For otherwise St. Johns discourse would be somewhat impertinent, to what end doth he say, Ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, and that Antichrists are come already? And again, he doth argue from the last times to Antichrist, and from Antichrist to the last times, reciprocally, which reason were not of strength, unlesse it were grounded upon this point.
For proof, see 1 Joh. 4.3. 1 Tim. 4.1, 2.
Obj. Doth not the Apostle say, that Antichrist shall not come untill there be a general Apostacy, and untill that which with-holds him be taken away? 2 Thes. 2.3. what is that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which hindred him?
A. That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was not the Roman Empire, for that was not taken ful∣ly away many hundred years after, and it is still not wholly taken away, but stands upon its two Leggs, the Emperor of Turkey and Germany, but the things which with-held him was indeed the Emperor himself, when the Emperor Constantine, removed from Rome to Constantinople, then the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was ta∣ken away, the lustre of the Emperor, that Monarch of the World, and that Antichrist could not stand together, but so soon as the Emperor was departed from Rome, Antichrist began to be revealed, when as all the Bishops of the Christian World did meet together at the Council of Nice, the Bishop of Rome (requested by Letter) came not, pretending indeed the weaknesse of his body, and Old Age, but Bellarmin plainly tells us the reason: It was not meet, saith he, the Head should follow the Members, the Members were rather to follow the Head, and if the Emperor were present, it was likely he would take his place above the Pope, which was not meet, the Pope being the Spiritual Head, therefore because of this, and some other inconveniences, the Pope in his discre∣tion thought it meet to absent himself. At this time Antichrist began to be re∣vealed to the full, for though after that time some godly men were in that Seat, as Gregory the Great, and some others, yet the question is not of the Person, but of the place.
Obj. But the Apostle saith, that Let must be first taken away which with-held Antichrist; and St. John saith here, that many Antichrists were come already, how can these two stand together?
A. Though the Antichrist was not then revealed, yet the Mystery of Ini∣quity did then work in many men, when St. John wrote this Epistle; and Saint Paul his second Epistle to the Thessalonians, for then men began to observe the Traditions of men, and the Laws of the Church must be as well kept as Gods Laws, against whom St. John wrote in his second Epistle, vers. 5, 6, 7. besides, some then exalted themselves above their Brethren, as you may see in his third Epistle, and so did put out their Brethren; this was the Spirit which made way for the Bishop of Rome, exalting himself above other Bishops, as the Em∣peror was above Kings and Princes: this Mystery by degrees encreased, now as the King may be said to come when he is yet in his Chamber, but some Parliament men go before, and the King follows soon after; so it is here, because Antichrist was not to come nakedly, but with Pomp, therefore way was made, and the Apostle wrote against the spirit of Antichrist then working, though Antichrist himself was not so fully revealed till afterwards, and so it is plain that which was spoken of Antichrist is in some part full∣filled.
Ʋse 1 Confutes a conceit of the Church of Rome, that cannot yet discern Antichrist, but say, Antichrist is some singular person.
But we say, Antichrist is a state that hath many fore-runners, and followers, and the Pope himself is one of them.