A19884:923
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.
Sect: 31. examined, concerning his subjecting the Church under the Classis, without their consent.
The authority and power, which they complain that their Church is subjected under, is still by the Complainants declared to be undue by another instance, in that it is such as is not competent to any men that are not subject to error, and hereunto they add another aggravation, viz, that it is done without the Churches consent.1 M. Parker in his learned discourse of Ecclesiastical policy showeth, at large, that Churches are no further under the authority of Synods then they have subjected themselves by their own consent. And, as for binding men to rest in their determinations, as if they were infallible, both Dr. Whittaker, and Junius, in showing that Councils are subject to error, have given sufficient light for discovery of the evil of that practise.
THe authority and power, which they complaine that theyr Church is subjected under, is still by the Complainants declared to be undue by another instance, in that it is such as is not competent to any men that are not subject to errour, and hereunto they add another aggravation, viz, that it is done without the Churches consent.1 M. Parker in his learned discourse of Ecclesiasticall policy sheweth, at large, that Churches are no furher under the authority of Synods then they have subjected themselves by their owne consent. And, as for binding men to rest in their determinations, as if they were infallible, both Dr. Whittaker, and Iunius, in shewing that Councills are subject to errour, have given sufficient light for discovery of the evill of that practise.
- 1Lib. 3. Cap. 26. p. 370.