A19884:847
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.
The Reader may see how he leaveth the whole power of jurisdiction in the particular Church, and bindeth them no further to make use of other Ecclesiastical Senates, out of themselves, then necessity requireth, and he doeth not acknowledge that it is a case of that necessity; but when the avoiding of troubles and dissentions in the Church makes it necessary. And when is that? Not when one alone contentiously differeth from all the rest. But, when the ⟨p. 240⟩difference is among the greater part. And that, in such a case, the judgment of the whole Church is first to be tried and the opinions, and assent of all being declared, matters are to be concluded.1 Else where he saith, that the presbytery of many Churches is to compose and end such things only as cannot be ended in particular Churches. Act. 15.1. to 8. 2. Chron. 20.33. Act. 16.4. And these are cases, either proper to those Churches, which are brought to them, or things common to many Churches, and so taken up by them. I demand of the Answerer, whether he be of this worthy writers judgment, or not? If not; why did he refer me to him for satisfaction? If yea; why is his practise so different from it? For, in this business, though of so great consequence, that it endangered the breaking of the Church (if I had not sat down quietly, and suffered wrong, for peace sake) the Answerer alone opposing the desire of the Elders, and of the greater part of the Church, and the business being proper to the Church, and which might have been ended among themselves, yet, against the liberty and right of the Church (if Mr. Fenners judgement be right) he would carry it to the Classis, that he might effect his purpose.
The Reader may see how he leaveth the wholl power of jurisdiction in the particular Church, and bindeth them no further to make use of other Ecclesiasticall Senats, out of themselves, then necessity requireth, and he doeth not acknowledge that it is a case of that necessity; but when the avoyding of troubles and dissentions in the Church makes it necessary. And when is that? Not when one alone contentiously differeth from all the rest. But, when the