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

§. 37. His second Argument is [Because they so fully prized and faithfully adhered to the Scripture, &c.]

Answ. What will not partiality say? 1. You must believe him that Scripture is against Infant-Baptism: And then the controversy is at an end. 2. You must believe him how closely ⟨p. 260⟩they adhered to Scripture, if you can, when you have read Gildas (who is translated into English) their neighbour, one of them, the only certain historian that knew them, who describeth them as I have said, as most flagitious heinous wicked men. Though I hope they amended after Gildas days, yet that showed you how they held to Apostolic discipline or Scripture. The book is so very small; it is but equal to entreat him to read it before he use this argument again^*. 3. You must believe him that all that prize and adhere to Scripture are against Infant-Baptism. Read and try whether there be not greater evidence that Cyprian, Athanasius, Nazianzene, Chrysostom, Augustine, the Egyptian Monks, and other such strict persons in those ages, at least the Novatians, and Donatists (in his own judgement) prized the Scripture than the Britons? And doth it follow (in despite of their own professions and practises) that all these and the rest such, were against Infant-Baptism?

Answ. What will not partiality say? 1. You must believe him that Scripture is against Infant-Baptism: And then the controversie is at an end. 2. You must believe him how closely ⟨p. 260⟩they adhered to Scripture, if you can, when you have read Gildas (who is translated into English) their neighbour, one of them, the only certain historian that knew them, who describeth them as I have said, as most flagitious heinous wicked men. Though I hope they amended after Gildas dayes, yet that shewed you how they held to Apostolick discipline or Scripture. The book is so very small; it is but equal to intreat him to read it before he use this argument again