his wordes For the forerunner must not be equall to him whose forerunner he is but lesse and inferiour If therefore Iohn of Constantinople who was the forerunner of Antichrist challenged the title of vniuersall Bishop Antichrist himselfe shall challenge greater matters and shall aduance himselfe aboue all that is called God But I reply that although the pride and ambition of Iohn of Constantinople was very great and Antichristian yet it was not to be compared with the incredible insolency and pride of the Antichrist of Rome Iohn of Constantinople sought a superioritie ouer all other Bishoppes but challenged not that height of authoritie and foueraigntie which the Popes since haue vsurped not only ouer Bishoppes and Ecclesiasticall persons but also ouer the Kings and Monarchies of the earth Neither hath the Antichristian pride of the Pope rested heere but as I haue shewed heretofore in some thinges hee matcheth himselfe Li. 1. cap. 5. with Christ in some things he aduanceth himselfe aboue him and aboue all that is called God To the second Bellarmine answereth that it was not Gregories meaning that Priestes as they are Priests belong to the army of Antichrist but as they are proud But hence it followeth not saith hee Antichristum fore principem sacerdotum sed fore principem superborum that Antichrist shall be the prince of Priests but that he shall be the prince of proud men shamelesse and yet ridiculous Doth it not follow that if he be the prince of Priests as they are proude that he is the prince of proude Priests such as the whole hierarchy of Rome consisteth of It followeth therefore vpon our arguments notwithstanding all his cauils that Antichrist was to haue his chiefe seate in Rome and in Rome professing her selfe the church of God but being indeed the whore of Babylon Chap. 14. Concerning the doctrine of Antichrist OVr aduersaries seuenth disputation is concerning 1 the doctrine of Antichrist For whereas it is certaine saith Bellarmine that there are foure principall doctrines of Antichrist none whereof is taught by the Pope therefore it followeth necessarily that the Pope is not Antichrist I answere that there are more doctrins of Antichrist that false prophet then foure among which those two doctrines of diuels which are mentioned by the Apostle 1. Tim. 4. as notes of that Catholike Apostasie whereof Antichrist is the head are to bee numbred forbidding marriage and commaunding abstinence from meates But yet not all these foure are the doctrines of Antichrist and those which be doe not vnfitly agree to the Pope as shall appeare in the particulars which wee are to examine in order For from these foure doctrines Bellarmine fetcheth foure arguments The first Antichrist shall deny Iesus to be Christ and consequently shall oppugne all the ordinances of our Sautour as Baptisme confirmation c. and shall teach that circumcision the Sabboth and other ceremonies of the old lawe are not yet ceassed But the Pope doth not deny Iesus to be Christ nor bring in circumcision instead of Baptisme nor the Saboth in stead of the Lordes day c therefore the Pope is not Antichrist The proposition and so also 〈◊〉 assumption â—…ath two parts the former concerning the deniall of Christ it selfe the second concerning the consequents thereof Of the former I haue sufficiently spoken heretofore prouing 〈◊〉 â—…ntly 〈◊〉 that as Antichrist was to deny Christ so Li. 1. ca 4. § 6 7. 8. the Pope doâ—… noâ—… in deed onely but in word also and doctrine although not openly directly expresly for Antichrist was not to be an open and professed enemy yet couertly indirectly and by consequent And of such denying of Christ Bellarmine himself in this chapter vnderstandeth Iohn to speak in the place by him alledged for the proofe of his proposition 1. Ioh. 2. 22. 2. But â—…iuing that this expâ—…ion will not cleare me Pope 〈◊〉 Antichristn â—…me he 〈◊〉 â—…th that Ancichrist is to 〈◊〉 Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 openly and 〈◊〉 all meanes Which bold assurâ—…ion I haue herâ—…of 〈◊〉 â—…fficiently disproued when I proued that AntiChristianisme is as the Aposâ—…â—…eth it a mystery of iniquities anâ—… that Antichrist is 〈◊〉 â—…and disguised emâ—… who vnder the name and profession of â—…tianitie denieth yea oppugneth Christ and his truth Buâ—… 〈◊〉 â—…s weigh his reasons The first whereof hath all his wâ—… 〈◊〉 such assertions as we haue before prooued to 〈◊〉 then vanitie it selfe and it is thus concluded He that 〈◊〉 be in nation and religion a Iew and shall be receiued of the Iewes fâ—… their Meâ—… shall â—…ugne Christ and teach that our Christ is not the Meâ—… But Antichrist shall be in nation and reâ—… 〈◊〉 and shall be reâ—…iued of the Iewes for their Messias 〈◊〉 beforâ—…â—…th bene shewed therefore he shall oppugne Christ openly c. I 〈◊〉 â—…ere first to the proposition and assumption ioyntly that theâ—…e is no necessitie nor yet likelyhood that there should come to the Iewes such a one as they expect and yet Bellarmine every where taketh this for granted But the assumption I haue proued heretofore to be a new fable and therfore further answere is superfluous Chap. 12. 3 The second argument is gathered out of 1. Iohn 2. 22. Who is a lyer but he that denieth Iesus to be Christ and this is Antichrist For all heretikes saith he are called Antichrists which any way deny Iesus to be Christ. Therfore the true antichrist himself shal simply by all meanes deny Iesus to be Christ. And this is proued because by the heretikes the diuell is said to worke the mystery of iniquitie because they deny Christ couertly but the comming of Antichrist is called a reuelation because he shall openly deny Christ. I answere first that Iohn in that place speaketh neither of the body of Antichrist in general as else-where in his Epistles the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed nor of the head of that body in particular who is most worthily called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Antichrist but of some other members of that body that is to say of those Antichrists or heretikes of that time as Cerinthus and others which denied the diuinitie of Christ and denying the sonne did consequently also denie the Father for hee is the Father of the Sonne as appeareth plainely by that which followeth in the text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is that Antichrist that denieth the Father and the Sonne Secondly the difference betwixt the petite Antichrists the graund Antichrist is not in respect of the couert and open deniall of Christ or if there be a difference to be made in this behalfe it is in this that diuers heretikes and petite Antichrists such as Simon Magus some others haue denied Iesus to be Christ more plainâ—…y and directly which the graund Antichrist according to his greater cunning and efficacie of deceit comming as the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all deceiueablenesse of iniquitie 2. Thess. 2. 10. was to
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
the scriptures And if the Hervaeus de potest Tap. e. R. Cupers Petrus de palude de potest Papae â—…t 4. church be aboue the Scriptures then much more is he For he not onely virtualiter est tota ecclesia that is virtually the whole church but also his power alone exceedeth the power of all the whole church besides Now that the authority of the church much more of the Pope who is superior to the church is aboue the scripture it is both generally affirmed by som particulars coÌ„firmed Cardinal Cusanus entitleth his book De authoritate ecclesia concilij supra coÌ„tra scripturaÌ„ Of the authority of the Church councell aboue against the Scripture Syluester Prierias master of the Popes pallace saith That indulgences are warranted vnto vs not by the authoritie of the Scripture Contra Lutheri conclusiones de potestate Papae but by the authoritie of the Church and Pope of Rome which is greater Boniface the Archbishop of Mentz saith That all men so reuerence the Apostolicke See of Rome that they rather desire the auncient institution of Christian religion from the Pope then from the holy Scriptures This saying the Pope hath so approued that he hath caused it to be inserted into the Dist. 40. c. si Papa Canon lawe The particulars which proue the Pope to aduaunce himselfe aboue the Scriptures are these 1 Because he hath as they say authoritie to adde to the Canonicall Scriptures other bookes that are not in the Canon And that those Dist. 19. c. si Romanorum Ioan. de turrecrem l. 〈◊〉 cap. 112. which be in the Canon haue their Canonicall authority from him In the 19. distinction cap. Si Romanorum Pope Nicolas not onely matcheth their decretall Epistles with the holy Scriptures but also affirmeth that the Scriptures are therefore to be receiued because the Pope hath iudged them canonicall Another saith Whosoeuer resteth not on the doctrine of the Romane church and Bishop of Rome as the infallible rule of God Syluester Prierias contra Lutherum à qua sacra scriptura robur trabis authoritatem From which the sacred Scripture draweth strength and authority hee is an Hereticke Eckius saith Scriptura nisiecclesiae authoritate non De ecclesia est authentica The Scripture is not authenticall but by the authority of the Church For I will not tell you how some of them haue not bene ashamed to say that the Scripture without the authoritie of the Church is of it selfe no better worth then AEsopes fables Pighius saith The authority of the church Vid. Chemnit exam part 1. pag. 47. is aboue the Scriptures because the authoritie of the Church hath giuen the Scriptures canonicall authority Secondly whereas the Scriptures are not the words and syllables but the true sence and meaning thereof They teach that the scriptures are to be vnderstood according to the interpretation of the Pope and Church of Rome and that sence which the Pope assigneth to the Scriptures must bee taken for the vndoubted word of God The Pope saith one hath authority so to expound Heruauâ—… de potestate Papae the scriptures that it is not lawful to hold or thinke the contrary A Cardinall of Rome saith If any man haue the interpretation of the church of Rome concerning any place of scripture although he neither know nor vnderstand whether and Cardinal Hosius de expresso dei verbo how it agreeth with the words of the scripture notwithstanding he hath ipsimum verbum Dei the very wordof God And if the sence which they giue be diuerse according to the variety of their practise and diuersitie of times we must acknowledge that the scripture is to follow the church and not the church to follow the scriptures Whereupon Cardinall Cusanus It is no Nicol. Cusanus ad Bohem. epist. 7. maruell saith he though the practise of the church expound the scriptures at one time one way and at another time another way For the vnderstanding or sence of the scripture runneth with the practise And that sence so agreeing with the practise is the quickning spirit And therefore the scriptures follow the church but contrarywise the church followeth not the scriptures And this is that which one who was no small foole in Rome auouched The Pope saith he may change the holy gospell and may Henricus Doctor magister sacri palatij Romae ad legatos â—…ohemicos sub Felice Papa 1447. giue to the gospell according to place and time another sence And to the same purpose was the speech of that blasphemous Cardinall that if any man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and man and the Pope thought the same he should not bee condemned To conclude therefore with Cardinall Cusanus This is the iudgement saith he of all them that thinke rightlie Cardinal s. Angeli ad cosdeâ—… legatos Bohemicos that found the authoritie and vnderstanding of the scriptures in the allowance of the church and not contrariwise lay the foundation of the church in the authority of the scriptures Ad Bohemos epist. 2. 11 Thirdly the Pope challengeth authority aboue the scriptures when he taketh vpon him to dispense with the word and law of God For whosoeuer taketh vpon him to dispense with the law of another challengeth greater authority then the others and it is a rule among themselues In praecepto superioris non debet dispensare inferior the inferiour may not dispense Antonin part 3. lit 22. cap. 6. §. 2. with the commaundement of the superiour That the Pope doth dispense with the lawes of God it is euident For scarcely is there any sinne forbidden there where with he doth not sometimes dispense nay whereof hee will not if it be for his aduantage make a meritorious worke Incest is an horrible sinne forbidden by the law of God and by the lawe of nature And yet there is no incest excepting that which is committed betwixt the parents and the children which hee hath not authority forsooth to dispense with for as they say hee may dispense against the law of nature The Pope dispensed with Henrie the eightth to marie his sister in law and 25. q. 6 authoritatem in glâ—…ss with Philip the late king of Spaine to mary his owne niece Pope Martin the fift dispensed with a certaine brother that Antonin sum 3. part tit 1. cap. 11. §. quod Papa sum angel diâ—…t Papa maried his owne sister And Clement the seauenth licensed Petrus Aluaraâ—…lus the spaniard for a summe of money to marie two sisters at once c. Disobedience to parents periury that is breaking of lawfull oathes rebellion against lawfull princes murdering of a sacred prince are condemned by the lawe of God as haynous offences But if children shall cast of their parents to enter into a Sodomiticall cloister if the Pope shall absolue the subiects from their oathes and forbidde them
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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
foretold do now come to passe The king of pride meaning Antichrist is at hand and that which is horrible to be spoken an army of priests is prepared for him Whereby he would also insinuate that he should be the prince of priests Now this is a principle in the church of Rome that the Pope especially such a Pope as Gregory the great speaking definitâ—…uelie and confidentlie can not erre And if this be true as they may not deny the Pope being the foundation of all their trueth then must they needs confesse that Antichrist was come almost a thousand yeers since and that the Pope their prince of priests who not onely succeedeth Iohn of Constantinople in that Antichristian title but also farre exceedeth him in all Antichristian pride challenging a soueraigne and vniuersall authority not onely aboue all other Bishops and priests but also aboue all kings and Emperours is that Antichrist 5 To this testimony of Gregory I might adde diuerse other witnesses But my purpose is not to draw mine arguments from the writings and as it were the cisternes of men who liued before the reuelation of Antichrist and therefore except themselues had bene prophets could not fully expound these prophecies but from the pure fountaines of holy scriptures expounded by the history and euent the best interpreters of prophecies For as Daniell saith of the like or rather as the Papists say of these same Dan. 129. prophecies concerning Antichrist The words are closed vp and sealed vntill the appointed tyme. And accordingly was it said by Augustine prophetias citiùs impleri quà m intelligt that prophecies are fulfilled sooner then vnderstood and by Irenaeus whome Bellarmine also alleadgeth to the same purpose omnes prophetiae Lib. 〈◊〉 aduers. haeres c. 43. Bell. de pont R. lib. 3 c. 10. saith he priusquam habeaÌ„t efficaciam aemgmata sunt ambiguitas hominibus All prophecies before they haue their complement are vnto men darke and doubtfull speeches And therefore speaking of some part of the prophecies concerning Antichrist hee Apoc. 13. saith Certius sine periculo est sustinere adimplet ionem prophetiae quà m suspicari c It is more sure and safe to wait for the fulfilling of the prophecie then before hand to deliuer vncertaine ghesses Lib. 5. advers hares pag. antepenult Omitting therefore the vncertaine coniectures of men for such are diuerse opinions of the fathers concerning Antichrist as Bellarmine confesseth of some from the sacred scriptures the Lib. 3. de pont R. c. 10. vndoubted oracles of God I frame this demonstration 6 Vnto whomesoeuer the prophecies of holy scripture describing Antichrist the head of the Antichristian body doe wholy and onely agree hee is that graund Antichrist who is foretold in the scriptures Vnto the Pope of Rome the prophecies of holy scripture concerning Antichrist the head of the Antichristian body do wholy and onely agree therefore the Pope of Rome is that graund Antichrist which is foretold in the scriptures The proposition I take for graunted For seeing the holy ghost hath of purpose in diuerse places of the scripture taken vpon him fully and sufficiently to describe Antichrist and that to this end that he might bee knowne we neede not doubt but that this description of Antichrist is so perfect and so proper vnto him as to whome that description agreeth not he is not Antichrist contrarywise whom it wholy and onely fitteth hee must be held and acknowledged to be that Antichrist All the controuersie therefore is concerning the assumption namely whether the descriptions of Antichrist in the scriptures agree to the Pope or not Antichrist is described by the holy ghost especially in three places viz. in the second chapter of the second epistle to the Thessalonians in the thirteenth of the Reuelation from the eleuenth verse to the end and in the seuenteenth chapter of the same booke For I omitte those places in the prophecie of Daniel which vsually are alleaged because they speake properly of Antiochus Epiphanes Chap. 7. 8. 11. 12. who was but a type of Antichrist as Bellarmine also confesseth and the ninth of the Apocalypse because it is by some expounded Lib. 3. de pont R. c 18. 21. of the Turks 7 And that the description of Antichrist in the scriptures fitly agreeth to the Pope it appeareth by this induction For whereas all the arguments and notes whereby Antichrist is described in the scriptures may be reduced to these heads to wit the place or seat where we are to find him the time when we were to looke for him his condition and qualities that he is an aduersary opposed vnto Christ in aemulation of like honour a man of sinne in generall and more particularly an horrible Idolatour his actions and passions that is such things as he shall either do or suffer I will make it euident by the helpe of God whose all-seeing spirit I humbly beseech to guide me into the truth that all and euery one of them doe so fitly and properly agree to the Pope of Rome that in the descriptions of Antichrist in the scripture the Pope may behold himselfe as it were in a glasse Chap. 2. Of the place or seate of Antichrist 1. ANd first as touching the place or seate of Antichrist I reason thus Mysticall Babylon spoken of in the seuenteenth and eighteenth of the Apocalypse is the seat of Antichrist Rome is Mysticall Babylon spoken of in the seuenteenth and eighteenth of the Apocalypse Therefore Rome is the seat of Antichrist As touching the proposition you are to vnderstand that Babylon in the scriptures is taken sometimes literally and sometimes mystically literally for Babylon either in Chaldaea or in Egypt Babylon in Chaldaea was the Metropolis or imperiall city of the Babylonian and Assyrian Monarchy Babylon in AEgypt is called Babylis and Cayrus of which some vnderstand the Apostle Peter to speake 1. Epist. 5. 13. Babylon mysticall in the Apocalypse is the seat or chiefe city of Antichrist resembling the 1. Pet. 5. 13. Apoc. 17. 5. Assyrian Babylon in pride idolatry filthinesse and especiallie in most cruell persecution of the church of God And for the same causes Apoc. 11. 8. is called spiritually Sodom and Egypt Sodom Ap. 11. 8. for pride and filthinesse Egypt for idolatrie and for cruelty towards the Israel of God And as the church of Christ in the Apocalypse is called Ierusalem mysticallie or the holy city so the church especially the Metropolis or chiefe city of Antichrist is mysticallie called Babylon This as it is the receiued opinion of the faithfull so may it euidently be gathered out of the seuenteenth and eighteenth of Apocalypse which without all doubt are prophecies concerning Antichrist and the Antichristian city and seat as the Papists themselues often confesse Bellarm. lib. 3. de Pâ—…t R. c. 2. Sander demonstr 13. 18. c 2 For that which the Papists sometimes obiect That by Babylon is
right of Kings dependeth For you must know that as they full solemnely dispute the 4 R. Cupers pag. 251. nuÌ„ 62. Empire or temporall rule as well as the priesthood or ecclesiasticall dominioÌ„ is translated vnto the successours of Peter that the 5 Idem pag. 52. num 28. p. 1. 251. n. 63. 64. right of rule direct dominioÌ„ of the Empire and kingdoms belongeth to the Pope howbeit he coÌ„mitteth the exercise therof to Emperours Kings that 6 Idem pag. 28 num 7. Emperours Kings all Princes receiue their right of gouerning their kingdoms from the Pope that by him they are confirmed by him deposed that to him Emperors Kings as being but his vassals are bound to sweare 7 c. tibi domino dist 63. c. 1. de iuretur allegiaunce and sidelity that hee so farre surpasseth the 8 c. solitae de maior obed Emperour as the Sunne excelleth the Moone that is according to their Astronomy 9 Gâ—…oss ibid. Staâ—…st Orichovius quantum Deus praestat sacerdoti tantuÌ„ sacerdos praestat regi qui regé anteponit sacerdoti is anteponit creaturaÌ„ creatori Apud Iuellum seuen and fiftie times or rather as the creatour is superiour to the creature Therefore Kings and Emperours 10 Li. â—…erem 1. sect 5. cap. 3. lib. 3. sect 1. cap. 3. when they come into the presence of his holinesse must after obeysance done in three seuerall distances fall downe before him and kisse his foote euen as Mantuan saith of him Ense potens gemino cuius vestigia adorant Caesar aurato vestitimurice reges And if they be in preseÌ„ce when he taketh 11 Lib. 1. câ—…ereÌ„ sect 2. c. 3. horse the Emperor or chiefest Prince that is present must hold his right stirrop when he is mouÌ„ted must hold the bridle play the lackey for a certaine space likewise wheÌ„ he lighteth off must hold the right stirrop which if he happen to mistake as being not vsed to seruice he must looke for a check as we read 12 Helmoldus Chron. Slauor l. 1. c. 81. Bal de vit pont of Hadrian the 4. who bitterly checked Frederick the Emperor for holding the stirrop on the wrong side Or if it be his pleasure to be caried alost on mens shoulders 13 lib. caerem. 1. sect 2. 5. de processione pontifiâ—…s Caesaris per vrbem Lib. 1. c. 8. caerem the Emperour kings princes that are present must put vnder their shoulder helpe to cary his holinesse for a space and whiles he is on foote the Emperour or chiefest Prince must beare vp his traine If the Emperour be at the Popes 14 Lâ—…b caerem. 1. sect 3. Antonin sinn part 3. â—…it 22. cap. 5. §. 13. E. venerabilem de elect feast his duetie is before dinner to hold the Pope water to washe his hands and to bring in the first messe For in deed Imperator est minister Papae The Emperour is the Popes minister 3. These are but matters of ceremony But as he vaunteth that all the right of kings dependeth on him so he challengeth authority and power to translate kingdoms to create depose Kings to translate the Empire from nation to nation and to giue the same to whom it pleaseth him The Emperour saith 1 Hadrian apud Auentâ—…n lib. 6. he is Emperour by vs. Whence hath hee the Empire but from vs Behold the Empire is in our power to giue it to whom wee well And accordingly he hath 2 Bellarm. de pont Rom. lib. 3. cap. 16. deposed diuerse Kings and Emperours and created others as I shall not need to prooue for both they and their followers boast thereof And if you desire some other examples of their insolent and Antichristian behauiour towardes Emperours and Kinges did not Gregory the seuenth make Henry the Emperour who came in all humilitie to submitte himselfe vnto him with his wife and childe daunce attendaunce at his gate bare-foote and bare-head by the space of three daies before he would graunt them any accesse vnto him When as the Emperour Fredericke Naucler generat 40. Barbarossa was excommunicated by the Pope and his sonne taken prysoner in Venice hee came to the Pope Alexander the third into the Churche of Saint Marke there to the ende that hee might bee absolued and his sonne restored Where before all the people the Pope hauing commaunded the Emperour to prostrate himselfe vpon the grounde and so to aske pardon he setteth his foote in the necke of the Emperour saying it is written Super aspidem basiliscum ambulabis conculcabis Leonem Draconem Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and Cockatrice and shalt tread vpon the Lion and the Dragon Which indignity when the Emperour being not well able to brooke made answere Not to thee but to Peter the holy father treading on the Emperours necke replied Et mihi Petro Both to mee and to Peter And when as Henry the sixt came to bee crowned Emperour and to that ende kneeled before Celestin the third sitting in his pontisicall chaire did not hee after hee had sette the imperiall Diademe on his head and as some say with his feete kicke it of with his foote againe What should I tell you of Innocent the second how hee caused his owne with the Emperours picture to bee set vp in the Palace of Laterane himselfe sitting in his pontificall throne and the Emperour kneeling before him and holding vp his hands as vnto God with these verses subscribed Rexvenit ante sores iurans prids vrbis honores Pòst homo sit Papae sumit quo dante coronam That is The King of the Romanes commeth before the gates swearing first to the honours priuileges of the citie afterward he becommeth the Popes man of whose gift he receiueth the imperiallcrowne 4. And thus hath the Pope lifted vp himself aboue al that is called God vpoÌ„ earth that is to say Kings Emperours let vs now coÌ„sider whether he exalteth himself aboue those which are called Gods in heauen that is to say the Angels First in generall it is auouched by himselfe his approued writers that the power of the Pope is greater then all other created power a Antonin sâ—…m pact 3. lit 22. c. 5. Potestas Papaemaior est omni alia potestate creata b Concil LateraneÌ„s sub Leo. 10. sess 10. That vnto him is giuen all power aboue all powers as wel of heauen as of the earth Qui totum dicit nihil excludit Hee that saith all excludeth nothing c Innocent Papa extr de constit R. Cupers pag. 28. num 5. that to the vicar of the creatour that is the Pope euery creature is subiect and more particularly that he hath d Felinus apud IuelluÌ„ viâ—…riatum Christi Christes vicarship not onley about things in heaueÌ„ in earth in hel but also aboue the Angels both good
45. 46. Bellarm. de concil l. 2. c. 17. de pot Rom. lib. 2. c. 31. Ioan. de turrecre sum de eccl lib. 2. c. 27. cap. 80. R. Cupers pag. 34. num 1. Bonifac. 8. c. quoniaÌ„ de immunit in 6. Panormit For it is not sit that the Pope should reseÌ„ble Christ who now is glorified in heauen as he was conteÌ„ned but as the Pastor of the whole world supernal heaueÌ„ly as he shall come to be our iudge to whom it is certain that all men of necessity must obey For it is euident that the worke of redeÌ„ption being accoÌ„plished the power of Christ was extended as well in heauen as in earth Mat. 28. All power is giueÌ„ vnto me in heaueÌ„ in earth Which power is translated vnto his Vicar c. In respect of his office therfore he is the foundation the head the husband the Lord of the vniuersal church in vnction Christ is therfore to be called a R. Cupers de eccl Christus Domini the Lords Christ. Now if it be obiected that Christ alone is the head b Eph. t. 21. 22. 4. 15. 5. 23. Col. 1. 28. of the Catholike Church and so of the c Eph. 5. 24. Ioan. 3. 29. 2. Cor. 11. 2. 1. Cor. 3. 11. 12. rest answere is made that d R. Cupers de eccl pag. 128. num 36. Christ and the Pope in the Church are vnuÌ„ idem caput one and the same head and doe make one and the same consistorie e Idem pag. 30. num 8. for it were a monstrous thing that the Church should haue two heads And to the same purpose saith a f 1. de turrecreâ—…at summ de eccle lib. 2. c. 26. Cardinall of Rome The iudgement of the Pope is reputed the iudgement of God and his sentence and his consistory the consistory of God and therefore Christ and the Pope are not properly two heads but one as Boniface the eight declareth In extrav c. vnam sanctam But to speake more particularly of his offices For prophecie hee is the vniuersall or oecumenicall Bishop and Pastor of Pastors Orat. Cornelij episcopâ—… 〈◊〉 in concil â—…rident sub Pau. lo 3. the Ordinary or Bishop of the whole world Who is oom a light into the world but men haue loued darkenesse more then light who hath the supreme authority of interpreting the scriptures who is the supreame iudge in controuersies of religion hauing De translat epise c. quanto in gloss an heauenly arbitrement and as it were a diuine and infallible iudgement who is aboue 1 Decret Greg. l. 1. de elect 〈◊〉 oâ—… c. significaâ—… Concil Florent Tâ—…dent generall councels for 2 R. Cupers de â—…ccl pag. 31. num 23. Pigâ—… lib. 6. c. 13. although in a generall councell the vniuersall Church is represented in Cupers pag. 125 nâ—… 9. so much that nothing is greater then the Councell Tamen Papa eidem omnimoda supereminet authoritate Notwithstanding Capâ—… sol 23. C. de sumâ—… trinit l. 1. in f. the Pope surpasseth the same in all maner authority whose iudgement is to bee preferred before the iudgement of the whole worlde insomuch that if the whole worlde should determine against the Pope wee must stande to his sentence for so they say 4 R. Cupers pag. 11 〈◊〉 18. Papae sententia totius orbis plâ—…to prefertuâ—… And againe 5 1. de turrecrem lib. 3. c. 64. Si totus mundus sentiret or as the 6 In c. nemo 9. q 3. glosse readeth sentenâ—…iaret contra Papam videtur quòd sentenâ—…ae Papae standum esset vt 24. q. 1. haec est fides haec gloss 7 Baldus who is of greater authority then all the Saints and in respect thereof is of 8 1. de turrecrem summ lib. 2 cap. 26. great perfection then the whole body of the Church besides But it is not sufficient for this Antichrist to preferre himselfe aboue the whole Church which is the body of Christ vnlesse also hee sought in respect of the propheticall office to match himselfe with Christ the head of the church yea and in some respects to ouermatch him 9. He seeketh to match himselfe with Christ 1. in taking vpon him to make newe articles of Eaith and to propound doctrines not contayned in the Scriptures as necessarie vnto saluation 2. In making fiue Sacraments more then Christ appointed some whereof hee preferreth aboue baptisme and those two which Christ hath ordained he hath so altered and chaunged as that the one is scarcely the other not at all the same And whereas Christ ordained the Sacrament of his body and blood in two kindes they not withstanding his institution will haue it administred to the people but in one kind For so it is professed in the Councell of Constance that although Christ administred this venerable sacrament â—…ss 13. vnto his Disciples vnder both kinds of bread and wine and although in the primitiue church this sacrament was receiued of the faithfull in both kinds notwithstanding this custome of receiuing the bread only was vpoÌ„ good reason brought in for the auoiding of some dangers and scandales 3. In making their owne deuises decretals traditioÌ„s of equal authority with the word of God Innocentius 3. comanded that the words of the canon Ioan. Bal in eius vita of the Masse should be held equal to the words of the gospell Agatho the Pope decreed that all the constitutions of the See apostolick are to be receiued as authorized by the diuine voice D stinct 19. c. sic omnes Ioan. de turrecrem lib. 2. c. 108. of Peter himselfe And in the same distinction this is the title or argument of one chapter Inter canonic as Scripturas decretales epistolae connumerantur that is Among the Canonicall scriptures the decretall epistles are numbred Which in Dâ—…st 19. c. in canonicâ—… the chapter it selfe is absurdly proued out of Augustine misalledged And as touching traditions whereby are meant De doctr Christi l. 2. c. 8. all points of popery which as themselues confesse are not contained in the written worde the holy Councell of Trent hath ordained that they are to bee receiued and honoured Pari piâ—…tatis affectu ac reuerentia With as great affection of Sess. 4. pietie and reuerence as the written worde of God Which decree when as a certaine Bishop misliked Ceruinus the Popes Iacobus Nachiantes Clodiae follae episcopus Bal. in vita Marcellâ—… secundi legate who afterwardes was Pope called Marcellus 2. caused him to bee expelled out of the Councell And lastly least he should seeme in any thing to be inferiour to Christ our Prophet hee confirmeth his doctrines by miracles as they call them 10. And thus the Pope matcheth himselfe with Christ our Prophet let vs now consider how he aduaunceth himselfe aboue him Which he manifestly doth in preferring his owne and the churches authority aboue
habet à nobis What soeuer the Emperour hath that hee hath wholy from vs. As Zacharias translated the Empire from the Greeks to the Almaines so wee can translate it from the Almaines to the Graecians Ecce in potestaâ—… nostra est vt demus illud cui volumus Behold it is in our power to giue it to whome we will For therefore are we appointed of God ouer nations and kingdomes to destroy and pluck vp to build and to planâ—… In the Clementines it is professed that the Pope Cap. Romani de iureiuran do hath traÌ„slated the Empire from the Greeks to the Germaines that he hath giuen power and authoritie to certaine of their princes to elect a king to be Emperour that the king thus chosen receiueth from the Pope the approbation of his person vnto the Empire as also his annointing consecration and imperiall crowne and that in respect hereof the Emperors are to submit themselues vnto the Pope and to bind themselues vnto him by an oath of fealtie and obedience And elsewhere in their lawe it is said Imperator tenet imperium a Papa vnde tenetur praestare iuramentum homagij scil quod vasallus praestare solet domino suo The Emperor holdeth his Empire from the Pope Whereupon hee is bound to performe the oath of homage to wit which the vassall vseth to performe vnto his Lord. 15 Thus therefore this argument is returned vpon the aduersary Whosoeuer causeth the image of the beast to be made putteth life into it and causeth it to speake he is vndoubtedly Antichrist But the Pope of Rome hath caused the image of the beast to be made put teth life into it causeth it to speake therfore he is Antichrist The assumption is proued because the image of the beast is the Empire renewed in the west the life is the imperiall dignity and the speeche are the edictes thereof This image the Pope causeth to be made this hee putteth life into this he hath made to speake For first he renewed the Empire in the west after it had lyen voide by the space of 325. yeares when hee annointed and crowned Charles the greate Emperour of the west so caused him to be acknowledged after he translated the Empire to the Almaines among whom he hath appointed seauen electours as it were to renewe this image but so as himselfe putteth life thereinto by approuing the person and ratifying the election maketh him to speake by annointing him Emperour and giuing vnto him the name and title of Augustus and Caesar. Which things I shal not need further to proue because they are matters wherof the Pope and Papists do greatly boast And therfore from their own profession we may conclude that the Pope is Antichrist Chap. 8. Of the name and marke which Antichrist shall impose vpon men of all sorts with some other effectes 1. THe second effect of Antichrist is noted Apoc. 13. 16. 17. 18. And hee Apoc. 13. 16. 17. 18. made all both small and great rich and poore free and bond to receiue a marke in their right hand or in their foreheads And that no man might buy or sell saue hee that had the marke or the name of the beast or the number of his name Here is wisedome let him that hath vnderstanding count the number of the beast for it is the number of a man and his number is six hundreth sixty and six Of which prophecie Bellarmine saith thus Fatentur omnes pertinere omnino Lib. 3. de pontis Rom. c. 10. ad Antichristum verba illa Ioannis Apoc. 13 c. All men confesse that those words of Iohn Apoc. 13. doe vndoubtedly belong to Antichrist From this ground therefore we may reason thus Whosoeuer enforceth all sorts of men according to this prophecie to take vpon them the name of the beast or the marke or number of his name he is Antichrist But the Pope of Rome enforceth all sorts of men according to this prophecy to take vpon them the name of the beast or the mark and number of his name therefore he is Antichrist For the clearing of this argument two things are to be coÌ„sidered First what this name number and marke is Secondly whether the Pope impose the same vppon all sorts of men The number is expressed in the text to be 666. And it is plainelie saide to bee the number of the name That we may not thinke it to be the number of the time when Antichrist should appeare as some haue imagined neither can it in any good sence bee said that Antichrist inforceth men to take vpon them the number of that time And it is called the number of the name because in the letters of the name this number is contained For it is the maner of the Hebrewes and Greekes to vse their letters for notes of number according to their order in the Alphabet c. it is also called the nuÌ„ber of a man because as it may seem the name of the beast coÌ„taining this number is also the name of a man And this I take to bee the most simple interpretation 2 What the name is wherof the holy ghost here speaketh it may easily be gathred out of the text For 1. the holy ghost doth not speak of Antichrist his name properly but of the name of the beast which Antichrist should cause al sorts of men to take vpon them If therefore we know what the beast is it will not be hard to tell what the name is The beast whose name Antichrist shall compel men to take vpon them is the former beast described in the beginning of the chapter For so it is said that Antichrist the second beast exerciseth the authority of the former beast that he causeth meÌ„ to worship the first beast whose v. 12. deadly wouÌ„d was healed that he causeth an image to be made v. 14. to the beast that he giueth spirit to the image of the beast that v. 15. he suffereth none to buy or sel which haue not the name of the v. 17. beast which caÌ„not be vnderstood but of the former beast Now that beast described in the former part of the chapt is without doubt the Roman or Latin state as hath bin proued heretofore the Papists soÌ„times coÌ„fesse the name wherof without questi on is Roman or Latin If therfore the name Romane or Latin in the learned toÌ„gues containe the nuÌ„ber 666. then the name of the beast which Antichrist causeth men to take vpon them is Roman or Latin But in what laÌ„guage are we to accouÌ„t the nuÌ„ber of the beasts name Surely either in Greeke which is most likely because the reuelatioÌ„ was writteÌ„ in greek or in Hebrew because the reuelatioÌ„ as some think was giueÌ„ in hebrew to S. Iohn being an Hebrewe borne or else we may take the beasts name according to his own laÌ„guage set down in Hebrew characters because the Latines doe not vse their letters as the Hebrewes Greeks do
he haue the marke or the name of the beast or the number of his name that speeche doth so fitte the Popes of Rome as that it might seeme rather to bee a narration of that which they haue done thâ—…n 〈◊〉 prophecy of that which they were to doe For Martin 5. in his bull annexed to the councill of Constance giueth straight châ—…rge to all gouernours that they should not suffer any Christians such as Iohn Wickleffe Iohn Husse and Ierome of Prage who in that bull are condemned for hereticks who acknowledge not the See of Rome nor embrace the doctrines and traditions of holy mother church not beleeuing as the church of Rome beleeueth nor liuing in the coÌ„munion of that church that is to say which haue not the marke nor the name of the beast nor number of his name they should not suffer them I say domicilia tenere larem fouere contractus inire negotiationes mercaturas quaslibet exercere aut humanit at is solatia cum Christi fidelibus habere To keepe house nor harth to make contracts to exercise any trafficke or merchandise or to haue any comforts of humane societie with other Christians In like sort Paulus 3. when Henry 8. of famous memory had shaken of his yoke and renounced his marke he forbadde al men to vse any trafficke or merchaundise or to make any contractes or couenants with him and his subiects he deposed as much as in him lay by his bull of excommunication the king disabled his posteritie absolued his subiectes from obedience exposed his subiectes and their goods to violence and spoile according to the inscription in his coyne Gens regnum quod non seruiâ—…rit mihi exterminabitur The nation or kingdome which serueth not mee shall bee rooted out The like thunderbolt Pius 5. sent out against our Soueraigne Ladie of blessed memorie Queene Elizabeth and Sixtus 5. against Henrie the king of Nauarre now king of Fraunce and Henrie prince of Condee And heereunto serue their blodie inquisitours at this day who are to suffer none to liue or to haue the benefite of humane societie who are but suspected of schisme or heresie And who is an hereticke That doth not beleeue as the Pope and church of Rome beleeueth though hee beleeue according to the scriptures And who is a schismaticke That doth not acknowledge the Antonin part 3. tit 22. c. 5. §. 11. Pope to bee the head of the church Seeing therefore the Pope of Rome causeth all sortes of men to take vpon them the marke of the beast and suffereth none to buy or sell that haue not the marke or name of the beaste or number of his name it cannot bee auoided but that hee is Antichrist 8 And these were the principall effects of Antichrist noted in the scriptures whereunto some others may bee added out of Apoc. 13. which haue in part beene touched heretofore as first that he exerciseth al the power of the former beast secondly that he causeth men to worshippe the former beast thirdly that he forceth men vpon paine of death to worshippe the image of the beast All which as well as the former agree to the Pope For as touching the first who knoweth not that the Pope hath swayed the Romane state for many hundred yeares exercising a more soueraigne and absolute authoritie ouer men of all sorts then euer the heathenishe Emperours did For hee forsooth hath the authoritie of the king Bald. in c. ecclesia vt lit pendent Bloud Rom. insâ—…aur lib. 3. of kings ouer his subiectes hee is perpâ—…uus dictator whome the princes of the worlde adore and worshippe hee is as Boniface the eightth in the greate Iubile Anno. 1300. hauing shewed himselfe the one daye in his pontificall vestimentes and the second in the imperiall robes proclaimed of himselfe I am Pope and Emperour I haue both the heauenlie and the earthly Empire and as they speake in their lawe the Monarchie of both powers hee hath the princehood of the whole world as wee haue hearde before And where doth he exercise this authority in the sight of the beast that is at Rome which is his Papall seate and in the gouernemente whereof hee succeedeth the Emperours 9 And that the Pope maketh the inhabitants of the earth to worship the former beast it is as euident seeing his main policyes and chief indeauours serue to magnifie the Romane state To this end besides many other policyes in part obserued before do his Iubileyes tend wherin he vseth to promise plenaâ—…y remission of al sinnes to all that either come on pilgrimage to Rome or miscarie in their iourney as also the incredible indulgences and pardons which hee graunteth to those which shall come as Pilgrims to Rome to visite the holie places there especially the 7. churches which are priuiledged aboue the rest To which purpose there is reported in an old English book and the reporte no doubt was currant in times Arnaldus Londinens of popery the whole pardon of Rome graunted by diuerse Popes a part whereof I will breefly recite for their behoofe to whome the absurdities of Poperie are not knowne The seauen priuiledged churches whereof not onely that Author speaketh but 〈◊〉 also of late hath wrieten a whole booke are 1. the church of Saint Peter in the Vatican 〈◊〉 the De 7. vrbis ecclesâ—… church of Saint Paul without the walles 3. the church of Saint Laurence without the walles 4. the church of holy crosse in Ierusalem 5. the church of Saint Mary Maior 6. the church of Sa it Sebastian without the city 7. the church of Saint Iohn Laterane To all them that dayly goe to the church of Saint Peter Sylâ—… graunted the third part of all then sinnes released 1. and 2800. years pardon And the 〈◊〉 of as many Lentons or Quarins Now a Quarin saith my author is to goe woolward and barefoot seuen yeare and to fast bread and water on the frydayes 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 one night where he sleepeth another 〈◊〉 coâ—… vnder no coâ—…ed place vnlesse 〈◊〉 be to heare masse in the church dore or porche 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or drinke out of no other vessell but in the same that he mede his auowe in Hee that doth all these points seuen yeares together death and â—…inneth a quarin that is to say a Lenton Besides there is an image of our Lord about the church dore hauing between his feete one of the pence that God was sold for as oâ—… as you looke vpon that pâ—…ny you haue 1400 yeares of pardon In that church be eleuen altars of which 7. are specially priuiledged with grace and pardon At the first altar is the visage of out Lorâ—… who looketh on that hath 700. yeares of pardon c. Before the quire dore stand 2. 〈◊〉 â—…rosses who kisseth the crosses hath 500 yeares pardon From the 〈◊〉 to the assumption of our Lady hangeth a cloth of our Ladies owne making before the quire and as many times 〈◊〉 a man beholdeth it
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
or full growth in Gregorie the seauenth in whose time and in all ages since the Pope hath been by some acknowledged to be that Antichrist 3. Now as touching his comming or birth which is the chiefe matter in question all agree Illyricus and the other writers 2. of the Centuries as Bellarmine coÌ„fesseth hold that about the yeare 606. Antichrist was borne when Phocas granted to the Bishop of Rome that he should be called the head of the whole Church Of the same judgement is Chytraeus For although he 3. confesse that the smoake of false doctrine ascending out of the In Apoc. 9 bottomlesse pitte began sooner to obscure and darken the truth yet he saith that in the yeare 607 Boniface the third was by Phocas ordained the Angell of the bottomlesse pit meaning thereby Antichrist when he receiued from him the title of oecumenicall Bishop Luther perceiuing that the Papacie consisteth of 4. the two swords teacheth that there is a two-fold comming of De supput annorum Mundi Antichrist the first with the spirituall sworde after the yeare 600. when Phocas gaue him the Antichristian title the latter with the temporall sworde after the yeare 1000. Bullinger doth not say as Bellarmine falsely chargeth him that Antichrist first 5. appeared Anno 763. for he aboue all others most plainely and In Apoc. 13. distinctlie hath deliuered that truth which we doe hold Pontisex Romanus saith he initium quidem dominij jecit sub Phocá sub regibus Francorum fundauit regnum ampliauit autem sub Henricis et Fridericis confirmauit demum sub sequentibus aliquot regibus regnat nostro seculo ac praecedentibus aliquot The Pope of Rome laide the beginning of his dominion vnder Phocas vnder the French Kings he founded his kingdome vnder the Henries and Fredericks he enlarged it vnder some other Kings which followed he confirmed it bereigneth in our and some former ages Musculus whom he nameth in the sixt place dooth not say that Antichrist 6. came about the yeare 1200 but by the tyrannie of the Popes and vsurped dominion ouer the Church by their shamelesse symony by their excessiue riote and diuellish pride by their abominable lusts and vncleannesse he concludeth that the Church of Rome is Babylon and the seat of Antichtist and addeth that Bernard was of the same minde Who seemeth to haue signified that Antichrist was then come and that onely it remained that the man of sinne should be reuealed that is acknowledged and detected as Musculus vnderstandeth him which discouerie of Antichrist saith he hath followed in our age And thus you see a notable consent of all our writers whom he alledgeth in the maine point concerning the time of the comming of Antichrist 4. Now let vs see what he objecteth against this receiued truth Concerning the time of his comming with the spirituall sword he objecteth that Phocas did not giue the title of vniuersall to the Pope but called him the head of the Churches as Iustinian before him had done and also the councell of Chalcedon And therefore no reason why the comming of Antichrist should be placed in the time of Phocas As touching the title good authours affirme that he receiued from Phocas both the title of the head of the Church and also of vniuersall or oecumenicall Bishop And no doubt he sought for and by suite obtained that which Iohn of Constantinople had before claimed Neither is there any great difference betwixt these two titles as they are now giuen to the Pope saue that to be the head of the vniuersall Church is the more Antichristian stile And although titles of honour and preheminence were sometimes giuen to the Church of Rome as the chiefe or head of the Churches the mystery of iniquitie working before the reuelation thereof in the Papacie yet before this graunt of Phocas which was obtained with much adoe and contention the Church of Rome had the preheminence and superioritie ouer all other Churches excepting that of Constantinople not in respect of authoritie and jurisdiction which after this graunt it more and more practised but in respect of order and dignitie And that for this cause especially because Rome whereof he was Bishop was the chiefe citie as it is specified in the councell of Chalcedon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the councell of Constantinople 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And for the same cause was the Patriarch of Constantinople sometimes * Concil Chalced. matched with him sometimes ‖ Tempore Maâ—…itii preferred aboue him because Constantinople which they called new Rome was become the imperiall seate Yea and the Bishops of Rauenna because their city was the chiefe in the exarchate of Rauenna whereunto Rome was for a time subject stroue with the Bishop of Rome in the time of the exarches for superioritie Seeing therefore that now the Pope of Rome had with great contention and ambition obtained the supremacie and soueraigntie ouer the vniuersall church and now intituled himselfe the head of the vniuersall Church a title peculiar vnto Christ the head I say not onely in respect of excellencie and dignitie as a chiefe member of the Church as he had beene in former times by some acknowledged because he was the Bishop of the chiefe citie but also in respect of authoritie and Iurisdiction as beeing the prince and supreme gouernour of the Church vniuersall we doe therefore worthily call this soueraigne dominion challenged ouer the vniuersall Church the first reuelation or open comming of Antichrist 5. Concerning the comming of Antichrist with the temporall sworde after the yeare 1000. he obiecteth that from the 700. yeare the Pope had receiued teÌ„porall dominion that about the yeare 715. he excommunicated the Greeke Emperour c. But Bellarmine knoweth well enough that we speake not so much of the Popes temporall dominion ouer those parts which they call the patrimonie of Saint Peter but of that which they call and challenge to themselues Utriusque potestatis temporalis spiritualis Monarchiam The Monarchie of both powers temporall and spirituall I answer therefore that the Pope indeed had a temporall dominion before but not generall and that he had long endeuoured to get the superioritie ouer the Emperours but neuer so fully attained vnto it as in the times of Gregorie the seauenth and afterwards For Gregorie the seauenth as Auentinus saith Primus imperium pontificium condidit c. First founded the Papall Annal. Bâ—…cm lib. 5. Empire which his successours saith he reckoning vnto his owne times for these 450. yeares in spight of the world and maugre the Emperours haue so held that they haue brought all in heauen and hell into subjection From this time forwarde the Emperour is nothing but a bare title without substance c. And thus haue I answered whatsoeuer is in his third Chapter pertinent to the matter in hand omitting as my maner is his other wranglings as being either altogether impertinent or meerely
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
if he said I am Christ. To the assumption I answere that although the Pope doth not plainly directly say I am Christ but forbeareth the name of Christ as Caesar did the name of a King yet notwithstanding in that he challengeth the office authoritie of Christ it is as much in deed and in truth although indirectly and by consequent as if he made himself Christ Christ being a name of office For certainly whosoeuer professeth himselfe to be y e foundatiō the head the husband Lord c. of y e vniuersal church he maketh himself Christ althogh he do abstain frō the name For who is the head and Lord c. of the vniuersall church but Christ who hath authoritie to ordain sacramēts to prescribe lawes to the conscience to deliuer doctrines and articles of faith as necessary to saluation to forgiue the sinnes of the quicke and the dead who is the Prince of Priests the great Priest after the order of Melchizedec the Pastor of Pastors the King of Kings and Lord of Lords by whom Kings and Emperours do raigne who hath authoritie to commaund the Angels to bestow the kingdome of heauen on whom he pleaseth Finally vnto whom is all power giuen in heauen and in earth but onely to Christ But the Pope doth challenge al this to himselfe and much more as hath bene shewed He forsooth is the foundation the head husband and Lord of the vniuersall Lib. 1. cap. 5. Church c. And to conclude if you respect his nature Atquè ac Christus Deus est ens secundae intentionis compositum ex Deo homine As well as Christ he is God an essence of the second intention compounded of God and man if his office vnctione Christus est he is by annointment Christ hauing the very same office which Christ had when he was vpon the earth And therfore Bellarm. de pontif Rom. lib. 5. cap. 4. if this be a propertie of Antichrist to leaue vnto our Sauiour the name and title of Christ to take to himselfe the dignitie office and authoritie of Christ it cannot be auoyded but that the Pope is Antichrist 9 The third doctrine of Antichrist saith Bellarmine is this He shall affirme himselfe to be God and will require that hee may be worshipped as God From whence he reasoneth thus Antichrist will affirme that he is God and will be worshipped for God The Pope of Rome doth not affirme himselfe to be God neither would be worshipped as God therefore the Pope is not Antichrist The proposition is proued out of 2. Thess. 2. 4. So that he sitteth in the temple of God shewing himself as though he were God Answ. The meaning of the Apostles words is thus much that Antichrist shall sit in the Temple of God as God that is he shall rule and raigne in the church of God as if he were a God vpon earth shewing himselfe not so much by words as by deedes that hee is a God Or as the vulgar Latine edition and English translation of the Rhemists doe reade tanquam sit Deus as though he were God And thus Chrysostome Theophylact and Oecumenius expounde this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he saith shewing himself he said not saying but endeuouring to shewe for he shall worke great workes and shall shewe forth wonderfull signes and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shewing as Beza obserueth is answerable to the Hebrew Moreh faciens se apparere prae se ferens or as we say taking vpon him as if he were a God It is not therefore necessary that Antichrist should in worde plainly openly professe himselfe to be God it is sufficient if in deed and behauiour hee taketh vpon him as if hee were 〈◊〉 God As for example if he shal be content to be acknowledged saluted and called God If he shall cause nay if he shal but willingly suffer himselfe to be worshipped as God if he shall challenge vnto himselfe those titles attributes and workes which are proper peculiar to the Lord. But Bellarmine perceiuing that this place in this sense may fitly be applied to the pope therefore he contendeth that it is not sufficient that Antichrist should indeed shew himselfe to be God as the Pope doth but that he shall openly name himselfe God and that he shall vsurpe not only some authoritie of God as the Pope doth but also the very name of God And that he saith is prooued out of these words of the Apostle 2. Thess. 2. in so much that he sitteth in the temple of God shewing himselfe tanquā sit Deus as though he were God Where saith he Paul doth not onely affirme that Antichrist shall sit in the temple for we also sit in temples and yet are no Antichrists but also expoundeth his maner of sitting namely that he shall sit as God to whō alone a tēple is properly erected And this hesaith is more cleerly set down in the Greek text for it is not said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as God but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that hee is God But in this cauill are contained diuers errours 1. by temple which as we haue proued signifieth the church of God he vnderstandeth a materiall temple which should be built at Ierusalem 2. by sitting in the temple which signifieth his raigning in the church he vnderstandeth the corporall gesture of sitting in that materiall temple 3. by his sitting in the temple of God as God which signifieth his ruling ouer the church as if he were God hee vnderstandeth thus much that the materiall temple should be erected and consecrated to his honor as if he were God As though that temple which should be erected to his honour as if he and no other were the true God were called of the Apostle the temple of God or as though he pretending himselfe to be the Messias of the Iewes sent from God would not also pretend the building of that temple to the honour of God 4. Whereas he saith that the Greek text hath not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is plaine that the text hath both In so much that he sitteth in the temple of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as God shewing himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he is God Now Antichrist may sit in the temple of God as God and by his deedes and demeanour beare the world in hand that he is a God vpon earth and yet not professe himselfe openly and plainely to be God 10 And in this sense to come to his assumption doth this place properly agree to the Pope of Rome who sitteth in the temple of God as God that is ruleth in the church of God as if he were a God vpon earth and in his behauiour and course of life taketh vpon him as if he were a God and so would be reputed of others For first in their owne lawe the Pope is not Dist. 96. c.
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
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