Why, the very phrase "contrary to the word of God" would take a month to define, and neither party agree at last.

One party says: The Church has power from God's word to order all matters of order so as shall appear to them to conduce to decency and edification: but ceremonies respect the orderly performance of divine service: ergo, the Church has power to ordain ceremonies: but the Cross in baptizing is a ceremony; ergo, the Church has power to prescribe the crossing in Baptism.

What is rightfully ordered cannot be rightfully withstood:--but the crossing, &c., is rightfully ordered:--'ergo', the crossing cannot be rightfully omitted.
To this, how easily would the other party reply; 1.

That a small number of Bishops could not be called the Church: 2.

That no one Church had power or pretence from God's word to prescribe concerning mere matters of outward decency and convenience to other Churches or assemblies of Christian people: 3.