[MarkBsnr]

An admission from your link that claims of Holy Water use prior to the 4th century are spurious: The use of holy water in the earliest days of the Christian Era is attested by documents of only comparatively late date. The "Apostolic Constitutions", the redaction of which goes back to about the year 400, attribute to the Apostle St. Matthew the precept of using holy water. The letter written under the name of Pope Alexander I, who lived in the second century, is apocryphal and of more recent times; hence the first historical testimony does not go back beyond the fifth century. Clearly the one who wrote this paragraph does not want to spend any more time in Purgatory for those little "qualified lies" of a church apologist than he has to.

The logic appears to be that since the first historical testimony does not go back beyond the fifth century, then any claim that it makes is false.

'Twas my point.

[OLD REGGIE]

The logic appears to be that since the first historical testimony does not go back beyond the fifth century, then any claim that it makes is false.

'Twas my point.

Let's just say we don't read it the same way. I see it that there are no authentic "letters/testimony" which predates the fifth century. Those which claim to be "older" are fraudulent.

BTW, I pinged Uncle Chip because it wan an exchange between the two of you which began this silly argument.

There is no further need of discussion. I have spoken! :-)