Chap. 2. the thirde Diuision.
And whereas Clement maketh S. Peter the Apostle to make it as it were his adopted sonne, therby to wipe away the shame of his birth, it doth S. Peter shamefull iniurie. For besides that it was farre from S. Peter to take this authoritie to himself, not only of making Archbishops tho∣rowout euery Prouince but also instituting a new order or of fice, without the counsell of the rest of the Apostles, which none else of the Apostles did, and which is cōtrarie to the practise of S. Peter, both in the first and sixt of the Actes, contrarie also to the practise of the Apostles which after shall appeare. I say besydes this, is it like that S. Peter woulde graffe the noblest plant as it is sayd of the ministerie of the Gospell, in such a rotten stock of that which was most abhominable in all I∣dolatrie? For the greater they were in the seruice of the Idolles, the more detestable were they before God.
I do not take vpon me the defense of Clements wordes in that Epistle, or of Po∣lydore in the booke and Chapter before recyted, in all things that they spake touching the matter. But I cannot suffer your vaine reasons to serue for an answere. For if Saint Peter did thus place Archbishoppes, yet did he not appoynt any newe order or office, as you haue bene oftentymes tolde. Of all Byshops there is one order or* 1.1 ministerie, but diuerse degrées. Betwéene an Archbyshop and a Bishop there is one∣ly a difference of degrée and dignitie, not of order or ministerie: as diuerse learned men giue vnto Peter, aboue the rest of the Apostles the preheminence of honour for orders sake, but not of power. Moreouer Peter in appoynting them without the con∣sent of the other Apostles, did no otherwise than the Apostle S. Paule whē he placed Timothie at Ephesus, and Titus at Creta. It may be also that in some places where there were before Archiflamines he placed such as were called Archbishops, &c. whiche might be done in respect of ye city & place, and not in respect of the idolatrous priests.