A letter to the author of the pamphlet called An answer [sic] to the…A letter to the author of the pamphlet called An answeer [sic] to the…

In Page 32, you say, That our Argument is so pleasant that you will give it the Reader in our own Words, by transcribing the whole 'Paragraph that contains it, which when you have done, you cry out, What can be finer! And so go on, in the next Page, with Banter and Derision: But, Sir, Ridicule is cheaper than solid Argument, tho' much less worthy of a gospel Minister; it is easier to laugh at Arguments than to answer them: The Sum of what you pretend as an Answer is, that the Notion of asking Advice, is to ask other's Judgment to be directed no otherwise than to be assisted in making a Judgment for themselves: And what then? If it be so, does it thence follow, that it is not as we say, That it is impossible, and self contradictory, that any one should ask Judgment to be directed, (even in this Sense that you speak of) that is already fully determined, that let the Judgment ⟨p. 29⟩be which way it will, he will go no other Way than this. Is it not self contradictory, to ask Judgment to be directed in making a Judgment for himself, that has already so made his Judgment, that he is resolved he will act no other Way than according to that Judgment, let the Advice be what it will? Is not this Children's Play? And is it a decent and orderly Way of treating the Body of neighbouring Ministers? And did not the Conduct of Springfield People plainly carry this in it, in that after they had had a Society-meeting, and by the Vote thereof, had referred the Matter to us, and had chosen a Committee on purpose, who came with Mr. Breck, to seek the Judgment of the Ministers, and then after they had put the Ministers to the Trouble of a Consideration of the Matter, took it out of their Hands again, before ever they had Opportunity to make any Judgment, and in treating them with the greatest Contempt, because that they advised that Mr. Breck and the Witnesses should be heard Face to Face, that they might be capable of judging? Is there any need of looking into the Platform, in order to know whether such a Behaviour ben't irregular & absurd, and that all those that have been the Encouragers of that People in such a Method of proceeding, may be justly looked upon as the Abettors of Disorder and Confusion? Such a Conduct is not only what common Sense knows to be absurd and disorderly, but is so by the known Principles, both of Congregationalists and Presbyterians;

In Page 32, you say, That our Argument is so pleasant that you will give it the Reader in our own Words, by transcribing the whole 'Paragraph that contains it, which when you have done, you cry out, What can be finer! And so go on, in the next Page, with Banter and Derision: But, Sir, Ridicule is cheaper than solid Argument, tho' much less worthy of a gospel Minister; it is easier to laugh at Arguments than to answer them: The Sum of what you pretend as an Answer is, that the Notion of asking Advice, is to ask other's Judgment to be directed no otherwise than to be assisted in making a Judgment for themselves: And what then? If it be so, does it thence follow, that it is not as we say, That it is impossible, and self contradictory, that any one should ask Judgment to be directed, (even in this Sense that you speak of) that is already fully determined, that let the Judgment