The Christian disputations, by Master Peter Viret. Divided into three parts, dialogue wiseThe Christian disputations, by Master Peter Viret. Deuided into three partes, dialogue wise

Theophilus. Thou, and those which do follow the doctrine which thou upholdest & maintainest. It is most true, that you do not speak it openly, but your doctrine importeth no less. For what rigour should God do, against the little Infants of the Christians, if for want of being w•tte with a little water, they were deprived eternally from the Joys of Paradise? I have already sufficiently proved, that the children of the Jews, were not bound unto such necessity: although that the commandment of the circumcision giveth an express term, the which is not in the baptism: wherein then ought the children of the Christians to be more culpable, then those of the Jews? If it hath pleased god, to send unto the mother, any adversity, or sickness, which was the cause that she hath brought forth her child before her full time, what fault can be in the child? and what consolation doth your doctrine bring unto the poor mother, being already sufficiently scourged and afflicted of the hand of God, to make her believe that her child is condemned unto perpetual exile, and banished from Paradise for ever? And that he is detained in the Limb, in the which without ceasing he curseth Father and mother? At the least wise the Carhards have preached and persuaded them so.

Theophilus. Thou, and those which doe follow the doctrine which thou vpholdest & mayntainest. It is most true, that you doe not speake it openly, but your doctrine importeth no lesse. For what rigor should God doe, against the little Infants of the Christians, if for want of being w•tte with a little water, they were depriued eternally from the Ioyes of Paradise? I haue alredy sufficiently proued, that the children of the Iewes, were not bound vnto suche necessitie: although that the commaundement of the circumcision giueth an expresse terme, the which is not in the baptisme: wherein then ought the children of the Christians to be more culpable, then those of the Iewes? If it hath pleased god, to send vnto the mother, any aduersitie, or sicknesse, whiche was the cause that shée hath brought foorth hir child before hir ful time, what fault can be in the child? and what consolation doth your doctrine bring vnto the poore mother, being alreadie sufficiently scourged and afflicted of the hand of God, to make hir beleeue that hir childe is condempned vnto perpetuall exile, and banished from Paradise for euer? And that hee is detayned in the Limbe, in the which without ceasing hee curseth Father and mother? At the least wyse the Carhards haue preached and perswaded them so.