Misrepresentations corrected, and truth vindicated. In a reply to the Rev. Mr. Solomon Williams's…

— The public Acts of the Church and Parish, from Time to Time, show, that the Point in Controversy was, Whether the Professors of Godliness, only, ought to be admitted? Public Votes, of which I made a Record, were several Times to know the Church's Mind concerning the Admission of Those who are able and willing to make a Profession of Godliness; using these Terms. And once it was passed, That such should not be admitted in the Way of publicly making such a Profession. And at another Time the Vote passed, That the Admission of such Persons in such a Way (described in the same Words) should not be referred to the Judgment of certain neighbouring Ministers. At another Time, it was insisted on by the Parish, in a Parish-Meeting, That I should put a Vote in the Church, in these Words, Whether there be not a Dispute between Mr. Edwards Pastor of the Church, and the Church, respecting the Question he hath argued in his Book last published? And accordingly the Vote was put & affirmed, in a Church-Meeting, in the same Terms.—And this was the Question I insisted on in my public Lectures at Northampton, appointed for the giving the Reasons of my Opinion. My Doctrine was in these Words, 'Tis the Mind & Will of God, that none should be admitted to full Communion in the Church of Christ, but such as in Profession, and in the Eye of a reasonable Judgment, are truly Saints, or godly Persons. The Town was full of Objections against those Sermons: but none, as ever I heard, objected, that my Doctrine was beside the Controversy.—And this was all along the Point of Difference between me and the neighbouring Ministers. This was the grand Subject of Debate with them, at a Meeting of Ministers, appointed on Purpose for Conference on the Subject. It was wholly concerning the Matter of Profession, or the Thing to be exhibited and made evident or visible; and not about the Manner of professing, and the Degree of Evidence.— And this was the Doctrine directly opposed by Mr. A—y, one of the neighbouring Ministers, whom my People had got as their Champion to defend their Cause in the Pulpit at Northampton. Thus one of the Corollaries he drew from his Doctrine (as it was taken from his Mouth in Writing) ⟨p. 5⟩was, That A Man may be a visible Saint, and yet there be no sufficient Grounds for our Charity, that he is regenerate. Quite contrary to what Mr. W.

— The publick Acts of the Church and Parish, from Time to Time, shew, that the Point in Controversy was, Whether the Professors of Godliness, only, ought to be admitted? Publick Votes, of which I made a Record, were several Times to know the Church's Mind concerning the Admission of Those who are able and willing to make a Profession of Godliness; using these Terms. And once it was pass'd, That such should not be admitted in the Way of publickly making such a Profession. And at another Time the Vote pass'd, That the Admission of such Persons in such a Way (described in the same Words) should not be refer'd to the Judgment of certain neighbouring Ministers. At another Time, it was insisted on by the Parish, in a Parish-Meeting, That I should put a Vote in the Church, in these Words, Whether there be not a Dispute between Mr. Edwards Pastor of the Church, and the Church, respecting the Question he hath argued in his Book last publish'd? And accordingly the Vote was put & affirmed, in a Church-Meeting, in the same Terms.—And this was the Question I insisted on in my publick Lectures at Northampton, appointed for the giving the Reasons of my Opinion. My Doctrine was in these Words, 'Tis the Mind & Will of God, that none should be admitted to full Communion in the Church of Christ, but such as in Profession, and in the Eye of a reasonable Judgment, are truly Saints, or godly Persons. The Town was full of Objections against those Sermons: but none, as ever I heard, objected, that my Doctrine was beside the Controversy.—And this was all along the Point of Difference between me and the neighbouring Ministers. This was the grand Subject of Debate with them, at a Meeting of Ministers, appointed on Purpose for Conference on the Subject. It was wholly concerning the Matter of Profession, or the Thing to be exhibited and made evident or visible; and not about the Manner of professing, and the Degree of Evidence.— And this was the Doctrine directly opposed by Mr. A—y, one of the neighbouring Ministers, whom my People had got as their Champion to defend their Cause in the Pulpit at Northampton. Thus one of the Corollaries he drew from his Doctrine (as it was taken from his Mouth in Writing)