Q.tnutnr~ttt IDl1rnlngitul ilnut1Jly Continuing LEHRE UND VVEHRE MAGAZIN FUER Ev.~LuTH. HOMILETIK THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY ~ THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY Vol. IX April, 1938 No.4 CONTENTS Page A Course in Lutheran Theology. Th. Engelder------------- --... -- _ .. ___ . __ ..... _ 241 Professional Growth in the Study of the Confessions J. Theodore Mueller_ ... _ .... __ ............. _ .... _._ ... _ .... 257 Kleine Danielstudien. L. Fuerbrlnger_. __ .. _ .. _._ .. _ ...... _. ________ .__ .____ "_"'_' __ "_ 268 Sermon Study on 1 Pet. 1:3-9. Th. Laetsch_ ....... __ ..... ___ .___ _ __ ._ .... _ ... _ .... _ 279 Miscellanea __ ..... _ .. _ ... ____ _ ... _ ...... _ ............... _ ... _ ... __ ............. _ .. ____ _____ ..... ___ .. _ 291 Theological Observer. - Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches ... .. _. ___ ._. __ . 296 Book Review. - Literatur ................ _ ..___ ............. _ .... _ .... ______ ..... __ .. _ ......... ___ 313 E1n Predlger muas ntcht alleln Ulei- den, also daM er die Schafe unter- weise, wie ale rechte CbrIaten BOllen "In. BOndern auch daneben den WoeI- fen Ulehren, dus sie die Schafe nteht angrelfen und mit fal8cher Lehre ver- fuehren und Irrtum eInfuehren. Luther Es 1st keln Ding. daa die Leute mehr bel der Kirehe behae1t denn die gute Prediet. - Apolog!e, Art. 24. If the trumpet live an uncertain BOund who shall prepare h1mM1f to the battle? -1 CM. 14, I. Published for the BY. Lath. Synod of MJssoarl, Ohio, and Other States CONCORDIA PUBLISHING BOUSE, St. Louis, •• ~ BCHIVE Theologica.. Observer - ~ifdjIidj • .8dtgefdjtdjtItdje~ I. Amrriklt New Testament Commentary, ReI'bed C. Alleman, Editor. - The Journal of the American Lutheran Conference, February, 1938, prints a review of this United Lutheran Church publication, by Dr. M. Reu. The original appeared in the Kirchliche Zeitschrift. The translation is by Dr. E. H. Rausch. The concluding paragraphs of Dr. Reu's review read: "We took the commentary in happy anticipation and read it with the sincere desire to do justice to it. Much of it has filled us with joy and thanksgiving; other things also, it is true, caused us much heartache. If this were the work of a private individual, we could expect that the offieal representation would disavow the offending sections and see to it that these could have no influence on the whole of the Church. But the commentary as a whole goes out with the sanction of the Board of Publication, hence has an official character. We fear it may be a mile- stone in the history of the Lutheran Church in our country and retard for decades what many believed to be of the inlmediate future. What stands between a Church with such an official commentary and many other Lutheran churches as a separating wall is now no more only the question of verbal inspiration, which now·~ without being more closely defined - is disavowed at every opportunity; it is now the question of the authority of Scripture itself, not only in antiquarian things and mat- ters of natural science, but even in religious things. The exposition of Prof. R. T. Stamm (Gettysburg) reaches deeply into the picture of Christ. If teachers of theology go to such lengths, where will their pupils land? To sow wind is to reap whirlwind. "We write this in deep sorrow. We belong to those who hoped for the mutual recognition of the American Lutheran Church and the United Lutheran Church in America. We are united with strong bonds of friend- ship ,"fith many members of the United Lutheran Church. I will never forget how leading men of the same came to my assistance in the very moment when they heard of my difficulties. I know that many of their members will continue to teach and preach as true Lutherans and will never recognize a Bible that has first passed through a critical inter- pretation and purification as the norm for doctrine and life. But all this dare not deter from bearing witness against a current whose critical attitude towards Scripture, if it prevail, can only result in loss for the Church." The liberal, modernistic attitude of some of the contributors to this book appears from the following excerpts from Dr. Reu's review. "The chapter on 'The Historical Relationships of Christianity,' by R. T. Stamm, is replete with many single surprising statements. We note just a few: 'The Book of Daniel was a tract written for these troubled times when King Antiochus, enraged by the failure of his plans to conquer Egypt, determined to punish the Jews for the trouble they had been making him.' 'Antiochus Epiphanes was the Darius of the Book of Daniel. He was also the Nebuchadnezzar with the golden image and the fiery fur- Theological Observer - .Rird)(td)~3eit\Jefd)td)tlid)e~ 297 nace, the king whose very fury to compel the Jews to abandon their religion was self-defeating.' 'As we have already seen in our study of the Book of Daniel, apocalyptic is essentially past history written in the future tense. The apocalyptist wrote history in the form of prediction. This does not mean that he deceived his readers by writing under the assumed name of some ancient worthy such as Daniel or Enoch or Ezra. The writers of the apocalypses and their first readers understood the literary device. It was only the succeeding generations, for whom their works were not immediately intended, who began to misunderstand them.' All this is presented not as the opinion of many present-day expositors, but as an actuality, and this in spite of the fact that then Jesus also (Matt. 24: 15; Mark 13: 14) and Paul (2 Thess. 2) and John made the 'mistake' that they transformed the apocalypse of Daniel with its 'dreams' from a book of history into a book of predictions! .. , We read on page 56: 'It [the New Testament apocalypse], too, is mainly past history written in the future tense, and like its predecessor it has suffered such misinterpretation. Its readers have treated it just as its author himself treated the Book of Daniel and the other apocalyptic material upon which he drew so heavily.' "Now we understand why afterwards (p.292) Mark 13 this 'little apocalypse' is not a reproduction of a speech of Jesus for the author of this chapter, but the interpolation of 'some teaching about the future which had long been current in the churches.' Now we understand why at the close of his exposition of Mark 13 concerning the second coming of Christ he writes (p. 295): 'As time passed, less stress was laid on the visible and temporal aspects of the Second Coming. The writer of the gospel of John, while recording the older form of the hope for the benefit of the more conservative Christians of his church, taught his readers that, strictly speaking, judgment is a present process and that for Christians there is no death: 'Whosoever liveth and believeth on Me shall never die,' Johnl1:26. 'Jesus had come again as the "Com- forter," the Holy Spirit, whom the Father had sent in His name to be resident in the hearts of believers, John 20: 21,22; 14: 26.' In this same way liberal theology began in Germany during the 19th century; so also liberal theology round about us in our own land often maintains in the present day. But while there as here a strong reaction against it has begun, now, post jestum, comes a Lutheran of America and carries these destructive thoughts as the result of his 'scientific' work into the circles of teachers in Sunday-school! 'For the benefit of the more conservative Christians' we can even today, following the example of John, speak of 'the older form of hope' and permit the passage 'From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead' to remain in the Apostles' Creed, knowing at the same time that, 'strictly speaking, judgment is a present process' and the coming of Christ is an inner coming, which perfects itself in the coming of the Spirit into the heart. "The second section of the volume brings the exposition of the in- dividual books. Here also most collaborators have done excellent work. Dr. Offermann's exposition of the Gospel according to Matthew is espe- cially worthy of mention. . .. But this second section also includes articles of a different kind. A person is surprised, for instance, to find 298 Theological Observer - ~itclJlicfH3eitgefclJiclJmclJes statements like the following in the exposition of the Gospel according to Luke by Dr. H. C. Alleman and Dr. John Aberly: 'The story [of the Gergesene demoniac] is told in the psychology of the day. Delusional insanity was a demoniacal possession which might well seem to be the presence of ten thousand devils.' . . . We are still more surprised over statements like the following: 'The restoration of Jairus' daughter is regarded by Luke as a rising from the dead ("knowing that she was," v.53).' "The sorriest production in this field has again been achieved by Stamm and after him by Berkenmeyer .... Stamm on Mark 4:12: 'For the modern man, however, such an interpretation (i. e., Mark's inter- pretation) of the purpose of Jesus' teaching raises great ethical diffi- culties.' On Mark 5:22 ff: 'There can be little doubt that Mark meant to narrate an actual raising from the dead. It would have been inconceiv- able to the Christians of his day that Jesus had not done as great things as they read in the Scriptures about Elijah and Elisha. Similar stories are told of Jesus' contemporaries and followers. In Acts 9:36-42 Peter is reported to have raised Tabitha from the dead, and according to Acts 20:8-10 Paul was thought to have restored the life of Eutychus. Was the servant greater than the Lord?' Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane can only be so understood 'that even to the last he had clung to the hope that the Kingdom could be established without His actual dying.' "w. C. Berkenlueyer of the faculty of the Philadelphia seminary writes: 'The speeches of Peter and Paul are far from verbatim. In fact, to many fine scholars (Holtzmann, Von Soden, R. Scott) the author of Acts is regarded as a possible redactor, if not the author of the Pastorals' (p.581). . .. On 1 Tim. 2:9-15: 'We ought to regard such an allegorical exegesis of Genesis, with the belief in the literal historicity of the Bib- lical account of the creation of man and woman, which is implied, as part of the intellectual-philosophical milieu of the writer, which we need neither accept nor consider as the testimony of his religious conscious- ness as the inspired Christian prophet any more than we would his command of Attic Greek, his science of astronomy, or his apocalyptic interpretation of history.''' (Cf. CONe. THEOL. MTHLY., 1937, pp. 869, 393; 1935, p. 553.) E. Fiftieth Anniversary of 1he Common Service. - On this topk the Rev. George J. Muller writes thus in the Lutheran: Is an anniversary worth celebrating, especially an anniversary of fifty years? Usually we make quite a big event out of such a golden anniversary, and yet here we are in 1938, the fiftieth year of the issuance of the Common Service and no plans have been publicized for the celebration of this important event in the history of our Lutheran Church in America. All Lutheran congregations in America can today be divided into two groups, liturgically; one uses the Service and the other does not. Perhaps we might make even another division, between those that use, and those that abuse, the Service. Important as have been the various developments of our Church on American soil, none has equaled the value and importance in the life of our people of the proper use of the proper liturgy. Here is the one Theological Observer - ~itd)nd)~2eitgefd)id)t!id)e~ 299 way in which a measure of American Lutheran unity has been attained. We have learned to treasure the same liturgical expression of our faith and in a certain measure have achieved the possibility of singing it to- gether. The three bodies that later formed the United Lutheran Church first cooperated in the preparation of the Common Service. Then they published it. Next they learned to use it, and finally they united their forces in one Church organization. Though the Common Service originated outside of the Missouri Synod, it has been adopted by them, also by Augustana, and is found complete with the same music as is in the Common Service Book in the new hymnal of the American Lutheran Church. So it seems to me that in 1938 some recognition should be shown to the liturgy which has achieved the only complete unity of acceptance of any item in the prac- tical life of the Lutheran synods of America. What can be done about it? How can we in a measure celebrate this truly vital part of our present-day American Lutheran life in all synods? My first suggestion would be that every pastor and every interested Lutheran should first read and study the ''Preface of 1888." I know it is in the Common Service Book, but I also regret to believe that there are thousands of our pastors and more of our church-workers who have never read it at all. Unfortunately this preface is not in the hymnals of the other synods; so the only possible way that it could be brought to them would be by way of their own church-papers. And to the editors of these papers I offer this as a gentle hint. Professor Graebner in his book on Problems of Lutheran Unity has a chapter on "Our Liturgical Chaos." I read it with mingled shivers of shame and despair. Not because I rejoiced in the iniquity of the Mis- souri Synod but because of the shame I felt that any of the pastors of our Church would thus mangle and despise their Lutheran heritage. And then I thought, too, Is our liturgical chaos in parts of our United Lutheran Church any less fearful and disgraceful than it is in other synods? I can vividly remember the meetings of the old New York and New England Synod, when we could not even sing the Communion Service, because there were five different musical settings in use and none of us knew all five. Weare gradually increasing the number of congregations that are adopting the Common Service. But how many are there that still butcher, mangle, and disfigure it beyond computation? Let more light be shed on the inner structure of the liturgy and its proper use by papers and discussions in local ministerial associations as well as by the formation of congregational study groups. We have the literature available if we are ready to use it. Looking back over these fifty years, we have much to be thankful for in the gradual regaining of the rich liturgical heritage of our Lu- theran Church. On the other hand, looking around on our present con- ditions in the congregations, we can all see many ways in which the use of the Service can be improved. What suggestions can be made for pastors and congregations in celebration of this anniversary? Here are my own, just as suggestions which can be further elaborated and expanded. There are at least six 300 Theological Observer - ~itcl)lid)"8ettgefd)tcl)t1id)es books put out by our own Publication House that give information. Explanation of Common Service; Manual of Worship, Strodach; Lu- theran Handbook, Traver; Worship, Finck; Catechism in Christian Wor- ship, Swank; WOl'ship Booklet, Jones; The Common Service, Harry; and, last but not least, a most profitable reading for pastors and musi- cians is to be found in the preface of the Reed-Archer Choral Service Book, just lately reissued by the Publication House. All or some of this reading ought to help in producing one or more inspiring sermons on "The Service and the Church-year." The second suggestion for this golden-anniversary year is that our Sunday-school superintendents should teach the singing of the Service, part by part, to the Juniors and Intermediates and have them memo- rize it. This cannot be done all at once, but it can be done, with patience, in the course of the year. And then bring those children regu- larly to the service to share in the worship of the congregation. The third suggestion applies to every congregation. Improve the slovenly and drawly singing of the Service. From comments of visiting pastors I gather that in most congregations slow and painful singing of the Gloria in Excelsis is a universal fault. Next comes faulty and slovenly phrasing, in spite of plain marking of punctuation. Why, most of us cannot even say the Lord's Prayer correctly. This is the way we pray: "Thy will be done [pause] on earth [pause] as it is in heaven." The only place the pause belongs is after the word earth, where there is a comma. Here in the Pittsburgh district we have tried to bring improvement by means of mass conferences of choirs and singers. But surely even the isolated Lutheran congregation can, with a little study, care, and effort, decently sing the Service. The fourth suggestion applies to the permitted variations in the singing of the Service. These are called "the Propers of the Day," and include the Introit, Gradual, and Hallelujah sentences. Perhaps the Hallelujah sentences are the most widely used; yet there are literally hundreds of pastol's and congregations that do not avail themselves of this means of diversifying the Service. A simple thing; yet why is it not brought into use? One of the finest improvements in the singing of the Service, I be- lieve, would be the restoration of the old churchly custom of the singing of the Introit. Can it be done by a small volunteer choir? From our own experience I would say that it can. And in our experience the simple melody of the Gregorian settings as found in the Reed-Archer Choral Service Book is most practicable and effective. Larger choirs may prefer the setting of Matthews or Schmauk. The fifth suggestion is that we more frequently use the Service in its fulness and completeness. Most of our congregations have Com- munion services four times a year. A few have them six times, and perhaps a still smaller number increase these celebrations of the Holy Supper. As a plain matter of fact we only use the Service as intended four to six times a year. Every other service which ends with the sermon, might just as well be the Matins, for it means we are using part of the Service as a minor order. 301 That is not the way our Lutheran people figure it out. They think the normal order is the preaching service, and that for the Communion service something is added to the regular service. No wonder that we have so many "oncers" in our congregations, who appear once a year to make their Easter Communion. Evelyn Underhill in her book Wor- ship, page 281, says: "Had the Protestant churches been true to the ideals of their founders, ... it would have led to the practise of frequent com- munions." Here is one way that every congregation can be led to a deeper and more spiritual life.- The article has been submitted in toto because it contains valuable material and hints for all of us. A. Presbyterian Church of America Loses Suit to Retain Name.- Christianity Today (February, 1938) reports that the group which seceded in 1936 from the Presbyterian Church, U. S. A., to form the Pres- byterian Church of America was enjoined by court order on January 18, 1938, from using that name. The injunction was issued by President Judge Frank Smith in Common Pleas Court Number Five, Philadelphia. He pointed out that the similarity between the name which the seces- sionists chose for themselves and the official name of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America is confusing. His decision declared that it would be "a serious hurt to the reputation of the [mother] Church and a detriment to its work if the [other] Church, bearing a similar name, should enter the areas already occupied by the [mother] Church, and in real competition with it, thereby destroying the faith of those individuals in foreign countries not sufficiently educated in English to comprehend the controversy existing between the organiza- tions." But the injunction decree not only restrained the group from calling it the Presbyterian Church of America but also forbade the use of any other name "similar to, or imitative of, or contractive of, the name Presbyterian Church in the United States of America or the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., or ever doing any act or thing calculated or designed to mislead the public or members of the plaintiff Church." In their defense the officers of the new Church had declared that their purpose was "to continue what we believe to be the true principles of the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Catechism." To this the judge replied: "A court in equity has no jurisdiction in examining into the merits of the two respective doctrines any more than it would look into the merits of commercial products after it had concluded that one concern had misappropriated the long-established trade name of another." The litigation began in August, 1936, with the filing of a petition by officers of the parent Church. Time will be allowed the defendants to file exceptions to the injunction decree before it is made final. Whether the group will appeal or not, or whether the moderator of the new Church, the Rev. J. J. De Waard of Cedar Grove, Wis., will call a special meeting of the General Assembly to choose a new name, has not been determined. At any rate the court decision means a new victory for Liberalism over the conservative Christian forces that rallied round their brave and steadfast leader, Dr. J. G. Machen. To an outsider the court decision appears to be rather one-sided and severe. J. T. M. 302 Theological Observer - sritd)lid)~c8eitl1efd)id)tHd)ell Inadequate Salaries in the Southern Methodist Denomination.- Speaking at the annual meeting of the Board of Lay Activities of the Southern Methodists, held at Lake Junaluska last August, Dr. Geo. L. Morelock, as reported by Christianity Today (February, 1938), gave some "staggering facts" which the efforts of the Board had brought to light. Among these "staggering facts" are reported the following: "One half of the ministers of the M. E. Church, South, are inadequately supported; there is a low tide of giving to the benevolences of the Church; ap- proximately sixty-five per cent. of the members are not enlisted at all; a large percent of the Church's ministers know apparently little of church finance and all kinds of duplication and overlapping occur in financial methods." Of the 6,181 pastoral charges studied, according to Dr. More- lock, 710 are paying their pastors less than $500 a year; 1,863 receive between $501 and $1,000; 69 per cent. of the pastors of Southern Meth- odism receive a salary of less than $1,501. To adiust the matter, the Mississippi Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, in session recently, set a minimum salary of $1,000 annually for unmarried ministers, with a married man's scale set at $1,200 annually. Funds to provide the minimums will be raised through a plan whereby ministers in the higher-salary brackets will join with their churches in donating a small percentage of the pastors' salaries. The funds will be pooled, and payments to those whose salaries must be supplemented will be made from it. J. T. M. Brief Items. - The one-thousandth translation of the Bible has ap- peared. It is a version which is intended for the Belgian Congo Ter- ritory. It is the British and Foreign Bible Society which has furnished the world this gift, constituting the one-thousandth instrument in the divine orchestra. Think of this reception given the newly appointed Cardinal Hinsley of England when he returned from Rome! Not only were immense crowds of Catholics at the railroad station, among them the Duke of Norfolk, but "two rover scouts were handed the cardinal's red hat to take to the cathedral." The service in the cathedral was attended by the ambassadors of Brazil, France, Belgium, and Poland, the Austrian min- ister, and the High Commissioner of Ireland. Rome evidently is still a power to reckon with. The Presbyterians have a college union representing fifty-four col- leges in all parts of the United States. A campaign has been launched for ten million dollars to support these schools. The two chairmen of the campaign committee are Dr . John H. Finley, editor of the New Y or k Times, and Dr. Arthur C. Compton of the University of Chicago. A University of Chicago professor, Dr. Ralph Gerard, teacher of physiology, is credited with saying in New York that "as man learns more of his neural mechanisms, the hormones that modify them, the drives they generate, and the personal and social consequences of his acts, much control will undoubtedly be possible, and reason will sufficiently dominate emotion to keep a functioning civilization from perishing." What twaddle! Is the professor blind? Theological Observer - .reitcf)licf)~3eitgefcf)icf)tlicf)es 303 The daily press reports that 1,016 clergymen of the Church of England state that they during the last eight years have subscribed to the faith of the Council of Trent and have pledged themselves to preach it in their parishes. They make the claim that two thousand other clergymen are in sympathy with them. At the Church Assembly meeting in February this matter was to be one of the topics of discussion. The Rev. E. T. Bagnall, secretary of the London Free Church Federa- tion, announced recently that during 1938, the fourth centennial of the Reformation, he would undertake to place a Bible in every Englishman's home. "In 1538 a Bible was placed in every parish," stated Mr. Bagnall; "why not a Bible for every home in 1938?" He admits that the scheme is an ambitious one and that at least ten million Bibles will be needed. News Bulletin N. L. C. Critics who question the need of foreign mission activities might consider these figures, included in a recent issue in the Religious Digest: The Imperial University of Tokyo recently circulated a questionnaire among its students which shows that of its 5,000 students 6 were Con- fucian, 8 Shintoists, 60 Christians, 300 Buddhists, 1,500 atheists, and 3,000 agnostics. - News Bulletin N. L. C. Protestant Christians in Germany, in spite of tremendous difficulties, are continuing to carryon mission-work in the foreign field. According to the annual of the Evangelical Missions, entitled Die deutsche evan- gelische Heidenmission, German evangelical missions at the end of 1936 numbered 1,659 European missionaries and 12,551 salaried native workers. These people served 1,349,100 heathen Christians and 66,000 candidates for baptism. The courage of the German missions is most commendable. Prof. Frederick C. Grant, dean and president of Seabury-Western Theological Seminary (Episcopal) at Evanston, Ill., has resigned his position and will join the faculty of Union Theological Seminary, New York, where he will become chairman of the Department of New Tes- tament. This statement of his made recently may be passed on: "Some- thing should be done to prevent many of the clergy's growing stale and going to seed. There are men in the ministry who have ceased to grow, have nothing in particular to give in their sermons, and whose pastoral ministry is purely mechanical. It ought to be made clear that ordina- tion is no guarantee in itself of a livelihood regardless of a man's abilities, devotion to his work, and personal character - or the success of his ministry." Making success in the ministry a criterion of one's fitness for this holy work is of course, taken by itself, an unjustified procedure. From San Francisco it is reported that the Methodists lost an office building in that city, the William Taylor Hotel, which has now become the Hotel Empire and whose church auditorium is being changed into a garage. The financial loss involved for Methodists is said to be $750,000. In the Christian Century we read that Washington, D. C., is becoming thoroughly alarmed at the prospect "of gaining the unenviable distinction of being the 'gambling capital' of America. New York City's vigorous house-cleaning seems to have driven the racketeers to the banks of the Potomac, where thousands of small-salaried people are falling easy prey, particularly to those who work the 'numbers' game. Six thousand 304 Theological Observer - Ritd)Hd)~8eit\1efd)id)md)eg men, it is said, are engaged in the highly lucrative practise of fleecing the innocent public here, and their daily intake approximates one hun- dred thousand dollars." The beginning of February saw many Methodists in Chicago. The occasion was the meeting of the United Methodist Council of the Future of Faith and Service, which lasted for three days and was attended by four thousand registered persons. Addresses were delivered by Alfred M. Landon and Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam. The meeting was held under the auspices of the Commission on Evangelism and the Million Unit Fellowship Movement. The two-hundredth anniversary of John Wesley's Aldersgate experience on May 24, 1738, was observed. The oldest Baptist church in the United States is observing its tercentenary this year. It is the First Church of Providence, founded by Roger Williams in 1638. In connection with the mentioning of the 250th anniversary of the birth of Emanuel Swedenborg we are told that the church edifice of the New Jerusalem Congregation in Boston is used so much for interdenomi- national gatherings that it has been called "the Protestant cathedral." Is it not significant that gatherings of this kind are held in a building used for spreading the teachings of an arch-heretic? Dr. William Pierson Merrill of the Brick Presbyterian Church in New York, a building which is now being torn down, has resigned. He is known as an outspoken Modernist. Being seventy-one years old, he quite likely retires from active church-work. In England literary men are discussing the English of the King James Bible. One man, while admitting its great beauty, states that it places before us an alien imagery. Defenders of the Bible very properly point to the Twenty-third Psalm as being intelligible to us in spite of its Oriental picture language. A. II. A1l5iautl 'Illl{l &erid)t filier bie mrd)e. S£)a~ iff bet &runbgebanfe be~ )llOttoorli.\ aum faufenben ,;sa~tgang bet ,,~nfg. ®bA!ut~. S\'ird)enaeitung" (~t. 1 unb 2). D.2ailife fagt untet anbetm: "SDie Sfitd)e foU toifien, toenn &otte~ &etid)te tibet bie mseH fommen foUen, bat bas &etid)t auetft anfiingt am Sjaufe &ottes. Unb toet tooUte feugnen, bat bas &etid)t fd)on angefangen ~aH ~Uet 2arm um bie S\'ird)e ~er unb in ber S\'ird)e fann e~ nid)t aubecfen, baf3 fie unter bem &erid)t &ottes fte~t. ®ine fonberfid)e ~ufgabe toar i~r gefferrt, aW im beutfd)en moff ber grote Umbrud) gefd)a~. ®in neues meid) toar mit einem .anafe gerommen, unb ber S\'ird)e ftanb es au, bem neuen jJofitifd)en meid) mit dner innerfid) erneuerten Sfird)e au anttoorten, mitten im molf bes Umbrud)s bie unbetgiingfid)e {Yadel bes ®bangefiums ~od)au~aften. SDenn tiber aUem msanbef ber Seit fte~t i~r etoiger ~uftrag: ,~rebigt bas ®bangefiuml' msas toiire getoorben, toenn dne S\'ird)e in ®rfd)dnung ge~ treten toare, erfiiUt bon bem {Yeuer ber ~lJoftef, einig im mefenntnis .anar~ tin 2ut~ersl SDas ift nid)t gefd)e~en. . .. SDas erfte lillort (an bem bie ~rtifung gefd)e~en foU) ift: ,&eoet bem 6taate, toas bes 6taate~ ift, uub &ott, toa~ &ottes ift.' SDa~ lonnte im ®rnft niemafs dne {Yrage fein, bat bie S\'ird)e bem 6taate gebe, toa~ be~ 6taate~ ift, aud) bem neuen 6taat. ~ier ift ~~rifti ~efe~f au flat unb bail ~ort beil \lSauIuil bon bet Dlitig~ fcii au einbeutig, alil ball eil bariifJet au einem ,SHrcljen]tteit' £Ommen bUtf±c. l1nb boclj ift eil baau gerol11men. llnan ~at jeneil ~ort ~~tifti bergeif en, iuoHte nicljt meqt @on £leo en, tuail @ones ift. . .. SDie Si:itclje feloft tuUtbe aUf ben \!fUat bes @l±aa±eil geIeg±. Wiclj± ~~rif±ue tuat me~t bet ,03tfie', tonbem bet @liaa±, bail /Boff, bie maffe. SDie arie ~ilier tuutbe aetbrocljen, bet aHe @Iauoe en±tuertd, bas aUe ~efenntnis antiquiert. . .. ~mmet tuei±et £ling ber ~agen aliltJfu:t§, bis es aUt offentricljen £eugnung eines pet~ fonlicljen ®oiteil fmn. UnltJiITfiitliclj fragt man, ltJie biefet \!fbftllta bet S"firclje ber mefotmation mogriclj tuat, bie bodj bon 2!:nfang iqten muqm barin ~a±te, Si:itclje be'3 ~otteil au f ein. SDet Wiebergang tuat nidjt bon geftew, er tuar langf± borOeteite±. @lett bet 2!:uffIiintng atbeitde ein frembet @eift an bet Si:itdje, bet iqren £eudjtet erf c~ii±tcrte. ~rft ram bie lEioeI~ fritH, ag iqre ;it1jeolo£len 6tein um @l±ein auil bet lEilief ausotacljen, bis bet £lanae ~au bilififdjet 2!:u±orita± aufammenftiitaie. SDie ~ioeIfritif ltJutbe ali£leWft bon bet reIigions£lefdjiclj±ricljen lEe±tacljtun£l ber @lcljrift; biefe taumte boUenbil aUil, ltJail bie S1:ritif noclj qatte fteqen laffen; ®ott bet~ fcljltJanb qintet bet ,meIigion'. SDie @ltimme fetner Dffenoarung ltJar ilum 6cljtueigen gelitadjt. 03s luar noclj niclj± bail 03nbe. 2!:uclj bie rerigions~ gefdJidj±Iiclje ~e±tacljtung luurbe burclj ein Weues abgeWft. butclj ein ~erein~ trag en ber \lSoIitif in Die S"firc~e. ~ar eil liiil~er noclj ein geiftlidjeil ffiingen geltJefen, fo ltJurbe eil nun ein poIitifcljet Si:mnpf, ein Si:ampf um bie llnadj±. Widj± ein Si:ampf £legen ben @l±acrt, fonbern ge£len Die, bie nodj @ott £lelien ltJoIIten, ltJail @oiteil ift. 03s qat nie gut geian, ltJenn bie Si:itclje fidj in bie \lSolitif mifclj±e, ltJenn fie poIitifdje Si:itclje ltJetben ltJoIIte. ~atten bie msaclj±et gefcljlcrfen, bie ltJacljen fonten, obet ±ta±en fie au fpa± aUf ben \lSfan? ... n ,~et mtclj liefenne± bor ben llnenfcljen, ben tuill iclj oefennen bor mei~ nem ~immnfcljen /Ba±er.' . .. ~ines lileiDt ber S"firclje unbettueqtt. ba'3 ~e~ fenntniil. SDail ~efenntniil iff aoer nidj± liloll in bail \lSe±tuilltJott gefa\3± ,SDu liilt ~qriftuil'. ~il qat eine qeHige @efdjidj±e £lefunben im Si:mnpf mit liofen @eiftem unb aIIetIei falfdjen \lSropqeten; unb ber @eif± @ones, bet bie S"fitdje in aUe )fiaqtqeit feitd, qat iqt ~efenntniffe £lefcljenfi, famtIidj et~ liau± aUf jenem ¥yeffengrunb, unaufgeoliate @ldjiite ®oneil. ~it tuiitben em @on fcljulbig ltJetben, tuomen tuir fie betlcugnen, bie ,8eugniffe ber iHeforlna±ion, bie ~efenn±niffe ber lutqetifcljen S"firclje. :In i~rem @eift au ptcbigen, in iqnen bie :Jugenb au unterriclj±en, mit [qnen bie llniiqferigen unb ~eIabenen aufauticlj±en, ge~ort cruclj au bem \!fuftrag ,\lSreDig± bail 03ban~ geHum!' )fiie bie auf3ete ®eftaH ber Si:irclje ltJetben ltJirb, tueill qeu±e fein llnenfdj. @lertfame Si:itdjliauprane qoren tuit fogar auil bem ~Jlunbe bon ;it1jeologen. . .. \!fliet !.lie Si:irdje ber ,8uhtnft ltJitb, e~ fei in ltJeIdjet ¥Yorm auclj immet, eine .ltirclje be~ ~efenn±niffe~ fein, ober fie tuirb eil nicljt fein. SDamm mag man bie tuoqI bon @on liera±en q etll en, bie oqne aUe Si:itcljen~ porim ficlj um bail ru±~etifclje ~cfenntng gefanunert ~alien unb fammeln." 03il fieqt alletbingil bo'3 au'3 in ber lut~erifcljen Si:itclje SDeutfcljIanbil. ~ie aUllete ~ebrangniil ift bae @eringf±e. :In ber llirdje feIlift ficqt eil boil auil. D. Qaiore qat redjt, ltJenn er bon "bern @eticljt iibet bie Si:itdje" rebe±. ~eorogen bet Iut~erifdjen Si:itdje re~ren unlutqerifdj bom qeHigen ~lienb~ maqf, fie betlirei±en eine ftJnetgiftif clje £eqte bon bet ~efe~rung, ~alien gar bie medj±fettigung~reqte betfalfdj± unb leugnen bie tuortridje @iingeliung bet 20 306 Theological Observer - .!UrdJlicf)~8eit\Jefcf)idJtU~s Sjetrigen ®djtift. ,;sa mandje ±teilien gar ungriiuliige milielfrHif. WIit ffiedjt Hagt Eailile barufJer. bat man nicljt einig ift "im mefennmiB WIadin EutljerB". :.Die Wot ber SHtdje geljt iljm au Sjeraen. WIjjcljten bodj er unb feine @ejinnungBgenoifen erfennen. baB man audj in iljrem S'1'reife bon bem Iutljerifdjen mefennmiB aligettJidjen iff r Unb mjjdjten fie bann audj ttJeiter edennen. bat baB aufricljtige mefennmiB aur lutljerifdjen Eeljte audj bie 5trennung bon benen forbert. bie bon bet lutljerifdjen Eeljte aligettJidjen finb r :.Dann rourbe baB @etidjt tilier bie SHtdje feinen feIigen 2roecl erreidjt ljalien. ®B ift tilierauB lieffagenBroed, baB man audj liei bem i~igen ®tanb ber :.Dinge nidjiB llon ciner g:reifirdje 11lilfen rom. Eailile fragt arfo: "Unb nun ljat bie Sfirdje tilier Wadjt baB j8ertrauen beB ®taag bedoren; fie foU auB iljrem ~ienft am j80If entraffen roerben; fie n~e iljm nicljt0 meljt. ~et ®taat fteljt iilier ben ~onfeHionen, er riitt iebem f eine ffieHgion; ali e t e t roiII bie Sfirdje nidjt meljt aUB ®taatBmiHeIn untet- ft ii ~ en" (®perrbrucl bon unB) , "et roiII nidjt meljr fitdjenberliunben fein. ~aljer audj bie SfirdjenauB±tittBroeUe, Me ie~t burdj geroiffe Sheife geljt, un]) bie WIeinung bieler, bat eB aeitgemiiBet fei, autet bet SHtdje au lelien. 1miirbe Mefe 9.EeUe roeiter geljen, fo roare baB aroat nidjt baB ®nbe bet Sfitdje, aliet ber j8oHBfirdje. ~ie bieIen Sfanale, bie bie SHrdje aum j80If ljatte in bet jj3f!ege ber ,;sugenb, in bem mancf)erIei ~ienft butdj baB 9.Eod @otteB, 11liitben fidj berfdjfiej3en, unb fie roiirbe, aUf iljte 2!nfiinge 3uriicrgefteIIt, nut nodj WliffionBfirdje fein. 9.Eare baB aum SjeH beB j8offeB?" ®B ift mille- greifIidj: fie Wnnen ben ®egen bet g:teifudje nidjt erfennen unb baB Uw ljeU bet ®taa±Bbetliunbenljeit. ",;sn cinet liebeu±famen ®djtift, ,j8jjIfer bor unb nadj Gl:ljriftuB', roeift jj3aur ~n±ljauB nadj, ttJie feljt bie ffieIigion nidjt bIOB jj3riba±faclje. fonbern j80IfBfadje ift, jjffentridje 2!ngeIegenljeit. . .. ,;sm @eljorfam gegen iein 1mod roitb fidj audj Me g:rage ber j80IfBfirdje rofen. 9.Eir ljalien fein ffiedjt, nadj g:teHirdje au rufen, forange ber mau bet j8oIfB- fitdje nodj nidjt a6ge6rodjen ift. 9.Eir lja6en bie j80IfBfirdje nidj± geliaut, bet Sj®rr ljat eB ge±an; fo ljalien roir fie audj nidj± aliaulitedjen." ,;sa, bie j8oIfB- firclje foU fogat bon @ott gelio±en fdn: ,,9.EeH roit unfet j80lf Iielien, eB grot unb ftad feljen mjjdjten, barum erfUIIt eB unB mit fdjroeret ®orge, roenn bie ~oIfBfitdje aufljoten foU; barum teben roir bon einem @otteB- geridjt wet bie Stirdje, roenn iljt baB j80H genommen ttJirb, 11lenn fie ben mefeljI iljtei3 S)®rrn nidj± meljt aUBfiiljren fann: ,Wlacljei bie j8 i:i I f e t ' (®perrbrucl' im Original) ,au meinen ,;stingcrn.''' :.Det ®taat rom bie SHtdje aUf iljte eigenen g:iite fteUen - unb bagegen roeljd fidj bie Sfirclje r 2!uB bem "WeujaljrBgrut beB Eutljetifdjen ffiateB an bie @eiftridjen" ber in elien biefen Wummern bet "SHtdjenaeitung" betjjffentridjt if±, tetIen roir forgcnbei3 mit: ,,2!uB ber SHtdje ljalien roir eine Unterneljmung fUt aUerIei fromme j8etanf±altungen gemadj±, um bon iljr ben j8erbadj± ber Un- 3eitgemiitljeit au neljmen. jj30Htifdje j))(etljoben ljalien roir inB S)anbeIn bet stitdje ljeriibergenommen, roeH fie augenfdjeinIidj au grotem ®rfolg in bet 1meIt fUljden. 9.Eir 6emtilj±en uni3, baB poIitifdje 1merf, baB un±et unB unb fUr unferB ~oUeB ®ljre unb g:teiljeit mit ljoljer Eeibenfcljaf± unb opfetfreu- bigem, aaljem 1mmen begonnen ttJutbe, mit @otiei3 ffiatfdjlut in cinB au liringen, unb bernadjriiffigten batwet bie jj3rebig± be9 ®bangeIiumB bom ffieiclj in ber ganaen 1meH au einem 8eugniB wer aUe j8i:ilfet unb wer unfer j8oIf, Wlatilj. 24, 14." /I ~ic Sfitdje lja± in bet 1mer± fein anbete9 ffiedjt, aI9 baB ®bangeIiulH bom ffieidj @otieB unb bet j8etfjjljnung au berllinbigen. Theological Observer - Stitd)nd)~.3ettllefd)id)tlid)e!l 307 Sl)atlnn aVer ltJirb fie immer ungeficfjert unb in !BerIegenljeit um bieiJorm iljrer irbifcfjen ®pften5 in ber ~ert fteljen. ®~ ift gut fo, bal3 ltJir ljeute aucfj burcfj ba~ poHtifcfje ~ort baran erinnert ltJerben, ban bie Si:ircfje feinen ~nfprucfj barauf ljat, anfeljnIicfj unb in SjerrHcfjfeit bor ber ~ert 5u f±eljen unb in iljr ein repriif entatibe~ .2eoen au fiiljren. ,®r ltJirb nicfjt f cfjreien nocfj tufen, unb jeine @5timme ltJirb man nicfjt ljiiren auf ben @affen', ZSef. 42, 2. @50 allein ltJirh bie Si:ircfje benen etltJa~ ltJert, bie mit ficfj feIDft unb mit ber ~ert nicfjt meljr aurecfj±fommen, bie in ficfj feIoft bereIenbet finb. . .. 2u ber in ~rmut unb beracfjteter @eftart, umhriingt unb befiimpft in ber ~eIt erfcfjeinenben unb aUf ba~ !Berljeinung~ltJor± iljre~ Sj®rrn angeltJiefenen unb geltJorfenen Si:ircfje ltJerben bie IDliiljfeHgen unb meIahenen ben ~eg fucfjen unb finhen. U ®. Religion in the Scandinavian Countries. - Writing in the Christian Century on the subject "Revolt in the North," Rev. Ezra P. Young, a Con- gregational minister of Little Falls, N. J., begins his article with this sentence: "When twenty-five million people dismiss the Church as un- important in their daily life, it is news." He maintains that, while people in the Scandinavian countries are willing to discuss almost any subject, they are not willing to consider the subject of Church. "Except among a few Fundamentalists and ardent ritualists, the state church in Scandinavia is a dead issue." "In general, the state churches of Scan- dinavia are little more than a parade-place for the elite, a glorified military museum." In fact, he thinks signs of revolt can be witnessed. This revolt is directed against creeds "which were written for the Middle Ages." A high-school principal of Denmark is quoted as saying: "Our attitude toward the state church is one of indifference rather than op- position. You to the West expect much of your Church; we expect little, and we are not therefore disappointed." Mr. Young has found that there are few churches in Denmark with the social message. He says that, while the people are very indifferent toward the state church, they do manifest interest in the Oxford Group and in Barth's theology, and among the workers and farmers the Free Church idea has spread widelr. Whether this author is reliable in his observations and whether his antipathy to the old Gospel did not color his glasses and failed to let him see things in the true light, is a question which may well be asked. Dr. Boe, president of St. Olaf College in Northfield, Minn., addressed a letter to the Christian Century in which he maintains that Mr. Young's observations, though probably correct for the instances reported on, do not furnish an adequate portrayal of the situation and a basis for just generalizations. A. The Doctrinal Status of the Anglican Church. - Much space has of late been given by the religious press to the discussion of a remarkable document which was published in England in the second half of January. The history of this document began fifteen years ago. At that time the archbishop of Canterbury (Dr. Davidson) appointed a commission of twenty-five members "to consider the nature and grounds of Christian doctrine with a view to demonstrating the extent of existing agreement within the Church of England and with a view to investigating how far it is possible to remove or diminish existing differences." Of the twenty- 308 Theological Observer - 5titd)lid)~.3eit\lefd)id)md)e!l five members of the commission five have died, and a sixth one has resigned because he left England. The vacancies, however, were filled in every case. The commission, so the Manchester Guardian informs us, has met each year for a week in September and in three years- 1934-5-6 - for a week also in March. "Between the full session the commission divided into groups, which worked on material assigned to them." And what is the outcome of these fifteen years of labor? From the paper just mentioned, which submits an exhaustive report, we glean the following: The commission "sought to trace the boundaries within which the wide liberty of statement and of interpretation which has always been the glory of the Anglican communion is allowable. This work was theological, dealing with doctrines, not judicial, passing jud~ent on persons." This purpose of the commission explains why many subjects which a comprehensive statement of doctrine would have to dwell on have been omitted or treated very briefly. In other words, controversial matters only are discussed. The first section of the report, called "Prolegomena," treats of what authority the Holy Scriptures, the Church, and the creeds have. On the Scriptures the commission makes this colorless statement: "When all allowance is made for possible divergences between the records as they stand and the historic facts behind them, it remains true that the religious and moral teaching of the gospels conveys faithfully the impress made upon the Apostolic Church by the mind and personality of Jesus and thus possesses supreme authority." With respect to creeds the following paragraphs are quoted by the Manchester Guardian: "General acceptance, implicit if not explicit, of the authoritative formularies, doctrinal and liturgical, by which the meaning of the Gospel has been defined, safeguarded, or expressed, may reason- ably be expected from members of the Church. Assent to formularies and the use of liturgical language in public worship should be under- stood as signifying such general acceptance without implying detailed assent to every phrase or proposition thus employed. Part 1, which oc- cupies itself with the doctrines of God and of redemption, accepts the doctrine of divine creation." (The Manchester Guardian report does not say what view the commission expresses on evolution. Other reports indicate that evolution is legitimated.) The non-omnipotent God of H. G. Wells is rejected. While miracles are accepted, the commission adds: "It is felt by many that miracle has a special value, in that it is a striking demonstration of the subordination of the natural order to spir- itual ends and affords particular points at which God's activity is mani- fested with special clarity and directness. On the other hand, it is to be recognized that many others feel it to be more congruous with the wis- dom and majesty of God that the regularities such as men of science ob!'erve in nature and call laws of nature should serve His purpose without any need for exceptions on physical plane. It is important to notice that the motives leading to this view are not exclusively scientific, but that a religious interest also is involved." The meaning seems to be that those who refuse to accept miracles must not be branded as false teachers. With respect to sin the commission says: "In our view the doctrine of a universal tendency to evil in man is not bound up with Theological Observer - .I'tird)Hd)~3ett\lefd)id)tficge§ 309 historical truth of any story of a fall." The acceptance of the Scriptural account of the virgin birth of our Lord is not insisted on. Concerning the resurrection of Christ we find this distressing paragraph: "To Chris- tians the resurrection of Jesus Christ is the central fact in human his- tory. And when a fact is so closely linked with such momentous and far-reaching issues in heaven and earth, it is not surprising that opinions should differ when the question is raised how much in the record of it is derived from the sheer occurrence of the fact itself and how much is due to the primitive interpretation of the fact in the minds which first per- ceived its transcendent significance and expressed it in forms inevitably belonging to their own manner of thought and speech." Of the ascension of Jesus the commission holds that "its physical features are to be inter- preted symbolically." Part 2 has the heading "The Church and Sacraments." Of the section dealing with the Real Presence the Manchester Guardian says: "The handling of the subject of the Real Presence is on familiar lines and bears witness to the approach of divergent schools of opinion, which is so marked a feature of present-day thought." This means, we suppose, that all the various teachings are declared permissible. The topics of reservation and of auricular confession, if we understand the Manchester Guadian correctly, are sidestepped because they belong to the realm of practise rather than of doctrine, according to the view of the commission. The prayers for the dead are said to meet with little opposition today. The following paragraph shows to what extent Scripture doctrine has been undermined: "If we extend this hope, as many feel bound to do, to a general expectation of further opportunities of grace for all, it will not be on account of specific declarations of Scripture, but rather as an inference from the Christian doctrine of God as a whole. That doctrine requires us to repudiate all conceptions of the judgment which represents God as abandoning the appeal of love and falling back on the exercise of omnipotent sovereignty to punish those who have failed to respond to the invitation of the Gospel. God is Love, and He cannot deny Himself." On views concer:l1ing angels and demons Christians are told that it IS legitimate for them to suspend judgment or to interpret the language of the Bible and of the liturgy of the Church in a symbolical fashion. The Manchester GtLm'dian says in conclusion of the report that "it does nothing to limit the traditional liberty of the Anglican communion. It does much to make the acceptance of the traditional doctrine of the Church easier for men of modern ways of thinking." In the Living Church a correspondent from London writes: "Prom- inent Non-conformists [Methodists, Congregationalists, etc.] have been inclined to welcome the report; but evangelical opinion within the Church has been less sanguine. For example, one of its most earnest and distinguished representatives, Prebendary Hinde, writes: "The first thought which springs to my mind is one of profound thankfulness that my faith rests on something more precise and more sure than this ex- pression of Christian doctrine. . .. If the report should fall into the hands of some 'man in the street' who wants to know truth, I fear it will lead him into a morass; certainly it will not establish him in the truth of the Gospel. He will probably draw the conclusion either that 310 Theological Observer - .Ritd;1td;~3eitgefd;id;tlid;eg the Church does not know truth or that truth is indeed many-sided and nothing much matters." A London Jesuit is quoted by the same correspondent as seeing in the report a confirmation of the oft-repeated charge that the Church of England is riddled with Modernism. He is said to have observed: "It is inconceivable that in future the Anglican Church will take any disciplinarian action to silence any bishop or person who openly denies the Virgin Birth, the Gospel miracles of Christ, or the existence of the devil and evil spirits." Sad to say, the Jesuit is right. A. Warum miiffen lUir an ber lutfje1.ifdjen 1ll6enbmafjl~refjre feftfjaften? Unter biefer itlierfdjrift fdjreilit l1Stof. D. SJermann @5affe, @lrfangen, in brei lIlummern ber ,,~. @l. 2.~." (inr. 3 ff., 71. ~a~rgang) ~eraen§bewegenbe jillorte an feine mmutl)eraner aur l8cibeqaltnng ber Iutqerifcljen .2eqre bom l)ei~ ligen ~Jjenbmaqr. @ligentriclj ift feine ~uff a~reiqe gebaclJt al§ ~ntwort au SJ. &olIwitJer§ l8el)aulltnng (,,~benbma~l§gemeinfcr)aft", l8eil)eft 3 aur ,,@lbangeIifcljen ~eologie" 1937), "baB ein~eitriclj bon allen ~eutigen @l;J;ege~ ten .2utqers ~6enbmal)l§lel)re aum minbeften in ilJrer fUr fie fo notwenhigen @linbeutigfeit burd) ein non liquet in 3'rage gefteut, baru6er lJinaus bon ben meif±en 6eftrit±en wirh". SDer erfte ~uffa~ f cljIieBt mit bem ~ppell: "SDas ift einet bet fcljwetf±en jEotwutfe, hen wit hen jEorfampfetn bon fSatmen unb SJalIe macljen, haB fie bas tefotmiette jEerfianbnis bon ~itclje unb ~itcljengemeinfcljaft, l8efenn±nis unh l8efenninisbetpflicljtnng l)eimliclj an hie @5teITe beWen gefetJ± lJa6en, Was jalJtqunbettelang in ber Iutqetifcljen s\!irclje SDeu±fcljlanM gegoIten lJa±. SDie aHe ebangelifclje ~itclje berpflidjtete, wie es lJeute noclj jehe wirfiiclj IutlJetif clje ~itclje tnt, ilJre q5farret aUf hie .2e~te bet l8efenn±niWe, weU fie bie tedjte Illuslegung het SJeiIigen @5djtift ift. inadj hen SJallefcljen l8efdjIiiffen follen hie q5farret barauf betpflidj±e± wetben mit ber offenen 3'rage, wie weit bie l8efenniniff e mit bet @5cljrift iilieteinftimmen. SDiefe 3'rage foll etft butdj ein neues ,edj±es SJiiten ber @5cljtift' entfdjieben werben. @ls ift fragficlj, oli man bann nicljt lieffer tate, nadj bem fSeifpid bidet reformieden ~itcljen hie .2elJrberpflicljtnng auf bie SJeilige @5djtift aIs norma normans iilierlJaupt au befcljtiinfen. )liir jebenfalls lJa!ten uns fUr lierecljtigt, bie mefenninisberllfliclj±Ung ber ~fatrer auclj in bet altprcuBifd)en ~ird)e e!ienfo ernf± au nelJmen, wie unfere jEatet fie genommen lJa!ien unb wie jehe wirfridj an ha§ lutlJerifd)e fSefenninis ge6unbene ~td)e fie neqmen mUll. iillir ±Un e~ l1.1alJrqaftig nidjt ,au~ @tiinben ber ~rabition unb bes fSefenninisformaHsmus' - nut ein bollenbetet inarr fiinnte meinen, lJeute mit folcljen mo±iben ~irdjen allfridj±en au Tiinnen -, fonbern einaig unb allein besl1.1egen, weir wir im tiefften SJeraen babon ftlieraeugt finb, unb aWat auf &runb ernftef±en @5±Ubium£l bet SJeHigen @5cljtift unb bet @efdjidjte ber ~itdje iilieraeugt finb, baB hie .2elJre ber ~uguf±ana (foute qeiBen: bet ~on~ forbia) ,aus &ottes )liod genommen unb barin feft unb woqI !iegtiinbet ift'." ~m aweiten ~uffa~ fd)reib± D. @5ane u. a. bie leiber nut au walJten iillorie: ,,@is fringt lJad, Wenn wit bas fo offen ausfprecljen, alier es mUll um ber iillaqrqeit willen getagt wetben. )liit ~eologen lJaben allen ~nraf3, ben groBen ~nteil an ber fdjweren @5djulb nid)± au betIeugnen, hie unfere ~ird)en !iis an ben ITtanh bes ~erberlien~ gebracljt lJat. ~ir plaubetn ia auclj fein &elJeimnis aus, fonbern ftellen nut feft, Was jeber @5±Uben± unb mancljet aufmerffame \l3tebig±l)iitet wdB: b i e e tJ an gel i f dj e ~ lJ e 0 ~ logie ber @egenwad lJat ±ro~ ber gewartigen fSemiiqun~ gen bet beiben fe~ten'Ja~qe~nte ben ~eg au einem luirffidj qeoLogifdjen [\etftanbni£l bet )Bibd nodj nidjt to i e bet 9 e fun ben. (@3lJerrfa~ tm Dtiginal.) ~it ~aben a1l0geaeidj" neic bibIifdje 5tIjeofogen, aber roir ~aben teine bibiifdje 5tIjeoiogie. . . . ~cIcf)e morailge audj immer bie mob erne Cf1;egefe betjenigen bet ffiefotma~ Honen gcgenilber ~aben mag, in£lbefonbere aUf bcm G.lebie± be£l rein flJradj" Iidjen [\erfte~ens, ben [\oraug roirb rein ~eutiget Cf!eget feinen morgangern im 16. :;:5a~r~llnbct± beftreiten, bat e£l fUr fie ein ein~ettHdje13 9leue£l ~efta" ment gab, ba£l me~r roar af£l eine @3umme bon aufeinanberfolgenben IHera~ tifdjen @3djicf)ten. @3oUte aber nidjt bamit bie ~a±fadje 5ufammen~angen, bat bie ~eutige Cf1;egefe bie G.lrauben£lf~e bet clJangelifdjen )Befennmifie, bie ben H1eforma±oren bollig ebibente @3djriftroa~r~ei±en roaten, nidjt me~t au£l bet @3cljtift au begtilnben bermag? ~an fagt un13, fein ~eutiget Cf6cge± finbe im 9(cucn ~eftament nodj !2ut~et£l 2tbenbma~gre~rc roieber. s\)iltfen luit un£l bie G.legenfrage erfauben, roelcljen ~(rtifel ber 2tuguftana lidj benn bie mob erne Cf1;egefe nodj bibIifdj au begtilnben getraue? . .. 5t~eofogen, bie fidj fefoft au ben merteibigern be£l ebangelifdjen G.llauben£l gegen ben !2ibe~ rafi£lmu£l bergangener :BeHen redjnen, geben bie !2e~re bom @3itaffeiben unb bom fil~nenben DVfet be13 C!itIiiferiJ aUf. @3ie bef±teiten, bat bie !2e~te bon bet C!itofiinbe fidj au£l bet )Bibel begtilnben liifl±. @3ie madjen auiJ :;:5C!ifU13 etnen \jSefagianer, bet bem llJCenfdjen roenigften13 bie C!irreidjung einer reIa~ tiben moUfommen~eit ilutraut unb bie Heinen S1!inber fUr filnilIOiJ ~aft. @3ie lJroteftieten gegen bie C!iinfeitigfeit, mH ber man bie lJauIinifdje fftedj±ferti~ gungiJle~re aum ~itteIlJunft bet ganaen @3djrift madjt. S\'uq, eiJ gibt faum einen @3~ be£l nrdjIidjen lBefennmifie13, ben bie moberne e1;egetifdje ~~eo~ fogie - unb roit reben nUt bon berjenigen, bie be!1lUtt firdjfidj fein rom - noclj aus bet @3djrift ilU begriinben unb ben G.lraubeniJf~en anberer Sl'on~ feffionen gegenilbet ilU bedeibigen bermocljte. ~er uniJ aIfo me~r ober minber triumlJ~ietenb entgegen~ar±, fein moberner C!i1;e9e± ~ar±e ~ell±e nodj an ber rut~erifdjen ~benbma~[0le~re feft, bem erroibern roir, bat roir baiJ mit lBebauern 3Ut S1!enntniiJ ne~men, bat roir im @tunbe ia audj nidjtiJ anbereiJ erroartet ~aben, bat eiJ un13 aber feine£lroegiJ geroit fei, bat bantU irgenb e±roaiJ gegen bie ~benbma~f£lIe~re unferer SHrdje gefagt fei. C!iiJ Wnnte ia fein, bat bie ,neuere t\'orfdjung' fidj mit i~ren ~nfdjauungen ilbet ba£l 2rbenbma~l ein bernidjtenbeiJ 2trmutiJ3eugniiJ aU£lfteUt. s\)ie SHrdje ~at iebenfaU0 redjt baran ge±an, roenn fie uniJ :it~eologen famt unfem iYor~ fdjung£letgebniffen niemaIiJ gana fo emf± genommen ~at, lDie roit un£l fefber aU ne~men pfIegen. . .. Unb fo feiert unf ere Sl'itdje o~ne iebe fftilcffidjt aUf bie ~einungen, ~l)lJotljefen unb s\)iiJfuffionen ,neueter t\'orfdjung' ilbet baiJ ~eilige menbma~l baiJ @laframent be£l 2tI±ariJ aI0 baiJ @3aftamen± beiJ roalj~ ren 2eibe13 unb )Bfu±e£l beiJ ~Cfrrn in genau bemfeIben @linn, roie fie in i~ten )Befenntniff en bariibet Ie~ti. @lie tut ba£l roa~t~aftig nidjt mit fdjrec~tem @eroiffen all£l einem falfdjen S1!onferlJa±i0muiJ, fonbem roeiI i~r ffieflJeft bor bem )illode G.lottei3 immer noclj gtoter ift afiJ i~t ffieflJefi bor ben .\;'l)lJot~efen bet mobernen ~iffenfdjaft." :;:5. :it. ~. fffiiffenfdjaft nub @llaube. ~uiJ bem )Blatt" S\). C!i. S\)." aitieti ber ,,!2ut~. ~eroIb" bie folgenben audj filr un£l roidjtigen alJoIogetif djen 2tngaben: ,,:BaljIreidje beutfdje ~aturforfdjer ~aben in le~ter :Beit aur t\'rage ,ffteligion unb 9laturroiffenfdjaft', ,~atut unb Dffenbarung' baiJ ~ort ergriffen. :;:5~te @ltimmen geben :BeugniiJ babon, bat ,ffteligion nnb ~iffenfdjaft nidjt im B i 2 Theological Observer - ~ttcl)ficf)~2eitgefcl)tcl)tlicl)eg llliiberflJru~ fteljen'. Wut einem ~orurien, ba~ jaljraeljnterang (feU ber anttte be~ borigen ~aljrljunbert~) geniiljri tDurbe, tDirb bami± entgiiftig aufgeriiumt. @ine ~illIe iiljnIi~er 3eugniffe itiigt ie~± ein Illied aUfammen: ,@ott, anenf~, ;ite~nH, Illiiffenfcfjaf±', bon Dr. ing. @. &). NC. meefman (@5~oningq, ~aber~ born), ber ben reIi(Jiofen @runbf±elIungen grof3er ma±urtDiffenf~af±Ier, ~q\)~ fifer, lmatfjematifer unb anberer ~orf~er na~gegangen iff. SDie aaqlrei~en bon iqm beigelimcljten 8eugniffe tlJiberflJre~en einbeutig ber ~nnaqme, baf3 Die Illiiff enf cqafi aum ~)coni0111u0 ober lma±eriaIi~mu0 fUqre. @ini(Je ?)Srolien barau0 mogen qier foI(Jen. \lIlt0 einem mrief ~ol±a~: ,~~ liegreife nicljt, tDie jeml1nb lin meiner Wufri~±igfeit unb @5±anbqaftigfei± in ber llterigion, au ber iefj mi~ lidenne, stDeifeIn fann. @~ iff mein fef±er ~orfai2, in biefem ®lauben au Iclien unb au fterlien in ber &)offnung, ba~ etDige Beben au ererlien. SDiefen @Iauben beitadjie i~ aI~ ein @ef~enf @otte~, ag einen illiernatilrn~en @Iauben.' SDer NCa±qematifer Grau~\): ,~~ bin ein Grljrift; ba~ tDm fagen: i~ graube an bie @otiljeit ~@fu Grqrifti mit St\)~O mtalje, SfolJernifu~, SDe~carie0 [~J, metDton, ~erma±, BeibniJi), ~a0caI, @rimalbi, @uler, @ulbin, mo~cotDi±f~, @erbH, mit alIen groBen ~fitonomen, alIen grof3en maturtDiffenf~af±Iern, alIen groBen NCa±qematifern ber frilljeren ~l1qrqunber±e. Unb menn man mi~ na~ bem @runb fragen fome, tDilrbe i~ iljn gern angeben. NCan tDirb jeljen, baf3 meine iiberaeugung ni~t ba~ ®r~ gelini£; aneraogener ~orurieile, fontern ba~ eine~ grilnbn~en @5tuDium~ ift. ~~ ±eile bie ±iefe iiberaeugung, bie fo bieIe Ijerborragenbe @e1eljrte, luie muffini, &)aUl) , Bl1ennec, ~mlJere, ~elIetier, ~re\)cine±, GrorioIi~, bur~ iljre Illior±e, iljre Staten unb in ifjren @5~riften befunbe± ljaben. Unb tDenn i~ jeJi)t bie lTlmnen ber no~ Bebenben au~ ~ur~t, iljre mef~eibenqeit au ber~ reJi)en, niclj± nenne, fo tum i~ bo~ bie mamen meiner beriiljm±en ~reunbe aufaiiljlen, bei benen i~ au meincr ~reube ben ~bel uub bie @roj3mu± ['?] be§ ~rifmcljen ®Imtben~ gefunben ljabe. @~ finb bie0: ber @3~OlJfer bet Sfrif±alIogmlJljie, &)au\); bie @rfinber be~ Grljinin0 unb be§ @5±e±ljoffolJ§, ~er~ Ietier unb Baennec; ber lierilljm±e @5eefaljrer an morb ber "Urania", ~re\)~ cine±, unb ber unfterbn~e @5~OlJfer ber b\)namif~en ®Iefitiaitii± 2fmlJere.' SDer ~fitonom ~uifeur: ,SDie berborrenben, bem reIigiofen @mlJfinben feinb~ n~en 52eljren entfpringen jebe§mal etucr @etfte§einftelIuug, in ber ber tDaljre ®elefjrie ni~t berljarren fann. Illiiebiel bebeu±enber unb anaieljenber ift filr iljn bie ~orf~ung, tDenn er an e1ne freie unb lji.i~f±e ~nteIIigena glaubt, bie tie lllieIt befeeIt, tDenn er tDeij3, baj3 bom fo§mif~en ~ebeI lii0 aum ~(tom jebe§ SDing un~ ettDa0 offenliaren rann bon einer (Jrbnung, bie au0 bem @tDigen ift.' U WlIe§ Wpologe±if~e feibe± ia an einer getDiifen Unfi~er~ ljeit unb @5~tDii~e, fo baj3 man geneig± ift, ab unb ilU ~rageaei~en an ben maub illl feJi)en. Unb bodj finb berglei~en @eIeljr±enaeugnifie ito~ alIen lmangeI§ be§tDegen tDeribolI, tDeir fie beaeugen, baj3 Illiiffenf~af± an unb fUr fi~ nidj± gottro§ ma~±. Illiirb bie Illialjr~eit un±erbrilcft unb bie Bilge ber~ breite±, 10 fja± bie0 au~ in einem @eleljrien feinen @runb in ber &(JE~WX unb &6L%[a. be0 berberb±en ~reif~e§. (~gL mom. 1, 1S.) ~. St . .\)Jc.