The second reply of Thomas CartwrightThe second replie of Thomas Cartwright

For proof whereof I will propound him / first that ^aPeter was Prince of the Apostles / as Plato was of the Philosophers: likewise that he ^bwas Prince off the Apostles / as Moses / Elijah / David / Isay off the Prophets. Now if Plato were ruler / or had the commandment off other Philosophers / or if Moses of ⟨p. DCXI⟩the Prophets that cam after his death: then Peter also might have the same over the Apostles, but if they be therefore so called / because they excelled the rest in gifts: then it is clear / that thes fathers esteemed not Peter chief / for any power or authority over the rest. An other saith / ^aPeter was that the rest off the Apostles were, off like not office only / but honour and power: directly contrary to D. ^bwhere he preferreth Peter in honour: and contrary to that he both here / and pag. 68. although not in the same in words / yet indeed doth affirm. Thirdly / it is to be noted / that here the D. hand is again with Harding against ⁵the bishop: to whom alleging that Peter had power over the rest off the Apostles / the bishop answereth: Peter was chief off the Apostles as Aristippus is called chief off Philosophers: that is, the first, or best man off the company: where he denieth that S. Peter was ether lord, or Prince, or had power, or was governor over the rest off the apostles. He addeth / from this opinion that Peter in all such assemblies and in all matters moderated the rest, was chief, and spake first, the late writers dissent not. If he mean the ⁶Papists / I grant: if the Catholic / he bringeth not / nor (as I think) can bring so much as one / which saith so. Here he hath the bishop against him / to whom may be added Calvin / Bullinger / Beza / Gualter / with others.

For proofe wherof I will propound him / firste that