Page 440
Chap. 5. the. 6. Diuision.
Higinus or as some thinke Pelagius (I speake here as Platina reporteth, not thinking that* 1.1 in Higinus time, ther was any Metropolitane) ordeyned that no Metropolitane should cōdemne any Byshop, vnlesse the matter wer first both heard, and discussed by the byshops of that prouince, at what time, and after a greate while, a byshop was the (*) 1.2 same we call a minister. Nowe the Archbyshop will without any further assistance or discussion by others suspend him, and in the end also throw him out of his charge, and if he haue the same authoritie ouer a byshop, as a byshop ouer the minister, (as it is said) he may do the like vnto him also.
This is another forged witnesse (such sound proofes the man hath that reprooues other men for the like) and yet God knoweth his witnesse maketh nothing for him. For who giueth authoritie to the Archbyshop to depriue eyther Byshop or inferiour minister, without due proofe and examination of the cause? touching consente of o∣ther, if he deale with him according to law, then dealeth he with the consent, not of the other Byshops only, but of all the realme: bycause that which is done by law: is done by the consent of all that consented either to the confirming or making of that law. Your glaunces by the way, (that there was then no Metropolitane: that then the same were byshops which we now cal ministers) bycause they be but barely affirmed, it shal be sufficient as flatly to denie them, and for proofe thereof to referre the Reader vnto that which hath bin spoken before.