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
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
foretold do now come to passe The king of pride meaning Antichrist is at hand and that which is horrible to be spoken an army of priests is prepared for him Whereby he would also insinuate that he should be the prince of priests Now this is a principle in the church of Rome that the Pope especially such a Pope as Gregory the great speaking definitâ—…uelie and confidentlie can not erre And if this be true as they may not deny the Pope being the foundation of all their trueth then must they needs confesse that Antichrist was come almost a thousand yeers since and that the Pope their prince of priests who not onely succeedeth Iohn of Constantinople in that Antichristian title but also farre exceedeth him in all Antichristian pride challenging a soueraigne and vniuersall authority not onely aboue all other Bishops and priests but also aboue all kings and Emperours is that Antichrist 5 To this testimony of Gregory I might adde diuerse other witnesses But my purpose is not to draw mine arguments from the writings and as it were the cisternes of men who liued before the reuelation of Antichrist and therefore except themselues had bene prophets could not fully expound these prophecies but from the pure fountaines of holy scriptures expounded by the history and euent the best interpreters of prophecies For as Daniell saith of the like or rather as the Papists say of these same Dan. 129. prophecies concerning Antichrist The words are closed vp and sealed vntill the appointed tyme. And accordingly was it said by Augustine prophetias citiùs impleri quà m intelligt that prophecies are fulfilled sooner then vnderstood and by Irenaeus whome Bellarmine also alleadgeth to the same purpose omnes prophetiae Lib. 〈◊〉 aduers. haeres c. 43. Bell. de pont R. lib. 3 c. 10. saith he priusquam habeaÌ„t efficaciam aemgmata sunt ambiguitas hominibus All prophecies before they haue their complement are vnto men darke and doubtfull speeches And therefore speaking of some part of the prophecies concerning Antichrist hee Apoc. 13. saith Certius sine periculo est sustinere adimplet ionem prophetiae quà m suspicari c It is more sure and safe to wait for the fulfilling of the prophecie then before hand to deliuer vncertaine ghesses Lib. 5. advers hares pag. antepenult Omitting therefore the vncertaine coniectures of men for such are diuerse opinions of the fathers concerning Antichrist as Bellarmine confesseth of some from the sacred scriptures the Lib. 3. de pont R. c. 10. vndoubted oracles of God I frame this demonstration 6 Vnto whomesoeuer the prophecies of holy scripture describing Antichrist the head of the Antichristian body doe wholy and onely agree hee is that graund Antichrist who is foretold in the scriptures Vnto the Pope of Rome the prophecies of holy scripture concerning Antichrist the head of the Antichristian body do wholy and onely agree therefore the Pope of Rome is that graund Antichrist which is foretold in the scriptures The proposition I take for graunted For seeing the holy ghost hath of purpose in diuerse places of the scripture taken vpon him fully and sufficiently to describe Antichrist and that to this end that he might bee knowne we neede not doubt but that this description of Antichrist is so perfect and so proper vnto him as to whome that description agreeth not he is not Antichrist contrarywise whom it wholy and onely fitteth hee must be held and acknowledged to be that Antichrist All the controuersie therefore is concerning the assumption namely whether the descriptions of Antichrist in the scriptures agree to the Pope or not Antichrist is described by the holy ghost especially in three places viz. in the second chapter of the second epistle to the Thessalonians in the thirteenth of the Reuelation from the eleuenth verse to the end and in the seuenteenth chapter of the same booke For I omitte those places in the prophecie of Daniel which vsually are alleaged because they speake properly of Antiochus Epiphanes Chap. 7. 8. 11. 12. who was but a type of Antichrist as Bellarmine also confesseth and the ninth of the Apocalypse because it is by some expounded Lib. 3. de pont R. c 18. 21. of the Turks 7 And that the description of Antichrist in the scriptures fitly agreeth to the Pope it appeareth by this induction For whereas all the arguments and notes whereby Antichrist is described in the scriptures may be reduced to these heads to wit the place or seat where we are to find him the time when we were to looke for him his condition and qualities that he is an aduersary opposed vnto Christ in aemulation of like honour a man of sinne in generall and more particularly an horrible Idolatour his actions and passions that is such things as he shall either do or suffer I will make it euident by the helpe of God whose all-seeing spirit I humbly beseech to guide me into the truth that all and euery one of them doe so fitly and properly agree to the Pope of Rome that in the descriptions of Antichrist in the scripture the Pope may behold himselfe as it were in a glasse Chap. 2. Of the place or seate of Antichrist 1. ANd first as touching the place or seate of Antichrist I reason thus Mysticall Babylon spoken of in the seuenteenth and eighteenth of the Apocalypse is the seat of Antichrist Rome is Mysticall Babylon spoken of in the seuenteenth and eighteenth of the Apocalypse Therefore Rome is the seat of Antichrist As touching the proposition you are to vnderstand that Babylon in the scriptures is taken sometimes literally and sometimes mystically literally for Babylon either in Chaldaea or in Egypt Babylon in Chaldaea was the Metropolis or imperiall city of the Babylonian and Assyrian Monarchy Babylon in AEgypt is called Babylis and Cayrus of which some vnderstand the Apostle Peter to speake 1. Epist. 5. 13. Babylon mysticall in the Apocalypse is the seat or chiefe city of Antichrist resembling the 1. Pet. 5. 13. Apoc. 17. 5. Assyrian Babylon in pride idolatry filthinesse and especiallie in most cruell persecution of the church of God And for the same causes Apoc. 11. 8. is called spiritually Sodom and Egypt Sodom Ap. 11. 8. for pride and filthinesse Egypt for idolatrie and for cruelty towards the Israel of God And as the church of Christ in the Apocalypse is called Ierusalem mysticallie or the holy city so the church especially the Metropolis or chiefe city of Antichrist is mysticallie called Babylon This as it is the receiued opinion of the faithfull so may it euidently be gathered out of the seuenteenth and eighteenth of Apocalypse which without all doubt are prophecies concerning Antichrist and the Antichristian city and seat as the Papists themselues often confesse Bellarm. lib. 3. de Pâ—…t R. c. 2. Sander demonstr 13. 18. c 2 For that which the Papists sometimes obiect That by Babylon is
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
the testimonie of S. Paule 2. Thess. 2. 8. And then that outlaw meaning Antichrist shal be reuealed And wheÌ„ 2. Thess. 2. 8. is that When he that hindereth shal be taken out of the way And who is that which hindereth the reuelation of Antichrist for a time that he might be reuealed in his due time Who this was 2. Thess. 2. 6. 7. the Apostle had told the Thessal by word of mouth and therfore forbare for iust causes to tell them by writing which they knew already to wit that he might not incurre the needlesse 2. Thess. 2. 5. 6. hatred of the Romanes But that which he had told them in all likelyhood was continued in the church For although this place in it selfe be most difficult yet generally it is vnderstood of the Empire and Emperours of Rome by most of the auncient writers of the Church Tertullian who shall be takeÌ„ out of the way but the Romane state whose departure being diuided De resurrect carn among ten Kinges shall bring in Antichrist Ambrose After the decay of the Romane Empire Paule saith that Antichrist In 2. Thess. 2. shall appeare Chrysostome on these wordes Onely hee that holdeth that is as hee expoundeth hindereth now vntill he In 2. Thess. 2. be taken out of the way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith hee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Empire of Rome when it shall bee taken out of the way then he meaning Antichrist shall come and worthily For whiles men shall be in awe of the Empire none will hastily be brought in subiection to Antichrist But when the Empire shall be dissolued he shall seize vpon the vacancie and shall challenge to himselfe the Empire or rule both humane and diuine Hierome speaking of these words And now what hindereth you know that he Ad Algas quaest 11. might be reuealed in his time that is saith he what the cause is why Antichrist commeth not yet you know very well Neither could he plainelie say that the Romane Empire is to be destroyed which the Emperours thinke is aternall Wherefore according to the Apocalypse of Iohn there is written in the forehead of the harlot cloathed with purple a name of blasphemy that is Romae aeternae to Rome aternal And afterwards these words onelie he which holdeth now must hold vntill hee bee taken out of the way and then that out law shall be reuealed hee expoundeth thus onelie that the Romane Empire which now holdeth that is gouerneth all nations depart and be taken out of the way and then Antichrist shall come Cyrill Antichrist shall come when the Catech. 15. times of the Romane Empire shall be fulfilled Primasius The kingdome of the Romanes shall bee taken out of the way before in 2. Thess. 2. Antichrist be reuealed Theophylact when the Romane Empire shall be taken out of the way then shall Antichrist come The in 2. Thess. 2. greeke scholiast on those words that which holdeth c. hee in 2. Thess. 2. 6. meaneth saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which letteth and hindereth And what is that Many vnderstand the holy ghost others the Romane Empire whose iudgement is the better For vntill that be dissolued Antichrist shall not come And for this cause blessed Paul spake so obscurelie because he would not incur vnseasonable enmitie with the Romans For when they should heare that the Empire of the Romanes shall be dissolued they would persecute him and al the faithful as being such as looked for the dissolution of the Empire But if he had spoken of the holy ghost what letted him to haue said plainelie that the grace of the holie ghost did hinder him that he should not appeare To which we may adde that in the sixt verse the Apostle speaketh in the newter gender and in the seauenth in the masculine the former whereof may signifie the Empire the latter the Emperour of whom the holy ghost speaketh as of one man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he vseth to speak sometimes of Antichrist and wee of the Pope although both by the one and the other is signified not one man but a state or succession Augustine in deede saith of De ciuit Dei lib. 20. c. 19. these words but he that hindereth shall hinder I do confesse that I am vtterly ignorant what he saith Some think that this is spoken of the Romane Empire and that Paul the Apostle would not therefore write it plainelie least he should incur this slaunder that he was an ill willer to the Romane Empire which men hoped to be aternall Notwithstanding this seemeth to haue bin his iudgement also for afterwards he thinketh those words may thus be expouÌ„ded of the Empire of Rome tanâ—…uÌ„ qui modò imperat imperet c. only he which reigneth must raigne for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also may signify to the same purpose Primasius expouÌ„deth those words tantuÌ„ vt qui tenet nunc sc. imperiuÌ„ only he which holdeth now to wit the Empire vntil he be done that is taken out of the way and then that outlaw shall be reuealed whome no man doubteth to signifie Antichrist 2 But what need I to be so diligent in gathering testimonies for the coÌ„firmation of this truth seeing it is not only confirmed by the former assertioÌ„ for how could Antichrist raign in Rome while the Roman Emperors remaind or raignd there but also is confessed by Bellarmine himself namely that by this let is to be vnderstood the Empire of Rome Rather let vs coÌ„sider whe ther the Empire that hindred be taken out of the way or not Beliarmine vnderstandeth this taking away of an vtter abolishing Cap. 5. of the Romane Empire so that there should not remaine so much as the name of the Emperor or King of the Romanes FroÌ„ wheÌ„ce he would proue that Antichrist is not yet come because the Romane Empire is not yet abolished Wee confesse that the Romane Empire which hindred the reuelatioÌ„ of Antichrist was to be dissolued and also diuided among ten that is many kings for so this number of ten is ofteÌ„ vsed indefinitly Num. 14. 22. Iob. 19. 3. Nehem. 4. 12. which is all that can be gathered either out of the scriptures or fathers But that there should be such an vtter abolishment of the Romane Empire as that there should not remain so much as the name or title of the Emperor or King of the Romanes we do vtterly deny It is sufficient that the Emperor was so far See a. book chap. 5. forth taken out of the way as it hindred the Reuelation or dominion of Antichrist And so much the phrase of the Apostle seemeth to import 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vntil hee be done out of the way or as the Rhemists themselues do read vntill he be taken out of the way as may appeare by conference of like places Let vs then consider in what sence the Romane Empire did Mat. 13. 49.
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
kinde as 1. Pet. 2. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 honour the king not this king onely but any whosoeuer is king 1. Tim. 3. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it behoouâ—…th therefore the Bishop not this or that Bishop but euery one that hath that calling to be without reproofe Mat. 6. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The light of the body is the eye See 1. Cor. 12. 15. 16. Mat. 12. 34. c. So when we say the good man or the wicked man we meane either generally al or indefinitely any that be such Mat. 1â—… 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The good man out of the good treasure of the hart bringeth forth the goodthings and the euill man c. 4. Sometimes againe the article is vsed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie that which is most notable in that kinde and therefore most worthily or as we say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deserueth that name And of this vse is Epiphanius his rule to be vnderstood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where the article is added vnto some definite and notable thing there is alwayes confirmation by the article namely that the word is not to be vnderstood indefinitly or indifferently of any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but without the article it is to be takeÌ„ of any one indefinitely Which latter part of the rule if it be true prooueth that the speech of our Sauiour Iohn 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if any other come is indefinit But neither doth the article vsed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwayes point out a certaine and singuler thing though sometimes it doe As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a Christians mouth signifieth the true God onely as Epiphanius saith So when we say the Apostle meaning Paul the Poet meaning among the Greekes Homer among the Latines Virgil the Oratour Demosthenes or Tullie the wiseman Salomon But when we say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is another of Epiphanius his examples and meane therby not indifferently any king but by an Emphasis that Prince to whom we are subiect we doe not alwayes nor for the most part vnderstand one certaine king but all or any to whom the soueraignty of our conutrey doth appertaine whether he be king or Queene As when we say the king supreme gouernour of the church no time prescribeth against the king the kings high-way the Princes lawes c. In like manner wheÌ„ we say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is Epiphanius his third example or as the Apostle more distinctly speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man of God For although by this Emphasis not any man is meant but the minister of 2. Tim. 3. 17. God yet it signifieth not one certaine minister but any one of that function called thereunto of God And in this sense is the Pope called the Antichrist the Antichrist in the same sense is called the man of sinne the sonne of perdition the outlaw But this prooueth not that therefore the Antichrist is but one certaine and singuler man For euen as the diuel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the vncleane spirit although there Luk. 11. 24 be many wicked ones is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the euill and yet there be many diuels and as the Bishop of Rome since the ti me of Boniface the third is called the Pope whereas before the name Pope was attributed to other Bishops and yet there haue beene many Popes so although al heretickes deserue to be called Antichrists al profane men men of sinne all reprobates sonnes of perdition all sonnes of Belial 1. Ioh. 2. 18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or outlawes yet not withstanding the Pope of Rome since the time of Boniface the third deserueth to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Antichrist the man of sinne the sonne of perdition the outlaw Which as it doth not prooue that the Pope signifieth but one singuler person so See Lib. 1. c. 6. neither doth it euince that the Antichrist signifieth one certaine man For looke what they can say of the Antichrist in this case the same may be said of the Pope 5. The third place is like to the second and therefore a short answer may serue 1. Iohn 2. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You haue heard that the Antichrist commeth and euen now there are many Antichrists where the article is prefixed before Antichrist so properly called but the name of Antichrist generally taken is vttered without an article which most plainely sheweth that Antichrist properly taken is but one man but generally taken it signifieth all heretickes As if he had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth but one certaine man because the article is prefixed The Antichrist so properly called is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore the Antichrist so properly called is but one certaine man The prosyllogisme or proofe of the proposition I haue already prooued to be most false when as I shewed that whereas there are foure vses of the article at the least Bellarmines obseruation holdeth onely in one and that the least vsuall namely when the article is vsed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is for a demonstratiue particle And that the article added to a word doth not alwaies signifie one certaine and singuler thing I will shew by some other examples which will sit neerer the Papists In 2. Thes. 2. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that hindreth is expounded by the fathers and acknowledged by the Papists to signifie the Emperour 2. Thes. 2. 7 of Rome not any one particular but the state and succession of Emperours Againe Mat. 16. 18. where there is not onely the article but also the pronounce demonstratiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vpon this rocke the Papists would haue vnderstood by that rocke which Pâ—…ter confessed which is Christ or faith in him not onely Peter himselfe but also although most falsely the whole succession of Popes And therefore by their owne doctrine the article doth not alwayes no not when it is ioyned with a demonstratiue particle signifie one certaine and particular thing or person Thirdly in the place before alledged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man of sinne the son of perdition is vnderstood by some to signifie not onely the head of the AntichristiaÌ„ 2. Thes. 2. 3 body but the whole multitude of those who ioyne with Antichrist Augustine reciteth this opinion and is so farre from misliking it that Bellarmine alledgeth it as Augustines Neither are we to thinke this interpretation to be dissonant from the manner of speech vsed in the Scriptures seeing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the woman Apoc 12. 6. signifieth the Church of Christ and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the harlot and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the woman Apoc. 17. 1. 18. the city Church of Antichrist And that I may come to the proposition it selfe and omit other examples 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifieth the Antichristian body or company of Antichristian heretikes 6. For better proofe whereof let vs
2. Tim. 4. 4. trueth and are conuertd vnto fables They cannot abide to heare that the Scripture should be the onely rule of faith and maners they cannot endure to see any of their people to read the Scriptures and therefore desire to keepe it from them in an vnknowne language The foundation of their trueth is the authoritie of their Church and in the Church of their Pope who they say cannot erre But if the Pope teach doctrines of Diuels and speake lyes in hypocrise as the Apostle hath prophesied especially of them then is there in that Church little soundnesse of trueth that is built vpon so vnsound a soundation Thus therefore I reason The head of the generall Apostasie is Antichrist The Pope is the head of the generall or catholicke Apostasiei therefore he is Antichrist 21. To the three former arguments a fourth may be added The seuen heades of that beast which signifieth the Romane state are not so many persons but so many heades or states of gouernement wherby the common wealth of the Romanes hath beene at diuerse times gouerned the sixt head was the state of emperours the seuenth Antichrist as the Papists confesse the eight which also is one of the seauen the state of Emperours renewed Whereby it euidently appeareth Rhem. in Apoc. 17. Bellarmi not onely that Antichrist is not one man but also that the Pope who is the seuenth head is Antichrist CHAP. 3. Concerning the time of Antichrist his comming 1. TO withdraw our minds from beholding Antichrist in the See of Rome and to make vs looke for the expected Messias of the Iewes that neuer shall come the Papistes labour by might and maine to perswade vs that Antichrist is not yet come For euen as the learned of the Iewes when Christ was among them contrary to their one perswasion for worldly respects refused the true Messias and made the people expect another which neuer shall be So the learned among the Papists hauing Antichrist among them for worldly respects cannot endure that he should bee acknowledged but teach the people that he is not yet come and describe vnto them such an Antichrist as themselues may well know shall neuer come as by the grace of God shall appeare in the particulars Now as touching the time of Antichristes comming Bellarmine first reciteth diuers false and erronious opinions as heo calleth them and afterwarde setteth downe sixe solemne demonstrations to prooue that he is not yet come In the former he spendeth a goodlong chapter reckoning vp diuers opinions both of the fathers in former ages and also of hetetiques as â—…he calleth them in latter times mingling the trueth with errours that the credit of both might be alike As touching the fathers because he taketh it for granted which is the question that Antichrist is not to come before the end of the world which we deny according to the Scriptures 1. Ioh. 2. 18 2. Iohn 7. 2. Thes. 2. 7 he would make their opinion concerning the approching of Antichrist which they heid according to the Prophesies of the Scripture compared with the euent of no better credit then their conceit of Christs approching vnto judgement grounded not so much vpon the Scriptures as vpon their owne conjecture For to omit their conjectures concerning Christs comming consuted by experience what can Bellarmine answer to the sound argument either of S. Ierome or Gregorie concerning the comming of Antichrist confirmed by experience alledged by Bellarmine himselfe Ierome applying the Prophesie of Paul Epist. ad Geront de Monogamia 2. Thes. 2. 6. 7. 8. that Antichrist should appeare when he that hindereth meaning the Romane Emperour was taken out of the way to his time wherein not onely the imperiall seat had beene remooued from Rome which was the first degree of taking out of the way that which hindered but also Rome it selfe in distresse being taken of the Gothes and the Empire in decay Quitenebat saith he de medio fit non intelligimus Anticbristum appropinquare He which did holde is taken out of the way and do we not vnderstand that Antichrist dooth approch And likewise Gregory Omnia quae praedicta sunt fiunt Rex superbia propè est All things which were foretold doe come to passe the King Lib. 4. epi. 38. of pride is at hand Which arguments alledged also by vs Bellarmine because he could not answer he thought to discredit by reckoning them among erronious conceits 2. But let vs come to his heretiques Who although they all agree in this that Antichrist is come and that it is the Pope yet saith Bellarmine they are deuided into sixe opinions The first opinion viz. of the Samosatenians in Hungarie and Transyluania is not worth the mentioning being of such heretiques as deny the Trinity and also the diuinity of Christ with whom though we haue as little to doe as the Papists sauing that some of our men haue soundly confuted their heresies whiles the Papists held their peace yet he numbreth our opinion with theirs as Christ was numbred among the wicked that by this mixture of truth with falshood he might discredit the truth As for the rest it is easie to shew that all Protestants almost that haue written in this argument and namely those whom Bellarmine alledgeth doe agree in the substance concerning the comming of Antichrist And that there is no such difference among them as Bellarmine would beare vs in hand For concerning this matter this is the receiued opinion of our Churches When with Iohn in his Epistles we speake of Antichrist meaning the whole bodie of Heretiques and Antichrists we hold with Iohn that euen in the Apostles times Antichrist had as it were set his foote in the Church and that from that time the mysterie of iniquitie that is Antichristianisme did more and more worke vntill the head of this body the man of sinne was reuealed Which with Paul we hold to haue beene done after that which hindered was remooued out of the way But when we speake of the head of this body who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called the Antichrist figured by the second beast Apoc. 13. of whom also the Apostle intreateth 2. Thes. 2. the constant opinion of the learned is this that of the reuealing or manifest appearing of Antichrist there were two principall degrees The first about the yeare 607. when Boniface the third obtained the supremacie ouer the vniuersall See lib. 1. cap. 3. Church The second after the yeare 1000. when he claimed and vsurped both swords that is a soueraigne and vniuersall authoritie not onely ecclesiasticall ouer the Clergie but also temporall ouer Kings and Emperours Vnto which second soueraigntie they had long aspired but neuer attained vntill the time of Gregorie the seauenth We holde then that Antichrist was come and shewed himselfe in Boniface the third and that after this his birth as it were he grewe by degrees vntill he came to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
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
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
the Iewes doo The Iewes looke for him with ioy as for their Messias but the Christians with feare I answere as true Christians looke not at all for the expected Messias of the Iewes to be Antichrist but acknowledge him that is come so Papists but that they cannot see the wood for trees might in stead of looking for Antichrist looke vppon him 10 The second thing which Bellarmine deliuereth concerning Antichrist for a certaine truth is That Antichrist shall be a Iew both by Nation and Religion that is he shall be a Iew borne hee shall be circumcised hee shall be an obseruer of the Iewes Sabboth and other Iewish ceremonies But how is this certaine truth proued forsooth from the premisses For the Iewes will not receiue one for their Messias that is not a Iew borne nor circumcised Nay it is not to bee doubted but that as the Iewes looke for their Messias out of the family of Dauid so hee will faigne himselfe to be of the Tribe of Dauid although indeed he be of the Tribe of Dan. But this Popish conceit built vpon their owne vaine imaginations needeth no answere For seeing I haue ouerthrowne their former assertion wherevpon this is grounded therefore this building of it selfe falleth to the ground Whosoeuer saith hee shall be receiued of the Iewes for their Messias he shall be a Iew borne and circumcised but Antichrist shall be receiued of the Iewes for their Messias as hath bene proued therefore Antichrist shall be a Iew borne c. The proposition is not altogether true for the Herodians receiued Herod for Epiphan lib. 1. de haeresi Iudaeor 7. their Messias and thence had their name But I will not stand vpon that The assumption I haue alreadie disproued shewing that Antichrist was not to be receiued of the Iewes for their Messias and therefore there is no validitie in this argument In the next place therefore for want either of reason or authoritie of scripture he vnderproppeth this tottering wall with testimonies of Fathers but such as either himselfe before hath reiected or else in this question may by the same reason be little regarded The twelue Fathers saith hee which affirmed that Antichrist shall be of the Tribe of Dan doo therefore holde that hee should be a Iew borne But himselfe hath tolde vs that we are not to beleeue them because their opinion cannot bee prooued out of the scriptures and therefore by the same reason neither they nor the rest are to be beleeued in this point which hath no ground in the word of God And thus his most euident demonstration is come to nothing For although the Iewes receiue not the Pope for their Messias but rather esteeme of him as of an other Pharao and withall apply vnto him all that is spoken either of Antichrist as the Papists say or of the type of Antichrist R. Ieuâ—… Gerson Antiochus as we say Dan. 7. 11. this hindereth not but that the Pope may bee Antichrist Yea this may bee some inducement to perswade vs that if those thinges which bee spoken of Antichrist or his type may in the iudgement of the Iewes who are no parties be applyed properly to the Pope that then the Pope is that Antichrist that in Daniel is figured and in other places of scripture not vnlike to that figure described Chap. 13. Of the seate or See of Antichrist 1 OVr aduersaries sixt disputatioÌ„ is concerning the seat or See of Antichrist concluded in this syllogysme Antichrist shall sit at Ierusalem and not at Rome the Pope sitteth at Rome not at Ierusalem therefore the Pope is not Antichrist The proposition concerning which all the coÌ„trouersie is is first proued by testimonies of scriptures afterwards defeÌ„ded against our obiectioÌ„s His 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or proofe standeth on three testimonies of scripture The first Apoc. 11. 8. where Iohn saith that Enoch Elias shal be slaine of Antichrist in Ierusalem And their bodies shal lie in the streets of the great Citie which is called spirituall Sodome or Egypt where our Lord also was crucified But what if Iohn speaketh neither of Antichrist nor of Enoch Elias nor of IerusaleÌ„ that hee speaketh not of Antichrist it may bee doubted For verse 7. hee saith that the beast which ascendeth out of the deepe which seemeth to bee the former beast described in the beginning of Chap. 13. shall kill the two witnesses And verse 2. it is said that the court of the Temple should be giuen to the Gentiles and that they should tread vpon the holy Citie 42. moneths which is the time allotted to the persecution of the beast with seuen heads Apoc. 13. 5. Besides the Papists teach that Antichrist shall bee the Prince of the Iewes and counterfeit Christians therefore by their owne doctrine this persecution of the Church by the Gentiles should not be the persecution vnder Antichrist And that Enoch and Elias be not here spoken of it hath bene shewed before thirdly that the holy Ghost doth not meane Ierusalem I haue heretofore proued But suppose that S. Iohn did speake both of Antichrist as it Chap. 6. Lib. 1. caâ—… 2. § 17. seemeth he doth not and also of Ierusalem which I am sure hee doth not yet notwithstanding this followeth not that wheresoeuer the witnesses of Christ are put to death by him or by his authoritie that there should be his principall seate Whereas therefore Bellarmine argueth thus Where the two witnesses are put to death there is the seate of Antichrist at Ierusalem the two witnesses are put to death therefore at Ierusalem is the seate of Antichrist I answere first to the proposition that it being generally vnderstood is false if particularly then Bellarmines argumentation is not a syllogisme but a paralogisme And to the assumption I answer negatiuely that answer I haue heretofore made good prouing that not Ierusalem is here meant but ciuitas Romana the Citie and Empire of Rome which euery where in the Apocalyps is called the great Citie wherein and by authoritie wherof our Lord was crucified See the first booke chap. 2. § 16. 17. 2 His second testimonie is Apoc. 7. 16. wherevnto I haue answered before in the second chapter of the first booke § 18. But as from that place hee would proue that Rome is not the seate of Antichrist so by another argument which he addeth he proueth that it is Ierusalem For saith hee If Antichrist be a Iew and professe himselfe to be the Messias and King of the Iewes then no doubt he will sit in Ierusalem but the former of these I haue disproued in the former chapter and therefore further answere needeth not Yea but foure of the Fathers auouch that Antichrist shall sit at Ierusalem Although they did yet Bellarmine hath taught vs that we are not bound to beleeue them vnlesse their assertioÌ„ can be proued out of the scriptures And yet of these foure Fathers which he alledgeth Lactantius speaketh not of
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
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
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
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