The Protestant Religion Truly State and Justified, Part 49
The One and Fiftieth accuſed Point.
That Bleſſing or ſigning with the ſign of the Croſs, is not founded in Holy Scripture.
Anſ. The man would not tell you whether he mean the Lawfulneſs of the Croſs only, or alſo the neceſſity of uſing it. But what are his Proofs?
1. Rev. 7.3. Hurt not the Earth, nor the Trees, till we have ſealed, (we read ſigned,) the Servants of our God in their foreheads.
Is here any mention of Croſſing or Bleſſing with the Croſs? An Angel in prophetical Viſion, is bid to mark or ſeal the Servants of God, as thoſe that are not to be deſtroyed, when God commiſſioneth other Angels to deſtroy the Perſecutors: Therefore the Prieſt muſt ſign all Chriſtians with the Croſs. And I would they did not infer as one did from Ezek. 9.4, 5. [And to the other he ſaid, go ye after him through the City and ſmite; let not your Eye ſpare, neither have ye pity, ſtay utterly Old and Young, and little Children and Women; but come not near any man on whom is the mark, and begin at my Sanctuary.] And thus whatever Plague or Death God bid Angels execute on his uncurable Enemies, Idolaters, and Perſecutors, the Devil will teach men, that Prieſts and their Hang-men may execute on all that are not marked in the Forehead with a Croſs? But as long as Rome is ſo like to Babylon, they were better teach men a truer Expoſition of the Revelations. Thus they can prove, that the Scripture is but like a Noſe of Wax, by uſing it as if it were ſo. It was Idolatrous Perſecuting Rome that was to be deſtroyed, and it was thoſe that had Gods mark, and not the Beaſts that were to be ſecured. And who is that Idolatrous perſecuting Beaſt?
The next Text is Mark 10.16. Chriſt put his hands on Children, and bleſſed them▪ And would he make men believe, that we deny Chriſts bleſſing them or others? Or that Paſtors may bleſs the people in his Name? Is here ever a word of ſigning with the Croſs?
The other is Luke 24.50. He led them out as far as Bethany, and he lift up his hands and bleſſed them. Therefore the Prieſt muſt Croſs men in the Forehead: Reader, this is the faſhion of theſe Men's confuting the Reformed Catholicks, and proving Popery, and uſing Scripture. And have they not reaſon to challenge the ſole Interpreting of it? Let but the Pope and his Prieſts expound it, and it ſhall all ſpeak for them, and ſpeak Blood and Fire againſt all that obey them not: But till then, they are it's Enemies, becauſe it is the greateſt Enemy to them.
2. But ſuppoſe Chriſts bleſſing had been Croſſing: With what Face do they feign Proteſtants in England, to be againſt Croſſing in the Forehead? When the World knoweth that the Church of England is not only for it, but Ejecteth and Silenceth all Miniſters that will Baptize the Child of the moſt Godly Chriſtians without it. And they know that all the Churches called Lutheran uſe it. Are none of theſe Proteſtants?
3. And though thoſe called Non-Conformiſts, are not for the uſing of it as a dedicating Symbol of Chriſtianity in Baptiſmal Covenanting, to bind the Covenanter to that Confeſſion and holy warfare which is the promiſed duty of the Covenant, nor for denying Chriſtendom to thoſe that refuſe this uſe of the Croſs, (out of a fear leſt this Covenanting uſe make it a human Sacrament added to Baptiſm;) yet I meet with few of them that Condemn the ancient Chriſtians, that lived among Heathens, (who ſcorned them as worſhiping a Crucified God,) for their ſeaſonable Croſſing themſelves in thoſe Heathens ſight, meerly to ſhew that they were not aſhamed of ſuch a Crucified Saviour; (not thinking what Papiſts would bring it to at laſt.)