A Confutation of a Popish and Slanderous Libel, Treatise · Answer 19 – Papist opinion 21
The aunswere.
A man maie easely perceiue, that you delight in greate nombers. For as before in your former argumentes, one matter was cutte into fower partes, to fill vp the nomber, so likewise in these argumentes without order, or dispositiō, diuers things are twise or thrise repeated. As dipping in baptisme, oile, and Chrisme, and crossyng whereas if you would hauehave followed any order, all these should hauehave made but one argument of Ceremonies, or Traditiōs. Or if you would néedes diuide theim into their particulers, you should hauehave made thirtie, or fourtie argumentes of theim, and not tenne onelyonly. But now, how well you difine the primitiue Churche (as I hauehave touched before) a manne maie meruaile to see: sometyme, you alledge twoo hundreth, somtyme three hundreth, somtyme fower hundreth, sometymes sixe hundreth, and at length you come almost to eighte hundreth yeres after Christe, when you alledge the seconde Counsaile of Nice, whiche was holden in the yere of our Lorde, seuen hundred eightie and one. So that the greater halfe of all the tyme, that hath passed from Christes ascention, vntil this daie, you would hauehave vsus to take for the primitiue churche. But you know full well, that none of vsus, would allowe all that tyme, for the primitiue Churche, especially when wee speake of that state, whiche we woulde hauehave to bee a paterne and example to all churches. OnelyOnly your purpose was, to amase your vnlearned frendes, to whom you made this apology, with the names of so manie aunciente fathers, as you rehease, and yet like a wise man, you note but fewe places, where a man should finde their aucthorities, as you alledge theim, lest you should happen to be discredited. Whiche must needes be compted fraudulent dealyng, because you note some wherof no learned manne will doubte, and passe ouer so many, whiche séeme somwhat straunge, that any suche thinges should be, to those that parhappes hauehave reade, as muche of the aunciente doctours as you. But vntounto all, your tenne as gumentes, I wil first oppose one answere whiche is sufficiente, to take theim all awaie, namely that suche thinges, as you bringe in, to hauehave been vsed, of the primitiue churche, were not in the first churche of the Apostles, whiche is moste properly called the primitiue churche, but in the latter and more corrupte age, and the further from the Apostles, the farther from sinceritie. Beside that of Ceremonies, not manifestly impious vsed in the aunciente churche, after the Apostles, the churche at al tymes after hath power, to abrogate or alter theim, as they growe to bee abused, or cease to be profitable, & therefore diuersitie of Ceremonies, maketh not diuersitie of Churches.
The Papiste.
Firste in the Primitiue Churche they did mixe in our lordes cuppe water with wine, and so for to doe, est lex Euangelica, & traditio dominica, as witnesseth S. Cypriane, Irenaeus, Eusebius Emissenus whiche these our reformatours will none of.
The aunswere.
The primitiue churche obserued in the sacramēt, that, which in drinking of wine, they commonly vsed, that is to put water among the wine, to allaie the strength of it, in whiche thyng, there was no harme, so long as superstition, and opinion of necessitie was awaie, but that it should bee as you saie, lex Euangelica & traditio dominica, the lawe of the Gospell, and the tradition of our Lorde, I suppose, you are not able to proue, by aucthoritie of those Doctours, whose names you recite. In deede Cypriane, verie earnestly vrgeth the law of the Gospell, & the institution of Christ, for wine to bée vsed therein, againste certaine heretikes, of his tyme, whiche contended, that it should be ministered onelyonly with water. And so he writeth lib. 2. Epist. 3. to Caecilius. Admonites autem nos scias, vt in Calice offerendo, dominica traditio seruetur, ne que aliud fiat à nobis, quam quod pro nobis dominus prior fecit. Vt Calix qui in comemorationem eius offertur mixtus vino offeratur. Nam cum dicat Christus, ego sum vitis vera, sanguis Christi non aqua est vti que , sed vinum. That is. Knowe thou, that wee are admonished, that in offeryng the Cuppe, the tradition of our Lorde be obserued, and that none other thyng be doen of vsus, then that which our lorde before did for vsus. That the cuppe whiche is offred in remembraunce of him be offered mingled with wine. For seyng that Christe saieth, I am the true Vine, not water truely, but wine is the bloude of Christe. By this testimonie, it is manifeste, that Cypriane vrgeth wine, and not water, to be of the institution of Christe, and the lawe of the Gospell. But I marueile how any Papiste can bee so shamelesse, to accuse vsus for takyng awaie water out of the Cuppe, whiche was no parte of Christes institution, when thei them selues are so bolde, to take awaie the cuppe altogether, whiche is the one halfe of the Sacramente, of Christes owne institution, and continued in the Churche 1400. yeres after Christe, vntill the late Counsaile of Constance, whiche was but. 155. yeres agoen. Thei maie robbe the people of the bloodde of Christe, whiche Christe appoincted for theim, and we are heinous heretikes, for not vsing water in the Cup, whereof as there is no vse, so was there none institution. This is the iudgemente of those, that bée blinded with their owne pride, to espie a mote in an other mannes iye, and not to see a beame in their owne.
The Papiste.
Seconde in the Primitiue Church in baptising, they vsed to dippe the partie baptized thries in the water, and S. Basile affirmeth, that it was a tradition of the Apostles, that who so euer did not so, he shoulde be deposed therfore, wheras our reformatours doe but sprincle a little water in the foreheade of the partie baptized, it may be quickly espied that thei follow not the primitiue churche.