<\/p>
Steven Wedgeworth writes: <\/p>\n
\u201cYou might want to be more skeptical of Torrance.\u00a0 You (and he) are right to sniff a problem, but the genealogy of that problem is a bit more complicated.\u00a0 Just one example.\u00a0 You blogged on visible and invisible and said that Torrance claimed later Federalism moved beyond the Scots Confession on visible\/invisible church stuff.\u00a0 But in chapter 16 of the Scots Confession the church is defined as invisible and \u2018known only to God, who alone knows whom He has chosen.\u2019 <\/p>\n
\u201cThe Scots Confession, along with all of the pre-Westminster Confessions, defines the Church as invisible and simply does not include an additional discussion on the visible.\u00a0 The WCF is new precisely because it spends as much time as it does talking about the visible church by itself. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe key to the unity is, I believe, what Luther called \u2018trysting places.\u2019 \u00a0The visible church, sacraments, etc. were all trysting places for believers to encounter the invisible realities through faith.\u00a0 Trigg has a good discussion on this in his book on Luther and baptism. <\/p>\n