yet expressing it in the conclusion which is a meere cauill for Bellarmine would not add any word in the premisses which he found not in Melancthon Caluin and Illyricus whose opinion he alleadged In the conclusion which was his owne he might very well expresse that which was necessarily to be vnderstood as Bellarmin explicateth out of Caluin himselfe for M. Downams deuise that the Church of Christ The Church comprehendeth not al that professe the name of Christ may be taken for the company of Christians that is of those that professe the name of Christ is too ridiculous since by this meanes he includeth all heretikes whatsouer who are indeed the Synagogue of the Diuell so confoundeth the Church of God and the Sinagogue of the Deuill wheras S. Paul saith that Antichrist shall sit in the TeÌ„ple of God he meaneth according to M. Downams interpretation the temple of the Diuell All which is so obsurd that the authors with whom Bellarmine disputeth would haue byn ashamed of so ridiculous an assertion and therfore they sought other cuasions as we shal see forthwith but now let vs go on with the other illation that the Protestants are out of the true Church for how the Temple of Hierusalem is by S. Paul called the Temple of God we shall see afterward in the discussion of Bellarmines answeres to the arguments of the Protestants 5. Wherfore M. Downam to saue himselfe and his brethren from being out of the true Church of Christ is driuen to this exigent to deny that there is any one visible Catholike Church but only one invisible Catholike Church and many particuler visible Churches which is a most extrauagant and absurd paradox contrary both to Scriptures Fathers and Councells as Bellarmine sufficiently proueth lib. 4. de There is one visible Catholicke Church Ecclesia militant cap. 10. But now I will only oppose to this insolent madnes the authority of the Creed generally receaued of all where the Church is called One Holy Catholike and Apostolike and who seeth not that all which belong truly to Christ must agree in one faith and not to be deuided by schismes and heresies which in M. Downams conceipt can only happen in particuler Churches or at least in them only be acknowledged and rooted out So that if any particuler Church will wholy fall to either or rather if the chiefe head and pastour of any such Church shal become either schismaticall or hereticall there is not meanes left for his reduction since that he is not bound to be at vnity with other particuler Churches nor to subiect himselfe to any visible Catholike Church or to any visible head therof which is as much in effect as to say that Christ hath left no meanes vpon earth to decide controuersies concerning Faith or to take away schismes diuisions but that euery particuler Church or Pastor yea indeed euery particuler man may freely follow his owne fancies without contradiction or controlement of any so long as he can pretend any text of Scripture though neuer so much wrested and falsly vnderstood for that which he is resolued to hould And is it meruarle that heresies and schismes be so rife in our daies since these absurd paradoxes are so currant But what should heretikes and schismatikes do but defend schismes and diuisions and imâ—ugne vnity and concord which if they would admit they must of force returne to the Catholike Church whereit is only to be found Since therfore the visible Church of Christ is one and by the aduersaries confession it is the RomaÌ„ it followeth manifestly that they themselues are out of Christs Church since that they The ProtestaÌ„ts are out of the Church of Christ are out of the Roman For the other cauill which M. Downam maketh that the RomaÌ„ Church is a particuler Church is not worth the answering for euery child can tell him that the Roman Church is taken for all those which agree in faith and are vnited with the Bishop of Rome who is not only Bishop of that particuler Citty but also the head and Pastor of the whole Church which of him her Head is called the Roman Church which coÌ„tinueth the true Church of Christ as Bellarmine proueth and Melancthon Caluin and Illyricus dare not deny howsoeuer M. Downam is so impudent in his rayling consorting himselfe with a vaine Poet whose meaning notwithstanding was far better then M. Petrarcha Downams is 6. M. Downam hauing thus shufled vp the matter hitherto at length commeth to explicate himselfe more plainly and agreeth with Caluin that the Church of Rome vnder the Pope may be called the Church of God in respect both of some notes and signes of a visible Church as the administration of the Sacrament of Baptisme and the profession of the Name of Christ as also of some reliques and remainder as it were the gleanings of the inuisible Church for he doubteth not but that in the corruptest times of Popery the Lord hath reserued some who haue not receaued the marke of the beast And for explication he compareth the Church of Rome to the state of Israel vnder Ieroboam and Achab because they then retained the Sacrament of Circumcision and professed Iehoua to be their God although they worshipped him Idolatrously And euen vnder Achab the Lord had reserued 7000. who neuer bowed their knee to Baal In which comparison M. Downam insisteth wholy Downam his petitio principij vpon his wonted figure of Petitio principij and consequently all that he saith is but meere railing If he would haue said any thing to the purpose he should haue shewed two points in that example the first that the visible Church among the Iewes was altogeather ceased by that Idolatry of Israel The second that Israel departed not from the Religion which was generally houlden before but that the ancient Religion was by little and little changed to Idolatry and that those which came after separated themselues from the former and yet were the true Church With these two points M. Downam might haue made some comparison betwixt the people of Israel and the Church of Rome But since The Protestants like to Israel the Catholikes to Iuda neither of these are so but the quite contrary it will fall to M. Downam and his fellowes share to be like the people of Israel since they haue left the visible Church of which they once were as the other did and consequently the Church of Rome is like to the people of Iuda and the rest which ioyned with them since it continueth in the ancient faith generally holden throughout Christendome before there were any Protestants in the World Neither do we graunt that the Protestants haue any part of Christs Church no more then the Israelites had since they haue not any iote of true faith howsoeuer they make profession of some articles for the reason why they hould them is not the authority of God proposed by the Scriptures or the
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
be of little accompt except they could bring better proofes that they are the true Church of God which affirmation whilst it be proued is petitio principij and the Iewes Turkes and Pagans will say asmuch for themselues if any man wil be so foolish as to belieue them which he hath reason to doe assoone as heretikes of which number to vs it seemeth euident that Protestants are 5. Next M. Downam maketh Bellarmine to prooue that Antichrists name is not yet knowne by the authority of Irenaeus which he impugneth because Irenaeus liued before the fulfilling of this Prophesy which he affiâ—meth to be now fulfilled which obiection I thinke deserues no other name then the M. Downams Petitio principij former for it is a playne petitio principij And M. Downam might easily haue discerned that Bellarmine was in that place discussing and searching out the most probable opinion among Catholikes who all agree that Antichrist is not yet come no more then he was in Irenaeus his tyme and therfore his authority among them proueth very well that his name is not yet knowne As for M. Downam and his Mates who haue forsaken the Catholike Church and faith he argueth against them from their owne authority and manifest experience as we haue seene Wherefore all Irenaus his proofes are good and firme for the end that Bellarmine bringeth them as likewise his inference is euident to all Catholikes that The danger of ProtestaÌ„ts the Protestants are in great danger to receaue Antichrist when he commeth since before he come they so verily perswade themselues that he is already come which is a good warning for Protestants also to looke about them and to take heed that they be not so confident but vpon better groundes for the daunger is great But heere I must desire my Reader to marke attentiuely M. Downams deuise who will needes be so foolish as to seeme to thinke that M. Downam mistaketh Bellarmine the proofes which Bellarmine bringeth to conuince that Irenaeus was of that opinion that Antichrists name should not be certainely knowne before his coÌ„ming were brought by him to proue absolutely against Protestants that Antichrists name is yet vnkowne whereas he beginneth not to propose his argument to this purpose till he had fully examined both Irenaeus and all the other opinions 6. Well you must giue M. Downam leaue to mistake sometymes otherwise he should haue very little to say to the purpose Yet he will try what he can say to Bellarmines true proofe which is that Antichrists name is not yet knowne because there is a great controuersy about it Against which he obiecteth that by the same reason Bellarmine may conclude that few pointes of religion are yet knowne because there be few concerning which there is no controuersy But M. Downam must consider the difference which is great For first about Antichrists name there is not only a question betwixt Catholikes and Protestants but likewise euen Protestants M. Downam contradicteth himselfe themselues doe vary and Catholikes also are not all of one opinion which M. Downam insinuateth in some sort saying that in other controuersies the truth is knowne of those which are Orthodoxall howsoeuer others will not acknowledge it But of this matter he dareth not go so farre but only aduentureth to say that he doubteth not but that the truth of it is knowne although some cannot and others will not as yet see it So that in this some cannot know the truth but in other controuersies all may that will And besides M. Downam might haue noted that not only the Orthodoxall but all others must know and acknowledge Antichrists name thus farre that they confesse that he whome the Orthodoxall take to be Antichrist hath that name which hath this number of 666. as all Pagans Turkes and Iewes confesse that the name of Iesus which Christian should to be the name of Christ is indeed the name of our Christ and contayneth the number 888. But heere it is otherwise for though M. Downam and his fellowes giue the Pope the name of Romanus and Latinus yet neither the Popes themselues nor any other giue them that name without addition especially that of Latin cannot be attributed to him for he is head aswell of the Greeke as the The name of Latin cannot be giuen to the Pope Latin Church his particuler Sea or Bishoprick to which this supreme iurisdiction is annexed is only Rome And besides there is much controuersy whether these names contayne the number 666. or no as we shall see presently Neither can M. Downam help himselfe with telling vs that without doubt the Roman State is signified by the beast whose name contayneth this number 666. for this he knoweth is denied by vs and his proofes wherof he braggeth are all discussed and confuted in their due places 7. Wherefore now let vs see how he will confute Bellarmines Answere to the reasons which Chytraeus and Bibliander bring for their opinions And heere Bellarmine must be content to put vp an iniuryous imputation that M. Downam layeth vpon him that it is his manner to make choyce of the easiest Bellarmine slauÌ„dered by Downam obiections omitting the harder which is so manifest and notoriouâ— a slander that I dare remit the iudgement to any indifferent or morall Protestant For no man that hath read Bellarmine can deny but that he vrgeth all arguments against himselfe to the vttermost in so much that it is the common censure of Protestants that he is a good Author to be read against himselfe because his obiections are so forcible but their meaning is that the Reader should stay in them and not passe to his answers because they are also most plaine and euident But to come to our particuler M. Downam should haue shewed vs those hard obiections of Chytraeus and Bibliander which Bellarmine omitted but he hath no such matter only he writeth thus VVe produce three other arguments as you haue heard speaking of himselfe in the plurall number and as it seemeth vsing the same figure in numbring his arguments for I can only find one of his owne adding which is that the number of 666. is not the name of Antichrist himselfe but of the former beast which signifieth the Roman State But how can Bellarmine be blamed for not answering this argument which M. Downam hath framed so many yeares after his booke was written Downam contrary to his fellowes For Chytraeus and Bibliander could not vse this argument since they were not of M. Downams opinion in this point but tooke that number to be vnderstood of the name of Antichrist himselfe as all other Authors but M. Downam do also for ought I can perceaue since he alleadgeth none for See cap. 5. n. 5. c. his opinion and indeed the matter is playne as you may see in those places where it is discussed at large The first reason then which Bellarmine answereth is the authority of Irenaeus to
cauill for the Church of Rome if we vnderstand that particuler diocesse is still accompted but a part of the Catholike Church and in this sense a man may still be a good Christian although he be not of the Church of Rome And in ancient tymes the Church of Rome alone that is the Church of which the Bishop of Rome is the chiefe Pastor was accompted the Catholike Church And consequently that he that was not a member of that Church was not taken for a Catholike or true Christian as appeareth sufficiently by the places which Bellarmine citeth to which I will only adde one more out of S. Hierome in his Epistle to Pope Damasus I am vnited in Communion saith he to thy Blessednes that is to the Chayre of Peter I know that the Church was built vpon that rock whosoeuer eateth the Lambe out of this house is prophane if any man be not in the Arke of Noe he will perish in the deluge I know not Vitalis I refuse Those which belong not to the Church of Rome belong not to Christ but to Antichrist Meletius I esteeme not Paulinus whosoeuer gathereth not what thee scattereth that is whosoeuer belongeth not to Christ belongeth to Antichrist Now let M. Downam compare the writing of any Catholike at this tyme and see if they attribute more to the Pope or Church of Rome at this tyme then S. Hierome did at that and with all consider if in S. Hieromes iudgement it be not a playne marke of an Antichristian to be against the Roman Church and of a good Christian to be vnited to it 8. To the third obiection M. Downam answereth that the Oath which Bellarmine alleadgeth is not an Oath of obedience and allegiance to the Pope but of faith and Religion towards God conformable to the faith and Religion then professed by the Bishop and The oath of obedience made to the B. of Rome before the yeare 606. Church of Rome But by M. Downams leaue the wordes of the Bishop are these Sub meiordinis casu spondeo atque promitto tibi perte Sancto Petro Apostolorum principi atque eius Vicario Beatissimo Gregorio vel successoribus ipsius me numquā c. ad schismata reuersurū sed semper me in vnitate Sanctae Ecclesiae Catholicae communione Romani Pontificis per omnia permansurum Vnder perill of loosing my place I profer promise to thee and by thee to S. Peter Prince of the Apostles and to most blessed Gregory his Vicar or to the successors of him that I will neuer returne to schisme but will alwayes in all pointes remayne in the vnity of the holy Catholike Church and in the communion of the B. of Rome By which we see that the promise to remayme in the communion of the Pope was as absolute as that other to remayne in the vnity of the Catholike Church which I suppose M. Downam will admit to be perpetuall without limitation of any tyme. And this promise he presently cōfirmeth with an Oath by Almighty God by the 4. Ghospells which he held in his hands and by the health of Nations and of the rulers of his Common wealth Now it is a friuolous cauill to say that this Oath was taken vpon the occasion of his lapse for this Bellarmine denieth not but only affirmeth that it was taken before the comming of Antichrist according to the Protestāts accompt Neither is it to the purpose that now such Oathes are more generall and common for this Bellarmine denieth not and who seeth not that the exaction of Oaths may proceed vpon diuers occasions And if the Oath be lawfull the often exacting of it is not culpable but rather If the Oath be lawfull the often exacting of it is not culpable commendable arguing greater vigilancy in them which gouerne And the like may be said of some other clauses more expresly set downe in some other formes of oathes according to the necessity of tymes and the qualities of them who are to sweare M. Downam should shew vs that there is any oath exacted of any now that is not fit to be performed by them which thinke it necessary to liue in the communion of the Pope as this Bishop did as appeareth by his Oath wherein he promiseth as much in generall as any other can expresse in particuler for he protesteth that he will neuer be drawne from this cōmunion by any perswasions or any other meanes and consequently that he will alway remaine in the obedience of the Pope for he renounceth not any heresy as M. Downam supposeth but only schisme which he performed by returning ad vnitatem Sedis Apostolicae to the vnity of the Apostolike Sea which I hartily wish that M. Downam and his fellow Protestants may also doe for otherwise it would not be sufficient to renounce their heresies though this were a good step to that To the fourth after a fit of rayling M. Downam answereth Priestly vnction vsed before the yeare 606. Desacra vnctione c. Cum venisset at length that both the places of S. Gregory Nazianzen are to be vnderstood figuratiuely of consecration to the Ministry this he endeauoureth to proue by the testimony of Innoc. 3. by which it appeareth that this cerimony of annoynting was not vsed in the Greek Church whereof Naziāzen was but reiected as Iewish vntill he imposed the same vpon them about the yeare 1200. But M. Downam goeth beyond Innocentius for he only affirmeth that they to whom he wrote that is at the most the Grecians of his tyme were not wont to vse this cerimony of annoynting but that the Greeke Church had not vsed it before Innocentius affirmeth not and much lesse that they had reiected it as Iewish Wherefore these are M. Downams additions which we may bouldly reiect since he hath no proofe for them and consequently his figuratiue interpretation falleth to the ground and we are to take the words of S. Gregory Nazianzen as they sound especially since others as ancient as he both of the Greeke and Latin Church make expresse mention of this Cerimony as M. Downam may see in Bellarmine lib. 1. de Sacramento Ordinis cap. 12. where he also handleth this obiection out of Innocentius 3. and vrgeth it further then M. Downam Bellarmin vrgeth Downams obiection further then he doth himselfe doth whome I must intreat not to be angry though I passe ouer his rayling in silence since he saith nothing to the purpose which is not already answered for now all our question is how ancient this Cerimony is and for the lawfulnesse therof I remit him to the place of Bellarmine already alleaged where he solueth that obiection taken from the Iewes and whatsoeuer els M. Downam can inuent 10. To the fifth obiection M. Downams answere is that S. Augustine is to be vnderstood of Sacrifice of prayer and not of any propitiatory Sacrifice but by M. Downams leaue he cannot carry it so for we will appeale to S.
that no Pope was a Iew neither by Nation nor by Religion nor in any sort It is also manifest that the Pope was neuer yet receaued by the Iewes for the Mesias but contrary wise is accompted their enemy and chiefe perfecutor Wherefore they in their daily prayers aske of God that he will giue the Pope thē liuing a good mind towards the Iewes and that in his daies he will send the Messias viz. that he may deliuer them out of the Popes power and they call a Bishop as chiefly the Pope is in the Syrian language Zanbon which signifieth a Tayle and is opposite to an head for because we call the Bishop the Head of the people they contrary wise call him the Tayle in reproach so farre are they off from being ready to receaue the Pope for their Messias Finally Rab. Leui Gerson cap. 7. and 11. Dan. expoundeth all those thinges which are spoken of Antichrist of the Pope whom also he calleth another Pharao and opposeth him to the Messias which is to come See orationes Mahasor sol 26. M. Dovvnams Ansvvere confuted 1. TO this Argument first M. Downam obiecteth in generall that in all this dispuration Bellarmine presupposeth See cap. ◠that Antichrist is but one singular person which though it were trne yet he did presuppose nothing but what he had proued before which I remit to the Readers iudgement Downams absurdity But now indeed this argumēt presupposeth no such thing but is of much moreforce if we speake of many then if we speake only of one for it is most euident that neither all the Popes since 607. were Iewes not that the Iewes haue receaued them as their Messias both which thinges shal be verified in Antichrist be he one man or many as Bellarmine most certainely proueth Secondly M. Downam noteth briefely three pointes out of the errours which Bellarmine reiecteth First his cunning in that he imitateth crafty tradesmen who being desirous to vtter their bad wares at a good price first shew those that are worse that the naughtines of the worse may comnend and set forth those that be not so bad But where M. Downam learnt this cunning or of what tradesmen I know not except he meaneth those of his owne profession but sure I am that no tradesman can deale more plainely and sincerely then Bellarmine doth telling vs what wares are so bad that by no meanes they are to be delt withall Againe what wares are likely to be very good Bellarmines sincere dealing but yet some doubt may be made of them which he declareth and vrgeth to the vttermost Finally what they are also that are out of all question being generally warranted by all the most skilfull and honest Merchants This is Bellarmines proceding in this and all other difficulties as the Reader may easily perceaue by perusing his workes and in particuler this place Now how this can be disliked by any good and substantiall chapman I cannot imagine only some crafty and deceiptfull Merchant may be hindered thereby to vtter his broken trash and therefore out of enuy cauill at him as M. Downam doth His second note is that S. Hippolytus is the Father of one of these errors vpon whose counterfaite authority saith M. Downam the Papists in other points concerning this controuersy do so muchrely But it M. Downam had asmuch wit as he hath malice he might haue noted out of this place in what manner we esteeme the authority of any Father though neuer so ancient or graue viz. if he holdeth any thing against all the rest and against a plaine place of Scripture in the interpretation of which all the rest agree we altogeather reiect the authority of that Father If he affirmeth any thing without euident proofe How Catholikes esteeme of the Fathers in which the rest are silent and yet he hath probability for that he saith we admit of his authority as probable and this so much the more or lesse as we find more or fewer of his opinion or that they affirme it with more certainty and resolution or bring better proofes for that they say But yet so long as we find any controuersy among the Fathers or that they vary in their expositions of any place of Scripture we hould it not altogeather certayne that the greater part affirme except the matter be decided by the successours of S. Peter and the other Pastors of the Church to whome it doth belong to decyde and define such controuersies But when all the Fathers agree it were more then rashenes yea plaine madnesse to goe against the whole streame of all antiquity either in opinions belonging to faith or in the exposition of the Scripture And by this M. Downam may see that though we esteeme the authority of S. Hippolytus much yet it alone is no certayne ground of our Faith though we are farre from reiecting him altogeather or calling him counterfaite as M. Downam doth without any other reason then that he displeaseth him as commonly all other Fathers doe M. Downams third obseruation is that these opinions which Bellarmine calleth errours shew into what absurdities men doe fall when as they will needes be comparing Christ with Antichrist as the Papists in many things doe But he should haue added that these absurdityes fall out when these comparisons are made without any sound or sufficient ground which the Papists do not in any thing at all as appeareth plainely by this whole Treatise and may in part be gathered by this that Bellarmine reiecteth those conceipts that were only grounded vpon these similitudes because they were only builded vpon them and are repugnant to other former groundes 2. Thus M. Downam passeth ouer the errors and commeth to the two probable opinions about which he liketh Bellarmines iudgement well inough in that he thinketh M. Downams iugling neither of them certain but maketh no mention of the other part in which he affirmeth that the latter is very probable for the authority of the Fathers M. Downam liketh also so well of Bellarmines interpretation of the two first places of Scripture that he would challeng them to be his owne or at least to belong to his fellows For in the first he plainely saith that Bellarmine answereth with them and in Gen. 49. Ierem. 8. the second he relateth it so cunningly that if the Reader be not very wary he will easily thinke that Bellarmine were against S. Hierome and that M. Downam had found it out In the third place M. Downam goeth against Bellarmine affirming that the trybe of Ephraim is not left out but vnderstood by the Tribe of Ioseph in which I like his iudgement very well for indeed as Ribera and others vpon this The tribe of Ephraim not omitted Apoc. 7. place proue very well the Tribe of Ephraim is in other places called the Tribe of Ioseph as Psal 77. Ezech. 27. Amos 5. and the reason is because though Ephraim were the yonger brother yet he was preferred
Scripture and many of M. Downams bretheren are ashamed to deny it and by all probability he would be at least afraid to affirme the contrary if he were well examined by the temporall Maiestrate Secondly sayth M. Downam the Pope and Church of Rome vaunt that they alone are the Catholike Church and that all others professing the name of Christ which are not subiect to the Pope or acknowledge not themselues members of the Church of Rome are heretikes or schismatikes This is very true indeed for we thinke that there is but one faith and one Church and whatsoeuer One faith and one Church Christians are out of it must needes be schismatikes at least if not heretikes and I would haue thought that M. Downam would not haue beene so absurd as to deny this common principle agreed of by all which if he had graunted he would not much haue meruailed that we hould our selues to be of the true Church and consequently that all that are not vnited to vs are out of the Church for we do no more then all other Churches and Congregations do And finally M. Downam must of force put some limits to his Church also which if he make so capable that it may comprehend vs also we shall in some sort be beholding vnto him though we cannot requite him with the like But when we know all the conditions that are required to be of his Church it will be an easy matter to inferre that whosoeuer wanteth those conditions must of force be out of it and so this exposition will agree aswell to M. Downams Church and any other as to the Roman How the third exposition may be applied to the Pope M. Downam explicateth not but only affirmeth that this is the most true exposition and agreeth properly to the Pope of Rome Of the truth we shall see in due place but how properly it agreeth to the Pope is not so easy to conceaue For first all the Churches of those which M. Downam taketh to be the only true or at least the best Christians acknowledg not the Pope at all and Catholikes acknowledg him only to be Christs Vicegerent vpon earth which is far from that which Antichrist shall do when he shall so sit in the Temple of God that he shall shew himselfe as if he were God himselfe Concerning the fourth opinion which pleaseth not M. Downam first he denieth it to be the more common opinion as Bellarmine affirmed it was and yet wheras Bellarmin bringeth an cleauen Authors for his opinion M. Downam bringeth but fiue for his foure of which affirme also as much as Bellarmine doth and are by him alleadged to that purpose which M. Downam could not choose but see and therfore thought good to add that the being more common doth not proue it to be the more true for truth goeth not by voyces neither is it See Part. 2. cap. 4. §. 15. to be weighed by the multitude of suffrages but by weight of reason By which you may imagine what a great deale of reason and wit M. Downam thinketh him selfe to haue and how little he attributeth to the Fathers But all this is but in his owne proud and foolish conceipt for all but himselfe will be easily perswaded that there was more wit and true wisdome in the meanest of these ancient Fathers then there is in this insolent Minister though he had many of his fellow Ministers ioyned with him Secondly he denieth this exposition to be more probable because the Temple shall neuer be reedified which were his wonted figure of petitio principij but that he addeth as hath bene shewed Wherfore I will not censure him any further till the Reader hath seene how learnedly he sheweth it and whether the Fathers or he haue more reason and probability in this point Thirdly he addeth that it were not materiall though this exposition were more litterall vnles the litterall were vsuall And to shew that it is not vsuall he obserueth that in all the Epistles by the Temple of God is meant the Church where first the Reader must marke that the word Temple is not vsed in any Epistle but only in this place of the 2. to the Thessalonians and in the 2. to the Corinthians and only in 3. Chapters of them both in the which the faithfull and their bodies are called the Temple of God because the Holy Ghost is present and Temple what it signifieth in the new Testamēt remaineth with them But how can this be applied to Antichrist sitting in the Temple of God and shewing himselfe as if he were God Can Antichrist dwell in the soules and bodies of men as in his Temple Or if he could were this hidden and spirituall sitting any ostentation or shewing of himselfe as God And yet in this place S. Paul affirmeth that Antichrist shall do so for which no doubt he must sit visibly in a visible Temple by which most properly is signified the Temple of Hierusalem yea when S. Paul wrote and for many yeares after only that was so called as Bellarmine proueth and is to be seene in all the foure Euangelists and the Acts of the Apostles Wherfore since this place may yea indeed must litterally be vnderstood of a materiall Temple aswell as many other places of the new Testament it is ridiculous folly in M. Downam to tell vs that in some few places the word Temple is to be taken spiritually also and contrariwise the word Church materially for of this we neuer made question Yea but saith M. Downam to sit in the Temple of God as God is to rule and raigne in the Church of God as if he were a God vpon earth By which expositiō he maketh all Prelats Magistrats which rule and raigne in the Church of God to sit in the Temple of God as God in the manner that S. Paul saith that Antichrist shal sit in the Tēple of God which is a fit interpretation for a Puritanicall Minister who seeketh to peruert the whole order Hierarchy of Gods Church by with drawing the Christian people from the obedience of their lawfull Pastours prepare thē to receaue Antichrist himselfe when he commeth and in the meane time his forerunners the Heretikes of which because Downam seemeth to haue byn a Puritan whē he wrote this M. Downam is one himselfe no meruaile though he pleadeth so hard for himself his fellowes and Maister but if he had meant to deale sincerly he should haue proued his exposition out of the Fathers or answered the authority of those which Bellarm. alleadgeth for himselfe neither of which he once attempteth but yet remitteth vs to another place See part ◠§. 13. 14. 15. where God willing we will examine all that he obiecteth 4. M. Downam hauing in this sort answered to Bellarmines proofes out of the Scripture returneth to his argument ad hominem where first he taketh great exception at Bellarmine for not putting the word true in the premisses and
Church but only their owne fancies because so it seemed necessary for their reputation and credit or some other human and priuate respect how much soeuer they pretend to be only moued by Scripture for of this they admit no more The Protestants haue no probable rule of faith nor any true faith at al. then they please and for the interpretation they haue no other rule then their owne pruate spirit or fancy which is far of from being any probable rule of truth much lesse so certaine as is necessary for the certainty of diuine and supernatural faith to be built vpon And this is the true reason why the Church of God is but one because there is but one rule of fayth from which whosoeuer falleth cannot haue any true faith at all nor belong to the true Church of God The other comparison which M. Downam vseth is much les to the purpose for it is not the Church but the Bishop of Sardis as he himselfe saith that it is agreed by In his Sermō at Lābeth pag. 2. Apoc. ◠1. Interpreters both new and old who had a name that he liued but indeed was dead neither was this death for want of faith but of charity and good workes as is manifest and though it were otherwise yet M. Downam could proue nothing by this comparison except we would belieue his bare word that the Church of Rome were in this case which is our chiefe question and M. Downams wonted figure to take it as granted Wherfore since he can argue no better let vs see how he can answere 7. To Bellarmines first reply vpon Caluins deuise that the Roman Church is not the true Church but that there VIII remaine in it only the ruines and reliques of a true Church M. Downam granteth that all visible Churches may faile and fall away but not the inuisible Church of Christ which he calleth the Catholike Church nor any one sound Christian that is of this inuisible Church In which answere he graunteth Bellarmine as much as he went about to proue that the gates of hell in his opinion haue preuailed against Christs visible Church so that in a whole thousand yeares Christ had not so much as one constant professor of his truth and though I might easily proue that Christ spake of his visible Church and that it The visible Church is to endure to the end of the world was to endure vntill the worlds end yet now I will not trouble my Reader with so needles a digression since the matter is so plaine and euident in it selfe that me thinks any man which maketh accompt of Christ his passion and glory or of his desire to saue soules and to prouide for their conuersion and faith should stop his eares not to heare so great a blasphemy vttered as M. Downam is not ashamed to affirme yet if any man haue any doubt or desire to be more fully satisfied in this point let him read Bellarmine him selfe lib. 3. de Ecclesia militant cap. 12. 13. To Bellarmines second reply M. Downam answereth that it proueth nothing except he suppose that the Church of Rome is the only true Church But he should haue answered it in forme admitted only that which Caluin auoucheth that the Papists hold the ruines of the Church and the foundations yea the buildings themselues halfe throwne downe for out of this only Bellarmine argueth and sheweth that the Protestants can neither haue the whole intire church since in their opinion it is fallen nor the part which remaineth of it since they grant The Protestants cannot haue the Church of Christ but only some new building of their own it to be amōg the Papists to which delēma M. Downā answereth not a word but only braggeth that the Church of Rome may fall yet the Catholicke Church of God may stand yea shall stand c. But he forgetteth himselfe marketh not what his Maister Caluin hath graunted that not only the Church of Rome but euen the very Church of Christ is fallen and that the Papists haue as much as is left of it cōsequētly the Protestāts can only haue some new hereticall building of their owne though M. Downam be neuer so loth to acknowledge it Neither will the example of the Church of Iuda vnder Iosias serue his turne for that was only a reformation of manners and a destruction of Idolatry without any departing from the ancient Church of God in which remained the true succession of Priests and Gods true religion after a visible manner no otherwise then if it should please his Maiesty to put downe heresie and aduance Catholike Religion in his Kingdome which were only to imbrace the true Church of Christ and not to erect any new building as the Protestants haue done as Bellarmine conuinceth 8. M. Downam hauing thus impugned Bellarmines arguments commeth to refute his solutions to their obiections and wheras Bellarmine gaue three solutions to the first See part 2. cap. 2. M. Downam passeth two of them ouer in silence telling vs that he hath taken thē away in another place which how true it is the Reader shall be iudge when we come to that encounter Now let vs see how he refuteth the second solution which Bellarmine giueth that the harlot of which S. Iohn speaketh is Rome Ethnick raigning worshiping Idols and persecuting Christians and not Rome Christian the Apoc. 17. contrary of which M. Downam neuer goeth about to proue with any new argument as he should haue done it being his turne now to argue but only contenteth himselfe to answere Bellarmines proofe which he doth also by halfes for Bellarmine proueth his exposition euidently by the authority of Tertullian S. Hierome and sheweth the impudency of heretikes that are not ashmed to alleadg those authours altogeather against their meaning to proue that S. Iohn speaketh of Rome Christian To all which M. Downam giueth him not a word but is very well content to be thus beaten so that it may not be spoken of but to the other proofe he thinketh himselfe able to say something therfore answereth two wayes 1. that though Popish Rome had not dominion ouer the Kings of the earth and were not drunke with the blould of the Saints and martyrs of Iesus yet we might vnderstand the Apostle thus that that Citty which then had dominion ouer the Kings of the earth and then persecuted the Saints is called Babylon because it was to be the seate or sea of Antichrist So that as you see M. Downam will haue Rome to be called Babylon because it was to be the seate or sea of Antichrist which he supposeth as manifest though Bellarmine in this third solution and before also in one of his arguments both which M. Downam passeth ouer in silence sheweth manifestly that Antichrist shall hate this Babylon and not make it the seat of his kingdome So that this first solution is nothing but M. Downams wonted
lieth lurking vnder the title of the Church as vnder a vizard Magdeburgenses Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. col 435. So that say they the Kingdome of Antichrist consisteth in doctrine which professeth Christ but yet he denieth his Merit and Office And after Iohn say they sheweth that Antichrist shall deny that Christ is come in flesh that is that Christ hath entirely redeemed and saued vs in his flesh but that our good workes do also help vs somthing to saluation Secondly they say that Antichrist shall not make himselfe Christ or God in word but in worke because he shall occupy the place of Christ and God in the Church making himselfe the head of all the faithfull which belongeth only to Christ So the Magdeburgenses loc cit He shall shew himselfe say they for God as that he is Christs vicar and the head of the Church and can fasten loose the articles of Faith Finally they say that Antichrist shall not reiect Idols yea that he shall adore them openly which they proue out of Daniel who cap. 11. after that he had said that Antichrist should rise against all the Gods addeth But he shall reuerence the God Maozim in his place and he shall worship the God whome their Fathers knew not with gold and siluer and precious stones c. And by Maozim the heretikes vnderstand the ornaments of the Churches the Masses Images Reliques and other like So Illyricus in lib. cont Primat and all the rest And that which the Apostle saith 2. Thess 2. that Antichrist shall extoll himselfe aboue all that is called God or that is worshipped they expound the Pope who maketh himselfe the Vicar of Christ and yet vsurpeth greater authority then Christ had Illyricus in catalog testium pag. 3. proueth this for I haue not hitherto seene how they proue the rest because Christ Matth. 24. declared that it is nothing els to shew himselfe to be God yea to extoll himselfe aboue God and his worship then to come in the name of Christ out of which it followeth that the Pope who challengeth himselfe to be Christs Vicar is most truly Antichrist Likewise Christ subiected himselfe to the Scripture saying that he did and suffered those things which he did and suffered that the Scripture might be fullfilled but the Pope sayth that he can dispence against an Apostle or Euāgelist and make those things which seeme right to be wicked c. This is the summe of the chiefest part of our Aduersaries doctrine of Antichrist which is wholy grounded vpon only Scripture falsly explicated by new glosses In signe wherof they alleadge not so much as one Interpreter or Doctour for themselues Wherfore let vs begin with the first that Antichrist shall openly and of set purpose deny Iesus to be Christ and therfore reiect all his Sacraments as the inuentions of a seducer it is proued first out of that which we haue said cap. 12. For if Antichrist shall be by nation and religion ◠Iew and receaued by the Iewes for their Messias as we haue shewed certainly he shall not preach our Christ but shall openly impugne him for otherwise the Iewes should receaue our Christ by Antichrist which is most absurd Besides since there cannot be two Christs how can Antichrist obtrude himselfe for Christ to the Iewes vnles he first teach that our Christ which went before was not the true Christ Secondly that it is proued out of that 1. Iohn 2. VVho is a lyer but he that denyeth Iesus to be Christ And this is Antichrist for all heretikes are called Antichrists who in some sort deny Iesus to be Christ Therfore Antichrist himselfe shall simply and in all sorts deny Iesus to be Christ And it is confirmed because the Diuell is said to worke the mistery of iniquity by heretikes because they hiddenly deny Christ But the comming of Antichrist is called a reuelation because he shall openly deny Christ Besides out of the Fathers S. Hilaryl 6. de Trinit saith that the diuell by the Arians endeauored to perswade men that Christ was not the naturall but the adoptiue Sonne of God but that by Antichrist he wil endeauour to perswade that he is not so much as the adoptiue that he may vtterly extinguish the name of the true Christ S. Hippolyt mart orat de consum mundi saith that Antichrists Character shall be that men shall be compelled to say I deny Baptisme I deny the signe of the Crosse and the like S. August lib. 20. Ciuit. Dei cap. 8. inquireth whether in the time of Antichrists persecution it be credible that any shall be baptized and a◠length he answereth Truly quoth he both the parents shall be so couragious for the baptizing of their children and likewise those who shall then first belieue in Christ that they will ouercome the strong man euen vnbound Where S. Augustine presupposed that Antichrist will not permit them to be baptized and yet that some godly parents will rather suffer any thing then that their children should not be baptized S Hierome in cap. 11. Dan. Antichrist saith he is to rise of a meane nation that is of the people of the Iewes and he shal be so vile and contemptible that Kingly honour shall not be giuen vnto him and by subtilties and deceipt he shall come to be a Prince and this he shall do because he shall frame himselfe to be captaine of the League that is of the Law and Testament of God Where S. Hierome teacheth that Antichrist shall obtaine the Kingdome among the Iewes because he shall shew himselfe zealous for the Iewish Law Sedulius in 2. Thess 2. saith that Antichrist shall restore all the Iewish Cerimonies that he may dissolue the Ghospell of Christ S. Gregory l. 11. ep 3. Because Christ saith he shall compell the people to Iudaize that he may recall the right of the outward Law and subdue to himselfe the perfidiousnesse of the Iewes he will haue the Sabaoth obserued Finally in the time of Antichrist by reason of the vehemency of his persecution the publicke offices and the diuine Sacrifices shall cease as we haue shewed c. 7. By which it is euident that Antichrist will not depraue the Doctrine of Christ vnder the name of Christianisme as the heretikes will but that he will most openly impugne the name and Sacraments of Christ and bring in the Iewish cerimonies which since the Pope doth not it is euident that he is not Antichrist Now that Antichrist will plainely and by name cal himselfe Christ and not his Minister or Vicar that is manifest first out of those words of our Lord Iohn 5. If another come in his owne name him you will receaue Where our Lord seemeth of purpose to haue added in his owne name foreseeing that the Lutherans Caluinists would say that Antichrist shall not come in his owne name but in the name of our Christ as his Vicar Besides the Fathers in many places teach this S. Iren. lib. 5. He will endeauour
places which a little before had bene destroyed by the impious deuises of Tyrants with a new building arise more costly and statly and the huge Temples were erected insteed of meane meeting places Heere S. Cyril Hierosol catech 14. These Kinges which now are by their piety couering this holy Church of the Resurrection in which now we are with siluer and gould built it vp and made it resplendens with siluer ornaments See besides if you list of the magnificence of Christian Temples and the splendour of holy Vessells of the Church Eusebius lib. 3. 4. de vita Constantini S. Greg. Nissen orat de S. Mart. Theodoro S. Greg. Nazianz. orat in Iulian. S. Chrys hom 66. ad Pop. Antioch S. Cyril Alexand. lib. de rect fide ad Regin S. Damas in vit S. Siluestri S. Ambrose lib. 2. de offic cap. 21. S. Hierom. in commen cap. 8. Zachar. S. August in psal 113. S. Paul in natal 3. S. Felicis Prudentius in hymno de S. Laurentio Procop. in lib. de aedificijs Iustiniani Certainly all these liued before the tymes of Antichrist and yet they witnesse that there were such buildinges and ornaments of Christian Temples euery one in their owne age that those which we see now can in no sort be compared to them Illyricus Seauenthly Daniel saith that Antichrist shall inrich his fellowes that the Pope hath done Bellarmine Doubteles he greatly inriched Iohn Eckins Io. Cochlâ—us Io. B. of Rochester Latomus Driedon Tapper Peter à Soto and so many other most learned men who hauing laboured night and daie to suppresse your furies neuer receaued one half-penny of the Bishop of Rome although neither did they desire reward of man who laboured chiefely for the glory of God And if the Bishop of Rome giueth rich benefices to Cardinalls and Bishops he is not so much to be thought to enrich them as the piety of the faithfull who gaue these rents to the Church Illyricus goeth on Paul 2. Thess 2. putteth 5. notes of Antichrist besides the aforesaid The first that he shall sit in the Temple of God This the Pope doth feigning himselfe the Vicar of Christ and reigning in the consciences of men For if he should professe himselfe the enemy of Christ as Mahomet doth he should be out of the Church But S. Paul Illyricus doth not only say that Antichrist shall sit in the Temple of God for euery Bishop sitteth in the Temple of God but he explicateth the manner how he shall sit in the Temple of God saying shewing himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the Pope by thy owne Testimony maketh himselfe the Vicar of God and consequently not God for the Vicar of God cannot be God vnlesse thou feignest lesser greater Gods Besides I aske of thee if the Pope be not out of the Church as thou saist in this place and consequently is within the Church where I pray thee art thou and thine art thou not out of the Church for the Church is one and the Pope sitteth in it wherefore you who are not in that are in none But let vs heare the rest Illyricus The second because he faith that the mystery was then dooing this I thinke to signify that the Bishop of Rome began a little after to list his head aboue others Bellarmine This is that which I briefly noted before following Nicolas Sanders who before had seene and written the same that in your opinion S. Peter is Antichrist and Simon Magus or Nero Christ For S. Paul saith not the mistery shall worke a little after but it worketh now wherefore if this Mystery belongeth to the Bishop of Rome it must nedes belong to S. Peter and if S. Peter which my hart abhorreth to thinke and my hand trembleth to write was Antichrist who seeth not that Simon and Nero S. Peters enemyes were Christ and God But keep to thy selfe such Gods and Christs for we enuy thee not but go forward Illyricus The third because he saith that Antichrist shall come with lying signes which the Pope hath donne as experience witnesseth The fourth that God shall send the efficacy of illusion which hath manifestly hapned in the Papacy for we belieued in all things the Pope more fâ—mely then God We treated before of the miracles of Antichrist cap. 15. and it is a most impudent lye that Illyricus saith of experieÌ„ce for the Popes haue done neither true nor false miracles either in this age or in the former with which notwithstanding they say that Antichirst doth chiefly reigne And that which he addeth of the efficacy of illusion euery man seeth how easily it may be returned vpon our aduersaryes for what greater efficacy of illusion can be imagined then that there should some be found in these tymes who choose rather to belieue two or three Apostataes then the whole Church all Councells and all the Fathers who besides their admirable doctrine and excellent sanctity of life were renowned also with many signes and myracles Now that which Illyricus bringeth out of S. Ambrose to explicate the fifth note is before refuted in the second demonstration with which we proued that Antichrist is not yet come Illyricus in the last place addeth somewhat out of ep 1. ad Tim. 4. In the last tymes same shall depart from the saith The Pope denieth that there is any other saith but hestoricall They shall attend to deceauing spirites The Pope proueth all things with visions of spirits and soules They shall prohibite marriage and the vse of meates both these are most true and manifest of the Pope But good Syr the Pope hath learned of S. Paul that there is one Faith looke thou from whence thou hast learned another faith Besides one God saith the Apostle Ephes 4. one faith one baptisme Neither did S. Paul euer define this one faith to be a confidence relying vpon the promise and word of God as you define it cent 1. lib. 2. col 262. but he saith Rom. 10. This is the word of faith which we preach because if thou confessest in thy mouth one Lord Iesus and hast belieued in thy harte that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saued And Hebr. 11. he saith by Faith we belieue that the worldes were framed by the word of God And who knoweth not that it pertayneth to the sacred history that Christ hath rysen from death and that the worldes were framed by the word of God And yet we name not this one only and true Faith by which we most certainely belieue whatsoeuer God hath vonchsafed to reueale by the Apostles and Prophets an historicall faith but the Catholike faith for we leaue to you the nouelties of wordes That which thou addest that the Pope proueth all thinges with the visions of spirites and soules I know not what spirit hath reuealed vnto thee For we somtime bring somthing out of the apparitions of soules written by approued and ancient authors to confirme those things which belong to the state of