M. 1. They know that it is not Baptism but Crossing that is refused: And if they will not administer one without the other, they are the refusers. If one refuse the Papists Exorcism, Salt, Spittle, &c. and they will not baptize without it, do they not deny to Baptize, unless one will receive all these? If God will justify them for rejecting all that think it a sin to receive their Crossing, then it is not them to whom it is to be imputed. But can that be true?
1. Christ that instituted Baptism, ordained the conditions of it, and the qualifications of such as shall be baptized, Mat. 28. and Mark 16. 16. He that believed was to be Baptized. Act. 28. If thou believe with all thy heart thou mayest: No, saith the Canon you shall not, though you repent and believe, unless also you will take the covenanting Badge of the Cross. Is not this to alter the terms of Christ's Covenant and Sacrament, ⟨p. 76⟩and directly to contradict his very fundamental Law of Christianity? Baptize all that are made disciples, saith Christ, and all that repent and believe: No saith our Convocation, baptize none of them that will not take the transient Image of a Cross, for their farther obligation.
2. Do you that think it is necessary to Christianity and Salvation know that this Federal Crossing is lawful? if you affirm it, you must say the same of all ceremonies of the same importance, and so must make a hundred new Articles of Faith, even of Ceremonies and such little things, and make them all necessary to Christianity and Salvation? And is not this to make a new Gospel, Christianity, and Church, and to turn Christ's easy Yoke into a worse than the slavery of Pharisaical Traditions? And is not this to shut all, or almost all men out of Heaven? No one on earth doth know that this, and all such ceremonies, and inventions of men are lawful: And must every one know it that will be a Christian, or have his child made one? Or must we all (as necessary to Christianity) believe all such things lawful if the Clergy do but say they are? And what if the Clergy in one Land say it is, and in another, say it is not: Must both be believed? Have wise Bishops no fitter penalty to enforce their usurping Canons by, than denying Christendom and Salvation?
M. 1. They know that it is not Baptism but Crossing that is refused: And if they will not administer one without the other, they are the refusers. If one refuse the Papists Exorcism, Salt, Spittle, &c. and they will not baptize without it, do they not deny to Baptize, unless one will receive all these? If God will justifie them for rejecting all that think it a sin to receive their Crossing, then it is not them to whom it is to be imputed. But can that be true?
1. Christ that instituted Baptism, ordained the conditions of it, and the qualifications of such as shall be baptized, Mat. 28. and Mark 16. 16. He that believed was to be Baptized. Act. 28. If thou believe with all thy heart thou mayest: No, saith the Canon you shall not, though you repent and believe, unless also you will take the covenanting Badge of the Cross. Is not this to alter the terms of Christ's Covenant and Sacrament, ⟨p. 76⟩and directly to contradict his very fundamental Law of Christianity? Baptize all that are made disciples, saith Christ, and all that repent and believe: No saith our Convocation, baptize none of them that will not take the transient Image of a Cross, for their farther obligation.
2. Do you that think it is necessary to Christianity and Salvation know that this Federal Crossing is lawful? if you affirm it, you must say the same of all ceremonies of the same importance, and so must make a hundred new Articles of Faith, even of Ceremonies and such little things, and make them all necessary to Christianity and Salvation? And is not this to make a new Gospel, Christianity, and Church, and to turn Christ's easie Yoke into a worse than the slavery of Pharisaical Traditions? And is not this to shut all, or almost all men out of Heaven? No one on earth doth know that this, and all such ceremonies, and inventions of men are lawful: And must every one know it that will be a Christian, or have his child made one? Or must we all (as necessary to Christianity) believe all such things lawful if the Clergy do but say they are? And what if the Clergy in one Land say it is, and in another, say it is not: Must both be believed? Have wise Bishops no fitter penalty to enforce their usurping Canons by, than denying Christendom and Salvation?
