An answer made the fourth day of September a thousand five hundred sixty [and]…Ane answer made the fourth day of Septembre a thousand fyue hundreth syxtie [and]…

We will demand of him if he him self was chosen by the ancients or elders of the Church unto the which he is appointed to be bishop,¹ if he was required by the people, if there was information before that, taken of his life and doctrine, he would say yea. But the contrary is well known, and we remit ourselves unto the conscience of them that hear us, which know how this goeth. And if he would say unto us, ye are not ministers because ye have not the imposition of hands, we might answer ⟨image 40⟩him ye are no minister because that in your institution or ordaining were omitted the substantial points and that commanded by Gods law,² the which may not be dispensed with. And if the disputation grew more hot we should go further & may use such words, ye have but one of the three points requisite in the institution or ordaining which is the imposition of hands, if the wanting of that as ye esteem doeth deprive us that we can not be ministers, for want of the other two much less ye shall be ministers then we. The Council of Calcidome,³ which is one of the 4 general Councils ordained that that the institution of a priest should be void, which haeth not been deputed specially unto the service of sone Church, irrita sayeth he, in iniuriam ordinantis. With more strong reason ⟨image 41⟩may we say the same to the Bishop that should dispute with us, when he wanteth the two substantial poī •es contrary to the ordinance of the Apostle.⁴ Yet see an other point which grieveth us greatly to speak, and yet nevertheless be we constrained thereunto that we may show to all this company that if this disputation of the vocation were ones opened it should be greatly dangerous if we should ask him who gave him this imposition of hands he would say that it was the Bishops by the authority that was given unto them.⁵