Reply Against Gilbert Brown, Part 2 · Section 1
Maiſter Gilbert Browne.
Secondly, Saint Paule in deſcriuing of the Antichriſt, 2. Theſſal. 2, 3.telles that he ſhal be but one, the ſonne of perdition. Now then, if there ſhalbe but one chiefe Antichriſt, whether is this preſent Pope he, or ſome other before him. For eueryevery man knowes that there hes bene moe then 230. Popes, as all the writers of their liues teſtifies. They cannot all be Antichriſtes, for that repugnes to Saint Paule, who hes put him in the ſingular nomber. And if Maiſter Iohn will followe the worde, as he ſayes he does, where will he finde that there ſhalbe many chiefe Antichriſts, and not one only? For that place of Saint Iohn where he ſaies, That now there is becommed many Antichriſts, can no waies be vnderſtood, but of the fore-runners of the great Antichriſt. 1. Iohn 2.18.For at that time Maiſter Iohn will graunt himſelfe, that the great Antichriſt, the ſonne of perdition was not begun.
Maiſter Iohn Welſche his Reply.The Antichriſt ſhould not be …o ſingular perſon, but a ſucceſsion of many in one kingdome defection and tyrannie.
Your ſecond reaſon is, the Antichriſt is but one ſingular perſon. The Popes hes bene many: therefore they are not the Antichriſt. I deny your propoſition, for there lyes all the controuerſie. We ſay the Antichriſt is not this Pope, or that Pope an certaine perſon. But wee aſcriue this name, to the whole ſeate and the ſucceſsion of your Popes: we ſay the bodie and the kingdome of your Romaine Kirk, whereof your Popes are the heades, is that Antichriſt whilk was to come. So if you proue that the Antichriſt ſhould be but a particular perſon, and not a body, a kingdome, a ſeate and ſucceſsion of men that are aduerſaries to God and to Ieſus Chriſt, I will graunt you hauehave ſufficientlie cleared your Pope from beeing Antichriſt. But content your ſelfe (Maiſter Gilbert:) this ye will neuer proue by the Scripture: and therefore ye muſt let your Popes be accounted the Antichriſt ſtill. And if this reaſon of yours be good, the Antichriſt is one certaine perſon. Therefore the Popes, becauſe they are many, are not the Antichriſt; wherefore (I pray you) ſhall not this alſo be good: the Vicare of Chriſt is one certaine man, but the Popes are many: therefore they are not Chriſt his Vicare? What difference (I pray you) is there beetwene the one and the other? And if ye will ſay, the Vicare of Chriſt is not one ſingular man, but a ſucceſſion of many in one office: why will ye not alſo graunt, that the Antichriſt is not a ſingular man, but the ſucceſsion of many in the ſelfe ſame impietie. So either chooſe you, whether will ye graunt that the Antichriſt is not one ſingular man, but a ſucceſsion of many; or elſe that the Popes are not Chriſt his Vicare: for the one ye muſt doe, if this reaſon of yours holde forth. But how doe ye proue that the Antichriſt is but one ſingular perſon? You ſay, that Saint Paule telles that he ſhalbe but one. Howe woulde yee hauehave cried out, if I had fathered ſik a falſet vponupon the ſpirit of God as you do heir? but let ſik be far from mee. You ſay, Saint Paule calles him the ſonne of perdition, and puts him in the ſingular nomber: therefore ſay ye, the Antichriſt ſhalbe but one ſingular perſon. I feare ye take pleaſure to deceaue the ſimple with ſik ſillie reaſons. Our Sauiour a)Matth 12.35.ſaies, that a good man o anthropos, out of the treaſure of his heart bringes forth good things. And he ſayes, b)Marc. 2.27The Sabboth was made dia ton anthropon, for man, and not o anthropos dia ton ſabbaton, man for the Sabboth. And alſo he ſaies, c)Luke 4 4o anthropos man ſhal not liue of bread only. Alſo d)2. Tim. 3.17that o anthropos the man of God may be made perfite. And, e)1. Timoth. 3.2.For it behooues ton episkopon a Biſhop or ouerſeer, &c. Heir are the ſame phraſes of ſpeach: they ſpeak all of a man in the ſingular nomber, with that ſame greeke article o, as the Apoſtle ſpeakes heir in deſcriuing the Antichriſt, and yet I trow ye will not be ſo ignorant or impudent, as to ſay, that our Sauiour and the Apoſtle ſpeakes of one ſingular perſon in theſe places. So what warrand hauehave ye to gather that heir, whilk you dare not gather out of the like phraſes of the Scripture? If then in theſe places there is not a ſingular man vnderſtood, ſuppoſe they ſpeake of a mā in the ſingular nomber; it will not follow that the Antichriſt muſt be one ſingular perſon, becauſe the Apoſtle ſpeakes of him as of one man, in the ſingular nomber, for the phraſes are all one: but the firſt ye muſt graunt: therefore the next will followe. Secondly, in the 16. of Matthew, our Sauiour ſaies, Epi taute te paetra, VponUpon this rock I will builde my Kirk, he ſpeakes heir in the ſingular nomber with the ſame article te, that the Apoſtle ſpeakes of, in deſcriuing the Antichriſt. Nowe let mee vſe this ſame argument againſt your Popes, that they are not this rock vppon the whilk the Kirk is builded, as you ſay, as you hauehave vſed heir to proue that he is not the Antichriſt. This rock vponupon the whilk Chriſt promiſed to builde his Kirk, is but one ſingular perſon, becauſe our Sauiour puts him in the ſingular nomber (Epi taute te petra) VponUpon this rocke: but your Popes of Rome are not one ſingulare perſon, but many: Therefore your Popes of Rome are not this Rock vponupon the whilk Chriſt promiſed to builde his Kirk What difference is there betweene your argument for the Pope, and this argument againſt the Pope, ſeeing both are grounded vponupon the like phraſe? Chooſe you then, Maiſter Gilbert, whether will you hauehave the Antichriſt, not to be one ſingular perſon, but a ſucceſsion of many: or will you hauehave the Popes not to be the rockes where upon the Kirk is builded? for the one ye muſt. Thirdly, I ſay, the Apoſtle Paule ſayes ſpeaking of the Antichriſt, that the myſterie of iniquity is begun euen now to work. …. Theſſal. 2.7. 1. Iohn 4.3.And Iohn ſaies, this is the ſpirit of that Antichriſt whilk ye hard was to come, and is euen now preſent in the world: and the Apoſtle ſaies, the Lord a)2. Theſ. 2.8.ſhall deſtroy him with his preſence: and your doctrine is, that hee ſhall not come while the end of the worlde. Now what a monſtrous man will yee make him, whoſe ſpirit was in the daies of the Apoſtles, and who muſt continue till the end of the world, if the Scripture be true, a man of fifteene hundreth yeare of age already. Is this credible? or are you able to perſwade men that hes but the leaſt drop of reaſon left in them, and beleeues the Scripture, that the Antichriſt ſhuld be but one ſingular man, ſince the Scripture ſaies, that his ſpirite was preſent in the worlde and his iniquity euen then began to woorke in the Apoſtles dayes, that is, 1500. yeare ſince, and he ſhall continue to the end of the world. Fourthly, is it poſsible that one ſingular perſon can performe all theſe things, whilk either the ſcripture or your owne doctrine telles he ſhall doe? Reuel. 13. & 14. & 17. & 18For the ſcripture ſayes, he ſhall reſemble the Lambe with hornes, he ſhal ſpeake like the Dragon, he ſhall doe all the power of the former beaſt, he ſhal make al men to worſhip the beaſts image, he ſhall make all, both rich and ſmall, &c. to receaue his marke, &c. ſo that no man ſhal buy or ſell but he that hes his marke, &c. ſo that all nations ſhalbe drunken with the wine of her fornication. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Romano Pont. & Rhemiſts annot. vponupon 2. Theſ. 2. and Sanderus in his demonſtra.And your doctrine is, that he ſhall builde the Temple of Ieruſalem, whilk the Turkes hes nowe in poſſeſsion, that he ſhall deſtroy Rome, that he ſhall aboliſh al religion, and all the outward ceremonies thereof, that he ſhall conquere and ouercome the ſtrongeſt impires in the earth, and be Monarch of the whole worlde. Nowe, is it likely, or can it bee, that any one mortall man is able to performe ſo great and ſo wonderfull things? Was there euer yet anye King, Emperour, or anye other creature vnderunder heauen, that euer performed ſo great and wonderfull things, and eſpecially in ſo ſhort a time, as ye aſsigne to your imaginary Antichriſt, as of three yeares and a halfe? That one ciety of Troy kept all the Grecians for the ſpace of 10. yeares almoſt beſieging it, before they could ouercome it. The temple of Ieruſalem was ſeauen yeares in building by Salomon, who had riches and wealth aboue all the Kings in the earth, who had an hundreth fiftie three thouſand, 2. Chron. 2.and ſex hundreth workemen for the ſame. That great Conquerour Alexander, with whome no Monarch is comparable, neither in power, nor happy ſucceſſe, was not able to conquere all Aſia the ſpace of ten yeare, whilk was the fourth part of the worlde And ſhall we thinke that a miſerable Iewe, by the helpe of their ſcattered people, being an enemy to God and all good men ſhalbe able to ouercome that great Monarchy of the Turks, againſt whome all the power of Chriſtendome hes not preuailed: & not only to ouercome them, but alſo to ouercome all the empires and kingdomes in the earth, and to reſtore the ciety of Ieruſalem, and builde the Temple againe from the foundation, and aboliſh all religion, both true and falſe, except his owne: (for this is the doctrine of your Kirk concerning the Antichriſt) and that in ſo ſhorte a time as three yeare and a halfe, as you aſcriue vntounto him. Who will beleue you, Maiſter Gilbert? Will any Turke, Chriſtian, or Iew him ſelf beleeue, that any one man, ſuppoſe his age were neuer ſo long, and his perſon neuer ſo ſtrong, can bee able to accompliſhe and performe ſo many, and ſo wonderfull things, as your owne doctrine affirmes ſhalbe done by the Antichriſt. So this doctrine of yours, that the Antichriſt ſhalbe but one ſingular perſon, can neither ſtand with the ſcripture, nor yet with your owne doctrine concerning the Antichriſt. Fiftly, as partly hes beene proued, this is the common phraſe of the Scripture, in the perſon of one to vnderſtand a multitude: & therefore Daniel in the deſcriuing of the Monarchies, he compares them to ſundry beaſtes in the ſingular nomber, to a lyon, a Beare, a Leoparde. &c. and yet by them was not ſignified one certaine perſon, but a ſucceſsion of kings in the ſelfſame kingdome: and therefore the Antichriſt is likened to a beaſt, to ſignifie a kingdome, Apoc. 13.& ſucceſsion of perſons in that kingdome. a)De reſurrectione ca…nis.Tertullian calles the Antichriſt a ciety, whilk proſtitutes the ſelfe to fornicatiō, to wit, ſpiritual b)In Apoc. 17.Ambroſe calles the woman cled with purple (who is the Antichriſt) the ciety of the diuell. c)Homil. 10. in Apoc, & homil. 13. & de ciuitate Dei, lib. 18 cap. 2. & lib. 20. cap. 19.Auguſtine calles that beaſt whilk is the Antichriſt, the vngodly, and body of the wicked, who fights againſt the Lambe, a people contrary the people of God, whilk ioyntly with their head is called the Antichriſt, a hereticall Kirk, whilk is called Babylon: nonnulli non ipſum Principem, ſed vniuerſum quodammodo corpus eius, id eſt, ad eum pertinentem, hominum multitudinem, ſimul cum ſuo principe, hoc loco Antichriſtū intelligi volunt. d)in Moralibus lib. 33. cap. 26.Gregory a Pope ſaies, the beaſt is a multitude of them who preaches the Antichriſt. And e)In Apoc. 13.Thomas a Papiſt ſayes, the beaſt (whilk is the Antichriſt) is a body, & ſo not a ſingular perſon. And the ordinary gloſſe ſaies, The head and the body together makes the Antichriſt. And Hugo a Cardinall calles him an Vniuerſitie, or communalty. So not only the ſcripture and reaſon, but alſo the teſtimonies of theſe Fathers, & of ſome of your ſelues concurres all in this, that the Antichriſt is not a ſingular perſon, but a body, an eſtate, a ſucceſſion. So I hope the reader hes ſeene nothing, neither by ſcripture, neither by reaſon alledged by Maiſter Gilbert, wherfore the Pope may not be the Antichriſt.