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

§. 8. And fol. 8. He addeth their next charge that fama vulgavit, fame reported, that they wholly believed not Christ, Prophets, or Apostles, the Old or New Testament. Sed quia fallaci rumorum monstro non facile assensum praebere debeo (maxime cum quidam vos totum ⟨p. 411⟩divinum Canonem abjecisse affirment, alii quaedam ex ipso vos suscepisse contendant) culpare vos de incertis nolo]: Where he fully confesseth that he knew them not, but went by fame, and that he suspected himself this fame to be false, calling it a Monster, and proving it contrary to it self, and professing that he ought not to believe it: But yet lest it should be true, he goeth on to prove the truth of the Scriptures, as he doth Infants salvation and Baptism.

§. 9. Now I leave it to the Reader, among many uncertainties, which of these he will believe most probable: 1. That all the parties were slandered: 2. Or that Peter and Henry were slandered by occasion of the mixed Manichees, or by the vulgar lying levity or Popish malice. 3. Or whether Peter and Henry were guilty as some now, though the rest were not. 4. Or whether they and the Albigenses and Waldenses, really denied all Infants salvation and Baptism (their very pretended words being cited.) 5. Or whether they were slandered as to Infant-salvation, and not as to their Baptism. 6. Or whether all this rose not from their denying the salvation of the children of all the wicked, as ex opere operato, by the Baptism of the Priest, and their refusing to bring their own children to be Baptized by such Priests, and their telling the wicked at age, that their Infant-Baptism would not save them. Believe which of these you find most cause.

§. 9. Now I leave it to the Reader, among many uncertainties, which of these he will believe most probable: 1. That all the parties were slandered: 2. Or that Peter and Henry were slandered by occasion of the mixed Manichees, or by the vulgar lying levity or Popish malice. 3. Or whether Peter and Henry were guilty as some now, though the rest were not. 4. Or whether they and the Albigenses and Waldenses, really denyed all Infants salvation and Baptism (their very pretended words being cited.) 5. Or whether they were slandered as to Infant-salvation, and not as to their Baptism. 6. Or whether all this rose not from their denying the salvation of the children of all the wicked, as ex opere operato, by the Baptism of the Priest, and their refusing to bring their own children to be Baptized by such Priests, and their telling the wicked at age, that their Infant-Baptism would not save them. Believe which of these you find most cause.