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…

3. That it is no slander, that they complain of the Answerer for this, and not of the Magistrate, seeing he urgeth it more vehemently then they seem to do. For they propound it as a matter only, in some respects, convenient, that the English preacher speak Dutch, but he presseth it as necessary. The former appeareth three ways. 1. in that caution which they give [If it were possible] wherein I suppose, they mean, with the consent and approbation of the Church: for otherwise, if they would obtrude one upon them, they need not put in that proviso. 2. In the reasons, which they give for that their desire, which do imply only an expediency, viz, that he may debate matters with the Classis, and treat with the Magistrate, on the Churches behalf, as occasion shall require, which a man may do, by learning the language after he is settled, though he have no Dutch before. 3. In their indulgence to me, which the Answerer acknowledgeth, in saying, that they were content to dispense with my want of the Dutch language, which showeth that they accounted it but an expediency, with which they would dispense, in a case of necessity. The latter (viz,¹ that the Answerer presseth it as a matter necessary) appeareth in his own words, when he saith, that a minister called to this place which can not speak Dutch, is, in great measure, no better then a Dumb Minister, in respect of one special work of his calling, which is to give advise &c. In the Classis. If, to sit in the Dutch Classis &c. Be one special work of the English Ministers calling, then indeed his ability to speak Dutch, is a necessary requisite, without which he is but a dumb minister. But how will this be proved? For 1. Paul in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus and in the rest of his Epistles, speaketh nothing of this property or duty, nor is it any where else in Scripture revealed to be necessary, how then is it a special work of his calling? 2. The Magistrates do not press this sitting in the Dutch Classis, upon the English preachers in other towns in Holland. How cometh it to be so special a work of a Ministers ⟨p. 92⟩calling in Amsterdam? 3. This is not urged as a special work of a ministers calling to the French & walloon Churches in that City; How comes it to be so to the English? 4.

3. That it is no slander, that they complaine of the Answerer for this, and not of the Magistrate, seing he urgeth it more vehemently then they seeme to doe. For they propound it as a matter only, in some respects, convenient, that the English preacher speake Dutch, but he presseth it as necessary. The former appeareth three wayes. 1. in that caution which they give [If it were possible] wherein I suppose, they meane, with the consent and approbation of the Church: for otherwise, if they would obtrude one upom them, they need not put in that proviso. 2. In the reasons, which they give for that theyre desire, which doe imply only an expediency, viz, that he may debate matters with the Classis, and treate with the Magistrate, on the Churches behalfe, as occasion shall require, which a man may doe, by learning the language after he is setled, though he have no Dutch before. 3. Jn theyre indulgence to me, which the Answerer acknowledgeth, in sayng, that they were content to dispense with my want of the Dutch language, which sheweth that they accounted it but an expediency, with which they would dispense, in a case of necessity. The latter (viz,