from mariage that is desyrons of mariage so it is vngodly to discorage madens myndes from the desyre and vow of chastite Ambrose writyng vpon the same place sayeth Hoc dicit ut qui uirginem habet cui animus ad nuptias non est seruet illam nec illi ingerat fomitem nuptiarum quam uidet nubendi uoluntatem non habere Thys doth he say that he that hath a virgin not mynded to mary shuld kepe hyr and not in tyse hyr to mariage whom he perceyuedh is not willyng to mary ye haue heard the Doctors now let vs se what resones we can fet out of the Scripture What so euer autorite of order or commandment Paule gyueth vnto fathers that same hathe he receyued of the lorde But he sayethe in the vij chapter of the former Epistel to the Corinthianes that he hath no commandement at all of the lorde concernyng virgines De Virginibus praeceptum Domini non habeo Therfore haue fathers no autorite gyuen them of Paul to command theyr childer not to mary for noman can receyue of Paule it that he hath not but he hath no precept or commandment of virginite Then can none haue that autorite of hym then is it not playn by Paul that a father may command sum of hys childer not to mary When Paule which hath as myche autorite as any other Apostel and hath receyued of god as miche autorite for fathers to theyr childer as any other Apostel yiâ— receyued no autorite of god to giue fathers where by they myght command they children to be virgines ye may be sure that ther is no other Apostel that granteth fathers autorite to command theyr children to be virgines and to lyue with out mariage If that the Prince haue the same autorite ouer hys subiectes concernyng mariage that a father hathe ouer hys childer I will reson with yow thus Where ye say the father hath autorite to command certayn of hys childern that they shal neuer mary i ax yow whether by thes certayn ye mean Richard Robert and Rolland only or all that he list to forbid to mary what soeuer they be and of what soeuer name If that ye grant that the father hath autorite to commande whom soeuer of hys childer he lift to absteyn from mariage and he Prince hath the same autorite ouer hys subiectes that a father hath ouer hys childer then may the Prince forbid all the laymen to mary as he hath forbidden the Prestes Also it foloweth that wheÌ„ the prince may so order all hys subiectes by the law of god as a father may order all hys childer by the law of god and a father by the law of god may ordre all hys childer to mary ergo theÌ„ may a Prince order all hys subiectes by the law of god to mary but all the prestes of thys Realme ar the Princes subiectes ergo he may order them all by then law of god to mary Where is now master bisshop your braggyng de iure diuino that a preste may not may Doth it not now foow by your oun sayng that a prieste myght mary lby the law of god if the Prince wold so ordre prestes bid them mary Ye must ether bring furth sum other reson or scripture or ellis prestes may mary iure diuino by the law of god If ye say that therfore the mariage of prestes is forbidden iure diuino by the law of god be caus the Prince forbid deth prestes to mary then if the kyng of france forbad men to eat oystens on the friday and flesh on the sonday it wer forbidden iure diuino to eat oysters on the frayday and flesh on the sonday and so myght it be lawful to day and to morow is dedly syn That it is no sin for a preste to mary that the forbiddyng of the mariage of prestes is no law of god i will proue it more at large that all the nobles and comones of Englond may se how shamfully ye mokked them bearyng them in hand that it was sin and forbidden by goddis law that a preste shuld mary first that it is no sin by the law of god i proue it thus All sin and all thyng that is vnlawful is forbidden by the law of god Paul sayeth Roman iij. by the law is sin knowen and Rom. vij I knew not sin but thorow the law that is throw the law of god But the mariage of prestes is not fotbydden by the law of god for Aron and Zacharias testifi that it was not forbidden in the old Testament Paul vnto Timothe and Titus witnesseth in thes worde a Bisshop must be the husband of one wyfe that mariage of prestes is not forbidden in the new Testament and allthyng that is ether bidden or forbidden is forbidden ether in the new Testament or in the old but ye se it is forbidden in nether of both therfore it is no sin by the law of god for a preste to mary If that the law of forbiddyng of prestes mariages were the law of god as ye say then it shuld be generall to al cuntres the transgression of that law shulde euery where be elyke syn but in Grecia and in Denmark and in hic Germany it is no syn for a preste to mary both be cause they make no vowes and because the Princes forbid not there prestes to marye TheÌ„ is not the forbiddyng of prestes mariages the law of god but coÌ„trari to the law of god as i shall proue it thus It is contrary to the law of god to forbid in payn of deth that god commanded in payne of damnation but they that forbid many that cannot leue chaste with out mariage to mary forbid that god commanded for he sayd by hys seruant Paul if they lyue not chaste let them mary If ye will that i shal say if they can not lyne chast let them mary then ar theyr sum that can not lyne chaste If that al the prestes shuld be bound to mary that kepe not them selues chaste few prestes shuld lyue syngle Then is it agaynst goddis law to forbid al prestes to mary namely them that kepe not them selues chaste and haue not the gift of chastite If that ye say all that will may haue the gift of chastite for the aâ—yng acordyng to that whiche is sayd what so euer ye ax the father in my name he will gyue yow it i answer first that thys text is to be vnderstand that what soeuer as man asketh of god which is necessari vnto saluation that he wil grant hym the same But when as thos thynges ar asked that ar not necessari for saluation the askers thoghe they be good men git not at all tymes of god theyr askyng as Paul wheÌ„ he asked thrise of god that he wold take from hym the prik of the fleshe obtened not hys askyng not withstandyng that Christe sayde what soeuer ye ask the father in my name that shal he gyue yow and whi because that
man̄is polytike lawes By thes polytike lawes ye cannot understande the law of moses nether the law of the gospel for ye mean of suche lawes as ye accuse me here after to be a transgressor and a breaker of in the huntyng of the fox in thes wordes with uiolatione of the sayd lawes to make a tumult under the pre tence of huntyng the fox but in my huntyng of the fox i wrote only agaynst thos ceremonies traditiones whiche ye can̄ot deni but the bisshop of rome hathe made therfore ye mean by your politike lawes of whos transgression ye accuse me nether the lawes of the new testament nor the olde but the ceremonies and traditiones whiche the bisshop of rome hathe ordened If that i had writen in my huntyng agaynst the lawes of moses or the gospel ye myght haue found out sum excuse for your self but now seyng that i wrote only agaynst the popis ceremonies i gather of yow thys that ye say that god hathe inclosed as it were inparked the kyngis dere beloued subiect es vnder the authorite of the kyngis maiesti alone by the ceremonies traditiōes which ye grāt that the pope hath ordened for other polytike lawes can ye not meane of in thys place I beleue that all the subiectes of all kynges and emperourers ar enclosed under theyr autoxite alon bi the euerlastinge worde of good and not by any corruptible polytike law of man for as man is corruptible so is all that he makethe then if the kyngis subiectes be enclosed ūder hys autorite by mānis polytike lawes whē thes lawes is broken as he that maked a law may breake the same agayn the kynges subiectes ar no longer under hys auto rite wherby ye gyue mē occasion to gather of yow that yemeāe that the kyng is supreme guerner of all hys suciectes all hys ar under hys autorite alon by the popis cerēonies traditiones Is not thys a suer grounde that ye byld the kynges supremeci upon Hathe not the kyng autorite ēoghe of the scripture for to māteyn hyssupremeci with al but that he must be fayn to fet sum of the popis ceremonies to help the scripture whiche were not able to do it alōe What a crasty for is thys to say that ceremonies enclose the kynges subiectes under hys autorite alone for that intent that the kyngis hyghnes seing that hys suprēicie were fortified with ceremonies suld be the redier to fortifi thē agayne Mark also ā other subtiltie of the fox where as in my former hūtyng i made suche argumētes agaynst the popis ceremōies traditi ones as he could not solute now because he seyng that he cānot defēde the pope ūder the nāe of ceremonies traditiōes now calleth hym good polytike lawes where with the kyngis subiectes ar inclosed under hys autorite alō after thys meruelous trāsformatiō he makethe the popis ceremonies the kyngis polytike lawes Marck also how that he wold makethe pope the kyngis frēde whi lsi he makeththe popis ceremōies māteyners of the kyngis supremeci for whē as the pop hys doctrine ar al on if the popis ceremonies māteyn the kyngis supremeci the pope doth the same Is not the kyngis hyghnes myche bound to master gardiner for purchessyng hym such a frende Now syr tell me if ye cā whiche of thes polytike lawes that i haue writen agaynst haue enclosed the kyngis subiectes under hys autorite If that there be no polytike lawes whiche i haue writen agaynst that incloseth the kyngis subiectes under hys autorite alon as iam suere ye can shew non that i wrote agaynst then must ye be taken as ye haue bene many a day for an impudent an vnshamefaced lyer Because ye say that i breake good polytike lawes therwithe make a tumult and a clamor let me know i pray yow whiche good polytike lawes i haue broken and i shal knoledge my offence take the ponishement worthy for suche an offence I wrote agaynst a sorte of popishe ceremonies vngodly tradiciones but that i remembre i neuer in all my booke wrote agaynst one polytike law A polytike law is an ordinance deuised by wise men for the profit of a citie or a cuntre or a comon welth Suche ordinances did not i ones touch in my booke let them be iudges which haue red the book And that thys manis lying may be more manyfeste i will shorthy per use and go thorow all the traditiones whiche i haue ether made mention of or spoken agaynst in my boke What polytike law is it to command all the peple of a realme to knele before a pece of molten or casten syluer to crepe to it and to kiss it and to syng Crucem tuam adoramus Domine lorde we worship thy cross What polyci is it to go so ernestly about to dryue the deuel out of acorn or ij of salt whiche noman eatethe and to coniure the deuel out of the hally water fat where noman saylethe and to suffer hym to be still in the great heapes of salt wher with mennis meat is seasoned and to let hym tary still vn coniured in the great ryuers and brode se and in the alefattes It were a more polytike law to send thes coniuiurers to the salt pannes and to the brode se wher into we ar suer that the deuel ran ones with the swyne of the gergesenes then to make such a besynes a bout a litle water and salt whiche must bothe be cast way al to gether and neuer cummeth in any mannis belly What polycye is it to desyre of god to gyue a new vertu uuto salt to hele burnyng agues and to water to hele cold dropsies and other colde diseases What polytike law is it to orden that chirches shalbe consecrated for the sacramentes and for goddis worde then a non after to make a place of them to rede polytike lawes in and all deuelysh doctrine that antichriste cā deuise What polici is it to rrcey ue the sacrament of Christis body and blood whiche was ordened to be reuyued in the remnmbrāce of Christes passion to take it for sik horse and in the remembrance of dedemē What polytike ordinance is it to syng dirge ether to bryng damned sowles out of hell or ellis to rayse mē from death tolyfe agayn Thys is a praty polyci to deserue remissiō of syn̄es by the mixtur of bothe the partes of the Sacramēt to gether What polytike law is thys that the psalmes whiche were ordened for the maker and creator shal be song in the honor of the creatures What polytike lawes ar thes that amā may not as wel prays god in lent in he brew as in latin that all the yeare thorow messes matines diriges euensongas shall be song in a tong that noman understandeth sauyng they that ar learned What polytike laues ar thes that the lay menshal haue but the half of Christis supper and that the
doctrine ergo ye hold still the pope If that the pope or any of hys taught the worde of god that was not hys doctrine but the doctrine of god whiche is eiher conteyned in the new Testament or in the olde and agaynst suche doctrine haue i not spoken nether wold i suche to be castaway thoghi he and hys had taught it but such doctrine wold i only to be driuen a way withe the pope as the pope hathe ordened only and not Christe and is ether playn manifest contrary to the writen worde of god or ellis uayn idle superfluous and hynderance to the prechyng of goddis undouted worde Now bable on as long as ye leste The rescuer Finally the bisshop of rome was expelled nether fox hys name only hys purs only ne hys doctrine only but for all to gether so far as eche of them exceded from the treuthe whiche is only mynded all noughty doctrine is expelled withe the bisshop of rome and not because it was hys but because it was nought It were pity that euel men shuld haue suche a stroke in thynges of the world and moche less of god that what good thynge one medled withe shuld be called by and by nought Kyng richarde the thyrde au usurper in thys realme brak the trust committed unto hym by hys brother concernyng the preseruation of hys childer And yit caused an act of the parlement after to be made in hys tyme that feoffes of trust shuld do acordyng to theyr trust The autor we iustly hate yit we make myche of the law whiche is good resonable Wherfore the fundacion of thys mannis resonyng to reproue or reiect any ordinance becaus our enemy ether made it or used it is uery slender and folishe God can be the auctor but of goodnes Amongest men that is nought is nought who soeuer hathe used it and that that is good is good who soeuer hathe abused it And therfore there cannot be a more fond maner of prouyng then to say thys is nought and whi so for such a man medled with it suche aman used it suche a man commanded it to be obserued The hunter Becaus ye cannot conconfut my argumentes whiche i haue made agaynst the pope hys traditiones that ye myght seme to your frendes to say sumthyng ye fayn an argument your self as thoghe it were myne and reason stoutly with histories examples agaynst it but all in vayn to no purpose your argument whiche ye haue made in my name is thys the pope hathe made the ceremonies of the chirche ergo they ar to be cast a way withe hyme whiche argument thoghe it be not myne yit for as miche as it is fathered on me a litle added to it i will make it myne and proue that if foloweth well enoghe Neuer the less that all men may se how unshamfaced a lyer ye be i wil reherse the argument that i made to proue that the pope was still in englōd The popis doctrine is the pope but ye hold still the popes ' doctrine whils ye holde still the ceremonies that he made ergo ye hold still the pope and when as i cum to the tryall of the popis ceremonies i do not as ye falsly lyk one of the vnsham faced hore of babylones sonnes reporte of me only say the traditiones ar to bē cast away becaus the pope made them but i proue bothe by testimonies of scripture and by naturall reson that they ar nonght haue i brought no other argument agaynst coniuryng of hally water and salt crepyng to the cross agaynst the forbiddyng of prestis mariages agaynst the robri of Christis cope agaynst the stewes agaynst the seruice in latin agaynst the prestes receynyng of the Gacrament to win ther by to other men remission of sinnes but that the pope made them I report me unto all them that haue red my booke whether i haue brought scriptur and reson or no i haue brought such resones as me thynke ye can not yit wype away withe all the sophistri logike law that ye haue as for the other ceremonies that i resoned not agaynst i dyd not say that they wer therfore nought because the pope made them as ye lie but i wold they whiche were uery trifles in compary son of thos traditiones that i wrote agaynst shuld be estemed bi the other whiche semed miche more gorgiōs thē they were not cōfutyng them becawse bothe my book shuld haue bene to long and also they neded no confutation when theyr ibetters as they appered wer proued to be nought Now what will the story of kyng Richard help yow seyng your fundacion is fals But i pray yow what an argument is thys kyng richard beyng an euel man made a good polytike law ergo the pope thoghe he be an euel man may make a good doctrine that god neuer made whiche is godly necessari for Christis chirche Aristotel and Plato were infideles and made good polytike lawes for the comon welthe ergo they culd also make good and godly and necessari doctrines for Christis chirche Your argument foloweth not where ye argue an euel man may make good politike lawes for the body ergo he may also make good and holsum doctrine for the soul Thys maner of resonyng from the less to the more affirmatiuely is alowed in no logike nor learnyng that euer i haue sene But leste ye shuld make your excuse and say that your argument is from lyke to kyke and as it were thus made kyng richarde an euel man made a good polytike lawe ergo the pope may make a good polytike law i will proue that ye take not thes ceremonies and traditiones for polytik lawes which ar profitable for the gouernance of a coman welthe but for lawes for the soule Ecclesiasticall lawes and for bothe promotors of goddis honor and for goddis seruice also ye and more ouer i can proue that ye take thes ceremonies for the commandementes of god and make the breakers of them the breakers of goddis commandementes whiche if i do then procedethe your argument thus an euel man may make good polytike lawes ergo he can also make good lawes for mannis saule and so holsum doctrines for the chirche of Christe that if they were takē away all semelynes godlynes shuld be takē away withe them as ye say here after expressedly of takyng away of the popis cererionies In yowr Catechisme lately set out in the kyngis name writyng vpon the fourth cōmandment ye say thus of the popis ceremonies agaynst the whiche i haue writen partely in my huntyng of the fox Lykewyse do they all breake thys commādment whiche do not obserue but despise suche laudable ceremonies of the chirche as set forthe goddis honor appertayn vnto good order to be vsed in the chirche And ther fore concernyng such ceremonies of the chirche as haue bene instituted by oure fore fathers and be alowed by the princes or
kynges of the dominiones as hallowyng of the font of the chalice of the corporace of the altare other lyke exorcismes and benedictiones sprynklyng of holy water gyuyng of holy brede bearyng of cādelles palmes crepyng to the cross and other lyke laudable customes rites ceremonies ar not to be despised but to be obserued Then can ye not say that ye meane by the popis traditiones polytske lawes for god gaue no cōmandment of polytyke lawes in the ten cōmandmentes but left that in the liberti of Princes to make as many or as few as they thynk necessari for theyr subiectes but ye weue thes ceremonies vnder the cōmandment of god to your great shame ye make thē commādmentes of god for if the transgression of ceremonies be the breakyng of goddis cōmandment then must the kepyng of them be the kepyng of goddis cōmādment they must also be goddis cōmandmentes If that a mā cum not to the chirche to krepe to the cros to bear candelles to heare mes in atong that he vnder stādeth not say not ye vnto hym whi wilt thow not cum to goddis seruice Is goddis seruice a polytike law thē it is playn that althoghe ve once sayd so ye meane not by the popes traditiones polytike lawes Now let vsse whether thys argumēt foloweth or no. The pope only being a man that an euel man brought in to Christrs chirche commāded to be kept thes ceremonies traditiones whiche ar not founde in any place of goddis worde ergo they ought to be cast out of the chirche agayne That the pop is amāye will grant me but that he is only a mā your canō law wil deny for it sayeth that the pope may do that amā may not do that is to serperate whome god had copled to gether that the pope is an euel mā a fals Prophet i dout whether ye will grant me thys both with hart and mouthe or no i must therfore proue it as well as i can He is the kyngis enemy an usurper of autorite vnto hym self that god gaue hym neuer ergo he is an euel mā but i will if i cā bryng a reason or two sumthyng strōger to proue that he is Antichrist and a false Prophete ther for that he is an euel man He is Antichriste whiche teacheth fals and cōtrary doctrine ūto Christis doctrine taketh it vpō hym which belongethe ōly vnto Christe the pope dothe so for he teacheth that Peter was hede of the hole catholike chirche ouer all kynges and Emperoures and aboue all the rest of the Apostelles and that he is aboue all Emperoures and kynges and that they ar bound to obey hym and not he them and that he beyng but a bisshop hathe bothe the swordes of the word and of temporall correction with many suche other false doctrines which becaus they ar well knowen i nede not greatly to reherse That he is a false Prophete i proue it thus by the autorite of the Prophet Ezechiel whiche paynteth your father and yow so playnly as thoughe he had sene yow bothe together In the thyrtent chatpter he sayethe thus Son of man Propheci agaynst the Prophetes of Israel whiche prophecie and say unto them that prophesi out of theyr oun hart heare the worde of the lord Thus sayeth the lord god Wo be unto the foolish Prophetes which go after theyr own spret when as they haue sene nothyng Thy Prophetes o Israel ar made lyke foxes in the wildernes ye haue not gone up to the burstynges nether haue ye made an hedge for the house of Israel to stand in battale in the day of the lord They haue sene uanite and a fals propheci sayng the lorde hath sayde when as the lorde hathe nor sent them they trust that theyr worde shal ones be alowed Haue ye not sene a vayn vision and spoken a lying prophesi And ye haue sayde the lorde hathe sayd when as i haue not sayd it Ther fore sayethe the lorde god for as myche as ye haue spoken uanite and haue sene a lye therfore sayeth the lorde be holde here am i agaynst yow and my hand shall be agaynst the Prophetes whiche se vanites and prophecie lyes they shal not be in the secret priuite of my peple and they shal not be writen in the nombre of the house of Israel nether shal they cum unto the land of Israel And ye shal know that i am the lorde Now because they haue deceyued my peple sayng peace when there is no peace and he byldeth a wall and they playster it ouer with an vnprofitable cruste Say vnto them that make an vnprofitable plasteryng of it that it shall fall and ther shall be a showre flowyng in and ye shall fall with the stones of the hale and the wynde of the tempest shall brust yow And behold when the wall fallethe shall it not be sayd vnto yow where is the couer that ye layde ouer I shall pul down the wall whiche ye haue couered with an vnprofitable crust and i will dashe it down to the grounde and the fundacion of it shal be openly knowen and vncouered and it shall fall and ye shall be kylled in the myddes of it and ye shall be taught to know that i am the lorde And in the ende of the chapter he sayethe thus Becaus ye haue made sad the ryghtuous mannis hart withe a lye when as i dyd not make hym sory and streyngthen the handes of the wikked that he return not from hys euel way that he may be kept quik Ther fore ye shal se no more vanite and ye shall gess no more but i will delyuer my peple out of your hande Thus far Ezechiel of whos wordes i gather that they ar fals Prophetes whiche speake vnto the peple thos wordes and doctrines whiche they haue not receyued of god and yit make the peple beleue that theyre doctrine and wordes be of god and wounde good mennis consciences where no sin is committed and confort euel men when as yit the wrathe of god is ouer them but thes properties agre bothe to your father of rome yow ergo ye ar bothe fals Prophetes ye and your father say that a preste may not mary by the law of god that noman may be a preacher of goddis worde except hebe first benet collat subbecō ano decon or a sacrificyng preste that it is dedly syn to eat fleshe in lent and on the dayes that ye haue for bidden to eat flesh on except a man by apardon or a licence for monie withe yow also is sin and yit can ye not proue that god hathe forbidden that ye forbid ye haue nether scripture nor worde of god for yow but thes lyes haue ye spoken out of your own hartes and wounde and strike the consciences of good men with dedely feare for leuyng of such thynges as god our law maker neuer commāded ye say it is good to take
it shall be lyke foly to call and make an other mannis lawes and ordinances hys by proclamation Vhere in how miche your foly is ye euydently declare that ether do not or will not speake the difference but abuse the simplicite of the reder as thoughe dedes and lawes were all one Where as in the one it were madnes by proclamation to make an other mannis dedes hys and the other of all wyse men used and obserued for in lawes and ordinances the Romanes sendyng to the Grekes for them made them by approbation thers And there is no comon welthe but it hath taken in sum poynt example of an other concernyng the lawes whiche be worthely theyrs where they haue receyued thē And amongest the Athenienses lawes made of solon were not solones lawes but the lawes of the city as the text of the law sayeth whiche sufficethe to reproue and confounde thys gentle mannis resonynge where in he wold seme to excell But the man concludethe that he wolde haue no law but the gospel in the chirche whiche is so far out of reson that i will not reson withe hym in it And he semethe hym self to be ashamed of it and therfore takethe vpon hym to proue sum parte of suche cerimonies as we obserue in the chirche to be repugnant to the scripture The hunter As a fox dar not aduenture to run in the playn way for fear of the howndes leste they shuld catche hym but rumneth in to holes and ledethe them out of the playne way in to busshes brambles and thyk thornes so do ye the romish foxis protector for ye leap away from my argumentes and answer nothyng to them but ye call me craftely away out of my argumentes to bable with yow whether dedes ordinances and lawes be all one or no wherefore ye lordely reproue me But i ax of yow whether a man saynge that the ordenyng of hally water to take venial synnes away was pope Alexanders dede speakethe good and true Englishe or no Is not an act and a dede all one And call ye not the lawes and ordinances made in the parlament howse the actes of the parlament Why may not i then call the popis lawes hys actes ād dedes Sothe he nothyng that makethe a law If he do sumthyng it that he dothe is a dede then if he orden a law hys law ordened is hys dede then will not thys shift serue yow to trifle about a worde and let the argument alone vnsoluted If thys worde dede do offende yow so sore i wil vse a terme more pleasant vnto yow and make my argument thus The popis ordinances and the pope ar all one then to whome soeuer ye gyue and attribute the popis ordinances hym as myche as lye the in yow ye make pope but ye gyue and attribute vnto the kynge the popis ordinances ergo as myche as lye the in yow ye make the kyng pope Now what aduantage haue ye goten by refusyng the worde dedes As concernyng your examples fet out of the ciuile law they do not solute my argument for my argument was thus As if the kyng of Denmark shuld make a proclamation that all the ceremonies of Moses law shuld be no more called Moses ceremonies but hys ceremonies yit for all that Moses ceremonies shuld abyde and contynue still Moses ceremonies for all hys proclamation so the ceremonies that the pope hathe ones made continue and abyde still the popis ceremonies for all that they ar commanded by proclamation no more to be called the popis ceremonies but the kynges ceremonies ye say that the Romanes send to the Grekes for theyr lawes and by approbation ▪ made them theyrs i pray yow remanded not the Grekes lawes still theyrs for all that the Romanes vsed the same lawes Was not the Romanes and Grekes partners in lawes togyther when they vsed to gether the self same lawes then it folowethe for all your examples and by your examples that the popis ceremonies ar yit still hys and ar occupeed in Englonde and that by your sayng the kyngis hyghnes and the pope ar partners to gyther concernyng ceremonies for the after partnership dispossesseth not the fierst hole awner of hys former possession but he only gyuethe parte of hys ryght vnto hym that is made afterward partner with hym Haue ye any other thyng to conclude with your examples If ye haue make your argument and i shal shape a solution for it as wel as i can I trow ye wil not be so mad as to argu thus on cite may receyne ciuile lawes of an other ergo the chirche may receyue lawes of the pope Whiche is a false Prophete and a feruent Pharise when as Christe sayethe in the gospel be ware of false Prophetes beware of the Leuin of the Pharises Where as ye say that i speake so far out of reson where i say that i wold haue no other law in the chirche but the law of the gospel alone that ye will not reson with me ye play as your brother fox did whiche when he cam thorow a wynyarde and saw that the grapes we re hyer then he could reche to sayd he wolde eat no grapes so when as my sayng is strongely defended withe goddis worde that ye can make no reson agaynst it ye wilnot reson with me scilicet becausye can not Thys conclusion do ye hold that the law of the gospel in not sufficient for Christes chirche to ordre and ruel it except the popis traditiones be annexed ther to and that he speakethe far out of reson that wold haue only the law of the gospel in the chirche Agaynst thys deuelish doctrine of yours i will make thes resones The law of the gospel is miche more perfit then the law of Moses But the law of Moses was sufficient by it self for all them that was vnder it and neded no mannis ordinance to be added vnto it to order the iewes that were vnder the old Testament then is the law of the gospel miche more sufficient by it self for all them that ar vnder it and miche less nedethe any mannis ordinances to be added vnto it to ordre them that ar vnder the new Testament Paule calleth the law of Moses a child leder vnto Christe a shadow of good thynges for to cum ād sayeth that the lawe bringethe nothyng to perfection If thys law neded nothyng to be added to it or mingled with it the law of the gospel whiche Paul preferreth before the old law ij Corinth in the third chapter hathe now no nede of the bisshop of romis traditiones to be added to it or mingled with it Is not the lau of the gospel perfit Is not that the moste perfit law that the moste perfit lawmaker makethe made not Christe the perfitest law maker the law of the gospel To that law whiche is perfit in all poyntes nothyng nedethe to be added ūto it Thē the law of the gospel nedethe not the popis law to