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

Answ. 1. But Cochleus is one of the most notable Liars of all the Papists that opposed Luther, and hath left his Calumnies to posterity! And must he be believed against Wycliffe? 2. And ⟨p. 366⟩Fuller wrote but about twenty years ago: And must one of our neighbours tell us what Cochleus saith was the opinion of Wycliffe, when we can read his words our selves? 3. But (to make this like its fellows) even this much is untrue, Fuller tells us no such thing out of Cochleus, but tells us that Gregory charged Wycliffe with eighteen Errors; Tho. Arundel with twenty three; the Council of Constance with 45. Tho. Waldensis with 80. Dr. Luck with 266. and Cochleus with 303. and then he reciteth 62. out of Waldensis, where the words are. 4. And Waldensis is known to be a false accuser of him in many particulars, though a learned Papist. 5. And even this Waldensis that saith his worst, and sought to make the most of his errors, never here accuseth him as denying Infant-Baptism: And would he not have done it, had it been true?

Answ. 1. But Cochleus is one of the most notable Lyars of all the Papists that opposed Luther, and hath left his Calumnies to posterity! And must he be believed against Wickliff? 2. And ⟨p. 366⟩Fuller wrote but about twenty years ago: And must one of our neighbours tell us what Cochleus saith was the opinion of Wickliff, when we can read his words our selves? 3. But (to make this like its fellows) even this much is untrue, Fuller tells us no such thing out of Cochleus, but tells us that Gregory charged Wickliff with eighteen Errors; Tho. Arundel with twenty three; the Council of Constance with 45. Tho. Waldensis with 80. Dr. Lucke with 266. and Cochleus with 303. and then he reciteth 62. out of Waldensis, where the words are. 4. And Waldensis is known to be a false accuser of him in many particulars, though a learned Papist. 5. And even this Waldensis that saith his worst, and sought to make the most of his errors, never here accuseth him as denying Infant-Baptism: And would he not have done it, had it been true?