The Protestant religion truely stated and justified by the late Reverend Mr. Richard Baxter ; prepared for the press some time before his death ; whereunto is added, by way of preface, some account of the learned author, by Mr. Danel Williams and Mr. Matthew Sylvester.

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 whe∣ther 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 Bles∣sing with the Cross? An Angel in prophe∣tical 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 what∣ever Plague or Death God bid Angels ex∣ecute 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 bet∣ter 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 Idola∣trous Persecuting Rome that was to be de∣stroyed, and it was those that had Gods

mark, and not the Beasts that were to be secured. And who is that Idolatrous per∣secuting 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 Cros∣sing 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 Pro∣testants?

3. And though those called Non-Con∣formists, are not for the using of it as a dedicating Symbol of Christianity in Bap∣tismal Covenanting, to bind the Covenan∣ter to that Confession and holy warfare which is the promised duty of the Cove∣nant, 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 Bap∣tism;) 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.)