(!tnurnrbtu
ml1rnlngitul flnut41y
Continuing
LEHRE UND VVEHRE
MAGAZIN FUER Ev.-LuTH. HOMILETIK
THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY-THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY
Vol. IX February, 1938 No.2
CONTENTS
PBI'e
The Pastor's Professional Bible-Study. Th. Laetsch _. _______ . _____ . __ ._. __ . 81
"Von der babyloniscben Gefangenschaft bis auf Christum."
P. E. Krehmann . __ .____________ 89
The Import and Content of Luther's Exegetical Lectures on the
Epistle to the Hebrews. Walter E. Buszin--___________ ______ 100
The Domine of Justification According to Thomas Aquinas.
Thco. Dierks ___ . _______ 114
Sermon Study on 1 John 2:12-17. ___ . ____________________ 123
Miscellanea ________________________ ____ _ 134
Theological Observer. - Kirchlich-Zeitgescbichtliches _______ 138
Book Review. - Literatur _. __ _ .. ____ .. __ ._ .. _____ . __ 150
BIn Prediger muu nlcht allein tDri-
deft, also das! er die Schate unter-
welle. wle lI1e rechte Cbriaten sollen
te1n. sondem aueh daDeben den Woel-
fen tDehren, class sic die Schafe niclit
angrelfen und mit falscher Lehre ver-
fuehren und Irrtwn elnfuehren.
Luther
Es 1st keln DIna. das eIle Leute
mehr bel der K1rche behaelt denn
die gute Predigt. - ApologW, ArC. 14.
I:t the trumpet elve an uncertaln
sound who ahall prepare hlmaIf to
the battle? -1 Cor. 14,'.
Published for the :~ ~, Ii' Ev. Lllth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States CONCORDIA PUBLISHING BOUSE, St. Louis, Mo.
~
Be I"
Theological Observer - ~itdjlidj~ Bengef djidjtlidje~
I. 2lmertktl
What Is This Word of God which Is in the Bible or Back of the
Bible? - Those who refuse to identify the word of Scripture with the
Word of God insist that the Bible still is a valuable book because it
contains the Word of God or has the Word of God back of it. But they
seem to be unable to tell us what exactly this Word of God back of the
Bible is. We have been waiting all these years for a clear, definite
definition of their "Word of God." We had hoped that the wise men
gathered at Edinburgh last year for the World Conference on Faith and
Order would be able to formulate their ideas on this matter in a plain
statement. The editor of the Christian Century sat in with them, and
this is what he learned: "The concept of the 'Word of God' was one of
the most difficult upon which the conference expended its effort.
Happily there appeared to be no literalists in the conference. The Bible,
taken as a book, was not regarded as synonymous with the Word. The
Word produced the Bible. 'A testimony in words is by divine ordering
provided for the revelation uttered by the Word [surely an awkward, if
not a meaningless, sentence]. This testimony is given in Holy Scripture,
which th'US [italics mine] affords the primary norm for the Church's
teaching, worship, and life [a non. sequitur surely].' But the Word
itself-what is it? 'It is ever living and dynamic and inseparable from
God's activity. God reveals Himself to us by what He does, by that
activity by which He has wrought the salvation of men and is working
for their restoration to personal fellowship with Himself.' I like this
immensely; only I wish it had not been made obscure by the far-fetched
necessity of connecting it up with the concept of 'Word.' God's action in
history, in the Church, and in our own individual lives is indeed the
ground of man's salvation; but it overstrains the meaning of 'Word' to
make it bear the meaning of action. To theologians it can be made plain
enough by quoting John: 'In the beginning was the Word, ... and the
Word was God'; but for other types of intelligence that seems a long
way round. Though the Bible was held subordinate to the Word, it was
held up as the norm of the Christian faith and practise." (Chr. Cent.,
Sept. 8, 1937, p.1096.)
Editor Morrison seems to be dissatisfied with the results of the de-
liberations of his brethren at Edinburgh on this point. The remarks in
brackets in his quotation from the statement of the conference ["surely
an awkward, if not a meaningless, sentence," etc.] indicate that. He
thinks that the brethren, in defining the term, only obscured its meaning.
He himself is on the side of those who make the Bible subordinate to
the Word. He is happy that "there appeared no literalists in the con-
ference." But he is not happy that the conference was unable to define
the concept 'Word of God' which is in and back of the Bible for the
benefit of the common "types of intelligence."
Several things are clear to us. We see that the men of Edinburgh
Theological Observer - .!fird)lid)=8eUgejd)td)tftd)es 139
refuse to identify Scripture and the Word of God. "The Bible was held
subordinate to the Word." Furthermore, it is clear to us that, if the ac-
tivity of God is His Word and that this activity is stilL working, it ought
to produce an expanded Bible and keep on producing enlarged Bibles,
containing new revelations. But the point in question, the definition of
their "Word of God," we can grasp as little as the keen-witted editor of
the Christian Century.
By the way, the statement that "happily there appeared to be no
literalists in the conference" is not quite accurate. Professor Zwemer
was there. But perhaps Dr. Morrison did not notice him. Perhaps
Dr. Zwemer did not speak loud enough. The Lutheran Herald's report
of the conference contains this paragraph: "The doctrine of the Word of
God brought additional difficulties. The emphasis on the Word seemed
too much limited to the idea of 'Logos,' the Word made flesh, of John 1.
The Word of Scripture did not receive quite the emphasis that the Lu-
therans wanted to give it. Verbal inspiration was definitely rejected,
being interpreted by every one as mechanical dictation. When an
Anglican bishop wanted to inject the statement that the Scripture is
'not an infallible source' of knowledge, Professor Zwemer of Princeton
immediately answered that the injection of this phrase would bring
violent schism into the Church because of 'all of us who still believe in
plenary and verbal inspiration.' The Bible was indeed accepted as a
means of grace, but the inspiration of the Bible was not eA-tended to the
entire Scripture." (Kirchliche Zeitschrift, 1937, p.692.)
To get back to our question, What is this Word of God which is in
the Bible or back of the Bible? Perhaps Dr. E. G. Homrighausen, elected
to a professorship in Princeton Seminary, can tell us. Dr. Homrighausen,
who according to Christianity of Today (November, 1937) declares that
"few intelligent Protestants can still hold to the idea that the Bible is
an infallible book," proceeds to answer our question in this wise: "The
Bible is not the actual Word of God, but merely a human witness to what
the Word of God did in and with men and history. The words of the
Bible are not to be believed because they are in the Bible. In reading
the Bible, there comes to me a strange language, there confronts me
a real God, and there emerges before me something about life that
I do not discover anywhere else. It is because the Scriptures do this that
they are 'sacred.' Not all the Bible does this for me. There is much in
the Bible like chaff, or rather like the seemingly insignificant parts of
a watch. There is a residue in the Bible that remains intact in spite
of all its inaccuracies, its antedated cosmology and science." This defini-
tion is similar to the Edinburgh declaration, - What God did in and with
men and history and what He does to me while I am reading the Bible,
that is the Word of God, - and Dr. Morrison would say that it is just as
obscure as the Edinburgh definition. - Perhaps Professor Homrighausen
can make the matter clear to his colleague Professor Zwemer while they
are comparing their lectures. E.
How an American Presbyterian Appraises Barthianism. - That Karl
Barth, coming from the Reformed camp, does not carry all adherents
of Reformed theology with him is evident from some trenchant criticisms
140 Theological Observer - .reitd)Iic!v8eUgejC!)id)Uid)es
of his teachings published in the Presbyterian by Dr. David S. Clark
and here submitted. His fling at German writers need not be taken too
seriously because we do not believe that the Germans have managed to
monopolize vagueness and obscurity. Dr. Clark's own sentences might be
quoted as evidence. However, his strictures on Barth's doctrine con-
cerning the Word of God are as justified as they are illuminating. He
writes in part:
"The Achilles heel of Barthian Theology is his doctrine of Scripture,
especially of inspiration. The formation of the written word is a 'paradox'
in Barthian language. A paradox is a contradiction. The written word
has a human and a divine element, which, according to Barth, are in
contradiction. The human letter, or writing, is the human element, and
as it is wholly human and contradicts the divine, it is imperfect, and
therefore an infallible word is impossible.
"Barth is willing to admit that the influx of the divine revelation
to the prophet's mind is of God and is infallible. But the efflux, resulting
in the writing of the Word, is only human and faulty. All this is due to
an inadequate view of inspiration and a neglect of the testimony of the
Scriptures, which are our only source of information.
"One error of Barth in this is an inheritance from the philosophy of
Hegel. We observe in studying Hegel's philosophy that he called a dif-
ference a contradiction. A human element and a divine element are dif-
ferent, but not :l contradiction. If you are a semipantheist, you will
identify the human and divine. If you are a normal theist, you will
recognize an almighty immanence and a supernatural providence that
can guarantee an infallible efflux and produce an infallible Word.
"Barth's conception of the Word of God is subjected to a tenuous
refinement like Kant's 'Ding an sich,' till it is difficult to get one's fingers
on it. The written word is not the Word of God, according to Barth.
The spoken word is not the Word. It is something in and through and
behind all this.
"Here is the German's tendency to go back of the thing to the thing
behind the thing, which always results in vagueness. A good example
is the recent Form Criticism. It all has an unsettling tendency.
"Somewhat more confusing is Barth's dialectic, which he inherited
from Hegel, who borrowed it from Fichte. It is called 'logic'; but in our
estimation it is not logic at all. When a conclusion necessarily results
from the combination of major and minor premises, we call that logic.
But the German scheme of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis is to our
mind an invalid process, because there is no necessary connection in
thought between the synthesis and the other terms. But perhaps we may
say casually that a German would not be indigenous without some
idiosyncrasy. The tendency to mere speculation and vagueness is con-
fusing to an American who looks for conciseness and terse expression.
Theology as a whole is capable of simple and lucid statement. Job said:
'Oh, that my adversary had written a book!' But we may say: 'Oh, that
the German critics would talk United States!'
"Barth deserves praise for exalting the sovereignty and authority of
God; but his doctrine of Scripture is fatal to any sound theology." A.
Theological Observer - [~itd.){id.)'3eit\Jefd.)icf)t1id.)es 141
The Shakers Rapidly Disappearing. - The Associated Press recently
reported the death of two members in the Shaker colony at West
Albany, N. Y. Only four members remain in this "family." In response
to an inquiry in the fall of 1932 we were informed that about 100
members remained in the five Shaker colonies, but that this number
was rapidly diminishing. In this letter Elder Shepherd added the
plaintive note: "Our work seems to be drawing to a close." The Shaker
Society, founded by "Mother" Ann Lee in 1776, is significant not only
because it represents the most successful experiment in Communism,
but especially because its religious tenets are weird and unnatural. The
entire Shaker system is built on perverted sex notions. According to
their official handbook, sexual lust in Adam and his descendants is the
cause of human depravity, and therefore absolute celibacy is the only
means of attaining redemption and perfection. Article X in the Synopsis
of Doctrine, based on a literalistic interpretation of Luke 20: 34 ff., con-
siders it perfectly normal and righteous that the natural family on which
the world relies for social order and continuance should be dissolved
and pass away before the family of Christ. But the divine institution
of matrimony cannot be set aside without impunity. Writing against the
celibacy of the Roman priests, Melanchthon said that God avenges the
contempt of His own gift and ordinance in those who prohibit marriage.
(Apology, XXIII:53.) History speaks a clear language concerning the
ultimate fate of those groups which ignore JJ:,,:n:riage, either by ad-
vocating celibacy (Conrad Beissel of Ephrata, Geo. Rapp of the Har-
monists, Jos. Baumler of the Separatists, "Father Divine") or by prac-
tising free love (Charles Fourrier and Saint-Simon of France, the Oneida
Community, House of David, Theosophy, etc.). F. E. M.
The new church calendar proposed by the Federal Council is dis-
cussed by the Living Church (Dec. 11, 1937) as follows: "It is interesting
to compare it with that of our own Church. The seasons are, in gen-
eral, the same - Advent, Christmastide, Epiphany tide, Lent, Eastertide
(which includes Ascensiontide and Whitsuntide). However, the Federal
Cotmcil calendar has extended Whitsuntide to the Sunday after Trinity,
which is designated 'The First Sunday in Kingdomtide.' This new
season of Kingdomtide continues to the end of the Christian year, the
last Sunday in Kingdomtide being designated also as 'Thanksgiving
Sunday.' The Federal Council defines Kingdomtide as a 'word coined to
stress Jesus' ideal of the kingdom of God on earth.' . .. Other diver-
gencies in the designation of the Sundays between the Federal Council
calendar and that of our own Church are the observance of the Fourth
Sunday in Advent as 'Christmas Sunday' and the continued numbering
of the Sundays after Epiphany through Septuagesima, Sexagesima, and
Quinquagesima. This latter also seems to us unfortunate as it eliminates
the season of preparation for Lent, so that the followers of the new
calendar will jump directly from the joyous Epiphany season to the
penitential Lenten one without the gradual transition that the Church
provides in her calendar. The Federal Council calendar does not in-
clude any specific commemorations of saints, though it does designate
November 1 as All Saints' Day and also (rather surprisingly) No-
142 Theological Observer - ~ircf)ncf)'3eitgefcf)id)md)ell
vember 2 as All Souls' Day. We are delighted to see this latter com-
memoration, which has unfortunately been dropped from our own
Prayer-book calendar, though the observance of it in the Church is
wide-spread. Other fixed festivals are Christmas Eve, the Nativity, the
festival of the Christening (January 1), Twelfth Night (January 5),
Epiphany, Presentation, the Annunciation, the Transfiguration, and Ref-
ormation Day (Oct. 31). . .. Among the more important special days
are Race Relations Day, Brotherhood Day, the World Day of Prayer,
Rural Life Sunday, Nature Sunday, Bible Sunday, and so on. Among
the special commemorations a new one is festival of the Christian Home,
observed the second Sunday in May and intended to take the place of
Mother's Day. We like this change in emphasis, since Mother's Day has
become so commercialized. The Church's true Mother's Day is the Feast
of Annunciation. Reformation Day is taken from the Lutheran calendar.
The inclusion of this commemoration in a Protestant calendar is under-
standable, but we should have preferred to see the designation of the last
Sunday in October as the Feast of Christ the King. This festival, in-
stituted in the Roman Catholic Church by the present Pope, is one that
should appeal to all Christians, and that we should like to see made
universal. It would have been a fine gesture of catholicity on the part
of the Federal Council to adopt it. On the whole we think that the
Federal Council calendar is an exceptionally fine one, and we hope
that it will be widely adopted throughout Protesta.'1.tism. Its wide-spread
use should be a hopeful step in the direction of the ultimate reunion
of Christendom." E.
Pastor's Tribute to a Pastor. - From the Rev. C. W. Seville, a member
of the Nova Scotia Lutheran Synod, comes this tribute to the late
Pastor Eric Hedeen of Topeka, Kans., who was killed in an automobile
accident: "I learned to know and to love Pastor Hedeen while I spent
ten months in a Topeka hospital in the course of four major operations.
He administered to me the Sacrament of the Altar and was indeed
a spiritual father to me. The joy of our Lutheran faith with peace in
Christ Jesus - oh, our eternal God-man Substitute! Pastor Hedeen's
passing was a great blow to me; yet the passing of Enoch and Elijah
were great blows to their friends, too. Pastor Hedeen was a manly
pastor, full of the grace and love of Christ in his heart. When he walked
into a sick-room, we always felt that he was conscious of his mission
as an ambassador of Christ. What a blessing for a congregation to have
such a man of God!" This is printed not only as a tribute to the
memory of Pastor Hedeen, but as a reminder to all pastors of the
exalted character of their calling and of the deep significance of their
spiritual ministrations to those who are sick or distressed.
Lutheran Companion, Dec.9, 1937
Brief Items. - On November 1 Dr. Melanchthon William Jacobus,
dean emeritus and acting president of Hartford Theological Seminary,
departed this life, eighty-one years old. His special field was the New
Testament. He became well known as one of the scholars that issued
the Funk & Wagnalls Bible Dictionary.
Theological Observer - ~itd)Hd)'{lcitgefd)id)md)es 143
The Anglican Church mourns the loss of the Rev. Dick Sheppard,
who at various periods of his life was vicar of St. Martin's-in-the-Fields,
dean of Canterbury, and canon of St. Paul's in London. He had just
been elected lord rector of the University of Glasgow, but did not have
the opportunity to deliver his rectorial address. He was a pronounced
pacifist.
Now that the Oxford Conference lies several months behind us, it
becomes known that not all participants were enthusiastic about what
happened there. The Rev. B. I. Bell, canon of St. John's Episcopal
Cathedral, Providence, R. 1., stated in a letter printed in the N ew York
Times that there was more division than unity at Oxford, and further-
more, that the British "were shocked," the orthodox East "was scan-
dalized," the Scandinavians "were dazed," and the Americans "were
taken in." The presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church in our country,
the Rev. James de Wolf Perry, who likewise attended the conference,
stated that in his view the most significant finding of the Oxford Con-
ference was "that the Church's function in the modern world is per-
sonal and not institutional, to Christianize the individuals and thus to
correct evils attaching to the social, political, or economic structure."
If this report, taken from the Christian Century, is correct, many mem-
bers of the conference must have seen a strange light.
In the Living Church we read the following in a correspondence
sent from Youngstown, 0.: "Upon invitation of the Rev. L. W. S. Stryker,
rector, seventy members of the Ministerial Association of Youngstown
attended a celebration of Holy Communion November 4 in St. John's
Church here. Participants included members of the Presbyterian, United
Presbyterian, Lutheran, and Christian churches. The Rev. F. H. Atkinson,
rector of St. John's, Sharon, was the celebrant, assisted by the Rev. G. V.
Higgins, rector of St. Andrew's, Youngstown, and the Rev. Messrs. A. J.
Rantz and Paul Schwartz, curates, respectively, of the local parish and of
St. John's, Sharon. The Rev. Mr. Stryker acted as instructor, explaining
the history, meaning, and order of the service before the service began,
and again at the sermon period. All the men made their communions
and expressed deep appreciation of this privilege." These Episcopalians
probably wished to salve their conscience by keeping the administration
of the Sacrament in their own hands. But what of the sanction which
they gave to the divergent teachings of the clergymen whom they in-
vited to commune? And how did the Lutheran or Lutherans feel who
participated?
In Russia, as the Lutheran Companion reports, help of the trade-
unions is being enlisted to revive the fight on religion, although the
Red Government is especially concerned over its failure to root out faith
among peasants in the rural districts. Significant of the trend in Russia
are reports to the effect that, whereas the Militant Godless League four
years ago had an enrolment of five million members, it now has only
two million enrolled. The writer, in concluding his comments, ap-
propriately quotes Ps. 2.
All the Baptist churches in Rumania have been closed, if the govern-
ment's decree, to be made effective on October 15, was enforced. This
144 Theological Observer - .ftitcl)licl)~2eitgefcl)icl)tlicl)e§
word came indirectly from the Baptist World Alliance office in London.
The Northern Baptist Convention of this country promptly appealed to
the State Department "to intercede on behalf of (in the name of) six
million Baptists in America, and officials promised to cable Bucharest
immediately." At this writing the reason for the suppression has not
been disclosed. - Lutheran Standard.
In a report of a Baptist meeting held in Scotland, Mr. Ernest Brown,
member of Parliament and the Minister of Labor, delivered an address
concerning which a correspondent of the Christian Century writes:
"He quotes Scripture with fluent ease, giving chapter and verse without
reference to notes. His statement that it is easier to preach a sermon
on peace than a sermon about the saving of the soul evoked a ready
response from his audience." Yes, people usually find a social gospel
sermon more interesting than a discourse on the topic "What Must I Do
to be Saved?"
On its new campus near Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia, Westminster
Seminary recently dedicated the J. Gresham Machen Memorial Hall.
President Edward H. Rian, of the board of trustees, gave the address.
Exchange
From Russia comes the news that the purges which are going on
in that harassed country are now being extended to the clergy, some
of whom are accused of working against the interests of the Soviet
Government and of being foreign enemies. The announcement says
that seven bishops have been put in prison, being accused of serving
as spies of Germany and Japan. This particular phase of the purge is
directed both against leaders of the Greek Orthodox Church and leaders
of other churches.
The Presbyterian Banner, a paper more than a hundred years old,
in December announced its intention to become defunct. The manage-
ment had been able to finance the paper during the last fifteen years
merely through the generosity of a friend who paid the huge deficits.
The paper urged its readers to subscribe for a new monthly which is
to be published by the Board of Christian Education of the Presbyterian
Church in the United States of America, The Pageant.
From Rome comes the news that the Pope has created five new
cardinals. Three of them seem to be Italians, the fourth is a Frenchman,
and the fifth a Briton. It is apparent that the Pope is very careful not
to let the Latin countries, especially Italy, lose control of the college of
cardinals.
The religious press carries the news that the town of Saloniki in
Greece is to be given back the name it had at the time of St. Paul and
is again to be known as Thessalonica.
It is sixty-five years ago that Rev. Paulin Gschwind, rector of the
church of Starrkirch in Switzerland, was excommunicated for refusing
to read the Vatican decrees of 1870 to his congregation. That action
led to the founding of the Old Catholic Church in Switzerland. A cele-
bration which was held in Starrkirch in October, 1937, to commemorate
this event is evidence that Old Catholics in Switzerland have not
become extinct.
Theological Observer - .reird)Iid)=,8dtgefd)id)tlid)ell 145
In an article on Dr. John Bachman, who for sixty years was pastor
of St. John's Church, Charleston, S. C., and who was better known as
a scientist than as a theologian, being one of the friends of Audubon,
we are told that he took an .interest .in the Negroes with whom he and
his people came .in contact. "His early acquaintanceship with slaves made
him a power among the Southern Negroes. His sympathetic .interest .in
their welfare is worthy of note even today; for the race problem, always
difficult, is still not adequately solved. During his ministry .in St. John's
he trained three colored men for the ministry, one of whom became a
missionary to Africa, another of whom died while ministering among his
people .in the South, and a third became a bishop in the Southern
Methodist Church. Hundreds of Negroes attended his services in
St. John's, sitting in the north gallery of the church." So writes the
present pastor of St. John's in the Lutheran. Dr. Bachman, it may
be mentioned, belonged to the South Carolina Synod.
In a Modernist paper we recently saw this sentence quoted: "The
obiter dicta of preachers, at any rate in matters affecting the relations
of Church and State, have done more harm .in Christendom than any
positive false teaching." While this is an overstatement, one cannot help
wishing that all preachers might read it.
Press reports state that Judge Albert B. Maris, serving in a Federal
court in Philadelphia, has decided that the school authorities of Miners-
ville, Pa., have no right to keep children out of the public schools who
on account of religious scruples refuse to salute the flag. The children
in· question belong to the sect called "Jehovah's Witnesses" (Russellites).
While we certainly do not wish to hold a brief for the Russellites, we
commend this decision because it upholds freedom of conscience. The
judge is reported to have said: "Liberty of conscience means liberty for
each individual to decide for himself what to him is religious. If an
individual sincerely bases his acts or refusals to act on religious grounds,
they must be accepted as such and may only be interfered with if it
becomes necessary to do so in connection with the exercise of the police
power, that is, if it appears that public safety, health, or morals, or
property, or personal rights will be prejudiced by them." If that prin-
ciple had been followed consistently, our country would not have wit-
nessed the humiliating spectacle of parents who were deprived of their
children, the latter being placed in State institutions because these people
held that the salutation of the flag was a wicked thing.
Westminster Abbey has a new dean. It is Rt. Rev. Paul F. D. de
Labilliere. On account of the prominence of his position religious
journals take note of this appointment.
The well-known pastor of the Brick Presbyterian Church in New
York, Dr. William Pearson Merrill, at least realizes that, if people do
not agree with each other .in the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, they
should not commune together. Speaking of the refusal of the Episco-
palians to commune with members of other Protestant bodies (a re-
fusal, however, which is not universally manifested), he writes in the
Christian Century: "We can and should understand their position and
attach small blame, if any, to their action. Nor should we insist on the
10
146 Theological Observer - ~itd)fid)~Seitgefd)id)mdJe!l
holding of intercommunion services under present conditions. . .. The
Catholic who holds to that view of the Lord's Supper is perfectly con-
sistent in refusing to participate in what to him is not the Christian
Sacrament. But there is no defense possible for refusal on his part to
submit the claim (that the officiant must have been properly ordained)
to general and impartial investigation." Well said! A.
II. ,l.u!ilauil
'!lie '!lcutfdJen ,5Jeibcn. ,,~adjbem vei ben ,SDeutfdjen GrlJriften' fo bieI
bom biVIifdjen @lauben geftridjen ift, toh:b nun audj ber @Iaube an ein
e to i 9 e s £ eve n im vwIifdjen @linn geftridjen. @lo fdjrewt ein ~ertreter
ber nationaIfirdjIidjen SD. ~. in )illlirltemberg, @ltubienrat @ltad in £ub~
toigsvurg, im ,SDeutfdjen @lonnta(l' liver ,~ob unb UnftervIidjfeit': ,@lauven
toir an ein perfiinIidjes ~ortreben nadj bem ~obe? )illeIdj falfdje ~rage, ber
man ifjren Urfprung im ~qeoretifdjen anmetftI SDer als m3erfaeug fidj @ott
aur ~erfligung @lterrenbe qat ein (lana anberes £ebensgeflifjI unb ~djvetouBt~
fein aIS ber @goift unb materiaIift. SDie, bie trihtmen bon einem perfiin~
Iidjen {Yorlleven im ~enfeig borr etoiger @liicffeIigfeit, frei bon arrer Wot
unb ~riibfar. finb nidjis anberes aIS @goiften unb fjimmIifdje ma±eriaIiften.
SDer bem £even (lefjorfam SDienenbe fjat ei(lentlidj fein ~djvetouf)tfein, fon~
bern ein ~oHs~ unb BebeniSbetouf)tfein. @r flifjlt fidj immer aliS ein ~eH
bes @anaen. Unb nur aIs ein foldjeiS @ltfrcf @ottes fjat er etoigeiS £eben.
SDem, ber @toigreit in fid) tragt, ift nidjt toidjtig, baf) er fortleUt (aus l!l.ngft
ober ~djfudjt), f onbem ball er toeitertoitfen barf aIS ein ~eH jener eluig
fdjaifenben unb ringenben Shafte, bie bas m3eltarr immer neu geftaIten.'
SDas fjci\)t mit anbem )illorten: SDu vift tot unb vlewft tot. lrljriftus aver
fpridjt: ,)iller an midj (llauM, ber toirb leben, ob et gleidj ftlirbe.''' (IlL @.
£. St., 1937, @S. 1079.) man nennt briiben bie "SDeutfdjen lrfjdften"
"beutfdje ~dbenu. SDiefe meaeidjnung ift nodj au gut flir biefe £eute. @.
SHnbedaufe. l!l.uf ber IDCiirrnet ~ljeolo(lifdjen £efjrfonferena (bom
30. l!l.uguft viiS aum 3. @Septemver 1937) trug ~tof. SDiime (£eipaig) in fei~
nem 9'teferat liber ,,;Oifenbarun(l @ottes in bet ~aufe" audj folgenbelj bor:
.. @ine vefonbere mefpredjung forbert bie fir dj I i dj e ~ r a ;!; i s b e r
St i n b e r tau f e. l!l.us bem Weuen ~eftament ift fie toeber aIs tatfiidjIidje
;Orbnung ber iilteften ~ljriftenqeit nodj aIS mefeIjl ~fjrifti atoingenb au ve~
gtlinben. SDie neuteftamentridje ~ra6iiS aeigt @Iaube unb ~aufe in un~
mitteIbarem meieinanber. ~itb biefes meieinanber aum ®efe~ erqolien, fo
entfteljt ber maptismus. @in ~erfudj, bicfe aum @efet etqobene ~ta;!;is bes
Weuen ~cftamentiS mit ber Stinbertaufiibung ber Stitdje in @inflan(l au
liringen, ift bie fPe£ulatibe .~iwotqefe bes Stinb er(lIauli ens. l!l.udj .l2utqer qat
fie berircien, freiliclj fett 1529 bie Stinbertaufe bon biefer ~~potljefe un~
abqiingig gemacljt. - @e(leniiber allen biefen WbIeqnungen llnb ~eljlbegrlin~
bungcn qat bie Stinbertaufe i~r t~eoro(lif djes 9'tedjt im Uniberf ali§muiS unb
in ber Unbebin(ltfjeit ber @nabe. @ott ~at bie m3eIt mit fidj berfiiqnt. Unb
fetne @nabe gefjt bem @fauben immet boraus. ~erfteqen toir mit .l2utljer
bas ganae lrljriftenleven aIS eine mung bet Staufe, fo fomm± ber @Iauve
nidjt au fpnt,inbem er ber 5raufe nadjfoI(l±' - SDamit ift bie @n±fdjeibung
bariibet, ob bie Stirdje fjier unb jet! aUt tatfiidjridjen frliung bet SHnbedaufe
baiS mecljt ljat, nidjt bortoe(lgenommen. @loU libetljaupt SNnbertaufe geiibt
Theological Observer - Rird)!id)~.8eitgefd)id)tnd)e5 147
toetben, fo mUB biefe audj bie ganae unb toitfUdje 5taufe bIdben; bie SNnbet~
taufe batf nidjt au einem nut ptopiibeutifdjen ~ft ~etabgebtiid't toetben. H
(\lmg. @bAlut~. Sl'a., 1937, (6. 1074.)
~it ftagen bettounbed: Writ toddjem ffiedjt oe~iirt man bie Si'inbet~
±aufe oei, toenn man ben 'lJetoeis fiir i~re (finfeJjlUng aus Wlat±~. 28, 19 unb
ben anbern (6teIfen nidjt filt atoingenb anfie~t unb fo nidjt getniB ift, baB bie
5taufe audj fiir bie Sl'inbet beftimmt ift? ~ie bon llSrof. ~orne fiit mei~
be~aHung ber Sl'inbertaufe angefii~r±en @riinbe gelien bem @etniffen fcinen
S)art. ~enn bie Sl'inbertaufe nidjt gottfidj eingefeJ;?t ift, mit toefdjem !Redjt
batf bet ~poftel fagen, baB