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…

But then, Thirdly, Nothing can be more plain and manifest, than that it never was what the Church meant, to give that Committee Power to choose for them; 'tis utterly inconsistent with their own Votes; because 'tis most plainly implied in those Votes, that they give that Power to some Body else that did not yet belong to their Church, viz to Mr. Breck: for tho' there is nothing in their Votes mentioned about the Committee's choosing Churches, yet there is this Vote relating to Mr. Breck, that we will repeat again Mr. John Burt chosen to go to Boston as a Messenger to ⟨p. 38⟩the Elders that Mr. Breck shall choose to ordain him.

But then, Thirdly, Nothing can be more plain and manifest, than that it never was what the Church meant, to give that Committee Power to chuse for them; 'tis utterly inconsistent with their own Votes; because 'tis most plainly implied in those Votes, that they give that Power to some Body else that did not yet belong to their Church, viz to Mr. Breck: for tho' there is nothing in their Votes mention'd about the Committee's chusing Churches, yet there is this Vote relating to Mr. Breck, that we will repeat again Mr. John Burt chosen to go to Boston as a Messenger to ⟨p. 38⟩the Elders that Mr. Breck shall chuse to ordain him.

Now, Sir, we would ask you whether or no this does not fully and plainly imply, that the Church left it with Mr. Breck to choose the Elders out of the County that were to ordain him? And whether therefore this Vote did not limit the Committee to Mr. Breck's Choice? And whether their being limited to the Choice of another, is not inconsistent with its being left to their Choice? And whether it being so that the Church never chose you themselves, nor ever gave the Committee Power to choose you in their Names, that it will not follow that the Church never chose you in any Sense whatsoever? The Matter is so plain that it seems to be mere Waste of Words to dispute about it, & would be so indeed, were the Obstacles, in the Way of Conviction, but ordinary. If there be any other Way of a Churches choosing, besides doing it by themselves, it must be choosing by a Committee that they have empowered to choose for them, and in their Names; but neither of these, we have now shown, ever was in this Case, unless Mr. Breck was their Committee, which you strenuously deny, Page 41, and bring Arguments to prove that he was not, which you suppose in Opposition to us, just as if we, when we said they made Mr. Breck their Committee, intended that the Church had formally passed a Vote, wherein they had used the Expression, and had in Terms voted that he should be their Committee. We don't deny but that Mr. Breck's nominating your Churches, might have been consistent with your being chosen by the Church, if he had only nominated to the Church, and the Church had then voted according to his Nominations; but instead of this he was left to nominate and choose too; his Nomination (if you will so call it) was after the Church-meeting was broke up, and was never brought to any Church-meeting at all, to see whether the Church would vote it or not: So that you was not chosen by the Church before you came, and therefore run before you was called; and you strenuously deny, yourself, Page 43, that you was accepted as a Council, by any Vote of the Church after you came. You make a Supposition, Page 44, that