A defence of Mr. John Cotton from the imputation of selfe contradiction, charged on him by Mr. Dan. Cavvdrey written by himselfe not long before his death ; whereunto is prefixed, an answer to a late treatise of the said Mr. Cavvdrey about the nature of schisme, by John Owen ...

The 18^th Contradiction is thus sta∣ted.

18. The forme of the visible Church is the Covenant, ei∣ther explicite, or implicite: and the latter is sometimes fully sufficient Mr. H. Surv. part. 1. pag. 47. 48 and o∣thers.

18. You say an implicit uniting, viz. A walk¦ing and communicating with you is a sufficient evidencing of the Forme: we say, Their folemne confession of their faith & expresse open covenanting with the Lord to wake with such a body of Saints, in all the wayes of Christ to be the mani∣fest Forme. D. Holmes ibid.

18. It is not generall Profes∣sion will serve the turne, but there must be a peculiar engagement and appropriation to this or that parti∣cular body, Mr. H. Surv. pag 63. Yet he said An Implicite Cove∣nant was suffi∣cient.

Ans. The expressions of M^r H. quo∣ted in Columne 1: and Columne 3: will not amount to an opposition of himselfe, much lesse to a Contradiction. For though he make an Implicite Covenant sufficient, yet a generall Profession will not serve the turne; to make an Implicite Covenant. For an Implicite Covenant must be with Reference to this or that particular Body: or else it is neither Co∣venant at all, nor Implicite. A Generall

Profession entreth not any man into any Relation with any Church, unlesse he offer himselfe to Joyne with them as M^r Hooker in that Place more largely, & tru∣ly openeth himselfe. Neither doth D^r Holms his expression contradict him. For he that maketh the explicite Covenant the manifest forme of the Church, He doth not gainesay the implicite covenant to be a real Forme of the Church, though not so manifest but more obscure.