A vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat lux

V. That some one must needs succeed Peter in his Episcopacy: But why so? why was it not needful that one should succeed him in his Apostleship? Why was it not needful that Paul should have a successor as well as Peter? and John as well as either of them? Because, you say, that was necessary for the Church, not so these. But who told you so? where is the proof of what you aver? who made you judges of what is necessary, and what is not necessary for the Church of Christ, when himself is silent? And why is not the succession of an Apostle necessary as well as of such a Bishop as you fancy? had it not been better to have had one still residing in the Church, of whose Infallibility there could have been no doubt or question? One that had the power of working Miracles, that should have no need to scare the people by shaking fire out of his sleeve, as your Pope Gregory the 7th was wont to do, if Cardinal Benno may be believed. But you have now carried us quite off from the Scripture, and Story, and probable conjectures, to attend unto you whilst you give the Lord Jesus prudential advice, about what is necessary for his Church; It must needs be so, it is meet it should be so, is the best of your proof in this matter: Only your fratres Walenburgici add, that never any man ordained the Government of a Community more weakly, than Christ must be supposed to have done the Government of his Church, if he have not appointed such a Successor to Peter as you imagine. But it is easy for you to assert what you please of this nature, and as easy for any one to reject what you so assert if he please. These things are without the verge of Christian Religion; […] Towers and Palaces in the air: But what must St Peter be succeeded in? his Episcopacy ⟨p. 180⟩and what therewithal? his Authority, Power and Jurisdiction over all Churches in the world, with an unerring judgement in matters of faith. But all these belonged unto Peter, as far as ever they belonged unto him, as he was an Apostle, long before you fancy him to have been a Bishop: As then his Episcopacy came without these things, so for ought you know, it might go without it. This is a matter of huge importance in that System of Principles, which you tender unto us, to bring us unto settlement in Religion, and the Unity of Faith;

V. That some one must needs succeed Peter in his Episcopacy: But why so? why was it not needfull that one should succeed him in his Apostleship? Why was it not needfull that Paul should have a successor as well as Peter? and John as well as either of them? Because, you say, that was necessary for the Church, not so these. But who told you so? where is the proof of what you averre? who made you judges of what is necessary, and what is not necessary for the Church of Christ, when himself is silent? And why is not the succession of an Apostle necessary as well as of such a Bishop as you fancie? had it not been better to have had one still residing in the Church, of whose Infallibility there could have been no doubt or question? One that had the power of working Miracles, that should have no need to scare the people by shaking fire out of his slieve, as your Pope Gregory the 7th was wont to do, if Cardinall Benno may be believed. But you have now carried us quite off from the Scripture, and Story, and probable conjectures, to attend unto you whilest you give the Lord Jesus prudentiall advice, about what is necessary for his Church; It must needs be so, it is meet it should be so, is the best of your proof in this matter: Only your fratres Walenburgici adde, that never any man ordained the Government of a Community more weakly, than Christ must be supposed to have done the Government of his Church, if he have not appointed such a Successour to Peter as you imagin. But it is easie for you to assert what you please of this nature, and as easie for any one to reject what you so assert if he please. These things are without the verge of Christian Religion; Towers and Palaces in the ayr: But what must St Peter be succeeded in? his Episcopacy