15. W. BISHOP.
His other reason is, that if we beleeue vnwritten traditions were ne∣cessary to saluation, then we must as well beleeue the writings of the an∣cient Fathers, as the writings of the Apostles: because Apostolicall tra∣ditions are not elsewhere to be found but in their bookes: but that were absurd, for they might erre.
Answer. That doth not follow for three causes: First, Apostolical tra∣ditions are as wel kept in the mind of the learned, as in the ancient fathers writings, and therefore haue more credit then the Fathers writings. Se∣condly, they are commonly recorded of more then one of the Fathers, and so haue firmer testimony then any one of their writings. Thirdly, if there should be any Apostolicall tradition related but of one auncient father, yet it should be of more credit than any other thing of his owne inuention, because that was registred by him as a thing of more estimation. And a∣againe, some of the rest of those blessed and godly personages would haue reproued it as they did all other falshoods, if it had not bin such indeed as it was termed: which when they did not, they gaue a secret approbation of it for such, and so that hath the interpretatiue consent at least of the learned of that age, and the following for Apostolicall tradition.
But Master Perkins proues the contrary by Saint Paul, who saith,* 1.1 That I continue to this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other thing then that which the Prophets and Moses did say should come. Why make you here a full point: let Saint Paul