AN INTERPRETATION OF THE NUMBER 666 Wherein, not only the Manner, how this Number ought to be Interpreted, is clearly proved and Demonstrated: but it is also showed, that this Number is an exquisite and perfect Character, truly, exactly, and essentially describing that State of Government, to which all other notes of Antichrist do agree. With all Known objections solidly, and fully answered, that can be materially made against it. By Francis Potter B. D. Dan: 12. 4. Many shall run to and fro, and Knowledge shall be increased. OXFORD. Printed by Leonard Lichfield, 1642. W. Marshal sculp engraved title page, incorporating the coat of arms of the University of Oxford, decorative pillars, two cities, several groups of people and a weighing balance Mr JOSEPH MEDE's judgement of this ensuing Treatise. THis discourse or Tract of the number of the Beast is the happiest that ever yet came into the world; and such as cannot be read (save of those that perhaps will not believe it) without much admiration. The ground hath been harped on before, namely that that number was to be explicated by some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the number of the Virgin company & new Jerusalem, which type the true & Apostolical Church, whose number is always derived from XII. But never did any work this principle to such a wonderful discovery, as this Author hath done; namely to make this number not only to show the manner and property of that state, which was to be that Beast, but to defigne the City wherein he should reign, the figure and compass thereof, the number of Gates, Cardinal titles or Churches, Saint Peter's Altar, & I know not how many more the like. I read the book at first with as much prejudice against the numerical speculation as might be, and almost against my will, having met with so much vanity formerly in that kind. But by the time I had done it left me possessed, with as much admiration as I came to it with prejudice. JOSEPH MEDE. TO THE READER. CHRISTIAN Reader, Grace and wisdom be multiplied unto thee. If thou knowest not to what issues the questions are driven concerning Antichrist, and the interpretation of this number; nor hast that knowledge which is requisite for the understanding of it; then I know that that which I have here written will seem nothing else to thee, but an intricate labyrinth of curious & unnecessary speculations. I have therefore a double request unto thee: either that thou wouldst stir up thy industry, whereby thou mayst attain such knowledge as is required for the understanding of it, or else that thou wouldst make use of thy sobriety, by leaving those things which are above thy reach and capacity, unto those more learned Readers, who even for this very reason, that thou dost not understand it, will, or may draw a probable argument, that this is the true interpretation. For assure thyself it is not in any man's power, much less in mine, to make that straight, which God hath made crooked; nor to make that plain and easy unto all men, which by the express words of the scripture is restrained only to those that have wisdom and understanding. But if thou art one of those other sort of Readers, of whom a Caius Lucilius dicere solebat ea quae scriberet, neque a doctissimis neque ab indoctissimis se legi velle; quod hi nihil intelligerent, illi plus fortasse quàm ipse de se. Cicero de Orat. Lucilius speaks, who canst understand more by that which I have written, than I myself that writ it; then my request unto thee is, not as his was, that thou shouldest abstain from reading of it; but by how much the more wise, and more learned, & more quick of apprehension thou art, so much the more earnestly do I desire, that thou wouldst vouchsafe to peruse this treatise, which with very great confidence, and yet not without due humility and submission to thy better judgement, I do here present unto thee. I know that all men are naturally in love, & most men ravished with their own opinions & inventions; & I know also that the heart of man is evil & deceitful above all things, and that the masterpiece of the deceitfulness of man's heart consists in deceiving of Anno. 1625. its self, & lastly, I know that he which knows all this, may have▪ alley in his right hand: yet am I confident that this my confidence concerning the truth of this interpretation, proceeds from evidence of truth and reason, and not from the blindness of mine own mind. I have not uttered it hastily & unadvisedly, but upon mature, or at the least upon long deliberation, and divers years have now passed, since some chief substantial points of it, were publicly declared and defended in the Divinity school at Oxford; and neither then, nor at any time since▪ could I ever hear, or learn any reason that could be brought against it, which might cause me to doubt of the probability or truth of it. Nevertheless if any man either by authority of scripture, or evident reason, shall be able to confute and evince, the possibility or probability of this interpretation, or of any substantial or essential part of it, I shall be then ready▪ and willing, even with mine own hands, to pull down these, than towers, of mine own imaginations, and shall rejoice to see the ruins and rubble of them, serve to level the ground, upon which a better building may be raised. But I am persuaded better things of this interpretation although I thus speak▪ & such things as accompany the manifestation of that truth, which shall never be abolished. Let not any man esteem it the less probable, because it proceeds from one, who is no way eminent, either in the Church or Commonwealth, except it be for his infirmities. Great matters may (and most usual do) proceed from mean and unworthy beginnings. A fountain of precious water may arise out of a dry and stony plat of ground, although it were otherwise barren and unfruitful; A late namlesse writer speaketh fitly to this purpose in these words Quòd si ita est, nec maximis ingenj is licet Sriptor anonymus de Bestia Apocalyptica. pag. 140, 141. hujus inventionem numeri, sibi minùs confidenter arrogare, nec diffitendum tamen est posse Deum perexiguo ingenio rationem hujus numeri patefacere, dicit enim numerus hominis est, id est, ●t alibi alia de re, & mensus est murum ejus. 144. cubitorum, mensura hominis quae est Angeli. Neither let it seem unprobable to any man, that the true meaning and interpretation of this number, having lain hidden for so many ages, should in these times be found out and revealed. For such happy times as these, in which Christian Princes and commonwealths, are able and willing to stand at defiance with the Pope, and to maintain truth to his face, these are the fittest times (as Mr Fox noteth) for the manifestation of this mystery, In his Comment upon the Apoc. and not heretofore, when no man in these Western Churches could affirm the Pope to be Antichrist, without apparent danger of his life. The same nameless Author whose words, I have above alleged, doth to this purpose also speak very fitly in these words. Neque enim Commentarius de bestiâ Apocalypticâ. res hoc uno indicio vertitur; multa alia signa aperta sunt et approbata, hoc anum adhuc occultum latet & obscurum, eorum gratiâ vestiguandum, qui ut Thomas de Christo, ad vulnera; ita hijudicium suum de Antichristo, ad hujus numeri explicationem reservant; neque enim hunc numerum tam insigniter nobis commendâsset Scriptura, si nunquam fuisset revelandus, & quamvis probabile est revelandum esse ante exitum Antichristi, videmus tamen bestiam, & reges terrae, et exercitus eorum aggregatos ad bellum faciendum cum Christo, & exercitu ejus, in ultimo praelio, in quo omnes devictierunt & profligati. Quaerant igitur omnes, vestigent & scrutentur, inventio quaerentibus non est desperanda, non-agnitio repugnantibus est pestifera. Concerning the interpretation itself, it supposeth this number 666. to be an image and typical representation of the whole body of Antichrist, that is, of the whole body of his Kingdom, state and Hierarchy: and thus much is generally acknowledged by many writers, and especially by Cotterius, who layeth this as a certain ground, by which the true interpretation of this number ought to be tried and examined. Now if this number be an Image and type of the whole body of Antichrist, than no man ought to imagine that the whole image of Antichrist, is like unto any one particular member, or part of the body of Antichrist; for as the whole image of Caesar, is not like unto the hand of Caesar, nor like unto the head of Caesar; so neither is this number being considered wholly, applicable to any particular Times, Names, Persons, Places, or other individual things or circumstances belonging unto Antichrist, as divers interpreters have endeavoured to apply it. But he that desireth to know Caesar by his image, must compare head to head, face to face, eye to eye, hand to hand, and foot to foot, and so conclude a likeness in general from an induction of particulars. In like manner he that desires to know Antichrist by this number, must first find in this number (being considered as an absolute number) such things as are most essential and remarkable in it, and such things by which this number is distinguished from all other numbers, and these things being found out, must be compared, with those things that are most essential and remarkable in that state or government which is Antichrist, and with those things, by which Antichrist is distinguished from all other states and governments whatsoever. Now the Root and Figure of every number, are those things which are most essential and remarkable in it; and by one or both of these, every number is distinguished from all other numbers, in these do the essential properties of all numbers consist, and upon these chief do all those mysteries depend, which S. Augustine, and divers other sacred and profane writers have observed to be in numbers. And concerning those things which are most essential and remarkable in the Kingdom of Antichrist, to, and with which, the Root and figure of this number being found out, is to be applied and compared; the Scriptures themselves do infallibly guide and direct unto them, by an actual application, of the Root and figure of an opposite number, unto such particulars, as are most remarkably answerable and opposite unto them. As for the finding out of the Root, and Figure of the number 666. This cannot be done, but by a kind of calculation or computation of the number itself; wherefore it is said in the Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Let him that hath understanding count the number of the Beast, that so he may find out the Root and Figure of it, by which the root and foundation of Antichrists Hierarchy, his original, his City state, doctrine, and many other particulars are manifestly revealed; And this is the effect of the following interpretation, which dependeth chief upon the extraction of the root of the number 666, as the words of the Text do necessarily imply, that the right interpretation should do; and I am so confident, that this is the true manner of counting the Beasts number, that I will be bold (with addition of two words only) to say in these times of this computation in particular, as Cotterius in the time of King james, concerning his typical interpretation in general. a— discrepant à viris doctis precibas omnibus contendo, tum autem à tua majestate Rex serenissime ut ij qui regno tuo doctissimi ornamento sunt, inquirant in singula, notent quod deprehenderint, ijs veroque certa videhuntur calculum adijciant, ut inde etc. Mat. Cotterius in Epistola ad Regem Angliae dedicatiante commentarios in Apocalyp. Haec sunt in quibus iudiciorum aliam experiri paratus sum, quae astrui cùm intersit si à vero non discrepant, á viris doctis precibus omnibus contendo, tum autem à tua Majestate, Rex serenissime, ut ij qui regno tuo doctissimi ornamento sunt, inquirant in singula, notent quod deprehenderint, ijs verò quae certa videbuntur (ulteriorem adhuc) calculum adjiciant, ut inde ad Ecclesiam Domini fructus aliquis accedat. As for those which shall think such a kind of interpretation as this is, dark & intricate, and to lean too heavily upon the props of humane arts and sciences; such when they understand these words of the Text. Here is wisdom, let him that hath understanding count the number, etc. may in them find a full answer to their own objections, in the mean time they may do well to consider that S. Austin, S. Hierome, S. Gregory, and divers others, have used the like, and far more obscure interpretations than this, of divers other numbers mentioned in the Scriptures. And such their interpretations have been commended by later b Ac nos quidem ut mignopere laudamus Ecclesiasticos doctores qui explanando sacras literas, in quibus ne unus apex, aut Iota unum sine singulari consilio & instincta Deipasitm esse creditur, arcanas & mysticotatas numerorum significationes non minus piè quàm a●utè prosequuntur: sic eos minimè probamus qui idem facere student in tractandis humanis disciplinis, & pro veris & propriis rerum naturalium rationibus atque causis, nescio quae numerorum & magnitudinum mysteria nobis obtrudunt. Pe●erius lib. 4. de Antiquis Philosophis. cap. 18. writers, & esteemed more fitly applicable to truths in Divinity, then unto humane arts and speculations. It may therefore be very well acknowledged, that this interpretation is dark and obscure in some degree, especially to some men, because it may be easily proved, that the true interpretation ought so to be. And as it is dark and intricate, so must it also be acknowledged, to be new, and unheard of in former times: In both which respects I may say of it, as a late worthy writer doth of his new Philosophy in a very like case. Scio quemadmodum arduum Gilbertus' de Magnete Magneticisque corporibus in praesatione ad Lectorem. est vetustis novitatem dare, obsoletis nitorem, obscuris lucem, fastiditis gratiam, dubiis fidem; it a multò magis novis & inauditis, contra omnes omnium opiniones, authoritatem aliquam conciliare & stabilire difficilimum. But all truths which are now old, were once new, and have had their several oppositions. New truths are like new friends, worthy to be tried, though not to be trusted, and I propose these things to the wise and learned, as b Si quid Fusce vacas adhuc amari, Nam sunt hinc tibi & hinc amici. Vnum si superest locum roga●us, Nec me quid tibi sum nonus recuses. Omnes hoc veteres tui fueruat. Tu tantum inspice qui novas paratur, An possit steri vetus sodalis, lib. 1. Epig. 35. Marshal proposed himself to his friend, to be tried and examined first, and to be believed afterward: as it is always wisdom to trust an old friend, so is it sometimes great folly, not to make an exact trial of one that is new. As touching the method and manner of composure of this treatise, I do willingly confess, that it is not only inartificial, but also rude and harsh, especially considering, how nécessary a perspicuous Method, and exquisite expressions had been, in so difficult a matter. But I hope the Logic is better than the Rhetoric, and perhaps there will not want those, that will quickly put my meaning into better words, and other languages, if it shall deserve them. My only aim hath been to speak so, that my meaning may be fully understood; and yet I find, that where I have endeavoured to express myself most clearly, there have I done as job did in his vexations, even darkened Counsel by words without knowledge. But I hope a wise, learned, and charitable Reader, will pick out my meaning howsoever, and pardon my unnecessary tautologies and circumlocutions. And to the serious and settled considerations, of such sober minded and judicious Readers, I wholly refer that which I have written. Let such consider what I say (not who speaks unto them) and God give them understanding in all things, that hating neutrality of opinion (especially in a matter of so great consequence and a Next unto the Knowledge of Christ and him crucified, there is no Knowledge more necessary for the Church of God, than the Knowledge of Antichrist and him revealed. necessity) they may be both able and willing, if the substance of that which I have here written be true, to believe it: or if it be otherwise, to confute it. In the mean time, and until I shall see reason to the contrary, I shall hope; That among this wood, and hay, and stubble, which I have here heaped together, there is also some Gold, and some Silver, and some Precious Stones (that is some long sought after and b Of which one is, the reconciling of the measures of the new Jerusalem, with those measures of the City mentioned in the last Chap: of Ezechiel▪ a truth until these times unknown unto the Church. truths) which being purged and refined from my errors and imperfections, by that fire of which the Apostle speaks in the third Chap: of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, shall continue in the Church of God, notwithstanding any thing which hath been as yet objected against it. Kilmington in Somerset: March: 27. 1642. FRAN: POTTER. THE CONTENTS OF THE CHAPTERS. CHAP. 1. The probability of the following Interpretation is briefly and generally proposed; that opinion of numeral letters being almost wholly rejected. CHAP. 2. That the mystery of the number 144, which is the number opposed to 666, consists in the square root of it, which is 12; and that therefore the mystery of 666 must be in the square Root of it also. CHAP. 3. The manner of the Interpretation more clearly, yet cursorily proposed. An introduction to the true Interpretation of the number 144 and the measures of the new Jerusalem. CHAP. 4. A disquisition concerning the Interpretation of the 16 and 17 verses of the 21 Chap: of the Revelat: and a new exposition of the measures of the new Jerusalem. CHAP. 5. A farther confirmation of the precedent Interpretation of the measures of the new Jerusalem. CHAP. 6. The Interpretation of the measure of the wall of the new Jerusalem, or of the 144 Cubits. CHAP. 7. A farther confirmation of the solid and square measures above mentioned, showing that the like measures are used in other places of Scripture. CHAP. 8. The reason why the new Jerusalem is measured by the solid and square measures only, that the measure and structure of the wall, and the number by which it is expressed, do both typically represent the Hierarchy of the Church of Christ. The conclusion of this digression concerning the measures and numbers of the new Jerusalem. CHAP. 9 That those writers who make the mystery of the number 144 to consist in the Root of it, ought also to have extracted the square Root of the number 666. That the extraction of the square Root is an ancient and useful invention by which many famous mysteries have been found out. CHAP. 10. What the counting of the number is. What is meant by the first Beast, the second Beast, & the image of the Beast mentioned Rev. 13. cap. That by counting the Beasts number some other number ought to be found out besider the number 666. CHAP. 11. What it is to extract the square Root of a number. That 25 is the number that is the Root of 666, & remarkably opposed unto 12. Some objections answered concerning the fractions of the root of 666. CHAP. 12. That the number 25 hath been conceived to be a fatal and unfortunate number, by such as knew no relation that it had to Antichrist, or to the number 666. CHAP. 13. Of the nature and quality of those particulars, in which the Root and the Figure of the Beasts number, is to be applied to the Papocie. CHAP. 14. That Rome is answerable to Jerusalem, and the Pope's Cardinals to Christ's Apostles. CHAP. 15. That the first number of Cardinals, according to their first institution and foundation, is chief to be considered, as that which doth most remarkably Antichrist in his original. CHAP. 16. A disquisition concerning other particulars, to which the number 12 is applied in the description of the new Jerusalem, & particularly of the 12 Gates, 12 Tribes, and 12 Angels. CHAP. 17. Of such particulars in the mystical Babylon, as are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Gates, Tribes, Angels, and Foundations of the new Jerusalem. CHAP. 18. Of such things as are answerable to the measure of 12000 furlongs, and the 12 manner of fruits growing on the tree of life. The conclusion of all that hath been said concerning the Antithesis of Things in general, as it is distinguished from that Antithesis of Numbers which is next to be proved. CHAP. 19 That the first decreed and limited number of Cardinals, and parish-Priests in Rome was 25. And that the first number of Churches for Baptism, and Parishes was 25 also. CHAP. 20. That the number of the Gates of Rome was 25. CHAP. 21. That as 12000 furlongs are the solid measure of a Cube, whose perimeter is equal to the compass of the new Jerusalem: so 25000 furlongs are the solid measure of a Cube, whose perimeter is equal in compass to the City of Rome. CHAP. 22. That the Popish Creed consists of 25 Articles, as the Apostles doth of 12. CHAP. 23. The conclusion which followeth upon the chief part of the application above proved, and some necessary and remarkable Observations concerning it. CHAP. 24. A brief and cursory recital of some other less remarkable particulars, in which the number 25 is remarkably applicable to the City and Church of Rome. CHAP. 25. That the number 25 is remarkable in divers things pertaining to S. Peter's Church in Rome. Of the measures of S. Peter's Altar, and the Characters imprinted upon it and other Popish Altars. CHAP. 26. That the number 25 is an affected symbolical device among the Papists: Of the Mass of Christ's five wounds, five times multiplied and repeated. Of their Jubelies, and affectation of the twenty fifth day of the month. CHAP. 27. Objections answered concerning the fractions of the Root of 666. That the Root of 666 more exactly applicable to the Papacy, than the Root of any square number could have been. CHAP. 28. A farther and a full answer to all objections about the Ro tof 666, drawn from the consideration of the figure of that number, by which the figure of the City of Rome is exactly expressed. CHAP. 29. Objections answered, and difficulties cleared, (even to such as have no knowledge in Arithmetic) concerning those solid figures and numbers, by which the several measures of the compass of Rome, and the new Jerusalem may be found out. Also some other objections briefly answered. Corrigenda. Pag. 24. l. 8. for, 18000 22500, read: 8000 to 22500. pag. 25. l. 26. for, measure, read, measured. p. 52. l. 4. for Papist, read, Papists. p. 53. l. 8. for Funains, read, Funccius. p. 53 l. 11 for, Pipina, read, Pipino. p. 65. l. 10. for, which is, or can be contained in, read, by which we can truly express. p. 65. l. 14 for, which is or can be contained in, r by which we can truly express, p. 85. l. 20. for, Papist, read, Papists. p. 97. l. 7. for, consist, read, consists. p. 112. l. 27. for, 121, read, 122. p. 128. l. 25. for, Muscomus, read, Moscomus. p. 130. l. 22. for, with, read, which. p. 133. l. 9 for, coemesterium, read, coemeterium. p. 135. in the marginal note, for, Azure, hoc, read. Azure nominibus &c—) hoc. p. 138. blot out the last words of the marginal note, beginning at these words, As perhaps it is intimated etc. p. 146. l 25 for, speaking either of his own time, or of that time in which Georgius Braunius writ his etc. read speaking either his own words, or the words of Georgius Braunius in his &c p. 147. l 3 for, saperesunt, read, supersunt. p. 156. l. 19 for, promised, read, pr●mised▪ p. 149. l. 12. for, milliarum. read, milliarium. AN INTERPRETATION OF THE NUMBER 666. CHAP. 1. The probability of the following interpretation is briefly and generally proposed; that opinion of numeral letters being almost wholly rejected. AMONGST those many and sundry opinions which divers men of different judgements & apprehensions have uttered concerning this number 666. there is not any one which either seems more probable, or is more true in itself, than the opinion of those Interpreters, who well considering that, Oppositorum eadem est ratio, have therefore endeavoured to find out the true interpretation of this number by comparing it with the number144, to which this number of the beast is evidently opposed. And this ground of theirs, for the manner of the interpretation, is to be esteemed so much the more probable, by how much the less success they found in it. For if this manner of interpretation seemed probable to them, to whom the truth of its application was unknown; how much more would they have stuck unto it, had they but known how many and how great mysteries their farther prosecution of it might have revealed both to themselves and others. As for that opinion concerning the numeral letters of the a Valdè à scopo aberrant, meo judicio, qui putant Sp. Sanctum his verbis de numero NOMINIS Antichristi age●e. Alchasar in 13. cap. Apocalyp. Si quis habet sapientiam, computet Numerum; nullam de NOMINE facit mentionem, sed tantummodò, computet NUMERUM Bestiae. At deinde, Et NVMERVS ejus (a●sque ulla NOMINIS interpositione) ●st 666. Petrus Bongus de numcrorum mysterus. pag. 156, name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, although it have some clearness and evidence in respect of the truth of its application, yet it is most uncertain and obscure in respect of the manner of the interpretation; there being no example in the Scriptures of any number so counted, or any name so characterized▪ & also the words of the text seem plainly to cross all such interpretations of any name whatsoever, in that it is expressly said, Let him that hath Understanding count the number of the beast. It is not said (as it is observed by many) let him count the name of the beast, or the numeral letters in his name: but this manner of speaking is rather purposely avoided by S. John, as Cotterius affirmeth saying, quemadmodum loqui, NOLUISSE Johannem certissimum est. Besides it is observed, that the number of the Beast, and the name of the Beast, are two things plainly distinguished in the text; and therefore it is not likely the counting of the number, and the counting of the name should be all one; much less, that the name ought to be counted, & not the number: whereas they that have understanding are advised by express words of the text to count the number, not the name. Wherefore, although I will not deny but that the holy Ghost may in a second sense (as it were) indirectly and obliquely glance at the name of the Beast by this number; yet that this should be the chief and main mystery which is to be found out by this number, there is no probability at all, as a Quia ut Hieronymus in ea Christi verba, Mat. 24 Qui legit, intelligat, sapienter ait, Quando ad intelligendum provocamur, mysticú monstratur esse quod scriptum est. Similiter ergo in praesenti, verba illa, Hic sapientia est, non patiuntur, sensus Antichristi nomen resp●●iat. Alchasar in 13. c. Apo. Et quiden: reverá non tam nominis Bestiae, quàm Bestiae ipsius numerus est: quomod● etiam statim vocatur. Numerus autem nominis ide● tantùm dicitur, quòd nominis Bestiae li●e●is in numeros relatis (Deoita disponen●e) contineatur. Come Apocal. Cantabrigrae nup●r editus. Nomen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 numerum conficit à Sp sancto notatum; numerum autem mysticum quo indicatur cusus prosapiae si● Bestia, Idem pag. 216. divers learned Interpreters do willingly acknowledge. But as touching the chief and principal meaning, that there may be found out such a kind of interpretation as may be warranted by an express Example in the holy Scriptures; And such an Interpretation, as the precedent & subsequent words of the text, may, not only seem to admit of, but necessarily to enforce; and such an interpretation, as doth essentially and accurately describe that state of government, to which all other notes of Antichrist agree; there is no way more probable, or more agreeable to reason, nor any way less repugnant to the writings of the chiefest interpreters, then to prosecute the grounds already laid by those, who have endeavoured to find out the mystery contained in this number, by comparing it with the number 144, to which this number 666, is (as it were) the anti-numerus, & must therefore be interpreted after the same manner, and in the same particulars applied to the Synagogue of Antichrist, as the number 144 ought to be interpreted, and as it is in the Scriptures applied to the Church of Christ. CAP. 2. That the mystery of the number 144, which is the number opposed to 666, consists in the square root of it, which is 12; and that therefore the mystery of 666 must be in the square root of it also. ANd now concerning the manner how this number 144 ought to be interpreted, it is already agreed upon, as it were, by a general consent as well of the ancient as of the later interpreters, that the only, or at least, the chief cause why this number was chosen rather than any other to be the measure of the wall of the celestial Jerusalem, is, because this number is raised, and built upon the number 12, which being multiplied into itself, produceth this square number 144. For as this number 144 is raised and built upon the number of 12 only, and cannot possibly admit of any other number to be the root and basis of it (as is evidently known to all that have skill in Arithmetic to count numbers, and extract the roots of them) so neither can the Church of Christ admit of any other foundation then that which is already laid by the 12 Apostles. As therefore this number 144 is built upon 12 unities, so is the Church of Christ upon the 12 Apostles. And as the number of 12 more conspicuous and remarkable in this number 144, than any other number, because it measureth not only the bottom or root, but the sides and ranks of it also, as will plainly appear to any one that considereth and counteth the sides and unities of this square figure following, where the number 144 is set down in due order, the unities being placed according to right angles and equal distances one from another. I say therefore, as the number of 12 more conspicuous and remarkable in this figurated number consisting of 144 unities, than any other number: so it is evident, that the number of 12 more conspicuous and remarkable in the Church of God, than any other number whatsoever. And hence it is that this number 12 is rehearsed and repeated above one hundred forty and four times in the Scriptures, and is in them so often used, and in so many and so divers particulars applied by the spirit to things pertaining to the Church, that we cannot but acknowledge this number to be chosen, and as it were affected by the Holy Ghost rather than any other. And although the number 144, may truly be said to be God's number in a more particular manner, than many other numbers used in the Scriptures, because it representeth the figure of the City, and in general, the form and structure of the Church, and Hierarchy thereof, (as shall be showed) yet it cannot so properly be called God's number, as the number 12, which almost in all material respects is applicable to the Church, and is used in the Scriptures always, as numerus certus pro certo, and not as numerus certus proincerto: in which sense it must needs be granted that the number 144 doth signify and represent the Church in general. For, it is not, in itself, being wholly considered, applicable, as the number 12 is, to any particular times, persons, or places, or other particular things, mentioned in the Scriptures; but only in respect of the root or basis of it, which is 12. For there were 12 Tribes, not 144; and 12 gates in Jerusalem, not 144; and 12 Apostles, not 144. And so it may be said of many other things. And, whereas the number 144 is not where mentioned in the Scriptures, but only in the 21 of the Revelation, it must needs be granted, that it is not there said to be the measure of the Wall (which doth in that place signify the spiritual building of God's Church) because there then were, or, at any time should be precisely so many, & no more faithful Christians, or living stones built upon the 12 foundations there named; but that we might thence learn, that how great or how little soever the number of faithful Christians should be, yet they must be all built upon the foundation of the 12 Apostles, as the number 144 is built upon 12 unities. And hence, that is evident, which most interpreters grant, that this number 144 was chosen to be the measure of the wall of the new jerusalem for this reason only, or for this reason chief, because it is the only square number which can be raised and built upon 12 unities, as is clearly known to all those that have understanding to extract the roots of numbers. CHAP. 3. The manner of the interpretation more clearly, yet cursorily proposed. An introduction to the true interpretation of the number 144 and the measures of the new Jerusalem. AND now, although I may take this for granted, (for the reasons above rehearsed,) that this number 144 is not in itself any way particularly to be applied to God's Church and people, but only in respect of the number 12, which is the root and basis of it; and so might accordingly proceed, showing, that the number 666, is not in itself applicable to any Times, Names, Persons, Places, or other circumstances belonging to Antichrist (as many vainly and fruitlessely have endeavoured to find out) but only, that the root of this number 666 (whatsoever number it be) must be the number, which is, in many particular respects, applicable to the kingdom of Antichrist; and that, as the number 12, which is the square root of 144, is more properly said to be God's number then the number 144, because it is a number which God would have conspicuous and remarkable in the founding of his Church, and divers other respects, both above that and all other numbers: so in like manner that number which is the square root of the number 666, must more properly belong to Antichrist, than the number 666, as a number which Antichrist would have conspicuous & remarkable both in the founding of his Kingdom, and also in divers other respects, above any other number whatsoever: although, I say, I might proceed to prosecute these grounds already laid, and taken for granted by learned interpreters, to show what number is the root of the number 666, and how it doth accurately and essentially describe, and the City, State, and Hierarchy of Antichrist; yet lest I might seem to some to build that, which I am fully persuaded and resolved to be a certain & infallible truth, upon weak & unsure grounds; I will therefore yet farther clear the manner of this interpretation, before I touch the truth of its application. And first, that I may not rely upon the bare authority of others, concerning the true and natural exposition of the number 144, which in the 21 of the Revelation (in which place only it is named) is said to be the measure of the wall of the new jerusalem; I will endeavour to make it manifest to such as have understanding, and to such as will not shut their eyes against it, that, howsoever the number 144 is there expressed, yet the number 12 is chief intended. And that I may make this to appear, it is necessary that I say something of the Vision itself in general, pointing at that which this glorious structure of the new Jerusalem doth shadow forth unto us. Concerning which, although I am not ignorant, that many ancient interpreters have affirmed, that the glorious and happy estate of the Church triumphant in heaven is here set forth unto us▪ yet as Mr Forbes and very a R●pertus in Apoc. Victorinus. Pictaviensis qui scripsit Commentaria in Apoc. vixit anno 300. B. B. 1. 2. 10. Tom. 3. pag. 142. Andrea's Episcop Caesariae in his Commentaries on the R●vel▪ saith, that this vision is typus p●aesen●is Ecclesiae. many other writers both ancient and modern have observed all things in this Vision mentioned,, are so exactly applicable to the Church militant here on earth, that, almost from every line & word, there may be an argument drawn to prove that the Church militant, and not the Church triumphant, is chief by this description to be understood. I should digress too far if I should stay to make this truth evident, by such particular instances, as might be brought out of the text. And because I suppose it is sufficiently known to all those who have seriously studied to find out the true meaning of this Vision, I will therefore instance only in the measures and numbers (which as they seem most to disagree from this my interpretation, so are they most to my purpose) endeavouring to find out such a true and natural exposition of them, as shall not only be agreeable to the scope of the Vision in general, but also necessarily enforced by the words of the text immediately going before and following after. And although I know that this exposition which I shall bring, will not seem probable to many that read it, yet will I set it down howsoever, lest upon their second and better consideration of such reasons & probabilities as are brought for it, they should judge it rather to be received then any other. Especially, being, all other interpretations, which are usually given of these measures, are for the most part frivolous, and frigid, and such as carry such a kind of emptiness with them, as is not agreeable to that weight of matter which seems to balance the other parts of this Vision. CHAP. 4. A disquisition concerning the Interpretation of the 16, and 17 verses of the 21 Chapter of the Revelation, and a new exposition of the measures of the new Jerusalem. THE words of the Text, in which these measures of the City and Wall are expressed, are these which follow in the 21 of the Revelation. 16. And the City lieth four square, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the City with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs: the length, and the breadth, and the height of it are equal. 17. And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four Cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the Angel. First, it is to be considered, that the furlongs and cubits, here used by the Angel, are, in the last words, said to be the measure of a man. Wherefore it is diligently to be considered, and enquired, how many kinds of measuring by furlongs and cubits are used by men. For, there can no other cause be imagined▪ why these words, mensura hominis quae est angeli, should have been added, but that they should be an exposition to the former, and as it were an answer to such doubts and objections as might arise from them. It is likely therefore that the true interpretation of these words, will be as a key to open all that is spoken concerning the measures above named. Now, if it had been said, the cubits are the cubits of a man; or, the furlongs are the furlongs of a man; than it had been probable that these words were added, lest the just length of the furlongs or cubits should have been mistaken; but forasmuch as it is said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it is the Measure of a man which the Angel useth. The words seem to intimate, that the danger of mistaking lieth rather in misunderstanding the manner of measuring by furlongs and cubits, then in mistaking the true length of the measures which are named. And if so; then that manner of measuring which is here meant, is not that which is most commonly used among men, or in the scriptures. For then there had been no danger of mistaking it, or cause why this exposition should have been added. It seems therefore, that, this kind of measuring by furlongs and cubits, which the Angel doth in this place use, doth properly belong to a man; and yet so, that it is not that kind of measuring which is most commonly and most ordinarily used, either by men, or in the scriptures. And now to find out, what this not so usual, although most proper kind of measuring is; it is diligently to be enquired, how many kinds of measuring by furlongs, or cubits, or by any other such like measures, are at all used among men. And upon this inquiry there are three kinds of measures, and three only, which will offer themselves to our consideration. For as there are only three several kinds of quantities, which are commonly called, linea, superficies, & corpus, that is, Length, Breadth, and Thickness: so there are three kinds of measures, used by men, which are properly answerable to these three kinds of quantities, and are called Lineal measure, Square measure, and Solid measure; and without these measures, the quantities above named, can neither be truly expressed nor rightly understood. And now, being there are but these three ways by which a man may measure such a solid figure as this City is here described to be, it must needs be granted, that this measure of 12000 furlongs, is either the Lineal, or the Superficial, or the Solid measure of this City: and if that measure of these three, which is most commonly used among men and in the Scriptures, must be rejected in this place, for the reason above said, then in all probability Lineal measure, the first of these three above named, which is far more commonly used in the Scriptures and among men then either of the other, must not be understood in this place; and so by consequence these 12000 furlongs can neither be the measure of one of the sides of this City, nor of the compass of it. But supposing that the holy Ghost speaketh properly, in setting down the measures of this City, and after the manner of men, (as the words of the text last above recited do intimate and evince) it is no hard matter, even by the words themselves to determine, not only which of these three measures is not, but which of them is, here to be understood. For first, it is diligently to be considered, what kind of quantity that is, which is here said to be measured by the Angel. And secondly, it is accuratly to be observed, that the measure of 12000 furlongs, is not here said to be the measure of the Length, nor of the Breadth, nor of the compass, nor of the ground-plot or Area, nor of the sides of the City; but only of the City itself, which is here set down plainly to be a solid cubical figure, containing three dimensions. This measure therefore of 12000 furlongs, is the measure of a solid cubical figure, and therefore in propriety of speech, and according to the manner of men, it must of necessity be understood to be a solid measure. If the measure of the length, or of the breadth, or of the compass of this City, had been said to have been 12000 furlongs, than who would, or who could have understood it of any other measure but lineal measure only? so likewise being the City itself is said to be measured 12000 furlongs, or as the Rhemists' translation hath it, for twelve thousand furlongs; who will, or who can, especially according to the manner of men, understand the measure of a solid figure to be any other than a solid measure? And although it may seem unprobable, that an Angel should express the magnitude of this City, by a phrase and a measure borrowed rather from the schools of geometry (which hath taught men to measure plain and solid figures with square and solid measures) then from the book of the Scriptures, wherein this kind of measuring is seldom or obscurely used; yet for this very cause, is this interpretation the rather to be embraced. For the holy Ghost would never have vouchsafed to have answered this objection so appositely by these words following, mensura hominis quae est Angeli, except humane reason might with probability have urged it. From the words of the text therefore, and from that manner of measuring which properly belongs to men, and is commonly used by them, it followeth that the measure of 12000 furlongs here named, must needs be understood of solid furlongs, there being no other manner of measuring solid figures, either possible or usual among men, but only by solid measures. For it is not possible for a man to find out, and to know the true quantity of a solid body, either intuitiuè, as Angels do; or, applicatiuè, as in lineal measures, but only discursiuè, and per ratiocinium, by the discursive faculty, and by counting and calculating numbers, which as it is the proper Act of man's reason only, so is it here, for this reason only, or for this reason chief said to be the measure of a man. CAP. 5. A farther confirmation of the precedent interpretation of the Measures of the new Jerusalem. AND this interpretation of these 12000 furlongs, may farther and evidently be confirmed, because according to this interpretation, the compass of this new Jerusalem, doth in all probability, and for all that can be showed to the contrary, exactly agree with the compass of the ancient and literal Jerusalem; and also with the compass of that City, which is by the Prophet Ezekiel in his last Chapter measured and described. Of which City, as also of the heavenly Jerusalem, the words of Villalpandus, lib. 2. cap. 21. pag. 118. upon the 48. chap. of Ezekiel are very probable and remarkable, where, speaking of that City described by Ezekiel, he saith as followeth, quo loco nulli dubium esse debet, nove Hierosolymae mentionem fieri, ex latere Christi olim fundandae, nunc verò fundatae, super fundamentum Apostolorum & Prophetarum, ipso summo angulari lapide Jesu Christo; at in omnibus antiquae urbis, respexisse dispositionem, parts, earumque nomina & Mensuras, nulli vel mediocriter ea perpendenti, dubium esse ullâ ratione poterit. In which words Villalpand confidently affirms two things. First, that that City, described by the Prophet Ezekiel, is the same with this new Jerusalem of which Saint John speaketh. And this is also affirmed by a Ad Prophetiam Ezechiclis quod attinet, de novo templo & novo Jerusalem omnes contextûs circumstantiae loquuntur, Prophetam non de materiali aedificio, sed de mystico templo agere.— Deinde Apocalypsis Johannis ubi hane Ezechielis Prophetiam imitatur & ex professo explicat, apertissimè dicit hanc novam Hierusalem à Deo ex coelis descendere paratam, ut sponsam ornatam viro suo.— Nomen Civitatis ab Ezechicle dicitur jehovah ibi non quòd talis urbs aliquando futura sit, quae vulgò sic appelletur; sed quòd propheticè indicetur Deum Opt. Max. in aeternâ illá Hierusalem Ecclesiae suae semper praestò futurum; sive ut Johannes noster in Apocal. hoc rectè exponat & explicet, ' Deum & Agnum in eâ: hronum habiturum. Quod etiam Thargum jonathan in praedicto Ezechielis loco agnoscit. Gracerus in 9 cap Danielis. Gracerus, by b In Commentariis fusè ostendimus templum & Civitatem Ezechielis non ad materialem illam Hyerosolymorum, sed ad Ecclesiam in Christo in terris fundatam pertinere, atque adeò non mysticè sed secundùm literam omnia quae de ejusmodi aedificiis à Propheta describuntur, de Ecclesia esse intelligenda, quod sufficiat ut certum posuisse. Blasius Viegas in 12. Cap Apocal. Viegas, c Urbem hanc sanctam & Catholicam Ecclesiam figurasse docuit B. johannes Apoc. 21. ea quae hic Propheta praedixerat testificando: quod argumento irrefragabili est, quae de templo, possessionibus, urbe, imo omnia quae in hoc Propheta continentur ad Ecclesiae aedisicationem & amplitudinem Sp sancto suggerente, spectâsle: & ita de sua Ecclesia Dominus loquens ad hanc urbem allasit dicens, Non potest civitas abscondi supra montem posita. Quod etiam quae de ipsá ●ic tradit manifestant. Nam quorsum tam accurata mensura laterum? quorsum annumeratio Pertarum, & ingredientium? quorsum nova civitatis nomenclatura?— proculdubio haec novam civitatem, Ecclesiam nempe Catholicam, ut novam Hierusalem illustratione coelestium virtutum descendentem de coelo adumbrarunt. Pet. Serranus in ult cap Ezechiclis p. 288. Serranus, d Hic est murus ille de quo ait D. johannes in cap. 21. Apo● Ubi Ecclesiae militantis civitatem describit, (etiamsi nonnulla interdum misceat ad Ecclesium triumphantem pertinentia) & habebat civitas haec murum magnum & altum. Sed dices fortasse, Qui sieri potest ut hi duo loci johannis & Ezechielis cohaereant? cùm Iohannes unum tantùm murum describat, Ezechiel tres? Hector Pintus in 40. Cap. Ezechiclis. Hector Pintus, e Unde Alchasar in Apoc. cap. 3. v. 12. notatione secund. pag. 318. censet judaeam hic esse Ecclesiam U●●em quam in illa vidit Ezechiel esse Romam non Jerusalem. Unde ejus nomen est Dominus ibidem, scilicet in suo Vicario Romano Pontisice; Templum esse monasteria virosa; religiosos. Cor. à Lapide in 40 cap. Ezech. But Alchasar else where in cap. 21 Apoc. interpreteth the new Jerusalem to be Rome, and therefore these two Cities in his opinion are all one. Cornelius à Lapide, Gaspar à Melo, and divers others, as a certain and undoubted truth. Secondly, (which doth also follow out of this former assertion) he observes that the Angel in the description of this heavenly Jerusalem, hath not only respect unto the figure, names, and parts of the ancient literal Jerusalem, but also to the measures of it. For, if the reason, why S. john & the Prophet Ezekiel do describe this heavenly Jerusalem to have been of a square figure, and to have had twelve gates, and twelve Tribes, and twelve names of twelve Apostles, be, because these things, had sometimes a real and actual existence in the literal Jerusalem; then why should there not be the like reason, and foundation of truth why this measure of 12000 furlongs, should be fetched & derived from such measures, as had sometime actual existence in the ancient and literal Jerusalem? I say therefore if that City described by Ezekiel by the same with this new Jerusalem, than this new Jerusalem must agree with that description, not only in figure, and in the number of the gates and tribes, but also in the measure, and compass of it. And forasmuch as the compass of that City in the last of Ezekiel, is in the text expressly said to be 8000 cubits, it is evident that the measure of 12000 furlongs cannot be understood to be the lineal measure, either of one side, or of the whole compass of the new Jerusalem. For supposing that this measure of Ezekiel (which is but a Cubit and an hand breadth (as shall be showed) were five foot long, yet 18000 of these measures would make but 144 furlongs, which is not the 84 part of 12000 furlongs. Wherefore there is no possibility that 12000 furlongs ought to be understood to be the measure, either of one side, or of the whole compass of the new Jerusalem. In like manner, if any one were willing, (as some interpreters have endeavoured) to understand this measure of 12000 furlongs, to be the square measure of the Area or platform of the new Jerusalem; he must then grant that the perimeter or compass of such an Area must be 436 furlongs at the least, as may be plainly proved by extracting the square root of 12000: but the compass of the same City, as Ezekiel describes it, cannot exceed 144 furlongs as it is above showed. Therefore neither can these 12000 furlongs be the square or superficial measure, either of all, or of any one of the sides of this new Jerusalem. It remaineth then that if this City do agree in measures (as of necessity it must) with that City measured by Ezekiel, that this measure of 12000 furlongs, must needs be understood, of solid furlongs. For according to this measure only it is possible to reconcile these two divers measures of the same City. It must needs be therefore, that that Cube, whose content or solid measure is 12000 furlongs, must be in compass 18000 Cubits, according as it is set down by Ezekiel. And that this may appear, something must be said of the true length of ezekiel's Cubits, and S. John's furlongs; Concerning the Cubit used by Ezekiel in the description of his last Vision, it is evident out of the 40 chap. and 5. vers. and out of the 41. chap. 8. vers. and out of the 43. chap. and 13. vers. that his Cubit is longer than other Cubits ordinarily used in the Scriptures by one span or hand breadth, which is the 4 part of the usual Cubit, as Villalpandus & Tomo 3. apparatus urbis Pag 68, 69. other interpreters, upon this place of Ezekiel, not without good reason, do affirm. But the common and usual Cubit mentioned in the Scriptures was about two foot and an half. And therefore in some of our English translations, the marginal note equalleth 2000 Cubits to a mile, And so doth Villalpand also in his map of Jerusalem, entitled, vera Hierosolymae veteris imago, Romae superiorum permissu, cum privilegio Summi Pontificis, Imperatoris, Regis Catholici, ac senatûs veneti &c: edita. And a mile contains 1000 Paces, every Pace being five foot. If therefore this Cubit of Ezekiel be bigger by one fourth part then other Cubits, it followeth then, that 22500 true or ordinary cubits are equal unto 18000 of these great Cubits; for as 4 are to 5, so are 18000▪ 22500. If then 22500 cubits, every cubit being two foot and an half, be the true compass of the new Jerusalem, as by Ezekiel it is measured, it must be granted, that if 625 foot make one furlong, than the compass of this City, reduced to such furlongs must be 90 furlongs. Which measure, how near it comes to agree with the solid measure set down by S. John, may easily be demonstrated by extracting the solid root of 12000: which if I have rightly performed, the compass of this cubical City, by necessary consequence, must needs be between 91 and 92 furlongs. And although it 91. stad. 71. pass. 2. ped. 11. un. doth not exactly and precisely agree with the former, yet one or two furlongs are not to be regarded in so large a compass; yet not therefore not to be regarded, because a difference, if it could be proved, were not to be regarded, but because it is beyond all comparison fare more probable that these two measures do exactly agree because the Cities are both one, then that any writer can now exactly set down the just length both of the Jewish Cubit, & of the Roman furlongs. For I suppose it were great ignorance for any man to affirm that the just lengths of both these measures can be now proved by any unquestionable monument of antiquity, or undeniable authority. For being there is nothing in this sublunary world immortal and unchangeable, but only words written that can be without alteration transmitted to posterity; it hath been therefore accounted a thing impossible until this age to find out any means demonstrative, how the exact length of any known measure, may without sensible error be exactly and infallibly transmitted to all succeeding generations. But howsoever the just length of the jewish Cubit be uncertain and utterly lost, yet the Roman furlongs and the Roman foot are not yet so forgotten, but that we may come very near unto the truth, as Snellius in his book de terrae ambitu hath probably defined it. And supposing 22500 Cubits, which is the measure of the City measured by Ezechiel, to be equal unto 57233 Roman feet, which is near unto the Compass of the new jerusalem, if I have cast it right, we may know the true length of the Jewish Cubit to have been near about two foot and an half, and half an inch, and one and one quarter of a quarter of an inch, and a little more, and by this means I believe the true length of the jews Cubits many be better known then by any other. Wherefore I suppose that these reasons above alleged, and rightly understood, are abundantly sufficient to show, not only a probability, that this measure of 12000 furlongs may, but a necessity, that it must be understood to be the Solid measure of this City; and therefore such a measure, which, a Fo●tassis per 12 Apostolorum numerum ●●ctà quadam Calculatione & resolutione quod quaeritur inve●●tur. And a little after he saith, ●2000 st●d●orum Civitatis ●or sand magnitudinem d●notant▪ Andreas Episcopus C●sa●ae Cappadociae in Apocal. Andreas Caesariensis rightly conjectures, is not lineally applicable to the compass or height of it, before man's reason by the discursive faculty, as by its proper act, do resolve this number into some other numbers, as in the extracting of the solid root is necessarily required. And thus much of the measure of the City. CHAP. 6 The interpretation of the measure of the wall of the new Jerusalem; or of the 144 Cubits. THE measure of the Wall now followeth, which is in the next words said to be 144 cubits: which measure cannot be understood of the length of the wall, because it is not possible that 144 cubits should compass that City, whose compass is above 91 furlongs as hath been showed. Besides, if it were possible, yet it were a kind of tautology, to set down again in the next words that measure of the wall, which may be evidently and certainly known by the measure of the City before declared. This measure than must be understood, either of the height of this wall, or of the thickness of this wall, or of both: and the meaning must be, that either the wall was 144 cubits high or 144 cubits broad, or else that, according to both these dimensions of height and breadth, the wall was 144 cubits of square measure. And this last kind of interpretation of these words howsoever it may seem intricate an● unusual to those that either are not acquainted with this kind of measure; or else have not observed▪ that the same kind of measure is evidently and expressly spoken of in other places of Scripture, yet according to this measure only, are walls usually measured by such as make them. And that this kind of square measure is to be understood in this place, I take it to be more than probable for these reasons. First, that measure of the wall (caeteris paribus, other respects being equal) is to be received before any other, by which the unknown quantity of the wall may be most perfectly, and according to most dimensions, made known and discerned▪ but supposing that 144 cubits are the square measure of this wall according to its height and thickness, it will follow, that not the height only, nor the thickness only, but that all the unknown dimensions of this wall may be found out by this number. Whereas contrariwise, if we understand this measure of 144 cubits to be the thickness of the wall, than the height of the wall remains unknown, and if we understand it of the height of the wall, than the thickness remains unknown. And although it were certain, that it were meant of one of these measures only, yet it is ambiguous, and impossible to be known by the words of the text, which of them is here intended. And although it were known which of these two measures is here meant, yet the figure and proportion of the wall would still be unknown. But if, as it is above said, this measure be understood of square cubits, than all these uncertainties and ambiguities are avoided and extinguished; and it must be granted that this one number doth represent the figure of the wall, and is the measure of both these, otherways unknown, dimensions. For, as this number is a square number, having 4 equal sides, each of them consisting of 12 unities▪ so this wall must be conceived to be of a square figure, each side being 12 cubits. The foundation then of this wall was 12 cubits broad, the height of the wall on the inside next unto the City was 12 cubits, and the height of the wall on the outside was 12 cubits, and the breadth of the wall on the top was 12 cubits, so these four lines contained and terminated the figure of the wall; Or, to speak more properly, these 4 lines contained and terminated that continuating superficies and imaginary plain, which did cut the length of the wall according to right Angles: and in respect of the figure and capacity of this plain, the measure of the wall itself (according to all dimensions not hitherto expressed) may be most truly, most properly, and most significantly said to be 144 cubits. And after this manner Villalpand understands and interprets this measure, as may be gathered out of his words part 1. Apparatûs urbis & Templi, libro 2. cap. 20. where he saith, Muri Hierusalem crassitudo magnâ ex parte 12 cubitorum, ad quem numerum respexisse videtur Angelus, Apoc. 21. & Mensus est murum 144 cubitorum, qui numerus ex duodenario in se ducto efficitur. That is to say; the thickness of the wall of Jerusalem was for the most part 12 cubits, unto which number the Angel seems to allude in the 21. cap. of the Revelation. and he measured the wall 144 Cubits, which number is made by multiplying the number of 12 into itself. And a little after he saith plainly, assumpt● veteris urbis tanquam linearibus numeris, eos insuperficiales redegit, that is, and taking, as it were, the lineal numbers of the old Jerusalem, he reduced them into superficial in the new. If then according to the opinion of Villalpand, and for the reasons above alleged, the number of 144 cubits be a Superficial measure, and therefore such a measure as is not lineally applicable to the wall of the new Jerusalem, than it follows, that man's reason by the discursive faculty must first count & extract the root of this number, before he can know and understand what the lineal measure of the thickness and height of the wall is. And this is the reason that the next words are added, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, mensura hominis quae est Angeli, it is the measure of a man which the Angel useth. For so these words ought to be translated, and so doth Villalpand rightly interpret them out of Ribera upon the Revelation; for they are (as it must needs be granted) an exposition of those measures of the City and wall set down by the Angel in the words before. Neither do they import any thing concerning the shape of the Angel, or any other meaning; but only this, that although the measurer were an Angel, yet he measured the City & the wall, after the same manner that men use to measure such quantities, and by such measures as have been invented by men, and are commonly used among them. Now if there be no other way invented by men, by which men usually do, or truly can measure quanties' containing three dimensions, but only by solid measure; nor no other way by which men either usually do, or possibly can, measure quantities containing only two dimensions, but only by superficial or square measure; than it must needs follow, that the measure of the City must be understood to be a solid measure, because it is the measure of a solid figure containing three dimensions, as it is above proved: and the measure of the wall, must be understood to be a superficial, or square measure, because it is the measure of two dimensions only, it being above showed, that it is altogether unprobable, that it ought to be understood of one dimention only, and absolutely impossible to understand it of three. CHAP. 7. A farther confirmation of the solid and square measures above mentioned, showing that the like measures are used in other places of Scripture. THere remaineth one thing yet for the farther clearing of these measures, and that is to show, that in other places of the holy Scriptures, the like phrases and measures are used by the holy Ghost. And first for the solid measure, I see not how it can be answered or avoided but that the same measure and phrase is used in the 7 chapter of the first book of Kings, where the stones with which the wall of the Court was built, are said to be stones of 8 cubits, and stones of 10 cubits. It is certain that these stones were squared stones, cut (as it is said in the text) according to the measures of hewed stones. And it is certain also that the cubit was about two foot and an half long. If therefore 10 cubits be the measure of the length, or of the breadth, or of the thickness of one of these stones: it must be granted that one of these stones, if he were every way square was 25 foot long, and 25 foot broad, and 25 foot high, & therefore did contain 15625 solid foot of stone, which is above 240 wain loads. But it is incredible and against reason, and the truth of the story, that these stones were so exceeding great. And it must also follow, that the wall which was built with 3 rows of such stones, was 20 foot thick and more, and 60 foot high and upward, all which is so fare from the truth of the story, and so disagreeing to reason, that there is no man (as I am persuaded) so vainly credulous, as to believe it. It remaineth therefore that this measure is to be understood of solid measure, by which measure stone and timber are commonly and usually measured. According to which measure, a squared stone of 8 cubits, is but two cubits long, and two cubits broad and two cubits in height: and 3 ranks of such stones, with one rank of Cedar beams, will make a wall of such a probable and convenient height and thickness as was requisite for the walls which are mentioned in the first book of Kings cap. 6. and the 36 verse, and in the 10, 11, and 12 verse of the chapter next following. I say therefore that as in this place of Scripture the measure of 8 or 10 cubits must in all probability be understood of solid measure▪ so likewise the measure of 12000 furlongs, mentioned in the 21 chap. of the Revelation, may be understood after the same manner, especially being the phrase is not unlike, and that as in the one place, 8 or 10 cubits are said to be the measure of the stone itself, and not of the length or breadth, or thickness▪ or compass of it▪ so also in the other place, 12000 furlongs are said to be the measure of the City itself; and not of the length or breadth, or thickness, or compass of it. As concerning square and superficial measure invented and used by men, it is evident that the holy Ghost in the Scriptures vouchsafeth to allude unto this also, and as it were directly and plainly to point at it. And this may in some sort appear out of the 43 chap. and 16 V of Ezekiel, but most evidently out of the 20 V of the last chap. of Ezekiel, where it said, all the oblation shall be 25 thousand by 25 thousand, etc. Concerning which place of Scripture, I will here set down the words of Haffenrefferus in his Commentaries upon Ezekiel, pag. 102, and 103. where he saith as followeth; Notanda est phrasis geometrica quam demonstrator Prophetae ex mediis Mathematicorum scholis huic suae descriptioni adhibuit, & Spiritus Sanctus phrasi Geometricâ ex media schola Mathematicorum desumptâ expressè loquitur, [Area 25000 Cubitorum Per 25000 Cubitorum quadrata,] quae res & Mathematicas disciplinas commendat, & quoth Theologiae studiosus earundem non prorsus ignarus esse debeat non obscurè demonstrat, that is, the Geometrical phrase is to be noted, which is taken out of the midst of the Schools of the Mathematicians, andin this description used by him that shown this vision to the Prophet; and the holy Ghost speaketh expressly by such a Geometrical phrase as is taken out of the midst of the Mathematic Schools, [an Area of 25000 Cubits, squared by 25 thousand Cubits] which as it doth much commend the Mathematical sciences, so doth it not obscurely intimate, that a student in divinity ought not to be altogether ignorant of them. If in this place of Ezekiel, the holy Ghost useth a circumlocution, that he might by a geometrical phrase, and by a number multiplied by itself, express and intimate the square and plain measure of a piece of ground; why may he not then in another place set down the square measure itself, by one number, without any circumlocution at all? If in the first place the sides of a square number be given, and yet the square number be not expressed, but left to be found by him that will multiply the sides into themselves, as S. Hierome hath done on this place, why may not then the square number itself be given in another place of Scripture, and yet the sides of it be left unexpressed, to be found out by him that will extract the root of it? As therefore it was needless that the square number itself should be expressed to Ezekiel▪ because by multiplying 25000 by itself we may certainly know that the square measure of the holy oblation was 625 Millions of square cubits, or 667 miles as S Hierome counteth it: so it was needless that the lineal measures of the wall should be expressed by the Angel to S. john, because by extracting the square root of 144, we may certainly know that the lineal measure of the wall, according to its thickness and height was precisely 12 cubits. CHAP. 8. The reason why the new Jerusalem is measured by the solid and square measures only; That the measure and structure of the wall and the number by which it is expressed, do both typically represent the Hierarchy of the Church of Christ. The conclusion of this digression concerning the measures and numbers of the new Jerusalem. IF a reason be demanded, why the Angel did not set down the lineal measures only of this new Jerusalem, as the manner is, in Ezekiels visions, and in other places of Scripture, where the like descriptions are used; I answer, that although the same quantity might have as perfectly (and in respect of the ignorance of many men, more perspicuously) been made known by the lineal measures; yet than it had not been possible to have retained the same numbers. For being the holy Ghost affecteth (as it were) this number of 12 more than any other, (as it is above showed;) and keepeth this number constantly through the whole description of this new Jerusalem; as if nothing were pleasing and acceptable unto him (as indeed it is not) but that which is either numbered with this number of 12, or built upon it; it was therefore convenient that the same number should be retained (if it were possible) in the measures also. But it was not possible to set down the true, & yet the same length, or breadth, or compass of this City, by the number of 12; either in unities, Ten, Hundreds, Thousands, or Millions: either by Reeds, Cubits, furlongs, handbreadthes, spans, or any other measure named in the Scriptures. For neither 12 furlongs, nor 12 hundred furlongs, nor 12000 furlongs, are equal either to one side of this City, or to the compass, or to the Area, but only 12000 furlongs to the solid content. So likewise neither are 12 cubits, nor 1200 cubits, nor 12000 cubits, nor 120000, nor 1200000, nor 12000000 of cubits, or the same numbers of any other measures named in the Scriptures, equal to any measures of this City above named, excepting only the solid measure, as is above said. As therefore there was a necessity that the Solid measure should be set down, because that only could be expressed by the number of 12 having thousands added to it; so was it necessary also that of all other solid measures, furlongs should be taken for the same reason. For as no other number with this measure, so is it certain that no other measure with this number could express the just quantity of this City. A second reason (and perhaps the chief reason) why the holy Ghost would have the magnitude of this new Jerusalem expressed by the solid measure, is, that there might be an express and evident example in the Scriptures, how to count and apply the number of the beast; that so having found out that number which is opposed unto 12, and having added thousands and furlongs to it, we might have the solid measure and content of that Cube given, whose perimeter is equal to the compass of the Romish Babylon: as 12000 furlongs are the solid measure of that Cube, whose perimeter is equal to the compass of the new Jerusalem. But of this in its due place. As concerning the reason why the measure of the wall is not expressed by lineal measures, it may be answered, that although the number of 12 might have been retained, and by it the true, and the same lineal measures of this wall described, yet it cannot be denied, but that the true measures of the wall, and the number of 12 are both necessarily, although mystically implied, and as purposely intended by the holy Ghost in the number 144, as if they had been many times expressly named. For this number is so significantly applicable, not only to the measures and structure of the wall here described, but also to that which is by the wall signified; that it may be truly said, that this number considered absolutely in itself, (and not as it doth by Cubits here in this place show the square measure of the wall,) is (as it were) an idea of the hierarchy of the Church: the wisdom of God having purposely linked two types together, that the one might unfold the other: the one being an imaginary structure of a material building; the other an intelligible form of an immaterial number: both of them signifying, that as the number 12 was the measure, number, and foundation of the City, Gates, and wall of the ancient and literal Jerusalem; and was, in respect of the 12 Patriarches, the root from whence the 12 Tribes had their original according to the flesh; so the same number of 12 should be the only conspicuous & remarkable number in the foundation & structure of the spiritual & new Jerusalem: in which the 12 Apostles●are 12 spiritual fathers answerable to the 12 Patriarches: and are 12 foundation-stones laid by our Saviour Christ, upon which foundation, and according to which foundation, (that is, by multiplying the doctrine of the Apostles by itself only,) all the spiritual bvilders of God's Church in the times to come, aught to erect and square their buildings. And they are also placed as 12 Angels at the 12 gates, to keep out (as it were) with a two edged sword every thing that defileth; and to admit into this City by the gates of Baptism, committed first and originally unto them, and prefigured by the 12 oxen under the brazen Sea, 12000 of every tribe; that is all those faithful Christians and true Jsraelites which can derive their spiritual genealogy from the faith and doctrine of the 12 Apostles. And this is without all question, the true and natural interpretation of the numbers and measures of this new Jerusalem. Concerning which it is to be observed, that those interpreters which did not understand the measures and proportion of the wall, and therefore could not discern how exactly that ecclesiastical state and Hierarchy, which our Saviour Christ built on the 12 Apostles, was typed out by it; yet by the only contemplation, and computation of this number 144, they have discerned, that the number of 12 was not only mystically and virtually contained in it, but also chief intended by it, and so they attained unto the same truth in effect, which by the structure and measures of the wall, being rightly understood, ought first to have been apprehended by them. And thus having been willing to build my opinion, as well upon reason, as upon the authority of others, I have long laboured (although by a tedious and intricate digression) to find out and to prove by the Scriptures, what is the true manner of the interpretation of that number, which is opposed to the number of the Beast. And herein I have but followed the advice and counsel of Rupertus, who writing of the number 666 hath these words, Quia sapiens ad computandum citatur, fortè in numero problema est, sanctam igitur Scripturam consulamus, sine quâ nihil constans aut certum sive de numero Dei, sive de numero Bestiae: nam sicutille Samson veracitèr dicere potuit, Si non arassetis in vitulâ meâ, non invenissetis propositionem meam: sic Dom: noster Jesus Christus, cujus propositiones sive problematasunt omnia, quae in hoc libro continentur, profunda mysteria, veraciter nobis dicat: Si non araverîtis in alià Scriptur à non invenietis solutionem numeri huius, quem praesens signavit Scriptura. The effect of which words is, that except the true meaning and interpretation of God's number, be found out by diligent search of other places of Scripture, there is little hope o● possibility to find out the mystery contained in the number of the Beast. CHAP. 9 That those writers who make the mystery of the number 144 to consist in the root of it, ought also to have extracted the square Root of the number 666. That the Extraction of the square root is an ancient and useful invention by which many famous mysteries have been found out. WHat hath been hitherto said, differeth little from the grounds which the latest interpreters have laid for the finding out of the mystery. I have as yet but beaten and made plain the same path, which Mr Forbes and other commentators upon the Revelation have trodden out before me, but I am now come to that place, where they either stood still, or turned out of the way. It is true Mr Forbes and others affirm, that the number 144 is the number which is opposed to the number of the Beast; and that, as it is a square and perfect number, built and raised upon the number 12 only, which is the root of it; so the Church of Christ is a square and perfect building, built upon the doctrine of the 12 Apostles. It is also true, that as the number 666 is neither a square nor perfect number, nor built upon the number 12: so neither is the Romish Hierarchy a square and perfect building, neither is it built upon the doctrine of the 12 Apostles. All this is true, but this is not all that is true; nor the tenth part of that which may be found out by this number. All this is but a negative description, showing rather, what Antichrist is not, then truly defining what he is. And those interpreters which rest satisfied with so imperfect a description, must confess that they know no more of Antichrist by this number then what is plain and evident by many places of the Sriptures. Why do they not therefore upon the grounds, which they themselves have laid, farther prosecute their own interpretations? Why do they not seek out the root of the beasts number, as well as the root of God's number, that so they may know, not only negatively, what is not the foundation of the Romish Hierarchy, but also positively, what it is? Were they so unaquainted in Arithmetic, that they knew not what the square root of a number is, nor how it ought to be extracted? I dare not accuse such learned men of this nescience, much less of their ignorance in this kind. Perhaps some of them through incogitancy, not rightly considering these words in the text, numerus enim hominis est, did think it unbeseeming the wisdom of God, and the majesty of the scriptures, to wrap up such divine mysteries in humane and heathenish inventions. True it is indeed, The extraction of the roots of numbers is an humane, and perhaps an heathenish invention; but it is a lawful, a profitable and an useful invention. It is the very ground, and foundation of Arithmetic and Geometry, and so necessary, and essential a part of these Sciences, that neither of them can well subsist without it. By it was found out that famous invention, for which it is said, that Pythagoras sacrificed an Hecatomb unto the Gods; and why may not Christians find out as great a mystery by it as ever Heathens did? Certainly if the wisdom of God will at any time vouchsafe to unlock this numbers mystery by any humane invention, (as the words themselves seem to intimate) there is none in respect of itself more probable, than this, by which so many, and so famous mysteries have been, and daily are revealed. I say therefore, why do not those later writers, which in part have rightly discerned wherein the mystery of God's number doth consist, extract the root of 666 also? For had they extracted the square root of this number of the beast, than had they truly endeavoured to interpret this number, after the same manner, that they themselves do interpret that number, which is opposed unto it; then had they found out that number, which is mystically implied in 666, as 12 is in 144; then had they found out that number, which is chiefly intended by 666, as 12 is by 144; then had they found out that nmber, which is the measure, number, and foundation, as well of that material City, wherein Antichrist doth reside, as also of that state and government, by which he ruleth in it. For as the number 12 is not only tightly applicable to that ecclesiastical government, and Hierarchy, which Christ did first institute in Jerusalem, but doth also describe, and measure the material City itself, as is partly above shown: so the root of the Beasts number, which is the number opposed to 12, is not only tightly and miraculously applicable to that government, and Hierarchy, which was by Antichrist first instituted, but doth also describe, and that material City, in which this government was first erected. And all this, by that which followeth shall be clearly and evidently proved. But first, for as much as this opinion, which I shall here set down, doth differ from all other in this respect, namely, in that it affirmeth, that the chief mystery doth not consist in the application of the number 666 unto Antichrist, but in finding out another number, by counting of this number, which other number is most properly, and most remarkably applicable unto him; I think it therefore necessary not to pass over such proofs as the text itself affordeth for the full confirmation of this point, wherein the difference consisteth. For although it cannot be denied, but that the like interpretation of the opposite number (as it is above showed) is a strong, and violentpresumption, why the Beasts number should be thus interpreted; yet the words of the text are so apposite, and do so necessarily enforce this interpretation, that I see not how it can be possibly avoided, although there were no example in the Scripture for it. CHAP. 10. What the counting of the number is. What is meant by the first Beast, the second Beast, and the Image of the Beast mentioned, Revel. 13. That by counting the Beasts number some other number ought to be found out besides the number 666. THE words are these in the 13 chap. of the Revel. Here, is wisdom, let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is six hundred sixty six. It is expressly said in these words, that the number 666 must be counted; now after what manner should this number be counted, but, after some such manner, as is commonly used among men? And lest any man should understand it of a merely speculative, or angelical, or of any intricate and unusual kind of computation, therefore it is added, Numerus enim hominis est, for it is the number of a man, or of Man, that is, as a Hic sapientia denotat ingenij acrimoniâ & perspi●acitate opus esse, ad ea quae sequuntur percipienda▪ Conveniniens est Richardi constructio, videlicet, Numerum hominis appella●i eum numerum, qui ab homine observari possit; quasi dicatur ejusmodi esse enumerandi ratio & computatio qu●m humani ingenij vis assequi & ini●e possit. Quá ratione nec phrasis est insolens, nec inepta ratio: immo aptissima est 〈◊〉, Qui ●●bet sapientious, computet numerum Bestiae, humani enim ingenij viribus haec fieri valet computatio— Numerus eni● hominis est (1) quia ejusmodi supputatio est quam possit humano more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 13 cap Apoc. Alchazar, Coterius, b Numerus 〈◊〉 est (1), ut Areta● ait consu●●us est calculus & inter homines cognitus; vel aliter, Qui habet intellectum computet ben●▪ n●m proprium est hominis intellectum h●ben●is, numerare. Gasper 〈◊〉 in 21 cap. Ap. Gasper à Melo, and many c Dicit enim numerus hominis est, id est, ut alibi alià de re, & mensus est murum ejus 144 cubitorum. Mensura hominis que est Angeli.— Sic quando ait simpliciter Numerus hominis est, intelligi● Hu●es numeri & ●ecipiendi & intelligendi hominem esse capacem. Scripter Anonymous in Commentaries de Bestia Apocalyptica pag, 140 & 141. Bibliotheca B●d. Oxon. M. 12, 16. Tho. others expound it, not only such a number, but such a computation, and counting, as is known unto men, & such as is commonly used among them. And that these words were not added to signify, that Antichrist should be a man, and one individual person, as the Papists would have it, not only Cotteriu●, but even Alchazar the Jesuit doth very well reason out of the words of the text. His words are these, Constructio illa non aptum videtur reddere sensum, sienimideò dictumfuit, [NUMERUS HOMINIS EST] ut Antichristus verus homo futurus affirmaretur, connexio literae haec erit; Qui habet sapientiam computet numerum nominis bestiae, quia Antichristus erit homo, atque adeò numerus eius erit numerus hominis, quae ratio minimè videtur apta. Nam quòd Antichristus sit homo futurus, nil deservit ad hoc, ut computetur, vel non computetur numerus eius. That is, that manner of construction seems not agreeable to reason; for if it were therefore said, it is the number of a man, that it might be affirmed that Antichrist was a very man, than the coherence, and sense must be this, Let him that hath wisdom, count the number of the name of the beast, because Antichrist shall be a man, & so his number shall be a man's number. Which kind of reasoning seems not at all to be probable; for that Antichrist shall be a man, it conduceth nothing either to the counting, or to the not counting of his number. Thus much Alchasa● in 13 cap. Apoc. By whose words it may be observed, that the evidence of truth made him so bold, as to confute that interpretation of th●se words which most Papists would have generally to be received. And here with all submission to better judgements, I hope I may without offence to any man, set down cursorily, that opinion which I suppose most probable, concerning the two Beasts, and the image of the Beast, mentioned in this 13 cap. of the Revelation. I conceive the first Beast with the wounded head, not to be that temporal power of the Roman Emperors, which they have exercised since the time of Constantine the great: but to be that temporal power of the Roman Emperors, which since that time hath been usurped by the Popes. For I believe that the Bishop and clergy of Rome shortly after the days of Constantine the great, did either by his donation, or by their own usurpation, when the Emperor was absent and taken out of the way, hold & usurp, for a short time at the least, even a temporal principality in and over the city of Rome, and the territories adjoining; and this temporal principality, wealth, and riches which the Popes and clergy of Rome then had, was the beginning of their greatness. And by this temporal greatness, I do not mean such subordinate Titles, Dignities, and maintenance, as were in those times by Emperors & Kings bestowed upon many other Christian Bishops, but such dominion and principality as is incompatible with the ministers of the Gospel, & such as Bellarmine speaks of, when he saith, that the same Ecclesiastical person may be both an Ecclesiastical and a temporal Prince. Many reasons and a Rab Abraham Levita, dicit Constantinum Româ c●ssisse camque Sacerdotibus E l●mcorum reliquisse▪ Et Ab●n Ezrain Dan. dicit, Constantinus dec●ravit lo●ii Romae quae erat sedes ejus & reliquit cum iniquitati quae voca●ur Petrus, etc. Angel: Rocca in Bib. Vatic. pag. 183. E piscopatus Romanus non aliter atque Alexandrinus quasi extra Sa cerdotii sines egr●ssus, ad secularem principa●um erat jam ante delapsus. Socrat Histor. Eccles. lib. 7. cap. 11. probabilities may be alleged to prove that the Bishops of Rome had such temporal dominion before the Goths and Vandals did overrun Italy. Most Papistsdoe willingly acknowledge it, and it is easily proved against all those that do acknowledge the donation of Constantine. And although the donation of Constantine be forged in many things, yet not perhaps in all. And if it be wholly forged, yet it is an argument that the Bishops of Rome had possession of some such temporal power in those ancienter times: for why else was it forged, but to prove that their ancestors had right to such things, as it was then undeniable, that they did formerly possess? This temporal power and principality over the city of Rome, did succeed the government of the Roman Emperors in Rome (who were the sixth head, that was in the time of S. John) and did receive a deadly wound, perhaps partly by some Emperors, and perhaps partly by some seditious tumults of the Citizens, but chief by the incursions of the Goths and Vandals, who endeavoured to erect a new form of government in Rome, and did so far effect it, as was necessary for the deadly wounding of the Pope's dominion, but yet could not so utterly abolish it, but that it revived again afterwards. This temporal dominion being revived and having the exarchy of Ravenna, and many other things added unto it, became formidable to all other temporal Princes, and to the Emperor himself, whom I account one of those ten Kings which was to give his power to this Beast. Of this temporal power Funecius speaks where he saith, Ex hoc tempore Papae in Italia domini, subinde quaesiverunt, quo modo potentiam suam stabilirent: donèc tandem à Pipino, maximam Italiae partem, quam vi subegerant, dono acceperint. After which time the Bishop & clergy of Rome usurping and enjoying without controlment this temporal principality, and being assisted with the obedience of other temporal Princes (some of whom they forced to obey them by their dragonlike power, and some they deceived by working miracles, and by the efficacy of error) began now to seek out some better title than his own usurpation and the donation of Princes, by which he might now establish himself and the Sea of Rome in his temporal principality. And considering that some of his predecessors having mouths speaking great things, did begin to clay me to themselves universal Ecclesiastical jurisdiction over the whole world, he resolved that it was his only way actually to settle such universal Ecclesiastical power on himself, as was rather claimed then possessed by his predecessors. And seeing that he could have no good title to such an universal Ecclesiastical power as he aimed at, either as he was a Bishop, or as he was an Archbishop, or as he was a Patriarch, he was therefore necessitated to make the people believe that he was the Vicar of Christ, and that in this he succeeded S. Peter, who derived from Christ this great authority peculiar to himself and his successors. And now having derived this great power to himself by authority of the holy Scriptures & by divine right, (as he makes the world believe,) he is now become a Beast having two horns like the Lamb, that is, two powers both Temporal, and Ecclesiastical; Ecclesiastical directè, and Temporal indirectè over all kingdoms in the world. First therefore, this unlawful temporal power which the Bishop of Rome first usurped I conceive to be the first Beast whose head was wounded, & I believe that the Bishops of Rome were even in those times, before they usurped any unlawful Ecclesiastical power, the Antichrist, not in respect of their Ecclesiastical or Episcopal power, but in respect of that their unlawful temporal power above mentioned. Secondly, I conceive the second Beast mentioned, Revel. 13. 11. to be that unlawful universal Ecclesiastical power which these latter times have settled upon the Pope; and I believe that he is the Antichrist, not as Bishop, or as Archbishop, or Patriarch, but as he pretends himself to be Pope & Vicar of Christ having such a transcendent Ecclesiastical power as is incommunicable to any other upon earth. This Ecclesiastical power doth now include in it efficaciter although indirectè, all that temporal power which the first Beast had, and all other temporal power besides it. And for this reason the second Beast is said to exercise all the power of the first Beast in his presence. For so the Pope continuing still a temporal Prince and Bishop of Rome, holdeth now all that temporal power and dominion, by virtue of his unlawful Ecclesiastical power, which for divers hundreds of years, the Bishops his predecessors were formerly content to hold, only by the pretended and perhaps forged donations of Constantine and other Princes. Now lastly, as touching the Image of the Beast, I suppose that to be the person of the Pope for the time being: especially he being considered as he is Vicarius Christi; for in this respect the Cardinals and others his followers do flatly adore him when he is elected, and do teach such Adoration to be due unto him. And this worship and adoration which is given unto him, although it be not sufficient to Qui singit sacros auro vel marmore vultus Non facit ille deos, Qui regat ille facit. transform him really and truly into such a Vicar of Christ as they pretend him to be: yet it is sufficient to transform him really and truly into such an Image and such an Idol as is in the text described. These things I have set down Obiter, and briefly to show that these two Beasts, and the Image of the Beast do all concur to the making up of that one great Antichrist, whose city, State, and Kingdom are described by the Beasts number, and to show how unprobable it is that all these things should be meant of one particular man as the papists would have Antichrist to be. It were an easy thing to confirm the same truth by many testimonies, both of protestants, and papists. But because it is certain and evidently proved by many learned writers that the great and chief Antichrist should not be one person only, but a state of government, or body politic, I will therefore recite here the words of Cotterius only, a late writer, who as I conceivereasoneth unanswerably to the same purpose in his commentaries upon the 13 cap. of the Apoc. where he speaketh in these words, Numerus enim hominis est: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quasi hic appellatio hominis Antichristo tribueretur; De bestiâ agitur, cui appellationem bominis competere repugnat; vult igitur Scriptura numerum bestiae ejusdem esse speciei cum nostrate; numeri enim ratio una non est: nos res nostras ad decadum, & centuriarum, & chiliadum, & myriadum rationes exigimus, quid ni veró angeli alias numerorum contabulationes sequantur? That is, for it is the number of a man, or of Man, not of this man, or that man, or any particular man, as if the name of a man were here attributed to Antichrist. The Prophet speaketh of the Beast, to whom the name and appellation of a man cannot agree. The meaning therefore is, that this number of the Beast is of the same kind, that other numbers are, which are used by us, that are men, and inhabitants of this world. For all numbering is not after the same manner; we that are men number our things by ten, & by hundreds, & by thousands, and by ten of thousands; but why may not Angels rank and dispose unities according to other progressions & proportions? For as much then, as this number is the number of a man, that is, a number of the same kind that other numbers are, that are Used by men, therefore we cannot doubt, but the computation, and counting of this number is such a kind of computation, as is usual among men▪ I ask therefore what it is, to count a number after the manner of men? And, what literal and grammatical sense can be given of these words, except they be understood of such a kind of computation, as is both usual among men, and proper to numbers only? but there is no other way whereby men usually do, or properly can be said to count numbers, but by such a kind of computation, which either is, or is reducible unto one of these following; namely either by Addition, or Substraction, or Multiplication, or Division, or by the extraction of Roots: and therefore it is absolutely necessary, that the number of the Beast must be counted according to one of these kinds of computation. But in all these kinds of computation, and in every one of them, the end and scope is, by one or more numbers given, to find out one other number, which was not known nor could be expressed before the computation was performed. And hence it followeth necessarily, that if the number of the Beast must be counted, then there must be some other number found out by it, beside the number itself, which is named and expressed. And this inference is so evident, & necessary, that some learned interpreters (although they aimed not at Ia●s B●●c●rd▪ any particular application) have by the words of the text, and by their own well grounded conjectures, and great sagacity fore▪ seen, and foretell, that there was some other number beside the number 666 to be understood in this place, by the number of the Beast. And this may appear by the words of Rupertus upon this place, where he writeth thus, Hic sapientia est, qui habet intellectum computet, etc. Quid hoc est, quod & numerum praescribit ipse, & tamen dicit, qui h●bet sapientiam computet numerum bestiae? qualem numerum? vel quare computet numerum Bestiae? numerus enim, inquit, hominis est, & numerus eius 666▪ quid hoc est quod & numerum praescribit ipse, & tamen dicit, qui habet sapi●ntiam computet numerum Bestiae? Num hoc intendit, ut computando sapientèr hoc totum perquiras, quot in isto numero fint monads, aut certè decades, etc. And a little after this anxious disquisition about counting this number, he concludes in these words, Duos ergo numeros hic intelligi oportet, alterum nominis eius, five Dei: alterum Bestiae, five hominis. That is, Two numbers therefore must be understood in this place, one being the number of the Beasts name, or of God; the other of the Beast, or of man, for God's number is not the same with man's number. By which words I know not what else can be understood, but this; That the number 666 is not only the number of the Beasts name, but also the number of God, that is, it is a number which God hath pleased to name, and reveal to men, that by counting of this number, they might find out that other number, which it pleased not God, expressly to name in this place, but rather mystically to conceal, because it is more properly the number of the Beast, than this, which is the number of his name. To these words of Rupertus may be added the like testimony of Pet. Bongus in his book de numerorum mysteriis, where writing of the same place of Scripture, and of the number 666 he hath the like words, Duos ergo numeros hic intelligi oportet, etc. two numbers therefore must here be understood, etc. Now therefore it being evident, that by counting of this number there ought some other number to be found out, the next thing to be inquired after, is, what kind of computation ought here to be used. For although it be granted, that this number must be counted, and that it cannot be counted, but that there must some other number be found out by it, yet for as much as numbers may be counted divers ways, (as is above said) and there may be divers numbers found out by them, a reason may well be demanded, why this counting of the number should be restrained to the extraction of the root only, rather than to any other kind of computation? To which I might answer, that the example of the opposite number (which is to be counted after this manner) is a sufficient reason; but I do rather answer that this restriction is not only probable, but absolutely necessary, because there is only one number named and expressed in the text. For if any other kind of computation had been intended, two numbers at the least ought to have been expressed. For neither Addition, nor Substraction, nor Multiplication, nor Division can be performed, but there must be two numbers at the least given; that by them a third, that is, either a Totum, or a Remainder, or a Product, or a Quotient may be found out; but in the extraction of Roots, one number only ought to be expressed whose root is to be extracted: and for this cause it is flatly against the literal, and the grammatical sense of the words of the text, to understand any other immediate computation or calculation by them. It were an imperfect speech to say, here is wisdom, let him that hath understanding add the number of the Beast, for it is the number of a man, & his number is 666, and yet not to declare what number it is to which this should be added. So likewise if it had been said, Let him that hath understanding subtract the number of the Beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666; it would be demanded from what number it should be subtracted: or if it had been said, Here is wisdom, let him that hath understanding multiply the number of the Beast, or divide the number of the Beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666; who seeth not how ambiguous, and imperfect the speech is; because there is no number expressed or intimated by which it should be multiplied or divided? But if it had been said, Here is wisdom, let him that hath understanding extract the root of the number of the Beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666, this is an entire and perfect speech of itself, and such as must of necessity be understood in this place: because there is no other way by which men either properly can, or usually do count one number only, but only by the extraction of the root of it. CHAP. 11. What it is to extract the square root of a number? That 25 is the number that is the root of 666; and remarkablely opposed unto 12. Some objections answered concerning the fractions of the root of 666. AND thus having hitherto proved by the example of the opposite number, and by the words of the text, that the root of this number ought to be extracted; I come now from quod fit, to quid fit, from proving that is to be extracted, to show what it is to extract it. To extract the square root of a number given, is to find out the greatest number, which being multiplied into itself and having the fractions added to the product, (if there be any fraction remaining) maketh the first number. And how this is to be performed I need not here relate; it is sufficiently declared by such as have written of Arithmetic. And although many learned, and worthy Divines (whose books I account myself not worthy to bear) are perhaps ignorant of it: yet is this kind of Mathematical learning called wisdom in Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, Act. 7. 22. the Scriptures, and in this may consist one part of that wisdom and understanding, which is in the words of the text required for the finding out of this mystery. Let him therefore that hath this skill in humane Arts, and Sciences, and let him that hath understanding to extract the roots of numbers, extract the root of the Beasts number, and he shall find that fatal number to be 25, and that the fractions remaining are 41: and that this is proved by multiplying 25 by itself, which makes 625, and by adding the fractions which are 41 unto 625, both which numbers added together, make the just sum 666. And although the root of this number, not being a simple root, as the root of 144 is, must in strictness of speech be expressed by more a of which the first i● Cardinal number, and the fractions are expresse● by an ordinal number. numbers than one, yet there can be no doubt or question which of those numbers must be the number answerable and opposite to 12. The root of 666 may be said to be 25 41/51 or else, to express it more exactly, it may be said to be 25 25/31: or it may be said to be 25 806/1000 or 25 8069758/10000000 nay any number whatsoever may be made one of those numbers by which the fractions may be expressed. But howsoever the number of the fractions be variable, yet the number ●5 is always constant and the same, as 12 is in the opposite root. And as 12 is the greatest number, and the least number, and the only number of unities of the same denomination with the number 144, (which is or can be contained in) the root of 144: so 25 is the greatest number, and the least number, and the only number of unities of the same denomination with the number 666, (which is or can be contained in) the root of the number 666. And this sicut similitudinis is sufficient to establish an evident antithesis between the two great Cardinal numbers of these two roots, although in respect of the fractions there be no sicut aequalitatis between them. And whether the fractions be added or not added to 25, yet they can neither augment, nor diminish the root, no not so much as by one unite, as it is sufficiently known to those that know what fractions are. It is no good argument to say that 25 is not opposed to 12, because 2● hath fractions appendent to it, and 12 hath not; for, Omne simile est etiam dissimile, and by the same reason it might be said, that the 12 Apostles are not answerable to the 12 patriarchs, because the Apostles had some privileges or defects which the patriarchs had not. Or that the Cardinals are not answerable to the Apostles in the Romish Hierarchy, because they have red hats, which Jbelieve the Apostles had not. Besides, it is often times an usual and ordinary thing, etiam praxi mathematicâ, in many arithmetical operations, to cast away, and not to regard the fractions of roots, because the root or Cardinal number itself is of sufficient exactness to prove or effect the conclusion, which is desired; nay sometimes and in some cases, when roots of numbers are to be extracted, they cannot make the fractions to be useful to their purposes, though they would. For suppose a captain have 666 men under his command, and would reduce them to a square figure of equal sides and ranks: to effect his purpose he must extract the root of 666, which he would find to be 25 41/51, and by that he would conclude that he must of necessity take the number 25 to be the number of ranks, and the number of men in every rank, and no other number would serve his turn. As for the 41 odd men he must reject them as unuseful, if he will have his army exactly square. The number 50 is no equilateral square number, and yet S. Augustine upon the 150 Psalm & else where maketh the mystery of this number to consist in the root of it which is 7 without any scruple of any fraction: and it were easy to set down many authors which interpret the same and other numbers after the same manner. Seeing therefore it is usual among men in many cases, and necessary in some, not to regard the fractions, but only the Cardinal number in the extraction of roots; why then may we not do likewise in extracting the root of 666? why may we not consider the number 25 first by itself, and as it is the only Cardinal number opposed to 12, by which the root of 666 can be truly expressed; and afterwards as it hath relation to the fractions, especially being the unities of the root of this number are sometimes to be applied to Persons, who are things indivisible into parts or fractions, as are also the unities of numbers essentially and absolutely considered. And the truth is, that no number of fractions, as fractions, is properly a part of any root essentially considered: for howsoever it be true that fractions, being reduced to some certain denomination, do more exactly show the side of a square figure as it is quantitas continua, yet it cannot be proved that they are any proper essential part of the root itself as it is quantitas discreta. For the fractions of a root do suppose every unity in the root to be divided into many parts, and the number itself, whose root is to be extracted, to be resolved into another number fare greater than itself. And the fractions (if it be well considered) are rather part of the root of the second number into which the first is supposed to be resolved, then of the root of the first number which was to be extracted. As for example the root of 666 is 25 806/1000 which fractions do suppose every unity of 666, to be multiplied into one million; and every unite of the root 25 to be multiplied into one thousand: for if the figures of the root and of the fractions be joined together they do make 25806. which number is the true root of 666000000 so that 806, (being now unities of the same denomination with the number 666000000,) are more properly a part of the root of 666 millions, then of the root of 666 unities. And by this it may be observed and understood, that while w● do ●e●ke after ordinal numbers, more exactly to express that root whose Cardinal number we have already found out, we do nothing else in effect (although many times we consider it not) but seek after the Cardinal number of another root whose fractions, being now the fractions of a greater number, are not at all, or not so much to be regarded. By these considerations it may sufficiently appear, that that Cardinal number which is the exact root of the greatest square number contained in any number given, whose root is to be extracted, is the number which is most remarkable and chief sought after in the extr●ction of every root; for this number is, and is to be reputed, not only the root of the greatest square number contained in the number given, but al●o of divers other numbers which do exceed it, but yet with this difference, that it is the root of the square number without fractions, and o● o●he● numbers with fractions added to it. A●d that the same Cardinal number with a little difference of fractious, should be the ro●t● o●●●● numbers then one and of ●ny numbers▪ 〈◊〉 i● a thingth ●●ose which are not 〈◊〉 ver●●● in the ●●t●action of roots, do neither co●●●●●r nor well understand: and this ●●●s them 〈◊〉, that because 25 is the ●oo●● o● 〈◊〉 th●t therefore it i● not the root of 666. But such should consider that one reason why these kinds of numbers are called roots, is, because every such number, is in this respect like unto the root of a tree; for as one root hath many branches growing upon it, and issuing from it, although some grow nearer the root then others: so the same number may be the root of divers other numbers, which have all a real, and yet a differing dependence upon it. And although ascending upward, there be no infallible direction from the root to any one particular branch, yet descending from the top of any one branch, there is certain and infallible direction to the same root: and so whosoever shall go to extract the root of any number greater than 624 and less than 676, according to such rules of art as are, and have hitherto been commonly taught, and generally received, shall be infallibly directed, not to the number 26, but to the number 25, & to that number only, as unto the only Cardinal number first sought after in the extraction of all roots; & this number either by itself, or having some fractions appendent to it, is the true root of all such numbers as are included between those two numbers above mentioned Neither is it usual or possible truly to express any root that hath fractions, by any other Cardinal number, but only by that number which being multiplied into itself produceth the greatest square number contained in that number, whose root is to be extracted. And although there be divers other numbers besides this number 666, by any one of which we might have been infallibly directed to this number 25, as unto the only Cardinal number by which their roots could have been expressed: yet there is no one of those numbers but only the number 666, whose most perfect figure doth represent the figure of Rome, as the most perfect figure of the number 144 doth represent the figure of Jerusalem: and for this reason chief, and for divers others (as shall be showed abundantly in due place) it was both convenient, and necessary, that this number 666 should be chosen rather than any other. But if it be objected, that the root of 666 is nearer to 26, than 25; yet I answer that it cannot be truly said to be 26, but is truly said to be 25: and that not only because 25 is contained in this root, as are also all other numbers less than 25, but because 25 is the greatest number of unities of the same denomination with the number 666, contained in this root. And that I may express this the more clearly I will make it plain by an instance, and because there is only a threefold ambiguity incident to the expression of such roots as have fractions, I will therefore suppose the same question to be proposed to three several men concerning the length of one side of an exactly square figure containing precisely 666 foot of square measure. The fi●st being asked how many foot in length one side of this figure must be, would perhaps say 25, because that is the greatest number of feet contained in it. The second being asked how many foot in length one side of this figure must be, would perhaps say 26, because the exact length is needest unto it. The third being asked the same question, would perhaps say, that it was neither 25 foot long nor 26, but that it was nine or ten inches more than 25, ●nd two or three inches less than 26. The first of these three answers is clearly and evidently true, for 25 is the greatest number and the least number, and the only number of feet by which that length can be expressed. The second answer is clearly and evidently false, for if that length, which wanteth above two inches of 26 foot, had lacked but one inch or one small part of an inch, it could not then have been ●ruly said to have been 26 foot long, and whosoever taketh proximum vero, pro vero, in this kind, 'tis plain that he taketh falsum pro vero, falsehood for truth. The third answer is impertinent, and not to the purpose, for the question propounded, was not how many inches, but how many foot long one side of that figure was. Neither ought the question to have been any other ways propounded; because in the extraction of all roots, the first number sought after, is a Cardinal number, and not an ordinal number, a number of such parts of which every one may be said to be an integrum, and not a number of fractions, which result of themselves without seeking after, when this first number is found out. And as afore the fractions, I have already showed, that they cannot darken the remarkableness of the number 25, nor disannul that antithesis, which is and aught to be between this number and that number, which is opposite unto it. Yet if any number, by which the fractions of this root may be expressed, be more remarkable and rather to be chosen then another: then without question it is that number, by which the fractions may be most exactly expressed by fewest figures, and by such numbers as do leave fewest fractions of fractions remaining. And certainly it seemeth strange and wonderful to me, neither do I think it merely accidental, that the number 25, should so exactly express the fractions of the root of 666, as that no other number less than it or near unto it, can so perfectly express them. For neither 41/●1 nor 806/1000 do so exactly express the fractions of the root of 666 as 25. 25/31 nay although those 25. 25/ ●1. ●●/60. numbers be infinite by which the fractions of this root may be expressed, yet I believe there is not any one of them which leaveth so small a number of fractions, as this number doth. And although numbers and their roots be infinite in number, yet that there should be any other number besides this number 666, the fractions of whose root may be so exactly expressed by the Cardinal number of its own root with any denominator whatsoever, as the fractions of the root of 666, are by 25; this is such a thing as I conceive to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a thing that cannot happen to be found out, although I will not say 'tis absolutely impossible. But in the mean time until some such number shall be produced, whose root may be after the same manner, and with the like exactuesse expressed, shall be fare from thinking that this happeneth casually and accidentally; but shall believe rather, that as the doubling of Pharaohs dream was an argument of the certainty of that which was signified by it: so because this number 25 is in a double respect remarkable in the root of 666, (first, in that it is the only Cardinal number of the prime or Cardinal unities: and secondly, in that it is the only number of ordinal unities or fractions, by which that root can be by fewest figures most exactly expressed) I do therefore conclude, that it is a certain and established truth, that this number twenty five is that fatal and unfortunate number of Antichrist opposed to the number 12, and that in an higher nature, & in a greater degree of opposition than 666 is opposed to 144, it being that very number which as it is most apparently and remarkably applicable to the City and Hierarchy of Antichrist, so is it also chief intended by the number 666: although it pleased the wisdom of God to seal it up in a mystery, and as it were to lock it up in the cabinet of a greater number, until that time came which God had appointed for man's reason to unlock this cabinet, by the key of computation, and so to take out this so long hidden number, by which Antichrist is (as it shall be showed) most evidently, and miraculously described. For if this number had been expressly named in this place to have been the number of the Beast, or if that mystical Babylon, in which Antichrist reigneth, had been measured in the Scriptures by this number 25, as the new Jerusalem is by the number 12, then there had been no mystery at all contained in it; than it had been so plainly set down, that Antichrist would have prevented it. For as it is not probable that ever any Pope will now choose such a name, whose numeral letters shall make the just ●umme 666, (because some men suppose that this number is so to be applied:) so neither is it likely that Antichrist would ever have chosen and affected this number 25 above, and before any other number, to be the only conspicuous, and remarkable number in the foundation of his Hierarchy, except the wisdom of God, who taketh the wise in their own craftiness, had sealed it up in a mystery in such sort that they should not understand it, as long as they had any possibility either to alter it or to deny it. For even so hath it come to pass in the Hierarchy of the Romish Clergy, that their ancestors have fatally, and unwittingly laid the foundation of the Papacy upon this number 25, and have made this number so particularly applicable to their City, and to themselves in all those material circumstances, in which the number 12 is applicable either literally to the city Jerusalem, or spiritually to the Church of God, and Hierarchy thereof; that no policy is now sufficient to cover it, nor their own impudence (with any show of probability) to deny it. CHAP. 12. That the number 25 hath been conceived to be a fatal and ●nfortunate number, by such, as knew no relation that it h●d to Antichrist, or to the number 666. AND now that I may come nearer to 〈◊〉 this number to the Papacy, I will first show ●hat as 12 is a good, and perfect number always taken in a good sense, in the Scriptures: ●o 25 is an unfortunate number in it ●●lfe, and that it hath been branded for an evil and unlucky number both by profane, and sacred writers, although they knew no relation that it had either to Antichrist, or the number 666. It is observed by Vince●tius that this number 25 is imparitèr impar ●●●rus qui impari numero imparitè● mensuratur, that is, an oddly uneven number, which is unevenly measured by an odd number. Others have observed, and proved both by reason and authority that the number of five is a fatal number, and that all numbers either ending in five, or made by it are evil, and unhappy also. Petrus Bongus, in his book de numerorum mysteriis, observeth & showeth that this number 25, which doth not only end in five, but is made by the multiplication of five by five, is mysteriously evil. His words are these, Hinc factum est, ut hoc numero 25 Hieroglyphicè notarentur qui illecebris, & voluptatibus hujus vitae dediti semetipsos rebus creatis manciparunt:— porrò, constat hic numerus de quinario, qui neque tetragonus, neque triangulus, neque cubus, neque perfectus est. And in another place he saith, numerus 25 duas duntaxat habet partes aliquotas nempe 1, & 5: pari modo quinarius cùm sit primus incompositus solâ numerabilis est unitate. Sic etiam ex diametro distans à perfectione, unde in vineâ domini infructuosos significat. But it is yet more remarkable which S. Hierome observes out of the Scriptures, concerning this number 25, in his commentaries upon the 11 cap. of Ezekiel, where speaking of this number he saith, Et quantum non subterfugit memoriam meam, nunquam in bonam partem potui hunc numerum reperire; licet in numeris ad sacerdotale ministerium à 25 annis eligantur; In Hebraeoenim non habent hunc numerum, sedtricenarium. And not S. Hierome only, but divers other interpreters upon the 8 and 11 cap. of Ezekiel, have made the like observations of this number. Lyra of the 25 men their mentioned, saith, Per quos significantur Apostatae à fide, vel à religione, maximè quandò sunt in suà maliti â firmati, quae significatur per numerum 25, qui numerus est quadratus, quià resultat ex ductu quinarii in seipsum. And Petrus Serranus, in his commentaries upon the same vision of Ezekiel, writeth after this manner; Ita ut potestati libidinum & cupiditatum vita omnis permissa sit: hoc autem malum signat sacer Propheta cùm 25 viros in portà orientali se vidisse asserit. Numerum enim quinarium, quo sensus hominis clauduntur, nunquam in bonam partem accipi legitur in Scripture â, ut Divus Hieronymus testatu●; etsi pluriès indifferenter inveniatur, undè totius populi lapsus vigesimoquinto numero hoc l●co significatur. If it be demanded what universal defection and what Apostasy this is from faith and religion by men confirmed in their own malice, which ●yra, and Serranus acknowledge to be typed out by this number 25, it may be well answered that there is none more probable than that defection, and universal Apostasy which was to come upon the Church of Christ at that time, when Antichrist was to sit in it. For because this vision was not literally fulfilled, or not fully terminated in the Jewish Church (as it cannot but appear to those that seriously consider it) therefore S. Hierome (as in this following treatise shall be showed) and many others do not only understand it of some defection, and Apostasy, which was to be among Christians, but do also apply it even particularly to the Synagogue of Rome. John Husse, in his book de revelatione Christi & Antichristi, saith of this vision after this manner: Mysticam meretricem Scriptura describens, eius excessum notificat, Ezek. 8. cap. de viris in templo qui stabant ante picturas. And Ecolampadius, after a particular application of the chief things contained in this vision, to the Monks, Friars, and Nuns of the Romish Church, hath these words, Et quid sibi vult haec visio, quàm quòd in Episcopis & doctoribus abominationes maximas ultimò cernat? And of those words, Et sunt circitèr viginti quinque, he saith,— Quid aliud his doce●ur, quàm nihilillos perfecto animo agere? understanding by the word illos, those Prelates of the Church of Rome, of whom he had before spoken. I might here add the words of Gaspar Sanctius, and others concerning this number upon the same occasion; but, as I conceive, these are sufficient to make it evident, that this number Twenty five is not only (even by the testimony of the Scriptures) an hieroglyphical character of some unhappy, desperate, and deplored estate of God's Church, but also hath been conceived by religious, wise, and learned men, mystically and typically to foreshow that quintessence of impiety and malice, which these latter times have discovered in the Church of Rome. Now therefore for as much as it is agreeable to other places of Scripture that this number 25 should be in some special manner applicable, both to Antichrist, and the Church of Rome: I may with the greater confidence proceed to the particular application, hoping by it, and upon the grounds above proved, to find out such an accurate and essential description of the Papacy, as shall not seem unprobable to have been intended by the holy Ghost: much less shall it be prejudicial to any man's wisdom to believe it. CHAP. 13. Of the nature, and quality, of those particulars, in which the root and the figure of the Beasts number is to be applied to the Papacy. AND now concerning those particulars in which this number is to be applied to the Papacy; it is to be remembered what is above said of the number 12, and of those things to which it is applied. For as Antichrist is opposed to Christ, and as 666 is opposed to 144; so is 25 opposed to 12, and so must those things which are chief to be measured or numbered by this number 25 be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ex adverso respondentia, that is correspondent, answerable on the other side, and in some sort opposed to, or set over against those things which are measured, numbered, or described by the number 12. And (as I am persuaded) for this Cause partly is the Church militant, in the 21 Chapter of the Revel: measured, numbered, and described by these two numbers only 144 and 12, that there might be an express example in the Scriptures not only showing in general how the number 666, aught to be interpreted; but also leading us (as it were) by the hand to those particulars, in which the root of this number ought principally to be applied. And although perhaps it were a sufficient application, and as much as some Readers would expect, and more than any Papist can confute, to heap together a greater number of particulars, in which this number 25 is rather applicable unto the Romanists, than it is to any other estate, Church, or sect; or then any other number is to themselves, and to their state: yet this is fare short of that most exact and exquisite application, which seemeth chief to be intended by the Holy Ghost. Indeed the frequent occurring of this number in things pertaining to the state, and Religion of the Romanists (as shall be showed in the second place, after I have proved the first, and chief application) may well be an argument, that either some secret destiny, which is in it; or their affectation of it, hath made it more proper to them, and more common among them, than any other number. Yet, if it were applicable to them in no more, nor in no other particulars, but in those only which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to those things, which are measured, numbered, or described by the number 12 in the 21 Chap. of the Revel. those only are abundantly and superabundantly sufficient, not only for an evident description, but for a remarkable, essential, and incommunicable definition as well of their City, as of their state and Hierarchy. For what can be either said, or imagined to be more essential, or remarkable either to, or in any city then the figure of it, the circuit of the walls, or compass of it, the number of the Gates, the number of the Churches, the number of Tribes, Wards, or Parishes into which it was first divided? And concerning the form of government (which is more properly a City, than the material structures) what can be said, or imagined, to be more essential to it, or remarkable in it: then the number, time, place, office, and in some sort the very name also of those persons, who are the very Basis and foundation of it, and the very hinges (as they themselves confess) on which their whole Hierarchy depends, and moves itself? As therefore the number 12 in the 21 Chap. of the Revel. is applied to the Church and Hierarchy thereof in such things as are most essential to it, and in such circumstances, as are most apparently remarkable in it: so the number 25 in like manner must be applied to the Papacy, and Pseudohierarchy thereof, in such things, as are most essential to it, and in such circumstances, as are most apparently remarkable in it. And as the number 12 is in that chapter after such an admirable and wonderful manner applied to the spiritual Jerusalem, that is to the Church and Hierarchy thereof, that the literal and material City, in which that Ecclesiastical Hierarchy was first established, is also by the same number plainly measured, and manifestly described: so ought also the number 25 to be in such sort applied to the mystical and spiritual Babylon; that the material City itself, in which that Pseudo-apostolicall Hierarchy hath been long since established, may be by the same number both truly measured, and evidently described. And for this cause it is absolutely necessary, that the Beast mentioned in the 13 Chap: of the Revel: which is Antichrist, must not be one person only (as the Papistsfalsly teach) but (as the latest a Although certain of the Scholastical Divines do say, that Antichrist shall be borne of the nation of the jews, and of the tribe of Dan etc. yet great learned men which with deep judgements have read the Scriptures, do write, that he shall not be one personal man only, but that under the name of Antichrist is meant and comprehended the whole kingdom of false teachers, bearing rule in the temple of God, and that in a great City which hath rule and dominion over the kings of the earth, Rapsodiae G. A. Bishop. of Exeter. pagina 287. Mis●ellan 25. and best writers do agree) must essentially consist of a certain number of such persons, as may be fitly answerable, b Antichristus habitu●us est suos Pseudo-apoilolos. Anselmus in 13. cap. Apoc. and opposite to Christ's Apostles, residing in some City answerable and opposite to Jerusalem. For how is it otherwise possible to interpret this number of the Beast, after the same manner, that that number which is opposed unto it is, and aught to be interpreted? How can we by counting the Beast's number find out the number of his Apostles, and the number of his Tribes, & the number both of the spiritual & material gates of his Church and City, & the figure and compass of it; except Antichrist shall have some City answerable to Jerusalem, and some Persons answerable to the Apostles, and essential to his Hierarchy ruling, and residing in it? CHAP. 14. That Rome is answerable to Jerusalem, and the Pope's Cardinals to Christ's Apostles. AND as this assertion must necessarily follow out of that which is above said, concerning the manner how this number ought to be interpreted, so is it evidently and apparently verified in the Papacy. a Alchasar upon the 21 cap. of the Rev. saith, Totam hujus prophetiae summam devolui ad Romae comparationem theologicam cum JERUSALEM; nomen Hierusalem hoc loco Romanae Ecclesiae attribui, veterem Hierusolimam nomen suum amisisse, illudquè novam ROMAM, id est, Romanam Ecclesiam comparâsse, utpote quae antiquae successit Hierysolimae, in eo quod fidelium omnium CAPUT & METROPOLIS sit effecta. Alchasar in disputat. de argumento 21. cap. For as Jerusalem truly was Caput, mater, gremium & ostium omnium Ecclesiarum, a Ex quo universe 〈◊〉 secunda Hierusalem ●●uit appellati, apud quam & Dominus (ad illius Robur cider) in Petro iterum crucifigi voluit, ubiquè unius Dei veneratio ac fides indeficiens, & Domini precibus & Petri favore ad ultimum usquè judicantis Domini adventum, in urbe sublimi & valente, ac in de veriore Hierusalem creditur permansura. O●●phrius Panvinius de praecipuis Urbis Romae basi●eis, pagina 265. Coloniae, 1584. And the same Onuphrius saith, pag. 138. that at Rome supra perist●●● extetiotis Basilicae Lateranensis porticus hi versus sunt, Dogmate Papali datur ac simul Imperiali, Quòd sim cunctarum ma●er, Caput Ecclesiarum. so doth Rome falsely pretend herself to be, and so Rome really, and truly is the mother of all spiritual whoredom, and abominations in respect of all those Churches which have been seduced by her. And as there is a clear and eminent Antithesis between Jerusalem and Rome, b Isidorus Moseonius lib. 1● de Cardinalibus (ubi enumerat appellationes Cardinalium magis proprias,) Cardinals, inquit, primo●n loco appellantur vi●●m gerentes Apostolorum. so is there also between Christ's Apostles, and the Pope's Cardinals; there being no persons in the whole world, of what rank, order, or degree soever styling themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vicem gerentes Apostolorum, as they do. They are the very substance, Soul, and Essence of the Papacy, and so nearly united to the Pope, that he accounts them as parts of his own body, c De donatis Papae Cardinales debent habere d●midium; Et Papa dimidium corum quae dantur Cardinalibus. Jacobatius de Concilijs, num. 173. Non possunt testari sine licentia Papae, & quia sunt pars corporis Papae non praestant juramentum fidelitatis, tanquam invis●●rati Papae. Jdem ibid. Item Papa habet singular 'em diligentiam de salute corporali Cardinalium: unde si Cardinalis infirmetur, non minuitur ei sanguis sine speciali Papae licentia. Idem, Numero 176. Cardinals in Ecclesia Romanâ unum corpus mysticum effecti sunt, & unum Collegium satro sanctum cum summo Pontifice constituunt. Hieronimus Manfredus de Cardinalibus cap. 5. Ecce illud Collegium, 〈◊〉 Apostolorum, Actuum 15, cujus in locum sacer Cardinalium Senatus submissus est, utroque consiliative & deliberativo munere praefultum. Alexander à Turre. lib 2º, 2 ae. Partis. pag. 82. Collegium Cardinalium dicitur Sacrosanctum Collegium Apostolorum, Ecclesiae gremium. jacobatius de concilijs. Num. 170. and they together with him make one complete College and Corporation, and one mystical Body, actually and eminently containing, upholding, and representing all power, and Ecclesiastical jurisdiction. They were instituted in the first most remarkable foundation of the Papacy by the Pope in the City of Rome, about the time of Constantine the great, in a Institutio Cardinalium figuralitèr habuit ortam ab institutione divinâ, exemplaritèr autem à Christo; expressa autem fuit facta tempore Pontiani & Marcelli Rom. Pont. propter baptisma. Gondisalvus Villadeigo tausarum olim Palatij Auditoris, in initio libelli de Origine Cardinalatûs. imitation of our Saviour Christ, who did in the first most remarkable foundation of his Church, erect the College of Apostles at Jerusalem, giving them a b The name which Christ gave to his Disciples was to be called Apostles, Luc. 6. 13. And the name which the Pope giveth to his best beloved disciples, is to be called Cardinals. For as Christ in his Church gave some to be Apostles, some Teachers, some Prophets, etc. 1. Cor. 12. 28. And, Ephes. 4. 11. So the Pope in the Romish Church hath given some to be called Cardinals, some jesuites, some Abbats; some Monks, some Friars, some Exorcists, some Acol●uts, etc. name, prefining their c The first limited number which Christ gave to his Apostles, was according to the number of the gates, and Tribes of Jerusalem; so the first limited and prefined number of the Cardinal●s was according to the number of the gates of ROME, and according to the number of those Divisions of the City and People of Rome, which the Popes have made answerable to the tribes of JERUSALEM, as shall be proved in due place. number, and declaring their d The Offi●●, and Commission, which Christ gave to his Apostles consisted in three things. First, The Administration of Baptism was committed chief and originally unto them. And although they did afterward commit this function unto others, yet they were first commanded to go and Baptise all nations, and as it were by the 12 gates of their Baptism to bring all true Israelites into the spiritual Jerusalem. So at the first institution of the Cardinals, their Office, and Commission was chief to baptise, and they were affixed to certain chief Churches in ROME, in which, and in which only baptism was to be celebrated. Secondly, the Apostles were to preach Christ, and to propagate and plant Christian Religion in all the world. So the Cardinals having quickly committed the celebration of Baptism unto others, employed themselves wholly to preach the Pope, and to plant and propagate Popery in all kingdoms of the world. Thirdly, Christ gave unto the Apostles the chief power to forgive and to detain sins; so likewise the Pope committeth the chief ●are and dispensation of his selling of pardons & indulgences unto the Cardinals, saying unto them as Christ to his Apostles, Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remi●tted, and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained. office, as the Pope hath since done to his Cardinals at Rome. As the Apostles truly were, and are the root and foundation of the Christian Church and of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction: so the Cardinals e For the order of Cardinals is a confessed innovation, as B. Morton showeth. And Antonius de Pratis affirmeth, CARDINALATUS non dicitur gradus nec Ordo Ecclesiasticae Hirarchiae à Christo institutae, nec gradui Apostolo●um succedens sicut Episcopatus & saccrdotium. De jurisdictione Episcopali, Num. 3o. Tom 3ᵒ Parte 2●. pag. 36●. falslypretend themselves to be, and so they truly are, and do in express words declare themselves to be the very f Cardinals sunt Bases Ecclesiae Gabriel Paleottus de descriptione Consistorii. Cardinals universi orbis regendi pondera sustinent, & super corum humeros totius Ecclesiae machin● imponitur Hieronymus Albanus de Cardinalibus, Questione ●●. Basis and g Alchasar in his Commentaries on the Revel: saith, The Pope useth to s●nd a Saphire stone to every new made Cardinal, to put him in mind that he is now one of those f●un●ation-stones which are mentioned in the description of the new JERUSALEM. foundation of the Romish Hierarchy. And therefore the Root and foundation of all that Superstition and Impiety, which being derived originally from Rome, hath been transfused through the whole body of the Christian Church. As it is the Privilege of the Apostles, to be as it were 12 stars set in that Crown, which is mentioned in the 12 Chapter of the Revelation; so is it an especial Privilege belonging to the Cardinals, to have their names written in the Crown of their Prince, as witnesseth a Cardinals sunt patrici● scripti in diade mate Principis. jacobatius. jacobatius de council. num. 153. There was a two fold state and Condition of the Apostles, first they were Apostoli urbis, affixed as it were to the City Jerusalem, where they were to abide until they were endowed with power from above: but afterwards they were Apostoli orbis, and were sent from thence into all kingdoms of the world: So likewise the Cardinals in imitation and affectation of the like honour are styled Cardinals Vrbis, & Orbis, and they remain, as it were affixed to the City of Rome, until they are endued with power from above, that is, until they are sent by the Pope as his Nuntios and legates into all kingdoms of the world. As the Apostles in respect of their spiritual fatherhood are fitly answerable to the 12 patriarchs, who are the fathers of all the Israelites according to the flesh: so the Cardinals are likewise called Patres Spirituales, affecting the like honour. As the Apostles, having supreme Authority in the Church, may in some sense be said to be the judges of the world, and to sit upon 12 Thrones to judge the 12 tribes of Israel; so the Cardinals make their a Cardinal. dicit Papa, Esto srater noster, & mua●i princeps— Consist orium enim Christi & Papae idem est censendum. Alexand▪ à Turte lib 1ᵒ 2ae Partis. pag. 35. Honour Regius humans; Pontificius certè divinus: Regum, terrestre de cousin; Pontificum coeleste▪ Majesty R●g●s minimè completa; Pontificis, numeris omnibus expleta: illa civilis & politica, haec super coelestis & sancta▪ Al●x. a Tur●e lib. 4ᵒ. pag 272. Idem pag 36. visionem throni Apo. 4ᵒ. Papae & Cardinalibus appheat, & coelesti Cherub. S●raphin. Consistory of their Apostolical Sea to admit of no appeal, but to be of such a celestial sublimity, that it is equal to the tribunal seat of God. And therefore they are styled Judices Orbis, and they do exercise all civil, & Ecclesiastical power over the city, and people of Rome: which either the patriarchs and Princes of the Tribes did in the literal, or the Apostles in the spiritual Jerusalem. Many other things might here be alleged to show how exact, and exquisite an Antythesis and Contra position there is between the Apostles, and Cardinals. It might be observed, that there is not one of those proper Appellations and Titles, which are usually attributed to the Cardinals: such as are these following. Patres Spirituales Vicem-gerentes Apostolorum. Senatores Papae Patres Purpurati. Patricij Mundi Principes judices Orbis Cardinals Vrbis & Orbis, and the like: There is not, I say any one of these Titles but the Cardinals may by it be proved either to be emulous of the like honour, which the Apostles had, or else to be the Image of such a kind of government, as was before their lives remarkable in the City of Rome. Both which Considerations (as by the way may be observed) are necessarily incident to the right discerning of that great Antichrist, who is not only to resemble some ancient government of Rome, but also * To be, or to be like that Synagogue of Satan as some interpreters conceive, Revel: 2, 2. 3. 9 to be that Synagogue of Satan mentioned in the Revel: which say they are Apostles, and are not. For as much therefore as there hath not been in any City answerable to Jerusalem, or in any other place, at any time since the Apostles lived, any state, Hierarthy, sect, or society of men, so confidently and yet so falsely, pretending, and arrogating themselves to have all fullness of power Apostolical annexed, and as it were appropriated unto themselves, as the College of Cardinals doth: I may therefore conclude that there are persons in the Papacy answerable to the Apostles, as Rome is to Jerusalem, & that if the Papacy be Antichrist, and if the number 666 be to be interpreted and applied after the same manner, which is above proved that it ought to be; then the first original number, and foundation of this College of Cardinals, must be typed out unto us by the square root of the number 666, as the first limited, and established number of the Apostles, is typed out by the square root of the number 144. CHAP. 15. That the first number of Cardinals according to their first institution and foundation is chief to be considered, as that which doth most remarkably Antichrist in his original. AND that only the first decreed, and established number of the College of Cardinals is typed out unto us, and plainly foretold by the root of the Beast's number: this is a fare more evident and remarkable description of Antichrist, then if any other number had been declared which should at any other time have been applicable unto them. For (as it is usually said) scire, is, per causas cognoscere, and as we cannot perfectly know any thing until we know what were the first original causes and beginnings of it, so this order of Cardinals (which beareth now so much sway in the Romish Church) and which is the very body and corporation of Antichrist) may be then perfectly discerned, when we know what it was in its first original and beginning. And for this cause it is that the holy Ghost in the description of the new Jerusalem useth chief such numbers and measures as were conspicuous and remarkable in the first apparent foundation of Christian Religion. For the wall of the new Jerusalem is said to have 12 foundations, not because the number 12, either in respect of the Apostles themselves, or in respect of Christian Bishops themselves (who are their lawful successors in so much of their authority as is necessary for the perpetual government of the Church) should be, at all times following, actually existent, and remarkable in the Church; but that by this one number, which is the root & Basis of another number, there might be an evident & strong allusion not only to the number, but also to the nature, quality, and office of those persons, from whom, as from the Root, the Church's Hierarchy doth originally proceed, upon whom it is fundamentally built, and in whom it was first apparently to be discerned. As therefore the number 12 is not applicable to the Hierarchy of the Church in respect of any one perpetual and constant number of Persons, which was always to continue, so neither aught the number 25 to be after this manner applicable to the Romish Hierarchy, but the true and exact application of it, ought chief to be terminated in the discovery, not only of the number, but also, of the nature, quality, & office of those Persons from whom their Pseudohierarchy did originally proceed, upon whom it was fundamentally built, and in whom and with whom it was first apparently to be discerned. Howsoever therefore it may perhaps at the first apprehension seem requisite, that according to this application which I am at, the number 25 ought to be the only constant, settled, and perpetual number of the Pope's Cardinals, or Apostles, which should at all times during the time of Antichrists continuance be actually applicable unto them; yet upon due consideration it must be granted, that such an application can neither be warranted by the example of the opposite number, which is applicable to the first number of the Apostles only; nor be agreeable to the nature of this type, which aims, not only at a certain number of unities, but also of such unities as are the root and Basis of other unities, which were to proceed from them, and to be built upon them; I say therefore, that it: must be granted that there is no necessity, nor any probability, that this number ought otherwise to be applied unto them, then in respect of that first decreed & established number, which was most conspicuous, and remarkable, & most exactly applicable unto them, in, and at the first foundation of their College, and in the first apparent and actual institution of their order. And that, not only the number of the 10 crowned horns mentioned in the Revelation, may be thus interpreted in respect of their first original only; but that also the number of the Beast ought to have special reference to the first original stock and image of Antichrist's Anti-Apostles, is a truth clearly discerned, and in general terms plainly expressed by a late learned interpreter of the Revelations, although he aimed not at the same particular application which I do. These things being now thus cleared and discussed in general, concerning the time, the place, and the persons which this number ought chief to ; and it being proved that Rome is answerable to Jerusalem; and that the Cardinals of Rome are those persons which may be fitly styled Anti-Apostles in the Romish Hierarchy; and lastly, that the time in which the root of the Beast's number ought to be applied to the Pseudohierarchy of Antichrist, must be in the first apparent and remarkable emersion of his Hierarchy: that so it may be like and answerable to that very nick of time, in which, and in which only, the root of the opposite number is actually applicable to the Hierarchy of the Church; these things, I say, being thus cleared and discussed, it remaineth now that I show by clear and evident testimonies, that as the College of Apostles did originally consist of 12 persons and no more, so the College and corporation of Cardinals in Rome, according to its first institution, & in the first apparent and remarkable foundation of the a That the first remarkable foundation of the Papacy was about 300 years after Christ, in or about the time of Constantine, is out of question. Then was that voice heard, hodiè seminatum est virus in Ecclesia. Then was the seat of the Empire taken out of the way, and removed from Rome to Constantinople, and then was Antichrist to come when the Roman Emperor was taken out of the way. Then do they pretend Constantine's donation to have been made. Then was the ancient purity of the Primitive Church decayed, then was the visible Hierarchy of the Christian Church almost quite extinguished by the violence of persecutions; for then as Baronius relates Anno 304. The persecuting Princes, velut gloriosae victoriae titulis de suba actis deletisque penitus Christianis columnas erexetunt. Cluniae enim in Hispania in nobili columnâ haec inscriptio legitur? DIOCLESIAN: JOVIUS etc. AMPLIFICATO por ORIENT. & OCCIDENT. IMPERIO ROMANO, & nomine Christianorum deleto. Rursus ibidem altera inscriptio. DIOCLESIAN. CAESAR AUGUST. SUPERSTITIONE CHRISTI UBI QUE deletá. i But because the Papacy began then suddenly to start up after these persecutions, therefore Baronius saith, fefellit planè spes vana principes, etc. Papacy, did consist of 25 persons and no more. CHAP. 16. A disquisition concerning other particulars, to which the number 12 is applied in the description of the new Jerusalem, and particularly of the 12 Gates, 12 Tribes, and 12 Angels. THat this truth may more plainly appear, it is requisite that something be first said briefly, and in general of those other particulars, to which the same number is also to be applied; for (as it is above intimated) all those particulars, to which the number 12 is applied in the description of the new Jerusalem, must have so many other particulars answerable and opposite to them, in that mystical Babylon to which the number 25 must be in like manner applicable. Now the number 12 is actually and expressly applied unto six several things, in the description of the new Jerusalem, which are these. 1 Twelve Gates. 2 Twelve Angels at the Gates. 3 Twelve Tribes written on the Gates. 4 Twelve foundations with names written on them. 5 Twelve thousand furlongs, the measure of the City. 6 Twelve manner of fruits of the tree of life. Notwithstanding that there is great difference among Interpreters, what these 6 things are, which are hereso expressly numbered, & described, and howthey aught to be applied to the Church: yet their divers interpretations (according to which every man aboundeth in his own sense) are rather helps then hindrances, for the right discerning and finding out of those things, which in the Romish Hierarchy are answerable unto them. For which way soever these things are to be understood, and according to what possible probability soever they may be interpreted, there are things in all senses answerable unto them in the Romish Babylon. If these Gates be literally to be understood of the gates of the material city Jerusalem; then the material gates of the City of Rome must be answerable unto them. And for a full application, in this sense, it shall be showed, that as the gates of Jerusalem were 12 in number, so the gates of Rome were 25 in number. But if those gates be also to be understood in a spiritual sense, which without all question is chief intended, and most exactly verified, than these gates must be understood to be the gates of the Church signified by Jerusalem. Now the gates of the Catholic Church (which is really and truly the Heavenly Jerusalem, may be said to be 12 divers ways. First, the Apostles themselves may be said to have been the 12 gates of the Church in respect of their faith and doctrine in general, because by their examples, and by the sincerity and truth of their life and doctrine, all other Christians have been converted to the true Religion. And in this respect the Cardinals of Rome, who make themselves answerable to the Apostles, and whose original number was 25, may be also said to have been the 25 gates of spiritual Babylon; because chief and originally, by their policy and hypocrisy, in laying the first foundation of Popery, all other Papists have been since persuaded, and invited to believe, and to embrace the Heresies and superstitions of the Church of Rome. But secondly, and in a more particular and proper sense, there may be said to have been 12 gates of the Church, because the administration of the Sacraments, & especially of Baptism (which is literally, and properly the gate of the celestial Jerusalem) was chief, & originally a Although others did baptise in the Primitive Church besides the 12 Apostles, yet they cannot be properly called the first gates of the Church, because these to whom this power was derived from the Apostles, were first baptised themselves by the Apostles. So that as Christ is truly and eminently said to be the foundation of that foundation which was laid by the Apostles, so the Apostles themselves are truly and eminently the first & chief gates of the Church, even in respect of those who have been since made (as it were) gates of the Church by their appointment, & by the fullness of their Commission & authority, which they di● all equally, and immediately receive from Christ as it appeareth in the Gospel. committed unto the 12 Apostles. And in this sense it shall be showed, that as in the first apparent beginning of Christianity, the administration of Baptism was originally committed unto 12 Apostles in the City of Jerusalem, which is therefore truly called Mater, gremium, & ostium omnium Ecclesiarum, the mother, the womb and the gate of all Churches; so in the first apparent beginning of Popery, the administration of Baptism was originally committed unto 25 Cardinals in the City of Rome, which city doth also style herself Mater, gremium, & ostium omnium Ecclesiarum, the Mother, the womb, and the gate of all Churches. Thirdly, these gates of the new Jerusalem seem to have special reference to those material Churches (or to those places which were then answerable to our Churches) wherein the Apostles did usually administer the word & Sacraments while they were in Jerusalem; for, as the Apostles are called gates, because administration of the word and Sacraments was performed by them, so Churches may be called gates, because these functions were performed in them. And as Baptism is truly said to be the gate of the Church, so according to the phrase of the Scriptures, that may be truly said of every particular Church or congregation which jacob once spoke of Bethel, Haec est domus Dei, haec Gen. 28. 17. est porta coeli: this is the house of God, this is the gate of heaven. And although those places in Jerusalem, wherein Christians first assembled themselves, were not such as our Churches now are (as neither was Bethel at that time when Jacob called it the gate of Heaven) yet it cannot be imagined, but that there were set congregations, which had some certain places to meet in, and several Pastors to instruct them: for as the Apostles divided the world as it were by line among themselves, so that one would not meddle within the compass of another's line, so it is to be conceived that the same Apostles, by whose precept or example Parishes and Dioceses in all places began to be erected, first in Cities, and then in Villages, did not confusedly and promiscuously perform all duties & Ecclesiastical functions among themselves; but that they did divide the City Jerusalem into 12 several Jurisdictions, Parishes or Divisions, and that they did in 12 several places administer the Sacrament of Baptism, and do all other religious duties which are now usually performed in Churches. These places were for the most part large upper rooms; such as that was which the Apostles prepared for our Saviour Christ to eat the Paschall Lamb in; these in those times were usually called a Ecclesia ante consecrationem propriè dicitur Basilica. Basilicae (which name hath been ever since retained, & showeth the true original from whence Christian Churches had their beginning) and these places were in those times really and truly Christian Churches, although, in respect of those which we now have, they were so but only as it were in semine & origine. Now forasmuch as this celestial Jerusalem is the type of the Christian Church universal, into which no man can have his entrance & admission, except it be by baptism, which ought always to be performed in some particular Church, or congregation, therefore every particular Church or Congregation, wherein this Sacrament is usually administered, may in this respect (as also in divers others) be truly said to be agate, by which men do usually and ordinarily enter into the spiritual Jerusalem. And because the first Christian Churches or congregations, which were at once and the same time instituted, and erected in Jerusalem by the Apostles, as patterns and platforms to all succeeding times and Cities, are presumed to have been 12 in number, according to the number of the 12 Apostles: therefore the number of the gates of the Christian Church universal, according to its first original and beginning (which time is chief aimed at in this whole description) are truly said to be twelve. And this I take chief, to be that literal verity, really and actually existing in the primitive Church, to which the twelve Gates of the new Jerusalem, have a plain and evident allusion. And this is farther cleared, because it followeth in the Text, that these Gates had 12 Angels placed at them, and the names of the twelve Tribes written on them. For first concerning the Angels, it is evident in this book of the Revelation that the Ministers of the Gospel are called the Angels of those Churches, which are committed unto them. If therefore these twelve gates be the first christian Churches, than the 12 Angels may fitly be said to be those 12 Pastors, to whom the charge of these twelve Churches was committed. For as touching Angels properly so called, which are ministering spirits, it is certain that the dispensation of the Gospel, is not committed unto Angels, but unto men; and that men, and not Angels, have power, and are appointed to baptise, and to excommunicate, that is, to admit in, and to cast out of the Church, and to open, and shut the gates of the heavenly Jerusalem. And for this cause it is plainly said in the 2 chap. of the Hebrews, verse 5. that God hath not unto Angels put in subjection the world to come; in which place the world to come, signifieth the renewed estate of the Church under the Gospel. Secondly, concerning the 12 Tribes, if the Gates be the first 12 Churches, and the Angels the 12 first Pastors, then questionless these Tribes, are the 12 first Ecclesiastical divisions, Titles, jurisdictions, or Parishes, into which the City and people of Jerusalem, in some sort were, and should in process of time have been more perfectly divided, if that City had not been destroyed, nor the Passage of the Gospel hindered. For it is to be considered, that this description of the new Jerusalem, is applicable to those times, by way of anticipation as it were, and rather in respect of that beauty and perfection, at which the primative Church then aimed, then in respect of that, unto which it had in those times attained. Nevertheless because it is evident by the Scriptures, that there was so great a number of believing Christians in Jerusalem at that time, that every Apostle might have had the charge of near 500 souls, it cannot therefore with any probability be imagined, but that they did distribute, and dispose themselves, and those believers, in as decent and convenient order, as those times would permit, and according to such Divisions, as did not only resemble, the 12 Tribes of the Jsraelites, (which were typical predictions of the Apostles times) but were also exemplary causes of the like Ecclesiastical divisions, namely, of Dioceses, and Parishes, which began immediately after the Apostles times to be erected in other Cities, and have been ever since continued in the Church. CHAP. 17. Of such Particulars in the mystical Babylon as are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the Gates, Tribes, Angels, and Foundations of the new Jerusalem. I Hope it is now sufficiently declared, what those things were in the primitive Church, to which the twelve Gates, the twelve Angels, and the twelve Tribes have a special allusion. The 12 Gates are 12 Churches or Congregations, in which the Sacraments and especially Baptism was administered. The 12 Angels are those 12 Pastors, to whom these 12 Churches were committed The 12 Tribes are those 12 Titles, or Parishes, or other divisions, into which the City and people of Jerusalem were divided. And all these things will be farther cleared, by that, which I shall now say, concerning those things, which are answerable, and opposite unto them in the Romish Babylon. And that not only, because— Contrariajuxta seposita magis elucescunt, contraries being placed together are the more easily discerned; but also, because the Church of Rome, by a pretended Imitation, but by a true and real Emulation, pretended herself to have been framed, and erected, after the example of the Church of Jerusalem, and to be a continual and perfect expression of it, even in respect of those things, which are above recited. Onuphrius de praecipuis Vrbis Rom: basilicis, in the second chapter, where he writes of the first Parishes, Churches, and Pastors, which were instituted and erected in the City of Rome, saith that Saint Peter came to Rome, and there founded the Church of Rome, and instituted the Clergy in that City, Hierosolimitanae caeter arumque orientalium Ecclesiarum exemplo, according to the example of the Church of Jerusalem, and other Oriental Churches. And concerning the institution of Cardinals, who were the first Parish Priests of the first Churches erected in Rome, a Gondisalvus Villadiego Causarum olim palatic Auditor in initio libel▪ de Origine Cardina●●●us. Gondisalvus Villadiego sayeth, Jnstitutio Cardinalium figuraliter habuit ortum ab institutione divinà, exemplariter autem a Christo, expressa autem fuit facta tempore Pontiani & Marcelli Rom. Pontif. that is, the institution of Cardinals, had its institution figuratively, from divine institution, exemplarily from Christ, but expressly from the Pope's Pontianus and Marcellus. By these and many other like testimonies, which are frequent in their own writers, it is evident that the Romanists are not likely to deny, either that their Church and City of Rome, hath such things in it, as are fitly answerable to those particulars, which are above rehearsed in the description of the new Jerusalem; or that the literal Jerusalem, in the time of the Apostles, bade not such Churches, such Pastors, and such Ecclesiastical divisions, as I have above described. But supposing, that which will not be granted, that these things mentioned in the description of the new Jerusalem, have no allusion to things actually existing in the primative Church, and in the literal Jerusalem; yet it may be plainly proved, that all these things whether real or imaginary, which are mentioned in the description of the new Jerusalem, may very fitly mutatis mutandis, that is, changing the Names, and the Number only, be applied to such things as had real and actual existence in the City, and in the Church of Rome. For it may be proved by a cloud of witnesses, that the Popes, about the time of Constantine the great, did divide the City and people of Rome into a certain number of Ecclesiastical divisions, jurisdictions, Titles, or Parishes; and that in every one of these divisions, there was a Church erected for the administration of Baptism, and to every one of these Churches a several Presbyter assigned and appointed. Of this first division of the City and people of Rome, Onuphrius writeth after this manner. Ne Presbyterorum administratio in promiscuo esset, Evaristus Titulos, vel, ut nunc dicimus, Paraecias in Vrbe primus presbyteris divisit, ut singuli à se invicem secreti in suâ urbis regione, Titulo, vel paraciâ, sacramenta Christianis exhiberent, singulosque presbyteros in unoquoque Titulo collocavit. which words do in effect intimate thus much, That Evaristus first divided the City of Rome into Titles, or, as we now say, Parishes, and appointed to every Priest his several Region, Title or Parish. And afterwards in the same chapter Onuphrius writeth thus, Dionysius vicesimus sextus Romanus Pont: Evaristi exemplum secutus, cùm jam Christiana pietas mirum in modum in e â urbe auct a esset, denuò Titulos, vel Paroecias Romae, cúm eas ampliasset, presbyteris divisit, ipsasque quo quisque suis limitibus, finibusque contineretur, distribuit: that is, Dionysius the 26 Pope of Rome, following the example of Evaristus, when as Christian Religion was much increased in that City, did again divide the Titles or Parishes (after that he had enlarged them) among the Priests, and did so distribute them, that every one might be contained within his own bounds and limits. Jsodorus Mosconius speaking of the Cardinals, writeth to the same purpose, saying, Nonnulli tutiùs ausi sunt affirmare, hb 10. part 1. cap. 5. tempore Silvestri primi, hoc est anno 314, creatos esse, qui (ut aiunt) primò Cardinalium Collegium ad similitudinem Romanorum procerum ordinavit; nam sicuti servabatur ut in Vrbe cuilibet Regioni, quae in plures divisa erat, plures Curatores deputarentur ad perficiendum ea, quae ad civium incolumitatem pertinerent, sub praefecti potestate; Jta Silvester Papaut indemnitati Ecclesiae commodiùs consuleret, singulis regionibus Vrbis singulos destinaverat Cardinals, That is, Others more waryly have affirmed that they were first created in the time of Silvester the first, in the year 314, who (as they say) ordained a College of Cardinals according to the similitude of the Senators of Rome. For as anciently it was observed, that (the City being divided into many Regions) there were certain Curators appointed to every Region, who being subjected under the authority of him, that was the chief governor of the City, were to perform such things as pertained to the welfare of the Citizens. So Pope Silvester, for the good, and for the more convenient government of the Church, destinated several Cardinals to every several Region of the City. These divisions which by Onuphrius and Mosconius are called Regions and Parishes, are by other writers called by divers other names. Some call them Diocaeses, some Jurisdictiones, some Gubernationes, some Tituli, some Ecclesiae parocbiales, some Curiae. By all which it is evident, that they were certain local divisions of the City and people, having Churches or public places of meeting erected in them, (as the Gates were to the ancient Tribes of the Israelites) & a power of Jurisdiction & government annexed to them: and being such, it cannot be denied but that these titles are fitly answerable to those Tribes of the Israelites, into which the City and people of the literal Jerusalem were anciently divided: and also unto those Ecclesiastical divisions above mentioned, by which in the times of the Apostles, the Citizens of the new Jerusalem, either were, or began to be, or shall yet be, or by the description of the new Jerusalem are supposed to have been distinguished. And it may be here observed, that these titles or parishes, into which the City of Rome was divided about the time of Constantine, succeeded, and came in the places, and were instead of those 30 or 35 Tribes, into which Rome was anciently divided. For the Cardinals, as they increased in power, and grew into credit, so being not content with that spiritual authority, and Episcopal jurisdiction which they had in their Titles, they began by little and little, to usurp upon the temporal dominion of the City, until they had engrossed all that authority unto themselves, which either the Curiales Flamines had over the Tribes in matters of religion, or the Senators in humane affairs. And by this means it did quickly come to pass, that the new division of Rome into 25 Titles, caused that ancient division to be antiquated and extinguished. S. Austin in his enarration upon the 122 Psalm, writing of the Tribes there mentioned (which both by himself and S. Hierome, are interpreted to be the same Tribes, which are spoken of in the description of the new Jerusalem) taketh occasion to speak, not only of those 35 Tribes, into which the City of Rome Ethnic was anciently divided, but also of certain divisions, which he calleth Curiae, into which Cities in his time were usually divided; his words are these. Tribus alio nomine dici possunt Curiae, sed non propriè, itaque Tribus uno nomine vicino, alio propriè dici possunt: sed vicino dicuntur Curiae,— Sunt autem, vel crant in istis quoque aliquando civitatibus Curiae etiam populorum, & una civitas multas Curias habet, sicut Roma 35 Curias habet populi. Hae dicuntur Tribus: has populus Israel duodecem habebat secundum filios jacob. The effect of which words is, that Tribes properly so called may by another name be called Parishes: and that all cities are usually divided into such wards or parishes, as are answerable to those Tribes, into which the Cities of Jerusalem and Rome were anciently divided. I might here add, that as a late a The word Curia is translated to signify a Parish by a late writer of the Roman Antiquities. Writer of the Roman Antiquities, calleth those ancient Curiae or Tribes of Rome, Parishes, because of the great likeness which they had to such Ecclesiastical divisions: so those first Titles or Parishes into which Rome Christian was divided, may by the same reason be called Tribes: but it matters not by what name they are called, so long as they are fitly answerable, to those ancient Tribes of Jerusalem and Rome, although called by another name, and changed to another number. And thus much of things, answering to the Tribes of the new Jerusalem. In the next place it is to be observed, that in every one of these Parishes, there was some public place of meeting appointed, or some Church erected, for the administration of Baptism; & these places or Churches in the City of Rome, are fitly answerable to those Churches in the literal Jerusalem, which were the first Gates of the spiritual Jerusalem. For as it is above declared, that every particular Church, may for divers reasons be said, to be a gate of the Church universal, but especially in respect of the administration of baptism, which literally and properly is the Gate of the Church: so these Churches in the City of Rome, which are named Baptismal Churches (as it is a By D. Field observed) because in these only, Baptism was originally administered, are in this respect, as also in divers others, properly and exactly answerable to those Gates of the Spiritual Jerusalem. That there were such Churches as these, and that to every one of these Churches there was at the first but one Priest appointed, as there was one Angel placed at every Gate of the celestial Jerusalem, is evident by that which Onuphrius hath written, and by the testimonies of divers other writers, whose words I shall have occasion to set down, when I come to speak of the number of these Churches. But when these Parish Priests degenerated into Cardinals, and were made a College, and Corporation, exercising a new kind of superepiscopall jurisdiction, in, and over these churches; then was the birth of Antichrist, then did Antichrist really, and truly, and literally, and locally sit, first in these christian churches at Rome, and from thence his pseudo-apostolicall Authority, hath been obtruded and imposed upon other churches. By which it is evident, that, as some interpreters do make the Apostles themselves, although in divers respects, to be the Gates, the Angels, and the foundations of the celestial Jerusalem; so the Cardinals in one respect may be said to be the first Gates of the Church of Rome because at their first institution, the administration of Baptism, was committed unto them only: and in another respect they may be called Angels, because they were Pastors of the first parish churches in Rome; and lastly, they may be truly said to have been the first Foundation stones, on which the Popish Hierarchy hath been ever since erected, as it is above more fully and particularly declared. I do not forget that some writers do interpret these twelve Foundations, to be the twelve Articles of the Creed, but I pass over this interpretation in this place, not because the Pope hath not a Creed consisting of twenty and five Articles answerable to those of the Apostles, but because I conceive the 12 Articles of the Creed, to be chief and directly aimed at, by the twelve manner of fruits growing on the tree of life, as in the sixth and last place shall be observed. And thus much in general of things sometime actually existing in Rome, answerable to the Gates, Tribes, Angels, and Foundations, sometime actually existing in the new Jerusalem, and that, according to all senses, which way soever they may with any probability be interpreted: concerning all which I do oblige myself to prove, that there were 25 Gates in Rome according to the sense literal, & 25 Churches for Baptism according to the sense spiritual, and 25 Pastors placed at these Churches, and 25 Cardinals sitting and ruling in them, and 25 Titles, Tribes, or Parishes belonging to them. CHAP. 18. Of such things as are answerable to the measure of 12000 furlongs, and the 12 manner of fruits growing on the tree of life. The conclusion of all that hath been said concerning the Antithesis of things in general, as it is distinguished from that Antithesis of numbers which is next to be proved. IN the next place it comes to be inquired, what that is in the City of Antichrist, which is answerable to the measure of 12 thousand furlongs, by which, as it is above showed, the true compass of that City, in which Christ did first and chief erect his Church and Hierarchy, is truly, although mystically declared. To which I answer that as the number 12, having thousands of furlongs added unto it, is the truesolid measure of an imaginary Cube, whose compass is equal to the compass of the city Jerusalem; so the number 25 having thousands of furlongs added to it, is the true solid measure of that imaginary Cube, whose compass is equal to the compass of the city of Rome. I will not here trouble the reader with Arithmetical computations; let those that have understanding to extract the Roots of numbers, either believe me, or else find out themselves, what is the solid root of 25000, and they shall be then resolved that a Cube of 25 thousand Furlongs, is in compass 116 furlongs, and above 3 quarters of a furlong, that is, 14 miles and an half, and almost half a quarter of a mile, which measure, how fitly it agreeth, with the circuit and compass of the city of Rome, shall in its place be evidently declared. It remaineth now in the sixth and last place to be considered, what is meant by the 12 manner of Fruits growing on the tree of life, and what those things are in the Church of Rome, answerable unto them. This tree of life in the midst of the city, is Christ in the midst of his Church: these 12 Fruits, are that food, by which Christians live, and are nourished up unto everlasting life; and that food by which Christians live is Faith. For all just men live by Faith (as it is written) and by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God: but the Apostles creed is the only true faith, because it is the material object of every Christian man's faith, and a perfect sum of the doctrine of Christian religion, gathered out of the Scriptures, and containing all truths necessary to be believed: and therefore whosoever confesseth with his mouth, and believeth with his heart all the Articles of the creed, he doth truly eat of all those fruits which grow on this tree of life. Now because the creed of the Apostles, did originally proceed from 12 persons, & doth naturally branch itself into 12 Articles, as it hath been long since actually divided: therefore I doubt not but that this is that particular truth really and actually existing in the Church, to which these 12 manner of Fruits have a special and evident allusion. Now as touching the Romish faith, I shall make it evident, that the Papists have added new Articles to the Apostles creed, and have increased the number from 12 unto 25, For whether we take the council of Trent itself, to be the faith and doctrine of the Church of Rome, or that Creed which was composed and set forth by Pope Pius the fourth, according to the doctrine decreed in that Council; in either of these, the number 25 is as remarkably applicable to the Romish faith, as the number 12 to the Apostles Creed: but I pitch chief upon that form and profession of the Romish faith, which Pope Pius the fourth hath set forth according to that Council, to be generally received by all men, or as the Bull itself witnesseth, ut unius ejusdem fidei professio uniformiter ab omnibus exhibeatur, unicaque & certaillius forma cunctis innotescat. That this Council of Trent, doth fully contain, the whole faith and doctrine of the Romish Religion, the Papists themselves are neither able, nor willing to deny. Thus much is testified by the eight and ninth acclamations at the end of this Council, which run after this manner; Cardinalis à Lothoringia. Sacrosancta Oecumenica Tridentina Synodus: eius fidem confiteamur, eius decreta semper servemus. Responsio Patrum. Semper confiteamur, semper servemus. Cardinalis à Lothor. Omnes ita credimus, omnes id ipsum sentimus: omnes consentientes & amplectentes subscribimus. Haec est fides beati Petri & Apostolorum: haec est fides Patrum; haec est fides Orthodoxorum. Responsio Patrum. Ita credimus, ita sentimus: ita subscribimus. I say therefore, as the 12 Apostles after that Christian religion began to be believed in the world, did assemble themselves together, and composed a Creed, consisting of 12 Articles, for the preservation of unity in matters of religion, and for the suppressing of heresies: so the chief Prelates of the Popish Church, after their Romish religion began to be received and believed in the world, did for the advancement of their superstitions, & for the suppressing of that which they call heresy, assemble themselves together at the Council of Trent: which Council was begun by 25 Prelates, continued 25 Sessions, and ended with the subscription of 25 Popish Archbishops: and last of all (which is the thing I chief aim at) the doctrine and faith decreed in this Council, was afterwards by the Pope and his Cardinals, reduced to a set form of words, so naturally branching themselves into 25 Articles, that they cannot with any conveniency be divided into any other number, as it shallbe declared. I have now spoken in general, of all those six things to which the number 12 is applied in the description of the new Jerusalem; and I have showed that there were things actually existing in the city Jerusalem, and in the Primitive Church, to which every one of these things hath an evident allusion. And I have also showed that there were, and are things actually existing in the City, and in the Church of Rome, fitly answerable and opposite to every one of those six things above mentioned; and that, according to all senses, and interpretations, which may, with any probability, be put upon them. If I have spoken more, than needs concerning the opposition, or contraposition of Things in general, I have therefore done it, because I am fully persuaded, that this description of the new Jerusalem, is not for this reason only set down in the Scriptures, that by it the true Church of Christ might be described; but also, that the false Church of Antichrist by way of Antithesis, and opposition, might by the same description (mutatis mutandis) be manifestly revealed. For there is not intended by this description an opposition of Numbers only, and not of those things also, which are numbered▪ nor an opposition of Things only, and not of those Numbers also, which are joined with them, but a double Antithesis and contraposition, both of Things and Numbers: so that from this description of the new Jerusalem, we may make two several inferences concerning Antichrist▪ the one drawn from the consideration of Things opposite, the other from the consideration of Numbers opposite. By the first, may be found out the Genus: by the second, the Differentia, by which Antichrist may be defined. From the first consideration it followeth, that Antichrist ought to have such things belonging to his state and Hierarchy, as I have already proved to have been actually existing in the Papacy: as namely, persons answerable to the Apostles, a City answerable to Jerusalem; having certain measures, and a certain number of Gates, Churches, Pastors, Parishes, professing their faith and religion under a certain number of heads and Articles. But from the second consideration, (which consists in the application of that number, which is opposed to 12, unto all these things above mentioned) it may be concluded, not only that Antichrist must have a City answerable to Jerusalem, but precisely, how many furlongs in compass his City must be, how many Gates it must have about it: how many chief Churches in it; into how many Parishes it was first divided: what the first original decreed number of these persons must be, who must pretend themselves to be the Basis, and foundation of that Hierarchy which Antichrist was to erect in it. And lastly, by this number may be concluded, into how many heads or Articles, the Faith and Religion of Antichrist, actually should, or conveniently might be divided. It remaineth now in the last place, that I make the truth of all these things to appear by particular application, and that I make good, what I have above promised by showing out of history, that the number 25, is as evidently applicable, in all these particulars above mentioned, to the City, State, and Hierarchy of Rome, as the number 12 is, in all like and answerable respects, to the Church of Christ and to the new Jerusalem. CHAP. 19 That the first decreed, and limited number of Cardinals, and Parish priests in Rome was 25. And that the first number of Churches for Baptism, and Parishes, was 25 also. I will first begin this application with the Cardinals of Rome, and with those Titles, and Churches in seperably united unto them. And, as I first shown that in the Romish Church, Cardinals were answerable to the Apostles; so I will first show, that their first original decreed number in the City of Rome was 25: as the first number of Apostles was 12 at Jerusalem. It is a truth generally received, and as I believe not contradicted by any writer, that the Cardinals sprang originally from being parish Priests in the City of Rome. a Tom 2. 〈◊〉 Clericis. cap. 16. Bellarmine acknowledgeth that Cardinalis in suo Titulo est veluti Parochus, that a Cardinal is as it were a Parish Priest in his own Title. b li●ro 1. 〈◊〉. pag 31. Alexander a Turre, writeth to the same purpose in these words, Nec aliud profectò erat ab Ecclesiae p●●mordijs agere Cardineas parts, quam obire ●uram animarum, cujus rei in argumentum ad huc in urbe retinent Parochialium Ecclesiarum Titulos. that is, neither was it any thing else in the Church's beginning to execute the office of a Cardinal, but only to discharge the cure of souls. For which cause the Cardinals even to this day do still retain the Titles of the Parish Churches of the City. Of those Parishes, which were also called Tituli Cardinals, Cadinall Titles, a De praecipuis Urbis ROMAE Basilicis. cap. 2. Onuphrius writeth thus, Tituli igitur erant sacrae aedes, vel (ut nunc dicimus) Ecclesiae five loca consecrata, in Dei, beatae virgins, & sanctorum hominum honorem vel memoriam, à fidelibus Christianis erecta, & per varias urbis regiones à Pont: Romanis antiquitùs distincta, in quibus animarum cura â presbyteris, qui in ijs commorabantur, habebatur: quibus qui praeerant, Presbyteri vocabantur Cardinals. And a little after in the same chap: he saith,— Hinc Presbyterorum Cardinalium nomen manâsse crediderim, ut is scilicet esset Presbyter Cardinalis, id est, Principalis, qui caeteris Presbyteris ejusdem Tituli (—) praeesset. Quum antea eo nomine opus non esset, quòd nisi●nus per singulos Titulos Presbyter lectus fuisset. It is clear by these testimonies, and by that which I have above said, and shall say concerning these titles, and by many other things that might be here alleged out of the same, and other authors; that every one of these Titles, into which the City of Rome was first divided, did necessarily imply and suppose three things. First, a Church in which the Sacraments, and especially Baptism was to be administered. Secondly, a Diocese, or Parish belonging to it. And thirdly, a Presbyter Cardinal placed in it. And as every Cardinal had his title, and every Title his Cardinal; so it is certain that originally, and at the first institution every Cardinal had but one Title; and every Title but one Cardinal. This necessary coherence, and dependence, which originally was between the Cardinals and their Titles, caused a S●●t 〈◊〉 correlativa antiquo more Praesbyter Cardinalis, & Titulus, ut alterum sine altero est▪ non valeat. Baronius, Anno 〈◊〉. Baronius to say, that according to the ancient custom, a Priest Cardinal and his Title, are in the Predicament of Relation, so that one could not subsist without the other. By all which things it is evident, that whatsoever was the number of the first Parishes in Rome, and of those Churches, which were called Tituli Cardinals, Cardinal Titles; the same number must also of necessity be the first number of the Cardinals, especially at their first institution, when these Titles were first settled on them: but the first certain number, and first decreed number either of such Priests, as were in the City of Rome, or of such Parishes as were in Rome, or (which is sufficient for my purpose) of such Cardinal Titles as were in Rome, was 25; and therefore, whether the Cardinals had their original from the first Presbyters in Rome, or from the first Parishes in Rome, or from the first Churches in Rome, their first number was 25. The Minor proposition, or so much of it as is necessary, I prove by many witnesses. First Baronius anno 309 saith expressly of these Titles after this manner. Marcellus xxv Titulos in urbe constituit quasi Dioeceses, that is Marcellus did constitute 25 Titles in the city as it were Dioceses. in vita Marcelli. Secondly, Alphonsus Ciaconius, who hath written the lives of the Popes, affirmeth the same in these words. Anno circiter 305. Marcelli Pontificatus 2ᵒ viginti quinque Titulos idem Pontifex instituit. And a little afterwards saith, Marcellus de quo nunc agitur Certum numerum praefinivit Titulorum, nempe xxv: that is, about the year 305 Marcellus, in the second year of his Popeship, did institute 25 Titles. Marcellus of whom we now speak prefined a certain number of Titles to wit 25. Isidorus Mosconius witnesseth the same in these words. Successiuè Marcellus anno 305 DECRETO statuit Titulos datos esse tantùm xxv. in quibus Baptisma dispensaretur. that is, Successively Marcellus in the year 305, did make a Decree, that the Titles given to the Cardinals should be only 25, in which Baptism was to be administered. In like manner Hieronymus Platus in his book de Cardinalis dignitate & officio, saith of these Cardinal Titles, si quis numerum quaer at horum Titulorum jam ante dictum est xxv ab Euaristo institutos esse: that is, If any one seek after the number of these Titles, it is above said that Euaristus did institute xxv. Polidor Virgil in his fourth book de inventoribus rerum, and ninth chap. hath many things concerning the Cardinals, and their original: and among the rest he hath these words. Nec ita multò post Marcellus, titulos urbis ab Euaristo primum Presbyteris datos numero limitavit, decreto statuens quinque & viginti: ac quasi dioeceses esse ad Baptizandum eos, qui ex gentibus externis in Christianorum coetum quotidi● venirent, & ad sepeliendum mortuos: Haec ex Bibliothecario, Damaso, Platina, ac aliis vel recentioribus sacrae historiae scriptoribus; quos miror neque hoc neque alio quod sciam loco, non explicuisse, qui essent two Praesbyteri quibus Titulos in urbe datos tradunt, unde haud-dubiè prima Cardinalium origo est: that is, Not long after Marcellus limited the number of Parishes in the City, which Evaristus first gave to the Priests, and did by Decree constitute that there should be 25, and that they should be as Dioeceses, to baptise those unbeleiving Gentiles, which came daily to be of the number of Christians, and to bury the dead. These things are taken out of Bibliothecarius, Damasus and Platina, and out of other later writers of sacred History: but it is marvel (saith Polidor Virgil) that these writers neither here, nor elsewhere (that I know) do declare who those Priests were, to whom they affirm these Titles in the City to have been given; from whence, without all doubt is the first original of the Cardinals. Afterwards in the same chapter, the same Author hath these words also, Faciunt praeterea sidem Tituli, quos hodiè habent Cardinals, quos vocamus, in locum illorum perpetuo tenore successisse Presbyterorum, quibus prout declaratum est, Evaristus primûm titutulos, deinde Marcellus velut dioeceses digesserat, that is, farthermore these titles, with those whom we call Cardinals do at this day enjoy, do witness, that the Cardinals by a perpetual and never discontinued succession, have succeeded in the places of those Priests, to whom (as it is above declared) Evaristus first distributed those Parishes, which were afterward made Dioceses by Marcellus. When these Parishes were made Dioceses, than were these Priests made Cardinals, by having a formal power, & jurisdiction added unto them, as it also appears by the like testimony of Volater anu●, who saith, Marcellus titulos xxv, sicuti Dioeceses, id est, Gubernationes ad Baptismi commoditatem instituit, that is, Marcellus made 25 Titles in the City as it were, Dioceses, that is, Goverments or Dominions for the more convenient administration of Baptism. But of all other writers, Onuphrius Panvinius de praecipuis urbis Romae Basilicis, setteth down these things most fully, the effect of whose words is thus in brief. That whereas originally there was a small uncertain number of Presbyters at Rome, they were brought to a certain number & order by Cletus and Evaristus, Popes of Rome; first Cletus reduced the Presbyters of Rome to the number 25; afterward Evaristus, about the year of Christ 100, appointed & prescribed a several Parish to every one of those Presbyters; which Parishes were afterwards enlarged, and had their bounds and limits more perfectly and more exactly prescribed unto them, by Pope Dionysius about the year of Christ 260; after which time Marcellus about the year of Christ 305, limited the number of those Titles, which anciently were first given to the Presbyters by Evaristus, and did by decree constitute that there should be in Rome 25, as it were so many Dioceses for the more convenient Baptising of such Gentiles, as were daily converted to Christian religion. And this is the sum of that which Onuphrius saith, concerning the first number of Cardinal Titles, which were at one, and the same time instituted, and decreed. After the time of Marcellus, when the Church was freed from persecutions, those Titles were increased by divers Popes, as the same Author writes, some adding one, and some another; but as Saint Paul is not numbered among the twelve Apostles, because he was not one of those twelve, who were all at once, and at the same time first named, and chosen to be Apostles; so those Titles and Cardinals, who were afterward added one after another, to this first established and decreed number of 25 at one and the same time instituted, cannot, neither aught to be numbered among them: because the mystery consisteth (as it is above clearly and evidently proved) in that number only, which was truly applicable unto them at the time of their first institution, and actual emersion of their order. And this first number 25 may be yet farther proved by the testimony of Hieronymus Albanus, who maketh mention of 25 Cardinals created by Marcellus. It may be confirmed also by the testimony of Platina who writeth to the same purpose in these words. Marcellus divino cultui intendens, ubi Priscillam matronam Romanam impulisset coeme●terium suis sumptibus via salaria constituere, Titulos quinque & viginti in urbe Roma constituit quasi Dioeceses, ad commoditatem Baptismi, & opportunitatem eorum qui ad sidem ex gentibus uotidiè veniebant. To the same effect writeth Damasus in these words. Marcellus Papa xxv Titulos Romae constituit quasi Dioeceses propter Baptismum & paenitentiam multorum qui convertebantur ex Paganis. The same is also witnessed by Anastatius, who saith of the same Pope Mercellus; Hic xxv. Titulos in urbe Romana constituit quasi Dioceses. By the general consent of those testimonies and Authors above recited, it is evident and unquestionable; (especially until the contrary shall be proved by better Authors, as I believe it will a For if there had been any considerable objection in all antiquity by which the contrary could have been effectually proved: I cannot think that these authors were ignorant of it; nor imagine any reason, why they should conceal it. never be) that the first number of Cardinal Titles, at one and the same time erected, established and decreed, was 25. And from hence it followeth necessarily (as it is above declared) not only that the first original number of the Cardinals was 25; but also, that at the first apparent foundation of Popery, the first remarkable division of the City and People of Rome, into Tribes, Wards, Parishes, or Dioceses was 25, and that at the same time the first number of Churches for the administration of Baptism was 25 also. If it be true which Onuphrius writeth, that there were 25 Priests in Rome before that there were 25 Parishes, and that there were 25 Parishes in Rome, before they were actually made 25 Cardinal Titles, or Dioceses by Marcellus; than it followeth, that although the order of Cardinals had been actually instituted before the time of Marcellus (as I believe it was not) yet their original number would have been 25. But as it is certain that the a As the first foundation of that Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, which Christ did build upon the 12 Apostles, was laid by Christ, before Christian religion was remarkably apparent in the world, and countenanced by supreme authority: so the first foundation of the Popish Hierarchy, might he, and was laid, before the main errors of Popery were remarkable in the world, and countenanced by supreme authority. first remarkable foundation of the Popish Hierarchy was about the time of Constantine the great, after the first 300 years were ended: so it is evident, and not unworthy to be observed, that these Authors, and many more whose words I have not recited, do testify by a more than ordinary consent, that at that very time the established and decreed number of Titles, (and therefore of Cardinals also and of Churches appointed for Baptism) was 25 as it is above declared. How long this first number of Cardinals & Titles continued without alteration, it is not material to inquire. For as the College of Apostles and their successors, did not long continue in their first number; so there is no necessity in respect of this mystery, that this College of Anti-apostles ought to do. Yet nevertheless it seems probable by that which Saint a Cumque secundum lueram manifestum sit quod dicituromissis parùmper jezoniae. & Azure hoc, dicendum est, quod usque ho die in Ecclesiâ quae est domus Domini, & ante portam in introitu sunt 25 viri ad sensus cuncta referentes. Hieron. in 11. cap. L. zechielis. S. Hierome could not be ignorant than Rome in these days did call herself januam & osthum omnium Ecclesi●rū. & by that which he adds afterward in his Comment on this Chapter, it seems he interprets this Gate to be a City which he calls praetenta & perdita, as Rome then was. Sunt multi in hujus portae introitu qui desperant salutem & dicunt, Cavitas in quá versamur, lebes est, & nos ●●nes— propterea audiunt quod non ipsi sint Carnes p●ae●eri●ae & perditae Civitas, sed li quos scandalizaverint & interfeceim. Ideirco super eos gladius indacitur, u● in si● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nequaquam intergentes, sed inter Christianos fuerint judicati Hieren. ●●id. Hierome hath written upon Ezekiel, that the same number continued unto his days. If it were afterward augmented before the time of Gregory the great, it seems it was de facto and not the jure: because in the time of Gregory ( b I 〈…〉 in vita Gregorii lib. 3. cap. 11. who is said to have reduced the Cardinal Titles to their ancient institution) there were only 25 Cardinals and no more, as they are nominatim recited by Onuphrius in his book de Pontisicum & Cardinalium creatione. Concerning Deacon Cardinals of the City of Rome their number is not to be considered. For it is certain that they were not instituted by Marcellus, nor at the same time that the Presbyter Cardinals were, nor in many ages after them. Yet if there had been Cardinal Deocons in Rome from the beginning, they should have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, answerable to those 7 Deacons in the Primitive Church, (as a Evaristus verò Apostolorum insticuto ad septenarium numerum Diaconos in Ec●lesiâ Romanâ auxit. Onuphrius de praecipuis urbis Basilicis cap 2. Onuphrius intimateth) and not to the 12 Apostles. The like may be said of Cardinal Bishops, that they were not thought upon, when the Presbyter Cardinals and their titles were first instituted; Wherefore Isidorus Mosconius saith thus of them; Episcopi tunc non erant in Collegio Cardinalium, ideò primus Episcopus ad Cardinalitiam dignitatem assumptus, fuit Conradus Suenns, Archiepiscopus Moguntinus, creatus ab Alexandro tertio Ann. 1163: that is▪ Bishops were not then in the College of Cardinals, therefore the first Bishop promoted to this dignity was Conradus Suenus, Archbishop of Mentz, created by Alexander the third in the year 1163. There was for many ages, a great difference and distinction, between the Presbyter Cardinals of the ancient foundation, and between the Bishop, and Deacon Cardinals, which were of a later institution; these were not capable of any of those ancient titles, given first to the Parish Priests of Rome. And although the a Sixtus quartus, quod nun quam antea factum suerat, Deaconias Praesbyteris, Titulos Diaconis assignare non dubitavit. Hieron. Piatus. pag. 19 Pope's omnipotency, hath since brought this anciently observed order, unto a promilcuous confusion, by giving these titles to Bishops, Deacons, and all sorts of Cardinals: yet there is in styling them, & writing of their b In lite●is Domini Papae nunquam ponitur Cardinalis Presbyter, quin additur. Titulus, nec Episcopus vel Diaconus cum Titulo. Alvarus Pelagius de planctu Ecclesiae lib. 2. Nota, Omnes Presbyteri Cardinales intitulantur hoc modo: Dil. Fill. F. T●. S. Lauretii etc. Praesbytero Cardinali, excepto uno videlicet, 12 Apostolorum qui intitulatur hoc modo. N. Basilicae Apostolorum Praesbytero Cardinali. ut in Capite, Cùm olim de Privilegiis. Episcopi autem Cardinales intitulantur hoc modo: F. Episcopo Portune. Et non fit mentio de Titulis, Diacom, Cardinals similitèr sine titulis hoc modo. N. Sancti Georgi● ad velum aureum Dracono Cardinali. Practica Cancellatiae Apostolicae à Petro Rebusso edita pag. 475. names, a distinction still observed, to testify the ancient difference which was between them. Forasmuch therefore as these Cardinal Bishops, and Deacons were not originally in the College of Cardinals, when their first number was decreed, but are rather redundant extuberancies of the Papacy, built upon, and dangerously overhanging that ancient foundation of the Presbyter Cardinals; I say therefore that whatsoever the number of Cardinals, either Bishops, Priests, or Deacons, either now is, or hath been at anytime since their first institution, either de facto, or de iure, it can no way prejudice, or infringe (howsoever, it may perhaps c De omnibus Christianitatis regionibus Cardinales assumantur, sic tamen quod numerum 24 non. excedant. praedicto autem numero pro magna Ecclesiae necessitate, ant utilitate duo alii aduci poterunt. Concil. Basil. Oecumenicum Sesse. 23. sub Eugen. 4. By this decree there must not be above 26, nor under 24: therefore there may be 25. And if the Pope be numbered among them, there must be 25 at the least. confirm) the truth of that which is above said concerning their first original number. I do therefore now conclude according to that which I suppose I have above evidently and sufficiently proved by many witnesses; first. That there were in Rome originally, at the first remarkable foundation of the Papacy 25 Churches, in which, and in no other Baptism was to be administered; which 25 Churches according to a b First in a general sense, as it may be said of every Church, that it is Domus Dei & porta coeli. Secondly▪ as they were Baptismal Churches. Thirdly, that as the Gates of the City, were seats of judgement to the Israelites, so there was an Ecclesiastical jurisdiction annexed to these Cardinal Titles as perhaps it is intimated in the ● 22 Psalm, that there shall be to the Churches in the n●w Hie●usalem. triple sense are answerable to the 12 Gates of the new Jerusalem. Secondly, that there were 25 Titles, Parishes, Wards, Dioceses, or other divisions of persons and places, belonging to these 25 Churches: which 25 Titles, are answerable to those 12 Tribes of the new Jerusalem. Thirdly, that there were 25 Priests or Pastors, to whom these 25 Churches were assigned; which 25 Pastors, are answerable to the 12 Angels placed at the Gates of the new Jerusalem. Lastly, I conclude that these 25 Priests were changed (which change was the first great and remarkable degree of the great Antichristian Apostasy) into 25 Cardinals; & so became the Basis and foundation, of a then newly erected Romish Hierarchy, which hath ever since continued, claiming and usurping supreme power and authority in the Church. And this Romish Hierarchy properly and essentially consists of the Pope and Cardinals only, who are a different kind of government from all that ever were before them, pretending themselves to be the sea Apostolic, and resembling an ancient government of Rome, but being nothing else in the truth of their being, but a real and continual emulation, and opposition of Christ and his Apostles: even in respect of that transcendency of Authority, & infallibility of Doctrine, which was proper unto Christ and his Apostles only, and absolutely incommunicable to any of their successors. And herein especially (as I conceive) consisteth the very soul and essence of Antichristianisme, in pretending to be what they are not, by imitating Christ and his Apostles, in those things wherein they are unimitable. And howsoever the Romish Clergy, are more properly the servants and vassals of Antichrist then the Laiety: and both Clergy & Laiety of that Church, than any other Christians; yet I believe that the very body, and essence of that great Antichrist, which was to come into the world, is to be confined to the College of Cardinals only, of which College the Pope is head, and he together with them, maketh one corporation of false Prophets sitting properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, as those words are, and may be divers ways interpreted, not only in, or against, or over the Church of God, but also pretending themselves to be the Church of God, a The Romish Prelates assébled in the University of Prague against john Husse and others do affirm in their fourth Decree or Article, That the College of cardinals of Rome are the body of the Church. To which joh. Husse answereth, that Christ is the Head, and all faithful christians the Body of the Church of Christ. To which the said Prelates do reply, as Master Fox relateth, by a long and ●edious process, showing how the Pope is Head, and how the College of Cardinals only, and not other Christians are the Body of the Church▪ Acts and Monuments Anno 1414. pag. 589. und 590. and 591. as the Romish Prelates pretend the College of Cardinal to be. But I return from whence I find myself digressing, and do conclude, that as all Ecclesiastical Hierarchy in the Church of Christ (against and above which the Cardinals of Rome do most energetically oppose and advance themselves) had its first original, institution, and foundation from the 12 Apostles in Jerusalem: so the opposite Hierarchy of Cardinals in the Synagogue of Antichrist had its first institution and foundation from 25 Parish Priests in Rome. CHAP. 20. That the number of the Gates of Rome was 25. COncerning the number of the Gates of the City of Rome according to the sense literal, it remaineth yet to be showed that their number was 25, as the number of the Gates of the material Jerusalem either was, or is generally received to have been 12. For howsoever the first number of Churches, in which Baptism was administered, be by the name of Gates, most principally aimed at in the description of the new Jerusalem, as according to the sense spiritual I have above shown: yet I cannot but think, that the number of the Gates according to the sense literal, is also directly intended; and that the number of the Gates of Jerusalem was twelve and no more Villanpandus Tom. 3o. a pag. 68, & 69 where is also exhibited a Map of Jerusalem with this inscription, Vera Hierusolimae veteris imago, Roma, superiorum permissiu, cum privilegio summi Pontificis, Imperatoris, Regis Catholici, ac Senatùs veneti, etc. apparatus urbis & templi: plainly affirmeth and reciteth them nominatim, after this manner. 1 Porta fontis. 2 Porta stercoris 3 Porta vallis 4 Porta Anguli. 5 Porta Ephraim. 6 Porta Vetus. 7 Porta piscium. 8 Porta Benjamin. 9 Porta gregis. 10 Porta Equarum. 11 Porta Aquarum. 12 Porta Fiscalis. b ●n indice tertio Appendicis ad Civitates Orbis. Georgius Braunus and Franciscus Hogenbergius, out of Livy and Pliny, who lived near about the time that S. john writ the Revelation, do write thus. Portas suburbiorum & urbis in universum 24 fuisse refert Plinius: Livius tamen ut passim in illius Historia est legere 27 ponit. And whereas some editions of Pliny make him to say sometimes, that there were 27 Gates in Rome, and sometimes 37, this is corrected as an error by Onuphryus lib. description urbis, where he writeth thus. Siigitur decem has portas quas ab ijs quatuor decem diversas fuisse liquet ipsis adjunxerimus, erunt 24 urbis Romae Portae ut Plinium dixisse existimo— nam quod vulgati codices habent 27 mendum proculdubio est ex adjectione numerorum aliquot ortum, ita ut 12 portae semel numerentur, praetereantque ex veteribus septem quae esse desierunt: It seems by the differing opinions of Live and Pliny, who lived not long the one after the other, that the number of the gates of Rome, was near about 25; for plus uno verum esse non potest, there can be but one truth; & it is not probable that either of these Authors was ignorant, how many Gates Rome had in their own times. If there were 27 when Livy writ, & but 24 when Pliny writ, than it is probable that in this interim, there were for some time but 25: but it is most likely, that as in all great Cities, there are Gates some of greater, and some of lesser note, some public, and some belonging to private houses or Palaces; and some so ambiguously placed and used, that it is hard and doubtful to be determined, whether they are to be accounted as Gates of the City, or not: so I say it is most likely that Livy accounted 2 or 3 Gates of lesser note, for Gates of the City, which Pliny thought fit rather to be left out as private passages; but perhaps a third man, which had been to set down his opinion concerning the number of the Gates of Rome in those times, would have taken one of those 3 Gates into the number which Pliny left out, and have left out 2 of those 3 Gates which Livy took in: and so doing it is likely he might have spoken more truly then either of them. For when Authors of equal credit and estimation, are of different opinions, it is more safe to go between them both (if there be any medium) then to join with either. But I confess all this proveth but a probability at the most, that the number of the Gates of Rome was 25. I am content therefore that Onuphryus that learned Roman Antiquary (who, and who only (as far as I know) hath written a peculiar Tract concerning the Gates of Rome) shall decide this Question. It is evident by those words of Onuphryus which are last above recited, that he affirmeth the number of the Gates of Rome in the time of Pliny to have been 24 at the least; but it is plain that among all those, Porta Triumphalis is not numbered, and therefore Onuphrius presently after, when he rehearseth nominatim all those 24 Gates above spoken of, addeth this Gate in the last place, as a Gate of the City, although not one of the former number number, saying expressly, Porta triumphalis extra numerum. And whereas afterwards he nameth two other Gates, which are Porta fenestralis Palatii, and Porta Stercoraria, he saith of the first, Porta fenestralis Palatii, non urbis, sed potius Palatii fuisse crediderim; and of the second, Porta Stercoraria, non urbis sed Capitoliis: plainly excluding these two last Gates, from being of the number of the Gates of the City, and plainly adding Porta triumphalis to the former number, as one of the Gates of the City; as, not only other authors do account it, but a ●●●ip. Roma. 〈…〉 pag. 54 elsewhere also, as well as in this place, himself affirmeth it to be, as these his words do witness, Pars muri antiquitùs per medium Burgum girabat & habebat duas portas, Aureliam & Triumphalem. But for the greater evidence of this truth, I will here set down the names of these Gates recited by Onuphrius in manner following. 1 Porta flumentana. 2 Porta Collatina. 3 Porta Quirinalis. 4 Porta Viminalis. 5 Porta Gabinia. 1 Porta Esquilina. 2 Porta Coelimontana. 3 Porta Latina. Divers of these Gates were called by other names also, a● Onuphrius showeth. 4 Porta Capena. 5 Porta Ostiensis. 1 Porta Portuensis. 2 Porta Janiculensis. 3 Porta Sextimiana. 4 Porta Aurelia. 5 Porta Querquetularia. 1 Porta Piacularis. 2 Porta Catularia. 3 Porta Minutia. 4 Porta Mugionia. 5 Porta Sanqualis. 1 Porta Naevia. 2 Porta Randuscula. 3 Porta Lavercalis. 4 Porta Libitinensis. 5 Porta Triumphalis. These 25 Gates Onuphrius setteth down as such as were altogether actually existing between the times of Pliny & Justinian, which doth very well agree with that time in which Marcellus did erect 25 Cardinalships in Rome. There were anciently 7 other Gates, of which Pliny writeth, that they ceased to be before his time; and therefore they are mentioned by Onuphrius, as such, as cannot, nor ought not to be numbered with those above named. But as touching these 25 Gates above specified, it is not material to inquire how long their number continued, whether until the time of Justinian, or how long afterward. For, as those that affirm the number of the Gates of Jerusalem to have been 12, do not mean that there were so many precisely at all times, but that there were so many at that time in which the City most flourished, or that there were so many plus minus, so that taking one time with another, and considering all things, there is no one number, by which the number of the Gates of Jerusalem can be more truly expressed, then by the number 12: so in like manner, it may be said of the Gates of Rome and of the number 25. For as the Gates of Jerusalem, so is it certain that the Gates of Rome, especially in these latter times, have been much altered and changed, which hath caused a great variety of opinions among many writers, as well concerning their names, as their number. But thus much may be observed, that although the new addition unto Rome, called urbs Leoniana, hath brought 7 other Gates with it, yet some of the former decaying, the same number 25 may still remain, and so much is expressly witnessed by Severinus Binius in his first Tome of general Counsels, pag. 261. where, speaking either of his own time, or of that time in which Georgius Braunius writ his Theatrium urbium orbis, he hath these words, Portas suburbiorum & urbis 24 fuisse refert Plinius, Livius tamen 27. Nunc sunt turres 365, portae 25 super▪ sunt, that is, pliny relates that the Gates of the City and Suburbs were 24, yet Livy saith 27, now there are 365 Turrets, and there remain 25 Gates. Thus I have now showed, that which way soever the 12 Gates of the new Jerusalem are to be understood, whether literally for material gates properly so called, or spiritually for Churches in which Baptism was administered, which are as properly Gates of the Church universal in a spiritual sense, as the other are of the material City in the sense literal. I say, which way soever these are to be understood, I have showed that as there were 12 Gates of Jerusalem, so there were 25 of Rome. I may now therefore conclude in general concerning the 4 first particulars above specified, that in what sense soever the new jerusalem may be said to have had 12 Gates, twelve Tribes, twelve Angels, and twelve Apostles, who were the first remarkable foundations of the Church of Christ, and all Ecclesiastical jurisdiction: in the same sense the Romish Babylon may be said to have had 25 Anti-gates, & 25 Anti-tribes, and 25 Anti-angels, and 25 Anti-apostles, which were the first remarkable foundations of the babylonical Tower of their Antichristian Hierarchy. CHAP. 21. That as 12000 furlongs are the solid measure of a Cube, whose perimeter is equal to the compass of the new Jerusalem: so 25000 furlongs are the solid measure of a Cube, whose perimeter is equal in compass to the City of Rome. THE next degree of application which remaineth yet to be proved, concerns the measures of the Circuit and compass of the City of Rome: and by that which is already above said, this point is driven unto this issue, that if the Pope be Antichrist, and Rome that City in which Antichrist was chief to erect his kingdom, than the measure of the compass or circuit of Rome must be plùs minùs between 116 and 117 furlongs, that is, 14 miles and an half, and almost half a quarter of a mile; and certainly this measure fitteth so justly, and is placed so exactly in the midst of that latitude which is admitted by diversity of the opinions of divers Writers concerning the compass of this City since the Pope ruled in it, that I do not believe it to be possible by any one other measure, more truly to express it. I need not in so clear a matter set down many men's opinions, especially being I shall have occasion to say more of it, when I come to speak of the Figure of this City, & of the Figure of the number 666. But briefly it may be observed, what a Commentationum Apocalypse. par. 2. pag. 152. Cantabrigiae 1632. a late Writer, in his Commentaries upon the Revelation, hath already observed out of Lipsius concerning the compass of Rome, his words are these. I am verò Roma hodierna, seu pontificia ambitum habet non nisi 13 aut 15 milliarum, ut nôrunt, inquit Lipsius, qui dimensi sunt. And of these two measures the same b Admire. lib. 3. Author supposeth 15 miles nearest unto the truth. But Georgius Braunius, and Franciscus c In indice tertio Appendicis ad Civitates Orbis. Hoggenbergius writ thus. Quòd si urbem ad nostrae aetatis consuetudinem metiri volemus, vix passuum millia quatuor decem omnis Romae, & I aniculae transtiberinae regionis, & Vaticani ambitus implebit. And d De descriptione urbis. lib. 7. pag. 28. Onuphrius to the same purpose in these words; Vrbis moenia aetate nostrâ vix quatuor decem millibus passuum complectuntur. Other Authors there are, which make the compass of Rome to be 16 miles and more, and some that affirm it to be less than 13 miles: but where diversity of times, and divers men's opinions have made such a diversity of measures, I leave it to any man's judgement, whether the measure of 14 miles and an half, and somewhat more above mentioned, be not more probable than any of them; because it is placed (as it were) in the very middle between them. I conclude therefore that as an imaginary Cube, whose solid measure is 12 thousand furlongs, is equal in compass to that City in which Christ erected his kingdom; so an imaginary Cube, whose solid measure is 25 thousand furlongs, is equal in compass to the City in which Antichrist hath erected his kingdom. CHAP. 22. That the Popish Creed consists of twenty five Articles, as the Apostles doth of twelve. I Come now unto the sixth and last point of application, which concerns the faith and doctrine professed by Antichrist, and the number of heads and Articles into which it is, or may be conveniently divided: and to this purpose I have already mentioned the Council of Trent, (of which the acclamations above mentioned testify, saying; Haec est fides Beati Petri & Apostolorum: Haec est fides Patrum: Haec est fides Orthodoxorum) I have noted three things in which the number 25 is applicable unto it. First, concerning the number of Prelates there assembled in the first Session, the History of the Council of Trent, lib. 2. pag. 130. plainly testifieth that the number of all the Prelates then, and there assembled, was 25. And although the number of Prelates was afterwards in other Sessions increased, and continually altered, and changed; yet this first Session was that which gave nomen & esle to the Council, and therefore the number of Prelates assembled in this Session is most remarkable, & rather to be observed then in any other. Secondly, concerning the number of Sessions, and that the whole Council is divided into 25 Sessions, all editions of that Council do testify, and the books themselves will be as a thousand witnesses until the end of the world. And lastly, it is witnessed by the same books also, that the number of Popish Archbishops, which subscribed to this Council was 25, and although many other Bishops and Legates, and Abbats, & others subscribed also, yet the number of Archbishops is more remarkable than any of the rest, because, as Bishops (who ought chief, if not only to have decisive voices in general Counsels) are virtually and representatively, their whole subordinate Clergy: so they themselves, especially in the Romish Hierarchy, are virtually and representatively contained in their Archbishops. It might be here, as I believe, truly added, that the number of all the Decrees of this Council of Trent, was also 25. (I mean of such a For the other Decrees which concern either the beginning, continuing, prorogueing, translating, or ending of the Council, or of any Session, or which concern safe conducts, are matters of mere formality and unavoidable necessity, and are not to be numbered with the Decrees of the Council, nor were read when the Decrees were confirmed, as the last act of the Council witnesseth. Decrees as concern matters of faith & reformation, which only are to be accounted for the Decrees of the Council, because these only were read and confirmed in this Council, as appeareth by the last words of the last Session) but because it is hard to set down any one certain number of them, and because it is already proved by that which is above said, that the number 25 more remarkable in this Council than any one other number: therefore I pass now to that Creed and form of profession of the Romish faith, which was composed by Pope Pius the fourth, according to the doctrine of the Council of Trent, by which Creed it is evident that they have increased the number of the Articles of the faith from twelve unto twenty five, as by the Creed itself here written verbatim out of Pope Pius his Bull may evidently appear. 1 Credo in unum Deum, patrem omnipotentem, factorem Coeli & Terrae. visibilium omnium & invisibilium. It is evident that some Articles of the Apostles Creed were believed by the jews, and were Arti le● of their saith before our ●aviour Christ came in the flesh▪ The jews than did, and do y●t believe one God the father almighty, they did believe the holy Catholic Church, the Communian of Sa●nts, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the flesh and life everlasting. A● therefore the Apostles did not make de novo all the Articles of their Cree●▪ but did only add certain articles to that faith, which was formerly believed in the Church pretending (and that truly) that this their addition was implicitly contained in that saith which the Jews did then profess concerning the Messiah which was to cow: So Antichrist was not to make de novo all the Articles of that Creed which he was to profess, but was only to add, as it were, one moiety to that faith which was formerly believed in the Church, pretending (but falsely, as it behoved Antichrist to do) that this his addition was implicitly contained in the Creed which was formerly professed in the Church. 2 Et in unum Dominum jesum Christum, filium Dei unigenitum & expatre natum ante omnia secula; Deum de Deo, Lumen de Lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero, genitum non factum, consubstantiolem patri, per quem omnia facta sunt. 3 Qui propter nos homines & propter nostram salutem descendit de Caelis, & incarnatus est de Spiritu sancto ex Maria Virgine, & homo factus est. 4 Crucifixus etiam pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato passus & sepultus est. 5 Et resurrexit tertiâ die secundùm Scripturas. 6 Et ascendit ad Coelum, sedet ad dextram patris. 7 Et iterum venturus est cum gloria judicare vivos & mortuos, cuius regni non erit finis. 8 Et in Spiritum sanctum Dominum, & vivificantem, qui expatre filioque procedit, qui cum patre & filio simul adoratur & conglorificatur, qui locutus est per Prophetas. 9 Et unam sanctam Catholicam & Apostolicam Ecclesiam. 10 Confiteor unum Baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. 11 Et expecto resurrectionem Mortuorum. 12 Er vitam venturi saeculi Amen. 13 Apostolicas & Ecclesiasticas traditiones reliquasque ejusdem Ecclesiae observationes & constitutiones firmissimè admitto & amplector. 14 Item sacram Scripturam juxta eum sensum, quem tenuit & tenet sancta mater Ecclesia (cujus est judicare de vero sensu & interpretatione sacrarum Scripturarum) admitto; nec eam unquam nisi juxta unanimem consensum Patrum accipiam & interpretabor. 15 Profiteor quoque septem esse verè & proprié sacramenta novae legis à Jesu Christo Domino nostro instituta, atque ad salutem humani generis, licet non omnia singulis necessaria, scilicet Baptismum, Confirmationem, Eucharistiam, Panitentiam, Ordinem, Extremam Vnctionem, & Matrimonium, illaque gratiam conferre, & ex his Baptismum, Confirmationem, & Ordinem sine sacrilegio reiterari non posse. 16 Receptos quoque & Approbatos Ecclesiae Catholicae Ritus, in supradictorum omnium sacramentorum solenni administratione recipio & admitto. 17 Omnia & singula quae de peccato originali & de justificatione in sacrosanctà Tridentiná Sy nodo definita, & declarata fuerunt, amplector & recipio. 18 Profiteor pariter in Missa, offerri Deo verum proprium & propitiatorium sacrificium pro vivis & defunctis, atque in sanctissimo Bucharistiae sacramento, esse verè, realiter, & substanti aliter, corpus & sanguinem, unà cum anima ●● Divinitate Domini nostri jesu Christ; fierique conversionem totius substantiae panis in corpus, & totius substantiae vini in sanguinem, quam conversionem Catholica Ecclesia, transubstantiationem appellat. 19 Fateor etiam sub altera tantùm specie totum, atque integrum Christum verumque Sacramentum sumi. 20 Constanter teneo Purgatorium esse, animasque ibi detentas, fidelium suffragiis juvari. 21 Similiter & sanctos unà cum Christo regnantes venerandos, atque inrocandos esse: eosque orationes Deo pro nobis offerre atque eorum reliquias esse venerandas. 22 Firmissimè assero, Imagines Christi ac Daiparae semper Virginis, nec non aliorum sanctorum habendas & retinendas esse; atque iis debitum honorem ac venerationem impertiendam. 23 Indulgentiarum etiam potestatem à Christo in Ecclesia relictam fuisse, illarumque usum Christiano populo maximè salutarem esse affirmo. 24 Sanctam Catholicam & Apostolicam Romanam Ecclesiam omnium Ecclesiarum Matrem & Magistram agnosco, Romanoque pontifici beati Petri Apostolorum principis successori, ac jesu Christi Vicario veram obedientiam spondeo ac juro. 25 Caetera item omnia â Sacris Canonibus & oecumenicis Conciliis, ac praecipuè à sacrosanctà Tridentinâ Synodo tradita, desinita, & declarata, indubitanter recipio: atque profiteor simulque contraria omnia atque haereses quaseunque ab Ecclesia damnatas & rejectas & anathematizata● ego pariter damno, rejicio, & anathematizo. The words which follow next in the Bull, which are these, Hanc veram Catholicam fidem, etc. do suppose and intimate that a perfect form of the Catholic faith is premised and formerly declared; wherefore I suppose that it cannot be denied, either that this Creed endeth in this place, or that it is not aptly and fitly divided, and distinguished into 25 Articles. For supposing the first part of this Creed, wherein we agree with the Papists, to be distributed into 12 Articles (as commonly it is, and as no man that is a Christian will deny) I do upon this supposition appeal unto any man, whether this whole Creed can with any tolerable conveniency be distributed, either into a greater number of Articles, without separating such things as are in themselves united, or into a lesser, without confounding such things as are in themselves to be distinguished. If it be objected that the 12 Articles of the Christian faith ought not to be accounted as part of Antichrists Creed, and that this application would better fit Antichrist, if that addition only which he hath made unto the Apostles Creed, either were, or conveniently might be divided into 25 Articles: I answer, that if Antichrist had added 25 Articles unto the Apostles Creed; then the number of Articles contained in the profession of his faith, would have been 37, and not 25. For it cannot be denied, that the Pope doth openly profess the 12 Articles of the Christian faith, nor proved that Antichrist ought not so to do. But rather it is to be considered; that it is as great, if not greater impiety and presumption, to add new Articles to the Christian faith, as wholly rejecting it, to erect another faith and religion. And that it more properly befits Antichrist, to deny the Christian faith ex consequenti and indirectly, then to renounce the external profession of it: for the mouth of Antichrist ought to be as a fountain sending forth at the same place sweet waters & bitter, he is to have a form of godliness, but to deny the power thereof; he is to pretend himself to be a Christian, and to be built upon the true foundation of the Apostles; but he is also to overthrow this foundation upon which, in some sort he is, and pretends himself to be built, by superinducing damnable doctrines, exconsequenti and indirectly contradicting & denying that faith which he doth externally profess. The Devils themselves may make profession of the Christian faith, to the same end that Antichrist doth, that is, to deceive by it: and it is probable that the Devils do more certainly know and believe, the historical truth of the Creed, than some Popes have done. And lastly, the Papists themselves cannot deny, but their imaginary Antichrist (who shall be of the Tribe of Dan as they say) must believe, or at least profess himself to believe, so many of the Articles of the Creed, as the jews now do, or as may be evidently proved out of the old Testament. By all which things it is evident, that the external profession of the Christian faith, can no way privilege the Pope from being that great Antichrist which was to come into the world: but rather it may be truly said, that this external profession, is causasine qua non, such a thing as could not but concur to his constitution. For as Antichristianisme consists of two parts, the one being an open, yet a feigned and hypocritical profession of the truth; the other a secret and indirect, yet a real and effectual eversion of it: so this form of the profession of the faith above mentioned, consisting of 25 Articles, of which 12 belong to the first part, and 13 to the second, may be fitly esteemed a perfect sum and character of Antichristianisme. CAP. 23. The conclusion which followeth upon the chief part of the application above proved, and some necessary and remarkable Observations concerning it. I Have now showed and proved, that as the number twelve is in six several things applicable to the new Jerusalem: so the number twenty five is applicable to the mystical Babylon in six several things, answerable and opposite unto them▪ and whereas the Tribes, Gates, Angels▪ Foundations, Measures, and Fruits of the tree of life, are all, or most of them such things as do admit a double, or manifold interpretation, according as they have been by divers Authors diversely expounded; I have made it manifest, that which way soever they be understood, there are things in all senses answerable unto them in the Romish Babylon, to which the number 25 is applicable, and that it should so fall out according to such diversity of interpretations, a Ille quip author in ●●s● dem verbis quae intelligere volumus, & ipsam sententiam forsitan vidit; & certè Dei spiritus qui per eum haec operatus est, etiam ipsam occu●●u●ā lectori vel auditori sine dubitatione praevidit, imo ut occurreret, quia & ipsa est veritate subnixa, providit. Nam quid in divinis cloquiis la●giùs & uberius potuit divinitùs provido●i, quàm ut cadem verba pluribus intelligantur modis, quos alia non minùs divina constantia faciunt approb●ri. Aug. de Doctrine. Christiana, lib. 3. cap. 27. this (as I believe) addeth much to this mystery, because every differing exposition, is, as it were, a distinct and several prophecy, in one respect or other, more clearly describing the Papacy. If the root of the number 666 had been applicable, only to one of those six things above mentioned, as for example, to the College of Cardinals of Rome in respect of their first original: this one thing, as I conceive, (if the historical truth of it cannot be confuted) had been a more manifest sign and token, that the Papacy is Antichrist, than all the b For it is above evidently proved both by reason, and by an example in the Scripture; that the mystery of the number consists, in the application of the root of it. But that the mystery consists in numeral letters of any name, it cannot be proved either by reason or Scripture, but only by the event. interpretations that any Writers have hitherto set forth concerning the number 666. But being the same root or number, doth not only show the first original number of Cardinals or Anti-apostles, but doth also intimate that they are according to divers spiritual senses, the Gates, Angels, and Foundations of the Pope's mystical City, State, and Hierarchy; and doth also show, how many furlongs in compass the City of Rome should be; how many Gates it was to have about it; how many Churches for Baptism in it; how many Pastors did first exercise Ecclesiastical jurisdiction over it; into how many Titles, or Parishes it was first divided, and unto how many heads and Articles Christian religion should be there augmented; being, I say, this one number 25, doth not in one, nor in two, nor in three only, but in all these particulars, and in all senses in every one of these particulars, truly and evidently, Number, Measure, Describe, and Characterise the City, State, and Hierarchy of Rome, and that state and City only; so that it is not so fitly applicable to any other state and City, no not in any one thing fitly answering any one of those six particulars above mentioned: then how can any man desire a more essential and exact description of the Papacy, than the right application of this number 25, plainly exhibits to him, that doth fully understand it? or how can any one which understandeth these things, justly say, that I have spoken hyperbolically, whereas I have above said, that the City, State, and Hierarchy of Antichrist, is by this number 25 most evidently, and miraculously described? I have as yet applied the number 25 unto the Papacy, only in such things as are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, answerable and opposite to such things, as are mentioned in the description of the new Jerusalem. But as the number 12 is in many other respects besides these, applicable to the true Church, and to such things as pertain unto it: So I am now to show (as I have also above promised) that this number 25 is in many other things applicable to the Papacy, and to such things as do pertain unto it. But first there are some observations concerning that part of the application which is already proved, which may in this place be interposed. First, it may be observed, that although the root of the number 666, were applicable to the Papacy in no other things, saving only in these above proved. Yet these are sufficient: because by these the Papacy is evidently distinguished from all other states of government: and because there are no other things in the Papacy more essential and remarkable than these. Secondly, that although the description of the new Jerusalem were of a City in all respects merely imaginary (as perhaps in some things it is,) and were not applicable either according to a sense of allusion, to that material Jerusalem which once was, or according to a sense of prediction, to the last state of the new material Jerusalem, which for all that we know, may be yet for to come: yet such an imaginary City, being so exactly, and in so many divers respects measured, numbered, and described by the root and figure of one number only, may be purposely set down, as a rule and pattern, by which the root and figure of another number given, aught to be applied, to a City, not imaginary, but really and actually existing: for God, who sometimes chooseth things that are not, to bring to nought things that are, may also by things that are not, bring to light things that are; and by the opposition or juxta-position of supposed and imaginary measures & numbers of a heavenly Jerusalem, may discover the true and real numbers, and measures of all things remarkable in the City of Rome. Thirdly, it may be observed, that although the description of the new Jerusalem had not exemplarily directed this application chief unto those particulars above mentioned, yet the things themselves are such, that it is probable that the wisdom of God would rather have foretold those things of Antichrist then any other. For God by his Prophets in the old Testament, intending to fore show and foretell the kingdom of Christ, did not foretell what number the letters of Christ's name, or any name of his Church or kingdom should contain (as the Papists would make us believe S. john doth concerning Antichrist) but did foretell by divers types, the number of Christ's Apostles, and their office and quality, as appears by divers Types in the Scriptures, and especially by the Type of the 12 Oxen under the brazen sea, by which, not only the number of the Apostles was foretold, but also their condition, as that the Sea of Grace, and Laver of regeneration should by them be supported, and carried into all quarters of the world, and that they should go and baptise all nations, etc. Since then the Cardinals of Rome are those persons in that Antichristian Hierarchy, which are answerable to the Apostles, and those to whom the administration of Baptism was originally most remarkably committed; it is therefore more probable, that their Number, Nature, and Condition should be typed in the Scriptures, than any other one thing concerning Antichrist. Lastly, it may be observed concerning the compass of the Area, or platform of the City of Rome, and concerning the first number of Churches at once and the same time instituted, that they are things fatal and mystical in themselves, as Onuphrius Panvinius, concerning both these things, hath observed; of the first he writeth thus. Pomaerii autem urbis Romae terminos non sine Augurum consilio poni, mutari, ac restitui potuissesatis constat innu●tque haec inscriptio, Collegium. Augurum Autore. Imp Casare Divi. Trajani Parthiciterminos Pomaerii restituendos curavit. Of the number of Churches he writeth thus. Cur autem non plures neq, pauciores Ecclesiae simul institutae fuerint, quae his nominibus decorarentur, operae pretium erit explicare, huicque instituto maximè consentaneum, cùm haec res insigni mysterio celebratasit. For although a Onuphrius in the 2 chap. of his book De praecipuis urb. Rom. B silicis wilnesseth that there were 25 Titles at ●nce instituted, & that this number was afterwards augméted successively, some Pope's adding one Title and some another until they came to ●8 in number which as he co●●e●lures was about the Time oF L●o the first in the year 44●. Onuphrius speaketh these words of other Churches in Rome also, & not only of these 25, which were first called Titles, yet his words can be verified of these Churches only, because even himself being judge, and that cloud of witness, which I have above alleged, there never was any other Totall number of Churches which were called Titles, in the City of Rome, which were as in this place he saith, simul institutae, at one time and altogether instituted, but only those 25 above mentioned. If therefore there be any mystery in this number, it must be in the number 25, and in no other. CHAP. 24. A brief and cursory recital of some other less remarkable particulars; in which the number 25 is remarkably applicable to the City, and Church of Rome. BUT I come now to a multitude of other remarkable particulars belonging to the Papacy and Church of Rome, in which their affectation of this number 25 may also be observed: and these things I will re●ite very briefly and cursorily, because I take them to be adventitious and supernumerary, and no essential part of this interpretation, yet are these things for the most part answerable in some sort to such things to which the number 12 is applied in divers places of the Scriptures. As the land of Canaan was divided into 12 jurisdictions and Divisions, which were governed by the heads of the Tribes, and did perhaps type out that division which a That division of the land of Canaan mentioned by Ezechiel, seems not to be yet fulfilled, but perhaps that land shall be yet again divided into 12 Dioceses, after the conversion of the jews, and shall have 12 Christian Bishops in it. And perhaps Jerusalem shall be n●w built, and be the Metropolis of it; but that Christ shall then reign personally & visibly in it, I see no reason. Ezekiel foretelleth, or that Ecclesiastical government which the 12 Apostles did exercise, not only over the City of Jerusalem as Pastors, but also over the whole Country belonging to that City as the first Christian Bishop's. So perhaps, the Antichrist of Rome, in those Kingdoms where conveniently he might, and in those times when he had fullest power, hath also divided certain kingdoms, into 25 provinces or other divisions, and hath placed 25 men of note and eminency in several Kingdoms who by their power could rule and govern others. There were heretofore 25 Abbats in England, as Camden witnesseth, which had voices in the Parliament house. And although I could set down some other particulars to this purpose, concerning other Kingdoms, yet I choose rather to leave it to those, who are better acquainted with the histories of foreign nations; who, if such observations shall be thought necessary, have better means and opportunities to search after them, than I can have. It shall be sufficient for me, only to touch briefly upon some common and obvious things in which the number 25 is remarkablely applicable to the Papists: rather to give an hint unto others, then that I do conceive the number of those particulars which I shall here set down, to be so much as considerable in respect of those, which may be found out hereafter. In the first place their affectation of the number 25, is remarkable in respect of the number of their Monks, Friars, and singing Masspriests in divers of their Abbeys, Priories, Monasteries, and other their societies and corporations: and because there are not others in the Romish Clergy more fitly answerable to those singers mentioneed in the 25 chapter of the first book of Chronicles, than these Monks and Friars, therefore it is so much the more observable, that the number 25 should be remarkable in respect of these, as the number 12 appears to be in that Chapter, in respect of those. The book called Bibliotheca Cluniacensis, in which are recited the Abbeys, Priories, and Deaneries belonging to that Order, testifieth, that in all those societies, where there is any settled number of Monks and Friars, there is none so frequent, & remarkable as the number 25, as by these particulars gathered out of this one book only may appear. De Provincia Lugdunensi. Prioratus de Gigniaco Lug. Dioecesis ubi per definitionem factam anno 1266 Monachi fuerunt reducti ad numerum 25. Decanatus de Paredo Eduensis Dioecesis ubi debent esse— 25 Monachi, Priore non computato, & notandum est per literas benae memoriae DominI Bertrandi Abbatis Cluniacensis quòd debent esse 25 Monachi in hoc Decanatu. pag. 1706. Prioratus Naluaci Lug. Dioec. ubi debent esse— 25 Monachi. ibid. Prioratus Sancti Marcelli Cabilenensis Dioec: ubi debent esse— 25 Monachi. pag. 1706. De Provincia Franciae. These in some sort are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to those orders mentioned, 1. Chron cap. 25. verses 9 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19 Decanatus Sancti Petri de Lehuno in sanguineterso Ambianensis Dioec: ubi debent esse Decano computato— 25 Monachi. p. 1712. Prioratus Sancti Lupi Bellonacensis Dioec: ubi debent esse Priore non computato— 25 Monachi. ibidem. Prioratus Mon●alium Sancti Victoris LeodiceNsis Dioec: ubi debent esse— 25 Moniales. p. 1716. Prioratus S. S Petri & Pauli de Raallo Meldensis Dioec: ubi debent esse— 25 Monachi. p. 1717. Prioratus de Arenthona in Anglia ubi debent esse 25 Monachi▪ p. 1719. Prioratus beatae Mariae de Gernago Parisiensis Dioec: ubi debent esse— 25 Monachi. Prioratus Sanctae Crucis de Volta, Sancti Flori Dioec: ubi debent esse— 25 Monachi. p. 1737. Prioratus Sancti Orientii Auxitanensis Dioec: in quosunt de praesenti— 25 Monachi. p. 1740. De Provinciis Angliae & Scotiae. Abbatia de Passaleto Glascoensis Dioec: in qua debent esse— 25 Monachi. p. 1748. Prioratus de Arenthona subditus Prioratui de Charitate in quo debent esse— 25 Monachi. p. 1749. To these might be added many other in England and elsewhere, but these are sufficient to show, that there are not so many corporations of any one other number belonging to the Cluniacensian Monks, as by the Catalogue exhibited in this book called Bibl. Cluniacensis. pag. 1715 plainly doth appear. And it is very probable that he that would trouble himself to find out the ancient numbers of other corporations, belonging to other Orders, might easily make (if it were necessary) the like observation. But instead of those many particulars which I might in this kind set down, I will mention only the last Order of note that the Popes have erected, and this is the order of Knights of the most glorious Virgin Mary (as they call them) instituted at Rome by Paul the fifth, An. 1618. which Order, as it is a Thea●er of Honour, by Andrew Favine, l. 8. c. 2. supposed, will be the most famous throughout all Christendom, and there is no other determination concerning the number of the Knights of this Order, but only this: That of the Knights of this order, there shall always remain * These 25 Residents having monthly allowance are in some sort answerable to those 12 Captains mentioned 1 Chron cap. 27. v. 1. Resident at Rome, in the Court of the holy Father 25, having 20 Ducats by the month, and the like number at Loretto. Next unto the numbers of these Societies & Corporations, it may be here observed, that the number 25 is also remarkable, in respect of certain Officers of great note and estimation, belonging to the highest Courts of justice in The chief Penitentiary his Court is as it were the high Court of Chancery in Rome, & perhaps these 25 Officers are not of less note▪ then the 12 Masters of the Chancery here in England. Rome; of which Courts and Officers Franciscus Abrahamus a Annalibus Ecclesiasticis anno 1457. pag. 27. Bzovius writes thus: Inter Cardinalestria officia sunt magni momenti, primus est Poenitentiarius, huic subsunt Poenitentiarii minores ●aud p●uci, & scriptores 25. And a little after, concerning another Court, he saith, Militant circa Rotam inter alios officiarios, Abbreviatores non minus 25. CAP. 25. That the number 25 is remarkable in divers things pertaining to S. Peter's Church in Rome. Of the measures of S. Peter's Altar, and the Characters imprinted upon it, and other Popish Altars. I Come now to their Altars, and first to that Sanctum Sanctorum, that great and high Altar in S. Peter's a Magnae haec Basilica toti terrarum orbi venerationi perpetuò fuit, inqua praecipu● quaeque nostrae religionis mysteria & Romanae Apostolicae sedis facta celebrata leguntur. Onuphr. de praecip. ●●b. Romae Basilicis. p. 65 Church at Rome, of which Altar and Church divers things are written very remarkably by divers authors: upon the top and high Terrace of this Church, as Angelus Rocca witnesseth, is placed upon a guilded Globe of brass, a guilded Cross of b Apud Basilicam Sancti Petri Romae supra tholi laternam locatur pila aenea inaurata, supra pilam cernitur Crux aenea inaurata palmorum quinque & viginti. Angel. Rocca in appendice Bib. Vatican p. 419. 25 hand-breadths in height. In the forepart of this Church are 5 Gates, which are commonly used, and one other Gate called Portasancta, which stands open only one year in c Onuph. de praecip. Bas. cap. 4. 25, and the twenty fifth year being ended, it is again shut by the Pope. In this Church (as also in the a Basilica S. Mariae ma●●ris est una ex quinque Pat●●archalibus Eccle siis; una ex septem, quae solenni ritu perpetuò visitari solent, ex quatuor demum anni jubilei una constituta.— Haec Ecclesia aliis Patriarchalibus Ecclesi●s similis est— Habet Altare majus marmoreo operculo ornatum, podia sive moeniana duo lapidea tessellat: &c.— sacella aliquot magnifica, Altaria circiter 25 marmorea, tessellatam sedem etc. Onuph. Pavin. de praecipuis Romae Basil. cap. 6. pag. 289. Church of S. Marry the greater) have been about 25 Altars as b 1 Altar S. Xisti. P. P. 2 Altar S. Leonis. 3 Altar Hadriani. 4 Alt. S Mariae. 5 Alt. SS. Processi, etc. 6 Alt. S. Mauritii. 7 Alt. Silvestri. 8 Alt. Mariae. 9 Alt. Gabinii. 10 Alt. Martialis. 11 Alt.. Bartholomei 12 Alt. S. Pastoris. 13 Alt. S. Thomae. 14 Alt. SS. Andreae & Gregorii. 15 Alt. Beat. Virgins. 16 Alt. Innocentii. 17 Alt. S. Suda●ii. 18 Alt. S. Antonii. 19 Alt. S. Tridentii. 20 Alt. novum SS. Apost. 21 Alt. Philippi & jacob. 22 Alt. Mortuorum. 23 Alt. vetus Simonis & judae translatum ad mediam Ecclesiam. 24 Alt. S. Habundii nunc dict. S. Catharinae. 25 Alt. S. Petronillae. All these 25 Altars were erected and altogether actually existing in S Peter's Church at Rome before the year 1500. That is, before there was any new addition of building to that Church. He mentioneth also sour other Altars, but they were not in the ancient Church of S. Peter, as Onuphrius writes, but in a wall which is between the new Church of S. Peter and the old, built since the year 1500. by Paul the third, in a place where anciently was a Chapel dedicated to S. Lucy. Onuph. de praecip. Urb. Rom Basil. cap 4. Onuphrius particularly recites them, besides the great Altar or Sepulchre of S. Peter, which is, as it were, their Sanctum Sanctorum, upon which no man may celebrate Mass but the Pope only. This is that before which the Roman Emperors have prostrated themselves and their Crowns, and this is that Sepulchre which (although it be not so) the Popes of Rome do account and esteem to be the Altar of Christ, as c D. Hieronymus adversus Vigilantium testatur Romanum Pont. Supta Petri & Pauli ossa veneranda 〈◊〉 Domino 〈◊〉, & ●umulos eorum Christi arbitrari▪ altaria D. August. Epist. 42. ad Madaurenses: Imperi● Ro● ni nobilissimi eminentissimum culmen ad sepulchrum Pisca●o●is Petri submisso 〈◊〉 supplicat. Onuph. illd. Onuphrius makes Saint Augustine and S. Hierome to witness. This Altar or Sepulchre is made four square of a perfect cubical figure; the length, breadth, & the height of it are equal; the measure of every side or area of this Altar is precisely 25 foot of square measure, as the words both of a Constantinus fecit Basilicam beato Petro Apostolo in Templo Apollims, cujus locum, cú corpus S. Petri recondidit, undique ex aere cyprio conclusit, quod est immobile: ad caput pedes 5, ad pedes pedes 5, ad latus dextrum pedes 5, ad latus sinistrum pedes 5, subter pedes 5, supra pedes 5, etc. Ba●on▪ anno 324. Baronius & Onuphrius do testify to all those that know what superficial or square measure is. But the number 25 is most remarkably imprinted upon all their Altars, because Christ's 5 wounds, as they call them, are in five several places ingraved upon the top of every Altar; which their multiplying of our Saviour's wounds from 5 to 25, what it may signify, either in their intention, or beyond their intention (either that they offer up Christ many times whom the jews crucified but once, or that their apostasy hath given him more wounds than the Jews cruelty) it is not material to inquire; Onuphr. de praecip. urb. Rom. Bas. c. 4. but certain it is, that usually and ordinarily, there are precisely 25 prints, marks, dents, or Characters ingraved upon all their Altars. And that the square measures of S. Peter his Sepulchre or Altar above mentioned, & the manner how their Altars are characterized with the number twenty five, may be more plainly understood, let this figure following be considered. That the number 25 should be remarkable in respect of their Altars is so much the more to be observed, because the number 12 is applicable to certain Altars mentioned in the Scriptures; as 1. King's c. 18. v. 31. Ezekiel c. 43. v. 16. CHAP. 26. That the number 25 is an affected symbolical device among the Papists: Of the Mass of Christ's five wounds, five times multiplied and repeated. Of their Jubelies, and affection of the twenty fifth day of the month. BUt these five Cinques, or these 25 round spots, which in Arms do signify numbers, That round spots in Arms do signify numbers is observed by the Author of Armoury E. B. p. 179. & sequ. as ᵃ some Writers have observed, have not been only imprinted upon their Altars, but being (as it is probable) from thence derived, have been accounted a symbolical device, and made armorial and recorded to have been sent from heaven in a more celestial manner, than the Ancile of ancient Rome as a sanctified a Elements of Armouries pag. 166. banner to lead Armies fortunately. And what greater testimony can there be of the affectation of a number? Yet if these 5 Cinques are inserted into the Arms of the Emperor of Rome, the King of Spain, and the Archduke of Austria; if the Pope and Cardinals cause them to be imprinted in the frontispiece of divers books printed at Rome for their better success, and the greater confirmation of them. If their Mass of Christ's five wounds, five times multiplied and repeated; have been by an Angel from heaven commanded, and by authority Apostolical confirmed, as the b Boniface Bishop of Rome lay sick and was like to die, to when our Lord sent the Archangel Raphiel with the office of the Mass, of the five wounds, saying: Rise and write this office, and say it five t●mes, & thou shalt be restored to thy health immediately: and what Priest soever shall say this office for himself, or for any other that is sick 5 times, the person for whom it is said shall obtain health and grace, and in the world to come (if be continue in virtue) life everlasting. And in what soever tribulation a man shall be in this life, if he procure this office to be said five times for him, of a Priest, without doubt he shall be delivered. And if it be said for the soul of the dead, anon, as it shall be said and ended five times, his soul shall be rid from pains. This hearing the Bishop he did erect himself in his bed, conjuring the Angel by the name of Almighty God, to tell him what he was, and wherefore he came, and that he should departed without doing him harm: who answered that he was Raphiel the Archangel, sent unto him of God: and that all the premises were undoubtedly true. Then the said Boniface confirmed the said office of the Five Wounds, by Apostolic authority, M. Fox in his Acts and Monuments p. 1398. hath related these things out of the Rubric of their Mass book. And by these things, two things are evident; First, that they do acknowledge the multiplication of the number 5 by 5, to have some secret mystery and virtue in it. Secondly, that the reason why they do affect the number 25, consists in the root of it, which is five. Rubtick in their Mass books affirmeth: then all these things seem to imply yet a greater mystery in this number, & to testify a greater affectation of it. To prosecute all these things particularly would require a large volume, but I do briefly and cursorily pass over these things which perhaps are not essential unto this interpretation. Lastly, their affectation of the number 25 seems remarkable in respect of certain times of note and high estimation among them. For first it is apparent that their Jubilee is, and hath been for many ages celebrated every five and twenty year only. Our Saviour Christ began to show himself, and to go about his Father's business when he was twelve years old; but Priests, Deacons, and subdeacons, and all other the Pope's sons and daughters, are not accounted of a perfect age, until they are a Qui 25 annum complevit aetatis est perfectae, qui non complevit imperfectae nec propriè res suas administrare potest Dig lib. 1. tit. 7. Dig. 7. Bas. B 33. tit. 1. c. 13. Them. 4. Austat p. 240 Diaconus aut subdiaconus annis 25 minor non ordinatur. N. 123. Bas. 3. tit. 1. c. 26. Higinius' Virgins sacrari ante annum 25 prohibuit. Volateran: lib. 22. p. 496. 25 years old completely. Perhaps the affectation of this number in this respect hath caused some translations of the Scriptures to be corrupted: for S. Hierome in his Commentaries upon the 11 Chapter of Ezekiel, having observed that the number 25 is never used in a good sense in all the Scriptures, answereth an objection against this his observation in this manner. Licet in Levitico ad sacer dotale ministerium à viginti quinque annis eligantur, in hebraeo enim non habet hunc numerum qui in Septuaginta dicitur, sed tricenarium. And this conjecture may be thought the more probable, because in another place of Scripture where it is evident that the number 25 is used in a bad sense, there the same copy of the Septuagint which S. Hierome used, maketh no mention of the number 25, but instead of it taketh another number, as by these his words upon the 8. Chap. of Ezekiel may appear. Quos nos viginti quinque viros transtulimus, Septuaginta posuerunt viginti, & in quibusdam exemplaribus quinque de Theodotione additisunt. And last of all, as they seem to affect the 25 year more than any other, so have they also affected the five and twentieth day of the month more than any other. Their chief holidays are upon the five and twentieth day of the month, and there is no one day of the month, which hath had originally so many holidays laid upon it. Upon the five and twentieth day of December the Church of Rome gins the year, & upon that day they have ordained the nativity of our Saviour Christ to be celebrated. Upon the five and twentieth day of jan: is the conversion of Paul. Upon the five and twentieth of February, so oft as it is leap year, is the feast of S Mathias: and it is observable that that day which is added to the year every leap year, is not placed at the beginning or ending of the year, or any month, but is made to be the five and twentieth day of the month. Upon the five and twentieth of March is the Annuutiation of the blessed Virgin. Upon the five and twentieth of April is S. Marks day. * When Pope. Gregory reform the Calendar, they rejected the golden number 19; by which means they made a twofold Epact of 25, of which one is written thus, 25, the other thus xxv▪ or in a different colour, but this is not mine own observation, but of a learned man; who also added, that until be could see some reason why the jesuits fastened this conceit upon 25 rather than any other number, he should impute it to their affectation of this number above all other. Upon the five and twentieth of July is S. James day. And which is more remarkable than all these, the feast of S. Barthol. is celebrated at Rome upon the five and twentieth day of August, as their Breviary witnesseth, although in all other places it be celebrated one day sooner. And this particular seems plainly to testify their affectation of the twenty fift day: because although all those holidays above recited, have been celebrated in all places upon the five and twentieth days of several months by the authority By comparing the 59 ver. of the first chap. of the first book of the Macab with the 7 verse of the sixth Chap of the second book of Mac. it seems probable that the birth day of Antiochus was the five and twentieth day of the month. of the Church of Rome, yet they would have the City of Rome itself to be singular in this, that it should celebrate one five and twenty day more than all the world beside. And to this purpose it may be here observed, that Antiochus who was almost in all things a type of Antichrist, failed not in this, but of all the days of the month, he and his officers did solemnize the five and twentieth day by offering sacrifice upon the Idol Altar on that day, and by their monthly persecutions of the jews, as it appeareth in the first book of the Maccabees cap. 1. vers. 59 CHAP. 27. Objections answered concerning the fractions of the Root of 666. That the Root of 666 more exactly applicable to the Papacy than the root of any square number could have been. HAving now, as I believe, sufficiently proved all that I have above promised concerning the application of the number twenty five unto the Papacy, both in respect of such things as are essential to this application, and also in respect of such things as are perhaps only accidentally adventitious unto it: I come now to answer such general objections as may be made against all that hath been yet said, & to show that howsoever some things may be objected which seem to make against this interpretation, yet they being duly considered and well examined, are a full confirmation of it; and do open a door to the finding out of as great, if not greater mysteries concerning the Papacy, as any of those which have been hitherto declared. First, it may be objected concerning the root of the number 666, that the root is not precisely 25, but a furred number between 25 and 26; and that therefore if in this mystery the number 25 be chief aimed at, it is probable that the wisdom of God would have led us to the finding out of this number 25, rather by commanding us to count and extract the root of the number 625, than the number 666. Secondly, supposing the root to be 25 (as it is most certain that it is) it may be objected concerning the number of the College of the Cardinals at their first institution, that their number was not 25 but 26, because the Pope numbereth himself among the Cardinals, as he is Peter's successor, in his Apostleship. And because he is a Cardinal and so accounted. Item Papa se annumerat inter Cardinales secundum Archid▪ in capitale Sacro▪ sancta. 22. distinct. Sicut imperator ponitur de numero Senatorum. Lib. Ius Senatorun cap. de dignitatibus. I●cobatius de council. num. 176. To the first objection it might be replied, that although the root of 666, may in some sense be said to be a furred number; yet it is to have its denomination, not from any square number exceeding the number given, but from the greatest square number contained in the number 666, as it is above said, and as by those that have written of this part of Arithmetic is sufficiently declared: yet if it be granted that roots of numbers may sometimes have their denomination, as well from the next square number exceeding the number given, as from the greatest square number contained in it: this doth rather confirm than prejudice the truth of this application, as it shall be anon declared. To the second objection, it might be answered, that as Christ was not numbered among the Apostles, nor properly was an Apostle, but was their Lord and Master, so the Pope, as he pretends himself to be Vicarius Christi, is not, nor can be numbered among the Cardinals, but is their Lord and Master: but yet, as the Pope pretends himself to be Successor Petri, (and that as well in his Apostleship, as in the Vicarship of Christ) in this respect it is nothing prejudicial to the application of the root of the number 666 to the Papacy, if it be granted that he may in some sort be numbered among them. For howsoever I say that these two objections may be thus briefly answered, yet I choose rather by admitting something to be true in either, to show how these two objections do reciprocally answer each other. For indeed either of these objections is a full answer to the other; they are like two earthen vessels, of which if one be knocked against the other, both are dissolved. All that can be concluded from the first objection is, that howsoever the root of 666 be expressly 25, that yet in some respect it may be said to be 26, because sometimes, and in some cases, although not properly, roots of numbers may have their denomination, à numero quadrato simpliciter proximo, from the next square number, although it exceed, and be not contained in the number given. All that can be concluded from the second objection is, that howsoever the first expressly decreed number of the Cardinals was 25, yet if the Pope be numbered among them, as in some respect he may and aught to be, that then that number may in some respect be said to have been 26, as therefore the first objection proveth the root of 666 to be expressly ●25, and yet in some respect 26. So the second proveth the original number of Cardinals to have been 25, and yet in some respect 26. from both therefore it may be concluded, that there is a greater similitude and likeness between the root of 666, and the first number of that College and Corporation which is Antichrist, then by any of those other things which are above said could have been conceived or imagined. For if the number of the Beast had been said to have been 625, the Quòd Papa inter Cardinales connumeratur, signúest pileus ex purpura qui in sepulchro Papae pingi so. let Hieron. Manfredus de Cardinalibus cap. 9 root of which number is so 25, that it can in no respect be said to be 26. Then the jesuits might with probability have alleged, that S. Peter was numbered among the 12 Apostles, and that the Pope being his Successor actually is and aught to be numbered among the Cardinals, & that after the Pope's death to testify that he was still a Cardinal, it is one of the usual ceremonies at the Pope's funeral, that a Cardinal's hat should be painted upon his coffin: and that therefore the first original number was 26, and not 25. Contrariwise, if the number of the Beast had been said to have been 676, the root of which number is so 26, that it can in no respect be said to be 25, than it would have been alleged, that the Pope is Vicarius Christi, and that as Christ was not numbered among the Apostles, so the Pope ought not to be numbered among the Cardinals: and that therefore the first decreed number by Marcellus was 25, and not 26: and against this objection I see not what could have been materially replied. But the wisdom of God foreseeing all these difficulties and ambiguities, and intending to declare exactly the true number of the first foundation of that College of Cardinals, whereof the Pope is head, and knowing that it could not be foretold absolutely without ambiguity, by one number only (because it is absolutely impossible to say truly, that that number was absolutely in all respects 25, or that it was absolutely in all respects 26, for as the Pope is Vicarius Christi, so it was 25 and not 26. But as he is Successor Petri, and as he is numbered among the Cardinals, so it is 26 and not 25.) doth therefore set down this number 666, that by our counting and extracting the root of this number he might lead us unto these two numbers the number 25, and the number 26, the last unities of both which numbers, are as two indivisible extremes and limits, without and beyond which, this number of Antichrists foundation▪ is not found, and between which, the very ambiguity of this numbers termination is in such an admirable manner contained and confined, that although it may in divers respects be said to be either of them; yet it can in no respect be said either to be any other number * without, that is extra, not sine. without, or beyond them: or to be so between them, that it may be said to be neither of them. For as the root of 666 cannot be said to be any number which is greater than 26, nor to be any number which is less than 25, so neither can it be truly said, that it is neither 25; nor 26. But as the original number of the foundation of that College was either 25, or 26, which way soever it be understood: so the root of 666 (considered as an absolute number in nudis essentialibus, as it ought to be) is one of these two numbers, take it which way you will. For if this number 666, be considered as it is an absolute number in itself, and as it is quantitas discreta only, than the root of this number cannot at all be said to be between 25 and 26, either as medium participationis, or as medium abnegationis. Not as medium abnegationis, because it may be said to be either, & in divers respects (although not by equal propriety of speech) to be both of the extremes: not as medium participationis, because in absolute numbers, unities immediately succeeding each other, do admit no latitude, either of extension, or denomination between them; and because all unities in absolute numbers are simpliciter & absolutè indivisibiles, that is, such as cannot be divided into parts, either of the same, or of any other denomination. Wherefore as it is absurd and impossible, to say that the number of Cardinals at the first foundation of their College, was 25 Cardinals and half a Cardinal; or 25 Cardinals and three quarters of a Cardinal: so is it as unproper and impossible to say that the root of 666 (being considered in puris essentialibus, and as an absolute number) is 25 unities and half an unity, or 25 unities & three quarters of an unity. But as the root of this number is properly and expressly 25, and yet in some respect 26: so the number of Cardinals was properly and expressly 25, as it is above proved, and yet if the Pope be numbered among them, it may in that respect be said to be 26. For because such a number was chosen and expressed to be the number of the Beast, as had a furred number for its root, it is therefore certain that the manner how the original number of Cardinals was terminated, is ambiguous, and such as could not by one number only be expressed. For the choice of such a number as had a furred root, doth not make that which is certain in itself, to be ambiguous unto us, but it makes the very ambiguity itself to be certain, that is, it makes us certainly know, that although 25 should be the only express and first decreed number of Cardinals; yet that the Pope himself (howsoever he be Primus in ordine and of another denomination) may, and must in some respect be numbered among them, and may, and must in some respect be excluded from them. And being the Pope must be numbered among them, as he is Successor Petri in his Apostleship, and must not be numbered among them, as he is Vicarius Christi, or as he is Successor Petri in his Vicarship of Christ, why may it not therefore be said, that the Root of this number doth foretell, not only the number of the Cardinals, but also, that the Pope should pretend himself to be, both Vicarius Christi, and Successor Petri. But however this may be, or seem to be too nice & intricate, yet I am persuaded that those few which fully understand what the furred root of a number is, and how it ought to be denominated, cannot but confess that here is a strange & extraordinary similitude, between the * By the Papacy I understand that College of Cardinals of which the Pope is bea●. Papacy in its first original, and the root of the number 666; and perhaps the likeness is so great, and so great, and so exquisite, that man's understanding is not able fully to comprehend it, nor the tongues of Angels to express it. And thus much I conceive to be sufficient to have said in way of answer to such objections as are above mentioned, and that a reason might be showed, why it was neither possible nor convenient, that any perfect square number, could so perfectly characterise the Papacy, as some one of those numbers which are contained between the number 625, and the number 676. But yet it may be here farther added, that although the number 25 be simpliciter, and may be truly said to be the root of all those numbers which are contained between those two square numbers 625 and 676, yet the number 26, may secundùm quid, that is, in some respect, be also said to be the root of so many of those numbers as are nearer unto 676 then to 625, and for this reason it was most convenient, that the number of the Beast should be greater than the number * For if any number less than 650, and greater ' then 625 had been taken, th●n the root had been 25, both taking minus ve●e, and also taking proxy vero pro vero, and so by consequence it could in no respect have been said to be 26, as in some respects it was necessary i● should b●. 650, and less than 676: that so taking proximum vero pro vero, it might in some respect, although not properly, be said to be 26. * But speaking properly and strictly, the root of 666, can be said to be no other Cardinal number but 25. because Quod inest in dicitur de, & quod non inest in non dicitur de, that is, because it is to have its denomination from the greatest square number contained in the number 666, and not from that number which is not contained in it, as it is above declared. CHAP. 28. A farther and a full answer to all objections about the Root of 666, drawn from the consideration of the figure of that number, by which the figure of the City of Rome is exactly expressed. A Reason may be yet farther demanded, why of all those numbers which are between 650 and 676, there was no other number expressed to be the number of the Beast, but only the number 666, to which I answer, that as it was most convenient for the reasons above alleged, that the number of the Beast should be between those two numbers; so there may be many reasons here alleged, why the number 666 was chosen rather than any other. First, it may be said that no other number whose root was 25, could be expressed by the numeral letters of the Beasts name, as concerning the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and divers other names of this Beast, in divers languages hath been, and may be observed. Secondly, it may be said that the number 666 was chosen rather than any other number, whose root was 25, that by the two last figures of this number, or by the number signified by the two last figures of this number, there might be an allusion to that image mentioned Dan. cap 3. whose height was 60 Cubits, and the breadth 6 Cubits. Which Image as Mr Forbs doth not without probability intimate, may very fitly shadow forth the Papacy. For as divers Nations, Tongues, and Languages were alured with all kinds of Music, and enforced by the fiery furnace, to fall down and worship that Image: so divers nations and languages have been both alured by the music of all kinds of flatteries and false doctrines, and also enforced by fiery Furnaces and other torments, to fall down and worship that Idol Shepherd at Rome. But as Nabuchadnezzar to his great astonishment, saw four men walking in the midst of the fire, instead of those three which fell down bound at the first: so the Pope to his terror may behold, that the number of Protestants increaseth daily notwithstanding his fiery persecutions, and those that heretofore lay dead for a time, in the street of the great City which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, do now stand upon their feet again in greater numbers, and cause fear to fall upon their enemies. But if neither of these reasons, nor any thing yet said, give satisfaction to judicious readers, nor show sufficient cause why the number 666 should be chosen rather than 625, or any other number whose root is 25; yet I am confident that that reason being added to it, which I shall now set down in the last place concerning the figure of the number 666, cannot but give full satisfaction to all such as understand it. For as the root of 144 is opposed to the root of 666, so also is the figure of that number opposed to the figure of this, and as the root of 666 exceeds the root of 144 by a double proportion and somewhat more, so the figure of 666, exceeds the figure of the number 144, by a double proportion and somewhat more. And as divers mysteries have been already found out, by the application of the root of the number 666, to such things as pertain to the Papacy: so there remain some mysteries to be found out, by application of the figure of the same number to the City of Rome. For as the actual application of that number which is the root of 144, to such things as are mentioned in the description of the new Jerusalem, doth guide, and direct, and as it were confine the application of that number which is the root of 666, to such things as are answerable and opposite unto them: so the actual application of that figure which is the figure of the number 144, to that new a And the city lieth four● square, ●ed the length is as large as the breadth, etc. Rev. 21. 16. Jerusalem described in the Revelation, is both an example and a warrant, showing how that figure which is the figure of the number 666, aught to be applied to that City which is answerable and opposite to Jerusalem. If therefore a reason be yet demanded, why the number 666 ought to be chosen to be the Beasts number, rather than any other whose root was 25. I answer, that for what reason soever the number 144 was chosen rather than any other number, whose root was 12; for the same reason was the number 666 chosen, rather than any other number, whose root was 25. But no better reason can be given or imagined, why the number 144 should be chosen rather than 145, or 146, or 154, or any other number, whose root is 12, but only because the figure of this number, is a perfect figure perfectly representing the figure of the City Jerusalem; & therefore it may be concluded, that no better reason ought to be expected, why ●66 should be chosen rather than any other number whose root was 25, but only because the figure of this number, doth perfectly represent the figure of the city of Rome. Now therefore that the truth of this may appear, I must briefly express what figurated numbers are. The sum of that which Euclid & others have written de numeris planis figuratis, that is, of flat superficial figurated numbers, is, that those numbers only are figurated numbers, which can be produced and made, either by the multiplication of one number by itself, or by the multiplication of some one number by another number: as for example, the number 12 is a figurated number, because it may be produced & made by the multiplication of the number 3 by the number 4, and also by the multiplication of the number 2 by the number 6, as by the following figures, wherein 12 unities are placed according right angles, and equal distances, may plainly appear. But the number 13 or 11 can by no means be reduced to any * That is, to any quadrangular figure strait lines and rectangles either of equal or unequal sides. figure, wherefore they are not figurated numbers, neither can so many unities be placed any manner of way, but still there will be something wanting to make the square figure complete, or something redundant which doth exceed it; as these examples show. The number 30 is a figurated number, because three times ten, or five times six make this number, as these examples show. And by these examples it may be observed, that the same number may have divers figures. And when it so falleth out that the same number may be varied into divers figures, than that figure which cometh nearest unto the equilateral square figure is the most perfect figure. For, Quadratum aequalium laterum is perfectissimum in suo genere, and the equilateral square figure is capacissima figura, the most capacious figure, of all Isoperimentrall figures consisting of 4 strait lines. But Quadratum oblongum, that is, such a figure as is longer one way then the other, is a figure which is more or less perfect, either as it approacheth nearer, or as it is farther distant from the perfect square of equal sides. Now when the figure of any given number is sought after, that is still to be accounted the figure of that number, which either is a perfect square, or nearest unto it. For when the same number is capable of divers figures, the rule is, Denominatio sit à praestantiori, that is, the most perfect figure is to give denomination to the number. As for example the number 144. may be made either by multiplying 12 by 12, or 9 by 16, as these examples do show. Yet this number is named a perfect square number of equal sides, from the more perfect figure, and not from the other; and this, and not the other, sheweth the true figure of the City Jerusalem. Now than that the true figure of Antichrists City may be found out, let us seek after the figure of the number 666: for the most perfect figure that this number is capable of, is as exactly applicable to Rome, as the most perfect figure of the opposite number is to Jerusalem. The nearest way that I know to find whether any number given, be a figurated number or not, & to find what is the most perfect figure of it, is to divide the number given by its own root, & severally by all such numbers as are less than it, if after the performance of every several division, there do some fractions remain, then is the number given no figurated number; but so many times as there do no fractions remain, of so many several figures is that number capable, of all which figures, that which either is the equiliterall square, or else that which is hearest unto it, is the most perfect figure which is sought after. I divide therefore the number 666 by 25, the quotient is 26, and the fractions are 16/25 so that it doth not yet appear to be a figurated number, but by this first computation it appeareth to be no perfect square number of equal sides, as 144 is; and therefore by this first division it may be concluded negatively, that the City of Antichrist is not of an equilateral square fiigure as Jerusalem was. In the next place I take away one unity from the number 25, and I do again divide the number 666 by the number 24, the quotient is 27, and the fractions remaining and because there be fractions remaining, it doth not yet appear to be a figurated number, in the next place I divide the number 666 by 23, the quotient is 28, the fractions remaining are 22/23. In like manner if the number 666 be divided by 22, the fractions remaining are 6/22. If by 21, the fractions are 15/●●. If by 20, the fractions are 6/2●. If by 19, the fraction is one unity, but if it be divided by 18, the quotient is 37, and no fraction remaineth; by this therefore it may be concluded that 18 being multiplied by 37, the product must be 666, and therefore this number is a figurated number, and that the most perfect figure of it is, Quadratum If furlongs be added to these numbers, it cometh near to show also the quantity of the City, for Rome is, or ●●● long since hath been, about 37 furlongs in length, and about 18 in breadth, and d●th, or hath contained about 666 furlongs of square measure, but as this manner of measuring the City of Antichrist is not drawn from the like example of the opposite numbers of Jerusalem; so neither is it so exact as the manner of measuring which is thence derived. oblongum proportione quasi duplà, that is, an oblong square figure in which the length exceeds the breadth by a double proportion and somewhat more; as by this figure may appear. Now how fitly this figure agreeth with the figure of the City of Rome let all men judge, and show if they can any one regular figure that comes nearer unto it. There can be no greater testimony for the truth of this, than the testimony of those who nether knew, nor aimed at any such application as I do, and yet have affirmed the figure of the City of Rome to be the same with this, as a late learned Commentator upon the Revelation hath affirmed in these words, jam vero Roma hodiernaseu Pontificia ambitum Commèntationum Apocallyp. part. 2. p. 152. habet nonnisi 13 aut 15 milliarium, ut norunt, inquit Lipsius, qui dimensi sunt; formam ut & ex ichnographia ejus videre est, quadrangulari proximam oblongam proportione quasi * The Disegno and Ritrato of Rome, set forth at Venice, and fixed to Ortelius his Theatrum Orbis, is so delineated; and the longitude being taken from the Castle of S. Angelo or mole di Adriano, to S. john of Lateran, compared with the latitude, observed from Saint Peter's Church in the Vatican, to the Church called S. Maria dell'opulo, carrieth the very same double proportion mentioned by Lipsius. Thus I have been informed, but cannot yet procure the sight of that book. duplà. I do therefore now conclude, that as the most perfect figure which the number 144 is capable of, sheweth and representeth the true figure of the City Jerusalem; so the most perfect figure that the number 666 is capable of, sheweth & representeth the true figure of the City of Rome. These things are so certain and perspicuous to all such as do understand what figurated numbers are, that I am persuaded they cannot, nor will not desire a more satisfying reason, why the number 666 was named to be the number of the Beast, rather than 625, or any other number whose root may be said to be 25; especially if they do consider these three things. First, how great a mystery concerning the figure of the City of Rome, is by this means revealed. Secondly, how plainly and expressly this reason is warranted & confirmed, by the evident application of the figure of the opposite number to the opposite City Jerusalem. And thirdly, it may be observed, that if but one unity be added unto, or subtracted All such numbers as are included between the two square numbers 625 and 676, either are no figurated numbers at all, as 661, 659, 669, etc. or else are such whose most Perfect figures do plainly differ from the figure of 666, and therefore from the figure of Rome. from the number 666, the figure of it is quite altered and changed, and such as either cometh nearer to Jerusalem then Rome, as the figure of 667, or such as differeth more from the true figure of Rome, than that figure which is above expressed. And thus much of the figure of Rome, and of the figure of the number 666, by which perhaps many other things may also be found out. CHAP. 29. Objections answered, and difficulties cleared, (even to such as have no knowledge in Arithmetic) concerning those solid figures and numbers, by which the several measures of the compass of Rome, and the new Jerusalem may be found out. Also some other objections briefly answered. HAving now found out the true figure of Antichrists City, some things may be here added to that which is above said concerning the measures of it; and so much the rather because those imaginary measures of the new Jerusalem, by which the true measures of the literal Jerusalem are truly, though mystically described, do as well depend upon the figure of the City there expressed, as upon the solid number which is there named. For it may be objected that that imaginary solid figure by which the perimeter of the new Jerusalem was found out, was made only by multiplying the whole Area into the length, or into the breadth of itself; and that therefore that imaginary solid figure, by which the perimeter of the opposite City is to be found out, ought not to be a Cube, as it is above said, but aught to be made only by the multiplication of the Area by the length or breadth of itself, having also respect unto the figure of it. To this objection I answer, that although the Area or Basis of a Cube be not like in figure to the Area of the City of Rome, ye it may be equal in compass unto it; and perhaps the literal Jerusalem was not exactly and precisely of an equilateral square figure, & yet it may be equal in compass with that cube mentioned in the description of the new Jerusalem. But yet nevertheless I grant that such an imaginary solid figure, as this objection aimeth at, and such a one as is not a perfect Cube, but is agreeable and applicable to the figure of the City of Rome, may be deduced fitly and analogically from the opposite measures of the new Jerusalem, and may also truly show the measures of the City of Rome, as by these figures following shall be declared. The first Figure. 25000 S●●d. sol. The number 18 and 37, are not here placed to show the true lineal measures of ihese figures, but to show the proportion of them. The second Figure. 25000 Stad. Sol. The solid measures of both these solid figures must be understood to be 25000 furlongs, that so they may be answerable to those 12000 furlongs, which are the true measure of the opposite solid figure, raised upon the square Area of Jerusalem, by multiplying the Area itself by its own length or breadth. For so likewise these two figures are made by multiplying the Area of the City of Rome by its length in the one figure, and by its breadth in the other figure. For because the length of this Area differeth from the breadth, therefore two solid figures arise from their several measures; whereas by the Area of Jerusalem, in which the length and breadth are all one, there can but one solid figure be produced. Now because these two solid figures (of which one is equal in height to the breadth of the Area of Rome, and the other equal in height to the length of the Area of Rome) cannot be both of them truly applied to the measures of Rome at the same time, and because no reason can be given, why one should be taken rather than the other (they being both derived, precisely after the same manner, from the figure and measures of the Area of Rome) as the opposite solid figure is from the Area of Jerusalem. Therefore they must both of them truly express the measures of the City of Rome, but at divers times. The first figure in which the height of this imaginary City is equal to the breadth of the Area, showeth the measures of the Area of Rome, at that time in which Antichrist began first to lift up himself and to bear sway in it. The second figure, in which the height of this imaginary City is increased from being equal to the breadth of the Area to be equal to the length of it, shows the measures of the Area of Rome, at that time when the pride of Antichrist shall be at the highest, and when his Kingdom shall begin to be top-heavie, and to threaten a downfall both to itself, and to those that depend upon it. Whosoever therefore desires to know how many furlongs in compass Rome heretofore was, when it was at the greatest that it hath been at, since the first remarkable foundation of the Papacy; let him by computation find out the a Which perimeter if I have rightly cast it, is about 140 furlongs and odd paces, that is 17 miles and an halfe &c: which measure as it is less than the compass of Rome as it was under the heathen Emperors, so is it greater then most writers have affirmed it to be at any time since the Pope ruled in it. perimeter of the first solid figure above mentioned, supposing the solid content of the figure to be 25000 furlongs. And whosoever desireth to know how many furlongs in compass Rome was, when it was in its greatest perfection, beauty and stability, that hath been incident unto it, since the first remarkable foundation of the Papacy; let him by computation find out the b Which is 14 miles and an halfe, and almost halfe a quarter of a mile. as is above showed. perimeter of that solid Cube, of which I have above spoken, supposing the solid content of itto be 25000 furlongs. And lastly, whosoever desireth to know, how many furlongs in compass Rome now is, or shall be when it shall be at the least that ever it shall be at, before its utter ruin and destruction, let him by computation find out the c Which is, if I have rightly cast it, 1 10 furlongs, and 66 paces, that is 13 miles and 3 quarters. which measure how near it comes to that which some late writers have observed, may appear by these words of Georgius Braun & Franciscus Hoggenbergius. Quod si urbem ad nostrae aetatis consuetudinem met●ri volemus, vix passuum millia 14 omnis Romae & ●aniculae five Transtiberinae regionis, & Vaticani ambitus implebit in Indice 3ᵒ Appendic: ad civitates orbis. perimiter of the second solid figure above mentioned, supposing the solid content of that figure to be 25000 furlongs, and he shall be then resolved that the wisdom of God by the root and figure of this number 666, hath so tightly set down and foretold all the differing remarkable magnitudes of the City of Rome since the Pope ruled in it, that there is no imaginable exactness wanting. But because these things are dark and intricate, and those which have not (and many which have) a competent knowledge in Geometry cannot yet readily find out the perimeter of a solid figure having only the solid content & proportion of the whole figure given, but none of the lineal measures, therefore such as would have the truth of these things made plain and evident, even to their senses, may consider, that it is a true rule, ut pondus ponderi, ita Solidum solido, that is, As weight to weight, so is solid measure to solid measure. If therefore one ounce of soft wax, or clay, or any other homogenial substance be taken, and be moulded and fashioned according to the figure of a Cube, whose length breadth and height are equal, and be supposed to represent 1000 solid furlongs; then the length of one of the sides of this little Cube, being divided into 10 parts, every one of those parts do represent the true length of one furlong. (for 1000 is a perfect and exact cubical number, whose cubical root is 10.) Let there be therefore a scale made or a line divided, containing 100 or 200 of those parts or divisions. And a line being thus divided let there be another piece of the same wax taken, being in weight precisely twelve times as much as the former, if the former little Cube were one ounce in weight, then let this be just 12 ounces, and let it be made and fashioned according to the figure of a Cube. Then let the compass or perimeter of this greater Cube be measured by those divisions of the little Cube, or by the scale above mentioned, and the perimeter of it will appear to our senses, and will be found to be 91 of those divisions, & some fractions remaining; as it is above showed, that the measure of the compass of the new Jerusalem is 91 furlongs and some odd paces. Then let there be another piece of the same wax taken, being 25 ounces in weight, and let it be made into a cubical figure also. And let the compass of this be measured by the same divisions above mentioned, and it will be found to be 116 of those divisions and some fractions remaining. Then let the same Cube or another piece of the same wax equal in weight unto it, be moulded into an oblong solid rectangular figure having 4 equal sides, the length exceeding the breadth or thickness by a double proportion and somewhat more, as 37 is to 18, so that it may be like in its proportions, to the first of the two figures above mentioned, in which the height is equal to the breadth of the Area: and then let the perimeter of the Basis or Area of this figure be measured by those divisions of the little Cube first mentioned, and it will be found to be above 140 furlongs as is above said. Lastly let the same piece of wax or another equal in weight unto it be transformed into the figure and proportions of the second figure above mentioned, in which the height is equal to the length of the Area of the same figure: and then let the perimeter of the Basis or Area be measured by the same divisions of the scale and little Cube first made, & the perimeter will be found to be, about 110 furlongs as is above said. And by this means I suppose, those that have little, or no insight in Arithmetic, may understand and see, how the perimeter of the new Jerusalem is mystically expressed by the measures of a solid cubical figure in the 21 Chap. of the Revelation; and may also conceive how the divers measures of the mystical Babylon or new Rome, may be, mutatis mutandis, analogically deduced from them. If it be objected against that which I have above said concerning the solid measure of the new Jerusalem, and consequently against all that I have above said of the measures of Rome; that according to some Copies and Editions, the words in the text are not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. that is, not twelve thousand, but (as some interpret it) twelve times twelve thousand. I answer first, that that reading which I have followed, is most generally and commonly received. Secondly, that these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, do more properly and more probably signify twelve thousand and twelve which causeth no considerable alteration in the measures) then twelve times twelve thousand. For if that number had been intended, than it should have been said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Lastly, supposing both these divers readings of this text were equally probable, yet being the measure of 12000 furlongs, doth agree with the measures of the same City set down by Ezechiel, and the measure of twelve times twelve thousand cannot agree with them, therefore that is the true reading, and not this. For by what means can we better interpret a doubtful and ambiguous place of Scripture, then by comparing it with another place of Scripture, which is clear and out of question. If it be objected, that 12000 furlongs cannot be the exact measure of the new Jerusalem, because the new Jerusalem is an exact cubical figure, but 12000 is not an exact cubical number. I answer, that howsoever some Authors which do write of these measures, do seem to imply some such objection, concerning the solid measure; and Lira concerning the square measure of the Area of this City, where he endeavours to apply this number 12000 unto it; yet there is no reality in this objection. For, that 12000, or any other number, which is not a perfect cubical number, or a perfect square number, may yet be the exact solid measure of a Cube; and may exactly express the superficial measure of an exactly square figure, is a certain and undoubted truth which cannot be denied, although perhaps some men do not suddenly and easily conceive it. I have now, as I hope, sufficiently answered all such objections, as I do yet know, can be materially objected against the substance of that which I have above written. And I am willing to publish these things (notwithstanding I cannot but discover much ignorance and weakness with them) that I may know what more can be objected against them. Wherefore I do humbly and earnestly desire, those religious, wise, & learned men, which do not yet believe that the Pope is Antichrist, nor that this is the true interpretation of his number, that they would not conceive their own apprehensions, which seem to make against these positions, so paraenetical, as if nothing but vain jangling, could be replied unto them. Let them publish them to the world, that Truth may be discovered, errors confuted, the Church enlightened, Antichrist revealed, and God glorified. They may perhaps receive satisfaction beyond their expectation, if not from me, yet from those who are better able to defend so much truth as I have written than I myself can be. As for Romish Catholics, especially such as are seducers of others, & such as are truly Italionated, I do well know that no evidence of truth is sufficient to convince them; and that although a man should bray them in a mortar with a pestle, yet would they not cease to gainsay those truths, which they are not able to confute. But for those of their laity, who out of ignorance and simplicity are seduced by them (of which there are many in this Kingdom) I do rather pray for their conversion, then desire their confusion, and that God would vouchsafe to open their eyes, that they may wonder at themselves, for having been so long deceived by those hypocrites at Rome; who are that very Synagogue of Satan, and that corporation of false Prophets, in whom dwelleth bodily, the fullness of that spirit of Antichrist, and the fullness of that spirit of error, which was to come into the world. For the farther manifestation of which truth, if it hath pleased God to discover any thing by me; it is, because he is sometimes pleased to show his strength in weakness, and to choose things that are weak, and things that are despised, to bring to nought things that are mighty. To him therefore, who is the only wise God, and who will in due time discover all necessary truths to his Church, be all Glory and Praise for ever. AMEN. FINIS.