in the primitiue church neither is it altogether misliked of vs although not much vsed among vs because it was so much abused by them But this ceremonie was done without vnction or chrisme for further proofe whereof see D. Fulke his answer to the Rhemists Acts. 8. 17. And therefore notwithstanding that ancient practise of the Church this Chrisme vsed in confirmation may belong to the marke of the beast And the rather because the Papists make their confirmation with Chrisme not onely a sacrament but also a most necessary and Principall sacrament So necessary as that they haue set it downe as a law that no man is to be esteemed a Christian without it Nunquam De consecrat dist 5. C. vt iciuni erit Christianus nisi confirmatione episcopals fuerit Chrismatus He shall neuer be a Christian who is not confirmed with Chrisme by a Bishop So principall as that they preferre it before Baptisme affirming that it is maiore veneratione venerandum with greater veneration to be reuerenced Now if it be a priuiledge De consecrat dist 5. C. de his vero peculiar vnto Christ the author and bestower of grace to ordaine Sacraments of grace then must it needes be accounted a practise Antichristian if any man shall take vpon him to ordaine a Sacrament and not onely to obtrude the same vpon all as necessary to saluation but also to preferre it before that excellent Sacrament of Baptisme ordayned by Christ himselfe Therefore as the ordayning and enforcing of this Sacrament vpon men is a note of Antichrist so those which doe not onely receiue it when they are young but also retaine it when they are olde remayning in the communion of the Church of Rome may be said to haue the marke of the beast 7. Secondly that to adhere to the Romaine Church was a marke of a true Catholicke before the yeere 606. he prooueth by 2. Romanae ecclesie adhaercre the authority of Augustine Ambrose and Victor Vticensis But we speake of the Church of Rome that now is that is the apostaticall Church of Rome he argueth of the ancient Church which was apostolicall Indeed whiles the Church of Rome did cleaue vnto Christ so long might it be a note of a good Christian to cleaue vnto it although these testimonies doe scarce proue it but after that Church became apostaticall and adulterous as appeareth by their fundamentall heresies and horrible Idolatries and consequently of a faithful Church became an harlot and of the Church of Christ the synagogue of Antichrist it hath beene the marke of an Antichristian to liue in the communion of that Church Besides this great difference betwixt the present and the ancient state of the Church of Rome there is also great oddes in the manner of adhering or cleauing thereto Then as other Churches did cleaue to the Church of Rome so did the Church of Rome cleaue to them now it acknowledgeth no Church besides it selfe Then the Church of Rome was accounted but a part of the Catholicke Church and so a man might be a good Christian although he were not of the Church of Rome now the Church of Rome alone must be accounted the Catholicke Church and consequently he that is not a member of that Church must not be taken for a Catholicke or true Christian. For when the Pope got the title of vniuersall Bishop or head of the vniuersall Church then the church whereof he was head was accounted the onely Catholicke and vniuersall Church Hereunto agreeth that Glosse Constat ecclesiam ideo esse vnam quia in vniuersali ecclesia est vnum caput suprem◅ Clementin Lib. 5. ad nostrum in gloss cui omnes de ecclesia obedire tenentur seil Papae It is euident that the Church is therefore one because in the vniuersall Church there is one supreame head whom all that are of the Church are bound to obey And agreeably therunto saith a late writer whose bookes were published at Venice in the yeere 1588. Non potest quis se Christianum fateri qui curae Papae dicit se non subesse No man may Rod. Cupers 127. num 29. professe himselfe to be a Christian who doth not confesse himselfe to be subiect to the Popes cure or charge And therfore in the conclusiō of his booke he professeth himselfe to be Mancipium S. R. E. The bond seruant of the holy church of Rome Non ignorans he saith haud possehaberese deum patrem si sanctam vniuersalem Romanam ecclesiam non habuerit matrem knowing that a man cannot haue God to be his father vnlesse he haue the holy vniuersall Church of Rome to be his mother Seeing therfore the Church of Rome is become the whore of Babylon as hath bene prooued and the synagogue of Antichrist seeing the Pope compelleth all men to cleaue to the church of Rome suffering none to buy or sel or to enioy any benefits of humane society which professe not themselues to be members of the Church of Rome it followeth that this cleauing to the Apostaticall Church of Rome or liuing in the communion thereof belongeth to the marke of the beast 8. Thirdly as touching the oth of obedience and fealty 3. Iura◅ium obedientiae made to the Pope of Rome Bellarmine prooueth that it was vsed in the time of Gregory the great and therefore before the yeere 606. as appeareth in the Epistles of Gregorie I answere that although Lib. 10. Epist 31. before the yeere 606. the Bishops of Rome tooke more vpon them then became the ministers of Christ yet Bellarmine is not able out of all antiquity to alleadge one example of such an oath of fealty and allegeance imposed by the Pope vpon forraine Bishops and much lesse vpon Kings and Princes as all Catholicke Bishops as they call them Priests graduates Princes and potentates are compelled to sweare vnto the Pope of Rome That one example which as it seemeth is all that he can alledge of an oath taken not long before the yeere 606. is little to the purpose For it is not an oath of obedience and allegeance to the Pope but of faith and religion towards God conformable to the faith and religion then professed by the Bishop and Church of Rome For it is the oath of a certaine Bishop who sweareth to renounce his former heresies and to professe and maintaine that faith and religion which then the Bishop and Church of Rome did professe which oath in effect is no otherwise to be vndestood then if a minister among vs being reclaimed from Popery or some other heresie should take an oath before a Bishop that whiles he liueth he will professe and maintaine that religion which is now professed and established in the Church of England and other reformed Churches which is not to sweare allegeance to them but the like allegeance with them vnto Christ. 9. Fourthly the annointing of Priests we confesse to be as ancient as the Priesthood of Aaron from
Thou bearest the person An. Do. 862 Annal. Boior lib. 4. of a Bishop say they but thou playest the tyrant vnder the habite or attire of a pastour wee feele a Wolfe the lying title calleth thee Father thou in thy deedes boastest thy selfe to be another Iupiter When as thou art the seruaunt of seruants thou striuest to be the Lorde of Lords c. Hee counterfeiteth the Lambe in calling himselfe the vicar of Christ and exercising the very same office which Christ himselfe had Bellarm. whiles he was vpon the earth And because by horne in the Scriptures often is meant power he may be saide to haue two hornes like the Lambe whiles he challengeth that two-fold power which is peculiar to Christ the Lambe as our King and Priest and vsurpeth both the swordes I meane both spirituall and temporall He speaketh like the Dragon in teaching those doctrines of Diuels mentioned 1. Tim. 4. 3. forbidding to mary and commaunding abstinence from meates in belching foorth most horrible blasphemies whereof wee will remember some in the next chapter in his diuellish curses against the Saints and Satannicall promises of the worlde and kingdomes thereof to them that will adore him Luc. 4. 6. Ecce in potestate nostra est imperium vt demus illud cui volumus Auentin Annal Boior lib. 6. saith Adrian the Pope Beholde the Empyre is in our power that wee may giue it to whom wee will And whereas Hierome writing of those wordes 1. Tim. 4. They speake in Hypocrisie saith he who being not continent would seeme to be so chaste as that they condemne mariage and so abstemious as that they iudge those who vse the creature sparingly whereas thēselues are giuen ouer to belly cheere what could haue bene spoken more fitly to shewe foorth the hypocrisie of the Pope Papists For do not they whiles they condēne contemne mariage vnder the shew of vowed chastity practise all vncleannesse and whiles they cōdemne all moderate eating of flesh do not they vnder a colour of fasting feast feed themselues with the choisest dainties Doe not many of them vnder the pretence of voluntary pouerty gather infinite riches And doth not all their religion stande in Opere operate in the bare performaunce of the outwarde worke that is to say in hypocrisie Neither are wee to omitte an hypocriticall pollicie which of late they haue vsed For when as they coulde not preuaile with their Sophistry that is to say with their Bookes of controuersies they hoped to preuaile among the simple with their hypocrisie that is to say with their bookes of deuotion Wherein there is a notable shewe of counterfait deuotion zeale and holinesse to bleare the eyes of the simple and vnstaied But it were to be wished that as they are so they were esteemed to be no better then baits of Antichrist seruing to allure men vnder shew of deuotion vnto idolatry apostasie from God especially if we cōsider that the principall of these bookes were set forth by Parsons other Iesuits who Quodlibet c. are plainly discouered euen by some of their owne side to be mere Machiuilians and wicked Atheists 5. Thus you see what maner of aduersary Antichrist is Now wee must shewe in particular wherein he is opposed to Iesus Christ. He is opposed vnto him as he is Christ and as he is Iesus as hee is Christ that is as he was annointed of God to be our Prophet our King and our Priest in which respect especially he is called Antichrist He is also opposed vnto him as he is Iesus that is to say as he is our Sauiour So that Antichrist opposeth himselfe both to the offices of Christ signified in the name Christ and also to the benefites signified in the name Iesus Now these things also most fitly agree to the Pope who opposeth himselfe to Christ in all these respectes not indeede aperto Marte as an open and professed enemy for so it becōmeth not Antichrist who was to be an hypocrit sitting in the Church of God c. but couertly and cunningly For we must remember that Antichristianisme is the mystery of iniquity wherin Christ was in word shew to be professed but indeed truth denied First thē to Christ our Prophet he is opposed partly as he oppugneth the prophecy of Christ and partly as himselfe is a false Prophet He oppugneth the prophecy of Christ First in denying Christ to be our onely Prophet whose voice in the canonicall Scriptures concerning matters necessarily to be beleeued vnto saluation wee ought onely to heare whiles he and his followers do teach that the scriptures are not perfect and that besides the Apocryphall writings which they haue matched with the canonical their owne traditions also are necessary and of equall authority with the scriptures Secondly by withholding from the people the scriptures which containe the whole doctrine of Christ our prophet in a strange language and also by reading and preaching vnto them their owne fancies and inuentions out of the legends and liues of saints and festiualls c. in steede of the sincere truth of God And by these two practises the Pope whiles he leaueth to Christ the name and title of beeing our prophet he taketh the thing to himselfe Againe he is opposed to Christ our prophet as himselfe is the false prophet spoken of in the Apocalypse teaching Antichristian errours and doctrines of diuells For so many errors as are taught and held by the Pope and church of Rome are so many oppositions betwixt him and Christ our prophet Of the errours of the Romish church there be many centuryes or hundreds and diuerse of them fundamentall In respect whereof wee may truly say that the catholike Apostasie for so I call the Romish religion is the common sewre of many grosse heresyes 6 But it will be said that howsoeuer the Pope holdeth diuerse errours yet he teacheth not those which the holy ghost hath noted as the peculiar doctrines of Antichrist Whereof the authour of the Wardword reckoneth vp three and Bellar-mine hath a fourth But neither of them durst mention those two doctrines of diuells which Paul assigneth to that Apostasie 1. Tim. 4. 3. whereof Antichrist is the head The first doctrine of Antichrist say they is to deny Iesus to be Christ. Which they Of this see more in the 2. booke and 14. chapter would proue out of 1. Iohn 2. 22. 4. 3. and 2. Iohn 7. But the Pope say they doth not deny Iesus to be Christ. To the prosyllogisme or proofe of the proposition I answere that these places of the Apostle Iohn doe not speake properly of the graund Antichrist who is the head of the Antichristian body but of certaine petite Antichrists or heretickes of those times which denied either of the natures of Christ for he speaketh of such as were then already come into the world and therefore from thence it cannot be proued that the great Antichrist shall
in numeratioÌ„ For seeing we know what the beast it self is we might wel take that name which fitteth this nuÌ„ber any of these ways Irenaeus whose master Policarpus beene Saint Iohns disciple reporteth that those who had seen Iohn face to face did teache that the number of the name of Lib. 5. the beast according to the computation of the Greeks by the letters which be in it shall containe 666. Hee therefore setteth downe three names in greeke letters contayning that number in two whereof there is no shew of reason that either of them should be this name seeing neither of them I meane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the name of the beast The third name is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof hee writeth thus Sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nomen sexcentorum sexaginta sex numerum valde verisimile est Quoniam verissunum regnum hoc habet vocabulum Latini enim sunt qui nunc regnant But the name Lateinos also containeth the number 666. and it is verse likelie because the most true kingdome hath this name For they are Latines which now raigne Which in effect is as much as if hee had saide the name Latine is very likelie because it hath the number 666. and is the name of the beaste which figureth verissimum regnum the most true kingdome that is the Latin or Romane state The name of the beast Apoc. 13. 7. therefore in greek contayning the number is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say Latine 3. In Hebrew the beasts name comprehending that number is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Romane For the beastes name beeing a nowne or name collectiue may indifferently according to the maner of the Hebrewes be vttered either in the Masculine or Foeminine gender And the Foeminine termination doth better fitte the prophecy not onely because it rendreth the iust number but also because the beast as it is subiect to Antichrist beeing the adulterous Romane state is elsewhere in the foeminine called the whore of Babylon and the mother of fornications The most vsuall name of the beast in it owne language that is the Latine tongue is Romanus which in Hebrewe characters is as Master Foxe supposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the knowledge whereof as himselfe reporteth hee attained by earnest prayer And that the name Latine or Romane in the learned tongues is the name whereof the holy ghost speaketh it appeareth because euery thing here spoken of the name agreeth fitly and properly thereunto For first it is the name of the beast Secondly is containeth the number 666 as may appeare by this suppâ—…ion Thirdly it is such a name as he to whom all other notes of Antichrist doe agree I meane the Pope enforceth men to take vpon them as shal be shewed Fourthly because the name Latinus or Romanus is also the name of a man For Latinus was one of the auncient Kings of Italy and Romanus was one of the Popes Wherefore I doubt not to conclude that the name is Romane or Latins in the learned tongues For howsoeuer many others names may be produced which comprehend the number 666 yet either they are not the name of the beast or are such names as Antichrist was not to impose vpon men But Lib. 2. cap. 10. of this more here after 4. Now let vs see what that marke is whereof the holy Ghost speaketh Charaâ—…t or Character is as it were a cognizance a note of difference wherby men of any profession or religion are knowne and distinguished from others And it is partly in ward and partly outward The inward is that which is imprinted in the soule the outward is that which is either expressed or receiued outwardly as namely in the forehead or in the right hand In the forehead that is by outward profession and in the right hand that is by operation as the ordinary glose expoundeth As for example the character or marke of a christian or seruant of Christ is subiectioÌ„ vnto Christ and acknowledgement of him to be our head Sauiour This inwardly is the grace of a true faith wrought in the soule by the finger of Gods spirit wherby we beleeue in Christ our sauiour For those that truly beleeue are sealed or signed to saluation That which Eph. 1. 13. outwardly is expressed is either by consession of the mouth or operation of the hands In respect whereof profession of the ChristiaÌ„ faith may truely be said to be the outward marke of a Christian as also determinat us modus us viueÌ„di c. as the scholemen speake the certaine maner of liuing according to the law religioÌ„ of Christ. So that he which beleeueth with his hart coÌ„fesseth with his mouth that Iesus is Christ withal frameth his life according to the law doctrine of Christ he may be said to haue the marke of God Apoc. 9. 4. both in the heart by beleeuing in the forehead by profession in the right haÌ„d by operation See Rom. 10. 9. 10. 2. Tim. 2. 19. And furthermore the outward markes receiued to testifie our subiectioÌ„ vnto Christ our coÌ„munion with him as also to distinguish vs froÌ„ men of other religions are the SacrameÌ„ts of Christ as baptisme and the Lords supper And thus you see the marke of a Christian which is but one in substance namely the true acknowledgement of Christ is thus diuersly expessed testified 5. The like may be said of the marke of the beast which is also called the marke of his name The beast as wee haue proued Apoc. 14. 11. is the Romane state the name is Romane or Latine The marke therfore of the beast is that whereby they of the Romish or Latine religion whom we call Papists are distinguished froÌ„ others that is their subiection vnto the Pope as their head and acknowledgement of the See of Rome This inwardly in the soule is their implicite faith whereby euery Papist is bound hand ouer head to beleeue whatsoeuer the Pope or Church of Rome beleeueth and the rather because they are to be perswaded that neither of both can erre That which outwardly is expressed is either by confession of the mouth or operation of the hands So that the profession of the Romishe religion and certaine maner of liuing according to the Lawes and customes of the Pope and church of Rome may also be said to be the marke of Antichristians euen as the obseruation of the Heathenish rites is called 2. Macah. 4. 10. the Character of the Graecians Who soeuer therfore in heart beleeueth whatsoeuer the Pope church of Rome do or shall beleeue outwardly professeth the Romish religion frameth his life according to the lawes customes of the church of Rome as for exaÌ„ple to fal downe before images to adore the Eucharist to frequeÌ„t the Masse c. he may be truly said to haue the marke of the beast Moreouer the outward marks
and kingdome of Antichrist And further we haue shewed heretofore that the whole body of Apostates and heretiques professing the name of Christ is Antichrist and after a more speciall maner the head of this body Apostasie And therfore it followeth that all of this Apostasie professing the name of Christ belong to this body and kingdome of Antichrist And whereas hee saith that this Apostasie is onelie a disposition so the kingdome of Antichrist c. I answere that all the degrees of this Apostasie going before the reuelation of Antichrist were a disposition not to the being but to the reuealing of Antichrist For in the Apostasie Antichrist was as Iohn plainely sheweth neither could he be reuealed vnlesse first he were Wherupon Theodoret saith Defectionem appellat Antichristi praesentiam he calleth Apostasie the presence or comming of Antichrist But is it not very likely thinke you that there hath bene a disposition or preparation already of more then 1500. yeares in most parts of the world for the raigne of one man three yeres and an halfe 19. Fiftly and lastly although we should grant saith he that a generall Apostasie from the faith hauing now continued many yeares is the kingdome of Antichrist yet it would not follow that therefore the Pope is Antichrist For it is not yet decided who haue made this defection they or we And iâ—… were more easie to proouâ—… that they haue made this defection for they haue reuolted from that Church and religion whereof their forefathers were which we haue not done c. In the foure former answers Bellarmine turned backe vpon vs hoping therby to repell the force of our argument but those being spent in this he turneth his backe vpon vs betaketh himselfe to his feete and leauing the defence of the question in hand runneth to his chiefe hold For whereas we proue that Antichrist is not one man contrary to their assertion by this argument among others because that generall Apostacie of the visible Church continuing for many ages whereof Antichrist is the head cannot be the worke of one man or of a few yeares Bellarmine answereth thus in effect that although your argument be very good to prooue that Antichrist is not one man yet notwithstanding here of it followeth not that the Pope is Antichrist Why neuer any of vs vsed this argument Antichrist is not one man therefore the Pope is Antichrist But in this assertion of ours we answere your chiefe demonstration whereby you would prooue that the Pope is not Antichrist and where in especially you please your selues reasoning as hath beene hard after this manner Antichrist is but one man therefore the Pope is not Antichrist And after you haue prooued this by many worshipfull demonstrations and stoutly denied our contrary arguments now in the end you make this cowardes bragge Although this should be granted which you say to prooue that Antichrist is not one man yet it doth not follow that the Pope is Antichrist 20. But let vs pursue the Iesuite in his flight Although this should be granted saith he c. Yet it followeth not that therfore the Pope is Antichrist For the question yet is who hath made this Apostasie we or you Well then let vs ioyne in this issue If the Apostasie be on our side let vs be thought to belong to Antichrist if this Apostasie be in the Church of Rome whereof the Pope is head then let it be acknowledged that the Pope is the head of this Apostasie and consequently Antichrist But you saith the Iesuite haue reuoltd from the Church and religion of your forefathers that is from the Church of Rome and Latin religion And therefore when you read vnlesse there come areuolt c. it is a wonder that you doe not apply that prophesie to your selues The Apostasie whereof the Apostle speaketh is not a separation from the Church of Rome that now is nor a forsaking of Romish or Popish religion but a reuolting from God a departure from the true faith and religion of Christ vnto Antichristianisme and idolatry We in forsaking the Church of Rome haue come out of Babylon Apoc. 18. 4. according to Gods commaundement and in reuolting from the Pope haue returned to God and therefore this Apostasie toucheth not vs. But you say I to the Papists haue reuolted from the true faith and religion of Christ vnto Antichristianisme and Idolatry as besides the infinite particulars wherein your Apostasie doeth consist may briefely appeare by these notes First the Apostle speaking of the same Apostasie in another place hath these words The spirit speaketh plaincly that in the latter times some shall make an Apostasie from the faith attending to erroneous spirits and doctrines of 1. Tim. 4. 1. diuels speaking lyes in hypocrisie and hauing their owne conscience seared Now who these are that make this Apostasie the Apostle further describeth by specifying two of those doctrines of diuels as certaine notes whereby to know them Forbidding to marry and commaunding to abstainâ—… from meates which God hath created to be receiued with thankesgiuing c. But as I haue shewed heretofore these notes touch not vs and properly agree to the Papists therefore Lib. 1. Chap. 4. 3. this Apostasie is among them Secondlie this Apostasie is among those who are fallen from the true religion and worship of God into idolatry and superstition For the Apostaticall Church is the Idolatrous Church signified by the whore of Babylon the mother of fornications But the Church of Roome is strangelie addicted to idolatry and superstition and for the same deserueth to be called the whore of Babylon where as we through the mercie of God are free from idolatry and therefore the Apostásie is with them and not with vs. For the Apostasie is of them that are made drunke with the cuppe of the whore of Babylous fornications as the Papists are and wee are not who haue come out of Babylon Thirdlie the Apostasie is of those that receiue the name and marke of the beast as the Papists doe and not of those that refuse it as wee doe The fourth note or touchstone as it were to trie who haue made this Apostasie iâ—… the word of God For that is the true faith and the true religion which is contayned and prescribed in the written word of God Now our desire is that the Scriptures may be acknowledged the onelie rule of faith and manners vnto the Scriptures we appeale in all controuersies and desire to be iudged by them vnto the reading of the Scriptúres we exhort our people that they may be further edified and confirmed in that trueth which we doe teach and prosesse The Papists contrarywise not daring to stand to the Scriptures slie to their vnwritten verities traditions decretals doctrines and authorities of men both besides and against the Scriptures and in a word that the prophecie of the Apostle foretelling this Apostasie might be verified in them they haue asserted their hearing from the
dissolution of the Empire to receiue powèr as kings with the beast or as the Papists reade after the beast that is Antichrist If therefore the gouernours Ap. 17. 12. of the kingdomes whereinto the Romane Empire was diuided haue receiued power as kings then it is certaine that Antichrist is already come For oither after him or at least with him they were to receiue their soueraignty It is as certaine therefore that Antichrist is come as it is sure that the gouernours of the prouinces which once belonged to the Empire are soueraigne princes and not liefetenants vnder the Emperour And that this Antichrist which is already come is the Pope it is plaine enough by the same chapter For whosoeuer succeedeth the Emperours who were the sixt head in the gouernment of Rome as the seauenth head of the Romane state he is Antichrist But the Pope as the seauenth head of the Romane state succeedeth the Emperors who were the sixt head in the gouernement of Rome therefore he is Antichrist If you say the seauenth head was not come in the Apostles time verse 10. and yet there were Bishops of Rome then I answere that the Bishops of Rome in the first three hundred yeares were meane men in respect of their owtward estate nothing lesse then heads of the Romane state And that howsoeuer afterwards they obtained great authority more more aspired vnto the soueraignty notwithstanding vntill the sixt head was taken out of the way the 7. was not reuealed But after the sixt head was gone the 7. succeeded in the gouernment of Rome Cupers de eccl p. 37. n. 9. vrbem Romanam ad papam pleno iure spectare constat pag. 258. n. 7. Romana vrbsita Papae dominio cessit vt Caesari nil iuris in â—…areseruelur Insomuch that now for a long time the city of Rome hath so wholy belonged to the Pope as that the Emperour hath no manner of right therein To conclude therefore If Antichrist was to sitte in Rome professing her selfe the church of God that after the taking away of the Romane Emperor whom he was to succeed in the gouernmeÌ„t of Rome as hath bin proued it followeth necessarily seeing these notes agree to the Popes of Rome and to none but them that therfore the Pope is Antichrist Chap. 4. Of the conditions of Antichrist and his opposition vnto Christ. 1. NOw if to those former notes of place and time we shal ad the rest find them al properly to fit the Popes of Rome then may it not be doubted but that the Pope is Antichrist In the next place therfore let vs coÌ„sider his coÌ„ditioÌ„ qualities in respect wherof he is called the man of sin For first Antichrist in respect of his oppositioÌ„ to Christ he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an aduersary in respect of his pride ambitioÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lifted vp aboue al that is called god c. FroÌ„ these 2. notes therefore we may argue thus He that is such an aduersary as the scriptures desoribe opposed vnto Christ in aemulation of like honour he is Antichrist The Pope is such an aduersaie as the scriptures describe opposed vnto Christ in 2. Thess. 2. 4. aemulation of like honour Therefore the Pope is Antichrist The truth of the proposition is testified by the Apostle implyed in the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth hostem aemulum Christi and confessed by the aduersaries The assumption Bellarmine would disproue by this slender argument because the Pope forsooth professeth himselfe the seruant of Christ. For euen as he professeth himselfe to be Christs seruaÌ„t so he termeth himselfe Of this see more in the 2. book 1. chap. Gen. 9. 25. the seruant of seruants which is Chams title when as in truth he would be esteemed Lord of Lords But this is so farre from disprouing the assumption as that the Pope could not be such an aduersary as is described in the scriptures and consequently not Antichrist vnlesse he professed himselfe to be the seruant of Christ. Let vs therefore consider what maner of enemy Antichrist is according to the scriptures First he is an Apostate or reuolter 2. a disguised enemy or hypocrite that is one that is fallen indeed froÌ„ god his truth as it werea star froÌ„ heauen yet retaineth the name profession of Christ vnder which name professioÌ„ he oppugneth christ his truth EueÌ„ as a rebellious subiect when he presumeth without commission to leuy a power of men against his Soueraigne that he may deceiue the rest of the subiects abuseth the name and authority of his prince to colour his rebellious practises And that this is the property of Antichrist Hilary hath well obserued It is Ad AuxentiuÌ„ the property of Antichrists name to be contrary to Christ. This is now practised vnder the opinion of counterfeit piety this vnder a shewe of preaching the Gospell is preached that our Lord Iesus Christ may be denied whiles whiles he is thought to be preached Tract 3. in Iâ—…an Epistol Augustine saith we haue found many Antichrists which confesse Christ with their mouth 2. First I say he is an apostate yea the head of that Apostasy 2. Thess. 2. 3. or falling away froÌ„ the truth mentioned 2. Tâ—…hess 2. insomuch as some of the learned as Chrysostome Augustine Theodoret Theophylact Oecumenius by that Apostasy vnderstand Antichrist Lib. 3. de pont R. chap. 2. himself Yea Bellar. himselfe affirmeth that by Apostasy in that place Antichrist himself may be most fitly vnderstood But the Papists which falsly hold that the visible church of Christ cannot er much lesse fall away expouÌ„d this Apostasy or defection to be a reuolt or falling away froÌ„ the Roman Empire Neither do we deny but that also there hath bin a defectioÌ„ froÌ„ the Romane Empire but yet we deny that it is vnderstood in this place Ambrose saith then shall desolution draw neere because In 2. Thess. 2. De ciuit Dei lib. 20. c. 19. many falling by error shall reuolt from the true religioÌ„ He calleth him a reuolter saith Augustine namly froÌ„ the Lord God Cyrill Now is the Apostasie for men are reuolted from the true Catech. 11. faith Chrysostome and Oecumenius the Apostasie hee calleth Antichrist himselfe because hee shall cause many to reuolt from In 2. Thess. 2. Christ. Or else he calleth apostasie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the departure from God and the thing it selfe The same hath Theophylact in effect And likewise Theodoret on this place The defection saith he he calleth Antichrist himselfe giuing In 2. Thess. 2. him a name from the thing it selfe For his endeauour is to withdraw men from the truth and to cause them to reuolt Primasius by Apostasy vnderstandeth the forsaking of the truth and Lyra the departure from the Catholicke faith But to omit In 2. Thess 2. humane testimonies the holy ghost who is the best expounder