[102] _Detur_, inquit, hoc est jure humano, posset fieri, consentientibus, cæteris omnibus fidelibus. (L. Op. Lat. i, p. 244.) At this period Luther was quite ready to acknowledge the pope as first magistrate of the Church, elected by her own free choice; but he denied that he was of divine institution. At a later period he denied that subjection was due to him in any respect, and this denial he owed to the discussion at Leipsic. Eck had come upon ground which he did not know so thoroughly as Luther. The latter, it is true, could not maintain his thesis, that the papacy had not been in existence for more than four centuries. Eck quoted authorities of an earlier date, and these Luther was unable to obviate, criticism not having yet attacked the spurious decretals. But the nearer the discussion was brought to primitive times, the more Luther's strength increased. Eck appealed to the Fathers. Luther quoted the Fathers in reply, and all the hearers were struck with his superiority to his rival. "That my exposition," said he, "is that of St. Jerome, I prove by St. Jerome's own Epistle to Evagrius, in which he says, 'Every bishop, whether at Rome, or Eugubium, or Constantinople, or Rhegium, or Alexandria, or Tanis, has the same merit, and the same priesthood.'[103] The power of riches, and the humiliation of poverty, constitute the only precedence or inferiority among bishops." [103] "Ejusdem meriti et ejusdem sacerdotii est." (L. Op. Lat. i, p. 244.) From the writings of the Fathers, Luther passed to the decrees of Councils which regard the bishop of Rome as only a first among equals.[104] [104] Primus inter pares. [Sidenote: PRIMACY OF ST. PETER.] "We read," says he, "in the decree of the Council of Africa," "The bishop of the first see must not be called either prince of the the pontiffs, or sovereign pontiff, or any other similar name, but only bishop of the first see. Were the supremacy of the bishop of Rome of divine institution, would not these words be heretical?" Eck replied by one of those subtile distinctions which were so familiar to him. "The bishop of Rome, if you will so have it, is not universal bishop, but bishop of the universal church."[105] [105] Non episcopus universalis, sed universalis Ecclesiæ episcopus. (Ibid. 246.) _Luther._--"I am quite willing to leave this reply unanswered: let our hearers judge for themselves." "Assuredly," said he, afterwards, "the gloss is worthy of a theologian, and well fitted to satisfy a disputant thirsting for glory. My expensive sojourn in Leipsic has not been for nothing, since I have learned that the pope, though not indeed the universal bishop, is the bishop of the universal church."[106]. [106] Ego glorior me tot expensis non frustra.... (L. Ep. i, 299.)