Infant baptism can be proved from Scripture — Bellarmine refutes Anabaptists, then denies the proof
They next call infant baptism necessary yet unwritten — or at least not proved enough from Scripture.
We deny the silence: our theologians prove infant baptism from Scripture against the Anabaptists.
This is not the place to rehearse those arguments.
Stranger still: Rome herself routs Anabaptists from Scripture — Bellarmine boasts his baptism arguments cannot be escaped (On Baptism 1.9).
The same Bellarmine, attacking Scripture's sufficiency, then says paedobaptism cannot be proved from Scripture.
We appeal from partisan Bellarmine to Bellarmine elsewhere convinced by the truth.
Latin
XXIII. Objiciunt praeterea, Bellarminus & alii, baptismum parvulorum tanquam rem necessariam, & tamen in sacra Scriptura non traditam, aut saltem quae sufficienter non probetur ex sacra Scriptura. Sed negamus non posse ex sacra Scriptura probari legitimum esse baptismum infantium. Illud certe multis & validis argumentis ex Scriptura sacra deductis contra Anabaptistas Theologi nostri confirmant. Quae argumenta referre & vindicare hujus loci non esset, & prolixiorem operam requirit. Sed quod valde mirum est, ipsi Pontificii ex Scripturis Anabaptistas egregie confutant. Inter alios vero Bellarminus de hac controversia ex Scripturis ita disputat, ut argumenta sua, nulla ratione solvi, nulla arte eludi posse, glorietur & fidat, libr. 1. de sacram. Bapt. cap. 9. Et tamen idem ille sui oblitus, dum Scripturae sufficientiam impugnare conatur, asserit paedobaptismum ex Scriptura satis probare non posse. Sed hic a Bellarmino studio causae abrepto, ad Bellarminum alibi evidentia veritatis convictum appellamus.