When Concordia Is Just A Title
You might recall both my anxious anticipation & my joyous reaction when I received my copy of Concordia: A Reader’s Edition Of The Book Of Concord. I stand by those reactions — if anything, I feel more strongly about the doctrinal & theological quality of the book now than I did then.
In today’s LCMS, though, there’s nothing that cannot be turned into a political football. 
Much as political issues seem to be the reasons behind keeping the man who has guided CPH to a renaissance-like resurgence (the Rev. Dr. Paul McCain) locked into interim status, political issues seem to be the driving force behind an attack on one of the most (if not the most) successful products/volumes to come out of CPH in years, if not decades — Concordia.
It seems that the Doctrinal Review approval of Concordia has been removed, even though there no doctrinal errors have been found. :dizzy:
I’ve been cogitating on how to best write up this controversy, along with my thoughts & feelings, but it seems that some other folks have done a quicker job of getting those bases covered. Check out this posting by the Aardvark (Concordia Discordia), as it’s a great summary & clearinghouse of the issues involved, including the stealth campaign by the forces on the LCMS’s left (i.e., DayStar, aka, DeathStar…) to subvert this edition of the Confessions because, among other things, the McCain edition removes some ambiguity that the Tappert & Kolb/Wengert editions tolerated that could open the door for some plausibly deniable syncretism & unionism.
This whole thing is distasteful, sad, unnecessary, & indefensible.
But then, sin is like that, isn’t it?
-ghp
Comments
-
Analytics & Hosting
