Full Text for Die rechte Mitte in der Liturgie und Ordnung des Gottesdienstes, part 4 (Text)

(ltnurnrbtu UJ4rnlngirul :!Innt~l!J CoDtiDuiDg LEHRE UNO WEHRE MAGAZIN FUER EV.-LUTH. HOMILBllK THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY. THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY Vol. V July, 1934 No.7 CONTENTS Zur Lehre von der Reue. Th. E ngelder . •••.•••.•.•.••.•. " 497 Christian Burial. J. A. Petersen .••••.•.......•••...••.• " 509 Die rechte Mitte in der Liturgie und Ordnung des Gottes· dienstes. L. Fuerbrinr:er. • • • • • • • • • • • . . • • . . . . • . . • • • . • •• 520 The Question of Aramaic Originals. P. E. Kretr 1IlUl-o~ nicht aUein t('rv/'l4 . L i .. ( ".·ill Bing. ua' die Leute mt:hr al~(l da ..... cr diE' Schnfc uuwn,l'iiOil't \vic ""i de-T Kirch£' 1I4'iuu·1t dtnn di .. gute .., i e r t.'l'htc Chribtel'l soll('n 'l'ill.. nude-rn l'lf·.li~t. .1pol o!lzj • • \rt . .!-~ . • luch danelJ..·n d('n\\ oclft n wthn'n. dat-· ie dit' Schl1f~ niehl. nngreiff'n lIm} mit Ii the trumpet. gin~ an un("~rtain !«lWld, ral.pher Lehre "erfuehr('Tl lind lrrtum ein "h" .• hall pr~pa" hhll,elf to the battle? fuehn·n L",II,..,. 1 Cor. Lf. S. Published for the Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States OONOORDIA. PUBLISHING HOUSE, St. Louis, Mo. ARCHIV 520 ~ie red)te .IIJUtte in bet ~itutgie unb Dtbnung bes @ottesbtenftes. c.:tlie redjte 9JUtte in ber £ttltrgie 1mb Orbultng be~ ~J.ltte~bienfte~. 4. ~m borigen 2htifel uber ba~ obengenannte 5rfjema finb roir aUf bie redj±e @3teUung ber lu±fjerifdjen ~itdje gegenuber ben romifdj~ fatfjoIifdjen 2eremonien unb @ebraudjen eingegangen. ~n biefem biet~ ten m:r±Uel tlJoUen roir nodj einige biefer romifdjen @iinridj±ungen, bie burdj Hiurgif (1)e . )Beroegungen audj in anbern ~irdjen @iingang finben, befj.Jredjen unb bann biefe ganae m:r±ifelreifje aum m:bfdjlul; bringen . .2utfjer unb Die ~rdje ber 9teforma±ion fjaben ba~ aI±e ~ i r dj e n ~ i a fj r bewefjalten, unb mit 9tedjt. (Er fjat audj bie brei marientage ge~ feier±, unb Die lutfjerifdje ~rd)e iff ifjm gefolg± unb beobadj±et Mefe ~age gar mand)eror±~ nod) ie~t. (~d) feIbf± fjabe jafjrelang an ben marien~ unb m:j.Joftertagen @otte~bienft gefjarten.) @3ie fja± aud) bem ~rd)enjafjr in djrifHid)er iYreifjeit einige befonbere ®ebi:idj±ni~±age beigefiigt. m3ir feiern ba~ 9teforma±ion~fef±; .2anbgemeinben fjaI±en ein @irn±ebanffef±j mir beobadj±en in unf erm .2anbe ben iafjrIid)en SDanff agung~±ag; roir fjaben ben )BuB±ag. m3it fjaIten ben fdjonen @ang be~ ~rdjenia1)r~ feft gegenuber ben rcformier±en @iinfluffen unb rooUen e~ un~ nidj± burdj Sjereincriefjen aUBetfirdjIidjer ~ntereff en, burd) )Beriidfidj±igung bief e~ unb jene~ SDinge~ berberben unb fefularifieren laffen. @eroiB, .2utfjer fja± nidj± gleidj aUe mi±±elaHedidjen romifdjen iYef±e abgefdjaff±. ~n unferer .2u±fjeraUi::gabe finbd fidj cine ~rebigt am 5rage ber fogenann±en Sjimmelfa1)r± maria (XII, 1728), bie aUerbing~ nod) aui:: bem ~aljre 1516 f±ammt. @ir fjat aud) am 5rage ber fueuae~erfinbung gej.Jrebigt (XII,1854). @ir roar eben audj fjier oefonnen, fonferbatib, nid)t aroing~ Iifdj ober carlf±abtifd), tuar aud) nidjt mit einem male in aUen @3tiiden £lana nar unb fertig. @irf± bor furaem frag±e ein ~af±or unferer @31)nobe fafi erf djrocfen bei mir an in beaug aUf m:Ui::fj.Jriidje .2utljer~ wer bie ~ungfrau maria, bie roofjl niemanb unter un~ lidj aneignen murbe, unb unfere .2utfjerau~gabe fjat £lana mit 9tedj± m:nmetfungen baau gemadjt.1) .2u±ljer~ m:u~fj.Jriidje mUffen of±er~ aui:: f einer 2ei± berf±anben ro'erben. m:ber ie ranger, befto mefjr etfann±e et ben berberbIicljen @iinflul; bet bielen iSef±e, iunnDte fi(1) gegen bie bielen iSeier±age, bie nm ber iSaur~ ljeit unb bet @3djlemmerci bien±en, f±raf±e bie SjeHigenanrufung, nnnnte bie @ebrccljen unb @3unbcn ber SjeiIigen unb ljoff±e, baB e~ basu fommcn roerbe, bn13 ein ~ng m:braljnm0 unb m:bam~ gefeier± roerben iuurbe. 1) 'Sci bct \ptcbi\lt am stage ber &;iimmelfa~tt 5JJlariii ~eiflt es 3U einer gegangenen @efang ber @emeinbe, mag biciet audj im a.:~otfat nodj fo Tunf±boU: roeiteren±roicreIt fein. ;Bic cbangefifdjc S'eitdjcmnufif mut alfo aI§ foldje dnen boH§±iimIidjen a.:~arafter ~aoen. ;Ba§ ~eitt feine§roeg§, bat fie ooerfIiidjIidj nntt feidjt fein bUtfe, roa§ bet geiftigen 5tiefe be§ a.:~tif±entum§ nidjt en±ilnedjen routbe. @§ ~eif3t bieIme~t, bat fidj bie IDCufit bntdj dne ebIe @infadj~eit au§aeidjne nnb nidjt aligelegene llSfabe luanbk bie nut bet IDCufifet aU ge~en betmag. ;Ba§ @efndj±e unb @e~ fdjtauli±c, bas metgtiilicHe unb 1JcrnIiegenbe ift bet ~nbadj± nidjt fiitbcdidj. "S) ~liet bot mit Hegt dne 2eiiung§anaeige einer mitiet~ niidjtigen ~lienbma~Isfciet in ernet Iu±~etifdjen Sfirdje. jffienn idj bas Iettete nidjt roiitte, fo roiitbe idj e§ roo~I fUt cine tomifdje ~eranftaItung fjaItcn. ~dne jffiotibetfiinbigung, roo bodj 2utfjet fdjon in feinet etften Iitutgifdjen @;djrift ,,~on bet til biefe£i ~afjte£i fanb fidj bie fOlgenbe ~u£ifufjtltng, bic toit ofjne ~ommentar toiebergeben: "There is a tendency on the part of many Protestant churches to-day to 'borrow' or 'steal' from the Oatholic Ohurch in matters of ritual and litmgy. The Literary Digest, in its issue of March 17, publishes a large picture in its religious column of New York's newest Methodist Ohmch which turns out to be 'strikingly' Oatholic. We are getting so familiar with plagiarism of this kind that it attracts little or no attention. Sometimes it is even difficult to recognize a Oatholic priest, so many ministers have taken to wearing the Roman collar. The Lutheran Ohmch is now in the 'lime-light' with a pro- posal that seems startling to many ProtGstants to return to many of the liturgical usages which Luther did not abandon when he broke with the Ohurch. The proposal embraces the 'restoration' to Lutheran churches of such typically Oatholic observances as the canonical hours of the breviary, the celebration of saints' days, the wearing of Mass vestments, decoration of altars with 'flowers and lights,' burning of incense, and singing to be based on ancient Gregorian chant. Oon- fessionals, we may believe, are just 'around the corner.' It will be more difficult than ever when looking for a Oatholic chmch in a strange city to know whether or not wo are 'in the right place.' "Such tendencies on the part of non-Oatholic brethren seem to us a good sign. They are a compliment to the beauty and dignity of Oatholic worship and a secret admission of the 'mistake' made by the early reformers in abolishing them. "Perhaps, too, they will result in 'opening the eyes' of many well- disposed non-Oatholics to take the step back to the mother Ohmch from which they have been so long separated. When large Protestant churches like the Lutheran admit the need of a 'reformation' of their manner of worship, there is hope that the true Ohmch of Ohrist may again exert her perennial appeal to her prodigal wandering childJ.·en dissatisfied with the husks of imitation with which they are being fed by their religious leaders and will turn back the steps of many to 'their Father's house.' " ~bet toatum liefjanbefn wit bief e 6adjen fo aU£ifufjrfidj? QBenn biefe SDinge aUf bern @eliiet bet WmteIbinge Hegen, ~bia1Jfjom finb, bie man tun unb laffen fann, toatum fo biele QBorte madjen'? QBir fjelien nodjmals fjetbot, b-aj3 toit f efjr entf djieben fut tedjte, £lute @ottesbienf±~ orbnung finb, fur eine toilrbi£le, fdjiine @ef±artun£l unb i5cier bes £lanaen @ottesbienftes, einfdjliej3Hdj bes fjeiIi£len ~lienbrnafjI6, biefet teuertoer~ fen 6tiftun£l unfers S)eiIanbes, Me tedj± fIdj3ig unb toutbig lieooadjte± werDen foll, tooliei nicl)t bot all em baB mysterium tremendum, ba£i "IDCitafd", fonD em , toie Eutfjet im @tollen Sta±edji6mus fjerbot~ebt, Die "frennblidjen, licbHdjen QBOtte" bet @5infetung bebacl)t toerben follen (Trigl., 6.768, IDCiilIet, 6.508 f.); toit toollen mi± Eutfjct gem 528 )Die ted)te Iffiitte in bet \!iturgic unb Dtbnung bes @ottesDienftes. auef) aIle ~ilnf±e feljen im $Dienfte beWen, ber fie gegeoen unb ge~ f ef)affen lja±; wir oegrilj3en auef) aIle Iiturgif ef)en 6±ubien, Die nomen±" lief) in beilug aUf Me engrif djen ®o±±e§bienfte aUf ba§ reef)te ru±~erif ef)e @iroe einge~en gegeniioer bet reformier±en {SormIofigfd±, Unorbnung unb 2Billfiir; aoet wir f e~en, ilumal wenn wir bie ~iref)engef ef)ief)±e un§ bergegenwariigen, manef)e ®efa~ren in foIef)en iibertriebenen Iiturgifu)en ~clDcgungen, bie fef)liej3Iief) aIle meljr ober weniger ~oef)" firef)Iief) au§Iaufcn. 2!m 2!nfang will niemanb bie .2eljre antaften, fow bern fiu) nur aUf bie Seremonien unb ®eorauef)e oefef)ranfen. 2!oer frilljer ober fpater, OC1DU13t ober unbewuj3±, wirb auef) bie .2eljre in=' voluier±. IDean finbe± meljr in ben Seremonien unb ®ebrii:uef)en, aI~ barin Iieg±, BumaI wenn fie rii:nger in noung gewefen finb. $Dafilr fonnten wir au§ neuerer Sdt me~r aI§ e i n meifpieI anfilljren, wollen aber nur noef)maI§ an Me ljoef)firef)Iief)e mewegung in $Deutfef)Ianb unb an ba§ Oxford Movement in @ingIanb erinnern. ~eber, ber bie ®e" f ef)ief)±e bief er mewegungen berroIgt, fann f eljen, baj3 e~ oeiben nief)t blot um Die Seremonien, fonbern um bid ernf±ere 6aef)en. bor allem um ben falfef)en ~iref)enoegtiff, ilU tun ift. $Diefe ®efaljren finb Buerf± unb bor alIem: ba§ jffiort wirb babei in feiner einaigartigen mebeutung autildgef e~± unb bafl 6aframcn± in ben morbergrunb geriidt. @ifl ift eine falfef)e liturgifef)e, weir unoibIifef)e, unlutljerifef)e 2!nfief)±, wenn man bafl 6aframent aI§ ben Sjoljepunft be~ ®o±±e§bienf±e§ beaeief)ne±. @i§ ift romanifierenber 6aframentaIi§mu~, wenn man ba§ 6ahamen± ii b e r ba§ jffiori fe~t, wa~renb e§ boef) nur ein 6aframen± unb' ®nabenmi±teI ift bur ef) bafl jffiori. .2u±ljer§ jffiorte finb fIar unb bef±immt genug, lnenn er f agt: ,,@iin ~ljrift foIl win en, baj3 aUf ®rben fein groj3er Sj eHigtum iff benn ®o±tefl jffior±; benn auef) ba§ 6aframent felof± buref) ®o±tefl jffiot± gemaef)t unb geoenebeiet unb geljeiIigt wirb unb wir aIle auef) baburd) geif±nef) geooren unb au G£ljrif±en geweilji werben. ... ba~ jffiort, ba~ aIle $Dinge ljeiIigi unb ljoljer iff benn ba§ 6aframeni." (XX, 70.) Unb unfer mefenn±ni§ fag±, bat "bie Seremonia ber Wlefie ober be~ 2!oenbmaljr~ ... um be~ ?$rebigen§ willen eingefe~± if±." (Trigl., 6.396, WlillIer, 6.252.) $Da iff ferner bie ®efaljr be~ ®!±ernaIi~mu~, ba§ ®ewief)±regen aUf ii:uj3ere $Dinge, aUf Seremonien unb ®eorii:uef)e, weir man eoen bem jffiot±e nief)± meljr aIle~ Butrau± unb anfii:ng±, bail jffiort Geringer au fef)ii:~en, unb Me .2eu±e buref) bie ii:uj3eren ~inge Dllr ~iref)e bringen unb oei ber ~ref)e erljar±en will. ®crabc baburef) maef)t bie romifef)"fat~onfef)e ~ref)e Mefen gewaItigen @inbrucl', befeftigt iljre geiftIief)e .ijerrf ef)aft unb berljilIIt iljren 2!ofall bom jffiot±, wogegen .2utljer fo braftifef) fef)iIt, wenn er ba§ geiftIief)e ffieef)t beil ?$apftefl benttieift, "barinne er bon 6peife, ~rinfen, ~reibern, ?$erfonen, ~ref)en, 2!Hii:rcn, ~eref)en, ~orporalen, milef)ern, jffieiljrauef), jffiaef)0, ~aijnen, geweiljtem jffiaffer, .2efen, 6ingen, ~af±en, ?$rii:oenben, Sinfen (unb wer fann ben ~eufeI ber romif ef)en SjeHigfeit gar erilii:ijlen?) orbnet, fe~± unb ernftHef) geoeu± oei einer ~obfilnbe unb ewiger mer" SDie red)tc WHite in ber £liturgie unb Otbnung bes ®ottesbienftes. 529 bammni§". (XIX, 1146.)7) ~abUt:dj ftutt bie romifdje llirdje ifjre IDlet~ unb ;Dpfertfjeorie, tuie jeber, ber ettua§ bon ber ~ogmengefdjidjte Mefer Sl:irdje tueit, augelte~en tnirb. ~urdj biefe ganae )!Betfe tuitb audj Die Wutoritiit be§ S1:Ieru§ ulier ba§ mon lietont unb liefeftigt, tuie man ba§ in ber romifdjen unb in ber gricdjiflfjen llirdje nur au beutIidj fiefjt unb tuie fidj bie.s bann audj in ben engHfdjen meaeidjnungen Right Reverend, Very Reverend unb bem fo fdjiinen, liiliHfdjen, alier unliiliIifdj berftanbenen unb gemitliraudj±en 91amen Father au§brucf±. ~a§ arrge~ meine geiftridje ~rief±erium a! Ie r @Iiiuliigen, 1 ~etr. 2, 9, tuitb auriicfgefe~t obcr gar liefeitigt, bie )!Ba~rfjei±' bie .2u±fjer tuieber fo fIar an ben ;;tag geliradjt unb bie )!BaHijer fo fiegreidj ertuiefen unb ber" teibigt fjat gegen fjierardjifdje, romanifierenbe ;;tenbenaen in Wmerifa unb in @uropa. llnb fo fiinnten tuir nodj mandje§ namijaf± madjen, tua§ un§ in bief er @5adje liegrtinbete mebenfen erregt. )!Bir muff en alier ie~t aliliredjen unb fjelien nodj einmal fjerbor, bat bie Iutijerifdje Sl:irdje bie redj±e IDHtte lieaeidjne± atuifdjen bem formlofen (fa!bini§mu§ einerfeit§ unb bem tyormaIi§mu§ tRom§ anb'ererfei±§. )!Bir fagen barum mit bem in @uropa liefannten D. @5djaliert in tRiga, ber aI§ liartifdjer ~farrer iebenfaU§ Die griedjifdj"faifjoIifdje Sl:irdje genauer fennt: "Wdj, ban bie ebangefifdje llirdje immer me~r fidj beHen lietuutt tuurbe, tuie gIiidIidj fie ift,bat ifjr @otte§bienf± nidjt an biefe ~inge [iiutere ~radj± ber @etuiinber ber ~rief±er, goIbene @efiite, )!Bciijraudj, @5alliiiI in ber ruffif djen unb riimif djen Sl:irdjeJ geliunben ift I" ,,@ott f eIlift fja± fie babon frei gemadjt unb iijr bafur ben tReidjtum bon )!Bort unb @5aframen± erfdjloffen. )!Bie toridjt finb bie meftreliungen, bie bie Sl:irdje tuieber mit iiijnfidjen ~ingen lieIaben tuorren 1" 8) )!Bir eignen un§ bie morie an, mit benen bor dina bieraig ~aijren unfer feIiger D. W . .2. @riiliner, bet biefe tyragen forgfiirtig ftuDiert fjatte, fetne mefpredjung be§ .2odjner" fdjen )!Bede§ tiliet ben ,,~auptgotte§Dienft bet ebAutfj. Sl:irdje" fdjlof3; ,,)!BofjHuenb liettiijrt un§ an bet ganaen Wrlieit bie liei aUer Qielie aUt @5adje unb ciner tuatmen )!Ber±fdj~ung nturgifdjer @5djiinijeit unb Stuecfmiitigfeit autage tretenbe 91tidjternijeit, Die nidjt fur Iiturgifdje tyormen fdjtuiirmt, nidjt @5djmuCf UnD Sier aur ~auptfadje im iiffentHdjen @otte§bienft tuerben ratt, fonbem ba§ e i n e, ba§ not ift, aI§ ba§jenige feftijiiIt, bem aUe§ iilirige Dienen mut, UnD tuir fdjIieten un§ bem ~unfdje an, tueIdjen ber geeijrte Q3erfaffer am @nbe feine§ Q3ottuor±§ au§fptidjt mit ben )!Borien: ,@oti erljaHe un§ liei feinem reinen ~ort unb @5aframent unb laff e un§ alf 0 in f einem )!Borte lelien, bat audj in lieaug aUf ben iiffentIidjen @otie§bienft arre§, tua§ fidj an Seremonien unb )!Beifen burdj IDlenfdjenljanb um bie @nabenmitteI ranft, benfeIlien biene unb baliei nidjt aI§ gemadjter, fonbem al§ ein nahlrIidjer unb 7) IJJ1nn lefe nud) IJJ1cInnd)tfjons QBotte in ber IUjllllogie liver bie "unalif)1igen, finbifd)en 8mmonien unb niittifd)en ®ottesbienfte" unb feinen guten lRnt (Trig~., 6. 438jWWUer, 6.282). 8) IUUgemeine ~b.~£lutf) . .Ritd)tnaeitung, 66, 567. 34 530 The Question of Aramaic Originals. tuitflid)et 6d)mud bei bem gemeinfamen mtaud) bet ®nabenmit±er unb im gemeinf amen mefennmi§: unb 200 bes m:Uetfjod)f±en etf d)eine.' 119) linb roit fd)fieten mit bem oefann±en )!Bori Eutfjet,S, bas er fagte, ag Q:atIftabt bas ~ragen bon 115tief±erHeibern gana betbie±en unb fUt fiinb" fjaf± etlfiiten llJorrte: ,,)!Bir gefjen aUf bet WHtielliafjn UnD fagen, es girt roebet ®ebie±en§ nod) ~etbietens, roeber aur 91ed)ten nod) aur Einfen; tuit finb roebet papiftifd) nod) catIf±abtifd), fOnD'etn frei unb d)tiftriclj." (XX, 185.) E. ~ . • • • The Question of Aramaic Originals. Possibly this question requires some explanation. It is by no means a mere academic question, as some are inclined to think, just as little as the claim made for the authenticity of the Vulgate is a mere academic question. If the Greek New Testament, in the form in which it is substantially before us to-day, either as a whole or in any of its books, is a translation, then it is, to that extent, not authentic. If that could be proved or would be established, then we should be obliged, in the interest of the full and exact truth, to make that original language our terminus a quo, thereafter using the Greek text in the same way as we use any other translation or version of the Bible, the chief value, for exegetical purposes, lying in the genius of each language to express in its own idiom the thought which the Holy Ghost originally set forth in the tongue or lunguage in which He actually had the inspired writers put down His message to men. In this particular investigation we are concerned with the gosp'els, specifically with those of Luke, John, and Matthew, the arrangement being given in the order of their relative importance in the discussion. Mark's gospel will have to be included, at least in an incidental fashion, chiefly on account of the most recent developments, which caused the inclusion of this book in the number of those for which an Aramaic original is alleged. Let us emphasize even in these introductory remarks that the question before us is not whether the words of Jesus and of His disciples as originally spoken were uttered in the Aramaic tongue. This fact is now universally acknowledged, especially since the in- vestigations by Meyer (Jesu Muttersprache) and Dalman (Jesus- Jeshua). Nor are we unconscious of the fact that this point plays a fairly important role in understanding the arguments in favor of an Aramaic original of the gospels. It is necessary, however, at the very outset, to emphasize that our argument is not concerned with this fact, but with the question whether the gospels as given by in- spiration of the Holy Ghost were given to the holy writers in Greek 9) ,\Je~re unb ill\elJre, 42, 143.