Full Text for Nathan Soederblom (Text)

Qtnurnr~tu UJqtulugtral :!Inutltly Continuing LEHRE UNO WEHRE MAGAZIN FUER Ev.-LuTH. H OMILETIK THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY-THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY Vol. XV May, 1944 No.5 CONTENTS The Right and Wrong of Private Judgment. Th. Engclder Nathan Soedel'blom. Theodore Gra"hner Page 289 314 328 Outlines on the Standard Gospels Miscellanea Theological Obsen.·er Book Review Eln Predlger muss nlcht alleln wei- deft. also dais er die Schafe unter- weise. wle de rechte Chrl8ten sollen Rln. sondem liIuch cianeben den Woel- ten tDeh7'lm. dass sle die Schafe nlcht angrelfen Wld mit talscher Lehre ver- tuehren und Irrtum elntuehren. Luther 339 3·a 354 Es 1st keln Ding. das die Leute mehr bel der Klrche behaelt denn die gute Predigt. - A pologie. Arl. 24 If tile trumpet give an uncertain sound. who ahall prepare himself to the battle? -1 eM. 14:8 Published for the Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States CONCORDIA PUBUSIUNG BOUSE, St. Louis 18, Mo. '11'1 T!:) I - tr. IS. A. 314 Nathan Soederblom times and must be preached to all true believers: 'All things are yours; and ye are Christ's.' Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ has made you free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage! Amen." (Loc. cit.) Let us follow the example of Luther, who would not permit any man to rule over his conscience, but did make Christ its absolute ruler. "In his very last sermon the great champion of private judgment and liberty of conscience declared once more (XII: 1260 fl.): 'I grant that the emperor, king, pope, cardinal, princes, and lords are pru- dent and wise; but I will believe on my Lord Christ alone: He is my Master and Lord, whom God has bidden me to hear and to learn of Him what is true, divine wisdom. . .. Therefore, dear Pope, your claim to sit in Christendom as lord and to have authority to decide what I should believe and do, that I cannot accept. For here is the Lord whom alone we should hear in these matters .... This, and much more, might be said on this Gospel, but I am too feeble; let this suffice. God give us grace that we receive His precious Word with thanksgiving and increase and grow in the knowledge and faith of His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and con- tinue steadfast in the confession of His holy Word unto the end, Amen!'" (Theological Quarterly, 1911, p.254.) (To be continued) TH. ENGELDER 4 •• Nathan Soederblom I Lars Olof Jonathan (Nathan) Soederblom was born in the parish of Troenoe, Sweden, January 15, 1866, the son of Rector Joseph Soederblom and his wife. He received the degree of Candi- date of Philosophy at the University of Uppsala in 1886 and the degree of Candidate of Theology in 1892. He was appointed pastor of the Swedish church in Paris in 1894 and also seamen's pastor at Dunkerque, Calais, and Boulogne. While in Paris, he pursued his studies and graduated from the EcoLe des hautes etudes, in the section of the science of religion, in 1898, receiving the degree of Doctor of Theology from the University of Paris in 1901. The same year he was called to the chair of comparative religion in the University of Uppsala. In 1914 he was made Archbishop of Sweden. The honorary degree of Doctor of Theology was conferred upon him by Geneva, Oslo, St. Andrews, Glasgow, and Greifswald, the honorary Doctor of Philosophy by the universities of Uppsala, Greifswald, Bonn. Other honorary degrees he received from Berlin and Oxford. In the work When the Hours Course and Change, 1909, there Nathan Soederblom 315 is in one essay a most remarkable passage which must be auto- biographical and where Soederblom apparently is giving an insight into what might be called his conversion. First the work of the Gospel came, breaking in on his purely intellectual state of total skepticism and darkening of the light when the old doctrines he had learned were lost to his convictions. Then he continues to set forth how one day the dazzling and amazing demolishment from the knowledge that God is holy and righteous fell, lightninglike, upon him. One is apt to agree with one of the keenest critics of Soeder- blom's religious position, the late Professor Adolph Hult of Rock Island Seminary, that this biographical self-analysis, where the Gospel precedes the Law in its work on the soul- saved first by the Gospel and then by the Law, discovering the threatening and dire demand of the Law - accounts for the unspeakable confusion of spiritual judgment that makes the writings of Soederblom as a Liberal "so disheartening in their jumbled brilliancy and their maze of winsome and repellent elements." One might find a symbol of the soul of the Swedish arch- bishop in two recollections which we have of his visit to the United States in 1923. For one thing, he delivered 130 lectures at eleven universities, which received him as the most distinguished Protestant representative of modern thought. But with him he carried in a leather plush-lined case a bishop's crozier seven hundred years old, which he bore as he walked in procession at the church meetings which welcomed him as the Augustana Synod's visitor from the "Mother Church." Probably there has not been among the church leaders of the last fifty years a figure which united such discordant elements of deep sentimental regard for the inheritance which has come down to us from the Apostolic Church and the sponsorship of destructive Biblical criticism of the religionsgeschichtliche Schule, of which Soederblom, Ernst Troeltsch, and Bousset were the banner bearers. Accordingly, as one side and the other of his spirit impressed those who came into contact with him, he was regarded on the one hand as a champion of ancient truth and, on the other, as a leader in the naturalistic criticism of religion. He was born of devout Christian parents. His father was a pastor of distinguished ability, who regarded his highest calling to be the preaching of the Gospel. Soederblom tells us that as he grew up through childhood and adolescence to manhood, he learned to love the church in which he had been baptized and confirmed because the constant answer to his inquiries into the source of the many peculiar blessings which he enjoyed in this church was always: Martin Luther and the Reformation. The 316 Nathan Soederblom hymns were his delight. He asked his mother, "Who gave us these hymns?" and the answer was, "Martin Luther and the Reformation." He was interested in the Bible and read it with growing love and devotion, and when he asked, "Whence this Bible?" the answer was: "In our language through Martin Luther and the Reformation." When upon the high festivals the liturgical service of the church uplifted his soul and he inquired from whom they had received these forms of worship, he was told, "From Martin Luther." He tells us that his mother was his first teacher, and he adds this compliment, that she was the best teacher he ever had. He relates that he memorized Martin Luther's Small Catechism and never lost the thrill which he felt when he repeated Martin Luther's wonderful explanation of the Second Article. Years later, when he was primate of Sweden, the leading figure of the Second Lutheran World Convention, held at Copen- hagen, Denmark, 1929, he closed the meeting at which he had presented the greetings of His Majesty, King Gustavus of Sweden, by reading a scholarly paper on the subject : "Luther as a Christian P ersonality and His Significance for Northern Europe." Here are a few excerpts: "Luther takes up the classical documents of elementary in- struction. His Little Catechism continues what the Ancient Church and the Middle Ages had taught and done. Luther was come not to break up but to fulfill- obedient to the Master. His piety as well as his psychological grip are shown by the fact that Luther bases his teaching on the main items of the faith which had of yore been taught by the Church, viz., the Ten Commandments, from Moses' time, the Lord's Prayer, which Jesus gave to His disciples, and the summary of the Ancient Church of its faith in Father, Son, and Spirit. He kept to the classical tradition of the Church. An inevitable objectivity determined him. Was Chris- tianity to be stated in terms, the starting point must be sought in its most widespread and time-honored documents. The same rule must be observed this very day." In conclusion Soederblom said: "May the Word live and work among us ; God's Word and promises shall stand fast. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. . .. Shall we not, in our different languages, confess QUI' faith in our Lord together, using Luther's words?" All arising, led by the Archbishop, then confessed: "I believe that Jesus Christ, true God, begotten of the Father from eternity, and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary, is my Lord; etc." A Fundamentalist magazine, Chr'.stian Faith and Life (Oc- Nathan Soederblom 317 tober, 1931, p.543), continuation of the Bible Champion, broke a lance for the orthodoxy of Dr . Soederblom in such terms as these: "There have arisen voices who claim him as a Liberal, who awaken the impression that he had broken with the historic Christianity of Holy Scriptures, that he was an outstanding leader of the Modernists, true, not radical, but one of them. That is false - it is a glaring misrepresentation. It manifests either a deliberate attempt to distort the facts, or it is, as is so often the case, a superficial understanding of a great and devout faith." In support of this judgment Christian Faith and Life quotes extracts from the remarks addressed by Soederblom to the first Lutheran World Convention (1923): "With profound gratitude in our hearts we lift our voices in praise to God for His grace in sending the prophet Martin Luther to reveal to us again the atoning work of His Son. . . . Luther is the greatest evangelist the Church of Christ has known since New Testament times. . . . Luther's doctrine of faith is often interpreted as a strong psychological effect which a man produces in himself. This is utterly false. Luther himself wrote in his first exposition of the Lord's Prayer: 'Proud-spirited saints do more harm than any other people on earth, etc.' Weare nothing. We are poor, weak vessels with impure content or at best with no content at all. But the empty hand of trust is filled by God's mercy in Christ Jesus. . . . Luther's special mission lay in the fact that he revealed again, as no other since the days of St. Paul had done, the boundless depths of the love of God in the Crucified One. And this evangelical doctrine of the salvation alone through the grace of God it is our mission to keep forever pure and whole. Nothing else can assure us of eternal life .... "So therefore we gather under the name of Luther but by no means in the name of Luther. Rather do we gather in the Name of Jesus Christ. The Word of God is our only strength. No worldly means nor human calculations will suffice. The Word that Luther brought to light again, the Word of Revelation, above all, the Word become flesh, the incarnated Logos, - this is our suf- ficiency. By the grace of God we should also incarnate that Word in our hearts and lives, because that Word is the Will of God." On the same occasion Archbishop Soederblom gave his hearty "yea" to this article of faith: "The Lutheran World Convention acknowledges the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the only source and the infallible norm of all church doctr ine and practice, and sees in the Confessions of the Lutheran Church, especially in the Unaltered Augsburg Confession and Luther 's Small Catechism, a pure exposition of the Word of God." It is necessary that we quote such expressions as these, uttered 318 Nathan Soederblom or publicly acknowledged by Nathan Soederblom, in order to account for the acclaim with which he was received in the United States by many Lutherans, particularly by the officials, theologians, and parish clergy of the Augustana Synod on his visit to this country. Dr. Hultl) records the unequivocal statement of a Lu- theran official paper that Soederblom is "the Lutheran theologian who freely but firmly [italics by the original writer of the editorial] moves within the limits drawn up by the Word and the Confes- sional writings." I had occasion soon after to interrogate one of the Augustana Synod editors regarding the honors which his Church had shown a man whose theological position I had learned to regard even more radical than that of Adolph Harnack. I pointed out that he had not so long ago contributed an article to an Episcopalian paper, The Churchman, in which he denied the pro- priety of using the Psalms and Old Testament examples of praying for victory in time of war, since the Jehovah of the Old Testament differed in degree but not in kind from the tribal deities of other Semitic nations. The answer I received was : "The trouble is, when Soederblom writes as a philosopher, one must read him as a philosopher and not forget what he writes as a theologian." The view still prevails also outside the Augustana Synod that Soederblom's religious speculations have been misunderstood, that in his rich, poetical mind there welled up a wealth of symbols to express the inexpressible and to dress in modern scientific terms the ancient faith of Christendom, and that at heart he was a simple Lutheran Christian. We also heard the note sounded occasionally, while Soederblom was still living, that the Lutheran Church should be proud of possessing the greatest Protestant leader of the age. It is, therefore, not out of place that in the series now running in the CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY a chapter be devoted to a brief analysis of Soederblom's religious position. II Nathan Soederblom was one of the leading representatives of a group of religionists called the "History (or Science) of Re- ligion School." The representatives of this school of thought hold that religion is a product of natural evolution, which has attained its highest developments, so far, in Christianity. As already noted, he was associated both in thought and literary activity with Ernst Troeltsch of Berlin. So far as scholastic attainments are concerned, Troeltsch was the giant, his scholarship by far richer and more profound than that of his brilliant Swedish friend. You will find little in his writings, however, that will compare with Soederblom's aesthetic evaluation of Cr..ristianity and of ancient dogma, none of 1) Kirchliche Zeitschrift, 1916, p.468. Nathan Soederblom 319 that enthusiastic delight in the Lutheran Church as a Church, none of thai eager quest tor the spiritu ... ~. _~ .. _.ling of th_ _ ____ ..;h's life, as he understood it. Yet Dr. Troeltsch, like Professor Harnack, recognized the complete religious solidarity between himself and the Swedish archbishop. He praised Soederblom for eliminating the distinction of "pagan" and "Christian" from the study of religions. Fundamental to the entire scheme is the conception that the Old Testament religion like all others has developed out of animism (spirit worship). In general, the pan-Babylonian view is held, which makes the religion of the Old Testament a late development out of ancient Babylonian mythology. Basic is also the assumption that the tendency towards the recognition of one Supreme Power in the world is manifested at a comparatively early stage in the development of man. The broad distinctions are made between the religions of savages, the religions of primitive culture, the religions of advanced culture, and finally, to follow the classifica- tion of Morris Jastrovv}l "the religions ..rhich emphasize as an the co-ext ; of relig .... life and which ain at a consistent accord behvecn religious doctrine and religious practice." This is understood to be not sh-nply a dassh'ication but stages of development through which all the higher religions have passed. From Wellhausen and Kuenen down, the Old Testament is interpreted as offering a conception of Jehovah not inconsistent with the supposition that there are other gods, albeit inferior ones and unworthy of notice. These are the fundamentals of the History of Religion School. They cut away the very ground from our faith. All religion certainly disappears if what we have in the Bible is merely a product of evolution. In his Origin of the Idea of God (Preface) we are prepared for Soederblom's evolutionistic study of his theme thus: "No one can give an account of the origin of the God-faith. The super- human, Divine origin of religion is not accessible to research. And its earliest appearance on our earth lies beyond the oldest testimonies. We were not along." Then he traces through 340 of 390 pages, in truly evolutionistic manner, "the primitive beginnings, to which a God-conception in the proper sense with consequent worship has attached itself." The lowest form of animistic and like religions of the vvild tribes of the earth are studied, and he says of them: "Even if a God-faith in the proper, customary sense has not 1:~::n found, i: ::::: ::::t follow thererrom that man e "L -'ked religion" (p. 207). There is no mention of true religion in the Bible before the patriarchs. The fundamental rejection of the Christian concept of revela- 2) The Study of n.eligion, p.1l7. 320 Nathan SoederbloID tion runs through all the religionsgeschichtliche papers and books of Soe erbIc "FoJ the 'hole cycle of the churL~_ J ear is filled with the life of Jesus and its continuation in the work of the Spirit. . .. But the revelation is not finished. The Father worketh until now."3l In the rather confused and vague, but, as R. Seeberg 4l says, "ueberaus anregenden Ausfuehrungen von N. Soederblom," Vater, Sohn und Geist (1909, pp. 70-72), we have the same presentation of continued revelation: ".Teder, der mem oder werJ.ger bcwusst, aber doch wesentlich von Christus abhaengig, sich zur Gottesgewissheit durcharbeitet, zu innerer Be- freiung and Erneuerung des Lebens, erwirbt sich gleichzeitig einen Platz in der Geschichte der Offenbarung." The New Testament came under the judgment of the same d<::,,~ructive criticism. "We know that Jesus Christ Himself-who in His personality is recog- nized by faith as God's speaking work to men - He, too, was a child of His time, although He rises heavens-high above the ages. He thought like his contemporaries concerning the form of the earth and the course of the sun. Like them, he related certain fom ~ ins, to €'Jil ,pirH lat IT men emoni! ." 5) I the v.l'u.lion VL ... 'roeltsch, Soec.;:;:;:;:;lom\:. 'Y~'ithlg l .... Je c(,_~ribute_ largely to the wiping out of the line of disti11ction betWeen natural and revealed religion. III The study of the Comparative Science of Religion tends to relativize Christianity in the minds of all whose spiritual ex- perience has been defective, either by lack of Christian training or by too prominent an intellectual disposition. In the following we shall trace the effect of Soederblom's preoccupation with ver- gleichende Religionskunde upon his career as a churchman and a theologian. In a letter, of which I have the original before me, addressed by Archbishop Soederblom to certain Hindu Christians in 1922, the practical working out of the confessional indifference of the Swed- ish primate is plainly revealed. The Church of Sweden had taken over certain missions formerly conducted by German Lutherans. When the natives were informed of the fact that the Swedish Church had entered into alta~ dnd pulpit fellowship with the Anglicans (Church of England), they asked, "How can this be?" Replying to a letter -~ -roteoL .L:>m Hindu laymen, Soederblom defended this change of Lutheran policy, made under his admin- istration. In this letter he eJ-':pressed views regarding the Lord's Supper and other doctrines which later caused these native S) The Individual and the Church, 1909, p.17. 4) Der Ursp'Mhng des ChristusglauiJens, 1914, p.62. 5) The Y :' Aut tine, 19Hi, p.21. Nathan Soederblom 321 Christians to organize a separate body. In 1923 they joined the Missouri Synod group of congregations in India. Summing up the activities of Dr. Soederblom until 1924, Dr. Reu said, "He has given evidence of an absolutely morbid tendency for uniting the churches." Soederblom was not really in America as a guest of Au- gustana, in 1923, but came under the auspices of the World Alliance for Promoting International Friendship Through the Churches, of which he was first vice-president. This alliance was then (as it is now) federated with a Church Peace Council com- pletely under radical control and was then working with two million dollars of Carnegie money. In the announcement of his addresses it was distinctly stated that their purpose was to bring about union between the churches, and Soederblom's achievement of establishing fraternal relationships of the State Church of England and that of Sweden was particularly stressed in the announcements of the World Alliance. At a number of American universities Soederblom lectured on the subject "Luther, Erasmus, Loyola." A typical passage is the following: "We now see that Luther was quite as authentic a continuation of the deep religious life of the Middle Ages as Erasmus or Loyola. Erasmus best deserves the name of reformer. He wanted reform. He wished to remove a lot of weeds from life, worship, and doctrine. Luther and Loyola were impelled by a deeper pathos, an all-consuming desire for peace of soul. They found it in different ways, and each in his way forms an original religious type. It may be disputed which is the straighter way, that which continues through Luther or that which continues through Ignatius Loyola and Tridentinum." In spite of his veneration for the Apostolicum and Luther's Catechism, creedal statements were lightly esteemed by Soeder- blom. "We must not attach too much weight to formulas, how- ever important they may be. The work of the Spirit goes on con- tinually in the Church, and that work of the Spirit acknowledges no confessional boundaries." As for the road to Christian union, he expected little from doctrinal discussion. His essays and ad- dresses are singularly free from any attempt to mediate between the doctrinal positions of the historic Christian denominations. He advocated in a most outspoken manner those avenues toward union which would circumvent all doctrinal differences and by ignoring them lead the church into active collaboration on the basis of full Christian fellowship. "This path is called Christian co- operation. This method is fundamentally practical, not theoretical. All sin- cere disciples can join in it. Even those who cherish the hope of absorbing all fellow Christians in their own flock can center with us upon the path of love without any prejudice to their principles. 21 322 Nathan Soederblom . . . For Christian co-operation it has often been made a rule- either understood or clearly expressed - to ascertain uniformity of creed before the members of Christ's Church can agree to work wholeheartedly together in His name. Leave to each communion entire freedom to regulate its own faith and its own affairs. Is not our sincere yearning to follow the Lord enough? Is it necessary to go into the question of our different creeds, views, and customs when the great thing in common really exists in our hearts, namely, obedience to the voice of our Lord? Our own work in His service as well as the distress of our generation renders sys:- tematic co-operation imperative."6) In 1930 Archbishop Soeder- blom was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts in pro- moting international friendship through the churches. Naturally, sympathies as wide as those documented in these brief extracts, which are typical, would not stop at acknowledging religious fellowship with those who had broken completely with the concept of evangelical orthodoxy and with declared enemies of the Christian system of doctrine. When the ultraradical Mod- ernist Loisy was to be honored on his seventieth birthday, it was So blom 0 re~ =utec _, Sea •. :avia - lthel on the committee. He, as well as Harnack, was willing to honor a man who had been excommurlicated by the Roman Catholic Church on account of his rejection of ihe fundamental doctrines of Chris- tianity and who was then issuing one book after the other teeming with blasphemous heresies. Dr. W. H. T. Dau has analyzed 7) the relationship between Soederblom and Harnack in connection with the visit of the Ger- man theologian to the principal ecclesiastical and academic centers of Sweden in 1923. He quotes a conservative editor who voiced in Nya Vaektaren his disgust at the manner in which the primate of the Swedish Church conducted himself, at a recent synodical convention, as "bishop of the whole world," who, like the Pope, devotes himself to world politics. This endorsement of religious radicalism, of course, stems directly out of the archbishop's iden- tification with the History of Religion School. He had written in one of his earlier essays: "Ideell gesehen, kann man zu den Zeugen des i.."1..."1eren Lebens, die zusammen gehoeren und sich zu einer objektiven Macht sammeln, auch solche ausserhalb der biblischen Religionslinie stehende Persoenlichkeiten rechnen, die auf hoe- herem odeI' niederem Stadirnn eine gleichbedeutende Gotteser- fahrung erlebt haben, besonders Sokrates."8) Dr. Huh expressed 6) Christian Fellowship or the United Life and Work of Christen~ dam, 1924, p.155. 7) TheoLogical Monthly, 1923, p. 225 fI. 8) Vater, Sohn und Geist, 1909, p. 71. Nathan Soederblom 323 himself as "appalled by the Socinian breakdown of the atonement doctrine in The Religious Problem, 1910, pp. 425 ff. and on. The whole chapter pits the hopeless 'retribution doctrine' of, as he says, Brahmanism and Moses and Paul and later Christian thought against the 'deeper-lying law for God's line of conduct, election and faithfulness, grace and forgiveness, suffering and atonement.' " There is but a difference of rank and degree, but not of kind, between Socrates and Jesus viewed as channels of divine revela- tion. "History and revelation show us how Christ, God's supreme Son, the real Revealer, suffers and dies. Dogmatics that are more well-meaning and eager than Biblical and sound have emphasized the divinity of Christ in a metaphysical way which incurs the risk of crucifying God the Father and of transforming Golgotha and Jesus' cry of anguish 'Eli, Eli' to a sort of sham maneuver in divinity. The Christian Church has always rejected the con- clusion from the dogma of the divinity of Christ that God Himself, the one, sole Almighty, suffers."9) Christ was not essentially God but with Him "a divine ferment entered into our species akin to the image of God that is latent and deformed hl mankind." Two lectures were published 1921 by Hinrichs in Leipzig. The first: Gehen wir einer religioesen Erne1tertmg entgegen? The second: Der Kirche Christi Weg in dieser Zeit. These essays very well illustrate on the one hand the moral earnestness, the enthusiasm for good causes which characterized Soederblom, and also his dubious religious position, which never fails to move into the liberal field and finds its explanation there. For instance: "I know of no evangelical theologian of the better kind, be- ginning with Martin Luther himself, who would consider the doc- trine of the two natures and three persons and everything per- taining to these as perfectly expressing the Savior's personality and His witness concerning Himself and the Father." To which we would add that to reject a mystery and to regard it as too profound for our understanding are certainly two very different things. In the second of these essays Soederblom maintains that it is God the Father who suffers and that Christ is not essentially the eternal Son of God but only the Revealer of God. He ap- proaches pretty close to the vulgar Rationalism of the eighteenth century when he draws a parallel between the Virgin Birth and the clahns for a miraculous conception which have been made for Buddha, Pythagoras, Plato, and the Pharaohs of Egypt. "The heart of the idea is that such a person was regarded as a product of deity and furnished with divine powers." Concerning the In- carnation, he has this significant interpretation: "It is a fundamental 9) Christian Fellowship, etc., p.146. 324 Nathan Soederblom belief of Christianity that the appearance of Jesus is a miracle, that the Word, the Logos, God's Purpose, became flesh in Him." Not God, but the divine purpose, then, became flesh in Christ. The idea of a vicarious satisfaction for sin as taught by the Church is definitely rejected in this essay as in others. The author terms it an "easy exchange between the sufferer and the human souL" The entire discussion is based on the notion not of some objective result of Christ's suffering and death, but as a revelation of something that had previously existed but not recog- nized by men in its fullness - the love of God for mankind. Christ is represented as at the height of his office as Revealer in His suffering and dying. Regarding the resurrection of Christ, the most that Soederblom is ready to conceue is the genuineness of the Gospel narratives as a record of convictions held by the Evangelists, namely, that the same body that was laid in the grave came forth again. But as for an actual restoration of the crucified body of Jesus to physical life, Soederblom quotes 1 Cor. 15 as denying any such conception. There is here simply a spiritual "resurrection," "h"rdly rnore than a c~ lued lenCE the I nalit J eSL~. Dr. Reu closes an analysis of Der Kirche Christi Weg in dieser Zei+ "Q fo11"">'