A70766:152
Moderation a virtue, or, A vindication of the principles and practices of the moderate…Moderation a vertue, or, A vindication of the principles and practices of the moderate…
Moderation a virtue, or, A vindication of the principles and practices of the moderate divines and laity of the Church of England represented in some late immoderate discourses, under the nick-names of Grindalizers and Trimmers / by a lover of moderation, resident upon his cure ; with an appendix, demonstrating that parish-churches are no conventicles ... in answer to a late pamphlet entitled, Parish-churches turned into conventicles, &c.Moderation a vertue, or, A vindication of the principles and practices of the moderate divines and laity of the Church of England represented in some late immoderate discourses, under the nick-names of Grindalizers and Trimmers / by a lover of moderation, resident upon his cure ; with an appendix, demonstrating that parish-churches are no conventicles ... in answer to a late pamphlet entitled, Parish-churches turned into conventicles, &c.
London: printed for Jonathan Robinson, 1683
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
3. Is not the Rubric as positive for dipping the Child in Water, warily and discreetly, (if the Godfathers and Godmothers shall certify that the Child may well endure it) as for sprinkling and signing with the Cross? And doth this ingenious and urgent Preacher demand such a Certificate from them, that he may observe this Rubric, which saith, And then naming it after them, (if they shall certify that the Child may well endure it) he shall dip it, &c. How many Children hath he dipped in St. Ethelbert? How often hath he demanded such a Certificate? Suppose in the South Parts Infants were dipped, and in the North sprinkled, what would become of Uniformity in a more considerable Ceremony than any of the rest?
3. Is not the Rubrick as positive for dipping the Child in Water, warily and discreetly, (if the Godfathers and Godmothers shall certify that the Child may well endure it) as for sprinkling and signing with the Cross? And doth this ingenious and urgent Preacher demand such a Certificate from them, that he may observe this Rubrick, which saith, And then naming it after them, (if they shall certify that the Child may well endure it) he shall dip it, &c. How many Children hath he dipp'd in St. Ethelbert? How often hath he demanded such a Certificate? Suppose in the South Parts Infants were dipt, and in the North sprinkled, what would become of Uniformity in a more considerable Ceremony than any of the rest?
4. Why may not the Cross be omitted sometimes to gratify a tender, scrupulous, weak Conscience, without blame, as well as the Omission of dipping Infants, out of respect to bodily Weakness? Is bodily Weakness in an Infant, a better Reason than a Weakness, or the Judgment of Conscience in a Parent? Should the one be omitted, and not the other? Or shall we declare our selves more tender of hurting, a weak Body, than wounding a weak Soul?