A10335:121
Th'overthrow of stage-plays, by the way of controversy betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes…Th'overthrow of stage-playes, by the way of controversie betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes…
Th'overthrow of stage-plays, by the way of controversy betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes wherein all the reasons that can be made for them are notably refuted; th'objections answered, and the case so cleared and resolved, as that the judgement of any man, that is not froward and perverse, may easily be satisfied. Wherein is manifestly proved, that it is not only unlawful to be an actor, but a beholder of those vanities. Whereunto are added also and annexed in th'end certain latin letters betwixt the said Master Rainoldes, and D. Gentiles, reader of the civill law in Oxford, concerning the same matter.Th'overthrow of stage-playes, by the way of controversie betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes wherein all the reasons that can be made for them are notably refuted; th'objections aunswered, and the case so cleared and resolved, as that the iudgement of any man, that is not froward and perverse, may easelie be satisfied. Wherein is manifestly proved, that it is not onely vnlawfull to bee an actor, but a beholder of those vanities. Wherevnto are added also and annexed in th'end certeine latine letters betwixt the sayed Maister Rainoldes, and D. Gentiles, reader of the civill law in Oxford, concerning the same matter.
Middelburg: printed by Richard Schilders, 1599
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
the rest do say that so much more is meant then the other three, as proveth my assertion. For the vBishop of Paris, cited and abridged by Dionysius Carthusianus, among sundry causes why the law of ⟨p. 97⟩God should forbid a man to put on woman's raiment, giveth this for one, 1that a great occasion of provoking men to lust might be taken away. For 2the apparel of women (saith he) is a great provocation of men to lust and lechery: because a 3woman's garment being put on a man doeth vehemently touch and move him with the remembrance & imagination of a woman; and 4the imagination of a thing desirable doth stir up the desire. The same in 5fewer words Aquinas doeth affirm. And Liranus further, having declared what moved him to prefer the last exposition (rehearsed by your self, though somewhat confusedly, which I was bold to mend in the recital of it, the better here to be understood) saith, that if the text be meant of common apparel, 6then is such an use or rather abuse forbidden, because it is an occasion of wantonness and lust. Wherein he hath relation to that, whereas the 7word, used in the former branch of the sentence touching mens furniture not to be worn by women, doeth sometime signify common apparel, sometime armour; he had said, that this place, he thought, the signification of armour fitted best: induced thereunto because he had read that women in the sacrifices of Mars did bear armour; and the reason added, for all that do so are abomination to the Lord, might well enough agree, sith matters of idolatry are commonly in the Scriptures termed abomination. But seeing it appeareth not by sufficient proof that women wore mens armour in the sacrifices of Mars, or men wore women's distaffs, spindles, and such like, in the sacrifices of Venus; and the later branch of the law forbidding a man to put on woman's