2. Thes. 2. 8. for although he should be wasted and consumed before by the spirit of Christs mouth that is the ministery of the word yet he should not be vtterly destroyed vntill the second comming of Christ. From hence therefore we reason thus If Antichrist were in the Apostles time and was to remaine vntill the second comming of Christ then Antichrist is not one singuler man but a succession of men vnlesse they will say that one and the same man may liue vpon the earth from the Apostles time vntill the comming of Christ of which time there be already aboue 1500. yeares expired But Antichrist was in the Apostles times and is to continue vntill the second comming of Christ as the two Apostles Paul and Iohn do plainely testifie therefore Antichrist is not one singuler man 10. Of this syllogisme Bellarmine cannot deny either the proposition or the assumption Onely he distinguisheth of the former part of the assumption viz. That Antichrist in the Apostles time was come indeede but not in his owne person but onely in his forerunners And this he would prooue first by a similitude which he might haue knowne from Plato to be a most slippery argument As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ came in the beginning of the world not in his owne person but in his forerunners the Patriarches and Prophets so Antichrist came in the Apostles time not in his owne person but in his forerunners the heretickes persecutors of the church In which similitude there is no proportiō vnlesse that which is in question betaken for granted namely that Antichrist is but one particular person as Christ is For if Antichrist be a succession of heretiques then might he be said to come in the first of the ranke although the chiefe of that order which principally is called Antichrist was not yet come And secondly the protasis or propositiō of this similitude is vntrue For although Christ might be said to be come from the beginning in respect both of the truth of the promise and also of the efficacy of his merits which is extended to all the faithfull from the beginning yet we neuer reade neither can it truely be said that he came in the Patriarches and Prophets especially seeing the holy Ghost maketh a kinde of opposition betwixt Heb. 1. 1. Mat. 21. 37 Gal. 4. 4. Gods sending of them and the comming of Christ who was not sent before the fulnesse of time came Neither are the Prophets or Patriarches any where called the forerunners of Christ For forerunners goe a little before as Iohn Baptist did who therefore is worthily called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the forerunner If any man obiect that as Christ 1. Pet. 3. 19 spake in the Prophets so Antichrist in the heretiques I answer that this latter is true not of Antichrist but of the diuell who is a lying spirit in the mouthes of all false Prophets Thirdly the reddition is contradictory to that which the Apostle Iohn deliuereth For he saith plainely that the Antichrist with the article prefiexed and that Antichrist whom they heard was to come was already entred into the world 1. Iohn 4. 3. 2. Iohn 7. and thence prooueth that therefore it is the last houre because Antichrist was to come in the last houre 1. Iohn 2. 18. So that in this similitude nothing is sound no proportion in the whole no truth in the parts 11. Wherefore by a new supply of arguments he laboureth to make good this exposition And as touching the place in Paul he argueth first from the authority of the fathers interpreters wherof some vnderstand by the mystery of iniquitie the persecution vnder Nero others the heretiques of those times which secretly seduced many The former had no reason to call the open persecution of Nero a mysterie who also although he were an enimy yet belonged not to the body of Antichrist who is a disguised enimy and a pretended Christian. The latter exposition we doe embrace For we holde Antichrist to be the whole body of heretiques in the last age of the world who vnder the name and profession of Christ aduance themselues against Christ first secretly as in the Apostles times afterwardes more openly when that which hindred was taken out of the way Of this body as euery member seuerally and all ioyntly is Antichrist and therefore Iohn calleth the heretiques of his time Antichrists and of them all saith that they are the Antichrist so especially the head of this body which we haue prooued to be the Papacy is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called Antichrist Wherefore although Antichrist was after a sort come and the mysterie of iniquity wrought in the Apostles time yet Antichrist was not reuealed vntill the head of this body appeared that is vntill the Pope became Antichrist who since the yeare of the Lord 606. hath shewed himselfe in his colours first by vsurping supreame authority ouer the vniuersall Church afterwards by claiming soueraignty ouer kings and Emperors as we haue heretofore shewed Seeing therfore the heretiques of whom the fathers speake did belong to the body of Antichrist it cannot be denied but that Antichrist when they were in the world was come in some of his members and had as it were set his foote into the Church 12. Secondly from our owne confession he would seeme to driue vs to great absurdity For saith he if Antichrist were come in the Apostles times and if Antichrist hath his seat in Rome then it will follow that Peter Paul were the true Antichrists Nero or Simon Magus the true Christ. For there were no other Bishops of Rome then but Peter and Paul with whom Nero and Simon Magus contended I answere that it cannot be prooued out of the Scripture or by any sound argument that Peter and Paul were Bishops of Rome and although they were it would not follow vpon our assertion that therefore they were Antichrists and much lesse that Nero or Simon Magus was Christ. For when we say that Antichrist was come in the Apostles time we speake of the body of Antichrist with S. Iohn Whō we say that Antichrist hath his seate in Rome we speake of the head of this body who especially is called Antichrist whom we do with Paul acknowledge not to haue beene reuealed vntill that which hindered was taken out of the way that is vntill the Romane Empire in the West was dissolued but afterwards by degrees he was aduanced in the Papacie aboue all that is called God sitting in the temple of God as if he were God that is ruling and raigning in the Church as if he were a God vpon earth And surely if the head of the Antichristian body was to be reuealed not long after the dissolution of the Romane Empire in the West and was about the same time with the rulers of the Prouinces to attaine vnto his kingdome as hath bin shewed and lastly if he shall continue in the world after he is reuealed vntill
2. Tim. 4. 4. trueth and are conuertd vnto fables They cannot abide to heare that the Scripture should be the onely rule of faith and maners they cannot endure to see any of their people to read the Scriptures and therefore desire to keepe it from them in an vnknowne language The foundation of their trueth is the authoritie of their Church and in the Church of their Pope who they say cannot erre But if the Pope teach doctrines of Diuels and speake lyes in hypocrise as the Apostle hath prophesied especially of them then is there in that Church little soundnesse of trueth that is built vpon so vnsound a soundation Thus therefore I reason The head of the generall Apostasie is Antichrist The Pope is the head of the generall or catholicke Apostasiei therefore he is Antichrist 21. To the three former arguments a fourth may be added The seuen heades of that beast which signifieth the Romane state are not so many persons but so many heades or states of gouernement wherby the common wealth of the Romanes hath beene at diuerse times gouerned the sixt head was the state of emperours the seuenth Antichrist as the Papists confesse the eight which also is one of the seauen the state of Emperours renewed Whereby it euidently appeareth Rhem. in Apoc. 17. Bellarmi not onely that Antichrist is not one man but also that the Pope who is the seuenth head is Antichrist CHAP. 3. Concerning the time of Antichrist his comming 1. TO withdraw our minds from beholding Antichrist in the See of Rome and to make vs looke for the expected Messias of the Iewes that neuer shall come the Papistes labour by might and maine to perswade vs that Antichrist is not yet come For euen as the learned of the Iewes when Christ was among them contrary to their one perswasion for worldly respects refused the true Messias and made the people expect another which neuer shall be So the learned among the Papists hauing Antichrist among them for worldly respects cannot endure that he should bee acknowledged but teach the people that he is not yet come and describe vnto them such an Antichrist as themselues may well know shall neuer come as by the grace of God shall appeare in the particulars Now as touching the time of Antichristes comming Bellarmine first reciteth diuers false and erronious opinions as heo calleth them and afterwarde setteth downe sixe solemne demonstrations to prooue that he is not yet come In the former he spendeth a goodlong chapter reckoning vp diuers opinions both of the fathers in former ages and also of hetetiques as â—…he calleth them in latter times mingling the trueth with errours that the credit of both might be alike As touching the fathers because he taketh it for granted which is the question that Antichrist is not to come before the end of the world which we deny according to the Scriptures 1. Ioh. 2. 18 2. Iohn 7. 2. Thes. 2. 7 he would make their opinion concerning the approching of Antichrist which they heid according to the Prophesies of the Scripture compared with the euent of no better credit then their conceit of Christs approching vnto judgement grounded not so much vpon the Scriptures as vpon their owne conjecture For to omit their conjectures concerning Christs comming consuted by experience what can Bellarmine answer to the sound argument either of S. Ierome or Gregorie concerning the comming of Antichrist confirmed by experience alledged by Bellarmine himselfe Ierome applying the Prophesie of Paul Epist. ad Geront de Monogamia 2. Thes. 2. 6. 7. 8. that Antichrist should appeare when he that hindereth meaning the Romane Emperour was taken out of the way to his time wherein not onely the imperiall seat had beene remooued from Rome which was the first degree of taking out of the way that which hindered but also Rome it selfe in distresse being taken of the Gothes and the Empire in decay Quitenebat saith he de medio fit non intelligimus Anticbristum appropinquare He which did holde is taken out of the way and do we not vnderstand that Antichrist dooth approch And likewise Gregory Omnia quae praedicta sunt fiunt Rex superbia propè est All things which were foretold doe come to passe the King Lib. 4. epi. 38. of pride is at hand Which arguments alledged also by vs Bellarmine because he could not answer he thought to discredit by reckoning them among erronious conceits 2. But let vs come to his heretiques Who although they all agree in this that Antichrist is come and that it is the Pope yet saith Bellarmine they are deuided into sixe opinions The first opinion viz. of the Samosatenians in Hungarie and Transyluania is not worth the mentioning being of such heretiques as deny the Trinity and also the diuinity of Christ with whom though we haue as little to doe as the Papists sauing that some of our men haue soundly confuted their heresies whiles the Papists held their peace yet he numbreth our opinion with theirs as Christ was numbred among the wicked that by this mixture of truth with falshood he might discredit the truth As for the rest it is easie to shew that all Protestants almost that haue written in this argument and namely those whom Bellarmine alledgeth doe agree in the substance concerning the comming of Antichrist And that there is no such difference among them as Bellarmine would beare vs in hand For concerning this matter this is the receiued opinion of our Churches When with Iohn in his Epistles we speake of Antichrist meaning the whole bodie of Heretiques and Antichrists we hold with Iohn that euen in the Apostles times Antichrist had as it were set his foote in the Church and that from that time the mysterie of iniquitie that is Antichristianisme did more and more worke vntill the head of this body the man of sinne was reuealed Which with Paul we hold to haue beene done after that which hindered was remooued out of the way But when we speake of the head of this body who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called the Antichrist figured by the second beast Apoc. 13. of whom also the Apostle intreateth 2. Thes. 2. the constant opinion of the learned is this that of the reuealing or manifest appearing of Antichrist there were two principall degrees The first about the yeare 607. when Boniface the third obtained the supremacie ouer the vniuersall See lib. 1. cap. 3. Church The second after the yeare 1000. when he claimed and vsurped both swords that is a soueraigne and vniuersall authoritie not onely ecclesiasticall ouer the Clergie but also temporall ouer Kings and Emperours Vnto which second soueraigntie they had long aspired but neuer attained vntill the time of Gregorie the seauenth We holde then that Antichrist was come and shewed himselfe in Boniface the third and that after this his birth as it were he grewe by degrees vntill he came to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
in the primitiue church neither is it altogether misliked of vs although not much vsed among vs because it was so much abused by them But this ceremonie was done without vnction or chrisme for further proofe whereof see D. Fulke his answer to the Rhemists Acts. 8. 17. And therefore notwithstanding that ancient practise of the Church this Chrisme vsed in confirmation may belong to the marke of the beast And the rather because the Papists make their confirmation with Chrisme not onely a sacrament but also a most necessary and Principall sacrament So necessary as that they haue set it downe as a law that no man is to be esteemed a Christian without it Nunquam De consecrat dist 5. C. vt iciuni erit Christianus nisi confirmatione episcopals fuerit Chrismatus He shall neuer be a Christian who is not confirmed with Chrisme by a Bishop So principall as that they preferre it before Baptisme affirming that it is maiore veneratione venerandum with greater veneration to be reuerenced Now if it be a priuiledge De consecrat dist 5. C. de his vero peculiar vnto Christ the author and bestower of grace to ordaine Sacraments of grace then must it needes be accounted a practise Antichristian if any man shall take vpon him to ordaine a Sacrament and not onely to obtrude the same vpon all as necessary to saluation but also to preferre it before that excellent Sacrament of Baptisme ordayned by Christ himselfe Therefore as the ordayning and enforcing of this Sacrament vpon men is a note of Antichrist so those which doe not onely receiue it when they are young but also retaine it when they are olde remayning in the communion of the Church of Rome may be said to haue the marke of the beast 7. Secondly that to adhere to the Romaine Church was a marke of a true Catholicke before the yeere 606. he prooueth by 2. Romanae ecclesie adhaercre the authority of Augustine Ambrose and Victor Vticensis But we speake of the Church of Rome that now is that is the apostaticall Church of Rome he argueth of the ancient Church which was apostolicall Indeed whiles the Church of Rome did cleaue vnto Christ so long might it be a note of a good Christian to cleaue vnto it although these testimonies doe scarce proue it but after that Church became apostaticall and adulterous as appeareth by their fundamentall heresies and horrible Idolatries and consequently of a faithful Church became an harlot and of the Church of Christ the synagogue of Antichrist it hath beene the marke of an Antichristian to liue in the communion of that Church Besides this great difference betwixt the present and the ancient state of the Church of Rome there is also great oddes in the manner of adhering or cleauing thereto Then as other Churches did cleaue to the Church of Rome so did the Church of Rome cleaue to them now it acknowledgeth no Church besides it selfe Then the Church of Rome was accounted but a part of the Catholicke Church and so a man might be a good Christian although he were not of the Church of Rome now the Church of Rome alone must be accounted the Catholicke Church and consequently he that is not a member of that Church must not be taken for a Catholicke or true Christian. For when the Pope got the title of vniuersall Bishop or head of the vniuersall Church then the church whereof he was head was accounted the onely Catholicke and vniuersall Church Hereunto agreeth that Glosse Constat ecclesiam ideo esse vnam quia in vniuersali ecclesia est vnum caput suprem◅ Clementin Lib. 5. ad nostrum in gloss cui omnes de ecclesia obedire tenentur seil Papae It is euident that the Church is therefore one because in the vniuersall Church there is one supreame head whom all that are of the Church are bound to obey And agreeably therunto saith a late writer whose bookes were published at Venice in the yeere 1588. Non potest quis se Christianum fateri qui curae Papae dicit se non subesse No man may Rod. Cupers 127. num 29. professe himselfe to be a Christian who doth not confesse himselfe to be subiect to the Popes cure or charge And therfore in the conclusiō of his booke he professeth himselfe to be Mancipium S. R. E. The bond seruant of the holy church of Rome Non ignorans he saith haud possehaberese deum patrem si sanctam vniuersalem Romanam ecclesiam non habuerit matrem knowing that a man cannot haue God to be his father vnlesse he haue the holy vniuersall Church of Rome to be his mother Seeing therfore the Church of Rome is become the whore of Babylon as hath bene prooued and the synagogue of Antichrist seeing the Pope compelleth all men to cleaue to the church of Rome suffering none to buy or sel or to enioy any benefits of humane society which professe not themselues to be members of the Church of Rome it followeth that this cleauing to the Apostaticall Church of Rome or liuing in the communion thereof belongeth to the marke of the beast 8. Thirdly as touching the oth of obedience and fealty 3. Iura◅ium obedientiae made to the Pope of Rome Bellarmine prooueth that it was vsed in the time of Gregory the great and therefore before the yeere 606. as appeareth in the Epistles of Gregorie I answere that although Lib. 10. Epist 31. before the yeere 606. the Bishops of Rome tooke more vpon them then became the ministers of Christ yet Bellarmine is not able out of all antiquity to alleadge one example of such an oath of fealty and allegeance imposed by the Pope vpon forraine Bishops and much lesse vpon Kings and Princes as all Catholicke Bishops as they call them Priests graduates Princes and potentates are compelled to sweare vnto the Pope of Rome That one example which as it seemeth is all that he can alledge of an oath taken not long before the yeere 606. is little to the purpose For it is not an oath of obedience and allegeance to the Pope but of faith and religion towards God conformable to the faith and religion then professed by the Bishop and Church of Rome For it is the oath of a certaine Bishop who sweareth to renounce his former heresies and to professe and maintaine that faith and religion which then the Bishop and Church of Rome did professe which oath in effect is no otherwise to be vndestood then if a minister among vs being reclaimed from Popery or some other heresie should take an oath before a Bishop that whiles he liueth he will professe and maintaine that religion which is now professed and established in the Church of England and other reformed Churches which is not to sweare allegeance to them but the like allegeance with them vnto Christ. 9. Fourthly the annointing of Priests we confesse to be as ancient as the Priesthood of Aaron from
Act. 17. 53. 23. 10. hinder and was to be taken away and in what sence it hindered not and was to remaine For the better vnderstanding whereof we are to distinguish betwixt the old Empire and 1. Cor. 5. 2. 2 Coâ—… 6. 17. the new The old Empire as it hindered the dominion of Antichrist was to be taken out of the way that it might bee no more an hinderance thereunto The new Empire in the west erected by the Pope hindreth not the dominion of Antichrist but rather supporteth him and therefore together with Antichrist was to remaine Neither doth the Apostle speake of the new Empire but of the old as shall appeare by these reasons 3 First the Apostle speaketh of the Empire which hindered 1. or held then of that only for so he saith only he which now letteth wil let vntill he be taken out of the way And Hierome expoundeth those words and now what hindreth you know after Ad Algas quaest 11. this maner quae causa sit vt Antichrist us in praesentiaruÌ„ non veniat optimè nostis You know very well what the cause is that Antichrist cometh not now But the old Empire hindered them and not the new And therefore the Apostle speaketh of the taking away of the old Empire not of the new Again when he saith 2. the Empire hindred he meaneth the imperial authority dominioÌ„ that at Rome not the title or name therof in Germany For it is not the name or title of an Emperour in Germany that can hinder the dominion of Antichrist at Rome much lesse at IerusaleÌ„ where the Papists say his seat shall be Thirdly 3. Antichrist appeared shewed himselfe and in that sence was reuealed before the erection of the new Empire For the new Empire is the image of the former beast which Antichrist the 2. beast Ap. 13. causeth to be made And wheras Antichrist is as the Papists also coÌ„sesse the 7. head of the beast which hath heads the Empire renewed which is the beast that was and is not though it be is the 8. in order though in name it is one of the 7. and in that sence is to bee referred to the sixt head namely the Emperours Fourthly the whore of Babylon that 4. is the Antichristian state was to sitte vpon the beast which afterwards was to ascend that is the Empire renewed Therfore with Antichrist there was to remaine an imperial state though much abased vnder him Fiftly the Empire renewed is the 5. beast whereon the whore of Babylon sitteth And therefore is Ioan de turrecrem lib. 2. c. 114. so farre from hindring Antichrist that it supporteth him as the beast doth the rider And to that end in deed was this Empire erected in the west that it might support the church of Rome For when as the church of Rome was oppressed by the king Adrian 4. in epistol ad archiep German apud Auenlin lib. 4. of the Lombards it sought aide of the Emperours of Constantinople and when they would not defend the church the Pope translated the Empire to the French king and from him vpon the same occasion to the Germaines and that to this end vt Dist. 96. c. si imperator in glossa Rex Teutonicorum foret imperator patronus sedis Apostolicae that the king of the Almaines might be Emperour and patrone of the See Apostolicke And for the same cause the Emperour 6. is called of them procurator siue defensor Romanae Ecclesiae the proctor or defender of the church of Rome Sixtly the Papists themselues doe hould that the Empire which now is shall continue vnto the end of the world For they say that in the second of Daniel as many others also haue said is described a succession of the chiefe kingdomes or Monarchies of the earth which should continue vntill the end of the world the last whereof is the Romane Empire Seauenthly the destruction of the Romane Empire which the fathers say shall go before the reuelation of Antichrist is the dissolution and diuision thereof among ten kings which in deede long since happened to the old Empire but cannot happen to the new vnlesse we can imagine that ten mightie kings shall arise out of the bare name and title of an Emperour diuided among them When as the Papists therefore teach vs not to expect Antichrist vntill the Empire that now is either be diuided into ten kingdomes they are ridiculous or vtterly abolished which they say shall continue to the end they are absurd and in both impious making as it may seeme a scorne of the prophecyes concerning Antichrist which they make to imply impossibilities and contradictions 4. By this which hath bene said it plainely appeareth that howsoeuer the old Empire in the west which hindered the dominion of Antichrist was to be takeÌ„ out of the way before Antichrist should be reuealed yet notwithstanding euen with vnder Antichrist there was to be an imperiall state in name title which is the beast whereon the whore of Babylon sitteth therfore is so far froÌ„ hindering Antichrist as that it supporteth him Let vs then coÌ„sider how the Empire which hindred the reuelatioÌ„ of Antichrist was takeÌ„ out of the way how afterwards Antichrist was reuealed Of the taking away of the Emperour as also of the reuelation of Antichrist there are two degrees The Romane Emperour was first takeÌ„ out of the way when the imperiaâ—… seat was by Constantine the great translated from Rome to Bizantium or Constantinople and that to this end as they haue set downe in the forged donation of Constantine that he might leaue rowme to the Pope Because forsooth where the princehood of priests and head of Christian religion Dist. 69. c. Constantinus de electione c. fundament in sexto was by the heauenly Emperour placed there it is not iuste that the earthly Emperour should haue power Secondly after the death of Constantine the great and of Flauius Valerius ConstaÌ„tinus his son the Romane Empire being diuided into 2. partes the Easterne the Westerne and by diuisioÌ„ being weakened the Westerne was ouerthrowne in the yeare of our Lord 475. Rome it selfe taken by the Gothes So that neither in Rome any Romane afterwards had his seate of authority vntill the Pope tooke vpon him the souerainty neither in the West was there any Romane Emperour vntill Charles the great that is to say from the yeare 475. vnto the end of the yeare 800. In the meane time Italy was gouerned first by the Gothes and afterwards a great part thereof by the Lombards And howsoeuer the Emperours of the East had recouered Rome and some part of Italy which because they gouerned by exarches hauing their seat in Rauenna was called the exarchat of Rauenna the Lombards enioying the rest yet before the renewing of the Empire in the West the Emperour of the East had lost all Italy and Rome and
Bellarmine De pont Rom. lib. 3. c. 10. 15. one of the heads of the former beast By the description of this beast that we may now note that which serueth for the present purpose reseruing the residue vntil their due time place it is apparant that there is one the same principall seate of both the beasts that in that seat the second beast succeedeth the former practising al the power or authority of the former beast Verse 12. that before him that is to say euen at Rome and that his chiefe endeuors teÌ„de to magnifie the beast that is the Romane state as in making meÌ„ to worship it in causing meÌ„ to make an image of to the beast wherunto he giueth spirit speach enforcing men to worship the same finally in compelling men to take vpon theÌ„ the marke of the beast his name nuÌ„ber of his name All which as they argue Antichrist to be a Romane succeeding the Emperors in the gouernmeÌ„t of Rome so also they fitly properly agree to the Pope who succeedeth the Emperours in the gouernmeÌ„t of Rome where he vsurpeth all more then al the power of the Emperours chaleÌ„ging a more vniuersal soueraigne or rather diuine authority then belonged to theÌ„ whose maine endeuors are to aduaunce the Romane state which he calleth the See Apostolik which he maketh al meÌ„ to worship causing them also to make an image of the Empire which was the head that had receiued the deadly wouÌ„d to in behoofe of the Romane state an image I say partly in the Emperour of Almaine reseÌ„bling the title ornameÌ„ts shew of the former Emperours partly in his owne courts not onely in Rome but in all other couÌ„tries represeÌ„ting the former imperial authority tyraÌ„ny both in Rome it selfe and in the prouinces thereunto beloÌ„ging This image both in the Empire popish courts he animateth authorizeth For as there is no question to be made hereof in respect of his courts so is it as true in respect of the Empire if that be true which themselues professe Namely that what the Emperor hath he hath it wholy froÌ„ theÌ„ that the Empire in the West was renewed by the Pope who traÌ„slated the title of the Emperor of Rome froÌ„ the Emperor of the East first to the FreÌ„ch after to the GermaÌ„s that the Pope caused this new Emperor to be made that he crowned authorized him that he appointed 7. Electors in Germany reseruing the coÌ„firmation of the electioÌ„ coronatioÌ„ of the Emperour to himself of which points we shal hereafter speake more at large Further he causeth al meÌ„ to worship the image by him Chap. 7. erected coÌ„pelleth all men to receiue the marke of the beast as also the name of the beast which caÌ„ be no other but either Romane or Latine the nuÌ„ber of his name i. to liue insubiectioÌ„ to the See of Rome to professe theÌ„selues to be Romanes Latines in respect of their religioÌ„ as herafter shal be shewed Chap. 8. 9. The same is proued out of the 17. chap. of th'apocalyps 3. where be reckened 7. heads that is 7. kinds of principall rulers as it were heads of gouernment whereby Rome hath bene gouerned euery one succeeding another The sixt head being the Emperours the seueÌ„th Antichrist which is the Pope For Antichrist is one of the 7. heads of the beast which hath 7. heads 10. hornes And this beast signifieth the Romane state therfore Antichrist is a head of the Romane state All which Bellarmine after a sort coÌ„fesseth Now it is most certaine that Antichrist is Lib. 3. de pont R. c. 15. none of the first 5. heads for they were past in th'apostles time neither is he the sixt head which was of the Emperours that then was for that was to be done out of the way as the Papists theÌ„selues do teach before the reuelatioÌ„ of Antichrist It remaineth therfore that the seuenth head which is the Pope is Antichrist The eight head which also is one of the seuen is the Empire renewed by the Pope is said to be the beast which was is not though it be wheron the whore of BabyloÌ„ sitteth If it be obiected that the seuenth head wherby Antichrist is signified was to continue but a short time as it is said vers 10 and that this therfore cannot agree to the Pope who hath raigned already in Rome many 100. yeares I answere that this is spokeÌ„ of purpose to arme the faithfull with patience who otherwise would thinke the reigne of Antichrist very long our Sauiour Christ also to be slowe in coÌ„ming Whereas in truth neither is our Sauiour Christ slow in coÌ„ming as Peter sheweth neither is 2. Peter 3. the kingdome of Antichrist long But in respect of God with whom a 1000. yeares are as one day in coÌ„patison of the eternal kingdome of Christ with whoÌ„ the faithful are to raigne after they haue suffered vnder Antichrist it is to be accompted very short And surely if the whole time from the Ascension of of our Sauiour vntil his returne vnto iudgement is noted in the Scriptures to be very short and that to this end that we should not thinke it long then is the raigne of Antichrist which is but part of this time much more short The holy Ghost in the beginning of the Reuelation signifieth that the time of fulfilling Apoc 1. 3. the prophecies therein mâ—…tioned was at haÌ„d And our Sauiour Heb. 10. 37. Christ promiseth by the Apostle that after a very litle while he would come in the last chapt of the reuelatioÌ„ he saith yea I Apoc. 22. 20. come quickly And Iohn likewise in his Epistle noteth that the 〈◊〉 Iohn 2. 18. whole time of Antichrist was but a part of the last howre 10. And further whereas the Papists obiect in respect of the time that Antichrist is not yet come because the Romane Empire is not yet dissolued and consequently that the Pope is not Antichrist it may notwithstanding euidently be shewed out of the same chapter of the Apocalypse compared with the Apoc. 17. euent both that the Empire is dissolued and that Antichrist is already come For the Empire is then knowen to be dissolued when it is diuided among ten who shall haue receiued power as kings as Iohn noteth the fathers teach the Papists themselues confesse But it is most certaine that the old Empire of of Rome is diuided among ten kings at the least who before the dissolution had not soueraigne authority and that the Empire which now is being but a title and contayning no such kingdomes is not capable of such a partition And that Antichrist also is come it is as euident For those ten hornes which in the Apostles time had not receiuèd the kingdome nor soueraigne authority but were gouernours of the prouinces by deputation froÌ„ the Emperour were after the
dissolution of the Empire to receiue powèr as kings with the beast or as the Papists reade after the beast that is Antichrist If therefore the gouernours Ap. 17. 12. of the kingdomes whereinto the Romane Empire was diuided haue receiued power as kings then it is certaine that Antichrist is already come For oither after him or at least with him they were to receiue their soueraignty It is as certaine therefore that Antichrist is come as it is sure that the gouernours of the prouinces which once belonged to the Empire are soueraigne princes and not liefetenants vnder the Emperour And that this Antichrist which is already come is the Pope it is plaine enough by the same chapter For whosoeuer succeedeth the Emperours who were the sixt head in the gouernment of Rome as the seauenth head of the Romane state he is Antichrist But the Pope as the seauenth head of the Romane state succeedeth the Emperors who were the sixt head in the gouernement of Rome therefore he is Antichrist If you say the seauenth head was not come in the Apostles time verse 10. and yet there were Bishops of Rome then I answere that the Bishops of Rome in the first three hundred yeares were meane men in respect of their owtward estate nothing lesse then heads of the Romane state And that howsoeuer afterwards they obtained great authority more more aspired vnto the soueraignty notwithstanding vntill the sixt head was taken out of the way the 7. was not reuealed But after the sixt head was gone the 7. succeeded in the gouernment of Rome Cupers de eccl p. 37. n. 9. vrbem Romanam ad papam pleno iure spectare constat pag. 258. n. 7. Romana vrbsita Papae dominio cessit vt Caesari nil iuris in â—…areseruelur Insomuch that now for a long time the city of Rome hath so wholy belonged to the Pope as that the Emperour hath no manner of right therein To conclude therefore If Antichrist was to sitte in Rome professing her selfe the church of God that after the taking away of the Romane Emperor whom he was to succeed in the gouernmeÌ„t of Rome as hath bin proued it followeth necessarily seeing these notes agree to the Popes of Rome and to none but them that therfore the Pope is Antichrist Chap. 4. Of the conditions of Antichrist and his opposition vnto Christ. 1. NOw if to those former notes of place and time we shal ad the rest find them al properly to fit the Popes of Rome then may it not be doubted but that the Pope is Antichrist In the next place therfore let vs coÌ„sider his coÌ„ditioÌ„ qualities in respect wherof he is called the man of sin For first Antichrist in respect of his oppositioÌ„ to Christ he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an aduersary in respect of his pride ambitioÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lifted vp aboue al that is called god c. FroÌ„ these 2. notes therefore we may argue thus He that is such an aduersary as the scriptures desoribe opposed vnto Christ in aemulation of like honour he is Antichrist The Pope is such an aduersaie as the scriptures describe opposed vnto Christ in 2. Thess. 2. 4. aemulation of like honour Therefore the Pope is Antichrist The truth of the proposition is testified by the Apostle implyed in the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth hostem aemulum Christi and confessed by the aduersaries The assumption Bellarmine would disproue by this slender argument because the Pope forsooth professeth himselfe the seruant of Christ. For euen as he professeth himselfe to be Christs seruaÌ„t so he termeth himselfe Of this see more in the 2. book 1. chap. Gen. 9. 25. the seruant of seruants which is Chams title when as in truth he would be esteemed Lord of Lords But this is so farre from disprouing the assumption as that the Pope could not be such an aduersary as is described in the scriptures and consequently not Antichrist vnlesse he professed himselfe to be the seruant of Christ. Let vs therefore consider what maner of enemy Antichrist is according to the scriptures First he is an Apostate or reuolter 2. a disguised enemy or hypocrite that is one that is fallen indeed froÌ„ god his truth as it werea star froÌ„ heauen yet retaineth the name profession of Christ vnder which name professioÌ„ he oppugneth christ his truth EueÌ„ as a rebellious subiect when he presumeth without commission to leuy a power of men against his Soueraigne that he may deceiue the rest of the subiects abuseth the name and authority of his prince to colour his rebellious practises And that this is the property of Antichrist Hilary hath well obserued It is Ad AuxentiuÌ„ the property of Antichrists name to be contrary to Christ. This is now practised vnder the opinion of counterfeit piety this vnder a shewe of preaching the Gospell is preached that our Lord Iesus Christ may be denied whiles whiles he is thought to be preached Tract 3. in Iâ—…an Epistol Augustine saith we haue found many Antichrists which confesse Christ with their mouth 2. First I say he is an apostate yea the head of that Apostasy 2. Thess. 2. 3. or falling away froÌ„ the truth mentioned 2. Tâ—…hess 2. insomuch as some of the learned as Chrysostome Augustine Theodoret Theophylact Oecumenius by that Apostasy vnderstand Antichrist Lib. 3. de pont R. chap. 2. himself Yea Bellar. himselfe affirmeth that by Apostasy in that place Antichrist himself may be most fitly vnderstood But the Papists which falsly hold that the visible church of Christ cannot er much lesse fall away expouÌ„d this Apostasy or defection to be a reuolt or falling away froÌ„ the Roman Empire Neither do we deny but that also there hath bin a defectioÌ„ froÌ„ the Romane Empire but yet we deny that it is vnderstood in this place Ambrose saith then shall desolution draw neere because In 2. Thess. 2. De ciuit Dei lib. 20. c. 19. many falling by error shall reuolt from the true religioÌ„ He calleth him a reuolter saith Augustine namly froÌ„ the Lord God Cyrill Now is the Apostasie for men are reuolted from the true Catech. 11. faith Chrysostome and Oecumenius the Apostasie hee calleth Antichrist himselfe because hee shall cause many to reuolt from In 2. Thess. 2. Christ. Or else he calleth apostasie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the departure from God and the thing it selfe The same hath Theophylact in effect And likewise Theodoret on this place The defection saith he he calleth Antichrist himselfe giuing In 2. Thess. 2. him a name from the thing it selfe For his endeauour is to withdraw men from the truth and to cause them to reuolt Primasius by Apostasy vnderstandeth the forsaking of the truth and Lyra the departure from the Catholicke faith But to omit In 2. Thess 2. humane testimonies the holy ghost who is the best expounder
haue beene the towne-bulles were they dwelt Neither will I tell you of the innumerable murders of infants besides those which died in their mothers wombes to preuent their parents shame As for common stewes they are mainteyned not onely in other popish countreys and cities but euen in Rome it selfe and not onely maintained by the Pope but maintainers also of the Pope to whom they pay as if hee were their bawde a yearely pension which amounteth sometimes to 30000. sometimes to 40000. Ducates It is said of Paulus the third that in his tables he had the names of 45000. curtizans which paid a monethly tribute vnto him Which besides his patronizing of filthinesse argueth his coueting of filthy lucre of which wee are also briefly to speake For of him in respect of these two vices filthinesse and couetousnesse it was said in old time Eius auaritiae totus non sufficit orbis Eius luxuriae meretrix non sufficit omnis Mâ—…t Parisâ—…in â—…nric 3. Neither doth the whole world suffice his couetousnesse nor all harlots his lâ—…chery 9. Of the insatiable anarice of the Pope and court of Rome many instances might bee giuen For they haue found out innumerable waies and meanes to scrape together incredible summes of money out of all countries without measure or modestie without shame or shewe of honesty But it shal be sufficient by application of Peters prophecy concerning 〈◊〉 Pet. 〈◊〉 3. false teachers in these latter times to shewe that through couetousnesse they haue with fained wordes and doctrines of their owne coyning made merchandize of al those that would â—…earken vnto them As sor example they haue fayned that Peter was ordained of Christ the Monarch of the whole Church that to him was committed the right both of the spirituall and temporall Monarchy that in this Monarchy the Pope succeedeth Peter as Christes vicar generall as the vniuersall Bishoppe as the Lorde of the whole earth They haue fayned a donation of Constantine wherein hee should not onely giue the Citie of Rome to the Pope but also resigne vnto him the whole Empire of the West Vpon these groundes they haue obtained both of Princes and Prelates what their greedy couetousnesse armed with such authoritie shamed not to demaund England Fraunce Germany and other countreys haue beene exceedingly or as some speake Ludouic 9. 〈◊〉 an 1228. tit de tallâ—… miserably impouerished by the intollerable exactions of the Pope and his Court. For first the first fruites hee claimed of all spirituall promotions which in these partes of Europe subiect Iewel ex legatione Hadrian 6. excus VViâ—…tembergae 1538 to that See did amount vnto two millions and foure hundred and three score thousand eight hundred fourty and three Florenes The first fruites of the spirituall liuings in Fraunce and the charges of obtaining the same liuings haue beene obserued Fulm brut ex postulatis senaâ—…us Paris Ludoâ—… 1â—… delatâ—… art â—…2 c. in three yeares to amount vnto nine hundred fourtie and sixe thousand six hundred sixty and six french crownes By the same title hee tooke vpon him to bestowe or rather to sell openly and without shame the liuings of the church and not onely when they were void but also before hand and that to diuerse men Insomuch that sometimes ten sometimes twelue haue purchased aduousons or reuersions of the same Ibid. art 〈◊〉 preferments against the next auoidance But which of all them wheÌ„ the liuing fell was to haue the benefit of the Popes graunt that was to bee decided at Rome whither they were to their great charge but to the enriching of the Romish Harpies to repaire This gainefull trade may well bee called making Merchandize of men for together with the benefices the poore people were bought and solde In respect here of Blondus saith That all Europe almost sendeth tributes Rom. inâ—… lib. 3. to Rome greater or at least equall to the reuenewes of the olde times Dum singulae ciuitates à Romano pontifice boneficia sacerdotalia accipiunt Whiles the spirituall promotiâ—… in euery Citie are receiued from the Pope Moreouer his yearely perquisites of elections preuentions dispensations licenses many such like merchandises the titles wherof with their taxes or prices are set downe in the booke called Taxae cancellariae Apostolicae are thought to surmount nine hundred thousand Florenes not to speake of his smoke-farthings Peterpence which neuerthelesse did arise to no small summe But besides his ordinary taxations his extraordinary exactioÌ„s were intollerable For hee hath not beene ashamed to demaund the tenths of all spirituall liuings in some whole realmes for many yeares together yea sometimes the third part of their liuing Mat. VVestmonast aâ—… 1301. Mat. Paris an 1246. Sylâ—…â—…otorum commuâ—… In prâ—…fat in lib. Steph. Gardiner de vera obedient Vâ—…d Muscull loc comm de â—…ccl ministr tit Nundinatiâ—… Rom. pontif Fulm brut pag. 62. Ioâ—… Monâ—…chus that were resident and the halfe of theirs that were non residents that for diuerse yeares sometimes also all the money and goods of them that deceassed Out of Fraunce alone in the time of Martin 5. the Pope and court of Rome receiued 9. millions In England the Popes pray was almost as great as the reuenewes of the crowne as Bonner testifieth 10. But his most odious merchandise is his setting to sale all maner of sinne which is called Taxa poenitentiaria apostolica wherby is promised impunity to euery one who hauing coÌ„mitted any sin be it neuer so grieuous paieth according to the rate for his absolution as namely for adultery incest Sodomy the abominatioÌ„ not to be spoken of coÌ„mitted with beasts wilfull murder pariâ—…ide periurie and such like Hereof a notable Canonist writeth thus Curia vult marcas bursas exhaurit arcas Si bursae pareas fuge Papas Patrlarchas Si de deris â—…arcas eis â—…pleboris areas Culpa solueris quaque ligatus eris But with what difference I pray you were these crimes rated Forsooth hee that would bee absolued from adultery or incest it must cost him foure Turons if from both togither it must stande him in six Turons And what if a Priest busy the body of a party excommunicated in Christian buâ—…all or if hee chaunce vpon ignoraunce to say Masse in a place interdicted Either of these faultes must coste him fixe Tuâ—…ons and two Ducates And here it is to bee noted that the Pope in a couetous pollicie forbiddeth many things which GOD doth not forbid namely to this ende that the straiter his prohibitions are the oftner hee may haue occasion to dispense there with As for example he forbiddeth mariage in kinsfolke vnto the seauenth degree but for money he will dispense therewith in all degrees of kindred excepting that which is betwixt the parent and the child 11 They haue with fained words through couetousnesse perswaded the world that the Pope hath all lawes in the closet of his breast that hee is the
bubbles the fire of vengeaÌ„ce which they cause to descend in the sight of men as painted fire or as the thunder and lightning of Salmoneus who as the Poet describeth him not vnlike to the Pope Flammas Iouis Aeneid 6. sonitus imitatur Olympi Imitateth the lightenings of Iupiter and the thunder of heauen But howsoeuer it is whether this descending of fire from heauen is to be vnderstood literally or mystically the prophecy of the holy Ghost concerning this first miracle of Antichrist is verified of the Pope and church of Rome who haue caused fire to come downe froÌ„ heauen according to the literall sence according to the allegoricall interpretation they haue so confirmed their doctrines by signes wonders as if God had answered them by fire from heauen and secondly they haue taken vpon them to bring downe the fire of Gods spirite and to bestowe his grace as it pleaseth them and lastly they haue according to the example of Elias with a diuine reuenge as it were with fire from heauen taken vengeaunce of their enimies not to speake of his punishing with fire all those that will not adore him 13. And thus much may suffice to haue spoken of the first miracle The second miracle saith Bellarmine is that Antichrist or his ministers shall make the image of the beast to speake But neuer Pope nor any minister of his did make an image to speake therefore saith hee the Pope is not Antichrist But I answere that this prophecie euen according to the Popishe interpretation agreeth to the Pope and his followers among whom it hath beene an vsuall practise to put life as it were into images in the sight and opinion of simple men making them to sweate to smile to srowne to nodde to becke and many times to speake which might happeÌ„ without a miracle for the Diuels sometimes did speake in the images of the Heathen Notwithstanding wee are not after a Popishe that is to say a grosse maner but after a propheticall and spirituall maner to vnderstand this mysticall prophecy of the holy Ghost concerning the image of the beast For if wee vnderstand the beast it selfe mystically as needes wee must or else wee shall make but a beastly interpretation of it so wee are in like sort to expound the image of the beast with the life and speach thereof The beast it selfe signifieth the Romanâ—… state especially vnder the Heathenish Emperours as hath bene shewed The image therefore of the beast must signifie a state which hath some resemblaunce thereof or at least the name and title of the Romane Empire as images beare the name of that which they resemble and is indeed but an image thereof Thus besides the Popes courts both in Rome and other countreys is the Empire renewed in the West which besides the name and some titles and ornaments hath little or nothing of the olde Empire For the old Empire consisted in the gouernment of Rome and the prouinces thereunto belonging none of which the Emperour hath as a Soueraigne Prince by right of the Empire and therefore is said to bee the beast which was and is not though it be being indeed as it is Apoc. 17. here called but an image of the former beast The life of this Empire is the imperiall dignity and the speach are his edicts Whosoeuer therfore caused this Empire which in the west had lien void 325. yeares to be renewed whosoeuer at the first created this Emperour since hath taken order for the electioÌ„ of the Emperour coÌ„firmeth the electioÌ„ he may be said to haue caused the image of the beast to be made to haue put life into it to haue procured authority vnto it wherby it speaketh 14. Now to whom all this is to bee applied let Bellarmine himselfe be iudge For he in his bookes De translatione imperij Romani by many testimonies laboureth to proue first that the Empire of Rome was translated but he might better haue said renewed in the West and as it were reuiued by the authority of the Pope and that Charles the great in whom this Empire was renewed receiued the same by no other title but by the authority of the Pope And that is the summe of his first booke Secondly that the Empire of Rome was translated from the family of Charles the great and from the French nation to the family of Otho and the nation of the Saxons and Germanes and that Otho was aduaunced to the Empire by the Pope which is the scope of the second Booke Thirdly that the seuen Electours of the Empire were ordained and appointed by the Pope which is the argument of his third booke And in his first booke he setteth downe the state Chap. 4. of that controuersie thus the question is saith he who is the authour of this traÌ„slation or rather renouation for the Emperour of the East continued after vntil the yeare 1452. before this time had by the Popes meanes lost his right in Italy and Rome therfore nothing was traÌ„slated but the name title who it was that gaue the name dignity power of the Romane Emperour and Caesar Augustus in the west to Charles the great his successors We answer saith he that which the coÌ„sent of al nations proclaimeth that Pope Leo 3. was either the only or the chiefe and principall authour of this translation that the Dutch nation is to acknowledge the receipt of the Empire from the Pope Vnto the testimony of Bellarmine of all those authours whom he citeth we will adde the professioÌ„ of the Popes theÌ„selues Innocentius 3. saith the 7. Electours had their authority Decret Gregorian de electione c. venerabilem ab Apostolica sede quae RomanuÌ„ imperiuÌ„ in persona magnifici Caroli à Graecis traÌ„stulit in Germanos From the See Apostolick which traÌ„slated the Romane Empire in the person of Charles the great froÌ„ the Grecians to the Germanes Vpon which translation saith Bellarmine The Romane commonweale returned againe De traÌ„slat imper li. 1. cap. 4. to the same state wherein Constantine the great established it wherein it remained froÌ„ Valentinian the elder vnto Augustulus Likewise Adrian 4. The Romane Empire saith he was Ad archiep Treuir Moguntin Agrippin apud Auentin lib. 6. translated froÌ„ the Greekes to the Almaines that the king of the Almaines should not be called Emperour before he were crowned of the Pope Before his consecration he is king after he is Emperour Vnde igitur habet imperiuÌ„ nisi à nobis From whence then hath he the Empire but from vs By the election of his princes he hath the name of a king by our consecration he hath the name of Emperour Augustus Caesar. Ergo per nos imperat Therfore he is Emperour by vs. Call to mind Antiquities Zacharias aduaÌ„ced Charies and gaue him a great name that he should be Emperour c. Imperator quod habet totum
he hath 400. yeares of pardon c. 10 They that visite the church of Saint Paul without the walles haâ—… 48000. yeares of pardon Item on Childerâ—…asse day 2. 4000 yeares of pardon Item on the vias of Saint Martin when the church was hallowed 14000. yeares of pardon and as many quarins and the third part of all sinnes released Those that visit the church of Saint Lauâ—…ence at the high altar haue 18000. 3. yeares of pardon and as many quarins And who goeth thither euery wednesday he deliuered a soule out of purgatory himself quite of all â—…nes In the church Sanctâ—…crucis that is of holy crosse is giuen an hundred thousand yeares of pardon and as 4. many quarins and euery Sunday a soule out of Purgatory and the third part of all sinnes released To theÌ„ that visite the church of 5 S. Mary Maior is grauÌ„ted at the high Altar 14000. yeares of pardon as many quarins And at the altar on the right haÌ„d 19000. yeares of pardoÌ„ And Pope Nicolas the 4. S. Gregory each of them grauÌ„ted thereto 10000. yeares of pardon And froÌ„ the AscensioÌ„ of our Lord vnto Christmas yee haue there 14000. yeares of pardon and as many quarins and the third part of all sins released To them that visite the church of S. Sebastian is granted 6 forgiuenesse of sinnes and all penaunce At the high Altar is giuen 2800. yeares of pardon and at the first Altar in the Church 2400. There is a vawte where lie buried 49. Popes that were Martyrs whoso commeth first into that place deliuereth 8. soules out of Purgatory of such as hee most desireth and as much pardon therto that all the worlde cannot number nor recken And euery Sunday you deliuer there a soule out of purgatory In that vawte standeth a pitte in which Peter and Paule were hidde 250 yeares he that putteth his head into that pitte and taketh it out againe is cleane of all sinnes To that place siue Popes each of them graunted a thousand yeares of pardon and as many karins And so the grace that is at S. Sebastians is grounded that it cannot be taken away To those that 7 visit the Church of S. Iohn Laterane Pope Siluester gaue as many yeares of pardon as it rained droppes of water the day that he hallowed the same Church And that time it rayned so sore that no man had seene a greater rayne before that day And when hee had graunted this hee doubted whether hee had so much power Then a voice came from heauen and said Pope Syluester thou haste power enough to giue that pardon And God graunted this much thereto that if a man had made a vowe to Ierusalem and lacked good to doe his Pilgrimage if hee goe from S. Peters Church to S. Iohn Lateranes hee shal be absolued from that promise And any time that a man commeth to Saint Iohn Lateranes hee is quite of all sinnes and of all penaunce with that that he be penitent for his sinnes Blessed is the mother that beareth the childe that bareth Masse on Saterdayes at Saint Iohn Lateranes For hee deliuered all them that hee desired out of Purgatory to the number of 77. soules Item on the tower of the Churche standeth a double crosse that was made of the sworde wherewith Saint Iohn was beheaded and euery time a man beholdeth that crosse hee hath 14000. yeares Pardon At the high altar a man may haue remission of all sinnes and of all penaunce and innumerable pardon more then he needeth for himselfe There is a graue wherein Saint Iohn laid himselfe hee that putteth therein his head hee hath an hundred thousand yeares of pardon and as many karins These indulgences with many such like which for breuity sake I omitte my Authour saith are written in a Marble stone before the Quire dore c. Besides these seuen there are many inferiour Churches whereunto great indulgeÌ„ces haue bene graunted by the Popes There are named in the aforesaid Booke 26. Churches wherein is graunted to them that visit any of them 1000. yeares pardon and in some 3000 in others 5000. some wherein promise is made of release from a third parte of sinnes and in some from all sinnes Here is a Church of Saint Gregory in which whosoeuer is buried hee shall neuer be damned Thus saith my Authour may a man haue at Rome great pardon and soule health blessed beene the people and in good time borne that receiueth these graces and well keepeth them c. 11. Hereby it appeareth that the Pope causeth the inhabitants of the earth to worship the beast with seuen heads that is seuen hilles that with the citie of Rome which wee haue proued to bee the whore of Babylon the inhabitants of the earth haue committed spirituall fornication and that with the cuppe of her fornications they haue beene infatuated and made drunke And that the Pope hath caused men vpon paine of death to worshippe the image of the 3. beast which he hath animated and put life into it is easie to proue whether you vnderstande it literally or mystically For literally as they haue put life and motion into images and made them to speake in the sight of men so haue they suffered none to liue that would not participate with them in their idolatry which they call worshipping of images Mystically the image signifieth either the Popes court or Empire renewed or both the one resembling the authority and power the other bearing the name and representing the dignitie of the old Empire Of the Popes court at Rome and of his Legates and Officers abroad there is no question to bee made but that none are suffered to liue which worshippe not them And it is true also of the Empire But by worshipping the image of the beast wee doe not vnderstand obedience to the Emperour in his lawfull decrees but the obedience performed vnto him as hee is an image of the persecuting Emperours inspired by the Pope and seruing as his minister to establish and propagate the Romish religion In this sence as hee who obeyeth him worshippeth the image of the beast and is in the same predicament with those that receiue the marke of the beast Apoc. 14. 9 So hee that obeyeth him not is put to death and dying in this quarell is in the same happy state with Apoc. 14 13. 15. 2. those which refuse to receiue the marke of the beast CHAP. 9. ¶ Of those things which Antichrist was and is to suffer 1. WE haue heard what Antichrist was to doe to others now let vs consider what the holy Ghost foretelleth shall be done vnto him There is mention made Apoc. 17. 12. of the Apoc. 17. 12. c. ten hornes that is the rulers of the ten prouinces subiect to the Empire in the West who although in the Apostles time had not receiued kingdome or soueraigne authority but were deputies onely vnder the Emperour yet after the decay of the
singuler person Therefore the Pope is not Antichrist To the proposition I answere that as the Pope is one so is Antichrist The Pope is one person not in number and nature as one certaine and singuler man but one at once by lawe and institution though successiuely so many as haue enjoyed the Papacie For euen as the Papists when they say that the Pope hath beene the head of the Church and Vicar of Christ these 1500. yeares doe not meane See lib. 1. cap. 1. 〈◊〉 4. any one Pope but the order and succession so we when we say that the Pope hath beene Antichrist almost these thousand yeeres wee meane not any one Pope onely but the whole rowe or rabble of them since the yeere 607. And thus Antichrist that is the head of the Antichristian body which was reuealed after the taking away of the Romane Empire is to continue after a sort vntill the end of the world is one person one I say at once ordinarily but continued in a succession of many The proposition thus denied by vs Bellarmine laboureth to confirme by authoritie of the Scriptures and testimonies of the Fathers Out of the Scriptures he produceth fiue testimonies The first out of the Gospell of Iohn chapter 5. verse 43. I am Iohn 5. 43. come in my Fathers name and you receiue mee not if another shall come in his owne name him will you receiueâ—… In which wordes Bellarmine vnderstandeth Christ to speake of Antichrist as of one singuler person And that he would prooue by testimonies of the Fathers and foure reasons But Bellarmine and the rest of the Papists which make this collection out of this place either ignorantly mistake or wilfully depraue this text For first whereas our Sauiour Christ speaketh indefinitely of any false teacher which should come vnto them in his owne name that is not sent of God they expound him as if he had spoken definitely of one singuler Antichrist Secondly whereas Christ speaketh not onely indefinitely but also conditionally If another come they expound him as if in a simple and proper axiome or proposition he had prophecied of the comming of Antichrist as if he had said that other counterfeit Messias that is to say that singuler Antichrist sha'l come in his owne name and him you will receiue And thirdly whereas Christ speaketh of those Iewes to whom he speaketh they vnderstand him to speake of those which shal be in the end of the world But let vs consider his proofes The Fathers saith he doe testifie that these words are spoken de vno Antichristo of one Antichrist First I answer that although diuers of the Fathers expound these words of Antichrist yet none of them hath that word Vno one and therefore the Iesuites collection is absurde The Fathers vnderstand this place of Antichrist therefore Antichrist is one singuler person For the Fathers also vnderstand that place Mat. 24. 24. of Antichrist where our Sauiour Christ speaketh in the plurall number of false Christs and false Prophets which should arise and confer that place with this And therefore they may seeme to vnderstand this speech of our Sauiour as if he had said If another come Mat. 24. 5. 24. in his owne name as many indeed shall come such will you receiue And sure it is that the Iewes haue receiued more then one of such as haue come in their owne name And secondly I answer that the Fathers had no reason to restraine these words vnto Antichrist alone as though Christ had prophecied of the Iewes receiuing of Antichrist for their Messias seeing his speech is neither simple nor definite but conditionall and indefinite Whereby our Sauiour Christ would shew the vntoward disposition of the Iewes who as they rejected him who was sent of God so they would be ready to receiue any other that should come in his owne name not sent of God And so Nonnus in his Paraphrase vpon this place expoundeth these words Ei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But if any other come c. And lastly if these answers will not suffice let the aduersary conclude his argument drawne from the authoritie of the fathers in a Syllogisme and when he hath so done let him prooue the proposition which must be this whatsoeuer those fathers write concerning Antichrist is true and then the assumptioÌ„ which is to this effect but this those fathers write that Christ speaketh those words de vno Antichristo of one singuler Antichrist then which will neuer be I will yeeld to the conclusion 2. But omitting his testimonies let vs come to those arguments which he draweth out of the text to proue that Christ in these words speaketh of one singuler Antichrist First saith he Christ opposeth vnto himselfe another man that is person to person as appeareth by these words I another c. His reason is thus to be framed where these two words I and another are opposed one to the other we are to vnderstand that as I signifieth one singuler person so also another but in this place I and another are opposed therfore c. I answere where the other is taken definitely for that other as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed Iohn 18. 16. and 20. 2. 3. 4. there the proposition may be true But where it is vsed indefinitely as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another in this place it is most false for in such speeches to a certaine and definite person is opposed an indefinite and vncertaine As for example Iob. 31. 8. What I sowâ—… let another reape meaning any other 1 Cor. 3. 10. I haue laide the foundation another buildeth thereon but let euery one take heed how he buildeth thereon Such examples are ordinary As if I shoud say this argument I call a childish reason another would call it a dotage and so I let it passe His second reason is this Whom the Iewes shall receiue for their Messias he is but one particular man Antichrist shall be receiued of the Iewes for their Messias as Christ here saith therefore Antichrist is but one singuler man Answer Christ dooth not here foretell that Antichrist shal be receiued of the Iewes for their Mesias For first his speech is conditional therefore not a prophecie Neither doth he foretel what they were to do but sheweth them what in respect of their present disposition they were ready to doe if any false teacher should obtrude himselfe vnto them Secondly it is indefinite and therfore not to be restrained to a certaine person Thirdly he doth not say that they shall receiue another for their Messias coÌ„ming in his owne name but onely that they shall receiue him Fourthly those Iewes to whom of whom our Sauior speaketh were not to be aliue at the comming of the great Antichrist according to the opinion of the Papists themselues therefore our Sauiour speaketh not of the Iewes receiuing of Antichrist much lesse of Antichrist as one particular person Thirdly saith he all false
cap. 3. §. 3. 2. But let vs come to his arguments The first whereof is this If before Antichrists comming the Romane Empire is to be diuided into ten kings whereof none shal be called king of the Romanes then is not Antichrist yet come for yet there is a king of the Romanes but the first is true therefore the last The proposition he taketh for granted although it cannot be denyed but that vpon the desolation of the empire in the West it was deuided among ten kings at the least who although they had the prouinces of the Empire yet none of them was called the king of the Romanes The proposition therefore is false and the reason may be returned vpon our aduersary For seeing these ten kings had not receiued their kingly power in the Apostles time but were to receiue it either after the beast which is Antichrist as some reade or with the Apo. 17. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beast as others it is euident therefore that when the ten rulers of the prouinces had receiued authority as kings then Antichrist was come But many huÌ„dred yeers since the rulers of the prouinces ceased to be deputies vnder the Emperor obtained power as soueraigne kings diuiding among them the westerne Empire therfore many hundred yeres since was Antichrist come The assumption he prooueth out of Daniel chap. 2. Where saith he is described the successioÌ„ of the chiefe kingdomes vnto the end of the world by a certaine image the golden head wherof signifieth the kingdome of the Assyrians the Breast of siluer the kingdom of the Persians the Bellie of Brasse the kingdome of the Grecians the Legs of Iron the kingdom of the Romans diuided into two parts c. And in the 7. chap. the same kingdomes are signified the last which hath ten hornes being the kingdome of the Romanes Now saith he as the two Legs haue ten toes Subtiliss which are not legs as the ten hornes are not the beast so the Roman Empire shall be diuided into ten kings whereof none is the king of the Romanes Answere 1. This argumentation of Bellarmine implieth a contradiction For if there be in Daniel described a succession of kingdomes which shall continue to the end of the world whereof the Romane is the last then the Romane Empire shall not vtterly be destroyed before the coÌ„ming of Antichtist which goeth before the end of the world But howsoeuer the coÌ„mon opinion hath bin that the fourth kingdom mentioned in those chapters is the Romane Empire yet by the learned especially of these latter times it hath beene most clearely prooued that by it is vnderstood that kingdome of the Seleucida Lagidae which tyrannized ouer the people of Iewry For the Seleucida who were Kings of Syria and the Lagidae who were Kings of Egypt were the two legs of the image were also the fourth beast the ten kings of these two kingdomes which successiuely Chap. 16. vsurped dominion ouer the Iewes were the ten hornes of the beast which being most true as hereafter also shal be shewed it appeareth euidently that this whole argumentation is impertinent But suppose that Daniel had spoken in those places of the Romane Empire yet would not that follow which Bellarmine would inferre thereof For by the beast is signified the kingdome it selfe and by the hornes the seuerall kings who although they be not the kingdome it selfe signified by the beast no more then the hornes are the beast yet are they so many kings of that kingdome which is signified by the beast As for example Seleucus Antiochus and the rest of the ten kings signified by the ten hornes and as Bellarmine speaketh by the ten toes though they were not the kingdome of Syria Egypt it selfe yet were they kings of that kingdome and therefore this argument of Bellarmine is very friuolous 3. His second proofe is out of Apocal. 17. Where Iohn describeth a beast with seauen heads and ten hornes vpon which beast a certaine woman sitteth which he expouÌ„deth to be the great citie sitting on seuen hils that is to say Rome The seauen heads as they signifie seuen hils so also seauen kings by which number saith he al the Romane Emperors are vnderstood the ten hornes are ten kings which shal raigne together And least we should thinke that these shal be Romane kings he addeth that these kings shall hate the harlot and make her desolate because they shall so deuide the Romane Empire among them that they shall vtterly destroy it Here Bellarmine as you see confesseth that Rome is the whore of Babylon and consequently the seate of Antichrist and not Rome vnder the olde Emperors but Rome after the dissolution of the Empire And that the ten hornes are so many kings among whom the Romane Empire should be deuided and that these ten Kings were to receiue their kingdome together and consequently that these are not the same ten hornes whereof Daniel speaketh which reigned successiuely Dan. 11. And wheras Bellarmine saith the 7. heads signifie all the Emperours it is vntrue For the holy Ghost nameth seauen because they were seauen indeed and therfore numbreth them Fiue are fallen the sixt is and the seauenth is not yet come But all this is besides the present purpose How then doth he prooue that before Antichrist commeth the Romane Empire shall be so vtterly destroyed as that not the name of a Romane Emperour or king of the Romanes should remaine because the Empire shall be deuided among ten kings which are not Romane kings But that proueth not that the name shall not remaine for he that is none of those ten kings may haue the name of the Emperour or king of the Romanes as namely the beast which was and is not though it be which is the eight head and is one of the seauen that is to say the Emperour erected by the Pope And why may none of these be called the king of the Romanes First forsooth because they shall hate Rome and make her desolateâ—… As though he that hath the title of the King of the Romanes may not hate Rome notwithstanding that title as indeed some of the Emperours haue done Secondly because they shall so diuide among them the Romane Empire as that they shall vtterly destroy it Where you see by a circular disputation the question brought to prooue his argument yet experience sheweth that although the Empire is dissolued and also diuided among the beast that is Antichrist ten kings there doth notwithstanding remaine the name and title of the Emperor or king of the RomaÌ„s And so much now shall suffice to haue spoken of that place froÌ„ whence I haue heretofore proued both that antichrist is already come that the Pope is antichrist 4. His third proofe is out of 2. Thes. 2. And now what hindereth you know that he may be reuealed in due time onely he which holdeth must holde vntill he be done out of the way and then that
signification of a curse And I adde that they might with as good reason alledge that Antichrist shal be of the Tribe of Beniamin of whom it is said verse 27. that he shal rauin as a Wolfe Ieremy vndoubtedly speaketh not of Antichrist nor yet as Bellarmine saith of the Tribe of Dan but of Nabuchadonosor who was to come by the coast or countrey called Dan to destroy Ierusalem as Ierome rightly expoundeth Why Dan is omitted in Apoc. 7. it is not wel knowne saith Bellarmine especially seeing Ephraim also which was one of the greatest Tribes is left out But here Bellarmine doth praeuaricari and by trifling betray the truth For it is not true that Ephraim is left out for seeing Manasses is mentioned Verse 6. wee must needes by the Tribe of Ioseph mentioned Verse 8. vnderstand the Tribe of Ephraim Neuer thelesse this may truly be said that there are other causes of this omission then that which is alledged concerning Antichrist For else we may say as well that Antichrist should come of the Tribe of Simeon because he is not mentioned in the blessing of Moyses Deut. 33. The truth is that where the holy Ghost numbreth the 12. Tribes and mentioneth Leui which for the most part is not As Apoc. 17. reckned among the 12. Tribes because it was scattered among them all some one of the other Tribes is left out otherwise where 12. are named 13. should be reckned The mentioning therfore of Leui is the cause why some one of the rest is not expressed but either comprehended vnder an other that is mentioned as Simeon vnder Iuda Deut. 33. Ephraim Manasses being two seuerall great Tribes vnder Ioseph Deut. 27. 12. Ezec 48. 32. are altogether omitted as Dan. Apo. 7. Now Dan seemeth to be omitted rather then any other because that was the first Tribe which fel from God vnto Idolatry for the same cause as some thinke the genealogie of that Tribe is omitted in the first booke of the Chronicles 3 These opinions therfore though countenanced with the authoritie of the Fathers Bellarmine dareth not deliuer as matters of truth because they cānot be proued out of the scriptures The which in truth is the cause why we reiect all the fancies of the Papists concerning Antichrist wherin they differ from vs because that although many of thē were also the opiniōs of the auncient writers who could but ghesse at the meaning of prophecies not then fulfilled yet they cannot be proued out of the word of God wherein Antichrist is sufficiently described This libertie therefore which Bellarmine lawfully taketh vnto himself in reiecting the testimonies of the Fathers in this point not warranted by the scriptures must in equitie also be graunted vnto vs. For vpō the same principle or ground which Bellarmine here setteth downe we reason against the Popish conceits after this maner Those opinions concerning Antichrist which cannot be proued out of the scriptures are not to be held as certaine truthes or beleeued as matters of faith although they haue the testimony of the Fathers But all the Popish cōceits cōcerning Antichrist are such as cannot be proued out of the scriptures therefore none of the Popish conceits concerning Antichrist are to be receiued for certaine truthes though diuers of them haue the testimony of the Fathers 4 Now let vs heare in the third place what those things are which Bellarmine would haue vs to take vpon his word for certaine and sound in this point There be two things saith hee most certaine one that Antichrist shall come for the Iewes especially and shal be receiued of them for their Messias The other that he shall be borne of the Nation of the Iewes and shall be circumcised and shall at the least for a time obserue the Sabbath On which two points the propositiō of the syllogisme before rehearsed doth consist the which Bellarmine thought to set out as true by setting by §. 1 it other opinions more absurd then it is But although there be degrees of falsehood in all these opinions yet all of them are false as being grounded vpon this false supposition that Antichrist 1 is but one singular man And secondly by the same reason that moued Bellarmine to reiect the former opinions may 2 these also be reiected namely because they cannot be proued out of the scriptures but contrariwise may be disproued thereby For Antichrist shall sit in the Temple of God that is shall raigne in the church of Christ and shall be an Apostate 3 and the head of the Apostasie as Bellarmine confesseth and therfore not the head of the Iewes who cannot be said to make an Apostasie before they be called but of back-sliding Christians Againe Antichrist is one of the seuen heads of the beast mentioned Apoc. 17. that is of the Romaine state hauing his 4 seate in Babylon that is in Rome in the gouernment whereof hee succeedeth the Emperour who whiles hee ruled in Rome hindered the reuelation of Antichrist as it hath beene shewed heretofore out of Apoc. 17. 13. 2. Thess. 2. All which do sufficiently proue that Antichrist was not to be a Iew either by nation or religion but a Latine or Romaine which name with the marke therof he causeth all sorts of men to take vpon thē And lastly for as much as the Papists themselues hold the calling of the Iewes it would be knowne whether they shall reuolt after their calling from Christ to Antichrist or whether they shall be called after the destruction of Antichrist or during the time of Antichrists raigne which shal be as they say the terme of three yeares a halfe precisely or 1260. daies But themselues denie that the Iewes shall reuolt after their calling or that they shal be called in the time of Antichrists raigne that they shal be called after the destruction of Antichrist which shall not be before the ende of the world it is absurd 5 But let vs see how he proueth these things which he saith are most certaine sure from whence he draweth his most euident demonstration First that Antichrist shall be receiued of the Iewes for their Messias he proueth by testimonies of scripture by authoritie of Fathers and by reason Out of the scripture he produceth two testimonies the former Ioh. 5. 43. which place I haue heretofore freed frō the corruptiōs of the papists shewing that our Sauiour Christ doth not speake absolutely Another shal come but cōditionally If an other shal com therfore doth not foretel what they were afterwards to do but telleth them what in respect of their present dispositiō they were readie to do if an other should come in his owne name vnto them not sent of God 2. Neither doth he speake definitely of Antichrist but indefinitly of any false teacher 3. he speaketh of those Iews to whō he speaketh who could not be the receiuers of Antichrist vnlesse he were come aboue 1500. yeares agoe 6 His second
Paul that Christ hath loued thee or giuen himselfe for thee Gal. 2. 20. Must thou beleeue that Christ is thy Sauiour redeemer theÌ„ must thou beleeue that thou art redeemed by Christ and shalt be saued by him Must thou beleeue that thou hast redemption by Christ then must thou also beleeue that by him thou hast remission of sinnes Ephe. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. But this to beleeue without speciall and extraordinary reuelation is damnable presumption saith the Papist Therefore they professe Christ but they receiue him not Nay they are so farre from receiuing Christ by a lustifying faith that they might be saued that they haue not so much as the historicall faith which consisteth in knowledge of the truth assent thereto For the most of them haue no knowledge pleasing themselues in their implicite faith vnder which name grosse palpable ignorace is commended in the laitie of the church of Rome And the rest assent not to the truth but set themselues against it So that whereas all the faith which they professe themselues to haue is but that faith which is also in the diuels yet they haue not euen that little which they do professe But the Apostle saith Bellarmine speaketh in the pretertence which haue not receiued the loue of the truth c. not in the future therefore this speech cannot be vnderstood of any other but those who before the Apostle wrote this had refused to beleeue the preaching of Christ his Apostles that is to say the Iewes Answ. The Apostle speaking both of the sinne of the Antichristians and of their punishment which presupposeth their sin going before he expresseth their sin in the pretertence which is to be referred not to the time of the Apostles writing but to the time of their punishment Antichrist shal be receiued of those that perish But why shal they perish because they haue not receiued the loue of the truth c. But this appeareth more plainly ver 12. God shal send theÌ„ stroÌ„g illusioÌ„s to beleeue lies that al may be condemned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that haue not beleeued that is that shall not haue beleeued the truth Qui non crediderint veritati but haue delighted that is but shall haue delighted in iniquitie Sed acquieuerint in iniustitia Conferre with this place Mar. 16. 16. Goe preach the Gospell saith our Sauiour Christ to euery creature baptising them as it is in Mathew 28. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hâ—… that hath Qui crediderit bap tizatus sueâ—…it c. beleeued and hath beene baptised shall be saued that is shall haue beleeued and shall haue bene baptised but he that hath not beleeued that is shall not haue beleeued shall be condemned Otherwise if Bellarmine will needes vrge the pretertense as though the Apostle meant that Antichrist should bee receiued onely of those who before that time had reiected the truth he must with all hold that Antichrist shall be receiued in the end of the world of those who died aboue 1500. years since 8 To these testimonies of scripture he addeth the authoritie of diuers Fathers who supposed that Antichrist was to be receiued of the Iewes and accordingly expound the place alledged out of 2. Thess. 2. 10. 11. Ans. So they held that Antichrist should come of the Tribe of Dan accordingly expounded some places of scripture which no man now vnlesse he will be too ridiculous can vnderstand of Antichrist Therefore as Bellarmine in that point answered a whole dozen of Fathers so may I answere here with as good reason that although this opinion might seeme probable to the Fathers in their time liuing before the reuelation of Antichrist yet now there is no probabilitie in it seeing it cannot onely not be proued out of the scripture but as you heard is confuted both by the scripture and the euent 9 Let vs therefore in the third place consider his reason Antichrist shall without doubt ioyne himselfe first and chiefly to those who are readie to receiue him But the Iewes are readie to receiue him not the Christians nor the Gentiles therefore Antichrist first and principally shall ioyne himselfe to the Iewes First to the proposition I answere that Antichrist shall ioyne himselfe not to any whatsoeuer but to those in the Church that are readie to receiue him For as Cyprian truly noteth They be the seruants of Epist. 1. lib. 1. God whom the diuell troubleth and they are Christians whom Antichrist impugneth Neque enim quaerit illos quos iam subegit aut gestit euertere quos iam suos fecit For he seeketh not those whom he hath alreadie subdued or desireth to ouerthrowe those whom hee hath already made his owne the enemie aduersary of the church whome hee hath estraunged and kept foorth of the Church them he neglecteth and passeth by as captiues and ouercome those he assaulteth in whom he perceiueth Christ to dwell If therefore Antichrist be ledde by the spirit of Sathan then no doubt he shall passe by both Iewes Insidels set himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Thess. 2. 4. that is both in the Church of God and against it that the vnsound he may seduce and the sound he may persecute The assumption standeth on two parts 1. affirmatiue that the Iewes are readie to receiue Antichrist 2. negatiue that the Christians and Gentiles are not readie to receiue him The former hee proueth because the Iewes do yet looke for their Messias who shall be a temporall King such a one as Antichrist shall bee But this reason is built on false suppositions First that Antichrist shall be one particular man which we haue proued to be false Secondly that Antichrist shall professe himselfe to be the Messias of the Iewes which as it hath bene disproued out of the scriptures so can it not with any colour of reason be proued out of the same For as hath bene shewed Antichrist is the head of the Catholike Apostasie or Apostate Christians sitting in BabyloÌ„ that is Rome professing her selfe the church of God being one of the seuen heads of the Romane state succeeding the â—…mperours in the gouernment of Rome c. Thirdly as Antichrist shall not be such a one as the expected Messias of the Iewes so there is no necessitie that there should such a one come to the Iewes as they expect The second part also of his assumption is false For although sound and constant Christians bee not readie to receiue Antichrist but alwayes haue bene readie to resist him euen vnto the death yet vnsound and back-sliding Christians who embrace not the loue of the truth that they might be saued either are as readie to receiue Antichrist as they are apt and prone to decline from the truth a searefull caueat to those which waxe wearie of the Gospell or alreadie haue reuolted from Christ to Antichrist haue receiued the marke of the beast Yea but Christians saith he doo not expect Antichrist as
he shall aduance himselfe against God against Christ our Sauiour list vp himself aboue all that is called God or that is worshipped yet he shall professe himselfe to be the seruant of Christ and a worshipper of God Fourthly the words of the text do not ascribe to Antichrist so great an extolling of himselfe as the Iesuit imagineth For first he is called a man of sinne sonne of perdition therfore we are to conceiue of such an aduancement of himselfe as is incident to a mortall wretched man SecoÌ„dly he is said to extoll himselfe aboue all that is called God or that is worshipped By all that is called God we are to vnderstand all to whom the name of God is communicated as to Angels in heauen to kings and Princes on earth And of this aduancing aboue Kings we are the rather to vnderstand this place because afterwards it is said that the Romane Empire hindered Antichrists aduancing or reuealing himselfe And by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are to vnderstand any thing which is worshipped as God or wherein God is worshipped Such in the Church of Rome are the Host the Crosse the Saints their Images reliques Aboue al which a man may aduance himselfe as the Pope doth and yet may acknowledge some other God besides himselfe Thirdly the greatest height of pride that is incident to any creature whatsoeuer is not to seeke to be aboue God for that cannot be imagined but to be as God And indeed the height of Antichrist his pride and aduancing of himselfe is noted in the words following 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in so much that he shall sit in the temple of God as God Whosoeuer therefore being but a mortall man shall aduance himself aboue all that is called God worshipped insomuch that he shall sit in the temple of God as God that is ruleth in the church of Christ as if he were a God vpon earth he is to be deemed Antichrist that is aemulus Christi one that would faine be equall to Christ although he neither professe himselfe to be the onely God who onely is to be worshipped neither yet abolish all other worship of God both true and false And if in this sense this place do properly agree to the Pope as indeed it doth then can it not be auoided but that he is Antichrist 13 The second testimony which he alledgeth to prooue this fond conceit is Dan. 11. 37. neither shall he care for any of the Gods but shall rise against all I answere Daniel in this place speaketh not of Antichrist and he of whom he speaketh was an Idolater and therefore this allegation is altogether impertinent As touching the first it is euident that Daniel from the 21. verse of that chapter to the end doth most plainly properly describe Antiochus Epiphanes For howsoeuer in this place Bellarmine would proue by the authoritie of Ierome that these words are to be vnderstood of Antichrist not of Antiochus yet in another place when part of this verse is obiected Li. 3. ca. 21 by some protestants as sitting the Pope he telleth vs plainly that Daniel speaketh ad literamâ—… literally of Antiochus who was a figure of Antichrist Secondly hee of whom Daniel speaketh was an Idolater and establisher of Idolatry So farre was hee from professing himselfe to be the onely true God or suffering none to be worshipped besides himselfe For if he speake of Antiochus Epiphanes as most certainly he doth it may easily be proued both by Historie of the Machabees and by other stories that he was both an Idolater himselfe and an inforcer of Idolatry vpoÌ„ others See I. Maccab. 1. 50. 2. Mac. cab 6. 2. c. Polybius also testifieth that in sacrifices honouring the Graecian Gods he surpassed other Kings which went before him Apud Athenaeum as might appeare by the Olympiaeum at Athens and the Images about the altar at Delos This Ierome also auoucheth and Bellarmine confesseth But of whomsoeuer Daniel speaketh he doth plainly describe him in the next verse to be an Idolater Ver. 38. And it is a world to see what silly shiftes the Iesuit maketh to auoyd this truth For first he readeth the words thus And he shall honor the God Maozim in his place Secondly he omitteth the words following the God which his fathers knew not he shall honour with golde c. which most plainly specifie his Idolatry who is here described and busieth himselfe wholy in giuing a false interpretatioÌ„ to the god Maozim The God Maozim saith he signifieth either Antichrist himself and then the meaning is he shall honor himselfe that is cause himselfe to be worshipped or else it signifieth the diuel whom Antichrist being a sorcerer shall worship in secret which interpretation he preferreth before the other And therefore this place doth not proue that he which is here described shal be an Idolater 14 I answere first that although either of his interpretations of the God Maozim were true as neither is yet the one hindreth not and the other proueth that he which is heere described is an Idolater For let the word Maozim signifie what it may yet the words following plainly conuince the partie here described of Idolatry the God which his fathers knew not he shall worship with gold And if the God Maozim signifie any but the true God and if also the words are so to be read as Bellarmine readeth them And he shall honor the God Maozim and the God whoÌ„ his fathers knew not he shall worship with gold and siluer c. then by these words the Idolatry is encreased For first it is said that he shall worship the God Maozim according to Bellarmines reading whereby is not meant as he saith the true God nay he saith to make Christ the God Maozim Li. 3. ca. 21 it is intollerable blasphemy O therefore first in these words is signified an Idolater and secondly it is added that the God also which his fathers knew not hee shall worship where againe his Idolatry is most plainely noted 2. But indeede Bellarmines interpretation is meerely false and that which he inferreth therevpon altogether absurd The God Mahuzzim signifieth the God of fortitudes that is the most mightie or almightie God which title as it is proper to the Lorde as Ieremy calleth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iehouah my Iere. 16. 19 strength and fortitude And likewise Dauid Psal. 31. 5. so may it not be ascribed to any other And therefore it is a sencelesse imagination that Daniel by the God of fortitudes would signifie either Antichrist himselfe a wicked and wretched man or the father of Antichrist the Diuell And further as touching the former interpretation it seemeth to be absurd that when Daniel according to his reading saith he shal worship the God Maozim his meaning should be that Antichrist should worship himselfe as though he that worshippeth and hee that is worshipped were one and the same And theÌ„
set vp in the temple of God the Idoll of Iupiter Olympius to be worshipped as it is recorded 2. Mac. 6. who was a God whom his fathers knew not that is acknowledged Strabo geograph lib. 16. not nor worshipped For the Syrians worshipped Apollo and Diana And the munitions of Mahuzzim that is Ierusalem and other cities of Iewry which had bene as it were the munitions and cities of God hee committed them to the tuition of a strange God namely Iupiter Olympius The same prophesie in effect was before deliuered Dan. 7. 25. See Tremell in Dan. 7. 8. 8. 11. by conference of which places with this in hand it is manifest that by the God Mahuzzim is meant the true God 17 This prophesie therefore being meant of Antiochus Epiphanes fulfilled in him cannot properly belong to Antichrist or any other Notwithstanding as in some other things so in the premisses Antiochus may not vnsitly be thought to haue bene a type or figure of Antichrist In so much that both the auncient Fathers haue vnderstood these prophesies of Antichrist and many also of the late writers besides the Iewes haue applyed the same particularly to the Pope For besides that it is most true of the Pope that hee doth what he will seeing Legi non subiacâ—…t vlli hee is subiect to no lawe and no man may say to him Sir why doo you so The rest also after a sort may be verified of him that both hee setteth himselfe against the Idols of the Gentiles and also hath abrogated the true worship of God And that in stead of Christ the Almightie God he hath set vp in his churches besides many other Idols the abhominable Idoll of the Masse a God which his fathers the first Bishops of Rome knew not which notwithstaÌ„ding he honoreth with gold and siluer and precious stones and hath committed the churches cities and countries of Christendome to the tuition and patronage of diuers Saints who as they are indeed so are they called by Paulus Ionius a Popish Bishop the tutelar Gods of the Papists Hist. lib. 24. in fine 18 And these were his testimonies of scripture In the next place for want of better proofes he slyeth to the authoritie of the Fathers as his last refuge as though they testified that Antichrist shall not be an Idolater nor one that will suffer Idols But I answer that the Fathers do either speake of the Idols and Idolatry of the Gentiles onely and in that sence their speeches are verified in this behalfe of the Pope who neither honoreth nor suffereth the Idols of the Gentiles or else if they speake of all Idols and Idolatry in generall when they say Idola seponet as Ireneus or adidololatriam non admittet as Hippolitus or idola odio habebit as Cyrill or adidololatriaÌ„ non adducet ille as Chrysostome they deserue such an Antichrist as in this behalfe is better then the Pope But indeed as the Pope is so Antichrist in the scriptures is described to bee an Idolater as hath bene shewed 19 Hauing thus doughtily proued this Popish conceit the Iesuit proceedeth to the disproofe of our assertioÌ„s expositions of some places of scripture and especially that of 2. Thess 2. Our assertion concerning the doctrine of Antichrist hee saith is onely built vpon the scriptures falsely expounded by new glosses In token whereof saith hee they alledge not one Interpreter or Doctor for them But this is a malicious slaunder witnesse this place which he mentioneth 2. Thess. 2. where we proue by the consent of many of the Fathers that by the Temple is meant the church of God and that in the church of God Antichrist was to be reuealed after the Romane Empire which hindered was taken out of the way c. Our assertions concerning Antichrist are grouÌ„ded on the prophesies of scriptures expounded by the euent which is the best expóunder of prophesies And with our assertions the opinions of the Fathers agree where they are consonant to the scripture and the euent Contrariwise the assertions of the Papists concerning Antichrist as they are repugnant to the scriptures and the truth of the euent so are they wholy grounded either vpon the vncertaine and many times misalledged coniectures of the Fathers who were no Prophets and therefore being not able to foresee the euent did not many times vnderstand the Prophesies or else on the blinde conceits of Popish writers who being deceiued with the efficacie of illusion and made drunke with the whore Babylons cuppe of fornications were giuen ouer to beleeue lyes And whereas our writers expounding those wordes of the Apostle 2. Thess. 2. 4. who is lifted vp aboue all that is called God or that is worshipped doo apply the same vnto the Pope vpon very good and sufficient proofes and from thence do plainely conclude the Pope to be Antichrist for euidence whereof I referre the Reader to the 5. chapter of my former booke He culleth out some stragling sentences out of some one of the vnsoundest writers of our side as their maner is which he may best hope to answere As though we had no more nor no better arguments to proue that the Pope aduanceth himselfe aboue all that is called God or that is worshipped then these two First because he professeth himselfe to bee the Vicar of Christ And secondly whereas Christ subiected himselfe willingly vnto the scriptures the Pope challengeth authoritie to dispense with the scripture Howbeit the former of these two reasons hee depraueth and the latter he is not able to satisfie For Illyricus his reason to proue that the Pope aduanceth himselfe aboue all that is called God is not because he maketh himselfe the Vicar of Christ but this because hee vaunting himselfe to be the Vicar of Christ doth notwithstanding vsurpe greater authoritie then the sonne of God claimed vnto himselfe of which that which Bellarmine Catalog test pag. 3. alledgeth as a second reason is by Illyricus added as a proofe Wherevnto Bellarmine is no otherwise able to answer then by impudent and shamelesse deniall either that Christ subiected Contrary to Galat. 4. 4. Luke 2. 51 himselfe to the lawe and word of God or that the Pope taketh vpon him to dispense with the scriptures or that any Catholike meaning Popish writer hath said that he may dispense with diuine precepts both which notwithstanding I haue heretofore proued by many instances and most euident allegations See the first booke chap. 5. § 10. 11. 12. For that which hee addeth of Christs subiecting himselfe to the prophesies and not to the precepts as though Illyricus had spoken of the one in his proposition and of the other in the assumption it is partly false and partly ridiculous and indeede not worth the answering Chap. 15. Of the miracles of Antichrist 1 WEe are now come to the eight maine argument which Bellarmine vseth to proue that the Pope of Rome is not Antichrist because forsooth those things
writings before to be the scriptures Why then Ierome saith so vpon Daniel 11. 24. where Daniel speaketh of Antiochus his dealings in Egypt that he did that which his forefathers neuer did Nullus Iudaeorum absque Antichristo in tot◅ vnquam or be regnauit These be Bellarmines scriptures But where do the scriptures indeede say that Antichrist shall subdue seuen of the tenne Kings Nay the contrary may rather bee gathered out of the scriptures The tenne hornes whereof Daniel speaketh were tenne Kings which successiuely raigned ouer Iudaea as hath bene shewed And although Antiochus Epiphanes might helpe away three of his next predecessors yet hee could not hurt the other sixe for there were but nine besides himselfe which were all dead and gone before he came to yeares Yea but this opinion of the Fathers is plainely enough deduced out of Apoc. 17. 12. where we reade and the tenne hornes which thou sawest are tenne Kings these haue one minde and they shall giue their power and authoritie to the beast No maruell though some of the Papists call the scripture a nose of waxe seeing they can frame and fashion it at their pleasure and giue vnto it what sense they list Doth Iohn speake of Antichrist his either killing three or subduing seuen Or doth Iohn speake of the same tenne hornes wherof Daniel doth Daniel speaketh of tenne Kings which were to bee dead and gone before the comming of the Messias Iohn speaketh of such as in his time had not yet attained to their kingdome verse 12. Daniel speaketh of tenne Kings of the Seleucidae and Lagidae which succeeded one an other Iohn of tenne Kings among whom the Romane Empire was to be diuided who also were to haue their kingdome together with the beast Daniel telleth vs what the little horne which was one of the tenne should doo to three of the other nine without mention of the rest Iohn sheweth what all the tenne hornes should doo to Antichrist which is none of the tenne hornes but one of the heades of the beast If therefore Bellarmine can proue from hence that these are the same tenne hornes spoken of in Daniel and that Antichrist shall kill three of them subdue the other seuen he may hope to proue any thing But what other scriptures hath hee forsooth Chrysostome and Cyrill For Chrysostome on 2. Thess. 2. saith that Antichrist shall bee a Monarch and shall succeede the Romanes in the Monarchy as the Romanes succeeded the Greekes the Greekes succeeded the Persians and they the Assyrians And Cyrill saith that Antichrist shall obtaine the Monarchy Catech. 15 which was the Romanes I answere that for substance these Fathers held the truth For what Monarch hath there bene in the West these fiue or sixe hundred yeares besides the Pope who calleth himselfe King of Kings and Lorde of Lords to whom all power is giuen in heauen and in earth who hath as they say the double Monarchy both of spirituall and temporal power who forsooth is Lord of the whole earth in so much that he taketh vpon him authoritie to dispose of the new found world And that he succedeth the Emperors in the Alexand. 6. gouernment of Rome as it becommeth Antichrist who is the second beast Apoc. 13. and the 7. head of the beast Apoc. 17. whereof the Emperour was the sixt I shall not neede to proue 15 There remaineth the fourth argument Antichrist shall persecute with an innumerable army the Christians throughout the world and this is the battell of God and Magog but this agreeth not to the Pope therefore the Pope is not Antichrist I answere to the proposition that no such thing can be proued out of the scripture Hee alledgeth Ezech. 38. 39. Apoc. 20. 7. 8. 9. 10. But Ezechiel speaketh not of Antichrist nor of the persecution of the Christian Church by him But hauing foretold chapter 37. the restitution of the Iewes from the Babylonian captiuitie and also prophesied of the comming of Christ in those chapters hee foretelleth of the afflictions and troubles which the people of the Iewes should sustaine in the meane time to wit after their returne out of captiuitie before the comming of the Messias and withall denounceth the iudgemēts of God against the Seleucidae who were the kings of Syria and Asia minor and their adherents who should be the chiefe enemies of the church and people of the Iewes after their returne For Gog signifieth Asia minor hauing that name from Gyges the King thereof Magog is Hierapolis the chiefe seate of Idolatry in Syria built by the Scythians and frō them hath that name So that by the land of Magog wee are to vnderstand Syria and by Gog Asia minor And the rest of the peoples that Plin. lib. 5. cap. 23. are named in Ezechiel were such as assisted the Seleucidae who were the kings of Syria and Asia minor in their warres either as their subiects or as their friends or as their mercenary souldiers And for as much as the princes and people of Syria and Asia minor were the most grieuous enemies of the Iewes by Ad Tremell Iun. in Ezech 38. 39. whom they sustained the chiefest calamities after their returne before the comming of Christ therefore by an vsuall speech in the Iewish language the mortall and deadly enemies of the church are called Gog and Magog And in this sense Iohn the Diuine vseth these names Gog and Magog to signifie the enemies of the church meaning not the same enemies whereof Ezechiel speaketh but the like enemies of the Church which should afflict the true Christians as Gog and Magog afflicted the Iewes Neither doth Iohn in this place speake of the persecution of Antichrist properly but of Sathan after he was loosed his inciting the enemies of the Church to battell and of Gods iudgements against them signified by fire And so much shall suffice to haue answered to this argument For after so long a Treatise I will not trouble the Reader with the tenne seuerall opinions which Bellarmine reciteth cōcerning Gog and Magog neither yet with any further answere to his cauillations and exceptions against some of the arguments of diuers Protestants which he thought were more easie to answere seeing in the former booke I haue sufficiently cleared those arguments whereby the Pope is more euidently proued to be Antichrist neither is the controuersie betwixt vs whether euery argument that hath bene produced by euery one doth necessarily conclude the Pope to be Antichrist That discourse therefore being rather personall then reall I let it passe Chap. 17. Being the conclusion of the whole Treatise HAuing therefore both by sufficient arguments manifestly proued that the Pope is 1. Antichrist and by euidence of truth maintained the same assertion against the arguments of the Papists let vs now consider in the last place what conclusions may vpon this doctrine be necessarily inferred for our further vse For first if this be true that the Pope is Antichrist as