# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_Januar 1856_S23
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

New Literature. 23

of communing oneself; rightly understood. For although 1. the fifth
canon of the Council of Toledo is not approved by our Church, in which it is
laid down as absolutely necessary that the presbyter who administers the
Supper to others must also administer the Eucharist to himself and always
commune together with them at the same time; 2. although it is also not
true, what the Council of Trent, Sess. 13, Cap. 8, lays down, that it has
always been the custom in the Church of God that the priests who administer
the Eucharist also commune themselves, and that this custom, as deriving
from apostolic tradition, must rightfully be retained, nevertheless 3. this
custom is not absolutely disapproved of in our churches, as though it
conflicted with the essence of the institution of the Supper of the Lord;
concerning which what Chemnitz notes on this in the second part of his
Examen of the Tridentine Council, fol. 296, may be consulted. And hence
4. these words of Luther in the Smalcald Articles must be understood only
according to the particular relation which they bear, namely to communion,
or to such a holy Supper, in which the one saying Mass conducts a private
Supper that he holds in common with no one, so that he, the consecrator, is
the sole recipient. It is therefore one thing to administer the holy Supper
also to oneself when it is likewise administered and distributed to others; it
is another thing to take and administer the holy Supper to oneself alone,
with the exclusion of others. It is not the former but the latter that Luther
here denied, which is also what we deny today.“ (Isagog. in libb. symb.
p. 794.) Still more decisively do Caspar Erasmus Brochmand, the
renowned Danish dogmatician, speak for a pastor's right to self-communion;
see System. th. loc. de coen. f. 485. Likewise Quenstedt in his Theologia
didactico-polemica, P. IV, c. 8, fol. 1033, and all our casuists.

(Submitted.)
New Literature.

System of Biblical Psychology, by Franz Delitzsch,
Doctor of Philosophy and of Theology, etc. Leipzig, at Dörffling and
Franke. Available from Schäfer and Koradi in Philadelphia.

The author declares himself against trichotomy, according to which
man consists of three parts — body, soul, and spirit — insofar as this lends
support to an error, whether it be the error that the Son of God assumed
human nature with the exclusion of the third part, the spirit, or the error
that human nature, with the exclusion of that same third part, was involved
in and corrupted by the Fall; he declares himself, however, in favor of the
same trichotomy insofar as he holds that in man soul and spirit are to be
distinguished —