bodi and forto do there sum bodili deede, wherbi thei schulden the more mynde haue of him, maden a bodili pilgrimage, euen lijk to the bodily pilgrimagis whiche of deuout and weel gouerned pilgrimes ben now woned be doon. Wherfore the text and teching of Petir weren [were, MS. (first hand).] contrarie to these now rehercid placis of the Gospel in whiche pilgrimagis ben allowid of Crist, if thilk text of Peter schulde be vndirstonde forto weerne and lette alle bodili pilgrimagis, that thei ben not doon. And so is the firste principal conclusion sufficientli proued.
The ije. principal conclusioun is this: Doom of kindeli weel disposid resoun weerneth not and lettith not bodili pilgrymagis to be doon in the maner now bifore seid. This conclusioun y may proue thus: If eny doom of resoun schulde so weerne and lette, cer|tis thilk doom of resoun muste be oon of the iij. domes bifore spoken in the iije. and iiije. chapitris of this present ije. partie, there brouȝt forth in treting of the ije. principal conclusioun mad for iustifiyng of ymagis. Or ellis it muste be oon of the domes whiche schulen be rehercid soone aftir in the ixe. capitulum. in argu|yng aȝens the firste and the ije. seyde principal gouer|naunces. But so it is, that noon of the iij. bifore sett out doomys of resoun may weerne and lette the seid pilgrimagis. Forwhi to ech of tho iij. kindis of domes it is bifore sufficientli answerid bothe for ymagis and for pilgrimagis to gidere, neither eny of the domes soone after in argumentis to be brouȝt forth in the ixe. chapiter weerneth and lettith. Forwhi to ech of hem anoon aftir in the xe. xje. xije. xiije. xiiije. and xve. chapitris it schal be sufficientli answerid. Wherfore no doom of weel disposid resoun in kinde schal lette and weerne or reproue the bifore seid pil|grimage,
