A vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat lux

And God forbid, that we should once imagine the present faith of Christians, or their Profession of Christian Religion, to be built upon such uncertain Conjectures, or to be concerned in them whether they be true, or false. Nothing can be spoken with more reproach unto it, than to say, that it stands in need of such supportment. And yet if this one Supposition fail you, all your building falls to the ground in a moment. Never was so stupendous a fabric raised on such imaginary foundations. But that we may proceed; Let us suppose this also, that Peter was at Rome, and preached the Gospel there, What will thence follow unto your advantage? what, towards the settlement of any man in Religion, or bringing us unto the Unity of faith, the things enquired after? He was at, he preached the Gospel at Jerusalem, Samaria, Joppa, Antioch, Babylon, and sundry other places, and yet we find no such Consequences pleaded from thence, as you urge from his ⟨p. 176⟩Coming to Rome. Wherefore you add,

And God forbid, that we should once imagine the present faith of Christians, or their Profession of Christian Religion, to be built upon such uncertain Conjectures, or to be concerned in them whether they be true, or false. Nothing can be spoken with more reproach unto it, than to say, that it stands in need of such supportment. And yet if this one Supposition fail you, all your building falls to the ground in a moment. Never was so stupendous a fabrick raised on such imaginary foundations. But that we may proceed; Let us suppose this also, that Peter was at Rome, and preached the Gospel there, What will thence follow unto your advantage? what, towards the settlement of any man in Religion, or bringing us unto the Unity of faith, the things enquired after? He was at, he preached the Gospel at Hierusalem, Samaria, Joppa, Antioch, Babylon, and sundry other places, and yet we find no such Consequences pleaded from thence, as you urge from his ⟨p. 176⟩Coming to Rome. Wherefore you adde,

1 V. That St Peter was Bishop of the Roman Church; that he fixed his seat there, and there he died. In gathering up your Principles I follow the footsteps of Bellarmine, Baronius, and other great Champions of your Church; so that you cannot except against the method of our proposals of them. Now this Conclusion is built on these three Suppositions. 1. That Peter had an Episcopal Office distinct from his Apostolical; 2. That he was at Rome. 3. That he fixed his Episcopal Sea there; whereof the Second is very Questionable, the First and Last are absolutely false. So that the Conclusion its self must needs be a notable fundamental Principle of Faith. It is true, and I showed it before, that the Apostles when they came into any Church did exercise all the Power of Bishops in and over that Church, but not as Bishops but as Apostles. As a King may in any of the Cities of his dominions where he comes, exercise all the Authority of the Mayor, or particular Governor of that place where he is, which yet doth not make him become the Mayor of the place; which would be a diminution of his royal Dignity. No more did the Apostles become Local Bishops, because of their exercising Episcopal Power in any particular Church, by virtue of their Authority Apostolical, wherein that other was included, as hath been declared. And Cui Bono? to what purpose serves this fictitious Episcopacy? All the Privileges that you contend for the Assignation of unto Peter, were beowed upon him as an Apostle, or as a believing disciple of Christ. As such he had those peculiar grants made unto him. The Keys of the Kingdom of heaven were given unto him as an Apostle (or, according to St Austin, as a believer) as