A96223:39
The answer of the Assembly of DivinesThe ansvver of the Assembly of Divines
The answer of the Assembly of Divines by authority of Parliament now sitting at Westminster. Unto the reasons given in to this Assembly by the Dissenting Brethren, of their not bringing in a model of their way. And since published in print, under the title of A copy of a remonstrance. Which answer was humbly presented to the Right Honourable the House of Peers assembled in Parliament. Ordered by the Lords in Parliament assembled, that this answer be forthwith printed and published. Joh. Brown, cler. Parliamentorum.The ansvver of the Assembly of Divines by authority of Parliament now sitting at Westminster. Unto the reasons given in to this Assembly by the Dissenting Brethren, of their not bringing in a model of their way. And since published in print, under the title of A copy of a remonstrance. Which answer was humbly presented to the Right Honorable the House of Peers assembled in Parliament. Ordered by the Lords in Parliament assembled, that this answer be forthwith printed and published. Joh. Brown, cler. Parliamentorum.
London: printed by John Field for Ralph Smith, 1646
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
Now here are three things h••h fle••, First, That they is not only do it as an Act of Order, but of Jurisdiction, in this Church where they have no relation. Secondly, Not in such Combination. Thirdly, For these Churches which are not within their Combination.
Now here are three things h••h fle••, First, That they is not onely do it as an Act of Order, but of Jurisdiction, in this Church where they have no relation. Secondly, Not in such Combination. Thirdly, For these Churches which are not within their Combination.
Th•se Papers, say they, which we of our selves brought in, being read, were returned back unto us. To which we Answer.
1. This W• was but •wo of these seven, who brought in each of them a Paper, but neither of them presented as the sense of all these Brethren; but, for ought we know, as their single sense; saving only, that they used the word We, which might give the Assembly some ground to think it was the Act of some others; whereupon, about the end of the debut one of them was asked, In whose name they presented those Papers, whether in his own name, or in the name of some others also, because he spake of We and U•? And th•• if it were in the name of others, it was desired it should be expressed, who they were. But it was not even then affirmed by him to be given in, in the name of all these Brethren. But he excused the word We, because that others were upon the negative in the debut, as well as himself: Nor were they expressly owned when presented, but by a third person (so far as either our notes or memories can inform us) who upon occasion of that question stood up and said, I own them with the rest of the Brethren; but who these Brethren were, or how many of them, was not expressed. And we question, whether these seven Brethren will yet say, That all of them had so much as seen them before they were brought in to the Assembly: And therefore it seems something strange they should now all say, we our selves (as in the Printed Paper) or We of our selves (as in the Paper given in to the Assembly) presented Papers; when neither all did present Papers, nor did it of themselves, but upon the reiterated motion of divers of the Assembly.