A96223:52
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.
To which we Answer.
1. Their earnest contending for some Questions (wherein they might possibly hope to advantage themselves, either by dividing the Assembly or otherwise) is no sufficient Testimony of their constant willingness, and forwardness to make known what ever they hold in Church-Government: The rather because,
1. Their earnest contending for some Questions (wherein they might possibly hope to advantage themselves, either by dividing the Assembly or otherwise) is no sufficient Testimony of their constant willingnesse, and forwardnesse to make known what ever they hold in Church-Government: The rather because,
2. Many other points as Fundamental, in reference to differences between them and us, they have never offered to debate or prove, but have rather shunned them when they have had fair opportunities before them, and Arguments put into their mouths: As for Instance, when that question was debated, The Scripture holds forth, that many particular Congregations may be under one Presbyterial Government, against which they disputed about thirty days together; and (as hath been said by one of them publicly in the Assembly) they must confess they had fair play; Especially they having the advantage to dispute ⟨p. 10⟩about half the time on the negative, before the Assembly brought one Argument for the affirmative; yet all this time, though the Argument lay fair before them, if they had pleased to use it, That if every particular Congregation have all, and sole power within themselves Independently, then there may be no such Presbytery over many Congregations: And though it were often hinted to them, both then and at other times to use it, they still declined it in their whole dispute; and likewise in their Reasons exhibited to both the Honourable Houses of Parliament, insisting mean while upon Arguments from Incongruities and Inconveniences. And when moved to use this Argument, from the Institution of such entire Independent power in single Congregations (which had been the fairest way of disputing against that Proposition) it was replied, That the Assembly was not to prescribe them their Arguments, but while they were Opponents, they might use what medium they thought fit. We might Instance in many other points, which we all know to be great and Fundamental questions, in reference to that way of Church-Government which the Brethren practise, as