CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY JANUARY-APRIL 1996 The: Anniversary of Concordia Theological Seminary Walter A. Maier ....................................................................... 1 Concordia Theological Seminary: Reflections on Its On(:-Hundred-and-Fiftieth Anniversary at the Threshold of the Third Millennium Dean 0. Wenthe ...................................................................... 7 Celebrating Our Heritage Cameron A. MacKenzie .......................................................... 17 F. C. D. Wyneken: Motivator for the Mission Norman J. Threinen ................................................................. 19 Father from Afar: Wilhelm Loehe and Concordia Thenlogical Seminary in Fort Wayne Jrunes L. Schaaf ........................................ ....... ..................... 47 The Protoevangelium and Concordia Theological Seminary Douglas McC. L. Judisch ........................................................ 75 Preach the Word! The he-Hundred-and-Fiftieth Anniversary Hymn ................ 95 Co~nfessional Lutheranism in Eighteenth-Century Germany Vernon P. Kleinig .................................................................... 97 Book Reviews ...................................................................... 127 Indlices to Volume 59 (1995) Index of Authors and Editors ..........,....... ....... ........................ 153 Index of Titles .......................................................................... 154 Index of Book Reviews ........................................................... 156 Books Received ........................................................................... 158 The Protoevangelium and Concordia Theological Seminary Douglas McC. L. Judisch The fountainhead of all messianic prophecy is recorded already in the third chapter of the first book of the Bible. A literal translation of Genesis 3:15 would constitute the following quatrain: I shall place enmity between thee and the woman and between thy seed and her Seed; He will crush thee with regard to the head, and thou wilt crush Him with regard to the heel. Rightly has the Evangelical Lutheran Church traditionally spoken of this passage as the protevangel, to use the strictly English derivative, which is, in fact, rarely used within Concordia Theological Seminary or the ministerium which has emanated hence. The customary shape, on the contrary, which this term assumes in this school and among its graduates is the original Greek form of the protoeuaggel- lion or, much more commonly, the intermediate Latin form of the protoevangelium. The meaning of the term, however, is in any case unchanging, namely, the "first gospel." At this special time as Concordia Theological Seminary celebrates its sesquicentennial there is a special propriety in some reflection on the special relationship existing between the first prophecy in history and the first seminary of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri. Ohio, and Other States. There is probably, in fact, no place on earth where the protoevangelium is cited and explained more frequently in chapel or classrooms-indeed, in commons or dormitory or wherever--by professors and by students and, indeed, by administrators and regents. Nor could anyone possibly bypass the singular connection of the protevange! with this institution by virtue of its official seal, which occurs (to give but one instance among many) on every issue of the Concordia Theological Quarter- ly. It was, actually, a mere four decades ago-fully, therefore, a decade following the observance of its centennial-that this particular connection between Concordia Theological Seminary and Genesis 3:15 was forged. It was only then that the president of the day, Dr. Walter A. Baepler, commissioned the preparation of an official seal of Concordia Theological Seminary. The goal was 76 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY specifically to produce an emblem which would express as clearly as possible the purpose of the school-yes, "the reason for its exis- tence."' Understandably enough, in his quest for wise counsel, he chose an exeget-and specifically an exegete of the Old Testa- ment-to prepare the design. Dr. Martin J. Naumann served as Professor of Exegetical Theology from 1948 until the time of his sudden death in 1972. One of Martin Naurnann's main interests was messianic prophecy and so the results of this commission, although unique, come as really no surprise. With the artistic assistance of his daughter Doris, the professor devised a design which was readily accepted by the Board of Control. The design was announced, on this basis, as the seal of Concordia Theological Seminary in an issue of The Springfielder published in February of 1957.* The descrip- tion begins in this way: "Preach the Word is on the left side of the cross in Greek letters which are copied from the facsimile copy of the Codex Sinaiticus in our library. "Preach the Word is the command of the Lord to the church and particularly to His called ministers.' The reference, of course, is to the motto of the seminary, keruxon ton logon, to which is appended its location in Holy Scripture, 2 4:2, "Preach the word; be instant in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." The initial description, at any rate, of the seal of the seminary then immediately proceeds to forge a single christological link between 2 Timothy 4 and Genesis 3:15. "Preach the Word is the command of the Lord to the church and particularly to His called ministers. The word is the word of the cross. The cross is presented as the fulfillment of the promise of Genesis 3:15. The victory of the cross is established by Christ's life and death and by His resurrection. The message of the victory over sin and Satan is symbolized by the cross over the head of the serpent? Unmentioned in the article which introduced the seal of the seminary is the presence of three circles around the head and arms of the cross. The goal, although unstated, was beyond any doubt to The Protoevangelium 77 symbolize the trinitarian dogma expressed by the traditional dictum of opera ad extra indivisa sunt (the activities of the several persons of the Holy Trinity in regard to the outside are inseparable). In this case all three persons of the Holy Trinity were participants in the work of redemption although, of course, participating in ways which are clearly distinctive. Some additional points concerning the seal of the seminary may be delayed to the conclusion of this study. We have, at any rate, noted already that this emblem is less than a third of the age of the institution which it represents. It is, however, the thesis of this essay that the centrality of the protoevangelium in the seal of Concordia Theological Seminary has been aptly chosen to represent its entire history from its foundation onward down to this year of 1996 and, by the grace of God, beyond this year down to the end of time. There are two main points which will be made here in this study to that end. The first justification, then, of the centrality of the protoevangelium to the seal of Concordia Theological Seminary is its preeminence in the Lutheran Confessions. This institution has been from the time of its foundation irreversibly dedicated to the faithful transmission of the Evangelical Lutheran Symbols to the prospective pastors of the church of God. Its very name, after all, Concordia Theological Seminary, derives from that Book of Concord in which the protevangel is certainly given a special prominence. Genesis 3:15 is quoted once in the Apology to the Augsburg Confession, cited a second time in specific words, and utilized in addition more implicitly. The quotation of the protevangel occurs already in Article 11, dealing with original sin, preceding the following observations (46-50): . . . defects and . . . concupiscence are punishments and sins. Death and other bodily evils and the dominion of the devil are properly punishments. For human nature has been delivered into slavery and is held captive by the devil, who infatuates it with wicked opinions and errors and impels it 78 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY to sins of every kind. But just as the devil cannot be conquered except by the aid of Christ, so by our own strength we cannot free ourselves from this slavery. Even the history of the world shows how great is the power of the devil's kingdom. The world is full of blasphemies against God and of wicked opinions, and the devil keeps entangled in these bands those who are wise and righteous in the sight of the world. In other persons grosser vices manifest themselves. But since Christ was given to us to remove both these sins and these punishments and to destroy the kingdom of the devil, sin, and death, it will not be possible to recognize the benefits of Christ unless we understand our evils.' On this basis, then, the references made subsequently in the Apology to the "consensus of the prophets" must therefore be read as embracing the protoevangelium. The phrase consensus prophetarum occurs first in Article IV, the prime article of the symbols on justification, following a citation of Acts 10:43 (83): Peter says, "To Him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins through His name." How could he say it anymore plainly? We receive the forgiveness of sins, he says, through His name, that is, for His sake-therefore, not for the sake of our merits, our contrition, attrition, love, worship, or works. . . . in addition he cites the consensus of all the prophets, which is really citing the authority of the ~hurch.~ True to the promise which concludes this paragraph the consensus prophetarum surfaces again in Article XI1 of the Apology. The opening word of this oracular symposium is clearly identified in sections 53-55 of this article on penitence: For the two chief works of God in men are these, to terrify and to justify and quicken those who have been temfied. Into these two works all scripture has been distributed. The one part is the law. which shows, reproves, and condemns sins. The other part is the gospel, i.e., the The Protoevangelium 79 promise of grace bestowed in Christ, and this promise is constantly repeated in the whole of Scripture, first having been delivered to Adam, afterwards to the patriarchs; then, still more clearly proclaimed by the prophets; lastly, preached and set forth among the Jews by Christ and disseminated by the apostles. For all the saints were justified by faith in this promise, and not by their own attrition or contrition. And the examples show likewise these two parts. After his sin Adam is reproved and becomes temfied; this was contrition. Afterward God promises grace, and speaks of a future seed, by which the kingdom of the devil, death, and sin will be destroyed; there He offers the remission of sins. These are the chief things. For although the punishment is afterward added, yet this punishment does not merit the remission of sin.' The German translation of the Apology introduces an actual quotation of Genesis 3:15 with the statement that "the first gospel was spoken to Adam" (das erste Evangeliurn) and identifies the semen futurum as "the blessed Seed, that is, Christ" (durch den gebenedeiten Samen, das ist, Christum).' The same primacy of the protevangel among prophecies is therefore to be assumed in section 66: Our opponents cry out that they are the church and follow the consensus of the church. But here Peter cites b e consensus of the church in support of our church: "to Him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins through His name," etc. Surely the consensus of the prophets should be interpreted as the consensus of the universal church. Neither to the pope nor to the church do we grant the authority to issue decrees contrary to this consensus of the prophet^.^ Even more clearly is the prophetic pfimacy of the protoevangelium necessarily implied in sections 72-73: Let pious consciences know, therefore, that God com- 80 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY mands them to believe that they are freely forgiven because of Christ, not because of our works. Let them sustain them- selves with this command of God against despair and against the terrors of sin and death. Let them know that this is what the saints in the church have believed since the beginning of the world. Peter clearly cites the consensus of the prophets; the writings of the apostles attest that they believe the same thing; nor are the testimonies of the fathers lacking.'O The phrase which points here, of course, most obviously to Genesis 3:15 is "since the beginning of the world" (a principio mundi in ecclesia) (73).11 The German version, however, makes the implica- tion quite explicit: "of this the idle sophists know little and the blessed proclamation, the gospel which proclaims the forgiveness of sins through the blessed seed, that is, Christ, has from the beginning of the world been the greatest consolation and treasure to all pious kings, all prophets, all believers. For they have believed in the same Christ in whom we believe; for from the beginning of the world no saint has been saved in any other way than through the faith of the same g0spe1."'~ The protoevangeliurn reappears in the context of properly distin- guishing the law and the gospel in the last of the Lutheran Confes- sions. "Law and Gospel" is, of course, the specific subject of Article V of the Formula of Concord, and, after recalling the insistence of the Blessed Reformer of the Church on distinguishing law and gospel with utmost care, section 23 of the Solid Declaration proceeds in this way: From the beginning of the world these two proclamations have been ever and ever inculcated alongside of each other in the church of God, with a proper distinction. For the descendants of the venerable patriarchs, as also the patri- archs themselves, not only called to mind constantly how in the beginning man had been created righteous and holy by God and through the fraud of the serpent had transgressed God's command, had become a sinner, and had corrupted and precipitated himself with all his posterity into death and eternal condemnation, but also encouraged and comforted The Protoevangelium 8 1 themselves again by the preaching concerning the seed of the woman, who would bruise the serpent's head (Genesis 3:15); likewise, concerning the seed of Abraham, in whom all the nations of the earth should be blessed (Genesis 22: 18); likewise, concerning David's son, who should restore again the kingdom of Israel and be a light to the heathen (Psalm 110:l; Isaiah 49:6; Luke 2:32), who was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniqui- ties, by whose stripes we are healed (Isaiah 53:5).13 In this passage the Woman's Seed occurs as the fust name of the Messiah in the church of the Old Testament. and the contents of all subsequent messianic prophecies are predicated of the Weibes Same or Semen Mulieris. Isaiah 53 is cited climactically as the most dramatic depiction in the prophets of the way in which the Woman's Seed would crush the serpent's head, namely, by permitting Himself to be crushed with regard to the heel.14 A second justification of the centrality of the protevangel to the seal of Concordia Theological Seminary is that certainly the predominating view of its faculty through the course of a hundred and fifty years has been the directly messianic interpretation of Genesis 3: 15 traditional in the Lutheran Church before the nineteenth century, whereby the word zerah ("her Seed") and the third mascu- line forms of the verse are understood as referring specifically and exclusively to the God-Man whom we call Jesus Christ. During the course, indeed, of the first century of its existence the devotion of the seminary and its synod as a whole to the exegesis of the Blessed Reformer and to the Lutheran Confessions (even to the exegesis therein) placed any challenge to the confessional understanding of the protoevangelium effectively beyond the realm of possibility. The first century, moreover, of Concordia Theological Seminary included a decade and a half (1856-1871) in St. Louis under the presidency of the chief doctor of the church since the reformers, the Blessed Carl Ferdinand Wilhelm Walther. An inspiring and useful example of his approach to Genesis 3:15 can be found in the ninth of his thirty-nine lectures on The Proper Distinction Between Law 82 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY and Gospel: What is the import of these words? It is this: The Messiah, the Redeemer, the Savior is not to come for the purpose of telling us what we are to do, what works we are to perform in order to escape from the terrible dominion of darkness, sin. and death. These feats the Messiah is not going to leave for us to accomplish, but He will do all that Himself. "He shall bruise the serpent's head" . . . means nothing else than this, that He shall destroy the kingdom of the devil. All that man has to do is to know that he has been re- deemed, that he has been set free from his prison, that he has no more to do than to believe and accept this message and rejoice over it with all his heart. If the text were to read "He shall save you," that would not be so comforting; or if it read "you must believe in Him," we should be at a loss to know what is meant by this faith. This protoevangelium, this Fist Gospel in Genesis, was the fountain from which the believers in the Old Testament drew their comfort. It was important for them to know: "There is One coming who will not only tell us what we must do to get to heaven. No, the Messiah will do all Himself to bring us there." Now that the rule of the devil has been destroyed, anything I must do cannot come into consideration. If the devil's dominion is demolished, I am free. There is nothing for me to do but to appropriate this to myself.15 Such is the exegesis of the protoevangelium which the venerable doctor offers in the course of supporting the fifth of his twenty-five theses on the proper distinction of law and gospel, namely, that "the first manner of confounding law and gospel is the one most easily recognized-and the grossest"-which "is adopted, for example, by Papists, Socinians, and Rationalists and consists in this, that Christ is represented as a new Moses, or Lawgiver, and the gospel turned into a doctrine of meritorious works, while at the same time those who teach that the gospel is the message of the free grace of God in Christ are condemned and anathematized."16 In the course, to be sure, of the decade and a half following the The Protoevangelium 83 adoption of the official seal of 1956, the previous consensus on messianic prophecy in general was broken by the introduction also in Concordia Theological Seminary of the critical method of biblical interpretation which had already come to predominate (temporarily, of course) in the classrooms of Concordia Seminary in St. Louis. There, indeed, by the closing years of the sixties of this century none of those teaching the Old Testament to undergraduate students regarded Genesis 3:15, to this author's knowledge, as a messianic prophecy of any kind or, in consequence, as the proclamation of the gospel. The description of the passage as protoevangeliurn was, indeed, depicted as hopeless obscurantism. A directly messianic interpretation of the verse was, to be sure, still being asserted with no compromise in the classes and sermons of the primary systemati- cian of the seminary in St. Louis and, indeed, of the church as a whole, Professor Robert Preus, now in glory. The critical approach made definite inroads during the sixties in Springfield as well, but it also encountered the vocal resistance of several of the exegetical theologians of Concordia Theological Seminary (in alliance, of course, with others in the faculty). One of the advocates of the traditional approach to the Old Testament was the aforesaid Dr. Martin Naurnann in his lectures and in various essays. His main contribution to posterity was, to be sure. published only after his death in his Messianic Mountaintops." The frontis- piece, in fact, of Messianic Mountaintops consists, quite appropriate- ly, in a rubrication of the seal of the seminary, with an accompany- ing note that its design had been "suggested" by the professor by then in glory." Martin Naumann begins, of course, his exploration of the messianic tecfain of the Old Testament with the quotation of Genesis 3:15 and this effusion of eloquence: But it was not, as has been said, sometimes with tenderness, the first little star in the pitch-black darkness of the night of sin and death that had come on man. No, not a small light, although a tiny light the clearer, the darker the night. Not just a glimmer, but rather the full burst of the sun of righteousness with healing in its wings. The promise of God did not grow from a germ of a seed to a-mighty tree. The promise of God and the grace of God was never a 84 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY "more or less" matter. It is as great as God's full majesty; indeed it is God's glory. Soli Deo Gloria is sung not only of the majesty Isaiah sees in the temple but always includes also the absolution he receives in the same temple from the same vision. This is God in the fullness of His glory: "God who justifies the ~ngodly."'~ Professor Naumann similarly begins the summation of his remarks on the protoevangelium with these words: "Adam and Eve, we see, had much more than a dim star of hope guiding them through life till they finally arrived back in Eden, in the eternal Eden described in Revelation in so many terms borrowed from Genesis. Adam and Eve had the word, a light unto their feet, the daystar from on high. No dim theology theirs, to grow only gradually into a knowledge of a divinity. No constantly changing or ever evolving religious concepts fnr them. They had re~elation."~~ During the decade of the sixties, moreover. Professor Raymond Surburg of Concordia Theological Seminary emerged as the primary champion in the synod as a whole of its traditional approach to the Old Testament in both isagogics and interpretation. In November of 1972, for instance, Dr. Surburg delivered an essay to the faculty of the seminary entitled "Messianic Prophecy and Messianism," which was subsequently published in The Sprin~elder in June of 1973.21 Therein, among many points made, he charted the course of the generalizing and critical approaches to the prophecy of the Old Testament, whereby Genesis 3:15 was first reduced to a speaking of the victory of mankind in general (with, one could say, Christ at its head) and then to describing an unending aversion between human beings and snakes.22 His own conception of the verse he expressed more fully in two works published some ten years later. In the course of a series of three lectures which Dr. Surburg delivered in Bethany Lutheran Theological Seminary in October of 1982?3 he speaks of messianic prophecy as having "its origin in Genesis 3:15," where the "first messianic promise was spoken directly by God."24 He utilizes, indeed, the following analogy to describe the fundamental role which Genesis 3:15 plays in biblical christology : The Protoevangelium 85 With this verse began the stream of messianic promises which in the course of the centuries was going to become a mighty stream in terms . . . of the person and work of Christ. By the time this small rivulet, beginning at Genesis 3:15, has swelled into a mighty river and has reached the open sea of the New Testament, a rather concise picture of the Messiah, God's Son, has been re~ealed.~' In the course of these lectures, too, Dr. Surburg obviously concurs in the conception of the Blessed Reformer as to the understanding of the original human audience of Genesis 3:15. As with Dr. Luther, so with Dr. Surburg, the verse not only is the gospel but was clearly understood and believed as gospel by Adam and Eve. It was only, indeed, by such a faith that the first parents of mankind, once they had fallen into sin, could again become righteous in the sight of God and so be saved.26 Even more profound, however, is Dr. Surburg's depiction of the protoevangelium in an essay which appeared in this journal in July of 1982, "Justification as a Doctrine of the Old Te~tament":~' The doctrine of justification of sinners had its origin immediately after the fall of Adam and Eve. By heeding Satan and disobeying God's will, they became subject to death in all its forms: spiritual, temporal, and eternal. By one act of disobedience they forfeited God's divine favor and incurred God's wrath. . . . When Adam and Eve were summoned before God as Judge, they expected to hear that the justice and holiness of God would require their Creator to pronounce condemna- tion. But in Eden God, while He pronounced a curse on the serpent and his seed, showed His great mercy and grace by announcing the ultimate deliverance of mankind in Genesis 3:15. . . . Critical scholarship interprets "the seed of the woman" as referring simply to Eve's descendants, thus translating the Hebrew word zerah . . . as a plural. Genesis 3:15, "the Protoevangelium," was the hope of cursed mankind, which was to be redeemed from the curse of the law and restored to the favor of God. Westermann's 86 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY objection that Genesis 3:15 cannot announce the gospel because it appears in a series of curses, simply reflects the bias of anti-scriptural form-criticism. . . . No, Genesis 3:15 was an announcement of God's mercy and, while it was made in general t . s and later messianic prophecies would give more and more specific information on many points, "yet it contained enough to lay a solid foundation for faith and hope towards God, and it was the first beam of gospel- light which dawned on a fallen world."28 By the time, however, that these words were spoken in the precise form quoted, they were uttered in the context of the theological symposia of Concordia Theological Seminary which were by then being conducted, as now, in the initial month of each year. It was, indeed, the sainted Professor Robert Preus who initiated and encouraged the forum in which those remarks were first uttered in January of 1982 and in which the remarks now printed here were first made orally in January of 1996. He had, of course, already assumed the presidency of Concordia Theological Seminary in the autumn of 1974. He it was, likewise, who had eagerly urged the posthumous publication of the Messianic Mountaintops previously noted. The main contribution, of course, which Robert Preus made to the continuing place of the protoevangelium within his seminary was the pivotal role which he played in deflecting-for his remain- ing years in this life, at least-the modem critical challenge to the confessional approach to Holy Scripture in general and to the Old Testament in particuiar-especially in Concordia Theological Seminary (in Springfield and then in Fort Wayne) and in Concordia Seminary in St. Louis (during his term of leadership there before his call to Springfield) but also in many other places to one extent or another. By no means to be forgotten, however, are the facts that he both utilized passages of the Old Testament as sedes doctrinae in lectures and discussions and preached on such passages in the chapel of this seminary. He made his mark, of course, as a systematician, but his exegesis was remarkably precise and dependable. Of particular relevance among his writings would be those which deal with the principles and procedures to be employed or avoided in the interpre- The Protoevangelium 87 tation of Holy Scripture in general and of the Old Testament in particular. In an article, for instance, entitled "The Unity of Scripture" he insists in a very useful way on properly distinguishing prophecy from typology:29 In the case of predictive prophecy we have a rectilinear correspondence between an Old Testament descriptive and cognitive prediction and a thing, person, or event described in the New Testament. In typology there is also a straight correspondence, but between a thing or person or event in the Old Testament and a person, thing, or event in the New Testament. In the case of predictive prophecy the words of the Old Testament predict; in the case of typology the reference of the words predict. The correspondence or unity between type and antitype in the case of biblical typology is therefore only a unity of two references, type from the Old and antitype from the New Testament. Except in cases where the New Testament itself clearly makes out an Old Testament type. the practice of typological exegesis can become open-ended and precariously arbitrary as a herme- neutical principle since it is an application not of the unity of Scripture, but of the unity of the references of Scripture. It is thus no more based on the explicative meaning of the biblical narrative than the application of the unitary princi- ples of Semler and his followers who believed that there was no unity of Scripture except that which was applicative- ly derived.'" President Preus was particularly insistent in this vein that the authors of the New Testament were always capturing the one intended sense of any prophecy which they cited from the Old Testament. "The New Testament writers," he asserted, "are correct in their under- standing and interpretation of the Old Testament, that is, they actually represent the sensus literalis and intention of the Old Testament, not a distorted interpretation, or ex eventu explanation of typology, or religious insight as they witness to the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy."" Although, however, the designation of anything as a type without the express authorization of scriptural words is necessarily arbitrary, 88 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY a prophecy already consists in scriptural words and therefore needs no additional authorization to demonstrate its existence as a prophecy. Dr. Preus had, therefore, no question as to the original and only meaning of Genesis 3:15. The author of this essay-and doubtless many of its readers as well-can recall him, indeed, frequently treating the verse as the protoevangelium-in lectures and sermons and discussion-in a way which was always directly and exclusively messianic. In November of 1973, for example, President Preus delivered a series of lectures in Mankato (again, specifically, in Bethany Lutheran Theological Seminary) on the proper interpreta- tion and use of the two testaments of Holy Scripture?* in his second lecture he asserts, with the reformers, "Christ as Savior was the object of the explicit faith of Old Testament believers; they were not saved by some implicit faith in the power or goodness of God."" Then he endorses the Blessed Reformer's conception of the results of the protoevangelium: "Adam was a Christian long before the birth of Christ. For he had the same faith in Christ that we have."" So pivotal, indeed, was the protoevangelium to Robert Preus, and so univocal in its proclamation of the gospel, that he treated Genesis 3: 15 as the equivalent in the Old Testament of John 3: 16 in the New Te~tament.~~ Along the same lines of enduring importance was the way in which Robert Preus encouraged the editing and translation and publication by the seminary of various works of Dr. Georg Stoeckhardt, the leading exegetical theologian in the history of the synod which Concordia Theological Seminary has served through the course of almost all of its years of existence. Thus, although the man whom the synod has historically regarded as the dean of exegetes of Holy Scripture never formally served on the faculty of Concordia Theological Seminary in the first century of its existence, the same seminary has done much in the course of its second century to preserve and disseminate his teaching in lectures and writings. Particularly related to the subject at hand are the transla- tion of the Adventspredigten, which was published with the subtitle of An Exposition of the Principal Messianic Prophecies of the Old Te~tarnent.~ and the translation and collection in a single volume entitled Christ in Old Testament Prophecy of a series of articles which originally appeared in the course of three years of Lehre und The Protoevangelium 89 ~ehre." Both of these works, like many others of Georg Stoeckhardt, were aptly translated by Erwin W. Koehlinger of Fort Wayne, who still continues with his labors in the same arena. Concluding Remarks A third justification of the centrality of the protoevangelium to the seal of Concordia Theological Seminary is its preeminence already in Holy Scripture. This institution has been from its foundation, as reflected in its articles of incorporation, dedicated first and foremost to the faithful transmission of the Word of God to the prospective pastors of His church. A necessary premise, of course, in this argument is that Genesis 3:15 records, in fact, the original proclama- tion of the gospel both in its canonical wording and in its canonical context in particular and in general. The constraints of space involved here, however, require us to postpone to the future any consideration in writing of these specific aspects of the protoevangel- ium. Those interested can, however, in the meantime have recourse, not only to the author's remarks in the Eleventh Annual Symposium on Exegetical Theology of Concordia Theological Seminary?' but much more significantly to the writings of those commentators of previous centuries who still remain more worthy of emulation than any of those alive today.39 Returning, then, to the seal of Concordia Theological Seminary, the position of the globe in the design beneath both cross and serpent's head evidently relates to the seemingly elliptical assertion, in The Springfielder which introduced the seal, that "sin still is on this world, but it has been overcome by the Seed of the W~man.""~ The idea is presumably that the devil appears to continue in control of this world, but Jesus Christ has actually already defeated Him beyond all recall by means of the cross. His victory, conversely, entails the justification of the world, the news of which Concordia Theological Seminary was founded to prepare men to take to all those dwelling on this globe. For this cause The SpringFelder sums up the theme of the seal of the seminary thus: The message of the men going from this seminary is the message that meets the realism of sin with the real salvation of the Christ. The Cross is the central symbol; it dominates 90 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY all?' Also noted as occurring within the inner circle of the seal is the date Anno Domini 1846411 the year of the Lord 1846?2 Unmentioned in the introductory article is the threefold repetition of the cross in connection with the letters abbreviating the phrase "Anno Domini'- thereby reemphasizing once again the centrality of the cross of Jesus Christ to the mission and so to the theology of the institution then established. For it was, of course, in that year of our Lord 1846 that the foundation of Concordia Theological Seminary took place, the foundation which the church celebrates anew with special gratitude b God in this sesquicentennial year of Concordia Theological Seminary. The Endnotes The SpringFelder, 215 (February 1957), 8. Ibid. A special expression of gratitude is due at the outset to Mrs. Barbara Steege, who rendered inestimable service to Concordia Theological Seminary through the course of many years as its librarian and was now able to locate elsewhere the issue of The SpringFelder cited here, which is unfortunately, as of this writing, missing from the archives in Fort Wayne. The assistance of the Reverend Bruce Lucas in contacting Mrs. Steege and others with any possible information is also much appreciated. Ibid. The motto was originally written in the specific kind of characters employed in Codex Sinaiticus, as opposed to the standardized form of Greek capitals which is now used by the seminary-as, for example, on the front cover of the Concordia Theological Quarterly. Ibid. The use of capitals and punctuation here and else- where has been adjusted to the customary usage of this journal. Concordia Triglotta: Die symbolischen Buecher der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche, ed. F. Bente (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 192 I), 1 16- 1 19. The htoevangelium 91 Ibid., 118-1 19. Ibid., 264-267. Ibid.. 266-267. The Book of Concord: The Cor$essions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, trans. and ed. Theodore G. Tappert (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959). 191. Ibid., 192. Ibid., 192; Concordia Triglotta, 272. Concordia Triglotta, 273. Ibid., 958-959. Ibid., 958-959. C. F. W. Walther, The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel: Thirty-Nine Evening Lectures, trans. W. H. T. Dau (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1928). 70-71. Ibid., 69. Martin J. Naumann, Messianic Mountaintops, ed. David P. Scaer and Douglas McC.L. Judisch (The Springfielder, 39: 2, [September 19751; Springfield: Concordia Seminary Monograph Series, 2). 72 pages. Ibid., on the inside of the front cover. Ibid., 9. Ibid., 12. Raymond F. Surburg, "Messianic Prophecy and Messianisrn," The Springfielder, 37: 1 (June 1973). 17-34. Ibid., 30-33. Raymond F. Surburg, "Luther and the Christology of the Old Testament," The Lutheran Synod Quarterly: Theologi- cal Journal of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod, 23: 1 (March 1983). 89 pages, in conjunction with Supplement to 1982 Reformation Lectures (Mankato, Minnesota: Bethany 92 CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Lutheran Theological Seminary), 1-20. Surburg, "Luther and the Christology of the Old Testament," 34. Ibid., 36-37. Ibid., 35-36, as similarly 23-24. Raymond F. Surburg, "Justification as a Doctrine of the Old Testament," Concordia Theological Quarterly, 46:2-3 (April-July 1982). 129-146. Ibid., 134-135. Robert D. Preus, "The Unity of Scripture," Concordia Theological Quarterly, 54: 1 (January 1990). 1-23. Ibid., 7-8. Ibid., 7. Robert D. Preus, How Is the Lutheran Church to Interpret and Use the Old and New Testaments?, Reformation Lectures (Mankato, Minnesota: November 1-2, 1973): Lecture I, 13 pages; Lecture 11, 9 pages; Lecture 111, 9 pages. Ibid., Lecture 11.4. Ibid., Lecture 11.4-5. Ibid., Lecture 111, 7. Georg Stoeckhardt, Advent Sermons: An Exposition of the Principal Messianic Prophecies of the Old Testament, trans. Erwin W. Koehlinger (Fort Wayne: Concordia Theological Seminary, 1984). 143 pages. Georg Stoeckhardt, Christ in Old Testament Prophecy, trans. Erwin W. Koehlinger (Fort Wayne: Concordia Theological Seminary), 186 pages. Douglas McC.L. Judisch, "The Protoevangeliurn and the Seminary," Eleventh Annual Symposium on Exegetical Theology (Fort Wayne: Concordia Theological Seminary, The Protoevangelium 93 1996), which is available on videotape from the Bookstore of Concordia Theological Seminary. 39. Martin Luther, Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 1-5, trans. George V. Schick, ed. Jaroslav Pelikan (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1958; Luther's Works: American Edition, I), 188-198; Abraham Calov, Biblia Testamenti Veteris Illustrata (Dresden and Leipzig: J. C. Zimmermann, 17 lg), I, 242-247. 40. The Springfielder, 215 (February 1957). 8. 41. Ibid. 42. Ibid.