The people watched that election, and approved [it] by their assent and applause. But [Joshua] neither elected himself, nor imposed [his own] hands, nor took the honor—
(col. 235)
—received obedience from him; but, conversely, [obedience is received] by the Prince himself [from Eleazar / the people]. If you should say [that] Origen (homily 6 on Leviticus) reasons thus, from the fact that in the vesting of Aaron the people was present (Lev. 8:4): “Although I the Lord had commanded about constituting the Pontiff, and the Lord had chosen [him], nevertheless the Synagogue too is convoked. For there is required, in ordaining a Priest, also the presence of the people, that all may know and be certain that he who is more excellent out of the whole people — who [is] more learned, who holier, who more eminent in every virtue — that one is chosen for the priesthood; and this with the people standing by, lest afterward there be for anyone any retraction, [and] lest any scruple remain. This too is what the Apostle prescribes in the ordination of a Priest, saying: ‘He must also have a good testimony from those who are outside’” [1 Tim. 3:7]. For which reason, too, the presence of the people would seem always necessary in the election of Princes [rulers]: It is answered [that] the reasoning of the argument is entirely equal [parallel]. But just as, among political Princes, there is succession by inheritance, or election by certain nobles [optimates], as in the Roman Empire, so also among the Ecclesiastical [princes] — about whom let Bellarmine be seen (bk. 1 On Clerics, from ch. 2). But whether [the people] conferred obedience on him by a solemn rite, is disputed below (bk. 2, ch. 1, last page, quest. 4, against Masius).