Not only did the first decades of the sixteenth century witness a profound change in the consciousness of religious experience, but they also offer a key, if we use the contrasting instances of William Tyndale and Thomas More, to understanding the communication of the experience by two masterful stylists who disagree radically about the analysis of religious experience, and consequently about its transmission to readers. More characteristically invokes logic and reason in support of his theological expositions while Tyndale typically resorts to the evidence of spirit and feeling. This polarity at the outset of the Reformation is a seminal one in that it is refracted, magnified, and mirrored in the religious polemic of the next two centuries as the various voices of dissent or conformity undertake to analyze and communicate religious experience. In the history of polemic, the complicated, academic method of scholastic humanism is parodied out of existence. The proofs offered by the heart, feelings, and the zealous intervention of the Holy Ghost appealed far more to radical reformers who wished to testify to their own prophetic powers and authority in the condemnation of established church practices. Evangelical witnessing, urged on by zeal, enabled every worshipper to become, in effect, a self-certified vehicle of the Holy Ghost.