writings before to be the scriptures Why then Ierome saith so vpon Daniel 11. 24. where Daniel speaketh of Antiochus his dealings in Egypt that he did that which his forefathers neuer did Nullus Iudaeorum absque Antichristo in tot◅ vnquam or be regnauit These be Bellarmines scriptures But where do the scriptures indeede say that Antichrist shall subdue seuen of the tenne Kings Nay the contrary may rather bee gathered out of the scriptures The tenne hornes whereof Daniel speaketh were tenne Kings which successiuely raigned ouer Iudaea as hath bene shewed And although Antiochus Epiphanes might helpe away three of his next predecessors yet hee could not hurt the other sixe for there were but nine besides himselfe which were all dead and gone before he came to yeares Yea but this opinion of the Fathers is plainely enough deduced out of Apoc. 17. 12. where we reade and the tenne hornes which thou sawest are tenne Kings these haue one minde and they shall giue their power and authoritie to the beast No maruell though some of the Papists call the scripture a nose of waxe seeing they can frame and fashion it at their pleasure and giue vnto it what sense they list Doth Iohn speake of Antichrist his either killing three or subduing seuen Or doth Iohn speake of the same tenne hornes wherof Daniel doth Daniel speaketh of tenne Kings which were to bee dead and gone before the comming of the Messias Iohn speaketh of such as in his time had not yet attained to their kingdome verse 12. Daniel speaketh of tenne Kings of the Seleucidae and Lagidae which succeeded one an other Iohn of tenne Kings among whom the Romane Empire was to be diuided who also were to haue their kingdome together with the beast Daniel telleth vs what the little horne which was one of the tenne should doo to three of the other nine without mention of the rest Iohn sheweth what all the tenne hornes should doo to Antichrist which is none of the tenne hornes but one of the heades of the beast If therefore Bellarmine can proue from hence that these are the same tenne hornes spoken of in Daniel and that Antichrist shall kill three of them subdue the other seuen he may hope to proue any thing But what other scriptures hath hee forsooth Chrysostome and Cyrill For Chrysostome on 2. Thess. 2. saith that Antichrist shall bee a Monarch and shall succeede the Romanes in the Monarchy as the Romanes succeeded the Greekes the Greekes succeeded the Persians and they the Assyrians And Cyrill saith that Antichrist shall obtaine the Monarchy Catech. 15 which was the Romanes I answere that for substance these Fathers held the truth For what Monarch hath there bene in the West these fiue or sixe hundred yeares besides the Pope who calleth himselfe King of Kings and Lorde of Lords to whom all power is giuen in heauen and in earth who hath as they say the double Monarchy both of spirituall and temporal power who forsooth is Lord of the whole earth in so much that he taketh vpon him authoritie to dispose of the new found world And that he succedeth the Emperors in the Alexand. 6. gouernment of Rome as it becommeth Antichrist who is the second beast Apoc. 13. and the 7. head of the beast Apoc. 17. whereof the Emperour was the sixt I shall not neede to proue 15 There remaineth the fourth argument Antichrist shall persecute with an innumerable army the Christians throughout the world and this is the battell of God and Magog but this agreeth not to the Pope therefore the Pope is not Antichrist I answere to the proposition that no such thing can be proued out of the scripture Hee alledgeth Ezech. 38. 39. Apoc. 20. 7. 8. 9. 10. But Ezechiel speaketh not of Antichrist nor of the persecution of the Christian Church by him But hauing foretold chapter 37. the restitution of the Iewes from the Babylonian captiuitie and also prophesied of the comming of Christ in those chapters hee foretelleth of the afflictions and troubles which the people of the Iewes should sustaine in the meane time to wit after their returne out of captiuitie before the comming of the Messias and withall denounceth the iudgemēts of God against the Seleucidae who were the kings of Syria and Asia minor and their adherents who should be the chiefe enemies of the church and people of the Iewes after their returne For Gog signifieth Asia minor hauing that name from Gyges the King thereof Magog is Hierapolis the chiefe seate of Idolatry in Syria built by the Scythians and frō them hath that name So that by the land of Magog wee are to vnderstand Syria and by Gog Asia minor And the rest of the peoples that Plin. lib. 5. cap. 23. are named in Ezechiel were such as assisted the Seleucidae who were the kings of Syria and Asia minor in their warres either as their subiects or as their friends or as their mercenary souldiers And for as much as the princes and people of Syria and Asia minor were the most grieuous enemies of the Iewes by Ad Tremell Iun. in Ezech 38. 39. whom they sustained the chiefest calamities after their returne before the comming of Christ therefore by an vsuall speech in the Iewish language the mortall and deadly enemies of the church are called Gog and Magog And in this sense Iohn the Diuine vseth these names Gog and Magog to signifie the enemies of the church meaning not the same enemies whereof Ezechiel speaketh but the like enemies of the Church which should afflict the true Christians as Gog and Magog afflicted the Iewes Neither doth Iohn in this place speake of the persecution of Antichrist properly but of Sathan after he was loosed his inciting the enemies of the Church to battell and of Gods iudgements against them signified by fire And so much shall suffice to haue answered to this argument For after so long a Treatise I will not trouble the Reader with the tenne seuerall opinions which Bellarmine reciteth cōcerning Gog and Magog neither yet with any further answere to his cauillations and exceptions against some of the arguments of diuers Protestants which he thought were more easie to answere seeing in the former booke I haue sufficiently cleared those arguments whereby the Pope is more euidently proued to be Antichrist neither is the controuersie betwixt vs whether euery argument that hath bene produced by euery one doth necessarily conclude the Pope to be Antichrist That discourse therefore being rather personall then reall I let it passe Chap. 17. Being the conclusion of the whole Treatise HAuing therefore both by sufficient arguments manifestly proued that the Pope is 1. Antichrist and by euidence of truth maintained the same assertion against the arguments of the Papists let vs now consider in the last place what conclusions may vpon this doctrine be necessarily inferred for our further vse For first if this be true that the Pope is Antichrist as
be giuen which they alledge to wit to conuert the Iewes But the assumption also is false For it is vntrue that they liue in mortall bodies or that they shall euer dye For where I beseech you doe they liue in mortall bodies in the earthly Paradice or in the heauenly In the earthly say the Papists but that was defaced either at or before the floud so that although the place remaine yet no Paradice remaineth as Bellarmine else where confesseth And if they were Lib. 1. de Sanctor beatitud C. 3 liuing in the earthly Paradise how is it said they were taken vp as it is plainely said of Elias that he was taken vp into heauen Or what priuiledge or reward haue they aboue others if all this 2. Kin. 2. 12 while they haue wanted Gods glorious presence which others enioy and hereafter are to be slaine of Antichrist Or how was Enoch translated that he should not see death if notwithstanding his translation he must dye the death If in the celestiall Paradise that is the third heauen as Paul speaketh it may first be 2. Cor. 12. doubted whether they be there in body because it may be thought that Christ was the first that in body ascended into heauen or if their bodies â—…o there we must hold that in the translation they were changed into immortall and incorruptible bodies as theirs shall who shall be found liuing vpon the earth as the second comming of Christ and shal be rapt vp into the aire 1. Cor. 15. 51. For this I say with Paule that flesh and bloud cannot inherit the kingdome of heauen neither doth corruption inherit incorruption 1. Thes. 4. 17. 9. But will you see vnder one view how farre this slender 1. Cor. 15. 50. coniecture taken from the comming of Enoch and Elias is from being a demonstratiue proofe First he cannot prooue necessarily that they are yet in their bodies Secondly if they be in their bodies he cannot proue that their bodies are mortall Thirdly if their bodies be mortal it is not necessary that they should returne into the world and die because at the end of the world they might be changed with the rest that then shal be liuing as some also haue thought Fourthly if they should returne into the Iustin. q. 85 ad orthodoxos world and dye there is no necessity that they should come in the time of Antichrist Fiftly if it should be granted that they are to come against Antichrist yet it would not follow that therefore Antichrist is not yet come but this only would follow that Antichrist is not yet destroyed which we doe not deny And this was his third demonstration whereby he proueth that Antichrist is not yet come and consequently that the Pope is not Antichrist To conclude therefore must not this needs be a good cause that by so learned a man is so stoutly proued The 7. Chapter answering his fourth demonstration concerning the most greeuous persecution vnder Antichrist 1. THe second signe accompanying Antichrist from whence Bellarmine draweth his fourth demonstration is the most greeuous notorious persecutioÌ„ of the Church in so much that the publicke seruice of God shall wholy cease His demonstration is thus to be framed When Antichrist is come there shal be the most greeuous and manifest persecution that euer was insomuch that the publicke seruice of God shal wholy cease But as yet there hath bin no such persecution neither hath the publicke seruice of God wholy ceased therefore Antichrist is not yet come Of his third argument and consequently of the proposition and assumprion there are three partes which seuerally are to be considered that the persecution vnder Antichrist is 1. Most greeuous 2. Most manifest 3. Such as shall cause all Gods worship to cease As touching the first he reasoueth thus Vnder Antichrist shal be the most greeuous persecution as yet this most greeuous persecution hath not bin especially vnder the Pope therefore Antichrist is not yet come neither is the Pope Antichrist The proposition namely that the most grieuous persecution is vnder Antichrist he proueth by two testimonies The first Mat. 24. 21. And then shal be great tribulation such as hath not bin since the beginning of the world neither shal be The other Apoc. 20. 7. Then shall Satan be let loose namely after the thousand yeeres are expired Answer We doubt not but that the persecution vnder Antichrist was to be very greeuous because the holy Ghost testifieth so much Apoc. 17. 6. Where the whore of Babylon is said to be drunke with the bloud of the Saints and with the bloud of the Martyrs of Iesus But his proofes are not to the purpose For the place in Mathew as heretofore hath beene shewed and as appeareth by the text it selfe is to be vnderstood of the calamities which at the destruction of Ierusalem by the Romanes the Iewes sustained For when you see saith our Saulour Christ the abomination Mat. 24. 15 of desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet standing in the holy place that is as Luke expoundeth when you see Ierusaelem Luk. 21. 20 compassed about with armies which Daniel calleth the abominable Dan. 9. 27. wings of desolation then let those which are in Iewry flye vnto the mountaines c. And his reason is because then there Mat. 24. 2â—… shal be great affliction such as hath not beene from the beginning of the world vntill now neither shal be Which Luke expresseth thus for there shall be great distresse in the Land and wrath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Luk. 21. 23. 24. this people and they shall fall by the edge of the sword and shall be carryed captiue into all nations and Ierusalem shall be troden vnder fâ—…ote of the Gentiles vntill the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled 2. As touching the thousand yeers mentioned Apoc. 20. After which Satan was to be loosed although the expiration of them fal in Antichrists raigne yet we are not to begin his raigne thereat as appeareth plainely Apoc. 20. v. 4. Neither is that letting loose of Sathan to be vnderstood of the persecution onely vnder Antichrist for it is manifest by the text that within those thousand yeares many martyrs were put to death by Antichrist for refusing to receiue his marke and that the greatest part la dead in Antichristian errours and superstition verse 4. 5. and by the 8. verse that Satan was let loose not onely to stirre vp persecution against the faithfull but also and that principally to stir vp vniuersall wars betwixt the nations of the world betwixt Gog and Magog that is as some expound the Papists and Mahometans Now I would gladly know of Bellarmine when these thousand yeeres began and when they expired for hereof there be diuers opinioÌ„s but I wil touch the principall 1. That these thousand yeeres begin with the incarnation of Christ and determine accordingly when as Siluester the second had obtained the
concerning the proposition For we doe grant that the Popes haue raigned and tyrannized in the Church almost a thousand yeeres and therfore aboue three yeers and a halfe Let vs therfore consider how he proueth that Antichrist shall raigne 3. yeers and a halfe precisely He proueth it by diuers prophecies of the Scriptures ghesses of the fathers which were no prophecies And first he alleageth these places Dan. 7. 25. and 12. 7. Apoc. 12. 14. Where we read saith he that the raign of Antichrist shal continus a time and times halfe a time that is a yeere and two yeeres and halfe a yeere and so he saith S. Iohn expoundeth it Apoc. 11. and 13. by 42. moneths and 1260 daies I answer that none of these places defineth the time or terme of Antichrists raigne Daniel speaketh not of the time of Antichrists raigne but of that time wherin the Iewes were to be afflicted the temple seruice of God in Ierusalem was to be profaned by Antiochus Epiphanes which time the Angell diuersly reckoneth Chap. 16. as was in part shewed in the last chapter shal hereafter be more fully declared For of their deliuerance from the tyrannie of Antiochus there are foure degrees obtained at 4. seueral times all which seeme to be noted by Daniel The first is the restitution of Gods worship renouation of the temple by Iudas Maccabeus 1. Mac. 1. 57. From the profanatioÌ„ therfore which was on the 15. of Casteu 1. Mac. 4. 52. in the yeere 145. vnto this restitutioÌ„ made on the 25. of Casteu in the 148. yeere were 3. yeers 10. daies which Daniel calleth a time times parcel of time Dan. 7. 25. as some thinke Dan 12. 7. The second degree was the victory of the Iewes against § De bello Iudaico lib. 1. Cap. 1. the forces of Antiochus Epiphanes wherby they were expelled out of Iewry the testitutioÌ„ begun confirmed which hapned after 3. yeers and a halfe as Iosephus noteth who also affirmeth that for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ioseph de bell long Antiochus had caused the daily sacrifice to cease his words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The terme as some thinke Daniel Chapter 12. vers 7. calleth a time and times 〈◊〉 â—…fe a time The third degree is the deadly sicknesse of Antiochus after his flight from Persâ—…pons at what time he promised all good things to the people of the Iewes From the profanation to this Dan. 12. 11 time Daniel reckoneth 1290. dayes to his death which hapned 45. dayes after to wit in the beginning of the yeere â—…49 he reckoneth 1335. dayes Now whereas Bellarmine saith that the terme of antichrists raigne shal be 3. yeers a halfe precisely saith that this terme is expressed in the Apocalypse by 1260. dayes and in Daniel by 1290. he seemed not to haue beene well aduised for 1290. are not 1260. nor 3. yeeres and a halfe precisely And therein he contradicteth himselfe and maketh Iohn in the same matter to be repugnant to Daniel 3. As touching the places in the Apocalypse it is hard to prooue that the times mentioned in the 11. 12. and 13. chapters be the same which he must prooue or else by conference of these places he prooueth nothing and if they be the same as indeed they are not it will be as hard to define where we are to begin the account But these two things may be affirmed First that all these times are not to be vnderstood literally And secondly that none of theÌ„ defineth the time of Antichrists raigne The 42. moneths in the 11. and 13. chapters signifie the time of the persecution vnder the Romane Emperours either only or especially for Chap. 11. v. 2. it is said that the Gentiles shal tread vpon the holy city 42. moneths But antichrist as the Papists hold shal be the Prince of the Iewes and counterfeit Christians And v. 7. it is said that the beast which ariseth out of the deepe which being the same with that which is described chap. 13. 1. is the Romane state especially as it was vnder the persecuting emperours that this beast I say shall persecute the two witnesses of God and their bodies shall lie in the streetes of the great Cities whereby in the Apocalypse is meant Rome or the R. empire And hereby also it appeareth that this terme of 42. moneths mentioned in both places is not literally to be vnderstood For the persecution vnder the Romane Emperours alone endured so many Sabboths of yeeres as there are moneths mentioned in those places that is 294. yeers as Master Fox expoundeth it Now if the other termes mentioned chap. 11. and 12. of time and times and halfe a time and of dayes 1260. be the same with the 42. moneths as Bellarmine will needes haue it then by them is not signified Anchrists raigne neither are they to be vnderstood literally no more then the 42. moneths but in the 11. chap. the time of the two witnesses preaching during the time of the afore said persecution and chap 12. the womans that is the Churches liuing in the desert during the said time Howbeit the speech of time and times and halfe a time may rather be vnderstood according to Daniels phrase of three yeeres and a halfe wherin the Church of Vid. Iunium in Apo. 12. Christ which was at IerusaleÌ„ after it was admonished by a voyce out of the sanctuary to depart accordingly remoued to Pella was sustained there For in that place it is plaine that the holy Ghost speaketh not of Antichrist nor yet of the beast but of the Serpent the diuell who seeketh the ouerthrow of the Church of Christ among the Iewes afterwards turneth his anger towards the rest of her seed that is the faithful among the Gentiles and to that end standeth on the sea shore from whence he raiseth the beast with seauen heads c. 4. And further I ad that if these times meÌ„tioned in those places which Bellarmine alledgeth did signifie the terme of Antichrists 2 raign precisely were to be vnderstood literally theÌ„ it wold follow that after antichrist is once reuealed al meÌ„ that be acquainted with the Scriptures may precisely define before haÌ„d the very day of Christs coÌ„ming vnto iudgemeÌ„t which the Lord notwithstanding wil not haue known Mar. 13. 32. as Bellarmine himself Cap. 3. lib. 3. must needs grant seeing he vseth this as the chiefe argument against those which by 1260. dayes vnderstand so many yeeres Againe it is incredible if not impossible that so many so great 3. things as they assigne to Antichrist should be effected brought to passe in so short a time as Hentenius a learned Papist doth confesse and as hath bin shewed heretofore For this is an errour depending In praesat translat Arcthâ—… vpon the former concerning the person of Antichrist presupposing that Antichrist is but one man And therfore
when 4 we proued that Antichrist is not any one man alone but a whole state and succession of men we proued this by consequence that his raigne was not to continue only three yeers and a halfe And againe Antichrist according to the conceit of the Papists is to 5 raigne before the preaching of the two witnesses and as Bellarmine faith is to continue one moneth after their death Seeing then the two witnesses preach 1260. dayes which as Bellarmine also saith make three yeers a halfe precisely how can the terme of Antichrists raigne be three yeeres and a halfe precisely Lastly 6 the Scriptures plainely testifie that the Antichrist which is to be destroied at the second comming of Christ was come euen in the Apostles time although he was not reuealed by exercising openly a soueraigne vniuersal dominioÌ„ vntill that which hindred that is the Roman Empire was taken out of the way But after the Empire was once dissolued in the West and the Emperor of the East had lost his right in Italy and Rome that is when that which hindred was taken out of the way then according to the prophecie 2. Thes. 2. 8. was Antichrist reuealed succeeding the Emperor in the gouernment of Rome and claiming an vniuersall authority first spirituall ouer the whole Church in the yeere 607. after temporal ouer the whole world aduancing himselfe aboue all that is called God all which we haue heretofore proued to haue bin done in the Papacie aboue three yeeres and a halfe agoe yea aboue so many hundred yeers agoe so that we shall not need to expect another Antichrist who is to raigne three yeers and a half And thus you haue heard not only Bellarmines allegations answered but also his assertion confuted 5 Now let vs see what Bellarmine can reply either against our assertion in general or against the expositioÌ„s of some protestants in particular For wheras we generally affirme notwithstanding his allegations aforesaid that Antichrist hath already ruled in the Church almost a thousand yeers Bellarmine besides the slender coniectures of diuers of the fathers grouÌ„ded on such prophecies of Scriptures as they could not vnderstand which are his first argument he produceth six other reasons no lesse easie to be answered His second argument is because the scriptures say that the time of the diuels loosing and Antichrists raigning is breuissimum very short or most short But how can that be true if Antichrist shall raigne a thousand yeeres or more For that which he speaketh of 1260. yeeres is the priuate opinion of some of which shall be touched afterwards I answer that the Scriptures no where say that Antichrists raigne or that the time Apo. 17. 10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apo. 12. 12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apo. 20 vers 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the diuell loosed is Breuissimum that is most short but onely that it is short or small which we doe acknowledge Let vs then weigh his argumeÌ„t which may be resolued into two syllogismes the former A thousand yeeres or more is not a short time Antichrists raigne is a short time therfore Antichrists raigne is not a thousand yeers or more First to the proposition I answer that a thousand yeers vnto the Lord who speaketh in the Scriptures is a short time The Apostle Peter expresly saith that a thousand yeers with the Lord 2. Pet. 3. 8. are but as one day Yea and the whole time from the ascension of Christ vntil his comming to iudgement is often noted in the Scriptures to be a short time and in one place it is called the last houre And likewise aboue 1500. yeers agoe it was promised 1. Ioh. 2. 18 that the prophecies concerning the destruction of Antichrist the second comming of Christ end of the world should within a short time be fulfilled To the assumptioÌ„ I answer that although the time of Antichrists tyranny seeme to belong to them that Apoc. 1. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ap. 22. 10. 12. 20. Heb. 10. 37 are exercised therby yet it is but short in comparisoÌ„ of that time which they shall raigne with Christ and is so called Apoc. 17. 10. But yet nothing so short as Bellarmine imagineth This therefore he proueth in the second Syllogisme The time of Sathan loosed is very short the terme of Antichrists raigne is the time of Sathan loosed therefore the terme of Antichrists raigne is very short The proposition he proueth by two places in the Apocalypse which affirme his time to be short but yet nothing so short as the Papists imagine for in the former place Chap. 12. 12. he is said to haue but a short time before he persecuted the Church of Christ among the Iewes which was aboue 1500. yeeres agoe And in the latter place Chap. 20. 3. it is said that he should be let loose for a smal time but this smal time beginneth at the expiration of the thousand yeeres wherein he had beene bound and continueth vntill the time that he shal be cast into the lake of fire and brimstone in the end of the world Now the thousand yeeres were expired many hundred yeeres agoe as hath beene shewed But although the time of Antichrists raigne be called short yet is it not so short as the time of Sathan loosed and therefore the assumption is false For howsoeuer the thousand yeares expire in the time of Antichrists raigne yet we are not to beginne the raigne of Antichrist with the loosing of Sathan For within the thousand yeares of Sathans imprisonment Antichrist not onely Apoc. 20. 4. was but also persecuted those that refused his marke and yet we are not to confound the time of his persecution much lesse of his hotest persecutioÌ„ with the time of his continuance Now the time of the diuel loosed as the Papists teach is the time of Antichrists most greeuous persecution which was a coÌ„sequent of mens refusing his marke that a fruite of his discouerie acknowledgement but he was not acknowledged vntill he came to his full grouth whereunto he attained not at the first And it is to be thought that the heate of his persecutioÌ„ wil be slaked before his end himselfe being consumed and wasted by the spirit of Christs 2. Thes. 2. 8. mouth his See impouerished if not ouerthrowne by the kings of the earth which before the end of the world shall not onely hate the whore of BabyloÌ„ the Popes coÌ„cubine but also shal make her Apo. 17. 1â—… desolate naked shal eate her flesh her they shal burne with fire 6. Thirdly he argueth from Math. 24. 21. mistaken by some of the fathers that vnlesse those daies meaning of Antichrists persecution should be shortned and consequently the persecution very short no flesh could be saued but how can it be very short if it shall continue a thousand yeares I answere first that the tribulation there
Antichrist Hierome and Theodoret where they deliuer Hieronyâ—… ad Algas 9. 11. Theodoret in 2. Thess. 2. Epitom 1. Anselm their owne iudgement doo not affirme that he shall sit in the Temple at Ierusalem but in the Churches of Christ. 3 His third testimonie is 2. Thess. 2. 4. In so much that he sitteth in the Temple of God Of which words there be many expositions saith Bellarmine some by the Temple of God vnderstand the mindes of the faithfull in which Antichrist shall sit after he hath seduced them which interpretation agreeth fitly to the Pope who only sitteth as it were a God in the mindes of men prescribing lawes to binde the conscience and that with guilt of mortall sinne as they speake Others expound these wordes of 2 Antichrist and his whole people who is therefore said to sit in templum August de ciuit Dei because Antichrist shall professe himselfe with his people to be the true church of God which also most fitly agreeth to Dei lib. 20. cap. 19. the Pope and church of Rome which vaunt that they alone are the catholike church and that all others professing the name of Christ which are not subiect to the Pope or acknowledge not themselues members of the church of Rome are heretikes or schismatikes Others by the temple vnderstand the churches 3 of the Christians which Antichrist shall make subiect to himselfe Chrysost. c. The which as we proued it to be the most true exposition so doth it properly agree to the Pope of Rome Others by the temple 4 of God vnderstand the temple of God at Ierusalem wherin Antichrist shall sit and this saith Bellarmine is the more common more probabte and more literall opinion I doubt not but that it is an opinion more plausible to the Papists who care not what they holde concerning Antichrist so that it agree not to the Pope But of these three things which Bellarmine avoucheth in commendation of this conceit two are false and the third is to no purpose For neither is this exposition more common among the auncient Fathers then that other which by the temple vnderstandeth the churches of the Christians which heretofore we haue shewed to haue beene the iudgement of Theodoret Li. 1. ca. 4 § 15. Ierome Chrysostome Theophylact Oecumenius c. And although it were the more common exposition yet that would not proue it to be more true for truth goeth not by voices neither is to be weighed by multitude of suffrages but by weight of reason Neither is it more probable for if the temple shall neuer be reedified as hath bene shewed then is there no probabilitie that Antichrist should sit in it Neither were that materiall though it were more literall vnlesse the literall were vsuall For in all the Epistles by the temple of God is meant the Church and there is an vsuall metonymie betwixt the words which signifie either the assembly or the place of the assembly So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth the place is often vsed for 1. Cor. 3. 16. 17. 2. Cor. 6. 16 Ephe. 2. 21. Apoc. 3. 12. the assembly or church and Ecclesia that is church is often vsed for the place Neither can the temple erected by Antichrist be truly called the temple of God Yea but saith Bellarmine in the scripture of the new testament by the temple of God are neuer vnderstood the churches that is to say the temples of Christians The more absurd is he to vnderstand this place of a materiall temple contrary to the vsuall acceptation of the word in the writings of the Apostles The Apostle therfore by temple meaneth not a materiall temple of wood and stone but a spirituall temple compact of liuing stones and by sitting in the temple not a corporall gesture for Antichrist is to sit there as God that is he is to rule and raigne in the church of God as if he were a god vpon earth But of this whole matter see more in the first booke chapt 2. § 13. 14. 15. 4 Now let vs come to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or disproofe of our assertion who hold that Antichrist shall sit not at Ierusalem but at Rome and in Rome professing her selfe the church of God First by a fond cauillation wherein hee greatly pleaseth himselfe he seeketh to driue vs to an absurditie For saith hee if Antichrist shall sit in the Church of God and if the Pope be Antichrist then the church wherein the Pope sitteth is the true church and consequently the Protestants and all others that be not of that church are out of the church c. This cauill is to be resolued into three syllogismes 1. Antichrist sitteth in the Church of Christ The Pope of Rome is Antichrist therfore saith Bellarmine the Pope sitteth in the true church of Christ. But hee might as well conclude thus Hee that professeth the name of Christ is a Christian the Papist the Anabaptist the Familist c. professeth the name of Christ therefore the Papist the Anabaptist the Familist is a true Christian. But hath not Bellarmine learned so much Logicke as not to foist into the conclusion that which is not contained in the premisses the word true is not coÌ„tained in the premisses and therefore sophistically thrust into the conclusion For Antichrist may sit in the church although not in the true Church Generally the Church of Christ signifieth the company of Christians that is of those that professe the name of Christ. But as of Christians some are onely in title and profession some indeed in truth so of Churches some are onely in title and profession Churches of Christ others are his true Churches Now Antichrist he was to be an Apostata and the head of the Catholike apostasie therfore the church whereof Antichrist is the head although it be in title and profession a church of Christ as being a company of them that are christened and professe the name of Christ yet it is but an apostaticall church a church which of a faithfull Citie is become an harlot and of the true Church of God the whore of Babylon But may not this absurditie rather be returned vpon the Papists who by the templeof God 2. Thess. 2. 4. vnderstand that temple which Antichrist shall build at Ierusalem Antichrist shall sit in the temple of God saith the Apostle Antichrist shal sit in that temple which himselfe shall build at Ierusalem saith the Papist therefore that temple which he shall build at Ierusalem shall be indeed the temple of God Whereas in truth according to their owne conceits it were rather to be called the temple of the diuell If any man obiect that it might after a sort be called the temple of God because the temple of God did stand there and because Antichrist will pretend to make it to the honor of God wherevnto the former temple was erected I answere by the like reason the church of Rome
may be called the church of God bicause once it was a true church and stil is in title professiō the church ofChrist although in truth it be but little more the church of Christ then Antichrists imaginary temple at Ierusalem would be the temple of God 5 His second syllogisme which is inferred vpon the former is this If the Pope sit in the true Church of God then the church of Rome is the onely true Church for the Church of Christ is one as Christ is one but the Pope sitteth in the true church of God as was proued in the former syllogisme therefore the church of Rome is the onely true church of Christ. First I answere to the proofe of his proposition The Catholike inuisible Church of Christ is one sheepfolde vnder one shepheard Christ but particular visible churches are more then one as the church of Corinth the church of Rome the seuen churches in the Apocalyps and all the Churches of the Gentiles mentioned Rom. 16. 4. and therefore the church of Rome although it were a true visible church yet were it but a particular church and therefore not the onely true church But now the church of Rome is not a true visible church of Christ but the whore of Babylon an adulterous and Idolatrous and Apostaticall church which once was Rome as Petrarch saith now Babylon once Bethel now Bethauen once the Church of Christ now the synagogue of Antichrist as hath bene proued And therefore there being no truth either in the proposition or the assumption I answere the proposition by this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although the Pope did sit in the true church yet it followeth not that therefore the church of Rome is the onely true Church and the assumption by this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the Pope doth not sit in the true church and therefore there is no shewe of reason in this cauill 6 His third syllogisme is inferred vpon the second If the Church of Rome be the onely true Church then those which are not members of this Church whereof the Pope is head as namely the Protestants are out of the Church But now say I the church of Rome is so farre from being the onely true church as that it is that Babylon Apoc. 18. 4. from which we are commaunded to seperate if wee will bee saued there being no saluation in that Church for those that receiue and retaine the marke of the beast Apoc. 14. 9. therefore this also is a fond and sophisticall cauill Notwithstanding as the adulterous and apostaticall state of Israel vnder Ieroboam and Achab so the Church of Rome vnder the Pope may be called the church of God in respect both of some notes and signes of a visible Church as the administration of some sacraments and profession of the name of the Lord and also of some reliques and remainder as it were the gleanings of the inuisible Church In Israell although an Apostaticall and Idolatrous state the sacrament of circumcision was retained so in the church of Rome the sacrament of baptisme The church of Israel professed Iehouah to be their God although they worshipped him Idolatrously so the church of Rome professeth the name of Christ but exceedeth Israel in Idolatry In Israel euen vnder Achab the Lord had reserued 7000. who neuer bowed their knee to Baal and so we doubt not but that in the corruptest times of Popery the Lord hath reserued some who haue not receiued the marke of the beast And as the church of Sardis was still called the church of Christ although greeuously fallen from Christ because they still professed the name of Christ and retained no doubt the Sacrament of Baptisme and had among them some fewe names that had not defiled themselues so I confesse with Caluin that the church of Rome may be called a church of Christ both in respect of some vestigia and outward notes of a visible church as administration of Baptisme and profession of the name of Christ and some secret reliques of the inuisible church which haue not bowed their knees to Apo. 20. 4 Baal But that which is saide to the church of Sardis may most iustly be avowed to the church of Rome Thou hast a name that thou liuest but indeed art dead thou professest Apoc. 3. 1. thy selfe to be the church of Christ but art the synagogue of Antichrist thou art called the church of Rome which once was famous for her saith but art the whore of Babylon the Apo. 3. 4. mother of all the fornications and abhominations in the christian world 7 Heere Bellarmine obiecteth two things If there remaine in the church of Rome but ruines and reliques of a true church then the church may be ruinated and the truth hath lyed who saith that the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile against it Ans. The Catholike and inuisible church of Christ which is the whole company of the elect can neuer faile But visible and particular churches which consist of hypocrites many times and vnsounde christians which are in the visible church but are not of the inuisible as the greater part may faile and fall away although not one sound christian that 1. Ioh. 2. 19. is of the inuisible church doth fall away As the lamentable experience of the church of Israel seuered from Iuda the examples of Corinth Ephesus and many other famous Churches which were planted by the Apostles Againe saith Bellarmine If the Church be ruinated and the ruines remaine in Poperie then the Papists haue the Church although decayed and ruinated but the Protestants haue no Church not entyre for the entyre Church is ruinated not ruinated or decayed for the ruines are among the Papists What haue they then a new building which because it is new is none of Christs and therefore who seeth not that it is safer to liue in the church decayed then in no church at all But in this cauill there is not so much as any shew of reason vnlesse he take that for graunted which we do most confidently denie and they are neuer able to proue that the church of Rome not onely is the true church of Christ but also the onely true church For otherwise the church of Rome may fall and yet the Catholike church of Christ may stand yea shall stand maugre the force of Antichrist and malice of Sathan himselfe And as for the church of the Protestants it is no new building as Antichrist vaunteth but is a part of the Catholike church of Christ reformed and renewed according to the word of God and the example of the primitiue church euen as the Church of Iuda vnder Iosias was no new building but the olde frame as it was vnder Dauid renewed and reformed according to the lawe of God 8 The exceptions which he taketh against our arguments concluding that Rome is the seate of Antichrist I haue for the Lib. 1. cap. 2. most part taken away before It shall suffice therefore
which the holy Ghost in the scriptures hath foretold concerning the miracles of Antichrist do not agree to the Pope church of Rome For concerning the miracles of Antichrist the scriptures saith he mention three things 1. that Antichrist shall worke many miracles 2. what maner of miracles they shall be 3. there are recorded examples Of al which points I haue intreated heretofore prouing from Bellarmine his owne grounds that the Pope is Antichrist And first that many signes and wonders should be wrought by Antichrist his adherents which Lib. 1. cap. 7. they call miracles the scriptures testifie the euent hath proued and we do confesse And secondly that all these signes wonders howsoeuer he and his followers do boast of them and in respect thereof contemne the true professors yet are as the Apostle saith lying signes and wonders both in respect of the ende which is to seduce and to confirme lies in respect of the substance which is counterfeit For wheras Bellarmine addeth that they are also called lying signes in respect of the efficient and author of them which is the father of lyes according to whose power Antichrist was to come who as some of the Fathers affirme was to be a notable Magician or sorcerer This seemeth to be somewhat far fetched vnlesse we will take the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be masculine as none doth Notwithstanding because the Apostle ascribeth the working of these miracles to the power of Sathan we will trace him in his owne steppes not doubting to apply this note also to the Pope and church of Rome seeing it cannot be doubted but that as very many not onely of their Cleargy but euen of their Popes haue bene notable Magicians and sorcerers so also very many of the miracles in the church of Rome haue bin the operatiōs or illusiōs of the diuell As for their Cleargy who knoweth not but that there haue bin fewe learned men among thē who haue not bene knowne or at the least suspected to be coniurers and skilfull as some call it of the blacke Art But as touching the Popes because it may seeme incredible that any known Magician or sorcerer should be aduanced to the Apostolike See as they call it therefore it may be thought that the sorcery witchcraft of the most of thē who indeed were sorcerers was hidden vnknown Notwithstanding euē in their owne writers there are recorded as knowne Magicians sorcerers aboue 20. Popes diuers wherofgaue themselues wholy to the diuell that in thē the prophesie of the Apostle might be fulfilled viz. that they might come to the Papacie by the helpe of the diuell or as the Apostle speaketh 2. Thess. 2. 9. that their comming might be according to the efficacie of Satan And as this hapned often so especially about those times wherein Antichrist in the Papacie was in a maner come to his full growth that is to say in Syluestex 2. Gregory 7. and all the Popes betwixt them who were a sort of infamous sorcerers And therefore if any miracles haue bin wrought by such Popes as Saunders braggeth of many signes wonders wrought by Gregory 7. we need not doubt but that as themselues were Magicians Demonsir 20. and sorcerers so their signes and wonders were wrought by the power of the diuell 2 And thus Bellarmine through all the causes sheweth the miracles of Antichrist to be lying signes and wonders But to what ende I beseech you serueth all this discourse Will Bellarmine conclude from hence that the Pope is not Antichrist either because there are no miracles in the church of Rome which was the first point or because those miracles which they haue be not lying signes and wonders which was the second If this were his ende why then doth hee not from this proposition as it were his groundworke assume and conclude after this manner By Antichrist and his adherents many signes and wonders shall be wrought which they call miracles as the scripture testifieth By the Pope and his adherents many signes and wonders haue not bin wrought which they call miracles therfore the Pope is not Antichrist But Bellarmine durst not reason thus seeing the Papists bragge of nothing more then of their signes and wonders which they call miracles And therefore from this ground I haue heretofore inferred the contrary For if it be a peculiar note of Antichrist and his adherents in these latter times to worke many signes and wonders which they call miracles then can it not be auoyded but that the Pope of Rome is Antichrist and the church of Rome the Synagogue of Antichrist seeing they alone do bragge of miracles See the first booke chap. 7. § 1. 2. Secondly why doth hee not reason thus By Antichrist and his followers lying signes and wonders shal be wrought But by the Pope and church of Rome there haue bene no lying signes and wonders wrought therefore the Pope is not Antichrist Indeed this would Bellarmine haue the simple reader gather from his words and that is the drift of all that discourse But this he could not assume and conclude because his owne conscience doth tell him that which all the worlde knowes that their church is full of lying signes and wonders which they call miracles Therefore from Bellarmines owne ground I reason thus If it be a peculiar note of Antichrist and his Synagogue in these latter times to work many lying signes and wonders then it must be confessed that the Pope is Antichrist and the church of Rome the Synagogue of Antichrist because among them are many lying signes and wonders but the first is testified in the scriptures and therfore the latter cannot be denied seeing I haue proued that the church of Rome is full of lying signes and wonders which notwithstanding they call miracles See the first Booke Chap. 7. § 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 3 It is plaine therefore that of those three things which Bellarmine obserueth out of the scriptures concerning the miracles of Antichrist the two first doo fitly serue to proue the Pope Antichrist Neither will the three examples of Antichrist his miracles which Bellarmine setteth downe in the third place disproue the same For of these three examples to wit First that Antichrist or at least his Ministers shall make fire to come downe from heauen in the sight of men Secondly that he shall put life into the Image of the beast and cause it to speake Thirdly that he shall faigne himselfe to die and to rise againe The two first which indeed belong to Antichrist doe fitly agree to the Pope as hath bene shewed in the first booke chap. 7. from the 8. § to the ende of the chapter The third belongeth not to Antichrist From whence notwithstanding Bellarmine argueth thus The third miracle of Antichrist saith he is that he shall faigne himself to die to rise againe for which miracle especially the whole world almost shall admire him But neuer did any Pope faigne
being set in the way toward the celestiall Canaan and land of promise seemed with the vnthankfull Israelites to be wearie of the celestiall Manna the foode of their soules and desired to be againe among the flesh-pots of Egypt For seeing they had not receiued the loue of the trueth that they might be saued therefore God hath sent vpon them the efficacie of errour 2. Thess. 2. 10. 11. 12. that they should belieue lies meaning the lies of Antichrist that all they might be condemned which belieued not the truth but delighted in vnrighteousnes meaning the mysterie of iniquitie wherof he had spoken verse 7. that is to say Antichristianisme or 2. Thess. 2. 7. Popery 2 And that we may proceed in order we are first to set down the state of this controuersie which in deed is the cheese of all controuersies betwixt vs and the Papists and of the greatest consequence For if this were once throughly cleared all others would easily be decided Our assertion therefore in few words is this That the Pope of Rome who is as it were the God of the Papistes is that grand Antichrist who according to the prophecies of the holy Ghost in the Scriptures was to be reuealed in these latter times The Papists hold the contrary And whereas we say and proue that their Lord God the Popes holinesse in Antichrist they affirme that our assertion is blasphemie and our arguments dotages Rhemist in 2. Thess. 2. Bellarmin lib. 3. de Pont. Rom. siue de Antichriste cap. 18. But if it were no harder a matter to demonstrate the truth of our assertion then to proue their conceipt concerning Antichrist and the proofes therof to be meere dotages I should very easily put this Question out of controuersie that the Pope is Antichrist 3 But first our assertion is to be expounded and afterwards proued As touching the name wee agree saith Bellarmine in Lib. 3. de pont Rom. c. 2. this that as the name Christ is taken two waies to wit commonly and properly so also the name Antichrist The name Christ commonly belongeth to all that are annointed of God and that either to the speciall calling of a King Prophet or Priest or to the general calling of a Christian. And in this sence it is taken either Psal. 105. 15. more largely for the whole body of those that professe the name of Christ whereof some are members of Christ in title and profession 1. Cor. 12. 12. onely or more strictly for the society of the elect the citizens of heauen who haue the marke of God and are not only Apoc. 9. 4. in shewe and profession but also indeed and in truth members of the mysticall body of Christ. Peculiarly and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the name Christ belongeth to Iesus the sonne of God who was annointed with the oyle of gladnesse aboue all his fellowes and is the Psalm 45. 7. head after a general maner of all Christians but more specially of the elect In like sort the cōtrary name Antichrist belongeth commonly to all that be enemies to Christ and those either open professed enemies as the Iewes Turkes Infidels in which sence the worde is not vsed in the Scripture or else couert professing themselues Christians and vnder the name and profession of Christ oppugning Christ and his truth And so it is taken 1. John 2. 18. 22. either more largely to signifie the whole bodie of Heretickes as in the Epistles of Iohn or more strictly the societie of them who hauing made an apostasie from Christ haue receiued the marke of the beast Properly or rather peculiarly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it belongeth to the man of sinne the sonne of perdition who after 2. Thess. 2. 3. a more generall maner is the head of all Heretickes and more specially of that societie which hath the marke the number and Apoc. 13. 17. name of the beast The societie or body of those who hauing made an apostasie frō Christ to Antichrist the Antichristian state which in the Scriptures is called the whore of Babilon wee hold to be the apostatical church of Rome The head of this Antichristian Apoc. 17. body catholicke apostasie we hold to be the Pope of Rome and consequently that the Pope is that graund Antichrist whom the holy Ghost in the Scriptures hath described vnto vs And that he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called the Antichrist not onely because he is the head of the Antichristian body but also because he being in profession the vicar of Christ is in deed Aemulus Christi that is an enemy opposed vnto Christ in emulation of like honour as if we should say a counter-Christ as the worde Antichrist doth also signifie 4 But when we say that the Pope is Antichrist wee meane not this or that Pope howsoeuer some of them haue beene more notorious Antichrists then others as for example Siluester the 2. Gregory the 7. aliâs Hildebrand Boniface 8. Iohn 22. aliâs 24. Alexander 6. c. but the whole rowe or rabble of them from Boniface the 3. downeward For although the Antichrist be but one person yet he is not one as Christ the head of the Christian body is one Christ because he liueth for euer hath no successours and therefore is one in nature and number as being one singular definit person The head of the Antichristian body which is to continue to the end of the worlde is continued not in one singular and definit person but in a succession of many who are mortall and momentary which successiuely haue bene are or shal be the heads of the catholicke apostasie of any wherof indefinitely or of all commonly the worde Antichrist is vnderstood For euen as the Pope or vicar of Christ according to the Popish conceipt is one person not in number and nature but by lawe and institution one at once ordinarily but many successiuely so Antichrist is not one singular person but a succession of Antichristian Popes which we begin at Boniface the thirde Because he with much adoe about the yeare of our Lord 607. obteined from the Emperour Phocas and al his successours since haue challenged vnto them the Antichristian title of the head of the catholicke or vniuersall Church or oecumenicall vniuersall Bishop Which title of blasphemy as Gregory calleth it befitting Lib. 4. epist 32. 34. 38. him that resembleth Lucifer in pride when as Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople had challenged not long before to wit about the yeare 600. in the time of Mauritius whom Phocas cruelly murdered Gregory the great then Pope of Rome affirmed confidently for so he saith Fidenter dico that therein he was the forerunner of Antichrist who was now euen at hand Omnia enim Lib. 4. epist. 38. quae praedicta sunt fiunt Rex superbiae propè est quod dici nefas est sacerdotum ei praeparatur exercitus For all things saith he which were
Anno. 1260. of that vniuersitie called the monks and priests the subiects of Antichrist One Lawrence also an Englishman master of Paris proued the Pope to be Antichrist the synagogue of Rome the great Anno. 1290. I. Fox BabyloÌ„ About the same time Maenardus Tyrolius in a publick edict calleth the Popes effeminate Antichrists And againe if they be not Antichrists I pray you what are they Auentin annal boior li. 7. Michael Cesenas principall of the gray fryers wrote against the pride tyranny and primacy of the Pope accusing him to be Anno. 1322. 1. Fox Antichrist and the church of Rome the whore of Babylon drunken with the bloud of Saints Hayabalus a fryer in the time of Clement the sixt preached and that as he saide by Anno. 1345. Henrie de Herford in Chronic. Catalog test 1. Fox commaundement from God that the church of Rome is the whore of Babylon and that the Pope with his Cardinalles is the very Antichrist Wilhâ—…lmus Occomensis as Auentine calleth him wrote a booke against Charles and Clement the sixte wherein he calleth the Pope Antichrist Auentin annal Boior li. 7. Briget whom the Papists worship as a canonized Saint calleth the Pope a murtherer of soules more cruell then Iudas Anno. 1370. more vniust then Pilate worse then Lucifer himselfe She prophecieth 1. Fox that the See of Rome shall bee throwne downe into the deepe like a milstone according to the prophecie of Saint Iohn Apocalypse 18. 21 About the same yeere Matthias Parifiensis a Bohemian writing a booke of Antichrist proueth that he is already come and noateth him to be the Pope Franciscus Petrarch in many places of his writings calleth Anno. 1374. the court of Rome the whore of Babylon the mother of the fornications and abominations of the earth Vrhanus the sixt and Clement the seauenth two Popes at once call one the other Antichrist As Bernard before had called Baldus de vit pontif Anacletus against whom Innocentius the second was chosen as Antipope That beast saith hee in the Apocalypse to Anno 1378. Anno. 1130. Epist. 125. whom is giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies to war with the Saints meaning Antichrist occupieth the chaire of Peter as a Lyon ready for the pray But most effectually doth our godly and learned countryman Iohn Wicleffe discouer the enormities and heresyes of the Anno. 1383. Bellar. de pont Rom. lib. 3. c. 1. Pope whom he pronounced to be Antichrist Artic. 30. His iudgement as in other things so also in this that worthy Martyr of Christ Iohn Husse followed Who affirmeth in his Anno. 1405. booke de ecclesia that hee was troubled because he preached Christ and discouered Antichrist That the Censures of the Romish church were Antichristian and proceeding froÌ„ Antichrist as Gerson the Parisians obiect against him Art 16 that in those times many ages before there had bin no true Pope nor true Romane church but the Popes were Antichrists the church of Rome the synagogue of Satan Whose iudgement many in Bohemia followed Sir Iohn Oldâ—…astell the Lord Anno 1413. 1. Foxe Cobham that famous noble martyr of Christ prosessed to K. Henry the 5. that by the Scriptures he knew the Pope to be the great Antichrist the son of perdition c. Hieronimus Sauanarola taught that the Pope is Antichrist because he did attribute Anno. 1500. 1. Foxe more to his owne indulgeÌ„ces pardoÌ„s then to Christs merits About the yeare of our Lord 1517. Luther began to preach against the Popes indulgences and afterwards against other Anno. 1517. errours and abominations of the Pope and church of Rome discouering more plainely then any had done before him that Rome is Babylon and the Pope Antichrist Since whose times this truth hath beene almost generally acknowledged by the true and reformed Churches of Christ. Seing therefore we haue proued that Antichrist was to sitte in Rome professing her selfe the church of God and that after the taking away of the Romane Emperour whom hee was to succeed in the gouernment of Rome and there to be reuealed both by his owne shewing himself in his colours also by the acknowledgement of others it cannot be auoided but that the Pope is Antichrist For he and none but he sitteth that is reigneth in Rome professing her selfe the church of God and that after the taking away of the Romane Emperour not onely by the remouing of the imperiall seat but also by the dissolutioÌ„ of the Empire in the West whom hee succeedeth in the gouernment of Rome where he hath bene reuealed not onely by his owne shewing himselfe in his colours but also by the acknowledgement of others 8. Vnto the former place of the Epistle to the Thessal we will adde two other places out of th'apocalyps from whence both the place and time of Antichrist may be iointly gathered The former place is in the 13. of th'apocalips where two beasts are described signifying two estates of the Romane gouernment 2. as they are opposed vnto Christ the former representeth the persecuting Emperours the latter Antichrist Of the former he saith thus I saw a beast arising out of 〈◊〉 sea that is of many diuers peoples which it had vanquished Now the description of this beast containeth in it the resemblances of those 4. kingdoms which are described in Daniel the Romane Empire farre surpassing theÌ„ al. The first of the beasts in Daniel signifying the kingdome of the Babylonians is coÌ„pared to a Lion The 2. resembling the kingdome of the Medes and Persians to a Beare The 3. representing the monarchy of the MacedoniaÌ„s to a Leopard The 4. figuring the kingdome of the Seleucidae and Lagidae to a beast with 10. hornes resembling so many of their kings who should tyrannize ouer Iewry The Empire of Rome therfore as if it were compounded of them all is resembled to a beast hauing ten hornes with so many diademes vpon them both in respect of the ten persecuting Emperors answering the 10. Seleucedae Lagidae as also in regard of the 10. kingdoms or prouinces wherinto the Romane Empire in those times was diuided being also like a Leopard hauing the feet or pawes as it were of a Beare the rauening mouth of a LioÌ„ And besides all this is said to haue seueÌ„ heads which afterwards chapt 17. are expounded to be 7. hilles also 7. heads of gouernmeÌ„t c. to this beast was giuen authority or power ouer euery tribe Verse 7. language and nation c. al which are proper to the Empire of Rome The former beast therefore signifieth the Romane state especially as it was vnder the persecuting Emperours as Bellarmine Lib. 3. de pont R. cap. 15. confesseth The second beast described vers 11. and so forward to the end of the chapter is as Bellarmine saith all men do confesse Antichrist who also is by the coÌ„fession of the said
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
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
to obey their princes if he shal excommunicate a lawfull prince or suborne a wicked traytour to murder his soueraigne then disobedience to parents periurie and rebellion in subiectes murthering of sacred Princes is not onelie a warrantable but also a meritorious acte For as you haue hearde Papa ex iniustitia potest facere iustitiam The Pope of sinne can make righteousnesse And that the Pope may thus dispense with the word of God his canonistes and diuines doe diuersely dispute One saith a Michael Medina Christian paraenes lib. 7. c. 17. Gratian. part 1. pag. 76. Potestas in diuinas leges ordinariè in Romano pontifice residet Power ouer the lawes of God remaineth ordinarily in the pope of Rome Others say Papa potest dispensare contra ius diuinum b 16. q. 1. de decimiâ—… in â—…loss Dist. 34. c. Lector 15 q. 6. authoritatem Priuilegium contra ius diuinum concedi potest The Pope may dispense or grant a priuiledge against the law of God c Abb. Panorm extr de d 〈◊〉 cap. sin that is as another saith hee may dispense against the law of God in particular but not in generall Papa potest dispensare contra Apostolum the Pope may dispense against the Apostle d Felin de constitut cap statuta canonum The Pope may dispense against the new testament vpon a greate cause e The Pope may dispense against the Epistles of Paule And to put this matter out of doubt which is so doubtfullie handled by some popish writers this question in summa angelica is determined and decided out of diuerse authors approued in the church of Dictione Papa Rome That as in the precepts of the second table the Pope cannot dispense vniuersally for that were not to dispense with them but wholly to abrogate the lawes themselues but in particular cases vbi ratio legis desicit where the reason of the lawe faileth so hec may dispense with all the precepts of the old and new testament But how shall wee know where the reason of the lawe faileth This may partly be knowne by those examples in the scripture where God himselfe dispensed with his lawes But where there is no example of Gods dispeÌ„sation in the like case then it appertaineth to the Pope alone to declare when and in what particular case the reason of the lawe faileth And I sirmelie beleeue saith the authour of that booke that if any man crauing a dispensation in any case against the lawe of God interpose not importunitie of reward or suite but simplie put himselfe into the hands of the Pope by declaring his case that God will not sufter his vicar to erre in dispensing So that whereas the lawes and commandements of God are to bee vnderstoode with this exception onely Nisi Deus ipse aliter voluerit vnlesse God himselfe otherwise appoint because hee alone may dispense with his owne lawes notwithstanding by the popish diuinitie they are to bee vnderstood with this exception vnlesse the Pope otherwise appoint that is wee are bound to keepe euery commaundement of God vnlesse the Pope interpose his authoritie betwixt God and vs as the tribunes of the comunalty among the Romanes were wont to intercede against other magistrates and exempt vs from the obedience thereof 12 And as the Pope may dispense with all the lawes of God so in the last place hee may and doth take away some and abrogate others Papa potest tollere ius diuinum ex Felinus de maior obed cap. sin parte non in totum the Pope may take away the law of God in part but not in whole Thus hee taketh away the second commaundement out of the decalogue because with it his Idolalatrie cannot stand and to make vp the full number of ten he diuideth the last commandement into two against all reason and authority of antiquitie But that commandement concerning images and diuerse others the Pope also abrogateth by his countermaunds God forbiddeth vs either to worshippe or to serue any but himselfe Mat. 4. 10. 1. Sam. 7. 3. Ex. 20. 3. The Pope commaundeth vs to worshippe Angells and Saints yea and the reliques of Saints God forbiddeth the making and worshipping of images the Pope commaundeth the contrary God condemneth stewes the Pope alloweth them yea Six 4. Concilâ—…trid sess 5. one of them built a famous stewes God condemneth concupiscence as a sinne the Pope alloweth it for no sinne God commaundeth all the faithfull to drinâ—… of the cup in the Lords supper the Pope forbiddeth the same God commaundeth euery soule to be subiect to the higher powers the Pope exempteth his cleargie a iugo seculari from the secular yoke God commaundeth all to mary who haue not the gift of continencie the Pope forbiddeth all his cleargie though neuer so incontinent to mary Besides it is euident that the Popes lawes in the church of Rome are in greater estimation theÌ„ the lawes of God the obedience of them beeing more straightly vrged and the disobedience thereof more seuerely punished then of Gods lawes As for example it is more safe for a man in the church of Rome to bee a meere Atheist a worshipper of no God then not to bee a worshipper of their God of bread though otherwise a good Christian better for a priest to bee a So domit then to mary better to bee a drunkard and whoremonger then to eat slesh in Lent better with the begging friers Anno. 1254. Matth. Paris 1254. to set foorth a new gospell which they called the gospell of the holy ghost and the eternall gospell wherein they taught that Christ is not God and that his gospell is not the true gospell Naâ—…r t. 2. 3â—…6 and no more to be compared with their gospell then the Bal. in lib. de vitis pontif in append 〈◊〉 Fox nutshell is to be compared with the kernel then for that learned man Guilielmus des Amore to write against them and their gospell for him the Pope disgraded and deposed from al his dignities when he would not suffer them to be disgraced him he sent into exile when hee retained them in his high fauour Yet because he had rather be Antichrist then seeme so he caused the friers Gospel when it was complained of to be burnt yet secretly that his Friers might not be disgraced nor scandalized Better for priuate men to reade any bookes of ribaldry or any villany whatsoeuer then to read any parte of the scriptures in their owne tongue To these many other particulars might be added wherin the Pope aduanceth his owne lawes aboue the commaundements of God and his owne authority aboue the authority of the Scriptures Let vs therefore humbly conclude according to the popish humilitie that as the Pope is aboue the Church so the Church is aboue the scriptures Humiliter confitemur saith a Papist ecclesiae authoritatem Ioan. Maria verractus apud Iuellum esse supra Euangelium We humbly coÌ„fesse that the authority
of them haue beene most foule monsters as some of their owne writers call them compounded of these and other horrible crymes Such besides others were Sixtus 4. Iohn 24. Alexander 6. Clement 7. and Paule 3. c. Neither may it be obiected that although diuerse Popes haue beene men of sinne yet many of them haue beene holy men and Saints of God and consequently not Antichrists For howsoeuer all the Romane Bishoppes of the first 600. yeares are reuerenced as Saints and so called of Popish writers as Saint Syluester Saint Leo Saint Gregory c. a very few onely excepted yet a very fewe of them which haue liued this thousand yeares are euen by Popish flatterers esteemed Saints and those fewe which be are honoured among them not for any true holinesse Onuphr Pontif Romani Chronologia praefixa chatechismo Canisij but either for the Antichristian aduancing of their See or for some supposed miracles which were no better then the lying signes woÌ„ders of Antichrist But so far indeed these Apostaticall Popes haue been from being Saints in the sight of God that all of them haue deserued to be called men of sinne sons of perditioÌ„ outlawes although some of them were not so wicked as the rest Men of sin because besides those peculiar sinnes wherewithall euery of them were seuerallie infected the whole order or successioÌ„ ofthem hath been guilty of many other crimes also as coÌ„moÌ„ to them al diuerse wherof the holy ghost hath set downe as noates of Antichrist As namely those which I haue already proued to be in the Pope heresy oppositioÌ„ or enmity to Christ apostasy hypocrisy satanical pride For if the Pope be an heretick or false prophet teaching the doctrines of diuels if a notorious hypocrite if an apostate yea the head of the catholike apostasy if an aduersary opposed vnto Christ though a couert and disguised enemie if the king of pride aduancing himselfe most insolently aboue all that is called God as we haue proued him to be then wee neede not doubt but that in respect of these sins though he had no more he deserueth to be called the man of sin 7 But vnto these diuerse others may be added as first and principallie the idolatrie superstitious and counterfaite religions of the Pope and church of Rome For the whore of Babylon whereby is signified the Antichristian state is described in the scriptures not onely as a spirituall adulteresse but also as the mother of all fornications and abominations in the earth which with the golden cuppe of her fornications that is idolatries Apoc. 17. and superstitions hath made drunke the kings and inhabitants of the earth Now the idolatry of the Pope and church of Rome is manifold and grieuous As first to the bread in the sacrament which beeing a small creature they worship as their maker and redeemer neither doe they thinke that they can worshippe it enough and therefore in the worship thereof the chiefe part of their solemne seruice consisteth Secondly to the crosse and crucifix and images of the trinitie all which as they teach are to be worshipped with diuine worship and are so worshipped among them Thirdly to the blessed virgin Mary who hath beene worshipped among them as much or rather more then God Her they call their Lady and goddesse and queene of heauen In her they repose their trust and assiance to her they flie in their necessitie of her they craue all good things and from her they expect remission of sins and eternall saluation in honour of her they haue deuised and vsed diuerse seruices as offices letanies â—…osaryes psalters c. full of blasphemous idolatries Fourthly to Saints departed who haue succeeded the tutelar gods of the heathenish Romanes there beeing almost no cuntry city parish trade or profession which had not their seuerall Saints to patronize them no disease nor other calamity in themselues or their cattell for which they had not their peculiar saints as it were Auerruncos deos to turne away those euills from them In the merits of Saints they trust for remission of sinne and for eternall life Them they adore to them they pray and not onely them doe they worship but their images also and reliques Wherein the Papists are more grosse idolatours then the very heathen For the Gentiles did not worship the images themselues but the persons represented by them but the Papists hold that the very same worship is due to the image which belongeth to the person whom it resembleth To these notorious idolatries we may Papa solus nouas religiones creat approbat adde their diuerse counterfeit religions and orders deuised or authorized by the Pope which are so many by-pathes misleading men out of the onely true way which leadeth vnto heauen Antonin part 3. tit 22. cap. 5. §. 21. besides them innumerable traditions superstitions truÌ„peries and fooleries Vpon all which notwithstanding the fond people of al natioÌ„s in these parts of the world haue so straÌ„gely doted as that they may most truely be said to haue bene besotted and made drunke with the wine of the whore of Babylons fornications that is to say with the idolatries and superstitions of the Church of Rome 8. Vpon their spirituall adultery that is to say their manifolde grosse idolatry hath followed their carnall adultery vncleannesse For seing by their idolatry they had dishonoured Rom. 1. 24. God as the Gentiles did therefore the Lord hath giuen ouer them also to their harts lustes vnto vncleannesse Neither haue they onely beene guilty of vncleannesse in themselues but also the causes thereof in others whiles they extenuate the sinne of fornication as though it were but a veniall sinne and recken Cap. at si clerici extra de iudic adultery among the lesse and lighter offences whiles they dispense with these sinnes and giue men leaue to committe them without controlment or else assigne vnto them ridiculous punishments but especially whiles they forbidde mariage vnto all their clergy and mainteyne open stewes For in forbidding mariage they open a gappe to all vncleannesse Tolle de ecclesia saith Bernard honorabile coniugium thorum In Cant. serm 66. immaculatum nonne reples eam coÌ„cubinarijs incestuosis seminiâ—…uis mâ—…llibus masculoruÌ„ concubitoribus omni denique genere immundorum Take out of the Church honorable mariage and the bed vndefiled and doe you not fill it with keepers of concubines incestuous fellowes Gonorrhaeans and Sodomites in a word with all kinde of vncleane persons For proofe hereof read but the actes of English votaries who yet may not be coÌ„pared 〈◊〉 Bale with those of hotter countreis remember the suruey taken here in England before the dissolution of Abbeyes Vid. praesat I. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 libri sui de actiâ—… Pontif. wherein our irreligious houses were found to be little better theÌ„ stewes of both sorts not to speake of their secular Priests who were knowne for the most parte to
which they esteeme as a note of the true church they contemne and despise all other churches which doe not vaunt of miracles as they do 2. And yet notwithstanding al their miracles are nothing worth First because they serue to confirme vntruths as shal be shewed therefore are not to be regarded Secondly because the vaine brag of manifold miracles amōg those that professe the name of Christ in these later times wherein miracles need not for the confirmatiō of Gods truth which heretofore hath bin sufficiētly cōfirmed is so farre frō being a note of the true church as that rather it is a plaine signe of false teachers an euident marke of the Synagogue of Antichrist For their owne deuises indeed doctrines of men do stil need signes wonders to cōfirme thē But the truth of the gospell which we professe hath bin sufficiently confirmed by the miracles of our Sauiour Christ of his Apostles and Disciples Whosoeuer therfore will not beleeue this doctrine thus cōfirmed neither will he beleeue though one should rise frō the dead to preach vnto Luke 16. him Againe miracles are graunted not for the beleeuers but for thē that liue in infidelity And as Augustine saith Quisquis Tharasius in cōcil Nicen. 2. adhuc prodigia vt credat inquirit magnum est ipse prodigium qui mundo credeme nō credit Whosoeuer yet seeketh after wonders that hee may beleeue is himselfe a great wonder who when De ciuit Dei lib. 22. c. 8. the worlde beleeueth doth not beleeue And therfore in another place he saith Contra istos mirabiliarios cautum me fecit Deus meus c. Against these miraclemongers my God hath made Tract 13. in Ioan. me wary saying There shall arise in the last daies false prophets working signes wonders that they might bring into errour if it were possible the very elect Likewise Chrysostome or whosoeuer Chrysost homil 49. in Matth. was the authour of those learned Homilies vpon Matthew in the 49. Homily where hee proueth that the true Church of Christ cannot now bee knowne or discerned by signes or other meanes but onely by the Scriptures hee saith that now the working of signes and wonders is altogether taken away namely among the true professours and and the working of counterfeit miracles is more found among false Christians And that Peter in the history of Clement declareth that vnto Antichrist shal be graunted the power of working full that is to say profitable signes So that now wee cannot knowe the ministers of Christ by this that they worke profitable signes but because they worke no signes at all And the Papists themselues confesse yea Bellarmine would seeme to set it downe as one of his grounds that to Antichrist and his followers shal be graunted the power of working many and great signes and wonders And therefore vnlesse the Pope and his followers did vaūt of their miracles we should want one good argument to proue the Pope Antichrist And thus it appeareth that the first point concerning the miracles of Antichrist doth fitte the Pope and so fit him as that from hence he may be proued Antichrist For vnto whomsoeuer in these latter times this properly and onely belongeth to boast of their myracles they are Antichrist and the synagogue of Antichrist For the scriptures haue foretold that by Antichrist and his adherents many signes and wonders should bee wrought in these latter times But to the Pope church of Rome in these latter times this properly and onely belongeth to vaunt of their manifold and great myracles For the Iewes want them the Turkes disclaime thē professing that their religion must be propagated not by miracles but by force armes All other Christians which already beleeue the trueth seeke not signes which they know among true beleeuers to be superfluous and in others to be badges of Antichrist therefore the Pope is Antichrist and the Church of Rome the Synagogue of Antichrist 3. The second thing which the Scripture noteth is what maner of myracles they are which Antichrist was to worke This the Apostle saith Bellarmine declareth in one worde when hee calleth them Lying wonders or as the wordes are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signes and wonders of lying that is most lying 2. Thess. 2. 9. signes and wonders Now they are called lying wonders either in respect of the end which is to seduce men by confirming vntrueths or in regarde of their substaunce which is counterfeit And thus Chrysostome expoundeth the words of th'apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he In 2. Thess. 2. saith lying wonders that is either false and counterfeit or else leading into falshood Augustine likewise reciteth these two expositions that they are called lying signes and wonders because De ciuit Dei lib. 20. c. 19. he shall deceiue the senses of mortall men by counterfeite shewes and appearances that he may seeme to doe that which hee doth not or else because howsoeuer they shall bee true wonders they shall drawe vnto lyes such as shall beleeue that they could not be done but by the power of God not knowing the power of the diuell c. First I say they are called lying signes in respect of the ende which is to seduce men Mat. 24. 24. to make them beleeue lyes and to deceiue them 2. Thess. 2. 10. 11. Apoc. 13. 14. For this is the end whereunto the signes and wonders not onely of Antichrist but of all false prophets are referred Deut. 13. 1. 2. Out of which places of scripture we are to obserue that the Lord many times suffereth false prophets and Antichrists to worke strange signes and wonders for the triall of the faithfull and seducing of those that will not beleeue the truth that they might be saued If there arise among you saith the Lord a prophet or dreamer of dreames and giue thee a signe Deut. 13. 1. 2. 3 wonder and the signe wonder which he hath told thee come to passe saying let vs goe after other Gods which thou hast not knowne and let vs serue them thou shalt not hearken vnto the words of the prophet or vnto that dreamer of dreames For the Lord your God proueth you to know whether you loue the Lord your God with all your soule and with all your heart c. Our Sauiour Christ also hath forewarned vs that in these latter times Mat. 24. 24. there shall arise false Christs and false prophets which shall shew great signes and wonders so that if it were possible they should deceiue euen the very elect In like sort the Apostle 2. Thess. 2. noteth that the comming of Antichrist shall be according to the 2. Thess. 2. 9. 10. efficacie of Satan in all power and lying signes and wonders and in all deceiueablenesse of vnrighteousnesse in them that perish c. on whome God shall sende the efficacie of deceipt that they may beleeue lyes Likewise Iohn the diuine prophecieth
Apoc. 13. 13. 14. of Antichrist that he should do great wonders whereby he should deceiue them that dwell on the earth Hereby therfore it is euident that false prophets and Antichrists many times haue power to worke great signes and wonders not onelie in shewe and appearāce but in deed and in truth Whereby they indeauouring to deceiue all and to make them belieue lies are permitted both in the iustice of God to seduce the wicked in his mercy to try the faithfull And therefore signes wonders as they haue not alwayes bin signes tokens of true teachers professors of the truth but onely then when they haue Miracles are diuine testimonies whereby the Lord doth beare witnesse to his truth Heb. 2. 4. bin wrought for the cōfirmation of the truth So in these later times the same being wrought for confirmation of vntruthes are vndoubted signes of the synagogue of Antichrist 4 Let vs then consider whether such signes and wonders be wrought in the church of Rome It is recorded of Gregory the 7. who was the first of the Popes which was openly acknowledged to be Antichrist that as he was a notable sorcerer so he wrought many signes and wonders among the rest he vsed to shake fire out of his sleeues And of his votaryes after he had forbidden mariage in the clergy Auentinus writeth that vpon that occasion many false prophets did as it were cast mists and by Annal. Boior lib. 4. fables and miracles did turne away the people of Christ from the truth And againe False prophets did then arise false Apostles false priests who by counterfeite religion deceiued the people lib. 5. wrought great signes and wonders and began to sit in the temple of God and to bee aduanced aboue all that is worshipped And while they endeuour to establish their owne power and dominion they haue extinguished Christian charity simplicity And since those times the church of Rome hath much boasted of her manifold miracles which haue beene partly deuised and partly wrought for the confirmation of such Antichristian doctrines idolatrous superstitions as cannot be cōfirmed by the scriptures as namely the absurd doctrine of transubstantiation and adoration of the breaden God the heathenish doctrine of purgatory and superstitious prayer for the dead the idolatrous inuocation and worshipping of Saints the more then heathenish adoration of images rotten reliques the Antichristian aduancing of the Pope aboue all that is called God or worshipped and such like doctrines of diuels lyes of Antichrist for the confirmation whereof the miracles of the Apostaticall church of Rome haue bin inuented But how many miracles soeuer they produce for the countenancing of such vntruthes they are so many arguments to proue their church Antichristian their Pope Antichrist Because as Antichrist and his followers were in these latter times to abound with signes wōders but alwayes such as serue to lead mē into error so neither Turks nor Iewes nor any other churches of Christians but only the Pope and church of Rome do vaunt of miracles and yet all their miracles are such as serue to deceiue men to make them beleeue vntruthes And therefore although they were in respect of their substāce neither counterfeit nor fabulous as in deed the most of the miracles in the church of Rome are yet were they to be esteemd as notes signes of false prophets Antichrists because their end is to seduce mē confirme lyes 5 Secondly they are called lying signes in respect of the substance being as Augustine speaketh vel figmenta mendacium De vnitat eccl 16. hominū vel portenta fallaciū spirituū either fictions of lying men or wonders of deceipt full spirits And such are the miracles whereby the aforesaide points of Poperie are warranted and confirmed And of them there are three degrees For many of them were such fabulous fictions ridiculous fables incredible lyes whereof their legends and festiualls are full as none would euer beleeue were they not intoxicated made drunk with the whore of Bylons cuppe of fornications and also giuen ouer of God to beleeue lyes And these loud lyes and more then poeticall fictions were in such request in the church of Rome that the records of them I meane their legends festiualls and such like fabulous treatises were both publickly and priuately read in the vulgar tongue whē as the holy scriptures were kept frō the people in an vnknown lāguage The 1. degree then is of such miracles as neuer were indeed nor yet in apparānce but in the opiniō only of men besotted giuen ouer to beleue incredible vntruths The 2. is of such as were phātastical in apparāce only as being crafty cōueiāces of deceitful men or iugling tricks of legerdemaine As for example the nodding or mouing the smiling or frowning the sweating or speaking of images the apparitiōs of souls deceased the manifold cures supposed to be wrought by saints departed or their images such like For of these two sorts there be innumerable wonders recorded in their legends and festiualls liues of Saints which are either altogether fabulous as beeing reports of things which neuer were not so much as in apparāce◅or if any such things haue bene done in the sight of men they haue bin either praestigiatory conueyances of wicked men or mere illusions of the diuell The third degree is of such as were lying miracles in respect of the forme as Bellarmine speaketh although true in respect of the matter For howsoeuer they were things truely done yet they surpassed not the whole strength of nature whereas true miracles are supernaturall neither can bee wrought by any naturall causes whether knowne or vnknown but onely by the omnipotent power of God And such lying signes are the principall miracles of the Apostaticall church of Rome Neither is the Pope and al his adherents able to produce any one true miracle wrought by the finger of God for the confirmation of those doctrines which are peculier to that church that is to speake more plainelie for the proofe of any point of popery But all their miracles as they are lying signes and wonders in respect of their ende so also in regard of their substance being either merely fabulous and therfore such things as neuer were not so much as in shewe and apparaunce or merely phantasticall that is such things as were in shewe onely and not in truth or merely natural and therefore but counterfeite miracles effected by the power of the diuell 6 Some of their owne writers confesse that sometimes there is great deceiuing of the people in fained miracles by the Nicol. Lyran. in Daniel 14. priests and their adherents for temporall gaine And another saith in the sacrament appeareth flesh sometimes by the conueyance of men sometimes by the operation of the diuell I once did Alexander de Hales see an image of Saint Nicolas as it was said when it with many others
was burnt in the market place at Chester by the appointment of my father then Bishoppe there which was made with such a deuise that if one standing behind did pull a certaine string which was in the back part thereof it would moue the hand as if it blessed the people But that it may appeare that in the Church of Rome were lying miracles and that the Popish people were giuen ouer to beleeue lyes I will for a taste recite a fewe examples out of their owne records Their Golden Legend so called because as gold excelleth all other mettals so that Booke * Viz. in lying excelleth all other bookes in the inuentiō of the body of S. Fremin the martyr reporteth that after the Sunne had miraculously sent his beames through a stone wall vpon the graue and thereupon they had digged there to find the body there issued thence such a sweet smel as they weened they had beene in Paradise Which odour spread it selfe not onely through the citie of Amiens where the body lay but also vnto diuerse other cities The sweetnesse whereof as it moued the people of diuerse cities to bring their oblations to this glorious Saint so it cured some a farre off as the Lord of Baugency from their diseases But when this body was taken vp and caried in the citie of Amiens straunge wonders were wrought For then that I may vse the wordes of the English Legend the elemēts them moued by the miracle of this Saint The snow that was that time great on the earth was turned into powder and dust by the heat that was then and the yse that hung on the trees became flowers and leaues and the medowes about Amiens flowred became greene And the Sunne which by his nature should goe lowe that day ascended as high as shee is on S. Iohns day at noone in the s◅mmer And as men bare the body of this Saint the trees enclined and worshipped the body all maner sicke men of what malady they had they receiued health in the inuention of the blessed body of S. Fremin c. In the Legend of S. Patricke the Irish Saint by whose praier forsooth all venemous beastes were banished out of Ireland for you may not thinke it was so before wee read and reading smile that on a time a sheepe being stollen hee admonished all the people that whosoeuer had stollen it should within seuen daies restore it to the owner The 7. daies being expired the sheepe was not restored Then saith the Legend S. Patricke commaunded by the vertue of God that the sheepe should bleate and crie in the belly of him that had eaten it And so it happened that in the presence of all the people the sheepe cried and bleated in the belly of him that had stollen it 7. In the Legend of the Annunciation of our Lady wee are told of a noble Knight who betooke himselfe vnto an Abbey and because hee was vnlearned there was a Master assigned vnto him But either hee was so dull or the inuenter of the tale so doltish that in a long time hee could learne no more but these two words Aue Maria. Which words as he alwaies had in his mouth whiles he was aliue so they grew out of his mouth when hee was dead For these wordes saith the Legend he had so sore imprinted in his heart that alwaies hee had them in his mouth wheresoeuer hee was At the laste hee died and was buried in the Church-yarde of the brethren It happened after that vpon his graue their grew a right faire Flowre de lyce and in euery flower was written in letters of gold Aue Maria. Of which miracle all the brethren were marueyled and they did open the sepulchre and found that the roote of this Flowredelyce came out of the mouth of the said Knight and anou they vnderstood that our Lord would haue him honoured for the great deuotion he had to say these wordes Aue Maria. Likewise in the booke of the conformities of S. Francis which Booke I could wishe were more common that Popery might appeare vnto all in her colours there is a miracle recorded for the proofe of transubstantiation that on a time frier Frauncis saying Masse did finde a spider in the Chalice which hee would not cast out but drunke it vp with the blood Afterward rubbing his thigh scratching where it itched the spider came whole out of his thigh without any harme to either But if the bread and wine after consecration bee turned into the very body and bloud of Christ then more maruellous and I am sure more true is the story of victor the Pope and * An. 1154. William Archbishop of Yorke and Henry of Lucemburgh the Emperour all which were poisoned the two first with that which was in the Chalice and the Emperour with the hoste which a Monke had poisoned And to these many more worthy miracles of the Church of Rome may be added But you-will say that howsoeuer their are many miracles wherein the Church of Rome glorieth yet notwithstanding those speciall miracles which are assigned to Antichrist in the Scriptures haue not beene wrought by the Pope or any of his followers 8. This is indeed the third thing which Bellarmine obserueth that whereas there are three examples of Antichrist his miracles specified in the Scriptures yet none of them haue bene wrought either by the Pope or any other in the church of Rome But I answere that of these three miracles one agreeth not to Antichrist as shal be shewed hereafter and the Lib. 2. cap. 15. other two agree to the Pope For howsoeuer Bellarmine and other Papists from these groundes doe argue that the Pope The authour of the Wardword is not Antichrist yet from thence may the contrary be gathered The former of these miracles is that Antichrist or at least his ministers shall make fire come downe from heauen The second that hee shall cause the image of the beast to Apoc. 13. 13. speake These two miracles Bellarmine vnderstandeth literally and from thence argueth thus Antichrist or his ministers shall make fire come downe from heauen and shall cause the image of the beast to speake But neither the Pope of Rome at any time nor any of his followers haue caused fire to come downe from heauen nor yet made the image of the beast to speake therefore the Pope is not Antichrist The argument is grounded on Apoc. 13. 13. literally vnderstood For such is the absurde peruersenesse of the Papistes that in other partes of Scripture which are simple and playne they doe hunt after mysticall and allegoricall sences but in this Booke of the Reuelation which is moste mysticall and allegoricall without all reason they insiste in the literall sence As for example in that thirtenth chapter where the holy Ghost speaketh of the marke of the beast which the followers of Antichrist should receiue on their foreheads on their right hāds they grossely vnderstande
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
the second comming of Christ then it followeth necessarily that euen this head of the Antichristian body cannot be any one singular man but is continued by a succession of many from the time of his reuelation vntill the end of the world of which time there is almost a thousand yeares expired But both in this argument and in the former Bellarmine sophistically beggeth the question For in his arguments there is no consequence vnlesse this be taken for granted that Antichrist is but one man Antichrist came in the Heretiques in the Apostles time therfore he came not in his owne person A good argument if Antichrist were but one man which is the question If Antichrist were in the Apostles time and if Antichrist must sit at Rome then he that was then Bishop of Rome was Antichrist a good argument if Antichrist were but one man which is the question 13. Now whereas S. Iohn saith that Antichrist in his time was come Bellarmine faineth him to speake of Antichrist as he saith Our Sauiour spake of Elias Mat. 17. 11. Elias indeed shall come namely in his own person but I say vnto you Elias is already come in suo simili in his like that is Iohn Baptist. So S. Iohn speaketh of Antichrist that he was indeed to come in his owne person but now he was come in his type You see to what silly shifts this worthy chaÌ„pion of the Pope is driuen For first he fathereth vpon Christ that Iewish fable which with the Iewes the Papists holde against Christ himselfe For whereas Malachie had prophecied of the comming of Elias before the day of the Malac. 4. 5 Lord meaning the first comming of Christ our Sauiour Christ plainlie anoucheth Mat. 11. 14. that Iohn Baptist was that Elias who according to the Prophecie of Malachie was to come Now Iohn Baptist was called Elias because he came in the spirit and power of Elias to turne the hearts of the fathers c. as the Angell also applyeth that prophesie Luk. 1. 17. But suppose that Christ had spoken of Elias Malac. 4. 6. according to Bellarmines conceit yet how dooth it follow that Luke 1. 17. therefore Iohn speaketh of Antichrist after the same manner No more then it followeth that Dauid should long after his death be sent againe to gouerne the people of God because it was prophesied by Ezechiel that the Lord would raise vp a Pastor for his people euen Dauid his seruant c. But as by the name of Dauid in Ezechiel Eze. 34. 23 24. 37. 35. is meant not Dauid himselfe but Christ of whom Dauid was a type so by the name of Elias in Malachie is not meant Elias himselfe Iere. 30. 9. but Iohn Baptist who resembled Elias in spirit and power in reforming the Church of God 14. Our second argument is this That which in the Prophecies of the Scriptures especially in the 7. and 11. of Daniel and in Apoc. the 13. and 17. is described vnder the name and figure of a beast is not one singuler thing or person but a whole state or succession Antichrist is described in the Apocatypse 13. vnder the name and figure of a Beast therfore Antichrist is not one singuler person but a whole state and succession The proposition is prooued by induction of particular examples As in the 7. of Daniel by the Lion is figured the Kingdome of the Assyrians and Babylonians by the Beare the Medes and Persians by the Leopard the Greekes and Macedonians by the beast with ten hornes the Seleucidae and Lagidae and so Chapt. 8. In the 13. of the Apocalypse there are two Beasts described the former signifying the state of the Romane Emperours the second signifying the state of Antichrist Bellarmine answereth that Daniel as sometimes by the beasts he signifieth whole kingdomes so sometimes also particular persons As in the eight Chapter by the Ramme â—…he vnderstandeth Darius the last King of the Persians by the Goate Alexander the great In which answer the vpright dealing of Bellarmine with the Scriptures appeareth For in the 20. verse of the 8. Chapter where that vision is expounded Dan. 8. 20. the Angels words are these The Ramme which thou sawest hauing two hornes are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Kings of the Medes and Persians And the Goate is the King of Iauan or Grecia meaning as before the Kings or Kingly estate as appeareth plainly by the words that follow and not as Bellarmine saith Alexander and the great horne betweene his eyes is the first King namely Alexander which being broken foure other stand vp in the steed thereof As Daniel therefore by seuerall beasts Dan. 8. 22. meaneth not so many particular men but whole states and orders of men and as Iohn in the 13. of the Apocalyps by the former beasts meaneth not any one Emperour but the whole state and succession of Emperours at the least so the holy Ghost in the same Chapter by the second beast describing Antichrist meaneth not any one particular Apo. 13. 11 person but the whole state and succession of Antichristian Popes to whom as heretofore hath beene shewed that description wholy agreeth And whereas Bellarmine addeth that Paul when he entreateth of Antichrist speaketh not of any one of the foure beasts in Daniel but of the little horne mentioned in the 7. of Daniel vers 8 I answer that the Apostle speaketh neither of the one nor of the other and therefore the former part of Bellarmines speech is vaine for no man saith so and the latter is false For the little horne is not Antichrist but Antiochus Epiphanes who liued aboue 200. yeares before the incarnation of Christ who although he were but one man might not vnsitly be called a type of Antichrist who is a state or succession of men 15. Our third argument is taken from that Apostasie which the Apostle foretelleth 2. Thes. 2. For where he speaketh of a defection whereof Antichrist is the head without addition we vnderstand a 2. Thes. 2. 3. generall defection of the visible Church which as it began to worke in the Apostles time so was it to increase vntill the reuelation of Antichrist and to continue more or lesse vntill his destruction This Apostasie because it cannot be the worke of one man or of a fewe 2. Thes. 2. 7. yeares euidently prooueth that Antichrist is not one singuler man but rather a state and succession of men To this Bellarmine for want of one good answer maketh many First saith he by that Apostasie wee may very well nay he saith rectissimè vnderstand Antichrist himselfe as diuers of the fathers teach and what will he inferre thereupon that therefore Antichrist is but one man Nay rather the contrary is to be inferred For if Apostasie be put by a metonymy of the adiunct for the subiect or rather of the effect for the cause that is for the parties which doe reuolt then it followeth that Antichrist who according to
Now whereas he saith that Iohn did not restore all things which as Christ saith Elias should doe I answer that Christ speaketh according to their vnderstanding and therefore that Iohn Baptist did restore all things in that sense that Elias was according to their conceit to restore al things But by restitution in this place we are to vnderstand the reformation of the people and Church of the Iewes to whom the messenger and forerunner is promised not to heretickes and seduced catholickes wherein Iohn Baptist was another Elias Neither is this restitution ascribed to the Baptist as though it had beene perfected by him but because he began that which Christ was to bring to perfection So that Iohn Baptist may truely be said to haue made this restitution Inchoatiuè 6. The fourth place is Apoc. 11. 3. I will giue to my two witnessesâ—… and they shall prophecie 1260. dayes Which words he affirmeth but without all reason are to be vnderstood of Enoch and Elias who are not once meÌ„tioned in al that chapter Neither can those two witnesses signifie Enoch Elias because they are to be killed by the beast and their bodies shall lie dead in the streets of the great Citie three dayes and an halfe For Enoch and Elias they were taken vp into heauen where in soule at the least they enioy the glorious presence of God For otherwise their estate were worse then of the rest of the faithfull departed and so their translation should rather haue biâ—… a punishment then a blessing or prerogatiue vnto them without question therefore their soules at the least are in heauen But whether they be there in soule alone or in soule body there may be some question but if they be there in body it cannot be that their body is mortall as the Papists would haue it subiect to death For how can corruption inherit incorruption or how can it be truly said that Enoch was translated that he should not see death if notwithstanding his translation 1. Cor. 15. 50. he shall suffer death If therfore their bodies be in heauen vndoubtedly they were in the translation changed and by that change became immortal as the bodies of them shall who shal be aliue vpon the earth at the second comming of Christ. If their 1. Cor. 15. 51. 53. 1. Thes. 4. soules alone be in heauen their bodies being dissolued and returned into dust then either they must come in their owne bodies or in others If in others then must we hold the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or flitting of soules into diuers bodies if in their owne then shall they not onely rise before the resurrection but also after their resurrection die againe All which absurdities plainely shew that the Popish opinion concerning the comming of Enoch and Elias is a meere fable whereby men are kept in security that they should not with vigilancie waite for the coÌ„ming of Christ because as yet forsooth Enoch and Elias are not returned The two witnesses therefore cannot signifie Elias and Enoch But if I should adde that Bellarmine caÌ„not proue that this place intreateth of Antichrist but rather of the beast with 7. heads arising out of the sea that is the Roman state either generally or especially vnder the Emperours as may be gathered by comparing verse 2. and 7. of the 11. chap. with the 1. and 5. of the 13. I would then know to what purpose he alledgeth this text to prooue that Enoch and Elias shall come against Antichrist if neither the one nor the other be here meant 7. Vnto these testimonies of Scripture he addeth the consent of the fathers who hold that Enoch Elias shal in their own persons come in the time of antichrist And to this purpose he nameth many but yet among al the ancieÌ„t which he citeth only Gregory is alledged to the purpose who in his morals expouÌ„ding the words of Lib. 14. c. 12. Bildad the Suhite as spokeÌ„ of Antichrist testifieth that in his time Enoch and Elias shal come which is as true as that Bildad spake of Antichrist Of the rest some speake of the returne of Elias only and that to conuert the Iewes without mention of his resisting Antichrist being deceiued by the corrupt translatioÌ„ of the 72. who in Malachy 4. v. 5. read Elias the Theibite and therby gaue occasion to the readers to expouÌ„d those words of Elias literally whereas in the Hebrew also in other translations we read Elias the Prophet which may truly be applied to Iohn who was a Prophet by the testimony of our sauiour Christ more then a Prophet Mat. 11. 9. Others who besides Elias mention the coÌ„ming of another agree not among themselues Victorinus refuting the opinion of in Apoc. 11 some who thought the two witnesses to be Elias Elizâ—…us or Elias Moses saith all our Ancestours by tradition haue deliuered that it is Elias and Ieremie Hilary refelling those which thought the two witnesses to be Elias Enoch or Elias and Ieremy contendeth that they must be Moses and Elias Hippolytus to Enoch in Mat. con 20. Elias addeth Iohn the Diuine who as he saith shal come with theÌ„ before the comming of Christ. All which opinions of the fathers giue vs a sufficient proofe into what vncertainties men are carried wheÌ„ they wil be wise aboue that which is written For seeing the holy Ghost hath not named these two witnesses it is hard especially for them who liued as themselues thought before the fulfilling of this prophecie to define whether by these two witnesses is not meant a sufficient though a smal number of Gods witnesses whom â—…he shall raise to testifie his trueth euen in the hottest persecution of the beast or if they be two and no more to determine particularly and by name who they are 8. Vnto these restimonies in the last place he addeth a reason to make vp this demonstration which may thus be concluded If Enoch Elias were taken vp before their death yet â—…iue in mortall bodies wherein once they shall die then shall they come in the time of Antichrist to set themselues against him But Enoch and Elias being taken vp before death doe yet liue in mortalâ—… bodies wherein they are once to die therefore they shall come in the time of Antichrist to set themselues against him The proposition is vnnecessary and the assumptioÌ„ vntrue For though we should grant that they yet liue in mortall bodies and that their death is yet deferred yet how doth this follow that they liue to resist Antichrist and to be slaine of him Yea but saith Bell armine there can nâ—…ne other reason be giueÌ„ Of their translation there is this reason that there might be euident examples of reward and happinesse laid vp both for the vpright in Enoch and for the zealous in Elias Of their yet liuing in mortall bodies if they did so according to the opinion of some of the fathers that reason might
his sense repugnant to the Scriptures which describe Antichrist not as an open enemy but as a secret and decipher antichristianisme not as a professed hostilitie but as a mysterie of iniquitie as hath beene shewed 6. Come we to his assumption This manifest persecution hath not bin neither is as yet why First because there are now so many false brethren in the church as neuer were more speaking of the church of Rome wherin it is hard indeed to finde a true christiaÌ„ But shal not Antichrist come whiles there are false brethreÌ„ in the church or rather shall we not thinke that the Apostasie of false brethren in the church of Rome pretended Christians wherof Antichrist is the head is a good argument of his comming Secondly because no man can tell when this persecution began That if it were true doth not disprooue the greatnesse of the persecution but argue the length Yea but vnder Nero Domitian the rest of the persecuting Emperours it was well knowne when the persecutions began and when they ended That happened because there was some intermission of those persecutions but these persecutions vnder Antichrist they haue no end nor yet intermissioÌ„ except it be when they haue none to persecute But how doth it appeare that none know when these persecutions of Antichrist began For sooth because some of vs say that Antichrist came in the yeere 200. others in 606. others in 773 others in 1000 others in 1200. The vanity of which objection which now like a twice-boâ—…de Colewurt he setteth before vs againe hath bin shewed before For of these opinions onely two belong to vs and those not different For we hold that as the whole soueraigntie and tyranny of the Pope consisteth in his two swords which he did not attaine at once but by degrees so we make two degrees of Antichrist his comming first with the spirituall sword in the yeere 607. secondly with the temporall after the yeere 1000. which was more fully obtained then before in Gregorie the seuenth In whom as hath bin said Antichrist was come to his full growth Since which time he hath been more and more reuealed and by some acknowledged Vpon which acknowledgment there hath followed separation from him according to the coÌ„mandement of God and refusall of his marke whereupon persecution hath ensued and neuer hath ceased where any such haue been found where the Pope hath to do Neither are we with Bellarmine ignorantly to confound the time of his comming with the beginning of his persecution For he began not to persecute vntil men began to forsake him and men did not forsake him vntill he was discouered what he was and acknowledged neither was he acknowledged vntill he came to his full growth 7. And thus the two first parts of this demonstration concerning the persecution of Antichrist how great and manifest it should be are already answered although in truth not worth the answering The third part is concerning the publike seruice of God and ceremonies of the church which he saith in the time of Antichrist by reason of that grieuous persecution shall wholy cease His reason is thus framed When Antichrist is come the publicke seruice of God and daily sacrifice of Christians meaning the sacrifice of the Masse shall cease but as yet the publicke seruice of God and daily sacrifice of Christians hath not ceased therefore as yet Antichrist is not come To the proposition I answer that Antichrist being an hypocrite and pretended Christian as hath bin prooued shall not abolish all worship of God much lesse at his first coÌ„ming For Bellarmine maketh this interruption of Gods seruice a fruite of his greatest persecutioÌ„ his persecution as I said is a consequent of mens for saking him and that of his acknowledgement and that of his shewing himselfe in his colours when he was come to his full growth whereunto he attained not at the first but by degrees But this proposition is prooued saith Bellarmine out of Daniel chap. 12. verse 11. From the time when the daily sacrifice shall be taken away are dayes 1290. Where saith he Daniel speaketh of the time of Antichrist For the expositioÌ„ of this place we need not with Bellarmine run to the Fathers seeing by conference thereof with some other places in Daniel whereunto it hath reference it may most plainly be shewed who it is that taketh away this daily sacrifice and what that sacrifice is In the eight chapt vers 11. and chapt 11. vers 31. it is affirmed that by Antiochus Epiphanes and his armies the daily worship of God should be taken away When as therfore Daniel asked when there should be an end of these things the Holy-ghost answereth that from the time that the daily sacrifice was taken away and the abomination of desolation placed whereof he had spoken chap. 11. 31. there should be 1290. dayes For of the restitution of Gods seruice and deliuerie of the Iewes from the tyranny of Antiochus there are foretold diuers degrees at diuers times which agreeably to these Prophecies of Daniel are noted in the histories of Iosephus and of the Maccabees for from the interruption of Gods seruice to the first restitution thereof by Iudas Macchabeus were three yeeres and ten daies namely from the 15. of the moneth Casteu In memorie hereof the Encaenia that is the feast of the dedication Iohn 10. 22. was celebrated on the 25. of Casteu 1. Macca 4. 59. in the 145. yeere of the Seleucida 1. Maccab. 1. 57. vnto the 25 of the moneth Casteu in the yeere 148 1. Maccab. 4. 52. which terme Daniel calleth chap. 7. 25. a time and times and parcell of time Vnto the victorie obtained by the Macchabees whereby the forces of Antiochus were expelled out of Iewry and thereby the restitution before begun established were three yeeres and a halfe as Iosephus testifieth which Daniel cha 12. 7. calleth a time times halfe a time vnto the time that Antiochus being stricken with the hand of God after his discomfiture and flight from Persâ—…polis promised to restore the religion of the Iewes what else they desired were 1290. dayes vnto the time of his death 1335. And that these are Prophecies coÌ„cerning Antiochus I will hereafter shew more at large In the meane time to the present Chap. 16. objection I answer that by the daily worship or sacrifice here mentioned we are to vnderstand not the sacrifice of Christians to be taken away by Antichrist but the daily sacrifice of the Iewes which was interrupted and taken away by Antiochus Epiphanes It was the custome of the Iewes saith Chrysostome to offer a sacrifice to God euery morning and euening which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which sacrifice was taken away by Antiochus and the same is testified by Iosephus and the author of the first booke of the Macchabees 8. To this place of Daniel although nothing at all to his purpose Bellarmine trusteth so much that vpoÌ„ it as it
à caeteris distinguuntur A Character or marke is à certaine manner of siuing according to the lawe of any whereby men are distinguished from others which also agreeth with our judgement Againe the Scriptures often times make mention of markes and seales which cannot Ezec. 9. Apoc. 9. 4. â—…t 7. 2. et 2 17. 2. Tim. 2. 19. without absurditie be vnderstood of visible markes 4 Now let vs see how easily this trifler is able according to his vaine brag to refute those toyes of ours His reasons are two the former because that which we deliuer concerning the marke agreeth not with the words of the text which he sheweth by foure instances First because the text speaketh but of one character we speake of many We answer that as of the Lambe so of the beast also there is but one character in substance although the same by diuers meanes may be diuersly expressed and testified that is subjection to the Pope as their head and the acknowledgment of the See of Rome and of the Popes supremacie c. And this marke to answer his second instance also is common to all as being inforced vpon all sorts of men without exception Heare the words of their law Subesse Romano pontifici omni Extr. de maior et obed C. vâ—…a sancta humanae creaturae declaramus dicimus definimus pronuntiamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis For euery humane creature to be subiect to the Pope of Rome we declare affirme determine and proneunce that it is altogether of the necessitie of saluation See more lib. 1. cap. 8. § 6. 7. Thirdly saith he The scripture sheweth this character to be such a one as may indifferently be caryed either in the right hand or in the forehead But none of these markes which the Protestants mention are such The Chrisme is receiued in the forehead and not in the hand c. The scripture saith thus Apoc. 13. 16. And he causeth all both small and great c. That he may giue them a marke on their right hand or else vpon their foreheads That is by his vsurped dominion and tyranny he shall make all sorts of men subject vnto him and in testimony of their subjection to receiue his marke on the forehead by profession or in the right hand by practise and operation Of the carying of this marke and the carying of it indifferently either on the forehead or in the hand the scripture speaketh not The marke is subjection vnto him which as hath beene said is diuersly expressed and testified Fourthly the Scripture saith that none in the kingdome of Antichrist shall be suffered to buy or sell vnlesse he haue this marke but how many saith he are there within the dominion of the Pope who hauing none of these markes doe buy and sell as namely the Iewes I answer that Antichrist was to sit in the Church of God and to tyrannize ouer Christians Now of all those that professe the name of Christ the Pope suffreth none where he hath to doe either to buy or sell except he haue his marke See the Bull of Martin the fift annexed to the councell of Constance where expresse and straight charge is giuen that whosoeuer doth not liue in subjection to the Pope and communion with the Church of Rome meaning such as Wicliffe and Husse shall not be suffred See lib. 1. cap. 8. §. 7. to buy or sell or to enjoy the comforts of humane societie Whereas therfore the Pope permitteth that to the Iewes which he will not permit to the professours of the Gospell of Christ that as it sheweth his greater opposition ot the seruants of Christ then to the enemies of Christ the Iewes so it bewrayeth him to be Antichrist 5. His second reason is thus concluded If all these things which the Protestants mention were vsed in the Catholick Church before the comming of Antichrist then none of them belong to the marke of Antichrist for otherwise Antichrist should haue learned them of the Church But all these things as namely Chrisme and the rest which the Protestants mention were vsed in the Catholicke Church before the yeere 607. that is before the comming of Antichrist according to the opinion of the Protestants therefore none of these belong to the marke of the beast First I answer to the proposition that although these things had beene vsed in the Catholick Church before the reuelation of Antichrist yet that hindereth not but that now they may appertaine to the marke of the beast For we doubt not to affirme that before the reuelation of Antichrist there were many corruptions crept into the Church both in Doctrine and in the worship of God the mysterie of iniquitie more and more working euen from the Apostles times vnto the reuelation of Antichrist which corruptions Antichrist was to retaine with increase If therefore the seeds of Antichristianisme which were sowne before Antichrists appearing were signes of his approaching the same being as it were growne vp confirmed and increased may without absurditie bee sayd to belong to the marke of Antichrist already come Especially if we consider the diuersitie in vsing of them since the reuelation of Antichrist and before For there was not in the Catholicke church an vniuersall subjection to the Pope as the head vntill he by much ambition and contention obtained the supremacie and was called the vniuersall Bishop and head of the vniuersall Church which he could neuer obtaine vntill the yeare 607. Seeing then there was not an vniuersall subjection to the Pope before that time these things if they had beene vsed at all could not be vsed as signes thereof as since they haue Neither were they imposed before and enjoyned vpon all by the lawes of the Pope as since they haue so that the cause of vsing them now is not the example of the ancient Church but the authoritie of the Popes lawe injoyning and commaunding them Therefore although these thinges had beene vsed in the Church before the yeere 607 yet now they may appertaine to the marke of the beast And therefore the connexion of the proposition is first to be denied But now if these things were not vsed in the first 600. yeeres will not he then in confuting those toyes shew himselfe a meere trifler 6. But let vs consider of the particulars And first that Chrisme was vsed before the yeere 606. he proueth by the testimonies of Tertullian Cyprian and Augustine I answer that these Fathers speake of the annointing with Oyle vsed in the Sacrament of 1. Chrisme Baptisme which also without warrant of the Scriptures is retained among the Papists But of the chrisme of saluation which the Papists make the element of their counterfeit sacrament of confirmation whereof there is no institution in the Scriptures no worde no element these Fathers speake not The ceremonie of imposition of hands with prayer for the confirmation and strengthning of those which before had beene baptized was indeed vsed
Paul that Christ hath loued thee or giuen himselfe for thee Gal. 2. 20. Must thou beleeue that Christ is thy Sauiour redeemer theÌ„ must thou beleeue that thou art redeemed by Christ and shalt be saued by him Must thou beleeue that thou hast redemption by Christ then must thou also beleeue that by him thou hast remission of sinnes Ephe. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. But this to beleeue without speciall and extraordinary reuelation is damnable presumption saith the Papist Therefore they professe Christ but they receiue him not Nay they are so farre from receiuing Christ by a lustifying faith that they might be saued that they haue not so much as the historicall faith which consisteth in knowledge of the truth assent thereto For the most of them haue no knowledge pleasing themselues in their implicite faith vnder which name grosse palpable ignorace is commended in the laitie of the church of Rome And the rest assent not to the truth but set themselues against it So that whereas all the faith which they professe themselues to haue is but that faith which is also in the diuels yet they haue not euen that little which they do professe But the Apostle saith Bellarmine speaketh in the pretertence which haue not receiued the loue of the truth c. not in the future therefore this speech cannot be vnderstood of any other but those who before the Apostle wrote this had refused to beleeue the preaching of Christ his Apostles that is to say the Iewes Answ. The Apostle speaking both of the sinne of the Antichristians and of their punishment which presupposeth their sin going before he expresseth their sin in the pretertence which is to be referred not to the time of the Apostles writing but to the time of their punishment Antichrist shal be receiued of those that perish But why shal they perish because they haue not receiued the loue of the truth c. But this appeareth more plainly ver 12. God shal send theÌ„ stroÌ„g illusioÌ„s to beleeue lies that al may be condemned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that haue not beleeued that is that shall not haue beleeued the truth Qui non crediderint veritati but haue delighted that is but shall haue delighted in iniquitie Sed acquieuerint in iniustitia Conferre with this place Mar. 16. 16. Goe preach the Gospell saith our Sauiour Christ to euery creature baptising them as it is in Mathew 28. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hâ—… that hath Qui crediderit bap tizatus sueâ—…it c. beleeued and hath beene baptised shall be saued that is shall haue beleeued and shall haue bene baptised but he that hath not beleeued that is shall not haue beleeued shall be condemned Otherwise if Bellarmine will needes vrge the pretertense as though the Apostle meant that Antichrist should bee receiued onely of those who before that time had reiected the truth he must with all hold that Antichrist shall be receiued in the end of the world of those who died aboue 1500. years since 8 To these testimonies of scripture he addeth the authoritie of diuers Fathers who supposed that Antichrist was to be receiued of the Iewes and accordingly expound the place alledged out of 2. Thess. 2. 10. 11. Ans. So they held that Antichrist should come of the Tribe of Dan accordingly expounded some places of scripture which no man now vnlesse he will be too ridiculous can vnderstand of Antichrist Therefore as Bellarmine in that point answered a whole dozen of Fathers so may I answere here with as good reason that although this opinion might seeme probable to the Fathers in their time liuing before the reuelation of Antichrist yet now there is no probabilitie in it seeing it cannot onely not be proued out of the scripture but as you heard is confuted both by the scripture and the euent 9 Let vs therefore in the third place consider his reason Antichrist shall without doubt ioyne himselfe first and chiefly to those who are readie to receiue him But the Iewes are readie to receiue him not the Christians nor the Gentiles therefore Antichrist first and principally shall ioyne himselfe to the Iewes First to the proposition I answere that Antichrist shall ioyne himselfe not to any whatsoeuer but to those in the Church that are readie to receiue him For as Cyprian truly noteth They be the seruants of Epist. 1. lib. 1. God whom the diuell troubleth and they are Christians whom Antichrist impugneth Neque enim quaerit illos quos iam subegit aut gestit euertere quos iam suos fecit For he seeketh not those whom he hath alreadie subdued or desireth to ouerthrowe those whom hee hath already made his owne the enemie aduersary of the church whome hee hath estraunged and kept foorth of the Church them he neglecteth and passeth by as captiues and ouercome those he assaulteth in whom he perceiueth Christ to dwell If therefore Antichrist be ledde by the spirit of Sathan then no doubt he shall passe by both Iewes Insidels set himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Thess. 2. 4. that is both in the Church of God and against it that the vnsound he may seduce and the sound he may persecute The assumption standeth on two parts 1. affirmatiue that the Iewes are readie to receiue Antichrist 2. negatiue that the Christians and Gentiles are not readie to receiue him The former hee proueth because the Iewes do yet looke for their Messias who shall be a temporall King such a one as Antichrist shall bee But this reason is built on false suppositions First that Antichrist shall be one particular man which we haue proued to be false Secondly that Antichrist shall professe himselfe to be the Messias of the Iewes which as it hath bene disproued out of the scriptures so can it not with any colour of reason be proued out of the same For as hath bene shewed Antichrist is the head of the Catholike Apostasie or Apostate Christians sitting in BabyloÌ„ that is Rome professing her selfe the church of God being one of the seuen heads of the Romane state succeeding the â—…mperours in the gouernment of Rome c. Thirdly as Antichrist shall not be such a one as the expected Messias of the Iewes so there is no necessitie that there should such a one come to the Iewes as they expect The second part also of his assumption is false For although sound and constant Christians bee not readie to receiue Antichrist but alwayes haue bene readie to resist him euen vnto the death yet vnsound and back-sliding Christians who embrace not the loue of the truth that they might be saued either are as readie to receiue Antichrist as they are apt and prone to decline from the truth a searefull caueat to those which waxe wearie of the Gospell or alreadie haue reuolted from Christ to Antichrist haue receiued the marke of the beast Yea but Christians saith he doo not expect Antichrist as
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
sort be applied to the tenth Prince of the Romanes 5. By conference of that which is written of the little horne chap. 7. with those thinges which are more plainly recorded of Antiochus chap. 8. 23. c. and chap. 11. 21. c. to the end of the chapter it appeareth euidently that he no other is that litle horne For wheras Daniel in the 7. chap had described 3. kingdomes besides the Babylonian which should tyrannize ouer the Iewes by three beasts in the 8. chap. he figureth the same 3. kingdomes by 2. beasts For the kingdome of the Medes Persians which before was resembled by a Beare is here signified by the Ramme with 2. hornes the kingdome of the Macedonians Seleucidae which before were represented by two seuerall beasts are heere figured by the Goate Bucke containing them both for both the Macedonians and Seleucid◅ were Iauan that is the Greekes Daniel 8. 21. And as in the 7. chapter the kingdome of the Macedonians was signified by a Leopard which had foure heads so here it is saide that after the great horne signifying Alexander the great was broken off there grewe foure hornes in stead thereof meaning the foure Princes among whom the Macedonian Monarchy was diuided The fourth kingdom figured chap. 7. by the beast with 10. hornes is here signified to be that kingdome which was chiefly erected by one of those foure hornes namely Seleucus that is the kingdome of the Seleucidae and from him namely in the end of their kingdome ouer the Iewes came forth a little horne that is the king with the impudent face chap. 8. verse 9. 23. which is Antiochus Epiphanes who was the tenth horne of the fourth beast And in the eleuenth chapter without figures of beastes the same three kingdomes are described the same tenne hornes reckned vp the same tenth horne more particularly deciphred 6. The people pusht at and oppressed by these hornes is Daniels people the people of the Iewes yet remaining and inhabiting in Tzeby that is in Iury and Ierusalem not onely before the desolation of Ierusalem but also before the reformation vnder Iudas Macchabaeus But Antichrist if we will beleeue the Papists shall be the counterfeit Messias of the Iewes neither shall hee afflict the Iewes but by them the Christians and that in the ende of the worlde c. 7. The times of afflicting the people of God assigned to the little horne doe precisely agree to the persecution vnder Antiochus But these times are diuersly to be reckened in respect either of the beginning or the end of the account For as touching the beginning we recken either from the defection and reuolt of the people wrought by Menelaus the priest in the yeare 142. the sixt moneth and sixt day vnto the restitution of Religion in the yeare 148. and 25. day of the ninth moneth and this space is 2300. dayes that is 6. moneths 3. yeares 18. dayes foretold Dan. 8. 14. or else we recken from the pollutiō of the temple and erection of the new altar abolishing of the daily sacrifice to wit in the 145. yeare of the Seleucidae on the 15. of Casleu diuersly in respect of the ende viz. either to the restitution begunne by Iudas Machabaeus Ioseph antiq lib. 12. cap 6. in the 25. of the same moneth Casleu in the year 148. which space is called a time and times and parcell of time that is three yeares and tenne daies or if we reade a time and times 1. Mac. 1. 57. and halfe a time we may recken vnto the time of that victorie which Macchabaeus and the Iewes had against the Armies 1. Mac. 14 52. of Antiochus whereby his instauration of Religion was secured and confirmed and Antiochus his Armies were expelled Dan 7. 25. Dan. 127. De bello Iud. lib. 1. cap. 1. out of Iury which as Iosephus noteth was done after three yeares and sixe moneths or if we recken to the time that Antiochus hauing heard of these and some other ouerthrowes of his Armies after his owne discomsiture and slight from Persepolis was striken by the hand of God and promised all good things to the Iewes it is 1290. dayes if Dan. 12. 11. 12. to his death 1335. By all which considerations it appeareth that Daniel by the fourth beast vnderstandeth not the Romane Monarchy but the kingdome of the Seleucidae and Lagidae nor by the tenth horne Antichrist properly but Antiochus Epiphanes 11 Thus much therefore may suffice to haue spoken of his proposition now let vs briefly consider of the assumption The Pope saith he ariseth not from base estate neither by deceit obtaineth his kingdome As touching the former I answere that although it were false of Antiochus yet is it true of the Pope whether you consider the meane estate of the first Bishops of Rome or the base birth and obscure parentage of diuers Popes For that which Bellarmine alledgeth in commendation of the Primitiue religion and auncient church of Rome is but a vaine flourish nothing appertaining to this purpose 2. That the Pope hath not attained to his kingdome by fraude and deceit Bellarmine had rather it should be taken for graunted then once called in question and therefore cunningly passeth it ouer with silence But if this were set downe in the scriptures as a badge of Antichrist to attain to his greatnes by fraude deceit I would make it manifest that neuer in any estate more deep policy and diuellish deceit hath bene vsed then in the See of Rome wherby they haue obtained their supremacy and maintained their soueraigntie ouer the Christian world Yea their whole religion of Popery and mystery of iniquitie seemeth to be nought else but a packe of policy deuised by worldly men to deisie the Pope and to enrich the popish cleargy For wherevnto else I beseech you tended their Indulgences and Pardons their Iubelies their doctrines of merits supererogation their purgatory their trentalls of Masses and praier for the dead their pilgrimages and adoration of Saints Images and reliques their licences and dispensations their thunderboults of excommunication their oathe of allegeance and fealtie imposed on Princes and potentates subiection to the Pope enforced vpon all sorts as absolutely necessary to saluation their wilfull deprauations of scriptures forgeries of Canons counterfeit donations of Constantine and others to proue the double supremacy of the Pope Whervnto tended his often maintaining of quarelles among Christian Princes his warres inioyned them for the recouery of the holy lande but that they being by these meanes weakened might be the more easily subdued vnto himselfe his Croisades and promises of heauen to all those that sight such battailes as like him Haue not their cleargy come to their riches and the Pope to his greatnes by these and such like meanes But because the comming to his greatnes by fraude and deceit is not set downe in the scriptures as a note of Antichrist vnlesse it be by way of type and
that the teÌ„ple should neuer be reedified and Hierome saith that the opinion which is Ad Marcell for the restoring of the temple is a Iewish fable Whereas therfore the Papists teach that Antichrist shall cause this temple to be built and that he shall haue his seat there which they know shall neuer be what doe they else but make a mockery of all the prophecies of the holy Ghost concerning the comming of Antichrist and with Iulian goe about to giue the lie to Daniel and our Sauiour Christ. 14. Againe if th'apostle had by temple meant such a temple as should be built by Antichrist hee would not haue called it the Temple of God but rather of the Diuell Non enim templum alicuius idoli saith Augustine aut daemonis De ciuit Dei lib. 10. c. 19. templum Dei Apostolus diceret For the temple of some idoll or Diuell the Apostle would not call the temple of God Neither are wee by the temple of God to vnderstand a materiall building for such as Bellarmine truely saith are not called the temple of God in the newe Testament And therefore the more grosse is he to vnderstande it of a materiall temple and of a corporall sitting For first materiall temples in the writings of th'apostles are not called the temples of God but the congregations of Gods people are the temple of God See 1. Cor. 3. 16. 17. 2. Cor. 6. 16. Ephes. 2. 21. Apoc. 3. 12. And according to the Scriptures phrase speaketh Lactanâ—…us Solâ—… Instit. lib. 4. cap. 30. saith hee catholica Ecclesia est quae verum cultum retinet hic est fons veritatis hoc est domicilium fidei hoc templum Dei It is the catholicke Church alone which retaineth the true worship this is the welspring of trueth this is the house of faith this is the temple of God The temple of God therefore signifieth the congregation or companie of them which professe the name of Christ. In this temple Antichrist sitteth that is ruleth and raigneth For wee are not to vnderstand it of the corporal gesture as appeareth by that which followeth he shal sitte in the temple of God as God that is he shall rule and raigne as if he were a God for that is meant by Gods sitting who doth not sitte after a corporall maner In the temple Psalm 9. 5. of God therefore which is his Church Antichrist sitteth that is ruleth and gouerneth challenging a soueraigne and vniuersall dominion ouer all those that professe the name of Christ as being the head husband and Lord of the vniuersall church which agreeth most fitly and properly to the Popes of Rome Neither are we to omit the phrase of sitting For whereas princes are said to raigne so many yeares the Popes are saide to sitte and the chiefe place of his dominion is called his Sedes that is Sec or seat 15 And this our interpretation is confirmed by the testimonies of the auncient The temple of God saith Theodoret he calleth the churches wherin Antichrist shal challeÌ„ge to himselfe in 2. Thess. 2. the first seat endeuouring to shewe himselfe to be God And againe Dei autem templum vocat ecclesias The temple of God Epitom he calleth the churches Hierome in templo Dei saith he vel Hierosolymis vt quidam putant vel in ecclesia vt veriùs arbitramur Ad Algasiam quaest 11. And he shall sit in the temple of God either at Ierusalem as some thinke or in the church as we more truely suppose Chrysostome in 2. Thess. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where it seemeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put corruptly for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so the greeke scholiast whoe vsually reporteth worde for worde out of Chrysostome saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 see Oecumen in 2. Thess. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the temple Hee saithe not in the temple at Ierusalem but in the churches of God And likewise Theophylact not in the temple which is at Ierusalem in 2. Thess. 2. specially but simply in the churches and in euery temple of God Augustine of these words saith But in what temple of God he shall sit as God it is vncertaine whether in that ruine of De ciuit Dei lib. 20. c. 19. the temple which king Salomon built or else in the church For the Apostle would not call the temple of an idoll or diuel the temple of God Whereupon some to whose iudgement not only Augustine in this place but Primasius also subscribeth some I say by Antichrist in this place will haue understood not the prince Bellarmine citeth it as Augustines owne iudgement cap. 13. himselfe but his whole body after a sort that is the multitude of men pertaining vnto him together with the prince himselfe And they thinke it might better be read in the latine as it is in the greeke non in templo Dei sed in templum dei sedeat tanquam ipse sit templum Dei quod est ecclesia Sicut dicimus sedet in amicum i. velut i amicus c. He sitteth not in the temple of God but as the temple of God as if he were the temple of God which is the church euen as we say sedet in amicum that is he sitteth as a friend Which exposition most fitly agreeeth to the Pope and church of Rome who esteeme themselues alone to be the catholike church and all others professing the name of Christ to be heretikes and schismaticks By this which hath bene saide it is plaine that by the temple we are to vnderstand the church of God And yet this doth no more proue the church of Rome to be the true church of God then they can proue the temple of Antichrist at Ierusalem where they say he should sit to be Of this see more in the 2. booke 13. chap. §. 4. 5. 6. the temple of God It is sufficient that the church where Antichrist sitteth hath bene the true church and still is in title and profession although in truth it bee but an Apostaticall church Eor Antichrist as he was to sit in the church so he was to be the head of the Apostasie and of those that fal from god who notwithstanding according to that exposition in Augustine shall sit in templum Dei as though they alone were the true church of God 16 But the Papists confirme their exposition viz that the temple of God signifieth the temple at Ierusalem out of the Apoc. 11. 8. eleuenth of the Apocalypse eight verse Where Iohn sheweth say they That the bodies of Enoch and Elias being slaine by Antichrist shall lie in the streets of Ierusalem Whereunto I answere that Iohn in that place neither speaketh of Enoch and Elias not yet of Ierusalem And whether he speake of the persecution of Antichrist there may be some doubt because he seemeth verse 2. and 7. to speake of the same persecution of the holy
city that is the church vnder the heathen namelie the persecuting Emperours for 42. moneths which is mentioned Apocalypse 13. 5. But supposing it to be vnderstood of Antichrist his persecution let vs consider the force of their argument Where the two witnesses of God are slayne by Antichrist there is say they the seat of Antichrist At Ierusalem the two witnesses of God shall bee slaine therefore at Ierusalem shall be the seat of Antichrist The proposition they take for graunted the which notwithstanding is not generallie true For the two witnesses of God may bee slaine in that place by the authoritie and commaundement of Antichrist where his proper seat is not For as our Sauiour Christ was put to death by the authority of the Romane Empire at Ierusalem where notwithstanding was not the imperiall seat of the Emperour So the witnesses of our Sauiour Christ might be slaine by the authority and commaundement of the Antichrist of Rome either at Ierusalem or else where where notwithstanding is not the proper seat of Antichrist This alone is sufficient to ouerthrow their whole argument For if their proposition be not generally true then their whole argumentation from a particular proposition is mere sophistry 17 Notwithstanding their assumption is also to be denyed because the holy ghost speaketh not of Ierusalem as Hierome proueth but of Rome or rather of the Empire of Rome Yea but say they Christ also was crucified where the two witnesses should bee slayne at Ierusalem Christ was crucified and not at Rome therefore at Ierusalem the two witnesses should bee slayne I answere to the assumption Christ was crucified at Ierusalem and in the great city also that is to say within the Romane Empire wherein and by authoritie where of our Sauiour Christ was put to death In which sence the Rhemists seeme to apply this prophecy to Rome If by the great city say they is meant any one city it is most like to be old Rome For by in Apoc. 17. 18. the authoritie of the old Romane Empire Christ was put to death first Whereunto I might adde that euen in Rome it selfe Christ hath bene crucified in his members and that within Ierusalem Christ was not crucified Heb. 13. 12. Now that Ierusalem is not here meant but Rome or rather the Romane Empire I proue first because it is called the great citie By which title throughout the Apocalypse is meant Babylon or Rome as appeareth by conference of these places Apoc. 14 8. and 16. 19. 18. 10. 16. 18. 19. 21. but especially Apoc. 17. 18. where the woman that is the whore of Babylon is said to be the great city which reigneth ouer the kings of the earth And of this great city i. Empire of Rome which as it is called Sodome which is the name of a city so also Egypt which is the name of a kingdom the streets may fitly signifie the cities or townes of the seuerall prouinces Once only is this title giuen to Ierusalē then not to the earthly Ierusalem but to the heauenly Ap. 21. 10. And so Augustine expoūdeth this place In pla Homil. 8. ◅n Apoc. te is ciuit at is magnae i. in medio ecclesiae in the streets of the great city that is in the middest of the church Sauing that by the name church he must needs vnderstand an adulterous apostaticall church which elsewhere is called the whore of Babylon because as it foloweth in the text it is called spiritualy Sodō or E For euen as in the middest of the church euen at Ierusalē christ was crucified so also the two witnesses of Christ were to bee slaine in the middest of the church euen in that city which professeth her selfe to be as it were the Ierusalem of Christendome Secondly the great city whereof he speaketh is called spirituallie Sodom or Egypt Sodom for her pride and vncleannes Egypt for her idolatrie and crueltie towards the Israell of God Which titles most fitly agree to Rome which is not inferiour either to Sodome in pride and vncleannesse or to Egypt in grosse idolatry and sauage cruelty towards the Mat 4. 5. Mat. 27. 53. church of God But they are not in this place ascribed to Ierusa lem which in the Apocalypse and elsewhere in the new testament is called the holy city euen then when it had crucifyed our Sauiour Christ. And not to seeke further euen in that eleuenth chapter of the Apocalypse vers 2. neither is the citie of Ierusalem in the Apocalypse any where spoken of in the ill Hicrome ad Marcell part This is also Hieroms argument in his Epistle to Marcella None of the holy scripture saith he can be contrary to it selfe and much lesse the same place of scripture For about ten verses before Ierusalem is called the holy city Now if it be called the holy city euen after the passion of our Lord how is it againe call◅d Cap. 13. spirituallie Sodom and Egypt But Bellarmine answereth that Hierome did not write this in good sooth by which aunswere it were easie to elude any testimony as though Hierome made no conscience to write vntruthes especially in so waightie a Irenaus matter although in the name of others Thirdly before the time of this reuelation which was in the latter end of Domitians raigne the temple and city of Ierusalem were vtterly destroyed and neuer so to be reedified as to become the seat of Antichrist therefore this place cannot be vnderstood of Ierusalem Wherefore these obiections notwithstanding our assertion remaineth fi◅e and stedfast that Antichrist was to sit in Rome christened and professing her selfe the church of God Euen as the Bishops of Germanie in Auentinus applying both this prophecie of Paul and that of Iohn Apocalypse 17 to the Lib. 5. hist. Boe. Antichrist of Rome In Babylonia say they in temple Dei sedet he sitteth in Babylon in the temple of God 18. Now let vs further consider what other euasions they vse to auoide this trueth First they say that Babylon did not signifie any one citie but the whole societie of the wicked Secondly if it signified any one citie that then it was olde Rome Now thirdly if the whore of Babylon doe signifie Rome christened that yet notwithstanding it is not as Bellarmine De Pont. Rom. lib. 3. c. 13. is not ashamed to say the seat of Antichrist But if Rome christened or Church of Rome be the whore of Babylon as wee haue proued though our aduersaries should not confesse it then is it so called because shee is an adulterous and apostaticall church which hath fallen from Christ to Antichrist whom in steed of Christ she acknowledgeth to be her husband and head then is she the mother both of all fornications Apoc. 17. 5. that is of all superstitious and idolatrous worshippe and also of al abominations as Atheisme Machiauellisme Sodomy and Antichristian heresies with whom the Kings and inhabitants Apoc. 17. 2. 4. of