FOR answere to the vije. argument y schal sette forth iij. open reulis, of whiche the firste is this: Whanne euere it is so, that ij. dyuerse werkis of Goddis lawe and seruicis ben euen like present in oon and the same while after her alle dewe circumstauncis to a man forto be doon and wrouȝt of him in the same while, and oon of hem is myche better than the other; certis thanne if the man, to whom these werkis in lijk wise so profren hem silf to be doon, chese not to do the better werk bifore the lasse good werk, he is not to be ther yn preisid, as y haue schewid bi ensaumple of Holi Writt and bi ensaumple out of Holi Writt in The Crier [This is no doubt the same work as The Before-crier mentioned above, p. 218.] and in othere placis of my writingis.
The ije. reule is this: Whanne ij. werkis of Goddis lawe and seruice thoruȝ out alle her dewe to hem circumstauncis ben not lijk present to the doer, but the lasse good werk is so present to the doer and the better good werk is not so present; certis than, if the man to whom this lasse good work is so present chese not and take not the lasse good werk for the while, he is not to be preisid. Forwhi ellis, as for thilk while, he schal lese the bothe seid godis, that is to seie, the bettir and the lasse good.
The iije. reule is this: It is not in eny mannys power forto haue for ech while the better werkis of Goddis lawe to him present, whilis lasse good werkis of Goddis lawe ben present to him and profren hem silf to be doon of him.
The iiije. reule folewing of these iij. bifore going reulis is this: That if a man, whanne he is to wirche
