Conclusion IV: useful doctrine decided among those agreeing on the premises; peace, weight, and necessity

CONCLUSION IV. If something is not found plainly in the Scriptures, nor handed down from them by all the saints' unanimous consent, yet does not openly and undoubtingly oppose and contradict them, and is decided by a council or congregation of those Christians who agree with us in the foregoing heads — not, however, as a Gospel or article of faith about which no one may doubt, but simply proposed as true and useful doctrine that may be taught in the Church or school — we acknowledge ourselves bound not to contradict it contentiously, but either to consent especially with those with whom we live (and therefore, so far as in us lies, we are also bound to pursue peace with them), or, if we happen to feel a scruple about it in our consciences, to propose that scruple seasonably and conveniently: so that if we cannot agree on the question of some article's truth simply and in itself, we may at least keep consent on the question of its weight and necessity — namely that although it is not altogether necessary to believe, it may still be usefully taught or at least tolerated in the Church and schools.

Moreover, if someone agreed with us on the article simply and in itself (for example, that the books of Judith, Tobit, and the like were not written by the prophets and accordingly are not of equal honor with the canonical) yet dissented from us on its weight and necessity (namely that for this cause the one who thinks apart and constantly believes otherwise is not to be condemned as a heretic): we acknowledge ourselves bound to side with the one who agrees with us on necessity — namely that neither affirmation nor denial of this article is to be judged necessary to salvation — and to regard as a tyrant or heretic the one who agrees with us on the article simply considered yet dissents on necessity, because he lays an unnecessary yoke on the disciples.