The repressor of over much blaming of the clergy.

vj. CHAPITER.

PERAUENTURE summe men wolen seie and knouleche here, as so nedis thei musten do, that it is leeful ynouȝ and expedient that ymagis be had and vsid in the chirche; but it is not leeful and expedient that men knele bifore hem, or preie bifore hem, or cense bifore hem, or sette liȝtis or laumpis bifore hem, or holde or bere eny suche rememoratijf signes bifore hem.

Aȝens which now rehercid holding y mai argue thus: It is leeful and expedient to do these now re|hercid deedis to God and to Seintis bifore a bare wal in a chirche, or in a corner of a chirche or of an other hous, or in the feeld. Forwhi into al this proceden bifore proued the vij. principal conclusiouns; but so it is, that what euer vertuose gouernaunce mai be do to God or to a Seint bifore a bare wal, mai be do to God or to a Seint bifore a wal peintid with the passioun of God or with the passioun of a Seint; and if this be trewe, bi lijk maner it mai be do to God or to a Seint, if the graued [graue, MS. (first hand).] ymage of God or the graued ymage of a Seint be sett vp in the same wal with picturis, schewing the passioun of Crist or the passioun or the holi lijf of the Seint. Wherfore bi lijk good skile alle suche other now rehercid deedis mowe be doon bifore ymagis.

Also into this same purpos y argue thus: It is lee|ful and expedient a man knele to God or to a Seint, (ȝhe, and ligge prostrate to God or to a Seint,) bifore an auter; and it is leeful him forto preie to God or to a Seint bifore an auter; wherfore it is bi lijk skil leeful to bere a liȝt in presence of God bifore the auter, and forto encense to God or to a Seint bifore an auter. And if this be trewe, what schal weerne to

do alle these same deedis bifore an ymage of God or of a Seint, sithen the auter in alle these casis is not take but as an ymage of God or of a Seint? And so takith Sent Ambrose in his Book of Mysteries and in his Book of Sacramentis, and holi Dionyse, the disciple of Poul, in his Book of the Chirchis Ierarchie. [See Ambros. De Myst., c. 8. (Op. tom. II., p. 336. Ed. Benedict.) De Sacram., lib. iv. c. 2 (id. p. 366). "Quid est enim altare, nisi forma corporis Christi?" id. lib. v. c. 2. (id. p. 374). "…." Dionys. Areop. De Eccles. Hierarch., c. iv. § 12. (Op. tom. I., p. 340. Ed. Cord.) Each of these works is doubtful or spurious.] It is also leeful and expedient [and expedient, by a later (?) hand in the margin.] a man forto knele to God, preie to God, and holde vp hise hondis to God, and make a vowe to God bifore a preest, or an othir man; and ȝit herbi thilk man so kneling takith not the preest for his God, [good, MS.] neithir he dooth tho now seid deedis to the preest. Wherfore in lijk maner, thouȝ a man do the same deedis bifore an ymage, he makith not thilk ymage therbi his God, neithir he dooth tho deedis to the ymage.

Also ferther thus: It is leeful ynouȝ a man to offre to God or to a Seint bifore an ymage of God or of a Seint, so that he offre not to the ymage but bifore the ymage. Wherfore bi lijk skile it is leeful ynouȝ forto knele and preie and bere liȝt and sette up can|delis bifore an ymage, whilis these deedis ben not doon to the ymage but to God or to a Seint. And if thou aske: "Wherto or in to what effect schulen [schulde, MS. (first hand).] suche liȝtis be born or be sett bifore ymagis?" Y answere thus: Tho liȝtis men mowe take and vse bi siȝt of hem as rememoratijf signes and mynding signes that greet cleernes of wisdom, greet solace is

and schal be in heuen bifore God and among Seintis; and bi this rememoraunce the remembrer, if he wole, schal be the more stirid to araie him and dispose him thidirward. And ferthirmore, sithen forto vse tho liȝtis into this vce bifore ymagis, a man schal not be lettid bi presence of tho ymagis, but he schal the rather and the more ther to be fortherid; it folewith that it is leeful and expedient a man to bere and holde and sette suche liȝtis bifore ymagis, in this now rehercid entent of remembraunce to himsilf and to othere biholders ther bi making.

Perauenture summen wolen in other wise seie, knouleche, and holde that al what is proued bi the firste vij. bifore going principal conclusiouns is trewe, but thei wolen seie thus, "What is it to us, that a thing is trewe in doom of reson? We wolen holde and knouleche and performe oonli it what Holi Scripture withnessith or groundith, and ther bi and ther fore what the lawe of God is. And we wole not attende to it what resoun iugith to be doon." Thus thei wolen seie sturdili and folili, as thouȝ the lawe of God were not ellis saue what is writun in the Bible, namelich in the Newe Testament.

But here aȝens y meete thus: The moral lawe of God is mad of ij. parties, of whiche the oon partie is lawe of kinde, (that is to seie, doom of resoun, and writun in the tablis of mennys weel disposid hertis,) and the other partie is lawe of feith vpon tho treuthis oonli, into whos fynding, leernyng, and kunnyng mannis resoun mai not suffice to arise and come withoute reuelacioun and assercioun ther of made bi God immediatli or mediatli, as bi sum aungel or apostil. And for to delyuere to us this now seid ij^e. partie of Goddis lawe serueth Holi Scripture, and not forto grounde to us the i^e. now seid partie of Goddis lawe, which is lawe of kinde or doom of natural resoun, as it is sufficientli schewid and proued weel nyȝ thoruȝ al the firste partie of this present book.

Notwithstonding that of Goddis lawe the firste now seid partie, (which is lawe of kinde and of resoun,) is XXti. sithis, (ȝhe, an hundrid sithis,) largir and more than is of Goddis lawe the ij^e. partie, (which is lawe of feith,) as it is open ynouȝ bi the firste partie of this present book. And therfore who euer wole seie and holde that forto haue and vse ymagis into the ofte bifore seid vce is not a point of Goddis lawe, and that bi cause it hangith in resoun and is not, as thou seist, expressid in the Bible, may se his owne confusioun and schame bi reding in the firste parti of this present book fro the bigynnyng of the firste parti into the eende of the [Spaces left in the MS. for the numbers, which are perhaps inten|ded to be xv. and xix. respectively.] chapiter, and eftsoone fro the bigynnyng of the [Spaces left in the MS. for the numbers, which are perhaps inten|ded to be xv. and xix. respectively.] chapiter, into the eende of the firste parti.

Also it is schewid bifore in this present ij^e. partie, the ij^e. chapiter, bi the firste and ij^e. principal argu|mentis into proof of the firste principal conclusioun, that Holi Writt weel allowith [allowith and approueth, MS. (first hand), twice.] ymagis to be had and to be vsid as mynding signes of aungelis in heuen and of othere thingis of moral gouernaunce in erthe. Wherfore bi thin owne seiyng that thou wolt folewe Holi Writt, and take for the lawe and seruice of God what that Holi Writ allowith, [allowith and approueth, MS. (first hand), twice.] thou muste needis allowe and approue for a point of Goddis lawe and of Goddis office and seruice forto haue and vse ymagis; thouȝ y wole not seie that it is to ech man vnder maundement of Goddis lawe to haue hem and vse hem, but that it is a point for whos fulfilling the doer schal be weel allowid and approued, as ther yn fulfilling a point of Goddis lawe and a seruice to God.

Also thus: Iudic. xvij^e. and xviij^e. capitulum. is writun a long storie, how a womman vowid that of a summe

of siluer schulde be mad an ymage of God; and her sone, clepid Michas, ordeyned the same ymage to be mad. And thilk ymage is clepid there a graued thing, and a wellid to gidere thing, ȝhe, and a God, with feeling good ynouȝ that the ymage was not God; and ȝit he clepid it God, for that it was the ymage of God, as ymagis of othere thingis ben clepid vndir the names of the thingis of whiche thei ben the ymagis; and, for as miche as aftirward he made mo of hem, he clepid hem there in the xviij^e. capitulum. hise Goddis. This Michas made oon of hise sones to be a preest in officiyng to God bifore these ymagis, and aftirward he made a straunge deken comyng to his hous forto be a preest in his hous into the seid officiyng to God bifore the seid first mad princi|pal ymage and the othere aftir maad ymagis. Aftir al this, the sones of Dan tooken awey bi strengthe these same ymagis and the seid preest which was bifore a deken oonli, and vsiden tho same ymagis, and ordeyneden that the same preest schulde office to God bifore tho ymagis in her tribu or kinred as he dide bifore in the hous of Miche. And in this officicing [Probably a clerical error for officiyng.] the tribu of Dan contynued bi manye hundridis of ȝeeris, as it is open there in the eende of the xviij^e. capitulum. Now, Sir, to thee thus: Neither Miche, neither his modir, neither aftirward the tribu or kinred of Dan, was holde eny ydolatrers, neither it was holde as for reprouable gouernaunce here now bifore spokun gouernaunce in having and vsing ymagis of God and in officiyng to God bifore tho ymagis; but it was take for a deuout and a preiseable gouernaunce.

And as it was thanne there, that thilk riche and worthi man hadde in his hous such a chapel and such officiyng bifore ymagis of God, (which therfore

he clepid God or Goddis,) so it [it is interlineated in a later hand, which has made considerable erasures.] was in manye other worthi mennys housis. For whi in the xix^e. capitulum. of Iudicum mensioun is mad of an othir deken dwelling in the hil of Effreym, and also in the xvij^e. capitulum. it is seid that a straunge deken came fro an othir place into the hous of Miche; and it is not to be trowid that dekenes officicieden, [So the MS.; but probably a clerical error for officieden.] where that preestis were not officiyng. Wherfore preestis in manye placis of Israel out of the temple officieden, and oratories in worthi mennys housis weren sumwhat bifore thilk tyme forto represente God, euen as the ark or chest of witnessing with propiciatorie representid God in the [the is added by a later hand.] tabernacle and in the temple.

And in lijk maner as Miche dide in this principal purpos, Laban the vncle of Iacob dide, in that that he hadde in his hous ymagis of God, whiche ymagis his owne douȝter Rachel, the wijf of Iacob, took awey with hir priueli, whanne sche departid from her fadris hous, and schulde iorney with hir husbond Iacob into the lond of Chanaan, as it is open Gen. xxxj^e. capitulum. And ȝit for al this that Laban hadde suche ymagis, and for al this that he clepid hem hise Goddis, he was not holden an ydolatrer, neither his gouernaunce was blamed theryn; [theryn is added by a later hand.] for thanne wolde not the modir of Iacob haue send him into the hous of Laban forto haue take a wijf there in ydolatrie, neither Iacob wolde haue dwellid and serued so long in the hous of Laban, that is to seie xx^ti. wyntir, if the hous of Laban hadde be wemmed so cursidli as with the synne of ydolatrie.

Wher fore folewith that Holi Writt wel allowith [allowith and approueth, MS. (first hand).] the seid having and vsing of ymagis of God, so that thou

maist not aschape, but that therfore thou allowe and approue it to be a point of Goddis moral lawe and a point of his seruice; inlasse [Both here and elsewhere it is not very clear whether the scribe intended to write inlasse conjunctim or disjunctim.] than thou wolte refuse al what is writun in the Oold Testament for eny moral lawe, and if thou wolt so do, whi schalt thou and wolte thou so bisili and so feruentli and sturdili stonde vpon this text and processe writun Exodi xx^e. capitulum. and Deut. v^e. capitulum. Thou schalte not make to thee eny grauen thing, et cætera? If thou go fro oon such pro|ces of the Oold Testament writun thanne for a point and a gouernance of Goddis lawe, go thou fro alle other like; and thanne thou infirmyst and feblist bi a greet deel the euydencis whiche thou hast and holdist aȝens the hauyng and the vsing of ymagis. And ȝit, the sothe to seie, what Laban dide aboute the ymagis was bifore the lawe of Iewis; and therfore if the gouernaunce of Laban was good and alloweable, it was not reuokid, as was the gouernaunce and lawe of the Iewis.