292 A VINDICATION OF THE ANIMADVERSIONS ON FIAT LT^X.
tain conjectures, or to be concerned in tliem, 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 tlie ground in a mo- ment. 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 inquired 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 coming to Eome. Wherefore you add, —
IV. " That St Peter was bishop of the Roman church ; that he fixed his seat there, and there he died." In gathering up your prin- ciples I follow the footsteps of Bellarmine, Baronius, and other great champions of your church, so that you cannot except against the method of our projsosals of them. Now, this conclusion is built on these three suppositions: — 1. That Peter had an episcoj^al offi.ce dis- tinct from his apostolical; 2. That he was at Rome; 3. That he fixed his episcopal see there; — whereof the second is very questionable, the first and last are absolutely false: so that the conclusion itself 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 Avhere 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 dimi- nution 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 V to what purpose serves this fictitious episcopacy? All the privileges that you contend for the assignation of unto Peter were bestowed 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 kirjgdom of heaven were given unto him as an apostle (or, according to St Austin, as a believer) ; as such was he commanded to feed the sheep of Christ. It was unto him as an apostle, or a professing believer, that Christ promised to build the church on the faith that he had professed. You reckon all these things ainong the privileges of Peter the apostle; who as such is said to be o Tpuroc, or first in order. As an apostle he had the care of all the churches committed unto him ; as an apostle
PRINCirLES OF PAPISTS ON THE UNITY OF FAITH. 2r',j
lie was divinely inspired and enabled infallibly to reveal tlio mind of Christ. All tliese things belonged unto him as an apostle. And what privilege he could have besides as a bishop, neither you* nor I can tell, no more than you can when, how, or by whom he was called and ordained unto any such office; all which we know well enough concerning his apostleship. If you will, then, have any to succeed him in the enjoyment of any or of all these privileges, you must bespeak him to succeed him in his apostleship, and not in his bishop- ric. Besides, as I said before, this imaginary episcojoacy, which limits and confines him unto a particular church, as it doth if it be an episcopacy properly so called, is destructive of his apostolical office, and of his duty in answering the commission given him of preaching the gosjjel to every creature, following the g\iidance of God's providence and conduct of the Holy Ghost in his way. Many of the ancients, I confess, affirm that Peter sat bishop of the church of Rome : but they all evidently use the word in a large sense, to imply that during bis abode there (for that there he was they did suppose) he took upon him the especial care of that church; for the same persons constantly affirm that Paul also was bishop of the same church at the same time, which cannot be otherwise understood than in the large sense mentioned. And Rufinus, Preefat. Recog. Clement, ad Gaudent., unriddles the mystery. " Linus," saith he, " et Cletus fuerunt ante Clementem episcopi in urbe Roma, sed superstite Petro; videlicet, ut illi episcopatus curam gererent, iste vero aposto- latus impleret officium;" — "Linus and Cletus were bishops in the city of Rome before Clemens, but whilst Peter was yet alive; they performing the duty of bishops, Peter attending unto his office apo- stolical." And hereby doth he utterly discard the present new plea of the foundation of your faith; for though he assert that Peter the apostle was at Rome, yet he denies that he ever sat bishop there, but names two others that ruled that church at Rome jointly during his time, either in one assembly or in two, — the one of the Circumcision, the other of the Gentile converts. And if Peter were thus bishop of Rome, and entered, as you say, upon his episcopacy at his first coming thither, wlience is it that you are forced to confess that he was so long absent from his charge ? Five years, saith Bellarmine ; but that will by no means salve the difficulty. Seven, saith Onuphrius, at once, and abiding at one place; the most part of his time, besides, being spent in other places, and yet allowing him no time at all for those places where he certainly was. Eighteen, saith Cortesius. Strange, that he should be so long absent from his especial cure, and never write one word to them for their instruction or consolation, whereas, in the meantime, he wrote two epistles unto them who, it seems, did not in any special manner belong unto his charge ! I wish