Commentary on Revelation, Lecture 6

Commentary on Revelation · Lecture 6

p. 656LECTURE VI.

Vers. 15.

And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

16.

And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate, and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

17.

For God hath put in their hearts to fulfill his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, untill the words of God shall be fulfilled.

18.

And the woman which thou sawest, is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

THe Angel, having described the beast, proceedeth to interpret the woman, which was the other part of the vision, vers. 3. and of the Angel's undertaking, vers. 7.

This woman is described by three things. 1. By her greatnesse, vers. 15. 2. By her ruine, vers. 16, 17. 3. By a more particular character from her present state, and the state of the world then, she is a city that ruleth over them, vers. 18. The p. 657first expoundeth that (ver. 1,) of many waters. The second, her judgment, which he undertook. The third pointeth her out (as it were) with the finger. Other circumstances of colour, &c. are clear from the scope, and need no interpretation, Therefore are omitted.

The woman (which is called a City, ver. 18.) hath her seat on many waters, ver. 1. that is, not on flouds, saith the Angel, but they are peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues, that is, many and diverse Nations, and a large dominion: She is said to sit on these, not as she sat in a peculiar manner on the seven hills; But, 1. by commanding and ordering these; It is called (ver. 18.) a ruling over the kings of the earth. 2. By her gathering treasures and store from these, whereby the pomp and greatnesse of that City is supported. 3. She maketh use of them for upholding of her pomp; and this is applyed to a City, because her rulers that sit in her, did so command, and it was by their commanding and ruling, that this affluence did redound to her, and because the speciall supream Court sitteth there, as it is said of Babylon, that she dwelleth on many waters, Ier. 51.13. which is expounded in part in the following words, by her abounding in treasures. People and Nations are compared to Waters, 1. In that they are of a flowing, changeable unstable nature like water, Gen. 49. And, 2. in that they are an unsure, though a promising-like ground to build a State upon: Babylon hath these, that is, many Nations for her foundation.

The second character, is the ruine of this whore, which is set forth in these three things, vers. 16. and confirmed by the anticipating of an objection, ver. 17.

1. This ruine is set out in the degrees and greatnesse of it, They shall hate her, make her desolate, naked, and eat her flesh, and burn her with fire: which words shew not only indignation at her in the instruments, but hold out the particular steps it should proceed by, 1. To hate her; the love and respect that once they bare to her shall now be turned to hatred, as is ordinary after lusts, as in Amnon to his sister Tamar. 2. They make her desolate and naked, that is, discover her shame, and withdraw their former supply, whereby she was supported in her pomp. 3. By executing judgments in a most vindictive and horrible manner, eating her flesh, and burning her with fire, which importeth her utter ruine.

2. This ruine is set out by the actors in it, to wit, the ten Kings, formerly described and set out by ten horns, even those who once committed fornication with her, and did partake in her sin; These, or some of these (as it is said of the thieves that were crucified with Christ, they cast the same in His teeth, i.e. one of them) shall be the performers of this judgment: for, some of them continue to lament her ruine, Chap. 18.

3. The time when they shall do it, is implyed to be after they had given their power a long time to the beast, and committed fornication with this whore, they shall begin to withdraw from her, and perform this execution on her. This is gathered, 1. from the series of the story; These ten Kings, first, when they got Kingdoms, gave their power to the beast, and make war with the Lamb, at that time they love the whore and do sin with her; But, afterward they change and withdraw: for, it is not done in the time of their giving power to the beast (for, they cannot give their power to the beast which supporteth the whore, and make desolate the whore that the beast supporteth, at one time) Neither do they fight with the Lamb and whore at one time, but when God draweth them from their first practice of adoring this whore, with whom at first the Kings did commit fornication, then this is done. 2. It is drawn from the 17. verse, wherein these Kings, in giving their power to the beast, are limited unto that time in which God shall have performed His Word, of this whores deluding the world, and then He who put that agreement in their hearts to the one, is to make the alteration and change to the other.

The confirmation of this, or the anticipation, is, ver. 17. where it may be objected, How can these Kings be instrumental in her ruine? Are they not slaves to the beast? and hath not the beast and she one standing, so that who sustaineth the one, must also sustain the other? Or, how can it be expected, that they who have been so long, and so much drunk with her fornications, shall after this abandon her?

The Angel, removing the objection, addeth a confirmation, thus, It is true, they shall give their power joyntly to the beast; but, 1. that is not forever, but till Gods Word be fulfilled, which is the word of the great, spiritual delusion that was to come, 2 Thess. 2. p. 658during Antichrists height, and his continuation for so long a time, but no longer, when that is fulfilled, the case will alter, as the word untill (Gen 49.10.) implyeth the removing the Scepter from Iudah then; so this untill, importeth a change when the prophecies foresaid are fulfilled. 2. That giving of such a joynt power willingly, is not by accident, nor is it of it self ordinary for so many Kings to give their power to an other: but, saith he, even this is of God, who in His secret wisdom and justice, that He may bring about what He hath determined on an unthankfull world, and might punish both Kings and others, that received not the Truth, and received it not with love, 2 Thess. 2. Thus far He gave up and shall give up these Kings to that delusion, so to do till His spiritual plagues be at an end. And He that made them so extraordinarily do the one, can, and will make them also do the other: And therefore as we have seen the one part fulfilled, to wit, Gods putting it in their hearts, thus to agree to be his slaves; so may we be confirmed to expect the other, and take the one as a pledge of the other, (though it be unlikely) that is, that the ruine of Antichrist and Rome then, (which is the object of the fifth vial) shall be by that part of the World, Kings and Nations over which he longest had his dominion. By which it is clear, 1. that Romes fall is by such Kings (or those who by Gods providence shall be Rulers in these parts) it is not unlikely also, of these races or lines that have been deluded, because in that, Gods power (who swayeth Kings to love or hatred as He pleaseth, Prov. 21.1.) is most remarkable thus, and their remembrance of their former delusion wakeneth that hatred most. 2. It is clear alio, that that ruine is after their partaking of her sin. 3. That sinning with Antichrist is a spiritual plague and judicial stroke from the Lord. And it would look otherwise exceeding mad and irrational-like to consider what slavery many Kings, Emperours, &c. have been put unto by Popes, if the Lords righteous judgment be not considered; which sheweth the rise of this delusion. 4. That the Lord hath a special hand in executing spiritual plagues as well as bodily. This as here it is set down, is sinfull, and the Elect are keeped from it, vers. 8. and it is called committing fornication spiritually, yet the Lord putteth it in their hearts. There is more here than a bare permission, He giveth up to a reprobate mind (Rom. 1.26.) those that abuse natures light, and so to delusion (2 Thess. 2.) those who abuse the light of the Gospel, which is as a plague inflicted by His justice; and till it be at an end, there is no off-bringing of these Kings untill He do it, who putteth them on. This His will is fulfilled, 1. In punishing the world by this Antichristian whore till she be at an height. 2. In punishing her, in both which, these Kings are instrumental, and He over-ruleth them in both, but diversly: in the last, which is good, He formally inclineth them to it, and effecteth it: In the former, which is evill, 1. in His providence He not only suffereth such objects and temptations as induce to that slavery to occur, but actively bringeth about many things in outward dispensations, which being of themselves good, are yet stumbled on by them in their corruption, so as they are furthered thereby in this enterprize. 2. He withdraweth grace, courage or means, to oppose that tentation, and so they yeeld. 3. He over-ruleth their blindnesse and corruption, so as to accept of, and follow this tentation rather than another, and suffereth it to come to such an height, and at such a time, and not at any other. 4. As they would not be subject to Him, so He giveth them up, and judicially (as that slavery is a punishment) hardneth them and dementeth them in that subjection (as Nebuchadnezar was put to live with beasts) and giveth them up to the hand of that delusion, as to an executioner of His justice, till what He intended be accomplished. If it be objected that this, to give their power to the beast, is sinfull, and therefore cannot be attributed to God. Hugo Card. answereth, That it is pleasing to God, not of it self, but by reason of its consequents, to wit, the many advantages that He bringeth out of their malice.

The last thing whereby the woman, or whore, is described, is by her present dominion: It is (saith the Angel) that great city that beareth rule over the Kings of the earth. Where, 1. this woman is, that is, representeth a City or Town literally and properly so, even as in the Angels exposition borus are Kings, heads are Hills, and Candlesticks are Churches, Chap. 1. &c. for, the Angel being now to close the characters, he giveth the clearest last, thereby to difference this city from all others, which is the scope. 2. It is that great city, that city which for greatnesse, power, splendor and dominion, was then eminent amongst all the cities of the earth, from which, others, in all places, thought it a priviledge to be called citizens, (especially in Iudea) to wit, Rome, stiled alway with the p. 659epithet Great, or that Great, &c. pointing out a singular city, known for eminency to be so. 3. It is more particularly characterized by its present condition, It is the city that ruleth, in the present time, not only over Provinces and common subjects, as vers. 15. but over Kings, deposeing, forfeiting, making and unmaking, at their pleasure, Kings and Tetrarchs; and that not any great city, but that city, which most singularly was acknowledged to be so: which words set out some city eminent for a present, large, ample and soveraign dominion beyond ordinary, in this time when Iohn wrote: which, by these characters, joyned with the former, and the Angels scope, (which is to make this whore known to Iohn) maketh evident that Rome is hereby designed, being that city, which, in its Governours, and by its Authority, then ruled over all the world (a…t was called, for its greatnesse, orbu Romanus) See Luk. 2.1, 2. Augustus commanded all the world to be taxed. At this time sent they Armies through Europe (almost all) and a great part of Asia and Africa, as they did their Proconsuls, Governours and Legats in their name: for, the Empire, after Augustus untill Trajan, was in its greatest height, during which time, to wit, in Domitians dayes that pieceeded Trajan, Iohn saw this vision. At that time they used to put up Kings, and transfer Kingdoms, as they did Herod the great, Math. …. and Herod the Tetrarch, Luk. 3. Agrippa, Act. 24. beside what is recorded in humane histories. So that no King about them durst declare an heir or successor, but by their consent, or prosecute any war but as they permitted. But sometimes they would make a word make the greatest Kings desist, as C. Popilius Laenas his word to Antiochus lying at Alexandria, when he had required him to cease from that war in name of the Romans; and when Antiochus said he would advise, he drew a line about him, and commanded him to answer before he passed it, which he did and removed.

From what is said, we conceive it clear, that all these characters do evidence Rome to be this city, and that it cannot be a city figuratively taken for a multitude of wicked. The adversaries (ut supra) have confessed it, Lect. 1. For it is called a city in the Angels interpretation (which must be properly taken) it is qualified by such circumstances as difference it from other cities, and pointeth it out to be properly applyed, as a distinct city from other Nations of the wicked over whom she commandeth, and so must be Rome.

2. That by this apostasie or whore, causing others to drink of her fornications, also is understood the grand apostasie or falling away under Antichrist, 2 Thess. 2. or the antichristian Kingdom (at least the chief seat thereof) cannot be denied, seing it is the most singular defection that was then to come, (such as Antichrists is) and such a defection as is supported by this beast, whom all adversaries acknowledge to be Antichrist. Therefore that defection is corruptly applied by Bellar. to the Iews rejecting of Christ, which preceeded Paul's writing of that: for, 1. he speaketh of it as a falling away yet then to come; otherwise his argument, that the day of Judgement was not so near, because that was not come, would be of no force. 2. He speaketh of it as a falling away, which supponeth them once to have had the profession of Christianity. 3. He extendeth it to be universall upon all that received, (not the profession of the Truth) but received not the love of the Truth. 4. That it hath speciall relation to Rome, his expressing the Roman Empire, as that which then letted, (and that under an obscure name) doth evince; and what can that delusion then else be, but what is admiration here? they must therefore both relate to the same antichristian defection, seing there are not two but one.

3. Here it is also clear, that this beast (in the last notion, to wit, the Ecclesiastick) is the Antichrist: for, he is the head of this great defection, and supporter to it, and supream ruler of this apostarizing dominion, which can agree to none other, but to him: and (vers. 11.) he is foreign, an eminent person or succession of persons as the rest, as he is called foreign elsewhere.

The scope being then, 1. to point out Antichrist: and, 2. his Kingdom, or whorish Church, or Congregation, Out of all that is said, we may, by resuming these characters, gather these two conclusions,

1. That the Church of Rome, for these many years past, hath been, and presently is that whorish Church aimed at here, and Antichrists seat and kingdom. 2. That the Pope, or who possesseth the Papacy in his complex dominion, is the very Antichrist particularly characterized here.

The making out one of these, maketh out both, they are so linked together: for, if the p. 660beast represent the Pope, Then certainly the whore must be that Church, which is supported by him, and whereof he is head, & contra; if Rome be the whore, he that is head to her, must be this beast and Antichrist. I shall make out both by resuming the characters and properties applyed to both, thus, If the characters be such that are given to this beast, as are peculiar to Antichrist; or, if the properties whereby this woman is described, be such as are peculiar to his Kingdom, Then the Pope is Antichrist, and the Romish Church the Antichristian Church and his Kingdom: because (which is the reason of the connexion) all these agree only to them; But the first is truth. Ergo. Or, if all these characters, spoken and prophesied of concerning this beast and whore, do belong to, and be fulfilled in, the Papacie and the Romish Church, Then is he Antichrist, and she the Antichristian Kingdom; But that these properties agree, and are to be applyed to them, may be made out, 1. by induction and recapitulation of the properties themselves which belong to Antichrist and his Church severally. Then, 2. by pointing out the time or state in which they are applicable to them.

Antichrist getteth these characters here, 1. That he shall be a Roman Governour, and govern the seven hilled city, and that many Nations and Kingdoms of the earth beside shall give him reverence, vers. 7. Compare vers. 8, 9, 10, and 11. 2. That he was not then in being in Iohns time, vers. 8. 3. That he was to succeed to that Government which then was, to wit, the Emperours and Cesars at Rome, vers. 10. 4. That he was not to have any new state of Empire, but to continue that which was, but in an other form, vers. 9. Therefore was he, in some respect, before Iohns time, vers. 8. 5. Though he be to succeed to the six Governments, and in some respect (as to the absolutenesse and seat of his Dominions) is to be one body with the Roman Empire, yet is he not to be so upon a Civil account, but on an Ecclesiastick, in which respect he is an other, not yet come, getting admiration, or adoration, having Kings under him, who hath absolute temporall power of themselves, which they could not have, were he a civil Prince, vers. 8, 9, 10. So this Empire is two beasts on this ground, and the last head two in this respect, yet indeed but one. 6. This Antichrist is too much reverenced, and that in more than an ordinary civil worship, vers. 8. 7. He shall be no ordinary civill power, nor warranted Ecclesiastick power, neither in name nor thing, but shall arise out of the pit, vers. 11. 8. He shall have Kings devoted to him, and to be at his beck, yea, such as were not Kings then, but since have gotten Kingdoms out of the ruines of the old Roman Empire, vers. 12, 13. 9. He shall especially make use of them to persecute, vers. 14. 10. When his fall approacheth, some of these shall be his enemies, and God will make use of them for his ruine, vers. 16. 11. The fountain of that Dominion and seat of that Governour shall be the chief city that then ruled over all, to wit, Rome, vers. 18, &c. 12. She carrieth all with much state, pompe and profanity, vers. 4, 5.

These are the properties ascribed to Antichrist, whereby he may be discerned, 1. In his nature, he is Ecclesiastick or mixed. 2. In his rise, unwarranted of God. 3. In his welcome, with great respect in the world. 4. In his seat, Rome. 5. In his Dominion, Nations, and Kingdoms. 6. His different and twofold consideration of Authority, Civill and Ecclesiastick, whereby he is set out as a twofold head, and by a double type.

These things being clearly properties of Antichrist, and uncontrovertably applicable to Rome, the question is, whether to Rome heathen before Constantine, (as Bellar. and Alcasar say, or, to Rome under the Antichrist that is to come, as Ribera, Viegas and Cornelius à Lapid… say, or if it be applicable to Rome presently, as of a long time it hath been?

For fixing on the time or state, whereto this, that she is antichristian and her Governour Antichrist, may be applied, consider these, 1. This must be true of Rome after and immediately after the sixth Government that then was, ceaseth to be a head to Rome, and a seventh succeedeth to that which then was. 2. It is when Kings which were not then, shall rise out of the Roman Empire, that is, when Provinces shall withdraw their civill dependance from Rome, and have Kings of their own. 3. When Rome hath turned from a Church to be an whore. 4. It is before its fall, and while the Kings or any of them giveth him their power, that is, while he is an head. But all these agree well to the Pope and Rome, and are fulfilled in them, as they have been now for many years past, and cannot be applied to Rome heathen, nor can be expected to be fulfilled afterwards.

p. 661The application is made out in the exposition of the words. There are three things I suppose, which especially will stick, 1. That, I say, Antichrist is not properly a civill Prince, but hath other pretences, and upon an Ecclesiastick account or pretext assumeth this greatnesse; Which is clear, 1. because he headeth the whore, which is not a civill body, but a degenerate Church and whore: and therefore he must be such a head as suiteth that body and carrieth on that defection. 2. He ruleth over Kings, without infringing (as they think) their temporall dominion, which saith, that he must do it on an Ecclesiastick account. 3. From this proceedeth the admiration the world hath of him. And, 4. this sheweth why in this last consideration, he is looked on as two beasts and two heads, because he is formally Ecclesiastick, but really civil. And in this respect, is not only a distinct head, ver. 1. but a distinct beast, ver. 11. which could not be, if he had not an Ecclesiastick consideration differing from these who went before him.

The second objection, is, that Rome is not Antichrists seat, because, saith Bellar. de pont. lib. 3. the Kings that are Antichrists vassals destroy it. Answ. 1. Then Rome is the whore at that time; for, they destroy her not till she be the whore, and so must it not be Rome heathen that is the whore, for, they destroy her not till the beasts ruine be advanced to the fifth vial, as is said, Chap. 16. and in the 17. untill she be a whore. But that Rome is his seat, appeareth: for, 1. he headeth Rome, sitteth on it, and ruleth as the six Heads, or Governments, before him did; but they sat at Rome, and had it for their seat, See Chap. 13.4. he got the Dragons seat, and so it is common with the rest to him to be King of that city. 2. He sitteth so as by him and in him Rome keepeth up her former beauty and rule over all the Nations about, during his being Governour: but that cannot be but by his sitting at Rome. 3. There is no other reason can be given, why in Antichrists description there should be so much mention made of Rome, and such particular descriptions of the sibnesse between him and her, except that he is head to her, and supporteth her, and sitteth especially in her, and that Rome the prime seat is named for all the Body or Kingdom as Metropolis thereof, as afterward. 4. That Rome is great during his time, is clear, but no other way but this of his keeping Court there, can be imagined, as that way whereby she ruleth over Nations, and propagateth abominations to them, but that in him, and by him she did it, as by her former Governments in part, who sat there before. Add, 5. that Rome, is some otherwayes his seat, ver. 7. than other Nations are, over which he governeth; and what can that be but this? 6. What other reason is there why Rome is more plagued, as sharing deeplier in Antichrists sin than others (Chap. 18.) but this that it was his seat? And, 7. why would the fall of it be so much lamented, as spoiling all their former Mercat, and scattering their Court, if it had not sitten there? Chap. 18. Beside, Bellarmin's argument mistaketh; for, it is the Kings, who once were Antichrists followers that destroy Rome, but not while they are so, do they it, but when Antichrist is discovered, then is his seat hatefull to them, whereas his followers lament it, Chap. 18. and therefore have no hand in it.

The third objection hath more shew of difficulty, that these cannot be applied to the Pope, because he arose not from the bottomlesse pit, i.e. unwarrantably, but hath Gods warrant, as they alleage by being Peters successor, Ergo. For answering this objection, we are not to insist in Scriptures, whereby the dominion and office usurped by the Pope is overturned, nor on vindicating of these Scriptures which they make use of in pretending that: (let that be sought from Common places) It shall suffice us to assert, that in Scripture there is no warrant, 1. For the titles or names that he assumeth to himself, there is no such order or officer mentioned by Jesus Christ in His house, as Pope, Pontifex Maximus, Vicar of Christ, universall Pastor, his holinesse, Bishop of Bishops, &c. there is no such shadow in the Word as may warrant these.

[This word Papa, est vox syracusa (say Divines) idem significans quod pater, à foreign: It was in old given to all eminent Bishops, as to Alexander and Athanasius, Bishops of Alexandria, apud Athanasium; to Augustine, by Ierome in his Epistles to him; and to Cyprian, Epist. 3. where Pamelius saith, it was a word of honour amongst heathens, as was that of Pontifex Maximus: whereof was spoken, Cap. 13. See also Ruffin. Symb. and Pamelius on him.]

2. We may assert, that for the matters wherein they exerce this power, as to dispense with oaths, and obligations of men to others, to dispose of, and transfer Kingdoms, crowns, p. 662titles, &c. to dispense with unlawfull marriages, constitute new holy dayes, and change worship, send to Purgatory and bring from it, (as they imagine) to indulge and give pardon even for sins to be committed, to absolve and forgive magisterially sins (without respect to the qualifications laid down in the Word, but) to such as perform such superstitions, and obey such and such orders; to canonize Saints (and thereby, as it were, to create gods to be worshipped) and many moe such things which cannot be reckoned. All these being contrary to the Word of God, and for the most part not committed to any, but reserved to the Lord as His own priviledge, we may clearly assert that power in so far to be from the pit, so as if an Angel would professe it, or preach such doctrine, we might account him accursed; yet such is the power pleaded-for in the Pope. And in many of these things is acknowledged to be but ex communi consuetudine. See Azor, Instit. moral. lib. 6. pag. 561.

3. If we consider it further in the speciall properties, wherewith they qualifie the Popes power, as it is essentiall to his threefold crown, twofold sword, and keys, we will find it of the same nature: as, 1. that it is extensive and universall over heaven, by opening it, setting up Saints to be worshipped, commanding Angels (as sometimes they have done in their Bulls) over Purgatory and the whole world; over the dead, to torment or relieve them at their pleasure, and over the living in all things, spirituall and temporall; in order to these, over persons Ecclesiastick (as they call them) and Civil, as Kings, Emperours, States, to command them to War or Peace, as they please, and to carry as supream to them all, ratifying Emperours and elections or not, and disposing of their crowns to others; yea, over consciences they usurp a dominion. 2. That it is absolute, supream and independent, not only of all Kings, but of all Councels and Decrees to which he giveth Authority or not as he pleaseth, and they are of Authority or not, as he confirmeth them; yea, to all traditions, and even to the Scriptures and Word of God, without which the Scriptures would not be by them accounted so, as Bailius, Catech., part. 1. quaest. 12. Aliter non magis fidem adhiberet Matthaeo quam Tito Livio, that is, otherwayes he would not give more faith to Matthew than to Titus Livius, and generally all affirm, that being their maxime, that the Church giveth Authority to the Scriptures as to us, and that no decree of the Church hath Authority but from him. Hence, according to this pleni-potentiary power, doth he constitute such books to be Scripture or not, and hath added many to the former Canon, which preceeding Councels have not acknowledged, and he doth confirm traditions and fables to be accounted truths as he pleaseth, and yet in all this so soveraingly as none may say to him, What dost thou? Vid. gloss. in Ex…ravag. Ioan. 22, De concessione prabenda, &c. tit. 4. cap. 2. Papa gaudet plenitudine po…esta…is, …ec est qui aud…at dicere, Domine, Quid ista facis? But, 3. all this he doth (say they) not only authoritatively, but infallibly as being free from erring; for, his determination is the first rule: and it is so, because he hath determined so, and this determination is not only extended to matters of faith, but of fact, as the canonization of Saints, confirming of traditions, &c. in which (say they) he cannot be mistaken.

Now, all these being pleaded-for, as essentiall to this power, without which they say he could not be Pope; and so essential, that they make them, for the most part, fundamentall to Christianity (at least to the members of that Church) and yet they being clearly, not only without, Scripture, but against it; yea, to the overturning of Scripture, (for, it were of no great consequence to have Scriptures or not, if all these were true) and it being true that the Lord hath never committed such unlimited power to men (no not to the High Priests under the Old Testament, who were singularly types of Christ) there is strong presumption here, that the power founded on such pillars must not be of God; for, is no such power be committed to any, then there can be no Popes warrantably, because these are essential to him; and indeed except it were received to be so, his power had fallen long since; for, no commission can be shown for many of his practices, but tradition and constant custom of their Popes, as their Casuists must confesse. Hence it is, that generally in their Schoolmen and Casuits, the authority by which they determine their Conclusions, is often not Scripture, but such a Decree of such a Pope, and the like.

4. If we consider their outward grandour and pomp, that Emperours and Kings must kisse their foot, hold their stirrup, walk at their foot, give them homage, that they must p. 663be so waited on and carried, that they should be covered while others are bareheaded, &c. All which can have no shew in the Word, nor example in Christ nor His Apostles, but being (as Baronius granteth in the place cited, cap. 13.) derived from the Heathens, and the manner of their Pontifex Maximus, it must be looked on as coming from the pit, as its pattern did: which is our fourth assertion.

5. If we will consider that office, by which the Pope of Rome pretendeth jurisdiction over all the Church, suppose it but in ecclesiastick lawfull things, whereby recourse ultimatly is to be had to him, as the only exercer of that power and office, We may assert, that there is no warrant in Scripture, that such power, as an universal jurisdiction over all the Church on earth, should be given or doth belong to the Pope of Rome, I mean even a supream power in lawfull things (laying aside their infallibility, and absolute unlimited power in all things, which yet in this case cannot be separated) there is no warrant in Scripture expresly, or that can be drawn from it, to prove that there is such a power of due belonging to the Bishop of Rome, so that whoever shall come to possesse that Sea, shall be invested with this catholick charge. And if it be not warranted in Scripture, it is not a plant of our heavenly Fathers planting, but must have its rise from the pit, that without His warrant will meddle so liberally with His matters, and in such a manner. Neither can it be thought that the Scriptures, which are full in the enumeration, qualifications, ordinances, callings and directions, &c. of Pastors, yea, of Deacons, in particular charges, should yet be altogether silent in this supream Officer, wherein, as to them, (as Bellarmine faith) the ground of Christian faith is contained, (Praefat, ad lib, de Pont. de summa rei Christianae agitur) and there applyeth what is spoken of Christ, as the corner-stone of the building, Isa. 28.16, &c. to the Pope.

We shall therfore endeavour to make out, that as this power is not warranted by Scripture under the former four considerations, so neither is it in respect of this, to wit, of the person that assumeth it: and therefore, as to him, must be still from the pit, seing he hath no warrant for it, even as they would suppose it to be in the Bishop of Constantinople, or any other, if they should assume this power without just title. This we shall hold at, only that the Scripture giveth no power to the Pope of Rome, or warranteth not him to exerce that absolute and universal dominion, Civil or Ecclesiastick, which he pretendeth unto, and this will be sufficient unto our purpose: for, if it fail as to that person, all that pretended power will fall; for, the question, is, If the Pope be Antichrist? And therefore we are to enquire particularly, if they for their deep medling in Christs affairs, as His Vicar, can give any warrant to beat the truth of that conclusion, to wit, that he hath right to it: It is not needfull simply to enquire, If there be any such at all? It's enough, if it be not competent to him, Then he usurpeth: And seing (as Bollarmine asserteth) no other can pretend warrant to that power, Then if it fall in him, it will fall altogether, seing Christ hath not shown His will to whom it is due: and we are not to account so of any without His warrant; which cannot be produced, &c. and therefore this assertion hath more in it than at first appeareth: for, if it be an office of Christs institution, Then he hath determined, who is to be accounted so, for warranting His peoples obedience; But this He hath not determined. Ergo, &c. And on the contrary, if He hath given in the Scripture no denomination of the Office, nor qualification of the Officer, no limits to the Power, no rules of Election and Ordination, nor grounds whereby the Church may discern who it is to whom such obedience is due in particular, and to none other, Then it cannot be warranted by him; (who hath done it in all other officers fully, and was not inferiour to Moses in ordering the affairs of his fathers house) But according to this assertion, the former is truth, the Pope can give no such evidences, either as to the office or the person exercing it. Ergo.

In prosecuting this, seing we have the Negative, the probation is incumbent to them and to make out the affirmative, that not only there is such a power, but that the Pope hath gotten warrant for him to exerce it; and it will not be sufficient to argue, No other can claim it, Therefore it belongeth to him. We would desire to know from Scripture what more just title he hath to it than others: otherwise any Bishop might so argue, No other can claim it, Therefore its mine. This will serve rather wholly to overturn it, as is said; and till from Scripture they make out their affirmative, the assertion will stand good: yet we shall a little descend to consider their grounds and concessions in this point, and we p. 664will find that the weight of their conclusion, that this power doth belong to the Pope, doth rest upon Traditions, Fathers, Councels, and especially the Popes own determination.

That the Scripture giveth such a power to the Pope of Rome, before it can be believed as of divine authority, these three must be made out by it. (See Greg. de Val. disp. 1. punct. 7. part. 37.) 1. That Peter not only as an Apostle with the rest, but as head and supream over all the Apostles, was furnished with, and established in that Authority by Jesus Christ over them and the Catholick Church, as their head. 2. That Peter sat and had this Authority, and exercised it at Rome, as peculiarly the seat of this Authority, and that this supremacy in Peter was no extraordinary priviledge to his person, but to be derived and continued in his successors to the end of the world. 3. That only the Pope of Rome is Peters successor in this supream power, and that by divine Authority it belongeth to that seat, and to him who shall sit there.

To passe the first two (which yet can never be made out by Scripture) the third also must be made out, or it will not bear this conclusion, that it is of faith to believe, that the Pope is invested with this power; But now there is no shadow of this in Scripture: and therefore when Bellar. cometh to make out this, he foundeth it on these four, to wit, 1. Apostolick tradition. 2. General… Councels. 3. Popes Decrees or Statutes. 4. Fathers and antiquity; But none of these are Scripture: and in effect all resolveth on this, the Pope appointeth himself head and successor. Ergo, he is head, &c. for, it is well known, nothing is received as Apostolick tradition, but what he decreeth to be so. Not are any generall Councels accepted as infallible, but such as are approven by him, and so far as approven. See Bellar. De authoritate Concil. lib. 2. cap. 1. And Gregorius de Val. casteth Traditions and Scripture, but as owned by his Authority, much lesse then will they admit any Father that differeth from him. Hence sundry Councels and Acts (as that of Chalcedon and Constantinople, in these Acts wherein Constantinople was equalled to Rome) are rejected by them on this ground, because they were not approven by the Pope. So it runneth in this circle, Whence hath the Popes this power; or, whence is it clear to us, so as to warrant our faith, that they have that power? They answer, in sum, from themselves, or from such grounds as resolve on themselves, because, say they, their power is such, as determineth all these things.

If it be asked further, How getteth these Popes power to determine so; and what warrandeth us to rest on their determination? Say they, because they are Peters successors in that universall office. If it be asked again, How is that made out, that they are his successors? Say they, by such determinations, we know him to be so. In a word, these determinations give him power, and he giveth them power to do so, and so about: yet this is the main thing, to wit, the application of this power to Rome, and particularly to the Bishop thereof, that is here questioned: and though possibly it were not requisit that all the successors should be other wayes known than by Historie; yet the ratio successionis, as Bellar. calleth it, to wit, Why the Bishop of Rome hath this peculiar Authority beyond others, that would be known, if it be either of divine, or catholick faith: which two are ill distinguished by Bellarmine.

If it be objected to them, These cannot ground a divine warrant to make a thing be believed to be jure divino, or of divine authority: Because to make a thing certain to us, certitudine fidei, and to be believed as such, there is a twofold certainty required, 1. An objective surenesse or certainty in the thing it self, 2. Subjective, in them that believe, that is, such certainty as proceedeth from such grounds as cannot cause a mistake, or fail any; which no humane testimony can bear out: and therefore only Gods testimony can give warrant for this. Bellar. (De Pontif. lib. 2. cap. 12.) seeing this, doth go about to distinguish between a divine warrant, or else, de jure divino, and to be of catholick faith: and saith, though it be not the first, (fortè, saith he, as loath to speak it out) Yet it is the second, and to be believed under pain of damnation, upon the grounds foresaid. His words are, Successio est à Christo, qui uno actu constituit Petrum & successores ejus in Pontificatu ad finem mundi; ratio successionis, i. e. cur Papa succedit, quia est Romanus, non est ex prima institutione Christi (quia alibi potuit Petrus fixisse) sed ex facto Petri; and calleth it not improbable to be setled at Rome by Christs command. But our question is, How it is evident that this Pope hath ground to claim that succession? p. 665or, Quomodo constat cum Petri successorem esse? to which this saith nothing: therefore addeth he, that though fortè Papa Romanus, quia Romanus, non sit jure Divino, tamen si quaeratur, Si Romanus Pontifex jure Divino sit caput omnium Ecclesiarum? omnino (saith he) respondendum est, quia nibil aliud requiritur quam ut ipsa successio sit jure Divino; Yea, there is more required before that succession can be believed to be peculiar to that Sea, seing they go together, and this would be evidenced to be so: for, we ask not now, If there be succession, but why the Pope carrieth himself as successor, and where is his warrant? At last it resolveth in traditions and Councels, which are so, and to be esteemed so, because he decreeth them so; and this is the ground of this article of their faith unto them, notwithstanding that the Scripture is silent in it: which yet containeth all things needfull to eternall life, Ioh. 5.39. 20, 21. And for that instance that Bellar. giveth of a catholick faith, as distinguished from a divine faith, to wit, whether Paul left a cloak at Troas or not: It is true, this was a truth before Paul wrote that epistle and is yet a truth, not simply necessary to salvation in it self; yet, considering it as revealed in the Word, the believing of it now, is of divine authority and hath a divine warrant: which it would not have had if it had not been in the Word, although it had been a truth in it self.

So that when it cometh to this, that the Pope is successor to Peter, that is only essayed to be proven by authorities. See Greg. de Val. disput. 1. De objecto fidei, punct. 7. pag. 35. and 36. Cajetan. Tom. 1. de primatu Rom. Eccles. all of them abusing Scripture, to prove that Peter was universall Bishop, and that this office is to continue: yet, for the third, that this office belongeth to the Popes of Rome, they can say nothing, but from such grounds as Bellar. asserteth, or at the most as Gregor. disp. 1. punct. 7…. pag. 35, 36, 37. testimoniis omnium locupletissimis, &c. for as Cajetan observeth, these four things must concur to make out this succession of the Bishop of Rome to Peter, 1. That Peter himself was at Rome. 2. That he was at it, not as Paul was, in the capacity of an Apostle, but as setled Bishop of that Sea of Rome peculiarly, and as head of the Church. 3. That Peter lived in that seat and died there. 4. That he willed his successors in that particular Sea and Diocess of Rome, to be his successors in the headship of the whole Church, and so that by his deed he annexed his catholick power unto that particular Sea, that whoever should succeed in the one, should also be invested with the other, (beside what is needfull to be cleared concerning every Bishop, that he was lawfully chosen that succeeded in that seat) Now, there is none of these four that is hinted at in Scripture. Therefore they come to say, as Cajetan, ibid. that this is not ex Evangelicâ institutione, but attested unto by Peters deed in dying there, and confirmed by an history (or fable) out of Egisippus, who saith that Peter going out of Rome to eschew martyrdom, did meet Jesus Christ, who told Peter that he was going again to Rome to suffer, from which Peter drew, that Christ willed him to return to die at Rome, which he did: and from this riseth the strength of all the arguments of Papists for the Bishop of Romes succession to him, as builded on a ground of saith, because this story holdeth out Peter acted by Christ; and it is a tradition confirmed by the Pope, as they are alleaged by Greg. de Val. From this unclearnesse it ariseth, that it is hotly disputed, even amongst the learnedest of the Papists, Whether this conclusion, that the Pope of Rome necessarily is Peters successor, be De jure divino, or jure humano Ecclesiastico. And Dominicus à Soto, in 4. Sent. dist. 24. quest. 2. (others also are of this mind) by many reasons asserteth the last. And when Greg. de Val. condemneth it, he doth it but on these grounds, because the Fathers and the Popes have not left that undetermined untill now, and that such an opinion as that of Soto doth suppose them to have determined nothing (he saith, vetus patrum traditio videtur; and when it is but videtur in traditions, what certainty is there?) which determination, as is said, resolveth still on the Pope himself: and ye may see more directly this question handled apud Greg. de Val. punct. 7. pag. 37, 39. where he doth ride the circle clearly, Saith he, How know we this particular Pope to be Peters successor? He answereth, by his determinations in faith and manners. If, secondly, it be asked, how we know his determinations to be right? Ans. Because he hath that priviledge, who is Peters successor; for, Peters successor hath only that power to determine so. From which it appeareth, that the Authority of this Pope, which is pleaded-for as necessary to salvation, not being from the Word, must be from the pit, and yet loose; or, question p. 666this succession, and all faileth, it is so essentiall a ground of Popery, that is thus supported. And though there be uncertainty sufficient from unclearnesse in all these four, which Cajetan laid down; yet if we add a fifth principle of theirs, to wit, that before we acknowledge the Popes constitutions, or the force of his deeds, we must know that that particular Bishop of Rome hath lawfully succeeded to Peter; for, as Gersom saith, and Greg. de Val. granteth, they supponed this, talis Papa ritè successit Petro per electtionem. And here the certainty is as Greg. de Val. saith, certitudine morali, & non fidei, and as Gersom, hoc est humanae cognisione solum cognitum; yet if this fail, the obedience cannot be claimed, because if he be an infidel or woman (as once there was) as Platina their own writer, in vit. Iob. 8. testifieth) such are incapable of orders, or if the election be unlawfull, it is null, they have no promise of assistance, in which cases, obedience is not due; or, if there be a schism (as for 70. years there was between two Popes, one at Rome and another at Avignion, and neither of which had a successor, but a third was chosen, whiles both these Seas were filled,) it will still be uncertain in such a case whom to acknowledge, or how to account of their determinations while this be cleared, so intricate is this great ground of their faith.

If any should say, This succession is but a matter of fact, and needeth no more but humane testimonies of histories? Ans. It is not questioned only about persons or facts, but the ratio why, or the fact that maketh Rome have this precedency; and if the conclusion be of Faith, the premisses that it is drawn from, must be so also; or, if the premisses be humane, then they can bear no conclusion of Faith: for, the conclusion must be suitable to them. Again, … is such a fact as groundeth our faith, (as to them) and can any humane storie work a divine Faith, such as the History of Moses and the Acts of the Apostles do? and therefore if the Storie of that fact in its matter had been of divine Faith, necessarily to be believed, our Lord would not have neglected it. 3. It is such a fact as the clearing whereof groundeth this supream Officer to them; and take away that fact and he is away, he dependeth so on it; and so a Deacon, or Pastor shall give more warrant for his place from Scripture, than the supream Vicar, which is very unsuitable: and yet without supposing it, their Pope is not Peter's successor. Such then as is the proof of the fact, such is the ground of this conclusion. 4. There being (as all the forecited Authors say) an identity now between the Bishop of Rome, and the Head of the Church, that who is the one, he necessarily (and no other) is also the other, Then whatever Authority is given for appropriating that priviledge to the Sea of Rome, there must be that same Authority for the continued succession of Peter (seing they are one, and the one descendeth by the other;) But that being such, as is before said, necessarily then the succession, which is his only and allanerly, and hath never been pleaded-for (as they say) by any other, must then be of that same Authority, testing on the same grounds of Councels, Fathers, Popes, Customes, &c. which can never give a divine warrant. And whatever be truth of Peters being and dying at Rome (which certainly in a great part was fulfilled before Luke wrote the Acts) yet is it not for nought that the Lord hath left it unrecorded, that we might thereby know it was not necessary to be believed: and therefore any conclusion which supposeth it to be necessary to be believed, is not necessary, except we rub on the wisdom of God who recordeth lesser things than this. And therefore a thing may be truth, and yet, not being writen, is not necessarily to be believed, but with a humane faith, as other histories at the most, whereas no article of faith is thus grounded: because the object of our Faith, or the ratio why we believe such a thing, is not simply because such a thing is truth (for, many facts are truth, which we are not obliged to believe) but because God hath revealed such a thing, and testifieth it to be Truth, Faith resting on that testimony and giving credit to Him that testifieth.

The other Conclusion, to wit, That the Church of Rome for these many years past and presently, is the whore intended here, the same argument will make it out. If the Rome that is present be the Rome unto which all the properties here mentioned do agree, and at this time, Then this Rome is that whorish Church; But unto the Rome that now is, and hath been these many generations past, agree both the properties and time in which it is to be fulfilled. Ergo. The properties given to this whorish Church, are four, That she hath her Court at Rome and sitteth on the seven-hilled City, yet also exercising dominion over many other Nations, vers. 15. but differently, so as Rome is here peculiar in another p. 667other manner the fountain and splendour of that Kingdom. 2. That it is Rome turned a whore and fallen from the simplicity she had, and to such an apostasie of which Rome is the head and chief seat. 3. That it is Rome claiming a superiority over all those of her association or apostasie, and deriving her errors to them, and they keeping a dependance on her, she is (and it is when she is) Mother and Metropolis of all, vers. 5. 4. It is Rome then when the Emperour hath ceased to command it, and another Government or Governour hath succeeded him there. 5. It is when ten Kings are withdrawn from the Empire and have given their subjection to Rome on a spiritual account. She that is Rome in that case, is the Whore: But all these properties agree to Rome, not as heathenish but as popish, and to the Pope as head thereof: And therefore this is neither to be applyed to Rome heathenish, nor to an Antichrist to come, but to that which is. And it is not unobservable in Gods providence, that considering the speciall sibnesse, that is holden forth here, both betwixt this city Rome, the Woman, Whore and Beast, that yet the Popish Church should glory in that title of the Roman Church; and many of them dispute that it is impossible to separate their Pope from that very City, or, that elsewhere he might choose to sit and continue Pope; and those who in this grant most, do affirm that he must and would still be Roman Bishop, and that the Church would still be the Church of Rome, although that city were possessed by Turks. By this all may the more easily discern, what Church or defection they are, who have such relation to, and dependance on, Rome at this time when this prophesie is fulfilled, ut supra.

Before we leave this Chapter, it may possibly not be unmeet, that (coronidis vice) we consider how the Popish Writers do interpret and apply it, wherein they are wonderfully straitned and perplexed. It was their common opinion to understand by this City or whore, the city or multitude of the wicked generally. This is followed by Thomas Aquinas, Hugo Card. Lyranus, Haymo, and many others: but the latter Writers, since Reformation brake forth, have been constrained to cast that opinion, because this City is so particularly circumstantiated, as to point at an individuall City (to speak so) and she is contradistinguished from many Nations and Kings, who yet are certainly a great part of the wicked in the world; and also (Chap. 18.) when she is destroyed, there are many wicked, living, and lamenting her destruction, and standing at a distance from her.

Upon these and the like grounds, the most learned of them are generally since that time brought to expound it of Rome, and, (as Viegas saith) impellimur aliam interpretationem excogitare: and Ribera saith, Interpretes coguntur &c. Alcasar in locum (all whom, with others, we cited before at the beginning of the Chapter) interpreteth it so, and citeth twentie Authors of their most eminent men for it. Also Corn. à Lapide, who addeth many to these cited by Alcasar, amongst whom are Suarez, in 3. part. tom. 2. disp. 5. Sixtus Senensis, lib. 2. pag. 88. Pererius, Salmeron, and others. All which take Babylon in all this prophesie to hold out Rome; and in this they and we agree, as to the generall.

2. There is again difference amongst themselves how to conceive Rome here, so as to save their Pope and the present Rome from this application. Hence, some (which is most received) apply it to heathen Rome. Others, as Ribera, Blasius, Viegas and Cornelius à Lapide apply it to Rome under Antichrist, who therefore say, that at or before his coming, Rome shall turn heathen and desert the Pope, and be destroyed by Antichrist, or by the Kings before his coming. Their reasons are, because it looketh to such a state of Rome, as then was to be fulfilled in Iohn's time; and therefore cannot be understood of heathenish Rome: but because this opinion supposeth Rome to be involved in defection (which cannot stand with her infallibility, and would shake all (seing some plead so much for Romes eternity) and make all suspicious; for, if Rome fall then, may it not be fallen already?) Therfore others cast it, (as Alcasar and those named by him) applying it to what heathenish Rome suffered at or before Constantines time, or after by the Goths. And Bellarmine seemeth to favour this, lib. 2. cap. 2. de Pont. Rom. Those who take it thus, expound the seven hills literally, but in other things the differ.

1. Some take the beast for the devil; but, others considering that the devil and the beast are differenced, and that this beast is cast into the lake long before the devil, and that the scope is to point out some eminent opposer of the Church for some particular time, therefore they do in generall apply it to Antichrist, as also that first beast, Chap. 13. (and some p. 668make the last a false prophet that maketh way for him) so do they of that beast, Chap. 11.7. and expresly say, he is one of the seven heads here mentioned, and also called the eight, because his nature differeth from them, and his hurt to the Church exceedeth them.

2. Concerning the seven heads they differ, some applying it to the seven tyrannous Kingdoms or Empires, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, &c. or, to the seven Ages of the world. Others do cast that, as Bellar. &c. and do understand by the seven Kings, all the Emperours indefinitly.

The reasons that do cast the first opinion, are, 1. These Kings here are such as command Rome, they being Governours of that City (therefore the seven hills and the seven Kings are set out by one and the same type) and it is brought in as a character to difference and discern this City mentioned here from others: and the applying of it to the seven Monarchies, agreeth to none of these, nor to the Angel's scope, which is to point out something to come, and to help to discern this City by its heads, when he expoundeth them to be Kings, as well as when he expoundeth them to be Hills, there is but the same scope.

If they say, they are heads of the beast, not of the woman. Ans. It is true, but the beast being the Empire that supporteth Rome, they must be heads of that Empire; and seing they are all heads of the same beast, and it being certain that the 6. and 7. are of Rome, the rest must be so also. Beside, how can either tyrannous Kingdoms or such ages of the world be called heads to the beast? If the devil be the beast, he rather headeth them; if Antichrist be the beast, he was not then in being to be headed by them; if the multitude of the wicked be the beast, (which yet their former reasons will cast) how will these ages or Kingdoms of the world differ from them? This conceit then is justly casten. Beside, the heathen Emperours being to them the sixth head, and Antichrist to come but three or four years before the end of the world to be the seventh, there would be a too great intervall here, and the beast would be without a head so long, which agreeth not, 1. with the scope here, which is to shew the succession of one to another: nor, 2. with the proportion of time that is among the first six heads: nor, 3. with reason, as if the Church were to want oppressors for so many hundred years. Beside, this application, being so generall, cannot agree with the particularnesse that is in the rest of the interpretation, especially to the other of the same type, to wit, of seven hills: and there can no reason be given for making the number of the ages of the world or tyrannous Kingdoms, seven, more than five, eight, nine, or eleven, &c. except as men shall be pleased to name them: and can such an uncertain rule be the ground of such an application? Therefore they must be Kings that relate to that body; for, it is of that, and not of all the wicked that ever were, that the Angel is speaking.

The other interpretation that thinketh to evite these considerations, by understanding all the Caesars and Emperours of Rome indefinitly, or all the persecuting Emperours, as Alcasar doth, will not be consistent either: for, 1. these Kings are such as five had preceeded, and one was but to come; but that cannot be said of the Emperours either way considered. 2. They are Kings, the first five whereof had fallen, which must be understood not of personall death, but of a politick change of Government. 3. They are such Kings as in that ones time that was to come, Rome was to be the whore, and to be otherwise supported than by that King which then was, or by those that had gone before him; But that cannot be said of heathen Emperours or any of the Caesars, or persecuters: It is therefore some power of greater sibnesse to Rome after its defection. And so it must remain, (as we interpreted) that by them are understood diverse changes of Government, whereof the last should be Antichrist, the same with the beast, considered as he was to come.

And from both these constrained interpretations, we may gather this concession, That Antichrist needeth be no individual person without a succession: for, according to the first, these first six persecuting Kingdoms were not in one person: therefore neither ought the seventh (which they apply to Antichrist) be restricted to one.

If according to the second, by the one head or King that was to come after Iohns time, be understood all the following Emperours, Then, by one beast or King, may there not be as well understood a succession of Popes?

Concerning the destruction of Rome, they that consider Rome here as under Antichrist do agree, 1. That it is yet to come, and that this part of the prophesie is to be fulfilled: Alcasar p. 669and others, who affirm it to be fulfilled, say otherwayes: but the nature of the destruction and overthrow, threatened to Rome here, will not admit of that application. 2. That it shall be a great destruction. But here they differ whether the Pope shall be necessitated to flee from it or not: but the exposition of the sixth vial and of the 19. Chap. will clear us. Beside, when (Chap. 18.) Rome after this becometh only a cage for unclean birds, they may consider if they will place him amongst these. That which occasioneth this debate, is, that they think the supremacy so linked to Rome, that they cannot be separated but by an immediate warrant from Heaven, and yet Gods People are called to come out of her, Chap. 18.4. If then the Pope be not capable to give obedience, he is not to be understood among that number. It is true, Domin. à Soto, and Anton. Card. Gasper C…sal. Valdensis and Alphon. Mendoza (whom Cornelius à Lapide citeth as of one judgment) and any other who hold the supremacy to be due to Rome, but jure humano, they are not prest with this consequent; yet, the generality of them, who maintain these to be inseparable jure divino, or such (as Corn. a Lap.) who say, What-ever may be disputed de jure of the Popes removal, yet they are sure de facto it shall never be, these will find more difficulty in this case.

3. They expound these Kings, to be the Kings that shall be in the world at Antichrist's coming, and that these shall be instrumentall in Romes destruction; as also, that this destruction shall be causally procured to Rome for the old bloudshed of the former Emperours, which is then to be repaid, with her late guilt of forsaking the Pope.

But in these they differ, 1. that some say the Kings shall destroy it before Antichrist come, because there are ten Kings at the destruction of it; others say, by Antichrist, after these Kings have submitted to him. The occasion of this difference is the confounding of this Chap. with that of Dan. 7. where it is said, that the little hor… (applyed by them to Antichrist) shall subdue three Kings, and therefore there will be but seven that yeeld to him: but of this, is somewhat said before, that these Prophesies are distinct; and this cleareth it, the Kings here willingly give their power to the beast, and continue to reigne with him contemporally: there, the standing and rising of one, supposeth the overthrow of others; We do thus far agree with them, that, 1. Romes destruction, prophesied of here, is to come, 2. that it shall be great, 3. that it shall be by Kings or Governours, such as shall then be in Antichrists time.

Further, we may observe from these interpretations. 1. What inconsistency there is in them with reason: For, if all they speak of Antichrist were laid down, it would look as if we imputed fables to them. 2. With one another, each differing opinion strongly confuteth another, because none asserteth what is right; and it is the strength of the one opinion, that the opposit is absurd. 3. It is inconsistent with their own way, sometimes they take things exceeding literally in darkest prophesies, (as about the time of Antichrist's continuance) sometimes in the interpretation, which is plainest, they excogitate mysteries, as in the exposition of that, the heads are seven Kings, i.e. say they, seven ages, and so give a new exposition, overturning what the Angel giveth. 4. It is inconsistent with the Fathers: sometimes they stick to them (when they speak of Rome, before it become antichristian) yet their exposition overturneth many assertions of the Fathers on this Chap. All the reason is, because the difficulty is great, to grant that this is Rome, and yet that the Pope is not Antichrist. And indeed, that being the scope and intent of this part of the prophesie, it is impossible to wave it, and not to misse the mark. Neither can this confusion and darkness of theirs be any evidence that this Prophesie is not fulfilled: that is an unsafe ground to argue from, that all Prophesies, however formerly dark, yet do become clear at their fulfilling (which is a main subterfuge of theirs in this case:) For, 1. do we not see the plainest truths of doctrine dark to these, whom the God of this world hath blinded? 2. Do we not see many Prophesies of Ezekiel, Daniel, &c. which certainly are fulfilled, yet to be obscure to many? And, who will deny, but many Prophesies concerning Christs Death, Birth and Sufferings, &c. are clearly fulfilled? yet generally, to the Jews they are as a sealed book, because the vail is not taken off their hearts, although the Word be clear, 2. Cor. 3. Yea, if we look to the strain of this Antichrist all alongst, we will see it is still to many as heresie and blasphemy, to apply it to him: else, would so many worship him, when this Prophesie concerning his coming is fulfilled? and when Babylon is destroyed, Chap. 18. yet are there still many that were p. 670drunk with its abominations that lament it; and (Chap. 19.) many shall side with the beast, even untill the battell of Armageddon make an end of him. We ought not therefore to marvell that Antichrist's worshippers discerne not that the Pope is he, or that Rome is his seat. If they so did, then this Prophesie of their admiring of him, adhering to him, and perishing with him, would not have been fulfilled; but, we would rather acknowledge the justice of God in the thing, and observe His truth and omniscience in foretelling it, even as the event is found to be.

Although we have formerly spoken to the many things in the opening of the Chapter; yet, having proposed their opinions, and finding the great weight and stresse to lie in these four. 1. If Romes destruction, which is threatened here, be to be executed by Antichrist, or the Kings while they befriend him; or, if by Antichrists enemies, while his kingdom is in destroying?

2. Concerning this defection, for which Rome is to be destroyed, if it be the same very defection, whereof Antichrist is the father, (as it were) and here she is to be the mother, ver. 5.

3. If that defection, whereof both are guilty, be a falling away from the profession of Christianity to heathenish idolatry, refusing worship to the true God, or Christ, directly and expresly? or, if it be a defection and corruption in Christianity, and such as is consistent with a profession therof?

4. If all this defection be to be confined within three years and an halfes continuance, which they make the duration of Antichrist, and the expiring thereof in Antichrists ruine shall be but fourty and five dayes before the end of the world and Christs second coming? or, if it shall preceed the end of the world many generations, and so to be in the world already? and consequently, if this Rome, as it is to be the whore, and the Pope who is present head thereof, be Antichrist? Seing therefore much weight lieth on these, and if one of these pillars be shaken, their doctrine concerning Antichrist will ruine. We shall therefore shortly propone these assertions or considerations: And, 1. we say, the actors or instruments in this destruction of Rome, are not Antichrist or Kings befreinding his way, neither is this overturning of Rome an advantage to his kingdom; but the actors are opposit to Antichrist, though of these who once gave their power to him. And this destruction of Rome is a main victory of Christ over the beast: for,

1. Rome is the seat of this Antichrist (as upon the fifth vial, Chap. 16. and above in this, and in Chap. 18. is shewed) and this whore, being, as it were, the adulteresse, and Antichrist the adulterer, he must certainly have his residence where she dwelleth, seing he supporteth this city by dwelling in it, even as its greatnesse was supported by the former heads, by their dwelling there: its overthrow therfore must be near to him. Its, 2. while these Kings give their power to Antichrist, then Rome is in pomp, and is supported by him; for, while he is great, she is so too; and he is great so long as the Kings give him power, Therefore it is not while they continue friends to the beast, but when they become enemies. 3. This destruction is the prosecution of one of the vials (we say, the fifth) all which pursue the beasts kingdom to destroy it. 4. This is marked as a main victory of the Lamb over Antichrist, who for a long time had made use of these Kings against him: it can be therefore no victory to Antichrist for which the Saints thus rejoyce, Chap. 18. 5. Add, that (Chapter following) all Antichrists followers are lamenting: and would they lament the destruction of Rome, if it were procured by themselves? and yet supposing (as they do) that then Antichrist commandeth all, can there be so many Kings and great men, &c. elsewhere to lament that ruine? 6. Could Rome be charged, as mother of harlots in the earth and yet to have no share in Antichrists defection? yea, it is a fountain of it, and therefore its ruine must have influence on the weakening of his kingdom.

2. We say, that the defection whereof Rome is found guilty, and wherefore she is thus plagued, is the very same with Antichrists: which thus appeareth, 1. Romes defection is some singular defection very generall and extensive, and is everywhere propagated to others, Chap. 17.5, 6. and 18.9. But there is no other such apostasie that is universall, spoken of in Scripture, but Antichrists, which singularly is the falling away. 2. All the characters of Antichrists defection agree to this Rome, 1. She commandeth over Nations, so doth he. 2. Both spread far and wide. 3. Both are guilty of the bloud of Saints and great persecution. 4. These who give their power to him, commit fornication with her. p. 6715. They belong to one time, and the beast Antichrist supporteth this city while it is a whore, and therefore he must be thought to strengthen her in her whoredoms. Beside what was said, that Rome is Antichrists seat, doth clear this also: And wherefore should Rome perish in Antichrists ruine (which is carried on principally by the vials, Chap. 16.) or be lamented by his friends, Chap. 18. if she did not partake deeply of his sin? neither could she be called the mother of abominations in the earth, if yet she should have no hand in Antichrists abominations, whereof the world will be guilty at the time of her ruine, as the most learned of themselves grant. And, to what end should there be still such connexion betwixt Rome and Antichrist all alongst, if an especiall relation between Rome and that defection were not demonstrated by it?

3. We say, that this defection, whereof Antichrist and Rome are found guilty, is not a totall falling from Christianity in the profession of it, but such, as, failing in the matter and corrupting the principal Truths of Christianity, shall yet stick boldly to a proud profession of Christianity, as claiming a speciall relation to Christ above others: for; 1. Antichrists defection is such, (as we shew, Chap. 13.) and they are one. 2. This great Antichrist is some way proportionable to the petty Antichrists that were in Iohn's time, and were his fore-runners; but these were not simply Heathens, but such as under the name of Christianity, and pretending to be eminently for it, (so as to cry down true Apostles) did wrong Christ. 3. It is that defection spoken of, 2 Thess. 2. which is a giving up to believe lies, even while he sitteth in the Temple of God, and boasteth of being a prime instrument in the Church. 4. His defection is such as was letted by the standing of the heathen Emperours, whereas if heathenish Idolatry were his sin. Antichrists design had not then been working under ground, but had been palpable in them. 4. It is observable, that when-ever the Scripture speaketh of Antichrists defection, it distinguisheth it alway from heathenish idolatry, and speaketh of it as of another thing; so, 2 Thess. 2. Antichrists mysterie of iniquity is opposed to that that was then among Heathens for the time: and by comparing the last part of Chap. 12. of this Book, with Chap. 13. it will appear, that Antichristianity succeedeth to Paganism, as a new design of the devils, to recover what he lost by the fall of the former. Add, that here it is called whoredom, which supponeth it to be against a marriage-tye, Ezek. 16.36, 38. which could not otherwise be. Again, If Antichrists, or Romes defection, were thus grosse, why should it be called a mysterie, 2 Thess. 2. and here, ver. 5? and what need were there of so many marks to discover Rome under that state, what deceiveablenesse would there be there? The Scriptures insisting so much in this, is certainly to make Believers warie, and to shew there will be need of spiritual wisdom to discern her, or him. Lastly, It is said, that all the World (except the Elect) wondered after this beast: and can it be thought that all Christians shall turn Pagans except the Elect, and that there shall be no hypocrites in the Church? yet this contradistinguishing of Antichrists followers (not from the Church visible, but from the Elect, who invisibly are so) saith, that this defection will make a narrower search in the Church than Paganism can do.

We do therefore take this assertion for truth, that Romes defection under Antichrist is a spreading of lies under the pretext of Christianity, not simply striking against God, but against Christ in his Offices, as Mediator, and the end of them, and derogating from them; in the spreading of which, the city of Rome, as a mother, hath a speciall influence and claim.

4. We would say concerning the continuing of Antichrist, or this defection and the time of its close, that it is not to be confined to one person (and that within three years and in half) and to finish but fourty five dayes before the end of the world; but is to take up a longer time. Of this we spoke somewhat, Chap. 11. and Chap. 13. and also before on this. And now we further add, that Antichrist hath a proportionablnesse in his continuance to the great effects which his dominion hath on the world; But that cannot be within three years and an half. 2. Antichrist is one, as the series of the heathen Emperours was one; for, he is the head next succeeding, and he is opposed to him, 2 Thess. 2. He that letteth must be removed before he (that is, Antichrist) should come. Now, seing he that letted was not an Emperour personally, but the series and time of them in their continuance, Therefore Antichrist who succeedeth as the other was removed, is not one person, but a succession: and would the Scripture so frequently and pressingly speak of Antichrists p. 672kingdom and that defection, if it belonged only to the case of the Church for three years and an half immediately before the end of the world? certainly many other trials of the Church had been of greater concernment: beside, Antichrists hurt being principally to souls, it cannot be effectuated so in such a time, which can have influence, at most, but upon some of one generation.

For that part of their opinion, that faith that Antichrists coming is but to preceed the end of the world three years and seven or eight moneths, and Romes destruction to be within that time of his reign, there is for this no probable shew: for, 1. Are there not many that lament Babylons ruine and rejoyce over her? and will that be but for a year or such a time? 2. Is not the battel of Armageddon, Chap. 19. posterior to this, where the beast is taken? Again, Is not that overthrow of Gog and Magog posterior to that, Chap. 20. when they are cast in the lake, where the beast is, before they come there? Beside, Is it probable that in the end of the world, when all, especially the Jews, shall give themselves to Christ, that universally they shall again make defection? And doth it not appear, that a glorious Church shall be on the earth after Antichrists height? I desire it may be considered, that the Jews are, in the body of that Nation generally to be converted after their blinded estate; which is yet to be fulfilled. Now, when shall that conversion be? It must either be before this Antichrist, or after his destruction; But neither can be said: It cannot be before his destruction; for, 1. then they would not be so ready to receive Antichrist and follow him (which yet they pretend) to Ierusalem. 2. Where is there a falling away of the Jews for the second time spoken of? But on the contrary, the Lords promise looketh otherwise, Rom. 11. which importeth such a re-ingrasting as not to be broken off again: and considering the tendernesse that the Jews shall have after their reingrafting, Zech. 12. 10. for so much wrong done to Christ formerly, can it be thought that they shall be the prime instruments of promoting Antichrist again, even after so much mercy is shown unto them, and that so suddenly? Neither can any say that the Jews conversion is to be suspended till Antichrists ruine, upon their principles, because, say they, there are but fourty five dayes to the end of the world: either therefore Antichrist must preceed that time allowed him by them, or the prophesie concerning the Jews conversion must be shaken.

From this it will necessarily follow, that the coming and revealing of Antichrist in the world, must necessarily preceed that time; if his ruine be sooner and his continuance longer, his rise must be proportionable: and considering that the Apostle speaketh of the working of that mysterie in his time, it must either be said, that it hath left off working (which agreeth not to his scope) or that it hath continued working for many hundreds of years, and hath made no progresse (which were absurd to say,) or, we must say, it hath already come to an height, and we are to look for it in the generations preceeding the end of the world. 3. To what end were the many exhortations to watchfulnesse that are propounded even to the Christians that lived in the first ages after the Apostles dayes, if they belonged only to the Christians in the last four years? Yea, 4. seing from Chap. 12. ult. and Chap. 13.1. it is clear, that Antichrists rise is the second great design which Satan driveth to overthrow the Church after the overturn of heathen Emperours, or paganism, Shall it be thought, that for ten or twelve hundred years he hath had no successe in it? or, that the Church hath been so long free from a publick oppressor? Add, that he being at a height, before the first vial which beginneth his ruine, and there being a long time to the pouring out of all, before the end, it must be thought that his rise and growth to his height, was proportionable in length of time: and therefore must preceed for many generations. Again, the world that is overturned by the vials (being the world of the beast) is that same world, which encreased under the trumpets, the encrease of it is under the one, and the ruine of it under the other; and seing the trumpets will rise that high as to succeed the seals, which contained the first period of heathenish persecution, It will follow therefore not only, that this defection will and must be long before the end, but also that it is already come into the world.

If we can then make out this, that this defection hath already seased on Rome, and that she must before this time be infected with it, there will be a short way to loose all the former questions: which may thus clearly be made out,

We have four characters to evince it, in this Chapter. 1. If the sixth Government p. 673over Rome, which was in Iohn's time be now ceased from ruling that city, Then this defection must be come; for so the Angel fixeth that time, and, a Thess. 2. the Apostle timeth Antichrists revealing, and the coming of that falling away, spoken of there, at his removing (to wit, the heathen Emperours) who then did let.

2. If the seventh Head or Government over Rome be come, which then was to come, and be acknowledged as is spoken of in this Chapter, Then the apostasie contemporary with it, is come also.

3. If there be ten Kings arisen, to be supream independent Governours over Provinces of that Empire, which in Iohn's time had not power in themselves, but were dependent on the Empire as parts of it, and have given their power to a new head upon an new account, Then this is fulfilled; But all these three, in the former exposition, are made out: Therefore this defection, which is supposed in all these changes, must have its beginning also.

4. If some of these Kings that once acknowledged this seventh head, be withdrawn from it, Then the defection must have been at its height; for, their withdrawing supposeth them once to have been involved in it, as the context cleareth. But in experience it is evident that some of these Kings have withdrawn, and so in part this event prophesied of is fulfilled: Therefore what it presupposeth, must be fulfilled also: for, this their withdrawing must either be that prophesied of here, or some other thing; But it can be no other event: because, 1. the Kings that rise, are the first that shall rise so qualified as are here: and so, 2. the withdrawing of these Kings that withdraw, is the first withdrawing of these Kings upon this account of hating Rome as the whore. For the context and series will clear this, the scope being to deduce Romes future remarkable changes without intermission; as, 1. Then heathen Cesars did govern all. 2. He shall be removed, and that Empire shall be weakned and not have the dominion that it had in the world. 3. Out of it shall arise so many Kingdoms, which shall be independent as to it. 4. There shall step up a Government from the bottomlesse pit of another nature than the former, that shall govern Rome. 5. These Kings that withdraw from the former head, shall willingly give their power and homage unto this Government upon another account. 6. These Kings (or some of them) again, out of hatred to Rome and that Governour, shall withdraw from it and hate her and diminish her greatnesse. These steps go in a series succeeding to one another immediately, and cannot be interrupted by the rising of any other Kings, or their withdrawing after it, without confounding this prophesie and darkening the Angels interpretation and quite overturning of the scope, no more than we can say there may be other cities with seven hills, &c. to which what is said of this can agree, seing he pointeth in this interpretation at as particular and singular events in respect of what was to come, as in respect of what then was present.

5. We may argue from Chap. 7.1. thus, That defection, mentioned Chap. 7. of the winds which then were to blow, is this apostasie of Antichrist; But that defection is already come. Ergo, &c. That its Antichrists defection, appeareth, 1. from the singular hurt of it; it is the great defection that the Church was to be troubled with after heathenish persecution. 2. It is the defection of the fifth trumpet, and the same that is mentioned, Chap. 13. as was said on the place, But that that must be come, this will clear it, that it immediately succeeded to the seals, and was immediately to follow upon them, and the Angels hast to seal the Elect evidenceth it, which is more fully opened there. Now, the seals having their close at the overturning of the heathenish Empire, This then which immediately succeeded, must long since be in being.

6. We may gather it, thus, This defection is contemporary with the Prophets prophesieing in sackcloth, the womans fleeing to the wildernesse, Chap. 12. and is the same with the Gentiles treading the outer court. Chap. 11. But both these are begun, even at the child's taking up to heaven, which is the close of heathen persecution (yea, and is closed as to the dayes set there) Therefore this must be of a long time since in the world also: both these propositions we cleared on Chap. 11. And all these arguments that prove the contemporariness of the beast and Babylon with the trumpets, and the succession of both to the heathenish persecution, and that immediatly, as on Chap. 6. Lect. 1. and 8. Chap. 7. Lect. 1. Chap. 9. Lect. 1. Chap. 11. Lect. 4. Chap. 12. Lect. 1. and 3. &c.

7. This defection is the same with Antichrists, as is said: Now, his defection is long p. 674since begun, and hath its rise from the healing of the head, which was wounded, Chap. 13. as there was made out, Therefore this is not to come.

8. We may have some light from Chap. 20. where this will be clear, that Antichrists defection must go before the thousand years there mentioned, because it supposeth saints to have been killed by the beast, who are there brought to reign; But we cannot look that these thousand years are wholly to come, and his persecution to go yet before it also, (that would take longer time to the fulfilling of all events, than in reason any will allow, yet to be running to the end of the world) This concludeth the more strongly, because generally not only our writer, but even the Popish themselves grant this, that it is not to come, but that they are begun, if they be not finished, so do Corn. àlap. Viegas, Alcasar, the Rhemists and others, who though they senslesly apply it, and with contradiction, as their manner is; yet agree in this, that long since they are begun. And although there should be difficulty to show when this defection began and how, (because much of that riseth from humane storie) yet these characters prove it must be in being and before this time begun; and that is sufficient to us. All these arguments begin it (almost) after the close of the heathenish persecution, whereof we spoke more on Chap. 11.

We may add an argument or two further, thus, If every condition of the visible Church be either contemporary with the seals, that is, the heathenish world, or with the antichristian world under the trumpets wherein Antichrist cometh to an height, or with the vials wherein is his declining, Then this apostasie must be come, because we are not now under the seals; that period is past: we must therefore be under one of the following two, seing these three prophesies carrie on the series to the end; But if we be under the vials, then Antichrist is not only come, but is already at his height: and it is not like that there being so many hundred years since the seals ended and the trumpets began, that still they be running, at least, in the first six; for, the seventh comprehendeth the vials.

Again, if the properties, concomitants and characters and events given to discern this defection be fulfilled, Then this defection of Antichrist must be come, seing these characters can agree to no other; But we will find the first true, as the former exposition of Chap. 9. 11. 13. and 17. will clear. Ergo. Taking this for granted then, that the antichristian defection is of a long time since come, and this also, that when it cometh, it continueth untill Romes destruction, which yet is not fulfilled: It must therefore follow, that it is in being for the present in the world, and hath been so for a long time; and that therefore we ought to look where it is for the present.

This is certain, that it is not to be fought amongst Pagans or Turks, but amongst professed Christians. 2. Not among ancient Hereticks that now are not in being, or such as have no pompe or splendor in the world: this being so eminent a Kingdom, cannot be applyed to them. It must therefore be either in the Roman Church or amongst us who are called Protestants; it can be attributed to no third now in being: But for us, they themselves will absolve us; for, we have neither the seat of this defection, not a Head or Monarch, as is over this kingdom, &c. This cursed priviledge therefore belongeth to them who have both, and glory in them.

2. Again, if these be truth, that Rome is infected with Antichrists defection while it is in the world, and is the whore spoken of after its appearing till she be destroyed, Then it will follow (laying aside other arguments from other circumstances) that Rome, as it is and hath been for many years, is the whore here spoken of, which is guilty of the Antichristian defection; (and this consequence will stand good till the antecedent be overturned) But the former is truth, from the former arguments, and from their concessions that grant that this destruction is not yet come. Ergo.

3. We may therefore resume our argument confidently. If all the characters applyed to this whore be verified in Rome now present, and as it hath been for many years, and in its Governour the Pope, Then is this Rome the whore, which is to be destroyed, and the Pope Antichrist, and no other is to be looked for; But the former is truth, they are fulfilled, and in them. Ergo, We may warrantably conclude that she is the whore, and he the Antichrist.

It is a wonder to consider how little the most learned adversaries have to say to this, except what evidenceth the force of the wine of her fornications on them: for, if Antichrist be come, there is no way to vindicate Rome and their Pope from this charge, it so natively p. 675followeth. Again, there is no way to evite this, that he is already come, but by pointingout such another imaginary Antichrist as shall never come, and thus to bound him up to the three or four last years of the world, contrary to the whole strain of this Prophesie, in some part following the way of the Jews, who, to evite the fulfilling of the Prophesies concerning the true Messias, do fabulously inquire for a Messiah contrary to the Scriptures, with such wars and effects of his reign: which, because they are not fulfilled, therefore tenaciously they adhere to this, that the true Messias is not yet come, which way, as it is just with God in both, thus to plague their rejecting of clear light, so ought it to work humility and commiseration in us, considering how unreasonable the wisdom of man is in the things of God. They say, 1. It cannot be the Church of Rome, but the City. Answ. But we have shown it is not the City simply (for, then it had been a whore long before Iohn wrote; for there was a City) but it is that City once a Church and afterward degenerating. Then (say they) Peter, and the Martyrs under the Heathens, are to be reckoned of this defection, for they lived there. Answ. No; for then that City was not become an harlot, neither is it simply Rome that is the whore, but Rome degenerated, such as she was foreseen to be after the heathen Emperours removall out of the way, which was not then fulfilled. Nor is it simply living there, but as a member of her that maketh one guilty, except it be made sinfull by other circumstances. Lastly, they say, Rome cannot be the whore, because (forsooth) of her holinesse, And what is that? There are so many Abbacies, Mortifications, holy Church-men, Relicts and Temples of Saints, many Masses and such like there, &c. All which serve not to prove this conclusion, that she is so. And it is not unobservable, that immediately after this answer, Corn. à Lap. professor at Rome, doth justifie the toleration of Stews and Brothel-houses in it, as a thing tending to prevent much sin, and becoming a well-ordered Commonwealth; And when this is mentioned by them as a piece of Romes holinesse, we may the more easily judge of the rest.

We may add yet one argument more for confirming of our application, which especially is binding, from their own principles. The Rome that is described here to be the whore, and as such to be destroyed, is either Rome heathen, which is past, or under Antichrist, which is to come, or popish under the Pope, which is present: for, (as Alcasar, Disp. 1. in hoc caput. assereth) there is no other Rome, which it can be applyed unto; But neither of the first two can be said: Therefore it must be the Rome that is present. It cannot be Rome heathen which is past; for so the arguments urged by Viegas, Ribera, and Cornelius à Lap. against it, are unanswerable: some whereof are formerly touched in general.

Arg. 2. If it be the destruction of Rome heathen, Then it must either be (as Be…ar. and some others make it) the destruction which Rome suffered by the Goths, Vandals, &c. and the rest of the barbarous Nations; But that cannot be: for, 1. that is not done by Antichrist, the Beast, or Kings, befriending him (as they say) nor for that guiltinesse, as we and the text say. 2. Rome was not then the whore, neither upon that account did these pursue it. 3. That destruction was not unrecoverable, as is here prophesied of. And, 4. (as Alcasar urgeth) it is not suitable to punish Rome heathen by the overturning of Rome christian, and now become so holy: it cannot be this then. Or, 2. it must be the overthrow which Constantine gave to the heathen Emperours (as Alcasar asserteth it) But that cannot be, 1. That was not of Rome the whore, which had once made defection. 2. That was not a destruction of Rome, (much lesse a total overthrow, as is implyed in Chap. 18.) but was rather a liberation of Rome; for even Rome the City had much freedom and glory by this, which is contrary to the scope of this Chapter and the Chapter following: therefore this opinion is not only called (singularis) a singular opinion, by Cornelius à Lap. but by Alcasar himself, (Not. 11. pro…miali) is suspected to be accounted a paradox: It is true, that was indeed the wounding of one of the heads, mentioned Chap. 13. But it is one thing to wound the head, another thing to destroy the City it self, the Government had been often changed before, yet the City stood. Now, this destruction is not any such, which was to come on its Governours only, but on the City it self; and that a totall stroke: Therefore this cannot be intended here, but is justly casten, and that unanswerably by the Authors foresaid, especially the last. This then cannot be understood of heathen Rome in any sense. Nor, 2. can it be understood of Rome, as under a defection yet to come so immediately before the end of the world: for, 1. It is not agreed amongst themselves if it be possible that Rome can fall into such defection p. 676yea, others, as Alcasar (Disp. 1. in cap. 17. and Notat. 11, and 13. in pro…emiali.) doth by many reasons oppose this, and with many Authorities and Prophesies, as one of St. Benedict, cited out of Gregorius, whereby it was still taken for truth, that Rome should never again be heathen. And, he saith, this opinion is (inova, & que ansam hartticis prebet & omnino improbabilis, &c.) new, improbable and favourable to hereticks, giving them ground to alleage, that seing Rome hath now so many images, &c. that it hath already fallen to that defection. And although his Authorities be not much, yet the argument that be draweth from the series of the prophesie against it, whereby he sheweth that this prophesie relateth to events long before the end of the world, and the other events, as that of Gog and Magog, and others, must follow it, are convincing and unanswerable. For confirming whereof, we add these considerations further, 1. That by this prophesie the state of the true Church is holden forth to be most glorious immediately before the end: Therefore it cannot consist with such an universal defection as this! This will bind the more, if we take-in the consideration concerning the Jews conversion formerly mentioned, which hath with it the fulnesse of the Gentiles, as its companion. 2. It is certain that the seven Vials have the last plagues, Chap. 15. and also that these seven Vials bring judgement on the Beast or Antichrist (who is singularily the Beast, and the object of the judgement of the first Vial, Chap. 16. 1, 2. and supposeth this defection to preceed) Now, it cannot be supposed that all these Vials are to be bounded within so short time to the end of the world, especially considering the enlargement of the Church, which, by these contemporary prophesies, is clearly intimated to fall under them. Therefore that application unto any future state of Rome, cannot stand: and seing by themselves neither of these can stand, it must necessarily follow, that the third is a truth, and that Rome, as here considered, is the Rome now in being. And, if any should say that Theologia symbolica is not argumentativa, and therefore no solid argument can be drawn from this Prophesie: Alcasar answereth, (ubi supra) that though this or that particular expression will not bear an argument in such Scriptures; yet, saith he (and that truly) where the scope and series agree joyntly in a conclusion, it must be of force, seing it is Scripture, otherwise no safe interpretation might be drawn from any prophetical or enigmatical Scripture. And therefore before the adversaries can exempt Rome present, or the Pope, from this charge, they must not only answer what we say, but must more satisfyingly answer what one of them opposeth to another; which can never be done untill they agree with us in the conclusion.

We have been the longer in this, because it is indeed the great scope of this Prophesie, to make this whore discernable, and it is their great work to disguise her so, that she be not discerned. And this Chapter is acknowledged by all to be the main seat of this Controversie, and the chief key, yea, as some call it, the Castle of this Prophesie (Arx Apocalypseos,) the opening and taking-in whereof, doth both confirm what is past, and make way for what is coming.