An apologetical reply to a book called an answer to the unjust complaint of…An apologeticall reply to a booke called an ansvver to the unjust complaint of…

Thirdly, By questioning the reason of their not complaining, after this manner, hitherto. But who seeth not,¹ that this is a mere evasion? For, what though they exhibited not a bill of grievances, till now? It may be, they waited, in hope of reformation, or, it may be, these last passages have ripened the sore, and filled up the measure, and caused it to run over. What consequent is there in these Arguments? They complained not thus before: therefore they were not injured. The sore did not run before: therefore it was not an ulcer. This measure did not run over before: therefore it was empty. Nor is there more weight in his conclusion of that 3 answer, when he appealeth to their consciences, whether now also they would not have kept silence, if they could have brought in Mr. D. even according to this corrupt order used by us, as they complain of it: 1. Let the Reader judge, whether any others are mentioned in the complaint either, Elders, Reply, ⟨p. 50⟩Classis, or government, but only the Answerer. Why then doeth he speak in the plural number, saying this corrupt order used by us? 2. Is there not a manifest contradiction, in this part of the answer? For, if they could have brought in Mr. D. by their free choice (which himself acknowledgeth to be the ordinance of Christ) how could they then have brought him in, according to this corrupt order, whereof they complain? so that, why should they not keep silence, if the cause of complaint had been removed, as, in this case, it had been?

Thirdly, By questioning the reason of their not complaining, after this manner, hitherto. But who seeth not,¹ that this is a mere evasion? For, what though they exhibited not a bill of greivances, til now? It may be, they wayted, in hope of reformation, or, it may be, these last passages haue ripened the sore, and filled up the measure, and caused it to run over. What consequent is there in these Arguments? They complained not thus before: therefore they were not injured. The sore did not runne before: therefore it was not an ulcer. This measure did not runne over before: therefore it was empty. Nor is there more weight in his conclusion of that 3 answer, when he appealeth to their consciences, whether now also they would not haue kept silence, if they could haue brought in Mr. D. even according to this corrupt order used by us, as they complaine of it: 1. Let the Reader judge, whether any others are mentioned in the complaint either, Elders, Reply,