The repressor of over much blaming of the clergy.

xx. CHAPITER.

CONFIRMACIOUN to the i^e. and ij^e. of these iiij. now putt conclusiouns is this. Who euer for deuocioun and loue which he hath to Holi Scripture wole holde that ech gouernaunce of Goddis moral lawe and ser|uice is groundid in the Newe Testament, (as summen holden,) or in the hool Bible, (as summe othere hol|dun,) and ellis it is not to be take for a point and deede or gouernaunce of Goddis lawe and of Goddis seruice, ȝit he mai not holde and seie that needis ech gouernaunce of Goddis seid lawe and seruise muste be groundid expresseli in Holi Scripture, as anoon aftir schal be proued. Wherfore he muste needis graunte and holde, that if eny deede or gouernaunce be groun|did or witnessid includingli or closingli in eny of the bifore spokun maners bi the thre reulis, it is ynowȝ forto seie and holde that thilk deede or gouernaunce is groundid or witnessid in Holi Scripture. And if he muste so graunte, certis thanne if it be schewid to him that ech of the xj. gouernauncis whiche y schal aftir in the ij^e., iij^e., iv^e., and v^e. parties of this book defende and iustifie, (of which oon is setting up of ymagis in chirchis, and an othir is pilgrymage vnto the memorialis or mynde placis of Seintis,) is in|cludingli or closingli groundid or witnessid in Holi Scripture bi eny of the maners bifore seid in the iij. reulis, (as aftir in the ij^e. parti of this book it schal be schewid,) he muste needis lijk weel graunte that ech of tho xj. gouernauncis is groundid or witnessid in Holi Scripture.

That thou maist not seie and holde ech gouernaunce and deede of Goddis lawe and seruice to be expressid in Holi Scripture, and that ellis it is not Goddis ser|uice

and a deede of Goddis lawe, lo thou maist se herbi. In al Holi Scripture it is not expressid bi bidding, counseiling, or witnessing, or bi eni [eni is added by a later (?) hand.] ensaum|pling of persoon, that a lay man not preest schulde were a breche, or that he schulde were a cloke, or that he schulde were a gowne, or that he schulde die wollen clooth into other colour than is the colour of scheep, or that men schulden [schulde, MS. (first hand).] bake eny fleisch or fisch in an ovyn, or that men schulde make and vse clockis forto knowe the houris of the dai and nyȝt; for thouȝ in eeldist daies, and thouȝ in Scripture mensioun is maad of orologis, schewing the houris of the dai bi schadew maad bi the sunne in a cercle, certis neuere saue in late daies was eny clok telling the houris of the dai and nyȝt bi peise and bi stroke, and open it is that nouȝwhere in Holi Scripture is expresse mensioun mad of eny suche. Also nouȝwhere in Holi Scripture is mensioun mad or eny ensaumpling doon, that a womman schulde were upon her heer and heed eny couerchief of lynnen threde or of [of is added by a later hand.] silk. Forwhi the coueryng with which a wommannys heed ouȝte be couered, wherof Holi Scripture spekith in the pistlis of Poul, [See 1 Cor. xi. 3-10. It need hardly be added that Pecock has committed an error in this sentence, the … of v. 10 being certainly a veil. Veils are also several times mentioned in the Old Testament. See Kitto, Cycl. Bibl. Lit., s. v. Veil.] was only the heer of wommennys heed vnschorn, and of noon other coueryng to wommennys heedis spekith Holi Scripture. And here aȝens Holi Scripture wole that men schulden lacke the coueryng which wommen schulden haue, and thei schulden so lacke bi that that the heeris of her heedis schul|den be schorne, and schulde not growe in lengthe doun as wommanys heer schulde growe. Perauen|ture,

as wijs as thou makist thee in the Bible forto reproue pilgrimage and setting up of ymagis and worschiping doon bifore ymagis, thou couthist not aspie this laste seid point of wommannis coueryng: therfore how thou canst fynde it bi Holi Scripture, lete se; and if thou canst not it fynde, it may be founde and proued so bi Holi Scripture that thou schalt not kunne seie nay; and ȝit it is holde for a dede alloweable and vertuose that wommen were couerchefis, and that men and wommen were gownys and clokis, not withstonding that more synne cometh bi wering of wommennys couercheefis and bi wom|mennys gownis than by vce of ymagis and bi pilgrim|agis, as al the world may wite, if the mater be weel and thriftili examyned, bi what schal be seid and proued of ymagis and of pilgrimagis in the ij^e. partie of this present book, and bi what is al redi therof clereli seid and proued in The book of worschiping.

Also thou schalt not fynde expresseli in Holi Scrip|ture that the Newe Testament schulde be write in Englisch tunge to lay men, or in Latyn tunge to clerkis; neither that the Oold Testament schulde be write in Englisch tunge to lay men, or in Latyn tunge to clerkis: and ȝit ech of these gouernauncis thou wolte holde to be leeful, and to be a meritorie vertuose moral deede forto therbi deserue grace and glorie, and to be the seruice of God, and therfore to be the lawe of God; sithen bi no deede a man hath merit, saue bi a deede which is the seruice and the lawe of God; and ech moral vertu is the lawe of God, as it is proued weel in othere place [Probably we should read placis.] of my writingis.

Also thus: Where it is [Perhaps we should read, Where is it, &c.; if not, we must under|stand from above, [Thou shalt not find] where, &c.] groundid expresseli in Scrip|ture, that men mowe lete schaue her berdis. And how

dare thei so lete, sithen it cannot be founde expresseli in Scripture [Holi is inserted in the MS. be|fore Scripture, but cancelled by a later(?) hand.] that thei ouȝten so lete, and namelich sithen it is founde in Holi Scripture that men leten her berdis growe withoute schering or schauyng, and also sithen it was the oolde vsage thoruȝ al the world in Christendom? Where is it in Holi Scripture groundid bi wey of comendyng or of allowaunce that men schulden or miȝten lauȝwe? For to the contrarie is euydence in Holi Scripture, Mat. v^e. capitulum., where it is seid thus: Blessid ben thei that moornen or weilen, for thei schulen be coumfortid; and also, Gen. [xviij^e.] [A space left in the MS. for the number.] c., Sara the wijf of Abraham was punyschid, for that sche lauȝed bihinde the dore of the tabernacle. Where is it also grondid in Holi Scripture that men myȝten alloweabili or schulden pleie in word bi bourding, or in deede by rennyng or leping or schuting, or bi sitting at the merels, or bi casting of coitis? And ȝit ech of these deedis mowe be doon and ben doon vertuoseli and merytorili.

Also where in Holi Scripture is it grondid that men myȝten or schulden singe, saue oonli where yn thei preisiden God, as aungelis diden in erthe whanne Crist was born? And so for esement of a man him silf, and for esement of his neiȝbour, it is not expressid in Holi Scripture that a man schulde singe. And ȝit Goddis forbode, but that into esement of him silf and also of his neiȝbour, a man mai singe, pleie, and lauȝe ver|tuoseli, and therfore merytorili; and if he mai do it merytorili, certis thanne thilk deede is Goddis seruice; and if it be Goddis seruice, it is needis a deede of Goddis lawe.

Where is it expressid bi word or bi eny persoonys ensaumpling in Holi Scripture that men schulden make

ale or beer, of whiche so myche horrible synne cometh, myche more than of setting up of ymagis, or of pil|grymagis; and the defautis doon aboute ymagis and pilgrimagis ben myche liȝter and esier to be amendid, than the defautis comyng bi making of ale and of beer. And also here with it is trewe that without ale and bere, and without sidir and wijn and meeth, men and wommen myȝte lyue ful long, and lenger than thei doon now, and in lasse iolite and cherte of herte forto bringe hem into horrible grete synnes. And ȝit thou wolte seie that forto make ale and beer and forto drinke hem is the seruice of God, and is merytorie, and therfore is the lawe of God: for bi no deede a man schal plese God and haue merit and meede, saue bi deede of his seruice; and ech deede which is his seruice is a deede of his lawe.

That in Holi Scripture is noon of these now rehercid gouernauncis groundid or witnessid or ensaumplid bi eny persoon expresseli, lo, y proue thus: No thing is expresseli spoken of in Scripture, which is not there in special openli named; but so it is, [is is interlineated in a later hand, which has also made some erasures.] that neither breche of lay man, neither gown, neither cloke, neither wommanis lynnen or silken couercheef, neither clock, neither Englisch tunge or langage, [After this follows, neither Latyn tunge or langage, but a later (?) hand has drawn a pen through it; rightly. See Luke xxiii. 38. But very possibly Pecock wrote it, since he was capable of making such a blunder as to say that a cloak is not mentioned in Scripture.] neither ale, neither bere is spokun of there in special and bi name. Wher|fore the vce of these thingis, as to be doon bi tho thingis, is not there expressid. Also thus: No gouer|naunce or treuthe is expresseli groundid or witnessid in Holi Scripture, which mai not be knowen [knowe, MS. (first hand).] bi the Scripture aloone, without more sett therto of propo|cisiouns

in the resoun of him which redith and vndir|stondith there the Scripture. Forwhi in this case thilk gouernaunce schulde be grondid or witnessid sumwhat and in parcel bi tho proposiciouns caste to Scripture, as it is groundid and witnessid sumwhat and in parcel bi the Scripture; but so it is, that noon of these now bifore spokun and rehercid gouernauncis may be knowe to be trewe, iust, and riȝtful bi eny text or processe in Scripture aloone, whilis no more at al in resoun is sett to the same Scripture, for to conclude the seid gouernance bi the Scripture and bi resoun to gidere. Wherfore noon of alle these seid gouernauncis is groundid or witnessid expresseli in Holi Scripture.

Confirmacioun herto is this: No thing is expressid or expresseli witnessid or groundid in Holi Scripture, which is not rehercid in Holi Scripture; but so it is, that noon of these gouernauncis is rehercid in Holi Scripture: wherfore noon of hem is expressid in Holi Scripture. And if noon of hem is there expressid, certis noon of hem is there expresseli groundid, wit|nessid, or denouncid, or tauȝt. Also thus: Oonli it is expressid or expresseli toold and tauȝt in Holi Scripture, which is knowun for trewe or to be doon, thouȝ no thing ellis in [in is interlineated by a later (?) hand, and doom written on an erasure.] doom of resoun be sett ther to; but so is not of eny of the bifore rehercid gouer|nauncis: wherfore noon of hem is expressid or expres|seli toold, or tauȝt, witnessid, rehercid, or groundid in Holi Scripture.

Now, Sir, to thee thus: In caas that y wolde holde aȝens thee, and seie that it is not to be do, that ale and beer be mad and drunke; or that wommen weere couerchefis of lynnen or of silk, of whiche so miche synne cometh; or if y wolde holde that it were not Goddis seruice forto at sum while lauȝe or make

feeste or pleie; and namelich if y wolde seie to thee thus: "Where ben these bifore rehercid gouernauncis groundid in Holi Scripture, namelich in the Newe Testament?" loke how thou woldist in this case answere to me forto defende bi doom of resoun the making and vsing of ale, or the wering of womman|nys couercheefis to be a moral, vertuose deede of Goddis lawe; and how thou woldist grounde or bi witnessing fynde eny of hem in Holy Scripture bi eny of the maners bifore spoken in the thre reulis, or in eny other maner; and in the same or euen lijk wise y schal defende bi resoun ech of the xj. gouernauncis aftir to be iustified in the ij^e., iij^e., iiij^e., and v_e. parties of this book, as there aftir schal be seen. And in the same or euen lijk wise y schal grounde or fynde bi witnessing ech of hem in Holi Scripture, as also thou schalt openli after in the ij^e. parti of this book se. Wolde God thilk men and wommen, (and namelich thilk wommen whiche maken hem silf so wise bi the Bible, that thei no deede wol|len allowe to be vertuose and to be doon in mannis vertuose conuersacioun, saue what thei kunnen fynde expresseli in the Bible, and ben ful coppid of speche anentis clerkis, and avaunten and profren hem silf whanne thei ben in her iolite and in her owne housis forto argue and dispute aȝens clerkis,) schulden not were couercheefis into tyme thei couthen [couthe, MS. (first hand).] schewe bi her Bible where it is expresseli bede, conseilid, or witnessid in her Bible to be doon; neither schulde sette hem silf for to sitte at priuey; neither schulden rise ther|fro, whanne thei were so set or sitting, into tyme thei hadden groundid expresseli in Holi Scripture that thei ouȝten alle tho deedis do, but if thei wolen leue her vnwijs and proud folie. And ȝit ech of tho deedis, whanne he is doon aftir doom of resoun and for God,

is seruice of God, and lawe of God; for ech of hem is a moral vertuose deede; and also forto leue eny of hem were a vice and a synne to God. And therfore ech of tho deedis, whanne thei ben [be, MS. (first hand).] doon bi resoun and for God, is a seruice and a lawe to God, name|lich sithen ech deede, which eny Cristen man schulde wirche and do bi avisement and in which he schulde bi avisement be occupied, ouȝte be a lawe to God. Forwhi eche such dede ouȝte be a seruice to God, sithen Poul seith i^e. Cor. x^e. capitulum. thus: Whether ȝe ete or drinke or eny other thing doon, alle do ȝe into the glorie of God.

Also y wolde that no suche wommen schulden anointe, waische, or bathe hem silf into tyme thei cou|then alle tho deedis grounde expressely in the Bible to be doon. Certis wommen mowe not so grounde the wering of her silken or lynnen couerchefis bi it what is writen ie. Thimothe, ij^e. capitulum., that wommen schulden haue couenable habit, where Poul seith thus: Also wommen in couenable habit with schamefastnes and sobirnes araiyng hem silf, not in writhen heris, or in gold, or in peerlis, or preciose clooth; but that that bicometh wommen biheting pite, bi gode werkis. Forwhi in tho daies of Poul summe wommen weriden couenable habit, and ȝit noone wommen we|riden thanne eny lynnen or silken keuercheefis, but weriden her open heer, as sumwhat therto sownith this same now rehercid processe of Poul, and bettir it mai be proued bi processe of Poul [A space left in the MS. for the reference. Pecock may probably have misunderstood 1 Cor. xi. 15: that veils were in that age some|times worn by women needs no proof, and is affirmed by St. Paul himself, 1 Cor. xi. 10. See Smith's Dict. Gr. and Rom. Ant., s. v. Ve|lum.] if thilk processe be weel discussid. Wherfore bi this that Poul seith, "Wommen to haue couenable habit,"

mai not be so groundid that thei schulden [The twenty-three following lines are added in the margin, being partly written on an erasure. The hand is very similar to that of the general text, but a little smaller; some additions and erasures how|ever being made by a later, though early, corrector. Some considerable erasures occur also in the preceding paragraph.] haue lyn|nen or silken keuerchefis.

Also thus: Whanne Poul seith that wommen schul|den haue couenable habit, he pointith not to hem which habit is couenable to hem and which is not couenable to hem; neither he pointith more speciali that for to were lynnen or silken couercheefis is co|uenable; or that it is not couenable. Wherfore forto haue al this pointid he remittith and sendith us sum|where ellis, and wole that we seche and fynde sum where ellis than in Holi Scripture which habit is couenable, and which is not couenable; but so it is, that into nowhere ellis he remittith us or sendith us or ouȝte sende us for this purpos, saue in to doom of resoun and into lawe of kinde and moral philso|phie. Forwhi nowhere in Holi Scripture this mater is pointid and tauȝt expresseli. Wherfore it was the entent of Poul in the seid proces, i^e. Thim. ij^e. capitulum., that forto fynde, know, and iuge expresseli which habit is couenable, and whether forto were lynnen or silken couercheefis is couenable, we schulden go to doom of resoun and lawe of kinde. And, if this be trewe, thanne doom of resoun and lawe of kinde and not Holi Scripture muste expresseli grounde this, that wommen mowe weel were lynnen and silken couer|cheefis, if it be in eny wise groundable and leeful. Forwhi whanne Holi Scripture remittith from him or leueth to an other thing or sendith into an other thing eny certeyn kunnyng or knowing to be had, Holi Scripture not groundith, namelich not expresseli, thilk kunnyng and knowing; but the thing, into

which Holi Scripture so remyttith, it so groundith. Wherfore needis if it be leeful wommen forto were lynnen and silken couercheefis, doom of resoun muste expresseli grounde thilk wering; and Holi Scripture not so it groundith. Ensaumple for this purpos is this: If the king sende his epistle to alle peintouris, that thei peinte alle crucifixis with couenable colouris; certis it mai not be seid as here that thilk epistle groundith this, that whijt colour schal be leid in oon certein parti of the crucifix and reed in an other parti, and so forth of othere colouris; but the craft of peinting muste it grounde; and as for the grounding therof, the king in his epistle leueth hem to her owne craft. In lijk maner it were if the king bi his epistle wolde comaunde to goldsmythis, that whanne euer thei schulden enamele eny cuppe or other iewel, thei schulden enamele it couenabili; certis herbi the king schulde not grounde to hem, that there in such a place of the iewel thei schulden leie rather blew ena|meling than reed or whijt, and that in this place thei schulden [schulde, MS. (first hand).] leie whijt or greene enameling rather than blew; but al this he leueth to be groundid bi her craft. Wherfore lijk wise it is to be seid in this present purpos.

Ferthermore forto iustifie her bathing, waisching, and anointing wommen mowe not allegge the storie of Sussanne, Daniel xiij^e. capitulum.; for thilk processe and storie is not Holi Writt, but Apocrif; and the verri book of Daniel (as miche as is Holi Writt) is eendid with the xij^e. chapiter of the same book, as Ierom ["Hæc idcirco, ut difficultatem vobis Danielis ostenderem: qui apud Hebræos nec Susannæ habet historiam, nec hymnum trium puero|rum, nec Belis draconisque fabulas: quas nos, quia in toto orbe dis|persæ sunt, veru anteposito, easque jugulante, subjecimus, ne videremur apud imperitos magnam partem voluminis detruncasse." S. Hieron. Præfat. in Dan. Proph. (Op. t. ix. pp. 1361, 1362. Ed. Vall. 1738.)]

the translatour witnessith; and ȝit in thilk story is no mension maad of alle the wommennys deedis now rehercid, saue oonli of bathing and of waisching with oyl and swope, and ȝit not of these bi wey of com|ending or bi wey of ensaumpling that othere per|soones schulde do the same.

Thouȝ the thre reulis or supposiciouns, whiche y haue sett bifore in the xix^e. chapiter, ben sufficient into the purpos of the iiij. conclusiouns there drawen out of hem, and into the purpos of a general proof there mad upon [upon is inserted by a later (?) hand.] the xj. bifore spokun gouernauncis, (and therfore y there settid no mo reulis than was nedeful to myn there purposid entent,) ȝit lest that summe reders wolden conceyue and trowe ther bi that in tho iij. reulis or supposiciouns y weene and vnderstonde to be alle maners bi whiche eny trouthe, gouernaunce, or conclusiouns is bede, counseilid, or witnessid in|cludingli or impliedli in Holi Scripture; therfore into oon other maner bi which a gouernaunce or treuthe is bede, counseilid, or witnessid bi Holi Scripture, y remytte and send ech man desiring forto it leerne or knowe into the firste parti of the book clepid Iust apprising of Holi Scripture. For there in the [Spaces left in the MS. for the numbers.] chapiter in prouyng of the [Spaces left in the MS. for the numbers.] trouthe schal be schewid this other maner of gronding, bidding, counseiling, or witnessing bi Holi Scripture, which is left here vnseid and vntauȝt.

Aftir that (fro the bigynnyng of this present chapi|ter hidir to) y haue thus confermed the firste and [and the, MS. (first hand).] ij^e. conclusiouns, put and proued in the next bifore going chapiter, y putte now here the v^e. conclusioun as for an eende of this present first parti, which v^e. conclu|sioun is this. For to conuicte and ouercome tho erring

persoones of the lay peple whiche ben clepid Lollardis, and forto make hem leue her errouris is a ful nota|ble, ȝhe, and an excellent remedie, the writing in her modiris langage of this present firste parti, and of the book clepid The iust apprising of Holi Scripture, and tho bookis of whiche mensioun is mad in these bokis, and the bitaking of these bookis and of tho bokis into her vce of reding and studiyng.

That this conclusioun is trewe y proue thus: For|to conuicte and ouercome tho seid erring persoones of the lay peple, and for to make hem leue her errouris, an excellent remedie is the dryuyng of hem into sure knowing or into weenyng or opinioun, that thei neden miche more to leerne and knowe into the profit and sure leernyng and knowing of Goddis lawe and seruice, than what thei mowe leerne and knowe bi her reed|ing and studiyng in the Bible oonli; but so it is, that forto dryue hem into the now seid knowing, trowing, or opinioun seruen at ful in an excellent maner the writing of this present firste parti in her modris lan|gage, with lijk writing of the book clepid Iust ap|prising of Holi Scripture; and bi so miche the better, if therto be sett the othere bokis named in these ij. And without the writing of this present first parti and of The iust apprising, or with out sum other writing lijk to hem, tho persoones wolen in no wise be so conuictid and ouercome, as assay therto mad bifore this present day thoruȝ this sixti wyntris by his ther yn vneffectual speding makith open experimental wit|nessing. Wherfore for to conuicte the seid persoones and forto make hem leue her errouris is an excellent remedie, (ȝhe, and as it were an vnlackeable remedie,) the seid writing of the now spoken bokis and the bitaking of tho seid bokis into the reeding and studi|yng of the same persoones.

The firste premisse of this proof and argument is trewe. Forwhi, if tho persoones were dryue into sure

knowing or into trowing, that thei neden leerne and knowe miche more into the profit and ful leerning and knowing of Goddis lawe than what is in the Bible, or what thei mowe leerne and knowe bi the Bible, certis thei schulden be maad seme to hem silf verry foolis; and thei schulden se and knowe weel hem silf to be fonnys and foolis, as anentis ful manye of the thingis whiche ben necessarili to be leerned and kunne of hem bisidis the Bible, ȝhe, and in the Bible; and thei schulden se that thei han miche nede to clerkis, and thei schulden [schulde, MS. (first hand.)] be aschamed of her bifore had hiȝe bering and presumpcioun and of her wyncing in witt, and of her hopping bisidis witt, as her of ful sure experience is had, blessid be God, and sure expe|rience may be had, how ofte euer eny of tho persoones talken in long leiser eernestli upon eny point of Goddis lawe and seruice with a sad and weel leerned clerk in moral philsophie and dyuynyte. For sotheli ful soone schulen tho persoones thanne stonde at her wittis eende, and ful rude be where yn the clerk schal sprede him silf abrode in large cleernes: Verrili the thing which we knowen we now speken, and the thing which we han seen we witnessen: [See John iii. 11.] where now aȝenward, (bi cause it seemeth to hem that thei neden nothing into the scole of Goddis lawe and seruice saue Holi Scripture aloone, and that therto Holi Scripture sufficith, and thei weenen hem silf forto kunne at ful and substanciali and piththeli Holi Scripture, for that thei kunnen bi herte the textis of Holi Scripture and kunnen lussche hem out thikke at feest, and at ale drinking, and vpon her hiȝe benchis sitting,) thei ben obstinat aȝens her owne goostli thrift and aȝens her soulis sauyng. And therfore the seid first premisse is redili trewe.

And that the ij^e. premysse of the same proof and argument is trewe in his firste parti, it schal be openli knowen to ech diligent of tho bokis the ouerreder and attentijf studier. Forwhi this firste parti of this pre|sent book and The iust apprising of Holi Scripture as in generalte schewen vndoutabli and vnaȝenseiabily, that myche moral philsophie and miche lawe of kinde is algatis necessarie to be leerned, as weel as the Bible; and that withoute the leerning of the seid moral philsophie and lawe of kinde the Bible may not be ariȝt vndirstonde; and that the seid philsophie and lawe of kinde is the more parti of Goddis lawe and seruice; and the othere bokis, whiche ben named in these now seid ij. bokis, schewen the same in spe|cialte: and therfore the reders and studiers in these bookis muste nedis be dryue herto, that thei han nede to the help and counseil and direccioun of clerkis, and han nede to miche other thing than to the Bible aloon. And therfore the ij^e. premisse of the principal argument is trewe as for his first parti, whos also secunde parti is confermed bifore bi experience and assay spoken bifore, where the same secunde parti is sett forth in the principal argument.

And so, (sithen the bothe premissis of the prouyng argument ben trewe, and the argument is formali maad,) it muste needis be that the conclusioun of tho premissis is trewe, which is not ellis than this pre|sent v^e. conclusioun. And therfore this present v^e. conclusioun is nedis to be holde for trewe. For making and writing of whiche now bifore spokun and rehercid bokis; to the hiȝe aloon God, louyngist Lord a thousind sithis gramerci. [Here eendith the firste party of the book clepid THE REPRESSER OF OVER MOCHE WIJTYNG THE CLERGIE.]