CONFIRMACIOUN to the ie. and ije. of these iiij. now putt conclusiouns is this. Who euer for deuocioun and loue which he hath to Holi Scripture wole holde that ech gouernaunce of Goddis moral lawe and ser|uice is groundid in the Newe Testament, (as summen holden,) or in the hool Bible, (as summe othere hol|dun,) and ellis it is not to be take for a point and deede or gouernaunce of Goddis lawe and of Goddis seruice, ȝit he mai not holde and seie that needis ech gouernaunce of Goddis seid lawe and seruise muste be groundid expresseli in Holi Scripture, as anoon aftir schal be proued. Wherfore he muste needis graunte and holde, that if eny deede or gouernaunce be groun|did or witnessid includingli or closingli in eny of the bifore spokun maners bi the thre reulis, it is ynowȝ forto seie and holde that thilk deede or gouernaunce is groundid or witnessid in Holi Scripture. And if he muste so graunte, certis thanne if it be schewid to him that ech of the xj. gouernauncis whiche y schal aftir in the ije., iije., ive., and ve. parties of this book defende and iustifie, (of which oon is setting up of ymagis in chirchis, and an othir is pilgrymage vnto the memorialis or mynde placis of Seintis,) is in|cludingli or closingli groundid or witnessid in Holi Scripture bi eny of the maners bifore seid in the iij. reulis, (as aftir in the ije. parti of this book it schal be schewid,) he muste needis lijk weel graunte that ech of tho xj. gouernauncis is groundid or witnessid in Holi Scripture.
That thou maist not seie and holde ech gouernaunce and deede of Goddis lawe and seruice to be expressid in Holi Scripture, and that ellis it is not Goddis ser|uice
