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…

With respect to our saying that the Church never voted, to desire the Assistance of any Church at all, but only certain Presbyters by Name; you say they chose four of the Elders, that with the Churches, they desired to assist, thinking the Churches were sufficiently distinguished by naming their Elders. What we argue from is what was publicly acted, voted, and recorded; but what you argue from is what they thought in the secret Closet of their Hearts: If that be according to congregational Principles, to make a Churches undeclared Thoughts the Foundation of other Churches Acts, we confess it is as you say, Page 44, 45, That we have no thorough Acquaintance with congregational Principles: What is most probable is, that the Church, being ignorant of congregational Principles, thought nothing about applying to any Churches, and did not know that there was any Need of it: And tho' you say it shows our Ignorance of those Principles, if we suppose, that in case Springfield Church had only desired the Assistance of certain Elders by Name, and those Elders with the Consent of their Churches, had come to ordain, it would not have been agreeable to those Principles: but in this Matter, Rev. Sir, we humbly think we understand congregational Principles better than you, or are more willing fairly to represent them: By those Principles an Elder can act nothing in another Church but by Virtue of a ⟨p. 41⟩Mission from his Church, but his Church has no Power to concern themselves in the Affairs of another Church, or to give any one a Mission to act in them, till applied to by that Church: All the Acts of other Churches, as well as Persons, as concerning themselves in the Affairs of that Church, are, by the Tenor of your own Words null and void, if not applied to, and called by that Church: An Application to a particular Person don't give a Church Authority to act; the Delegate goes as the Churches Representative, & all that he acts is in the Name of his Church, and not by any Power of his Office as an Elder, which extends not beyond the Limits of his own Congregation; in his coming the Church comes, and therefore, however he has been called personally, yet if the Church han't been applied to, the Church comes uncalled: It 'don't at all follow that it is not so, because the Platform says they may improve Elders of other Churches, as you mention;

With respect to our saying that the Church never voted, to desire the Assistance of any Church at all, but only certain Presbyters by Name; you say they chose four of the Elders, that with the Churches, they desired to assist, thinking the Churches were sufficiently distinguished by naming their Elders. What we argue from is what was publickly acted, voted, and recorded; but what you argue from is what they thought in the secret Closet of their Hearts: If that be according to congregational Principles, to make a Churches undeclared Thoughts the Foundation of other Churches Acts, we confess it is as you say, Page 44, 45, That we have no thorough Acquaintance with congregational Principles: What is most probable is, that the Church, being ignorant of congregational Principles, thought nothing about applying to any Churches, and did not know that there was any Need of it: And tho' you say it shews our Ignorance of those Principles, if we suppose, that in case Springfield Church had only desired the Assistance of certain Elders by Name, and those Elders with the Consent of their Churches, had come to ordain, it would not have been agreeable to those Principles: but in this Matter, Rev. Sir, we humbly think we understand congregational Principles better than you, or are more willing fairly to represent them: By those Principles an Elder can act nothing in another Church but by Vertue of a