Tertullian, On Monogamy 12

Listen to this exquisitely slippery counter-argument. They claim the Apostle allowed remarriage precisely so that he could bind only the clergy to the yoke of monogamy: what he prescribes for some, he does not prescribe for all. So does that mean he exempts bishops from what he commands everyone? And if he prescribes something for bishops, does he not command it for everyone? Is it for everyone because it is for bishops, and for bishops because it is for everyone? Where do bishops and clergy come from, if not from the laity? If not everyone is bound to monogamy, where do you get monogamists for the clergy? Should a separate order of monogamists be created just to supply recruits? But when you people get puffed up and inflamed against the clergy, suddenly we are all one; suddenly we are all priests, because God the Father made us priests. Yet when you are challenged to meet the standard of priestly discipline, you put down your mitres and claim we are unequal. The issue was about ecclesiastical orders—what kind of men ought to be ordained. Therefore every form of common discipline had to be presented openly, a standing edict for all, so the people would know which order they must observe, the one that produces their leaders, and so that the honor of the office would not grant itself license as if it were a privilege of place. The Holy Spirit foresaw that some would say, 'Everything is permitted to bishops,' just like that Uthinensis of yours who never feared the Scantinian law. How many digamists preside among you, openly insulting the Apostle, certainly not blushing when these texts are read under their noses! Come now, you who think monogamy is an exception made for bishops: walk away from the rest of the disciplinary qualifications that are listed alongside it. Stop being irreproachable, sober, well-behaved, hospitable, teachable; instead be a drunk, quick to strike, quarrelsome, greedy, unable to manage your own household, neglecting your children's discipline, not even caring for a good reputation among outsiders. For if bishops have their own private law on monogamy, then all the other qualifications that go with it are written for bishops alone. But for laypeople, to whom monogamy does not apply, the rest are foreign as well. You have slipped the bonds of all discipline, Psychicus, if you want to. Consistently maintain that what is commanded to some is not commanded to all; or if the other qualifications are common but monogamy is imposed only on bishops, are you declaring that only they are Christians, the ones entrusted with the whole of discipline?