thinke that these 72. Iewish priests sent by Eleazarus the hie priest brother to Symon Priscus into Egypt to king Ptolomeus to translate the old testament out of their vulgar tongue that is the Hebrew into Greeke did translate the same seuerally being placed in 72. distinct celles so as no one coulde know what another did without diuine inspiration This notwithstanding they all agreed so perfectly when their interpretations were compared together as if they had beene all in one place and one acquainted with anothers act Which if it were true the decision whereof I leaue in suspence to the iudgement of the reader it coulde not but prâ—ceede of the holyghost Others as saint Ierome Aristeas Iosephus and all the Iewish Rabbins hold the flat contrarie opinion and auouch boldly that the report of the 72. celles and of the translation accomplished in so many seueral places is nothing else but a fable Which latter opinion seemeth more probable though not certaine because the Iewes could best tel the case of whom S. Hierome receiued his opinion Howsoeuer it was two things are certaine first that the Hebrew text is the foundation and originall and onely to be stoode vpon so often as any difficultie ariseth in the olde testament Secondly that howsoeuer they did translate yet was there such corruption of their translation euen in saint Hieromes time and before his dayes as it was found in very many places to swarue wholly from the Hebrew Which thing not only Saint Hieerome but Origen and other writers do witnesse for which cause Saint Hierome and Saint Augustine do verie wisely and grauely exhort to haue recourse to the Hebrew in the old Testament and to the Greeke in the new Testament so often as any varietie doth appeare And here wee must note two things first that those priests which Eleazar sent to Ptolomee were 72. in number as sundrie thinke albeit the two odde persons be omitted of others for breuitie sake Secondly that they translated onely the Pentateuche as writeth Iosephus in his first booke of antiquities Adde heereunto with the same Iosephus that they were sent to his librarie at Alexandria where if wee will beleeue Genebrardus were 54. thousand and 800. bookes CHAP. VI. Of Esdras Zorobabel and Nehemias God albeit hee doth often afflict and exercise his people with the crosse of temporall punishment for their good that so they may beholde their owne vnworthienesse and appeale to his mercie and wholly depend vppon his holy prouidence yet for his mercie sake hee doth in all ages and at all times excite worthie persons for their great commoditie and solace For after that he had visited the Iewes and kept them in bondage seauentie yeares in a strange countrey among infidels and idolaters hee raised vp diuers excellent men for their preseruation to wit Zorobabel Esdras and Nehemias Zorobabel was the captaine that brought them home and caused the temple to be builded Nehemias builded vp the walles of the citie deliuered the people from oppression and prouided that the law of God was put in execution among them This Nehemias was in great fauour and authoritie with king Artaxerxes and so obtained most honourable and ample letter patents for the accomplishment of whatsoeuer he did desire Esdras descended of the kinred of Aaron hee was a priest well learned in the law of Moses Hee was called Esdras the scribe that is one who had authoritie to write the lawe and to expound it Saint marke calleth such a one a Scribe Saint Mathew tearmeth such persons Lawyers and doctours of the lawe which is a point well worthie the obseruation This Esdras performed the office of a true priest indeed for he collected the bookes of holy scripture which were dispersed after the destruction of Hierusalem in time of the captiuitie without which bookes pure and sincere religion could not consist Yea so soone as the temple was builded againe vnder Zorobabell he is noted as Hierome recordeth to haue found out the Hebrew letters we now vse whereas vntil that time both the Samaritans and the Hebrewes had the selfe same characters Eusebius Caesariensis a man as well of great antiquitie as of learning calleth Esdras the most excellent diuine and skilfull doctour among the Iewes affirming that hee changed the Hebrew letters for this ende and purpose lest the Iewes should conuerse with the Samaritans He addeth further that his memorie was so great as he could recite the scriptures without the booke Some write that he inuented the prickes annexed to the text but others hold the contrarie The fift booke of the Monarchie of the Greekes from the Machabees vntill Christ. CHAP. I. Of the partition of the Monarchie and the reason of the same THe former part of the Monarchy of the Greekes which is from King Alexander the great vnto the Machabees conteineth 155. yeares and may be proued exactly by the chronographie of holy Writ The latter part of the Monarchie which is from the Machabees vnto Christ or if yee will from Antiochus Epiphanes to Herodes Magnus which is al one contayneth 173. yeares but cannot be proued out of the holy scriptures as the former part which is the cause of this my partition for perspicuitie sake yet may it bee gathered sufficiently out of the bookes of the Machabees Iosephus Iulius Africanus and Egesippus The obseruation As Alexander began this monarchie in the seuenth yeare of his raigne in the age of the world 3641. so did Antiochus Epiphanes sonne to Antiochus Magnus the sixt king of Syria beginne the time of this partition that is the second part of the Monarchie in the age of the world 3749. He was hostage at Rome from whence he fled and vsurped the kingdome of Syria from his brothers sonne he pretended to protect his sisters sonne Philometor the yong king of Egypt by that meanes sought craftily to get the kingdome of Egypt into his hands For better expedition of his wicked purpose he procured certain cities to be yeelded into his hands In his returne from Egypt he tooke Ierusalem and spoyled it The Agyptians peruing his craftie dealing receiued their cities againe in regard whereof hee entred Egypt with a strong armie but had the repulse by aide of the Romans after which repulse he retured in great rage and tyrannically bent his force against Hierusalem he constrained the Iewes for the space of two yeares vtterly to forsake the law Machabeus therefore and his sonnes being priests rose vp in armes against his brutish crueltie and deliuered the people CHAP. II. Of the gouernment of the Iewes after the captiuitie A triple gouernment was among the Iewes betweene the captiuitie the aduent of our sauior Christ Iesus for they were gouerned first by princes of the tribe of Iuda and royall stocke of Dauid from the captiuitie vntill Antiochus After that they were gouerned by priests who were not of the royal petegree of Iuda but of the tribe of Leui.
he became seruant to the king of Babel 2. King 23. verse 34 and 36. 2. King 24. verse 1. The second obiection The scripture calleth Sedechias the brother of Iechonias therefore it is not consonant to the trueth to say hee was his vncle The answer I answer with saint Austen and saint Hierome that the custome of the scripture is to terme kinsemen by the name of brothers and therefore Sedechias is indifferently called vncle 2. King 24. verse 17. or brother 2. Par. 36. verse 10. 37 17 3 41 25 8 1 7 40 29 52 16 16 29 55 2 31 11 11 11 1 443 Make addition and the summe will be found 443. To the which adde three monethes for the raigne of Ioâ—chas The sixt age The sixt age from the beginning of the captiuitie till the sacred passion of Christ Iesus conteineth 660. yeares whereof let this be the demonstration The captiuitie in which are inuolued the eleuen yeares of Sedechias continued the space of 70. yeeres Ierem. 25. vers 11. and 29. Daniel 9. vers 2. Esdr. 1. verse 1. 2. Paralip 36 verse 22. This is confirmed by the raigne of the Monarchs for Nebuchad-nezzer from the beginning of whose eight yeare the second and chiefe captiuitie beganne reigned 45. yeeres Euilmerodach his sonne reigned 30. yeres And Balthazar reigned 3. yeares Al which put together make the 70. yeeres of the Iewish captiuitie For in the first yeare of king Cyrus who succeeded Balthazar the Iewes were set at libertie Esdr. 1 verse 1. S. Clement Eusebius and all approoued writers do constantly affirme the same The seuentie weekes in Daniel make iust 490. yeares as al writers do affirme Concerning which weeks because there is verie great varietie amongest historiographers I will here suppose that which by Gods grace I shal proue effectually when I come to the fourth chapter of the third booke of this first part whither I referre the Reader for his full resolution in this intricate and important controuersie In the meane season remember that the 490. yeares are but 475. yeares after the course of the Moone From the ende of the captiuitie vntill the twentieth yeare of Artaxerxes Longimanus inclusiuè where I hold that the 70. weekes doe beginne are iust 115. yeares and two moneths all which put together do make iust 660. yeres For the weeks make no more but 475. yeares after the course of the sunne which must be marked attentiuely and which shall be prooued hereafter accordingly 70 475 115 in al 660 Thus wee haue it perspicuously prooued euen by the testimonie of holy Writ that from the beginning of the world vntil the time that Christ suffered on the crosse for our sinnes be iust â—ure thousand foure score and seuenteene yeares three monethâ— and sixteene dayes The first age 1656 The second 353 The third 505 The fourth 480 The fift 428 The sixt 660 in all 4082. Now because the exact knowledge of the raigne of the kings of Iudah dependeth more then a little of the raigne of the kings of Israel I purpose in God to adioyne hereunto a manifest declaration of the same specially because without the knowledge thereof the bookes of the Kings and Chronicles can neuer be rightly vnderstoode The Kings of Israel Ieroboam raigned 21. yeares which I prooue thus Asa king of Iudah beganne to raigne in the twentieth yeere of Ieroboam 1. King chapter 15 verse 9. and Nadab the sonne of Ieroboam beganne to raigne ouer Israel in the second yere of Asa 1. King chapter 15 verse 25 therefore Ieroboam his father whom he succeeded in the kingdome raigned before his death 21. yeares Nadab raigned 2. yeares 1. King 15. verse 25. Baasha raigned 24. yeares 1. King 15. verse 33. Elah or Hela raigned 2. yeares 1. King 16.8 Zimri raigned 7. dayes 1. King 16. verses 15 and 16. daye 7 Amri or Omri raigned 12. yeares 1. King 16.23 Achab or Ahab reigned 22. yeeres 1. King 16.29 Ochozias or Ahaziah reigned 2. yeeres 1. King 22.51 Ioram or Iehoram raigned 12. yeeres 2. King 3. verse 1. both these two to wit Ochozias and Ioram were the sonnes of Achab. Iehu reigned 28. yeeres 2. King 10. verse 36. Ioachas or Iehoahaz reigned 17. yeeres 2. Kin. 13. ve 1. Ioas or Iehoash reigned 16. yeeres 2. King 13. verse 10. Ieroboam the sonne of Ioas or Ioash reigned 41. yeeres 4. King 14. verse 23. where we must note well by the way that the other Ieroboam was the sonne of Nebat 1. King 12.2 We must heere obserue as a necessarie rule that betweene Ieroboam and Zachariah was an inter-reigne of 23. yeeres I prooue it because we reade 2. Kin. 15.1 8. that Azariah king of Iudah beganne his raigne in the seuen and twentieth yeere of Ieroboam as also that Zacharias beganne his raigne in the eight and thirtieth yere of Azariah to which we must adde that Ieroboam raigned 41. yeeres and so the kingdome perforce was voide 23. yeres For if we make abstraction of 14. from 37. the remainder will be 23. yeres for the inter-reigne moneths 6 Zachariah reigned 6. moneths 2. King 15.8 moneth 1 Sellum or Shallum reigned 1 moneth 2. King 15.13 yeeres 10 Menahem or Manahen reigned 10. yeeres 2. King 15.17 Pekahiah or Phaceas reigned 2. yeeres 2. King 15.23 Pekah or Phasee raigned 20. yeeres 2. King 15.27 Osee or Hosheah reigned 9. yeeres 2. King 17. verse 1. In the dayes of this king about the yeare of the worlde 3304. beganne the captiuitie Of the ten Tribes whereof see more at large in the eight chapter next following in the sixt Section CHAP. III. Of the state of the Hebrewes The people of y e Iews the elect people of God liued vnder the protection and empire of Patriarkes Chiefetaines or Gouernours Iudges Kings againe Chiefetaines after the captiuitie Priests before the captiuity and Priests after the captiuity had to doe with the kings of the Persians Egyptians Syrians strangers and with the emperors of Rome The Israelites were gouerned 3. wayes by Iudges from Iosue to Saul Kings from Saul to the captiuitie Priests from the captiuitie to Christ. For exact vnderstanding of this chapter it is expedient to note well the fift booke of this first part from the second chapter to the end of the same booke CHAP. IIII. Of the Patriarkes â—he Patriâ—â—kes of the â—ebrewes were Abraham Isaac liued yeeres one hundred begat Isaac Ge. 21.5 threescore and begat Iacob Ge. 25.26 Iacob caled also Israel Ge. 35.10 he had 12 children with Lea Ruben Ge. 35.22 these were the heads of the twelue Tribes Simeon Ge. 35.22 these were the heads of the twelue Tribes Leui Ge. 35.22 these were the heads of the twelue Tribes Iudah Ge. 35.22 these were the heads of the twelue Tribes Isachar Ge. 35.22 these were the heads of the twelue Tribes Zabulon Ge. 35.22 these were the heads of the twelue Tribes Zilpha the handmaid of Lea Gad Ge. 35.22 these were the heads of the twelue Tribes Aser Ge. 35.22 these
so long For from the building thereof vntill the captiuitie be onely 432. yeares and eleuen yeares after that was it burnt as is prooued in the second doubt of this present chapter The captiuitie began the fourth yeare of Ioachim aliâs Eliachim Iere. 25. ver 1. Daniel with others of the Nobilitie were carried captiues Dan. 1. ver 3. yea Ioachim himself was bound with chaines and so carried to Babell 2. Paralip 36. ver 6. Nabuchodonozor carried away into Babell Ioachims mother his wiues his Eunuches and the mightie of the land carried he away into captiuitie from Ierusalem vnto Babell 4. King cap. 24. verse 15. The king of Babell made Matthanias his vncle king in his steed and changed his name to Sedechias verse 17. ibid. The first doubt The captiuitie beganne when Ieconias was carried away captiue to Babylon as it seemeth in S. Mathew cap. 1. v. 11. And yet was he eight yeares old when he was caried into Babylon 2. Par. 36. ver 9. before which time hee did not reigne ibid. Therefore the captiuitie could not beginne in the 11. yere of Sedechias as Iosephus and the Hebrews reckon neither at the birth of Ieconias as S. Mathew writeth The answere For the manifestation of this difficultie we must obserue that Ierusalem was thrise taken by the Babylonians to wit in the daies of Ioachim Iechonias and Sedechias 4. King ca. 24. 25. By reason whereof some reckon the beginning of the captiuitie from Ioachim some from Ieconias other some as the Hebrewes doe generally from the 11. yeare of king Sedechias See the answere of the third doubt heereof I haue spoken more at large in the second chapter in the handling of the fift age The second doubt The Prophet Ieremie writeth that the Citie of Ierusalem was burnt togither with the kinges pallace and the temple in the tenth day of the fift moneth in the 19. yeare of king Nebuchad-nezar Iere. 52. verse 12. but as the booke of Kings saith it was burnt in the seuenth day of the said moneth 2. Kin. 25. verse 8. The answere I answere that the citie was three daies in burning to wit from the seuenth day vntill the tenth Ieremie therefore speaking of the end is not contrarie to the booke of the kings speaking of the originall thereof The third doubt The prophet Daniel saith that the calamitie began in the third yeare of king Ioachim or Iehoiakim Dan. 1 ver 1. but the prophet Ieremie affirmeth that it was in the fourth yeare of Iehoiachim and in the first yeare of Nabuchad-nezar king of Babell Ier. cap. 25. verse 1. The answere We must here obserue that the captiuitie the first of the three was in the end of the third yeare of Ioachim as Daniel truely writeth in rigour of supputation yet may it be well said that it began in the fourth yeare as we reade in Ieremie because the remnant in the third yeare was in effect nothing at all The second Section Of the time of the siege The citie of Ierusalem was besieged the space of two yeres that is from the ninth yeare vntill the eleuenth of king Sedechias 4. Kin. 25. ver 1 2. during the time of which siege the famine was so sore and vrgent that the handes of pitifull mothers sod their own children to be their meate Lam. Ier. ca. 4. verse 10. which thing seemeth so repugnant to nature as it were ineredible to be tolde if holy writ had not first reported it The like horror was among mothers in murthering their children when Titus in the second yeare of Vespatianus his father besieged it and manie murthered themselues because the famine was so great The 3. Section Of Noe his floud The scripture recordeth that when God saw the wickednes of man to be great on earth and all the thoughtes of his heart to be naught continually it repented him that he had created man Wherefore his holy will was this to destroy from the face of the earth the man whom hee hadde made from man to beast to the creeping thinges and to the foules of the aire And this God purposed to doe by drowning of the world with a generall floud of water Yet Noah found fauour in Gods sight so that himselfe his wife his sonnes and their wiues eight persons in all with cattell foules and all liuing things two of euery sorte were saued in the arke Gen. 6.7 Noah was 600. yeares olde when the floud was vpon the earth Gen. chap. 7. ver 6. the floud preuailed on the earth 150. dayes Gen. 7. ver 24. The floud continued a whole yere Gen. 8. ver 13. It was in the yere of the world 1656. For from Adam to the birth of Noah are 1056. Gen. 5. And from the birth of Noah till the floud are 600. yeares The fourth Section Of the building of the temple King Salomon builded the temple in the fourth yeare of his raigne which was in the 480. yeare after the children of Israel were come out of Egypt 3. Kin. 6. ver 1. And in the yeare of the world after Iosephus 3102. after others 3149. but after the exact supputation 2994. as is already prooued While the temple was a building K. Salomon appointed seuentie thousand to beare burdens foure score thousand to hew stones in the mountaines and three thousand sixe hundreth ouerseers to cause the people to worke Par. cap. 2. ver 18. The fift Section Of the abode of the Israelites in Egypt There is a great controuersie and varietie not to be dissembled amongst Historiographers and learned writers concerning the time that the Israelites were in Egypt For Moses saith that the Israelites were in Egypt 430. yeares In Genesis it is said that they were there only 400. yeares S. Stephen saith that Abrahams seed should be a soiourner 400. yeares in a strange land And yet it is very certaine by authenticall supputation of the Scriptures that they were in Egypt only 215. yeares so that we want two hundreth yeares and odde of the accompt made in Genesis Exodus and the Actes S. Hierome confessed freely that he knew not howe to reconcile these places of the holy scripture S. Chrysostome reconcileth the places thus to wit that God appointed the Israelites to abide 400. yeares in Egypt yet for the heynous sinnes of the Egyptians he shortened the time euen as he abridged the 120 yeares which he graunted before the floud vnto men that they might repent and brought them to one hundreth Neither was Niniuie destroied after 40. daies Neither died Ezechias as God had said I answere therefore with Saint Austen and other learned writers that the 400. yeares mentioned in Genesis and in the Acts must be reckoned from the birth of Isaach vntill the departure out of Egypt and the 430. from Abrahams going out of his countrie For the seed of Abraham was so long afflicted in a land not their owne as the scripture speabeth Partly in Palestine partly in Mesopotamia and
Ioatham Amos prophesied against the nations adiacent to them in the time of Ozias Esaias prophesied against Iuda and Iurasalem in the time of Ioatham Ioel prophesied to Iuda and Ierusalem in the time of Ozias Michaeas prophesied against Ierusalem and Samaria in the time of Ioatham Nahum prophesied to the Assyrians and Niniuites in the time of Ioatham Abacuc prophesied against Babylon and Nabuchodonosor in the time of Manasses Ieremias prophesied to the citie of Ierusalem in the time of Iosias and Zedechias Sophonias prophesied against Iurusalem and Iuda in the time of Iosias Ezechiel prophesied to the captiues in Babylon in the time of Ioachim Daniel prophesied to his countrey men in Babylon in the time of Ioachim Haggaeus prophesied to all the people in Ierusalem and Iuda in the time of Zorobabel Zacharias prophesied to the people of Ierusalem and Iuda in the time of Zorobabel Malachias prophesied to the people of Ierusalem Iuda in the time of in the end of the captiuitie 〈…〉 CHAP. X. Containing a particular description of the time of the Prophets called the greater The first section of the Prophet Esay THe Prophet Esay was the sonne of Amos not of that Amos who was the third of the 12. lesser Prophetes but of another Amos hauing different characters with the Hebrews Aug de ciuit libr. 18. cap. 27. Hier. in 1. cap Esaiae Esay prophesied to Ierusalem and Iuda that is to the two tribes of Beniamin and Iuda Hier. in 1. cap Esaiae Esay who was also called Azarias Osee Ioel Amos prophesied at the selfe same time in the daies of Osias Ioatham Achas and Ezechias kings of Iuda Hier. in princ Esaiae The wicked king Manasses caused the prophet Esay to be sawed in peeces with a wodden saw Wherefore that which the Epistle to the Ebrewes saith of the tortures of Gods Saintes that they were hewen in sunder is very fitly referred to the prophet Esay Hier. lib. 15. cap. 57. in Esaiam The second section of the prophet Ieremie Ieremie prophesied to y e two tribes of Iuda Beniamin he foretold their captiuitie in Babylon hee began his prophesie in the daies of Iosias he continued the same in the daies of Ioachim and vntill the eleuenth yeare of Sedechias in the time of the captiuitie Orig. hom 1. in Hier. Aug. de ciu lib. 18. c. 33. Betweene the time of Ieremias and Esaias were one hundred and fiftie yeares Hier. lib. 9. cap. 30. in Esaiam He was the sonne of Helkias the priest cap. 1. Iere. v. 1. the tradition of the Hebrewes is that whensoeuer the father or graundfather of any prophet is put in the title such a one was also a prophet himselfe Gloss. ordinar Sophonias prophesied at the same time with Ieremias Athanas in synop Aug. de ciu lib. 18. cap. 33. Iehoiakim king of Iuda burnt the book which Baruc wrote wrote at the mouth of Ieremias in which booke the prophet shewed what punishment God had determined to bring vpon Iuda and Israel if they would not returne euery man from his euill way and bring forth worthy fruites of repentance But Ieremie at Gods appointment wrote another book which contained the afflictions of Iuda and Israel in a farre larger maner Ierem. cap. 36. Where we may note by the way that the wicked do euer kicke against the preachers of Gods word especially when their sinnes are reprooued But at length they tast of the cup of Gods wrath for their great contempt and disobedience And our papistes are now become Iehoiakims as who both burne the writers of all bookes that reprooue their superstitions and idolatry and also cast the bookes into the fire Yea euen the holy bibles if they be once translated into the vulgar tongue Ieremie began to prophesie when he was a childe in the 13. yeere of Iosias king of Iuda hee continued his prophesie during the reigne of Iosias the sonne of Amon. 19. yeares and after that vnder Ioachim 11. yeres and vnder Sedechias 11. yeares who was the last king of Iuda The three moneths of Ioachaz and Iechonias are reckoned in the yeares afore named So that from the beginning of his prophesie vntill the captiuitie of Ierusalem in which himselfe was taken he prophesied 41. yeres ouer and besides that time in which he was carried away into Egypt and prophesied in Taphins Hier. in cap. 2. Ierem. at which Taphins in Egypt as some write hee was stoned to death But before that time he was put in a deep dungeon of myre Iere. 38. The third section of the prophet Ezechiel Ezechiel followed Ieremie and began to prophesie in the fift yeare of the transmigration of Iechonias which was the same yeare of the reigne of Sedechias Hier. lib. 5. cap. 29. in Ieremiam in the 30. yere after some of his age Ezechias c. 1. but as S. Hierome writeth the 30. yeares whereof the Prophet speaketh are not the yeares of the age of Ezechiel himself but the yeares from the 18. of king Iosias at what time the booke of the law was found vntill the fift yeare of the captiuity of Iechonias Hier. in cap. 1. Exech 2. Ezechiel was carried away captiue into Babilon togither with Iechonias Daniel and the three children Hier. in princ Ezech. Aug. de ciu lib. 18. cap. 34. This holy prophet foretold the destruction of Hierusalem and the captiuitie of the Iewes for their manifold sinnes and wickednesse earnestly exhorting them to repentance For which cause the Iewes were so exasperated against him as the wicked are this day against the preachers of Gods word that they trailed him on the ground amongst the stones till his braines went out Author oper imperf in Matt. cap. 23. hom 46. prop. finem A golden obseruation In the dayes of Iosias king of Iuda Helkiah the Priest found the booke of the lawe of the Lord giuen by the hand of Moses Which when the good king vnderstood hee gathered togither all the inhabitantes of Ierusalem and of Iuda and the Priests and the Leuites and all the people from the greatest to the smallest and he read in their eares all the words of the booke of the couenant that was found in the house of the Lord and the king caused all that were found in Ierusalem and Beniamin to stand to it and hee compelled all the people of Israel to serue the Lord their God 2. Par. 34.4 Kin. 22. Thus saith the holy scripture By which we see euidently that the ouersight of all persons in all causes aswell ecclesiastical as ciuill pertaineth to the king and that the king hath the charge of religion committed into his handes and also that he may compel priests and Leuites to doe their dueties in that behalfe On the other side we may note the intollerable impietie of our disholy fathers the late bishops of Rome Who most irreligiously and very impudently excommunicate christian kings and monarches because they appoint the word of God to be preached in their
sucuus Anno Dom. 333 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 743 15 88 Fridericus 1. Anno Dom. 333 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 743 37 89 Henricus 5. aliâs 6. Anno Dom. 333 The raigne of the Caesars Anno. Dom. 743 10 yeares 90 Otho 5. aliâs 4. Anno Dom. 333 The raigne of the Caesars Anno. Dom. 743 13 91 Fridericus 2. Anno Dom. 333 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 743 33 92 Rodulphus Anno Dom. 333 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 743 19 93 Aldulphus Anno Dom. 333 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 743 1 yeare 3. monethes 94 Albertus Anno Dom. 333 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 743 9 yeares The names of the Caesars 95 Henricus 6. Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 5 yeares 96 Ludouicus 4. Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 33 97 Carolus 4. Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 32 98 Venceslaus Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 22 99 Robertus Bat. Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 10 100 Sigismundus Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 27 101 Albertus 2. Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 2 102 Fridericus 3. Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 53 103 Maximilianus Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 26 104 Carolus 5. Flandr Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 30 yeares 105 Ferdinandus Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 6 yeres 4. 〈◊〉 106 Maximilianus Anno Dom. 752 The raigne of the Caesars Anno Dom. 998 11 yeares Of these Emperours more shalbe said in peculiar 〈◊〉 when I come to the second part and first booke thereof The third booke containeth the description of the second Monarchie that is of the Persians CHAP. I. Of the originall of the monarchie and succession in the same GOd most mightie and most faithfull for his power doth whatsoeuer pleaseth him and for his promise sake hee vndoubtedly accomplisheth whatsoeuer he hath said He suffered the Iews his peculiar people to be long afflicted by the Babilonians but after that 70. yeares were fully complete and expired according to his promise Isai. 45 1.48.20 He with great ioy wrought their deliuerance He appointed king Cyrus to set them at libertie whom for that purpose he called his annointed Es. 45.1 Which Cyrus hauing conquered the kingdome of the Medes against Astyages left the said kingdome to Darius his vncle by whose aide he tooke Babylon and so transported the Monarchie of Babylon to the Persians Cyrus deliuered the Iewes from captiuitie the very same yeare that he took Babylon He also gaue them great treasures to build the temple of Hierusalem and sent them home againe vnder the conduct of Zorobabel Esd. cap. 1. cap. 2. 2. Par. 36. ver 23. Esd. 7. v. 15. He commaunded to giue them of his own reuenewes day by day so much as should be necessary Esd. 6. verse 8.9 Cyrus king of Persia brought forth by the hand of Mithridates the treasurer all the vessels of the house of the Lord which Nabuchodonosor had taken out of Hierusalem and placed in the house of his false God Cyrus numbred them vnto Sesbazer the Prince of Iuda To wit 30. Chargers of gold a thousand chargers of siluer 29. kniues thirtie basons of gold 410. basons of siluer and of other vessels 1000. all which with other rich gifts the king bestowed on the Iewes to build vp againe their Temple Esd. 1. 2. Par. 36. The building of the Temple was hindered by the aduersaries of Iuda and Beniamin that is the inhabitants of Samaria whom the king of Assyria had placed in the stead of the ten tribes which ten tribes he had carried away vnto Ashur and put them in Halah and in Habor by the riuer of Gozan and in the citie of the Medes for at that time the Medes and Persians were subiect to the Assyrians which vexation hindering of the Iewes in building their Temple continued about the space of thirtie yeeres that is vntill the sixt yeare of Darius the sonne of Histaspis surnamed Assuerus and Artaxerxes indifferently Esdr. cap. 4. The difficultie The Prophet Daniel who liued euen in the time of the captiuitie of Babylon affirmeth constantlie that the same night in which Balthasar the king of the Chaldees was slain Darius King of the Medes tooke the kingdome being 62. yeares of age Dan. cap. 5. vers 31. and the said Daniel saith that he vnderstoode the time of the captiuitie by the bookes of Ieremy in the first yeare of Darius sonne of Assuerus who was of the seede of the Medes Dan. 9. vers 1. but Esdras writeth plainely that Cyrus was king of Babylon and gaue the Iewes leaue to build their temple to whom also he gaue great treasure as is alreadie saide Esdr. 1. Esdr. chap. 6. vers 3. The answere I say first with Saint Hierome vppon Daniel that Cyrus gaue the title of honour to Darius as well in respect of his olde age as for kinred sake I say secondly that Cyrus went about warres in other Countreyes and so had not the title though he were king indeed I say thirdly that Darius died the same yeare that he and Cyrus wan Babylon so as the Monarchie of the Medes Persians and Babylonians descended wholly vnto Cyrus The names of the kings of the Persian Monarchie Darius A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 9 monethes Cyrus A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 30 yeares Cambyses A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 8 yeares Smerdes magus A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 7 moneths Darius Histaspis aliàs Artaxerxes alias Assuerus A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 36 yeares Xerxes A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 20 yeares Artabanus A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 7 monethes Darius Artaxerxes Longimanus A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 40 yeares Zerxes A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 2 monethes Sogdianus A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 7 monethes Darius Nothus A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 19 yeares Artaxerxes Mnemon aliàs Memnon A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 40 yeares Darius Ochus aliàs vagosus A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 26 yeares Arsames sonne of Ochus A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 4 yeares Darius Arsami filius aliàs Arbelas or Melas A. M. 3426 the time of their reigne A. M. 3655 6 yeares The first obseruation It is to be obserued that Artaxerxes was the commō name of all
kinges of Persia as Pharaoh was the common name of all kinges of Egypt and as Caesar was the common name of all the Emperours of Rome The second obseruation The custome of the Persians was this that when anie king went to warre against any strange nation hee left his sonne or the next of the bloud royall to bee king in his place Cyrus therefore when hee had warre against the Scythians and marched towarde them appointed Cambyses his sonne king of the countrey in his absence according to the custome of the Persians Xerxes likewise the sonne of Histaspis succeeded his father but left his kingdome to his sonne Longimain when hee went to warre against the Greekes in regarde heereof sundrie writers doe not place Cambyses and Xerxes in the lineall order of succession which point must bee well obserued to auoide obscuritie and to reconcile the dissenting historiographers CHAP. II. Of the time of repairing the temple in Hierusalem KIng Cyrus in the first yeare of his raigne as hee was the Persian monarke set the Iewes at liberty and appointed them to build the Temple againe in Hierusalem I say as monarke because as learned men write hee had raigned certain yeres in Persia before he tooke Babylon became the monarke Cambyses and other aduersaries did a long time hinder the building of the Temple so as it had not the accomplishment vntill the sixt yeare of Darius Assuerus Esdr. 6. vers 15. Albeit Darius in his second yeare gaue commandement that the worke should go forward Esdr. chap. 4. ver 24. The first difficultie The Iewes obiected against our Sauiour Christ that their temple was 46. yeares a building Ioh. 2. vers 20. yet by the supputation already made in the fourth section of the first chapter and second booke it cannot be so much The answere I say first that concerning the supputation of yeeres there is great varietie amongst historiographers Eusebius reckoneth the time from the 55. Olympiade to the 64. Olympiade inclusiuè that is 40. yeres others reckon 21. yeres others 23. others 30. neither agreeing with the account of the Iews neither yet with the raign of the monarks I say secondly that the teÌ„ple was 46. yeres in building as the Iews affirmed who best knew the time and their assertion is not dissonant from the raigne of the monarks for Cyrus raigned 30. yeares Cambyses 8. yeares Smerdes 7. moneths Darius sixe yeares and Nehemias after that builded vp the walles The replie The temple was finished in the sixt yeare of Darius as recordeth Esdras and so wee want one whole yeare and fiue months of the 46. yeeres whereof the Iewes spake The answere I answer that the temple is said to be finished in the 6. yere of Darius because all the worke in effect was then accomplished neuerthelesse some part thereof was left vndone because Nehemias after that builded vp the walles as wee reade in the first second and third chapter of his booke The second difficulty Cambyses Esdras 4. verse 6.7 is called Assuerus and Artaâ—â—rxes so as the names seeme to be confounded The answere I say first that Cambyses successor to king Cyrus a louing and mercifull Prince who furthered in all respectes the godly desire of the Iewes was a naughtie wicked and tyrannicall regent one that wholly bent himselfe against God and against his peculiar flocke Wherein appeareth the vncertaintie of mans felicitie in this worlde while a godly father hath to his successor a wicked and vngodly sonne a sonne that reuoketh the priuiledges which his father gaue to the people of God But his life was short miserable and bloudy the proper reward of all brutish tyrannie For as hee mounted vppon his horse hee sodainly fell vpon his disâ—ased sword and so had a bloudie end I say secondly that Artaxerxes is a name common to all the kinges of Persia to which name Assuerus is equiualent with the Hebrewes and so Cambyses is indifferently called Artaxerxes or Assuerus as is saide in the first obseruation The third difficultie Esdras writeth that the Iewes were appointed by three seuerall kinges of Persia to reare vp againe their temple Esdras 6. verse 14. and therefore not only at the first by Cyrus and afterwardes by Darius but also by Artaxerxes the third The answere I aunswere as I said before that Artaxerxes is the common name to all the kinges of Persia which obseruation if it once be forgotten many difficulties will ensue thereupon When Esdras therefore saith by the commaundement of Cyrus and Darius and Artaxerxes it is all one as if hee had saide and Darius which is also called Artaxerxes for the particle and is there not copulatiue but expositiue as in other places also CHAP. III. Of the continuance of the monarchie Darius Ochus was a tyrannicall and bloudthirstie king he murdered his two brethren that so he might enioy the kingdome Hee made warre with the Egyptians and by that meanes cruelly vexed the Iewes By this prince and vntil the time of Alexander the great the church was euer in great miserie and affliction All the priuiledges graunted by Cyrus and Darius were vtterly taken away but God who neuer wil forsake his church though hee suffer it to be tossed and turmoiled for a time in the end brought solace and true ioy vnto the Iewes For shortly Darius Ochus was slaine of Bagoses by whom also Arsames was murdered and Darius Arbelas the last king of the Persians was ouercome and slaine of Alexander the Great So that the monarchie of the Persians endured 249. yeares and eight moneths after the supputation of others 191. whereof more at large hereafter The resistance was so great that the Iewes were enforced to builde with one hand and to holde their weapons in the other Nehe. 4. verse 17. The Monarchie of the Persians reached from India euen to Ethiopia ouer an hundred and seuen and twentie prouinces Est. cap. 1. verse 1. Darius Assuerus king of the Medes Persians and Chaldeans to shewe the riches and glorie of his kingdome and the honour of his maiestie made a feast to all his princes and seruauntes and to all captaines and gouernours of his prouinces for the space of an hundred and fourescore dayes And when these daies were expired the king made another feast to all the people of Susan the chiefe citie both vnto the great and small none excepted This he did for the space of seuen daies in the court of the kinges pallace vnder an hanging of white greene and blew clothes fastened with cordes of fine linnen and purple in siluer ringes and pillers of marble The beds were of golde and of siluer vppon a pauement of porphirie and marble and alabaster and blew colour They gaue them drink in vessels of gold and chaunged vessell after vessell and royall wine in aboundance according to the power of the king and none was compelled to drinke more then as best pleased him Est. cap. 1. v. 3 4 5 6 7 8. The
of the Iews was at an end about 30. yeeres before Christs incarnation Herode the stranger was successor to this Aristobulus in the kingdom and priesthood of the Iewes In the third yeere of the 186. Olympiade and in the age of the world 3937. yeeres then in the 32. yeere of Herod was our Sauiour borne The fourth obseruation Herod the great had many children Aristobulus Alexander Antipater Antipas Philippus and Archelaus Of which Aristobulus and Alexander were his children by his beloued wife Mariamne which Mariamne he put to death causing his children Alexander and Aristobulus to be strangled in Samaria Archelaus Herodes called Antipas Antipater and Philip yet liued amongst whom the kingdome was diuided Herodes the Great designed his sonne Archelaus to be king by his last will and testament but the Emperour Augustus would not confirme Herodes will and so hee was not king at the first yet Augustus was content that he should be Tetrarke and vpon hope of his good regiment to be king afterward This Archelaus saith Rhegino did reigne in Iudea when our Sauiour was brought out of Egypt for feare of which king he returned into Nazareth a towne in Galile where hee abode till his baptisme This was done in the seuenth yere of Christ and in the 15. yeere of his birth Archelaus being accused of treason before Augustus was banished out of Iewrie the kingdome was diuided among his 4. brethren Herod Antipater Lysanias and Philip. Yet this Antipater after Carion was slaine long before The first obseruation Whether Antipater was slaine as writeth Carion or liuing stil with Philip and the rest as saith Eusebius certaine it is that foure only are mentioned in the holy scripture to wit Archelaus who raigned in Iurie after Herod the great Antipas whom S. Luke calleth Herod who was Tetrarke of Galilie Philip who was Tetrarke of Iturea and Trachonitis Lysanias who was the Tetrark of Abilene Pilate being then president in Iewry which Lysanias after Eusebius was one of the brethren albeit other writers affirme no such thing CHAP. III. Of the 2300. daies Daniel had a vision of great persecution that shoulde come vnto the church that the daily sacrifice should cease and Gods trueth be troden vnder foote And that the sinnes of the Iewes were the cause of such horrible afflictions Yet for the solace of Gods children whom he neuer forsaketh finally the time of the desolation is appointed and pronounced in these obscure words Vnto the euening and morning two thousand and three hundreth then shall the sanctuarie be cleansed Sundrie as S. Hierome witnesseth trouble themselues miserably about the exposition of this place Some for 2300 read 2200 least sixe yeares and three monethes abound Other some vnderstand the place of Antichrist and that this shalbe reallie complete in him which was spoken typically of Antiochus And this childish imagination doe our late Iesuites and other papistes imitate whose fantasticall interpretation was confuted by S. Hierome before they were borne But the meaning is plaine and easie that is vntill so many naturall daies be past which in all make sixe yeares three monethes and an halfe For so long was the temple prophaned vnder the wicked king Antiochus And that this is the true sence of the place I prooue by two reasons First because that vnto the morning and to the euening cannot possibly be vnderstood of either yeares or monethes and yet can the same be truely and simply verified in so many natural daies Secondly because the prophet of God doth expound the rest of the vision euen of the kinges of Syria And my reasons are confirmed by S. Hieromes testimonie whose expresse words are these Vespere autem manè successioneÌ„ diei noctÃsque significat The euening and the morning doth signifie the succession of the day and the night And in the very same place hee prooueth by Iosephus and the bookes of the Machabees that the setting vp of Iupiters Image in the Temple and the time of the desolation wrought by Antiochus is correspondent to the 2300. daies CHAP. IIII. Of the priestes of the Iewes after the captiuitie vnto Alexander the Great The names of the priests Iesus Filius Iosedech Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 72 yeares Ioachim Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 30 Eliasib alià s Nechasib Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 40 Ioiada Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 24 Ionathan alià s Ioannan Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 52 Iaddo alià s Iaddua Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 28 yeares Iesus or Ieshua was the high priest in the returne euen as Zorobabel or Zerubbabel was the ciuill gouernour Diuers thinke diuersly of this succession but I deliuer plainly what I iudge most probable CHAP. V. Of the priests of the Iewes from king Alexander vnto the Machabees The names of y e priests Onias Priscus A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 25 yeares Simon Priscus A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 13 Eleazar A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 20 Manasses A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 27 yeares Simon Iunior A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 28 Onias Iunior A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 39 Iason A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 3 yeares Menelaus A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 7 yeares This Menelaus was a very wicked priest whom Antiochus put to death at Berytus Antiochus moreouer inhibited Onias his sonne to succeed him and appointed Alcimus aliâs Iacimus the high priest which Alcimus was of the race and petigree of Aaron but not of the same familie Onias therefore sonne to Menelaus went into Egypt and insinuating himselfe into the amitie of Ptolomee Philometor and Cleopaâ—ra his wife perswaded them to build a temple in Heliopolis like to that of Hierusalem and to make him priest in the same place Iacimus after he had been high priest three yeares died leauing no successor behinde him and so the citie of Hierusalem was seuen whole yeares togither without a priest Afterward the gouernment of the Iewes was committed to the familie of the Assamoneans and then they rebelled against the Macedonians and made Ionathan the high priest These points and specially the case of Iacimus or Alcimus ought diligently to be marked against the mangled and fondly commended popish succession whereof by the power of God more shalbe said hereafter From about this time vntill Herod the great Iudas Machabeus and others of his race had the gouernment and priesthood among them From Herode vntill Christ our redeemer were yeares 32. plus minus During which time priests were not made of the line of the Assamoneans
neither could Aaronicall succession be found any where at all priesthoode was bought with money and the hie priest was changed euery yere Which obseruation if it be annexed to the case of Alcimus will confound our papistes vtterly So write Iosephus and Eusebius Yea Iosephus addeth that from Herod vntill the citie was burnt by Titus there were 28. priestes who liued 107. yeares CHAP. VI. Of the varietie of religion before the incarnation of Christ our Sauiour Epiphanius in praefat contr haereses Barbarisme before the floud from the time of Adam Scythisme after the floud from y e daies of Noah Grecisme which began of the idolaters and was deuided into the sect of Pythagoreans Platonickes Stoickes Epicures Iudaisme which was from the time of Abraham it was deuided into the Scribes Pharisies Sadducees Hemerobaptists Osseans Nazareans Herodians Samaritisme from the time of Nabuchodonozor it was deuided into the Gorthenes Sebneans Essenes Dositheans At what time as the Church was miserably afflicted with the tyrannie of Antiochus sectes and diuisions euery where arose and pure doctrine was troden vnder foote Before Christ these three were the principall the sect of the Pharisies the sect of the Sadduces and the sect of the Essenes The Pharisies as some thinkeâ— had their denomination according to the etimologie of the word that is of separation because they did separate themselues from the common sort of Gods people and liued after another maner Yet others thinke more fitly that they had y â— name of y e interpretation of the holy scriptures because they taught out of the chaire of Moses and declared the scriptures vnto the people So write Reuchlinus and Iosephus and the etimologie of the name is consonant therunto For the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth as properly signifie to expound as to deuide For which consideration saith Iosephus they are called Pharisies that professe the knowledge of the legall rites The Sadducees were corrupt with the Philosophie of the Greekes they had many things common with the Epicures they denied the resurrection they held that there were neither Angels nor spirits they reiected the bookes of the prophets and al this notwithstanding they would be called Sadducees that is iust men as the worde soundeth in the Hebrew tongue The Essenes that is workers were euen such and none other then this day be our popish Monks and Iesuits For the Essenes fled from the common people they dealed not with secular affaires they gaue themselues to contemplation they had all things in common they woulde not marrie they had precise houres appointed for reading and prayer they liued in great abstinence they dwelt in celles and were clad in poore attire These were the Essenes saith Iosephus who best knew the sects of his owne time and of his deare countrey-men and who knoweth not our popish Dominicans Franciscans Scotsts Thomists and Iesuites to be the selfe same sectaries They differ onely in these sixe points first they vse not so strict abstinence as I haue proued in the first booke in the 17. chapter and eleuenth section For our Iesuites will conuerse with the best and eate of all meates that are the best yea they are so farre consâ—med with seuere abstenicie that their great doctor Heywood when hee did sowe sedition in this Realme against his naturall soueraigne and natiue countrey pronounced before a great assemblie after he had beene reproued for not keeping the popish fasts that he could dispense both with himselfe and others to eate vppon all dayes at their pleasures which thing neuerthelesse the common people deluded with their doctrine thinke verily to be the ready way to hell Secondly the Essenes were distinguished from other people by their vsuall precise kind of abstinence where and with whome soeuer they did conuerse but our Iesuits are so farre from that that if you meet them in the common inne vpon the friday at Douer or other place of arriuall on what day soeuer yea though it be good fryday they wil eate flesh with you for companie and so accommodate themselues to the time as you may worthily deeme them worldelie politikes and not religious Iesuites as they professe to be Thirdly the Essenes were louers of peace but our Iesuits are fosterers of rebellion the Essenes sought quietnes but our Iesuits stirre vp sedition in euerie countrey Fourthly the Essenes delt faithfully with all men but our Iesuits deale vnfaithfully and glorie in the same Their constant doctrine is marke wel my words that one may say and sweare cleane contrarie to his minde so these three points concurre First if the iudge or magistrate before whom he sweareth be not a competent iudge or lawfull magistrate such a one is not in England by their opinion the Papists onely excepted Secondly if the matter bee not an article of their faith Thirdly if they dissemble to redeeme their vexation or trouble and this kinde of dealing is with them a godly politike equiuocation This rotten foundation once laide they make many sandie buildings thereupon for they will both say and sweare to their neighbours iudges and magistrates here in England that they haue not said masse bin in such places reconciled such persons beene in such company and so foorth when for all that they haue daily practised the same yet they perswade themselues that all this may lawfully be done The like execrable and plaine diabolicall equiuocation they vse when to auoid the danger imminent they are content with their lippes to acknowledge our most gratious soueraigne for their Queene but in their hearts thinke the flat contrarie Which thing is euident by the detestable excommunication of their pope Pius whereof I haue spoken at large in the preface of my Motiues For in that deuillish curse proceeding fro the master deuil himselfe her most excellent M. is not called the true and lawfull Queene but the pretensed Queene of England which their dissimulation is the flat herisie of the Helchesits Fiftly the Essenes taught to yeelde faithfull seruice and obedience to all magistrates specially to princes but our Iesuites stirre vp their Popes to sowe sedition and to make warres against Princes to excommunicate them and to dispossesse them of their royall scepters Sixtly the Essenes professed humilitie as well in deede as in worde but our Iesuites professe nothing lesse indeede though they desire to be so reputed This is to be proued many wayes for first whereas euery secte of their Religion the Dominicans the Franciscans the Carthusians the Carmelites the Capuchenes and the rest hath some one cardinall for their protector the late hatched Iesuites being rumors to all the rest cannot be content to submit themselues to any cardinall for which their hautie mindes they are iustly despised of them all Againe for a shew of humilitie their professed fathers so termed will haue no possessions yet they labour closely tooth and naile to get large possessions to the Seminaries to their penitentiaries readers students
eate grapes they thinke that hearbes trees and plants haue life in such manner as they feele great paine when one cutteth or plucketh them vppe by the rootes or otherwise for this respect they deeme it an heynous offence to purge the field from thornes and thistles and so they condemne husbandrie the most innocent art of all as guiltie of many murders yet they thinke husbandrie or tillage of the grounde to bee pardonable in their auditors because by that their labor they bring foode to their elect in whose bellies the substance is purged and the offence taken away And consequently although themselues do no murders actually as they preteÌ„d yet do they liue of manifest murders practised by others really Where note by the way that the church of the Manichees consisted of two sortes of people their elect and their auditors They held this fantasticall opinion that whosoeuer did eate flesh should be made the same thing which he did eate As for example if a man did eate an hogge he should be made a hog if a bull he should become a bull if a bird he should be a bird if a fish a fish and so in the rest The Manichees held also that if any man marry a wife that same man so soone as he passeth out of this life is changed into another bodie and becommeth a woman Yea they say further that if a man kil a man an asse or other liuing thing that man straight after his death is changed into that liuing thing which he killed be it a mouse serpent or whatsoeuer else The Manichees vse to blesse their meates in this manner O bread neither did I reape thee neither did I grinde thee neither did I make thee neither did I bake thee but an other did al these things and brought thee to me my selfe therefore do eate thee without offence These and other like monstrous assertions did this heresie bring forth This is the grace that they vse CHAP. XII Of the Pelagians taken out of Saint Augustine PElagius sometime a monke and a Brytan borne extolled free-will so much that hee ascribed little or nothing vnto grace He affirmed that man may keepe all Gods holy commaundements without his diuine grace and being reprooued saith saint Austen for derogating so much from the grace of God he answered with vnchristian subtiltie that grace was therefore giuen to man that hee might keepe Gods lawes with more facilitie That grace saith Pelagius without which wee can doe nothing that good is is onely in our free-will which free-will God ingraffed in our nature without any our deserts so that God helpeth vs by his law and doctrine to this end onely saith Pelagius that wee may learne what to hope for and what to do but not to do what we know ought to be done The Pelagians hold saith S. Austin that infants in their carnall natiuitie are so pure and free from originall sinne that they neede not the second and spirituall regeneration of water and the holie ghost Now if any man would aske the Pelagians to what end infants are baptized They will answere forsooth saieth saint Austen that by this externall regeneration they may haue accesse into heauen and not thereby to be absolued from the guilt of sinne For if they die without Baptisme yet do they promise them eternall life but without the kingdome of heauen This is the heresie of Pelagius which I haue sincerely recited out of saint Augustine that excellent writer and immoueable pillar of Christs church because many talke thereof who seem not throughly to vnderstand the same With which heresie how the papists agree and how they dissent from the same shall God willing bee shewed when I come to the next Booke in the chapter of mans Iustification CHAP. XIII Of the Arrian heresie ARrius the heretike was the reader of diuinity in Alexandria a man of great learning and eloquence but withall prowd and ambitious He denied the diuinitie and godhead of Iesus Christ affirming him to be pure man and a meere creature Which his blasphemous doctrine was dispersed throughout Egypt Lybia Alexandria Thebais and many other prouinces Alexander a godly bishop laboured by all meanes possible to dissuade Arrius from his pestiferous and execrable heresie but all his trauell was in vaine because many other bishops and cleargie men embraced the opinion of Arrius and obstinately defended the same The most christian emperour Constantinus worthily surnamed the Great deepely lamenting the church of God to be diuided with schisme and dissention sent Hosius the Bishop of Corduba in Spaine to Alexander and Arrius with his owne hand-writing earnestly exhorting them to set all dissention aside and to agree in vnitie peace and trueth But when the blessed Emperour could not preuaile in his holy purpose hee commaunded al christian bishops to resort at a certaine day designed to Nice a citie in Bithynia where this great controuersie was decided before Constantine himselfe and Arrius with his complices driuen into exile The Emperour Constantinus sent for Arrius into his pallace so meaning fully to make trial of his opinion who when he asked Arrius if he were of the same opinion with the councill of Nice Arrius without all deliberation and stay subscribed in the presence of the Emperour to the decrees of the saide councill Then the emperour greatly admiring that fact willed Arrius to confirme his subscription with an othe to which Arrius yeelded deceitfully as he had done before insomuch that the Emperour being perâ—waded that Arrius was an orthodox and good christian charged Alexander the bishop of Alexandria seuerely to receiue Arrius againe into his woonted place and dignitie Yet Alexander knowing Arrius to be an enemy to God and his holy religion and suspecting his dissimulation with the Emperour his soueraigne fearing God on the one side and reuerencing his soueraigne on the other gaue himselfe to deuout and earnest prayer so commending the whole cause vnto God While Alexander was thus deuoutly occupied behold news came vnto him that as Arrius came from the emperours pallace the worme of conscience did wonderfully trouble him and solubilitie of body did so vehemently assault him that hee was inforced sodainely to withdraw himselfe to a common place where while he sought to haue the ordinary course of nature blood gushed but all his inwards fell from him and so he perished most miserably The secret subtiltie wherwith Arrius fought to deceiue the godly and most christian Emperor was this Arrius wrote his execrable opinion of Christ in a peece of paper kept closely vnder his arme holes that 〈◊〉 hee subscribed in the presence of the Emperour then the Emperour maruelling that he would so doe vrged him to confirme the same with an oath Arrius roundly tooke an oath that he thought as he had written meaning indeede of his first writing which hee kept secretly vnder his arme-hole Where euerie one may see how grieuous a sinne it is to dissemble with God
that that vow which for the obedieÌ„ce of mans law is preiudicial to Gods law is wicked and damnable but such is the vowe annexed in popish priests marke well my words therefore the vow imposed to popish priests is wicked and damnable I say first the vow annexed because the priests do not formally vow single life but the Pope hath annexed it to their orders by his wicked decree I say secondly the vowe imposed because the priestes indeede woulde willingly retaine their libertie stil. I say thirdly that gods law doth not onely graunt libertie to marrie but also chargeth euerie one that hath not the gift of continencie to take a wife to vse holy wedlocke for the auoiding of sinne I say fourthly that mans law onely hath prohibited the marriage of priests which being once proued this fourth assertion wilbe manifest Thus therfore writeth their deare Gratian in expresse words Copula namque sacerdotalis vel consanguineorum nec legali nec euangelica vel apostolica auctoritate prohibetur ecclesiastica tamen lege penitus interdicitur For the marriage of priests or kinsfolks is neither forbiddeÌ„ by the law of Moses nor by the lawe of the gospell nor by the law of the apostles yet is it vtterly interdicted by the lawe of the church of Rome Marke well these wordes for Christes sake gentle christian reader for they are able to confound al obstinate papists in the world Obserue therefore first that this Gratian who vttereth these words was a verie famous popish Canonist brother to Peter Lombard surnamed for his supposed deserts the Maister of Sentences who was sometime bishop of Paris and of such renowme in the popish church as his bookes are this day read publiquely in the diuinitie schooles Obserue secondly that this great learned papist Gratian liued with his brother Lombard about 400. yeeres agoe euen then when the pope was in his greatest pompe and tyrannie Obserue thirdly that this Gratian being so learned and so renowmed among the papists did euen in the altitude of popedome commit that to the publique view of the world which vtterly ouerthroweth al papistrie Obserue fourthly that the pope and his vassalles being iustly infatuated for their manifold sinnes had not power to hinder and keepe backe from the print such bookes as vtterly disclose their tyranny falshood and paltrie dealing Oh sweete Iesus great is thy mercy wonderfull is thy iustice infinite is thy wisedome vnsearchable are thy iudgements Truly saith the Psalmograph Vnles the Lord defend the citie in vaine do they labour that keepe the same Thou O God who causest the red sea to giue place to the Israelites thou who causest Balaams asse to speake thou who causest the fire to suspend it force in the burning furnace thou who causest yron to swimme vpon the water thou who causest lockes and brasen gates to open voluntarily thou thou O mightie God of Israel hast enforced Gratian that learned famous and zealous papist to confesse openly for the battering downe of al popery that the marriage of priests which the Pope enforceth vppon them vnder paine of damnation euerlasting is neither forbidden by the law of Moses nor by the lawe of thy holy gospel nor yet by the law of thine apostles Caietanus their owne deare Cardinall and learned schooleman confirmeth that which Gratian hath already said These are his wordes Nec ratione nec authoritate probari potest quod absolute loquendo sacerdos peccet contrahendo matrimonium Nam nec ordo in quantum ordo nec ordo in quantum sacer est impeditiuus matrimonij siquidem sacerâ—otium non dirimit matrimonium contractum siue ante siue post seclusis omnibus legibus ecclesiasticis stando tantum â—is quae habemus à Christo apostolis It can neither bee proued by reason nor yet by authoritie if we will speake absolutely that a Priest sinneth by marrying a wife For neither the order of priesthood in that it is order neither order in that it is holy is any hindrance vnto matrimonie for priesthood breaketh not marriage whether it be contracted before priesthood or afterward setting al ecclesiastical lawes aparte and standing onely to those things which wee haue of Christ and his Apostles Antoninus is consonant vnto Caietane and writeth in this manner Episcopatus ex natura sua non habet opponi ad matrimonium the office of a bishoppe of his owne nature is not opposite vnto marriage Saint Clement telleth it as a wonder that the Apostle giuing so many rules and precepts touching matrimonie should say nothing of the marriage of Priests if it had beene a thing necessarie these are his words Omnes Apostoli Epistolae quae moderationem docent continentiam cum de matrimonio de liberorum procreatione de domus administratione innumerabilia praecepta contineant nusquam honestum moderatumque matrimonium prohibuerunt All the Epistles of the Apostle which teach sobrietie and continent life whereas they containe innumerable precepts touching matrimonie bringing vp of children and gouernment of house yet did they no where forbidde honest and sober marriage I say fiftly that to take away the christian libertie from man which God hath granted to man is a wicked and damnable sinne and therefore doth the holy vessell of God bid vs to perseuer constantly therein For after that hee hath exhorted euerie one to continue as God hath appointed and withal hath shewed the freedome of marriage to bee granted to all hee forthwith addeth these words Ye are bought with a price be not the seruants of men as if he had said to marrie or not to marrie is in your owne election let therefore neither Iew nor Gentile ouerrule your libertie let none entangle your consciences let none bring you into faithlesse bondage let none impose that heauie yoke vpon your necks which yee are no way able to beare Nowe by due application heereof the vow of single life at the least the vow annexed to priesthood which by the law of man spoileth vs of our christian libertie must needs be a wicked and damnable vowe For as the learned papist Victoria hath wel obserued the gospell is called the law of libertie because christians after the promulgation of the gospel are onely bound to the law of nature And yet our late popes haue made our case more intollerable then euer was the heauie yoke of the Iewes For Saint Paul chargeth vs to stand fast in the libertie wherewith Christ hath made vs free and not to be intangled againe with the yoke of bondage I say sixtly that to abandon Gods holy ordinance is a wicked and damnable sinne and yet is this done as the Pope bluntishly auoucheth by his tyrannically extorted vowes for matrimonie contracted after priesthood is by Gods law true and perfect matrimonie as is alreadie proued by popish grant and yet is such matrimonie become no matrimonie by popish vow as the Pope would enforce vs
the same I say secondly that mans will is so brought into bondage and thraldome of sinne by the fall of Adam as man before his regeneration can neither do nor once will any one act which is acceptable in Gods fight Note well the second obiection with the answere to the same The second obiection If free will after the fall of Adam can not make election as well of good as of euill then doeth free will vtterly lose it owne nature for where sinne must needes be chosen of necessitie there can be no true libertie The answere I answere that there be three kinds of libertie as S. Bernard proueth learnedly in a peculiar treatise of free will the first is called Libertas à coactione vi vel necessitate Libertie from coaction violence or necessitie for all these three are one the same with him as euery one that readeth him seriously will perceiue The second is called Libertas à peccato liberty from sinne The third is called Libertas à miseria libertie from miserie The two latter liberties from sin miserie can not be had in this life the first was froÌ„ the creation is at this present and shalbe in al Adams posteritie world without end For such is the essence nature formall reason of will that it cannot be coacted or inforced The reason is euident because it implieth contradictioÌ„ that Wil do any thing which it is coacted or enforced to do For when we do any thing violently we doe it against our wil not with our wil. If this were not so the angels in heauen should haue no free wil contrary to the vniform consent of all learned men For they haue no more freedome in heauen to sin then the vnregenerate haue freedome on earth to do wel Further then this it would follow hereupon that the angels in heauen should not be happy For what happines can it be to wil do by coaction that which they wil do and yet it is certain y t they haue freedom only to do wel if any wil hold the contrarie he must likewise hold that angels in heauen may sinne and consequently that they may be damned into hel fire The third obiection If there be no free-wil to do good before regeneration then must all the morall good deedes of infidels be sin which to hold is most absurd For to serue our soueraigne to die in the defence of our countrey to honour our parents to feede the hungrie to cloathe the naked and such like which the infidels do cannot but be good acts The answer I answer that albeit these like moral deeds be indifferent in their owne nature glorious in the eyes of the world and right profitable to others yet are they meere sins in the doers displeasant in Gods sight And I prooue it because that without faith God cannot be pleased as the apostle witnesseth Again the same apostle saith that whatsoeuer is not of faith is sin and so euery act of the infidel must needs be sin because it is not of faith Neither wil it help to say that if the said acts of infidels be not good yet are they not euil For as their great popish canonist Nauarre their Romish cardinal Caietan auouch euery act in indiuiduo must perforce be good or euil the reason therof is euident For euery act must either be referred to some end or to no end at al if to no end then it is an idle act and wee must render an account for the same if it be referred to any other end then to God it is flat sin bicause as the apostle saith whatsoeuer we do we ought to do it for Gods glory S. Austen in his fâ—urth booke against Iulianus the Pelagian handleth this question so learnedly and in so ample and perspicuous maner as none that shal reade the booke with iudgement can stand any longer in doubt thereof I wil cite one onely periode for breuitie sake Thus doth he write Si gentilis inquis nudum operuerit numquid quod non est ex fide peccatum est prorsus in quantum non est ex fide peccatum est non quòd per se ipsum factum quod est nudum operire peccatum est sed de tali opere non in domino gloriari solus impius negat esse peccatuÌ„ If an infidell saist thou shall clothe the naked is such an act sinne because it is not of faith it is doubtlesse sinne in that it is not of faith not for that the worke it selfe is sinne of it owne nature for to clothe the naked of it owne selfe is not sin but to clothe the naked for any other end then for Gods glorie is sinne indeede And it is so manifest a sinne as none but the wicked can denie it to be sin Thus did Saint Austen answere the Pelagians then and thus do I answere the papists now telling them that they are become Semipelagians herein The replie If this be so indeed then may an infidel aswel rebel against his prince as truly serue his prince aswel betray his country as die in defence thereof as wel rob his neighbour as relieue him and so in the rest The answere I answer that it is farre otherwise because although they sin in so doing for want of faith in Christ Iesus yet shal their punishment bee so much more tolerable by how much their sinnes are the lesse Neither is this answere inuented of mine owne braine but long sithence framed by S. Augustine whose words are these Sed ad hoc eos in die iudicij cogitationes suae defendent vt tolerabilius puniantur quia naturaliter qua legis sunt vtcunque fecerunt scriptum habentes in cordibus opus legis hactenus vt alijs non facerent quod perpeti nollent Hoc tamen peccantes quòd homines sine fide non ad eum finem ista opera retulerunt ad quem referre debuerunt Minus enim Fabritius quam Catilina punietur non quia iste bonus sed quia ille magis malus minus impius quam Catilina Fabritius non veras virtutes habendo sed à veris virtutibus non plurimùm deuiando But in this their cogitations shall defend them in the day of iudgement that their punishment may be more tolerable because they haue done naturally in some sort those things that pertained to the law hauing the worke of the lawe so deepely written in their hearts that they did so to others as they wished to be doone vnto themselues Yet they committed this sinne that they beeing men without faith did not referre these workes to that end to which they should haue done For Fabritius shal be more gently punished then Catiline not because he is good but for that hee is not so bad as Catiline neither because he hath true vertues but for that he is not so farre from true vertues as Catiline The fourth obiection It is cleare by the
otherwise he should be contrarie to himselfe who affirmeth it to bee sinne in many places of his works as is alreadie prooued but hee onely laboureth to perswade the reader that it is neuer imputed to the faithfull that stoutly striue against it And that this is the true meaning of S. Austen I proue it by the iudgement of S. Ambrose concerning the selfe same matter Thus doth hee write Caro contra spiritum contra carnem spiritus concupiscit â—ec inuenitur in vllo hominum tanta concordia vt legi mentis lex quae membris est insita non repugnet Propter quod ex omnium sanctorum persona accipitur quod Ioannes apostolus ait si dixerimus quoniam peccatum non habemus nosipsos seducimus veritas in nobis non est cum tamen idem ipse dicat qui natus est ex Deo peccatum non facit qoniam semen ipsius in eo manet non potest peccare quoniaÌ„ ex Deo natus est Vtrumque ergo verum est quia nemo sine peccato est in eo quod nemo est fine lege peccati qui natus est ex Deo peccatum non facit quia per legem mentis id est per charitatem quae Dei semen est peccatum non facit Charitas enim operit multitudineÌ„ peccatoruÌ„ the flesh lusteth against the spirit the spirit against the flesh neither is there found in any man such concord but that the lawe of concupiscence which is ingrafted in the members fighteth against the law of the mind And for that cause Saint Iohns words are taken as spoken in the person of all saints If we say we haue no sin we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs when for al that the same apostle saith He that is borne of God sinneth not because his seed abideth in him and he cannot sinne because he is of God Therfore both are true because no man is without sinne for that no man is without the law of sinne that is concupiscence and he that is borne of God sinneth not bicause he sinneth not by the law of his mind that is by charitie which is Gods seede for charitie couereth the multitude of sinnes Out of these words I note first that concupiscence moueth rebellion against the spirit in the holyest man vpon earth I note secondly that this rebellion of concupiscence is sinne in euerie one because S. Iohn speaketh of sinne indeede whose words saint Ambrose applieth heere to concupiscence I note thirdly that hee speaketh of originall concupiscence because he speaketh of that concupiscence which is in the saints that is in those that are borne of God I note fourthly that the faithfull sinne not because charitie couereth their sins So then S. Austen meaneth as S. Ambrose doth that they are without sin to whom sinne is not imputed Yea Aquinas himselfe granteth which is to be admired that the inordinate motion of sensualitie euen which goeth before the deliberation of reason is sinne though in a lowe degree These are his expresse wordes Dicendum quòd illud quod homo facit sine deliberatione rationis non perfectè ipse facit quia nihil operatur ibi id quod est principale in homine vnde non est perfectè actus humanus per consequens non potestesse perfectè actus virtutis vel peccati sed aliquid imperfectum in genere horum Vnde talis motus sensualitatis rationem praeueniens est peccatum veniale quod est quiddam imperfectum in genere peccati I answere that that which man doth without the deliberation of reason he doth it not perfectly because that which is the chiefe in man worketh nothing there wherefore it is not perfectly mans act and consequently it cannot be perfectly the act of vertue or of sinne but some imperfect thing in this kinde Whereupon such a motion of sensuality preuenting reason is a venial sinne which is a certaine imperfect thing in the nature of sinne The fourth replie Concupiscence at the most is but a little venial sinne as S. Thomas Aquinas truely saith therefore it cannot bring a man to hell neither debarre him of heauen The answere I answere that euerie sin is mortall vndoubtedly as which is flatly against Gods holy commaundements For that the transgression of Gods commandements is a grieuous mortal sinne no man euer did or will denie Cursed is euery one saith the apostle that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to doe them Againe in another place The reward or wage of sinne is death And S. Iames saith Whosoeuer shall keepe the whole lawe and yet faileth in one point he is guiltie of all Nowe that euerie sinne aswel great as small is against Gods holy lawe I prooue sundrie waies First because the Apostle saith that al our thoughts words and works ought to be referred to the glorie of God for most certaine it is that no sinne at al is referred to Gods glorie For no sin no not the least of al is referrible to god but is of it own nature repugnant to his glorie Secondly because wee must yeelde an account to God for euerie idle word as Christ himselfe telleth vs and yet as euerie child can perceiue God most merciful and most iust wil neuer lay that to our charge which is not against his holy law Thirdly because the apostle saith of sin generally that the punishment thereof is death Fourthly because sinne in generall is defined by the fathers to bee the transgression of Gods law which definition could not bee true if anie little sinne could stand with his commaundement Fiftly because famous popish writers as Ioannes Gerson Michael Baius Almayn and our owne Bishop of Rochester doe all freely graunt that euerie sinne is mortall of it owne nature and deserueth eternall death their words I haue alleaged in my booke of Motiues Sixtly because Durandus and Iosephus Angles to whom the Schooles of the papistes this day accord doe sharpely impugne Aquinas his doctrine in that he teacheth Venials not to be against Gods law The 7. conclusion Although good works do not iustifie yet are they pretious in Gods sight and neuer want their reward Christ himselfe prooueth this conclusion when he promiseth that not so much as a cup of colde water giuen in his name shall passe without reward And in another place hee saith That whosoeuer shall leaue house parents brethren wife or children for his sake shal receiue much more in this world and in the world to come life euerlasting And in another place Christ telleth vs that when the sonne of man commeth in his glory and al his holy angels with him then will he pronounce them blessed that haue done the works of charitie to their poore neighbours God saith S. Paul will reward euery man according to his workes The Lord rewarded me saith holy
still the naturall dimensiue quantitie Ergo it is impossible that it bee conteined vnder the forme of a little round cake For the manifestation of this argument I note first that all learned men aswell papistes as others agree in this that God by his absolute power cannot doe those thinges which implie contradiction in the doing the reason wherof I haue yeelded in my booke of Motiues in the 12. preamble I note secondly that it is essentiall to quantitie to haue one part without another as the great philosopher Aristotle doth auouch See the 2. part book 2. chap 6. and note it well I note thirdly that the whole demensiue quantitie of Christes naturall body which he had here visibly on earth and still retaineth in heauen is togither with his body in the eucharist as all learned papistes graunt And so by popish docrine a body being foure cubites long and two cubites broad remaining stil so long broad must perforce be conteined vnder another body which is neither two cubites long nor one cubite broad but it is impossible as implying flat contradiction When occupatiō of place is taken away from a body it then ceaseth to be and is no body at all But Christes body occupieth no place in the Eucharist as learned papistes graunt Ergo Christes body is not corporally there And least any man distrust the proposition Saint Augustine hath these expresse wordes Cum ergò sit corpus aliqua substantia quantitas eius est in magnitudine molis eius sanitas vero eius non quantitas sed qualitas eius est Non ergo potuit obtinere quantitas corporis quod potuit qualitas Nam ita distantibus partibus quae simul esse non possunt quoniam sua quaeque spatia locorum tenent minores minora maiores maiora non potuit esse in singulis quibusque partibus tota vel tanta sed amplior est quantitas in amplioribus partibus breuior in breuioribus in nulla parte tanta quanta per totum Infra Nam spatia locorum tolle corporibus nusquam erunt quia nusquam erunt nec erunt When therfore any substance is a body the quantitie therof is in the magnitude of the bignesse but the health is not the quantitie but the qualitie thereof Therefore the quantitie of the body could not attaine that which the qualitie could For y e parts being so distant which could not be togither because al seuerally keepe their spaces of places the lesse lesser places and the greater greater there could not be in al the places seuerally the whole or so much but there is a larger quantitie in the larger partes a shorter in shorter partes and in no part so much as in the whole For if spaces of places be taken from bodies they shalbe in no place and because they shalbe in no place neither shall they haue any being at all Out of these wordes I note first that euery quantitatiue bodie hath one part distant from another I note secondly that the same partes occupie distinct places I note thirdly that two quantities cannot be in the same place at one and the same time I note fourthly that a greater quantitie must haue a greater place and that it cannot be conteined in the lesser I note fiftly that no one part can conteine so much as the whole I note sixtly that when bodies are without places they lose their natures and beings I therefore conclude that it is impossible for Christs natural body to be contained in a little round cake and his whole bodie in euerie little part thereof all which the papists impudently and blasphemously do auouch Guiliel Ocham and Durandus two popish doctours do both subscribe to S. Austens reason If it were possible for Christs bodie to be in diuers places at once the angel of God should haue made a foolish reason to the women that came to see Christ in the sepulcher for the angell prooued Christ not to be there bicause he was risen These are the words Hee is not here for he is risen as he said But if Christs body could bee in many places at once as the papists would haue vs beleeue then doubtlesse did the angel reason childishly For the women might haue said though he be risen yet may hee be here also Yet the angel who was not to be instructed of the papists but from heauen affirmed that hee could not be there because he was risen For he said not Christ is risen and is not here but he is not here because he is risen Lo his rising is the cause that he coulde not be there Marke this reason well for it doth conuince Peruse the twelfth preamble in my first booke of Motiues and the first replie of the seauenth obiection in the first paragraph The fourth Paragraph Of the originall of transubstantiation Transubstantiation is not onely repugnant to all philosophy but so absurd also in al christian speculation as it was vnknowne to the church of God and to all approued writers the space of one thousand two hundred yeres after Christs sacred incarnation For it was first hatched by pope Innocentius the third of that name in the council of Lateran which was holden 1215. yeeres after Christ. Yea the determination of this synode was reputed of so little force that the zealous papist and famous schoole-doctour Durandus boldely published the contrarie doctrine euen after the flat resolution of the same councell Whose doctrine doth so gall the papists that the Iesuite Bellarmine vnwilling on the one side to oppose himselfe against Durand rigorously and on the other side not knowing what to say in defense of the Romish synode maketh as it were this mitigation betweene them Itaque sententia Durandi haeretica est licet ipse non sit dicendus haereticus cum paratus fuerit ecclesiae iudicio acquiescere Therfore the opinion of Durand is hereticall though himselfe may not be called an hereticke because he was readie to giue place to the decree of the Church thus writeth our Iesuite Out of whose words I note first that a man may steale an oxe proclaime the same to the world without any remorse and yet be no theefe at all for Durand held an hereticall opinion published the same in print constantly and yet as the Iesuite telleth vs was no hereticke for so doing I note secondly that Durand liued more then threescore yeares after the popish Councell of Lateran I note thirdly that he neuer retracted his opinion notwithstanding the decree and censure of the popish Synode and therefore vainely and without reason sayth our Iesuite that Durand was willing to obey the decree of their Church for if he were willing to obey their church heerein how came it to passe that he liuing so long after he knewe their Churches minde did commit that to print wittingly and willingly which is altogether against the same for no man doubtlesse impugneth
Infra illud quoque vacare non creditur mysterio quod summus pontifex septem modis accipit osculum videlicet ad os ad pectus ad humerum ad manus ad brachia ad genu ad pedes The Priest kisseth the aulter thrise to signifie I knowe not to whom the triple peace that is to say peace temporall peace spirituall and peace eternall Againe the Bishop kisseth the booke twise to signifie the concord betweene the old and the new testament Furthermore we beleeue this to be a great mysterie that the popes holinesse receiueth a kisse seuen maner-wise to wit to his mouthe to his brest to his shoulder to his hands to his armes to his knee and to his feete Thus gentle reader thou maiest beholde their irreligious ceremonies with their fond interpretation of the same For they had neede to put manie of their Priestes to the Schoole all their life before they will perfectly vnderstand such obscure and vnsauerie significations Yet such is the blindnesse of the seely people that they were brought into the admiration of the masse by these and other like beggarly ceremonies For the lesse they vnderstood the more magnificence and maiestie they ascribed to the thing I must needes adde hereunto the kissing of the patine Ad notandum inquit Durandus charitatem sacerdos osculatur patinam quae designat cor patens in latitudine charitatis The priest saith Durandus kisseth the Patine to giue a signe of charitie which signifieth an open heart in the latitude of charitie I weene this is a sufficient Sermon for y e whole auditorie But alas coulde the people no way be taught what charitie was vnlesse the priest kissed the Patine doubtlesse they were so farre from learning any thing thereby as neither they nor the priest himselfe commonly knewe what was meant by the same The 6. Section Of the triple breaking of the Sacrament THe papistes breake their supposed Christes body into three partes thereby to expresse this high mysterie Christes bodie risen again walking on earth and lying in the graue So saith pope Sergius in their own canon-law These are y e words Triforme est corpus Domini Pars oblata in calicem missa corpus Christi quod iam resurrexit monstrat Pars comesta ambulantem adhuc super terram Pars in altari vsque ad missae finem remanens corpus in sepulchro quia vsque ad finem seculi corpora sanctorum in sepulchris erunt The bodie of our Lord is threefold The part that is put into the chalice signifieth Christes body risen againe The part eaten signifieth Christ yet walking on earth The part remaining to the end of the masse signifieth Christes body in the graue because the bodies of Saintes shalbe in the graues till the worldes end We see here their doctrine we behold their practise Let vs now duely examine their mysteries First therefore the peece dipped into the cup is Christes body say they after his resurrection but it may more fitly represent Christes body crucified because drowning of the body is most like to y e crucifying of the same Secondly the part that is eaten may more fitly represent Christs dying then walking for as I weene a deuoured thing is past walking Thirdly Christ doth not now walke on earth and so it is a false figure or signification Fourthly this practise of reseruing some part to the ende of the masse is nowe changed for the priest this day eateth vp all euen in the church of Rome Here it shall not bee amisse to set downe the maner of the Popes receiuing because although the act bee done verie seldome yet is it not then without a mysterie and lest credit bee not giuen to my words their owne Durand shall tell the storie for them Thus doth he write Romanus pontifex ideò non communicat vbi frangit quoniam ad altare frangit ad sedem communicat quia Christus in Emaus coram duobus discipulis fregit in Hierusalem coram discipulis duodecim manducauit In Emaus enim fregisse legitur sed non comedisse legitur Ascendens igitur sedem ibi communicat siquidem secundum apostolum Christus caput est ecclesiae caput autem in corpore sublimius excellentius ob sui perfectionem caeteris membris collocatur The Pope doth not receiue the sacrament where hee breaketh it because he breaketh it at the altar but he receiueth it in his chaire For Christ brake it in Emaus before his two Disciples and he ate it in Hierusalem before his twelue apostles For we reade that he brake it in Emaus but not that he ate it He therfore ascends vp to his seate receiueth it there For as the apostle saith Christ is the head of the church and the head must be set in an higher and more excellent place then the other members in the body for the perfection thereof In these words I note first the fond resons of popish mysteries I note secondly that the Pope is nothing inferiour to Lucifer in pride I note thirdly that the Pope aduanceth himselfe aboue Saint Peter whose successour hee sometime claimeth to bee For herein hee cannot be content to imitate Peter who receiued with the other apostles his brethren but hee must haue a more excellent and higher seat euen while he eateth the eucharist that so hee may be as another Christ. What is this my dearest if it be not to shew himselfe Antichrist indeede The seauenth Section Of the Popish Miter WHen Moses that holy seruant of God came downe from the mount Synai hauing the 2. tables of the law in his hands his face shiâ—ed bright was as if it had had two horns as their vulgar latine text saieth For the resemblance wherof si dijs placet the Pope and his byshops must haue miters on at masse hearken to their owne glosse and then giue your censure for the mystery thereof Thus writeth Durand Mitra scientiam vtriusque testamenti designat Duo namque illius cornua duo sunt testamenta anterius nouum posterius vetus quae duo episcopus memoriter debet scire illis tanquam duplici cornu fidei inimicosferire Videri debet quideÌ„ subaitis episcop cornutus sicut Moses de monte Synai descendens The myter signifieth the knowledge of both testaments for his two hornes are the two testaments that before is the new testament and that behind is the olde which two the bishop must haue by hart and without the booke and must smite the enemies of the faith with them as with a double horne The Byshoppe must be horned to his subiects euen as Moses was when hee came downe from the mount Synai By this euerie child may see how fond the popish mysteries and ceremonies be This one thing I wil adde that if the Romish bishops shall neuer weare myters vntill they can the olde and new testament as is here mentioned the most of them
you papistes auricular confessâ—on is an holy sacrament and to be made of such sinnes only as are committed after baptisme And yet doth S. Iohn speake as is euident by the text only of those sins that were done before baptisme This is your Hysteron proteron to whom an horse-mil and a mil-horse is all one I say thirdly that the confession which these Ephesians made whereof S. Luke speaketh is an euident external signe of true inward remorse and of sincere faith in Christ Iesus but doubtlesse it doth nothing at all resemble the blasphemous popish auricular confession For first they confessed their sinnes verbally as they burnt their bookes really but of absolution S. Luke speaketh not one word which for all that in poperie is essentiall Secondly this confession was voluntarie but popish confession is by compulsion Thirdly this confession was done in the face of the congregation but popish confession is made in the priests eare Fourthly as some of the faithfull made this confession so other some did not but amongst the papistes it must be made of all vnder paine of damnation Fiftly as Mathew confessed himselfe to haue been a publican and as Paule confessed that he had persecuted Christes Church but neither of them confessed any other sinne So the faithfull at Ephesus of zeale confessed their notorious deedes but not all their particular sinnes Nay they only confessed how Satan had seduced them and for that end they burnt their bookes Which publick attestation done to the glory of God can neuer establish secret popish whispering in the priestes eare I say fourthly that S. Hierome maketh altogither against popish confession as who affirmeth the priest or bishop to haue no other power in binding and loosing then the priest of the old testament had in making cleane or vncleane That is to say as the priestes of the old testament did declare who were cleane or vncleane so the ministers of the Church knowing some sinners to be penitent and other some to be vnpenitent pronounce according to Gods worde that the sinnes of the one sorte are bound and of the other sort loosed And heere note by the way that the word peccatorum in S. Hierome doth as aptly signifie sinners as sinnes and therefore these wordes Auditâ peccatorum varietate I thus translate hauing heard the varietie of the sinners This I say because the papistes seeke to make aduantage of the indifferencie of the word And yet howsoeuer they take it it cannot serue their turne The 2. obiection Christ commanded him that was clensed from his leprosie to go vnto the priest And he likewise commanded his apostles to loose Lazarus that was bound thereby signifying that they should loose our sinnes The answere I say first that this text of Scripture prooueth plainly that the priest cannot forgiue sinne or make the sinner cleane but only pronounce and declare him to be cleane whom God hath alreadie clensed For otherwise God would haue sent him to the priest that had the leprie before hee was clensed from the same that so hee might haue found remedie at the Priestes handes I say secondly that as yet the ceremonies of the lawe were not abrogate and therefore Christ woulde not haue them contemned or omitted Now the law was as we reade in Leuiticus that whosoeuer was clensed from the leprosie should present himself before the priest and offer vp the sacrifice of thanksgiuing This is the mysterie wherein the papistes would stablish their popishe absolution The end of the lawe was that Gods goodnesse shoulde be publickly approoued and that the party clensed should giue a signe of gratitude Therfore doth it follow in the text Goe and shewe thy selfe to the priest and offer the gift that Moses commaunded for a witnesse to them For he could not be receiued into the congregation but by the iudgement of the priest I say thirdly that Christ commanded not only his disciples to loose Lazarus but all the Iewes also and the very women that were present And consequently not priests only but euen lay men and women also may giue absolution Which thing I weene the wiser sort of papists will neuer graunt Yet the end of this loosing was not to establishe popishe absolution but to make the miracle manifest to the incredulous Iewes I prooue it by these wordes next afore going I knowe that thou hearest me alwaies but because of the people that stand by I said it that they may beleeue that thou hast sent me Yea it cannot be prooued by the text that the disciples were appointed to loose Lazarus saue only in generall termes as also were the women that stood by And indeed Christ seemeth to haue committed that office principally to the Iewes that so all occasion of incredulitie might be taken from them The 3. obiection S. Iames saith confesse your sinnes one to another and pray one for another that he may be healed And Christ himself saith receiue ye the holy Ghost Whose sinnes so euer yee remit they are remitted to them and whose sinnes so euer ye reteine they are retained And a little before he saith thus As my father sent me so doe I send you Now it is certaine that Christ was sent with all power euen to binde and loose mens sinnes and therefore his apostles being sent in the same maner must needes haue power to forgiue sinnes as he had Yea the church hath euer thus vnderstood these Scriptures The answere I say first that in these wordes Christ gaue authoritie to preach the gospel which whosoeuer beleeue haue their sinnes remitted and whosoeuer beleeue it not are subiect to damnation Other binding and loosing we finde none in the scriptures neither yet that Christ heard any confessions This sense of binding and loosing by preaching the word of God S. Hierom whom the papistes boast to be their patrone heerein maketh so euident as more to a reasonable man cannot be wished These are his words Funibus peccatorum suorum vnusquisque constringitur quos funes atque vincula soluere possuÌ„t apostoli imitantes magistrum suuÌ„ qui eis dixerat quaecunque solueritis super terraÌ„ erunt soluta in coelo Soluunt autem eos apostoli sermone Dei testimonijs scripturarum exhortatione virtutum Euery one is bound with the cordes of his sinnes which cordes and bandes the Apostles can loose while they imitate their maister that said these words vnto them what things soeuer ye shall loose on earth shalbe loosed also in heauen And the apostles loose them by y e word of God by the testimonies of the scriptures by the exhortation of vertues Behold here these golden words The papists bitterly exclaime against vs when we teach that Gods ministers do bind loose mens sins by the true preaching of his sacred worde and yet the holy and most learned father S. Hierome whom the papistes in their
time in which the Nouatians seuered thēselues from the church and refused to communicate with them that were fallen during the persecution of the Emperour Decius the bishops of the churches added to the canō that in euery church a priest shoud be ouer the penitents to the end that whosoeuer were fallen after baptisme might confes their sins before the priest designed for that purpose Thus writeth Socrates by whose words it is cleare that to confesse our sins committed after baptisme was the appendice to the canons yet cannot the Iesuite Bellarmine denie that Nectarius abolished that appendice or addition and consequently wil he nill he he must likewise grant that Nectarius disanulled the law for confessing sins after baptisme These are the expresse words of our Iesuite Non sustulit Nectarius nisi appendicem ad veteres canones quae accesserat initio haeresis Nouatianae Nectarius tooke away nothing saue onely that appendice which was added to the olde canons which was made in the beginning of the Nouatian heresie And thus me thinke the stornie of Nectarius though somewhat intricate is discussed sufficiently CHAP. XIII Of the authoritie of summoning councels OF the force validitie of late popish councils I haue spoken sufficiently in my booke of Motiues Now where the papists chalenge to their Pope a great prerogatiue aboue the Emperour because as they say he euer commanded generall councels to be holden euery where this doctrine in this place I purpose briefly to disproue The first conclusion The first general councel of Nice in which Arrius denying the consubstantialitie of the son of God was condemned was not celebrated by the Popes appointment who in those daies was reputed but as other bishops but by the flat and expresse commandement of the Emperor Constantinus surnamed the Great in the yere 327. This I do not barely say but I will prooue the same after my wonted manner by the expresse testimonies of approued Historiographers Al the fathers assembled in the sacred councel of Nice wrote to the church of Alexandria and to the inhabitants of Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis in this expresse maner Quoniam dei gratia mandato sanctissimi Imperatoris Constantini qui nos ex varijs ciuitatibus prouincijs in vnum congregauit magnum sanctum concilium Nicaenum coactum est necessariū videtur c. Because through the grace of God and by the commandement of the most holy Emperor Constantine who hath gathered vs together out of diuerse cities and prouinces the great and holy councel of Nice is assembled it seemeth necessary that the whole councell send letters to you by which ye may vnderstād aswel those things that were called into questiō as the things that are decided decreed in the same Thus writeth Socrates Out of these words I note first that this testimonie is of greatest credit without al exception as which was not published by one or two but by more then three hundred bishops as writeth Nicephorus who were the most vertuous learned priests in the christian worlde I note secondly these holy fathers of this famous councel doe not once name the Pope in their letters so far were they in these daies frō ascribing the chiefe prerogatiue in councels to the B. of Rome I note thirdly that al the councel confesseth in their ioynt letters as we see that the councel was called by the emperor and that they all were assembled together by his commandement Where I wish the reader to obserue diligently the word Cōmandement for if the emperor did not cal coūcels together by his own authority but by the popes as the papists prate then could not this holy councel truely say as al the fathers thereof constantly do say to wit that they came thither by the Emperours commandement I note fourthly that none in the world can better tell how the councell was called then the fathers of the councel who were the persons called and yet do they ioyne the emperors commandement with the grace of God and exclude the Pope altogether Theodoret hath these words Verum vbi spes eum fefellerat celebre illud Nicaenum concilium cogit publicos asinos mulas mulos quinetiam equos episcopis comitibus suis ad iter faciendum vtendos dat Sozom. hath these words Verū vbi contra quà m expectabat res succederet contentio reconciliationem concordiae c. But after the matter succeeded otherwise then he expected reconciliation was hindered with contention and Hosius also sent to make peace returned leauing y e thing vndone y e emperor appointeth a councel at Nice a city in Bythinia writeth to the presidents of al churches to be presēt at a day appointed Niceph. hath these words Infectis reb ad imperatorē rediit qui ad pacem componendam missus fuerat Hosius Itaque imperator c. Hosius that was sent to make peace returned to the Emperour not hauing accomplished the matter Therfore the Emperour perceiuing the mischife to grow to a head doth proclame the famous councel of Nice in Bythinia and by his letters calleth al bishops thither at the day appointed Thus wee see euidently by the vniforme testimonie of foure graue Historiographers whereof three liued more then a 1100. yeares ago that the bishop of Rome had no more to do in general councels then other bishops had First they tel vs that the Emperour sent Hosius the bishop of Corduba to bring the contentious to vnitie Secondly when that would not take place that hee proclaimed a councell to bee holden at Nice in Bythinia Thirdly that he cōmanded al bishops to come thither at a certain day apointed But of the B. of Rome neuer a word at al. The second Conclusion The second generall councell of Constantinople holden against Macedonius and his complices for denying the diuinity of the holy ghost was called by the commandement of the emperour Theodosius the first about the yeare of our Lord 389. Socrates hath these words Imperator nulla mora interposita concilium episcoporum ipsius fidem amplectentium conuocat quo tum fides concilii Nicaeni corroboraretur c The emperor Theodosius with al expedition calleth a councel of bishops embracing the right faith that aswel the faith of the Nicene councell might be confirmed as that a bishop might be appointed at Constantinople because he was in hope to make the Macedonians to agree with the bishops that held the right faith he sent forthe bishops that were of the Macedonian sect Sozomenus hath these words Breui deinde concilium episcoporum sibi consententium cōuocauit partim vt Nicaeni concilii decreta confirmarentur patrim vt ordinaretur aliquis qui Constantinopolitanae sedis episcopatum administraret Then shortly after Theodosius called a councel of Bishoppes that agreed with him partly that the decrees of the Nicene councell might be confirmed partly that one might be appointed B. at
these expresse words Mens namque fuit Apostolorum non de diebus sancire festiuitatum sed conuersationem rectam dei praedicare culturam mihi ergo videtur quod sicut multa alia per prouincias ad consuetudinem venerunt sic Paschae festiuitas tradita sit eó quod nullus Apostolorum aliquid huic sanxisset For the meaning of the Apostles was not to make lawes for keeping holidaies but to preach the word of God and holy conuersation I therefore thinke that as many other things grew to a custome in diuerse countries so did also the keeping of Easter because none of the apostles made any lawe for the same Out of whose wordes I do note first that the scope of Christs apostles was this to preach the word of God not to appoint holidays Secondly that the keeping of Easter which is our sabbaoth was after the custome of the countrey Thirdly that the apostles made no lawe for the same Yea the first man in the world that made any positiue lawe for the christian sabbaoth was Constantine surnamed the Great who within three hundred and thirtie yeres after Christ about the 20. yere of his reigne to take away all contention in the church made a flatte Edict for the keeping of Friday and Sunday throughout the yeere Of this none can stand in doubt that shall pervse that fine Oration which Eusebius made de Laudibus Constantini the three and thirtieth yeere of his happy raigne This controuersie by the Emperours appointment was handled in the councill of Nice and immediatly after his decree which thing is euident by the saide Eusebius in his third booke de vitae Constantini and in his fourth booke hee affirmeth plainely that all subiect to the Romane empire were commaunded to abstaine from all bodily labour vppon the sundayes and fridayes Cassiodorus doeth prooue the same out of Sozomenus in these expresse wordes Die verò qui Dominicus vocatur quem Hebraei primam vocant Graeci autem soli distribuunt qui ante septimum est sanctuit à iudicijs aliÃsque causis vniuersis habere vacationem in eo tantum orationibus occupari The Emperour Constantine decreed that all people should cease from al sutes and other ciuil causes and consecrate themselues wholy vnto prayer vppon the Lordes day which the Iewes doe call the first day of the weeke and the Greekes doe terme Sunday as also vpon the friday The learned diuines in Germanie affirme directly that the Sunday may be altered These are their words Nam qui iudicant ecclesiae authoritate pro sabbato institutam esse diei Dominici obseruationem tanquam necessariam longè errant for they that thinke the church appointed the sunday to be kept for the sabbaoth of necessitie are deceiued grossely My third proofe is this Philippus Melancton Erasmus Roterodamus Iohannes Caluinus Petrus Martir Bullingerus and Vrsinus do all with vniforme consent yeelde so manifest testimonie to mine assertion as none doubtlesse that reade them attentiuely can without blushing deny the same Petrus Martir hath these words Quòd vnus dies certus in hebdomada cultui diuino mancipetur stabile firmum est an vero hic vel alius constituatur temporarium est ac mutabile That one day in the weeke must be assigned for diuine seruice it is constant firme and perpetuall but whether this or that day ought to be appointed for that purpose it is a thing that respects the time and may be changed Caluin in his Institutions after he hath commended the alteration of the saboth in the primitiue church affirmeth flatly that the day may yet be changed these be his wordes Neque sic tamen septenarium numerum morâ—r vt eius seruituti ecclesiam astringam neque enim ecclesias damnauero quae alios conuentibus suis solemnes dies habeant modò à superstitione absint Quod erit si ad solam obseruationem disciplinae ordinis bene compositi referantur Neyther do I for all that make such accompt of the seuenth day that I will haue the church tyed to keepe the same for I will not condemne churches which appoint other solemne dayes for their meetings so they be voide of superstition Which shal bee done if they appoint such tdayes onely for discipline and for comely order sake Vrsinus hath these words Summa est alligati sumus sabbato moraliter ceremonialiter in genere sed non in specie Hoc est ad aliquod ministerii publicè exercendi tempus sed non ad septimum vel aliquem alium certum diem This is the effect we are tied to the saboth morally and ceremonially in generall but not in speciall that is to say we are bound sometime to exercise the publike ministerie but wee are neither tied to the seauenth nor to any other certaine day And againe hee saith that all ceremonies appointed by the church may be altred againe by the counsell of the church Againe in another place he hath these expresse words Ecclesia christiana primum vel aliumdiem tribuit ministerio salua sua libertate the church of Christ hath libertie to appoint either the first day or some other day for Gods seruice To what end shoulde I alleage moe authorities for nothing can be more plainely spoken And as the church hath authoritie to alter the sabboth day so hath it power also which Bâ—llinger hath well obserued to appoint for the seruice of God certaine other festiuall dayes as the feast of the birth of our Lord of his incarnation circumcision passion resurrecâ—ion ascension and such like All which is this day verie prudently and laudably practised in the church of England An obiection If this your doctrine were true as you beare the world in hand it is then would it follow necessarily that there shoulde be no difference betweene the ordinance of God and man the reason seemeth euident because they both should be of like authoritie The answere I answere that they are not of like authoritie and I yeeld a double disparitie thereof for first the sabboth day is de iure diuino in generall albeit the determination thereof to this or that day in speciall be de iure humano but the other holidayes are both in generall and in speciall de iure humano Secondly because other holydaies are as well generally as specially appointed by man and therefore may be wholly abolished by the power of man But the sabboth day is generally appointed by God although the limitation thereof be reserued to his church and therefore notwithstanding that the church can limit the obseruation to this or that day yet can no power vpon earth wholly abolishe the same The fourth booke conteineth the description of the third Monarchie that is of the Greekes from Alexander vntill the Machabees CHAP. I. Of the originall of the monarchie and the circumstances of the same ALexander king of the Macedonians for his martiall
prowesse and heroical vertues surnamed the Great began to reigne in Macedonia when Darius Arbelas was made king of the Persians He made warre with the said Darius he conquered and slew him in Asia and so translated the Monarchie from the Persians vnto the Greekes The monarchie of the Greekes began in the seuenth yeare of Alexanders reigne in the age of the world 3641. The histories of the Greekes are much more recent then the stories of the Iewes For all their histories are after the first monarchie of the Babylonians and Assyrians neither haue they any thing certaine which is more auncient then their Olimpiades Which Olimpiades had their beginning in the first or second yeare of Ioatham king of Iuda as Glareanus Paulus Phrigio Bibliandâ—r and others doe write though some writers otherwise of credite holde the contrary in the age of the world 3251. which was about 230. yeares before the monarchie of the Persians This Monarchie tooke the name of king Alexander and was termed indifferently the monarchie of the Greekes or of Alexander because he so excelled all others in power valure fortitude and other vertues as none in the world were deemed comparable to him He is highly commended by the prophets Iâ—remie and Daniel as a most valiant and happie emperour Daniel describeth a Goate which ouercame the Ramine and hee declareth manifestly that the goate was the king of the Greekes the Ram of the Persians His fathers name was Philip his mothers name Olympias Olympias was the mother of Alexander and was also taken for the space of 4. yeres as I haue already proued But Olympias is a mountaine in Greece between Thessalia and Macedonia aboue the which there appeareth no cloud In regard whereof it is vsurped of the Poets for heauen This hill as Plutarchus writeth is tenne furlonges in height The prophet Daniel speaking of the goate that is of Alexander foretold that his Empire shoulde be deuided into foure kingdomes and so it came to passe For Cassander had Macedonia Seleucus Syria Antigonus Asia the lesse and Ptolemeus Egypt For the exact vnderstaÌ„ding of Daniels prophesie it is necessarie to vnderstand the succession of the kings and their reignes especially of the kinges of Syria of whom the Scripture maketh precise mention King Alexander reigned sixe whole yeares and died in the seuenth after his death the nobles had mortall domesticall warres amongst themselues striuing for the space of thirteene yeares who should haue dominion This chaunced after that the Empire was deuided as is already said and shall appeare more at large in the third chapter following CHAP. II. Of the kinges of Syria succeeding Alexander The kings of Syria and Asia 1 Seleucus Nicanor Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 31 yeares 2 Antiochus Soter Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 19 3 Antiochus Theos Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 15 4 Seleucus Gallinicus Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 20 5 Seleucus Ceraunus Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 3 yeares 6 Antiochus Magnus Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 36 7 Seleucus Philopator Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 12 8 Antiochus Epiphanes Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 12 9 Antiochus Eupator Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 2 yeares 10 Demetrius Soter Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 10 11 Alexander filius Epiphan Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 5 12 Demetrius Nicanor Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 2 13 Antiochus Sedetes Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 3 14 Tryphon Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 3 15 Antiochus pius Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 12 yeares 16 Demetrius Nicanor Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 4 17 Alexander Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 2 18 Antiochus Gryphus Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 29 19 Seleucus sonne to Gryphus was at strife with his vncle and others of his kinred for the space of ten yeares Anno Mun. 3647 the reign of euerie king of Syria and Asia Anno Dom. 3877 10 yeares The first obseruation Seleucus the sonne of Gryphus king of Syria warred against Cyzicenus the sonne of Antiochus Sedetes whom after hee had taken him hee put to death By and by mortall wars arose between the brethren Wherwith the Syrians were so grieued and so annoyed with the ciuill warres that they knew no other fitter meanes to redeeme their vexation then to yeeld vp the kingdome to Tygranes the king of Armenia Which Tygranes enioyed Syria vntill such time as hee was ouercome of Pompeius who deliuered Syria vp to the Romaines This kingdome of Syria continued about 240. yeares and was deliuered into the handes of the Romaines 17. yeares after Iulius Cesar was first Emperour of Rome The second obseruation Seleucus Callimcus the sonne of Antiochus hadde two sonnes to wit Seleucus surnamed Ceraunus and Antiochus Magnus Seleucus Ceraunus liued but three yeres and then left y e kingdom to his brother Antiochus Magnus Which Antiochus made warre against Ptolemeus Philopator the king of Egypt and his sonne Epiphanes by meanes whereof the Iewes and church of God was in continuall affliction This Antiochus had the repulse in his first attempt yet after y e death of Ptolemeus who before his death commended his sonne to the protection of the Romaines he returned with a great armie into Egypt By this occasion long warres were betweene the Romaines and Antiochus Hanniball and many Regions in Greece ioyned themselues to Antiochus Neuerthelesse hee was so often discomfited in battaile that he was enforced to seek for conditions of peace And besides this hee was glad to send his sonne Epiphanes to Rome for an hostage In the end when he went about the sacking of the rich Temple of Belus in Syria the multitude of the Citizens slewe him and all his guard The Iewes saith Carion liued in great peace from the time of Alexander to Antiochus Magnus But when warres beganne betweene the Assyrians and Egytians then y e Iewes being seated in the middes were oppressed on both sides At length saith Iosephus Antiochus was victor and brought the Iewes vnder his