A LOOKING-GLASS FOR THE POPE.  
Wherein HE MAY SEE HIS own Face, the express Image of ANTICHRIST.  
Together with THE POPE'S NEW CREED, containing 12. Articles of superstition and treason, set out by Pius the 4. and Paul the 5. masked with the name of Catholic Faith: Refuted in two Dialogues.  
Set forth by LEONEL SHARP Doctor in Divinity, And translated by EDWARD SHARP Bachelor in Divinity.  1. KING. 18. 
How long will you halt between two religions? if GOD be GOD follow him, if Baal be GOD follow him.  
LONDON Printed by EDWARD GRIFFIN dwelling in the little old Bailie near the Kings-head. 1616.   

THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY to the most Reverend Clergy of ENGLAND.  
IT must not seem strange (most Reverend Fathers in GOD, and my much beloved Brethren) if, seeing the Captains of Israel be gone forth to war against Antichrist, a Soldier of a meaner rank, moved with the goodness of the cause, enter the battle, and join himself to the standard. For all do see the Pope renew the old wars, and cannot rest quiet, but assays by all means, 
Papistas' nostros, nostras dicerem.  how he may recover the possession of GREAT BRITAIN being lost, and in a vain hope thereof our Papists in the masculine, (I should have said in the feminine but that I should seem to some to have spoken false Latin) are grown more in number, and far more insolent than they were wont heretofore. Who then; though he be the meanest servant of Christ borne under, or rather with the Gospel restored, without which he would not deem Paradise itself to be a pleasant Country; would not resist and withstand to his teeth Antichrist himself renewing his forces, and taking courage unto him with such earnestness, to recover that seat from whence aforetime he was justly cast out? I was not ignorant what labours were to be undertaken, what wrongs were to be digested, by them who enter combat, and maintain fight with so cruel an enemy: so that it were better for them to be silent, if they thought what were available rather for their own private, then for the public estate of the Church of Christ. But that which usually falls out in war, that the tried prowess of the Captains doth by their ensample whet on the courages of the Soldiers, and doth stir up and prick forward their sluggish minds to the effecting of some exploit: The very same doth happen to God's Ministers in this spiritual warfare, to whom there is ability given from God, to some greater, to some less, to all some. Whereby though they can add nothing to the matters in controversy, and it may be they ought not: because not new things are to be delivered by Divines, but after a new manner as Vincentius wrote, nor with a divers faith, but with a divers style as Austen warneth: yet notwithstanding both by the consent of their testimony, & with the difference of their gifts and the variety of discourse they can and ought give their helping hand to the Gospel. That was also an encouragement that assoon as the beast wounded with the king's spear began to grunt, 
Bellarmine Parsons. Pacenius. Christano: Becan. Coquaeus, and many others.  it presently cast up out of his mouth a great swarm of jesuits, who should not so much refute with arguments, as traduce with slanders, written with the hand of scorpions, the King's majesty, being not only the best of Kings, but the best of men, and undoubtedly the true Defender of the Faith. Right Heretics; who murder men not with the sword, but with their wiles, as Jerome writeth: for a man's style may be counted aswell a cutthroat, as a sword drawn against Kings, whose honour seems to be more dear and tender unto them than their lives. So that james Clement, or Francis Ravillacke, were no more cruel in wounding the King's body, than Bellarmine, or Pacenius in wounding the King's name. It is said that Ethnic Room did imprint that letter, whereof Cicero makes mention not to the table of judges, as divers interpret it, but as Cicero and Pliny, to the head and forehead of false accusers; to the leaden head, and iron forehead, that they may carry countenances as stigmatical slaves branded with the marks of those letters in disgrace of their slanderous tongues, whom Plautus doth therefore term litered men. Truly it may seem very unjust, if I do not desire that those jesuits should be accounted litered, whom popish Rome doth nourish and cherish within her, as those old geese, and dogs, who by their cackling and barking, did pursue any that assaulted the capital. Add that those two staves, whereof Zacharie the Prophet maketh mention, the authority of Magistrates, and the obedience and agreement of Subjects, 
Za: cap. 1. vers. 7.  calling the one the staff of beauty, the other the staff of bonds, These graceless jesuits endeavour to break them both, making rebellion an Arittle of their faith, wherein they go so far that they be not only convinced of our side, but even of their own. For of late certain secular Priests as they are called, more moderate in show then the rest, that they may the more freely disperse abroad closely among us the seeds of superstition, do cunningly inveigh against the Articles of treason, brought in by the jesuits; whenas Alan and many other secular Priests do both command and practise treason. Our men therefore both as good Patriottes and as faithful Ministers, being bound with the double bond of warfare, every one of them for his Graces, for his time and place, much more for his power ought to oppugn both these Articles, whereby we may maintain according to our vocations the liberty of the kingdom, under which we were borne, together with the truth of the Gospel by which we were borne again. Wherein the most learned bishop of Elye doth very justly tax the Ministers that are lukewarm and silent in a business of such importance, 
Epist Dedicat. to the KING.  who do not bestow their pains in writing, when as this cause, as he saith, is to be reckoned among those, wherein he that gathereth not with Christ, doth scatter abroad with the enemy of Christ; wherein if any man shall not deliver his faithful knowledge, e●e shall not deliver his own soul. And doth add this, that in such a business you were better want power then will, and ability than faithfulness. Which I remember was sometime told me of that most Reverend archbishop D. Whitgift, then when the quarrel on both sides was not so hot, when he wished that in so great a plenty of excellent Divines among us there were more that would employ their spare times from their duty of preaching, in the pains of writing. I am come therefore into the field being thereto provoked with the goodness of the cause, the ensample of the Captains, the injury of the enemy, the Oath of warfare, the encouragement of the Fathers, that I might somewhat daunt the enemy, insulting so unworthily.  
To which purpose I thought good to set this task to myself, that I might lay open the new creed of faith, gathered out of the new Articles of faith both open and secret by the bishop of Rome himself, not so much for our own Countrymen that are Papists, whom if so many books so excellently set forth in English cannot satisfy, nothing at all can satisfy; as in a Latin Dialogue for their sakes that are in foreign parts. And this Dialogue is divided into three books, whereof two of them are now set forth, the third God willing, which at this time lieth in scattered papers, if my health will permit shall be committed to print assoon as may be. In all which I first bring in a certain jesuite Robert Saturnine a turbulent and wicked fellow, who with his choicest arguments doth eagerly defend heresy and treason: And I join with him for an answerer Antonius Patriotta an Orthodoxal Divine. 
Cicero.  You know the manner of Dialogues, that men speak those things in them, which they never spoke. Therefore Saturnine will happily complain, that those things are laid to his charge which he never spoke, whenas I dare religiously affirm, that this factious Priest doth not use only the arguments of the chiefest jesuits, but their method and their words, chief of Alan, Bellarmine and Parsons, that any of them in all things may seem to be Robert Saturnine.  
I have prefixed before the Dialogue a true looking-glass for the Pope, i. a lively picture of Antichrist prophetically drawn out by S. Paul and S. john, expounded by the ancient Fathers as far as they could foresee, and by the new more certainly by the event; I thought good to set it together with short conclusions, priest to that end, wherein the Pope with all his rabble may discern himself. For the order of nature did require, that he should evict the Pope to be Antichrist, which appeareth by the Glass, who had a purpose to prove popery to be Antichristianity, which is taught in the Creed. I thought good to set before them both, the Glass of Christ, and a short compendium of Christianity, fetched out of the Gospel, and expressed in my Epistle to the Christian Reader. For you know that two duties belong to the Minister, one that he preach Christ sincerely: the other that he plainly lay open Antichrist, as that worthy man and Martyr of God john hus thought in his time.  
Now all this (I know not how little or nothing) father's and brethren, I submit to your judgement, and commit to your patronage. For those reasons which seemed equal to me to take in hand the defence of the business, should seem so to you for the defence of my person. I, when I read that there was mention made of the popish creed by our men, but saw that it was laid open by none to my knowledge of set purpose with any of their discourses, I took the matter in hand not so much in hope to perform that I should do, as for desire to try what I could do, hoping thereby to stir up other men's cares who can deal in the business more learnedly and eloquently. You have hitherto heard why I undertook this labour: now if it please you understand, why I dedicated it to you. For when I perceived that the whole body of Religion was to be handled by me in this Creed, I thought good most humbly to call together the Religious Clergy to be Patron of this work, of whom the Romish Clergy have taken so many deadly blows, that they fear no Clergies forces and blows more; and whom it grieveth them to see endowed of God with so many excellent parts of piety, knowledge, tongues and prophesy. Therefore that great Tiberine fisherman, when as his trade of fishing began to be laid aside, and wax cold, because that certain great fishes had broken out of his nets torn and worn for age, drew unto him certain skilful workmen out of our Universities, with deceitful rewards, who might mend again the nets being so tattered and torn, and make them fit to catch not Souls but Crowns; and those whom he first caught with his golden bait as fishes, he sent back again as fishermen. Whereto agreeth that of martial.  
He sent us great rewards,  
but sent them on a hook:  
How can the fish on fisherman  
in lovely manner look?  
With the same cunning deceit he doth daily endeavour to entangle young learned students, and to entice them with deadly gifts unto him, that they may help, and uphold his forlorn and desperate quarrel. Wherein he seems to be like to that Pithius the usurer in Cicero, 
Cic: office: 3.  who that he might cozen Cannius a plain country Gentleman, called to him all the fishermen, and taught them what they should do, that they should fish altogether, and bring the fish when it was caught, and lay them at his feet, by which devise he might sell his farm at a dearer rate. So the Bishop hath sent for fishermen out of Germany, 
Which is the Pope's signet.  but chief out of England, under the ring of the fisherman, who should secretly return to the fish ponds whence they came, and being caught themselves should catch others, and should bring their boats, and fishes of all sorts, to him, that by that means he might make the merchandise of his Church the more saleable. This is the Bishop's cunning. Was this the reason he alured our youth unto him with rewards, and placed them in his Colleges of Rome and Rheims, that he should send them back twice worse than he found them? This cozenage of our young men, wherewith this grand cozener of the world doth uphold his seat, is to be prevented with all the advise we can. Whereby he doth plainly show, what great confidence he puts in our men's wits, wherewith he perceiveth, that the tower of Babylon is both most eagerly defended and impugned in this age of ours. He hath none of his side more learned than the English-Priests, chiefly the jesuits, who that they might infect the English, writ in English, in the judgement of wisemen elegantly, in the judgement of fools probably, that they may supply that by the goodness of their style, which is wanting to the goodness of their cause. Neither yet do they bring any new matter, but they polish and trim over their old stuff, objected a hundred times by their side, and refuted a hundred times by ours; and they cast a new colour and flourish over there threadbare and withered arguments, that the jesuits school may seem to have refined old popery, as Medea did Pelia with her enchantments. 
The description of a Papist.  But it doth bewray in the encounter both her fear and diffidence, while she doth enlarge the Canon with the Apocriphals, diminish the Scripture with her traditions, overthrow the original with her translation, pervert the text with her gloss. In the mean while she sends out books wherein she stuffs out her arguments concluded commonly out of mere allegories, enforced proportions, lame similitudes, feigned miracles, foolish revelations, naked names of Fathers, hired testimonies of Schoolmen, which she (I must confess) hath furnished with fine words and well polished, and with a curious composition of sentences, attiring the Roman harlot with all her trim, with the enticements whereof the unstable and unwary young age of many may be caught and deceived. Upon the Favourers of which books, who either bring them over to us, or by reading defend them, or give them to other to be read with allowance of them; I wish that punishment might be inflicted, 
D. Ed. Cok. do: come: place in his Epistle prefixed before the case of Postnati.  which a most Reverend judge declareth to be prescribed by law. The authors of these books, assoon as the Italian air hath blown upon them, do think the northern people to be scarce men, who writ against them though they writ with a better conscience and greater faithfulness than themselves. For they hold themselves to the true Canon, they trust wholly to the written word, they go to the original, 
The description of a Protestant.  they have the same text and commentary, but that they bring in the Apostles breaking the way, and the Father's following after, as witnesses of their own times, as those that judge the Apostles in a matter of faith are to he hearkened unto without the Fathers, and not the Fathers without the Apostles. So they do not play with reeds in their hands like the Adversaries, but strike thorough with their darts: neither do they allege arguments without testimonies, or testimonies without arguments: which they do not reckon up for number, but consider for the weight: neither do they deceitfully urge parcels taken out of the body of the Scripture, as the Adversaries, who read them reported out of some magistral book or other; but allege them being furnished with all circumstances, that from thence they may infer and urge the truth: neither do they follow after types and allegories, but search out the inward substances and natures of things, neither do the use any whorish trim, but such sound and sober ornaments, which become the cause of God. Fearful opponents, great Orators, such as many more are to be esteemed who do not write, whose stings if any shall think are lost because they lie close, he is much deceived. By hearing of whose learned Lectures and Sermons, and reading their books I ingenuously confess, I come better instructed and prepared to defend the cause. That as we read the family of the Scipios were borne to the ruin and overthrow of Carthage, so me think I may hope, that our Clergy is borne again of God and sent into the world to the utter ruin: and destruction of Rome. Whom therefore may I better desire to be the Patron of my labours, than that Clergy that is the fatal vanquisher of Rome? I may add thereto, that seeing myself in the former course of my life have been joined with many notable men in the University, either in the fellowship of studies, or in the Court in the duty of preaching, or in conversation in the bond of friendship: I thought by this my dutiful Dedication I should renew the memory of our acquaintance in Christ. Last of all, who is ignorant that our writers, when once they have stirred up more earnestly the God of this world, and have touched Antichrist to the quick, with what virulent calumniations the professed enemies will traduce them? And it is not to be wondered at, if they spare not their books whose throats they would cut: and detract from their good names, whose lives they seek after? who when they cannot do mischief to good men by themselves, will attempt to effect it by false brethren. If this were done in the green tree, how much more in the withered? and if they deal thus with the tale Cedars, how will they press down the mean trees, and lower shrubbs? The greater is my hope, that it will come to pass that they who writ, being moved with the sense of their injury: and they that do not write being moved with the goodness of the cause, will by their authority maintain another, that offers himself to danger for the glory of Christ. For the Doctors and writers in the cause of the Gospel as they be most odious to such as be wicked so should they be most dear to them that be well given. For these causes (Fathers and Brethren) I have thought good to have these my small labours to be most humbly and dutifully dedicated unto you, in whose religion I thought faithfulness; in whose doctrine assistance; in whose love comfort; and in whose authority help did consist. You have seen as I said at the first the insolency of the Papists, your Fathers have felt their cruelty, you cannot neither ought you to forget the powder or rather the jesuits treason; which threatened the Kingdom; the massacres of Paris, and the Church; the fires of Queen Marie: whose embers the Pope your old friend O ye Clergy of England doth hide and cover, he doth well remember your duty, he forgets not your love toward him. Against your argument drawn from the Scripture he fetcheth his drawn from the faggots. You pass over the fire covered over with false ashes.  
Therefore that which ministereth occasion to many to write, the same must be an occasion for all to take heed. And that which was cause to me to seek for your patronage and help, the same should be the cause of stirring up our zeal, and watchfulness. GOD preserve the KING and Kingdom, GOD defend the Clergy the most flourishing of the whole world, being the eye of the Kingdom, from the injuries and treacheries of all their enemies.  
Your Lordships and Your worship's most devoted in Christ LEONEL SHARP.   

THE EPISTLE to the Christian READER; Wherein the glass of Christ, and Christianity is contained.  
YOU are not ignorant, Christian Reader, that the hatred of the Synagogue of Rome, hath been a long time very deadly and open against the reformed Church, and that it hath been secret against the Scripture, and covered over, with a shadow of outward Religion, and a veil of devotion. For although she be much moved with the envy at our flourishing Church, and with the injury of her own beauty so despised; yet because she feeleth herself so wounded in her head with a weapon from heaven, cast by the hand of man, she is no less angry with God, that gave the weapon, than with man that cast it. Which if it were not so, truly she would never have endured so many 
a Aesop's fables, a nose of wax, a shipman's hose, a Delphian sword, black and inky Divinity. Scripture men, inky Divines.  slanders, so wickedly & profanely uttered against the holy Scripture to have been published in print: she would never have furthered such devices in her inward Laterane Conclave, which should have framed 
b Matth: Paris: in Hen: 3. pag. 104.  a new Gospel, 
c Li●● consor: Fran●isi pag. 304.  a new jesus, 
d The Bull of Pius 4. about the profession of the oath of orthodox faith annex. to the Con: Trent: sub Innoc: 3.  a new Creed. But she was displeased with the four Evangelists, because they passed by their Pope as a unknown man. And therefore she created a fift Evangelist, who by the help of the Monks might coin a fift Gospel fit for their purpose than the other. They deemed the true jesus the son of Marie, crucified by God's decree upon Mount Caluarie for the salvation of men, to be but half a Saviour. Therefore they devised Francis, Peter Barnardons son, as if he had been pierced with the same wounds of Christ, and in the same parts, and consecrated him in the Laterane Council to be the Typical jesus. She thought the twelve articles of the faith, gathered together by Christ's 12. Apostles, not to be sufficient for salvation. And therefore published twelve new articles of the faith composed in the Council of Trent, and brought by Pope Pius the fourth, into the form of a Creed, Paul the fift being the furtherer of it. O holy mother the Church, but o father far more holy. In the mean time she preached Christ's great love & bounty toward the Pope, and the Pope's reverence and obsequiousness toward Christ. But seeing Babylon that old whore had learned to trim and paint herself, but to dissemble her inward affections, and cunningly to cloak her hatred with love, and her love with hatred, every wiseman is to forecast, being taught by former hurt and mischief, not any more what she doth pretend, but what she doth intend. She knoweth that the Scripture is a revealer of her idolatry, luxury, covetousness, pride and cruelty. She frets and chafes that no portion of honour and government, but of labour and pains is allotted unto the Pope by Christ his Testament. She is grieved at the heart that she is foretold by the Apostles to be mystical Babylon, and the Pope to be that Antichrist. She abhors the Scripture as a thief doth the gallows; she despiseth the Apostles as her accusers; she hates Christ as her judge, but with a secret hatred; as she loveth Antichrist with a secret love, whose enemy she doth earnestly counterfeit herself to be, that she may seem to be at familiar enmity with him. So she doth counterfeit herself to be a most dutiful worshipper of the Scripture, as of the former councils: and doth often allege it as the Devil doth, turned to a contrary sense, and doth allege it but as a falsifier fraudulently corrupted: and she is inwardly vexed, that such a blow is given to her head by the Scriptures, not as they be expounded by us, but as they be understood by those Synods. But she takes nothing more grievously than that in the supremacy of her jurisdiction, i in the chief article of her public religion, that two of their chiefest founders, as she calls them, be so silent witnesses in this cause S. Peter, 
1 Pet: 5.  & S. Paul. S. Peter who did plainly forbid superiority to any one Priest over the Clergy: & styled himself most truly & most humbly not an Archpriest, but a fellow-priest: S. Paul who when of purpose he sent an Epistle to the Romans, made no mention at all of the Pope and the prerogative of the Church of Rome, nor of the after-borne articles of the faith, which she in great plenty brought in afterward. And when as of set purpose he had reasoned of the perpetual government of the militant Church, and had gathered together many unities; one God, one faith, one spirit, one body, one Lord, he overpast one visible head, 
Ephes: 4.  being forgetful of their Peter. And no marvel, when as Peter himself was forgetful of himself. He did rather divide the government of the Church among all the Bishops, and would rather have it an Aristocratical government with many under Christ, than Monarchical under one: as the practice of the Church next following for many ages did approve. For that the five patriarchs had equal authority, both Balsamon doth witness, and the Council of Niece doth confirm. And Francis Duarene writes, that Boniface the third, 
Francis: Duar. de sacris benef: lib. 1. cap: 10.  not before the 607. years, not without much ado could obtain of Phocas to be created the universal Bishop. The Pope than is indebted to a King-killer for all the glory of his kingdom, and yet he seemeth to give thanks to Christ, as if by his word, Feed my sheep, he had ordained the Bishops of Rome in Peter, as he writes himself, a fellow-minister, to be Kings so many ages before they were borne. 
Cic. ad Petum ep: 9 ●: 8.  As Cicero when as a false decree of the Senate, was brought into Armenia and Syria as made against his mind, writes that thanks were given him from foreign Kings, because he had named them to be Kings by his consent, whom he knew not that they were not only named, but not so much as to be borne. But the Nicene Council doth greatly discontent the Roman Bishop, whom he maketh but equal to the Bishop of Alexandria. For therefore the Bishop had corrupted that Canon, which had restrained the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, nor being therewith content, did add many years after fifty false Canons to twenty true of the Nicene Council, that he might make the whole world believe, that his supremacy which was apparently shortened by the Nycene Fathers being alive, were enlarged by them being dead. As the same Cicero doth pleasantly sport himself with Antony, 
Philip: 1.  when as he had published certain false decrees of Caesar, that the Citizens that were sent into banishment of him alive, should be recalled being dead: and that the City that was denied them of him alive, should be granted being dead: and that many immunities and privileges that were taken of him being alive, should be sold of him being dead: by which means Antony did affect both an infinite and hurtful power. So the Pope doth publish many acts as proceeding from Christ, as from the Apostles, as from the Nicene Fathers, whereby he doth usurp most proud and cruel government in the Church. And he fetcheth them from the dead, for they were never made by them when they were alive. In like manner he bringeth in the Chalcedon Fathers being dead, 
Colup: of a Can: of Chalcedon.  denying that which they affirmed when they were alive. judging, say the Fathers of Chalcedon, that the See of Constantinople in matters Ecclesiastical be as well advanced in matters ecclesiastical as the Roman, being the next unto it. Which words are falsely recited, 
Distinct: 22. Renovantes.  or rather filthily corrupted in the Canon Law; while he addeth a negative to the last words, which altereth the sense of the whole Canon into a clean contrary: yet notwithstanding let it not be advanced in matters ecclesiastical as she, but let her be the next unto it. What should I make many words? The first six general councils, which may be thought to have best of all known Christ's mind, and to deliver it most faithfully about the government of the Church, although they granted a primacy of order, and difference to the Bishop of Rome; yet they denied him a supremacy of power and jurisdiction: and according to the sixth Canon of the Nicene Council hemmed in the See of Rome into certain limits, wherein being included she should not break forth. Yet for all that they broke over the bounds set down both by God and Men. God that he might punish the contempt of the Gospel, brought so grievous a sluggishness upon the world, and so general an apostasy upon the Church, that the time itself laying up and hiding all means of help, did not only bring to light the bramble formerly hid in the ground, but brought it abroad, and set it aloft, and placed it above all the Cedars of Libanus: First, above Bishops in Boniface the third: after above Kings and Emperors in Gregory the 7, whose wings being so often clipped by four councils, Worms, Papta, Brixis and Montze, grew again in the successors so far that they flew at the last above councils. Till the three general councils of Pisa, Constance, and Basil, 
Constant: Con: Sess: 1.  did not only displace Popes out of the Popedom, but decreed that Counsels were above the Popes. For the Pisan Council did cast two Popes Gregory and Benett out of their seats; and choose Alexander the fift. And the Council of Constance assembled by the summons of john the 23. for refusing their trial, and for his abominable simony, and wicked life and manners, deprived him of his Popedom, 
Sess: 10 & 12. Sess: 4. & 5.  and after condemned Gregory the twelfth not appearing, and cut him of as a withered member, and an incorrigible heretic and schismatic as they plainly termed him. And that it may seem not to have dealt rashly, This holy general Synod, say they, lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost, and representing the Church militant, hath immediate power from Christ (not from the Pope but from Christ) whose power any whosoever, of what estate and condition soever, even the Pope himself is bound to obey. And farther declareth, if the Pope do obstinately refuse to obey the statutes, ordinances, and injunctions, which either this holy Synod, or any other, hereafter general Synod lawfully assembled, either now have or hereafter shall decree, that he is to be constrained to a condign satisfaction, and worthily to be punished: and so john the 23. being deposed and cast out, it choose Martin the fift for Pope. The Pope and the Council did long contend about the majority and superiority as they term it: but the Council had the upper hand. Here comes to my mind a certain tale, not unpleasant, of the spawn of a frog, which a Calf had trodden upon in the absence of the Dam, which Calf when one escaping from the rest, had described to the frog his dam to be a great beast; how big I pray said she, and (puffing out herself) thus big? greater by the half said the young one: 
Horaec. Sermo: 2 Sa●y: 2.  what by so much, said the Frog, when she had blown up herself more and more? not if you break yourself, said he, can you be equal to it.  
The Council of Constance with her foot trod upon two frogs, though they would have fled from trial, and declared itself to be greater and higher than the Pope though he swelled never so big. The Council had done well, if it had not crushed in pieces two Doves; and had not decreed that cup which Christ for divers causes had commanded in his supper should be given to the people, for more and more weighty causes, as they say, was to be taken from them. Which the Council of Basill did restore afterward, 
Sess: 13.  being assembled by Martin the fifts Bull, and confirmed by the letters of Eugenius the 4. whom she deposed, and being ratified by the Bull of Nicholas the fift, who succeeded Eugenius, declared the decree of the Council of Constance about the power of the general Council against the Pope to be a truth of the catholic faith, 
Basil: Con: Sess: 16.  and adjudged him an heretic that did obstinately resist the two former truths.  
Therefore let the Pope either submit himself under the general Council, or by the judgement of the general Council he must needs confess himself to be an heretic. Hence is all their grief, and their secret quarrel against the Scriptures, and the former Synods, and the latter also, (though they somewhat favoured the Romish superstition) because they did repress her ambition. Till at the last two other councils, the Laterane and the Tridentine, did lift up the Pope, not only above all councils, but above all Scriptures, that he at his pleasure might put out the crows eyes, as the Proverb is, and as if he were the 13 Apostle, set forth a doctrine at his own liking contrary to the Scripture. After this sort after many ages, and dangers, the Pope got place above Bishops, Kings, Counsels, and Scriptures themselves.  
So great a work it was to build the Romish seat.  
The very naked name whereof is opposed against all our encounters, as it were Gorgon's head. Do we allege the Fathers? what marvel is it, if when he perceiveth they stand against him, he rejects them in several, when he contemns them all in general? Do we allege Counsels? The former are corrected by the later, the better by the worse, and the more by the fewer. Do we allege the Scriptures? what good do we thereby, when we have a Sphinx at home, who can lay open the Scripture as it were a riddle according to his own sense and his best avail. Thus they reduce all things at the last to the mother the Church, or rather to the father of the Church. For they make the mother to be of the masculine gender, and bring the most general general, to one that is singular, that is, to the Pope for the time ruling. With whose spirit that Synagogue being filled, it seemeth closely to be offended with none of the Apostles more than with S. Paul: by whose silence, she takes herself not only not to be assisted, but to be hurt by his testimony, when as the merit of works being abandoned, he concludeth the only mercy of God in Christ being apprehended by faith, to be man's justice before God. Which conclusion doth overthrow all Popery, as it shall afterward appear. It doth plague the Synagogue: for it toucheth two things to the quick, the Bishop's mitre, and the Monks bellies: for faith being placed in the only merits of Christ, hath diminished the Indulgences, the treasure of the Church, and makes the offerings to images to be more rare and sparing. So that the Synagogue, doth sometime as well closely accuse S. Paul of heresy, as Luther and Caluin. I once heard two old popish Doctors, one of them a Friar jeronimite in Portugal, another a jacobine in France say, when they were priest with Paul's authority, one of them that S. Peter without doubt was a Catholic, but Paul if he be not warily expounded seems to smell of heresy. Tother, that places out of Paul, by the testimony of Peter, were hard to be understood, and had need of a Romish Commentary; Peter I said made mention of the hardness, but not of the commentary. In whose Epistle say they, whatsoever soundeth against the Roman faith therein we do not attain to the true sense, that which the Rhemists have observed. 
Rhem: testam argument: epist: in gene.  For he in the first chapter (say the Friars) did commend the faith of the Church of Rome, whereto Cyprian denieth that unfaithfulness can have access. But in the 11. chapter, I say, 
Epist: 50.  he warned the same Church, that if it departed from the bountifulness of God, it should take heed lest as the Church of Israel was cut off, so she were not cut off also. It may therefore be cut off be it spoken by Cyprians leave. For it is in act cut off, when it is fallen from that foundation, which is placed in the only mercy of Christ, apprehended by faith. That faith therefore of the Church which Paul the Apostle so much commended, and taught by his writings is one: and the faith of this Church which Paul the Pope hath left so deformed with his unwritten traditions is another. And yet she glorieth much, as I said, that Paul is her founder; I had rather they would use him as an author. But she will never do it. She maketh more account of Paul's Bulls, than Paul's Epistles: which the ancient Fathers did rightly term the key of the Scripture. Which most of the popish sort do so fear, that they cannot reconcile Paul and S. james together, but oppose them one against tother, 
The reconciling of Paul and James.  as if james the Apostle had concluded that a man is justified by his works before God, not with faith alone, against the Apostle Paul; when as Paul doth not understand the same faith and the same justification which james doth. For he requireth faith placed in the heart: this rejecteth faith bragged on in the tongue. He requireth a lively faith, this rejecteth a dead faith. He doth enforce a heavenly faith, which layeth hold on the promise: this casteth of a devilish faith, which doth only acknowledge Christ's history without application: he doth commend and extol fruitful faith working by love: this doth rightly condemn a barren faith void of the duty of holiness: he doth set forth the justification before God, which Aquinas calleth the righteousness of imputation, james the justification before men, whom the same Aquinas calleth the righteousness of declaration. Moses, from whom either Apostle drew his testimony, doth expound each, and doth take up the controversy, begun by the Adversary. The imputation of righteousness, whereof Moses maketh mention Gen: 15.6. went thirty years before that work, for which they dream that Abraham was justified before God. Which circumstance of time Paul most earnestly weighing, concludeth that faith was imputed to Abraham to obtain righteousness before God 15 years, as Moses noteth, before he begat Isaac, and other 15 years at the least before he would have sacrificed him.  
They know not well how to lose themselves out of this indissoluble knot, whosoever think that righteousness was imputed to Abraham before God, because he killed his son who was not as yet borne, when as the Holy Ghost doth pronounce him to be righteous: which S. james himself v: 23 seemeth to understand, as Oecumenius gathereth out of the place. that Abraham was the image of justification, which is wrought by faith alone, when it was imputed to him for righteousness, 
ver: 23. ver: 21.  that he believed: and of that justification also which is by works, when he would have offered his son Isaac upon the Altar. Therefore faith did make perfect the person of Abraham, and the work did justify the faith, and declare each to be perfect. Is this a fight? is this an opposition? especially between two holy Apostles, who writ their Epistles with the instinct of the same spirit. But no one thing doth more nearly gaul the Synagogue, then that Paul the Apostle by the direction of the spirit, writ the commentary of the mystery, 
Apoc: 9 2 Thess: 2. 1 Tim: 4.1.  which S. john afterward set forth of that great Antichrist, whom he maketh to be the falling star, i. an apostata from the faith, or rather the prince of the apostasy, as Paul expounds it. john calls him the Angel of the bottomless pit, the keykeeper of hell, the beast arising out of the earth, and counterfeiting the lamb with two horns, and in his voice resembling the Dragon. Therefore in show the Vicar of Christ, in deed his adversary, in ambition above Kings, Gods emulus as Paul explains it. john in order the 7. King of the Roman state, 
Apoc: 13.  the revived image of the former beast, to be after revealed within the Empire decayed, as Paul doth interpret it. john sitting in the common place Lord of the seven hilled City, in the special place in the temple of God, 
A description of the Pope.  that is, in the Church of God, as Paul doth expound it: for King's thrones are called Bishops seats. Therefore he is in office a Bishop, in name Roman or Latin, in his disposition a great hypocrite, and a notable dissembler, by his cunning an enchanter and bewitcher of souls, by his worship an Idolater, by his malicious practice a murderer, given over to sin, sold over to destruction, as both of them define. Water is no liker water than Antichrist to the Pope. But S. Paul being not therewith content, defineth Antichristianitie, to be not iniquity, but the mystery of iniquity. And doth after divide it into three parts; 

1. Curious speculations.  
2. Absurd superstitions.  
3. jewish ceremonies,   whereof it is wholly compounded: which who so holdeth doth not hold the head, as the Apostle speaketh. I beseech thee Christian Reader tell me what is more like, than old and new antichristianity? What is become of them, who deny that Popery hath his beginning from the ancient heresies? which being of the same age with the Apostolic truth in many things, as Tertullian saith, was wounded with the Apostolic style, as shall be made manifest in the discourse following. I do therefore more disdain than admire that the Apostle Paul doth so exceedingly displease the Roman synagogue, who did foreshow that Popery should be patched together, of Paganism, Idiotism, and judaisme.  

A little Glass of Christ and Christianity.  But I purposing to set out all the force and nature of Antichrist and Antichristianitie in latin, I thought good to set before it a lively and short form of Christ and Christianity, which the Apostle defineth to be the mystery of godliness: that the truth of the Gospel being brought into light out of the labyrinth, as it were, of discoursing, might put to flight with her authority and countenance the Tridentine heresy.  

a Colos. 1.29.  God the Father did decree by the testimony of Paul, that his only begotten son from all eternity, 
b Heb. 1.10.  the Creator of heaven and earth, 
c Colos. 1.16.  of Angels and men, 
d Heb. 1.3.  the brightness of his glory, and Character of his person, 
e Heb. 2.16.  should take on him not the nature of Angels but of men, 
f Heb. 7.25.  wherein he alone without any fellow helpers might fully finish the whole salvation of man. God the son, 
g Rom. 9.5.  God above all blessed for ever, though Arrius revived burst for grief, 
h 1. Tim. 3.16.  revealed in the flesh, approved in the spirit.  
True God, true man, brought forth without a father  
By a maid, whom God begat without a mother.  

i Heb. 7.3.  As he was shadowed out by Melchisedech, and therefore 
k 1. Tim. 2.5.  the only one Mediator between God and man in the fullness of time, fulfilled the decree of his Father, reconciling God displeased with man that was lost by his own accord, 
The means whereby salvation is procured to man.  by the excellency of his person, the sanctity of his nature, obedience of his life, and sacrifice of his death, did alone deserve eternal salvation, not infusing into him so much grace, whereby man himself might merit salvation to himself, 
m Rom. 4.24.25.  but imputing the merit of his death, which he might lay hold on with a thankful and holy mind. God the holy Ghost proceeding from them both, did lay open to the mind of man salvation which the Father decreed, the Son deserved, and sealed it up in his heart, 
n Ephes. 1.14.  given not as a pledge, but as an earnest (which Austin observeth out of the Apostle 
o Austin in this place. ) because that money which was borrowed when it is paid again the pledge is restored; but the earnest when the price is paid again is not restored, because it is part of the price which is not to be taken away, but is to be supplied, as 
p Aquin. in this place.  Aquine teacheth out of Austin. Therefore the spirit of Christ given to man, the earnest of heavenly inheritance is not paid back again. So the Apostle hath set three foundations of man's salvation more sure than heaven and earth.  

1. The eternal decree of the Father.  
2. The infinite merit of the Son.  
3. The irrevocable earnest of the spirit.   
So the work of our salvation is from God alone, the knowledge of salvation from the word of God alone, hence he is called the word of salvation. 
q Gal. lib. 2. de sanitate tuenda.  Galen writeth that the cause of many diseases in the body as hereditary proceeds from corrupt seed, and from putrefied nourishment. The disease of the soul is hereditary, from corrupt seed as job saith, which is increased by custom of sinning, as with impure nourishment. Now as the diseases of the bodies are cured by contraries, so the diseases of souls: which God being 
r Pet. 1.23.2.2.  dead begetteth again by immortal seed, being again begotten feedeth them with pure nourishment, being sick & diseased healeth them with wholesome medicines, that is with the pure word of God, who is to be accounted the true Father, Pastor and Physician of the soul. Yet he useth men to that purpose as instruments, whom he sendeth and moveth, that first they preach forgiveness and absolution from all their sins promised freely by faith in Christ to the penitent: and after enjoin two things to him that is forgiven; One, that he pay back again the duty of holiness to the blessed trinity alone, for so unspeakable a blessing of salvation; The other, that he afford all the help of charity to man for God's sake, being the lively Image of God: setting before the obedient at the last inward peace upon the earth, and an eternal inheritance in the heavens. So the men of God do raise up a man that is sorrowful with the promise, direct a man that goeth astray with the commandment, comfort him that is fainting with the reward: but the men of God do speak outwardly, the spirit of God doth work inwardly. They do beat these things into their ears, the spirit doth engender faith, hope, and love in the heart; faith which doth apprehend the promise; hope which looketh for the reward, love which keepeth the commandment. 
s Colos. 1.12.  For God doth not find man fit, but maketh him fit to participate the inheritance of the Saints in light, whom he draweth being unwilling, and took him resisting out of the power of darkness, and placed him being thus delivered in the kingdom of light, the kingdom of the son of his love. 
t Ephes. 2.1.  For he found man not yet regenerated, dead in sins, not half dead, but stark dead: not like to the man with the palsy who lay sick on his couch, but to Lazarus who lay four days stinking in his grave: So that every sinner, before he hear the powerful voice of Christ speaking inwardly to him, lieth putrefied, and consumed in the grave of his sins. Whence a sinner riseth, and cometh forth as Lazarus, for the power of the Lord is in both, not the power of the dead, 
u Austin: in tracta: of john 49.  as Austin doth expound Saint Paul. So that he hath need not of helping grace, whereby he recovereth health, but creating grace, whereby he is again brought to life. And a sinner is merely passive and can bring no more help to his conversion, than Lazarus brought to his rising again. In whom Christ doth not help his weak will, but create a new 
x Galat. 6.15. Ephes. 2.10. , hence the conversion of a sinner is called new creation; not in respect of the natural faculties, and of moral virtues which sin only corrupteth, but of spiritual graces which sin hath blotted out, as the master of the sentences observed out of Austin. Therefore the image of God imprinted in the soul, in respect of the substance is deformed, in respect of the qualities is clean put out 
y Greg. Nyss. de orat. Dom. Serm 5.  as Gregory Nyssen teacheth. The restoring then of the image blotted out, is the rising again of man being dead. This is the nature, this is the disposition of the Apostles doctrine: it doth depress man, that it may extol God: it doth cast off corrupt nature, that it may bring in saving grace. A man therefore must live in God, yea farther by God, before he can either will, or think any good; a mere passive subject of grace at the first, while being as it were made warm by the spirit of Christ, he beginneth to will his own conversion, and is made a voluntary instrument of grace, by no imbred or infused force of the will, but by the power of the seed of grace, and of the new life which he had from God. Paul doth thus distinguish between a man to be converted, and converted. He maketh him to be altogether the servant of sin, because he is overcome of sin; this free in part, because he is made free by the Son: not appointing him free in part, lest he make him sacrilegious, nor this altogether a servant, lest he might make him sluggish. He doth not therefore take from the unregenerate, all power of willing, but all power of well-willing, that he may not lift up the crest of his natural pride; and he granteth to the regenerate some power of well-willing, that he may not weaken the strength of spiritual diligence. And that God may give life to the dead, and renew and repair the lost image of God 
z Ephes: 3.10. , he doth fasten and imprint the true knowledge of God and ourselves into the mind, and righteousness and holiness into the will of man; he doth enlighten the blind, with the light of his wisdom shining into him, he doth cover him being naked with the rob of his righteousness put upon him, and being unsavoury, he doth season him with the salt of his holiness infused into him. Whereby 
a 1 Cor: 1.30.  Christ is said to be made of God to the faithful man wisdom, righteousness, and sanctification. Paul makes mention of a twofold righteousness and life of a Christian: one, whereby he liveth before God; tother, whereby he liveth before men. 
b Gal: 2.20.  By faith before God, by apprehending of Christ 
c Gal. 5.6. , by love before men by the practice of holiness. So that good works are not the cause of justification, but justification is the cause of good works, as 
d Aug: de Spi: & li.  Austin affirmeth: neither do we attain faith by virtues, but virtues by faith, as Bede gathereth out of Gregory. One order is in moral matters, another in heavenly: one in Aristotle, another in Paul 
e Arist. 3. ethi. . There a man must do just things justly, before he be just: Here a man must be first just in another before he can do just things, and justly in himself. As Christ is made sin for us, so we are made the righteousness of God in Christ. 
f 2 Cor. 5. vlt.  For Christ himself most holy was made sin by the imputation of our sin, we sinners therefore are righteous only by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. At 
g August: in Euchirid: c. 41.  Austin doth expound the Apostle, and Anselme, Austin. He therefore is sin as we are righteousness: not ours, but we are Gods, not in ourselves, but in him: as he is sin, not his own, but ours; not in himself, but in us. So Austin. So 
h Ansel: in loc.  Anselme; He is sin, saith he, as we righteousness, not ours, but Gods, not in us, but in him: as he is sin, not his own, but ours, not in himself but in us. Both of them do acknowledge with us, the imputed righteousness of Christ with the Apostle, howsoever the Synod of Trent do make inherent righteousness the form of justification, and the Rhemists too profanely scoff at the imputation of righteousness, which Pighius that arch-papist doth confess. A sinner therefore dead in himself, liveth righteous in Christ, and liveth not to himself, but to God: but yet so liveth, that he feeleth in himself the fight of the spirit and the flesh, which the Apostle acknowledgeth not only in other Christians, but in himself, for the comfort of others: I do not that good I will, saith the Apostle, but the evil I would not that I do: which a bad man, did not badly express: 
I hate and what I hate, against my will must be,  
What I would cast away, to bear is grief to me.  But that the Apostle speaketh of the motions of concupiscence, whereto the will doth not consent, this of the beastly affections, whereto the will is wholly addicted. Which notwithstanding by the working of the natural conscience, he saith he hateth. But assoon as a man gins to live in God, sin gins to die in man. For it hath received a deadly wound in the root in respect of guiltiness: while it be cured by perfect burial it remains dead, not cut off, that we may be humbled; not imputed, lest we should be cast down. Sin dwelleth in us as a jebusite subdued, not expelled; subdued, it taketh fear from us; not expelled, it shakes off security, that to strive with it, it is far more safe, than to have no enemy at all. In this fight God's grace doth help us, strengthening us with a double sacrament: of Baptism, and the Lords Supper: there the fountain of regeneration is powered out, here the bread of life is set before us: there is a healthful bath to wash us when we are fowl, here is a spiritual feast to feed us when we were faint: so that from each we may take strength to resist. So the power of God is made perfect in our infirmity, which when out of our own scars it stirreth up in us a courage to fight, so from help ministered from thence it puts into us sure hope that we shall overcome. For it bringeth grief out of the fall for sin, and stirreth up strife out of grief with sin, and out of strife bringeth the victory of sin: So out of poison it gets a remedy, and out of the sickness it getteth health. Neither doth it in the mean while deprive us of inward comfort, while we wait for the eternal triumph: But in the fight it shows us the propitiation; after the fight, which endeth in death, it presently openeth the holy place of holiest, so that neither peace of conscience is wanting to them being alive, and their souls shall have rest when they are dead. Thus it cometh to pass, that these broken relics of sin in the sons of God, by God's grace do much profit, when out of them they make an antidote against pride, neither are puffed up with the merits of their own works. Whereby the doctrine of Trent ought to be accounted the more abominable, which doth decree that eternal life is to be restored to the faithful, for the merit of works, which the Apostle propoundeth not as the reward of a servant, but the inheritance of a son; not paid for spiritual obedience, but given to the spiritual generation, as Austin expounds the Apostle: the crown of righteousness in respect of Christ, who merited: a crown of mercy, in respect of us for whom he merited, to be given by the just judge, not for the weight of man's merit, but for the force of God's promise: to be rendered according to their works, not for their works, 
Gregor: in 7. Psal: peniten.  as Pope Gregory distinguisheth out of the Apostle. The study therefore of good works is to be urged, because God shall judge according to thy works: but merit is to be detested, because it shall never save thee for good works. For whatsoever you do well is of God, not of the merit of man, but of the blessing of God. You do owe it therefore to God, as the creature to the Creator, as a captive servant to his redeemer: acknowledge thyself a servant, who of right dost owe duty unto thy Lord: and whereas God doth call thee his son, acknowledge grace, and forget not nature. Neither think thou hast deserved any thing, if thou have done well, because thou oughtest to have done so. Besides remember, that there is some filthiness from the flesh mingled with thy work though good, which doth purely flow from the spirit, that that very thing, that we seem to live justly, is a fault, if our work, when God's severity judgeth it, God's mercy do not excuse it before himself, so that the fault in the work must first be forgiven to the penitent, by grace, before the work itself be crowned by promise. Lastly the Apostle saith that the afflictions of this life are not worthy of the glory which shall be revealed, that if a man should serve God a thousand years, and that most zealously, he should not deserve for the merit to be half a day in heaven, 
Anselm. de mensura crucis.  Anselme said, although we die a thousand times, although we perform all the virtues of the mind, yet we can do nothing worthy of earthly blessings, and such as are present, which we daily receive from God, much less heavenly and future which we look for as Jerome, 
Jerom. in hunc loc.  Chrysostome, and Basill have taught. But take away merit, and the desire of virtue will wax cold. It may be in bastards, who serve God with a servile, and mercenary mind, but in sons it is not so, who worship God the father with a free & voluntary spirit, which the spirit of adoption hath given them, who testifieth to their spirits that they be the sons of God, the inheritors of heaven, and coheirs with Christ. And if the free love of God, whereby he being moved did bring thee back from death to life, and forgave thee all thy transgressions, and healed all thy infirmities, and hath crowned thee with his mercies, (mark what the Prophet saith) not with thy merits, but with his mercies: if this free love I say shall not draw from thee free obedience, nothing shall ever draw it from thee.  
There be many forcible arguments whereby the Apostle persuadeth us to live holily, soberly, and justly, that with good works we set forth God's glory, which works though they appease not God, yet they please God, and make our election and vocation thereby sure unto us. But there is nothing more powerful than the fatherly love of God, to provoke to goodness the ingenuous minds of sons. This is the will of God even the sanctification and salvation of us all: to the which ends he chose us from eternity, he called and justified us in time, and he shall glorify us to eternity. So the mercy of jehovah toward his sons is from eternity to eternity, for whom he hath preordained salvation in choosing them, declared it in calling them, begun it in justifying them, and shall perfect it in glorifying them. They that being persuaded by the spirit of God do certainly know that they be in the grace of God now present, and shall be ever hereafter, entering into the state of grace by faith, and standing therein by faith, and glorying under the hope of the glory of God, by faith, as the Apostle teacheth: which place Chrysostome doth thus expound, that he that hath given his faith to God, that there ought not only a full persuasion to be assured them of those things which are given presently, but of those that are to come, as if they were now given. That the state of regeneration should be thought to be more certain, then of creation. The state of the first Adam was changeable, of the second unchangeable, whose true and lively members all the sons of God are to be esteemed. Wherefore of the state of Christ be unchangeable, the state of them that are truly Christians, who being grafted into Christ by faith do live, and shall live by their faith (as the Apostle noteth out of the Prophet) must needs be unchangeable. For it was granted to Adam, that he was able not to die, as Austin speaketh, but to a Christian that he cannot possibly die. Three things saith Bernard I consider, wherein all my hope doth consist: 

1. The love of adoption.  
2. The truth of the promise.  
3. And the power of the reward.    
Which do so strengthen and confirm my heart, that no want of merits, no consideration of our profit, no account of the heavenly blessing can drive me from the depth of that hope wherein I am surely grounded. Therefore let my foolish thought murmur all it can, saying who art thou? or how great is that glory, or by what merits dost thou hope to obtain it? And I will confidently answer, I know whom I have trusted, I am in great assurance, because my God in great love hath adopted me, because he is true in his promise, and able to perform it. Thus Bernard out of the Apostle: Who makes it plain that the state of regeneration is most assuredly confirmed to every son of God, not only by God's promise, but by God's Oath. Whom he maketh partaker of the right faith, and of working love, and of lively hope, and of earnest repentance, and of new obedience, and calleth him the heir of the promise. To whom God as being willing to make the immutable certainty of his counsel known plentifully, as to Abraham the Father, so to Abraham's son, did not only promise, but swear that he would perform that to him which he had promised. 
Heb. 6.  For in God it is all one to swear and to say. Yet that we should have strong consolation, who follow after to obtain the hope set before us, which he hath appointed as a sure and strong anchor, entered within the veil, i. heaven, whither Christ the forerunner is entered before us, he hath confirmed our immutable state unto us by two immutable things his promise and his Oath. Let the prayer of Christ be joined to the oath of God, wherein he prayeth to God the father, that he would embrace us with the same love, that he embraced Christ himself, i. with eternal love: and would crown us with the same glory, as he crowned himself: and did not only pray for us, but died also, and rose again and was received into heaven, that he should for ever make intercession for us. Who hath left unto us his holy spirit, whereby he hath sealed unto us the heavenly inheritance. And therefore God hath assured eternal salvation to his sons, not only by promise, but by Oath, but by prayer, and sacrifice of Christ, and by the seal of the holy Ghost, that we should not doubt thereof. And yet that wicked Council of Trent decreed, that none could know by the certainty of infallible faith that he is in the state of Grace, much less shall be, but that every one should be in doubt and fear of his own Grace. That it seemeth to have utterly overthrown all the foundations of man's salvation laid by the Apostle, as it shall plainly appear by the discourse upon the popish Creed. Antony Marinarius did withstand that wicked decree even in the Council itself, who taught the perseverance of the faithful was secure, and their security to be persevered in. Ambrose Catharinus did likewise resist, who maintained that a son of God by the certainty of faith doth know that he is in the state of grace, as any man may be sure that there is Rome, yea and that without doubting or fear, so that he openly did resist the Council. Albertus' Pighius did afterward oppose himself, who of set purpose doth defend that our righteousness is imputed to us by faith alone unto life. The Council of Colen may thee joined to these, wherein many learned Divines True it is, say they, and it is required to the justification of a man, that he certainly believe, not only in general, that they who do truly repent shall obtain mercy by Christ, but that the man that believeth shall obtain forgiveness of his sins by faith in Christ: which they learned out of the Apostle by the interpretation of Bernard. Thou hast Gentle Reader the Glass of Christ, the sum of the Apostolic doctrine, to be set before the doctrine of the Trent Council, who doth strike us with a curse for the same, more fully hereafter to be propounded and maintained. The power whereof is such, that it doth clip the wing of human pride, that it doth advance the glory of God's grace, that it doth stir up an earnest desire of godliness, and doth fasten a sure anchor of salvation: that the sons of God may be made lowly in sin, thankful in blessing, holy in life, and cheerful in death.  
This doctrine Trent Council doth overthrow, from whence those twelve articles of faith proceeded, which Pius the 4. brought into the form of a Creed, enjoined to be publicly professed of his, by his Bull under an oath: which though they had their birth and beginning from heretics, yet they carry the name of the true faith, and counterfeit the Apostles to be their parents, that the greater store of Christians may be induced to receive them. As we heretofore have heard that Lambert counterfeiting the name and kindred of the Earl of Warwick, had many followers, when in truth he was the bastard of a villainous Priest: So if any shall compare these twelve bastardly and false articles of the Pope's creed, with the true and right articles of the Apostles creed, he shall find them to be as like the Apostles, as the bastard of Simon the Priest, was like the soon of the Duke of Clarence. The schoolmen and the Canonists have had great ado between them, whether the Pope could make any new articles of the faith. Bellarmine as a worshipful moderator takes up the matter in Tortus. He divides the articles into two sorts. He writes that some are of immediate revelation, others drawn & fetch from them, which notwithstanding are to be received with a catholic belief. How foolishly I shall show hereafter, now only I show what they hold. Articles of the first sort Bellarmine denieth may be made of the Pope. As much as if he should deny the sun could be made by the Pope, so many ages fastened to his globe by the hand of God. The articles of the second stamp he doth plainly affirm may be made by the Pope; as if he should say, that he professeth himself to be the author and maker of that book, whereof he is the expounder and interpreter.  
Now the jesuits have divided those that were drawn from the first into two other kinds, which are so cunningly couched together that they can hardly be distinguished. Some of them consist in practice, whereby treason is nourished, other consist in doctrine, whereby superstition is cherished. Those they scatter mystically and closely, these plainly and openly. Those I call practical and mystical, which concern the Pope's power in deposing of Kings by the sentence of excommunication, and absolving subjects from the oath of fealty: and conspiracies and rebellions to be concealed under the seal of confession; and Clerks to be exempted from the judgement of a secular Prince; and the power of the Pope above the Council, and other wicked conclusions of the same kind, with the school of Paris hath lately condemned. And a certain Priest termed a more moderate answerer, that he may more covertly and freely teach the professed articles of superstition, doth overthrow those mystical articles of rebellion: for which cause he complaineth that their salary is denied him, and the Priests of his order by the Pope. Whom I think good he should answer, as the Ass answered Balaam, Am not I thine Ass, whereon thou wert wont to ride even till this day? Tell me if ever I did the like before, and now I have once offended in telling the truth, why wilt thou beat me, and take my provender from me? If such Priests will give ear to me, let them forsake so unthankful, and unjust a master, and come over to our side. For I fear lest while they secretly sow their open articles of superstition among our Countrymen, that they will draw them from the faith of Christ, and beget scholars for jesuits, whom they will infect with their hidden articles of rebellion, and bring them from their allegiance and obedience to the King. These are fetched from the first, bastards borne of bastards, vipers bred of vipers, the last more wicked than the former, shortly bringing forth an of spring more villainous. Those that are fetched from immediate revelations, as they be supposed, make truth the way for heresy, as the authors thereof pretend justice for wickedness. But this is the disposition of all heretics, that out of a general truth propounded, they always assume and draw out heresy, which as a witch doth cast in a sacred fury into their deceived minds. The Pelagians from the general allegation of God's grace and help, do gather a special rule of their heresy, which as poison they distill more easily into the minds of their simple Auditors. The Papists holding those articles of Christ generally, do infuse heretical poison deep into their minds being seasoned with the sweet of those generals. I will give you one example, which doth farther spread itself. They believe in general that Christ is ascended up into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God, and shall come from thence to judge both the quick and the dead. Yet the Priest doth daily bring Christ from thence, to wit, out of heaven into the sacrament, so that he is corporally present in the sacrament, when it is manifest that he is contained in heaven till all things be fulfilled. But here they distinguish, that Christ shall come once from heaven visibly to judgement, but cometh invisibly every day into the sacrament. O notable deduction, that overturneth the principle from whence it is drawn! O notable distinction, which doth by distinguishing utterly overthrow the principal article But so doth heresy besmere over the lip of the cup as it were with honey, that it may be taken and go down the more merrily. As Pius the 4, who brought in the Constantinople creed, which he calleth the Rom: creed, as a preface before the new creed being their own. Which when it seemed to me to be unworthily done, I thought good to discourse of this new Creed of the faith, composed by the Pope in a wicked intent, being the sum of Antichristianitie, in a Latin Dialogue, divided into three books. The first Dialogue bringeth in Antichrist as an Actor on the stage: the second and third as a Doctor in the chair. The first doth fully describe the practice of the Beast, and therefore is termed Pragmatical Antichrist, or Hildebrand restored to life. Taking that name from Caesar Baronius, 
Caes: Baron: in sentent: sua contra Venet.  who to provoke Paul the fift against the Venetians; methinks (saith he) I see sitting in Peter's chair, Gregory the 7. and Alexander the 3. two roots of the Church liberty now decayed, both issuing out of the City of Senes, whence your Holiness takes your beginning; whereof the one did bring under Henry that obstinate Emperor, tother did vanquish Frederick very stoutly opposing himself against him. You must take in hand the same quarrel. Therefore Paul the 5. in Baronius judgement is Hildebrand brought to life again. And if the Pope by Baronius persuasion do Gregorize or Alexandrize with Princes, I pray to God for jesus Christ his sake, to preserve our Prince, that he may Henrize and Frederize, but with better success with the Popes. The second and third Dialogue discourse of the articles of Antichrist, and therefore is entitled dogmatical Antichrist, or The Pope's Creed, because it containeth the articles publicly to be professed: but chief that incomprehensible supremacy, which to the Papists is a transcendent, when it had not a being with the Apostles, being the head of Goliath, an evil head, or a head full of all mischiefs, which you shall perceive in the second Dialogue by all means defended, yet you shall say with a stone cast out of the word of God to be well broken. But because he hath made a sceptre of his Crosiers staff, the second Dialogue is rightly termed The ruling Pastor. I follow after as I can but not with equal paces, certain notable Fathers of our Church, who when as they first refute the grave (as they seem) and probable opinions of Antichrist earnestly and sound: do afterward pleasantly and wittily laugh at his foolish and harmful Institutions. Truth doth sometime laugh at heresy, because she is safe and secure, as Tertullian saith. Scu●tile jesting doth not beseem a Divine, but a witty conceit, arising from the matter in question, which ridiculous Antichrist cannot choose but utter to every one be he never so sober, in his feigned gravity, and pastoral majesty. Wisely said the Poet, 
An earnest jest  
Doth more stoutly and better sometime set out great matters.   
But the Papists take it in ill part, that their Pope, compared to the King is scoffed at, as though he extended his Empire in japonia beyond the fields of Cuticalindon: and they be grieved that the cardinals vanity proudly comparing himself to the King, is pleasantly flouted at: but that the flourishing meadow in purgatory devised by the old Doctor is scoffed at, they take very heinously. But who may not think that such odious comparisons, such proud vanities, such foolish old-wives-tales should not rather be laughed at with a pleasant jest, than put off with an earnest argument? as the Prophet laughed at the wicked fooleries of the Baalites and the Apostle called the circumcision of the false Apostles pleasantly concision. So ridiculous be these toys, which they term holy deceits, their vanities be so insolent, which they cast upon the people as bridles to deceive them, that a wise man even in the dark night of popery could not choose but deride the Pope.  
Henry the second when he had honourably entertained the Pope's Legate at Windsor, and in hunting had caught a stag, Look my Lord said he, how fat the stag is, and yet he never heard Mass. And when Ottobone an other of the Pope's Lagates, was purposed to lay a heavy curse upon certain noble men that rebelled, and came to that purpose to Killingworth being attired in his purple rob, and his red cardinals hat, it is said that they being all in white, and putting a surplasse upon a Surgeon whom they had got to curse Ottobone with the like curse, broke out into this jest, that a curse of one in white was as terrible as the curse of a purple Priest. That which was lawful for Kings and Peers the popish sons of the Pope, to utter against the pride and superstition of the Pope: I pray let it be lawful for a King, who doth not acknowledge the Pope for his Father, to reprove sometime with a pleasant jest that superstition which he hath learned out of the word to be not only very hurtful, but often very foolish. As that learned Marnixius in his Beehive, when he derideth both the other vanities of popery, and also those feigned cells in hell with a continued irony, and pleasant dissembling: I should marvel if the Pope and Bellarmine should not like the two Soothsayers laugh between themselves, when they see the world so fit to be cozened by them. But I myself truly will follow after not jests but arguments. And I rather grieve, then laugh when I think of the Pope, that great scourge of God. Neither do I hate a Papist but popery: I tax heresy not the men: and I wish an overthrow to heresy, salvation to the men.  
Our books are taught this fashion to bring in,  
To spare their persons and to tax their sin.  
I would not have thought it meet to tax the person of a jesuite, if he had not laid open his person who is more dear unto us than our lives, to the sword of soldiers, being first wounded with the quill of a goose. Whose book might have profited the very slanderers themselves even to their salvation, if they had had in them but one crumb of grace: whereto agreeth that speech of the wise Poet.  
He doth deserve both prick and praise  
Who so with profit pleasure lays.  
But whenas the jesuits do show themselves not only Aristarchi, that is reprehenders of our writings, 
Cicero in piso.  as the Orator said, but censors like Phalaris, neither do they set a note upon our writings, but persecute our writers with fire and faggot: and do not only sprinkle over our books with black salt, but our Court with hell dust: they may con our men thanks, who for such deeds, give but such words: and suffer themselves sometime to be galled with the freedom of style, whom they have hurt with the fury of their wickedness. Wherein our own men should have been more favourable to our own writers being so excellent for holiness and learning, whom yet I hear of some (I hope they be but a few false brethren) like to janus, are wont to be though lightly bitten and reprehended. Who if they be not ours, they might do very well, if, they would more open themselves: if they be ours, as I rather desire, let them favour our holy labours: unless they desire to hear of some writer of ours, which Lelius a certain critical reprehender heard out of martial.  
When Lelius carpeth mine and keepeth in his verse,  
Or let him hold his prate, or else his own rehearse.  
For it is both grievous and unseemly that their writings should be closely bit with a Theonine tooth, by false brethren, whose throats are first assailed with a leonine cruelty by open enemies. There is almost none of our writers, who have not written that the Pope is Antichrist; But there be certain men among us very moderate, forsooth, and politic, who would not have the Adversary so angered and stirred up with so sharp a conclusion, and that thereby all hope of composition and peace between the parties should be cut off: between whom they think to be a great difference of words, but little or none at all of things: that God is alike dear to each Church, and that the liturgy of each is alike accepted of God, that salvation is in both, when each doth rest upon Christ the foundation, that a Papist may, although halting come to heaven, and that the hatred of Papists is not so great as we make it, and that it is not conceived by their own accord, but that it is incensed by such bitter disputations: and that the quarrel had been ended, if certain hot spirited Theologians had not increased the controversy. These lukewarm Christians, that seem to be of no side and of both sides, seem to dispute soberly and politicly. But your religious wisdom, Christian Reader doth better understand, that the Roman Synagogue is full of idolatry, and that it doth therefore hate God, and by Moses judgement, is again hateful to God: neither was Cain provoked with any injury of Abel's, but by his own malice and hatred of godliness: And though both of them were wont to sacrifice to God in Adames house, yet Cain's sacrifice was rejected, Abel's accepted, and the work pleased God for the person, not the person for the work; that which Saint Gregory gathereth out of Moses, because the person was first made righteous by faith, as the Apostle taught Heb. 11. and that therefore there is no less difference of worship and faith between a Protestant and a Papist, then was between Cain and Abel. And that the Synagogues anger against our Church is as implacable, as Caines against Abel, and Ismaels' against Isaac, and that before it was stirred up with the blast of contention, it was moved with hatred of the promise. And as the hatred of Ishmael against the promise, which he derided, being covered with a vizard of circumcision, broke out against the son of the promise; so the hidden and secret hatred of the Synagogue of Rome against the holy scriptures, the tables of the promise, as I said, being covered with a certain show of voluntary religion, did grievously break and burn out against our Church the heir of the promise, so that Agar doth not leave off to persecute Sara again, the Haidmayde her Mistress in the house of Abraham. And when it can be proved that Cain's sacrifice was as well accepted of God as Abel's, than I will grant that the Papists Mass be as acceptable to God, as the Liturgy of the Protestants; and when it can be evicted that Christ alone apprehended by faith without our works, is not the foundation of the church I will grant that the same is the foundation of both Churches. Lastly, when it shall appear that Ishmael the son of the handmaid borne by the power of nature, is coheyre of the house of Abraham with Isaac the son of the free woman borne by the force of the promise, than I will grant that an obstinate Papist, may come halting to heaven. In the mean time I will warn these lukewarm and halting Protestant, that they will give sentence in God's matters according to the certain truth of God, not out of their prevaricating charity, and that there be no middle counsel to be taken: neither let them trust, the Pope being more jointly and easily entreated by them, will be the more easy and gentle to them. Whom we by short conclusions out of holy Paul and john, excellently expounded by notable worthies of our Church, although a little more bitterly and roughly, then seemeth good to some, we show to be Antichrist. I confess that this is a weighty and dark prophecy, whose importance doth reject the vanity of tales, whose obscurity requireth more clear light of interpretation. So it falleth out sometime that the exposition is larger, the conclusion shorter. For a short exposition and a long conclusion are faulty alike when hard and controversies of importance are handled. For a short exposition wants light, and a long conclusion wants sharpness of wit. The Adversary doth offend in both, while he is busied in the interpretation of the prophecy, for it doth lessen things of weight, neither doth it make plain matters obscure. For he doth depress the excellency of the prophecy by stuffing it up with the vanity of many fables, and being satisfied with uncertain conjectures of Fathers, and with their naked names, hath not driven away the obscurity. So it falleth out, that from strange and unkind expositions of the prophecy, they gather weak and idle conclusions. In the unfolding of this mystery, the holy fathers have stood us in good steed, and more had, if they had been Prophets. But whenas they (Daniel being the Author) do teach that the understanding of the prophesy, is to be taken from the performance of it, and grant that truth is the daughter of time, we that are fallen upon the ends of times, conferring all the parts of the prophecy between themselves with great study and reverence, and bringing light to the text, out of the context, and to the context out of the event, because Christ hath opened the book that was sealed up, nor called it an 
a A thing sealed & hidden.  apocrypse, but an 
b A thing opened and revealed.  apocalypse, we do from thence more confidently draw a conclusion, not as an Article of faith, but as azure demonstration of the doctrine of Christ. Although the popish Synagogue, which without any testimony of Scripture makes this the thirteenth Article of their faith, I believe that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, may justly pardon the reformed Church if being taught by so many testimonies of Scripture, it make this to be an Article of their faith, I believe that the Pope is Antichrist. Now I did foresee that when I made a looking glass for Paul the 5. it would come to pass, that the jesuits, who do so often traduce the King of great Britain, with their slanderous and infamous libels, would be much moved to anger, that I often used the name of their Pope in this manner. For what will they say? darest thou an obscure fellow speak so often to the Pope being so great a Prince? or conceivest thou any hope that being an heretical minister, thou canst convert so great a Doctor? Whereby thou hast got nought else for thy labour, but that thy folly and pride should be known to all men. These I presage will be the emblems of the Iesuitish style, whereto (thy self Reader shalt be an Arbitrator) I shortly answer. I see that the Pope of his own is accounted a great Father, but thrust as a small Prince by his great neighbour Princes into a small corner of the south: but how big soever he be, I speak to the Pope as not to a political Prince, but political Antichrist. I favour his civil dignity whatsoever it be, but I spare not his spiritual impiety. But what? do I take in hand to convert the Pope? no more than I endeavour to wash an Ethiopian. I am not yet so mad. I know that the belly hath no ears. And it may be Paul the fift, as it is said, is dead. What then? but Paul being dead the Pope is alive. One head groweth up under an other. For the popedom is a Hydra. I do not defend that this or that Pope, but that the Pope is Antichrist. It remaineth now Christian Reader, that I exhort and entreat thee by thy salvation, that the hatred of the Synagogue being contemned, though thou well know Christ, to know him with me daily better out of the Scriptures, that both of us may more earnestly love him, and more earnestly follow him being loved, and further that you know him peradventure suspected by you, to be Antichrist, more certainly by the event of the prophecy, that being known each may pursue him with an holy hatred, and right execration; to which purpose I first set before thee the Glass of Christ and view of Christianity, now I set before thee the Pope's looking-glass and the picture of ANTICHRIST.   

The Translator to the READER.  
CHristian Reader, I doubt not, but a translation of such a nature, will incur much reprehension, even of good men, not only in respect of the matter, which it somewhat obscure for the vulgar, but also for the manner, which must needs come short of the original. For the first, if the work be so good, that it was thought fit to be made known to some, I see no reason, but it may be made known to more; and so may be, Bonum quo communius, eo melius. And for the other, I confess, it comes far short of that sufficiency, wherein it was set out in Latin, and so would have been, though it had fallen on a skilful workman in respect of our English, which is far more barbarous, and is many times the worse, when it is set out with bombasted words and inckehorne terms, such as the world is too well acquainted with at this day. What the Rom-Catholikes think of the work, I care not, they are like to lose by it, and losers will have their words. The Latin hath been censured by them already, as I am informed to be well written for the style, but exceeding bad for the matter. Whose censure I will regard, contrary to Cicero's censuring of a Gentlewoman's dancing, whereof he said, the better the worse: but I of their censures, the worse the better. For if nought that was good was heretofore looked for from Galilee, what good can be looked for at this day from Rome, the forge of all slanders and villainies. And if Christian Kings cannot be exempted from their obloquys and injuries, why should we poor men, both the Author and Translator hope no escape the opprobries of such black-mouthed Orators. Howsoever it be, and whatsoever befall, the work was first set out, and now translated not only to reveal Antichrist, who by his gadding Priests is ready to seduce thee: but also to set forth Christ unto thee, who by his grace is most ready to save thee. If aught therein be amiss, impute it to the weakness of men; if there be any good, for thy good yield glory to God, to whom I commend thee; and rest  
Thy Christian well-willer, EDWARD SHARP.   

THE POPE'S LOOKING GLASS.  

CHAP. I. The dedication of the work.  
Having a purpose to report a Conference had in Latin among great learned men on both sides, about the Pope's new Creed, lately reprinted by yourself Pope Paul the fift, I thought it good to prefix a short Treatise, termed the Pope's Looking Glass, which is nothing else but an evident and lively deciphering of Antichrist prophetically painted out, by S. Paul and Saint john, before the whole Dialogue, and to set it forth dedicated to your name: partly that I might show yourself to yourself, with those your sacrilegious swarms of Locusts and Frogs about you: partly that I might recall ingenuous Papists from the frantic love of Popery, when they shall thoroughly begin to know the Pope: and lastly that I might unite the Christian Kings and Princes that yet favour the Pope, 
The Pope an enemy to God and man  in the defence and quarrel of Christ, and Protestant Princes, when they shall perceive that he is a deadly enemy to God's Testament, and Princely government. I hope those excellent workmen that have of late so copiously pictured the image of the Beast, in every her several member and joint, will give me leave to do it more compendiously in a lesser Table, and narrower room, for I have endeavoured to the uttermost of my power to contract the large discourses of other men, and to draw them into short conclusions. For this being concluded and proved, that the Pope of Rome is that Antichrist which is shadowed out in the glass, it doth necessarily follow, that Popery which is questionable between us, is that Antichristianisme which is contained in the Creed.   

CHAP. II. Wherein, as in diverse following Chapters, is set down what Antichrist is. In this the mistaking of the Prophet Daniel and the Apostle john.  
FIrst therefore I will truly and briefly propound and expound the state and sum of the principal controversy what Antichrist is, lest when I come to the combat, that is to the conclusion, I may seem rather to fight with my adversaries shadow then with himself.  
Our men for the most part do search out for the type of Antichrist in Daniel, 
antichrist's type in Daniel, himself in the Apocalypse.  and for Antichrist himself in john: your men do seek for himself in Daniel where his Type is, and in john where himself is, they are afraid to seek him for fear to find him. For there in the place of the literal sense, they urge the mystical, here in stead of the mystical they press the literal. There where Daniel the Prophet doth hystorically and properly paint out Antiochus Epiphanes, they dream that Antichrist is properly described, here where john the Prophetical Apostle doth mystically, yet purposely and lively describe Antichrist, that shall mystically give life to the Beast, rising out of the sea, and mystically bring down fire from heaven, there they imagine such a hag and as it were a bewitching Canidia, which shall give motion to wooden pictures, life to the dead, and speech to the dumb, and shall call down for very true fire from Heaven. 
What is meant by the ten horns in Daniel.  There the ten horns that are sprung out of the breach and ruins of the Macedonian Empire, ten Kings, seven from Seleucus, and three from Lagis, who succeeded orderly one after another in the government of Syria, and oppressed jury, and were all dead before the coming of Christ, 
What is meant by the ten horns in the Apocalypse.  they take for ten horns, or those ten Kings, who after the death of Christ, rose out of the division and ruins of the Roman Empire, that was to be dissolved many ages after: who had the government together with the beast: neither did in order succeed one another in the same kingdom, but govern in diverse Provinces at the same time. Neither did destroy jury, being destroyed already, but shall subvert and overthrow the Roman Empire, 
What absurdities follow by the Popish interpretation of john.  as your men suppose, but as the truth is the Popedom itself. So that, while your Doctors do in the Apocalypse a bookefull of hidden mysteries, follow after a literal and a proper sense, mark I pray you what a pleasant and comical Antichrist they have imagined. Whom S. john doth term a beast with two horns, they will make a horned beast indeed. The two witnesses whom Saint john calleth two Olive trees, and two Candlesticks, if by the Letter they urge them to be two men, that is Enoch and Elias, who must be slain by Antichrist they will imagine a very terrible Antichrist that will kill Olive trees and Candlesticks: If the two witnesses shall cast out true fire out of their mouths, these fiery fellows will suddenly consume Antichrist. If Antichrist contrarily shall fetch down true fire from heaven, and give life to Images as it were to so many Pygmalion's (which if you forget not they will cause to be worshipped) they will bring a notable magician upon the stage; so those profane companions will clean alter the Holy Ghosts most weighty prophecy, into their own ridiculous comedy. Furthermore while they thus perversely compare daniel's prophecy with john's Apocalypse, they do so confound not only things with things, but ages with ages, that unless they raise dead men out of their graves, or make Kings reign before they were borne, their interpretations can in no wise hang together. At a word (Paul the fift) they must not bring back the sun fifteen degrees, as in the dial of Ahaz, but more than a thousand degrees, that these may agree together. Blessed john of set purpose hath written Antichrist his mystery; Paul hath made a Commentary. 
How far daniel's prophecy reacheth for time.  Our men while they bring light to john's hidden mystery out of Paul's commentary, your men do bring darkness out of daniel's prophecy: all which (be it spoken by those Doctor's leave who do think otherwise) if you only except the comfortable prophecy of the resurrection of Christ, Chap. the 12. I can evict to have been fulfilled within the compass of seventy years, if you reckon from that time wherein jerusalem was taken by the Chaldees, to that time wherein it was utterly overthrown by the Romans. Wherefore let us take the type of Antichrist if you please out of Daniel, himself we shall find in Saint john's prophecy and Saint Paul's, which your men do so much labour to obscure, that they may utterly pervert the state of the question.   

CHAP. III. The state of the question, and divers significations of Antichrist.  
FOr this is the whole question set down by Becanus, 
B●can. in spec. Antioch refor. c. 10.  whether Antichrist properly so called, shall come one ●●an in his own person? Agreeable to that which Bellarmine had said before; for either of them do imagine that this Adversary shall be one singular person, by reason of the addition of the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that Antichrist, for that article doth point out always one that is singular, he is much deceived. For it doth often point out one kind, 
Antichrist not one singular person, but a succession.  as in the same place, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the Fathers do expound it, and the Papists do acknowledge it, He that withstandeth: He means the Emperor in general, not this or that Emperor. And Matthew the 16 chapter, vers. 18. not only the article, but the demonstrative Pronoune is also added, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whereby not only one Peter (though falsely) is understood of you, but a succession of Popes. Therefore the article doth either settle Antichrist in a succession, or in that place doth not settle a succession in the Pope. Choose of these two whether you will. I perceive that Becan and Bellarmine do inquire after both: first, whether he be: then, what he is. Whether Antichrist be foreshowed in the Scriptures, no man doubteth: whether he can be pointed out in the world, I will so clear it, that none shall doubt, if first by inquiry we find out, what he is. In the question, what he is, as they make him one singular adversary by the addition of the article, so likewise by the composition of the name, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. They grant he is Christ's opposite and adversary, his Vicar they deny him. S. john saith, that the Beast that came up out of the earth (which by Bellarmine's confession is that Antichrist) 
Apoc: 13.  had not two Lambs horns, but two horns like a Lamb, and spoke like a Dragon. A Vicar or substitute in appearance, an adversary in truth; as it is manifest by the definition of the thing itself, and of the word. For what can those two horns of the Lamb signify other, than the two offices of Christ, his priestly, and his kingly office? which the Beast imagineth that she weareth in steed of the lamb, whence I conclude,  
The Beast is a counterfeit Vicar of the Lamb by the witness of john.  
Antichrist is that Beast by the testimony of Bellarmine.  
Therefore Antichrist is that counterfeit Vicar of the Lamb.  
No Vicar, saith he, but an Opposite, and an Adversary: yea a Vicar to his person, that he may be an opposite to his glory, 
The divers significations of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and an Adversary to his doctrine. But that the composition of the name will not bear. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in composition is only a note of Emulation and Opposition, not so only but of substitution and surrogation also. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not only signify a Captain of a contrary part: but also a Propraetor, who had the same authority in a Province, that a Praetor had in a City: sometime him that was in the place of a Praetor, or the Praetor's Legate. 
Adversary like to God. Proconsul.  You have all the significations in one word, how much rather in divers? as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noteth opposition: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equality: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 substitution.  
Antichrist doth comprehend all these significations, who though he be in truth his Adversary, yet doth challenge Christ his authority, as his equal, and usurps his place, as his Vicar.  
The Pope is Christ his Vicegerent, doth emulate his honour, and oppose his doctrine.  
Therefore he is in subtlety his Vicar, in pride his Opposite, in heart his Adversary, that is in plain terms, he is Antichrist.  
Whom S. john affirmeth to have been in his time, 
1 Ioh: 2. v. 18 & 22. Cap. 4.3. Antichrist had his beginning in the days of the Apostles. 2 Thess: 2.  for he speaketh of Antichrist properly so called, as Bellarmine confesseth, to whom he joineth the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Saint Paul likewise saith, that he began then to work secretly, after that which hindered was taken away, that he should be revealed in his time, and should sit and domineer so long in the Church of God, till Christ shall come to judgement: and that he should decay, and by little and little be consumed with the spirit of the Lords mouth, that is, with the ministery of the word; but at the glorious appearing of the Lord he should be utterly overthrown. not therefore one singular enemy shall come in his own person, as Becan feigneth: unless happily he think that one and the same man in number could possibly live from the age of the Apostles unto the coming of Christ. Thus I therefore argue briefly out of the premises.  
If that Antichrist was in the days of the Apostles after to be revealed to domineer in the Church, nor to be destroyed till the coming of Christ, certainly he cannot be one singular person, unless peradventure they dream that Antichrist shall survive Methusalah many hundred years.  
But the Antecedent or former part is true, as S. john and S. Paul do manifestly prove.  
Therefore the Consequent that he cannot be one and a singular person is likewise true.   

CHAP. IU. The divers kinds of Antichrists, wherein it is farther proved to be a succession.  
FOR whereas Antichrist so called in a common sense by john in his Epistle, they say did come in the times of the Apostles: but that Antichrist so properly called in the Apocalyps is not come as yet; first they do not agree among themselves, who understand that it is Antichrist so properly called of john in his Epistle, by reason of the addition of the article: secondly, although he there make mention of antichrist's so commonly called, small and little ones, whom considered by themselves I confess to have been the forerunners of that great Antichrist, yet I say and affirm, that they be truly to be termed parts of that great beast, as Paul in his Commentary of this mystery hath so plainly expounded. For he saith, that he who then began to work secretly, should continue till the coming of Christ. That therefore he could not be a beast of three years continuance, soon up & soon down. But as small Rivers while they keep within their own banks have their own names, 
A similitude between Antichrist and a great River.  but when they flow into the Thames, or into Seine do lose their own names, and make the stream the greater: So is it with these small and common Antichrists: they falling into their own heresies are considered apart; but when they fall out of their own channels as it were into that great gulf Antichrist, 
1 Ioh: 4.3. & 2.18. & 22.  they lay aside their own names, and make up that grand Antichrist. And therefore john in his Epistle saith, that that Antichrist then was, and after should be. How may that be will you say? that he was then in secret, that he should be in open sight: that he was then an infant, but should after be a man. These were the heresies, this was that Apostasy whereof S. john and S. Paul spoke, a disposition as Bellarmine confesseth, tending to the kingdom of Antichrist; he said well to the kingdom, not to his beginning. For than he was borne but to the kingdom of Antichrist, not to the essence of him, that then was as john said, but to the revealing of him who then lay hid as Paul said. The apostasy therefore began in those heresies, wherein Antichrist did lurk, which Paul doth teach shall last not only to an appearance, and a kingdom, but to the diminishing and overthrow of Antichrist. And this apostasy could not be of three years, and one man only. And therefore it is convinced that Antichrist is not one singular man, but a succession of men. Moreover the two beasts described by S. john in the Apocalyps, the Sea-beast, and the Land-beast; by the Sea-beast you mean the state of the Roman Empire; by the Land-beast the state of Antichrist. 
Bellar. de Rom: Pont. cap. 10. & cap. 15. lib. 3  But the Sea-beast doth not signify this or that Emperor, but a succession of Emperors: therefore the Land-beast doth not signify this or that Bishop only, but a succession of Bishops, whereof many were great beasts indeed. As likewise neither the four beasts in Daniel, whereof the beast in the Apocalyps is compounded, do not note singular Kings, but Kingdoms. Here Bellarmine disputeth against us topically, or rather typically.  
Such as the figure is, such is the thing figured.  
Antiochus the figure of Antichrist was one singular man.  
Therefore Antichrist the thing figured is one singular man.  
If the proposition be general it is very false, for the proportion between the figure, and the thing figured, doth not hold in all, but in those only wherein they be compared. Many are often the type of one, as many high Priests of one Christ, and one is the type of one, as Melchisedech of Christ, whom you notwithstanding do make to be the type of many Priests. It holdeth not therefore that because Antiochus the type was one man, that therefore Antichrist must be but one man. The comparison stands not in the unity of the person, but in the likeness of nature: And therefore if the proposition be taken generally, it is very false, and if particularly, than it is a mere fallacy. But if it please him to argue from a type, I will requite him with an argument drawn from a type, the author whereof is the Holy Spirit.  
The first Beast that is the state of the Roman Empire is a Beast of many heads.  
The second Beast that is the state of Antichrist, is the image of the first by the witness of S. john.  
Therefore the state of Antichrist is a beast of many heads.  
But so many heads, so many persons. As therefore the state of Antichrist may resemble the state of the Empire, it doth consist not in one person only, but in a succession of many persons: which when we affirm, it must not be prejudicial to those holy Bishops, who for Christ's sake spent their blood at Rome under the Emperors: but to the shame of their Successors, who forsaking the rule of holy Scripture, have spilled the blood of other men. For it is not Rome regenerated, and suffering, but degenerated and persecuting must be counted the seat of the Beast with many heads: which notwithstanding is to be understood, that to the Beast there is but one only head at one time, more successively, whom God hath permitted 


The properties & effects of Antichrist.  1 To be like the Lamb in two horns.  
2 To speak as a Dragon.  
3 To show forth the power of the first Beast in his own sight.  
4 To make the earth and the inhabitants thereof to worship the first Beast.  
5 To cure the deadly wound of the former Beast.  
6 To restore spirit and speech to the image of the first Beast.  
7 To kill such as will not worship the image of the Beast.  
8 To work false wonders, namely to make fire descend from heaven in the sight of men.  
9 To have the name of the Beast, and the name of a man, and the number of his name, which number is six hundred sixty and six.  
10 To imprint the mark of the Beasts name upon all; either on the forehead, or on the right hand.  
11 To forbid that none shall buy or sell without the mark of the Beast.    
These be the true notes of the second Beast, that is, of Antichrist, by your own interpretations, which notwithstanding are miserably detorted, as afterward shall plainly appear. Now I take this as granted, that these so weighty and admirable matters cannot be brougnt to pass by one singular Beast within the compass of three years and a half, whereunto so many Beasts, and so many ages are required.  
Antichrist therefore is that ould-aged Animal, not a simple, but a compound beast: for as many Marij were in one Caesar, 
2 Thess: 2. v. 3.4.  so there be many Antichrists in that Antichrist, whom Paul termeth that man of sin, and that son of perdition. They do therefore but trifle, and say nothing to purpose, 
A comparison between the people of Rome and Antichrist.  who think that therefore he is called the man of sin, because he is a single man. For as Florus did paint out all the people of Rome under the figure of one man, to wit, an infant 250 years; and 250 years a young man; a strong man other 250; and an old man the last 250 years, the same people still governing successively in the same City, with the same policies, always to the same end, as one man aspiring to greatness, till by the laziness of some of the Emperors it became decrepit, and exceeding feeble: So it doth seem, that the Apostles by the spirit of prophecy, did describe many Bishops of Rome, as one wretched man, and one beast successively governing, in that seven-hilld City, an infant in the Apostles time, after closely growing up, in certain of the ambitious Roman Bishops, till it came to strength in Boniface the third, and to the full age of a man, and greater ripeness in Gregory the seventh, and others of his successors, ever another man, not another thing, the same an infant, the same a youth, and a man, differing not in mind, but in age, by the same means breathing and aspiring to greatness, the same closely hidden, and openly revealed, the same domineering, and the same to be overthrown, and now at the last an overworn and a decayed Antic: so that he seemeth by his long lasting impiety to be utterly consumed and brought to nothing. The sum of all is this, that Antichrist properly so termed, is a succession or a kingdom contrary to the kingdom of Christ, in profession a Vicar, in presumption an Opposite, in purpose an Adversary.   

CHAP. V Wherein is inquired what manner of one Antichrist is.  
WE have found out what Antichrist is, now let us search out, what kind a one he is, by that means we shall certainly know who it is. Who that he might not appear unto us in his likeness, Satan hath abused the wits of certain good men, being ignorant of the event of the prophecy, who have out of that first error devised a notable tale. For first presupposing that Antichrist is but one single adversary, hence they have imagined, 
The Popish description of Antichrist.  that he shall be by Nation and Religion a jew, of the tribe of Dan, the Messiah of the jews, and that he shall sit in the Temple of jerusalem being re-edified by himself, that he shall reign three years and a half, that he shall put to death three Kings, and subdue seven others, and shall obtain the Monarchy of the whole world: that those two witnesses, whom they think to be Enoch and Elias, reserved alive in some place all this while, shall return upon the earth, and fight with Antichrist, and being slain by him, shall rise again after three years and a half: and it shall come to pass that the jews being converted by that miracle, shall kill Antichrist in Mount Olivet, and shall join themselves with Christ, who shall come to judgement five and forty days after. This tale certain ancient writers have devised, which they so unconstantly report, 
Bellarmine an A better of the former tale.  that it easily appeareth by the contradiction that it is but a lie. All this false tale Bellarmine telleth as truth, except that part concerning the Tribe of Dan. But let us rejecting all fables, 
Antichrist described out of the Scriptures and Fathers.  seek after the truth of God, written by the Apostles: being now manifested by event, the best Interpreter of the prophesy, and by the judgements of the Father's agreeing with the Scriptures. 
Apoc. 9 2. Thes. 2. 1. Tim. 4.10.  Saint john doth call Antichrist a star fallen from heaven: Paul an Apostata from the faith, or rather the chief Captain and Ringleader of that general Apostasy; a Renegade from the Lord God as Augustine doth expound it: 
August. de civit. Dei lib. 20. cap. 10. Greg. lib. 4. epist. 38. That falling star not Lucifer. Esa. 14.  The King of pride with his prepared army of Priests, and therefore a Bishop as Gregory the first thinketh. But Bellarmine doth understand that star to be Lucifer, according to that, how art thou fallen from heaven O Lucifer. And doth urge the pretertense, that Saint john did not see the star to fall hereafter, but that it is fallen already. Neither doth he mark that this his gloss is far wide from the text. 1. That Lucifer's fall from heaven went long before the sound of the fift trumpet. 2. He is ignorant of the phrase of the Prophets, who when they foretell things to come, for the certainty of them, speak as if they were come already.  
3 Neither doth he observe the sense of this Prophet who by the name of stars meaneth the Pastors of the Church. At the last he calleth Luther that falling star, 
That falling star not Luther.  and the Lutherans Heretics, and the Protestants Locusts, whose army he brought out of the bottomless pit when he fell. Of that anon, now I demand, how an abject silly Friar, as they call him out of his cloister, that examineth all things by Scriptures can be that star falling from heaven? not that great Lucifer, much less that little Luther, can be called the falling star, but some great Bishop, as lofty as the stars, Lucifer's mate, who a good while since, hath forsaken heavenly doctrine and holy life, and hath betaken himself to earthly businesses and wicked manners, that is, hath fallen from heaven to earth. For then are Bishops said to stand in heaven, 
What the fall of a star meaneth.  when they perform their duties, and then fall to the earth, when forsaking holy life and doctrine they seek after worldly matters. But this doth not agree with the Pope only, for many other stars having been pulled down by the Dragon's tail are fallen to the earth. 
The Pope's key and the effects of it.  True. But none besides the Pope is of that power, as holy john ascribes unto him. For the key of the bottomless pit was given to this falling star. This great bishop while he shined, as a star in the Church, that is in heaven, he used the key of heaven committed to him as he ought; but after he fell from heaven, he took to himself the key of the bottomless pit. Therefore Antichrist the Angel of the bottomless pit is the key keeper of hell. 
Apoc. 9.1. 1. Tim. 4.1.3.  Whereof blessed Paul giveth a double reason. One that by that his key he brought into the Church the doctrine of Devils in forbidding meats and marriages: Another, that lifting up himself above all that is called god, that is above Kings and Emperors, he doth shut them out of their kingdoms, and thereby hath brought the darkness of the bottomless pit into the common wealth. Is not this the lively image of the Pope? who assoon as he left of to be a star, by his fall, began afterward to be a foolish fire. 
Ignis satuus.  Whose key is now no longer the key of heaven, but of hell. For his hatred to that doctrine and government, that proceed from God is a most certain brand of Antichrist. Of the key I shall speak more hereafter in the Creed.   

CHAP. VI Wherein Antichrist is proved an Apostata, and universal Bishop.  
WHom Saint john termeth a falling star, Saint Paul termeth an Apostata from the faith, and makes him a Captain not of a particular, but an universal Apostasy; whom he so sets down with his proper marks, that he seemeth to have pointed his finger at the Church of Rome, to whom every way they do agree. She forbiddeth marriages and meats, not in open blasphemy, as some old Heretics did; but in hidden hypocrisy, as the forenamed Apostates, as the Apostle noteth. Whence I infer thus.  
The head of the universal and general Apostasy is Antichrist  
The Pope is the head of the universal and general Apostasy  
Therefore the Pope is Antichrist.  
Therefore Antichrist is not a jew, or head of the jews who cannot be said to have departed from Christ, before they came to him, but an Apostatical Christian. 
Lib. 4. Epist. 32.34.38.  And as it is observed by Gregory the great, A Bishop beleigerd with an army of Priests, not a Bishop only, but an universal Bishop. Not that he alone for that cause did depose all other Bishops, but that he advanced himself before all others. Whence again I argue thus.  
An Apostatical Christian an universal Bishop is Antichrist  
The Pope is an Apostatical Christian, and an universal Bishop.  
The Pope therefore is Antichrist.  
And that title of universal Bishop Pope Gregory calleth wicked, profane, sacrilegious. Whereunto to consent, is nothing else (saith he) but to lose the Faith. As he writ to Anianus; and thereby to advance himself in honour above the Empire, as he writ to Mauritius: which whosoever doth, as john Bishop of Constantinople did already, and Ciricius did afterward, he doth pronounce him confidently to be the follower of Lucifer, and the forerunner of Antichrist. 
The Pope first universal Bishop.  Pope Gregory was a true Prophet, alas, too too true a Prophet? for within five years after, that King of pride, whom he foretold to be so near at hand with his army of priests, did usurp that chair, from whence Gregory did deliver that Oracle, and hath held it now above 1000 years, being first called the universal Bishop, 
Then universal Prince.  because he hath the jurisdiction over all Bishops. As first, Boniface that falling star. After that, universal Prince created out of himself, because he had the sovereignty over all Kings and Emperors, as Gregory the seventh. So that the Bishop of Rome, is by a Bishop of Rome prophetically concluded to be for his treason Lucifer, 
Lastly, Lucifer and Antichrist.  for the loss of his faith Antichrist. But the Bishop, as themselves affirm, cannot err in his definitive sentence: for he hath the Spirit assistant, and tied to the Chair. The Bishop therefore is Antichrist; for that I may cast up all into a short sum, Antichrist is a falling star, a degenerating shepherd, a domineering Bishop.   

CHAP. VII. Antichrist within the Church in stead of God, and how he lifts up himself against God.  
Do you not behold yourself in this Looking-glass, Paul the fift? suffer not yourself to be deceived by those men, who imagine Antichrist to be an outward adversary, whom the Apostle doth make an homebred stubborn Traitor: for as he doth abuse the name of a King, against a King, so he doth oppugn Christ, in the name of Christ. Whom therefore Paul doth place within the Church, not without it; and sitting not in a bodily gesture, but in a spiritual government. Besides that, 
Theod. in 2. Thess. 2.  the thrones of Kings are called the seats of Bishops. And he sitteth not in a material Temple, for Temple is not any where so taken in the new Testament, as Bellarmine confesseth; therefore in the spiritual Church, for the which the Temple of God is always taken, as the Fathers expound it. 
Chrysostomus. Oecumenius. Hieronimus ad Algasium. quae: 11. who all affirm he shall sit in the Church, not in the Temple of jerusalem.  Antichrist he sitteth in the Temple of God, not in the Temple which he shall re-edify in jerusalem, as is imagined: for that should not be called the Temple of God, but of the Devil. Again, he is said to sit against the Temple, as Augustine did well translate it out of Greek, as if he were the Temple of God, that is, the Church. Wherein the wretched man bearing rule, doth not think himself to be God, much less God alone, as Bellarmine dreameth (Antichrist is not such a fool) but in stead of God: for he sitteth as God, and taketh upon him as he were God: not Christ, but for Christ: a Substitute to his Person, and an Opposite to his Glory: for in many things he makes himself equal to Christ, 
The Pope wherein he makes himself equal to Christ.  carrying himself like God, forgiving sins, redeeming souls, making new articles of the faith, the judge of all men, himself to be judged by no man. That although he call not himself God, yet he makes a show as if he were God, as the Apostle teacheth. Is not this the lively picture of the Pope? Doth it not present him unto us, almost palpable? Not so, saith Bellarmine, For Antichrist doth think himself to be God alone, wherein he doth not agree with himself.  
Bellarmine's Antichrist, is the Messiah of the jews, who doth brag that he is sent from God.  
He doth not therefore brag that he is God alone: for God that doth send is one, and God that is sent is another. Again, he saith, The Pope doth not sit as God, but as a Bishop, but yet as he that hath all the power of God, both in heaven and in earth: as he saith in another place. He sitteth therefore at the least as a Bishop deified. But he doth not call himself Christ. But he taketh to him, if not the name, yet the power of Christ. This therefore I infer.  
Who sitteth as God in the Church, and makes a show as if he were God, the same is Antichrist.  
The Pope hath done, and doth this:  
The Pope therefore is Antichrist.  

How the Pope lifteth up himself against God.  For do not think Paul the fift, that Antichrist is so foolish to lift up himself above God, or doth swell with greater pride than doth befit a miserable mortal man. He is said therefore, Not to lift up himself against every God, true and false, as Bellarmine supposeth. Wherein he doth contradict himself.  
For a Magician doth not lift up himself above all that is God. For he doth not lift up himself above the Devil, who is the God of this world.  

Bellar. de Pont. lib. 3. cap. 14.  But Antichrist is a Magician, as Bellarmine saith.  
Therefore Antichrist doth not lift up himself above all that is God: as the Cardinal saith.  
But he doth lift up himself above all that is called God, as the Apostle teacheth. To whom not the essence of God, 
The name of God to whom imputed in the Scripture.  but the name of God is attributed: for the name of God in the Scripture, is given to the Angels in heaven, and the Princes on the earth: for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, doth not only signify Majestical or Majesty, but it is also any thing which is worshipped as God, or wherein God is worshipped: And therefore the images & altars among the Heathens, were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Now when as the Pope beareth rule over the Angels in heaven, and over the Princes in the earth, and over holy things in the Church, it cannot be but he needs must be Antichrist.   

CHAP. VIII. How Antichrist doth deny Christ.  
NEither suffer yourself, Pope Paul the fift, to be deluded by them who shall tell you that Christ is not openly, expressly, and directly denied by Antichrist so properly called. For Antichrist was not so blockish, that he would openly and directly deny Christ, by whose name and profession he saw so much profit and honour to come unto him; you may be sure he was not so mad. It was therefore requisite that he might both satisfy his own hatred, and serve his own turn, he should deny Christ secretly, by consequent & indirectly: for could Antichrist possibly have held his government so many years in the Church, if he had openly denied Christ? certainly he could never have held it; for all those Christians over whom he governed, would either have hist him out for a fool, or burned him up for a blasphemer. It was not therefore for antichrist's profit to deny Christ after this manner. Add moreover that he is described by the Apostle to be a cunning and a crafty companion, and that he shall come with all deceit of injustice. 
Popery is a mystery of Iniquity.  Besides all his religion is not called iniquity, but the mystery of iniquity. And the gloss hath noted, that the mystical impiety of Antichrist shall be cloaked over with the name of piety. It had been therefore very absurd to have denied Christ plainly, openly and expressly, for that did no whit agree either with the good of his kingdom, or the humour of Antichrist, or the mystery of Iniquity. It followeth therefore that he denied Christ secretly, implicitly and indirectly, and retaining the name of Christ, did abolish his faith and doctrine. But that belongeth to petty Antichrists, to deny Christ secretly and indirectly: but to that great Antichrist directly and openly; whereupon his coming is called a Revelation, as Bellarmine doth sophistically gather. By which words is expressed not the manner of the denial of Christ, but the manner of usurping his kingdom. For if you consider the manner of doctrine, the apostasy of the great Antichrist is called mystical, and so is his opposition, as of all the rest, but that their apostasy from Christ ought to be counted particular, his universal. And therefore for all Bellarmine's words, that Antichrist doth deny Christ secretly and indirectly, as the Pope, who though he doth in word expressly and directly confess Christ to be God and man, yet he doth closely and indirectly deny both Christ's Divinity, and his Humanity.   

CHAP. IX. The Pope taketh away the properties of each nature in Christ.  
FOR he taketh away the properties of each Nature. The Godhead is infinite, the Humanity finite. The Pope doth set out the Deity of the Father in pictures and images; and doth imagine the humanity of Christ to be present in many places at once: and therefore doth forge a finite Divinity, and an infinite Humanity.  
He doth confess directly in word, that Christ is just and merciful, but in deed doth indirectly deny both: for perfect justice doth not admit imperfect satisfaction, that is human: and perfect mercy doth not grant imperfect pardon; it doth not remit the fault and retain the punishment.  
The Pope doth teach that imperfect satisfaction and pardon is performed by Christ to the faithful: he doth therefore deny unto Christ perfect justice and mercy, and so makes Christ a plain I doll.   

CHAP. X. The Pope denieth the three offices of Christ.  
HE doth in word acknowledge the three offices of Christ, but indirectly denieth them, his Prophecy, his Priesthood, and his Kingdom.  
His prophesy, 
First his Prophecy.  while he telleth us that the Canonical Scriptures, wherein the voice of our Prophet in all things necessary to salvation is fully contained, whether they be principles of faith, or precepts of life, to be very imperfect. And therefore doth account his Decretal Epistles among the Canonical Scriptures. 
Distinc. 9 Sic omnes.  Fie upon such blasphemy, and intolerable pride. Herein he is a very jew, in that he abrogateth God's commandments by man's traditions. For as the jews had the unwritten Cabala to interpret the old Testament; so the Pope hath brought in his unwritten traditions, as the jewish Cabala, whereby he doth bring a sense of his own, what pleaseth him of the written commandments of God. But with the same argument that Christ did refute the jewish, we do briefly refute the Popish traditions.  
The observation of human traditions is the abrogation of God's heavenly commundements, 
Matth: 15.  witness Christ.  
But Popery is the observation of human traditions, witness the decretals. Here Duarenus said prettily, that it fared ill with men's affairs since the decrees had gotten wings, that is, since the decretals were so saucy as to fly into the Church over the Scriptures.  
Therefore Popery is the abrogation of God's heavenly commandments.  
I will bring one example, wherein it appeareth that Bellarmine the Pope's sweetheart hath by his exposition overthrown one of the greatest commandments of the Law. 
Bellarmine's lewd dealing with the second commandment.  God said, Thou shalt not make to thyself any likeness to worship. Here Bellarmine distinguisheth; Thou shalt not worship an Idol: But thou shalt worship an Image. A distinction of the word not of the thing. Far an Image is an Idol when it is worshipped. But the worshipping of an Idol is Idolatry: and in the Commandment there is no mention made of an Idol, but of a likeness, and that of every likeness, which as it were the genus or general doth comprehend equally both Image and Idol. But Idolatry is to worship the Creature for the Creator, yea by your leave with the Creator too; for the worship of any likeness is absolutely forbidden in the law, whether it be worshipped for God, or with God. And the reason of the prohibition is absolute. Idolatry is compared to fornication, and God to a jealous husband, who by no means will have the likeness of any thing to be worshipped either before him or with him. Bellarmine seemeth to allege the same excuse for his idolatry, which the harlot doth for her adultery: for she telleth her jealous husband, I took not this Lecher for my Husband, but for my Friend, I took him with you, not for you: So this adulterous mind of Bellarmine answereth to God, that is full of jealousy: I do not worship the image for God, but with God, not for the Creator, but with the Creator. But God as a most jealous husband doth absolutely forbid any worship of an image, as the lewd embracing of an adulterer: 
Ioh: 9 v. 20.  and therefore S. john calleth the worshipper of an Idol, the worshipper of the Devil. Now it is plain that the Pope is a worshipper of an Idol, therefore the worshipper of the Devil. The Pope oweth me a good turn for saying he is an Idolater, wherein I fear I shall seem to prevaricate and dissemble, that while I give him the name of an Idolater, I take from him the name of Antichrist.  
For Antichrist is not an Idolater, as Bellarmine would have it.  
The Pope is an Idolater, as truth itself would have it.  
Therefore the Pope is not Antichrist.  
I counsel the Pope that if he give credit to Bellarmine's proposition, he grant our assumption, so while he take to himself the name of an Idolater, he may happily lay aside the name of Antichrist. But he will resume it, so giddy headed and wavering is Bellarmine.  
By whose confession, Antichrist doth worship Maozim, that is as he saith the Devil.  
But the worshipper of the Devil is an Idolater.  
Antichrist therefore is an Idolater.  
But the Pope hath taken to him the note of an Idolater from holy john: let him therefore take again to him the note of Antichrist.  
From hence ariseth that which I intended to prove, that the Pope doth nothing else but abrogate and annihilate a principal commandment of God with his tradition and opposition. What is it to deny the Prophecy of Christ, if this be not? what? as though he hath not only corrupted but also perverted the Gospel of Christ, 
The Pope's fift Gospel.  while he hath suffered a fift Gospel to be coined by his Dominicans, as Matth: Parisiensis doth witness. They called it the Gospel of the Holy Ghost, 
Anno 1254. Math. in Hen. 3.  and the eternal Gospel: wherein they taught that Christ is not God, nor his Gospel the true Gospel, and that compared to their Gospel, his was the shell, and theirs the kernel. O blasphemy to be punished with hell fire. Hereof they be the Neptunian or rather Vulcanian Fathers, who in that Tridentine furnace have by their firing and hammering shaped out that profane Gospel anew, but without the name of the fift Gospel. Although Clement the eight did of late gladly and willingly take unto him the name of the fift Evangelist, put upon him by crouching G●briel that detestable Parasite, as though Clement had finished the fift Gospel; which doth not only give a blow to the four Gospels, but a deadly wound. The authors whereof do incur Paul's curse, which is denounced not only to Popes, but to Apostles, and Angels, if any shall bring in not a contrary but another Gospel. Not if any contrary, but if any besides that which the Galathians received of Paul, that is, besides that which they had received out of the legal and evangelical Scriptures, as Augustine did expound the place; if they do not only preach or overthrow the whole Gospel, but if they do never so little preach beside the Gospel, or do thwart any thing, as Chrysostome hath explained the place. For another Gospel doth not only corrupt, but pervert the Gospel of Christ. The Pope of Rome doth not only bring in another, but a contrary, wherein he doth not only add many things, but oppose many things against the Gospel of Christ. In the one, he doth weaken the Gospel; in the other, he destroyeth it; for every addition doth import an imperfection, every opposition a falsehood. And therefore Popery is to be deemed not only a corruption, but a subversion of the Gospel. Out of that fift Gospel is their new Creed of their faith taken, which containeth twelve articles of the faith to be discussed in the Dialogue following. For the making whereof divers Popes heretofore took great pains, and every one added a piece of his own, till it came to full perfection by Pius the fourth, and hath been lately printed by your authority Paul the fift, that the great glory of your omnipotent power in the Papacy might appear. As likewise the conformities of S. Francis are lately brought to light, and by your commandment published in print, I think that typical jesus being brought again into the world by you might remove the true jesus out of his throne. Let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered. Let true jesus utterly confound the typical jesus. Do not these things Paul the fift manifestly prove that thou art that great Antichrist, who although thou do openly in word confess that Christ is a Prophet, dost in very deed indirectly deny and overthrow the Prophecy of Christ?  
More than that, the Pope doth indirectly overthrow his Priesthood and his kingdom.  
His priesthood whereon dependeth the sacrifice and intercession of Christ, 
2 His Priesthood.  while he doth erect another priesthood which doth either offer another propitiatory sacrifice, or doth reiterate the sacrifice of Christ as imperfect. When as the Apostle doth prove throughout the whole Epistle to the Hebrews that the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ if you seek for the number is but one, if for the time is but once offered: 
Heb. 10.14. Well expounded.  if for the Priest: by himself; if for the place, upon the Cross; if for the manner, bloodily: if for the virtue: exceeding effectual to make holy the faithful. With what face therefore doth the Pope either devise another propitiatory sacrifice, or cause that to be often repeated of profane Priests unbloodily upon the Altar; as though the bloody sacrifice of Christ were not sufficient to make perfect the believers? wherein he showeth himself an utter Adversary unto Christ. But they do daily sacrifice Christ say they, that they may apply him to the faithful. But the Apostles did not sacrifice Christ, but propounded him in the word and sacraments, that they might apply him to the faithful.  
Out of the sacrifice of Christ the redemption of the Church is the first part of his priesthood, which the Pope of Rome hath communicated with the Saints.  
Thus they speak of Gregory.  Let him save us from our sins, that in heaven with the Saints we may rest. 
You would think that Gregorians not Christians spoke. Of Peter and Paul, Grant that by both their merits we may obtain the glory of eternity. 
Out of the Roman breviary.  It is true that it is said, that the Lord can hardly be discerned from his Apostles.  
O blessed mother  

In the Parisian Missal  Satisfying for our sinne●  
By the right of a mother  
Command the redeemer.  

B●rnard. in Mart. lib. 1.  So that the jesuits do think meet to salvation to mingle the mother's milk with the sons blood: and they do appeal from the seat of God's justice, to the seat of his mother's mercy, whom they call the goddess and Queen of heaven. So that popery is no more to be called Christianisme, but Marianisme.  
Now if the Pope do communicate the office of redemption with the Saints, what marvel is it if they impart the office of intercession with them? whereas the Apostle doth affirm, 
1. Tim, 2.5.  there is but one God, so but one mediator between God and men the man Christ jesus, one mediator of intercession, who doth offer up our prayers to God, as he that alone doth pay the price of redemption for us all, sith the efficacy of his intercession dependeth upon the merit of his redemption.  

3 His kingdom.  Last of all they profess Christ to be a King in word, in deed they deny him. And whereas Christ doth walk in the midst of the 7. golden candlesticks, and is not only present in his Church, but Precedent of his Church: this exorbitant Priest, made a Vicar by himself, and a voluntary Prince, doth reign and supply his turn as if he were absent, and taking unto him the whole power of Christ in heaven and earth, makes Christ but a titular King, and an idle God, so that he seemeth again with the jews to mock him in setting a crown of thorns upon his head, and giving him a ●eed for a Sceptre into his hand. But Christ is a king invisible, the Pope visible. But Christ although invisible yet he is really in the Eucharist, yea carnally, as the Pope teacheth, falsely, yet he teacheth it: but in the real presence of the greater that is Christ, there is no real presence of the lesser, that is the Pope, so the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist doth take away the visible and spiritual King out of the Church.  
Now seeing in deed he denieth the offices of Christ which he professeth in word, 
The benefits of Christ diminished.  what marvel is it if he diminish the benefits which spring out of the offices? if making of the cross, he weaken the merit of the cross; if teaching his death he abolish the power of death: if granting the spirit, he extenuate the force of the spirit; if preaching the Gospel he put out the light of the Gospel: while he doth confound free will with God's grace, man's satisfaction with Christ his blood, inherent justice with imputed obedience in justification: that part of salvation being attributed to man, part to God may divide the glory of so excellent a work between God and man. Wherein I cannot rightly determine whether Antichrist hath offered more contumely to God or wrong to man. Out of the premises I argue briefly thus.  
Whosoever doth deny Christ closely and indirectly, is Antichrist.  
The Pope of Rome doth deny Christ closely and indirectly and taketh away his natures, his properties, his offices, his benefits.  
The Pope therefore is Antichrist.  
Wherein he doth always one thing and pretends another.  
He is therefore a cunning crafty Antichrist.   

CAHP. XI. Wherein the smoky Kingdom of Antichrist is plentifully described out of john.  
SAINT john saith that the key of the bottomless pit is given to the star that fell from heaven. 
Apoc. 9 The Pope the key Keeper of Hell.  Now mark in this hellish business, how diligent this Angel of darkness showeth himself.  
2 For assoon as he receiveth the key, he presently useth it to opening of the bottomless pit, as it followeth in Saint john: from whence ascended the smoke of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun and the air were darkened with the smoke of the pit.  
3. Therefore antichrist's kingdom is dark and smoky. 
The darkness under Antichrist.  I do not think that any, who knoweth but his letters, much less any learned man to be so weak an Interpreter of the apocalypse, as to think the outward darkness is here meant: and that the darkness of this sun, which we see, or of this air which we breath, and not rather the darkness of souls, and minds is here understood, or that smoke out of a furnace, rather than out of hell is here described. Now the kingdom of Christ is the kingdom of light, and therefore the kingdom of Antichrist is the kingdom of darkness. 
Apoc. 8.12.  At the sound of the fourth trumpet, Saint john saith, 
No comparison between the old Heretics and Antichrist.  that the third part of the sun, the Moon, and the stars were darkened: When Martion destroyed Christ's humanity, Arrius denied his divinity, so that the world was turned Arrian, Eutiches confounded his natures, Nestorius divided them, when Pelagius obscured the grace of Christ, but all these were nothing to those universal darknesses brought in by Antichrist. For he took some contagion from each of these, and added much of his own; When he commanded the Scriptures to be shut up in an unknown tongue, lest the people might understand God speaking unto them: when he commanded prayers to be made in an unknown tongue, 
Scriptures in an unknown tongue.  that the people might not speak to God with understanding: when he taught implicit faith, that is brutish ignorance, whereby he blinded their minds with incredulity: 
Implicit faith. Images to be adored.  when he set pictures before them not to be gazed on only, but to be adored, that he might feed their eyes with vanities, and choke their souls with idolatry. Do you not perceive the bottomless pit to be wide open? you do not see the smoke rising out of the pit for the darkness which hath darkened the sun and the air. For the kingdom of lies is the kingdom of darkness. While he hath taken away the Scriptures as pearls from Swine, 

Scriptures as pearls for Swine.  
Prayers as cha●tering for Parrots.  
Faith for asses. Images for Idiots.   and prescribed prayers as pratings for parrots, and delivered faith as an instruction for asses, and allowed images as books for idiots. So Antichrist hath obscured the eternal Gospel of Christ more clear and bright than the Sun itself, with the thickness of hellish darkness, being worthy to be choked up with the smoke of the pit, that selleth nothing else but smoke: as is evident by the doctrine of Antichrist, 
A short description of Christian religion.  clean contrary to the doctrine of Christ. For the doctrine of Christ doth bring forth 4. principal effects: 

1. It doth cast down the corrupt nature of man.  
2. It doth advance the saving grace of God.  
3. It doth weaken the strength of concupiscence.  
4. It begetteth peace of conscience.    
1. So it settles true humility in a sinner. 2. Right faith toward God in him being humbled 3. Holiness in him being faithful. 4. And security in him being holy. Whereby 1. displeasing himself, 2. and trusting in God, 3. And living holily, 4. he is secure in his way, and triumpheth joyfully in his end.  
The doctrine of Antichrist doth bring forth effects clean contrary.  

1. It doth extol the corrupt nature of man. 
A short description of popery.   
2. It doth diminish the free grace of God.  
3. It addeth matter to increase concupiscence.  
4. It withdraweth peace of conscience.   
For 1. it maketh a sinner proud with a conceit of his own strength. 2. Ungrateful by the diminishing God's grace. 1. Inwardly filthy, outwardly glorious. 4. Doubtful in the way and fearful in the end. That 1. neither he knoweth himself truly, 2. Nor believeth in God rightly, 3. Nor liveth holily; 4. Nor dieth quietly. You have Paul the fift the very form and face of Christianity, and Antichristianitie set before you and yours, that they might love the one and detest the other. No Egyptian darknesses are more gross, no Cymmerian to be compared with these darknesses of the Pope's kingdom which Antichrist the Angel of Hell hath fetched out of the smoke of the pit.   

CHAP. XII. Antichrist his ministers are Locusts, whose properties are described.  
WHose ministers, the Locusts and Scorpions being engendered of smoke and darkness, it makes well for them, that the world is full of darkness. Blind superstition will be more bountiful to them, than quickfighted religion.  

Apoc. 9.3. What a Locust is.  4 The Locusts came out of the smoke, as S. john saith, the Locust is bred of corrupt smoke, an Antichristian Monk out of perverse doctrine, who neither can fly aloft by heavenly contemplation, nor walk beneath according to God's ordinance, but being lifted up by certain Luciferian speculations into heaven, falleth down again to the earth: and when he hath delivered many things truly and gravely about the Trinity, doth presently fall back to prate of idle traditions, mingling some truth with much falsehood; like the Devil who makes true premises to infer false conclusions. The Locusts spring out of the ignorance of the people, as it were out of smoke.  

The division of Locusts.  The Locusts are either elder or younger. The elder out of the family of Francis, Dominicke, Bennet, etc. The younger out of the house of limping Loyola, these be more learned and polished, who after they had translated the Bible into the English tongue; they of Rheims the New, and those of Douai the Old, they add certain smoky interpretations, whereby they bring obscurity to a for or translation. So the translation intricate enough in itself, is made more intricate by their notes. As you may see in this very mystery, 
Places of Scripture obscured by popish interpretations. 1 Ioh: 2.18.  whose parts being plain enough, by the text & event, is much obscured by the darkness rising out of the Gloss, and Commentary of the jesuits. 1. S. john saith, that that Antichrist was in his time, whom Paul saith shall continue till the coming of Christ; what can be more clear? To this place they bring obscurity out of the Gloss, when they imagine that Antichrist shall be one man of three years continuance. 2. S. Paul makes him an Apostata not from the name of Christ, but from the faith of Christ, and doth describe the Apostasy by two evident notes. This place they darken with their Gloss, which tells us that he is a jew, who never came to Christ, and therefore can never departed from Christ.  
3. What is more clear, then that the City with seven Hills, that dominiering City, is the seat of Antichrist, as S. john sets it; now made the Temple and Church of God, as S. Paul will have it, 
Matth: 24.14.  that is Rome by their own confessions; and yet this light is darkened with another Gloss, that jerusalem is his seat, whose final destruction Christ did foretell should be after the preaching of the Gospel over the whole world; & the Prophet Daniel, that the desolation of the Temple shall continue to the consummation and end, that is the end of the world: 
Luc: 21.22.24.  as not only Jerome but Christ himself hath expounded. Yet they give the lie both to Daniel and Christ, when they outface the matter, saying that jerusalem shall be builded again by Antichrist, together with the Temple, wherein he shall sit and reign. 4. What is more evident than that Enoch was translated that he should not see death? 
Heb: 11.5.  yet to this plain Text they put a dark and contrary Gloss, when they say that he shall return again, and see death, and be killed forsooth by Antichrist: Do you not perceive that the Locusts do spring out of the smoke of the pit, which do darken with their Glosses certain places of the Scripture, that be as clear as the Sun beams. So that all their endeavours are to darken, nor enlighten this mystery. They fear nothing more than that antichrist's hood should be plucked over his ears, out of which now like Democritus he laugheth at all the world, 
The Pope like Democritus.  which he hath deceived with his smoke. As the Poet brought sorrowful Agamemnon upon the stage, with his head covered for the greatness of his grief: So these good fellows bring upon the stage, their pleasant Antichrist hoodwinked for the greatness of his joy, that the world may not see how he fleeres at them.  

The number of the Locusts  5. The multitude and number of Locusts is answerable to the number and power of the Monks old and new: chief the jesuits, whose swarms do add greater force to do mischief.  
6. Power is given to these Scorpions over the earth, and charge given them that they hurt not the grass of the earth, 
Apoc: 9 v. 4.  nor any green herb, nor any tree, but men only, as it followeth in S. john. These Locusts than are reasonable creatures, yet such as abuse their reason to the destruction of men: for they do not trample upon herbs and trees, but do annoy the bodies and souls of men, whom they strike with their stings, infect with their poison, and kill with a lingering death.  

The practice of jesuits.  These jesuits whom these Locusts and Scorpions do lively represent, do choke up with their poison, and extinguish the fidelity of subjects toward their Prince, and the faith of Christians toward God.  
The fidelity of subjects, when they teach they are released from the Oath of Allegiance given to their Princes, whom the Pope doth denounce excommunicated: 
The Pope's usurped power over Princes.  who can drive out of his Kingdom, and deprive of his government Kings Catholic in the faith, but wicked as goats, heretical Kings as wolves, as Bellarmine writeth, neither only open but secret Heretics, as Symancha●; nor those only, but their sons and followers are utterly to be rooted out, as Creswell agreeth with Symancha, by any means whatsoever, as Saunders, either by open force, 
2 King: 33.  as jesabel by jehu; or by craft, as Holophernes by judith, as Rainoldus & Bourchier write: 
The cruel practice of Papists against Princes.  or by knife & dagger, whereby Henry the 3. & Henry the 4 were most basely murdered, either of them being a Catholic, as they term them, only because they favoured hertikes & that before sentence was denounced against them; or else by a dag & poison, 
The gunpowder treason from jesuits.  by which means Queen Elizabeth was often assaulted, as Walpoole and Comensus persuaded: or else with gunpowder, wherewith King james with all the King's Progeny and Nobility, and the whole Kingdom of Britain should have been utterly overthrown by certain wicked English conspirators, as Garnet the Provincial of the jesuits in England thought meet: whereby it is manifest that the Cheargy-popery, whereof jesuitisme is the brain; is nothing else but a catechism of treason. Must we not here needs acknowledge the poison of Locusts and Scorpions, whereby the Allegiance of subjects towards their Princes is shaken off? Let us look after another kind of poison, if you please, 
The Papists poison the faith of Christians.  whereby the souls of simple people are infected, to choke up the faith of Christians, which they teach must be secret and implicit, that the Lay-people must believe as the Church believeth, when as they know not neither what themselves, or the Church believeth, as Bellarmine saith, that faith is not placed in the understanding, but in ●he assent. i. The Collier's faith, or that circular faith which Staphilus so much commendeth, the master of the sentences proveth out of the first of job ver. 4. While the oxen were at plough, the asses fed near them, Many, 
Mast sent. lib. 3 distinct. 25.  saith he, believe such things they know not, and they have their faith covered as in a mystery. He liketh the greater and Doctors to Oxen, 
Lombard's foolish interpretation.  the less and the simpler to Asses, who in their humility adhering to the greater, believe in a mystery: an ass-headed interpretation by the master's leave.  
8. Whereby it appears that Laike-popery is nothing else but mere foolery.  

Vers. 4. Whom the Locusts do hurt.  9 Neither do these Locusts and Scorpions hurt all men, but those only which have not Gods mark in their forehead, their minds they go about to intoxicate with their poison. As S. john saith, that the great heaps of unbelievers are only the prey of the Locusts.  

Vers. 5. Locusts kill not, but afflict men.  10. It is given to the Locusts and Scorpions, not to kill men, but to afflict them for five months, but how can that be true, say some, when as the jesuits be notable cut-throats.  
I answer, that S. john in this verse speaketh of the slaughter of souls, which these destroying Locusts do chiefly devour. Wherein they do not kill men at a blow, but by afflicting them by little and little, as they which be stung of Scorpions, consume away by lingering grief. This is S. john's sense, when he saith, that the Scorpions do not kill men, but torment them.  
For when these Antichristian scorpions do infuse and convey the poison into men, what gnawing and pritching do they leave behind them? how do they vex men's consciences? how do they inwardly bite and sting? men feel themselves to be miserable sinners, and after death stand in horror of judgement. They hear little of the true fire of hell, much of the false fire of Purgatory from the Monks, they feel the bitterness of sin, they feel not the sweetness of the remedy. They never hear of Christ; They give ear to the monks, preaching historically of the cross, of the death and resurrection of Christ: but of the virtue of the cross, of the benefit of his death, of the efficacy of his resurrection, (the force and power whereof doth consist in special application) not one word. 
The Papists enemies to certainty of salvation.  Yea, rather there Doctors cry out that it is presumption and arrogancy, if the wounded conscience of a penitent sinner be certainly persuaded by faith, that Christ jesus is his Saviour, or that he may confidently trust he is in the estate of grace, unless an Angel do specially reveal it unto him, as though to a faithful man's spirit, the spirit of Christ, the God of the Angels doth not give a more inward, more certain, and a more excellent testimony that he is the son of God, the heir of heaven, and fellow-heire with Christ, so that the faithful man feeleth, that he is governed by the spirit of Christ, from whom he received that testimony, and doth join the grace of that government, with the grace of that comfort. Neither of this do those locusts feel or teach, who while they deprive their auditors of the holy confidence in God's mercy, 
The manner how Papists torment men's conscience.  nor suffer them to serve God with a sunlike, but a servile spirit, and therefore not with the rejoicing of the spirit, nor suffer them to enjoy peace of conscience in the midst of their afflictions, and send sinners trembling for fear to the treasure of the Church, as popish indulgences, and human satisfactions, and such trifling toys of the same kind. In the mean time the crafty teachers, and the unhappy hearers, being utterly void of true faith and repentance, when they have done all they can do, for all that inwardly feel, inwardly, I say, feel the horror of God's divine judgement, and the most grievous torment of the afflicted conscience, and this falleth out after those scorpions have strucken them with their stings: whereupon their grief is like the grief of a scorpion, when it hath stung a man.  
For as when a Scorpion stings a man with the sting of his tail, the wound is not presently felt, but the deadly poison doth afterward spread itself abroad: So those that be hurt by these Loyolane Scorpions, do not presently feel the hurt, but do by little and little perish without sense, assoon as they suck in the venom of their poisonful doctrine. So these Locusts do hurt men with their number, venom, and sting.   

CHAP. XIII. Other properties of Locusts.  
11. THese be strange Locusts that are resembled to horses prepared for battle. What comparison can there be between a base Locust, and a warlike Horse? Thus notwithstanding the strength of this vild Locust is expressed.  
12. The Locusts do likewise wear crowns upon their heads, here he setteth down the cunning and the craft, It is worth the noting, that the heads of those Locusts are said to be crowned, when the horns of the Sea-beast afterward are said to be crowned: why so? Because the Priests have more prevailed with their subtlety and craft, than the Ethnic Emperors with their power and force.  
13. But the crowns the Locusts wear, are not of gold, but like to gold. Hear he sets out their pride, true and golden crowns are fit for Kings, false and couterfet for Priests, and therefore are said not to be golden, but as it were golden. Whereat, as if they were true, and their own, they wax very proud: for by the sufferance of Princes they are grown to that power, that they have often cast off their golden crowns.  
14. The faces of the Locusts, are as the faces of men, wherewith they deceive men.  
15. They have women's locks, which signify the diverse enticements and deceits of false doctrine: where again their cunning is described.  
16. Teeth as it were of Lions, wherewith like their Master that roaring Lion, they rend asunder, & tear in pieces those with their jaws, whom they caught with their guile. Hear you have their fierceness and their cruelty.  
17. They had habergions, like habergions of iron. These noble Locusts, very warlike, with crowns upon their heads, men's faces, women's hair, lions teeth, armed at all points are elegantly and lively described by the holy Ghost.  
Some will happily object, that all this place is not to be understood, of Antichrist, and his Ministers, but of the Turks. I answer that cannot be. For whereas at the sound of the 4. Trumpet, 
Cap. 9 v. 1.  the Angel had foreshowed the Arch heretics, the forerunners of Antichrist: at the sound of the 5. Trumpet, the Angel brings in the King of the arch-heretics, before which the Angel beginneth with that dreadful Proem in the 8. chap: about the end, crying with a loud voice, woe, woe, woe, upon the inhabitants of the earth.  
By the first woe signifying the dark kingdom of Antichrist: by the second woe the violent tyranny of the Turk: which cannot be one and the same, because he saith in the 12. verse: one woe is past, and behold two woes follow after. This is not therefore the same, but an other wo.  
By the third woe the terrible appearance of the last judgement.  
But Bellarmine saith, but proves it not, 
Bellarmine's lewd dealing with the King of England. Bellarmine. Christana vic. Pacenius. Becanus. Personius. Cidonius. Garnettus. Gerardus. Grenwellus. Creswellus. Reynaldus, and infinite other.  That Luther is that falling star, and that Lutherans, and Protestants are those Locusts. Having forgotten that Paul the fift, that Prince, is the Captain General of those warlike Locusts. Who after he had compared the most renowned King JAMES to julian the Apostata; doth secretly signify that he is denounced excommunicate, and may be slain by his Subjects in battle, but not by cutthroates. Bloody Cardinal, fitly painted out by a Pasquil, a Lion in the cave: with this Motto well appllied Open the cave, and you shall see his disposition.  
This jest is too bitter, will some say, to bestow upon that great learned Cardinal. Is it so? he that allows the murder of a King in fight, doth not he deserve a sharp reproof in writing? He doth not deal with our most worthy JAMES as a King, and we do not mean to deal with him as a Cardinal. He was learned heretofore, now he is malicious: heretofore he was a chief man in disputation, now in rebellion. Heretofore a close enemy, now an open. Heretofore the scorpions venom was not wanting in him, but lurked in him. Cardinal Comensis set on Parry that Cutthroat, to murder Queen ELIZABETH with his dagger. Cardinal Bellarmine nothing the honester, but the cunninger, denieth that the King may be dispatched by a murderer, but by a Soldier he denieth not: As if there were any difference in the case of murder, whether one kill a King in a Camp, or under a canopy, by open war, or secret treachery. That may be rightly spoken of Bellarmine, that Cicero spoke of a great Lawyer, he must kill a King, that will use his help. Therefore that may be well said to this slippery Sophister, this armed and bloody Locust, which martial said to a certain Cobbler.  
Good Tortus be not angry with my jest,  
I tax thy craft, I mean thy life none ill;  
Endure it man: from mirth I will not rest,  
When thou dost think that others thou mayst kill.  

The cruel dealing of the Papists with Hen: 4. the French King.  How ready a Scholar Mariana this man's Auditor found of Raviliake the death of that illustrious French King Henry the 4. never sufficiently to be lamented, never of kings sufficiently to be revenged, doth too too well declare. The first of his Scholars struck out his tooth, the second took away his life, themselves buried his heart. A magnanimous and valiant King murdered of a base rascally parricide, like to Caesar in his life, like in his death, for so he is bemonde of a Christian Poet.  

Caesar and He●: 4. compared  Caesar in valour I was like to thee,  
In kind of death we likewise do agree:  
The knife before thee took away thy breath,  
The knife behind me brought me to my death:  
Thou by the hands of Senators didst fall,  
I by a base and Savage Cannibal.  
But this Rogue you will say was not Marian's scholar; no more than Catsby, Percy, Writ, and Faux were scholars to Garnet, Parsons, Gerard, and Grenwell.  
18. But let us return to Saint john, 
Vers. 16.  who giveth the Locusts stings in their tails, and a short time to hurt.  
19 Whose King being the Angel of the bottomless pit, he brings in at the last, 
The description of Antichrist.  whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, destroying. The very Roman Antichrist himself destroying souls, overthrowing common weals, casting down crowns, dissipating Churches: being armed with so many bloody laws, so many conspiring councils, so many warlike Legions, fetters, halters, gallows, racks, fires: environed with so many Inquisitors, so many cursative jesuits, some of them dogmatical, some pragmatical King-killers, that he may be rightly called Abaddon and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
You see, Paul the fift, the disposition of the Roman Antichrist, by the star that fell from heaven; by the key of the bottomless pit which he received: by the pit which he opened: by the smoke of the pit which he brought forth, by the kingdom of smoke which he built up, by the stinch of the smoke that he thrust out, by the Locusts and Scorpions which do very lively resemble the Monks new and old: by their infinite swarms whereby they do hurt: their double venom which they instill: their deadly sting wherewith they strike: their power, pride, cunning, cruelty which they practise: very worthy subjects of their King Abaddon whom they obey.   

CHAP. XIV. Wherein is set down actions of the Beast.  
OF what kind Antichrist is we have expounded, now we must show whereabout he is occupied. The star which fell from heaven doth show his disposition: The beast that rose out of the earth shall express his action.  
Saint john describeth two beasts, one ascending out of the sea, another out of the earth. The first doth resemble the Roman Empire: the other Antichrist properly so called.  

Saint john's Sea-beast.  The Roman Monarchy rose out of the sea: that is out of a turbulent state, out of the factions and disorders of nations, as out of a troublesome sea: who is called a beast not in respect of his civil authority, which he hath from God, but of his beastly vices, which he took from the Dragon.  

Saint john's land-beast.  The Prophet brings in another beast rising out of the earth, not the same, but divers from it, like in many things, yet not the same. For I saw saith Saint john another beast rising out of the earth, which is both the seventh head of the Roman beast, and yet a beast in itself, for her different beginning and nature.  

The actions of Antichrist the land-beast  1 Ascending out of the earth: therefore Antichrist is the son of the earth. Therefore from the earth, being borne of earthly and sensual concupiscence, and devilish counsel: as james the Apostle doth join these 3. 
ja. cap. 3.15.  signifying all one thing, earthly, sensual, devilish.  

To speak like the Dragon.  2 She is said to speak as a Dragon, although she dissembles the 2. horns of a lamb, whereof I spoke before. And herein Bellarmine doth almost agree with us. That by the Dragon the Devil is understood, by the first beast the great number of sinners but under the Roman Empire, as we have set down by the consent of all Interpreters, neither doth Bellarmine greatly deny it. By the later Beast Antichrist as elsewhere, as also the Preachers and Apostles of Antichrist being the head of the first beast, cut off, and living again, he doth acknowledge with us to be the true image of that Beast.  
3 She is said to work all her power in his sight. 
She worketh in the sight of the first beast.  First it is certain that one and the same seat the city with seven hills belongeth to them both, which hath ruled over Kings and Princes, which can be no other than that great Lady Rome. In which seat the land-beast did succeed the sea-beast and derived all the power of the Roman Empire to herself, so that by her own men it is called the Kingdom of Priests, she doth show all the power of the first beast in his sight, that is at Rome.  
4 She doth constrain the earth and the inhabitants thereof to worship the beast how will some say? when the Pope doth enforce the inhabitants of the earth not to worship the Emperor, but himself.  
So you are to understand the beasts not to be the person that did reign, either in the Empire, or in the Popedom; but those tyrannical powers, which those beastly persons did put in practice. Again you are to consider the Papal power to be truly imperial, and although it commend itself veiled with the name of Christ, yet that it was brought in by the Dragon, as well as the other; that it might worship the Dragon, and be an express image of the Imperial power, which contained in it the Papal. 
The actions of Pagan Emperors.  For the Emperor was the chief Bishop. Now the Emperors did belch out blasphemies against God, condemn the true worship of God, oppress the true worshippers of God, maintain the worship of Devils: and did openly serve the Dragon, from whom they received their tyrannical power. And what did the Popes? 
The action of the Antichristian Popes.  Did they not with a blasphemous mouth challenge to themselves the divine name, and godhead with Domitian? did they not scoff at the grace of Christ, with julian? did they not persecute the servants of Christ, with Dioclesian? did they not bring in the worship and doctrine of Devils? and while they did openly profess the name of Christ, did they not closely and secretly serve the Dragon? So the difference between the Emperors and the Popes about the manner of worshipping the Dragon was somewhat but in plain truth nothing at all. But here is a necessary distinction to be used. There was in the Emperors a blind ignorance of Christ, in the first Bishops a true confession of Christ, in their successors a feigned, who did in word condemn the old Roman Idolatry and tyranny, 
What popery is.  but did call it back again in deed. For what is popery indeed if you do truly weigh many of the parts of it, but refined paganism. The Authors whereof were so bewitched of the Devil, that they intended one thing, and did another: in intention they worshipped God, in very deed the Dragon; as deceivers, so deceived; the principal Authors of the devils worship, as Saint john saith; of the doctrine of devils, as Saint Paul saith. What is popery else therefore whether you consider the worship, or the doctrine but secret Draconisme?  
1. They think that they do gaily well, when they call upon other Mediators, either Angels or Saints: when they adore the Pictures of Saints: yielding worship to the Image (as they say) which is due to the example, whenas the contrary is fit, to give no worship to the Image when none is due to the substance. They think they do passing holily, but indeed they worship the Devil, when they worship the Image as john teacheth, whence Lactantius concludeth, there is no religion there where there is an Image. Hence it followeth that the Roman Synagogue is void of religion which is full of Images. The Popes imagine that they be Masters of abstinence and continency, when for conscience sake they forbid meats and marriages: when as in truth they bring in the doctrine of devils, as S. Paul teacheth. They do not intend so, you will say. The murderer doth not intend to kill his Father, but his enemy; but in stead of his enemy he killeth his Father in the dark: shall we say he killed not his father but his enemy, because he intended not his fathers but his enemy's death? which if it be absurd to speak in this outward darkness, do we not think it as absurd in this inward darkness of the soul, if any man say that he doth worship God when he doth worship the Dragon, because he doth intend to worship God not the Dragon? Therefore the Emperors, and the Popes do agree in a third, that is, in worshipping the Dragon, from whom they have received their power. Add hereto that the Pope, in whom the image of the first beast doth revive and live again, as shall appear afterward; while he driveth men to worship himself, it may be said, that he doth compel them to worship the image of the first beast: from whence thus I dispute.  
He that compelleth men to worship the image of the first beast, is Antichrist.  
The Pope doth compel men to worship the image of the first beast.  
The Pope therefore is Antichrist.   

CHAP. XV. The decayed Emperor revived by the Pope.  
5 FOR she is said to cure and heal the deadly blow of the former beast, and to restore to him a spirit, and a voice.  
That I may not be longer about those things, which are so copiously unfolded by others, the Empire took a deadly wound in Augustulus, 
The Empire dead,  which was the last Emperor of the East, from whom the Empire lay as it were dead for 325 years, till it was restored again by the Pope, and received as it were new life in Charles the Great, as Bellarmine doth vauntingly confess. For he saith, That the Pope did translate the Empire first from the Greeks' to the French, 
revived.  afterward to the Germans, and appointed that the choice of the Emperor should be made by seven Electors, on that condition that the confirmation and inauguration of the Emperor so chosen should belong to the Pope: that by this means that dead head might seem to live and flourish again by the spirit of the Pope. But reserving to himself the power of the Empire, he left the title to the Germans, 
Cap. 15. de mira: Anti:  as Bellarmine doth unadvisedly confess, that Antichrist shall be the last that shall enjoy the Roman Empire, without the name or title of the Roman Emperor. 
The Emperor but titular.  And therefore the German Emperor in respect of his power is only Titular, for the Pope hath not only derived to him the spiritual power but the temporal also: therefore the state of Antichrist is the lively image of the old Empire. The German Empire, is not now the Empire but the title, and dead ghost of the Empire, to whom the Pope giveth spirit, that is authority, and a voice, that is his Edicts, when he giveth life to the Emperor by his confirmation. To what end I pray you ● that it may sustain and uphold the Pope's Seat, wherein the power of the Empire doth reside without a name, according to john's Prophecy. Hence the German Emperor is called, the Procurator and protector of the Apostolical See. I dispute then thus.  
Antichrist is the restorer of the old Roman Monarchy, witness S. john.  
The Pope of Rome alone is the restorer of the old Roman Monarchy, Bellarmine not only witnessing it, but glorying in it.  
The Pope of Rome therefore alone is Antichrist.   

CHAP. XVI. Of bringing down fire from heaven.  
But Bellarmine doth expound this place according to the letter, as that likewise of bringing down fire from heaven.  
Antichrist saith he, and the Antichristian Church doth make the image of the Beast to live and speak.  
But the Pope and the Popish Church did never make the image of the Beast to live and speak.  
Therefore the Pope is not Antichrist.  
Besides, Antichrist saith he, doth cause fire to come from heaven in the sight of men.  
The Pope did never bring down fire in the sight of men.  
The Pope therefore is not Antichrist.  
The proposition of the former syllogism taken literally, is not S. john's proposition: for not the image of every beast is to take life from Antichrist, but the image of the first Beast, that is of the Roman Empire, which the Pope in name and title renewed in the Emperor, in strength and power retained in himself. And therefore he perversely collecteth out of john, that power is given to Antichrist to give life, and frame speeches to Images, which may seem as credible to sober men, 
Popish false miracles.  as that the picture of Memnon being enlightened by the Sun beams, spoke very plainly, as Tacitus reporteth. But grant it be so: the assumption literally taken agreeth with the Pope, and the popish Synagogue, if ye believe the Legend. How often by them are images counterfeited to move, to sweat, to nod, to speak in the sight, and opinion of simple people, that they may be alured to the worship of those Saints, whose images they be?  
There was some wonder toward as oft as the image began to speak. 
Martialis.   
The Devil did often speak in the images of the Ethnics, but a Priest in the images of the Papist, that he may seem to take the Devils turn in deluding of men. I retort therefore this argument.  
Whatsoever Church doth make images to speak, in the opinion of men, is Antichristian.  
But the popish Church doth make images to speak in the opinion of men.  
Therefore the popish Church is Antichristian.  
6. Now I come to Bellarmine's latter syllogism, if first I shall explain the sixth action of the Beast: She worketh great signs, so that she maketh fire to descend from heaven in the sight of men.  
The Beast that is Antichrist doth work great miracles, v: 13. which blessed Paul calls lying signs and wonders. 1. in respect of the end, because they serve to seduce men, Ioh: 14. 2. in respect of the matter; for they be either the counterfeitings of lying men, or the wonders of deceitful spirits, as Augustine speaketh. 3. In respect of the form, for whereas true miracles do exceed nature, and are wrought by the omnipotent power of God; false wonders are they which are partly effected by natural causes, partly by the power of Satan. Bellarmine doth well agree with us in all.  

False miracles.  The miracles of the first and second kind have been infinite in the dark kingdom of Antichrist: the apparition of Spirits, the visions of Angels, our Lady how often hath she come gliding out of heaven? how often have the miserable souls crept puling out of Purgatory, besetting highways, and recounting their torments to procure men to pity them? hence the market of Purgatory is grown very gainful, and the bargains about sins very profitable. Then could the Images walk a foot; then could the Bells strike alone without help; then could the Angels like Quoristers chant it out in Canterbury Minster, and play upon Dunstan's Harp; then could the Apostles come down from heaven to help Basill to say Mass. These lying miracles were feigned by cheating knaves, to confirm strange lies, and to cousin simple people of their coin. For how often hath a spirit being apprehended by the Magistracy, and an Angel stripped, and our Lady sent to her Cell, been all of them notably whipped? Souls so whipped with rods, that they had rather been in Purgatory. So they covered all their tricks and conveyances, their kind of deceit, and their manner of working with the fear of punishment. Of these miracles Paul spoke, which being merely false had a show of miracles, but not the power, being the devices of cogging companions. There were other miracles of deceivable spirits, which were wrought partly by the force of natural causes, partly by the power of Satan. So that that Synagogue seemed to be another Canidia. Antichrist doth make fire to descend from heaven in the view of men, saith S. john, that is in the opinion of men, as they imagine. Whether that be taken mystically or literally, let us in a word consider. Fire according to the Scripture descends mystically, either when God doth approve the religion and sacrifices, of his servants, 
How fire descends from heaven in the Scripture.  as of Abel and Elias: or when God doth by an extraordinary fashion send down the graces of the Spirit into their hearts, as in the fiery tongues: or when God did cast down fire from heaven moved by the prayers of his servants, as of Elias to destroy his enemies. 
Three sorts of fire.   

1. Is the fire of sacrifice.  
2. The fire of grace.  
3. The fire of Revenge.   
In all these Antichrist is God's Ape. For he hath confirmed and approved the sacrifice of the Mass and Transubstantiation with miracles: 
The Mass confirmed by a false miracle.  witness that pillar of fire from heaven, falling to the earth, even upon that place, where by the negligence of the Priest, as the Legend reports, the body of God fell out of the pyx upon the grass: that pillar of fire shining like the Sun was about the body of God, so that all the beasts of the field, except a black Horse, which bended but one of his legs, bended all their four legs to the body. Which miracle I have brought out of the Legend, that I might gratify Bellarmine, who knows that beasts than were well nurtured, like to his lean jade, that forgetting to eat his meat, did adore the sacrament upon his knees: which the beasts had not done if God forsooth had not brought down the fiery pillar from heaven, whereby they might have discerned the body of God lying upon the grass. Add hereto that Antichrist doth bestow the grace of the spirit, & sanctification, upon his Agneit Dei, his hallowed grains, his holy water, and his bells, as Primasius hath it. Further, he striketh his enemies with vengeance from God, as it were with fire fallen from heaven, but that in the conceit of men, that they whom Antichrist his fury doth daunt, may seem to be wounded with heavenly revenge, as it were with fire fallen from above. Which whether it be true of the flash of excommunication, which the Pope, who is called the God of revenge, casts abroad, let Kings look to it, whose kingdoms have been often set on fire by such popish lightning. But to excommunicate a King is, say they, no miracle. But so to excommunicate a King that you cast him out of his kingdom, and release subjects from the obedience of their Kings, it is a great miracle, that either Kings are so patiented to endure, or Subjects so mad to believe. Wherefore this is not material fire, but mystical, brought down from heaven by Antichrist in the sight of men, not that he doth so indeed, but that he seemeth so to do. Although if the literal sense do more content you, I have found out Gregory the seventh, 
Gregor: the 7. miracle.  that notable enchanter, who could strike fire out of his bosom, as oft as he listed. Thus I infer.  
Whosoever in the conceits of simple men doth seem to bring down revenging fire out of heaven, is Antichrist.  
This the Pope doth and hath done.  
Therefore the Pope is Antichrist.   

CHAP. XVII. Of the Pope's Character.  
I Proceed. The Beast is said to imprint his character upon all, both great and small, to be carried either in their forehead, or their right hand. Wherein he doth perversely follow Christ's character, which GOD doth imprint upon his servants, subjection to Christ, and the acknowledging of him to be their head and Saviour. And it is partly inward, partly outward. 
Christ's character of two sorts.  The inward character is true faith imprinted upon the soul by the spirit of God, whereby we believe that Christ is our only Redeemer. The outward character, is the confession of the mouth, & the operation of the hands. And therefore a Christian doth bear the mark of God in his heart by faith, in his forehead by profession, 
Rom. 10.  in his hand by working, as S. Paul hath expounded: besides that, the two sacraments are the seals of faith, the witnesses of profession, and the practices of holiness. 
The divers characters of the Pope.   
In like sort Antichrist hath a mark proper to himself of his own, which he doth imprint and brand the Antichristians withal. Which character hangs upon his name, and his name upon his state. Of the first Beast that is of the Roman or Latin monarchy, 
The seven forms of government among the Romans.  there were seven heads, that is, seven kingly forms of governing the commonweal. 1. Kings properly so called. 2. Consuls. 3. Decemviri. 4. Tribunes of soldiers. 5 Dictator's. 6. Emperors properly called. 7 Antichrist. The state of the Beast is Roman or Latin. Therefore the character of the Beast is a note of difference whereby all they are discerned from all other, who are of the Roman or Latin Religion, whom we term Papists.  
And the subjection to the Pope of Rome, as to their head, and the acknowledging of that See, the inward and outward mark of Antichrist.  

The double mark or character of Antichrist.  The inward mark is that implicit faith, which I touched before. The outward mark is that outward profession of the mouth, and the conformity of life to the Pope's laws: as the observation of the heathenish rights was called the character of the Greeks': which is made perfect by the sacraments of confirmation and order, invented by the Pope. And Antichrist doth so imprint all his with the mark of the Beast, that he will suffer none to buy or sell, except they be branded with the Beasts mark. So every Papist is a stigmatic, otherwise he cannot hold his house, or keep open doors, or have any contract or business, or have any comfortable society with Christ's faithful servants, as Martin the fift in the bull annexed to the counsel of Constance did word for word declare.  
8. The name of the Beast or of Antichrist doth follow in the last place, it is not a proper but a common name. For if we know what the Beast is, we shall quickly know what his name is.   

CHAP. XVIII. Of the name and number of the second Beast.  
THe Beast with seven heads, as I said, is the state of the Roman and Latin Empire, whose six Heads or Kings, were called Roman or Latin. The seventh is Antichrist called likewise Roman or Latin. Therefore Antichrist is the seventh King of the Roman or Latin Empire. But the Pope is the seventh King of the Roman Empire. The Pope therefore is Antichrist.  
9 But he must not only bear the name of the Beast, but the number of his name, not the number of time, but of his name: for so saith Saint john, no man may buy or sell, but he that hath the mark and name of the Beast, or number of his name. He doth not say the number of the time, wherein Antichrist was to be revealed, but the number of his name, which he was to stamp upon his.  
But the number of the name is the number of the years 666. which is contained, 
The number of the Beast.  both in the Hebrew name, in which language the prophesy was delivered to S. john: or in Greek, in which language it was written by S. john, Romanus in the Hebrew, Latino's written in Greek, maketh up that number.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Ireneus witness: Romanus by Fox his account. There the common name of Antichrist is Romanus or Latinus. It is the name of a man also, which is very fitting: for Latinus was the name of a King in Italy; Romanus of a Pope. Hear is wisdom, saith S. john, he that hath understanding let him count the number of the Beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.  
It is an old tradition not to be rejected of them that be addicted to traditions, that Irenaeus took the the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Ignatius, Ignatius from Polycarpus, Polycarpus from S. john. There be other names that contain the same number, as Euandas and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but none of these be the name of the Beast, nor the name of a man, none such, which Antichrist doth imprint upon his, and to whom all the notes of Antichrist do agree.  
Whosoever doth compel those that be under his jurisdiction to take on them the mark and name of the Beast, the number of his name, and the number of a man is Antichristrist.  
But the Pope of Rome doth compel those that be under his jurisdiction to take upon them the mark and name of the Beast, and the number of his name, and the number of a man, as I have demonstrated before.  
Therefore the Pope is Antichrist.   

CHAP. XIX. Wherein is showed the place where Antichrist sitteth.  

The Pope sits in Rome which is Babylon.  We have seen the actions, the mark and the name of the Beast. Let us see his seat: I have expounded the star which fell from Heaven, I added somewhat of the Beast which rose out of the earth: now hearken to the whore which sitteth on the Beast. Ere while the falling star did represent Antichrist, now the whore of Babylon doth represent the seat of Antichrist. A falling star, because he left his place: a whore because she broke her troth: ere while the Land-Beast did point out Antichrist, so called, not only because she took a surer and a stronger beginning out of rest and idleness, but because she being a slave to her beastly affections, savours nothing but earth and flesh. Now the whore of Babylon doth shadow out by your own confessions the seat and Church of Antichrist: 
Aug. de civit. Dei. lib. 16 cap. 17. & cap. 22. lib. 18. Sic Hieron. in Esa. cap 47. v. 1. and else where often. Demonst. 13. & 18.  for they are not afraid to call Rome, Babylon, as the Rhemists, Parsons and Bellarmine: and mystical Babylon, as Augustine calls Babylon as it were first Rome, and Rome as it were the second Babylon, and the daughter of the first Babylon: whereupon your own men grant that Rome is that whore of Babylon described by S. john: yea, they proceed farther, for your Saunders calleth it the seat and ●ity of Antichrist. We take that you grant: for it follows by your grant, that not Heathenish Rome, but the Bishops Rome is mystical Babylon: for the state of Antichrist being the seventh head, doth follow the state of the Empire, being the sixth head of the Beast. And therefore Heathenish & Imperial Rome could not be the seat & city of Antichrist. Therefore Christian Rome, & the Pope's Rome. Whereby it is brought to pass, that not Heathenish Rome, but the Pope's Rome is mystical Babylon. For this is the sum of my conclusion.  
Mystical Babylon is the seat and city of Antichrist, described in the Apocal. chap. 17.  
But Rome is mystical Babylon there described.  
Rome therefore is the seat and city of Antichrist.  
But they distinguish of Rome in the assumption, and they enforce it to be Heathenish and the Imperial Rome, which then governed & persecuted the Saints. Not this Christian and Popish described by S. john. It is a very weighty and evident prophesy.  
1. It had been a cold and a weak prophesy, 
Reasons to show it was not Heathenish Rome: but the Popish.  if he had prophesied of that persecution which he saw in others, and felt in himself. Prophecies look not to the present, but the future times.  
2. If he had meant that Ethnic Rome had been Babylon, which did afflict the Saints at that time, he had not spoken as of a mystery: for that could not seem to him so mystical that Pagans should persecute christian's. That was a plain mystical evil, that Christians should oppress christian's.  
3. Neither would he have called Ethnic Rome a whore in that sense, which had not given her faith to Christ, and therefore had not as yet broken it: neither did she deceive the nations with whorish tricks and dalliances: but had vanquished them with military force and weapons. He doth therefore call Rome a whore, after it left off to be a faithful city, which daunted the nations, not as Bellona, but enchanted them as Circe.  
4. Neither would he have made her merchants the Sales-men of souls, or that all nations had been deceived by her venomous baits, if he had meant Ethnic Rome, which subdued nations by force, did not infect them with poison. For that kept a shambles for bodies not a market for souls. And among all the negotiations of Popish Rome, none is so gainful as the traffic of souls, whereof S. john; which Ethnic Rome never practised. Therefore the Christian Popish Rome is that Babylon, 
Popish Rome Babylon.  whose wares are men's souls, whose Merchants are the Monks, which make men value their salvation at a high rate. Not without cause, Martial a pleasant Poet, thought he might jest with one Calliodore, who had put over his servant tor 2000 pieces of silver, that out of his man's price he might sup daintily, and feed upon Mullet, and other kinds of delicate fish.  
I may well cry, o wretch, that fish is not thy meat.  
It is a man, a man thou Calliodore dost eat.  
The same may be truly said of Bellarmine, Becan and such like jesuits, who sell men's souls to feed their bellies.  
It is not fish ye jesuits, whereon you do so feed,  
O they be men ye Cannibals, o they be men indeed.  
Whom if I cannot yet satisfy, (for I know their wrangling and obstinate wits) I will send them to the Angel, the Interpreter of the Mystery, who doth convict that Rome, in name only Christian and Popish, to be that whore of Babylon.  
First, the seven heads of the Beast, whereof he spoke mystically before, are seven hills, saith the Angel, and seven Kings. The hills are the heads of the city, the seven Kings the heads of the government, by them the situation of Rome, by these the seven kinds of government are noted, whereof I spoke before. Five went before john's time, the sixth was then, that is, the Empire, which the first Beast shadoweth out, the seventh was not yet come, that was the Popedom, which the latter Beast doth represent.  

The Rhemists' objection.  But the 7. hills and the 7. King's say the Rhemists are not taken literally and properly, but mystically, and indefinitely so that they signify all the Kingdoms of persecutors. Why therefore doth the Angel add, of the seven Kings, 5. are fallen, one is, and the other is not yet come? which place the Rhemists do so expound afterward, but unwittingly, they confess five went before Christ, one than was, the other was to follow, whereby they overthrow their former idle interpretation. Whose peevishness I pray behold how great it is. In all other places almost, 
Their mistaking.  where the sense is altogether mystical, they imagine a literal sense of their own. Hear where the Angel sets down a plain literal sense they imagine a mystical. Against sense, which seethe the 7. hills of the city, whereupon Rome is called the seven hild-city: Against the history, which mentioneth 7. Kings, that is the 7. kingly forms of government of that City. Neither doth the Angel say, as they dream the seven heads are 7. hills, and the 7. hills are seven Kings, but the 7. heads are 7. hills, and those seven heads are seven Kings as Bellarmine acknowledgeth. The Rhemists' exposition is very foolish. For the Kings being the heads do shadow out the heads of the politic body very fitly, the hills very unfitly. Besides that, it is very false for if the hills be Kings, the City which is the woman vers: 18. sitteth upon 7. Kings. For she is said to sit on the hills vers: 9 The light of which place, did so strike and dazzle the English- Rhemists, 
Anglo-Rhemen in Apoc: cap. 17.5.  as it had done  before, that they confess Rome to be that Whore of Babylon, and that it may fall out not inconveniently, that great Antichrist may have his seat at Rome. Out of this exposition of the Angel, and the confession of the Adversary ariseth this proposition. That great City placed upon seven hills, and subject, to the 7. kingly forms of government, is the seat of Antichrist, hence I dispute both negatively, and affirmatively. Negatively: But jerusalem although a great City, 
antichrist's seat not at jerusalem.  yet was not situated on seven hills, nor ever subject to seven such kingly forms of government; jerusalem therefore is not the seat of Antichrist. Affirmatively, but of all cities this situation and government is proper to Rome. Rome therefore properly is the head-city of Antichrist. Now sith Antichrist sits only at Rome, as the Angel interprets in john, and the Adversary confesseth, and sitteth in the temple of God, as Paul sets it down, that is in God's Church, as the fathers expound it out of the Scriptures, it followeth both ways necessarily that not that Ethnic but that Ecclesiastical Rome is the head-city of Antichrist. Sibilla did foretell both the situation of the place, 
Sibilla did foretell Antichrist.  and the state of Antichrist. And she foretold there would be great terror and fury of the Empire near the banks of Tiber, and that the king would be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and gave him the name like to a bridge, and should be a Bishop adorned with a white, that is a silver mitre, glistering with precious stones; as Ireneus likewise foretold. Therefore he was a Latin Bishop, that did hold Peter's chair, as Bernard, who shall be called most holy Lord, and most holy Bishop as joachim the Abbot said. Can Saint john, could Saint Paul, could Sibilla, Irenaeus, Barnard, joachim the Abbot, touch him nearer than they touch him? Or more plainly show the situation of the seat, the kind of government, the state of the King, the bank of Tiber, the name of the chair of Antichrist, so that one of the Papists called him most holy Pope? But let us return to the Angel, by whom the beast which carried the whore is thus described, (which was) that is a flourishing Empire (but is not) in truth the Empire of Rome for his strength and power but his shadow rather vers: 3. (and yet is) the Roman Empire for name and title: (and is called the eight beast) for 5. are already fallen, 
Vers. 10.  as the Angel saith. One King was then, that is the Empire in Saint john's time, and another was not as yet come, 
Vers. 11.  that is the Papacy which drew to itself the strength and power of the old Empire without the name: and is called the seventh head of the beast, 
The eight beast.  although of it own self it be a beast. But the beast which was and is not (is the eight) that is a new Empire, for the name and title, and is one of the seven: that is, of the Emperors. Therefore although the old Empire may seem to be described by the Angel by the name of the beast, yet a new is chief set out, which the second beast did renew, that the Whore might sit upon it, and be upholden by it. What is more perspicuous than this Angelical interpretation, which event itself hath proved true? for the whore sitteth upon this hest and is upheld by it. For therefore the Roman in name, but the German Emperor in deed is called as I said the defender Procurator and Protector of the Apostolic sea. Out of the premises I shortly dispute.  
6 The beast whereon the Whore sitteth is a new Empire; for it is not the sixth head but the eight, therefore not Ethnic Rome under the Pagans, but in name only Christian under the Christian Emperors is that Whore described by Saint john.  
7 Now those ten horns saith the Angel, are ten Kings vers: 12. which as yet have not received the Kingdom.  
They be not then those ten horns, whereof Daniel did prophecy whose kingdoms are at an end. But they shall have kingly power together with the beast, that is with Antichrist, which cannot be understood but of the Proconsul's, or Propraetors who were vicegerents to the Emperors in the Provinces, who together after the dissolution of the Eastern Empire had at that time absolute kingly authority with the Pope. For while the Empire stood and flourished, neither the Pope at Rome nor the Kings in the Provinces did rule absolutely; after it decayed, both he enjoyed Rome and a great part of Italy, and they enjoyed the Provinces. And these ten horns together with the beast as Bellarmine confesseth it, & event proves it, 
Lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 13.  divided the Roman Empire between them. Hence I infer this.  
At that time whenas Rome was accounted the Whore of Babylon by the Angel, than the ten horns took absolute power with Antichrist.  
But before Rome was Christian and Popish the ten horns had not absolute power with Antichrist.  
It followeth therefore that Rome not before it was Christian and Popish, was accounted the Whore of Babylon by the Angel.   

CAHP. XX. Wherein the qualities of the Whore of Babylon are described.  
WHose glorious profession is fitly resembled to the golden cup of fornication. It is said that Edward the 4. King of England had three Concubines the first very devout, the second very subtle, the third very pleasant. The whore of Babylon alone doth express these three dispositions. For what is more devout, what is more jocund, what is more wily? she hath a face none of her own, as her Husband Antichrist hath not. For he doth always wear a vizard, and therefore is a counterfeit Antichrist. A whore, not only for her carnal filthiness, but for her spiritual Idolatry, whereto she hath enticed the nations with her allurements, such as had to do with her. She is therefore a blasphemous and filthy Whore, more than that a proud, covetous, cruel whore. And therefore she is said to be decked with purple and golden attire, enriched with the spoils of all sorts, and drunk with the innocent blood of the Saints. 
Note  For what extremities soever impiety could effect by blasphemy, or lust by lasciviousness, or covetousness by rapine, or pride by delicacy, or cruelty by torture, the same the Angel so long before foretold that the Church should endure by that whore of Babylon. Neither if we grant that Ethnic Rome from her cradle was Babylon, because the beast is said to have 7. heads, any inconvenience will follow thereby. Neither if we shall say that the purple whore began then, 
The Pope compared to Romulus.  when Romulus first founded Rome will it overthrow the exposition of the Angel. For it remained to be that, which she was in the beginning. Yea a great deal worse when it was falsely Christian under Antichrist, then heathenish under Romulus. It is reported that Romulus was a notable thief, a Deflowrer of Virgins, a truce breaker, a brother-killer, and that he founded Rome at the first by these sins. But he was not so notorious for his theifts, as this for his sacrilege. Nor he so filthy for the forcing of Virgins, as this for the worshipping of Images: Nor he for his breaking his league with men, as this with God: Nor he such a spiller of his brother's blood, as this of Christian blood. What an one think we him to be, who doth surpass a thief in robbery, a deflowerer of Virgins in lechery, a truce breaker in treachery, and a brother-killer in cruelty. Therefore the Angel called the Bishop of Rome Babylon and the purple whore by a supper excellency. 
The descripti- of the Whore of Babylon.  For she was proud by the spoils of Provinces, this by the spoils of all Churches. She was composed or carnal, this of spiritual adulteries and whoredoms. She brak her faith with men, this with God. She was enraged against the bodies of the Saints, this against the souls of the Saints. She dealt with the lambs of Christ by open force as a lions Whelp, this as a Fox with her cunning did savagely tear them in pieces and devour them. Wherefore let Rome if you will, be that whore of Babylon from the beginning: certainly she could not make drunk 10. kings with the golden cup of her fornication, before there were ten Kings. For while Ethnic Rome did stand, they were the emperors subjects, they were no kings: They were kings under the Pope of Rome, therefore by popish Rome made drunk, to whom by an excellency the name of that whore is given by the Angel. Neither yet will I ever accuse that Bishoply Rome, which suffered for Christ under the ethnic Emperors. For not Rome regenerated and suffering, but degenerating and persecuting can properly be called that whore of Babylon. Neither do I wholly excuse the imperial Rome, 
Imperial Rome not to be excused.  which under Constantine, Theodosius and other holy emperors professed Christ: because Rome which was Babylon from the beginning, did retain in her bosom divers relics of the former paganism, and divers seeds of the future Antichristianisme. Because it is not necessary that all that were of the same succession should be of the same affection. No I would not exclude Paul the 5. himself from the hope of salvation, if the wretched sinner would repent, and return unto his God. Hence certain dispute against us.  
Antichrist cannot be saved: for he is the son of perdition, as the Apostle teacheth.  
The Pope may be saved, by your own confession.  
The Pope therefore is not Antichrist. Or thus.  
It is not lawful to pray for Antichrist,  
It is for the Pope,  
The Pope therefore is not Antichrist.  
This objection is a fallacy, called the begging of the question. For it doth presuppose Antichrist to be one singular man. We contrary; as by many reasons we have proved it. If therefore they keep them to the point, and take the Pope collectively, the assumption is false, if they take him for this or that single man, the assumption is true, if the Pope repent. But then there be four terms in the syllogism. For the Pope is otherwise taken in the assumption, then in the conclusion. For there it is taken for singular Popes, here for a succession of Pope. But of this sophism I have spoken enough before.   

CHAP. XXI. How the Church of Rome may be said to be the Church of God.  
But here is another doubt to be resolved, how the seat of Antichrist can be called that purple whore, as Saint john saith, and temple and Church of God as Saint Paul saith.  
For if Antichrist sit in the Church of God as I taught before, and popish Rome be the seat of Antichrist, as in many words I have declared, it seemeth that popish Rome is the Church of God. I answer and distinguish of the proposition, and that out of God's book, which considereth the Church after 2. sorts.  

1. After the inward truth, and the outward profession.  
2. After the outward profession only.   
As blessed john calleth the Church of Sardis the Church of Christ although it had grievously fallen from the doctrine of Christ. Why so? Because as yet it professed the name of Christ, and retained the sacrament of Baptism, and because certain lay hid among them, who had not polluted themselves. So the Church of Rome may be called the Church of God and of Christ, because it professeth the name of Christ, because it retaineth certain footsteps and outward marks of a visible Church, as Baptism, the Decalogue, the creed, 
The Papists have the truth as the Philistines had the Ark.  the Lords Prayer: but notes miserably corrupted: as the Philistines who retained among them the Ark of God's presence, but they felt it to be to them the Ark of pestilence: as the Cutthites the bastard Israelites, who had Moses books, and would at once fear God and worship Idols: As the Samaritans their successors, who bragged that they had jacobs' well among them, when they had infected the well of the water of life. Therefore the Delegates did justly complain of the Church of Rome in the Council of Trent: That that was true which God complained by jeremy: This people have committed two evils; one, they have forsaken me the fountain of living water: The other they have digged to themselves cisterns, which can hold no water. Although I cannot deny that certain relics of the invisible Church do lie hidden in the same, who have not bended their knee to Baal. But as it is said to the Church of Sardis, You have a name that you live, but you are dead, that may deservedly be spoken of the Romish Church, in respect of the inward faith the soul of the Church, you are stark dead, although in outward profession you are said to live. You are called the Temple of God, because you retain the name of Christ, but you are the whore of Babylon, because you have forsaken the faith. The temple of God equivocally, not univocally, for an equivocal Church is good enough for equivocating Christians. Now the ten horns, that is the ten Kings, have one purpose, as the Angel speaketh, to give over his virtue and his power to the beast. Her they will serve, they will love and seek after her; her they will sustain with their forces, at her book they will draw the sword, and being confederaed in holy leagues both with the beast and within themselves, will fight with the Lamb: but after that, the Lamb shall by little and little begin to weaken and consume Antichrist by the preaching of his word, than the ten horns which before had to do with the whore, shall begin to hate her, and leave her forsaken and naked.   

CHAP. XXII. An advise to Princes to join against the Pope.  
8 WHich cannot be said of old, but of new Rome, whereof a great part of the prophecy is now fulfilled. For the Pope hath lost, as Bellarmine bemoaneth, a great part of Germany, Suetia, Gothia, Noruegia, all Denmark, a good part of England, France, Helvetia, Polonia, Bohemia, and Pannonia. He might better have said all England, and joined Scotland and Ireland thereto, but that he would show he hath a little vain hope in certain secret and broken relics of Antichrist among us. I would to God that as the Kings of Great Britanny, with many other great Princes have cast of the whore, 
A desire that France and Spain would forsake the Pope.  so the Kings of France and Spain would forsake her. Rome is more to be feared of them, then of our Britain King, whose Crown is more free, whose succession more certain, whose subjects more loyal, whose kingdom is more remote, and shut up from popish assaults. I would that so mighty Princes, this Prince's confederates, would follow his valour and holiness in this point, whereby they might wholly fulfil the prophecy. It is not for men of mean condition to give counsel, but to make prayers, while they expound this so holy and weighty prophecy. If not to advise, yet to wish, first that those two potent Kings would join with the King of Great Britain, and others those worthy Kings and Princes of the Reformed Church, against Antichrist. Next that if they do make a secret league with Antichrist and within themselves against the Kings and Princes of the Reformed Church, that all our side would make a holy League with all possible haste, and take heed that our neighbours and brethren, the Protestants of France and Flanders, be not unawares oppressed by them, whiles ours neglect them. But we may not make wars with our neighbour Kings. But we ought to take heed, lest they bring in a very dangerous war upon us. But we must be addicted to peace. True, which hath no treachery nor deceit; otherwise an holy war is to be preferred before a treacherous peace, whereto the Holy Ghost doth exhort Kings, that with united forces they destroy and overthrow the whore of Babylon, that is Rome, as Bellarmine himself confesseth.   

CHAP. XXIII. The overthrow of Rome.  
AS the Angel doth continue his prophecy to the last overthrow of the whore, which cannot agree with heathenish and imperial Rome; for this overthrow doth follow the dissolution of the old Empire, and the division thereof into ten kingdoms, which according to the prophecy would that the whore should first perish, afterward themselves should consume and destroy it. Therefore this overthrow belongeth to Rome that is popish, but christian in name, as the Angel did notably expound it; for whereas she is said to sit upon many waters, that is, many people and many nations, as the Angel expounds it, ver: 15. and whereas the woman is called the great City, which beareth rule over the Kings of the earth, ver: 18. nothing doth hinder but that it may be popish Rome. But that popish Rome is not rightly said to have government: first it is sufficient that Rome then Imperial, is described to be the seat wherein the whore of Babylon shall bear rule afterward. Again, they which call her the kingdom of the Romans, 
Turrianus.  the kingdom of Priests, do confess that she beareth rule, who have very cunningly changed the secular kingdom into a spiritual, that which Aquinas the Angelical Doctor doth observe. 
Aquinas.  But so excellent a prophecy did not only look into the age then present, but foresaw the age long after to follow. And therefore the description of the whore is first set out in all her parts as you see, and after her destruction, which cannot be understood of the burning of Ethnic Rome by the Goths and Vandals, 
10  but by a final and sudden destruction, as it were a millstone cast by great force into the sea. For it shall not saith the Angel, be found again any more: which cannot agree to Ethnic Rome, for after it had received that dangerous wound by the Goths, it was afterward cured and restored to health. Besides, the Angel doth add that the destruction of the whore shall be for ever: which although it do agree with Rome Ethnic, yet that you may see it likewise agreeth with Rome popish, the woman saith the Angel, which is the great City, together with her false Prophet shall be cast into the lake of fire. Let the little frogs take heed to themselves, those foul spirits the jesuits, which issue daily out of the mouth of the Dragon, the beast and the false Prophet. Bellarmine, Becan, and the rest of those frogs, may merrily scoff and laugh at our men (but with a Sardonian laughter) because the City and Antichrist, as they writ, to us are both one, as the street & josephus: for the woman which is the great City, together with her false Prophet shall be cast into the lake of fire. Here is no distinction of destruction: for both the seat, and he that holdeth the seat shall perish for ever. But Christian Rome shall not perish, say they. True, if the truth agreed with the name: but the Antichristian whore shall be utterly overthrown. Therefore the Angel crieth out, Come out of Babylon my people, lest as ye be partakers of her sins, you be likewise partakers of her plagues. which place Hierome doth allege in his Epistle to Marcelia, whom he persuadeth to come out of Rome now, not heathenish but popish, because it is Babylon: which the very Papists themselves do grant to be the seat of Antichrist. I demand therefore at the last, whether they make Ethnic Rome to be the seat of Antichrist, because he then sat at Rome, when the Ethnic Emperors governed there, or whether he should sit afterward when they were worn out. If they say he sat at Rome with the Ethnic Emperors, they overthrow all the tale of Antichrist utterly, whom they imagine shall come in the end of the world: if they say he shall sit after the Emperors be clean gone, 
Popish Rome the seat of Antichrist.  it followeth that Rome is Babylon, and the seat of Antichrist, not the former heathenish, but the latter popish. For whereas they go about to prove out of the Apocalyps, that jerusalem is the seat of Antichrist, thereof I shall have occasion to speak more properly in another place. Now out of these premises doth arise that principal syllogism which I took in hand to prove.  
Mystical Babylon is the seat and City of Antichrist described in the 17 and 18 of the Apocalyps by the confession of the Adversaries.  
But Rome christian in name and popish is that mystical Babylon, as the exposition of the Angel doth manifestly convict.  
Rome therefore in name christian and popish, is the seat and city of Antichrist.  
This is the angels exposition, Paul the fift, not mine: this exposition if you have any sense at all pierceth to the quick, it galls and wounds exceedingly. This syllogism doth inwardly launch and wound these your worthy Advocates, though they seem to have little sense, made like a dart, by the exposition of the Angel, to be cast and aimed at them. For what are they else but the shameless bawds of the whore? what do they else, but with their cunning nets of words, and with their learned snares deceive and catch simple people, 
Papists deceive the people.  that they may bring them to that withered and overworn whore, whom they paint out with all their boxes of their slaberments. But as Chrysostome said of a woman that coloured her face with painting, that God would not acknowledge her in the resurrection for his creature, that may more truly be said of this same hagged and painted whore, of whom we speak.   

CHAP. XXIV. Wherein is set down the time when Antichrist is revealed.  
I Have spoken much of the seat wherein she doth govern, now somewhat of the time when she shall be revealed. For Antichrist lurked closely a long time, and closely grew by degrees, as an earthquake, 
A notable similitude of an earthquake.  which doth not show itself strait way, but beginneth first by a little wind, and then being shut up and kept in, in certain hollow caves of the earth, making no motion or sound, but by little and little gathering great strength, at last violently breaketh out, 
The degrees of an earthquake.  tears the earth in pieces, shatters rocks, casts down mountains, overturneth Towers, subverts Cities, swallows up Rivers, inflames the air, bringeth forth lightning, filleth the heavens with dreadful noise, and the world with terrible fear. Such is the working of an earthquake, small, little and hidden at the first, great and terrible after it breaks out. Such for all the world is the working of Antichrist. In the beginning, like a little wind, it lieth hid in certain hollow cells of the Church, afterward by degrees growing bigger, and gathering strength, it doth aghast the world. Insinuating himself at the first with a feigned cloak of sanctity, creepeth secretly into men's minds: at the last shall appear, and break out openly to their destruction, after that which hindereth is taken away, as the Apostle teacheth. It is agreed on both sides, that which S. Paul saith hindereth, 
What hindered the revealing of Antichrist. De resur: car: 2 Thess: 2.6.  that Antichrist which then was might not be revealed was the Roman Empire, as all the Father's thought, Tertullian, Ambrose, Chrysostome, Cyrill, Primasius, Theophylact upon this place, Hierom to Algasia quest. 11. unless better you know what detaineth the coming of Christ, that Antichrist should first be revealed in his time, as that learned jewel doth expound out of the former words. The day of Christ, saith the Apostle, shall not come, unless there come a falling away first, and unless Antichrist be revealed ver: 7. he teacheth who doth keep back the coming of Christ, only he which detaineth, shall detain till he be clean taken away: which all the Fathers almost, as I said, understand of the Roman Emperor, about the end of whose fall they say that Antichrist shall come. The Apostle used first the neuter gender, v: 6. then the masculine, v: 7. By the one some think he meant the Roman Empire, by the other the Roman Emperor. For so long as the Rom: Empire flourished, or the Roman Emperor bore rule, Antichrist could not sit & domineer in that seat: he lay close at that time and durst not show himself. The Emperor who hindered him was to be taken out of the way, that Antichrist might openly govern at Rome; that the Pope's chair might there be placed in stead of Caesar's throne. But herein the adversaries dissent from us; That the Rom: Empire they say, should be utterly overthrown and ended, so as not so much as the name of the Rom: Empire should remain, before Antichrist came. Which as soon as Bellarmine had said, he denied: in which contradiction, as in many others, that great learned Bishop of Ely takes him tardy. Truly that which he said, neither the Apostle hath said, or any Father hath said. The Apostle hath taught, that that which hindered must be taken out of the way, and removed out of his place, so far forth as it hindered the revelation and domination of Antichrist, he did not teach it should be abolished and overthrown, as they say, so that he should lose his name: for the removing of the Empire is one thing, the abolishing is another. 
The Roman Empire is not dissolved but divided into 10 Kings.  The Emperor is gone out of the City of Rome, the Rom: Empire is dissolved and divided into ten Kings, therefore Antichrist is now come. This is therefore the conclusion of all those Fathers, whom I mentioned before. He that held is taken away, saith Hierome, 
Ad Geront. de Monoga.  and do we not understand that Antichrist is near at hand? for so S. john saith, the ten horns shall receive the Kingdom together with the Beast, that is, with Antichrist, and the ten Kings shall divide the Roman Empire among themselves (the number of ten is often taken indefinitely.) You have heard the prophesy, mark the event. The ten horns have received the Kingdom, and have divided the Roman Empire among themselves, together with the Beast, that is, with Antichrist: by the confession of Bellarmine. Therefore Antichrist is now come. But the name of the Roman Empire is not abolished. Neither ought it to be abolished; for S. john hath taught, that the sixth head of the Sea-Beast, that is, the Empire, 
The sixth head of the Sea-beast.  after it was deadly wounded should be cured and healed again: not therefore to be utterly taken away and finished, as they say, so that it retain not the name of an Empire. Again, he sets out the cause, why the second Beast, that is, Antichrist should renew the image of the former Beast, that the whore might sit upon her, as I have taught, and be sustained by her. And therefore the former Beast was not clean to be taken away, lest the latter being deprived of her stay, should fall to the ground.  
But how doth S. john and S. Paul then agree? 
An objection answered.  S. Paul saith, that the Emperor must be taken out of the way, that he might leave Rome empty for Antichrist, as the Papists expound it: Saint john saith, that the whore sitteth upon the Beasts back, that is, the Emperor, that she might be upheld by him. How do you reconcile these? will you say, if you understand S. Paul to speak of the old, and S. john of the new Empire. S. Paul speaketh of the Empire which hindered or detained, and of that only, for so he saith, He only that now hindereth shall hinder, till it be taken away. The old Empire did hinder Antichrist not the new. S. Paul therefore spoke not of the new Empire, but of the old. S. john speaketh of the Empire that carrieth the Beast, that is so far off from hindering it, that it doth rather underprop and uphold it. And to that purpose was the Empire renewed in the West, 
The Empire renewed in the West, to uphold the Pope.  that it might hold up the Church of Rome. S. john therefore doth not in this place speak of the old Empire, but of the new. But the Popish sort, who think that not the Majesty only, but the name of the Empire is to be extinguished, before Antichrist come, do seem by obscuring the prophesy with certain contradictions to delude their Auditors. They say that the Roman Empire which now is, shall continue to the end of the world by the prophesy of Daniel, and the same men say, that it shall be dissolved and divided into ten Kings (Very foolishly; they say it notwithstanding) before Antichrist come. As though ten very potent Kingdoms could consist of the naked name, and vain title of an Emperor, or that that could be said of them, should be utterly abolished before Antichrist came, which by them is said, shall continue till the end of the world. Wherein in the one, they seem to follow the madness of Epicurus, who seems to make the world of moats, as these men make ten Kingdoms of words. For what is now the Roman Empire, but a mere word? In the other they show their brains to be cracked, who say, that the Roman Empire that now is, shall continue to the world's end, and yet shall be utterly overthrown before the coming of Antichrist, whom they say shall reign three years and a half before the end of the world. In them both they show their notable impiety, who while they wrap and enfold a most weighty prophesy of Antichrist, within their impossibilities & contradictions they profane God's Word, and deceive God's Church. The sum of all is gathered by the Apostle, that the old Empire is to be taken away, and to be dissolved and divided into ten Kingdoms, before that Antichrist should come, that the new was to be restored and repaired, being the image of the old, upon whose back he should sit and advance himself when he came.   

CHAP. XXV. How the old Empire was taken away.  
THe old Empire therefore whereof S. Paul spoke which hindered the revealing of Antichrist, let us consider how it was taken out of the way: whereof we put two degrees. First, when Constantine the Great, did translate the seat of the Empire from Rome to Constantinople: 
Two degrees of the falling of the Empire.  the second after the division of the Empire, into the Eastern and Western, which did presently weaken them both, and afterward dissolved the Western, which was properly the Roman Empire, it was first deprived (the Eastern I mean) of all the title and interest to Rome and Italy. The empty seat of the Empire, the Majesty thereof divided and diminished, than first in the West, and after in the East put out and overthrown, we say to be the two degrees of the removing of that obstacle, which hindered the revealing of Antichrist, and his dominion in the city of Rome. I trip over the history briefly, they that will set faster footing, may fetch it out of the fountains themselves, if they please.  
I do likewise set down two degrees of the Revelation of Antichrist. One wherein he began to reign, 
Two degrees of revealing Antichrist.  the other wherein he began to be acknowledged.  
I note also two degrees of the Kingdom, when it took upon it the chief government of the universal Church, Anno 607. when he was called universal Bishop by Phocas that King-killer, at that very time when Mahomet began, so that Phocas the murderer, 
When Mahomet began.  the Universal Bishop, and wicked Mahomet may seem to be of one birth. The wind of false doctrine, and of Church-ambition, did by stealth creep into the minds of certain Bishops, 
Socrat. li. 7. c. 11  who, as Socrates is witness, lifting up themselves above the limits of their Priesthood, into strange government, did strive about the primacy and superiority over all Churches: and to that purpose Zosimus and Celestinus did foist in a new devised Canon of the counsel of Niece, detected and rejected by the Bishops of Carthage. But that small wind kept in, I know not how in the heart of the Church, it did not all break out before Boniface the third had extorted that proud title from Phocas the Emperor, by his importunate entreaty.  
But yet Antichrist was but a Pupil as it were in his nonage, not only being subject to the Emperor for a time, but the emperors Vice Gerent in the government of Ravenna: by whom the election of the Pope first made by the Clergy and people of Rome, was necessarily confirmed, until Benedict the second obtained this privilege of the Emperor Constantine the fourth, Pogonotus, that the Pope should be created without the confirmation of the Emperor. And then Antichrist began to be his own man, living after his own law, or rather without law, as the Apostle speaks. Not long after, as Boniface the third did extol himself above all Bishops; so Gregory the second vaunted, that he was above the Emperor: Gregory the third did spoil Leo the third, being first excommunicated by Gregory the second, because he went about to abolish images, did spoil, I say, him of all his revenues in Italy, and absolved his subjects from their oath of fealty. And so took from him all the government of the West, as a Popish Author doth testify in his book called, The bundle of times. 
Faesciculus temp●rum.  At last, that we may not follow after the mean passages in the history severally, Gregory the seveuth, like an Earthquake, broke out and shattered both the Church and the Empire. For he first settled the Popish government, as Aventinus doth witness; which his successors continued 450. years in despite of the Emperors, so that they made the Emperor his vassal. After that Antichrist was come to his height, being revealed by his two degrees, and domineering in the Church, first be began to be acknowledged of many holy and learned men in particular: but from the time of Gregory the seventh, to the happy age of Luther, and then in general Rome was acknowledged to be Babylon, the Pope Antichrist in all the Reformed Churches. I am not ignorant that this assertion of the Reformed Church, of our own men is thought doubtful, of yours mad and doting, but if they do seriously mark those conclusions following, our men will feel that scruple taken from them, and your men a sting fastened in them. For thus I will dispute from all the premises.  
To whomsoever all those essential notes of Antichrist set down by blessed Paul and john, do only agree, he is only that great Antichrist.  
But all those essential notes do agree to the Pope of Rome only.  
Therefore the Pope of Rome only is that great Antichrist.   

CHAP. XXVI. A recapitulation of that which went before.  
NOw that the assumption may plainly appear, we will set out, as in one view, all those propositions shortly, which have been before more largely and sound concluded. I told you first what Antichrist was.  
1. 
Chap. 3.  That Antichrist is not one singular and individual person, but a state and a succession of persons.  
2. That he is in a counterfeit show, 
Chap. 4.  a Vicar or Vicegerent, in presumption a fellow-mate, in purpose an adversary. Afterward of what kind Antichrist was.  

Chap. 5.  3. That Antichrist is the head of a general Apostasy from the faith.  

Chap. 6.  4. That Antichrist is an Apostatical Christian, and an universal Bishop.  
5. That Antichrist is not an outward and a professed: but an homebred and hypocritical adversary.  
6. That Antichrist is subtle, denying Christ indirectly.  

Chap. 7.  7. He that sits in the Temple of God, as God, and makes a show as if he were God, the same is Antichrist.  
8. He that lifts up himself above all that is called God, or sovereignty above the Angels in Heaven, above Princes on the earth, above holy things in the Church, the same is Antichrist.  

Chap. 8. 9 10.  9 He that taketh away the natures, properties, offices, benefits of Christ, by consequent, and indirectly is Antichrist. 
Chap. 11.  I have showed what kind of kingdom and attendance belongs to Antichrist.  
10. Antichrist is the keykeeper of hell.  
11. Antichrist is the head of that smoky and dark kingdom.  

Chap. 12. 13.  12. Abaddon or Apollyon is the King of the Locusts. i. Antichrist is the eldest son of the Devil.  

Chap. 14.  I showed what the Beast doth that riseth out of the earth.  
13. That Antichrist is the son of the earth.  
14. That Antichrist hath two horns of a Lamb, but uttereth the voice of the Dragon.  
15. He that showeth all the power of the first Beast in his sight is Antichrist.  
16. The image of the first Beast is Antichrist.  
17. He that compelleth men to adore the image of the first Beast is Antichrist.  

Chap. 15.  18. The restorer of the old Rom. Empire is Antichrist.  

Chap. 16.  19 He that cometh with lying signs and wonders, is Antichrist.  
20 The seventh King of the Roman or Latin Empire is Antichrist. 
Chap. 17.   
21 He that compelleth all under his rule to take on them the Character and name of the beast, and the number of his name, and the number of a man is Antichrist, I have showed where he sits.  
22 Who so sitteth in that imperial city situated on 7. hills, and 7. kingly forms of government, 
Chap. 19  near to the banks of Tiber, and is a Latin Bishop, and possesseth Peter's chair, and is called most holy Pope, is Antichrist.  
23 Whose seat is mystical Babylon, i: Rome in name Christian and Bishoply, the same is Antichrist.  
24 Who so sitteth upon the whore that is blasphemous, idolatrous, lustful, proud, selling souls, bloody, 
Chap. 20  and is the same in all things for wit and disposition is Antichrist.  
I have showed at what time he is revealed.  
26 He that after the fall of the Roman Empire, and the departure of the Roman Emperor out of the city of Rome, sitteth governing in the city of Rome, being made the temple and the Church of God, is Antichrist.  
None of all these notes belong to Luther, very few of them to the Turk. But to the Pope of Rome, both every of them severally, and all of them jointly, and to him alone as it is evidently proved before.  
Therefore the Pope of Rome only is that great Antichrist. You have Paul the fift, a glass wherein you may behold all yourself: but that you have certain about you more desirous of your momentany reputation than your eternal salvation, who have cast a certain mist upon the Glass, that you might not know yourself therein. To whom I think good briefly to answer.   

CHAP. XXVII. Wherein is showed what kind of one Antichrist is not.  
WE have showed what kind of one Antichrist is: now what kind of one he is not let us likewise set down.  
Although that which is strait is the rule both of itself and that which is crooked, as the Philosopher well said, yet let us yield so much to our Adversaries either ignorance or obstinacy, that as we have brought out the true and right notes of Antichrist, out of the text of Scripture, so we may refute the false and feigned proceeding out of the brain of man.  
Bellarmine writes honestly, that the opinions of the Fathers about Antichrist, which cannot be proved out of the Scriptures, are not to be held as certain truths, or to be believed as matter of faith. I would he would follow his own rule, we should sooner agree among ourselves. And he hath rejected some of their fables in this cause, the Scripture being his guide: but I think he refused other men's devices herein, that with greater authority he might show forth his own.  
Some of them as false and absurd, others as more probable, but false for all that, both of them he doth reject. Why so I pray? Because they cannot be proved out of the Scripture. Who would not think that this man dealeth with us in good sooth.  
Of the generation of Antichrist.  

1 Antichrist is not as he saith borne of a Virgin.  
2 He is not the Devil as Hippolytus thought.  
3 He is not a Devil incarnate.  
4 He is not Nero brought to life again.   
These opinions saith he are absurd. Others are more probable, neither true.  

1 Antichrist is not a bastard, as Damascen said.  
2 He is not of the Tribe of Dan, as 12. Father's do think and all Papists almost besides Bellarmine.   
Do you not see Paul the 5. how your Bellarmine rejecteth twelve Fathers in this cause? and gives his own side the slip? He denieth the old Tribe of Antichrist, we look he should deny his Country anon. He denieth him to be of Dan: by and by he will deny him to be a Iew. For as for the Tribe of Dan, Bellarmine alloweth Hyeromes' opinion. Why? This cannot, saith he be proved out of the Scripture. Although for the Tribe, divers Papists bring texts as probable as Bellarmine doth for the nation. But those this plain dealing man forsooth hath rejected. Do you not see how your men disagree in this matter, that you may no more tell our men of their disagreements.   

CHAP. XXVIII. Of the Nation, Religion, Office, and seat of ANTICHRIST.  
BUT Antichrist, saith he, shall be by Nation a jew, by Religion circumcised, and for a time a keeper of the Saboth: by his office Messiah, for he shall especially come for the jews sake, and shall be accepted of them for Messiah: and he shall sit at jerusalem in the Temple of God, re-edified by himself.  
A liar must bear a memory.  
Messiah of the jews, saith he, shall come not in his own name, but in God's name. So Bellarmine. 
Bellarmine's contradiction.   
But Antichrist shall come not in God's name, but in his own, saith Bellarmine.  
Antichrist therefore is not the Messiah of the jews. But he proveth out of two places of the Scripture that Antichrist is the Messiah of the jews, one, if another shall come in his own name saith Christ. joh. 5. him you shall receive. Whereout of a compound supposition of an indefinite person if another, he doth infer a simple proposition definitely, that is that Antichrist absurdly, nor well applied to the purpose. Which sets down that that Antichrist shall come a little before the end of the world. Those jews therefore, whom Christ spoke to then alive now dead, could not receive Antichrist for Messiah. Unless peradventure as he tells us Enoch and Elias shall return before the end who shall resist Antichrist, 
A great absurdity.  so he imagines the jews that Christ spoke to shall rise again before the general resurrection to receive Antichrist. But see how untowardly the parts of this tale hangs together. For he saith, That Enoch and Elias should be killed of Antichrist, and after three days and a half live again: and that it shall come to pass afterward, that the jews being converted by that miracle shall kill their Messiah in the mount olive, and shall return to Christ, who shall come 45. days after. Which dream of his he refuteth in another place which he bringeth. The Apostle saith that to them who receive not the love of the truth, to their salvation, God will send the working of error, to believe lies, and so to be judged with the judgement of condemnation 2. Thess. 2.9. Woe be to those, saith he, who have not received Christ, The jews. Although the Apostle saith not, who received not the truth 1. Christ, but who received not the love of the truth: as false Christians. But how shall God punish those jews? God shall send upon them the working of error, that they might believe a lie 1: Antichrist, and should be damned. Therefore the jews shall receive Antichrist for Messiah.  
But Bellarmine doth affirm that the jews shall be converted by Enoch and Elias, and therefore shall be saved. The Apostle speaketh of men rejecting Christ, and therefore to be condemned, he speaks not therefore of the jews. But the Apostle saith that Antichrist is sent to them, who would not receive Christ, which of the jews is true, of the Christians false. Yea he saith that he is sent to seduce those who have not received the love of truth, which doth well agree with the Papists those false-christians. Who although they receive Christ, 
The Papist receive Christ but not the love of Christ.  receive not the love of Christ. But the Apostle speaketh of the time past. Who have not received the love of truth, not in the future; Therefore he understandeth the jews, who before the Apostle wrote this, refused to believe the preaching of Christ and his Apostles. But the Apostle speaking of the sin and punishment of Antichristians, which presupposeth a sin going before, did express their sin in the pretertense, which is not to be referred to the time of the Epistle which Paul writ, but to the time of the punishment which he enjoined. But if the jesuite do urge the pretertense so far, as if the Apostle should understand, that Antichrist should be received of them only, who had rejected Christ before that time, he must hold that he must be received of them in the end of the world who were dead a thousand five hundred years before. And is not this a worthy demonstration, 
A popish absurdity.  whereby he proveth that Antichrist shall be in Office the Messiah of the jews, to be received of them in the end of the world? whence as one error begets another, he concludeth that he is by nation a jew, by Religion circumcised etc. I have won it now that Antichrist is an Apostata-christian. It followeth therefore that he can by no means be an Infidel jew, who as yet was not come to Christ. I proved that he was an inward and hypocritical enemy who denied Christ secretly & indirectly. It followeth then that the jew no ways can be an outward and professed enemy who denieth Christ directly and plainly. I conclude both out of the Scripture and out of the fathers, that Antichrist was to sit in the Temple of God that was in the Church. And therefore that Antichrist was not to sit in the temple of jerusalem. Hierome with many other Fathers have determined. And yet this Pythagoras who thinks that his he said so will satisfy fools, doth boldly affirm that he shall sit in the Temple of jerusalem to be builded again by him. 
Bellarmine fighteth with himself.  Wherein see I pray you how he fighteth with himself.  
The temple re-edified of Antichrist is the Temple of the Devil.  
But Antichrist shall fit saith he in a Temple re-edified by himself.  
Therefore he shall sit in the Temple of the devil not therefore in the Temple of God. Unless happily he will change the temple of God into the temple of the Devil. Besides that, Antichrist shall sit at Rome, as the Rhemists themselves confess. Not therefore at jerusalem, unless peradventure jerusalem moved out of her place shall pass over to Rome. Which perchance they can bring to pass, who change the three wisemen of the east into 3. 
The Papists altar east from west.  Kings of Sheba in the west. For Sheba stands west from the city jerusalem, and Chaldee whence they came stands east. I cannot see therefore but by the same power, they may as well carry jerusalem to Rome as turn the east into the west. I have evicted before even by the confession of the Adversary: That Rome is the seat and city of Antichrist, and yet they prove by a strange kind of Logic, that jerusalem is the seat of Antichrist. For where Gods two witnesses (saith he) are killed of Antichrist, there is the seat of Antichrist: But those two witnesses shall be killed by Antichrist at jerusalem: 
Apoc. 11.7.  Therefore Antichrist his seat is at jerusalem. He takes the proposition for granted, which for all that stands in great need of proof. For wheresoever Antichrist shall kill 2. witnesses of God, that there he shall have his seat. No more than if some great Prince such an one as they would have Antichrist to be, should there be said to have the seat of his Empire, wheresoever his authority was of power to kill his enemies.  
Do you not know that Kings have stretched-out hands? Tiberius' hand stretched out itself as far as jerusalem to crucify Christ, though he sat at Rome. Antichrist hath a long hand; whose hand reacheth farther to kill Gods two witnesses, than where he sits; not ever where Antichrist rageth there he sitteth. The proposition then generally taken is false, particularly understood is a paralogism. The assumption also is very false: for the holy Ghost doth call not jerusalem but Rome, or rather the Rom: Empire, that great City in whose streets the bodies of those two witnesses shall lie slain: and that great City is called spiritually Sodom and Egypt, where our Lord was crucified. Jerusalem above is called the holy City after Christ his passion, how then here is it spiritually called Sodom and Egypt? 
Apoc: 11.8. jerusalem in the Apocalyps taken for the holy City always.  as Hierom writes to Marcelia. jerusalem is always taken in the Apocalyps for the holy City, Rome for the great City, which hath the government over the Kings of the earth, which cannot agree with jerusalem. Besides, the word spiritually toucheth Rome very near: for as Rome is mystically Babylon, so it is spiritually Sodom and Egypt. Sodom for her pride and uncleanness; 
Rome compared to Babylon, Sodom and Egypt. ☜  Egypt for her idolatry and cruelty against the Saints; for who is so blind that can not see that Rome is the chapel of Idols, the stews of lust, the queen of pride, the shambles of Saints, and the den of King-killers; and therefore she is truly spiritual Sodom and Egypt.  
But where our Lord was crucified, there Gods two witnesses were murdered by Antichrist. 
Christ how crucified at Rome.   
But not at Rome, but at jerusalem he was crucified.  
Therefore not at Rome but at jerusalem those two witnesses shall be killed.  
We deny the assumption. At Rome in that great City, that is, in the Roman Empire, our Lord was crucified. First, because by the commandment and authority of the Rom: Empire Christ himself was crucified, 
Apoc. 17.18.  as the Rhemists do confess. Secondly, because Christ in his members is often crucified at Rome. Thirdly, he was not crucified within jerusalem but without, as S. Paul witnesseth to the Heb: cap: 13. v. 12. Lastly, because jerusalem before the Apocalyps, which was extant about the end of Domitian, being utterly overthrown, together with their Temple, was never to be built again, as we have formerly evicted out of the prophecy of Daniel, who saith, that the desolation of the Temple and City shall continue until the end of the world, as Hierom expounds out of the words of Christ. Neither do the frivolous answers of Bellarmine much trouble me, wherewith he presumes (as he writeth) that Daniel would have said something that he doth not say: as if he could not say what he would, and therefore he feigns that the Prophet spoke thus: Either that the Temple should not be re-edified till a little before the end of the world: or else as it was desolated before it was re-edified: so the abomination of desolation, i. Antichrist, should remain in the same re-edified to the end of the world; or else that it should never be fully built again, 
jerusalem the figure of the Christian Church.  but that Antichrist should sit in the Temple begun and not finished. jerusalem is wholly the figure of the Christian Church, which after it was built up by the preaching of the Gospel among the Gentiles, there was an end both of the City and Temple of jerusalem, 
Matth: 24.14.  as Christ prophesied, daniel's best Interpreter: who foretold the abomination of desolation, that is the abominable and desolate wings, 
What is meant by the abomination of desolation.  (understanding the Eagles and the Legions of the Romans, as Luke expoundeth) should bring a final destruction to the City and Temple, so that the desolation of them both should continue to the end of the world, as Christ explaineth, foreshowing that jerusalem being overthrown of the Romans, 
Luc: 21.22, 23, 24.  shall be trodden under foot of the Gentiles, till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, i. till he shall come to judgement, which is described in the next words. So that the bounds of the Christian Church being enlarged, the City and Temple should have their last end by the testimony of Christ: for the truth appearing, the type faded away. So that the primitive Church believed that jerusalem was turned into eternal ashes; 
Ad Marcel.  and Hierom calleth the opinion of some, who thought the Temple should be restored, a mere jewish fable. Therefore Bellarmine, in Hieroms judgement, who dreams of the restoring of the Temple, is not a Christian Doctor, but a jewish Babbler. Unless he be worse to be thought of, 
Bellarmine and Julian alike.  who with julian the Apostata will fasten a lie upon Christ, while together with him he will as it were carry stones to the building of it: he in a mock to Christ, this in the honour of Antichrist: That Bellarmine may fear fire from heaven to disturb the work, which as the story reporteth, julian suffered. 
Theodoret. lib. 3 cap: 20. Sozom: lib. 5. cap. vlt. Cic: de orat. 3.  One thing I greatly fear, that Antichrist will not take it in good part, that such a mighty Monarch of the world, as he is like to be, must sit in a Temple b●●●ded in part. Cicero did prettily set out the praise of the Capitol, wherein Latin jupiter doth reside, that the roof was not only good for use and necessity, but for ornament and beauty: that although the Capitol were builded up as high as the heaven where the rain was not engendered, yet it would have no name, if it had no roof. But Bellarmine, although he carried mortar and stone to the Temple of jerusalem by the help of Antichrist, wherein so great a Prince should sit, so far of he was for tendering his Master's honour, that he did not supply necessity: for he left the Temple with out beams or roof, he left it on the earth, where many showers do gather, many storms do suddenly fall, that he may seem to have exposed the great Prince to the pleasure of the unmerciful heaven in the midst of his stately Palace.  
But let us make up the rest of the tale of this imagined Prince governing in an imagined place. For he addeth many things of his kingdom and his victories, whereof the Scripture hath not one word.  
It is a very conceited dream that is fetched out of Daniel misunderstood; who prophesied of Antiochus Epiphanes the son of great Antiochus, the brother of Seleucus Philopater, the successor of that nameless beast, the tenth horn literally and properly as of nine others which went before, cap. 11. which Bellarmine himself confesseth, and yet concludeth  
1. That Antichrist rising out of a most base stock, by fraud and guile shall obtain the kingdom of the jews.  
2. That he shall fight with three Kings, of Egypt, Lybia and Ethiopia, and shall possess their kingdoms themselves being vanquished. which was not true of Antiochus himself being the figure of Antichrist.  
3. That he shall make captive seven other Kings, and shall enjoy the Monarchy of the whole world. O noble conqueror, to be preferred before all the Pompey's, Caesars, and Alexander's, who shall do so great acts in the compass of three years and a half.  
4. With his mighty army he shall persecute the Christians, and these be the wars of Gog and Magog.  
Do you think these to be the oracles of the Scriptures, or Bellarmine's own dreams? grant that Antiochus was antichrist's type in many things. what then? if we should apply all those things, 
Antiochus & Antichrist unlike: to make them the same many absurdities do follow.  which were proper to the person of Antiochus to Antichrist, in respect whereof he was not the type of Antichrist, and shall infer from them not the like but the same thing. Let Antiochus be fetched out of hell, and let his soul pass into Antichrist, that he may perform all those things. And although Antichrist be a most wild beast, as Antiochus, yet he must come not out of a most wild, but a most honourable stock, that he the son of Antiochus the Great, the brother of Seleucus Philopater, and successor in the kingdom of Syria, as Antiochus is plainly set down by Daniel cap: 11. v. 21. in whose place one that is very wild shall arise. Plato's great year must return again, that Antiochus again must be an hostage at Rome before he come to his kingdom, and kill his Nephew Demetrius, as Richard the third King of England did, and make three voyages into Egypt.  
And great Achilles must be sent again to Troy.  
Let Antiochus make war again, let him in his return plague the jews, and let Antichrist do all the acts of Antiochus, which Daniel the Prophet doth so lively describe, that to Porphery who knew not with what spirit he wrote, he seemeth to have compiled an history rather than a prophecy, whereof more hereafter. Now let us pursue the rest of the pretty passages of this tale.  
Enoch and Elias must come again from heaven to earth, to wit, those two witnesses, who preach the Gospel in their own persons, and fight with Antichrist shall be killed by him, and shall rise again after three days and a half. and the rest which out of the 11 of the Apocalyps, they miserably by force press out, by wring the letter, so that they seem to play the jews in no place more. Although in that place neither Enosh, nor Elias, 
The second beast mistaken for the first.  nor Antichrist, as certain learned men think is understood: for the beast that makes war against these witnesses of God, is said to ascend out of hell, which seems to be the first beast, which is said to rise out of the sea, cap: 13. v. 1. when as the second is said to rise out of the earth. Again, the floor of the Church is said to be given over to be trampled on by the Gentiles 42 months v: 2. which time is assigned to the persecution of the first beast, cap: 13. v. 5. Again it is to be trodden on by the Gentiles not the jews, whose Prince Antichrist is feigned to be. Now they which precisely take the two witnesses to be two men, 
The two witnesses Apoc. 11. not agreed on.  could never yet agree among themselves about the persons. Some that they were Elias and Moses: some Elias and Elizeus: some not Elias but jeremy: others together with Elias and Moses think that john the Divine is added as a witness above number; of Enoch none of the Fathers make any reckoning: of the two Testaments, as two witnesses, and the divers sincere Interpreters of the two Testaments, who expound the place, they do more easily shift themselves, as it shall be understood afterward; who being clad with sackcloth, in great sorrow and grief did preach repentance to the Gentiles, at whose hands in steed of reward, 
Persecution committed.  they received most cruel death. The cruel persecution of the first beast, wherein they devoured the most faithful witnesses of God, lasted 294 years, which made the 42 months, according to daniel's weeks; whereof more anon. Neither did God suffer his witnesses to die unrevenged, 
Persecution revenged.  if we compare the story to the Prophecy. For God did punish those bloody Emperors for his two witnesses sake, so that the Nations were consumed by sharp and quick diseases growing by long drought, and too great heat of the Sun, which bred such plagues, that often devoured whole Cities, and consumed whole armies. So happily the two witnesses may be said to have shut heaven that it should not rain, and to have opened it that it should rain, whenas by the prayers of the Christian Legion, the Army of the Pagan Emperor being environed by the Quadi, 
☞  being presently like to perish for want of water, obtained a plentiful shower from heaven: while the host of their enemies perished, being stricken with thundering and lightning from heaven: whereupon it was called the thundering Legion of the Christians. And when as the witnesses of God being so unworthily and cruelly dealt withal, threaten eternal fire upon the wicked Gentiles, and did perhaps foretell that fire should come from heaven, whereby Cities and Camps were devoured, may they not be said after a sort to cast out fire out of their mouths, to consume their enemies? And when as God's cruel enemies the Emperors, did destroy one another by mutual war, and committed such massacres by sea and land, that they seemed to turn whole fields and rivers into blood, might not God seem according to the Prophecy, most justly to have revenged the wrongs of his witnesses? especially when he raised other witnesses, as Phenixes out of their ashes, who should bear witness to the truth. and so Gods two witnesses in singular persons, may seem to rise again in a succession. And because not only the triumphant Church, but the militant also is often called heaven, both in the Apocalyps, 
The Church called heaven.  and in the Scripture elsewhere, therefore when the witnesses of God had built again the Temple of God out of these ruins and relics, so, as the Prophet speaketh: they seemed to ascend up, and to be in beaven. But if any think it convenient to expound this place of the persecution of Antichrist, which did lively express the cruelty of the first Beast, and of those Antichristians, which did most cruelly persecute the Church in these latter ages, for the space of 494. years, I will not greatly strive against them: when as they did play the Gentiles under the name of Christ, as Tertullian speaketh. Only I show what other learned men have probably thought, without prejudice to them that think otherwise. But all that I have said, is refuted of the Adversaries in 3. words: for thus they cry out, Antichrist is not yet come: and they call all things to question, whether there be Antichrist, which if you please we still discuss in the last place.   

CHAP. XXIX. Wherein it is disputed, whether Antichrist be, that is, whether he be come.  
THat Antichrist is foreshowed in the Scripture it is evident enough: now whether he be to be showed in the world, it shall yet further appear, when we shall have discussed whether he be come or no.  
Of this coming Bellarmin gives six tokens. 

Tow going before. 

1. The Preaching of the Gospel over the whole world.  
2. The subversion and desolation of the Roman Empire, so that the very name remain not.    
Two accompanying. 

3. The preaching of Enoch and Elias.  
4. The most grievous and public persecution of the Church, which shall clean take away the public worship of God.    
Two following. 

5. The continuance of the Kingdom of Antichrist for three years and an half.  
6. The destruction of the world 45. days after.      
Out of the first token thus he disputeth: 
If the Gospel be not as yet preached over the whole world, Antichrist is not yet come.  
The first is true. Therefore the second is true.   

The first note whether the Gospel have been preached.  The consequent of the proposition he proveth out of the words of Christ, Matth. 24. ver. 14. The Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world, that it may be a testimony to all nations, saith Christ: but he saith not, that then Antichrist shall come: but then shall the end come, that is, either the end of the world, as Bellarmine thinks, or the rasing of jerusalem, as we have evicted. But grant that the end of the world is understood by those words: yet unless Bellarmine will take that for granted, which is in controversy, that Antichrist shall not come before the end of the world: which we most stiffly do deny, this exposition can help Bellarmine nothing at all But what if the place be to be understood not of the end of the world, 
The destruction of jerusalem taken for the end of the world by Papists.  but of the destruction of jerusalem, it will avail him much less. Hear therefore first I oppose Chrysostome against Bellarmine, which interprets the place not of the end of the world, but of the destruction of jerusalem, which the context of the place doth convince: for first Christ answers to his Disciples, to whom he had said, 
The 24. of Matthew expounded. Vers. 2.  it should come to pass that the city and the Temple should be utterly overthrown, so that a stone should not be left upon a stone, First, I say, answers them about the overthrow of jerusalem, which they thought should have stood for ever. They ask him, 
Vers. 3.  Tell us when these things shall be? that is, when shall the Temple be destroyed, and afterward they ask him of the end of the world, and of his coming to judgement. The parts of the question are therefore double, first of the destruction of jerusalem, the second of the end of the world: which they thought should not continue longer than jerusalem. To the first Christ answers first from ver. 4. 
Vers. 4. to 23.  to the 23. To the second he answers from the 23. 
Ver. 23. to the 42.  to the 42. And first Christ foreshoweth the calamities which went before the destruction, to the fifteenth verse, in that verse he expounds the destruction foretold by Daniel. But if any body think that the abomination of desolation, standing in the holy place, be to be taken by an anology for the sitting of Antichrist in the Church, I will not gain say it; but if he expound it properly, and to the letter, he shall not have only Chrysostome and Luke, but Christ himself gainsaying him. Among other calamities which were before the destruction of jerusalem, he foreshowed two spiritual ones especially: a seducing of false Prophets, a defection of the people. Christ doth therefore forewarn and comfort his Disciples: he forewarneth them that they beware of false Prophets: he comforts them with a double promise, one of eternal salvation vers. 13. 
Vers. 13.  if they shall hold out to the end: another of a prosperous success, which their ministry by spreading the Gospel over all the world, shall have before jerusalem be utterly overthrown. That it might be a witness to every nation, that the Church shall endure when jerusalem shall be destroyed, whose bounds the Apostles and their Disciples by the preaching of the Gospel, before the destruction of jerusalem had extended over all nations, both Gentiles and jews. Neither is it to be thought, that Christ had confounded all these prophecies in the handling of them, that he might not nourish an error, which the Disciples had conceived of the continuance of jerusalem till the end of the world. Therefore after he had vers. 15. 
Vers. 15.  described her overthrow, he adjoined both counsel and comfort: counsel the ver. 16. 
Vers. 16.17.18.19.20.  17.18.19.20. that they that were in jury should shift for themselves by speedy flight, and that women great with child should pray that their flight be not in the winter, or on the Sabbaoth day. Comfort, wherein he promiseth that for the Elect jews sake, the time of the siege shall be shortened, and that otherwise no jew should escape as Chrysostome expounds the 22. verse. This exposition of Chrysostome is notably confirmed by the collation of Luke with Matthew. For as in Matth. 24.15. Christ doth propound those words out of Daniel. When you shall see the abomination of desolation (which Daniel calls the abominable wings desolating) to stand in the holy place, Luc. cap. 21. 20. expounds it thus. When you shall see jerusalem environed with armies, 
What the abomination of desolation in Daniel meaneth.  which Daniel terms abominable wings, then understand that the desolation and destruction is at hand, both to the holy city and the holy Temple: and he warneth the jews that they avoid these calamities hanging over their heads, with flying away vers. 23. 
Vers. 23.  24. But whereas Christ, Matth. vers. 23. gins to prophesy of the end of the world, 
Vers. 34.  and of his coming to judgement, vers. 34. where there seemeth to be the greatest mixtures of each of the prophecies, he speaketh so distinctly when he foreshoweth the signs severally going before the destruction of jerusalem, and the end of the world, that he defines a certain time of the one, and leaveth the other uncertain. Of that: verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass away, before all those things be fulfilled, (pointing his finger at jerusalem, as he sat upon the Mount of Olives. But of this, i. 
The uncertain certainty of the end of the world.  of the end of the world, as he noteth the certainty of the thing, so the uncertainty of the hour and the day, which neither any Angel, or the son of man knew, but the father alone. By which the consequence of Bellarmine's proposition is found out to be very vain and foolish: which sets, 
14 15.  The preaching of the word dispersed over the whole world, out of those verses, to be the sign forerunning the coming of Antichrist: against the literal sense of the prophesy most clearly set down, not only by Chrysostome, but by Christ himself, Luke being the interpreter. You see the inconsequence of the proposition, now mark the falsehood of the assumption (But the Gospel is not preached over all the world) as Paul Coloss. 1. vers. 6. 
The Gospel preached in the world.  saith, that the Gospel was preached in all the world in his time, and therefore before the destruction of jerusalem, which happened two years after the Apostles death, as Eusebius writeth lib 4. and the Apostle adds, that the Gospel came so into the wolrd, that it brought forth fruit. True (saith Bellarmine) The Gospel was virtually, then in the whole world, but not actually: No? How then could it bring forth fruit, if it were not in the whole world actually? but the Apostle there speaketh more significantly vers. 23. That the Gospel was preached to every creature under heaven. Whom shall we believe Paul or Bellarmine, the Apostle or the Cardinal? Their sound is gone through the whole world, saith the Apostle, that is, shall go out, saith Bellarmine. But Chrysostome by the same testimonies of the Apostle, doth prove that the prophesy of Christ was then fulfilled, the Gospel was preached all over the world, 
Chrysost. homil. in Matth. 24.  before the destruction of jerusalem. So by Fame the Gospel could come to all nations, saith Bellarmine, not by several preachings. Paul saith not the report of the Gospel in all lands, but that their fruit by their preaching was dispersed, which could not be without Preachers. Yet by the whole world, every little and obscure corner of the world is not meant, but the greatest part of the known and habitable world, Luc. 2.1. Neither by all nations, are meant all several nations, but all in general, that is, both jews an Gentiles. For in this place as elsewhere, there is an opposition between all Nations and the jews. At that time the Gospel was only heard of in jury, wherein the Church at that time was enclosed; but the partition-wall being broken down, and the hedge being broken up, it made such a sound every way, with such a number of Preachers, and with such admirable efficacy of preaching, that it is easy to be believed that the sound of the Gospel could go into all lands within the compass of forty years, for so many years at the least, came between the prophesy expounded and fulfilled. Lastly, although it was preached to all, it was not received of all, therefore left as a testimony to all nations, that being offered to all, and rejected of some, it might make them inexcusable. Do you not see the foolish consequence of Bellarmine's proposition, and the apparent untruth of his assumption? Therefore I do retort the argument upon him thus, Christ himself prophesying, Paul interpreting, and Chrysostome assisting.  
The Gospel was preached in all the world before the sacking of jerusalem.  
Therefore by the consent of Bellarmin Antichrist is already come. And Caluine seems to me with very deep judgement to set the universal preaching of the faith, before the universal defection from the faith, the head whereof by the Apostle is said to be Antichrist, 
The preaching of the Gospel hindered by Mahumet in the east and Antichrist in the west.  for there could not be a general falling from the faith, before there were a general preaching of the faith: which when it was interrupted as in the east by Mahomet, so in the west by Antichrist, it was true, that the succession being interrupted, divers men of God were extraordinarily raised up by God, I say Angels of God, who by the sincere preaching of the Gospel did restore and repair the visible Church miserably torn in pieces by him: who did cast down the wall of the western Babylon, as of jericho, and did tread down the glory of Antichrist as of Dagon, so that by the noise of the evangelical Trumpet Babylon seemed to fall in the midst of men, and the world began now not to doubt of the coming of Antichrist, 
The decay of Antichrist.  but to deliberate of his departure. For with the greatest part of the Christian world, the swelling title of Antichrist failed, his great power fainted, his spiritual by the judgement of others, 
☜  his temporal by his own: his markets of indulgences deceased, his golden Euphrates was at an ebb, his great streams of money running into that Church wholly dried up, being brought back again into their own channels not without great love showed to that Tyberine Bishop, to whom Luther and Caluixe and other preachers of the word thought such abundance of wealth to be very pernicious. As Tacitus writeth that Aleius Capito, and Lu: Aruntius, to keep in the overflowing of Tiber, they would divert the floods and streams whereby it did swell to that height, that Tiber being cut off from the neighbour rivers, might flow as with less glory, so with less danger. 
Ana: 1.  The Christian world seemeth to have taken the same counsel, to moderate the hurtful abundance of the Tiberine Bishop, so that Bellarmine may seem to cast a needless doubt of the entrance of Antichrist, of whose overthrow we so earnestly think. We have heard the man's first demonstration, let us consider of the second which is thus concluded.   

CHAP. XXX. Of the second token going before antichrist's coming.  
IF the Roman Empire be not yet utterly overturned, so that it hath not lost the name of the Roman Empire, Antichrist is not yet come.  
But the first is true. Therefore the second is true. Or thus.  
If before the coming of Antichrist the Roman Empire was to be divided into ten Kings, whereof none shall be called the King of the Romans, Antichrist is not yet come.  
But the Antecedent is true. Therefore the consequent is true.  
Let us see the strength and sinews of this wonderful demonstration, wherein they so greatly triumph, although in opening of the prophecy, it is sufficiently before refuted, the assumption whereof they go about to strengthen on every side. This is the assumption. But the Roman Empire is not yet utterly overturned, so that it hath lost the name of the Roman Empire. Which they prove because the Roman Empire is to be divided into ten Kings whereof none is called the King of the Romans. They endeavour to strengthen either part out of the 2. 
Daniel 2.32.  and seventh of Daniel, and 17. of the Apoc. in the 2. of Daniel they say is described a succession of 4. Kingdoms to last unto the world's end, by the Image, having the head of gold, the breast of silver, the belly of brass, and the feet of iron. The head of brass signifieth say they the Kingdom of the Chaldees, the breast of silver the Kingdom of the Persians, the belly of brass the Kingdom of Alexander and the Grecians, the feet of brass the Kingdom of the Romans: the 2. feet the eastern and the western Empire of the Romans: Now as 2. feet have 10. toes, say they, which are not feet: So the Roman Empire shall be divided into 10. Kings, whereof none is, or is called the King of the Romans. The very same 4. kingdoms Dan. 7. are described by 4. beasts, a Lion, a bear, a Leopard, and a fourth without a name having 10. horns, whereof none is, or is called a beast. But this beast they say signifieth the Roman Empire, and the 10. horns 10. Kings which shall divide that Empire. Which they prove out of the 17. of the apocalypse, where john describes the beast with seven heads and 10. horns upon whom the woman sat. For the Angel say they doth so interpret. The woman is a great city which sitteth upon 7. hills, that is Rome. The 10. horns are 10. Kings which shall reign at one time, and shall hate the whore etc. By which words the Angel doth signify that the Roman Empire by them shall be divided and desolated, so that it shall not retain the name of the Roman Empire. But that Antichrist is not as yet to come, it is openly evicted out of Daniel cap 7. vers: 14. the ten horns are the ten Kings of that kingdom, whereof we have spoken hitherto. And another say they, shall rise after them, 
Dan. 7.24.  (to wit Antichrist) and he shall be more potent than the former, and shall subdue three Kings, and he shall utter speech against the most highest, and shall tread under foot the Saints of the Almighty, and shall imagine that he can change times and laws, and they shall be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time. And this they prove out of Hirom. who addeth, that a leventh little King shall arise, who shall overcome three of the ten Kings. Yea Bellarmine goeth farther, and out of the 11. Chapter vers: 21. and in his place shall stand up the most vile, concludeth that Antichrist rising out of a base place shall by fraud and deceit get the Kingdom of the jews, and shall not sight only with three Kings of Egypt, Libya, and Ethiopia, and shall enjoy their Kingdoms themselves being vanquished, but shall also make slaves seven other Kings, and shall have the government of the whole world 3. years and a half: and in the mean time shall oppress the Christians with an innumerable army, and these are the wars of Gog and Magog. By all which prophecies of Daniel and john concerning the Roman Empire and Antichrist, together with the extent of his Kingdom, beginning, end, and continuance thereof, all (as he thinks) so fitly agreeing between themselves, he peremptorily concludeth that Antichrist is not yet come. Whereby there is a greater charge necessarily imposed upon us to look diligently to the expounding of daniel's prophecy, as we were careful formerly of expounding of john's prophecy: So the argument shall be well satisfied, when I shall confer the history with the prophecy, and set in order things confused, and make plain things obscure, and shall compare Testament with Testament, book with book, chapter with chapter, verse with verse; neither will I add a long Commentary to a clear text, nor too short a Commentary to an obscure, by this means I shall neither admit superfluities, or omit necessaries. Especially when the prophecy is as a riddle which being darkly in many words set down by the Prophet cannot be made plain in a few words by a Doctor, which doth rather require a Prophet to be the interpreter, till event hath made it plain. Wherein the Papists (but chief Bellarmine) must deal more favourably with us, who hath rejected 12. Fathers in this cause, if we likewise do reject the same, and among them Jerome chief, so it be without touch of his reputation, seeing Austen saith that prophecies may sooner be accomplished then understood, and doth sometime require that naked authorities being laid aside, the matter with the matter, and the cause with the cause, and the reason may strive with the reason. Ireneus saith that prophecies till they be performed are to be counted doubtful riddles: 
Irene lib. 4. ad ver. heres. c. 43.  wherein Bellarmine shall not grant less to us, than he taketh to himself, who when he seethe his Master the Pope to be pinched and stung by Ireneus, 
Bellar. de Pon: lib. 3. cap. 18.  makes this answer to serve his turn. Ireneus (saith he) thinks it a surer way and less dangerous to expect the fulfilling of the prophecy, then to suspect it. And the Papists seem to have learned this modesty out of Daniel who prophecing of other things as we shall prove, of Antichrist as the Papists think, say that the words are shut and sealed up to the time appointed. Who if we grant to have foretold of the Roman Empire and of Antichrist, he will neither much hurt our cause or help theirs. For if daniel's fourth beast be the state of the Roman Empire, and the 10. horns the ten Kings among whom it shall be divided, and the eleventh horn springing thence be Antichrist, assuredly the Pope who is raised out of the fall and ruin of the Empire, is Antichrist. Here if you please I will consider of all those places alleged by Bellarmine and search-out how they agree within themselves and how with the text.  
Bellarmine saith, that the fourth Empire, 
Bellarmine's contradiction.  which he taketh to be the Roman, shall last to the world's end. And yet he saith that the Roman Empire, shall be utterly destroyed before the coming of Antichrist, who shall reign three years and a half. How can he then allege it for a truth that the Roman Empire shall last to the world's end? I send this great Chrysippus again to Aristotle's Analytickes, whither some time he sendeth others without cause, that when he hath reviewed them he may teach us how two contradictions can be true at one time.  
The Roman Empire shall last to the world's end.  
The Roman Empire shall not last to the world's end, for it must have the final destruction at the coming of Antichrist, who shall reign three years and a half. Now let us consider how Bellarmine and Daniel do agree. Many of our age and those very learned, who seem very exactly to search into Daniel, do think that the fourth Empire (which many other without doubt as well learned as they do take for the Roman Monarchy) was the Kingdom of the Seleucides and the Lagides in Syria and Egypt, 
The exposition of the 7. of Daniel.  as they afflicted jury hemmed in between them: and therefore designed to be more terrible than the three former, because more dangerous to jury. And that the ten horns were ten Kings of Syria & Egypt, who did successively oppress the jews, and that Antiochus Epiphanes was the tenth and last, who more than the rest did plague them most cruelly, and that therefore he was the type of Antichrist who should no less afflict the Christians, and not Antichrist himself, as Bellarmine dreameth. Let us if you please allege some of the reasons drawn out of the Text.  

Reasons th' t Antichrist is not properly in Daniel.  1 The fourth beast was a kingdom to be abolished before the coming and reign of the Messiah, as the Prophet teacheth cap: 7. v. 11. 26. 27. which is true of the kingdom of the Seleucides, false of the Roman.  
2. The fourth beast did make war with the jews, and did grievously oppress them, did hinder the worship of God, not only before the coming of Christ, but before the purging of the Temple, and the restoring of the jewish worship by judas Machabeus cap: 7. v. 25. 26. 27. which agreeth with the kingdom of the Seleucides, not with the Roman.  
3. Ten horns and no more did belong to the fourth beast, that is, ten Kings, (I will name them anon) who did oppress jury with their tyranny, which being understood of seven Seleucides, and three Lagides is very true, of the Romans very false, who after they got the government of jury, were more than ten.  
4. Besides, those Kings did succeed one another orderly in the same kingdom; this is true in the seven Seleucides and three Lagides, but not in them who after descended from the Kings in the Rom● Empire, who at the same time did reign in divers Provinces, as the Adversary himself confesseth.  
5. Lastly, the Leopard cap. 7. signifying the Grecian Empire, is shadowed by the Goat cap: 8. which appears by that, that as the Leopard is said there to have had four heads, so the Goat, when his great horn was broken of, Alexander, four horns are said to succeed in his place, i four Princes among whom the Empire of the Goat was divided; which to the Roman Empire agreeth not, but to the Greek it doth. 
Alexander and his four Princes.  For after Alexander's death, Ptolomey the son of Lagis held Egypt: Philip, Alexander's brother, Macedon: Seleucus Nicanor, Syria and Babylon: Antigonus, Asia the less: these were Alexander's four Princes, as Hierom observeth. If it be demanded how the two feet prophesied of by Daniel, 
What is meant by the 2 feet, and 10. toes.  which in Bellarmine's judgement doth fitly resemble the Rom: Empire divided into the East and West, from whence ten Kings, as ten toes did proceed: I answer from those four Princes of Alexander, two of them, that is, Seleucus' Nicanor, and Ptolomey Lagis were the most potent, who brought the other four Kingdoms by mutual wars under their subjection: from him the kingdom of the Seleucides, and the kingdom of Syria in the North: from this the kingdom of the Lagides, and of the Kings of Egypt in the South did descend, and both these did with their invasions greatly afflict the jews, placed in the midst. These were the two feet, which did so miserably trample upon the jews, from whence did spring out ten Kings, as ten toes, which Daniel describeth cap: 11. 
daniel's little horn, who it is.  for the three Lagides descended from Ptolemy; the seven Seleucides from Seleucus, and from thence in the end of the kingdom of the Selcucides over the jews, a little horn sprouted out, cap: 7. & 9 that is, a King with a bold face, that is, 
The ten horns.  Antiochus ●piphanes, the tenth horn cap. 11. properly and lively described. 
1 Ptolemy Lagis.  The first horn of the fourth and nameless beast Ptolemy Lagis King of the South, i of Egypt, is described v: 5. than Seleucus Nicanor the most puissant of Alexander's Princes, 
v: 11. 

2. Seleucus Nicanor.  
3. Antiochus' So●er.  
4. An●i●chus Theos.    the King of the North is the second horn: for he prevailed against Ptolemy and recovered jury and all Syria from him, and governed there himself. Him did Antiochus Soter the third horn succeed, whose son Antiochus Theos the fourth horn, that he might establish a league between himself and Ptolemy Philadelphus' King of Egypt, 
v: 6.  took Bernice, Philadelphus' daughter to wife, that thereby he might fulfil that part of the Prophecy of the two feet, one of iron, tother of clay, that they should mingle themselves with man's seed, and yet should not grow together, Dan: 2. v. 43. the prophecy was proved true by event: for Antiochus Theos had already Laodice another wife alive, 
5. Seleucus Callinicus.  of whom he begat Seleucus Calinicus the fift horn, who slew Bernice, her son and servants: Antiochus Theos was poisoned by Laodice his wife, and Ptolemy, 
v: 7.  Bernices Father presently after the marriage died for grief. 
6. Ptolemy Euergetes.  But in his place arose Ptolemy Euergetes the sixth horn, who being of the same race with Bernice, i her Brother, made war upon Seleucus Callinicus to revenge his sister's death, 
v: 8.  and vanquished him, and being crowned King of Syria returned into Egypt with his spoils and prisoners, and having greater power than Callinicus, enjoyed Syria many years, and jury therein. 
v: 9  Wherefore the two sons of Callinicus, Seleucus Ceraunus and Antiochus the Great, invaded Syria, and raised a cruel war: Ceraunus against Ptolemy Euergetes; 
v: 10.  who being dead, Antiochus the Great gathered great forces against Ptolemy Philopater the the son of Euergetes. Of this Antiochus the great, the Angel prophesieth from the 10. 
v: 11. 12.  verse to the 20. first of his wars with Ptolemy Philopater, and those first prosperous, wherein he recovered Syria, then unfortunate, 
7. Ptolemy Philopator.  wherein he lost it again. Here Ptolemy Philopator lifted up into pride by this good success, was the seventh horn, and slew many thousands of the jews and therefore shall not always prevail: 
v: 12, 13, 14, 15, 16.  After of the wars and victories of Antiochus the Great, which he got of Ptolomeus, Epiphanes the son of Philopater: and of the depopulation of the jews, whence Antiochus the Great is the eight horn. 
8. Antiochus the Great.  He gave his daughter Cleopatra. in marriage to Ptolemy Epiphanes, that he might again mingle the iron and the clay together, but all in vain, according to the prophecy, cap: 2. when as he pretended peace and friendship by that marriage, but intended destruction to Ptolemy, but all in vain: because Cleopatra took part with her husband against her Father. Lastly, 
v: 17.  of Antiochus the Great his invading the Isles of Greece, which he subdued, 
v: 18.  and of the wars he made with the Romans, wherein he got great disgrace, and of his ignominious death inflicted upon him in a mutiny by savage people for his sacrilege. 
v: 19  Into his room succeeded Seleucus Philopator his son the ninth horn, 
9 Seleucus Philopator.  who did impoverish the people with grievous impositions, and emptied the treasury and the Temple of jerusalem, and perished not by war but by treachery: for Heliodore being suborned by Antiochus Epiphanes took him away by poison. Now into his place shall step up, saith the Angel, a most contemptible fellow, i there shall succeed Seleucus Philopator in the kingdom of Syria one very base in manners, not in his Ancestors, Antiochus Epiphanes, the third son of Antiochus the Great, the brother of Seleucus Philopator, Demetrius Uncle, the tenth horn, 
10. Antiochus Epiphanes.  that little horn so fully described by Daniel in the rest of the 7. and 11. chap: for the Angel doth prophecy, of his entrance, deeds, and end in the rest of the chapter: of his entrance, to note that he came not to the kingdom of Syria by any lawful right of succession, or election: for Demetrius his Nephew was right heir of the kingdom; but crept in by cunning and flattery, as a tutor and a guardian of the young Prince, and a protector of the Kingdom in the nonage and absence of Demetrius, sent to Rome for an hostage in his steed. You have the history agreeing with the prophecy, described both by others, and especially by josephus. 
Antiq. lib. 12. cap: 1.  Therefore Antiochus Epiphanes the tenth and little horn, out of small and weak beginnings usurped the kingdom of Syria, a man for his wickedness vile and contemptible, who did break off and cast away by his craft, three of the former horns in the Kingdom of Syria, the father, the brother, and the nephew, that he might attain to the Kingdom. And uttered speeches against the Almighty, and so oft trampled upon the Saints of God, so that the times of persecuting the people of God, daniel's countrymen, assigned to the little horn, do precisely agree with the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes: 
Four degrees of deliverance.  which are diversly reckoned up in respect of the beginning and ending: for there are four degrees noted of the deliverance from the tyranny of Antiothus, procured at four several times.  
The first, cap. 7. vers. 25. when the worship of God was renewed, and the Temple restored by judas Machabaeus: for from the profanation of the Temple, which began the fifteenth of Casleu, anno 145. to this reformation made the 25. of Casleu, anno 148. three years and ten days came between, which space Daniel calls a time, times, & a piece of time, cap. 7. v. 25.  
The second degree, when the jews having vanquished Antiochus, drove his forces out of jury, and re-established the new reformation: 
P● Bell. I de. lib. 1. cap. 1.  which happened 3. years and an half, as josephus observes, from the time, when the daily sacrifice did cease: which space Daniel calls a time, times and half a time, cap. 12. vers. 7.  
The third degree, is from the profanation of the Temple, to the deadly sickness of Antiochus, which is contained by Daniel in 1290. days, cap. 12. vers. 11.  
The last degree, is from the profanation to his death, which happened 45. day after, and these days are exactly cast up by Daniel to be 1335. By all which it appeareth, that Daniel did shadow out by the fourth beast not the Roman Empire, but the kingdom of the Seleucides and the Lagides, 
The disagreement of Bellarmine & Daniel  and that he described by the tenth and little horn, not Antichrist properly, but Antiochus Epiphanes. And I pray you mark how ill Bellarmine agreeth with Daniel. Daniel describeth a beast with a tenth horn, Bellarmine's beast hath an eleventh Daniel speaks of ten Kings, who successively did afflict the jews, daniel's countrymen. Bellarmine speaks of ten Kings, who together with an eleventh, at the same time did altogether bear rule in the world: but in divers places. Daniel sets down ten kings, whereof the three latter were rooted out in the sight, and procurement of the tenth, the other six, either all of them, or most of them being dead before he was borne. Bellarmine feigns that three of them were slain by him, and seven others subdued at such time, as they were not in the world. Lastly, Daniel saith, that his horn or king was broken off, being infamous for his cowardly flight, and being infected with a filthy disease, after he had tormented the jews the time appointed, did miserably consume away and perish. Bellarmine imagines his horn the Egyptians, Lybians and Aethiopians being vanquished, and seven other Kings subdued should get the monarchy of the whole world for three years and a half. O admirable Conqueror, more renowned than the Antiochi, Alexander's and Caesars. 
☜  Therefore we look that Bellarmine shall play the Orator for Antichrist who may excellently set forth these wars and victories, as Cicero did Caesar's. No man hath so flowinng a wit, so copious and eloquent tongue and style, who I will not say, can paint and set out, but point at and reckon up thy worthy Acts, Most Mighty Antichrist. Neither could any man so soon pass thorough remote Kingdoms by their speedy journeys, as thou, I will not say, by thy swift marches, but by thy swifter victories. For thou, o great Antichrist, with thine innumerable host, shalt subdue all the Christians in the world within three years and an half, and shall obtain the monarchy of the whole earth. And this is the war of Gog and Magog. Let me then add the rest which followeth in Cicero. All which unless I should confess to be so great, that no man's wit or understanding can conceive, let me be counted for a mad man. But an imaginary victory doth befit an imaginary Antichrist. Thus out of the premises I argue against Bellarmine. If Antichrist be found in this prophesy where Antiochus is literally described He is there either in his person, or in his likeness, or in his identity, or like substance, or in his image.  

The absurdities that follow if Antiochus be Antichrist. 2. Macc. 9  If Antichrist be in all things Antiochus, certainly as Antiochus is dead, as it is in the end of the chapter, so Antichrist is dead. Then Antichrist must die before his birth: but by what kind of death Antiochus died, is declared. Lice did crawl out of his swollen body in great abundance, which did inwardly gnaw upon him, hereby his flesh putrefied, 
Wherein Antiochus and Antichrist disagree.  and fell from him by piecemeals, so that the army could not endure the stinch of the beast. Antichrist therefore must be eaten up with louse, and being so putrefied, must cast out a filthy stink, that Antichrist may be another Antiochus.  
If Antichrist shall get the same kingdom of the jews, which Antiochus enjoyed: if he shall cast down and root out three horns, that is, three kings next going before in the kingdom of Syria, the father, the brother, the nephew, as Antiochus did to get his father's kingdom by deceit: therefore these three must be alive, after they be dead, and Antiochus the father, and Seleucus' the brother, and Demetrius the nephew, must rise again before the resurrection, that Antichrist may deprive them of their kingdom, and by his cunning cast them off and destroy them. This is the sum of my conclusion. Antichrist is Antiochus in his identity, or in his likeness: if in his identity, it is a great miracle: if in his likeness, it is a lame argument: for every similitude doth halt, as the Logicians teach, and a symbolical argument is not of force to argue, as Aquinas saith. Yet notwithstanding rather for a flourish, then for a proof of the cause let us shortly see wherein Antichrist is like or dislike unto Antiochus. Antiochus came not out of a base stock and kindred, as many Popes did, but out of a kingly race. Antichrist is the son of the earth, as S. john telleth us. Antiochus most abject in his manners, but of a great parentage, but is farther described by the Prophet to be by his country a Syrian, by religion uncircumcised, a breaker of the sabbath, an oppressor of the jews, a worshipper of jupiter Olympius. What Antichrist? how is he painted out by you? Is he not though base in mind, yet base by birth, by country a jew, by religion circumcised, a keeper of the Sabbaoth, the Messiah of the jews, an enemy to Idols, is he not thus described? that he may well enough deny himself to be Antiochus, though he be hanged up in his picture. You see how unlike, now mark how like he is to Antiochus. For I will never deny that Antiochus in many things is the type of Antichrist. Nay, I will say more, 
Antiochus the type of Antichrist, wherein they do agree.  that S. Paul and S. john did bring many things out of daniel's prophesies into their own, wherewith they did lively set out and express that Antichrist. Antiochus is an enemy to God, and adversary to the Church, lifting up himself above all, & against all that is called God, an Outlaw, whose will stands for a law, whose mouth speaketh great things, whose hands do afflict God's Saints, such an one is Antichrist described by the Apostles. Antiochus as he did abrogate his country and false ceremonies, so the jewish and the true ceremonies. Antichrist hath overthrown the Idols of the Gentiles, and hath altered the true and Christian worship of God. Antiochus is inwardly an Atheist, and outwardly an Idolater: for he did worship jupiter Olympius in the Temple of jerusalem, and caused others to worship him, whom their forefathers worshipped not, who had worshipped Apollo and Diana. So Antichrist is an inward Atheist, and an outward Idolater. Antiochus shall worship in his place the god Maozim described vers. 38. as it is in the vulgar translation: So Antichrist also, who shall worship the Devil, as the author of his strength and power, he shall worship the devil against God, as your interlined gloss hath it. And Bellarmine, He shall worship the Devil after the manner of the Magicians, but closely. And this is called the god Maozim, by whose help Antichrist shall work miracles. Antichrist therefore shall be an idolater by his own confession, which elsewhere he often denieth. But Antichrist shall fight against all Gods, that he alone may be taken for God, as he lately hath written. How then shall he worship the Devil, as he writ before? you see that Antichrist is like to Antiochus in many things, I grant then that Antichrist is typically described by Daniel, but not prophetically, 
Bell. lib. 2. cap. 21. de Antichr.  whom even Bellarmine grants to have spoken literally of Antiochus, when he seethe that the Pope is so nearly urged and stung by our men with these notes of likeness. Although he cite Jerome elsewhere, expounding those words 21. v. cap. 11. not of Antiochus, but properly of Antichrist. Therefore in the same place he doth both follow and forsake Hierome. 
In Dan. cap. 11.  Neither is it marvel, when Hierome seems to forsake himself. For Hierome in the former part of the 11. chapter confesseth that the Seleucidae are described, and Seleucus Philopater in the twentieth. And one that is most vild, shall stand in his place, that is, Seleucus Philopater in the place of Antiochus the great. What reason had he then, why he should expound the 21. ver. And the most vild shall stand in his place, 
Bellarmine contradicts himself.  not of Antiochus Epiphanes, Seleucus brother and successor, but of Antichrist, whom Daniel did not prophetically describe? Hear Bellarmine staggers, and speaks as it were out of a tottering boat. He saith it, he denies it, that the Angel spoke literally of Antiochus, and Hierome brings such a reason against himself, as Hierome himself cannot answer. But Bellarmine thought it not suffiicient to dissent from himself, 
The ten horns in john and Daniel not the same.  but he must set a jar also between Daniel and john. For he saith, that the ten horns in Daniel and john are the very same: yet Daniel speaks of ten horns broken off and cast aside before Messiah came in the flesh: john speaks of those ten horns, which in his time had not attained the Kingly sovereignty. Daniel speaks of the ten kings of the race of Seleucus and Lagis, who by turns successively succeeded one another in the Kingdom. john speaks of ten Kings, among whom the Roman Empire was to be divided, who governed at one time in divers provinces. Daniel tells us what the little horn, which was the tenth, did do to the three next foregoing, without mention of the rest. john tells us what the ten horns shall do to Antichrist, which is not one of the ten horns, but one of the seven heads of the Beast. daniel's king is a tenth horn, pointing out one singular man. john's king is not to be accounted an eleventh horn, but a head, and signifies not one singleman, but a state, daniel's ten horns rose out of the ruins of the Macedonian Empire, john's ten horns out of the overthrow of the Roman Empire. So that there is no likeness between daniel's horns and johns, 
Dan. 7.8.  but that in either of them they were ten, daniel's ten horns if you consider the chronology, were broken & fell off many ages before. john's ten horns did appear, that is, before they received kingly power with the Beast, the Roman Empire being destroyed. Those ten horns, if you consider cosmography, bear rule in Syria and Babylon, out of these ten horns, wherein a certain number is set for an uncertain, as our men have proved, one had the Kingdom of France, another of Spain, another of Great Britain, and other in other nations and kingdoms. Those ten horns after the captivity, and before the coming of Christ did oppress jury situated between them, These horns being converted by Christ triumphing in the heavens, shall at the last wound and strike thorough that double horned Beast of Rome. O cunning Chronologie, and skilful cosmography, BELLARMINE, that can so well distinguish the places and times of each prophesy, CICERO did in open place jestingly tax a certain Poet, 
Bellarmine well compared.  who was very foolish in the judgement of others, but very learned in his own, that in one place made Euripides and Menander, and in another Socrates and Epicurus have conference together, whose lives were severed not by many years, but many ages, and that he had many Schools in the world, that had as little learning as himself. He did as wittily sport at other writers, who said that Numa was Pythagoras' scholar, when Pythagoras was borne divers ages after Numa. But another most pleasantly said, that by the ignorance of a foolish Historiographer, he was made a Babylonian of a Grecian, and that his Country being cut off from Hellespont with the very wales and towers and people were carried into Mesopotamia. These men's ignorance Bellarmine seemeth very well to express, who brings in Kings of Syria long dead, conversing with many Kings of Europe borne a thousand years after, transporting Europe into Asia, 
Absurdities out of Bellarmine's interpretation.  and Paris to London, and the seats of other Kings and Princes who fell from the Roman Empire together with their subjects into Hierapolis and Babylon. That I can hardly refrain from crying out, that this learned Historiographer will one day bring to pass that The Parthian shall drink Araxis, & the Germane Tigris.  
A man may easily slip in the mistaking of a year or years, but it is a foul fault to confound an age or ages together, which this learned Doctor hath committed. But I know his answer that he had rather err with certain fathers, then hold a truth with us. Let us now see the return of that terrible demonstration, fetched out of daniel's corrupt interpretation.  
If the Roman Empire be not as yet altogether overthrown, Antichrist is not yet come. For the destruction of the Roman Empire is a certain token foreruning the coming of Antichrist (as it appears out of Daniel who speaks never a word either of the desolation of the Roman Empire or of the coming of Antichrist) But the Roman Empire is not so utterly overthrown. Therefore Antichrist is not yet come.  
The general overthrow of the Roman Empire he thus proveth out of Daniel.  
If before the coming of Antichrist the Roman Empire be to be divided into ten Kings, whereof none is, or is called the King of the Romans, than Antichrist is not yet come. For the general overthrow of the Empire is not come, because the name remaineth.  
The first is true. Therefore the last is true.  
He proveth the assumption out of Daniel, 
What be the two feet and ten toes.  out of the first vision of the 2. feet, and out of the second of the ten horns of the beast without a name. For as two feet, have ten toes, which are not feet, and as the ten horns are not the beast, so the Roman Empire shall be divided into ten Kings whereof none is the King of the Romans. O full wittily as he thinks. But daniel's two feet are not the eastern and western Empires of Rome, but Ptolomeus Lagis, and Seleucus Nicavor, Alexander's Princes as I said before: And the ten horns of the beast are not ten Kings rising out of the ruin of the Roman Empire, but ten Seleucides, as toes springing out of those feet, after the destruction of the Macedonian Empire, whence four horns arose in Alexander's place, as I showed before, which fell afterward to be two feet. Hath not Bellarmine proved the assumption doubtely well out of Daniel. But he hath showed it I warrant you better afterward out of john. For those ten horns in john are ten Kings among whom the Roman Empire is divided. I grant it. Neither so shall I lose the cause But that is not set down by john which Bellarmine addeth, whereof none is, or is called the King of the Romans. The clean contrary is set down by john as I proved before. As the Roman Empire was to be taken away as Paul taught, 
Why the Roman Empire restored.  so far forth, as it hindered the revealing and government of Antichrist: So a new Empire as the picture of the old was to be restored of the land-beast chap. 13. i. of Antichrist that the whore of Babylon might sit upon her back chap. 17. One of the two heads of the sea-beast, i. the western Empire of Rome, dead in Augustulus, revived in Charles by the land-beast, that is Antichrist, got life again and gathered strength, and therefore it was not finally overthrown. The image of the first beast recovered life, and voice: and therefore did not altogether lose her power and name. The image of the old Empire got life again, the name remained: the thing itself perished not, but passed over from the chief secular Prince, to the chief spiritual prince: as Aquinas teacheth. So as Antichrist was the last state, that held the Roman Empire, without the name of the Roman Emperor as Bellarmine confesseth. Therefore the Pope did transfer the Majesty and the power of the Roman Empire to himself and hath left a bare name and title to the Emperor, that the Emperor might be like him. 
The power of the Empire in the Pope, the name in the Emperor.  A Bishop in name, and an Emperor in name. Indeed the Bishop infringeth the faith of Christ, professeth his name, and seems his Vicegerent. A substitute in name, but a real Adversary. So the majesty of the Emperor resides in the Pope, the title in the Emperor. Then the titular Emperor is the Pope's real vassal. Let him be called, and you will the King of the Romans, to whom the Pope hath not left one foot of land in all Italy. So that the old Roman Empire in substance and power, is so divided between the Kings and the beast, that it is extinguished, unless happily you would have the Empire consist, not in the number of lands, but of syllables. I retort therefore the argument that I may overthrow the assumption of the first syllogism which he took for granted, that the Roman Empire was not yet subverted.  
The prophecy of Saint john hath taught us that the Roman Empire is to be divided and determined, as Bellarmine saith, and then that Antichrist shall come.  
Event proveth that the Empire is a good while since overthrown.  
Therefore Antichristi come.   

CHAP. XXXI. Wherein the third demonstration is refuted.  
Bellarmines' two former demonstrations as 2. reeds we have broken in pieces, let us if you please briefly scatter the rest being fully refuted by others. Any man will see how weak they be being severed, I have united them that they might be the stronger, two of the signs accompanying: and two other following being as notably concluded, whereby he proveth that Antichrist is not as yet come.  
The first sign that doth accompany the coming of Antichrist is not only the preaching of Enoch and Elias, but their combat with Antichrist.  
Wherein Bellarmine doth greatly dote, not unlike a frantic woman among us, who imagined she had such inward acquaintance with the Angel Gabriel, that she received many letters from him to be delivered to many others about divers businesses, I think Elias was the Carrier: And we have such an other mad fellow sent to give light unto the world. These seem not to be so mad as Bellarmine, who as if he had conferred with Enoch and Elias three days since in Paradise, 
The fable of Enoch & Elias.  or at least had received letters from them, doth hold so fast, and tell so confidently that jewish fable received from others, that he seems to believe it, it is this, that both of them being reserved so many ages in a certain aerial paradise, living in their mortal bodies, shall return into the world to fight with Antichrist, and shall be slain by him, and both of them shall rise again the third day before the general resurrection: and by that miracle convert the jews, and enforce them to kill Antichrist their Messiah (as they thought) in the mount of Olives, and to embrace Christ at the last their true Messiah.  
To prove the truth of all these passages Bellarmine hath misreported divers testimonies out of the Scripture and fathers, all which the most excellent and learned King of great Britain hath so wrested out of the hands of the silly weak Doctor, that in the judgement of all learned men he seems to have won the cause. It is not needful then to discuss those testimonies again, that I may not do that which is done already, all which are restored by the King to their natural and proper sense, so that from thence I may fetch arguments, to pursue the beast being wounded with the King's weapon. All godly learned men will grant, that these two holy Prophets, for their singular holiness had an especial privilege from God: when one of them, 
Heb. 11.  that is Enoch was translated, that he should not see death, the other was taken up in a fiery chariot into Heaven. Let me therefore ask Bellarmine certain questions for my learning, that I may search out the truth of this business, not only for the refuting of the fable, but for comforting of the Church. 
The first question.  First therefore I demand where Enoch and Elias be at this present? Bellarmine answers and that confidently; in Paradise. What? are they in that Paradise, 
A discourse of Paradise.  wherein Adam was placed at the first, which Moses describes to be planted by God in the region of Eden, a place so full of delights, watered with a great river from whence four other great and noble rivers did flow? Out of which he makes mention, that Adam was expelled, a dreadful Cherubin being set to stop the entrance, that none of Adam's posterity may ever re-enter? where the Armenians, condemned afterward for Heretic; in the Florentine counsel, did say that the souls of the Saints did abide after death to the day of judgement? yea saith Bellarmine in the very same Paradise Enoch and Elias are reserved alive. 
Enoch & Elias have a loss by being in Paradise and losing heaven.  A great privilege forsooth, that when other Saints the citizens of heaven do live with God, these for so many ages be kept out of heaven by God. That we may grant that Paradise is as well planted and delightsome a place, as ever it was, wherein with the smell of flowers and fruit, the sweetness of fountains, the greenness of the fields, the chanting of birds, the melody in the woods, the shadow of trees they might delight themselves so many ages. Yet for all that, Paradise could not be so pleasing unto them, that it could content them for the loss of one day, wherein they were deprived of heaven. 
Ecclesiasticus corrupted.  For whereas Bellarmine proves out of the Apocryphal scripture of Ecclesiasticus, that Enoch was translated into Paradise, he had said somewhat if Paradise had not been foisted into the Apocryphal text: for though it be in the Latin vulgar translation, yet it is not in the Greek original. But what will he answer for Elias, whom the canonical Scripture doth plainly set down to be taken up into heaven, not as it were into heaven, but into heaven itself? He cannot deny that which many sober Papists do grant, that God in the Scripture did pubblish his decree concerning Elias in very plain words, unless happily in Bellarmine's opinion when God had determined to take Elias up into heaven, he suddenly changed his mind, and cast him into Paradise? Elias therefore doth so much the more grievously take the loss of heaven, as he was near enjoying of it, 
Paradise taken away.  and missed it. But if Paradise which was sometime a most pleasant and delightsome place, hath been a long time since taken away, what comfort then is left to Enoch and Elias wherewith they might comfort themselves for the want of heaven? Now to let pass other Papists, Pererius the jesuite doth in many words prove, that Paradise was overflown with the flood, and grew so wild and unwholesome, that although it was a place, yet it left off to be a Paradise. 
Paradise overflown with the flood.  But this uniesuited Bellarmine that he might preserve that place free from the inundation of waters, to be more pleasant and wholesome for Enoch and Elias, hath removed it into a place near the circle of the Moon. 
Paradise not near the Moon.  But the jesuite Pererius doth prove that it is the more incommodious, and unwholesome, and altogether inhabitable. First for the nearness of the Sun and other stars, then for the Element of fire placed next the moon, beside for the perpetual agitation of the place, being carried swiftly about with the constant motion of the heaven. So that Bellarmine hath provided very ill for those good Fathers, when he placed Paradise so near the Moon, & hath done great wrong to the Inhabitants of the earth, as Pererius noteth prettily and pleasantly, that the height of Paradise, being in a place opposite to the east, would keep away the light of the Sun. It is good sport to see these two learned jesuits wrangling together about the situation of Paradise, 
Papist against Papist.  as the Madianites wounding one another with their mutual blows. Yet out of this their conflict the truth doth appear that Enoch and Elias is not in the earthly Paradise. And yet without all doubt they must be in Paradise, then in heavenly Paradise Which when all is done he confesseth they be not in the ethereal, but aerial heaven. Aerial Doctor, who dreams that God will give, but an aerial happiness to these his excellent Prophets. For whereas he thinks it is a matter of religion for any to confess, that heaven gates were open for any before Christ, and to the proof thereof hath gathered, and bend all his forces, that most learned bishop of Elie hath so weakened and dispersed them, that he hath clean vanquished the Sophister and driven him out of the field. Enoch and Elias are members of the son of man: the son did first ascend into heaven by his own power: Enoch and Elias being members of Christ have ascended by the power of the son of man, so that Christ may be rightly said to tread the way before them both. Whence seeing it sufficiently appears that Enoch and Elias do now live in heaven; I will demand again, 
The second Question.  whether they entered heaven in their souls alone, or with their bodies also? For if only in their souls, as certain learned men do think, they must twice rise again, if it be true that Bellarmine saith, once to fight against Antichrist; the second time, to convert the jews to Christ. If with their bodies also, which the greater sort, and better learned on both sides do conclude, that they may not deny the privilege given to them for our comfort, I will not curiousty inquire whether they enjoy the blessed vision of God, when I hear they be entered into the house of God, that is, the heavens, wherein Christ saith, that he hath many mansion places. 
Three examples of God his glory. 

Enoch.  
Elias.  
Christ.    It contents me that God for the comforting of his Church upon earth would have three examples and shows of his glory to appear; Enoch before the Law, Elias under the Law, Christ under the Gospel; that the two former by another's, Christ by his own power entered heaven in their bodies. Enoch for the comfort of married folks, Elias for the comfort of Virgins, Christ for the comfort of either estate, who being borne of a Virgin that was espoused, did adorn both of them in his life, the Virgin by his example, the married by his miracle: but especially, that Enoch being famous for his integrity, Elias for his zeal, Christ for his perfection in all graces, might be openly known to have their entrance into heaven. Hence every faithful man may behold the foundation of his happiness in Christ, the first fruits in Enoch and Elias, in him the working cause, in these a warrantable earnest of their resurrection and ascension into the highest heaven, with the highest joy; and hence may we conclude against any jewish heretic, that as there was an entrance into heaven to Enoch and Elias, to perfect their happiness, so a return to the earth is denied unto them, only Christ who ascended up into heaven, not for himself alone, but for them and us, must come again in the latter day, that he may bring those that belong unto him into heaven. Nor let any doubt but that Christ, by which power he shall carry those being changed in the twinkling of an eye into heaven, whom he shall find alive at his coming on the earth, hath with that power changed Enoch and Elias in the very moment of their translation, and assumption, that being made like to his glorious body, he shall as he hath made them, so also make us fit for heaven.  

The third Question.  Here I thirdly demand how Bellarmine can imagine their bodies to be mortal and corruptible, who have so many ages enjoyed in the heavens immortality and incorruption; for flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, and corruption cannot put on incorruption, as the Apostle teacheth, 
Bellarmine contradicteth the Scripture.  whom the Cardinal doth contradict. Enoch was translated that he should not see death, saith the Apostle; he shall return that he may see death, saith the Cardinal. so Bellarmine always beats against the rock, so long till it be to be feared he will be beaten in pieces by the rock. But if so be that Enoch and Elias do live in their bodies in the heavens which is God's house, as the wiser Papists do confess to be agreeable to Scripture, it followeth that their bodies be incorruptible and immortal.  

The fourth Question.  I demand therefore in the fourth place, how it can be, that they should be killed by Antichrist in the latter day? how they can so die that they be raised up the third day? There is no show of truth in the invention, no probability in the devise. And yet these two inhabitants of heavenly Paradise, the possessors of immortality, as Hierom calls them; not that now they desire, but that they now enjoy immortality, as Tertullian speaketh, the marksmen and first borne of our resurrection, as Epiphanius saith; the most ancient inhabitants of heaven, in whom the worth of grace hath changed the law of nature, as Athanasius saith, 
Immortality not overcome by death.  even these two this old doting Doctor Bellarmine doth imagine shall return again upon the earth, that they may die by the hand of Antichrist. Mortality shall be drunk up of life, but immortality shall not be drunk up of death. For God will not give that glory to Antichrist, that he triumph over the death of the Saints in heaven; for they be immortal. If they be heavenly and immortal, what business have they upon the earth to fight with Antichrist, whom Christ hath purposed by three means utterly to destroy and abolish.  

1. By the effectual ministery of his word. 
Three means whereby Antichrist is vanquished.   
2. By the powerful forces of Kings.  
3. By the glorious appearance of his last coming.   
But if we should grant them that they should come to fight with Antichrist, it would not follow for all that, that Antichrist were not yet come, which he so labours to prove; this only would follow, that Antichrist were not yet gone, which we will easily grant. And is not this then a doughty demonstration? The sum is this.  
Enoch and Elias are not yet returned out of Paradise.  
Therefore Antichrist is not yet come.  
It is reported of Lycurgus, 
Lycurgus' his devise to make his commonweal endure.  that his common weal might continue, that he feigned as though he took a long journey, and bound his citizens with an oath, that they should not alter the form of the common weal settled by him till he returned. Lycurgus never meant to return, therefore he hoped that his common weal should last for ever. That which Lycurgus did in a good mind, the Popish sort do with an ill intent, dissembling that many things must be endured for the continuance of their Hierarchy, that thereby they may blind the eyes of their credulous scholars, not to expect Antichrist as themselves have fashioned him, till Enoch and Elias should return out of Paradise. They know for a certain that they shall never return out of Paradise, and therefore their Antichrist shall never come.   

CHAP. XXXII. The fourth Note concurring.  
ANd yet Bellarmine doth add another sign that doth accompany the coming of Antichrist, a most grievous and notorious persecution, which shall take away the public worship of God; which sign though in the true meaning it do most truly agree with the Pope of Rome, 
The Pope justly challenged for a persecutor.  who hath publicly taken away the true, and pure worship of God, as much as lieth in him, with his most grievous and bitter persecution, yet this Roman Advocate, with a cunning sleight of putting of, doth remove the infamy of this fiery persecution from the Pope, that inflicts it, and layeth it upon our Church which endures it; as Tacitus writes of Nero, who when he had set fire on the City, laid the fault upon the Christians. It irks me to stay any longer in wiping away this bloody demonstration, wherein he doth so maliciously insult over our miseries, & as another Fimbria scoffs at our savola's, 
Fimbrias scoffs like Bellarmine's  whom Antichrist hath grievously wounded, because they have not received the beasts whole weapon into their bodies. What? whether is this a more feeble, or more cruel demonstration? To the proof whereof I cannot tell whether he show more malice or ignorance, in violent writhing of Scriptures after his wont manner to serve his turn. I will unloose those knots, and think it very necessary, to defend the Scripture from his miserable corruption. When Antichrist shall come he shall raise the most grievous and terrible persecution that ever was, such an one, wherein the public worship of God shall utterly cease. Therefore Antichrist is not yet come. As if he should say, there was a grievous persecution, if a persecution under the Pope, but not a most grievous and notorious: that the persecution of the primitive Church, was far more grievous, and more notorious, then that of ours, whereof we so justly complain, which he termeth nought else but a chastisement. What is this else but cruelly to scoff at our miseries, and scornfully to trample upon our ashes? When the Pope hath consumed so many millions of innocent men with fire and sword, thus to mitigate the Popish persecution with a comparison of the Emperor's persecutions? and to name it not a persecution but a chastisement? Which, if our Princes would revenge, on God's behalf, 
Charles the 5. plagued Rome  as the army of Charles the fift, under the conduct of the Duke of Burbone, is said to have taken Rome, while he washed away blood with blood, and gelded those jetcherous Cardinals, as Sadolett doth pitifully bemoan the matter in his Epistles: Bellarmine would leave of with his sarcasms to flout at our just complaints, which his inhumanity as well as their immanity hath drawn from us. But let us return to the argument. He confirms the three parts of his proposition. First, that the persecution of Antichrist shall be the most grievous of all others that ever were, he proveth it out of the 24. of Matthew, out of the words of Christ: 
Matth: 24. misalleaged.  there shall be then great tribulation, such as was not from the beginning, or shall be to the end. which place that it is not to be understood of the persecution of Antichrist, but of the calamities of the jews, both the context of the place, and the testimony of Luke, doth most plainly convince. And we read out of the 20 of the Apocalyps, saith he that Satan shall be then loosed, who was bound till that time. Which place is not to be referred to the coming of Antichrist, as is made plain by that which goeth before, and followeth after.   

CHAP. XXXIII. Of the losing and binding of Satan.  
THe coming of Antichrist doth go before the losing of Satan, who appeareth by the premises, to be not only borne and of some years, but being of a ripe and settled age governed under the figure of the beast cap: 13. so furious that he slew them that refused to worship the image of the beast, his synagogue was described under the type of the whore, making the Princes of the earth drunk with the golden cup of her fornication, and herself made drunk with the blood of the Saints. I add also out of the consequents: for the Angel, (by whom Satan is said to be bound for a thousand years, after the end of those years to be loosed for a small time v: 2. & 3. of which small time there is mention made cap: 12.) reciteth that he saw their souls, who were killed for the testimony of Christ, because they would neither worship the image of the beast, nor take his mark upon them, v: 4. & 5. But for the clearer understanding of this obscure place, I must first speak of some few distinctions taken out of the Text, that thereby the vanity of this demonstration may be laid open to every man's view. 
The exposition of the place of the losing and binding of Satan.  Twice Satan is said to be bound, twice to be loosed: first bound by Christ, that he might not destroy the soul of any of the faithful: but loosed to afflict the flesh. Bound for ever, that by his spiritual tricks he might not overthrow the salvation of the Church: but lose for a time, that with bodily plagues he might exercise their patience. Here I distinguish the time, from which he was bound, from the time wherein he was twice loosed. Once from the beheading of john Baptist, to the Empire of Constantine: again from the government of Constantine to the Empire of Ottoman the first, and the Popedom of Boniface the 8. He was loosed from the death of the Baptist almost 300 years, that he might rage's in the Roman Emperors against the primitive Church to the Empire of Constantine; when he was bound again with the angels chain for a 1000 years v: 2. cap: 20. He was again let lose that he might rage's for a little while v: 3. as before almost three hundred years in the Turkish Emperors, and the Rom: Bishops, from Ottoman the first, and from Boniface the 8; whereof, he without, this within, 1300 years from the death of Christ, 1000 from the death of Constantine, began cruelly to rage against the Church, one in the East, the other in the West. There are who number the beginning of the 1000 years from the year of Christ 73. wherein jerusalem being defaced, Satan cap: 12. did endeavour to put out the Church dispersed among the Gentiles: the seed of the woman, which fled into the wilderness for a short time, that is, a time, times, and half a time: which space doth well answer 42 months, and 1260 days, as the learned teach, which according to the supputation of Daniel, do make two hundred ninety and four years. In which time the Dragon, as is said, being angry with the woman, did go about to destroy the rest of the woman's seed that remained. Now in the 20. chapter, where the same history is thought to be continued, the Angel is said to have bound Satan with a chain for a thousand years, which was ended in the year 1703. at what time Satan is understood to be loosed in Gregory the 7. 
Gregor: 7.  in whom Antichrist as a strong man began to strive against the Empire. 
Difference about the losing of Satan.  But they seem more rightly to interpret this place, who think that Satan bound for a thousand years was let lose, at the river Euphrates in the outward enemy of the Church Ottoman, the first Emperor of the Turks, and his posterity the most barbarous enemies of the Christian name, in whom the prophecy of Gog and Magog is thought to be fulfilled. Unless they be rather to be believed, who understand the place not of the Turk only, nor of the Pope only, but of them both; counting, as I said, the second losing of Satan, from the reign of Constantine, wherein he was bound for a 1000 years, to the reign of Ottoman, and the Popedom of Boniface, wherein he was loosed after that bloody decree of the counsel of Laterane, about the burning of God's servants, termed by them Heretics, which hath most cruelly devoured and consumed many millions of innocent men tormented with a lingering death, who refer the place to Antichrist only, do shrewdly gale Bellarmine's master, who refer it to the Turk only, do take away Bellarmine's demonstration. They that refer it to them both, 
Two sta●es erected for cruelty.  when both perform the same, they erect two stages, one at Constantinople, tother at Rome, wherein we may see a black Devil furiously raging in the one, and a white Devil in the other. For whereas it is certain, that the Saracens without, and Antichrist within, did bring many plagues upon the Church within the compass of that 1000 years, and did stir up many mischiefs, and many garboils within the bowels of the Church, Satan being the leader, and the Pope the author: First I say that the invasion of the outward enemies neither was so general, nor so continual; nor the persecution of the inward enemies, although it was raised up often for the show of religion, not so often for the cause of religion, as for a greedy humour to govern: that the Church might feel rather the outward peace to be intermitted, then quite omitted, and that Satan's chain did seem rather to be somewhat slackened by the Angel, rather than altogether loosened. For Satan did rather nourish and increase Antichrist his darling and sweet heart with outward peace than war: flattering the world rather than threatening it; bond rather than loose: so that in comparison of those continual invasions of Turks, and the perpetual persecutions of Popes, wherewith the whole East and West Churches have been most miserably torn in pieces these 300 years The outward peace may seem to be given to the Church, as a breathing time for a thousand years, but yet such as the Church may cry out with Esay, behold in peace my bitterness is most bitter: for by those means whereby Satan did grant an outward peace to the Church, by the same he assayed to take away the inward: being very careful to yield to the Pope his gainful merchandise of souls, while he sold sins, 
Satan did more hurt bound then lose.  as it were, by the drum in the Temple at the highest rate; and did rack and gather together great treasures to his companion, compassed him with pleasures and got him all authority, all which he could not have effected without long peace. Satan therefore was bound, 
☜  not that he should not at all stir against the Church, but that he might do it more mildly, and for his own good: that he might seem rather to play then rage in his chain, and to play not the cutthroat, but the cozener; and might rather infect men than kill them, and might not massacre them with murders, but deceive them with lies, and show himself more a Comedian then a Tragedian, and deceive the world more with sweet baits, then mingle any sour, unless it were when he went about to get his eldest son the Empire, than he is said to play the Tragicomedian. So Satan being bound did do more good to Antichrist, then if he had been lose: yea, rather he lost that being lose, that he got being bound. For whom Antichrist long held blinded with superstition, and deceived with the enticements of peace, those he did after so stir up, worn out with wars, and discontented with persecutions, that they at last rebelled against him, and did very valiantly defend the oppressed cause of the Gospel. Now that I have shortly expounded the place of Satan's losing, let us return to Bellarmine's argument, who proves out of this place, that the most grievous persecution that ever was, shall be under Antichrist, which if it touch the Turk only, it taketh away the foundation of Bellarmine's demonstration, if it press the Pope, the argument is brought upon the author's head. For the most grievous persecution whereof he speaketh, is come already. And therefore Antichrist is come. Add that this comes nearer the Pope than he is aware. For  
The inward most grievous persecuter of the Church is Antichrist.  
The Pope is the most grievous inward persecuter of the Church.  
The Pope therefore is Antichrist.  
But antichrist's persecution must be most notorious (saith he) The Pope's persecution is not most notorious: why so? because all the wicked would oppugn the Church with open war, and not only infidels and known sinners, but hypocrites, and false brethren would join themselves to the Pope, and laying themselves open, would openly invade the Church. For such persecution becometh Antichrist, the Pope it becometh not. And why? because there be so many hypocrites and false brethren in the Church, he meaneth the Roman. I grant it, it is a defence full of truth. The Pope that great hypocrite, 
The Pope that great hypocrite.  must needs beget sons like himself, arrant hypocrites and dissemblers. But I fear I may not grant him that, where he saith, that hypocrites and sincere Christians, whom as chaff and wheat, Christ saith, are not to be divided before the day of his coming, Bellarmine affirms that they are to be separated before the coming of Antichrist.  
Hence thus I dispute.  
When all hypocrites shall be made known, Antichrist shall come.  
When Christ cometh all hypocrites shall be made known.  
Therefore when Christ cometh, Antichrist shall come.  
Therefore Antichrist shall be not a beast of three year old, but a beast of a day old: unless he think that Antichrist shall come after the coming of Christ, and the end of the world: for that which he adds in the end, that there shall be such a persecution under Antichrist, that all the public ceremonies and sacrifices of religion shall cease, is a mere dotage. He wholly forgets what is set down by the Apostle, that Antichrist shall be a notable hypocrite, not an outward, but an homebred enemy, who with feigned holiness and sanctity, shall entice and deceive simple people, as Acosta, Viega, Pererius, Ribera, four principal jesuits do plainly set down: and by this means do greatly weaken Bellarmine's idle demonstration. Which let us weigh if you please.  
The public worship of God, and the daily sacrifice of Christians under the persecution of Antichrist, shall cease at that time when Antichrist shall come.  
The worship of God, and the sacrifice of Christians is not ceased.  
Therefore as yet Antichrist is not come.  
He proves his poposition out of the 12. 
Dan. 12.5.11.  of Daniel vers. 11. from that time, when the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, are 1290. days: where Daniel, 
Bellarmine against Daniel.  if we credit Bellarmine, speaks of Antichrist, Daniel himself gainsaying it, who expounds himself. chap. 8. v. 11. & chap. 11. vers. 13. directly affirming, that the daily worship of God shall be taken away by Antiochus Epiphanes and his army, speaking not of the daily sacrifices of Christians, but of the daily sacrifices of the jews. The manner of the jews was to offer sacrifice to God morning and evening, which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which sacrifice was taken away by Antiochus, as josephus and the author of the first book of Macchabees, and Chrysostome plainly witness. And to Daniel demanding when the end of these evils shall be, God answers, from that time, When the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination of desolation set up, whereof he spoke chap. 11. vers. 31. that there should be 1290 days to the restoring thereof, and the deliverance of the jews from Antiochus tyranny. Of this restoring and deliverance I showed out of Daniel, 
divers degrees of deliverance.  that there were divers degrees noted by Daniel, at divers times. For from the hindrance of the worship of God, to the first restoring of the same by judas Macchabeus, the Prophet saith, there were three yeeeres and ten days: which space chap. 7. vers. 25. he called a time, times, and a piece of time. To the victory of judas Macchabeus, when he drove Antiochus forces out of jury, and so did establish the first restitution, Daniel saith, there was three years and an half, which space chap. 12. v. 7. he calleth a time, times, and half a time. To the time, wherein Antiochus strucken by the hand of God, promised he would restore the jewish religion, he understands there were 1290. 
Bellarmine mistaken in taking away the daily sacrifice.  days to the time of his death 1335. in all which numbers the prophecies of Daniel, and histories of josephus, and the Macchabees do very well agree. I marvel the more that Bellarmine was so blind in the prophesy, and so ignorant in the history, that he dreameth that the public worship of God, and sacrifice of the jews, taken away by the most grievous persecution of Antiochus within three year and a half, should be the like public worship of God, and sacrifice of the Christians, taken away by the persecution of Antichrist, three years and a hafe before the end of the world. He confirms the assumption by experience, which doth testify that the public worship of God was never taken away by the Pope, & that the sacrifice of the Christians never ceased. He means the mass, and other public voluntary worships of the degenerated Church of Rome, which the Creed shall make plain to be neither worship of God, nor the sacrifice of Christians. So the proposition is fetched out of the Scripture misunderstood, the assumption is the begging of the thing in question. And is not this a worthy demonstration?   

CHAP. XL. Of the 5. note of the continuance of antichrist's kingdom.  
Now to the 2. last signs following.  

1. The continuance of the kingdom of Antichrist 3. years and a half.  
2. The dissolution or end of the world five and forty days after.   
And do not these make as doughty a demonstration as the former? 
An impossibility.  The kingdom of Antichrist must last just three years and a half. All which time is not sufficient for the gathering of the jews together dispersed over the face of the whole earth: much less for the building again of the temple, which is so defaced and razed, that not one stone is left upon another. 
2. Chr. 2.2. The 2. buildings of the temple described.  The first building whereof, in great peace, in great provision of all necessaries, by the most exquisite workmen, the number of whom the scripture sets down to be a hundred and fifty thousand could not be perfected in less than 7. years by Solomon. But the second re-edifying of it being oft hindered by the incursion of a near enemy, and their own frights, that often the work was interrupted, the high wales and the stately roof uncovered, and was not finished under 46. years. 
joh. 2.  And yet Bellarmine allots but three years and a half to so great a work. He doth to good purpose imagine Antichrist to be an Enchanter, who can call forth spirits out of hell, and send them as Messengers, 
Note  being carried on the wings of the wind to gather the jews with all speed, out of all the coasts of the world, and after may hire Marlines workmen to carry stones, and lay them artificially in the work. But that he should in the same three years and a half bring into captivity all Christians, subdue 10. Kings, get the Monarchy of the world, is a tale so incredible that Turks may laugh at, and Christians abhor. Let him write this to his fools, whom he teacheth that faith is not in the understanding, but in a blind assent, that they must receive without search and inquiry, whatsoever is offered to them, be it never so incredible, so it be in the name of the Church. And mark at last what this Magician hath brought to pass. He hath brought in Bellarmine dancing in a circle. For thus he makes him dispute for him.  
Antichrist shall precisely reign three years and a half.  
The Pope spiritually hath reigned in the Church 1500. years, neither hath any other been taken for Antichrist which did reign just three years and a half.  
The Pope therefore is not Antichrist.  
And therefore Antichrist is not yet come.  
The syllogism may be thus resolved.  
If neither the Pope nor any other reigned precisely so long, than Antichrist is not yet come.  
The antecedent is true. Therefore the consequent.  
Hear you see Bellarmine to bring the chief question in a round to prove that which is in controversy. 
Bellarmine dancing in a round.  Antichrist is not yet come, why so? Because the Pope is not Antichrist. The Pope is not Antichrist, why so? Because Antichrist is not yet come. Behold the Cardinal dancing in a round. He goes about to strengthen his proposition out of Daniel, and john misunderstood, to wit, that Antichrist shall reign just three years and a half. I have evicted out of Daniel 7. v. 25. that a time times and a peecs of time, i three years and ten days was that space wherein the profanation of the temple and the hindrance of God's worship was first committed by Antiochus as josephus the best interpreter of the prophecy hath numbered. Archimedes himself could not have set it down better. So much time passed from the profanation of the temple to the purging and reforming of the same made by judas Machabeus. From that purging to the expulsion of the army out of jury there are counted a time times, and half a time Dan. 12. in which two numbers the 1300. days mentioned chap. 8. vers. 14. are contained, when as that reformation well began, was better established and settled, from which time if you account to the sickness of Antiochus there arise 1290. days chap. 12. 11. if to the death of Antiochus they amount in the Prophet's account to 1334. chap. 12. 12. 
Bellarmine's absurdities.  Now I pray let us apply this notable demonstration of Bellarmine about the continuance of antichrist's reign, and we shall perceive, not only how he agreeth with the Prophet, but also with himself. First those things that are to be understood literally and properly of the tyranny of Antiochus, who died so many ages before Antichrist, he takes it literally and properly for the Kingdom of Antichrist, who shall reign by his own record in the end of the world. But he allegeth always Jerome who refers that place chap: 8. of the days 2300. to Antichrist, which make six years and more. How therefore do they say that Antichrist shall rule 1260. days which makes three years and a half? 1300. days and 1260. days how do they agree? now whereas out of the 12. Chap: they exactly define that antichrist's Kingdom shall endure a time, times and a half time, let them tell me how they can reconcile therewith 1260. days: wherein they say the Kingdom of Antichrist in daniel's judgement must be contained? how can 1260. days agree precisely with a 1290? They must devise a new Arithmetic and a new Logic to make these numbers agree. For whereas Bellarmine doth add, That Daniel after he had said chap: 12. that Antichrists Kingdom should endure 1290. days, he adds presently that he is happy that doth expect and abide to those 1335. days that is to the 45. days to the death of Antichrist as he expoundeth, because Christ as he thinks shall then come to judgement, 
Daniel utterly mistaken.  this is the dotage of a cracked brain, as shall afterward be made as clear as the light. For the judgement which Daniel mentions, is not the last judgement of the world, but the temporal judgement that shall consume that beastly Antiochus speaking so proudly, 
Dan 7.11.  whenas yet there is leave granted to the other beast to continue after for a time and times. 
The sixth and last sign.  But Bellarmine doth dream that the end of the world shall be 45. days after. That we may come at last to consider of his sixth and last sign; Bellarmine will seem to be of God's secret counsel, 
Bellarmine wiser than Christ and against Christ.  who knoweth more than either the Angels or the son of man: but that he will not acquaint us with the day and hour, but with the year wherein the world shall have an end. Yet he lately writes that 45. days after the Scripture saith that the day of judgement shall be put off and longer. Therefore those days that Christ promiseth shall be shortened for the elects sake, Bellarmine that worthy Divine saith shall be lengthened. And those days which Christ saith shall be contracted for the comfort of the elect, those he saith shall be protracted for their torment. Fie upon such paltry Divines, that do shut up those fountains of comfort that Christ openeth for the good of his Children. What greater comfort can possibly be then the promise of Christ, hat the day of judgement shall be hastened for the deliverance of Gods elect? And yet this worldly Cardinal tells us that it shall be put off for their affliction. They shall be ignorant saith he that live after the 45. whether that day shall be deferred any longer. He knows it is well with him in this world and lives in all delight and delicacy with that his latiall jupiter the Pope, 
☞  but whether it will be so well with him in another world that he knoweth not. And therefore he thinks of the prolonging of this present world. I think verily that if God would invite him presently to his heavenly banquet, he would crave, as old as he is, some more days; it may be some more year, wherein he may pamper and cherish his old carcase, 
Mart. lib. 9  and would secretly answer with that profane martial, 
Seek others for to feast with jupiter above,  
I hear upon the earth my jupiter will love.   
Hear they place their heaven: they put far from them that day of judgement, wherein they are to give account of so many impieties against Christ, and so many outrages against Christian Kings and people. But let us come to his argument, wherewith he proveth that we are not to expect Antichrist before his departure, nor before the end of the world to look for his coming. Thus he argueth.  
The end of the world is not yet come.  
Therefore Antichrist is not yet come.  
This shall be their everlasting argument while the world endureth, thus will they argue for Antichrist: this because Bellarmine thought to be very absurd, he doth alter the question and concludes thus. That it shall not be long before Antichrist come. For If it were long before Antichrist came, the end of the world would be long hence. But the consequence is false. Therefore the antecedent  
He proves his proposition out of the Apostle. That Antichrist shall come a little before the end of the world, and immediately before the second coming of Christ, and then that jolly fellow shall appear, whom the Lord jesus shall consume, with the spirit of his mouth, and the brightness of his coming. But the Apostle doth distinguish between the coming and the destruction of Antichrist, between the substance of Antichrist and his appearance or revelation: between which and his destruction there is a great distance. He lay close hidden in the days of Saint john & Saint Paul, as I have said before; he was therefore. He did appear after the removing of the Empire, for that did hinder that he might not appear: which happened not till many ages after. Again the Apostle distinguisheth between the consuming of Antichrist, and his final overthrow. After he is revealed, he saith he shall waste away by little and little with the spirit of the lords mouth, but shall be utterly put out by the brightness of his coming. 
Bellarmine a profane jester.  Hear let me a little touch Bellarmine's profane jesting. Surely saith he the spirit of Christ must be very weak, if it cannot dispatch Antichrist raging above a 1000 years. And there it pleaseth him to distinguish between the word of God, and his power. As though there is not power in the word of God to weaken, and break Antichrist in pieces, the force whereof the beast shall feel in his fall and destruction. Now the thing is a working, now Christ doth enfeeble Antichrist with his word, afterward he shall destroy him with his presence. He shall kill him by weakening him, that I may put off the Cardinal's ridiculous distinction, who doth thus distinguish, He doth not say he shall weaken him but he shall kill him. And it pleaseth him to scoff at us when we say that now Antichrist shall be overthrown by the word of the Lord, 
☞  when as now the word of the Lord shall be overthrown by him. May not a Christian, and an old man, and a Divine blush for shame, (as for a Cardinal nothing will make him blush) to sport and jest in a matter so weighty and serious? As God himself so Gods word is eternal, his Ministers Gods witnesses Antichrist could kill, the word itself he could never kill, which shall abide when he rots to nothing. Yea truly as the word of God is a living word so the Ministers of the word God's faithful witnesses being slain, shall by the power of the word rise again, if not in their several persons, yet in a succession, and kill this murdering Antichrist. Christ therefore hath not a weak spirit, but the Cardinal hath a weak brain, who doth not as yet understand, the degrees and means which Christ useth in the abolishing of Antichrist. But he tells us Saint john saith that Antichrist shall come in the last hour: 
What is meant by the last hour.  But he understandeth the last hour to be all that time from the ascension of Christ to his second coming, which God doth call an hour, very short in respect of the Saints glory, but very long in respect of their patience. This testimony I thus retort.  
When that Antichrist cometh it shall be the last hour, saith john.  
But Antichrists are now come (meaning the whole body together with Antichrist that head, which elsewhere he affirmeth is come)  
Therefore now is the last hour.  
And if then was the hour of the coming of Antichrist, he is not to be destroyed three years and a half before the end of the world.   

CHAP. XLI. Of the sixth and last Note.  
But he proves it out of Daniel, 
Cap: 12.12.  that after Antichrist hath reigned three years and a half, he shall be destroyed 45 days before the day of judgement. For when he had continued 1290 days, he adds, happy is he that shall live to see 1335 days. 
Daniel mistaken.  This place is properly to be understood of Antiochus, of his death, and of the deliverance of the jews. But grant that the place be to be understood of the kingdom of Antichrist, and the end of the world: than it would follow, 
Three absurdities.  first, that the kingdom of Antichrist lasted not 1260 days, which make three years and a half, but 1290. Again, it follows that Antichrist is to be destroyed 45 days before the end of the world, whom the Apostle saith must be destroyed at the coming of Christ. Thirdly, it would follow, that the time of Christ's coming should be known to men, which Christ doth assure us is unknown unto Angels. If these consequences be absurd, than the Antecedent is absurd, from whence they arise.  
You have, Paul the fift, Bellarmine's six demonstrations making small proof that Antichrist is not yet come. Now seeing I have dilated about Antichrist all the questions, whether he be, what he is, of what kind, what is his kingdom and retinue, what he doth and wherein he is busied, the name wherewith he is termed, the mark wherewith he is branded, 
What Antichrist is.  the seat wherein he ruleth, the time wherein he is revealed, and withal what he is not: It is not requisite that I tell you in many words who it is, when you yourself seem to have Antichrist wholly in your breast, and to carry him in your bosom. 
antichrist's sufferings.  You have heard what he hath done, now hear what he shall suffer. For we are so far from doubting of his coming, that we think of his destroying foretold of the Angels in john. 
Apoc. 14.7. The first Angel.  I saw saith he an Angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the eternal Gospel to preach unto them, that are upon the earth, and to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people, speaking with a loud voice, Fear the Lord, and give honour to him, because the time of his judgement is at hand, and worship him, who made heaven and earth, the sea and all that are therein. This Sermon of the Angel, what is it else, but a brief sum of all those Sermons which Luther and Caluin, 
The Angel and the Protestants pr●●ch alike.  and other Preachers of the Gospel preached in all the coasts of the Christian world, that they might bring the people to the faith of Christ, the fear of God, and the worship of him alone?  
He only that made heaven and earth is to be worshipped, he only is to be served.  
God only made heaven and earth.  
Therefore we must worship and serve God only.  
This syllogism of the Angel, as a Ram is advanced by our men, to batter, overthrow, and expel out of the consciences of men all those forces of Idols, which Antichrist hath erected.  
And there followed another Angel, saying, 
The second Angel. Apoc: 14.8.  Babylon is fallen, Babylon that great City is fallen, because she hath made all nations drunk with the wine of the wrath of her fornication. Here the spiritual fall of Babylon, not the material is to be understood; which being weakened, and shaken by the preaching of the word, while as yet the walls were standing, fell in men's minds, and was wholly cast down. For who is there, but of small understanding, to whom the iniquity of the Church, and Court of Rome doth not appear? to whom their impiety is not evident? to whom she seems not to be the mother of fornication, the receptacle of spoils, the queen of pride, the shop of sins, and the sink of all filthiness? 
In what account the Pope was heretofore.  A hundred and threescore years since one that was no Heretic, as a Lutheran is termed, but a Roman-Catholike, writ thus of the Pope, as it is recited in the catalogue of the witnesses of truth.  
jupiter is below.  
In heaven is Pluto's place.  
Upon a brutish animal  
Bestowed is all grace.  
It is as jewels in the mire  
And dirt upon the face.  
And if he were so hateful, when the darkness did cover his filthiness, how much more hateful doth he seem to all since the light of the Gospel hath laid him open and naked to the view of all men?  
The third Angel followed them, 
The third Angel. Apo: 14.10.11  crying with a loud voice, If any shall adore the beast, and her image, and bear her mark in his forehead, or in his hand, he shall drink of the wine of his wrath, which is mingled with wine in the cup of his wrath: And he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the sight of the Angels, and before the face of the Lamb, and the smoke of their torment doth ascend up for ever. This Angel doth threaten eternal destruction not only to Rome and the beast, but to all that love Rome, or adore the beast, whether they carry the mark of the beast either openly in their forehead, or closely in their hand. 
An exhortation to Ministers.  Here I admonish every man of God, every messenger of God, myself being the least, and last of all Christ's servants, that they seek not after ease to make them idle, or after wealth to make them covetous, or after pleasures to make them luxurious, or after preferment to make them proud: but that they have a continual care to recover souls fallen to the beast, or preserve them that stand upright; to whom being stamped with the mark of the beast, the Angel of God doth denounce so grievous and endless torments. There is no doubt but as soon as any of you do earnestly undertake this business of God and Christ, but he shall endure many wrongs, not only from outward enemies, but which is more grievous from false brethren, those following the quarrel of Antichrist, these covering their own with the name of Christ, so that they can look for nothing from these but molestation and trouble, from those nothing but death and destruction. But let him for his comfort hear that voice, which john heard from heaven: writ, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord, so saith the Spirit, that they rest from their labours, and their works follow them. And if those dead be blessed that live and die in the Lord i in the faith of the Lord: how much more happy be they that live and die for the Lord i for the faiih of the Lord? We have three witnesses testifying this happiness 


Three witnesses of happiness.  1. The voice from heaven.  
2. The Scripture in the Church.  
3. The spirit in the consciences.   all testifying that the sense of our misery is short, but the sense of our happiness everlasting; that the life weakened by sickness, is necessarily to be laid down, and that it is not greatly material, whether a man die under a canopy, or in a camp, so he die in Christ, and for Christ; that a momentany life is here granted to us, but that the reward of a life well spent is immortal. And whereas it is appointed that all shall die, God's servants may rather wish that their life, which must necessarily be ended, be rather spent in a holy cause, then reserved for a natural end: especially against seducing, and bloody Antichrist, and all his adherents, who now if ever are most wrung and grumble, threatening fire and sword to the Saints of God. The wicked therefore when they fall, shall be most grievously punished in hell, for all their impieties, and abominations, but these that are washed and redeemed with the blood of Christ, shall presently from their death in great triumph enjoy a place, and rest in heaven. 
The sixth Angel. Apoc: 16.12.  For after in the sixth Viol, which the sixth Angel poureth out into that great river Euphrates, there is mention of a great battle, to which those 3. unclean spirits coming in the likeness of frogs out of the mouth of the Dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false Prophet, do summon the Kings of the earth against the great day of the Almighty God, who shall gather them together into a place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon. In which words the malice of Satan, and of Antichrist, and the Antichristian Synagogue is plainly set down, as likewise of the jesuits, those frogs, who croaking out of their caves, provoke the Kings of the earth to war against Christ, and the Church, but with what success the place and day doth declare. That is the day wherein the right hand of Almighty God shall be great and glorious by the fall of Antichrist. 
The place where the Popish frogs shall be destroyed,  The place is called in Hebrew, the hill of thieves and robbers, as Aquinas: or a cursed army prepared to battle; or an army of destruction, which shall both bring destruction and endure it. Unless that be better, as divers read Charmagaddon, that is, a troop appointed to the slaughter; or Gnarmageddon, which signifies a crafty kind of killing; so that the sense is, that Princes are to be brought into that place, by the cunning sleight of Satan, and Antichrist, where they may utterly perish. Although another far otherwise, and far better do take it not for a noun appellative, but proper, Megiddo it was a hilly city in the land of Canaan, and because Har in Hebrew is a hill, and that was situated upon an hill, it was called Harmageddon. That place was renowned for the slaughter of the Canaanites where, where jabin and Sisera fight against the people of God, were daunted and vanquished under the government of Deborah, for whom the stars were said to fight in their courses: as the winds and seas did fight for our Elizabeth of blessed memory, against the Spanish invincible Armado, to whom that distichon of Claudian doth fitly agree.  
O much beloved of God, for whom the seas do fight,  
And winds conspire to blow, to put the foe to flight.  

The seventh Angel.  Therefore Harmageddon was the place of this battle that the enemies of the Church with jabin and Sisera, gathered together by God, might expect the like destruction. 
Apoc. 16. 17. etc.  This the seventh Angel which powered out his vial into the air, doth notably set out. There went a great voice from heaven out of the throne saying, It is finished. And there were made lightnings, and sounds, and thunders, and a mighty earthquake, such an one as was not since men inhabited the earth: And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the Heathen fell, and great Babylon came into remembrance with God, to give unto it the cup of the indignation of his wrath. And every Island did fly away, and the hills were not found, and a great hail like talents fell down from heaven upon men, and men did blaspheme God for that great plague of hail.  
What marvel if when the Creator is offended, all the creatures be likewise offended? for as then the stars abiding in their order & course, did fight from heaven against Sisera for Deborrah; so now the lightnings and thunders, and wonderful earthquakes, and the mighty talentary hail shall, when God is angry, fight for his Church against great Babylon. And as then the victory at the waters of Megiddo, so these now shall not be attributed to the force of men, but the powers of heaven. So likewise in the 20 of john, when Satan shall be loosed after a thousand years, by whom Gog and Magog shall be mustered to battle, the tents of the Saints, and the beloved city shall be besieged, but he addeth, that fire shall issue out of heaven from God, which shall consume the enemies. In which place john doth not understand those enemies, whom Ezechiel describeth, the Seleucidae inhabitants of Syria and Asia the less. For Gog doth signify Asia the less, deriving the name from Gyges' their king, Magog is Hierapolis the chief seat of Idolatry in Syria, builded by the Scythians, & by them so called. So that in Ezechiel, Gog is taken for Asia the less, and Magog for Syria: now because the Seleucidae were the most outrageous & cruel enemies of the jews, by whom after their captivity, and before the coming of the Messiah, they were to endure most greevons afflictions; therefore by a usual proverb among the jews, the cruel enemies of the Church are called Gog and Magog, 
The enemies of God called Gog & Magog. And why.  which john did apply to the setting out of the enemies of the Christian Church, whom Satan in the latter days, under the conduct of Antichrist, should stir up to war against the Saints. Not therefore the same, whom Ezechiel describes; but the like, called Gog and Magog, consumed and devoured by fire sent from God out of heaven, that the conquest being got not by earthly, but by heavenly powers might take away courage from the Antichristians, and increase it in the Saints. In the mean time one of the seven Angels chap. 17. had conference with john, saying, Come and I will show thee the condemnation of the great whore which sits upon many waters, that is, people, nations and tongues, with whom the Kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the people have been drunk with the wine of her fornication, who after they have a long time fought on the beasts side a against the Lamb, at last being conquered by the Lamb, who is King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, shall join their forces against the Beast, 
The order in destroying of Antichrist.  and shall devour and consume by fire the Babylonish whore, left naked & forsaken of all men. And mark in what order the victory shall proceed. First, Antichrist is consumed with the spirit of the Lords mouth, that is, with the ministry of the word, but with the brightness of the Lords coming is clean abolished. So saith Paul, so john. After the preaching of the eternal Gospel, by the second Angel, followeth the spiritual fall of Babylon, denounced by the third Angel, chap. 14. Babylon is fallen. Afterwards God's decree of antichrist's ruin, being published by the seventh Angel, his destruction follows, showed by one of the seven Angels, and the outward overthrow of Babylon procured by Princes. That prophesy is fulfilled, this is to be fulfilled: let that which is fulfilled win credit to that must be fulfilled: There followeth at the last, the last condemnation and everlasting destruction of the whore, chap. 18. proclaimed from heaven by another Angel, Babylon that great city is fallen, is fallen, antichrist's Metropolitan seat is now become a dwelling place for Devils, 
An exhortation to come out of Babylon.  and a cage for every unclean spirit, and every unclean bird. There is joined by him an heavenly admonition, to them who as yet abide in Babylon. Come out of her my people, lest as you be partakers of her sins, you likewise be partakers of her plagues. Hear the Angel speaketh to all Papists, chiefly to them that be simple and ingenuous that they be careful of their salvation: if the words of God cannot move them, let his deeds move them: if they will not hearken to men, let them hearken to Angels: if they fear not temporal punishments, let them fear eternal: let them come out of Babylon with all speed: lest as they be found partners of her sins, they be found partners likewise of her plagues: which the Angel doth describe very lively in the verses following. While at the last, the last Angel being of great strength took up a stone, as it were a mill stone, and cast it into the sea, saying, with such force shall Babylon that great city be cast, and shall never be found again. Where the most bitter lamentations of her lovers, and the exceeding joy and triumph of the Saints is described. In which battle, whereof the Angels prophesy, there is no cause, 
Comforts for God's children in respect of the Captains.  why the Antichristians should lift up their minds, or Christians deceive theirs. For if we look upon the captains of either side, on that side the Lamb, on this Antichrist; on that side the invincible lion, on this a silly beast shall fight. If we look upon the subsidiary soldiers on that side, 
Soldiers.  most valiant Princes converted by Christ shall fight, on this side with old doting Priests forsaken by Christ. If we look for soldiers from heaven, we shall have the Angel's fellow-soldiers in this battle, whom we had fellow-witnesses of the Gospel. So heavenly bands shall fight with earthly forces. If we look for the authors of this war, God on this side shall fight with the Devil, 
Authors.  power and eternity with weakness and rottenness. If we look to the causes of this war, the truth and the pure worship of that one everliving God, 
Causes.  written religion, sound faith, heavenly magnanimity shall fight with deceit, with idolatry, with superstition, with perfidiousness and fear. And if God do suffer some of his soldiers to fall in the quarrel, that they may rise again and come to him, will he suffer his cause to be lost, will he suffer his truth and power to be overcome by error and wickedness? Assuredly he will never suffer it. The Christians therefore have no cause to fear, the Pope hath no cause to insult.  
For the Pope alone hath all the marks of Antichrist.  
The Pope alone therefore is Antichrist.   

CHAP. XLII. The scope and conclusion of the whole work.  
I Have finished the Glass, Paul the fift, set before you to see yourself, before others to look on themselves, wherein Antichrist is fully set down as in preface. Hear you may see contained his right and true marks, the false being rejected and cast by. Every of them in several, and all of them jointly together do prove the Pope to be that great Antichrist. Hence it followeth that Popery is Antichristianity. What he is, and who he is, appears out of the preface. What he doth and what he teacheth, out of the Dialogue divided into three books. First comes upon the stage Antichrist pragmatical. In the two other books Antichrist dogmatical. There he carries himself like a Rebel, here like a Sophister: there he doth impair the glory of the Empire, here the truth of the Gospel, there he doth undermine the faithfulness of subjects, here the faith of Christians. The first book doth propound the rules and grounds of Christian fealty and obedience toward Kings against Christian rebellion, shadowed over with a show of Catholic religion. The other two do erect the foundation and pillars of Christian doctrine and faith, against the Antichristian heresy, compacted of twelve new articles of the faith, brought into the form of a creed by Pius the fourth, whereupon I call it the Pope's creed. I do solemnly profess that I am afaithfull servant of Christ and the King. I do not take upon me, being the meanest and the least of all other, to give warning unto Kings, once already warned by the great King, not therefore to be warned of any, but of Christ the King of Kings Let jesus Christ therefore be in our thoughts a while, who although he be absent in body, yet present in spirit, hath an interest, and being, yea and a government also in the spirits of all Christians, and chriefly of all Princes, his bounty is to be loved, his majesty is to be dreaded even of Kings: for as the powerful government of Kings is to be dreadful to their own subjects, so the most powerful government of God is to be dreadful to Kings; of God I say manifested in the flesh, who being present with them in spirit, seemeth thus to speak, and complain.   

CHAP. XLIII. THE PROSOPOPEY.  
I AM not ignorant, who am ignorant of nothing (o ye Christian Kings and Princes) that the Bishop of Rome, my Vicar, as he calls himself, my Adversary, 
The Pope both an heretic and traitor.  as he carries himself, hath been a Teacher of heresy in the Church, and a Practiser of treason in the commonweal for these many years. For ever since he was made the universal Bishop, he hath done nothing else, but corrupted my Gospel, and perverted your Empire. And no marvel, for out of the corruption of the Gospel, doth follow the dissolution of the Empire. For whereas I have erected by the Gospel a twofould pillar of government, Authority in Magistrates, and Allegiance in Subjects; it is strange to see the Gospel perverted in the minds of men, how each pillar of government falls to the grounds. The greatest fault whereof is in the bishops treachery, and in your slothfulness, that whereas I had submitted all Bishops under your power and judgement, you have suffered one to fly out so far above the rest, that he dare not only rebel against yours, but against my Majesty also. That therefore the ancient dignity of the Empire, may be recovered being lost, and for ever maintained being recovered; my counsel to you is, that the truth of the Gospel, shaken and long weakened, by the Pope's tyranny, may at last be restored by your princely authority. For what is more reasonable, then that I should have you defenders of my glory, whom I have appointed Ministers of my power? And if it were in question heretofore, whether that bishop, were that Antichrist; He is so prophetically described by my beloved Disciples john and Paul, that now it is out of question, seeing that event hath laid open and made clear the prophecy. For all the parts of the prophecy are so plainly interpreted, 
All notes of Antichrist agree with the Pope.  of the succession of the persons, the nature and disposition of the King, and kingdom, the acts of the beast, the impression of the Character, the number of his name, the situation of his seat, the time of his revealing, the cup of the whore, the kind of his merchandise, the fall of Babylon, lastly the coming in, and going out, the birth, and death of Antichrist, the last answering the first, and the middle answering both, with such a consent and barmonie, inferring things to be fulfilled, by things that are fulfilled, that I could not have made it clearer, if I had named the Bishop of Rome himself. And Antichristianity is well defined by my Apostle, to be not iniquity, but the mystery of iniquity. For if Antichrist had appeared to you in his own likeness, you needed not to have been so careful about the business. Now that he doth insinuate himself with a counterfeit holiness, and a dissembled sanctity, how many millions of innocent men hath he cozened and deceived with his hidden & mystical wickedness? But let the vizard be taken off from this hidden Antichrist, than none can hereafter be deceived, but he that will wittingly and willingly be deceived. Beware therefore that the old tricks, and stratagems being laid open, beguile you no more. He feigneth himself to be the Prince of the covenant, and yet he hath altered my covenant: He pretends himself to be a Keeper of my will and testament, and yet he hath not only razed and defaced my testament, 
The Pope hath altered Christ his Testament and brought in a new.  but hath foisted in one of his own. He terms himself the foundation of the Church, and challengeth to him my peculiar title, and yet he doth with cunning devices subvert and overthrow my Church. He makes a show of great zeal to my cross, and yet doth annihilate the power of the cross. The holy Scripture makes mention of God's double government, the legal, and evangelical: The legal which hath the condition of working annexed unto it, do this and thou shalt live. 
jerem. 31.31. Heb. 8.5. ad finem.  The evangelical requireth the condition of believing, Believe and thou shalt be saved. But it requireth faith not as a work, but as an instrument, whereby you may receive the promises of the spirit, therefore that is called a conditional, this a free convenant. Where there is no covenant, there is no faith, and where there is no faith, there is no salvation. human faith doth rest upon an human covenant, heavenly faith upon a heavenly covenant. Heavenly faith is of two sorts, answering the double covenant: One legal, which believeth the promises and threatenings of the law to be true: the other evangelical, which is rightly called justifying faith, which doth believe the promises of the Gospel grounded upon myself not only to be true in general, but doth apply them to every believer in particular to eternal life. Now salvation is to be expected of you, not out of the form of each of these covenants, but out of one of them. The form of the legal covenant is, as I said, Do this, and thou shalt live: the form of the evangelical covenant is, believe and thou shalt be saved. If therefore you look for salvation out of the legal covenant, you must wholly and entirely, and at all times do that which is commanded. You do it not: you shall die therefore. If you look for salvation by the Gospel, you must certainly believe that which is promised. These be the distinct forms of each covenant, for the procuring salvation, by no means to be confounded, yet the Pope hath confounded them: Do and believe; and so hath brought in a third covenant which holy writ doth not acknowledge Thus the Prince of the covenant, hath broken God's covenant. It is not to be denied, that faith, and good works are to be joined together in a man that is justified, but to mingle and confound these two forms Do this and believe, that thereby a man is to be justified, is utterly to be denied, as my Apostle Paul hath delivered. For as the Law doth not admit the least transgression, so the Gospel doth not admit your least satisfaction. Now what is more evident than that this hypocritical enemy, who vaunts himself to be a faithful keeper of my will, hath not only in many places ●ased my will, 
The Dominicans brought in a new Gospel.  but which is far more heinous shuffled in a new will? As when the Dominicans printed their new Gospel by the sufferance and connivency of the Pope: as when Paul the fift caused the conformities of Saint Francis that typical jesus my ape, 
S. Francis typical jesus.  to be reprinted. A mere forger, who having abrogated my will, hath brought in one of his own. A man● testament, which is ratified by the death of the testator admitteth not, either addition, or detraction, saith the Apostle, much less God's testament, which is confirmed with my blood and death. But my testament, say they, is of two sorts, 

The first nuncupative.  
The second written.  
The last doth abrogate the former as my Apostle teacheth.    

The Pope deviseth Christ's nuncupative will.  But I know what vexeth them. The Legacies set down in writing, they think not sufficient to serve their turns, and therefore they have devised a will nuncupative, not out of my Sermons, but out of their decretals. 
A fit similitude between the bod● of man & Scripture of God.  How far better did the old rabbins, who compared the five books of Moses for the absolute knitting of the parts thereof within themselves, to the body of man? whereto if you add a part as as finger to a hand, you bring in a deformity; if you take away a part, as a jaw from the face, you bring in infirmity; if you shut up a part as the mouth, which nature hath opened, or open a part, as the side, which nature hath shut up, you bring danger to the life. So if the Pope do add unnatural parts to the written will of God, he doth corrupt God's book, as when he addeth Apocryphal and decretal Epistles: if he take away natural parts he doth deceive the soul of man, as when he taketh the second commandment out of the decalogue, and taketh the cup from the supper: if he open those things that should be shut, he offers wrong to God, if he shut up those that should be opened, he offers wrong to men. The rabbins shall rise up in judgement, and condemn both the Pope and all Popelings, who accuse all the written will of God of imperfection, when as they judge the five books of Moses to be a volume most perfect. They who diminish, add, change every thing at their pleasure, shave away with their censure what they mislike, and what they like restore; that curiously open secrets, so that their own Clergy thinks basely of them: and of envy shut up things to be revealed, that they be not known of the people of God: They I say are contumelious to God, whose last will they have either corrupted or abolished. They are injurious to the sons of men from whom they have either openly stolen away, or privily filched away God, heavenly Legacies. Here I appeal to all learned and ingenuous Papists. It is no small matter that is in hand, but one of the greatest that ever was: the thing in controversy is God's Testament. The legacies of all the sons of God, are in question, which cannot be of force unless God's testament be safely kept. Herein the sons of God must maintain their right against men, and Devils. Your Masters grant that Rome is Babylon, the context and event convince it to be bishoply Rome, against whom my servant john doth denounce most certain destruction. Come forth of her therefore assoon as possibly you can. Yea? out of the Catholic Church doth some of you say? he is ever harping on this string, he should say from the Catholic or common whore, if he would hearken to john. Bid her therefore farewell, whose welfare she cannot endure. I heartily beseech you, that you would be pleased to be saved. Saved you cannot be, unless Gods last will and testament, wherein the salvation of man is contained, be kept safe and sound from the corruptions of Antichrist.  
The parts of the Testament are two. 

Remission of sins.  
The sanctifying of a sinner, which consisteth in the true enlightening of the mind, and the reforming of the heart. 
The parts, form, and Legacies of he new Testament.     
The form of the Testament is, 

I will be your God.  
You shall be my people.    
Upon these, three Legacies do depend. 

The remission of your sin.  
The imputation of my grace.  
The gift of eternal glory.    
The forgiveness of sin is free, is perfect, is eternal. It is free: I blot out your sins for my own sake, not for your sakes, but for my own names sake. I am that lamb that was slain, who alone take away your sins. Are you then so mad that you will go from the Lamb that is stain, to the golden Calf that is set up; that you believe the sin of man can be forgiven by the man of sin? The dispensing of grace is not in his power, much less the forgiveness of sin, which as it is free, so it is perfect. For I do not remit some sins, and retain others; I do not remit the fault, and retain the punishment: but I wash away all your sins, and forgive all your punishment, if your confession be earnest, my pardon is perfect. What? Is it not also everlasting? 
Righteousness imputed.  I have made an everlasting covenant with you, never to forsake you, ever to bless you, and to send my fear into your hearts, that you never forsake me. The imputation of righteousness doth necessarily follow the forgiveness of sin; the grant of life, and that eternal life doth likewise follow imputation of righteousness: for he that believeth in the son of God shall never come into condemnation, but shall go from death to life; and let him surely persuade himself, that being now justified by me, and now glorified by me, that being saved by my grace, he shall sit in heavenly places with me, and enjoy the real possession of the highest heavens. Your sanctification, 
Sanctification  is the second part of the new covenant, the beginning of your glorification, as your coronation hereafter is the full accomplishment. For what is grace but glory begun? 
☜  and what is glory but grace perfected? Eternal life therefore, which is begun in this world, and made perfect in the world to come, doth not differ in kind, but in degree. Therefore your sanctification is begun in this world, so that the relics of sins do abide in the most holy, but covered; the inbred corruption did abide in Paul regenerated, but weakened; it remained in him to try him, not to destroy him: that corruption is remitted, not finished; the guilt is released, but the act remaineth. Sanctification is not therefore perfect but true, which enlighteneth your minds to true knowledge, and reformeth your wills to the sincere obedience of the Gospel, and therefore doth change the whole man, both the inward and the outward man, into my likeness, by the power of my spirit, that beholding the same in the Gospel, as in a glass, 
Glorification.  you may proceed from glory to glory, that is, from the glory of your sanctification here, to the glory of your coronation hereafter. And herein behold how ill the Pope, and I agree. 
How Christ & Antichrist disagree.  I set before you free remission, he a mercenary: I a categorical and absolute, he an imperfect and hypothetical: I an everlasting, he a temporary. I require a sincere sanctification of a sinner in this life, but imperfect: he feigns a perfect holiness, but a counterfeit. Now your Christ jesus, as he is propounded in the free covenant, and the new testament, is appointed the only foundation of the Church by the Prophets and Apostles, upon whom they are taught to build their good works, as gold, silver, and precious stones, as the superficies fit for that golden, and precious foundation: but they deny good works to be the foundation itself, because your works be they never so glorious, cannot endure the weight, and burden of the kingdom of heaven. They make Christ alone, even Christ alone apprehended by faith, as it were that mighty Atlas, that with his shoulders and his power can bear up heaven, being made of God for you wisdom, justice, sanctification, and redemption, and therefore the foundation of the whole building. Not that salvation is begun by him, and made perfect by you; for there is one great stone of the whole building, as deepest in the foundation, so chiefest in the corner; as the ground and beginning, so the roof and accomplishment of salvation. Which your Pope hath not only deformed with wood, hay, and chaff built upon it, that is, with foolish and absurd doctrines, differing from the foundation, but with wicked and pestilent doctrines overthrowing the foundation, and by that means hath most wickedly taken away the beginning, matter, form, instrument, and end of salvation. 
The causes of salvation.  For whereas the holy Scripture doth appoint the free mercy of God, the efficient cause of righteousness; the meritorious my obedience both active and passive; the formal, the imputation thereof by the Holy Ghost; the instrumental, faith conceived out of God's word, founded upon a free promise; the final, the glory of God's divine mercy and justice: when as the Pope doth overthrow all the foundations of salvation, then doth he take and stop from you all the means and lights of comfort. While I set before you eternal life 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a reward of grace, he makes it a stipend for work: that I make a gift, he makes a debt: that I make a patrimony, he makes a stipend; what I make due to adoption, he makes as paid for obedience. He doth not say it to him that is obedient, which is very true, but for obedience, which is very false: that he forsooth might set my gifts to sale, and by that means deprive me of glory, and you of peace. From whence it doth arise that the Roman Antichrist (let him pretend what he will) is a breaker of God's covenant, a corrupter of his will, a subverter of the foundation, being full of Satan, being busy about this one thing, to bring destruction to my Churches, and damnation to your souls. Is it any marvel then if he bring destruction to bodies, and overthrow to Empires? 
Papists, as Dogs.  when as he secretly sends in his runagate Priests into your Kingdoms, who as mad dogs, with their infamous libels may rend in sunder the good name, and fame of Kings, & bring them into hatred & contempt of others. Who as subtle Foxes, 
Foxes.  do with their cunning sleights alienate the King's subjects from the faith of their obedience due by my commandment, and to be performed by their oath. 
Wolves.  And as cruel Wolves after they have taken away the Kings good name by false calumniations, and drawn away the King's subjects from their fealty and obedience, do spill the King's blood by what means soever, either by open rebellions, or secret conspiracies, and defend it to be a deed most lawful and meritorious. They show their dog's tooth by railing, their foxlike subtlety by equivocating, and their wolvish cruelty by conspiring. They do nothing else but deceive the simple, bite them that be sincere, and devour those that be innocent. They pretend faith, but they teach perjury: They say they reconcile men to Christ, but in deed reconcile them to Antichrist: in the mean while whom they get to adhere to the Pope, they draw from the King. For while they build up spiritual obedience, they cast down the civil: is not this the quality of a Fox? They set upon those that be weakest, that they may overcome the strongest, as the Serpent seduced Eve, that Eve might seduce Adam; so these Serpents set upon wives, that the wives may deceive their husbands; they catch after women, that they may entangle young men, in whom is greater vigour, and heat to commit any wicked enterprise. So they have a school full of masculine women, and feminine men; doth not here appear to you the wiliness of the serpent? Now with what villainous slanders these curs have abused Princes, both living and dead, being the excellencies and glories of the earth, witness those infinite libels cast out against Elizabeth Queen of England, and james King of Great Britain. What marvel is it if they rail upon holy Doctors, that do but write against them, when they revile great Princes that can proscribe them? But that is no marvel, that they spare not the good name of a King, when they spare not his blood. For they be not only biting dogs, but devouring wolves, as appears not only by the gunpowder Treason, I should have said the jesuits treason, but by the cruel death of Henry the third and fourth Kings of France. 
An exhortation to Princes.  I am grieved at your sluggishness; I am grieved at your slavery, o ye Kings and Princes, who do endure such sowers of sedition, such teachers of perjury, such authors of King-killing. Beware of these dogs, catch these foxes, drive away these wolves, as my spirit hath advised you; to whom slandering is a sport, consening is a game, rebellion and conspiracies is meat & drink. Foresee that your patience be no longer hurtful, both to you and me. Awake out of sleep at the last, and defend my glory together with your own safety, take the cause of the Gospel in hand, and laying aside Antichrist, put on Christ jesus, not a false and a feigned jesus, as he is devised by that Apostata, but true and right jesus, as he is preached by the Apostle. Do no longer hold shadows for bodies, shows for substances, prefer not things vain before those that be sound, nor things frail before eternal. Vain and frail is the outward show of Christ, which deceives the eyes, sound and eternal is the truth that feeds the souls: it is not the form but the power of the Cross that brings salvation. Let not the glistering show of Antichrist, which wrongs you being alive, and cannot help you being dead, deceive your eyes, that it may keep you from Christ, from whom you may expect comfort in life, and true rest in death. Whereby their madness seems the more, who groveling upon the ground, so dote upon Antichrist, that they neglect the faith of Christ, his name only being retained, who cannot feel the saving force of the Cross, nor the inward power of the Spirit, nor the heavenly light of the Gospel, nor the spiritual glory of my kingdom: As if my estate, base and contemptible, in whom there is no outward form, nor show to be desired, as my Prophet Esay said, had caused you to turn both your looking and your liking from me: or as if I had suffered the most grievous anguishes of the soul, and the most bitter tortures of the body for mine own sake, and had not been wounded for your transgressions, and broken for your sins, that the chastisement of your peace might reside upon me, and salvation out of my wounds and miseries might come to you. For this is the very truth, the baseness of the estate, I undertook, 
☜  the weakness of the flesh I took on me, the ignominy of the Cross I endured, for your sake, seems vile and contemptible in the judgement of flesh and blood. But if that heavenly majesty, if that power, if that glory, which through the vail of humility, weakness and ignominy is transparent to the eye of faith, might appear to your minds: even as I am described by john a lamb slain, and a lion invincible, that so I may appear to you a mighty God in the form of a weak man. How great love and fear, if you believe either a heaven or a hell, would the uniting of so infinite mercy with such infinite power and justice stir up in your souls? Great sinners such as commonly Kings are, had need of great grace, the preaching whereof shall be as acceptable to you as necessary, when once you shall feel the sting of an accusing conscience pricking you, whereby you might come to heaven by the way of repentance, that could not come thither by the way of innocency. But they that understand not the force of their sickness, desire not the force of the remedy. And while they feel not the wound inflicted by sin, they look not for the remedy applied by grace. To whom I denounce that I will prove either a most loving Patron, or a most severe judge, with my right hand to save them, or to be revenged on them. All men whatsoever they have or are, own it all of right to me: but Kings and Princes chief, whom by my special favour and grace I have advanced a few over so many millions of men, and placed them in mine own throne. To what end? to what end I pray? that they might give themselves to lust and idleness, to serve the Dragon, to advance, and adorn Antichrist? not so, not so verily. But that they may watch over the Church, may fight for the Lamb may spoil & tear in pieces the Beast: & if that heavenly choir of Saints in heaven fall down before the lamb sitting on his throne, and worship him that lives for ever, and cast their Crowns before the throne, saying: Thou art worthy o Lord to have all glory and honour, because thou hast made all things, and being slain hast redeemed us by thy blood unto God. If that innumerable rank of melodious Angels do with sweet and loud voices sing of the power, wisdom, and strength of the Lamb, that is slain, and give him all honour due unto him. What ought you to do, you under whose purple robes, as yet abideth dust and ashes, and who wear but corruptible Crowns upon your heads, what ought ye to do in the cause of your King and Redeemer? for since I have brought those holy souls after the end of all their travels & dangers in my quarrel and battle, into the possession of true happiness promised and vowed unto them: you that as yet are in the very heat & danger of the battle, both the necessity of my help, & the expectance of the reward, aught to stir you up to a more fervent desire to defend mine honour. Hear I have a just & grievous cause to complain, that your mutual suspicions quarrels have made Antichrist, weak and contemptible in himself, to be so dreadful and mighty. Hence it is that that Laterane Idol hath taken to itself, the golden head of a swelling title: and spread abroad the silver arms of his pecuniary jurisdiction: and strouted out the brazen belly of conspiracy and rebellion: and hath moved and stirred from home, those iron feet of violence and pride, wherewith he hath not only trod upon your crowns, but your necks. I tell you plainly, the discord of Kings hath increased Antichrist, their amity shall weaken him. Is it for your good to admit of spies, that may search into your counsels? fiery spirits that may cast the seeds of discord between neighbor-kings, and set them together by the ears? Harpeyes' that may spoil you of your treasures? Horse leeches that may suck your blood? secret traitors that with fair words may cut your throats? who when they have laughed at you in their sleeves, that they have left you lead, and taken your gold, that they may distract your minds, and stir them up to make war against your brethren, that thereby that Latiall jupiter waxing great by your discords, may leap for cruel joy at your miseries and destructions. I appeal to your own consciences, have you not at all times found the Pope's Nuntij, Dataries and jesuits to be such? Let there be an end of quarreling at the last, all these mischiefs shall be presently taken away, and now this serpent that hath swollen so big with discords to the public hurt, shall be broken and consumed. Let me therefore be a counsellor to you, 
The duty of Kings.  that a true and a sound peace being concluded among you, every one of you in your several kingdoms, wherein I have left you Kings to be my vicegerents, that you restore the true worship of God, renew a right faith, establish good manners, purge the true Sacraments of the Church, call back a-againe the old discipline brought in by the College of the Apostles, and confirmed by the counsel of Niece. Further, that what every one have done, all the rest do allow, that you gather together a general counsel by general consent, wherein the fear of danger being taken away, and the partaking of sides being laid aside, 
An admonition to the Pontifician Princes, to beware of Siren and Erinys.  the cause of Christ may be safely and freely handled against Antichrist.  
Hear I do severally admonish the Roman Catholic Kings & Princes to beware of two counsellors, whereof I call one of them Siren, the other Erinys. Siren doth persuade them to follow their pleasures, avoid labour, fear danger, do not stir a settled policy, do not break truce with their old friend and companion the Pope, that they go not about to mend any mischief, that is almost past help. For they cannot, she saith, cast off the Pope though they would. Can they not? What cannot the arm of a King bring to pass, being strengthened with the arm of God? from thence faith doth arise, from faith the magnanimity of kings, whereof that drives away blind superstition, this base sluggishness and cowardice. That makes them to discern, this makes them to withstand all human hindrances, so that they may cast off the Pope as easily as an old heavy gown. It is a reproach for the Popish Kings to say, that the mischief is greater than can be remedied, that as yet they cannot mend it? That they cannot cast out the Pope if they would. Can the Princes of Germany, could the Kings of Denmark, Scotland and Sueuland, that I may not speak of a great part of France, Helvetia, Polonia, Bohemia, and Pannonia. The Kings of England could, the Father, the young Son and the Daughter, even then when all their neighbours abroad were alienated from them, when at home they had a seditious clergy, and a superstitious people, even than did the holy courage of a Man, a Child and a Woman break thorough, and pass over all human lets and impediments whatsoever. Let it be a shame for Popish Princes, both young men and ancient men, not to be able to do that which a Child and a Woman were able to do. But Siren perhaps will whisper, that it is not good stirring of Paul the fift, being full of Gregory's, Alexander's, Bonifaces and julij. O what foolish fear is that, so to take heed that they fear a mischief, which when they are able to put it clean away, they pull it and draw it upon them? But some will not cast off the Pope if they could. They think it a necessary evil for Kings to bridle their subjects, and for subjects to bridle their Kings, To whom Christ doth seem more hard and rigorous, as he that never dispenseth with sin, and doth remit nothing, but to him that earnestly reputes. They have need therefore of a gentle and a cockering Antichrist: who may dispense with adultery and incest, and may approve and allow of marriages forbidden by the Law of God. As the fashion of the world is now adays, licence is to be given to sinning; so sin doth make the Pope necessary. Unhappy necessity, which necessarily brings damnation to a man. He doth worthily love his sin, who while he keeps that, loseth his soul. He rates his short life at too high a price, who that while he may live a while after his own lust, doth lose life eternal. In the mean time, while Antichrist doth constrain them with so extreme necessity, what a heavy burden doth he lay upon them? that he seemeth to bind them with links of gold in this life, whom he hath appointed for the chains of darkness in the life to come. These you shall easily break asunder, by the help of God and assistance of Protestant Princes. But the contrariety of their religion is suspected unto us. But this contrariety is your security: for if the Popes be so saucy to do such things, when so many Princes have forsaken the seat of pestilence, what would they attempt if none at all had departed from them? for if the frederic, Henry's and Charles did so easily punish the Gregory's, Alexander's and Clements, even in the very midnight of popish darkness; if Philip the Fair, and Lewis the 12. did handle the Bonifaces and julij after their deserts: how far more easily may their posterity with the aid of Protestant Princes in so clear a light of the Gospel, tame and bring under Paul the fift? Especially seeing Philip the 2. the present king of Spain, cannot forget that his father who always was the Pope's champion, was unworthily and basely abused by the Pope, in keeping Sicily and Naples from him. And let the French King remember, that not only Henry the 3. but Henry the 4. his father, was cruelly murdered by a villain sent in for that purpose. Therefore the holy courage of Protestant Kings, should not move suspicion in Popish Kings against the Kings their neighbours, but rather it should stir up their anger against the Pope, that with joined forces they might break the Idols head, shorten his arms, pair his nails, open his belly, cut off those legs and feet, wherewith they may remember their ancestors crowns were so basely cast to the ground. You have heard how evil Siren hath persuaded them, now hear how far worse Erinys doth advise them: whose deadly music, if you be wise, you shall keep far off both from your minds and ears, persuading you, that it is fit to raise war in the defence of Antichrist, against your brethren and allies: for they purpose nothing else, but that their treasure being spent on both sides, and their forces being weakened by mutual wars, as it often happened heretofore, that they may build up a chair for the Priests, and by casting down the thrones of Kings, to whom it is great pleasure to lift up their shrub, which may set fire on the wood, and consume the Cedars of Libanon. Now I tell you before hand, that you take heed of that war, which these holy Erinys will cry out, and tell you, must be necessarily made against my Church: for you are like to have Christ himself against you in the field. I know full well that lately at Rome, as often before; a conventicle of Priests have been gathered together by the Pope of Rome, and Satan's command to deface and diminish my glory. That they took counsel wherein the Popish Kings and Princes were in a league confederated among themselves, against the Protestant Kings and Princes, chiefly against JAMES the King of Great Britanny, who concluded the Pope to be Antichrist, and as he rightly inferred Popish Kings and Princes were the members of Antichrist: that the common cause were to be maintained by common forces: that he sent in his Priests who might provoke his sons, as he calls them, to wage war against my servants. The Kings therefore of the Reformed Religion, have more need imposed by Antichrist, to fulfil the prophesy, and to fight God's war, and unite their forces and powers against that double horned Beast the Pope. For I think that popish Kings have learned more wit at the last, then to put in execution the bloody and cruel counsel of the Beast. They know that the first Beast bore it not scot free, whose ten horns were said to be crowned, because it spilled the innocent blood of my servants. For the very same power of the Empire, which did condemn me being borne into the world, the Prince of your salvation, and fasten me upon the cross, the same did endeavour to overthrow the Primitive Church with ten persecutions. How I did revenge the death of my Saints upon the authors thereof, how I did cut off some of the Emperors by mutual fights, how did I comsume the people with continual plagues, how I did devour the cities with floods and earthquakes, how I struck and dispersed whole armies with thunderings and lightnings cast from heaven, their stories do well declare. As many creatures as I had, so many viols I had of my raging wrath, which I powered out upon mine and my servants enemies. But some of you will say, Those were Pagans that did kill, and Christians that were killed: we are Catholics which do punish, they are heretics which are punished They are as certainly heretics as you are catholics. You catholics? I would you were Christians, they be not words, but deeds must make this good. You carry the name of Christ, I confess: but you play the Pagans under the name of Christ. Are they heretics? True as I am an heretic, that call all things to the rule of the Word. But Antichrist doth allege Scripture also: true, as the Devil did allege them misunderstood. Who as he enticed the jews to kill me, shadowed out and promised in the Prophetical Scriptures, to be the Messiah, so he hath moved many Catholics in name, in truth most heretical heretics, the bond slaves of Antichrist, to burn both my servants and their books, and they blot out as much as lay in them, by their cunning, and their power, the faith and the Church, whose quarrel I often revenged with a high hand stretched from heaven. I will give you one notable example After that the Counsel of Constance had condemned to the fire, those two my servants, Hu● and Hierome, the Pope sent two Erinnes into Germany, the Cardinal of Winchester, and the Cardinal of Saint Angelo: who when they had called back Sigismond the Emperor, from making war against the Turks, they incited him to bear arms against the Bohemians, the new professors of my Gospel, and brought into the field three other great German Princes, with all their forces: will you hear the issue of their whole fight & passage? The Bohemians levy an army, come into the field, strike up the alarm, they had scarce come to handy gripes, but the King, and the Princes being stroke with a causeless sudden fear, in their rage crying out to their soldiers to stand to it and fight did cowardly and beastly fly away: five times they made inroads into Bohemia, and five times they were discomfited. And so not long after three several Popes the Authors of this tragedy, and those two devilish Cardinals not without great shame, and sorrow came to a fearful end. In all which occurrences he that doth not behold the hand of God, is blind, he that doth not fear it is wicked. I pass over that invincible Spanish Armado, which being gathered together by the instigation of Priests, was dispersed by the winds, swallowed up by the seas, and brought to confusion by the hand of God. What? do you think that God's hand is shortened? or do you think that God hath left off to defend his servants? Infinite be the examples of God's power, which God hath showed both in former ages, and often in this present age in the defence of the Church against her mightiest enemies. Let things to come be taught by things past. And if those former tyrants, or those that followed had gone unpunished for their wickedness, there had been cause for Antichrist, with all his faction to have rejoiced in their sin: there had been some reason, that the Kings of the earth had promised to themselves impunity, who had bestowed all their might, in building up and enlarging the Kingdom of the two horned beast. Now that I have first cracked and broken to pieces the ten crowned and bloody horns, and after have scattered both by land and sea the smoky slaves of the second beast, what at last shall become of Antichrist is declared in the sixth seal. But what in the mean time may antichrist's soldiers hope for, who being set on fire by these fire brands did turn all their forces to do mischief? I do advise you therefore, ye popish Kings and Princes, that ye depart out of Babylon, as fast as you can, then that being converted to me, you make war with united forces in the quarrel of the Church against Antichrist, at least that you give no ear to these sirens or Erinnes which will bring destruction, both to your souls and bodies. On my word the bishop of Rome, and the great Antichrist are terms convertible. The decree of God stands fast for ever, that the bishop shall be consumed by those Kings, by whom he was adored. You cannot serve me and the Pope, with whom peace being made by you, see if it be not to be called peace rather than a compact of slavery. From whence if I cannot draw the popish Kings and Princes, I will for all that warn you ye Kings and Princes Protestants, that you prefer a holy war before a wicked league with the Pope, and think those arms to be holy, when there is no hope left but in arms. And take heed that being deceived with an opinion of a false peace you be not on a sudden brought to ruin. I wish you may be at peace with neighbour Kings, and neighbour Kings with you, but at no hand have peace with the Roman Antichrist. Why so? it is wicked; it is dangerous, it cannot hold. It is wicked; what peace, what consent, what agreement can be with the holy scriptures and man's traditions, with free will and God's grace, with inherent justice, and imputed righteousness, with man's satisfactions and my blood procuring their salvation? what holy society and unity can there be with the invocation of dead Saints, and the prayers to the living God, with the popish Mass and the Lords supper, with Christian faith and Antichristian distrust? You see it is wicked, now mark how dangerous. Sweet is the name of peace & the opinion of unity is delightsome. But what true Christian doth doubt, that that bond of peace is most sure, which is knit together with the truth and unity of the Spirit. Whence it followeth that sweet destruction is included in that peace which is made with falsehood. I add that there cannot possibly be peace between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent: between the lamb and Antichrist: between those where God hath set everlasting hatreds. Fire and water will better agree then Christ and Antichrist: wherefore I advise Protestant Kings and Princes, that they make perfect that reformation of the Church by my help, which by my help they have begun. First that they compose all home differences chief in the Articles of the doctrine of the Gospel with quiet and Christian conference: for it is to be feared that inward dissension will bring back again the outward enemy. Secondly, that they resist the common Adversary with common help and counsel, for there is danger that if every one resist not, all will be surprised. Thirdly, that they may the better defend their Christ, let them at once set upon Antichrist: for he hath more courage that doth invade, than he that doth defend. Lastly if they cannot in all points fulfil the prophecy, yet let them banish the beast out of their Dominions. For it is impossible that Christ and Antichrist should dwell together. In the end I advise both sides that in the deliberation of this great business they prefer not worldly wisdom, before heavenly wisdom, secondly that the evil custom of men, be not prejudicial to the eternal truth of God. Thirdly, that sluggish doubtfulness do not put of, and procrastinate this so noble and so worthy an enterprise. Lastly that the deceitful condition of peace with Antichrist, do not cross the desire of recovering liberty. So that every one of you being content with his own kingdom and territories, shall not busy himself about invading others, but will cast about how he may prevail and overthrow the Devil, and his eldest son the Roman Antichrist, i. not one wicked man, but all the Kingdom of unrighteousness. Every one of you have a just cause of his own, and now you have a fair offer made you. The truce made between Caesar and the Turk, offers a fit occasion to repress the insolency of this Bishop after you will more easily repel the Turk. And seeing you have both a just quarrel, and fit opportunity against the beast, let there not be wanting a will in you.  
If Christ the Saviour, o ye renowned Kings and Princes do speak thus secretly unto you, and inwardly warn you, shall he not persuade you, though he were not of power to punish you? The rather seeing he hath showed, that the Pope is a Capital enemy to God's testament, and kingly government. The Pope hath cast such projects, and Rome takes such counsels that kingly Majesty, and popelike Majesty cannot long stand together. Our sins makes the Bishop great, who if he rise to that greatness which he aimeth at in his mind, Kings of necessity must fall to the ground. My Dialogue shall make it plain, if it please you to vouchsafe to read it, wherein pragmatical Antichrist first enters the stage.   
Glory to God.   

PRAGMATICAL ANTICHRIST, OR HJLDEBRAND BROUGHT TO LIFE: OR The first Dialogue of Christian obedience due to Kings against Antichristian rebellion covered under the show of Catholic RELIGION.  


The Speakers be six. 

1. MICHAEL CALANDRE.  
2. William Argentine two noble Roman Catholics, laics as they be termed, one more gentle, the other more fierce.  
3. George Velbacel an old Priest, calander's Confessor.  
4. Robert Saturnine a jesuite Argentines' Guest: one more mild and moderate, the other more violent and bitter.  
5. Antonius Patriotta a Professor of the reformed Divinity.  
6. Carolus Regius a common Lawyer, either of them a Maintainer of our Religion, Country, and King.      

AFter that Paul the fift had sent two bulls into England wherein he § 1 had forbidden his Catholic sons as he styles them, to take the Oath of Allegiance and obedience: I remember there was speech after the end of Easter Term that two Lay noble Romane-Catholickes Michael Calandre, and William Argentine, went aside out of the city into their countryhouse to advise about their affairs. It was said that old George Velbacell the Archpriest, whom age and custom had made more mild and gentle went, with them together with his keeper, that he might ease the trouble of his long imprisonment with some country delight. There followed not long after a wandering jesuite younger in years, a man of a fiery spirit, his name was Robert Saturnine. He, that he might conceal his Priesthood, covered his bald pate with a Gregorian, or periwig, and seemed by his attire to be a Courtier, There happened at that time to arrive to Calandre a man full of courtesy and hospitality Antonius Patriotta and Charolus Regius one of them a Doctor in Divinity, the other a great councillor at Law, both of them an adversary to Popery, yet so that they could find in their hearts to love the person of a Papist, if they thought him an honest man, and a faithful subject to their King and Country. They came of purpose to persuade Calandre their old acquaintance, to take the Oath of supremacy, if it might be: if not, at least the oath of Allegiance: lest if he did refuse it, he might give just occasion to our worthy King to be alienated in mind from him, and so might bring some trouble to that Noble and ancient Family.  
§ 2 Here Calandre upon a scruple of conscience which the Pope's two bulls did seem to inflict to the superstitious old man, Patriotta said, that he took a pause for a while, and to have answered at the last with tears in his eyes: Let us lay aside for a time these sad discourses Antony and Charles, and let me lead you being weary of your journey into your chamber where you may repose and refresh yourselves before supper.  
And that you may not be ignorant, what guests you are like to find in my house, I dare be bold to tell you, whom ever I have found my trusty and faithful friends, to have been earnest Disputants, not dangerous informers, and to have gauled the Papists not with your accusations, but your arguments: my old familiar friend Argentine, shall be with you at Supper, and Velbace● my Confessor, who hath taken the oath of Allegiance himself, and went about to persuade others to do the same. And he had almost prevailed with me, but that the most Holy Father did interpose his greater authority. A third guest, Argentines' shadow, I will conceal by your leaves, unless you will assure me that you will procure him no harm, which cannot well be without my danger. It is his part to dispute against the obedience of subjects, which in his mind heretical Kings do unjustly exact of them, and to object the strongest reasons he can, for the authority of the Pope in deposing such Kings, and releasing their subjects from the oath of Allegiance. And if you can wipe away, and weaken his objections, you shall easily persuade me, and my Argentine too, I think, to perform the oath of fealty and obedience to our King.  
Then Patriotta truly, said he, so he attempt nothing § 3 against the King and kingdom, and dispute as it were in the school to search out the truth, and not in an assembly to move sedition, I give you my honest promise, I will not take on me the part of a spy, and leave of to be a guest, nor cast off the duty of a friend, while I retain the duty of a subject. Here Regius, as one that knew the danger of the law better, paused a while, yet following his purpose, that I may gain a lost sheep to the King, I will said he borrow so much of the law, that I may hear a jesuite disputing.  
And upon this condition, said Calandre, smiling I will name you my third guest, in habit a Courtier, in profession a jesuite, Father Robert Saturnine.  
And thus all the guests meeting together in the Parlour, Patriotta said, that after they had courteously saluted one another, as the manner is, they sat down to a costly supper; and that it might not be a dumb feast, the Priests did wisely dissemble their inward grief of mind, with forced and pleasant discoursing. When supper was ended they were all brought into a gallery, and there sometime walking, and sometime sitting, they continued their conference about the matters in question, till it was late in the night.  
§ 4 Here Calandre beginning, whereas your coming, said he, was ever welcome to me Velbacel and Saturnine, than never more welcome, then in this dangerous time, wherein there is a great, and a grievous controversy, not only between Catholics and Heretics, but between Catholics and Catholics, about the oath of Allegiance, and the Pope's authority in deposing heretical Kings, and the absolving the subjects from their obedience due to them, as it is thought. As it falls out between you two, one of you dissuades me, that I should not swear, the other persuades me, that I should swear. Thus we Laicke-Catholikes are torn asunder by you the Priests, and so distracted in this quarrel, between the Bishop and the King, that we know not in the world what to do. Wherefore when I was desirous, that you should discuss your contrary reasons in this matter of difference, and by the discourse, and bending of your wits, some sparks of truth might appear to the satisfaction of our consciences: see of a sudden there are met two great learned men, Antonius Patriotta, and Carolus Regius, two shrewd Adversaries, that I may say the truth, in the whole business of Religion, but yet without malice: unknown happily to you, but very friendly to me, so that you need not fear, that your conference come abroad, so it be done freely, not licentiously.  
§ 5 Then said Saturnine; your promise made to me Calandre doth make me fear no danger from these Gentlemen your friends. Therefore I lay aside that person and habit, which the necessity of the time, not mine own will and desire hath cast upon me, and I take to me the person of a jesuite. Although I have not forgot the last Term of all, that an holy Priest condemned by the Queen's Law, was cruelly put to death. O Dracos Law, written with bloody letters.  
Good words I pray you, saith Patriotta, it was not § 6 the Queen's law, but the Pope's Bull that hanged that Priest. For when there were two Priests condemned for one offence, the King offered life to them both, if they would take the oath of Allegiance. The one of them took it; tother refused it. The one of them lives by the mercy of the King, the other died by the commandment of the Pope. Now tell me, whether it were the Queen's law, or the Pope's Bull did hang him. O Hipponactean Bull, whose several lines, 
Hipponax a Poet of Ephesus, who being painted by Bubalus in such manner that he was laughed at, made such bitter verses against the Painter, that fo● shame he hung himself. The jesuits deceived the Pope with false alarms. C●●: lib. 1. cap. 11.  as several lambickes brought the Priest to the gallows. But in the forefront of it he wisheth health and apostolical benediction to his sons the Roman Catholics; but within it there is contained a curse, and destruction to you all. Belike your Pope did sweeten the edge of the cup, that the poison within might go down more merrily. This bitter cup the Pope hath mingled for you Calandre and Argentine, and the rest of the laypapists. The jesuite hath wished it to you, who being the Pope's intelligencer, signified that the power of the English Papists was greater than the Protestants, if he would that outward forces were joined with them: as Cominaeus writes that the Burgundian spies being deceived with the mist and darkness of the night, deceived the Duke of Burgundy, telling him that the forces of France, were greater and nearer, when as they took the longer briars and brambles in the field, for javelins & lances. So the false reports of the jesuits, deceived the Bishop, whereby he took rash and untimely counsel, to send his Bulls unto you. Hence the Pope, as Pius the fift had done before him, compiled an horned argument, wherewith he struck his sons on both sides, and drove them to that exigent, that either they must run upon the point of the Queen's law, if they obeyed not the King, or incurred the Pope's curse, if they obeyed him. For he drives them (whose calamities undertaken for the Catholic faith, he doth miserably deplore) either to hell, or the gallows. For of necessity they must either be damned, or hanged, if you believe the Pope, damned unless they obey the inhibition, or hanged if they obey it. Is this the salvation of Paul the fift that he sendeth to his sons? is this his Apostolical blessing? Doth the pitiful Father thus bless his sons that have hitherto endured so great afflictions for retaining, as he writes, the Catholic faith? He hath well rewarded your holiness, that hath sent his Papists in a bad cause with a false fear of hell, to certain death upon the gallows.  
§ 7 And the Roman-Catholikes, Saturnine, may not only thank the false messages sent to the Pope, 
The jesuits false doctrine hath troubled the Papists.  but the pestilent doctrine broached by you, for all the sorrows they have endured. For what else could have extorted that Law from so merciful a Queen, which you erewhile blamed as bloody? For your jesuits after the sending in of Pius the fifts Bull, came swarming into England, as Campion, Parsons, and many others, and did mightily labour to put that Bull in execution, and did propound it as the thirteenth Article of their faith. That there was no more obedience to be showed to a Queen excommunicated, 
The seditious doctrine of jesuits ga● that severe law when it came to practise.  and deposed; then presently followed the rebellion in the North. It was therefore your seditious doctrine that begat so severe a law. Your school hath made the Catholic doctrine of Rome a Catechism of rebellion: Your Logic first made a Papist, and a Traitor to be all one: your Society was the first overthrow of the Roman-Catholikes estate. For your Papists behaved themselves quietly for the first eleven years, while Pius the fift, that old credulous dotard, was induced by the false whisperings of the English Catholics, as they call them, showing that their powers were so strong, that they could resist the Queen's forces, had excommunicated the Queen by his Bull, and deprived Her of her kingdom, and had released her subjects from the Oath of their Allegiance, and being so released stirred them up to take arms against Hir. But the old man quickly found his error, and corrected it with his dispensation, that the Papists to redeem their troubles (so he speaketh) should show outward obedience to Queen Elizabeth, but restrained with two conditions: one, things so standing: tother, while the public execution of the Bull might be performed, that is to say, while they had so much power, as by force they might overcome the Queen. 
Rebellion among jesuits is an article of faith.  Hence among the cases of conscience brought into England by you, sprang out the 55 Article. Where a Catholic being demanded, Do you believe that the Pope can put the Queen from her authority? he is taught to answer, notwithstanding any fear of death, I do believe it. For this question doth appertain to faith, and requires a confession of faith. Behold your Catholic faith, which this present oath is said, by the Pope, to cross, it is the chief head of jesuitisme, which we may call the marrow of Popery. And are you now in a chafe Saturnine, that a few jesuits are hanged up for Traitors, who make treason an article of their faith? And do you not think the King hath a just cause to take away their heads, 
Ala●us.  who have with such conjuring bewitched the consciences of subjects, that they think that war, holy, just, and honourable, which is raised against their Prince?  
But what if they were not only messengers and masters, § 8 but authors and actors of rebellion? 
The I●suites and authors and actors of rebellion.  and have entered into the most cruelest conspiracy, that ever was since the creation, not only to depose the King, and absolve his subjects, but to raze out the King and Kingdom, and to blot out the English nation, and to root out the men out of the earth for ever (and that not the guilty only, but the innocents also, according to that old tyrannical practice, 
Cicero pro Diatore.  Let our friends perish so our enemies perish also.) And they would have the Catholics with heretics, 
The Martyrdom of the Kingdom of England.  as we seem to you, the noble with the ignoble, and the fathers to be Martyrs with their sons. For what else was that gunpowder treason devised by you: but the Martyrdom of the King and Kingdom?  
§ 9 Then Saturnine you do great wrong to the jesuits (saith he) whom you feign to be the Authors of Catesby's conspiracy, for that which they heard only under the seal of confession, thought it was meet to be concealed about the martyrdom of the kingdom, as you call it (which God wot hurt no body) being only devised, and not performed. Garnet therefore the chief jesuite, did wrong to the jesuits (saith Patriotta) who when himself had nourished that evil humour in Catesby whom he would have to be the head and heart of the whole conspiracy, a right Catiline, and an apt scholar (who concluded by a very wicked consequence, out of the bull of Clement the eight, wherein the Pope had excluded the King being an heretic, as he writ, from entrance into the Kingdom, concluded, I say, that being entered, he was by all means possibly to be expelled) out of that wicked proposition, which now is in question, he sucked out that most pestilent poison of that unheardof treachery. But when Garnet would have him the chief workman in this conspiracy, he joined unto him divers other counsellors out of his own tribe, nay out of his own bosom.  
And lest that living mess of jesuits being singularly inspired with the spirit of the Pope of Rome, 
Garnet. Greenwell. Gerard. Parsons.  should lay the whole fault upon a Lay-traitor now dead, let it be understood that it was confessed by Garnet, being now ready to die, under his hand by a voluntary confession. He writ that Greenwell with Catesby was heard of him, 
The Traitor betrays himself.  not confessing, but consulting: That Greenwell with Gerard were not only authors, but actors, who declared their guiltiness of the fact by their flight: That Baldwine and Parsons were acquainted with it, whereof he set on Fauxe that Fire brand in Germany: The other made acquainted by him of the villainous treachery, came flying against the day, out of Italy into Lions in France, as it were on pilgrimage to S. Winefreds' well, as a crow to carrion, that like another Nero, he might with a detestable pleasure nearer behold the fire most furiously consuming each part of his country. But this Martyrdom of the King and Kingdom, as you call it, was not brought to effect. What then? As though we are ignorant that Antichrist doth deliver many to death, and doth assign many more. That he doth thirst after more blood than he doth spill. We were all Martyrs in your intention, but not in execution. That the mischief was devised, we attribute it to your malice, that it took no effect, to God's mercy. Which moved the never-suspecting heart of the King, the most mildest of all that are, have been. or shall be, that out of those letters whereof little reckoning was made, he smelled out the kind of danger, and, I may almost say, the very gunpowder itself, and so was made an instrument of the public safety. Hence riseth a double bond, one that bindeth the King to God, the other that more nearly for ever bindeth us to the King. There is no want either of counsel and care to the King and his prudent and faithful Counsellors: but when neither care nor counsel can prevent such blind and secret conspiracy, both thanks are to be given to God for our deliverance past, whereof I doubt we are too forgetful, and continual prayers are to be powered out for the time to come, that he may alway defend both the King and Kingdom of Britannnie against their secret and devilish devices. For God's help begins there where man's help fails, as Philo saith. In the mean time let us take heed, that when God's providence is not wanting to us, we be not wanting to God's providence.  
§ 10 Let Saturnine go shake his ears, that calls Queen ELIZABETH'S Law cruel, which condemneth such Priests as have been the devisers, teachers & executioners of treason. And let the Roman Catholics themselves judge, Calandre and Argentine, whether in this weighty business they ought to follow such guides, who do not only reach and offer to us and you, but drink to the Laity a large draft out of that cup, which being guilded over with a vain title of religion, but indeed being full of most bitter poison, the Pope hath mingled and prepared; Very untowardly I assure you. Wherein they deal as those do, who meaning to make others drunk, use to make themselves drunk first. For what drunkenness of the mind is this, or madness rather, to make two things most nearly knit together by the commandment of God, 
Eccles. cap. 5. & cap. 8. v. 1.  sever and part asunder by the inhibition of man? And whereas Ecclesiastes doth draw from faith and obedience to God, as a necessary effect out of a proper cause, faith & obedience toward the King, although he be evil: to put these two chief duties of a Christian so well agreeing, and so nearly united, into another rank of such things as be clean contrary and opposite? as if one being set down, 
The chief head of the Pope's bull.  the other were taken away. As the Pope's bull doth pretend concluding in bad Logic, but in worse Divinity, that the Oath of Allegiance toward the king cannot be performed with faith reserved toward God.  
§ 11 
Another horned argument of the Popes.  In the mean time the lay-people are at a maze, when they be enforced by you Saturnine, that if they have not at all taken the Oath of obedience, that they should stoutly refuse it: if they have taken it, that they speedily retract it. Hence it is, that they which refuse it be guilty of secret treason, they that retract it have their conscience troubled with manifest perjury.  
I am not ignorant that it seems 
a Distinct. 19 q Si●om.  sacrilege to you to dispute of the Pope's action. 
b Extra●. Io 22. cum inter non nullos.  Heresy to doubt of his power, 
c Causa 25 qu. 1. vi●latores. ibid. gloss. blasphemar●  Blasphemy against the holy Ghost, either to say or do any thing against the Pope's canons and decrees: 
d Distinct. 4. si Papa.  although he draw infinite numbers of people by heaps into hell, as Boniface speaketh. Such an holy frenzy hath distracted men's minds, that whatsoever hath proceeded from the Pope, although it be against the commandments of Christ, against the examples of the Primitive Church, although it be manifestly convinced, to be against justice and common sense, yet they think it must be received as an Oracle from God.  
But make not shipwreck of your estates or lives, Calandre and Argentine, I advise you: that laying aside all servile prejudice, you earnestly consider what you have to do.  
Then Saturnine, the loss of a man's estate or life, is § 12 less than the loss of his soul, which is made by the forsaking of Gods Law. 
Malac. 2.7.  For the Law of God is forsaken, when as the will of the chief Priest, whose lips do preserve knowledge, as Malachi witnesseth, is neglected.  
True, said Patriotta, so long as the lips of the chief Priest do preserve the Law, so that the voice of the Law and the voice the Priest do agree. But if the Law do fail from the Priest, as jeremy foretold might come to pass, that the Law may bid one thing and the Priest another, then without doubt we are not now to obey the Apocryphal voice of the chief Priest, 
Sum sylvest verbo obedien. num. 50.  but the canonical authority of the Law, as Sylvester that Catholic Doctor gave warning. If the Pope enjoin any thing under the pain of excommunication, which savoureth of sin, in the performance whereof it is presumed there will succeed a scandal of souls and bodies in the city, than the Pope is not to be obeyed.  
Then Calandre being somewhat moved, started up from his seat, and said, that he greatly wished, that the chief Priest would resolve his own Dilemma, and withal, did much commend the clemency of the King, who had used the Oath of Allegiance for distinction sake, that he might truly discern the true Catholic subjects from the treacherous. And added further, that it was news to him, which he heard from Patriotta about the jesuits, whom, if it did appear by Garnets' voluntary confession to have been the principal authors of the gun-powder-treason, he would never hereafter receive any jesuite into his house: 
The subject of the whole Dialogue.  but because, saith he, we are met together to know the reasons of faithful obedience to the Prince, of what sort soever he be: and of the power of the Bishop of Rome, in deposing heretical Kings, and absolving subjects from their faith and obedience, while these things be argued by you, that be learned on both sides, we that be unlearned laics do promise you our best attention.  
§ 14 

Two foundations of Christian obedience due to any King.  
1. The perpetual commandment of Christ.  
2. The practice of the ancient Christians.   Then Patriotta: First I will lay down, saith he, two grounds or foundations of faithful obedience, to be performed of all subjects to kings, as well evil as good, Pagans as Christians, Heretics as Catholics.  

1. On the perpetual and immutable commandment of Christ.  
2. The other, the example of the first Christians, and chief of the Bishops of Rome, for 800 years and more, after Christ.   
Let us consider them both against the chief head of the Pope's bull, wherein he affirmeth, but proveth not, 
The bull.  that the oath of allegiance and obedience to King james, cannot be kept with reservation of the Catholic faith, and salvation of your souls.  

Matth. 22.21.  Why then did Christ say, Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are Gods? by which words what meant he else, than that Christians should give civil obedience to the Emperor, and spiritual obedience to God. Why did he make good this commandment with his own example, when he sealed his obedience with payment of tribute for himself and for Peter? Christ therefore gave in charge, that Christians should faithfully obey Tiberius a pagan, and a most cruel Emperor, and (that which is more) obeyed him himself, and shall the Pope forbid the faithful Papists to obey King james a Christian and a most merciful Prince? and shall he dare to say that the Oath of obedience cannot be kept, their faith and salvation reserved, which Christ the Author of faith and salvation did both command and perform? I am not ignorant that both the Pope and Bellarmine do take it for proved and granted that the King is an Heretic. But if the King might argue both cases with them face to face, before learned and equal judges, I durst pawn my life, that the King in their presence would convince more strongly, and more peremptorily that the Pope were Antichrist, then that the Pope with the help of his Champion should prove the King to be an Heretic. But grant to them for a time that which they miserably beg, would Christ think good that faithful obedience should be given to an Infidel, i. to an Emperor that was altogether a stranger from the faith, and would he judge the same to be denied to an Heretic, i. to a King deceived in the faith? he would not, he would not. If Christ then did right, then doth this supposed Vicar of Christ amiss.  
And if fealty and obedience cannot be performed to a King as you think with reservation of the Catholic faith, why did Saint Peter when he had set down Catholic faith in the 1. Chap: command obedience due to the King in the 2. Chapter. 
1. Pet. 2.13.  Be subject to the King as to the most eminent, even to Nero that monster of men? wherein he taught that the impiety of the person ordained of God to govern, ought not to over throw the obedience of subjects, nor the authority of the Prince. If Peter speaks well, than Peter's successor speaks ill. If Peter speak by the spirit of Christ, than Peter's successor speaketh by the spirit of Antichrist. But Peter did bind all, by a bond of a religious commandment, both Clerks and laics, when he presently added, 
1. Pet. 2.17.  fear God, honour the King, As if he had said, they be clean void of God's fear, whosoever deny honour to the King. And therefore Solomon proverbs 21. doth comprehend both duties under one word: My son fear God and the King.  
§ 13 Here Saturnine. But ancient Ignatius, saith he, in his Epistle to the Church of Smyrna, speaketh after this manner, 
Forged Ignatius brought in to cross Solomon.  worship God, next the bishop, and last of all the King.  
This is a hard case, Saturnine, said Patriotta to make Ignatius salomon's corrector, as if he had forgotten his duty toward the chief Priest. 
Pro. 21.  Solomon saith honour God, and the King: but I say, honour God first, the Bishop next, and the King last. Certainly true Ignatius would never have spoken so saucily. Solomon saith, but I say, and so prefer a Priest before a Prince. But it is no hard matter for you to place the Bishop in the middle betwixt God and the King. For you do nothing more willingly then make your Pope the controller of all Kings, and to that purpose bring in a counterfeit and a bastardly Ignatius to patronize your ambition.  
§ 14 But Peter saith Saturnine calleth the Prince a human creature. True, answered Patriotta, in respect of his nature: but in respect of his ordination, he is of as heavenly a creation as a Priest. For king's rule by God, as priests preach by God. From man they have their nature, from God their power. For there is no power but from God as the Apostle teacheth. As they are men they are immediately from their Parents, as they are Princes from God. Therefore a Magistrate is called a Minister and ordination of God. Yea which is more, Kings are called Gods. They as God's vicegerents upon earth are vouchsafed the honour of God's name. Priests are called men of God, Angels of God, but kings are called Gods. Therefore the King is not called a human creature by Peter, because he hath his beginning from man, 
A double obedience due to kings active passive in things lawful unlawful.  but because the government is administered by man and for man. Be subject to him saith Peter for the Lord, the text hath it sometime as to the Lord, i. as to Christ's Vicar in his own kingdom: as Eleutherius Pope of Rome called King Lucius, sometime in the Lord, i. in all things lawful, although in things unlawful, there is a certain kind of obedience due: but an active obedience in things lawful to do that which is commanded, a passive in things unlawful to suffer that which is inflicted. But for the Lord saith Peter, that Kings although they be tyrants, (as then Nero was,) bearing the rule and image of God upon earth, though they be Gods scourges, yet they must be honoured with the fealty and obedience of all for God's sake. As an heathen man could say, Good Emperors are to be desired of us, but any are to be endured. The Apostle addeth, for the praise of the good, and the punishment of the wicked. Hence a certain Master of the Presbytery gathered a false & a dangerous consequence cozen german to yours: 
A lewd collection of a Schismatic.  That because the king is a power ordained by God, to the praise of the good, and the punishment of the wicked, if he govern to punish the good, and praise the wicked, that he is not a power ordained by God, and if he be not of God no more to be obeyed, but to be resisted. O wicked consequence unknown to Peter & Paul, who although they did see, and feel the tyranny, and cruelty of the Lion, as Paul calls Nero; that they thought not that the abuse of the power did take away the power itself, but did lay necessity of obedience upon all Christians, teaching that it would come to pass, that if they did resist Nero, they did resist God himself the Author and ordainer of so great power. With what face therefore can the Pope deny that the Oath of Allegiance and obedience is to be kept with a Christian moderate King, though an Heretic, as you think, as a matter in itself unlawful, and contrary to faith and salvation: whereas Peter commanded faithful obedience as holy, and performed it as duty, to Nero a Pagan and most bloody tyrant?  
§ 15 And if fealty and obedience cannot be performed of Catholics to an Heretical King retaining their Catholic religion, why did Saint Paul, whenas formerly he had in plentiful manner delivered the Catholic religion of Rome, in his 13. Chapter draw from thence this precept, 
Rom. 13.1.  that every soul should submit himself to the higher power? he that speaks of all excludes none as Chrysostome observes. And Bernard to the Archbishop of Seine, every soul is subject, therefore yours. Who hath exempted you from this general commandment? The exception is a mere illusion. Subjection requireth these three.  

1. Reverence in their souls.  
2. Honour in their words.  
3. Obedience in their deeds.   
And mark that he requireth subjection of the soul in a subject. 
Rom. 12.  In the beginning of the 12. Chapter, speaking of the obedience due to God, he exacteth subjection of the body, 
Rom. 13.  In the beginning of the 13. Chapter speaking of the obedience due to a Prince, he requireth the subjection of the soul. 
What obedience is due to Princes.  Hath he not likewise submitted the soul to God and the body to the Prince? yes verily. But to that end he hath distinguished these, because men do for the most part thus excuse themselves, that they vow their soul to God, when they prostitute their body to the Devil: and yield their body to the magistrate, when they deny him the reverence of the soul. Therefore let the soul be subject to the higher power saith the Apostle. Hence two other parts of subjection do necessarily follow; Paul the Apostle doth add the reasons with a commandment, which Paul the bishop doth not add with his prohibition. For all power saith he is of God. He speaketh not so much of the Prince as of the government, nor so much of the person as of the power. To show that he rather respecteth the right of governing, than the quality of the governor. Again if the power of a King be from God, 
Power from God not the Pope or people.  than it is not from the Pope, as divers of the Pope's flatterers would have it. Neither is it from the people as divers flatterers of the people do at this day strive for it. I believe they leave the power of destroying a government to him, whom they dream to have a power given to build it up. They that yield so much to the Pope, subject a King under a sober tyrant, they that yield so much to the people, subject him under a furious tyrant, and as the Poet said very wittily and truly, to a beast of many heads. And therefore the King is not bound to give account either to Pope or people, but to God, from whom he received all his power immediately. Hence the Apostle presently inferreth these two conclusions: 1. He that resisteth God's power, resisteth the ordinance of God, and draweth to himself damnation. The 2. that the King is God's Minister, and beareth the sword, wherewith he doth defend the good, and punish the wicked, and that all must be subject, not for wroth, but for conscience. That no man may think that Peter and Paul, thought that obedience was due for the times sake, and that they wanted force rather to resist Nero, than a mind. I will shut up all in a word. The Catholic faith of the ancient Roman Church, as it was delivered by Paul the Apostle, did infer loyal subjection to a Pagan cruel King. The Catholic faith of the upstart Church of Rome, as it is delivered by Paul the Bishop doth take away and overthrow Allegiance and all obedience as it were unnatural, from a Christian King, and such a King that even by the confession of his Adversaries is very merciful. Whom then shall we believe? Paul the Apostle, or Paul the Bishop, an holy decree, or an unholy prohibition? Neither were these commandments of Christ, Peter and Paul of civil obedience to be showed to Emperors, Kings, and civil Magistrates, mutable according to times, but are to be accounted perpetual and eternal.  
I have laid the first foundation of our loyalty, the express and everlasting commandment of Christ, the second follows which is the practice of Christians.  
§ 16 Hear, Saturnine, before you go further saith he, I yield that subjection, reverence, honour, fealty, obedience, is to be performed to a King, 
A King excommunicated no King in popery.  so long as a King is a king, but if he leave off to be a king, than it ought no longer to be performed. But he leaveth off to be a King assoon as he is denounced to be rightly excommunicated by the Vicar of Christ, whereby he is presently accounted by law to be deposed of his Kingdom, and his subjects absolved from the Oath of obedience. And although you lay very heinous and grievous crimes of treason upon our most holy Father, and upon many holy Priests, and chief upon the jesuits, yet if you would think of the matter a little better, all this smoke of words would vanish to nothing. For first I affimre that the Pope of right hath had, and now hath this power: then I affirm that assoon as he had it, he did put it in practice. And yet it followeth not, that he that defends this, as you conclude is a Traitor.  

Thomas Aquinas objected.  Unless perhaps you dare account Thomas Aquinas that most glorious Saint, and Angelical Doctor to be a Traitor, who writeth thus. After that the Prince is denounced an Apostata, all inferiors and subjects are to be absolved from the Oath they had taken, and from their obedience due unto him. And you may if you please join with him, 
Francis Toletanus objected.  as a fellow in the like treason Francis Toletan a worthy Professor in our time, who doth thus comment upon Thomas: Note saith he that there is the same reason of one that is excommunicated: because that assoon as one is denounced excommunicate all his subjects are freed from the fealty: 
The Laterane Council objected.  and that most famous ecumenical Lateran Council, held about 300. years since, of 70. Pattiarches and archbishops, and 400. and 12. Bishops, and 800 other choice Prelates, because it decreed, that the Pope had the power we speak of, do you think it was a conventicle of Traitors?  
Then Patriotta, what Thomas Aquinas saith he, what § 17 Toletane, what Laterane Council do you speak of? Thomas Aquinas writ 1200 years after Christ, was overtaken with the error of his time, and was the Pope's vassal: neither did he allege any Prophet, Apostle, or Doctor, only he rested upon the only example of Gregory the seventh, who was the first that a 1000 years after Christ did attempt by excommunication to cast Henry the 4. out of his Kingdom. 
Pope Hildebrand no fit example against Kings.  A very weighty authority forsooth against a King's sword, which Christ ordained, and to whom the Church of Christ, as it shall appear afterward, obeyed for a 1000 years, of an upstart Canonist, dreaming in the dark night of Popery, that the subjects might be absolved by the Pope, from the oath of obedience, wherewith God had bound them, and alleging no other Author but Pope Hildebrand, a turbulent and furious monster, as he was accounted by his own Cardinals.  
And yet Aquinas was somewhat more reasonable than Toletane, 
Aquinas answered.  he thought that no man's subjects were to be absolved from their oath of obedience, but his, that was denounced an Apostata, that for ever had fallen from all christianity. But Toletan forsooth, 
Toletane answered.  the worthy professor of our age, the Pope's hireling, with less learning and greater boldness, as if he were some worshipful Umpire gives his sentence without all reason: Note saith he, that the case is all one of a Prince excommunicated by the Pope upon any cause whatsoever. Do you not think that these be notable demonstrations in a controversy of this weight? which antichrist's hired slaves, have uttered as Oracles upon their bare authority, against the perpetual and manifest commandments of Christ, and practices of the Apostles? In the mean while the Apostles shall be silent, the Fathers shall be mute, while Kings shall be censured by two of the Pope's young and sworn chaplains professed and sworn enemies of Kings.  
§ 18 But that famous Lateran Council both for antiquity and number must fight in the quarrel. 
The Laterane Council answered.  We seek not what evil associates, but what good authors you can allege in this business, neither must you strive with number, but with reason. It was no hard matter at that time, for Innocent the third to call together 800 Covent Priors, and their Vicars his creatures, the hungry Friars, and drowsy pated Monks, for whom it was not lawful to sit in Counsels, who might prevail against 400 Bishops, not in weight of reason, but in number of voices, and coin any decree against Princes, at the beck of the Pope their great God and maker.  
But what if at that time nothing at all was decreed, but only propounded, and deliberaetd on, as Platina testifieth, that many things were offered to consultation, but that nothing could be determined, because the Pope suddenly departing, to quiet a sedition lately stirred up, died in his journey? And yet will you call the meeting of a number of hunger-starved Friars, only consulting, how the Pope might depose a King out of his kingdom, but concluding nothing, because the Pope's sudden death prevented it, will you call it the most famous general Laterane Council? And that power which Kings have received from God, and that obedience which subjects are bound to perform, both by a charge from Christ, and rules from the Apostles, shall a few of the later proud Bishops 1000 years after Christ, and mercenary schoolmen, and begging Monks, take the same power from Princes by the decrees of men? Shall God ordain Kings, and shall men overthrow them? Hath God's word bound us to obedience, and shall man's word release us of the same?  
But that I may do no wrong to God's word, I will oppose men to men, Catholics to Catholics, as they be called, and ancient to younger ones.  
Otho Frisingensis writes, after he had read over and § 19 over the acts of the Roman Kings and Emperors, 
Lib: 6. cap. 35.  that he found none before Henry the 4th Emperor excommunicated by the Bishop of Rome, or set beside his kingdom, which was first assayed by Gregory the seventh in the year after Christ 1066.  
I have found out Vrsbergensis, 
Vrsbergens. in anno 1085.  who speaking of the Synod of Mentz (wherein the Pope's Legates being present, the Bishops that had taken arms with Gregory the seventh against the Emperor were deposed, and cast out of their bishoprics) said, that there by common consent and counsel was settled the peace of God; whence he concludeth that Gregory was the author of that devilish garboil against the Emperor.  
Sigebertus the Abbot speaketh plainer, 
Sigibertus in anno 1088.  and goeth further, if good men will give me leave to say so. This only novelty, saith he, that I may not say heresy, did not as yet appear in the world, that his Priests, who saith to a King, thou Apostata, and that causeth an hypocrite to bear rule for the sins of the people, should teach the people that they ought to show no obedience to wicked Kings: and though they have taken an oath of Allegiance, yet own no fealty, neither are to be called Periurs, if they have such minds against Kings, yea that he is accounted for an excommunicant, that doth obey the King: that he doth against the King is freed from the fault of injustice and perjury. This was counted novelty, this was counted heresy of your Sigebert about 500 years since, which doctrine you thrust upon us, as catholic out of Aquinas, Toletane, and the Laterane Council.  
And because Baronius the Cardinal, 
Vincent. in Spec. hist: lib. 15. cap: 84.  doth deny Sigebert the Abbot, a Schismatic, I add Vincentius the Bishop above 300 and fifty years ago, by whom this very heresy is condemned in the same words, wherewith they are taxed by Sigebert.  
And if either Sigebert or your Vincentius have lost their authority, because as Schismatics, they were said to take part with Kings against the Pope, see that your credits be not cracked by these late writers, because the favourers of this novel heresy, as rebels flatter the Pope against Kings. For it is plain that there were very excellent and sincere Catholics, not a few, as they were accounted in those times, whom Gregory's fact did mightily displease, and who did plainly deny, that the Apostolic See had any authority to depose Henry the 4. Emperor, as he did, and to absolve his subjects from their oath of fealty: as the Bishop of Mentz, who was in great favour with Gregory the seventh, 
Gregor 7. epist. 21. lib. 8. apud S●uer. ad Conc.  writ to him, and entreated him to furnish him with those reasons, whereby he was moved to depose the Emperor, that he might be the better provided to answer them, that did gainsay him.  
And Gerochus, Gregory's great champion was constrained to say, 
Avent. lib. 5. fol. 563.  as it is in Aventine, that the Romans took divine honour to themselves, neither would give any account of their doings, neither would endure that any should say to them, why do you so? who answer as the Poet writes. So I will, so I command, my will stand for a reason. I did first use heavenly weapons against you Saturnine, you made resistance with human. Now I oppose human against human, yours against yours; and I will prove it with a necessary argument, that it was a new heresy, which Sigebert so called. If that be taken for a good definition of heresy, which Robert Grosthead that holy and learned Bishop of Lincoln under King Henry the third, fetched out of S. Austen.  

The definition of heresy.  Heresy in Greek, saith he, is an election or choice in Latin, wherein an opinion chosen by a human sense contrary to the holy Scripture, is openly taught, and obstinately maintained.  
By which argument, as Matth: Parisiensis reports, he proved Innocent the Pope to be an Heretic, because he thought it in his power to bestow a benefice upon a child. with the same argument shall Paul the fift be convicted, who thinks it in his power to deprive a King of his Kingdom.  
For this opinion was first chosen by human sense, by Hildebrand to get vainglory, and enlarge the bounds of the Church's dominion with all human policies and powers. And it is against the holy Scriptures, which hath submitted Bishops to Kings, not Kings to Bishops, as before I concluded. And it is openly taught, being set out in two Bulls by Paul the fift. and it is obstinately defended by the Bishop, who forbids under the pain of excommunication, that the Catholics shall not take the Oath of Allegiance, or else retract it being taken. And it is to be doubted, that to whom the definition of heresy doth agree, whether heresy the thing defined doth agree? That Grosthead being dead seemeth with his definition, as with his crosier-staff to strike the Pope upon his breast.  
Then Saturnine. What Schismatics, saith he, what § 21 Sigebert, what Vincentius, what Grosthead with his Crosiers staff do you reckon up? As if they were not all condemned by the Church, because they were at contention with the head of the Church. But that we may not seem rather to contend with the authorities of men, then of God, Paul the Apostle forbade to salute an Heretic, yea he warneth, that after the first or second admonition, we should avoid him. If it be not lawful to salute an Heretic, is it lawful to serve and obey an Heretic? Paul teacheth, that we sacrifice an heretic, as hateful to God, as a great sacrifice to him, and tha● we fly from him as from a gangrene. And shall it not be lawful to cut of the gangrene and cast it away, lest it do infect us: when as we are bidden to cut off our own flesh, if it be affected with a gangrene?  
Now saith Patriotta, you show yourself a right jesuite, § 22 when as Paul did forbid, that we should salute an Heretic, 
How heretics are to be dealt withal.  but avoid him after the first or second admonition; in one word, he did forbid voluntary society, not necessary duty: familiar salutations, which courtesy affords, not reverent observance which piety imposeth; private acquaintance whereby souls are infected, not public obedience whereby government is maintained. It is not lawful to salute an Heretic; will you not therefore pay an Heretic the money that is owing him? yes that I would say you. I demand again, whether the debt of obedience be not more just, than the debt of money? which is of greater force, a debt contracted in your own consent, or that which is imposed upon you by the commandment of God?  
§ 23 Here Saturnine. We own nothing, saith he, to Heretics. Nothing said Patriotta? Doth not the servant own faithful service to his Master, being an Heretic? he oweth it you say to an Infidel, not to an Heretic. You trifle. If you own it to an Infidel which doth oppugn the faith, do you not owe it to an Heretic, who only doth err in the faith? Doth not the wife own faithful obedience to her husband though he be an heretic? yes, when nothing may be the cause of divorce, but adultery, as Christ teacheth: no not infidelity itself, as Paul saith. Lastly, children are bound to obey their Parents in the Lord, although they be Heretics: Therefore shall not subjects much more obey the Prince, Lord of the family, the husband of the common weal, the public father of the country, although he be an heretic? for heresy doth not dissolve the bond of duty, but breaketh of the knot of acquaintance. But heresy is a gangrene, as the Apostle faith. But although we are commanded to cut of all heresy, as a gangrene, yet are we not commanded to root out every heretic. It were wrong with the Papists if this your opinion were settled in our men's minds. But we leave these parts of cruel Surgeons to yourselves, who presently betake yourselves to launching and fearing, and always use the cutting knife and fire, and look not for easier and gentler remedies. But seeing in this quarrel you seem to buckle with us with weapons out of the Scripture, which you do seldom handle, whereby you prove that Kings in right may be, and in fact have been deprived, that subjects may by a word be absolved, as by a word they were bound with an oath of obedience. Go to, let us see before you come to the second foundation, the practice of Christians, what you can say against us in the former.  
Then Saturnine, I will freely speak (saith he) what I § 24 verily think. God had not securely provided for his Church, if he had not sent some holy & stout Prophets and Priests, who might with their Church discipline correct and keep under such Kings as were wicked and tyrannous, when they grew desperate, 
Examples out of the old Testament. 1. Saul.  and might remove them being the hatred of God and men, the shame to religion, and the burden to the people.  
Therefore we read the first King over God's people, because he seemed to take upon him the spiritual function, was excommunicated by Samuel at God's commandment, and put from the possession of his Kingdom, although after David's anointing, and his own deposing, he held it by tyrannical force many years: and did often attempt to murder both David the competitor of the kingdom, and Samuel the executioner of God's decree, as he had slain fourscore and five of the holy Priests the Nobites.  
Who knoweth not that a special Prophet was sent § 25 of God to jeroboam King of Israel, 
2. jeroboam.  who did denounce the judgement of God, against the King and the King's race, because he had separated the people by a wicked schism from the ancient and true worship of God, begun at jerusalem, and had erected a new altar in Bethel (whereby the schism and division from the Apostolic See is properly prefigured) and ordained a new Clergy, a hunger-starved, and contemptible out of Aaron's order, such an one as yours is. The sin was afterward so severely punished according to the censure of the Prophet, that there was none left of the King's stock to make water against the wall. The King did very fond lay hold upon the man of God to kill him, because he thought the denouncing of God's judgement was treason against the King's crown and dignity.  
§ 26 
3. Ozia.  We read likewise that Ozia the King of juda being puffed up with intolerable pride, not content with the honour of a King, did insolently presume to usurp the spiritual and Priestly office, being stoutly withstood by Azaria and 80. other Priests, and violently expelled out of the Temple: and that because he threatened and resisted the Priests, he was strucken with a filthy leprosy: and therefore not only cast out of the Temple, but by their authority separated from the company of men (which was a special figure of the Priestly authority under the new Law, which may excommunicate Kings as well as others for heresy, which is a spiritual leprosy) and committed the government of the Kingdom to jotham his son. An apparent example that it is lawful for Priests to take arms, and by force to bring under the wickedness of Kings, when as they deem it is available for the preservation of religion, and the honour of God.  
§ 27 The zeal of the good Priests in the depriving of that wicked Queen Athalia is worthily commended: 
4. Athalia.  whom jehoida the chief Priest with a power of the Priests and Commons did command to be put beside her throne, and put to death, and did anoint and crown the true heir.  
§ 28 Who is ignorant how courageously Elias answered, being designed to death by Achab and jezabel, 
5. Ahab.  who had cast down the holy altars, and had slain the true worshippers of God. That it was not he and other men of God, but Achab and his house that had troubled Israel: and with what zeal he slew jezabels' false Prophets, restored the holy altars, called for fire from heaven, wherewith he did destroy Ochozias captains and messengers, and anointed jehu king over Israel, and cast Achab with all his posterity out of the Kingdom, of whom it is said, That he put down, and overthrew Kings, and cast the mighty out of their seats: 
Eccles. 48.  as God appointed jeremy over kingdoms, that he should plant, and root them up, build them up, and pluck them down Which power of Christ's priesthood under the new Testament, doth appear to be far larger and more ample, and is given to the chief Priest the Bishop of Rome, that he may in the name of Christ break in pieces, and beat to powder with his iron rod, as if they were earthen vessels, such kings as lift up themselves against Christ his Church, which is his spouse & his kingdom.  
For by those examples it is evident, that Kings anointed and justly created, may of right be deposed: Secondly, for what causes they may in fact be deprived: Lastly, that in the inauguration and consecration of kings, as also in their deprivation God did use the ministry of Priests and Prophets, either ordinary or extraordinary, to that purpose, that they might be, not only judges, but correctors of kings. For whereas kings do hold their dignity and supreme authority from God, and have bound themselves with all their might to promote the true religion and worship of God, and the honour of their highest King and Lord, and to govern the people in the faith and fear of God, the Priests and Prophets (to whom the chief and principal care of religion and souls is committed, and who have been set above Princes in spiritual matters) did of right oppose themselves against them in those passages, which brought dishonour to God, ruin to the religion, and damnation to the souls of subjects: and did exercise justice and judgement against their Princes, in the name of God, who abused their government to overthrow the true worship of God, & brought in and established idolatry, heresy and other abominations.  
§ 29 For there was between God and the King a certain compact, as it were, which had force ever after, either openly, or at lest secretly, that none should draw away their subjects, either by force, or by any other means from the faith of their Ancestors, and from the religion & holy ceremonies of God, delivered & received by the hands of Priests: whereby God did insinuate, that if they did observe these precepts and conditions, they should long reign with their posterity: otherwise it should come to pass, as we taught before, that as the Prophets and Priests did anoint kings on that condition only, that they should defend and maintain the worship and honour of God: so likewise they should depose kings, when they broke the covenant of God, and fell to strange gods, and drove their people to Apostasy. And thus it appeareth, it was under the old Testament. And if God did furnish the Priests and Prophets of the old Testament, with such power of excommunication, whereby they might deprive wicked and tyrannous kings, cast out of their thrones, and driven from the company of men, not only of life, if they could, and this common light, that they might bring no damage to the Synagogue: with how much greater authority hath he strengthened the high priest of the new testament, the vicar of Christ, that he might cast out & expel from the Communion of the Church, & being so cast out depose from their kingdoms such Kings, as are Infidels, Apostates, Heretics and Tyrants, and that not only, but release their people's oaths given to such kings, who have broken their own oath made to the Priest, in the name of God, at their coronation? unless we think that God had less care of his Church, then of his Synagogue, or doth more bear with Kings in these days, who be heads of Apostasy from God, than he did with Kings of former times. Both which be it far from God's justice and providence. Truly he had left a miserable and a wretched Church as desolate and forsaken, if he had exposed it, being bereft of the help of holy Priests, to the lust of cruel Tyrants, that they might toss and turn it at their pleasure, and alter the state of religion every year. For whereas heretofore Christian Bishops did not depose, Nero, Dioclesian, julian the Apostata, Valens and the like: it was because Christians wanted temporal strength: for otherwise they might have done it by right, I say by right, the Bishops might have deprived the Pagan-Emperours, Apostates and Heretics, if the Church had had that force to resist, as before and after getting force it did resist.  
Then Patriotta, while in your malice, Saturnine, you § 30 suffer yourself to be thus carried against Kings, you belch out notable blasphemy against God: for what is blasphemy if this be not? to accuse God's providence against the Church, unless he give power to holy Priests to depose wicked Kings: you have very unadvisedly founded the depth of God's counsel, with the plummet of your shallow judgement, who hath never the less, I cannot tell whether much the more provided for his Church, as well by trying her patience with adversity, as seeking after thankfulness with prosperity: aswell when he consumed the sins of the Saints by the persecution of Princes, as when he satisfied their desires with the mercy of pious Princes: aswell by spoiling his sons of earthly pleasures recompensing them with the rewards of the blessed, as continuing them he delighted them with the comforts of such as were miserable. Which I do not speak to that end, that I may excuse the cruelty of Tyrants, but that I may set forth the mercy of God, because those things which they intent to the Saints for their evil, God turneth to their good.  
But you went about to daily with the express commandments of Christ and the Apostles, with a few examples of the Priests and the Prophets ill understood, and far worse applied to the Pope. How did that unbeseeme a Divine? let us therefore, if you please, weigh them severally.  
§ 31 Samuel, you say, did excommunicate Saul, and being excommunicate cast him out of his kingdom: 
Samuel did not excommunicate or depose Saul.  therefore the Pope hath power to cast a Prince out of his Kingdom. I deny first the Antecedent. It was not the Prophet, but God himself that cast off Saul for his wickedness: for it is Gods only prerogative, to depose the mighty out of their thrones, & to raise up those that are cast down: to deject kings, lift up kings, and to bestow a Kingdom upon whom he please. He sent Samuel only to denounce it to Saul, and to anoint David in his room.  
Samuel did anoint David, when God did expressly command it, therefore the Pope may depose a Prince, although God did not expressly command it. I pray tell me, hath the Pope any revelation from God to deprive a King? No, you will say, but he hath a commandment, as before him many other had: true, to denounce the judgements of God, either temporal or eternal, not to execute them. God is the actor in casting down of Saul, not Samuel. God inflicted the punishment as a judge, Samuel only did publish it as a messenger, neither as he was a Prophet by his general vocation, but as he was a Prophet by special instinct, appointed to that purpose: not as Superior to Saul, but as God's messenger, who did precisely lay this charge on him, and named the successor with his own mouth. What is this to the Pope? unless you think the prerogative proper to the mighty God, communicable with a sinful man: which if he take it on him without God's special and express commandment, he doth not exercise it under God, but equal as God. And whatsoever is done without God, is done against God. But Saul, as you say, is deposed by Samuel, by God's commandment, God set down the censure, Samuel declared it.  
I add also out of the text, he did not declare the § 32 person of Saul to be cast out of the possession of the kingdom, as you say, but the offspring of Saul from the succession of the kingdom: for Israel and juda, after Saul was rejected of God, and David anointed, did for all that with David obey him many years: 
1. Sam. 24.11.  whom David after his deposing, called his Lord, and the Lords anointed. God keep me, saith he, from laying my hands upon him: for he is the anointed of the Lord: he doth not say, he was, but he is the anointed of the Lord. And he restrained himself in ot for fear, but for conscience, not for courtesy, but for duty, when he found him sleeping in the cave, and one of his captains would have killed him: Take heed (saith he) what you do, 
1. Sam. 24.5.  for who shall strike the Lords anointed, and be guiltless? he did not think it compassion, because he spared him, but he would have thought it a sin, if he had laid his hand on him. Hence arose that scruple in his conscience, because he had cut off the lappet of the King's garment: he trembled when he cut off the skirt of the king's coat, these good fellows blush not to offer violence to the king's person. He commanded the man to be thrust through, who had killed Saul the Lords anointed, these appoint earthly & heavenly rewards, for such as murder anointed Kings.  
And if all Israel did of right obey Saul, being rejected § 33 by God's command, if David himself anointed the successor of the kingdom, did perform all loyal obedience to him, if he reverenced him as the Lords anointed, and condemned it as a sin in himself, if he had laid his hand upon him, when he might, and revenged it upon another that had committed it: how can the Pope absolve the subjects from the oath of obedience, made to any king whatsoever, or make his act meritorious who doth kill him, from whom the Pope without any authority hath taken the government? you see therefore that there is neither truth in the Antecedent, of your enthymem, nor coherence in the consequence.  
§ 34 After the same manner we may answer you about jeroboam, 
The example of jeroboam answered.  that which yourself confess by the way: that the Prophet was sent, who should denounce the punishment in word only, not violently inflict it himself: and did not utter one word of the schism, and deposing, but only foretold what should follow, that josias should overturn that altar, and burn the Priests bones upon it, as it fell out 300. years after jeroboam was dead.  
But whether it prefigured our falling from the Apostolical sea, 
jeroboam and his Priests types of popery.  as you call it, or your backsliding from the Apostolical truth, and whether jeroboam with his altar do represent your Pope, who hath corrupted the true and ancient worship of God with unwritten traditions; or our Princes who have reform it, so corrupted by the holy Scriptures, it is not to be argued at this time: only I see a great likeness between his calves, and your idol upon the altar. I appeal to your religious wisdom, what difference is there in the case of Idolatry, whether a calvish or a crusty Godhead be adored? I know your answer, you do not worship the bread, but Christ in the bread. And jeroboams Priests might make the same answer, that they worshipped not the calf, but God in the calf: whose Idolatry for all that you hold to be condemned. But whether jeroboams Priests be the types of our Ministers, or of your shauling; and whether they be more abject and hunger-starved, they who for conscience sake serve the living God, or your Priests who to fill their paunches serve the golden calf; it belongs not to this question in hand. And all this example, proveth nothing else, but that a wicked King may rightly be reprehended of a Prophet, as a wicked Pope may of any Priest: yet you would not say that a Pope might justly be deposed of him, as neither the king by the Prophet, although he were grievously reprehended by him as he well deserved. § 35  
Neither leprous Ozias though he were shut from the company of men according to the Law, 
Ozias the Leprous no type of excommunication.  whom you make the figure of a spiritual Leper, and by that reason of one that is excommunicate, was at any time thrust from his kingdom, because the government thereof was committed to his son. 
4. Reg. 15.  For Ozias continued king to his dying day, as the Scripture calleth him in the 25. year of his reign which was the last of his life. jothan therefore was not as yet the King, but the King's Vicegerent, while his father lived.  
Neither did any Leper by God's law lose his private inheritance, 
Inheritance not lost for leprosy.  much less a king the public inheritance of the crown. Neither did heresy which you term a spiritual leprosy, drive any out of his kingdom, no more than covetousness or ambition, or the contempt of the word cast the Pope out off his Popedom, which the Fathers called the leprosy of the soul. And if leprosy shall remove a king out of his throne, how shall the Popes hold their chairs? that you leprous conclusion doth as well touch the Pope's mitre as the King's crown. This figure than is as pernicious to the Pope as to the King.  
For whereas you said it was the office of the Priest to separate those that were Lepers, there you err greatly.  
It was their office to discern the leprosy, the Magistrates to separate, lest they should faint others. That we may therefore urge this figure against you: It is the duty of Princes to separate the leprous, that is heretical Popes, rather than of Popes to separate heretical Princes.  
But whereas you said the person of the King was stoutly assaulted by Azaria and 80. other Priests, and by violence cast out of the Temple, that is an error far more dangerous. For they did not violently cast him out, but as the text hath it, they caused him to make haste to go out of the temple, no force at all being attempted. For it followeth, because the Lord struck him, he was forced of his own accord to departed. And so the word signifies, and so your vulgar translation hath it, which you call Ieromes, he made haste to go forth.  

2. Chron. 26. The jesuits violence taxed.  But this error hath brought forth that dangerous sin, Saturnine, by the help of your conclusion, as it were by the aid of a Midwife. For you conclude it is a manifest example, that it is lawful for Priests by force of arms, and by violent means to repress the wickedness of Kings.  
Azarias I confess and the other Priests did resist the King, but with words, not with weapons. And because he had broken the Law by burning of incense, they did as it was meet, sharply reprove him: neither did they forcibly rush upon the Magistrate, or lay strong hand upon him, to drive him out of the temple, much less out of the kingdom. But your men Saturnine go further, and from admonition fly to rebellion, from reprehension to force, from reproof to arms, being cozened and deceived by the false interpretation of this and the like places.  
§ 37 Here I appeal to you Princes, neither to you only who have departed from the Pope, but to you who cleave unto him. 
☜  How long will ye suffer these martial and swaggering Priests to abuse your patience? how long shall this superstitious madness deceive you? 
An Ap strophe to popish Kings.  how long shall this wol●ish fierceness under sheeps clothing assail you? how long shall they cover their detestable rebellion against kings under the cloak of religion? And as if they fetched poison from heaven as Hercules Aeteus' in the tragedy, abusing the authority of holy Scriptures, and examples of holy Priests, gather force against your sacred persons, and opprobry to your Majesties?  
This is, said Saturnine, to chaff with us not to dispute § 38 with us. But mark the reason if you please, why Ozias the king was strooken with the leprosy, because he presumed to execute the spiritual and priestly function, whereof you have ordained your King's supreme Governors.  
I mark it well, said Patriotta, and when we maintain that it is lawful for our Princes, to preach the Gospel, to baptize, to minister the supper of the Lord, to forgive sins, than cast us in the teeth with Ozias pride and plague. In the mean while learn, that it is not for priests, but kings to bear arms; and the kings of juda, who used the temporal sword, to restore the truth, and suppress error, which David, jehosophat, Ezekias, josias were said to have done, got great favour with God, and great honour with men. But we when we are justly displeased with you, whenas like seditious tribunes you stir up the commons against Kings, and call them to arms, wherewith they may vanquish the professors of the Gospel, as occasion is offered, then here I pity you exceedingly, that from Azarias example, peevishly understood and wretchedly drawn to your purpose, you draw from an idle figure so slender an argument of your outrage, that there appeareth neither probability in the Antecedent, or necessity in the consequence.  
And whereas you said that Athalia was deprived of § 39 her kingdom and put to death, by jehoida, the priest, with the forces of the priests and people, 
Atha●●● justly deposed but not by the Priest.  joash the right heir, whom he preserved in the temple, being proclaimed, anointed, and crowned king, you held that the Pope might likewise, rightly deprive a lawful king for heresy both of his kingdom and life, it doth lay open apparently the wretchedness of your cause.  
For what can you say else then that a wicked woman who flew all Ochasias the king's offspring, one son only excepted, and did unjustly usurp the kingdom, was surprised and punished, by the undoubted and lawful heir of the crown the king being proclaimed, and anointed, and the crown set on his head by the consent of the whole kingdom as you yourself have confessed:  
But jehoida the high priest commanded to put her to death not the king. True: but he commanded it by the authority of the king not his own. But the king you say, was but a child of seven years of age; but he was no less a king at seven years, then if he had been of seventy years. For age cannot take away the right of a kingdom which blood hath given him. 
jehoida had Gods law & man's law to approve his action.   
But jehoida when he commanded Athalia to be slain, in the king's name did it, both by God's law, and man's law. First, he preserved the young king in the Sanctuary, being kept from the rage of Athalia, and nourished him secretly in the Lord's house. Again, he was the chief of his Tribe, as others were of theirs, that he might arrogate so much to himself as others might, in the nonage of the king to pacify the kingdom, and to take vengeance upon the usurping Queen for the cruel tyranny against the king's progeny Besides that, his wife was the king's Ant, and he was his nearest kinsman, and therefore was bound both by the law of nature and nations to defend the kings right, his age and innocency. Last of all whatsoever he attempted was with the King's authority, and with the common counsel, and consent of all the nobility. For he convented all the captains and chief Fathers of Israel unto him into the house of God, and made a covenant with them, and exacted an Oath of them in the house of God, and showed the king's son unto them. And so being not only the high priest, but chief also of his Tribe, and nearest ally to the king, nor with his own, but with the common counsel and consent of the Peers, nor commanded with his own, but with the king's authority that wicked Athalia injustly usurping the kingdom, the king's offspring being first murdered, and extinguished, to be cast from her kingdom, and of her life. What is this to the Pope to depose a lawful king to be murdered by a rebellious people, being first by excammunication deposed from his kingdom?  
And whereas you brag of Elias zeal, who did not § 40 only answer king Ahab very stoutly, but slew 400. 
Elias killed not Baal's Priests.  of jesabels' false Prophets; you tell us of the act, but you cunningly conceal the cause and manner of it. The famine of the kingdom and Elias miracle were the causes, that king Ahab yielded up by a compact, and public decree of the kingdom these false Prophets into Elias hands to be put to death according to Gods Law.  
But Elias you say killed them. What? with his own hand? do you think the Prophet was a slaughterman? you will say, no, though they were not slain by Elias hand, yet by Elias authority. You should say by his advise, rather than authority. For Elias was a private man, not a Magistrate. But Ahab if Elias had not urged him, had not slain them. I think so, Elias moved the king to do it, but compelled him not. Ahab gave his consent with all Israel that the Baalitish priests, who had seduced the king and kingdom should be slain being convicted by God's law.  
For whenas a grievous famine grew upon them, and that no rain could fall, but at the word of Elias, as he had foretold Ahab before the drought; being accused to Ahab to be the procurer of the famine, and troubler of Israel, defendeth himself, and testifieth before the king, that God had sent that plague upon all Israel, because he and his Father's house had forsaken the commandments of God, and worshipped strange Gods. And to make his word good, he offered before all Israel, upon pain to lose his head, that the king and his people were seduced by Baal's priests, and that he would make it plain by a miracle, that is with fire sent down from heaven, which should make it appear whose sacrifice God did approve: promising that they should have plenty of rain, after the conversion of Israel to the true God, and that he was sent to that end at that time. The King accepts the condition, all the rest give their consents, and when they plainly perceived by the miracle of Elias, that the Baalites were convicted to be the deceivers, and should have cast down themselves upon their faces, and given glory to God, as the people did, and should most humbly have submitted themselves to the truth of God: Elias did advise them, to lay hands on the Baalites, and to punish them with death by God's law, due to such seducers and deceivers. So Elias persuaded Ahab and all Israel, to consent to the slaughter of the Baalites with a public decree. Therefore by the consent of the King, the decree of the kingdom, in so extreme necessity, by so notable a miracle wrought by the Prophet, not by Elias hand, but by his persuasion, the people did in public place put to death those Baalitish impostors, according to the law of God publicly convicted. How can you draw this example to your purpose? Will you reason after this manner? False Prophets may rightly be put to death by Magistrates, therefore Princes may rightly be deposed by Priests? I will not send you to the schools to learn better Logic, but to 
* An I'll in Thessaly where Eleborus groweth that purgeth Melancholy.  Anticyra to purge your foolish brain if you dispute after this manner.  
§ 41 But you will say he consumed Ochasias' captains and soldiers with fire called down from heaven. 
How Ochosias' soldiers were destroyed, & by whom.  Elias spoke the word, God performed the deed. That fire from heaven was not in Elias power, but in God's will: And if Elias had not received a special instinct of God's spirit to that end, he durst never have called for fire from heaven, for that had been plainly to have tempted God; which Christ reproved in his Apostles, desirous to imitate Elias. As these were extraordinary, so by no means you can thence draw a conclusion for disputation, or an ensample for imitation, no more than you can allow of thest, because Israel by Gods command spoiled the Egyptian; or persuade that one kill himself, because Samson killed himself; or teach that one may curse and kill unhappy boys, because Elizeus handled forty two in that manner, that called him bald pate in bethel. But here I do acknowledge you to be very perverse followers of Elias, 
How the Papists differ from Elias in their fireworks.  in that you go about to use consuming fire: for Elias called down for fire from the height of heaven, but you have fetched it up from the depth of hell; Elias by the instinct of God, you by the instigation of the Devil. And yet Elias did not once touch the King, much less depose him; but you went about not only to depose the King, but utterly to consume the King, with all his excellent progeny and kingdom.  
But Elias you say did by God's appointment anoint § 42 jehu King over Israel, and cast off Ahabs' son, and all his house for ever bearing rule in the kingdom.  
Elias did not anoint jehu, but one of the sons of the Prophets, whom Elizeus scent, and charged him in the name of God, not in Elizeus name (mark) but in the name of God, that jehu should take sword in hand, and root out Ahabs' house. The King therefore was not cast off by the prophet, but slain by jehu, to whom God had given Ahabs' kingdom, that he might destroy Ahab and all his house and posterity. Now if you please let us weigh your argument. God may rightly give a Kingdom to whom he will, and by name stir up a subject, to punish his master's sin: therefore the Pope may rightly do the same. What Catholic King can be safe from the conspiracies of his subjects, if once he begin to displease the Pope? With such arguments our English jesuits have gone about to bewitch ou men, that they may take away the lives of our most worthy Princes. Be they not the very slaves of Antichrist, and members of the Devil, who do flatter the Pope with such arguments, to the destruction of Kings?  
§ 43 But Elias did cast down and destroy Kings, that is to say, did foretell they should be cast down, if you believe Hugo the Cardinal. 
Hugo the Cardinal expounding jeremy.  And jeremy was set over Kingdoms, to plant and root out, to build up and pluck down Kingdoms; that is, as that learned Cardinal expounds it, I have appointed you, saith God, to pull up: that is, to threaten the jews that they shall be cast out of their own country: and that you destroy: that is, that you prophesy that the City of jerusalem shall be destroyed: and that you disperse, that is, that you foretell, that they shall be dispersed by the Chaldean Princes: and that ye scatter abroad, that is, foreshow, that the kingdom of the jews shall be scattered abroad after the captivity. And that the jews should not be cast into despair, he did not only foreshow their captivity, but their deliverance also, adding that he should build up, that is, show that the City should be re-edified; and that you should plant, that is, tell the jews that they shall be planted in jury. This literal sense Hugo the Cardinal did give, that I may omit the mystical sense, whereby the Prophet's doctrine doth understand, that the kingdom of sin should be rooted out and destroyed, and the kingdom of virtue should be planted and advanced in the conscience.  
§ 44 We have examined your examples, whence you infer a conclusion that ill hangs together; first, that Kings rightly created and anointed, may rightly be put down. I answer, that one of the Kings you named was put down, and that was Ahab, not by Elias, not by Elizeus, but by jehu, whom God by his own mouth raised up by name. The deposing therefore of the King, was not effected by the Prophet, but by a Prince by name appointed to that purpose. What doth this help your cause? Saul was not deposed, it is manifest that his posterity was cut of from the succession of the kingdom, and not his person from the present possession.  
Ierob●am was by the Prophet sharply reproved, not violently expelled. Ozias, as a Leper was removed from the government, not the right of his kingdom. Athalia was never rightly created, and for the cruel murdering of the King's offspring was put to death, not by the Priests, but the King's authority.  
The second conclusion is very idle, for what causes the Kings in fact are to be secluded. What shall you need to inquire, for what causes they be deposed, when you do not prove they should be deposed? Athalia was taken away neither for apostasy, nor heresy, but because she usurped the Crown against the lawful heir apparent. God commended the acts of Ozias, but detested his pride. jeroboam both an Apostata, and an Idolater, and yet never set beside the cushion. Achab the Idolater was cast of with all his race, but by the Magistrate, not by the Priest. The causes therefore which you allege help your cause no whit at all.  
The last conclusion which concerns the persons of § 45 the deposers is very lame. You say, that God used the ministery of the Prophets, and the Priests to that purpose, either ordinary or extraordinary, as judges and executors of Gods will. God did use the tongues, as I said, of the Prophets and Priests to foretell and denounce those plagues which God decreed to bring upon those Kings: and sometimes he used their hands to anoint those, whom by name he appointed to be the successors of the kingdom: but he never used them, either ordinary or extraordinary, either judges or executioners of his will in deposing them. He used them as messengers, who with their lively voice did deliver God's decrees to Kings, either deposed or appointed by God: other execution or authority they had none, which is very far from that power of the Pope, whom you challenge to be the ordinary judge, Tutor, and Corrector of Kings. And do you endure his ferula, o ye Kings, will you kiss the rod, that hath so often paid you, and by this your patience make your Tutor more cursed and whip you the more? But I come now to you Saturaine.  
§ 46 You have not, of my word you have not one Priest or Prophet under the old Testament that deposed a King: 
King's deposed Priests.  but I have a King that deposed a Priest. Whom you will say? 
Abimilech.  I speak not of Saul, who slew Abimelech for taking part with David. I pass over joash the King who commanded Zachariah, 
Zacharia.  jehoidas son to be stoned to death, forgetting his father's virtue and duty. What say you to Solomon who displaced Abiathar the high Priest from his primacy and dignity, 
Abiathar.  because he followed Adoniah's faction being the elder brother. When it would have followed by your conclusion, that Solomon was rather to be deposed, because the High Priest thought Adoniah's right to the kingdom to be better than salomon's.  
§ 47 But whereas you added that Princes hold their sovereign dignity and authority received from God, because truth drew that speech from you, which falls out very seldom, I accept it willingly: and thence conclude that God alone hath the power of putting down Kings, who alone set them up: and that Kings are bound to give account to God alone, from whom they received that honour.  
But whereas you make the end of supreme princely majesty received of God, to be the promoting of the true worship, and honour of God, and the retaining of the people in the faith and fear of the Lord: I marvel what it meant, that when always you deny that a King should meddle with spiritual affairs and business: now as if you were forgetful of your own mind, 
Alanus.  you direct the chief end and scope of the King's dignity, to set forward the worship of God, to stir up others to honour his high Lord, and to preserve the people in the faith and fear of God. We accept of your grant, but that which you add, that Priests and Prophets have opposed themselves against Kings in all those matters, 
How Priests ought to oppose Princes.  which may bring either dishonour to God, or overthrow to religion, or damnation to souls; I am afraid unless you expound yourself more plainly, we may not grant it unto you. For if you say they opposed themselves as men of God, and did earnestly admonish them by word and counsel, or else did sharply reprove such Princes, we do willingly acknowledge the freedom of their holy vocation; but to take upon them to be judges over Kings by their rule and authority, and do either judicially deprive them, or violently invade them, we detest the pride of such a turbulent spirit.  
But between God and the King there is a certain § 48 covenant which always is of force either openly or secretly. Be it so. 
The covenant between God and the King.  And what if the King do break some article of the league, who shall accuse him? before what judgement seat, before what judge shall he be endighted? shall it be in the Court of the common people, who for fashion sake have made choice, and accepted of the King? or in the consistory of a Bishop, who hath anointed and consecrated him? I see what you mean to answer, a Bishop, who hath conditionally anointed him, if he break the condition and covenant made with God, hath again deprived him, and hath showed justice against him in the name of God, who hath abused his supreme authority.  
The Scripture recites nineteen Kings of Israel and § 49 fourteen of juda, 
No bad King of 33 deposed by a Priest.  who broke the covenant made with the Lord, and worshipped strange gods, and drove the people to apostasy, show me any one of them to be deprived by a Priest or a Prophet, because they had broken their first covenant, and take the cause: if you cannot, leave of to tell an untruth, and to cross your own speech, whom we even now heard confessing, that Kings do hold their supreme authority received from God, not then from a Priest, not from the people, and that therefore they are not bound if they break their covenant, to give account either to a Priest, or to the people, but to God. For he holds his Crown by the right of blood, and inheritance, not by the virtue of inunction or consecration, or of election and acceptation, as you were wont to say, that you may give some authority of deposing and depriving to a Priest, whom you make to be the first mover, and some to the people whom you make the remover. So you make Kings hypothetical, and the people conditional, but Priest absolute and categorical, being herein very simple, because that power which you say they have received of God to depose Kings, that was never brought into practice under the whole old Testament.  
Your argument therefore from the stronger, falls to ground and comes to nothing, that if the priestly excommunication under the old Testament was of such force, of how greater and larger force is it under the new? But we have evicted it, that there was none at all under the old.  

Popish blasphemy.  At last you return back again and repeat that former blasphemous argument of yours, that God was not provident enough, but left the Church in a miserable case, like a widow clean forsaken, if he had not given the chief Priest to her, either as a Tutor forsooth, or a Husband. That is like as if the father & husband of the Church were not alive, or took care of another daughter and wife, or else would appoint in his place such a one to be a Tutor for his daughter, whom he foretold to be an adversary, or provide such an husband for his daughter, who would prove an adulterer.  
Lastly, as if Peter and Paul had dissembled, and had commanded obedience to be showed to Nero, so long till Christians could make head: and other Christian Bishops had so many ages consented to the like dissimulation, you do not blush to affirm, that Bishops could of right excommunicate their Princes, and depose them being excommunicate, if the Church had then power to resist.  
True, said Saturnine: for Christ his Priestly prerogative, § 51 wherewith he was able to break in pieces, such kings, as earthen vessels, being granted by large and precise charter to the Bishop of Rome, the chief Priest (which reason brought by us, you past by as a man unknown) gave power to the first Bishops, and right to the thing itself, as the Lawyers speak, to depose Kings excommunicate, being infidels, apostates, heretics and tyrants: but the Church did never practise that authority, till she gathered strength in process of time.  
For that commandment of Christ alleged by you, Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are Gods, doth he not submit Caesar to be kept under by the Vicar of God, when he denieth to God, those those things which belong to God? And whereas Christ did th●●ce speak to Peter, Feed my Lambs feed my sheep, feed my sheep: did he not commit all Christians, little and great, lambs and sheep, subjects and princes, to be fed and ruled without exception to Peter and Peter's successor? And when as he had committed the keys of heaven to Peter and Peter's successor to let in and shut out, doth he not show that divine and admirable power of excommunication, which you forsooth would have so weak and feeble? for whereas you said, that Prelates and Bishops ought to be subject and obedient to Kings, 
Heb. 13.17.  I did much marvel that you were so forgetful of another commandment no less Apostolical, whereby he bond Kings as well as subjects to obey their Prelates and their Pastors, and to submit themselves, as to them by whom account is to be given to God for their souls: wherein what Christian Prince can exempt himself, if he do think that he have a soul?  
§ 52 Then Patriotta, I passed by that your reason, Saturuine, of the prerogative of Christ communicated with the Bishop, 
Christ overruling Kings not as a priest but as a king.  not as unknown, but as very idle. For that prerogative whereby Christ doth bruise and break in pieces kings and kingdoms, the Prophet shows not to be his Priestly, but his Princely power. I have set my king, saith God, not therefore as a Priest, but as a King, he hath broken and beat in pieces wicked Kings with his iron Sceptre. As a Priest he bears the Cross, as a King he bears the Sceptre: as a Priest he offered up himself upon the cross and suffered his blood to be shed for the remission of sins: as a King he vanquished his enemies, shed their blood, weakened and overcame their power with the sight of this so great glory that resides in him, so you went about to blind our eyes, while you did closely subject the sceptre of a King to be trampled on by the Pope's feet.  
§ 53 For you say, that this prerogative of Christ is communicated with the Pope. What else? And that with large and precise charter: where be those words? point at the place, show the charter, where Christ imparted this his prerogative with the Bishop of Rome. 
Heb. 7. v. 23.24.25.26.  For there be many others appointed Priests (saith S. Paul) who by reason of death cannot continue, but this because he abides for ever, hath an immutable priesthood, whence he can perfectly save those, who come unto God by him, always living to make intercession for us. For such a Priest was fit for us, holy, innocent, immaculate, separated from sinners, made higher than the heavens, who hath no need every day, as the Priests of Levi, to offer sacrifices, first for their own sins, then for the sins of the people; for that he did once, when he offered up himself, the only sacrifice for sin, that he might obtain for us eternal redemption. The Bishop of Rome let him pack and be gone, and let him brag of Christ's Priestly prerogatives, granted to him by a large charter, that all men may spit in the blasphemous face of this impure wretch.  
But if he have not all, yet he hath imparted with § 54 him some of his prerogatives at the least. Which I pray you? the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to open & shut heaven, the power of binding and losing, the power of feeding and ruling: by all which you do more than insinuate, that the Bishop can rightly by the power of excommunication wrest from Caesar, his sceptre, his crown, sword, subjects, kingdom and life. For these belong to Caesar.  
Therefore when Christ spoke to Peter, feed my sheep, he meant this, depose Princes; I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven, that is, I will give you the thrones of earthly kings, that you may let into the kingdom whom you will, and whom you will exclude: that you may lose subjects whom you please, and whom you please bind: that you may punish whom you will, and may forgive whom you will. We must, I think, learn not only a new Divinity, but a new Grammar and a Logic also.  
To feed Christ's sheep, 
The popish strange divinity.  and to abandon Christian Princes, are Synonamaes or all one with the Papists.  
To bind Kings and to bind Sceptres is all one. To exclude a King out of the Temple, and take from him his kingdom and life, be Synonomaes with you.  
O divine and admirable power of excommunication, which brought in not only a new Grammar, but a new Logic also into Divinity?  
All Princes ought to be taught of the high Priest, therefore deposed. They may be shut out of the kingdom of heaven, therefore out of their earthly domimions. Prince's ought to obey the wholesome doctrine ●aught by their Pastors: therefore if they refuse it, they may rightly be cast off by them. The condition of Princes is very hard. But what shall they do? excommunication can do thus much if we believe Saturnine. But you have other Catholic Doctors, as I hear honester men a great deal, who weaken and take away the edge of excommunication, for bringing forth such monstrous effects.  
§ 55 For that I may say nothing of Austin, who thought that excommunication was very sparingly to be used against Princes, 
August. count Epist. Parmen. lib. 3. cap. 2.  and when it were, it was not to root them up, but to correct them: that we may omit Bernard, 
De consid. ad Eugen. lib. 2.  who was not afraid to tell Pope Eugenius, Therefore your power is over sins, not over possessions, because for them, not for these, you have received the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven. Thomas Aquinas your Angelical Doctor said, that excommunication is one thing, and rotting out is another: which we find written in an Epistle of Pope Urban, recorded in the canon Law, whereof he allegeth a reason out of the Apostle, who saith, that one excommunicate is to that end so dealt withal, 
Decret. 2. part. caus. 4 qu. 3. cap. 37.  that his soul may be saved in the day of the Lord. It is used then for correction, not for destruction: for excommunication is discipline, saith Pope Urban, not a rooting up. Either of them both a Canonist and a Priest, seemed to borrow the distinction out of Austin. So he writeth, that excommunication is not the taking away any man's private goods, which the transgressor of the Law did formerly possess: but it was the taking away of the public goods, which he was to receive from the Church, and the receiving of the Sacraments. 
The force of excommunication.  Therefore excommunication is of force, if you may believe your own men, to shut a King out of the Church, not out of his Kingdom: to deprive him of the Sacrament, not his Sceptre; to sever him from the Communion of the faithful, not from the obedience of his subjects: to save his soul, not to destroy his body: to remove him from the confines of the Kingdom of Heaven, till he repent, not to drive him out of his territories, or to lose the rains of obedience from subjects, or free them from their sworn fealty. As Ludonicus Richeomus hath it in his Apologeticke. These agree with the canon: Render, saith Christ, to Caesar, the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are Gods. Which be Caesar's? his sceptre, crown and sword: which be Gods? our faith, worship, invocation, and all our spiritual obedience? 
Matth. 22.   
Christ therefore saith, render to Caesar his sceptre, his crown, his sword: what say you Saturnine? let him take away from Caesar, being excommunicate, his sceptre, his crown, his sword, be these your Synonimaes to render and to take away?  
Christ if he had pleased, could thus have excommucate Tiberius, and obtained of his father an army of Angels to have cast him out of his throne. He would not: for he came to give an heavenly crown, not to take away an earthly crown. When a certain man said to him, 
Luc. 12.  Master command my brother to divide the inheritance with me, the Lord answered, who hath made me a judge between you? Christ thought that the power of dividing a private inheritance, belonged not to his vocation, who therefore could appoint the Pope to be a judge & Distributer of king's crowns? Christ being demanded of Pilate, what kingdom he laid claim to, answered, my kingdom is not of this world: but you, Saturnine, with the turn of a key, which others received as well as Peter, have delivered all that belongs to Caesar, to the Vicar of Christ's disposition, forsooth. Therefore what Christ could not do, can the Vicar of Christ do? That which the Lord himself would not undertake, shall a servant take upon him?  
Peter was a simple scholar to Christ belike, whom § 56 you do make to be your founder: 
What Peter did to Princes.  for he did not cast Nero out of his throne with a thunder bolt of excommunication: he did not forbid Christians from taking the Oath of Allegiance, or free them when they had taken it: he did not dispose of his kingdoms and dominions: he did not arm the servants against their master, or stir up other Princes against the Emperor. He taught that the glory of Martyrdom was to be sought after by suffering, not the infamy of rebellion by resisting: chiefly by Bishops, to whom he hath committed the power of persuading, not enforcing; the duties of teaching, not of fight: the use of prayers, not of weapons. Shall it be lawful for the Pope's successor, which was not lawful for his founder? did not Peter understand what it was to feed sheep? did he not learn what it was to bind and to loose? did he not know the power of the keys? Belike he had not met with your dictionary. He could with his word as well have strucken Nero, as he struck Ananias, but he following his master's steps, yielded simple obedience to Nero, as he had yielded to Tiberius.  
§ 57 Whose successors they were so far from resisting the Emperors, 
How Peter's successorus used Princes.  the servants their masters, that for 300. years, even to Sylvester they did patiently submit themselves to Pagans, as Martyrs, and for 300. years, to Boniface, they did humbly obey both Christian, Catholic and Heretic Princes, as beadsmen? and for 400. years, to Gregory the 7. they did obey them even in their absence somewhat tolerably, as freemen. For the times of the Empire were divers, as the times of the Church were, & as the qualities of Emperors were divers, so of Bishops: while the Emperor was but one and present, the Bishop was of small reputation, but when he was absent and divided, he grew great: the Imperial spoils being left in Italy, whereby the master being somewhat weakened and cast off, the servant began to grow lusty and stout, and I wish he would leave off to continue so still.  
Lest happily the King of birds do come  
And take his feathers from this jetting jay,  
Whereat the rest may do nought else but laugh  
To see stolen feathers taken thus away.  
For surely it was not thus from the beginning that the staff should resist the sword, the crosier the sceptre, the mitre the crown. No marvel you say: for then the Christian Bishops wanted temporal forces. They might well have excommunicated and deposed Princes, 
Ala: cont●exec Angli inst. pa 167.  if the Church had had power enough to resist. As two great Masters, of not building up, but of destroying divinity have taught, Alan and Bellarmine. 
Bellar: de Rom. Pont. lib. 5. cap. 7.   
So I believe, the Apostle Paul when he saw the ancient Christians to be few in number, and weak in power, § 58 taught them then not to resist the power, 
How Paul used Princes.  belike he served the time not the truth, when he taught that subjects should be subject to Nero for conscience sake. For when they were increased in number and power, if we believe these Cardinals, they should no more suffer as patiented Martyrs, but take upon them like boasting soldiers For so they have corrected the Apostles discipline with their worthy interpretation, and put out the crows eyes as the proverb is, and have wisely altered the rules of the holy Ghost which ought to be perpetual and immutable, to the practice of the Church as the case required. But one thing I doubt much they cannot wipe away. It is damnation to resist the power saith the Apostle: 
Moses.  what is it then to lay violent hands upon him? Moses forbade, that the people should not speak evil of their Governor: would he have suffered, 
Solomon.  if they could to resist him? Solomon forbade, that none should curse the king secretly in his conscience; did he grant by force to cast him off if they had might to do it? 
judas.  judas the Apostle did style them fitly Dreamers, that spoke ill of government, and despise such as be in authority: would he take these Cardinals for holy Doctors, who persuade the people, to drive the king out of his kingdom if they can.  
Let us believe it if it be possible, that Moses, Solomon, § 59 and judas the Apostle, when they would have the subjects tongues to be tied up, they would leave their hands to be lose. jeremy the Prophet exhorted the exiled jews that they should offer up their prayers for the life of the King of Babylon. Paul the Apostle did advise the persecuted Christians to pray to God for the safety of Nero. Is it eredible that the Prophet and the Apostle, for whom they would have subjects prayers poured out, that they would have their blood to be poured out? unless you think the Apostle was like to Charles the fift, who commanded that public prayers should be made for the deliverance of Clement the 7. whenas his own legions kept him captive.  
I expect that the Cardinals do thus expound the place of the Apostle, to have commanded them to have prayed for Nero, because they wanted force to resist: which if they had got, they might justly have gone from praying to violence, and from orisons to weapons. O warlike priests! In the mean while what wrong do they offer to Peter and Peter's successors, who suffered death for Christ, whom they insinuate not to have wanted courage but power to resist? And they make goodly Martyrs, if when they died for the truth, delivered rebellious souls out of their afflicted bodies.  

Tertul. in Apo. leget  And I wonder that two so learned Cardinals were so ignorant of the history, to say, that Christians might lawfully have resisted, if they had had strength, when Tertullian doth allege, that they had power, but might not lawfully resist. Which if it may be truly said of the second age after Christ, how much more in the fourth, fift, and sixth age, whenas christian's being graced by Princes, and defended by laws, might profess the § 60 Catholic religion, openly and freely. It is an not able saying of Austen, 
August in Ps: 124.  that the Christian soldiers did obey julian the Apostata their temporal Lord, not because as these men dream they wanted power to resist, 
Christian soldiers obeyed julian.  but for the Lord eternal. For the soldiers in their war against the Persians might easily have surprised julian being far from home, 
S●cra. lib. 3. cap. 22.  and secure. But they were, you will say, pagan soldiers. Yea forsooth, as Socrates tells us: the next day after julians' death, when jovinian was chosen Emperor by them, he refused that honour, because he suspected the greater part of the army to be heathenish, all of them cried out with one voice that they were Christians. The Fathers writ against julian, they fight not, they used their pens, not their arms; they struck the Apostata with their arguments, not with their weapons, as they dealt afterward with Constantius and Valens heretical Emperors.  
But your Cardinals, and Fathers do undertake the § 61 business against Princes, not with the pen, but with the sword, assoon as they be denounced excommunicate for heresy, and releasing their subjects from the Oath of allegiance, tell them they may bear arms against them having been sometimes their Princes, and do obtrude this as a principal head of Catholic Religion, making much for the salvation of their souls.  
Although I have lighted upon some who before the sentence denounced by the Church, hold that an heretical Prince by right for the very act, 
Caietane.  is to be removed forcibly by the subjects. But Caietane denieth that the subjects may be absolved before the sentence be publicly denounced. Very frankly: that he will allow somewhat to an heretical Prince.  
But Alanus will have all Heretics not only after they be by name particularly denounced, 
Alanus.  but by law and ipso facto as they say assoon as they begin to appear heretical, or be by law excommunicated, should be put from their kingdoms. For as Fame so Heresy.  Gathers strength by going forward. 
Alanus is somewhat more earnest in the matter then Caietane, who pronounceth that war to be holy, just and honourable, which subjects undertake against their heretical Prince, and doth advise the valiant Englishmen to take part with the enemy against the Queen.  
But after our Cardinal had delivered his opinion as Apollo from his three footed stool, 
Philop. 194.  Philopater doth boldly affirm, that it is an opinion certain, and of faith, and undoubtedly held of all the learned, and agreeable to Apostolical doctrine: that every Christian Prince, if he flatly fall from the Catholic religion, and call others from the same, to fall presently from all his power and dignity, by the force of God's law and man's law: and that before the sentence of the supreme Pastor and judge be denounced against him, and that all manner of subjects are free from every bond of Oath, which they should by obedience have performed to a lawful Prince; and that they may and aught, if they have power, cast out from the government of Christians such a man as an Apostata or Heretic, and a Renegade from Christ the Lord, and an utter enemy to the common weal.  
§ 62 There is an other sprung up, a man of a more fiery spirit, 
De iustae abdica Hen. 3. Gal. Re. William Reynolds.  and another Saturnine or Gracchus, William Reynolds, who said, that Henry the third French King was ipso fact● excommunicated, because he favoured Heretics. Who after a long disputation concludes that he was lawfully put to death before the excommunication published. For saith he, public grief doth not attend for legal forms. And though in a hidden crime no man ought to be condemned, his cause not being heard, or the party not being cited: yet in public and notorious crimes, the evident knowledge of the fact, is in stead of the sentence. What would this man do to an Heretic Prince, who thought a Catholic not to be spared.  
§ 63 Symancha proceeds farther, and he affirms that by the law a secret Heretic is to be excommunicate, 
Symancha.  and not he alone, but his son also: because Heresy is a leprosy, and that leprous sons are begotten by leprous Parents, and therefore to be put from the succession of the kingdom. O damned Rascal, that cuts up the root with the branches.  
Aquinas, Toletane, and Caietane were more temperate, these go to the quick, neither speak they so mildly and scholarlike, but they speak to the purpose.  
I could name you some Priests that bear arms, and that you held, Saturnine, to be lawful.  
Very odious, said Saturnine, are these your calumniations, § 64 wherewith you load our Priests, as if they had carried arms, they use spiritual not temporal sword.  
But your spiritual sword must command the temporal if the Pope command, said Patriotta. And you persuade that other should take arms, as Alanus did. 
The practice of Papists.  But what difference is there between the Author of a mischief and the Actor? Whether you counsel others to bear arms against the Prince, or bear them yourself? you do not arm the hand of a Subject, but you inflame his mind. You do not draw forth the sword, but you whet on the spirit with absolutions, promises, praises, rewards not only in this life, but in the life to come. Is this your Catholic faith? Doth this make for the salvation of souls? Christ and his Apostles did instruct both by their doctrine and example their disciples to humility, patience, faith, and obedience. You stir up your disciples, to insolency, fury, treachery, and sedition. Good God, how far doth your new Divinity differ from the ancient? You have seen already what Christ and his Apostles taught, now mark what they did. Christ for the redemption of the Church, suffered his blood to be shed. Christ's Vicar as he is cold, for the enlarging of his Empire is ever shedding other men's blood. Peter and Paul for the confirmation of their faith, did with quiet minds endure martyrdom inflicted by the Prince: And many Roman bishops did afterward tread in the same steps. But you their degenerated and bastardly offspring, for the sealing up of your treachery did go about with most bloody minds, to bring the most barbarous martyrdom upon our whole Nation, that ever was devised since man was created. O unworthy attempt. Therefore the spiritual Father of Kings, as he is styled, shall he tread under foot the majesty of a King? And the universal Pastor of the flock feed himself fat not with the milk, but with the blood of the flock? And shall he break in pieces Sceptres with his crosiars staff? And stall he stir up the people being quiet, whom he should have quieted being stirred up? And shall he set together by the ears Princes being at peace, whom being at a jar he should have appeased? And shall he set forth with the holiest title of religion, those two wicked policies the discord of Kings, and the rebellion of Subjects? As if when he filled all places with garboils and murders, he shall think he hath deserved God's favour, by the bloody sacrificing of innocents.  
§ 65 God hath hitherto disclosed the Pope's devices against the English Church and God hath taken vengeance on you, and that stone which you tossed up and down, is (o ye seditious Priests) rolled down upon your own heads. For what? Do you not think that your daily conspiracies are not as clearly apparent as the noon day? and all your devices with many projects made known and evident? that you as subtle Sinon's lurk closely among us, professing love to your Catholics worse than any hatred, persuading them to violate their faith sworn to the King, and hail in that Trojan horse, full of deceit, pernicious aswell to them as to us? That have your Cursitors as Pegasus, who run about hither and thither, quickly taking up all reports, that may inveigle men's minds, and watch for all occasions? That have your boy-priests gadding up and down, who may increase your number and forces, and, as Gracchus striplings, may stir up such as be offended already, and provoke them to an uproar? That set the old and greater Foxes over these cubs, who first open the school of deceits to them, and a shop of crafty devices, teaching that the Pope hath plenary power to depose a King, and absolve their subjects from the Oath of fealty: and that the King though he be not by name excommunicated, doth yet stand excommunicated by divers bulls, because he hath infringed the authority of the Pope's supremacy etc. and therefore that the subjects may, if fit opportunity be offered, attempt any mischief against his sacred person: persuading them in the mean while to dissemble their faith, and show an outward obedience to the King, while they reserve their heart to the Pope? You cherish closely your Catelines, who when the conspiracy waxeth ripe, may be your Captains and standerd-bearers to execute your wicked devices with actions and arms. Lay aside therefore that vizard of religion, which you have worn so long, cast away that habit of gravity, pluck of that cloak of sanctity: appear such as you are, confess yourselves to be the trumpets of war, not of the word: that you feed not souls, but seek for blood: that the Magistrate may distinguish between a devout and a quiet, and between a Machiavellian and a turbulent Papist.  
But you Calandre, and you the rest of English Papists, § 66 that be laics, I beseech you by jesus Christ, I do exhort you by your own salvation, that you repel these Sirens music, not only unprofitable but hurtful to the hearers, from your ears and your minds, lest you bring a most just reproach upon the true Catholic Religion, an incurable wound to the conscience, a lamentable ruin to your family, and an extreme plague to your country. This I had to say of the fealty and obedience of subjects to be performed to Kings and Magistrates, ordained by the perpetual commandment of Christ and the Apostles against the inhibition of the Pope, and the sophisms of the jesuits; it followeth that I pursue the second foundation of our obedience, the examples of ancient Christians, and chief of the Roman Bishops, unless happily any other course seem better to you.  
Then Calandre I promise you, said he, that nothing § 67 is more acceptable to us, that I may make answer for Argentine my friend. I never doubted of civil obedience to be rightly performed to good Kings by Catholics: I thought to confess the truth, I was absolved from the oath of obedience to Heretics and Tyrants, after once they were denounced excommunicated by the Pope, and now lawfully deposed from their kingdom. Now seeing I perceive that Christ, Peter, and Paul, not only taught, but showed civil obedience to Tiberij and nero's, and to be so far from taking from them with their divine power, as they might, their sceptre, sword and Crown, that under them they laid down their life to confirm their faith and obedience. You have said that which makes me begin to doubt, of such force of excommunication, and such power of the Pope.  
For when I did diligently observe every passage of your disputation Patriotta, out of that perspicuous and short exposition, & as it were consisting of those three texts, I must needs confess, that the sparks of this unknown, and unheard of truth, did first cast themselves into mine eyes, wherewith the authority of Aquinas, Toletane, and Laterane Council for their power of excommunication, and the authority of the Pope alleged by Saturnine, presently brought a must over them. But light was brought out of the mist by Fristugensis, Vrshergensis, Sigebert, and Vincentius, and all the ancient and sincere Catholics, and grave witnesses of those times, as I hear my Velbacellus affirm, at what time Gregory the 7. did first attempt to drive Henry the 4. Emperor by his excommunication out of his kingdom. Here Saturnine being driven from human authorities, betook himself to divine. But whatsoever he took, Patriotta straightway caught it out of his hands; where he said that the Apostle forbade we should not salute an heretic, and commanded to avoid him after one or two admonitions; Patriotta made answer, that he forbade voluntary society, not necessary subjection, private familiarity, not public obedience. And when he priest that a gangrene was to be cut of, he instantly replied, that it was not an heretic, but heresy was compared to a gangrene, and with a religious kind of charity, (as it seemed) sparing the heretic, thought good the heresy should be rooted out. And from thence in my judgement concluded not amiss, when no heretic was to lose his inheritance or his life, that a King much less was to be deprived either of his life or inheritance by reason of heresy. Here Saturnine bent all the force of his wit, and betaking himself into the fortifications of the old Testament, from every place gathering the forces of examples, with arguments drawn from thence fought very valiantly, so that when I heard him alone, he made me consent almost unto him. But this heretic Patriott, shrunk not a foot, but presently buckled hand to hand. He had said that Saul was deposed, Patriot as the truth was distinguished, that the person of Saul was not removed from the possession of the kingdom, but his offspring from the succession. But by whom? even from GOD, not from Samuel, whom he proved to be not a judge, but a messenger, nor to have inflicted the punishment of deposing, but to have published the decree, and that not by the right of his general vocation, but by special instinct and revelation from God, not as Prophet, but as a Prophet appointed to that end, to anoint David for the succession of the kingdom, whom God had named with his own mouth. So that nothing can accrue to the Pope from hence, unless he can prove he have received a revelation to depose a Prince.  
When he contended that jeroboam was cast aside § 68 by the Prophet, he again denied it, confessing he was grievously reproved by the Prophet, not violently removed.  
Saturnine assaults again, that Ozias a Leper was by force driven out of the Temple, by Azaria and 80. Priests, and that he was separated from the society of men, and the government committed to jothan his Son.  
Here Patriott, a better Text-man as it seemeth, denied that the King was put out of the Church forcibly, but being struck with a leprosy, was enforced by his own accord to departed out of the Sanctuary, not out of the kingdom; the right whereof he reserved to himself to his dying day, and put over the government to his son as to his Vicegerent. And that a Leper never lost his private inheritance, much less his public. And when as heresy is a leprosy, nor ever any was deprived of his kingdom for leprosy, and therefore for heresy none was to be deprived. Which reason must needs satisfy me in this business, unless it can be proved that the leprous jews lost their inheritance.  
And when Saturnine affirmed that the lepers were separated from the company of men by the Priests, Patriotta excepted against it, that it was their duty to discern the leprosy, but the Magistrates were to put them apart. So that the judgement of the business belonged to the Priests, the parting of the person to the Magistrate. Whence he concluded and retorted it upon Saturnine, who said that heresy was a spiritual leprosy, that it followed from this figure, that the King ought rather to separate an heretical Pope, than the Pope an heretical king. So that this figure was more hurtful to the Pope then to the King.  
§ 69 One thing there was which both Patriott did shrewdly reinforce against you Saturnine, and did likewise mightily offend us all, when you concluded out of Azarias example, that it was lawful for Priests to take arms to repress the wickedness of Kings, for the Priest resisted the King not with arms, but with words: unless perhaps you will take a grievous admonition, reproof and reprehension for arms. Azarias did not cast the king out of the temple, much less out of the kingdom. And do you think of corselets, swords, and lawnces, wherewith a warlike Priest may remove a King from his throne? fie upon this proud vanity. A Bishop ought not to be a striker, much less a warrior. It was not lawful for David to build up Gods material Temple, because he was a man of blood, and will you build up Gods spiritual Temple with bloody hands? But I refer you to the canons, and go forward.  
For where you said that Athalia was lawfully deposed § 70 by jehoida the Priest, it was first answered, that she was never rightly created and crowned. Again, that she was deposed by jehoida, not as he was high Priest, but chief Prince of his tribe, and next ally to the king, nor by himself alone, but joined with all the Nobles of the kingdom: not with the authority of the Priest, but by the authority of joash, being first anointed and crowned by him: that whatsoever he did, he seemed to do by the power of the king, with the common consent of the Peers and Nobles against the wicked usurper of the Kingdom, which had murdered all the King's Progeny. What is this to the Pope, that he may depose a lawful Prince with his Bishoply authority?  
And whereas you propounded Elias zeal to be imitated by you, Patriott answered truly, that your zeal was too fiery, and would prove too preposterous, unless you could prove you had Elias special instinct.  
And when you said that Achab was removed from his Kingdom by Elias or Elizeus: it is partly true, partly false. It is true that you say, he was removed, but by jehu whom one of the sons of the Prophets did anoint by God's special commandment, which God gave to Elizeus, that jehu should root out all the posterity of Achab. He was not therefore deposed by Elias or Elizeus, but by jehu, whom God had raised up by name extraordinarily for that purpose. Neither did the son of the Prophet, when he anointed jehu, begin thus, thus saith Elizeus, but thus saith the Lord.  
This doth no whit help the pope's cause, that Patriott did sometime scatter abroad your arguments, as brooms that are not bound together: and enforced him as a cripple with a broken leg to halt now upon one leg, now upon both, both in his antecedent and consequent: as if the antecedent retained neither truth in the matter, or Law in the form, and the consequent had lost all the necessity of proof. So that you neither did help the pope's power, or satisfy our consciences.  
For it was to no purpose, as he rightly said, to seek for causes at the last, why princes should in fact be deposed by priests and prophets, when you cannot prove that any was deposed.  
§ 71 You therefore as it seems, could not allege that any king was deposed by a priest, but Patriott did allege that a priest was deposed by a king, one especially, Abiathar by Solomon. This did not only not help but hurt the pope's cause.  
Hear when you did enforce the covenant between God and the King, your ready adversary did demand, if the King break any of the articles of agreement, who would enter suit against him? or in what court or consistory were he to be accused? And out of your own grant he concluded, when you said that the king held his supreme authority taken from God, and therefore the king was to yield account to God alone in the heavenly court for his government.  

Two pillars of government overthrown.  And where there are two pillars of government, Authority in the King, and obedience in subjects, which for all our good we are to keep safe & sound, you seemed, Saturnin, to overthrow them both, when you made the king, as it were, an hypothetical proposition, and the subjects conditionales: but when you made the Pope's categorical and absolute, although I reverence them as most holy fathers, yet I will speak truly, you have dealt herein as an unskilful Physician, who gets a more grievous disease to the body by curing one that is easier.  
Being repelled from the old Testament you fled into § 72 the strength of the new, and here I had great hope, that that your feed my sheep, and I will give you the keys, had well strengthened the Pope's authority, and sharpened the edge of ecclesiastical excommunication. But it fell out otherwise. For the adversary proved that by the first words diligence was enjoined the bishop to feed the flock, and by the second were committed the keys of the heavenly, not the earthly kingdom. And he brought for proof not only Augustine and Bernard, as common witnesses: but Aquinas, Pope Urban, Dominicus à Soto, and Ludovicus Rycheomus, all of them being on our side, who thought the force of the keys to be not in possessions, but in crimes, not in binding Sceptres, but sins, and judge it not to be a rooting up, but a mere discipline. What you! do you think these to be Heretics, as lately you termed Sigebert and Vincentius? what marvel is it if strangers accuse the Pope, when his own condemn him? if his enemies set upon him, when his friends forsake him? if the late Catholics leave him, when the ancient forsake him? The first foundation therefore of our obedience laid by Patriotta upon the perpetual and unchangeable commandment of Christ and his Apostles stands firm and sure; unless you think that it be lawful for the Vicar of Christ, an holy man though a sinner to pluck down the sacred tables of the Testament, to violate the heavenly laws of Christ, and to abrogate the eternal decrees of God.  
For whereas in the end you say that the Apostles and their Successors might lawfully have deposed Nero, Dioclesian, julian, Constantius, Valens and the rest, if the Church had had power to resist: you would never have said it, as your adversary rightly objected, unless you think the holy Apostles and fathers were dissemblers, who obeyed those evil Emperors for fear, not for duty, for times sake, not for conscience sake: wherein we heard that not the holy Scripture only, but the ancient history was directly against you.  
§ 73 That we may greatly lament that Bellarmine and Alan so great wits brought forth so wicked an untruth. And that we may omit Symancha, Creswell, Reynoldes, Parsons and others of our side, who brought all their wit and eloquence to patronize so wicked a cause with Alan, trumpets, not of the word, but of war: and we must needs confess that they have brought an overthrow to many Catholic families, and a plague to their Country; but also a torture to our consciences, and an everlasting infamy to the Catholic religion.  
Wherefore leave off I pray you any more to solicit us in this cause, Saturnine, upon whose head we see your first argument to be retorted by Patriotta, who confessed that subjection, reverence, honour, fealty, and obedience is due to a King, while the King is a King.  
But the King is king, and we be subjects notwithstanding any excommunication, or authority of the Pope whatsoever, as Patriotta hath proved against you (as it seems to us) not only with common, but with proper arguments of our own Catholics.  
It followeth therefore, by your own confession that all subjection, reverence, honour, fealty, and obedience is to be performed of us to our King.  
§ 74 Then Saturnine, I am right hearty sorry, most honourable Calandre, and am much vexed with all, that you whom we ever held a devout son of the Roman Church, now to find a Renegade in the Heretics tents, and not only doubting of the supreme authority of the bishop, but that which is far worse, and more dangerous to your soul, oppugning it.  
For not only the excommunication of Princes, which to divers seems to be the sovereign censure of the ecclesiastical and spiritual power of the Pope, belongeth unto him, but their overthrow also and rooting out, which proceeds not from the power of excommunication, but from the power of a certain supreme authority in the Pope; either as he is directly the Lord of the temporalties, or indirectly in the order to the spiritualties, as very learned and holy Catholic fathers have delivered.  
I am not ignorant what was attempted lately by George Blackwell the Archpriest with certain answers of his to weaken and cut in sunder all the sinews of ecclesiastical excommunication. Neither that only, 
Blackwell accounted an Apostata.  but hath broken and cut off as it were the joints of the Pope's two arms, not that of his supreme authority spiritual and ecclesiastical, but of his civil and imperial power, which the Roman Bishop hath received from Christ, and hath exercised upon the earth under Christ. But the timorous old man, and wretched Apostata, did not so much hurt by his fact as by his example, which gave occasion of a very foul schism to you the Catholic laics, whose constancy the Christian world did much commend.  
Hear Calandre you are too testy, said he, Saturnine, § 75 who straightway call me a Renegade, when I never fell from the Catholic faith, only because I refused and rejected certain false Catholic errors brought in by a company of factious fellows, certain claubackes of the Pope. But because your heat hath carried you so far, to accuse the reverend old man George Blackwell, as a wretched Apostata, and a Captain of schism, I will entreat Velbacellus, that he answer somewhat, not for me only but much more for our Archpriest his ancient friend.  
Then Velbacellus: Truly said he, when I am unwilling § 76 at any time to dissent from my brethren, than never more unwilling then at this time, when ill hap hath made our adversaries beholders of our disorders. But because I think it not fit, Calandre, to neglect your authority, and withal have purposed to satisfy both your conscience, and mine, in this worthy business of religion: I will do as you advise me.  

Two popish means to overthrow Princes.  These are as you say, Saturnine, the two engines the Roman bishops have used to overthrow Princes, the one ecclesiastical excommunication, the other civil and imperial authority. What was the force and nature of excommunication, they were not Ignorant, they knew it was given to bind sins not sceptres, as Patriotta did truly dispute out of our own men. Which first when Gregory the 7. was Pope, as he did rightly observe out of Frisingensis, Sigebert, and Vincentius all ours, brought forth those monstrous effects, the deposing of Kings, the absolving of subjects, and the stirring of them up to take arms against their Prince, with which this present Oath of allegiance doth meet.  
Whose successors fearing that ecclesiastical excommunication in process of time, would lose not that native and inherent power, but that unnatural and borrowed in the opinion of men, they assumed that civil as you call it, and imperial power given by the Canonists for the increase of their own authority, as if it had been bestowed by Christ himself.  
§ 77 For the old Canonists did first make them Lords of all the temporalties, and said, that the supreme jurisdiction, not in spiritual things only, but in temporal things also, did belong to Peter's successors, whose worm eaten assertions, and such as long ago were hist out by the more sober Papists, certain men, not unlearned, have lately renewed, and have set them out publicly in printed books, for found and Catholic doctrine, and have very stoutly defended them. Whereof some 
a Franci: Bozius de temp. eccles: monarch: lib. 1. cap. 3. fol. 98.  as you say, defend the Bishop of Rome to be directly Lord of things temporal, one and the same to be the Ruler and Monarch of the world. That 
b Baron. annal. tom. 1. ann. 57 pag. 423. & 433.  Christ as he received all judicial power from the Father, and united it with his Preist-hood, when he meant to settle a Kingly Preist-hood in the Church, put it over to Peter and his successors: and that as Christ was King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, so the Church ought to be Queen and Lady of all, and if the husband must be Lord of all the temporalties, the spouse must be Lady of all likewise: that all temporal Princely power did first reside in the soul of Christ: then in the Church the Queen of the world, and from thence it did flow to others, that were faithful or unfaithful, as from a fountain. 
c Thom. Bozi. de iure statu. praefat. ad Aldobran.  That this spouse of Christ, Queen of the world, as often as the order of the universal doth require it, can transfer the proper right of one to another, as a secular Prince, for the adorning of a city, may pluck down private men's houses, and may do it by Law, although he have not erred, by whom such rights were translated to others. So the Pope gave the Indies to the Spaniards. 
d Isodor. Moscow. de mayest. mili. Eccles: pag. 670  All dominion do hold of the Church and of the Pope the head of the Church. And that authority is to be considered in the Pope, power in Emperors and Kings: for power doth depend of authority: that true, 
e Care de potest. Rom. Pont. pag. 9 Difference between power and authority. Idem pag. 111.  just and ordinate from God, and mere dominion as well in spiritual things as in temporal, is fetched by Christ, and the same is committed to S. Peter and his successors: that Christ was Lord of all these inferior things, not only as he was God, but also as he was man, having at that time dominion in the earth: and therefore as the dominion of the world, both divine and human, was then in Christ as man, so now it is in the Pope the Vicar of Christ. As God may be called by a secondary means, the temporal Governor and Monarch of the world, though in himself principally he be neither temporal nor of the world: 
Idem pag. 112.  so the Pope may be said to be the temporal Lord and Monarch, although his power be a certain spiritual thing. That Christ when he had performed the mystery of our redemption, as a King, gave Peter the government of his kingdom, and that holy Peter did use that power against Ananias and Sapphira. That Christ, as he is directly the Lord of the world in temporal things, and therefore that the Pope Christ's Vicar is the like: that he set out an immutable truth, by the sole coming of Peter to Christ upon the water, 
Pag. 151.  and that the universal government, which is signified by the sea, was committed to Peter and his successors: that divers powers and authorities were given of God, but that all did depend upon the supreme authority of the Pope, and that they take their light from thence, as the stars do from the Sun.  
§ 78 And as God is the supreme Monarch of the world productively and gubernatively, 
Pag. 145.  although of himself he be neither of the world nor temporal; so the Pope, although originally and from himself he have dominion over all things temporal, yet he hath it not by an immediate execution, and committeth that to the Emperor by an universal jurisdiction. That the Roman Bishop is the chief father and man in the world: and that all hang on him, as on the chief workman (he should have said foundation) otherwise if any should appoint an Emperor by himself (I think he should say a substantive) in respect of his temporalties should make two principles, which heresy that he might avoid, he makes the Emperor an adjective; 
Isodor. Mos. pa. 22. de mayest. mil. Eccles.  As another saith, that the holy writer in the old Law made the Priesthood an adjective to the kingdom, but that S. Peter made the kingdom an adjective to the Priesthood. 
g though Boz. de iure sta. lib. 1. cap. 6. fol. 137.  That kings are not immediately from God, but by the interposing of the Church, and the chief Priest thereof. That there is a warlike and compulsive power given to the Church above Kings and Princes: that Constantine gave nothing that was his own, but restored what was unjustly and tyrannously taken from the Bishops.  
§ 79 That Christ committed to Peter the keykeeper of eternal life, 
Isido. Mos de mayest. pag. 27.  the right of earthly and heavenly government: and that in his place the Pope is the universal judge, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords: and therefore that he is consecrated as a chief Bishop, and crowned as a King. Because he hath each power: that he useth that power either absolutely or ordinarily: absolutely, when he doth abrogate such laws, as he please: ordinarily when he useth laws. When he will live under laws to use the counsel of Cardinals; when he will not, to rule without counsel, because his power is from God, not from the College of Cardinals. 
I think not only Asses but Lions also.  That all the faithful and the unfaithful, and every natural creature, for so he speaketh, is subject to the Pope's government, and that therefore the Pope doth all men to worship him, prostrate themselves before him, and kiss his feet: that the adoration of Dulia service is given to him, as to Images and Saints, in respect of his kingdom he hath a crown, of his priesthood a mitre: That Emperors and Kings may be compelled to observe their oaths taken at their coronations and confirmations, because by the virtue of their oath they be made the Pope's vassals. That by the Law of God and nature, the Pre●sthood is more eminent than the Empire. That secular powers are not necessary, but that Princes should perform that by the terror of discipline, 
August. trump apud Carer. p. 130. & 132.  which a Priest cannot do by virtue of his doctrine. And if the Church could punish offenders, the Imperial and Kingly government should not be necessary, because potentially it is included in the Apostolical government. 
Celsus Mancinus ib 3. cap. 1. Et Care. p. 133.  That it may be avowed of Christ's Vicar by a certain similitude, which Plato in Time us spoke of God: for being demanded what God was, answered, he is not man, he is not heaven, nor good, but somewhat that is better: if a man shall demand, whether the chief Bishop be a Duke, a King, or an Emperor, 
Isodor. Mosc. pag. 80.  he shall answer warily, if he shall affirm by denying, that the Pope is something more excellent, something more eminent. That all temporal jurisdiction is to be exercised, 
F●e upon flattery.  not at the Pope's commandment, but at his beck. Prince's will and command, God the Lord doth all things with his beck agreeable to that.  
He spoke and with his beck made all Olympus quake. And that Christ had all plenary jurisdiction above all the § 80 world, and all creatures, and that therefore the Pope Christ's Vicar hath it. To what end I pray you, to what end? As they make Christ, 
Leli: Ze●h: tract: Theol. pag. 81. Franc. Bozius lib. 2 cap. 14.  so they make the Pope the absolute Lord of the world, out of those words, Behold two sword, which signify the power spiritual and temporal, and from them I will give you the keys. The keys of heaven are given, therefore of the whole earth. And from those words, all power is given to me in heaven and in earth, therefore the right, both of the heavenly, and earthly Empire is committed to the Pope, who is Christ's Vice gerent upon earth. To what end say I? But that Christian Kings, and Emperors should acknowledge, that they hold their kingdoms and Empires of him, forsooth, and that as oft as they do any great hurt to the Church, they may be deprived by the Pope, and the right of their kingdom may rightly be conveyed over to others: or if they do not acknowledge it, they may be constrained by arms either of their own subjects, or of outward Catholic Princes, if the Pope will have it so, to part with their kingdom and life.  
§ 81 Here Patriotta, I believe truly said he, that your Doctors did strive among themselves, by advancing the dignity of the Popes, and suppressing Emperors and Kings whether of them with a more gross, or with a more spruisse kind of flattery, might set forth the pride of the Pope's court. But the very naked recital of these toys, seems to be a sound refutation of them.  
Then Velbacellus, I do said he, and have much grieved, that the withered, and decayed opinion of the Canonists, disproved long since, and rejected of good Catholics, should be now taken up again, and brought in as a thing forlorn, by so many excellent wits, the chief whereof both for place, and learning was Cardinal Baronius, who did very stubbornly and obstinately defend the direct, ordinary, and inherent authority of the Pope, whereby as a Lord of the world in temporal matters he may at his pleasure depose Emperors and Princes. Is it not necessary to add his many other reasons. They are extant in his books that are in many men's hands, there they may fetch them, that will have them.  
There is sprung up on the other side Cardinal Bellarmine, § 82 a man of no less credit with our men, 
Bellarmine.  and as well deserving of the Church, who did overthrow that ordinary, direct, and inherent government of the Pope in temporalties, as left by Christ, with so sound arguments of scripture, that in my mind neither the adversaries, nor himself afterward could with his most exquisite skill of distinctions dissolve them. But that he may seem somewhat to gratify the Pope, although saith he, he be not the Lord of all temporalties directly, neither hath inherent and ordinary authority as he is Pope to disthronize temporal Princes, yet be is Lord of the temporalties indirectly, in order to the spiritualles, as he usually speaketh, and hath an extraordinary and a borrowed authority, as he is chief spiritual Prince, to alter kingdoms, to take them from one and give them to another, if it be necessary to the salvation of souls, i. in order to the spirituals.  
Carerius a Doctor of Padua, 
Carerius against Bellarmine.  a sharp witted and earnest fellow, he is of a contrary opinion, and doth not only strive with argument, but lays a curse upon the adversaries, sparing none, no not Bellarmine himself, whom he taking in hand of purpose to refel in a whole book, written as the Preface imports, against the wicked Politicians, and Heretics of our time, did a little too plainly touch the Cardinal: So far are they from agreeing in the manner of diriving so great authority to the Pope from Christ.  
Here Patriotta, your Doctors saith he, § 83 seem praeposterously to wrangle among themselves, of the manner to derive such authority from Christ, when as yet it appeareth not that he hath any at all: and in vain do they argue, whether the Pope received directly or indirectly such government, when it is doubtful whether he received any or no. But I easily grant them by their dissenting about the manner to overthrow the thing itself: that the confusion of tongues may again seem to happen in building their tower of Babel.  
§ 84 Then Velbacellus, somewhat more gently I pray Patriotta. Although that I ingenuously confess, while they thus eagerly strive among themselves about the manner, and overthrow their own opinions with mutual contradictions, they seem to leave the Pope very small or no authority at all in temporalties. For Carerius saith, the Pope hath either ordinary and direct authority to depose Kings as he is Pope, or he hath no authority at all. But he hath none direct and ordinary, as he is Pope by Bellarmine's assumption. Therefore he hath none at all by Carerius conclusion. It were long, to set down all the reasons drawn from Scripture, whereby Bellarmine hath utterly overthrown the direct and ordinary authority of the bishop, neither were it necessary, because they may be had in his fift book he set out, so that men may think he spoke one thing and thought another. Which when he might not touch openly for offending the Pope, he did with sleights and devices impugn, that he might by any means deliver the truth.  
For he seemeth indirectly, that I may use his own adverb, to take away all power of the Pope of depriving Princes. For if the Pope, as he is Pope cannot directly, and ordinarily depose Princes, though the cause be just as Bellarmine saith, and yet as he is the chief spiritual Prince, may dispose of kingdoms, taking them from one, and giving them to another, if it be necessary, for the saving of souls, that is, indirectly in order to spirituals as he affirmeth; what other thing did he closely insinuate, but that the Pope had no power at all to displace Princes? For Saint Peter, neither did, or could transfer any power but ordinary. Besides it is plain, that the Pope is no otherwise the chief spiritual Prince, but as he is Pope, so that what he cannot do as Pope, he cannot do as he is the chief spiritual Prince.  
Which Carerius concludeth against Bellarmine, and doth urge it with this grant, that the Pope is properly called God's Vicar.  
Either he is not saith he, the Vicar of Christ, or else he deposeth inferior powers as Pope.  
But he deposeth them not as Pope: by the witness of Bellarmine.  
He is not therefore the Vicar of Christ by the conclusion of Carerius.  
So Bellarmine gave Christ's Vicar so grievous a wound, if we believe Carerius, that he could never cure with all the remedies of his distinctions. And Carerius while he decks him with strange feathers, spoiled him of those were his own. Whom while he ordained Lord of the temporalties, hardly left him Lord of the spiritualties. In the mean time, when neither the direct, nor indirect power be a matter of faith formally determined by the public sentence of the Church, as Alanus and Covarruvias confess, there was no reason why Saturnine should call my friend Blackwell wretched Apostata, who never swerved from the Catholic faith; unless by inveighing so bitterly against Blackewell, he vaunt himself to be of the contrary faction.  
Then Patriotta, I willingly behold Bellarmine and § 85 Carerius, as Cadmeyes brethren, or the Madianites cutting one another's throat. But I could more willingly behold the Pope, as a jackdaw despoiled of his Eagles and Doves feathers which he hath stolen, which is of all his regal and bishoply ornaments, wherewith he hath so long jetted so proudly and terribly up & down: but I leave this cause to God, to be mended by him at his due time.  
But truly Baronius and Carerius with all their faction do flatter the Pope more grossly, but Bellarmine with his cunning opposition flatters him more smoothly, being the more dangerous enemy to Kings, because the more close. But that I often observed the witty old fellow crossing of himself with his own tricks, and coining those distinctions, whereby he unweaved those things which he had woven before. O Penelopean skill of disputing. But while he doth touch kings crowns indirectly, and tells us that it is all in the Pope, so that he thinks it meet to belong to a spiritual end, he bewrayeth less malice, but greater craft.  
Here Argentine who had kept silence from the beginning, looking earnestly first on Saturnine, then on Velbacellus, Saturnine, saith he, seems to me, to be more strict in this matter, then is requisite, and Velbacel more lose and remiss: because he gave too much authority, this none at all, to our most holy father, to suppress Kings when need requires. This great Doctor of the Church therefore Bellarmine took a middle course, who first overthrew that infinite power of ordinary and inherent government: then retained that extraordinary and borrowed authority in the Pope, least Kings like untamed coultes, as it were, not having bit and bridle should wax too lusty, whom the most holy Pope might bring again into the circle of religion and justice, if once they began to start out, first with his counsel, and after, if that were relected, with some other moderate chastisement. Which would be the most safe course for Kings, and very available for subjects.  
§ 87 Then Carolus Regius, this moderate chastisement of Kings, Argentine, as you call it, is their utter ruin and rooting out if you understand Bellarmine aright. For there lurks under those adverbs certain deceits, which subjects have found to be as damnable to them as Kings have. For he bringeth in your Pope, whom one doth well term Satan's Ass, with this his extraordinary and borrowed power which he bestowed upon him, curbing of Kings with a bridle, when the reins lay on his own neck, turning and overturning kingdoms at his pleasure, taking them from one and giving them to another, 
Means of the Pope's greatness.  when he thinketh good that it is for the order tending to spiritual good. And by what counsels he always used, to take from Kings both their kingdoms and their lives, all histories do show them to have been, by the emulation of neighbour Princes, the faction of subjects, the treason of the nobles, and the superstition of the people. And do you call this a moderate chastisement? And safe for kings, and good for subjects? Wherein as there are many things very unjust and unworthy, so those are most of all, that he termeth these wicked treacheries holy counsels, and pretends that they tend in order to a spiritual end. And do in that manner sow the scruples of conscience, mingled with the seeds of treachery in the hearts of men, as if the grains of religion and rebellion had sprung out of one and the same blade. So it comes to pass, that the Roman faith at this day doth beget and nourish most dangerous faction both to Kings and subjects, which so long is very demure and humble, till as a wise man observes, it hath found the key of power and authority. For as all faction which springs out of the heat of desire, is dangerous, so that is most dangerous which riseth out of the scruple of conscience. For when it riseth from desire, it is like fire, that taketh hold of stubble, which though presently it rise up into a great flame yet soon being consumed is extinguished. But when it ariseth from the conscience, it is like fire, that heats iron, which getting his strength but slowly, keeps it surely; as a very worthy and a wise Senator left it in writing.  
Wherefore that which Bellarmine said of the Oath of § 88 allegiance, that it was not therefore lawful, because it was offered someway tempered, and qualified; that may more justly be said of the Pope's temporal dominion, as it is qualified and tempered by Bellarmine: know therefore Argentine, that such qualifications are nothing else, but Satan's sleights and deceits, wherewith the majesty of Kings is either openly or closely assailed, which Christ hath fortified plainly with his commandments. That these vain pretences of adverbs are Satan's gins and stratagems, whereby under the colour of religion, he bringeth utter destruction both to your souls and bodies. But because you will not give as good credit to us, as to your own men, and I think it not meet to take upon me Velbacellus part, I pray you Calandre entreat your Confessor, that he would lay open and unfold the subtle and hurtful flights & devices of this working brain.  
Yield so much, saith Calandre, to the Catholics your friends, Velbacellus, yield it to the Catholic religion, which is necessary to be discerned from these false Catholic opinions, as you call them, lest the consciences of Catholics be corrupted.  
§ 89 Then Velbacell, I will do, saith he, as you require me, in respect of my duty to the King not unwillingly, but against the Pope's inhibition not so willingly, howsoever it be, I answer for the satisfying of the conscience sincerely, and for the Catholic religion not unfitly.  

The Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy confounded by Bellarmine.  And I marvel much that Bellarmine, being a learned man, and of great wit, did confound the Oath of Allegiance with the Oath of Supremacy: but I am grieved at the heart, that the supremacy of the Pope, which he doth of right enjoy in spiritual and ecclesiastical causes, is so enfolded with the worldly government, which is in temporal and civil causes, that he brings his lawful authority in hazard to be lost. Add thereto, that when he had overthrown the direct dominion of the Pope in all temporal matters with sound reasons, he did maintain the indirect government in order to the spiritual, as he speaketh, with such slight & flaggy arguments, that with this his playing fast & lose, he seems to have left him no authority at all. Although other think otherwise: and think that he doth aswell submit Kings crowns to the Pope's feet, as Baronius doth. But let it be as every man takes it. He cannot directly take away the crowns from Kings. What then? but he can indirectly: he cannot as Pope ordinarily depose Kings, but extraordinarily he can, as he is the chief spiritual Prince: He hath not inherent authority: but that is fetched else where: much forsooth: what matter is it with what authority Kings be cast off, if they may be cast off by the Pope? But they be worse than mad, who subject the crowns of Kings to schoole-distinctions.  
Hear Saturnine: But although, said he, it please § 90 you to scoff at the distinctions of Catholic Doctors, yet I hope you will not deny that the Pope is Lord of all the temporalties, which doth belong to the Bishopric of Rome.  
But that England & Ireland are portions of Peter's patrimony, and the Bishop of Rome's temporalties, it is plain by the articles of agreement between Alexander the third, Pope of Rome, and Henry the second, King of England, agreed on in the year of the Lord 1171. who when he was absolved by the Pope, for the death of Thomas of Becket, did covenant that none should afterward accept that Crown of right, or should be acknowledged for King, till he had his confirmation from the chief pastor of our souls. Which covenant was renewed in the year 1210. by john, King of England, who had confirmed the same by oath to Pandulphus, the Pope's Legate, at the request of the Barons and Commons, as a matter of great importance, to preserve the commonweal, to keep it from the unjust usurpation of Tyrants, and to avoid other mischiefs, whereby before they had smarted, and to prevent that they fall not into the like again, by the default of any wicked King thereafter. Wherefore if it be honourable and pious for the Bishop to dispose of the kingdom, being made tributary, why may he not likewise depose a refractory and a disobedient Prince?  
§ 91 Then Velbacellus, you allege, saith he, a worm eaten and ridiculous charter, whereby you make the King of England Tributary to the Pope, 
England not tributary to the Pope, neither can be.  which was never done: and if it were, it neither could, or ought bind the successors Kings of England. For Rome neither can, nor ever could at any time show such a grant, as Thomas Moor that great Catholic doth argue: and if it could, it was to no great purpose, for no King of England might at any time give away England to the Pope, or make his kingdom tributary, though he were so disposed. Therefore let us pass by that counterfeit compact, and that frivolous devise, and let us return to the matter in hand, The question is not Saturnine, of the true temporalties of the patrimony of Peter, but of the true temporalties of the patrimony of Kings, the sovereignty whereof either directly or indirectly is given to the Pope, and it is given either by Law divine or positive: and therefore the temporalties of Kings do no more belong to the Pope, than the temporalties of Peter belong to Kings. And every King may as well deprive a Pope, as any Pope may deprive a King. And an Emperor may aswell he called Lord of all the spiritualties, as a Pope Lord of all the temporalties. But God hath distinguished these, giving the spiritual swords to Popes, and the temporal to Kings, as Bellarmine himself seemeth formerly to confess: who if he had been still the same man, he would never have placed Popes to be Lords of temporalties indirectly, for order to the spirituals, and have rooted and cast them out as Kings, and have attempted any evil against them by their agents, either subjects or strangers, when place and occasion was offered, if they thought it available to spiritual good: 
So it is a spiritual action, but a diabolical.  as if he thought the murder of Kings to be a spiritual action, which after some sort may be said with a distinction, that the spirit of God doth not direct and govern such bloody counsels, but the spirit of Satan. Who if he go forward as he begins, and use the pen of such a man as Bellarmine is, it is to be feared (I will speak plainly, what I think truly) it is, I say, to be feared that blood will overtake blood: and that Kings will imitate Charles the fift, who when Clement the seventh began to grow proud, belegred Rome with his army, 
Bellar. de Rom. Pont. tit. lib. 5. cap. 6.  and battered the castle of Saint Angelo, not with arguments, but with cannon-shot.  
But why, added the Cardinal to his adverb indirectly, § 92 other of the like force, 
Bellarmine's dangerous adverbs.  incidently and casually seen? as if he should say, although the Pope as he is Pope, cannot ordinarily, no not upon just cause depose a Prince, yet as he is Lord of the temporalties, incidently and casually he may change kingdoms, and take them from one, and give them to another, if not as the politic Prince of the Church, yet as the chief spiritual Prince, whether I say he do not lay traps for Kings, whereby they may more certainly of a sudden be surprised. thieves have not an ordinary power to break up houses well fenced, or to rob travelers by the highway-side being well accompanied, but they have power casually to do both: when they light upon houses that be but sorrily defended, or travelers that be ill appointed. So he denieth that the Pope hath ordinary power to depose Kings, and to cast them off, but grants that he hath a power accidentary and casual, whereby he may either with his own, or others forces, or with the secret devices of his part, by any means overthrow king, when they least suspect it, and find them most weak and feeble, looking for no such matter. What is this else but to make the Pope Machiauils scholar, sometime playing the Lion, sometime the Fox, attempting the destruction of Kings with whom he is displeased, either by force or fraud, as he can casually bring his purposes to pass, and swallow up Kings, as it were, their prey? which without doubt is far from the holy father's mind: but so it sometimes falls out, that wicked men being deceived by such distinctions do abuse the opinions of learned men against the Pope's will to the ruin of Princes.  
§ 93 Therefore Calandre and Argentine if you will be advised by me, put out of your minds and consciences, this bewitching and overthrowing divinity; you may do better to go the plain, and the King's highway, directed by Christ and his Apostles, and showed unto you erewhile by Patriott: and avoid these by-paths and dangerous downfalls, that you may live and die with the honour of your families, and safeties of your consciences.  
Then Patriott, I wish it, I wish it, said he, with all my heart Velbacell, 
The second foundation of obedience the practice of Christians, & chief of the Ro. Bishops.  that you understood all the mystery of iniquity aswell as you understand this part in controversy, I will clear your eyesight with an ointment, as old Tobies was. And being warned by you, I will show you the right way of obedience, prescribed by Christ, and trod forth by the footsteps of the ancient Christians, and chiefly of the Bishops of Rome, that I may finish that I promised, that it may appear what predecessors the Bishop of Rome had in the better ages, and what in the worse: who were so far off from having power in the temporalties, that they had it not in the spirituals, & they who vaunt themselves, now to be Lords over kings, acknowledged themselves to be their servants, as I will make it plain out of your own histories.  
§ 94 And when I often think of the former times, it is doubtful to me whether the Bishop of Rome grew greater by the piety and obedience of his ancestors, 
How the Pope grew great.  or by their impiety and rebellion: or whether he attained greater power and wealth by the munificence of former Caesars, or by the overmuch patience of such as succeeded: for when as the ancient nobleness of that Imperial city, and the great estimation of the Apostolic See, and the invincible holiness of thirty Martyrs had first made him famous: then the great favour of Christian Emperors, 
Popes for their excellency first had primacy of order.  and the sincere faithfulness of the Bishops, and their dutiful obedience did so highly promote and advance him, that he did easily obtain the primacy of order among all the other Bishops. And you might perceive for the first six hundred years, at the least, virtues in the Bishops contending with virtues, patience with obedience, and constancy with learning: and you could hardly know whether they were more famous for the glory of their zeal and martyrdom, or for the commendation of their knowledge and obedience. So great was the favour of Emperors, so deadly the hatred of Pagans, so exceeding the love of Christians was toward the Bishops, that you may well doubt whether their cruelty did more purge and refine the Bishop's holiness, or this over lavish bounty did infect and corrupt it. Whence came that notable speech of Tertullian, The blood of the Martyrs is the seed of the Church, aswell as that of Augustine's: Religion brought forth riches, and the daughter eat up the mother. Which I think was not spoken to that end, as though the subsequent peace had clean extinguished that primitive zeal, which persecution had raised up, but rather cooled & abated it: for as the Bishops for 300. years, to Sylvester, performed passive obedience to the Heathenish Emperors: so before and after Boniface, for 500 years they performed active obedience to Christian Emperors. And when as either an Heretic, or an Apostata, or a Tyrant possessed the seat of the Empire: yet by the doctrine of Christ, when they might not do that the Emperor commanded, they would suffer that the Emperor inflicted.  
The histories are extant which show that the Emperors § 95 were acknowledged supreme Lords, 
Pope's subject to Emperors.  even in things spiritual, by the Rom. Bishops, & that they were reverenced & obeyed, not with a constrained, but voluntary observancy, not with a counterfeit, but sincere humbleness of mind. Did not Meltiades the Bishop of Rome acknowledge Constantine the great to be supreme head in things spiritual, 
Meltiades. Euseb. l. 1. cap. 5 August. lib. 1. con. Parmen. Epist. 162. & alibi Reticio. materno. Marino.  and did he not humbly obey him, when as he, as the Emperor commanded, together with others, did hear the cause of Cecilianus and Donatus, about the choice of a Bishop, committed by the Emperor, not to himself alone, but to other Colleagues? who when as Donatus first appealed from the sentence of Meltiades, he committed the whole matter again to be discussed by the Council Aralatense, called together by him, excluding Meltiades out of it: from which Council when Donatus did the second time appeal, because Caecilianus had received his ordination from Foelix, he referred Foelix business to Aelianus a civil Magistrate: to whose sentence when Donatus would not stand, the Emperor called the whole cause before himself and determined it. Meltiades was far from the sovereignty of all temporalties, when the Emperor committed an Ecclesiastical cause, first to him and other Delegates, and after appointed second judges, and lastly called the whole cause before his Royal Majesty, and by himself determined it Meltiades being excluded.  
§ 96 Damasus, Siritius, Anastasius, did they not acknowledge Theodosius the elder their supeme Lord, 
Theodor. lib. 5. cap. 23. Damasus, Siritius, Anastasius.  and most humbly submitted themselves unto him, when as Flanianus was grievously accused before the emperors Majesty, that he had intended upon the See of Antioch against the canons of the Church, was freed by the Emperor against their wills, and commanded to return to his country, and feed his flock committed to his charge?  

Innocentius.  I think Innocent did acknowledge Arcadius' son to Theodosius his supreme Lord, when we was an humble suitor to the Emperor, that he would command a Council to be assembled for the examination of Chrysostom's cause: whom for all that the Arrian Emperor did reject in a good cause, 
Nicephor. lib. 13. cap. 3.  and sent away his messengers with reproach, as perturbers of the Western Empire, drove Chrysostome farther off into banishment, published a decree wherein he inflicted a penalty of deprivation upon all Bishops, who favoured either Innocent or Chrysostome, and would not communicate with Atticus, Chrysostom's successor. Innocents' cause was the better at that time, but Arcadius' authority was the greater. It was then no new matter, that the Bishops of Rome were humble supplicants to Emperors: so far was it that they had rule in civil causes.  
Leo the Bishop did humbly entreat Theodosius the § 97 younger to command a Council of Bishops to be called together in Italy, to repress Eutiches heresy, 
Leo Epist. 9  which place the Emperor would not hear off, but assembled the Council at Ephesus: where when Dioscorus the Bishop of Alexandria had oppressed the truth, and confirmed Eutiches heresy, and had cast out Orthodoxal Flavianus from his Bishopric of Constantinople, Leo did the second time earnestly entreat the Emperor that he would command a general Council to be gathered in Italy, 
Epist. 24.  which for all that Theodosius would not grant to the good old man. If at that time the Bishop could have commanded the Emperor, what need had he to entreat him? if the power of assembling Counsels had been in Leo, why did he give such deep sighs? why did he shed so many tears, wherewith he might move the emperors gentleness in that business? which when he saw was denied him in so great an hatred of the Christian faith, why did not the Lion begin to roar, and affright the Emperor with excommunication? why did he not cast him out of his throne? why, if he might have done it lawfully, did he not deal with him by threatenings, or by force of arms? but then the Bishops of Rome did attempt all things with prayers and tears, not with threats and weapons.  

Epist. 43.  When Theodosius was dead, he did as humbly and as earnestly entreat Martian, who had gathered together the Chalcedone Council, that with his Imperial decree he would disannul the Council of Ephesus, and command the Chalcedone Council that they should not serve from the Nycene faith. Leo's piety, certainly, was great, far greater than his authority: but his piety, at the last, obtained that it required. Wherein Leo was not superior, but happier, in that the Imperial authority was answerable to the Bishop's holiness.  
§ 98 Gregory the great did humbly tell Mauritius the Emperor, 
Gregor. Q. 2. Epist. 61.  that the charge he enjoined him, as he thought, was unjust, and yet being commanded, did publish the emperors decree. I did (said he) perform my duty each way, who both gave obedience to the Emperor, and for God delivered my mind what I thought.  

Lib. 5. Epist. ad ora. de bal. fili tradendis.  I think he did imitate Ambrose, whose answer to Valentinian the younger, being an Arrian Emperor, is very memorable, being commanded to allot one church in Milan to the Arrians, which though he condemned the thing, granted. I will (said he) never willingly part with my right, and being compelled, I have learned not to resist. So keeping a sincere conscience to God, denied not obedience to the Emperor.  
Let the Bishop of Rome now go and learn modesty of those ancient Bishops, at lest of his own precessours, but especially of their great Gregory: who acknowledged Mauritius the Emperor, from whom john of Constantinople had received the title of universal Bishop, to be his most reverend Lord, and himself his servant, as many had done before him. But Gregory the great did more lessen and abase himself, who am I that speak to my Lord, that am but dust and a worm? (how far off was this worm from deposing of Lions) which he professed not with a feigned, but sincere humbleness of mind, and submitted himself to his Lord, not with a show of humility, but with a necessity of duty: unless peradventure you will imagine Gregory to be a dissembler, reverencing the Emperor with feigned, not true obedience, and submitting himself in jest rather than earnest.  
But after that Boniface, Gregory's successor, had § 99 from Phocas obtained the title of universal Bishop, the Bishops perchance did deny their obedience to Emperors.  
No indeed: for Agatho when Constantine did call divers learned and holy men out of the West, who should communicate with the Greeks' in the sixth general Council, about the truth of religion, he writ back, that he had sent his fellow-servants to his most excellent Lord, according to the most holy decree of his Princely Maiestly, and the duty be aught unto him.  
Our submission hath obediently performed, which is by you enjoined, and in another Epistle, all the Bishops (saith he) both of the North and of the West, the Christian servants of your Empire, do give thanks to God for your religious mind.  
Yea truly, two hundred years after the universal § 100 title, when the Empire was translated out of Greece into Germany, when it did reside in the family of Charles the great, who had left the Pope great possessions in Italy, 
cause: 2. quest. 7 cap. Sic nos.  how dutiful and humble did the Pope show himself to Ludouike his son, and Lotharius his nephew?  
The submission of Leo the fourth, Bishop, that we may make short, is famous and notorious, which he showed to Ludouike and Lotharie: We, if we have done any thing (Leo the Bishop writing to Lodouike) and have not dealt justly with them, over whom we be placed, whatsoever is done amiss we will amend at the discretion of your Excellency: beseeching your Majesty, that you would be pleased to send those, who in the fear of God may strictly examine, not only those things whereof we are accused, but all other our dealings both great and small.  
Hear we have the Emperor the Pope's corrector in great matters and small.  
But this was, you will say, no part of the Pope's duty, 
Ibi ca Petr●.  but a dispensation of the Pope's humility. Indeed Gratian doth speak so ridiculously, as if the Bishop had submitted himself in jest, for a mock to the Emperor, and not in earnest and of bounden duty.  

Distinct. 10. de capi. Caro. Ludo & La. ha.  Did he afterward in jest, or with voluntary humility submit himself to Lotharius, and not rather in all duty & observancy, when he promised that he would inviolably observe all the Ecclesiastical laws of Charles, Ludouike and Lotharius, and did swear not only present obedience, but for ever after?  
The Bishop of Rome was then, as you see, the emperors subject and servant. He did humbly supplicate the Emperor, as his Lord, he did not proudly command him as his servant. He did obey, he did not resist: and that not a Catholic only, but an heretic also, and that an Arrian. He gave honour to his person, he offered no wrong to his crown. He kept his laws, he did not gainsay them. And he received Ecclesiastical canons from him, himself set down none. He did perform the Oath of obedience, he did not then free others from keeping it. The Emperors themselves were not only, but their Lieutenants also, were the Bishops of Rome judges and Correctors, in all matters, both small and great. The Pope's therefore were not then their judges and Controllers. They were not as yet Lords of the spiritualties, much less of the temporalties, as they are now termed by their Clawbacks.  
§ 101 
Popes grew greater by abundance, & division of the Empire.  At the last, being enriched and furnished with the temporalties of Bishops & Kings, by little & little they began to wax proud against their Lords & patrons: & grew very great by the division of the Empire, the departure of the Emperor out of Italy, the dissension of Kings, and the rebellions of the people.  
Gregory the 7. was the first as Frisingensis testifieth, 
Gregory the 7. the first that excommunicated & cursed Emperors.  1600. years after Christ, that cursed Henry the 4. Emperor with excommunication, and assayed to set him beside his kingdom: and to that end loosed his subjects from their oath of obedience. Whose next successors followed his frantic humour: Who as Hilde brand had stirred up first Rodolphus, then Hermanuus, after that Ecbertus all servants against their Sovereign, and lastly Courad and Henry sons against their father, all of them being bound with an Oath of fealty, and these beside with the bond of nature.  
But the Author of this tragedy Gregory, 
Sigeb. in ann. 1●84. Vesserg. in an. 1089. Gregory's fall.  four years after being forsaken by his own people, with a joint consent of all was cast out of his Popedom. And being at the point of death, as Sigebert found it written of him, one of his twelve Cardinals whom he chief favoured being called unto him, he confessed to God, to S. Peter, and the whole Church, that he had grievously sinned in the administration of the pastoral charge committed unto him, 
In the life of Greg. 7.  and that by the instinct of the Devil he had raised discords and wars among men, as Benno the Cardinal writeth.  
I am not ignorant that the Italian writers of malice against the Emperor, did go about to hide and dissemble the faults of their Pope with the greatest skill of lying that might be. Who can give credit to Blondus, Fulgofius, Trithemius, and other writers of small account, either of a later time, who were borne some hundred years after these things were done, that either for favour, or hatred as Bloudus, or for ignorance as Fulgosius, and Trithemius the Abbot they might easily overreach? who I say can credit these men ascribing false praise to Hildebrand, when as his own abbot and Cardinals, who were not only earewitnesses, but eyewitnesses of the whole tragedy, who had a purpose not to honour the faults of men, but defend the ordinance of God, branded him with deserved infamy? and writ that the chief. Author of rebellion and perjury was put beside his Popedom? and that he troubled the world being moved by the instinct of the Devil, as he confessed upon his death bed? And may we not now marvel, that this Bishop who followeth his outrage, may not fear his ruin? Who hath stirred up Tirone against King james a most merciful Prince, as he stirred up Rodolphe against Henry the Emperor.  
§ 102 But Rodolphe the chief Actor, when he beheld his right hand cut off in the skirmish, 
Rodulphus ruin and repentance. Vrsbergene in ann. 1080.  and ready to give up the Ghost, fetching deep sighs, is said to speak thus to the Bishops that stood about him, as Vrspergensis records: Behold this is that right hand, wherewith I swore fealty to Henry my sovereign Lord, and now as you see showing the trunk of his arm I leave both his Kingdom and this present life. Whose end I wish to Tirone that most treacherous Traitor, but I wish him his repentance also.  

In ann. 1080. Hildebrands' revelation.  Sigebert writeth that Hildebrand by a revelation from heaven, as he said, foretold the death of a false King that year wherein Rodolphe was slain. He understood him to be Henry. But Henry fight with his Saxons returned Conqueror, and Rodolphe the false King died. If this were a true Revelation, as Gregory said; God as he foretold did thus punish Rodolphe the false King whom Gregory had raised up against his Lord: if it were not a divine Revelation, but some devilish familiarity with the spirits, what a holy Saint was this man whom you so commend, who had such acquaintance with the Devil, who deceived and betrayed the frantic humour of this his hellish Scholar.  
§ 103 That same treacherous head likewise of Hermannus being broken by a stone cast from a tower by a woman's hand, 
Hermannus ruin.  his brain being dashed in pieces and running about his ears, frighted and scattered the army following the ensigns of his treachery.  

Ecbertus' ruin.  Eebertus flying out of his throne into a sincke-hole to save his life, lost it.  
Conradus the elder son being rightly disinherited of his father's kingdom which he had betrayed died miserably. 
Conradus ruin   
Henry the younger son being instructed by the Pope's lesson, to break his oath wherewith he bond himself to his Father, 
Henry's treachery against his father.  first levied an army against his Father; And when by the intercession of divers of the nobility, who regarded the sun rising more than the sun setting, the quarrel seemed to be ended between the Father and the Son: the son alured the Father with promises, tears and Oaths, to enter into a castle, whom he received as an Emperor, but detained as a prisoner, and made him this offer, that either he should resign his crown, or his head. O most perjured and villainous parricide: O most wicked scholar of a wicked master.  
That stone which Gregory the 7. first moved against § 104 Henry the 4. Emperor, with his overthrow as it appeareth: the same other Popes afterward have not left off to cast down upon other Emperors, and Kings, sometime with no better success, always with no less disgrace to the Church. As Adrian the 4. and Alexander the third, against Frederick the first, Honorius, and Gregory the 9 and Innocent the 4. against Frederick the 2. two very wise, devout, and valiant Emperors that we name no others.  
For Adrian the 4. 
Adrian against Frederick.  an agreement being made with the Cardinals and William King of Sicily, and other peers and cities of Italy that they should expel Frederick the first out of Italy, first cast out his bolt of excommunication. And when a fly shortly after had choked Adrian as he was a drinking, 
Choked with a fly.  Alexander the third persecuted the Emperor in the same footsteps, he sent out his Cursitors out of his own bosom, who should solicit Crema, Placentia, V●rona, Mylaine, Brixia to rebellion; he did more incense William the King of Sicily his adversary to assault Frederick. He did corrupt Henry Duke of Saxony and made him forsake his sovereign in the field; he raised up the French, the English, the Spanish and the Venetian to molest and vex him: with these devices, and engines he endeavoured to strip the Emperor of his kingdom and his life. But God did so bless and assist his servant Frederick, that he took the cities of Italy, and overthrew them, drove the treacherous Duke out of his dukedom, and the Pope from his Popedom, and made him fly to Saint Mark at Venice under the habit of a Cook. Although he afterward being moved by natural affection, to release his son out of captivity, suffered himself to be there trod upon by Alexander's feet. 
Alexander trod upon the emperors neck.  Which base indignity was not so reproachful for the Emperor to suffer as for the Pope to commit.  
§ 105 It is not requisite to touch the causes why the Pope's thought meet that Henry the 4. 
As Cardinal Wolsie dealt with King Henry the 8.  Emperor and Frederick the first should be deposed; whenas there was no lawful power or just reason for any Popes at any time to depose Emperors. Adrian the Pope that followed, was displeased with Frederick the first, because the Emperor had set his name in his letters before the Pope's name: because he forbade the Cardinals under the colour of visiting the Churches to rob and to spoil them: i. because he withstood the bishops ambition and avarice. As Gregory the seventh set upon Henry the fourth, that he might transfer the donation of bishoprics taken from the Emperor to himself, so Adrian to exempt the persons of Bishops, whereby neither in respect of their benefice, or duty they might adhere to Princes.  

Frederick the second had good success against the Pope. Pla. in Greg. 9  The like causes did incense Honorius and Gregory the 9 and Innocent the 4. against Frederick the second his Nephew, whom God did assist being so unworthily abused, that he handled the treacherous Cardinals according to their deserts, plagued the Popes and his Priests, shut up Gregory the ninth, and brought him to that misery that he died in great anguish of mind.  
Let the Pope take heed lest if he Gregorize with Princes, Prince's Henrize, and Frederize with Popes.  
Neither is Innocent the 4. 
Conuina. Theobaldus. Franciscus. Gulielm. de San. Severino. Pandulphus.  therefore the more happy § 106 man, that by the name of the Church, the power of the keys, the discord of princes, the negligence of bishops, the superstition of the people, he drove Frederick the second out of his Empire and provided two other to be chosen in his room. For if they had not prevailed more with conspiracies and poysonnings, than elections: 
Caspini. in Freder. 2. Frederick murdered.  they could never have surprised Frederick that noble Prince. But at last he was taken away by poison as he returned into Apulia. Whereof when he seemed to have recovered, he was choked with a pillow, by Manfred his bastard son, as he lay in his bed.  
These be the acts of Popes whereby they ruinated Princes, and so highly advance their Popedom: 
The popish engines against Princes  Excommunications, wherewith as with hooks they catch after kingdoms, and as with whips to scourge kings; open rebellion whereby they toss Princes up & down as balls with their feet; and secret conspiracies, whereby as with gins they lay for and entangle Princes, and take them unawares, that they may more covertly take them out of the way by poison.  
That there is a great doubt as I said, left whether the bishop of Rome grew more by the virtue and obedience of his predecessors, or by their treachery and wickedness: whether by the beneficence of former Emperors, or patience of the later, he is come to that height and top of greatness that the world wonders at.  
I have now laid the two foundations of obedience toward a King whatsoever he be, and of the fealty of their subjects One in the perpetual and unchangeable decree of Christ, the other in the perpetual practice of the ancient Christians, and chief of the Bishops of Rome, for eight hundred years at the least till worldly ambition had clean put out all piety and religion.  
§ 107 Here Saturnine, that I may omit saith he, other things (lest our disputation be overlong) which you have collected out of histories concerning the bishops of Rome, that one I cannot pass over, that you said that Gregory the 7. whom you defaced as much as you could, was the first Author that excommunicated and deposed Kings.  
For both Leo the 3. Emperor was excommunicated by Gregory the 2. and plainly deprived of all his temporalties he held in Italy, and the Greek Emperors were removed from the Empire by Leo the third bishop of Rome, for defect in religion, and forsaking the defence of the Church, and the Empire translated to the Germans. 
The defence of Popes. Causa: 15 qu. 6. alius Plat. in Zach. 1. Fussing. lib. 5. cap. 22.  For who knoweth not that Childricke the French King was deposed by Pope Zecharie the first, as foolish and unprofitable, and Pipine appointed in his place? as it is clear in our law, and Platina writes that by his authority the kingdom of France was adjudged to Pipine. And Frisingensis, which Author yourself do follow, writeth that Pipine was absolved by Pope Steven from the Oath of fealty, which he had given to Childricke, and the other peers of France likewise, and that the King being shaven and thrust into a Monastery, Pipine was anointed King. More than that, Gregory the great, whom erewhile you called a worm in respect of the Emperor, did bring the same into practice whereof we now speak, four ages before Gregory the 7. for in the charter of a privilege granted to the monastery of Saint Medard, he so decreeth; If any king, Prelate, judge or other secular person whatsoever do violate the decree of the Apostolic authority and grant, of what degree or state soever he be, let him be deprived of his honour.  
Wherefore in that you deprave Gregory the seventh that most holy man being dead, because he was the first that offered to depose Henry the 4. Emperor, a man full of dishonest lust, 
The Empe●●● Henry the 4. slandered. Auenti. lib. 4. Anna. Bot●.  infamous for his adulteries & whoredoms, which his very friends could not deny, as Aventine writeth: truly it bewrays both great ignorance, and singular malice in heretics. And, that I may not heap many things together, wherewith the histories of those times have set forth the fame and glory of Gregory; the form of his election, as it is set down by Platina, Sabellicus and other writers, 
Author. 3. conver. Angli. par. 2 cap. 7.  doth easily show what kind of man he was. We have chosen this day, being the 21. day of May, in the year of our Lord 1072. for the true Vicar of Christ, 
Gregory's false praise.  Hildebrand the archdeacon, a man of great learning, great holiness, wisdom, justice, constancy, religion. The commendation of Lambert Schafnabergensis is extant, wherein he writeth, that those things which were usually brought to pass by the prayers of Gregory with signs and wonders, and most fervent zeal for God and the laws of the Church, do sufficiently defend him against the venomous tongues of all slanderers.  
And what other authors write, even the Germans themselves, of Gregory's enemy, infamous for adultery, 
Marian. Sco. i● chro. an. 1075  simony and other trespasses, what shall need to speak? Marianus Scotus is witness, that Gregory the 7. moved with the just outcries of Catholic men, who mightily spoke against the savageness of Henry's impiety, did for the same excommunicate the Emperor, but principally for his simony, in buying and selling of bishoprics. And this act of the Pope, did greatly content Catholics, but displease them who were ready to buy and sell benefices, and favoured the Emperor.  
I might allege the same for Adrian the fourth, and § 108 Alexander the third, against Frederick the first, and for Honorius, and Gregory the ninth, and Innocent the third against Frederick the second, but that I remember, you gave us a caveat, that the question between us was not about the quality of the person, but about the right of power. I might show also if it were not over long, that those very Roman Bishops themselves, whose humility and obedience you commended, did perform the same, not with any prejudice of their right, but for want of power to resist the heretical and tyrannous Emperors. I might allege likewise national councils and Parliaments also, which did always approve the necessary and just correcting and deposing of such Emperors and Kings, as you name, by the Pope's censures.  
§ 109 Then Carolus Regius, it is pretty, said he (which the Orator observes) to put over the business till another time, when you have no more or better matter to allege though you would. But that I may briefly answer the objections, that Leo the 3. Emperor, was deprived of all his temporalties by Gregory the second, 
Leo the Emperor, how deposed by the Pope.  which he held in Italy; certainly if we diligently search the history, although the revolt of the Italians from Leo the Emperor of Constantinople, may seem to be the act of Gregory the second, 
Zoner. an. Tom. 3. in impera. Leo. Isaar.  as historians testify, because it made much for the Bishop, to have the emperors wings clipped in Italy: yet it nothing belongs to the controversy in question: for the Pope did it not as the minister of excommunication, but as the head of rebellion; neither as a Bishop without the rest, but as a Rebel with the rest, not with that universal authority, which § 110 he now claimeth, but with a popular sedition.  

Visp●rg●in an. 718. Sige●ert. in an. 731. Blond. dec. 2. l. 1 Sab●ll. Enne. 8. lib. 8. Au●ntin. Anna lib 4. fol. 344. & Sigebert. in an. 801. How the Empire was translated to the Germans.  But the Empire was translated from the Greeks', by Pope Leo the third, to the Germans. Not so. For the Empire was translated, not by the Pope's keys, but by the decree of the people of Rome, as your own historiographers testify, neither for religions sake, but for respect of civil justice: for the Romans who had in purpose revolted long since from the Emperor of Constantinople, who perceived themselves to be forsaken of the Grecians, and exposed to the inroads of the Lombard's, taking that occasion, because a frantic woman, that is, Irene the mother to Constantine the sixth, had put out her sons eyes, and taken away his crown, all of them with one applause chose Charles for their King, crown him by the hands of Leo the Pope, and salute him Caesar and Augustus.  
Neither did the Pope depose Childericke, 
Sabell. ●nne 8. lib. 8.  the French § 111 King, but gave consent to the Peers and people of the Kingdom, deposing him, who making much of Pepines prowess, 
Childericke not deposed by the Pope.  and being weary of the King's silly weakness, Zacharie the Pope being first consulted withal, and the title of a King taken from Childericke, that all hope of ruling might be taken from him, shave him for a Priest, and chose Pepine for their King. He was therefore set beside his Kingdom, not only by the Pope's consistory, but the council and consent of the Peers and people, for that he was unprofitable for the kingdom, as you observed: how justly I do not dispute, only I show, that not by the excommunication of the Pope, who could never have brought so great a matter to pass, but by the joint-consent of the Nobles and people, he was put from his Kingdom, and Pepine and his posterity substituted in his place.  
For whereas you said that Gregory the great, brought § 112 the deposing of a King into act: that is very ridiculous: for I demand what King he deposed? you take exception, that he far before is deposed by him, whosoever for time to come, doth break the privilege of that house so long as the world endured. And therefore he deposed Kings, not only before they were crowned, but before they were borne. But the proposition that you defend, is as false, as the reason you allege is frivolous. What King soever doth infringe the privilege of the monastery of Medard, let him be deprived of his honour. Whether is this rather a deprivation of a King, or an imprecation? Add which you omitted, and let him be damned in the lowest pit of hell with judas the traitor. If the Pope have power out of this place to depose a King, he hath likewise power to damn him. But he hath not power to damn him, therefore he hath not power to depose him. Are you well in your wits, who take a vow for a censure; and the form of imprecation, for a sentence of deprivation, a former curse, for a revenge following?  
§ 113 And you never can sufficiently adorn and set out Gregory the seventh, your sweet delight, and that worthily, for that he showed himself not only a traitor, as you are yourselves, and desire to make others like yourselves; but also a captain and ringleader of all treason, to promote the glory of Priests, with diminishing the credit of the people.  
For those praises which you lay upon Gregory, and those reproaches you cast upon Henry, do nothing either help your cause, or hurt ours: but I wonder that this good archdeacon, as you call him, proved so bad a Bishop, 
Gregory condemned, and for what.  that all the German Bishops almost did condemn him in the Council of Worms, of monstrous perjuries, strange mis-behaviours, and divers outrages in his life. But the Italians did acquit him. Not so neither. For thirty of them being assembled at Brixia, after they had received Ambassadors and letter, from nineteen Bishops, who had consulted at Mentz, with the Nobles of Italy and Germany, did publicly testify, that Gregory did most impudently intrude himself into the See Apostolic by deceit and bribery, did pervert all Church government, did trouble all government in the Christian Empire, did attempt the destruction both of body and soul of a Catholic and peaceable King, and maintained a perjured rebel against him. Nor being therewith content, at last adjudged Hildebrand a most shameless person, committing sacrilege and robbery, defending perjuries and murders, calling into questiun the Catholic and Apostolic faith, about the body and blood of Christ, being an ancient scholar of Berengarius the heretic, an evident observer of dreams and divinations. And therefore to be canonically deposed for his backsliding from the true faith, 
Lambert in an. 1077.  and to be thrust out of his Popedom. But these factious fellows favoured the Emperor against the Pope. What? they that favoured the Pope against the bishop? But Lambert Schafnaburgensis doth praise the man. But the same very Lambert, whenas he was the Pope's Legate, and had showed that the Emperor had reconciled and submitted himself at Canufium, yea by his own report, all of them (the Italians) began to chafe, to hiss and clap their hands, and to scoff at his apostolical Legacy with flouting outcries, and to cast out bitter and railing curses in their mad mood, that they nothing regarded his excommunication; whom all the Italian bishops had excommunicated a goodwhile since upon just causes; him, who had climbed up into the Apostolic seat with simonical heresy, imbrued it with murders, defiled it with adulteries and capital enormities: that the King had done otherwise then became him, and had much stained his honour, for submitting the majesty of a King to an Heretical Pope, most infamous for all villainies. For all this we excuse not the faults of the Prince, but defend his right, neither do we accuse the life of the Pope, condemned by his own side, but we weigh his fact: we observe this one thing, that a Simoniacal and an adulterous Emperor, as Marianus Scotus writeth, was ill removed by a Simoniacal and adulterous Pope as the Germans and Italians call him.  
I am not ignorant that Frederick the first and second, § 114 are after the same manner as bitterly traduced and disgraced by the Pope's Flatterers as Henry the fourth was: 
Princes traduced by popist writers.  as Lud●uicke the fourth Emperor by john the 22. and Philippe the fourth surnamed the fair, the French King by Boniface the 8. and Henry the 2. King of England by Alexander the 3. and john King of England by Innocent, all of them being once excommunicated, were by the flattering style of the Roman writers abused and slandered. That it is no great matter to wonder at, that the Princes of our time being taken for Heretics by you though falsely, Henry the 8. Edward the 6. Elizabeth, and james the first be so unworthily dealt withal, who did even then in the midst of popish darkness so cruelly vex their own Princes.  
But that not only the English whose faithfulness toward their Princes, certain hired vassals of the Pope have endeavoured to corrupt in their books set out in English; but that the Germans, the French, the Spaniard, the Italian may see out of their own monuments the fidelity of their ancestors toward their own Emperors and Princes, even then when the Popes did most terribly thunder against them: that they may acknowledge it with me, and the rather imitate and express it, in so clear a light of the Gospel: hearken I pray you hearken, not what a few Lutherans and calvenistes, but what the Catholics of these nations almost without number, have often decreed in their Synods and Parliaments for their Kings against the Pope's tyranny: which writers shall with authority easily overcome the rest either old or new, being few in number and corrupted by bribes.  
§ 115 You heard before what the Germans & Italians both bishops and Nobles did decree publicly, for their Emperor Henry the 4. against Gregory the 7. Now hear what the Germans did publicly first for Frederick the second against Innocent the 4. then for Lewes against john the 22. and after of the rest.  

The Pope resisted by the popish clergy.  The German bishop's first whenas they had received a charge from Albert Pope Innocent's Legate, to publish the bull of excommunication against Frederick, all of them refused it. The Abbots being commanded, to curse the bishops that refused, neglected it. The Clergy receiving a new charge that they should choose new bishops, and the Monks other Abbots, being greatly aghast at the novelty of the example began to disdain, and chafe: and detest the rashness of the Pope's Legate, and grievously to accuse even the Pope himself, for undertaking so strange and shameful an action against all equity and right, and filling all Germany with troubles.  
How did they entertain Raberius a French man being another Legate sent from Innocent in the same business, having his associate the bishop of Rentzburge when he delivered the bull against the prince? All of them scoffed at the man's impudence, and disdainfully asked what that light headed and superstitious French man, what the Rome-pope himself did in Germany, without the consent of the Germaine-byshops his colleagues. They disdain that discords should be sown, that the liberty of Christians should be oppressed, that the flock of Christ redeemed by his blood should be brought into slavery by false Teachers. And when the Legate would not give over, the German bishops did not only despise his commandments but denounced a curse against him in all their Churches, as an enemy to Christian peace, and an Arch heretic, and pronounced him to be worse than any Turk, Saracene, Tartar, or Iew. They did publicly likewise accuse the bishop of Rome, for attempting such matters among Christians, which were against reason and the law of nations, against the doctrine of Christ, and which were not at any time done among the most savage Tartars.  
And as the Bishops, so the nobles of Germany did take in foul scorn so great a wrong offered by the § 116 Pope to the Emperor their Master: & to repel it convented all the States, wherein Eberhardus the archbishop of Salisburge a godly old man, when he had known ten Romane-byshoppes, and had diligently marked their practises and dispositions, under Frederick the first, Henry the sixth his son, and Frederick the second his Nephew for fifty years together, that the chief bishop was wholly compounded of avarice, luxury, contention, wars, discords, and desire of rule and so did decipher him for a ravenous wolf in each part under a shepherds weed, and so lively paint him out, that although in other matters he were not a Lutheran, in this one, you would have said he had been almost Luther himself The old Catholic father's Oration is extant in Aventine a Catholic Writer, 
Auenti. annal. lib. 7. fol. 683.  there you may have it if you will read it.  
§ 117 That which the bishops and Nobles of Germany with the whole commons did with common consent against Innocent the fourth in the quarrel of Frederick the Emperor, the very same they did in the like quarrel of Lewes the fourth Emperor against john the 22. that although they were released from the Oath of Obedience they did notwithstanding take the Oath of obedience to be faithful to Lewes though he were removed, and that they did by the judgement of all the Doctors in both laws.  
Philip the fair the French King in a council with full consent of the Nobles and bishops, did not only set at nought, and despise the injust sentence of the Pope's deprivation sent out against him, but brought all the kingdom from the Pope's obedience: and that he might the better tame his pride, he laid hold of the Pope, kept him in durance, so that within six weeks after in great anguish of soul he gave up the Ghost. 
Popes crossed by the French.  The pragmatical sanction is well known, which did of old infringe the Pope's authority: and all the canons of the Church of France (that part which maintaineth the popish religion) and all the decrees of the King's parliament do so disannul the Pope's power in excommunicating Kings and releasing their Subjects from the Oath of obedience; 
Tract. inscript. le Franc. Discourse an. 1600.  that the very body of Sorbone, and the whole University of Paris do condemn the doctrine of the jesuits as schismatical and pernicious.  
Neither Henry the 8. only, Edward the 6. and § 119 Queen Elizabeth, 
English practice against Popes.  whom you term Caluinists and Heretics, did by their laws expel this usurped authority of the Pope, and punished by death the Abetters thereof: but other Kings of England, who reigned in the midst of popery, thought good to contemn the Pope's censures, and to suppress the Actors therein by your Laws.  
The law of Edward the 3. 
25 Edwar: 3.  doth it not seem to be made by a Caluinist, which makes it treason, to attempt and go about the death of the King, to move war in his Kingdom against the King, or to join with the King's enemies in his kingdom, or to give them aid, and comfort, either within the Kingdom or without?  
Do you not see how that two hundred years before Queen Elizabeth was borne, the Priest's treason, covered with the habit of religion by the Statute of Edward the third in every branch of it, as it were with lime twigs, is met with and suppressed?  
If to attempt the death of the King be treason, therefore Greenway and other jesuits, who took counsel to destroy the King and kingdom had been Traitors by Edward the thirds Law although Queen Elizabeth had made no such law.  
If to raise war against the King in his kingdom were then treason, the priests were Traitors, who stirred up papists to take arms and to join themselves with Catsby and Persie in the rebellion.  
If to join with the King's enemy in his kingdom were then treason, how can you then, ye jesuits, avoid the sharpness of King Edward's law, who being the instruments of sedition, do adhere to the Pope the King's deadly enemy, under the colour of religion?  
If to aid and animate the King's enemies either within his kingdom or without was treason at that time; truly whosoever at this day under pretence of religion whatsoever do either solicit foreign Kings, to invade this Kingdom, as Garnet, Creswell, Baldwine, and others have done; or persuade the people to take arms to depose their King, as Greenwell, Hall and others have undertaken, were Traitors although Elizabeth with her Caluinists, had never made any law against them.  
§ 120 But King Edward's law you will say doth not touch the people by name. True. But when the noble King remembered that the French King was stirred up against john King of England, who had contemned the Pope's censures, that the Subjects were incensed against their King, the Barons and Bishops fell from him, and were the Ministers of the Pope's wrong; that thereby he might the better confirm his subjects in their obedience, against the French, the Spanish and the Roman, and all others whatsoever, fro● whom he foresaw danger might come to himself and his kingdom and that he might decline the envy of naming the Pope particularly, made a general Statute with the consent of the bishops, Baron, and Commons without any exception of person or cause whatsoever, wherein he made him a Traitor, whosoever did adhere to the King's enemy in his kingdom, or did aid or animate any either within his dominions or without, who should move war against the King; including by his general word aswell the Pope, as the Pope's factors, as if he had expressly named them.  
§ 121 But in the 26. of Richard the second, the Prelates, Dukes, Earl, Barons, and a●l the Commons of England, the Clerks and Lay people named the Pope, when they all joined in a covenant of association with the King against the Pope, that the● would maintain to the hour of death, against the papal citations, suspensions, excommunications and censures, the crown of England, which they held as always free, subject to no commonweal, but immediately subject to God, and not subject by name to the bishop of Rome: & that they would unite themselves to the King against the Pope, in all causes undertaken by the Pope against the King, his crown and dignity, and wou●d live and die with the King. This was the love and the ancient faithfulness of the whole English people toward their King, namely, against the Pope: they were so far from suffering the King to be deposed by the Pope.  
Now the Spaniards, with what earnestness they have § 122 detested the treachery of subjects against their king, covered with any pretence or colour of religion whatsoever, 
Concil. Teleta. 4 Cano. 75.  their many Counsels of Toled do declare in that book which is entitled the Apology for the Oath of Allegiance, 
The practice of Spaniards against Popes.  wherein they seem to check your equivocation, which they observed in many things, when as they made profession of their oath with their tongue, and retained in their mind perfidious treachery.  
Do you not see how in the thick darkness of Popery, these noble Nations, the Italians, Germans, French, English and Spanish did retain this light and heat of obedience toward their Kings against the Popes? and that in this business, neither the Bishops dissented from the Nobles, nor the Nobles from the Bishops: but the laics with the clerk, and the clerk with the laics, Counsels with Parliaments did fully agree to maintain the dignity of the King, and the obedience and concord of subjects against the popish censures? what is become of this ancient nobility, and this virtue of the people? where is that magnanimity of the Italians, French, Germans and Spanish? when shall we ever see a second Frederick, or another Philip the fair, who will suppress the Pope's insolency in Germany and France? when will these noble Kingdoms bring forth such Catholic Bishops, which will keep the King's crowns and the people's consciences free from the Pope's tyranny? They have England, Scotland and other famous countries going before them in this business. But you call these schismatical, the Italian, German, French, English and Spanish, who with common consent resisted the Pope. But mark, if you believe Sigebert your Abbot, if it be not a harder matter for you to wipe away the note of heresy from the Pope, who carries himself so proudly against Kings, then to take away the aspersion of schism from those Catholic people, who did maintain their Kings against the pope's.  
§ 123 But from these things which we have spoken, it doth sufficiently appear, Saturnine, how that is very false which you alleged erewhile, that the Counsels and national Parliaments did ever approve the deposing of Kings by Popish censures, when as they did publicly condemn their insolency, cruelty, treachery toward their Kings, as you see. For so the matter stands, grace did never destroy nature, or divinity civility, faith did never overthrow civil justice, but made it better, nor ever took away the affection of man, but made it more human: And when men ought to behave themselves reverently toward the parents of their bodies, much more reverently ought they to carry themselves toward their country, and the father thereof? for this love of our country, and reverend respect of our Kings, is not taught us by a master, but in bred and grafted by nature, which whosoever doth under pretence of religion, either weaken or blot out, he opposing himself to God the author of nature, is to be accounted not a Pastor, but an impostor, not a holy father, but a cruel tormentor of souls and bodies: But you, as if the Popish religion put all civil honesty out of the mind of men: and as if Popish zeal did blot out all natural affection, you think that the glory of your Pope must be builded up with the blood of our Princes, and the greatness of your Kingdom, with the ruins and desolations of our Country. And if Catholic Kings did retain those Princely spirits of their ancestors, proud Popes would not more boldly desire to rule without the commandment of God, than they to forbid them, being armed with the sword of God. And by the example of most excellent Protestant Kings, they would not only prune and cut off these hurtful sprigs of this unjust and poisonful power, but they would utterly cut up, and pluck up that poisoned tree from the very roots out of their Kingdoms. But the beginning of all this mischief is the Pope's spiritual supremacy, whereby he claims to be the head of the visible Church, the Vicar of Christ, the judge and Father of Kings, the universal Bishop of Bishops: to whom the original of all spiritual jurisdiction doth forsooth immediately descend from Christ, to be derived mediately to others from him: which whether it be done with greater wrong to Kings or to Bishops, I cannot justly set down. But all this spiritual supremacy, from whence all the force and nature of that excommunication doth depend, whereof so many things have been spoken, and of the deposing of Kings, and of releasing of subjects from the oath of obedience: Patriott shall pluck it in pieces in the Creed, wherein first he shall fly at the head of Popery, after he shall wound the body. Thus we have seen Pragmatical Antichrist upon the stage, now we shall hear him disputing out of his chair.   

DOGMATICAL ANTICHRIST, OR The Pope's Creed, OR The Pastor reigning. The second book of the Dialogue.  
AFter that the most renowned james § 124 King of Great B●itaine, had made answer to the Pope's two bulls, & Bellarmine's Epistle for the Oath of Allegiance: One Matthew Tortus, under whose vizard Bellarmine lay hid, uttered both elsewhere divers articles blasphemous against God, and those two reproachful against Princes, full of insolency and cruelty, one of the supreme dignity, the other of the depriving power of the Pope, and set them out, being taken forth of the Pope's new creed, with all the skill he could. This creed was composed of twelve new articles of the Romish-Catholike faith, 
The division of the Pope's creed.  taken in Council of Trent, as it it propounded in the bull of Pius the fourth, about the oath of the profession of the Christian faith. It may be divided into two parts; one wherein the faith of Christians, the other wherein their faithfulness toward Princes is corrupted. From that spring out the articles of superstition and idolatry, from this, of treason and sedition. By them they are made evil Christians, by these evil subjects, that it is hard to say, whether they have more troubled the Church, or this the commonwealth. Hence Lionel Sharp an English Divine took upon him to lay open the pope's whole creed, and to illustrate it in a Dialogue. For when as the most learned Bishop of Chichester, had plainly showed against Tortus, or rather counterfeit Bellarmine, that the Apostles Creed was set forth, whereto james the Apostle before his martyrdom had added the Article of Christ, before the departure of the Apostles from jerusalem: and therefore before S. Peter came to Rome, by the testimony of Baronius himself, 
Anno 44.  and had concluded necessarily from thence, that the Catholic faith was fully finished before the Apostolic See was begun: hence it is said, there arose a doubt in that right honourable calander's conscience, a Papist, but very moderate and honest, not only of the supremacy of Peter, and of that depriving power annexed to the supremacy, but of all the whole Romish Catholic faith, which he saw was contained in the popish, not Apostolical, Nycene, or Constantinopolitan Creed.  
§ 125 Therefore when those former learned men together with William Argentine, came again to visit him: It is very well said Calandre, that you are met again to discuss before us a very difficult controversy, of the pope's new creed, which Pius the fourth had formerly compiled, & Paul the 5. commanded it lately to be printed: my good friend Argentine hath lately recited it, and I hope by and by he will recite the same to you. This being prescribed by the Church; utterly to reject it, I do as yet (to speak truly) make a conscience: and to admit it wholly, unless it be ratified by the testimonies of the holy Scripture, I cannot admit without scruple of conscience. For I have lately learned to give attendance to the holy Scripture, which holy S. Peter doth directly affirm to be as a candle lightened in this life, to us wandering in darkness, 
2. Pet. 1.  Which holy Paul doth likewise make the foundation of the Church, 
Ephes. 2.20. 1. Tim. 3.15.  and yet I cannot departed rashly from the Catholic Church, whereto I have been accustomed, which the same S. Paul calls the pillar and ground of truth, by which there is a creed of faith set out for me. So I hang doubtful between the Scripture & the Church, which God hath given unto us, as the Sun and Moon, the two great lights to give us light to life.  
Then Patriott: you say right Calandre, said he, in the § 126 general, that as the Sun and Moon, so the Scripture and the Church, as two lights, show light unto us, 
The Scripture and Church compared to the Sun & Moon.  but that you err in the special, as after it shall better appear.  
But the holy Scripture hath light in itself as the Sun, the Church is a light, but borrowed from the Scripture, as the Moon from the Sun; & these two, I confess, are given us of God to direct us unto eternal life. But the Scripture directs us with masterly authority, the Church with her ministry: for the holy Scripture is the wisdom of God in Christ, inspired from above into holy men, for the eternal salvation and perfection of the Church, as the Apostle hath defined it. God hath commended the Scripture to the Church, 
The office of the Church.  as an heavenly charge, that it may discern, expound, keep and publish it to men: the Scripture is therefore men's master, but the Church is God's minister. Therefore the Apostle calls the truth the foundation of the Church, and the Church the pillar of truth, as Solomon made his chariot to have a golden axtree, and pillars of silver, understanding by the axletree, the sound doctrine of the Messiah, by the pillars, the faithful teachers of the same.  
§ 127 It is a wicked thing therefore to detract from the majesty of the holy Scripture, and it is unjust to derogate from the ministry of the true Church: for the Scripture is the truth of God: 
The office of the Scripture.  and the Church is the house of God: the truth is the golden foundation of this house: and this house is the silver pillar of this truth, that is, cut out of the truth, as out of the rock, as Chrysostome observeth. So if the Scripture be the base of the Church, than the Church is the pillar of the word, as he spoke very wittily. Now reason teacheth, that the foundation is not sustained by the house, but the house by the foundation. And religion concludes from thence, that truth makes the Church, not the Church the truth. For the approbation of the truth is the working cause of the Church. For before it do approve the written word of God, it is but a company of Infidels and Idolaters: after it hath approved it, it beginneth to be the family of the faithful worshippers of God, that is, a Church. Further, although the Church by the Spirit do discern the true Scripture from the false: yet the Scripture being once known and acknowledged, as before it made, so after it showeth the Church. For what more certain note can there be of showing a thing, than the working cause of the thing? Again, what privilege soever the Church doth rightly challenge to itself, it received from the Scripture, as that which calleth the Church the pillar of truth. Therefore the truth of the Scripture is more ancient in time, more perspicuous for the light, and greater for authority then the Church; which when it once receiveth her essence, light and power from the Scripture, then at last, as a pillar, it upholdeth with her ministry the truth in respect of men, and reveals it to the inhabitants of the earth: and it is that ground whereon men both may and aught to lean and rest. 
Laws upon pillars, so the Scriptures on the Church.  Whereupon the Prophetical and Apostolical doctrine is said to be the foundation of the Church, the Church is the strength of doctrine, not the foundation. It is evident therefore, that the Church is founded and sustained by the truth, and that the truth is sustained and revealed by the Church once founded, as it were, a watchtower for travelers, to direct them into heaven. The Heathens were wont to write their laws in tables, and hang them up upon pillars to be read of the people. The Apostle describing the Church, compareth it to such a pillar, the use whereof was to show the Law, when itself was not the Law. So the true, Orthodox and Catholic faith being written in the tables of the Scripture, is fastened to the Church, as it were to a most beautiful pillar, as a most strong prop, which resteth upon it, not with its own, but a borrowed strength. Wherefore the Apostle in the second to the Ephesians defines the Church, when in the second to Timothy, he describes it. For there he argueth from the causes, here from the effects, in each place he understandeth the Church of Ephesus, that is, a particular Church. In the first place he teacheth what made that, in the second what that did: nor so much, what it always doth (for of necessity the foundation being taken away, the Church must fall, as it happened first to the Church of Ephesus, and afterward to the Church of Rome) as what it ought to do. For this is rather an admonition than a commendation, and with a praise giveth warning of duty. Wherefore you shall do well, Calandre, as S. Peter warns you, if you always give attention to the holy Scripture, as to the candle: to the Church, as to the candlestick, so long as it containeth and upholdeth that candle, giving light to all the house. For if it be bereft of the light of her sun, and being blind endeavours to make others blind also, while it makes new Articles of the faith, and conceals the old: it doth retain the name of a Church, but it hath altogether lost the nature, that which may very truly be spoken of the Church of Rome.  
§ 128 You do very unadvisedly traduce the Church of Rome, saith Saturnine, by whom you think that new Articles of the faith were made; for the Articles of the faith, which it propoundes are divided into two sorts.  

One are of immediate Revelation.  
Others are drawn and fetched from thence.   

What articles of faith the Church maketh.  The Church doth not make new Articles of the faith of the first sort. But the Church maketh Articles of the second sort, which ought to be believed with the Catholic faith as the case requireth, if it think them necessary. Therefore Vincentius Lyrinensis thinketh that the life of prophetical and evangelical doctrine, must be directed by the rule of Ecclesiastical and Catholic sense, so that he doth in vain brag of the text of scripture, who rejecteth the sense of the Church.  
§ 129 Then Patriott, how absurdly is it said saith he, that the Church doth not make immediate revelations of God? Unless that be more absurd to think that to fetch and draw from, is the same which to make: for an Article must first be made, before a doctrine can be drawn or fetched from the same. Therefore that is said to be an Article of the faith, which is drawn from an Article Foolishly; Articles are principles, deductions are conclusions. An article is one thing, a conclusion drawn from the article is another: which often is so contrary that it utterly overthroweth the article. As it shall be made clear in the explication of your creed. For I confess with Vincentius Lyrinensis, that the line of prophetical and Apostolical doctrine is to be directed by the rule of the ecclesiastical and catholic sense. For the ecclesiastical and catholic sense must always agree with the Prophetical and apostolical text. For where the text doth fail us, the gloss cannot help us. Whence I conclude that nothing can be Catholic and Ecclesiastical, which is not Prophetical or Apostolical. Now because Vincentius doth restrain the prophetical and apostolical line, to the cannon of the Scripture, which he confesseth to be more than sufficient for faith; it followeth that nothing contrary to the canonical Scripture, can be Ca holicke though it be so determined by the Church. Wherefore, Calandre, if the Church of Rome have cast any article of faith into the Creed of the second sort, which is contrary to an Article of the first sort; and have added an ecclesiastical gloss, disagreeing from the definition of canonical Scripture, that Church shall sooner leave off to be the Catholic Church, than that Article shall begin to be Catholic: Let us come therefore to the Creed, and let us entreat Argentine if he please, to open it unto us.  
Then Argentine, I will do it and very willingly; and § 130 I will so profess it, as it is propounded by the Bull of Pius the 4. to be a form of an Oath, of the profession of the orthodoxal faith.  
1 I William Argentine do firmly admit and hold the Apostolical and Ecclesiastical traditions and other ordinances and constitutions of the Church of Rome. 
The Pope's creed Traditions. Scriptures according to the Roman sense   
2 I do firmly hold and admit the holy Scriptures according to that sense which the mother Church hath and doth hold, whose right it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Scripture, neither will I ever admit it or expound it, but according to the joint consent of the fathers.  
3 I profess that there be seven Sacraments truly and properly of the new Law, 
7 Sacraments.  ordained by our Lord jesus, necessary for the salvation of mankind. Baptism, Confirmation the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme unction, Orders, Matrimony. I admit the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church.  

Original sin and justification.  4 I admit and hold all and every those points concerning original sin and justification which were determined in the holy Council of Trent.  

The Mass.  5 I profess that there is offered up in the Mass unto God, a true proper propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead.  

Transubstantiation.  6 I believe that in the holy Eucharist the body and blood of Christ is truly and really, and substantially: and that there is made a change of the whole substance of bread into his body, and of the whole substance of wine into his blood: which change or conversion the Catholic Church calleth transubstantiation. I confess also that under one kind only whole Christ is received, and a true sacrament.  

Purgatory.  7 I constantly hold that there is a purgatory, and that the souls there detained are holp with the prayers of the faithful.  

Adoration of Saints.  8 I hold that the Saints reigning with Christ, are to be worshipped and to be called upon: and that they offer up their prayers to God for us, and that their relics are to be worshipped.  

The worshipping of Images.  9 I firmly hold, that the Images of Christ, and the ever blessed Virgin, and of other Saints are to be had, and to be adored with due worship.  

Indulgences.  10 That the power of indulgences was left by Christ, and that the use of them is very available for salvation.  

The supremacy of the Pope.  11 I acknowledge the Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church to be the mother and mistress of all Churches, and I vow and swear true obedience to the bishop of Rome, the successor of blessed Peter the Prince of the Apostles, and the Vicar of jesus Christ.  

The authority of the Council of Trent.  12 I undoubtedly likewise receive all other things defined and determined by the holy Canons, and ecumenical councils, chief of the holy Council of Trent, and I reject and accurse all things contrary, and all heresies rejected by the Church.  
This true Catholic faith without which none can § 130 be saved, at this present I voluntarily profess, I will procure as far as lieth in me to be wholly, uncorruptly, and constantly kept and taught by God's assistance to my lives end: I the same William promise, vow and swear, so help me God, and these his holy Evangelist.  
And I stand in fear of that which the most holy Father added. It shall not be lawful for any man to infringe this authority of our ordination, inhibition, derogation, will, statute, decree and commandment, or by any rash attempt to withstand it.  
If any shall presume to attempt any thing against these, let him know that he shall incur the displeasure of almighty God, and of blessed Peter and Paul his Apostles. Given at Rome at Saint Peter in the year of the incarnation of our Lord 1564. in the Ideses of November, and of our Bishopric the first.  
You have heard of me Calandre the 12. open and § 131 known Articles of the Pope's Creed. 
Secret Articles drawn from the former.  Now if it please you take them which are drawn from them more hidden and unknown. I hope my old friend Saturnine will give me leave to open unto you seeing your time is not long, and are not far from heaven, and do daily expect the hour of your departure, to open I say to you the inward sense of the creed, and to furnish you as it wherewith provision in this your journey, that when you depart hence Saint Peter the Porter of heaven may the sooner let you in being thus provided. The Masters speak wisdom among those that be perfect, they have certain hid mysteries, all which they do not lay open to all, but some certain to some, as these are thought best to agree with their capacities and desires. Neither will I pour out all, I will reserve the mystical sense of every Article to be found out by the practice. In the mean time by your favour, Saturnine, the order being somewhat inverted, I will propound the primacy, the eleventh Article in order, the first in authority (whereon all the rest depend) which I desire you with some of your best reasons to defend, now rather than at any other time, wherein it is fiercely impugned by the assaults of the Heretics of our time.  
§ 132 I believe therefore that Saint Peter was very certainly appointed in the Scripture to be the primate, 
The primacy is the chief head of faith and the chief foundation of the Catholic faith, as Bellar: in Torto. most plainly grounded upon the Scriptures.  and Prince of the Apostles, and of the universal Church; and that the Pope of Rome Peter's successor is the heir of this primacy, and universal principality in the whole: who being the keykeeper of eternal life, the Pastor of the universal flock, the head and foundation of the universal Church, the infallible rule of faith, the chief judge of all causes and persons, having the same tribunal with Christ, and the same consistory: in stead of Christ, nay in stead of God, nay as God himself upon earth, and therefore I hold him to be reverenced and worshipped.  
I believe the chief inward power annexed to the primacy is of 2 sorts 

Sacred.  
Temporal.    
The sacred whereby the bishop of Rome, as the spiritual Lord can by excommunication drive away Kings and Princes, from the flock of Christ not only Heretics in the faith as ravening wolves, but Catholics also, if they prove wicked as outrageous rams. and to deprive them of all government and free their subjects from the Oath of fealty and Obedience. The temporal whereby the Pope as Lord of the temporalties in earth can dispose of all crowns, and them directly, 
Princes saucily resembled to Wolves & Rams by Bellarmine.  or indirectly in order to the spirituals, as it set down by you Saturnine in the former Dialogue, can take from one, and bestow upon another, as he shall think it to be available to the spiritual end. And I vow and swear spiritual obedience to the chief Prince my spiritual bishop of Rome, according to those mystical rules, which our Masters have prescribed to the cureent right of the present Church, and the preservation of the same.  
Here Saturnine you seem not half wary enough § 133 Argentine said he, who not contenting yourself with a public profession of the faith, 
Popish mysteries not to be revealed.  which Pius the 4. did prescribe, especially to the more learned sort, but have published the hidden and secret Articles drawn from thence, i Mysteries as we call them and that in the presence of Heretics: which before the creed was set out, aught to have been believed of you, but ought not to be revealed.  
It seems then, said Patriott, as Aristotle had some strange books which he writ to all; and other subtle books, which he writ for them of the wiser sort, which were said to be set out, and not set out; So the Pope hath some doctrine that is populare, and other that is mystical, that many of the doctrines of your Church seem to be proserpina's mysteries. Yet you see sometime how they fall from men that be not so evil disposed, and come abroad into the world.  
Then Argentine as much as ever I hated heresy so § 134 much I love the Catholic faith, whereof I need not be ashamed, seeing Calandre required it at my hands and you were present, who can stoutly maintain the same against any cavilling Heretic whatsoever. That was very necessary said Calandre, seeing other were here who could as stoutly make answer. Therefore let us ignorant Lay-men learn, let the learned teach. It is your part to answer, mine to demand. It is an old song of the Papists, a learner must believe; but a truer, a learner must ask. You believe too many things Argentine, as there be many men who be too incredulous in many thtngs, so I fear that in many things many be too credulous. When we begin to believe that we ought not we will not believe that we ought. How oft and that without cause may you hear it among us, It is a matter of faith: which ranging out of the circuit of holy Scripture, I suppose reacheth farther than it ought. These doctrines therefore of the Catholic faith, as they are called, which are brought by our men into the form of a creed, the state and drift of every cotroversie being briefly and truly propounded, I could wish they were sound disputed and discussed by you. But chief that primary Article of the supremacy whereof I desire not to know all, but the most chief points, as also of the rest, that the errors of the Church of Rome now doting for age, as they be well observed by certain honest Pontificians, may appear unto us.  
§ 135 Those certain Pontificians, Saturnine said, must be very honest I warrant you that reprove our Father the Pope: and accuse our mother the Church of dotage. For whereas you desire to have the Articles of the Catholic faith discussed, Calandre; you are in a great error. For they are in all humility to be received, not curiously to be discussed. For as Austen saith well, the simplicity of believing, not the quickness of understanding is required in a Christian man. That he may with reverence believe what the Church teacheth, not wittily discuss it, and may humbly submit himself to the judgement of the Church without any discourse.  
§ 136 But said Calandre if you confess that our mother the Church hath no errors: 
The Pope of Rome doth err by the Papists judgement. Peter de Aliaco a Cardinal. Adrianus Pope. The three Legates of the Trent council.  I wonder that Peter de Aliaco a very learned Cardinal granted that there were many things not only in manners but in faith had need of reformation. Why did Adrian the sixth, ill touching the fountain itself, say that all mischief came from the chief bishop into the whole Church, and promised reformation of all things by his Legate Cheregatus to the Germans. I wonder also why the three Legates in the Council of Trent, did apply that prophesy of jeremy to themselves, and to the popish people: This people have committed two great evils: They have forsaken me saith the Lord the fountain of living water, and have digged to themselves cisterns that can hold no water. And in the Council itself Cornelius the bishop of Bitont, did openly acknowledge the Apostasy of the Church of Rome in the chief heads both of doctrine, and life. I would to God, saith he, that they had not fallen wholly from religion to superstition, from faith to infidelity, from Christ to Antichrist, from God to Epicurism; saying out of a wicked heart, and with an impure mouth, There is no God. Neither did any Shepherd or Pope care for these things. For all of them sought their own, and not one of them all sought for those things that belong to jesus Christ. § 137 I wonder also why after that Council many not only private Doctors did pluck in pieces the decrees of that Council, as Sixtus Senensis, Canus, 
The council of Trent rejected by their own side.  Lindanus the bishop, Catharinus, Pighius, Ouander, Ferus and many more: but Pope Pius himself confessed, that the worship of the Church of Rome had much swerved by continuance of time from the ancient institution. Therefore these reverend Doctors, Cardinals, and holy bishops, do give me both cause and leave greatly to doubt. Neither do I desire only that the chief Articles of immediate Revelation be discussed, which I embrace with all faith and reverence, but these articles of the second sort, which are supposed to be fetched from the first, and in truth do altogether overthrow them. For whereas by the advice of Austen, the simplicity of believing no● the quickness of understanding is required; not an humble desire of learning things necessary, but a curious desire to seek after high mysteries is forbidden by him. For the simplicity of belief, 
Implicit faith, blind Idol.  doth as well shut out brutish ignorance, as presumptuous knowledge. I can therefore no longer adore that blind Idol, implicit faith, whereby we are taught to receive with all reverence, what the Church teacheth, and to believe as the Church believeth though we do not well know what the Church believeth. 
Bellarm: de iustific: lib. 1. cap. 7.  Neither can I give credit to Bellarmine saying that faith doth consist in the assent, not in knowledge, and may better be defined by ignorance, than understanding. Whence our learned adversaries do too truly conclude, that as Clergy popery was before nothing else but a catechism of treason, so Laicke-popery was nothing else but mere idiotism: and as they worthily laugh at the foxlike craft of our Doctors, so likewise the ass-headed ignorance of our scholars. Such faith which the collier had, so commended by Staphilus. A certain collier being at the point of death, 
Apol●g. Staphi. pars 1. pag. 53.  was tempted by the Devil, and demanded, what faith he held, the collier answered, I believe and die in the faith of the Church of Christ. 
The Collier's faith.  And being again demanded, what was the faith of the Church, answered, as it § 138 were in a circle, it is that faith that I hold: and so the Devil being vanquished by this answer, fled away, if we may believe Staphilus. Therefore the faith of a Romish Catholic is the Collier's faith, that is, a circular faith I pray you, Saturnine, teach me first before I give my assent, and write to that reverend Bellarmine, that he will provide that implicit faith, which is nothing else but blind and affected ignorance, be put out of the creed, wherewith the gravity and wisdom of the Catholic religion is greatly defaced. I have learned at last to distinguish between the fictions of man's brain, and the doctrines of Christian faith, the foundations whereof are not the opinions of men, but the oracles of God: and those which are committed to writing by the Prophets and Apostles by inspiration of God, wherein all necessary principles of faith, and precepts of life are plentifully contained: as I hear it affirmed by the fathers. Let us now come to the creed.  
§ 139 Wherein first I demand, whether the supremacy of Peter with such things, as depend thereon, have her foundation directly in the Scripture, as the Cardinal writeth in Tortus. For I hold no doctrine necessary to be believed, unless it be founded on the Scripture, as Pope Gregory the first reacheth, I am a bad Text-man, and I read the books of the Prophets and Apostles but seldom, the reading whereof the Church hath forbidden to us laymen, fearing lest by reading we should fall into heresies. But I am both ashamed, and repent of that my ignorance and negligence. Yet I leave not off to reverence the fathers both old and new, whose son I profess my self to be, and not their servant. I account them for scholars in the Scripture, not masters: witnesses and interpreters thereof, not arbitrators and judges. Neither am I so much moved with their names, as with their reasons.  
I seek not then what they bring out of themselves, but what they prove out of the Scripture; in the cause of faith, I will henceforth admit of no definition of the Church, unless it rely upon a manifest testimony of holy Scripture, or at the least a necessary conclusion drawn from thence; I will not have the matter ordered by bare authority, but let thing with thing, cause with cause, and reason strive with reason; neither am I led with the number of arguments but with the weight. 
* Number doth oppress the memory, weight doth beget knowledge.  Neither am I delighted with circumstances, I desire brevity. And I will prefer one sound argument shortly and directly concluded out of the Scripture, before all the quirks of men brought for pomp and show. Neither will I suffer any of you to leap from this one point to another, before I see this be fully sifted and discussed among you. Buckle up yourself therefore, Saturnine, to set the onset, and confirm the supremacy of Peter, and the succession of the Pope, and that power which you say is annexed to the supremacy out of the holy Scripture: but that you may not serve from the state of the question, remember that you are to prove the primacy, not of order and distinction, which is granted to Peter, but the primacy of power and jurisdiction, which is denied. For this is, as Bellarmine saith, the chief point of the Catholic faith, and the chief foundation of all religion.  
Then Saturnine, you do too much restrain, saith § 140 he, 
Scripture alone hurtful to the Romish Church.  Calandre, the Catholic faith, if you keep it within the compass of the Scripture. For if you admit of Scripture only, it doth go ill with the Catholic Church, as Paul the fift did wisely answer the Venetian Ambassador. Yet I will do as you will have me, and I will comprehend these three together, the primacy of Peter, the succession and power of the Pope For the Church could not long stand without a Primate and Prince, nor a Prince without a successor, nor a successor without a supreme power.  

I will give you the keys. Matth. 16. Whatsoever you bind, or whatsoever you lose. Feed my sheep, feed my Lambs. joh. 21. What they meant by Popish keys. What by feeding.  When Christ therefore promised the keys of the Kingdom of heaven to Peter alone, that is, to the Church, he promiseth the principality. When he committed the power of binding and losing to Peter alone, he committed the power of the keys. When he gave the charge to Peter alone to feed the whole flock, he gave him the principality. Therefore the primacy was there promised, here it was given. For as he that receives the keys of a city, receives the government of the city, so he that hath received the keys of the Church, hath received the government of the Church. And because to feed is the same, which to govern, and only Peter is commanded to feed, not some, but all, therefore only Peter received the promise first in those words, to govern the whole Church. Wherein there is joined to the threefold confession of his love, 
What to lose & bind.  a twofold confirmation of honour: but those words of Christ joined to the primacy, do prove the power of excommunicating, which was directed to Peter alone, whatsoever you shall bind, and whatsoever you shall lose. And that twofold, one of binding Kings, the other of losing subjects, not only from sins, but from vows, laws and oaths. For in those words (whose sins ye remit) or the power of order is given to all, 
Io. 20.  limited over sin. But in those words, whatsoever you shall bind, and whatsoever you shall lose, there is a power not limited, and universal given to Peter alone, not restrained to sins, not to persons; because he doth not say, whomsoever, but whatsoever. Whence it followeth that james the King of Great Brittany, doth either not belong at all to the sheepfold of Christ, or that he is subject to Peter, and to his successor the Bishop of Rome, the chief Pastor, as well as the King of France and Spain: & that as King's catholic, 
King's very saucily resembled to Rams and Wolves.  but evil as unruly Rams, so heretical Princes as ravening wolves, are justly to be driven by him out of the fold, & deprived of all government, & the Lords being bound, that they rule no longer, the subjects are lose that they obey no longer.  
Here Patriot; An egg, saith he, is not so like an § 141 egg, as Saturnine to Bellarmine: who as if he had disinherited that the primacy and principality of Peter could be proved out of one place, huddled three together, whereby he boasted in Tortus that it was most plainly founded.  
Here before I weigh Saturnines argument, I purpose to mark the popish Doctors wrangling among themselves, by what Text of Scripture the supremacy of Peter is said to be given unto him.  
Cardinal Contarenus saith it was given, 
Contar: de Sacra: Christ. leg. l. 3. p. 203. Bellar: de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 12. C●nterane and Bellarmine 2. Cardinals at a far.  when Christ said to Peter, I will give thee the keys. Cardinal Bellarmine contradicteth Contarene, and denieth that the keys were then given, but promised, and that the gift of supremacy was granted with the keys, Ioh: 21. when Christ said to him, Feed my sheep, as Saturnine observed, more subtly, than truly, saith Contarene.  
But there is no more promised to Peter, Matt: 16 than was given to all the Apostles, Ioh: 10, as Christ the best interpreter, expounded that his (whatsoever you shall lose) spoken to Peter, in those words, (whose sins soever you remit) speaking to all his Apostle. And taught that all this power of the keys, was both common to all the Apostles, and directly restrained to sins, as Ambrose, Austin, Theophylact, and Bernard thought. Therefore the supremacy of Peter was not founded upon the keys.  
§ 142 But mark I pray you the singular subtlety of Bellarmine in this place, which Saturnine also used. In the first words is understood the unlimited power of jurisdiction given to Peter alone, not restrained to sins, or to persons, because he saith not, whomsoever; but whatsoever: in the second words, the power of order limited over sin communicated to all. O admirable witty interpretation! The Bishop therefore may set open any prison, resolve any hard doubt, for that general word, Whatsoever you shall lose, doth plainly contain all these things under it. 
The right interpretation of the keys.  Those things are known and common, which the Fathers both old and new, both the popish and our own, have left written in their Commentaries of the proper and true sense of the keys: all of them did comprehend the right of the keys, and the power of binding and losing, within the remitting and retaining of sins: the key wherewith heaven is opened or shut, they make to be the interpretation of the Law, as Tertullian; the knowledge of the Scriptures, as Chrysostome; appointed for sins, not Seignories, as Bernard; given to all Ministers, that they may bind and loose, that they may retain or remit sins, as out of Christ Ambrose, Austin, Theophylact: that they might rightly out and divide the word of wrath, and the word of grace, as St Paul, that to the obstinate, this to the penitent. The key of knowledge doth direct the key of power, i the force of doctrine, the execution of discipline, whereby the obstinate are shut out, and the penitent are reconciled. 
Two keys of order and jurisdiction.  This is the force, this is the use of the keys, whereof the Fathers made two, the one of Order, the other of jurisdiction.  
The key of order, the power of the ministery, whereby they preach the Gospel, administer the Sacraments, and by the preaching of the Gospel remit or retain sins.  
The key of jurisdiction, the power of restraining sinners, by excommunication, that is, by expelling the obstinate out of the Church, and receiving the penitent, 
Concil: Colo: sub Herman: Sacra confess. Concil. Colon. sub Adulpho.  as Gropper in his book of the Council of Coleyne under Hermannus and Adulphus, who said, that each key did not belong to Peter alone, but was transferred to all the Apostles and their successors. And Cusanus long before that, Nothing said he, is spoken to Peter, that is not spoken to others: for as it is said to Peter, 
Cusan a Cardinal against Bellarmine.  whatsoever thou shalt bind, so it is said to others, whatsoever ye shall bind. Here you have Cusan opposite to Bellarmine, a Cardinal to a Cardinal. One Peter you will say received the keys, but he received them not as one man, but as the unity of the Church, as Pius the second said. 
Pius 2. a Pope against Bellarmine.  Here you have a Pope opposite to a Cardinal. Peter received them not as in his own person, but as in the person of the Church. For if this be said to Peter only, I will give thee the keys, the Church hath them not. If the Church have them, Peter when he took the keys signified the whole Church, as Austin taught. 
Tract. 14. in Joh.  Then Caietane the Cardinal when he could not rid himself out of these straits, If we speak, saith he, formally and properly, the keys promised to Peter are above the keys of order and jurisdiction. But this saith Cardinal Bellarmine is not true; for it was never heard of in the Church that there were more keys in the Church than two, which he doth as well grant to all the Apostles as to Peter.  
Whence I thus argue against Bellarmine.  
Peter received no other power than that which was promised in the keys, as Bellarmine saith.  
But the rest of the Apostles had all that power, as the Fathers, and the learneder Papists teach, and Bellarmine whether he will or no doth confess.  
Therefore Peter had no other power than the rest of the Apostles.  
Yet Bellarmine hath a trick how to scape, he saith, § 143 that the keys were given to Peter immediately, to the rest mediately by Peter.  
With hundred chains bind fast the man,  
And yet this fly lad Proteus  
Will still escape do what you can.  
And yet he shall not escape: for if the keys were given mediately to the rest by Peter, they should open and shut, bind and loose, not in Christ's name, but in Peter's name. Then how can that be true which Paul writeth of himself, Paul the Apostle, neither from men, nor by man, but by jesus Christ. For if we credit Bellarmine, he came mediately either from the man Peter, or by the man Peter. How doth Paul affirm that he was not inferior to the chief Apostles, as who had received both his doctrine and his vocation immediately with them from Christ? Will the Cardinal than father a lie upon the Apostle, and labour to prove that Paul did mediately receive the keys from Peter? All the Apostles received the keys from Christ, the spirit descended upon all the Apostles in fiery tongues. 
All the Apostles received the keys and fiery tongues from Christ. All the Apostles are pillars.  All the Apostles are said to be the pillars of the Church, as the Fathers observed out of the Scripture. What? Did Bellarmine read that to Peter was given a greater and a better key, than to the rest of the Apostles? Hath he heard that a larger and a more shining fiery tongue than the rest, sat upon Pater's head, as the prince, then upon the other Apostles heads? Hath he learned, that of twelve pillars one was set more firm and surer than all the rest, that the house might be more supported by that, than by the rest? which if Bellarmine knew not, let him leave of to play the fool, and to tell us that the power was given to Peter immediately from Christ, and to the rest mediately by Peter, as it were by assignment. Mark I beseech you, Calandre, I cannot say whether more wicked, or more ridiculous consequences follow necessarily out of this place of the keys.  
The keys are promised to Peter: § 144  
Therefore to none but to Peter. 
Wicked and ridiculous conclusions.   
Two keys were given as badges of the ministery,  
Therefore three Crowns as badges of the Empire.  
For when Christ gave the keys, he gave principality,  
as Bellarmine saith.  
Peter received the keys of the kingdom of heaven,  
Therefore of earthly kingdoms.  
Peter can exclude Kings heretical out of heaven,  
Therefore out of their thrones.  
He can bind sins,  
Therefore Sceptres.  
He can show his power in offences,  
Therefore in possessions.  
He can release penitent men from their sins,  
Therefore traitorous subjects from their oaths.  
He hath a key wherewith he doth lose the sins of Kings,  
Therefore he hath a club wherewith he may break their heads.  
So Bellarmine hath changed Peter's key into Hercules club.  
He can lose and bind any thing,  
He can therefore as Oedipus, lose any riddle, he can bind  
Turks and bears.  
These consequences prove that a King is not to be deprived of his kingdom for heresy, but that the Cardinal is deprived of his wit for frenzy. Peter's key is altogether the key of heaven, whereby by the preaching of the eternal Gospel he hath opened heaven to the faithful and penitent, and shut it to the unfaithful and impenitent, which the Pope the counterfeit successor of Peter doth use otherwise, as sometime an elegant Poet played upon this princely porter.  
I should not marvel much 
Doctor Giles Fletcher.   
If that the Pope's good grace,  
Did happily bear the key  
Of that dark Stygian place.  
For he enriched hath  
that place with many an elf,  
And opened wide hell gate,  
And entered in himself.  
But sith that heaven and hell  
Are set so far asunder,  
That he should bear the key  
Of heaven it is a wonder.  
But now 'tis none at all,  
From heaven he all shuts out,  
And ●pes the gate of hell,  
And letteth in that rout.  
As the falling star in the prophecy of john he hath changed the key of heaven into the key of the bottomless pit.  
§ 145 Bellarmine being driven from the keys, must needs betake himself to that his hold, Feed my sheep.  
Why then good Sir, why do you urge this place of the keys any more for the supremacy, whereby nothing was promised more to Peter than was granted to all the Apostles, as the Fathers both old and new, both strangers and your own do apprarantly prove?  
But in this place, because to feed is the same with to rule, and Peter alone is commanded to feed the sheep, not some, but all; therefore to Peter alone is given the principality over the whole Church, being armed with a double sword, with a double power, spiritual and temporal, which the old man saw, I believe, as lunatic Pentheus by fits saw, Two several Suns, two several Moons appear. which the Fathers both old and new, being of a more settled wit, 
Bellarmine's pride in making a Cardinal equal to a King.  and sharper insight could never see. But Bellarmine thinketh so gaily of the pastoral vocation, that in respect thereof he preferreth a Bishop before a King, as a shepherd before a sheep: which perhaps he had well concluded, if Christ had said to Peter, Feed thy sheep; he said it not, but feed my sheep. But he doth not only prefer a Bishop before a King, but makes a Cardinal equal with him very fond. The Bishop of Ely, was sometime Cardinal of S. Paul's Church, as now Bellarmine is Cardinal of the Church of Rome. Yet notwithstanding being as well learned, he would not compare himself for modesty sake with the Cardinal, when well he might. For though as he is Bishop of Ely, he is inferior to Bellarmine, yet as he was Cardinal of S. Paul's Church he was nothing inferior. And yet the Cardinal is so mad, as to compare himself to the King the Bishop of Elies' Lord. But let us return to the argument.  
It is famous that which the Fathers all with one consent § 146 write upon this place, 
To feed the same which to teach.  that to feed is the same which to teach. which is not proper to Peter alone, but common to all Apostles and Ministers: that all the Apostles were equally shepherds of the whole flock, that james and john were no more Peter's sheep, than Peter was james and john's sheep; who are equally called pillars, to feed and to rule are not synonimaes, but by Peter● interpretation they be contrary. That Peter was thrice confirmed by name, because Peter denied Christ thrice by name. Not therefore for honours sake, as you say, but for comfort: or if for honour, not that it was enlarged upon Peter above the rest, but that it was restored to Peter: of whom Christ required a threefold confession of love, that with his threefold confession he might blot out his threefold denial.  
Excellently said Chrysostome; When Christ said to Peter, Feed my sheep, it was Christ his purpose, 
Chrysost: l. 2. de sacerd.  to teach Peter, and all the rest, how much he loved the Church, to that end that we with all our minds should take care for the same. and elsewhere in his 87 homily, mark well the words said he, feed my lambs, i feed my faithful people not yours: I have demanded if you loved me, that love which you professed towards me, show toward them: feed them, not yourself. Woe to the shepherds of Israel that feed themselves, 
Ezec: 34. cap.  Ezec: 34. not my flock: woe to the shepherds that scatter the sheep of my flock. Hearken Paul the fift: that feed themselves, who seek their own profit and glory, not the glory of God, not the salvation of the faithful, over whom they have charge.  
§ 147 Neither did Austen speak less elegantly, when it was spoken to Peter saith he, 
Aust. de agone. cap. 3.  it was spoken to all; Do you love me? feed my sheep. And elsewhere, as my sheep, not as thy sheep, 
Tract. in joh. 131.  seek my glory in them, not thine own, my gain, not thine. Hear Paul the fift, you think that Kings are not Christ his sheep, but your own. You seek not the glory of Christ in teaching them, but your own in subduing them. 
How the Pope feedeth.  You do not endeavour to gain sheep to Christ, but to seek wool for yourself. Yea you do not only clip the flock, but devour the flock, while you deliver doctrine pernicious to the faith of subjects, to the safety of Kings, to inward and outward peace. And do you love Christ? you love your own self, Christ you do not love, no more truly than your Lord Apollyon whose vicegerent you are upon the earth I might if I would join other fathers to Chrysostome and Austen; I might allege out of your own men, Marsilius Patavine, and Cusan, who appoint the feeding to be by word, and by example, by sound preaching, & good example; and make it common not only to all Apostles, but to all Ministers.  
Bellarmine far otherwise.  

Bellar: lib. 1. de pant. cap. 16.  He said to Peter. Feed. Therefore Peter alone must feed.  
He said once feed my sheep; sheep, i Priests, Bishops, and Apostles, who have bred Lambs, twice Lambs, first understanding jews, and then Gentiles.  
Therefore he committed the universal flock to Peter, and because to feed is the same which to rule: therefore he gave to Peter the universal principality over the flock.  
§ 148 A clear and evident place saith Stapleton, that by sheep Pastors, 
Staepl: doctr: punc: con. 2.  bishops, and Apostles are signified: by lambs the rest of the faithful. So happy is Bellarmine, that he never coined so ridiculous or idle a conceit, but some or other would take it up, 
Mauled: in Ioh: 21.  and commend it over to fools. Mark saith Maldonatus, if this subtlety cast-not learned men into a laughter. Lambs & sheep confounded, joh. 17. the name of the Lamb is a little more kind, and carrieth a greater show of love, 
Feed is not to rule.  but there is no difference in the thing but in the word.  
For whereas you say that to feed is all one with to rule, whence you seem with Bellarmine to fetch the universal Monarchy of Peter, it is not only a hungry, but a swelling and proud interpretation.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is not to rule, but to feed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, are not Rectors but Pastors. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are sinononymas, the former word Christ used in the 3. place. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Now assume out of john being rightly translated, and what will you then conclude? that it was given in charge to Peter, that he should feed the flock, therefore to rule the flock.  
But be it so, let feed, and rule be all one; to rule when it is enjoined to bishops, is that which to direct: that is to rule with wisdom and counsel, not with power and government. But Bellarmine doth thus interpret Christ, feed Peter. i. rule and govern.  
Baronius goeth farther, 
Baronius maketh feed to kill.  in the excommunication of the Venetians, to Paul the 5. there is a double ministry of Peter, to feed and to kill, for the Lord said to him feed my sheep, and he heard a voice from heaven kill and eat.  
This killing is not cruelty saith he, but piety and sincerity, § 149 very well; Paul the 5. 
The Pope, doth kill in piety.  out of his love and piety forsooth doth kill men, which Seneca doth call cruel piety. But he killeth them that he may hide them in his entrails, saith he: I think so, he will have the Pope not only to fleece the flock, but swallow it up at a bit. Baronius doth use the words of charity, but the examples of cruelty. For he propoundeth Gregory the seventh, and Alexander the third, his Countrymen of Seine to be imitated by Paul the 5. Christian Kings must be very secure I warrant you, whenas the Pope doth once begin to play Gregory's and Alexander's pranks. As Bellarmine doth stretch out his (to rule) to the head and throat, he doth it somewhat more w●●●ly, but with as little honesty. For when he had written in his letters to his friend Blackwell, that no Pope had ever commanded that the Prince should be killed: and the Author of the Apology had excepted, that he commanded war to be raised, wherein he might be slain: he answers in Tortus, 
How the Papists may kill a King, how not.  that Bellarmine spoke not of murder, which may happen in battle, but of that murder which may be committed by a roister. A very honest distinction. As though he be not as well a murderer, who at the command of the Pope doth kill the King by open force, 
Cardinal Comensis incited Parry to kill Q. Elizabeth.  as he that shall do it by secret treachery. That this Cardinal threatening wars & arms is no honester than Cardinal Comensis, whose letters are extant, wherein he encouraged Parry, with promise of reward and pardon from the Pope, that he should bring to good effect the purpose of his good spirit, those were his words, that is, that he should murder Queen Elizabeth with his dagger. Bellarmine proved no better to our excellent King james, but somewhat the closer. Did Peter feed the Church after this manner? This is not food but poison. Did he so guide the flock of his Master, as if the chief bell-wether of the flock went astray, he would take care, that he should either closely or openly be slain? Give a Shepherds' crook to a Shepherd. What hath a Shipheard to do with a sword? Yes forsooth saith he, when Christ made Peter a Pastor, he made him a Prince. For when he commanded him to feed he commanded him to rule. And he gave him not only a ministry but a magistracy. But, good Sir, the inward and spiritual government is one thing which Peter exercised over souls, by the word, the Sacraments, and the keys: the earthly and outward government is another thing, which Paul the 5 doth practise by fraud and force against crowns. I pray you tell me Calandre, what difference you make between these two, and the Commentaries, of the Fathers, and their own popish writers? Mark the consequencies depending on this interpretation partly foolish, partly wicked.  
Peter is commanded to feed the flock of Christ. § 150  
Therefore none but Peter.  
Upon Peter is laid the charge of feeding and teaching.  
Therefore the honour of ruling and reigning is bestowed on him.  
Peter's duty is to teach Kings.  
Therefore to depose Kings.  
To instruct Kings, therefore to destroy Kings.  
To Peter is granted a spiritual regiment, therefore an earthly government.  
Whether doth he that knits together such consequences (and these are necessarily gathered out of Bellarmine's interpretation) seem to be sent to the schools or to the Anticira for a purge. Charge is laid, Calandre, upon all true Pastors in Peter, to feed and rule the flock of Christ committed to their charge, but so that they feed them with the spiritual food of wholesome doctrine, and rule them with the staff of wholesome discipline. But if Paul the 5. do not feed the flock but feed upon it, and do not order the steps of his sheep, but break their legs and their heads, truly he doth give food, and use his shepherds staff otherwise then Christ appointed. Wherefore I think King james would rather fast then be fed by such a Shepherd, who feedeth to that end that he may kill and eat. What other Kings do let themselves look to it; let them laugh in their sleeves as they please, when they read these foolish quiddities of Scholars, but let them take heed of such wicked baits of rebellion, which lurk in Bellarmine's new Dictionary. Wherein 
To feed and to rule are 〈◊〉.  
To teach a King and to depose a King all one.  
The excommunication of a King, and deprivation.  
The absolving of sinners from s●●e, is the absolving subjects from their duty.   
§ 151 Do they not perceive that this is the Grammar of that proud and bloody Antichrist? Therefore King james doth willingly forsake the popish flock, that he may betake himself to God's flock, which is known of Christ, and followeth him and flieth from a stranger. For he doth not regard these carnal Cardinals so leaden-pated in their arguing.  
Peter is the Porter of heaven: Therefore the Lord of the world.  
Peter is a Pastor, therefore a Prince.  
Peter is a Fisher of men, therefore of kingdoms.  
A net was given him wherewith he may take fishes as well great as little.  
Therefore he hath government aswell over Kings as subjects.  
Peter is charged to feed the sheep, therefore he is charged to feed the rest of the Apostles.  
He is twice charged to feed Lambs: therefore the jews and Gentiles, and by consequent all Christians.  
Do not these hang together as a sick-man's dreams? Doth not Bellarmine seem to expose the Scripture to mockery, when he reasoneth after this fashion, against Aquinas rule, who doth plainly deny that symbolical divinity, 
Bellarmine buildeth his Church government upon tropes.  hath any force to argue? whereon for all that he hath built the whole supremacy, and doth pronounce it to be a doctrine of the Catholic faith, most plainly founded upon the Scriptures. The Philosophers do laugh at Epicure for making the world of moats. And will not Divines hiss out Bellarmine that frameth the ecclesiastical government of tropes? For truly you shall assoon find moors Utopia in the world, as Peter's Monarchy in the text. Which Article notwithstanding, is feigned to be the chief article of the Pope's Creed, wherein are contained many articles, aswell of superstition and Idolatry, as of conspiracy and rebellion. So that Popery is nothing else but a plain catechism of false faith toward God and the King.  
For that double power ecclesiastical and temporal, § 152 which you feign to be so inwardly joined to the supremacy, that it cannot be separated from it, you have erected as a double engine, to overthrow the truth of divinity, and the King's dignity. For you have translated each of them, as it were, from Peter, to the Pope and the Pope's successor, which you assume and prove not. Ecclesiastical, whereby by excommunication he may bind Kings, and absolve subjects, not only from sins, but from vows, laws and oaths. So by excommunication the Pope stealeth away crowns from Kings, and souls from subjects, while he taketh away authority from the one, and obedience from the other. In both he breaketh God's will, whereby the civil power of the Prince, though he be evil, and the obedience of the subject is sound established, as I have fully and at large satisfied you in the former Dialogue: and I have no less infringed the Pope's temporal jurisdiction, where you alleged it. In the mean while there was no reason this insolent Cardinal should term Kings Catholic in the faith, if once they began to be wicked, unruly rams: 
Bellarmine's sauciness justly reproved.  and Protestant Kings and Princes ravenous wolves, himself being a goat and a fox: he durst not, I say, call them so, but that he thinketh Kings to be very patiented. Who if they remembered themselves to be Kings, would teach this saucy and busy Cardinal to follow his holy study, and not to trouble himself with King's affairs. Neither would they at all suffer either the truth of God's Testament to be so corrupted by such wicked Impostors, or the majesty of kingly government to be so defaced. For the dissolution of government springeth out of the corruption of God's Testament. Wherefore if they would admit of wholesome counsel, they would judge these deceitful jugglers, who make controversies last for ever by the pernicious quirks and tricks, were to be suppressed by arms, not to be refuted by art: for certainly these will never leave off to offer dishonour to God, and wrong to Kings.  
§ 153 Then Saturnine, you are too hot and earnest, said he, Patriott, against that most learned Cardinal, and light of our age.  
And you must leave off (said he) to praise your Cardinal, and prove the supremacy. For your Popish writers could never yet agree upon a text, whereon the supremacy was plainly grounded.  
Then Saturnine, what is more plain and evident, saith he, than that Peter is called the head of the Apostles, 
Ephes. 1. The Popish division of the head.  and the rock whereon Christ promised he would build his Church? Matth. 16. for although S. Paul do call Christ the principal and invisible head of the Church, which giveth life to the whole body of the Church, yet it is evident that there is a ministerial and a visible head appointed by Christ, that may outwardly govern the whole Church, 
Cor. 12.  whereof he maketh mention, Corinth. 12. The head cannot say to the feet, I have no need of you, which cannot be understood of Christ the principal head. For Christ the eternal word of God can say to us, 
It followeth not but might have been aswell spoken to john or james.  I have no need of you, it followeth then, that it is to be understood of a ministerial head, that is, Peter, and Peter's successor, the Bishop of Rome. And although Paul do affirm Christ to be that one only chief foundation of the Church, 1 Cor. 3. 1●. yet when he saith in another place, that the Church is builded upon the foundation of the Apostles, & therefore upon the person of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, as Christ did first call him the Rock, and Esay when in the spirit of prophesy he spoke in the person of God, Behold I will lay in Zion a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation, 
A text peculiarly proper to Christ blasphemously applied to Peter.  as he understandeth Christ the chief foundation, whereof the Apostle speaketh, Another foundation, 1. Cor. 3. so he did foreshow Peter, whom Christ called the rock, and the Pope that precious & corner stone, that surefoundation, but a second foundation. 
Bellarm in praefat. de Rom. Pont. cap. 1.  As was likewise prophesied of one head, which the sons of juda, and the sons of Israel being assembled, should appoint to themselves. Whereby it appeareth that there ought to be one universal Bishop of the whole Church, 
Saunders of the visib. Monar. l. 4. c. 5  and that Christ and his Vicar make one head, one visible and ministerial head, whereon all the Church should depend, for the remedy of schism: one rock, one secondary foundation, even the person and chair of Peter, whereon the Church might rest, for fear of slipping and falling.  
Let us ask after the fathers, the sincere interpreters of § 154 the Scripture, Optatus, who thinketh that the word Cephas, as it signifieth a head, taken from the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & therefore calleth Peter the head of the Apostles. For the word stone in the Syriake signifieth head, in the Greek, 
Ad Marcel. tom. Epist. 2.  each prerogative of Peter is described by that word. Now that the person of Peter was both called, and laid the rock of the Church by Christ, Jerome is a witness, who doth plainly affirm, that Peter was he upon whom the the Lord founded the Church. And to Damasus tom. Epist. 2. 
August. in Psal. contra. part Donat.  I am joined in communion with your blessedness, that is, to the chair of Peter, I know that the Church is builded upon that rock. And Austin when he maketh mention of the seat of Peter, saith, that that is the rock. 
Cypria. de unica Ecces. Cathol.  And Cyprian Whosoever doth forsake the chair of Peter, whereon the Church is builded, doth he trust to be in the Church? It would be too long to reckon up all the fathers, who have written that the person of Peter was called, and placed the rock by Christ, whereon he promised not only to build the Church at that time, but would build it after. And therefore I alleged three, who called it not the person of Peter only, but called the chair the rock, that I might note down in the Bishop of Rome the perpetual building of the Church, according to the words of Christ. Now be packing Patriott, and deny if you can this chief article of the Catholic faith, that the supremacy and principality of Peter, is plainly grounded upon the Scriptures. Whence a divers beginning and excellency may be gathered both of the Ecclesiastical and secular government: that the Pope, as spiritual Prince, as Peter hath derived his power immediately from Christ, to govern his subjects: But secular Princes have received their power mediately to govern their subjects, either by the means of election. as the Emperor, and King of Polonia, or of hereditary succession, as the Kings of Spain, France & England, or of grant and donation, as the free Princes, or of just war and conquest, as Godfrey heretofore and other Lords held the holy land. Therefore to the Pope, as to Peter, ordained the chief spiritual Prince immediately from Christ in the Church, as to the head and rock of the Church, spiritual obedience for conscience sake is to be given of all Christians: But to secular Kings ordained mediately by human titles, only secular obedience for policy's sake, to preserve good order and manners, is to be performed, obedience to the higher power always being preserved: which I would have you know, I speak to that end, that I might call to your remembrance, Calandre, that whereof you cannot be ignorant that you do so swear fealty to the King, that you abjure not your fealty to the Vicar of Christ. The use of which article I thought good shortly to set before all Catholics in respect of their Princes.  
§ 155 Then Patriots, you have spoken much in few words, said he, Saturnine, and almost all, I am sure the chiefest points, which your men do allege out of the Scripture for the supremacy, so that you seem to have placed them in the rearward, as your best soldiers at the push of the pike, whom if I shall by God's grace overthrow, I trust I shall more easily defeat the rest of your broken and scattered forces.  
And first we must shortly see, in what sense Christ the eternal son of God, is said to be the head, the rock and foundation of the Church, and so it shall easily appear to Calandre, what wrong is offered to Christ, 
Christ is the head, & how. Ephe. 1.22.23.  when these are given to Peter. God hath put all things under the feet of Christ, saith the Apostle, and gave him to be the head over all things of the Church, which is his body the fullness of him that falleth all in all. Therefore Christ is the head of the universal Church, not only because he giveth life to all the members thereof, and doth pour into them all the senses and motions of spiritual graces: but also because he doth rule and govern all things subject unto him with his spirit: and thus the Church is the body of Christ. There is therefore that reference between Christ and the Church, as that he cannot be said to be the head, but in respect of this body, nor the Church be a body, but in respect of this head. That it is no less absurd to imagine a Church with two heads, then to imagine Christ to have two bodies. Therefore Paul when he called Christ alone the head, he brought all the rest, 
Christ is head alone, all others be but members.  both men and Angels into the rank of members. Of the Angels it appeareth vers. 21. Of men chap. 4. and even of those men, whom he purposed afterward to set over the Church militant, whereof he hath appointed none to be the head, but hath left them all parts in the body. For when as he writ of the perpetual government of the Church, by way of comparison, and of set purpose, 
Ephes. 4.  & had gathered many unities to preserve the unity of the spirit, in the bond of peace: One body, one spirit, one hope, one Lord, 
Among many unities one visible head omitted.  one faith, one baptism, one God, and one Father of us all; he omitted one visible head, when as he should have made mention in this place if any where at all. What? shall we think that Paul was altogether forgetful of Peter, when as to every of the Apostles was given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ, by whom he ascended into heaven, there was not one Apostle given, who should bear rule over all the rest: but many Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors & Doctors, whom before he called Bishops, to the gathering of the Saints, 
The government left by Christ not Monarchical but Aristocratical.  the work of the ministry, and the building up of the body of Christ. So that Paul thought that the government left by Christ upon the earth, was not Monarchical, by one which Bellarmine doth so greatly extol, but Aristocratical by many. And that he thought was sufficient to preserve the unity of the spirit and of faith, to meet with them, who cry out that the Church is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, if it be without a visible head appointed forsooth for the remedy of schism. And if Bellarmine had lived in those days, he would, I think, have put Paul in mind not to have slipped over Peter the head of the universal Church. But now Bellarmine it is not safe for the Apostle to use your council: And hath left in writing that we ought all of us to worship and adore Christ himself, ever living and present with his spirit and majesty, declared to be the only head of the Church, and in this place called the only Lord.  
§ 156 But Christ, you say, is that one head by a principal mean, in that he giveth life to the body, but the Pope, by the right of Peter, is the ministerial head, that he may govern. But to appoint a double head of the Church, by reason of the difference of a double duty of the head, one principal that giveth life, another ministerial that ruleth, this is not to divide, but to pluck in sunder the functions of the head. For to direct both the inward and the outward functions of this whole body, it is the chief and proper duty of that head, as Paul teacheth, which giveth life to the body.  
But you imagine that Paul hath spoken of the ministerial head in another place. When as he said, the head cannot say to the feet, I have no need of you. Which cannot be understood of Christ as you say: for he is such a head, who may say to us, I have no need of you: which that I may grant to be true as Christ is the eternal word and perfection itself (for so he hath no need of men, for he filleth all places, and himself cannot be filled) but as he is the head of the Church, he hath need both of the head and members, that he may be a head by the nature of relation or reference. For these are so knit together by that nature, that it can no more be a head without a body, than it can be a body without a head: whereby the Church is called the body of Christ, and the fulfilling of him that filleth all in all: which is not wrought by the worthiness of his human nature, but by the excellency of his divine nature. Of the corruption of that place to the Corinth's, and of the frivolous and absurd consequencies of your argument, you shall hear by and by.  
In the mean time listen I pray in what sense Christ, § 157 whom Peter confesseth to be the son of the living God, is called the rock and foundation of the Church, 1 Cor: 3.11. Matth: 16. Another foundation none can lay, besides that which is laid already jesus Christ. Christ therefore is that one foundation of the Church, that one rock, whereon the whole Church ought to be founded.  
Which is to be taken in this sense, 
How Christ a Rock.  that he is borne for us, that he died and rose again for us, that he was taken up into heaven, made of God for us, wisdom, justice, sanctification, redemption, satisfaction, purging, and to conclude salvation and glory: as Paul described him in the first chap: not that half and part of these good things, but that the full accomplishment and perfection is to be sought in Christ. Neither doth he say that Christ was given to us for the increase and help to wisdom, holiness, and redemption, but doth attribute the sound effect of all to Christ alone, 
Coloss: 2.  in whom he saith that we are perfected: in which place first he taught in what sense Christ is called the only foundation, than he placed the only foundation of the Church, that we may put our whole trust and confidence in Christ and him alone, being founded on him the eternal and immovable foundation. 
Th'Apostles builders not foundations.  And it is worth the marking, that Paul, Cephas, and other the Apostles are called builders, not foundations: who should build the whole Church upon Christ alone, not the foundation whereon it should be builded. But the Apostle saith that the Church was builded upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets. But the personal foundation is one, whereof is mention in this place; and the doctrinal is another, whereof is mention to the Ephesians: where he understandeth not Peter only, but all the Apostles, as they be Doctors of the Church, are the doctrinal or instructing foundations, as it is in the Apocalypse. where the Apostles are accounted the 12 foundations of the house of God.  
§ 158 Let Saturnine now come, and himself be judge, whether he can call the person of Peter, the rock and the foundation of the Church. If he affirm it still, (for I know his wrangling, and never yielding wit) let him say likewise, that Peter was borne for us, died for us, rose again for us, and ascended into heaven for us: that Peter was made of God for us, wisdom, justice, sanctification, redemption, satisfaction, purging, life & glory, that our faith and confidence is as well upon Peter, as upon a foundation, as upon Christ. For Christ in this sense is both the rock and foundation of the Church.  
Do you not see Calandre these men's open blasphemy, 
Popish blasphemy.  who have called Peter, and in him the Pope the second foundation of the Church? to me truly there can be no more deadly plague, than they who make a mere man the rock of the Church. But they make a holy man, but a man; as Marry a blessed woman, but a woman: when as she is said to break the Serpent's head. as Peter a holy man, but a mortal man and a sinner. And then hardly a man, when fearing death, he denied life, as Gregory saith: yet they call him the rock, whom Christ afterward called Satan. Who put such a weak and slender foundation of Christ his Church? what other thing do they offer to the world, than that which the Atheist may scoff at, and the jews detest? Let them leave of therefore any more to be mad with the disgrace and hurt of the Church: and let them confess the only son of God to be the eternal foundation of the eternal Church.  
But the names of King, Lord, Bishop, Pastor, and § 159 the like, given to Christ, are given to Kings and Priests. We confess and acknowledge, that such names as express his ministery given to Christ, may be given to Magistrates either ecclesiastical or civil, after a certain manner: but that those names which do express the nearest conjunction of Christ and his Church, 
Certain names given to Christ, not to be given to men.  by the power whereof life and salvation is derived unto us, as the names of Head, Rock, Foundation, that those should be given to any mortal man whatsoever, in respect of the whole Church, that we deny again and again.  
But the Fathers call Peter the rock whereupon Christ hath founded his Church: as Jerome and divers other Fathers affirm. 
Cusan. lib: 2. de cencord: eccles: cap. 13.  But your Cardinal Cusan hath answered before out of Jerome, although Peter by the rock is to be understood the stone of the foundation, yet agreeable to him the other Apostles were likewise the stones of the Church, as Apoc: 21. twelve stones: 
The rest rocks as well as Peter.  therefore so many Apostles, so many foundations; which is spoken in respect of the Apostolical doctrine, as Paul before expounded it.  
Other, and that more justly, upon this rock I will build my Church, expound it of Christ, as Austin. 
August ●e verb: D m: secund: Mat S●m: 13.  Thou therefore saith he, art Peter, and upon this rock, which thou hast confessed, upon this rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, 
Christ the only rock.  Thou art the son of the living God, I will build my Church, that is, I will build my Church upon myself the son of the living God, upon myself I will build thee, not myself upon thee.  
And Gregory; Christ saith he, doth call himself the rock. Other call the faith and confession of Peter the rock, 
Chrysost: serm: de Pent: & Homil. 55. in Matth: Hilar. de Trin: lib: 2.  as Chrysostome; Upon this rock, saith he, not upon this Peter, for he buildeth not his house upon a man, but upon faith.  
And Hilary; There is one immovable foundation, there is one blessed rock of faith, confessed by the mouth of Peter, Thou art the son of the living God, upon this rock of confession, is the Church builded; this faith is the foundation of the Church.  

Ambros: in Ephes: cap. 2.  And Ambrose; The Lord said to Peter, upon this rock I will build my Church, i upon this catholic confession of faith. Faith therefore is the foundation of the Church: for there is nothing said of the flesh of Peter, but of the faith of Peter: because the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.  
§ 160 Out of whose most weighty witnesses, that I may reckon no more, I gather this argument not to be excepted against.  
That (according to Scripture and Fathers) which Peter confessed, that wherein he believed, was, and is the rock.  
But Peter confessed Christ, not himself, Peter believed in Christ, not in himself.  
Therefore according to Scripture and Fathers, not Peter but Christ was and is the rock.  
which argument may be gathered out of venerable Bede, 
Beda in cap: 21. Johan:  who writeth that Christ was the rock, upon which foundation even Peter himself was to be built.  
The ground whereof agreeable to the Scripture, may be fetched out of Peter de Alliaco, 
Pet: de Alliac● recommen. scrip. pag. 269.  a reverend Cardinal of Rome, a very eager maintainer of the Pope's supremacy, who notwithstanding being overcome with the light of that truth; By the rock, saith he, Peter doth not seem to be understood but Christ. For who can ground the strength of the Church upon Peter's weakness? whereof ask but the damosel that kept the door, and she will answer you, that Peter being frighted at her word, as Gregory saith, while he feared death denied life. Wherefore seeing Peter did stagger, and his Vicar hath no fast footing, and seeing Bishops themselves do so greatly differ about the chief Priesthood of Peter, and Priests wrangle about their chief Priest, who dare presume to say, any man of what sanctity or dignity soever, whether he be Priest, or chief Bishop, whether it be Peter, or Peter's Vicar, or any other whosoever but Christ himself, to be the foundation of the Christian Church? Christ therefore hath founded his Church upon himself, as a most sure foundation, against the synagogue of Satan: and upon this rock hath surely grounded Peter himself, of whom he spoke that former sentence, upon this Rock. These are the words of Peter de Alliaco. You would think that Luther or Caluin were speaking.  
And yet Cardinal Bellarmine was so saucy, as to § 161 apply the prophecy of Esay of the chosen stone, 
Blasphemy subscribed to by the popish.  precious corner stone, a sure foundation placed in Zion, to the Pope, sur reverence: This hath that base slave of Antichrist delivered against the most manifest exposition of Peter, 1 Pet: 2. to whom Tho: Aquin. Cardinal Caictan, and Maldonat, and Fererius, jesuits, and many other popish writers subscribe. That with a few others did Bellarmine attempt against the Scripture, which the boldness of many popish writers more learned were afraid to attempt. And will you hearken to this fellow Calandre, in a chief article of faith, as he calls it, so far dissenting from his own side? or dare you securely admit of those, whom you see as the Madianites, mutually wounding themselves in a cause of such importance?  
Saturnine, who seemeth to be no other thing but very Bellarmine himself proceedeth from Christ to Peter, from Peter to the Pope; from the Pope he falleth to the Pope's chair, and he proveth that the Church is to be founded upon that rock out of testimonies, borrowed and framed out of Jerome, Austin, and Cyprian.  

Cic: de erat:  Cicero makes mention of a certain mad fellow, who finding a small boat on the seashore, purposed to build a great ship of it. 
Papists like madmen.  These men's madness is like, who finding Peter's chair in the Fathers, do dream that the Church must be built upon the chair.  
Jerome to Damasus, I am united in communion, saith he, to your blessedness, that is to Peter's chair, I know that upon that rock the Church is builded, that is upon the chair, as you relate it. 
Jerome misalleaged.  But jerom thus; I following after none chiefest but Christ, 〈◊〉 united to your Blessedness etc. You pass by Christ in this sentence, as if he were a man unknown, and you curtal Ieromes words, wherein he confesseth that he doth follow none chief but Christ. You make mention of Peter's chair; Upon that rocks, saith Jerome, I know that the Church is ●aide. Why should you not rather refer, That rock to Christ that goeth before, then to Peter that followeth after in the sentence? chief, when Jerome doth add the word, I know, that the Church is builded upon that rock. Now that Christ is that rock whereon the Church is builded, ●one at all doubteth: but that Peter is that rock, many deny. And yet you are so mad that you will build the ship of the Church, upon the chair as it were upon a small boat?  
You have well Saturnine by rasing out the name of Christ, shaven away the sentence, as a beard, with Ieromes sharp razor.  
I shall marvel much if Austin when he cannot endure that Peter should be the foundation of the Church, would suffer the Pope to be: and if when he did remove the person of Peter from this honour, he would admit Peter's chair.  
But when he makes mention of Peter's seat, that, said he, is the rock. Is it so indeed? let us add the words following reckon up said he all the Priests from the very seat of Peter, and in that order of Father's mark who succeeded one another, that is the rock against which the proud gates of hell shall not prevail.  
Then Saturnine, while you are handling another § 161 matter, Patriot you do confirm by Austin's authority another article of the Catholic faith of the Pope Peter's successor.  
But, said he again, to the confirmation of an article of the Catholic faith, Austin's authority without the testimony of the Scripture cannot be sufficient, in the judgement of Austen himself: who speaketh of the matter as he had heard, that the Bishop of Rome's seat was the seat of Peter, and that in that seat some succeeded others: but he makes it no article of the faith. Wherefore when he speaketh that is the rock it cannot be referred, either to the seat or to the succession of bishops in the seat. For therein he should contradict himself, who makes Christ the rock of the Church, 
Apostles rocks in respect of doctrine.  unless rather he refer it to Peter, so understood as I said with the rest of the Apostles, who in respect of doctrine, may in some sort be called rocks. But it is not said you will say, he is the rock, but she is the rock, therefore the reference is not to the person in this place, but to the seat, i. to the chair.  
As though by the deceit and carelessness of writers greater faults than these had not crept into Austin's works, than she for he. Although what hinders why, she is the rock, may not aswell be referred, to the person of Peter, as those words in the Gospel (upon this rock etc.) are referred to the person of Peter by the Rhemistes.  
But let that be granted you for a time which you shall never evict, that Peter's chair is meant in that place, Austen saith not that is the rock whereon the Church is builded, but that is the rock which the gate of hell shall not vanquish. So he doth not promise that Rome shall always withstand, but doth testify that Rome did then resist the gates of hell, while it kept that faith uncorrupt that Peter left unto them. For if he should now live, and make diligent search, he should not find Rome in the midst of Rome. 
This Room not old Rome.  Our Romans' at this day are no Romans', they are but the carcases of those Romans', who received their first faith from Paul and Peter, which these men have breathed out as their souls.  
§ 162 And now let Cyprian make answer for himself, who affirmeth that the like power was given to all the Apostles by Christ: 
Lib. de unitat. Eccles.  and that the rest of the Apostles were the same that Peter was, being endowed with the same fellowship of honour and power. Let him make answer for himself, how he could lift up Peter's chair above the chairs of the rest, and would not have it forsaken for just cause, which he did oppose in an unjust.  
But Cyprian as both Jerome and Austen and other fathers have just cause to complain, 
Contra Stepha. Corruption of Fathers after their death  that so many bastardly books are brought in the place of those that were right and true. And false sentences deceitfully foisted in, and true violently cast out, that now being dead they are constrained to speak and hold their peace according to other men's pleasures not their own.  
Now Jerome at your command conceals that, which he uttered before. 
Cypr. de unit. Eccles.  Now Cyprian speaketh that which he never meant. He that forsaketh Peter's chair whereon the Church is built, doth he trust that he is in the Church?  
Cyprian writ thus a little before; Christ doth build his Church upon Peter alone, 
How Peter the first stone in order not in power.  meaning that Peter was the first stone that was placed upon Christ the foundation, upon whom the rest in their order were to be builded. First therefore in order not in power: therefore he said that equal authority was given by Christ to all the Apostles, but that it took the beginning from unity, that the Church may be showed to be one. The foundation therefore of the building in Cyprian is nothing else, but a beginning. The rest of the Apostles were this which Peter was, being endowed with the fellowship of honour and power, but the beginning from one. This therefore is proper to the person of Peter, that he be the first stone set upon the foundation, upon which etc. How is it then derived to Peter's chair, whereon the Church was to be builded? Let Peter be changed into chair, and the masculine gender into the feminine. Do you think that that Father had so weak and childish a memory, that within the compass of nine lines he would so apparently contradict himself? that he would remove the person of Peter out of his place, and place Peter's chair in the room? to displace the Predecessor out of the rank to place the successors? To cast out the first stone in the building, out of his order, to place those that followed? he would never have done it, he was never so mad. It was not therefore Cyprians ill memory, but the falsehood of certain scribes, who brought that new clause, of a quite other nature into Cyprians text.  
Many popish correctors in this age, and those very § 163 learned, 
One copy of Cyprian alleged against many.  and many famous Printers have taken great pains in setting forth and printing of Cyprian, they sought for all the ancientest and sincerest manuscripts out of the best libraries of all Christendom, they could possibly get, they did very diligently compare them between themselves, and all of them agreed in this, that that clause could not be found in any of their written copies. Pamelius a Canon of Bryges only excepted, who being an obscure man, and of small reckoning said he found that clause lately written in an old copy belonging to the Abbey of Cambray, and brought it into the Anwerp editions printed by Stelsius: when that notwithstanding he confesseth he had eight other written copies in his hands fetched out of divers libraries, in all which he saith this clause could not be found, but only in the copy of Cambray. Now let us give credit if we can, that one written copy of the Abbey of Cambray was uncorrupt, and that all the rest were corrupted. Let us prefer one blind copy, before so many excellent copies both printed and written. And let us prefer one Pamelius Cannon of Briges, before so many notable Roman writers, Remboltus, Cauchius, Coster, Erasmus, Gravius, Manutius, Morelius. Shall we think one to be of more credit than all the rest? Which we must needs do, before we must admit of such a bastardly and new devised clause. Let Saturnine pack up and be gone, let him brag, that Peter's chair is the rock of the Catholic Church. And let me as my manner is a little consider the consequencies of this peeterly argument.  
Peter confessed Christ the son of the living God to be the rock and foundation of the Church, against whom the gates of hell shall not prevail.  
Therefore Peter is the rock and foundation of the Church against whom they have prevailed.  
Or thus, 
Peter in respect of doctrine is the foundation, as the rest of the Apostles.  
Therefore in respect of his person.   
Or thus, 
Peter the first stone in order set in the foundation is the rock.  
Therefore the Pope Peter's successor, as it is presumed, is the rock.  
The person of Peter.  
Therefore the chair of Peter.  
He is more dull than a stone that gathereth so.  
In one word Peter in this place holdeth the primacy of degree only and order.  
Therefore it giveth the Pope of Rome the supremacy of jurisdiction and power.   
Is not this making of the supremacy out of the rock, like the making of a rope of sand? how foolishly are these argued? but that one thing how blasphemously of Bellarmine? who apply the prophecy of Esay of Christ the chosen stone, precious, chief corner stone a sure foundation, to his Master the Pope. Christ is the chief foundation, the Pope forsooth is a second. This argument is not fetched from disparates, as Tortus plays upon us, but from immediate contraries; for heaven is no farther distant from hell, then Christ from the Pope, that is from Antichrist.  
But my good Lords the Popes do always lurk under Peter's cloak, as the Dominicans are said to lurk under our Lady's frock.  
Wittily said Erasmus as many things, What is charity, it is a Monks cloak said he, for it covers the multitude of sins.  
In like manner I may call Peter's virtue the bishops cloak; for it covereth many a wicked man. They do willingly snatch at that speech of Optatus, 
Bellarm lib. 1. de Rom. Pont. cap. 17. Vall. decla. de dona. Constant.  who thinking the name Cephas in Siriacke a stone, to signify in greek a head, is set upon Peter by the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Bellarmine observes, and therefore calleth Peter the head of the Apostles. Which learned Valla doth wonder could ever come into any man's mind: 
Comment. in joh. cap. 1.  and Cardinal Catetane a notable writer among the Papists, refutes it out of the Gospel. For he allegeth out of the Evangelist to meet with this error, that the word Cephas is interpreted to be Peter, not a head. 
Ferus in hunc l c. Papists against Papists.  And Ferus doth flatly say that that interpretation of this word is very foolish and ridiculous. The dirivation of this name is not so ridiculous as the proof of that, which out of that § 165 place of Paul (the head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you) Bellarmine being falsely collected, 
Bellarmine mistaketh S. Paul.  doth violently urge against the scope and mind of the Apostle. who taketh the head by a metaphor for any excellent part which is endued with great graces: the eyes, the ears, 
Chrysost. hom. viges. nou●: in 1. Cor. Corinth 12. expounded.  the hands, the feet for inferior parts, which are furnished with meaner gifts, as Chrysostome expounds, saying they did excel in gifts some greater some less, chiefly in the knowledge of tongues. They which received the greater gifts, did contemn them who had received lesser gifts, and these again grieved at it, and envied their betters. This difference in the mystical body, he went about to compound, by the example of agreement of the parts in the natural body, where the head doth not say to the feet I have no need of you etc. But all the members have mutual need one of another. Out of this metaphor Bellarmine dreams that the visible and ministerial head of the whole Church is appointed.  
Now mark the foolish consequences necessarily depending upon this interpretation.  
If one ministerial head of the whole Church, be taken out of this place, therefore because Paul maketh mention of eyes, ears, hands, feet, whereof there are two members, it is requisite that there be two in the Church, that must have two eyes, 2. that must have two ears, 2. that may be resembled to two feet, than it will be a very beautiful Church that doth consist of nine members only.  
§ 166 But how do they urge the likeness of the head and the feet, I would feign know whom they understand to be the feet of the Church? Some take them to be Kings, 
iniquity after the inferior members.  as Cardinal Poole, some for learned men as Turriane, most of all the jesuits of his own order: Kings who with their government may sustain this putrefied head, jesuits who may do the like with their wits, and may carry it over among the Indies, to domineer in the new found world. To the which feet the Pope cannot truly say, I have no need of you: and therefore he giveth greater credit to the jesuits, then to those idle paunches the Monks, who in their hourly prayers spend their whole time in mumbling on their beads. That that also may agree with the argument of your head, which Paul hath in the same place, that the greatest honour is put upon the dishonestest members, hence it may be other orders will conclude, that the jesuits are more dishonest than all the rest of the Monks.  
But I demand why there should not be many ministerial heads when there be many ministerial feet? where be the two eyes, whereby this metaphorical head without brains may pry into the secrets of Kings? where be the two ears, whereby they may listen after all reports? where be the two hands whereby they may rake and gather in all men's moneys? if you answer that two are not necessary for the head, when the head hath many more, we confess that it is better for your head to increase his treasure, then to make good the argument. For a duality of these members are more necessary to make the unity of the head, that a fit proportion may be reserved.  
But this so honourable a title, the head of the Church, § 167 the head of faith, being proper to Christ, who liveth and reigneth in the heavens, 
To make the Pope head is blasphemy.  so that he be present in earth with his Church, with his majesty and spirit, yea that he is within his Church to give life and govern the same with his word, to have this communicable with a mortal man and a sinner cannot be done without blasphemous contumely. Some things in Bellarmine are blasphemous, some are frivolous, these are both blasphemous and frivolous, as this argument drawn from a metaphorical head, whereon the supremacy the chiefest foundation of their catholic religion doth depend. And here see I pray you what discreet men may suspect, who think the Cardinal to be learned, they yield so much to his wit, that rather than they will think him to be a foolish disputer, they take him as it seems to be a secret betrayer of the cause. He defends his head with so withered forces and ridiculous arguments, that without any resistance of the Adversary, he will fall to the ground by his own weakness. That which the Orator said to Mar. calidius, 
Cicer. in Bruto.  negligently and coldly defending the cause of his own head and life, Thou Mar. calidius, unless thou dissemblest, thou wouldst not thus plead? This may more rightly be spoken to this worthy patron of his head, Thou Bellarmine, if thou thoughtst as thou speakest, wouldst thou handle a case of such importance so lazily, so loosely?  
For whereas out of the premises, Saturnine, you gather a different beginning with Bellarmine of Ecclesiastical and secular government, and from the divers beginning of each power, do draw a divers nature of obedience due to each power; and do propound the twofold use of this article to be considered of all Catholics: because all this discourse doth so nearly touch the King's crown & dignity, I leave it to be discussed by Regius our Counsellor; wherefore Calandre, you are to entreat him, that he would tell us what he thinks in this matter, and ease me of the labour of farther disputing.  
§ 168 Then Calandre, truly, said he, when I diligently mark all the parts of your answer, I perceive little or nothing making for this our universal Ecclesiastical Prince to be in the text. For if Christ gave the key not a sceptre, as well to all the Apostles and Ministers, as to Peter, and gave a Bishop's staff, not a sword; and ordained Peter not to be the head, but a member: and not the foundation of the building, but a work man; as not only many ancient, but Popish interpreters of the Scripture do teach with one consent; where I pray you shall I find grounded plainly upon the text, that universal Church government, as they call it? unless peradventure we may call Peter the Prince of the Apostles, as we call Homer the Prince of Poets, Demosthenes the Prince of Orators, and Plato the Prince of Philosophers. Wherefore my good friend Charles, I entreat thee, that as Patriott hath laid open the truth of God obscured by divers sophisms: so you would free the dignity of Princes, being defaced by Popish usurpation, as it becometh one that is of counsel with the King, which I ever held more dear to me then my life, even then when I was most nuzzled up in popery.  
Then Regius, All power, said he, is from God, & it is Either 

Ordained, And that two fold: 

Ecclesiastical. § 169  
Secular. 
The division of power.     
Tolerated,    
The Ecclesiastical, 

1. If you respect Christ, it is Monarchical or governed by one: for all power is given to him alone by the father, both in heaven and earth.  
2. If you respect men, is is Aristocratical or governed by many, and those the chiefest, as Patriott confirmed out of Paul.    
Therefore this your spiritual Prince, Saturnine, chosen a Monarch by himself, a King at his own pleasure, a supposed Vicar of Christ, an universal Bishop, ordained not by Christ the maintainer of Kings, but by Phocas the murderer of kings, at that very time when as Mahomet that false Prophet his brother came into the world; successor not of Peter, but of Romulus, what power he hath immediately to rule over Kings, when Peter himself had none at all, I understand that it is but tolerated. As the Dragon hath, from whom the two horned beast took all his power, as john testifieth in the Apocalyps. Therefore this power is not ordained but tolerated, not for the comfort of the world, but for the plague, not an holy ordinance, but to be a scourge for the Saints. But there is a certain spiritual power immediately from God. True: but that which promotes the Kingdom of light: not that which promotes the Kingdom of darkness, which is immediately from the Devil, such as the woeful experience of many ages hath proved you Popish power to be. Therefore to your spiritual Prince, holding the seat of the Dragon, spiritual obedience is no more due to him then to the Dragon.  
§ 170 But secular power, whether it consist in many, in few, or in one, although it be in Nero, yet it is immediately ordained of God, as Paul hath taught, and to that purpose is called by him the ordinance of God. But that, 
Secular power from God.  will some say, may be said of the secular tyrannical power, as of Tiberius and Nero, which may be said of the Popish tyrannical power, as of Gregory the 7. or Paul the 5. true in respect of the abuse. But the ordination of the secular power is of God, the abuse of the Devil. Therefore pilate's power which condemned Christ, is not said to be tolerated from above, but given from above. It was therefore a wicked power, not a usurped power, as Austin thought: wicked in respect of tyranny, not usurped in respect of the ordination: but the power of this Prelate, I may say this , as Bernard spoke, it is not only wicked but usurped. I conclude therefore out of the Apostles principle, for the secular power against Bellarmine.  
All power ordained, is immediately from God: by the witness of Paul.  
All secular power, whether it be by the people, by the Princes, or by the King, is a power ordained. For reason, which is a glimmering of the divine light doth suggest, that all societies must be subject to one of these, whether it be simple or mixed, for the good of common safety.  
Therefore all secular power is immediately from God.  
§ 171 But the title of the power is not divine but human, therefore the secular Prince hath mediately power and government, to rule over these or those subjects, 
Bellarmine in his answer to a book entitled, an answer of a Doctor of Divity, to an Epistle written to him by a reverend friend of the monition of the censures from the Pope, denounced against the Venetians.  either election coming between, as the Emperor: or succession, as the Kings of France, Spain and England: or grant, as the free Princes, (as the Popes in their own Dominion, for so he might have said) or by just war, as Godfrey heretofore etc. Very ignorantly. He doth not distinguish between the title of the power and the power itself. The title is the condition, without the which the power is not obtained to this or that King, over those or these subjects. The power is that authority and jurisdiction which God doth give immediately to a Prince, as Paul teacheth. The Cardinal therefore uniesuited, as I may so say, did abuse that most renowned French King, If any man (said he) should demand of the most Christian King, by what right he holdeth France, or maketh Laws, he shall not answer by the Law of God, but by the title of hereditary succession. Yea truly, the noble King might have answered otherwise, according to that wit wherewith he was endued: being demanded why he bare rule over his subjects, or made laws: That he did it not by the right of hereditary succession, but by the ordinance of that power which he received immediately from God. Inheritance doth not give that power, but it is a property necessary in that man, to whom God doth immediately give that power. That subjects may give reverence to their Kings, not for bloods sake, but for God's sake. Go to, and what if one should demand of Paul the fift, by what right he holdeth his Popedom, he will answer as he is taught, not by the title of man's election: but by the Law, forsooth, of God. Therefore the Pope's power is by God's Law, as it seemeth, although his election be by the Cardinals. Why then may not the King's power be by the Law of God, though his succession be from his ancestors? for whose condition seems to be like, why should their jurisdiction be dislike? The Cardinal therefore deals very unjustly, who denieth that to the King, which he granteth to the Pope.  
§ 172 But the malapert Cardinal did try the patience of the most Christian King, 
The cruel dealing of the jesuits with the French King.  as another of his order a bloody novist, struck out his tooth, when he meant to cut his throat. But now the jesuits do bless the King, but the King as oft as he cheweth his meat, its marvel he do not curse the jesuits: who while the controversy depended about the expulsion of the jesuits, received a wound from john Chastile, and the blood issued out of his mouth, spoke pleasantly, as his use was, Now at the last the jesuits being convicted by my mouth must be cast out. That his friends may grieve that they were brought back again by that mouth, as innocent and cleared, who were the authors of so cruel a murder: whose scholar did thrust that valiant King to the heart. After the same manner, 
Tom. 11.  Baronius, that testy old man, did entertain the Catholic King Philip the second, the Champion of their Church, for withholding Sicily and Naples from the Church. Whom will they spare if they spare not the Spaniard? What may the Defender of the Faith expect of these fellows, who do thus entertain the Christian and Catholic Kings?  
But although there be no truth, yet there is some equity in Bellarmine. 
Bellarmine's lewd dealing with all Princes.  He spareth no Princes, not those of his own side. He holdeth that those who be Catholic in faith, if they begin to be wicked, are to be driven by the chief Pastor from the flock, and deprived of their kingdom as well as heretics. Those as giddy headed rams that they hurt not with their horns, these as ravenous wolves that they devour not the flock. So scornfully doth this Braggadochian Cardinal term the Excellencies and Majesties of the Christian world.  
The world doth not marvel that Priests be so saucy, but it wonders that Kings be so patiented, that they will suffer Princely crowns to be tumbled up and down by them as footballs: and the prerogatives of kingdoms to be so weakened & diminished by school distinctions.  
For this Cardinal, like a bad archer, doth strike his confederate, next neighbour-kings, while he doth directly level and aim, but in vain, against james the King of Great Britain, whom God still defend from his treachery. But to the argument. He denieth all secular Princes to have any power immediately given from God, to rule over subjects.  
But it is well that he doth affirm even in the same § 173 chapter, in as many words, that secular Princes have power immediately from God, to rule their subjects, as they are superiors, and he allegeth a good reason, because the commandment of obedience is immediately from God, and this is true. For he cannot be superior and above other if he do not rule, neither can he be a subject that is not bound to obey. And yet again in the end. If secular Princes (saith he) have no power immediately from God over the Laity, much less over the Clergy: therefore over none. Which he granted before. Is it so indeed, will some say? yea truly, look upon the place, 
He is both unconstant & unlearned.  you shall see Bellarmine affirming and denying the same predicate of the same subject, and that in respect of the same, and that in one and the same chapter. Let this great Logician be packing, who sends his adversaries to turn over Aristotle's Analytickes: and after he hath read them himself, let him teach us how two contradictions may be true at once.  
Secular Princes have no power immediately from Christ to bear rule over subjects. And  
Secular Princes have power immediately from Christ to rule over subjects. 
A manifest contradiction  He speaketh in both places, not of the title but of the power. A manifest contradiction.  
But how may Proteus fast be held,  
Who changeth shape at every turn,  
But the feeble old man doth often fail in memory, and contradict himself, as Father Paulus, and Fulgentius, and Marsilius, and Chichester, have taken the man tardy, and held him to it shrewdly.  
As the man's great wit appears in Tortus, all whose disputation doth hang upon the begging the thing in question.  
§ 174 For that he may prove that the King's oath doth require not only civil obedience of Papists, but denial of the catholic faith, 
Bellarmine continually beggeth the question.  he taketh the thing in controversy for granted, to wit, that it is agreed among all Catholics, that the chief Bishop may rightly depose heretical Kings, and free their subjects from obedience. And he affirmeth, that this is the catholic doctrine, but proves it not, which ought sound to have been proved, if he would disprove the oath.  
He addeth further, that when the Kings of the earth, have admittance into the Church, with this condition that they submit their sceptres to Christ, etc. if they refuse it, it is lawful for him, who hath the rule over all the Church upon earth in Christ his steed, to remove them from the communion of the faithful, and to forbid their subjects to obey them.  
How falsely the Bishop of Chichester teacheth, now we observe the man's wit, we are very sorry that Bellarmine doth openly beg, and that one thing twice, which is in the very question. For it is in question among us, whether the Pope have the power to depose the Prince, and to free his subjects from their obedience.  
Here Bellarmine, as if like Apollo Pythius he gave his Oracle from his threefooted stool, pronounceth malapertly enough, that he, who is Christ his Vicegerent in governing the Church, hath that power. For he saith, that he hath power to excommunicate, therefore to depose. He proveth that excommunication is an inward thing fastened upon the supremacy, when he should prove, that this deposing is an inward thing belonging to excommunication: otherwise he disputeth not to the point. So the state of the controversy being either turned aside, or altogether unknown, he goeth from the point, and fighteth with us after the manner of the Andabata, who fought blindfold.  
And because the power to depose Princes by excommunication § 175 is denied the Pope, therefore he saith, the power of excommunicating is wholly denied. It followeth not, it is a fallacy from that which is in some sort, to that which is simply and absolutely. And when he had affirmed, and repeated it again and again, till a man might loathe it, that Christ's Vicar had so great power, he used no arguments or proofs to that purpose: he desireth to be credited upon his bare word without reason, as if he were a Pope, 
Bellarmine & the Pope need not allege reasons of their actions  who is not bound to bring arguments to refute the oath; for than saith he, he might be thought an undiscreet Prince, if he thought he might not forbid a wicked action, except he added reasons to his inhibition, and write a large treatise after the fashion of the Philosophers to that end. They do very cunningly, as they seem, excuse that unreasonable creature: who sets down the articles of the catholic faith, as the Mathematics do their principles. You must not therefore, o ye Kings, in a matter of such importance as concerns your right, so nearly look for any reasons from Robert Bellarmine, more than you expect from Paul the 5. He speaketh as a Prince, not as a Philosopher. He setteth out not arguments but edicts. He disputes not, but determines in the Pope● cause against the King, and that against the opinion of infinite Papists both better learned and honester men than himself, as appeareth in the answer of the Bishop of Chichester. So that Bellarmine seemeth to many wisemen, to have attained an opinion of learning, rather than learning itself. Fo● in that whole disputation's the begging sophism of the thing in question, 
The ground of Bellarmine's argument is the begging of the question  is the foundation of all Bellarmine's answer: so heavy headed and dull he seems in Logic: and so unskilful in Grammar, as appeareth in that part, wherein Satur●ine disputeth of the spiritual and temporal obedience, 
Bellarmine the great learned man speaks false Latin.  and allegeth Bellarmine's own words out of Tortus, luretur fidelitas, Let fealty saith he, be sworn to the King, but so, ne abiuretur fidelitas, that faith be not forsworn to Christ his Vicar.  
§ 176 He speaketh false Latin in disgrace of all Grammarians. But that far worse that he thinketh so basely to the contempt of Kings and Emperors. For we do not so much blame his grammar, as his divinity. And we observe this by the way, he doth object incongruity of speech to others, when he himself is faulty in manifest barbarism: and calls other men's styles dirty, when his own is cast over with hell dust. That which Robert Bellarmine's mouth doth clearly show, the same doth Robert Saturnine: who when he had abased the power of secular Princes, to advance forsooth the power of that one spiritual Prince; hath also so tied the spiritual obedience of Christians to the will of one Bishop, that by the pretence thereof, he may take from Princes at his pleasure, the civil obedience of subjects.  

God the object of spiritual obedience.  But as he erred in the original of either power, so he erreth in the object and end of either obedience.  
We make the true object of spiritual obedience to be God himself, the end God's word: he makes a contrary object, the Pope himself, and the end the Popes will.  
We make the true object of civil obedience, God's ordination of the civil Prince; the end the spiritual obedience toward God: therefore Paul saith, we must obey him for conscience sake, not for the business sake that is enjoined by the Prince, but for the authorities sake that is ordained by God.  
He placeth the Bishop in God's place, enjoining spiritual obedience to us, for very conscience of those things that are enjoined, and he maketh civil obedience terminable at pleasure, by the observation of good order and manners. So that subjects obey the civil Magistrate, not for conscience sake, as Paul speaketh, but for policy's sake, as Bellarmine speaketh; and that Clergy men obey not for necssarie subjection, but at voluntary discretion, and are held in, 
Clergy exempted from obedience.  not by force of law, but by force of reason, as he saith. So to us the observing the spiritual duty is the direction, and limitation of the civil, to him the bond of the spiritual obedience, is the disjointing and losing of the civil. Is not Bellarmine's deceit evident enough, who under the pretence of spiritual obedience, hath taken the civil clean away? So he playeth the juggler, 
Civil obedience taken away.  to deceive the Papists sight, and that with a twofold trick: One whereby he persuadeth, that for the show of civil obedience they think the spiritual may be abjured by them; the other, whereby under the show of spiritual obedience, he clean taketh away the civil.  
Hence ariseth those new and strange interpretations § 177 of Bellarmine in the school of Divinity; 
Bellarmine's new and strange interpretations.  Let not obedience be showed to man, contrary to the obedience of God, that is, let not obedience be showed to the King contrary to the obedience of the Bishop. And we must rather obey God than men: that is, we must rather obey the Pope, than Kings. I appeal to your own consciences ye Papists, whether you think this to be the Apostles commentary, that in respect of spiritual obedience, which consisteth in faith, devotion, love and fear of God, a sinful mortal man should be advanced into the seat of God? What if the Pope command, which God forbiddeth, that we take from Caesar the things that are Caesar's, by Gods own gift, his sword, sceptre, crown, subjects and life, is not this under the show of spiritual obedience to forbid civil obedience? And to command, that obedience be given to the Pope commanding unjust things, against God's obedience, who hath enjoined your subjection to the King. 
Rom: 13.  This ought not to appear spiritual obedience to you, but spiritual cozenage, whereby under the cloak of spiritual obedience, which the Pope hath gotten by the gift of men, he lose the bond of civil duty, which is due to the King by the gift of God.  
§ 178 I beseech you, o ye Christian Kings and Princes, whether you think it be for your good, 
A cave at for Kings.  that such positions as these be settled into your subjects minds? That such a catechism as this not only lie close hidden in books, but be openly taught in your Universities & Churches? There be none so dangerous treacheries to Princes, as those which are hid under the cloak of duty, and coloured with the name of catholic religion. Under the pretence whereof Bellarmine hath cherished rebellion in the subjects of the Venetian commonweal, which professeth Popery, as he hath done at this time in the subjects belonging to the most excellent King of Great Britain.  A Trojan or a Tyrian to him are all alike. 
Beware o ye Kings, lest the mischief intended to one fall upon all the rest. Saturnine is an ill egg of an evil bird, as in the proof of the article of supremacy; he is a corrupter of God's will, so in the practice of it, he is an enemy of princely government. And as you had him ere while a manifest forger, so now you have him an open traitor.  
§ 179 Here Calandre both your discourses said he, the one against the Pope, the other for the King, give me just occasion of two doubts: one, how the spiritual and civil obedience is distinguished in the word of God: the other, whether the former councils did cast of this spiritual power which the Pope doth generally usurp. Which two points being briefly and plainly discussed, will clear the whole controversy, and satisfy any man that is not contentious.  
Then Patriott; You do wisely, Calandre, saith he, to call every thing to her beginning, for every thing as it is first, so it is true: and that which is right, sets out both falsehood and itself.  
First therefore I answer about the distinction of the double power, the Spiritual and Civil, 
Chrysost: de verbis Esa: Vidi D●m: hem:  both which Christ ordained. I call that Spiritual which concerns the souls, and that Civil which rules the bodies. That, 
4. Power distinguished.  Christ committed to his Minister; this, to his Magistrate: sometime to more, sometime to few, often to one. That is called Episcopal government, this Princely: or, that is spiritual, this civil. Each as I said is of God. 
To whom it is committed and how performed.  The Holy Ghost hath appointed Bishops to rule the Church of God, Act: 20. and Wisdom saith, By me Kings do reign, and Lawmakers appoint just things. Therefore Kings do rule by God, as Bishops do feed. Government belongs to them, ministery to these. But these you will say have Government also. I confess it. 
Bernard: de consid: ad Eug:  But these have an inward government over men's souls, they have an outward over men's bodies. Bishops have the key of the word and sacraments to be exercised not in the name of the King, 
Matth: 16.  but in the name of Christ: nor the key only of knowledge, 
The difference of government between Princes and Bishops. Rom: 13. Chrysost. ex Paul. ibid.  but of discipline, and that not after their own pleasure, but after Gods will. Kings have the sword, to be drawn in defence of godliness and justice, whereby they command those things that be true and good, forbidden such as be false and evil, and punish the wicked of what calling soever, and defend the righteous. The weapons of Bishops are spiritual, of King's corporal. Therefore Bishops ought to teach, to admonish, to reprove, to deprive of the seals of grace, and to drive from the communion of the faithful, those that grievously and publicly offend, till they repent: 
Chrysost: ibid.  Kings ought to restrain them according to the quality of the offence, either of liberty, or goods, with loss of limbs, or of life itself. Therefore the government of Bishops is by persuasion, of Kings by compulsion: of a Bishop directing, of a King constraining. A King rules men a-against their will, a Bishop with their wills. 
Jerom. all Heli●: in Epitap: N●potiani.  He doth govern by fear, this bringeth to liberty. He reserveth the bodies for death, this keepeth the souls for life. Either of them doth punish not only thieves, murderers, adulterers, perjured men, traitors, but also blasphemers, idolaters, Heretics, schismatics, whether they be of the Laity or Clergy, but he with the corporal sword, the bishop with the spiritual. Either of them have equally a care of holiness and honesty, the one that he may teach by precepts, the other that he may ordain by laws. Either of them is practised about holy things but not upon holy things. For they are not subject either to the will of the Pastor, or government of the King. The King is conversant about holy and divine things, not in the administration and execution thereof, as Vzias. but in appointing and ordering them as Ezechias. A bishop is conversant about holy things in the doing and executing of them to preach the word, to Minister the sacraments, and use the keys: Good laws are made to settle truth by the counsel and faithfulness of the bishop, and by the power and authority of the King.  
§ 180 There are some who foolishly compare these two together, there are other who do wickedly mingle them together, so that one doth destroy the other, which God hath most wisely joined together, that one should help the other. Now this spiritual power if you respect Christ, 
Ephes. 4.  is monarchical, under him alone; if men, it is aristocratical under many: as we showed out of Paul. The civil is of three sorts.  
Either belonging to the 

People.  
Princes, or chief.  
King.    
Which last when we set forth we disgrace not the rest.  

The duty of a bishop.  It cannot be denied but that the bishop in his spiritual perfection and comfort, doth excel the King; for God doth not appoint the King but the bishop to be the seedsman of his word, the Messenger of his grace, the disposer of the mysteries of his kingdom. But in the outward authority and power of compelling, the King doth excel the bishop, while he commands that which God alloweth. Neither do I so prefer the civil government before the spiritual, but do affirm that the same God, who teacheth those that be simple, and draw such as be willing by the mouth of the minister, doth draw those that be negligent, and constrain such as be retractory, by the sword of the magistrate, whom the spirit and God of the spirits hath ordained to that purpose.  
Yea truly they who set the civil government behind the spiritual simply as the body behind the soul, and the flesh behind the spirit, do make a very fleshly comparison between Kings and bishops; unless they imagine bishops to be without bodies, and Kings without souls. And who so infer thereupon that a godly king cannot inflict a punishment upon a wicked Priest, do deface holiness in the King as a matter temporal, and advance wickedness in a Priest as a matter spiritual. And who thence conclude, that a Christian King cannot promote holy rites by his laws, as well as a minister can by his doctrine and censure, give more without cause, to the shaving of a Priest then to the character of Baptism: and do foolishly prefer priestly anointing before the Princely. And they seem not well to understand what those excellent lights of the world, Constantine, justinian, Theodosius, Valentinian, Gratian, Zeno, Charles the great, L●wes his son, and Lothary his nephew, and many other Kings and Emperors did out of God's word justly command bishops in causes ecclesiastical, and wherein they did obey bishops, as was made manifest before.  
But the bishop hath power from God to govern § 181 the Church as is before said: therefore above the King in the government of the Church; I distinguish of the government,  
One was 

Inward.  
Outward    
It is one thing to administer the inward another thing to order it. In the administration of the inward government, a bishop doth excel a King, in the ordering of it a King doth excel a Bishop.  
I confess a Pastor is superior in feeding, so Carpenters in building and Mariners in sailing are above a Prince. 
A Priest not above a Prince.  What then are they simply better? It is a fallacy from that which is in part to that which is simply.  
But the actions of a bishop are more excellent than the works of a King, as the preaching of the word, the administration of the Sacraments, the remitting and retaining of sins. Therefore a bishop doth excel a King.  
But the working and perfection of these things doth depend not upon the arbitrement of the Bishop, but the commandment of God.  

August. count Cres. lib. 4. c. 6. Ambros.  There is a double spiritual power, 

1 Ministerial of men.  
2 Imperial of God.    
Therefore the credit of these actions must serve the glory of God not the honour of the Priest. The spiritual work is of God, 
A bishop great not in respect of his person but doctrine.  the bodily service is of the Minister. Men in the remission of sins do not exercise the right of power, but do exercise their ministery. They pray, God doth grant. The ministery is from men, the gift from an heavenly power. The reason therefore drawn from the perfection of heavenly graces in the Church, to prefer the person of a Priest before the person of a Prince, is very weak, because the subjection due to the sword is annexed to the person of the Prince, the worthiness and power due to the key is not annexed to the person of the bishop, but to his doctrine.  
§ 182 By God's law obedience is due to each. For he that saith keep the commandment of the King, saith likewise, obey your Prelates, who watch over your souls. But we are to hold this that here are not to be understood by Prelates, Popes and Cardinals, who obtrude their own inventions upon us, but holy and Christian Bishops and Pastors, who deliver the word of God unto us, as the Apostle addeth, for we are not tied to the decrees of Doctors, but to the oracles of God. Therefore the obedience required is not the outward subjection to the person of the Priest, but an inward submission to the doctrine of Christ, and an allowance and practice of the same. For in respect of the person, bishops are called servants, and their function is called a Ministry as I said.  
Therefore the greatest King is bound to believe and obey the least servant of God delivering his Lords will. And he oweth that subjection to the Lord, not to his Messenger, to his doctrine not to his person. For he cometh not in his own, but in the Lord's name, which may be as truly said of the meanest Minister as of the greatest bishop. 
What a Bishop may do.  A bishop therefore may teach a King that is ignorant, may reprove him being an Heretic as the Prophet did jeroboam king of juda: may admonish him being of a bad life as john did Herod: may correct him being a Tyrant as Elias did Ahab: may reprehend him being otherwise good if he do openly and grievously transgress, as Nathan did David: and deprive him of the sacrament of grace, while he repent, as Ambrose did Theodosius. But whether he can remove him from the company of his faithful subjects, by excommunication, it is a great question and diversly discussed by the Fathers. They who hold it may be done by the Bishop, do deny for all that, that the King by him may be put from the obedience of his subjects, much less being excommunicated be abandoned by his subjects, and killed either by open force, or secret treachery as certain of the popish sort do hold. I say, certain, for the honester sort decree otherwise, and commit the King to the bishop's cure, submit him not to his Court. For the King is the Lords servant, and the bishop's Lord: as I said before: subject to the bishop's pulpit, not his consistory; that he may be directed by him, not judged by him. A bishop is appointed to persuade, not compel; not to gape after crowns, but to watch over their souls; and when he obeyeth the King, than he prescribeth the doctrine of obedience to others, as Christ, Paul and Peter went before them both in precept and practice.  
§ 183 Then Calandre, you have satisfied me abundantly, Patriot, 
Primacy of order only due to Peter.  in the distinction of these powers: now if you please, I desire the other about the largnes of that spiritual power which the Pope now usurps whether the former councils did grant the same.  
Then Patriot, the Fathers saith he do grant to Peter the primacy of order, and to the bishop of Rome as to his successor, whom certain do call the bishop of the first sea: but they deny unto him the primacy of power, as I said either over Kings, or over their fellow bishops.  

jerusalem. An●ioch. Alexandria. Constantinople. Rome.  There were either four or five patriarchs, among whom the government of the whole Church was divided. That all the rest were equal to the Patriarch of Rome in all points of jurisdiction, whose power was bounded within certain limits, out of which he might not pass, doth appear by that notable Cannon the sixth, 
The Nicene Council of 318. Bishops.  of the Nycene Council. Which was gathered together by the authority of Constantine the great in the year of Christ 325. wherein 318. bishops met together, and set out 20. true Cannons only, as Ruffinus numbers them, the true copies whereof remained in all the patriarchal Churches, and are extant in many others at this day.  
The sixth Cannon of the Council, doth make the government of the bishop of Rome the form of government of the bishop of Alexandria, as it is said before. Where it doth appear, that the government of the bishop of Rome was shut within the compass of his own Province. For if it had reached into other Provinces, it had not been the form of the government of Alexandria, 
Rome no larger in jurisdiction than Alexandria.  which was contained in one Province. Again it appeareth by the Cannon that the bishop of Rome had the same fashion. Therefore the government of Alexandria was like unto Rome. How could there otherwise be a likeness. For there could be no likeness between an universal bishop and a provincial.  
The second general Council was the first Council § 184 of Constantinople assembled by Theodosius the elder in the year of Christ 381. wherein 150. 
Constantinople Council the first of 150. bishops.  bishops met together, who confirmed the decree of the Nicene Council.  
Then came the third general Council the first of Ephesus, 
The Council of ●phesus of 200. Bishops.  gathered together by Theodosius the younger in the year of Christ 4●1. it consisted of 200. bishops, in which two councils the Provinces of the Christian world were divided, and every Province assigned to his own Patriarch, and the bishop of Constantinople by name made equal to the bishop of Rome without any difference of honour, but that the bishop of Constantinople was next after the bishop of Rome in place, & had the second voice in all answers and subscriptions.  
The 4. 
The Council of Chalced●ne of 630. bishops.  general Council of Chalcedon gathered by Valentinian and Marcian in the year of Christ 451. which consisted of 630. bishops who decreed thus in the 28. Cannon, we every way following the decrees of the holy Fathers, and acknowledging the Cannon of the 150. bishops, we also decree the very same, and ordain the same about the privileges of the most holy Church of Constantinople, which is new Rome. For to the throne of old Rome, because that City bare rule over all; the Fathers by right give the privileges, 
Constantinople equal with Rome.  and the 150. Father's being moved with the same consideration do give equal privileges to the most holy throne of new Rome, rightly judging that city, which is honoured both with the Presence and Senate of the Empire, and doth enjoy equal privileges with Rome that ancient Lady; should be advanced in causes Ecclesiastical aswell as she, and be as much esteemed, being the next unto her.  
§ 185 But the fathers of the Council of Chalcedone Acto 3. writ thus to Leo the most holy and blessed universal Archbishop and Patriarch of great Rome. Note, saith Binius, that in these books Leo is called the universal Archbishop. 
Suri. tom. 2. Concil. pag. 111. & Bini t●m 2. Concil. fol. 215.  But note also that which Binius concealed, that it is added to Leo the Archbishop of the Romans. Note here the authority of the Bishop of Rome, saith Surius: but it may be that these words slipped out of the margin into the text, though they be most true, saith Binius. But we appeal from these two pararasites of the Roman Bishop to the very acts of the Council themselves, which we before alleged.  
But this canon is rejected, say they, by Leo the Bishop of Rome, about the privileges and eminency of the Bishop of Constantinople, because he presupposeth that the Roman seat was made the head of the Church not by God's Law, but by man's Law, as Binius saith, fol. 180. whom shall we believe? Leo, who out of his ambition rejected the canon; or Gregory, who with all reverence received the whole Council, as it is in Gratian distinct. 15. cap. sicui.  
But the Council, say they, in their Epistle writ Leo the head of the universal Church. Because Leo so writeth, 
Piniu●i● anno in hanc. Synod. 188.  lib. 3. epist. 3. to Eulogius the Bishop of Alexandria, your holiness knoweth, that by the holy Synod of Chalcedon, the name of universality was given to the seat of the Bishop of Rome only, wherein now by God's providence myself do serve.  
Why then is not the name of universal prefixed before the Epistle of the fathers? It was prefixed, say they, but by the craft of some Scribe it was taken out, what a jest is this? as if it were not more likely, that the Pope's Epistle admitted a fraudulent addition, 
Whether one Leo or 600. Bishops are rather to be believed.  than the Epistle of the general Council, a subtraction? But he it so, let Leo have written so. Whether is it more meet to give credit to the Pope privately in his own cause, or to 600 Bishops in the cause of the Church, decreeing against it in a public Council? especially when as Gregory the great doth plainly write, that none of his predecessors did ever use the title of universal Bishop.  
Farther, the fift general Council, was the second of § 186 Constantinople, assembled in the Empire of justinian, 
2. Constantinople Council of 280. Bishops.  in the year of Christ 586. wherein were present 280. Bishops, who repeating word for word the former decree of Chalcedon, renewed in the 36. canon.  
Whereby it is evident that Constantinople had no less authority in Ecclesiastical causes, than Rome had: and that Rome had obtained the primacy of order, because it was the chief seat of the Empire: which so many fathers in five Synods gathered together would never have said, if they had judged the primacy of Peter, had been founded upon the institution of Christ.  
What? can we imagine that so chief an article of the Catholic faith was unknown to fathers, so many for number, so famous for holiness, so excellent for learning, and that in five several the most renowned general Counsels?  
If the supremacy was plainly grounded upon the Scripture, 
Note.  than did the Counsels very ill to take away the supremacy. If the Counsels did well in taking it a way, certainly the supremacy is not so plainly founded upon the Scripture. If you shall lay envy to their charge, whereby men of such justice and integrity, would not behold a matter so manifest, we will wonder at it. If you object ignorance to them, that having eyes in their heads they could not see, we will laugh at it. Neither can we conceive any other cause alleged by you, but either blind envy, or envious blindness.  

An irony. Concordan li. 2 cap. 13.  O blind or envious Cusan, who rested content in the decrees of these Counsels, and whatsoever right belongeth to the Pope, doth think the same was given him by the Church. 
Defence. part. 2. de cap. 18.  O malicious and dull pated Marsilius Patavine, who thought he had no power, either above Bishops or other Churches, by any Law, either divine or human, but that only which was given the Pope, either absolutely or for a time in the Nicene Council.  
If all this power was given, first by the Scripture, not therefore by the Church: if by the Church, as Cusan and Marsilius say, not therefore by the Scripture.  
§ 187 The sixth Council was the Council of Carthage, in the year of Christ 418. 
The Council of Carthage of 217. Bishops.  wherein 217. Bishops were assembled, among whom Austin was present. In which Council, as in the rest, the power of all the patriarchs was made equal, the right of appealing to the Bishop of Rome, to such as were condemned by the Archbishop of their own Diocese, was denied.  
Which Cardinal Bellarmine, notwithstanding doth avow to belong to all Bishops by the Law of God, 
Cap. 25. de primi Rom. sedis.  yea, if any were condemned by a Synod of their own province among the Antipodes, they might provoke to the consistory of the Bishop of Rome. Which Cardinal, I think, lives not in our Horizon, but with the Antipodes, who is wont to tread contrary steps, against so many men alive, not only of ours, but against his own Doctors also. Unless peradventure he descended lower than the Antipodes, who dare be so bold to go against so many holy father's being dead.  
He doth admit with his followers, many fraudulent devices, whereby he goeth about to weaken the authority of this Council. Boniface the second with one blot of a grievous accusation, doth wipe out all the decrees of that Council, and damns them all. For he saith, that Aurelius, sometime Bishop of the Church of Carthage, with the rest of his Colleagues (among whom was S. Austin) began to wax proud, at the instigation of Satan, in the times of Boniface and Celestine his predecessors, against the Roman Church. It is a hard case to say, that Austin with his Colleagues, at the instigation of Satan began to wax proud against the Church, because they had resisted both by their decrees and letters, three proud Roman Bishops, Zozimus, Boniface and Celestine, in a just cause common to all Churches.  
Apiarius a wicked Priest, whom for his lewdness in § 188 discharge of his ministery, 
Apiarius.  Urban the Bishop had justly deprived, appealed to Zozimus Bishop of Rome: who sent three Legates, Faustine, Philip, and Asellus, to the Council at Carthage, in favour and aid of Apiarius: them he enjoined among other things, that they should lay claim, in his name, to the right of appeals to him and his seat: if any Bishop accused or condemdemned, did appeal to Rome, that the Bishop of Rome might commit that cause, by his letters, to be determined by the next provinces, or send Legates from his side, who might sit about the business in his turn, and with other Bishops might determine of the whole matter. To that purpose he delivered to his Legates, the title and instrument of his right written with his own hand, the Canon of the Nycene Council, 
Concil. Carthag. 6. cap. 3.  whereby he affirmed that the right of appeals was bestowed upon him: The fathers of the Carthaginian Council assoon as they had heard the Legates, answered, that they never had read any such thing in the canons of the Council of Niece, and withal, willed the Legates, that if they had that canon, they should give it to Daniel the public Notary, 
A false canon offered for a true.  to read it openly. They in stead of the canon of the Nicene Council, offer the third chapter of the Council of Sardis, but mangled and gelded. For in the authentic it is thus written.  
Osius said, If any Bishop be condemned, for any cause, and thinketh that he have no evil, but a good cause, that the judgement may be again renewed, doth it please you that for charity we honour the memory of Peter the Apostle, that it may be written of them, who have examined the cause to julius the Bishop of Rome, and if he shall think that the judgement is to be renewed, it be renewed, & appoint judges to that end? But if he prove the cause to be such, that those things be not repealed, which were already spread, those which he decreeth shall stand firm, if this please all? the Synod answered, It pleaseth. Council: Sard: cap: 3. apud Surium Tom: 1.  

The Pope corrupteth the words of Osius.  But the Bishop of Rome curtoling those words of Osius; Doth it please you, that for charity we honour the memory of Peter the Apostle, and by writ to julius the Rom: Bishop, goeth on thus: Osius the Bishop said, It pleaseth that if a Bishop be accused, and the Bishops of the same Country being assembled, shall judge and depose him from his degree, if be that is cast of do appeal, and fly to the Bishop of the Roman Church, & would have himself heard, if he shall think it in ●●t the judgement be reversed, or do vouchsafe to write the examination of the cause to those Bishops that be of the next Province, that they make diligent inquiry, and determine it according to the credit of the truth. And if any man will have his business again to be heard, and shall move the Bishop of Rome with his petition to send his Legate, let it be in his power to do what he will in the business, and what he shall think best.  

The Pope's devise to cozen the African Fathers.  Here mark the notable trick wherewith the Bishop of Rome went about to cozen the African Fathers.  
First he pretends a Canon of the Nicene Council for the right of appealing. The Legates foist in a Canon § 189 of the Council of Sardis.  

Bellarm: lib. 2. de Rom Pont: cap: 25.  But Sozi●●us and Boniface, though these Canons were not expressly in the Nicene Council, yet they called them the Nicene Canons, as Bellarmine saith, because the Council of Niece, and the Council of Sardis were taken for all one.  
Is it even so, for one? when as they diffred in time, place, and variety of Canons? For as Baronius is a witness, the Nicene Council was assembled in the year 325. the Council of Sardis 347. so that eighteen years came between those counsels; the Nicene Council was in Asia, in a City of Bythinia, the Sardine Council was in Thracia, the confines of Illiria, as the same Baronius saith. 
Concil: T●m. 1 Bellarmine and Baronius at a ●arre.  How divers the Canons of each Council were, Surius teacheth.  
Baronius doth excuse it otherwise, that Sozimus and Boniface did not allege the Canon of the Council of Sardis, but the Canon only of the Council of Niece: yet there can be no suspicion of deceit in this, but that either some of the Canons of the Nicene Council repeated in the Council of Sardis were lost out of the Council of Niece, and reserved whole and sound in the Roman register; or that by some gatherer of the Canons, because the name of Sardis was infamous through the Arrians, they were recited in the name of the Nicene Council.  
Two thieves by the contrariety of their answers will easily be descried. And do we not see these two old forgers by the difference of their answers to be taken tripping?  
It is a sport to see the Popes deceived by his Scribe, as they call him, who for Sardis put in Niece, and when that by the words of the Legates was manifestly refuted, who alleged in the Council of Carthage the Council of Sardis, I suspect, saith Bellarmine, that the words of the Legates, by the fault of the writer, crept out of the margin into the text. It is well, when thieves fall out, as the proverb is, true men come by their goods. Now the Legates when they allege the Canons of the Council of Sardis, for the Nicene, they cut of certain words that were in the middle which they thought were not for their turn, which Osius delivered, It pleaseth you that for charity we honour the memory of Peter the Apostle, and it be writ to julius the Bishop of Rome? Wisemen saw, if the privilege of appealing should belong altogether to the Bishop of Rome, that some parasitical Osius was not to be set down, who might win it by flattering entreaty, but might have it by authority. 
Decret: 5. q. 4. Osius dixit.  And therefore Gratian in his Decretals doth let pass the same words with the like craft; doth any man when he dealeth with other in his own right say by entreaty, if it please you all?  
§ 190 Now let us go forward to the rest. When as the Carthaginian Fathers every one of them answered, that they never read that Canon among the Nycene Canons, and yet had among them the true copy, which Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage, who was present himself in the Council of Niece, brought from Niece to Carthage, they decreed by common consent that the true copies of the Nicene council should be required of the Bishops of Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, and the Bishop of Rome himself, if happily that Canon might be found among them. Neither for the space of five whole years, the matter being much sought after and debated, any thing at all could be found. In the mean time, the true copies came from Cyrill of Alexandria, and from Atticus Bishop of Constantinople, wherein twenty Canons only, as Ruffinus counts them, were contained, agreeable to the copy of Carthage, whereof, of so many divers copies, so excellent, gathered from all the quarters of the world, Austin with his colleagues writeth to Boniface the Bishop of Rome after this manner: 
Epist: Carth: Conc: ad Bonif: cap: 101.  Who doubteth that the copies of the Nycene Council are most true, which being brought out of so many places, and so worthy Churches of Greece, and compared, do so well agree together?  

Afric. Conc: cap: 92.  Whereby the Carthaginian Fathers set out a decree presently, that Priests if they complained of the censures of their Diocesans, should be heard of the Bishop's next adjoining, and if they thought good to appeal from them, they should appeal only to the councils of Africa, or to the primates of their own Provinces. And they that would needs appeal to places beyond the sea, should be received by none to the communion within Africa.  
Here they who before contrary to the decree of the § 191 Chalcedon Council did by stealth bring in the affirmation for the negation, added an exception clean contrary to the scope of the decree of the Carthage Council. Unless perhaps they appeal to the sea of Rome. The Council of purpose did except against the Roman sea, when it expressly concluded, that it was lawful for none to appeal to the bishop of Rome. So that Bellarmine himself otherwise a notable forger, could not allow that exception of Gratian the forger, 
Bellar. de Rom. Pont. lib. 2. cap. 24.  unless perhaps they appeal to the sea of Rome. For this exception saith he doth not seem to agree. For the Aphricans most of all for the Roman Church did decree, that it should not be lawful to appeal beyond the sea.  
They joined letters to the decree, which they sent to Celestine the bishop of Rome, We entreat say they, that henceforth you would not easily admit to audience any that come from hence, nor would receive any into your communion that stand excommunicated by us. For this also your blessedness shall easily find determined in the Nicene Council. And if this seem to be observed in the inferior Clarks, and Lay people, the Council will have much more observed in the bishops. Let not them therefore who are suspended from the Communion in their own Province, be restored by your holiness of set purpose against right and reason. Let your holiness rather punish as it is meet, the impudent gaddings of Priests and other like Layikes. For no decree of the Fathers is forbidden by this of the church of Africa. And the decrees of the Nycene Council, committed both the Clerks of inferior degrees, and bishops themselves most plainly to their own Metropolitans. For they did wisely and justly foresee, that what business soever were begun, should be likewise ended in their own proper places. Neither did they think that the grace of the holy Ghost was wanting to any Province, whereby justice might wisely be discerned, & firmly retained by the Priests, chiefly because it is granted to every one, if he think good, to appeal from the sentence of the judges to the Synods of their own Province, or after that to the general Synod: unless there be any who think, that God can infuse the righteousness of judging into one man, whatsoever he be, and deny it to an infinite number of Priests assembled in a Council. How then shall this over-sea judgement be certain, 
Reasons not to appeal beyond sea.  whereto the persons of witnesses be necessary, who either for weakness of nature, or for age, or for some other lets and impediments cannot be present? For that which was sent by Faustinus, in the behalf of the Nycene Synod, in the truer descriptions of the Nycene Council we could find no such matter. Therefore do ye not suffer this, that we may not seem to bring in the smoky pride of the world into the Church. These things did the Carthaginians publicly write to Celestine bishop of Rome, wherein they did refute out of the true and authentic copies the appeals to the Roman by shop which Sozumus laid claim to out of the false Cannons of the Nycene Council. For the decrees of the Nycene Synod, do commit either the Clerks, or the bishops themselves directly to their own metropolitans. They forbid therefore, that they which were excommunicated by us should be received into the communion by the Romans. As it is say they determined in the Council of Niece. The Africans rejected the Pope's Legates as new creatures and unknown to the ancient Church: they called their gaddings to Rome impudent, and deemed the sending of his Legates the smoky pride of the world. And they did propound not the bare decree of the Synod, but enforced it with very weighty reasons.  
One is, that if so great authority were given to the § 292 bishop of Rome, not only by the right discerning of judgement, but by the grace of the holy Ghost given to him alone, than it should seem to be denied to all others assembled in the Council.  
The second, that when it is sufficient to appeal twice, the Synod gave leave to such as would appeal from the sentence of his bishop, first to appeal to the provincial Synod, then from that to the universal.  
The third, that seeing in the repealing of sentences the presence of witnesses is requisite, the Roman bishops do impose a very unequal law upon Christians to come necessarily from other kingdoms so far distant by sea and land: especially being hindered by age, or sickness, or any other impediments which fall out to be very many.  
The fourth, because by this custom of appealing the authority of all other bishops being diminished, and brought into one, the smoky pride of the world would be brought into the Church.  
The Carthaginian Fathers upon these reasons rejected that unjust request of the Roman bishop: and discovered the false and forged Cannons by the true and right copies sent from Cyrill and Atticus. So wisdom overcame deceit, and modesty pride. For the Fathers did the second time condemn Apiarius, and in Apiarius Sozimus, Boniface, Celestine, that is in one wicked runagate, three very cunning forgers.  
Here Saturnine in a great chafe, These saith he, are § 293 the main points that your men out of the Carthaginian fathers, do commonly object against ours. But the good fathers offended of ignorance, 
A mere Shifter.  yours of malice. The Fathers by a double ignorance, One because they believed there were but twenty Cannons only of the Nicene Council, whereas there were seventy, whereof fifty being burnt by the Arrians perished. Wherein, as many other things so that right of Appeals, which the Roman bishop did challenge was contained. 
Soz●m. lib. 3. cap. 10.  The other because they did not distinguish between the two Synods of Sardis, 
Popish reasons to prove mo●e Canons of Niece than 20. Epist. of Egypt: to Marcus. For the copy of the Nicene Council Tom. Conc. 1.  as it appeareth out of Sozemane, whereof one was Catholic and general of 300. bishops which Austin saw not. The other was heretical of 86 bishops which Austin saw.  
Now beside those twenty Cannons, which Ruffinus reckons up that there were other 50. more appeareth out of a certain Epistle of Athanasius and the Egyptians to Marcus the Roman bishop, of whom they required the true copy of the 70. Cannons, after the Arrians had burnt the authentic copy, which Athanasius brought from Niece.  
There is extant a record of julius the Roman bishop against those of the east in the behalf of Athanasius, wherein beside those twenty Cannons, other twenty seven are repeated: whereof six do more clearly set forth the authority of the Roman bishop then that Cannon which Sozimus alleged.  
Besides that there be many more Cannons of the Council of Niece besides those twenty which Ruffinus reckons up.  

Euseb. in the life of Const. cap. 3. Ambros. Ep 82.  One, wherein it decreed that Easter should be celebrated on the sabbath day, as appeareth by Constantine's Epistle in Eusebius.  
A second, wherein it decreed that a man twice married should not be admitted into the clergy. As Ambrose telleth us.  

jerom. in pref. on judith. Austen. Epist. 110.  A third, wherein the book of judith is admitted among the canonical books as Jerome witnesseth.  
A fourth, wherein it is forbidden that two bishops should sit together in one Church as Austin affirms.  
A fift, wherein it decreed that it was not lawful for them that were fasting to minister the Sacrament of the supper. As the African Fathers testify.  
Lastly the heretical Doctors Luther, Caluine, and the writers of the centuries out of the first book of Socrates cap. 8. do allege a Cannon out of the Council of Niece, wherein their Wives are permitted to Priests. But none of these Cannons are found among those 20. which they only number.  
Therefore if Sozimus be said to be a corruptor and a Forger of the Cannons of Niece, because he recited one Cannon under the name of the Nycene Council, which is not found among the 20. Cannons; by the same reason Constantine, Ambrose, Jerome, Austin, the African Fathers, the century writers, Luther and Caluine are to be termed corrupters and forgers: for all of them do recite Cannons out of the Council of Niece, which are not reckoned among those twenty Cannons.  
Last of all in the Council of Florence Sess. twenty, one john a great learned man affirmed, that he could show by many testimonies of the ancient, that the Fathers of the 6. Council of Carthage, did at the last acknowledge that very corrupt and false Cannon of the Nycene Council were sent over to them out of Constantinople and Alexandria.  
Then Patriot, he that holds you not worthy, Saturnine, § 194 saith he, of a cardinals hat, that can lie so profoundly for the triple crown, doth you great wrong  
You do very shamelessly object ignorance to the Carthaginian Fathers among whom Austin was present, 
A popish slander.  out of Bellarmine; and malice to our men.  
When the Papists perceived that their Sozimus wa● taken tardy in a manifest lie, they devised this tale of the 70. Cannons of the Nycene Council. And to th● purpose coined an Epistle, as it had been sent from Athanasius and other Egyptian bishops, to bishop Marcus, wherein they do complain forsooth, that the true copies were burnt by the Arrians at Alexandria and therefore required the true copy of the seventy Cannons. 
Athanasius Epistle forged.  And as one lie commonly begets another, they sergeant Marcus answer to Athanasius and the Egyptians, given the tenth before the kalends November, when Nepotian and Secundus were Consuls, which day was near the end of the 13. year of the reign of Constantine, as we may see in Sozomen the first book cap. 25. and 28. in which year he writeth that Athanasius was absent, out of Egypt in the Council of tire, and returned not home, but fled to Constantinople, and remained there till he was banished into France.  
How then could Athanasius send this Epistle to Marcus out of Egypt, where he was not when the Epistle was sent?  
Again in Marcus Epistle is mention of the persecution of Egypt, which was not at all in Constantine's time, but long after under Constantius when Marcus was dead.  

Tusc: 1.  Cicero laughs hearty at a Fellow, who said he remembered what was done before he was borne, Who can choose but laugh at your Marcus remembering the persecution in Egypt, raised after his death.  

Sozom. lib. 1. ap. 17. Beda distinct. 16. Nicene canons burnt before they were made.  Now Marcus went next before julius, julius was bishop of Rome when the Nycene Council was gathered, as Sozomen and Bede write. Therefore your Athanasius, who is said to write to Marcus, writeth that the Nycene Cannons were burnt before they were made.  
Besides whereas there were twenty Cannons afterward made, they were preserved uncorrupt in the public § 195 and authentic records of Churches wherein the Creed of the Nycene faith was contained, and the Arrian heresy was confuted, the other 50. were said suddenly to have perished through the malice of the Arrians.  
O foolish Arrians who blotted out 50. Cannons which touched no part of the Arrian heresy, and spared the Nycene creed, and the Epistle sent to them of Alexandria which condemned that whole heresy.  
The Orator doth make himself merry with certain witnesses of Doris, 
Orat. pro Flac.  who being produced against Flaccus, when they had lost nothing said they had lost the public tables; O shepherds said he desirous of letters, for they took nothing from them but letters; if they had brought forth those that had been true, there had been no fault, if false there had been a punishment for corrupting the letters. They thought it best to say they were lost.  
These popish witnesses are not much unlike, 
The Papists like foolish Shepherds.  who feign that the Arrians stole 50. Cannon's out of the Nycene Council, which hurt them nothing at all, and left twenty sound and untouched, whereby they were to be condemned. If the Papists bring forth the true Cannons, they hurt their cause, if false they hurt their credit. They think it the safest course to say that 50. were burnt, and that by them, who could receive no profit by this their dealing.  
But if the Arrians were so foolish, the Romanistes were wiser than to suffer 20. Canons to remain among them which did restrain their supremacy, and suffer 50. to perish which did enlarge it.  
But we see so little likelihood in the tale, 
The former forgery rejected by Bellarmine.  that Bellarmine himself hist it out. For he writeth that the burnings of the books happened in the time of Constantius the Emperor, whenas Athanasius being banished, one George an Arrian was ordained in his place, as Athanasius witnesseth in his Epistle to all the Orthodox. 
Marcus received an Epistle after he was dead.  But it appeareth, saith he, by Ieromes Chronologie that Marcus the Pope was dead at that time. Therefore Marcus after he was dead received an Epistle from Athanasius. And therefore being dead made answer to Athanasius, if we give credit to Bellarmine. It is good sport to see how these lying Papists do cover this tale with their mutual contradictions.  
But julius answer doth confirm Marcus Epistle, § 196 wherein there is mention of seven and twenty Nycene canons, 
A counterfeit julius.  besides those twenty which are reckoned up by Ruffinus.  
Hear we have a counterfeit julius, not only lying for the supremacies sake, but also forswearing himself: though he that is a common liar, as it is said, is a common for-swearer. He doth not only counterfeit false canons, but ratifies them with an oath. That I said true, the Godhead is my witness, as he saith in that counterfeit answer. But if the answer of the true julius, sent to the Council of Antioch, in Athanasius quarrel, mentioned by Athanasius in his second Apology, if it be compared with this, it will lay open all the circumstances of this untruth and perjury. I will not go far for proof, this blind and bastardly decretal doth plainly reprove itself.  
It was given the first of November, as it is written, when Felician and his Colleague were Consuls, 
Socrat. l. 1. c. 40  that very year wherein Constantine died.  
Now the Council of Antioch that deposed Athanasius, 
Sozom. l. 3. c. 5.  and to which julius writ, was gathered together by Constantius five years after Constantine's death. So this answer was sent to the Synod of Antioch, five years before that Synod was assembled. Do you not see with your eyes, and feel with your fingers how gross this lie is?  
Beside, julius in his answer writeth, that Athanasius remained with him at Rome a year and a half, waiting for the presence of the Antiochians, after he had cited them with his first process, whereto is ascribed the calends of October, as to the latter the calends of November of the same year.  
So between the two days of appearance were one and thirty days, in which short time, to go from Rome to Antioch, 
Pegasi, be horses with wings.  and return again, the Pope's Paritours had need to be Pegasi, who were not to gallop, but fly.  
But if julius six canons did more clearly set out the Pope's prerogative, than that one canon of Sozimus, truly you make Sozimus to be a very wise man, who chose one canon and the worst, when he could have alleged six, and those far better.  
For whereas you bring many other canons of the Nycene Council, as you call them, beside those twenty recited by great authors, let your jesuits make you an answer, who distinguish the decrees of the Council of Niece into two kinds.  
The first kind they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, constitutions, as they interpret them.  
The other they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is properly, canons, as they with us confess.  
They are ignorant, as they confess, of the number § 197 of the constitutions and acts: But of the canons properly so called, they grant that the number is rightly set down by Ruffinus. To the first kind, they refer those your canons improperly so called, whereof some they affirm are among the acts of the Nycene Council, and deny them to be among the Canons: as Turrian plainly in his poem upon the canons of Niece, in Binius, part. 1. pag. 169. But of these constitutions which you urge, there will be another time when you shall have a particular answer.  
Hear I rest, here I dwell, here I stick fast against all the corruptions and falsifications, where Austin hath taught me to set fast footing, who doubteth, saith he, that all the copies of the Nycene Council are true, which are brought out of so many sundry places, and from so noble Grecian Churches, being compared together, and do so well agree. I give credit to Cyrill of Alexandria, so writing back to the Carthaginian fathers.  
I thought it necessary to send over to your Charity, 
Sur tom. 1. rescript. Cyril. Alexan p. 586  the faithfullest copies out of the authentic in the Synod, held in Nice a a city of Bithynia.  

Epist. Atti. episc. con. ibidem. fol. 190.  methinks I hear Atticus Bishop of Constantinople, thus writing back: I have sent unto you the canons, all of them, as you commanded, as they were decreed in the city Niece by the fathers.  
I ought not, I cannot, but must needs consent to 217. fathers, assembled in the African Council, whereto Austin did subscribe.  
Is any man so mad to prefer the forged writings of a counterfeit Mark, and a counterfeit julius, fetched I know not whence, written in the dark and in a corner, disagreeing between themselves, before the true and undoubted canons reserved in the Registry, not only of Carthage and Alexandria, but of Constantinople and Rome, exemplified in the light, openly and agreeing in all points among themselves? And will any man hearken to 3. suspected & convicted witnesses in their own cause, rather than to more than 200. witnesses assembled in a Council in the common cause? and those bringing in the pride hurtful to the Church with out all reason; these suppressing that pride with all forcible and holy reasons they could?  
§ 198 But there is brought upon the stage, by Bellarmine, the ridiculous person of one john, 
Ridiculous john brought upon the stage.  whom he calleth a very learned man, who affirmeth in the Council of Florence, forsooth, that he could show many testimonies of the Ancient. What doth this jolly john affirm, that the fathers of Carthage did at the last acknowledge, that false and corrupt canons of the Nycene Council, were sent them from Alexandria and Constantinople. Who affirms it? One john. Who told him so? No body. Only he saith on his bare word, that he can show many testimonies of the Ancient. Why then doth he not show them? Therefore what a certain ignorant animal saith he can show, and doth not, shall we accept it for a lawful testimony of a recantation, made by so excellent and wise a Council? And because a certain Robert hath brought in an obscure john in the fag end of all, and calls him a very learned man, therefore we must admit of him as a fit and sufficient witness against so many most reverend fathers of Carthage? And when he dare object ignorance to all these, doth he not see that in himself he doth betray his own arrogancy? he doth attribute learning to one john, and ignorance to Austin, forsooth he thinks he can fetch smoke out of lightning, and light out of smoke: minerva's heir, who dreams that all knowledge is borne with him, and shall die with him. For otherwise he would never have objected ignorance to Austin, and the rest of the Carthaginian fathers, as if they knew not to distinguish between the two Counsels of Sardis, when himself betrayed more ignorance in confounding the Counsels of Niece and Sardis.  
But that we may return thither, where we went aside, § 199 necessarily to pursue the adversary, 
Primacy of order granted to Rome, but of power denied.  and shortly to set down to you the judgement of the primitive Church, Calandre, concerning the primacy, you see that the primacy of order and degree was granted to the Bishop of Rome, but the primacy of power and jurisdiction was denied by six Counsels. I am not ignorant, Victor did affect before the Nycene Council, what Leo did arrogantly seek afterward: like the two sons of Zebede, one of them desirous to sit on the right hand of Christ, the other on the left. But the desire of glory doth not infer an article of the faith. Therefore the fathers of the primitive Church, did provide as far as they might, that one should not advance himself above the rest. The fathers of Niece did assign a province, aswell to the Roman Bishop, as to the Bishop of Alexandria, out of which he might not departed. The Bishops of Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon, did make the See of Constantinople equal to the See of Rome: The Carthaginians did deny the right of appealing from the African Synods to Rome. It is not credible that so many learned and holy fathers assembled in six Counsels, would have denied that jurisdiction to the Roman Bishop which the Scripture had yielded him. But there are other started up, who saw more, and understood the Scripture better than 2000 fathers assembled in those six Counsels. Now they can show us an heavenly charter in many places, wherein God gave to Peter, and to Peter's successor, as they presume, the Bishop of Rome, that universal principality; I will give thee the keys, and whatsoever thou shalt bind etc. and feed my sheep, and thou art Peter, and upon that rock, and divers others of that kind.  
§ 200 But those fathers, though they searched usually into all the mysteries of holy Scripture with piercing eyes, 
Peter's key was no better, his tongue no more free than the rest.  yet they could not perceive a greater key, or a better given to Peter then to the rest of the Apostles, nor a larger or a more shining fiery tongue sitting on Peter's head, as the chief Prince, then on the rest: neither that one pillar was set more sure and strong, than the other 12. pillars, but that they were all alike equal among themselves: 
Acts 15. Acts 8. Peter not equal but inferior to the rest.  nor that Peter alone was appointed the Pastor of all the Apostles, much less the Prince, lifting up himself above the rest of the Apostles, above the Emperor above the Council. Therefore in the first Council of jerusalem, Peter was not Precedent, but james. And Peter being sent by the rest of the Apostles with john into Samaria obeyed. Now the superior is not sent by the inferior, but contrary: It follows that Peter was not above the rest, but equal with the rest: yea, truly below the whole Council: to the which for going to Cornelius the Centurion, being accused, he gave account of his fact, wherein he confessed himself to be inferior to the Council: which was kept, not by Peter's command, but by the consent of all the Apostles. Therein there was a great discourse of the sum of Christianity, of justification, and of the salvation of the Elect by the grace of Christ: before Peter gave his sentence, and that not sitting, but arising, and that very modestly and gently. Afterward, james did only yield his opinion, but pronounced and set down in writing the decree itself, which all the assembly of Apostles and Priests did follow. It seemed good also, not to Peter alone, but to the Apostles and Priests, with the whole Church, to send certain choice men to Antioch, with the Apostle Paul and Barnabas: and the synodal Epistle did not bear the name of Peter, but of all the Apostles, Priests and Brethren. And if Peter had received the primacy of jurisdiction from Christ, the other Apostle had done him great wrong, that suffered not Peter to be Precedent of the Council, that they sent Peter as inferior into Samaria, that they took account of his doing, that they met not together by his appointment, that they suffered him not to sit above others, to propound the decree, to send Legates, and to seal up the synodal Epistle in his own name. But the Apostles did no wrong to Peter. It followeth then that Peter received no primacy of jurisdiction from Christ, but was equal to the rest of the Apostles, and inferior to the whole Council.  
The Papists do grant a double government to Peter. § 201 
Peter's double pretended government. Galat. 2. Paul, nothing inferior to Peter.  They make him Lord of the spirituals and temporals. Therefore the Apostle Paul did ill, be it spoken with reverence, who made himself equal to Peter, and gave out, that he was inferior in nothing unto Peter, and which was more, reprehended him sharply to his face, as his equal and fellow-servant, and that publicly, when he took him in a fault. For the Gospel (saith he) was committed to me over the Gentiles, as it was to Peter over the jews. For he that was powerful through Peter in the Apostleship of the jews, the same was powerful in me over the Gentiles. And when as james, Cephas and john, who seemed to be pillars, knew that grace was given me, than they gave the right hands of fellowship to me and Barnabas, See Cephas doth acknowledge Paul his fellow, he had him not for a subject: neither did he challenge to himself the highest top of government, but gave the right hand of fellowship: which was done by Peter not only in respect of humility of mind, but for equality of office. far be it from us to think it was written by Paul for pride of mind, but for the truth of the matter. And if Christ had appointed Peter the universal Bishop & Prince of his Church, how durst Peter and Paul, covenant between themselves in the 18. year after Christ his passion, that Peter should exercise the Apostleship over the jews, and Paul over the Gentiles, not only, but chief? whereby Paul by the Ancients, is called the Prince of the Apostles, as well as Peter. But the equal hath no government over his equal.  

Peter would be are no rule over the clergy. 1 Pet: 5.  Neither could Peter himself bear rule over the Clergy, that he might not seem to permit that to other, which he would not take to himself, when he called himself not a chief Priest, but a fellow Priest. Much less did he use the sword, and civil government, and judge Caesar to be subject unto him; but admonished himself with all other Christians, to submit themselves to Caesar, as to the most excellent, and to other Magistrates as sent from him, neither did at any time exercise civil government. He had it not therefore; for that is not a power which is never brought into act. Therefore Peter was no more over Kings, than he was over Apostles.  
§ 202 Nay Christ himself as a man was not above the Emperor. 
Christ himself as man not above Emperors.  As he is God, he is King of Kings, and Lord of Lords; as he was man he did not only submit himself to Tiberius, but to Pilate, Tiberius' Deputy in jury. You had no power, said he, over me, if it were not given you from above. Again he saith, that his kingdom was not of this world, when he was demanded of Pilate, what kingdom he laid claim unto. Whereby it appeareth that Christ was to have not a temporal, 
August: in Psal: 47.  but a spiritual kingdom, as Austin gathereth out of those words. hearken to this o ye Kings, and envy not, Christ is a King after another fashion than you are, who said my kingdom is not of this world. Fear not therefore, if the kingdom of this world be taken from you, you shall have another given unto you, and that a heavenly one, whereof he is King. If Christ had not a temporal kingdom, was it for Peter to have it? what is this else but to make the servant above his master, and the ambassador above him that sent him? and if it did not belong neither to Christ, nor to Peter, do you think that not only the temporal kingdom, but the chief government over all temporal kingdoms, was given to the Pope, Christ's supposed Vicar, & Peter's counterfeit successor? fie upon such foolish pride, fie upon such lofty vanity, which Christ did reprehend in many places in the the Apostles, when he said, the Kings of the earth bear rule over them, but you not so. And as my father sent me, so I send you. And my kingdom is not of this world. And yet Bellarmine dares to write, 
Bellarmine contrary to Christ.  that the supreme temporal power was given to the chief Bishop, which Christ himself by his own confession did not exercise. Christ saith, the Kings of the earth beareth rule over them, but you not so: Bellarmine contrary, but you so. Christ, as my Father sendeth me so I send you: Bellarmine contrary, not as my Father sendeth me do I send you. The Father sent me in humility, and ignominy; I send you in pomp and majesty; Christ, my kingdom is not of this world; Bellarmine contrary, yea it is of this world. and of all this world. So manifestly doth the Cardinal contradict Christ.  
But although Christ as man did not exercise temporal § 203 power, he might if he had so liked, saith Bellarmine. Here the question is not what Christ could have done, but what he did. Neither is the authority of Peter to be grounded upon that which Christ could have done, but upon that which Christ did indeed. Christ could if he had pleased, have made the world in an instant, but he would not: the Scripture witnesseth he would not, because it is said that he took to him six days to bring forth that work. He could if he would have redeemed the world with one drop of blood without death, but he would not: that he would not the Scripture beareth witness, wherein it is said, that he must die for us. So he could if he would as man, exercise the dominion of temporal things, but he would not; that he would not, truth itself doth witness, which said, my kingdom is not of this world. From a possibility to a deed, the argument is not of force in Christ, much less in Peter. O pleasant madness of Bellarmine, whereby he dreameth that the temporal power in possibility, as hanging in the air, is bestowed upon his Bishop.  
§ 204 But mark the man's reason: God hath appointed Christ to be heir of all things. 
How the temporal rule forsooth descendeth upon the Pope.  Therefore if he would, he could have cast Tiberius out of his throne, and Pilate out of his judgement seat: for he was the heir of all things. Peter could if he would have wrested Nero's sceptre out of his hands, for he was heir to Christ. And the Pope can if he will cast of the Crown from the head of any King heretic or catholic, if he begin to go astray, for he is Peter's heir. For all comes to this at last, that the temporal dominion of the whole world, descends from Christ to Peter, from Peter to the Pope. That the Pope forsooth might have and exercise power over Kings, which Christ had but used not, but might have used, if he had been so pleased. Avant with all these foolish quiddities which infer such dangerous consequences. 
Austin and Maldonate against Bellarmine.  But if he had consulted not only with Austin, but also with Maldonat on of his own side, he should have understood, that that place was to be interpreted of the spiritual, not temporal inheritance of the world, granted to Christ by the Father. For what? he that refused the judgement of dividing a private inheritance, would he take to him the public inheritance of the whole world? And he that willingly submitted himself to the authority of Pilate given from above, even to the death of the Cross, did he show himself a temporal Lord both over Tiberius and the whole world?  
The power of Pilate, saith Bellarmine, was not ordained § 205 but permitted. And this is the sense of the place, that Pilate could do nothing against Christ, if God had not permitted it. As that place is also understood, this is your hour and power of darkness, Luc: 22. but because S. Thomas (saith he) upon the 13 to the Romans, understandeth the place of the ordinary power, we do not disagree: But that this power did extend itself to Christ, we think that to be done out of pilate's ignorance, who not knowing the worthiness of Christ, judged him as some private Citizen of the country. As if in our days a Clergy man were brought to the bar of a Secular judge under the name and habit of a Lay-man, he may be condemned by that power wherewith a Laicke may, out of the ignorance of the judge; yet it doth not follow thereby that Clerks by law are subject to the judgement of Lay-men, or that Christ was subject to the judgement of Pilate. Thus far Bellarmine.  
But Christ said that pilate's power was not permitted § 206 but given from above. The permitted power was that power of darkness whereby God suffered that the jews should kill the Lord of Glory, wherein they sinned most grievously. And therefore it is called the power of darkness, not given from above as was pilate's the judge, which Austin called not an usurped but an unjust power. Which place (saith he) when I heard it to be expounded by S. Thomas of a lawful power I do not withstand it. 
Bellarmine contradicteth himself.  It is well that which before you did wickedly affirm, being instructed by Thomas you honestly deny. The man speaks out of a boat, now inclining to this side, now to that, neither doth he sometime contradict others so much as himself. But mark how by turning himself into all parts, he hath found a starting hole to escape by. Whereas Pilate did stretch out this power against Christ, it was out of pilate's ignorance, that knew not the worth of Christ. As if a Clerk under the habit of a Lay man should be brought before a lay-Iudge, he might by the ignorance of the judge be condemned as a Lay-man, which notwithstanding the Law doth not allow, etc.  
That which he imputes to the ignorance of Pilate, Austin imputes it to his fear, lest he should offend Caesar in losing of Christ. But this may be ascribed to his ignorance that he beggeth the question: 
Bellarmine begs the question.  For he takes it as granted, which is in question, that a Clerk may not by law be condemned by a secular judge, though out of the judges ignorance he may, being attired like a lay-man As if he should say that Alexander the 3. being in his pontificalibus might not rightly be judged by Frederick the Emperor, 
Alexander 3.  but being in his cook's apparel he might by ignorance: or that Bishop who bare arms against Richard the first King of England, 
An English Bishop in K: Richard the first days. Odo brother to W. Conqueror.  could not be hanged in his Bishop's attire, but being found in a coat-armour, he might by ignorance: Or that Odo the brother of William the first, a very wicked traitor, could not be committed to ward, as Bishop of Bayon, but as Earl of Kent: Or that some traitorous jesuite, imagine some Gar●et or Oldcorne, could not be hanged in his massing robes, but might by ignorance, being clad in a Courtier's attire. I could wish rather that such Clerks were unknown than known. But he doth very untowardly make Christ his innocency, a cloak for a harmful Clerk: that because Christ could not be rightly condemned by Pilate, therefore every Clerk is exempted from the judgement of a secular judge. It is as I said, a manifest begging of the thing in question. For I can better dispute after a contrary manner;  
There was no exempting of the person of Christ from the judgement of Pilate,  
Therefore there is no exempting of Paul the fift from the judgement of the Emperor.  
For if Christ the chief Bishop was not exempted from the judgement of the Emperor, whose power was from above, then certainly the Bishop of Rome, ought not to be exempted from the judgement of the Emperor's power. The actions of Christ are rules for the Pope, the actions of Popes are not rules for Christ.  
But whereas the Cardinal brings in his Clerk in § 207 a lay-man's weed, before a secular judge, he doth very ill apply it to his purpose. For he having got this freedom or exemption, as is taught, he should not say to the judge, that he hath power from heaven against him, but the contrary: you have no power against me from above, for I am a Clerk: but when Christ said not this, but the clean contrary, (you have power against me from above) he allowed not the exempting of a Clerk: unless the prerogative of a Clerk be greater than the prerogative of Christ. But you have brought in a very dull-pated Clerk, who being endowed with a privilege as you call it, cannot utter it that he may be safe from danger: being like to the Ass and her colt, whence they are wont to draw another argument for the temporal government of Christ. 
An argument drawn from the Ass for the Pope's power.  He sent his disciples that they should bring him the Ass and her colt, whereon according to the prophecy, the humble King might sit, when he entered into jerusalem; and commanded them to tell the owners of the Asses, the Lord had need of them: whence they conclude, that Christ was the temporal Lord of the whole world. very foolishly, for whereas he borrowed the Ass, it showeth Christ's poverty, and whereas he road on it, when he went into jerusalem, it showeth his humility and meekness: as the Fathers expound it. Therefore they that gather from thence, the dignity and excellency of a temporal Prince, the Lord hath need of them, that I may not seem to speak more sharply against them.  
And if the authority of a Prince might have been gathered out of this place, he would not have said the Lord had need of them, but the Lord commands that you send them. Whose humility when Celestine the bishop of Rome perversely desiring to follow was carried through the City upon an Ass, 
The Ass sat upon the Pope not the Pope upon the Ass.  and enjoined his Cardinals to do the like, was laughed at by them, who believed that the Ass rather sat upon the Pope, than the Pope upon the Ass: because when he would resemble Christ his humility, he should have cast off the Pope's stateliness. And yet they are so blockish, that they think that Christ when he rid into jerusalem after his manner in triumph, that he exercised temporal power. Did they then think this manner to be scarce papal in Celestine; do they think it Regal in Christ? And that which they thought wild in Christ, do they think triumphant in him? And that which they thought a sign of weakness in him, do they count it a show of power in Christ? Christ assuredly is the King of heaven and earth, and he hath a kingdom both spiritual and eternal. But his kingdom is not of this world, though it be in this world, as he professed before Pilate. 
How Christ stood before Pilate.  He stood therefore before Pilate both the Emperor's Lord and Subject: afterward to judge him, now to be judged of him: God to be feared by his invincible majesty, man to be pitied by his visible humility: in whose person the power of the spirit lay hid under the frailty of the flesh, that he might teach Peter, and in him the Pope, to rejoice at heavenly graces, not to wax proud at earthly titles, and ever to bear in mind the glory of a Kingdom not outward, and decaying; but inward and eternal.  
§ 209 But now let us urge the argument out of the scriptures above alleged, and let us enforce it more closely out of the interpretations of the ancient Fathers.  
Christ had no kingdom of the world.  
Therefore Peter had none: unless he could give that to Peter he had not himself. 
The Pope decreaseth by the same degrees he increased.   
Christ is the emperors subject as he is man, how therefore can Peter be his Lord? unless the Disciple may be above his Master. And if Peter be a subject, how can the Pope be a Lord?  
Peter was not above the rest of the Apostles.  
Therefore the Pope is not above other bishops.  
Peter was inferior to the Council.  
Therefore the Pope is inferior to the Council.  
By the same degrees that the Pope did increase, by the same if you please let him decrease.  
First he was advanced above bishops, as Boniface the third; afterward above Kings and Emperors, as Gregory the seventh: then he took upon him the imperial and pontifical dignity, and that by the right of his Popedom: as Boniface the 8. Last of all he was lifted above all councils, that all the remedies for mischief might be taken away, and that the Christian people might happily lament their miseries, but not cure them.  
But Peter was not above the rest of the Apostles. Cyprian, That were saith he, the rest of the Apostles, that Peter was; endued with the same fellowship of honour and power.  
There was a parity of power among all the Apostles, where was then the superiority of Peter?  
The Carthaginian Fathers therefore decreed in the Council that the bishop of the first sea should not be called Prince of Priests, or chief Priest, 
Chap. 42.  or have any such title, but only the bishop of the first sea: where is then the spiritual principality of the Pope, whereof Bellarmine dreameth?  
Afterward Gregory the first did not only detest the title of universal bishop in john of Constantinople, 
Lib. 4. Epist. cap. 32. Gregory the first did detest the title of the universal bishop.  but in himself and all others as new, wicked, a name of singularity, to be a general plague of the Church, the corruption of faith, against the Cannons, against Peter the Apostle, against the sense of the Gospel, against all Churches, against God himself. That never any holy man used any such title, 
Lib. 4. Epist. 34 & Epist. 38 39  that none of his Predecessors did give their consents it should be used, and that whosoever did use it, he was the Messenger and forerunner of Antichrist. This is a notable title, the universal bishop of the Church, proper to the bishop of Rome as Bellarmine saith. Therefore new, profane wicked etc. as Gregory saith.  
§ 210 
Lib. 2. de Rom. Pont. cap. 31. Bellarmine's objection against Pope Gregory.  But here Bellarmine doth distinguish, there is one sense of this title, that he who is called the universal Bishop of all Christian cities, so that other be not bishops, but only his Vicars, and in this sense it is a profane word as Gregory speaketh. So that according to blessed Gregory's mind, the universal bishop seems to take authority from all other, that an universal bishop be one and an only bishop, as Bellarmine doth expound in Tortus, as if Gregory had judged that all other bishops had been put out of office by john of Constantinople, who would needs be styled the universal Bishop.  

Bellarmine doth cross the history.  Wherein Bellarmine doth cross the history which showeth that all the Greek bishops did consent to john of Constantinople, that he should take to him the title of universal bishop: which they would never have done, if by the grant of that title, they had thought all Bishop like authority should have been taken from them. And Platina showeth that Boniface the 3. took to him that place of pre-eminency, which john challenged.  

Bellarmine contradicteth himself.  Besides that in the very said place he doth contradict himself, where he writeth that the Greek Bishops would not only prefer the Constantinopolitan sea before the sea of Alexandria and Antioch, but make it also equal to Rome, and universal. Which how can it agree with that which he said before? for he did not prefer himself before the sea of Alexandria and Antioch, but the sea of Constantinople took them both away: and did not equal himself to the Roman, but abolished the Roman: for he was the universal and only bishop, and made the other not his fellow but his Vicar. For other were not bishops, but his Vicar's only as he imagineth Gregory to have thought. 
Lib. 4. epist. 36. Lib. 4. ep. 34.   
For Gregory thought by that title not to take away all bishops but to diminish them, or that other patriarchs had their honour abrogated, but derogated: nor that all other were put down, but that he was set up above all other: neither did he go about that one thing, that he alone should be, but be alone in authority; or that other should be no bishops at all, but that he should seem a bishop of better worth than the rest: and that he should join them as parts to himself, not cut them off: and should be among bishops, as Lucifer among the Angels, who preferred himself before others, took not others away. So this universal bishop suffered other bishops to be, but to be in subjection, if we believe Gregory a better interpreter of his own mind, than Bellarmine. And this did Boniface the third effect, when Boniface took nothing to him by the grant of Phocas, which john did not claim by the grant of Mauritius.  
That which Boniface took to himself, Paul the 5. retaineth, and that much more.  
He doth retain therefore a new, profane, wicked, § 111 blasphemous name etc. as Gregory thought: while he is called universal bishop.  
It is well said and truly, an evil head, is a head of evils. And every evil as it is more general is the worse. And therefore an universal evil is the greatest evil, from whence all other evils are powered into the Church and Commonweal: into the Church, heresies; into the Commonweal, treasons: while it utterly lost the faith of Christ, and trod underfoot the majesty of the Emperor. 
Lib. 4. Ep. 39  Gregory foretold each of them. For thus he said to Anianus: to consent to this wicked name, what is it else but to lose the faith? And how much damage the faith hath sustained it shall appear by those Articles of the faith which follow. And to Mauritius he writ, 
Epist. 32.  that who so delighteth in that name, doth thereby set himself above the honour of the Emperor. And how much damage the Empire hath sustained, the lamentable ends of many emperors doth declare. Regius our Councillor shall tell you who they were. Gregory as I said was a true, alas too true a Prophet. And our learned interpreter of Gregory the bishop of Chicester said well that the universal Bishop is for the Empire Lucifer; for the Church Antichrist.  
§ 212 Yet Gregory himself (they say) though he liked not the universal title, he exercised the universal jurisdiction. Wherein they imagine Gregory to be not truly holy, but profanely politic, like to Caesar, who refused the name of a King as odious, that he might more cunningly exercise the authority of a King.  
Therefore they counterfeit a certain Epistle of Gregory, thus indorst to john bishop of Siracuse, To john bishop of Siracuse concerning the bishop of Constantinople accused of a foul fault. In the Epistle itself the Bizancen primate, is said to have been accused of a certain fault, 
Gregor. lib. 7. Epist. 64.  whom the most holy Emperor, would have judged by us according to the canonical decrees. But the error of name Bizancene, or Biazene, derived not from Byzantium the city of Constantinople, 
Gloss in Grati. edita à Greg 13  but from Bizatium a Province of Africa, is amended in the gloss of the Cannon law, which saith that Anselme and Gratian were deceived in the inscription of the Epistle of Saint Gregory: 
An epistle suspected to be forged.  because Bizancene did not signify the Patriarch of Constantinople, but the Primate of Africa. Which things gives us just cause to suspect that the Epistle is forged: as another wherein they bring in Gregory affirming that the Constantinopolitan Church is subject to the Apostolick-sea, 
Lib. 7. epi. 63. Lib. 2. de Rom. Pontific. c. 14.  as Eusebius the bishop of the same sea doth confess. Which place Bellarmine citeth. But in Gregory's time none did sit in the sea of Constantinople but john and Siricius, who did usurp the title of universal bishop, Nicephorus a witness in his tripartite history. Whereby it appeareth that a counterfeit Eusebius is brought in as a witness of the Roman prerogative, 
A counterfeit Eusebius.  and a bastardly Epistle devised by some scribe, who testified that Gregory wrote that being dead, which while he lived, he reprehended so earnestly not only in another but in himself.  
When this devise took no success, they tried another § 213 way: 
Baronius. Bellarmine.  That there were very many of Gregory's Predecessors, who did write themselves bishops of the Catholic Church, that is of the universal. 
The universal bishop and Bishop of the universal Church not all one.  And that it is all one to be called the universal bishop of the Church, and Bishop of the universal Church. Wherein they have not only Costerus gainsaying them in his Euchiridion: and Lindane in his panoply, in whose judgement these differ, the universal bishop, and the bishop of the universal Church: or that all ambiguity may be taken away, they deny it to be one to be called the bishop of the Catholic Church, that is, universal, and Catholic, that is universal Bishop of the Church. And they will deny it. Is it all one to say Tortus is a learned divine of the school of Papia, and a Divine of the learned school of Papia? Nothing less. For in that proposition false praise is given to Tortus, in this true to Papia. So the Pope is the Catholic bishop of the Church is one thing, and the Pope is the bishop of the Catholic Church is another. For in that proposition a counterfeit title of the Pope, in this the true name of the Church is expressed. But Catholic and Universal are all one. What then? But these propositions be not all one. The Pope of Rome is the bishop of the catholic Church, i. of the universal, therefore the bishop is universal: no more than these two propositions be all one: The King of Spain is the Catholic King, therefore the universal King. Or thus. The King of Spain is the King of the Catholic Church; therefore he is King of the whole Christian world. For the power over all Churches doth no no more belong to the Pope, who is called Catholic, than the power over all kingdoms belongeth to the King that is called Catholic.  
§ 214 Although this universal Bishop challenge the chief government, not only over spiritual, but over temporal causes also, so that the power over all things is in the Pope, the execution of that power is said to reside in Emperors and Kings, which he may take from one and give to another, as to his vassals, at his own will and pleasure, as Gregrrie the seventh did. And if he will to unite each power, both the Bishoply and Imperial in himself by the force and right of his Popedom, as Boniface the eighth did. Whereof the divine Apostle S. Peter did neither, but being poor and lowly, who thought that the care of feeding, not the power of ruling, was granted unto him: and that not the government, but the ministry was committed to him. As Bernard said to Pope Eugenius. 
Bern. de consid. ad Euge. lib. 2.  Government is forbidden the Apostles. Therefore darest thou usurp, either governing the Apostle-ship, or being an Apostle, the government? The Apostolic form is this, government is forbidden, the ministry is enjoined. What then will you say? did he deny, that Eugenius the Pope was the temporal Lord of his provinces? Not so. But he answereth, be it that thou challenge them, it must be by some other claim not by the right of an Apostle, 
Lib. 5. de Rom. Pont. cap. 20.  For Peter could not give that he had not. Which answer the Cardinal doth well allow. Whereby it appeareth that these two powers by the force and right of the Popedom, either can or aught to be confounded in one person: 
Nich. pa. in epist ad Micha. Imp.  As Nicholas the first himself taught: when we come to the truth, speaking of Christ the Saviour, neither did he of his own accord, as Emperor take to him the right of the Bishopric, 
Lib. 5. de Rom. Pont. cap. 5.  or being Bishop, usurped the name of the Emperor, which place Bellarmine taking upon him to expound, Nicholas the first, saith he, doth directly teach that Christ did distinguish the acts, offices and dignities of the Bishop and the Emperor, lest the Emperor should presume to enter upon the right of the Bishop, or the Bishop upon the rights of the Emperor. And yet Bellarmine doth maintain that these two powers are confounded in the Bishop of Rome, 
Bellarmin contradicteth Christ, the Pope and himself.  by the power and right of his Bishopric, which he confessed to be distinguished plainly by Christ and the Pope. What will you do with this goodfellow, who contradicts both Christ, the Pope and himself at his pleasure? But I leave Bellarmine in this point to be fully confuted and confounded by our Counsellor Regius. Hear only I make it plain, that the Pope doth usurp temporal dominion over the Emperor, which neither Peter nor Christ had, 
The Pope accounted inferior to the Council.  and either of them condemned in a Bishop.  
Peter also was inferior to the Council of jerusalem, § 215 and the Pope for a long time was accounted, 
De elect. & electi potesta. cap. significasti.  even of his own side, inferior to the general Council. As Panormitane: In matters of faith, the Council is above the Pope, so that he cannot decree any thing against the determination of the Council. 
Counsels deposed Popes.  Hence it is that the Council may condemn the Pope for heresy, as the general Counsels of Pisa, Constance and Basill, did displace many Popes out of their popedoms for heresy, wherein it was decreed, that the Council was above the Pope. 
Concord. lib. 2. cap. 34.  Hence Cusan showing the custom of the Church, writ, that the general Council was of the chiefest power in all things, even above the Pope himself. I might allege many other notable Papists to be of this mind, but I hold it not cessarie in this place: But now the Pope is lifted up above the Counsels, and imagineth that the supremacy is chiefly placed in himself, that Bishops being cast off, and Emperors cut down, 
Is he Peter's successor that is nothing like Peter?  and Counsels suppressed, he may do what he please without controlment. And may we think him to be Peter's successor, that hath nothing in him like Peter? which notwithstanding Bellarmine takes for granted, when no thing is so much in controversy. As he doth likewise every where affirm that he is Christ his Vicar, without proof, when as nothing is so necessary for the Romish Catholic faith, then that he should confirm both these out of the Scriptures. The successor of Peter is read in the fathers, the Vicar of Christ is not read. It is not therefore to be believed by Catholic faith, but by historical faith.  
Of the Vicar of Christ, I shall consider afterward, now in few words of the successor of Peter.  
§ 216 Neither will I argue in this place those things which are much controverted, whether Peter were at Rome: whether he were ever Bishop, or whether Bishop of Rome: neither if he were, will I dispute the case whether the personal dignity of Peter could pass into a successor, which is denied, when it was granted by Christ in respect of his confession which he delivered, not of the seat which he possessed. Neither if it were in respect of the seat, when it is reported that Peter had two seats, one at Antioch, the other at Rome, I will not now inquire, why Peter's privilege should be tied to Rome, rather than to Antioch: Again, I will not discuss that in this place, which shall be inquired after in more words, in the whole explication of the Pope's Creed, whether the Pope have succeeded Peter in the faith, only here I will briefly inquire, whether he succeeded in the seat, and whether the succession of the Pope, whereon all Popery dependeth, be a divine or human constitution. For if it be a human constitution, and confirmed only by human testimonies, sure it cannot be an article of the Catholic faith, as Argentine averred out of his Doctors. If it be divine, let them tell us in what place of Scripture they find it written, that the Bishop of Rome should succeed Peter; or where Peter ordained the Pope or any other to be his successor. They answer for the most part, as much as they can, that Christ when he said, Feed my sheep, did understand Peter's successor in that place, to whom together with Peter he gave the chief and perpetual jurisdiction over the whole flock.  
But neither the successor there, nor the Bishop of § 217 Rome is named the successor. Grant that Peter the Apostle was superior to the rest of the Apostles in this place, do they think that the Bishop of Rome, successor to Peter, being dead, was made superior to all the Apostles being alive? let them answer, and let the Papists unloose this knot if they can for their lives.  
Baronius writeth that Peter died the year 69. and john the year 101. so 32. years came between the death of Peter and john.  
Now I demand whether Linus or Clemens succeeded Peter being dead, 
If any should have the supremacy, it was john that survived Peter  for thereof there is a great controversy among them, whether Linus was above john, or john above Linus? if they say that Linus was above john, that is, a Bishop above an Apostle, we will laugh at it: if they deny it, it followeth that either the supremacy died with Peter, or that it came not to Linus the Bishop, but to john the Apostle, as survivor. Where is then the succession of the Pope? to resolve this doubt, 
Caietaen de di. in. instit. Pont. cap. 13. Bellarm. lib. 2. de Pont. cap. 12  certain great Papists do answer that the succession of the Pope, in so much as Peter was Bishop of Rome, took the beginning from the fact of Peter, not from the institution of Christ. Therefore this is matter of fact not of faith.  
Go to! and what was Peter's fact, they answer, that he appointed his seat Rome, and there ended his life. Caietane doth add, that the death of Peter did not simply give the succession of Rome, but that he there died by the especial appointment of Christ: which Caietan proved by a certain history, 
Peter's supremacy depends on a revelation.  which shows that Peter, thinking for fear of persecution to leave Rome, and being now gone forth part of the way, Christ met him, to whom Peter said, whither goest thou Lord? Christ made him answer, I go to Rome, that I may be there crucified: whereby Peter being admonished, returned, that he might die at Rome.  
Therefore the Pope's succession dependeth upon Peter's fact, and hath the beginning from thence, and out of this fact they take all this as granted, that Peter was at Rome, that Peter was Bishop of Rome, that Peter was put to death at Rome, and that by Christ his appointment. What certainty was in all these, unless we give credit to a few human histories, which are subject to many human errors? such as that error is chiefly, whence notwithstanding Caietane saith, the succession was granted to the Pope, 
Acta Petr. & Pan. Baron 69.  about the return of Peter by the occasion of the vision.  
§ 218 The first founder of the tale was Linus, a foolish counnterfet writer, 
Loco. Theo. lib. 6. cap. 8. Linus a counterfeit writer.  as it is observed by Baronius himself. But be it a history; it comes not from the revelation of the holy Ghost; but from tradition, as Canus telleth us. Again, how doth it appear, that it was the purpose of Christ and Peter, so to confirm the succession by this fact, so that the Church should be always bound under pain of damnation to be believe it? for when they say it is of the necessity of salvation to be subject to the Roman Bishop, as to Peter's successor, and that by the power of that succession, they contend that in all points of faith and salvation he is set over by God himself; it had been meet that the succession of the Pope had been more clearly and evidently confirmed unto us, then by a blind and uncertain vision, the author whereof themselves condemn for a bastard and a fool.  

Francis, Vict. relect. 2. de potesta. Eccles.  Besides that, the election of the Pope is an human ordination: which were absurd, if Christ had appointed the succession proper to Rome, by Peter's fact, to alter the form of the election. Therefore none is bound to believe, that this or that pope (imagine Clement the eighth, 
De here. lib. 2. cap. 9  or Paul the fift) to be Peter's true successor, as Alphonsus writeth. So that it is lawful for any, and at his pleasure, to cast off the pope, of whose canonical election he doubteth. Wherefore seeing the succession of the pope is so uncertain, he should do better, if as the Emperor doth not write himself Caesar's successor, but Caesar; so the pope would not name himself Peter's successor, but Peter himself, as pope Stephen sometime called himself. For we will as easily believe that Paul the fift is Peter himself, as Peter's true successor.  
Now that I may gather all into a short sum, you see most noble Calandre, in Saturnine, Bellarmine himself, polishing and refining certain old arguments of his own side, whereby he doth vnderpropt the supremacy staggering, and falling almost to the ground: but in vain doth the Cardinal hope that such silly sleights can deceive a learned age, which cozened a rude and ignorant age.  
For first, he alleged so many corrupt interpretations of certain places, that they may be refuted, not of the ancient and our own, but of the new, and such as be their own Doctors. Out of whom, notwithstanding, he bringeth forth certain figurative arguments, which necessarily infer such foolish and damnable consequences, that the wise seem to laugh at, and the religious detest.  
Such an one was that interpretation and argumentation § 219 of Boniface the eighth, out of the first of Genesis.  
In the beginning, not in the beginnings, 
Bonif. 8. extrauag. Concil. tit. de maior. de chedi.  God created heaven and earth, when Boniface understood that the pope was understood by the Beginning.  
Hence he doth thus argue; 
Foolish interpretation and worse consequence. The Sun the Pope, the Moon the Emperor.  He therefore that doth not submit himself to the Pope, doth devise two principles with the Manichees as Boniface devised. Such another was that out of the same chapter; God made two great lights in the firmament, when therefore the Pope brought this sense into the text, that by the Sun the Pope, by the Moon the Emperor was understood; thence he concludeth, that the Pope was so far greater than the Emperor, as the Sun was greater than the Moon. What Mathematical Archimedes could better describe the quantity of the Sun and the Moon?  
Such be the interpretations, and the arguments drawn from thence by Bellarmine. He beateth the keys of the earth out of the keys of heaven. He gathereth the honour of ruling out of the labour of feeding: he understands Peter for the rock, a metaphorical head, for the visible head of the universal church. And out of these allegorical expositions, 
Arist: 1. Metaphys.  he thinks he can make orderly syllogisms for Peter's supremacy. Pythagoras was said so to instruct his scholars in the speculative science of numbers, and to have imprinted such deep notions into their minds, that after when they came to the consideration of natural things, they thought that the works of nature consisted of the principles of number: So this Pythagoras hath so deeply woven his symbolical divinity in the minds of his auditors, that out of the metaphors of holy scripture, they believe that the height of ecclesiastical Monarchy is erected. Whether is he more crafty that so persuadeth, or he more simple that so believeth? nay more than that, this Rom: Advocate doth indite him as guilty of heresy, that doth not believe so. It is well, the plaintiff not proving, as the Lawyers say, he that is accused is set free.  
§ 220 You demand further Calandre of the judgement of the primitive Church, whereof the most learned Fathers assembled in the first six general councils, did not only not acknowledge this supremacy, but struck it dead with their decrees. 
The popish lewd dealing.  Here the Pope's side have brought in so many voluntary corruptions, forgeries, impostures, wherewith they might foist in false Canons and blot out true, that they who have dealt so deceitfully, are rightly deemed to have a bad cause.  
Lastly, we brought into open view, not only the doctrine and practice of Christ and Peter, that the literal sense hath reproved this supremacy, which the allegorical sense of the Scripture did not prove, and that literal sense is confirmed not only by the testimony of the ancient Fathers and Doctors of our own side, but by the testimony of the very Papists themselves. So that this tower of Babylon being not only bereft of her rotten weak upholders, but being also thrust at by our strongest engines, that is, by the decrees of the Church, and oracles of scripture, must needs be shaken in pieces and fall to the ground.  
Therefore the supremacy of Peter that in Bellarmine's judgement is a transcendent thing above all, by the censure of the Scripture is nothing at all: and the succession of the Pope, is not from the institution of Christ, as they say, but from the fact of Peter: and this fact is proved not by any certain revelation, but by an uncertain vision. Behold why the primacy of Bellarmine in Tortus did vaunt that this article of the catholic faith had a sure ground in the Scriptures.  
And now mark, Calandre, to what pass all Bellarmine's devices are brought. The deposing of a King hangeth on the excommunication of the Pope; the power of excommunication is united to the supremacy, the supremacy hath the beginning from a Primate, but the Primate though he be narrowly fought for, yet cannot possibly be found in the text. Where is then the supremacy? where is the power of excommunicating Kings? where is the right of deposing them? Truly your Primate hath either a bad title or a bad Patron. But the Patron is said to be very good: therefore the title is very bad. But the Papists will accept any thing at his hands as he hopeth, with whom if he prevail in this cause, it is more for the credulity of the Readers, than the wisdom of the Writer.  
Then Regius; The supremacy being overturned, that double power which is so annexed to the supremacy must needs be overturned, the spiritual and the temporal. The spiritual, whereby as a Bishop by excommunication he thinks he may drive from their kingdoms, Kings that are in opposition, whether Heretics or Roman-Catholikes: The temporal whether it be direct or indirect, whereby he may as the chief spiritual Prince take the Crown from one, and bestow it at his pleasure upon another. But of the temporal we shall see afterward. 
Excommunication the mother of rebellion.  Now let us consider of the spiritual. This great Sophister, when the Pope of Rome purposed to shoot his venomous arrow at the head of the Prince, he bent the Pope's bow with this double power, as it were with a double string, that if the temporal did fail, the spiritual should hit him home. Which if I should not account holy as the desire of gold is holy, I should lie. For this trick of popish excommunication, wherewith he bindeth Kings that they cannot reign, or absolve subjects that they do not obey, the world hath felt long since that it is but a devilish art, as Vrshergensis saith, which hath brought in treachery and rebellion under the cloak of faith and religion, dreadful to Kings, damnable to subjects, to whose bodies it hath brought destruction, and damnation to their souls, as appeareth manifestly by the former Dialogue.  
§ 222 Then Saturnine; We, saith he, for our parts do not greatly care what Heretics say: what the Church ordeynes, that we regard; neither are we bound to their conceits, but to her decrees. And we retain the supremacy by a double right, by claim, and by possession. About the claim the Heretics have often moved many brawls: from the possession they shall never remove us.  
Then Regius you say that you regard the constitutions of the Church, as you call them, I wish rather you should regard the oracles of Scripture. You say that you hold the supremacy by a double right by claiming and by possessing. The Pope is fallen from the right of a great claymer, as Patriott hath plainly won. Now at the last you urge another right, of a great possessor: which what is it else than the right of a strong thief? For what other law belongs to thieves, than to brag that that which they possess is their own, howsoever they have got it? Now seeing the supremacy is not grounded upon God's institution, but man's ambition, which you see to be clearly overthrown by the oracles of the scripture, and decrees of the councils: it followeth now that the serpent's head being broken, we break in pieces likewise the rest of his members.  
Then Calandre, Saturnine seems to be driven to straits, when as being beaten from the right of claiming, he flieth to possession. That therefore you may have a breathing time, let us put of the conference about the other Articles till another day: for now it is more than time that you refresh your minds being tired with the labour of this discourse.    

A Table of the principal matters contained in this Treatise.  

A.  

ABomination of desolation, what is meant thereby 82. 90  
Absurdities. 78. 108. 133  
An admonition to popish Princes, 156.  
Adrian against Frederick choked with a fly. 253.  
Agathus obedience to Constantine. 249  
The oath of Allegiance and Supremacy confounded. 240  
Ambrose did obey Valentinian an Arrian. 248  
Alexander the 3. in a Cook's attire. 374  
Alexander and his four Princes. 99  
Alexander trod upon the Emperor's neck. 254  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whereof it is a note. 6.  
antichrist's type in Daniel, himself in john. 2. The reasons. 98. He began to work in Paul's time. 2. He must decay by the preaching of the word, and perish at Christ's last coming 793.  
Epiphanes described in Daniel not Antichrist. 3.  
He shall work wonders. 3. He is held for one single man. 5. The reasons. ib: but is a succession. 9  
Antichrist hath two horns like a lamb speaketh like a dragon. 5. 40.  
Antichrist is Christ's Vicar in appearance in truth his adversary. 6.  
Antichrist not a beast of three years and a halves continuance. 8.  
Heresies makes the great Antich: 8. 28.  
Antichrist is the Land beast. 9  
As many Marij in one Caesar, so many Antichrists in one Antichrist. 11. He is that man of sin and son of perdition. 11.  
Antichrist in many ages yet but one. 11  
The popish description of Antich: 12 a bearer, 39  
Antichrist a falling star, an Apostata, a Renegade from the Lord. 13  
He is not a jew, but an Apostatical Christian 15. He sitteth in the temple of God; or against the temple. 17 He doth not openly deny Christ. 19  
Antichrist denieth Christ's two natures, three offices, and the benefits thereof. 20. 21. 26. 27  
His kingdom dark and smoky. 28 He teacheth implicit faith. 28 He taketh away the scriptures, giveth images for books. 29. He is the son of the earth. 40. He worketh in the sight of the Sea-beast. 41  
The actions of Antichristian Popes. 41 Like to Domitian, julian, Dioclesian. 42. His double character. 50  
What hindered the revealing of Antichrist. 67. The degrees thereof. 71  
All the notes of Antichrist agree to the Pope only, and to no other. 75. 13●  
Antichrist not borne of a Virgin, not a Devil, not Nero, not a bastard, not of Dan. 76. ●  
He shall sit at Rome. 80  
antichrist's temple without a roof. 8●  
Antichrist shall fight with three Kings, and vanquish. 95. He shall worship the Devil. 105. Three means whereby he shall be vanquished. 117  
Antichrist increased Satan as well lose as bound. 122. He shall come a little before the end of the world. 131 His sufferings. 134  
How Christ and Antichrist agree. 149  
He can neither help alive or dead. 153  
He is the eldest son of the Devil. 163  
An argument drawn from an Ass to prove the Pope's power. 375  
Antiochus and Antichrist disagree. 104 yet he is his figure. 105. if Antiochus and Antichrist be the same there follow many absurdities. 84. 104. The Angel's power out their plagues, 134 135. 137. 138.  
The Angel and the Protestants preach alike. 135  
Aquinas, Toletan, and the Laterane Council answered. 183. 184  
Apiatius a wicked Priest. 353  
Apostles builders not foundations. 310 rocks in respect of doctrine. 315  
An Apostrophe to Kings. 198  
Apocalypse a book full of hidden mysteries. 3.  
The rest of the Apostles the same with Peter. 317  
Arrius denied Christ's divinity. 28  
The Spanish Armado overthrown 161  
What Articles of the faith the Church of Rome maketh. 280  
Athanasius Epistle forged. 362  
The Assurance of salvation to the faithful, and whence. 35  
Athalia how deposed. 199. 225  
Austin and Maldonate against Bellarlarmine. 372    

B  

BAbylon, which by their own confession is Rome. 52  
Reasons to show popish Rome Babylon 53. 60. taken for Babylon in Luther's time. 73. her behaviour and description. 58. 59 her whorish qualities. 58  
An English Bishop in his coat armour. 374.  
Baronius and Bellarmine at a jar. 355  
Baronius saith Christ gave all his power to Peter and his successors. 231.  
Baronius maketh to feed, to kill. 299  
Blackwell accounted an Apostata. 229 237. Bellarmine's pride in making a Cardinal equal to a King. 296. 168. 337. 373. 378.  
Bellarmine's contradictions. 77. 80. 97. 106. 383. saith the jews shall be converted by Enoch and Elias. 78 his absurdities. 129  
Bellarmine's sauciness reproved. 303. 336  
Bellarmine and julian alike. 83. wiser than Christ. 130  
Bellarmine and the Pope need not allege reasons. 339.  
Bellarmine's six tokens of Antichrist coming; the first, 88 the second, 94. the third, 111. the fourth, 118. the fifth, 127. the sixth, 133. he begs the question, 374.  
Bellarmine a profane jester. 132. 118.  
Bellarmine contrary to Christ. 371. compared to a foolish Poet 108. his dangerous adverbs. 242. Bellarmine antichrist's orator. 103. speaks false Latin. 340. Bellarmine mistaken in the daily sacrifice, 126. he contradicteth scripture, 116. woundeth the Pope's power, 237. the Pope's flatterer. 237  
Bellarmine a lion in a cave. 37.  
Bellarmine against Cusan. 293  
Bellarmine's moderate chastisement of Kings, 238  
Bellarmine's strange interpretation. 341  
Bellarmine's foolish distinction. 229.  
Bellarmine is well I thank you in this world ib: placeth faith in the assent, 33  
Bellarmine rejects twelve Fathers. 96  
The number of the beast, 51  
The second Beast mistaken for the first; 85. The Bohemians victories over the Papists five times. 161  
Boniface got to be universal Bishop. 249 above all bishops 72  
The Duke of Burgundy deceived with briars and brambles in steed of lances. 169  
The duties of a Bishop. 344. not above a Prince, 346. great not in respect of his person but doctrine, 346. what he may do. 347    

C.  

Canon's of Niece burnt before they were made. 362  
Popish reasons to prove more Canons of Niece than twenty. 360  
A Caveat for Kings. 342  
A false Canon offered for a true, 353  
The Canonists make Pope's Lords of the temporalties, 230.  
Carerius against Bellarmine. 235.  
Charles 5. surprised Rome, 243. 119  
Childerike not deposed by the Pope 259  
Christ's characters of two sorts. 49  
G●ue to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, 176. 213.  
Constantinople equal with Rome. 349  
The Nicene Council of 319 Bishops, and when, 346  
Constantinople Council of 150 Bishops, and when. 349  
Ephesus Council of 200 Bishops, and when, ibid.  
The Ch●lcedon Council of 630 Bishops, and when. ibid.  
Constantinople Council the second, of 280 Bishops, and when. 351  
The Council of Carthage of 217 Bishops: when. 352.  
The Creator being offended, the creatures are offended. 138. four effects of Christ his doctrine, 23. many types of Christ, 9 some of Christ's names not communicable, 314. Christ made of God for man, wisdom, justice, etc. 150. Christ over Kings not as Priest but as King. 210. 19●. the difference between Christ's priestly and Christ's ignominious and glorious estate, 153. princely government, 210. Christ would not distribute lands, and doth the Pope think he may distribute Crowns? 173  
What places of Christendom the Pope hath lost. 63  
False Christians receive not the truth, 78. Christ the head, and how. 307 Christians did not resist, 216 but obeyed.  
A text of Christ blasphemously applied to the Pope. 305  
The Clergy exempted from obedience 341. Two Covenants Legal and evangelical. 145  
The Pope hath brought in a third covenant, ibid. The Covenant between God and the King. 207. 192.  
Corinth's the 14 expounded. 330  
As Christ is the Lord of the Church, so the Church is the Lady of all. 231  
Canterene and Bellarmine at a ●art. 291  
The office of the Church. 277.  
Wicked & ridiculous conclusions. 295. 301. 318. 302.  
The Church compared to heaven. 14. 87. Paul to the Ephesians defines the Church, to Timothy describes it, 279. The enemies of God's Church overthrown. 161.  
One copy of Cyprian alleged against many. 317  
civil obedience taken away. 341.    

D.  

daniel's little horn, who it is. 99  
What is meant by daniel's 2 feet and 10 toes. 99 109.  
daniel's ten horns, and their names. 3. 99 106.  
daniel's prophesy containeth 70 years excepting Christ's resurrection. 4.  
The exposition of the 7 of Daniel. 97. Daniel mistaken, 133. The disagreement of Bellarmine and Daniel. 102  
Decretal Epistles among the Canonical scriptures. 21  
The Dominicans brought in a new Gospel. 23. 146.    

E.  

EBerhardus a popish Bishop against the Pope. 263  
Ecbertus ruin after rebellion. 252  
Ecclesiasticus corrupted. 113. 253.  
Edward the 3. and Richard the 2. made laws against the Pope. 265. 266.  
Elias, Enoch, and Christ, three examples of God's glory. 115  
England not tributary to the Pope, neither can be. 242  
The fable of Enoch and Elias. 111  
The Sea-beast resembles the Roman Empire. 40  
The Empire took a deadly wound in Augustulus, 43. & new life in Charles the great, 44. It is now but titular, the power is in the Pope. 44.  
Emperor, protector of the Apostolical See, 57 the Empire renewed in the West to uphold the Pope. 70. the Rom: Empire not dissolved but divided, 68 Two degrees of the Empires fall, 71. how & when the Empire was translated from the Greeks' to the Germans. 258.  
An exhortation to Ministers, 136. to Princes, 152, to come out of Babylon, 141  
Excommunication the mother of rebellion. 390    

F  

COrruption of Fathers after their death. 316  
To Feed and teach all one. 297. Not to rule. 299.  
The Collier's Faith. 288.  
Implicit Faith a blind Idol. 287.  
What meant by Feeding. 290.  
Saint F●●●cis typical Christ. 146, His conformities brought to light. 24  
Fred●ricke the 2. had good success against the Pope. 254. after murdered. 255.  
Forgiveness of sins is free, perfect▪ eternal. 148.  
How Fire came down from heaven, the three sorts thereof. 47. Forgery rejected. 363.  
A desire that France and Spain would forsake the Pope. 63    

G  

GArnet and three other jesuits Authors of the Gunpowder treason. 172. 33.  
The Germans condemn Hildebrand. 257.  
Gregory the great obeyed Mauritius 248. Alleged to depose Kings before they were borne. 259.  
Gregory the 3. vaunted himself above the Emperor, Gregory the 3. spoilt him. 72.  
Gregory the 7. overthrew all. 73. stroke fire out of his bosom. 48. Cast out of his popedom, 251. First excommunicated and cursed Emperors. 251.  
The name of GOD in Scripture given to Angels and Kings. 18.  
God the object of spiritual obedience 340.  
The enemy of God called Gog & Magog. 95. 139.  
God's help begins whenas man's help doth fail. 137.  
Gros●heads definition of heresy. 186.  
The Gospel's hath been preached in all Lands. 88 91. Hindered by Mahomet in the East, Antichrist in the west. 93.  
The Gunpowder treason found out by a letter. 173.    

H  

TO make the Pope Head is blasphemy. 321.  
Three witnesses of happiness.  
Henry the 4. French King compared to Caesar. 38.  
Henry the 3. and 4. French Kings murdered. 33.  
Henry the 2. and King john gave not their kingdoms to the Pope. 241.  
Henry's treachery against his father. 233  
Henry the 4. Emperor slandered by popish writers. 234.  
Hermannus ruin. 252.  
Paul's not salute an Heretic how applied. 187.  
How Heretics are to be dealt withal. 188. Servants and children ought to obey Heretics. 188.  
Heretics not to be saluted. 222.  
Hildebrands' false praises. 257.  
Hildebrand no fit example against kings his revelation. 232.  
Three condemned and for what. 260.  
What is meant by the lambs 2. horns. 6.  
What is meant by the last hour. 133.    

I  

Idolatry to worship the image for the Creator with the Creator 22. compared to fornication. 22.  
The jesuits violence taxed. 198.  
The practice of jesuits. 32. 220. 336.  
The jesuits doctrine hath troubled the Papists. 170.  
Rebellion among jesuits is an article of faith. 171.  
The false report of jesuits made Pius the 5. excommunicate Q. Elizab. 169.  
jesuits Authors and Actors of rebellion. 171.  
jehcida had God's law and man's law to approve his action. 200.  
jehu not the Prophet deposed Ahab. 225. 4. degrees of the jews deliverance. 102.  
jerusalem in the Apoc: always taken for the holy city. 81  
jerusalem the figure of the Christian Church. 82.  
The destruction of jerusalem taken for the end of the world. 88  
jeremy and Paul exhorted to pray for bad Princes. 216.  
Forged Ignatius brought to cross Solomon. 178.  
If any one had the supremacy it was john that survived. 385.  
jeroboam not deposed by the Priest. 196.  
His Priest's types of popery. 196.  
An image is an Idol when it is worshipped. 22.  
Immortality not overcome by death. 117.  
A great impossibility foolish interpretations and worse consequences. 387.  
Inheritance not fit for leprosy. 197.  
Jerome misalleaged. 314.  
A counterfeit julius. 364.    

K  

KIngs by Papists judgements may be killed by force or craft. 32. Saucily compared to rams & wolves 32. 291.  
Discord of Kings have increased the Pope's power. 155.  
King's duty. 156.  
Kingly majesty and Popelike majesty cannot agree. 164.  
The King an human creature. 178  
A King excommunicated no King with Papists. 182.  
Kings wherein heads of the Church. 199.  
Kings not immediately from God but from the Church say they. 233  
A King not to be resisted with sword but words. 224.  
A King may aswell deprive a Pope as a Pope a King. 242.  
No bad King of 33. deposed by a priest 207.  
Whence Kings have their government as Papists say Ibid.  
King's deposed Priests. 306.  
What is meant by the keys by binding and losing, 290. The right interpretation of the keys. 292.  
Peter's key no greater than the rest. 368.  
Two keys of order & jurisdiction. 292.  
All the Apostles received keys. All fiery tongues. 294.  
How the Papists may kill a King how not. 300.    

L  

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the name of the beast. 51.  
Lambart and Rabirius 2. Pope's Legates scoffed at. 261.  
Leo the Pope obeyed the emperors Theodosius and Martian. 247.  
Leo the 4. obedient to Kings. 249.  
Leo the Emperor how deposed by the Pope. 258.  
The legacies of the sons of God are in question. 147.  
A learner must believe and ask. 285.  
The parts form and legacies of the new testament. 148.  
A Leper never lost his inheritance. 224.  
The thundering Legion of the Christians. 86.  
Lycurgus devise to make his commonweal last. 117.  
The number, division, and power of Locusts. 34.  
The Locusts hurt and afflict men but kill not. 34.  
Resembled to Horses and why. 36.  
Their Craft, pride and cruelty. 36.  
Lombardes' foolish interpretation of a place in job. 33.  
Luthar not that falling star, nor Protestants those Locusts. 37.  
A counterfeit Linus. 386    

M  

The Martyrdom of the King and kingdom. 172.  
Martion destroyed Christ's humanity 28.  
Marcus received an Epistle after he was dead. 362.  
Marshal's Ca liodore and t●● jesuits ●●e Cannibals. 54. Marshal's Cobbler. 38.  
The Mass confirmed by a black horse. 48.  
Government left by Christ not Monarchical but Aristocratical. 308.  
Matthew the 24. expounded.  
The Monks cloak resembled to charity. 319.  
How Moses, Solomon and Jude used Princes. 215.  
Number doth oppress the memory wait doth beget knowledge. 289.    

N  

Nostorius divided Christ his natures. 28.    

O  

THe Priest to be Obeyed so long as he preserves knowledge. 175.  
Two foundations of Christian obedience. 176.  
A double obedience due to Kings active and passive. 179.  
Odo brother to W. the Conqueror 174.  
Primacy of order granted to Rome, of power denied. 367.  
What 3 things obedience requireth. 180  
What obedience is due to Princes. 180.  
Austius words corrupted. 354.  
Ozias leprosy no type of excommunication. 167.    

P  

PEter would bear no rule over the Clergy. 370.  
What Peter did to Princes. 213.  
How Peter next successors used Princes. 214.  
How Paul used Princes. 215.  
Priests have been deposed by Kings 226.  
How Priests ought to oppose princes 207.  
Peter inferior to the rest. 368.  
Peter commanded obedience to Kings, Peter of Rome now otherwise. 177.  
Paul nothing inferior to Peter. 369.  
councils deposed Popes. 383.  
Subject to the Emperor and his Vicegerent 72. 242. 2●●.  
The Pope a persecutor 118. An hypocrite 114. Bisely accounted of. 135. Injurious to God and man. 147. dangerous to hold peace with. 162. His bull hanged the jesuits. 169. He forbiddeth that whi●h God commandeth 174. Power from God not from the Pope or people. 181. His power pretended greater than the former Priests to depose Princes. 192. Inferior to the Council. 383.  
His practice toward Princes. 244.  
He had primacy of order. 245.  
The Pope's power pretended from Christ's priesthood. 209.  
His charge to feed sheep, 209. How he feedeth. 298.  
His supremacy cause of much mischief. 269.  
He can no way depose Princes. 236.  
The Pope's Creed. 281.  
Spain and France have taken great wrong from Popes. 158.  
Two means how he overthroweth Princes. 230. 253.  
Popish Writers traduce Princes. 261.  
Popery begetteth dangerous effects to Kings and Subjects. 239.  
God used Prophet's tongues to reprove Princes not their hands to depose them. 205.  
Ph●cas a murderer, the universal bishop, and Mahomet of one birth. 71.  
The difference of government between bishops and Princes. 343.  
How Christ stood before pilate. 376.    

R.  

Reason's not to appeal to Rome, 358. A Recapitulation of the former discourse, 74. 75.  
Rome spiritually Sodom & Egypt. 81.  
Two stages erected for cruelty, one at Constantinop: another at Rome 122.  
Old Rome doteth for age, 286.  
This Room not ancient Rome. 316.  
The Popes of Rome do err by the Papists judgement. 286.  
How Christ a rock, 339. How the temporal rule descends upon the Pope. 372.    

S.  

SAmuel did not excommunicate Saul. 194.  
Places of Scripture obscured by Popish interpretations. 31.  
No doctrine necessary, but grounded on Scripture. 28  
The office of the Scripture. 278  
Scripture alone hurtful to the Roman Church. 290  
An admonition to popish Kings to beware of Siren and Erinys. 156.    

T.  

Four Popes acknowledged Theodosius supreme Lord. 246  
Tiberius at Rome killed Christ in jerusalem. 80.  
Christ obeyed Tiberius a Pagan, the Papists will not obey King james a Christian. 177.  
The council of Trent rejected by their own side. 287.  
Bellarmine buildeth his church government upon Tropes. 302    

W.  

The two witnesses Apoc: 11. not agreed on. 85.  
The uncertain certainty of the end of the world. 91.    

Z.  

ZAcharie supposed to depose Childericke but did not. 256.    
FJNIS.