The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1888-03-02

Replies to THE Criticisms on his LsStn1s By
"LutherRn."

Replies to the CsltICisEnS on his LSStnro By
"LuthsrAn."
To Ox Editor ora.s IAttVt0enoa.
sm:-The Lutheran minister Of Grafton
endeavored, in his second communication,
to sustain the charge made by him against
me in your issue Of the 18th ult. The
weakness Of his Argument Is quite nppal-
ent in the fact that he is forced to inter-
polate words not used by me, in order to
givo q shadow Of credlbility to his posi-
ton. These explosives 30 introduced by
him arc Of his own coming; for they were
not In my mind or in my lecture. In fact
the whole DRIFT Of my argument precluded
the erroneous construction which this
gentleman sought TO put upon my state
ment SO clearly laid down in my first lee
ture, and since then several timeB repeat
ed, namely: that Martin Luther taught
that the true body and blood Of Christ are
present in the Sacrament Of the Lords
supper, and persistently denounced, in
the strongest possible language, those
who denied this doctrine.
The Lutheran minister, OF Grafton, now
denies thRt Luther taught consubstantiR.
ton as l maintained in my second leC'
turs, Not to engage in fruittesa battle
OF words, he and had better see what
precise meaning each Of US attaches to
that INSTRUMENTATION. He shOul.
ders on me, uor the word biblo in his
Communication ia no donbt tniaprint for
the word bishop, the burden OF proving
that Luther taught the doctrine oil consub'
stantiation. Now / assett, and il required,
| will give abundant proof that Luther ex.
pressly taught that the true body oil
Christ Is under the bread, In the bread
and with the bread; nay that the bread
lie the body OF Christ. assert moreover
that he constantly employed the bitterest
inveCsives sSainst the sscrRmenisrians
who impeaChed the doctrine Of Christie
body and blood being truly present inthe
Eucharist. In ono word, he .persistently
maintained that whilst the bread remained
substantially unchanged the body oil
Christ wal also truly present. Mind do
not say he called that body the natural
body Of Christ, neither do Catholics, but
he did hold and teach that the body Of
Ohrist was not absent, as the Zuingliana
commended, bat really and substantially
1 pIEBeuE. utbLLlUulGu huU ChtSHs
also assert that from his own express
ion that the body Of Christ ia with the
bread, arose the term applied to his
Observation-Disclosures. Your cor.
| respondent objects TO the term itselt and
to the doctrine it Is meant to convey.
The words be- uses sesm to mo to be taken
from tho American Encyclopedia. En-.
cyclopedias arc hardly the proper sources
whence We theoloRians should draw
our arguments. Bot If thi9 minister reters
his readers to the American" beg them
10 aIso examine "Chsmbsl's." See in
Chambsr's Encyclopedia the worda lin.
panstiOn" and CONTAMINATION"
ANY one familiar With "Buek's Thsolog'
iCal Dictionary" needs not to bs informed
that il bitter hostility to the Roman Catho'
/ lie Church is one OF the surest marks OIL
Protestant orthodoxy, that work Ia pre-.
eminently orthodox. Now the word con.
substantiRtion IL thus defined tenet Of
the Lutheran Church, with regard to the
manner Of the change made in the bread
and vine in the EuCharlat. The diVincs
Of that profession maintain that, after con.
secrstion, tho body and blood Of our
Saviour are substantially presented, to.
gether with the substance Of the bread
and wine, which is called CorGubstsntiR-
tion, or "impanation." my edition oil
Buck'a Theological Dictionary was pub
lished in Philadelphia by Joseph ]. Wood
ward, 1920. II / have been migled By
Luther's own writings al we'll as By those
Of his contemporaries, whether friendly or
inimiCal to him, l shall feel under
obligations to your Grafton correspondent
for q moro correct exposition, with Of
course proper references, OF Just what
Luther did teach and what Lutherana
teach to-day; for confess was little
surprised at the assertion made by the
Lutheran minister Of Grafton that all
Lutherans to-day still believe Luther's
doctrine concerning the Eucharist. My
reason for being surprised at this state
ment was this amongst others: Before me,
at the time l read that statement, lay
copy OF "a sermon on the doctrines and
discipline Of the Evangelical Lutheran
Church, preschsd at Charleston, 8. c.,
November IL, 1887, by appointment Of the
Synod Of South Carolina and adjacent
States by John BaChmann, D. D., Presi-
dent OF the General Synod Of the Evan
geliCal Lutheran Church in the United
States" After giving Luther q and
Melancthon'a views on the Eucharist, this
eminent Lutheran divine says: (PRs. 80 }
"Msny other Lutheran divines believe
that whilst the bread and wine are Nero
ly symbolical representations OF the
Savior's absent body by which we are
reminded OF his suffering, there Is also
peculiar and spiritual blessing bestowed
on all worthy communicates. In fact the
Lutheran church has, for century past,
ceased to agitate this question-leaving ito
members to follow the dictates Of con.
science agreeable to the light Of Scripture
This We are authorized to do without q
departure from the creed Of our church,
since at our ordination, in this country
especially, we only profess to believe that
the fundamental articles OF the Word Of
God are taught in q manner substantially
correct in the docsrinsl articles Of the
Augsburg Confession The reader may
hence Judge whether or not had reason
for feeling surprised at the sweeping az
sertion Of your Grafton correspondent.
JOHN J. KAHN,
Bishop Of Wheeling.