More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second…

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.

Answ. 1. Not a word of Dr. Hammonds books is cited to prove this, but Mr. Tombes his Review. And must we know of Mr. Tombes 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. Tombes. 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. Hammonds 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 denyed 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.

§. 11. Pag. 120. He proveth Mr. Wills guilty of unfaithfulness, want of conscience, cheating, forgery; and after, pag. 122. of manifold Lying. Because, 1. He knoweth that Cluniacensis —hath given no such wicked and false testimony, &c. And how proveth he that? [For both Osiander and the Magdeb. from whom he had it, give an account of Fifteen particulars &c.] Answ. 1. Doth that prove that Cluniac. hath no more? 2. Do they say that those fifteen are all? 3. And doth that prove that Mr. Wills knew it, who never saith, that he ever saw Cluniacensis book? as it seems Mr. D. did not. 4. Doth Mr. D. himself know it, of a book never read? See how this accuser proveth Lies? For my part I have not at hand either Cluniack or Osiander, or the Magdeb. and will not be at the labour to get and search them for nothing.