A Treatise Concerning Antichrist, Book 1 · Chapter 4

A Treatise Concerning Antichrist · Book 1 · Chapter 4

p. 46Chap. 4. Of the conditions of Antichrist, and his opposition vntounto Christ.

1. NOw if to those former notes of place and time, we shal ad the rest, & find them al properly to fit the Popes of Rome, then may it not be doubted, but that the Pope is Antichrist. In the next place therfore let vsus cōsider his cōditiō & qualities, in respect wherof he is called the man of sin. For first Antichrist in respect of his oppositiō to Christ, he is foreign an aduersary, in respect of his pride & ambitiō, foreign lifted vp aboue al that is called god &c. Frō these 2. notes therefore we may argue thus; He that is such an aduersary as the scriptures desoribe opposed vntounto Christ in aemulation of like honour, he is Antichrist: The Pope is such an aduersaie as the scriptures describe opposed vntounto Christ in 2. Thess. 2. 4.2 Thess 2:4aemulation of like honour: Therefore the Pope is Antichrist. The truth of the proposition is testified by the Apostle, implyed in the name foreign which signifieth hostem & aemulum Christi, and confessed by the aduersaries. The assumption Bellarmine would disproue by this slender argument; because the Pope p. 47forsooth professeth himselfe the seruant of Christ. For euen as he professeth himselfe to be Christs seruāt, so he termeth himselfe; Of this see more in the 2. book & 1. chap. Gen. 9. 25.Gen 9:25the seruant of seruants, (which is Chams title) when as in truth he would be esteemed Lord of Lords. But this is so farre from disprouing the assumption, as that the Pope could not be such an aduersary as is described in the scriptures, and consequently not Antichrist, vnlesse he professed himselfe to be the seruant of Christ. Let vsus therefore consider what maner of enemy Antichrist is according to the scriptures. First, he is an Apostate or reuolter: 2. a disguised enemy or hypocrite; that is, one that is fallen indeed frō god & his truth as it werea star frō heauen, yet retaineth the name & profession of Christ; vnderunder which name & professiō he oppugneth christ & his truth: Euē as a rebellious subiect, when he presumeth without commission to leuy a power of men against his Soueraigne, that he may deceiue the rest of the subiects, abuseth the name and authority of his prince to colour his rebellious practises. And that this is the property of Antichrist, Hilary hath well obserued: It is Ad Auxentiūthe property of Antichrists name, to be contrary to Christ. This is now practised vnderunder the opinion of counterfeit piety: this, vnderunder a shewe of preaching the Gospell, is preached, that our Lord Iesus Christ may be denied whiles whiles he is thought to be preached. Tract. 3. in I… an. Epistol.Augustine saith, we hauehave found many Antichrists which confesse Christ with their mouth.

2. First I say he is an apostate, yea the head of that Apostasy 2. Thess. 2. 3.2 Thess 2:3or falling away frō the truth, mentioned 2. T…hess 2. insomuch as some of the learned as Chrysostome, Augustine, Theodoret, Theophylact, Oecumenius by that Apostasy vnderstand Antichrist Lib. 3. de pont, R. chap. 2.himself. Yea Bellar. himselfe affirmeth that by Apostasy in that place Antichrist himself may be most fitly vnderstood. But the Papists, which falsly hold that the visible church of Christ cannot er, & much lesse fall away, expoūd this Apostasy or defection, to be a reuolt or falling away frō the Roman Empire. Neither do we deny but that also there hath bin a defectiō frō the Romane Empire: but yet we deny that it is vnderstood in this place. Ambrose saith, then shall desolution draw neere because In 2. Thess. 2. De ciuit. Dei lib. 20. c. 19.2 Thess 2many falling by error shall reuolt from the true religiō. He calleth him a reuolter, saith Augustine, namly frō the Lord God. p. 48Cyrill, Now is the Apostasie, for men are reuolted from the true Catech. 11.faith. Chrysostome and Oecumenius, the Apostasie hee calleth Antichrist himselfe, because hee shall cause many to reuolt from In 2. Thess. 2.2 Thess 2Christ. Or else he calleth apostasie foreign, the departure from God and the thing it selfe. The same hath Theophylact in effect. And likewise Theodoret on this place. The defection (saith he) he calleth Antichrist himselfe giuing In 2. Thess. 2.2 Thess 2him a name from the thing it selfe. For his endeauour is to withdraw men from the truth, and to cause them to reuolt. Primasius by Apostasy vnderstandeth the forsaking of the truth, and Lyra, the departure from the Catholicke faith. But to omit In 2. Thess 2.2 Thess 2humane testimonies, the holy ghost who is the best expounder of himselfe, sheweth what kind of defection hee speaketh of For afterwards in the same chapter he noteth this Apostasy 2. Thess. 2. 10. 11. 12.2 Thess 2:102 Thess 2:112 Thess 2:12to be of those, who because they hauehave not loued nor beleeued the truth that they might be saued (but hauehave taken pleasure in vnrigteousnes) are therefore giuen ouer by the iust iudgement of God to beleeue the lies of Antichrist to their damnation. But more plainely the same Apostle speaking of that Apostasie which in these later times was to accompany the reuelation of Antichtist: he saith 1. Tim. 4. 1. 2. The spirit speaketh euidētly 1. Tim. 4. 1. 2.1 Tim 4:11 Tim 4:2that in the latter times some shall make an Apostasie from the faith, attending to erronious spirits and doctrines of diuells, speaking lyes in hypocrisie, hauing their owne conscience seared.

3 Now the Papists are as ready to obiect this Apostasy to vsus, as wee to them. How then shall we discerne whether we or they hauehave made this reuolt? The Apostle in the same place setteth downe two of those doctrines of diuells, as certaine notes whereby those which make this Apostasie may be discerned. Forbidding (saith hee) to marry, and commaunding to abstaine 1. Tim 4. 3.1 Tim 4:3from meats, which God hath created to bee receiued with thanksgiuing. The former where of Hierome also hath noated to bee a In Dan. 11.Dan 11marke of Antiehrist. Nota est Antichristi prohibere nuptias. But these notes agree not vntounto vsus, who neither forbid mariage, nor commaund abstinence from any meats for religion sake. As for the Papists (especiallie since the times of Gregory the seauenth, they forbid mariage to some men at all times, p. 49and certaine meats to all men at sometimes and that for religion sake: esteeming of mariage in their clergie worse then adultery or Sodomy; and eating of flesh in Lent, or other forbidden times, as a mortall sinne. And as touching the falling away of the Church; certaine it is, that although neither the inuisible 1. Iohn. 2. 19.1 John 2:19church in generall, nor any one sound member thereof cā fall away from faith either totally or finally: yet not onelyonly the members of visible churches, but also the churches themselues consisting of hypocrites, as of the greater part, may fall away. As the Church of England which was in King Edwards daies, reuolted in Queene Maries time, from Christ to Antichrist. So hath the church of Rome (which once was famous for her Rom. 1.Rom 1faith) as may appeare not onelyonly by those notes set downe by the Apostle 1. Tim. 4. 3. and some others which hereafter See the 2. boke chapt. 2.shalbe noted: but also in those innumerable particulars both in doctrine and maners wherein they hauehave reuolted from the purity of the primitiue Church. And of this catholicke Apostasie the Pope is head.

4. Secondly, Antichrist is not an open and outward, but a couert & disguised enimy, oppugning Christ & his church not by open violēce, but with all deceiueablenes of vnrighteousnes. 2. Thess. 2. 10.2 Thess 2:10For he is not so foolish as to professe himself to be Antichrist. Neither could that be which the Apostle testifieth (as Radulphus Flauiacēsis saith) that Antichrist should attaine vntounto ecclesiasticall In Leuit. lib. 18 cap. 1. apud Magdeburg. centur. 10.honours, and in the temple of God that is the society of the faithfull, should take the chaire of honour, vnlesse hauing first pretended a kind of cōformity with the faithful he should deceiue those of whom he is to be ordained. Therfore Antichristianisme is called the mystery of iniquitie: whereupon the Glose saith, 2. Thess. 2. 7.2 Thess 2:7The impiety of Antichrist is mysticall, that is, cloaked vnderunder the In 2. Thess. 2.2 Thess 2name of godlinesse. And, as in the Popes miter was wont, so also in the whore of Babylons forehead is written a mystery. Apoc. 17. 2. Thess. 2. 4. Augustin. Primas…: & gloss…in Apoc. 13.Rev 172 Thess 2:4Rev 13And Antichrist himselfe is deciphered as an hypocrite, sitting in the tēple of God, professing himselfe and his followers to be the onelyonly true church of God, vsing the two Testaments, pretending himselfe, as Hierome saith, to bee the Prince of the couenant, And consequently head of the Church: deceiuing vnsounde p. 50In Dan. 11.Dan 11Christians with a glorious profession of religiō (signified by the Apo. 17.golden cup) & with a shew of coūterfait holinesse (otherwise he could neuer so effectually deceiue many christiās, as that the elect Mat. …4. 24.Matt 4:24should be in any daūger to be seduced) speaking lies in hypocrisie, oppugning Christ & his truth vnderunder the outward shew 1. Tim. 4. 2.1 Tim 4:2& profession of Christian religion, hauing two hornes like the Apoc. 13. 11.Rev 13:11lambe, coūterfeiting in some things the humility & meekenes of Christ, & yet challēging that double power both spirituall & tēporall which belongeth to Christ the lābe, as our chief priest and king: and not onelyonly that, but speaking also like the dragon. Which is to be vnderstood partly of his blasphemous speaches which he doth vtter, partly of the doctrines of diuels which he 1. Tim. 4 1.1 Tim 4:1doth teach, partly of those hellish curses which he thundreth against the true professors of the faith, partly of those great promises, which like the prince of the world he maketh to those Mat. 9 4Matt 9:4that will adore him. These things need no application for those to whom the disguising & more then pharisaical hypocrisie of the Pope & Papists is knowne. For must not his holines be called sanctissimus, most holy, whē he is most wicked? doth not he call himself Seruūseruorū, the seruāt of seruants, whē in truth he maketh himself the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords? And as Faber hath obserued, the Pope in word saith that he is the seruant of seruāts, but in deed he permitteth himselfe to be adored, Praesat. instit.which the Angel in th' Apocalyps refused. Frō which fact of the Pope, as if it were a rule of iustice, Antoninus concludeth, that Su…. part. 3.there is no lesse honour due to the Pope then to the Angels. Wherupon …it. 22. …. 4.(saith he) he receiueth from the faithfull adorations, prostration or falling downe before him, and the kisses of his feete; which the Angell permitted not to be done vntounto him by Iohn the Euangelist. Neither was Bernards complaint either vniust or Apoc. 22. Serm. in conuers. Pauli.Rev 22vntrue, Heuheu, Do…ine Deus &c. Alas Lord God, that they be first in thy persecution, which seeme to louelove the primacie in thy Church, and to beare rule. And else where, A silihy contagion (saith he) spreadeth it selfe now adaies through the whole In cant. se…m. 33.body of the Church &c. All are louers, and all enemies, all friends, & al aduersaries; all domesticall or of the houshold, and none peaceable: all neighbours, and yet all seeke their owne: they p. 51are ministers of Christ, and they serue Antichrist. And such was the complaint of diuerse Bishoppes in their Epistle to Pope Nicolas recorded in Auentine: Thou bearest the person An. Do. 862▪ Annal. Boior. lib. 4.of a Bishop (say they) but thou playest the tyrant: vnderunder the habite or attire of a pastour, wee feele a Wolfe: the lying title calleth thee Father, thou in thy deedes boastest thy selfe to be another Iupiter. When as thou art the seruaunt of seruants, thou striuest to be the Lorde of Lords &c. Hee counterfeiteth the Lambe, in calling himselfe the vicar of Christ, and exercising the very same office which Christ himselfe had Bellarm.whiles he was vponupon the earth. And because, by horne, in the Scriptures often is meant power: he may be saide to hauehave two hornes like the Lambe, whiles he challengeth that two-fold power which is peculiar to Christ the Lambe as our King and Priest, and vsurpeth both the swordes, I meane both spirituall and temporall. He speaketh like the Dragon, in teaching those doctrines of Diuels, mentioned 1. Tim. 4. 3. (forbidding to mary and commaunding abstinence from meates) in belching foorth most horrible blasphemies (whereof wee will remember some in the next chapter:) in his diuellish curses against the Saints, and Satannicall promises of the worlde and kingdomes thereof to them that will adore him. Luc. 4. 6.Luke 4:6Ecce in potestate nostra est imperium, vt demus illud cui volumus Auentin. Annal. Boior. lib. 6.saith Adrian the Pope, Beholde the Empyre is in our power, that wee may giuegive it to whom wee will. And whereas Hierome writing of those wordes, 1. Tim. 4. They speake in Hypocrisie (saith he) who, being not continent, would seeme to be so chaste, as that they condemne mariage, and so abstemious as that they iudge those who vse the creature sparingly; whereas thēselues are giuen ouer to belly cheere, what could hauehave bene spoken more fitly to shewe foorth the hypocrisie of the Pope & Papists. For do not they, whiles they condēne & contemne mariage, vnderunder the shew of vowed chastity practise all vncleannesse; and whiles they cōdemne all moderate eating of flesh, do not they vnderunder a colour of fasting, feast & feed themselues with the choisest dainties? Doe not many of them vnderunder the pretence of voluntary pouerty gather infinite riches? p. 52And doth not all their religion stande in Opere operate, in the bare performaunce of the outwarde worke, that is to say, in hypocrisie? Neither are wee to omitte an hypocriticall pollicie which of late they hauehave vsed. For when as they coulde not preuaile with their Sophistry, that is to say, with their Bookes of controuersies: they hoped to preuaile among the simple with their hypocrisie, that is to say, with their bookes of deuotion. Wherein there is a notable shewe of counterfait deuotion, zeale and holinesse, to bleare the eyes of the simple and vnstaied. But it were to be wished, that as they are, so they were esteemed to be no better then baits of Antichrist, seruing to allure men vnderunder shew of deuotion, vntounto idolatry & apostasie from God: especially if we cōsider that the principall of these bookes were set forth by Parsons & other Iesuits, who Quodlibet &c.are plainly discouered euen by some of their owne side, to be mere Machiuilians and wicked Atheists.

5. Thus you see what maner of aduersary Antichrist is. Now wee must shewe in particular wherein he is opposed to Iesus Christ. He is opposed vntounto him as he is Christ, and as he is Iesus: as hee is Christ, that is, as he was annointed of God to be our Prophet, our King, and our Priest; in which respect especially he is called Antichrist. He is also opposed vntounto him as he is Iesus, that is to say, as he is our Sauiour. So that Antichrist opposeth himselfe both to the offices of Christ signified in the name Christ, and also to the benefites signified in the name Iesus. Now these things also most fitly agree to the Pope: who opposeth himselfe to Christ in all these respectes, not indeede aperto Marte as an open and professed enemy, (for so it becōmeth not Antichrist, who was to be an hypocrit sitting in the Church of God &c.) but couertly and cunningly. For we must remember that Antichristianisme is the mystery of iniquity, wherin Christ was in word & shew to be professed, but indeed & truth, denied. First, thē to Christ our Prophet he is opposed, partly as he oppugneth the prophecy of Christ, and partly as himselfe is a false Prophet. He oppugneth the prophecy of Christ; First, in denying Christ to be our onelyonly Prophet (whose voice in the canonicall Scriptures concerning matters p. 53necessarily to be beleeued vntounto saluation, wee ought onelyonly to heare) whiles he and his followers do teach that the scriptures are not perfect, and that besides the Apocryphall writings (which they hauehave matched with the canonical) their owne traditions also are necessary, and of equall authority with the scriptures. Secondly by withholding from the people the scriptures (which containe the whole doctrine of Christ our prophet) in a strange language, and also by reading and preaching vntounto them their owne fancies and inuentions, out of the legends and liues of saints, and festiualls &c. in steede of the sincere truth of God. And by these two practises, the Pope, whiles he leaueth to Christ the name and title of beeing our prophet, he taketh the thing to himselfe. Againe he is opposed to Christ our prophet as himselfe is the false prophet spoken of in the Apocalypse, teaching Antichristian errours and doctrines of diuells. For so many errors, as are taught and held by the Pope and church of Rome, are so many oppositions betwixt him and Christ our prophet. Of the errours of the Romish church there be many centuryes or hundreds, and diuerse of them fundamentall. In respect whereof wee may truly say that the catholike Apostasie (for so I call the Romish religion) is the common sewre of many grosse heresyes.

6 But it will be said, that howsoeuer the Pope holdeth diuerse errours, yet he teacheth not those, which the holy ghost hath noted as the peculiar doctrines of Antichrist. Whereof the authour of the Wardword reckoneth vp three, and Bellar-mine hath a fourth: But neither of them durst mention those two doctrines of diuells which Paul assigneth to that Apostasie, 1. Tim. 4. 3.1 Tim 4:3whereof Antichrist is the head, The first doctrine of Antichrist (say they) is, to deny Iesus to be Christ. Which they Of this see more in the 2. booke and 14. chapter.would proue out of 1. Iohn. 2. 22. & 4. 3. and 2. Iohn. 7. But the Pope (say they) doth not deny Iesus to be Christ. To the prosyllogisme or proofe of the proposition I answere, that these places of the Apostle Iohn doe not speake properly of the graund Antichrist, who is the head of the Antichristian body, but of certaine petite Antichrists, or heretickes of those times, which denied either of the natures of Christ, (for he speaketh p. 54of such as were then already come into the world:) and therefore from thence it cannot be proued that the great Antichrist shall directly and expresly deny Iesus to be Christ. Notwithstanding, seeing they are called Antichrists not onelyonly because they belong to the Antichristian body as inferiour members thereof, but also as it may be thought, because they did after a sort deny Christ as the great Antichrist also should doe, although not after the same manner: I doe therefore thus farre graunt the proposition it selfe, that Antichrist was in some sort to denie Christ. For Iohn speaketh not of the manner how he doth denie Christ. Neither are we to thinke that Antichrist will denie him after euerie manner, but in such sort as shall be most consonant to the whole mysterie of iniquitie, and suteable to the rest of his lying and deceipt. That is to say, in outward 2. Thess. 2.2 Thess 2shewe and semblance to professe Christ (as those Antichrists did, of whom Iohn speaketh) but in deed and in truth to denie him. To come therfore to the assumption: let vsus consider whether the Pope and church of Rome doe not in some sort denie Christ, Christ may be denyed, either in deeds or words. Quisquis autem factis negat Christum, is Antichrist us est, And whosoeuer in deedes (saith Augustine) denieth Christ, he is Antichrist. Let vsus therefore marke (saith he) who it is that denieth, & Tract. 3. in Epist. Ioan.let vsus not attend to his tongue but to his works. I regard not what he speaketh, but how he liueth. Works do speake, and do we require words? He is the more lying Antichrist, who with his mouth prosesseth Iesus to be Christ, and by deeds denyeth him. According to the Lawyers rule, it is more to testifie a matter by deedes then by words. And Tullie saith, that where the things themselues Contra Salust.beare witnesse, words are needlesse. And as Antichrist was thus to deny Christ, both as he is the man of sin, and an aduersary oppugning Christ and his church: So doth the Pope, howsoeuer in word he professeth Christ. For euen the diuells themselues hauehave in word confessed Christ, whom notwithstanding by their deeds they deny. If therefore the Pope be a man of sin (which we shall proue anone) and an aduersary opposed vntounto Christ, (which now we hauehave in hand to proue) then it cannot be denyed but that indeed he denieth Christ.

p. 557 Secondly, Christ may be de denyed in word & doctrine, and that either indirectly and by consequent, or else directlie & expresly. He that denieth Christ by consequent, howsoeuer openly he doth confesse him, doth indeede deny him; as those which deny either of his natures, or any of his offices. For such is the necessary coherence of truth within it selfe, as nothing can by necessarie consequence be deducted from it, which is not also true. And therefore it is impossible that the consequent should be false, the antecedent being true. Whereupon it followeth, that whosoeuer denieth the consequent, doth indeed deny the antecedent. Iesus is Immanuel, and consequently God and Man. He is Christ, and consequently annointed of God to be our King, our priest, & our prophet. He therefore that denieth any of these, denieth Iesus to be Christ. And further, is Christ truly God? then is he also Iehouah, one that is of & from himself, namely as he is God: thē is he also the Lord & creator of al things, gouerning all things with his presence and prouidence. Is he truly man? then hath he a true body consisting of three dimensions, length, bredth, thicknes, circūscribed, visible, con…ined in one place at once, as being but one body not discontinued. Is he the true Messias & Mediator betwixt God & man? then is he the only mediator, for there is but one. Wherefore 1. Tim. 2. 5. Act. 4. 12.1 Tim 2:5Acts 4:12whosoeuer saith, that Christ is not foreign God of himself, he denieth him to be God: or preferreth any creature before him either in heauen or in earth, he denieth him to be the Lord and maker of al; or assigneth a vicar vntounto him to supply his absence on earth, denieth his omnipresēce. Again, whosoeuer saith that Christ his body doth not consist of 3. dimensiōs, that it is not circūscribed, that it is not visible, that it is not cōtained in one place as al other bodies, yea as al other finite natures are; he denieth Iesus to be truly man, & consequently denieth him to be Christ. Lastly whosoeuer adioyne other mediators vntounto Christ and in some respects preser others aboue him, deny him to be the only mediator; & therfore deny him to be the true mediator, for there is but one, & consequētly deny Iesus to be christ. And thus as the Antichrists wherof Iohn speaketh (according 1. Iohn. 2. 22. Lib. 3. de pont. Rc. ap. 14.1 John 2:22to Bellarmin his own expositiō) did, & as the graund Antichrist (according to our cōfessiō) doth deny Christ, not only in deed, p. 56but also in word and doctrine, although not openly and expressely yet indirectly, and by consequent: So doth the Pope and church of Rome, deny Iesus to be Christ. For, what a God and Lord, what a creatour and gouernor of all things the Pope and Papists make our Sauiour Christ, you may easily conceiue; First, when they de…y him to bee foreign God of himselfe, and consequently Iehouah. For whosoeuer is Iehouah, he is of, and from himselfe. True indeed it is, that Christ is filius a patre, sed Deus a se, quate nus est Deus: that is, sonne of and from his father, but God of and from himselfe, namely as he is God. And if he were not of and from himselfe, he were not God. And although in the concrete we may and must say with the councel of Nice, that Christ is God of God, that is, Christ who is God, is from the father who is God (the word God beeing taken foreign personallio) because the person of the sonne who is Deus genitus God begotten is from the person of the father who is Deus gignens God begetting: yet it is not likewise true in the abstract. For howsoeuer the Godhead is communicated from the father to the sonne by eternall generation, and from the father and the sonne to the holy ghost by eternall procession, yet the deity of the sonne and so of the holy ghost, beeing the selfe same infinite eternall and indiuisible essence of the father, is from, and of, and by, and for it selfe. And who knoweth not that such is the simplicity of the diuine nature as that God is the godhead, and the godhead is God, and consequentlie that Christ as he is God is the Godhead, which is of and from it selfe. And therefore to conclude, Christ is God of God, in respect of his person, and he is also God of himselfe in respect of his essence which is of it selfe: he is God of God, the name God being vsed personally and relatiuely (for hee is God the sonne, of God the father: and God begotten, of God begetting) and he is God of himselfe, the name God beeing taken foreign essentially & absolutely, namely as he together with the father and the holy ghost is one and the same eternall Iehouah and onelyonly true God. In which respect if the Papists deny Christ to be God of himselfe, as they do when they accuse this our doctrine of heresie, and deny him so to bee foreign (God of p. 57himself) as we affirm, they do also deny him to be God. Secōdly, when as not onelyonly in heauen they set aboue him his mother whom they cal the Queene of heauen, desiring her to cōmaund him, & to shew her selfe to be a mother (as though Christ were as they paint him a baby vnderunder his mothers gouernmēt) for so they say, Iube natū, & iure matris impera, & againe monstra te esse matrē &c. but also on earth, when eueryevery shaueling priest cā by breathing out a few words out of his vnclean mouth, create his maker (for so they teach, Sacerdos est creator creatoris sui, that is, the priest is maker of his maker. And againe, Qui creauit Stella clericor. serm. discip. serm. 111. apud Iuellum.vos, dedit vobis creare se, Hee which made you, gaue you power to make him,) & when he hath so done, offer him vp to his father. Wherein eueryevery priest amōg thē, being the sacrificer, is after a sort preferred aboue Christ, who is the sacrifice. Thirdly, when as they appoint vntounto Christ a vicar to supply his absence, vntounto whom they assigne all power which is in heauē and earth, yea Vid. Cap. 5.infinit power, which they say is translated frō Christ vntounto him, what do they else but make Christ a titular king, and with the Epicures an idle God, who hath as it were resigned al his right & authority to the Pope. What a man they make our Sauiour Christ who knoweth not, when they hold, & with fire & fagot persecute those that will not hold the same, that his body is multipresent, that is, present in many or rather infinit places at once, and that discōtinued: for they say that it being in heauen is also present really and corporally vponupon the earth, wheresoeuer their Masse is celebrated or their hoste reserued, howsoeuer it is not in the space betwixt heauen and earth, nor in those places where the host is not▪ which is to assigne many or rather innumerable bodies to our Sauiour Christ. And further that his very body, which they say is really presēt in the Masse, is void of quantitie & qualitie, foreign not circūscribed, not visible, nor any way sensible, & cōsequently, no body. The which in effect is as much as to denie that Christ is come in the flesh, which is the doctrine of that Antichrist whereof John speaketh. And here by the way note the absurditie of Papists, 1. Iohn. 4. 3. 2. Iohn. 7.1 John 4:32 John 1:7who circumscribe the deity of the father whiles they resemble the same by pictures or images, and denie the humanitie p. 58of the sonne to be circumscribed: & consequently against all reason make the deitie finit, and the humanitie infinit. The office of Christ is his mediation. Now what a mediatour they make him you may easily iudge, whē they ioyne infinit others with him. For the Apostle saith, that there is but one mediatour 1. Tim. 2. 5.1 Tim 2:5betwixt God and man, and this one alone our Sauiour Christ is, or else he is none at all.

8. Again, Christ may be denied directly & expresly: & that may be done either secretly & in priuate, or else opēly & in publick profession. After the latter sort Antichrist was not to denie our Sauiour Christ: because he was to be an hypocrite & a disguised enemy as hath bene proued. Neither was it necessary that he should deny Christ expresly & directly, & yet this also may bee proued of diuerse Popes. Who howsoeuer they professed publickly that Iesus is Christ (which is all that our aduersaries alledge in this case, and yet that all is nothing, for the Diuels thēselues hauehave publickly professed Iesus to be Christ) yet priuately and among their fauourets they hauehave denied Christ, & not that onelyonly, but hauehave shewed thēselues also to hauehave bene meere Atheists, & diuels incarnat. For to omit Iohn the 22. who denied the immortality of the soule, & of some is called the 23. of others 24. were not Alexander the 6. & Sixtus the fourth, Iulius 2. and Paulus 3. besides diuers others, very Atheists? were not more then twenty of them knowne Necromancers and sorcerers? not to speake of them which were not knowne, which renoūcing Christ our Sauiour, betooke thēselues to the Diuel. As namely Siluester 2. Benedict 9. Gregory 5. & Gregory the 7. who also in a rage cast the Eucharist, that is according to their opinion the very body of Christ into the fire, because it did not answere to his questions when as he consulted therewith. And what may we thinke of Clement the seuēth? who, when he was at deaths doore, said he should now be certified of three things wherof he had doubted al his life, viz. whether there be a God, whether the soule be immortall, and whether there be a life after this life. Or of Iulius the 3. who being forbidden by the Physitians the vse of Porke, commaunded his porke to be set before him, Al dispette di Dio, In despite of p. 59God? As for Pope Leo the 10. hee did plainely enough denie Christ when as more then once he called the Gospell, the fable of Christ, For whē he had receiued an incredible summe of money for indulgences, he said to Bembus, O quantum nobis Ex. Sibrand. …ull. de pap. Rom. l. 10. c. 18profuit illa de Christo fabula! O how much that fable of Christ hath profited vsus! And another time when Bembus alledged for his comfort a testimonie out of the Gospell, he answered: Quid mihi narras fabulamillā de Christo? What doest thou tell me of that fable of Christ? If therefore this bee a property of Antichrist to denie Christ, then it cannot be auoided but that according to our aduersaries owne groundes, the Pope who so many waies denieth Christ, is Antichrist. And so much of his opposition to the Prophecie of Christ. For of the other three doctrines which the Papistes assigne to Antichrist, See booke …. chap. 14.we are to intreat when wee come to answere the obiections of the Papists.

9. To the Priesthood of Christ our only priest and mediatour, who according to the Scriptures with the oblatiō of himselfe once made hath perfectly redeemed vsus, are opposed. 1. Heb. 10. 12. 14Heb 10:12Heb 10:14Their priesthood, whereby Christ is daily offred and his sacrifice repeated in their abominable sacrifice of the Masse propitiatory as they say both for the quicke and the dead: 2. Their owne satisfactions as prices of sinne opposed to the satisfactiō of Christ: 3. Their adioyning vntounto Christ other intercessours and mediatours, by whose not onelyonly intercession they hope to be heard, but also merites, hope to be saued. Of Gregory they say thus in their praiers,

Hic nos saluet à peccatis,

vt in coelo cum beatis

possimus quiescere.

That is, Let him saue vsus from our sinnes, that in heauen wee may rest with the blessed. Of Thomas Becket th'archbishop of Canterbury, because he died in the Popes quarrell, which like a rebell he maintained against his soueraigne king Henry the second, they say full deuoutly,

Tu per Thomae sanguinem, quem pro te impendit,

Fac nos Christe scandere quò Thomas ascendit.

p. 60That is, By the blood of Thomas, which he for thee did spend,

Make vsus Christ to come whither Thomas did ascend.

Of Peter and Paule, Concede vt ambo…ū meritis aeternitatis gloriam consequamur. Graunt that by the meries of them Ex. Rom. Breuiar.both we may obtaine eternall glory. To Mary the blessed virgin whom they idolatrously cal our Ladie and the Queene of heauen, they pray thus, O vnica spes miserorum, libera nos Ex compassionib. Mariae.ab omni malo, O thou that art the onelyonly hope of them that are in miserie, deliuer vsus from all euill. And elsewhere they call her, Desperatorum spem vnicam, peccatorum salvatricem, Innoc. in orat. de 300. dier. indulgent. In orat. de 5. vnb…rib.The onelyonly hope of them which are in despaire, and the Sauiour of sinners. Againe, Mediatrix Dei & hominum, salus & spes in the sperantium, O thou the mediatrix betwixt God and men, the saluation and hope of them that hope in thee. And somewhere it is said:

O regina poli, mater gratissima proli

Spe…ere me noli, me commendo tibi soli.

O Queene of heauen, mother most deare to thy sonne, do not thou despise me, vntounto thee alone I cōmend me. And againe:

Cum nulla spes sit altera

nisi tu virgo puerperaIn missali Paristensi.

patris parens & filia

cui me reconcilia.

Seeing there is no other hope, besides thee O virgin mother, the mother and daughter of-thy father, to whom I pray thee reconcile me. And to conclude (for innumerable such speeches might be produced,) they say;

O foelix puerpera

nostra pians sceleraIbid.

iure matris impera

redemptori.

O happy mother which doest purge away our sins, by thy motherly authority commaunde our redeemer. So that sometimes they doe ioyne vntounto our Sauiour Christ other mediatours not onelyonly of intercession, but also of redemption, (which indeede is presupposed in the former) sometimes also they exclude our Sauiour Innocent, in orat. in laudem virginis.Christ, when as they say that Mary purgeth away the sins p. 61of all the faithfull, and that she and no other is the onelyonly hope of them that are in misery and despaire. And not to speake of their blasphemous psalter, wherein they turne that which is spoken in the Psalmes either of God or Christ, to the virgin Mary: some of them say, that whereas the kingdome of Christ consisteth in two things, iustice and merciemercy; Christ reserueth iustice vntounto himself, & merciemercy he hath giuen vp to his mother. And therefore one saith, A foro iustitiae Dei appellundum est ad Bernardinus in Mar…al.forum misericordiae matris eius. From the court of Gods iustice, we must appeale to the court of his mothers mercy.

10 As touching the kingdome of Christ, what doth not the Pope oppugne in it? The realme and kingdome of Christ is his church which he ruleth by his spirit inwardly, and outwardly by his word, which is both his scepter and his lawe, and also by such officers and ministers as hee hath ordained both in the church and common wealth. The church and people of God this sonne of perdition seeketh to destroy. First by killing the bodies of the true seruants of Christ that refuse his marke, in respect whereof hee may most worthilie bee called foreign or abaddon that is, a destroyer, & his church the whore Apoc. 9.Rev 9of Babylon, which is drunke with the bloud of Saints and of the Martyrs of Iesus, as shall be shewen in the second booke and seauenth chapter. And as hee killeth the bodies of those that will not receiue his marke, so hee murdereth the soules of them that submit thēselues vntounto him, poysoning them with his damnable errours and making them drunke with the wine of his fornications, after which they shall drinke of the cuppe of Apoc. 14. 9.Rev 14:9Gods wrath. Now in making hauocke of mens soules he taketh such liberty vntounto him, as that if he should draw with him innumerable soules into hell, yet no man may say vntounto him Domine cur ita facis? Syr, why do you so? And in the Canon, Si papa dist. 40. it is sayd, If the Pope do cary with him innumerable Gloss…iur. ca….peoples by troupes into hell, no man in this world may presume to reproue his fault, because he is to iudge all, and to be iudged of none, vnlesse he be found to erre from the faith, which the Pope as he is Pope cannot doe. Hereunto Bellarmine aunswereth that the words of this Canon bee not the words of any Pope, p. 62Cupers. pag. 18. num. 12.but of Boniface the Archbishop of Mentz. Yea, but say I, the Lib. 3. de pont. Rom. cap. 21.Pope hath so approued this speeche being deliuered by another, as that hee hath canonized it, and appointed it for one of the canons of his law. Which is more then if it had bin spoken by himselfe. But Bellarmine replyeth; If this sentence of Boniface be not true, why do you obiect it: if it be true, why do you not receiue it? I aunswere, because it being not onelyonly false, but blasphemous also and Antichristian, is notwithstanding by the Pope authorized for a Canon in his lawe. Moreouer, one of the chiefe works of Gods spirit the spirit of adoption, which is speciall faith, apprehending the righteousnesse of Christ to our iustification, hee laboureth to extinguish in the hearts of men, calling it presumption: acknowledging no other faith Iam. 2.Jas 2but such as is common to the diuells (which consisteth onelyonly of knowledge and assent), and yet not requiring that in the lay people whome vnderunder the name of implicite faith, hee nuzleth in palpable ignorance, and leadeth them beeing blind, as Elizeus did the Aramites, euen whether it pleaseth 2. King 6.2 Kgs 6him. The pure wheat of Gods word hee suppresseth and keepeth from the people in an vnknowne tongue, and see deth them with the mast of their Legends and festiualls and lyes (I should hauehave sayd liues) of Saints. The lawes of Christ he partly dispenseth with, and partly abrogateth, making them of none effect by his owne constitutions and traditions. In the church, in steede of the offices and functions ordayned by Christ, hee hath created a new priesthoode, erected an hierarchy, consecrated orders and religions of his owne. In the common wealth hee absolueth the people from their obedience to their princes if they shal displease him. And it is a principle among them, that it is lawfull for him to depose Emperours and Kings, and to absolue their sworne subiects from fidelity and allegiance towards them. And thus you see how the Pope opposeth himselfe to the prophecy, priesthood and kingdome of Christ. Whereunto I might adde how he is opposed to these offices of Christ, not onelyonly in these respects allreadie mentioned, but as an aemulus, as an antiprophet, an antipriest, and a counter king seeking in his Antichristian pride to match p. 63our Sauiour Christ in all those offices: but hereof I shall hauehave occasion to speake in the next chapter. Now to the benefites of Christ he is opposite, as he is an enemy to the grace of god: as hee taketh away Christian liberty, and taketh vponupon him to make new lawes, to binde the conscience: as he abridgeth the merites of Christ, and ascribeth the merite of saluation not onelie to our owne works prescribed of God, but also to such as hauehave beene in superstition, will worship, and idolatrie, deuised by themselues: as he teacheth men to seek saluation elsewhere then in Christ. All which oppositions of the Pope to Christ, whosoeuer shall duely consider, hee will not seeke further for Antichrist.