A19884:970
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.
Before I search into the particulars of his answer I have just cause to complain that my Tenet, in this question, is not proposed but mangled, and counterfeit, & that, though some prints & lineaments of it are represented, yet, not in their true decency and proportion: like certain looking glasses, which representing the visage misshapen, yet, after a sort, preserve something of the hue & complexion. Which will appear by comparing what is here said by him with that which I then wrote to the Classis, which, because it was large and in latin, & a private writing, I forbear now to publish, till further provocation. Whereby the learned may see, 1. What mistakes were in the Translation, as it was published, in that printed pamphlet, against which I protested in print. 2. That my intent in writing to the Classis, was, not to dispute the point, but to declare passages between the Answerer and me, for the removal of calumnies which had been cast abroad among them. 3. That the 4. first Scriptures were alleged, not to prove that no infants should be baptised, whose parents are not members ⟨p. 287⟩of that Church, but to show, that they had no power to require any more of me then to perform the duties of the pastoral office, to the members of that Church (whereunto I should have relation) which I was ready to perform. So that my writing served only to prevent that trouble, which I foresaw would follow, if the Classis, to gratify the Answerer, should assume to themselves an undue power of binding me to rest in,1 & conform to that writing spoken of before. And that such power is unjustly assumed by the Classis I prove thus.
BEfore I search into the particulars of his answer I have just cause to complaine that my Tenet, in this question, is not proposed but mangled, and counterfait, & that, though some prints & lineaments of it are represented, yet, not in their true decency and proportion: like certaine looking glasses, which representing the visage mishapen, yet, after a sort, praeserve something of the hue & complexion. Which will appeare by cōparing what is here said by him with that which I then wrote to the Classis, which, because it was large and in lattin, & a private wrighting, I forbeare now to publish, till further provocation. Whereby the learned may see, 1. What mistakes were in the Translation, as it was published, in that printed pamphlet, against which I protested in print. 2. That my intent in wrighting to the Classis, was, not to dispute the point, but to declare passages betweene the Answerer and me, for the removeall of calumnies which had bene cast abroad among thē. 3. That the 4. first Scriptures were alleadged, not to prove that no infants should be baptised, whose parents are not members