Baxter - BX5202 B291 1679

rI67 '1 E Apocrypha ] fignifieth : 3, If they were force- time told it, they forget it; and apply not that name to everyLeffon that they thence hear. 4. It is not denyed that the founder Books that are Apocrypoa may be read in the Church as a Homily may be with due notice of their difference from the Canonical Books : But the queftion is whether not only they, but the Books proved fabulous by many Proteftants, may be there read,. and that inftead of fo much of the holy Scripture then omitted, and that without any better notice given to the Common people of the difference. 5. And the chief doubt is, whether this may not only be done, but allo the-Calendar as fo appointing it, may be Appro- ved ofand Confented to by us all. 7 It bath been before opened, that no Parent is permitted to be Godfather to his own Child ; or to fpeak one word at his baptizing, to enter him into the Covenant of God, or dedicate him to him, nor to promife in his name, nor to undertake any part of his Chriftian education, nor fo much as to be urged to be prefent. Nor is there a word to intimate that the Godfathers repreCent the Parent, or fpeak in his name or ftead, but the contrary is implyed. E Though the Parents are to procure thefe God fathers, 2. It bath allo been before chewed how great a Controverfie it is, whether Infants Right to Gods proamifes and Church Rate, be not by that Covenant [ I Will be thy God and the God ofthy feed ;) implyed in i. Cor 7. 14. [ els were your Children unclean but now are they holy. ] And fo whether Infants have any right upon a God- fathers words there, who never took them for, M4 his