The repressor of over much blaming of the clergy.

iij. CHAPITRE.

THE ij^e. answere which may be mad to the ij^e. bifore going argument sett in the firste chapiter of this iij^e. parti mai be this: Thouȝ bi the bidding of God the preestis and dekenys hadden in her verri lordschip

tho xlviij. citees with the suburbis of the same citees; ȝit herbi rose not this, that thei hadden eny more of immouable godis in her lordschip and possessioun than was nedeful hem to vse and occupie in her owne de|menyng. And therto sownen tho wordis, Numeri xxxv^e. capitulum., whiche ben bifore rehercid in the firste colour to the firste answere, whanne God seid thus, Ȝeue ȝe to the dekenis citees forto dwelle in hem: wherbi it wolde seme folewe ferther, that mo citees or othere citees than in whiche the preestis and de|kenys hadde nede to dwelle yn, was not Goddis wil that schulden be ȝoue to hem; and thanne folewith ferther, that it was not leeful thanne preestis and dekenys forto haue so manye housis and feeldis, that thei myȝten sette hem out to ferme and receyue ȝeerli rentis for hem.

To this answere muste be seid thus: This answere seith sooth in this, that it is likeli to be trewe that, in the firste endewing of the preestis and dekenys bi the xlviij. citees with her suburbis, thei receyueden no more of immouable godis than was necessarie hem silf to occupie in her owne demenyng; but whanne it is concludid forto folewe herof, that it was Goddis wil that the same preestis and dekenys schulden neuer aftirward receyue and haue into her lordschip eny immouable godis, whiche thei hadden no nede bi hem silf occupie bi her owne indwelling or tiling: certis it is to be seid, that this folewith not in fourme of gode argument. And also the contrarie ther of folewith of it which was ordeyned of God him silf to be doon, Leuyticus the laste chapiter. Forwhi it was ordeyned of God him silf, that if a lay persoon wolde offre and ȝeue an hous or a feeld to the clergie in the next ȝeer bifore the iubile ȝeer, (ȝhe, thouȝ it were so nyȝ to the iubile ȝeer, that it were not but iiij. or v. daies bifore the iubile ȝeer,) the clergye myȝte sille this hous or

feeld to an other persoon than to him which ȝaue it to hem. And thanne anoon aftir, as soone as the iubile ȝeer were come, the same hous or feeld schulde turne aȝen into the lordschip of the clergie for euer|more, as it is open, Leuytik the last chapiter. And as oon lay man myȝte in this maner offre an hous or a feeld to the clergie, so ij. lay men or iij. lay men or xx. or an hundrid myȝten so do, that ech of hem schulde offre and ȝeue to the clergie an hous or a feeld; ȝhe, and oon man myȝte offre and ȝeue ij. or iij. housis and ij. or iij. feeldis, as is open ynouȝ to folewe of the proces there, which ȝeueth such licence in general withoute eny restreynyng.

Here upon y argue thus: In the next ȝeer going bifore the iubile ȝeer, (ȝhe, in the iiij^e. day bifore the iubile ȝeer,) whanne the clergie was endewid with immouable godis sufficientli forto exclude al nede to haue more of immouable godis, the clergie miȝte receyue an hous or a feeld ȝouun to hem of the laife; (and bi lijk skile iiij. housis and iiij. feeldis ȝouun to hem of the layfe;) and the clergie myȝte thanne anoon forth with sille hem to lay persoonis othere and dyuerse fro the ȝeuers. And thouȝ in the next ȝeer folewing, which is iubile ȝeer, the clergie schulde as litle be nedi to haue tho housis and feeldis as thei were in the iiij^e. dai bifore the iubile ȝeer, ȝit tho housis and feeldis schulden needis bi the lawe of God turne into the lordschip and possessioun of the clergie, as is open, Leuyticus the laste chapiter. Wherfore it accordid with the lawe of God and with his ordinance, that the clergie myȝte receyue [recey, MS., but a hyphen follows at the end of the line.] and haue mo housis and feeldis than thei hadden nede to occupie in her owne demenys; and thanne folewith herof, that thei myȝten putte tho same housis and

feeldis into ferme and rente; for [or, MS. (first hand).] ellis tho housis and feeldis schulden [schulde, MS. (first hand).] not be to hem availing.

If eny man wolde seie here, that in tho daies no lay persoon ouȝte ȝeue eny hous or feeld [or feeld is added by a later (?) hand.] to the clergie of thilk tyme, saue whanne the clergie had nede to occupie bi her owne vce thilk same or summe othere like hous or feeld, certis this seiyng may be at fulle putt abak and be rebukid. Forwhi if this seiyng were trewe, thanne the clergie schulde not and ouȝte not sille anoon forth with eny hous or feeld, which the lay peple hadde ȝeue to hem; and ȝit pleinli in the laste chapiter of Leuitik it is licencid to preestis and dekenis for to sille the hous or feeld which a lay persoon schal ȝeue to hem; ȝhe, forto sille it anoon aftir the ȝifte maad to hem; ȝhe, and forto sille anoon forthwith to hem that ȝauen the hous and the feeld or to othere per|soones whiche ȝauen [ȝaue, MS. (first hand).] hem not. And so bi al this processe now bifore going (fro the bigynnyng of the firste argument markid in the firste chapiter of this present iij^e. parti hiderto) it is weel proued, that to preestis and to othere clerkis of the Oold Testament it was not forbodun bi the lawe of God forto haue lordschip and in possessioun immouable godis; but it was licencid and grauntid to hem bi the lawe of God for to haue in lordschip and in possessioun citees, housis, and feeldis, and pasturis,—not oonli tho whiche thei helden in her owne demenys, but also mo othere [Perhaps we should read othere mo.] whiche thei myȝten sette forth to ferme and rente. And therfore Holi Scripture of the Oold Testament forbedith not to preestis and clerkis of the Newe Testament forto haue in lijk maner like immouable goodis.

And ȝit wherto schal y make me so bisy forto defende the firste [Both here and below Pecock should have written thridde instead of firste.] principal gouernaunce aȝens eny forbode which schulde be pretendid to be ther aȝens in the lawe of Iewis? Forwhi, ben not alle the lawis of the Iewis reuokid bi Crist ech oon, except what is lawe of kinde, that is to seie, what doom of cleer resoun wole haue to be do or to be left vndo; as alle Cristen men bileeuen, and as it is open bi Poul in his Epistle to the Romayns and in his First Epistle to Corinthies and in his Epistle to Galathies and Acts xv^e. capitulum.? And therfore, thouȝ it hadde be trewe, (as it is not trewe,) that vnmouable endewing in propirte of lordschip hadde be [An erasure of a letter (n?) has been made at the end of be.] forboden to preestis and clerkis of the Iewis, what is it forto forbede to preestis of Cristen men, but if Cristen preestis weren Iewen preestis; or but if the lawis of Iewis weren not ceesid; or but if doom of cleer resoun wolde nedis dryue and proue that Cristen preestis ouȝten not haue eny vnmouable endewing? Which thing doom of cleer resoun can not proue, (as in the ij^e. principal conclusioun of this iij^e. present parti it schal be proued,) but y can proue the contrarie, as schal be seen aftir in this present iij^e. partie in the v^e. prin|cipal conclusioun. Wherfore, forto answere to eny colour taken bi Iewes lawes aȝens the seid firste prin|cipal gouernaunce had and vsid in the clergie of Cristis chirche is more than is nede forto take upon me.

Also thus: If eny oon forbode maad in Iewis lawe to preestis schulde binde also Cristen preestis, bi lijk skile ech other forbode maad in Iewis lawe to preestis schulde [schulden, MS. twice (first hand).] also binde Cristen preestis. And so wolde folewe this, that if this forbode mad to Iewen preestis, that thei schulden not haue vnmouable endewing,

schulde strecche to Cristen preestis; bi lijk skile this forbode mad to Iewen preestis, that thei schulden drinke no wijn, neither sidir, neither eny drinke, which myȝte make the drinker drunke, thoruȝ al the tyme whilis he schulde offre sacrificis in her cours, (which forbode is writun Leuiticus x^e. capitulum.) schulde also binde Cristen preestis, that al the while thei were wekeli occupied in offring the sacrifice of the auter, thei schulden drinke no wijn, neither ale ne bere, neither sider, neither eny drinke which mai make drunke. But this thing wole not be so hard forto leie upon Cristen preestis, that thei ben bounde therto bi strengthe of a lijk forbode mad to Iewen preestis. Wherfore folewith, that neithir eny man mai make him so streit to Cristen preestis forto pretende, that bi strengthe of eny [iny, MS.] forbode in Iewis lawe Cristen preestis ouȝten not be endewid bi vnmouable pos|sessiouns. And thus miche fro the bigynnyng of this chapiter in this present iij^e. partie hidir to is ynouȝ for proof of the firste conclusioun for his firste partie, that Holi Scripture forbedith not neither weerneth in eny place of the Oold Testament the seid firste principal conclusioun.