repentance or conuersion to God is an earnest sorrow of hart of sinnes committed and a faith determining that sinnes are certaynely remitted to him for Christ c. The Papists contrariewise although they number contrition among the parts of repentance yet they feigne that it meriteth this remissâ—on of sinnes and they adde auricular confessâ—on not commaunded by God and satisfaction or workes not due with which they feygne that the eternall paines of sinnes may be satisfied and that these same works may be redeemed with money all which doctrine is blasphemous against the merit of the Sonne of God who alone hath satisfyed for our sinnes Bellarmine Heere I see nothing proued no testimonies of the Ghospell produced but only vayne words interlaced with lyes for thou mightest haue omitted that which thou sayest of conuersion and earnest sorrow of the hart for we truly require conuersion and earnest sorrow of the hart in Penitents wheras you only haue I know not what terrours insteed of contritioÌ„ That which thou addest of faith determining that our sinnes are forgiuen vs is refuted before That which thou saiest that among the Papists the contrition deserueth remission of sinnes is a lye before refuted also That also which thou affirmest that the Papists say that euerlasting paines are satisfyed by temporall satisfactions is likewise a lye for we thinke not that we satisfy for euerlasting paines which we doubt not to be remitted vs in our iustification but for temporall punishments which either heere or in Purgatory God exacteth of them who after Baptisme come to pennance and reconciliation The punishment saith S. Augustine tract 124. in Ioan. endureth longer then the fault least the fault should be thought small if the punishment were also ended with it Finally that which thou addest that auricular confession is not commaunded and that satisfaction is repugnant to the merit of Christ thou saist indeed but doest not proue it Read if thou please S. Cyprian ser 5. de lapsis and thou shalt find Confession and Satisfaction to be necessary and these very words often repeated Now that Satisfaction is to be redeemed with money least peraduenture thou shouldest suspect some vnlawfull negotiation is nothing else among Catholikes then that one kind of satisfaction may be changed into another by the Priests iudgment as fasting into almes Let vs go forward to the rest §. X. Chytraeus THE Ghospell teacheth that marriage is graunted and free for all men Lay and Priests and expresly saith that the forbidding of marriage and meates is a diuellish doctrine Contrariwise the Papists forbid a great part of men Priests and Monkes marriage and commaund abstinence from certaine meates vpon certaine daies Bellarmine But where I pray thee doth the Ghospell teach that marriage is graunted to them who haue a vow of continency Peraduenture Hebr. 13. where we read Marriage is honorable in all But if in all comprehendeth all men whatsoeuer marriage shal be honorable in the Father the Daughter in the Mother and the Sonne in Brother and Sister or if this pleaseth you not let it not please you neither that marriage ought to be called honourable betwixt a Monke and a Nunne and other men for whome it it is not lawfull to marry by reason of their vow for the Apostles meaning only is that we honour Marriage in all who are duely and lawfully marryed and it remayneth that you proue that those are duely and lawfully marryed who haue vowed to God perpetuall continency Heare S. Chrysostome what he wryteth epist 6. to Theodore a Monke who meant to marry a wife or perhaps had already marryed one Marriage saith he is honourable but it is not fitting for thee now to keep the priviledges of marriage although thou often callest this Marriage yet I thinke it worse then adultery Concerning the place of the Apostle 1. Tim. 4. forbidding to marry c. see what we said before chap. 21. neere the end of it §. XI Chytraeus THE Ghospell teacheth that there is one true and solide foundation vpon which the Church of God is built viz. our Lord Iesus Christ 1. Cor. 3. Act. 4. and Augustine so interpreteth the place of Matth. 16. Vpon this rock which thou hast knowne saying Thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God that is vpon my selfe the Sonne of the liuing God I will build my Church I will build thee vpon me not me vpon thee The Pope contrary wise cryeth out that vpon the rock of the Roman Church and the ordinary succession of Popes all the rest of the Church in the Christian world is built Bellarmine But I belieue S. Paul is not repugnant to himselfe when he saith Ephes 2. we that are built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Neither is S. Iohn Apoc. 21. where he saith that the 12. Apostles are 12. foundations of the Church contrary to S. Paul 1. Cor. 3. affirming that there is no other Foundation of the Church but Christ for S. Paul 1. Cor. 3. speaketh of the principall foundation But both he Ephes 2. and S. Io. Apoc. 21. speake of secondary Foundations Of which manner of foundation S. Augustine also speaketh in psal contra part Donat. where he saith Number the Priests euen from the very seat of S. Peter that is the rock which the proude gate of hell do not ouercome But of this we haue spoken sufficiently before lib. x. de Pontifice cap. 10. §. XII Chytraeus THE Ghospell teacheth that no Apostle or Bishop or other Minister of the Ghospell hath superiour and greater power and rule then another so farre as pertayneth to the Ministry but that all Ministers haue equall power to teach the Ghospell administer Sacraments bynd wicked and absolue those which do pennance as the Scriptures cleerly teach Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 3. v. 4. Ioan. 20. Matth. 18. the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen are giuen to all the Apostles togeather On the contrary side the Bishop of Rome boasteth that he hath by Gods law supreme power ouer all other Bishops and the whole Church and both swords the spirituall and politick c. Bllarmine I could not yet find where the Ghospell teacheth that one Bishop or Minister hath not greater power then another for the places which thou citest do plainely signify the contrary for Luc. 22. our Lord indeed exhorteth his disciples to humility and forbiddeth Kingly and tyrannicall dominatioÌ„ to them who ought to gouerne the Church In the meane time notwithstanding he affirmeth that among the Apostles one is greater then the rest yea and the guid or captayne of the rest For he saith let him that is greater among you become as the lesse and the precessour in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Dux the guide or captaine as a seruant or Mynister And the Apostle 1. Cor. 3. where he saith that he had planted and Apollo watred and againe that he as the Architect had laid the Foundation and that others do build vpon it doth he
tyme and were so addicted to this world that they would by no meanes vnderstand that their Messias was to come in that humility in which our Sauiour came which notwithstanding was plainly foretould in the Scriptures which we haue no reason to thinke but that Ecclesiasticus and those of his tyme did vnderstand aright and consequently knew well inough that Elias was not to come at our Sauiours first comming but at his second since it is manifest in this place that they expected his comming litterally and in person Now as for the authority of Iansenius who M. Downam prayseth as he did before Arias Montanus because he Iansenius maketh for him to be one of the best writers among the Papists there had byn no great cause of his commending him if M. Downam had bene disposed to haue dealt sincerely since Bellarmine shewed how he changed his opinion in Matth. 17. where he writeth that the Prophet Malachie cannot be vnderstood but of the true Elias and consequently must needes Downam dealeth not sincerely taking the obiection omitting the answere thinke that Ecclesiasticus was not deceaued in vnderstanding him so But this is another of M. Downams tricks to steale an obiection from Bellarmine and omit his answere where we might meruayle at his impudent folly but that it is no new nor strange thing in him as it was in Iansenius or any Catholike Writer to attribute an errour to Canonicall Scripture which was the cause of Bellarmines meruayling at Iansenius and of his changing so absurd an opinion or rather errour in his later writings in which he doth not only auouch and prooue this truth but also affirmeth that it is the doctrine of the Catholike Church which none but an Heretike will deny Concerning the other place which speaketh of Henoch M. Downam triumpheth saying that it is Ecclesiast 44. a wonder that Bellarmine would alleage it for this purpose But that hauing nothing to say to the purpose he is desirous to say something to bleare the eyes of the simple The originall text hath Henoch pleased the Lord God and was translated for an example of repentance to the generations that is that the generations present and to come might be moued by his example to turne vnto the Lord and to walke before him knowing by his example that there is a reward layd vp for those that turne vnto the Lord and walke before him as Henoch did But will Bellarmine hence conclude that therfore Henoch is to come agayne in the flesh to oppose himselfe to Antichrist Hitherto M. Downam And this is all he hath to say Where first we see that he cannot deny but that the latin text which Bellarmine cited made much for this purpose and there is no reason but that we should attribute as much at least to the latin interpretation as to M. Downams interpretation since it cannot be denyed but that there is The latin interpreter not to be reiected lesse suspition of partiality in him being so ancient who made no doubt of the sense and therfore translated it in that sorte as it were to exclude M. Downams deuise and since the latin Church hath all this tyme receaued this translation for Scripture we must not deny it now because it is contrary to some Protestant opinions especially since we see far greater difference in other partes of Scripture betwixt the originall text some interpretations allowed by the Church neither of which the Fathers durst reiect but rather imbraced and expounded them both as the word of God and indeed who knoweth not that the chiefest certainty that we haue of either dependeth vpon the approbation and authority of the Church which cannot erre in matters of this moment And I belieue M. Downam will hardly giue vs any other sufficient reason why he belieueth these bookes to be Scripture rather then others or this interpretation to be good and others bad But besides the authority of the latin text we thinke the Greeke to be for vs also at leastwise no man can deny but that our exposition is conformable to the Fathers doctrine who affirme our assertion of Henochs comming and consequently we are sure that we may safely expound it so without danger of errour and that M. Downam hath no reason to deny our sense so peremptorily M. Downams opinion of Henochs trāslation maketh as much for any other vertue as for repentance cōtrary to the Scripture though he thinke his owne better which we meruayle not at But further we cannot well see why Henochs translation should rather serue for an example of Repentance then of Hope Religion Iustice Innocency Faith Charity or any other vertue if we admitt M. Downams exposition and yet he is said particulerly to be an example of pennance which commeth very fitly for the latin interpreter and our explication and agreeth passing well with that which S. Iohn writeth Apoc. 11. that these two diuine witnesses shall preach amicti saceis in sack-cloth which wil be a good example of pennance indeed 5. About the third place Matth. 17. 11. his first answere is that by the Euangelist Marke who speaketh in the present tense Elias I. VIII indeed comming first restoreth all thinges the meaning of our Sauiour Christ appeareth to haue byn this Elias quidem venturus fuit primum restituturus omnia Elias indeed was to come first and was to restore Matth. 17. Mar. 9. M. Downam egregiously corrupteth S. Marke S. Matthews Text. all thinges And you must note that he putteth S. Markes wordes as he citeth them as also his owne interpretation in latin in a distinct character to bleare the eyes of the simple and make them belieue that they are both very Scripture And surely howsoeuer he may excuse the later the first is somewhat hard since that S. Markes words are Elias cùm venerit primò restituet omnia which the Protestant English Bible translateth Elias verily when he commeth first restoreth all thinges where we see a when which sufficiently sheweth that Elias was not yet come and besides both venerit restituet are the future and not the present tense and in the wordes following S. Marke hath an which cleareth this matter greatly Sed dico vobis quia Elias venit But I say vnto you that Elias is also come which sheweth plainely that in the former clause our Sauiour spake of a future comming as if he had said Elias shall come in person and also is come in spirit in S. Iohn Baptist which only was required at the first comming of our Sauiour But nothing will serue head-strong Heretikes therfore M. Downam corrupteth S. Matth. Matth. 11. 11. also making him say Iohn Baptist is that Elias who was to come putting it downe in a distinct letter as before whereas the wordes are Ipse est Elias qui venturus est where he could see the first est and translate it truly but not the second because it was against
little vpoÌ„ the ChristiaÌ„ Princes in whose dominioÌ„s at this daie there is The difference betwixt the Catholike the ProtestaÌ„t Princes diuersity of Religions he shall find that all the Catholike Princes tolerate in some sort their Hereticall subiects as the Emperour the King of France the King of Poland now the Arch-duke in Flanders whereas heere in England the Catholikes canfind no such fauour who that they suffer for Religion and not for treason none but impudent Ministers and their mates can deny Neither is this craft of ProtestaÌ„ts any great glory for theÌ„ who by reasoÌ„ of the distrust which they haue in their owne cause vse to put Catholiks to death vnder the name of Treason Catholikes are put to death for Religion by Protestants though they can prooue nothing against them but the exercise of their Religion For in this they imitate the Iewes who dealt so with our Sauiour and some other Tyrants but chiefly Iulian the Apostata which were alway accompted the greatest and worst persecutors Whereas Catholikes haue alway punished heretikes directely for their heresie esteeming it as it deserued a far greater crime then treason as being coÌ„mitted against the King of HeaueÌ„ whoÌ„ all earthly Princes are bouÌ„d to respect more then theÌ„selues so wee see in Queene Maries tyme Bishop Craâ—mer had his Treasons pardoned but not his heresies for which hee was burned And so it appeareth by the proceeding of our aduersaries that wee are free froÌ„ heresie how false their imputations of treasons are is proued by many and lastely by W. R. in his CoÌ„futatioÌ„ of O. E. aliâs Sutcliffes vaunting challeng in the last chapter to which I remit my reader And this shall suffice for the greatnes of the persecution vnder Antichrist 6. Touching the manifestnes of it M. Downam is not of Bellarmines mynd yea he thinketh his doctrine contrary to our Sauiours who hath said that the good and bad shall grow togeather like wheat and tares vntill the day of the great haruest But M. Downam Antichrists persecutioÌ„ most manifest Matth. 13. may vnderstand that Bellarmine houldeth with S. Augustine quaest 11. super Matth. that this is to be vnderstood of the whole world in which Bellarmine denieth not but there wil be store of tares in this tyme of Antichrist and besides our Sauiour only willeth his seruants not to roote out all the tares when there is danger that the corne may also he destroyed by that meanes But now we speak of his enemies who partly by persecuting partly for feare of persecution will separate themselues of their owne accord from among Gods wheate to wit his elect and yet are to bee separated also in the day of Iudgment against their wills which is all that the place alleadged doth proue To the authority of S. Augustine alleadged by Bellarmine he giueth two answeres First if he had said so we might haue Downam reiecteth S. Augustine esteemed his speach to haue bene but a human coniecture rather then a prophesy diuine so that it is no matter what S. Augustine or any other can say For if it please not M. Downams vaine fancy it shall be accompted but an humane coniecture though he gather it out of Scripture as S. Augustine doth this But secondly saith M. Downam Bellarmine without all shame falfifieth his wordes who speaketh of the Diuell alone and not of all the wicked saying Now it is said that he shall goe forth viz. into open persecution he shall breake forth of the couerts of hatred for which we must note that S. Augustine interpreteth the depth into which the Diuell was put to be their hartes which hate the Christians in quorum saith he quotidie velut in abysso Bellarmin vniustly charged by M Downam cacis prosundis cordibus includitur cap. 8. In whose blind and profound hartes he is daily inclosed as in a depth Which exposition he mentioneth againe cap. 11. which Bellarmine cited where he expoundeth how he is said to come forth out of this depth to wit out of the couerts of hatred within which he was inclosed into open persecution because he shall seduce those whose harts he possessed to make warre against Christians which before he hated but was not permitted to hurt all which that he meaneth of all the wicked the wordes following immediately declare Haec enim erit nouissima persecutio noâ—issimo imminente iudicio cùm saÌ„cta Ecclesia toto terrarum orbe patietur vniuersa scilicet ciuitas Christi ab vniuersa Diaboli ciuitate quantacumque erit vtraque super terram For this shal be the last persecution the last iudgment being at hand which the holy Church shall suffer ouer all the world to wit the whole citty of Christ by the whole citty of the Diuell how great soeuer either of them shall be vpon the earth Can any thing be more plaine then this And after againe he saith that the holy Church shal be enuironed ab omnibus inimicâ—â— suis by all her enemies yea he repeateth the very like wordes to those which he had spoken in the singular number againe in the plurall speaking of the Nations quae sunt in quatuor angulis terrae in the foure corners or quarters of the earth in apertum odium de operto erupturae sunt they shal breake forth into open hatred of their hidden malice Wherfore let any man iudge whether Bellarmine changed S. Augustines sense though for brenity and perspicuities sake he cited his wordes in the plurall number as they were to be vnderstood are repeated also by S. Augustine himselfe All the Churches enemies shal ioyne to impugne her in Antichrists tyme. 7. Now that al that hate Christians or the Church haue not hitherto ioyned against them is so manifest that M. Downam cannot deny and therfore granting it he only turneth to aske whether they shall do so when Antichrist commeth or no To whome we returne answere that they shall as hath bene sufficiently proued and therfore it is manifest that Antichrist is not yet come To the second part of Bellarmines proofe he answereth that the vncertainty of the beginning of Antichrists persecution if it were true doth not disproue the greatnes but argueth the length As though now we treated of the greatnes and not of the manifestnes of this persecution Downam forgetteth what he impugneth which surely is plainly disproued if it were so secret that no man can tell when it began Secondly he saith the persecutions vnder Nero the rest were wel knowne when they began and when they ended because there was some intermission of them but these now haue no end nor yet intermission except it be when they haue none to persecute And is not this a wise answere thinke you to tell vs that the beginning of a persecution cannot be shewed because it hath no intermission nor end Except he would haue vs to vnderstand him that he meaneth that it hath had no beginning
S. Gregory Nazianzen who liued about the yeare 380. in Apologet. ad Patrem suum when he was made B. of Safimi There came vpon me againe quoth he the vnction and spirit and I haue new cause of mourning and sadnes In which place he maketh mention of a double vnction the one when he was made Priest and the other then at his consecrating Bishop Likewise orat 1. de pace speaking of S. Basil who being made Bishop refused the exercize of that authority Although he hath the spirit and talents and the care of a flock committed vnto him and is annoynted with the oyle of Priesthood and perfection yet his VVisdome delayeth to take vpon him the Prelacy Now for the Sacrifice for the dead it shal be sufficient in this place to bring S. Augustines testimony who lib. de hares cap. 53. saith That it was the peculiar fancy of Aerius the Arch-Heretike that we ought not to offer oblation for the dead Of the Adoration of Images only S. Hierome who liued about the yeare 400. shall suffice He in vita Paulae saith thus Prostrate before the Crosse she adored as though she had seene our Lord vpon it Finally of the adoration of the Eucharist S. Ambrose may deseruedly suffice who lib. 3. de Spiritu Sancto cap. 12. explicating that place Adore his footestoole Therefore saith he by the footestoole is meant the earth by the earth the flesh of Christ which at this day also we adore in the mysteryes and which the Apostles adored in our Lord Iesus as we haue said before which S. Augustine saith almost in the same wordes in explicat Psal 98. Since therefore all these thinges which our Aduersaries will haue to be the Characters of Antichrist were vsed by the Catholike Church many yeares before Antichrist was borne it must needes follow that either Antichrist learned them of that Church and to say this is to confound Antichrist with Christ or that none of these things belong to the Characters of Antichrist And this is that which we prooue Thus much shall suffice for this rash and most absurd opinion of our Aduersaries which they haue not proued by any witnesses or reasons The second opinion is of certaine Catholikes who thinke that Antichrists Character is the letters with which his name shal be written So thinke Primasius Beda and Rupertus who seeme to be deceaued because they read But he who hath the Character of the name of the beast or the number of his name But S. Iohn saith not so but thus But he who hath the Character or the name of the beast or the number of his name and the Greeke text agreeth with this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The third opinion is of S. Hippolytus Martyr orat de consummatione mundi some others that the Beastes Character shal be not to vse the signe of the Crosse but rather to execrate and abolish it In which the Caluinistes are egregious forerunners of Antichrist I rather thinke that Antichrist shall inuent a positiue Character also as Christ hath the signe of the Crosse knowne to all but it is not knowne what this Character is vntill Antichrist commeth as we said of the Name M. Dovvnams Ansvvere confuted 1. THOVGH Bellarmine frame no particuler argument from this discourse of Antichrists Character yet M. Downam will needes by resoluing the discourse it selfe and by conferring it with the former Chapter make him argue from the Character as he did from the number of the name About which we will not striue with him but rather supposing that this was Bellarmines mynd we will examine the solution he giueth to this argument so framed by himselfe 2. And first he would deny that Antichrists marke shal be knowne at his comming in the very same manner that he denyed before that the number of his name should be knowne Wherefore for this point I remit the Reader to that which hath bene said before 3. As also for the other that this Character is not yet knowne because there is so much controuersy about it for he only teacheth briefely that which he explicated more at large about the number of his name which we examined and confuted before Wherefore let vs see what he can say for the Protestāts or Heretikes of this tyme whose opinion Bellarmine impugneth by which we shall also discouer how much his explication helpeth them and what absurdity the opinion of Catholikes conteyneth Which two points M. Downam thought good to touch before he came to answere Bellarmines two proofes 4. And first to that out of the Scripture M. Downam granteth that the marke of Antichrist is but one meaning as he explicateth himselfe in substance although the same by diuers The mark or Character of Antichrist but one meanes may be diuersly expressed and testified that is subiection to the Pope as their head and the acknowledgment of the Sea of Rome and of the Popes Supremacy c. But what he meaneth by one in substance is not easy to conceaue except it be this that all the outward signes Characters and markes agree in this that they signify the same subiection to the Pope c. so that the markes shal be distinct and diuers in themselues and in their manner of signification though the thing by them signified be one But this is not sufficient to affirme that the Character of Antichrist is but one for in this sort the name and the number of the name and the Charcter are all one in substance since they signify the same thing and all signes which signify the same thing may be said to be one in substance as wryting speach gesture and the like and all the figures in the old Testament which signified Christ are but one figure in substance and all the Sacraments of the Church which signify grace shal be but one Sacrament which is too great an absurdity for M. Downam to defend consequently he must needes graunt that his fellow Ghospellers assigne more Characters then one contrary to the Scripture and therefore they are so farre from truly interpreting the Scripture that they wholy peruert it To Bellarmines second instance out of the Scripture M. Downam giueth no direct answere at all but would same put it off by telling vs that the Pope hath declared that it is necessary to saluation to be subiect to the Pope But this is only to shew that the body must be vnited with the head in which all Religions whatsoeuer yea all Societies must The mark of Antichrist shal be common to all in his King dome needes agree But Bellarmines instance impugneth two of the markes which some Protestants affirme to be the Characters of Antichrist by this euident proofe that the Character of Antichrist shal be common to all men in Antichrists Kingdome as the Scripture plainely affirmeth but the oath of Obedience and the Priestly vnction agree to few therefore these cānot be the Character wherof the Scripture speaketh
A TREATISE OF ANTICHRIST CONTEYNING The defence of Cardinall Bellarmines Arguments which inuincibly demonstrate That the Pope is not Antichrist AGAINST M. GEORGE DOWNAM D. of Diuinity who impugneth the same By Michael Christopherson Priest THE FIRST PART Si Patrem familias Beelzebub vocauerunt quantò magis domesticos eius Matth. 10. If they haue called the Goodman of the house Beelzebub how much more them of his houshould Imprinted with Licence M.DC.XIII TO THE KINGS MOST EXCELLENT MAIESTY MOST MIGHTY PRINCE I HOPE it will not be deemed any presumption but rather a iust and necessary preuention for me to offer this my Treatise concerning Antichrist to your Soueraigne Maiesty Sure I am that it procedeth from a loyall and dutifull mynd desirous to auoid all occasion of offence and ready to imploy my best labours yea my life it selfe in your Maiestyes seruice My aduersary likewise hath prouoked me hereunto who togeather with M. D. 〈…〉 Powell haue taken the same course with their disputations of the same subiect And though they may seeme to haue the better hand by reason of your Maiestyes education and present profession yet I want not reasons of encouragement wherby I may be induced to hope and expect your Maiesties fauourable patronage and protection At least your Maiesty giueth all men good leaue to dispute of this Controuersy by accounting the Protestants proofs but bare coniectures yea promising to yield to the Truth when it shal be manifested by more forcible Arguments and more probable Interpretations which we haue good cause of hope to see shortly performed by the labours of so many learned men of forraine Nations who haue endeauored to giue your Maiesty satisfaction in this kynd In the meane space we cannot but highly extoll this rare modesty in so great a Monarch especially when we heare M. Powell and other such vnlearned Vpstarts protesting with full mouth that they know as certainly that the Pope is the great Disput de Antichr in initio Antichrist as that God is in Heauen and Iesus Christ our Sauiour and Redeemer Certainely it is strange how any man could fall into a fit of such extreme and impudent madnes were it not that God permitteth sometymes such excesse of malicious folly for the reclayming of others misled and seduced by these erring guids and false Prophets In which respect I haue alway thought this Question very profitable and of great importance to omit how necessary the discussion thereof may proue sooner then we are aware in regard of the true and great Antichrist himselfe whose comming we haue far more reason to expect in our dayes then the Ancient Fathers had in theirs Thus the diuine Goodnesse alway turneth euill into good and maketh all things concurre to the welfare of his Elect and by this strang paradox and calumniation preuenteth and prepareth vs against Antichrists comming with an exact Discouery of his whole proceeding and persecution which whosoeuer considereth attentiuely as it is layd downe in the sacred Scripture and declared by the holy Fathers will easily perceaue that hitherto the chiefest signes and notes of Antichrist haue not byn fulfilled by any So that indeed there can be no doubt or question whether he himselfe be come only some controuersy might be moued which of his forerunners doth most resemble him And in this also the matter may easily be decided for who seeth not that the false Mahomet draweth nighest vnto him both in name and deedes His name contayning the number 666. which is by S. Iohn assigned to Antichrist and his impiety enmity and persecution against Christ and Christians is notorious to the whole world For which cause there haue not wanted some both Catholicks and See Peâ—erius in Apoc. Protestants who haue persuaded themselues that there is no other Antichrist to be expected But these are euidently confuted by many inuincible arguments Notwithstanding this their errour though neuer so grosse may seeme in some sort excusable because they impugne a certayne and manifest enemy But what shall we say of those who take their marke so much amisse that they make the chiefe visible Pastour of Christs Church a member of Sathan yea Antichrist himselfe Can any thing be more absurd or intollerable Is it possible that any Christian would giue Luther the hearing when his proud spirit of contention and contradiction made him first breake forth into this open blasphemy How did not Princes perceaue that this was the high way to all rebellion Could they conceaue or imagin that Temporall Authority Iurisdiction would be regarded where the chiefest spirituall power vpon earth was thus impudently contemned and trodden vnder foot Can they trust to their Pedigrees when they see the continuall succession of 1500. yeares so lightly esteemed What better Title can they pretend for themselues then the expresse words of our Sauiour with which he established S. Peter and his Successors Your Maiesty wisely obserued that vnlesse In the conference at Hampton court the Authority of Bishops were mayntained that of Princes could not stand No Bishop no King saith your Maiesty And certaine it is that no lawfull Bishop can be vpholden against the Popes Authority to which all other spirituall Iurisdiction is subordinate Can any Iudge or Magistrate of the Realme be independant of your Maiesty This is so euident that euen the Puritans themselues though otherwise neuer so blinded with malice against the Pope could not choose but see it For which cause they stick not to protest to all the world that if the Prelats haue the Truth especially in this point the Pope and the Church of Rome and in them God and Christ Iesus himselfe haue great wrong and indignity offered vnto them in In the Christian and modest offâ—r c. published anno 1606. pag. 16. that they are reiected and that all the Protestant Churches are Schismaticall in forsaking vnity and communion with them Thus then it plainely appeareth that the Protestants neither according to the Truth it selfe nor in the Puritans iudgment can defend themselues their pretended Bishops but by establishing the Pope and Roman Church And all the vehemency which they vse against the Pope to proue him Antichrist falleth vpon themselues who participate with him in admitting the Hierarchy of Bishops And as for other proofes proper to Puritans they are inforced to answere them as well as we yea most of all these Arguments be such as might very easily be turned against any lawfull Prince whatsoeuer and much more against such Protestant Princes as besides their Temporall power make clayme to spirituall Iurisdiction Let any discreet Reader reflect vpon all particulers and he will easily discerne that if Catholicks had byn no more moderate then Luther and other Protestants were King Henry could not haue intitled himselfe Head of the Church in spirituall and Ecclesiasticall affayres without hauing the name of Antichrist applyed and appropriated vnto him For if such contumelious inferences be made against the Pope
be diligentlie explicated nine heads are to be treated of First of the name it selfe of Antichrist 2. VVhether Antichrist be one man or a kind of men 3. Of the tyme of his comming and death 4. Of his proper name 5. Of what nation he shal be borne by whome he shall chiefly be receaued 6. Where he shall fixe his seate 7. Of his doctrine and manners 8. Of his miracles 9. Of his kingdome and warres For out of all these it will most cleerely appeare with what impudencie the heretikes make the Pope Antichrist to which we will adde a Chapter wherin we will proue that the Pope is not onlie not Antichrist but that hee hath in no sort left to be the Bishop and pastour of the whole Church that nothing may remayne not solued of Caluins obiections For the first some of our aduersaries teach that the name of Antichrist doth properlie signifie the Vicar of Christ and therefore that the Pope who affirmeth himselfe to be Christs Vicar is Antichrist So teacheth VVolfgāgus Musculus in locis cap. de potest Ministrorū and he proueth it because that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth vice whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vice-Christi in Christs place as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth him who obtrudeth himselfe for Captaine that is who will be accompted the Captaynes Vicar The Magdeburgenses cent 1. lib. 2. cap. 4. colum 435. do teach that the Pope is therefore the true Antichrist because he maketh himselfe the vicar of Christ But without doubt they are deceaued or endeauour to deceaue for the name of Antichrist cannot in any sort signifie the Vicar of Christ but only some that is contrary to Christ and contrarie not howsoeuer but in such sort that he striueth with him for the seate dignity of Christ that is who is aemulus Christi at emulation with Christ and would be accounted Christ hauing cast him downe who is truly Christ That this is the signification of this name it is proued three waies First because among the Grecians the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properlie signifie opposition and because not onlie those things are said to be opposed which are repugnant one to the other but also those which are of equall value from thence it proceedeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in composition sometyme signifieth contrarietie sometyme equiualence as is manifest in the examples of all such names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth an emulous in a combate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a cōtrary remedie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a cōtrarie speach 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equiualent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equall to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the thumme because it is opposed against and is equiualent to all the rest of the hand and so of the rest But a Vicar doth not signifie opposition but subordination to another and therefore it cannot be expressed by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signifie the Captaines Vicar but ordinarily a contrarie Captaine as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to make warre and sometime him that is in the Captaines place not as subiect to him but as equall as among the Latins Propraetor or Proconsul doth not signifie the Vicar of the Pretor or Consul but him that is in some Prouince that which the Pretor or Consul is in the Citty and in this Musculus was deceaued for because he read in Budaeus that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie a Propretor he thought that it doth signifie the Vicar of the Pretor which is false Secondly the same is proued out of the Scripture for although this name were of it selfe ambiguous yet as it is takē in Scripture it is not doubtfull and our question must not be of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absolutelie but as it is taken in the Scriptures Now in the Scriptures Antichrist is said to be him who is extolled aboue all that is called God 2. Thess 2. which certainelie is not to be the Vicar but the enemy of Christ And 1. Ioan. 2. Antichrist is sayd to be him who denieth Iesus to be Christ that he may sell himselfe for Christ and Matth. 24. Antichrist is said to affirme himselfe to be Christ which certainily is not the part of a Vicar but of an Emulous Thirdly out of all the Authors who haue written of Antichrist and out of the common sense of all Christians who by Antichrist vnderstād a certaine notable false Christ In which sort expoūdeth also this word of the ancient Greeks S. Damascen lib. 4. de fide cap. 28. and after the same manner doth S. Hierome expound it of the Latins who notwithstanding was also most skilfull in the Greeke tongue quaest 11. ad Algasiam Lastlie so also expoundeth it in his Thesaurus lingnae Graecae Henricus Stephaenus who withstanding is one of the heretikes of Geneua Hence we haue our first argument against our aduersaries For since the name of Antichrist signifieth the enemy and emulous of Christ and the Pope confesseth himself to be Christs seruant and subiect to Christ in all thinges and in no sort saith that he is Christ nor maketh himself equall to him it is manifest that he is not Antichrist M. Dovvnams Ansvvere confuted 1. FIRST M. Downam telleth vs of two great aduātages that Bellarmine hath against him and all Protestants in this point 1. In respect of his great learning much reading 2. In that he is to proue the negatiue part so that it is inough for him if he Bellarmins aduantages in this cōtrouersy can but shew plainelie and euidently that any one seueral essential mark ascribed vnto Antichrist in the Scriptures doth not agree to the Pope All which wee willinglie acknowledg and from hence doe inferre M. Downams ignorance and impudency that whereas it had bene inough for Bellarmine to haue disproued him in one point it is not inough for him that he is disproued in all as the Reader will easilie perceaue in perusing the particuler arguments Likewise we acknowledg the controuersie to be of that importance and consequence that it manifestlie conuinceth them to be the limmes of Antichrist The importance of this cōtrouersy who are in errour cōcerning this point for this consequēce doth not onlie touch vs if we were in the wrong as M. Downam seemeth to insinuate by only naming vs but it cōcerneth them also as fullie since that it is euident that none but heretikes can charge any and much lesse the chiefe Pastour of Christs Church with so foule an imputation Now how true it is that all heretikes are lymmes of Antichrist I need not shew since that it is graunted on both sides And therfore it behooueth M. Downam and his fellows to haue as great a will to cleere themselues in this behalfe as it doth vs and so much the more also because we are but the defendants and they are the slanderous calumniators likewise for that
of Antichrist doe oppose themselues to the members of Christ contending which of them are to haue that appellation so Antichrist properlie taken shall striue with Christ whether of them is to be accounted trulie and properly Christ And when S. Iohn speaketh of such enemies as professe the name of the true Christ he meaneth only of Antichrists forerunners and members which are only the members of Antichrist and not properly Antichrist himself who notwithstanding at the first till he hath gotten credit authority will perhaps deale deceitfully but afterwards will plainely oppose himself to Christ as S. Matth. S. Paul S. Iohn also doe teach in the place which Bellarmine alleadgeth in which S. Iohn speaketh of an open professed enemy as is manifest And M. Downam should haue answered to that place directly and not haue run to others and so bouldly affirmed that S. Iohn speaketh only of hidden enemies against the expresse place which he was to answere To the third proofe he only answereth that if all Authours meane that Antichrist shal be such a false Christ as shall plainely and directly affirme himselfe to be Christ the only Messias then their affirmation Downam reiecteth all authors agreeth not with that Antichrist whome the Scriptures describe which is in effect to admit that all those authors are against him but that he vnderstandeth the Scripture better then they all only he vouchsafeth to answere in particuler to his good friend Henricus Stephanus saying that neither he nor any approued author denieth but that Antichrist may signify him who being an enemy of Christ professeth himself to be his Vicar Now you must suppose that no Authors are approued whome M. Downam mislikes and besides consider how any Author can take occasioÌ„ to deny that which they neuer heard brought in question and withall we are to note that may of M. Downams which only importeth that the name of Antichrist may be applied to his meÌ„bers but now our question is what is the proper signification of that word as it is vnderstood of the chiefe Antichrist himselfe and not of his members 5. To the assumption he answereth graunting it in all that the Pope confesseth of himselfe in word but in deedes he saith that the Pope in many things matcheth himself with Christ and in some thinges aduanceth himselfe aboue him which he saith that he hath proued els where which we are to examine in that place Now it is sufficient for vs that the Pope is See cap. 14. noe open enemy of Christ as Antichrist shal be For of this it followeth euidently that the Pope is not the chiefe Antichrist properly so called which is all that Bellarmine intendeth to proue in this place THE SECOND CHAPTER That Antichrist shal be a certaine determinate Man NOvv concerning the second saith Bellarmine we agree with our Aduersaries in one thing differ in another We agree in that that as the name of Christ is takeÌ„ in two sorts somtime properly for one excellent singular Christ who is Iesus Nazarenus somtime commonly for all those who haue likenesse with Christ in being annointed in which sort all Prophets Kings Priests are called Christs Psal 104. Touch not my Christs So also the name of Antichrist somtime is taken properly for one notable enemy of Christ of whome there is mention 2. Thess 2. Ioan. 5. and in other places and somtime commonly for all who in any sort impugne Christ For 1. Ioan. 2. we read You haue heard that Antichrist commeth and now many are become Antichrists That is yow haue heard that Antichrist shall come and now thought that singular Antichrist be not yet come yet many seducers are already come who also may be called Antichristes But we disagree of Antichrist properly so called whether he be one singular man For all Catholikes thinke so that Antichrist shal be one certaine man but all the heretikes before alleadged teach that Antichrist properly so called is not any singular person but a singular Throne or TyraÌ„nical Kingdome and Apostolicall seate of them who gouerne the Church The Magdeburgenses cent 1. lib. 2. c. 4. col 435. The Apostles teach say they that Antichrist shall not be only one person but an whole kingdome by false Doctors ruling in the temple of God that is in the Church of God in the great Citty that is in the Roman Citty gotten by the worke fraude and deceipt of the Diuell So they The like are in others before alleadged Their reasons are these First S. Paul 2. Thess 2. saith that already euen in his time Antichrist had begun to be in the world the mystery of iniquity doth worke now And notwithstanding he sayth in the same place that Antichrist shal be slaine by Christ in the end of the world From hence Beza concludeth thus vpon 2. Thess 2. They are manifestly deceaued whosoeuer thought that this was to be vnderstood of one Man vnlesse they giue me some one who may remaine aliue from Paules tyme vntill the day of Iudgement Soe also doth Caluin argue in the place which I cyted before This reason is confirmed out of S. Iohn who in the first Epistle and fourth Chapter saith Euery spirit that dissolueth Iesus is not of God and this is Antichrist of whome you haue heard that he commeth and now he is in the world Beza's second reason is because Daniel in his 7. Chapter by the particuler names of the beastes a Beare a Lion and a Leopard doth not vnderstand particuler Kings but seuerall Kingdomes one of which conteyneth many Kings therfore after the same manner Paul 2. Thess 2. who doth wonderfullie agree with Daniel by the man of sinne and sonne of perdition doth not vnderstand one particuler person but as it were a certayne body of many Tyrants The 3. reason is Caluins vpon the 2. Chap. of first Epistle of S. Iohn where he saith that they doe dote and willfullie erre who belieue that Antichrist shall be one man seeing that Paul 2. Thess 2. hath written that the Apostasy shall come and that Antichrist shal be the head of it For Apostasy is a certaine generall failing or defection froÌ„ the Faith which indeed maketh one body â—nd one Kingdome is not a matter of a few yeares that it can be accomplished vnder one King For all this the truth is that Antichrist shal be one particuler man which is proued out of all the Scriptures Fathers who treat of Antichrist The places of Scripture be fiue the first is in the Ghospell of S. Iohn cap. 5. I came in the name of my Father and you receaued me not if another come in his owne name him will you receaue Musculus Caluin in Marlor in Comment huius loci will haue these words to be vnderstood of false Prophets in generall and not of any one but their exposition is repugnant to the ancient Fathers and with the text it selfe For that these wordes are spoken of Antichrist do witnes S.
should be such that before the desolation of Hierusalem the Ghospell should he preached throughout the world for a testimony to all Nations vers 14. And therfore that they should not feare least togeather with Hierusalem his Church should be ouerthrowne for be ore the distruction of Hierusalem he would by their preaching to all Nations both Iewes and Gentiles plant his Church in many nations of the world And for asmuch as the Temple and Citty of Hierusalem were types and figures of the Church of Christ which were to be abolished when the Church oâ— Christ should be established therefore he addeth that vpon the planting of the Church by their Ministry should the end and destruction of Hierusalem come 8. But this is not only doubtfull since oâ— I M. Downams Downam expoundeth Scripture childishly authority is not sufficient to make it certaine but also altogeather childish and foolish For how could the Apostles feare least togeather with Ierusalem Christs Church should be ouerthrowne since as he himselfe saith the Temple and Cittie of Hierusalem were Types and figures of the Church of Christ which were to be abolished when the Church of Christ should be established and consequently the Apostles should neuer haue greater hope that Christes Church should be established then when they should see the Temple and Citty of Hierusalem and in them the Iewes Synagogue abolished And were not he a wise man thinke you that would go about to comfort Catholikes by telling them that they must not be afrayd though they see heretikes abolished who are their chiefest aduersaries since that the preuailing of Catholikes consisteth chiefly in the abolishing of heretikes But by this we may see to what absurdities such men as M. Downam are brought when leauing the exposition of the Fathers they will follow their owne priuate new-fangled inuentions 9. After this againe he saith that wee may not thinke that our Sauiour Christ would intermingle the Prophesies concerning the destruction of Ierusalem and the end of the world therby to nourish the The prophesies coÌ„cerning the destruction of HierusaleÌ„ the end of the world intermingled error of his Disciples who imagined that the end of IerusaleÌ„ should not be before the end of the world as appeareth by their question But on the other side the Fathers tell vs that we must thinke that our Sauiour did intermingle these Prophesies of purpose to let them be in continuall expectation of the end of the world and that when they should see the subuersioÌ„ of the Temple they should not be secure that the end of the world was not also very neere And this experience also teacheth since as Bellarmine in part sheweth in the former Chapter and first opinion the holy Fathers expected our Sauiours comming euery one in his tyme. And this is that which they thinke to appeare both by the Apostles question and our Sauiours answere for they seemed to be doubtfull of it and our Sauiour leaueth them as doubtfull in this point 10. Thirdly M. Downam goeth about to confirme his opinion by those wordes of our Sauiour Verilie I say vnto you this generation shall not passe vntill all those thinges pointing as it seemeth saith M. Downam towards Ierusalem as he sate on the Mount Oliuet be fulfilled But by this exposition of his he intermingleth these Prophesies more then any Catholike doth for he maketh the last wordes to appertayne to the former part only to haue no coherence with that which goeth immediatly before which is as great a coÌ„fusioÌ„ as may be And because he saw it himselfe he imagineth our B. Sauiour vpon the suddaine only while he pronounceth these wordes to Downams fond imagination point towards Ierusalem But we are not bound to belieue all his imaginations nor reports neither since he is no Euangelist and therefore we also thinke that he tooke somewhat to much vpon him when he presumed to change one only letter in this narration because it fauoured his imagination more then that which he should haue left if he had bene a faithfull translator which indeed belonged vnto him For our Sauiour saith not all those thinges as though they were thinges a farre of but these thinges of which he had spoken S. Matthew Omnia haec S. Marke Omnia ista S. Luke only Omnia So that mee thinkes since all three Euangelists were so diligent to repeate the word All he should not haue bene so Downam corrupteth the thxt of Scripture bould as to change it into some by applying it to part only of our Sauiours speach and to the further part also But we thinke our selues more bound to belieue the Euangelists the holy Fathers expounding them then these farre fetched deuises of M. Downam and so we doubt not that before this generation that is this corruptible world passeth and both heauen and earth be renewed all those thinges shall come to passe And this our Sauiour signifyeth when hee immediately addeth that Heauen and earth shall passe and not continue alway as now we see them but his wordes shall not passe vnfulfilled 11. Neither can M. Downam help himselfe by telling vs Luc. 21. that Luc. 21. The question concerning Ierusalem is propounded alone for well we may graunt him that S. Luke onlie mentioneth that question but wee shall still thinke our selues bound to belieue S. Matthew telling the same story and rehearsing the other questions also which S. Luke answereth aswell as he though he omitteth the questions for breuities sake And this very circumstance of preaching the Ghospell in the whole world was not omitted by S. Luke but rather very particulerly signified in those wordes donec impleantur tempora NationuÌ„ while the tymes of Nations be fulfilled that is till all Nations haue had the ghospell preached vnto them as S. Marke and S. Matthew do explicate S. Paul repeateth the very same Rom. 11. Caecitas ex parte contigit in Israel blindenes hath hapned in part in Israel which S. Luke said Ierusalem calcabitur à gentibus But how long S. Paul donec plenitudo Gentium intraret vntill the fulnes of Nations should enter which is the very same that S. Luke saith in the words following already rehearsed 12. Finally M. Downam is content to cite S. Chrysostome Downam maketh much accompt of one Father if he fauour his fancies for his opinion for it is the propertie of such men to eâ—â—e me more the authority of one Father which fauoureth their conceipts then of neuer so many if they bee against their fancies so now we see this man who would not vouchsafe the Fathers which Bellarmine alleaged so much as a word is yet content to bring out S. Chrysostome for himselfe and he seemeth to meane the place which a little after he citeth againe Homil. in Matth. 24. And though we might oppose many against one and so thinke our selues before M. Downam yet we would haue him know that our doctrine standeth not so much
his owne person But certainely we haue experienced no such thing from the yeare 600. or 1000. The Heretikes indeed say that they suffer great persecution by Antichrist because sometime some of their number are burnt but what comparison is there betwixt such a persecution and that of Nero Domitian Decius Dioclesian and others since that for one heretike which is burnt there were in times past a thousand Christians put to death and that in the whole Roman Empire not in one only Prouince wheras now the greatest punishmēt is to be burnt then there were incredible and innumerable torments of which see Cornelius Tacitus in Nerone and Eusebius in his Ecclesiasticall History S. Damasus in the life of S. Marcellinus writeth that there were aboue 17. thousād Christiās put to death by Dioclesiā Eusebius who liued at that tyme writeth lib. 8. cap. 6. hist that al prisōs were so full of Martyrs that there was no place for offenders and in all that booke he affirmeth that there were so many put to death within the space of two yeares that it is impossible to number them Besides the heretikes of our tymes haue put to death more Catholikes within these 20. or 30. yeares in France and Flanders then the Inquisitors haue burnt heretikes perhaps these hundred yeares Wherfore they cannot call this a persecution but rather a ciuill warre for as S. Augustine teacheth ep 80. ad Hesychium when the true persecution of Antichrist shall come only the children of the Church shal be in tribulation and not their persecutours as in the tyme of Dioclesian and the former Princes only Christians were persecuted but did not persecute againe And if this be to be called a persecution rather Catholikes suffer it then Lutherans and Caluinists for Catholikes are cast out of many Prouinces and haue lost their Churches their Inheritance and their Country it selfe these new Ministers of this Ghospell intruding themselues into other mens possessions and as we said may be seene in the Commentaryes of Laurence Surius and other Historiographers of our tyme the fury of Caluinists consumed more Catholikes in few yeares then there haue bene Heretikes punnished by the iudgement of Catholike Princes for denying their Faith Now that the persecution of Antichrist shal be most manifest and knowne S. Aug. proueth lib. 20. de ciuitate Dei cap. 11. out of those wordes of the Apoc. 20. And they compassed the tents of the Saintes and the beloued Citty for by these wordes it is signified that all the wicked shal be togeather in Antichrists army and shall with open warre impuge all the Church of Saintes for now there are many faigned in the Church which hiding their malice are in hart out of the Church and in it only in bodie But thē all shall break forth sayth S. Augustine into open persecution out of their lurking corners of hatred This surely is so farre of from being fulfilled at this tyme that there was neuer almost a greater number of false brethren and faygned Christians and this persecution is so farre of from being knowne and manifest that neither they which say they suffer it nor wee that are said to cause it can tell whē it began Certainly the persecutiōs of Nero Dominā other Romā Princes were diligently noted by Eusebius Orosius Sulpitius there is no doubt whē they began whē they ended as likewise the comming of Christ because it was true manifest we know verie well when it was and to whome first manifested and there is no diuersitie of opinions among vs concerning this matter But the heretikes which say that Antichrist is come and hath persecuted so long cannot produce one author who hath noted the tyme whē Antichrist came or to whome he first appeared or when he began his persecution and they disagree so among themselues that one saith he came in the yeare 200. another in the yeare 606. another in the yeare 773. another in the yeare 1000. another 1200. So that they seeme rather to dreame in their sleepe then to speake waking Finallie that in Antichrists tyme the publique and dailie office and Sacrifice of the Church shall cease by reason of the greatnes of the persecution Daniel plainely teacheth cap. 12. from the tyme that the continuall Sacrifice shal be taken away M. CC. XC dayes where by the consent of all he speaketh of Antichrists tyme and as S. Irenaeus lib 5. S. Hierome and Theodoretus vpon that place S. Hippolytus Martyr in orat de consūmatione mundi and Primasius in cap. 11. Apoc. expound it the is sense is that Antichrist shall forbid all the diuine worship which is now exercised in the Christian Churches and especiallie the holie Sacrifice of the Eucharist but that this signe is not yet fulfilled experience teacheth Out of which three thinges may be gathered First that Antichrist is not yet come since the continuall Sacrifice is still in vse Secondlie that the Bishop of Rome is not Antichrist but most contrarie to him since he doth chiefly adorne and defend the Sacrifice which Antichrist shall take away Thirdlie that the heretikes of this tyme aboue all others are the forerunners of Antichrist since they wish nothing more earnestly then vtterly to abolish the Sacrifice of the Eucharist M. Dovvnams Ansvvere confuted 1. MAISTER Downam verie courteously admitteth that Antichrists persecution was to be verie grieuous but alloweth not of Bellarmines proofes affirming that The persecution of Antichrist most grieuous the great tribulation which our Sauiour speaketh of Matth. 24. is no other then the calamyties which at the destruction of Hierusalem by the Romans the Iewes susteyned which how true it is may be sufficiently seene by that which hath bene said in the 4. chapter Now it is sufficient that we agree in the cōclusion 2. Wherefore all his long discourse about the thousand yeares Apoc. 20. is altogeather impertinent and foolish also in that he vnderstandeth those 1000. yeares definitely The 1000 yeares Apoc. 20. are to be takē indefinitely which indefinitely signify all the yeares and space from Christs Passion when the Deuill was bound vntill Antichrists time when he shall be loosed and it is false that any were put to death by the chiefe Antichrist within those thousand yeares For how could that be since he was not to come before they were expired as all but Heretikes agree But all this as also the question of Gog and Magog is from the present purpose which M. Downā could not choose but see though he were content to cast this mist before the Readers eyes that he might not see the force of Bellarmines argument which consisteth in this that the persecution of Antichrist is to be most grieuous which he is content to The persecution of Antichrist shal be greater then the calamities of the Iewes graunt because he cannot deny it would help to prooue it also though verie simplie God wot but wee will accept his good will since his meaning
To this M. Downam answereth not a word neither indeed could he for euery part and parcel is most euident and playne and therefore he was inforced to run to his old shift and to bring vs his wonted figure of petitio principij by which he desireth vs to graunt him his conclusion that the Pope is Antichrist without any further proofe But he must pardon vs because it importeth vs much to hould with Christ which we cannot see how we can possibly doe if we oppose our selues against his substitute and Vicegerent as though he were Antichrist as M. Downam would haue vs. To the third instance M. Downam answereth more formally denying that the Scripture speaketh of the carrying of this marke and the carrying of it indifferently either in the forehead or in the Antichrists Character may be caried either in the right hand or forehead hand But by M. Downams leaue the Scripture mentioneth both the forehead and the right hand that with disiunction that all must haue the marke in the one or in the other by which it is plaine that either of them will serue so that it is indifferent to Antichrist in which of them his marke be carryed so that it be carried in the one of them for that it must be carryed is euident by the Scripture euen according to M. Downams translation which is this That he may giue them a marke on their right hand or els on their foreheads For surely if he giue them a marke on either place they must carry it perforce Now as for his Mysticall interpretation that they shall receaue this marke on their forehead by profession or in the right This Character is not profession or practise hand by practize and operation first it is hard to vnderstand how profession is made with the forehead except there be some marke vpon the forehead and it will be no very easy matter for Antichrists Ministers to examine euery man that would 〈◊〉 or 〈…〉 practise and operation and finally those vactions which are assigned can hardly be drawne to either of these two heads if profession be taken properly for declaration by speach and practise for our owne actions and operations since they doe rather import a suffering and passiue receauing then any actiue operation in which notwithstanding they draw neerer to this marke which shal be giuen by Antichrist and receaued by all others and therefore neither profession not practise agreeth well to this M. Downam contradicteth himselfe marke Finally M. Downam seemeth to contradict himselfe for on the one side he will haue profession and practise to answere to the forehead and hand and consequently to be the marke and yet a little after he saith that the subiection it selfe is the marke which is not only contrary to the former but also foolish since that this subiection is the thing signified by the marke and not the marke it selfe For what wise man would euer say that subiectiō is a signe or marke but rather that other things are signes and markes of it as appeareth plainly to any that will consider the subiection of seruantes to their Maisters subiects to their Prince and of Christians to Christ and God c. To the fourth instance M. Downams answere is that Antichrist shall prohibite all Christians that haue not his marke to buy or sell c. but he will permit the Iewes c. But we find no such exceptiō in the Scripture which generally affirmeth that he shall not permit any little or great rich or poore free or bound vnder which diuisions no doubt not only the whole nation of the Iewes but euen euery particuler Iew is comprehended And besides we find no such rigour in the Pope towards M. Downams Christians for though that Bull of Martinus Quintus had ben generall for all The Bull of Martinus Quintus against the Hussites tymes and places as it was not yet doth it not exact that euery man should professe by word or worke his subiection to the Pope before he be admitted to buy or fell any thing at all especially such things as are necessary for daily sustenance but only excludeth all Hussites c. from all human conuersation when voility or decessity or some other lawfull circumstance doth not otherwise require which are openly manifestly and notoriously such which is farre lesse rigour then Antichrist shall vse and yet much more then we see vsed in many Countries now euen by Martinus Quintus his authority where Catholikes and Heretikes are permitted to liue peaceably togeather Yea euen in Italy Spayne Rome it selfe where they are most carefull to auoyd this contagion there is no such rigour vsed as M. Downam See part 2. cap. 8. §. 7. speaketh of the reason of which we shall afterward declare more at large But though all this be true yet we must not omit to obserue that Bellarmine in this instance only impugneth three of the markes which M. Downams brethren assigned viz. Chrisme the Oath of Fidelity and Preisthood All which three it is euident that not only all Iewes but likewise very many Christians yea Catholikes also haue not and yet are permitted to buy and sell neither are they once questioned withall about any of them All which M. Downam could not choose but see though because he could find no solution for Bellarmines instance thus lymited he thought best to runne to generalityes where he might roue a◠randome and make his Reader belieue that he had something to say though he saw himselfe that he could say nothing directly to the purpose M. Downam hauing this dispatched the first argument commeth to the second where first he affirmeth that though those things had bene vsed in the Catholike Church before the reuelation of Antichrist yet that hindereth not but that now they may appertayne to the marke of the beast because he doubteth not to affirme that there were many corruptions crept into the Church before the reuealing of Antichrist which he was to retayne with increase So that as you see the marke of Antichrist was in the world before himselfe yea in the Catholike Church which consequently must The Church of God cannot haue the marke of Antichrist needes belong to Antichrist and be a great freind of his as indeed she is to the Pope and euer was and wil be as to her chiefe Pastour vpon earth But how she should beare and vniuersally imbrace any marke or corruption of Antichrist seemeth as vnpossible as that Christ and Antichrist shall haue both one marke or one Church and therefore M. Downam must either perswade vs that euen from the Apostles tymes the Church of Christ bare Antichrists marke and consequently that he was then come or els he must graunt that his brethren haue not rightely assigned the markes of Antichrist but rather haue vttered an horrible M. Downams blasphemy blasphemy charging Christs Church and consequently Christ himselfe who teacheth his Church with the markes and
for their Messias but he doth well not The Herodians to stand vpon this for the solution is euident for these Herodians were a few flattering Courtiers now we speake of the whole Nation of the Iewes and chiefly of those great Rabbynes who professe so great knowledge in Scripture which teacheth most euidently that the Messias is to be of the Iewish nation and the Tribe of Iuda though for this second they cannot now much striue because their Genealogies are so confounded and so it will be no hard matter for Antichrist to be taken for one of the Tribe of Iuda though indeed he be of the Tribe of Dan. To the authority of the Fathers he answereth according Downam reiecteth the Fathers to his custome that they are not to be belieued in this point which hath no ground in the word of God and still he insisteth vpon Bellarmines reiecting the twelue Fathers which affirmed that Antichrist should be of the Tribe of Dan for the same reasons But he abuseth both Bellarmine and the Fathers as the Reader may easily see Bellarmine for he reiecteth not the Fathers authority but imbraceth it as very probable which was as much as the most of them affirmed The Fathers because he reiecteth them all in a thing wherin they agree as certaine which they would neuer do without some certaine ground either of Apostolicall tradition or Scripture and reason which Bellarmine hath sufficiently explicated in his former assertion Finally M. Downam briefly passeth ouer the opposition which Bellarmine sheweth that the Iewes haue against the Pope because he was ashamed to see what Iewes the Protestants are in this behalfe but yet he is content to take hold of their application of the Prophesies of Daniel against the Pope because they are no parties and therfore their authority The Iews opposite to the Pope may be some inducement to thinke indeed that the Pope is Antichrist where I could wish the Reader to marke attentiuely the great connexion betwixt Iewes and Protestants in this point of impugning the Pope though vpon different grounds For if you examine a Iew why he is so eager against the Pope he will tell you that it is because he hateth Christ himselfe and for his sake all Christians but chiefly the Pope who is the chiefe of them Againe if you How the Iewes and the Protestāts agree and differ in impugning the Pope pose M. Downam with the same question why he cannot abide the Pope He will tell you another tale that it is because he loueth Christ and all true Christians to whome he thinketh the Pope and his adherents to be most opposite And is it not strange that these men should ioyne in the expositions of Scripture Yea that M. Downam should take the Iew to be no party against the Pope but an indifferent man and therfore thinketh his exposition fit to be some inducement to make men belieue his doctrine Is it not too plaine that M. Downam is in the high way to deny Christ howsoeuer he protesteth the contrary since he hateth the Pope whome the Iewes only detest out of their malice to Christ himselfe True it is that the consequence is not so necessary from the hatred of the Pope to the hatred of Christ as contrariwise but yet he that is come so farre as to hate Christs most principal seruant in the highest degree and with vnplacable hatred may easily be carried a step further except God giue him grace to turne back in time which I most hartily wish for M. Downam himselfe and all others that are in that most miserable and dangerous estate THE THIRTENTH CHAPTER Of Antichrists Seate TOVCHING the sixt saith Bellarmine our Aduersaries bouldly affirme that the chiefe Seat of Antichrist is Rome or the Apostolike Chaire founded there for they say that Antichrist shall inuade the Sea of Peter and raise it vp to a certaine soueraigne height from the which it shall rule and tyranniclly gouerne the whole Church And that Rome is the Kingly Citty of Antichrist they proue out of Apoc. 17. where S. Iohn speaking of the Seate of Antichrist saith that it is the great Citty which is scituated vpon seauen hills and which hath the Kingdome ouer the Kings of the earth And that at Romè not in the pallace of Nero but in the very Church of Christ Antichrist shall haue his Seate they proue out of S. Paul who 2. Thess 2. saith that Antichrist shall sit in the Temple of God for since he saith absolutly in the Temple of God he meaneth the true Temple of the true God and there is none such but the Church of God For the Temples of the Gentiles are true Temples but of the Diuels not of God And the Temple of the Iewes was indeed of God but it ceased to be a Temple when the Iewish sacrifice and Priesthood ceased for these three are so ioyned that one cannot be without the other Besides the Temple of the Iewes within a while after was to be desolated and neuer to be bult againe as Dan. cap. 9. saith and the desolation shall perseuere till the consummation and the end Wherfore the Apostle cannot speake of it And this argument is confirmed out of the Fathers S. Hierome quaest 11. ad Algasiam He shall sit saith he in the Temple of God either at Hierusalem as some thinke or in the Church as we thinke more truly and Oecumenius He saith not saith he the Temple of Ierusalem but the Churches of Christ Theodorus Bibliander addeth the testmony of S. Greg. who l. 4. ep 38. ad Ioan. Constantinopolitanū saith The king of pride is nigh and which is impious to be spoken an army of Priests is prepared for him Out of which words a double argument is drawne one thus Iohn of Constantinople is sayd to forerun Antichrist because he will be called the vniuersall Bishop therfore he shall be Antichrist who in very deed shall make himselfe the Vniuersall Bishop and shall sit in the Church as the head of all The other thus The army of Antichrist shall be Priests therfore Antichrist shall be the head of Priests By which arguments the heretikes thinke that they euidently shew that the Bishop of Rome is Antichrist since he ruleth at Rome sitteh in the Temple of God and is called the vniuersall Bishop and is the Prince of Priests Notwithstanding the true opinion is that Hierusalem and not Rome shall be the seat of Antichrist and the Temple of Salomon and Throne of Dauid not the Temple of S. Peter or the Sea Apostolike which we can proue in two sorts First with an argument ad hominem Secondly out of the Scripture and Fathers First then I make this argument Antichrist shall sit in the Church of Christ and shall be accompted the Prince head of his Church and shall haue Magistracy and offices in it as Philippus Melanctonin apologia art 6. confess Augustanae Caluinus lib. 4. Iustit cap. 2. § 12. cap. 7.
that word vntill for it importeth no such matter but only signifieth what is done till then but whether it continued at that time or after that time or no must be gathered by other coniectures or proofes As to exemplify in one of M. Downams authorities there was neuer any so foolish yet as to bring that place of Matth. 1. to proue our Blessed Ladies perpetuall Virginity but S. Hieroms and other Fathers haue byn inforced to answere it and to shew that the word vntill she weth only what hath byn done or not done vntill then but leaueth the rest of the time altogeather vncertaine whether things continued in the same state still or no. To Bellarmines second answere M. Downam hauing corrupted his words as the Reader may see if he please replieth first that the Primitiue Church belieued that the Temple should neuer be built againe held this assertion of the Papists as a Iewish fable But he bringeth not any one authority to proue Downam belyeth the Primitiue Church against the testimony of the Fathers this withall and therfore we must needes tell him that we do not belieue him for if we did we should do the Fathers great iniury which Bellarmine alleadgeth to reiect their authority without any ground and to thinke that M. Downam knew the beliefe of the Primitiue Church better then all they who liued so long before him For the other part of his answere we will not contend but that our Sauiour might meane the Army of the Romans by the Abhomination of Desolation but that he meant only that M. Downam neither hath proued The temple of Ierusalem shal alway be prophane though it be built againe nor euer will be able to proue and therfore Bellarmines solution is very good that Daniel when he affirmeth that the desolation shall perseuere to the consummation and end might very wel meane that though the Temple were built againe in the end of the world yet it should alway be prophaned after the ouerthrow made by Titus because the chiefest prophanation and abhomination of desolation shall be in Antichrists time At Bellarmines third solution M. Downam is much offended and telleth vs that in this place Daniel speaketh not a word of Antichrist nor yet of Antiochus his Type And for Antiochus we belieue him neither did Bellarmine euer dreame of any such matter of Antichrist the matter is not cleare though now it skilleth not whether he did or no for Bellarmine is only to shew that Antichrist sitting in the Temple of Hierusalem is not against this place of Daniel and not to proue out of this place that he shall sit there Wherfore let M. Downam begin his reply anew and so he doth arguing that it is not probable that Antichrist being so great a Monarch will suffer the temple which he chooseth for his chiefe seate to be vnbuilt or that he will sit in a temple without a roose or vnfinished To which it is easy to answere that this is not probable indeed if he may haue tyme inough and there fall no other hinderance But now M. Downam may remember that his raigne is to endure in that greatnes but only three yeares a halfe which is very little for the finishing of so sumptuous a building yet we thinke he may haue the roofe vp also at least in some part in which he shall sit till he may get the rest finished as he will hope he shall but yet he shall be hindred either The tēple of Ierusalem shall not be finished by Antichrist Socrat. l. 3. cap. 20. Theodoret. l. 3. c. 20. Sozom. l. 5. cap. vlt. Luc. 21. by the shortnes of time or by some accidents not vnlike to those that fell out in Iulians time though it be very likely that God wil permit much more in Antichrists daies without working myracles especially since it is certaine that the Temple was not to be built againe vntill the end of the world as Daniel foretould Which M. Downam will needes haue confirmed by that place of Luc. 21. where our Sauiour foretelleth that Hierusalem should be troden vnder the foote of the Gentiles vntill the tymes of the Gentiles be fulfilled Which words if they might haue that sense were a good explication of that which Daniel called the consummation and end for it is certaine that the times of the Gentiles shall be fulfilled before the end of the world be fully accomplished 10. To Bellarmines answere to the Fathers M. Downam replieth not a word and yet it contained matter of no smal importance but that which ouerthroweth the whole Protestants deuise For Bellarmine affirmeth proueth that those Antichrist shall sit in materiall Churches and not in the Church of Christ as a Bishop Fathers which they alleadg are no way against vs but manifestly against them since they speake of materiall Churches in which Antichrist will commaund himselfe to be placed and worshipped for God and not that he shall sit in the Church of Christ as a Bishop which is only the fond conceipt of M. Downam and his like without any authority either of Scriptures or Fathers or shew of reason Neither must the reader thinke that M. Downam omitted this reply because he maketh little accompt of the Fathers when they seeme to be on his side for of this we shal see the contrary in that he laboureth so earnestly to make S. Gregory seeme to say something in his fauour For to Bellarmines answere concerning his authority he replieth that the pride and ambition of Iohn of Constantinople though very great and Antichristian was not to be compared with the incredible insolency and pride of the Antichrist of Rome because Iohn of Constantinople challenged not that height of authority The Pope hath not so much soueraignty as Iohn of Constātinople challēged See part ◠cap. 1. soueraignty which Popes since haue vsurped not only ouer Bishops and Ecclesiasticall persons but also ouer the Kings and Monarches of the Earth VVhere to omit that Bibliander made his illation against the Pope precisely because he maketh himselfe the vniuersall Bishop and sitteth in the Church as head of all and consequently all other charges are from the purpose you see the Pope charged first with taking more soueraignty vpon him then Iohn of Constantinople did which is a loud lye by M. Downams leaue for Iohn of Constantinople would haue bene the Vniuersall Bishop in that sense that there should be no other properly Bishops besides himselfe but al others should be his Vicars and Vicegerents which was more then euer the Pope challenged or pretended The second charge seemeth to be that Iohn of Constantinople sought only a superiority ouer all Bishops but the Pope hath vsurped the same ouer all Kings and Monarches also But this is so ridiculous that M. Downam may well be ashamed therof for what doubt can there be but only in a flattering parasites conceipt that he who hath superiority ouer all Bishops must needes
at his reuealing but aboue all that is called God as S. Paul affirmeth His interpretation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we admit but deny that those things which he recounteth are adored in the Church of Rome as God or that the Pope aduanceth himselfe aboue them neither of which he wil be euer able to proue as shall appeare when Downam belyeth the Pope church of Rome he goeth about it Lastly M. Downam affirmeth that the greatest height of pride that is incident to any creature whatsoeuer is not to seek to be aboue God for that cannot be imagined but to be as God And indeed sayth he the height of Antichrist his pride and aduancâ—â—g of himselfe is noted in the words following 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 insomuch that be shall fit in the Temple of God as God In which words M. Downam affirmeth the quite contrary to that which S. Paul sayth for his words are plaine that Antichrist shall oppose and extoll himselfe aboue all that is called God And this may very easily be imagined if we speake of one that either belieueth not that there is any true God or els iâ— he belieueth it and consequently in his hart cannot extoll himselâ—e aboue him yet he may desire to vsurpe the honour due to How Antichrist may extol himselfe aboue God him to himselfe and to this end professe himselfe to be the only true God and to this intent sit in the Temple as he to whome it ought to be erected and so shew that he is God which is indeed the height of Antichrists pride since he cannot desire any more then to be a compted and adored as if he were the only true God which cannot be vnlesse he be extolled aboue the true God and the false also Dan. 11. 13. To the second testimony out of Dan. 11. M. Downam answereth two things First that Daniel speaketh not of Antichrist in proofe wherof he alledgeth Bellarmine himselfe who in this very booke cap. 21. affirmeth that in part of this very verse Daniel speaketh ad litteram litterally of Antiochus who was a figure of Antichrist To which I answere that he doth so indeed and yet these words which he alleadgeth heere cannot be vnderstood of Antiochus as S. Hierome affirmeth and proueth against wicked Porphyry with whome M. Downam will needs partake And if M. Downam will know the reason of both it is this Daniel in the same words prophesieth both of Antiochus and of Antichrist but with this distinction that where the words will beare it they are litterally first to be vnderstood of Antiochus and secondly of Antichrist who in many things is rather figured then expressly prophesied of but when we meet with words that can by no meanes be litterally applied to Antiochus then of forcâ— we must vnderstand theÌ„ litterally also of Antichrist of this sort there be many in this chapter of Daniel and the next amongst which in the Fathers iudgment these are to be numbred as also they most euidently proue and none but Porphyry and such Infidels or heretikes can deny Those other WheÌ„ the Scripture is litterally to be vnderstod of the figure and when of the thing figured words which Bellarmine speaketh of cap. 21. may be applyed to Antiochus and consequently are litterally to be vnderstood of him And this is no peculiar thing to this place of Scripture but ordinary in all prophesies of Christ which for the most part are still mingled with some other figure of him to which many sentences are to be applyed ad litteram but not all and the signe when they are when they are not to be applyed to the figure is when they containe somthing which can or cannot be verifyed but of Christ to giue M. Downam one example he may at his leasure peruse the 71. Psalme in which Salomon and our Sauiour are spoken of and all that can be applied to Salomon is litterally Psalm 71. to be vnderstood of him but somethings cannot as that his Kingdome or name shall remaine cum sole ante lunaâ— or that he should rule à flumine vsque ad termines orbiâ— terrarum that all Kings shall adore him and all Nations shall serue him that all the Tribes of the earth should be blessed in him and the like of which see S. Augustine lib. 17. de Ciuit. Dei cap. 8. sub med The second part of M. Downams answere consisteth in prouing that Antiochus was an Idolater But of this no man doubteth and because this is so certaine therfore it is also out of question among all truly wise and learned men that the words alleadged by Bellarmine cannot be vnderstood of Antiochus but only of Antichrist 14. Wherfore M. Downam commeth to the obiection which Bellarmine made out of the next verse against himselfe and insteed of replying vpon Bellarmines answere M. Downam will needs answere also Wherfore let vs see this answeâ—e of an answere I answere first sayth M. Downam that although either of his interpretations of the God Maozim were true as neither is yet the one hindreth not and the other proueth that he which â—â— heere described is an Idolater for let the word Maozim signify what it may yet the words following plainely conuince the party heere described of Idolatry The God which his Fathers knew not he shall worship with gold But let M. Downam apply either of Bellarmins solutions to this place he shal see that it proueth nothing at all For if by this God which his Fathers knew not be meant Antichrist himselfe then he shal only honour not properly adore Antichrist shal honor or worship but one God himselfe as God If the Diuell be vnderstood which is the second solution then he shall only adore him secretly not publikely by which the second part of M. Downams obiection is also taken away for though the word Maozim did signity a false God yet in those which follow the idolatry is not increased but further explicated for then by the God Maozim and by the God which his Fathers knew not is meant only the same false God and the manner how he is to be worshipped is shewed viz. with gold c. By which also M. Downam may see how falsly he chargeth Bellarmine with omitting this secoÌ„d clause for Bellarmine before alleadgeth §. 13. the whose place with both clauses and now he alleadgeth not the words of Daniel verbatim but only taketh the sense which M. Downams brethren obiected against vs who were not so shamelesse or foolish as M. Downam is to affirme that Daniel speaketh of two Gods which Antichrist shall adore for they knew well inough that it is an ordinary thing in Scripture to repeat the same thing in diuers words especially with a little addition in the later and in this place they also knew that all interpreters agreed that only one God was spoken of and that the Scripture could not be vnderstood otherwise without too apparent a
which interprete the Temple of God to be the Churches of Christ do in no sort deny that Antichrist shall also sit in the Temple of Hierusalem yea the greater part do expresly affirme it and besides by the Churches of God they vnderstand not the Christian and Catholike See cap. 13. people but the materiall Churches erected in the honour of Christ which Bellarmine proued so plainely that M. Downam thought it his best course to passe it ouer in silence without giuing him any answere at all or taking any notice of any such proofe And the second point so far as it is different from the former is affirmed also by vs for we only differ from the Protestants in that they affirme that Antichrist is to be reuealed in the Church of God And we also affirme that he is not to be reuealed till after the Roman Empire be taken out of the way by the 10. Kings which shall rule togeather at Antichrists comming Wherfore secondly M. Downam acknowledgeth that their assertions concerning Antichrist are grounded on the prophesies of Scriptures expounded by the euent and that the opinion of the Fathers agree with them where they are consonant to the Scripture and the euent and that the assertions of the Papists are wholy grounded either vpon the vncertaine and many times mis alleadged contectures of the Fathers who were no Prophets and therefore being not able to foresee the euent did not many times vnderstand the Prophesies c. And is Downam acknowledgeth the Fathers to be against him not this all one in effect with that which Bellarmine affirmeth Doth not M. Downam giue vs the Fathers coniectures and expositions and take to himselfe the Scripture expounded by the euent which the Fathers were not able to foresee and consequently these expositions by the euent must needs be since the Fathers dayes and therfore rightly called by Bellarmine new Glosses and how false they are appeareth sufficiently by their contrariety to the expositions of the Fathers and by the confutation of Bellarmine for this deuice of M. Downam to make his exposition good by the euent is no more in effect but to say that he will first suppose as certaine out of his owne head and without all Scripture that the Pope is Antichrist and then afterward he will make the Scripture say so by one deuice or other and to all arguments against this interpretation he will answere that the euent is cleare and consequently the obiection nothing worth And this indeed is the Protestants proceeding in all controuersies by which they make their owne idle foolish fancy the rule of Faith and of Scripture and Fathers The Protestāts proceeding in all controuersies and all other proofes After this M. Downam commeth more nigh to his reply for Illyricus but first he disgraceth him fowly calling him one of the vnsoundest writers of his side which how his brethren the Lutherans who make so great accompt of Illyricus will put vp I neither know nor greatly care But I must needs tell M. Downam that he doth Bellarmine great iniury Illyricus one of the vnsoūdest Protestant writers in Downams iudgment to charge him that he doth vse to cull out some stragling sentēces out of some one of the vnsoundest writers for all men know that Bellarmine flyeth none of their arguments but many times affoardeth them some of his owne when they want And M. Downam should haue shewed vs what author that Bellarmine had seene hath any better arguments then those of Illyricus for this point for his telling vs that he hath proued it Bellarmin vniustly charged himselfe better in another place only argueth that M. Downam hath a good conceipt of himselfe and that he hath gotten some new deuise since Bellarmine wrote aswel in this as in other things but this is nothing against Bellarmine how good soeuer his proofes be which the Reader shall iudg See part 2. c. 5. after they be examined and perhaps find them not so good as M. Downam imagineth Now let vs examine his second charg against Bellarmine in defence of Illyricus which is that he depraueth his first reason which is not sayth he because the Downam cannot defend Illyricus Pope maketh himselfe to be the Vicar of Christ but this because he vaunting himselfe to be the Vicar of Christ doth notwithstanding vsurpe greater authority then the Sonne of God claymed vnto himselfe of which that which Bellarmine alleadgeth as a second reason is by Illyricus added as a proofe But why then doth Illyricus alleadge our Sauiour XXII XXIII XXIV to expound S. Paul Which Bellarmine sheweth to be a threefould absurdity and M. Downam answereth not a word nor yet to Bellarmines censure of the blindnesse and impudency Gal. 4. 4. Christ is said to be vnder the law Luc. 2. 51. to be subiect to his parents because he obserued obeyed both not being bound to either of our aduersaries who some times vtter such things as are against common sense by which M. Downam seemeth to acknowledg that he hath his share in both But no doubt we shall find a sound reply vpon Bellarmines answere to Illyricus his second argument which M. Downam acknowledgeth to be his and replieth by calling it an impudent and shamelesse denyall that Christ subiected himselfe to the law and word of God or that the Pope taketh vpon him to dispense with the Scriptures or that any Catholik◠writer hath sayd that he may dispense with Diuine precepts both which notwithstanding M. Downam saith that he hath els where proued by many instances and most euident allegations where by both he seemeth only to meane the two later and so we must take the first vpon his poore credit which might perhaps haue had some sway if he had answered Bellarmines euident proofe to the contrary or impugned his solution taken out of S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine But See part 2. c. 5. §. 10. 11. 12. since he is altogeather silent in both the Reader hath good cause to suspect that he is so impudent and shamelesse that he will affirme that which he can neither proue nor defend And consequently at least suspend his iudgement of those many instances and most euident allegations for the other two points which he boasteth of till we come to that place where they are to be examined And now for conclusion of this whole argument and discourse I will intreate the Reader to consider his substantiall reply against Bellarmines answere concerning Illyricus his consequence for thus M. Downam writeth for that which he Bellarmine addeth of Christ his subiecting himselfe to the Prophesyes and not to the preceptes as though Illyricus had spoken of the one in his proposition and of the other in the assumption it is partely false and partely ridiculous and indeed not worth the answering Thus M. Downam as it seemeth in a great chafe at Bellarmines vnlearned answer But good Syr vouchsafe out of your high wisdome to
and hauing deposed one Emperour commaunded another to be created and vsurped not the Empyre to himselfe And in like manner when he depriued the Emperour Leo of the Princedome of Râ—â—eÌ„na he challenged not that Princedome to himselfe but permitted the Kinges of the Lombardes to haue it which notwithstanding afterward Pepin hauing ouercome the Lombards gaue to the Pope Finally if to depose Princes be to shake off hornes there will not be only three but many more pulled off by Antichrist For it is manifest that besides Leo the 3. the Greeke and Childericke the French King there haue bene deposed by Popes Henry the 4. by Gregory the 7. Otho the 4. by Innocentius the 3. Frederike the 2. by Innocentius the 4. all which lost their Empyre in very deed Of the third we haue most plaine testimonies of the ancient Fathers Lactantius lib. 7. cap. 16. and S. Irenaeus lib. 5. say that after Antichrist hath slaine 3. of the 10. Kings the rest forth with shall be subdued by him and then he shal be Prince of all S. Hierome in cap. 11. Dan. vpon that place And he shall do those things which his Fathers haue not done None of the Iewes saith he besides Antichrist euer reigned in the whole world S. Chrysostome in 2. Thess 2. affirmeth that Antichrist shal be a Monarch and succeed the Romans in the Monarchie as the Romans succeeded the Grecians the Grecians the Persians and the Persians the Assyrians Finally S. Cyril Cateches 15. saith that Antichrist shall obtaine the Monarchy which was the Romans before and this opinion of the Fathers is euidently inferred out of Apoc. 17. where we read And the ten hornes which thou hast seene are ten Kings These haue one Counsell and will giue their force and power to the beast Now it is certayne that this no way agreeth to the Bishop of Rome for the Pope neuer was King of the whole world Of the 4. S. Iohn speaketh Apoc. 20. And when the thousand yeares shall be consummated Sathan shal be loosed out of his prison and shall go forth and seduce the Nations which are vpon the foure corners of the earth Gog and Magog and shall gather them into battaile the number of whome is as the sand of the sea And they ascended vpon the breadth of the earth and compossed the Campe of the Saints and the beloued Citty And there came downe fire from God out of Heauen and deuoured them and the Diuell which seduced them was cast into the poole of fire and brimstone where both the beast and the false Prophet shal be tormented day and night for euer and euer In these wordes is described the last persecution and the end of it Of which S. Augustine speaketh thus lib. 20. de ciuitate Dei cap. 11. This shal be the last persecution the last iudgment being at hand which the Holy Church shall suffer in the whole world viz. the whole Citty of Christ of the whole Citty of the Diuell how great soeuer both of them are vpon earth The like are in Ezechiel 38. 39. which are briefly to be expounded by reason of many errours which haue bene of this matter M. Dovvnams Ansvvere confuted 1. MAISTER Downam answereth first iointly to all these 4. points that none of them are found in the Scriptures which you must vnderstand according to his interpretation who affirmeth that the Prophesies of Daniel cap. 11. and Dan. 7. â—â— 7. were to haue their complement before the comming of the Messias which notwithstanding he acknowledgeth to be against both Iewes and all ancient Christians who all agree against M. Downam that by the two legs of the Image cap. 2. and the fourth beast with 10. hornes cap. 7. the Roman Monarchy Dan. 2. 7. and not the Kingdome of the Selcucidae Lagidae is signifyed which difference as M. Downam well noteth is the occasion why both the Iewes Christians constantly affirme that all which is said of the two legs and the fourth beast could not be fulfilled before the comming of Christ but only thus far that this fourth Kingdome of the Romans was to be in the world before his comming Neither doth it follow hence that whatsoeuer is spoken of the little horne cap. 7. 8. Dan. 7. 8. 11. Dan. 8. 11. is by them expounded at least litterally of Antichrist for first they all agree that all the 8. Chapter is plainly to be vnderstood of Antiochus and in no sort of Antichrist but only by application and accomodation Likewise in the 11. Dan. 11. they admit so much to be vnderstood of Antiochus as can be applied to him but all cannot and therefore part must of force be referred to Antichrist euen litterally and that which may be verified of Antiochus must likewise be vnderstood of Antichrist in whom it is more perfectly to be fulfilled But in the 7. chap. there is no mention at all of Dan. 7. Antiochus but only of Antichrist neither is it the same little horne which is spoken of in that Chapter and in the 8. as is most manifest for the little horne in the 7. Chapter belongeth to the 4. beast and that in the 8. to the third that is to the Monarchy of the Grecians and the successors of King Alexander as is most manifest v. 8. 9. where the 4. heads which that Monarchy is said to haue cap. 7. The little horne Dan. 7. is not the same with the little horne Dan. 8. because it was to be deuided among foure Kinges after Alexanders death are called 4. hornes out of one of which this little horne is said to proceed as indeed Antiochus did But the little horne which is spoken of in the 7. chap. arose in the middest of the 10. hornes which the 4. beast is said to haue Now in the 11. Chap. there is not any mention of any hornes at all but of the Kinges of Egypt and Syria and chiefly of Antiochus and by occasion of him of Antichrist as hath bene said 2. But M. Downam telleth vs that the learned of our tymes haue made the contrary cleere but he omitteth their proofes and only alleadgeth out of S. Hierome that Porphyry that learned Praefat. in Dan. though malicius enemy of Christianity perceaued Daniels Prophesies in the 7. 8. 11. and 12. Chapters so fully and perfectly to agree to Antiochus Epiphanes that he affirmed that they were written not before hand by Daniel but after the fulfilling of them by some one that liued in the tymes of Antiochus Epiphanes But M. Downam findeth not in S. Hierome those 4. Chapters specified which he setteth down but only a generall assertion that Daniel seemed rather to Hierome and three other ancient writers wrote expresly against Downams expositioÌ„ haue written a story then a prophesy yea S. Hierome plainly conuinceth both Porphiry and all his followers which are M. Downams learned men and himselfe that neither the 7. nor the 11. and 12. Chapters can be wholy
many Prouinces of the people of Rome S. Hierome maketh mention of this opinion in quaest heb cap. 10. and saith VVhether it be true or no the end of the warre will shew And now doubtlesse the issue of the war hath taught vs that it was not true for neyther hath there followed any renewing of the Church after the warre of the Gothes neither haue all warres ceased The 8. is of S. Hierome himselfe in cap. 38. Ezech. who seeing the difficulty omitting the litterall sense did mystically expound it of the Heretikes for he will haue Gog which in Hebrew signifieth the House top to signify the Heresiarches who like to the toppe of an House are lifted vp and proud and Magog which is interpreted of the toppe of an House to signify them who belieue these Arch-heretikes and are subiect to them as the House to the roofe or toppe This opinion taken for the mysticall sense is most true but not in the litterall for Ezech. cap. 38. saith that Gog shall come in the last yeares and S. Iohn Apoc. 20. saith that the same Gog shal come after a thousand yeares and by the name of a thousand yeares all Catholickes vnderstand all the time which is from Christs cōming to Antichrist Since therfore Gog shall not come but about the end of the world and heresies began in the beginning of the Church while the Apostles liued it is manifest that properly and litterally Gog doth not signifie the Hereticks We must also know that S. Hierome when he saith that Gog is interpreted an house roofe and Magog of an house roofe meaneth not that Gog and Magog in Hebrew are altogeather the same that an house roofe or of an house roofe with vs but he meaneth that it is in a manner the same for properly an house roofe is not Gog but Gog and of an house roofe is not Magog but Miggag The 9. opinion is of S. Augustine lib. 20. de ciuitate Dei cap. 11. who by Gog vnderstandeth the Diuell who is like a great house roofe that is a great house roofe in which all the euill do dwell and by Magog he vnderstandeth the army of Antichrist gathered of the Nations of the whole world which opinion doutbles is most true and to be imbraced in that it referreth Gog and Magog to the tymes of Antichrist aswell because all Catholike Authors which write vpon the Apocalyps do follow it as Arethas Primasius Beda Haym◠Rupertus Richardus Anselmus and others as also because that all which is said by Ezechiel and S. Iohn of Gog and Magog do most rightly agree to Antichrist for then truly shal be the last and greatest persecution and after it shall Ierusalem be renewed that is the Church glorified neither shall there any battailes be heard of after But in that by Gog it vnderstandeth the Diuell it seemeth not true for S. Iohn saith that the Diuell being let loose shall call Gog and Magog to warres wherefore the Diuell is one thing and Gog another Wherefore our opinion which is the 10. conteyneth three thinges First we affirme that the battaile of Gog and Magog is the battaile of Antichrist against the Church as S. Augustine rightly taught Secondly we say that it is very probable that by Gog Antichrist himselfe is signified by Magog his army For Ezechiel alway calleth Gog a Prince and Magog a Land or Nation Thirdly we say that it is probable that Gog is so called of Magog and not contrarywise so that Antichrist is called Gog because he is Prince of that Nation which is called Magog and that the army of Antichrist is called Magog of the Scythian Nation not that it consisteth of those Scythians which the Iewes faygne to be beyond Cancasus and the Caspian Sea but either because a great part of Antichrists army shall consist of Barbarous people which came out of Scythta as Turkes Tartars and the rest or which I rather thinke because it shal be a very terrible and cruell army for we call them Scythians which we would call bloudy For that Magog signifieth the Scythian Nation it is manifest out of Genes 10. where we read that the second sonne of Iaphet was called Magog of whome the Country of Magog was denominated which his posterity inhabited which was Scythia as Iasephus teacheth lib. Amiq. cap. 11. and S. Hierome in quest hebr in Gen. cap. 10. For as from the three sonne of Cham that is Chus Myrami and Chanaham Aethiopia is called Chus Aegipt Myrami and Palestina Chanaham so doubtles Scythia is called Magog of Magog the sonne of Iaphet And that Ezechiel naming Magog had relation to the Nation denominated of Magog the sonne of Iaphet it is manifest because in the same place he addeth as companions to Gog other Nations denominated of other sonnes or nephews of Iaphet as Gomer Togorma Mosoch Tubal c. Wherefore let vs conclude that the battaile of Gog and Magog is the last persecution which Antichrist shall raise in the whole world against the Church Neither is it against vs that Ezech. cap. 38. saith that the weapons of Gog and Magog shal be burnt for the space of 7. yeares wheras notwithstanding it is manifest that after Antichrists death there shall not be past 45. daies to the end of the world as is gathered out of Daniel 12. for Ezechiel speaketh not properly but figuratiuely after the manner of Prophets neither meaneth he that indeed those weapons are to be burned for the space of 7. yeares but that it shal be so notable an ouerthrow that the Launces and Targets of the slaine might suffice a very long tyme to make fires if need were One doubt remaineth whether by reason of the most cruell persecution of Antichrist the Faith and Religion of Christ shal be altogeather extinguished For Dominicus Soto in lib. 4. sent dist 46. q. 1. art 1. thought surely that it would be so The departing saith he and defection from that Seae shal be a signe of the cōsummation of the world And after Faith being extinguished by the departure from that Sea Apostolike the whole world shal be vayne and should without cause continue any longer And after Let therefore men be astonished how pestilent self loue is for thence floweth pussing vp and pryde which vnder the conduct of Antichrist shall at length consume the Citty of God But this opinion in my iudgment cannot be defended for first it is repugnant to S. Augustine who lib. 20. de ciuit Dei cap 11. saith that the Church shall be euer inuincible against Antichrist Neyther shall she saith he forsake her warfare who is called by the name of Tents Secondly it seemeth to me also to be repugnant to the Ghospell for Matth. 16. we read Vpon this Book I will build my Church and the gates of Hell shall nor preuayle against her But how shall they not preuaile if they shall wholy extinguish her Likewise Matth. 24. Our Lord saith of the Ministers of Antichrist They shall giue great
soules of which sort is that which Eusebius writeth of the apparition of S. Potamiena lib. 6. hist Eccles cap. 5. and that which S. Augustine relateth of the apparition of S. Felix Nolanus lib. de cura pro mortuis cap. 16. But for the confirmation of other doctrines I know not what Catholike euer alleaged the visions of soules but this is not your first lye That which thou bringest in the last place of the forbidding of meates and marriages is euidently inough confuted by S. Aug. lib. 30. cont Faust cap. 6. where he saith thus If you were exhorted to Virginity in such sort as the Apostles doctrine exhorteth He that giueth to marriage doth well and he that giueth not to marriage doth well so that you did say Marriage is good but Virginity better as the Church doth which truly is the Church of Christ the holy Ghost would not foretell you thus saying forbidding to marry for he forbiddeth who saith that this is euill not he who preferreth another thing better before this which is good And after You see therefore that there is a great difference betwixt those which exhort to virginity preferring a greater good before a lesse and those which forbidde to marry vehemently accusing the act of propagation which only properly belongeth to marriage And that there is a great difference betwixt those who absteyne from meates for the sacred signification or for the chastising of the flesh and those which absteyne from meates which God hath created saying that God hath not created them VVherefore that is the Prophets and Apostles doctrine this is the doctrine of lying Diuells Thus S. Augustine for himselfe and vs. Neither is it necessary to adde any thing Illyricus concludeth VVherefore it is manifest out of these signes that the Pope is that very true Antichrist himselfe of whome the Scriptures haue prophesied But perhaps he might haue concluded more fitly in this manner Wherefore it is manifest by these lyes that Illyricus is one of his forerunners whome holy Daniel long before foretould that he should haue an impudent face THE XXII CHAPTER The foolâ—ries of Tilemanus are refuted TILEMANVS Heshusius in the Booke which he intituled de sexcentis erroribus Pontificiorum whereas he should haue intituled it de sexcentis mendacijs Luther anorum made a peculiar title of Antichrist that is titul 33. and it comprehendeth foure errors Thus then he saith Tilemanus First the Papists say that Antichrist shall come out of Babylon of the Tribe of Dan. Compendium Theologia lib. 7. cap. 8. Bellarmine We thanke Tilemanus who teacheth that so ancient and so holy Fathers are Papists for if they be Papists who say that Antichrist shall come of the Tribe of Dan surely S. Irgnaeus S. Hippolrtur S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Prosper Theodorctus S. Gregory Beda Arethas Rupertus Anselmus and Richardus are Papists For all these as we shewed before cap. 12. with common consent do teach that Antichrist shal be borne of the Tribe of Dan. But go on Tilemanus Secondly the Papists deny that the Bishop of Rome with his Company is the true Antichrist whereas it is proued and demonstrated with most forcible and most plaine testimonies of Gods word Bellarmine But we haue not yet seene these testimonies neither are they in any place of our Hebrew Greeke or Latin Bibles for the testimonies which are alleadged by your brethren do not so much as name the Bishop of Rome Tilemanus Thirdly they teach that Antichrist shall raigne only 3. yeares and a halfe Compend Theologiae Bellarmine Heere we giue thee immortall thankes that thou confessest that not only all the ancient Fathers but also the Prophet Daniel and S. Iohn Euangelist are Papists and surely I haue compassion of thee and thine to whome thou only reseruest the dregges of writers hauing giuen all the learned approued Fathers to the Papists See if thou wilt what we taught before cap. 8. and thou shalt find that S. Irenaus S. Hippolytus S. Cyril S. Hierome S. Aug. Theodoretus Primasius drethas Bedâ— Anselmus Richardus Rupertus and also Daniel and S. Iohn did expresly teach that which thou affirmest the Papists to teach Tilemanus Fourthly they teach that Antichrist shal be slaine in the Mount Oliuet Compend Theol. lib. 7. cap. 4. Bellarmine But heere also thou makest great men Papists for that Antichrist was to be slaine in the Mount of Oliuet S. Hierome in comment cap. 11. Dan. gathereth out of Daniel himselfe and Isayas Theodoretus also writing vpon the same place although he nameth not the mount Oliuet yet he affirmeth that Antichrist is to be killed not far from Hierusalem But let vs see now with what arguments thou confutest the foresaid errours for thou addest a preseruatiue immediatly in these words Tilemanus The Papists trifles of Antichrist because they are grounded vpon no testimony of the holy Scripture are to be reiected and detested for as S. Hierome rightly speaketh that which hath no authority in the Scripture is contemned with the same facility with which it is affirmed And Paul admonisheth that we should take heed of the traditions of men Coloss 2. And this I say least any man deceaue you with false reasons c. Likewise see that no man prey vpon you by Philosophy we must seeke out of the word of God what is to be thought of Antichrist as 1. Ioan. 2. VVho is a lyer but he that denieth Iesus to be Christ This is Antichrist Likewise 2. Thess 2. the man of sinne and the sonne of perdition extolleth himselfe aboue euery God c. Likewise Matth. 24. There shall arise false Christs and false Prophets and they shall giue signes c. Likewise Dan. 11. and he shall make the munition of the God Maozim c Likewise Apoc. 17. And I saw a woman drinken with the bould of Saints and with the bloud of the Martyrs of Iesus Out of these testimonyes of the sacred Scripture it appeareth manifestly what the Christian saith is of Antichrist whome Christ and the Apostles foretould was to come And since it is cleerer then noone-day that euery one do most exactly agree to the Bishop of Rome it ought not to be doubted but that that most naughty Roman Tyrant is Antichrist Thus he Bellarmine It will not be offen fiue I trust if we reduce these thy arguments to the forme of syllogismes for the more ignorant sort and conclude thence most euidently the confutation of the aboue written errours Wherfore the first errour is refuted thus The Papists trifles because they are grounded vpon no Testimony of Scripture are to be reiected and detested But the word of God proclaimeth who denieth Iesus to be Christ this is Antichrist 1. Io. 2. Wherfore it is an errour to say that Antichrist shall come of the Tribe of Dan. The second errour is thus confuted as Hierome rightly saith that which hath not authority in the Scripture is contemned with the same facility with which it is affirmed but Paul
not plainely inough signify that he was greater then Apollo and his other coadiutours Moreouer Io. 20. it is said indeed to all the Apostles Behould I send you and whose sinnes you remit c. notwithstanding cap. 21. all the Apostles and the rest of the faithfull are subiected to S. Peter as sheep to their Pastour when it is said by our Lord to S. Peter alone in the presence of other Apostles feed my sheep Finally although Matth. 18. it be said to all the Apostles VVhatsoeuer you shall bind c. notwithstanding Matth. 16. it is said to Peter alone To thee I will giue the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen c. and without doubt our Lord would not promise him any thing singulerly vnlesse also he would giue him some singuler thing but of these we haue said many thinges before lib. 1. cap. 12. 13. 14. To that which thou obiectest of both the Swordes against the Extrauagant of Bonifacius 8. where thou also laughest at the Popes arguments I will only answere in this place that they are all taken out of S. Bernard whome Caluin Melancthon and other of your crew are wont to call an holy man and to alleadge him oftener then once See lib. 2. 4. de Consider or if thou pleasest see what we haue treated of this very matter in our last Booke de Pontifice And this shall suffice of thy Antithesis or opposition in this place Now it remayneth that we shew that this very vision of S. Iohn doth best agree to Luther and Lutherans for first it is plaine that Luther may be signifyed by that starre which fell from heauen to earth seeing that he became of a religious man a secular of a continent a marryed and of poore rich and changed his sober and slender fare with plentifull and dainty cheere For what else is this then to haue fallen from heauenly to earthly conuersation Now he that feeleth not the smoke of the bottomlesse pitte which hath ensued vpon his fall is altogeather blind and stupide for before Luther fell from the Catholike Church almost all the West was of the same faith and religion and whithersoeuer a man went he presently acknowledged his brethren for they were all in light But aâ—ter Luthers fall there arose such a smoke of Errours Sects and Schismes that now one cannot know another in the same Prouince yeâ— not in the same Citty or house This smoke hath also darkened the Sunne and the Ayre as it is said in the Apocalyps for both we and our Aduersaries do vnderstand by the Sunne Christ and by the Ayre the Scriptures by which we after a certaine sort breath in this life And truly how vehemently this smoke hath obscured Christ Transiluania and the Countreys therabout do testify where Christs Diuinity is openly denyed Germany also witnesseth where the Anabaptists plainly and the Vbiquists more obscurely deny Christs Humanity And though there were in tymes past many heretikes which did likewise impugne Christ yet none more impudently then the heretikes of our time for many of them doe not only deny Christ to be God but they adde that he cannot be inuocated nor knoweth what we do It is an horrour to heare or read with what temerity the mysteries of Christ are disputed of at this tyme. Likewise it is incredible how vehemently this smoke hath obscured the Scriptures for now there are so many Translations and Commentaryes contrary one to another that those thinges which in times past were most cleere seeme now most obscure What can be said more plainly then that which S. Paul saith 1. Corinth 7. Of Virgius I haue not the precept of our Lord but I giue counsaile And yet all the heretikes of this tyme do constantly deny that there is any counsaile of Virginity and that S. Paul meant not to giue any counsaile to imbrace Virginity in that place but rather to terrify men from it What can be more plainely spoken then that word of our Lord This is my Body and yet there is nothing more obscure at this time What should I say of those of Transiluania who haue so peruerted with their Commentaries the Ghospell of S. Iohn which is well knowne to haue bene chiefly written against Cerinthus and Ebion who denyed Christs Diuinity that they most of all proue out of it that Christ is not God Let vs come to the Locusts which went out of the smoke of the pyt Chytraeus by the Locusts vnderstandeth the Bishops Clerkes and Monkes in the Church before S. Gregoryes tyme and yet these wonderfull Locusts were not yet risen But all which S. Iohn saith of the Locusts do most aptly agree to the Lutherans and the other heretikes of this tyme. For first the Locusts are wont alway to come in great multitude and to go in flocks Prou. 30. the Locust hath no King and they all go out by their swarmes so the Lutherans properly haue not one Head because they deny that there ought to be one Head of the whole Church Notwithstanding in a very short tyme they haue increased to a huge multitude neither is it any meruaile for they haue opened the gate to all vicious men the gluttons run to them because the Lutherans haue no certaine fasts the incontinent because among them all vowes of continency are disliked and Monks Priests NuÌ„nes are permitted to marry Likewise all Apostataes because among them all Cloysters are opened and conuerted into Pallaces couetous and ambitious Princes because both Ecclesiasticall goods and persons are subiected to their power the idle and the enemies of good workes because among them only Faith is sufficient good workes are not necessary Finally all sinfull and wicked people because all necessity of confessing their sinnes and giuing account to their owne Pastour which is wont to be a very great bridle to sinners is taken away among them Hence therfore are the Locusts so multiplyed Now these Locusts are strangely described by S. Iohn for they are said to haue a mans face yea a womans the taile of scorpions the body of Locusts Likewise they weare vpon their heads a crowne as it were of gould they haue the teeth of Lions and their brest armed with an iron plate Finally they seemed to be as horses prepared to the warre and the sound of their winges was heard as the noyse of chariots running to warre and they had for King ouer them an Angell or the bottomelesse pytte who is called an Exterminatour Their smoth face signifieth the beginning of their preaching which alway beginneth from the Ghospell for they promise to say nothing but the most pure word of God so they most easily allure the simple The scorpions taile signifieth the poysoned and deadly euent for after they haue proposed the word of God they depraue it with their peruerse interpretation and in that sort as it were writhing their taile they strike in their sting and infuse their deadly poyson The Locusts body which is in a manner nothing but
belly for the locust hath a great belly and therefore it can neither go nor fly well but skippeth a little vp and presently falleth downe to the ground againe signifieth that the heretikes of this tyme are men addicted to their bellies enemies of fasting and continency and therefore they can neither go by the way of the commandements nor fly to the contemplation of heauenly thinges They indeauour indeed sometyme to erect themselues and amend their manners but they presently fall to the earth againe like Locusts of which the Saxonicall Visitation may serue for an example For when Luther cōsidered that by reason of the Euangelicall liberty which he preached and the abrogation of all Ecclesiasticall lawes the people did runne into all vices without a bridle he ordayned a Visitation and admonished the Pastors that they should preach pennance the feare of God obedience good workes c. but it profited nothing See Cochlaeus in vita actis Lutheri anno 1527. In like manner they endeauour to fly by contemplation and they write euery where bookes of the Trinity of the Incarnation and of such other mysteries but they fall into most grieuous errours yea most pernicious heresies as is manifest of the Vbiquists who destroy the whole mystery of the Incarnation and Trinity The Crownes vpon the heads of the Locusts signify the arrogancy and pride with which they extoll themselues aboue all men There is a booke of Luthers extant to Duke George In it he saith thus From the tyme of the Apostles no Doctor or VViter no Deuine or Lawyer hath so notably and cleerely confirmed instructed and comforted the consciences of secular states as I haue done By the singular grace of God I know this certainely that neither Augustine nor Ambrose which notwithstanding are the best in this assayre are equall to me in this What that not only Luther and Caluin do set nothing by a 1000. Cyprians and Augustines but also euery paltry Minister accompt all Papists asses and blocks Now these Crownes were as it were of gould that is they seemed of gould but they were not because they faigne that they are moued to that which they say with the zeale of Gods honour and charity whereas notwithstanding they know nothing lesse then the zeale of God The Lions teeth signify the detractions with which both in writing speaches they teare the fame of Bishops Clerkes Monkes and of the very Saints themselues which reigne happily with God And surely they seeme to be nourished with detraction and they say so many thinges which neither are or haue bene and perhaps shall neuer be that they seeme to haue cast of all conscience this is manifest inough aswell by other thinges which are euery where read in their bookes as by those which we cited a little before out of the Smalchaldicall Synod Illyricus Tilemanus Caluin and Chytraeus The brest armed with an iron plate signifieth their obstinacy for they are so obdurate that though they be most plainely conuinced yet they neuer yeild and many tymes they had rather die then leaue their obstinacy The likenes of horses which seemed prepartd to warre signifieth their bouldnes and temerity for they most bouldly prouoke all to warre whereas notwithstanding afterwards for the most part they bring only lyes for arguments Luther in assertione art 25. Come hither saith he all you Papists togeather ioyne all your studies if perhaps you can vndoe this knot In which manner do almost all the rest speake Now the similitude of the flying chariots signifieth the swiftnes which this new heresy vseth in taking possession of diuers Countries for in short tyme it hath not only inuaded many Kingdomes in the North partes but also durst runne out to the Indians although God permitted not that is could stay there for that new and tender Church of Christ did not deserue so great a scourge Finally the Angell of the bottomelesse pit is said to be the King of these Locusts for although the Locusts haue not a visible King as we said before yet they cannot want an inuisible King that is the Diuell for he is King ouer all the children of Pride Iob. 41. Now the King of the Locusts is called an Exterminatour because the Diuell neuer so destroyed and wasted the Church by any heresie or persecution as he hath done by the Lutherans for other heresies for the most part destroyed one or two articles but did not wholy ouerthow the whole order and discipline of the Church But the Lutheran Heresie partly by herselfe and partly by her ofspring the Anabaptists Caluinists Trinitarians Libertines hath destroyed all the good thinges which the Church had in the places where it could preuayle for it hath taken from God the Trinity by the new Samosatenes the Deity from Christ by the same men and his Humanity by the Anabaptists from all the Angells and Saintes all worship and inuocation from Purgatory the suffrages of the liuing yea it hath exterminated Purgatory it selfe From the Church which is in earth it hath taken away many bookes of diuine Scripture in a manner all Sacraments all Traditions the Priesthood the Sacrifice Vowes Fasts Holy-dayes Temples Atars Reliques Crosses Images all Monuments of piety Likewise all Ecclesiasticall lawes all discipline and order But perhaps she hath spared hell least she should wrong her King the Angell of the bottomlesse pitte She hath not For many of the Lutherans do also deny the true and locall hell and feygne I know not what imaginary hell as we shewed before in the disputation of Christs descending into hell Truely therfore this may be called an exterminating heresie and worthy of that Captaine who is called in Hebrew anaddoch in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latin Exterminator And surely it were a wonder if the Lutherans themselues did not admire this extermination vnlesse they were altogeather blinded with the smoke of which we spake before But amidst so many euills there is one consolation that as S. Iohn saith these Locusts hurt not the greene herbs and trees but only those men that haue not the signe of the liuing God for since that this heresie is wholy carnall it cannot easily deceaue good men and those in whose minds religion and piety is greene and doth flourish So we see that it hath seldome or neuer happened that any hath fallen from the Church to the Lutherans who began not first to be of a corrupt and loose life among Catholiks But thus much of this THE XXIIII CHAPTER The arguments of Caluin and Illyricus are confuted who go about to proue that the Pope is no longer a Bishop where also the fable of Pope Ioane the Woman is confuted THERE remaineth that which we propounded in the last place viz. that we shew that the Bishop of Rome is not only not Antichrist but that he hath not lost his Bishoprick by any other meanes for Caluin and Illyricus the one with a reason the other with a certaine coniecture go about
in great part because he is supposed though falsly to arrogate more to himselfe in Temporall affayres then of right he ought how much more would the same imputation fall vpon such a Prince as did first vsurp spirituall Iurisdiction without eyther example or other probable pretense But I will not vrge these odious inferences any further your Maiesty will easily conceaue how far this proiect might be pursued And by perusing this small labour of myne which I now offer to your Maiesty it will manifestly appeare that we haue euident and inuincible Arguments taken out of Scripture and all Antiquity to free our chiefest Pastour the Popes Holynes from this most absurd and false calumniation and that whatsoeuer any Protestant can answere to these our proofes is without any difficulty ouerthrowne and confuted As likewise their rayling inuectiues and friuolous obiections are presently dissolued returned vpon themselues All which considered I account it no presumption to be an humble Suppliant to your most Excellent Maiesty for some release and mitigation in the pressures and persecutions which Catholicks endure vnder this pretence of the Popes being Antichrist For how can it possibly stand with iustice or reason that a lawfull Prince should punish his loyall subiects for performing their duty to their spirituall and lawfull Pastour That Rebells should vphold Hereticks who are Traytors against God and his Church it were no meruaile since they all agree in the impugnation of superiour powers And yet it is too notorious to the world what Catholicks suffer for their conscience in your Maiestyes Dominions what losse of lyuings liberty yea sometyme of life it selfe How busy are Purseuants in ransacking their houses abusing their seruants and apprehending their persons What insolencyes and vexations are they constrayned to endure And to omit the generality and seuerity of this persecution from which neither frailty of sex nor band of matrimony nor Nobility of birth can exempt any how many things lye hid and vnknowne which would astonish and amaze the world if they were laid open to the view therof What prying and inquiring into mens secret actions in somuch that euen ordinary prouision for the sustenance of nature cannot be made without suspition of Treason as appeared not long since by the pot of peares which were supposed to haue bene balls of wildfyre How many are beaten and tormented euen to death in priuate houses without any publick tryall Some Prentises in the Citty of London can giue good testimony heerof I might adde such other particulers as the rods kept in store by some of no small account for yong youths vnder twenty yeares whom they vse like schollers thinking it not to be against their grauity to whip them priuately with their owne hands But I will not offend your Maiestyes eares with the recitall of such base and vnworthy actions Only I will humbly beseech our Blessed Sauiour to moue your Maiestyes hart to take pitty and compassion of these abuses by giuing present Order for the redresse and reformation of so much as your Maiestie already misliketh which we hope to be the greatest part And for the rest we only craue this fauour that we may be spared vntill vve be heard for vve nothing doubt but that if your Maiesty vvould once resolue to informe your selfe thoroughly of the truth God vvould not be vvanting to our iust desires and to your Maiesties so Honourable and necessary endeauours GOD of his goodnes direct and protect your Maiesty AMEN Your Maiesties most faithfull Subiect and humble Oratour Michael Christopherson P. THE PREFACE to the Reader TO some I doubt not this my labour which I haue taken in discussing this question of Antichrist will seeme superfluous or at least not so well bestowed as it might haue bene in many other subiects And they will be much confirmed in this their opinion if they consider that among so many learned men as haue written in our language and euidently confuted the heresies of our tymes none of them haue vouchsafed to yield so far to our Aduersaries as to handle this question of set purpose which doubtles they omitted not without great consideration and weighty reasons the chiefest of which if I be not deceaued was for that they perswaded themselues that few or none especiallie of the prudent and moderate sort did indeed and in their hart hold this absurd paradox though they were content to let it passe because it serued for a motiue to withdraw the common people from the Catholike faith which in their conceipt conteyned other errors And for this cause those worthy and zealous writers endeauored chiefly to take away this false perswasion of the Churches erring partly by confirming and demonstrating the infallibility of her authority and partly by descending to particuler controuersies and most euidently conuincyng the Churches doctrine in euery one of them to be conformable to the diuine Scriptures and all antiquity For they did easily discouer that by this course they should not only confute this abhominable bâ—asphemy but also with one and the same labour confirme and establish the contrary truth viz. that the Catholike Church togeather with her supreme Pastour is the piller of Truth and the building of Christ against which no force of errors or heresies either hath or euer shall be able to preuayle Which course of theirs as most prudent in it selfe so likewise most profitable to others I am far from mysliking but doe altogeather approue and admyre it And yet notwithstanding I hope that this my labour may be in some sort profitable also For all are not so quick wytted as to make these necessary inferences but rather many are with-held from yielding to the manifest truth in other pointes by a preiudicate opinion which they haue conceaued in this and the iust and discreet silence which hath hitherto bene vsed ministreth to them some cause of suspition that the Protestants haue reason for that they say especially since they vrge this point so much both in their Writings and Sermons and the matter is of so great importance and consequence that whosoeuer hath the truth on his syde in this ought iustly to be belieued in the rest since that Antichrist can neither agree with Christ nor so great a calumniation as this is of the Pope if it be false can agree or stand with the spirit of truth Besides the Protestants out of this their doctrine make most odious inferences against Catholikes as to go no further we may see in M. Downams last Chapter where he deduceth out of it six conclusions First that out of this all other controuersies may be decided and that the doctrine of the Catholike Church is to be reiected as the errors of Antichrist Secondly that their separation from vs is warranted yea commaunded by the word of God and all returning forbidden Thirdly that all they which partake with vs are reprobates and to be damned Fourthly that the Recusant Papists but especialy Iesuites and Seminary Priests
ought not to be fauoured or spared in a Christian Common wealth Fifthly that there can be no reconciliation betwixt Protestants and the Church of Rome Sixtly that Protestants ought to be thankefull to God who hath not suffered them to be carried away with this Catholike Apostasy By which last wordes we may also note that if this their position of the Pope being Antichrist doth fall they haue no colour left to accuse the Catholike Church of schisme or heresy and consequently it remayneth euident that she is the true Church of Christ For no schisme or heresy can be Catholike or vniuersall as the Roman Church is only the persecution and Apostasy of Antichrist may in some sort vsurpe this name because though it shall want the vniuersality of tyme being to remayne but a very short tyme yet it shal be very vniuersall in respect of place as is manifest by that which is said in this Treatise Thus much shall suffice of the importance and necessity of this my small labour And now I will briefely say some thing of Cardinall Bellarmine whome I defend and of M. Downam whome I confute And concerning this renowned and mâ—st learned Cardinall I shall not need to vse many wordes his fame being spred ouer the whole world by his large and profound disputations against all sortes of hereticks which haue risen or are extant in these our dayes Wherefore it shal be sufficient to note that which maketh to our purpose that in this his Treatise of Antichrist he vseth not so many arguments as some others haue don only contenting himselfe with those which are proper and peculiar to this place omitting others which do rather proue that the Pope is the chiefe Pastour of Christes Church then disprooue that he is not Antichrist which in him proceedeth from two causes the one is his exactnes in the method and diuision of his disputations which conteyne euery one seuerall questions and arguments the other for that hauing before sufficiently discussed the affirmatiue position that the Pope is and ought to be acknowledged to be the chiefe Pastour of Gods Church he would not make any needeles repetition of those demonstrations but rather proceed to other which hitherto he had not touched and which directly concluded that the Pope not only by reason of his office but also in respect of his person can in no sort be that Antichrist which the Scriptures and Fathers affirme that we are to expect towards the end of the world I shall not need to adde any more in commendation of this his worke for that the whole Treatise following hath no other subiect I haue translated his whole Booke verbatim so that the Reader may peruse it and iudge of it himselfe It were superfluous to giue any reason why in my allegations of this worthy Cardinall I only mention his name for the most part for any man may easily perceaue that I do it for breuities sake and according to the vse of Schooles and not for any want of respect to his place and person whome I honour from my hart and defend him in this Treatise so far as my poore ability will giue me leaue Concerning M. Downam for so I commonly call him to giue him to understand that I impugne not his person but his detestable heresy I shall haue something more to say for first the Reader must not be ignorant that he hath peruerted the order of this disputation For whereas Cardinall Bellarmine first demonstrateth that the Pope is not Antichrist and afterward answereth the obiections of his Aduersaryes M. Downam tooke it to be his best course first to obiect whatsoeuer either former heretikes had inuented or he himselfe could adde omitting altogeather the answers which Bellarmine gaue that by this meanes he might possesse his Readers mynd by inueighing against the Pope at his pleasure without any contradiction and so haue him the more fauourable when he came to make shew of answering to Bellarmins arguments This is the cause why I am constrayned to confute M. Downams second booke in the first place not producing the argumeÌ„ts without his solutions as he dealt with the Cardinall but examining whatsoeuer he answereth distinctly in so much that one Chapter excepted where his confusion would not permit Cap. 4. it in all the rest euery number of my confutation answereth to the same in him so that if any man hath a desire to confer what both he and I say he may easily do it by reading first one section or number in him then the same in me which I would require of all such as do any way doubt of my sincere dealing because he findeth not M. Downams wordes verbatim alleaged which could not be without great prolixity But he that goeth thus far should also do well to read so much in Cardinall Bellarmime as is discussed in euery seuerall number which that the Reader may conueniently doe I haue also prefixed numbers to the Cardinalls discourse and noted in the margent where that which is handled in euery seuerall place may be found in him without difficulty And by this meanes I hope the Reader may peruse this my labour with clarity and profit and discouer M. Downams false dealing aswell in this point specified as in many other which now it is no tyme to rehearse they beeing very neere as many as there be leaues in this whole Booke and they may easily be found by either perusing the marginall notes or seeking in the table at the word Downam And yet perhaps it will not be amysse to note one or two of them in this place which especially discouer the badnesse of M. Downams cause For what can be more absurd or hatefull to Christian eares then to heare the enemyes of Christ and his Church commended and imbraced and his true Seruants and Doctors insolently reiected and accused of errours And yet this is M. Downams case not once or twyce but throughout the whole course of this disputation for he doth not only agree in substance with the Samosatens who are knowne heretikes and condemned by his owne iudgement but also ioyneth himselfe ex professo with that vile Apostata and capitall enemy of Christ Porphiry not only against S. Hierome who most earnestly and learnedly confuteth him at large but also against all other Ecclesiasticall writers yea euen the very Iewes themselues who in that point agree with the Christians but in another where they are opposite to vs there M. Downam ioyneth with them so that it seemeth that M. Downam and his fellow Protestants seeke of purpose how they may oppose themselues to Christ and his Church yea that they esteeme more of Gentilles and Iewes then they do of Christian writers though neuer so many so worthy or so ancient And surely whosoeuer shall consider attentiuely how often and how scornefully the ancient Fathers and pillars of Christs Church be reiected by M. Downam cannot choose but admire yea â—hould vp his handes and blesse himselfe
to thinke how it hath byn and is still possible that either they themselues or others by them should be so bewitched Neither can there any probable cause be giuen of so great blindnes and so enormous a cryme but only the want of Gods grace which their sinnes haue with drawne and deserued that they should be in this sort as it were giuen ouer to a reprobate sense What can be said in defence of this detestable excesse Deny it they cannot the thing being so euident and so often reiterated And dare they excuse it by telling vs That the Fathers are only forsaken when they forsake the Scripture Is not this plainely to make Infidells and Heretikes better Interpreters of Scripture then the Church of Christ and all Christians in generall and the most learned Pastours thereof in particuler If they answer that it is not the authority of these Infidells which they follow but the inspiration of the Holy Ghost which they experience in themselues is this any thing els in effect then to acknowledge that Porphiry and the Iewes had the true spirit of Christ and that the ancient Fathers and the Church of Christ in their tyme had it not For if the Protestants haue the spirit of Christ now it is manifest that those others had it then since their expositions be all one But who is so foolish and sacrilegious as to depriue Gods Church and Saintes of his spirit and it tribute it to his professed enemyes and consequently how shall we belieue the Protestants when they tell vs that they are full of Gods Spirit since we see their spirit to agree with that of the Diuells instruments and to be quite opposite to that of Gods elect Heere is no starting hole to be found neither haue they any thing to reply but only to stand vpon their bare affirmation which M. Downam doth so often in his disputation still desiring to haue that graunted which is chiefly in question But I will omit this and the rest of his absurdities remitting the Reader to his owne experience after that he hath with diligence perused the whole Heere I would make an end of this Preface hauing said asmuch as I thinke necessary concerning the disputation which followeth But because I haue lately seene two Sermons not long since preached by this our Doctour by which it seemeth that he hath resolued to relinquish Puritanisme and turne Protestant I thought it good to admonish my Reader of this point also because I rather inclined before to thinke that he was a Puritan and insinuated so much in a place or two And withall Chap. 10. 13. by this occasion I must intreat my Reader to marke the great difference betwixt M. Downam in these his Sermons and the same man in his booke of Antichrist for in this he euery where reiecteth all antiquity as I haue said but in his Sermons he singeth vs a new song and can tell vs. that it neuer yet happened that the newest thinges did proue the truest and argueth chiefely from authority obiecting still to his Puritan Aduersaries That they go against the whole streame of all Antiquity yea he can alleadge S. Augustine lib. 4. de Bapt. con Donat. cap. 24. ep 118. to proue that the consent of the whole Church argueth either the definition of a Councell or an Apostolicali Tradition though he corruptely translateth Traditum Ordayned and likewise in the second place where S. Aug. affirmeth that Insolentissimae insaniae est it is a most insolent madnes to dispute against that which vniuersa Ecclesia the whole Church obserueth he addeth of his owne the word Primitiue that so he may haue some stareing hole against vs when he is vrged with the same Authority of S. Augustine which if he would follow himselfe as he would now haue the Puritans do he must of force retyre himselfe from the Protestants also and betake himselfe to the Catholike Church which all Antiquity most manifestly defendeth And surely whosoeuer considereth the arguments which Protestants make against Puritans cannot but euidently perceaue that the very same principles do ouerthrow the Protestants themselues And I meruaile much how they can defend themselues from that terrible sentence of S. Paul Inexcusabilises o homo omnis qui iudicas quo enim iudicas alterum teipsum condemnas eadem enim agis quae iudicas And the very same iudgment falleth vpon the Puritans themselues when they go about to impugne the Brownists Familists Anabaptists Arians or any other sect whatsoeuer For this they cannot do but by Antiquity which notwithstanding they are forced to reiect in all those pointes in which they differ and dissent from the Cathelike Roman Church I will not descend to any particulers though I easily might for what can be more euident then that the autherity of S. Cyprian other Fathers who vrge the necesâ—ity of a Bishop for the conseruation of vnity is much more to be vnderstood of one chiefe Bishop in the whole Church then of particuler Bishops in particuler Diocesses since there can be no question that vnity is as necessary in the whole world as in one Diocesse and much more easily mayntained in this then in that Likewise M. Downam can tell vs not only of Bishops but also of Metropolitans and Patriarches and alleadgeth for his purpose the Councell of Nice but he will not acknowledge that in the same Councell Rome hath the first place and is preferred before all others as likewise Alexandria and Antiochia are before Ierusalem which M. Downam would willingly haue the chiefe of which there can be no other true reason giuen but the excellency of S. Peter aboue the other Apostles who founded three Churches and placed or fixed his Sea in Rome where he ended his life with a most happy Martyrdome Now if we aâ—ke M. Downam a reason why he seeth not this aswell as that which fauoureth the Protestants against the Puritans I cannot imagine what he can answere vs but only that by this meanes he should incurre the disgrace and ouerthrow of his Ministry which he esteemeth so highly But I intreat both him and all other euen as they tender their owne saluation to looke about them in tyme and not to suffer themselues to be carried away with the sway of the tyme and the desire of worldly pleasures and preferments which M. Downam and all others may easily conceaue not to be very great if his complayntes of pouerty and contempt which he maketh in his former Sermon be true as no doubt they are in great part and these miseryes will daylie increase as their credit doth decrease so that if now that pittifull yâ—t ridiculouâ— complaint of M. Downam be true That not only euery meane man almost Ser. 1. pag. 67. preferreth himselfe before the Minister but also disdayneth to bestow either his Sonne on the Ministry or his Daughter on a Minister the tyme no doubt will come and that shortly also that they â—halbe inforced to marry