Against Symbolizing with Antichrist in Ceremonies, Part · Chapter 2 · Section 36 [i.e. 35]
#Sect. 36. The fourth ſinne that maketh this Croſſe Sacramentale in theſe words, we receiue this child into the congregation of Chriſtes flocke.
THe fourth point which maketh the Croſſe a ſacramentale vnlawfully added is the complement of a word wherwith it is graced (to witt) this: Sect. 36.We receiue this child into the Congregation of Christes flocke, and ſigne is with the ſigne of the Croſſe, in token that heereafter he ſhall not be aſhamed to confeſſe the faith of Christ crucified, & manfully to fight vnderunder his banner against the fleſh, the worlde, and the Deuill, and to continue his faithfull ſouldiour vntounto his liues ende. Heerein we cannot denie but that wee are paſt the auncient boundes. We ſtande on the Fathers, but which of them (tell me) vſed the Croſſe with any worde annext vntounto it, and not rather as aaPerk. problem. in figno crue▪ ſect. 5. geſture of prayer either explicit or implicit at the leaſt, and that not by it ſelfe exiſtent, but ſubſiſtent in prayer? Leaſt this ſhould ſeeme ſtraunge vntounto vsus, we muſt conſider that the ſigne of impoſition of handes was at the firſt no other (as theſe wordes ofbAuguſt de bapt. cont. Donatiſt. Auguſt. ſhew) Quid eſt impoſitio manaum nifi invocatio ſuprà hominem. And ofcTertul. lib. de bapt. Tertullian, Dehine manus imponitur per benedictionē aduocans & inuitans ſpiritum ſanctum. And laſtly of Hierome, dHieron, aduerſ. Luciferian.Epiſcopus ad invocationem ſpiritus manum impoſiturus excurrit. The Oyle likewiſe at the firſt had no word ceremoniall annext vntounto it: neither was it vſed without prayer, as now we vſe the croſſe.eAmbroſ. de iis qui initiant. myſter. cap. 7. Ambroſe witneſſeth it had this prayer, Deus omnipotens qui te regenera…t ex aqua & ſpiritu ſancto, remiſit que peccata tua, ipſe te vngat in vitam aternam. fAuguſt. ſerm. 19. de ſanct.Auguſtine ſaith of the croſſe it ſelfe (if the wordes be his own) hoc facit cum fideli invocatione nominis Chriſti victorioſae Crucis inſignita memoria. To conclude, Mr Bucer gBucer. Canſur. cap. 12 479.wiſhed the words of the Croſſe were turned to a prayer. Howbeit there be who thinke the croſſe the more tollerable euen for this words ſake, becauſe it declareth to what end we vſe it, & ſo diſtinguiſheth it from the croſſe popiſh. Firſt, Caſſander vſed this apologie, for the conſecrating of the water by the croſſe and for other groſſe ceremonies: Iſtae ceremoniae (ſaieth he) mouent hominù animos ſi accedas interpretatio & intelligentia. Which, while ourhHerman. Hamelmā. detradit. p. 1. lib. 4. colum. 374. writers refure as friuolous, we by this ſacramētal word which we giuegive vntounto the croſſe in practiſe iuſtifie. But by this meanes the croſſe becometh ſignum commonefaciens, and is not mute Not ſo. For this ſignum lChemnit. exam. part. 2. fol. 38.commonefaciens which our writers do approue, is that which ſpeaketh out of the word which the ſigne of the Croſſe doth not. When the Gentiles obiected that there were many myſteries ſignified in the hiſtories of their Gods, Arnobius replied,mArnob. cont. Gent. lib. 5. Chriſtiano ſatis eſt quod ſcriptū eſt, & quod auditur, accipe…e. So let the croſſe ſpeak what myſteries he can, in this his ſacramētal word, if he ſpeak not out of the ſcripturs, we Chriſtians care not for it. Mr nIoh. Caluin. lib 4. inſtitut. cap. 10.Caluin knew the popiſh ceremonies doe admoniſh by the word of mā (& the croſſe doth no more) who (yet) termeth them dumbe & ſeparat from doctrine. To Martial obiecting That the church had ordained the croſſe for a remēbrance of Chriſtes paſsion. oD. Fulke reioynd. art. 3. pag. 157.D. Fulk thus replieth: Chriſt cōmitted to the prelats the gouernment of his church to feed it with his worde, & not with dumbe ſignes and dead jmages, ſuch as he hath forbiddē. HaueHave we not here the Croſſe termed [A dumbe ſigne] & no teacher, becauſe he ſpeaketh out of the mouth of the Prelates of the church only? Secondly, what though the addition of this worde did open the mouth of the Croſſe and make him a teacher? this helpeth not as longe as he is a ſuperfluous reacher, and a teacher that is vnlawfull. Superfluous he is, becauſe the common plea againſt Images lyeth flat againſt him.pIoſias Simler. in Exod. 20. fol. 86. Quod ſierudiunt vel abſque interprete id faciunt vel opus habent iuterprete. abſque interprete mutae ſunt. Quod ſi autem verbis docendum eſt, poteru id abſque ijs commodi…is fieri. He is alſo a teacher vnlawfull. God will not hauehave his Church taught by the Deuill. and the ſigne of the Croſſe is a Deuill. Who wil hauehave his childe taught by a papiſt? but the ſigne of the Croſſe is popiſh. Mark 1.25. Apoc. 9.20.In the third place, he is a teacher inſufficient. When Mariall affirmeth that Images teach like the worde, and the worde becommeth a ſcandall to diuerſe aſwell as Images:qD. Fulke reioind. artic. 9. pag. 201. D. Fulke replyeth that the ſcriptures doe plainly condemne the errours and vice to which they are wreſted: whereas Croſſes and Images doe not for. Although then it be true, what this Sacramentall word of the Croſſe doeth teach yet it cannot be approued as long as it teacheth inſufficientlie: and do not like the ſcripture condemne the vices and the errors to which his worde is areſted In that monument of the Croſſe which Costantine the great ſat vp, this word was annextrNicephor. Caliſt. hiſtor. lib. [ne…s vinae which, though it were good, yet did it hurt, men heereby grew into a conceit that the Croſſe was a choſen inſtrument of Chriſt, to ouercome by. which eftſoones falleth out in the worde of our Croſſe. Becauſe (like the ſcripture) it doeth not pretende all occaſions of ſuch errour▪ neither teacheth any one leſſon againſt the ſame. So farre of the worde of the Croſſe in generall. Now to the forme in which it ſpeaketh, and to the matter what.
The forme cannot be denied to be Sacramentall, like vntounto theſe,sDurant. de rit. lib. 1. c. 19. ſect. 33 vngo te oleo, I anoynt thee with oyle. tBellarm. de confirmat. cap. 10.Conſignote ſigno ſanctae Crucis, & Chriſmo te oleo ſalutis. I ſigne thee with the ſigne of the Croſſe, and annoint thee with the oyle of ſaluation. Compare with theſe, the forme how our Croſſe doeth ſpeake, Wee receiue: Wee ſigne, &c. ſpeakes it not as the popiſh Oyle ſpeaketh in Baptiſme, and in the ſacrament of Confirmation: to partake with the iniquitie of them? It may be added, it ſpeaketh like the water in Baptiſme (I Baptize) to ſteale away the honor of it. As for the Quidditi which ſome hauehave light on, the Miniſter ſaith not [I ſigne] &c. as he ſaith in the water [I Baptize] but [We receiue, and we ſigne] it maketh no materiall difference, as a groſſe papiſt him ſelfe will yeeld:uIoh. Molan. de Sacrament. c. 3. cocluſ. 4. in hac forma [Ego] non eſt planè neceſſarium: Et ſi commutetur in (Nos) non vitiatur forma. But when the Booke ſaith (We receiue) it ſpeaketh in the perſon of the Congregation. And ſpeaketh it in the perſon of the Miniſter onelyonly, when it ſaieth, [I Baptize]? If it doe, the Miniſter may ſay [We Baptize] if he liſt you ſee, and ſo take in the Congregation. But this is the verie ſame miſerable ſhifte which is vſed when men excuſe the infantes Credo & volo Baptizari, when yet he hath neither any faith, nor deſire to be baptized. Forſooth he ſpeaketh not this (ſaywIacob. a Vitriac. hiſtor. Occidental. lib. 2. cap. 36. ſome) in his owne perſon, but in the perſon of the Congregation. Which, how like you? is it not acute like the other? Be they ſpoken in whoſe perſon they may be, the wordes are ſtill ſacramentall, vniting the Croſſe to the other partes, and to the other actions of the ſacrament, as both the precedencies and the ſequencies ſhewe. Before the Booke maketh requeſt for the Infantes that are to be dedicated to God by our office and miniſterie. Compare theſe wordes with the Canon that telleth vsus, the childe baptized is dedicated to God by the ſigne of the Croſſe which followeth them. After, the Booke directeth vsus to giuegive thankes that the childe is receiued into the Congregation. Compare theſe with the wordes of the Croſſe to which they hauehave relation, yea which they repeate, and whereby the infant was receyued: and tell me whether the Booke doeth not incorporate the ſigne of the Croſſe into the Sacramentall actions: ſeeinge this, it combyneth and knittes it to them both, à priori and à poſteriori, as it were with a couple of ſtrong cordes, neuer to be vnlooſed by them who ſay, the Croſſe cometh after Baptiſme, and if not morallie, at the leaſt a part thereof: vnles they take vp the ſword of Alexander (that which alreadie they begin to doe): to cut off with violence, what they cannot by art vntie.