A Treatise Concerning Antichrist, Book 2 · Chapter 3
CHAP. 3. Concerning the time of Antichrist his comming.
1. TO withdraw our minds from beholding Antichrist in the See of Rome, and to make vsus looke for the expected Messias of the Iewes that neuer shall come, the Papistes labour by might and maine to perswade vsus that Antichrist is not yet come. For euen as the learned of the Iewes, when Christ was among them, contrary to their one perswasion, for worldly respects refused the true Messias, and made the people expect another which neuer shall be: So the learned among the Papists hauing Antichrist among them, for worldly respects cannot endure that he should bee acknowledged; but teach the people that he is not yet come, and describe vntounto them such an Antichrist as themselues may well know shall neuer come, as by the grace of God shall appeare in the particulars. Now as touching the time of Antichristes comming, Bellarmine first reciteth diuers false and erronious opinions as heo calleth them: and afterwarde setteth downe sixe solemne demonstrations to prooue that he is not yet come. In the former he spendeth a goodlong chapter, reckoning vp diuers opinions both of the fathers in former ages, and also of hetetiques as …he calleth them; in latter times, mingling the trueth with errours, that the credit of both might be alike. As touching the fathers, because he taketh it for granted, (which is the question) that Antichrist is not to come before the end of the world, which we deny according to the Scriptures: 1. Ioh. 2. 18 2. Iohn. 7. 2. Thes. 2. 7he would make their opinion concerning the approching of Antichrist, which they heid according to the Prophesies of the Scripture compared with the euent, of no better credit then their conceit of Christs approching vntounto judgement, grounded not so much vponupon the Scriptures, as vponupon their owne conjecture. For to omit their conjectures concerning Christs comming consuted by experience, what can Bellarmine answer to the sound argument either of S. Ierome or Gregorie, concerning the comming of Antichrist, confirmed by experience, alledged by Bellarmine himselfe. Ierome applying the Prophesie of Paul Epist. ad Geront. de Monogamia.2. Thes. 2. 6. 7. 8. that Antichrist should appeare, when he that hindereth (meaning the Romane Emperour) was taken out of the way, to his time, wherein not onelyonly the imperiall seat had beene remooued from Rome (which was the first degree of taking out of the way that which hindered) but also Rome it selfe in distresse, being taken of the Gothes, and the Empire in decay: Quitenebat (saith he) de medio fit, & non intelligimus Anticbristum appropinquare? He which did holde, is taken out of the way; and do we not vnderstand that Antichrist dooth approch? And likewise Gregory, Omnia quae praedicta sunt, fiunt: Rex superbia propè est. All things which were foretold doe come to passe: the King Lib. 4. epi. 38.of pride is at hand. Which arguments alledged also by vsus, Bellarmine because he could not answer, he thought to discredit by reckoning them among erronious conceits.
2. But let vsus come to his heretiques: Who although they all agree in this, that Antichrist is come, and that it is the Pope: yet saith Bellarmine, they are deuided into sixe opinions. The first opinion, viz. of the Samosatenians in Hungarie and Transyluania, is not worth the mentioning, being of such heretiques as deny the Trinity, and also the diuinity of Christ, with whom though we hauehave as little to doe as the Papists, sauing that some of our men hauehave soundly confuted their heresies, whiles the Papists held their peace: yet he numbreth our opinion with theirs, as Christ was numbred among the wicked; that by this mixture of truth with falshood, he might discredit the truth. As for the rest, it is easie to shew, that all Protestants almost that hauehave written in this argument, and namely those whom Bellarmine alledgeth, doe agree in the substance concerning the comming of Antichrist: And that there is no such difference among them, as Bellarmine would beare vsus in hand. For concerning this matter, this is the receiued opinion of our Churches. When with Iohn in his Epistles we speake of Antichrist, meaning the whole bodie of Heretiques and Antichrists, we hold with Iohn that euen in the Apostles times Antichrist had as it were set his foote in the Church, and that from that time the mysterie of iniquitie, that is, Antichristianisme, did more and more worke, vntill the head of this body the man of sinne was reuealed: Which with Paul we hold to hauehave beene done, after that which hindered was remooued out of the way. But when we speake of the head of this body, who foreign is called the Antichrist, figured by the second beast, Apoc. 13. of whom also the Apostle intreateth 2. Thes. 2. the constant opinion of the learned is this: that of the reuealing or manifest appearing of Antichrist, there were two principall degrees. The first about the yeare 607. when Boniface the third obtained the supremacie ouer the vniuersall See lib. 1. cap. 3.Church. The second after the yeare 1000. when he claimed and vsurped both swords, that is, a soueraigne and vniuersall authoritie, not onelyonly ecclesiasticall ouer the Clergie, but also temporall ouer Kings and Emperours. VntoUnto which second soueraigntie they had long aspired, but neuer attained, vntill the time of Gregorie the seauenth. We holde then, that Antichrist was come and shewed himselfe in Boniface the third: and that after this his birth as it were, he grewe by degrees, vntill he came to his foreign, or full growth in Gregorie the seauenth: in whose time and in all ages since, the Pope hath been by some acknowledged to be that Antichrist.
3. Now as touching his comming or birth, which is the chiefe matter in question, all agree. Illyricus and the other writers 2.of the Centuries, as Bellarmine cōfesseth, hold, that about the yeare 606. Antichrist was borne, when Phocas granted to the Bishop of Rome, that he should be called the head of the whole Church. Of the same judgement is Chytraeus. For although he 3.confesse, that the smoake of false doctrine, ascending out of the In Apoc. 9bottomlesse pitte, began sooner to obscure and darken the truth: yet he saith, that in the yeare 607, Boniface the third was by Phocas ordained the Angell of the bottomlesse pit, meaning thereby Antichrist, when he receiued from him the title of oecumenicall Bishop. Luther perceiuing that the Papacie consisteth of 4.the two swords, teacheth that there is a two-fold comming of De supput. annorum Mundi.Antichrist: the first with the spirituall sworde after the yeare 600. when Phocas gaue him the Antichristian title: the latter, with the temporall sworde, after the yeare 1000. Bullinger doth not say, as Bellarmine falsely chargeth him, that Antichrist first 5.appeared Anno 763. for he aboue all others most plainely and In Apoc. 13.distinctlie hath deliuered that truth which we doe hold. Pontisex Romanus (saith he) initium quidem dominij jecit sub Phocá: sub regibus Francorum fundauit regnum: ampliauit autem sub. Henricis et Fridericis: confirmauit demum sub sequentibus aliquot regibus: regnat nostro seculo ac praecedentibus aliquot. The Pope of Rome laide the beginning of his dominion vnderunder Phocas: vnderunder the French Kings he founded his kingdome: vnderunder the Henries and Fredericks he enlarged it: vnderunder some other Kings which followed he confirmed it: bereigneth in our and some former ages. Musculus, whom he nameth in the sixt place, dooth not say, that Antichrist 6.came about the yeare 1200: but by the tyrannie of the Popes, and vsurped dominion ouer the Church, by their shamelesse symony, by their excessiue riote, and diuellish pride, by their abominable lusts and vncleannesse, he concludeth that the Church of Rome is Babylon, and the seat of Antichtist: and addeth that Bernard was of the same minde. Who seemeth to hauehave signified that Antichrist was then come, and that onelyonly it remained that the man of sinne should be reuealed (that is, acknowledged and detected, as Musculus vnderstandeth him) which discouerie of Antichrist, saith he, hath followed in our age. And thus you see a notable consent of all our writers whom he alledgeth in the maine point, concerning the time of the comming of Antichrist.
4. Now let vsus see what he objecteth against this receiued truth. Concerning the time of his comming with the spirituall sword, he objecteth that Phocas did not giuegive the title of vniuersall to the Pope, but called him the head of the Churches, as Iustinian before him had done, and also the councell of Chalcedon: And therefore no reason, why the comming of Antichrist should be placed in the time of Phocas. As touching the title, good authours affirme, that he receiued from Phocas both the title of the head of the Church, and also of vniuersall or oecumenicall Bishop. And no doubt he sought for, and by suite obtained that which Iohn of Constantinople had before claimed. Neither is there any great difference betwixt these two titles, as they are now giuen to the Pope, saue that to be the head of the vniuersall Church, is the more Antichristian stile. And although titles of honour and preheminence were sometimes giuen to the Church of Rome, as the chiefe or head of the Churches, the mystery of iniquitie working before the reuelation thereof in the Papacie: yet before this graunt of Phocas, which was obtained with much adoe and contention, the Church of Rome had the preheminence and superioritie ouer all other Churches excepting that of Constantinople, not in respect of authoritie and jurisdiction (which after this graunt, it more and more practised) but in respect of order and dignitie: And that for this cause especially, because Rome whereof he was Bishop, was the chiefe citie, as it is specified in the councell of Chalcedon, foreign: and in the councell of Constantinople, foreign. And for the same cause was the Patriarch of Constantinople sometimes *Concil. Chalced.matched with him, sometimes ‖Tempore Ma…itii.preferred aboue him: because Constantinople (which they called new Rome) was become the imperiall seate. Yea and the Bishops of Rauenna, because their city was the chiefe in the exarchate of Rauenna, whereunto Rome was for a time subject, stroue with the Bishop of Rome in the time of the exarches for superioritie. Seeing therefore that now the Pope of Rome had with great contention and ambition obtained the supremacie and soueraigntie ouer the vniuersall church; and now intituled himselfe the head of the vniuersall Church (a title peculiar vntounto Christ) the head I say, not onelyonly in respect of excellencie and dignitie, as a chiefe member of the Church (as he had beene in former times by some acknowledged, because he was the Bishop of the chiefe citie; but also in respect of authoritie and Iurisdiction, as beeing the prince and supreme gouernour of the Church vniuersall: we doe therefore worthily call this soueraigne dominion challenged ouer the vniuersall Church, the first reuelation or open comming of Antichrist.
5. Concerning the comming of Antichrist with the temporall sworde after the yeare 1000. he obiecteth, that from the 700. yeare the Pope had receiued tēporall dominion, & that about the yeare 715. he excommunicated the Greeke Emperour. &c. But Bellarmine knoweth well enough that we speake not so much of the Popes temporall dominion ouer those parts which they call the patrimonie of Saint Peter; but of that which they call and challenge to themselues, Utriusque potestatis temporalis & spiritualis Monarchiam, The Monarchie of both powers, temporall and spirituall. I answer therefore, that the Pope indeed had a temporall dominion before, but not generall: and that he had long endeuoured to get the superioritie ouer the Emperours, but neuer so fully attained vntounto it, as in the times of Gregorie the seauenth, and afterwards. For Gregorie the seauenth, as Auentinus saith, Primus imperium pontificium condidit, &c. First founded the Papall Annal. B…cm. lib. 5.Empire, which his successours (saith he, reckoning vntounto his owne times) for these 450. yeares, in spight of the world, and maugre the Emperours, hauehave so held, that they hauehave brought all in heauen and hell into subjection. From this time forwarde the Emperour is nothing but a bare title, without substance, &c. And thus hauehave I answered whatsoeuer is in his third Chapter, pertinent to the matter in hand, omitting (as my maner is) his other wranglings, as being either altogether impertinent, or meerely personall.