# sign of the cross in baptism?



## cupotea (Jan 6, 2008)

I'm reading John Brown's book on English Puritanism, he mentions:

as equal reverence was due to every part of Scripture and to all the revealed names of God, there is no reason why the people should stand at the reading of the gospel, or bow at the name of Jesus; that at the Communion it was as lawful to sit as to kneel or stand; that the sign of the cross in baptism is superstitious; that it is papistical to forbid marriages at certain times of the year; 

What is "the sign of the cross in baptism ", could someone elaborate?

Thanks!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jan 6, 2008)

The sign of the cross is a hand motion meant to symbolize the four points of the cross by touching four points of the body (forehead, stomach, left shoulder, right shoulder) in the shape of a cross. It is a practice commonly found in liturgical churches, such as the Roman Catholic Church, Anglican Church, Lutheran Church and Eastern Orthodox Churches, and often accompanies the sacraments of communion and baptism. I would link to the Wikipedia article on the subject but it is a picture purporting to represent Christ.


----------



## cupotea (Jan 6, 2008)

Thank you so much!


----------



## JohnOwen007 (Jan 6, 2008)

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> The sign of the cross is a hand motion meant to symbolize the four points of the cross by touching four points of the body (forehead, stomach, left shoulder, right shoulder) in the shape of a cross. It is a practice commonly found in liturgical churches, such as the Roman Catholic Church, Anglican Church, Lutheran Church and Eastern Orthodox Churches, and often accompanies the sacraments of communion and baptism. I would link to the Wikipedia article on the subject but it is a picture purporting to represent Christ.



Well actually that's not how the sign of the cross has been done in infant baptism in the Anglican tradition. The minister simply makes a cross sign on the child's forehead (doesn't tip different parts of the body).

The Elizabethan Puritans objected to this, the use of the wedding ring in marriage, the surplice, and kneeling at communion. These practises in some parts of the Anlglican communion have been abolished, and in other parts have been embellished.

John Brown's description of Anglican ritual is a little muddled. What has happened in the Anglican tradition is that all sorts of extra elements have been introduced over time (especially as a result of the Oxford movement in the 19th century) that are not a part of the Anglican formularies. For example, bowing at the name of Jesus is a novelty Archbishop William Laud introduced that has no place in the Anglican confessions.

Every blessing.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jan 7, 2008)

JohnOwen007 said:


> Well actually that's not how the sign of the cross has been done in infant baptism in the Anglican tradition. The minister simply makes a cross sign on the child's forehead (doesn't tip different parts of the body).



Right, there are variations on the theme, and it also depends on whether it is the "celebrant" or the laity who is performing the action, and in Orthodoxy there are more variations on how it is done, but the gist is that the hand motions represent the cross. It is also not confined to sacramental use but is encouraged in many situations. This is from an Anglican Church in Canada:



> The Sign of the Cross
> 
> People new to the parish, or those who visit us notice the custom of making the sign of the cross and they want to know:
> Where does it come from?
> ...



And this is from an Episcopal Church in Ohio (another source that violates the second commandment):



> The Cross and Christianity
> St. Paul writes, "Far be it from me to glory except in the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ"(Gal 6:14). For St. Paul the Cross is one of the two hinges of our faith, the other is the Resurrection. In fact, the Resurrection is only possible after we have been crucified "to the world" and the world to us.
> 
> This idea is at the heart of Christian belief; that Resurrection is the reward or goal, but the Cross is the means. The road to God and eternal life leads through the Cross.
> ...



For another view of the sign of the cross, see Kevin Reed, _Biblical Worship_, Chap. 4:



> The Sign of the Cross
> It is appropriate for us to offer a few comments on the placement of crosses in edifices of worship. When we speak of the cross, or crosses, we are referring to the visible symbol called a cross, not the sufferings of the Saviour. When the apostle Paul exclaimed, "God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Gal. 6:14), he uttered a precious truth. But the apostle's expression is obviously a synecdoche, by which he exalts the saving work of Christ. Paul's statement has no reference to visible symbols, known among us as crosses.
> 
> The direct adoration or worship of crosses is plainly forbidden by the scriptures, in the first and second commandments, which prohibit worshipping anyone or anything besides the Lord. Historically, Protestants condemned the adoration of crosses; for example, the Scottish Confession of 1580 specifically lists the "worshipping of images, relics and crosses," among the deplorable practices of "the Roman Antichrist." (This condemnation was extended to the superstitious gesture of "crossing," which is also employed within Romish rites and ceremonies.)
> ...


----------



## JohnOwen007 (Jan 7, 2008)

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> This is from an Anglican Church in Canada:
> 
> [...]
> 
> ...



Both these denominations are excellent examples of *desertion *from the Anglican formularies (39 Articles and BCP). They are kinda like using the PCUSA as an example of reformed theology--not very good!

As you are probably well aware, the Anglican Communion is on the brink of schism, and the provinces behind the problems are America and Canada.


----------

