Chap. 6. the. 9. Diuision.
And if the Emperours permitted the election of the Byshop to that Citie, where it made most for their suretie, to haue one of their owne appoyntment, as was Rome, whiche with their By∣shops did oftentimes put the good Emperoures to trouble: it is to be thought, that in other places, both cities, and townes, they did not denie the elections of ministers to the people, besides that, cer∣taine of those constitutions are not of Rome, but of any citie whatsoeuer. And these Emperours were, and liued betwene. 500. and odde yeares, vntill the very poynte of a thousande yeares after Christ, so that hitherto this libertie was not gone out of ye Church, albeit the Pop〈1 line〉〈1 line〉 which brought in all tyrannie, and went about to take all libertie from the Churches, was now on horse back, and had placed himselfe in that Antichristian seate.
In that the Emperours did but permitte such elections to the people, it is manifest, that the interest was in them, else why should they be said to haue permitted it. In déed true it is, that the Emperours so long did remitte of their interest in suche elections, that afterwards when they would haue claymed their right therein, they coulde not ob∣teyne it, but by violence were shut from all, as the histories manifestly deelare.
Hitherto you haue proued nothing in question, neyther haue you reasoned ad ide m:* 1.1 for you shoulde either haue proued that the election of ministers dothe of necessitie perteyne to the people, or that the same manner of electing is conueniente for thys Church of England in this time, and state: both which I haue improued, and do still vtterly denie, neyther dothe any thing that you haue alleadged, proue eyther of them.