Qtnurnr~iu
m4rningtral :!Inut41y
Continuing
LEHRE UND VVEHRE
MAGAZIN FUER Ev.-LuTH. HOMILETIK
THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY-THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY
Vol. IX November, 1938 No. 11
CONTENTS
Page
A Course in Lutheran Theology. Th. Engelder _____ . _______ . __ .. __ ._. _____ .. _ 801
Was lehrt die Schrift ueber die iustitia civilis? G. Hnebener ... __ .. 821
The Lure of Biblical and Christian Archeology. P. E. Kretzmann ___ 828
Sermon Study on Heb. 10:19-25. Th. Laetsch .. _. _____________ .. _ __ _______ 834
Predigtentwuri fuer den ersten Adventssonntag _______ .. ____ .. ______ . ___ 846
Miscellanea _______ . . ________________ . ___ . . _________ . __________________ _ .. ____ . __ 849
Theological Observer. - Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches ___ ___ .____ ._. __ . _ 852
Book Review.-Literatur -__ .... _. __ .. __ .. _.' _. _______________ .. ___ . .. __ . __ . _________ 873
E1n Pred1ger muss nicht al1eln w ei-
den, IJlso dass er die Schafe unter-
weise. wie sie rechte Christen Bollen
sein. sondem auch daneben den Woel-
fen wehTen. dass sie die Schafe nicht
angreifen und mit falscher Lehre ver-
roehren und Irrtum elnfuehren.
LutheT.
Es 1st k eln Ding. das die Leute
mehr bel der Kirche behaelt denn
die gute Predigt. - Apologie, A,.t. 24.
If the trumpet give an uncertain
sound who shall prepare himself to
the battle? -1 COT. 14, ,.
Published for the
Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States
CONCORDIA PUBLISHING ROUSE, St. Louis, Mo.
Miscellanea 849
Miscellanea
Science and Christian Education
This was the subject upon which Dr. Arthur H. Compton, professor
of physics at the University of Chicago, spoke at the closing session of
the International Convention of Christian Education held here in Colum-
bus last week. Dr. Compton is a scientist of the first water, winner of the
1927 Nobel prize in science and renowned for his work in connection
with the cosmic ray. The burden of his message before this international
gathering of religious educators was that science has given new powers
to man, but that Christianity is the key to the proper use of these en-
larged powers. It was extremely heartening to hear this eminent scien-
tist develop this proposition. To be sure, he spoke as a scientist, not
as a theologian. He tried to give us the viewpoint of a man of science,
telling us that scientists regard science as the basis of civilization and
the primary factor in stimulating its growth. He traced the rapid, far-
reaching advances that have been made, for example, in the field of
physics - in heat, light, and electricity - in the last fifty years and stated
that these advances have powerfully influenced our intellectual, economic,
and social life and contributed much to human welfare. But then the
learned scientist from Chicago at once admitted that the key to the
future of man lies not only in the increased knowledge and increased
strength which science has put at our disposal but in the use which man
makes of that knowledge and strength. The new powers which science
has given to man may be, and have been, abused by cruel men and by
selfish, short-sighted nations, averred Dr. Compton. And in this indict-
ment he included not only Germany and Russia but our own country
as well, for he admitted a rather universal tendency on the part of
mankind to divide into antagonistic groups, in which men become ter-
ribly destructive. Science, in other words, has demonstrated the tre-
mendous need of cooperation and has helped to show the rich rewards
which cooperation, consideration of one another, brings; but the real
key to effecting this cooperation, this brotherly love, is Christian edu-
cation. The eminent physicist made an eloquent plea for that which
Paul prays for in his letter to the Philippians: "It is my prayer that
your love may be more and more rich in knowledge and all manner of
insight" (Phil. 1: 9, Moffatt's translation). He insisted that love alone
isn't enough; it must be enriched by increasing knowledge and insight.
But knowledge alone isn't enough either; it must be motivated by
Christian love. Hence science, which has brought about a technological
society and demonstrated the mutual dependence of the members of
such a society upon each other, shows how absolutely indispensable
Christian education is if our increased knowledge and strength is to
benefit rather than hurt society.
Remember once again, these words came not from a theological
professor or a minister or a Sunday-school superintendent but from
a world-renowned scientist. Perhaps, had he told us more fully what
54
850 Miscellanea
he understands by Christian education, what the content of such edu-
cation is, we would not have seen eye to eye with him. But his telling
argument for the need of Christian education stands nevertheless. In
fact, if we Lutherans have the precise message - the life-giving, power-
bestowing Gospel of Jesus Christ in all its saving fulness - that our
world needs to save it from chaos despite its advance in scientific knowl-
edge and technique, it becomes us to be particularly zealous in giving this
message to our children and college youth, to our fathers and mothers,
that they in turn may be used in helping others to see and follow the
light. - Lutheran Standard.
The Body of Christ in the Holy Supper
The question has been raised: "Which is the form in which we
receive the body of Christ and His blood in Holy Communion? Is it the
natural body of the Son of God, as it hung on the Cross, or is it the
glorified form in which we receive it?"
The question concerns the peculiar mode of Christ's presence in the
Lord's Supper. In it neither the real presence nor the oral manducation
is being denied. It has been said: "Since Christ is now glorified, He
can give us no other than His glorified body today." Such reasoning in
matters of doctrine is out of place; for not any logical deduction from
an unwritten premise, but Scripture, in its clear declaration, is our
principium cognoscendi, or our norm of faith. The syllogism in this
case reads: 1. Christ is now glorified. 2. He cannot be present in any
other way than in His glorified body. 3. Therefore in the Holy Supper
we receive His glorified body. Evidently the minor premise is not stated
in Scripture. It must be noted that the Scriptures carefully determine
the body given us in the Holy Supper when in the words of institution
it specifies "the body given for you," "the blood shed for you."
Dr. Pieper, in his Christliche Dogmatik (III, 415), writes very prop-
erly: "Also with regard to the materia coelestis it is necessary for us
to adhere to the words of institution and to repudiate all substitutes
invented by men." Among the substitutes put in place of Christ's true
body given for us and His true blood shed for us he mentions also
the "glorified body of Christ" or the "glorified corporeity" of Christ or
the "glorified Christ," etc. "Calvin," he says, "holds that the powers
of the glorified body of Christ infuse themselves into the believing soul,
while modern theologians speak of the pneumatico-physical efficacy of
the Lord's Supper, for the reason that in this Sacrament the glorified
body of Christ is said to be received. But the words of institution do
not say anything of a glorified body, and neither the essence of the Holy
Supper (the real presence) nor its salutary effect (remission of sins)
should be based upon the glorification of the body of Christ. The fact
that Christ's body was not yet glorified at the first Holy Communion
did not prevent the real presence of the body and blood; just so also
the fact that Christ's body is now glorified does not promote (foerdert
nicht) the real presence that occurs till the end of time whenever the
Holy Supper is being celebrated in the Christian Church. The real
presence has its fully adequate rationale in the words of institution:
Miscellanea 851
'This is My body; this is My blood.' It is only when the Reformed
object that a human body cannot be present at several places at the
same time that we emphasize the fact that Christ's body is not merely
a truly human body but also the body of the Son of God, to which
Scripture expressly ascribes divine attributes, including also omni-
presence, just because of the personal union. Very rightly Dr. Walther
declares: 'The presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Holy
Supper must not be based upon the glorified state of Christ's body. The
glorification imparts to Christ's body only spiritual, not divine properties.
We believe that Christ's body is present and received in the Holy Supper
1. because of Christ's promise; 2. because Christ's body is the body of
God's Son.' To this Dr. Walther adds the warning: 'Divines, such as
Sartorius and others, who in general have written much that is ex-
cellent, use the glorified state of Christ's body as a support (Stuetze) of
His presence in the Holy Supper. But that is a false prop, and false
props are just as dangerous as are open contradictions. It is incorrect
to say that Christ can now give us His body in the Holy Supper because
He is glorified. In this erroneous argumentation there is implied that
Christ could not give us His body as long as this was not yet glorified,
and this would abrogate the first celebration of the Holy Supper.' Even
if now the communicants receive also the glorified body because the
glorified body is identical with the non-glorified, nevertheless, according
to the words of institution, the body concerns us not inasmuch as it is
glorified, but inasmuch as it was given for us into death for our recon-
ciliation (als der zu unserer Ve?"Soehnung dahingegebene), TO {m:EQ Ulliiiv