and thouȝ an hundrid of my predecessouris han mys vsid like wise, what riȝt were this that an ynnocent, ȝhe, many innocentis comyng aftir me, to whom these godis ben ȝouun as weel as to me, and whiche schulden weel vse tho same godis, schulden be de|priued of the same godis?
If thou seie the now rehercid opynyoun of the seid clerk to be groundid here on [this,] that sufficient mark and euydence may be take, that al my successouris schulen be viciose mys vsers of tho godis, bi cause that y and so manye of my predecessouris han be in habit and in custom mys vsers of the same godis, certis this ground is vntrewe. Forwhi a man forto take such a mark or evidence were him forto iuge of thingis pureli and vttirli to come, and so forto take upon him the iugement which oonli longith to God, after sen|tence of Crist rehercid, Acts ie. capitulum., where it is writun that Crist seide, It is not of ȝou forto wite tymes and momentis, which the Fadir hath putt in his power; and so such a iuger schulde iuge ouer presumptuoseli, sithen he stieth so hiȝ that he takith upon him the iugement which is according oonli to God, and in that he makith him as God, which mai not be withoute synne and vice. And therfore this grounding is nauȝt, for it is aȝens resoun now formed.
It is also aȝens the witnes of Holi Scripture. For|whi not withstonding that King Saul was a wickid customable synner, ȝit God prouidid that Dauid a iust king succedid next to him; and not withstonding that fro King Roboam in Israel bi long successioun into Ezechie ech king was habituali an ydolatrer and mys vsing habituali the godis of his state and degre and office, ȝit a ful noble and holi king Ezechie and an other good king Iosie succediden. And therfore bi lijk skile, thouȝ y bischop and many of my prede|cessouris weren habituali and customabili mys vsing godis of the chirche, no sufficient mark and euydence
