By this which I haue cyted it appeareth, what was one cause of this excesse and stately 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉ompe of the Byshoppes, namely that certaine noble and riche men, beyng chosen to the ministerie, and liuing somewhat like vnto the former estates, wherein they were before, others also assayed to be like vnto them, as we see in that poynt the nature of man is to readie to followe, if they see any example before theyr eyes. But there is no reason bicause Ambrose and such like did so, there∣fore our Bishops shoulde do it (*) 1.1 of the Churches costes. Nor bicause Ambrose and such lyke did tarie in their trim houses, which they had built them selues of their owne charge before they were Bishops, that therfore they should come out of their chambers or narrow houses into courts and pallaces, builded of the Churches costes.
Where haue you shewed any such thing by Ambrose his example? or how doth it appeare that by such meanes the pompe of the Bishops (as you cal it) was brought in? That which you speake of Ambrose house is most vntrue: it was perteyning to the Byshop, and no part of Ambrose his proper possessions, as it is euident by this, that it was neare vnto the Churche, euen within the limits, of the Church, as I haue sayde before.