rise, as it is proued bi the firste principal conclusioun. Wherfore he muste needis grounde treuthis and con|clusions of the ije. maner now seid, that is to seie, treuthis and conclusiouns into whiche mannis witt mai not bi it silf and bi natural help without reuelacioun mad therto fro God uprise [Perhaps meant to be written divisim in the MS.] and come to, forto hem kunne and knowe. And these ben articlis of feith as it is schewid in The folwer to the donet; and so the firste partie of this iije. conclusioun is schewid to be trewe.
Also that Holi Scripture makith rehercel of many treuthis and conclusiouns groundid in moral philsophi for the entent here in this iije. conclusioun seid, it is schewid bifore in proof of the ije. conclusioun. Wher|fore the ije. parti of this iije. principal conclusioun is needis to be holde for trewe.
Also that tho feithis whiche now here ben rehercid as for no lawis to Cristen men ben not lawis to hem, and that tho feithis whiche now here ben rehercid as for lawis to Cristen men ben lawis to hem; it is schewid in the firste parti of the book clepid The iust apprising of Holi Scripture; and ther yn the reder mai it leerne, if he wole. But y wolde se that oure Bible men whiche holden hem so wise bi the Bible aloone, ȝhe, bi the Newe Testament aloon, cou|then bi her Bible aloon knowe which feith is a lawe to man and which feith is not a lawe to man, and thanne he dide a maistrie passing his power. Wherbi and bi many othere pointis of Goddis lawe and ser|uice to man, whiche mowe not be knowen bi oonli the Bible but by doom of resoun and moral philsophi, (as it is weel open thoruȝ manye treticis in the book of Cristen religioun and in the Filling of the iiij. tablis and other mo,) tho Bible men mowe take good
