A26959:1009
More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second…
More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second defence of our infant rights and mercies in three parts ... / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for N. Simmons and J. Robinson, 1675
Text 1 › Chapter 3: Mr. D.'s Justification of his slander of the Waldenses, Confuted more largely.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
§. 9. His next proof is the report of a late Papist Jos. Vicecomes, l. 2. c. 1. Whom he also after mentioneth in his Reply, who as truly numbereth Luther, Calvin, and Beza with the adversaries of Infant-Baptism. If such witnesses be his proof, he could not have chosen better for his turn than him and Cochleus, and some such calumniators, of which sort I could name him more.
§. 9. His next proof is the report of a late Papist Jos. Vicecomes, l. 2. c. 1. Whom he also after mentioneth in his Reply, who as truly numbreth Luther, Calvin, and Beza with the adversaries of Infant-Baptism. If such witnesses be his proof, he could not have chosen better for his turn than him and Cochleus, and some such calumniators, of which sort I could name him more.
§. 10. His last witness is, Dr. Hammond confesseth that Peter Bruis and Henry his Scholar and the Petrobrusiani and Henricani that sprung from them opposed Infant-Baptism.]
Answ. 1. Not a word of Dr. Hammond's books is cited to prove this, but Mr. Tombs his Review. And must we know of Mr. Tombs what Dr. Hammond held? No wonder then if I and the world must learn what I hold my self, and what I have written, from such as Mr. Danvers and Mr. Tombs. And why not also from all the rest that have written against me? 2. I think it not worth my labour to search over Dr. Hammond's books to see whether he hath said this or not: seeing I know that he was my neighbour and lived so lately that he ⟨p. 388⟩had no other means to know what these two men and their followers held, than what we and others have as well as he. You must give us elder proofs than this. 3. And if it were asserted by him or proved by others, it were no proof that the Waldenses denied Infant-Baptism; but it would only follow that Bruis and Henry were Manichees and not Waldenses, which seemeth to be the mistake of their later accusers at least.