A19884:416
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.
3. To that which he addeth, concerning the fighting of some of these Complainants against his calling, they answer and profess, that the fighting, which he meaneth, was not, out of disesteem of, or disaffection to Mr. Balmford, but for the defence and maintenance of their right, in which case, they would have opposed any other. For, seeing how unjustly they were deprived of Mr. Hooker, whom they generally desired, and having heard, that some of the Dutch Ministers had said, that, if they had known so much before, concerning him, as they had then heard matters should not have been carried against him as they were: whereupon they conceived hopes that they might yet enjoy Mr. Hooker. Hence came their opposition to Mr. B. calling, whom they thought the Answerer more forward to bring in, that he might deprive them of the other. But, since that time, finding their expectation and hope frustrate, they have wished that Mr. B. had been settled amongst them.
3. To that which he addeth, concerning the fighting of some of these Complainants against his calling, they answer and professe, that the fighting, which he meaneth, was not, out of disesteeme of, or disaffection to Mr. Balmford, but for the defence and maintenance of theyre right, in which case, they would have opposed any other. For, seing how unjustly they were deprived of Mr. Hooker, whom they generally desired, and having heard, that some of the Dutch Ministers had sayd, that, if they had knowne so much before, concerning him, as they had then heard matters should not have bene carryed against him as they were: whereupon they conceyved hopes that they might yet injoy Mr. Hooker. Hence came theyre opposition to Mr. B. calling, whom they thought the Answerer more forward to bring in, that he might deprive them of the other. But, since that time, finding theyre expectation and hope frustrate, they have wished that Mr. B. had bene setled amongst them.
Concerning the other two, seeing the Answerer concealeth their names, I will be silent, and am sorry that he concludeth that passage with persisting in his former fault of misapplying (& so abusing) the Scripture, which he allegeth for his own purpose.