Baxter - BV649 B3 1670

26 Who are Profefors. If-yoti fay, that i heir ignorance and ungodly lives doth {hew that they either underfland not the baptifrnal Covenant, or Confent not to' it. I anfwer, Mark well what you fay yroür felves 'For this loth but fhew that they are Hypocrites': You cannot fay then that they are no 'Profef ors, but that they are dijJ ri bling pr ofeffors. They pro- fees the truth, they do not truly and uprightly profefs it. I tell you,all the common fort ofthe people in. England, areeither Saints or Hypo - crises : fee how I have moved this to them in my Treatife called The formal Hypacrite. They all profefs enough to five them if .they,fincerely pro- fef;ed it. Hethat is baptized and profeffeth hirn- felf a Chriflian, and yet is a drunkard, a fwearer, a fornicator, or fuch like, is certainly an Hypo- crite as going againfl his own profefiion : The very Creed, Lords Prayer and Ten Command- mentshave enough to condemn him as an hypo- crite. And will yore now corne in, and juflifie thefe men from their hypocrifie, by faying that they areno Profeff)rs ? If they were no Profeffors, they could be no Hjpocrites, but sneer Atheifis or In- dels. I know that thofe are the hi`Qheft fort of Hypocrites, who counterfeit the highef} zeal and piety, by the hiheft profeflìon But this is but a difference in de see. Who ever profeffeth to be a hriflian, profeffeth true Repentance, faith and oiirz_ís , and is an Hypocrite if he be not a Saint. And then Confider, that if you would exclude anyof the'fe from the Communion of the Church, it man: not be becaufe they are no profcors, but' becaufe they are hypocrites, ignorant or fcanda, Ions? And if fo, then no man mule be Ilaut'o it, but