Edification Nor do's our Church impose them like the Church of Rome as necessary and as parts of Religion but as merely indifferent and changeable things As for our Penances 't is needless to shew that they are not cruel like those of Rome 3. The Church of Rome subjects her Members by several of her Doctrines to enslaving passions For instance Purgatory subjects them to fear and auricular confession to shame and the dependence of the efficacy of the Sacraments upon the Priest's intention exposes them to great anxiety But our Church rejects the Doctrines of Purgatory and the dependence of the efficacy of the Sacraments upon the Priest's intention and do's not oblige her Members to Confess their sins to Men but when for the relief of their Consciences or making satisfaction c. it is their duty so to do 4. The Church of Rome maintains Licentious Principles and Practices which our Adversaries cannot charge upon the Church of England Secondly In all those Doctrines and Practices in which the Church of Rome is justly charg'd with plainly contradicting the Scripture For instance our Church rejects and utterly abhors the Popish Doctrines and Practices of Image-worship invocation of Saints Transubstantiation Pardons Indulgences Sacrifice of the Mass denying the Bible to the Vulgar Prayers and Sacraments in an unknown Tongue robbing the Laity of the Cup in the Lord's Supper prohibiting Marriage to Priests Merit Superogation making simple Fornication a mere venial sin damning all that are not of her Communion c. Nor is there any Church that more severely condemns all instances of unrighteousness and immorality than the Church of England do's Thirdly In their public Prayers and Offices To shew this in all particulars wou'd be a tedious task therefore I shall instance only in the office of Infant-Baptism by which the Reader may judge of the rest Before they go into the Church after many preparatory prescriptions the Priest being drest in a Surplice and purple Robe calls the Infant saying what askest thou c. the Godfather answers Faith P. What shalt thou get by Faith G. Eternal Life P. If thou therefore c. Then the Priest blows three gentle puffs upon the Infant 's face and saies Go out of him O unclean Spirit c. Then Crossing the Infant 's Forehead and Breast he saith Receive the sign of the Cross c. Then he praies that God wou'd alwaies c. And after a long Prayer the Priest laying his Hand on the Infant 's Head comes the idle and profane Form of the Benediction of Salt viz. I conjure thee O creature of Salt in the Name c. with many Crossings Then he puts a little Salt into the Infant 's mouth saying Take thou the Salt of Wisdom and adds most impiously be it thy Propitiation unto Eternal Life After the Pax tecum he praies that this Infant c. Then the Devil is conjur'd again and most wofully be-call'd Then the Priest Crosses the Infant 's Forehead saying And this sign c. Then he puts his Hand on the Infant 's Head and puts up a very good Prayer Then he puts part of his Robe upon the Infant and brings him within the Church saying Enter thou c. Then follow the Apostles Creed and the Paternoster Then the Devil is conjur'd again and the Priest takes spittle out of his mouth and therewith touches the Infant 's Ears and Nostrils saying c. Then he conjures the Devil again saying Be packing O Devil c. Then he asks the Infant whether he renounces the Devil c. Then dipping his Thumb in Holy Oyl and anointing the Infant with it in his Breast and betwixt his shoulders he saies I anoint thee c. Then he puts off his Purple Robe and puts on another of White colour and having ask'd four more questions and receiv'd the answers he pours water thrice upon the Child's Head as he recites over it our Saviour's Form of Baptism Then dipping his Thumb in the Chrism or Holy Ointment he anoints the Infant upon the Crown of his Head in the figure of a Cross and praies O God Omnipotent c. Afterwards he takes a white linnen cloth and putting it on the Child's Head saies Take the white garment c. Lastly he puts into the Child's or his God-Father's Hand a lighted Candle saying Receive the burning Lamp c. Besides those things which are in the Common Ritual there are divers others added in the Pastorale which I shall not mention And now if any Man will read our Office of Baptism he will acknowledge that no two things can be more unlike than these two Offices are Our Litany indeed has been Condemn'd by Dissenters as savouring of Popish Superstition but nothing is more false if a Man compares it with the Popish one the greater part of which consists in invocations of Saints and Angels But the Brevity I am confin'd to in this Discourse will not permit me to abide any longer upon this Argument Fourthly In the Books they receive for Canonical For the Church of Rome takes all the Apocryphal Books into the Canon but the Church of England takes only those which the Primitive Church and all Protestants acknowledge 'T is true she reads some part of the Apocryphal Books for instruction of manners but she do's not establish any Doctrine by them Fifthly and Lastly in the Authority on which they found their whole Religion The Church of Rome founds the Authority of the Scriptures upon her own infallibility and the Authority of many of her own Doctrines on unwritten traditions and the Decrees of her Councils which she will have to be no less inspir'd than the Prophets and Apostles but the Church of England builds her whole Religion upon Scripture which is her rule of Faith and Practice She Reverences ancient general Councils but do's not think them infallible And as for that Authority which our Church claims in Controversies of Faith by requiring subscription to 39 Articles 't is plain that she means no more Authority than to oblige her Members to outward submission when her decisions do not contradict any essentials of Faith or Manners but not an authority to oblige Men to believe them infallibly true and this is necessary for the Peace of any Church 'T is true she thinks it convenient that none should receive Orders be admitted to Benefices c. but such as do believe them not all as Articles of our Faith but many as inferiour truths and she requires Subscription as a Test of this belief but the Church of Rome requires all Persons under pain of damnation to believe all her false and wicked Doctrines as much as the most undoubted Articles of Faith as may be seen in the Creed of Pius the fourth As to the Motives which our Church proposes for our belief of the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures they are such as are found in the Scriptures themselves viz. the excellency of them and the Miracles which confirm them
appointed him in performing what belong'd to him as a Mediatour and discovering to Mankind in Scripture the Method and Means by which they may be sav'd and the sufficiency of Scripture appears in its being a sufficient means to that end and it 's putting Men into such a State as will render them capable of attaining to it III. I am next to consider how we may know what things are indifferent in the worship of God To this I might answer briefly that in things forbidden by human Authority the not being requir'd in Scripture and in things requir'd by human Authority the not being forbidden in Scripture is a Rule whereby we may know what things are indifferent in the worship of God But because things in their nature indifferent may become unlawful in their use and application therefore I shall add the following particulars 1. Things are call'd indifferent from their general Nature and not as if they were never unlawful for they are lawful or unlawful as they are us'd and apply'd 2. A thing may not be requir'd or forbidden by one Law which is by another and that may be indifferent in one state which is not in another and therefore when we say a thing is indifferent we must consider the Case and Law which it respects Thus to discourse about common affairs is a thing indifferent but it is unlawful when practis'd in the Church and in the midst of Religious Solemnities 3. As there are certain Rules which we are to respect in common conversation and which even in that case ought to tie us up in the use of things otherwise indifferent so there are some Rules which we must have a regard to in the administration of Divine worship And as in common matters the nature of the thing in actions the end in conversation the circumstances are to be heeded viz. time place persons as when where before whom we are cover'd and uncover'd c. so in sacred matters the nature of the thing in the decency and solemnity of the worship the end for which it was appointed in the Edification of the Church and the Peace Glory and Security of that are to be respected By these Rules we are to judge of the indifferency of things in God's service But because these Rules are general and Decency Edification and Order are variable according as circumstances alter and because different men have different opinions of them therefore I shall give more particular Directions 1. Some things are so notoriously agreeable or opposite to Decency Edification and Order that common reason will be able to judge of them Thus 't is plain that a tumultuous speaking of many together is less for Edification and has more of confusion than the orderly speaking of one by one and service in an unknown Tongue do's less conduce to Edification than when 't is in a Language commonly understood But 2. There are other things which are not so evident and therefore for the clearing of them we may observe 1. That Decency Order and Edification depend upon each other and must not be consider'd asunder And therefore we must not throw down the bounds of public Order and bring all things into confusion for the sake of Edification or because we think any matter indecent What is against public Order and Practice is for that reason indecent were there no other reason to make it so So that if we wou'd judge aright of either of these we must judge of them together and as Order alone is not enough to make a thing Decent which is in it self indecent so Decency or particular Edification is not enough to recommend that which cannot be introduc'd without the disturbance of public Order 2. That when the case is not apparent we shou'd rather judge by what is contrary than by what is agreeable to these rules We know better what things are not than what they are and therefore since we better know what is indecent than decent disorderly than orderly against Edification than for it it 's best to take this course in judging about it As for instance if we wou'd inquire into the decency of the posture to be us'd in the Lord's Supper or the Edification that may arise from it it may not perhaps be so easy for a Man to judge of the greater Decency and Edification of kneeling or sitting but if he find that the posture injoin'd is not indecent or destructive of Piety and of the ends for which the ordinance was instituted he is therewith to satisfy himself If says St. Austin Epist 118. what is injoyn'd be not against Faith or good manners it is to be accounted indifferent and I may add if it be not indecent disorderly and destructive of Piety it 's lawful 3. That if the case be not apparent and we cannot easily find out how the things injoin'd are decent c. we are obliged to be cautious how we condemn an action which those men practice whom for other things we cannot condemn When we find that they argue and produce Experience and Reason for it and we have a whole Church against our Opinion we shou'd be apt to think the fault may be in our selves and that 't is for want of understanding and insight for want of use and Tryal and by reason of some prejudices that we thus differ in our judgment from them We see what little things do determine men ordinarily in these matters how addicted they are to their own ways and customs and therefore we shou'd think again So may we be reconcil'd to the rites of a Church as we are to the customs and habits of a Nation which at first seem as indecent as the Ceremonies of a Church can do In short we have reason to suspect 't is a Zeal without Knowledge when we presume to set our Judgment Reason and Experience against the Judgment Reason and Experience of the Christian World IV. I am now to shew in the last place how we are to determine our selves in the use of indifferent things with respect to the worship of GOD. 1. Then as particular Persons solitary and alone we may forbear to use what is indifferent when no Law of Man requires it and we may freely use it when no Law of Man forbids it 2. In our conversation with others we must so use our Liberty as shall be less to the prejudice and more to the benefit of those we converse with We may act or forbear in complyance with Persons of weaker Judgment But 3. as we are Members of a Church we are to obey the commands of it For if the not grieving a Brother or endangering his Soul obliges us to restrain the exercise of our Liberty much more do's the Peace of the Church oblige us to the same Let every one please his neighbour for his good to Edification Rom. 15.2 that is to his improvement in Knowledge Grace or Piety and the promoting of Concord and Charity Now Edification is chiefly so
all successive Ages of the World I desire them to consider 1. That there is no promise of such a gift by vertue of the New Covenant and therefore no reason to expect the continuance of it and 't is presumtion to promise our selves what God has not promis'd us For as for the Spirit of Supplications Zac. 12.10 't is plain that 't is the same with the Spirit of Grace or of inward Piety and devotion But that there is no such Promise in the New Covenant is evident from what is acknowledg'd on all hands viz. That there are many good Christians who cou'd never pretend to any such Inspiration For all good Christians have a Right to the blessings of the New Covenant and I am very confident 't wou'd be look'd upon by all sober Dissenters as a very rash and unjust censure to affirm that a Man cannot be a good Christian who do's not Pray by immediate Inspiration but is alwaies fain to depend either on his own invention or a Form 2. That as there is no Promise so there is no need of any such immediate Inspiration 'T is true the Spirit will assist us in all necessary things wherein our duty and Spiritual Life are concern'd but 't is an unwarrantable presumtion to expect an immediate Inspiration in Prayer because there is no necessity of it For 1. As for the Matter of our Prayers the Holy Spirit has already sufficiently reveal'd it to us in the Gospel and as plainly instructed us what we are to pray for as he can be suppos'd to do by any immediate Inspiration And therefore to suppose after all a necessity of immediate Inspiration is in effect to suppose that We have neither reason enough to understand the sense of plain Words nor memory enough to retain it But say the Dissenters We know not what to Pray for as we ought but the Spirit it self maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered Rom. 8.26 and therefore we cannot in all cases know the Matter of our Prayers without immediate Inspiration But I answer that the words relate not to the matter but to the Manner of our Prayers What to Pray for as we ought we know not that is we know not how to Pray with that fervency and resignation which we ought unless the Spirit assist us 2. As for the words of Prayer there is no necessity they shou'd be immediately dictated to us since we may use Forms and those Forms with small additions may be adapted to all particular Cases and Circumstances 3. If Prayers are Inspir'd they are equal to Scripture and are infallible and the Word of God because whatever God inspires must needs be so But this I am sure no sober Dissenter will presume to say 4. There is no sign of this immediate Inspiration remaining among us Heretofore all Inspiration was attested by Miracles but the pretended Inspiration of Prayer has no Miracles to warrant it Whereas if the Inspiration be continu'd 't is requisite that proper signs shou'd be continu'd that so we may be able to distinguish that which is Divine from that which is Natural or Diabolical If it be said that the Scripture is sufficient to distinguish them I answer that tho' the Scripture may be sufficient to distinguish whether the Matter of the Inspiration be true or false yet it 's not sufficient to distinguish the Inspiration it self whether it be Divine or Natural or Diabolical For 1. 'T is certain a Man may Pray agreeably to Scripture by Natural Inspiration that is by a Natural or accidental fervency of temper as might be prov'd by many instances And in this case how shall he know by Scripture whether his present Inspiration be Natural or Divine 'T will be said perhaps that God Inspires good Men with fervency in Prayer and yet this fervency sometimes proceeds from temper of body and why do's not the want of a sign to distinguish conclude against the Inspiration of fervency as well as against the Inspiration of the Matter and Words of Prayer I answer that we have a Promise of the Spirit 's assistance for the fervency of our Prayers but not for the Matter or Words of them Besides we may easily distinguish whether the Inspiration of fervency be Natural or Divine by our own sense If it be accompany'd with a fixt and constant Devotion of Soul 't is Divine but if it be only a sudden fit and leaves us habitually indevout we have just reason to think it Natural But we cannot distinguish by Scripture between one and the other for both may be agreeable to Scripture And can it be imagin'd that had God meant to continue the gift of Inspiration to us he wou'd have left us thus in the dark concerning it without any certain sign to distinguish whether it be from his Spirit or from an ill-affected spleen or a fever 2. As for Diabolical Inspirations we have sundry instances such as Wier Hacket D. George and John Basilides Duke of Russia who had such gifts of Prayer as ravish'd the Auditors and in the opinion of the most impartial seem'd to exceed the power of Nature and made many think them immediately Inspir'd by God Now since by such Inspirations the Devil may sometimes serve his own ends by recommending false Teachers c. we may reasonably suppose he do's use that method And since he may Inspire Men with such Matter of Prayer as is agreeable to Scripture we cannot by Scripture certainly distinguish between his Inspiration and that of the Spirit But surely 't is blasphemy to think that if God had continu'd this gift of Inspiration he wou'd leave us without a sign to distinguish it from that which is Diabolical And since there is no sign we have all the reason in the world to think the gift is ceas'd But farther we have not only no certain sign of the Divine Inspiration of conceiv'd Prayers but many very certain ones of the contrary I will instance in four 1. The great impertinence nonsence and rudeness to say no worse that are sometimes mingled with these Extempore Prayers and which we cannot attribute to the Holy Ghost without blasphemy 2. That they are so generally tinctur'd with the particular Opinions of those that offer them Whether this be not so I appeal to all the world and if it be so then surely they are not Inspir'd For either we must suppose this gift of Inspiration to be consin'd to one party which wou'd be to stint the Spirit with a witness or else we must blasphemously say the Spirit Inspires contradictions and indites contrary Prayers to Men of opposite Parties 3. Another plain sign that conceiv'd Prayers are not Inspir'd is that that which gives them the reputation of being so is not so much the Matter as the manner of expressing them As for the Matter I suppose the Dissenters will not deny but our Forms may equal at least if not excell their conceiv'd Prayers and therefore all the
nothing can be distinctly heard To this I answer that those who can read may bring Books and those that cannot may attend to those that are near Nay I have been credibly inform'd that some devout People that cou'd never read have attain'd to an ability of reciting most of the Psalms without book by often hearing them in those Churches where they are alternately recited I shall add that for the most part the Psalms are recited alternately in those Churches only where it may be reasonably presum'd that the whole Congregation can read very few excepted Now if the People may join in Vocal Praise why may they not also join in Vocal Prayer If it be said there is some example or warrant in Scripture for the one but not for the other it seems to be a good answer that there is such a parity of reason as that the express warrant of Scripture for the one is an imply'd warrant for the other I have already shewn Chap. 3. that the People's joining in Vocal Prayer was very anciently practis'd and if this was the Primitive way 't is probable that it was the way in the Apostles times I know 't is objected that the People's speaking to God in the Church is disorderly and a breaking in upon the Minister's office But will they say that the Children of Israel intrench'd upon the Priest when they all bowed themselves upon the Pavement and worshipped the Lord and prais'd him saying for he is good for his mercy endureth for ever 2 Chron. 7.3 Ecclesiastical Order is secur'd by the Minister's presiding in God's public Worship and guiding the performance of it but not to allow the People to make an Audible confession of sin after the Minister nor to utter some few affectionate Petitions and those very short to which they are also invited and â—â—ted by him seems rather to favour of an affectation of undue superiority over the People than to proceed from any fear of the Minister's office being invaded Some urge that Women are forbidden to speak in the Church 1 Cor. 14.34 but this is strangely misapply'd to the Matter in hand For 't is plain that the speaking mention'd by the Apostle signifies nothing but Prophesying Interpreting Preaching and Instructing and that the reason why he will not allow this to the Woman is because Preaching implies Authority whereas the Woman's part is obedience and subjection They that will read the whole Chapter will find that this is the meaning of St. Paul 5. I proceed in the next place to consider whether there be any just cause to find fault with the reading of the Apocryphal Lessons in our Church Now if Sermons and Catechizing be allowable besides the Word of God why may not some Apocryphal Lessons be read which contain excellent Rules of life Especially since those Writings were greatly esteemed by the Church in its purest Ages when they and other human writings also were publicly read as well as the Scriptures and those Chapters of the Old Testament which are omitted do either recite Genealogies or the Rules of the Levitical Service or matters of fact deliver'd in other Chapters that are read or which are hard to be understood If it be said that because the Scripture is all of Divine Authority 't is more profitable to read any part of that than any other good Lesson I answer that then no place will be left for Sermons which are no more of Divine Authority than the Apocryphal Lessons There is no danger of any person 's mistaking the Apocryphal Lessons for Canonical Scripture because the Church speaks so plainly in her Sixth Article nor do we read them otherwise than the antient Church did I shall only add that no Apocryphal Lesson is read upon any Lord's Day in the Year and as for other exceptions I refer the Reader to Dr. Falkener's Libertas Eccles p. 164 c. 6. If any object against our Standing at the Creed Mr. Baxter saies his judgment is for it where it is required and where not doing it wou'd be aivisive and scandalous Nay elsewhere he saies that 't is a convenient praising gesture c. See his Christ Direct p. 858. I proceed now to the Vindication of the Litany against which 't is pleaded 1. That the People utter the Words of invocation in the Litany for the most part the Minister all the while suggesting the matter of it to them But this Objection is of no force if what I have said concerning the lawfulness of allowing the People an interest in Vocal Prayer be admitted If it be said that the People bear too considerable a part to the disparagement of the Minister's office I answer that 't is a great mistake For 1. tho' the People say Good Lord deliver us and We beseech thee to hear us Good Lord yet the Minister saies the other and the far greater part of the Prayer 2. They are but these Two short and known Petitions which are excepted against and if the People may be allowed any part in Vocal Prayer I know of nothing more proper than these nor are they repeated but when they are apply'd to new and distinct matter Besides they relieve our attention and cherish our warm affections in Prayer and I could almost appeal to the keenest of our Adversaries whether if Good Lord deliver us were apply'd but once in gross to that part of the Litany we shou'd not be more apt to languish in the offering it up than as it is now ordered But 3. 'T is plain that in those Prayers the Minister has the principal and guiding part in that he utters all the distinct matter of the Prayer which the People do not whereas he utters words of invocation as well as they And consider I pray whether if the People were to utter that which is the Minister's part now and the Minister to say that only which is theirs we shou'd not have more grievous complaints that the Minister's authority was slighted in the whole design since he seem'd only to learn from the People what the Congregation was to pray for 2. 'T is Objected that we pray to be deliver'd from all deadly sin which seems to imply that there are some sins which are not deadly Now in answer to this it is by some truly enough said that these words do not necessarily imply a distinction between sins that are and sins that are not deadly But admitting that such a distinction were intended yet we must observe that tho' all sin be in its own nature deadly or damnable yet thro' the Mercy of God and the Merits of Christ sins of mere infirmity are not imputed and therefore not deadly to us But there are some sins so heinous that he who commits them is thereby put into a damnable state and 't is of such sins as these that this passage is to be understood as appears by Deadly Sin being added to Fornication from Fornication and all other Deadly Sin Good Lord deliver us
of Grace and receive a right to eternal Life I cannot deny but they may be sav'd without Baptism by the uncovenanted Mercy of God but then the hopes of God's mercy in extraordinary cases ought not to make us less regardful of his sure ordinary and covenanted Mercies and the appointed Means to which they are annex'd Nay Infants do by Baptism acquire a present right unto all the Promises of the Gospel and particularly to the promises of the Spirit 's assistance which they shall certainly receive as soon and as fast as their natural incapacity removes Now since these are the benefits of Baptism and since Infants are capable of them let any impartial Man judge whether it is more for their benefit that they shou'd receive them by being Baptiz'd in their infancy or stay for them till they come to years of discretion Is it better for a Child that has the Evil to be touch'd for it while he is a Child or to wait till he is of sufficient Age to be sensible of the benefit Or is it best for a Traytor 's Child to be presently restor'd to his Blood and Estate and his Prince's Favour or to be kept in a mere capacity of being restor'd till he is a man I must add that Baptism laies such an early pre-engagement upon Children as without the highest baseness and ingratitude they cannot afterwards retract For there is no person of common Ingenuity Honour or Conscience but will think himself bound to stand to the Obligation which he contracted in his Infancy when he was so graciously admitted to so many blessings and privileges before he cou'd understand his own good or do any thing himself towards the obtaining of them And therefore the Wisdom of the Church is highly to be applauded for bringing them under such a beneficial pre-engagement and not leaving them to their own liberty at such years when Flesh and Blood wou'd be apt to find out so many shifts and excuses and make them regret to be Baptiz'd 2. Infant-Baptism is very Expedient because it conduces much to the Well-being and Edification of the Church in preventing those scandalous and shameful delays of Baptism which grown Persons wou'd be apt to make in these as they did in former times to the great prejudice of Christianity Since therefore Infant-Baptism is not only Lawful and commanded by the Church but most Expedient in it self and most agreeable to the practice of the Apostles and Primitive Christians and to the Will of Christ it must needs be concluded that there lies the same obligation upon Parents to desire Baptism for their Children as there do's upon grown Persons to desire it for themselves For what Authority soever exacts any thing concerning Children or Persons under the years of discretion laies at least an implicit obligation upon Parents to see that it be perform'd For if in the time of a general contagion the Supreme Power shou'd Command that all Men Women and Children shou'd every Morning take such an Antidote that Command wou'd oblige Parents to give it to their Children as well as to take it themselves Just so the Ordinance of Baptism being intended for Children as well as grown Persons it must needs oblige the Parents to bring them to it What I have here said about the obligation which lies upon Parents to bring their Children to Baptism concerns all Guardians c. to whose care Children are committed And if any ask at what time they are bound to bring them to Baptism I answer at any time for the Gospel indulges a discretional latitude but forbids the wilful neglect and all unreasonable and needless delays thereof V. As to Communion with Believers who were Baptiz'd in their Infancy 't is certainly Lawful and has ever been thought so nay 't is an exceeding great sin to refuse Communion with them because that wou'd be a disowning those to be Members of Christ's Body whom he owns to be such Nothing now remains but that I take off two objections First 'T is said that Infant-Communion may be practis'd as well as Infant-Baptism But I answer 1. There is not equal Evidence for the Practice of Infant-Communion because St. Cyprian is the first Author which they can produce for it and then the Author of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy and Cyril of Jerusalem mention it towards the latter end of the Fourth Century and St. Austin in the Fifth whereas for Infant-Baptism we have the Authority of St. Cyprian and a whole Council of Fathers over which he Presided of Origen Tertullian Irenaeus St. Jerom St. Ambrose St. Chrysostom St. Athanasius Gregory Nazianzen and the Third Council of Carthage who all speak of it as a thing generally practis'd and most of them as of a thing which ought to be practis'd in the Church I may add that none of the Four Testimonies for Infant-Communion speak of it as of an Apostolical Tradition as Origen do's of Infant-Baptism 2. There is not equal Reason for the Practice of it For Persons of all Ages are capable of Baptism but the Holy Eucharist is the Sacrament of Perfection instituted for the remembrance of Christ's Death and Passion which being an act of great Knowledge and Piety Children are not capable to perform Nor is there an equal concurrence of Tradition or the Authority of so many Texts of Scripture for Infant-Communion it being grounded only upon John 6.53 Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood ye have no life in you Now 't is doubtful whether this be meant of the Eucharist or no because it was not as yet instituted but if it be so to be understood yet the sence of it ought to be regulated by the chief end of its Institution Do this in remembrance of me Nay the Western Church discerning the Mistake upon which Infant-Communion was grounded have long since laid it aside tho' they still continue the practice of Infant-Baptism But in truth the practice of Infant-Communion is so far from prejudicing the Cause of Infant-Baptism that it mightily confirms it because none were or cou'd be admitted to partake of the Holy Communion till they were validly Baptiz'd And therefore the practice of Infant-Communion fully proves that all the Churches wherein it ever was or still (e) As in the Greek Russian and Abyssin Churches and among the Christians of St. Thomas in the Indies is practis'd were of opinion that the Baptism of Infants is as Valid and Lawful as that of grown Persons Secondly 't is objected that Children who have not the use of Reason cannot know what a Covenant means and therefore they cannot contract and stipulate tho' St. Peter says the Baptism which saveth us must have the Answer or Restipulation of a good Conscience towards God To this I Answer 1. That this Objection is as strong against Infant-Circumcision as against Infant-Baptism 2. That God was pleas'd to Seal the Covenant of Grace unto Circumcis'd Infants upon an implicite and imputative
Table-gâ—sture and expresses Fellowship with Christ c. This is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace and yet 't is not accounted an additional Sacrament to that of the Lord's Supper 4. And lastly Suppose that an Independent when he is admitted into their Church-Covenant shou'd signify his assent by holding up his hand or the like this is an outward and visible sign of no less then a new state of life that is of being made a Member of Christ's Church and being engaged to all the duties and instated in all the Privileges of it and yet this was never charg'd upon them by the Presbyterians as introducing a New Sacrament Now from all these instances 't is evident how unreasonable a thing it is that our using the sign of the Cross in token that hereafter he the Infant shall not be asham'd to confess the Faith of Christ crucify'd c. shou'd be thought an adding of a New Sacrament of the Cross to that of Baptism But 't is objected that our Convocation c. 30. declares That by the sign of the Cross the Infant is Dedicated c. Now say they Baptism is it self a Seal of Dedication to God and therefore our Dedicating the Infant by our own invented way of the sign of the Cross is adding a New Sacrament To this I answer that Dedication may properly signify a Confirmation of our first Dedication to God and a Declaration of what the Church thinks of a Baptiz'd Person and the sign of the Cross is the Medium of this Declaration That this is the meaning of our Church is evident if we compare the Office of Baptism and the Canon together Both the Rubric and Canon say that Baptism is compleat without the sign of the Cross It is expresly said We receive this Child into the Congregation of Christ 's Flock and upon that do sign it with the Cross So that the Child is declar'd to be within the Congregation of Christ 's Flock before 't is sign'd with the Cross Since therefore the Person is Dedicated in Baptism and the Baptism is acknowledg'd compleat without or before the sign of the Cross we cannot be thought to Dedicate in Baptism and to Dedicate by the Cross again but the Dedication by the Cross must be something very distinct from the Dedication of Baptism that is the one is the sign of the Dedication and the other the Dedication it self So that this is plainly no other than a Declaration the Church makes of what the Baptiz'd Person is admitted to and what engagement he lies under Which Declaration is therefore made in the name of the Church in the Plural number We receive this Child c. and do sign him with the sign of the Cross c. whereas in Baptism the Minister alone as the immediate Agent of Christ pronounces in the singular number I Baptize thee in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost From what has been said I hope it appears that our Office of Baptism has nothing in it that may in the least justify a separation from us CHAP. VII Objections against our Communion-Office and particularly that of kneeling at the Sacrament Answer'd THO' the Communion-Office for the Gravity and Holiness thereof is preferr'd by the Dissenters before all other Offices in the Common-Prayer-Book yet it has not past free from exception For I. 'T is objected against it that the Petition in the Prayer before Consecration That our sinful Bodies may be made clean by his body and our Souls wash'd by his most precious Blood implies that the Blood of Christ has greater efficacy than his Body inasmuch as the Soul is said to be cleans'd by the Blood of Christ and only the Body by Christ's Body But I answer that at the delivery of the Bread and Wine the Priest saies The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy Body and Soul unto everlasting Life and The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which was c. And therefore 't is plain that our Church teaches that the Sanctification and Salvation of our Souls and Bodies flow from the Body as well as the Blood of Christ Nor do's the mentioning of one alone exclude the other for the Apostle speaks sometimes of the Bread alone 1 Cor. 10.17 and sometimes of the Wine alone 1 Cor. 12.13 and yet all Men must grant that he meant both II. 'T is said that Christ did not deliver the Elements into every Person 's hands with a Form of words recited to every one of them as we do But I answer 1. That this do's not appear from Christ's words for the Evangelists may well be suppos'd to give a short account of the Institution and then what might be particularly said or done to every one wou'd be sufficiently related in being said to be done or spoken to all 2. Suppose that our practice do's vary from this circumstance of the Institution it may be as easily defended as celebrating the Lord's Supper at Dinner-time and not at Supper which the Dissenters themselves do not scruple 3. Our Saviour commanded his Disciples Matth. 28.19 to Teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost But will any Man think that when great numbers are to be Baptiz'd together the Form of Baptizing in the Name of the Father c. may not lawfully be express'd severally to every Person And why then may not the same be done in the Lord's Supper Wherefore the practice of our Church herein is no way unsutable to the Institution of Christ or the nature of the Sacrament and the alteration of it wou'd be for the worse and abate the Solemnity of its Administration See Falkner 's Libert Eccles p. 218 c. III. The last and great objection is against the posture of kneeling at the Sacrament and therefore I shall consider it largely and endeavour to shew 1. That Christ has not forbidden us to kneel at the Sacrament 2. That kneeling is not a deviation from his Example 3. That 't is not unsutable for its being no Table-gesture 4. That 't is not contrary to the practice of the Church in the best and purest Ages 5. That kneeling is not therefore unlawful because 't was introduced by Idolaters and is still notoriously abus'd by the Papists to Idolatrous ends and purposes First then Christ has not forbidden us to kneel at the Sacrament For in all the Scriptures God has not given us any express command to determine our practice one way or other and if Authority did not restrain our Liberty we might either sit kneel or stand without the least violation of the Law of God The Apostles and Disciples of our Lord at the Institution of the Sacrament which the Scripture relates in several places (a) Matth. 26.26 c. Mark 14.22 c. Luke 22.19 c. 1 Cor. 11.23 c. were the Representatives