Lehre und Wehre St. Louis, Missouri — Februar 1856, Seite 33

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

Lehre und Wehre.

Jahrgang II.  Februar 1856.  No. 2.

Consubstantiation und Impanation.

Wollen die Gegner der lutherischen Kirche hier in Amerika die Lehre Luthers, der Augsburgischen Confession, der Concordienformel und überhaupt der ganzen alten lutherischen Kirche vom heiligen Abendmahle, insonderheit von der Art und Weise der Gegenwart des Leibes und Blutes JEsu Christi in diesem Sacramente, mit einem kurzen bündigen Terminus bezeichnen, so ist nichts gewöhnlicher, als daß sie dann die in der Ueberschrift genannten Kunstausdrücke, Consubstantiation und Impanation, oder auch Incorporation, gebrauchen.

Diese Insimulation findet sich noch in der neuesten von J. Newton Brown besorgten Ausgabe der Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge von 1854. In diesem Werke heißt es unter dem Titel: „Consubstantiation," folgendermaßen: „A tenet of the lutheran church respecting the presence of Christ in the Lord's supper. Luther denied that the elements were changed after consecration, and therefore taught that the bread and wine indeed remain; but that together with them, there is present the substance of the body of Christ, which is literally (!) received by communicants. As in red-hot iron it may be said, two distinct substances, iron and fire, are united, so is the body of Christ joined with the bread. Unter dem Titel „Lutheranism" heißt es: „It has undergone some alterations since the time of its founder. Luther believed the impanation or consubstantiation."

Zwar ist es nun ein bedauerliches niederschlagendes Zeugniß von dem Stand der hiesigen theologischen Bildung, wenn ein Werk, welches dieselbe repräsentiren will, solche, wir wollen nur sagen, Verunstaltungen der Lehre einer über den ganzen Erdball verbreiteten Kirche enthält; noch unverzeihlicher ist es aber, und setzt entweder die größeste Unkenntniß oder böse Absichten voraus, wenn selbst lutherisch sich nennende angebliche Theologen die Lehre der Kirche, deren Diener, Haushalter und Wächter sie sein wollen, ebenso unrichtig darstellen. Leider! geschieht das aber hier nicht selten. Die ganze sogenannte „amerikanisch-lutherische" Kirche, einen Dr. B. Kurtz und Dr. S. S. Schmucker an der Spitze, sagt sich zwar selbst von der Annahme

Doctrine and Defense.

Volume II.  February 1856.  No. 2.

Consubstantiation and Impanation.

If the opponents of the Lutheran church here in America wish to designate with one short, terse term the teaching of Luther, of the Augsburg Confession, of the Formula of Concord, and indeed of the whole ancient Lutheran church concerning the Holy Supper — in particular concerning the manner of the presence of the body and blood of Jesus Christ in this sacrament — nothing is more common than for them then to use the technical terms named in the heading, Consubstantiation and Impanation, or also Incorporation.

This false imputation is still to be found in the most recent edition of the Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, edited by J. Newton Brown, of 1854. In this work it says, under the heading "Consubstantiation," the following: "A tenet of the lutheran church respecting the presence of Christ in the Lord's supper. Luther denied that the elements were changed after consecration, and therefore taught that the bread and wine indeed remain; but that together with them, there is present the substance of the body of Christ, which is literally (!) received by communicants. As in red-hot iron it may be said, two distinct substances, iron and fire, are united, so is the body of Christ joined with the bread." Under the heading "Lutheranism" it says: "It has undergone some alterations since the time of its founder. Luther believed the impanation or consubstantiation."

To be sure, it is now a regrettable, disheartening testimony to the state of theological education here, when a work that means to represent it contains such — we will only say — distortions of the teaching of a church spread over the whole globe; but it is still more unforgivable, and presupposes either the grossest ignorance or evil intentions, when even professed theologians who call themselves Lutheran misrepresent the teaching of the church whose servants, stewards, and watchmen they claim to be, just as inaccurately. Unfortunately, this happens here not infrequently. The whole so-called "American Lutheran" church, with a Dr. B. Kurtz and Dr. S. S. Schmucker at its head, itself indeed disclaims the acceptance of