The triple cord or a treatise proving the truth of the Roman religion, by sacred scriptures taken in the literall sense expounded by ancient fathers. interpreted by Protestant writers. With a discouery of sundry subtile sleights vsed by Protestants, for euading the force of strongest arguments, taken from cleerest texts of the foresaid scriptures.

CHAP. X. The true State of the Question, concerning Antichrist.

Whether Antichrist be yet come; And whether the Bi∣shop of Rome can be sayd to be Antichrist. SECT. I.

Catholike Doctrine.

FORMER ages not dreaming of so senseles a Paradoxe, as the Pope being Antichrist, there is not therfore in any ancient Councels any thing to be found concerning the same. But the vniforme(1) consent and doctrine of the Catho∣licke Church is, and euer hath bene, that Antichrist is not yet come, that he is to come neere the ending of the world, that he is to be one man, and to worke strange wonders, that his raigne is to be short, and sundry such like, which cannot be ascribed to any Pope that euer was.

Points not defyned.

Concerning the name of Antichrist, S. Ireneus(2) thinketh it probable, that the name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be applyed

vnto it, but more probable, that it shalbe called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. O∣thers(3) thinke, that he shalbe called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Others,(4) that these figures 666. shall not signify his name, but the tri∣ple preuarication of the Deuill to be fulfilled in Antichrist. Others(5) most truly acknowledge herin their ignorance, auouching that his name is not yet knowne. And most cleere it is, that the foresaid figures do agree with seuerall most di∣stinct Names.

As touching Antichristes Character, some(6) affirme the leters wherewith his name is to be written to be the same.(7) Others, the contemning, and abolishing of the Signe of the Crosse.(8) Others professe their ignorance thereof.

Some vnderstand by Gog and Magog, Heretickes.(10) Others by Gog the Diuell, and by Magog, Antichrists Ar∣my.(11) Others, that the war of Gog & Magog shalbe the warre of Antichrist agaynst the Church. And that by Gog is signifyed Antichrist, and by Magog his Army.

Protestants vntruthes.

(9)Rogers auoucheth that,(14) The Pope doth performe no part of a Christian, but euery part of an Antichristian Bishop, in cor∣rupting the doctrine of the truth with errours and cursed opinions, in polluting the Sacraments of Christ by superstitious Ceremonies, in per∣secuting the Church and Saintes, with fyre and sword, in making merchandise of Gods heritage, in sittting in the Tēple of God as God, shewing himselfe that he is God, and exalting himselfe agaynst all that is called God, or that is worshipped. And(15) his Iurisdiction hath bene, and is iustly renounced and banished out of England by Kings and Parlaments, as by King Edward the 1. 3. and 6. by King Ri∣chard the second, by King Henry the 4. and 8. &c. There is not one Point heere auouched by M. Rogers which is not a grosse lye; and in particular, that the Popes Iurisdiction was not banished out of England by Kings and Parla∣ments, as Rogers pretendeth, will easily appeare, by view∣ing onely F. Parsons Answere to S. Edward Cookes Re∣portes.

Caluin produceth seuerall reasons in proofe that the

Pope is Antichrist, as that,(16) He boasteth, that he can bynd Consciences with what law be pleaseth, and make them subiect to E∣ternall punishments: He at his pleasure either ordayneth new Sacra∣ments, or corrupteth those which are ordayned by Christ; yea altogea∣ther abolisheth them, that in place of them he may substitute those sa∣criledges which himselfe hath inuented. He deuiseth meanes of gaining Saluation altogeather different from the Doctrine of the Ghospell. To conclude, he sticketh not at his pleasure to change the whole Religion. What, I beseech you, is it to extoll a mans selfe aboue all that is repu∣ted God, if this the Pope doth not? If abhominable lyes were strong proofes, certainly these would demonstrate & con∣clude the Pope to be Antichrist.

Protestant Doctrine.

Caluin(17) and other Prot. teach, that Antichrist is al∣ready come, and that not one man, but the whole succession of Popes for many ages, is the said Antichrist. A Point of such importance, that the Prot. assembled at Vapingum Anno 1603. did make it an Article of their faith, that,(18) they should belieue and defend the Bishop of Rome to be properly Anti∣christ, and the sonne of Perdition, foretold in the Word of God.

Whitaker(19) and sundry other Prot. teach that, Boni∣face the third (who liued Anno 607.) and all his Successours to haue bene Antichrists. Rogers obiecting many Crimes against the B. of Rome saith,(20) In respect of which fruites of impieties, the said B. of Rome in the holy Scripture is described to be very Anti∣christ, that wicked man, that man of sinne, the sonne of Perdition, and the Aduersary of God. But how absurd this is, and directly contrary to Scriptures, Fathers, and many others more lear∣ned Prot. I shall presently discouer.

SECT. II. It is proued by the Scriptures, that Antichrist is not yet come; and that the Bishop of Rome cannot be said to be Antichrist.

IN cleerer Confutation of this foolish Paradoxe of the Pope being Antichrist, we must obserue that the word Antichrist, signifyeth one who opposeth himselfe to Christ; for the Proposition, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, doth properly signify opposition; now because those thinges are not only said to be opposite, which impugne one another, but also those which are equi∣pollent, therfore 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in composition, doth sometimes signi∣fy Contrariety, and other tymes equiualence, but neuer sub∣ordination, which the word Vicar doth, when the Pope is titled the Vicar of Christ. Againe, in Scriptures he is called Antichrist(1) who is extolled aboue all that is called God, and(2) who denieth Iesus to be Christ, and affirmeth himselfe(3) to be Christ, none of which is to be the Vicar, but the professed Enemy of Christ. And in this sense is vnderstood the word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. by Henricus(4) Stephanus the great Grecian of Geneua.

But to come to the matter it selfe, Christ our Sauiour sayth,(5) I am come in the name of my Father, and you receiue me not, if another shall come in his owne Name, him you will receiue. Here our Sauiour speaking of Antichrist, (as Fathers(6) gene∣rally vnderstand) opposeth not a kingdome or succession of men to himselfe, but another person, whom S. Paul calleth(7) The man of sinne, the sonne of Perdition; whom Christ also foretelleth, that the Iewes will receiue, which yet they ne∣uer did the Pope.

S. Paul speaking of Antichrist giueth this good Coun∣saile,(8) Let no man seduce you by any meanes for vnles there come a Reuolt first and the man of sinne be reueyled, the sonne of Perdition, which is an aduersary, and is extolled aboue all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himselfe as if he were God. This is spoken of Antichrist by our

Aduersaries(9) Confession, & yet almost euery word doth conuince them. For first it is said, that there shall come a Reuolt, or falling away before Antichristes comming, which whether it be vnderstood of the Roman Empyre, (as sundry(10) Fathers, and the Prot. Piscator(11) do thinke) or of Fayth and Religion (as some Prot. contrary to all Scriptures do imagine) is yet in neither sense performed before that tyme in which Protestants place Antichristes first comming.

Secondly, these words, The man of sinne, the sonne of Per∣dition, he sitteth shewing himselfe, do signify one determinate person; and the rather in that the Greeke Article is prefiged, which doth determine(12) the signification to one certaine thing: which is yet more manifest by those words of S. Iohn,(13) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: where speaking of Antichrist, who is to be one man, the Article is set before, but speaking of Antichrist as it is taken for all such as any wayes impugne Christ, the Article is omitted.

Thirdly Antichrist must be not only an(14) Aduersa∣ry to Christian Profession, but also (as(15) Zanchius vnderstandeth the sayd words) an open and professed Ad∣uersary, such an one, as shall(16) deny the Father, and the Sonne, and extoll himselfe aboue all that is called God; shewing himselfe as though he were God, not(17) caring for any God; And,(18) will come in his owne Name, causing those to be(19) slayne, that will not adore his Image. None of all which, yet did any Pope.

Fourthly, he is to sit in the Temple of God, whereby is vn∣derstood the Temple of Hierusalem, which Antichrist will seeke to reedify. So S. Iohn telling that Enoch and Elias shalbe slaine by Antichrist, affirmeth, that,(20) The Beast shall kill them, and their Corpes shall lye in the streetes of the great Citty (which spiritually is called Sodome, and Aegypt) where also their Lord was crucifyed. Whereby is euidently vnderstood Hieru∣salem, there, and not at Rome, Christ being crucifyed: the same also being called Sodome by the Prophet Esay in his vision concerning(21) Iude and Hierusalem, saying:(22) Heare yee the word of our Lord, Princes of Sodome, giue eare to the

Law of our God, yee People of Gomorrha. Yea the word (spiritu∣ally) doth plainly argue, that thereby is meant one materiall and particular place, spiritually called, in regard of the wic∣kednes, Sodome and Aegypt.

Fiftly, Antichristes Raigne must be but of short conti∣nuance, namely, as Christ preached but three yeares and a halfe; so likewise to Antichrist must be permitted no longer tyme for his preaching or teaching. This terme is mentio∣ned by the Prophet(23) Daniel, and S. Iohn, to be A tyme and tymes and halfe a tyme: or as some Prot. translate,(24) A tyme, two tymes, and halfe a tyme. For as(25) Lyra (a naturall borne Iew) S. Austine & S. Hierome do obserue, the word tymes, without any other determinate number, signifyeth according to the Hebrew phrase, two yeares, & the word, tyme, in the singular number, one yeare: which sayd vnder∣standing of times for yeares, is made yet more euident by the same Prophet Daniel, who by the like phrase of(26) se∣uen tymes, signifyeth (as Protestants(27) themselues do vn∣derstand him) the seauen yeares of Nabuchodonosors chan∣ged Estate.

To this yet further adde, that the continuance of An∣tichristes Persecution is elswhere explayned in a prescribed certaine tyme, not only of fourty two(28) moneths, but also of a(29) thousand, two hundred, sixty dayes: both which do lite∣rally amount to the foresaid tyme of three yeares, and a halfe. Now, there was neuer any Pope which by any Prot. was imagined to be Antichrist, that raigned precisely three yea∣res and a halfe. Add also that the shortnes in generall of An∣tichrists raigne, is in many places of Scripture taught, as where it is said,(30) (his) dayes for the Elect shalbe shortned: that, he(31) hath but a short tyme: He(32) must tarry a short tyme: He(33) must be loosed for a little season. And lastly that Antichri∣stes raigne(34) is to be but a little before the end of the world. By all which it doth euidently appeare, that Anti∣christes Raigne must be but of short continuance, & ther∣fore Prot. making the Pope Antichrist, for these thousand yeares last past, do therby impugne the cleerest Scriptures.

Now, wheras sundry(35) Prot. would euade by affir∣ming,

that in those foresaid numbers, of a tyme, two tymes & halfe, 42. moneths, and 1260. dayes, S. Iohn vseth a certaine number or tyme, for an vncertaine, not vnderstanding ther∣by indeed any definite certainty of tyme at all. This yet is insufficient, for though the numbers, 10. 100. 1000. should be vsed sometimes in the Scriptures for an vncertaine time, yet that course houldeth only in such like full and perfect numbers, wheras the other foresaid numbers now in exam∣ple or question, being each of them compounded of a mixt variety or inequality of numbers, as one, two and a halfe; fourty and two, and 1260. are vnlike to the other full and equall numbers, of 10. 100. 1000. And therfore not subiect to the like vnderstanding. Neither could that variety of numbers be to any end, if only an vncertaine number be vnderstood. But this is so euident, that, Foxe(36) with sundry other Prot. do all of them vnderstand heerby a cer∣tayne definite tyme, answerable to the euent thereby for∣tould.

In the determining of which euent, Protestants do much vary amongst themselues; for(37) Danaeus, by a tyme, two tymes and halfe a tyme, vnderstandeth the 350. yeares, during which the Waldenses were persecuted. And by(38) the 42. moneths, & 1260. dayes, he vnderstandeth three yeares and a halfe, in which Husse and Hierome of Prague preached.(39) Fox & Ford do by the 1260. dayes vnderstand the tyme of Herods first per∣secution: And by the 42. Months,(40) Fox after great stu∣dy and doubtfulnes had thereof, vpon a suddayne recey∣ueth, to vse his words (arcano quodam admonitionis sibilo) by a certayne secret whispering admonitiō, the sense therof to be, a Sab∣both of yeares, which, sayth he, amount to 294. yeares, wherein the Primitiue Church was persecuted before Constātines time. By the 1260. dayes, and the 42. monethes Brocard(41) and Nappier do vnderstand the preuayling of the Papacy for the last 1260. yeares, since the tyme of Siluester and Constantine. So va∣riable and vncertayne are Prot. in their determining the tyme of Antichristes coming and Raygne.

But supposing these different Interpretations were all of them true, as indeed not any one is, neither can any thing be

alledged in good proofe thereof, yet none of them do proue the Pope to be Antichrist: for first the(42) Waldenses, Husse and Hierome of Prague, were in the opinion of Prot. con∣fessed Papists, and therefore in no danger to be persecuted by the Pope. But being truly heretickes, and holding sun∣dry grosse errours, which Protestants disclayme, and for which they were most iustly punished, this strongly argu∣eth the Pope to be a faythfull seruant of Christ, not Anti∣christ. Secondly Herods Persecution was before any Pope was. Thirdly the Persecution of the Primitiue Church, du∣ring the sayd supposed 294. yeares vntill Constantines ty∣me, was done not by the Pope, but by the then Heathen Emperours, who persecuted the then Popes of Rome.

Fourthly the 1260. yeares of the Papacy preuayling since the tyme of Siluester and Constantine (the confessed antiquity of the Papacy being thereby deduced vp to the Ancient Fathers of those purer tymes) doth argue the Pope to be a true Bishop and Prophet, rather then Antichrist: as also the Church hauing bene grieuously persecuted before Constantine, if it hath also bene persecuted euer since till now, then the Predictions of the Prophets concerning the Churches florishing, quiet, and increase, were not as yet performed, which were wicked to thinke.

But at Antichrists coming, the persecution shalbe such,(43) as was not since the beginning of the world, nor shalbe: In so much as then Sathan(44) shalbe loosed out of his Prison, and shall go forth and seduce the Nations that are vpon the foure corners of the Earth: so that the persecution shalbe so much more grie∣uous then all former, by how much the(45) Diuell being loosed, and set at liberty, may tempt and tyrannize more then when he was bound: yea, as then the Diuine Sacrifice(46) shalbe taken away, which cleerly hitherto is vnaccō∣plished. And lastly the persecutions raysed by sundry Hea∣then Emperours, as Nero, Domitian, and Diocletian, did both for cruelty and number of persons persecuted, incom∣parably exceed all pretended cruelties of all Popes in all ages.

The same also is confirmed by that of S. Iohn,(47) The

Angell &c. apprehended the Old Serpent, which is the Diuell and Sa∣than, and bound him for a 1000. yeares &c. that he seduce no more the Nations, till the thousand yeares be consummate &c. And when the 1000. yeares shall be consummate, Sathan shalbe loosed out of his prison &c, and shall seduce the Nations &c. Heer though the nū∣ber of a 1000. yeares be vncertayne, as signifying more yea∣res, yet to signify fewer yeares it cannot: a thing so euident, that some Prot. do(48) accordingly affirme the same, colle∣cting thence that Antichrists coming is to be(49) after the first 1000. yeares from Christ. To which purpose also Hospinian speaking of the pretended corruption, which, as he affir∣meth, preuayled at the end of the 1000. yeares after Christ, sayth,(50) Now began to draw neare the end of the Period of 1000. yeares, whereof Iohn in his Apocalips c. 20. writeth, then Sathan is to be loosed agayne. Willet affirmeth that Wicliffe taught the sayd 1000. yeares to end(51) Anno Domini 1600. And that then Antichrist should beginne to appeare.(52) Fox and(53) Wal∣ter Bruth thinke the sayd 1000. yeares to end 1300. Hence it now appeareth that most Prot. placing Antichrists coming within the first 1000. yeares next after this Reuelation (du∣ring which tyme at the least Sathan was bound not to se∣duce the Church) do thereby impugne the sacred Scriptures, and their owne other writers.

Before this persecution to be raysed by Antichrist,(54) The Ghospell shalbe preached in all the world, for a Testimony to all Nations; so as no Nation may excuse its Infidelity. But this so generall preaching hath not yet been performed, as is eui∣dent in seuerall Kingdomes of the East and West Indies late∣ly found out, wherein no memory at all of Christ, or his Ghospell was found; neyther will it suffice to answere, that here it is not spoken of all the world absolutly, but only by a figure, the whole is taken for a part; for otherwise S. Paul should haue sayd vntruly(55) Into all the Earth hath the sound of them gone forth, and vnto the ends of the whole world the wordes of them. And(56) elswhere speaking of the Ghospell he sayth, In the whole world it is, and fructifyeth and groweth: And(57) is preached among all Creatures, that are vnder heauen. But Christ maketh this preaching in all the world, to be a signe of the

end thereof, for so he immediatly addeth, and then shall come the consummation; wherefore if this preaching were not taken to be properly in all the world, but only in some parts ther∣of, then it were no signe, for in that sense, in the first twē∣ty yeares after Christ, the Ghospell was preached by the Apostles in all the world: neyther in that sense could it be a Testimony to all Nations at the day of Iudgement. Besides, it was promised properly to Christ, that(58) All Nations shall serue him, and he dyed generally for all, and therefore in the (39) Apocalips, the Elect are described out of all Nations,(59) and peoples, & Tribes: and in the same sense are these words vnderstood by S. Austine(60) S. Hierome and Origen.

Now, to the place obiected from the Romans, S. Aust.(61) answereth, that S. Paul tooke the preterperfectēse for the fu∣ture, as Dauid also did, whose words they were: And that in the other place, S. Paul affirmed the Gospell, to be in all the world, not actually, but virtually, because the seed of Gods word was cast by the Apostles into the world, which fructi∣fiing & increasing, might fil the whole world, as one putting fire to seuerall parts of a Citty, may truly be sayd to haue burned the whole Citty, because he placed the fyre, which by litle and litle increasing, consumed the whole Citty. It may also be answered with S. Hierome(62) and S. Tho∣mas, that the same of the Ghospell came to all Nations then knowne in the tyme of the Apostles, and that heereof only speaketh S. Paul.

Enoch and Elias are reserued aliue, that they may op∣pose themselues to Antichist at his coming, and preserue the Elect in the faith of Christ, and at length conuert the Iewes; To which purpose it is said, Behould(63) I will send you Elias the Prophet, before the coming of the great and fearfull day of our Lord &c. Elias(64) indeed shall come, and restore all thinges.(65) And, I will giue to my two witnesses, and they shall prophecy 1260. dayes. Some answere that the words of Malachy are to be vnderstood of S. Iohn Baptist, of whom Christ said,(66) he is Elias that is for to come. But the truth is, that though S. Iohn Baptist, in regard of his office of being Precursor be∣fore

the first coming of our Sauiour, as also in regard of his preaching vnto the people, was called Elias, in that Elias is to be the Precursor before the second coming of Christ, & is to preach and conuert the Iewes; yet that the former wor∣des are to be vnderstood of the true Elias it is playne, in that the Prophet speaketh of the second coming of Christ, when he shall come to Iudgment, to wit, at the great and fear∣full day: whereas the first coming, when S. Iohn Baptist came, was not to iudge, but to be iudged, not to destroy, but to saue. Besides S. Luke explaineth the same saying,(67) And he shall go before him in the spirit and vertue of Elias; and our Sauiour himselfe, euen after S. Iohns death, auouched that,(68) Elias should come and restore all things.

Some also reply, that by the two witnesses are vnder∣stood all the faithfull Ministers, which God rayseth vp in the tyme of Antichrist, as Luther, Swinglius, Caluin &c. But this is idle, for of the two witnesses S. Iohn sayth,(69) They shall prophesy 1260. dayes, cloathed with sackcloathes, they shall haue power to turne waters into bloud, and to strike the Earth with all plague. Antichrist shall kill them, and their bodies shall lye in the streetes in the great Citty &c. where their Lord also was crucified. And, after three dayes and a halfe, the spirit of lyfe from God shall enter into them. And, they shall go vp to heauen in a Cloud, & their Enemies see them: Now that all, or any of these particulars were performed in Luther, or any other Prot. Minister, I thinke no man will auouch.

At Antichrists, coming his name and Character shalbe so knowne, as that,(70) He shall make all litle and great, & rich and poore &c. to haue a Caracter in their right hand, or in their fore∣heades. And, that no man may buy or sell, but he that hath the Chara∣cter, or the name of the Beast, or the number of his name. Now what this name or Character is, hitherto is vnknowne.

Antichrist, at his Coming will worke many strange si∣gnes and feigned miracles, his(71) Coming is according to the operation of Sathan in all power, and lying signes and wonders.(72) And both he and his Ministers(73) shall shew great signes and won∣ders: Yea he shall seeme to make fyre(73) to come downe from heauen: and to make(74) the Image of the Beast to speake. In so

much that(75) All the Earth wilbe in admiration of him. Now neuer did any Pope worke such wonders as these. But the greatest wonder to me is, that so many men endowed with comon sense and reason as Prot. are, and professing to be∣lieue the sacred Scriptures for most true, should so directly contrary to all sense and reason, and to so many cleerest textes of sacred Writ, maintayne a Paradoxe so grosse and absurd.

SECT. III. That the Fathers expound the Scriptures agreably with Catholikes, in proofe that the Pope cannot be Anti∣christ.

S. Hierome(1) and S. Damascene, do interprete the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to be one who doth emulate and op∣pose himselfe to Christ. The Centuristes confesse that,(2) S. Austine teacheth the Etymology of Antichrist, in Epist. Ioannis, Tract. 3. He is called Antichrist in Latin, who is contrary to Christ &c. Some vnderstand Antichrist to be so called, because he is to come before Christ &c. It is not so said, it is not so written, but Antichrist, that is contrary to Christ &c. Likewise in Tract. de Antichristo, desi∣ring to know of Antichrist, first you shall marke why he is so called to wit, for that he wilbe contrary to Christ in all thinges &c. he will dis∣solue the Euangelicall law, and will recall into the world the worshi∣ping of Deuils.

S. Austine(3) himselfe expounding those wordes of S. Iohn,(4) He that speaketh of himselfe, seeketh his owne glory, affirmeth that, This shalbe he who is called Antichrist, extolling himselfe, as the Apostle sayth▪ aboue all that is called God, and which is worshiped: for our Lord declaring that he will seeke his owne glory, not the glory of the Father, sayth to the Iewes: I came in the name of my Father, and you receiued me not, another shall come in his owne name, him you will receiue; he shewed, that they would receiue Antichrist, who would seeke the glory of his owne name. And the same exposition of this place is giuen by S. Chrysostome

S. Cyril. S. Ambrose, S. Irenaeus, and Ruffinus.

Concerning the tyme of Antichristes raigne, S. Ire∣naeus(5) alleadging those wordes of Daniel, A tyme, tymes, & halfe a tyme, that is (saith he) three yeares and sixe monthes, in which Antichrist cōming, shall raigne vpon the Earth. Hipolitus(6) writing vpon those wordes of Daniel,(7) He will con∣firme the Couenant to many one weeke, and in the halfe of the weeke shall the hoast and the sacrifice faile, sayth: When Daniel said, he will confirme his Couenant to many one weeke, is signifyed seauen yeares. The Prophets shall preach halfe a weeke &c. that is three yeares and a halfe Antichrist shall raigne vpon Earth, after his king∣dome and glory shalbe taken away. S. Chrysostome affirmeth,(10) that,(8) Many Scriptures do signify, and especially S. Iohn in his Re∣uelation, that Antichrists kingdome is to continue three yeares and sixe moneths. Saint Hierome writing vpon the 11. Chapter of Daniel, teacheth that, Ours do better and more truly ex∣pound, that in the end of the world Antichrist is to do these thinges, who is to ryse from the Iewes &c. and is to persecute the Saintes three yeares and a halfe, that is, 1260. dayes, and after to perish vpon the famous and holy mountayne. And also,(9) Tyme signifieth a yeare, Tymes, according to the propriety of the Hebrew speach, who also haue the Duall number, prefigure two yeares, and halfe a tyme sixe mon∣thes, in which the Saintes are permitted to the power of Antichrist. S. Cyril: Antichrist shall raigne only three yeares and a halfe, which we affirme not from Apocriphall Bookes, but from the Prophet Da∣niel S. Austine is so full herein, that he doubteth not to write, that,(11) he who being halfe a sleepe, readeth these thinges, may not doubt of the most cruel raigne of Antichrist against the Church, al∣though it is to be indured but a short tyme. For tyme, and times, and halfe a tyme, are one yeare, and two yeares, and a halfe. And by this it is manifest to be three yeares and a halfe; the number also of the dayes being afterwards set down: sometymes in the Scriptures it is declared by the number of moneths.

S. Austine likewise affirmeth that he shall spring from the Iewes, saying.(12) As our Authors say, Antichrist shalbe borne of the people of the Iewes, of the Tribe of Dan, according to the Pro∣phet, saying,(13) Be Dan a snake in the way, a serpent in the path. This Prophecy is vnderstood of Antichrist, by(14) Irenaeus,

Hippolitus, Ambrose, Austine, Prosper, Theodoret, Gre∣gory, and many others vpon the 7. Chapter of the Apoca∣lyps, where they suppose that S. Iohn did omit Dan, from amongst the Elect of the Israeliticall Tribes, in detestation of Antichrist to be borne of that Tribe. And certaine it is, that the Iewes will receiue and follow him for their Mes∣sias, as our Sauiour himselfe sayth,(15) If another shall come in his owne name, him you will receiue; which maketh it very pro∣bable, that he shalbe a Iew borne, else they would not so easily admit him.

The Fathers also teach, that Antichrist shall sit in the Temple of Hierusalem, and not in the Church of Rome. S. Cyril demaundeth,(16) What Temple saith the Apostle? In the Temple of the Iewes which is left: for God forbid that it should be in this, in which we are. S. Hilary affirmeth that,(17) Anti∣christ is therfore called by Daniel, Abhomination, because comming against God, he challengeth Gods honour to himselfe &c. And, recei∣ued by the Iewes, shall sit in the place of Sanctification, that where God was inuocated by the prayers of Saintes, there he receiued by Infidels, should be worshiped with Gods honour. S. Gregory Na∣zianzen writeth:(18) As concerning this place, The Abhomina∣tion of desolation standing in the holy Place, they say, that the Tem∣ple of Hierusalem is to be built againe, and Antichrist is to be belie∣ued to be Christ, by the Iewes; and that he is to sit therin, and is to be thought to be the king of the whole world: But he shall come at the Desolation and ruine of the world. Arethas writing vpon the foresaid wordes of the Apocalyps, auoucheth that,(19) He shall cast their bodies vnburyed into the streetes of Hierusalem: for there shall he raigne as king of the Iewes. And the like is taught by S. Irenaeus(20) and Hypolitus.

Concerning Enoch and Elias their Coming to resist Antichrist, S. Ambrose writing vpon these wordes of S. Paul,(21) I thinke that God hath shewed vs Apostles the last, as it were deputed to death, expoundeth them thus:(22) This ther∣fore doth he apply to his person, because he was alwayes in need, suffe∣ring persecutions and pressures aboue the rest, euen as Enoch & Elias are to suffer, who are to be Apostles in the last tyme for they are to be sent before Christ to prepare the people of God and to strengthen all

Churches for the resisting of Antichrist, who, the Apocalyps doth te∣stify, 〈…〉〈…〉 suffer Persecution, and be slayne. And the like is taught m••••t plainly by(23) S. Austine, saying, That Elias shall conuert the Iewes to Christ, vltimo tempore, before the end of the world &c. is most commonly belieued and taught of vs Christians, and is held as a point of Infallible truth, for we may well hope of the comming of him before the Iudgment of Christ, whom we do truly be∣lieue to liue in body at this houre, without euer hauing tasted of Death.

But the Ancient Fathers were so wholy Romane Ca∣tholike in this Point, as that Fulke confesseth, saying,(24) Indeed most of the Ancient Fathers did Iudge that the Romane Em∣pire should first be decayed, before Antichrist were reueyled. Wher∣of also sayth Caluin,(25) For as much as they haue expounded this place, of the defection of the Romane Empire, it is more friuolous then that it needeth any long Confutation: and I do meruayle that so many writers, otherwise learned and witty, haue bene deceyued in so easy a thing, but that when one had erred, the rest without Iudge∣ment followed the troupe. Of this also write the Centurists, Austine in his Treatise of Antichrist, declareth in few words the tyme of Antichristes comming, therefore the Apostle Paul from hence affir∣meth, Antichrist not to come before into the world, vnles first a de∣parture shall come, that is, vnlesse all Kingdomes shall depart from the Romane Empyre, which were before subiect vnto it. So many se∣••erall wayes do the Ancient Fathers testify from the Scrip∣tures, that the Pope is not Antichrist.

SECT. IIII. That Prot. agree with Catholikes in the Doctrine of the Pope not being Antichrist.

THough nothing be more frequently declaimed in Prot. Pulpits, thē the Pope being Antichrist; yet how much that foolery is disclaymed by the learnedst Prot. Writers, this present Section shall testify. M. Foxe writing vpon the 11. Chapter of the Apocalyps, where S. Iohn mentio∣neth

Antichrists Raigne to be (42) moneths, acknowledgeth that,(1) It cannot be that a long tyme should be figured by the same short tyme, for by a short tyme, a short tyme is signifyed; to which end he also alledgeth the testimonies of Lambertus & Chy∣traeus. Wherefore it cannot be imagined, that the Popes of Rome for so many hundred yeares to haue bene Antichrists.

Bucer is of opinion that Mahomet(2) is that very Antichrist, who for many ages hath subiected most Nations of the (belieuing) Gentiles vnto the bondage of Sathan. Fox affirmeth that,(3) Al∣though, as S. Iohn sayth, there be many Antichrists, which are fore∣runners, yet to speake of the head and principall Antichrist he is to come in the later end of the world, whereby is meant no doubt the Turke. And he maketh the like exposition of(4) Sathan being loosed at the end of the 1000. yeares, which he vnderstandeth to be directly meant of the Turke, and but Anagogically of the Pope. Peter Martyr determineth as well(5) Mahomet, as the Pope to be Antichrist.

Zanchius(6) hauing recyted the opinion both of the Papists and Prot. concludeth, that(7) It may not be denyed, but that neere the end of the world, a certaine man shall aryse in the Church of Christ, who shall exceed all the other Antichristes in ma∣lice, power, and other wickednes: And of this man may be vnderstood the Prophecy of Iohn and Daniel, of 3. yeares and a halfe, in which he shall raigne.

Lambertus in his Treatise much commended by Fox,(8) affirmeth that(9) Antichrist is not yet come: and that the foresaid place(10) to the Thessalonians, is to be vnderstood of an open professed Enemy; as also that(11) the Pope although he doth (in his opinion) corrupt with his lyes, the true sense of the Myste∣ries of faith; yet for so much, as he doth not openly forbid to belieue them, he therfore is not that great Antichrist. For which beliefe D. Doue reproueth some of his owne Brethren, saying,(12) Some learned Prot. being ouer much modest, make a doubt whether Antichrist be yet reueyled or not.

Add hereunto that such Prot. as do absolutely affirme the Pope to be Antichrist, do yet mainly differ in the assi∣gning of the Man, or the tyme of his comming: for first, Fulke,(13) Whitaker, and others do giue instance of Boni∣face

the third Anno 607. Nappier collecteth the yeare of his comming, to be about(14) Anno 313. and that Pope(15) Siluester was the man. Bullingers Iudgment is, that Anti∣christ should appeare(16) that fatall yeare of our Lord 763. And another Prot. wryter(17) assigneth yet a longer time, and nameth Hildebrand (who was Gregory the seauenth) and who liued(18) 1074. Fox(19) thinketh his comming to be Anno 300. So variable is the Collection which Prot. make from Scriptures, concerning the person, and tyme of Antichrist: Wheras no doubt, at his comming, he will be easily knowne by reason of the great wonders he shall worke, the strange persecutions he shall rayse, and sundry such like, so plainly foretould vs by the Scriptures themsel∣ues. And yet this their confessed incertainty notwithstan∣ding, Fox termeth this point,(20) the head, and body of all Controuersies. But the Premises considered, I thinke I may more truly terme it a mere fiction, begunne vpon splene or choller, and desperatly continued without Scripture, or reason.

SECT. V. Obiections from Scriptures that the Pope is Antichrist, answered.

SVndry(1) Prot. do vrge for their chiefest obiection, that by the(2) 7. hilles vpon which the woman sitteth, is described the Citty of Rome, and consequently Rome is Antichrists seate. But I answere first, In the same verse, those 7. hilles, are said to be 7. Kings. Secondly,(3) S. Austine and others do vnderstand by the Whore, the vniuersall Citty of the Diuel, which in the Scriptures is often called Babylon, and is op∣posed to the Citty of God, which is his Church: and by 7. mountaines they vnderstand the whole cōpany of the Proud, and especially the Kings of the Earth. Thirdly, though ther∣by be vnderstood Rome, (as some rather(4) thinke) yet see∣ing the whore is thē sayd to be in being, for fiue of the Kings mentioned,(5) vpon which the woman sate, are sayd to be then

fallen, and that the sixt then(6) was, whereby it is manifest that the woman her selfe was then also in being, it cannot be vnderstood of the Church of Rome, whose(7) fayth was then renowned in the whole world, but of the heathen Citty(8) which hath Kingdome ouer the Kings of the Earth, and which was(9) drunken of the bloud of the Saints, and of the bloud of the Martyrs of Iesus. In which manner was the Citty of Rome, during the extremest Persecutions of Nero, Domitian, and other Ro∣man Emperours.

But some reply that Antichrist is to sit(10) in the Temple of God, and therefore in the true Church; and whereas we an∣swere, that by the Temple of God, is vnderstood the Temple of Hierusalem, they vrge that,(11) that long since was destroied and shall neuer agayne be reedifyed. But that thereby is truly meant the Temple of Hierusalem, is plaine, as is(12) be∣fore proued; as also in that in the Scriptures of the New Testament, by the Temple of God, are neuer vnderstood the Churches of Christians, but alwayes the Temple of Hierusalem: yea the Ancient fathers both Greeke and Latine, for diuers ages did forbeare to call the Churches, Temples, but eyther Oratories, or howses of prayer, or the like. And this they did eyther in regard, that as then they had no Temples, but places in priuate houses appointed for prayer, or else that thereby they might distinguish the Church from the Synagogue; the memory of the Iewish Temple, being as then fully a∣bolished: for which reason lykewise the Apostles in their writings, called not Christian Priests, Priests, but eyther Bishops, or Seniors.

Further, the Iewes who are to receyue Antichrist for their Messias and King, will receyue none that sitteth not in Hierusalem, they dreaming nothing more, then of resto∣ring Hierusalem and the Temple: yea at Antichrists coming Rome (if thereby be vnderstood the(13) harlot) shalbe made desolate, and burnt with fyre, so that it cannot be now sayd to be the Seat of Antichrist. Lastly, if Antichrist be to sit in the true Church, and to be accompted the head and Prince thereof, as Prot.(14) teach, and withall, if the Pope of Rome be Antichrist, as they further auoch, then it euidēt∣ly

followeth, that the Pope sitteth in the true Church, and is the head thereof. Now there is but one true Church, and there is but one Christ, which thing also(15) Caluin con∣fesseth, therefore Prot. and all others who are not in the Church which is vnder the Pope, are out of the true Church of Christ.

Caluin foreseeeing this great inconuenience to follow, answereth,(16) That as oftentymes buildings are so pulled downe, that the foundations and ruines remayne; so Christ hath not suffered his Church eyther to be ouerthrowne by Antichrist from the foundation, or to be layd euen with the ground &c. but euen after the very wasting, he willeth that the building halfe pulled downe, shold yet remayne. But this maketh against Caluin, for first, if the ruines of the Church of Christ only remaine, then the Church is ruinous, and consequently the gates of hell haue preuayled against it, contrary to our Sauiours promise.(17) Secondly, if the Church hath suffered ruine, and the ruines and foundation, yea the building halfe pulled downe, be possessed by the Po∣pe, then Prot. haue no Church, for the Church entyre and perfect, according to them is fallen to ruine, and the ruines are vnder Antichrist. What then haue they? Peraduenture some new building; but in that it is new, it is not the house of Christ: Who then (not besotted) doth not plainly see that it is far more safe to remaine in a Church, (though rui∣nous and halfe fallen) then in no Church? And who would thinke (considering the premises, and much more which may be gathered from the Fathers and otherwise) that men indued with common sense and reason, would endeauour to defend a fancy so idle, as this conceipt of the Pope being Antichrist?

Notes

• (1)

  Bellar. de sum. Ponti∣fice l. 3. c. 1. &c. Rhem. Testam. A∣poc. 13. & in 2. Thess. 2.
• (2)

  L. 5.
• (3)

  Primasius, Anselmus, Richardus in hunc locum. Apoc.
• (4)

  Rupertus in Apoc.
• (5)

  Iren l. 5. Arethas in hunc locum Apoc.
• (6)

  Primasius, Beda, Ruper∣tus.
• (7)

  Hippol. Orat. de con∣sum. mundi.
• (8)

  Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 3. c. 11.
• (10)

  Aug. de Ciuit. l. 20. c. 11.
• (11)

  Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 3. c. 17.
• (9)

  Hier. in Ezech. c. 38.
• (14)

  Def. of the Artic. art. 37. p. 210.
• (15)

  Ib. Art. 37. p. 211.
• (16)

  In 2. Thess. 2.
• (17)

  Instit. l. 4 c, 7 §. 23.24.25. Whi∣tak. of Anti∣christ. pa. 66.
• (18)

  Article 41.
• (19)

  De Ec∣cles, p. 144. Fulke in his Answ. to a Counterf. Cath. p. 27. Downham of Anti∣christ. p. 4.
• (20)

  Def. of the Art. art. 37. p. 211.
• (1)

  2. Thess. 2.
• (2)

  1. Ioan. 2.
• (3)

  Mat. 24.
• (4)

  In his Thesaurus.
• (5)

  Io. 5.43.
• (6)

  See hereafter. next. sec. 3.
• (7)

  2. Thess. 2.3.
• (8)

  2. Thess. 2.34.
• (9)

  Lamber∣tus, Anti∣christus, &c. p 75.
• (10)

  Ambr. in 2 Thess. 2. Hier. q. 11. ad Algasiam. Aug. de Ciu. Dei. l. 10. c. 19. Cyr. Catech. 15. Chrysost. in 2. Thess 2.
• (11)

  In Epi∣stolas Pauli p 468.
• (12)

  Epiphan. haer, quae est Samaritano∣rum.
• (13)

  1. Ep. 2.18.
• (14)

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 2. Thess. 2.4.
• (15)

  In Pauli Epistolas p. 245.
• (16)

  Ep. Io. 2.22.
• (17)

  Dan. 11.37.
• (18)

  Io. 5.43.
• (19)

  Ap. 13.15.
• (20)

  Apoc. 11.8.
• (21)

  C. 1.1.
• (22)

  Ib. ver. 10.
• (23)

  Dan. 7.25. Apoc. 12.14.
• (24)

  Dan. 12.7. in the Engl. Bible of Anno 1576.
• (25)

  In Dan. c. 12. Aug. de Ciu. Dei. l. 20. c. 23. Hier. in Dan. c. 7.
• (26)

  Dan. 4.20.
• (27)

  See the Marg. No∣tes of the Engl. Bible of Anno 1576. in Dan. 4.31. And see Fr. du. Ion. in Reuel. 12. p. 151.
• (28)

  Apoc. 11.12. & 13.5.
• (29)

  Apoc. 12.6. & 11.3.
• (30)

  Mat. 24.22.
• (31)

  Apoc. 12.12.
• (32)

  Apoc. 17.10.
• (33)

  Apoc. 20.3.
• (34)

  Dan 7.9.10.12. A∣poc. 20.3.4. Mat. 24.14. 2. Thess. 2.8.1. Io. 2.18.
• (35)

  Chytraeus in Apoc c. 12 & 13. Bul∣ling. in Apo. c. 11. Ser. 46. fol. 141. & ser. 47. fol. 143. Deut. v∣pon the Re∣uel. p. 132.
• (36)

  In Ap. p 316. 365. Dan. cont. Bel. part. 1. p. 372. Nap∣pier vp▪ the Reuel. pag. 145 161. Brocard vp. the Reuel. fol. 110 123. Ford in Ap. p. 70. 71. 84. 87.
• (37)

  Cont. Bel. part. 1. p. 372.
• (38)

  Ib. p. 374.
• (39)

  In Apo. c. 11. p. 304. 316. Ford in Ap. 11. p. 71. 84.
• (40)

  In Ap. c. 13. p. 365. & Ford in Ap. c. 13 p. 97. & in c. 11. p. 70.
• (41)

  Vpon the Reuel. f. 110. Nap. vp. the Re∣uel. p. 43. 68. 145. 161. 168. 233.
• (42)

  See the Prot. Apol. p 334. &c. 337. &c.
• (43)

  Mat. 24.25.
• (44)

  Apoc. 20.7.
• (45)

  See hereof S. Aug. de Ciu. Dei. l. 20. c. 8. 9.
• (46)

  Dan. 12.11. See Iren. l. 5. Hier. & Theodoret. in hunc lo∣cum.
• (47)

  Ap. 10. 1. 2. &c.
• (48)

  Fr. d•• Ion. vp the Reuel. in c. 12. p. 153.
• (49)

  Ib. in c. 20. Reuel. p. 257.
• (50)

  Hist. Sa∣cram. l. 4. c. 2. p. 295. and see Ep. Dedic.
• (51)

  Synop. p. 63.
• (52)

  In Apo. c. 11. p. 245. & in c. 12. p. 346.
• (53)

  In Wil. Synops. p. 63.
• (54)

  Mat. 24.14.
• (55)

  Rom. 10.18.
• (56)

  Col. 1.6.
• (57)

  Col. 1.23.
• (58)

  Ps. 71.
• (59)

  Cap 7.
• (60)

  Aug. Ep. 80. ad Hesych. Hier. & O∣rig. in Math. c. 24.
• (61)

  Ep. 80.
• (62)

  In Math. c. 20. D. Tho. in Rom. c. 10.
• (63)

  Mal. c. 4.5.6.
• (64)

  Mat. 17.11.
• (65)

  Ap. 11.3.
• (66)

  Mat. 11.14.
• (67)

  C. 1.17.
• (68)

  Mat. 17.11.
• (69)

  Ap. 11.3.6.7.8.11.12.
• (70)

  Ap. 13. 16. 17.
• (71)

  2. Thess. 2.9.
• (72)

  Mat. 24.24.
• (73)

  Ap. 13. 13.
• (73)

  Ap. 13.13.
• (74)

  Ap. 13.15.
• (75)

  Ap. 13.
• (1)

  Ep. ad Algasiam. q. 11. Damasc. de fide. l. 4. c. 24.
• (2)

  Cent. 5 c. 4. Col. ••16.
• (3)

  Tract. 29. in Ioan.
• (4)

  Hom. 15. in Io. 5. & Orat. 4. in 2. Thess. 2. Cyr. Alex. l. 3. in Io. c. 6. Am∣bros. in 2. Thess. 2. Ruf∣finus in Ex∣pos. Symb. Iren. l. 5. cont. haer. c. 25.
• (5)

  L. 5. cont. haer. c. 25.
• (6)

  De Con∣sum. mundi. & Antich.
• (7)

  C. 9 27.
• (10)

  Catech. 15.
• (8)

  Ho. 49. ex c. 24. Math. operis imperf.
• (9)

  In Cap. 7. Dan.
• (11)

  L. 20. de Ciu. Dei. c. 23. And ac∣cording to the Engl. Translation p. 823.
• (12)

  Tract. de Antichr. & de Benedict. Iacob. and see Cent. 5. c. 4. Col. 416.
• (13)

  Gen. 49.17.
• (14)

  Iren. l. 5. adu. haer. Hip. Orat. de Consum saec. Ambr. c. 7. de bened. Pa∣triar. Aug. q. 12. in Iosue. Pros l. de praedict. q. 4. Theod. q. vlt. in Gen. Greg. l. 30. Mor. c. 18.
• (15)

  Io. 5.43.
• (16)

  Catech. 15.
• (17)

  Can. 25. in Math.
• (18)

  Orat. 47.
• (19)

  In Apoc. 11.
• (20)

  L. 5. c. 30. Hipol. l. de Consum. mundi.
• (21)

  1. Cor. 4.9.
• (22)

  In. 1. Cor. 4.
• (23)

  De Ciu. Dei l. 20. c. 29.
• (24)

  Ag. Rhem. Test. in 2. Thess. 2.3.
• (25)

  In Thes. 2.3.
• Cent. 5. c. 4. Col. 420.
• (1)

  In Ap. c. 11. p. 239. & in c. 12. p. 347. 347. And Fr. du Ion. vp the Reuel. in c. 20. p. 257. 258.
• (2)

  Liber Psalmorum, 5. in Ps. 22. fo. 146. 147.
• (3)

  Act. & Mon. p. 739.
• (4)

  Ib. p. 743.
• (5)

  Com. plac. pa. 351.
• (6)

  In Ep. Pauli ad Phil. Col. &c. p. 245.
• (7)

  Ib. p. 246.
• (8)

  In Apoc. c. 11. p. 239.
• (9)

  See An∣tichristus siue progn. finis mundi p. 74.
• (10)

  Ib p. 75.
• (11)

  Ib. p. 79.
• (12)

  Serm. of the second Comming of Christ & the disclo∣sing of Anti∣christ versus fin.
• (13)

  Answer. to a Coun∣terf. Cath. p. 36. Whi∣tak. of An∣tich. p. 66. Willet Sy∣nop. p. 160. Perkins vp. the Creed. p. 307.
• (14)

  Vp. the Reuel. p. 66. 68.
• (15)

  Ib. p. 43.
• (16)

  In Apo. in c. 13. ser. 61. fol. 198.
• (17)

  Fr. du Ion. vp. the Reuel. in. c. 20. p 257.
• (18)

  Cow∣pers Chron. f. 197. 199.
• (19)

  In Apo. p. 98. 245. 346. 347.
• (20)

  In Apo. c 11. p. 326.
• (1)

  Fulk. ag. Rhem. Test. in Ap. 17. sec. 7. Nap. vpō the Reuel. in c. 17. p. 205. Willet. Sy∣nop. p. 171.
• (2)

  Ap. 17.9.
• (3)

  In Ps. 26. Arethas, Beda, Ruper∣tus, in Ap. c. 17.
• (4)

  Apoc. 17.15.18. see Tertul. l. cont. Iud. & l. 3. cont. Marcion. Hieron. Ep. 17. ad Mar∣cellam, & q. 11. ad Alga∣siam.
• (5)

  Vers. 10.
• (6)

  Vers. 10.
• (7)

  Rom. 1.8. & 16.19.
• (8)

  Apoc. 17.18.
• (9)

  Vers. 6.
• (10)

  2. Thess. 2.4.
• (11)

  Dan. 9.27.
• (12)

  See be∣fore, and see Apoc. 11.18.
• (13)

  Apoc. 17.16.
• (14)

  Melanc. in Apol. Conf. Aug. art. 6 Cal. In∣stit. l. 4. c. 2. §. 12. &c. 7. §. 25. Illyr. Cent. 1. f. 2. c. 4. Col. 435. and many others.
• (15)

  Calu. In∣stit. l. 4. c. 1. §. 2.
• (16)

  Instit. l. 4. c. 2. §. 11.
• (17)

  Math. 16.18.