Freddy Finkelstein said on Bailing Water...
Anon @12:08 has a very good point. The Confessions do more than confess, they point to practice as proof of our confession. In the statement he cites, Melanchton (sic) answers the accusations of Rome, that we stand outside of the One True Church, by a) declaring the accusations False, "Falsely are we accused...", and by b) pointing the Romans to our practice as proof of our answer, as proof that we are catholic, "...for the Mass is retained among us..."
As for FC X (Epitome), it is elucidated further in Article X of the Thorough Declaration, stating directly that practices which would associate us with the heterodox are not adiaphora, but are to be avoided as prohibited by God (emphasis mine):
“When under the title and pretext of external adiaphora such things are proposed as are in principle contrary to God's Word (although painted another color) [such as, fundamentally anthropocentric worship practices replacing christocentric practices, which openly conceal the Marks of the Church by removing the Sacrament from the Divine Service, which adopt worship practices defining human acts of worship as a Means of Grace, or which promote human experiences as assurance of salvation --FF], these are not to be regarded as adiaphora, in which one is free to act as he will, but must be avoided as things prohibited by God [the practice of immersion, for instance, falls into this category --FF]. In like manner, too, such ceremonies should not be matters of indifference, as make a show or feign the appearance, as though our religion and that of the Papists [or the Reformed, or the Baptists, or the Pentecostals... --FF] were not far apart, thus to avoid persecution, or as though the latter were not at least highly offensive to us; or when such ceremonies are designed for the purpose, or required and received in this sense, as though by and through them both contrary religions were reconciled and became one body; or when a reentering into the Papacy [or turning to the Reformed, or the Baptists, or the Pentecostals... --FF] and a departure from the pure doctrine of the Gospel and true religion should occur or gradually follow therefrom.”
The point is, the Confessions point us, as well as our adversaries, to our Practices as proof of our Confession. Therefore, our Practices must manifestly prove our separation from the heterodox and from sectarianism.
JB states that it is abhorrent to put words in the mouths of the Confessors, to make them say what they do not say. I agree, but at the same time, I say, it is abhorrent to take words from their mouths, to make them say any less than they do, by failing to take their words at face value. Much of what the Confessions say is very easy to understand, if one is accustomed to didactic reading -- neither secret hermeneutic nor deep knowledge of dead languages is required to to unveil their "true meaning."
I ended my 03/11/2009-5:14PM comment by stating that the only winning play is to return to our Confessions. They require a Church Practice that proves them. In the Confessions we will find a degree of freedom in Practice, but no freedom to jettison manifestly catholic rites; and we will find the requirement to remove from them only what cannot be practiced without sinning.
Freddy Finkelstein
March 12, 2009 1:51 PM
