Full Text for CTM Theological Observer 7-1 (Text)

QTnurnr~iu m4rnlngiral ilnutqly Continuing LEHRE UND VVEHRE MAGAZIN FUER Ev.-LuTH. HOMILETIK THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY-THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY Vol. VII January, 1936 No.1 CONTENTS Page Testifying the Gospel of the Grace of God. Th. Engelder. • • • 1 Der Pietismus. Theo. Hoyer . • . . • . . . . . . . . . • . . . • . . • . • • • • • 6 Present-Day Problems of Lutheranism. F. Kreiss. . • • • . • • • • 14 Luther on the Study and Use of the Ancient Languages. F. v. N. Painter . . . . . . • . .• 23 Der Schriftgrund fuer die Lehre von del' satisfactio vicaria. P. E. Kretzrnann . . • • . • . • •• 27 Sermon Study on 2 Cor. 4. 3-6. Theo. Laetsch ......•..• , 30 Dispositionen ueber die erste von del' Synodalkonferenz angenommene Evangelienreihe .................... 39 Miscellanea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 51 Theological Observer. - Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches. . . . . 55 Book Review. - Literatur. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 73 Ein Prediger 1I1U88 n1eht aIleln ID.~, also dUs er die Schafe unterwelae, wi. ole rechte Christen lO11en seln. sondem ouch daneben den Woe1fen weMen, da.se iie die Schafe nicht ancrelfen und mit falacher Lehre Tertuehren und Irrtum ein· fuehren. -'- Luther. E. at keln Ding, daa die Leute mehr bel der Kirch. behaelt denn die gute Predigt. - ~polollia. ~rt . t .. It the trumpet giTe an uncertain lOund, wbo oball prepare himself to the battle? 1 COf'. ~. 8. Published for the Ev. Luth. Synod of JIlissouri, Ohio, and Other States COB'COBl):u. PtrBLISHDfG HOtrSE, St. Louis, Mo. CHIVE Theological Observer. - ~ttc9!icl)1n religions, wbich are called religions ouly in an improper sense. But that is only incidental. What the author writes so compellingly witnesses to the absoluteness of Christianity that it deserves notice. He says: "Christianity is different from all other religions not merely in degree, but in nature. The relation between Christianity and religion [man-made religion] is not that between a part and the whole, but that between something and its opposite. The heathen religions are of Satan, not of God. Gael calls them over and over in His 'Vord "abomina- tions"; but the Laymen's Foreign Missions Inquiry in its report, Rethink- Theological Observer. - ~itcf){icf)<'leitgefcI)icl)mcf)es. 59 ing Missions, would have Christian missionaries fraternize and cooperate with heathen religionists for the good of humanity, and some missionaries in the Far East are actually trying to do this very thing." An excellent testimony indeed. In pointing out the absolute character of Christianity in contrast with all man-made religions, the writer stresses the following [we quote in, part only]: 1. Man-made religion says: God helps those who help themselves. Christianity says: God helps those who cannot help themselves. 2. Man-made religion consists in man's doing something for himself, or in human works, character, devotion, and merit. Christianity consists in man's doing nothing for himself, but trusting God for all. Divine grace to those who have no merit (Rom. 10,6-10; 5,15). 3. Man- made religion holds that man is essentially good and only needs teaching, development, or knowledge in order to become perfect (the root error of Confucianism). Christianity teaches that man is a fallen and sinful being (total depravity) and needs redemption, not merely enlightenment, in order to become inherently good (Rom. 5, 12; 6, 23). 4. Man-made religion teaches man's (LiJility to turn to God whenever he wishes to do so (free will). Christianity teaches man's inability to turn to God until God first works in the soul (the will in bondage to a sinful nature; man is a free agent to act according to his nature, but he cannot originate the love of God in his heart, because his nature is evil, ,John 6, 44; 8, 44; 3, 3). 5. Man-made religion represents man as becoming divine, as ancient heroes, sages, etc., were worshiped after their death as gods: Buddha, Confucius, the Roman emperors; man becomes God by deification and the human race becomes divine by evolution (Acts 12,22; Rom. 1,23). Christianity teaches that God became human in the incarnation of the Son of Go(l, who took to Himself human nature for the redemption of man; God became man (John 1,1.14). 6. Man-made religion says, Do. Christianity says: Done (Jolm 19,30). 7. Man-made religion says: Something in my hand I bring (salvation by works or character). Christianity says: Nothing in my hand I bring; simply to Thy cross I cling (salvation by divine grace, Rom. 11, 6) . - The author cl02e8 his remarks by saying: "Enough has been said to show that the reality back of the heathen religions is Satanic and that the fallen angels, or demons, accept the worship which the heathen offer to false gods and idols. Those who ignorantly think they are worshiping Buddha, or Kuan-yin (the Chinese goddess of mercy), or the Ohinese kitcllen god (commonest of gods), or the sun, moon, and stars are really worshiping demons from the pit. And those more 'enlightened' modern pagans in so-called Christian lands are just as truly deceived by Satan and furthering his purposes in the world (2 Oor. 4, 3. 4)." It is under- stooel, of course, that what the author here writes is not new to Lutheran pastors (ef. Dr. Pieper, Oh1'istliche Dogmcttik, Vol. I); but what is here stated with so much clearness bears repetition anel emphasis. Incidentally it shows what position all believing Christians take over against the naturalistic, humanistic religion of the carnal heart. J. '1'. M. The Norwegian Lutheran Church and the Union Movement among Lutherans. - Luther(Lnemn (October 30), reporting that tIle special committee on Lutheran union appointed by Dr. Knubel resolved that joint sessions with committees of other synods should be held not later than the end of January, 1936, writes: "The committee appears to be 60 Theological Observer. - .Ritcf)licf):3eitgefcf)icf)tlicf)es. very hasty. It will perhaps be possible to have a few preliminary meetings, but m,atters of essential significance can certainly not be executed in 80 short a time. It is best to let the matter take its time and work itself out toward a mutual understanding." On this, Eva;n,gelisk Luthersk Tidende remarks editorially: "We do not know why Luthera;n,eren fears that this great union endeavor is working too fast. It gives no reasons why it should be necessary or desirable that the committee should take its time. . .. True union consists in one language, one meaning, and one mind, as God's Word demands. If Lutheraneren fears the committee is not approaching such a union and unity, then it must take much time and wait a long time for the great union which this movement has for its goal. Lutheraneren, however, has a gigantic work to perform in its own body before there can be any negotiations with other synods in the matter of union. We have on many occasions shown that the Union of 1917 is founded upon a compromise in doctrine. The Articles of Union which were agreed upon were not expressions of unity in faith and doctrine. This becomes more evident as time goes on. The troubles in the Norwegian Lutheran Church are not in matters of adiaphora. There is division [t~enighed] regarding natural man's condition before conversion, regard- ing the sinner's conversion before God, regarding justification, regarding predestination, regarding the sufficient clearness of God's Word in the revelation of the way to salvation. Not to mention such matters as revivals, laymen's activities, the position of woman in the congregation, secret societies, nnionism, etc. If Lu,themneren wishes a real and true union and unity according to God's Word, it has enough to do at home for a long time. The columns of our paper have borne sufficient testimony to this fact for many years. Also of late we called attention to the fact that the edi- tors of Lutheraneren and the Lutheran Herald declared the Oxford Group Movement, or Buchmanism, unchristian and un-I~utheran while one of the theological professors of the Church declared it to be both Lutheran and Christian. When prominent teachers in a Church proclaim different ways of justification and salvation before God, it must cause confusion and apostasy from the faith. And Lutheraneren is not ignorant that there are complaints that Modernism, the denial of the whole Christian faith, is working inroads into its Church. 'l'hat is a fruit of unionism, which the Union of 1917 used for its basis. Lutheraneren thus has reason to be afraid at this time." -We would call to mind what the Apostle Paul writes to the Ephesians, chap. 4, 11-15. More yet than the Norwegian Lutheran Church the United Lutheran Church ought to secure union and unity in the sense of Scripture within its own circles before it seeks union negotia- tions with other synods. But may not perhaps the very discussion of Christian doctrine and practise at these inter synodical meetings foster true unity? May not God's Word assert its power for good when it is clearly and sharply confessed by those to whom unity in union is precious? Nevertheless, the points which Tidende here stresses are all-important. J.T.M. The Liberals and the Apostles' Creed. - That the Liberals are experiencing a good deal of difficulty through the adherence of many of their churches to the use of the Apostles' Creed would be clear even if they did not say so. Now and then some of them frankly speak of their Theological Observer. - .Rircf)Hcf)~,8eitgefd)icf)tHcf)e~. 61 difficulties with this ancient symbol and ask the question whether they can conscientiously continue to use it. The editor of the Ohristian Oen- tU1'Y, writing on the subject "Honesty and the .Apostles' Oreed," has this to say: "No less staunch a churchman than Bishop Lawrence of Massa- ,chusetts has recently declared that the continued use of the .Apostles' Oreed should be left to the free choice of each congregation, and a great majority of the professors and students in the Episcopal theological school at Oam- bridge expressed agreement with this pronouncement. In Bishop Law- rence's opinion no pledge should be required from young people joining the church beyond the confession that they are disciples of Christ. The use of the .Apostles' Creed as a test of membership in the church is of course ,quite another matter from the use of it in the liturgy of worship. In the former use it cannot be regarded as anything but a literal statement of belief, and to demand subscription to it as a condition of church-member- ship implies an intent on the part of the church to treat it as a literal summary of facts, and of the most important facts, in the Christian Gospel. It also implies that each item of fact or belief in the Creed is given the appropriate emphasis which it should receive in the mind of every faith- ful Christian. This of course falsifies the actual si tua tion in most Prot- -estant churches." While the editor thinks that as a statement of faith the .Apostles' Oreed is out of the question for our generation, he has a good word to say for its liturgical use: "The Creed has an honored place in the service of worship. The congregation stands and recites together the ~ncient words which have been professed by Christian multitudes through the ages. It is pretty hard to shake the Church out of this immemorial habit, and there are plausible rationalizations in defense of it. It is an -esthetic cxercise, not a prosaic one, This creed is a bridge which spans the centuries, thus connecting the present with the past and helping to unify history as an organic movement." Though he is willing to a certain degree to defend the use of the Apostles' Oreed by a liberal modernistic ,congregation, he says, having balanced the arguments pro and con, that, cafter all, the argument for relinquishing the .Apostles' Creeel is more con- vincing than the argument for retaining it. "In Ohristianity the ethical, the vital, the real, must be paramount." It seems clear that the position <>f those who wish to retain a creed for liturgical reasons while they have abandoned the beliefs expressed therein is unworthy of intelligent people. The Modernists should let the Church know where they stand. Nothing ,else is compatible with honesty. A. "To Preserve Lutheranism. - It is through the instruction in the Catechism under the tutelage of the patient pastor that future members ·are preparcd for membership in the Ohurch" (meaning, of course, that they are prepared for the duties of their membership). "The future of the Ohurch can be no greater than the effort expended to educate those {)ontemplating confirmation in doctrinal soundness, No one can. gainsay the fact that as a Church we would be far more influential than we are .at present had the proper doctrinal instruction been given in the past. Suffice it to say that the congregations best weathering the storm of local a.nd national strife are those which understood the importance of indoc- trination in the past. The majority of influential and thinking laymen of to-day are those who were thoroughly catechized when received into the 62 Theological Observer. - stird)fid)"3dtllcfd)id)tIid)cs. Church through the rite of confirmation. It is a situation peculiar to the Lutheran Clmrcll that her most stable congregations arc those which have assigned an important place to the Catechism." The article from which we are quoting goe8 on to discuss the new ideas and methods in catechetical instruction whieh are being advocated in certain quarters, has something to say about "Parochial Schools Stressed Doctrines," and concludes with this paragraph: "'rhe solution to the present weaknesses in catechization is, after all, very simple. Our pastors have for a long time been imitating the antics of other Protestant min- isters who have no timc or sympathy for the Catechism and have lain down on the job. They have felt that the thoroughgoing and detailed catechctical methods common to the Swedish and German branches of onr Church are hackneyed expressions and worn-out pedagogical whimsicalities. It is easy to espouse the ~~merican dislike for thoronghgoing catechization because of the extra time for leisure on the part of the pastor. It would be wise for the United Lutheran Church to send clergymen to Sweden, Germany, and other Lutheran countries to make a study of correct orthodox catechet- ical methods. If something of this nature is not done in the near futnre, our Church will in the next decade lose its denominational individuality and become submerged in the maze of that religious conglomeration known as American Protestantism. There is a disease in the Lutheran Church which must be remedied. If Lutheranism is to be salvaged from the scrap- heap of non-catechetical .L\merican Protestantism, it must begin in the present if its constituency is to be indoctrinated in the fnture. This means hard work, a patient continuance in well-doing, and a general overhauling of the worn-ont, un-Lutheran cateehetical methods common in the past. This is a serious matter and mU8t receive immediate attention. If present conditions and catechetica1 methods are not Teformcd in the near future, the older established Lutllcran bodies will some clay refnse to recognize onr feeble attempts to remain under the banner of the Augsburg Con- fession." (2\'1:1'. Andrew B. Ekel, Renovo, Pa., on "Catechetical Instruction"; Luthemn, October 3, 1935.) An editorial appearing in the same number states: "The article hl this issue concerning more thorough catechetical instruction differs from any previously published in one respect. It presents the convictions of a layman. We know from conversations, however, that many thoughtful members of our congregations have deep admiration for pastors who insist upon thorough preparation for active membership in a Lutheran congre- gation. Etc." Mr. Ekel's words mean something to every Lutheran pastoT. E. Even to This! - Under this heading the Lutheran Sentinel (August 28, Ifl35) writes: "Yes, it really has come to this that some pastors and congregations within the American Lutheran Conference do not feel, it appears, that they can haye a cOlllplete social church gathering (which in the very nature of the case must be of a religious character) without a Catholic priest present and pa1,ticipating [original italics]. Two sepa- rate accounts of such unholy gatherings we read in two of our reputable Norwegian papers. The first appeared in Flkandinaven. under the date of January 21 of this year. In this account the author, H. C. Casperson,- Folksbladct's editor, I believe, - chronicles an event that took place in 63 North Minneapolis, occasioned by the twenty-fifth anniversary of Pastor O. H. Sletten's ministry in St. Olaf's Congregation. Pastor Sletten has for years been a leader in the Lutheran :B'ree Church, and from a pastor in this church-body, which in its official organ states that it refuses to be scared by a 'ghost from Marburg,' we might well expect even this. Now, what took place at this silver jubilee? Editor Casperson reports, with no sense of shame, it seems, that Father Dunphey, rector of the Church of Ascen- sion (Roman Catholic), was first given the floor and that he delivered a 'very taking and appreciatory speech.' In glowing terms the Father spoke of the 'great light of truth that Dr. Sletten had been granted the privilege of holding aloft in North Minneapolis these many years.' Just think of it, a Catholic priest praising a Lutheran pastor as a beacon light of truth! VV c had expected that some one either from the Free Church or from the :Merger Church would correct or protest this account in Skandinaven, but to date none has corne to our notice. - About three weeks later I was handed a copy of Minneapolis Tidencle, of January 31 of this year. This reliable paper tells of a farewell reception tendered Pastor B. E. Bergesen, who has served Zion Lutheran Church (North Min- neapolis) for a number of years, having resigned to serve as a traveling evangelist in the Norwegian Church of America. The report indicates that this farewell reception was a colorful and many-colored affair. Among those participating by their presence and addresses were: Dr. O. H. Sletten of the Free Church, Pastor C. S. Thorpe, Dr. J. A. O. Stub, Drs. Slolee and Weswig of Luther Seminary (last four mentioned from Lhe l,i[erger Church), and Father Rakowski of the Catholic Church. The new pastor of Zion Ohurch, the Rev. O. G. Malmin, opened and closed the meeting. All enlightened Lutherans know that the Roman Catholic Church in the Decrees of the Oouncil of Trent has officially pronounced anat11ema upon sola g,"atia and sola fide, salvation by grace alone, salvation by faith alone. Aud just because of this, Luther often exclaimed: 'Pope, I will be your pestilence!' The old Romans had a striking saying: 'Vestigia terrent,' the footsteps terrify. (This was sajd by the fox in Aesop's fable entitled 'The Lion and the Fox' when he saw that there were no footsteps back- ,nLrd from the lion's lair.) What effect must the ahove display of friend- ship have upon the souls entrusted to these pastors' spiritual care and guidance? 'If the hlind lead the blind, will not both fall into the ditch?' Matt. 15, 14. How long will the lay people in the Norwegian Lutheran Church of America, some of whom at least still have some Lutheran con- sciousness left, tolerate such 'spiritual wickedness in high places'?" J. T. M. "Popular Heresies Not New. - A writer in the Presbyte,"ian Banner declares that recently he has read through the three volumes of Hodge's Theology with a surprising result. He says: 'The more I read Hodge, the humbler I get. There is not one of these strikingly original thoughts I have had that I do not find in the quotations of the liberals of that day and perhaps of centuries ago, quoted by Dr. Hodge in order to refute them. And besides, a lot of heresies far better than any I ever conjured up. Or did I conjure them up? Perhaps I heard them somewhere and forgot where I heard them - thought they were my own.' That very correctly states the situation. All these wonderful ideas and interpretations put 64 forth by our modernistic friends have recurred time and again through Christian history. Do not call yourself an 'advanced thinker' when you hold theories that were exploded centuries ago." - Watohman-Examiner, September 5, 1935. Some Interpretations of the Mystic Number 666. - This. is a, case where the kettle and the pot are calling one another black. 'Writing in the Commonweal David Goldstein, director of the Nation-wide Catholic Campaign for Christ, complains, of the me'an exegesis engaged in by the Seventh-da,y Adventists, who maintain that the Pope's title Vicariu,s FUii Dei, when the letters having a, numerical value are counted, yields the number 666, which is that of the beast in the Apocalypse. He one da,y came upon a young convert of Seventh-day Adventism who painted the tia,ra, of the Pope and put on it the title just quoted, In the' first pla,ce Mr. Goldstein takes the defensive and writes as follows: - "1) Vicarius Filii Dei is not the name of the Pope. He is known as His Holiness Pope Pius XI. Tha,t name' to,tals 69 and not 666 as. 'the number of his [the beast's] name' must total a.ccording to chapter 13 of the Book of Revelation. "2,) Vicarius F'ilii Dei iSi a, title, and it is not the official title of the Pope, though he is the Vicar of Christ" who is the Son of God. "3) The official title of the Pope is Vicarius Iesu Christi (Vicar of Jesus Christ), as, it is set down in The Catholio Enoyclopedia and The Catholio Dictionary. '(4) An examination of pictures of the Pope's tiara shows that neither the title Vicarius Ji'ilii Dei nor any other title is inscribed thereon. '(5) The title Vicariu8 Filii Dei does not total 666 according to a proper tabula,tion of Roman numerical values. For instance, when an I ap- peaJ's before an L it does not total, as Secventh-day Adventism says, 1 and 50', or 51. It totals I minus 50, which is 49." Next Mr. Goldstein turns the tables on his a,dversa.ries and vigorously takes the offensive. He points to the indisputa,ble fact tha,t the "prophetess" or "seer" of Seventh-day Adventism is Ellen Gould White. Then he a,rgues thus: "The twO' L's in Ellen total 100. The U (V) equals 5, the L 50', and the D 500 in GO'uld; the VV equals two V's, 10, and the I is one, in White. Hence the grand total is 666. Thus not the' Pope, but the founder of the Seventh-day Adventist sect is the terrible creature depicted in the Book of Revelation a.ccording to their own system." vThat's next? A. Episcopal Succession Advocates Given a Jolt. -It is a long story, a synopsis of which may be given as follows: A certain Mr. Ringenhjelm, who had served as a Methodist minister and for a short period attended the Augustana Theological Seminary in Rock Island, sought to be ordained by the Augustana Synod. Four times his application was considered and rejected. He was not regarded "qualified to serve successfully as a pastor" (Luthemn Co'rnpanion). Soon thereafter Bishop Stewart of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Chicago ordained him as a deacon. Then Mr. Ringen- hjelm went to Sweden, his native country, to seek church-work there. The rest of the story had best be told in the words of the Swedish Bishop of Straengaes, written in reply to inquiries by Dr. Brandelle, till recently president of the Augustana Synod. Theological Obs('rver. - mr(!)liC!)~3eit\lcfcl)i(!)mc!)es. 65 "Ringenhjelm was here in Sweden and served as a deacon in the En- glish church in Stockholm. The plan was that he should devote himself to the service of Americans in Stockholm who belong to the Episcopal communion. There are a number of these. The Bishop of Chicago in- quired if under the circumstances I would be kind enough to ordain Ringenhjelm on his behalf. I was unable to see that there were any legitimate reasons why I should refuse him this service, inasmuch as he and the Episcopal Church desired to show me and the Swedish Church this confidence. The reasons for my act in ordaining therefore were essentially these two: I desired to render a service when the opportunity was given me, and I regarded it of a certain value to thus demonstrate an ecclesias- tical fellowship which stretches beyond one's own communion. As will appear from the above, it was not a question of ordaining Ringenhjelm for service in America; such a rite would naturally have been performed by the proper authorities in America. . .. I may be permitted to add that, if the situation should arise that I should be requested by Augustana to ordain some one on behalf of the synod, I would with great joy assume such a commission." Canon B. 1. Bell (a call on is next in rank to a dean in an Episcopalian diocese) of America wrote quite bitterly about the action of Bishop Stewart of Chicago for requesting this ordination to the priesthood from a Lutheran bishop. Canon Bell now in turn is taken to task by the Living Ohurch for speaking so disrespectfully of His Eminence Bishop Stewart. The Lutheran Oompanion editor relates the incident in a fully documented artide. One misses, however, the quod eTat demonstmndum at the conclusion, namely, that loyal Lutherans have no right to maintain fraternal relations with the Swedish State Church. A. Lutheran Statistics. - Advance figures on Lutheran church-member- ship in America and their support of congregational and benevolent ac- tivities have been compiled for the United Stewardship Council by the Rev. Dr. Oeo. Linn Kieffer, National Lutheran Council statistician. Details will appear later. Here are totals: Confirmed membership in United States and Canada, 3,127,7G5; per capita for congregational support, $10.24; for benevolence, $2.35. The United Lutheran Church total per capita for all support, $12.D7, is approached closely by that of the Synod- ical Conference, $12.9G, and the American Lutheran Conference, $12.17. The independent bodies and synods show an average per capita of $8.fi7. N.L.O.B. II. 2(u,laUll. Sur ~'edeibigltltg bdl httfjcrifif)en ~efenntniffe~. SDat man fic'fj auc'fj in SDeu±fc'fjIan)), in Ianbe£!~ ober bo!f£!firc'fjIic'fjen Si;reifen, mieber auf ben illiert be£! Iu±fjetifc'fjen ~efenn±niffe£i oefinn± unb beffen fjofje illiic'fjtigfeit mcnigften£i t~coretifc'fj 3U idjiiten tveit, ocmeift u. a. auc'fj ein ffiril1ic'fj in ber ,,\lL It. Q. Sl:." bon P. D. illi. EaioIe, be111 .\5erau£!gelier Mefer ±~eoIogifc'fjen 3eitfc'fjrift, untet ber ftoerfc'fjrift "SDa£! bt±~erifc'fje )Befenntni£i im ~euer bon rec'fj±£J un)) Hnr£i" etfc'fjienener \[ttifeI, ber, a'ogefefjen bon einigen \[u£ibrfrcfen unb ®iiten, benen tvir nic'fjt oeifti1l11l1en tannen, fo bid illia~re£i ent~iirt, bat er eingefjenbcn ®±ubiu111£i auc'fj in a1l1erifanif c'fj~firc'fjHc'fjen ~rei~ fen torilrbig if±. Eailile gelj± 3uniic'fjft 1.10n be1l1 @cbanfen au£i, bat ba£l 5 66 Theological Observer. - ~itd)lidJ'3eitgeid)id)t1id)e~. IutljerifcI)e l8efenn±ni5 mit ber Iu±ljerifcI)en ffieformation unb SHrcI)e aUf5 innigfte berqnicft if±. I@r fcI)reibt: "i.?6cit e.0 eine htiljcrifcI)e .Il'ircI)e gibt, ljaite fie ein )Befenntni5; bie5 l8efenntnW luar ba.0 l8anner, um ba5 fie ficI) fcI)arte, bie~))(aucr, bie @o±t um fie geoaut, ber ;;sungorunnen, aU5 bem fie ficI) immer luicber erneuerte. @5 lnar aU5 bem Sjeraolut ber ffieformation geoorcn, mit IDciiriL)rerOIut geroeiljt. . ., WocI) feine !:ScI)rift ljat oef cI)rie~ oen, IniebieI SPratt unb !:Segen bom Iu±ljerifcI)en mefenn±nw aUf mou unb SHrcI)e aU5ging, roeIcI)e jiliaffenriif±ung e5 roar, erft im SPamjJf gegen ffiom ullb allerfel ;;srrgeif±er, bann gegen UuffIiirung unb ffiationaIi511ms, gegen IDconi5mus unb mobernismus unb gcgcn aile.0, lua5 roiber @ott ift." ~ies lj errIicI) e, roidjiige )Bctcnntni5 ber Iutljerifcljen SHrcI)e fteljt nun, luie 2aiole lneiter aeigt, im "Sheu3feuer bon unb linfs". ,,~ie bon linfiJ fprecI)en es offen aU0, baB i e inc ,8 e i ten b g it I t i g b 0 r ii 6 e r f e 1. @s fei nut noclj eine !:SacI)e ber :itljeologen, nicI)± ber .lfircI)e; nut R1jeologen ljiitten bafiir ;;sntereffe unb ftritten bariioer mit ,~aftorengeaiinf'. SDas SPircI)enboU fenne bas )Befenntni.0 nicI)± meljr; es fei iljm ,roeitljin fremb unb aroeifeIljaf±' geroorben; es fenne lj ii cI) it en.s nocI) ben Sl'a±ccI)i.s~ mus." ~emgegcni\oer item 2aioIe bie ~rage, 00 biefer @inroutf oerecI)tigt fei, unb antll10rtet u. a.: ,,~a.s SLircljenlloIf foll fein )l3efcnntni.s nicI)t meljr fennen'i ;;Seben !:Sonn±ag fingt C0 au.s bem l8efenntnis ljerau5 unb octet aus bem )Befenn±nis; unb bie @eodbiicI)er in ben ~)iiufern, bie @r~ bauungsbiicI)er, aile.0 ift butcI)triinU born ).!)efenn±nis. UlIe.0, iuas in unferm lutljeriicljen SHrcljenboIf borljanben ift an @lauben, ,\3 offen, meoen, cdmd ben @eift be.0 )Befenntniffes; babon Ieoen unicrc tI!jrif±en, barauf iter~ oen fie. ()ber roa.0 ift ba.0 SHrcI)enHeb anber.0 ag bas gefungene l8efenn±ni.0 ber SHrcI)e? jilienn unfer ~'ircI)enbon bie einilelnen eate ber 2Iuguftana unb ber U,\Jologie, ber C3cI)maIfaIbifcfjen lICrlUc1 unb ber stonforbienformef aucI) nicI)± renni, fo ift ba.0 nicI)t ausi cfjlag[jelJenb. 2fucI) bie ffiibe[ fenn± es nicI)± in allen ifjren :rcUen; iff bamit bie )Bibel iioer!joH'? @ i n )Befennt~ ni.0 ljat aoer bie @emeinbe 3ur Sjanb, fermi es !:SaJ;l um \SaJ;l, ).!)ucI)f±aoen um mucI)f±aoen, ben meinen Sl'atecI)ismu5. man fage nicI)± fpiit±ifcI), baB fie , lj ii cI) ft e n 5' ben ,)faiecI)ismu.0 renne; benn bief er SPatecI)ismus ift 11JirfIicI) bas &) ii cI) ft e, hie Slrone be.0 )Befenn±njffes, iff Die goIbene !:ScljaJ;l~ fammer, in ber aile !:ScI)ate bes ht±ljetif cI)cn )Befenntniff es ocf cI)Ioff en fiegen. ~aljer ift ein statecI)i.0musboIf aucfj 6ellJ1113tes unb geriifte±es SfircI)enboIf gegen aile !:Scf±cn unb !:ScI)roiirmereien." - Ullerbings giM ber !:ScI)reioer SU, baB in bent eaJ;l, bas ffiefenninis fei bem mou "ll1eitfjin fremb unb a11)eifeIljaft geroorben", droa.0 jilialjre.0 liegt. ~as tiitjti abet nicI)± baljer, baB bas ffiefenn±ni5 "beraItd", "erf±arr±" geinorben iff. ~a.0 oeljaupten au roolIen, roare bie reinf±e )BIinbljeit. ,,!:Sonbern allerlei fircI)enfeinbIicI)e, cI)riftusfeinllIicI)e IDCacljie unterrouljrten fett langem ba~ l8efennini.0 ber SfircI)e, erfcljiitter±en ben @Iamen bes ,ilircI)cnboIf.0, macI)±cn iljm bie l8ibeI fremb unb bas )Befenn±nis fremb, bas auf bie l8ioeI aufgebaut if±. Unb ba lmtnhet± man ficI), l1)enn e.0 3U eincm ,.~JCaffenaofarr' in ber SHrcI)e ram, menn !jeu±e ilJCilIionen nicI)± meljr roifjen, lua.0 )l3erenn±nis, mas SHrcI)e ift. WocI) anbere UrfacI)en maren im !:Spief, gotten±frembe±e ,jilieHanfcI)auungen' mit innerem Uufruljr her menfcI)ljeit gegen @ott, 3umeif± getarn± afiJ ,~orticI)rit±', aI5 ,jiliiffenfcI)af±', al.0 ,mereblul1g' her ffieIigion. Uber bas rom man nicI)± augeoen. man fucI)t nacI) einem anbern !:ScI)ulbigen. ~arum fei ber @lauoe crlofcI)en, roeir hie .l'rircI)e fein Ieoenbiges l8dcnn±ni.0 rneljr Theological Observer. - .~itcf)!icf)~8eitgefcf)icf)t1icf)e5. 67 ~atte; i~t Q3cfeim±nis, dnft dne Eebensmaclj±, fei liingft sum ±o±en Q3uclj~ f±aben erf±arrl. ~er ~OD fei in bie SHrclje eingeaogen, fie ~abe bergeffen, hlas fie ift, niimIiclj bet Iebenbige Eeib GSl)rifii. U ~arauf anihlorid bet @Scljreiber: ,,~ahlo~r, bie Q3efenntniffe finb in Q3urfjfta6en gefaf3t; aber biefe Q3udjf±aben umfaffen )illorie, unb Mefe )illor±c en±ljaHen Eeben. )illofjI ljaben lmenfcljen bas Q3efenn±nii3 gemaclj±, llnb bie @Spuren ber ~Jcenfcljcn~ fjiinbe finb ficlj±bar; aber ber 1tJafjre @Scljopfer ift ber ~emge @eift, ben ~@ifus ber S'i'irclje ber~eif3en fjat. SDatum finb auclj bie Q3efenniniffe immer aus ei n em @eift unb @Sinn; bie fpiiteren beraclj±e±en niclj± bie borigen, fonbern bauien ficlj aUf bie borigen, aber aUe aUfammen auf bie @Scljrift, .ben untriigIicljen 9)~af3f±ab @oties. )iller bon ,@rf±anung' ber Q3efenniniffe rebet, fjai nie i~res CSleifiei3 .'Qauclj berfpiir±. Be6en aus @o±± ift Eeben unb lJIeibt Eeben; nur bes lmenfcljen m:ugen hlerben fian, unb bann Hagt er bas Er6cn ber @irftarrllng an. Wicljt an ben Q1efenntniffen Iiegi es, fon~ bern an ben m:ugen ber lmenfcljen. Wiclj± ber lmangeI ,aeitgemiif3er' Q3e~ fenntniffe ift bie Woi ber mrclje, fonbern baB fie felbft fein Beben !jat; Werbofitiit genug, aber fein Eeben. U - "m:nbers Hegen bie ~inge, hlenn auclj bon r e clj t s !jer ficlj ber )illiberfptuclj erfj,ebt, bon ba ljer, hlo man feinen anbern @o±± !ja±, af§; bie Q3efenn±niffe fefjren, feinen anbern GSljri~ ftui3 En, feinen anbern @Iallben En. lman gIaubt, bie ebangeIifclje beuifclje 8~eiclj0firclje am bef±en af§; un i e r t e S'i'irclje 6aum au fi.innen, nicljt nembe bmcfj bie WibeUietung bet S'i'onfeHionen, aliet boclj burclj beren \![bfcljlei~ fungo ~ebe Q3donllng bes lu±~erifcljen Q3efenn±niffe£l !jinbere biefen ,~ori~ fcljrit±'; baljer bie 93feHfcljiiffe gegen bicft Q3e±onung unb bamH auclj gegen bas Q3erenntni£l. Unb niclj± aUein gegen bas Q3efennini!;l, fonbern gegen bie lut!jerifclje S'i'irclje feIbf±. ~iirr± ba£l Q3efenn±ni!;l, fo farr± auclj bie mrclje. ~ai alier bie lui!jerifcI)e S'i'irclje i~t ffieclji, bann auclj i!jre Q3efenn±niffe. )illai3 ljabi i!jr gegen bief c Q3efenniniffe? @Sagt ci3 uns boclj I )illie oft ift biefe ?Jorbetung er~oben lDorbenl ll'He hlurbe fie erfiirr±. )illir moclj±en arlen @miies bitten, nicljt langer bie Q3ibel gegen bas Q3efennini!;l aus~ aufpielen. @ibi es bednocljet±e Q3efenniniscljrifien, fo gibi ei3 auclj ber~ fuocljer±e Q3ibeIcgriften; ~ier IDUf3bra1lclj, ba lmif3brauclj. m:ber nicljt ber lmif3brauclj enifcljeibe±, fonbern ber recljie @ebrauclj, un)) bas ift ber, baf3 reclj±e Q3efenniniscljriften bie @Scljrift iiber aUe£l !joclj!jarten, ~er3 1lnb Eeilen lJanaclj einricljien unb immer fragen: )illie fieljt gef cljrieben? @So Iaff e man bas Q3efenntni£l unangciafict; ia man !jaUe um f 0 fefter baa1l, ie megr lJie @Scljm:cn eines fiifufatifierien GSljrifienmm£l bagegen anrennen. ~enn hies Q3efenntnis fte!j± aUf bCl11 'fjeiIigen Q30ben ber @Scljrift, ift bon @o±t fellift ber S'i'irclje beuifcljer ffieformation eingeftifte±, ~at ficlj behlii!jrt in guten unb bofen ;Q:agen. '@is ift noclj all hlenig, es ,unangeiaftd' au laWen. )illir fag en meljr: @ir'fjebt es hlieber aum 93anier, ricljte± 11111 biefes 93anier !jer Wieber bie Iu±~erifclje Sfirclje in SDeutfcljlanb auf I ~!jr fonn± fie aUclj, hlenn tljr 11l0rr±, bie ,elJangefifclje SfirOJe bcutfcljer ~(ation' nennen; nnr auriicf aum @Iauben ber \{later, dudcf aum Q3denntnis ber \{liiier J U - m:uclj !jieraulanbe ift man, feIlif± in htt!jerifcljen S1'rcifen, befennini£lmiibe gehlorhen nnb !jat Ee'fjrfor±bHbung mit neuen, ber Brit angepaf3±en m:1l0~ hriicfen geforber±. SDas !jier @efagte biirfte ba'fjer anclj uns amerifanifdj~ Iu±!jerifcljen GSljriften bon )illicljtigfei± f ein. \!Uier, fo mocljten hlir ben @Scljreiber fragen, hlatum eine lu±!jerifdje SHrclje, bie aUf bem lut!jerifcljen Q3efenninis ftelj±, e ban gel i f clj nennen, 68 Theological Observer. - ~itcf)lidH3eitgefcl)ic9t1icge~. ba bief er mame boclj fo allgemein im @'5inn bon u n i e r t georauclj± ltJirb? Wudj in bem mamen r u ± ~ e r i f clj riegt ein geltJartige~ @'5±frd mefenntnt~. i!Ba~ iilirigens 1:1cr @'5cljreilier bon ben mefcnntni~Ol:J+)Onenten bon r e clj ± ~ ~er fagt, niimHc~ bai3 fie feiucn anbern @ott, feiucn 1mbcrn G1:~riftum, feinen anbern @fauucn re~ren aIS ben, ben bie mefenntniHe re~ren, ±rifft nicljt ou. 5Die oa~Ircicljen meformierten 3. m., bie hem Iut~erifcljen me- fenntnis ie unb ie ol:Jl:Joniert ~alien, ~alien ficlj nie bon unb gana oU bem G1:~riftu~ unb bem @Iaulien liefann±, ben unfere mefenn±niffe barfegen unb aUf @runb ber @'5cljrif± liefennen. 5Da~ ~a± ficlj bon aIter~ ~er geoeigt in i~rem i!Biberfl:Jruclj gegen bie rut~erifclje 2e~re bon G1:~rifti l15erfon, ber anitteilung bel' @igcnfcljaften, ben @nabcnmitteIn, bem ~emgen Wlienb- ma~r, ber @nabenltJa~r ufltJ. 2aiufe foUte an biefem l15unft Genauer reben unb bie @eGeniiii2e in~ flare liringen. 5Der unierte, reformierle @eift ftant in lieaug aUf bicfe 2e~ren nie reclji§, lontern nut: ling. ~.~. an. Collapse, of Religion in Russia. - What Dr. WalteT Van. Kirk, sec- retary of the Depa.rtment of International Justice and Good Will of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America" reports on religious conditions in Russia, which country he has just toured, is sad be,yond any lamenta,tions and tears of which we are ca.pable. We quote some of the most important statements. in his report. "The Soviet Government is the sworn enemy of religion. While in Moscow, I stood before the old Duma, Building, on one side of which tlwre is inscribed the legend 'Religion is the opiate of the people.' Every on the question whether the old calendar, knawn as the Julian, or the new, usually called the Gregorian, should be foUowed. '1'he former, we aTe tald,. is now about faurteen days behind the sun and far that reasan ought to be rega,rded as, antiquated. Howecver, the,re, are people in Greece who' a,re not willing to take this pra.ctical or pragma,tic paint of view. The Living ChUTOh informs us tha,t twa' bishops. in Greece "whO', had ance agreed with the rest of the synad to' use the revised or GregDrian ca,lendar, like the rest of CllTistendam, refused to do so later and ha,ve fallen ba.ck an the- use of tl1C aId Julian calenda,r." These people now "ha,ve started an open schism by consecrating a, rival hierarchy of the 'Orthodox Old Calenda,rian Rite.' They ha,ve already consecra,ted four bishops of this rite and prapose to lay hands on three more, making nine recusantsl in all." The ultra.-conservatives, so the article on which we draw says·, have been permitted the use af the old ca,lenda.r for themselves, but these "Paleohemerologists" insist that, if the calenda;r is changed, this is identical with apostasy, and they will oppase it with all their might. The cDntrocversy has its· semihuma,rous aspect, inasmuch a.s same of these standpa,tters tell their people "that a, large number of children will not be a,ble to ha,ve' any birthdays this. year, for the omission af fourteen days from the calendar would ha,ve that effect inevita,bly." Shall we laugh Dr weep? A. ~ • II