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…

Or was there ever any Pretence that there was any Vote that, through' Carelessness, was not recorded, or that there was ever any other Church meeting, wherein there was any such Vote, or indeed wherein this Affair was ever agitated, or that there ever was so much as any open Mention, in any Church meeting, of your particular Churches,; being designed to be sent for? If there was any of these Things, why are we not told of them? Or can you find out any Way in which you might truly be applied to and called by Springfield Church without any, either express or implicit Mention of you, in any Vote of the Church, and without the Churches knowing, when together, or in the Time of any public Church Act, what Churches were to be applied to? And is the Form of the Letter missive barely considered, sufficient Proof that you was chosen by the Church, against the most authentic Accounts of Facts, public Records of Votes of the Church, confirmed by every ⟨p. 36⟩one's Memory, and all other collateral Evidences? But you say, The Church chose a Committee to manage the Affairs respecting the Ordination, and that one necessary Affair for which they were chosen was to sign Letters to the several Churches, of which those Elders were the Pastors. Of which, First, we would enquire, how you know that this is one Affair for which they were chosen? There is no Account or Hint of any such thing in their Votes. Secondly, If the Church did choose them to sign Letters, they chose 'em to sign Letters without any Direction who to sign them to; for the Churches were not chosen by the Church meeting: And if you say that the Church meant to give this Committee Power to choose for 'em; for the present we will suppose they did mean to give 'em this Power. This, we humbly conceive, by congregational Principles, is what they could not do: A Church indeed may choose a Committee to consider Things, and make Report; but their Determinations are not Acts of the Church till reported to the Church and made their own by themselves: A Church may also choose a Committee to execute their Acts, as to sign Letters in the Name of the Church; but then it must first be the Act of the Church, before they can execute it: The Business of a Committee is not to make Acts themselves, and when they have done execute their own Acts, that never have been passed by the Church.

Or was there ever any Pretence that there was any Vote that, thro' Carlessness, was not recorded, or that there was ever any other Church meeting, wherein there was any such Vote, or indeed wherein this Affair was ever agitated, or that there ever was so much as any open Mention, in any Church meeting, of your particular Churches,; being design'd to be sent for? If there was any of these Things, why are we not told of them? Or can you find out any Way in which you might truly be applied to and called by Springfield Church without any, either express or implicit Mention of you, in any Vote of the Church, and without the Churches knowing, when together, or in the Time of any publick Church Act, what Churches were to be applied to? And is the Form of the Letter missive barely considered, sufficient Proof that you was chosen by the Church, against the most authentick Accounts of Facts, publick Records of Votes of the Church, confirmed by every