Full Text for CTM Theological Observer 4-5 (Text)

(!tnurnr~iu UJqrnlngirul flnutlJly Continuing LEHRE UND VVEHRE MAGAZIN FUER EV.-LuTH. HOMILETlK THEOLOGICAL QU A.RTERL Y -THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY Vo1. IV May, 1933 No.5 CONTENTS FUERBRINGER, L.: Die pel'soenliche Weisheit Got tes ... . l'aa:e 321 I GRAEBNER, THEODORE: Buchmanism ... . . . .... . 329V'i WOHLFEIL, L. T.: What is Meant by ".All Fulness." Col. 1, 19? 339 HEERBOTH. L. Aug.: Exodus 6, 3 h. W as God Kll O W ll to the Plltriarchs as Jehovnh~ ... . ... . . . . . . . . .. . 345 KRETZMANN, P. E.: Das Commll Iohanneum. 1 Joh. 5.7 349 XRETZMANN. P. E.: Die H nuptschriften L uthers in cbro- nologischer Reihenfolge .................. ...... ...... 354 FRITZ, J. H. C.: The Theme of the Sermon. . . . . . . . . .. . ... 355 Dispositionen ueber die altkirchliche Epistelreihe . . '" . . 361 Miscellanea. . . ... .......................... . .. .. . ....... 369 Theologicnl Observer. - Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches ..... , 374 Book Review. - Literatur 389 £ 111 .Prf'di~er mU<:: 3 n icht allt!in welden.. r .. b t hE'in Din;.:. dQ.'· die L1..Ut4~ meh r 11 It ..1;1' t'r li ll Schafe wlI c""wpi,t'>. wit: 1ft'! del' Ki rehe Iwlt.wIt d l III tl il ~\lt, it! r. ,t'ht e Ch~ j- t t>n oIleli ·jll , somiern Pn . 1i:.{t. - .Jpo(f)!1ip . .. 4rt . ~~ . !'Oil· Ilil S C,' I;lte niC!itt .mgl~it '].I UIld ll1it I I t ll< I r 1111V· t Kh t ,I Tl unc·,rhin llmd. t~h('t.(>r L ·hr- ll'rfuehrlln und l rrtllll! eill· wilt) ,.:h:.Jl\ ph.'pan,' hilll ... elf tr) the battle;- til( hr,,". - -1 If 1 Cor. l~. S. Published for the Ev. Luth. Syn od of liIi.:i80tlri, Ohio, alld Ol-her States CONC ORDIA PUBLISHING HOUSE, St. Louis. M o. I 374 Theological Observer. - .Rircl)ltcl)=3eitllefcl)icl)tltcl)eg. Theological Observer. - stirdjndj~geitgefdjidjtndje~. I. ,2lmtrika. Buchmanism. ®o nennt ficlj dne lEc.tllcgung, bie I)ieraulanbe, oe~ jonben) auet m linglanb unb in anbern europiiifcljen 2iinbern, aiemficlj 21:uffe~en enegt. ;Ber &rlinber ber lEetvegung, naclj bem fie auclj genannt tvirb, iff bon ©aufe aus rut~erifcljer jjSaftor nnb ~a± aUf bell! ®eminar in j))?oun± ~nrtJ feine ifjeologifclje 21:nsoUbung erfjaIteu. llRan barf aoer ailet~ bings ben lEucljmanismus nicljt fo o~ne tvei±eres ber ~cretnig±en 2nt~e~ rifcljen SHrclje in Die ®cljufje fcljieoen, ba ~ncljman ficlj fcljeinoar fdne ,,~uclj~ manfcljen jjSrinaipien" in @::ngfanb ge~ort ~at. :;Sntereffant ift es nun, tvie Ohristianity To-day lioer biefe lEetvegung, bie namen±riclj un±et ben &e~ bifbeten "the first-century Christian fellowship" - tvas immer bas oe~ beuten mag - beroreiten tom, urteiIt. :;Sn einem ~rlifel Wirb ein getviffer Rev. Harold T. Commons, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Atlantic City, New Jersey, aiiiert, ber ficlj tioer biefe Oxford Group ausfpricljt, tvie foIgt: "After three years on 'the inside' I finally severed my connection with the Group out of loyalty to my Lord; for I realized that it is ac- tually far removed from real New Testament Christianity." Rev. Commons ~at aud) eine fl'Iugfcljritt oerfaf3t, marin er baf3 "Buchmanism is an- other one of the m"ny counterfeits and delusions of the latter days." 8u fjaoen iff bicfe fl'Illgfcljrift bam ~erfaffer, Rev. H. T. Commons, 17 S. Marion Ave., Ventnor, Atlantic City, New Jersey, luie Christianity To-day angio±. )!Bic tveiier aU§\lefii~rt tvirb, gefjiiren ilu bicfer &rnppe iOlllofjI 2ioerale tvte fl'unbamcnt(xrif±en. ~rllf ciner filraHclj abgeljaItcncn ~erfammlnng ber &mppe im Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in llletv [Jot! oegrlit±e lEifd)of )!B. >t. ilRanning bie @(ifte; 3ugegcn tvaren aud) lEifd)of fl'. ,;So IDccCSonneil, Dr. :;So~n m. ID?ott, Dr. @:. ~. ll)(c21:fee unb ~. 1)To§s ®tel1c.nfon, jjSriifibent bes Princeton Semi- nary. IEtidjer, in benen ber lEud)manismu§ oefcljrieoen tvirb, finb: For Sinne1's Only bon 21:. ~. mll11eil unb The Conversion of the Church bon ®. We. ®~oemafer. OMistianity 'Po-day urtetrt tioer bie ~etvegung: "Such knowl- edge as we have of this movement does not lead us to rejoice greatly at the apparent success that is attending its advocates. 'We cannot agree with them that what they are propagating is in any adequate sense of the word first-century Christianity or even that the methods they employ are those that the apostles employed. The vel'y fact that Modernists and Punclamell talists seem equally at home within its fellowship indicates that there is nothing very distinctively Christian 11 bout the movement. The apostles are about the last men this world has known who would approve when :U1'. Russell writes (p. 142), with 1'111'. Buchman approving' (p. 145): 'Through a unity in common action many of divers religious be- liefs and more of Hone have reached an altitude of Christian experience which may hold the one possible solution of modern world problems.''' :Bum lllinbefien !nUB bom ~ucljmanismlt§ gefagt luerben, bat er cine unio~ niftifclje ~etvegung ift, bie reinen Haren jjSofaunenton Ietben rann, tvotan ficlj ba~er al1clj fein oefenntnistrellet CS~rift oe±eiIigen barf. :;So >t . . m. Theological Observer. - Stird)lid)'Seitgefd)id)tlid)cs. 375 Debate on Missions Proceeding. -As was to be expected, the so- called "Laymen's Report" is eliciting very much discussion in sectarian (' circles, some speakers championing, others rejecting, the views of the authors of the report. There are many people who correctly perceive that the question is whether Jesus Christ is to be looked upon as merely a Savior or as the Savior of the world and whether the Christian religion is merely the outcome of a process of evolution or whether it rests on divine revelation. The reporter of a meeting held in Philadelphia thinks that the report "may prove to be the most divisive statement in this generation." Quite interesting are some of the remarks made by Dr. Robert Speer of New York at the meeting just alluded to. We are told that in speaking of the criticism directed against the missionaries in the field, holding that some of them are too narrow and provincial, this great mis- sionary leader of the Presbyterians admitted that the missionaries are limited in their outlook, but stated that he felt the same was true of everyone else in the world, including the members of the commission, and that it would be difficult to find anywhere a group which rated higher in its chosen work than the missionaries." Quite interesting, too, is the remark ascribed in this same correspondence to Dr . William T . Ellis, who said "that in his eighteen months on mission-fields he had shaken hands with over one thousand missionaries and that they excelled the workers at home." We ourselves do not hesitate in the least to subscribe to this sentiment. A. Men who have Surrendered the Authority of the Scriptures. - ~~ They constitute the majority of the Protestant theologians. There is, first, the great host of the "liberal" Protestants. Reviewing the recent publi- cation Oontemporal-y Ame1'ican Theology: Theological At~tobiogl'aphie8, Vol. I, C. M. Jacobs, president of Philadelphia Seminary, writes in the Lutheran of January 12, 1933: ''With the solitary exception of Professor Machen the writers have surrendered the old Protestant belief in the authority of the Scriptures. To be sure, none of them would deny that there is truth in the Scriptures, but they would require the Scriptures to be substantiated from outside of themselves. This substantiation seems to be located by almost all the writers in 'religious experience.' And yet there is no evidence of any agreement on what 'religious experience' really is. . .. It contains the contributions of twelve men. . .. It repre- sents the viewpoint that we generally call 'liberal.' . .. Only one of the contributors belongs to the conservative group, and Professor Machen is known, even in conservative circles, as a reactionary." Liberal theology has divested Scripture of its divine authority. And a great number of "conservative" theologians are doing the same. All those theologians who refuse to identify Scripture with the Word of God are surrendering the authority of the Bible. One of them is Dr. Jacobs. In this same review he states: "This indifference to the 'theology of crisis' may be due to an equal indifference to the conception of 'the Word of God.' The term does not appear in the index, and the idea scarcely appears in the book. There are abundant references to the Scriptures; but in Lutheran theology the two are not equated." Scripttwe and the W01'd of God al'e not eqttated in Lutheran theology! Dr. Jacobs is reaffirming the statements he made at his induction into his present office: "But with all the emphasis which 376 we lay upon the Scriptures we do not identify them with the Word of God. 'Ve confess that the Word of God is a means of grace; none of us will say that the Bible is a means of grace, save as it preserves in human language, and passes down from generation to generation, the record of God's Word." But he who refuses to identify Scripture with the Word of God no longer accepts the Bible as the divine authority. 1) There is the plain statement: The Scriptures are not absolutely the Word of God. Only God's 'Word carries authority, and whatever part of the Scriptures is not God's Word cannot bind us. - So much of Scripture is authoritative as is God's Word; but 2) which portions, statements, words of the Bible, are God's Word? Unless that can be shown beyond the shadow of any doubt, the entire Scriptures are worthless to us. The Bible contains no index or notes which declare what portions are, what portions are not, God's ·Word. The reader must determine that. What test must be em- ployed? Dr. Jacobs will not have the test of "religious experience" applied. He assures the "liberal" theologians that that test cannot determine how much of Scripture is the truth. He has not yet told us how he distinguishes between Scripture and God's 'IVord. But whatever test he applies can only be a human test. He can give us only human authority for his findings. He thus believes in an authority of Scripture which rests on human authority. He has surrendered the article of the divine authority of Scripture. How much would that "'iVon, of God" be worth to us which Rey. D. F. Forrester, S. T. D., offers to us? Writing in the Liv-in.q Ghttroh of February 11 on "The New Testament in the Seminaries," Dr. Forrester finds the 'iVord of God in the Scriptures in this way: "All of them [the writers of the epistles] struggled with evident limitations of temperament, environment, and vocation. In their case it is necessar,)' not only to find out what they said, but also what they were trying to say, what the eternal 'iYord of God was saying in them to all men everywhere. . .. The wheat must be sifted from the chaff, the 'Worcl' taken from the worn-out wrappings. And then that 'Word' shall be made plain. All must be fitted to our modern thought. . .. What is warped and ill-balanc~ 1 lllllst be corrected, what ,yas neglected must be added, what was soiled by the heat and dust of controwrsy must be polished until it is bright and clear again." That is the crucible in Dr. Forrester's laboratoTY through which Scripture lllust pass in order to yield the VVord of God. Dr. Jacobs will hardly emplo~" this crucibie. But whichever crucible he may ell1Jllo~', he ha.~ jnvested \vhrrt he offers lV \vith only human authority - the authority of Dr. Jacous, which his collb ... ~ues may not recognize. - 3) Keo-Luther- anism destroys the authority 0.1 the Bible by its refusal to bow to 2 Tim. 3, 16. Denying the verbal and plenary inspiration of the Scriptures in spite of 2 Tim. :3, 16, hrpakin_ down the D.uthorit:y of a single sbtement of the Bible. it invalidates all statements of the Bible. E. '!lie ~idHigfcit ncr neutfdlcn 6jJrllllje fitr :!:f)Co[ilgen. @ana eigen~ tfrmIiclj oerfrljr±e e£i lln£i, af£i mit im ".\311±lj. ~ero[bU Me ,mage ei.ne£i unga~ rifcljen ebangeHfcljen )jSaf±or£i Iaj'en, ber ficlj barfrber aufljiirt, bat bie eban~ gdiiclje @eiftIicljfei± in Ungarn niclj± meljr bie beutfdje @lptadje fern±. mir ref en: "itber bie fpradjIidje ~ht£ibHbung ber llngarifdjen clJangefifdjen @ei.ft~ Iidjen btadj±e ba£i ,(ifbangcHfujor .\3aPia' cincn bemeden£imetten attifef au§ ber ~eber lJe~ mefefcfaoaer )jSfarrer£i @uftab @)ileberenIJi. SDarin oeton± er Theological Observer. - .fl:itcf)1icf),,scitgcid)id)tlid)cs. 3 77 Die befonbere ~ebeutung, bie bei bcr ~(u~bHbung ber el1angeIififjen StljeoTogen bC!: bcuticfien ®pracf]c 5ufant, in foIgenbcn ~ht£:fii~rungen: ,~n£: iifj feiner~ scit llon ber I{Srei3burger clJangeIififjen )t~corogie ilur lSortbiIbung naifj ~CltfdJlanb moute, 1l111rbe ciner meiner 'frofefforcn badber ltnge~aI±en unD lagie miL: ,,®inb mir dIva niifjt Hug genug, unb gIauben ®ie, in :Ileutfd)~ fanb me~r au Icrnen~" :Ilie~ i1± ber 13rotJinaiaH£:mlt~, bem unfere 2e~rer J.lfimag tJerfaIIen finb. .;seber ®eeIforger braud)t 2e6cn~crfa~rung unb einen meiten ®efid)±§hei£:.' ,,,t . .9R. The Oxford Movement. - Prof. Dr. :Emil Brunner, \\pll know11 as a, supporter of Karl Barth, writes an interesting article ill the Ki1'chenblatt fuel' die reto1'mieTte Bahtl'ci." on the English Oxford Movement. In Hl:33 this illlwement. is cdehmting its first centenary. Dr. Bnllmer says that the' Oxford :J10vemellt., as a High Church and lit.urgical mOYement, is spreading in other count.ries and that. its st.rength lies in the fact. that it considers a. world revolution possible and places a~ainst. a common and st.rong·ly concentratect hate of Christ. a. propaganda for a common and strongly concent.rated love of Ghrist. The moyement. notes -not unjustly- the' existing powerlessness as rega.rds the faith and the leadcl'ship of the Protestant. Church world and offers a remedy. "I am not an Oxforder," Theological Observer. - ,lhrdjHdh3eitgefd)id)Hidjes. 381 writes Professor Brunner, "but we must feel the impetus which this move- lllent has given to the churches. If such an impetus COllles frOlll the evangelical side, more strongly and with still more force, so much the better." - Evnngelioa,l News B1weau in H oUnn,d. ~ie eUllltgefifdjc SHtdje ilt oftcrrdd) ltnicrt. )8efannHiel) ~a(len fiel) bie In:otef±antifel)en SHtel)en in :Dftetteiel) 11eteinigt. S\)et illame Union routbe abet iingftliel) betmieben, lueH e<3 aIi3 alli3gemael)±e iSael)e gaIt, bat fetne bet oefte~enben SHnlJen il)re ffieel)±c pteisgcoen fome. 9hm ift es aoet boel) Union, roie bie ,,2r. Q;. 2. Sl'." Ii etiel)tet. lffiir lefen ba: ,,:i5e me~t bie neue Q3etfaffung oefannt roitb, befto meljt mUB Iicfiitel)±e± roerben, baB fie ben oeteel)tig±en )8cIlmgen bci3 2u±1)ct±umi3 niel)± ffiedjnung tragi." :i5n einem 2rt±ifeI flag± ein ru±~etifel)ct lffiot±fii~tet bet 0:legnet bet neuen mtdjell~ betfaffung, \.)Sfatter st'oel) in 2rt±etf ee, 111ie foIgt: ,,~a<3 iSdjItmmfte ift unb o IeiIit, bat Ulli3, bie tvir in llnferer renten eLJangeIifel)en ~irdje 2rugsourgi~ fdjen )8efenn±niffei3 ge±mtf±' un±ettiel)±e± unb fonfitmiet± 1110tben finb, bie 111it i~t 5J::reuc geloot 1)aben, biefe unfete )8efenn±ni<3fitdje nun einfadj ge~ nommC11 roitb, ~enn bie Siitel)e bet neum ~itdjmbetfaifltng 'ift cine un i e t ± e st i tel) e, mag audj ber mame Union iingftIiel) betmieben fein. S10ftbarc ®iiter bet el1angeIifel)Cl1 lffia1)tfjeit, bic unfercr stitdje anllcrtraut finb, luerben bamit altfgegeoen, U ~tc pro±ef±antifdje Union in of±erreidj neftaItet riel) fomit gan15 iilmIidj IUle tie in \.)Sreuf3en unb ~eu±fdjr(mb iiJjer~ [pupt Unier ben llmf±anben IileiIi± ben 2ltt~eranem in tfterteiclj nidj±§ cmbercs Hbtig als bas ~efenntnii3 bmdj bie ::rat, niimHel) bmclj 2o§fagung bon bet nellen ~irel)cnbetfafiung. :i5. :it. IDe. The DE tlda:' of -- :tin -Juther. - Some time ago it was re- ported in several newspapers that in Baltimon~ there lived a direct descen- dant of Martin Luther, Dr. Aloysius Luther, who was a Roman Catholic priest, With reference to the ahoye report the well-);:nown Gcrman histo- rian Dr. Otto Sartol'ius writes in the Deutsche PtulTel'blatt that. at the present time there are 646 descendants of Dr. JVIartin Luther still alive, but tlwt none of theSe beal' the n'"i1lC of Luther. The last descendant who 10re the name of Luther was thc jurist Martin GoUlie1 Luther, who died unmarried at Dresden in 1759. Of the 646 still living several descend hom :Margaret Luther, the dang-htel' of Luther who marriecl Herrn von Kunheirn, and from the two granddaughters of Luther, children of his son Dr, Paul Luther, Among these 180 different family names aTe found. :iHost. of these clescelHlauts live in Thuringia and n :ony: the re,t are scat.tered over the whole world. Among these 046, __ .. ever, there, is Hone, according to Dr. Sartorius, who is a Catholic priest. EvanqclicaZ News 1 'au ill Holland, l}111ic~mmfj nee ~L'Utfd)cn (};uuugcfifdjen SH1..,~ .. liuniJei3. m3ie bie n~'f. Q;. 2. st," mit±eirt, ~a± bie Q3eteinig±e Q;iJ.~2u±1), ~itdje 2ruftraIiens ben ~.[nfcljrltf3 an ben ~eu±idien Q;vangeIiic9en ShtclJcnbunb abgeIeI)nt. :i5n feinem 0djteiben an ben ~ircljenIiunb betonte bet 0:leneraIptiifei3 ber aUftraliidjen stirdje, P. is±Or15, aui3briicUiel), bat biefe 2rbre~nung eine enbgiiItige fei, bat Sll tem aJjre~nenben )8clel)lut abet niel)± eine "geroiHe Q3etftimmung" ge~ fiif)t± 1)abe; es jelen I)ingegen grunbfiiJ,}ridje [lebenfen, bie bie anftraIifdjen 2ut1)etanet au i~remQ;ntfdjlut Iieftimmt 1)aiten. S\)odj [egten bie 2u±~e~ ranet in 2ruftrarien lffied taranf, bie Q3etIiinDung mit bet bett±fdjen .l()eimat unb bor allem mit ber [u±1)erijel)en Slirdje in ~eutfdjranb mogIiel)ft felt aU 382 Theological Observer. - ~ird)lid)'2eitgeid)icf)t1id)es. milpfen. 6ic luoIlten ba~ Eeben ber Stircqe in SDeutfcqlanb "miterIeben". 6ie ~offten, bie~ am beften baburcq erreicqen au fiinnen, baf3 Die {Yiiben aluifdjen \!tuftraIien unb bem rut~erifdjen &jHf~luerf miigIidjft feft gemilpft luerDen, unD feien ber frberaeugung, baB i~re ~erbinbung mit ber Iut~e~ rifcqen ®efamHtrcqe in SDeutfcqlanb am beften bireft unb o~ne ~ermittrung einer nicqt au~gefprocqen rut~erifcqen Organifation aUftanbe fommen unb er~aIten luerben fiinne. ~n Dem 6cqreiben ~eiB± e~ au~brilcfIicq: ,,{yilr un~ ~ier taugt nur nare~, bef±immte~, natiirIicq au~ inner em @5rlefmi~ ~erbor~ gegangene~ {Yeft~anen am g)efenn±ni5 ber ~ii±er. u SDa~ ift ein fcqiine~ g)efenntni~; aber lua~ foIl bie g)etollung be~ "inneren @5rlebniffe~U? ®ilt in \!tuftraIien nicqt me~r ba~ 6djriftprinaip? @5~ ift fein {Yortfcqritt, luenn man ba~ uinnere @5rlebni~u aum principium cognoscendi macqt. ~.;it. WI. ,iTohn Caly,ill and the Bible. - An article with this heading by Prof. Thos. C. Johnson, which appeared in the Evangelical Qual·terly of July 15, 1932, investigates the charge that John Calvin did not believe in the plenary, verbal inspiration of Scripture, since he did not believe in the absolute inerrancy of Scripture. The writer first establishes Calvin's teaching on inspiration. H e quotes Calvin's comments on 2 Tim. 3, 16: "First he [St. Paul] commends the Scripture on account of its authority and secondly on account of the utility which springs hom it. In order to uphold the authority of the Scriptures, he declares that it is divinely inspired: for if it be so, it is beyond all controversy that men ought to receive it with reverence. This is a principle which distinguishes our r eligion from all others, that we know that God hath spoken to us a nd are fully convinced that the prophets did not speak at their own sug- gestion, but that, being organs of the Holy Spirit, they only uttered what they had been commissioned from heaven to declare. Whoever, then, wishes to profit in the Scriptures, let him first of all lay down this as a settled point, that the Law and the Prophets are not a doctrine delivered according to the will and pleasure of men, but dictated by the Holy Spirit . .. . " The writer might also have quoted these statements from the Institutes of the Ohristian Religion, IV, 6-9: "To these at the same time were added historical details, which are also the composition of prophets, but dictated by the Holy Spirit. . .. Unless the Spirit of Christ went before and in a manner dictated words to them. . .. Although, as I have observed, there is this difference between the apostles and their successors, they were sure and authentic amanuenses of the Holy Spirit, and there- fore their writings are to be regarded as the oracles of God, whereas others have no other office than to teach what is delivered and sealed in the Holy Scriptures." That certainly is the Scriptural doctrine of verbal inspiration. But did not Calvin nullify his teaching by denying the abso- lute inerrancy of Scripture? Dr. Johnson finds thus on this point: "Did Calvin hold nevertheless that there are errors in the Bible? He has been represented by some to teach that there is an error in Matt. 27, 9 and an- other in Acts 7,16. But what he says on Matt. 27, 9 ('Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah, the prophet') is: 'How the name of J ere- miah crept in I confess I do not know, nor do I anxiously trouble myself to inquire; certainly, that the name J eremiah ha~ been put by an error for Zechariah, the thing itself shows; for nothing like this is read in Jeremiah.' To represent Calvin as here acknowledging an error in Scrip- Theological Observer. - .Ritd)lid)'8eitgefd)id)tlid)e~. 383 ture as it came from the liand of its original authors is without warrant. He says that the name Jeremiah here has obrepserit (crawled in), has crept in}· and in view of what he has taught about the inerrancy of the sacred historians he can only mean that this error has orept in in the course of the transmission of the text to subapostolic ages. As to Acts 7,16: In his exposition of this passage these words are found: 'And whereas he [Stephen] saith afterwards they were laid in the sepulcher which Abraham had bought of the sons of Hemor, it is manifest that there is a mistake in the word Abraham. . .. Wherefore this place must be amended.' Now, Calvin simply teaches here that there was a mistake in the passage as it lay before Calvin. He is not at pains to tell the reader in the passage itself or its immediate context by whom the mistake was made. But the reader acquainted with Calvin's representation of the real source of the original text of Scripture, made throughout his life, can have no doubt that he would have said if asked who had introduced the mistake, 'Oh, a copyist' (substantially as he had said of a difficulty in Acts 7, 14). In his comment on this fourteenth verse he had said, 'Whereas he saith that Jacob came into Egypt with seventy-five souls, it agreeth not with the words of Moses; for Moses maketh mention of seventy only.' And after giving comments by certain others, he gives his own view of the apparent discrepancy between Moses and Stephen: 'I think that this difference came through the error of the writers (librari- o?·um) wh.o wrote out the books. And it was a matter of no such weight for which Luke ought to have troubled the Gentiles, who were used to the Greek reading. [?] And it may be that he himself did put down the true number and that some man did correct the same amiss out of that place of Moses.' (Calvin, Oom. on Aots, Vol. I, 197.198.) These two cases are usually considered the most favorable to the view that Calvin held to the errancy of the sacred text. They are worthless for the purpose." (See CONC. THEOL. MTHLY., II, p. 943.) But does not Calvin hold that the apostles occasionally gave incor- rect quotations from the Old Testament? Professor Johnson answers: uFor his view of the propriety of the quotations of the Old Testament by New Testament writers it will suffice to read his comment on Matt. 2, 6: 'It ought always to be observed that, whenever any proof is quoted from Scripture by the apostles, though they do not translate word for word and sometimes depart widely from the language, yet it is applied cor- rectly and appropriately to their subject. Let the reader always con- sider the purpose for which the passages of Scripture were brought forward by the evangelists, so as not to stick too closely to the particular words, but to be satisfied with this, that the evangelists never tort~!re S01-ipt~we into a different meaning, but apply it oorrectly in its native meawing. [Italics mine.] But while it was their intention to supply with milk children and "novices" (1 Tim. 3, 6) in faith, there is nothing to prevent the children of God from making a careful and diligent inquiry into the meaning of Scripture and thus being led to the fountain by the taste which the apostles afford.' If Calvin notes an occasional variation by a New Testament writer from the literal translation of an Old Testa- ment passage, he notes also that the New Testament writer makes the variation to clarify the message delivered by the writer of the Old Dis- 384 Theological Observer. - ~irdJlidJ'8eitgefd)idJHidJes. pensation and to apply it to the case for "':hose solution or enforcement he uses it." It cannot be denied, however, that Calvin unfortunately assumes that the New Testament writers now and then, in quoting from the Old Testa- ment, went beyond the native meaning of the passage a dduced. Lehre 1tnd Wehre, 16, p. 207, mentions as a ca se in point Calvin's comment on John 19,23 f.: "The passage which they [the evangelists] adduce from Ps.22 seems to be referred improperly (int empestive) to the present business" (the parting of Christ ' s raiment among the soldiers). "For when David there laments that he has fallen a prey to his enemies, he uses the term 'garments' metaphorically, to designate his all; as though he had said with this one word that he had been plundered and despoiled by the wicked. P aying no attention to this figurative use of the word, the evangelists depart from the native sense (a nativo senS1b discedunt)." Baier-Walther, 1., p .. lOO, cites, in addition to the fOTegoing, Calvin's comment on Ps. 8: "While the prophet is speaking of the glorious state of man, the apostle refers it, Heb. 2, to the exinanition of Christ. . .. What the apostle thereafter says on the brief humiliation is not taken from the text (non est exegetimbm), but he applies (defiectit) to the matter in hand what had been said by David in another sense. So, too, in Eph. 4, 8 he does not so much interpret the passage Ps. 68, 18, but r ather , piously changing the meaning (pia deficctione) , makes it apply to the person of Christ." It appears that Calvin here suffered a momentary lapse. He would not have used the phrase 'pia deflectione' if he had remembered tha t the Holy Ghost is the real Author of Hebrews and Ephesians. And the term de- fiectiane does not fit in with his statement "that the evangelists never t orture Scripture into a different meaning, but apply it correctly in its native meaning." Calvin certainly cannot be made a champion of a "lib- eral" view of the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures; but he did permit himself to use expressions which are not consistent with the doctrine of verbal inspiration. Dr. F. Pieper (Clw . Dog., I, 332) puts it thus: "How- ever, it must be admitted that Calvin, in contradiction to his direct statements that Scripture was written dictante Spirit1b Sancta and that the holy writers must be regarded as Spi1-it1tS Sancti amanuenses, occa- sionally finds that the evangelists quote the Old Testament incorrectly. (See his comment on John 19, 23 f.: 'The passage which they adduce from Ps. 22, etc.') This is an inconsistency on the part of Calvin." E. The Largest Church of the World. - In the Allgemeine Evan· gelische Ki1·chenzeitung we read that in Liverpool, England, a Catholic / cathedral of enormous dimensions is being erected a t present, the architect / being Sir Edwin Lutyens. It is stated that this cathedral will be the / largest church or temple in the world. It will far surpass the Dome of St. Peter in Rome. It will even be larger than the so-called Gol Gunbaz at Bijapud near Bombay, India, erected by Sultan Mohammed Adil Shah. The cupola of the new cathedral at Liverpool will have a diameter of 168 feet and will be supported by four large arches. To give an idea of i ts size, we may state that the building will cover an area of 33,000 square feet; St. Peter's in Rome occupies an area of only 27,069 square feet. Up to this time the cathedral at Winchester had the reputation of being the longest of all of them, its length being 560 feet. The Liverpool Theological Observer. - stitd)1id)~3eitgefd)id)tlid)e~. 385 cathedral will be 676 feet long. The height of the cross which will crown the cupola is to be 150 feet. In its interior the building will have forty- six altars. - The question arises whether Roman power in England is growing. Last year the Catholic Church in England added about 18,000 names to its list of members. The total now is 2,253,420. A. / Number of Catholic Priests in the World. - The Allgemeine Evan- gelisch-Lutherisa ;;; ifir~r;;;;;eitung' presents statistics on the number of Roman Catholic priests throughout the world, saying that there are 321,000 of them, of whom 257,00{)1 are "secular priests" and 64,000 priests belonging to certain orders. America has 51,000 of them, Europe 252,000, Africa 4,800, Asia 10,500, and Australia 2,200. It is .interesting to note that thirty years ago the mlmber of priests was 235,000. A. The Proposed "Free Church of America." - The Clwistian Gen- ttwy of January 26 reports: "On January 12 the commissions of the Uni- tarian and Universalist churches released their report, after a year of joint consideration of the 'practicability of uniting these two communions for the common good.' They reject both 'the status q1W' and 'o1'ganic merge1" and advise the formation of a representative 'council' on the basis of 'unity of purpose, the bond of highest r eligious fellowship.' 'Local churches would retain t heir present name, adding F ree Church of America.' 'The merger of local churches might or might not be wise.' It is suggested t hat some twenty lines of effort be carrie(l on in common, including church extension, education, publications, and cooperation with the International Association for Liberal Christianity ." A. "iilicr ulltcrifunifdie :Iriiumc ~inluegl/ in ~rllfmcn. jffiie wit au£l bet ,,~ITgemeinen (fb . ~.2uff). Si:ircljenaeitung" fe~en. ~a± ficlj bie (fbangelifclj ~ .2u±~etifclje @JL)nobe bon @Jan±a Si:a±~atina. ~arana unD anbern @Jtaaten Q3rafifien£l an ben ;Deu±fcljen (fi1angelifcljen Sfitcljenliunb angefcljloffen. ;Die @5L)nobe aii~I± 40.000 l5eeIen unb etwa 80 @emetnben mit 84 ~af±oten. ;Die @5t)nobe. wie in bet "Si:itcljenaeitung" lie~aupte± witb. liefennt ficlj aUt S)eiIigen @5cljtift unb au fiimtIicljen Q3efenntni£lfcljtiften bet ebangeIifclj~ Iut~etifcljen Sfitclje. (f£l ~eif3t nun in bem \l!uffat. worau£l wit aitieten: ,,;Diefet Iu±~etifclje [~arafiet bet @Jl)nobe. bet bie @runblage i~re£l (fn±~ fte~en£l ift unb auclj i~te£l Q3efte~en£l lilcilien with. foIT butclj lieftimmte @5icljerungen. bie bet Si:itcljenliunb liei ben 18et~anblungen augefag± ~at. gewa~t± lileilien. ;Die (finae~eiten finb noclj nicljt offentIiclj liefanntgegelien. (fin ~afiot. bet in£l ~[uge gefaf3t iff flit bicfen 2wecr. iff \l!u£lliiIbung bet ~af±oten in lHeuenbetteHiau unb \l!u£lliliung cinet gewiffen ~ufficljt in fon~ feffioneI1et Q3eaie~ung feiten£l bet Iu±~etifcljen .2anbe£lfitclje bon Q3al) em. " ;Del' @5cljteiliet jene£l ~uffate£l tut ben merrwiitbigen \l!u£lfpruclj: ,,;Die .2ut~eranet Q3rafiIien£l mUf3ten aoet etft liliet ametifanifclje :il:'tiiume ~in~ meg. e~e fie ficlj au biefem ~nfcljlut entfcljloffen." ~f± bamit aUf unfete \l!toeit in Q3rafiIien geaiert? ;Da6 UrieH iiliet bie ~rage. wo e~er ma~re£l .2ut~et±um oU finben iff. liei bem gana unioniftifcljen ;Deu±fcljen (fban~ geIifcljen Sfitcljenliunb obet in ber lllhffoutifl)nobe. fonnen wit gettOf± itgenb~ cinem unoefangenen Q3eurteilet iioetlaffen. ;Danfliat brucren wit ~iet bre ~(u6fil~tungen D. S'teu£l in bet ".\HtcljIicljen 2ei±fcljrift" born ~elitltat b. ~. liliet ben genannten ~[nfcljIllf3 ali: ,,(f£l ift auclj barum ein fitcljcngefcljiclj±nclje£l (fteigni£l. InciI e£l cine 25 386 Theological Observer. - .Il:itctlict~.8eit!lefd)icttlicte§. bam £utijerifdjen @otic§raf±en gegrilnbe±e, unterftilJ;}te un!> geIeite±e ®t:)nobe if±, bie fidj nun an ben au§ reformierten, unieden unb ru±ijerifdjen stirdjen ilufammengefeiJten stirdjenounb menbe±. ®onf± tum ber @oite§faften feine eigcncn, Iut£jcrifdjen jffiege gegangen, unb jene brafiIianifdje ®i)nobe ijat jaijreIang im (lJegenfaJ;} au ber benadjoaden unicrten ®lJllObe ®ilbbrafiIiens gcftanDen, bie 310m: nidjt unter bem Stirdjenbllnb, luo£jI aber untcr bem SUerIiner £JbedircL)Cnrat fteij±, ber feinerfeit§ im .ltirdjenbunb mieber ein fdjmerroiegcnbc0 jffiort au fagen ija±. ®onft £jat mnn, oei ber SUielefeIber Zngung be0 Slirdjenbunbe§, fidj gemeiger± nUf ben \l(ntrng be§ medre±er§ bet (lJo±±ef3fnf±en, bie Wll§!anbarbeit nid)t burdj bie gemeininme offiaieile ®piiJe in SUcdin, fonbern fefof±iinbig burd) bie 52nnbe§fircf)C11, arfo bie !uiije< rifdje Wrbeit burdj bie Iut£jerifdjen .lhtdjen, bie unier±e burdj bic unicr±en, iun au laff en, infoIge mobon e§ au feinem Wnfdjlut ber @otie§faften an ben Sfirdjenbunb fam. mun aber mar e§ bie bom @otte§faf±en gegrilnbe±e ®l)nobe feTher, bie um WUfnn£jme ont; ja audj ber @otie§faften ijaitc fd)on oUbor feTher e§ oereit§ in froedegung geaogen, 00 er ben Stirdjenollnb nngeljen follie, Die Wroeit in SUrafiIien mitalltragen. @emit, mir minen, ber 8Hrdjew ounb ljat ber orafiIianifdjen ®i)nobe berfprodjen, iljren Iu±ljerifdjen SUefennt< ni§f±anb nidjt anautaften, i£jr 5U geftn±ien, iI)re ~af±oren nlldj ferner£jin bon meuenbeiteI§au au be3ic£jen unb ber bat:)rifdjen £anbe§fird)e cine \lid ~atemed)t liber bie ®l)nobe einauriiumen; joit: wiifcn nntilrlidj audj, baf3 nod) eillbebeutjcnner Unterld)ieb atlJifdjen bent )Berliner :Cberfirdjenrat unb bem ,\{irdjenbll!llJ, refp. feinem Wu§fdjull, bcfte0t. ~[bcr bn0 alie§ fdjafft bn0 !lid)± am ®eite, ma§ in ber offiaielien CSrf£iloUl,1 bcs '2(usfdju]fe§ bes SHrd)enbunbcB mH gemeint au fein fdjeint, !umn cr Don cinem ,firdjen< ncfd)id)±rid)cn CSreigni§' rebet.