A19884:319
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…
An apologetical reply to a book called an answer to the unjust complaint of VV.B. Also an answer to Mr. I.D. touching his report of some passages. His allegation of Scriptures against the baptising of some kind of infants. His protestation about the publishing of his writings. By John Davenport BD.An apologeticall reply to a booke called an ansvver to the unjust complaint of VV.B. Also an answer to Mr. I.D. touching his report of some passages. His allegation of Scriptures against the baptising of some kind of infants. His protestation about the publishing of his wrightings. By Iohn Davenporte BD.
Rotterdam: printed by Isaac van Waesberghe, 1636Rotterdam: printed by Isaack van Waesberghe, 1636
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Reply. First, This answer is but a mere diversion of the Reader from the true question between the Answerer, and the Complainants. They complain of him for rejecting and opposing those men, whom, with one consent, the Church desired: not, of not giving his voice for their calling, nor of his declaring what he judgeth best for the Church, nor of his bringing the matter to the Classis, being simply considered, but of his rejecting these men, and opposing them, so far, as to deprive the Church of them. To this the Answerer answereth just nothing in his own defence, and to convince the Complainants of untruth.
Reply. First, This answer is but a mere diversion of the Reader from the true question betweene the Answerer, and the Complainants. They complaine of him for rejecting and opposing those men, whom, with one consent, the Church desired: not, of not giving his voyce for their calling, nor of his declaring what he judgeth best for the Church, nor of his bringing the matter to the Classis, being simply considered, but of his rejecting these men, and opposing them, so farr, as to deprive the Church of them. To this the Answerer answereth just nothing in his owne defense, and to convince the Complainants of untrueth.
Secondly that which he acknowledgeth himself to have done, leaveth him under the guilt of that sin which they charge upon him. For, 1, his opposing and rejecting of these men, whom the Church desired, was unjust, seeing they held no opinions, which, by warrant of the Scripture, make them uncapable of being called to his Church. 2. His manner of proceeding was disorderly, in carrying the matter to the Classis, before he had declared to the Church the equity of his refusing these men, by the Scriptures. 3. Is a mere pretence that things were unjustly ⟨p. 65⟩carried, and swayed against him, in the Church, or Consistory, a sufficient ground of an appeal to the Classis, as to an higher lawful judicatory; that so he may sway them, according to his own will, without a rule, or to other mens customs, without a word? If this be not to deprive the Church of their liberty and power, in the free choice of their Pastor, let the Reader judge. The whole shall be resolved into a Syllogism.