our glorying in the sufferings of Christ and 't is proper to make a Profession of doing so in our Baptism Therefore the Scriptures warrant our use of it in general and particularly at that time Admon p. 181 182 183. Since then may the Papists in Italy or Spain argue 't is our Duty to savour the things of God To have our Lips season'd with Wisdom and Grace To open our Ears to the Doctrine of Christ as becomes his Disciples To preserve our Garments clean by immaculate Purity of Life that we may appear faultless before the Tribunal of Christ To walk in the Light by a blameless observance of our Baptismal Vows that we may with the wise Virgins be admitted to the Heavenly Nuptials Nay since 't is as proper to make a Profession of all this in our Baptism as of Glorying in the sufferings of Christ And since the Scriptures warrant us to make that Profession not only by Words but also by such Actions as the Vniversal custom of our Country has made significant to those Vses we are thereby warranted to use all the Rites forementioned in the Celebration of Baptism since by the universal custom of our Country See Rit Rom. they are applied to signifie our obligation to these undoubted Duties of Christianity Nay the Bishop's Argument will go farther For since 't is as lawful to profess our Glorying in the sufferings of Christ in other parts of Religious Worship as in Baptism and universal custom has applied this Action to signifie our doing so why do we not imitate instead of blaming the Papists for their so frequently crossing themselves in all their Devotions Or rather since the Scriptures command us to express the inward religious sense of our Minds by Actions nay since as the Bishop asserts Scripture-Presidents not only warrant but oblige us to use such actions as well as words as by universal custom signifie our glorying in the sufferings of Christ How come we to lay aside so pious a custom so commendable nay so necessary an Expression of our devout respect to a crucified Saviour which we are not only warranted but oblig'd to use Nay as the Romish Church has in other parts of Divine Worship introduc'd a great number of Actions or Rites to express some part or other of our Christian Duty or Devotion and those Actions are rendred significant to that purpose by universal custom among those of that Church 't is plain by this Argument that all those Rites are warranted by Scripture and our first Reformers seem to have been very unreasonable in their Rejection of ' em So that this loose way of Reasoning will serve to worse purposes than I hope his Lordship ever design'd it For it will altogether as well fit the mouth of a Papist for justifying his observance of most of those numerous Rites and Ceremonies or in his Lordship's language significant Actions which their Church has enjoyn'd as it does his for justifying the Cross in Baptism If the Bishop should pretend that the numerousness of those Rites is the only fault of 'em he would do well to acquaint us where we may stop what number of 'em is innocent and what becomes sinfully excessive Thirdly I come to examine the Propositions the Bishop has laid down for proving the use of the Cross in Baptism to be warranted by Scripture and shew wherein I think his Argument in 'em weak and unconcluding That we are according to Proposition the first to express our inward Reverence or Worship of God by outward Means such as Praise Prayer c. will be freely granted That we are according to Proposition the second and third to express that inward Worship in general by such bodily Gestures as either nature or civil custom direct us to and render most fit to represent and testifie it to others by will be also own'd But I cannot so easily grant That the Scriptures warrant our expressing the sense of our Minds in all Religious Things or Matters by significant Actions The particular Duties we owe to God are almost numberless and if we were warranted by Scripture to express the Thoughts and Sense of our Mind as to each of 'em by some significant Rite and Ceremony the Romish Church would be sufficiently authoriz'd by Scripture in her introducing such a load of significant Rites and Ceremonies into Christian Religion Admon p. 181. especially if as the Bishop observes such significant Actions be more effectual and sincere expressions of the sense of our Minds then words Tho' then the Scriptures enjoyn Bodily Worship in general and consequently warrant all such devout Postures as either nature or civil custom has taught us to express it by as bowing prostration kneeling standing and in these parts of the world the mens being uncover'd yet they do not warrant us to contrive distinct significant Actions to express each distinct part of inward Worship as one to express our Faith in God another to express our Love to him another our Hope another our subjection to his Authority another our resignation to his disposal another our dread of his Justice c. So tho' we may testifie our Worship of Christ as the Incarnate Word by the forementioned Postures of Devotion yet the Scriptures no where warrant our contriving one significant Action or Rite to express but Believing his Gospel another to express our Reliance on the virtue of his Merits and Sacrifice another to signifie out subjection to his Royal Authority another to declare out glorying in his Cross or Sufferings Besides the Religious Postures that are expressive of Worship in general the Scriptures require no other External Rites as Signs of our particular respect to him besides those of being Baptiz'd in his Name and commemorating his Death by receiving the Bread and Wine as the sacred Memorials of it Therefore As to the fourth and fifth Proposition Tho' 't is our duty to glory in the sufferings of Christ yet the Scripture does not warrant much less oblige us as the Bishop adds to contrive any particular Rite or Ceremony to signifie it any more than to contrive such a Rite do signifie but belief of his Gospel or dependance on his Mediation or subjection to his Government The Scriptures command our expressing our inward Worship by Reverence in our Bodily Postures and consequently uncovering the Head is to us a Particular included in that general Precept But the Scripture no where commands us to signifie this particular Duty of glorying in the sufferings of Christ by any External Rites and therefore does not warrant any particular Rite for that end for that would have been to have left a Gap open for bringing in an endless Train of such significant Rites of our own devising into Christian Religion even such as would have made the Yoke of Christianity as heavy as that of Judaism once was As to the sixth and seventh Proposition it plainly follows from what has been suggested That if the Scripture neither
dissatisfaction with his Lordship will be easily inclin'd to believe this genuine Account of the Matter That he has mistaken their Silence for their Ignorance and concluded they could not repeat their Catechism because they would not admit him to be their Catechizer 2. He computes that there being but nine Meetings in the Diocese and taking one Meeting-house and one Lord's-day with another not 300 at each Meeting and there being 30000 Dissenters in the Diocese Admon p. 136. it may be thence concluded that only one in ten or thereabouts go to worship God any where on the Lord's-day And this he professes was a great grief to him Now as to this matter of fact I hope the Bishop cannot take it unkindly that I endeavour to allay his grief by offering him the following Account from the Dissenting Ministers in his Diocese In the Parish of Temple-more alias Derry there are two Meetings in which there will be found above 2400. who ordinarily worship God every Lord's-day For tho' every one of these does not attend every Lord's-day because some of 'em must be left to secure their houses yet these and more are ordinary Hearers as the Ministers of those two Congregations can undeniably prove by their Examination Rolls Nay the least Congregation among us are ordinarily 600 and some above a 1000 that do worship God every Lord's-day together So that where Ministers are settled in Parishes we do not know of one in 20 that do not ordinarily attend on publick worship And for those which the Bishop saith have not been at any publick worship these seven years we know none such of our Communion And for those places that are not furnisht with Ministers the Ministers that are setled supply 'em as frequently as their work in their own Congregations can allow Now if this Account be true the Bishop's Computation and the Conclusion he draws from it is far enough from being so And that there are yet some Congregations that want Ministers and can only have occasional supplies is much more their grief who are doing all they can to remedy it than it can be supposed to be his Lordship's who does all he can to lessen the number of their Meetings by obliging his Tenants to suffer neither Ministers nor Meeting-houses to be upon his Land 3. The Bishop pretends that his Book contains an Answer to what he found objected by those of the Dissenters Admon p. 137. that he convers'd with against the ordinary Lords-day worship in the establisht Church and that he confin'd himself to what he had seen and known to be their Opinion and Practice Ans 'T is evident by Mr. Craghead's Reply to his Discourse which Taxes him with the same Calumnies as the Remarks that if those Dissenters he Convers't with gave him that Account he pretends of these matters they were such as understood not the known Opinions or Practises of their own Teachers As when they alledg so many Reasons either against the lawfulness of all Forms of Prayer and against joyning in publick worship where they are used or against the publick reading the Scriptures or against all bodily worship c. And therefore if the Bp. had been ingenious in prosecuting what he now saith was his design he should have told us that he intended only by this Book to Correct the mistakes of a few Ignorant People that neither knew the Judgment of their Pastors nor the common Practise of the Congregations they Joyned with And that he intended not to charge the generality of the Dissenters even not those of his own Diocess with those weak Opinions and weaker Arguments and Objections which he endeavours to censure and confute But he has been so far from doing this that tho in the Conclusion of his Book he particularly Addresses himself to those of his Diocess yet in his very Entrance on his Subject he undertakes to represent the Practise of Dissenters in general or in his own terms of them that differ from the Establish't Church Nay Where he supposes his charge only to be true of those in the North of Ireland he takes care to confine it to them and therefore he gives us just ground to conclude that where he mentions the Dissenters without any such Restriction he is to be understood as speaking of the whole Body of them according to the very Titles of his several Chapters Praise Prayer Hearing Bodily Worship how practist among Dissenters And to Convince him of the Reasonableness of this I shall put a Parallel case to him Suppose I should write a Book about Ecclesiastical Discipline how Practised in the Establish't Church and among Dissenters and in the Account of the Practise of the Establisht Church should represent the sad neglect of all the Duties of their Function both by Bishops and Priests and accordingly should charge the Bishops with so many years Non-residence in which there had been no Consecration of Churches nor Confirmation of Children nor Ordination of Priests and the Priests with such neglect of their Cures as a great many in the Diocess of Down and Connor were Accus'd of And suppose I should particularly address this Book to the late Bishop and Clergy of that Diocess Would his Lordship in this case think me Excuseable from the guilt of Calumniating because I had particularly addrest this Discourse to them when I have not in the Body of the Book confined my Accusations to them but speak all along of the faults of the Conformable Bishops and Clergy in general without any such particular limitation or would he think me Ingenuous in producing such Arguments as the Bishop and Clergy of the forementioned Diocess may alledge to excuse themselves as the common Reasonings of the Conforming Clergy And yet this were of the two more justifiable than the Bishop's management of this Charge against Dissenters in which he has wronged the generality even of those to whom he now pretends that this Discourse was confined but much more the generality of the Dissenters against whom the greatest part of his Book is levell'd without any Distinction I confess to have told us plainly that he only Confuted the weak Discourses he had met with among some few of the Dissenting Laity would have lessened the Character of his Book by supposing the cause of the Dissenters to be little concerned in it and so probably the main Design of it to blast the Reputation of the whole Party had been frustrated by such an ingenuous Confession But without such an ingenuous Confession I do not see how 't is possible to excuse his Discourse from untruth and disingenuity either in attributing to Dissenters in general what is peculiar to those in the North of Ireland as in the Head of Frequent Communion or in ascribing to a whole Party without distinction so many Opinions Arguments and Practises as either none at all or none but very Weak and Ignorant People are chargeable with of which there are so many to be found in
Mistake and demands some place of Scripture to prove this Notion of a Sacraments being a Sign from us to God See Admon p. 180. I shall endeavour herein to give him all reasonable satisfaction And this Account of Sacraments I shall particularly prove in reference to Baptism which is the Sacrament in dispute That Baptism is a Sign from us to God of our Obligation to the Duties of his Covenant as well as a Sign from God to us of the Truth of his Promises is evident from the Apostle Peter's excellent Description of that Internal and Saving Baptism which the External Washing is the Sign of viz. 1 Pet. 3.25 That 't is not the putting away the filth of the Flesh i. e. Baptism is not meerly or principally that but the Answer of a good Conscience towards God Which words manifestly allude to the Covenant-Transaction that passes between the great God and the Adult Person baptiz'd for of such the Apostle here speaks and to the Questions that were to that end propos'd to such as receiv'd this Seal of God's Covenant They were ask't If they believ'd in the Lord Jesus with all their heart See 8 Acts 37. or as some ancient Christian Writers propose the Question If they recounc'd the Devil and his Angels the World and its Pomps If they believ'd in If they devoted themselves to the Father Son and Holy Ghost c. And their sincere Profession and Promise of doing so which in Baptism they ratified by this External Rite of Washing with Water is that which the Apostle here calls the Answer of a good Conscience towards God So that the Apostle was so far from supposing that Baptism was not a Sign from us to God that he rather defines it by this part of its end and use viz. To be a Solemn Rite whereby we profess to engage our Hearts to the Duties of his Covenant And indeed since Baptism is the Solemnizing a mutual Covenant between the Blessed God on the one part and our Selves or our Seed on the other it is first a Sign from us to God of our Consent to the proposed Terms of his Covenant before it can be a Sign from him to us of our or our Childrens interest in those Benefits of his Covenant that presuppose our consent as the Condition thereof 'T is the Baptism of Repentance for the Remission of Sins 1 Mark 4. and is therefore first a Sign of our Repentance towards God before it can be a Sign from him of the Remission of Sins And so 't is propos'd by the Apostle Peter at the first time we read of its Administration to his Adult Converts 2 Acts 38 39. Repent and be Baptized every one of you in the Name of Christ for the Remission of Sins for the Promise is unto you and your Children Where they were by Baptism first to profess their Repentance towards God and Faith in our Lord Jesus and then receive the promised Benefit Remission of Sins Nay Christ's own Command to his Apostles first to Disciple or Proselyte all Nations and then to Baptize 'em plainly implys that one great use of Baptism was to be a solemn Bond upon 'em to the Duties of that Christian Profession they had embrac'd and the Baptizing 'em in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit has been always suppos'd to imply a Solemn Dedication of 'em by this Sacred Rite to the Faith Worship and Service of that Blessed Trinity into whose Name they are Baptized There is in that Institution a Seal set to the Covenant of God on our part as well as on his To which 't is not improbable that those words of the Apostle Paul refer 2 Tim. 2.19 Nevertheless the Foundation or as some reader the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tabula contractus the Covenant of God stands sure having this Seal on God's part The Lord knows them that are his and this Seal on our part Let him that names the Name of Christ depart from iniquity As the Covenant is mutual so the External Rite is intended to ratifie our Restipulation as well as God's Promise and accordingly our breach of the Baptismal Covenant by Apostasie or Infidelity is Perjury and therefore so often in the Scripture Language represented by the breach of the Conjugal Vow that the Adulteress is guilty of And this Notion of Baptism as an obliging Sign from God to us is the more unreasonably deny'd by the Bishop if we consider that 't is this very use of Baptism that chiefly occasion'd the Name of a Sacrament being given to it because Baptism was reckon'd like the Military Oath of the Roman Soldiers as a solemn Listing the Person Baptiz'd into the Service and Warfare of Christ against the World the Flesh and the Devil So that the Bishop has excluded that from the nature and notion of a Sacrament which was the chief if not the only ground of this Rite of the Christian Religion being called one And it were as easie to shew the same concerning the other Institutions that are call'd Sacraments Thus as Circumcision was a Token of the Covenant between God and Abraham and his Seed in their Generations so 't was an obliging Sign on their part as well as on God's part It oblig'd them to receive and obey the Revelations of the Divine Will to ' em And hence after the delivery of the Law of Moses Circumcision was an External Bond on those that receiv'd it to observe that Law as the Apostle Paul plainly intimates to us 5 Gal. 3. He that was Circumcis'd made himself a Debtor to the Law to do it i. e. brought himself under a solemn Tye thereto by this External Rite That the Feasts upon Sacrifices under the Law were Foederal Rites in allusion to the general Custom of those Eastern Nations to Confirm mutual Covenants by Eating and Drinking together See 26 Gen. 30 31.31 Gen. 44 45 46. 9 Jos 14.41 Psal 9.5 Lam. 6. Obad. 7. v. is so largely prov'd by the Learned Dr. Cudworth in his excellent Treatise on the Lord's Supper and Feast upon a Sacrifice that I shall refer the Reader to it for fuller satisfaction And that one passage in the 50 Psalm v. 5. is sufficient to put it out of doubt Gather my Saints together those that have made a Covenant with me by Sacrifice Now the Covenant was made and celebrated not meerly by Offering it up but chiefly by their Religious Feast upon it And as the Lord's Supper succeeds in the place and stead of those Jewish Feasts upon Sacrifices so 't is evidently design'd as such a Foederal Rite whereby we renew our League of Peace with God upon the Memorials of the Attoning Sacrifice of his own Son by our renewed Consent to the Terms of his Covenant And hence the Apostle Paul warns his Corinthian Converts against the Idolatrous Practice of Feasting in the Temples of the Heathen Idols as inconsistent with the Obligations which their Feasting at the Lord's Table had laid upon
'em to be the Worshippers of the only true God who was too jealous of his own Honor to admit of any Rival in it See 1 Cor. 10 ch from the fourteenth to the twenty third verse 3. These Foederal Rites of Baptism and the Lord's Supper must be consider'd as intended also to be distinguishing Signs of our Christian Profession and the Relations which we are thereby invested in Thus our Baptism is the honourable Badge of our Discipleship whereby we are discriminated from the Infidel World We do hereby put on the Livery of Christ as those words of the Apostle Paul imply 3 Gal. 27. For a many of you as have been Baptized into Christ have put on Christ. And therefore he adds they were no more to be distinguish'd into Jew or Greek c. but all were one in Christ Jesus This one Livery was to be the common Sign of their belonging to him as their one Lord and Master And accordingly our partaking of one External Baptism is made a Mark and Character of those that belong'd to that one visible Body or Church of which Christ is the Lord and Head as our partaking of one Internal Baptism is the certain Mark of our belonging to the one invisible Church or mystical Body of Christ See 1 Eph. 4 5 6. To the same purpose we read elsewhere that we are by one Spirit baptized into one Body whether we be Jews or Gentiles whether we be bond or free and have been all made to drink into one Spirit The latter words of being made to drink into one Spirit according to the general consent of the best Expositers refer to the Lord's Supper as the former do to Baptism And the words plainly imply that Baptism and the Lord's Supper are the Symbol and the Bond of our External Communion as Members of the visible Church as by partaking of the sanctifying Operations of the same Holy Spirit we become Members of one mystical Body of Christ So that by our Baptism we are incorporated into the Christian Community and thereby discriminated in our right to its External Priviledges from them that are without who are yet Aliens and Foreigners And so by the Lord's Supper we are as partakers of Christ's Holy Table distinguish'd from them that partake of the Table of Devils and are in fellowship or Communion with them 1 Cor. 10.20 21. Thus was Circumcision the discriminating Mark of these that embrac'd the Faith of Abraham from such as were Aliens from the Commonwealth of Israel and Strangers to the Covenants of Promise Circumcised and Vncircumcised was equivalent to one that did or did not own the Jewish Religion Having thus far clear'd the general Nature and Vses of these two Institutions in the Christian Religion which we call Sacraments for all the particular uses of each of 'em I am not now concern'd to consider I come to apply this Account to the Matter in Debate And accordingly 't is obvious to any that shall consider the foregoing Account that there is one Vse of these Foederal or Sacramental Rites that does necessarily presuppose Divine Institution viz. Their being obliging signs on God's part to ratifie his Promises For it were too absurd for any to imagine that God will oblige himself by signs he never appointed for that end And therefore the Papists themselves pretend their new Sacraments to be Divine ones by feigning God's Institution for ' em When therefore I speak of a Human Sacrament I mean no more by it than an External Rite set up by meer Human Authority without any pretence of Divine Institution for several Sacramental Uses such as conconstitute it as truly a part of Religious Worship as Baptism and the Lord's Supper are So that it wants nothing but God's Instituting it to be a Seal to his part of the Covenant as Men have made it a Seal to their part to render it as proper a Sacrament as either of the two former And 't is only in this sense that I suppose the Cross to be made a Human Sacrament by the establisht Church 'T is made by 'em a Sacrament as far as Men can make one of a Religious Rite that they can pretend no Divine Authority for And this is sufficient to prove it a sinful Human Invention as I shall now show in prosecuting the Particulars here suggested I. The Cross is set up for several Sacramental Uses even the like Vses as Baptism and the Lord's Supper are appointed for For according to the foregoing Account of these Foederal or Sacramental Rites 1. 'T is set up as a Representing or Instructive sign And that both in the Duties and the Benefits of the New Covenant 'T is set up as Instructive in the Duties of it And this the Bishop grants when he owns Admon p. 178. That the Cross is us'd to signifie the Return we ought to make to God for the Benefits receiv'd in Baptism And indeed the words of the Service-Book put this out of doubt We sign this Child c. in token that he shall not be ashamed to Confess the Faith of Christ crucified c. 'T is set up as Instructive in the Benefits of the New Covenant This indeed the Bishop denys in the place last quoted and tells us The Cross is not us'd by 'em to signifie any Grace or Benefit communicated from God But I think there is just ground to conclude the contrary from the Reason which the Convocation alledges for Retaining the use of the Sign of the Cross viz. That the Holy Ghost by the Mouth of the Apostles did honour the name of the Cross so far that under it he comprehended not only Christ crucified but the force effect and merit of his Death and Passion with all the comforts fruits and promises we receive or expect thereby See the Thirtieth Canon of the Church of England Now I would gladly know what this Reason can signifie to vindicate their retaining the use of the Cross unless they supposed it a fit external Sign to signifie the same things which the Holy Ghost had honour'd the Name of the Cross to signifie And this Inference seems the more just from the account they give of this Ceremony of Crossing as practis'd by the Primitive Christians viz. That they signed their Children with the Sign of the Cross when they were Christen'd to dedicate 'em by that Badge to his Service whose Benefits bestow'd on 'em in Baptism the name of the Cross did represent And consequently the Sign of it is design'd to represent too But 2. Which is more considerable The Cross is made by the establisht Church an obliging and ratifying sign on our part to bind us to the Duties of God's Covenant even to the same which Baptism is appointed to oblige us to viz. To confess boldly the Faith of Christ crucified To fight manfully under his Banner against the Flesh the World and the Devil and to continue Christ's faithful Soldiers and Servants to our lives end And I may still renew
the Question propos'd in the Remarks What more peculiar Duties of the New Covenant could Baptism oblige us to And to put the matter if possible out of doubt the Infant is expresly said in the Canon to be by this Badge dedicated to the Service of Christ See Coll. of Cases 2d Edit p. 377 378. I know indeed the ingenious Author of the Case relating to the Cross in Baptism distinguishes here between and immediate and proper and an improper and declarative Dedication and accordingly would perswade us that the Convocation only designed the latter partly because they refer to the words us'd in the Service Book when the Child is cross't partly because they suppose the Child dedicated by Baptism before and suppose Baptism compleat without the sign of the Cross But I see not that either of these Reasons warrant us to take the words of the Convocation in so very strain'd and improper a sense as this is viz. That when they affirm the Cross to be a lawful outward Ceremony and honourable Badge whereby the Infant is dedicated to the Service of him that died on the Cross they should mean no more than that 't is a lawful outward Ceremony and honourable Badge to declare that the Infant has been dedicated to Christ by another outward Ceremony and honourable Badge before For 't is evident that the words us'd when the Child is sign'd with the sign of the Cross do as fully and directly express a proper immediate Dedication as the words us'd when 't is Baptiz'd and therefore we have no reason from them to apply so unusual and odd a sense to the words of the Canon and the Convocations supposing Baptism compleat without the sign of the Cross does no way Argue that they design'd not a proper renew'd Dedication by the Cross for tho' we are dedicated by Baptism yet we properly renew that Dedication as oft as we attend the Lord's Table And the Romish Church does in their Ritual See Rit Rom. Paris 1635. p. 7. suppose no more necessary by Divine Right to this Sacrament than we do and speak of their Ceremonies as only pertaining to the Solemnity of that Sacrament yet they use several other Rites for proper immediate Dedication besides that of washing with water 3. The Cross is made a distinguishing sign of our Christian Profession and the Relations we are thereby invested in For this evidently follows from its being made the Honourable Badge of our Dedication to the Service of a crucified Saviour So that by being cross't we do truly according to the establisht Church wear the Livery of Christ as by being Baptiz'd And this former Paternal sign is as effectually made the common Symbol and Tessera of our Discipleship the mark of our belonging to him as our Lord and Master as the latter can be II. Now from hence I farther infer That the Cross is made as much a Sacrament as Men can make any sign of their own for which they can produce no Divine Institution 'T is set up for most of the same uses as Baptism nay for such uses as do constitute it a proper part of positive Worship that has no stamp of Divine Authority and consequently 't is made a sinful Human Invention For if as the Bishop himself supposes all ways of Worship are displeasing to God that are not expresly contained in the Holy Scriptures nor warranted by the Examples of Holy Man therein or as he now adds that cannot be by parity of Reason deduc'd thence much more are all parts of Worship truly displeasing to him and such as our Saviour justly censures for vain Worship that are no way Instituted And yet that all those Rites in Religious Worship whereby we oblige and bind our selves to serve God or which is the same Dedicate our selves to his Service are a proper part of Positive Worship is evident from the Bishop's own confession who p. 4. of his Discourse does therefore make the Sacraments to be a part of outward Worship not only on the account of our expressing therein our dependance on the grace of God but likewise on the account of obliging and binding our selves by 'em to serve him And doubtless it does as properly belong to God alone to appoint the Religious Rites whereby we bind our selves to his Service as to the Supreme Magistrate to appoint the Ceremonies us'd in our taking the Oath of Fidelity and Allegiance Nay it belongs to him alone to appoint the Honourable Badge of our Discipleship who receives us into his Holy Covenant and no inferiour Pastors are any more authoriz'd to superadd any other Rite for this use to that he has Instituted already than the Servant of any great Prince is warranted of his own Head to prescribe to his Fellow-servants the wearing of a new Livery as an Honourable Badge of their belonging to such a Master besides that which he has appointed of his own choosing To set up External Rites for such Sacramental uses as these viz. not only to instruct us in the Priviledges and Duties of the New Covenant but to oblige and bind us to 'em and to be the Honourable Badge of our Christian Profession when God has already instituted other Rites for these very ends is a piece of Presumption we dare not be guilty of 'T is an offering him a part of Worship which has no stamp of his Authority which therefore we have no reason to hope he will accept nay which there is no shadow of Reason for if his own Foederal Rites be sufficient for all the ends they are appointed for Having thus stared my Argument I come II. To shew the insufficiency of the Bishop's Answer to this Argument All that I can find he has directly reply'd to my Argument is only this That the whole force of it seems to proceed from two Mistakes concerning the nature of Sacraments First As if they were signs from us to God and not wholly from God to us Secondly As if we were to learn the true Nature of Sacraments from the Schools and partial Definitions of interessed Disputants and not from the Holy Scriptures Hence saith the Bishop he has not given us one place of Scripture to prove his imperfect Account of a Sacrament As to this Answer to the Argument I need do no more for the Refutation of it than refer the Reader to the foregoing Account of a Sacrament wherein I fully prov'd concerning Sacraments in general and particularly that of Baptism that they are as truly and properly signs from us to God as from God to us nay that they cannot be the latter without being the former And this I have prov'd not from the Dictates of the Schools but from the Oracles of God having quoted no other Human Authority but his own and I hope he will not reckon himself one of those Partial and Interessed Disputants he speaks of So that 't is not the force of my Argument but of his Answer that proceeds from a