Durham cites Boyd's massive Latin commentary on Ephesians on the parity (identity) of presbyter and bishop. He says Boyd called his many opponents (defenders of diosisian bishop), papizantes. He references Boyd on page 502 (except for typo the same page in both editions) but I cannot find his use of the term. If it is transliterated Greek that may explain it. Normally any Greek in Durham on Revelation is not transliterated, but then this may not be NT Greek. Boyd also may use the term any number of pages before or after that page. Anyone know if papizantes is Greek or Latin? Google says in Greek it means pagan; but I'm not putting store in that. Here is the link to Boyd. Durham's comment from his digression on the identity of angel, bishop and presbyter is below. Any thoughts or eurekas are most welcome. I shall only add a word of that zealous, and pious writer, learned Mr. Boyd, who having clearly made out this by many scriptures and citations of Fathers, both against papists and others, who (he says) in this were papizantes, does close with a saying of famous Whitaker against Sanders, who having cited Jerome’s reason for the bringing in of bishops for the preventing of schism, “Hoc Veri-verbium gravissimè subjungit” (he says) “sed ipso morbo deterius penè remedium fuit. Nam ut primò unus presbyter reliquis Prælatus est, & factus Episcopus; ita postea unus Episcopus, reliquis est prælatus. Sic ista consuetudo Papam cum suâ Monarchiâ peperit, & paulatim in Ecclesiam invexit.” And then does subjoin of himself, “Nec ego sanè video, Si semel hoc remedium, ut ad schismata vel tollenda vel præcavenda necessarium, admittamus & amplectamur, cur aut quomodo gradus sistendus sit, donec ad unum summum Patriarcham sive Pontificem Oecumenicum, qui solus toti præsit Hierarchiæ Ecclesiasticæ, tandem deveniamus, atque Hoc Italus velit, & magno mercetur Abaddon, ille Romanus, qui cum suis asseclis, eodem hoc utuntur argumento, ad Monarchiam suam in Ecclesiâ firmandam.”  . Boyd, In Epistolam Pauli Apostoli ad Ephesios Prælectiones (London: 1652), 502. Conferring with the Boyd, some slight corrections have been made to the text as it appeared in the first edition of Durham. The quotations are from an excursus situated in an exposition of Ephesians 4:11, which is listed in the book’s index of common places as treating the head of the church, but dealing especially with episcopacy. My thanks go again to Sherman Isbell for locating and confirming these citations in his copy of Boyd’s commentary.  . Boyd is citing William Whitaker writing against Bellarmine in Controversiam de Romano Pontifice, Distributam in Quæstiones VIII in Opera theologica (1610), 540. Whitaker is responding to an argument from Nicholas Sanders, De visibili monarchia ecclesiæ (1571).