myȝte be mad, were or schulde be vnleeful and a sect of perdicioun, how euer good and profitable and leeful he were or schulde be mad; and so the same secte schulde be good and badde, leeful and vnleeful, which is repungnaunce. And therto to this bad argument muste be sett more, if he schulde eny thing proue and conclude, as is forto seie and argue thus: Petir seide that sectis of perdicioun denying Crist schulden come; and so it is, that these religiouns now had and · vsid in the chirche ben sectis of perdicioun denying Crist; therfore of hem spake or meened Petir. Or ellis thus: Of hem is the prophecie of Peter verified and vpon hem fallith thilk prophecie of Petir; and but if the arguer can proue the ije. premysse of this argument, and eer than he proue thilk ije. premysse of this ar|gument, that is to seie, that these now had and vsid religiouns in the chirche ben sectis of perdicioun deny|ing Crist, certis he may not waite aftir that the con|clusioun of this argument be proued or be trewe, that is to seie, that the seid prophecie of Petir fille upon the religiouns now had and vsid in the chirche. And thanne ferther, forto proue that these religiouns ben sectis of perdicioun, he muste take his euydencis and hise motyues in othir place out and fro the seid text of Peter; forwhi it muste be proued that the now had religiouns ben sectis of perdicioun, eer and bifore we wite what and of whom the seid text of Peter meeneth. And thus it is open ynouȝ that, as bi the firste text in the bifore sett noumbre of textis, may noon hurte bifalle to the now had and vsid religions.
And thanne ferthermore thus: Alle the othere textis in the same now seid noumbre speken of persoones tech|ing vntreuli and lyuying viciosely, whether thei lyue in eny religiose sect or out of religiose sect; for of alle suche viciose persoones, whether thei lyuen in sect of religioun or out of sect of religioun, tho textis mowen be verified riȝt weel, as is open ynouȝ bi the general
