The Institution of Christian Religion

Moreover they do slanderously set the Fathers against us (I mean the ancient Fathers and the writers of the age as yet more uncorrupted) as though they had them for maintainers of their ungodliness: by whose authority if the debate were to be ended, the better part of the victory (to speak even most modestly) would bend to our side. But whereas many things have ben excellently well and wisely written of those Fathers, and in some things, that hath happened to them which is wont to happen to men: these good natural children forsooth, according to the rightness that they have both of wit, judgement and mind, do worship only their faults and errors: and those things which are well spoken, they either mark not, or feign as if they knew them not, or do corrupt them: so as a man may say that their care was altogether to gather dung in of the gold of the Fathers. Then they oppress us with importunate crying out against us, as despisers and enemies of the Fathers. But we do so not despise them, that if it were the matter of my present purpose, I could very easily prove by their consenting voices the greater part of these things that we say at this day. But we so read their writings, that we alway remember, that all things are ours, to serve us, not to have dominion over us: and that we are Christs alone, whom we must obey in all things without exception. Who so keepeth not this choice, shall have nothing certain in religion:¹ forasmuch as those holy men were ignorant of many things, do oftentimes strive one with an other, yea and sometimes fight with themselves. Not without cause (say they) we are warned of Solomon, that we pass not the old bounds which our Fathers have set. But there is all not all one rule in the bounding of fields, and the obedience of Faith, which ought to be so framed that it forget her people and the house of her Father. If they have so great delight to use allegories, why do they not rather expound the Apostles, than any other, to be their Fathers, whose appointed bounds it is not lawful to pluck up?² for so did Hierome expound it, whose words they have registered among their canons. But if they will have the bounds of the same Fathers, whom they mean, to be steadfastly kept: why do they, so oft as they list, so licentiously pass them?

Moreouer they do sclaunderously sett the Fathers agaynst vs (I meane the auncient Fathers and the writers of the age as yet more vncorrupted) as though they had them for mainteners of their vngodlynesse: by whose authoritie if the debate were to be ended, the better part of the victorie (to speake euen most modestlie) wold bend to our side. But wheras many thynges haue ben excellentlye well and wisely written of those Fathers, and in some thynges, that hath happened to them which is wont to happen to mē: these good naturall children forsothe, accordyng to the rightenesse that they haue bothe of witt, iudgement and mynde, doo worship onely their faultes and errors: and those thynges which are well spoken, they eyther marke not, or fayne as if they knew them not, or do corrupt them: so as a man may say that their care was altogether to gather dong in of the golde of the Fathers. Then they oppresse vs with importunate cryeng out agaynst vs, as despisers and ennemies of the Fathers. But wee doo so not despise them, that if it were the mater of my present purpose, I could very easily proue by their consentyng voices the greater part of these thynges that we say at this daye. But we so reade their writynges, that we alway remembre, that all thynges are ours, to serue vs, not to haue dominion ouer vs: and that we are Christes alone, whome we muste obeye in all thynges withoute exception. Who so keepeth not this choise, shall haue nothyng certaine in religion: