1'an Companion favors the reception of the U. L. C. into the American J.Jutheran Conference. The Amcrican Lutheran Conference, if the recommendations. of the committee originating it are followed, will hose a definite doctrinal plutform. Would the U. L. C. amI all its members be willing to place themselves on that platform? 'Would they, for instance, subscribe to its paragraphs on the inerrancy of the Scriptures and the opposition to membership in lodges? These are the great questions which have to be answered. Perhaps the editor of the Lutheran Oompanion wishes to suggest that the U. L. C. should be invited to study the platform of the new conference and, if it can, adopt it and be received as a member. That, of course, would throw an altogether different light on his statement. Our interest in drawing attention to the editorial in the fJuthemn Comp(!nion is the earnest desire that tlie impol'tant truth be not overlooked which Professor Elert of Er- langen, whom we quote at length elscwhere, has expressed thus: "Our Church's chief concern has been purity of doctrine, to which she, together with the Augustalla, pledges herself." A. II. AU5ianb. ~inc 21n1ueifuno 31111t 6tllbiullt bc~ 2Htelt Xcftllntent~. ).j3rof. Dr. (§mH maUaAInatliurg fd)teivt in "St~eologifd)e lDHiteHungen aui.l bem ~ntiquat:ia± jBetn~. Eievifd)" bom 15. j)1obemver b.~. u. a.: "mei aUen feinen me~ miU)ungen um ba.il \nerftiinbnii.l beil 2nten 5teftamenti.l in feinen 5teHen unb a16 (lJanaei.l bergeffe bel' @5tubent jebod) eini.l nid)t. :tlai.l ~ne 5teftament ift fur uniJ nid)t ein ~ofumeltt dnet velievigen frteli\lion, berm Stenntni!J bieIleid)t intereffant ift, bie uni.l avet innerlid) nidjti.l an{teljt. :tlai.l ~He 5teftamen± ift ein @5tiicl unferer jB i vel/bon bel' wit glauven, 'oa[) fie iliotteij jillod ent~im. ~ebet tbtu'ocnt mUB eij bon feinem erften eemefter an a16 cine ~emge, if)lll gana perfonHdj gefterrtc Wufgalie anfe~en, immer wieber 'ourdj 'oie 3eitnefc~id)Hid) ve'oillgten lj:onnen bel' artteftamenHid)en Gffenvatung au bem eigenHidjen ~n~a1t 'oeil im ~r±en 5teftament enH)al~ ienen ilioite!JttJorteij ljinburdjaubringen, 'oer 03wigfeigoe'oeutung ~at. jiller bai.l ~nte 5teftament ftubiert, o~ne feIfJer in feincm ~nnerften bon bem e i n en, Ieoen'oigen, unoe'oingten 2!nfprudj er~eoenben (3)ott bei.l 2!Ucn :iteftamenti3 etgriffen au ttJerben, ~at im ilirunbe 3eit unb .mU~e lJer~ fdjwenbet." S'jier ift ljin31t3ufilgen: @:~rifhli.l unb feine ljeiIigen 2fpofteI Theological Observer. - .!tirdJHd)~3eitGercl)id)ttid)e~. 67 kf)ren, ban bie 6djrift mten 5teftament~ @otte~ ~ort nidjt blOB "ent~ ljiiH", lonbern @otte~ cigene~ unfeljfbare~ )fiott i ft, ~olj. 10, 35: "IDie @:idjrift fann nidjt l1elirodjen lUerben"; 2 5tim. 3, 16: ,,~IIe @:idjrift bon @ott eingegelien." ~udj 2 ~ett. 1,21 lieaieljen fidj bie )fiotte: "IDie ljei~ ligen IDlenfdjen 0Jotte~ IJalien {J e t e bet, geh:ielien bon bern ~emgen @cijt", auf bie @:i dj r i f t be~. ~nen 5teftarnenHl, lUie au~ bem griedjifdjen 5tebt (~. 20) ljerborgef)t. ~n liei\u{J auf bie @:dernung bet ljelitiiifdjen 6ptadje gilit j)3tof. j8aIIa einige gute m!infe, a. j8. ben, miiglidjft bieI lJeIitiiifdje ~ofabeIn au~tuenbig au Iemen unb Iaut lJefJriiifdj au Ielm. ~.~. Verbal Inspiration Denied in Australia. - The Alt8t1'alia,t~ Lu- titercLn reports the following: "Again and again the Anglican bishop of Adelaide has given evidence of his Modernism in theology. Another evi- dence of t.his was given when he recently stated in his pastoral address that, although recent Biblical criticism had only strengthened thc posi- tion of the Bible and excavations and research had confirmed the Bible narrative in unexpected ways, yet the contentions of the Fundamentalists (those who stick to the old faith), who believed that every word of the Bible was inspired and that everything happened historically as the Bible records, were not confirmed and could not be, Naturally a public state- ment of this kind brought forth many protests from believing children of God. Letters written to the press gave evidence that the Lord still has His seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to the modern Baal of skepticism. Possibly more letters were written tllan were published, and those published were possibly much abridged, The following, sent in to the Advertiser by Pastor Th. Lutze, appeared only in part: - " 'To the deep sorrow of thousands of earnest Christians Dr. Thomas, in his pastoral address, has again attacked the Bible, God's Book, de- claring that not all of its historical statements are true. Fortunately there arc many thousands who know and believe the Bible to be in its eaeh and every statement the inspired, inerrant Word of God, it having proved itself to be such in their lives and daily experience. For the benefit, however, of those who are inclined to follow the bishop rather than the Book of God, will Dr. Thomas give your readers a list of the his- torical inaccuracies he flO confidently alleges the Bible contains? Those who have read but a little about the Higher Criticism know of its bom- bastic assertions and its mallY humiliating defeats at the hands of able scholars who accept the vel'bal inspiration of every part of the Bible. The history of the Higher Criticism is a tragic one and too sad for words. Surely, 'tis true that "the time is out of joint" when leaders in the Church charge God's Book with untruthfulness. Let me quote what the learned Bishop Ryle wrote: "Once admit the principle that the writers of the Bible could make mistakes and were not in all things guided by the Spirit, and I know not where I am. I see nothing certain, nothing solid, nothing trustworthy, in the foundations of my faith. A fog has descended on the Book of God and enveloped every chapter in uncertainty. WllO shall decide when the writers of' Scripture made mistakes and when they did not? How am I to know where inspiration ends and where it begins? What I think inspired another may think uninspircd. The texts I rest upon may possibly have been put in by a slip of the pen I The 68 Theological Observer. - .!titd)lid)~Scit\lefc!)tc!)tricl)e~. words and phrases that I love to feed upon may possibly be weak, earthly expressions, in writing which the author was left to his own private, UIl- in.spired mind. The glory is departed from my Bible at this rate. A cold feeling of suspicion and doubt creeps over me as I read it. I am almost tempted to lay it down in flat despair. A partially inspired Bible is little better thaIl no Bible at alL'" "That is perfectly true. Our Christian faith rests on the Bible. If the Bible is a hoax, then also is Christianity. Let Christians continue to believe that they have a sure word of prophecy. The Scriptures call not be broken. "At a conferellce of the Southern Subdivhion of the South Australian Pastoral Conference, held at Birdwood on September 9 and 10," 1930, the fonowing resolution with regard to this matter was adopted:- "'This conference notes with deep regret the seemingly determined efforts on the part of leaders of some churches to discredit the Bible in some of its historical statements and to undermine the Biblical truth of verbal inspiration, and it pledges itself to resist to the utmost the in- sidious attacks of Higher Criticism and Modernism, which, u'nder the specious plea that verbal inspiration is not acceptable to the intellectual man or to-day, make concessions to man's innate unbelief and in fact charge those with insincerity who still hold the doctrine of verbal in- spiration.' " J. T. M. The Lutheran Church in Russia.- In an open news-letter Dr. John A. Morehead touches on this subject and presents what we mig'ht look upon as the latest inrormation available. He says: "The Christian churches in Russia, after suffering the distresses of the 'World War, succeeding civil wars, change of form of govenlment, and famine, l1ave been caught hI the toils of a thoroughgoing social and economic revolution. To what extent the almost unendurable afflictions of organized religion are due to the temporarily unavoidable hardships alJd excesses of the period of transi- tion and to wlmt extent they grow out of permanent elements of the Soviet system, are not yet entirely clear. The process of the execution of the five-year plan for the nationalization of industry, including agri- culture, is impoverishing well-to-do fanners (Kulaks), a large class, upon whom the churches have largely depended for support. Moreover, although the new Rnssian constitution proclaims the separation of Church and State and provides, in a way, for religious freedom, limiting decrees and prac- tise raise the gravest questions as to the rcal attitude of the Soviet govern- ment toward religion amI as to whether there really is genuine religious liberty iu Russia. Is the Soviet system with its backgrouud of antirelig- ious philosophy, with its secularization of education, the press, and charity, and with its unofficial support of the activities of the 'Society of the God- less' compatible with the existence and development of the Christian Church in Russia?" In a later paragraph Dr. Morehead relates that in the closing months of 1929 and in the first part of H)30 the hostility against churches amounted to persecution. Among others, Lutheran pastors were arrested, imprisoned, and exiled. The Lutheran theological seminary in Leningrad was compelled to quit its quarters, although the rental contract was still good for three ycars. However, the students were housed in farmers' 11Omes, and with exemplary devotion 011 the part of students and professors the Theologica.l Observer. -- .n'itd) (icf)<,BdtQef c~id)tlicf)e~. 69 instruction continued. Early in April the clouds dispersed a little, when Mr. Stalin issued a proclamation ordering that all physical religious per- secution cease and that religion be opposed by no other means than edu- ~,ation. For the seminary ut Leningrad the tide quite unexpectedly has turned for the better. "A wealthy citizen of a foreign country offered his residence near the center of the city of Leningrad at a rental no more than previo~sly paid for the use of this vitally nccessary institution for the recruiting of the ministry of the Lutheran Church. The building is larger and more commodious than that previously occupied, providing ample facilities for classrooms, dormitories for the students, and apart- ments for professors. . .. Hence the outlook now is favorable." It will be remembered that this seminary, which means so much for the Lutheran Church of Russia, was opened in 1924. A. The Augsburg Confession a Dond of Union. - Writing on this subject, Prof. Werner Elert of Erlangen, Germany, expresses some thoughts which merit quotation. He points out that at the time when the Augs- burg Confession was drawn up, three views were held as to how the unity of faith should be given expression. "The Landgrave Philip of Hesse, who was greatly influenced by Zwingli, demandea a political federation against the emperor and the Pope. The Margrave of Brandenburg advocated as a necessary condition of union, not only agreement in doctrine, but ac- ceptance of a common church constitution as well. Saxony declined to enter into such an agreement. Unity of doctrine was essential. Freedom in determining matters pertaining to external ceremonials must be granted to each province." We all know that this view prevailed, and we thank God for it. Professor Elert reminds us how in the centuries that followed the Augsburg Confession united the Lutherans of Germany with those of the Scandinavian countries. What of other peoples? He says: "The Rvan- gelicals east of the empire, the churches in Esthonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland, among the Transylvanians as well as in the Netherlands, were united into a great communion of faith with the Germans in the unity of the Augsburg Confession. Dissension in most of these regions, especially ill Poland and Hungary, was caused by Calvinism. If at this time constant pressure for union is being exerted, if the Lutherans are accllsed of endangering the unity of Protestantism by faithfully adhering to the [AugsburgJ Confession, we might well ask why the propaganda for Calvinistic doctrine was made in these regions, which destroyed the unity of faith; for Calvinism did not enter these countries till the Lutheran Reformation had been introduced or where the Lutheran Church was al- ready prospering. The Slovenian and Croatian Church became the prey of the Counter-Reformation." ~We hope that the following declaration of Professor Rlert will more and more be recognized as true by all who call themselves Lutherans: "Our Church's chief concern has been purity of doc- trine, to which she, together with the Al1g11stana, pledges herself. Our Church therefore has been, and ever will be, true to herself so long as she holds fast to this Confession." A. JIDa!) G:inftein nidjt lueii!, !lariilier ~at et ficlj feThft nadj einem )Betidjt !ler Associated Press, !latied )Bedin, hen 15. jIlobemliet 1930, fo ausge~ fptodjen: "Dr. Albert Einstein, originator of the relativity theory, lec- tured on the laws of cause and effect last night before u crowd of young 70 Theological Observer. - ~itrl}ncf)'.3citgefcf)icf)tficf)eg. radicals in Humboldt Hall. He encouraged his audience to ask questions and not to imagine they were foolish questions. 'For beforc God we are relatively all equally wise or - equally foolish,' he remarked. He touche'd on the metaphysical and psychological aspects of causation, beginning with the ideas of primitive peoples, who are able to conceive only an 'animistic will cause'; who, in othcr words, believe all happenings arc directly caused by a thinking agency, human, divine, or demoniacal. ITe said he saw nothing to prove that thc world was 'causal.' .As to thc 'first cause,' he said, he couldn't even now tell which came first, the hell or the egg. Determinism, which lays down that everything that happens is due to the law of necessity, Einstein said, 'is belief, not knowledge.' Physicists no longer believc in strict determinism, he added. Mankind, he said, has not gone very far in knowledge. 'The farther we proceed, the more formidable are the riddles facing us,' he asserted. He aidd' the ultimate issues were beyond man's ken." ~a~ ift oefdjeiben getebet. Unb biefe mefdjeibenljeit ift am ~ra~e. @l~ giot ein "meta\.lf)~fifdje£l \{StooTem". @i£l tuitb tualjr oTeioen, ban in baB ~nnm ber ~atUt: fein gefdjaffenet &eift bringt. @i~ ift audj in neuew; 8eit bon ~aturforfdjet1t batauf ljingetuiefen tuotben, ball bie ffiiitfef in bet ~atut fidj meljten, je fdjiitfer ba£l ~anb. llJed~aeug tuirb, tuomit wit bie ~atur oeooadjten. ~et &tunb ljietfilt ift bet: !!Bie &oit aUe ~inge gefdjaffen ljat, fo ift et e~ audj, ber aUe 5Dinge in iljtem @:lein unb Eeoen llnb in metuegung etljiHt, SM. 1, 16. 17. @ott aoet ift unfidjtoat, 1 :.tim. 6, 16, aTfo unerteidjoat flir IDliftoffojJ unb :.tereffo\). ~aljet ba~ mefurtat, baB oei bet auneljmenben ®djiitfe unferer l8eooadjtung13inftrumente bie miitf er fidj meljren. WOCt bie 1/ mef djeibenf)eit" fann audj au weit ge±tieoen werben. ~a13 gefdjieljt bann, tuenn fie in &gnoftiili~mu~ all~artet. ~ie !!Bert ift "causal" in bem @:linne, ban fie, audj aogefeljen bon ber ()ffenoarung bet @:ldjrift, aT~ bon @ott gemadjt etfannt tuirb, tuenn fie mit metftanb (You;) oetradjtet tuitb, mom. 1, 20 j /I&otte~ unfidjtoare~ !!Befen, ba~ ift, feine eluige ~aft unb @ottljeit, witb etfeljen, fo man be~ tuafjrnimmt an ben m3eden, niimliu) an bet @:ldjojJfung bet lilleft." !!B~ hie oerliljmt getuotbene ~rioritiigfral1e oetrifft, 00 ha13 ~uljn ober ba~ @ii ober - tua~ aUf gleicljer Einie negt - 00 ber @iicljoaum obet bie @lidjcf ba~ erfte fei, fo Teljrt bie ®djrift oefanntridj, baB butdj @otte~ ®clji:ijJfltng~tuort eine fertige, l.JoHfommen alll3geoirbetc ~fTanaen. unb :.tiertueft inl3 ~afein ttat. ~ie ~j1an3en finb cljer al13 iljr @:lame unb bie :.tiete eljer aW iljre ~ungen. @ibenfo ift ber IDlenfdj fedig unb bon. fommen au~geoHbet gcfdjaffcn. [Yilr bie gegenteirige Wnnafjme, bie ganse llnb bie ljallJe @lbolution, fefjlen bie I/au~flirrenben 9)Wte!gtiebet", juie ve~ fonnene ~aturtuiffenfdjafner auclj ber ~euaeit aug eo en. ~. ~. '!let \l3njJft loin liMe dll'iftfirfJc Cl!infjcitSjfrOltt" ltia)t lItitmndlett. ~er metIinet "meidj~oote" fdjreibt: /lm~att fantt e~ in ~eutfdj[anb nod) itnmer nidj! Taffen, meljr ober llJcnincr llemeljmlidj 1mb beutridj bon ber ,djrifb fidjen @iinljeit~ftont' au rcben llnb au fdjtuiirmen, in bet fidj bet ~roteftan~ ti~mu~ anb .I1atljoli3i~mu~ 3ufammenfhtben mliffe unb tuerhe gegen bie IDliidjte bet @ottfofi9feit unb be~ Untetmcnfdjenttt1n~. ~au man mit biefen :.ttiiumen tatfiidjridj einem \{Sljantom nacljjagt, acigt mit tulinfdjen13tuetier ~eumu)fcit wiebet einmal het OS861'vatOl'e Romano, ben bie ,@:ldji:inere 8u. funft' bom 29. ~uni 1930 aitied. ~a~ illatifanifdje ()rgan nimmt fcine aoTeljnenbe @:lteUungnaljme gegenlioet eittet Ligue pour Ie Christianisme 'rheological Observer. - Sl'itd)lid) • .BeitgefclJicl)t(id)e~. 71 aum WnfaE, Unt grunbfiiiJHd)e @;rlniigungen 3um ~roofem interfonfeffio~ neUet 3ufammenfaffuligen ilbed)t'lupt ill! beriiffentridjen. jillit fefen 11. a. : ,jillir etinnern bOt allent baran, baB ba£l fidjtoare manb, ba£l bie Grr)riften ilufantmenfdjIie\\t, bon ~@;fu Irfjtifto, unfernt .0@;ttn, feftgefett hJotben ift in fetnet waf)tcn SNtdje, bie, hJie @5t. Wmorofhts fagte, bod ift, hJo !l3eh:us ift. SDie djtiftridjen SDiffibenten berfdjiebeneJ: SDenominationen fjaoen ftdj feiber bon biefem manbe fosgemadjt, unb batum nefjmen bie @5paHungen unb @5efien intmet mer)r au. SDas einaige muter, fie au beteinioen, fann fein anbetes fein afs bas bon Irfjrifto gehJoUte, bas bon i~m eingefette minbe~ mittel bet e i n e n ~eJ:be unter bem e i n en .aulinifd)en mtiefe lennt. (ie welb aud) In ber telili\onlSgefd)id)trid,1en ~otfd)lllt\l ber !Jleu3eit Ilut !Befd,1eib, weift fie me~r aIg einmal au unb fagt gan3 tid)tig: ,,(,l;s bettieft fid) bei mit !tnmet me~r bie ftuCtaeuguM, bnll ber whflid)e Hd: SDet !Hlloftel ~aufus aHJ ~etfilnfidJteit; ~aulus al~ I)JHflionarj ;DIe motjd)aftj ~aufi Wl\ffionsmetlJobej SDie beiben ~~eflalonid)er~ btiefcj SDet @alnterbrlefj SDlc @efd)id)te ber Storlnt~ergemeinbc bon if)ret @eUn, bung bilS 311m alueHen Sforlntf)erbciefej 6trtif3l1oe burd) bie Sfotint~etbrlefej SDet lRilmerbtief; SDet ~~mlllletuciefj SDer Sfo!of!erudefj $:let (ill~efccbt\efj SDie ~a, [totaluciefe. - lffiit filnnen nid)t aUen fdnen !Husfill)mn\len 3uftlmmen. lffienn er (agt: ,,~aulus toar, wenn tule ben innecften !Jlerb feiner \:l'tilmmlgfeit d)ataf, tetiflmn wOUen, 9)tl)ftllec" (6. 12), [0 ift ba~ nld)t rid)tlo, eil fet benn, bab man jeben gliiubigen [~ciften, ber mit ~aulus faot: ,,~d) rebe, bod) nun ntd)t id), fonbecn [l)tifttts {ebet tn mit", @al. 2, 20, einm ~\)ftifet 1tennen lotu. lllid) tel: fallt aud), bab "ber G:l)ataUet beg ~nlllus bieUehf)t nid)t Ilana ol)ne ~afel if!. (i~ ~iinot hlO~l mit bet £leibenfd)aftlicfJtcit felnes ~empecament~, mit bet ~eiflen .\llehe all feinen ge\ftlid)en Sfinbecn 3ufammen, ball er 1m Stampfe mit felnen @egnecn bieUeid)t nid,1t immec bie [treMe @renae belJ .3uHiffigen in ber Sftitif e\n\Jel)alten ~at" (6. 13). !Hbet ell gibt auelJ einen ~ ell i g e n .3 0 tn, einen 1) ell i \J e n 0; i fer um @otte!! (il)te unb um bie !lBa~rl)e\t bes (ibnngeHums unb geoen beflen \:l'ehtbe. Unb (0 ~a!len wil: uns nod) elne lltci~e fcagfid)ct ober iniger 6iitJe angemertt. !Huct babet 1ft aud) [0 blel Ulld)tI\Jes unb @lItes gefagt, bieeinac1nen mrlefe weeben inl)artlid) bem £efer fo na~e Ilebrad)t, unb bie @tllnbe